Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 247 / Tuesday, December 24, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 77599 

12. Energy Effects 

This action is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under Executive Order 

13211, Actions Concerning Regulations 

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. 

13. Technical Standards 

This rule does not use technical 

standards. Therefore, we did not 

consider the use of voluntary consensus 

standards. 

14. Environment 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Department of Homeland Security 

Management Directive 023–01 and 

Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 

which guide the Coast Guard in 

complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and 

have determined that this action is one 

of a category of actions that do not 

individually or cumulatively have a 

significant effect on the human 

environment. This rule involves 

establishment of a safety zone. This rule 

is categorically excluded from further 

review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 

2–1 of the Commandant Instruction. An 

environmental analysis checklist 

supporting this determination and a 

Categorical Exclusion Determination are 

available in the docket where indicated 

under ADDRESSES. We seek any 

comments or information that may lead 

to the discovery of a significant 

environmental impact from this rule. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation 

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Security Measures, 

Waterways. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 

CFR part 165 as follows: 

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 

AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. 

Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 

33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; 

Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department 

of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. Add § 165.T11–612 to read as 

follows: 

§ 165.T11–612 Safety zone; Allied PRA– 

Solid Works; San Diego, CA. 

(a) Location. The limits of the safety 

zone will include all the navigable 

waters within 600 feet of the nearest 

point of the fireworks barge in 

approximate position 32°42.13′N, 

117°10.01′W. 

(b) Enforcement Period. This section 

will be enforced from 9 p.m. to 10 p.m. 

on January 28, 2014. If the event 

concludes prior to the scheduled 

termination time, the Captain of the Port 

will cease enforcement of this safety 

zone and will announce that fact via 

Broadcast Notice to Mariners. 

(c) Definitions. The following 

definition applies to this section: 

designated representative means any 

commissioned, warrant, or petty officer 

of the Coast Guard on board Coast 

Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, and 

local, state, and federal law enforcement 

vessels who have been authorized to act 

on the behalf of the Captain of the Port. 

(d) Regulations. (1) Entry into, transit 

through or anchoring within this safety 

zone is prohibited unless authorized by 

the Captain of the Port of San Diego or 

his designated representative. 

(2) All persons and vessels shall 

comply with the instructions of the 

Coast Guard Captain of the Port or the 

designated representative. 

(3) Upon being hailed by U.S. Coast 

Guard patrol personnel by siren, radio, 

a flashing light, or other means, the 

operator of a vessel shall proceed as 

directed. 

(4) The Coast Guard may be assisted 

by other federal, state, or local agencies. 

Dated: December 9, 2013. 

J.A. Janszen, 

Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting, 

Captain of the Port San Diego. 

[FR Doc. 2013–30657 Filed 12–23–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2012–0988; FRL–9904–36- 

Region-5] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Indiana; 

Indiana State Board Requirements 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to its authority 

under the Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA is 

taking final action to approve state 

implementation plan (SIP) submissions 

made by the Indiana Department of 

Environmental Management (IDEM) 

intended to meet the state board 

requirements under section 128 of the 

CAA. The proposed rule associated with 

this final action was published on 

August 19, 2013. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

January 23, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R05–OAR–2012–0988. All 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the www.regulations.gov index. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., Confidential Business Information 

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 U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and 

Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This 

facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 

p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding 

Federal holidays. We recommend that 

you telephone Andy Chang at (312) 

886–0258 before visiting the Region 5 

office. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Andy Chang, Environmental Engineer, 

Attainment Planning and Maintenance 

Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–0258, 

chang.andy@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

EPA. This supplementary information 

section is arranged as follows: 

I. What is the background for this action? 

II. What action is EPA taking? 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What is the background for this 

action? 

Under section 128 of the CAA, each 

SIP must contain provisions that 

address two requirements: (i) That any 

board or body which approves permits 

or enforcement orders under this 

chapter shall have at least a majority of 

members who represent the public 

interest and do not derive any 

significant portion of their income from 

persons subject to permits and 

enforcement orders under this chapter, 

and (ii) that any potential conflicts of 

interest by members of such board or 

body or the head of an executive agency 

with similar powers be adequately 

disclosed. To comply with this statutory 

provision, Indiana submitted the 

following rules for incorporation into 

the SIP: IC 13–13–8–1, IC 13–13–8–2(a), 

IC 13–13–8–2(b), IC 13–13–8–3, IC 13– 

13–8–4, and IC 13–13–8–11. EPA’s 

August 19, 2013, proposed rulemaking 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
77600 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 247 / Tuesday, December 24, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

1 In EPA’s August 19, 2013, proposed approval of 

Indiana’s state board provisions, we incorrectly 

cited this rule as IC 13–18–8–2(b). We want to 

clarify that this final approval is consistent with 

Indiana’s submission, specifically with respect to IC 

13–13–8–2(b). 

(see 78 FR 50360 at 50366) details how 

these rules satisfy the applicable 

requirements of section 128. EPA did 

not receive any comments regarding its 

proposal to approve Indiana’s state 

board provisions. 

II. What action is EPA taking? 

For the reasons discussed in our 

August 19, 2013, proposed rulemaking, 

EPA is taking final action to approve 

IDEM’s submissions addressing the state 

board requirements under section 128 of 

the CAA. The specific rules that we are 

approving as satisfying these 

requirements are IC 13–13–8–1, IC 13– 

13–8–2(a), IC 13–13–8–2(b),1 IC 13–13– 

8–3, IC 13–13–8–4, and IC 13–13–8–11. 

It should be noted that our August 19, 

2013, rulemaking contained proposed 

actions for various additional IDEM 

submissions, including those addressing 

the CAA section 110(a)(1) and (2) 

‘‘infrastructure’’ SIP requirements for 

the 2008 ozone and 2008 lead national 

ambient air quality standards, as well as 

the prevention of significant 

deterioration of air quality provisions. 

This final rulemaking, however, is 

limited only to the state board 

requirements under section 128 of the 

CAA. 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

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 Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

Tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the State, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on Tribal governments or preempt 

Tribal law. 

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 action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of 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 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 February 24, 2014. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this action 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 rule or action. Parties with 

objections to this direct final rule are 

encouraged to file a comment in 

response to the parallel notice of 

proposed rulemaking for this action 

published in the Proposed Rules section 

of today’s Federal Register, rather than 

file an immediate petition for judicial 

review of this direct final rule, so that 

EPA can withdraw this direct final rule 

and address the comment in the 

proposed rulemaking. This 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, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: December 6, 2013. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

40 CFR part 52 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. 

■ 2. In § 52.770 the table in paragraph 

(c) is amended by adding a new heading 

entitled ‘‘State Statutes’’ and entry IC 

13–13–8 at the end of the table to read 

as follows: 

§ 52.770 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 247 / Tuesday, December 24, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 77601 

EPA-APPROVED INDIANA REGULATIONS

Indiana citation Subject 

Indiana 

effective 

date 

EPA approval date Notes 

*******

State Statutes 

IC 13–13–8 .................... Environmental Rules 

Board.

1/1/2013 12/24/2013, [INSERT PAGE NUMBER WHERE 

THE DOCUMENT BEGINS].

1, 2(a), 2(b), 3, 4, and 

11 only. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2013–30336 Filed 12–23–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Railroad Administration 

49 CFR Part 225 

[FRA–2008–0136, Notice No. 6] 

RIN 2130–ZA12 

Adjustment of Monetary Threshold for 

Reporting Rail Equipment Accidents/ 

Incidents for Calendar Year 2014 

AGENCY: Federal Railroad 

Administration (FRA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This rule increases the rail 

equipment accident/incident reporting 

threshold from $9,900 to $10,500 for 

certain railroad accidents/incidents 

involving property damage that occur 

during calendar year 2014. This action 

is needed to ensure that FRA’s reporting 

requirements reflect cost increases that 

have occurred since the reporting 

threshold was last published in 

November of 2012. 

DATES: This regulation is effective 

January 1, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kebo Chen, Staff Director, U.S. 

Department of Transportation, Federal 

Railroad Administration, Office of 

Safety Analysis, RRS–22, Mail Stop 25, 

West Building 3rd Floor, Room W33– 

314, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., 

Washington, DC 20590 (telephone 202– 

493–6079); or Gahan Christenson, Trial 

Attorney, U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Federal Railroad 

Administration, Office of Chief Counsel, 

RCC–10, Mail Stop 10, West Building 

3rd Floor, Room W31–204, 1200 New 

Jersey Ave. SE., Washington, DC 20590 

(telephone 202–493–1381). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

A ‘‘rail equipment accident/incident’’ 

is a collision, derailment, fire, 

explosion, act of God, or other event 

involving the operation of railroad ontrack equipment (standing or moving) 

that results in damages to railroad ontrack equipment, signals, tracks, track 

structures, or roadbed, including labor 

costs and the costs for acquiring new 

equipment and material, greater than 

the reporting threshold for the year in 

which the event occurs. 49 CFR 

225.19(c). Each rail equipment accident/ 

incident must be reported to FRA using 

the Rail Equipment Accident/Incident 

Report (Form FRA F 6180.54). 49 CFR 

225.19(b), (c) and 225.21(a). Paragraphs 

(c) and (e) of 49 CFR 225.19 further 

provide that the dollar figure that 

constitutes the reporting threshold for 

rail equipment accidents/incidents will 

be adjusted, if necessary, every year in 

accordance with the procedures 

outlined in appendix B to part 225 

(Appendix B) to reflect any cost 

increases or decreases. 

Aside from periodically reviewing 

and adjusting the annual threshold in 

accordance with Appendix B, FRA has 

also periodically amended its method 

for calculating the threshold. In 49 

U.S.C. 20901(b) Congress required that 

the threshold be based on publicly 

available information obtained from the 

Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), other 

objective government source, or be 

subject to notice and comment. In 1996 

FRA adopted a new method for 

calculating the monetary reporting 

threshold for accidents/incidents. See 

61 FR 60632 (Nov. 29, 1996). In 2005, 

FRA again amended its method for 

calculating the reporting threshold 

because the BLS ceased collecting and 

publishing the railroad wage data used 

by FRA in the threshold calculation. 

Consequently, FRA had to substitute 

railroad employee wage data collected 

by the Surface Transportation Board for 

the BLS data that was no longer 

collected (70 FR 75414 (Dec. 20, 2005)). 

In this rule, FRA is merely adjusting 

the reporting threshold based on the 

currently published formula in 

Appendix B. Following the adoption of 

this 2014 reporting threshold, FRA 

intends to evaluate and amend, as 

appropriate, its method for calculating 

the monetary threshold for accident/ 

incident reporting and, as a result, the 

formula utilized to calculate the 

threshold may change. FRA intends to 

reexamine and amend its method for 

calculating its reporting threshold 

because, since 2006, new data sources 

and methodologies for calculating the 

threshold have become available and 

updating the formula to include these 

advances will ensure it appropriately 

reflects changes in costs, wages, and 

inflation. 

New Reporting Threshold 

Approximately one year has passed 

since the rail equipment accident/ 

incident reporting threshold was 

revised. 77 FR 71354 (November 30, 

2012). Consequently, FRA has 

recalculated the threshold, as required 

by 49 CFR 225.19(c), based on increased 

costs for labor and increased costs for 

equipment. FRA has determined that 

the current reporting threshold of 

$9,900, which applies to rail equipment 

accidents/incidents that occur during 

calendar year 2013, should increase by 

$600 to $10,500 for equipment 

accidents/incidents occurring during 

calendar year 2014, effective January 1, 

2014. The specific inputs to the 

equation set forth in Appendix B (i.e., 

Tnew = Tprior * [1 + 0.4(Wnew— 

Wprior)/Wprior + 0.6(Enew—Eprior)/ 

100]) are: 

Tprior Wnew Wprior Enew Eprior 

$9,900 $26.93344 $25.56943 197.23333 191.50000 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES