### 27543 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 93 / Wednesday, May 14, 2014 / Proposed Rules

EPA analysis: As noted in the State’s submittal, the EPA approved the Washington title V permitting program on August 13, 2001, with an effective date of September 12, 2001 (66 FR 42439). Meanwhile, Washington does not have a SIP-approved PSD permitting program and, therefore, is not required to have PSD permitting fees in its SIP. As discussed earlier in this notice, PSD permitting in Washington takes place by means of a FIP. Therefore, we are proposing to conclude that Washington has satisfied its current obligations under CAA section 110(a)(2)(L) for the 2008 lead NAAQS by virtue of the EPA’s prior approval of Washington’s title V permitting program. 110(a)(2)(M): Consultation/Participation by Affected Local Entities

CAA section 110(a)(2)(M) requires states to provide for consultation and participation in SIP development by local political subdivisions affected by the SIP.

State submittal: Washington cites the following regulations and statutes as pertinent to this infrastructure SIP requirement: WAC 173–400–171 Public Involvement, RCW 34.05 Administrative Procedure Act, RCW 42.30 Open Public Meetings Act, and RCW 70.94.240 Air Pollution Control Advisory Council.

EPA analysis: As discussed in the preamble relating to CAA section 110(a)(2)(J), Ecology routinely coordinates with local governments and other stakeholders on air quality issues. The public involvement regulations cited in Washington’s submittal were previously approved into Washington’s federally-approved SIP on June 2, 1995 (60 FR 28726). Therefore, the EPA proposes to find that Washington’s SIP meets the requirements of CAA Section 110(a)(2)(M) for the 2008 lead NAAQS. VI. Proposed Action

The EPA is proposing to partially approve the April 1, 2014, submittal from Washington to demonstrate that the SIP meets the requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA for the lead NAAQS promulgated on October 15, 2008, except for the requirements related to PSD permitting and portions of the interstate transport requirements as discussed in detail above. Specifically, we are proposing to find that the current EPA-approved Washington SIP meets the following CAA section 110(a)(2) infrastructure elements for the 2008 lead NAAQS: (A), (B), (C)—except for those elements covered by the PSD FIP, (D)(i)(II)— except for those elements covered by the PSD FIP, (D)(ii)—except for those elements covered by the PSD FIP, (E), (F), (G), (H), (J)—except for those elements covered by the PSD FIP, (K), (L), and (M). As previously noted, the EPA anticipates that there would be no adverse consequences to Washington or to sources in the State resulting from this proposed partial disapproval of the infrastructure SIP related to PSD. The EPA, likewise, has no additional FIP responsibilities as a result of this proposed partial disapproval for requirements related to PSD. Remaining interstate transport requirements arising under CAA Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2008 lead NAAQS will be addressed in a separate action. VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA’s role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed action merely approves the state’s law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by the state’s 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 the requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because this action does not involve technical standards; and

• Does not provide the 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 it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law. The SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the State, except for non-trust land within the exterior boundaries of the Puyallup Indian Reservation, also known as the 1873 Survey Area. Under the Puyallup Tribe of Indians Settlement Act of 1989, 25 U.S.C. 1773, Congress explicitly provided state and local agencies in Washington authority over activities on non-trust lands within the 1873 Survey Area and the EPA is therefore approving this SIP on such lands. Consistent with EPA policy, the EPA nonetheless provided a consultation opportunity to the Puyallup Tribe in a letter dated September 3, 2013. The EPA did not receive a request for consultation. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, and Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: May 5, 2014. Dennis J. McLerran, Regional Administrator, Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2014–11073 Filed 5–13–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R10–OAR–2014–0228; FRL–9910–96– Region 10]** 

**Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Idaho Franklin**  **County Portion of the Logan Nonattainment Area; Fine Particulate**  **Matter Emissions Inventory**

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule.

**SUMMARY :**  The Idaho Department of Environmental Quality (IDEQ) submitted a revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP), dated


### 27544 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 93 / Wednesday, May 14, 2014 / Proposed Rules

1 For a given air pollutant, ‘‘primary’’ national ambient air quality standards are those determined by the EPA as requisite to protect the public health, and ‘‘secondary’’ standards are those determined by the EPA as requisite to protect the public welfare from any known or anticipated adverse effects associated with the presence of such air pollutant in the ambient air. See CAA section 109(b). December 14, 2012, to address Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act) requirements for the Idaho portion (hereafter referred to as ‘‘Franklin County’’) of the cross border Logan, Utah-Idaho nonattainment area for the 2006 24-hour fine particulate matter (PM 2.5 ) national ambient air quality standards. The EPA is proposing to approve the baseline emissions inventory contained in IDEQ’s submittal as meeting the requirement to submit a comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of direct PM 2.5 and PM 2.5 precursor emissions in Franklin County.

**DATES :**  Written comments must be received on or before June 13, 2014.

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10– OAR–2014–0228, by any of the following methods:

• www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.

• Email: R10-Public

_ Comments@
epa.gov.

• Mail: Jeff Hunt, EPA Region 10, Office of Air, Waste and Toxics (AWT– 107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101.

• Hand Delivery/Courier: EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101. Attention: Jeff Hunt, Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, AWT– 107. Such deliveries are only accepted during normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.

Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA–R10–OAR–2014– 0228. The 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 the disclosure of which 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 the 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 the 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, the 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 the EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the 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 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, the disclosure of which 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. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business hours at the Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Jeff Hunt at (206) 553–0256, hunt.jeff@epa.gov, or the above EPA, Region 10 address.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Throughout this document whenever ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background

A. PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards B. Designation of PM 2.5 Nonattainment Areas C. Submittal Requirements for PM 2.5 Nonattainment Areas II. Analysis of the State’s Submittal III. Proposed Action IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Background

A. PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards

Under section 109 of the CAA, the EPA establishes national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or ‘‘standards’’) for certain pervasive air pollutants (referred to as ‘‘criteria pollutants’’) and conducts periodic reviews of the NAAQS to determine whether they should be revised or whether new NAAQS should be established.

On July 18, 1997, the EPA revised the NAAQS for particulate matter to add new standards for fine particles, using PM 2.5 (particles less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers in diameter) as the indicator for the pollutant. The EPA established primary and secondary 1 annual and 24-hour standards for PM 2.5 (62 FR 38652). The annual standard was set at 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m 3 ), based on a 3-year average of annual mean PM 2.5 concentrations, and the 24-hour standard was set at 65 mg/

m 3 , based on the 3-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour PM 2.5concentrations at each populationoriented monitor within an area. On October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144), the EPA revised the level of the 24-hour PM 2.5 NAAQS to 35 mg/m 3 , based on a 3-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations. B. Designation of PM 2.5 Nonattainment Areas

Effective December 14, 2009, the EPA established the initial air quality designations for most areas in the United States for the 2006 24-hour PM 2.5 NAAQS (74 FR 58688, November 13, 2009). Among the various areas designated in 2009, the EPA designated the cross border Logan, Utah-Idaho nonattainment area as nonattainment for the 2006 24-hour PM 2.5 NAAQS. The boundaries for these areas are described in 40 CFR 81.313. C. Submittal Requirements for PM 2.5 Nonattainment Areas

Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires a state with an area designated as nonattainment to submit for EPA approval a comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of actual emissions for the nonattainment area. The EPA’s requirements for an emissions inventory for the PM 2.5 NAAQS are set forth in 40 CFR 51.1008, promulgated as part of the EPA’s Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation Rule published April 25, 2007 (72 FR 20586) (hereafter referred to as the ‘‘PM 2.5 implementation rule’’). Although the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (D.C. Circuit) recently remanded the PM 2.5 implementationrule and directed the EPA to repromulgate it pursuant to subpart 4 of part D, title I of the CAA ( see Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013)), the court’s ruling in this case does not affect the EPA’s action on the emissions inventory. Subpart 4 of part D, title I of the Act contains no specific provision governing emissions inventories for


### 27545 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 93 / Wednesday, May 14, 2014 / Proposed Rules

2 Emissions Inventory Guidance for Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and Regional Haze Regulations, EPA–454/R–05– 001, August 2005, updated November 2005. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/eidocs/eiguid/ eiguidfinal

_nov2005.pdf. PM 10 or PM 2.5 nonattainment areas that supersedes the general emissions inventory requirement for all nonattainment areas in CAA section 172(c)(3). See ‘‘State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,’’ (57 FR 13498, 13539, April 16, 1992). This proposed approval is limited to the emissions inventory for direct PM 2.5 and
PM 2.5 precursors submitted by IDEQ for the Franklin County portion of the Logan, Utah-Idaho nonattainment area as required under section 172(c)(3) of the CAA. II. Analysis of the State’s Submittal
Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires states to submit a comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of actual emissions for each nonattainment area. The EPA’s requirements for an emissions inventory for the PM 2.5 NAAQS are set forth in 40 CFR 51.1008. For the PM 2.5 NAAQS, the pollutants to be inventoried are PM 2.5 and PM 2.5 precursors (i.e., nitrogen oxides (NO X), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), ammonia (NH 3 ), and sulfur dioxide (SO 2)). 2

The Franklin County emissions inventory provides a 2008 inventory in tons per day (tpd) winter-time episode estimates for PM 2.5 and PM 2.5 precursors. Monitoring data for Franklin County, and the overall Logan nonattainment area, indicates that high PM 2.5 concentrations occur during the winter months when meteorological conditions trap pollutants in the valley. Therefore, the Franklin County emissions estimates reflect the winter stagnation episodes when secondary PM 2.5 formation dominates. The source categories include stationary sources, area sources, on-road mobile sources and off-road mobile sources. A summary of the Franklin County emissions inventory is provided in Table 1 below, and the detailed Franklin County emissions inventory is found in Appendices B and C of IDEQ’s submittal.



### TABLE 

### 1—F RANKLIN 

### C OUNTY 

### 2008 W INTER 

### E MISSIONS 

### I NVENTORY IN 

### TONS PER 

### E PISODE 

### D AY

Source category PM 2.5 NO X SO 2 VOC NH 3
Agriculture, crops, and livestock ................................ 0 .008 0 0 2 .763 4 .65 Gasoline, bulk, and stations ...................................... 0 0 0 0 0 Commercial cooking .................................................. 0 0 0 0 0 Construction dust ....................................................... 0 .014 0 0 0 0 Fuel combustion, industrial ........................................ 0 .006 0 .087 0 .061 0 .001 0 .002 Fuel combustion, commercial/institutional ................. 0 .004 0 .07 0 .018 0 .001 0 Fuel combustion, residential non-wood ..................... 0 .001 0 .049 0 .014 0 .002 0 .008 Fuel combustion, residential wood ............................ 0 .1 0 .009 0 .002 0 .138 0 Miscellaneous Commercial/Industrial Processes ...... 0 .001 0 .001 0 0 0 .008 Solvent, commercial and consumer .......................... 0 0 0 0 .14 0 Solvent, commercial and industrial ............................ 0 0 0 0 .26 0 Waste disposal ........................................................... 0 0 0 0 .008 0 Mobile, emissions ...................................................... 0 .028 0 .711 0 .004 0 .498 0 .008 Mobile, road dust ....................................................... 0 .596 0 0 0 0 Nonroad mobile .......................................................... 0 .035 0 .428 0 .009 0 .636 0 Point sources ............................................................. 0 0 0 0 0

Totals .................................................................. 0 .793 1 .355 0 .108 4 .447 4 .676

The Franklin County emissions inventory includes emissions estimates from stationary sources, area sources, on-road mobile sources, and off-road mobile sources. The methodologies used to derive the 2008 inventory for PM 2.5 are as follows:

• The stationary source emissions inventory is based on 2008 data of actual emissions reported by all permitted facilities. In Franklin County there are no industrial point sources of this type.

• Area-wide source emissions were calculated based on reported data for fuel usage, product sales, population, employment data, and other parameters covering a wide range of activities, in conjunction with the 2008 triennial National Emissions Inventory (NEI).

• IDEQ calculated residential wood stove base year and subsequent emission reductions using the EPA’s Woodstove Calculator and tax receipt information from certified woodstove change out incentive programs.

• The on-road emissions inventory, which consists of mobile sources such as trucks, automobiles, buses, and motorcycles, was prepared by IDEQ using the EPA’s Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator (MOVES2010a).

• The non-road mobile source category includes aircraft, trains and boats, and off-road vehicles and equipment used for construction, farming, commercial, industrial, and recreational activities. Non-road emissions were estimated by IDEQ and Utah Department of Air Quality using the EPA’s NONROAD2008a model as described in Appendix B of the SIP submittal.

• Paved road emissions were estimated by IDEQ, based on the EPA’s January 2011 version of AP–42, Section
13.2.1.

The EPA has reviewed the results, procedures, and methodologies for the Franklin County emissions inventory. IDEQ used standard procedures to develop its emissions inventory and appropriately used seasonal emissions inventories to represent episodic meteorological conditions when PM 2.5 levels are of the greatest concern. After reviewing the IDEQ submittal of the Franklin County emissions inventory and supporting documentation, the EPA is proposing to find that the emissions inventory meets the requirements of the CAA and the EPA’s guidance. III. Proposed Action

The EPA is proposing approval of the PM 2.5 and PM 2.5 precursor emissions inventory submitted by IDEQ, dated December 14, 2012, for the Franklin


### 27546 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 93 / Wednesday, May 14, 2014 / Proposed Rules

County, Idaho portion of the cross border Logan, Utah-Idaho nonattainment area. The EPA has determined that this action is consistent with sections 110 and 172(c)(3) of the CAA. IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA’s role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, 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 CAA; and

• does not provide the 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 the 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, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: April 28, 2014. Dennis J. McLerran, Regional Adminstrator, Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2014–11092 Filed 5–13–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Parts 52 and 70**

**[EPA–R07–OAR–2014–0164; FRL 9910–68– Region 7]** 

**Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of Iowa;**  **Ambient Air Quality Standards, and Controlling Pollution** 

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule.

**SUMMARY :**  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve revisions to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the state of Iowa. These revisions will amend the SIP to include revisions to Iowa air quality rules necessary to allow for implementation of revised National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for fine particulate matter (PM 2.5 ), lead, and sulfur dioxide (SO 2) as they apply to construction permit exemptions. The spray booth ‘‘permit by rule’’ proposed revision will add content limits for lead-containing spray materials. The updated Federal references for the revised NAAQS are also included in this revision.

EPA is also proposing to approve revisions to the Iowa Title V Operating Permits Program to modify requirements for insignificant activities. The changes will correspond to the revisions to the construction permit exemptions amended with this SIP revision.

**DATES :**  Comments on this proposed action must be received in writing by June 13, 2014.

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07– OAR–2014–0164, by mail to Amy Algoe-Eakin, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219. Comments may also be submitted electronically or through hand delivery/courier by following the detailed instructions in the **ADDRESSES** section of the direct final rule located in the rules section of this Federal Register

. **FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Amy Algoe-Eakin, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at 913–551–7942, or by email at algoeeakin.amy@epa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  In the final rules section of the Federal Register , EPA is approving the state’s SIP revision as a direct final rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial revision amendment and anticipates no relevant adverse comments to this action. A detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final rule. If no relevant adverse comments are received in response to this action, no further activity is contemplated in relation to this action. If EPA receives relevant 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 action. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on part of this rule and if that part can be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those parts of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. For additional information, see the direct final rule which is located in the rules section of this Federal Register

.

Dated: April 29, 2014. Karl Brooks, Regional Administrator, Region 7.
[FR Doc. 2014–10966 Filed 5–13–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 170**

**[EPA–HQ–OPP–2011–0184; FRL–9910–56]**

**RIN 2070–AJ22**

**Pesticides; Agricultural Worker Protection Standard Revisions;**  **Extension of Comment Period**

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).