Rule2025-12526
Air Plan Approval; Ohio; Regional Haze Plan for the Second Implementation Period
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
July 8, 2025
Effective
August 7, 2025
Issuing agencies
Environmental Protection Agency
Abstract
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving the Regional Haze State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio or Ohio EPA) on July 30, 2021, as supplemented on August 6, 2024, and clarified by Ohio on June 16, 2025, as satisfying applicable requirements under the Clean Air Act (CAA) and EPA's Regional Haze Rule for the program's second implementation period. Together, Ohio's 2021 SIP submission, 2024 SIP supplement, and 2025 clarification address the requirement that States must periodically revise their long-term strategies for making reasonable progress towards the national goal of preventing any future, and remedying any existing, anthropogenic impairment of visibility, including regional haze, in mandatory Class I Federal areas. Ohio's complete SIP submission also addresses other applicable requirements for the second implementation period of the Regional Haze Program. EPA is taking this action pursuant to sections 110 and 169A of the CAA.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 90 Issue 128 (Tuesday, July 8, 2025)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 128 (Tuesday, July 8, 2025)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 29993-29997]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2025-12526]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R05-OAR-2021-0544; FRL-12175-02-R5]
Air Plan Approval; Ohio; Regional Haze Plan for the Second
Implementation Period
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving the
Regional Haze State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio or Ohio EPA) on July 30,
2021, as supplemented on August 6, 2024, and clarified by Ohio on June
16, 2025, as satisfying applicable requirements under the Clean Air Act
(CAA) and EPA's Regional Haze Rule for the program's second
implementation period. Together, Ohio's 2021 SIP submission, 2024 SIP
supplement, and 2025 clarification address the requirement that States
must periodically revise their long-term strategies for making
reasonable progress towards the national goal of preventing any future,
and remedying any existing, anthropogenic impairment of visibility,
including regional haze, in mandatory Class I Federal areas. Ohio's
complete SIP submission also addresses other applicable requirements
for the second implementation period of the Regional Haze Program. EPA
is taking this action pursuant to sections 110 and 169A of the CAA.
DATES: This final rule is effective on August 7, 2025.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R05-OAR-2021-0544. All documents in the docket are listed on
the <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a> website. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business
Information (CBI), Proprietary Business Information (PBI), or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly
available docket materials are available either through
<a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a> or 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 Federal holidays. We recommend that
you telephone Alisa Liu, Environmental Engineer, at (312) 353-3193
before visiting the Region 5 office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alisa Liu, Air and Radiation Division
(AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-3193, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#bdd1d4c893dcd1d4cedcfdd8cddc93dad2cb"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="0965607c276865607a68496c7968276e667f">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.
I. Background
On July 30, 2021, Ohio EPA submitted a revision to its SIP to
address regional haze for the second implementation period,
supplemented it on August 6, 2024, and clarified it on June 16,
2025.\1\ Ohio EPA made this SIP submission to satisfy the requirements
of the CAA's Regional Haze Program \2\ pursuant to CAA sections 169A
and 169B and 40 CFR 51.308.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Ohio EPA's letter dated June 16, 2025, is included in the
docket for this rulemaking.
\2\ The Regional Haze Rule is codified at 40 CFR 51.308.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On August 30, 2024, EPA proposed to approve Ohio's Regional Haze
SIP revision. A detailed analysis of Ohio's plan and EPA's evaluation
are contained in the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), dated August
30, 2024 (89 FR 71124), and will not be restated here. In the NPRM, EPA
proposed to find that Ohio's Regional Haze SIP submission as
supplemented satisfied the regional haze requirements for the second
implementation period contained in 40 CFR 51.308(f), including the
incorporation by reference of Director's Final Findings and Orders
(DFFOs) with specific emissions rates in Ohio's long-term strategy into
the SIP at 40 CFR 52.1870(d) at three power plants (Cardinal Power
Plant, General James M. Gavin Power Plant, and Ohio Valley Electric
Corp.--Kyger Creek Station) and retirements by 2028 at two power plants
(Miami Fort Power Station and Zimmer Power Station).
On June 16, 2025, Ohio clarified in a letter that Zimmer Power
Station Unit B006 retired in 2022 and that Miami Fort Power Station is
considering converting Units B015 and B016 to natural gas in lieu of
permanently shutting down. As such, Ohio stated that the DFFOs for
these two facilities are not necessary for reasonable progress and are
no longer part of its SIP submittal. Ohio EPA confirmed the past
retirement of Zimmer Power Station Unit B006 is already permanent and
federally enforceable.\3\ Additionally, Ohio EPA also concluded that
the DFFO for Miami Fort Power Station is not necessary for reasonable
progress. Although not relied upon for reasonable progress, Ohio EPA
affirms that Miami Fort Power Station continues to be required through
Ohio EPA-issued Orders at the State level to either permanently shut
down B015 and B016 or convert to natural gas in 2028.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ For Zimmer Power Station, the Retired Unit Exemption form,
title V Permit P0135965, and list of retired generators from the
Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland Interconnection (PJM) Regional
Transmission Organization (RTO) documenting the facility's
retirement are included in the docket. Permit P0135965 is also
publicly available at <a href="https://edocpub.epa.ohio.gov/publicportal/edochome.aspx">https://edocpub.epa.ohio.gov/publicportal/edochome.aspx</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Public Comment Process
The public comment period on EPA's proposed rule opened August 30,
2024, was extended until October 15, 2024, was reopened on a limited
basis on February 28, 2025, and finally closed on March 17, 2025. 89 FR
71124, August 30, 2024; 89 FR 76442, September 18, 2024; 90 FR 10876,
February 28, 2025. During this period, EPA received relevant comments
from the following individuals, businesses, agencies, and
organizations: Buckeye Power, Inc. and Ohio Valley Electric Corporation
[[Page 29994]]
(Comment 1); Anonymous (Comment 2); Anonymous (Comment 3); U.S. Forest
Service (USFS) (Comment 4); National Park Service (NPS) (Comment 5);
Coalition to Protect America's National Parks (Comment 6); Black
Environmental Leaders, Coalition to Protect America's National Parks,
Junction Coalition, National Parks Conservation Association, Northeast
Ohio Black Health Coalition, Ohio Environmental Council, and Sierra
Club (Environmental Groups) (Comment 7); and National Parks
Conservation Association, Sierra Club, Coalition to Protect America's
National Parks, Ohio Environmental Council (Conservation Groups)
(Comments 8-21); and Buckeye Power, Inc. and Ohio Valley Electric
Corporation (Comment 22).
III. Summary of Public Comments and EPA's Responses
All comments received are included in the rulemaking docket for
this action. In the June 17, 2025, Response to Comments document, which
is included in the docket for this rulemaking, EPA provides full
detailed responses to all significant comments received that further
explain the basis for our final action.
EPA received comments on the NPRM addressing topics including, but
not limited to, new emission limits, docket organization, cost
considerations, visibility, enforceability of retirements,
enforceability of permit conditions, existing effective controls, four-
factor analyses,\4\ CAA considerations, Best Available Retrofit
Technology (BART), enforceability of Ohio's administrative orders,
State-to-State consultations, Federal Land Manager (FLM) consultation,
environmental justice, regional planning organization work products,
incorporation by reference, Federal Implementation Plan (FIP)
considerations, and renewable and nuclear energy options. The comments,
while partially summarized below, are available in full in the docket
for this rulemaking and are fully addressed in the June 17, 2025,
Response to Comments document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Under CAA 169A(g)(1), the four statutory factors are the
costs of compliance, the time necessary for compliance, the energy
and non-air quality environmental impacts of compliance, and the
remaining useful life of any potentially affected sources. See also
40 CFR 51.308(f)(2)(i). An evaluation of potential control options
for sources of visibility impairing pollutants based on applying the
four statutory factors in CAA section 169A(g)(1) is referred to as a
``four-factor'' analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments received from Buckeye Power Inc., which operates Cardinal
Power Plant, and Ohio Valley Electric Corporation, which operates Kyger
Creek Station, were supportive of the proposed rulemaking and of the
new emission limits for those facilities that Ohio EPA effectuated
through DFFOs.
USFS expressed concern regarding EPA's consideration of costs/sales
ratios as well as the comparison of emission reductions from already
implemented shutdowns and fuel conversions to potential additional
emission reductions.
NPS provided alternative considerations regarding the four-factor
analyses and effective controls demonstrations submitted by Ohio for
General James M. Gavin Power Plant, Cardinal Power Plant, Ohio Valley
Electric Corp.--Kyger Creek Station, and Carmeuse Lime, Inc.--Maple
Grove Operations. NPS also asserted that, at times, Ohio's
implementation of the FLM consultation process did not follow the
requirements of 40 CFR 51.308(i)(2) and (3).
The Coalition to Protect America's National Parks raised concerns
about the number of industrial facilities in Ohio, their
disproportionate impact on communities of color and low income, and
their impact on Ohio's residents in general.
The Environmental Groups raised concerns about the impact of
emissions from General James M. Gavin Power Plant on public health and
regional haze in certain mandatory Class I Federal areas.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Areas statutorily designated as mandatory Class I Federal
areas consist of national parks exceeding 6,000 acres, wilderness
areas and national memorial parks exceeding 5,000 acres, and all
international parks that were in existence on August 7, 1977. CAA
162(a). There are 156 mandatory Class I areas. The list of areas to
which the requirements of the visibility protection program apply is
in 40 CFR part 81, subpart D. Class I Federal areas are hereinafter
referred to as ``Class I areas''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Conservation Groups commented on benefits of improved
visibility at Class I areas that would also improve public health. The
Conservation Groups questioned the enforceability of permanent
shutdowns, and whether the commitments to shut down 15 units by 2028
was as an adequate reason not to require new emission controls on these
units. The Conservation Groups also questioned the enforceability of
permit conditions requiring certain facilities to convert to natural
gas and limited use. By forgoing four-factor analyses for Ohio Valley
Electric Corp.--Kyger Creek Station, Cardinal Power Plant, and
FirstEnergy Generation LLC--Bay Shore Plant, the Conservation Groups
commented that Ohio failed to show that these facilities were
effectively controlled and that cost-effective controls were not likely
available. For the four-factor analyses that Ohio provided for General
James M. Gavin Power Plant and Carmeuse Lime, Inc.--Maple Grove
Operations, the Conservation Groups asserted that EPA's proposed
approval of Ohio's conclusions was arbitrary and capricious and not
reasonable considering the requirements of the CAA. For both
facilities, the Conservation Groups commented on Ohio's consideration
of visibility as a fifth factor. As an overarching concern, the
Conservation Groups asserted that EPA could not exempt sources from
Best Available Retrofit Technology requirements in the second
implementation period. Regarding Ohio's DFFOs, the Conservation Groups
questioned whether the requirements are practically enforceable,
whether the terms were permanent, and whether they provide for
monitoring, reporting and recordkeeping to provide adequate reporting
for citizen enforcement.
The Conservation Groups also raised concerns about Ohio's
implementation of the State-to-State consultation process, referring to
requests from the Mid-Atlantic/Northeast Visibility Union (MANE-VU) and
the Visibility Improvement State and Tribal Association of the
Southeast (VISTAS) for four-factor analyses, low sulfur fuel standards,
and lower emission limits. As to the FLM consultation process, the
Conservation Groups reiterated comments provided by the FLMs that
addressed Ohio's public notice process, reasons used to forgo four-
factor analyses, assumptions used in cost calculations, evaluation of
certain control measures, and consideration of visibility as a fifth
factor. Environmental justice was also expressed as an area of concern
by the Conservation Groups. The Conservation Groups commented that the
public was not given an opportunity to review or comment on the work
products of the Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium (LADCO) during
Ohio's development of their SIP revision. As to EPA's NPRM, the
Conservation Groups commented that EPA's proposed action was not clear
as to how the DFFOs were to be incorporated by reference into Ohio's
SIP. Overall, the Conservation Groups urged EPA to disapprove Ohio's
SIP revision and issue a FIP as soon as possible.
Regarding the reopening of the public comment period to notify the
public that three permits were added to the docket, Buckeye Power, Inc.
and Ohio Valley Electric Corporation provided additional comments,
noting that the reopening of the comment period was unexpected and
unnecessary, asserting that the presence of the permits
[[Page 29995]]
themselves in the docket has no impact on the SIP.
As discussed in further detail in our proposed rule, this rule, the
June 17, 2025, Response to Comments document, and the brief summary of
those responses below, EPA finds that Ohio submitted a Regional Haze
SIP revision that meets all the regional haze requirements for the
second implementation period.
EPA concludes that Ohio's determinations of the measures necessary
for reasonable progress were based on a reasonable consideration of the
four statutory factors as discussed in the NPRM. Ohio thoroughly
examined sources for existing effective controls and for potential
additional emission controls through four-factor analyses. While Ohio
provided information on control costs/sales ratios and visibility, Ohio
did not use this information to reject potential additional emission
controls. Ohio also did not reject emission controls merely because of
other ongoing emission reductions. Rather, in consideration of the four
statutory factors, Ohio found that potential additional controls were
not cost-effective.
While some commenters suggested that Ohio should consider certain
add-on control measures as cost-effective based on thresholds
established by other States, the preamble to the Regional Haze Rule
speaks to the flexibility afforded to States when considering the cost
of compliance factor. See, e.g., 82 FR 3078, 3088, January 10, 2017. As
such, EPA notes that the cost effectiveness threshold in one State
should not necessarily be determinative of whether controls are cost-
effective in another State.
In all cases, Ohio appropriately considered the four statutory
factors and carefully weighed the potential emission controls and the
large statewide reductions achieved during the second implementation
period before appropriately deciding on whether further controls were
necessary to make reasonable progress or needed in the State's long-
term strategy. Ohio documented that 27 of the 38 coal-fired units above
Ohio's threshold for source selection have either already permanently
shut down, converted to limited use, converted to natural gas, or
accepted enforceable limits. For the units that have already been
retired, the record demonstrates that the shutdowns are federally
enforceable and permanent. Based on 2016 emissions as shown in Table 4
of Ohio's SIP submittal, the shutdowns and conversions that have
already taken place during the second implementation period represent
statewide reductions of more than 37,000 tons per year sulfur dioxide
(SO<INF>2</INF>) and 28,000 tons per year nitrogen oxides
(NO<INF>X</INF>), and the conversions to natural gas add another 15,000
tons per year of SO<INF>2</INF> reductions to that total.
For 2028 projections of emissions and visibility impairment, Ohio's
technical demonstrations relied upon the thorough analysis and modeling
provided by LADCO, which were subject to public notice and comment at
both the State and Federal level. Based on this modeling, EPA notes
that emissions from Ohio are not reasonably anticipated to cause or
contribute to visibility impairment in any Class I areas that are above
the 2028 uniform rate of progress.<SUP>6 7</SUP> Section III.2. and
appendix A of Ohio's SIP submission provide references to LADCO's
technical support document and supporting materials. Additionally, in
the 2028 LADCO modeling, Miami Fort Power Station was assumed to be
operating similar to past operation in that it was not retired in the
2028 modeling scenarios. Therefore, the modeling shows that all Class I
areas affected by Ohio will be below their 2028 uniform rate of
progress, whether or not Miami Fort Power Station continues to operate
on coal. If Miami Fort Power Station does shut down or convert B015 and
B016 to natural gas, then even greater emission reductions will be
realized than were modeled. Based on that information, Ohio EPA
concluded, and EPA agrees, that considering the numerous other on-the-
books and on-the-way controls identified in the State's long-term
strategy, removing the DFFO for Miami Fort Power Station from the SIP
submission will not impact Ohio's ability to make reasonable progress
at the Class I areas affected by emissions from Ohio. In line with
recent proposals from EPA,\8\ the Agency has determined that where
visibility is below the uniform rate of progress in 2028 and the State
has considered the four statutory factors, the State has presumptively
demonstrated reasonable progress for the second implementation period
for that Class I area, as Ohio has.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 40 CFR 51. 308(f)(3)(ii). See 89 FR 71124; 71146-71147,
August 30, 2024.
\7\ The uniform rate of progress is used as a tracking metric to
help States assess the amount of progress they are making towards
the national visibility goal over time in each Class I area. See 89
FR 71124; 71125.
\8\ See ``Air Plan Approval; West Virginia; Regional Haze State
Implementation Plan for the Second Implementation Period,'' 90 FR
16478, 16483-16484 (April 18, 2025). See also ``Air Plan Approval;
South Dakota; Regional Haze Plan for the Second Implementation
Period,'' 90 FR 20425, 20434 (May 14, 2025) and ``Air Plan Approval;
Vermont; Regional Haze State Implementation Plan for the Second
Implementation Period,'' 90 FR 22033, 22043 (May 23, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ohio documented quantifiable and meaningful reductions in
SO<INF>2</INF> and NO<INF>X</INF> emissions and ensured improvements in
actual emission rates would continue to make reasonable progress by
effectuating DFFOs for Cardinal Power Plant, General James M. Gavin
Power Plant, and Ohio Valley Electric Corp.--Kyger Creek Station.
Although a commenter questioned the practical enforceability of the
DFFOs, EPA notes that the DFFOs effectively provide that specific
monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping requirements are provided for
and must be incorporated into the facilities' title V operating
permits, thereby affording adequate reporting for enforcement.
Given these facts and others discussed more fully in the NPRM and
June 17, 2025, Response to Comments document, EPA agrees that it was
reasonable for Ohio to conclude that existing Federally enforceable
measures as well as controls included in the DFFOs constitute
reasonable progress for the State's long-term strategy in the second
implementation period.
Although one comment asserted that EPA did not provide an
independent evaluation of Ohio's four-factor analyses for General James
M. Gavin Power Plant and Carmeuse Lime, Inc.--Maple Grove Operations
and, as such, that EPA's proposed approval of Ohio's SIP revisions was
arbitrary and capricious, EPA carefully evaluated Ohio's SIP revisions
along with the associated record in the docket and documented the
information the State relied upon for transparency to the public.
As to comments regarding Ohio's participation in the FLM
consultation process and the State-to-State consultation process, EPA
fully considered Ohio's public notices that documented the FLMs'
recommendations, MANE-VU's and VISTAS' requests, and Ohio's Responses
in proposing to find that Ohio's FLM and State-to-State consultation
process satisfied the requirements of 40 CFR 51.308(i)(2) and (3) and
51.308(f)(2)(ii), respectively.
While some comments raised concerns regarding public health, park
visitation, and local economies, EPA notes that these are not
considerations within the Regional Haze Program. With respect to public
health concerns in particular, the primary national ambient air quality
standards are among the standards that provide public health
protection, including protection for the health of sensitive
populations such as asthmatics, children, and the elderly.
[[Page 29996]]
Although some commenters urged EPA to disapprove Ohio's SIP
revision and issue a FIP as soon as possible, as stated throughout our
proposed action, this action, and the June 17, 2025, Response to
Comments document, EPA has determined that Ohio reasonably considered
the statutory and regulatory requirements and appropriately determined
what measures are necessary for reasonable progress for the second
implementation period and, therefore, a FIP is not necessary. For
additional justification and rationale for this final action, please
see the June 17, 2025, Response to Comments document located in the
docket.
EPA is finalizing its approval of Ohio's July 30, 2021, Regional
Haze SIP submission as supplemented on August 6, 2024, for the second
planning period as proposed, with the exception of the DFFOs for Miami
Fort and Zimmer Power Stations, after considering all comments received
as addressed in detail in the June 17, 2025, Response to Comments
document as well as Ohio's June 16, 2025, letter provided during EPA's
review process.
IV. Final Action
EPA is approving the Regional Haze SIP revision submitted by Ohio
EPA on July 30, 2021, supplemented on August 6, 2024, and clarified on
June 16, 2025, as satisfying the regional haze requirements for the
second implementation period contained in 40 CFR 51.308(f). EPA is
finalizing the incorporation by reference into Ohio's SIP at 40 CFR
52.1870(d) the following Ohio EPA DFFOs for Cardinal Power Plant, B001,
B002, and B009 (State effective date: July 26, 2024); Ohio Valley
Electric Corp.--Kyger Creek, B001, B002, B003, B004, and B005 (State
effective date: July 26, 2024); and General James M. Gavin Power Plant,
B003 and B004 (State effective date: July 26, 2024).
V. Incorporation by Reference.
In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the Ohio
EPA's DFFOs described in section IV of this preamble and set forth in
the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 below. EPA has made, and will continue
to make, these documents generally available through
<a href="http://www.regulations.gov">www.regulations.gov</a>, 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). Therefore, these materials have
been approved by EPA for inclusion in the SIP, have been incorporated
by reference by EPA into that plan, are fully federally enforceable
under sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of the effective date of the
final rulemaking of EPA's approval, and will be incorporated by
reference in the next update to the SIP compilation.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
<bullet> Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
<bullet> Is not subject to Executive Order 14192 (90 FR 9065,
February 6, 2025) because SIP actions are exempt from review under
Executive Order 12866;
<bullet> Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
<bullet> 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.);
<bullet> 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);
<bullet> Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
<bullet> Is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997) because it approves a State program;
<bullet> Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); and
<bullet> 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.
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).
This action is subject to the Congressional Review Act, and EPA
will submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United States. 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 September 8, 2025. 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. 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, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: June 24, 2025.
Cheryl Newton,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40 CFR part 52 is
amended as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
0
2. In Sec. 52.1870:
0
a. Amend the table in paragraph (d) by:
0
i. Adding an entry for ``Cardinal Power Plant'' after the entry for
``AK Steel Corporation''.
0
ii. Adding an entry for ``General James M. Gavin Power Plant'' after
the entry for ``Forest City Technologies, Plant 4''.
0
iii. Adding an entry for ``Ohio Valley Electric Corp.--Kyger Creek''
after the entry for ``Morgan Adhesives Co''.
0
b. Amend the table in paragraph (e) under ``Visibility Protection'' by
adding an entry for ``Regional Haze Plan for the
[[Page 29997]]
Second Implementation Period'' after the entry for ``Regional Haze
Five-Year Progress Report''.
The additions read as follows:
Sec. 52.1870 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
EPA-Approved Ohio Source-Specific Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ohio effective EPA approval
Name of source Number date date Comments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Cardinal Power Plant.......... DFFO........................ 7/26/2024 7/8/2025, 90 FR Regional haze
[insert Federal emission limit.
Register page
where the
document
begins].
* * * * * * *
General James M. Gavin Power DFFO........................ 7/26/2024 7/8/2025, 90 FR Regional haze
Plant. [insert Federal emission limit.
Register page
where the
document
begins].
* * * * * * *
Ohio Valley Electric Corp.-- DFFO........................ 7/26/2024 7/8/2025, 90 FR Regional haze
Kyger Creek Station. [insert Federal emission
Register page limits.
where the
document
begins].
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(e) * * *
EPA-Approved Ohio Nonregulatory and Quasi-Regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable geographic
Title or nonattainment area State date EPA approval Comments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Visibility Protection
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Regional Haze Plan for the Statewide............ 7/30/2021, 8/6/ 7/8/2025, 90 FR Full Approval.
Second Implementation Period. 2024, and 6/16/ [insert Federal
2025. Register page
where the
document
begins].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2025-12526 Filed 7-7-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on July 8, 2025.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.