Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 37 / Thursday, February 25, 2016 / Proposed Rules 9391 

TABLE TO § 165.171—Continued 

9.0 SEPTEMBER 

9.1 Windjammer Weekend Fireworks .................................................... • Event Type: Fireworks Display. 

• Sponsor: Town of Camden, Maine. 

• Date: A one night event in September.* 

• Time (Approximate): 8:00 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. 

• Location: From a barge in the vicinity of Northeast Point, Camden 

Harbor, Maine in approximate position: 

44°12′10′′ N., 069°03′11′′ W (NAD 83). 

9.2 Eastport Pirate Festival Fireworks ................................................... • Event Type: Fireworks Display. 

• Sponsor: Eastport Pirate Festival. 

• Date: A one night event in September.* 

• Time (Approximate): 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. 

• Location: From the Waterfront Public Pier in Eastport, Maine in approximate position: 

44°54′17′′ N., 066°58′58′′ W (NAD 83). 

9.3 The Lobsterman Triathlon ................................................................ • Event Type: Swim Event. 

• Sponsor: Tri-Maine Productions. 

• Date: A one day event in September.* 

• Time (Approximate): 8:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. 

• Location: The regulated area includes all waters in the vicinity of 

Winslow Park in South Freeport, Maine within the following points 

(NAD 83): 

43°47′59′′ N., 070°06′56′′ W. 

43°47′44′′ N., 070°06′56′′ W. 

43°47′44′′ N., 070°07′27′′ W. 

43°47′57′′ N., 070°07′27′′ W. 

9.4 Eliot Festival Day Fireworks ............................................................ • Event Type: Fireworks Display. 

• Sponsor: Eliot Festival Day Committee. 

• Date: A one night event in September.* 

• Time (Approximate): 8:00 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. 

• Location: In the vicinity of Eliot Town Boat Launch, Eliot, Maine in 

approximate position: 

43°08′56′′ N., 070°49′52′′ W (NAD 83). 

9.5 Lake Champlain Swimming Race .................................................... • Event Type: Swim Event. 

• Sponsor: Christopher Lizzaraque. 

• Date: A one day event in September. 

• Time (Approximate): 9:00 a.m. to 3 p.m. 

• Location: Essex Beggs Point Park, Essex, NY, to Charlotte Beach, 

Charlotte, VT. 

44°18′32′′ N., 073°20′52′′ W. 

44°20′03′′ N., 073°16′53′′ W. 

* Date subject to change. Exact date will be posted in Notice of Enforcement and Local Notice to Mariners. 

Dated: January 22, 2016. 

M. A. Baroody, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port, Sector Northern New England. 

[FR Doc. 2016–04052 Filed 2–24–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2015–0315; FRL–9942–73– 

Region 5] 

Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Removal of 

Stage II Gasoline Vapor Recovery 

Requirements 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve, 

as a revision to the State 

Implementation Plan (SIP), a submittal 

by the Indiana Department of 

Environmental Management (IDEM) on 

April 27, 2015 and September 10, 2015. 

The submittal concerns the state’s Stage 

II vapor recovery (Stage II) program for 

Clark and Floyd counties in southern 

Indiana as part of the Louisville, 

Kentucky ozone nonattainment area, 

and Lake and Porter counties in 

northwest Indiana as part of the Chicago 

ozone nonattainment area. The 

submittal removes Stage II requirements 

from both nonattainment areas, as a 

component of the Indiana ozone SIP. 

The submittal also includes a 

demonstration under the Clean Air Act 

(CAA) that addresses emission impacts 

associated with the removal of the Stage 

II program. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before March 28, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2015–0315 at http://

www.regulations.gov or via email to 

blakley.pamela@epa.gov. For comments 

submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Once submitted, comments 

cannot be edited or removed from 

Regulations.gov. For either manner of 

submission, EPA may publish any 

comment received to its public docket. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. EPA will generally not consider 

comments or comment contents located 

outside of the primary submission (i.e. 

on the web, cloud, or other file sharing 

system). For additional submission 

methods, please contact the person 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
9392 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 37 / Thursday, February 25, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

1 In areas where certain types of vacuum-assist 

Stage II systems are used, the differences in 

operational design characteristics between ORVR 

and some configurations of these Stage II systems 

result in the reduction of overall control system 

efficiency compared to what could have been 

achieved relative to the individual control 

efficiencies of either ORVR or Stage II emissions 

from the vehicle fuel tank. 

identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the 

full EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Francisco J. Acevedo, Mobile Source 

Program Manager, Control Strategies 

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

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–6061, 

acevedo.francisco@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

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

EPA. This supplementary information 

section is arranged as follows: 

I. Background 

II. What changes have been made to the 

Indiana Stage II Vapor Recovery 

Program? 

III. What is EPA’s analysis of the state’s 

submittal? 

IV. What action is EPA proposing to take? 

V. Incorporation by Reference 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

Stage II and onboard refueling vapor 

recovery (ORVR) are two types of 

emission control systems that capture 

fuel vapors from vehicle gas tanks 

during refueling. Stage II systems are 

specifically installed at gasoline 

dispensing facilities (GDF) and capture 

the refueling fuel vapors at the gasoline 

pump nozzle. The system carries the 

vapors back to the underground storage 

tank at the GDF to prevent the vapors 

from escaping to the atmosphere. ORVR 

systems are carbon canisters installed 

directly on automobiles to capture the 

fuel vapors evacuated from the gasoline 

tank before they reach the nozzle. The 

fuel vapors captured in the carbon 

canisters are then combusted in the 

engine when the automobile is in 

operation. 

Both Stage II and ORVR were required 

by the 1990 Amendments to the CAA 

under sections 182(b)(3) and 202(a)(6), 

respectively. In some areas, Stage II has 

been in place for over 25 years. It was 

not, however, widely implemented by 

the states until the early to mid-1990s as 

a result of the CAA requirements for 

‘‘moderate,’’ ‘‘serious,’’ ‘‘severe,’’ and 

‘‘extreme’’ ozone nonattainment areas, 

classified under section 181 of the CAA, 

and for states in the Northeast Ozone 

Transport Region (OTR) under section 

184(b)(2) of the CAA. 

Under section 202(a)(6) of the CAA, 

Congress required EPA to promulgate 

regulations for ORVR for light-duty 

vehicles (passenger cars). EPA adopted 

these requirements in 1994, at which 

point moderate ozone nonattainment 

areas were no longer subject to the 

section 182(b)(3) Stage II requirement. 

See 59 FR 16262 (April 6, 1994). 

However, some moderate areas retained 

Stage II requirements to provide a 

control method to comply with rate-ofprogress emission reduction targets. 

ORVR equipment has been phased in for 

new passenger vehicles beginning with 

model year 1998, and starting in 2001 

for light-duty trucks and most heavyduty gasoline-powered vehicles. ORVR 

equipment has been installed on nearly 

all new gasoline-powered light-duty 

vehicles, light-duty trucks and heavyduty vehicles since 2006. During the 

phase-in of ORVR controls, Stage II has 

provided volatile organic compound 

(VOC) reductions in ozone 

nonattainment areas and certain 

attainment areas of the OTR. Under 

section 202(a)(6) of the CAA, Congress 

recognized that ORVR and Stage II 

could eventually become largely 

redundant technologies, and provided 

authority to the EPA to allow states to 

remove Stage II from their SIPs after 

EPA finds that ORVR is in widespread 

use. On May 16, 2012, EPA determined 

that ORVR was in widespread 

nationwide use for control of gasoline 

emissions during refueling of vehicles at 

GDFs (77 FR 28772). 

In 2012, more than 75 percent of 

gasoline refueling nationwide occurred 

with ORVR-equipped vehicles, so Stage 

II programs have become largely 

redundant control systems and Stage II 

systems achieve an ever declining 

emissions benefit as more ORVRequipped vehicles continue to enter the 

on-road motor vehicle fleet.1

On that date, EPA also exercised its 

authority under section 202(a)(6) of the 

CAA to waive certain Federal statutory 

requirements for Stage II at GDFs. This 

decision exempted all new ozone 

nonattainment areas classified serious 

or above from the requirement to adopt 

Stage II control programs. Similarly, any 

state currently implementing Stage II 

programs was authorized to submit SIP 

revisions that, once approved by EPA, 

would allow for the phase-out of Stage 

II control systems. 

To assist states in the development of 

SIP revisions to remove Stage II 

requirements from their SIPs, EPA 

issued its ‘‘Guidance on Removing Stage 

II Gasoline Vapor Control Programs 

from State Implementation Plans and 

Assessing Comparable Measures’’ (EPA– 

457/B–12–001) on August 7, 2012. In 

that document, EPA provided both 

technical and policy recommendations 

to states and local areas on how to 

develop and submit and approvable SIP 

revision seeking to phase out an existing 

Stage II program. 

II. What changes have been made to the 

Indiana Stage II Vapor Recovery 

Program? 

Indiana originally submitted a SIP 

revision request to EPA on February 25, 

1994, to satisfy the requirements of 

section 182(b)(3) of the CAA. The 

submission applied to Clark and Floyd 

counties Indiana as part of the 

Louisville, Kentucky ozone 

nonattainment area and Lake and Porter 

counties Indian as part of the Chicago 

ozone nonattainment area. EPA fully 

approved Indiana’s Stage II program on 

April 28, 1994 (59 FR 10111), including 

the program’s legal authority and 

administrative requirements found in 

Section 8–4–6 of Title 326 of the 

Indiana Administrative Code (326 IAC). 

In January 2013, IDEM issued a 

Nonrule Policy Document, Air-036 

(NPD), addressing EPA’s May 16, 2012 

determination. In the NPD, IDEM stated 

that it would not enforce the 

requirements for Stage II at new and 

modified GDFs in Clark, Floyd, Lake 

and Porter counties. At the same time 

Indiana also initiated a rulemaking 

process to revise its SIP to remove Stage 

II requirements for all facilities in Clark, 

Floyd, Lake and Porter counties. As part 

of that process, Indiana completed a 

state-specific analysis following EPA’s 

recommended methodology. In that 

analysis, Indiana concluded that, during 

calendar year 2016, ORVR would be in 

widespread use in Indiana and that 

there would no remaining emissions 

reduction benefit from Stage II 

requirements beyond the benefits from 

ORVR. 

On April 27, 2015 and September 10, 

2015, IDEM submitted rules as SIP 

revision requests of amendments to 326 

IAC 8–4–6 and 326 IAC 8–4–1. These 

amendments would remove Stage II 

requirements from the Indiana ozone 

SIP and allow GDFs currently 

implementing Stage II in the four 

program counties to decommission their 

systems. To support the removal of the 

Stage II requirements, the revised rules 

included copies of 326 IAC 8–4–1 and 

326 IAC 8–4–6, as published in the 

Indiana Register on March 4, 2015; a 

summary of state-specific calculations 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 37 / Thursday, February 25, 2016 / Proposed Rules 9393 

2The actual number of facilities expected to 

remove Stage II equipment during this timeframe 

believed to be less, thus resulting in lower 

emissions increase. 

based on EPA guidance used to 

calculate program benefits and 

demonstrate widespread use of ORVR in 

Indiana; and a section 110(l) 

demonstration that includes offset 

emission documentation that addresses 

the 2013–2015 period, when Stage II 

requirements were waived in Indiana 

but widespread use of ORVR had not yet 

occurred. 

III. What is EPA’s analysis of the state’s 

submittal? 

Revisions to SIP-approved control 

measures must meet the requirements of 

section 110(l) of the CAA in order to be 

approved by EPA. Section 110(l) states: 

‘‘The Administrator shall not approve 

a revision of a plan if the revision would 

interfere with any applicable 

requirement concerning attainment and 

reasonable further progress (as defined 

in section 171), or any other applicable 

requirement of this Act.’’ 

EPA evaluates each section 110(l) 

non-interference demonstration on a 

case-by-case basis considering the 

circumstances of each SIP revision. EPA 

interprets section 110(l) to apply to all 

requirements of the CAA and to all areas 

of the country, whether attainment, 

nonattainment, unclassifiable, or 

maintenance for one or more of the six 

criteria pollutants. EPA also interprets 

section 110(l) to require a demonstration 

addressing all criteria pollutants whose 

emissions and/or ambient 

concentrations may change as a result of 

the SIP revision. The degree of analysis 

focused on any particular national 

ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) 

in a non-interference demonstration 

varies depending on the nature of the 

emissions associated with the proposed 

SIP revision. 

In the absence of an attainment 

demonstration, to demonstrate no 

interference with any applicable 

NAAQS or requirement of the CAA 

under section 110(l), EPA believes it is 

appropriate to allow states to substitute 

equivalent emissions reductions to 

compensate for any change to a SIPapproved program, as long as actual 

emissions in the air are not increased. 

‘‘Equivalent’’ emissions reductions 

mean reductions which are equal to or 

greater than those reductions achieved 

by the control measure approved in the 

SIP. To show that compensating 

emissions reductions are equivalent, 

modeling or adequate justification must 

be provided. The compensating, 

equivalent reductions must represent 

actual, new emissions reductions 

achieved in a contemporaneous time 

frame to the change of the existing SIP 

control measure, in order to preserve the 

status quo level of emissions in the air. 

In addition to being contemporaneous, 

the equivalent emissions reductions 

must also be permanent, enforceable, 

quantifiable, and surplus to be approved 

into the SIP. 

The implementation of the Stage II 

program in Indiana has resulted in 

reductions of VOC emissions. VOCs 

contribute to the formation of groundlevel ozone. Thus the potential increase 

in VOC needs to be offset with 

equivalent (or greater) emissions 

reductions from another control 

measure in order to demonstrate noninterference with the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. The Indiana Stage II SIP 

revision includes a 110(l) demonstration 

for both areas that uses equivalent 

emissions reductions to compensate for 

emission reduction losses between 2013 

and 2015 resulting from the removal of 

Stage II systems at a number of GDFs 

before ORVR is in widespread use as 

allowed by Indiana’s NPD. IDEM has 

calculated that by 2016, ORVR will be 

in widespread use in both areas and the 

absence of the Indiana Stage II program 

after 2016 would not result in a net VOC 

emissions increase compared to the 

continued utilization of this emissions 

control technology. The emission 

reduction losses resulting from 

removing Stage II before 2016 are 

transitional and relatively small since 

ORVR-equipped vehicles will continue 

to phase into the fleet over the coming 

years. IDEM’s calculation indicates a 

maximum potential loss of 0.02317 tons 

per summer day (tpsd) in Lake and 

Porter counties and 0.00408 tpsd in 

Clark and Floyd counties from 2013 

through 2015. 

For Lake and Porter Counties, IDEM is 

proposing the use of VOC emission 

reductions associated with the 

shutdown of the State Line Energy 

Generating Plant (State Line Energy) 

formerly located in Lake County, 

Indiana to offset the 0.02317 tpsd 

increase in those counties. State Line 

ceased operations in March 31, 2012 

and its operating permit has been 

revoked. The expiration and revocation 

of this source’s permit enables the state 

to use the VOC emission credits 

associated with this facility for other 

purposes under the SIP and makes such 

credits permanent and enforceable. 

Using the last three full years of 

operations (2009–2011) State Line 

Energy averaged 0.215 tpsd of VOC of 

emissions offsets. Table 1 shows the 

increase of emissions associated with 

the removal of Stage II systems at 

facilities in Lake and Porter counties, as 

well as offset emissions associated with 

State Line Energy. In the table, the 

number of facilities removing Stage II 

equipment for 2013 represents the 

actual number of facilities that sought 

an exemption from implementing the 

Stage II requirements. For 2014 and 

2015, the number of facilities removing 

Stage II equipment is a conservative 

estimate.2

TABLE 1—LAKE AND PORTER COUNTIES OFFSET ANALYSIS

Year 

Number of 

facilities 

removing 

Stage II 

Emissions 

factor VOC 

tons/ 

facility/ 

avg. summer 

day 

Emissions 

increase VOC 

tons/avg. 

summer day 

State Line 

Energy 

offsets VOC 

tons/avg. 

summer day 

(avg. of 

2009–2011) 

Offset 

greater 

than 

increase? 

2013 ........................................................................................... 6 0.000944006 0.005664035 0.215 Yes. 

2014 ........................................................................................... 12 0.000654335 0.007852014 0.215 Yes. 

2015 ........................................................................................... 24 0.000402349 0.009656365 0.215 Yes. 

As illustrated in Table 1, and 

documented in Indiana’s SIP revision, 

for Lake and Porter counties, for each 

year prior to the widespread use of 

ORVR in Indiana (2016), the VOC 

emissions increase associated with the 

removal of Stage II systems is more than 

offset by the VOC emission reductions 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
9394 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 37 / Thursday, February 25, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

3Clark and Floyd counties are currently 

designated nonattainment for the 1997 Annual fine 

particulate matter (PM2.5) standard. While VOC is 

one of the precursors for particulate matter 

(NAAQS) formation, studies have indicated that in 

the southeast which includes the Louisville, KY 

ozone nonattainment area, emissions of direct PM2.5

and the precursor sulfur oxides are more significant 

to ambient summertime PM2.5 concentrations than 

emissions of nitrogen oxides and anthropogenic 

VOC. See. E.g., Journal of Environmental 

Engineering—Quantifying the sources of ozone, fine 

particulate matter, and regional haze in the 

Southeastern United States (June 24, 2009), 

available at: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/

journal-ofenvironmental-management. Currently, 

Clark and Floyd counties are no designated 

nonattainment for any of the other criteria 

pollutants (i.e. sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, 

lead or carbon monoxide) and those pollutants are 

not affected by the removal of Stage II requirements. 

attributed to the permanent closure of 

the State Line Energy facility. 

For Clark and Floyd counties, IDEM is 

proposing the use of offsets generated by 

the Architectural and Industrial 

Maintenance (AIM) coatings rule 

adopted by Indiana at 326 IAC 8–14. 

Indiana’s AIM coatings rule goes above 

and beyond the Federal AIM rule by 

adopting a rule that is similar to the 

Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) 

model rule. According to a 2006 Lake 

Michigan Air Directors Consortium 

(LADCO) white paper, the OTC model 

rule provides a 31% to 48.4% 

(depending on the AIM coatings 

category) reduction in VOC emissions 

compared to uncontrolled 2002 base 

case emissions while the Federal AIM 

rule alone only provides a 20% 

reduction compared to base case. 

The Indiana AIM rule was approved 

into the SIP on August 30, 2012 (77 FR 

52606). Indiana was not required to 

adopt an AIM coatings rule but did so 

as a multi-state effort to help reduce 

ozone levels at the regional level. 

Indiana did not adopt the AIM rule to 

comply with any Indiana SIP planning 

requirements and has not taken credit 

for it in air quality plans, nor has it been 

included in maintenance year horizons 

or rate of further progress (RFP) 

inventories. Therefore, these SIP 

approved AIM limits can be used as 

offsets for other purposes, such as this 

SIP revision. Offsets of 0.234 tpsd of 

VOC are available based on calculations 

derived using the 2011 National 

Emissions Inventory data. Table 2 

shows the increase of VOC emission 

associated with the removal of Stage II 

systems at facilities in Clark and Floyd 

between 2013 and 2015, as well as offset 

emissions associated with AIM coatings. 

In the table, the number of facilities 

removing Stage II equipment for 2013 

represents the actual number of 

facilities that have sought an exemption 

from implementing the Stage II 

requirements. For 2014 and 2015, the 

number of facilities removing Stage II 

equipment is a conservative estimate. 

TABLE 2—CLARK AND FLOYD COUNTIES OFFSET ANALYSIS

Year 

Number of 

facilities 

removing 

Stage II 

Emissions 

factor VOC 

tons/ 

facility/ 

avg. summer 

day 

Emissions 

increase VOC 

tons/avg. 

summer day 

AIM Coatings 

offsets VOC 

tons/avg. 

summer day 

(avg. of 

2009–2011) 

Offset 

greater 

than 

increase? 

2013 ......................................................................................... 0 0.000659923 0 .0 0.292 Yes. 

2014 ......................................................................................... 4 0.000457424 0 .001829695 0.292 Yes. 

2015 ......................................................................................... 8 0.000281269 0 .002250149 0.292 Yes. 

As illustrated in Table 2, and 

documented in Indiana’s SIP revision, 

for Clark and Floyd counties, for each 

year prior to the widespread use of 

ORVR in Indiana (2016), the VOC 

emissions increase associated with the 

removal of Stage II systems is more than 

offset by the VOC emission reductions 

attributed to reductions in AIM coatings 

emissions. For both the Clark and Floyd 

counties and Lake and Porter counties 

analyses, Indiana is requesting to use 

only the portion of the emissions offsets 

necessary to offset the emissions 

increase due to the removal of Stage II 

systems before Indiana’s 2016 

widespread use timeframe. Indiana 

retains the right to utilize any remaining 

emissions offsets in the future. 

Based on the use of permanent, 

enforceable, contemporaneous, surplus 

emissions reductions achieved through 

the shutdown of the previously 

permitted State Line Energy facility in 

Lake and Porter counties and the offsets 

from VOC reductions in AIM coatings 

emissions in Clark and Floyd counties, 

EPA believes that the removal of the 

Indiana Stage II program does not 

interfere with southeast Indiana’s ability 

to demonstrate compliance with the 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS. 

EPA also examined whether the 

removal of Stage II program 

requirements in both areas will interfere 

with attainment of other air quality 

standards. Lake and Porter counties are 

designated attainment for all standards 

other than ozone, including sulfur 

dioxide and nitrogen dioxide. Clark and 

Floyd counties are designated 

attainment for all standards other than 

ozone and particulate matter.3 EPA has 

no reason to believe that the removal of 

the Stage II program in Indiana will 

cause the areas to become 

nonattainment for any of these 

pollutants. In addition, EPA believes 

that removing the Stage II program 

requirements in Indiana will not 

interfere with the areas’ ability to meet 

any other CAA requirement. 

Based on the above discussion and 

the state’s section 110(l) demonstration, 

EPA believes that removal of the Stage 

II program will not interfere with 

attainment or maintenance of any of the 

NAAQS in both the Chicago and 

Louisville, Kentucky ozone 

nonattainment areas and would not 

interfere with any other applicable 

requirement of the CAA, and thus, are 

approvable under CAA section 110(l). 

IV. What action is EPA proposing to 

take? 

EPA is proposing to approve, as a 

revision to the Indiana ozone SIP, 

regulations submitted by IDEM on April 

27, 2015 and September 10, 2015. EPA 

finds that the revisions will not interfere 

with any applicable CAA requirement. 

V. Incorporation by Reference 

In this rulemaking, EPA is proposing 

to include in a final EPA rule regulatory 

text that includes incorporation by 

reference. In accordance with 

requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is 

proposing to incorporate by reference 

Indiana rules 326 IAC 8–4–1 

‘‘Applicability’’ and 326 IAC 8–4–6 

‘‘Gasoline dispensing facilities’’, 

effective March 5, 2015. EPA has made, 

and will continue to make, these 

documents generally available through 

www.regulations.gov and/or at the 

appropriate EPA office (see the 

ADDRESSES section of this preamble for 

more information). 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 37 / Thursday, February 25, 2016 / Proposed Rules 9395 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this action 

merely approves state law as meeting 

Federal requirements and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. For that 

reason, this action: 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, the SIP is not approved to 

apply on any Indian reservation land or 

in any other area where EPA or an 

Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 

tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of 

Indian country, the rule does not have 

tribal implications and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: February 11, 2016. 

Robert A. Kaplan, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2016–03894 Filed 2–24–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2016–0075; EPA–R05– 

OAR–2016–0090; FRL–9942–72–Region 5] 

Air Plan Approval; Indiana; 

Commissioner’s Orders for A.B. Brown 

and Clifty Creek 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

revisions to the Indiana State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by 

the Indiana Department of 

Environmental Management (IDEM) to 

EPA on January 27, 2016, and February 

5, 2016, for parallel processing. The 

submittal consists of orders issued by 

the Commissioner of IDEM that require 

more stringent sulfur dioxide (SO2) 

emissions limits than those currently 

contained in the SIP for Vectren’s A. B. 

Brown Generating Station (‘‘A.B. 

Brown’’) and Indiana-Kentucky Electric 

Corporation’s Clifty Creek Generating 

Station (‘‘Clifty Creek’’). IDEM 

submitted these limits to enable the 

areas near these generating stations to 

qualify for being designated 

‘‘attainment’’ of the 2010 primary SO2

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS), a matter that will be 

addressed in a separate future 

rulemaking. EPA’s approval of these 

revisions to the Indiana SIP would make 

the Commissioner’s orders’ SO2

emissions limits federally enforceable. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before March 28, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Nos. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2016–0075 for A.B. Brown or 

EPA–R05–OAR–2016–0090 for Clifty 

Creek at http://www.regulations.gov or 

via email to aburano.douglas@epa.gov. 

For comments submitted at 

Regulations.gov, follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 

For either manner of submission, EPA 

may publish any comment received to 

its public docket. Do not submit 

electronically any information you 

consider to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Multimedia submissions (audio, video, 

etc.) must be accompanied by a written 

comment. The written comment is 

considered the official comment and 

should include discussion of all points 

you wish to make. EPA will generally 

not consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, please 

contact the person identified in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

For the full EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jenny Liljegren, Physical Scientist, 

Attainment Planning and Maintenance 

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

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–6832, 

Liljegren.Jennifer@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

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

EPA. This supplementary information 

section is arranged as follows: 

I. Why did IDEM issue these Commissioner’s 

Orders? 

II. What are the SO2 limits in these 

Commissioner’s Orders? 

III. By what criterion is EPA reviewing this 

SIP revision? 

IV. What action is EPA taking? 

V. Incorporation by Reference 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Why did IDEM issue these 

Commissioner’s Orders? 

On January 27, 2016, and February 5, 

2016, IDEM submitted for parallel 

processing draft revisions to its SIP 

consisting of orders issued by IDEM’s 

Commissioner that establish more 

stringent SO2 emissions limits than 

those currently contained in the SIP for 

A.B. Brown and Clifty Creek. IDEM 

established these SO2 emissions limits 

to enable the areas near A.B. Brown and 

Clifty Creek to qualify in the future for 

being designated ‘‘attainment’’ of the 

2010 primary SO2 NAAQS. Under a 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS