Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 18, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 48431 

1Areas designated as mandatory Class I Federal 

areas consist of national parks exceeding 6000 

acres, wilderness areas and national memorial parks 

exceeding 5000 acres, and all international parks 

that were in existence on August 7, 1977 (42 U.S.C. 

7472(a)). Listed at 40 CFR part 81, subpart D. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2017–22505 Filed 10–17–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2017–0082; FRL–9969–64– 

Region 5] 

Air Plan Approval; Illinois; Regional 

Haze Progress Report 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is approving the regional 

haze progress report under the Clean Air 

Act (CAA) as a revision to the Illinois 

State Implementation Plan (SIP). Illinois 

has satisfied the progress report 

requirements of the Regional Haze Rule. 

Illinois has also met the requirements 

for a determination of the adequacy of 

its regional haze plan with its negative 

declaration submitted with the progress 

report. 

DATES: This direct final rule will be 

effective December 18, 2017, unless EPA 

receives adverse comments by 

November 17, 2017. If adverse 

comments are received, EPA will 

publish a timely withdrawal of the 

direct final rule in the Federal Register 

informing the public that the rule will 

not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2017–0082 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 

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: 

Charles Hatten, Environmental 

Engineer, Control Strategy Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–6031, 

hatten.charles@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. EPA’s Analysis of Illinois’s Regional Haze 

Progress Report and Adequacy 

Determination 

III. What action is EPA taking? 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

States are required to submit a 

progress report every five years that 

evaluates progress towards the 

Reasonable Progress Goals (RPGs) for 

each mandatory Class I Federal area 1

(Class I area) within the state and in 

each Class I area outside the state which 

may be affected by emissions from 

within the state. See 40 CFR 51.308(g). 

States are also required to submit, at the 

same time as the progress report, a 

determination of the adequacy of the 

state’s existing regional haze SIP. See 40 

CFR 51.308(h). The first progress report 

must be submitted in the form of a SIP 

revision and is due five years after the 

submittal of the initial regional haze 

SIP. On June 24, 2011, Illinois 

submitted its first regional haze SIP in 

accordance with the requirements of 40 

CFR 51.308. EPA approved Illinois’ 

regional haze plan into its SIP on July 

6, 2012, 77 FR 39943. 

On February 1, 2017, Illinois 

submitted a SIP revision consisting of a 

report on the progress made in the first 

implementation period towards the 

RPGs for Class I areas outside of Illinois 

(progress report). Illinois does not have 

any Class I areas within its borders. This 

progress report included a 

determination that Illinois’ existing 

regional haze SIP requires no 

substantive revision to achieve the 

established regional haze visibility 

improvement and emissions reduction 

goals for 2018. EPA is approving 

Illinois’ progress report on the basis that 

it satisfies the requirements of 40 CFR 

51.308. 

II. EPA’s Analysis of Illinois’s Regional 

Haze Progress Report and Adequacy 

Determination 

On February 1, 2017, Illinois EPA 

submitted the progress report as a 

revision to its regional haze SIP to 

address progress made in the first 

planning period towards RPGs for Class 

I areas that are affected by emissions 

from Illinois’ sources. The progress 

report included a determination of the 

adequacy of the state’s existing regional 

haze SIP. 

Illinois has no Class I areas within its 

borders. In the initial SIP, the following 

Class I areas are identified as sites that 

may be affected by emissions from 

within Illinois: Sipsey Wilderness Area 

(Alabama), Caney Creek Wilderness 

Area and Upper Buffalo Wilderness 

Area (Arkansas), Great Gulf Wilderness 

Area (New Hampshire), Boundary 

Waters Canoe Wilderness Area 

(Minnesota), Brigantine Wilderness 

Area (New Jersey), Great Smoky 

Mountains National Park (North 

Carolina, and Tennessee), Mammoth 

Cave National Park (Kentucky), Acadia 

National Park and Moosehorn 

Wilderness Area (Maine), Isle Royale 

National Park and Seney Wilderness 

Area (Michigan), Hercules-Glades 

Wilderness Area and Mingo Wilderness 

Area (Missouri), Lye Brook Wilderness 

(Vermont), James River Face Wilderness 

and Shenandoah National Park 

(Virginia), and Dolly Sods/Otter Creek 

Wilderness (West Virginia). 

In developing the Long Term Strategy 

(LTS), the original Illinois regional haze 

SIP determined that ‘‘on-the-books’’ 

controls, together with best available 

retrofit technology (BART) controls, 

would constitute the measures 

necessary to address Illinois’ 

contribution to visibility impairment in 

the Class I areas at which emissions 

from Illinois contribute. This was 

supported by modeling assessments 

from the Midwest Regional Planning 

Organization (MRPO) and in 

consultation with other states and 

Regional Planning Organizations. 

A. Regional Haze Progress Report SIP 

Elements 

The following sections discuss the 

information provided by Illinois in the 

progress report. Each section describes 

Illinois’ applicable progress report 

submission along with EPA’s analysis 

and proposed determination as to 

whether the submission met the 


ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
48432 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 18, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 

2 Illinois did not rely upon the Clean Air 

Interstate Rule (CAIR) or the Cross-State Air 

Pollution Rule (CSAPR) for its regional haze SIP, 

and thus, has avoided the issues that presented 

themselves in other states due to their reliance on 

CAIR and CSAPR. 

applicable requirements of 40 CFR 

51.308. 

1. Status of Implementation of All 

Measures Included in the Regional Haze 

SIP 

Illinois provided the status of 

implementation of all control measures 

as required by 40 CFR 51.308(g)(1). 

Illinois identified control measures 

regulated explicitly for the purposes of 

the regional haze program, as well as 

additional control measures that were 

expected to take effect within the first 

planning period. The regional haze 

controls implemented by Illinois 

include both BART and a LTS. 

In its original regional haze SIP, 

Illinois relied primarily on three control 

strategies for meeting its regional haze 

requirements to ensure reasonable 

progress: 2 (1) Federal consent decrees 

for two petroleum refineries; (2) sourcespecific limits for three power plants 

that were included in Federally 

enforceable permits; and, (3) emission 

reductions from the vast majority of 

state’s electric generating unit (EGU) 

fleet resulting from the Multi-Pollutant 

Standard (MPS) and the Combined 

Pollutant Standard (CPS) regulatory 

requirements found in Title 35 of the 

Illinois Administrative Code (35 IAC), 

Mercury Rule, Part 225, Subpart B— 

Control of Mercury Emissions from 

Coal-Fired Electric Generating Units 

(Part 225). These elements of Illinois’ 

SIP satisfied the requirements for BART 

in 40 CFR 51.308(e). All three control 

strategies have been implemented or are 

being implemented on the schedules 

approved in the SIP. 

In addition to these control measures 

being implemented, in Section 1.2 of the 

report Illinois identified a list of ‘‘onthe-books’’ control measures used in the 

MRPO’s modeling for Illinois’ SIP that 

the state expected to implement 

between 2002 and 2018. These ‘‘on-thebooks’’ control measures are being 

implemented as planned or in a manner 

at least as stringent as anticipated at the 

time of the original haze plan submittal. 

More detailed information regarding the 

implementation dates of the various 

control measures can be found in 

Appendix A of the report. 

Illinois did not rely on additional 

emissions controls from other states in 

its regional haze strategy. In Section 1.3 

of the report, Illinois noted the 

following additional control measures 

not considered in Illinois’ regional haze 

SIP which are expected to contribute to 

further reduction of sulfur dioxide (SO2) 

emissions before 2018: Compliance with 

the 2010 SO2 National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard, and the Federal Tier 

3 Vehicle Emissions and Fuel Standard 

Program (2014). 

The report noted that in 2015 Illinois 

adopted regulations that set statewide 

fuel sulfur standards for stationary 

sources at 1000 parts per million (ppm) 

for residual oil and 15 ppm for distillate 

fuel oil. These regulatory requirements 

were to be implemented by January 1, 

2017. 

EPA concludes that Illinois has 

adequately addressed the status of 

control measures in its regional haze SIP 

as required by 40 CFR 51.308(g)(1). 

2. Summary of Emissions Reductions 

Achieved in the State Through 

Implementation of Measures 

In its progress report, Illinois 

provided a summary of emission 

reductions achieved through 

implementation of control strategies 

described in the above paragraph as 

required by 40 CFR 51.308(g)(1). 

Illinois’ reliance upon the MPS and 

CPS from 35 IAC 225, the sourcespecific limits incorporated into 

Federally enforceable permits for three 

power plants, and requirements 

contained in Federal consent decrees for 

two petroleum refineries have resulted 

in significant emission reductions of 

nitrogen oxides (NOX) and SO2. In 

Section 2.0 of the progress report, 

Illinois provided emissions data from 

the base year 2002 for the regional haze 

rule, projections of emissions for 2015 

and 2018, and actual emissions data 

from EPA’s Air Markets Program Data. 

These data indicate that greater 

reductions of NOX and SO2 emissions 

have occurred in 2015 at regulated 

sources than were anticipated for the 

entire first implementation period 

ending in 2018. 

The additional emission reductions 

reported in Section 2.0 were based on 

other factors such as the shutting down 

or conversion of coal-fired EGUs to 

combustion of other fuels, and control 

measures related to Federal 

requirements such as, Maximum 

Achievable Control Technology and the 

Mercury and Air Toxics Standards. The 

report shows that emission reduction of 

visibility-impairing pollutants in Illinois 

have been greater than anticipated at the 

time of its regional haze plan submittal. 

EPA finds the summary of emission 

reductions achieved from control 

strategy implementation adequately 

addresses the applicable provisions of 

40 CFR 51.308(g)(2). 

3. Assessment of Visibility Conditions 

and Changes for Each Mandatory Class 

I Federal Area in the State 

Illinois does not have any Class I 

areas within its boundaries, and as the 

applicable provisions pertain only to 

states containing Class I areas, no 

further discussion is necessary. EPA 

concludes that Illinois has adequately 

addressed the applicable provisions of 

40 CFR 51.308(g). 

4. Analysis Tracking Emissions Changes 

of Visibility-Impairing Pollutants 

In its progress report, Illinois 

provided an analysis tracking the 

emissions progress over the past five 

years, as required by 40 CFR 

51.308(g)(4). Illinois based its report on 

the most recent updated emissions 

inventory to account for emission 

changes during the applicable five-year 

period. The analysis includes emissions 

of SO2, NOX, ammonia (NH3), volatile 

organic compound (VOC), and direct 

emissions of fine particulate matter 

(PM2.5) for the years 2010 to 2014 (the 

most recent year for which Illinois has 

a full quality-assured inventory). In 

order to provide a five-year analysis 

with data from years with full qualityassured inventories, Illinois EPA has 

interpolated 2010 inventory data from 

its 2008 and 2011 inventories. 

Table 1 below contains Illinois 

inventory data aggregated by source 

type for each visibility-impairing 

pollutant. This data shows significant 

reductions in Illinois emissions of SO2

(40% reduction) and NOX (15% 

reduction) while showing slight 

increases or decreases in emissions of 

PM2.5 (0.15% increase), VOC (0.5% 

increase), and NH3 (4% reduction). 

TABLE 1—ILLINOIS EMISSIONS BY SOURCE TYPE

Source type 

SO2 (tpy) NOX (tpy) PM2.5 (tpy) VOC (tpy) NH3 (tpy) 

2010 2014 2010 2014 2010 2014 2010 2014 2010 2014 

Point Source ............. 311,447 182,200 151,017 99,753 10,929 14,261 45,598 42,345 1,622 1,901 


ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 18, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 48433 

TABLE 1—ILLINOIS EMISSIONS BY SOURCE TYPE—Continued 

Source type 

SO2 (tpy) NOX (tpy) PM2.5 (tpy) VOC (tpy) NH3 (tpy) 

2010 2014 2010 2014 2010 2014 2010 2014 2010 2014 

Area Source ............. 5,733 5,688 45,150 58,012 119,001 118,411 166,221 172,831 69,916 68,177 

On-Road Mobile ....... 1,037 1,040 187,348 174,774 5,290 5,286 70,721 73,769 6,048 3,868 

Off-Road Mobile ....... 1,994 2,576 144,695 116,965 9,596 7,074 77,368 72,795 96 109 

Animal Husbandry .... 0 ................ 0 ................ 0 ................ 0 ................ 45,826 44,442 

Total .................. 320,232 191,504 528,211 449,504 144,816 145,032 359,909 361,740 123,507 118,496 

An additional table in the report 

shows the significant reductions in SO2

and NOX emissions were driven 

primarily by reductions from the EGU 

sector. Illinois anticipates that this trend 

will continue in 2015 and beyond, due 

to further increases in the stringency of 

the state regulations and additional 

coal-fired EGUs in Illinois being retired 

or converted to natural gas combustion. 

Emissions of VOC and PM2.5 appear to 

have increased slightly over the fiveyear period. However, Illinois EPA 

analysis indicates that this apparent 

increase is due mainly to changes in 

inventory methodologies. While VOC 

emissions in Illinois decreased for many 

subcategories in the inventory summary, 

these reductions are overwhelmed by 

the significant increase in the 

‘‘Petroleum and Related Industries’’ 

subcategory. With respect to calculating 

the proportion of PM2.5 in source 

emissions, Illinois determined that the 

apparent increase in PM2.5 emissions is 

from the EGU sector, while overall PM 

emissions, fuel usage, and emissions of 

other pollutants for the EGU sector 

showed significant reductions. 

Overall emissions of visibilityimpairing pollutants in Illinois have 

declined over the five-year period 

between 2010 and 2014. Again, the 

regional haze SIP for Illinois control 

strategies focused primarily on 

reductions of SO2 and NOX. 

EPA finds that the analysis tracking 

the emissions progress over the past five 

years adequately addresses the 

applicable provisions of 40 CFR 

51.308(g). 

5. Assessment of Changes Impeding 

Visibility Progress 

The Regional Haze Rule at 40 CFR 

51.308(g)(5) requires an assessment of 

any significant changes in emissions 

over the past five years that have 

impeded progress in improving 

visibility. 

In the progress report, Illinois has not 

identified any significant changes in 

anthropogenic emissions within Illinois 

that have occurred over the last five 

years that would limit or impede 

progress in improving visibility. Illinois 

reports that there have been no 

significant unexpected increases in 

emissions in the past five years. 

Likewise, Illinois reports that there have 

been no projected decreases in pollutant 

emissions from the regional haze SIP 

that have not been realized. Data 

detailed in Sections 2.0 and 4.0 of 

Illinois’ progress report show Illinois 

achieving emission reductions of SO2

and NOX beyond the projected emission 

reductions in the original regional haze 

SIP. 

Because Illinois does not contain any 

Federal Class I areas, Illinois is not 

required to assess whether emission 

increases outside the state are causing a 

Class I area within the state to be 

adversely affected. Thus, EPA concludes 

that Illinois has adequately addressed 

the applicable provisions of 40 CFR 

50.308. 

6. Assessment of Current Strategy 

In its progress report, Illinois submits 

that the elements and strategies outlined 

in its original regional haze SIP are 

sufficient to enable Illinois and states 

where Illinois contributes to visibility 

impairments to meet all established 

RPGs. To support this conclusion, 

Illinois has implemented, or will 

implement by 2018, all controls from its 

regional haze plan. In the progress 

report, Illinois states that good progress 

has been made in reducing in visibilityimpairing pollutants in the last five 

years. The state noted that it is on track 

to meet its 2018 goals for emission 

reductions before the end of 2018 for 

key pollutants, SO2 and NOX. Section 

2.0 of the progress report, provides 

actual emissions data showing 

significant emissions reductions in 

visibility impairing pollutants in 2015 

that have already exceeded the 

projected emission reductions in the 

Illinois by 2018. 

EPA agrees that Illinois’ assessment of 

strategies outlined in its regional haze 

SIP has adequately addressed the 

applicable provisions of 40 CFR 50.308. 

7. Review of the State’s Visibility 

Monitoring Strategy 

Illinois’s progress report indicates that 

there are no Class I areas within its 

borders. EPA concludes that because 

Illinois does not have any Class I areas 

within its borders and therefore is not 

required to address the applicable 

provisions related to review of the 

state’s visibility monitoring strategy, the 

state has adequately addressed the 

applicable provisions of 40 CFR 51.308. 

B. Determination of Adequacy of the 

Existing Regional Haze Plan 

The rule at 40 CFR 51.308(h) requires 

a determination of adequacy for the 

regional haze plan to be submitted at the 

same time as the progress report. The 

rule requires the state to select from four 

options based on the information given 

in the progress report. Illinois submitted 

a negative declaration that further 

substantive revisions to its regional haze 

plan are not needed at this time. Illinois 

determined that its regional haze plan is 

adequate to meet the regional haze rule 

requirements and expects Class I areas 

affected by Illinois to achieve the 

reasonable progress goals. The nearest 

Class I area outside the state of Illinois 

is either in southwestern Missouri or 

northern Michigan. See 77 FR 3966, 

3967 (January 12, 2012). Illinois reports 

that it is on track to meet the visibility 

improvement and emission reduction 

goals. EPA agrees that the current 

Illinois regional haze plan is adequate to 

achieve these goals. 

C. Public Participation and Federal 

Land Manager (FLM) Consultation 

On June 23, 2016, Illinois provided an 

opportunity for FLMs to review the 

revision to Illinois’ SIP reporting on 

progress made during the first 

implementation period toward RPGs for 

Class I areas outside the state that are 

affected by emissions from Illinois’ 

sources. This was 60 days in advance of 

the public hearing. 

Illinois’ progress report includes the 

FLMs comments received and responses 

to those comments in Appendix A in 

the progress report. 


ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
48434 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 18, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 

Illinois also published notification for 

a public hearing and solicitation for 

comments in the Illinois Register on 

October 7, 2016, with the public 

comment period commencing on that 

day and ending on November 6, 2016. 

Illinois received no request for a public 

hearing. Illinois received one public 

comment during the public comment 

period. The state provided a response to 

the comment, regarding the Illinois 

regional haze report. 

EPA finds that Illinois has addressed 

the applicable requirements in 

§ 51.308(i) regarding FLM consultation. 

III. What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is approving the regional haze 

progress report submitted on February 

1, 2017, as a revision to the Illinois SIP. 

Illinois has satisfied the progress report 

requirements of 40 CFR 51.308(g). EPA 

also finds that Illinois has met the 40 

CFR 51.308(h) requirements for a 

determination of the adequacy of its 

regional haze plan with its negative 

declaration also submitted on February 

1, 2017. 

We are publishing this action without 

prior proposal because we view this as 

a noncontroversial amendment and 

anticipate no adverse comments. 

However, in the proposed rules section 

of this Federal Register publication, we 

are publishing a separate document that 

will serve as the proposal to approve the 

state plan if relevant adverse written 

comments are filed. This rule will be 

effective December 18, 2017 without 

further notice unless we receive relevant 

adverse written comments by November 

17, 2017. If we receive such comments, 

we will withdraw this action before the 

effective date by publishing a 

subsequent document that will 

withdraw the final action. All public 

comments received will then be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on the proposed action. EPA will 

not institute a second comment period. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

on this action should do so at this time. 

Please note that if EPA receives adverse 

comment on an amendment, paragraph, 

or section of this rule and if that 

provision may be severed from the 

remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt 

as final those provisions of the rule that 

are not the subject of an adverse 

comment. If we do not receive any 

comments, this action will be effective 

December 18, 2017. 

IV. 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). 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by December 18, 2017. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this action for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. Parties with 

objections to this direct final rule are 

encouraged to file a comment in 

response to the parallel notice of 

proposed rulemaking for this action 

published in the proposed rules section 

of this Federal Register, rather than file 

an immediate petition for judicial 

review of this direct final rule, so that 

EPA can withdraw this direct final rule 

and address the comment in the 

proposed rulemaking. This action may 

not be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: September 28, 2017. 

Robert A. Kaplan, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

■ 2. In § 52.720, the table in paragraph 

(e) is amended by adding an entry for 

‘‘Regional Haze Progress Report’’ 


ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 18, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 48435 

immediately following the entry for 

‘‘Regional haze plan’’ to read as follows: 

§ 52.720 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED ILLINOIS NONREGULATORY AND QUASI-REGULATORY PROVISIONS

Name of SIP provision 

Applicable 

geographic or 

nonattainment 

area 

State submittal 

date EPA approval date Comments 

*******

Regional Haze Progress Report .................. Statewide .......... 02/01/17 10/18/17, [Insert Federal Register citation] 

* * * * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2017–22502 Filed 10–17–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2016–0058; FRL–9969–61– 

Region 5] 

Air Plan Approval; Michigan; Regional 

Haze Progress Report 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is approving the 

Michigan regional haze progress report 

under the Clean Air Act (CAA) as a 

revision to the Michigan State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). Michigan 

has satisfied the progress report 

requirements of the Regional Haze Rule. 

Michigan has also met the requirements 

for a determination of the adequacy of 

its regional haze plan with its negative 

declaration submitted with the progress 

report. 

DATES: This direct final rule will be 

effective December 18, 2017, unless EPA 

receives adverse comments by 

November 17, 2017. If relevant adverse 

comments are received, EPA will 

publish a timely withdrawal of the 

direct final rule in the Federal Register 

informing the public that the rule will 

not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2016–0058 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: 

Gilberto Alvarez, Environmental 

Scientist, Attainment Planning and 

Maintenance Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West 

Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 

60604, (312) 886–6143, 

alvarez.gilberto@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. Requirements for the Regional Haze 

Progress Reports and Adequacy of 

Determinations 

III. What is EPA’s analysis? 

IV. What action is EPA taking? 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

States are required to submit a 

progress report every five years that 

evaluates progress towards the 

Reasonable Progress Goals (RPGs) for 

each mandatory Class I Federal area 

within the State and in each mandatory 

Class I Federal area outside the State 

which may be affected by emissions 

from within the State. See 40 CFR 

51.308(g). States are also required to 

submit, at the same time as the progress 

report, a determination of the adequacy 

of their existing regional haze SIP. See 

40 CFR 51.308(h). The first progress 

report is due five years after the 

submittal of the initial regional haze 

SIP. 

Michigan submitted its regional haze 

plan on November 5, 2010. EPA 

approved Michigan’s regional haze plan 

into its SIP on December 3, 2012, 77 FR 

71533. 

In order to satisfy the requirements for 

Best Available Retrofit Technology 

(BART) for certain taconite ore 

processing facilities in Minnesota and 

Michigan, EPA promulgated a Federal 

Implementation Plan (taconite FIP) on 

February 6, 2013, 78 FR 8706. In 

Michigan, the taconite facility impacted 

by this FIP is the Tilden Mining 

Company. The taconite FIP was stayed 

by the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals 

on June 14, 2013. EPA subsequently 

reached a settlement agreement with 

Cliffs Natural Resources and Arcelor 

Mittal that was fully executed on April 

9, 2015. On April 12, 2016, EPA 

published a final rule that modifies the 

taconite FIP with the settlement 

agreement conditions, 81 FR 21672. 

Michigan submitted its five-year 

progress report on January 12, 2016. The 

State submitted its determination of 

adequacy with the progress report. 

There are two Class I areas in 

Michigan, Isle Royale National Park (Isle 

Royale) located on Lake Superior and 

Seney National Wildlife Refuge (Seney) 

located in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula. 

The emission reductions from several 

Federal programs contribute to visibility 

improvement in Michigan. In its 

regional haze plan, Michigan considered 

the emission reductions from the Tier 2 

Gasoline, Heavy-duty Highway Diesel, 

Non-road Diesel, and a variety of 

Maximum Achievable Control 

Technology programs. Michigan elected 

to use the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule 


ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES