80 FR 45631 - Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Iowa; Regional Haze Five-Year Progress Report State Implementation Plan
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 147 (July 31, 2015)
Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 147 (July 31, 2015)
| Page Range | 45631-45635 | |
| FR Document | 2015-18826 |
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 147 (Friday, July 31, 2015)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 45631-45635] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2015-18826] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R07-OAR-2014-0365; FRL-9931-72-Region 7] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Iowa; Regional Haze Five-Year Progress Report State Implementation Plan AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule; supplemental. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is issuing a supplement to its proposed approval of a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Iowa (Iowa) through the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR). Iowa's SIP revision addresses requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and EPA's rules that require states to submit periodic reports describing progress toward reasonable progress goals established for regional haze and a determination of the adequacy of the state's existing implementation plan addressing regional haze (region haze SIP). EPA's proposed approval of Iowa's periodic report on progress toward reasonable progress goals and determination of adequacy of the state's regional haze SIP published in the Federal Register on July 3, 2014. This supplemental proposal addresses the potential effects on our proposed approval from the April 29, 2014, decision of the United States Supreme Court (Supreme Court) remanding to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) EPA's Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) for further proceedings and the D.C. Circuit's decision to lift the stay of CSAPR. DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 31, 2015. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA- R07-OAR-2014-0365, by one of the following methods: 1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. 2. Email: harper.jodi@epa.gov. 3. Mail or Hand Delivery: Jodi Harper, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219. Hand deliveries are only accepted during normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR- 2015-0365. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 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 www.regulations.gov or email. 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 email comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email 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. Docket. All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the 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 www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219. EPA requests that you contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The interested persons wanting to examine these documents should make an appointment with the office at least 24 hours in advance. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jodi Harper, (913) 551-7483, or by email at harper.jodi@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,'' or ``our'' refer to EPA. [[Page 45632]] I. Background EPA previously proposed to approve a SIP revision by Iowa reporting on progress made in the first implementation period toward meeting the reasonable progress goals for Class I areas outside Iowa that are affected by emissions from Iowa's sources.\1\ 79 FR 37976 (July 3, 2014). In its submittal, Iowa determined its existing regional haze SIP requires no substantive revision to achieve the established regional haze visibility improvement and emissions reduction goals for 2018. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ Iowa does not have any Class I areas within its borders. Iowa states in the progress report SIP that Iowa sources were identified, through an area of influence modeling analysis based on back trajectories, as potentially impacting four Class I areas in two nearby states: Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness and Voyagers National Park in Minnesota, and Isle Royale National Park and Seney Wilderness Area in Michigan. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- States are required to submit a progress report in the form of a SIP revision every five years that evaluates progress toward the reasonable progress goals for each mandatory Class I area within the state and in each mandatory Class I area outside the state which may be affected by emissions from within the state. See 40 CFR 51.308(g). In addition, the provisions under 40 CFR 51.308(h) require states to submit, at the same time as the 40 CFR 51.308(g) progress report, a determination of the adequacy of the state's existing regional haze SIP. The first progress report SIP revision is due five years after submittal of the initial regional haze SIP. IDNR submitted its regional haze SIP on March 25, 2008, and submitted its progress report SIP revision on July 16, 2013. EPA proposed to find that the progress report SIP revision satisfied the requirements of 40 CFR 51.308(g) and (h) in a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) published in 2014. 79 FR 37976. This action supplements EPA's prior NPR by more fully explaining and soliciting comment on the basis for our proposed approval. II. Summary of Iowa's Progress Report SIP Revision and the NPR On July 16, 2013, Iowa submitted a SIP revision describing the progress made toward the RPGs of Class I areas outside Iowa that are affected by emissions from Iowa's sources in accordance with requirements in the Regional Haze Rule.\2\ This progress report SIP also included an assessment of whether Iowa's existing regional haze SIP is sufficient to allow nearby states with Class I areas to achieve the reasonable progress goals by the end of the first planning period. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\ EPA promulgated a rule to address regional haze on July 1, 1999 (64 FR 35713) known as the Regional Haze Rule. The Regional Haze Rule revised the existing visibility regulations to integrate into the regulation provisions addressing regional haze impairment and established a comprehensive visibility protection program for Class I areas. See 40 CFR 51.308 and 51.309. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The provisions in 40 CFR 51.308(g) require a progress report SIP to address seven elements. In the NPR, EPA proposed to approve the SIP as adequately addressing each element under 40 CFR 51.308(g). The seven elements and EPA's proposed conclusions in the NPR are briefly summarized below. The provisions in 40 CFR 51.308(g) require progress report SIPs to include a description of the status of measures in the regional haze implementation plan; a summary of the emissions reductions achieved; an assessment of the visibility conditions for each Class I area in the state; an analysis of the changes in emissions from sources and activities within the state; an assessment of any significant changes in anthropogenic emissions within or outside the state that have limited or impeded visibility improvement progress in Class I areas impacted by the state's sources; an assessment of the sufficiency of the regional haze implementation plan to enable States to meet reasonable progress goals; and a review of the state's visibility monitoring strategy. As explained in detail in the NPR, EPA proposed the Iowa's progress report SIP addressed each element and therefore satisfied the requirements under 40 CFR 51.308(g). In addition, pursuant to 40 CFR 51.308(h), states are required to submit, at the same time as the progress report SIP revision, a determination of the adequacy of their existing regional haze SIP and to take one of four possible actions based on information in the progress report. In its progress report SIP, Iowa determined that its regional haze SIP is sufficient to meet its obligations related to the reasonable progress goals for Class I areas affected by Iowa's sources. The State accordingly provided EPA with a negative declaration that further revision of the existing regional haze implementation plan was not needed at this time. See 40 CFR 51.308(h)(1). As explained in detail in the NPR, EPA proposed to determine that Iowa had adequately addressed 40 CFR 51.308(h) because the visibility data trends at the Class I areas impacted by Iowa's sources and the emissions trends of the largest emitters in Iowa of visibility-impairing pollutants both indicate that the reasonable progress goals for 2018 for these areas will be met or exceeded. Therefore, in our NPR, EPA proposed to approve Iowa's progress report SIP as meeting the requirements of 40 CFR 51.308(g) and (h). III. Impact of CAIR and CSAPR on Iowa's Progress Report Decisions by the Courts regarding EPA rules addressing the interstate transport of pollutants have had a substantial impact on EPA's review of the regional haze SIPs of many states. In 2005, EPA issued regulations allowing states to rely on the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) to meet certain requirements of the Regional Haze Rule. See 70 FR 39104 (July 6, 2005).\3\ A number of states, including Iowa, submitted regional haze SIPs consistent with these regulatory provisions. CAIR, however, was remanded to EPA in 2008, North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176, 1178 (D.C. Cir. 2008), and replaced by CSAPR.\4\ 76 FR 48208 (August 8, 2011). Implementation of CSAPR was scheduled to begin on January 1, 2012, when CSAPR would have superseded the CAIR program. However, numerous parties filed petitions for review of CSAPR, and at the end of 2011, the DC Circuit issued an order staying CSAPR pending resolution of the petitions and directing EPA to continue to administer CAIR. Order of December 30, 2011, in EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, D.C. Cir. No. 11-1302. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\ CAIR required certain states like Iowa to reduce emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2 ) and nitrogen oxides (NOX ) that significantly contribute to downwind nonattainment of the 1997 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for fine particulate matter (PM2.5 ) and ozone. See 70 FR 25162 (May 12, 2005). \4\ CSAPR was issued by EPA to replace CAIR and to help states reduce air pollution and attain CAA standards. See 76 FR 48208 (August 8, 2011) (final rule). CSAPR requires substantial reductions of SO2 and NOX emissions from EGUs in 28 states in the Eastern United States that significantly contribute to downwind nonattainment of the 1997 PM2.5 and ozone NAAQS and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- EPA finalized a limited approval of Iowa's regional haze SIP on June 26, 2012. 77 FR 38006. In a separate action, published on June 7, 2012, EPA finalized a limited disapproval of the Iowa regional haze SIP because of the state's reliance on CAIR to meet certain regional haze requirements, and issued a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) to address the deficiencies identified in the limited disapproval of Iowa and other states' regional haze plans. 77 FR 33642 (June 7, 2012). In our FIP, we relied on CSAPR to meet certain regional haze requirements notwithstanding that it was stayed at the time. As we explained, the determination that CSAPR will provide for greater reasonable progress than BART is based on a forward-looking projection of emissions and any year up until 2018 would have been an [[Page 45633]] acceptable point of comparison. Id. at 33647. When we issued this FIP, we anticipated that the requirements of CSAPR would be implemented prior to 2018. Id. Following these EPA actions, however, the DC Circuit issued a decision in EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 696 F.3d 7 (D.C. Cir. 2012), vacating CSAPR and ordering EPA to continue administering CAIR pending the promulgation of a valid replacement. On April 29, 2014, the Supreme Court reversed the DC Circuit's decision on CSAPR and remanded the case to the DC Circuit for further proceedings. EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, L.P., 134 S. Ct. 1584 (2014). After the Supreme Court decision, EPA filed a motion to lift the stay on CSAPR and asked the DC Circuit to toll CSAPR's compliance deadlines by three years, so that the Phase 1 emissions budgets apply in 2015 and 2016 (instead of 2012 and 2013), and the Phase 2 emissions budgets apply in 2017 and beyond (instead of 2014 and beyond). On October 23, 2014, the DC Circuit granted EPA's motion. Order of October 23, 2014, in EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, D.C. Cir. No. 11-1302. EPA issued an interim final rule to clarify how EPA will implement CSAPR consistent with the DC Circuit's order granting EPA's motion requesting lifting the stay and tolling the rule's deadlines. 79 FR 71663 (December 3, 2014) (interim final rulemaking).\5\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \5\ Subsequent to the interim final rulemaking, EPA began implementation of CSAPR on January 1, 2015. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Throughout the litigation described above, EPA has continued to implement CAIR. Thus, at the time that Iowa submitted its progress report SIP revision, CAIR was in effect, and the State included an assessment of the emission reductions from the implementation of CAIR in its report. The progress report discussed the status of the litigation concerning CAIR and CSAPR, but because CSAPR was not at that time in effect, Iowa did not take emissions reductions from CSAPR into account in assessing its regional haze implementation plan. For the same reason, in our NPR, EPA did not assess at that time the impact of CSAPR or our FIP on the ability of Iowa and its neighbors to meet their reasonable progress goals. The purpose of this supplemental proposal is to seek comment on the effect of the D.C. Circuit's October 23, 2014, order and the effect of the status of CAIR and CSAPR on our assessment of Iowa's progress report SIP and our determination that its existing implementation plan need not be revised at this time. Iowa appropriately took CAIR into account in its progress report SIP in describing the status of the implementation of measures included in its regional haze SIP and in summarizing the emissions reductions achieved. CAIR was in effect during the 2008-2013 period addressed by Iowa's progress report. EPA approved Iowa's regulations implementing CAIR as part of the Iowa SIP in 2008, 73 FR 20177 (April 15, 2008), and neither Iowa nor EPA has taken any action to remove CAIR from the Iowa SIP. See 40 CFR 52.2520(c). Therefore, Iowa appropriately evaluated and relied on CAIR reductions to demonstrate the State's progress toward meeting its emission reductions.\6\ The State's progress report also demonstrated Class I areas in other states impacted by Iowa sources were on track to meet their reasonable progress goals as discussed in the NPR. EPA's intention in requiring the progress reports pursuant to 40 CFR 51.308(g) was to ensure that emission management measures in the regional haze SIPs are being implemented on schedule and that visibility improvement appears to be consistent with the reasonable progress goals. (64 FR 35713, July 1, 1999). As the D.C. Circuit only recently lifted the stay on CSAPR, CAIR was in effect in Iowa through 2014, providing the emission reductions relied upon in Iowa's regional haze SIP. Thus, Iowa appropriately took into account CAIR reductions in assessing the implementation of measures in the regional haze SIP for the 2008-2013 timeframe, and EPA believes that it is appropriate to rely on CAIR emission reductions for purposes of assessing the adequacy of Iowa's progress report demonstrating progress up to the end of 2014 as CAIR remained effective until that date, pursuant to 40 CFR 51.308(g) and (h). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \6\ EPA discussed in the NPR the significance of reductions in SO2 and NOX as Iowa and the Central Regional Air Planning Association (CENRAP) identified SO2 and NOX as the largest contributor pollutants to visibility impairment at the Class I areas affected by Iowa's sources, specifically, and in the CENRAP region generally. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In addition, EPA believes reliance upon CAIR reductions to show Iowa's progress toward meeting emissions reductions from 2008-2013 is consistent with our prior actions. During the continued implementation of CAIR per the direction of the D.C. Circuit through October 2014, EPA has approved redesignations of areas to attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in which states relied on CAIR as an ``enforceable measure.'' See 77 FR 76415 (December 28, 2012) (redesignation of Huntington-Ashland, West Virginia) and 80 FR 9207 (February 20, 2015) (redesignation of St. Louis, Missouri). While EPA did previously state in a rulemaking action on the Florida regional haze SIP that a five year progress report may be the appropriate time to address changes, if necessary, for reasonable progress goal demonstrations and long term strategies, EPA does not believe such changes were necessary for Iowa's progress report SIP. See generally 77 FR 73369, 77 FR 73371 (December 10, 2012) (proposed action on Florida haze SIP). In this action, EPA is proposing that the remanded status of CAIR and the implementation of its replacement CSAPR at this time do not impact the adequacy of the Iowa regional haze SIP to address reasonable progress from 2008 through 2013 or even through 2014 to meet requirements in 40 CFR 51.308(g) and (h) because CAIR was implemented during the time period evaluated by Iowa for its progress report. EPA's December 3, 2014, interim final rule sunsets CAIR compliance requirements on a schedule coordinated with the implementation of CSAPR compliance requirements. 79 FR at 71655. As noted above, EPA's June 7, 2012, FIP replaced Iowa's reliance upon CAIR for regional haze requirements with reliance on CSAPR to meet those requirements for the long-term. Because CSAPR should result in greater emissions reductions of SO2 and NOX than CAIR regionally, EPA anticipates Iowa to maintain and continue its progress toward their projected emissions for 2018. See generally 76 FR 48208 (promulgating CSAPR). Although the implementation of CSAPR was tolled for three years, the rule is now being implemented, and CSAPR budgets of SO2 and NOX from EGUs in Iowa are the same as assumed by EPA when it issued the CSAPR FIP for Iowa in June 2012. See 76 FR 48208 (CSAPR promulgation) and 77 FR 33642 (limited disapproval of Iowa regional haze SIP and FIP for Iowa for certain regional haze requirements). At the present time, the requirements of CSAPR apply to sources in Iowa under the terms of a FIP, because Iowa to date has not incorporated the CSAPR requirements into its SIP. The Regional Haze Rule requires an assessment of whether the current ``implementation plan'' is sufficient to enable the states to meet all established reasonable progress goals. 40 CFR 51.308(g)(6). The term ``implementation plan'' is defined for purposes of the Regional Haze Rule to mean ``any [SIP], [FIP], or Tribal Implementation Plan.'' 40 CFR 51.301. [[Page 45634]] EPA is, therefore, proposing to determine that we may consider measures in any issued FIP as well as those in a state's regional haze SIP in assessing the adequacy of the ``existing implementation plan'' under 40 CFR 51.308(g)(6) and (h). Because CSAPR will ensure the control of SO2 and NOX emissions reductions relied upon by Iowa and other states in setting their reasonable progress goals beginning in January 2015 at least through the remainder of the first implementation period in 2018, EPA is proposing to approve Iowa's finding that there is no need for revision of the existing implementation plan for Iowa to achieve the reasonable progress goals for the Class I areas in nearby states impacted by Iowa sources. We note that the Regional Haze Rule provides for periodic evaluation and assessment of a state's reasonable progress toward achieving the national goal of natural visibility conditions by 2064 for CAA section 169A(b). The regional haze regulations at 40 CFR 51.308 required states to submit initial SIPs in 2007 providing for reasonable progress toward the national goal for the first implementation period from 2008 through 2018. 40 CFR 51.308(b). Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.308(f), SIP revisions reassessing each state's reasonable progress toward the national goal are due every the years after that time. For such subsequent regional haze SIPs, 40 CFR 51.308(f) requires each state to reassess its reasonable progress and all the elements of its regional haze SIP required by 40 CFR 51.308(d), taking into account improvements in monitors and control technology, assessing the state's actual progress and effectiveness of its long term strategy, and revising reasonable progress goals as necessary. 40 CFR 51.308(f)(1)-(3). Therefore, Iowa has the opportunity to reassess its emissions trends and the adequacy of its regional haze SIP, including its reliance upon CSAPR for emission reductions from EGUs, when it prepares and submits its second regional haze SIP to cover the implementation period from 2018 through 2028. As discussed in the NPR and in Iowa's progress report, emissions of SO2 and NOX from EGUs are far below original projections for 2018. In addition, the visibility data provided by Iowa show the Class I areas impacted by Iowa sources are all currently on track to achieve their projected emissions reductions. EPA is seeking comment only on the issues raised in this supplemental proposal and is not reopening for comment other issues addressed in its prior proposal. IV. Summary of Reproposal In summary, EPA is proposing to approve Iowa's progress report SIP revision. EPA solicits comments on this supplemental proposal, with respect to only the specific issues raised in this action. EPA is not reopening the comment period on any other aspect of the July 3, 2014, NPR, as an adequate opportunity to comment on those issues has already been provided. The purpose of this supplemental proposal is limited to review of the Iowa progress report in light of the Supreme Court's decision in EME Homer City and the D.C. Circuit's recent Order lifting the stay on CSAPR. This supplemental proposal reflects EPA's desire for public input into how it should proceed in light of those decisions when acting on the pending progress report, in particular the requirements that the State assess whether the current implementation plan is sufficient to ensure that reasonable progress goals are met. 40 CFR 51.308(g)(6) and (h).\7\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \7\ EPA previously determined that CSAPR (like CAIR before it) was ``better than BART'' because it would achieve greater reasonable progress toward the national goal than would source-specific BART. 77 FR 33642 (June 7, 2012). EPA is not taking comment in this supplemental proposal on whether the Iowa implementation plan meets the BART requirements or whether CSAPR is an alternative measure to source-specific BART in accordance with 40 CFR 52.301(e)(2). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews In this action, 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 the Iowa Nonregulatory Provisions described in the proposed amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth below. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents generally available electronically through www.regulations.gov and/or in hard copy at the appropriate EPA office (see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble for more information). Under the Clean Air Act (CAA), the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act 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 Clean Air Act; 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). 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 proposed action and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of [[Page 45635]] 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 proposed 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 29, 2015. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this proposed rule does not affect the finality of this rulemaking 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 future rule or action. This proposed 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 oxides, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur dioxide, Volatile organic compounds. Dated: July 21, 2015. Mark Hague, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7. For the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA proposes to amend 40 CFR part 52 as set forth below: Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations 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. Subpart Q--Iowa 0 2. In Sec. 52.820(e) the table is amended by adding entry (42) at the end of the table in numerical order to read as follows: Sec. 52.820 Identification of plan. * * * * * (e) * * * EPA-Approved Iowa Nonregulatory Provisions ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Applicable Name of nonregulatory SIP geographic or State submittal EPA approval date Explanation provision nonattainment area date ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * * * * * * * (42) State Implementation Plan Statewide.......... 7/19/13 7/3/2014, 79 FR (SIP) Revision for the 37976. Attainment and Maintenance of National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Regional Haze (2013 Five-Year Progress Report). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [FR Doc. 2015-18826 Filed 7-30-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Proposed Rules 45631
contact the individual listed in the FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 0365. EPA’s policy is that all comments
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to AGENCY received will be included in the public
view the hard copy of the docket. The docket without change and may be
Regional Office’s official hours of 40 CFR Part 52 made available online at
business are Monday through Friday, [EPA–R07–OAR–2014–0365; FRL–9931–72– www.regulations.gov, including any
8:00 a.m.–4:00 p.m., excluding federal Region 7] personal information provided, unless
holidays. An electronic copy of the the comment includes information
State’s SIP compilation is also available Approval and Promulgation of Air claimed to be Confidential Business
at http://www.epa.gov/region8/air/ Quality Implementation Plans; Iowa; Information (CBI) or other information
sip.html. Regional Haze Five-Year Progress whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Report State Implementation Plan Do not submit information that you
Please see the Direct Final Rule which consider to be CBI or otherwise
is located in the Rules Section of this AGENCY: Environmental Protection
protected through www.regulations.gov
Federal Register for detailed instruction Agency (EPA).
or email. The www.regulations.gov Web
on how to submit comments. ACTION: Proposed rule; supplemental. site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system,
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection which means EPA will not know your
Kevin Leone, Air Program, EPA, Region Agency (EPA) is issuing a supplement to identity or contact information unless
8, Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595 Wynkoop its proposed approval of a State you provide it in the body of your
Street, Denver, Colorado 80202–1129, Implementation Plan (SIP) revision comment. If you send an email
submitted by the State of Iowa (Iowa) comment directly to EPA without going
(303) 312–6227, leone.kevin@epa.gov.
through the Iowa Department of Natural through www.regulations.gov, your
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Resources (IDNR). Iowa’s SIP revision email address will be automatically
‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ section of this addresses requirements of the Clean Air captured and included as part of the
Federal Register, EPA is approving the Act (CAA) and EPA’s rules that require comment that is placed in the public
State’s SIP revision as a Direct Final states to submit periodic reports docket and made available on the
Rule without prior proposal because the describing progress toward reasonable Internet. If you submit an electronic
Agency views this as a noncontroversial progress goals established for regional comment, EPA recommends that you
SIP revision and anticipates no adverse haze and a determination of the include your name and other contact
comments. A detailed rationale for the adequacy of the state’s existing information in the body of your
approval is set forth in the preamble to implementation plan addressing comment and with any disk or CD–ROM
the Direct Final Rule. regional haze (region haze SIP). EPA’s you submit. If EPA cannot read your
proposed approval of Iowa’s periodic comment due to technical difficulties
If EPA receives no adverse comments, and cannot contact you for clarification,
EPA will take no further action on this report on progress toward reasonable
progress goals and determination of EPA may not be able to consider your
proposed rule. If EPA receives adverse comment. Electronic files should avoid
adequacy of the state’s regional haze SIP
comments, EPA will withdraw the the use of special characters, any form
published in the Federal Register on
Direct Final Rule and it will not take July 3, 2014. This supplemental of encryption, and be free of any defects
effect. EPA will address all public proposal addresses the potential effects or viruses.
comments in a subsequent final rule on our proposed approval from the Docket. All documents in the
based on this proposed rule. April 29, 2014, decision of the United electronic docket are listed in the
EPA will not institute a second States Supreme Court (Supreme Court) www.regulations.gov index. Although
comment period on this action. Any remanding to the United States Court of listed in the index, some information is
parties interested in commenting must Appeals for the District of Columbia not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
do so at this time. For further Circuit (D.C. Circuit) EPA’s Cross-State information whose disclosure is
information, please see the ADDRESSES Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) for further restricted by statute. Certain other
section of this notice. proceedings and the D.C. Circuit’s material, such as copyrighted material,
decision to lift the stay of CSAPR. will be publicly available only in hard
Please note that if EPA receives an
DATES: Comments must be received on copy. Publicly available docket
adverse comment on a distinct materials are available either
or before August 31, 2015.
provision of this rule and if that electronically in www.regulations.gov or
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
provision may be severed from the in hard copy at the Environmental
remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt identified by Docket ID Number EPA–
R07–OAR–2014–0365, by one of the Protection Agency, Air Planning and
as final those provisions of the rule that Development Branch, 11201 Renner
following methods:
are not the subject of an adverse 1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219. EPA
comment. See the information provided on-line instructions for submitting requests that you contact the person
in the Direct Final action of the same comments. listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
title which is located in the Rules and 2. Email: harper.jodi@epa.gov. CONTACT section to schedule your
Regulations Section of this Federal 3. Mail or Hand Delivery: Jodi Harper, inspection. The interested persons
Register. Environmental Protection Agency, Air wanting to examine these documents
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Planning and Development Branch, should make an appointment with the
rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, office at least 24 hours in advance.
Dated: July 1, 2015. Kansas 66219. Hand deliveries are only
Shaun L. McGrath,
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jodi
accepted during normal hours of
Harper, (913) 551–7483, or by email at
Regional Administrator, Region 8. operation, and special arrangements
harper.jodi@epa.gov.
[FR Doc. 2015–18513 Filed 7–30–15; 8:45 am] should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
Instructions: Direct your comments to Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2015– or ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 13:28 Jul 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\31JYP1.SGM 31JYP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_45778/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Proposed Rules 45633
acceptable point of comparison. Id. at implementation plan need not be measure.’’ See 77 FR 76415 (December
33647. When we issued this FIP, we revised at this time. 28, 2012) (redesignation of Huntington-
anticipated that the requirements of Iowa appropriately took CAIR into Ashland, West Virginia) and 80 FR 9207
CSAPR would be implemented prior to account in its progress report SIP in (February 20, 2015) (redesignation of St.
2018. Id. Following these EPA actions, describing the status of the Louis, Missouri). While EPA did
however, the DC Circuit issued a implementation of measures included in previously state in a rulemaking action
decision in EME Homer City Generation, its regional haze SIP and in on the Florida regional haze SIP that a
L.P. v. EPA, 696 F.3d 7 (D.C. Cir. 2012), summarizing the emissions reductions five year progress report may be the
vacating CSAPR and ordering EPA to achieved. CAIR was in effect during the appropriate time to address changes, if
continue administering CAIR pending 2008–2013 period addressed by Iowa’s necessary, for reasonable progress goal
the promulgation of a valid progress report. EPA approved Iowa’s demonstrations and long term strategies,
replacement. On April 29, 2014, the regulations implementing CAIR as part EPA does not believe such changes were
Supreme Court reversed the DC Circuit’s of the Iowa SIP in 2008, 73 FR 20177 necessary for Iowa’s progress report SIP.
decision on CSAPR and remanded the (April 15, 2008), and neither Iowa nor See generally 77 FR 73369, 77 FR 73371
case to the DC Circuit for further EPA has taken any action to remove (December 10, 2012) (proposed action
proceedings. EPA v. EME Homer City CAIR from the Iowa SIP. See 40 CFR on Florida haze SIP). In this action, EPA
Generation, L.P., 134 S. Ct. 1584 (2014). 52.2520(c). Therefore, Iowa is proposing that the remanded status of
After the Supreme Court decision, EPA appropriately evaluated and relied on CAIR and the implementation of its
filed a motion to lift the stay on CSAPR CAIR reductions to demonstrate the replacement CSAPR at this time do not
and asked the DC Circuit to toll State’s progress toward meeting its impact the adequacy of the Iowa
CSAPR’s compliance deadlines by three emission reductions.6 The State’s regional haze SIP to address reasonable
years, so that the Phase 1 emissions progress report also demonstrated Class progress from 2008 through 2013 or
budgets apply in 2015 and 2016 (instead I areas in other states impacted by Iowa even through 2014 to meet requirements
of 2012 and 2013), and the Phase 2 sources were on track to meet their in 40 CFR 51.308(g) and (h) because
emissions budgets apply in 2017 and reasonable progress goals as discussed CAIR was implemented during the time
beyond (instead of 2014 and beyond). in the NPR. EPA’s intention in requiring period evaluated by Iowa for its progress
On October 23, 2014, the DC Circuit the progress reports pursuant to 40 CFR report.
granted EPA’s motion. Order of October 51.308(g) was to ensure that emission EPA’s December 3, 2014, interim final
23, 2014, in EME Homer City management measures in the regional rule sunsets CAIR compliance
Generation, L.P. v. EPA, D.C. Cir. No. haze SIPs are being implemented on requirements on a schedule coordinated
11–1302. EPA issued an interim final schedule and that visibility with the implementation of CSAPR
rule to clarify how EPA will implement improvement appears to be consistent compliance requirements. 79 FR at
CSAPR consistent with the DC Circuit’s with the reasonable progress goals. 71655. As noted above, EPA’s June 7,
order granting EPA’s motion requesting (64 FR 35713, July 1, 1999). As the D.C. 2012, FIP replaced Iowa’s reliance upon
lifting the stay and tolling the rule’s Circuit only recently lifted the stay on CAIR for regional haze requirements
deadlines. 79 FR 71663 (December 3, CSAPR, CAIR was in effect in Iowa with reliance on CSAPR to meet those
2014) (interim final rulemaking).5 through 2014, providing the emission requirements for the long-term. Because
reductions relied upon in Iowa’s CSAPR should result in greater
Throughout the litigation described regional haze SIP. Thus, Iowa emissions reductions of SO2 and NOX
above, EPA has continued to implement appropriately took into account CAIR than CAIR regionally, EPA anticipates
CAIR. Thus, at the time that Iowa reductions in assessing the Iowa to maintain and continue its
submitted its progress report SIP implementation of measures in the progress toward their projected
revision, CAIR was in effect, and the regional haze SIP for the 2008–2013 emissions for 2018. See generally 76 FR
State included an assessment of the timeframe, and EPA believes that it is 48208 (promulgating CSAPR). Although
emission reductions from the appropriate to rely on CAIR emission the implementation of CSAPR was
implementation of CAIR in its report. reductions for purposes of assessing the tolled for three years, the rule is now
The progress report discussed the status adequacy of Iowa’s progress report being implemented, and CSAPR budgets
of the litigation concerning CAIR and demonstrating progress up to the end of of SO2 and NOX from EGUs in Iowa are
CSAPR, but because CSAPR was not at 2014 as CAIR remained effective until the same as assumed by EPA when it
that time in effect, Iowa did not take that date, pursuant to 40 CFR 51.308(g) issued the CSAPR FIP for Iowa in June
emissions reductions from CSAPR into and (h). 2012. See 76 FR 48208 (CSAPR
account in assessing its regional haze In addition, EPA believes reliance promulgation) and 77 FR 33642 (limited
implementation plan. For the same upon CAIR reductions to show Iowa’s disapproval of Iowa regional haze SIP
reason, in our NPR, EPA did not assess progress toward meeting emissions and FIP for Iowa for certain regional
at that time the impact of CSAPR or our reductions from 2008–2013 is consistent haze requirements).
FIP on the ability of Iowa and its with our prior actions. During the At the present time, the requirements
neighbors to meet their reasonable continued implementation of CAIR per of CSAPR apply to sources in Iowa
progress goals. the direction of the D.C. Circuit through under the terms of a FIP, because Iowa
The purpose of this supplemental October 2014, EPA has approved to date has not incorporated the CSAPR
proposal is to seek comment on the redesignations of areas to attainment of requirements into its SIP. The Regional
effect of the D.C. Circuit’s October 23, the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in which states Haze Rule requires an assessment of
rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
2014, order and the effect of the status relied on CAIR as an ‘‘enforceable whether the current ‘‘implementation
of CAIR and CSAPR on our assessment plan’’ is sufficient to enable the states to
of Iowa’s progress report SIP and our 6 EPA discussed in the NPR the significance of meet all established reasonable progress
determination that its existing reductions in SO2 and NOX as Iowa and the Central goals. 40 CFR 51.308(g)(6). The term
Regional Air Planning Association (CENRAP) ‘‘implementation plan’’ is defined for
identified SO2 and NOX as the largest contributor
5 Subsequent to the interim final rulemaking, EPA pollutants to visibility impairment at the Class I
purposes of the Regional Haze Rule to
began implementation of CSAPR on January 1, areas affected by Iowa’s sources, specifically, and in mean ‘‘any [SIP], [FIP], or Tribal
2015. the CENRAP region generally. Implementation Plan.’’ 40 CFR 51.301.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 13:28 Jul 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\31JYP1.SGM 31JYP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_45778/page/3.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Proposed Rules 45635
Representatives, and the Comptroller future rule or action. This proposed Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of
General of the United States prior to action may not be challenged later in Federal Regulations is amended as
publication of the rule in the Federal proceedings to enforce its requirements. follows:
Register. A major rule cannot take effect (See section 307(b)(2).)
until 60 days after it is published in the PART 52—APPROVAL AND
Federal Register. This proposed action List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 PROMULGATION OF
is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
Environmental protection, Air
U.S.C. 804(2).
pollution control, Incorporation by ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, reference, Intergovernmental relations, continues to read as follows:
petitions for judicial review of this Nitrogen oxides, Particulate matter,
action must be filed in the United States Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et. seq.
Reporting and recordkeeping
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
requirements, Sulfur dioxide, Volatile Subpart Q—Iowa
circuit by September 29, 2015. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the organic compounds.
■ 2. In § 52.820(e) the table is amended
Administrator of this proposed rule Dated: July 21, 2015. by adding entry (42) at the end of the
does not affect the finality of this Mark Hague, table in numerical order to read as
rulemaking for the purposes of judicial Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7. follows:
review nor does it extend the time
within which a petition for judicial For the reasons stated in the § 52.820 Identification of plan.
review may be filed, and shall not preamble, EPA proposes to amend 40 * * * * *
postpone the effectiveness of such CFR part 52 as set forth below: (e) * * *
EPA-APPROVED IOWA NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS
Applicable geographic State submittal
Name of nonregulatory SIP provision EPA approval date Explanation
or nonattainment area date
* * * * * * *
(42) State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision Statewide ..................... 7/19/13 7/3/2014, 79 FR 37976.
for the Attainment and Maintenance of Na-
tional Ambient Air Quality Standards for Re-
gional Haze (2013 Five-Year Progress Report).
[FR Doc. 2015–18826 Filed 7–30–15; 8:45 am] consistent with the requirements of the Management Section, Air Planning and
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Clean Air Act (CAA). In the Final Rules Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides
Section of this Federal Register, EPA is and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
approving these portions of the SIP Environmental Protection Agency,
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION revisions as a direct final rule without Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
AGENCY prior proposal because the Agency Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such
views these as a noncontroversial deliveries are only accepted during the
40 CFR Part 52 submittals and anticipates no adverse Regional Office’s normal hours of
[EPA–R04–OAR–2015–0413; FRL–9931–64– comments. A detailed rationale for the operation. The Regional Office’s official
Region 4] approval is set forth in the direct final hours of business are Monday through
rule. Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
Approval and Promulgation of DATES: Written comments must be Federal holidays.
Implementation Plans; Georgia: received on or before August 31, 2015. Please see the direct final rule which
Revisions to Definitions and Ambient is located in the Rules section of this
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
Air Quality Standards Federal Register for detailed
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04–
instructions on how to submit
AGENCY: Environmental Protection OAR–2015–0413, by one of the
comments.
Agency (EPA). following methods:
ACTION: Proposed rule. 1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: D.
on-line instructions for submitting Brad Akers, Air Regulatory Management
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection comments. Section, Air Planning and
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 2. Email: R4-ARMS@epa.gov. Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides
portions of the State Implementation 3. Fax: (404) 562–9019. and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the 4. Mail: ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2015– Environmental Protection Agency,
State of Georgia, through the Georgia 0413,’’ Air Regulatory Management Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Department of Natural Resources’ Section (formerly Regulatory Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Mr. Akers
Environmental Protection Division (GA Development Section), Air Planning and can be reached by phone at (404) 562–
rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
EPD) on August 30, 2010, December 15, Implementation Branch (formerly Air 9089 or via electronic mail at
2011, and November 12, 2014. The SIP Planning Branch), Air, Pesticides and akers.brad@epa.gov.
submittals include changes to GA EPD’s Toxics Management Division, U.S. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For
air quality rules that, among other Environmental Protection Agency, additional information see the direct
things, modify definitions and modify Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., final rule which is published in the
the ambient air standards for fine Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Rules Section of this Federal Register.
particulate matter. The portions of the 5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Lynorae A detailed rationale for the approval is
SIP revisions that EPA is approving are Benjamin, Chief, Air Regulatory set forth in the direct final rule. If no
VerDate Sep<11>2014 13:28 Jul 30, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\31JYP1.SGM 31JYP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_45778/page/5.svg)
Document Created: 2015-12-15 13:00:03
Document Modified: 2015-12-15 13:00:03
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Proposed Rules | |
| Action | Proposed rule; supplemental. | |
| Dates | Comments must be received on or before August 31, 2015. | |
| Contact | Jodi Harper, (913) 551-7483, or by email at [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 80 FR 45631 | |
| CFR Associated | Environmental Protection; Air Pollution Control; Incorporation by Reference; Intergovernmental Relations; Nitrogen Oxides; Particulate Matter; Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements; Sulfur Dioxide and Volatile Organic Compounds |
2024 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR