```

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 128 (Thursday, July 3, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 37976-37980]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-15686]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2014-0365; FRL-9913-04-Region 7]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Iowa; Regional 
Haze State Implementation Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing 
approval of a revision to the Iowa State Implementation Plan (SIP) 
submitted by the State of Iowa on July 16, 2013. Iowa's July 16, 2013, 
SIP submission (``progress report SIP'') addresses requirements of the 
Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) and EPA's rules that require states to 
submit periodic reports describing progress towards reasonable progress 
goals (RPGs) established for regional haze and a determination of the 
adequacy of the state's existing SIP addressing regional haze 
(``regional haze SIP''). EPA is proposing approval of Iowa's progress 
report SIP submission on the basis that it addresses the progress 
report and adequacy determination requirements for the first 
implementation period for regional haze.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 4, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. 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 or Courier: Ms. Jodi Harper, Air Planning 
and Development Branch, Air and Waste Management Division, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 7, 11201 Renner Boulevard, 
Lenexa, Kansas 66219.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-
2014-0365. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be

[[Page 37977]]

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: Ms. Jodi Harper, Air Planning and 
Development Branch, Air and Waste Management Division, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 7, 11201 Renner Boulevard, 
Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at (913) 551-7483 or by email at 
harper.jodi@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' or 
``our'' refer to EPA. This section provides additional information by 
addressing the following:

I. What is the background for EPA's proposed action?
II. What are the requirements for the regional haze progress report 
SIPs and adequacy determinations?
    A. Regional Haze Progress Report SIP
    B. Adequacy Determination of the Current Regional Haze SIP
III. What is EPA's analysis of Iowa's progress report SIP and 
adequacy determination?
    A. Regional Haze Progress Report SIPs
    1. 40 CFR 51.308(g)(1)
    2. 40 CFR 51.308(g)(2)
    3. 40 CFR 51.308(g)(3)
    4. 40 CFR 51.308(g)(4)
    5. 40 CFR 51.308(g)(5)
    6. 40 CFR 51.308(g)(6)
    7. 40 CFR 51.308(g)(7)
    B. Determination of Adequacy of Existing Regional Haze Plan
IV. What action is EPA proposing to take?

I. What is the background for EPA's proposed action?

    States are required to submit a progress report in the form of a 
SIP revision every five years that evaluates progress towards the RPGs 
for each mandatory Class I Federal area within the state and in each 
mandatory Class I Federal area outside the state which may be affected 
by emissions from within the state. 40 CFR 51.308(g). States are also 
required to submit, at the same time as the progress report, a 
determination of the adequacy of the state's existing regional haze 
SIP. 40 CFR 51.308(h). The first progress report SIP is due five years 
after submittal of the initial regional haze SIP. On March 25, 2008, 
the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) submitted the state's 
first regional haze SIP in accordance with 40 CFR 51.308(b).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On June 26, 2012, EPA finalized a limited approval of Iowa's 
March 25, 2008, regional haze SIP to address the first 
implementation period for regional haze (77 FR 38006). In a separate 
action, published on June 7, 2012 (77 FR 33642), EPA finalized a 
limited disapproval of the Iowa regional haze SIP because of the 
State's reliance on the Clean Air Interstate Rule to meet certain 
regional haze requirements, which EPA replaced in August 2011 with 
the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) (76 FR 48208 (Aug. 8, 
2011)). In the aforementioned June 7, 2012, action, EPA finalized a 
Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) for Iowa to replace the State's 
reliance on CAIR with reliance on CSAPR. Following these EPA 
actions, the DC Circuit issued a decision in EME Homer City 
Generation, L.P. v. EPA (hereinafter referred to as ``EME Homer 
City''), 696 F.3d 7 (D.C. Cir. 2012), vacating CSAPR and keeping 
CAIR in place pending the promulgation of a valid replacement rule. 
On April 29, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the DC Circuit 
opinion vacating CSAPR, and remanded the case for further 
proceedings. EME Homer City, 572 U.S. 134 S. Ct. 1584. CAIR 
continues to remain in place.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On April 4, 2013, IDNR provided to the Federal Land Managers, a 
revision to Iowa's SIP reporting on progress made during the first 
implementation period toward RPGs for Class I areas in the state and 
Class I areas outside the state that are affected by emissions from 
Iowa's sources. There are no Class I areas located in the State of 
Iowa. Notification was published in the Legal Notices section of the 
Des Moines Register on May 9, 2013. A public hearing was held on June 
11, 2013, at the Air Quality Bureau in Windsor Heights, and the public 
comment period ended on June 12, 2013.
    On July 16, 2013, IDNR submitted the SIP to EPA. This progress 
report SIP and accompanying cover letter also included a determination 
that the state's existing regional haze SIP requires no substantive 
revision to achieve the established regional haze visibility 
improvement and emissions reduction goals for 2018. EPA is proposing to 
approve Iowa's progress report SIP on the basis that it satisfies the 
requirements of 40 CFR 51.308(g) and 51.308(h).

II. What are the requirements for the regional haze progress report 
SIPs and adequacy determinations?

A. Regional Haze Progress Report SIP

    Under 40 CFR 51.308(g), states must submit a regional haze progress 
report as a SIP revision every five years and must address, at a 
minimum, the seven elements found in 40 CFR 51.308(g). As described in 
further detail in section III below, 40 CFR 51.308(g) requires a 
description of the status of measures in the approved regional haze 
SIP; a summary of emissions reductions achieved; an assessment of 
visibility conditions for each Class I area in the state; an analysis 
of 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 progress in 
Class I areas impacted by the state's sources; an assessment of the 
sufficiency of the approved regional haze SIP; and a review of the 
state's visibility monitoring strategy.

B. Adequacy Determinations of the Current Regional Haze SIP

    Under 40 CFR 51.308(h), states are required to submit, at the same 
time as the progress report SIP, 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. As described in 
further detail in section III below, 40 CFR 51.308(h) requires states 
to either: (1) Submit a negative declaration to EPA that no further 
substantive revision to

[[Page 37978]]

the state's existing regional haze SIP is needed; (2) provide 
notification to EPA (and other state(s) that participated in the 
regional planning process) if the state determines that its existing 
regional haze SIP is or may be inadequate to ensure reasonable progress 
at one or more Class I areas due to emissions from sources in other 
state(s) that participated in the regional planning process, and 
collaborate with these other state(s) to develop additional strategies 
to address deficiencies; (3) provide notification with supporting 
information to EPA if the state determines that its existing regional 
haze SIP is or may be inadequate to ensure reasonable progress at one 
or more Class I areas due to emissions from sources in another country; 
or (4) revise its regional haze SIP to address deficiencies within one 
year if the state determines that its existing regional haze SIP is or 
may be inadequate to ensure reasonable progress in one or more Class I 
areas due to emissions from sources within the state.

III. What is EPA's analysis of Iowa's regional haze progress report and 
adequacy determination?

    On July 16, 2013, IDNR submitted a revision to Iowa's regional haze 
SIP to address progress made towards RPGs of Class I areas in the state 
and Class I areas outside the state that are affected by emissions from 
Iowa's sources. This progress report SIP also included a determination 
of the adequacy of the state's existing regional haze SIP. Iowa has no 
Class I areas within its borders. IDNR utilized particulate matter 
source apportionment (PSAT) techniques for photochemical modeling 
conducted by the Central Regional Air Planning Association (CENRAP) to 
identify four Class I areas in two nearby states potentially impacted 
by Iowa sources: Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness (BOWA) and 
Voyagers National Park (VOYA) in Minnesota, and Isle Royale National 
Park (ISLE) and Seney Wilderness Area (SENE) in Michigan. Collectively 
these four Class I areas are referred to as the Northern Midwest Class 
I areas. 77 FR 11979.

A. Regional Haze Progress Report SIPs

    The following sections summarize: (1) Each of the seven elements 
that must be addressed by the progress report under 40 CFR 51.308(g); 
(2) how Iowa's progress report SIP addressed each element; and (3) 
EPA's analysis and proposed determination as to whether the state 
satisfied each element.
1. 40 CFR 51.308(g)(1)
    40 CFR 51.308(g)(1) requires a description of the status of 
implementation of all measures included in the regional haze SIP for 
achieving RPGs for Class I areas both within and outside the state.
    Iowa evaluated the status of all measures included in its 2008 
regional haze SIP in accordance with 40 CFR 51.308(g)(1). Specifically, 
in its progress report SIP, Iowa summarizes the status of the emissions 
reduction measures that were included in the final iteration of the 
Central Regional Air Planning Association (CENRAP) regional haze 
emissions inventory and RPG modeling. Iowa also discusses the status of 
those measures that were not included in the final CENRAP emissions 
inventory and were not relied upon in the initial regional haze SIP to 
meet RPGs. The state notes that the emissions reductions from these 
measures, which are relied upon by Iowa for reasonable progress, will 
help ensure Class I areas impacted by Iowa sources achieve their RPGs. 
The measures include applicable Federal programs (e.g., mobile source 
rules, Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standards, Federal 
and state consent agreements, and Federal and state control strategies 
for electric generating units (EGUs)). This summary includes a 
discussion of the benefits associated with each measure.
    EPA proposes to find that Iowa's analysis adequately addresses 40 
CFR 51.308(g)(1). The state documents the implementation status of 
measures from its regional haze SIP as well as describes significant 
measures resulting from EPA regulations other than the regional haze 
program as they pertain to the state's sources. The progress report SIP 
highlights the effect of several Federal control measures both 
nationally and in the CENRAP region, and when possible, in the state.
    Regarding the status of BART and reasonable progress control 
requirements for sources in the state, Iowa's progress report SIP notes 
that no non-EGU BART sources were found to be BART eligible and 
therefore, no BART specific emissions limits were developed. 
Additionally, Iowa summarized its reasonable progress control 
determinations from its regional haze SIP. Because the state found no 
additional controls to be reasonable for the first implementation 
period for sources evaluated for reasonable progress in Iowa, no 
further discussion of the status of controls was necessary in the 
progress report SIP.
    EPA proposes to conclude that Iowa has adequately addressed the 
status of control measures in its regional haze SIP as required by 40 
CFR 51.308(g)(1). Iowa describes the implementation status of measures 
from its regional haze SIP, including the status of control measures to 
meet BART and reasonable progress requirements, the status of 
significant measures resulting from EPA regulations, as well as 
measures that came into effect since the CENRAP analyses for the 
regional haze SIP were completed.
2. 40 CFR 51.308(g)(2)
    40 CFR 51.308(g)(2) requires a summary of the emissions reductions 
achieved in the state through the measures subject to 40 CFR 
51.308(g)(1).
    In its regional haze SIP and progress report SIP, Iowa focuses its 
assessment on NOX and SO2 emissions from EGUs 
because available information from multiple sources (CENRAP, CAIR 
provided by EPA's Clean Air Markets Division (CAMD), etc.) determined 
that these compounds accounted for the majority of the visibility-
impairing pollution in the Central Region.
    During the period from 2002-2011, SO2 emissions 
decreased in Iowa by 25 percent.\2\ Also during that same period, 
NOX emissions decreased by 51 percent. Iowa noted that 
Integrated Planning Model (IPM) projections for the 2018 planning 
period indicated an anticipated increase in EGU SO2 
emissions and decrease in EGU NOX emissions. Iowa notes that 
the 2011 actual SO2 and NOX EGU emissions were 
significantly below the projected 2018 values, representing 
SO2 and NOX emissions that are 37 percent and 41 
percent below their 2018 projections. Iowa also noted that these 
decreases in emissions have occurred while actual heat input has 
increased, indicating the reductions reflect cleaner generation and not 
merely decreased electricity demand.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See also sections III.A.4. and III.A.6. of this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA proposes to conclude that Iowa has adequately addressed 40 CFR 
51.308(g)(2). The state provides estimates, and where available, actual 
emissions reductions of NOX and SO2 from EGUs in 
Iowa that have occurred since Iowa submitted its regional haze SIP. 
Iowa appropriately focused on NOX and SO2 
emissions from its EGUs in its progress report SIP because it 
previously identified these emissions as the most significant 
contributors to visibility impairment at those areas that Iowa sources 
impact. Given the large NOX and SO2 reductions at 
EGUs that have actually occurred, further analysis of emissions from 
other sources or other

[[Page 37979]]

pollutants, was ultimately unnecessary in this first implementation 
period. Because no additional controls were found to be reasonable for 
reasonable progress for the first implementation period for evaluated 
sources in Iowa, EPA proposes to find that no further discussion of 
emissions reductions from controls was necessary in the progress report 
SIP.
3. 40 CFR 51.308(g)(3)
    40 CFR 51.308(g)(3) requires that states with Class I areas provide 
the following information for the most impaired and least impaired days 
for each area, with values expressed in terms of five-year averages of 
these annual values:\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The ``most impaired days'' and ``least impaired days'' in 
the regional haze rule refers to the average visibility impairment 
(measured in deciviews) for the twenty percent of monitored days in 
a calendar year with the highest and lowest amount of visibility 
impairment, respectively, averaged over a five-year period. 40 CFR 
51.301.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (i) current visibility conditions;
    (ii) the difference between current visibility conditions and 
baseline visibility conditions; and
    (iii) the change in visibility impairment over the past five years.
    Iowa does not have any Class I areas within its boundaries, and as 
this section pertains only to states containing Class I areas, no 
further discussion is necessary. EPA proposes to conclude that Iowa has 
adequately addressed 40 CFR 51.308(g)(3).
4. 40 CFR 51.308(g)(4)
    40 CFR 51.308(g)(4) requires an analysis tracking emissions changes 
of visibility-impairing pollutants from the state's sources by type or 
category over the past five years based on the most recent updated 
emissions inventory.
    In its progress report SIP, Iowa presents data from a statewide 
emissions inventory developed for the year 2002 and compares this data 
to the National Emissions Inventory (NEI) version 2 (dated April 10, 
2012), or simply the 2008 NEIv2. For both the 2002 dataset and the 2008 
NEIv2 data, pollutants inventoried include volatile organic compounds, 
NOX, fine particulate matter, coarse particulate matter, 
ammonia, and SO2. The emissions inventories from both the 
2002 dataset and the 2008 NEIv2 include the following: ammonia, area, 
fugitive dust, offroad and onroad mobile sources, stationary point 
sources, road dust, fires, and biogenic sources. The comparison of 
emissions inventory data shows that emissions of the key visibility-
impairing pollutants identified by CENRAP for the central states, 
NOX and SO2, continued to drop from 2002 to 2008 
(decreasing 68,109 and 37,380 tons, respectively). While not all 
emissions in Iowa contribute to visibility impairment at a Class I 
area, Iowa chose to include a complete statewide inventory containing 
emission rates for all anthropogenic and biogenic sources, however in 
the Midwest, point source emissions of NOX and 
SO2 are often more closely evaluated in the context of 
regional haze.
    The comparison also shows that a projected increase in emissions of 
fine and coarse particulate matter occurred, but increased less than 
the projected amount. Actual increase in fine and course particulate 
matter emissions during that same time period was by 20,318 and 173,147 
tons, respectively. This increase was driven almost entirely by 
fugitive dust emissions, and to a lesser extent the road dust sector 
for coarse particulate emissions. Iowa also noted that the 2002 
fugitive dust and road dust emissions estimates represent values after 
the application of transport factors, while the 2008 data have not been 
similarly adjusted. While the transport factor discrepancy does not 
permit a precise comparison of the 2002 and 2008 fugitive dust and road 
dust emissions, Iowa notes that a crude evaluation is possible assuming 
a simple fifty percent reduction of the 2008 fugitive dust and road 
dust emissions as a surrogate for the application of county-level 
transport factors. This simple reduction would bring the 2008 fine 
particulate and coarse particulate fugitive and road dust emissions in 
line and generally below the 2002 values. Iowa further notes that such 
emissions from Iowa are not known to contribute significantly to 
visibility impairment at Class I areas.
    EPA proposes to conclude that Iowa has adequately addressed 40 CFR 
51.308(g)(4). While ideally the five-year period to be analyzed for 
emissions inventory changes is the time period since the current 
regional haze SIP was submitted, there is an inevitable time lag in 
developing and reporting complete emissions inventories once quality-
assured emissions data becomes available. Therefore, EPA believes that 
there is some flexibility in the five-year time period that states can 
select. Iowa tracked changes in emissions of visibility-impairing 
pollutants using the 2008 National Emissions Inventory, the most recent 
updated inventory of actual emissions for the state at the time that it 
developed the progress report SIP. EPA believes that Iowa's use of the 
six-year period from 2002-2008 reflects a conservative picture of the 
actual emissions realized between 2002-2013, as in many cases, Iowa had 
already reached or surpassed their 2018 goals by 2008. There also is a 
general downward trend from 2002-2008, so it is likely additional 
NOX and SO2 emissions reductions occurred between 
the 2008 data and actual conditions in 2013.
5. 40 CFR 51.308(g)(5)
    40 CFR 51.308(g)(5) requires an assessment of any significant 
changes in anthropogenic emissions within or outside the state that 
have occurred over the past five years that have limited or impeded 
progress in reducing pollutant emissions and improving visibility in 
Class I areas impacted by the state's sources.
    In its progress report SIP, Iowa addresses the changes in 
anthropogenic emissions between the 2008 NEIv2 data and the 2018 
projections from the initial regional haze SIP. Iowa noted that there 
have been significant reductions among anthropogenic emissions 
categories, and that during the period from 2002-2008, in many cases 
the emissions reductions had already dropped below the 2018 
projections. An increase in ammonia (NH3) was noted, 
however, the actualized increase was less than the projected increase 
and Iowa is still on track to meet the 2018 NH3 emissions 
target. Iowa also noted that it is uncertain if this increase is a 
reasonable representation of actual emissions increases or if it is 
computational in nature, because of changes to the versions and inputs 
to the Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) NH3 emissions model. 
Iowa concluded that emissions reductions of all pollutants in 2008 were 
generally ahead of schedule or had already met the 2018 projections, 
and that no changes in anthropogenic emissions have limited or impeded 
progress in reducing pollutant emissions and improving visibility.
    EPA proposes to conclude that Iowa has adequately addressed 40 CFR 
51.308(g)(5). Iowa demonstrated that there are no significant changes 
in anthropogenic emissions that have impeded progress in reducing 
emissions and improving visibility in Class I areas impacted by Iowa 
sources. The state referenced its analyses in the progress report SIP 
identifying an overall downward trend in these emissions from 2002 to 
2008. Further, the progress report SIP shows that Iowa is on track to 
meeting its 2018 emissions projections.
6. 40 CFR 51.308(g)(6)
    40 CFR 51.308(g)(6) requires an assessment of whether the current 
regional haze SIP is sufficient to enable Iowa, or other states, to 
meet the RPGs

[[Page 37980]]

for Class I areas affected by emissions from the state.
    In its progress report Iowa states that it believes that the 
elements and strategies outlined in its original regional haze SIP are 
sufficient to enable Iowa and other neighboring states to meet all the 
established RPGs. To support this conclusion, Iowa notes that the 
actual 2011 EGU emissions of SO2 and NOX are 
already below the 2018 projected emissions (by 55,408 and 27,055 tons, 
respectively), with further decreases expected. In particular, Iowa 
notes that the emissions reductions already achieved in the 2007 to 
2011 period and the additional reductions not accounted for in the 
original regional haze SIP (as discussed previously for purposes of 40 
CFR 51.308(g)(1)) further support Iowa's conclusion that the regional 
haze SIP's elements and strategies are sufficient to meet the 
established RPGs.
    EPA proposes to conclude that Iowa has adequately addressed 40 CFR 
51.308(g)(6). EPA views this requirement as a qualitative assessment 
that should evaluate emissions and visibility trends and other readily 
available information, including expected emissions reductions 
associated with measures with compliance dates that have not yet become 
effective. Iowa referenced the improving visibility trends at affected 
Class I areas and the downward emissions trends in the state, with a 
focus on NOX and SO2 emissions from Iowa's EGUs 
that support Iowa's determination that its regional haze SIP is 
sufficient to meet RPGs for Class I areas outside the state impacted by 
Iowa sources. EPA believes that Iowa's conclusion regarding the 
sufficiency of the regional haze SIP is appropriate because of the 
calculated visibility improvement using the latest available data and 
the downward trend in NOX and SO2 emissions from 
EGUs in Iowa.
7. 40 CFR 51.308(g)(7)
    40 CFR 51.308(g)(7) requires a review of the state's visibility 
monitoring strategy and an assessment of whether any modifications to 
the monitoring strategy are necessary. In its progress report SIP, Iowa 
summarizes the existing IMPROVE monitoring network and its intended 
continued reliance on IMPROVE for visibility planning. Iowa operates 
two IMPROVE Protocol sampling sites, one at Viking Lake State Park in 
southwestern Iowa, and the other at Lake Sugema Wildlife Management in 
southeastern Iowa.
    EPA proposes to conclude that Iowa has adequately addressed the 
sufficiency of its monitoring strategy as required by 40 CFR 
51.308(g)(7). Iowa reaffirmed its continued reliance upon the IMPROVE 
monitoring network.

B. Determination of Adequacy of Existing Regional Haze Plan

    Under 40 CFR 51.308(h), states are required to take one of four 
possible actions based on the information gathered and conclusions made 
in the progress report SIP. The following section summarizes: (1) the 
action taken by Iowa under 40 CFR 51.308(h); (2) Iowa's rationale for 
the selected action; and (3) EPA's analysis and proposed determination 
regarding the state's action.
    In its progress report SIP, Iowa took the action provided for by 40 
CFR 51.308(h)(1), which allows a state to submit a negative declaration 
to EPA if the state determines that the existing regional haze SIP 
requires no further substantive revision at this time to achieve the 
RPGs for Class I areas affected by the state's sources. The basis for 
Iowa's negative declaration is the findings from the progress report 
(as discussed in section III.A of this action), including the findings 
that: NOX and SO2 emissions from Iowa's sources 
have decreased beyond original projections; and the NOX and 
SO2 emissions from EGUs in Iowa are already below the levels 
projected for 2018 in the regional haze SIP and are expected to 
continue to trend downward for the next five years. Based on these 
findings, EPA proposes to agree with Iowa's conclusion under 40 CFR 
51.308(h) that no further substantive changes to its regional haze SIP 
are required at this time.

IV. What action is EPA proposing to take?

    EPA is proposing approval of a revision to the Iowa SIP, submitted 
by the State of Iowa on July 16, 2013, as meeting the applicable 
regional haze requirements as set forth in 40 CFR 51.308(g) and 
51.308(h).

Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the 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 
proposed 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 proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the CAA; and
     does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as 
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), 
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in 
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct 
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen 
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: June 13, 2014.
Mark J. Hague,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7.
[FR Doc. 2014-15686 Filed 7-2-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
```