### 30610 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 102 / Wednesday, May 28, 2014 / Notices

8 59 FR 36969 (July 20, 1994). 209(b)(1)(C) (as EPA has interpreted that
subsection in the context of section 209(b) motor vehicle waivers). 8

In order to be consistent with section 209(a), California’s nonroad standards and enforcement procedures must not apply to new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines. To be consistent with section 209(e)(1), California’s
nonroad standards and enforcement procedures must not attempt to regulate engine categories that are permanently preempted from state regulation. To determine consistency with section 209(b)(1)(C), EPA typically reviews nonroad authorization requests under the same ‘‘consistency’’ criteria that are applied to motor vehicle waiver requests. Pursuant to section 209(b)(1)(C), the Administrator shall not grant California a motor vehicle waiver
if she finds that California ‘‘standards and accompanying enforcement procedures are not consistent with section 202(a)’’ of the Act. Previous decisions granting waivers and
authorizations have noted that state standards and enforcement procedures are inconsistent with section 202(a) if: (1) There is inadequate lead time to permit the development of the necessary technology giving appropriate consideration to the cost of compliance within that time, or (2) the federal and state testing procedures impose inconsistent certification requirements.

If California amends regulations that EPA has already authorized, California
can seek EPA confirmation that the amendments are within the scope of theprevious authorization. A within-thescope confirmation, without a full authorization review, is permissible if three conditions are met. First, the amended regulations must not
undermine California’s determination that its standards, in the aggregate, are as protective of public health and welfare as applicable federal standards. Second, the amended regulations must not affect consistency with section 202(a) of the Act. Third, the amended regulations must not raise any ‘‘new issues’’ affecting EPA’s prior
authorizations.

III. EPA’s Request for Comments

As stated above, EPA is offering the opportunity for a public hearing, and is requesting written comment on issues relevant to a within-the-scope analysis pertaining to CARB’s amendments affecting compliance flexibility and reduced compliance costs. Specifically, we request comment on whether California’s CHE amendments: (1) Undermine California’s previous determination that its standards, in the aggregate, are at least as protective of public health and welfare as comparable federal standards; (2) affect the consistency of California’s requirements with section 209 of the Act; or (3) raise any other new issues affecting EPA’s previous waiver or authorization
determinations.

Should any party believe that the
amendments noted above are not within the scope of the previous authorization, EPA also requests comment on whether
the CARB CHE amendments meet the
criteria for a full authorization. Specifically, we request comment on: (a)
Whether CARB’s determination that its standards, in the aggregate, are at least as protective of public health and welfare as applicable federal standards is arbitrary and capricious, (b) whether
California needs such standards to meet compelling and extraordinary conditions, and (c) whether California’s standards and accompanying enforcement procedures are consistent
with section 209 of the Act.

EPA also requests comment on whether the CHE amendments, for which CARB seeks a full authorization, meet the criteria of section 209(e) for a
full authorization.

IV. Procedures for Public Participation

If a hearing is held, the Agency will
make a verbatim record of the proceedings. Interested parties may arrange with the reporter at the hearing to obtain a copy of the transcript at their own expense. Regardless of whether a public hearing is held, EPA will keep the record open until July 21, 2014. Upon expiration of the comment period,
the Administrator will render a decision on CARB’s request based on the record from the public hearing (if a hearing is conducted), all relevant written submissions, and other information that she deems pertinent. All information will be available for inspection at the EPA Air Docket No. EPA–HQ–OAR–

2014–0060.

Persons with comments containing proprietary information must distinguish such information from other comments to the greatest extent possible
and label it as ‘‘Confidential Business Information’’ (‘‘CBI’’). If a person making comments wants EPA to base its decision on a submission labeled as CBI,
then a non-confidential version of the document that summarizes the key data
or information should be submitted to the public docket. To ensure that proprietary information is not inadvertently placed in the public docket, submissions containing such information should be sent directly to the contact person listed above and not to the public docket. Information covered by a claim of confidentiality will be disclosed by EPA only to the extent allowed, and according to the procedures set forth in 40 CFR Part 2. If no claim of confidentiality accompanies the submission when EPA receives it, EPA will make it available to the public without further notice to the person making comments.

Dated: May 15, 2014. Christopher Grundler, Director, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Office of Air and Radiation.

[FR Doc. 2014–12009 Filed 5–27–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION**
**AGENCY**

**[FRL–9911–34–OAR]**

**California State Nonroad Engine Pollution Control Standards; Small Off**  **Road Engines Regulation; Request for Within-the-Scope and Full**  **Authorization; Opportunity for Public Hearing and Comment** 

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Notice.

**SUMMARY :**  The California Air Resources Board (CARB) has notified the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that it has adopted amendments to its spark-ignited (SI) Small Off-Road Engines (SORE) regulation (2008 SORE amendments). By letter dated December 2, 2013, ARB asked that EPA authorize these amendments pursuant to section
the Clean Air Act. CARB seeks
confirmation that the amendments are within the scope of a prior authorization issued by EPA, or, in the alternative,
that the amendments merit full
authorization. This notice announces that EPA has tentatively scheduled a public hearing to consider California’s authorization request for the 2008 SORE amendments, and that EPA is now accepting written comment on the request.

**DATES :**  EPA has tentatively scheduled a public hearing concerning CARB’s request on June 19, 2014, at 10 a.m. ET. EPA will hold a hearing only if any party notifies EPA by June 9, 2014 to express interest in presenting the agency with oral testimony. Parties wishing to present oral testimony at the public hearing should provide written notice to
David Dickinson at the email address noted below. If EPA receives a request for a public hearing, that hearing will be held at 1310 L Street NW., Washington,
DC 20005. If EPA does not receive a


### 30611 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 102 / Wednesday, May 28, 2014 / Notices

1 The federal term ‘‘nonroad’’ and the California term ‘‘off-road’’ are used interchangeably.

2 60 FR 37440 (July 20, 1995).

3 65 FR. 69763 (November 20, 2000).

4 65 FR 69767 (November 20, 2000); 68 FR 65702 (November 21, 2003).

5 75 FR 8056 (February 23, 2010).

6 71 FR 75536 (December 15, 2006).

7 The specific regulatory text for the 2008 amendments is codified at title 13, California Code of Regulations (CCR), sections 2401, 2403, 2404,

Continued request for a public hearing, then EPA will not hold a hearing, and instead will consider CARB’s request based on written submissions to the docket. Any party may submit written comments until July 21, 2014.

Any person who wishes to know whether a hearing will be held may call David Dickinson at (202) 343–9256 on or after June 13, 2014. Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0036, by one of the following methods:

• Online at http:// www.regulations.gov: Follow the Online Instructions for Submitting Comments.

• Email: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov.

• Fax: (202) 566–9744.

• Mail: Air and Radiation Docket, Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2014– 0036, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Mail code: 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington,
DC 20460. Please include a total of two copies.

• Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center, Public Reading Room, EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket’s normal hours of operation, and special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.

Online Instructions for Submitting

Comments: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2014– 0036. EPA’s policy is that all comments
we receive will be included in the public docket without change and may
be made available online at http:// 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 http:// www.regulations.gov or email. The http://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 http:// www.regulations.gov, your email address will automatically be 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. For additional information about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http:// www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.

EPA will make available for public inspection materials submitted by CARB, written comments received from any interested parties, and any testimony given at the public hearing. Materials relevant to this proceeding are
contained in the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, maintained in Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– OAR–2014–0036. Publicly available
docket materials are available either electronically through http:// www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Air and Radiation Docket in the EPA Headquarters Library, EPA West Building, Room 3334, located at 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open to the public on all federal government work days from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.; generally, it is open Monday through Friday, excluding holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is (202) 566–1744. The Air and
Radiation Docket and Information
Center’s Web site is http://www.epa.gov/
oar/docket.html. The electronic mail (email) address for the Air and
Radiation Docket is: a-and-rDocket@epa.gov, the telephone number is (202) 566–1742, and the fax number is (202) 566–9744. An electronic version of the public docket is available through the federal government’s electronic public docket and comment system. You may access EPA dockets at http:// www.regulations.gov. After opening the http://www.regulations.gov Web site,enter, in the ‘‘Enter Keyword or ID’’ fillin box to view documents in the record. Although a part of the official docket, the public docket does not include
Confidential Business Information (‘‘CBI’’) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

EPA’s Office of Transportation and Air Quality also maintains a Web page that contains general information on its
review of California waiver and authorization requests. Included on that page are links to prior waiver and
authorization Federal Register notices. The page can be accessed at http:// www.epa.gov/otaq/cafr.htm.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  David Dickinson, Attorney-Advisor, Compliance Division, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue (6405J) NW., Washington, DC 20460. Telephone: (202) 343–9256. Fax: (202)343–2804.
Email: Dickinson.david@epa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 
I. California’s SORE Regulation

Small off-road engines and equipment 1 are rated at or below 19 kilowatts (kW) (25 horsepower (hp)). The vast majority of engines covered by the SORE regulations are SI engines that are used to power a broad range of equipment, including lawn mowers, leaf blowers, generators, and small industrial equipment. Exhaust and evaporative emissions from these engines are a significant source of hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen, pollutants that contribute to smog problems in California.

CARB promulgated its first SORE regulations in 1992 and amended them in 1993. EPA authorized the regulations, as amended, on July 5, 1995. 2 CARB further amended these regulations in 1994, 1995, and 1996, and EPA
confirmed all the amendments to be within the scope of the prior approval on November 9, 2000. 3 CARB again amended the SORE regulations in 1998, this time requesting within-the-scope
determination for all but one of the amendments, for which full authorization was requested. EPA issued its within-the-scope determination on November 9, 2000, for these former amendments, and a full authorization on November 10, 2003, for
the latter amendment. 4 In 2000 and again in 2004, CARB amended the SORE regulations to more closely align with the federal SORE program. EPA
confirmed that the 2000 amendments were within the scope of the previously granted SORE authorization in February, 2010, and also granted a full
authorization for the 2004 amendments to standards and test procedures for certain nonroad compression ignition engines. 5 EPA issued a full
authorization for CARB’s 2004 amendments to the SI SORE regulations on December 11, 2006. 6

CARB adopted the 2008 SORE amendments on November 21, 2008. 7


### 30612 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 102 / Wednesday, May 28, 2014 / Notices

2405, 2406, 2408, 2408.1 and 2409 (see enclosure 6 to CARB’s December 2, 2013 request). California’s Office of Administrative Law formally approved the rulemaking on April 5, 2010 and the regulations became effective on May 5, 2010.

8 EPA’s most recent authorizations for CARB’s SORE regulations can be found at 71 FR 75536 (December 15, 2006) and 75 FR 8056 (February 23, 2010). 9 59 FR 36969 (July 20, 1994).

10 62 FR 67733 (December 30, 1997). The applicable regulations are now in 40 CFR part 1074, subpart B, § 1074.105.

11 59 FR 36969 (July 20, 1994). The 2008 SORE amendments made three further changes to California’s SORE regulations. First, California
modified certification emissions credits to expire five years after creation, and permitted the generation of certification emissions credits through theproduction of professional grade zeroemissions equipment. Second, the amendments eliminated production emissions credits, and provided manufacturers with the option to convert production emissions credits
into certification emissions credits until 2010. Third, manufacturers were permitted to use a certification fuel with up to ten volume percent ethanol content, provided that the same fuel is
used for certification with the EPA.

By letter dated December 2, 2013, CARB submitted a request to EPA pursuant to section 209(e) of the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act) for
authorization of its 2008 SORE
amendments. CARB seeks EPA’s
confirmation that the 2008 SORE amendments fall within the scope of EPA’s previous authorizations, 8 or, in the alternate, a full authorization for
those amendments.

II. Clean Air Act Nonroad Engine and
Vehicle Authorizations

Section 209(e)(1) of the CAA prohibits states and local governments from adopting or attempting to enforce any standard or requirement relating to the
control of emissions from new nonroad vehicles or engines. The Act also preempts states from adopting and enforcing standards and other requirements related to the control of
emissions from non-new nonroad engines or vehicles. Section 209(e)(2), however, requires the Administrator, after notice and opportunity for public hearing, to authorize California to
enforce such standards and other requirements, unless EPA makes one of three findings. In addition, other states with air quality attainment plans may adopt and enforce such regulations if the standards, and implementation and enforcement procedures, are identical to California’s standards. On July 20, 1994, EPA promulgated a rule that sets forth, among other things, regulations providing the criteria, as found in section 209(e)(2), which EPA must consider before granting any California authorization request for new nonroad engine or vehicle emission standards. 9 EPA revised these regulations in 1997. 10 The authorization criteria are (1) whether California’s protectiveness determination that its standards, in the aggregate, are at least as protective of public health and welfare as comparable federal standards is arbitrary and capricious; (2) California does not need such standards to meet compelling and extraordinary conditions; or (3) The California standards and accompanying enforcement procedures are not
consistent with section 209 of the Act. As stated in the preamble to the 1994 rule, EPA has historically interpreted the section 209(e)(2)(iii) ‘‘consistency’’ inquiry to require, at minimum, that
California standards and enforcement procedures be consistent with section 209(a), section 209(e)(1), and section 209(b)(1)(C) (as EPA has interpreted that
subsection in the context of section 209(b) motor vehicle waivers). 11

In order to be consistent with section 209(a), California’s nonroad standards and enforcement procedures must not apply to new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines. To be consistent with section 209(e)(1), California’s
nonroad standards and enforcement procedures must not attempt to regulate engine categories that are permanently preempted from state regulation. To determine consistency with section 209(b)(1)(C), EPA typically reviews nonroad authorization requests under the same ‘‘consistency’’ criteria that are applied to motor vehicle waiver requests. Pursuant to section 209(b)(1)(C), the Administrator shall not grant California a motor vehicle waiver
if she finds that California ‘‘standards and accompanying enforcement procedures are not consistent with section 202(a)’’ of the Act. Previous decisions granting waivers and
authorizations have noted that state standards and enforcement procedures are inconsistent with section 202(a) if: (1) There is inadequate lead time to permit the development of the necessary technology giving appropriate consideration to the cost of compliance within that time, or (2) the federal and state testing procedures impose inconsistent certification requirements.

If California amends regulations that EPA has already authorized, California
can seek EPA confirmation that the amendments are within the scope of theprevious authorization. A within-thescope confirmation, without a full authorization review, is permissible if three conditions are met. First, the amended regulations must not
undermine California’s determination that its standards, in the aggregate, are as protective of public health and welfare as applicable federal standards. Second, the amended regulations must not affect consistency with section 202(a) of the Act. Third, the amended regulations must not raise any ‘‘new issues’’ affecting EPA’s prior
authorizations.

III. EPA’s Request for Comments

As stated above, EPA is offering the opportunity for a public hearing, and is requesting written comment on issues relevant to a within-the-scope analysis. Specifically, we request comment on
whether California’s 2008 SORE amendments: (1) Undermine California’s previous determination that its standards, in the aggregate, are at least as protective of public health and welfare as comparable federal standards; (2) affect the consistency of California’s requirements with section 209 of the Act; or (3) raise any other new issues affecting EPA’s previous waiver or
authorization determinations.

Should any party believe that the amendments are not within the scope of the previous authorization, EPA also requests comment on whether the 2008
SORE amendments meet the criteria for a full authorization. Specifically, we request comment on: (a) Whether
CARB’s determination that its standards, in the aggregate, are at least as protective of public health and welfare as applicable federal standards is arbitrary and capricious; (b) whether
California needs such standards to meet compelling and extraordinary conditions; and (c) whether California’s standards and accompanying enforcement procedures are consistent
with section 209 of the Act.

IV. Procedures for Public Participation

If a hearing is held, the Agency will
make a verbatim record of the proceedings. Interested parties may arrange with the reporter at the hearing to obtain a copy of the transcript at their own expense. Regardless of whether a public hearing is held, EPA will keep the record open until July 21, 2014. Upon expiration of the comment period,
the Administrator will render a decision on CARB’s request based on the record from the public hearing, if any, all relevant written submissions, and other information that she deems pertinent.
All information will be available for inspection at the EPA Air Docket No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0036.


### 30613 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 102 / Wednesday, May 28, 2014 / Notices

1 42 U.S.C. 9604(i)(2)(A).

2 42 U.S.C. 9604(i)(2)(B). Persons with comments containing proprietary information must distinguish such information from other comments to the greatest extent possible
and label it as ‘‘Confidential Business Information’’ (‘‘CBI’’). If a person making comments wants EPA to base its decision on a submission labeled as CBI,
then a non-confidential version of the document that summarizes the key data
or information should be submitted to the public docket. To ensure that proprietary information is not inadvertently placed in the public docket, submissions containing such information should be sent directly to the contact person listed above and not to the public docket. Information covered by a claim of confidentiality will be disclosed by EPA only to the extent allowed, and according to the procedures set forth in 40 CFR Part 2. If no claim of confidentiality accompanies the submission when EPA receives it, EPA will make it available to the public without further notice to the person making comments.

Dated: May 15, 2014. Christopher Grundler, Director, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Office of Air and Radiation.

[FR Doc. 2014–12017 Filed 5–27–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND**
**HUMAN SERVICES**

**Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry** 

**Notice of the Revised Priority List of**
**Hazardous Substances That Will Be Candidates for Toxicological Profiles** 

**AGENCY :**  Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

**ACTION :**  Notice.

**SUMMARY :**  The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA or Superfund), as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA), requires that ATSDR and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) prepare a Priority List of Hazardous Substances commonly found at facilities
on the CERCLA National Priorities List (NPL). The Priority List of Hazardous
Substances includes substances that have been determined to be of greatest public health concern to persons at or near NPL sites. CERCLA, as amended, also requires that the Priority List of Hazardous Substances be revised periodically.

This announcement provides notice that a revised Priority List of 275
Hazardous Substances has been developed and is now available. CERCLA, as amended, also requires ATSDR to prepare and to periodically revise toxicological profiles on
hazardous substances included in the priority list. Thus, each priority list substance is a potential toxicological profile subject, as well as a candidate for identification of priority data needs.

In addition to the Priority List of Hazardous Substances, ATSDR has developed a Completed Exposure Pathway Site Count Report. This report
lists the number of sites or events at
which ATSDR is involved and wherein
a substance has been found in a completed exposure pathway (CEP).

Address for Printed Copy: Requests for a printed copy of the 2013 Priority
List of Hazardous Substances and Support Document, including the CEP report, should be submitted to Ms. Nickolette Roney, Division of Toxicology and Human Health Sciences, ATSDR, Mail Stop F–57, 1600 Clifton Road, NE., Atlanta, GA 30333.

Electronic Availability: The 2013 Priority List of Hazardous Substances and Support Document are posted on
ATSDR’s Web site located at www.atsdr.cdc.gov/SPL. The CEP Report is posted at www.atsdr.cdc.gov/CEP.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Ms. Nickolette Roney, Division of Toxicology and Human Health Sciences, ATSDR, 1600 Clifton Road NE., Mail Stop F–57, Atlanta, GA 30333, telephone 800–232–4636.

This is an informational notice only; comments are not being solicited at this

time.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  CERCLA establishes certain requirements for ATSDR and EPA with regard to hazardous substances most commonly
found at facilities on the CERCLA NPL. Section 104(i)(2)(A) of CERCLA, as amended, 1 requires that ATSDR and EPA prepare a list, in order of priority,
of at least 100 hazardous substances most commonly found at facilities on the NPL and which, in the agencies’ sole discretion, pose the most significant potential threats to human health (see also 52 FR 12866, April 17, 1987). CERCLA section 104(i)(2)(B) 2 also requires the agencies to revise the priority list to include 100 or more additional hazardous substances (see also 53 FR 41280, October 20, 1988), and to include at least 25 additional
hazardous substances in each of the three successive years following the 1988 revision (see 54 FR 43615, October 26, 1989; 55 FR 42067, October 17, 1990; and 56 FR 52166, October 17, 1991). CERCLA section 104(i)(2)(B) further requires ATSDR and EPA at least annually to revise the list to include any
additional hazardous substances that have been determined to pose the most significant potential threat to human
health.

In 1995, the agencies, recognizing the stability of this listing activity, altered the priority list publication schedule (60 FR 16478, March 30, 1995). As a result, the substance priority list is now on a 2-year publication schedule, with
annual informal review and revision. Each substance on the Priority List of Hazardous Substances is a potential subject of a toxicological profile prepared by ATSDR and, subsequently,
a candidate for the identification of priority data needs.

The ranking of substances on the priority list is based on an algorithm that consists of three criteria, weighted equally and combined to result in the total score. The three criteria are: (1) Frequency of occurrence at NPL sites; (2) toxicity; and (3) potential for human exposure. The site-specific information used to develop the priority list has been collected from ATSDR public
health assessments and from site-file data packages used to develop the public health assessments. Since the development of the 2011 substance priority list, additional site specific
information has been collected. The new information may include more recent NPL frequency-of-occurrence data, additional environmental media concentration data, and more information on exposure to substances at NPL sites. Using these additional data, one substance has been replaced
on the list of 275 substances since the 2011 publication. Changes in the order of substances appearing on the Priority
List of Hazardous Substances will be reflected in program activities that rely on the list for guiding future activities. Using the current algorithm, a total of
848 candidate substances have been analyzed and ranked. Of these candidates, the 275 substances on the priority list may in the future become the subject of toxicological profiles.

Additional information on the existing methodology used in the development of the Priority List of
Hazardous Substances can be found inthe Support Document and in the abovereferenced Federal Register notices.

In addition to the revised priority list, ATSDR is also releasing a revised