12136 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 42 / Tuesday, March 4, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R10–OAR–2013–0707; FRL–9907–45– 

Region 10] 

Revision to the Washington State 

Implementation Plan; Update to the 

Solid Fuel Burning Devices 

Regulations 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision submitted by the Washington 

State Department of Ecology (Ecology) 

received on January 30, 2014. The SIP 

submission contains revisions to 

Washington’s solid fuel burning device 

rules to control fine particulate matter 

(PM2.5) from residential wood 

combustion. The updated regulations 

reflect Washington State statutory 

changes made in 2012, setting revised 

PM2.5 trigger levels for impaired air 

quality burn bans and setting criteria for 

prohibiting solid fuel burning devices 

that are not certified. The submission 

also contains updates to the regulations 

to improve the clarity of the language. 

We are proposing to approve these 

changes because they meet the 

requirements of the Clean Air Act and 

strengthen the Washington SIP. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before April 3, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10– 

OAR–2013–0707, by any of the 

following methods: 

• www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: R10-Public_Comments@

epa.gov. 

• Mail: Jeff Hunt, EPA Region 10, 

Office of Air, Waste and Toxics (AWT– 

107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, 

Seattle WA, 98101 

• Hand Delivery/Courier: EPA Region 

10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, 

Seattle WA, 98101. Attention: Jeff Hunt, 

Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, AWT— 

107. Such deliveries are only accepted 

during normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R10–OAR–2013– 

0707. The 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 

the disclosure of which 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 the 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 the 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, the 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 the EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

the 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 

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. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy 

during normal business hours at the 

Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, EPA 

Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, 

WA 98101. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff 

Hunt at (206) 553–0256, hunt.jeff@

epa.gov, or the above EPA, Region 10 

address. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

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

intended to refer to the EPA. 

The following outline is provided to 

aid in locating information in this 

preamble: 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. Summary of SIP Revision 

III. Proposed Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

On July 18, 1997, the EPA 

promulgated the 1997 PM2.5 National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS), including an annual standard 

of 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter (mg/ 

m3) based on a three-year average of 

annual mean PM2.5 concentrations, and 

a 24-hour (or daily) standard of 65 mg/ 

m3 based on a three-year average of the 

98th percentile of 24-hour 

concentrations (62 FR 38652). The EPA 

established the standards based on 

significant evidence and numerous 

health studies demonstrating that 

serious health effects are associated 

with exposures to PM2.5. On October 17, 

2006, the EPA revised the PM2.5 24-hour 

standard from 65 mg/m3 to 35 mg/m3

based on additional evidence and health 

studies (71 FR 61144). 

Following promulgation of a new or 

revised NAAQS, the EPA is required by 

the Clean Air Act (CAA) to designate 

areas throughout the United States as 

attaining or not attaining the NAAQS; 

this designation process is described in 

section 107(d)(1) of the CAA. Effective 

December 14, 2009, the EPA designated 

Tacoma-Pierce County, Washington 

(partial county designation) as a 

nonattainment area for the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 standard (74 FR 58688; published 

on November 13, 2009). Under the CAA, 

a state is required to submit a revision 

to its SIP to meet nonattainment 

requirements within three years of the 

effective date of designation. 

In 2012, the Washington State 

Legislature revised Chapter 70.94 

Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 

Washington Clean Air Act (Washington 

Clean Air Act) to address the TacomaPierce County PM2.5 nonattainment area 

(Tacoma-Pierce County area) and other 

areas at risk for nonattainment 

statewide. On November 28, 2012, 

Ecology, in close coordination with the 

Puget Sound Clean Air Agency 

(PSCAA), submitted Regulation 1— 

Article 13: Solid Fuel Burning Device 

Standards, adopted by the PSCAA 

Board on October 25, 2012. These local 

air agency regulations, covering the 

Tacoma-Pierce County area, 

incorporated the PM2.5 related statutory 

changes to Chapter 70.94 RCW. On May 

29, 2013, the EPA approved the PSCAA 

regulations into the Washington SIP and 

approved Ecology’s ‘‘2008 Baseline 

Emissions Inventory and 

Documentation’’ satisfying the 

attainment planning requirements due 

at the time for the Tacoma-Pierce 

County area (78 FR 32131). 

On January 30, 2014, Ecology 

submitted to the EPA a SIP revision 

updating Chapter 173–433 of the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 42 / Tuesday, March 4, 2014 / Proposed Rules 12137 

Washington Administrative Code 

(WAC) Solid Fuel Burning Devices for 

purposes of aligning the regulations 

with the statutory changes made in 2012 

by the Washington State Legislature, 

and supporting the local PSCAA 

regulations approved on May 29, 2013 

by the EPA (78 FR 32131). The SIP 

revision also helps provide the 

necessary regulatory framework to 

support an anticipated maintenance 

plan and redesignation request for the 

Tacoma-Pierce County area in the 

future. 

II. Summary of SIP Revision 

In the January 30, 2014 submission, 

Ecology revised the regulations 

contained in Chapter 173–433 WAC 

Solid Fuel Burning Devices to reflect 

two significant changes to the 

Washington Clean Air Act. Ecology 

revised Chapter 173–433–140 WAC 

Criteria for Impaired Air Quality Burn 

Bans to remove outdated course 

particulate matter (PM10) burn ban 

trigger levels and replace them with 

more stringent PM2.5 trigger levels to 

make it consistent with Chapter 

70.94.473 of the Washington Clean Air 

Act. Ecology provided an analysis 

covering former PM10 nonattainment 

areas in both Western and Eastern 

Washington to demonstrate that the 

PM2.5 trigger levels are more stringent 

and will provide continued 

maintenance of the PM10 NAAQS, 

established on July 1, 1987 (52 FR 

24663). Ecology also removed an 

outdated carbon monoxide trigger level 

for residential wood combustion 

curtailment. The EPA agrees with 

Ecology’s analysis that historic 

violations of the 1985 carbon monoxide 

NAAQS centered on areas of high traffic 

congestion and have little connection 

with dispersed residential woodstove 

emissions. The EPA’s past approval of 

maintenance plans for carbon monoxide 

areas located in Washington applied 

specifically to transportation control 

measures, so this revision will have no 

impact on control measures relied upon 

for attainment and maintenance of the 

1985 carbon monoxide NAAQS in these 

areas of Washington. These 

transportation control measures 

combined with continuing fleet 

turnover with cleaner new cars and 

trucks have brought carbon monoxide 

levels to historic lows. Ecology cites 

monitoring data from the Spokane 

carbon monoxide maintenance area 

where carbon monoxide levels are 

roughly one-fifth of the federal limit, 

with little to no potential for future 

violations. 

In the January 30, 2014 submission, 

Ecology also added a new section, 

Chapter 173–433–155 WAC Criteria for 

Prohibiting Solid Fuel Burning Devices 

that Are Not Certified to incorporate 

changes to Chapter 70.94.477 of the 

Washington Clean Air Act. This 

provision allows Ecology or a local air 

agency to prohibit the use of uncertified 

solid fuel burning devices in a fine 

particulate matter nonattainment or 

maintenance area, even in the absence 

of an air quality episode or impaired air 

quality burn ban. The new Chapter 173– 

433–155 WAC is consistent with and 

supports the local PSCAA corollary 

contained in Regulation 1, Section 13.07 

Prohibitions on Wood Stoves That Are 

Not Certified Wood Stoves, already 

approved into the Washington SIP. This 

Washington regulation and the local 

PSCAA corollary will be a key 

component in Ecology’s future 

maintenance plan demonstration 

showing that the current low levels of 

PM2.5 for the Tacoma-Pierce County area 

can be sustained over time. Lastly, 

Ecology updated other sections of 

Chapter 173–433 WAC to improve 

clarity and ensure that consistent 

terminology is used throughout all the 

sections. 

III. Proposed Action 

The EPA is proposing to approve 

Washington’s SIP revision received 

January 30, 2014. Specifically, the EPA 

is proposing to approve and incorporate 

by reference into the SIP the rules 

shown in Table 1 below. In addition, 

Ecology submitted Chapter 173–433– 

200 WAC Regulatory Actions and 

Penalties to demonstrate adequate 

enforcement authority to implement the 

program. Regulations describing agency 

enforcement authority are not generally 

incorporated into the SIP to avoid 

potential conflict with the EPA’s 

independent authorities. Therefore, the 

EPA has reviewed and is proposing 

approval of Chapter 173–433–200 WAC 

as having adequate enforcement 

authority, but will not incorporate this 

section by reference into the SIP 

codified in 40 CFR 52.2470(c). We have 

made the determination that this action 

is consistent with section 110 of the 

CAA. The EPA is soliciting public 

comments which will be considered 

before taking final action. 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES

Agency Citation 

(WAC) Title State effective date Submitted 

Ecology ................................... 173–433–010 Purpose .................................................................................. 02/23/14 01/30/14 

Ecology ................................... 173–433–020 Applicability ............................................................................. 02/23/14 01/30/14 

Ecology ................................... 173–433–030 Definitions ............................................................................... 02/23/14 01/30/14 

Ecology ................................... 173–433–100 Emission Performance Standards .......................................... 02/23/14 01/30/14 

Ecology ................................... 173–433–110 Opacity Standards .................................................................. 02/23/14 01/30/14 

Ecology ................................... 173–433–120 Prohibited Fuel Types ............................................................ 02/23/14 01/30/14 

Ecology ................................... 173–433–140 Criteria for Impaired Air Quality Burn Bans ........................... 02/23/14 01/30/14 

Ecology ................................... 173–433–150 Restrictions on the Operation of Solid Fuel Burning Devices 02/23/14 01/30/14 

Ecology ................................... 173–433–155 Criteria for Prohibiting the Use of Solid Fuel Burning Devices that Are Not Certified.02/23/14 01/30/14 

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 proposes to approve state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this proposed 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.); 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

12138 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 42 / Tuesday, March 4, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

• 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 it will not 

impose substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law. The 

SIP is not approved to apply in Indian 

country located in the State of 

Washington, except for non-trust land 

within the exterior boundaries of the 

Puyallup Indian Reservation, also 

known as the 1873 Survey Area. Under 

the Puyallup Tribe of Indians 

Settlement Act of 1989, 25 U.S.C. 1773, 

Congress explicitly provided state and 

local agencies in Washington authority 

over activities on non-trust lands within 

the 1873 Survey Area and the EPA is 

therefore approving this SIP on such 

lands. Consistent with EPA policy, the 

EPA nonetheless provided a 

consultation opportunity to the 

Puyallup Tribe in a letter dated 

September 3, 2013. The EPA did not 

receive a request for consultation. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, and Particulate 

matter. 

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

Dated: February 25, 2014. 

Dennis J. McLerran, 

Regional Adminstrator, Region 10. 

[FR Doc. 2014–04783 Filed 3–3–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

[Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2013–0008; 

4500030113] 

RIN 1018–AZ34 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Designation of Critical 

Habitat for the Sharpnose Shiner and 

Smalleye Shiner 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of the 

comment period. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), announce the 

reopening of the public comment period 

on the August 6, 2013, proposed 

designation of critical habitat for the 

sharpnose shiner (Notropis 

oxyrhynchus) and smalleye shiner (N. 

buccula) under the Endangered Species 

Act of 1973, as amended (Act). We also 

announce the availability of a draft 

economic analysis (DEA) of the 

proposed designation of critical habitat 

for sharpnose shiner and smalleye 

shiner and an amended required 

determinations section of the proposal. 

We are reopening the comment period 

to allow all interested parties an 

opportunity to comment simultaneously 

on the proposed critical habitat rule, the 

associated DEA, and the amended 

required determinations section. 

Comments previously submitted need 

not be resubmitted, as they will be fully 

considered in preparation of the final 

rule. 

DATES: We will consider comments 

received or postmarked on or before 

April 3, 2014. Comments submitted 

electronically using the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES

section, below) must be received by 

11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the closing 

date. 

ADDRESSES: Document availability: You 

may obtain a copy of the proposed 

critical habitat rule and the associated 

draft economic analysis at Docket No. 

FWS–R2–ES–2013–0008, or by mail 

from the Arlington, Texas, Ecological 

Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT). 

Written Comments: You may submit 

written comments by one of the 

following methods: 

(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal: http://

www.regulations.gov. Submit comments 

on the critical habitat proposal and 

associated DEA by searching for FWS– 

R2–ES–2013–0008, which is the docket 

number for the critical habitat proposed 

rulemaking. 

(2) By hard copy: Submit comments 

on the critical habitat proposal and 

associated DEA by U.S. mail or handdelivery to: Public Comments 

Processing, Attn: FWS–R2–ES–2013– 

0008; Division of Policy and Directives 

Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS 

2042–PDM; Arlington, VA 22203. 

We request that you send comments 

only by the methods described above. 

We will post all comments on http://

www.regulations.gov. This generally 

means that we will post any personal 

information you provide us (see the 

Public Comments section below for 

more information). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Debra Bills, Field Supervisor, Arlington, 

Texas, Ecological Services Field Office, 

2005 NE Green Oaks Blvd., Suite 140, 

Arlington, Texas 76006, by telephone 

(817–277–1100), or by facsimile (817– 

277–1129). Persons who use a 

telecommunications device for the deaf 

(TDD) may call the Federal Information 

Relay Service (FIRS) at 800–877–8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Comments 

We will accept written comments and 

information during this reopened 

comment period on our proposed 

designation of critical habitat for the 

sharpnose shiner and smalleye shiner 

that was published in the Federal 

Register on August 6, 2013 (78 FR 

47612), our DEA of the proposed 

designation, and the amended required 

determinations provided in this 

document. We will consider 

information and recommendations from 

all interested parties. We are 

particularly interested in comments 

concerning: 

(1) The reasons why we should or 

should not designate habitat as ‘‘critical 

habitat’’ under section 4 of the Act (16 

U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), including whether 

there are threats to the species from 

human activity, the degree of which can 

be expected to increase due to the 

designation, and whether that increase 

in threat outweighs the benefit of 

designation such that the designation of 

critical habitat is not prudent. 

(2) Specific information on: 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS