Air Plan Approval; Iowa; Revisions to Regional Haze Plan and Visibility Requirements in Infrastructure State Implementation Plans for the 2006 PM2.5, 43741-43745 [2019-18137]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2019 / Proposed Rules
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
• In addition, the SIP is not approved
to apply on any Indian reservation land
or in any other area where the 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).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: August 6, 2019.
Michael Stoker,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R07–OAR–2019–0468; FRL–9998–40–
Region 7]
Air Plan Approval; Iowa; Revisions to
Regional Haze Plan and Visibility
Requirements in Infrastructure State
Implementation Plans for the 2006
PM2.5, 2012 PM2.5, 2010 NO2, 2010 SO2,
2008 Ozone, and 2015 Ozone NAAQS
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
Iowa’s request on four actions regarding
the Iowa State Implementation Plan
(SIP). The four SIP actions relate to
Iowa’s Regional Haze Plan and
infrastructure SIPs for the 2006 Fine
Particulate Matter (PM2.5), 2012 PM2.5,
2010 Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), 2010
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2), 2008 Ozone, and
2015 Ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS).
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before September 23, 2019.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07–
OAR–2019–0468 to https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
16:22 Aug 21, 2019
Jkt 247001
Jed
D. Wolkins, Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 7 Office, Air Quality
Planning Branch, 11201 Renner
Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at
telephone number (913) 551–7588;
email address wolkins.jed@epa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
[FR Doc. 2019–17804 Filed 8–21–19; 8:45 am]
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the Docket ID No. for this
rulemaking. Comments received will be
posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov/, including any
personal information provided. For
detailed instructions on sending
comments and additional information
on the rulemaking process, see the
‘‘Written Comments’’ heading of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
I. Written Comments
II. What is being addressed in this document?
A. Regional Haze SIPs and Their
Relationship With CAIR and CSAPR
B. Infrastructure SIPs
C. What are the prong 4 requirements?
D. What is the EPA’s analysis of how Iowa
addressed prong 4 and regional haze?
III. Have the requirements for approval of a
SIP revision been met?
IV. What action is the the EPA taking?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Written Comments
Submit your comments, identified by
Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2019–
0468, at https://www.regulations.gov.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from Regulations.gov.
The EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not
submit electronically any information
you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. The EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, the full
EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
43741
II. What is being addressed in this
document?
On May 14, 2019, the State of Iowa
submitted a request to revise the State
of Iowa’s Regional Haze Plan, changing
from reliance on the Clean Air Interstate
Rule (CAIR) to reliance on the Cross
State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) for
certain regional haze requirements;
removing EPA’s Federal Implementation
Plan (FIP) for reliance on CSAPR for
certain regional haze requirements,
converting EPA’s limited approval/
limited disapproval of Iowa’s Regional
Haze Plan for the first regional haze
planning period to a full approval; and
approving the states’ submissions
addressing the Clean Air Act (CAA or
the Act) section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)
provision (prong 4) that prohibits
emissions activity in one state from
interfering with measures to protect
visibility in another state of Iowa’s
infrastructure SIP submittals for the
2006 PM2.5, 2012 PM2.5, 2010 NO2, 2010
SO2, 2008 Ozone, and 2015 Ozone
NAAQS. The EPA is proposing approve
these requests.
A. Regional Haze SIPs and Their
Relationship With CAIR and CSAPR
Section 169A(b)(2)(A) of the CAA
requires states to submit Regional Haze
SIPs that contain such measures as may
be necessary to make reasonable
progress towards the natural visibility
goal at Class I areas, including a
requirement that certain categories of
existing major stationary sources built
between 1962 and 1977 procure, install,
and operate Best Available Retrofit
Technology (BART) as determined by
the state. Under the Regional Haze Rule
(RHR), adopted in 1999, states are
directed to conduct BART
determinations for such ‘‘BARTeligible’’ sources that may be
anticipated to cause or contribute to
visibility impairment in a Class I area.1
Rather than requiring source-specific
BART controls, states also have the
flexibility to adopt an emissions trading
program or other alternative program as
long as the alternative provides greater
reasonable progress towards improving
visibility than BART.2 The EPA
provided states with this flexibility in
the 1999 RHR, and further refined the
criteria for assessing whether an
alternative program provides for greater
reasonable progress in two subsequent
rulemakings.3
The EPA demonstrated that CAIR
would achieve greater reasonable
1 See
64 FR 35714 (July 1, 1999).
40 CFR 51.308(e)(2).
3 See 70 FR 39104 (July 6, 2005) and 71 FR 60612
(October 13, 2006).
2 See
E:\FR\FM\22AUP1.SGM
22AUP1
43742
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2019 / Proposed Rules
progress than BART in revisions to the
RHR made in 2005.4 In those revisions,
the EPA amended its regulations to
provide that states participating in the
CAIR cap-and-trade programs pursuant
to an EPA-approved CAIR SIP or states
that remain subject to a CAIR FIP need
not require affected BART-eligible
electric generating units (EGUs) to
install, operate, and maintain BART for
emissions of SO2 and nitrogen oxides
(NOX). As a result of the EPA’s
determination that CAIR was ‘‘betterthan-BART,’’ a number of states in the
CAIR region, including Iowa, relied on
the CAIR cap-and-trade programs as an
alternative to BART for EGU emissions
of SO2 and NOX in designing their
Regional Haze SIPs. These states also
relied on CAIR as an element of a longterm strategy (LTS) for achieving
reasonable progress. However, in 2008,
the United States Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C.
Circuit) remanded CAIR to the EPA,
which it did without vacatur to preserve
the environmental benefits provided by
CAIR.5 On August 8, 2011, acting on the
D.C. Circuit’s remand, the EPA
promulgated CSAPR to replace CAIR
and issued FIPs to implement the rule
in CSAPR-subject states.6
Implementation of CSAPR was
scheduled to begin on January 1, 2012,
when CSAPR would have superseded
the CAIR program.
Due to the D.C. Circuit’s 2008 ruling
that CAIR was ‘‘fatally flawed’’ and its
resulting status as a temporary measure
following that ruling, the EPA could not
fully approve Regional Haze SIPs to the
extent that they relied on CAIR to satisfy
the EGU BART requirement. On these
grounds, the EPA published in the
Federal Register a limited disapproval
of Iowa’s Regional Haze SIP on June 7,
2012, and promulgated a FIP relying on
4 CAIR created regional cap-and-trade programs to
reduce SO2 and NOX emissions in 27 eastern states
(and the District of Columbia), including Iowa, that
contributed to downwind nonattainment or
interfered with maintenance of the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS or the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. See 70
FR 39104 (July 6, 2005).
5 North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176, 1178
(D.C. Cir. 2008).
6 CSAPR requires 28 eastern states to limit their
statewide emissions of SO2 and/or NOX in order to
mitigate transported air pollution unlawfully
impacting other states’ ability to attain or maintain
four NAAQS: the 1997 ozone NAAQS, the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS, the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS, and the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The
CSAPR emissions limitations are defined in terms
of maximum statewide ‘‘budgets’’ for emissions of
annual SO2, annual NOX, and/or ozone-season NOX
by each covered state’s large EGUs. The CSAPR
state budgets are implemented in two phases of
generally increasing stringency, with the Phase 1
budgets applying to emissions in 2015 and 2016
and the Phase 2 budgets applying to emissions in
2017 and later years. See 76 FR 48208 (August 8,
2011).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:22 Aug 21, 2019
Jkt 247001
CSAPR rather than CAIR, pending
Iowa’s submission, and EPA approval
of, a SIP revision that corrected the
deficiency.7 The EPA finalized a limited
approval of Iowa’s Regional Haze SIP on
June 26, 2012, as meeting the remaining
applicable Regional Haze requirements
set forth in the CAA and the RHR.8
In the June 7, 2012 limited
disapproval action, the EPA also
amended the RHR to provide that
participation by a state’s EGUs in a
CSAPR trading program for a given
pollutant—either a CSAPR Federal
trading program implemented through a
CSAPR FIP or an integrated CSAPR state
trading program implemented through
an approved CSAPR SIP revision—
qualifies as a BART alternative for those
EGUs for that pollutant.9 Since the EPA
promulgated this amendment,
numerous states covered by CSAPR
have come to rely on the provision
through either SIPs or FIPs.10 Iowa is
currently relying on the FIP published
in the Federal Register on June 7, 2012
to rely on CSAPR as a BART-alternative
for the covered BART-eligible sources.
Numerous parties filed petitions for
review of CSAPR in the D.C. Circuit,
and on August 21, 2012, the court
issued its ruling, vacating and
remanding CSAPR to the EPA and
ordering continued implementation of
CAIR.11 The D.C. Circuit’s vacatur of
CSAPR was reversed by the United
States Supreme Court on April 29, 2014,
and the case was remanded to the D.C.
Circuit to resolve remaining issues in
accordance with the high court’s
ruling.12 On remand, the D.C. Circuit
affirmed CSAPR in most respects, but
invalidated without vacating some of
the CSAPR budgets as to a number of
states.13 The remanded budgets include
the Phase 2 SO2 emissions budgets for
Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, and
Texas and the Phase 2 ozone-season
NOX budgets for eleven states. This
7 See 77 FR 33642, 77 FR 33653–77 FR 336554
(June 7, 2012). EPA finalized limited disapprovals
of fourteen states’ regional haze SIP submissions
that relied on CAIR in this action, including Iowa’s.
8 See 77 FR 38006. (June 26, 2012)
9 See 40 CFR 51.308(e)(4).
10 EPA has promulgated FIPs relying on CSAPR
participation for BART purposes for Georgia,
Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Michigan, Missouri, Ohio,
Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia,
and West Virginia, 77 FR at 33654, and Nebraska,
77 FR 40150, 40151 (July 6, 2012). EPA has
approved Minnesota’s and Wisconsin’s SIPs relying
on CSAPR participation for BART purposes. See 77
FR 34801, 34806 (June 12, 2012) for Minnesota and
77 FR 46952, 46959 (August 7, 2012) for Wisconsin.
11 EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 696
F.3d 7, 38 (D.C. Cir. 2012).
12 EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, L.P., 134
S. Ct. 1584 (2014).
13 EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 795
F.3d 118 (D.C. Cir. 2015).
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
litigation ultimately delayed
implementation of CSAPR for three
years, from January 1, 2012, when
CSAPR’s cap-and-trade programs were
originally scheduled to replace the CAIR
cap-and-trade programs, to January 1,
2015. Thus, the rule’s Phase 2 budgets
that were originally promulgated to
begin on January 1, 2014, began on
January 1, 2017.
Recognizing that changes to the scope
of CSAPR’s coverage could potentially
affect its 2012 determination that
CSAPR is ‘‘better than BART,’’ on
November 10, 2016,14 the EPA
published in the Federal Register a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
explaining the Agency’s belief that the
potentially material changes to the
scope of CSAPR coverage resulting from
the D.C. Circuit’s remand would not
have altered EPA’s 2012 conclusion that
CSAPR is ‘‘better-than-BART,’’ that is,
that participation in CSAPR remains
available as an alternative to BART for
EGUs covered by the trading programs
on a pollutant-specific basis. On
September 21, 2017, the Administrator
signed the final action, ‘‘Interstate
Transport of Fine Particulate Matter:
Revision of Federal Implementation
Plan Requirements for Texas.’’ 15 In this
action, the agency removed Texas from
the CSAPR annual NOX and SO2 trading
programs and affirmed the continued
validity of the Agency’s 2012
determination that participation in
CSAPR meets the Regional Haze Rule’s
criteria for an alternative to the
application of source-specific BART.
On May 14, 2019, the State of Iowa
submitted request to revise its Regional
Haze SIP to rely on its participation in
the CSAPR annual trading programs for
NOX and SO2 to satisfy the requirements
of 40 CFR 51.308(d)(3) and 51.308(e)
with respect to emissions of NOX and
SO2 from electric generating units,
pursuant to the option provided in 40
CFR 51.308(e)(4) (the ‘‘CSAPR-betterthan-BART’’ provision).
We are proposing to approve Iowa’s
submission as satisfying the SO2 and
NOX requirements in 40 CFR
51.308(d)(3) and (e) for BART-eligible
EGUs subject to the CSAPR SO2 trading
program and the annual CSAPR NOX
trading program. We are also proposing
to convert the limited approval/limited
disapproval of Iowa’s Regional Haze
plan to a full approval. Finally, the EPA
is proposing to withdraw the FIP relying
on CSAPR as a BART-alternative for
these sources.
14 See
81 FR 78954 (November 10, 2016)
challenges to this rule are pending. Nat’l
Parks Conservation Ass’n v. EPA, No. 17–1253 (D.C.
Cir. filed November 28, 2017).
15 Legal
E:\FR\FM\22AUP1.SGM
22AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2019 / Proposed Rules
B. Infrastructure SIPs
By statute, SIPs meeting the
requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and
(2) of the CAA are to be submitted by
states within three years (or less, if the
Administrator so prescribes) after
promulgation of a new or revised
NAAQS to provide for the
implementation, maintenance, and
enforcement of the new or revised
NAAQS. The EPA has historically
referred to these SIP submissions, which
are made for satisfying the requirements
of sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2), as
‘‘infrastructure SIP’’ submissions.
Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) require states
to address basic SIP elements such as
for monitoring, basic program
requirements, and legal authority that
are designed to assure attainment and
maintenance of the newly established or
revised NAAQS. More specifically,
section 110(a)(1) provides the
procedural and timing requirements for
infrastructure SIPs. Section 110(a)(2)
lists specific elements that states must
meet for the infrastructure SIP
requirements related to a newly
established or revised NAAQS. The
contents of an infrastructure SIP
submission may vary depending upon
the specific NAAQS in question, as well
as the provisions already contained in
the state’s implementation plan at the
time at which the state develops and
submits the submission for a new or
revised NAAQS.
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) includes four
distinct components, commonly
referred to as ‘‘prongs,’’ that must be
addressed in infrastructure SIP
submissions. The first two prongs,
which are codified in section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), are provisions that
prohibit any source or other type of
emissions activity in one state from
contributing significantly to
nonattainment of the NAAQS in another
state (prong 1) and from interfering with
maintenance of the NAAQS in another
state (prong 2). The third and fourth
prongs, which are codified in section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), are provisions that
prohibit emissions activity in one state
from interfering with measures required
to prevent significant deterioration of air
quality in another state (prong 3) or
from interfering with measures to
protect visibility in another state (prong
4).
Through this action, the EPA is
proposing to approve the prong 4
portion of Iowa’s infrastructure SIP
submissions for the 2006 PM2.5, 2012
PM2.5, 2010 1-hour NO2, 2010 1-hour
SO2, 2008 Ozone, and 2015 Ozone
NAAQS. All other applicable
infrastructure SIP requirements for these
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:22 Aug 21, 2019
Jkt 247001
SIP submissions have been or will be
addressed in separate rulemakings. A
brief background regarding the NAAQS
relevant to this proposal is provided
below. For comprehensive information
on these NAAQS, please refer to the
Federal Register notices cited in the
following subsections.
1. 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS
On October 17, 2006, the EPA revised
the 24 hour primary PM2.5 NAAQS to 35
micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m3).16
States were required to submit
infrastructure SIP submissions for the
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS to the EPA no later
than September 21, 2009. Iowa
submitted an infrastructure SIP
submission for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS
on July 29, 2013. This proposed action
only addresses the prong 4 element of
that submission.
2. 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
On December 14, 2012, the EPA
revised the annual primary PM2.5
NAAQS to 12 micrograms per cubic
meter (mg/m3).17 States were required to
submit infrastructure SIP submissions
for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS to the EPA
no later than December 14, 2015. Iowa
submitted an infrastructure SIP
submission for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
on December 22, 2015. This proposed
action only addresses the prong 4
element of that submission.
3. 2010 1-Hour SO2 NAAQS
On June 2, 2010, the EPA revised the
1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS to an
hourly standard of 75 parts per billion
(ppb) based on a 3-year average of the
annual 99th percentile of 1-hour daily
maximum concentrations.18 States were
required to submit infrastructure SIP
submissions for the 2010 1-hour SO2
NAAQS to the EPA no later than June
2, 2013. Iowa submitted an
infrastructure SIP submission for the
2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS on July 28,
2013. This proposed action only
addresses the prong 4 element of that
submission.
4. 2010 1-Hour NO2 NAAQS
On January 22, 2010, the EPA
promulgated a new 1-hour primary
NAAQS for NO2 at a level of 100 ppb,
based on a 3-year average of the 98th
percentile of the yearly distribution of 1hour daily maximum concentrations.19
States were required to submit
infrastructure SIP submissions for the
2010 1-hour NO2 NAAQS to the EPA no
16 See
71 FR 200 (October 17, 2006).
78 FR 3086 (January 15, 2013).
18 See 75 FR 35520 (June 22, 2010).
19 See 75 FR 6474 (February 9, 2010).
17 See
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
43743
later than January 22, 2013. Iowa
submitted infrastructure SIP
submissions for the 2010 1-hour NO2
NAAQS on July 29, 2013. This proposed
action only addresses the prong 4
element of those submissions.
5. 2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
On March 12, 2008, the EPA revised
the 8-hour Ozone NAAQS to 0.075 parts
per million.20 States were required to
submit infrastructure SIP submissions
for the 2008 8-hour Ozone NAAQS to
the EPA no later than March 12, 2011.
Iowa submitted an infrastructure SIP for
the 2008 8-hour Ozone NAAQS on
January 17, 2013. This proposed action
only addresses the prong 4 element of
that submission.
6. 2015 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
On October 1, 2015, the EPA revised
the 8-hour Ozone NAAQS to 0.070 parts
per million.21 States were required to
submit infrastructure SIP submissions
for the 2015 8-hour Ozone NAAQS to
the EPA no later than October 1, 2018.
Iowa submitted an infrastructure SIP for
the 2015 8-hour Ozone NAAQS on
November 30, 2018. This proposed
action only addresses the prong 4
element of that submission.
C. What are the prong 4 requirements?
The prong 4 requirement of CAA
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) requires a
state’s implementation plan to contain
provisions prohibiting any source or
other type of emissions activity within
the State from emitting any air pollutant
in amounts which will interfere with
measures required to be included in the
applicable implementation plan for any
other State under part C of this
subchapter to protect visibility (which
includes sections 169A and 169B). On
September 13, 2013, the EPA issued
Guidance on the Infrastructure State
Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements
Under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1)
and 110(a)(2) (‘‘2013 Guidance’’).22 The
EPA developed this document to
provide states with guidance for
infrastructure SIPs for any new or
revised NAAQS. The 2013 Guidance
states that the prong 4 requirement may
be satisfied by an approved SIP
provision that the EPA has found to
adequately address contribution of that
state’s sources that impacts the visibility
program requirements in other states.
The 2013 Guidance also states that the
20 See
73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008).
80 FR 65292 (October 26, 2015).
22 ‘‘Guidance on the Infrastructure State
Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements Under Clean
Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2)’’;
Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, September 13,
2013.
21 See
E:\FR\FM\22AUP1.SGM
22AUP1
43744
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2019 / Proposed Rules
EPA interprets this prong to be
pollutant-specific, such that the
infrastructure SIP submission need only
address the potential for interference
with protection of visibility caused by
the pollutant (including precursors) to
which the new or revised NAAQS
applies.
The 2013 Guidance lays out how a
state’s infrastructure SIP may satisfy
prong 4. One way that a state can meet
the requirements is via confirmation in
its infrastructure SIP submission that
the state has an approved Regional Haze
SIP that fully meets the requirements of
40 CFR 51.308 or 51.309. 40 CFR 51.308
and 51.309 specifically require that a
state participating in a regional planning
process include all measures needed to
achieve its apportionment of emission
reduction obligations agreed upon
through that process. A fully approved
Regional Haze SIP will ensure that
emissions from sources under an air
agency’s jurisdiction are not interfering
with measures required to be included
in other air agencies’ plans to protect
visibility.
D. What is the EPA’s analysis of how
Iowa addressed prong 4 and regional
haze?
Each of Iowa’s infrastructure SIP
submittals (2008 8-hour Ozone, 2015 8hour Ozone, 2010 1-hour NO2, 2010 1hour SO2, 2006 24-hour PM2.5, and 2012
annual PM2.5) relied on the State having
a fully approved Regional Haze SIP to
satisfy its prong 4 requirements.
However, at the time of those
submittals, the EPA had not fully
approved Iowa’s Regional Haze SIP, as
the Agency issued a limited disapproval
of the State’s original Regional Haze
plan on June 7, 2012. As detailed earlier
in this proposed action, the EPA is
proposing to convert EPA’s limited
approval/limited disapproval of Iowa’s
Regional Haze plan to a full approval
because final approval of Iowa’s SIP
revision relying on CSAPR pursuant to
40 CFR 51.308(e)(4) would correct the
deficiencies that led to EPA’s limited
approval/limited disapproval of the
State’s Regional Haze SIP. With this
proposed action, the EPA would then
fully approve Iowa’s Regional Haze SIP
for the first planning period. Because a
state may satisfy prong 4 requirements
through a fully approved Regional Haze
SIP, the EPA is therefore also proposing
to approve the prong 4 portion of Iowa’s
2010 1-hour NO2, 2010 1-hour SO2,
2006 24-hour PM2.5, 2012 annual PM2.5,
2008 8-hour Ozone, and 2015 8-hour
Ozone infrastructure SIP submissions.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:22 Aug 21, 2019
Jkt 247001
III. Have the requirements for approval
of a SIP revision been met?
The state submission has met the
public notice requirements for SIP
submissions in accordance with 40 CFR
51.102. The submission also satisfied
the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part
51, appendix V. The state provided the
Federal Land Managers the draft rule on
Febuarary 28, 2019, providing until
April 28, 2019, to receive comments and
received no comments. The state
provided public notice of this SIP
revision on March 29, 2019, providing
until April 29, 2019 to receive
comments and received no comments.
The state held a public hearing on April
29, 2019 and received no comments. In
addition, as explained above, the
revision meets the substantive SIP
requirements of the CAA, including
section 110 and implementing
regulations.
IV. What action is the the EPA taking?
The EPA is proposing to take the
following actions: approve Iowa’s SIP
submittal relying on CSAPR for certain
Regional Haze requirements in
accordance with the CAA and the
Regional Haze Rule (40 CFR
51.308(e)(4)); withdraw the FIP relying
on CSAPR to satisfy those requirements;
fully approve Iowa’s Regional Haze SIP
for the first planning period; and
approve the prong 4 portions for each of
the six NAAQS identified above. We are
soliciting comments on this proposed
action. Final rulemaking will occur after
consideration of any comments.
V. 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 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);
• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82
FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory
action because SIP approvals are
exempted under Executive Order 12866.
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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).
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).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
Matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: August 13, 2019.
James B. Gulliford,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, the EPA proposes to amend
40 CFR part 52 as set forth below:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
E:\FR\FM\22AUP1.SGM
22AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 163 / Thursday, August 22, 2019 / Proposed Rules
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
‘‘(51)’’ in numerical order to read as
follows:
Subpart Q—Iowa
§ 52.820
2. In § 52.820, the table in paragraph
(e) is amended by adding the entry
■
*
*
43745
(e) * * *
Identification of plan.
*
*
*
EPA-APPROVED IOWA NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS
Applicable
geographic
or nonattainment
area
Name of nonregulatory SIP revision
*
*
*
(51) Sections 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Prong Statewide
4 Requirements for the 2006 Fine Particulate Matter, 2012 Fine Particulate Matter,
2010 Nitrogen Dioxide, 2010 Sulfur Dioxide, 2008 Ozone, and 2015 Ozone NAAQS.
■
3. Revise § 52.842 to read as follows:
§ 52.842
Visibility protection.
The requirements of section 169A of
the Clean Air Act are met because the
Regional Haze plan submitted by Iowa
on March 25, 2008 and supplemented
on May 14, 2019, includes fully
approvable measures for meeting the
requirements of the Regional Haze Rule
including 40 CFR 51.308(d)(3) and
51.308(e) with respect to emissions of
NOX and SO2 from electric generating
units.
[FR Doc. 2019–18137 Filed 8–21–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 62
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2019–0338; FRL–9998–62–
OAR]
RIN 2060–AU52
Federal Plan Requirements for
Municipal Solid Waste Landfills That
Commenced Construction On or
Before July 17, 2014, and Have Not
Been Modified or Reconstructed Since
July 17, 2014
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: In this action, the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
proposes a federal plan to implement
the Emission Guidelines and
Compliance Times for Municipal Solid
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:22 Aug 21, 2019
Jkt 247001
State
submittal
date
EPA Approval date
*
*
1/17/2013; [Date of publication of
7/28/
the final rule in the
2013; 7/
Federal Register],
29/2013;
[Federal Register
7/29/
citation of the final
2013;
rule].
12/22/
2015;
11/30/
2018; 5/
14/2019.
Waste Landfills (2016 MSW Landfills
EG) for existing MSW landfills located
in states and Indian country where state
plans or tribal plans are not in effect.
This proposed MSW Landfills Federal
Plan includes the same elements as
required for a state plan: Identification
of legal authority and mechanisms for
implementation; inventory of
designated facilities; emissions
inventory; emission limits; compliance
schedules; a process for the EPA or state
review of design plans for site-specific
gas collection and control systems
(GCCS); testing, monitoring, reporting
and record keeping requirements; public
hearing requirements; and progress
reporting requirements. Additionally,
this action summarizes implementation
and delegation of authority of the MSW
Landfills Federal Plan.
DATES: Comments. Comments must be
received on or before October 7, 2019.
Public Hearing. We will hold a public
hearing on September 6, 2019 from 1:00
p.m. to 5:00 p.m. (Eastern Daylight
Time) in Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina as specified in the ADDRESSES
section of this preamble. If no one
contacts the EPA requesting to speak at
the public hearing to be held concerning
this action by August 27, 2019, the
public hearing will not take place.
Information regarding whether or not a
hearing will be held will be posted on
the rule’s website located at https://
www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-airpollution/municipal-solid-wastelandfills-new-source-performancestandards. EPA does not intend to
publish any future documents in the
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Explanation
*
*
This action approves the following CAA elements: 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)—prong 4. [EPA–
R07–OAR–2019–0468; FRL–9998–40–Region 7].
Federal Register regarding a public
hearing on this proposed action and
directs all inquiries regarding a hearing
to the website and contact person. See
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for
information on registering and attending
a public hearing.
ADDRESSES: Comments. You may send
comments, identified by Docket ID No.
EPA–HQ–OAR–2019–0338, by any of
the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov/ (our
preferred method). Follow the online
instrucations for submitting comments.
• Email: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov.
Include Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–
2019–0338 in the subject line of the
message.
• Fax: (202) 566–9744. Attention
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2019–
0338.
• Mail: U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center,
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2019–
0338, Mail Code 28221T, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington,
DC 20460.
• Hand/Courier Delivery: EPA Docket
Center, WJC West Building, Room 3334,
1301 Constitution Avenue NW,
Washington, DC 20004. The Docket
Center’s hours of operation are 8:30
a.m.–4:30 p.m., Monday–Friday (except
federal holidays).
• Public Hearing: A public hearing
will be held at the U.S. EPA’s North
Carolina campus located at 109 T.W.
Alexander Drive, Research Triangle
Park, NC 27711.
Instructions: All submisison received
must include the Docket ID No. for this
E:\FR\FM\22AUP1.SGM
22AUP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 163 (Thursday, August 22, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 43741-43745]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-18137]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R07-OAR-2019-0468; FRL-9998-40-Region 7]
Air Plan Approval; Iowa; Revisions to Regional Haze Plan and
Visibility Requirements in Infrastructure State Implementation Plans
for the 2006 PM2.5, 2012 PM2.5, 2010 NO2, 2010 SO2, 2008 Ozone, and
2015 Ozone NAAQS
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve Iowa's request on four actions regarding the Iowa State
Implementation Plan (SIP). The four SIP actions relate to Iowa's
Regional Haze Plan and infrastructure SIPs for the 2006 Fine
Particulate Matter (PM2.5), 2012 PM2.5, 2010
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), 2010 Sulfur Dioxide
(SO2), 2008 Ozone, and 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS).
DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 23, 2019.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2019-0468 to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket ID
No. for this rulemaking. Comments received will be posted without
change to https://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal
information provided. For detailed instructions on sending comments and
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the ``Written
Comments'' heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this
document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jed D. Wolkins, Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 7 Office, Air Quality Planning Branch, 11201
Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at telephone number (913) 551-
7588; email address [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Written Comments
II. What is being addressed in this document?
A. Regional Haze SIPs and Their Relationship With CAIR and CSAPR
B. Infrastructure SIPs
C. What are the prong 4 requirements?
D. What is the EPA's analysis of how Iowa addressed prong 4 and
regional haze?
III. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?
IV. What action is the the EPA taking?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Written Comments
Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2019-
0468, at https://www.regulations.gov. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions,
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
II. What is being addressed in this document?
On May 14, 2019, the State of Iowa submitted a request to revise
the State of Iowa's Regional Haze Plan, changing from reliance on the
Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) to reliance on the Cross State Air
Pollution Rule (CSAPR) for certain regional haze requirements; removing
EPA's Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) for reliance on CSAPR for
certain regional haze requirements, converting EPA's limited approval/
limited disapproval of Iowa's Regional Haze Plan for the first regional
haze planning period to a full approval; and approving the states'
submissions addressing the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act) section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) provision (prong 4) that prohibits emissions
activity in one state from interfering with measures to protect
visibility in another state of Iowa's infrastructure SIP submittals for
the 2006 PM2.5, 2012 PM2.5, 2010 NO2,
2010 SO2, 2008 Ozone, and 2015 Ozone NAAQS. The EPA is
proposing approve these requests.
A. Regional Haze SIPs and Their Relationship With CAIR and CSAPR
Section 169A(b)(2)(A) of the CAA requires states to submit Regional
Haze SIPs that contain such measures as may be necessary to make
reasonable progress towards the natural visibility goal at Class I
areas, including a requirement that certain categories of existing
major stationary sources built between 1962 and 1977 procure, install,
and operate Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) as determined by
the state. Under the Regional Haze Rule (RHR), adopted in 1999, states
are directed to conduct BART determinations for such ``BART-eligible''
sources that may be anticipated to cause or contribute to visibility
impairment in a Class I area.\1\ Rather than requiring source-specific
BART controls, states also have the flexibility to adopt an emissions
trading program or other alternative program as long as the alternative
provides greater reasonable progress towards improving visibility than
BART.\2\ The EPA provided states with this flexibility in the 1999 RHR,
and further refined the criteria for assessing whether an alternative
program provides for greater reasonable progress in two subsequent
rulemakings.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See 64 FR 35714 (July 1, 1999).
\2\ See 40 CFR 51.308(e)(2).
\3\ See 70 FR 39104 (July 6, 2005) and 71 FR 60612 (October 13,
2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA demonstrated that CAIR would achieve greater reasonable
[[Page 43742]]
progress than BART in revisions to the RHR made in 2005.\4\ In those
revisions, the EPA amended its regulations to provide that states
participating in the CAIR cap-and-trade programs pursuant to an EPA-
approved CAIR SIP or states that remain subject to a CAIR FIP need not
require affected BART-eligible electric generating units (EGUs) to
install, operate, and maintain BART for emissions of SO2 and
nitrogen oxides (NOX). As a result of the EPA's
determination that CAIR was ``better-than-BART,'' a number of states in
the CAIR region, including Iowa, relied on the CAIR cap-and-trade
programs as an alternative to BART for EGU emissions of SO2
and NOX in designing their Regional Haze SIPs. These states
also relied on CAIR as an element of a long-term strategy (LTS) for
achieving reasonable progress. However, in 2008, the United States
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit)
remanded CAIR to the EPA, which it did without vacatur to preserve the
environmental benefits provided by CAIR.\5\ On August 8, 2011, acting
on the D.C. Circuit's remand, the EPA promulgated CSAPR to replace CAIR
and issued FIPs to implement the rule in CSAPR-subject states.\6\
Implementation of CSAPR was scheduled to begin on January 1, 2012, when
CSAPR would have superseded the CAIR program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ CAIR created regional cap-and-trade programs to reduce
SO2 and NOX emissions in 27 eastern states
(and the District of Columbia), including Iowa, that contributed to
downwind nonattainment or interfered with maintenance of the 1997 8-
hour ozone NAAQS or the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. See 70 FR 39104
(July 6, 2005).
\5\ North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176, 1178 (D.C. Cir. 2008).
\6\ CSAPR requires 28 eastern states to limit their statewide
emissions of SO2 and/or NOX in order to
mitigate transported air pollution unlawfully impacting other
states' ability to attain or maintain four NAAQS: the 1997 ozone
NAAQS, the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS, and the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The CSAPR
emissions limitations are defined in terms of maximum statewide
``budgets'' for emissions of annual SO2, annual
NOX, and/or ozone-season NOX by each covered
state's large EGUs. The CSAPR state budgets are implemented in two
phases of generally increasing stringency, with the Phase 1 budgets
applying to emissions in 2015 and 2016 and the Phase 2 budgets
applying to emissions in 2017 and later years. See 76 FR 48208
(August 8, 2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Due to the D.C. Circuit's 2008 ruling that CAIR was ``fatally
flawed'' and its resulting status as a temporary measure following that
ruling, the EPA could not fully approve Regional Haze SIPs to the
extent that they relied on CAIR to satisfy the EGU BART requirement. On
these grounds, the EPA published in the Federal Register a limited
disapproval of Iowa's Regional Haze SIP on June 7, 2012, and
promulgated a FIP relying on CSAPR rather than CAIR, pending Iowa's
submission, and EPA approval of, a SIP revision that corrected the
deficiency.\7\ The EPA finalized a limited approval of Iowa's Regional
Haze SIP on June 26, 2012, as meeting the remaining applicable Regional
Haze requirements set forth in the CAA and the RHR.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See 77 FR 33642, 77 FR 33653-77 FR 336554 (June 7, 2012).
EPA finalized limited disapprovals of fourteen states' regional haze
SIP submissions that relied on CAIR in this action, including
Iowa's.
\8\ See 77 FR 38006. (June 26, 2012)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the June 7, 2012 limited disapproval action, the EPA also
amended the RHR to provide that participation by a state's EGUs in a
CSAPR trading program for a given pollutant--either a CSAPR Federal
trading program implemented through a CSAPR FIP or an integrated CSAPR
state trading program implemented through an approved CSAPR SIP
revision--qualifies as a BART alternative for those EGUs for that
pollutant.\9\ Since the EPA promulgated this amendment, numerous states
covered by CSAPR have come to rely on the provision through either SIPs
or FIPs.\10\ Iowa is currently relying on the FIP published in the
Federal Register on June 7, 2012 to rely on CSAPR as a BART-alternative
for the covered BART-eligible sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See 40 CFR 51.308(e)(4).
\10\ EPA has promulgated FIPs relying on CSAPR participation for
BART purposes for Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Michigan,
Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia,
and West Virginia, 77 FR at 33654, and Nebraska, 77 FR 40150, 40151
(July 6, 2012). EPA has approved Minnesota's and Wisconsin's SIPs
relying on CSAPR participation for BART purposes. See 77 FR 34801,
34806 (June 12, 2012) for Minnesota and 77 FR 46952, 46959 (August
7, 2012) for Wisconsin.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numerous parties filed petitions for review of CSAPR in the D.C.
Circuit, and on August 21, 2012, the court issued its ruling, vacating
and remanding CSAPR to the EPA and ordering continued implementation of
CAIR.\11\ The D.C. Circuit's vacatur of CSAPR was reversed by the
United States Supreme Court on April 29, 2014, and the case was
remanded to the D.C. Circuit to resolve remaining issues in accordance
with the high court's ruling.\12\ On remand, the D.C. Circuit affirmed
CSAPR in most respects, but invalidated without vacating some of the
CSAPR budgets as to a number of states.\13\ The remanded budgets
include the Phase 2 SO2 emissions budgets for Alabama,
Georgia, South Carolina, and Texas and the Phase 2 ozone-season
NOX budgets for eleven states. This litigation ultimately
delayed implementation of CSAPR for three years, from January 1, 2012,
when CSAPR's cap-and-trade programs were originally scheduled to
replace the CAIR cap-and-trade programs, to January 1, 2015. Thus, the
rule's Phase 2 budgets that were originally promulgated to begin on
January 1, 2014, began on January 1, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 696 F.3d 7, 38
(D.C. Cir. 2012).
\12\ EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, L.P., 134 S. Ct. 1584
(2014).
\13\ EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 795 F.3d 118 (D.C.
Cir. 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recognizing that changes to the scope of CSAPR's coverage could
potentially affect its 2012 determination that CSAPR is ``better than
BART,'' on November 10, 2016,\14\ the EPA published in the Federal
Register a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) explaining the Agency's
belief that the potentially material changes to the scope of CSAPR
coverage resulting from the D.C. Circuit's remand would not have
altered EPA's 2012 conclusion that CSAPR is ``better-than-BART,'' that
is, that participation in CSAPR remains available as an alternative to
BART for EGUs covered by the trading programs on a pollutant-specific
basis. On September 21, 2017, the Administrator signed the final
action, ``Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter: Revision of
Federal Implementation Plan Requirements for Texas.'' \15\ In this
action, the agency removed Texas from the CSAPR annual NOX
and SO2 trading programs and affirmed the continued validity
of the Agency's 2012 determination that participation in CSAPR meets
the Regional Haze Rule's criteria for an alternative to the application
of source-specific BART.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See 81 FR 78954 (November 10, 2016)
\15\ Legal challenges to this rule are pending. Nat'l Parks
Conservation Ass'n v. EPA, No. 17-1253 (D.C. Cir. filed November 28,
2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On May 14, 2019, the State of Iowa submitted request to revise its
Regional Haze SIP to rely on its participation in the CSAPR annual
trading programs for NOX and SO2 to satisfy the
requirements of 40 CFR 51.308(d)(3) and 51.308(e) with respect to
emissions of NOX and SO2 from electric generating
units, pursuant to the option provided in 40 CFR 51.308(e)(4) (the
``CSAPR-better-than-BART'' provision).
We are proposing to approve Iowa's submission as satisfying the
SO2 and NOX requirements in 40 CFR 51.308(d)(3)
and (e) for BART-eligible EGUs subject to the CSAPR SO2
trading program and the annual CSAPR NOX trading program. We
are also proposing to convert the limited approval/limited disapproval
of Iowa's Regional Haze plan to a full approval. Finally, the EPA is
proposing to withdraw the FIP relying on CSAPR as a BART-alternative
for these sources.
[[Page 43743]]
B. Infrastructure SIPs
By statute, SIPs meeting the requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and
(2) of the CAA are to be submitted by states within three years (or
less, if the Administrator so prescribes) after promulgation of a new
or revised NAAQS to provide for the implementation, maintenance, and
enforcement of the new or revised NAAQS. The EPA has historically
referred to these SIP submissions, which are made for satisfying the
requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2), as ``infrastructure
SIP'' submissions. Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) require states to address
basic SIP elements such as for monitoring, basic program requirements,
and legal authority that are designed to assure attainment and
maintenance of the newly established or revised NAAQS. More
specifically, section 110(a)(1) provides the procedural and timing
requirements for infrastructure SIPs. Section 110(a)(2) lists specific
elements that states must meet for the infrastructure SIP requirements
related to a newly established or revised NAAQS. The contents of an
infrastructure SIP submission may vary depending upon the specific
NAAQS in question, as well as the provisions already contained in the
state's implementation plan at the time at which the state develops and
submits the submission for a new or revised NAAQS.
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) includes four distinct components, commonly
referred to as ``prongs,'' that must be addressed in infrastructure SIP
submissions. The first two prongs, which are codified in section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), are provisions that prohibit any source or other
type of emissions activity in one state from contributing significantly
to nonattainment of the NAAQS in another state (prong 1) and from
interfering with maintenance of the NAAQS in another state (prong 2).
The third and fourth prongs, which are codified in section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), are provisions that prohibit emissions activity in
one state from interfering with measures required to prevent
significant deterioration of air quality in another state (prong 3) or
from interfering with measures to protect visibility in another state
(prong 4).
Through this action, the EPA is proposing to approve the prong 4
portion of Iowa's infrastructure SIP submissions for the 2006
PM2.5, 2012 PM2.5, 2010 1-hour NO2,
2010 1-hour SO2, 2008 Ozone, and 2015 Ozone NAAQS. All other
applicable infrastructure SIP requirements for these SIP submissions
have been or will be addressed in separate rulemakings. A brief
background regarding the NAAQS relevant to this proposal is provided
below. For comprehensive information on these NAAQS, please refer to
the Federal Register notices cited in the following subsections.
1. 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS
On October 17, 2006, the EPA revised the 24 hour primary
PM2.5 NAAQS to 35 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/
m\3\).\16\ States were required to submit infrastructure SIP
submissions for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS to the EPA no later
than September 21, 2009. Iowa submitted an infrastructure SIP
submission for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS on July 29, 2013. This
proposed action only addresses the prong 4 element of that submission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See 71 FR 200 (October 17, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
On December 14, 2012, the EPA revised the annual primary
PM2.5 NAAQS to 12 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/
m\3\).\17\ States were required to submit infrastructure SIP
submissions for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS to the EPA no later
than December 14, 2015. Iowa submitted an infrastructure SIP submission
for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS on December 22, 2015. This proposed
action only addresses the prong 4 element of that submission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See 78 FR 3086 (January 15, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. 2010 1-Hour SO2 NAAQS
On June 2, 2010, the EPA revised the 1-hour primary SO2
NAAQS to an hourly standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) based on a 3-
year average of the annual 99th percentile of 1-hour daily maximum
concentrations.\18\ States were required to submit infrastructure SIP
submissions for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS to the EPA no
later than June 2, 2013. Iowa submitted an infrastructure SIP
submission for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS on July 28, 2013.
This proposed action only addresses the prong 4 element of that
submission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See 75 FR 35520 (June 22, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. 2010 1-Hour NO2 NAAQS
On January 22, 2010, the EPA promulgated a new 1-hour primary NAAQS
for NO2 at a level of 100 ppb, based on a 3-year average of
the 98th percentile of the yearly distribution of 1-hour daily maximum
concentrations.\19\ States were required to submit infrastructure SIP
submissions for the 2010 1-hour NO2 NAAQS to the EPA no
later than January 22, 2013. Iowa submitted infrastructure SIP
submissions for the 2010 1-hour NO2 NAAQS on July 29, 2013.
This proposed action only addresses the prong 4 element of those
submissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See 75 FR 6474 (February 9, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. 2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
On March 12, 2008, the EPA revised the 8-hour Ozone NAAQS to 0.075
parts per million.\20\ States were required to submit infrastructure
SIP submissions for the 2008 8-hour Ozone NAAQS to the EPA no later
than March 12, 2011. Iowa submitted an infrastructure SIP for the 2008
8-hour Ozone NAAQS on January 17, 2013. This proposed action only
addresses the prong 4 element of that submission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ See 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. 2015 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
On October 1, 2015, the EPA revised the 8-hour Ozone NAAQS to 0.070
parts per million.\21\ States were required to submit infrastructure
SIP submissions for the 2015 8-hour Ozone NAAQS to the EPA no later
than October 1, 2018. Iowa submitted an infrastructure SIP for the 2015
8-hour Ozone NAAQS on November 30, 2018. This proposed action only
addresses the prong 4 element of that submission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See 80 FR 65292 (October 26, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. What are the prong 4 requirements?
The prong 4 requirement of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) requires
a state's implementation plan to contain provisions prohibiting any
source or other type of emissions activity within the State from
emitting any air pollutant in amounts which will interfere with
measures required to be included in the applicable implementation plan
for any other State under part C of this subchapter to protect
visibility (which includes sections 169A and 169B). On September 13,
2013, the EPA issued Guidance on the Infrastructure State
Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements Under Clean Air Act Sections
110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) (``2013 Guidance'').\22\ The EPA developed this
document to provide states with guidance for infrastructure SIPs for
any new or revised NAAQS. The 2013 Guidance states that the prong 4
requirement may be satisfied by an approved SIP provision that the EPA
has found to adequately address contribution of that state's sources
that impacts the visibility program requirements in other states. The
2013 Guidance also states that the
[[Page 43744]]
EPA interprets this prong to be pollutant-specific, such that the
infrastructure SIP submission need only address the potential for
interference with protection of visibility caused by the pollutant
(including precursors) to which the new or revised NAAQS applies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ ``Guidance on the Infrastructure State Implementation Plan
(SIP) Elements Under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and
110(a)(2)''; Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, September 13, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2013 Guidance lays out how a state's infrastructure SIP may
satisfy prong 4. One way that a state can meet the requirements is via
confirmation in its infrastructure SIP submission that the state has an
approved Regional Haze SIP that fully meets the requirements of 40 CFR
51.308 or 51.309. 40 CFR 51.308 and 51.309 specifically require that a
state participating in a regional planning process include all measures
needed to achieve its apportionment of emission reduction obligations
agreed upon through that process. A fully approved Regional Haze SIP
will ensure that emissions from sources under an air agency's
jurisdiction are not interfering with measures required to be included
in other air agencies' plans to protect visibility.
D. What is the EPA's analysis of how Iowa addressed prong 4 and
regional haze?
Each of Iowa's infrastructure SIP submittals (2008 8-hour Ozone,
2015 8-hour Ozone, 2010 1-hour NO2, 2010 1-hour
SO2, 2006 24-hour PM2.5, and 2012 annual
PM2.5) relied on the State having a fully approved Regional
Haze SIP to satisfy its prong 4 requirements. However, at the time of
those submittals, the EPA had not fully approved Iowa's Regional Haze
SIP, as the Agency issued a limited disapproval of the State's original
Regional Haze plan on June 7, 2012. As detailed earlier in this
proposed action, the EPA is proposing to convert EPA's limited
approval/limited disapproval of Iowa's Regional Haze plan to a full
approval because final approval of Iowa's SIP revision relying on CSAPR
pursuant to 40 CFR 51.308(e)(4) would correct the deficiencies that led
to EPA's limited approval/limited disapproval of the State's Regional
Haze SIP. With this proposed action, the EPA would then fully approve
Iowa's Regional Haze SIP for the first planning period. Because a state
may satisfy prong 4 requirements through a fully approved Regional Haze
SIP, the EPA is therefore also proposing to approve the prong 4 portion
of Iowa's 2010 1-hour NO2, 2010 1-hour SO2, 2006
24-hour PM2.5, 2012 annual PM2.5, 2008 8-hour
Ozone, and 2015 8-hour Ozone infrastructure SIP submissions.
III. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?
The state submission has met the public notice requirements for SIP
submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The submission also
satisfied the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. The
state provided the Federal Land Managers the draft rule on Febuarary
28, 2019, providing until April 28, 2019, to receive comments and
received no comments. The state provided public notice of this SIP
revision on March 29, 2019, providing until April 29, 2019 to receive
comments and received no comments. The state held a public hearing on
April 29, 2019 and received no comments. In addition, as explained
above, the revision meets the substantive SIP requirements of the CAA,
including section 110 and implementing regulations.
IV. What action is the the EPA taking?
The EPA is proposing to take the following actions: approve Iowa's
SIP submittal relying on CSAPR for certain Regional Haze requirements
in accordance with the CAA and the Regional Haze Rule (40 CFR
51.308(e)(4)); withdraw the FIP relying on CSAPR to satisfy those
requirements; fully approve Iowa's Regional Haze SIP for the first
planning period; and approve the prong 4 portions for each of the six
NAAQS identified above. We are soliciting comments on this proposed
action. Final rulemaking will occur after consideration of any
comments.
V. 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
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);
Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866.
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).
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).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate Matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: August 13, 2019.
James B. Gulliford,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the EPA proposes to amend
40 CFR part 52 as set forth below:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
[[Page 43745]]
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart Q--Iowa
0
2. In Sec. 52.820, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by adding the
entry ``(51)'' 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
revision nonattainment date EPA Approval date Explanation
area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
(51) Sections 110(a)(2) Statewide........ 1/17/2013; 7/28/ [Date of This action approves
Infrastructure Prong 4 2013; 7/29/2013; publication of the following CAA
Requirements for the 2006 Fine 7/29/2013; 12/22/ the final rule elements:
Particulate Matter, 2012 Fine 2015; 11/30/ in the Federal 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)--
Particulate Matter, 2010 2018; 5/14/2019. Register], prong 4. [EPA-R07-OAR-
Nitrogen Dioxide, 2010 Sulfur [Federal 2019-0468; FRL-9998-
Dioxide, 2008 Ozone, and 2015 Register 40-Region 7].
Ozone NAAQS. citation of the
final rule].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
3. Revise Sec. 52.842 to read as follows:
Sec. 52.842 Visibility protection.
The requirements of section 169A of the Clean Air Act are met
because the Regional Haze plan submitted by Iowa on March 25, 2008 and
supplemented on May 14, 2019, includes fully approvable measures for
meeting the requirements of the Regional Haze Rule including 40 CFR
51.308(d)(3) and 51.308(e) with respect to emissions of NOX
and SO2 from electric generating units.
[FR Doc. 2019-18137 Filed 8-21-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
