Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 125 / Thursday, June 28, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 30345 

Consideration supporting this 

determination is available in the docket 

where indicated under ADDRESSES. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 110 

Anchorage grounds. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 

CFR part 110 as follows: 

PART 110—ANCHORAGE 

REGULATIONS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 110 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 471, 1221 through 

1236, 2071; 33 CFR 1.05–1; Department of 

Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. Add § 110.209 to read as follows: 

§ 110.209 Saint Lawrence Seaway 

Anchorages, New York. 

(a) Carleton Island Anchorage; Saint 

Lawrence River, Cape Vincent, New 

York—(1) Carleton Island Anchorage 

Area. The waters bounded by a line 

connecting the following points, 

beginning at 44°11′57.11′′ N, 

076°14′04.62′′ W; thence to 44°11′21.80′′ 

N, 076°14′05.77′′ W; thence to 

44°11′34.07′′ N, 076°15′49.57′′ W; 

44°11′35.35′′ N, 076°16′47.50′′ W; 

44°11′43.49′′ N, 076°16′48.00′′ W; 

44°11′57.11′′ N, 076°14′04.62′′ W and 

back to the beginning point. These 

coordinates are based on WGS 84. 

(2) Tibbett’s Island Anchorage Area. 

The waters bounded by a line 

connecting the following points, 

beginning at 44°05′20.27′′ N, 

076°23′25.78′′ W; thence to 44°05′21.85′′ 

N, 076°22′40.97′′ W; thence to 

44°04′34.08′′ N, 076°23′09.98′′ W; 

44°04′07.72′′ N, 076°23′33.76′′ W; 

44°04′32.78′′ N, 076°24′43.80′′ W; 

44°05′44.37′′ N, 076°23′56.29′′ W; 

44°05′20.27′′ N, 076°23′25.78′′ W and 

back to the beginning point. These 

coordinates are based on WGS 84. 

(b) The regulations. (1) Anchors must 

not be placed in the Saint Lawrence 

Seaway shipping channel. No portion of 

the hull or rigging may extend outside 

the limits of the anchorage area. 

(2) No vessel may occupy any general 

anchorage described in paragraph (a) of 

this section for a period longer than 10 

days unless approval is obtained from 

the Captain of the Port Buffalo (COTP) 

for that purpose. 

(3) The COTP, or authorized 

representative, may require vessels to 

depart from the Anchorages described 

in paragraph (a) of this section before 

the expiration of the authorized or 

maximum stay. The COTP, or 

authorized representative, will provide 

at least 12-hour notice to a vessel 

required to depart the anchorages. 

Dated: June 25, 2018. 

J.M. Nunan, 

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, 

Ninth Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. 2018–13928 Filed 6–27–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket Number USCG–2018–0105] 

RIN 1625–AA87 

Security Zone; Seattle’s Seafair Fleet 

Week Moving Vessels, Puget Sound, 

WA 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is amending 

its Seattle Seafair Fleet Week Moving 

Vessel Security Zone regulation. In 

response to public comment, we are not 

finalizing our proposal to remove 

existing language about a published 

notice identifying the designated 

participating vessels. However, last 

minute changes to the participating 

vessels in the Parade of Ships during 

Fleet Week may cause the published 

notice to become outdated after 

publication. In that case the Coast Guard 

will use actual notice to enforce a 

security zone around participating 

vessels, as well as other methods of 

informing the public about changes, and 

we have amended the regulation to 

reflect the possibility of changes. 

DATES: This rule is effective July 30, 

2018. 

ADDRESSES: To view documents 

mentioned in this preamble as being 

available in the docket, go to http://

www.regulations.gov, type USCG–2018– 

0105 in the ‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click 

‘‘SEARCH.’’ Click on Open Docket 

Folder on the line associated with this 

rule. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this rule, call or 

email Petty Officer Zachary Spence, 

Sector Puget Sound Waterways 

Management Branch, U.S. Coast Guard; 

telephone 206–217–6051, email 

SectorPugetSoundWWM@uscg.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Table of Abbreviations 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

DHS Department of Homeland Security 

FR Federal Register 

NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking 

§ Section 

U.S.C. United States Code 

II. Background Information and 

Regulatory History 

On July 10, 2012 (77 FR 40521), the 

Coast Guard Captain of the Port, Sector 

Puget Sound, published a final rule that 

became effective Aug. 1, 2012; the 

Seattle’s Seafair Fleet Week Moving 

Vessels security zone. On April 6, 2018, 

the Coast Guard published a notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM) titled 

Security Zone; Seattle’s Seafair Fleet 

Week Moving Vessels, Puget Sound, 

WA (83 FR 14801) in which we 

proposed to amend the current final 

rule. There we stated why we issued the 

NPRM, and invited comments on our 

proposed regulatory action. During the 

comment period that ended May 21, 

2018, we received three written 

submissions. 

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule 

The Coast Guard is amending its 

Seattle Seafair Fleet Week Moving 

Vessel Security Zone regulation, 33 CFR 

165.1333, under authority in 33 U.S.C. 

1231. In past years, some of the 

designated participating vessels which 

required the security zone have been 

rescheduled at the last moment due to 

operational needs, and as a result, the 

changes precluded the Coast Guard from 

providing sufficient notice of which 

vessels are participating in the parade of 

ships in the Federal Register. The 

amended regulation will allow the Coast 

Guard to publish dates and times of the 

Parade of Ships in the Federal Register 

and Local Notice to Mariners, and of the 

designated participating vessels it is 

aware of at the time it issues the notice, 

and provide that actual notice will be 

used to enforce the security zone around 

any vessels designated after the notice 

has been issued. Further, for the reasons 

discussed above, the amended 

regulation will require that the Coast 

Guard publish the above information 

before the beginning of the Parade of 

Ships instead of the three days currently 

provided for in the regulation. The 

names of the designated vessels will 

also be published in a Broadcast Notice 

to Mariners. 

IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, 

and the Rule 

As noted above, we received three 

written submissions on our NPRM 

published April 6, 2018. The first 

commenter requested to stop the 

Russian and Chinese fishing ships from 

fishing within the U.S. Exclusive 

Economic Zone. As this comment does 

not relate to this rulemaking, no 

response is required. The second 

commenter requested the Agency stop 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
30346 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 125 / Thursday, June 28, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

wasting water from several of the Snake 

River hydroelectric dams that provide 

power and water for the navigation of 

vessel traffic for the region. This 

comment also does not relate the subject 

matter of this rulemaking and no 

response is required. 

The third commenter provided a 

number of different concerns, each of 

which we address in turn as follows. 

First, the commenter provided that 

the Thirteenth Coast Guard District 

failed to contact ‘‘interested community 

groups’’ as recommended by the Office 

for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, U.S. 

Department of Homeland Security, prior 

to implementation of exclusion zones. 

As noted by the commenter, the Coast 

Guard published a notice of proposed 

rulemaking in the Federal Register, 

providing notice of a proposed change 

of the notice of an annual security zone. 

Second, the commenter provided that 

the Parade of Ships fails to comply with 

33 CFR 100.15, which details the 

procedures for submission of a marine 

event permit, and that the event had 

never been conducted in a lawful 

manner. The Coast Guard has 

determined that in light of the existing 

regulations in place, such as the Naval 

Vessel Protection Zone in 33 CFR 

165.2030, and the subject regulation, 33 

CFR 165.1333, the Parade of Ships will 

not introduce extra or unusual hazards 

to the safety of life on the navigable 

waters of the United States such that a 

marine event permit would be required 

under 33 CFR 100.15. The commenter 

provided a discussion on the 

information required in a marine event 

permit application. As the discussion on 

what is required in a marine event 

permit does not relate to the proposed 

amendments to 33 CFR 165.1333, no 

further response is required. 

Third, the commenter provided that 

proposed revisions to 33 CFR 165.1333 

are actually due to previous Coast Guard 

errors instead of changing schedules, 

because it appears from prior 

correspondence with the Coast Guard 

that the Coast Guard may have 

mistakenly left out U.S. Navy vessels 

from the applicability of this zone. 

Naval Vessel Protection Zones under 33 

CFR 165.2030 apply to large U.S. Navy 

vessels, which have historically 

participated in the Parade of Ships. As 

stated in the NPRM for the regulatory 

change we proposed, the reason why 

this rule is being amended is due to last 

minute changes in the vessels 

participating in the Parade of Ships due 

to operational needs. Based on this 

comment, however, we have decided to 

make a change from our proposed 

amendment to § 165.1333. We are 

amending § 165.1333(a) to explain that 

the Coast Guard may use actual notice 

to enforce security zones around 

participating vessels not included in the 

notice, in situations when due to 

operational needs there is a change after 

the notice has been issued and the 

COTP needs to add a vessel to the list 

of designated participating vessels. In 

those situations the Coast Guard will 

also announce any such changes in the 

Local Notice to Mariners. The reference 

to actual notice reflects existing 

authorities and enforcement practices, 

but we hope that stating it in the Code 

of Federal Regulations will be helpful. 

The change is within the scope of the 

proposed rule, which envisioned using 

actual notice for security zones around 

all participating vessels. 

The COTP does not designate large 

U.S. Navy vessels—those more than 100 

feet in length overall—that participate 

in the parade as designated participating 

vessels because persons who violate the 

naval vessel protection zone around 

those vessels, which are issued under 14 

U.S.C. 91 authority, are already subject 

to penalties under 33 U.S.C. 1232. 

Whether a large U.S. Navy vessels is in 

Parade of Ships or not, it will be 

surrounded by a naval vessel protection 

zone and persons should comply with 

the provisions of that regulation. 

Fourth, the commenter provided that 

Broadcast Notice to Mariners before and 

during the event is insufficient notice. 

The proposed regulatory change 

provides that the security zones will be 

enforced with actual notice which meets 

the standard set in 5 U.S.C. 552(a)(1). 

The Coast Guard considered the 

commenter’s concerns about receiving 

Broadcast Notice to Mariners and, in 

response we revised the regulatory text 

to include an email and a phone number 

which members of the public can 

contact the Captain of the Port to receive 

an updated list of participating vessels. 

Furthermore, the Coast Guard actively 

conducts outreach to those participating 

in planned First Amendment activities 

related to the Parade of Ships so as to 

ensure the safety of all participants, and 

that participants of such activities are 

aware of all means to obtain the names 

of the vessels to which regulations 

apply. 

Fifth, the commenter provided that an 

accurate list of vessels in the Parade of 

Ships is essential for vessel operators 

engaged in First Amendment activities. 

The Coast Guard concurs with this 

comment, but has pointed to the 

problem of last-minute changes making 

this objective difficult to achieve. 

Instead of eliminating the notice 

identifying participating vessels, as 

proposed, we will use actual notice to 

enforce security zones around vessels 

designated after the notice has been 

issued. In addition to actual notice, the 

Coast Guard will broadcast the names of 

the vessels to which the security zone 

applies using a Broadcast Notice to 

Mariners. 

Sixth, the commenter provided that 

the Coast Guard’s fear of free speech 

activities is irrational. The Coast 

Guard’s rule amends the manner in 

which notice will be provided as to 

which vessels will have a security zone 

during the annual Parade of Ships 

during Fleet Week. The Coast Guard 

strives to ensure that free speech 

activities are respected and 

accommodated. 

Seventh, the commenter provided that 

the Coast Guard should require an 

application for the maritime event, 

pursuant to 33 CFR 100.15, as it might 

allow for citizens to comment on the 

entire event in a meaningful way. The 

Coast Guard’s position with respect to 

marine event permits can be found in 

the response to this commenter’s second 

comment. Citizens may comment on the 

event in any way that is provided for 

under the protections of the First 

Amendment. 

Eighth, the commenter provided that 

proposed revisions to 33 CFR 165.1333 

expand restricted zones in Elliot Bay. 

The proposed amendment to 33 CFR 

165.1333 did not expand the geographic 

size nor timeframe of the security zone. 

After considering all the foregoing 

comments, the Coast Guard amended 

paragraph (a) of the regulatory text to 

maintain the notice while adding a 

provision providing for the Coast Guard 

to use actual notice for any vessels 

designated as participating vessels after 

the notice is issued. This maintains the 

notice but clarifies that we can address 

last minute changes to participating 

vessels because of operational needs. 

We also amended paragraph (e) to 

reflect additional methods of obtaining 

an up to date list of participating 

vessels, and we included both the date 

and times of the period that the 

regulation will be enforced, as opposed 

to just the date. 

This rule amends the way in which 

the Coast Guard informs the public of 

the Seattle Seafair Fleet Week Parade. In 

order to provide notice to the public 

regarding the vessels requiring the 

security zones, the Coast Guard will 

continue to publish a notice in the 

Federal Register identifying designated 

participating vessels. We will also list in 

those notices the times, in addition to 

the dates, that the security zones will be 

enforced. We will use actual notice to 

make persons aware of changes to the 

notice identifying designated 

participating vessels and we will 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 125 / Thursday, June 28, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 30347 

identify all designated participating 

vessels, included those added late, in 

both Local Notice to Mariners and 

Broadcast Notice to Mariners. 

V. Regulatory Analyses 

We developed this rule after 

considering numerous statutes and 

Executive orders related to rulemaking. 

Below we summarize our analyses 

based on a number of these statutes and 

Executive orders, and we discuss First 

Amendment rights of protestors. 

A. Regulatory Planning and Review 

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

direct agencies to assess the costs and 

benefits of available regulatory 

alternatives and, if regulation is 

necessary, to select regulatory 

approaches that maximize net benefits. 

Executive Order 13771 directs agencies 

to control regulatory costs through a 

budgeting process. This rule has not 

been designated a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action,’’ under Executive 

Order 12866. Accordingly, this rule has 

not been reviewed by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB), and 

pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt 

from the requirements of Executive 

Order 13771. 

This regulatory action determination 

is based on the fact that this rule only 

changes the means by which the public 

will be notified about the security zone. 

B. Impact on Small Entities 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 

1980, 5 U.S.C. 601–612, as amended, 

requires Federal agencies to consider 

the potential impact of regulations on 

small entities during rulemaking. The 

term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises small 

businesses, not-for-profit organizations 

that are independently owned and 

operated and are not dominant in their 

fields, and governmental jurisdictions 

with populations of less than 50,000. 

The Coast Guard received no comments 

from the Small Business Administration 

on this rulemaking. The Coast Guard 

certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this 

rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. 

While some owners or operators of 

vessels intending to transit the safety 

zone may be small entities, for the 

reasons stated in section V.A above, this 

rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on any vessel owner 

or operator. 

Under section 213(a) of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), 

we want to assist small entities in 

understanding this rule. If the rule 

would affect your small business, 

organization, or governmental 

jurisdiction and you have questions 

concerning its provisions or options for 

compliance, please contact the person 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section. 

Small businesses may send comments 

on the actions of Federal employees 

who enforce, or otherwise determine 

compliance with, Federal regulations to 

the Small Business and Agriculture 

Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman 

and the Regional Small Business 

Regulatory Fairness Boards. The 

Ombudsman evaluates these actions 

annually and rates each agency’s 

responsiveness to small business. If you 

wish to comment on actions by 

employees of the Coast Guard, call 

1–888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). 

The Coast Guard will not retaliate 

against small entities that question or 

complain about this rule or any policy 

or action of the Coast Guard. 

C. Collection of Information 

This rule will not call for a new 

collection of information under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501–3520). 

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal 

Governments 

A rule has implications for federalism 

under Executive Order 13132, 

Federalism, if it has a substantial direct 

effect 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. We have 

analyzed this rule under that Order and 

have determined that it is consistent 

with the fundamental federalism 

principles and preemption requirements 

described in Executive Order13132. 

Also, this rule does not have tribal 

implications under Executive Order 

13175, Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments, 

because it does not have a substantial 

direct effect on one or more Indian 

tribes, on the relationship between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes, 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian tribes. If you 

believe this rule has implications for 

federalism or Indian tribes, please 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires 

Federal agencies to assess the effects of 

their discretionary regulatory actions. In 

particular, the Act addresses actions 

that may result in the expenditure by a 

State, local, or tribal government, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector of 

$100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or 

more in any one year. Though this rule 

will not result in such an expenditure, 

we do discuss the effects of this rule 

elsewhere in this preamble. 

F. Environment 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Department of Homeland Security 

Directive 023–01 and Commandant 

Instruction M16475.1D, which guide the 

Coast Guard in complying with the 

National Environmental Policy Act of 

1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have 

determined that this action is one of a 

category of actions that do not 

individually or cumulatively have a 

significant effect on the human 

environment. This rule involves 

amending the way in which the Coast 

Guard will notify the public which 

vessels are designated participants in 

Seattle’s Seafair Fleet Week. It is 

categorically excluded from further 

review under paragraph L60(a) of 

Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction 

Manual 023–01–001–01, Rev. 01. A 

Record of Environmental Consideration 

supporting this determination is 

available in the docket where indicated 

under ADDRESSES. 

G. Protest Activities 

The Coast Guard respects the First 

Amendment rights of protesters. 

Protesters are asked to contact the 

person listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

coordinate protest activities so that your 

message can be received without 

jeopardizing the safety or security of 

people, places or vessels. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation 

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Security measures, 

Waterways. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 

CFR part 165 as follows: 

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 

AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 

33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; 

Department of Homeland Security Delegation 

No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. Amend § 165.1333 by revising 

paragraphs (a) and (e) to read as follows: 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
30348 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 125 / Thursday, June 28, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

§ 165.1333 Security Zones, Seattle’s 

Seafair Fleet Week moving vessels, Puget 

Sound, WA. 

(a) Location. The following areas are 

security zones: All navigable waters 

within 500 yards of each designated 

participating vessel in the Parade of 

Ships while each such vessel is in the 

Sector Puget Sound Captain of the Port 

(COTP) zone, as defined in 33 CFR 

3.65–10, during a time specified in 

paragraph (e) of this section. The Coast 

Guard will publish a notice in the 

Federal Register each year before the 

start of the Seattle Seafair Fleet Week to 

identify the designated participating 

vessels for that year. Should information 

in the notice change after publication, as 

it may for operational reasons, the Coast 

Guard will use actual notice to enforce 

security zones around participating 

vessels not in the published notice. The 

Coast Guard will also provide this 

information in the Local Notice to 

Mariners. 

* * * * * 

(e) Annual enforcement period. The 

security zones described in paragraph 

(a) of this section will be enforced 

during Seattle Seafair Fleet Week each 

year for a period of up to 1 week. The 

Seattle Seafair Fleet Week will occur 

annually sometime between July 25 and 

August 14. The annual notice published 

in the Federal Register identifying the 

designated participating vessels will 

contain the dates and times that this 

section will be enforced. The Coast 

Guard will issue a Broadcast Notice to 

Mariners before the start of the Seattle 

Seafair Fleet Week to identify the 

designated participating vessels for that 

year. In addition, members of the public 

may contact the Sector Puget Sound 

COTP at (206) 217–6002 for a list of 

participating vessels. 

Dated: June 22, 2018. 

M.M. Balding, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Captain 

of the Port Puget Sound. 

[FR Doc. 2018–13899 Filed 6–27–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2017–0143; FRL–9979– 

97—Region 7] 

Air Plan Approval; Iowa; Amendment 

to the Administrative Consent Order, 

Grain Processing Corporation, 

Muscatine, Iowa; Final Rule 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is taking final action to 

approve a revision to the State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by 

the State of Iowa for the purpose of 

incorporating an amendment to the 

Administrative Consent Order (ACO) for 

Grain Processing Corporation (GPC), 

Muscatine, Iowa. The revision amends 

the ACO to change the date for 

completion of performance testing to 

allow the state more time to complete 

processing air construction permit 

applications submitted by GPC and 

specify testing requirements as 

appropriate in the final permits. This 

revision will not impact the schedule 

for installation and operation of control 

equipment, will not alter any other 

compliance dates, and will not 

adversely affect air quality in 

Muscatine, Iowa. The state held a 30- 

day comment period, during which no 

comments were received. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on July 

30, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R07–OAR–2017–0143. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the https://www.regulations.gov 

website. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, i.e., CBI or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available through https://

www.regulations.gov or please contact 

the person identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section for 

additional information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Heather Hamilton, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Air Planning and 

Development Branch, 11201 Renner 

Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at 

(913) 551–7039, or by email at 

hamilton.heather@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. This section 

provides additional information by 

addressing the following: 

I. Background 

II. What is being addressed in this document? 

III. Have the requirements for approval of a 

SIP submission been met? 

IV. What action is EPA taking? 

V. Incorporation by Reference 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

On August 25, 2017, EPA proposed to 

approve a revision to the Iowa State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) which 

amended the Administrative Consent 

Order (ACO) for Grain Processing 

Corporation (GPC), Muscatine, Iowa. 

The revision amended the ACO to 

change the date for completion of 

performance testing from May 31, 2017, 

to May 31, 2018, to allow the state more 

time to complete processing the 

remaining air construction permit 

applications submitted by GPC, and to 

specify testing requirements as 

appropriate in the remaining final 

permits. See 82 FR 40519. In 

conjunction with the August 25, 2017 

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR), 

EPA issued a direct final rule (DFR) 

approving the amended ACO. See 82 FR 

40491. In the DFR, EPA stated that if 

adverse comments were submitted to 

EPA by September 25, 2017, the action 

would be withdrawn and not take effect. 

EPA received an adverse comment prior 

to the close of the comment period. EPA 

withdrew the DFR on October 12, 2017. 

See 82 FR 47396. 

On April 11, 2018, EPA proposed to 

incorporate the amendment to the ACO 

for GPC. See 83 FR 15526. A revised 

Technical Support Document was 

included in the docket that addressed 

background information with regard to 

air quality in Muscatine, Iowa, as well 

as declining design values for the 

National Ambient Air Quality Standard 

for fine particulate matter with a 

diameter of 2.5 microns or smaller 

(PM2.5). The proposal also addressed 

EPA’s response to the adverse 

comments. The comment period for the 

proposed action ended on May 11, 2018. 

Three comments were received that 

were not related to the scope of the 

proposed rulemaking and therefore, will 

not be addressed in this final 

rulemaking. 

II. What is being addressed in this 

document? 

This final action approves a revision 

to the Iowa State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) submitted by the State of Iowa for 

the purpose of incorporating an 

amendment to the Administrative 

Consent Order (ACO) with Grain 

Processing Corporation (GPC), 

Muscatine, Iowa. The revision changes 

the date for completion of performance 

testing from May 31, 2017, to May 31, 

2018, and will allow the state more time 

to complete processing air construction 

permit applications submitted by GPC 

and specify testing requirements as 

appropriate in the final permits. This 

amendment will not impact the 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES