40662 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 134 / Monday, July 14, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

We are issuing these final priorities, 

requirements, and definitions only on a 

reasoned determination that their 

benefits justify their costs. In choosing 

among alternative regulatory 

approaches, we selected those 

approaches that maximize net benefits. 

Based on the analysis that follows, the 

Department believes that this regulatory 

action is consistent with the principles 

in Executive Order 13563. 

We also have determined that this 

regulatory action does not unduly 

interfere with State, local, and Tribal 

governments in the exercise of their 

governmental functions. 

In accordance with both Executive 

orders, the Department has assessed the 

potential costs and benefits, both 

quantitative and qualitative, of this 

regulatory action. The potential costs 

are those resulting from statutory 

requirements and those we have 

determined as necessary for 

administering the Department’s 

programs and activities. 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995: 

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

does not require you to respond to a 

collection of information unless it 

displays a valid OMB control number. 

The collection of information is 

approved under OMB control number 

1855–0026. 

Intergovernmental Review: This 

program is subject to Executive Order 

12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR 

part 79. One of the objectives of the 

Executive order is to foster an 

intergovernmental partnership and a 

strengthened federalism. The Executive 

order relies on processes developed by 

State and local governments for 

coordination and review of proposed 

Federal financial assistance. 

This document provides early 

notification of our specific plans and 

actions for this program. Accessible 

Format: Individuals with disabilities 

can obtain this document in an 

accessible format (e.g., braille, large 

print, audiotape, or compact disc) on 

request to either of the program contact 

persons listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. 

Electronic Access to This Document: 

The official version of this document is 

the document published in the Federal 

Register. Free Internet access to the 

official edition of the Federal Register 

and the Code of Federal Regulations is 

available via the Federal Digital System 

at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you 

can view this document, as well as all 

other documents of this Department 

published in the Federal Register, in 

text or Adobe Portable Document 

Format (PDF). To use PDF you must 

have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is 

available free at the site. 

You may also access documents of the 

Department published in the Federal 

Register by using the article search 

feature at: www.federalregister.gov. 

Specifically, through the advanced 

search feature at this site, you can limit 

your search to documents published by 

the Department. 

Dated: July 9, 2014. 

Nadya Chinoy Dabby, 

Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and 

Improvement. 

[FR Doc. 2014–16462 Filed 7–11–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R10–OAR–2011–0715, FRL–9913–28– 

Region–10] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Idaho: 

Infrastructure Requirements for the 

1997 and 2006 Fine Particulate Matter 

and 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Clean Air Act (CAA) 

requires that each state, after a new or 

revised National Ambient Air Quality 

Standard (NAAQS) is promulgated, 

review their State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) to ensure that it meets the 

infrastructure requirements necessary to 

implement the new or revised standard. 

The Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) finds that the Idaho SIP meets the 

infrastructure requirements of the CAA 

for the NAAQS promulgated for fine 

particulate matter (PM2.5) on July 18, 

1997 and October 17, 2006, and for 

ozone on March 12, 2008. The EPA also 

finds that the Idaho SIP meets the 

interstate transport requirements of the 

CAA related to prevention of significant 

deterioration and visibility for the 2006 

PM2.5 and 2008 ozone NAAQS. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

August 13, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket 

Identification No. EPA–R10–OAR– 

2011–0715. All documents in the docket 

are listed on the http://

www.regulations.gov Web site. Although 

listed in the index, some information 

may not be publicly available, i.e., 

Confidential Business Information or 

other information the disclosure of 

which is restricted by statute. Certain 

other material, such as copyrighted 

material, is not placed on the Internet 

and will be publicly available only in 

hard copy form. Publicly available 

docket materials are available either 

electronically through http://

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

EPA Region 10, Office of Air, Waste, 

and Toxics, AWT–107, 1200 Sixth 

Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101. The 

EPA requests that you contact the 

person listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, 

excluding Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kristin Hall at: (206) 553–6357, 

hall.kristin@epa.gov, or the above EPA, 

Region 10 address. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document wherever 

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

intended to refer to the EPA. 

Information is organized as follows: 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. Response to Comment 

III. Final Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

On September 15, 2008, June 28, 

2010, and August 10, 2011, Idaho made 

submissions to the EPA demonstrating 

that the Idaho SIP meets the 

infrastructure requirements of the CAA 

for the 1997 PM2.5, 2006 PM2.5, and 2008 

ozone NAAQS. On March 26, 2014, we 

proposed action on these submissions 

(79 FR 16711). On April 15, 2014, we 

made a correction to our proposal 

because we supplied an incorrect docket 

number in our proposed action (79 FR 

21179). However, any commenter 

wishing to submit comments did not 

need to resubmit them, because we 

routed the comments to the correct 

docket. 

An explanation of the CAA 

requirements and implementing 

regulations that are met by these SIP 

submissions, a detailed explanation of 

the submissions, and the EPA’s reasons 

for the proposed action were provided 

in the notice of proposed rulemaking on 

March 26, 2014, and will not be restated 

here (79 FR 16711). The public 

comment period for our proposed action 

ended on April 25, 2014, and we 

received one comment. 

II. Response to Comment 

Comment: We received the following 

anonymous comment through the 

www.regulations.gov Web site: ‘‘When 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 134 / Monday, July 14, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 40663 

the EPA can stop all the toxic emissions 

from the multitudes of volcanos on the 

earth, then and only then will I give up 

my wood stove!! You people need to 

stop telling us how to live. My taxes pay 

your wages and I think your 

organization needs to be dismantled!’’ 

Response: Under section 110 of the 

CAA, states are responsible for 

developing provisions to address air 

pollution for incorporation into the SIP. 

The EPA’s role is to evaluate these state 

choices to determine if the revisions 

meet the requirements of the CAA. 

Furthermore, under section 116 of the 

CAA, states have authority to adopt or 

enforce standards or requirements for 

the control or abatement of air pollution 

(except as specifically limited by the 

CAA). The EPA must approve state 

submissions so long as they meet the 

minimum requirements established by 

the CAA. Union Electric Co. v. EPA, 427 

U.S. 246 (1976). To the extent that the 

commenter wants to influence these 

state choices, the comments are best 

submitted during the state public 

comment period, rather than as part of 

the EPA’s approval or disapproval 

process. We have determined that the 

provisions selected by Idaho for 

inclusion in its SIP meet the CAA 

infrastructure requirements for the 1997 

and 2006 fine particulate matter and 

2008 ozone standards. We provided a 

copy of the comment to Idaho 

Department of Environmental Quality 

for consideration during future state 

rulemaking, but we are otherwise taking 

no further action on the comment. 

III. Final Action 

The EPA finds that the Idaho SIP 

meets the following CAA section 

110(a)(2) infrastructure elements for the 

1997 PM2.5, 2006 PM2.5, and 2008 ozone 

NAAQS: (A), (B), (C), (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), 

(H), (J), (K), (L), and (M). We also find 

that the Idaho SIP meets the 

requirements of CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) as it applies to 

prevention of significant deterioration 

and visibility for the 2006 PM2.5 and 

2008 ozone NAAQS. This action is 

being taken under section 110 of the 

CAA. 

IV. 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, the 

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 

this action does not involve technical 

standards; and 

• Does not provide the 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 the 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. The 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 September 12, 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. This action may not 

be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2)). 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Ozone, Particulate matter, 

and Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: June 16, 2014. 

Dennis J. McLerran, 

Regional Administrator, Region 10. 

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. 

Subpart N—Idaho 

■ 2. In § 52.670, the table in paragraph 

(e) is amended by adding three entries 

at the end of the table for ‘‘Section 

110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements 

for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS,’’ ‘‘Section 

110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements 

for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS,’’ and 

‘‘Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure 

Requirements for the 2008 Ozone 

NAAQS.’’ 

The additions read as follows: 

§ 52.670 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

40664 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 134 / Monday, July 14, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

EPA-APPROVED IDAHO NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS AND QUASI-REGULATORY MEASURES

Name of SIP 

provision 

Applicable 

geographic or 

non-attainment area 

State submittal date EPA approval date Comments 

*******

Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements 

for the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS.

State-wide ......................... 9/15/2008; 6/28/2010 ........ 7/14/2014 [Insert page 

number where the document begins].

This action addresses the 

following CAA elements 

or portions thereof: 

110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), 

(D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), 

(J), (K), (L), and (M). 

Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements 

for the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS.

State-wide ......................... 6/28/2010; 8/10/2011 ........ 7/14/2014 [Insert page 

number where the document begins].

This action addresses the 

following CAA elements 

or portions thereof: 

110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), 

(D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), (E), (F), 

(G), (H), (J), (K), (L), 

and (M). 

Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements 

for the 2008 Ozone 

NAAQS.

State-wide ......................... 6/28/2010 .......................... 7/14/2014 [Insert page 

number where the document begins].

This action addresses the 

following CAA elements 

or portions thereof: 

110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), 

(D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), (E), (F), 

(G), (H), (J), (K), (L), 

and (M). 

[FR Doc. 2014–16299 Filed 7–11–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2013–0649; FRL–9913–41– 

Region–3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Maryland; Section 110(a)(2) 

Infrastructure Requirements for the 

2010 Nitrogen Dioxide National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is approving a State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 

submitted by the State of Maryland 

pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA). 

Whenever new or revised National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) are promulgated, the CAA 

requires states to submit a plan for the 

implementation, maintenance, and 

enforcement of such NAAQS. The plan 

is required to address basic program 

elements, including, but not limited to 

regulatory structure, monitoring, 

modeling, legal authority, and adequate 

resources necessary to assure attainment 

and maintenance of the standards. 

These elements are referred to as 

infrastructure requirements. The State of 

Maryland has made a submittal 

addressing the infrastructure 

requirements for the 2010 nitrogen 

dioxide (NO2) NAAQS. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

August 13, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

Number EPA–R03–OAR–2013–0649. All 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the www.regulations.gov Web site. 

Although listed in the electronic docket, 

some information is not publicly 

available, i.e., confidential business 

information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically through 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy for 

public inspection during normal 

business hours at the Air Protection 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

Copies of the State submittal are 

available at the Maryland Department of 

the Environment, 1800 Washington 

Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore, 

Maryland 21230. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ruth Knapp, (215) 814–2191, or by 

email at knapp.ruth@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

On February 9, 2010 (75 FR 6474), 

EPA established a new 1-hour primary 

NAAQS for NO2 at a level of 100 parts 

per billion (ppb), based on a 3-year 

average of the 98th percentile of the 

yearly distribution of 1-hour daily 

maximum concentrations. Section 

110(a) of the CAA requires states to 

submit SIPs to provide for the 

implementation, maintenance, and 

enforcement of a new or revised 

NAAQS. Specifically, section 110(a)(1) 

requires states to submit SIPs meeting 

the applicable requirements of section 

110(a)(2) within three years following 

the promulgation of such NAAQS, or 

within such shorter period as EPA may 

prescribe, and section 110(a)(2) requires 

states to address specific elements for 

monitoring, basic program requirements 

and legal authority that are designed to 

assure attainment and maintenance of 

the newly established or revised 

NAAQS. 

The contents of a SIP submission may 

vary depending upon the data and 

analytical tools available to the state, as 

well as the provisions already contained 

in the state’s SIP at the time in which 

the state develops and submits the 

submission for a new or revised 

NAAQS. States were required to submit 

such SIPs for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS to 

EPA no later than January 2013. 

II. Summary of SIP Revision 

On April 15, 2014 (79 FR 21173), EPA 

published a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPR) for the State of 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES