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

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 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
27544 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 93 / Wednesday, May 14, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

1For 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 (PM2.5) 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 

PM2.5 and PM2.5 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. PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards 

B. Designation of PM2.5 Nonattainment 

Areas 

C. Submittal Requirements for PM2.5

Nonattainment Areas 

II. Analysis of the State’s Submittal 

III. Proposed Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

A. PM2.5 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 

PM2.5 (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 PM2.5

(62 FR 38652). The annual standard was 

set at 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter 

(mg/m3), based on a 3-year average of 

annual mean PM2.5 concentrations, and 

the 24-hour standard was set at 65 mg/ 

m3, based on the 3-year average of the 

98th percentile of 24-hour PM2.5

concentrations at each populationoriented monitor within an area. On 

October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144), the 

EPA revised the level of the 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS to 35 mg/m3, based on a 

3-year average of the 98th percentile of 

24-hour concentrations. 

B. Designation of PM2.5 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 PM2.5

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 PM2.5 NAAQS. The 

boundaries for these areas are described 

in 40 CFR 81.313. 

C. Submittal Requirements for PM2.5

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 PM2.5

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 ‘‘PM2.5

implementation rule’’). Although the 

U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of 

Columbia (D.C. Circuit) recently 

remanded the PM2.5 implementation 

rule 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 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 93 / Wednesday, May 14, 2014 / Proposed Rules 27545 

2Emissions 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. 

PM10 or PM2.5 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 PM2.5 and 

PM2.5 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 PM2.5

NAAQS are set forth in 40 CFR 51.1008. 

For the PM2.5 NAAQS, the pollutants to 

be inventoried are PM2.5 and PM2.5

precursors (i.e., nitrogen oxides (NOX), 

volatile organic compounds (VOCs), 

ammonia (NH3), and sulfur dioxide 

(SO2)).2

The Franklin County emissions 

inventory provides a 2008 inventory in 

tons per day (tpd) winter-time episode 

estimates for PM2.5 and PM2.5

precursors. Monitoring data for Franklin 

County, and the overall Logan 

nonattainment area, indicates that high 

PM2.5 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 

PM2.5 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—FRANKLIN COUNTY 2008 WINTER EMISSIONS INVENTORY IN TONS PER EPISODE DAY

Source category PM2.5 NOX SO2 VOC NH3

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 PM2.5

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 PM2.5

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 

PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursor emissions 

inventory submitted by IDEQ, dated 

December 14, 2012, for the Franklin 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
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 (PM2.5), lead, and sulfur dioxide 

(SO2) 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). 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS