7410 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 26 / Friday, February 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

6. Protest Activities 

The Coast Guard respects the First 

Amendment rights of protesters. 

Protesters are asked to contact the 

person listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

coordinate protest activities so that your 

message can be received without 

jeopardizing the safety or security of 

people, places or vessels. 

7. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires 

federal agencies to assess the effects of 

their discretionary regulatory actions. In 

particular, the Act addresses actions 

that may result in the expenditure by a 

State, local, or tribal government, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector of 

$100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or 

more in any one year. Though this 

proposed rule would not result in such 

expenditure, we do discuss the effects of 

this rule elsewhere in this preamble. 

8. Taking of Private Property 

This proposed rule would not cause a 

taking of private property or otherwise 

have taking implications under 

Executive Order 12630, Governmental 

Actions and Interference with 

Constitutionally Protected Property 

Rights. 

9. Civil Justice Reform 

This proposed rule meets applicable 

standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform, to minimize litigation, 

eliminate ambiguity, and reduce 

burden. 

10. Protection of Children From 

Environmental Health Risks 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Executive Order 13045, 

Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks. This rule is not an economically 

significant rule and would not create an 

environmental risk to health or risk to 

safety that might disproportionately 

affect children. 

11. Indian Tribal Governments 

This proposed rule does not have 

tribal implications under Executive 

Order 13175, Consultation and 

Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments, because it would not have 

a substantial direct effect on one or 

more Indian tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes. 

12. Energy Effects 

This proposed rule 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 proposed rule does not use 

technical standards. Therefore, we did 

not consider the use of voluntary 

consensus standards. 

14. Environment 

We have analyzed this proposed 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 made a preliminary determination 

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 is 

categorically excluded from further 

review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 

2–1 of the Commandant Instruction. A 

preliminary environmental analysis 

checklist supporting this determination 

is 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 

proposed rule. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100 

Marine safety, Navigation (water), 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Waterways. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to 

amend 33 CFR part 100 as follows: 

PART 100—SAFETY OF LIFE ON 

NAVIGABLE WATERS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 100 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233; Department of 

Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1 

§ 100.719 [Removed] 

■ 2. Remove § 100.719. 

■ 3. Revise § 100.720 to read as follows: 

§ 100.720 Annual Suncoast Offshore 

Grand Prix, Gulf of Mexico, Sarasota, FL. 

(a) Regulated area. The regulated area 

is established by a line drawn from the 

start line position 27°18.40′ N, 82°35.36′ 

W, thence to turn 1 position 27°16.74′ 

N, 82°34.92′ W, thence to turn 2 

position 27°18.20′ N, 82°34.51′ W, 

thence to turn 3 position 27°18.67′ N, 

82°35.09′ W, thence to turn 4 position 

27°18.66′ N, 82°35.45′ W, thence to the 

finish line position 27°18.64′ N, 

82°35.00′ W. All coordinates referenced 

use datum: NAD 1983. 

(b) Special local regulations. (1) 

Spectator craft will be permitted to 

anchor shoreward of the shoreside 

boundaries, in the spectator area 500 

yards from the regulated area between 

position 27°18.02′ N, 82°34.42′ W and 

position 27°16.85′ N, 82°34.67′ W. 

(2) Spectator craft will be permitted to 

anchor seaward of the seaside 

boundaries, in the spectator area 500 

yards from the regulated area between 

position 27°18.54′ N, 82°35.56′ W and 

position 27°16.64′ N, 82°35.07′ W. 

(3) All vessel traffic not involved with 

the Suncoast Offshore Grand Prix shall 

enter and exit Sarasota Bay via Big 

Sarasota Pass and stay well clear of the 

racecourse. 

(4) New Pass will be closed to all 

inbound and outbound vessel traffic at 

the COLREGS Demarcation Line. 

Vessels are allowed to utilize New Pass 

to access all areas inland of the 

Demarcation Line via Sarasota Bay. It 

may be opened at the discretion of the 

Patrol Commander. 

(5) Entry into the regulated area shall 

be in accordance with this regulation. 

Spectator craft will stay clear of the race 

area at all times. 

(c) Effective date. This section is 

effective from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. EDT, 

annually during the first Sunday of July. 

Dated: January 21, 2014. 

G.D. Case, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port St. Petersburg. 

[FR Doc. 2014–02664 Filed 2–6–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2009–0805; FRL–9906–32– 

Region 5] 

Approval of Air Quality Implementation 

Plans; Indiana; Ohio; ‘‘Infrastructure’’ 

SIP State Board Requirements for the 

2006 24-Hour PM2.5 NAAQS 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: Under the Clean Air Act 

(CAA), the Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

elements of state implementation plan 

(SIP) submissions by the Indiana 

Department of Environmental 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 26 / Friday, February 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 7411 

Management (IDEM) and the Ohio 

Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio 

EPA) to address the section 110 

requirements of the CAA for the 2006 

24-hour fine particle national ambient 

air quality standards (2006 PM2.5

NAAQS). The SIPs under section 110 of 

the CAA are often referred to as the 

‘‘infrastructure’’ SIP, and specifically we 

are proposing approval of portions of 

these states’ submissions intended to 

meet the state board requirements of 

section 110. This section requires states 

to comply with the applicable state 

board requirements found in section 128 

of the CAA. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before March 10, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2009–0805, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: aburano.douglas@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (312) 408–2279. 

4. Mail: Douglas Aburano, Chief, 

Attainment Planning and Maintenance 

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

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. 

5. Hand Delivery: Douglas Aburano, 

Chief, Attainment Planning and 

Maintenance Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 

Such deliveries are only accepted 

during the Regional Office normal hours 

of operation, and special arrangements 

should be made for deliveries of boxed 

information. The Regional Office official 

hours of business are Monday through 

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

Federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID. EPA–R05–OAR–2009–0805. 

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 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 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, 

Environmental Engineer, 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 is the result of EPA’s review of the 

applicable state board requirements for 

Indiana and Ohio? 

III. What action is EPA taking? 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What is the background for this 

action? 

Under sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the 

CAA, and implementing EPA policy, 

states are required to submit to EPA 

infrastructure SIPs to ensure that their 

SIPs provide for implementation, 

maintenance, and enforcement of the 

NAAQS, including the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS. These submissions must 

contain any revisions needed for 

meeting the applicable SIP requirements 

of section 110(a)(2), or certifications that 

their existing SIPs already met those 

requirements. 

EPA highlighted this statutory 

requirement in an October 2, 2007, 

guidance document entitled ‘‘Guidance 

on SIP Elements Required Under 

Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 

8-hour Ozone and PM2.5 National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards’’ (2007 

Memo). On September 25, 2009, EPA 

issued additional guidance pertaining to 

the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS entitled 

‘‘Guidance on SIP Elements Required 

Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 

2006 24-Hour Fine Particle (PM2.5) 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS)’’ (2009 Memo). 

On October 29, 2012, EPA finalized 

its approval of the majority of the 

infrastructure SIP elements for Indiana 

and Ohio with respect to the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS (see 77 FR 65478). However, we 

took no action on the state board 

requirements of section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii); 

instead, we committed to address 

compliance with these requirements at 

a later time (see 77 FR 65478 at 75480). 

Today’s proposed rulemaking and 

future final action are intended to fulfill 

that commitment. 

To assist states with addressing the 

state board requirements of section 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii), EPA issued ‘‘Guidance 

on infrastructure SIP Elements Required 

Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 

2008 Lead (Pb) National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS)’’ (2011 

Memo) and most recently, ‘‘Guidance on 

Infrastructure SIP Elements under Clean 

Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 

110(a)(2)’’ (2013 Memo). Notably, the 

2013 Memo specifies that the state 

board requirements are not NAAQS 

specific, i.e., the requirements are 

identical for each NAAQS. Today’s 

rulemaking describes how Indiana and 

Ohio have met the applicable state 

board requirements under section 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii) for the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS; this rulemaking does not 

address any other NAAQS, nor does it 

extend to any other infrastructure SIP 

element of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

II. What is the result of EPA’s review of 

the applicable state board requirements 

for Indiana and Ohio? 

Integral to the infrastructure SIP 

requirements for IDEM and Ohio EPA 

with respect to the state board 

requirements for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS 

was the need for these two states to 

show that they had met the applicable 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

7412 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 26 / Friday, February 7, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

requirements contained in section 128 

of the CAA, and for the states to submit 

such provisions for incorporation into 

the SIP. 

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. IDEM’s and Ohio EPA’s 

satisfaction of these requirements 

follow, below. 

On August 19, 2013, EPA proposed 

approval of IDEM’s provisions intended 

to address the applicable requirements 

of section 128 (see 78 FR 50360). No 

comments were received regarding our 

proposed approval of Indiana’s state 

board provisions, and EPA’s final 

approval of these provisions was 

published on December 24, 2013 (see 78 

FR 77599). IDEM had previously 

requested in a May 22, 2013, SIP 

submission that EPA’s approval of its 

state board provisions satisfy any 

applicable infrastructure SIP 

requirements for the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS. EPA therefore proposes that 

Indiana has met the section 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii) requirements for the 

2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

On June 7, 2013, Ohio submitted a SIP 

revision clarifying that the state does 

not have a board that has the authority 

to approve enforcement orders or 

permitting actions as outlined in section 

128(a)(1) of the CAA; instead, this 

authority rests with the Director of Ohio 

EPA. Therefore, section 128(a)(1) of the 

CAA is not applicable in Ohio. 

Under section 128(a)(2), the head of 

the executive agency with the power to 

approve enforcement orders or permits 

must adequately disclose any potential 

conflicts of interest. In its June 7, 2013, 

submission, Ohio EPA noted that EPA 

has previously approved provisions into 

Ohio’s SIP addressing these 

requirements (see 46 FR 57490). 

Specifically, ORC 102: Public Officers— 

Ethics contains provisions that require 

the Director of Ohio EPA (and his/her 

delegate) to file an annual statement 

with the ethics committee including 

potential conflicts of interest; 

furthermore, this annual filing is subject 

to public inspection. Ohio EPA 

requested in its June 7, 2013, 

submission that these SIP-approved 

provisions satisfy any applicable 

infrastructure SIP requirements for the 

2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA therefore 

proposes that Ohio has met the 

applicable requirements for section 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii) for the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS. 

III. What action is EPA taking? 

For the reasons discussed above, EPA 

is proposing to approve submissions 

from IDEM and Ohio intended to 

address the state board requirements 

under section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) for the 

2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. To reiterate, this 

action does not extend to any other 

NAAQS, nor does it extend to any other 

element under section 110(a)(1) and (2) 

for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

VI. 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. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Particulate Matter, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: January 22, 2014. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2014–02701 Filed 2–6–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2009–0807; FRL–9905–69– 

Region 5] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Ohio; 

Test Methods; Error Correction 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to determine 

that an October 26, 2010, action was in 

error and to make a correction pursuant 

to section 110(k)(6) of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA). The correction will bring the 

codification section of the October 26, 

2010, action into accord with the actual 

substance of the rulemaking action. The 

October 26, 2010, final rule approved 

various revisions to Ohio regulations 

that consolidated air quality standards 

in a new chapter of rules and adjusted 

the rule cross references accordingly in 

various related Ohio rules, including a 

specific revision to the cross reference 

in the Ohio Administrative Code (OAC) 

pertaining to methods for measurements 

for comparison with the particulate 

matter air quality standards. The 

correction will remove the appearance 

that EPA approved extraneous portions 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS