### INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT We ProtectHoosiers andOurEnvironment.

Michael R. Pence Govenwr 

### Ms. SusanHedman Regional Administrator U.S. EPA, Region 5 77 WestJacksonBoulevard Chicago, Illinois 60604

DearMs. 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 ImplementationPlan Submittal for IndianaRegarding 326 lAC 2-7-10.5 and 326 lAC 2-8-11.1; MinorNew Source Review for Title V and FESOP Sources (LSA #11-747)

Pursuantto Section 110 ofthe 1990 CleanAirAct and Title 13 ofthe Indiana Code, the IndianaDepartment ofEnvironmental Management (IDEM) submits an amendmentto the Indiana state implementationplan (SIP). This amendment consists ofrevisions to 326 lAC 2-7- 10.5 and 326 lAC 2-8-11.1. IDEM requests thatthe 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 ofnewunits or modification ofexisting units at Title V sources, also known as minor new source review (NSR). While 326 lAC 2-7 is Indiana's operatingpermitprogramfor Title V sources, section 10.5 is a construction permitprogramthat is embedded inthe Title V programrules. Similarly, 326 lAC 2-8-11.1 applies to construction ofnewunits ormodification ofexisting units at federally enforceable state operatingpermit (FESOP) sources. While Indianahas a constructionpermitprogram for minorNSRapproved into the SIP (repealed 326 lAC 2-1) the minorNSRrules as they applyto construction and modifications at Title V and FESOP sources have notpreviouslybeenpart of the Indiana SIP.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 ofthese sections exist in the Indiana SIP intheir curr-ent f01m. Inthe minorNSRrules at 326 lAC 2-7-10.5, approvals are designated as minor or significant source modifications (minor or significantpe1mit revisions under 326 lAC 2-8-11.1). IDEMis aware ofU.S. EPA's concern withthe types ofactions that could be approved as a minor modification withoutthe appropriate amount ofpublic notice. IDEMpreviously submitted 326 lAC 2-7-10.5 as part ofa 1999 rulemaking (LSA #98-95) and subsequently withdrewthe SIP requestbecause ofapprovability issues. IDEMhas addressed these concerns withthe cunentrulemaking effective October 26,2013 (LSA #11-747). IDEMworked closely with RegionV staffto draftrule language that U.S. EPAwill be able to approve into the SIP. IDEM isprovidingtechnical documentationto demonstrate that a carbon monoxide (CO) threshold of 100 tons peryearfor minormodifications will not impacttheNAAQS. The threshold for all minorNSR approvals (i.e., including smaller sources that do not operate under the TV orFESOP operatingpe1mit program) that cuiTently exists inthe SIP as the nowrepealed 326 lAC 2-1 is 25 tons per year. Any source withpotential emissions ofless than 25 tons per

An Equal Opportunity Employer 

# 0 (!) RecycledPaper AState

**that~**

### Ms. SusanHedman Page 2 of2 year ofCO could obtain aregistrationpe1mitthat does notrequire public notice. Underthe 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 emissionunits without public notice thatunder comparable situations inthe SIP would have requiredpublic notice. Therefore, IDEM is providingtechnical documentationto supportthe 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 inthe SIP. IDEMbelievesthis is an en-or since 326 lAC 2-8-11.1 was noteffective until 1999. The FESOP rules at 326 lAC 2-8 were SIP approved in 1995 except for the permitterm change from 5 to 10 years at 326 lAC 2-8-4 (LSA #06-487) that was SIP approved in 2007. IDEMreplaced 326 lAC 2-8-11 with 326 lAC 2-8- 11.1 inthe 1999 rulemaking. Secondly, U.S. EPA will soonbe approving 326 lAC 2-7-10.5(b) and (k) as part ofa SIP submittal request sentto U.S. EPA onAugust 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 orfederal district court orders into constructionpermits. IDEMprovided additional clarificationinthis cuiTent rulemaking (LSA #11-747) thatthe public notice requirements in 326 lAC 2-7-10.5(k) apply to pe1mits issued for the purpose ofincorporatingrequirements from federal consent decrees. Thirdly, the emission thresholds distinguishing betweenminor and significant modifications at 326 lAC 2-7-10.5 and 326 lAC 2-8-11.1 include PM2.5. 

### IDEM added PM2.5

### throughoutthepe1mit rules at 326 lAC 2 in anotherrulemaking (LSA#11-251). This submittal consists ofone (1) 

### hard copy ofthe required documentation. An 

### electronic version ofthe submittal in PDF format that is identical to the hard copy (except for the modelingfiles that are provided on disc) has been sentto Chris Panos at the U.S. EPA Region V office. In orderto assist with your review ofthis SIP submission, a list ofsupporting documents is attached. Throughoutthe development ofthese amendments to the existingrule, staffofthe Office ofLegal Counsel worked closely with your staffto ensure that any potentialproblemsthat might exist withthis requested SIP revision wouldbe resolved. I requestthat U.S. EPA approve this additionto Indiana's SIP. Ifyou have any questions regarding this submittal, please contact Mike Dalton, Rule Support Section Chief, Office ofLegal Counsel at (317) 232-8884.

NK/sb Attachments: SupportingDocuments 

# s~·tfce·r·e.~~~/~., **//.~r~~7·** • .· /1 

### _,;'A 

### .• '<./fVt

.



# Nan~y;tt~i ,



# ~ / Chief,t.Rii'les DevelopmentBranch Office ofLegal Counsel

cc: PamBlakely, U.S. EPARegion 5 (no enclosures) Steve Rosenthal, U.S. EPARegion 5 (no enclosures) SamPortanova, U.S. EPA Region V (no enclosures) Christine Pedersen, IDEM (no enclosures) Matt Stuckey, IDEM (no enclosures) SIP file

### Supporting Documents LSADocument #11-74 7 Attachment A: Administrative Checklist ( 40 CFR 51, Appendix V) Attachment B: Final Rule. LSA Document#

### 11-74 7(F) as posted inthe IndianaRegister on October 23,2013 (DIN: 20131023-IR-326110747FRA) Attachment C: Signature Page Attachment D: SecondNotice ofCommentPeriod, including the Notice ofPublicHearing, as posted inthe Indiana Register on February 6, 2013 (DIN: 20130206-IR-326110747SNA) AttachmentE: Certificates ofWeb Publication (Notice ofPublic Hearings) Attachment F: Transcript ofFirst Public Hearing held onMay 8, 2013 Attachment G: Proposed Rule, including the Notice ofPublic Hearing, as posted inthe IndianaRegister on June 12, 2013 (DIN: 20130612-IR-326110747PHA) Attachment H: Transcript ofSecond Public Hearing held onAugust 14, 2013 Attachment I: Technical Support Document for CarbonMonoxide (CO) Threshold

### ADMINISTRATIVE CHECKLIST (40 CFR51, Appendix V) 

### 1. The submittal is accompanied by a formal letter ofsubmittal from the governor orhis designee. 2. Evidence thatthe State has adopted the plan inthe State code or body ofregulations; orissuedthe permit, order, consent agreement ("document"); in final form.

a. Date ofadoption orfinal issuance: b. The effective date ofthe plan, ifdifferent from the adoption/issuance date. 3. Evidence that the State has the necessary legal authority under state lawto adopt and implementthe plan. 4. A copy ofthe actual regulation ordocument submitted for approval and incorporation byreference into the plan, includingthe following:

a. Indication ofthe changes madeto the existing approvedplan, where applicable. b. The submittal shall be a copy ofthe official State regulation or document signed, stamped, dated by the appropriate state official indicatingthat it is fully enforceable bythe State. Effective date shall be stated inthe document itself. 5. Evidencethatthe State followed all ofthe procedural requirements ofthe State's laws and constitution in conducting and completingthe adoption/issuance ofthe plan.

6. Evidence thatpublic notice was given, including date of proofofpublication. X Certificates ofWeb Publication Enclosed

Signature Page (Attachment 

### C)

Date ofSec. ofState (September 26, 2013) 30 days afterfiling (October26, 2013) IC 13-14-8

Indiana Admin. Code (AttachmentB)

Signature Page (Attachment 

### C)

Attachments D, E, and G

_X_Notices ofFirst and Second Public Hearings (IndianaRegister)

7. Cetiification thatpublic hearings were held in accordance with informationprovided in public hearing notice. Attachments F & 

### H

### _X_Transcript from FirstPublic Hearing _X_Transcript from Second Public Hearing 8. Compilation ofpublic comments and State's response. X Second Notice _X_Proposed Rule 9. Technical support. AttachmentD Attachment G Attachment IIndiana 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-326110747PHA). Date of First Hearing: May 8, 2013 Proposed Rule: June 12, 2013, Indiana Register {DIN: 20130612-IR-326110747PRA). 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 ofa 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 ofsignificant deterioration provisions under Sections 160 through 169B ofthe CAA (42 U.S.C. 7470 through 42 U.S.C. 7492); (B) the nonattainment new source review requirements under Sections 171 through 193 ofthe CAA (42 U.S.C. 7501 through 42 U.S.C. 7515); (C) Section 112(g) and 1120) ofthe 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 forthe purpose of resolving alleged violations of:

(A) the prevention of significant deterioration provisions under Sections 160 through 169B ofthe CAA (42 U.S.C. 7470 through 42 U.S.C. 7492); (B) the nonattainment new source review requirements under Sections 171 through 193 ofthe CAA (42 U.S.C. 7501 through 42 U.S.C. 7515); (C) Section 112(g) and 1120) ofthe 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 ofthis rule, the owner or operator of a source may repair or replace an emissions unit or air pollution control equipment or components thereofwithout prior approval ifthe repair or replacement:

Date: Oct 23,2013 3:00:00PM EDT DIN: 20131023-IR-326110747FRA Page 1Indiana 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 orthe 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 ofthe emissions unit, process, or control equipment. Ifthe repair or replacement qualifies as a reconstruction or is a complete replacement ofan emissions unit or air pollution control equipment and would require a modification approval or operating permit revision modification under a provision ofthis rule, the owner or operator ofthe 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 ofthe nature and location ofthe proposed construction or modification. (ii) The design capacity and typical operating schedule ofthe proposed construction or modification. (iii) A description ofthe 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 ofthe 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 ofthis title and the CAA, the ambient air quality standards set forth in 326 lAC 1-3, orthe prevention of significant deterioration maximum allowable increase under 326 lAC 2-2:

(i) Information on the nature and amount ofthe pollutant to be emitted, including an estimate ofthe 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 ofthis title and the requirements ofthe 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 ofthe CAA. (ii) Affirmation that the statements in the application are true and complete, as known at the time of completion ofthe application, and shall subject the applicant to liability under state laws forbidding false or misleading statements. (2) Ifthe 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) ofthis rule: (A) An identification ofthe applicable requirements to which the source will be subject as a result ofthe modification, including the applicable emission limits and standards, applicable monitoring and test methods, and applicable record keeping and reporting requirements. (B) A description ofthe Part 70 permit terms and conditions that will apply to the modification and that are consistent with sections 5 and 6 ofthis rule. (C) A schedule of compliance, if applicable. (D) A statement describing what the compliance status ofthe modification will be after construction has been completed consistent with section 4(c)(10) ofthis rule. (E) A certification consistent with section 4(f) ofthis rule. (e) The following minor modifications shall be processed in accordance with subsection (f): (1) Modifications that would reduce the frequency ofany monitoring or reporting required by a permit condition or applicable requirement. (2) The addition of a portable source or relocation ofa portable source to an mdsting source ifthe 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 2Indiana Register 

## fd1 (1) Modifications that would have a potential to emit within any ofthe following ranges: (A) Less than twenty-five (25) tons peryear and equal to or greater than five (5) tons per year of either PM, PM 10, or direct PM2 5. 

### (B) Less than twenty-five (25) tons peryear and equal to or greaterthan ten 

### (10) tons peryear ofthe 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 peryear and equal to or greaterthan five (5) tons peryear ofVOC 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 peryear and equal to or greaterthan twenty-five (25) tons peryear of carbon monoxide (CO). 

### (E) Less than five (5) tons one (1) ton peryear and equal to or greaterthan two-tenths (0.2) ton peryear of lead (Pb). (F) Less than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greater than five (5) tons per year ofthe following regulated air pollutants:

(i) Hydrogen sulfide (H2S). (ii) Total reduced sulfur (TRS). (iii) Reduced sulfur compounds. (iv) Fluorides. 

### (4) Modifisations forwhish the potential to emit is limited to less than twenty five (25) tons peryear of any regulated pollutant other than !=lAPs, ten (10) tons peryear ofany single I=IAP as defined under Section 112(b) ofthe C/\1\, ortwenty five (25) tons peryear ofany sombination of 1=1/\Ps by complying with one (1) ofthe following sonstraints: (/\) Limiting total annual solvent usage or maximum VOC sontent, or both. 

### (8) Limiting annual hours ofoperation ofthe 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 sommissionerthat the sontrol device supplier guarantees that a specific outlet sonsentration, in sonjunction with design airflow, will result in aetual emissions less than twenty five (25) tons of PM, orfifteen (15) tons peryear 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 of40 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 ofan mdsting sourse that has a potential to emit greaterthan the thresholds under subdivision (3) ifthe modification will replase or repair a part or piese ofequipment in an mdsting process unless the modifisation:

(A) results in the replacement or repair ofan 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 greaterthan the significant levels in 326 1/\C 2 2 or 326 1/\C 2**~** (8) /\ modifisation that has a potential to emit greaterthan the thresholds under subdivision (3) that adds an emissions unit or units ofthe 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 ifthe modifisation would result in a potential to emit greaterthan 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 peryear of eitherVOC or NO , any modification that would result in an increase of either in emissions ofeither pollutant of greaterthan orxequal to the following:



### (A) Fifteen (15) pounds perday ofVOCs. (B) Twenty-five (25) pounds per day of NO

. X Date: Oct 23,2013 3:00:00PM EDT DIN: 20131023-IR-326110747FRA Page 3Indiana 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) ofthe 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 ofthe National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) or prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) standards would allow for an increase in emissions greaterthan 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) Ifthe source has a final Part 70 permit and only requests preconstruction approval or ifthe 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 ofthe modification may commence in accordance with section 12 ofthis rule. (ii) For a source without a final Part 70 permit, operation may begin after construction is completed. 

### (B) Ifthe 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 ofthis 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 greaterthan or equal to twenty-five (25) tons per year ofany ofthe following pollutants: (A) PM, PM 10, 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 greaterthan 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 peryear. (6) Any modification with a potential to emit greaterthan or equal to ten (1 0) tons per year of a single HAP as defined under Section 112(b) ofthe CAA ortwenty-five (25) tons peryear of any combination of HAPs. (7) Any modification with a potential to emit greaterthan or equal to one hundred (1 00) tons peryear 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 denythe modification as follows:

(A) Within one hundred twenty (120) calendar days from receipt ofan application for a modification in subsection (g) except subsection (g)(1). (B) Within two hundred seventy (270) calendar days from receipt ofan application for a modification under subsection (g)(1 ). (4) A modification approval underthis subsection may be issued only ifall ofthe 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 4Indiana 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 ofthis rule. (C) The conditions ofthe modification approval provide for compliance with all applicable requirements and this rule. (D) For modifications forwhich a source is requesting a combined preconstruction approval and operating permit revision, the U.S. EPA has received a copy ofthe proposed modification approval and any notices required and has not objected to the issuance ofthe modification approval within the time period specified in section 18 ofthis 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 ofthe 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 ofthe 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 ofthe 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 priorto 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 ofthe affidavit of construction. (B) The commissioner shall issue a validation letter within five (5) working days of receipt ofthe 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 ofconstruction. (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 ifthe 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 underthis rule shall provide that construction must commence within eighteen (18) months ofthe issuance ofthe modification approval. (k) All modification approval proceedings under this section shall provide adequate procedures for public notice, including offering an opportunityfor 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 ofthis rule. Modifications for the purpose of incorporating the control requirements and emission limitations ofa final federal district court order orfederal 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 5Indiana 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 ofthis 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 ofthis 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 ofthis 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 ofthis 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. (AirPollution Control Division; 3261AC 2-7-10.5; filed Nov25, 1998, 12:13p.m.: 221R 1039; errata filed May 12, 1999, 11:23 a.m.: 221R 3107; filed Oct23, 2000, 9:47a.m.: 241R 672; filed May21, 2002, 10:20 a.m.: 251R 3065; filedAug 10, 2004, 3:35p.m.: 271R 3947; errata filedJul23, 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 ofthis 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, ifthe 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 orthe 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 ofthe emissions unit, process, or control equipment. Ifthe 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 ofthis rule, the owner or operator ofthe 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 6Indiana Register (c) An application required underthis section shall meet the requirements of section 3(c) ofthis rule and include the following information: (1) The company name and address. (2) A description ofthe change and the emissions resulting from the change. (3) An identification ofthe applicable requirements to which the source is newly subject as a result ofthe 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 implementthe change, including limitations and methods to be used to comply with the limitations for modifications described in subsection (d)(4). (5) A schedule ofcompliance, ifapplicable. (6) A certification consistent with section 3(d) ofthis 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 ofany 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, ifthe 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 peryear and equal to or greaterthan five (5) tons peryear of either PM, PM 1(l' or direct PM2 5. 

## tB1 {2) Less than twenty-five (25) tons peryear and equal to or greaterthan ten (1 0) tons peryear ofsulfur dioxide (S02). 

## tG1 (3) Less than twenty-five (25) tons peryear and equal to or greaterthan ten 

### (1 0) tons peryear of nitrogen oxides (NO ). 

### f91 (4) Leslthan twenty-five (25) tons peryear and equal to or greaterthan ten 

### (1 0) tons peryear ofVOC for modifications that are not described in clause 

### (E) [sic]. 

### tej (5) Less than twenty-five (25) tons peryear and equal to or greaterthan five (5) tons peryear ofVOC 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 peryear and equal to or greater than twenty-five (25) tons peryear of carbon monoxide (CO). 

## tG1 (7) Less than five (5) tons one (1) ton peryear and equal to or greaterthan two-tenths (0.2) ton peryear of lead (Pb). 

## fFI1 (8) Less than twenty-five (25) tons peryear and equal to or greater than five (5) tons peryear ofthe 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 peryear of any regulated pollutant other than HAPs, ten (10) tons peryear of any single H/\P as defined under Section 112(b) ofthe CAA, ortv.·enty five (25) tons peryear ofany combination of H/\Ps by complying with one (1) ofthe follo'Ning constraints: (/\) Limiting total annual solvent usage or mmdmum VOC content, or both. (B) Limiting annual hours of operation ofthe 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 commissionerthat the air pollution control device supplier guaranteesthat a specific outlet concentration, in conjunction with design air flow, will result in actual emissions less than tv;enty five (25) tons of PM, orfifteen (15) tons peryear 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 1O(a)(15) or 1O(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 7Indiana 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 ofthe 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 ofthe National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) or prevention ofsignificant deterioration (PSD) standards, would allow for an increase in emissions greater than the thresholds in subsection (f), orwould not provide for compliance monitoring consistent with this rule and should be processed as a significant permit revision. (4) Ifapproved, 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 ofthe minor permit revision to the permit. (B) Provide a copy ofthe 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 greaterthan 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 ofthe following pollutants:

(i) PM, PM 10, 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 peryear, 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 greaterthan or equal to ten (1 0) tons per year of a single HAP as defined under Section 112(b) ofthe CAA ortwenty-five (25) tons per year of any combination of HAPs. (H) Any modification with a potential to emit greaterthan or equal to one hundred (1 00) tons peryear 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 ofthe 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 unitthat is

Date: Oct 23,2013 3:00:00PM EDT DIN: 20131023-IR-326110747FRA Page 8Indiana 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 ofthis 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) Ifapproved, 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 atthe Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Office of1\ir Quality, Indiana Government Genter North, Tenth Floor, 100**~Jorth** Senate Avenue, Indianapolis, Indiana 4@204. (AirPollution Control Division; 326 lAC 2-8-11.1; filed Nov

### 25, 1998, 12:13p.m.: 22 IR 1055; errata filed May 12, 1999, 11:23 a.m.: 221R 3107; filed May21, 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; filedJun 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 ApprovedbyAttorney General: September

### 20, 2013 Approvedby Governor: September

### 25, 2013 Filed with Publisher: September26, 2013, ·9:33 a.m. Documents IncorporatedbyReference: None ReceivedbyPublisher 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 BusinessAssistance 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 byLegislative Services Agency An html version ofthis document.

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

# Rule Signature Page

Rule#: Agency: Subject: LSADocument#

### 11-74 7 (F) Env:ironmental Rules Board MinorNew Source Review ADOPTED:



# .By:~~/ everly Gard · Chairperson, EnvironmentalRules Board DateJ'd7fh 

# .

APPROVED: 

# 6/ I



# By:~/}. **~--·Date:~'J**

**~** Governor, State oflndiana

ACCEPTED FORFILING: By:----,-- Indiana} TI1LE 326 AIRPOLLUTION CONTROLDIVISION 

### Legislati LSADocument#ll-747(FR) FiledwithPublisher: September 26, 2013, 9:33a.m. 

### By: SgbIndiana Register TITLE 326 AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DIVISION SECOND NOTICE OF COMMENT PERIOD LSA Document #11-74 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 ofTitle 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 ofthe Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements to individual states. Indiana's air permitting regulations are codified in Title 326, Article 2 ofthe 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 airwill generally need some level ofair 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 ofthe minor NSR program is to ensure that the source is aware ofall ofthe air permitting requirements prior to starting construction. Underthe CAA, Indiana is required to have a minor NSR program as part ofthe 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 of326 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 peryear 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 yearthreshold for major modifications that currently exists under subsection (g)(3). Therefore, some modifications will no longer be processed underthe minor modification procedures ofsubsection (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-326110747SNA Page 1Indiana 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 ofTitle 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 ofthe 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 higherfee 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 perthe modification. Public Participation and Workgroup Information No workgroup is planned for the rulemaking. Ifyou 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 ofthe rule and suggestions for the development ofdraft 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 ofthe following ways: (1) By mail or common carrierto 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 offaxed comments by calling the Rule Development Section at (317) 233-8903. (3) By electronic mail to sbem@idem.in.gov. To confirm timely delivery ofsubmitted comments, please request a document receipt when sending the electronic mail. PLEASE NOTE: Electronic mail comments will NOT be considered part ofthe 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 ofthe 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 ofthe rulemaking. COMMENTPEruODDEADLINE All comments must be postmarked, faxed, ortime stamped no laterthan 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 10:08:50AM EDT DIN: 20130206-IR-326110747SNA Page 2Indiana Register Affected: IC 13-15-5; IC 13-17

Sec. 10.5. (a) An owner or operator ofa 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 ofthe CAA (42 U.S.C. 7470 through 42 U.S.C. 7492); (B) the nonattainment new source review requirements under Sections 171 through 193 ofthe CAA (42 U.S.C. 7501 through 42 U.S.C. 7515); (C) Section 112(g) and 1120) ofthe 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 forthe purpose of resolving alleged violations of:

(A) the prevention ofsignificant deterioration provisions under Sections 160 through 169B ofthe CAA (42 U.S.C. 7470 through 42 U.S.C. 7492); (B) the nonattainment new source review requirements under Sections 171 through 193 ofthe CAA (42 U.S.C. 7501 through 42 U.S.C. 7515); (C) Section 112(g) and 1120) ofthe 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 ofthis rule, the owner or operator of a source may repair or replace an emissions unit or air pollution control equipment or components thereofwithout prior approval ifthe 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 ofthe emissions unit, process, or control equipment. Ifthe repair or replacement qualifies as a reconstruction or is a complete replacement ofan emissions unit or air pollution control equipment and would require a modification approval or operating permit revision modification under a provision ofthis rule, the owner or operator ofthe 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) Ifonly 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 ofthe nature and location ofthe proposed construction or modification. (ii) The design capacity and typical operating schedule ofthe proposed construction or modification. (iii) A description ofthe 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 ofthe 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 ofthis title and the

Date: Oct 29,2013 10:08:50AM EDT DIN: 20130206-IR-326110747SNA Page 3Indiana 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 ofthe pollutant to be emitted, including an estimate ofthe 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 bythe commissionerto be necessaryto reasonably demonstrate compliance with the requirements ofthis title and the requirements ofthe 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 ofthe CAA. (ii) Affirmation that the statements in the application are true and complete, as known atthe time of completion ofthe application, and shall subject the applicant to liability under state laws forbidding false or misleading statements. (2) Ifthe 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) ofthis rule: (A) An identification ofthe applicable requirements to which the source will be subject as a result ofthe modification, including the applicable emission limits and standards, applicable monitoring and test methods, and applicable record keeping and reporting requirements. (B) A description ofthe Part 70 permit terms and conditions that will apply to the modification and that are consistent with sections 5 and 6 ofthis rule. (C) A schedule of compliance, ifapplicable. (D) A statement describing what the compliance status ofthe modification will be after construction has been completed consistent with section 4(c)(10) ofthis rule. (E) A certification consistent with section 4(f) ofthis rule. (e) The following minor modifications shall be processed in accordance with subsection (f): (1) Modifioations that would reduoe the frequenoy ofany monitoring or reporting required by a permit oondition or applioable requirement (2) The addition ofa portable souroe or relooation of a portable souroe to an m<isting souroe ifthe 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 ofthe following ranges: (A) Less than twenty-five (25) tons peryear and equal to or greaterthan five (5) tons peryear ofeither PM, PM 10, or direct PM2 5. (B) Less than twenty-five (25) tons peryear and equal to or greater than ten (1 0) tons peryear ofthe 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 peryear and equal to or greater than five (5) tons peryear ofVOC 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 peryear and equal to or greater than h\'enty five (25) tons peryear of oarbon monm<ide (GO). 

### (€1 (D) Less than five (5) tons one (1) ton peryear and equal to or greater than two-tenths (0.2) ton per year of lead (Pb).**~** (E) Less than twenty-five (25) tons peryear and equal to or greater than five (5) tons peryear ofthe following regulated air pollutants:

(i) Hydrogen sulfide (H2S). (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 peryear of any regulated pollutant other than l=l/\Ps, ten (1 0) tons peryear ofany single HAP as defined under 8eotion 112(b) ofthe GAA, ortwenty five (25) tons peryear ofany oombination of l=l/\Ps by oomplying with one (1) ofthe follov.•ing oonstraints:

Date: Oct 29,2013 10:08:50AM EDT DIN: 20130206-IR-326110747SNA Page 4Indiana Register (/\) Limiting total annual solvent usage or mm<imum VOG content, or both. (B) Limiting annual hours ofoperation ofthe 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 forfederal permitting programs. (iv) Certifying to the commissioner that the control devise supplier guarantees that a speoifio outlet concentration, in oonjunotion with design airflow, will result in actual emissions less than twenty five (25) tons of PM, orfifteen (15) tons peryear 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 ofthe 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 ofan m<isting source that has a potential to emit greaterthan the thresholds under subdivision (3) ifthe modification will replace or repair a part or pieoe ofequipment in an m<isting process unless the modification:

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

### (B) qualifies as a reconstruction ofan entire process; (G) may result in an increase of actual emissions; or (D) •.vould result in a net emissions increase greaterthan the significant levels in 32e lAG 2 2 or 32e 1/\G 2

**~** (8) J\ modification that has a potential to emit greaterthan the thresholds under subdivision (3) that adds an emissions unit or units ofthe 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 ifthe modification would result in a potential to emit greaterthan 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 peryear of eitherVOC or NO , any modification that would result in an increase of either in emissions of either pollutant of greaterthan orxequal to the following: (A) Fifteen (15) pounds per day ofVOCs. (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 ofan application for a modification described under subsection (e), the commissioner shall do one (1) ofthe following: (A) Approve the modification request. (B) Denythe modification request. (C) Determine that the minor permit revision request would cause or contribute to a violation ofthe National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) or prevention ofsignificant deterioration (PSD) standards would allow for an increase in emissions greaterthan the thresholds in subsection (g) orwould 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) Ifthe source has a final Part 70 permit and only requests preconstruction approval or ifthe 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 ofthe modification may commence in accordance with section 12 ofthis rule. (ii) For a source without a final Part 70 permit, operation may begin after construction is completed. (B) Ifthe 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 ofthis rule.

Date: Oct 29,2013 10:08:50AM EDT DIN: 20130206-IR-326110747SNA Page 5Indiana 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 greaterthan or equal to one (1) ton per year. (4) Any modification with a potential to emit greaterthan or equal to twenty-five (25) tons per year of any ofthe following pollutants: (A) PM, PM 10, 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 greaterthan 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 greaterthan or equal to ten (1 0) tons per year of a single HAP as defined under Section 112(b) ofthe CAA ortwenty-five (25) tons per year of any combination of HAPs. (7) Any modification with a potential to emit greaterthan 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 denythe 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 ofan application for a modification under subsection (g)(1 ). (4) A modification approval underthis subsection may be issued only ifall ofthe 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 ofthis rule. (C) The conditions ofthe 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 ofthe proposed modification approval and any notices required and has not objected to the issuance ofthe modification approval within the time period specified in section 18 ofthis 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 ofthe authorized individual. Date: Oct 29,2013 10:08:50AM EDT DIN: 20130206-IR-326110747SNA Page 6Indiana 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 ofany changes to emissions units not included in the request for modification approval, but which should have been included under subsection (a). (v) The signature ofthe 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 ofthe 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 bythe 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 ofthe affidavit ofconstruction. (B) The commissioner shall issue a validation letter within five (5) working days of receipt ofthe affidavit of construction. (C) The validation letter shall authorize the operation of all or part ofeach 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 ifthe 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 under326 lAC 2-1.1-6. 0) Each modification approval issued underthis rule shall provide that construction must commence within eighteen (18) months ofthe issuance ofthe modification approval. (k) All modification approval proceedings underthis 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 ofthis rule. Modifications for the purpose of incorporating the control requirements and emission limitations ofa final federal district court order orfederal 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 ofthis 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 ofthis 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 ofthis 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 ofthis rule.

Date: Oct 29,2013 10:08:50AM EDT DIN: 20130206-IR-326110747SNA Page 7Indiana 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 atthe Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Offioe ofAir Quality, Indiana Government Genter North, Tenth rloor, 100**~Jorth** Senate /\venue, Indianapolis, Indiana 

### 4e204. (AirPollution Control Division; 3261AC 2-7-10.5; filed Nov

### 25, 1998, 12:13p.m.: 221R 1039; errata filed May 12, 1999, 11:23 a.m.: 221R 3107; filed Oct23, 2000, 9:47a.m.: 241R 

### 672; filed May21, 

### 2002, 10:20 a.m.: 251R 3065; filedAug 10, 2004, 3:35p.m.: 271R 3947; errata filedJul23, 

### 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 ofthis rule, the owner or operator ofa source may repair or replace an emissions unit or air pollution control equipment, or components thereof, without prior approval, ifthe 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 orthe 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 ofthe emissions unit, process, or control equipment. Ifthe repair or replacement qualifies as a reconstruction or is a complete replacement ofan emissions unit or air pollution control equipment and would require a permit or operating permit revision under a provision ofthis rule, the owner or operator ofthe 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 underthis section shall meet the requirements ofsection 3(c) ofthis rule and include the following information: (1) The company name and address. (2) A description ofthe change and the emissions resulting from the change. (3) An identification ofthe applicable requirements to which the source is newly subject as a result ofthe 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) ofthis 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 ofany monitoring or reporting required by a permit oondition or applioable requirement. (2) The addition ofa portable souroe or relooation ofa portable souroe to an m<isting souroe, ifthe 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 greaterthan five (5) tons peryear 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 ( 10) tons per year ofsulfur

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

### fG1 (3) Less than twenty-five (25) tons peryear and equal to or greater than ten (1 0) tons peryear of nitrogen oxides (NO ). 

### f91 (4) Lestthan twenty-five (25) tons peryear and equal to or greater than ten (1 0) tons peryear ofVOC for modifications that are not described in clause (E). 

## te7 (5) Less than twenty-five (25) tons peryear and equal to or greater than five (5) tons per year ofVOC 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 peryear and equal to or greater than two-tenths (0.2) ton peryear 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 ofthe 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 ofany single H/\P as defined under Sestion 112(b) ofthe G/\A, ortwenty five (25) tons per year of any sombination of H/\Ps by somplying with one (1) ofthe follo'<'ving sonstraints: (A) Limiting total annual solvent usage or mm<imum VOG sontent, or both. (8) Limiting annual hours ofoperation ofthe 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 peryear 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 1O(a)(15) or 1O(a)(16) ofthis 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 ofthe application required under subsection (e), the applicant shall aolmmvledge the requirement to comply with the R/\GT,**~JSPS,** or NESH/\P. (6) /\ modification forwhich a souroe 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 ofan 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 ofthe National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) or prevention ofsignificant deterioration (PSD) standards, would allow for an increase in emissions greater than the thresholds in subsection (f), orwould not provide for compliance monitoring consistent with this rule and should be processed as a significant permit revision. (4) Ifapproved, 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 9Indiana Register (A) Notify the permittee upon incorporation ofthe minor permit revision to the permit. (B) Provide a copy ofthe 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 greaterthan or equal to one (1) ton peryear. (E) Any modification with a potential to emit greater than or equal to twenty-five (25) tons per year ofthe following pollutants:

(i) PM, PM 10, 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 peryear, a modification that would increase the potential to emit greaterthan or equal to six-tenths (0.6) ton peryear. (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) ofthe CAA ortwenty-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 ofthe 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 unitthat 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 ofthis rule. (E) The commissioner shall approve or denythe significant permit revision as follows:

(i) Within one hundred twenty (120) calendar days from receipt ofan 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) Ifapproved, 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 souroe 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 atthe Indiana Department of Environmental Management, Offiee of/\ir Quality, Indiana Government Genter**~Jorth,** Tenth Floor, 100**~Jorth** Senate Avenue, Indianapolis, Indiana 46204. (AirPollution Control Division; 3261AC 2-8-11.1: filed Nov25, 1998, 12:13p.m.: 221R 1055; errata filed May 12, 1999, 11:23 a.m.: 221R 3107; filed May21, 2002, 10:20 a.m.: 251R 3072; errata filedJul23, 2007, 4:19p.m.:

Date: Oct29,201310:08:50AM EDT DIN: 20130206-IR-326110747SNA Page 10Indiana 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 byLegislative Services Agency An html version ofthis document.

Date: Oct 29,2013 10:08:50AM EDT DIN: 20130206-IR-326110747SNA Page 11Indiana Register TITLE 326 AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DIVISION

Notice ofPublic Hearing Notice of Public Hearing LSA Document #11-747

UnderIC 4-22-2-24, IC 13-14-B-6, andIC 13-14-9, notice is herebygiven that on May B, 2013, at 1:30p.m., at the Indiana Government CenterSouth, 302 West Washington Street, Conference CenterRoom A, Indianapolis, Indiana, the Environmental Rules Board will hold

### a public hearing on amendments concerning minornewsource review requirements for Title 

### Vand FederallyEnforceable State Operating Permit (FESOP) sources at 326 lAC 2- 7-10.5 and 3261AC 2-B-11.1. The purpose ofthis hearing is to receive comments from the publicpriorto preliminaryadoption ofthese rules by the board. Allinterestedpersons are invited and willbe given reasonable opportunityto express their view concerning the proposed amendments. Oralstatements willbe heard, but, forthe accuracyofthe record, all comments shouldbe submittedin writing. Additionalinformation regarding this action maybe obtainedfrom Susan Bern, Rule Development Section, Office ofLegal Counsel, (317) 233-5697 or(BOO) 451-6027 (in Indiana). Individuals requiring reasonable accommodations forparticipation in this eventshould contact the Indiana Department ofEnvironmental Management, Americans with Disabilities Actcoordinatorat: Attn:ADA Coordinator Indiana Department ofEnvironmentalManagement 100 North Senate Avenue Indianapolis, IN 46204-2251 oreal/(317) 233-17B5 (V). Speech andhearing impaired callers maycontact IDEM via the Indiana Relay Service (711) or(BOO) 

### 743-3333. Please provide 

### a minimum of72 hours notification. Copies ofthese rules are now on file at the Office ofLegal Counsel, Indiana Department ofEnvironmental Management, Indiana Government CenterNorth, 100 North Senate Avenue, Thirteenth FloorEast andLegislative Services Agency, Indiana Government CenterNorth, 100 North Senate Avenue, Room N201, Indianapolis, Indiana and are open forpublic inspection. Nancy King, Chief Rules Development Branch Office of Legal Counsel

Posted: 02/06/2013 byLegislative Services Agency An html version ofthis document.

Date: Oct 29,2013 10:09:31AM EDT DIN: 20130206-IR-326110747PHA Page 1

## IDEM INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT We ProtectHoosiers andOurEnvironment. MichaelR. 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 thatthe IndianaDepmimentofEnvironmentalManagement (IDEM)Noticeof Public Hearings for the EnvironmentalRules BoardMeeting, 05/08/2013, regardingthefollowing rulemaking actions:

• PreliminaryAdoption, MinorNew SourceReview, LSA#11-74 7 • PreliminaryAdoption, Permits andNAAQS Protection, LSA#12-500

was published onIDEM's web site onAprilS, 2013. 

### Itwillremainposted onthe site until atleast May4, 2013. Thenotice infull maybe found atthe following web address, underthe "Statewide" category. http://www.in.gov/idem/6777.htm Web publicationofthe notice was attherequest ofChristine Pedersen, Section Chief, Rule Development Section, Office ofLegal Counsel, IDEM.

Attachments: Copy ofweb page as published.

RecycledPaper 

## @ By:

MikeFinklestein IDEM Webmaster

An Equal OpportunityEmployer PleaseRecycle 

## OI 

## (**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 t'D all agency

state-wlc!e public notices. as !'eqrni'edi by statute or rufe inctm:lililg: peimitling, n:trerne:killlg, meeting: andi hearing notices. Click hlghlightec! lillks to

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 page. By

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 regional page. This

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'coiurnn.

### LegalNotice ofPublicHearing Under40 CFR51.102, noticeishereby giventhattheEnvironmental Rules Board (board) will hold apublichearing at itsregularly scheduledmeeting onWednesday, May 8, 2013. The meetingwill convene at 1:30p.m. attheIndiana Government Center-South, Conference Room A, 302WestWashington Street, Indianapolis, Indiana. Thepurpose ofthehearingis to receive publiccommentspriorto theproposedactions. Allinterestedpersons are invited andwillbe givenreasonable opportunityto express theirviews concerningtheproposedaction. Boarddocuments maybeviewed and downloadedfromtheIndianaDepartmentof EnvironmentalManagement'sWeb site as early as one weekpriorto themeeting at http://www.in.gov/idem/4696.htm. Copies oftheproposedrules are also availableto any personuponrequest, maybeviewed online viathe Internetfrom locallibraries, and are available for public inspectionatthefollowing locations: IndianaDepartment ofEnvironmentalManagement, Office ofAir Quality, Indiana GovernmentCenter-North, 100North SenateAvenue, lOthfloor-Eastwing, Indianapolis, Indiana46204. Legislative Services Agency, Indiana Government Center-North, 100North Senate Avenue, RoomN201, Indianapolis, Indiana46204. IndianaDepartment ofEnvironmentalManagement, Northwest Office, 330W US Highway 30, SuiteF, Valparaiso, Indiana46385. IndianaDepartment ofEnvironmentalManagement, Northern Office, Suite450, 300N. Michigan Street, SouthBend, Indiana46601-1295. IndianaDepartment ofEnvironmentalManagement, Southwest Office, 1120North Vincennes Avenue, P.O. Box 128,Petersburg, Indiana47567-0128. IndianaDepartment ofEnvironmentalManagement, Southeast.Office, 820 West Sweet Street, Brownstown, Indiana47220-9557. Indianapolis Central Library, 40 East St. Clair Street, Indianapolis, Indiana46204. HammondPublic Library, 564 State Street, Hammond, Indiana46320. AllenCountyPublic Libr.ary, 900 LibraryPlaza, FortWayne, Indiana46802. EvansvilleVanderburghPublicLibrary, 200 SEMartinLutherKingJr. Blvd., Evansville, Indiana47713. Thefollowingrules arenoticedfor hearing and action: MinorNewSource Review (LSA#11-747). Thepurpo_se ofthishearing is to receivepublic commentonamendments to 326 lAC 2-7 and 326 lAC 2-8 concerningIndiana's airpermitting regulations and minornewsourcereview (NSR)requirements for TitleV andFederally Enforceable State OperatingPermit (FESOP) sources. Theserevisions will address U.S. EPA concerns onminormodificationslimits, aninconsistencyintheleadlimits, andprovide clarification onpublicnotice for source modifications for consentdecreeprovisions. This rule willbe submittedto the United States EnvironmentalProtectionAgency as a revisionto the State ImplementationPlanrequiredbythe CleanAirAct. A copy ofthemostrecentlypublished version ofthisrule is available at: http://www.in.gov/idem/5679.htm.

### For additional information concerningthisrule contact SusanBern atthe Indiana Department ofEnvironmentalManagement, Office ofLegal Counsel, IndianaGovernment CenterNorth, 100North SenateAvenue, Indianapolis at (317) 233-5697 or (800) 451-6027 (ext. 3-5697)(inIndiana), or sbem@idem.in.gov. 

## Permits and NationalAmbientAir QualitfS ndards Protection (LSA#12-500). The purpose ofthis hearing is toreceivepublic comm tonamendments to 326 lAC 2-1.1-5, 326 lAC 2-5.1-3, and 326 lAC 2-6.1-5 concerningreqm ements for theprotectionofambient air quality standards inconstructionpennits. Thisrule 

## ill clarifythe applicability ofthese requirements inpermitting actions and make otherrelatedrevisions. Thisrule will be submitted to theUnited StatesEnvironmentalProtectionAgency as a revisionto the StateImplementation Planrequiredbythe CleanAirAct. A copy ofthemostrecentlypublishedversionofthis ruleis available at: http://www.in.gov/idem/5679.htm. For additional informationconcerningthis rule contact SusanBern atthe Indiana Department ofEnvironmentalManagement, Office ofLegal Counsel, IndianaGovernment CenterNorth, 100North Senate Avenue, Indianapolis at (317) 233-5697 or (800) 451-6027 (ext. 3-5697)(inIndiana), or sbem@idem.in.gov. Forthesehearings, oral statementswillbeheard, butfor the accmacy oftherecord, please submit statements inwritingto the attendant designatedto receive w:t:itten comments at thepublichearings. A transcriptofthehearings and all :written submissions totheboardatthepublichearings

. shallbe opentopublicinspectionatthe IndianaDepartment ofEnvironmental Management; copies maybemade availableto anypersonuponpaymentofreproduction costs. Anyperson heard orrepresented atthehearings orrequesting notice shallbe givenwrittennotice ofthe actions ofthe board. Christine Pedersen, Chief RuleDevelopment Section Office ofLegal Counsel 

# ****************************************************************************** Individuals requiringreasonable accommodations forparticipationinthis event should contact the IndianaDepatiment ofEnvironmentalManagement, Americans withDisabilities Act coordinator at: · Attn: ADA Coordinator IndianaDepartmentofEnvironmentalManagement 100 N. SenateAvenue Indianapolis, IN46204

orcall (317) 233-1785. Speechandhearing impairedcallers maycontactthe agency viathe IndianaRelay Service at 1-800-743-3333. Pleaseprovide a minimumof72homs' notification..! 

## ( INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT We ProtectHoosiers andOurEnvironment. 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 certifythatthe IndianaDepmiment ofEnvironmental Management (IDEM)Notice of Public Hearings for the Environmental Rules BoardMeeting, 08/14/2013,regardingthe following rulemaking actions:

• Final Adoption, PM2.5 Ozone Designations, LSA#13-164 • Final Adoption, MinorNew Source Review, LSA#11-747 • Final Adoption, Petmits andNational AmbientAir Quality Standards Protection, LSA #12-500 • PreliminaryAdoption, Sewage Sludge Incinerationand CarbonMonoxideMonitoring, LSA#13-215

were published onIDEM'sweb site onJuly 10, 2013.· It

### will remainposted onthe site until at leastAugust 14, 2013. Thenoticeinfull maybe found atthe following web address, underthe "Statewide" category. http://www.in.gov/idem/6777.htm Web publication ofthenotice was atthe request ofChristine Pedersen, Section Chief, Rule Development Section, Office ofLegal Counsel, IDEM.

Attachments: Copy ofweb page as published.

An Equal OpportunityEmployer 

### By:

MikeFinkelstein IDEMWebmaster 

# 0

AStatethatWorks 

# - ® RecycledPaperIN.govIDEMHomeAboute-ServicesFeaturedTopicsNewsandEventsPublicNoticesFactSheetsFormsRulesContactStaffMapsInformationAboutYourCommunityYourEnvironmentAirQualityAboutAgriculture&Business&!Education&.Family&ILaw&PublicTa:<s:e.s&;Tourism&IndianaEnvirolllllentEmployment:TrainingHealth·Justice:SafetyFinance:TransportationT-PublicNotices:StatewideThisistheIDEMPublicNoticeSitefornoticescoveringtheentireStateofIndianaThispageisdesignedtoprovidepublicaccesstoallagencystate-widepublicnoticesasrequiredbystatuteorruleincluding:permitting,rulemaking,meetingandhearingnotices.Clickhighlightedlinkstoviewadditionalinfomnationrelatedtothenotice.Forpubllcmeetingsnotrequiringnotices,pleasechecktheIDEMCalendar.Subscriptions:Wanttoknowaboutnewnoticesassoonasthey'reposted?Youcannowsubscribetothisregionalpublicnoticepage.Bysubscribingtoaregion,youwillbesentane-mailDrtextmessagetoyourphoneeverytimeIDEMaddsinformationtothisregionalpage.Thisallowsyoutostaycurrentonallpostingandnevermissanewposting.Tosubscribe,clickonthesubscriptionITnkinthelefthandcolumn.Statewide1_:...:::..:_::_-::_:_-:___________·----------------..:1IIUlIPM2.5andOzoneDesignations,LSA#13-164'LegalNoticeofPublic[0711012013-'YesAirToxicsProgramBlue-GreenAlgaeCommunityEnvironmentalHealthCTAP:ComplianceandTechnicalAssistanceProgram.HearinoIPDR:oa/1412013:RuleWriter.ZacllaryiRuz.yckijEnvironmentalCleanupT-------·-·--'"'·-'"'·-·-·-··-·EnvironmentalEducationEnvironmentalJustice---HoosierRiverwatch-·-·---....·-------·-----·--·--.MinorNewSourceReview,LSAt/11-747iLegalNoticeofPublic.HearinofPDFljLegalNoticeofPubliciHearingIPDF!-iYes08/141201307110/2013-Yes:0811412013:07/1012013-'Yes...._______________]RuleWriter.SusanBern:Addresson1234567 8 910IJl12 1314151617 18 19202122 232425262728 293031:0811412013!RuleWriter.SusanBerniAddressonNotice,___··Ii.J.II·•II. . .I'11:44:05PMllilIPartnersforPollutionPreventionPollutionPrevention!NPDESDraftRenewal·--------·0612812013-:YesManager:SholehIHourmozdiCurrenttimezone:Ea$temDaylightTimeRecycleIndianaJEQEJ07/2912013WatershedsandNonpointSourceWaterPollutioniAddressonNoticeIResources---------

### LegalNotice ofPublic Hearing Under40 CFR51.102, notice is hereby giventhatthe Environmental Rules Board (board) will hold apublichearing at itsregularly scheduledmeeting onWednesday, August 14, 2013. The meeting will convene at 1:30p.m. atthe Indiana Government Center-South, Conference Room A, 302 WestWashington Street, Indianapolis, Indiana. Thepurpose ofthe hearing is to receive public commentspriorto theproposed actions. All interestedpersons are invited andwill.be givenreasonable opportunityto express their views concerningtheproposedaction. Board documents maybe viewed and downloaded from the IndianaDepartment of EnvironmentalManagement's Web site as early as oneweekpriorto the meeting at http://www.in.gov/idem/4696.htm. Copies oftheproposedrules are also available to any personuponrequest, maybe viewed online viathe Internetfrom local libraries, and are available for public inspection atthe following locations: IndianaDepartmentofEnvironmental Management, Office ofLegal Counsel, Indiana Government Center-North, 100 North Senate Avenue, 13thFloor, Indianapolis, Indiana46204. Legislative ServicesAgency, Indiana Government Center-Nmih, 100North Senate Avenue, RoomN201, Indianapolis, Indiana46204. IndianaDepartmentofEnvironmental Management, Northwest Office, 330 WestUS Highway 30, Suites E and F, Valparaiso, IN46385. IndianaDepartmentofEnvironmental Management, NmihemOffice, Suite 450, 300N. Michigan Street, SouthBend, Indiana46601. IndianaDepartment ofEnvironmental Management, Southwest Office, 1120North Vincennes Avenue, P.O. Box 128, Petersburg, Indiana47567-0128. IndianaDepartmentofEnvironmentalManagement, Southeast Office, 820 West Sweet Street, Brownstown, Indiana47220-9557. Indianapolis CentralLibrary, 40 East St. Clair Street, Indianapolis, Indiana 46204. HammondPublic Library, 564 State Street, Hammond, Indiana46320. AllenCounty Public Library, 900 LibraryPlaza, FmiWayne, Indiana46802. Evansville VanderburghPublicLibrary, 200 SE MartinLuther KingJr. Blvd., Evansville, Indiana47713. The following rules.arenoticedfor hearing and action: PM2.5 and OzoneDesignations (LSA#13-164). Thepurpose ofthis hearingis to receive public commentpriorto adoption ofamendments to 326 lAC 1-4to add federal designations for the 1997 annual standardfor patiiculatematterwith an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to two and five-tenths microns (PM2.5), the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard, andthe 2008 8-hour ozone standm·d. A copy ofthemostrecentlypublished version ofthis rule is available at: http:/ /www.in.gov/idem/5679.htm. Foradditional information concerningthis rule contactZacharyRuzycki atthe Indiana DepartmentofEnvironmentalManagement, Office ofLegal Counsel, Indiana Government CenterNmih, 100North SenateAvenue, Indianapolis at (317) 232-8229 or (800) 451-6027 (ext. 2-8229)(inIndiana), or zruzycki@idem.in.gov.

### MinorNew Source Review (LSA #11-747). 

### The purpose ofthis hearing is toreceivepublic commentpriorto final adoption ofamendments to 326 lAC 2-7 and 326 lAC 2-8 conceming Indiana's air permittingregulations and minor newsource review (NSR) requirements for Title V andFederallyEnforceable State OperatingPermit (FESOP) sources. Theserevisions will address U.S. EPAconcerns onminormodifications limits, an inconsistency inthe leadlimits, andprovide clarification onpublic notice for sourcemodifications for consent decree provisions. This rule willbe submittedto theUnited States Environmental ProtectionAgency as a revision to the State ImplementationPlanrequired bythe CleanAir Act. A copy ofthemostrecently published version ofthis rule is available at: http://www.in.gov/idem/5679.htm. For additional information concerning this rule contact SusanBern atthe Indiana Department ofEnvironmentalManagement, Office ofLegal Counsel, Indiana Govemment CenterNmih, 100Nmih SenateAvenue, Indianapolis at (317) 233-5697.or (800) 451-6027 (ext. 3-5697)(inIndiana), or sbem@idem.in.gov. Permits and NationalAmbientAir Quality Standards Protection (LSA#12-500). 

### The purpose ofthis hearing is to receivepublic commentpriorto final adoption ofamendments to 326 lAC 2-1.1-5, 326 lAC 2-5.1-3, and 326 lAC 2-6.1-5 concemingrequirements for the protection ofambient air quality standards inconstructionpermits. This rule will clarifythe applicability ofthese requirements inpermitting actions andmake otherrelatedrevisions. This rule will be submittedto the United States Environmental ProtectionAgency as a revision to the State Implementation Planrequiredbythe CleanAirAct. A copy ofthe mostrecentlypublished version ofthisrule is available at: http://www.iri.gov/idem/5679.htm. Foradditional information concerning this rule contact SusanBern atthe Indiana Department ofEnvironmentalManagement, Office ofLegal Counsel, Indiana Government CenterNorth, 100North Senate Avenue, Indianapolis at (317) 233-5697 or (800) 451-6027 (ext. 3-5697)(inIndiana), or sbem@idem.in.gov. Sewage SludgeIncineration and CarbonMonoxideMonitoring (LSA#13-215). 

### The purpose ofthis hearing is to receive public commentpriorto preliminary adoption of amendments to 326 lAC 3-5-1 concerning sewage sludge incinerators and carbonmonoxide (CO) monitoring. This rulewill allowcontinuous emissions monitoring for total hydrocarbons or carbon monoxideto ensurethat compliance with all applicable requirements is achievedinthe most efficientwaypossible and is consistentwithfederal requirements. This rule will be submittedto the United States Environmental ProtectionAgency as arevisionto the State ImplementationPlanrequiredbythe CleanAirAct. A copy ofthemostrecentlypublished version ofthis rule is available at: http://www.in.gov/idem/5679.htm. For additional information concerning this rule contact SusanBern atthe Indiana Depmiment ofEnvironmentalManagement, Office ofLegal Counsel, Indiana Government CenterNorth, 100North Senate Avenue, Indianapolis at (317) 233-5697 or (800) 451-6027 (ext. 3-5697)(inIndiana), or sbem@idem.in.gov.

Forthese hearings, oral statements will beheard, butfor the accuracy ofthe record, please submit statements inwritingto the attendant designatedto receive written comments at thepublichearings.

### A transcript ofthe hearings and all written submissionsto theboard atthepublichearings shall be opento public inspection atthe IndianaDepartment ofEnvironmental Management; copies maybemade available to anypersonuponpayment ofreproduction costs. Anyperson heard or represented atthehearings orrequestingnotice shall be givenwrittennotice ofthe actions ofthe board. ChristinePedersen, Chief Rule Development Section Office ofLegal Counsel 

## ****************************************************************************** Individuals requiring reasonable accommodations for participationinthis event should contact the IndianaDepartment ofEnvironmentalManagement, Americans withDisabilities Act coordinator at: Attn: ADA Coordinator IndianaDepartment ofEnvironmentalManagement 100N. Senate Avenue Indianapolis, IN 46204

or call (317) 233-1785. Speech andhearing impaired callers maycontactthe agency viathe IndianaRelay Service at 1-800-743-3333. Pleaseprovide aminimum of72hours' 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 13th 1 

## 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 SourceI



### (( 

## 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 80 2 , 

## 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 behalfofthe Indiana Utility Group (lEA) American Electric Power Service Corporation (AEP) Following is a summary ofthe 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 ofany 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 promotejob 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 ofthe changes that U.S. EPA required in orderfor IDEM to get state implementation plan (SIP) approval ofthe 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 ofthese 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 peryear (TPY) greaterthan 25 tpy carbon monoxide (CO) permitting requirements from the minor modification portions ofthe rule. The subsequent dropping ofthe 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 ofan 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 ofan 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 1Indiana 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 ofthe 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 of25 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 ofthe 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 mustjustify 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 ofthe Clean AirAct. (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 ofamendments to 326 lAC 2-7-10.5 and 326 lAC 2-8-11.1. Comments were made by the following parties: JenniferThompson, Bingham Greenebaum Doll on behalfof CASE Coalition (BGD) Following is a summary ofthe comments received and IDEM's responses thereto: Comment: U.S. EPA has not issued a letter ofdeficiency 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 ofCASE's members are further confused because the entire state has been in attainment with carbon monoxide since 2000. CASE raised the issue ofcompleting 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 ofdeficiency. 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 AirAct 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 ofa 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 ofthe 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 priorthreshold 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 Page2Indiana 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. 10.5. (a) An owner or operator ofa 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 ofthe CAA (42 U.S.C. 7470 through 42 U.S.C. 7492); (B) the nonattainment new source review requirements under Sections 171 through 193 ofthe CAA (42 U.S.C. 7501 through 42 U.S.C. 7515); (C) Section 112(g) and 112U) ofthe 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 ofthe CAA (42 U.S.C. 7470 through 42 U.S.C. 7492); (B) the nonattainment new source review requirements under Sections 171 through 193 ofthe CAA (42 U.S.C. 7501 through 42 U.S.C. 7515); (C) Section 112(g) and 112U) ofthe 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 ofthis rule, the owner or operator ofa source may repair or replace an emissions unit or air pollution control equipment or components thereofwithout prior approval ifthe 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 orthe 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 ofthe emissions unit, process, or control equipment. Ifthe repair or replacement qualifies as a reconstruction or is a complete replacement ofan emissions unit or air pollution control equipment and would require a modification approval or operating permit revision modification under a provision ofthis rule, the owner or operator ofthe 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) Ifonly 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 ofthe nature and location ofthe proposed construction or modification. (ii) The design capacity and typical operating schedule ofthe proposed construction or modification. Date: Oct 29,2013 9:58:10AM EDT DIN: 20130612-IR-326110747PRA Page 3Indiana Register (iii) A description ofthe 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 ofthe 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 ofthis title and the CAA, the ambient air quality standards set forth in 326 lAC 1-3, or the prevention ofsignificant deterioration maximum allowable increase under 326 lAC 2-2:

(i) Information on the nature and amount ofthe pollutant to be emitted, including an estimate ofthe potential to emit any regulated air pollutants. (ii) Estimates ofoffset 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 ofthis title and the requirements ofthe 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 ofthe CAA. (ii) Affirmation that the statements in the application are true and complete, as known at the time of completion ofthe application, and shall subject the applicant to liability under state laws forbidding false or misleading statements. (2) Ifthe 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) ofthis rule: (A) An identification ofthe applicable requirements to which the source will be subject as a result ofthe modification, including the applicable emission limits and standards, applicable monitoring and test methods, and applicable record keeping and reporting requirements. (B) A description ofthe Part 70 permit terms and conditions that will apply to the modification and that are consistent with sections 5 and 6 ofthis rule. (C) A schedule of compliance, ifapplicable. (D) A statement describing what the compliance status ofthe modification will be after construction has been completed consistent with section 4(c)(10) ofthis rule. (E) A certification consistent with section 4(f) ofthis rule. (e) The following minor modifications shall be processed in accordance with subsection (f): (1) Modifioations that would reduoe the frequenoy ofany monitoring or reporting required by a permit oondition or applieable requirement. (2) The addition of a portable souree or relooation ofa portable souree to an m<isting souree ifthe 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 ofthe following ranges: (A) Less than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greater than five (5) tons peryear of either PM, PM 10, or direct PM2 5. (B) Less than twenty-five (25) tons peryear and equal to or greater than ten (1 0) tons per year ofthe 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 greaterthan five (5) tons peryear ofVOC 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 peryear of earbon monmdde (GO). 

## te1 (D) Less than five (5) tons one (1) ton per year and equal to or greaterthan two-tenths (0.2) ton per year of lead (Pb). 

## fA (E) Less than twenty-five (25) tons peryear and equal to or greater than five (5) tons peryear ofthe following regulated air pollutants:

(i) Hydrogen sulfide (H2S). (ii) Total reduced sulfur (TRS).

Date: Oct 29,2013 9:58:10AM EDT DIN: 20130612-IR-326110747PRA Page4Indiana 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 otherthan 1=1/\Ps, ten (1 0) tons peryear of any single 1=1/\P as defined under Scotian 112(b) ofthe G/\A, ortwenty fhfC (26) tons per year ofany eombination of 1=11\Ps by eomplying with one (1) ofthe following eonstraints: (A) Limiting total annual solvent usage or mmEimum VOG eontent, or both. (8) Limiting annual hours ofoperation ofthe 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, orfifteen (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 40 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 soureo requests an emission limit to avoid 32a lAG 8 1 a. (7) /\ modifieation ofan mEisting soureo that has a potential to emit greaterthan the thresholds under subdivision (3) ifthe modifieation will replaee or repair a part or pieeo of equipment in an mEisting proeess unless the modifieation:

(/\) results in the replaeement or repair ofan entire proeess; (8) qualifies as a reeonstruetion of an entire proeess; (G) may result in an inerease ofaetual emissions; or (D) 'li'ould result in a net emissions inerease greaterthan 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 ofthe 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 ifthe modifieation \'o'ould result in a potential to emit greaterthan 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 peryear of eitherVOC or NO , any modification that would result in an increase of either in emissions ofeither pollutant of greaterthan orxequal to the following: (A) Fifteen (15) pounds per day ofVOCs. (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 ofan application for a modification described under subsection (e), the commissioner shall do one (1) ofthe 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 ofthe National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) or prevention ofsignificant deterioration (PSD) standards would allow for an increase in emissions greaterthan the thresholds in subsection (g) orwould 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) Ifthe source has a final Part 70 permit and only requests preconstruction approval or ifthe 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 ofthe modification may commence in accordance

Date: Oct 29,2013 9:58:1 OAM EDT DIN: 20130612-IR-326110747PRA Page 5Indiana Register with section 12 ofthis rule. (ii) For a source without a final Part 70 permit, operation may begin after construction is completed. (B) Ifthe 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 ofthis 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 greaterthan or equal to one (1) ton peryear. (4) Any modification with a potential to emit greaterthan or equal to twenty-five (25) tons per year ofany ofthe following pollutants: (A) PM, PM 10, 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 greaterthan 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 greaterthan or equal to ten (1 0) tons per year of a single HAP as defined under Section 112(b) ofthe CAA ortwenty-five (25) tons per year of any combination of HAPs. (7) Any modification with a potential to emit greaterthan or equal to one hundred (1 00) tons peryear 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 denythe 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 ofan application for a modification under subsection (g)(1 ). (4) A modification approval underthis subsection may be issued only if all ofthe 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 forwhich a source is requesting a combined preconstruction approval and operating permit revision, the commissioner has complied with the requirements under section 17 ofthis rule. (C) The conditions ofthe 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 ofthe proposed modification approval and any notices required and has not objected to the issuance ofthe modification approval within the time period specified in section 18 ofthis 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 documentto:

(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-326110747PRA Page 6Indiana 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 priorto 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 ofthe 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 ofany changes to emissions units not included in the request for modification approval, but which should have been included under subsection (a). (v) The signature ofthe 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 ofconstruction ofthe 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 priorto 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 ofthe affidavit ofconstruction. (B) The commissioner shall issue a validation letter within five (5) working days of receipt ofthe affidavit of construction. (C) The validation letter shall authorize the operation ofall or part ofeach emissions unit covered by the affirmation in the affidavit ofconstruction. (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 ifthe 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 ifan 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 underthis rule shall provide that construction must commence within eighteen (18) months ofthe issuance ofthe 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 ofthis rule. Modifications forthe purpose of incorporating the control requirements and emission limitations ofa final federal district court order orfederal consent decree undersubsection (b) shall follow procedures for public notice as established in 326 lAC 2-1.1-6. (I) The commissioner shall provide for review bythe 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 ofthis 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 ofthis 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 ofthis 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 9:58:1OAM EDT DIN: 20130612-IR-326110747PRA Page 7Indiana 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 ofthis 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 ofAir Quality, Indiana Government Genter North, Tenth Floor, 

### 100 North Senate Avenue, Indianapolis, Indiana 

### 46204. (AirPollution Control Division; 3261AC 2-7-10.5; filed Nov

### 25, 1998, 12:13p.m.: 221R 1039; errata filed May 12, 1999, 11:23 a.m.: 221R 3107; filed Oct23, 

### 2000, 9:47a.m.: 241R 672; filed May21, 

### 2002, 10:20 a.m.: 251R 3065; filedAug 10, 2004, 3:35p.m.: 

### 27 IR 3947; errata filedJul23, 

### 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; filedJun 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 ofthis rule, the owner or operator ofa source may repair or replace an emissions unit or air pollution control equipment, or components thereof, without prior approval, ifthe 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 ofthe emissions unit, process, or control equipment. Ifthe repair or replacement qualifies as a reconstruction or is a complete replacement ofan emissions unit or air pollution control equipment and would require a permit or operating permit revision under a provision ofthis rule, the owner or operator ofthe 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 ofsection 3(c) ofthis rule and include the following information: (1) The company name and address. (2) A description ofthe change and the emissions resulting from the change. (3) An identification ofthe applicable requirements to which the source is newly subject as a result ofthe 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 ofcompliance, if applicable. (6) A certification consistent with section 3(d) ofthis 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 8Indiana Register applicable requirement. (2) The addition ofa portable soureo or relocation ofa portable soureo to an mdsting soureo, ifthe 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 greaterthan five (5) tons peryear ofeither PM, PMtO.' or direct PM2 5. 

## fB1 {2) Less than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greaterthan ten (1 0) tons peryear ofsulfur dioxide (S02). 

## fG1 (3) Less than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greaterthan ten (1 0) tons per yearof nitrogen oxides (NO ). 

## f91 (4) Los§than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greaterthan ten (1 0) tons per year ofVOC for modifications that are not described in clause (E). 

## fE1 (5) Less than twenty-five (25) tons per year and equal to or greaterthan five (5) tons peryear ofVOC 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 greaterthan twenty five (25) tons peryear of carbon monmdde (GO). 

## fG1 (6) Less than five (5) tons one (1) ton per year and equal to or greaterthan 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 greaterthan five (5) tons peryear ofthe following regulated air pollutants: 

## fi1 (A) Hydrogen sulfide (H2S). 

## 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 ofany regulated pollutant other than I=IAPs, ten (1 0) tons peryear of any single I=IAP as defined under Section 112(b) ofthe GAA, or twenty five (25) tons per year of any combination of I=IAPs by complying with one (1) ofthe following constraints: (A) Limiting total annual solvent usage or mmdmum VOG content, or both. (B) Limiting annual hours ofoperation ofthe 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 soureo 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, orfifteen (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 1O(a)(15) or 1O(a)(1 e) ofthis 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 forthose 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 ofthe 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 ofan application for a minor permit revision, the commissioner shall either: (A) approve the minor permit revision request; (B) denythe minor permit revision; or

Date: Oct 29,2013 9:58:10AM EDT DIN: 20130612-IR-326110747PRA Page 9Indiana Register (C) determine that the minor permit revision request would cause or contribute to a violation ofthe National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) or prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) standards, would allow for an increase in emissions greaterthan the thresholds in subsection (f), orwould not provide for compliance monitoring consistent with this rule and should be processed as a significant permit revision. (4) Ifapproved, 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 ofthe minor permit revision to the permit. (B) Provide a copy ofthe 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 greaterthan or equal to one (1) ton peryear. (E) Any modification with a potential to emit greater than or equal to twenty-five (25) tons peryear ofthe following pollutants:

(i) PM, PM 10, 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 greaterthan or equal to five (5) tons per year, a modification that would increase the potential to emit greaterthan 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 peryear of a single HAP as defined under Section 112(b) ofthe 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 ofthe 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 ofthis rule. (E) The commissioner shall approve or denythe significant permit revision as follows:

(i) Within one hundred twenty (120) calendar days from receipt ofan 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) Ifapproved, 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 10Indiana 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 atthe Indiana Department of environmental Management, Office of/\ir Quality, Indiana Government Center North, Tenth Floor, 100 North Senate /\venue, Indianapolis, Indiana 46204. (AirPollution ControlDivision; 3261AC 2-8-11.1: filed Nov25, 1998, 12:13p.m.: 221R 1055; errata filed May 12, 1999, 11:23 a.m.: 221R 3107; filed May21, 2002, 10:20 a.m.: 25/R 3072; errata filedJul23, 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 byLegislative Services Agency An html version ofthis document.

Date: Oct 29,2013 9:58:10AM EDT DIN: 20130612-IR-326110747PRA Page 11Indiana Register TITLE 326 AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DIVISION

Notice ofPublic Hearing Notice of Public Hearing LSA Document #11-747

UnderIC 4-22-2-24. IC 13-14-8-6. and IC 13-14-9. notice is herebygiven that on August 14, 2013, at 1:30 p.m., at the Indiana Government CenterSouth, 302 West Washington Street, Conference CenterRoom A, Indianapolis, Indiana, the Environmental Rules Board will holda public hearing on amendments to 3261AC 2-7- 10.5 and 3261AC 2-8-11.1 concerning minornewsource review (NSR) requirements for Title Vand Federally Enforceable State Operating Permit (FESOP) sources. The purpose ofthis hearing is to receive comments from the publicpriorto final adoption ofthese rules by the board. Allinterestedpersons are invitedand willbe given reasonable opportunityto express their views concerning the proposedamendments. Oral statements willbe heard, but, for the accuracy ofthe record, all comments shouldbe submittedin writing. Additionalinformation regarding this action maybe obtained from Susan Bem, Rule Development Branch, Office ofLegal Counsel, (317) 233-5697 or(800) 451-6027 (in Indiana). Individuals requiring reasonable accommodations forparticipation in this eventshould contact the Indiana Department ofEnvironmental Management, Americans with Disabilities Actcoordinatorat: Attn: ADA Coordinator Indiana Department ofEnvironmental Management Indiana Government CenterNorth 100 North Senate Avenue Indianapolis, IN 46204-2251 orcall (317) 233-1785 (V). Speech andhearing impaired callers maycontact IDEM via the Indiana Relay Service (711) or(800) 

### 743-3333. Please provide a minimum of72 hours notification. Copies ofthese rules are now on file at the Rule Development Branch, Office ofLegal Counsel, Indiana Department ofEnvironmental Management, Indiana Government CenterNorth, 100 North Senate Avenue, Thirteenth FloorandLegislative Services Agency, Indiana Government CenterNorth, 100 North Senate Avenue, Room N201, Indianapolis, Indiana andare open forpublic inspection. Nancy King, Chief Rule Development Branch Office of Legal Counsel

Posted: 06/12/2013 byLegislative Services Agency An html version ofthis document.

Date: Oct 29,2013 10:09:55AM EDT DIN: 20130612-IR-326110747PHA Page 1I 

### '( 

### 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 theI 

### ( 

## 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 V 1 

## 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. ,rI 

### ( 

## 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. And, you know, I mean nothing's 16 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 ofthe 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 of25 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 greaterthan 100 TPY. IDEM has performed an air quality analysis to provide technical support for this SIP change and will demonstrate this will be protective ofthe 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 ofwhether a source may cause or contribute to a violation of PSD increment orthe NAAQS, i.e. a significant deterioration of air quality. Based on the modeling results, there were no exceedances ofeitherthe 1-houror 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 

# -coState Totals



### IDEM has operated four CO ambient monitors continuously during this same time period. Charts 2 and 3 below showthe 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 of9 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 -FortWayne 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 -FortWayne Career Cntr. -EastChicago- 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 ofthe NAAQS. 

## Air Quality Impact Objectives The purpose ofthe 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 ofthe model used in the analysis, and the receptor grid utilized for the analyses. C. Determine ifthe 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 ofvarying 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 ofemission 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. Ifstacks are lowerthan 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 ofestablishing 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 ofthe structure's height orwidth. 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 orwidth)

Since all the stack heights are below GEP stack height, the effect ofaerodynamic 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 ofAERMINUTE, 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

- • 100 meter spacing along the facility's property boundary, • 100 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, • 100 meter spacing out to 1,600 meter, • 500 meter spacing outto 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 ofTerrain 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 ifthe sources under consideration would exceed the PSD Slls (concentrations). All ofthese 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, forthis analysis, emissions for individual units were modified and stack parameters were altered to demonstrate more conservative conditions. Stacks were modeled individually at 100 tons peryear using the sources' current stack configurations. Stack heights and velocities were also reduced by halfto 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. Forthe steel mini-mill scenario, the roof monitors were modeled as volume sources with 100 TPYfor each release point and were also modeled as combined units. Ifthe volume sources were modeled as a combined unit, the 100 TPYwas 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 peryear 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 ofeither 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 ImpactAnalvsis STEEL MINI-MILL POINTSOURCES

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-MILLVOLUME 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 

### 711.73 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 belowfor 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 belowfor 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 

### 865 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

## =100TPY * (336/8760) hours 

### Section D -Summary ofAir 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 ofthe 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.

9STEELMINI-MILLPOINTSOURCESVOLUMESourceID982005003459A9B9C909E9F70470511081109111011111112Source106A6B6C606E6F6G6H616J1112SourceDescriptionMeltShopBaghouse1MeltShopBaghouse2VacuumDegasserTunnelFurnace1Stack1TunnelFurnace1Stack2TunnelFurnace2AnnealingFurnacesAnnealingFurnacesAnnealingFurnacesAnnealingFurnacesAnnealingFurnacesAnnealingFurnacesTFFan5TFFan6BoxAnnealingFurnaceBoxAnnealingFurnaceBoxAnnealingFurnaceBoxAnnealingFurnaceBoxAnnealingFurnaceTunnelRoofMonitorTunnelRoofMonitorTunnelRoofMonitorTunnelRoofMonitorTunnelRoofMonitorTunnelRoofMonitorTunnelRoofMonitorTunnelRoofMonitorTunnelRoofMonitorTunnelRoofMonitorRoofMonitor1RoofMonitor2LIMEPRODUCTION/MININGOPERATIONSource10OC1OC2KilnKilnEasting(X)(m)514188.52513923.57514927.54514398.35514398.23514471.04514741.88514741.54514741.5514707.33514706.84514706.84514412.47514442.16514428.93514428.93514428.93514428.93514428.93Easting(X}(m)514424.77514424.77514424.77514424.77514424.77514424.77514424.77514424.77514424.77514424.77514320.21514396.41Easting(X)(m)511086.69511087.59Northing(Y)(m)4425063.14424974.734424672.064424933.134424958.464424959.144425220.854425245.34425270.044425207.674425232.564425258.184425012.254425012.254425441.044425417.044425393.044425369.044425345.04Northing(Y)(m)4425004.624425011.624425018.624425024.624425031.624425038.624425045.624425051.624425058.624425065.624424905.434424905.72Northing(Y)(m)4520113.54520096.5BaseElevation(m)264.94264.55265.69264.69264.7264.87264.25264.54264.65264.73264.87265.04264.97265.01264.73264.94265265.07265.12BaseElevation(m)265265.1265265265265265264.9264.9264.9264.79264.56BaseElevation(m)202.9202.9StackHeight(m)60.9647.5545.7230.4830.4834.2923.4123.4123.4123.4123.4123.4114.0314.0322.8322.8322.8322.8322.83ReleaseHeight(m)11.7311.7311.7311.7311.7311.7311.7311.7311.7311.7336.8836.88StackHeight(m)38.138.1Temperature(K)408.2408.21273972972838.8308.2308.2308.2308.2308.2308.2322322308.2308.2308.2308.2308.2ExitVelocity(m/s)12.4149.76208.258.618.2311.2211.2211.2211.2211.2211.2219.719.712.0612.0612.0612.0612.06Init.HorizontalDimensionInitialVert.Dimension(m)(m)0.210.210.210.210.210.210.210.210.210.210.710.43Temperature(K)4644645.255.255.255.255.255.255.255.255.255.2516.5916.59ExitVelocity(m/s)21.821.8StackDiameter(m)8.68.61.551.221.222.292.132.132.132.132.132.131.2351.2352.152.152.152.152.15co(g/s)0.008340.008340.008340.008340.008340.008340.008340.008340.008340.008340.0420.318StackDiameter(m)1.81.8co(g/s)46.9346.932.3130.08850.08850.1770.1610.1610.1610.1610.1610.1610.04170.04170.060.060.060.060.06co(g/s)11.81311.813NATURALGAS-FIREDEGUSourceIDSourceDescriptionEasting(X)Northing(Y)BaseElevationStackHeightTemperatureExitVelocityStackDiameterco(m)(m)(m)(m)(K)(m/s)(m)(g/s)CT1SUSDCombustionTurbine543282.954616352.9229.161.82338.7111.386.12.877CT2SUSDCombustionTurbine543321.334616353.18229.1361.82338.7111.386.12.877CT3SUSDCombustionTurbine543093.494616580.63229.2461.82338.7111.386.12.877CT4SUSDCombustionTurbine543093.144616620.26228.5461.82338.7111.386.12.877B001AuxilliaryBoiler1543231.394616349.05229.1418.29672.0426.410.912.877B002AuxilliaryBoiler2543086.344616522.73228.9918.29672.0426.410.912.877EG01EmergencyGenerator1543177.574616405.62228.7118.29708.7140.810.30.164EG02EmergencyGenerator2543168.434616405.62228.5718.29708.7140.810.30.164EG03EmergencyGenerator3543473.14616006227.3614.58677.04157.190.20.164FP01FirePump1543174.524616405.62228.6615.24852.0410.450.30.164FP02FirePump2543171.484616405.62228.6215.24852.0410.450.30.164Emergencyunits=100TPY•(500/8760)hoursFERTILIZERPLANTSourceIDSourceDescriptionEasting(X)Northing(Y)BaseElevationStackHeightTemperatureExitVelocityStackDiameterco(m)(m)(m)(m)(K)(m/s)(m)(g/s)PrimaryReformerStack495803.454198148.72118.873043614.73.812.8775AmmoniaStorageFlare496097.974199121.99119.5846.381273.15200.122.8776AmmoniaProcessBackendFlare496010.634198588.71118.87651273.15207.712.8777AmmoniaProcessFrontendFlare496009.654198580.5118.87651273.152016.442.877EmergencyDieselGenerator495997.224198356.19118.576.096672.0440.250.3560.1110StartupHeater495817.724198288.14118.8734.1461172.0414.31.9810.1111APackageBoilerStackA495784.054198427.72118.8838.1449.8213.81.82882.87711BPackageBoilerStackB495784.054198468.51119.4938.1449.8213.81.82882.87711CPackageBoilerStackC495758.014198468.59120.9838.1449.8213.51.82882.877110PackageBoilerStackD495758.084198427.56119.0338.1449.8213.51.82882.87716DieselFireWaterPumpEngine495642.244198448.4121.146.096672.0422.10.20320.1117UANFlare495669.814198152.8118.8747.641273.15200.372.877Emergencyunits=100TPY•(336/8760)hoursNOTE:ALLMODELRESULTSAREINUG/M3AND2.877G/S=100TPYYELLOWDENOTES1stHIGHESTMODELEDCONCENTRATIONOUTOF5YEARSModel 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 48.9ModelResultsReduceHeight(ug/m3)-SeeandVelocitynotesbelowforbyl/2emissions(ug/m3)1-Hour8-Hour1-Hour8-Hour7.24.173.230.47.24.883.740.16.9388.434.38.23.980.828166.395.8531.8220187.796.24912843110.472.828.230.810.271.327.724.716.771.34170.821.7127.651.470.621.5128.253ModelResultsReduceHeight(ug/m3)-SeeandVelocitynotesbelowforby1/2emissions(ug/m3)1-Hour8-Hour1-Hour8-Hour2511.285.141.1628.9244.2789.5319.71.50.52.10.90.40.20.70.327.51837.525.428.48.5632349.216.4129.648.750.916.5129.834.347.615214.9127.856.517.4118.566.179.447.7199.6 133.511531158.140.7