83 FR 997 - Approval of Iowa's Air Quality Implementation Plan; Muscatine Sulfur Dioxide Nonattainment Area; Availability of Supplemental Information and Reopening of the Comment Period
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 6 (January 9, 2018)
Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 6 (January 9, 2018)
| Page Range | 997-1001 | |
| FR Document | 2018-00026 |
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 6 (Tuesday, January 9, 2018)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 997-1001] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2018-00026] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R07-OAR-2017-0416; FRL-9972-76--Region 7] Approval of Iowa's Air Quality Implementation Plan; Muscatine Sulfur Dioxide Nonattainment Area; Availability of Supplemental Information and Reopening of the Comment Period AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule; availability of supplemental information and reopening of the comment period. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: On August 24, 2017, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a notice of proposed rulemaking to approve the Iowa State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision for attaining the 1-hour sulfur dioxide (SO2 ) primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for the Muscatine nonattainment area (herein called a ``nonattainment plan'') in the Federal Register. EPA received several comments, including one suggesting that insufficient information was provided in the docket to allow the reviewer the ability to fully evaluate the nonattainment plan and EPA's proposed action to approve it and another comment that insufficient emissions inventory information for the 2018 attainment year was provided for the action. As a result, we are: Providing additional information in the docket and clarifying that all information, including files that are too large to be provided in the docket, are available upon request; providing an updated 2018 projected emissions inventory; and reopening the public comment period to afford stakeholders an opportunity to comment on these specific additions of information only. EPA has updated Document A, ``Index of Docket Documents'' in the docket to this rulemaking. EPA will address all comments received on the original proposal and on this supplemental action in our final action. DATES: The comment period for the proposed rule published on August 24, 2017 (82 FR 40086) (FRL-9966-60-Region 7) is reopened. Comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-RO7-OAR-2017-0416 must be received on or before February 8, 2018. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments pertaining to this supplemental action, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2017-0416 to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tracey Casburn, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at (913) 551-7016, or by email at [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' and ``our'' refer to EPA. This section provides additional information by addressing the following: I. What action is EPA taking? II. What is the background for this action? III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews [[Page 998]] I. What action is EPA taking? On August 24, 2017, at 82 FR 40086, EPA proposed to approve a state implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by the state of Iowa for attaining the 1-hour SO2 NAAQS for the Muscatine nonattainment area. EPA received several comments on the original proposal, including one suggesting that insufficient information was provided in the docket to allow the reviewer the ability to fully evaluate the nonattainment plan and the basis of EPA's proposed action to approve it. As a result, in this supplemental action, EPA is providing additional information in the docket for the proposed action and clarifying that, especially in the case of files too large to post in the docket, this information is available upon request. These large files include modeling files utilized to support the nonattainment plan. EPA also received a comment that the SIP submittal, and EPA's proposed approval of the nonattainment plan, did not include adequate emissions inventory information for the 2018 attainment year. As a result, EPA is providing updated 2018 projected emissions inventory information for the proposed action. EPA is soliciting comment only regarding the information added by this document and its relationship to EPA's proposed SIP approval. That is, at this time, EPA is soliciting comment only on the newly docketed information, including modeling files which can be obtained upon request, and how they relate to EPA's proposed action. We will address all comments received on the original proposal and new comments submitted in response to this action in our final rulemaking action. II. What is the background for this action? As discussed in EPA's original August 24, 2017, proposal (82 FR 40086), on April 23, 2014, the EPA issued recommended guidance for meeting the statutory requirements in SO2 SIPs, in a document entitled, ``Guidance for 1-Hour SO2 Nonattainment Area SIP Submissions,'' (April 2014 guidance) available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-06/documents/20140423guidance_nonattainment_sip.pdf. In this guidance the EPA described the statutory requirements for a complete nonattainment area SIP, which includes an accurate emissions inventory of current emissions for all sources of SO2 within the nonattainment area. Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires that the state's nonattainment plan include a comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual emissions from all sources of the relevant pollutant or pollutants in such area, including such periodic revisions as the Administrator may determine necessary to assure that the requirements of part D of title I of the CAA are met. Section 172(c)(4) of the CAA requires that the state's nonattainment plan expressly identify and quantify the emissions, if any, of any such pollutant or pollutants which will be allowed, in accordance with section 173(a)(1)(B) of the CAA, from the construction and operation of major new or modified stationary sources in each such area. The plan shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Administrator that the emissions quantified for this purpose will be consistent with the achievement of reasonable further progress and will not interfere with attainment of the applicable NAAQS by the applicable attainment date. The emissions inventory and source emission rate data for an area serve as the foundation for air quality modeling and other analyses that enable states to: (1) Estimate the degree to which different sources within a nonattainment area contribute to violations within the affected area; and (2) assess the expected improvement in air quality within the nonattainment area due to the adoption and implementation of control measures. As noted above, the state must develop and submit to EPA a comprehensive, accurate and current inventory of actual emissions from all sources of SO2 emissions in each nonattainment area, as well as any sources located outside the nonattainment area which may affect attainment in the area. See the April 2014 guidance. The base year inventory establishes a baseline that is used to evaluate emissions reductions achieved by the control strategy and to assess reasonable further progress requirements. The state's nonattainment SIP noted that, at the time, the most recent and available triennial inventory year was 2011, and the stated found that it served as a suitable base year. Table 1 provides the baseline 2011 SO2 emissions inventory data for sources within and outside of the nonattainment the area (data have been rounded to the nearest whole number). It is important to note that emissions from the onroad mobile, nonroad mobile, area source and fire source categories are for the entire Muscatine County and not just the nonattainment area which is a portion of the county. Emissions from these source categories are approximately 0.11 percent of the total SO2 emissions for the nonattainment area. Table 1--2011 Base Line Emission Inventory for the Muscatine, IA Nonattainment Area ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Base line emissions inventory for the Muscatine NAA ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2011 SO2 Facility Emissions (tpy) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Inside of the NAA................. Grain Processing 10,810 Corporation. Muscatine Power and 2,374 Water. Monsanto............ 537 HNI Corp.--North <1 Campus. HNI Corp.--Central <1 Campus. H.J. Heinz L.P...... <1 Union Tank Car Co... <1 Outside of the NAA................ Louisa Generating 7,304 Station. All of Muscatine County........... Onroad Mobile....... 3 Nonroad Mobile...... 2 Area Sources........ 10 Fires............... 9 --------------- Total......................... .................... 21,049 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [[Page 999]] The state's nonattainment SIP provided a 2018 projected emissions inventory only for the stationary sources that would be controlled under the SIP (Grain Processing Corporation, Muscatine Power and Water and Monsanto); the state's 2018 projected emissions are provided in table 2. As noted in EPA's proposal, the inventory was developed assuming each SO2 source operates 8,760 hours per year at its permitted maximum allowable emission rate. Table 2--Projected 2018 Allowable Annual SO2 Emissions From Control Strategy Sources From the Nonattainment Plan ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Projected 2018 emissions for the controlled sources ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2018 SO2 Facility Emissions (tpy) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Grain Processing Corporation............................ 167 Muscatine Power and Water............................... 5,051 Monsanto................................................ 1,196 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ In this supplemental document, EPA is providing an update to the state's 2018 projected emissions inventory for public inspection. The updated 2018 projected emissions inventory includes: Emissions from Louisa Generating Station (LGS) located in nearby Louisa County (presented as a potential to emit (PTE) level as provided by the state); emissions from the less than 1 ton per year (tpy) point sources that were included in the baseline emission inventory; and emissions from the area source, fire, nonroad mobile, and onroad mobile source categories. Tables 3 through 6 provide information on how EPA completed the 2018 projections from the area source, fire, nonroad mobile, and onroad mobile source categories as well as the less than 1 tpy point sources. A summary of the 2018 projected emissions inventory is provided in table 7. As with the state's 2011 baseline emissions inventory, the fire, nonroad mobile, onroad mobile and area source emissions are county-wide and not specific to the partial Muscatine County nonattainment area. EPA increased the emissions based on population growth factors. In order to complete these projections, EPA first gathered population projections for Muscatine county, as seen in table 3.\1\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ http://www.iowadatacenter.org/datatables/CountyAll/co2010populationprojections20002040.pdf. Table 3--Population Growth Data for Muscatine County ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Population projections ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 2010.................................................... 42,760 2015.................................................... 43,453 2020.................................................... 44,225 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Next, EPA developed growth factors by computing population ratios by comparing the projected 2020 population to the 2010 population and then comparing the 2020 population to the 2015 population, as provided in table 4. Table 4--2018 Growth Factors ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 2018 Growth factors ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1.03.................................................... 2020/2010 1.02.................................................... 2020/2015 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Then, EPA downloaded the 2011 and 2014 emissions from the National Emissions Inventory (NEI) and multiplied the NEI values by the growth factors to calculate a 2018 maximum projection value, as provided in table 5. That is, EPA multiplied the 2011 NEI base year emissions by the 2018 growth factor of 1.03 and the 2014 NEI base year emissions by the 2018 growth factor of 1.02, then selected the highest estimate for each source category as the 2018 maximum projected emissions (data have been rounded to the nearest whole number). Table 5--2018 Sulfur Dioxide Emissions Projections Muscatine County Iowa [Tons] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2018 Sulfur dioxide emissions projections Muscatine County Iowa (tons) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2011 a 2014 b 2018 (2011) 2018 (2014) 2018 Maximum ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fire............................ 9 13 9 13 13 Area Sources.................... 10 5 10 5 10 Nonroad Mobile c................ 2 1 2 1 2 Onroad Mobile................... 3 4 3 4 4 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- a 2011NEIV2. b 2014NEIV1. c Marine/Aircraft/Rail emissions were included in the nonroad category, rather than area source category for 2011. In order to project the 2018 emissions for the less than 1 tpy sources provided in the 2011 baseline emission inventory (HNI Corporation--North and Central Campuses, H.J. Heinz, L.P., and Union Tank Car Co.--Muscatine), EPA selected the highest emissions from the 2008 to 2015 time period as the sources' projected 2018 emissions, table 6. The total of the county's nonroad mobile, onroad moble, fire and area source category projected 2018 emissions would be about .13 percent of the partial county nonattainment area's total emissions).\2\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\ The total projected 2018 emissions includes LGS at its projected PTS in 2018, 15,188. It is expected that the actual emissions from this source in 2018 would be much lower. [[Page 1000]] Table 6--Projected 2018 SO2 Emissions for the Small Uncontrolled Sources (tpy) in the Muscatine County Iowa Nonattainment Area -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Projected 2018 emissions from the less than 1 ton per year (tpy) sources in the Muscatine NAA --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2018 Facility name 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Projected -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- HNI Corporation--North Campus............... 0.06 0.07 0.08 0.07 0.11 0.03 0.03 0.08 0.11 HNI Corporation--Central Campus............. 0.04 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.05 H.J. Heinz, L.P............................. 0.06 0.03 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.04 0.06 0.06 Union Tank Car Co.--Muscatine............... 0 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Additionally, there is a large source outside of the nonattainment area, LGS, that was included in the state's 2011 baseline emission inventory. On October 12, 2017, the state submitted, via email, the 2018 potential to emit (PTE) from LGS equaling approximately 15,188 tpy. The email has been added to the docket for public inspection. Table 7 provides a summary of the projected 2018 emissions for the nonattainment area, and that summary includes LGS at its PTE. However, after reviewing LGS's operating history from 2012 to 2016 we expect that the facility will emit considerably less SO2 emissions than its PTE in 2018. Table 8 provides the annual SO2 emissions from LGS from 2012 to 2016 as reported to EPA's Clean Air Markets Division.\3\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\ Data reported to the CAMD shows that LGS has not operated in a manner to allow for SO2 emissions approaching its PTE (15,188) since 2008. Table 7--Updated 2018 Emissions Inventory Summary ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 2018 Projected emissions inventory for the Muscatine NAA ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2018 SO2 Facility Emissions (tpy) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Inside of the NAA.............. Grain Processing 167 Corporation. Muscatine Power and 5,051 Water. Monsanto............... 1,196 HNI Corp.--North Campus 0.11 HNI Corp.--Central 0.05 Campus. H.J. Heinz L.P......... 0.06 Union Tank Car Co...... 0.02 Outside of the NAA............. Louisa Generating 15,188 Station. All of Muscatine County........ Onroad Mobile.......... 4 Nonroad Mobile......... 2 Area Sources........... 10 Fires.................. 13 --------------- Total...................... ....................... 21,631 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Table 8--Louisa Generating Station SO2 Annual Emissions Data, 2012-2016 (CAMD) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Louisa Generating Station SO2 emissions, 2012-2016 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Year 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Annual SO2 Emissions............ 8743 8285 8763 6096 5129 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The EPA is providing the updated 2018 projected emissions inventory information for public inspection and in support of the Agency's previous proposal to determine that the state has met the requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3) and 172(c)(4). III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not subject to review under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011). This action is not subject to review under Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under Executive Order 12866. This action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rulemaking will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rulemaking would approve pre-existing requirements under state law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). [[Page 1001]] 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 also does not have Federalism implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). Thus Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this action. This action merely proposes to approve a state rule implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the CAA. This rulemaking also is not subject to Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) because it proposes to approve a state rule implementing a Federal standard. In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a state submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA when it reviews a state submission, to use VCS in place of a state submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This action does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides. Dated: December 21, 2017. James B. Gulliford, Regional Administrator, Region 7. [FR Doc. 2018-00026 Filed 1-8-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 2018 / Proposed Rules 997
PART 111—[AMENDED] b. For First-Class Mail only: Mailer 2018 projected emissions inventory; and
Move Update Process Certification and reopening the public comment period to
■ 1. The authority citation for 39 CFR USPS-approved alternative methods for afford stakeholders an opportunity to
part 111 continues to read as follows: mailers with legitimate restrictions on comment on these specific additions of
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552(a); 13 U.S.C. 301– incorporating USPS-supplied change-of- information only. EPA has updated
307; 18 U.S.C. 1692–1737; 39 U.S.C. 101, address information into their mailing Document A, ‘‘Index of Docket
401, 403, 404, 414, 416, 3001–3011, 3201– lists. Refer to the Guide to Move Update Documents’’ in the docket to this
3219, 3403–3406, 3621, 3622, 3626, 3632, available at www.postalpro.usps.com or rulemaking. EPA will address all
3633, and 5001. contact the National Customer Support comments received on the original
■ 2. Revise the following sections of Center (see 608.8.1 for address) for proposal and on this supplemental
Mailing Standards of the United States additional information. action in our final action.
Postal Service, Domestic Mail Manual * * * * *
(DMM), as follows: We will publish an appropriate DATES: The comment period for the
amendment to 39 CFR part 111 to reflect proposed rule published on August 24,
Mailing Standards of the United 2017 (82 FR 40086) (FRL–9966–60–
States Postal Service, Domestic Mail these changes, if this proposal is
adopted. Region 7) is reopened. Comments,
Manual (DMM) identified by docket identification (ID)
* * * * * Stanley F. Mires, number EPA–RO7–OAR–2017–0416
Attorney, Federal Compliance. must be received on or before February
602 Addressing
[FR Doc. 2018–00006 Filed 1–8–18; 8:45 am] 8, 2018.
* * * * * BILLING CODE 7710–12–P
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments
5.0 Move Update Standards pertaining to this supplemental action,
* * * * * identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07–
[Revise the heading and text of 5.2 to ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
OAR–2017–0416 to https://
read as follows:] AGENCY
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
5.2 Authorized Methods 40 CFR Part 52 instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
Mailer Move Update Process [EPA–R07–OAR–2017–0416; FRL–9972– edited or removed from Regulations.gov.
Certification and USPS-approved 76—Region 7] EPA may publish any comment received
alternative methods are authorized for to its public docket. Do not submit
meeting the Move Update standard. The Approval of Iowa’s Air Quality
Implementation Plan; Muscatine Sulfur electronically any information you
National Customer Support Center consider to be Confidential Business
administers and approves both Mailer Dioxide Nonattainment Area;
Availability of Supplemental Information (CBI) or other information
Move Update Process Certification and whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
alternative methods. Information and Reopening of the
Comment Period Multimedia submissions (audio, video,
5.2.1 Mailer Move Update Process etc.) must be accompanied by a written
Certification AGENCY: Environmental Protection comment. The written comment is
Agency (EPA). considered the official comment and
Mailer Move Update Process
Certification methods are as follows: ACTION: Proposed rule; availability of should include discussion of all points
a. Address Change Service (ACS). supplemental information and you wish to make. EPA will generally
b. National Change of Address reopening of the comment period. not consider comments or comment
Linkage System (NCOALink). This contents located outside of the primary
SUMMARY: On August 24, 2017, the submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or
includes both pre-mail NCOALink
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) other file sharing system). For
processing systems and the physical
published a notice of proposed
mailpiece processing equipment system: additional submission methods, the full
rulemaking to approve the Iowa State
National Change of Address Linkage EPA public comment policy,
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision for
System Mail Processing Equipment information about CBI or multimedia
(NCOALink MPE). See the NCOALink attaining the 1-hour sulfur dioxide (SO2)
submissions, and general guidance on
page (NCOALink MPE Solutions) on primary National Ambient Air Quality
making effective comments, please visit
www.postalpro.usps.com for more Standard (NAAQS) for the Muscatine
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
information on the MPE application. nonattainment area (herein called a
commenting-epa-dockets.
c. Applicable ancillary service ‘‘nonattainment plan’’) in the Federal
endorsements under 507.1.5.1 or Register. EPA received several FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
507.1.5.3, except ‘‘Forwarding Service comments, including one suggesting Tracey Casburn, Environmental
Requested.’’ that insufficient information was Protection Agency, Air Planning and
provided in the docket to allow the Development Branch, 11201 Renner
5.2.2 Alternate Methods reviewer the ability to fully evaluate the Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at
Alternate Move Update methods are nonattainment plan and EPA’s proposed (913) 551–7016, or by email at
as follows: action to approve it and another casburn.tracey@epa.gov.
a. Green & Secure: Mailpieces using comment that insufficient emissions
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
the Green & Secure alternative method inventory information for the 2018
will be excluded from the Address attainment year was provided for the Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
Quality Census Measurement and action. As a result, we are: Providing and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. This section
Assessment Process under 5.3. Details additional information in the docket provides additional information by
are available in Publication 685, and clarifying that all information, addressing the following:
Publication for Streamlined Mail including files that are too large to be I. What action is EPA taking?
Acceptance for Letters and Flats, provided in the docket, are available II. What is the background for this action?
available at www.postalpro.usps.com. upon request; providing an updated III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:00 Jan 08, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09JAP1.SGM 09JAP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_1003/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 2018 / Proposed Rules 999
The state’s nonattainment SIP Station (LGS) located in nearby Louisa TABLE 3—POPULATION GROWTH DATA
provided a 2018 projected emissions County (presented as a potential to emit FOR MUSCATINE COUNTY—Continued
inventory only for the stationary sources (PTE) level as provided by the state);
that would be controlled under the SIP emissions from the less than 1 ton per 2020 ...................................... 44,225
(Grain Processing Corporation, year (tpy) point sources that were
Muscatine Power and Water and included in the baseline emission Next, EPA developed growth factors
Monsanto); the state’s 2018 projected inventory; and emissions from the area by computing population ratios by
emissions are provided in table 2. As source, fire, nonroad mobile, and comparing the projected 2020
noted in EPA’s proposal, the inventory onroad mobile source categories. Tables population to the 2010 population and
was developed assuming each SO2 3 through 6 provide information on how then comparing the 2020 population to
source operates 8,760 hours per year at EPA completed the 2018 projections the 2015 population, as provided in
its permitted maximum allowable from the area source, fire, nonroad table 4.
emission rate. mobile, and onroad mobile source
categories as well as the less than 1 tpy TABLE 4—2018 GROWTH FACTORS
TABLE 2—PROJECTED 2018 ALLOW- point sources. A summary of the 2018
ABLE ANNUAL SO2 EMISSIONS FROM projected emissions inventory is 2018 Growth factors
CONTROL STRATEGY SOURCES provided in table 7.
As with the state’s 2011 baseline 1.03 ....................................... 2020/2010
FROM THE NONATTAINMENT PLAN
emissions inventory, the fire, nonroad 1.02 ....................................... 2020/2015
Projected 2018 emissions for the controlled mobile, onroad mobile and area source
sources emissions are county-wide and not
specific to the partial Muscatine County Then, EPA downloaded the 2011 and
2018 SO2 nonattainment area. EPA increased the 2014 emissions from the National
Facility Emissions
emissions based on population growth Emissions Inventory (NEI) and
(tpy) multiplied the NEI values by the growth
factors. In order to complete these
projections, EPA first gathered factors to calculate a 2018 maximum
Grain Processing Corpora-
tion .................................... 167 population projections for Muscatine
projection value, as provided in table 5.
Muscatine Power and Water 5,051 county, as seen in table 3.1 That is, EPA multiplied the 2011 NEI
Monsanto .............................. 1,196 base year emissions by the 2018 growth
TABLE 3—POPULATION GROWTH DATA factor of 1.03 and the 2014 NEI base
In this supplemental document, EPA year emissions by the 2018 growth
FOR MUSCATINE COUNTY
is providing an update to the state’s factor of 1.02, then selected the highest
2018 projected emissions inventory for estimate for each source category as the
Population projections
public inspection. The updated 2018 2018 maximum projected emissions
projected emissions inventory includes: 2010 ...................................... 42,760 (data have been rounded to the nearest
Emissions from Louisa Generating 2015 ...................................... 43,453 whole number).
TABLE 5—2018 SULFUR DIOXIDE EMISSIONS PROJECTIONS MUSCATINE COUNTY IOWA
[Tons]
2018 Sulfur dioxide emissions projections Muscatine County Iowa
(tons)
2018 2018 2018
2011 a 2014 b (2011) (2014) Maximum
Fire ....................................................................................... 9 13 9 13 13
Area Sources ....................................................................... 10 5 10 5 10
Nonroad Mobile c .................................................................. 2 1 2 1 2
Onroad Mobile ..................................................................... 3 4 3 4 4
a 2011NEIV2.
b 2014NEIV1.
c Marine/Aircraft/Rail emissions were included in the nonroad category, rather than area source category for 2011.
In order to project the 2018 emissions Tank Car Co.—Muscatine), EPA selected onroad moble, fire and area source
for the less than 1 tpy sources provided the highest emissions from the 2008 to category projected 2018 emissions
in the 2011 baseline emission inventory 2015 time period as the sources’ would be about .13 percent of the partial
(HNI Corporation—North and Central projected 2018 emissions, table 6. The county nonattainment area’s total
Campuses, H.J. Heinz, L.P., and Union total of the county’s nonroad mobile, emissions).2
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
1 http://www.iowadatacenter.org/ 2 The total projected 2018 emissions includes expected that the actual emissions from this source
datatables/CountyAll/co2010population LGS at its projected PTS in 2018, 15,188. It is in 2018 would be much lower.
projections20002040.pdf.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:00 Jan 08, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09JAP1.SGM 09JAP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_1003/page/3.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 6 / Tuesday, January 9, 2018 / Proposed Rules 1001
The SIP is not approved to apply on List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 to its public docket. Do not submit
any Indian reservation land or in any Environmental protection, Air electronically any information you
other area where EPA or an Indian tribe pollution control, Incorporation by consider to be Confidential Business
has demonstrated that a tribe has reference, Reporting and recordkeeping Information (CBI) or other information
jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian requirements, Sulfur oxides. whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
country, the rule does not have tribal Multimedia submissions (audio, video,
implications and will not impose Dated: December 21, 2017. etc.) must be accompanied by a written
substantial direct costs on tribal James B. Gulliford, comment. The written comment is
governments or preempt tribal law as Regional Administrator, Region 7. considered the official comment and
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 [FR Doc. 2018–00026 Filed 1–8–18; 8:45 am] should include discussion of all points
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). BILLING CODE 6560–50–P you wish to make. The EPA will
This action also does not have generally not consider comments or
Federalism implications because it does comment contents located outside of the
not have substantial direct effects on the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION primary submission (i.e. on the web,
States, on the relationship between the AGENCY cloud, or other file sharing system). For
national government and the States, or additional submission methods, please
on the distribution of power and 40 CFR Part 52 contact the person identified in the FOR
responsibilities among the various [EPA–R09–OAR–2017–0680; FRL–9972– FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
levels of government, as specified in 83—Region 9] For the full EPA public comment policy,
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, information about CBI or multimedia
August 10, 1999). Thus Executive Order Approval of California Air Plan submissions, and general guidance on
13132 does not apply to this action. Revisions, Yolo-Solano Air Quality making effective comments, please visit
This action merely proposes to approve Management District http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
a state rule implementing a Federal commenting-epa-dockets.
standard, and does not alter the AGENCY: Environmental Protection
relationship or the distribution of power Agency (EPA). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
and responsibilities established in the ACTION: Proposed rule. Rebecca Newhouse, EPA Region IX,
CAA. This rulemaking also is not (415) 972–3004, newhouse.rebecca@
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection epa.gov.
subject to Executive Order 13045, Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a
‘‘Protection of Children from revision to the Yolo-Solano Air Quality SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Management District (YSAQMD) Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) portion of the California State and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
because it proposes to approve a state
Implementation Plan (SIP). This
rule implementing a Federal standard. Table of Contents
revision concerns emissions of volatile
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s
role is to approve state choices, organic compounds (VOCs) from I. The State’s Submittal
organic liquid storage and transfer A. What rule did the State submit?
provided that they meet the criteria of B. Are there other versions of this rule?
the CAA. In this context, in the absence operations. We are proposing to approve
a local rule to regulate these emission C. What is the purpose of the rule revision?
of a prior existing requirement for the II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Proposed
State to use voluntary consensus sources under the Clean Air Act (CAA
Action
standards (VCS), EPA has no authority or the Act). We are taking comments on A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule?
to disapprove a state submission for this proposal and plan to follow with a B. Does the rule meet the evaluation
failure to use VCS. It would thus be final action. criteria?
inconsistent with applicable law for DATES: Any comments must arrive by C. EPA Recommendations To Further
EPA when it reviews a state submission, February 8, 2018. Improve the Rule
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, D. Proposed Action and Request for Public
to use VCS in place of a state Comment
submission that otherwise satisfies the identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– III. Incorporation by Reference
provisions of the CAA. Thus, the OAR–2017–0680 at http://www. IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
requirements of section 12(d) of the regulations.gov, or via email to Rebecca
National Technology Transfer and Newhouse, at newhouse.rebecca@ I. The State’s Submittal
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. epa.gov. For comments submitted at A. What rule did the State submit?
272 note) do not apply. This action does Regulations.gov, follow the online
not impose an information collection instructions for submitting comments. Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this
burden under the provisions of the Once submitted, comments cannot be proposal with the dates that it was
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 removed or edited from Regulations.gov. adopted by the local air agency and
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Burden is defined For either manner of submission, the submitted by the California Air
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). EPA may publish any comment received Resources Board (CARB).
TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULE
Amended/
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Local agency Rule No. Rule title Submitted
revised
YSAQMD .................................. 2.21 Organic Liquid Storage and Transfer ................................... 09/14/16 01/24/17
On April 17, 2017, the EPA completeness criteria in 40 CFR part 51 B. Are there other versions of this rule?
determined that the submittal for Appendix V, which must be met before We approved an earlier version of
YSAQMD Rule 2.21 met the formal EPA review. Rule 2.21 into the SIP on October 31,
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:00 Jan 08, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\09JAP1.SGM 09JAP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_1003/page/5.svg)
Document Created: 2018-01-09 02:18:42
Document Modified: 2018-01-09 02:18:42
| 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; availability of supplemental information and reopening of the comment period. | |
| Dates | The comment period for the proposed rule published on August 24, 2017 (82 FR 40086) (FRL-9966-60-Region 7) is reopened. Comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number EPA-RO7-OAR-2017-0416 must be received on or before February 8, 2018. | |
| Contact | Tracey Casburn, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at (913) 551-7016, or by email at [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 83 FR 997 | |
| CFR Associated | Environmental Protection; Air Pollution Control; Incorporation by Reference; Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements and Sulfur Oxides |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR