Document ID: EPA-R05-OAR-2006-0002-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Direct Final Approval of Lake County, Indiana PM10 SIP Revision for ASF Keystone, Inc.
Posted Date: 2006-05-23T12:08:15Z

[Federal Register: May 23, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 99)]
[Rules and Regulations]               
[Page 29588-29590]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr23my06-9]                         

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2006-0002; FRL-8166-9]

 
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Indiana

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: EPA is approving revisions to the Indiana particulate matter 
(PM10) State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions are 
for sources at the ASF Keystone, Inc. (Keystone) coil spring 
manufacturing facility in Lake County, Indiana. On December 15, 2005, 
Indiana requested revisions that will increase the PM10 
emission limit for one unit and reduce the limits for two units. The 
changes result in a net decrease of 1.77 pounds PM10 per 
hour (lb/hr) in the allowable emissions. The emission limits for a 
fourth unit that has shut down were also removed. Indiana also 
requested removing the process weight rate limits and using lb/hr as 
the short-term emission limit. The maximum permissible PM10 
emissions will not increase after removing the process weight rate 
limits because of the net decrease in short-term emission limits.

DATES: This direct final rule will be effective July 24, 2006, unless 
EPA receives adverse comments by June 22, 2006. 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-2006-0002, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail: mooney.john@epa.gov.
     Fax: (312)886-5824.
     Mail: John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria Pollutant Section, 
Air Programs Branch, (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
     Hand Delivery: John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria Pollutant 
Section, Air Programs Branch, (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such 
deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours 
of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of 
boxed information. The Regional Office's official hours of business are 
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding Federal 
holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-
2006-0002. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you 
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov
 or e-mail. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an 

``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your 
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of 
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without 
going through http://www.regulations.gov your e-mail address will be 

automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is 
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you 
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name 
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any 
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to 
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA 
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid 
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of 
any defects or viruses. For additional instructions on submitting 
comments, go to Section I of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 
this document.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the 
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. 
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically 
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West 
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This Facility is open from 
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal 
holidays. We recommend that you telephone Matt Rau, Environmental 
Engineer, at (312) 886-6524 before visiting the Region 5 office.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information 
section is arranged as follows:

I. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?
II. What Is EPA Approving?
III. What Is EPA's Analysis of the Supporting Materials?
IV. What are the Environmental Effects of These Actions?
V. What Action is EPA Taking Today?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews.

I. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    A. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through 
http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of 

the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk 
or CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM 
as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the 
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one 
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as 
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information 
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. 
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with 
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    B. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments, 
remember to:
     Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other 
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and 
page number).
     Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives 
and substitute language for your requested changes.
     Describe any assumptions and provide any technical 
information and/or data that you used.
     If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how 
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be 
reproduced.
     Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and 
suggest alternatives.

[[Page 29589]]

     Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the 
use of profanity or personal threats.
     Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period 
deadline identified.

II. What Is EPA Approving?

    EPA is approving PM10 emission limit revisions for four 
units at the Keystone facility. The limit on the small coil 
manufacturing unit increases from 0.02 to 1.05 lb/hr. The limits on the 
medium and large coil lines are cut in half. The medium coil unit limit 
drops from 2.10 to 1.05 lb/hr. The limit on the large coil unit is 
reduced from 3.50 to 1.75 lb/hr. A net PM10 limit decrease 
of 1.77 lb/hr results from these revisions. The limit on the 
miscellaneous coil manufacturing unit, 1.05 lb/hr, is also removed 
because the unit no longer operates. The revised PM10 
emission limits better reflect the actual emissions from these units. 
EPA is also removing the process weight rate emission limits for the 
four units. The small coil unit limit of 0.014 lb/T and the limits of 
0.700 lb/T for the other three units are being deleted.

III. What Is EPA's Analysis of the Supporting Materials?

    The emission limit revisions to the coil manufacturing units can be 
modeled as volume sources. Each unit is controlled by an electrostatic 
precipitator that exhausts inside the plant. Rooftop vents release the 
air from inside the plant to the outside. Indiana stated that no 
modeling is needed. EPA agrees with Indiana because the PM10 
emissions from all units combine in Keystone's building prior to being 
released into the ambient air. The net limit reduction means the 
maximum impact will not increase.
    Indiana also provided the maximum production rates for the coil 
manufacturing units. The peak rate for the small coil line is 1.5 tons 
per hour (T/hr). The maximum production rate is 3 T/hr for the medium 
coil line and 5 T/hr for the large coil line. The short-term emission 
limits being replaced equal the process weight rate limit at these 
maximum production rates. Thus, Keystone would not be able to emit up 
to the new limit of 1.05 lb/hr on the small coil manufacturing unit 
because the process weight rate limit would restrict emissions to only 
0.02 lb/hr. The lower short-term limits on medium and large coil 
manufacturing units are more restrictive than the process weight rate 
limits for these two units. The net decrease in short-term 
PM10 emission limits will reduce the overall maximum 
emissions from this facility.
    Indiana held public hearings on June 1, 2005 and on August 3, 2005. 
No public comments were received during the comment periods including 
at the public hearings.

IV. What Are the Environmental Effects of These Actions?

    Scientists have correlated exposure to PM10 with 
increased hospitalizations for asthma attacks, worsening of lung 
disease, chronic bronchitis, and heart damage. Particulate exposure can 
increase respiratory symptoms such as irritation of the airways, 
coughing, and difficulty breathing. In addition to these human health 
effects, particulate matter is the main cause of haze which decreases 
visibility. Particulate eventually settles on land or water which can 
acidify lakes, deplete the nutrients in soil, and damage sensitive 
forests and agricultural crops. No adverse impact from PM10 
emissions are anticipated from the Keystone revisions because of a net 
decrease in PM10 emission limits.

V. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?

    EPA is approving revisions to the PM10 limits for 
sources at a Lake County, Indiana steel coil manufacturer. The 
revisions result in a net reduction in the PM10 emission 
limits. The limit for the small coil manufacturing unit is increased 
while the limits for the medium and large coil units are decreased. The 
emission limits for the miscellaneous coil manufacturing are removed 
because the unit was eliminated. EPA also removed the process weight 
rate emission limits for all four units. The PM10 emissions 
from the units are vented inside the Keystone plant. No adverse impact 
on ambient air is expected because the revisions cause a net reduction 
in PM10 emission limits.
    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 July 24, 2006 
without further notice unless we receive relevant adverse written 
comments by June 22, 2006. 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. The EPA will not institute a second 
comment period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action 
should do so at this time. If we do not receive any comments, this 
action will be effective July 24, 2006.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Executive Order 12866; Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not 
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget.

Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use

    Because it is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under 
Executive Order 12866 or a ``significant energy action,'' this action 
is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning 
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or 
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001).

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    This action merely approves state law as meeting Federal 
requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those 
imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that 
this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 
601 et seq.).

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Because this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state 
law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that 
required by state law, it 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).

Executive Order 13175 Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal 
Governments

    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will 
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on 
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or 
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (59 
FR 22951, November 9, 2000).

Executive Order 13132 Federalism

    This action also does not have Federalism implications because it 
does

[[Page 29590]]

not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship 
between the national government and the states, or on the distribution 
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, 
as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). 
This action merely approves a state rule implementing a federal 
standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of 
power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act.

Executive Order 13045 Protection of Children From Environmental Health 
and Safety Risks

    This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection 
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.

National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In 
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the 
state to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP 
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements 
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule does not impose an information collection burden under 
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 
et seq.).

Congressional Review Act

    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 rule 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 Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by July 24, 2006. Filing a 
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule 
does not affect the finality of this rule 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. 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, Particulate matter.

    Dated: April 20, 2006.
Norman Niedergang,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

0
For the reasons stated in the preamble, part 52, chapter I, of title 40 
of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart P--Indiana

0
2. Section 52.770 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(175) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  52.770  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (175) On December 15, 2005, Indiana submitted revised particulate 
matter (PM10) regulations for ASF Keystone, Inc. in Lake 
County. The emission limit for the small coil manufacturing unit is 
increased while the limits for the medium and large coil manufacturing 
units are decreased. The result of these revisions is a net decrease in 
PM10 emission limits. The emission limits for miscellaneous 
coil manufacturing are removed because the unit no longer operates. EPA 
also removed the process weight rate emission limits for the four 
units.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) Indiana Administrative Code Title 326: Air Pollution Control 
Board, Article 6.8: Particulate Matter Limitations for Lake County, 
Rule 2: Lake County: PM10 Emission Requirements, Section 4: 
ASF Keystone, Inc.-Hammond. Filed with the Secretary of State on 
October 20, 2005 and effective November 19, 2005. Published in 29 
Indiana Register 794 on December 1, 2005.

[FR Doc. 06-4765 Filed 5-22-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P