[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 79 (Tuesday, April 23, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30360-30361]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-08612]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OGC-2024-0179; FRL-11892-01-OGC]


Proposed Settlement Agreement, Clean Air Act Suit

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed settlement agreement; request for public 
comment.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with section 113(g) of the Clean Air Act, as 
amended (``CAA'' or ``the Act''), the Environmental Protection Agency 
(``EPA'' or ``the Agency'') is providing notice of a proposed 
settlement agreement in Cleveland-Cliffs, Inc. v. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Case No. 16-2643 (8th Cir.) (and consolidated 
cases). Petitioners Cleveland-Cliffs, Inc. (Cliffs) and Cleveland-
Cliffs Steel, LLC (Cliffs Steel) filed petitions for review in the 
United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, challenging 
final rules promulgated by EPA under the CAA related to regional haze 
best available retrofit technology determinations for taconite 
facilities in Michigan and Minnesota. The proposed settlement agreement 
would establish deadlines for EPA to take certain, specified actions.

DATES: Written comments on the proposed settlement agreement must be 
received by May 23, 2024.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OGC-2024-0179 online at https://www.regulations.gov (EPA's preferred 
method). Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket ID 
number for this action. Comments received may be posted without change 
to https://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal information 
provided. For detailed instructions on sending comments and additional 
information on the rulemaking process, see the ``Additional Information 
about Commenting on the Proposed Settlement Agreement'' heading under 
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Grubb, Office of Regional 
Counsel, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 5; telephone (312) 
886-7187; email address [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Obtaining a Copy of the Proposed Settlement Agreement

    The official public docket for this action (identified by Docket ID 
No. EPA-HQ-OGC-2024-0179) contains a copy of the proposed settlement 
agreement. The official public docket is available for public viewing 
at the Office of Environmental Information (OEI) Docket in the EPA 
Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, 
Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal 
holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 
566-1744, and the telephone number for the OEI Docket is (202) 566-
1752.
    The electronic version of the public docket for this action 
contains a copy of the proposed settlement agreement, and is available 
through https://www.regulations.gov. You may use https://www.regulations.gov to submit or view public comments, access the index 
listing of the contents of the official public docket, and access those 
documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once 
in the system, key in the appropriate docket identification number then 
select ``search.''

II. Additional Information About the Proposed Settlement Agreement

    In February 2013, EPA issued a Regional Haze (RH) Federal 
Implementation Plan (FIP) that established nitrogen oxide 
(NOx) and sulfur dioxide (SO2) best available 
retrofit technology emission limits for taconite facilities in 
Minnesota and Michigan, entitled ``Approval and Promulgation of Air 
Quality Implementation Plans; States of Minnesota and Michigan; 
Regional Haze State Implementation Plan; Federal Implementation Plan 
for Regional Haze'' at 78 FR. 8706 (February 6, 2013) (the ``Original 
FIP Rule''). In September 2013, EPA issued partial disapprovals of 
Minnesota's and Michigan's regional haze SIPs for failure to require 
BART for the taconite furnaces, entitled ``Approval and Promulgation of 
Air Quality Implementation Plans; States of Michigan and Minnesota; 
Regional Haze,'' at 78 FR 59825 (September 30, 2013) (the ``SIP 
Rule''). Petitioners Cliffs and Cliffs Steel each filed a petition for 
review challenging the SIP Rule, and those petitions for review have 
been consolidated in the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth 
Circuit under lead Case No. 13-3573. In 2016, EPA revised the Original 
FIP Rule to address administrative petitions related to EPA's actions, 
entitled ``Air Plan Approval; Minnesota and Michigan; Revision to 2013 
Taconite Federal Implementation Plan Establishing BART for Taconite 
Plants; Final Rule,'' at 81 FR 21672 (April 12, 2016) (the ``Revised 
FIP Rule''). Petitioners Cliffs and Cliffs Steel each filed a petition 
for review challenging the Revised FIP Rule, and those petitions for 
review have been consolidated in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the Eighth Circuit under lead Case No. 16-2643.
    The proposed settlement agreement, if finalized, provides a process 
for resolving all of Cliffs' and Cliffs Steel's challenges to the SIP 
Rule and the Revised FIP Rule. Under the proposed settlement agreement, 
no later than November 22, 2024, EPA would sign a proposed rulemaking 
proposing changes to the Revised FIP Rule that is substantially 
consistent with, and includes equations identical to those set forth 
in, Attachment A to the Settlement Agreement. If EPA timely signs a 
final rule that includes changes that are substantially consistent 
with, and includes equations identical to those set forth in, 
Attachment A to the Settlement Agreement, after the final rule has been 
published in the Federal Register, Cliffs and Cliffs Steel would 
promptly file an appropriate pleading for the dismissal with prejudice 
of Case Nos. 16-2643, 16-2653, 16-3446, 13-3573, 13-3575, and 14-1712, 
which will resolve the litigation.
    The proposed Settlement Agreement also includes standard language 
regarding resolution of costs and attorneys' fees, stipulation of 
extensions, lapses in appropriations, disputes in implementation, 
preservation of Agency discretion, and the CAA section 113(g) process.
    In accordance with section 113(g) of the CAA, for a period of 
thirty (30) days following the date of publication of this document, 
the Agency will accept written comments relating to the proposed 
settlement agreement. EPA or the Department of Justice may withdraw or 
withhold consent to the proposed settlement agreement if the comments 
disclose facts or considerations that indicate that such consent is

[[Page 30361]]

inappropriate, improper, inadequate, or inconsistent with the 
requirements of the Act.

III. Additional Information About Commenting on the Proposed Settlement 
Agreement

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OGC-2024-
0179, via https://www.regulations.gov. Once submitted, comments cannot 
be edited or removed from this docket. EPA may publish any comment 
received to its public docket. Do not submit to EPA's docket at https://www.regulations.gov 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, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or 
multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective 
comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. For additional information about submitting information 
identified as CBI, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document. Note that written 
comments containing CBI and submitted by mail may be delayed and 
deliveries or couriers will be received by scheduled appointment only.
    If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you 
include your name, mailing address, and an email address or other 
contact information in the body of your comment. This ensures that you 
can be identified as the submitter of the comment and allows EPA to 
contact you in case EPA cannot read your comment due to technical 
difficulties or needs further information on the substance of your 
comment. Any identifying or contact information provided in the body of 
a comment will be included as part of the comment that is placed in the 
official public docket and made available in EPA's electronic public 
docket. 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.
    Use of the https://www.regulations.gov website to submit comments 
to EPA electronically is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments. 
The electronic public docket system is an ``anonymous access'' system, 
which means EPA will not know your identity, email address, or other 
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
    Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified 
comment period. Comments received after the close of the comment period 
will be marked ``late.'' EPA is not required to consider these late 
comments.

Gautam Srinivasan,
Associate General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2024-08612 Filed 4-22-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P