63934 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 207 / Friday, October 25, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

section of this Federal Register, EPA is 

approving the State’s SIP submittal as a 

direct final rule without prior proposal 

because the Agency views this as a 

noncontroversial submittal and 

anticipates no adverse comments. A 

detailed rationale for the approval is set 

forth in the direct final rule. If no 

adverse comments are received in 

response to this action, no further 

activity is contemplated. If EPA receives 

adverse comments, the direct final rule 

will be withdrawn and all public 

comments received will be addressed in 

a subsequent final rule based on this 

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a 

second comment period. Any parties 

interested in commenting on this action 

should do so at this time. 

DATES: Comments must be received in 

writing by November 25, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R03–OAR–2013–0594 by one of the 

following methods: 

A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

B. Email: fernandez.cristina@epa.gov. 

C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2013–0594, 

Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director, 

Office of Air Program Planning, Air 

Protection Division, Mailcode 3AP30, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2013– 

0594. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change, and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through www.regulations.gov, your 

email address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the 

comment that is placed in the public 

docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, EPA recommends that you 

include your name and other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters, any form 

of encryption, and be free of any defects 

or viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, 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 either 

electronically in www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy during normal business 

hours at the Air Protection Division, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

Copies of the State submittal are 

available at the Virginia Department of 

Environmental Quality, 629 East Main 

Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ellen Schmitt, (215) 814–5787, or by 

email at schmitt.ellen@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For 

further information, please see the 

information provided in the direct final 

action, with the same title, that is 

located in the ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ 

section of this Federal Register 

publication. 

Dated: September 20, 2013. 

W.C. Early, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2013–25044 Filed 10–24–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2013–0683; FRL–9902–01– 

Region9] 

Approval of Air Quality Implementation 

Plans; California; El Dorado County Air 

Quality Management District; 

Reasonably Available Control 

Technology for Ozone 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

a State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision submitted by California for the 

El Dorado County Air Quality 

Management District (EDAQMD) 

portion of the California SIP. The 

submitted SIP revision contains the 

District’s demonstrations regarding 

Reasonably Available Control 

Technology (RACT) requirements for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS). We are proposing to approve 

the submitted SIP revision under the 

Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA 

or the Act). We are taking comments on 

this proposal and plan to follow with a 

final action. 

DATES: Any comments must arrive by 

November 25, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2013–0683, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions. 

2. Email: steckel.andrew@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel 

(Air–4), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Instructions: All comments will be 

included in the public docket without 

change and may be made available 

online at www.regulations.gov, 

including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through 

www.regulations.gov or email. 

www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous 

access’’ system, and EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send email 

directly to EPA, your email address will 

be automatically captured and included 

as part of the public comment. 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. 

Docket: Generally, documents in the 

docket for this action are available 

electronically at www.regulations.gov 

and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, 

California. While all documents in the 

docket are listed at 

www.regulations.gov, some information 

may be publicly available only at the 

hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 207 / Friday, October 25, 2013 / Proposed Rules 63935 

material), and some may not be publicly 

available in either location (e.g., CBI). 

To inspect the hard copy materials, 

please schedule an appointment during 

normal business hours with the contact 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stanley Tong, EPA Region IX, (415) 

947–4122, tong.stanley@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What document did the State submit? 

B. Are there other versions of this 

document? 

C. What is the purpose of the RACT SIP 

submission? 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Proposed Action 

A. How is EPA evaluating the RACT SIP 

submission? 

B. Does the RACT SIP submission meet the 

evaluation criteria? 

C. EPA Recommendations To Strengthen 

the SIP 

D. Proposed Action and Request for Public 

Comment 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What document did the State submit? 

Table 1 lists the document addressed 

by this proposal with the date that it 

was adopted by the local air agency and 

submitted by the California Air 

Resources Board. 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED DOCUMENT

Local agency Document Adopted Submitted 

EDAQMD ...... EDAQMD Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) State Implementation Plan (SIP) Update Analysis Staff Report (‘‘2006 RACT SIP’’).02/06/07 07/11/07 

EDAQMD’s RACT SIP submittal 

became complete by operation of law 

under CAA section 110(k)(1)(B) on 

January 11, 2008. 

B. Are there other versions of this 

document? 

There is no previous version of this 

document in the El Dorado portion of 

the California SIP. 

C. What is the purpose of the RACT SIP 

submission? 

Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) 

and nitrogen oxides (NOX) help produce 

ground-level ozone and smog, which 

harm human health and the 

environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA 

requires States to submit enforceable 

regulations that control VOC and NOX

emissions. Sections 182(b)(2) and (f) 

require that SIPs for ozone 

nonattainment areas classified as 

moderate or above require 

implementation of RACT for any source 

covered by a Control Techniques 

Guideline (CTG) document and any 

other major stationary source of VOCs or 

NOX. The EDAQMD is subject to this 

requirement as it is designated and 

classified as a severe ozone 

nonattainment area for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. 40 CFR 81.305; 69 FR 

23858 at 23887 (April 30, 2004) (final 

rule designating and classifying the 

Sacramento Metro area, which includes 

the El Dorado County AQMD, as serious 

nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQs); 75 FR 24409 (May 5, 

2010) (final rule reclassifying 

Sacramento Metro area as severe-15 

nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS). Therefore, the 

EDAQMD must, at a minimum, adopt 

RACT-level controls for all sources 

covered by a CTG document and for all 

major non-CTG sources of VOCs or NOX

within the EDAQMD nonattainment 

area. Any stationary source that emits or 

has a potential to emit at least 25 tons 

per year (tpy) of VOCs or NOX is a major 

stationary source in a severe ozone 

nonattainment area. CAA 182(d), (f). 

Section IV.G. of EPA’s final rule to 

implement the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS (70 FR 71612, November 29, 

2005) discusses RACT requirements. It 

states in part that where a RACT SIP is 

required, States implementing the 8- 

hour standard generally must assure 

that RACT is met either through a 

certification that previously required 

RACT controls represent RACT for 8- 

hour implementation purposes or 

through a new RACT determination. 

The submitted document provides 

EDAQMD’s analyses of its compliance 

with the CAA section 182 RACT 

requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. EPA’s technical support 

document (TSD)(‘‘2006 RACT SIP 

TSD’’) has more information about the 

District’s submission and EPA’s 

evaluation thereof. 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Proposed 

Action 

A. How is EPA evaluating the RACT SIP 

submission? 

Rules and guidance documents that 

we use to evaluate CAA section 182 

RACT SIPs include the following: 

1. ‘‘Final Rule to Implement the 8- 

Hour Ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard—Phase 2’’ (70 FR 

71612; November 29, 2005). 

2. ‘‘State Implementation Plans, 

General Preamble for the 

Implementation of Title I of the Clean 

Air Act Amendments of 1990’’ (57 FR 

13498; April 16, 1992). 

3. Issues Relating to VOC Regulation 

Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations: 

Clarification to Appendix D of 

November 24, 1987 Federal Register, 

May 25, 1988, U.S. EPA, Air Quality 

Management Division, Office of Air 

Quality Planning and Standards (‘‘The 

Blue Book’’). 

4. Guidance Document for Correcting 

Common VOC and Other Rule 

Deficiencies, August 21, 2001, U.S. EPA 

Region IX (the ‘‘Little Bluebook’’). 

5. ‘‘State Implementation Plans; 

Nitrogen Oxides Supplement to the 

General Preamble for the 

Implementation of Title I of the Clean 

Air Act Amendments of 1990’’ (57 FR 

55620, November 25, 1992) (‘‘the NOX

Supplement’’). 

6. RACT SIPs, Letter dated March 9, 

2006 from EPA Region IX (Andrew 

Steckel) to CARB (Kurt Karperos) 

describing Region IX’s understanding of 

what constitutes a minimally acceptable 

RACT SIP. 

7. Memorandum from William T. 

Harnett to Regional Air Division 

Directors, (May 18, 2006), ‘‘RACT Qs & 

As—Reasonably Available Control 

Technology (RACT) Questions and 

Answers’’. 

8. RACT SIPs, Letter dated April 4, 

2006 from EPA Region IX (Andrew 

Steckel) to CARB (Kurt Karperos) listing 

EPA’s current CTGs, ACTs, and other 

documents which may help to establish 

RACT. 

With respect to major stationary 

sources, EPA evaluated the 2006 RACT 

SIP submission in accordance with the 

major source threshold (25 tons per 

year) that applies in severe ozone 

nonattainment areas. CAA 182(d), (f). 

B. Does the RACT SIP submission meet 

the evaluation criteria? 

The 2006 RACT SIP provides the 

District’s conclusion that the applicable 

SIP for the El Dorado County AQMD 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
63936 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 207 / Friday, October 25, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

1See email dated February 29, 2012 from Stanley 

Tong (EPA Region 9) to Adam Baughman (El 

Dorado AQMD). 

2Sierra Pacific Industries does not appear in 

CARB’s 2010 emissions inventory. http://

www.arb.ca.gov/app/emsinv/facinfo/facinfo.php 

satisfies CAA section 182 RACT 

requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. This conclusion is based on 

the District’s analysis of SIP-approved 

requirements that apply to: (1) CTG 

source categories; and (2) major 

stationary sources of NOX or VOC 

emissions. See 2006 RACT SIP Staff 

Report at Table B and Appendix A. 

First, with respect to CTG source 

categories, Appendix A of the 2006 

RACT SIP Staff Report lists all CTG 

source categories and matches those 

CTG categories with corresponding 

District rules which implement RACT. 

EDAQMD also searched its database of 

permitted sources and Standard 

Industrial Classification (SIC) codes and 

other source data and emission 

inventory data for potential sources 

belonging to those CTG categories for 

which the District did not have rules. 

Based on these evaluations, the 

District’s analysis indicated that except 

for the metal parts and products 

category, there were no CTG source 

categories for which the District had 

sources but no applicable RACT 

requirement. See 2006 RACT SIP at 7. 

Recent discussions with EDAQMD 

revealed that emissions at its metal parts 

coating facilities are below the 

applicability threshold for the CTG. 

Specifically, one facility emitted 0.24 

tons and 0.28 tons of VOCs in 2010 and 

2011 and another facility emitted 0.7 

tons of VOCs in 2011,1 well below the 

CTG’s applicability threshold of 10 tons 

per year. EDAQMD should submit a 

negative declaration for the metal parts 

CTG. 

We reviewed CARB’s emissions 

inventory database for other potential 

CTG and/or major non-CTG sources not 

included in EDAQMD’s analysis and 

did not identify any additional CTG 

source category or major source in the 

District that is subject to section 182 

RACT. 

It should be noted that EDAQMD does 

not have many significant air pollution 

sources and has submitted a number of 

negative declarations. Not including 

gasoline stations, print shops, autobody 

shops and dry cleaners, CARB’s 2007 

emissions inventory for EDAQMD only 

lists six facilities. Included in the six is 

EDAQMD’s only major source, Sierra 

Pacific sawmill, which shut operations 

in 2009 and has not restarted.2 The next 

largest source in EDAQMD is a landfill 

which emitted 4.2 tpy VOCs and 2.1 tpy 

NOX in 2010, according to CARB’s 2010 

emissions inventory. 

Where there are no existing sources 

covered by a particular CTG document, 

states may, in lieu of adopting RACT 

requirements for those sources, adopt 

negative declarations certifying that 

there are no such sources in the relevant 

nonattainment area. Table 1 below lists 

all of the source categories for which 

EDAQMD’s 2006 RACT SIP provides 

negative declarations. 

TABLE 1—EDAQMD NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS

CTG source category CTG document title 

Aerospace ................................................................................................. EPA–453/R–97–004—Control of VOC Emissions from Coating Operations at Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework. 

Automobile Coating; Metal Coil Container, & Closure; Paper & Fabric .. EPA–450/2–77–008—Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources—Volume II Surface Coating of Cans, Coils, 

Paper, Fabrics, Automobiles, and Light-Duty Trucks. 

Large Appliances ...................................................................................... EPA–450/2–77–034—Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources, Volume V: Surface Coating of Large Appliances. 

Magnet Wire ............................................................................................. EPA 450/2–77–033—Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources, Volume IV: Surface Coating of Insulation of 

Magnet Wire. 

Metal Furniture ......................................................................................... EPA–450/2–77–032—Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources, Volume III: Surface Coating of Metal Furniture. 

Ships ......................................................................................................... 61 FR 44050 Shipbuilding and Ship Repair Operations (Surface Coating). 

Wood Coating: Factory Surface Coating of Flat Wood Paneling ............ EPA 450/2–78–032—Control of Volatile Organic emissions from Existing Stationary Sources, Volume VII: Factory Surface Coating of Flat 

Wood Paneling. 

Wood Furniture ......................................................................................... EPA 453/R–96–007—Control of VOC Emissions from Wood Furniture 

Manufacturing Operations. 

Natural Gas/Gasoline ............................................................................... EPA–450/2–83–007—Control of VOC Equipment Leaks from Natural 

Gas/Gasoline Processing Plants. 

Refineries .................................................................................................. EPA–450/2–77–025—Control of Refinery Vacuum Producing Systems, 

Wastewater Separators, and Process Unit Turnarounds. 

EPA–450/2–78–036—Control of VOC Leaks from Petroleum Refinery 

Equipment. 

Synthetic Organic Chemical ..................................................................... EPA–450/3–84–015—Control of VOC Emissions from Air Oxidation 

Processes in Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry. 

EPA–450/4–91–031—Control of VOC Emissions from Reactor Processes and Distillation Operations in SOCMI. 

Tanks ........................................................................................................ EPA–450/2–77–036—Control of VOC Emissions from Storage of Petroleum Liquids in Fixed Roof Tanks. 

EPA–450/2–78–047—Control of VOC Emissions from Petroleum Liquid 

Storage in External Floating Roof Tanks. 

Dry Cleaning ............................................................................................. EPA–450/3–82–009—Control of VOC Emissions from Large Petroleum 

Dry Cleaners. 

Pharmaceutical Products .......................................................................... EPA–450/2–78–029—Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Manufacture of Synthesized Pharmaceutical Products. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 207 / Friday, October 25, 2013 / Proposed Rules 63937 

3See Sacramento Metro AQMD Rule 466, Solvent 

Cleaning, section 301.1 which specifies a 25 grams/ 

liter VOC limit for general solvent cleaning; 40 CFR 

Part 59, subpart D, National Volatile Organic 

Compound Emission Standards for Architectural 

Coatings; and CARB’s suggested control measures 

for architectural coatings at: http://www.arb.ca.gov/ 

coatings/arch/Approved_2007_SCM.pdf. 

TABLE 1—EDAQMD NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS—Continued 

CTG source category CTG document title 

Polyester Resin ........................................................................................ EPA–450/3–83–008—Control of VOC Emissions from Manufacture of 

High-Density Polyethylene, Polypropylene, and Polystyrene Resins. 

EPA–450/3–83–006—Control of VOC Fugitive Emissions from Synthetic Organic Chemical Polymer and Resin Manufacturing Equipment. 

Rubber Tires ............................................................................................. EPA–450/2–78–030—Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Manufacture of Pneumatic Rubber Tires. 

Source: 2006 RACT SIP at 9. 

We are proposing to find that the 

EDAQMD 2006 RACT SIP submission, 

including all of these negative 

declarations, adequately demonstrates 

that the applicable SIP rules for all CTG 

source categories operating within the 

El Dorado AQMD satisfy RACT and that 

there are no existing major stationary 

sources of NOx or VOC in El Dorado 

County subject to RACT for the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS. 

C. EPA Recommendations to Strengthen 

the SIP 

We recommend strengthening the 

solvent cleaning limits in Rule 225, 

‘‘Solvent Cleaning Operations 

(Degreasing)’’ and coating limits in Rule 

215, ‘‘Architectural Coatings,’’ to more 

closely match corresponding 

requirements adopted by the 

Sacramento Metro AQMD and Placer 

County Air Pollution Control District.3

These recommendations will strengthen 

the SIP, but are not required to satisfy 

RACT. We discuss these 

recommendations further in our 2006 

RACT SIP TSD. 

D. Proposed Action and Request for 

Public Comment 

Based on the evaluations discussed 

above and more fully in our 2006 RACT 

SIP TSD, we are proposing to conclude 

that EDAQMD’s 2006 RACT SIP 

submission satisfies CAA section 182 

RACT requirements for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS and to fully approve this 

submission into the California SIP 

pursuant to section 110(k)(3) of the Act. 

We will accept comments from the 

public on this proposal for the next 30 

days. Unless we receive convincing new 

information during the comment period, 

we intend to publish a final approval 

action that will incorporate this RACT 

submission into the federally 

enforceable SIP. 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Clean Air Act, 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 Clean Air Act. This 

action merely proposes to approve 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 Clean Air Act; 

and 

• does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, with 

practical and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this proposed action 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, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Dated: September 25, 2013. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2013–25260 Filed 10–24–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52, 62 and 70 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2012–0410; FRL 990–64- 

Region 7] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Approval and 

Promulgation of State Air Quality Plans 

for Designated Facilities and 

Pollutants, State of Iowa; Control of 

Emissions From Existing Hospital/

Medical/Infectious Waste Incinerator 

Units, Negative Declaration and 111(d) 

Plan Rescission; Approval and 

Promulgation of Operating Permits 

Program, State of Iowa 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS