Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Proposed Rules 45631 

contact the individual listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

view the hard copy of the docket. The 

Regional Office’s official hours of 

business are Monday through Friday, 

8:00 a.m.–4:00 p.m., excluding federal 

holidays. An electronic copy of the 

State’s SIP compilation is also available 

at http://www.epa.gov/region8/air/

sip.html. 

Please see the Direct Final Rule which 

is located in the Rules Section of this 

Federal Register for detailed instruction 

on how to submit comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kevin Leone, Air Program, EPA, Region 

8, Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595 Wynkoop 

Street, Denver, Colorado 80202–1129, 

(303) 312–6227, leone.kevin@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ section of this 

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 

SIP revision and anticipates no adverse 

comments. A detailed rationale for the 

approval is set forth in the preamble to 

the Direct Final Rule. 

If EPA receives no adverse comments, 

EPA will take no further action on this 

proposed rule. If EPA receives adverse 

comments, EPA will withdraw the 

Direct Final Rule and it will not take 

effect. EPA will address all public 

comments in a subsequent final rule 

based on this proposed rule. 

EPA will not institute a second 

comment period on this action. Any 

parties interested in commenting must 

do so at this time. For further 

information, please see the ADDRESSES

section of this notice. 

Please note that if EPA receives an 

adverse comment on a distinct 

provision of this rule and if that 

provision may be severed from the 

remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt 

as final those provisions of the rule that 

are not the subject of an adverse 

comment. See the information provided 

in the Direct Final action of the same 

title which is located in the Rules and 

Regulations Section of this Federal 

Register. 

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

Dated: July 1, 2015. 

Shaun L. McGrath, 

Regional Administrator, Region 8. 

[FR Doc. 2015–18513 Filed 7–30–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2014–0365; FRL–9931–72– 

Region 7] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Iowa; 

Regional Haze Five-Year Progress 

Report State Implementation Plan 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule; supplemental. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is issuing a supplement to 

its proposed approval of a State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 

submitted by the State of Iowa (Iowa) 

through the Iowa Department of Natural 

Resources (IDNR). Iowa’s SIP revision 

addresses requirements of the Clean Air 

Act (CAA) and EPA’s rules that require 

states to submit periodic reports 

describing progress toward reasonable 

progress goals established for regional 

haze and a determination of the 

adequacy of the state’s existing 

implementation plan addressing 

regional haze (region haze SIP). EPA’s 

proposed approval of Iowa’s periodic 

report on progress toward reasonable 

progress goals and determination of 

adequacy of the state’s regional haze SIP 

published in the Federal Register on 

July 3, 2014. This supplemental 

proposal addresses the potential effects 

on our proposed approval from the 

April 29, 2014, decision of the United 

States Supreme Court (Supreme Court) 

remanding to the United States Court of 

Appeals for the District of Columbia 

Circuit (D.C. Circuit) EPA’s Cross-State 

Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) for further 

proceedings and the D.C. Circuit’s 

decision to lift the stay of CSAPR. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before August 31, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R07–OAR–2014–0365, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: harper.jodi@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or Hand Delivery: Jodi Harper, 

Environmental Protection Agency, Air 

Planning and Development Branch, 

11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, 

Kansas 66219. Hand 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–R07–OAR–2015– 

0365. 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, e.g., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in hard 

copy. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy at the Environmental 

Protection Agency, Air Planning and 

Development Branch, 11201 Renner 

Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219. EPA 

requests that you contact the person 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section to schedule your 

inspection. The interested persons 

wanting to examine these documents 

should make an appointment with the 

office at least 24 hours in advance. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jodi 

Harper, (913) 551–7483, or by email at 

harper.jodi@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

or ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 


rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
45632 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

1 Iowa does not have any Class I areas within its 

borders. Iowa states in the progress report SIP that 

Iowa sources were identified, through an area of 

influence modeling analysis based on back 

trajectories, as potentially impacting four Class I 

areas in two nearby states: Boundary Waters Canoe 

Area Wilderness and Voyagers National Park in 

Minnesota, and Isle Royale National Park and Seney 

Wilderness Area in Michigan. 

2EPA promulgated a rule to address regional haze 

on July 1, 1999 (64 FR 35713) known as the 

Regional Haze Rule. The Regional Haze Rule 

revised the existing visibility regulations to 

integrate into the regulation provisions addressing 

regional haze impairment and established a 

comprehensive visibility protection program for 

Class I areas. See 40 CFR 51.308 and 51.309. 

3CAIR required certain states like Iowa to reduce 

emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen 

oxides (NOX) that significantly contribute to 

downwind nonattainment of the 1997 National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for fine 

particulate matter (PM2.5) and ozone. See 70 FR 

25162 (May 12, 2005). 4CSAPR was issued by EPA to replace CAIR and 

to help states reduce air pollution and attain CAA 

standards. See 76 FR 48208 (August 8, 2011) (final 

rule). CSAPR requires substantial reductions of SO2

and NOX emissions from EGUs in 28 states in the 

Eastern United States that significantly contribute 

to downwind nonattainment of the 1997 PM2.5 and 

ozone NAAQS and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

I. Background 

EPA previously proposed to approve 

a SIP revision by Iowa reporting on 

progress made in the first 

implementation period toward meeting 

the reasonable progress goals for Class I 

areas outside Iowa that are affected by 

emissions from Iowa’s sources.1 79 FR 

37976 (July 3, 2014). In its submittal, 

Iowa determined its existing regional 

haze SIP requires no substantive 

revision to achieve the established 

regional haze visibility improvement 

and emissions reduction goals for 2018. 

States are required to submit a 

progress report in the form of a SIP 

revision every five years that evaluates 

progress toward the reasonable progress 

goals for each mandatory Class I area 

within the state and in each mandatory 

Class I area outside the state which may 

be affected by emissions from within the 

state. See 40 CFR 51.308(g). In addition, 

the provisions under 40 CFR 51.308(h) 

require states to submit, at the same 

time as the 40 CFR 51.308(g) progress 

report, a determination of the adequacy 

of the state’s existing regional haze SIP. 

The first progress report SIP revision is 

due five years after submittal of the 

initial regional haze SIP. IDNR 

submitted its regional haze SIP on 

March 25, 2008, and submitted its 

progress report SIP revision on July 16, 

2013. EPA proposed to find that the 

progress report SIP revision satisfied the 

requirements of 40 CFR 51.308(g) and 

(h) in a notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPR) published in 2014. 79 FR 37976. 

This action supplements EPA’s prior 

NPR by more fully explaining and 

soliciting comment on the basis for our 

proposed approval. 

II. Summary of Iowa’s Progress Report 

SIP Revision and the NPR 

On July 16, 2013, Iowa submitted a 

SIP revision describing the progress 

made toward the RPGs of Class I areas 

outside Iowa that are affected by 

emissions from Iowa’s sources in 

accordance with requirements in the 

Regional Haze Rule.2 This progress 

report SIP also included an assessment 

of whether Iowa’s existing regional haze 

SIP is sufficient to allow nearby states 

with Class I areas to achieve the 

reasonable progress goals by the end of 

the first planning period. 

The provisions in 40 CFR 51.308(g) 

require a progress report SIP to address 

seven elements. In the NPR, EPA 

proposed to approve the SIP as 

adequately addressing each element 

under 40 CFR 51.308(g). The seven 

elements and EPA’s proposed 

conclusions in the NPR are briefly 

summarized below. 

The provisions in 40 CFR 51.308(g) 

require progress report SIPs to include 

a description of the status of measures 

in the regional haze implementation 

plan; a summary of the emissions 

reductions achieved; an assessment of 

the visibility conditions for each Class 

I area in the state; an analysis of the 

changes in emissions from sources and 

activities within the state; an assessment 

of any significant changes in 

anthropogenic emissions within or 

outside the state that have limited or 

impeded visibility improvement 

progress in Class I areas impacted by the 

state’s sources; an assessment of the 

sufficiency of the regional haze 

implementation plan to enable States to 

meet reasonable progress goals; and a 

review of the state’s visibility 

monitoring strategy. As explained in 

detail in the NPR, EPA proposed the 

Iowa’s progress report SIP addressed 

each element and therefore satisfied the 

requirements under 40 CFR 51.308(g). 

In addition, pursuant to 40 CFR 

51.308(h), states are required to submit, 

at the same time as the progress report 

SIP revision, a determination of the 

adequacy of their existing regional haze 

SIP and to take one of four possible 

actions based on information in the 

progress report. In its progress report 

SIP, Iowa determined that its regional 

haze SIP is sufficient to meet its 

obligations related to the reasonable 

progress goals for Class I areas affected 

by Iowa’s sources. The State accordingly 

provided EPA with a negative 

declaration that further revision of the 

existing regional haze implementation 

plan was not needed at this time. See 40 

CFR 51.308(h)(1). As explained in detail 

in the NPR, EPA proposed to determine 

that Iowa had adequately addressed 40 

CFR 51.308(h) because the visibility 

data trends at the Class I areas impacted 

by Iowa’s sources and the emissions 

trends of the largest emitters in Iowa of 

visibility-impairing pollutants both 

indicate that the reasonable progress 

goals for 2018 for these areas will be met 

or exceeded. Therefore, in our NPR, 

EPA proposed to approve Iowa’s 

progress report SIP as meeting the 

requirements of 40 CFR 51.308(g) and 

(h). 

III. Impact of CAIR and CSAPR on 

Iowa’s Progress Report 

Decisions by the Courts regarding 

EPA rules addressing the interstate 

transport of pollutants have had a 

substantial impact on EPA’s review of 

the regional haze SIPs of many states. In 

2005, EPA issued regulations allowing 

states to rely on the Clean Air Interstate 

Rule (CAIR) to meet certain 

requirements of the Regional Haze Rule. 

See 70 FR 39104 (July 6, 2005).3 A 

number of states, including Iowa, 

submitted regional haze SIPs consistent 

with these regulatory provisions. CAIR, 

however, was remanded to EPA in 2008, 

North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176, 

1178 (D.C. Cir. 2008), and replaced by 

CSAPR.4 76 FR 48208 (August 8, 2011). 

Implementation of CSAPR was 

scheduled to begin on January 1, 2012, 

when CSAPR would have superseded 

the CAIR program. However, numerous 

parties filed petitions for review of 

CSAPR, and at the end of 2011, the DC 

Circuit issued an order staying CSAPR 

pending resolution of the petitions and 

directing EPA to continue to administer 

CAIR. Order of December 30, 2011, in 

EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. 

EPA, D.C. Cir. No. 11–1302. 

EPA finalized a limited approval of 

Iowa’s regional haze SIP on June 26, 

2012. 77 FR 38006. In a separate action, 

published on June 7, 2012, EPA 

finalized a limited disapproval of the 

Iowa regional haze SIP because of the 

state’s reliance on CAIR to meet certain 

regional haze requirements, and issued 

a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) to 

address the deficiencies identified in 

the limited disapproval of Iowa and 

other states’ regional haze plans. 77 FR 

33642 (June 7, 2012). In our FIP, we 

relied on CSAPR to meet certain 

regional haze requirements 

notwithstanding that it was stayed at the 

time. As we explained, the 

determination that CSAPR will provide 

for greater reasonable progress than 

BART is based on a forward-looking 

projection of emissions and any year up 

until 2018 would have been an 


rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Proposed Rules 45633 

5Subsequent to the interim final rulemaking, EPA 

began implementation of CSAPR on January 1, 

2015. 

6EPA discussed in the NPR the significance of 

reductions in SO2 and NOX as Iowa and the Central 

Regional Air Planning Association (CENRAP) 

identified SO2 and NOX as the largest contributor 

pollutants to visibility impairment at the Class I 

areas affected by Iowa’s sources, specifically, and in 

the CENRAP region generally. 

acceptable point of comparison. Id. at 

33647. When we issued this FIP, we 

anticipated that the requirements of 

CSAPR would be implemented prior to 

2018. Id. Following these EPA actions, 

however, the DC Circuit issued a 

decision in EME Homer City Generation, 

L.P. v. EPA, 696 F.3d 7 (D.C. Cir. 2012), 

vacating CSAPR and ordering EPA to 

continue administering CAIR pending 

the promulgation of a valid 

replacement. On April 29, 2014, the 

Supreme Court reversed the DC Circuit’s 

decision on CSAPR and remanded the 

case to the DC Circuit for further 

proceedings. EPA v. EME Homer City 

Generation, L.P., 134 S. Ct. 1584 (2014). 

After the Supreme Court decision, EPA 

filed a motion to lift the stay on CSAPR 

and asked the DC Circuit to toll 

CSAPR’s compliance deadlines by three 

years, so that the Phase 1 emissions 

budgets apply in 2015 and 2016 (instead 

of 2012 and 2013), and the Phase 2 

emissions budgets apply in 2017 and 

beyond (instead of 2014 and beyond). 

On October 23, 2014, the DC Circuit 

granted EPA’s motion. Order of October 

23, 2014, in EME Homer City 

Generation, L.P. v. EPA, D.C. Cir. No. 

11–1302. EPA issued an interim final 

rule to clarify how EPA will implement 

CSAPR consistent with the DC Circuit’s 

order granting EPA’s motion requesting 

lifting the stay and tolling the rule’s 

deadlines. 79 FR 71663 (December 3, 

2014) (interim final rulemaking).5

Throughout the litigation described 

above, EPA has continued to implement 

CAIR. Thus, at the time that Iowa 

submitted its progress report SIP 

revision, CAIR was in effect, and the 

State included an assessment of the 

emission reductions from the 

implementation of CAIR in its report. 

The progress report discussed the status 

of the litigation concerning CAIR and 

CSAPR, but because CSAPR was not at 

that time in effect, Iowa did not take 

emissions reductions from CSAPR into 

account in assessing its regional haze 

implementation plan. For the same 

reason, in our NPR, EPA did not assess 

at that time the impact of CSAPR or our 

FIP on the ability of Iowa and its 

neighbors to meet their reasonable 

progress goals. 

The purpose of this supplemental 

proposal is to seek comment on the 

effect of the D.C. Circuit’s October 23, 

2014, order and the effect of the status 

of CAIR and CSAPR on our assessment 

of Iowa’s progress report SIP and our 

determination that its existing 

implementation plan need not be 

revised at this time. 

Iowa appropriately took CAIR into 

account in its progress report SIP in 

describing the status of the 

implementation of measures included in 

its regional haze SIP and in 

summarizing the emissions reductions 

achieved. CAIR was in effect during the 

2008–2013 period addressed by Iowa’s 

progress report. EPA approved Iowa’s 

regulations implementing CAIR as part 

of the Iowa SIP in 2008, 73 FR 20177 

(April 15, 2008), and neither Iowa nor 

EPA has taken any action to remove 

CAIR from the Iowa SIP. See 40 CFR 

52.2520(c). Therefore, Iowa 

appropriately evaluated and relied on 

CAIR reductions to demonstrate the 

State’s progress toward meeting its 

emission reductions.6 The State’s 

progress report also demonstrated Class 

I areas in other states impacted by Iowa 

sources were on track to meet their 

reasonable progress goals as discussed 

in the NPR. EPA’s intention in requiring 

the progress reports pursuant to 40 CFR 

51.308(g) was to ensure that emission 

management measures in the regional 

haze SIPs are being implemented on 

schedule and that visibility 

improvement appears to be consistent 

with the reasonable progress goals. 

(64 FR 35713, July 1, 1999). As the D.C. 

Circuit only recently lifted the stay on 

CSAPR, CAIR was in effect in Iowa 

through 2014, providing the emission 

reductions relied upon in Iowa’s 

regional haze SIP. Thus, Iowa 

appropriately took into account CAIR 

reductions in assessing the 

implementation of measures in the 

regional haze SIP for the 2008–2013 

timeframe, and EPA believes that it is 

appropriate to rely on CAIR emission 

reductions for purposes of assessing the 

adequacy of Iowa’s progress report 

demonstrating progress up to the end of 

2014 as CAIR remained effective until 

that date, pursuant to 40 CFR 51.308(g) 

and (h). 

In addition, EPA believes reliance 

upon CAIR reductions to show Iowa’s 

progress toward meeting emissions 

reductions from 2008–2013 is consistent 

with our prior actions. During the 

continued implementation of CAIR per 

the direction of the D.C. Circuit through 

October 2014, EPA has approved 

redesignations of areas to attainment of 

the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in which states 

relied on CAIR as an ‘‘enforceable 

measure.’’ See 77 FR 76415 (December 

28, 2012) (redesignation of HuntingtonAshland, West Virginia) and 80 FR 9207 

(February 20, 2015) (redesignation of St. 

Louis, Missouri). While EPA did 

previously state in a rulemaking action 

on the Florida regional haze SIP that a 

five year progress report may be the 

appropriate time to address changes, if 

necessary, for reasonable progress goal 

demonstrations and long term strategies, 

EPA does not believe such changes were 

necessary for Iowa’s progress report SIP. 

See generally 77 FR 73369, 77 FR 73371 

(December 10, 2012) (proposed action 

on Florida haze SIP). In this action, EPA 

is proposing that the remanded status of 

CAIR and the implementation of its 

replacement CSAPR at this time do not 

impact the adequacy of the Iowa 

regional haze SIP to address reasonable 

progress from 2008 through 2013 or 

even through 2014 to meet requirements 

in 40 CFR 51.308(g) and (h) because 

CAIR was implemented during the time 

period evaluated by Iowa for its progress 

report. 

EPA’s December 3, 2014, interim final 

rule sunsets CAIR compliance 

requirements on a schedule coordinated 

with the implementation of CSAPR 

compliance requirements. 79 FR at 

71655. As noted above, EPA’s June 7, 

2012, FIP replaced Iowa’s reliance upon 

CAIR for regional haze requirements 

with reliance on CSAPR to meet those 

requirements for the long-term. Because 

CSAPR should result in greater 

emissions reductions of SO2 and NOX

than CAIR regionally, EPA anticipates 

Iowa to maintain and continue its 

progress toward their projected 

emissions for 2018. See generally 76 FR 

48208 (promulgating CSAPR). Although 

the implementation of CSAPR was 

tolled for three years, the rule is now 

being implemented, and CSAPR budgets 

of SO2 and NOX from EGUs in Iowa are 

the same as assumed by EPA when it 

issued the CSAPR FIP for Iowa in June 

2012. See 76 FR 48208 (CSAPR 

promulgation) and 77 FR 33642 (limited 

disapproval of Iowa regional haze SIP 

and FIP for Iowa for certain regional 

haze requirements). 

At the present time, the requirements 

of CSAPR apply to sources in Iowa 

under the terms of a FIP, because Iowa 

to date has not incorporated the CSAPR 

requirements into its SIP. The Regional 

Haze Rule requires an assessment of 

whether the current ‘‘implementation 

plan’’ is sufficient to enable the states to 

meet all established reasonable progress 

goals. 40 CFR 51.308(g)(6). The term 

‘‘implementation plan’’ is defined for 

purposes of the Regional Haze Rule to 

mean ‘‘any [SIP], [FIP], or Tribal 

Implementation Plan.’’ 40 CFR 51.301. 


rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
45634 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

7EPA previously determined that CSAPR (like 

CAIR before it) was ‘‘better than BART’’ because it 

would achieve greater reasonable progress toward 

the national goal than would source-specific BART. 

77 FR 33642 (June 7, 2012). EPA is not taking 

comment in this supplemental proposal on whether 

the Iowa implementation plan meets the BART 

requirements or whether CSAPR is an alternative 

measure to source-specific BART in accordance 

with 40 CFR 52.301(e)(2). 

EPA is, therefore, proposing to 

determine that we may consider 

measures in any issued FIP as well as 

those in a state’s regional haze SIP in 

assessing the adequacy of the ‘‘existing 

implementation plan’’ under 40 CFR 

51.308(g)(6) and (h). Because CSAPR 

will ensure the control of SO2 and NOX

emissions reductions relied upon by 

Iowa and other states in setting their 

reasonable progress goals beginning in 

January 2015 at least through the 

remainder of the first implementation 

period in 2018, EPA is proposing to 

approve Iowa’s finding that there is no 

need for revision of the existing 

implementation plan for Iowa to achieve 

the reasonable progress goals for the 

Class I areas in nearby states impacted 

by Iowa sources. 

We note that the Regional Haze Rule 

provides for periodic evaluation and 

assessment of a state’s reasonable 

progress toward achieving the national 

goal of natural visibility conditions by 

2064 for CAA section 169A(b). The 

regional haze regulations at 40 CFR 

51.308 required states to submit initial 

SIPs in 2007 providing for reasonable 

progress toward the national goal for the 

first implementation period from 2008 

through 2018. 40 CFR 51.308(b). 

Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.308(f), SIP 

revisions reassessing each state’s 

reasonable progress toward the national 

goal are due every the years after that 

time. For such subsequent regional haze 

SIPs, 40 CFR 51.308(f) requires each 

state to reassess its reasonable progress 

and all the elements of its regional haze 

SIP required by 40 CFR 51.308(d), 

taking into account improvements in 

monitors and control technology, 

assessing the state’s actual progress and 

effectiveness of its long term strategy, 

and revising reasonable progress goals 

as necessary. 40 CFR 51.308(f)(1)–(3). 

Therefore, Iowa has the opportunity to 

reassess its emissions trends and the 

adequacy of its regional haze SIP, 

including its reliance upon CSAPR for 

emission reductions from EGUs, when it 

prepares and submits its second 

regional haze SIP to cover the 

implementation period from 2018 

through 2028. As discussed in the NPR 

and in Iowa’s progress report, emissions 

of SO2 and NOX from EGUs are far 

below original projections for 2018. In 

addition, the visibility data provided by 

Iowa show the Class I areas impacted by 

Iowa sources are all currently on track 

to achieve their projected emissions 

reductions. EPA is seeking comment 

only on the issues raised in this 

supplemental proposal and is not 

reopening for comment other issues 

addressed in its prior proposal. 

IV. Summary of Reproposal 

In summary, EPA is proposing to 

approve Iowa’s progress report SIP 

revision. EPA solicits comments on this 

supplemental proposal, with respect to 

only the specific issues raised in this 

action. EPA is not reopening the 

comment period on any other aspect of 

the July 3, 2014, NPR, as an adequate 

opportunity to comment on those issues 

has already been provided. The purpose 

of this supplemental proposal is limited 

to review of the Iowa progress report in 

light of the Supreme Court’s decision in 

EME Homer City and the D.C. Circuit’s 

recent Order lifting the stay on CSAPR. 

This supplemental proposal reflects 

EPA’s desire for public input into how 

it should proceed in light of those 

decisions when acting on the pending 

progress report, in particular the 

requirements that the State assess 

whether the current implementation 

plan is sufficient to ensure that 

reasonable progress goals are met. 40 

CFR 51.308(g)(6) and (h).7

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

In this action, EPA is proposing to 

include in a final EPA rule regulatory 

text that includes incorporation by 

reference. In accordance with 

requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is 

proposing to incorporate by reference 

the Iowa Nonregulatory Provisions 

described in the proposed amendments 

to 40 CFR part 52 set forth below. EPA 

has made, and will continue to make, 

these documents generally available 

electronically through 

www.regulations.gov and/or in hard 

copy at the appropriate EPA office (see 

the ADDRESSES section of this preamble 

for more information). 

Under the Clean Air Act (CAA), the 

Administrator is required to approve a 

SIP submission that complies with the 

provisions of the Act and applicable 

Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 

40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP 

submissions, EPA’s role is to approve 

state choices, provided that they meet 

the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, 

this action merely approves state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this action: 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• 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, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

The SIP is not approved to apply on 

any Indian reservation land or in any 

other area where EPA or an Indian tribe 

has demonstrated that a tribe has 

jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian 

country, the rule does not have tribal 

implications and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this proposed action 

and other required information to the 

U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 


rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Proposed Rules 45635 

Representatives, and the Comptroller 

General of the United States prior to 

publication of the rule in the Federal 

Register. A major rule cannot take effect 

until 60 days after it is published in the 

Federal Register. This proposed action 

is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 

U.S.C. 804(2). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by September 29, 2015. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this proposed rule 

does not affect the finality of this 

rulemaking for the purposes of judicial 

review nor does it extend the time 

within which a petition for judicial 

review may be filed, and shall not 

postpone the effectiveness of such 

future rule or action. This proposed 

action may not be challenged later in 

proceedings to enforce its requirements. 

(See section 307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen oxides, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur dioxide, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: July 21, 2015. 

Mark Hague, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, EPA proposes to amend 40 

CFR part 52 as set forth below: 

Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations is amended as 

follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart Q—Iowa 

■ 2. In § 52.820(e) the table is amended 

by adding entry (42) at the end of the 

table in numerical order to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.820 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED IOWA NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS

Name of nonregulatory SIP provision Applicable geographic 

or nonattainment area 

State submittal 

date EPA approval date Explanation 

*******

(42) State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision 

for the Attainment and Maintenance of National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Regional Haze (2013 Five-Year Progress Report).

Statewide ..................... 7/19/13 7/3/2014, 79 FR 37976.

[FR Doc. 2015–18826 Filed 7–30–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2015–0413; FRL–9931–64– 

Region 4] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Georgia: 

Revisions to Definitions and Ambient 

Air Quality Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

portions of the State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the 

State of Georgia, through the Georgia 

Department of Natural Resources’ 

Environmental Protection Division (GA 

EPD) on August 30, 2010, December 15, 

2011, and November 12, 2014. The SIP 

submittals include changes to GA EPD’s 

air quality rules that, among other 

things, modify definitions and modify 

the ambient air standards for fine 

particulate matter. The portions of the 

SIP revisions that EPA is approving are 

consistent with the requirements of the 

Clean Air Act (CAA). In the Final Rules 

Section of this Federal Register, EPA is 

approving these portions of the SIP 

revisions as a direct final rule without 

prior proposal because the Agency 

views these as a noncontroversial 

submittals and anticipates no adverse 

comments. A detailed rationale for the 

approval is set forth in the direct final 

rule. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before August 31, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2015–0413, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: R4-ARMS@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (404) 562–9019. 

4. Mail: ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2015– 

0413,’’ Air Regulatory Management 

Section (formerly Regulatory 

Development Section), Air Planning and 

Implementation Branch (formerly Air 

Planning Branch), Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Lynorae 

Benjamin, Chief, Air Regulatory 

Management Section, Air Planning and 

Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides 

and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Regional Office’s normal hours of 

operation. The Regional Office’s official 

hours of business are Monday through 

Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding 

Federal holidays. 

Please see the direct final rule which 

is located in the Rules section of this 

Federal Register for detailed 

instructions on how to submit 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: D. 

Brad Akers, Air Regulatory Management 

Section, Air Planning and 

Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides 

and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Mr. Akers 

can be reached by phone at (404) 562– 

9089 or via electronic mail at 

akers.brad@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For 

additional information see the direct 

final rule which is published in the 

Rules Section of this Federal Register. 

A detailed rationale for the approval is 

set forth in the direct final rule. If no 


rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS