Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Iowa; Regional Haze Five-Year Progress Report State Implementation Plan, 45631-45635 [2015-18826]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Proposed Rules
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 https://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.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUMMARY:
Kevin Leone, Air Program, EPA, Region
8, Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595 Wynkoop
Street, Denver, Colorado 80202–1129,
(303) 312–6227, leone.kevin@epa.gov.
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.
rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
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
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule; supplemental.
AGENCY:
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–
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
45631
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.
Jodi
Harper, (913) 551–7483, or by email at
harper.jodi@epa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
or ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
E:\FR\FM\31JYP1.SGM
31JYP1
45632
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Proposed Rules
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.
rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
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
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.
2 EPA 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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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
3 CAIR 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).
4 CSAPR 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.
E:\FR\FM\31JYP1.SGM
31JYP1
rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Proposed Rules
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
5 Subsequent to the interim final rulemaking, EPA
began implementation of CSAPR on January 1,
2015.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
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
6 EPA 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
45633
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.
E:\FR\FM\31JYP1.SGM
31JYP1
rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
45634
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Proposed Rules
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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
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:
7 EPA 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).
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
• 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
E:\FR\FM\31JYP1.SGM
31JYP1
45635
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 147 / Friday, July 31, 2015 / Proposed Rules
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.
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:
■
Dated: July 21, 2015.
Mark Hague,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7.
§ 52.820
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, EPA proposes to amend 40
CFR part 52 as set forth below:
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(e) * * *
*
*
EPA-APPROVED IOWA NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS
Applicable geographic
or nonattainment area
Name of nonregulatory SIP provision
*
*
*
*
(42) State Implementation Plan (SIP) Revision Statewide .....................
for the Attainment and Maintenance of National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Regional Haze (2013 Five-Year Progress Report).
[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
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
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
rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:28 Jul 30, 2015
Jkt 235001
State submittal
date
EPA approval date
*
7/19/13
*
7/3/2014, 79 FR 37976.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Explanation
*
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
E:\FR\FM\31JYP1.SGM
31JYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 147 (Friday, July 31, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 45631-45635]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-18826]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
[[Page 45632]]
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ EPA 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ CAIR 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).
\4\ CSAPR 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[[Page 45633]]
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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Subsequent to the interim final rulemaking, EPA began
implementation of CSAPR on January 1, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ EPA 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 Huntington-Ashland, 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.
[[Page 45634]]
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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ EPA 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
[[Page 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
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et. seq.
Subpart Q--Iowa
0
2. In Sec. 52.820(e) the table is amended by adding entry (42) at the
end of the table in numerical order to read as follows:
Sec. 52.820 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
EPA-Approved Iowa Nonregulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable
Name of nonregulatory SIP geographic or State submittal EPA approval date Explanation
provision nonattainment area date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
(42) State Implementation Plan Statewide.......... 7/19/13 7/3/2014, 79 FR
(SIP) Revision for the 37976.
Attainment and Maintenance of
National Ambient Air Quality
Standards for Regional Haze
(2013 Five-Year Progress
Report).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2015-18826 Filed 7-30-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P