Document ID: EPA-R05-OAR-2020-0369-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: Proposed approval of the Indiana SO2 revisions for Indiana Harbor Coke Company and Cokenergy LLC
Posted Date: 2021-02-11T05:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 27 (Thursday, February 11, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 9038-9039]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-02741]

[[Page 9038]]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2020-0369; FRL-10016-82-Region 5]

Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Two Revised Sulfur Dioxide Rules for 
Lake County

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
approve revisions to the Indiana sulfur dioxide (SO2) State 
Implementation Plan (SIP). The State of Indiana has requested these SIP 
revisions in order to satisfy the requirements of a Federal consent 
decree. If approved, these revisions would limit annual bypass venting 
limits in the sulfur-containing waste gas emissions from a coking and 
power generating facility in Lake County, Indiana which is owned and 
operated by Indiana Harbor Coke Company (IHCC) and Cokenergy LLC 
(Cokenergy). The revisions would also require Cokenergy to operate and 
maintain a permanent SO2 flow rate monitor and improve the 
percent control capture efficiency of the facility. The rulemaking also 
includes technical corrections and clarifications that do not have a 
substantive effect of the application of the rule.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 15, 2021.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2020-0369 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: Andrew Lee, 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) 353-7645, 
lee.andrew.c@epa.gov. The EPA Region 5 office is open from 8:30 a.m. to 
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays and 
facility closures due to COVID-19.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.

I. Background

    On July 10, 2020, the Indiana Department of Environmental 
Management (IDEM) submitted a request for revisions of the Indiana 
SO2 SIP for IHCC and Cokenergy, which operate a coking and 
power generating facility in East Chicago, Indiana. IHCC operates four 
coke oven batteries, and Cokenergy uses the coke oven gases to generate 
steam and electricity. The electricity and coke are used by the 
neighboring steel mill operated by ArcelorMittal. Under the terms of a 
consent decree entered on October 25, 2018, the two companies requested 
that Indiana revise 326 Indiana Administrative Code (IAC) 7-4.1-7 
(Cokenergy) and 326 IAC 7-4.1-8 (IHCC) to address emissions of sulfur-
containing waste gases. See United States and the State of Indiana v. 
Indiana Harbor Coke Company and Suncoke Energy, Inc. and Coke Energy, 
LLC, Civil Action No. 18-cv-35 (N.D.Ind. 2018). Indiana's adoption and 
submittal of these revised rules to EPA for approval into the SIP 
satisfy part of the consent decree's requirements.

II. Changes for the Facility

    IHCC's coke batteries produce coke as their main product. Hot coke 
oven gas is generated from heating coal in coke ovens to approximately 
2,000 [deg]F. The volatile products from the coal, produced by the high 
heat, are then combusted with oxygen to provide heat from above and gas 
flues in the bottom of the chamber collect the combustion gases and 
provide heat from below. This recycling of gases is the fuel used for 
the ovens during normal operations. Once almost all the coke oven gases 
are combusted, the gas passes from the different ovens in a battery 
into a common tunnel and passes into an afterburner which oxidizes any 
gases that are not fully combusted. The gas stream is then directed to 
one of the sixteen heat recovery steam generators (HRSGs) operated by 
Cokenergy, where this heat is used to make steam to generate 
electricity. The coke oven gas cools as it passes through the HRSG, 
allowing the gas to be routed through air pollution control devices, 
including a flue gas desulfurization (FGD) unit and a baghouse, before 
venting through the main stack. When a HRSG is offline because of 
maintenance, malfunction or process concerns, or for any other reason, 
some of the gases must be vented through the common tunnel afterburner 
to a bypass vent stack because the extreme temperature of the gases 
would damage the pollution control equipment downstream. IHCC has 
sixteen bypass vent stacks, one associated with each HRSG.
    The revised SIP decreases the amount of coke oven gas which can be 
allowed to vent to the atmosphere through the bypass vent stacks. 
Previously, the facility was permitted to vent fourteen percent (14%) 
of the coke oven waste gas through the common tunnel on an annual 
basis. Now, during normal operation of the HRSG, the revised rule 
limits venting gases out through the bypass vent stacks to a maximum of 
thirteen percent (13%) of the coke oven waste gases leaving the common 
tunnel, as determined on an annual basis. However, if Cokenergy 
undertakes HRSG ``retubing,'' as defined in 326 IAC 7-4.1-7(e), then 
venting gases out through the bypass vent stacks is allowed up to a 
maximum of fourteen percent (14%) of the coke oven waste gases leaving 
the common tunnel, as determined on an annual basis for the calendar 
year that Cokenergy undertakes the HRSG retubing. The rule requires the 
facility to verify that the fourteen percent venting limit in 326 IAC 
7-4.1-7(d)(1) is warranted by the retubing activities. If less than 
3.25% of the annual venting is due to the retubing activities, then the 
facility may only vent 13% of their annual emissions via the bypass 
vent stacks. Overall, this action would increase the control capture 
efficiency of the facility by increasing the percentage of the exhaust 
gas stream routed to control devices.
    Rule 326 IAC 7-4.1-7 retains the combined SO2 limit for 
Cokenergy's heat recovery coke carbonization waste gas stack and the 
16-bypass vent stacks operated by IHCC for a 24-hour average 
SO2 emission limit of 1,656 pounds per

[[Page 9039]]

hour. The revised rule adds a requirement that Cokenergy install, 
operate, and maintain a permanent SO2 flow rate monitor to 
continuously measure the flow rate in the heat recovery coke 
carbonization waste gas stack.
    The revised proposed rule 326 IAC 7-4.1-8 continues to require that 
IHCC comply with the following requirements: The coke ovens must 
recycle the gases emitted during the coking process in such a way that 
the recycled gases must be the only fuel source used for the ovens 
during normal operations, the gases must not be routed directly to the 
atmosphere unless they first pass through the common tunnel 
afterburner, and a maximum of 19% of the coke oven waste gases leaving 
the common tunnel may be vented to the atmosphere on a 24-hour basis. 
The sulfur dioxide limits on IHCC's coke oven battery operations in 326 
IAC 7-4.1-8(a) are unchanged. 326 IAC 7-4.1-8 includes the same new 
limitations on bypass vent stack usage as in 326 IAC 7-4.1-7, as 
discussed above. The rulemaking also includes technical corrections and 
clarifications that do not have a substantive effect of the application 
of the rules.

III. Compliance With the Clean Air Act (CAA)

    CAA section 110(l) states that SIP revisions cannot be approved if 
they interfere with applicable requirements concerning attainment and 
reasonable further progress. EPA proposes to find that this proposed 
action is consistent with CAA section 110(l) because the proposed 
changes retain and/or tighten the existing SO2 limits. EPA 
is therefore proposing to approve Indiana's revised rules 326 IAC 7-
4.1-7 and 326 IAC 7-4.1-8.

IV. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is proposing to approve Indiana's July 10, 2020 request to 
revise 326 IAC 7-4.1-7 and 326 IAC 7-4.1-8. The proposed SO2 
SIP revisions are expected to strengthen the SIP and will also fulfill 
the requirements of the Federal consent decree with Cokenergy LLC and 
IHCC.

V. Incorporation by Reference

    In this proposed rule, 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 7-4.1-7 ``Cokenergy LLC 
sulfur dioxide emission limitations'' and 326 IAC 7-4.1-8 ``Indiana 
Harbor Coke Company sulfur dioxide emission limitations'', effective on 
April 24, 2020. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these 
documents generally available through www.regulations.gov and at the 
EPA Region 5 Office (please contact the person identified in the FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more 
information).

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);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 
2017) regulatory action because it is not a significant regulatory 
action under Executive Order 12866;
     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, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Sulfur oxides.

    Dated: February 3, 2021.
Cheryl Newton,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2021-02741 Filed 2-10-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P