This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains regulatory documents having general

applicability and legal effect, most of which

are keyed to and codified in the Code of

Federal Regulations, which is published under

50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by

the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of

new books are listed in the first FEDERAL

REGISTER issue of each week.

Rules and Regulations Federal Register

72545 

Vol. 79, No. 235 

Monday, December 8, 2014 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Bureau of Prisons 

28 CFR Part 551 

[BOP Docket No. 1140–F] 

RIN 1120–AB42 

Smoking/No Smoking Areas 

AGENCY: Bureau of Prisons, Justice. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the Bureau 

of Prisons (Bureau) finalizes without 

change a proposed rule that was 

published on this subject on May 12, 

2006, to revise regulations pertaining to 

smoking/no smoking in Bureau 

facilities. The revised regulations 

generally prohibit smoking in and on 

the grounds of Bureau institutions and 

offices, except as part of an authorized 

inmate religious activity; and, for 

Bureau staff and official visitors, only in 

smoking areas designated by the 

Warden. Possession of smoking 

apparatus and tobacco in any form is 

prohibited for inmates under this rule, 

unless as part of an authorized inmate 

religious activity. We intend this 

amendment to promote a clean air 

environment and to protect the health 

and safety of staff and inmates. 

DATES: This rule is effective January 7, 

2015. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sarah Qureshi, Office of General 

Counsel, Bureau of Prisons, phone (202) 

307–2105. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In this 

document, the Bureau revises 

regulations pertaining to smoking/no 

smoking for inmates in Bureau facilities. 

The revised regulations indicate that 

smoking is generally prohibited in and 

on the grounds of Bureau institutions 

and offices, with the following two 

exceptions: Smoking is permitted as 

part of an authorized inmate religious 

activity; and, for Bureau staff and 

official visitors, smoking is permitted 

only in smoking areas designated by the 

Warden. 

This rule also clarifies that possession 

of smoking apparatus and tobacco in 

any form is prohibited for inmates, 

unless as part of an authorized inmate 

religious activity. Smoking is defined as 

inhaling the smoke of any substance 

through the use of smoking apparatus 

including, but not limited to, cigars, 

cigarettes, or pipes. We intend this 

amendment to promote a clean air 

environment and to protect the health 

and safety of staff and inmates. 

A proposed rule was published on 

this subject on May 12, 2006 (71 FR 

27652). The Bureau received a total of 

66 comments. Approximately 57 of the 

comments were copies of the same six 

form letters. The remaining nine 

comments addressed issues raised in the 

six form letters. Because all the 

comments related to the same set of 

issues, we address each issue raised by 

the commenters below. 

Comment: The rule is contrary to 5 

U.S.C. 7301, E.O. 13058 (banning 

smoking of tobacco products in all 

federal buildings except—see sec. 2(b)), 

which says the order does not extend to 

residential accommodation for persons 

involuntarily residing in a federal 

government building. 

Bureau’s response: 5 U.S.C. 7301 

states only that ‘‘[t]he President may 

prescribe regulations for the conduct of 

employees in the executive branch.’’ 

Executive Order 13058, Protecting 

Federal Employees and the Public From 

Exposure to Tobacco Smoke in the 

Federal Workplace, issued on August 9, 

1997, states that the smoking of tobacco 

products is thus prohibited in all 

interior space owned, rented, or leased 

by the executive branch of the Federal 

Government, and in any outdoor areas 

under executive branch control in front 

of air intake ducts. The Executive Order 

carves out an exception to its smoking 

prohibition for any residential 

accommodation for persons voluntarily 

or involuntarily residing, on a 

temporary or long-term basis, in a 

building owned, leased, or rented by the 

Federal Government. 

Although the Executive Order 

prohibiting smoking in federal buildings 

does not extend to buildings such as 

Bureau facilities, it does not 

affirmatively preclude the Bureau from 

exercising its authority to regulate in 

this manner. The Bureau therefore has 

determined that this regulation is 

necessary to conform with the intention 

of the Executive Order to protect 

Federal Government employees and 

members of the public from exposure to 

tobacco smoke in the Federal 

workplace. 

The dangers of secondhand smoke 

exposure are well-documented. An 

August 2005 report from the American 

Lung Association states that 

secondhand smoke lingers in the air 

hours after cigarettes have been 

extinguished and can cause or 

exacerbate a wide range of adverse 

health effects, including cancer, 

respiratory infections, and asthma. 

Secondhand smoke has been classified 

by the Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) as a known cause of cancer in 

humans (Group A carcinogen). 

Secondhand smoke exposure causes 

approximately 3,400 lung cancer deaths 

and 22,700–69,600 heart disease deaths 

in adult nonsmokers in the United 

States each year. Nonsmokers exposed 

to environmental smoke were 25 

percent more likely to have coronary 

heart diseases compared to nonsmokers 

not exposed to smoke. 

Further, a June 2006 report from the 

Surgeon General concluded that 

scientific evidence indicates that there 

is no risk-free level of exposure to 

second hand smoke. Even short 

exposures to second hand smoke can 

cause blood platelets to become stickier, 

damage the lining of blood vessels, 

decrease coronary flow velocity 

reserves, and reduce heart rate 

variability, potentially increasing the 

risk of heart attack. 

Comment: The Bureau increased 

prices on other commissary items when 

it removed tobacco products from the 

commissary. 

Bureau’s response: There has been no 

policy change related to pricing of 

institution commissary items for several 

years. Prices of items in the commissary 

fluctuate on a regular basis due to 

changes in the cost to the Bureau of the 

products themselves. Any increase in 

pricing that may have been observed 

when the Bureau removed tobacco 

products from the commissaries would 

be due to such regular fluctuations. 

There was no change in the Bureau’s 

pricing policy related to the removal of 

tobacco from the commissaries. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
72546 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

Comment: Banning tobacco products 

will decrease the safety of staff. The 

price of contraband tobacco will 

increase, inciting inmate security issues. 

Bureau’s response: Previous 

regulations on inmate smoking allowed 

Wardens to prohibit smoking at their 

institutions with the concurrence of the 

Regional Director where the institution 

is located. At those institutions where 

the Warden has prohibited smoking, 

there has been no increase in assaults on 

staff. 

However, Bureau regulations on 

inmate discipline were amended, 

through a separate rulemaking 

document, to increase the severity of 

sanctions that may be imposed for 

violation of the prohibited act codes (75 

FR 76263, Dec. 8, 2010). The code 

prohibiting possession of non-hazardous 

contraband now includes smoking 

apparatus and tobacco in any form 

where prohibited. The specifically 

worded code, combined with more 

severe sanctions for violations, will 

deter possession of tobacco products in 

Bureau facilities. 

Further, the Bureau implemented 

measures to increase searches of 

employees, to further ensure that 

Bureau staff are not a source of 

contraband on Bureau grounds. In a rule 

published on June 6, 2007 (72 FR 

31178), the Bureau revised its 

regulations on searching non-inmates 

(including staff) to include random 

searches and searches using electronic 

devices other than metal detectors. This 

enhanced the Bureau’s ability to detect 

and prevent contraband, thereby 

increasing the safety of staff and inmates 

in Bureau facilities. 

Comment: The prohibition on 

smoking and possession of tobacco and 

smoking-related apparatus should also 

apply to staff. 

Bureau’s response: As a practical 

matter, smoking is a lawful activity for 

Bureau employees. In the interests of 

balancing staff morale with institution 

safety and security, the Director has 

decided to allow for the possibility of 

limited opportunities for staff smoking. 

Under current policy, Wardendesignated staff smoking areas must be 

outdoors, to minimize the impact of 

second-hand smoke inhalation. Also, 

current Bureau policy requires that 

Bureau facilities maintain staff smoking 

cessation programs, which are intended 

to further minimize the likelihood that 

tobacco or smoking apparatus will be 

introduced upon institution grounds. 

However, to ensure that persons 

visiting inmates are prohibited from 

smoking in and on the grounds of 

Bureau institutions and offices, we are 

altering the rule to state that smoking is 

permitted, in smoking areas designated 

by the Warden, only for Bureau staff and 

official visitors. 

The Bureau intends for § 551.162 (b) 

of the rule to allow smoking for noninmates only in areas designated by the 

Warden. Currently, Warden-designated 

staff smoking areas are carefully 

determined based on the unique 

circumstances at each Bureau facility. 

Comment: The Bureau violated the 

Administrative Procedure Act by 

discontinuing the sale of tobacco 

products. 

Bureau’s response: By discontinuing 

the sale of tobacco products, the Bureau 

did not violate any requirement set by 

the Administrative Procedure Act (5 

U.S.C. 551, et al.). The removal of 

tobacco products from institution 

commissaries was not a prohibition of 

inmate possession of tobacco, which 

Wardens were permitted to authorize 

under the previous regulations. The 

listing of products available for sale in 

institution commissaries is not 

appropriate subject matter for federal 

regulations because particular brands, 

items, and cost will vary frequently 

depending on market fluctuations and 

what particular products are available or 

needed in different locales or in 

institutions with different security 

levels and needs. 

Comment: The rule prohibiting 

possession of tobacco in any form is too 

broad in that it applies to snuff and/or 

chewing tobacco, which produce no 

smoke and do not implicate air 

quality—the rule should only apply to 

‘‘lighted’’ tobacco products. 

Bureau’s response: Snuff and chewing 

tobacco are also harmful to health in the 

same way that ‘‘lighted’’ tobacco 

products are. A February 13, 2006, 

report by the American Cancer Society 

(http://www.cancer.org/docroot/PED/

content/PED_10_13X_Quitting_

Smokeless_Tobacco.asp?#why_quit) 

states that smokeless tobacco can cause 

serious health problems, including 

nicotine addiction, cancer of the mouth 

and pharynx, leukoplakia, gum 

recession, bone loss around the teeth, 

and abrasion and staining of teeth. The 

Bureau is therefore committed to 

reducing these health risks in inmates 

by prohibiting use and possession of 

tobacco in any form. 

Further, inmates may attempt to 

smoke snuff and chewing tobacco if 

such products are permitted in Bureau 

facilities and smoking tobacco is not 

permitted. To prevent this disparity, the 

Bureau now prohibits all forms of 

tobacco for inmates in Bureau facilities. 

Comment: The regulation leads to 

forced medical treatment that is not 

properly implemented by qualified 

medical staff, in violation of the 

Constitution. 

Bureau’s response: The inmate 

Smoking Cessation Program is not 

‘‘forced’’ treatment. Participation in the 

program is voluntary—inmates decide 

of their own volition whether to 

participate in the program. Under 

current Bureau policy, Wardens are 

required to establish an institution 

Smoking Cessation Program consistent 

with local resources. A Smoking 

Cessation Program must, at a minimum, 

address nutrition, physical activity 

(exercise), stress management, and 

nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). 

Use of the NRT is optional, just as 

program participation is voluntary. 

Further, the programs are run by 

qualified medical staff at each 

institution. Either Bureau health 

services or psychology services staff 

coordinate Smoking Cessation Programs 

at the institution level, and are trained 

specifically to do so. 

Comment: The smoking cessation 

program is not available to indigent 

inmates. 

Bureau’s response: The Smoking 

Cessation Program is available to 

indigent inmates. Inmates may 

participate on a voluntary basis in all 

aspects of the program. There is no 

charge for any aspect of the program 

except for the nicotine replacement 

therapy, which is optional. The NRT is 

not considered medically necessary by 

health services staff, and therefore will 

not be provided to inmates who cannot 

pay for it. However, inmates without 

funds may participate in all other 

aspects of the program. 

Comment: This regulation is an 

additional punishment on inmates 

suffering from nicotine addiction. 

Bureau’s response: This regulation is 

no different from current policies and 

regulations in place that prohibit inmate 

possession of other contraband that is 

harmful to health, such as illegal drugs. 

The Bureau offers drug abuse treatment 

programs for inmates who suffer from 

drug addiction, and offers smoking 

cessation programs for inmates suffering 

from nicotine addiction. Prohibiting the 

possession of tobacco and smoking 

apparatus does not constitute 

punishment. 

Comment: The regulation is subject to 

review under SBREFA because it creates 

a black market that exceeds the 

threshold of $100,000,000. It blocks 

access to a long-standing market 

segment for legitimate businesses. The 

inmate trust fund is also impacted. 

Bureau’s response: Title 5 of the 

United States Code, section 804(1), 

requires the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) to review any federal 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 72547 

regulation which ‘‘the Administrator of 

the Office of Information and Regulatory 

Affairs of the Office of Management and 

Budget finds has resulted in or is likely 

to result in . . . (A) an annual effect on 

the economy of $100,000,000 or more.’’ 

Notwithstanding the fact that Congress 

did not intend ‘‘economy’’ to encompass 

the ‘‘black market’’ or other illegal 

business ventures, this regulation was, 

in fact, submitted to OMB for review. 

OMB found this regulation to not be 

significant under 5 U.S.C. 804(1), and 

therefore decided that it did not warrant 

further review. Therefore, even if the 

regulation has an arguable economic 

impact, the Bureau has complied with 

SBREFA by submitting it to the Office 

of Management and Budget for review 

and approval. 

Comment: This regulation creates a 

massive enforcement burden for Bureau 

staff. 

Bureau’s response: Bureau staff are 

trained to intercept contraband in all 

forms. Intercepting tobacco and smoking 

apparatus imposes no additional burden 

on Bureau staff, but may be done while 

staff perform routine searches of noninmates and their belongings, and 

routine searches of inmates, their living 

and working areas, and belongings. 

Also, the previous regulation allowed 

any Warden to decide, with the 

Regional Director’s concurrence, not to 

designate smoking areas for general use. 

Several Wardens have already made this 

choice for their facilities, and the 

Bureau has not observed any further 

enforcement burden on staff with 

relation to this change. 

Comment: The regulation 

discriminates against the mentally ill, 

who may find it difficult/impossible to 

quit smoking. 

Bureau’s response: A 2002 Psychiatric 

Services journal article entitled, 

‘‘Smoking Cessation Approaches for 

Persons With Mental Illness or 

Addictive Disorders,’’ a summary of 24 

empirical studies with results from 

1991–2001, found that the recorded 

‘‘quit rates’’ of patients with psychiatric 

disorders were similar to those of the 

general population. It was no more 

difficult for the mentally ill to quit 

smoking than it was for someone with 

no mental disorder. 

Also, mentally ill inmates are 

typically housed in no-smoking units 

already, and are permitted only limited 

time, under supervision, to visit any 

currently-existing authorized outdoor 

smoking areas. Such inmates already 

have decreased their smoking activity 

by virtue of limited access to smoking 

areas. This regulation does not, 

therefore, apply any differently to a 

mentally ill inmate than to any other 

inmate. 

Comment: The regulation creates a 

substantial burden as defined in 42 

U.S.C. 2000cc on the religious exercise 

of Native Americans in that it is not the 

least restrictive means of furthering the 

compelling government interest. 

Bureau’s response: 42 U.S.C. 2000cc 

relates to government imposition of a 

state, not Federal, ‘‘land use regulation 

in a manner that imposes a substantial 

burden on the religious exercise of a 

person’’ without demonstrating that it is 

the ‘‘least restrictive means of furthering 

[a] compelling governmental interest.’’ 

With regard to state governments, courts 

have acknowledged the application of 

this statute in a prison setting. See 

Ephraim v. Angelone, 313 F.Supp.2d 

569 (E.D.Va. 2003) (State prison’s 

refusal to provide inmate with 

vegetarian religious diet was not 

required to be analyzed under strict 

scrutiny test set forth in Religious Land 

Use and Institutionalized Persons Act 

(RLUIPA) because there was no showing 

prison was receiving federal funding, or 

that burden imposed on inmate affected 

interstate commerce, as required for Act 

to be applicable); Borzych v. Frank, 439 

F.3d 388, (C.A.7 Wis. 2006) (State 

prison procedure, prohibiting activities 

and literature advocating racial or 

ethnic supremacy or purity, was not 

overbroad and therefore not substantial 

in relation to its proper application 

under RLUIPA). 

The Bureau’s action in this document 

is a Federal regulation, not a state 

regulation, and therefore does not 

violate RLUIPA. Further, the regulation 

permits smoking as part of an 

authorized inmate religious activity, and 

therefore does not impact inmate 

religious activity. 

The statute governing Federal action 

in this context is the Religious Freedom 

Restoration Act (42 U.S.C. 2000bb, et 

seq.) (RFRA). Although the regulation 

does not burden inmate religious 

activity, we note that preserving inmate 

health has been found to constitute a 

‘‘compelling penological interest’’ under 

both RLUIPA and RFRA that would 

override a burden on inmate religious 

activity, if such a burden existed. 

Ragland v. Angelone, 420 F.Supp.2d 

507 (W.D.Va. 2006) (Virginia’s inmate 

grooming policy did not violate 

RLUIPA; policy furthered compelling 

penological interests in security, staff 

safety, inmate identification, and inmate 

health.); See also Weir v. Nix, C.A.8 

(1997), 114 F.3d 817 (Prison’s 

prohibition of personal property in 

prison yard did not place ‘‘substantial 

burden’’ on inmate’s rights under RFRA, 

he was free to use his Bible in his cell.); 

Davie v. Wingard, (1997) 958 F.Supp. 

1244, 166 A.L.R. Fed. 709 (Prison 

officials’ safety, security, and discipline 

concerns presented ‘‘compelling 

government interest’’ justifying hair 

length regulations challenged under 

RFRA.). 

For the aforementioned reasons, the 

Bureau finalizes this rule without 

change. 

Executive Order 12866 

This regulation has been drafted and 

reviewed in accordance with Executive 

Order 12866, ‘‘Regulatory Planning and 

Review’’, section 1(b), Principles of 

Regulation. The Director of the Bureau 

of Prisons has determined that this rule 

is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 

under Executive Order 12866, section 

3(f), and accordingly this rule has not 

been reviewed by the Office of 

Management and Budget. 

Executive Order 13132 

This regulation will not have 

substantial direct effects on the States, 

on the relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. Therefore, in 

accordance with Executive Order 13132, 

it is determined that this rule does not 

have sufficient federalism implications 

to warrant the preparation of a 

Federalism Assessment. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Director of the Bureau of Prisons, 

in accordance with the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), has 

reviewed this regulation and by 

approving it certifies that this regulation 

will not have a significant economic 

impact upon a substantial number of 

small entities for the following reasons: 

This rule pertains to the correctional 

management of offenders committed to 

the custody of the Attorney General or 

the Director of the Bureau of Prisons, 

and its economic impact is limited to 

the Bureau’s appropriated funds. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995 

This rule will not result in the 

expenditure by State, local and tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of $100,000,000 or more 

in any one year, and it will not 

significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. Therefore, no actions were 

deemed necessary under the provisions 

of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
72548 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 235 / Monday, December 8, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 

This rule is not a major rule as 

defined by § 804 of the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 

1996. This rule will not result in an 

annual effect on the economy of 

$100,000,000 or more; a major increase 

in costs or prices; or significant adverse 

effects on competition, employment, 

investment, productivity, innovation, or 

on the ability of United States-based 

companies to compete with foreignbased companies in domestic and 

export markets. Inmate smoking has 

been gradually decreasing in Bureau 

facilities since publication of the final 

rule in 2004 (see 69 FR 13737, Mar. 24, 

2004), which restricted smoking to 

authorized outdoor areas except for 

authorized religious activities, and 

allowed Wardens to choose, with 

Regional Director concurrence, not to 

designate smoking areas at all for 

general inmate use (except for 

authorized religious activity). The 

determination to remove tobacco 

products from sale in the inmate 

commissaries likewise occurred several 

years ago when it became apparent that 

inmate smoking was decreasing. 

Therefore, the economic impact is 

expected to be minimal. 

List of Subjects in 28 CFR Part 551 

Prisoners. 

Charles E. Samuels, Jr., 

Director, Bureau of Prisons. 

Under rulemaking authority vested in 

the Attorney General in 5 U.S.C. 301; 28 

U.S.C. 509, 510 and delegated to the 

Director, Bureau of Prisons in 28 CFR 

0.96, we amend 28 CFR part 551 as set 

forth below: 

Subchapter C—Institutional 

Management 

PART 551—MISCELLANEOUS 

■ 1. The authority citation for 28 CFR 

part 551 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 18 U.S.C. 1512, 

3621, 3622, 3624, 4001, 4005, 4042, 4081, 

4082 (Repealed in part as to offenses 

committed on or after November 1, 1987), 

4161–4166 (Repealed as to offenses 

committed on or after November 1, 1987), 

5006–5024 (Repealed October 12, 1984 as to 

offenses committed after that date), 5039; 28 

U.S.C. 509, 510; Pub. L. 99–500 (sec. 209); 

Attorney General’s May 1, 1995 Guidelines 

for Victim and Witness Assistance. 

■ 2. Revise subpart N to read as follows: 

Subpart N—Smoking/No Smoking 

Areas 

Sec. 

551.160 Purpose and scope. 

551.161 Definitions. 

551.162 Smoking generally prohibited. 

551.163 Possession of smoking apparatus 

and tobacco prohibited. 

§ 551.160 Purpose and scope. 

To advance towards becoming a clean 

air environment and to protect the 

health and safety of staff and inmates, 

the Bureau of Prisons will restrict areas 

and circumstances where smoking is 

permitted within its institutions and 

offices. 

§ 551.161 Definitions. 

For the purposes of this subpart, 

smoking is defined as inhaling the 

smoke of any substance through the use 

of smoking apparatus including, but not 

limited to, cigars, cigarettes, or pipes. 

§ 551.162 Smoking generally prohibited. 

Smoking is generally prohibited in 

and on the grounds of Bureau 

institutions and offices, with the 

following two exceptions: 

(a) Smoking is permitted as part of an 

authorized inmate religious activity; and 

(b) For Bureau staff and official 

visitors, smoking is permitted only in 

smoking areas designated by the 

Warden. 

§ 551.163 Possession of smoking 

apparatus and tobacco prohibited. 

Possession of smoking apparatus and 

tobacco in any form is prohibited for 

inmates, unless as part of an authorized 

inmate religious activity. 

[FR Doc. 2014–28620 Filed 12–5–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–05–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R10–OAR–2014–0790; FRL–9918–76– 

Region 10] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Washington; Update to Materials 

Incorporated by Reference 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Final rule; administrative 

change. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is updating the materials 

that are incorporated by reference (IBR) 

into the Washington State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). The 

regulations affected by this update have 

been previously submitted by the 

Washington State Department of 

Ecology (Ecology) and approved by the 

EPA. In this action, the EPA is also 

notifying the public of a correction to a 

typographical error the IBR tables. This 

update affects the SIP materials that are 

available for public inspection at the 

National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA), the Air and 

Radiation Docket and Information 

Center located at EPA Headquarters in 

Washington, DC, and the EPA Regional 

Office. 

DATES: This action is effective December 

8, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: SIP materials which are 

incorporated by reference into 40 CFR 

part 52 are available for inspection at 

the following locations: Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 10, Office of 

Air, Waste, and Toxics (AWT–150), 

1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101; 

the Air and Radiation Docket and 

Information Center, Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1301 Constitution 

Avenue NW., Room Number 3334, EPA 

West Building, Washington, DC 20460; 

or the National Archives and Records 

Administration (NARA). For 

information on the availability of this 

material at NARA, call (202) 741–6030, 

or go to: http://www.archives.gov/

federal_register/code_of_federal_

regulations/ibr_locations.html. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff 

Hunt, EPA Region 10, (206) 553–0256, 

hunt.jeff@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The SIP is a living document which 

a state revises as necessary to address its 

unique air pollution problems. 

Therefore, the EPA from time to time, 

must take action on SIP revisions 

containing new and/or revised 

regulations as being part of the SIP. On 

May 22, 1997, the EPA revised the 

procedures for incorporating by 

reference Federally-approved SIPs, as a 

result of consultations between the EPA 

and the Office of the Federal Register 

(OFR) (62 FR 27968). The description of 

the revised SIP document, IBR 

procedures and ‘‘Identification of plan’’ 

format are discussed in further detail in 

the May 22, 1997 Federal Register 

document. On March 20, 2013, the EPA 

published a Federal Register beginning 

the new IBR procedure for Washington 

(78 FR 17108). 

Since the publication of the last IBR 

update, the EPA approved into the 

Washington SIP the regulatory changes 

listed below. The EPA also reorganized 

the content and order of the tables 

contained in 40 CFR 52.2470 paragraph 

(c) ‘‘EPA approved regulations’’ in order 

to acknowledge the EPA’s approval of 

Washington Administrative Code 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES