INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 

We Protect Hoosiers and Our Environment. 

Michael R. Pence 

Govenwr 

Ms. Susan Hedman 

Regional Administrator 

U.S. EPA, Region 5 

77 West Jackson Boulevard 

Chicago, Illinois 60604 

Dear Ms. Hedman: 

100 N. Senate Avenue • Indianapolis, IN 46204 

(800) 451-6027 • (317) 232-8603 • www.idem.IN.gov 

November 7, 2013 

Thomas W. Easterly 

Commissioner 

Re: State Implementation Plan Submittal for 

Indiana Regarding 326 lAC 2-7-10.5 and 326 lAC 

2-8-11.1; Minor New Source Review for Title V 

and FESOP Sources (LSA #11-747) 

Pursuant to Section 11 0 of the 1990 Clean Air Act and Title 13 of the Indiana Code, the 

Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) submits an amendment to the 

Indiana state implementation plan (SIP). This amendment consists of revisions to 326 lAC 2-7-

10.5 and 326 lAC 2-8-11.1. IDEM requests that the United States Environmental Protection 

Agency (U.S. EPA) approve 326 lAC 2-7-10.5 and 326 lAC 2-8-11.1 as additions to the SIP. 

Rule language at 326 lAC 2-7-10.5 applies to construction of new units or modification 

of existing units at Title V sources, also known as minor new source review (NSR). While 326 

lAC 2-7 is Indiana's operating permit program for Title V sources, section 10.5 is a construction 

permit program that is embedded in the Title V program rules. Similarly, 326 lAC 2-8-11.1 

applies to construction of new units or modification of existing units at federally enforceable 

state operating permit (FESOP) sources. While Indiana has a construction permit program for 

minor NSR approved into the SIP (repealed 326 lAC 2-1) the minor NSR rules as they apply to 

construction and modifications at Title V and FESOP sources have not previously been part of 

the Indiana SIP. Therefore, IDEM is asking that 326 lAC 2-7-10.5 and 326 lAC 2-8-11.1 be 

added to the SIP as neither of these sections exist in the Indiana SIP in their curr-ent f01m. 

In the minor NSR rules at 326 lAC 2-7-10.5, approvals are designated as minor or 

significant source modifications (minor or significant pe1mit revisions under 326 lAC 2-8-11.1 ). 

IDEM is aware of U.S. EPA's concern with the types of actions that could be approved as a 

minor modification without the appropriate amount of public notice. IDEM previously 

submitted 326 lAC 2-7-10.5 as part of a 1999 rulemaking (LSA #98-95) and subsequently 

withdrew the SIP request because of approvability issues. IDEM has addressed these concerns 

with the cunent rulemaking effective October 26,2013 (LSA #11-747). IDEM worked closely 

with Region V staff to draft rule language that U.S. EPA will be able to approve into the SIP. 

IDEM is providing technical documentation to demonstrate that a carbon monoxide (CO) 

threshold of 100 tons per year for minor modifications will not impact the NAAQS. The 

threshold for all minor NSR approvals (i.e., including smaller sources that do not operate under 

the TV or FESOP operating pe1mit program) that cuiTently exists in the SIP as the now repealed 

326 lAC 2-1 is 25 tons per year. Any source with potential emissions of less than 25 tons per 

An Equal Opportunity Employer 0 (!) Recycled Paper A State that~ 
Ms. Susan Hedman 

Page 2 of2 

year of CO could obtain a registration pe1mit that does not require public notice. Under the 

cun-ent rulemaking (LSA #11-747), FESOP and Title V sources constructing or modifying 

emission units that qualify for a minor modification could construct an emission units without 

public notice that under comparable situations in the SIP would have required public notice. 

Therefore, IDEM is providing technical documentation to support the 100 tons per year CO 

threshold. 

There are a few items that IDEM would like to clarify. According to the chart at 40 CFR 

52.770, 326 lAC 2-8-11.1 is cuiTently approved in the SIP. IDEM believes this is an en-or since 

326 lAC 2-8-11.1 was not effective until 1999. The FE SOP rules at 326 lAC 2-8 were SIP 

approved in 1995 except for the permit term change from 5 to 10 years at 326 lAC 2-8-4 (LSA 

#06-487) that was SIP approved in 2007. IDEM replaced 326 lAC 2-8-11 with 326 lAC 2-8-

11.1 in the 1999 rulemaking. Secondly, U.S. EPA will soon be approving 326 lAC 2-7-10.5(b) 

and (k) as part of a SIP submittal request sent to U.S. EPA on August 9, 2012 (78 FR 16412). 

The provisions in subsection (b) were added in another rulemaking (LSA #11-251) authorizing 

the state to incorporate terms from federal consent decrees or federal district court orders into 

construction permits. IDEM provided additional clarification in this cuiTent rulemaking (LSA 

#11-747) that the public notice requirements in 326 lAC 2-7-10.5(k) apply to pe1mits issued for 

the purpose of incorporating requirements from federal consent decrees. Thirdly, the emission 

thresholds distinguishing between minor and significant modifications at 326 lAC 2-7-10.5 and 

326 lAC 2-8-11.1 include PM2.5. IDEM added PM2.5 throughout the pe1mit rules at 326 lAC 2 in 

another rulemaking (LSA #11-251). 

This submittal consists of one (1) hard copy of the required documentation. An electronic 

version ofthe submittal in PDF format that is identical to the hard copy (except for the modeling files 

that are provided on disc) has been sent to Chris Panos at the U.S. EPA Region V office. In order to 

assist with your review of this SIP submission, a list of supporting documents is attached. 

Throughout the development of these amendments to the existing rule, staff of the Office 

of Legal Counsel worked closely with your staff to ensure that any potential problems that might 

exist with this requested SIP revision would be resolved. I request that U.S. EPA approve this 

addition to Indiana's SIP. If you have any questions regarding this submittal, please contact 

Mike Dalton, Rule Support Section Chief, Office of Legal Counsel at (317) 232-8884. 

NK/sb 

Attachments: Supporting Documents 

s~·tfce·r·e.~~~/~., • .• .· '<./fVt /1 _,;'A //.~r~~7· . 

Nan~y;tt~i , ~ / 

Chief,t.Rii'les Development Branch 

Office of Legal Counsel 

cc: Pam Blakely, U.S. EPA Region 5 (no enclosures) 

Steve Rosenthal, U.S. EPA Region 5 (no enclosures) 

Sam Portanova, U.S. EPA Region V (no enclosures) 

Christine Pedersen, IDEM (no enclosures) 

Matt Stuckey, IDEM (no enclosures) 

SIP file 
Supporting Documents LSA Document # 11-7 4 7 

Attachment A: Administrative Checklist ( 40 CFR 51, Appendix V) 

Attachment B: Final Rule. LSA Document # 11-7 4 7 (F) as posted in the Indiana Register on 

October 23,2013 (DIN: 20131023-IR-326110747FRA) 

Attachment C: Signature Page 

Attachment D: Second Notice of Comment Period, including the Notice ofPublic Hearing, 

as posted in the Indiana Register on February 6, 2013 (DIN: 20130206-IR-326110747SNA) 

Attachment E: Certificates of Web Publication (Notice of Public Hearings) 

Attachment F: Transcript of First Public Hearing held on May 8, 2013 

Attachment G: Proposed Rule, including the Notice of Public Hearing, as posted in the 

Indiana Register on June 12, 2013 (DIN: 20130612-IR-326110747PHA) 

Attachment H: Transcript of Second Public Hearing held on August 14, 2013 

Attachment I: Technical Support Document for Carbon Monoxide (CO) Threshold 

ADMINISTRATIVE CHECKLIST (40 CFR 51, Appendix V) 

1. The submittal is accompanied by a formal letter of submittal 

from the governor or his designee. 

2. Evidence that the State has adopted the plan in the State code 

or body of regulations; or issued the permit, order, consent 

agreement ("document"); in final form. 

a. Date of adoption or final issuance: 

b. The effective date of the plan, if different 

from the adoption/issuance date. 

3. Evidence that the State has the necessary legal authority 

under state law to adopt and implement the plan. 

4. A copy of the actual regulation or document submitted for 

approval and incorporation by reference into the plan, 

including the following: 

a. Indication of the changes made to the existing 

approved plan, where applicable. 

b. The submittal shall be a copy of the official State 

regulation or document signed, stamped, dated by 

the appropriate state official indicating that it is fully 

enforceable by the State. Effective date shall be stated 

in the document itself. 

5. Evidence that the State followed all of the procedural 

requirements of the State's laws and constitution in 

conducting and completing the adoption/issuance of the plan. 

6. Evidence that public notice was given, including date of 

proof of publication. 

X Certificates of Web Publication 

Enclosed 

Signature Page 

(Attachment C) 

Date of Sec. of State 

(September 26, 2013) 

30 days after filing 

(October 26, 2013) 

IC 13-14-8 

Indiana Admin. Code 

(Attachment B) 

Signature Page 

(Attachment C) 

Attachments D, E, and G 

_X_ Notices of First and Second Public Hearings (Indiana Register) 

7. Cetiification that public hearings were held in accordance 

with information provided in public hearing notice. 

Attachments F & H 
_X_ Transcript from First Public Hearing 

_X_ Transcript from Second Public Hearing 

8. Compilation of public comments and State's response. 

X Second Notice 

_X_ Proposed Rule 

9. Technical support. 

Attachment D 

Attachment G 

Attachment I 
Indiana Register 

TITLE 326 AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DIVISION 

Final Rule 

LSA Document #11-747(F) 

DIGEST 

Amends 326 lAC 2-7-10.5 and 326 lAC 2-8-11.1 concerning Indiana's air permitting regulations and minor 

new source review (NSR) requirements for Title V and Federally Enforceable State Operating Permit (FESOP) 

sources. Effective 30 days after filing with the Publisher. 

HISTORY 

First Notice of Comment Period: December 21, 2011, Indiana Register (DIN: 20111221-IR-326110747FNA). 

Second Notice of Comment Period: February 6, 2013, Indiana Register (DIN: 20130206-IR-326110747SNA). 

Notice of First Hearing: February 6, 2013, Indiana Register (DIN: 20130206-IR-32611 0747PHA). 

Date of First Hearing: May 8, 2013 

Proposed Rule: June 12, 2013, Indiana Register {DIN: 20130612-IR-32611 07 4 7PRA). 

Notice of Second Hearing: June 12,2013, Indiana Register (DIN: 20130612-IR-326110747PHA). 

Date of Second Hearing: August 14, 2013. 

326 lAC 2-7-10.5; 3261AC 2-8-11.1 

SECTION 1. 3261AC 2-7-10.5 IS AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS: 

326 lAC 2-7-10.5 Part 70 permits; source modifications 

Authority: IC 13-14-8; IC 13-15-2; IC 13-17-3-4; IC 13-17-3-11 

Affected: IC 13-15-5; IC 13-17 

Sec. 10.5. (a) An owner or operator of a Part 70 source proposing to: 

(1) construct new emission units; 

(2) modify existing emission units; or 

(3) otherwise modify the source as described in this section; 

shall submit a request for a modification approval in accordance with this section. 

(b) In addition to the request for modification approval in subsection (a), the commissioner may issue a source 

modification for the purpose of incorporating the control requirements and emission limitations that are set forth in 

a: 

( 1) final federal district court order that adjudicates violations of: 

(A) the prevention of significant deterioration provisions under Sections 160 through 169B of the CAA ( 42 

U.S. C. 7470 through 42 U.S.C. 7492); 

(B) the nonattainment new source review requirements under Sections 171 through 193 of the CAA (42 

U.S.C. 7501 through 42 U.S.C. 7515); 

(C) Section 112(g) and 1120) of the CAA (42 U.S.C. 7412(g) and 42 U.S.C. 74120)); 

(D) 326 lAC 2-2; 

(E) 326 lAC 2-3; or 

(F) 326 lAC 20; or 

(2) federal consent decree that is entered into for the purpose of resolving alleged violations of: 

(A) the prevention of significant deterioration provisions under Sections 160 through 169B of the CAA (42 

U.S.C. 7470 through 42 U.S.C. 7492); 

(B) the nonattainment new source review requirements under Sections 171 through 193 of the CAA (42 

U.S.C. 7501 through 42 U.S.C. 7515); 

(C) Section 112(g) and 1120) of the CAA (42 U.S.C. 7412(g) and 42 U.S.C. 7412U)); 

(D) 326 lAC 2-2; 

(E) 326 lAC 2-3; or 

(F) 326 lAC 20. 

(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of this rule, the owner or operator of a source may repair or replace an 

emissions unit or air pollution control equipment or components thereof without prior approval if the repair or 

replacement: 

Date: Oct 23,2013 3:00:00PM EDT DIN: 20131023-IR-326110747FRA Page 1 
Indiana Register 

(1) results in a potential to emit for each regulated pollutant that is less than or equal to the potential to emit of 

the equipment or the affected emissions unit that was repaired or replaced; 

(2) is not a major modification under 326 lAC 2-2, 326 lAC 2-3, or 326 lAC 2-4.1; and 

(3) returns the emissions unit, process, or control equipment to normal operation after an upset, malfunction, 

or mechanical failure or prevents impending and imminent failure of the emissions unit, process, or control 

equipment. 

If the repair or replacement qualifies as a reconstruction or is a complete replacement of an emissions unit or air 

pollution control equipment and would require a modification approval or operating permit revision modification 

under a provision of this rule, the owner or operator of the source must submit an application for a permit or 

permit revision modification to the commissioner not later than thirty (30) calendar days after initiating the repair 

or replacement. 

(d) Any person proposing to make a modification described in subsection (e) or (g) shall submit an application 

to the commissioner concerning the modification as follows: 

(1) If only preconstruction approval is requested, the application shall contain the following information: 

(A) The company name and address. 

(B) The following descriptive information: 

(i) A description of the nature and location of the proposed construction or modification. 

(ii) The design capacity and typical operating schedule of the proposed construction or modification. 

(iii) A description of the following: 

(AA) The source and the emissions unit or units comprising the source. 

(BB) Any proposed emission control equipment, including design specifications. 

(C) A schedule for proposed construction or modification of the source. 

(D) The following information as needed to assure all reasonable information is provided to evaluate 

compliance consistent with the permit terms and conditions, the underlying requirements of this title and the 

CAA, the ambient air quality standards set forth in 326 lAC 1-3, or the prevention of significant deterioration 

maximum allowable increase under 326 lAC 2-2: 

(i) Information on the nature and amount of the pollutant to be emitted, including an estimate of the 

potential to emit any regulated air pollutants. 

(ii) Estimates of offset credits, as required under 326 lAC 2-3, for sources to be constructed in 

nonattainment areas. 

(iii) Any other information, including, but not limited to, the air quality impact, determined by the 

commissioner to be necessary to reasonably demonstrate compliance with the requirements of this title 

and the requirements of the CAA, whichever are applicable. 

(E) Each application shall be signed by an authorized individual, unless otherwise noted, whose signature 

constitutes the following: 

(i) An acknowledgment that the applicant assumes the responsibility of assuring that the source, emissions 

unit or units, or emission control equipment will be constructed and will operate in compliance with all 

applicable Indiana air pollution control rules and the requirements of the CAA. 

(ii) Affirmation that the statements in the application are true and complete, as known at the time of 

completion of the application, and shall subject the applicant to liability under state laws forbidding false or 

misleading statements. 

(2) If the source requests that the preconstruction approval and operating permit revision be combined, the 

application shall contain the information in subdivision (1) and the following information consistent with section 

4(c) of this rule: 

(A) An identification of the applicable requirements to which the source will be subject as a result of the 

modification, including the applicable emission limits and standards, applicable monitoring and test 

methods, and applicable record keeping and reporting requirements. 

(B) A description of the Part 70 permit terms and conditions that will apply to the modification and that are 

consistent with sections 5 and 6 of this rule. 

(C) A schedule of compliance, if applicable. 

(D) A statement describing what the compliance status of the modification will be after construction has 

been completed consistent with section 4(c)(10) of this rule. 

(E) A certification consistent with section 4(f) of this rule. 

(e) The following minor modifications shall be processed in accordance with subsection (f): 

(1) Modifications that would reduce the frequency of any monitoring or reporting required by a permit condition 

or applicable requirement. 

(2) The addition of a portable source or relocation of a portable source to an mdsting source if the addition or 

relocation would require a change to any permit terms or conditions. 

Date: Oct 23,2013 3:00:00PM EDT DIN: 20131023-IR-326110747FRA Page 2 
Indiana Register 

fd1 (1) Modifications that would have a potential to emit within any of the following ranges: 

(A) Less than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greater than five (5) tons per year of either PM, 

PM10, or direct PM2 5. 

(B) Less than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greater than ten (1 0) tons per year of the 

following pollutants: 

(i) Sulfur dioxide (SO ). 

(ii) Nitrogen oxides (~0 ). 

(iii) VOC for modificatio~s that are not described in clause (C). 

(C) Less than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greater than five (5) tons per year of VOC for 

modifications that require the use of air pollution control equipment to comply with the applicable provisions 

of 3261AC 8. 

(D) Less than one hundred (1 00) tons per year and equal to or greater than twenty-five (25) tons per year of 

carbon monoxide (CO). 

(E) Less than five (5) tons one (1) ton per year and equal to or greater than two-tenths (0.2) ton per year of 

lead (Pb). 

(F) Less than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greater than five (5) tons per year of the 

following regulated air pollutants: 

(i) Hydrogen sulfide (H2

S). 

(ii) Total reduced sulfur (TRS). 

(iii) Reduced sulfur compounds. 

(iv) Fluorides. 

(4) Modifisations for whish the potential to emit is limited to less than twenty five (25) tons per year of any 

regulated pollutant other than !=lAPs, ten (10) tons per year of any single I=IAP as defined under Section 112(b) 

of the C/\1\, or twenty five (25) tons per year of any sombination of 1=1/\Ps by complying with one (1) of the 

following sonstraints: 

(/\) Limiting total annual solvent usage or maximum VOC sontent, or both. 

(8) Limiting annual hours of operation of the process or business. 

(C) Using a partisulate air pollution sontrol devise as follmvs: 

(i) Achieving and maintaining ninety nine persent (99%) efflciensy. 

(ii) Complying with a no visible emission standard. 

(iii) The potential to emit before controls does not mcseed major source thresholds for federal permitting 

programs. 

(iv) Certifying to the sommissioner that the sontrol device supplier guarantees that a specific outlet 

sonsentration, in sonjunction with design air flow, will result in aetual emissions less than twenty five (25) 

tons of PM, or fifteen (15) tons per year of PM or direst PM~ 

(D) Limiting individual fuel usage and fuel type f8r a combustion sourse. 

(E) Limiting raw material throughput or sulfur sontent of raw materials, or both. 

(5) 1\ modifisation that is subject to a RACT, a ne·.v sourse performance standard (NSPS), or a national 

emission standard for hazardous air pollutants (NESI=IAP) and the RACT, NSPS, or NESI=II\P is the most 

stringent applisable requirement, mccept for those modifisations that would be subjest to the provisions of 40 

CFR Part 63, Subpart 8, Hazardous Air Pollutants: Regulations Governing Construsted or Resonstructed 

Major Sourses*. /\s part ofthe applisation required under subsection (d), the applicant shall aolmmvledge the 

requirement to somply with the R/\CT, NSPS, or NESI=I/\P. 

(6) /\ shange for whish a sourse requests an emission limit to avoid 326 1/\C 8 1 6. 

(7) /\ modifisation of an mdsting sourse that has a potential to emit greater than the thresholds under 

subdivision (3) if the modification will rep lase or repair a part or piese of equipment in an mdsting process 

unless the modifisation: 

(A) results in the replacement or repair of an entire prosess; 

(8) qualifies as a reconstrustion of an entire process; 

(C) may result in an insrease of actual emissions; or 

(D) would result in a net emissions insrease greater than the significant levels in 326 1/\C 2 2 or 326 1/\C 2 

~ 

(8) /\ modifisation that has a potential to emit greater than the thresholds under subdivision (3) that adds an 

emissions unit or units of the same type that are already permitted and that will somply with the same 

applisable requirements and permit terms and conditions as the mdsting emission unit or units, mcsept if the 

modifisation would result in a potential to emit greater than the thresholds in 326 lAC 2 2 or 326 11\C 2 3. 

f91 (2) For a source in Lake County or Porter County with the potential to emit twenty-five (25) tons per year of 

either VOC or NO , any modification that would result in an increase of either in emissions of either pollutant 

of greater than orxequal to the following: 

(A) Fifteen (15) pounds per day of VOCs. 

(B) Twenty-five (25) pounds per day of NO . 

X 

Date: Oct 23,2013 3:00:00PM EDT DIN: 20131 023-IR-32611 07 47FRA Page 3 
Indiana Register 

(f) Minor modification approval procedures for modifications described under subsection tat (e) are as follows: 

(1) Except as provided in 326 lAC 2-13, the source may not begin construction on any emissions unit that is 

necessary to implement the modification until the commissioner has approved the modification request. 

(2) Within forty-five (45) calendar days from receipt of an application for a modification described under 

subsection (e), the commissioner shall do one (1) of the following: 

(A) Approve the modification request. 

(B) Deny the modification request. 

(C) Determine that the minor permit revision request would cause or contribute to a violation of the National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) or prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) standards would 

allow for an increase in emissions greater than the thresholds in subsection (g) or would not provide for 

compliance monitoring consistent with this rule and should be processed under subsection (h). 

(3) The source may begin construction as follows: 

(A) If the source has a final Part 70 permit and only requests preconstruction approval or if the source does 

not have a final Part 70 permit, the source may begin construction upon approval by the commissioner. 

Notwithstanding IC 13-15-5, the commissioner's approval shall become effective immediately. Operation of 

the modification shall be as follows: 

(i) For a source that has a final Part 70 permit, operation of the modification may commence in accordance 

with section 12 of this rule. 

(ii) For a source without a final Part 70 permit, operation may begin after construction is completed. 

(B) If the source requests that the preconstruction approval and operating permit revision be combined, the 

source may begin construction upon approval and operation may begin in accordance with section 12 of this 

rule. 

(g) The following significant modifications shall be processed in accordance with subsection (h): 

( 1) Any modification that is subject to 326 lAC 2-2, 326 lAC 2-3, or 326 lAC 2-4.1. 

(2) A modification that is subject to 326 lAC 8-1-6. 

(3) Any modification with a potential to emit lead at greater than or equal to one (1) ton per year. 

(4) Any modification with a potential to emit greater than or equal to twenty-five (25) tons per year of any of the 

following pollutants: 

(A) PM, PM10, or direct PM2 5. 

(B) Sulfur dioxide (SC?:J: · 

(C) Nitrogen oxides (NU ). 

(D) VOC. X 

(E) Hydrogen sulfide (H2S). 

(F) Total reduced sulfur {TRS). 

(G) Reduced sulfur compounds. 

(H) Fluorides. 

(5) For a source of lead with a potential to emit greater than or equal to five (5) tons per year, a modification 

that would increase the potential to emit greater than or equal to six-tenths (0.6) ton per year. 

(6) Any modification with a potential to emit greater than or equal to ten (1 0) tons per year of a single HAP as 

defined under Section 112(b) of the CAA or twenty-five (25) tons per year of any combination of HAPs. 

(7) Any modification with a potential to emit greater than or equal to one hundred (1 00) tons per year of carbon 

monoxide (CO). 

(h) The following shall apply to the significant modifications described in subsection (g): 

(1) Any person proposing to make a modification described in subsection (g) shall: 

(A) submit an application concerning the modification; and 

(B) include the information under subsection (d). 

(2) Except as provided in 326 lAC 2-13, the source may not begin construction on any emissions unit that is 

necessary to implement the modification until the commissioner has issued a modification approval. 

(3) The commissioner shall approve or deny the modification as follows: 

(A) Within one hundred twenty (120) calendar days from receipt of an application for a modification in 

subsection (g) except subsection (g)(1 ). 

(B) Within two hundred seventy (270) calendar days from receipt of an application for a modification under 

subsection (g)(1 ). 

(4) A modification approval under this subsection may be issued only if all of the following conditions have 

been met: 

(A) The commissioner has received a complete application for a modification. 

(B) The commissioner has complied with the requirements for public notice as follows: 

Date: Oct 23,2013 3:00:00PM EDT DIN: 20131023-IR-326110747FRA Page 4 
Indiana Register 

(i) For modifications for which a source is only requesting preconstruction approval, the commissioner has 

complied with the requirements under 326 lAC 2-1.1-6. 

(ii) For modifications for which a source is requesting a combined preconstruction approval and operating 

permit revision, the commissioner has complied with the requirements under section 17 of this rule. 

(C) The conditions of the modification approval provide for compliance with all applicable requirements and 

this rule. 

(D) For modifications for which a source is requesting a combined preconstruction approval and operating 

permit revision, the U.S. EPA has received a copy of the proposed modification approval and any notices 

required and has not objected to the issuance of the modification approval within the time period specified in 

section 18 of this rule. 

(5) The commissioner shall do the following: 

(A) Provide a technical support document that sets forth the legal and factual basis for draft modification 

approval conditions, including references to the applicable statutory and regulatory provisions. 

(B) Send this technical support document to: 

(i) the U.S. EPA; 

(ii) the applicant; and 

(iii) any other person who requests it. 

(i) The following shall apply to a modification approval described in subsection (g) for a source that has not 

received a final Part 70 permit: 

( 1) After receiving an approval to construct and prior to receiving approval to operate, a source shall prepare 

an affidavit of construction as follows: 

(A) The affidavit shall include the following: 

(i) The name and title of the authorized individual. 

(ii) The company name. 

(iii) Subject to item (iv), an affirmation that the emissions units described in the modification approval: 

(AA) were constructed in conformance with the request for modification approval; and 

(BB) will comply with the modification approval. 

(iv) Identification of any changes to emissions units not included in the request for modification approval, 

but which should have been included under subsection (a). 

(v) The signature of the authorized individual. 

(B) The affidavit shall be notarized. 

(C) A source shall submit the affidavit to the commissioner either after construction of all the emission units 

described in the modification approval or after each phase of construction of the emission units described in 

the modification approval, as applicable, has been completed. 

(2) A source may not operate any emissions units described in the modification approval prior to receiving a 

validation letter issued by the commissioner, except as provided in the following: 

(A) A source may operate the emissions units covered by the affirmation in the affidavit of construction upon 

submission of the affidavit of construction. 

(B) The commissioner shall issue a validation letter within five (5) working days of receipt of the affidavit of 

construction. 

(C) The validation letter shall authorize the operation of all or part of each emissions unit covered by the 

affirmation in the affidavit of construction. 

(D) Subject to clause (E), the validation letter shall include any amendments to the modification approval if 

the amendment is requested by the source and if the amendment does not constitute a modification and 

require public notice and comment under 326 lAC 2-1.1-6. 

(E) A validation letter shall not approve the operation of any emissions unit if an amendment to the 

modification approval requested by the source would constitute a modification and require public notice and 

comment under 326 lAC 2-1.1-6. 

U) Each modification approval issued under this rule shall provide that construction must commence within 

eighteen (18) months of the issuance of the modification approval. 

(k) All modification approval proceedings under this section shall provide adequate procedures for public 

notice, including offering an opportunity for public comment and a hearing on the draft modification approval for 

significant modifications as established in 326 lAC 2-1.1-6 or section 17 of this rule. Modifications for the 

purpose of incorporating the control requirements and emission limitations of a final federal district court 

order or federal consent decree under subsection (b) shall follow procedures for public notice as 

established in 326 lAC 2-1.1-6. 

Date: Oct 23,2013 3:00:00PM EDT DIN: 20131023-IR-326110747FRA Page 5 
Indiana Register 

(I) The commissioner shall provide for review by the U.S. EPA and affected states of each: 

( 1) modification application; 

(2) draft modification approval; 

(3) proposed modification approval; and 

(4) final modification approval; 

in accordance with the procedures established in section 18 of this rule for modifications that a source is 

requesting a combined preconstruction approval and operating permit revision. 

(m) A modification approval issued in accordance with this section shall be incorporated into the source's Part 

70 permit or permit application as follows: 

( 1) For a source that has a final Part 70 permit and requested that the preconstruction approval and permit 

revision be combined, the modification approval shall be incorporated into the Part 70 permit as an 

administrative amendment in accordance with section 11 of this rule. 

(2) For a source that has a final Part 70 permit and requested only a preconstruction approval, the source may 

begin operation in accordance with section 12 of this rule. 

(3) For a source that has a complete Part 70 permit application on file, but does not have a final Part 70 permit 

and requested only preconstruction approval, the modification approval: 

(A) shall be deemed incorporated in the Part 70 permit application; and 

(B) will be included in the Part 70 permit when issued. 

(4) For a source that has a final Part 70 permit and requested a modification under subsection (b), the 

modification approval shall be incorporated into the Part 70 permit as an administrative amendment in 

accordance with section 11 of this rule. 

*This doeument is ineorporated by referenee. Copies may be obtained from the Government Printing Offiee, 

732 North Capitol Street NVV, Washington, D.C. 20401 or are available for review and espying at the Indiana 

Department of Environmental Management, Offiee of/\ir Quality, Indiana Government Genter North, Tenth ~leer, 

100 North Senate /\venue, Indianapolis, Indiana 46204. 

(Air Pollution Control Division; 3261AC 2-7-10.5; filed Nov 25, 1998, 12:13 p.m.: 221R 1039; errata filed May 12, 

1999, 11:23 a.m.: 221R 3107; filed Oct 23, 2000, 9:47a.m.: 241R 672; filed May 21, 2002, 10:20 a.m.: 251R 

3065; filed Aug 10, 2004, 3:35p.m.: 271R 3947; errata filed Jul23, 2007, 4:19p.m.: 

20070815-IR-326070466ACA; filed Oct 1, 2010, 3:48p.m.: 20101027-IR-326070372FRA; filed Feb 6, 2012, 2:54 

p.m.: 20120307-IR-326090493FRA; filed Jun 11, 2012, 3:15p.m.: 20120711-IR-326110251FRA; filed Sep 26, 

2013, 9:33a.m.: 20131023-IR-326110747FRA) 

SECTION 2. 326 lAC 2-8-11.1 IS AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS: 

326 lAC 2-8-11.1 Permit revisions 

Authority: IC 13-14-8; IC 13-17 -3-4; IC 13-17-3-11 

Affected: IC 13-15-5; IC 13-17 

Sec. 11.1. (a) Any person proposing to add additional emission units, modify existing emission units, or 

otherwise modify a FESOP source as described in this section shall submit a permit revision request in 

accordance with this section. 

(b) Notwithstanding any other provision of this rule, the owner or operator of a source may repair or replace an 

emissions unit or air pollution control equipment, or components thereof, without prior approval, if the repair or 

replacement: 

(1) results in a potential to emit for each regulated pollutant that is less than or equal to the potential to emit for 

the equipment or the affected emissions unit that was repaired or replaced; 

(2) is not a major modification under 326 lAC 2-2-1, 326 lAC 2-3-1, or 326 lAC 2-4.1; and 

(3) returns the emissions unit, process, or control equipment to normal operation after an upset, malfunction, 

or mechanical failure or prevents impending and imminent failure of the emissions unit, process, or control 

equipment. 

If the repair or replacement qualifies as a reconstruction or is a complete replacement of an emissions unit or air 

pollution control equipment and would require a permit or operating permit revision under a provision of this rule, 

the owner or operator of the source must submit an application for a permit or permit revision to the commissioner 

not later than thirty (30) calendar days after initiating the repair or replacement. 

Date: Oct 23,2013 3:00:00PM EDT DIN: 20131023-IR-326110747FRA Page 6 
Indiana Register 

(c) An application required under this section shall meet the requirements of section 3(c) of this rule and 

include the following information: 

(1) The company name and address. 

(2) A description of the change and the emissions resulting from the change. 

(3) An identification of the applicable requirements to which the source is newly subject as a result of the 

change, including the applicable emission limits and standards, applicable monitoring and test methods, and 

applicable record keeping and reporting requirements. 

(4) Proposed permit terms and conditions required to implement the change, including limitations and methods 

to be used to comply with the limitations for modifications described in subsection (d)(4). 

(5) A schedule of compliance, if applicable. 

(6) A certification consistent with section 3(d) of this rule. 

(d) The following modifications shall require Minor permit revisions and shall require are required for approval 

prior to construction and operation for modifications that have a potential to emit within the following 

ranges: 

(1) Modifications that reduce the frequency of any monitoring or reporting required by a permit condition or 

applicable requirement. 

(2) The addition of a portable source or relocation of a portable source to an mdsting source, if the addition or 

relocation would require a change to any permit terms or conditions. 

(3) Modifications that would have a potential to emit within the following ranges: 

W (1) Less than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greater than five (5) tons per year of either PM, 

PM1

(l' or direct PM2 5

. 

tB1 {2) Less than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greater than ten (1 0) tons per year of sulfur 

dioxide (S02

). 

tG1 (3) Less than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greater than ten (1 0) tons per year of nitrogen 

oxides (NO ). 

f91 (4) Lesl than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greater than ten (1 0) tons per year of VOC for 

modifications that are not described in clause (E) [sic]. 

tej (5) Less than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greater than five (5) tons per year of VOC for 

modifications that require the use of air pollution control equipment to comply with the applicable provisions of 

3261AC 8. 

fF1 (6) Less than one hundred (100) tons per year and equal to or greater than twenty-five (25) tons per year 

of carbon monoxide (CO). 

tG1 (7) Less than five (5) tons one (1) ton per year and equal to or greater than two-tenths (0.2) ton per year 

of lead (Pb). 

fFI1 (8) Less than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greater than five (5) tons per year of the 

following regulated air pollutants: 

tt1 (A) Hydrogen sulfide (H2S). 

W (B) Total reduced sulfur (TRS). 

fili1 (C) Reduced sulfur compounds. 

fiv1 (D) Fluorides. 

(4) Modifications for which the potential to emit is limited to less than twenty five (25) tons per year of any 

regulated pollutant other than HAPs, ten (10) tons per year of any single H/\P as defined under Section 112(b) 

of the CAA, or tv.·enty five (25) tons per year of any combination of H/\Ps by complying with one (1) of the 

follo'Ning constraints: 

(/\) Limiting total annual solvent usage or mmdmum VOC content, or both. 

(B) Limiting annual hours of operation of the process or business. 

(C) Using a particulate air pollution control device as follows: 

(i) Achieving and maintaining ninety nine percent (99%) efficiency. 

(ii) Complying with a no visible emission standard. 

(iii) The potential to emit before air pollution controls does not mEGeed major source thresholds for federal 

permitting programs. 

(iv) Certifying to the commissioner that the air pollution control device supplier guarantees that a specific 

outlet concentration, in conjunction with design air flow, will result in actual emissions less than tv;enty five 

(25) tons of PM, or fifteen (15) tons per year of PMw.-or direct PM~~ 

(D) Limiting individual fuel usage and fuel type for a combustion source. 

(e) Limiting rav,r material throughput or sulfur content of ra•.v materials, or both. 

(5) A change that is not described under section 1 O(a)(15) or 1 O(a)(16) ofthis rule and is subject to a R/\CT, a 

nmv source performance standard (~JSPS), or a national emission standard for hazardous air pollutants 

Date: Oct 23,2013 3:00:00PM EDT DIN: 20131023-JR-326110747FRA Page 7 
Indiana Register 

(~JESI=IAP) and the R/\CT, NSPS, or ~JE£1=1/\P is the most stringent applicable requirement, e><eept for those 

modifications that 'Nould be subject to the provisions of 40 CFR 63, Subpart B l=lazardous Air Pollutants: 

Regulations Governing Constructed or Reeonstrueted Major Sources*. As part of the application required 

under subsection (e), the applicant shall aelmm.,.ledge the requirement to eomply with the RACT, ~JSPS, or 

~JESI=IAP. 

(6) l\ modification for '""hieh a souree requests an emission limit to avoid 326 lAC 8 1 6. 

(e) Minor permit revision procedures shall be as follows: 

(1) Any person proposing to make a change described in subsection (d) shall: 

(A) submit an application concerning the change; and 

(B) include the information under subsection (c). 

(2) Except as provided in 326 lAC 2-13, the source may not begin construction on any emissions unit that is 

necessary to implement the change until the commissioner has revised the permit. 

(3) Within forty-five (45) calendar days from receipt of an application for a minor permit revision, the 

commissioner shall either: 

(A) approve the minor permit revision request; 

(B) deny the minor permit revision; or 

(C) determine that the minor permit revision request would cause or contribute to a violation of the National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) or prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) standards, would 

allow for an increase in emissions greater than the thresholds in subsection (f), or would not provide for 

compliance monitoring consistent with this rule and should be processed as a significant permit revision. 

(4) If approved, the permit shall be revised by incorporating the minor permit revision into the permit. The 

commissioner shall make any changes necessary to assure compliance with this title and the CAA prior to 

attaching the minor permit revision to the permit. The commissioner shall do the following: 

(A) Notify the permittee upon incorporation of the minor permit revision to the permit. 

(B) Provide a copy of the minor permit revision to the permittee. 

Notwithstanding IC 13-15-5, the commissioner's decision shall become effective immediately. 

(f) Significant permit revision procedures are as follows: 

(1) A significant permit revision is a modification that is not an administrative amendment under section 10 of 

this rule or subject to subsection (d) and includes the following: 

(A) Any modification that would be subject to 326 lAC 2-2, 326 lAC 2-3, or 326 lAC 2-4.1. 

(B) Any modification that results in the source needing to obtain a Part 70 permit under 326 lAC 2-7. 

(C) A modification that is subject to 326 lAC 8-1-6. 

(D) Any modification with a potential to emit lead at greater than or equal to one (1) ton per year. 

(E) Any modification with a potential to emit greater than or equal to twenty-five (25) tons per year of the 

following pollutants: 

(i) PM, PM10, or direct PM2 5. 

(ii) Sulfur dioxide (SO ). · 

(iii) Nitrogen oxides (~0 ). 

(iv) VOC. x 

(v) Hydrogen sulfide (H2S). 

(vi) Total reduced sulfur (TRS). 

(vii) Reduced sulfur compounds. 

(viii) Fluorides. 

(F) For a source of lead with a potential to emit greater than or equal to five (5) tons per year, a modification 

that would increase the potential to emit greater than or equal to six-tenths (0.6) ton per year. 

(G) Any modification with a potential to emit greater than or equal to ten (1 0) tons per year of a single HAP 

as defined under Section 112(b) of the CAA or twenty-five (25) tons per year of any combination of HAPs. 

(H) Any modification with a potential to emit greater than or equal to one hundred (1 00) tons per year of 

carbon monoxide (CO). 

(I) Any modification that removes or reduces compliance monitoring, testing, record keeping, reporting, or its 

frequency. 

(2) The following conditions shall apply to significant permit revisions: 

(A) Any person proposing to make a modification described in this subsection shall: 

(i) submit an application concerning the modification; and 

(ii) include the information under subsection (c). 

(B) The commissioner shall provide a copy of the significant permit revision application and draft and final 

operating permit revision to the U.S. EPA. 

(C) Except as provided in 326 lAC 2-13, the source may not begin construction on any emissions unit that is 

Date: Oct 23,2013 3:00:00PM EDT DIN: 20131023-IR-326110747FRA Page 8 
Indiana Register 

necessary to implement the change until the commissioner has revised the permit. 

(D) The commissioner shall provide for public notice and comment in accordance with section 13 of this 

rule. 

(E) The commissioner shall approve or deny the significant permit revision as follows: 

(i) Within one hundred twenty (120) calendar days from receipt of an application for a significant permit 

revision, except for a significant permit revision under subdivision (1)(A). 

(ii) Within two hundred seventy (270) calendar days from receipt of an application for a significant permit 

revision under subdivision (1 )(A). 

(F) If approved, the permit shall be revised by incorporating the significant permit revision into the permit. 

The commissioner shall make any changes necessary to assure compliance with this title and the CAA prior 

to attaching the significant permit revision to the permit. 

(g) ~Jotvtithstanding a permit requirement for emissions to remain below major source thresholds under Part 

70 in 32e 11\G 2 7, PSD in 32e lAG 2 2, or emission offset in 32e lAG 2 3, any modifications that require an 

adjustment to the FESOP emission limitations shall be required to be reviewed in aeeordanee with the procedures 

in subsection (f). 

*This document is incorporated by reference. Copies may be obtained from the Government Printing Office, 

732 North Capitol Street ~JVV, VVashington, D.C. 20401 or are available for review and espying at the Indiana 

Department of Environmental Management, Office of 1\ir Quality, Indiana Government Genter North, Tenth Floor, 

100 ~Jorth Senate Avenue, Indianapolis, Indiana 4@204. 

(Air Pollution Control Division; 326 lAC 2-8-11.1; filed Nov 25, 1998, 12:13 p.m.: 22 IR 1055; errata filed May 12, 

1999, 11:23 a.m.: 221R 3107; filed May 21, 2002, 10:20 a.m.: 251R 3072; errata filed Jul23, 2007, 4:19p.m.: 

20070815-IR-326070466ACA; filed Oct 1, 2010, 3:48p.m.: 20101027-IR-326070372FRA; filed Feb 6, 2012, 2:54 

p.m.: 20120307-IR-326090493FRA; filed Jun 11, 2012, 3:15p.m.: 20120711-IR-326110251FRA; filed Sep 26, 

2013, 9:33a.m.: 20131023-IR-326110747FRA) 

LSA Document #11-747(F) 

Proposed Rule: 20130612-IR-32611 07 47PRA 

Hearing Held: August 14, 2013 

Approved by Attorney General: September 20, 2013 

Approved by Governor: September 25, 2013 

Filed with Publisher: September 26, 2013, · 9:33 a.m. 

Documents Incorporated by Reference: None Received by Publisher 

Small Business Regulatory Coordinator: Jessica Faust-Hamblin, IDEM Small Business Regulatory Coordinator, 

MC 60-041GCS W041, 402 West Washington Street, Indianapolis, IN 46204-2251, (317) 232-8172 or (800) 

988-7901, ctap@idem.in.gov 

Small Business Assistance Program Ombudsman: Brad Baughn, IDEM Small Business Assistance Program 

Ombudsman, MC 50-011GCN 1301, 100 North Senate Avenue, Indianapolis, IN 46204-2251, (317) 234-3386 or 

(800) 451-6027, bbaughn@idem.in.gov 

Posted: 10/23/2013 by Legislative Services Agency 

An html version of this document. 

Date: Oct 23,2013 3:00:00PM EDT DIN: 20131023-IR-326110747FRA Page 9 

Rule Signature Page 

Rule#: 

Agency: 

Subject: 

LSA Document# 11-7 4 7 (F) 

Env:ironmental Rules Board 

Minor New Source Review 

ADOPTED: 

.By:~~/ everly Gard · 

Chairperson, Environmental Rules Board 

DateJ'd7fh . 

APPROVED: 6/ I By:~/}. ~ ~--·Date:~'J Governor, State oflndiana 

ACCEPTED FOR FILING: 

By:----,--

Indiana} 

TI1LE 326 AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DIVISION 

Legislati LSA Document #ll-747(FR) 

Filed with Publisher: September 26, 2013, 9:33a.m. 

By: Sgb 

Indiana Register 

TITLE 326 AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DIVISION 

SECOND NOTICE OF COMMENT PERIOD 

LSA Document #11-7 4 7 

DEVELOPMENT OF AMENDMENTS TO RULES CONCERNING MINOR NEW SOURCE REVIEW AIR 

PERMITTING REGULATIONS 

PURPOSE OF NOTICE 

The Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) has developed draft rule language for 

amendments to 326 lAC 2-7 and 326 lAC 2-8 concerning Indiana's air permitting regulations and minor new 

source review (NSR) requirements for Title V and Federally Enforceable State Operating Permit (FESOP) 

sources. By this notice, IDEM is soliciting public comment on the draft rule language. IDEM seeks comment on 

the affected citations listed and any other provisions of Title 326 that may be affected by this rulemaking. 

HISTORY 

First Notice of Comment Period: December 21, 2011, Indiana Register (DIN: 20111221-IR-326110747FNA). 

CITATIONS AFFECTED: 326 lAC 2-7-10.5; 326 lAC 2-8-11.1. 

AUTHORITY: IC 13-14-8; IC 13-17-3-4; IC 13-17-3-11. 

SUBJECT MATTER AND BASIC PURPOSE OF RULEMAKING 

Basic Purpose and Background 

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) has the authority to delegate implementation 

of many of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements to individual states. Indiana's air permitting regulations are 

codified in Title 326, Article 2 of the Indiana Administrative Code (lAC). In Indiana, persons or businesses 

planning to construct a new facility, expand an existing facility, operate a facility, or carry out an activity that will 

emit one or more regulated pollutants into the air will generally need some level of air permit for construction and 

operation. In most cases, IDEM has combined the construction and operating permit programs and issues a 

single document that serves as both the construction and operating permit. IDEM's preconstruction approval 

process is called New Source Review (NSR). 

Permitted sources may add to or modify their existing operations. However, unless the changes or 

modifications are by themselves exempt, the source may need to apply for preconstruction approval and go 

through NSR. Under Indiana's NSR regulations, for any type of preconstruction approval, IDEM will review 

applicable requirements for the new or modified source of air emissions. There are two categories of NSR, major 

and minor. Major NSR is triggered when the proposed construction will be subject to IDEM's prevention of 

significant deterioration (PSD) regulations at 326 lAC 2-2 or emission offset regulations at 326 lAC 2-3. Minor 

NSR is used when the construction or modification project does not trigger the more stringent PSD or emission 

offset requirements. The purpose of the minor NSR program is to ensure that the source is aware of all of the air 

permitting requirements prior to starting construction. Under the CAA, Indiana is required to have a minor NSR 

program as part of the state implementation plan (SIP). However, Indiana has the authority to customize the 

state's minor NSR regulations for the state's purposes, as long as state regulations meet the minimum federal 

requirements. 

On February 3, 1999, IDEM submitted amendments to U.S. EPA concerning Indiana's existing minor NSR 

SIP rules for approval into the SIP. U.S. EPA identified several issues with Indiana's minor NSR rules concerning 

instances where preconstruction approval may be granted without the appropriate amount of public notice. In this 

rulemaking IDEM is proposing to make revisions to Indiana's minor NSR regulations for the Title V permit program 

at 326 lAC 2-7 and FESOP program 326 lAC 2-8 to address U.S. EPA concerns. 

Specifically, IDEM is proposing to amend 326 lAC 2-7-10.5 and 326 lAC 2-8-11.1 to limit minor modifications 

to those that have a potential to emit regulated pollutants of less than 25 tons per year. This threshold is based on 

the threshold that was previously part of 326 lAC 2-1-1 before it was repealed in 1998 (LSA Document #98-95) 

and replaced with the provisions for Title V sources at 326 lAC 2-7-10.5 and for FESOP sources at 326 lAC 2-8-

1.1.,1. All modifications for which the potential to emit carbon monoxide (CO) is greater or equal to 25 tons per year 

will be processed as significant modifications. Also, the current language at 326 lAC 2-7-10.5(e)(3)(E) and 326 

lAC 2-7-1 0.5(g)(3) for lead is inconsistent, and IDEM is proposing to amend the threshold for lead in clause (E) to 

reflect the one ton per year threshold for major modifications that currently exists under subsection (g)(3). 

Therefore, some modifications will no longer be processed under the minor modification procedures of subsection 

(f) and will follow the major modification procedures under subsection (h) where public notice is required. 

IDEM is also proposing to modify the language at 326 lAC 2-7-10.5(k) and 326 lAC 2-7-10.5(m) to make it 

clear that source modifications for consent decree provisions must go through public notice provisions under 326 

Date: Oct 29,2013 10:08:50AM EDT DIN: 20130206-IR-32611 0747SNA Page 1 
Indiana Register 

lAC 2-1.1-6 and be incorporated into the Title V permit using the administrative amendment procedures under 

326 lAC 2-7-11. Consent decree provisions can be made permanent and federally enforceable through a 

construction permit due to an amendment to 326 lAC 2-7-10.5 in a recent rulemaking (LSA Document #09-493). 

IDEM seeks comment on the affected citations listed and any other provisions of Title 326 that may be 

affected by this rulemaking. Upon completion, these amendments will be submitted to U.S. EPA for SIP approval. 

IC 13-14-9-41dentification of Restrictions and Requirements Not Imposed under Federal Law 

No element of the draft rule imposes either a restriction or a requirement on persons to whom the draft rule 

applies that is not imposed under federal law. 

Potential Fiscal Impact 

Some projects that would previously have been a minor source modification may now be considered a 

significant source modification. Significant source modifications have a higher fee than minor source 

modifications. In 2011, IDEM issued 26 Title V minor source modifications (MSM) and 11 FESOP minor permit 

revisions (MPR). Also, some sources may not be able to construct or modify emission units in advance of 

receiving approval from the department to construct and operate per the modification. 

Public Participation and Workgroup Information 

No workgroup is planned for the rulemaking. If you feel that a workgroup or other informal discussion on the 

rule is appropriate, please contact Susan Bern, Rule Development Section, Office of Legal Counsel at (317) 

233-5697 or (800) 451-6027 (in Indiana). 

SUMMARY/RESPONSE TO COMMENTS FROM THE FIRST COMMENT PERIOD 

IDEM requested public comment from December 21, 2011, through January 20, 2012, on alternative ways to 

achieve the purpose of the rule and suggestions for the development of draft rule language. IDEM received no 

comments in response to the first notice of public comment period. 

REQUEST FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS 

This notice requests the submission of comments on the draft rule language, including suggestions for 

specific revisions to language to be contained in the draft rule. Comments may be submitted in one of the 

following ways: 

(1) By mail or common carrier to the following address: 

LSA Document #11-747 Minor NSR 

Susan Bern Mail Code 61-49 

Rule Development Section 

Office of Legal Counsel 

Indiana Department of Environmental Management 

100 North Senate Avenue 

Indianapolis, IN 46204-2251 

(2) By facsimile to (317) 233-5970. Please confirm the timely receipt of faxed comments by calling the Rule 

Development Section at (317) 233-8903. 

(3) By electronic mail to sbem@idem.in.gov. To confirm timely delivery of submitted comments, please 

request a document receipt when sending the electronic mail. PLEASE NOTE: Electronic mail comments 

will NOT be considered part of the official written comment period unless they are sent to the email 

address indicated in this notice. 

(4) Hand delivered to the receptionist on duty at the thirteenth floor reception desk, Office of Legal Counsel, 

Indiana Government Center North, 100 North Senate Avenue, Indianapolis, Indiana. 

Regardless of the delivery method used, in order to properly identify each comment with the rulemaking 

action it is intended to address, each comment document must clearly specify the LSA document number of the 

rulemaking. 

COMMENTPEruODDEADLINE 

All comments must be postmarked, faxed, or time stamped no later than March 8, 2013. Hand-delivered 

comments must be delivered to the appropriate office by 4:45 p.m. on the above-listed deadline date. 

Additional information regarding this action may be obtained from Susan Bern, Rule Development Section, 

Office of Legal Counsel, (317) 233-5697 or (800) 451-6027 (in Indiana). 

DRAFT RULE 

SECTION 1. 3261AC 2-7-10.51S AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS: 

326 lAC 2-7-10.5 Part 70 permits; source modifications 

Authority: IC 13-14-8; IC 13-15-2; IC 13-17-3-4; IC 13-17-3-11 

Date: Oct 29,2013 1 0:08:50AM EDT DIN: 20130206-IR-326110747SNA Page 2 
Indiana Register 

Affected: IC 13-15-5; IC 13-17 

Sec. 1 0.5. (a) An owner or operator of a Part 70 source proposing to: 

(1) construct new emission units; 

(2) modify existing emission units; or 

(3) otherwise modify the source as described in this section; 

shall submit a request for a modification approval in accordance with this section. 

(b) In addition to the request for modification approval in subsection (a), the commissioner may issue a source 

modification for the purpose of incorporating the control requirements and emission limitations that are set forth in 

a: 

( 1) final federal district court order that adjudicates violations of: 

(A) the prevention of significant deterioration provisions under Sections 160 through 169B of the CAA (42 

U.S.C. 7470 through 42 U.S.C. 7492); 

(B) the nonattainment new source review requirements under Sections 171 through 193 of the CAA (42 

U.S.C. 7501 through 42 U.S.C. 7515); 

(C) Section 112(g) and 1120) of the CAA (42 U.S.C. 7412(g) and 42 U.S.C. 74120)); 

(D) 326 lAC 2-2; 

(E) 326 lAC 2-3; or 

(F) 326 lAC 20; or 

(2) federal consent decree that is entered into for the purpose of resolving alleged violations of: 

(A) the prevention of significant deterioration provisions under Sections 160 through 169B of the CAA ( 42 

U.S.C. 7470 through 42 U.S.C. 7492); 

(B) the nonattainment new source review requirements under Sections 171 through 193 of the CAA (42 

U.S.C. 7501 through 42 U.S.C. 7515); 

(C) Section 112(g) and 1120) of the CAA (42 U.S.C. 7412(g) and 42 U.S.C. 74120)); 

(D) 326 lAC 2-2; 

(E) 326 lAC 2-3; or 

(F) 326 lAC 20. 

(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of this rule, the owner or operator of a source may repair or replace an 

emissions unit or air pollution control equipment or components thereof without prior approval if the repair or 

replacement: 

(1) results in a potential to emit for each regulated pollutant that is less than or equal to the potential to emit of 

the equipment or the affected emissions unit that was repaired or replaced; 

(2) is not a major modification under 326 lAC 2-2, 326 lAC 2-3, or 326 lAC 2-4.1; and 

(3) returns the emissions unit, process, or control equipment to normal operation after an upset, malfunction, 

or mechanical failure or prevents impending and imminent failure of the emissions unit, process, or control 

equipment. 

If the repair or replacement qualifies as a reconstruction or is a complete replacement of an emissions unit or air 

pollution control equipment and would require a modification approval or operating permit revision modification 

under a provision of this rule, the owner or operator of the source must submit an application for a permit or 

permit revision modification to the commissioner not later than thirty (30) calendar days after initiating the repair 

or replacement. 

(d) Any person proposing to make a modification described in subsection (e) or (g) shall submit an application 

to the commissioner concerning the modification as follows: 

(1) If only preconstruction approval is requested, the application shall contain the following information: 

(A) The company name and address. 

(B) The following descriptive information: 

(i) A description of the nature and location of the proposed construction or modification. 

(ii) The design capacity and typical operating schedule of the proposed construction or modification. 

(iii) A description of the following: 

(AA) The source and the emissions unit or units comprising the source. 

(BB) Any proposed emission control equipment, including design specifications. 

(C) A schedule for proposed construction or modification of the source. 

(D) The following information as needed to assure all reasonable information is provided to evaluate 

compliance consistent with the permit terms and conditions, the underlying requirements of this title and the 

Date: Oct 29,2013 10:08:50AM EDT DIN: 20130206-IR-326110747SNA Page 3 
Indiana Register 

CAA, the ambient air quality standards set forth in 326 lAC 1-3, or the prevention of significant deterioration 

maximum allowable increase under 326 lAC 2-2: 

(i) Information on the nature and amount of the pollutant to be emitted, including an estimate of the 

potential to emit any regulated air pollutants. 

(ii) Estimates of offset credits, as required under 326 lAC 2-3, for sources to be constructed in 

nonattainment areas. 

(iii) Any other information, including, but not limited to, the air quality impact, determined by the 

commissioner to be necessary to reasonably demonstrate compliance with the requirements of this title 

and the requirements of the CAA, whichever are applicable. 

(E) Each application shall be signed by an authorized individual, unless otherwise noted, whose signature 

constitutes the following: 

(i) An acknowledgment that the applicant assumes the responsibility of assuring that the source, emissions 

unit or units, or emission control equipment will be constructed and will operate in compliance with all 

applicable Indiana air pollution control rules and the requirements of the CAA. 

(ii) Affirmation that the statements in the application are true and complete, as known at the time of 

completion of the application, and shall subject the applicant to liability under state laws forbidding false or 

misleading statements. 

(2) If the source requests that the preconstruction approval and operating permit revision be combined, the 

application shall contain the information in subdivision (1) and the following information consistent with section 

4(c) of this rule: 

(A) An identification of the applicable requirements to which the source will be subject as a result of the 

modification, including the applicable emission limits and standards, applicable monitoring and test 

methods, and applicable record keeping and reporting requirements. 

(B) A description of the Part 70 permit terms and conditions that will apply to the modification and that are 

consistent with sections 5 and 6 of this rule. 

(C) A schedule of compliance, if applicable. 

(D) A statement describing what the compliance status of the modification will be after construction has 

been completed consistent with section 4(c)(10) of this rule. 

(E) A certification consistent with section 4(f) of this rule. 

(e) The following minor modifications shall be processed in accordance with subsection (f): 

(1) Modifioations that would reduoe the frequenoy of any monitoring or reporting required by a permit oondition 

or applioable requirement 

(2) The addition of a portable souroe or relooation of a portable souroe to an m<isting souroe if the addition or 

relooation v,rould require a ohange to any permit terms or oonditions. 

(&) (1) Modifications that would have a potential to emit within any of the following ranges: 

(A) Less than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greater than five (5) tons per year of either PM, 

PM10, or direct PM2 5

. 

(B) Less than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greater than ten (1 0) tons per year of the 

following pollutants: 

(i) Sulfur dioxide (SO ). 

(ii) Nitrogen oxides (~0 ). 

(iii) VOC for modificatioAs that are not described in clause (C). 

(C) Less than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greater than five (5) tons per year of VOC for 

modifications that require the use of air pollution control equipment to comply with the applicable provisions 

of3261AC 8. 

(D) Less than one hundred (1 00) tons per year and equal to or greater than h\'enty five (25) tons per year of 

oarbon monm<ide (GO). 

(€1 (D) Less than five (5) tons one (1) ton per year and equal to or greater than two-tenths (0.2) ton per 

year of lead (Pb). 

~ (E) Less than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greater than five (5) tons per year of the 

following regulated air pollutants: 

(i) Hydrogen sulfide (H2

S). 

(ii) Total reduced sulfur (TRS). 

(iii) Reduced sulfur compounds. 

(iv) Fluorides. 

(4) Modifioations for whish the potential to emit is limited to less than twenty five (25) tons per year of any 

regulated pollutant other than l=l/\Ps, ten (1 0) tons per year of any single HAP as defined under 8eotion 112(b) 

of the GAA, or twenty five (25) tons per year of any oombination of l=l/\Ps by oomplying with one (1) of the 

follov.•ing oonstraints: 

Date: Oct 29,2013 10:08:50AM EDT DIN: 20130206-IR-326110747SNA Page 4 
Indiana Register 

(/\) Limiting total annual solvent usage or mm<imum VOG content, or both. 

(B) Limiting annual hours of operation of the process or business. 

(G) Using a particulate air pollution control devise as follo•.vs: 

(i) Achieving and maintaining ninety nine percent (99%) effioienoy. 

(ii) Complying v;ith a no visible emission standard. 

(iii) The potential to emit before controls does not mcoeed major source thresholds for federal permitting 

programs. 

(iv) Certifying to the commissioner that the control devise supplier guarantees that a speoifio outlet 

concentration, in oonjunotion with design air flow, will result in actual emissions less than twenty five (25) 

tons of PM, or fifteen (15) tons per year of PM or direst PMi1-,&.,. 

(D) Limiting individual fuel usage and fuel type f8r a combustion source. 

(E) Limiting raw material throughput or sulfur content of raw materials, or both. 

(5) A modification that is subject to a RAGT, a nmv source performance standard (NSPS), or a national 

emission standard for hazardous air pollutants (NESI=I/\P) and the Rl\GT, NSPS, or NESI=Il\P is the most 

stringent applicable requirement, mcoept for those modifications that would be subject to the provisions of 40 

GFR Part e3, Subpart B, l=lazardous Air Pollutants: Regulations Governing Constructed or Reconstructed 

Major Sources*. As part of the application required under subsection (d), the applicant shall aolmo•.vledge the 

requirement to comply •.vith the RJ\GT, NSPS, or NESI=Il\P. 

(e) J\ change for •.vhioh a source requests an emission limit to avoid 32e lAG 8 1 e. 

(7) J\ modification of an m<isting source that has a potential to emit greater than the thresholds under 

subdivision (3) if the modification will replace or repair a part or pieoe of equipment in an m<isting process 

unless the modification: 

(/\) results in the replacement or repair of an entire process; 

(B) qualifies as a reconstruction of an entire process; 

(G) may result in an increase of actual emissions; or 

(D) •.vould result in a net emissions increase greater than the significant levels in 32e lAG 2 2 or 32e 1/\G 2 

~ 

(8) J\ modification that has a potential to emit greater than the thresholds under subdivision (3) that adds an 

emissions unit or units of the same type that are already permitted and that vrill comply with the same 

applicable requirements and permit terms and conditions as the m<isting emission unit or units, mceept if the 

modification would result in a potential to emit greater than the thresholds in 32e 11\G 2 2 or 32e 1/\G 2 3. 

t91 (2) For a source in Lake County or Porter County with the potential to emit twenty-five (25) tons per year of 

either VOC or NO , any modification that would result in an increase of either in emissions of either pollutant 

of greater than orxequal to the following: 

(A) Fifteen ( 15) pounds per day of VOCs. 

(B) Twenty-five (25) pounds per day of NO . 

X 

(f) Minor modification approval procedures for modifications described under subsection td1 (e) are as follows: 

( 1) Except as provided in 326 lAC 2-13, the source may not begin construction on any emissions unit that is 

necessary to implement the modification until the commissioner has approved the modification request. 

(2) Within forty-five (45) calendar days from receipt of an application for a modification described under 

subsection (e), the commissioner shall do one (1) of the following: 

(A) Approve the modification request. 

(B) Deny the modification request. 

(C) Determine that the minor permit revision request would cause or contribute to a violation of the National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) or prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) standards would 

allow for an increase in emissions greater than the thresholds in subsection (g) or would not provide for 

compliance monitoring consistent with this rule and should be processed under subsection (h). 

(3) The source may begin construction as follows: 

(A) If the source has a final Part 70 permit and only requests preconstruction approval or if the source does 

not have a final Part 70 permit, the source may begin construction upon approval by the commissioner. 

Notwithstanding IC 13-15-5, the commissioner's approval shall become effective immediately. Operation of 

the modification shall be as follows: 

(i) For a source that has a final Part 70 permit, operation of the modification may commence in accordance 

with section 12 of this rule. 

(ii) For a source without a final Part 70 permit, operation may begin after construction is completed. 

(B) If the source requests that the preconstruction approval and operating permit revision be combined, the 

source may begin construction upon approval and operation may begin in accordance with section 12 of this 

rule. 

Date: Oct 29,2013 10:08:50AM EDT DIN: 20130206-IR-326110747SNA Page 5 
Indiana Register 

(g) The following significant modifications shall be processed in accordance with subsection (h): 

(1) Any modification that is subject to 326 lAC 2-2, 326 lAC 2-3, or 326 lAC 2-4.1. 

(2) A modification that is subject to 326 lAC 8-1-6. 

(3) Any modification with a potential to emit lead at greater than or equal to one (1) ton per year. 

(4) Any modification with a potential to emit greater than or equal to twenty-five (25) tons per year of any of the 

following pollutants: 

(A) PM, PM10, or direct PM2 5. 

(B) Sulfur dioxide (SC?J· · 

(C) Nitrogen oxides (NU ). 

(D) VOC. X 

(E) Hydrogen sulfide (H2S). 

(F) Total reduced sulfur {TRS). 

(G) Reduced sulfur compounds. 

(H) Fluorides. 

(5) For a source of lead with a potential to emit greater than or equal to five (5) tons per year, a modification 

that would increase the potential to emit greater than or equal to six-tenths (0.6) ton per year. 

(6) Any modification with a potential to emit greater than or equal to ten (1 0) tons per year of a single HAP as 

defined under Section 112(b) of the CAA or twenty-five (25) tons per year of any combination of HAPs. 

(7) Any modification with a potential to emit greater than or equal to one hundred (1 00) twenty-five (25) tons 

per year of carbon monoxide (CO). 

(h) The following shall apply to the significant modifications described in subsection (g): 

(1) Any person proposing to make a modification described in subsection (g) shall: 

(A) submit an application concerning the modification; and 

(B) include the information under subsection (d). 

(2) Except as provided in 326 lAC 2-13, the source may not begin construction on any emissions unit that is 

necessary to implement the modification until the commissioner has issued a modification approval. 

(3) The commissioner shall approve or deny the modification as follows: 

(A) Within one hundred twenty (120) calendar days from receipt of an application for a modification in 

subsection (g) except subsection (g)(1 ). 

(B) Within two hundred seventy (270) calendar days from receipt of an application for a modification under 

subsection (g)(1 ). 

(4) A modification approval under this subsection may be issued only if all of the following conditions have 

been met: 

(A) The commissioner has received a complete application for a modification. 

(B) The commissioner has complied with the requirements for public notice as follows: 

(i) For modifications for which a source is only requesting preconstruction approval, the commissioner has 

complied with the requirements under 326 lAC 2-1.1-6. 

(ii) For modifications for which a source is requesting a combined preconstruction approval and operating 

permit revision, the commissioner has complied with the requirements under section 17 of this rule. 

(C) The conditions of the modification approval provide for compliance with all applicable requirements and 

this rule. 

(D) For modifications for which a source is requesting a combined preconstruction approval and operating 

permit revision, the U.S. EPA has received a copy of the proposed modification approval and any notices 

required and has not objected to the issuance of the modification approval within the time period specified in 

section 18 of this rule. 

(5) The commissioner shall do the following: 

(A) Provide a technical support document that sets forth the legal and factual basis for draft modification 

approval conditions, including references to the applicable statutory and regulatory provisions. 

(B) Send this technical support document to: 

(i) the U.S. EPA; 

(ii) the applicant; and 

(iii) any other person who requests it. 

(i) The following shall apply to a modification approval described in subsection (g) for a source that has not 

received a final Part 70 permit: 

(1) After receiving an approval to construct and prior to receiving approval to operate, a source shall prepare 

an affidavit of construction as follows: 

(A) The affidavit shall include the following: 

(i) The name and title of the authorized individual. 

Date: Oct 29,2013 10:08:50AM EDT DIN: 20130206-IR-326110747SNA Page 6 
Indiana Register 

(ii) The company name. 

(iii) Subject to item (iv), an affirmation that the emissions units described in the modification approval: 

(AA) were constructed in conformance with the request for modification approval; and 

(BB) will comply with the modification approval. 

(iv) Identification of any changes to emissions units not included in the request for modification approval, 

but which should have been included under subsection (a). 

(v) The signature of the authorized individual. 

(B) The affidavit shall be notarized. 

(C) A source shall submit the affidavit to the commissioner either after construction of all the emission units 

described in the modification approval or after each phase of construction of the emission units described in 

the modification approval, as applicable, has been completed. 

(2) A source may not operate any emissions units described in the modification approval prior to receiving a 

validation letter issued by the commissioner, except as provided in the following: 

(A) A source may operate the emissions units covered by the affirmation in the affidavit of construction upon 

submission of the affidavit of construction. 

(B) The commissioner shall issue a validation letter within five (5) working days of receipt of the affidavit of 

construction. 

(C) The validation letter shall authorize the operation of all or part of each emissions unit covered by the 

affirmation in the affidavit of construction. 

(D) Subject to clause (E), the validation letter shall include any amendments to the modification approval if 

the amendment is requested by the source and if the amendment does not constitute a modification and 

require public notice and comment under 326 lAC 2-1.1-6. 

(E) A validation letter shall not approve the operation of any emissions unit if an amendment to the 

modification approval requested by the source would constitute a modification and require public notice and 

comment under 326 lAC 2-1.1-6. 

0) Each modification approval issued under this rule shall provide that construction must commence within 

eighteen (18) months of the issuance of the modification approval. 

(k) All modification approval proceedings under this section shall provide adequate procedures for public 

notice, including offering an opportunity for public comment and a hearing on the draft modification approval for 

significant modifications as established in 326 lAC 2-1.1-6 or section 17 of this rule. Modifications for the 

purpose of incorporating the control requirements and emission limitations of a final federal district court 

order or federal consent decree under subsection (b) shall follow procedures for public notice as 

established in 3261AC 2-1.1-6. 

(I) The commissioner shall provide for review by the U.S. EPA and affected states of each: 

( 1) modification application; 

(2) draft modification approval; 

(3) proposed modification approval; and 

(4) final modification approval; 

in accordance with the procedures established in section 18 of this rule for modifications that a source is 

requesting a combined preconstruction approval and operating permit revision. 

(m) A modification approval issued in accordance with this section shall be incorporated into the source's Part 

70 permit or permit application as follows: 

( 1) For a source that has a final Part 70 permit and requested that the preconstruction approval and permit 

revision be combined, the modification approval shall be incorporated into the Part 70 permit as an 

administrative amendment in accordance with section 11 of this rule. 

(2) For a source that has a final Part 70 permit and requested only a preconstruction approval, the source may 

begin operation in accordance with section 12 of this rule. 

(3) For a source that has a complete Part 70 permit application on file, but does not have a final Part 70 permit 

and requested only preconstruction approval, the modification approval: 

(A) shall be deemed incorporated in the Part 70 permit application; and 

(B) will be included in the Part 70 permit when issued. 

(4) For a source that has a final Part 70 permit and requested a modification under subsection (b), the 

modification approval shall be incorporated into the Part 70 permit as an administrative amendment in 

accordance with section 11 of this rule. 

Date: Oct 29,2013 1 0:08:50AM EDT DIN: 20130206-IR-326110747SNA Page 7 
Indiana Register 

*This dooument is inoorporated by referenoe. Copies may be obtained from the Government Printing Offioe, 

732 North Capitol Street NV\l, VVashington, D.C. 20401 or are available for review and oopying at the Indiana 

Department of Environmental Management, Offioe of Air Quality, Indiana Government Genter North, Tenth rloor, 

1 00 ~Jorth Senate /\venue, Indianapolis, Indiana 4 e204. 

(Air Pollution Control Division; 3261AC 2-7-10.5; filed Nov 25, 1998, 12:13 p.m.: 221R 1039; errata filed May 12, 

1999, 11:23 a.m.: 221R 3107; filed Oct 23, 2000, 9:47a.m.: 241R 672; filed May 21, 2002, 10:20 a.m.: 251R 

3065; filed Aug 10, 2004, 3:35p.m.: 271R 3947; errata filed Jul23, 2007, 4:19p.m.: 

20070815-IR-326070466ACA; filed Oct 1, 2010, 3:48p.m.: 20101027-IR-326070372FRA; filed Feb 6, 2012, 2:54 

p.m.: 20120307-IR-326090493FRA; filed Jun 11, 2012, 3:15p.m.: 20120711-IR-326110251FRA) 

SECTION 2. 326 lAC 2-8-11.1 IS AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS: 

326 lAC 2-8-11.1 Permit revisions 

Authority: IC 13-14-8; IC 13-17 -3-4; IC 13-17-3-11 

Affected: IC 13-15-5; IC 13-17 

Sec. 11.1. (a) Any person proposing to add additional emission units, modify existing emission units, or 

otherwise modify a FESOP source as described in this section shall submit a permit revision request in 

accordance with this section. 

(b) Notwithstanding any other provision of this rule, the owner or operator of a source may repair or replace an 

emissions unit or air pollution control equipment, or components thereof, without prior approval, if the repair or 

replacement: 

(1) results in a potential to emit for each regulated pollutant that is less than or equal to the potential to emit for 

the equipment or the affected emissions unit that was repaired or replaced; 

(2) is not a major modification under 326 lAC 2-2-1, 326 lAC 2-3-1, or 326 lAC 2-4.1; and 

(3) returns the emissions unit, process, or control equipment to normal operation after an upset, malfunction, 

or mechanical failure or prevents impending and imminent failure of the emissions unit, process, or control 

equipment. 

If the repair or replacement qualifies as a reconstruction or is a complete replacement of an emissions unit or air 

pollution control equipment and would require a permit or operating permit revision under a provision of this rule, 

the owner or operator of the source must submit an application for a permit or permit revision to the commissioner 

not later than thirty (30) calendar days after initiating the repair or replacement. 

(c) An application required under this section shall meet the requirements of section 3(c) of this rule and 

include the following information: 

(1) The company name and address. 

(2) A description of the change and the emissions resulting from the change. 

(3) An identification of the applicable requirements to which the source is newly subject as a result of the 

change, including the applicable emission limits and standards, applicable monitoring and test methods, and 

applicable record keeping and reporting requirements. 

(4) Proposed permit terms and conditions required to implement the change, including limitations and methods 

to be used to comply with the limitations for modifications described in subsection (d)(4). 

(5) A schedule of compliance, if applicable. 

(6) A certification consistent with section 3(d) of this rule. 

(d) The following modifications that have a potential to emit within the following ranges shall require minor 

permit revisions and shall require approval prior to construction and operation: 

(1) Modifioations that reduoe the frequenoy of any monitoring or reporting required by a permit oondition or 

applioable requirement. 

(2) The addition of a portable souroe or relooation of a portable souroe to an m<isting sou roe, if the addition or 

relooation would require a ohange to any permit terms or oonditions. 

(3) Modifioations that '#ould have a potential to emit '#ithin the following ranges: 

tA1 (1) Less than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greater than five (5) tons per year of either PM, 

PMtQ' or direct PM2 5. 

fB1 \:l) Less than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greater than ten ( 1 0) tons per year of sulfur 

Date: Oct 29,2013 10:08:50AM EDT DIN: 20130206-IR-326110747SNA Page 8 
Indiana Register 

dioxide (SO). 

fG1 (3) Less than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greater than ten (1 0) tons per year of nitrogen 

oxides (NO ). 

f91 (4) Lest than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greater than ten (1 0) tons per year of VOC for 

modifications that are not described in clause (E). 

te7 (5) Less than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greater than five (5) tons per year of VOC for 

modifications that require the use of air pollution control equipment to comply with the applicable provisions of 

3261AC 8. 

(F) Less than one hundred (100) tons per year and equal to or greater than twenty five (25) tons per year of 

sarbon monm<ide (GO). 

fG1 (6) Less than five (5) tons one (1) ton per year and equal to or greater than two-tenths (0.2) ton per year 

of lead (Pb). 

f1=11 (7) Less than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greater than five (5) tons per year of the 

following regulated air pollutants: 

fi1 (A) Hydrogen sulfide (H2S). 

fii1 (B) Total reduced sulfur (TRS). 

tffi1 (C) Reduced sulfur compounds. 

fi¥1 (D) Fluorides. 

(4) Modifisations for whish the potential to emit is limited to less than twenty five (25) tons per year of any 

regulated pollutant other than H/\Ps, ten (1 0) tons per year of any single H/\P as defined under Sestion 112(b) 

of the G/\A, or twenty five (25) tons per year of any sombination of H/\Ps by somplying with one (1) of the 

follo'<'ving sonstraints: 

(A) Limiting total annual solvent usage or mm<imum VOG sontent, or both. 

(8) Limiting annual hours of operation of the prosess or business. 

(G) Using a partisulate air pollution sontrol devise as follows: 

(i) Ashieving and maintaining ninety nine persent (99%) effisiensy. 

(ii) Complying ·.vith a no visible emission standard. 

(iii) The potential to emit before air pollution sontrols does not m(eeed major sourse thresholds for federal 

permitting programs. 

(iv) Certifying to the sommissioner that the air pollution control device supplier guarantees that a specific 

outlet concentration, in conjunction ·.vith design air flow, will result in actual emissions less than t\venty five 

(25) tons of PM, or fifteen (15) tons per year of PM.w-or direct PM~7 

(D) Limiting individual fuel usage and fuel type for a sombustion source. 

(E) Limiting raw material throughput or sulfur content of raw materials, or both. 

(5) /\change that is not dessribed under section 1 O(a)(15) or 1 O(a)(16) of this rule and is subject to a R/\GT, a 

new source performance standard (~JSPS), or a national emission standard for hazardous air pollutants 

(NESI=I/\P) and the R/\GT, NSPS, or NESI=I/\P is the most stringent applicable requirement, m(oept for those 

modifications that would be subject to the provisions of 40 GFR 63, Subpart 8 Hazardous /\ir Pollutants: 

Regulations Governing Constructed or Reconstructed Major Sources*. /\s part of the application required 

under subsection (e), the applicant shall aolmmvledge the requirement to comply with the R/\GT, ~JSPS, or 

NESH/\P. 

(6) /\ modification for which a sou roe requests an emission limit to avoid 326 1/\G 8 1 6. 

(e) Minor permit revision procedures shall be as follows: 

(1) Any person proposing to make a change described in subsection (d) shall: 

(A) submit an application concerning the change; and 

(B) include the information under subsection (c). 

(2) Except as provided in 326 lAC 2-13, the source may not begin construction on any emissions unit that is 

necessary to implement the change until the commissioner has revised the permit. 

(3) Within forty-five (45) calendar days from receipt of an application for a minor permit revision, the 

commissioner shall either: 

(A) approve the minor permit revision request; 

(B) deny the minor permit revision; or 

(C) determine that the minor permit revision request would cause or contribute to a violation of the National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) or prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) standards, would 

allow for an increase in emissions greater than the thresholds in subsection (f), or would not provide for 

compliance monitoring consistent with this rule and should be processed as a significant permit revision. 

(4) If approved, the permit shall be revised by incorporating the minor permit revision into the permit. The 

commissioner shall make any changes necessary to assure compliance with this title and the CAA prior to 

attaching the minor permit revision to the permit. The commissioner shall do the following: 

Date: Oct 29,2013 10:08:50AM EDT DIN: 20130206-IR-326110747SNA Page 9 
Indiana Register 

(A) Notify the permittee upon incorporation of the minor permit revision to the permit. 

(B) Provide a copy of the minor permit revision to the permittee. 

Notwithstanding IC 13-15-5, the commissioner's decision shall become effective immediately. 

(f) Significant permit revision procedures are as follows: 

(1) A significant permit revision is a modification that is not an administrative amendment under section 10 of 

this rule or subject to subsection (d) and includes the following: 

(A) Any modification that would be subject to 326 lAC 2-2, 326 lAC 2-3, or 326 lAC 2-4.1. 

(B) Any modification that results in the source needing to obtain a Part 70 permit under 326 lAC 2-7. 

(C) A modification that is subject to 326 lAC 8-1-6. 

(D) Any modification with a potential to emit lead at greater than or equal to one (1) ton per year. 

(E) Any modification with a potential to emit greater than or equal to twenty-five (25) tons per year of the 

following pollutants: 

(i) PM, PM10, or direct PM2 5. 

(ii) Sulfur dioxide (SO ). · 

(iii) Nitrogen oxides (~0 ). 

(iv) VOC. x 

(v) Hydrogen sulfide (H2S). 

(vi) Total reduced sulfur (TRS). 

(vii) Reduced sulfur compounds. 

(viii) Fluorides. 

(F) For a source of lead with a potential to emit greater than or equal to five (5) tons per year, a modification 

that would increase the potential to emit greater than or equal to six-tenths (0.6) ton per year. 

(G) Any modification with a potential to emit greater than or equal to ten (1 0) tons per year of a single HAP 

as defined under Section 112(b) of the CAA or twenty-five (25) tons per year of any combination of HAPs. 

(H) Any modification with a potential to emit greater than or equal to one hundred (1 00) twenty-five (25) 

tons per year of carbon monoxide (CO). 

(I) Any modification that removes or reduces compliance monitoring, testing, record keeping, reporting, or its 

frequency. 

(2) The following conditions shall apply to significant permit revisions: 

(A) Any person proposing to make a modification described in this subsection shall: 

(i) submit an application concerning the modification; and 

(ii) include the information under subsection (c). 

(B) The commissioner shall provide a copy of the significant permit revision application and draft and final 

operating permit revision to the U.S. EPA. 

(C) Except as provided in 326 lAC 2-13, the source may not begin construction on any emissions unit that is 

necessary to implement the change until the commissioner has revised the permit. 

(D) The commissioner shall provide for public notice and comment in accordance with section 13 of this 

rule. 

(E) The commissioner shall approve or deny the significant permit revision as follows: 

(i) Within one hundred twenty (120) calendar days from receipt of an application for a significant permit 

revision, except for a significant permit revision under subdivision (1 )(A). 

(ii) Within two hundred seventy (270) calendar days from receipt of an application for a significant permit 

revision under subdivision (1 )(A). 

(F) If approved, the permit shall be revised by incorporating the significant permit revision into the permit. 

The commissioner shall make any changes necessary to assure compliance with this title and the CAA prior 

to attaching the significant permit revision to the permit. 

(g) ~Jotwithstanding a permit requirement for emissions to remain below major sou roe thresholds under Part 

70 in 326 1/\G 2 7, PSD in 326 1/\G 2 2, or emission offset in 326 1/\G 2 3, any modifieations that require an 

adjustment to the FESOP emission limitations shall be required to be revimved in aeeordanee ·.vith the proeedures 

in subseetion (f). 

*This doeument is ineorporated by referenee. Copies may be obtained from the Government Printing Offiee, 

732 ~Jorth Capitol Street NVV, VVashington, D.C. 20401 or are available for review and eopying at the Indiana 

Department of Environmental Management, Offiee of /\ir Quality, Indiana Government Genter ~Jorth, Tenth Floor, 

100 ~Jorth Senate Avenue, Indianapolis, Indiana 46204. 

(Air Pollution Control Division; 3261AC 2-8-11.1: filed Nov 25, 1998, 12:13 p.m.: 221R 1055; errata filed May 12, 

1999, 11:23 a.m.: 221R 3107; filed May 21, 2002, 10:20 a.m.: 251R 3072; errata filed Jul23, 2007, 4:19p.m.: 

Date: Oct29,201310:08:50AM EDT DIN: 20130206-IR-326110747SNA Page 10 
Indiana Register 

20070815-IR-326070466ACA; filed Oct 1, 2010, 3:48p.m.: 20101027-IR-326070372FRA; filed Feb 6, 2012, 2:54 

p.m.: 20120307-IR-326090493FRA; filed Jun 11, 2012, 3:15p.m.: 20120711-IR-326110251FRA) 

Notice of Public Hearing 

Posted: 02/06/2013 by Legislative Services Agency 

An html version of this document. 

Date: Oct 29,2013 10:08:50AM EDT DIN: 20130206-IR-326110747SNA Page 11 

Indiana Register 

TITLE 326 AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DIVISION 

Notice of Public Hearing 

Notice of Public Hearing 

LSA Document #11-747 

Under IC 4-22-2-24, IC 13-14-B-6, and IC 13-14-9, notice is hereby given that on May B, 2013, at 1:30 p.m., 

at the Indiana Government Center South, 302 West Washington Street, Conference Center Room A, Indianapolis, 

Indiana, the Environmental Rules Board will hold a public hearing on amendments concerning minor new source 

review requirements for Title V and Federally Enforceable State Operating Permit (FESOP) sources at 326 lAC 2-

7-10.5 and 3261AC 2-B-11.1. 

The purpose of this hearing is to receive comments from the public prior to preliminary adoption of these 

rules by the board. All interested persons are invited and will be given reasonable opportunity to express their 

view concerning the proposed amendments. Oral statements will be heard, but, for the accuracy of the record, all 

comments should be submitted in writing. 

Additional information regarding this action may be obtained from Susan Bern, Rule Development Section, 

Office of Legal Counsel, (317) 233-5697 or (BOO) 451-6027 (in Indiana). 

Individuals requiring reasonable accommodations for participation in this event should contact the Indiana 

Department of Environmental Management, Americans with Disabilities Act coordinator at: 

Attn: ADA Coordinator 

Indiana Department of Environmental Management 

100 North Senate A venue 

Indianapolis, IN 46204-2251 

oreal/ (317) 233-17B5 (V). Speech and hearing impaired callers may contact IDEM via the Indiana Relay Service 

(711) or (BOO) 7 43-3333. Please provide a minimum of 72 hours notification. 

Copies of these rules are now on file at the Office of Legal Counsel, Indiana Department of Environmental 

Management, Indiana Government Center North, 100 North Senate Avenue, Thirteenth Floor East and Legislative 

Services Agency, Indiana Government Center North, 100 North Senate Avenue, Room N201, Indianapolis, 

Indiana and are open for public inspection. 

Nancy King, Chief 

Rules Development Branch 

Office of Legal Counsel 

Posted: 02/06/2013 by Legislative Services Agency 

An html version of this document. 

Date: Oct 29,2013 10:09:31AM EDT DIN: 20130206-IR-326110747PHA Page 1 

IDEM INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 

We Protect Hoosiers and Our Environment. 

Michael R. Pence 

Governor 

Thomas W. Easterly 

Commissioner 

April23, 2013 

CERTIFICATE OF PUBLICATION 

100 North Senate Avenue 

Indianapolis, Indiana 46204 

(317) 232-8603 

Toll Free (800) 451-6027 

www.idem.IN.gov 

This is to ce1iify that the Indiana Depmiment of Environmental Management (IDEM) Notice of 

Public Hearings for the Environmental Rules Board Meeting, 05/08/2013, regarding the following 

rulemaking actions: 

• Preliminary Adoption, Minor New Source Review, LSA # 11-7 4 7 

• Preliminary Adoption, Permits and NAAQS Protection, LSA #12-500 

was published on IDEM's web site on AprilS, 2013. It will remain posted on the site until at least 

May 4, 2013. 

The notice in full may be found at the following web address, under the "Statewide" category. 

http://www.in.gov/idem/6777.htm 

Web publication of the notice was at the request of Christine Pedersen, Section Chief, Rule 

Development Section, Office ofLegal Counsel, IDEM. 

Attachments: 

Copy of web page as published. 

Recycled Paper @ 

By: 

Mike Finklestein 

IDEM Webmaster 

An Equal Opportunity Employer Please Recycle O 
I 

( 
IN~ 

... . ··JV"··· I . : 

. ·. 

~lfJlou:t 

I .Agrlcu'ntrrre & I lf:ndiana E:rl:vi:r.omnent Law& l Pnblie l Ta."res:&.l To11lrlism& Jusliee Safety P:lnance 'Fr.a:n.sporta.i!:ion lk!sinesS~& II Ednca.tlon& En:itp]oyment Training 

IDEM Home 

About 

·e-Seroioes 

__ 

_':~.?:_t?_r.:._~!:~!'!::'. __ 

---· ·-- ___ . _. -----· _ • 

.. !:.~~~!:1-~-------------·-·-----------···-· 

News and Events 

Nonrule Policies 

.... _ ...... ____ ~ .... 

-

.... 

-------

.... 

-

...................................... 

-

Public !Iotloes 

Publications & Forms ,... 

R.;,~~ 

' 

--

:c~~;;.;;t---

· · .. ______ -· · · ·.---------· ·----· 

Information For 

_2grfcultu.r_e ____ ~. Businesses & Cm!Sultants .... 

.. .. ............................. ..................... .......... ____ ... 

---

.......... -· 

Citi:llens 

.................... 

-

.. 

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

................................. .. 

Educat(ns 

Government 

Kids --------· 

Media 

·-----·---

.. 

-

Researchers 

Environmental Information 

---~~~-~':~~~t.'!o/. _____________________ _ 

Your Environment 

.... 

--------

........................................... 

-------

............... . 

Air Quality·'-----· 

~~~Prog~.r.un--------~-

--~~~:~!l!!l~-~!~~-----··-------·-···-

.5?~':1.1?~~!_1y-~!J.V:i_r~n_~l!~! 

-~~l!f: _____ _ 

<:TAP: Compliance and Tecbntcal 

---~~~~-a!;~~.!:.?..~~----------

.-§:!!.r .. <:~:!l.~-~~~~!.> __________ ... :.. -· 

Environmental Education 

Hoosier Riverwatch 

Partners ----~----·----- for PoHution Preven!imt 

Po.frutlon Preventio-n 

--~:_:y::_!~-~~~!~EI~-----------------------·. 

This is the IDEM Pt~bllc Notlcoe Slle ror nomcesoovering the entire State of lrlcfr.ma Tlis page is designed to. provide public .access 

state-wlc!e public notices. as !'eqrni'edi by statute or rufe inctm:lililg: peimitling, n:trerne:killlg, meeting: andi hearing notices. Click hlghlig

view additiona1 infon:rnratioo refated ro the nonce. For public meetings mot l'eqtxirlll.g nouces, please check the IDEM Calendar. 

Sl.lbscrlptlons: Wantito· koow about new noffces as soor11 as they're posted? You can now subscribe to thisregionaf p1ibfrc notice 

subscribilng to a region, you will be sent an ,e-mail or text messag.e to yo!lqmone every time nJEM adds information to this regiona

a1Jows you to stay cmrenl: on all posfmg :and never miss a new posting. To sribscrlbe, click on me subscripfion link in the lei hand

Legal Notice of Public Hearing 

Under 40 CFR 51.102, notice is hereby given that the Environmental Rules Board (board) will 

hold a public hearing at its regularly scheduled meeting on Wednesday, May 8, 2013. The 

meeting will convene at 1:30 p.m. at the Indiana Government Center-South, Conference Room 

A, 302 West Washington Street, Indianapolis, Indiana. The purpose of the hearing is to receive 

public comments prior to the proposed actions. All interested persons are invited and will be 

given reasonable opportunity to express their views concerning the proposed action. 

Board documents may be viewed and downloaded from the Indiana Department of 

Environmental Management's Web site as early as one week prior to the meeting at 

http://www.in.gov/idem/4696.htm. 

Copies of the proposed rules are also available to any person upon request, may be viewed online 

via the Internet from local libraries, and are available for public inspection at the following 

locations: 

Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Office of Air Quality, Indiana 

Government Center-North, 100 North Senate Avenue, lOth floor-East wing, Indianapolis, 

Indiana 46204. 

Legislative Services Agency, Indiana Government Center-North, 100 North Senate 

Avenue, Room N201, Indianapolis, Indiana 46204. 

Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Northwest Office, 330 W US 

Highway 30, Suite F, Valparaiso, Indiana 46385. 

Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Northern Office, Suite 450, 300 N. 

Michigan Street, South Bend, Indiana 46601-1295. 

Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Southwest Office, 1120 North 

Vincennes Avenue, P.O. Box 128, Petersburg, Indiana 47567-0128. 

Indiana Department ofEnvironmental Management, Southeast.Office, 820 West Sweet 

Street, Brownstown, Indiana 47220-9557. 

Indianapolis Central Library, 40 East St. Clair Street, Indianapolis, Indiana 46204. 

Hammond Public Library, 564 State Street, Hammond, Indiana 46320. 

Allen County Public Libr.ary, 900 Library Plaza, Fort Wayne, Indiana 46802. 

Evansville Vanderburgh Public Library, 200 SE Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Evansville, 

Indiana 47713. 

The following rules are noticed for hearing and action: 

Minor New Source Review (LSA #11-747). The purpo_se of this hearing is to receive public 

comment on amendments to 326 lAC 2-7 and 326 lAC 2-8 concerning Indiana's air permitting 

regulations and minor new source review (NSR) requirements for Title V and Federally 

Enforceable State Operating Permit (FESOP) sources. These revisions will address U.S. EPA 

concerns on minor modifications limits, an inconsistency in the lead limits, and provide 

clarification on public notice for source modifications for consent decree provisions. This rule 

will be submitted to the United States Environmental Protection Agency as a revision to the State 

Implementation Plan required by the Clean Air Act. A copy of the most recently published 

version of this rule is available at: http://www.in.gov/idem/5679.htm. 
For additional information concerning this rule contact Susan Bern at the Indiana 

Department ofEnvironmental Management, Office of Legal Counsel, Indiana Government 

Center North, 100 North Senate Avenue, Indianapolis at (317) 233-5697 or (800) 451-6027 (ext. 

3-5697)(in Indiana), or sbem@idem.in.gov. 

Permits and National Ambient Air QualitfS ndards Protection (LSA #12-500). The 

purpose of this hearing is to receive public comm ton amendments to 326 lAC 2-1.1-5, 326 

lAC 2-5.1-3, and 326 lAC 2-6.1-5 concerning reqm ements for the protection of ambient air 

quality standards in construction pennits. This rule ill clarify the applicability of these 

requirements in permitting actions and make other related revisions. This rule will be submitted 

to the United States Environmental Protection Agency as a revision to the State Implementation 

Plan required by the Clean Air Act. A copy of the most recently published version of this rule is 

available at: http://www.in.gov/idem/5679.htm. 

For additional information concerning this rule contact Susan Bern at the Indiana 

Department ofEnvironmental Management, Office of Legal Counsel, Indiana Government 

Center North, 100 North Senate Avenue, Indianapolis at (317) 233-5697 or (800) 451-6027 (ext. 

3-5697)(in Indiana), or sbem@idem.in.gov. 

For these hearings, oral statements will be heard, but for the accmacy of the record, 

please submit statements in writing to the attendant designated to receive w:t:itten comments at 

the public hearings. 

A transcript of the hearings and all :written submissions to the board at the public hearings . 

shall be open to public inspection at the Indiana Department of Environmental Management; 

copies may be made available to any person upon payment of reproduction costs. Any person 

heard or represented at the hearings or requesting notice shall be given written notice of the 

actions of the board. 

Christine Pedersen, Chief 

Rule Development Section 

Office of Legal Counsel 

****************************************************************************** 

Individuals requiring reasonable accommodations for participation in this event should contact 

the Indiana Depatiment of Environmental Management, Americans with Disabilities Act 

coordinator at: · 

Attn: ADA Coordinator 

Indiana Department of Environmental Management 

100 N. Senate Avenue 

Indianapolis, IN 46204 

or call (317) 233-1785. Speech and hearing impaired callers may contact the agency via the 

Indiana Relay Service at 1-800-743-3333. Please provide a minimum of72 homs' notification. 
.! 

( 

INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 

We Protect Hoosiers and Our Environment. 

100 N. Senate Avenue • Indianapolis, IN 46204 

(800) 451-6027 • (317) 232-8603 • www.idem.IN.gov 

Michael R. Pence 

Govenwr 

Thomas W. Easterly 

Commissioner 

July 11, 2013 

CERTIFICATE OF PUBLICATION 

This is to certify that the Indiana Depmiment of Environmental Management (IDEM) Notice of 

Public Hearings for the Environmental Rules Board Meeting, 08/14/2013, regarding the 

following rulemaking actions: 

• Final Adoption, PM2.5 Ozone Designations, LSA #13-164 

• Final Adoption, Minor New Source Review, LSA #11-747 

• Final Adoption, Petmits and National Ambient Air Quality Standards Protection, LSA 

#12-500 

• Preliminary Adoption, Sewage Sludge Incineration and Carbon Monoxide Monitoring, 

LSA #13-215 

were published on IDEM's web site on July 10, 2013. · It will remain posted on the site until at 

least August 14, 2013. 

The notice in full may be found at the following web address, under the "Statewide" category. 

http://www.in.gov/idem/6777.htm 

Web publication of the notice was at the request of Christine Pedersen, Section Chief, Rule 

Development Section, Office ofLegal Counsel, IDEM. 

Attachments: 

Copy of web page as published. 

An Equal Opportunity Employer 

By: 

Mike Finkelstein 

IDEM Webmaster 

0 

A State that Works 

- ® Recycled Paper 

IN.gov 

IDEM Home 

About 

e-Services 

Featured Topics 

News and Events 

Public Notices 

Fact Sheets 

Forms Rules 

Contact 

Staff Maps 

Information About 

Your Community Your Environment Air Quality 

About Agriculture& Business& ! Education& . Family& I Law& Public Ta:<s:e.s& ; Tourism& 

Indiana Envirolllllent Employment : Training Health · Justice : Safety Finance : Transportation 

T 

- Public Notices: Statewide 

This is the IDEM Public Notice Site for notices covering the entire State of Indiana This page is designed to provide public access to all agency 

state-wide public notices as required by statute or rule including: permitting, rulemaking, meeting and hearing notices. Click highlighted links to 

view additional infomnation related to the notice. For publlc meetings not requiring notices, please check the IDEM Calendar. 

Subscriptions: Want to know about new notices as soon as they're posted? You can now subscribe to this regional public notice page. By 

subscribing to a region, you will be sent an e-mail Dr text message to your phone every time IDEM adds information to this regional page. This 

allows you to stay current on all posting and never miss a new posting. To subscribe, click on the subscription ITnk in the left hand column. 

Statewide 

1

_:...:::..:_::_-::_:_-: ___________ ·--- -------------..:1 II Ul I 

PM2.5and Ozone Designations, LSA#13-164 'Legal Notice of Public [0711012013- 'Yes 

Air Toxics Program 

Blue-Green Algae 

Community Environmental Health 

CTAP: Compliance and Technical 

Assistance Program 

.Hearino IPDR :oa/1412013 

:Rule Writer. Zacllary 

iRuz.ycki 

j 

Environmental Cleanup T 

-

- - - - -- ·- ·- -'"' ·- '"' ·- ·- ·-· ·-· 

Environmental Education Environmental Justice 

-

-

-

Hoosier Riverwatch 

-·-·- --

.... 

·--- ----·-----·--·--. 

Minor New Source Review, LSAt/11-747 iLegal Notice of Public 

.Hearino fPDFl 

j Legal Notice of Public 

i Hearing IPDF! 

- iYes 

08/1412013 

07110/2013- Yes 

:0811412013 

:07/1012013- 'Yes 

.... ______________ _ 

] Rule Writer. Susan Bern 

:Address on 

12345

7 8 9 10 IJl 

14 15 16 17 18 

21 22 23 24 25 2

28 29 30 31 

:0811412013 

! Rule Writer. Susan Bern 

iAddress on Notice 

, __ _ 

Partners for Pollution Prevention 

Pollution Prevention 

! NPDES Draft Renewal 

·--------· 

0612812013- :Yes Manager: Sholeh 

IHourmozdi 

Current time zone: Ea$tem 

Recycle Indiana JEQEJ 07/2912013 

Watersheds and Nonpoint Source Water Pollution iAddress on Notice 

Resources 

-- - - - - - - -

Legal Notice of Public Hearing 

Under 40 CFR 51.102, notice is hereby given that the Environmental Rules Board (board) will 

hold a public hearing at its regularly scheduled meeting on Wednesday, August 14, 2013. The 

meeting will convene at 1:30 p.m. at the Indiana Government Center-South, Conference Room 

A, 302 West Washington Street, Indianapolis, Indiana. The purpose of the hearing is to receive 

public comments prior to the proposed actions. All interested persons are invited and will.be 

given reasonable opportunity to express their views concerning the proposed action. 

Board documents may be viewed and downloaded from the Indiana Department of 

Environmental Management's Web site as early as one week prior to the meeting at 

http://www.in.gov/idem/4696.htm. 

Copies of the proposed rules are also available to any person upon request, may be viewed online 

via the Internet from local libraries, and are available for public inspection at the following 

locations: 

Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Office of Legal Counsel, Indiana 

Government Center-North, 100 North Senate Avenue, 13th Floor, Indianapolis, Indiana 46204. 

Legislative Services Agency, Indiana Government Center-Nmih, 100 North Senate 

Avenue, Room N201, Indianapolis, Indiana 46204. 

Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Northwest Office, 33 0 West US 

Highway 30, Suites E and F, Valparaiso, IN 46385. 

Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Nmihem Office, Suite 450, 300 N. 

Michigan Street, South Bend, Indiana 46601. 

Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Southwest Office, 1120 North 

Vincennes Avenue, P.O. Box 128, Petersburg, Indiana 47567-0128. 

Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Southeast Office, 820 West Sweet 

Street, Brownstown, Indiana 47220-9557. 

Indianapolis Central Library, 40 East St. Clair Street, Indianapolis, Indiana 46204. 

Hammond Public Library, 564 State Street, Hammond, Indiana 46320. 

Allen County Public Library, 900 Library Plaza, Fmi Wayne, Indiana 46802. 

Evansville Vanderburgh Public Library, 200 SE Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Evansville, 

Indiana 47713. 

The following rules. are noticed for hearing and action: 

PM2.5 and Ozone Designations (LSA #13-164). The purpose of this hearing is to receive 

public comment prior to adoption of amendments to 326 lAC 1-4 to add federal designations for 

the 1997 annual standard for patiiculate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal 

to two and five-tenths microns (PM2.5), the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard, and the 2008 8-hour 

ozone standm·d. A copy of the most recently published version of this rule is available at: 

http:/ /www.in.gov/idem/5679 .htm. 

For additional information concerning this rule contact Zachary Ruzycki at the Indiana 

Department ofEnvironmental Management, Office of Legal Counsel, Indiana Government 

Center Nmih, 100 North Senate A venue, Indianapolis at (317) 232-8229 or (800) 451-6027 (ext. 

2-8229)(in Indiana), or zruzycki@idem.in.gov. 
Minor New Source Review (LSA #11-747). The purpose ofthis hearing is to receive public 

comment prior to final adoption of amendments to 326 lAC 2-7 and 326 lAC 2-8 conceming 

Indiana's air permitting regulations and minor new source review (NSR) requirements for Title V 

and Federally Enforceable State Operating Permit (FESOP) sources. These revisions will 

address U.S. EPA concerns on minor modifications limits, an inconsistency in the lead limits, 

and provide clarification on public notice for source modifications for consent decree provisions. 

This rule will be submitted to the United States Environmental Protection Agency as a revision 

to the State Implementation Plan required by the Clean Air Act. A copy of the most recently 

published version of this rule is available at: http://www.in.gov/idem/5679.htm. 

For additional information concerning this rule contact Susan Bern at the Indiana 

Department of Environmental Management, Office of Legal Counsel, Indiana Govemment 

Center Nmih, 100 Nmih Senate Avenue, Indianapolis at (317) 233-5697.or (800) 451-6027 (ext. 

3-5697)(in Indiana), or sbem@idem.in.gov. 

Permits and National Ambient Air Quality Standards Protection (LSA #12-500). The 

purpose of this hearing is to receive public comment prior to final adoption of amendments to 

326 lAC 2-1.1-5, 326 lAC 2-5.1-3, and 326 lAC 2-6.1-5 conceming requirements for the 

protection of ambient air quality standards in construction permits. This rule will clarify the 

applicability of these requirements in permitting actions and make other related revisions. This 

rule will be submitted to the United States Environmental Protection Agency as a revision to the 

State Implementation Plan required by the Clean Air Act. A copy of the most recently published 

version ofthis rule is available at: http://www.iri.gov/idem/5679.htm. 

For additional information concerning this rule contact Susan Bern at the Indiana 

Department of Environmental Management, Office of Legal Counsel, Indiana Government 

Center North, 100 North Senate A venue, Indianapolis at (317) 233-5697 or (800) 451-6027 (ext. 

3-5697)(in Indiana), or sbem@idem.in.gov. 

Sewage Sludge Incineration and Carbon Monoxide Monitoring (LSA #13-215). The 

purpose of this hearing is to receive public comment prior to preliminary adoption of 

amendments to 326 lAC 3-5-1 concerning sewage sludge incinerators and carbon monoxide 

(CO) monitoring. This rule will allow continuous emissions monitoring for total hydrocarbons 

or carbon monoxide to ensure that compliance with all applicable requirements is achieved in the 

most efficient way possible and is consistent with federal requirements. This rule will be 

submitted to the United States Environmental Protection Agency as a revision to the State 

Implementation Plan required by the Clean Air Act. A copy of the most recently published 

version of this rule is available at: http://www.in.gov/idem/5679.htm. 

For additional information concerning this rule contact Susan Bern at the Indiana 

Depmiment of Environmental Management, Office of Legal Counsel, Indiana Government 

Center North, 100 North Senate A venue, Indianapolis at (317) 233-5697 or (800) 451-6027 (ext. 

3-5697)(in Indiana), or sbem@idem.in.gov. 

For these hearings, oral statements will be heard, but for the accuracy of the record, 

please submit statements in writing to the attendant designated to receive written comments at 

the public hearings. 
A transcript of the hearings and all written submissions to the board at the public hearings 

shall be open to public inspection at the Indiana Department of Environmental Management; 

copies may be made available to any person upon payment of reproduction costs. Any person 

heard or represented at the hearings or requesting notice shall be given written notice of the 

actions of the board. 

Christine Pedersen, Chief 

Rule Development Section 

Office of Legal Counsel 

****************************************************************************** 

Individuals requiring reasonable accommodations for participation in this event should contact 

the Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Americans with Disabilities Act 

coordinator at: 

Attn: ADA Coordinator 

Indiana Department of Environmental Management 

100 N. Senate Avenue 

Indianapolis, IN 46204 

or call (317) 233-1785. Speech and hearing impaired callers may contact the agency via the 

Indiana Relay Service at 1-800-743-3333. Please provide a minimum of72 hours' notification. 
( ' 
?(: 

( ' 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

; ( 12 

t -~ 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

,.( 

! 

~ {;..~~. 

BEFORE THE STATE OF INDIANA 

ENVIRONMENTAL RULES BOARD 

PUBLIC MEETING OF MAY 8, 2013 

ORIGINAL 

PROCEEDINGS 

before the Indiana Environmental Rules Board, 

Beverly Gard, Chairman, taken before me, Lindy L. 

Meyer, Jr., a Notary Public in and for the State 

of Indiana, County of Shelby, at the Indiana 

Government Center South, Conference Center, 

Room A, 402 West Washington Street, Indianapolis, 

Indiana, on Wednesday, May 8, 2013 at 1:29 

o'clock p.m. 

William F. Daniels, RPR/CP CM d/b/a 

ACCURATE REPORTING OF INDIANA 

12922 Brighton Avenue 

Carmel, Indiana 46032 

(317) 848-0088 

1 
( 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

' 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

' 

APPEARANCES: 

BOARD MEMBERS: 

Beverly Gard, Chairman 

Thomas R. Anderson 

Gary Powdrill 

Dr. Ted Niemiec 

Joanne Alexandrovich 

Kelly Carmichael 

William Etzler 

Chris Horn 

Gail Boydston 

Calvin Davidson 

Mike Mettler, Proxy, Department of 

Health 

Pamela Fisher, Proxy, Indiana Economic 

Development Corporation 

Amy Cornell, Proxy, Lieutenant 

Governor 

Thomas W. Easterly (nonvoting) 

IDEM STAFF MEMBERS: 

Bruno Pigott 

Scott Deloney 

Chris Pedersen 

Susan Bern 

Martha Clark Mettler 

Matt Stuckey 

Roger Letterman 

Nancy King 

Ann Long 

MaryAnn Stevens 

Betsy Rouse 

Janet Pittman 

Betsy Zlatos 

Dan Watts 

Lauren Aguilar 

PUBLIC SPEAKERS: 

Jennifer K. Thompson 

2 
{ 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

(( - 12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

~~ 

CHAIRMAN GARD: 

1:29 o'clock p.m. 

May 8, 2013 

I'll call the 

3 

May 8th, 2013 meeting of the Environmental Rules 

Board to order. The Chair sees a quorum, so we 

can conduct business. I'm going to do what we do 

every meeting, go around and have people 

introduced themselves and say who they represent. 

COMM. EASTERLY: I'm Tom Easterly, 

Commissioner of the Indiana Department of 

Environmental Management, and I represent IDEM. 

MS. CORNELL: I'm Amy Cornell, and 

I'm proxy for the Lieutenant Governor's Office. 

MR. METTLER: I'm Mike Mettler, proxy 

for State Health Commissioner, Dr. VanNess. 

MS. FISHER: Pam Fisher, proxy for 

Secretary of Commerce Victor Smith. 

MR. HORN: Chris Horn. I represent 

labor. 

MS. BOYDSTON: Gail Boydston, 

representing manufacturing. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Beverly Gard, 

representing the general public. 
( 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

( 12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

( 

MR. ETZLER: Bill Etzler 1 small 

business. 

MR. ANDERSON: 

environment. 

MR. POWDRILL: 

public at large. 

Tom Anderson, 

Gary Powdrill 1 the 

DR. NIEMIEC: Ted Niemiec 1 health 

care providers. 

MS. ALEXANDROVICH: Joanne 

Alexandrovich 1 local government. 

MR. CARMICHAEL: 

representing utilities. 

MR. DAVIDSON: 

Kelly Carmichael 1 

Calvin Davidson/ 

representing solid waste recyclin~. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Thank you. 

The first order of business today is the 

approval of the minutes summary of March 13th1 

2013 Board meeting. Are there any additions or 

corrections to the summary as presented to you? 

(No response.) 

CHAIRMAN GARD: If not, is there a 

motion to approve them? 

DR. NIEMIEC: So moved. 

4 
5 

1 MR. POWDRILL: Second. 

2 CHAIRMAN GARD: Second? All in 

3 favor, say aye. 

4 MR. ETZLER: Aye. 

5 MS. FISHER: Aye. 

6 MR. POWDRILL: Aye. 

7 MR. METTLER: Aye. 

8 MS. ALEXANDROVICH: Aye. 

9 MR. ANDERSON: Aye. 

10 DR. NIEMIEC: Aye. 

11 MR. CARMICHAEL: Aye. 

(( 12 MS. BOYDSTON: Aye. 

13 MR. DAVIDSON: Aye. 

14 MR. HORN: Aye. 

15 MS. CORNELL: Aye. 

16 CHAIRMAN GARD: All opposed, no. 

17 (No response.) 

18 CHAIRMAN GARD: Motion passes. 

19 Before we move on to IDEM's report, 

20 several people have questioned me since they've 

21 been here this afternoon with questions on the 

22 disclosure form. Nancy, if -- does anybody have 

23 any questions for Nancy on the disclosure form 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

( 12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

aye. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Is there a second? 

DR. NIEMIEC: Second. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: All in favor, say 

MR. ETZLER: Aye. 

MS. FISHER: Aye. 

MR. POWDRILL: Aye. 

MR. METTLER: Aye. 

MS. ALEXANDROVICH: Aye. 

MR. ANDERSON: Aye. 

DR. NIEMIEC: Aye. 

MR. CARMICHAEL: Aye. 

MS. BOYDSTON: Aye. 

MR. DAVIDSON: Aye. 

MR. HORN: Aye. 

MS. CORNELL: Aye. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: All opposed, nay. 

(No response.) 

CHAIRMAN GARD: The motion passes. 

25 

This is a public hearing before the 

Environmental Rules Board of the State of Indiana 

concerning preliminary adoption of amendments to 

rules at 326 IAC 2-7 and 2-8, Minor New Source 
I 

( ( 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

( ( 12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

\ ( 

Review. 

I will now introduce Exhibit B 1 the draft 

rules 1 into the record of the hearing. 

And who from the Department will comment 

on the rule? 

COMM. EASTERLY: Susan. 

26 

MS. BEM: My name is Susan Bem 1 and I 

work in the Rule Development Branch. 

IDEM is proposing to amend the Minor New 

Source Review Rules for Title V and Federally 

Enforceable State Operating Permits 1 or FESOP 1 

sources that are seeking approval for 

construction of new units or modifications: 

These amendments will allow IDEM to 

request U.S. EPA State Implementation Plan 1 or 

SIP 1 approval of the Minor New Source Review 

Program for these Title V and FESOP sources. 

IDEM submitted the Minor New Source Review 

Rules at 2-7-10.5 and 2-8-11.1 under Title 326 to 

U.S. EPA in 1999 for SIP approval. EPA would not 

approve the rules because the rule allowed 

certain modifications to be permitted under the 

minor modification process instead of the 
1 significant modification process, which does not 

2 require public notice. 

27 

3 EPA has also stated that the threshold for 

4 carbon monoxide needs to be 25 tons per year and 

5 not the 100 tons per year so that any 

6 modification for carbon monoxide greater than 25 

7 tons per year would fall underneath the 

8 significant modification process, and therefore 

9 have public notice. The 25-ton-per-year 

10 threshold is consistent with other regulated 

11 pollutants, such as particulate matter. 

12 It's important to have federal EPA 

13 approval of Minor New Source Review Program in 

14 order to get the overall preconstruction approval 

15 program approved by EPA. 

16 The amendments in the draft rule will also 

17 bring the state rule in line with what is in the 

18 current SIP for Indiana, and as I mentioned 

19 earlier, the rule as we amended it back in 1999 

20 has not been SIP approved yet. 

21 And the draft rule that you have before 

22 you in your Board packet, as Chris already 

23 mentioned, it's the current Administrative Code 
t 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

l 

language with any changes with strikeout are 

things that ~re being removed from the rule, and 

any new language being shown in bold text. 

28 

And the Department requests that the Board 

preliminarily adopt the rule as presented. 

Thank you. Any questions? 

MS. ALEXANDROVICH: Yeah, I do. 

Under -- on page 3 of 14 and 5 of 14 in our 

packet, there are stricken sections regarding 

sources wit~ monitoring frequency changes, 

portable sources, HAP sources, and those subject 

to RACT, NSPS --

MS. BEM: Uh-huh. 

MS. ALEXANDROVICH: -- and NESHAP. 

Why is that stricken? 

MS. BEM: So, in the -- so, those are 

all changes that we are proposing would not be 

processed underneath the minor modification 

process, but would be over in the significant 

modification process, and those are all of the 

changes that EPA had said that we couldn't have 

these different types of exemptions in there for 

SIP approval, and that was what they were looking 
1 for in SIP approval, that those have to be 

2 underneath the major modification process so it 

3 goes through public notice and all of the other 

4 requirements that are part of that process 

5 underneath the subsection. 

6 MS. ALEXANDROVICH: Okay. I kind of 

7 went through it, but I just the only 

8 difference that I could see was --

9 

10 altogether. 

11 

MS. BEM: So, it's not going away 

MS. ALEXANDROVICH: the amount of 

12 time that IDEM had to look over the changes went 

13 from 45 days to 120. 

14 MS. BEM: Yeah, the time frames for 

15 approving modifications, changes, with that 

16 process changed, and then also any steps for 

17 requests for public hearing and other different 

18 steps. 

19 

20 

21 

MS. ALEXANDROVICH: Okay. I have --

CHAIRMAN GARD: Go ahead. 

MS. ALEXANDROVICH: -- another 

22 question, or actually maybe more of a comment 

29 

23 about making -- allowing the public to comment on 
(( 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

(I 12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

{ ( 

30 

a federal consent decree. I suppose that if the 

public thinks the permit is not stringent enough, 

IDEM can do something about it, but I can't 

possibly conceive of any other .public comment 

that could make any difference on those consent 

decrees. Is that kind of how it works? 

MS. BEM: Yeah. I mean -- and since 

they are federal consent decrees and they're ju$t 

taking the exact same +equirements from the 

federal consent decree and putti0g them into the 

state permitting process and -- you know, there 

shouldn't be any substantial public comments made 

on that, but since as that new consent decree 

provision is put into this modification process, 

we couldn't put it in as part of the minor 

modification process, and it's part of the 

since it's part of the major modification 

process, we have to put that public notice 

MS. ALEXANDROVICH: Okay. 

MS. BEM: -- requirement in there. 

MS. ALEXANDROVICH: And one last 

thing: What about state consent decrees, from 

state courtsi do the -- it needs to be public 
31 

c 

t 

1 noticed for that? 

2 MS. BEM: There's prob -- I would 

3 assume there's a separate public notice process 

4 as part of that state consent decree provision, 

5 but for the -- but for this -- the federal 

6 consent decrees, we needed a process to get them 

7 into -- I guess a lot of these federal consent 

8 decrees, there's a requirement in them that the 

9 provisions have to be permitted and enforceable 

10 as part of the State Implementation Plan. 

11 And in order to make them permanent and 

~ 12 enforceable, we have this construction permit 

13 process where we add them to the construction 

14 permits, and then they become enforceable, and 

15 the consent decree can eventually go away, and so 

16 that's why we've added the federal consent 

17 decree, because of that· SIP provision 

18 requirement. And then once we get the SIP 

19 approved, it would be a SIP approved construction 

20 permit program. 

21 MS. ALEXANDROVICH: And so, usually 

22 for·a state -- when you guys have agreements on, 

23 you know, a court order or something, you put 

( 
32 

( 

1 that into the permiti is that kind of how it 

2 works at the state level? 

3 COMM. EASTERLY: We rarely have court 

4 consent decrees on air at the state level. 

5 They're unusually federal, because a state 

6 agreement doesn't shield you from federal 

7 enforcement, so that's why you want it in the 

8 Federal Court system, so then you would be 

9 shielded from additional federal enforcement. 

10 We have a lot of administrative agreed 

11 orders or Commissioner's orders with companies 

( 12 that are out of compliance. They none of 

13 those would change the underlying requirements, 

14 which meant that they would get -- there's 

15 nothing to change, you know, in the permit. You 

16 have to comply with the permit at the end of our 

17 process. 

18 MS. ALEXANDROVICH: Okay. 

19 COMM. EASTERLY: So, it's really only 

20 the federal consent decrees that wind up with 

21 this issue. 

22 CHAIRMAN GARD: Any other questions? 

23 MS. BOYDSTON: I just have one. 

.( 

~ 
33 

1 CHAIRMAN GARD: Yes. 

2 MS. BOYDSTON: If I understand this 

3 correctly, you could potentially have people that 

4 have had minor modifications to permits that have 

5 not gone through public notice in this time 

6 periodi right? 

7 COMM. EASTERLY: In the past. 

8 MS. BEM: Yeah, since 1999 up 

9 until --

10 MS. BOYDSTON: So, potentially they 

11 would come forward for a permit renewal saying, 

12 "This is my modification to Title v II I and they 

13 forward for. their permit renewal, but they didn't 

14 have anything changing and they wouldn't go 

15 forward for public notice. So, in theory, you 

16 could have some things that weren't -- that 

17 didn't have a public notice, I think, if I've 

18 thought through this. 

19 COMM. EASTERLY: Permit renewals are 

20 public noticed. 

21 MS. BOYDSTON: If there's not a 

22 modification pending? 

23 COMM. EASTERLY: Yes. 
(( 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

( ( 12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

( ( 

34 

MS. BOYDSTON: We rarely are in those 

situations. 

COMM. EASTERLY: Okay. 

MS; BOYDSTON: So, let me ask this, 

then: If you could just consider what your 

expectation would be for people that might have 

had a pathway through this process that didn 1 t 

have a public notice, what would your expectation 

be for them? Because if they could come forward, 

if there 1 s a chance of that? Besides they can 

come -- because I 1 ve had someone explain to me a 

possibility where that could occur. 

MS. BEM: Yeah. 

MS. BOYDSTON: Would you just examine 

that? It 1 s not an impact to the decision to 

them, for me --

MS. BEM: Uh-huh. 

MS. BOYDSTON: at least, but I 

just wanted to make sure that was the process 

that was considered before someone ran into it. 

MS. BEM: Okay. We'll consider that 

as we look at, you know, the comments that we 

receive on this. I would think that anything 
35 

1 permitted underneath, you know, the rules as they 

2 applied at the time the permit was issued, you 

3 know, those permit decisions would stand, and 

4 then --

5 MS. BOYDSTON: I think it would be 

6 

7 

rare. I think it would be rare. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Other questions from 

8 the Board? 

9 DR. NIEMIEC: Yes. It's implied that 

10 these changes are being made directly in response 

11 to U.S. EPA concerns. Can you briefly summarize 

12 which of these changes are explicitly related to 

13 feedback from the EPA and whether there are 

14 certain ones that we are proposing changing that 

15 EPA hasn't said there's a problem with, but we're 

16 anticipating will be helpful in getting the SIP 

17 and other procedures handled that we've discussed 

18 here? Basically which part of our changes are 

19 explicitly -- have been explicitly obtained 

20 through feedback from U.S. EPA and which of these 

21 might be just changes that we anticipate will be 

22 helpful to in getting our program approved? 

23 MS. BEM: All of the changes that 

I 

( 
((' 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

i( 12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

(( 

we're making that are shown through the 

strikeouts or bold language are changes that are 

due to comments that we received on the SIP 

renewal that we submitted in the past. 

36 

DR. NIEMIEC: Okay. So, all of those 

are directly -- basically direct~d by EPA, that 

we have to change these to be consistent with 

what they require? Because that wasn't really 

stated very forcefully in here. 

So, thank you. 

MS. BEM: Uh-huh. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Are there other 

questions? 

(No response.) 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Okay. Thank you. 

MS. BEM: Thank you. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: We have one 

individual that has signed a comment card, 

Jennifer Thompson. 

MS. THOMPSON: Good afternoon. My 

name's Jennifer Thompson, and I'm an attorney 

with the law firm of Bingham Greenebaum Doll. 

I'm here today representing the CASE Coalition. 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

For those of you not familiar with the CASE 

Coalition, CASE stands for Clean Air Strong 

Economy. 

37 

The CASE Coalition addresses environmental 

issues impacting its members through pragmatic, 

proactive strategies and programs that 

appropriately leverage the members' companies' 

expertise and resources. Our members are major 

manufacturers with significant operations in 

Indiana. Our members include: Alcoa, 

ArcelorMittal, BP, Chrysler, Eli Lilly, GM, and 

Sabic Innovative Plastics. 

As you heard, IDEM is proposing to 

eliminate the minor source modification option 

for projects that will increase CO emissions, as 

326 IAC 2-1.1-3(e) exempts construction or 

modification approvals if CO is under 25 tons per 

year, and the proposed rule would require a 

significant source modification if CO emissions 

are 25 tons per year -- 25 tons per year or more. 

CASE submitted comments on this rulemaking 

during the public comment period, and would like 

to further comment today, because IDEM's notice 
(\ 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 . -

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

~~. 

38 

materials and its response to comments state that 

the revisions are required in order for IDEM to 

get State Implementation Plan approval fLom EPA. 

However, U.S. EPA has not issued a letter 

of deficiency to IDEM regarding its February 3rd, 

1999 amendments to its minor NSR SIP rules, and 

minimal written communication between EPA and 

IDEM exists regarding this issue. This is 

further complicated by the fact that both EPA and 

IDEM staff have changed over this 14-year period, 

makipg it almost impossible for industry to 

follow and understand what is going on with this 

rulemaking. Many of CASE's members are further 

confused because the entire state has been in 

attainment with carbon monoxide since 2000. 

CASE raised-the issue of completing a 

demonstration in lieu of changing the CO 

permitting threshold, an alternative that EPA 

offers up to states in its standard language in 

its letters of deficiency. 

IDEM did not address the CASE Coalition's 

comments other than to say, nLack of public 

notice is an approvability issue for EPA.n 
1 The CASE Coalition is seeking 

2 clarification on the procedures afforded by the 

3 Clean Air Act when seeking to amend a SIP and 

4 IDEM's reasons for not pursuing a demonstration, 

5 both for CASE's benefit and the Board's. 

6 I contacted IDEM on CASE's behalf after 

39 

7 its response to comments were made available, and 

8 I was advised that IDEM had not discussed a 

9 demonstration with U.S. EPA. 

10 Lastly, one final question that recently 

11 came up was in the potential Fiscal Impact 

12 Section of the notice for this rulemaking. It 

13 states that, "Some projects that would previously 

14 have been a minor source modification may now be 

15 considered a significant source modification," as 

16 one of your Board members has raised this concern 

17 about all of those facilities that have utilized 

18 the minor source modification procedures for the 

19 last ten years. 

When I first read it, I assumed it was 

just IDEM explaining what this rule how the 

However, I now would 

20 

21 

22 

23 

rulemaking is changing. 

like some clarification. Is IDEM suggesting that 
40 

I 

( I . 

1 sources that relied on this existing minor source 

2 CO threshold over the past ten years may be at 

3 risk? So 1 I'm seeking clarification on what 

4 happens to those minor source modifications that 

5 were completed under the prior threshold once 

6 this rulemaking is passed. 

7 Thank you for the opportunity to comment 

8 on this rulemaking 1 and I'll --

9 CHAIRMAN GARD: Are there --

10 MS. THOMPSON:. -- take any questions. 

11 CHAIRMAN GARD: Are there any 

( ( 12 questions from the Board for Ms. Thompson? 

13 (No response.) 

14 CHAIRMAN GARD: Does IDEM have any 

15 comment that they would like to make? 

16 COMM. EASTERLY: Scott was going to· 

17 address the demonstration issue 1 I believe. Are 

18 you here 1 Scott? I saw you. Yeah. 

19 MR. DELONEY: Yeah. Hi. I'm Scott 

20 Deloney. I'm with the Air Permittings Branch in 

21 the Office of Air Quality 1 and we have in fact 

22 initiated dialogue with EPA over the concept of 

23 conducting an alternative demonstration. That is 

' ( \ .. 
41 

1 an alternative that we've explored in previous 

2 occasions and not come to a very quick conclusive 

3 option for proceeding in a timely manner 1 but we 

4 are continuing that dialogue 1 and hope that we're 

5 able to reach a conclusion here shortly. 

6 COMM. EASTERLY: And we can talk 

7 about some of the accomplishments. The Clear Air 

8 Act is not working in this case. EPA has 18 

9 months to approve or reject a SIP revision. This 

10 was sent in in 1999 1 and now they've told us that 

11 they will not approve it unless we make these 

12 changes. 

13 Are people at risk? Theoretically/ yes. 

14 This came out when we were working on a very 

15 controversial permit in Northwest Indiana/ and 

16 EPA pointed out that we couldn't use this rule as 

17 the basis of our approval because this __ rule's not 

18 SIP approved. So 1 we found other underlying 

19 federal rules that would allow us to issue that 

20 permit. 

21 So -- and particularly if you put this 

22 nonapproval by EPA to this time with the court 

23 decision that just came out from the Indiana 
42 

( ( 

1 Court of Appeals, it's really unclear what will 

2 happen, but the right thing to do is to get this 

3 rule approved so that then we will have an 

4 approved SIP so that the jeopardy won't be there. 

5 As a practical matter, when we issue the 

6 permit renewal approvals, I think that's the end 

7 of it, because now you have a permit that says 

8 that all of those changes you made in the past 

9 are in your approved permit, and that goes 

10 through a process that is currently, I believe, 

11 fully approved; right, our renewal pTocess? 

'( (. 12 MR. DELONEY: I think it is, yeah. 

13 COMM. EASTERLY: So, these are 

14 questions there's really no answer to, and 

15 they're not -- I mean I don't want to be in this 

16 position, but we are. 

17 CHAIRMAN GARD: Uh-huh. 

18 Any questions from the Board? 

19 Yes. 

20 MR. POWDRILL: Yeah. I'm just 

21 confused, be~ause Jennifer said that she can find 

22 no documentation where EPA has questioned this 

23 rule, and the Commissioner just said that EPA has 

·( \ . 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

l 

43 

questioned the rule. I'm confused. 

COMM. EASTERLY: EPA does most of 

their discussions on the phone. They are loathe 

to write things down. We can make them write it 

down by forcing them to disapprove this, and that 

will put our people in further jeopardy, because 

then they'll be sitting there with our rules 

disapproved, and nothing-- it's clear you can't 

use them then. 

MR. DELONEY: The answer is in 

securing the proper authority in order to 

maintain the ability to continue permitting 

actions at the agency level, and the hope is, is 

that eventually we'll be able to establish a 

cooperative solution that we can in fact really 

explore for securing the hundred-ton threshold. 

And we may be able to do that prior to the 

conclusion of this rulemaking still, too, but at 

this point in time, that isn't in place. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Yes, uh-huh. 

MR. ETZLER: At the risk of opening 

another can of worms, how does our rule compare 

to other states' rules have that have been --
I 

( ( 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

(_( 12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

i'( 

COMM. EASTERLY: I don't know the 

answer to that. I haven't looked into that. 

MR. DELONEY: .I don't know if --

Roger or Chris, did you have any perspective on 

that? 

MR. LETTERMAN: No. 

44 

MR. DELONEY: The one thing that EPA 

does try to achieve any time it issues a SIP 

approval is, is to establish consistency with 

prior actions, and that's part of their rationale 

for what they've requested us to address. 

MR. ETZLER: I think it would be an 

interesting endeavor to look at that and give us 

some feedbackr 

MR. DELONEY: 

other states? 

The SIP approvals for 

MR. ETZLER: Uh-huh. 

MR. DELONEY: I can tell you that one 

challenge with that is, is, as the Commissioner 

has indicated before, EPA has acted on some of 

our submittals and then requested us to go back 

and revise them because the agency's changed its 

mind or position on particular issues, and that's 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

( 12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

not at all uncommon, which is exactly why, in 

this particular case, there are states that have 

secured a SIP approval based on an alternative 

demonstration for a hundred-ton threshold for 

carbon monoxide. 

However, the rationale that was used in 

tho~e cases isn 1 t necessarily transf~rrable in 

Indiana 1 s case, because what represents a 

worst-case scenario in one state 1 s circumstance 

45 

may be different for Indiana. The model that was 

approved for use at that time.may be different. 

It may be a different regulatorily approved model 

that 1 s in place tod~y. But those are all things 

that we 1 re researching on this matter, too. 

MR. ETZLER: Well, a follow-up 

question: Why are they reluctant to talk to us 

about a demonstration project? 

MR. DELONEY: U.S. EPA? They 1 re 

willing to talk about it with us. There 1 s two 

things that make it challenging. One is -- and 

we 1 ve had two experiences. The first is, is that 

based on existing guidance, we 1 ve developed a 

strategic plan to proceed with a model 
46 

(C 

1 demonstration. We get the -- we secure the 

2 results, we submit them for federal review and 

3 endorsement in advance of proceeding with a 

4 rulemaking, and then it doesn't exactly address 

5 all of the hoops that they would have liked to 

6 have seen us jump through, and then we're back to 

7 square one. 

8 The second approach is, is to secure an 

9 advanced approval of our modeling plan, so that 

10 once we initiate the modeling and we have 

11 results, there's already an endorsement of what 

/ ( ' 

\ 12 was -- how it was going to be handled in the 

13 first place. 

14 That's the approach that we are taking in 

15 this particular instance, because it's proven to 

16 be more successful in the past. But in this 

17 particular case, we have no guarantees for a 

18 means to move forward. So, that's the approach 

19 that we're taking here is to ensure that federal 

20 approvability as we move for~ard. 

21 MR. ETZLER: If we're pursuing 

22 getting approval for a demonstration, why is 

23 there such an urgency to get this rule moved 

'\ \, 
( 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

\ 

through until we know whether or not we can do 

that? 

47 

MR. DELONEY: Well, that goes back to 

wanting to ensure that we have the necessary 

authority in order to implement the minor NSR 

program. 

MR. ETZLER: I understand that, but 

we've lived under this aura of no approval up to 

this point, and I guess all of the sudden we've 

leaped across this fence to say we need to do 

this to protect ourselves. And yet the end 

result is that we create, I think, a great deal 

of uncertainty in the business community of how 

we're going to approach this. 

You know, what's going to happen to us? I 

mean a number of our Board members have raised 

this question. You know, do we create a bigger 

can of worms by approving the rule rather than 

living with where we're at, trying to get a 

demonstration project approved so that we leave 

the limits where they're at, at the hundred-ton 

threshold? 

COMM. EASTERLY: Well, we've been 

I 
48 

. I 

( ( 

1 told that this is not those approvals aren't 

~ federally acceptable, so we can issue the permit. 

3 It's not a federally acceptable process, so 

4 it's -- all of those people are at risk. 

5 MR. ETZLER: But they're at risk 

6 anyway, are they not? 

7 COMM. EASTERLY: They're at less 

8 risk, because EPA hadn't raised this issue. But 

9 you're right, they -- they're theoretically all 

10 at risk, but there are more risks going forward. 

11 MR. ETZLER: Okay. ':J:'hank you. 

(( 12 MR. DELONEY: You know, I did just 

13 want to clarify again that we certainly hope to 

14 have more certainty before we come back to you 

15 for final adoption, and that we may have 

16 everything that we need in order to support a 

17 hundred-ton threshold, but we don't have that 

18 today. 

19 MS. ALEXANDROVICH: I have one more 

20 question. 

21 CHAIRMAN GARD: Yes. 

22 MS. ALEXANDROVICH: How many 

23 rulemakings are pending SIP approvals? 

I( 
49 

I 

( ( 

1 COMM. EASTERLY: More than dozensi 

2 right? 

3 MR. DELONEY: Yeah. Chris/ I think 

4 we're about two dozen 1 20 or so. 

5 MS. PEDERSEN: I would say probably 

6 around maybe a dozen right now --

7 MR. DELONEY: Twelve? 

8 MS. PEDERSEN: -- that are actually 

9 in EPA's hands. 

10 MR. DELONEY: We have had two or 

11 three that we've withdrawn over the past several 

i 12 years as well 1 and then we've got -- '• 

13 COMM. EASTERLY: And EPA proposed 

14 disapproval of some of them. 

15 MR. DELONEY: They've propos~d 

16 disapproval of one as well. 

17 COMM. EASTERLY: They're trying to 

18 fix their backlog. It's embarrassing to them 1 

19 and all of the states are pushing them/ because 

20 this is a problem across the country 1 to make 

21 decisions so that we know what the law is. 

22 DR. NIEMIEC: So 1 it sounds like 

23 you 1 re summarizing by saying that if we· 
50 

( ( 

1 preliminarily adopt this, that would almost 

2 certainly meet with their approval, and that by 

3 the next meeting, prior to final adoption, we 

4 would know whether a demonstration is feasible or 

5 approvable. 

6 COMM. EASTERLY: It might not be the 

7 next meeting, but by the time we bring it back 

8 for final adoption, we'll know a lot more 

9 about --

10 MR. DELONEY: Right. 

11 COMM. EASTERLY: -- whether they're 

• 1 12 (( going to let us do that, or if they will do that. 

13 MR. DELONEY: We expect to have a 

14 definitive answer before we come back to you for 

15 final adoption. 

16 DR. NIEMIEC: Right. Because 

17 according to this timetable, it would be at the 

18 next meeting potentially for final adoption, the. 

19 latest in the schedule. 

20 CHAIRMAN GARD: In August. 

21 MR. DELONEY: Or for October. But 

22 the key thing that's going to take time for us is 

23 to get EPA's approval of a modeling plan. In 

i( 

\ 
1 other words, we will make a presentation to EPA 

2 how we would present -- how we would conduct 

-3 this, consistent with how other states have· 

4 secured approval, but also consistent with their 

5 guidance. Once they approve that, then they are 

6 more or less endorsing the results, and if the 

7 results support a hundred-ton threshold, then 

8 that's something that the agency would consider 

9 proposing. 

10 DR. NIEMIEC: Okay. Thank you. 

11 MR. ETZLER: So, following up on the 

12 Doctor's question, and I -- just to clarify, if 

13 you don't have a response from EPA on 

14 demonstration approval; we would not expect to 

51 

15 see this on the August agenda for final adoption? 

16 

17 response. 

COMM. EASTERLY: If we don't have any 

If we have a response that it's no, 

18 we're going to tell you that. 

19 MR. ETZLER: No, I -- but I'm. just 

20 saying if we don't get a response, all I'm asking 

21 is would we withhold this until October, to give 

22 EPA a chance to comment on the demonstration? 

23 COMM. EASTERLY: If I had a sense 
52 

, I 

( ( 

. \ 

1 that they were going to comment. We don't know 

2 what they're going to say over there. 

3 'MR. ETZLER: I understand, 

4 Commissioner. I'm not trying to put you on the 

5 spot. I'm just --you know, I sense that the 

6 best thing to do is preliminarily adopt this. 

7 COMM. EASTERLY: Because of the 

8 timing of our carry-along process. 

9 MR. ETZLER: And then give you a 

10 chance to get the model approval for the 

11 demonstration and see where that takes us, to 

\ ( 12 determine where we go from there. 

13 MR. DELONEY: That's right. We have 

14 no guarantee whether the demonstration would 

15 support a hundred-ton threshold 

16 MR. ETZLER: Okay. 

17 MR. DELONEY: but we do want 

18 federal approval of our plan as to how we would 

19 conduct the demonstration, and then once that 

20 exercise is complete, then we'd know whether it 

21 could be supported going forward or not, and then 

22 at that point in time, we have the ability to 

23 make a decision. 

1: I 
53 

I 

I 

1 But either way, the agency feels obligated 

2 to be able to determine what the answer is in 

3 order to properly respond to comments that we 

4 have received concerning the rulemaking as well 

5 as what we're delivering to you this afternoon at 

6 this meeting. 

7 CHAIRMAN GARD: Calvin, did you have 

8 a question? 

9 MR. DAVIDSON: Yes. I may have 

10 missed this earlier. What brought this up after 

11 fourteen years that they're ready to act? Did 

12 you --

13 COMM. EASTERLY: We've been pushing 

14 them since -- certainly since the BP thing, but 

15 before that, to get our SIP approved, probably 

16 long before I got here, but certainly for the 

17 last five or six years we've been trying to get 

18 them to approve our SIP so that the words that 

19 you and I read in the state rules actually are 

20 the requirements. 

21 The company Ted's associated with has a 

22 facility in Northwest Indiana that the last SIP 

23 approval goes back to Board of Health rules, 
( ( 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

i ( 12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

I, ( 

because they will not approve the IDEM rules for 

that facility. 

MR. DAVIDSON: So, do you have the 

opportunity to submit a more revised SIP, I 

guess, since it's that old, or do they have that 

kind of dialogue, since they don't put it in 

writing? Do they come back and say, "Well, 

what'f3 closer to reality today?" I think that's 

where -- I'm not lost with some of the technical 

as much as the timeliness of this seems very 

confusing. 

COMM. EASTERLY: Well, we can only 

54 

submit as a SIP revision a rule that's passed by 

the Board, so we have to go through the process 

of getting a rule, which means we have to 

convince the company that the new rule that meets 

EPA's needs is more -- is at least as acceptable 

to them as where they are now in the federal 

thing, and that's not always an easy discussion. 

MR. DAVIDSON: And last question: 

About the revisions that Ted asked about earlier, 

I guess I -- it sounded like that was more of a 

red-line comment, "This is what we submitted. 
( 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 ----------

9 

10 

11 

12 

l, 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

55 

This is what they marked up or added or deleted, " 

but it sounds like that's more of a verbal 

dialogue that occurs, and I'm only asking that 

how much subject to interpretation is in that, or 

is this an actual marked-up copy from EPA? 

MR. DELONEY: Well, what's before you 

is a marked-up copy that would have been prepared 

by agency staff in response to dialogue with 

U.S. EPA, and U.S. EPA does have the opportunity 

to review, you know, and comment on what we 

produce as our understanding as a resolution to 

the issues that they've raised. 

However, what we do is, on a monthly 

basis, we maintain a dialogue with U.S. EPA over 

all open rulemakings, as well as on pending 

approvals that we have with them, and go over 

where we are at in addressing their concerns to 

ensure that we're on the same page before 

proceeding, identify where there are gaps between 

the two agencies on particular issues, and also 

determine where they are at and what they need 

from us in order to proceed on those -- some of 

those that are still pending, and that's where we 
56 

(/ 

1 collect a lot of the information. 

2 MS. ALEXANDROVICH: So, most of those 

3 discussions or critiques of the rules from 

4 U.S. EPA are coming from Region V, or -- I mean 

5 how often do they send it off to some other 

6 MR. DELONEY: Quite often. 

7 MS. ALEXANDROVICH: -- program? 

8 MR. DELONEY: Quite often. 

9 MS. ALEXANDROVICH: Do they let you 

10 know if they do that? 

11 MR. DELONEY: Yes, they do. Most of 

.. ( \. 

12 the regulatory work with U.S. EPA is done out of 

13 the Office of Air Quality and Planning Standards 

14 out in North Carolina, and that's where Region V 

15 forwards the majority of t~e policy-related 

16 issues that would prevent them from being able to 

17 move forward on a SIP submittal from a state 

18 within Region V. 

19 And then they provide feedback to Region V 

20 and then they share that with us. And sometimes 

21 there will be joint conference calls where staff 

22 from OAQPS in North Carolina and Region V in 

23 Chicago are communicating with us on particular 

1. ( 
( 

1 

2 

issues. 

COMM. EASTERLY: So 1 Scott's 

3 explaining it politely. The way I tell EPA 

4 (Laughter.) 

5 COMM. EASTERLY: is 1 11 There are 

6 17 1 000 of you all empowered to say, 'no 1

111 and I 

7 think that the only -- like in this case, we vie 

8 for Giuseppe now that Lisa's left -- there's one 

9 person that's in power to override them and say, 

10 llyes.ll So 1 we have to satisfy whoever's 

11 interested, of those 17,000 people, before you 

12 can get a 11 yes 11 out of them. 

13 MR. DELONEY: There are a very small 

14 handful of employees with U.S. EPA that are 

15 actually empowered to sign a letter and provide 

16 formal comments to states like Indiana, and 

17 that's why the majority of the feedback that we 

18 get is verbal as opposed to in writing. 

19 MR. CARMICHAEL: And is this are 

20 you confident that this will be approved by EPA 

21 as drafted? 

57 

22 

23 

COMM. EASTERLY: 

has told me. I --

That's what my staff 

I 

( 
58 

. I 

(( 

1 (Laughter.) 

2 MR. CARMICHAEL: No more bites at the 

3 apple. 

4 COMM. EASTERLY: It can always 

5 change, Kelly. 

6 MR. POWDRILL: But what frustrates me 

7 is 

8 COMM. EASTERLY: But for years we've 

9 had a lot of these in, and now she's sitting 

10 there expecting 

11 MR. POWDRILL: If the model is 

(( 12 approved, then does this become unnecessary/ this 

13 rule? 

14 COMM. EASTERLY: Nor no. We need all 

15 of the rest of it. 

16 MR. DELONEY: No. The only -- as far 

17 as the modeling is concerned, the challenge is 

18 how you go about.identifying a worst-case 

19 scenario 1 so that if you were to rely on a 

20 hundred-ton threshold for multiple sources in a 

21 given area that have varying operationsr 

22 different number of stacks 1 different stack 

23 heights, all of those things, how do you identify 

( ( 
1 a worst-case scenario to model and demonstrate 

2 that a hundred-ton threshold wouldn't jeopardize 

3 the ambient air quality standards? 

59 

4 That's the key challenge for us to come to 

5 

6 

7 

8 

an agreement on is: What scenario do we model? 

Modeling it is no problem. Determining what it 

is that we model is where the challenge is. 

COMM. EASTERLY: And the area-wide 

9 model they're probably going to make us use, we 

10 know for 802 , overpredicts significantly, so it's 

11 going to be very conservative, which means it's 

12 going to be hard to get down. 

13 MR. DELONEY: Although it is the one 

14 ambient air quality standard that is -- there is 

15 a little bit of leeway in order to be able to 

16 make that demonstration. It's -- it's really 

17 just a matter of determining how you can make it 

18 while representing a worst-case scenario. 

19 CHAIRMAN GARD: Other questions for 

20 IDEM? 

21 (No response.) 

22 CHAIRMAN GARD: Thank you. 

23 MR. DAVIDSON: It's not -- I'm sorry. 
60 

, I 

\,( 

1 CHAIRMAN GARD: Yes, Calvin. 

2 MR. DAVIDSON: It's not untimely. 

3 I'm just curious about how the process works. 

4 I've learned a lot about these Monday morning 

5 meetings, and it sounds like the future of a lot 

6 of Indiana businesses relies on these Monday 

7 morning meetings. 

8 MR. DELONEY: Thursday morning. 

9 MR. DAVIDSON: Is it Thursday 

10 morning? Sorryi I had the wrong day. And what's 

11 taken out of those Thursday morning phone calls 

·( \ . 12 that they're not willing to give you direction, 

13 you know, much to take to the bank, but for us to 

14 make those kinds 6f decisions, there are a lot of 

15 people relying on those discussions, and I think 

16 what we're hearing is some of -- you know, are 

17 you fighting as hard as Indiana business wants 

18 you to? 

19 MR. DELONEY: Uh-huh. I can 

20 certainly understand that concern, and I think 

21 that you'd be very comfortable with the positions 

22 that we take with regard to representing business 

23 in Indiana. 

(, ( 
l 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

( l2 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

61 

I think the other thing that would be --

is unfortunate to report is, is that the majority 

of the meetings, we walk away pulling our hair, 

because each and every issue that was tabled from 

the previous month as well, we have nothing new 

to report, which is exactly how the SIP submittal 

can, you know, sit without any action for ten 

years or beyond. 

But when we have run into situations --

the Commissioner made reference to a proposed 

disapproval of one of our SIP submittals, and 

that was taken to the Air Pollution Control Board 

for final adoption in 2009, and we made that SIP 

submittal in 2009, and we didn't receive any 

formal EPA response to it until just a month ago. 

And their proposed disapproval was more or 

less over the fact that they really couldn't wrap 

their arms around it to come up with a way to 

draft a notice for approval, and so it was easier 

for them to identify ways to propo~e disapproval. 

And I think that the key thing there is, 

is that we worked extremely close with the 

source, because this particular submittal only 
62 

( ( 

1 applied to one entity in Indiana, and we needed 

2 to coordinate closely with the source to address 

3 EPA's concern, and we wanted to have a conference 

4 call that involved the source in order to 

5 properly communicate and ensure that all parties 

6 are involved. 

7 U.S. EPA will not participate in any 

8 dialogue with the state concerning a policy 

9 relevant issue involving any outside stakeholder, 

10 which includes the regulated community, 

11 environmentalists/ general citizens, and it 

( ( 12 really does make it difficult for us to ensure 

13 effective communication. 

14 And so, that is unfortunate/ but that is 

15 why we have an open process that we use, not just 

16 in our rule development activities, but alS0 1 you 

17 know 1 in cases where there needs to open dialogue 

18 in understanding the technical work we're doing. ' 

19 We have work groups and open meeting~ in order to 

20 share that type of information. 

21 CHAIRMAN GARD: Any other questions? 

22 (No response.) 

23 CHAIRMAN GARD: Thank you. 

( ( 
( 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

63 

MS. THOMPSON: Chairman Gard, I have 

one clarifying question. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Okay. 

MS. THOMPSON: Scott, so if you 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Can you come to the 

microphone? 

MS. THOMPSON: Sure. Sure. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Thank you. 

MS. THOMPSON: I just wanted to 

clarify, and have Scott clarify, that if they're 

seeking a demonstration for the change in the CO 

threshold, and the only difference between the 

SIP-approved rule that existed before 1999, 

that's still on EPA's books as being SIP 

approved, and the one that exists right now, 

before your proposed changed, is a lack of public 

notice, the permit approvals for CO -- CO 

modifications irrvolving 25 tons per year or more 

and up to a hundred tons per year or more right 

now are a minor modification approval, so they go 

through permitting, they're just not public 

noticed. 

And my question is: That change, just 

(. 
64 

((I 

1 going from public notice to no public notice, 

2 requires modeling? Because you're still getting 

3 approval, it's still going through permit 

4 approval, it's just not being public noticed, and 

5 that's I just wanted to clarify that you're 

6 saying that has to go through modeling. And I 

7 don't have the answer. I'm asking. 

8 MR. DELONEY: Well, what I am 

9 referring to is basically modeling in conjunction 

10 with determining whether we could support a 

11 hundred-ton threshold for determining the 

i ( 12 I' 

permitting threshold, not so much whether or not 

13 it needs to be public noticed. 

14 But for supporting the incorporation of a 

15 hundred-ton threshold into the State 

16 Implementation Plan would be a model 

17 demonstration that would show that our reliance 

18 on a hundred-ton threshold for our rule in SIP 

19 would pose no threat to the ambient air quality 

20 standards for CO. 

21 MS. THOMPSON: So, but -- and I may 

22 be not understanding you correctly, but to me, 

23 that sounds like you're only requiring permit 

( ( 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

( 

65 

approval for a hundred tons per year or more, and 

that's not where we are today. Today we're at 

minor source requires approval, just not public 

notice 0t 25 tons per year. 

confused between why you're 

CHAIRMAN' GARD: 

to intervene here --

So, I'm getting 

You know, I'm going 

MS. THOMPSON: That's fine. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: -- because I don't 

want us to get into the situation where we have 

presenters and IDEM continuing to just -- your 

dialogue is important, but I think we don't want 

to have these kinds of debates between presenters 

and IDEM. This is really more for the Board. 

So, with that, I'm going to ask for 

anybody else that didn't sign an appearance card 

that would like to comment to please comment. 

(No response.) 

CHAIRMAN GARD: No one else? So, the 

public hearing is concluded. I'll entertain 

Board discussion on preliminary adoption. 

(No response.) 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Is there a motion for 
66 

\..(( 

1 preliminary adoption? 

2 MR. ANDERSON: I move for preliminary 

3 adoption. 

4 CHAIRMAN GARD: Is there a second? 

5 MS. ALEXANDROVICH: I'll second it. 

6 CHAIRMAN GARD: All in favor 1 say 

7 aye. 

8 MR. ETZLER: Aye. 

9 MS. FISHER: Aye. 

10 MR. POWDRILL: Aye. 

11 MR. METTLER: Aye. 

( ( 12 MS. ALEXANDROVICH: Aye. 

13 MR. ANDERSON: Aye. 

14 DR. NIEMIEC: Aye. 

15 MR. CARMICHAEL: Aye. 

16 MS. BOYDSTON: Aye. 

17 MR. DAVIDSON: Aye. 

18 MR. HORN: Aye. 

19 MS. CORNELL: Aye. 

20 CHAIRMAN GARD: Any opposed 1 say nay. 

21 (No response.) 

22 CHAIRMAN GARD: The motion is passed. 

23 The next public hearing will be 

u 
( 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

( 12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

74 

CERTIFICATE 

I, Lindy L. Meyer, Jr., the undersigned 

Court Reporter and Notary Public residing in the 

City of Shelbyville, Shelby County, Indiana, do 

hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and 

correct transcript of the proceedings taken by me 

on Wednesday, May 8, 2013 in this matter and 

transcribed by me. 

Notary Public in and 

for the State of Indiana. 

My Commission expires October 27, 2016. 
Indiana Register 

TITLE 326 AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DIVISION 

Proposed Rule 

LSA Document #11-747 

DIGEST 

Amends 326 lAC 2-7-10.5 and 326 lAC 2-8-11.1 concerning Indiana's air permitting regulations and minor 

new source review (NSR) requirements for Title V and Federally Enforceable State Operating Permit (FESOP) 

sources. Effective 30 days after filing with the Publisher. 

HISTORY 

First Notice of Comment Period: December 21, 2011, Indiana Register (DIN: 20111221-IR-326110747FNA). 

Second Notice of Comment Period: February 6, 2013, Indiana Register (DIN: 20130206-IR-326110747SNA). 

Notice of First Hearing: February 6, 2013, Indiana Register (DIN: 20130206-IR-326110747PHA). 

Date of First Hearing: May 8, 2013. 

PUBLIC COMMENTS UNDER IC 13-14-9-4.5 

IC 13-14-9-4.5 states that a board may not adopt a rule under IC 13-14-9 that is substantively different from 

the draft rule published under IC 13-14-9-4, until the board has conducted a third comment period that is at least 

21 days long. Because this proposed rule is not substantively different from the draft rule published on February 

6, 2013, at DIN: 20130206-IR-326110747SNA, the Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) is 

not requesting additional comment on this proposed rule. 

SUMMARY/RESPONSE TO COMMENTS FROM THE SECOND COMMENT PERIOD 

The Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) requested public comment from February 6, 

2013, through March 8, 2013, on IDEM's draft rule language. IDEM received comments from the following parties: 

Indiana Cast Metals Association (INCMA) 

Bingham Greenebaum Doll on behalf of CASE Coalition (BGD) 

Indiana Energy Association on behalf of the Indiana Utility Group (lEA) 

American Electric Power Service Corporation (AEP) 

Following is a summary of the comments received and IDEM's responses thereto: 

Comment: The commenter is uncertain what has precipitated new action on this rule given the long period of 

time since the United States Environmental Protection Agency's (U.S. EPA's) 1999 feedback on this matter and is 

not aware of any new threat or mandate to propose new revisions at this time. This opposition is further supported 

by Governor Pence's moratorium on new rules recently put into effect by Executive Order 13-03 to promote job 

creation, economic development, and freedom which should encompass this rule. The draft rule language 

significantly limits the ability of business owners to more simply and efficiently amend their permits as needed by 

ratcheting down the standards to more strictly define minor changes. We believe the current standards have 

proven to be adequate and allowed reasonable changes when needed without an overly bureaucratic review and 

without harm to the environment. The burdensome and ever changing regulatory environment is a major concern 

for economic development and job growth among most manufacturers. (INCMA) 

Comment: It is not clear that this rule needs to be amended. U.S. EPA has not issued a letter of deficiency to 

IDEM regarding this issue. IDEM should consider the full costs to Indiana's economy imposed by these changes, 

including the costs related to the competitive disadvantage Indiana businesses will face from longer permit review 

time periods for certain Title V source modifications. (BGD) 

Response: The rulemaking was initiated prior to the new rule moratorium and as soon as IDEM had a clear 

understanding of the changes that U.S. EPA required in order for IDEM to get state implementation plan (SIP) 

approval of the construction modification provisions for existing Title V and FESOP sources. While the changes 

made in these rules affect minor new source review construction modifications, the changes are necessary to 

obtain SIP approval for 326 lAC 2-7-10.5 and 326 lAC 2-8-11.1 as a whole. SIP approval of these construction 

modification rules will address concerns about IDEM's authority to create applicable requirements through Title I 

modifications. 

Comment: The primary concern relates to the proposed changes to 326 lAC 2-7-1 0.5( e) and 2-8-11.1 (d) that 

remove the less than 100 ton per year (TPY) greater than 25 tpy carbon monoxide (CO) permitting requirements 

from the minor modification portions of the rule. The subsequent dropping of the 100 tpy threshold to 25 tpy to 

qualify as a significant modification appears to create an inconsistency with 326 lAC 2-5.1-3(a)(1) where it states 

that a permit is only required for the construction of an emission unit when the emissions of CO exceed 100 tpy. 

(lEA) (AEP) 

Response: The thresholds for pollutants that are contained in 326 lAC 2-5.1-3 refer to permitting of an 

entirely new source. Existing sources that are at the registration level use 326 lAC 2-5.5-6 for construction 

Date: Oct 29,2013 9:58:10AM EDT DIN: 20130612-IR-326110747PRA Page 1 
Indiana Register 

modification pollutant thresholds and existing sources that have a minor source operating permit (MSOP) use the 

construction modification pollutant thresholds listed in 326 lAC 2-6.1-6. IDEM is aware that, in the future, changes 

may need to be made to these rule provisions in order for them to be approved into the SIP. U.S. EPA considers 

the current CO threshold in 326 lAC 2-7-10.5(e)(3) and 326 lAC 2-8-11 (d) to be a relaxation of the current 

approved SIP as it was published in the Federal Register (FR) on July 21, 1997 (62 FR 38919). The current SIP 

requires public notice for construction modifications with allowable emissions of 25 tpy of any regulated pollutant. 

Comment: Past experience has shown that CO changes below the PSD significance level have a very minor 

ambient impact that should allow processing of the changes as minor permit modifications. The commenter is 

willing to work with IDEM to identify objective criteria that could be used to identify those rare cases where a 

stationary source would have a significant ambient impact from CO at levels below the PSD significance level. 

Should IDEM choose to proceed with these changes, IDEM must justify the reasons for these changes. (lEA) 

(AEP) 

Comment: States are given the opportunity to provide a demonstration in a SIP revision submittal to justify 

the change to its rules. IDEM could make a demonstration in lieu of changing the Title V minor and significant 

source modification thresholds for CO. Since 326 lAC 2-7-10.5 does not change any emission limitations and 

permit approval is still required for modifications involving CO emissions equal to or greater than 25 tpy, the only 

difference between 326 lAC 2-7-10.5 and prior rule 326 lAC 2-1-1 (or the proposed rule) is that the public notice 

of minor source modifications is not required. Thus, it does not appear that this change would interfere with an 

applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further process toward attainment with the ambient 

air quality standards, or any other applicable requirement of the Clean Air Act. (BGD) 

Response: IDEM realizes that the only difference between the rules is the public notice requirement, but the 

lack of public notice of CO source modifications from 25 to 100 tpy is an approvability issue for this rule with U.S. 

EPA. IDEM has discussed this issue with U.S. EPA and because the requirement is in the current SIP, it is the 

benchmark U.S. EPA uses when evaluating backsliding issues. 

Comment: IDEM should remove 326 lAC 2-7-10.5(g)(7) from the rule language and incorporate the new 

threshold for CO into 326 lAC 2-7-10.5(g)(4) so that CO is listed with the other pollutants that have a 25 tpy 

threshold instead of being listed separately in 326 lAC 2-7-10.5(g)(7). (BGD) 

Comment: IDEM should remove 326 lAC 2-8-11.1(f)(1 )(H) from the rule language and incorporate the new 

threshold for CO into 326 lAC 2-8-11.1 (f)(1 )(E) so that CO is listed with the other pollutants that have a 25 tpy 

threshold instead of being listed separately in 326 lAC 2-8-11.1 (f)(1 )(H). (BGD) 

Response: IDEM has amended the draft rule language as suggested. 

SUMMARY/RESPONSE TO COMMENTS RECEIVED AT THE FIRST PUBLIC HEARING 

On May 8, 2013, the Environmental Rules Board (board) conducted the first public hearing/board meeting 

concerning the development of amendments to 326 lAC 2-7-10.5 and 326 lAC 2-8-11.1. Comments were made 

by the following parties: 

Jennifer Thompson, Bingham Greenebaum Doll on behalf of CASE Coalition (BGD) 

Following is a summary of the comments received and IDEM's responses thereto: 

Comment: U.S. EPA has not issued a letter of deficiency to IDEM regarding its February 3, 1999 

amendments to its minor NSR SIP rules, and minimal written communication between U.S. EPA and IDEM exists 

regarding this issue. This is further complicated by the fact that both U.S. EPA and IDEM staff have changed over 

this 14-year period, making it almost impossible for industry to follow and understand what is going on with this 

rulemaking. Many of CASE's members are further confused because the entire state has been in attainment with 

carbon monoxide since 2000. CASE raised the issue of completing a demonstration in lieu of changing the CO 

permitting threshold, an alternative that EPA offers up to states in its standard language in its letters of deficiency. 

IDEM did not address CASE Coalition's comments other than to say, "Lack of public notice is an approvability 

issue for EPA." The CASE Coalition is seeking clarification on the procedure afforded by the Clean Air Act when 

seeking to amend a SIP and IDEM's reasons for not pursuing a demonstration, both for CASE's benefit and the 

Board's. Also, does the demonstration need to include modeling? 

Response: IDEM is consulting with U.S. EPA regarding the details of a demonstration that Indiana would be 

able to use for U.S. EPA to approve a change in the CO permitting threshold. The difference between the minor 

and significant source modification under 326 lAC 2-7-10.5 is that public notice and comment is not required for 

preconstruction approval of a minor source modification. 

Comment: In the potential Fiscal Impact Section of the notice for this rulemaking, it states that, "Some 

projects that would previously have been a minor source modification may now be considered a significant source 

modification." Is IDEM suggesting that sources that relied on this existing minor source CO threshold over the 

past ten years may be at risk? The commenter is seeking clarification on what happens to those minor source 

modifications that were completed under the prior threshold once this rulemaking is passed. 

Response: IDEM is not suggesting that sources that relied on the existing minor source CO threshold are at 

risk. IDEM was referring to modifications after the new rule is in place and the potential fiscal impact due to 

differences in fees between minor and significant source modifications. 

Date: Oct 29,2013 9:58:10AM EDT DIN: 20130612-IR-326110747PRA Page2 
Indiana Register 

3261AC 2-7-10.5; 3261AC 2-8-11.1 

SECTION 1. 3261AC 2-7-10.51S AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS: 

326 lAC 2-7-10.5 Part 70 permits; source modifications 

Authority: IC 13-14-8; IC 13-15-2; IC 13-17-3-4; IC 13-17-3-11 

Affected: IC 13-15-5; IC 13-17 

Sec. 1 0.5. (a) An owner or operator of a Part 70 source proposing to: 

(1) construct new emission units; 

(2) modify existing emission units; or 

(3) otherwise modify the source as described in this section; 

shall submit a request for a modification approval in accordance with this section. 

(b) In addition to the request for modification approval in subsection (a), the commissioner may issue a source 

modification for the purpose of incorporating the control requirements and emission limitations that are set forth in 

a: 

(1) final federal district court order that adjudicates violations of: 

(A) the prevention of significant deterioration provisions under Sections 160 through 169B of the CAA (42 

U.S.C. 7470 through 42 U.S.C. 7492); 

(B) the nonattainment new source review requirements under Sections 171 through 193 of the CAA (42 

U.S.C. 7501 through 42 U.S.C. 7515); 

(C) Section 112(g) and 112U) of the CAA (42 U.S.C. 7412(g) and 42 U.S.C. 7412U)); 

(D) 326 lAC 2-2; 

(E) 326 lAC 2-3; or 

(F) 326 lAC 20; or 

(2) federal consent decree that is entered into for the purpose of resolving alleged violations of: 

(A) the prevention of significant deterioration provisions under Sections 160 through 169B of the CAA (42 

U.S.C. 7470 through 42 U.S.C. 7492); 

(B) the nonattainment new source review requirements under Sections 171 through 193 of the CAA (42 

U.S.C. 7501 through 42 U.S.C. 7515); 

(C) Section 112(g) and 112U) of the CAA (42 U.S.C. 7412(g) and 42 U.S.C. 7412U)); 

(D) 326 lAC 2-2; 

(E) 326 lAC 2-3; or 

(F) 326 lAC 20. 

(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of this rule, the owner or operator of a source may repair or replace an 

emissions unit or air pollution control equipment or components thereof without prior approval if the repair or 

replacement: 

( 1) results in a potential to emit for each regulated pollutant that is less than or equal to the potential to emit of 

the equipment or the affected emissions unit that was repaired or replaced; 

(2) is not a major modification under 326 lAC 2-2, 326 lAC 2-3, or 326 lAC 2-4.1; and 

(3) returns the emissions unit, process, or control equipment to normal operation after an upset, malfunction, 

or mechanical failure or prevents impending and imminent failure of the emissions unit, process, or control 

equipment. 

If the repair or replacement qualifies as a reconstruction or is a complete replacement of an emissions unit or air 

pollution control equipment and would require a modification approval or operating permit revision modification 

under a provision of this rule, the owner or operator of the source must submit an application for a permit or 

permit revision modification to the commissioner not later than thirty (30) calendar days after initiating the repair 

or replacement. 

(d) Any person proposing to make a modification described in subsection (e) or (g) shall submit an application 

to the commissioner concerning the modification as follows: 

(1) If only preconstruction approval is requested, the application shall contain the following information: 

(A) The company name and address. 

(B) The following descriptive information: 

(i) A description of the nature and location of the proposed construction or modification. 

(ii) The design capacity and typical operating schedule of the proposed construction or modification. 

Date: Oct 29,2013 9:58:10AM EDT DIN: 20130612-IR-326110747PRA Page 3 
Indiana Register 

(iii) A description of the following: 

(AA) The source and the emissions unit or units comprising the source. 

(BB) Any proposed emission control equipment, including design specifications. 

(C) A schedule for proposed construction or modification of the source. 

(D) The following information as needed to assure all reasonable information is provided to evaluate 

compliance consistent with the permit terms and conditions, the underlying requirements of this title and the 

CAA, the ambient air quality standards set forth in 326 lAC 1-3, or the prevention of significant deterioration 

maximum allowable increase under 326 lAC 2-2: 

(i) Information on the nature and amount of the pollutant to be emitted, including an estimate of the 

potential to emit any regulated air pollutants. 

(ii) Estimates of offset credits, as required under 326 lAC 2-3, for sources to be constructed in 

nonattainment areas. 

(iii) Any other information, including, but not limited to, the air quality impact, determined by the 

commissioner to be necessary to reasonably demonstrate compliance with the requirements of this title 

and the requirements of the CAA, whichever are applicable. 

(E) Each application shall be signed by an authorized individual, unless otherwise noted, whose signature 

constitutes the following: 

(i) An acknowledgment that the applicant assumes the responsibility of assuring that the source, emissions 

unit or units, or emission control equipment will be constructed and will operate in compliance with all 

applicable Indiana air pollution control rules and the requirements of the CAA. 

(ii) Affirmation that the statements in the application are true and complete, as known at the time of 

completion of the application, and shall subject the applicant to liability under state laws forbidding false or 

misleading statements. 

(2) If the source requests that the preconstruction approval and operating permit revision be combined, the 

application shall contain the information in subdivision (1) and the following information consistent with section 

4(c) of this rule: 

(A) An identification of the applicable requirements to which the source will be subject as a result of the 

modification, including the applicable emission limits and standards, applicable monitoring and test 

methods, and applicable record keeping and reporting requirements. 

(B) A description of the Part 70 permit terms and conditions that will apply to the modification and that are 

consistent with sections 5 and 6 of this rule. 

(C) A schedule of compliance, if applicable. 

(D) A statement describing what the compliance status of the modification will be after construction has 

been completed consistent with section 4(c)(10) of this rule. 

(E) A certification consistent with section 4(f) of this rule. 

(e) The following minor modifications shall be processed in accordance with subsection (f): 

(1) Modifioations that would reduoe the frequenoy of any monitoring or reporting required by a permit oondition 

or applieable requirement. 

(2) The addition of a portable souree or relooation of a portable souree to an m<isting souree if the addition or 

reloeation would require a ehange to any permit terms or eonditions. 

fd1 (1) Modifications that would have a potential to emit within any of the following ranges: 

(A) Less than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greater than five (5) tons per year of either PM, 

PM10, or direct PM2 5

. 

(B) Less than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greater than ten (1 0) tons per year of the 

following pollutants: 

(i) Sulfur dioxide (SO ). · 

(ii) Nitrogen oxides (~0 ). 

(iii) VOC for modificatioAs that are not described in clause (C). 

(C) Less than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greater than five (5) tons per year of VOC for 

modifications that require the use of air pollution control equipment to comply with the applicable provisions 

of3261AC 8. 

(D) Less than one hundred (1 00) tons per year and equal to or greater than twenty five (25) tons per year of 

earbon monmdde (GO). 

te1 (D) Less than five (5) tons one (1) ton per year and equal to or greater than two-tenths (0.2) ton per 

year of lead (Pb ). 

fA (E) Less than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greater than five (5) tons per year of the 

following regulated air pollutants: 

(i) Hydrogen sulfide (H2

S). 

(ii) Total reduced sulfur (TRS). 

Date: Oct 29,2013 9:58:10AM EDT DIN: 20130612-IR-326110747PRA Page4 
Indiana Register 

(iii) Reduced sulfur compounds. 

(iv) Fluorides. 

(4) Modifieations for 'Nhieh the potential to emit is limited to less than twenty five (26) tons per year of any 

regulated pollutant other than 1=1/\Ps, ten (1 0) tons per year of any single 1=1/\P as defined under Scotian 112(b) 

of the G/\A, or twenty fhfC (26) tons per year of any eombination of 1=11\Ps by eomplying with one (1) of the 

following eonstraints: 

(A) Limiting total annual solvent usage or mmEimum VOG eontent, or both. 

(8) Limiting annual hours of operation of the proeess or business. 

(G) Using a partieulate air pollution eontrol devise as follows: 

(i) 1\ehieving and maintaining ninety nine pereent (99%) effieieney. 

(ii) Complying with a no visible emission standard. 

(iii) The potential to emit before eontrols does not e><eeed major souree thresholds for federal permitting 

programs. 

(iv) Certifying to the eommissioner that the eontrol devise supplier guarantees that a speeifie outlet 

eoneentration, in eonjunetion with design air flm'v', will result in aetual emissions less than tv10nty five (26) 

tons of PM, or fifteen (15) tons per year of PM or direst PM~"' 

(D) Limiting individual fuel usage and fuel type f8r a eombustion souree. 

(e) Limiting raw material throughput or sulfur eontent of rav,r materials, or both. 

(6) A modifieation that is subjeet to a R/\GT, a new souree performanee standard (~JSPS), or a national 

emission standard for hazardous air pollutants (NeSI=I/\P) and the R/\GT, NSPS, or NeSI=IAP is the most 

stringent applieable requirement, m<eept for those modifieations that '.Vould be subjeet to the provisions of 4 0 

GFR Part a3, Subpart 8, l=lazardous Air Pollutants: Regulations Governing Gonstrueted or Reeonstrueted 

Major Sourees*. /\s part ofthe applieation required under subseetion (d), the applieant shall aelmowledge the 

requirement to eomply with the R/\GT, ~JSPS, or NeSI=I/\P. 

(a) A ehange for whish a sou reo requests an emission limit to avoid 32a lAG 8 1 a. 

(7) /\ modifieation of an mEisting sou reo that has a potential to emit greater than the thresholds under 

subdivision (3) if the modifieation will replaee or repair a part or pie eo of equipment in an mEisting proeess 

unless the modifieation: 

(/\) results in the replaeement or repair of an entire proeess; 

(8) qualifies as a reeonstruetion of an entire proeess; 

(G) may result in an inerease of aetual emissions; or 

(D) 'li'ould result in a net emissions inerease greater than the signifieant levels in 32a 1/\G 2 2 or 32a lAG 2 

~ 

(8) /\ modifieation that has a potential to emit greater than the thresholds under subdivision (3) that adds an 

emissions unit or units of the same type that are already permitted and that will eomply with the same 

applieable requirements and permit terms and eonditions as the mEisting emission unit or units, mmept if the 

modifieation \'o'ould result in a potential to emit greater than the thresholds in 32a 1/\G 2 2 or 32a 1/\G 2 3. 

f91 (2) For a source in Lake County or Porter County with the potential to emit twenty-five (25) tons per year of 

either VOC or NO , any modification that would result in an increase of either in emissions of either pollutant 

of greater than orxequal to the following: 

(A) Fifteen (15) pounds per day of VOCs. 

(B) Twenty-five (25) pounds per day of NO . 

X 

(f) Minor modification approval procedures for modifications described under subsection W (e) are as follows: 

( 1) Except as provided in 326 lAC 2-13, the source may not begin construction on any emissions unit that is 

necessary to implement the modification until the commissioner has approved the modification request. 

(2) Within forty-five (45) calendar days from receipt of an application for a modification described under 

subsection (e), the commissioner shall do one (1) of the following: 

(A) Approve the modification request. 

(B) Deny the modification request. 

(C) Determine that the minor permit revision request would cause or contribute to a violation of the National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) or prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) standards would 

allow for an increase in emissions greater than the thresholds in subsection (g) or would not provide for 

compliance monitoring consistent with this rule and should be processed under subsection (h). 

(3) The source may begin construction as follows: 

(A) If the source has a final Part 70 permit and only requests preconstruction approval or if the source does 

not have a final Part 70 permit, the source may begin construction upon approval by the commissioner. 

Notwithstanding IC 13-15-5, the commissioner's approval shall become effective immediately. Operation of 

the modification shall be as follows: 

(i) For a source that has a final Part 70 permit, operation of the modification may commence in accordance 

Date: Oct 29,2013 9:58:1 OAM EDT DIN: 20130612-IR-326110747PRA Page 5 
Indiana Register 

with section 12 of this rule. 

(ii) For a source without a final Part 70 permit, operation may begin after construction is completed. 

(B) If the source requests that the preconstruction approval and operating permit revision be combined, the 

source may begin construction upon approval and operation may begin in accordance with section 12 of this 

rule. 

(g) The following significant modifications shall be processed in accordance with subsection (h): 

( 1) Any modification that is subject to 326 lAC 2-2, 326 lAC 2-3, or 326 lAC 2-4.1. 

(2) A modification that is subject to 326 lAC 8-1-6. 

(3) Any modification with a potential to emit lead at greater than or equal to one (1) ton per year. 

( 4) Any modification with a potential to emit greater than or equal to twenty-five (25) tons per year of any of the 

following pollutants: 

(A) PM, PM10, or direct PM2 5· 

(B) Sulfur dioxide (SC?:zl· · 

(C) Nitrogen oxides (NU ). 

(D) VOC. X 

(E) Hydrogen sulfide (H2S). 

(F) Total reduced sulfur (TRS). 

(G) Reduced sulfur compounds. 

(H) Fluorides. 

(I) Carbon monoxide (CO). 

(5) For a source of lead with a potential to emit greater than or equal to five (5) tons per year, a modification 

that would increase the potential to emit greater than or equal to six-tenths (0.6) ton per year. 

(6) Any modification with a potential to emit greater than or equal to ten (1 0) tons per year of a single HAP as 

defined under Section 112(b) of the CAA or twenty-five (25) tons per year of any combination of HAPs. 

(7) Any modification with a potential to emit greater than or equal to one hundred (1 00) tons per year of carbon 

monmdde (CO). 

(h) The following shall apply to the significant modifications described in subsection (g): 

(1) Any person proposing to make a modification described in subsection (g) shall: 

(A) submit an application concerning the modification; and 

(B) include the information under subsection (d). 

(2) Except as provided in 326 lAC 2-13, the source may not begin construction on any emissions unit that is 

necessary to implement the modification until the commissioner has issued a modification approval. 

(3) The commissioner shall approve or deny the modification as follows: 

(A) Within one hundred twenty (120) calendar days from receipt of an application for a modification in 

subsection (g) except subsection (g)( 1 ). 

(B) Within two hundred seventy (270) calendar days from receipt of an application for a modification under 

subsection (g)(1 ). 

( 4) A modification approval under this subsection may be issued only if all of the following conditions have 

been met: 

(A) The commissioner has received a complete application for a modification. 

(B) The commissioner has complied with the requirements for public notice as follows: 

(i) For modifications for which a source is only requesting preconstruction approval, the commissioner has 

complied with the requirements under 326 lAC 2-1.1-6. 

(ii) For modifications for which a source is requesting a combined preconstruction approval and operating 

permit revision, the commissioner has complied with the requirements under section 17 of this rule. 

(C) The conditions of the modification approval provide for compliance with all applicable requirements and 

this rule. 

(D) For modifications for which a source is requesting a combined preconstruction approval and operating 

permit revision, the U.S. EPA has received a copy of the proposed modification approval and any notices 

required and has not objected to the issuance of the modification approval within the time period specified in 

section 18 of this rule. 

(5) The commissioner shall do the following: 

(A) Provide a technical support document that sets forth the legal and factual basis for draft modification 

approval conditions, including references to the applicable statutory and regulatory provisions. 

(B) Send this technical support document to: 

(i) the U.S. EPA; 

(ii) the applicant; and 

(iii) any other person who requests it. 

Date: Oct 29,2013 9:58:10AM EDT DIN: 20130612-IR-32611 0747PRA Page 6 
Indiana Register 

(i) The following shall apply to a modification approval described in subsection (g) for a source that has not 

received a final Part 70 permit: 

(1) After receiving an approval to construct and prior to receiving approval to operate, a source shall prepare 

an affidavit of construction as follows: 

(A) The affidavit shall include the following: 

(i) The name and title of the authorized individual. 

(ii) The company name. 

(iii) Subject to item (iv), an affirmation that the emissions units described in the modification approval: 

(AA) were constructed in conformance with the request for modification approval; and 

(BB) will comply with the modification approval. 

(iv) Identification of any changes to emissions units not included in the request for modification approval, 

but which should have been included under subsection (a). 

(v) The signature of the authorized individual. 

(B) The affidavit shall be notarized. 

(C) A source shall submit the affidavit to the commissioner either after construction of all the emission units 

described in the modification approval or after each phase of construction of the emission units described in 

the modification approval, as applicable, has been completed. 

(2) A source may not operate any emissions units described in the modification approval prior to receiving a 

validation letter issued by the commissioner, except as provided in the following: 

(A) A source may operate the emissions units covered by the affirmation in the affidavit of construction upon 

submission of the affidavit of construction. 

(B) The commissioner shall issue a validation letter within five (5) working days of receipt of the affidavit of 

construction. 

(C) The validation letter shall authorize the operation of all or part of each emissions unit covered by the 

affirmation in the affidavit of construction. 

(D) Subject to clause (E), the validation letter shall include any amendments to the modification approval if 

the amendment is requested by the source and if the amendment does not constitute a modification and 

require public notice and comment under 326 lAC 2-1.1-6. 

(E) A validation letter shall not approve the operation of any emissions unit if an amendment to the 

modification approval requested by the source would constitute a modification and require public notice and 

comment under 326 lAC 2-1.1-6. 

U) Each modification approval issued under this rule shall provide that construction must commence within 

eighteen (18) months of the issuance of the modification approval. 

(k) All modification approval proceedings under this section shall provide adequate procedures for public 

notice, including offering an opportunity for public comment and a hearing on the draft modification approval for 

significant modifications as established in 326 lAC 2-1.1-6 or section 17 of this rule. Modifications for the 

purpose of incorporating the control requirements and emission limitations of a final federal district court 

order or federal consent decree under subsection (b) shall follow procedures for public notice as 

established in 326 lAC 2-1.1-6. 

(I) The commissioner shall provide for review by the U.S. EPA and affected states of each: 

( 1) modification application; 

(2) draft modification approval; 

(3) proposed modification approval; and 

(4) final modification approval; 

in accordance with the procedures established in section 18 of this rule for modifications that a source is 

requesting a combined preconstruction approval and operating permit revision. 

(m) A modification approval issued in accordance with this section shall be incorporated into the source's Part 

70 permit or permit application as follows: 

(1) For a source that has a final Part 70 permit and requested that the preconstruction approval and permit 

revision be combined, the modification approval shall be incorporated into the Part 70 permit as an 

administrative amendment in accordance with section 11 of this rule. 

(2) For a source that has a final Part 70 permit and requested only a preconstruction approval, the source may 

begin operation in accordance with section 12 of this rule. 

(3) For a source that has a complete Part 70 permit application on file, but does not have a final Part 70 permit 

Date: Oct 29,2013 9:58:1 OAM EDT DIN: 20130612-IR-326110747PRA Page 7 
Indiana Register 

and requested only preconstruction approval, the modification approval: 

(A) shall be deemed incorporated in the Part 70 permit application; and 

(B) will be included in the Part 70 permit when issued. 

(4) For a source that has a final Part 70 permit and requested a modification under subsection (b), the 

modification approval shall be incorporated into the Part 70 permit as an administrative amendment in 

accordance with section 11 of this rule. 

*This document is incorporated by reference. Copies may be obtained from the Government Printing Office, 

732 North Capitol Street ~JVV, Washington, D.C. 20401 or are available for revimv and copying at the Indiana 

Department of Environmental Management, Office of Air Quality, Indiana Government Genter North, Tenth Floor, 

100 North Senate Avenue, Indianapolis, Indiana 46204. 

(Air Pollution Control Division; 3261AC 2-7-10.5; filed Nov 25, 1998, 12:13 p.m.: 221R 1039; errata filed May 12, 

1999, 11:23 a.m.: 221R 3107; filed Oct 23, 2000, 9:47a.m.: 241R 672; filed May 21, 2002, 10:20 a.m.: 251R 

3065; filed Aug 10, 2004, 3:35p.m.: 27 IR 3947; errata filed Jul23, 2007, 4:19p.m.: 

20070815-IR-326070466ACA; filed Oct 1, 2010, 3:48p.m.: 20101027-IR-326070372FRA; filed Feb 6, 2012, 2:54 

p.m.: 20120307-IR-326090493FRA; filed Jun 11, 2012, 3:15p.m.: 20120711-IR-326110251FRA) 

SECTION 2. 326 lAC 2-8-11.1 IS AMENDED TO READ AS FOLLOWS: 

326 lAC 2-8-11.1 Permit revisions 

Authority: IC 13-14-8; IC 13-17 -3-4; IC 13-17-3-11 

Affected: IC 13-15-5; IC 13-17 

Sec. 11.1. (a) Any person proposing to add additional emission units, modify existing emission units, or 

otherwise modify a FESOP source as described in this section shall submit a permit revision request in 

accordance with this section. 

(b) Notwithstanding any other provision of this rule, the owner or operator of a source may repair or replace an 

emissions unit or air pollution control equipment, or components thereof, without prior approval, if the repair or 

replacement: 

(1) results in a potential to emit for each regulated pollutant that is less than or equal to the potential to emit for 

the equipment or the affected emissions unit that was repaired or replaced; 

(2) is not a major modification under 326 lAC 2-2-1, 326 lAC 2-3-1, or 326 lAC 2-4.1; and 

(3) returns the emissions unit, process, or control equipment to normal operation after an upset, malfunction, 

or mechanical failure or prevents impending and imminent failure of the emissions unit, process, or control 

equipment. 

If the repair or replacement qualifies as a reconstruction or is a complete replacement of an emissions unit or air 

pollution control equipment and would require a permit or operating permit revision under a provision of this rule, 

the owner or operator of the source must submit an application for a permit or permit revision to the commissioner 

not later than thirty (30) calendar days after initiating the repair or replacement. 

(c) An application required under this section shall meet the requirements of section 3(c) of this rule and 

include the following information: 

(1) The company name and address. 

(2) A description of the change and the emissions resulting from the change. 

(3) An identification of the applicable requirements to which the source is newly subject as a result of the 

change, including the applicable emission limits and standards, applicable monitoring and test methods, and 

applicable record keeping and reporting requirements. 

(4) Proposed permit terms and conditions required to implement the change, including limitations and methods 

to be used to comply with the limitations for modifications described in subsection {d)(4). 

(5) A schedule of compliance, if applicable. 

(6) A certification consistent with section 3( d) of this rule. 

{d) The following modifications shall require Minor permit revisions and shall require are required for approval 

prior to construction and operation for modifications that have a potential to emit within the following 

ranges: 

(1) Modifications that reduce the frequency of any monitoring or reporting required by a permit condition or 

Date: Oct 29,2013 9:58:10AM EDT DIN: 20130612-IR-326110747PRA Page 8 
Indiana Register 

applicable requirement. 

(2) The addition of a portable sou reo or relocation of a portable sou reo to an mdsting sou reo, if the addition or 

relocation would require a change to any permit terms or conditions. 

(3) Modifications that would have a potential to emit within the following ranges: 

tAt (1) Less than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greater than five (5) tons per year of either PM, 

PM tO.' or direct PM2 5. 

fB1 {2) Less than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greater than ten (1 0) tons per year of sulfur 

dioxide (S02

). 

fG1 (3) Less than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greater than ten (1 0) tons per year of nitrogen 

oxides (NO ). 

f91 (4) Los§ than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greater than ten (1 0) tons per year of VOC for 

modifications that are not described in clause (E). 

fE1 (5) Less than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greater than five (5) tons per year of VOC for 

modifications that require the use of air pollution control equipment to comply with the applicable provisions of 

3261AC 8. 

(F) Less than one hundred (1 00) tons per year and equal to or greater than twenty five (25) tons per year of 

carbon monmdde (GO). 

fG1 (6) Less than five (5) tons one (1) ton per year and equal to or greater than two-tenths (0.2) ton per year 

of lead (Pb). 

tJ=I1 (7) Less than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greater than five (5) tons per year of the 

following regulated air pollutants: 

fi1 (A) Hydrogen sulfide (H2

S). 

fH1 (B) Total reduced sulfur (TRS). 

fiH1 (C) Reduced sulfur compounds. 

fiv1 (D) Fluorides. 

(4) Modifications for whish the potential to emit is limited to less than twenty five (25) tons per year of any 

regulated pollutant other than I=IAPs, ten (1 0) tons per year of any single I=IAP as defined under Section 112(b) 

of the GAA, or twenty five (25) tons per year of any combination of I=IAPs by complying with one (1) of the 

following constraints: 

(A) Limiting total annual solvent usage or mmdmum VOG content, or both. 

(B) Limiting annual hours of operation of the process or business. 

(G) Using a particulate air pollution control devise as follows: 

(i) Achieving and maintaining ninety nine percent (99%) effieieney. 

(ii) Complying ·.vith a no visible emission standard. 

(iii) The potential to emit before air pollution controls does not mweed major sou reo thresholds for federal 

permitting programs. 

(iv) Certifying to the commissioner that the air pollution control devise supplier guarantees that a speeifie 

outlet eoneentration, in conjunction •.vith design air flow, ·.viii result in actual emissions less than twenty five 

(25) tons of PM, or fifteen (15) tons per year of PM.w-or direst PM~~ 

(D) Limiting individual fuel usage and fuel type for a combustion soliree. 

(E) Limiting raw material throughput or sulfur content of rmv materials, or both. 

(5) A change that is not described under section 1 O(a)(15) or 1 O(a)(1 e) of this rule and is subject to a RAGT, a 

ne'N source performance standard (NSPS), or a national emission standard for hazardous air pollutants 

(~JESI=I/\P) and the RAGT, NSPS, or NESI=IAP is the most stringent applicable requirement, OJEeept for those 

modifications that ·.vould be subjeet to the provisions of 40 GFR e3, Subpart 8 Hazardous Air Pollutants: 

Regulations Governing Constructed or Reeonstrueted Major Sources*. As part of the application required 

under subsection (e), the applicant shall aelmowledge the requirement to comply with the RAGT, ~JSPS, or 

~JESI=I/\P. 

(e) A modification for whish a source requests an emission limit to avoid 32e lAG 8 1 e. 

(e) Minor permit revision procedures shall be as follows: 

(1) Any person proposing to make a change described in subsection (d) shall: 

(A) submit an application concerning the change; and 

(B) include the information under subsection (c). 

(2) Except as provided in 326 lAC 2-13, the source may not begin construction on any emissions unit that is 

necessary to implement the change until the commissioner has revised the permit. 

(3) Within forty-five (45) calendar days from receipt of an application for a minor permit revision, the 

commissioner shall either: 

(A) approve the minor permit revision request; 

(B) deny the minor permit revision; or 

Date: Oct 29,2013 9:58:10AM EDT DIN: 20130612-IR-326110747PRA Page 9 
Indiana Register 

(C) determine that the minor permit revision request would cause or contribute to a violation of the National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) or prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) standards, would 

allow for an increase in emissions greater than the thresholds in subsection (f), or would not provide for 

compliance monitoring consistent with this rule and should be processed as a significant permit revision. 

(4) If approved, the permit shall be revised by incorporating the minor permit revision into the permit. The 

commissioner shall make any changes necessary to assure compliance with this title and the CAA prior to 

attaching the minor permit revision to the permit. The commissioner shall do the following: 

(A) Notify the permittee upon incorporation of the minor permit revision to the permit. 

(B) Provide a copy of the minor permit revision to the permittee. 

Notwithstanding IC 13-15-5, the commissioner's decision shall become effective immediately. 

(f) Significant permit revision procedures are as follows: 

(1) A significant permit revision is a modification that is not an administrative amendment under section 10 of 

this rule or subject to subsection (d) and includes the following: 

(A) Any modification that would be subject to 326 lAC 2-2, 326 lAC 2-3, or 326 lAC 2-4.1. 

(B) Any modification that results in the source needing to obtain a Part 70 permit under 326 lAC 2-7. 

(C) A modification that is subject to 326 lAC 8-1-6. 

(D) Any modification with a potential to emit lead at greater than or equal to one (1) ton per year. 

(E) Any modification with a potential to emit greater than or equal to twenty-five (25) tons per year of the 

following pollutants: 

(i) PM, PM10, or direct PM2 5

. 

(ii) Sulfur dioxide (SO ). . 

(iii) Nitrogen oxides (~0 ). 

(iv) VOC. x 

(v) Hydrogen sulfide (H2S). 

(vi) Total reduced sulfur (TRS). 

(vii) Reduced sulfur compounds. 

(viii) Fluorides. 

(ix) Carbon monoxide (CO). 

(F) For a source of lead with a potential to emit greater than or equal to five (5) tons per year, a modification 

that would increase the potential to emit greater than or equal to six-tenths (0.6) ton per year. 

(G) Any modification with a potential to emit greater than or equal to ten (1 0) tons per year of a single HAP 

as defined under Section 112(b) of the CAA or twenty-five (25) tons per year of any combination of HAPs. 

(l=l) Any modifieation ·.vith a potential to emit greater than or equal to one hundred (1 00) tons per year of 

earbon monm<ide (GO). 

tt) (H) Any modification that removes or reduces compliance monitoring, testing, record keeping, reporting, 

or its frequency. 

(2) The following conditions shall apply to significant permit revisions: 

(A) Any person proposing to make a modification described in this subsection shall: 

(i) submit an application concerning the modification; and 

(ii) include the information under subsection (c). 

(B) The commissioner shall provide a copy of the significant permit revision application and draft and final 

operating permit revision to the U.S. EPA. 

(C) Except as provided in 326 lAC 2-13, the source may not begin construction on any emissions unit that is 

necessary to implement the change until the commissioner has revised the permit. 

(D) The commissioner shall provide for public notice and comment in accordance with section 13 of this 

rule. 

(E) The commissioner shall approve or deny the significant permit revision as follows: 

(i) Within one hundred twenty (120) calendar days from receipt of an application for a significant permit 

revision, except for a significant permit revision under subdivision (1)(A). 

(ii) Within two hundred seventy (270) calendar days from receipt of an application for a significant permit 

revision under subdivision ( 1 )(A). 

(F) If approved, the permit shall be revised by incorporating the significant permit revision into the permit. 

The commissioner shall make any changes necessary to assure compliance with this title and the CAA prior 

to attaching the significant permit revision to the permit. 

(g) Notwithstanding a permit requirement for emissions to remain below major souree thresholds under Part 

70 in 326 11\G 2 7, PSD in 326 1/\G 2 2, or emission offset in 326 1/\G 2 3, any modifications that require an 

adjustment to the FESOP emission limitations shall be required to be reviev1ed in aeeordanee with the proeedures 

in subseetion (f). 

Date: Oct 29,2013 9:58:10AM EDT DIN: 20130612-IR-326110747PRA Page 10 
Indiana Register 

*This document is incorporated by reference. Copies may be obtained from the Government Printing Office, 

732 North Capitol Street NVV, VVashington, D.C. 20401 or are a'v<ailable for review and copying at the Indiana 

Department of environmental Management, Office of /\ir Quality, Indiana Government Center North, Tenth Floor, 

100 North Senate /\venue, Indianapolis, Indiana 46204. 

(Air Pollution Control Division; 3261AC 2-8-11.1: filed Nov 25, 1998, 12:13 p.m.: 221R 1055; errata filed May 12, 

1999, 11:23 a.m.: 221R 3107; filed May 21, 2002, 10:20 a.m.: 25/R 3072; errata filed Jul23, 2007, 4:19p.m.: 

20070815-IR-326070466ACA; filed Oct 1, 2010, 3:48p.m.: 20101027-IR-326070372FRA; filed Feb 6, 2012, 2:54 

p.m.: 20120307-IR-326090493FRA; filed Jun 11, 2012, 3:15p.m.: 20120711-IR-326110251FRA) 

Notice of Public Hearing 

Posted: 06/12/2013 by Legislative Services Agency 

An html version of this document. 

Date: Oct 29,2013 9:58:10AM EDT DIN: 20130612-IR-326110747PRA Page 11 

Indiana Register 

TITLE 326 AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DIVISION 

Notice of Public Hearing 

Notice of Public Hearing 

LSA Document #11-747 

Under IC 4-22-2-24. IC 13-14-8-6. and IC 13-14-9. notice is hereby given that on August 14, 2013, at 1:30 

p.m., at the Indiana Government Center South, 302 West Washington Street, Conference Center Room A, 

Indianapolis, Indiana, the Environmental Rules Board will hold a public hearing on amendments to 3261AC 2-7-

10.5 and 3261AC 2-8-11.1 concerning minor new source review (NSR) requirements for Title Vand Federally 

Enforceable State Operating Permit (FESOP) sources. 

The purpose of this hearing is to receive comments from the public prior to final adoption of these rules by 

the board. All interested persons are invited and will be given reasonable opportunity to express their views 

concerning the proposed amendments. Oral statements will be heard, but, for the accuracy of the record, all 

comments should be submitted in writing. 

Additional information regarding this action may be obtained from Susan Bem, Rule Development Branch, 

Office of Legal Counsel, (317) 233-5697 or (800) 451-6027 (in Indiana). 

Individuals requiring reasonable accommodations for participation in this event should contact the Indiana 

Department of Environmental Management, Americans with Disabilities Act coordinator at: 

Attn: ADA Coordinator 

Indiana Department of Environmental Management 

Indiana Government Center North 

100 North Senate A venue 

Indianapolis, IN 46204-2251 

or call (317) 233-1785 (V). Speech and hearing impaired callers may contact IDEM via the Indiana Relay Service 

(711) or (800) 7 43-3333. Please provide a minimum of 72 hours notification. 

Copies of these rules are now on file at the Rule Development Branch, Office of Legal Counsel, Indiana 

Department of Environmental Management, Indiana Government Center North, 100 North Senate Avenue, 

Thirteenth Floor and Legislative Services Agency, Indiana Government Center North, 100 North Senate Avenue, 

Room N201, Indianapolis, Indiana and are open for public inspection. 

Nancy King, Chief 

Rule Development Branch 

Office of Legal Counsel 

Posted: 06/12/2013 by Legislative Services Agency 

An html version of this document. 

Date: Oct 29,2013 1 0:09:55AM EDT DIN: 20130612-IR-326110747PHA Page 1 

I 

'( 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

I 

\, 12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

BEFORE THE STATE OF INDIANA 

ENVIRONMENTAL RULES BOARD 

PUBLIC MEETING OF AUGUST 14, 2013 

ORIGINAL 

PROCEEDINGS 

before the Indiana Environmental Rules Board, 

Beverly Gard, Chairman, taken before me, Lindy L. 

Meyer, Jr., a Notary Public in and for the State 

of Indiana, County of Shelby, at the Indiana 

Government Center South, Conference Center, 

Room A, 402 West Washington Street, Indianapolis, 

Indiana, on Wednesday, August 14, 2013 at 1:29 

o'clock p.m. 

William F: Daniels,. RPR/CP CM d/b/a 

ACCURATE REPORTING OF INDIANA 

12922 Brighton Avenue 

Carmel, Indiana 46032 

(317) 848-0088 

1 
1 APPEARANCES: 

2 BOARD MEMBERS: 

3 Beverly Gard 1 Chairman 

Thomas R. Anderson 

4 Gary Powdrill 

Dr. Ted Niemiec 

5 Joanne Alexandrovich 

Kelly Carmichael 

6 Ken Rulon 

William Etzler 

7 Chris Horn 

Gail Boydston 

8 Calvin Davidson 

Cameron Clark 1 Proxy 1 Department of 

9 Natural Resources 

Pamela Fisher 1 Proxyr Indiana Economic 

10 Development Corporation 

David Bausman 1 Proxy 1 Lieutenant 

11 Governor 

Thomas W. Easterly (nonvoting) 

12 

13 IDEM STAFF MEMBERS: 

14 Bruno Pigott 

Martha Clark Mettler 

15 Zac Ruzycki 

Susan Bern 

16 Nancy King 

Chris Pedersen 

17 Carol Comer 

Ann Long 

18 Betsy Rouse 

Janet Pittman 

19 

20 PUBLIC SPEAKERS: 

21 Ann Mciver 

22 

23 

2 
. ( 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

1:29 o'clock p.m. 

August 14, 2013 

3 

CHAIRMAN GARD: I'm going to call the 

meeting to order. It is 1:30. The Chair sees a 

quorum, so I call the August 2013 meeting of the 

Environmental Rules Board to order. I'm going to 

go around as usual and ask Board members to 

'introduce themselves and say who they represent. 

We do have a couple of new faces, and I want to 

welcome everyone, including the new people. 

Commissioner? 

COMM. EASTERLY: 

the Commissioner of the Indiana Department of 

Environmental Management, and I'm a nonvoting 

member of the Board. 

MR. BAUSMAN: David Bausman. I'm the 

Program Manager of Policy and Regulatory Affairs 

at the Indiana Btate Department of Agriculture. 

I serve as a proxy for the Lieutenant Governor. 

MR. CLARK: Cameron Clark. I'm the 

Director of the Indiana Department of Natural 

Resources. 

MS. FISHER: Pam Fisher, proxy for 
4 

1 Secretary of Commerce Victor Smith. 

2 

3 designate. 

4 

MR. HORN: Chris Horn. I'm the Labor 

MS. BOYDSTON: Gail Boydston 1 

5 manufacturing. 

6 CHAIRMAN GARD: Beverly Gard 1 general 

7 public 1 and Chair of the Board. 

8 MR. ETZLER: Bill Etzler 1 small 

9 business. 

10 MR. ANDERSON: Tom Anderson, 

11 environmental representative. 

12 

13 public. 

14 

MR. POWDRILL: 

DR. NIEMIEC: 

Gary Powdrill 1 general 

Ted Niemiec 1 

15 represehting health care. 

16 MS. ALEXANDROVICH: Joanne 

17 Alexandrovich 1 local government.-

18 MR. CARMICHAEL: Kelly Carmichael 1 

19 representing the public utilities. 

20 MR. DAVIDSON: Calvin Davidson, 

21 representing solid waste recycling. 

22 MR. RULON: Ken Rulon, representing 

23 agriculture. 
( 

1 

2 

MR. CARMICHAEL: Second. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Any further 

3 discussion by the Board? 

4 (No response.) 

5 

6 aye. 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

CHAIRMAN GARD: All in favor, say 

MR. HORN: Aye. 

DR. NIEMIEC: Aye. 

MR. ANDERSON: Aye. 

MR. BAUSMAN: Aye. 

MR. POWDRILL: Aye. 

MR. CLARK: Aye. 

MR. CARMICHAEL: Aye. 

MR. RULON: Aye. 

MS. ALEXANDROVICH: Aye. 

MR. DAVIDSON: Aye. 

MS. FISHER: Aye. 

MS. BOYDSTON: Aye. 

MR. ETZLER: Aye. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Those opposed, nay. 

(No response.) 

CHAIRMAN GARD: The motion passes. 

The next item is a public hearing before 

39 
1 the Environmental Rules Board concerning the 

2 final adoption of amendments to rules at 

3 326 IAC 2-7 and 2-8, Minor New Source Review. 

4 I will now introduce Exhibit C, the rules 

5 as preliminarily adopted with IDEM's suggested 

6 changed incorporated. 

Is there someone -- Susan. 

40 

7 

8 MS. BEM: My name is Susan Bern, and I 

9 work in the Rule Development Branch. 

10 This rulemaking is to amend the Minor New 

11 Source Review Rules for Title V and FESOP 

12 sources. They are seeking approval for 

13 construction of new units or modifications that 

14 was preliminarily adopted in May. These 

15 ·amendments will allow IDEM to request U.S. EPA 

16 state implementation plan, or SIP, approval of 

17 the Minor New Source Review program for Title V 

18 and FESOP sources. 

19 At preliminary adoption IDEM had committed 

20 to working with EPA to see if a demonstration 

21 could be developed to show that a 

22 100-ton-per-year threshold for carbon monoxide 

23 compared to the 25-ton-per-year threshold in the 
I 

( 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

current SIP for construction permits is not a 

relaxation of the SIP and is protective of the 

National Ambient Air Quality Standard for carbon 

monoxide. 

41 

The Board adopted a revision to the rule 

where all modifications for which the potential 

to emit carbon monoxide is greater or equal to 25 

tons per year will be processed as significant 

modifications, with the understanding that IDEM 

would further consult with EPA before final 

adoption. Currently, in the state rule, the 

threshold for significant modifications for CO is 

a hundred tons per year or greater. 

So, IDEM used some recent new source 

review projects to evaluate varying levels of 

carbon monoxide emissions. We looked at a 

variety of sources with varying stack parameters, 

plant layouts, and terrain to represent 

conservative conditions. IDEM modeled individual 

units at a hundred tons per year, and then 

modeled at a hundred tons per year again with 

lower stack heights and lower flow rates to 

represent these more conservative conditions. 
1 We looked at a mini steel mill 1 a lime 

2 production/mining operation 1 a fertilizer plant 1 

3 and a natural gas EGU 1 and then the modeling 

4 results were compared to the one-hour and 

5 eight-hour significant impact levels/ or SILS 1 

6 under the New Source Review Rules. The modeling 

7 results shows that there were no impacts above 

8 the significant impact levels. 

9 We also looked at monitoring data since 

10 1999 1 where we have not had a CO monitor 

11 violation of NAAQS since this rule has been in 

12 place with a hundred-ton-per-year threshold. 

13 We consulted with U.S. EPA Region V1 and 

42 

14 then in coordination with the National Office of 

15 Air Quality Planning and Standards to work on the 

16 modeling protocol that we used for this 

17 demonstration 1 and EPA has indicated that they 

18 could use -- that we could use this type of 

19 demonstration as part of our SIP request for the 

20 rule that is final effective -- or if this Board 

21 adopts the rule today 1 and that's what we would 

22 use to demonstrate that this would not be a 

23 relaxation of the SIP. 

,r 
I 

( 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

43 

So, therefore, IDEM is proposing for final 

adoption to maintain the hundred-ton-per-year 

threshold for CO at 326 IAC 2-7-10.5, in 

subsection (e) for a minor m,odification, and then 

within the FESOP Rules at 326 IAC 2-8-11.1, 

subsection (d), minor permit revisions. This 

demonstration, as I already stated, would be used 

as the technical support for the SIP revisions. 

The Department requests that the Board 

final adopt the proposed rules with IDEM's 

suggested changes. 

And any questions? 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Any questions? 

Yes. 

DR. NIEMIEC: I have a very minor 

question, which is: Could you give an estimate 

of what the approximate cost was in personnel 

hours or some other factor that was involved in 

doing this demonstration? 

MS. BEM: W~ll, most the time was 

spent after preliminary adoption, and we -- I 

mean, you know, generally we had a couple of 

phone calls with EPA, and I don't -- on the 
1 modeling end of -- side of things, you know, we 

2 modeled four or five different sources, and I'm 

44 

3 not sure how long it takes for the modeler to do, 

4 but I would not say it was very extensive in the 

5 amount of time. 

6 

7 

DR. NIEMIEC: Okay. Thank you. 

MS. ALEXANDROVICH: Well, will EPA 

8 SIP approve thisi do you know? 

9 MS. BEM: Well, yeah, we definitely 

10 have been working with EPA since preliminary 

11 adoption. They looked at the modeling protocol 

12 before we conducted the modeling, so that way we 

13 knew, in advance of spending the time doing the 

14 modeling, that this was the right route, and then 

15 we've also shared the modeling results with them. 

16 And, you know, I mean nothing's 

17 guaranteed. EPA policies or any number of things 

18 could change between now -- we cannot submit the 

19 rule for SIP approval until the rule is final and 

20 effective, which is three to four months after 

21 final adoption, but we will, you know, promptly 

22 submit it for SIP approval at that time, and 

23 since we've had a lot of coordination with EPA 

. ( 
I 

i 

1 this summer, hopefully that 1 s something they 

2 could work on right away. 

3 

4 

5 

6 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Any other questions? 

(No response.) 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Thank you. 

I have no sign-up cards to comment. Is 

45 

7 there anyone that didn 1 t present a speaker 1 s card 

8 that would like to make a comment to the Board? 

9 (No response.) 

10 CHAIRMAN GARD: If not, this hearing 

11 is concluded. 

12 

13 

14 

Any further Board discussion? 

(No response.) 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Do I hear a motion to 

15 adopt IDEM 1 s suggested changes to the rule as 

16 preliminarily adopted? 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 discussion? 

MR. POWDRILL: So moved. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Is there a second? 

MR. CARMICHAEL: Second. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Any further 

22 (No response.) 

23 CHAIRMAN GARD: All in favor, say 
46 

1 aye. 

2 MR. HORN: Aye. 

3 DR. NIEMIEC: Aye. 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

MR. ANDERSON: Aye. 

MR. BAUSMAN: Aye. 

MR. POWDRILL: Aye. 

MR. CLARK: Aye. 

MR. CARMICHAEL: Aye. 

MR. RULON: Aye. 

MS. ALEXANDROVICH: Aye. 

MR. DAVIDSON: Aye. 

MS. FISHER: Aye. 

MS. BOYDSTON: Aye. 

MR. ETZLER: Aye. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Those opposed 1 nay. 

(No response.) 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Nancy? 

MS. KING: Yesr ma'am. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Okay. We adopted the 

20 changes. Now we have to adopt the rule with the 

21 changes; right? 

22 MS. KING: Yes 1 the second suggestion 

23 would be to adopt -- to final adopt the rule as 
1 amended. 

2 CHAIRMAN GARD: Okay. I just wanted 

3 to clarify that. 

4 Okay. Now I need a motion to adopt the 

5 final rule as amended. 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 vote. 

MR. CARMICHAEL: So moved. 

MR. POWDRILL: So moved. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Second? 

MR. POWDRILL: Second. 

MR. RULON: Second. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: This is a roll-call 

13 Mr. Etzler? 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

MR. ETZLER: Yes. 

COMM. EASTERLY: Etzler. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Mr. Rulon? 

MR. RULON: Yes. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Ms. Boydston? 

MS. BOYDSTON: Yes. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Mr. Anderson? 

MR. ANDERSON: Yes. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Mr. Horn? 

MR. HORN: Yes. 

47 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 that? 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Mr. Powdrill? 

MR. POWDRILL: Yes. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Mr. -- Dr. Niemiec? 

DR. NIEMIEC: Yes. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Dr. Alexandrovich? 

MS. ALEXANDROVICH: Yes. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Mr. Davidson? 

MR. DAVIDSON: Yes. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Mr. Mettler? Who 

COMM. EASTERLY: He has left. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Okay. Mr. Clark? 

MR. CLARK: Yes. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Ms. Fisher? 

MS. ·FISHER: Yes. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Mr. Bausman? 

MR. BAUSMAN: Yes. 

is 

CHAIRMAN GARD: The Chair votes yes. 

19 We didn't have -- yeah, we did. 

20 MR. CARMICHAEL: Do I get a vote, 

21 too? 

22 COMM. EASTERLY: Oh, it was you we 

23 skipped. 

48 
49 

(Laughter.) 

CHAIRMAN GARD: You aren't on here. 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

Mr. Carmichael, you aren't 

MR. CARMICHAEL: Yes. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: -- on here. I'm 

6 sorry about that. 

7 COMM. EASTERLY: We'll try and do 

8 better. 

9 (Laughter.) 

10 

11 on this? 

12 

13 

14 votes yes. 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Is anybody else not 

(No response·. ) 

CHAIRMAN GARD: Okay. 

14 ayes, zero nays. 

Mr. Carmichael 

The rule·had 

15 been adopted. 

16 Okay. The next order of business is a 

17 public hearing before'the Environmental Rules 

18 Board concerning final adoption of amendments to 

19 rules at 326 IAC 2-1.5-5, 2-5.1-3, and 2-6.1-5, 

20 Permits and National Ambient Air Quality 

21 Standards Protection. 

22 I will now introduce Exhibit D, the rules 

23 as preliminarily adopted with IDEM's suggested 
64 

1 CERTIFICATE 

2 I, Lindy L. Meyer, Jr., the undersigned 

3 Court Reporter and Notary Public residing in the 

4 City of Shelbyville, Shelby County, Indiana, do 

5 hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and 

6 correct transcript of the proceedings taken by me 

7 on Wednesday, August 14, 2013 in this matter and 

8 transcribed by me. 

9 

I 10 

11 Lindy . Meyer, Jr., 

12 Notary Public in and 

13 for the State of Indiana. 

14 

15 My Commission expires October 27, 2016. 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 
CO De Minimis Threshold Anti-backsliding Demonstration for 326 lAC 2-7-10.5 

and 326 lAC 2-8-11.1 

Purpose of the Demonstration 

IDEM proposes to change the carbon monoxide (CO) emissions minimum threshold for 

a major source modification from 25 tons per year (TPY) to greater than or equal to 100 

TPY. The proposed change affects 3261AC 2-7-10.5 and 3261AC 2-8-11.1 concerning 

Indiana's air permitting regulations and minor new source review (NSR) requirements 

for Title V and Federally Enforceable State Operating Permit (FESOP) sources. IDEM 

has been using this 100 TPY threshold since 1999 and no CO monitor in Indiana has 

exceeded the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) since that time. While 

IDEM has been using a 100 TPY threshold since 1999 in 326 lAC 2-7-10.5 and 326 lAC 

2-8-11.1 the Indiana state implementation plan (SIP) contains a CO threshold of 25 TPY 

for construction permit approvals. The current rulemaking (LSA #11-747) retains the 

100 TPY CO threshold put in place in 1999 in state rule. Further, Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration (PSD) requirements in 326 lAC 2-2-1 define the significant 

emissions level for a major source as equal to or greater than 100 TPY. IDEM has 

performed an air quality analysis to provide technical support for this SIP change and 

will demonstrate this will be protective of the CO NAAQS. 

Analysis Summary 

IDEM reviewed CO point source emissions and ambient air monitoring data from 2000 

through 2012. Emissions have trended downward significantly and monitored 

concentrations are well below the NAAQS and have also trended downward during this 

time. 

In addition, IDEM selected sources for modeling from recent PSD permits where 

emissions for individual units were modified and stack parameters were altered to 

demonstrate more conservative conditions. The individual sources were modeled at 

100 TPY and the modeling results compared to the 1-hour and 8-hour CO significant 

impact levels (Sils). The SIL is a measure of whether a source may cause or 

contribute to a violation of PSD increment or the NAAQS, i.e. a significant deterioration 

of air quality. Based on the modeling results, there were no exceedances of either the 

1-hour or 8-hour CO SIL. 

CO Air Quality Trends 

Chart 1 below shows the downward trend in state-wide total point source emissions in 

Indiana since 2000. 

1 
Chart 1 

500000 

T 450000 

~ 400000 

s 350000 

300000 

p 250000 

e 200000 

r 150000 

y 100000 

e 50000 

a 0 

Indiana Total CO Emissions Trends 2000-2012 

Indiana Total CO Emissions Trends 2000-2012 

,.Al. 

.... _,.r " ........... ..er 11111"" "\.. -

' ..&. 

"" ~ , ~ 

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 

-co State Totals 

IDEM has operated four CO ambient monitors continuously during this same time 

period. Charts 2 and 3 below show the trends during that time. There are two NAAQS 

for CO, each with different averaging periods. For the 1-hour averaging period, a 

NAAQS of 35 parts per million (ppm) has been established. For the 8-hour averaging 

period, a NAAQS of 9 ppm has been established. Neither can be exceeded more than 

once per year. Both charts illustrate that ambient values are well below respective 

NAAQS and have trended downward over this time. 

Chart 2 1-Hour Second Maximum Value (ppm) 

40 

35 

30 

25 

p 

p 20 

m 15 

10 

5 

0 

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 

-Fort Wayne Career Cntr. -East Chicago- Post Office -lndpls -Illinois St. 

-lndpls- E. 16th St. -NAAQS 

2 
Chart 3 8-Hour Second Maximum Value (ppm) 

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 

-Fort Wayne Career Cntr. -East Chicago- Post Office -lndpls -Illinois St. 

-lndpls- E. 16th St. -NAAQS 

These trends show that a slight emissions increase that might occur from this rule will 

not likely cause a violation of the NAAQS. 

Air Quality Impact Objectives 

The purpose of the air quality impact analysis is to accomplish the following objectives. 

Each objective is individually addressed in this document in each section outlined 

below. 

A. Emission sources selected for the air quality analysis. 

B. Provide analyses of actual stack heights with respect to Good Engineering 

Practice (GEP), the meteorological data used, a description of the model used in 

the analysis, and the receptor grid utilized for the analyses. 

C. Determine if the significant impact level was exceeded. 

D. Summarize the Air Quality Analysis. 

Section A- Emission Sources for the Air Quality Analysis 

IDEM recently performed several PSD modeling reviews that can be used to evaluate 

varying levels of CO emissions. These are from a variety of sources and provide 

examples of varying stack parameters, plant layouts, and terrain. The emissions listed 

with the source are what they have been permitted for under PSD. IDEM selected the 

following PSD sources to evaluate for the CO de minimis threshold anti-backsliding 

3 
demonstration: 

• Steel mill (mini-mill), with 3421 TPY of CO, 

• Lime production I mining operation, with 822 TPY of CO, 

• Natural gas-fired electric generating unit (EGU), with 554 TPY of CO, and 

• Fertilizer plant, with 1048 TPY of CO. 

IDEM believes these sources will provide a broad base of emission source types which 

could be affected under 326 lAC 2-7-10.5 and 326 lAC 2-8-11.1. 

Section 8- Good Engineering Practice (GEP), Met Data, Model Used, Receptor 

Grid, and Terrain 

Stack Height Compliance with Good Engineering Practice (GEP) -Applicability 

Stacks should comply with GEP requirements established in 326 lAC 1-7-4. If stacks 

are lower than GEP, excessive ambient concentrations due to aerodynamic downwash 

may occur. Dispersion modeling credit for stacks taller than 65 meters (213 feet) are 

limited to GEP for the purpose of establishing emission limitations. The GEP stack 

height takes into account the distance and dimensions of nearby structures, which 

would affect the downwind wake of the stack. The downwind wake is considered to 

extend five times the lesser of the structure's height or width. A GEP stack height is 

determined for each nearby structure by the following formula: Hg = H + 1.5L. 

Where: 

Stacks 

Hg is the GEP stack height 

H is the structure height 

L is the structure's lesser dimension (height or width) 

Since all the stack heights are below GEP stack height, the effect of aerodynamic 

downwash will be accounted for in the air quality analysis. 

Meteorological Data 

The meteorological data used in AERMOD consisted of calendar years 2008 through 

2012. 

• Steel mill (mini-mill) 

o Indianapolis National Weather Service (NWS) surface data with Lincoln, 

Illinois upper air data. 

4 
• Lime production I mining operation 

o South Bend NWS surface data with Lincoln, Illinois upper air data. 

• Natural gas-fired electric generating unit (EGU) 

o South Bend NWS surface data with Lincoln, Illinois upper air data. 

• Fertilizer plant 

o Evansville NWS surface data with Lincoln, Illinois upper air data. 

The meteorological data was preprocessed using the latest versions of AERMINUTE, 

AERSURFACE, and AERMET. 

Model Description 

IDEM used AERMOD, Version 12345. All regulatory default options were utilized in the 

U.S. EPA approved model, as listed in the 40 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 51, 

Appendix W "Guideline on Air Quality Models". 

Receptor Grid 

The following receptor grids were used as follows: 

Lime production I mining operation -

• 100 meter spacing along the facility's property boundary, 

• 100 meter spacing from 0 to 1 ,000 meters from the facility, 

• 250 meters spacing from 1,000 to 3,000 meters from the facility, 

• 500 meters spacing from 3,000 to 10,000 meters from the facility. 

Steel mill operation -

• 1 00 meter spacing along the facility's property boundary, 

• 1 00 meter spacing out to 2000 meters, 

• 250 meters spacing out to 5000 meters, 

• 500 meters spacing out to 7000 meters, 

• 1000 meters spacing out to 10,000 meters. 

Fertilizer plant-

• 80 meter spacing along the facility's property boundary, 

• 1 00 meter spacing out to 1 ,600 meter, 

• 500 meter spacing out to 5,700 meter, 

• 1,000 meter spacing out to 26,000 meter. 

EGU-

• Slightly less than 100 meter at along the facility's property boundary, 

5 
• 100 meter spacing out to 3,000 meter in a circle, 

• 500 meter spacing out to 10,000 meter circle, 

• 1,000 meter spacing out to 20,000 meter circle. 

Treatment of Terrain 

Receptor terrain elevation inputs were interpolated from NED (National Elevation 

Dataset) data obtained from the USGS. NED terrain data was preprocessed using 

AERMAP. 

Section C -Significant Impact Level (SILl Analysis 

Significant impact analyses were conducted to determine if the sources under 

consideration would exceed the PSD Slls (concentrations). 

All of these sources had total PSD permit emissions well in excess of 100 tons per year 

and all modeled below the Slls as configured in their permits. However, for this 

analysis, emissions for individual units were modified and stack parameters were 

altered to demonstrate more conservative conditions. 

Stacks were modeled individually at 100 tons per year using the sources' current stack 

configurations. Stack heights and velocities were also reduced by half to provide more 

conservative results for the analysis. There were intermittent sources in these 

examples to which IDEM applied the 1-hour modeling guidance to calculate the 

emissions rate for those sources. 

For the steel mini-mill scenario, the roof monitors were modeled as volume sources with 

1 00 TPY for each release point and were also modeled as combined units. If the 

volume sources were modeled as a combined unit, the 1 00 TPY was equally 

apportioned among those release points. For example, the tunnel roof monitors for the 

steel mini-mill were modeled individually and also modeled as one unit. When they 

were modeled as one unit, the 100 TPY was equally divided among the 10 roof 

monitors. This configuration greatly exceeds what was permitted for this source and is 

overly conservative. IDEM's permit program would not allow a 100 ton per year source 

to vent its emissions from a roof monitor- a stack would be required. 

IDEM compared modeling results to the 1-hour and 8-hour CO Slls. Based on the 

modeling results, there are no exceedances of either the 1-hour or 8-hour CO Slls. 

6 
Slls for the CO time averaging periods are: 2000 ug/m3 for the 1-hour averaging period 

and 500 ug/m3 for the 8-hour averaging period. The emission rate of 2.877 g/s shown 

in the tables below equates to 100 TPY. In the following tables, each row represents an 

individual stack, except for the first stack for the steel mini-mill volume sources, which is 

explained above. 

CO Sianificant Impact Analvsis 

STEEL MINI-MILL POINT SOURCES 

Stack Height co 100 TPY Each Stack (ug/m3) Reduce Height and Velocity by 

1/2 (ug/m3) 

(m) (g/s) 1-Hour 8-Hour 1-Hour 8-Hour 

60.96 2.877 6.6 3.2 28.6 10.6 

47.55 2.877 3.1 1.7 12.7 8 

45.72 2.877 61.4 49.2 222.7 121.7 

30.48 2.877 165.3 35 240.5 49.6 

30.48 2.877 154.6 34.1 215.7 47.9 

34.29 2.877 83.2 23.6 152.9 36.7 

23.41 2.877 348.2 84.8 533.9 120 

23.41 2.877 354.5 90.5 571 124.1 

23.41 2.877 409.6 85.4 949.6 255.5 

23.41 2.877 304.5 85.4 435 129.8 

23.41 2.877 290.1 89.8 453.7 129.3 

23.41 2.877 345 92.4 497.7 125.5 

14.03 2.877 249.4 62.7 345.8 108.9 

14.03 2.877 252.8 63.4 365.8 110.6 

22.83 2.877 264.1 58 448.1 87.5 

22.83 2.877 279.2 60.9 482.9 84.5 

22.83 2.877 291 64 503 85.8 

22.83 2.877 288.8 64.8 486.8 85.9 

22.83 2.877 293.9 64.4 493.4 85.4 

STEEL MINI-MILL VOLUME SOURCES 

Release Height co 100 TPY as a Unit (ug/m3) co 100 TPY Each (ug/m3) 

(m) (g/s) 1-Hour 8-Hour (g/s) 1-Hour 8-Hour 

11.73 0.2877 616.6 250.4 2.877 623.4 239.1 

11.73 0.2877 2.877 619.8 247.1 

7 
11.73 0.2877 2.877 626.7 253.4 

11.73 0.2877 2.877 628.7 257.1 

11.73 0.2877 2.877 627.8 259.3 

11.73 0.2877 2.877 632.1 259.1 

11.73 0.2877 2.877 635.9 256.4 

11.73 0.2877 2.877 642.9 252.2 

11.73 0.2877 2.877 651.2 249.9 

11.73 0.2877 2.877 652.6 246 

36.88 1.4383 278.8 43.6 2.877 288.3 47.1 

36.88 1.4383 2.877 291.1 45.4 

LIME PRODUCTION/MINING OPERATION 

Stack Height co 100 TPY Each Stack (ug/m3) Reduce Height and Velocity by 

1/2 (ug/m3) 

(m) (g/s) 1-Hour 8-Hour 1-Hour 8-Hour 

38.1 2.877 13.5 7.6 84.7 47.7 

38.1 2.877 13.5 8.1 85.7 48.9 

NATURAL GAS~FIRED EGU 

Stack Height co Model Results (ug/m3)- See Reduce Height and Velocity 

notes below for emissions by 1/2 (ug/m3) 

(m) (g/s) 1-Hour 8-Hour 1-Hour 8-Hour 

61.82 2.877 7.2 4.1 73.2 30.4 

61.82 2.877 7.2 4.8 83.7 40.1 

61.82 2.877 6.9 3.9 88.4 34.3 

61.82 2.877 8.2 3.9 80.4 28 

18.29 2.877 166.3 95.2 531.8 220 

18.29 2.877 187.7 96.2 491 284 

18.29 0.164 31 10.4 72.8 28.2 

18.29 0.164 30.8 10.2 71.3 27.7 

14.58 0.164 24.7 16.7 71.3 41 

15.24 0.164 70.8 21.7 127.6 51.4 

15.24 0.164 70.6 21.5 128.2 53 

Emergency un1ts - 100 TPY * (500/8760) hours 

FERTILIZER PLANT 

Stack Height co Model Results (ug/m3)- See Reduce Height and Velocity 

notes below for emissions by 1/2 (ug/m3) 

(m) (g/s) 1-Hour 8-Hour 1-Hour 8-Hour 

30 2.877 25 11.2 85.1 41.1 

46.38 2.877 628.9 244.2 789.5 319.7 

8 
65 2.877 1.5 0.5 2.1 .9 

65 2.877 0.4 0.2 .7 .3 

6.096 0.11 27.5 18 37.5 25.4 

34.146 0.11 28.4 8.5 63 23 

38.1 2.877 49.2 16.4 129.6 48.7 

38.1 2.877 50.9 16.5 129.8 34.3 

38.1 2.877 47.6 15 214.9 127.8 

38.1 2.877 56.5 17.4 118.5 66.1 

6.096 0.11 79.4 47.7 199.6 133.5 

47.64 2.877 115 31 158.1 40.7 

Emergency un1ts = 100 TPY * (336/8760) hours 

Section D -Summary of Air Quality Analysis 

Modeling results taken from the AERMOD model showed CO impacts were predicted to 

be less than the Slls. The analysis shows this rule change affecting 326 lAC 2-7-10.5 

and 326 lAC 2-8-11.1 will be protective of the CO NAAQS. More detailed data on 

source inputs and results can be found in the accompanying Excel file: CO threshold 

params_model_results_revised_source_descriptions.xlsx. 

9 

STEEL MINI-MILL 

POINT SOURCES 

VOLUME 

Source ID 

98 

200 

500 

3 

4 

5 

9A 

9B 9C 

90 

9E 

9F 

704 705 

1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 

Source 10 

6A 6B 

6C 

60 

6E 

6F 

6G 

6H 

61 

6J 

11 

12 

Source Description 

Melt Shop Baghouse 1 Melt Shop Baghouse 2 

Vacuum Degasser 

Tunnel Furnace 1 Stack 1 Tunnel Furnace 1 Stack 2 

Tunnel Furnace 2 

Annealing Furnaces 

Annealing Furnaces Annealing Furnaces 

Annealing Furnaces Annealing Furnaces Annealing Furnaces 

TF Fan 5 TF Fan 6 

Box Annealing Furnace 

Box Annealing Furnace 

Box Annealing Furnace 

Box Annealing Furnace 

Box Annealing Furnace 

Tunnel Roof Monitor 

Tunnel Roof Monitor Tunnel Roof Monitor Tunnel Roof Monitor Tunnel Roof Monitor Tunnel Roof Monitor Tunnel Roof Monitor Tunnel Roof Monitor Tunnel Roof Monitor Tunnel Roof Monitor 

Roof Monitor 1 Roof Monitor 2 

LIME PRODUCTION/MINING OPERATION 

Source 10 

OC1 

OC2 

Kiln Kiln 

Easting (X) 

(m) 

514188.52 513923.57 514927.54 514398.35 514398.23 514471.04 514741.88 514741.54 

514741.5 

514707.33 

514706.84 514706.84 514412.47 514442.16 514428.93 514428.93 514428.93 514428.93 514428.93 

Easting (X} 

(m) 

514424.77 514424.77 514424.77 514424.77 514424.77 514424.77 514424.77 514424.77 514424.77 

514424.77 

514320.21 514396.41 

Easting (X) 

(m) 

511086.69 

511087.59 

Northing (Y) 

(m) 

4425063.1 

4424974.73 4424672.06 4424933.13 4424958.46 4424959.14 4425220.85 

4425245.3 

4425270.04 4425207.67 4425232.56 4425258.18 4425012.25 4425012.25 4425441.04 4425417.04 4425393.04 4425369.04 4425345.04 

Northing (Y) 

(m) 

4425004.62 4425011.62 4425018.62 4425024.62 4425031.62 4425038.62 4425045.62 4425051.62 4425058.62 4425065.62 4424905.43 4424905.72 

Northing (Y) 

(m) 

4520113.5 4520096.5 

Base Elevation 

(m) 

264.94 264.55 265.69 264.69 

264.7 

264.87 264.25 264.54 264.65 264.73 264.87 265.04 264.97 265.01 264.73 264.94 

265 

265.07 265.12 

Base Elevation 

(m) 

265 

265.1 

265 265 265 265 265 

264.9 264.9 264.9 

264.79 

264.56 

Base Elevation 

(m) 

202.9 202.9 

Stack Height 

(m) 

60.96 

47.55 45.72 

30.48 30.48 34.29 

23.41 23.41 23.41 23.41 23.41 23.41 

14.03 14.03 

22.83 22.83 22.83 22.83 22.83 

Release Height 

(m) 

11.73 11.73 11.73 11.73 11.73 11.73 11.73 11.73 11.73 11.73 

36.88 36.88 

Stack Height 

(m) 

38.1 38.1 

Temperature 

(K) 

408.2 408.2 

1273 

972 972 

838.8 

308.2 308.2 308.2 308.2 308.2 308.2 

322 322 

308.2 308.2 308.2 308.2 308.2 

Exit Veloc

(m/s) 

12.414 

9.76 

20 

8.25 8.61 8.23 

11.22 11.22 11.22 11.22 11.22 11.22 

19.7 19.7 

12.06 12.06 12.06 

12.06 

12.06 

I nit. Horizontal Dimension Initial Vert. Dim

(m) (m) 

0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.71 0.43 

Temperature 

(K) 

464 

464 

5.25 

5.25 

5.25 

5.25 5.25 5.25 

5.25 5.25 5.25 5.25 

16.59 

16.59 

Exit Veloc

(m/s) 

21.8 

21.8 
cription Easting (X) Northing (Y) Base Elevation Stack Height Temperature Exit Velocity Stack Diameter co 

(m) (m) (m) (m) (K) (m/s) (m) (g/s) 

 Turbine 543282.95 4616352.9 229.1 61.82 338.71 11.38 6.1 2.877 

 Turbine 543321.33 4616353.18 229.13 61.82 338.71 11.38 6.1 2.877  Turbine 543093.49 4616580.63 229.24 61.82 338.71 11.38 6.1 2.877  Turbine 543093.14 4616620.26 228.54 61.82 338.71 11.38 6.1 2.877 

Boiler 1 543231.39 4616349.05 229.14 18.29 672.04 26.41 0.91 2.877 Boiler 2 543086.34 4616522.73 228.99 18.29 672.04 26.41 0.91 2.877 

enerator 1 543177.57 4616405.62 228.71 18.29 708.71 40.81 0.3 0.164 enerator 2 543168.43 4616405.62 228.57 18.29 708.71 40.81 0.3 0.164 enerator 3 543473.1 4616006 227.36 14.58 677.04 157.19 0.2 0.164 

mp 1 543174.52 4616405.62 228.66 15.24 852.04 10.45 0.3 0.164 mp 2 543171.48 4616405.62 228.62 15.24 852.04 10.45 0.3 0.164 

Emergency units= 100 TPY • (500/8760) hours 

scription Easting (X) Northing (Y) Base Elevation Stack Height Temperature Exit Velocity Stack Diameter co 

(m) (m) (m) (m) (K) (m/s) (m) (g/s) 

rmer Stack 495803.45 4198148.72 118.87 30 436 14.7 3.81 2.877 

rage Flare 496097.97 4199121.99 119.58 46.38 1273.15 20 0.12 2.877 

 Backend Flare 496010.63 4198588.71 118.87 65 1273.15 20 7.71 2.877 

 Frontend Flare 496009.65 4198580.5 118.87 65 1273.15 20 16.44 2.877 

el Generator 495997.22 4198356.19 118.57 6.096 672.04 40.25 0.356 0.11 

Heater 495817.72 4198288.14 118.87 34.146 1172.04 14.3 1.981 0.11 

er Stack A 495784.05 4198427.72 118.88 38.1 449.82 13.8 1.8288 2.877 

er Stack B 495784.05 4198468.51 119.49 38.1 449.82 13.8 1.8288 2.877 

er Stack C 495758.01 4198468.59 120.98 38.1 449.82 13.5 1.8288 2.877 

er Stack D 495758.08 4198427.56 119.03 38.1 449.82 13.5 1.8288 2.877 

r Pump Engine 495642.24 4198448.4 121.14 6.096 672.04 22.1 0.2032 0.11 

lare 495669.81 4198152.8 118.87 47.64 1273.15 20 0.37 2.877 

Emergency units= 100 TPY • (336/8760) hours 

877 G/S = 100 TPY 

S 1st HIGHEST MODELED CONCENTRATION OUT OF 5 YEARS 
Model Results Permitted Limits co 100 TPY Each Stack (ug/m3) Reduce Height and Velocity by 1/2 (ug/m3) 

1-Hour 8-Hour (g/s) 1-Hour 8-Hour 1-Hour 8-Hour 

107.6 51.3 2.877 6.6 3.2 28.6 10.6 

50.6 28.2 2.877 3.1 1.7 12.7 8 

49.4 39.6 2.877 61.4 49.2 222.7 121.7 

5.1 1.1 2.877 165.3 35 240.5 49.6 

4.8 1.1 2.877 154.6 34.1 215.7 47.9 

5.1 1.5 2.877 83.2 23.6 152.9 36.7 

19.5 4.8 2.877 348.2 84.8 533.9 120 

19.8 5.1 2.877 354.5 90.5 571 124.1 

22.9 4.8 2.877 409.6 85.4 949.6 255.5 

17 4.8 2.877 304.5 85.4 435 129.8 

16.2 5 2.877 290.1 89.8 453.7 129.3 

19.3 5.2 2.877 345 92.4 497.7 125.5 

3.6 0.9 2.877 249.4 62.7 345.8 108.9 

3.7 0.9 2.877 252.8 63.4 365.8 110.6 

5.5 1.2 2.877 264.1 58 448.1 87.5 

5.8 1.3 2.877 279.2 60.9 482.9 84.5 

6.1 1.3 2.877 291 64 503 85.8 

1.4 2.877 288.8 64.8 486.8 85.9 

6.1 1.3 2.877 293.9 64.4 493.4 85.4 

Model Results Permitted Limits co 100 TPY as a Unit (ug/m3) 100 TPY Each (ug/m3) 

(g/s) 1-Hour 8-Hour 1-Hour 8-Hour 

17.9 7.3 0.2877 616.6 250.4 623.4 239.1 

0.2877 619.8 247.1 

0.2877 626.7 253.4 

0.2877 628.7 257.1 

0.2877 627.8 259.3 

0.2877 632.1 259.1 

0.2877 635.9 256.4 

0.2877 642.9 252.2 

0.2877 651.2 249.9 

0.2877 652.6 246 

36.1 5.4 1.4383 278.8 43.6 288.3 47.1 

1.4383 291.1 45.4 

Model Results Permitted Limits 100 TPY Each Stack (ug/m3) Reduce Height and Velocity by 1/2 (ug/m3) 

1-Hour 8-Hour co 1-Hour 8-Hour 1-Hour 8-Hour 

(g/s) 

55.4 31.2 2.877 13.5 7.6 84.7 47.7 

55.3 33.3 2.877 13.5 8.1 85.7 48.9 
 Height 

locity 

) 

Hour 8-Hour 

73.2 30.4 

83.7 40.1 88.4 34.3 

80.8 28 

531.8 220 

491 284 

72.8 28.2 71.3 27.7 

71.3 41 

127.6 51.4 

128.2 53 

e Height 

locity 

) 

Hour 8-Hour 

85.1 41.1 

789.5 319.7 

2.1 0.9 

0.7 0.3 

37.5 25.4 

63 23 

129.6 48.7 

129.8 34.3 

214.9 127.8 

118.5 66.1 

199.6 133.5 

158.1 40.7