37976 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 128 / Thursday, July 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

While notice of the final determination 

will not be published in the Federal 

Register, copies of the determination 

can be obtained by sending a written 

request to Sara Bartholomew at the 

above address. 

Dated: June 19, 2014. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2014–15534 Filed 7–2–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2014–0269; FRL–9911–00– 

Region 9] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan, Placer County 

Air Pollution Control District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

revision to the Placer County portion of 

the California State Implementation 

Plan (SIP). This revision concerns the 

necessary procedures to create emission 

reduction credits from the reduction of 

volatile organic compound (VOC), 

oxides of nitrogen (NOX), oxides of 

sulfur (SOX), particulate matter (PM), 

and carbon monoxide (CO) emissions 

due to the permanent curtailment of 

burning rice straw. 

We are proposing to approve a local 

rule that provides administrative 

procedures for creating emissions 

reduction credits, consistent with Clean 

Air Act (CAA or the Act) requirements. 

DATES: Any comments on this proposal 

must arrive by August 4, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2014–0269, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions. 

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

3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel 

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

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Instructions: All comments will be 

included in the public docket without 

change and may be made available 

online at www.regulations.gov, 

including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through 

www.regulations.gov or email. 

www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous 

access’’ system, and EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send email 

directly to EPA, your email address will 

be automatically captured and included 

as part of the public comment. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Docket: Generally, documents in the 

docket for this action are available 

electronically at www.regulations.gov 

and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, 

California 94105–3901. While all 

documents in the docket are listed at 

www.regulations.gov, some information 

may be publicly available only at the 

hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted 

material, large maps), and some may not 

be publicly available in either location 

(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy 

materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Nancy Levin, EPA Region IX, (415) 942– 

3848, levin.nancy@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

proposal addresses the following local 

rule: Placer County Air Pollution 

Control District Rule 516, Rice Straw 

Emission Reduction Credits. In the 

Rules and Regulations section of this 

Federal Register, we are approving this 

local rule in a direct final action without 

prior proposal because we believe these 

SIP revisions are not controversial. If we 

receive adverse comments, however, we 

will publish a timely withdrawal of the 

direct final rule and address the 

comments in subsequent action based 

on this proposed rule. Please note that 

if we receive adverse comment on an 

amendment, paragraph, or section of 

this rule and if that provision may be 

severed from the remainder of the rule, 

we may adopt as final those provisions 

of the rule that are not the subject of an 

adverse comment. 

We do not plan to open a second 

comment period, so anyone interested 

in commenting should do so at this 

time. If we do not receive adverse 

comments, no further activity is 

planned. For further information, please 

see the direct final action. 

Dated: April 25, 2014. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2014–15564 Filed 7–2–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2014–0365; FRL–9913–04– 

Region 7] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Iowa; Regional 

Haze State Implementation Plan 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing approval of 

a revision to the Iowa State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by 

the State of Iowa on July 16, 2013. 

Iowa’s July 16, 2013, SIP submission 

(‘‘progress report SIP’’) addresses 

requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA 

or Act) and EPA’s rules that require 

states to submit periodic reports 

describing progress towards reasonable 

progress goals (RPGs) established for 

regional haze and a determination of the 

adequacy of the state’s existing SIP 

addressing regional haze (‘‘regional haze 

SIP’’). EPA is proposing approval of 

Iowa’s progress report SIP submission 

on the basis that it addresses the 

progress report and adequacy 

determination requirements for the first 

implementation period for regional 

haze. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before August 4, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. 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 or Courier: 

Ms. Jodi Harper, Air Planning and 

Development Branch, Air and Waste 

Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 7, 11201 Renner Boulevard, 

Lenexa, Kansas 66219. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2014– 

0365. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 128 / Thursday, July 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 37977 

1On June 26, 2012, EPA finalized a limited 

approval of Iowa’s March 25, 2008, regional haze 

SIP to address the first implementation period for 

regional haze (77 FR 38006). In a separate action, 

published on June 7, 2012 (77 FR 33642), EPA 

finalized a limited disapproval of the Iowa regional 

haze SIP because of the State’s reliance on the Clean 

Air Interstate Rule to meet certain regional haze 

requirements, which EPA replaced in August 2011 

with the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) (76 

FR 48208 (Aug. 8, 2011)). In the aforementioned 

June 7, 2012, action, EPA finalized a Federal 

Implementation Plan (FIP) for Iowa to replace the 

State’s reliance on CAIR with reliance on CSAPR. 

Following these EPA actions, the DC Circuit issued 

a decision in EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. 

EPA (hereinafter referred to as ‘‘EME Homer City’’), 

696 F.3d 7 (D.C. Cir. 2012), vacating CSAPR and 

keeping CAIR in place pending the promulgation of 

a valid replacement rule. On April 29, 2014, the 

U.S. Supreme Court reversed the DC Circuit 

opinion vacating CSAPR, and remanded the case for 

further proceedings. EME Homer City, 572 U.S. 134 

S. Ct. 1584. CAIR continues to remain in place. 

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: Ms. 

Jodi Harper, Air Planning and 

Development Branch, Air and Waste 

Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 7, 11201 Renner Boulevard, 

Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at (913) 551–7483 

or by email at harper.jodi@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

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

provides additional information by 

addressing the following: 

I. What is the background for EPA’s proposed 

action? 

II. What are the requirements for the regional 

haze progress report SIPs and adequacy 

determinations? 

A. Regional Haze Progress Report SIP 

B. Adequacy Determination of the Current 

Regional Haze SIP 

III. What is EPA’s analysis of Iowa’s progress 

report SIP and adequacy determination? 

A. Regional Haze Progress Report SIPs 

1. 40 CFR 51.308(g)(1) 

2. 40 CFR 51.308(g)(2) 

3. 40 CFR 51.308(g)(3) 

4. 40 CFR 51.308(g)(4) 

5. 40 CFR 51.308(g)(5) 

6. 40 CFR 51.308(g)(6) 

7. 40 CFR 51.308(g)(7) 

B. Determination of Adequacy of Existing 

Regional Haze Plan 

IV. What action is EPA proposing to take? 

I. What is the background for EPA’s 

proposed action? 

States are required to submit a 

progress report in the form of a SIP 

revision every five years that evaluates 

progress towards the RPGs for each 

mandatory Class I Federal area within 

the state and in each mandatory Class I 

Federal area outside the state which 

may be affected by emissions from 

within the state. 40 CFR 51.308(g). 

States are also required to submit, at the 

same time as the progress report, a 

determination of the adequacy of the 

state’s existing regional haze SIP. 40 

CFR 51.308(h). The first progress report 

SIP is due five years after submittal of 

the initial regional haze SIP. On March 

25, 2008, the Iowa Department of 

Natural Resources (IDNR) submitted the 

state’s first regional haze SIP in 

accordance with 40 CFR 51.308(b).1

On April 4, 2013, IDNR provided to 

the Federal Land Managers, a revision to 

Iowa’s SIP reporting on progress made 

during the first implementation period 

toward RPGs for Class I areas in the 

state and Class I areas outside the state 

that are affected by emissions from 

Iowa’s sources. There are no Class I 

areas located in the State of Iowa. 

Notification was published in the Legal 

Notices section of the Des Moines 

Register on May 9, 2013. A public 

hearing was held on June 11, 2013, at 

the Air Quality Bureau in Windsor 

Heights, and the public comment period 

ended on June 12, 2013. 

On July 16, 2013, IDNR submitted the 

SIP to EPA. This progress report SIP and 

accompanying cover letter also included 

a determination that the state’s existing 

regional haze SIP requires no 

substantive revision to achieve the 

established regional haze visibility 

improvement and emissions reduction 

goals for 2018. EPA is proposing to 

approve Iowa’s progress report SIP on 

the basis that it satisfies the 

requirements of 40 CFR 51.308(g) and 

51.308(h). 

II. What are the requirements for the 

regional haze progress report SIPs and 

adequacy determinations? 

A. Regional Haze Progress Report SIP 

Under 40 CFR 51.308(g), states must 

submit a regional haze progress report 

as a SIP revision every five years and 

must address, at a minimum, the seven 

elements found in 40 CFR 51.308(g). As 

described in further detail in section III 

below, 40 CFR 51.308(g) requires a 

description of the status of measures in 

the approved regional haze SIP; a 

summary of emissions reductions 

achieved; an assessment of visibility 

conditions for each Class I area in the 

state; an analysis of 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 progress 

in Class I areas impacted by the state’s 

sources; an assessment of the 

sufficiency of the approved regional 

haze SIP; and a review of the state’s 

visibility monitoring strategy. 

B. Adequacy Determinations of the 

Current Regional Haze SIP 

Under 40 CFR 51.308(h), states are 

required to submit, at the same time as 

the progress report SIP, 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. As described in 

further detail in section III below, 40 

CFR 51.308(h) requires states to either: 

(1) Submit a negative declaration to EPA 

that no further substantive revision to 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
37978 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 128 / Thursday, July 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

2See also sections III.A.4. and III.A.6. of this 

action. 

the state’s existing regional haze SIP is 

needed; (2) provide notification to EPA 

(and other state(s) that participated in 

the regional planning process) if the 

state determines that its existing 

regional haze SIP is or may be 

inadequate to ensure reasonable 

progress at one or more Class I areas due 

to emissions from sources in other 

state(s) that participated in the regional 

planning process, and collaborate with 

these other state(s) to develop additional 

strategies to address deficiencies; (3) 

provide notification with supporting 

information to EPA if the state 

determines that its existing regional 

haze SIP is or may be inadequate to 

ensure reasonable progress at one or 

more Class I areas due to emissions from 

sources in another country; or (4) revise 

its regional haze SIP to address 

deficiencies within one year if the state 

determines that its existing regional 

haze SIP is or may be inadequate to 

ensure reasonable progress in one or 

more Class I areas due to emissions from 

sources within the state. 

III. What is EPA’s analysis of Iowa’s 

regional haze progress report and 

adequacy determination? 

On July 16, 2013, IDNR submitted a 

revision to Iowa’s regional haze SIP to 

address progress made towards RPGs of 

Class I areas in the state and Class I 

areas outside the state that are affected 

by emissions from Iowa’s sources. This 

progress report SIP also included a 

determination of the adequacy of the 

state’s existing regional haze SIP. Iowa 

has no Class I areas within its borders. 

IDNR utilized particulate matter source 

apportionment (PSAT) techniques for 

photochemical modeling conducted by 

the Central Regional Air Planning 

Association (CENRAP) to identify four 

Class I areas in two nearby states 

potentially impacted by Iowa sources: 

Boundary Waters Canoe Area 

Wilderness (BOWA) and Voyagers 

National Park (VOYA) in Minnesota, 

and Isle Royale National Park (ISLE) and 

Seney Wilderness Area (SENE) in 

Michigan. Collectively these four Class 

I areas are referred to as the Northern 

Midwest Class I areas. 77 FR 11979. 

A. Regional Haze Progress Report SIPs 

The following sections summarize: (1) 

Each of the seven elements that must be 

addressed by the progress report under 

40 CFR 51.308(g); (2) how Iowa’s 

progress report SIP addressed each 

element; and (3) EPA’s analysis and 

proposed determination as to whether 

the state satisfied each element. 

1. 40 CFR 51.308(g)(1) 

40 CFR 51.308(g)(1) requires a 

description of the status of 

implementation of all measures 

included in the regional haze SIP for 

achieving RPGs for Class I areas both 

within and outside the state. 

Iowa evaluated the status of all 

measures included in its 2008 regional 

haze SIP in accordance with 40 CFR 

51.308(g)(1). Specifically, in its progress 

report SIP, Iowa summarizes the status 

of the emissions reduction measures 

that were included in the final iteration 

of the Central Regional Air Planning 

Association (CENRAP) regional haze 

emissions inventory and RPG modeling. 

Iowa also discusses the status of those 

measures that were not included in the 

final CENRAP emissions inventory and 

were not relied upon in the initial 

regional haze SIP to meet RPGs. The 

state notes that the emissions reductions 

from these measures, which are relied 

upon by Iowa for reasonable progress, 

will help ensure Class I areas impacted 

by Iowa sources achieve their RPGs. The 

measures include applicable Federal 

programs (e.g., mobile source rules, 

Maximum Achievable Control 

Technology (MACT) standards, Federal 

and state consent agreements, and 

Federal and state control strategies for 

electric generating units (EGUs)). This 

summary includes a discussion of the 

benefits associated with each measure. 

EPA proposes to find that Iowa’s 

analysis adequately addresses 40 CFR 

51.308(g)(1). The state documents the 

implementation status of measures from 

its regional haze SIP as well as describes 

significant measures resulting from EPA 

regulations other than the regional haze 

program as they pertain to the state’s 

sources. The progress report SIP 

highlights the effect of several Federal 

control measures both nationally and in 

the CENRAP region, and when possible, 

in the state. 

Regarding the status of BART and 

reasonable progress control 

requirements for sources in the state, 

Iowa’s progress report SIP notes that no 

non-EGU BART sources were found to 

be BART eligible and therefore, no 

BART specific emissions limits were 

developed. Additionally, Iowa 

summarized its reasonable progress 

control determinations from its regional 

haze SIP. Because the state found no 

additional controls to be reasonable for 

the first implementation period for 

sources evaluated for reasonable 

progress in Iowa, no further discussion 

of the status of controls was necessary 

in the progress report SIP. 

EPA proposes to conclude that Iowa 

has adequately addressed the status of 

control measures in its regional haze SIP 

as required by 40 CFR 51.308(g)(1). Iowa 

describes the implementation status of 

measures from its regional haze SIP, 

including the status of control measures 

to meet BART and reasonable progress 

requirements, the status of significant 

measures resulting from EPA 

regulations, as well as measures that 

came into effect since the CENRAP 

analyses for the regional haze SIP were 

completed. 

2. 40 CFR 51.308(g)(2) 

40 CFR 51.308(g)(2) requires a 

summary of the emissions reductions 

achieved in the state through the 

measures subject to 40 CFR 51.308(g)(1). 

In its regional haze SIP and progress 

report SIP, Iowa focuses its assessment 

on NOX and SO2 emissions from EGUs 

because available information from 

multiple sources (CENRAP, CAIR 

provided by EPA’s Clean Air Markets 

Division (CAMD), etc.) determined that 

these compounds accounted for the 

majority of the visibility-impairing 

pollution in the Central Region. 

During the period from 2002–2011, 

SO2 emissions decreased in Iowa by 25 

percent.2 Also during that same period, 

NOX emissions decreased by 51 percent. 

Iowa noted that Integrated Planning 

Model (IPM) projections for the 2018 

planning period indicated an 

anticipated increase in EGU SO2

emissions and decrease in EGU NOX

emissions. Iowa notes that the 2011 

actual SO2 and NOX EGU emissions 

were significantly below the projected 

2018 values, representing SO2 and NOX

emissions that are 37 percent and 41 

percent below their 2018 projections. 

Iowa also noted that these decreases in 

emissions have occurred while actual 

heat input has increased, indicating the 

reductions reflect cleaner generation 

and not merely decreased electricity 

demand. 

EPA proposes to conclude that Iowa 

has adequately addressed 40 CFR 

51.308(g)(2). The state provides 

estimates, and where available, actual 

emissions reductions of NOX and SO2

from EGUs in Iowa that have occurred 

since Iowa submitted its regional haze 

SIP. Iowa appropriately focused on NOX

and SO2 emissions from its EGUs in its 

progress report SIP because it 

previously identified these emissions as 

the most significant contributors to 

visibility impairment at those areas that 

Iowa sources impact. Given the large 

NOX and SO2 reductions at EGUs that 

have actually occurred, further analysis 

of emissions from other sources or other 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 128 / Thursday, July 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 37979 

3The ‘‘most impaired days’’ and ‘‘least impaired 

days’’ in the regional haze rule refers to the average 

visibility impairment (measured in deciviews) for 

the twenty percent of monitored days in a calendar 

year with the highest and lowest amount of 

visibility impairment, respectively, averaged over a 

five-year period. 40 CFR 51.301. 

pollutants, was ultimately unnecessary 

in this first implementation period. 

Because no additional controls were 

found to be reasonable for reasonable 

progress for the first implementation 

period for evaluated sources in Iowa, 

EPA proposes to find that no further 

discussion of emissions reductions from 

controls was necessary in the progress 

report SIP. 

3. 40 CFR 51.308(g)(3) 

40 CFR 51.308(g)(3) requires that 

states with Class I areas provide the 

following information for the most 

impaired and least impaired days for 

each area, with values expressed in 

terms of five-year averages of these 

annual values:3

(i) current visibility conditions; 

(ii) the difference between current 

visibility conditions and baseline 

visibility conditions; and 

(iii) the change in visibility 

impairment over the past five years. 

Iowa does not have any Class I areas 

within its boundaries, and as this 

section pertains only to states 

containing Class I areas, no further 

discussion is necessary. EPA proposes 

to conclude that Iowa has adequately 

addressed 40 CFR 51.308(g)(3). 

4. 40 CFR 51.308(g)(4) 

40 CFR 51.308(g)(4) requires an 

analysis tracking emissions changes of 

visibility-impairing pollutants from the 

state’s sources by type or category over 

the past five years based on the most 

recent updated emissions inventory. 

In its progress report SIP, Iowa 

presents data from a statewide 

emissions inventory developed for the 

year 2002 and compares this data to the 

National Emissions Inventory (NEI) 

version 2 (dated April 10, 2012), or 

simply the 2008 NEIv2. For both the 

2002 dataset and the 2008 NEIv2 data, 

pollutants inventoried include volatile 

organic compounds, NOX, fine 

particulate matter, coarse particulate 

matter, ammonia, and SO2. The 

emissions inventories from both the 

2002 dataset and the 2008 NEIv2 

include the following: ammonia, area, 

fugitive dust, offroad and onroad mobile 

sources, stationary point sources, road 

dust, fires, and biogenic sources. The 

comparison of emissions inventory data 

shows that emissions of the key 

visibility-impairing pollutants identified 

by CENRAP for the central states, NOX

and SO2, continued to drop from 2002 

to 2008 (decreasing 68,109 and 37,380 

tons, respectively). While not all 

emissions in Iowa contribute to 

visibility impairment at a Class I area, 

Iowa chose to include a complete 

statewide inventory containing emission 

rates for all anthropogenic and biogenic 

sources, however in the Midwest, point 

source emissions of NOX and SO2 are 

often more closely evaluated in the 

context of regional haze. 

The comparison also shows that a 

projected increase in emissions of fine 

and coarse particulate matter occurred, 

but increased less than the projected 

amount. Actual increase in fine and 

course particulate matter emissions 

during that same time period was by 

20,318 and 173,147 tons, respectively. 

This increase was driven almost entirely 

by fugitive dust emissions, and to a 

lesser extent the road dust sector for 

coarse particulate emissions. Iowa also 

noted that the 2002 fugitive dust and 

road dust emissions estimates represent 

values after the application of transport 

factors, while the 2008 data have not 

been similarly adjusted. While the 

transport factor discrepancy does not 

permit a precise comparison of the 2002 

and 2008 fugitive dust and road dust 

emissions, Iowa notes that a crude 

evaluation is possible assuming a 

simple fifty percent reduction of the 

2008 fugitive dust and road dust 

emissions as a surrogate for the 

application of county-level transport 

factors. This simple reduction would 

bring the 2008 fine particulate and 

coarse particulate fugitive and road dust 

emissions in line and generally below 

the 2002 values. Iowa further notes that 

such emissions from Iowa are not 

known to contribute significantly to 

visibility impairment at Class I areas. 

EPA proposes to conclude that Iowa 

has adequately addressed 40 CFR 

51.308(g)(4). While ideally the five-year 

period to be analyzed for emissions 

inventory changes is the time period 

since the current regional haze SIP was 

submitted, there is an inevitable time 

lag in developing and reporting 

complete emissions inventories once 

quality-assured emissions data becomes 

available. Therefore, EPA believes that 

there is some flexibility in the five-year 

time period that states can select. Iowa 

tracked changes in emissions of 

visibility-impairing pollutants using the 

2008 National Emissions Inventory, the 

most recent updated inventory of actual 

emissions for the state at the time that 

it developed the progress report SIP. 

EPA believes that Iowa’s use of the sixyear period from 2002–2008 reflects a 

conservative picture of the actual 

emissions realized between 2002–2013, 

as in many cases, Iowa had already 

reached or surpassed their 2018 goals by 

2008. There also is a general downward 

trend from 2002–2008, so it is likely 

additional NOX and SO2 emissions 

reductions occurred between the 2008 

data and actual conditions in 2013. 

5. 40 CFR 51.308(g)(5) 

40 CFR 51.308(g)(5) requires an 

assessment of any significant changes in 

anthropogenic emissions within or 

outside the state that have occurred over 

the past five years that have limited or 

impeded progress in reducing pollutant 

emissions and improving visibility in 

Class I areas impacted by the state’s 

sources. 

In its progress report SIP, Iowa 

addresses the changes in anthropogenic 

emissions between the 2008 NEIv2 data 

and the 2018 projections from the initial 

regional haze SIP. Iowa noted that there 

have been significant reductions among 

anthropogenic emissions categories, and 

that during the period from 2002–2008, 

in many cases the emissions reductions 

had already dropped below the 2018 

projections. An increase in ammonia 

(NH3) was noted, however, the 

actualized increase was less than the 

projected increase and Iowa is still on 

track to meet the 2018 NH3 emissions 

target. Iowa also noted that it is 

uncertain if this increase is a reasonable 

representation of actual emissions 

increases or if it is computational in 

nature, because of changes to the 

versions and inputs to the Carnegie 

Mellon University (CMU) NH3

emissions model. Iowa concluded that 

emissions reductions of all pollutants in 

2008 were generally ahead of schedule 

or had already met the 2018 projections, 

and that no changes in anthropogenic 

emissions have limited or impeded 

progress in reducing pollutant 

emissions and improving visibility. 

EPA proposes to conclude that Iowa 

has adequately addressed 40 CFR 

51.308(g)(5). Iowa demonstrated that 

there are no significant changes in 

anthropogenic emissions that have 

impeded progress in reducing emissions 

and improving visibility in Class I areas 

impacted by Iowa sources. The state 

referenced its analyses in the progress 

report SIP identifying an overall 

downward trend in these emissions 

from 2002 to 2008. Further, the progress 

report SIP shows that Iowa is on track 

to meeting its 2018 emissions 

projections. 

6. 40 CFR 51.308(g)(6) 

40 CFR 51.308(g)(6) requires an 

assessment of whether the current 

regional haze SIP is sufficient to enable 

Iowa, or other states, to meet the RPGs 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
37980 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 128 / Thursday, July 3, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

for Class I areas affected by emissions 

from the state. 

In its progress report Iowa states that 

it believes that the elements and 

strategies outlined in its original 

regional haze SIP are sufficient to enable 

Iowa and other neighboring states to 

meet all the established RPGs. To 

support this conclusion, Iowa notes that 

the actual 2011 EGU emissions of SO2

and NOX are already below the 2018 

projected emissions (by 55,408 and 

27,055 tons, respectively), with further 

decreases expected. In particular, Iowa 

notes that the emissions reductions 

already achieved in the 2007 to 2011 

period and the additional reductions not 

accounted for in the original regional 

haze SIP (as discussed previously for 

purposes of 40 CFR 51.308(g)(1)) further 

support Iowa’s conclusion that the 

regional haze SIP’s elements and 

strategies are sufficient to meet the 

established RPGs. 

EPA proposes to conclude that Iowa 

has adequately addressed 40 CFR 

51.308(g)(6). EPA views this 

requirement as a qualitative assessment 

that should evaluate emissions and 

visibility trends and other readily 

available information, including 

expected emissions reductions 

associated with measures with 

compliance dates that have not yet 

become effective. Iowa referenced the 

improving visibility trends at affected 

Class I areas and the downward 

emissions trends in the state, with a 

focus on NOX and SO2 emissions from 

Iowa’s EGUs that support Iowa’s 

determination that its regional haze SIP 

is sufficient to meet RPGs for Class I 

areas outside the state impacted by Iowa 

sources. EPA believes that Iowa’s 

conclusion regarding the sufficiency of 

the regional haze SIP is appropriate 

because of the calculated visibility 

improvement using the latest available 

data and the downward trend in NOX

and SO2 emissions from EGUs in Iowa. 

7. 40 CFR 51.308(g)(7) 

40 CFR 51.308(g)(7) requires a review 

of the state’s visibility monitoring 

strategy and an assessment of whether 

any modifications to the monitoring 

strategy are necessary. In its progress 

report SIP, Iowa summarizes the 

existing IMPROVE monitoring network 

and its intended continued reliance on 

IMPROVE for visibility planning. Iowa 

operates two IMPROVE Protocol 

sampling sites, one at Viking Lake State 

Park in southwestern Iowa, and the 

other at Lake Sugema Wildlife 

Management in southeastern Iowa. 

EPA proposes to conclude that Iowa 

has adequately addressed the 

sufficiency of its monitoring strategy as 

required by 40 CFR 51.308(g)(7). Iowa 

reaffirmed its continued reliance upon 

the IMPROVE monitoring network. 

B. Determination of Adequacy of 

Existing Regional Haze Plan 

Under 40 CFR 51.308(h), states are 

required to take one of four possible 

actions based on the information 

gathered and conclusions made in the 

progress report SIP. The following 

section summarizes: (1) the action taken 

by Iowa under 40 CFR 51.308(h); (2) 

Iowa’s rationale for the selected action; 

and (3) EPA’s analysis and proposed 

determination regarding the state’s 

action. 

In its progress report SIP, Iowa took 

the action provided for by 40 CFR 

51.308(h)(1), which allows a state to 

submit a negative declaration to EPA if 

the state determines that the existing 

regional haze SIP requires no further 

substantive revision at this time to 

achieve the RPGs for Class I areas 

affected by the state’s sources. The basis 

for Iowa’s negative declaration is the 

findings from the progress report (as 

discussed in section III.A of this action), 

including the findings that: NOX and 

SO2 emissions from Iowa’s sources have 

decreased beyond original projections; 

and the NOX and SO2 emissions from 

EGUs in Iowa are already below the 

levels projected for 2018 in the regional 

haze SIP and are expected to continue 

to trend downward for the next five 

years. Based on these findings, EPA 

proposes to agree with Iowa’s 

conclusion under 40 CFR 51.308(h) that 

no further substantive changes to its 

regional haze SIP are required at this 

time. 

IV. What action is EPA proposing to 

take? 

EPA is proposing approval of a 

revision to the Iowa SIP, submitted by 

the State of Iowa on July 16, 2013, as 

meeting the applicable regional haze 

requirements as set forth in 40 CFR 

51.308(g) and 51.308(h). 

Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

Under the 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 proposed 

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 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 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 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, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: June 13, 2014. 

Mark J. Hague, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7. 

[FR Doc. 2014–15686 Filed 7–2–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS