59250 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 187 / Thursday, September 26, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

• is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address 

disproportionate human health or 

environmental effects with practical, 

appropriate, and legally permissible 

methods under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the State, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

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. 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 Clean 

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of 

this action must be filed in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the 

appropriate circuit by November 25, 

2013. 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)). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter], Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: August 22, 2013. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code 

of Federal Regulations 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 F—California 

■ 2. Section 52.220 is amended by 

adding paragraph (c)(430) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.220 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(430) New and amended regulations 

for the following APCD was submitted 

on June 11, 2013 by the Governor’s 

Designee. 

(i) Incorporation by Reference. 

(A) South Coast Air Quality 

Management District. 

(1) Rule 444, ‘‘Open Burning,’’ 

adopted on May 3, 2013. 

(2) Rule 445, ‘‘Wood Burning 

Devices,’’ adopted on May 3, 2013. 

[FR Doc. 2013–23252 Filed 9–25–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R06–OAR–2006–0600; FRL–990–30– 

Region 6] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Texas; 

Revisions to New Source Review 

(NSR) State Implementation Plan (SIP); 

Emergency Orders 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to 

disapprove revisions to the State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) for the State 

of Texas that relate to Emergency 

Orders. This includes portions of SIP 

revisions that relate to Emergency 

Orders that were submitted by Texas on 

August 31, 1993; December 10, 1998; 

February 1, 2006; and July 17, 2006. 

EPA is disapproving these revisions 

because these regulations do not meet 

the requirements of the Clean Air Act 

(the ‘‘Act’’ or ‘‘CAA’’), EPA regulations, 

and applicable policy and guidance. 

EPA is taking this action under section 

110 and parts C and D of Title I of the 

Act. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

October 28, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R06–OAR–2006–0600. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the http://www.regulations.gov Web 

site. Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., Confidential Business Information 

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 http://

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Air Permits Section (6PD–R), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 

Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 

75202–2733. To inspect the hard copy 

materials, please schedule an 

appointment with the person listed in 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

paragraph below or Mr. Bill Deese at 

214–665–7253. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Ashley Mohr, Air Permits Section (6PD– 

R), Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, 

Dallas, Texas 75202–2733, telephone 

(214) 665–7289; fax number (214) 665– 

6762; email address mohr.ashley@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ means EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. What action is EPA taking? 

II. What is the background? 

A. Summary of Our Proposed Action 

B. Summary of the Submittals Addressed 

in this Final Action 

III. Responses to Comments 

IV. What are the grounds for this disapproval 

action of the Texas Emergency Orders 

Program? 

V. Final Action 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is taking final action to 

disapprove the Texas Emergency Orders 

Program as submitted by Texas on 

August 31, 1993, as revised by the 

December 10, 1998, February 1, 2006, 

and July 17, 2006 SIP revision 

submittals. These submittals include the 

initial adoption of 30 TAC 116.410 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 187 / Thursday, September 26, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 59251 

through 116.418, the initial adoption of 

30 TAC Chapter 35, and subsequent 

revisions to sections within these 

regulations. EPA has concluded that the 

Emergency Orders Program contained in 

these regulations does not meet the 

requirements of the Act and the EPA’s 

New Source Review (NSR) regulations. 

EPA proposed disapproval of the 

above SIP revision submittals on 

February 5, 2013 (78 FR 8076). We 

accepted comments from the public on 

this proposal from February 5, 2013 

until March 7, 2013. A summary of the 

comments received and our evaluation 

and response thereof is discussed in 

section III below. In the proposal and in 

the Technical Support Document (TSD), 

we described our basis for the actions 

identified above. The reader should 

refer to the proposal, the TSD, section 

IV of this notice, and the Response to 

Comments in section III of this notice 

for additional information relating to 

our final action. 

EPA is disapproving the submitted 

Texas Emergency Orders Program as not 

meeting all the requirements applicable 

to New Source Review (NSR). 

Specifically, the issuance of Emergency 

Orders to projects that are subject to 

Major NSR fail to meet the requirements 

of the CAA and the implementing 

regulations as follows: 

• The Emergency Orders Program 

does not satisfy the public participation 

required for NSR at the time the 

Emergency Order is issued; and 

• The Emergency Orders Program 

does not meet the requirement that a 

NSR permit be issued prior to the 

commencement of construction of a 

Major Source. 

The provisions in these submittals 

relating to the Texas Emergency Orders 

Program that include the 30 TAC 

Chapter 116.410 through 116.418 and 

Chapter 35 regulatory provisions were 

not submitted to meet a mandatory 

requirement of the Act. Therefore, this 

final action to disapprove the submitted 

Texas Emergency Orders Program does 

not trigger a sanctions or Federal 

Implementation Plan clock. See CAA 

section l79(a). 

II. What is the background? 

A. Summary of Our Proposed Action 

On February 5, 2013, EPA proposed to 

disapprove revisions to the SIP 

submitted by the State of Texas that 

relate to the Emergency Orders Program. 

Texas submitted these SIP revisions on 

August 31, 1993; December 10, 1998; 

February 1, 2006; and July 17, 2006. 

Table 1 summarizes these SIP revision 

submittals and their associated affected 

provisions that we proposed to 

disapprove in our February 5, 2013 

action. 

Our February 5, 2013 proposal 

provides a detailed description of the 

submittals and the rationale for EPA’s 

proposed action, together with a 

discussion of the opportunity to 

comment. The public comment period 

for this action closed on March 7, 2013. 

B. Summary of the Submittals 

Addressed in This Final Action 

Tables 1 and 2 below summarize the 

changes that are in the SIP revision 

submittals. A summary of EPA’s 

evaluation of each section and the basis 

for this final action is discussed in 

sections III through V of this notice. The 

TSD (which is located in the docket) 

includes a detailed evaluation of the 

submittals. 

TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF PENDING SIP SUBMITTALS ADDRESSED IN THIS ACTION

Description of SIP submittal 

Date 

submitted to 

EPA 

Date 

adopted by 

State 

Date 

effective as 

State rule 

Sections related to emergency orders 

Original Recodification of 

Chapter 116.

8/31/1993 8/16/1993 9/13/1993 Chapter 116: Submittal of sections 116.410 through 116.418. 

Emergency and Temporary 

Orders.

12/10/1998 11/18/1998 12/10/1998 Chapter 35: Submittal of sections 35.1–35.3, 35.11–35.13, 35.21– 

35.30, and 35.801–35.809. 

Chapter 116: Revisions to section 116.410; Repeal of sections 

116.411–116.418, which were replaced by sections 35.802–35.809. 

Federal New Source Review 

Permits Rules.

2/1/2006 1/11/2006 2/1/2006 Chapter 116: Recodification of § 116.410 to § 116.1200. 

Revision to Provisions for 

Emergency Orders.

7/17/2006 6/28/2006 7/19/2006 Chapter 35: Revisions to sections 35.801, 35.802, 35.804, 35.805, 

35,807, and 35.808. 

TABLE 2—SUMMARY OF THE INDIVIDUAL REVISIONS TO EACH SECTION EVALUATED

Section—title 

Date 

submitted to 

EPA 

Adopted by 

State 

Effective as 

State rule Comments 

30 TAC Chapter 35—Emergency and Temporary Orders and Permits; Temporary Suspension or Amendment of Permits Conditions 

Subchapter A—Purpose, Applicability, and Definitions 

Section 35.1—Purpose .................................................... 12/10/1998 11/18/1998 12/10/1998 Initial adoption. 

Section 35.2—Applicability ............................................... 12/10/1998 11/18/1998 12/10/1998 Initial adoption. 

Section 35.3—Definitions ................................................. 12/10/1998 11/18/1998 12/10/1998 Initial adoption. 

Subchapter B—Authority of the Executive Director 

Section 35.11—Purpose and Applicability ....................... 12/10/1998 11/18/1998 12/10/1998 Initial adoption. 

Section 35.12—Authority of the Executive Director ......... 12/10/1998 11/18/1998 12/10/1998 Initial adoption. 

Section 35.13—Eligibility of the Executive Director ......... 12/10/1998 11/18/1998 12/10/1998 Initial adoption. 

Subchapter C—General Provisions 

Section 35.21—Action by the Commission or Executive 

Director.

12/10/1998 11/18/1998 12/10/1998 Initial adoption. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

59252 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 187 / Thursday, September 26, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

TABLE 2—SUMMARY OF THE INDIVIDUAL REVISIONS TO EACH SECTION EVALUATED—Continued 

Section—title 

Date 

submitted to 

EPA 

Adopted by 

State 

Effective as 

State rule Comments 

Section 35.22—Term and Renewal of Orders ................. 12/10/1998 11/18/1998 12/10/1998 Initial adoption. 

§ 35.23—Effect of Orders ................................................. 12/10/1998 11/18/1998 12/10/1998 Initial adoption. 

Section 35.24—Application for Emergency or Temporary 

Orders.

12/10/1998 11/18/1998 12/10/1998 Initial adoption. 

Section 35.25—Notice and Opportunity for Hearing ....... 12/10/1998 11/18/1998 12/10/1998 Initial adoption. 

Section 35.26—Contents of Emergency or Temporary 

Orders.

12/10/1998 11/18/1998 12/10/1998 Initial adoption. 

Section 35.27—Hearing Required ................................... 12/10/1998 11/18/1998 12/10/1998 Initial adoption. 

Section 35.28—Hearing Requests ................................... 12/10/1998 11/18/1998 12/10/1998 Initial adoption. 

§ 35.29—Procedures for a Hearing .................................. 12/10/1998 11/18/1998 12/10/1998 Initial adoption. 

Section 35.30—Application Fees ..................................... 12/10/1998 11/18/1998 12/10/1998 Initial adoption. 

Subchapter K—Air Orders 1

Section 35.801—Emergency Orders Because of Catastrophe.12/10/1998 

7/17/2006 

11/18/1998 

6/28/2006 

12/10/1998 

7/19/2006 

Initial adoption. 

Revisions to section 35.801. 

§§ 35.802—Application for an Emergency Order ............ 8/31/1993 8/16/1993 9/13/1993 Initial adoption as section 116.411. 

12/10/1998 11/18/1998 12/10/1998 • Redesignated to section 35.802; 

• Revisions to introductory paragraph; 

• Revisions to paragraphs (1)–(8); 

• New paragraph (9); and 

• Redesignate former paragraph (9) to 

paragraph (10) with revisions. 

7/17/2006 6/28/2006 7/19/2006 Revisions to introductory paragraph (1) 

and paragraph (5). 

Section 35.803—Public Notification ................................. 8/31/1993 8/16/1993 9/13/1993 Initial adoption as section 116.412. 

12/10/1998 11/18/1998 12/10/1998 • Redesignated to section 35.803; and 

• Revisions to introductory paragraph. 

Section 35.804—Issuance of an Emergency Order ........ 12/10/1998 11/18/1998 12/10/1998 Initial adoption. 

7/17/2006 6/28/2006 7/19/2006 Revision to paragraphs (1) and (1)(C). 

Section 35.805—Contents of an Emergency Order ........ 8/31/1993 8/16/1993 9/13/1993 Initial adoption as section 116.415. 

12/10/1998 11/18/1998 12/10/1998 Redesignated to section 35.805; and 

Revision to introductory paragraph and 

paragraphs (1)–(4). 

7/17/2006 6/28/2006 7/19/2006 • Reorganization of paragraph (3) to 

paragraphs (3), (3)(A), and (3)(B); 

• New paragraph 3)(C); 

• New paragraph (4); and 

• Redesignation of existing paragraph (4) 

to paragraph (5) with revisions. 

Section 35.806—Requirement to Apply for a Permit or 

Modification.

8/31/1993 

12/10/1998 

8/16/1993 

11/18/1998 

9/13/1993 

12/10/1998 

Initial adoption as § 116.416. 

• Redesignated to section 35.806; and 

• Revisions to introductory paragraph. 

Section 35.807—Affirmation of an Emergency Order ..... 8/31/1993 8/16/1993 9/13/1993 Initial adoption as section 116.414. 

12/10/1998 11/18/1998 12/10/1998 • Redesignated to section 35.807; and 

• Revisions to the introductory paragraph, paragraphs (1)–(3); 

• New paragraph (4); 

• Redesignation of former (4)–(5) to 

paragraphs (5)–(6) with revisions. 

7/17/2006 6/28/2006 7/19/2006 • Revisions to paragraph (1). 

• Reorganization of paragraph (5) into 

paragraphs (5), (5)(A), and (5)(B); and 

• New paragraph (5)(C). 

Section 35.808—Modification of an Emergency Order ... 8/31/1993 8/16/1993 9/13/1993 Initial adoption as section 116.417. 

12/10/1998 11/18/1998 12/10/1998 • Redesignated to section 35.808; and 

• Revisions to paragraphs (1)–(3). 

7/17/2006 6/28/2006 7/19/2006 Revision to paragraph (1). 

Section 35.809—Setting Aside an Emergency Order ..... 8/31/1993 8/16/1993 9/13/1993 Adopted as § 116.418. 

12/10/1998 11/18/1998 12/10/1998 • Redesignated to section 35.809; and 

• Revision to introductory paragraph. 

30 TAC Chapter 116—Control of Air Pollution by Permits for New Construction or Modification 

Subchapter K—Emergency Orders 

Section 116.1200—Applicability ....................................... 8/31/1993 8/16/1993 9/13/1993 Initial adoption as section 116.410. 

12/10/1998 11/18/1998 12/10/1998 Revised introductory paragraph. 

2/1/2006 1/11/2006 2/1/2006 Redesignated to section 116.1200. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 187 / Thursday, September 26, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 59253 

1On August 18, 1993, sections 116.411 through 

116.418 were adopted under Chapter 116, 

Subchapter E—Emergency Orders. On November 

18, 1998, these regulations were replaced with 

sections 35.802 through 35.809 and placed in 

Chapter 35, Subchapter K. 2As part of this final rulemaking, we would like 

to provide clarification that a SIP is not limited only 

to provisions that address criteria pollutants and 

their precursors. Our intent in mentioning the scope 

of the SIP in our proposal (78 FR 8076, February 

5, 2013) was only to differentiate between the air 

and non-air related provisions contained in the 

August 31, 1993, December 10, 1998, February 1, 

2006, and July 17, 2006 SIP revision submittals. 

With this rulemaking, we are providing clarification 

that the SIP is limited to provisions that address air 

quality; therefore, the non-air portions of the SIP 

submittals received from Texas were returned to the 

state. 

In general, the regulations governing 

Emergency Orders are found in 30 TAC 

Chapter 35—Emergency and Temporary 

Orders and Permits; Temporary 

Suspension or Amendment of Permit 

Conditions. These regulations provide 

the process by which the Texas 

Commission on Environmental Quality 

(TCEQ) may issue a Temporary Order, 

Emergency Order, Mandatory Order, 

Permissive Order, and Prohibitory Order 

and include provisions that apply to 

both air orders and non-air orders. As 

part of this action, we are disapproving 

only those portions that are applicable 

to the issuance of air Emergency Orders. 

As noted in our proposed action on 

February 5, 2013, EPA returned the nonair portions of the aforementioned 

submittals to the State. Under the CAA, 

SIPs can only include provisions 

addressing air quality, so the portions of 

the Texas submittals related to non-air 

orders cannot be included in the SIP.2

Today, EPA is disapproving the 

regulations identified in Table 2 above, 

except for provisions that do not relate 

to the air quality requirements of the 

Act. EPA returned the following non-air 

portions of the submitted rules to the 

State: 30 TAC 35.13; 35.24(b) and (e)(6)– 

(7); and 35.25(e)(1)–(8) and (11)–(15). 

Other state and local agencies operate 

programs similar to the Emergency 

Orders Program. In these cases, the 

regulations containing the provisions 

related to those programs are located 

within the states’ air quality permitting 

regulations, not in the SIP. EPA may 

exercise its enforcement discretion on a 

case-by-case basis to evaluate the owner 

or operator’s proposed action in 

response to a catastrophe and utilize 

enforcement discretion to allow for 

appropriate immediate actions to 

minimize impacts and restore the 

sources to full operation. 

III. Responses to Comments 

The Federal Register proposing 

disapproval of these SIP revisions was 

published on February 5, 2013 at 78 FR 

8076, and the public comment period 

closed on March 7, 2013. In response to 

our proposal, we received comments 

from the following: Baker Botts, L.L.P. 

on behalf of Business Coalition for 

Clean Air Appeal Group (BCCA); Baker 

Botts, L.L.P. on behalf of Texas Industry 

Project (TIP); and the Texas Commission 

on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). EPA 

has summarized the comments below; 

the complete comment letters received 

are available for review in the docket for 

this rulemaking. 

Comment 1: TCEQ comments that the 

Emergency Orders rules are not 

intended to substitute for the SIPapproved NSR permitting processes, 

and the rules require that the regulated 

entities that are issued an Emergency 

Order are required to undergo the NSR 

permitting processing on a specific 

timeframe to obtain necessary NSR 

authorizations. 

Response: EPA agrees that the 

Emergency Orders rules are not 

submitted as a substitute for the current 

SIP-approved NSR permitting process. 

However, the issuance of an Emergency 

Order under the submitted program 

precedes the NSR permitting process 

and authorizes construction prior to the 

SIP-approved NSR permitting process 

occurring. The CAA does not provide an 

option to authorize construction prior to 

the completion of the NSR permitting 

process. While the submitted rules 

require that a source obtain the 

necessary NSR authorization(s) within a 

specified timeframe, the initial 

authorization via the Emergency Order 

allows a source to commence 

construction prior to the source 

undergoing the required NSR permitting 

process. Because the issued Emergency 

Order is the initial preconstruction 

authorization, the program must be 

evaluated to determine if it meets the 

applicable requirements for NSR. 

Comment 2: TCEQ comments that the 

review of Emergency Orders 

applications and the orders themselves 

ensure or require compliance with the 

requirement that any construction or 

modification will not interfere with the 

attainment or maintenance of the 

NAAQS or violate applicable portions of 

the control strategy. TCEQ further 

comments that case-by-case 

enforcement discretion does not have 

the same protective outcome for the 

environment as the Emergency Orders 

Program and does not satisfy the public 

participation required for either major 

or minor NSR in the Clean Air Act. 

Response: EPA is not disputing the 

merits of the technical review process 

that TCEQ facilitates as part of the 

Emergency Orders Program. However, 

Texas submitted the Emergency Orders 

Program as a revision to the State’s SIP. 

Therefore, as part of this action we are 

evaluating the Emergency Orders 

Program to determine if it is consistent 

with the applicable CAA requirements, 

EPA regulations, and applicable policy 

and guidance. 

EPA does not agree that the case-bycase enforcement discretion approach 

described in our proposed action does 

not have the same protective outcome 

for the environment as the Texas 

Emergency Orders Program. On page 78 

FR 8081 of our proposed action, we 

described a real-world approach of 

applying the state-only Emergency 

Orders Program, including the review 

process outlined in the program rules, 

with case-by-case EPA enforcement 

discretion. This described approach 

would maintain the elements of the 

Texas Emergency Orders Program 

technical review and couple it with the 

EPA’s case-by-case evaluation of the 

owner or operator’s proposed action in 

response to a catastrophe. Therefore, the 

approach discussed by EPA in our 

proposal would not be any less 

protective than a stand-alone Emergency 

Orders Program and can still allow for 

facilities to take appropriate immediate 

actions to bring a source back up to full 

operation and minimize additional 

impacts resulting from the catastrophe. 

In response to TCEQ’s statement 

regarding public participation 

requirements and enforcement 

discretion, the public participation 

requirements cited by EPA in our 

proposed action as the basis of our 

disapproval are applicable to SIP 

revisions that are submitted to EPA for 

review and approval into the SIP, and 

would not apply to our proposed 

utilization of EPA’s enforcement 

discretion. As stated previously, on a 

case-by-case basis EPA would evaluate 

proposed actions in response to a 

catastrophe and would utilize its 

enforcement discretion to allow for 

appropriate immediate actions to 

minimize impacts and restore the 

sources to full operation. 

Comment 3: TCEQ comments that the 

case-by-case approach described by EPA 

in the proposed action does not provide 

legal certainty of approved rules and 

forces companies to evaluate the costs of 

the risks of violating the CAA 

provisions at times when quick action is 

necessary. TCEQ states that the 

Emergency Orders rules allow regulated 

entities to obtain needed authorizations 

for immediate actions in response to 

natural disasters and other defined 

catastrophes while mitigating the 

economic risks regulated entities have 

to calculate and consider from fines and 

penalties associated with unauthorized 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

59254 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 187 / Thursday, September 26, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

3Rather, the orders showed that companies were 

allowed to construct and operate without prior 

public notice, and prior to the issuance of a SIPapproved permit. For example, one order (94–0722– 

AIR) allowed a facility to construct, operate, shut 

down, and dismantle two temporary boilers at a 

polypropylene unit at a chemical plant. The public 

was provided notice of the Emergency Order four 

days after the boilers were dismantled. The three 

orders submitted by Texas are available for review 

in the docket of this rulemaking. 

4 In the December 10, 1998 SIP revision submittal, 

the record indicates that while it is not anticipated 

for most situations it is possible that construction 

at a facility in response to a catastrophe could 

trigger Major NSR. The record also indicates that 

the issuance of an Emergency Order to authorize 

Major NSR actions in response to a catastrophe 

under the proposed program is possible. 

5The Minor NSR requirements for public 

participation are found at 40 CFR 51.161, and 

require prior to construction or modification the 

availability for public inspection of information 

regarding the construction (including the State’s 

analysis of the effect on air quality), a 30-day period 

for submittal of public comment, and a notice by 

prominent advertisement in the area affected. EPA 

recognizes a state’s ability to tailor the scope of its 

Minor NSR program as necessary to achieve and 

maintain the NAAQS. See 77 FR 74140. 

air emissions that could hinder 

necessary immediate actions. 

Response: The practice described in 

our proposal notice is simply a 

description of state-EPA interaction 

utilized by sources located in other 

states. Companies in those states are not 

required to utilize this practice, and can 

use available SIP-approved permitting 

mechanisms to address their needs. 

Similarly, companies in Texas can 

address their needs using permitting 

mechanisms available in the Texas SIP. 

Texas submitted the Emergency 

Orders Program as a revision to the 

State’s SIP. Therefore, EPA is evaluating 

the SIP revision submittal to determine 

if the program meets the requirements of 

the CAA, EPA regulations, and 

applicable policy and guidance. In the 

case where a submitted SIP revision, 

like the Texas Emergency Orders 

Program, does not meet the applicable 

CAA requirements or is inconsistent 

with EPA regulations, policy, or 

guidance, we cannot approve that 

revision into a SIP. 

Comment 4: TCEQ indicates that they 

had previously provided various 

documents to EPA during informal 

discussions to illustrate how the 

Emergency Orders rules are compliant 

with the CAA, and that they can provide 

this information again, if necessary. 

Response: EPA did receive from Texas 

three orders signed by the TCEQ 

Commissioners affirming Emergency 

Orders previously issued by the 

Executive Director of the TCEQ. These 

documents were not persuasive in 

demonstrating that the Emergency 

Orders Program met the requirements of 

the CAA, as described in Section IV of 

this notice.3

Comment 5: TCEQ notes that EPA has 

approved similar rules for other states to 

address emergency conditions, 

including the rules for New Mexico. 

Response: EPA is currently evaluating 

the rules currently approved into the 

New Mexico SIP to determine what 

action, if any, is needed to ensure that 

the State’s SIP is consistent with the 

applicable CAA requirements, EPA 

regulations, and applicable policy and 

guidance. If it is determined that some 

action is needed regarding the New 

Mexico SIP, EPA will address that in a 

separate action and rulemaking. This 

final action addresses only those 

aforementioned SIP revision submittals 

submitted by Texas related to the State’s 

Emergency Orders Program. 

Comment 6: BCCA and TIP comment 

that the Emergency Orders Program 

satisfies all statutory requirements for 

SIP approval, including compliance 

with the NAAQS, and will often result 

in a facility that is issued an Emergency 

Order being subject to more stringent 

requirements than those that might 

otherwise be required. 

Response: We do not agree that the 

Emergency Orders Program satisfies 

statutory requirements for SIP approval. 

As detailed in our proposed action, the 

proposed SIP revisions related to 

Emergency Orders do not meet all of the 

requirements applicable to NSR. 

Specifically, the issuance of Emergency 

Orders to projects that are subject to 

Major NSR fails to satisfy the public 

participation required for NSR at the 

time the order is issued and does not 

meet the requirement that a NSR permit 

be issued prior to the commencement of 

construction of a Major Source. The 

basis of our disapproval, as outlined in 

our proposed action, is that the 

Emergency Orders Program fails to meet 

these NSR requirements. 

Comment 7: BCCA and TIP comment 

that many, if not most, projects eligible 

for an Emergency Order may not reflect 

a new major stationary source or a major 

modification, and that they are unaware 

of a situation in which an Emergency 

Order has been used to circumvent 

major NSR requirements. The 

commenters also state that Emergency 

Orders Program has been an appropriate 

complement to the minor NSR 

permitting requirements where prompt 

actions are necessary in response to a 

catastrophe. BCCA and TIP further 

comment that if EPA disapproves the 

Emergency Orders Program on the basis 

of Major NSR concerns, that EPA would 

be making the minor NSR program 

subject to the same requirements for SIP 

approval as Major NSR programs. The 

commenters state that if EPA were to 

identify a proper basis to disapprove the 

program, EPA should do so to the most 

limited extent possible. BCCA and TIP 

reference a recent court decision that 

indicated that in cases where EPA had 

concerns that a state program would 

enable circumvention of Major NSR 

requirements, ‘‘EPA might have made 

use of its conditional approval 

authority’’ rather than disapproving the 

entire program. 

Response: Under the submitted 

provisions found in 30 TAC Chapter 35, 

the TCEQ may issue an order under its 

Emergency Orders Program that 

authorizes immediate action for the 

addition, replacement, or repair of 

facilities, control equipment, or the 

repair or replacement of roads, bridges, 

and other infrastructure whenever a 

catastrophe necessitates such 

construction and emissions otherwise 

precluded under the Texas Clean Air 

Act. See 30 TAC 35.801. The Emergency 

Orders Program SIP revisions submitted 

by Texas for review by EPA do not limit 

the program solely to Minor NSR 

actions. The submitted SIP revisions 

and the proposed regulations contained 

in the submittals do not provide any 

indication that the program is limited 

only to Minor NSR.4 Therefore, EPA’s 

evaluation of the SIP revisions includes 

a comparison with Major NSR 

requirements. As noted in our proposed 

action, the Emergency Orders Program 

does not meet all applicable 

requirements for Major NSR. 

We do not agree that the disapproval 

of the Emergency Orders Program on the 

basis of our Major NSR concerns would 

be making the State’s Minor NSR 

program subject to the same standards 

for SIP approval for Major NSR. The 

Emergency Orders Program as submitted 

by Texas applies to both Major and 

Minor NSR and, consequently, must be 

evaluated against all applicable federal 

requirements, including those for both 

Major and Minor NSR. Further, as we 

noted in our proposed action, the Minor 

NSR program requires public 

participation as part of the construction 

permitting process, see 40 CFR 51.161, 

which the Emergency Orders Program 

does not.5

Regarding conditional approvals, the 

CAA does provide that EPA may 

conditionally approve a SIP submittal 

‘‘based on a commitment of the state to 

adopt specific enforceable measures by 

a date certain, but not later than 1 year 

after the date of approval of the plan 

revision.’’ See CAA 110(k)(4). However, 

in order to conditionally approve the 

SIP revisions related to the Emergency 

Orders Program, we would need a 

commitment from Texas to make 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 187 / Thursday, September 26, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 59255 

revisions to the submitted rules, as 

necessary, to address our concerns 

(including the concerns outlined in our 

proposed disapproval notice) and meet 

all applicable requirements. To date, 

EPA has not received any such 

commitment from Texas that would 

allow for EPA to use its conditional 

approval authority. 

Comment 8: BCCA and TIP comment 

that they believe that the Emergency 

Orders Program is more stringent than 

the enforcement discretion approach 

recommended by EPA. The commenters 

state that an enforcement discretion 

approach provides no standards for an 

agency to allow construction or 

modification in response to a 

catastrophe; whereas, the Emergency 

Orders Program has specific 

requirements that must be met by an 

issued Emergency Order. 

Response: The EPA’s enforcement 

discretion approach and the TCEQ’s 

Emergency Orders Program both 

provide a process for the agencies to 

follow when evaluating actions 

proposed by emission sources in 

response to catastrophes, including 

natural disasters. Both approaches 

achieve the overall goal of coordinating 

a review process in order to allow the 

source to take appropriate actions in 

response to a catastrophe. The use of the 

different processes is not an issue of 

stringency. It is an issue of the most 

effective means available to the agencies 

to quickly achieve the overall goal. 

IV. What are the grounds for this 

disapproval action of the Texas 

Emergency Orders Program? 

EPA is disapproving the revisions to 

the SIP submitted by the State of Texas 

that relate to the Emergency Orders 

Program, identified in Tables 1 and 2. 

EPA proposed disapproval of the 

Emergency Orders Program and 

solicited public comments. EPA has 

reviewed and responded to the 

comments (including adverse 

comments), and EPA is taking this final 

action to disapprove the Emergency 

Orders Program based on the reasons 

discussed below. 

Based on our evaluation, EPA has 

found that the proposed Emergency 

Orders Program does not meet all 

applicable requirements of the CAA, 

EPA regulations, and applicable policy 

and guidance. Specifically, the issuance 

of Emergency Orders to projects that are 

subject to Major NSR fail to meet the 

requirements of the Clean Air Act and 

the implementing regulations as 

described below: 

A. The Emergency Orders Program Does 

Not Satisfy the Public Participation 

Required for NSR at the Time the 

Emergency Order Is Issued 

As stated in our proposed action, the 

Emergency Orders Program fails to 

satisfy the public participation 

requirements for Major NSR at the time 

the Emergency Order is issued. Instead, 

the applicable public participation for 

Major NSR projects will take place after 

the issuance of the Emergency Order 

when the applicant submits their 

application for a Major NSR permit. 

Meanwhile, the applicant is authorized 

by the Emergency Order to begin 

construction of the Major NSR project 

prior to permit application submission 

and permit issuance. Consequently, the 

public is not afforded an opportunity to 

review and comment on the proposed 

project (as required under the CAA and 

implementing regulations) until after 

construction has begun; thus the public 

has not been provided meaningful 

opportunity to participate prior to 

commencement of construction of the 

Major NSR project. See 40 CFR 51.161 

and 51.166(q). 

B. The Emergency Orders Program Does 

Not Meet the Requirement That a NSR 

Permit Be Issued Prior to the 

Commencement of Construction of a 

Major Source 

While EPA agrees with commenters 

that the Emergency Orders Program will 

not replace the current SIP approved 

NSR permitting processes, including 

Major NSR, the program does provide 

an interim authorization for immediate 

action, including construction, 

following a catastrophe via the issuance 

of an Emergency Order. The issued 

order is not a final issued Major NSR 

permit. If the proposed action 

authorized under an Emergency Order is 

subject to Major NSR, the Emergency 

Orders Program requires that the source 

apply for a Major NSR permit within 60 

days following the issuance of the order. 

These permits are required to be applied 

for and issued in accordance with the 

applicable NSR requirements. However, 

the NSR permitting would occur 

following the commencement of 

construction at the source, which is not 

consistent with the CAA requirements. 

For PSD see CAA at § 165(a)(1) and 40 

CFR 51.166(a)(7)(iii). For NNSR see 

CAA § 172(c)(5) and 40 CFR 

51.165(a)(2)(i)–(iii). 

In summary, for the reasons stated 

above, the submitted Emergency Orders 

Program is not approvable in the Texas 

SIP because it does not meet all of the 

applicable requirements of the CAA, 

EPA regulations, and applicable policy 

and guidance. Some commenters state 

that EPA could limit its disapproval of 

the Emergency Orders Program by 

exercising its conditional approval 

authority. As discussed in our response 

to comments, a conditional approval 

requires a commitment from the State to 

make revisions to the submitted rules, 

as necessary, to address our concerns 

and meet all applicable requirements. 

See CAA 110(k)(4). To date, EPA has not 

received any commitment from Texas 

that would allow for EPA to use its 

conditional approval authority. 

Therefore, for the reasons discussed 

above, we are taking final action to 

disapprove the SIP revision submittals 

relating to the Texas Emergency Orders 

Program as submitted by Texas on the 

August 31, 1993, December 10, 1998, 

February 1, 2006, and July 17, 2006. 

V. Final Action 

EPA is disapproving the Texas 

Emergency Orders Program submitted in 

a series of SIP revisions, indentified in 

the Tables in section II of this preamble. 

These affected provisions are addressed 

in the August 31, 1993, as revised by the 

December 10, 1998, February 1, 2006, 

and July 17, 2006 SIP revision 

submittals submitted by Texas. 

EPA is disapproving the 

aforementioned SIP revisions submittals 

because these regulations do not meet 

the requirements of the CAA, EPA 

regulations, and applicable policy and 

guidance. EPA is taking this action 

under section 110 and parts C and D of 

Title I of the Act. We are not taking on 

action the non-air portions of the 

referenced SIP revision submittals, 

which are beyond the scope of the SIP 

and were returned to the State. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

This final action is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under the terms of 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and is therefore not 

subject to review under the Executive 

Order. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This action does not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 

Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq, because this 

SIP disapproval under section 110 and 

subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act 

will not in-and-of itself create any new 

information collection burdens but 

simply disapproves certain State 

requirements for inclusion into the SIP. 

Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

59256 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 187 / Thursday, September 26, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

generally requires an agency to conduct 

a regulatory flexibility analysis of any 

rule subject to notice and comment 

rulemaking requirements unless the 

agency certifies that the rule will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

Small entities include small businesses, 

small not-for-profit enterprises, and 

small governmental jurisdictions. For 

purposes of assessing the impacts of 

today’s rule on small entities, small 

entity is defined as: (1) A small business 

as defined by the Small Business 

Administration’s (SBA) regulations at 13 

CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental 

jurisdiction that is a government of a 

city, county, town, school district or 

special district with a population of less 

than 50,000; and (3) a small 

organization that is any not-for-profit 

enterprise which is independently 

owned and operated and is not 

dominant in its field. 

After considering the economic 

impacts of today’s rule on small entities, 

I certify that this action will not have a 

significant impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. This rule does 

not impose any requirements or create 

impacts on small entities. This SIP 

disapproval under section 110 and 

subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act 

will not in-and-of itself create any new 

requirements but simply disapproves 

certain State requirements for inclusion 

into the SIP. Accordingly, it affords no 

opportunity for EPA to fashion for small 

entities less burdensome compliance or 

reporting requirements or timetables or 

exemptions from all or part of the rule. 

The fact that the Clean Air Act 

prescribes that various consequences 

(e.g., higher offset requirements) may or 

will flow from this disapproval does not 

mean that EPA either can or must 

conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis 

for this action. Therefore, this action 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. 

We continue to be interested in the 

potential impacts of this rule on small 

entities and welcome comments on 

issues related to such impacts. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

This action contains no Federal 

mandates under the provisions of Title 

II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 

Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 1531– 

1538 ‘‘for State, local, or tribal 

governments or the private sector.’’ EPA 

has determined that the disapproval 

action does not include a Federal 

mandate that may result in estimated 

costs of $100 million or more to either 

State, local, or tribal governments in the 

aggregate, or to the private sector. This 

action disapproves pre-existing 

requirements under State or local law, 

and imposes no new requirements. 

Accordingly, no additional costs to 

State, local, or tribal governments, or to 

the private sector, result from this 

action. 

E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

Executive Order 13132, entitled 

‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999), requires EPA to develop an 

accountable process to ensure 

‘‘meaningful and timely input by State 

and local officials in the development of 

regulatory policies that have federalism 

implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have 

federalism implications’’ is defined in 

the Executive Order to include 

regulations that have ‘‘substantial direct 

effects on the States, on the relationship 

between the national government and 

the States, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government.’’ 

This action does not have federalism 

implications. It will not have substantial 

direct effects on the States, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132, because it 

merely disapproves certain State 

requirements for inclusion into the SIP 

and does not alter the relationship or 

the distribution of power and 

responsibilities established in the Clean 

Air Act. Thus, Executive Order 13132 

does not apply to this action. 

F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination 

With Indian Tribal Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications, as specified in Executive 

Order 13175 (59 FR 22951, November 9, 

2000), because the SIP EPA is 

disapproving would not apply in Indian 

country located in the State, and EPA 

notes that it will not impose substantial 

direct costs on tribal governments or 

preempt tribal law. Thus, Executive 

Order 13175 does not apply to this 

action. 

G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 

(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as 

applying only to those regulatory 

actions that concern health or safety 

risks, such that the analysis required 

under section 5–501 of the Executive 

Order has the potential to influence the 

regulation. This action is not subject to 

Executive Order 13045 because it 

because it is not an economically 

significant regulatory action based on 

health or safety risks subject to 

Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997). This SIP disapproval 

under section 110 and subchapter I, part 

D of the Clean Air Act will not in-andof itself create any new regulations but 

simply disapproves certain State 

requirements for inclusion into the SIP. 

H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This rule is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 

2001) because it is not a significant 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law 

104–113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 

note) directs EPA to use voluntary 

consensus standards in its regulatory 

activities unless to do so would be 

inconsistent with applicable law or 

otherwise impractical. Voluntary 

consensus standards are technical 

standards (e.g., materials specifications, 

test methods, sampling procedures, and 

business practices) that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. NTTAA directs EPA 

to provide Congress, through OMB, 

explanations when the Agency decides 

not to use available and applicable 

voluntary consensus standards. 

The EPA believes that this action is 

not subject to requirements of Section 

12(d) of NTTAA because application of 

those requirements would be 

inconsistent with the Clean Air Act. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 

(Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes federal 

executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs 

federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their 

mission by identifying and addressing, 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, 

policies, and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. 

EPA lacks the discretionary authority 

to address environmental justice in this 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 187 / Thursday, September 26, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 59257 

action. In reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve or disapprove 

state choices, based on the criteria of the 

Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this action 

merely disapproves certain State 

requirements for inclusion into the SIP 

under section 110 and subchapter I, part 

D of the Clean Air Act and will not inand-of itself create any new 

requirements. Accordingly, it does not 

provide EPA with the discretionary 

authority to address, as appropriate, 

disproportionate human health or 

environmental effects, using practicable 

and legally permissible methods, under 

Executive Order 12898. 

K. Congressional Review Act 

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. 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). 

L. Petitions for Judicial Review 

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 November 25, 2013. 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).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: September 4, 2013. 

Ron Curry, 

Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

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 SS—Texas 

■ 2. Section 52.2273 is amended by 

adding paragraph (h) to read as follows: 

§ 52.2273 Approval status. 

* * * * * 

(h) EPA is disapproving the Texas SIP 

revisions submittals under 30 TAC 

Chapter 35—Emergency and Temporary 

Orders and Permits; Temporary 

Suspension or Amendment of Permit 

Conditions and 30 TAC Chapter 116— 

Control of Air Pollution by Permits for 

New Construction or Modification as 

follows: 

(1) The following provisions under 30 

TAC Chapter 35, Subchapter A— 

Purpose, Applicability and Definitions: 

(i) 30 TAC 35.1—Purpose—adopted 

November 18, 1998 and submitted 

December 10, 1998. 

(ii) 30 TAC 35.2—Applicability— 

adopted November 18, 1998 and 

submitted December 10, 1998. 

(iii) 30 TAC 35.3—Definitions— 

adopted November 18, 1998 and 

submitted December 10, 1998. 

(2) The following provisions under 30 

TAC Chapter 35, Subchapter B— 

Authority of the Executive Director: 

(i) 30 TAC 35.11—Purpose and 

Applicability—adopted November 18, 

1998 and submitted December 10, 1998. 

(ii) 30 TAC 35.12—Authority of the 

Executive Director—adopted November 

18, 1998 and submitted December 10, 

1998. 

(iii) 35.13—Eligibility of the Executive 

Director—adopted November 18, 1998 

and submitted December 10, 1998. 

(3) The following provisions under 30 

TAC Chapter 35, Subchapter C—General 

Provisions: 

(i) 30 TAC 35.21—Action by the 

Commission or Executive Director— 

adopted November 18, 1998 and 

submitted December 10, 1998. 

(ii) 30 TAC 35.22—Term and Renewal 

of Orders—adopted November 18, 1998 

and submitted December 10, 1998. 

(iii) 30 TAC 35.23—Effect of Orders— 

adopted November 18, 1998 and 

submitted December 10, 1998. 

(iv) 30 TAC 35.24—Application for 

Emergency or Temporary Orders— 

adopted November 18, 1998 and 

submitted December 10, 1998. No action 

is taken on subsection (b) and 

paragraphs (e)(6)–(7) which are outside 

the scope of the SIP. 

(v) 30 TAC 35.25—Notice and 

Opportunity for Hearing—adopted 

November 18, 1998 and submitted 

December 10, 1998. No action is taken 

on paragraphs (e)(1)–(8) and (11)–(15) 

which are outside the scope of the SIP. 

(vi) 30 TAC 35.26—Contents of 

Emergency or Temporary Order— 

adopted November 18, 1998 and 

submitted December 10, 1998. 

(vii) 30 TAC 35.27—Hearing 

Required—adopted November 18, 1998 

and submitted December 10, 1998. 

(viii) 30 TAC 35.28—Hearing 

Requests—adopted November 18, 1998 

and submitted December 10, 1998. 

(ix) 30 TAC 35.29—Procedures for a 

Hearing—adopted November 18, 1998 

and submitted December 10, 1998. 

(x) 30 TAC 35.30—Application Fees— 

adopted November 18, 1998 and 

submitted December 10, 1998. 

(4) The following provisions under 30 

TAC Chapter 35, Subchapter K—Air 

Orders: 

(i) 30 TAC 35.801—Emergency Orders 

Because of a Catastrophe—adopted 

November 18, 1998 and submitted 

December 10, 1998; revised June 28, 

2006 and submitted July 17, 2006. 

(ii) 30 TAC 35.802—Applications for 

an Emergency Order—adopted August 

16, 1993 and submitted August 31, 1993 

(as 30 TAC 116.411); revised November 

18, 1998 and submitted December 10, 

1998 (as redesignated to 30 TAC 

35.802); revised June 28, 2006 and 

submitted July 17, 2006. 

(iii) 30 TAC 35.803—Public 

Notification—adopted August 16, 1993 

and submitted August 31, 1993 (as 30 

TAC 116.412); revised November 18, 

1998 and submitted December 10, 1998 

(as redesignated to 30 TAC 35.803). 

(iv) 30 TAC 35.804—Issuance of an 

Emergency Order—adopted November 

18, 1998 and submitted December 10, 

1998; revised June 28, 2006 and 

submitted July 17, 2006. 

(v) 30 TAC 35.805—Contents of an 

Emergency Order—adopted August 16, 

1993 and submitted August 31, 1993 (as 

30 TAC 116.415); revised November 18, 

1998 and submitted December 10, 1998 

(as redesignated to 30 TAC 35.805); 

revised June 28, 2006 and submitted 

July 17, 2006. 

(vi) 30 TAC 35.806—Requirement to 

Apply for a Permit or Modification— 

adopted August 16, 1993 and submitted 

August 31, 1993 (as 30 TAC 116.416); 

revised November 18, 1998 and 

submitted December 10, 1998 (as 

redesignated to 30 TAC 35.806). 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

59258 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 187 / Thursday, September 26, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

(vii) 30 TAC 35.807—Affirmation of 

an Emergency Order—adopted August 

16, 1993 and submitted August 31, 1993 

(as 30 TAC 116.414); revised November 

18, 1998 and submitted December 10, 

1998 (as redesignated to 30 TAC 

35.807); revised June 28, 2006 and 

submitted July 17, 2006. 

(viii) 30 TAC 35.808—Modification of 

an Emergency Order—adopted August 

16, 1993 and submitted August 31, 1993 

(as 30 TAC 116.417); revised November 

18, 1998 and submitted December 10, 

1998 (as redesignated to 30 TAC 

35.808); revised June 28, 2006 and 

submitted July 17, 2006. 

(ix) 30 TAC 35.809—Setting Aside an 

Emergency Order—adopted August 16, 

1993 and submitted August 31, 1993 (as 

30 TAC 116.418); revised November 18, 

1998 and submitted December 10, 1998 

(as redesignated to 30 TAC 35.809). 

(5) The following provision under 30 

TAC Chapter 116, Subchapter K— 

Emergency Orders: 30 TAC 116.1200— 

Applicability—adopted August 16, 1993 

and submitted August 31, 1993 (as 30 

TAC 116.410); revised November 18, 

1998 and submitted December 10, 1998; 

revised January 11, 2006 and submitted 

February 1, 2006 (as redesignated to 30 

TAC 116.1200). 

[FR Doc. 2013–23380 Filed 9–25–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2013–0058; FR–9901–21– 

Region3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Pennsylvania; Withdrawal of Direct 

Final Rule for the Update of the Motor 

Vehicle Emissions Budgets for the 

Lancaster 1997 8-Hour Ozone 

Maintenance Area 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Withdrawal of direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is withdrawing the direct 

final rule to approve revisions to the 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’s State 

Implementation Plan (SIP). The 

revisions consist of an update to the 

SIP-approved Motor Vehicle Emissions 

Budgets (MVEBs) for nitrogen oxides 

(NOX) and volatile organic compounds 

(VOCs), and an updated point source 

inventory for NOX and VOCs for the 

1997 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient 

Air Quality Standard SIP for Lancaster 

County. In the direct final rule 

published on August 8, 2013, the table 

with the revised MVEBs contained 

numerical errors. Therefore, EPA is 

withdrawing this direct final rule in its 

entirety. EPA will commence a separate 

rulemaking action for this SIP revision. 

DATES: The direct final rule published at 

78 FR 48323 on August 8, 2013, is 

withdrawn as of September 26, 2013. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Asrah Khadr, (215) 814–2071, or by 

email at khadr.asrah@epa.gov. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 

Volatile organic compounds. 

Dated: August 29, 2013. 

W. C. Early, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

Accordingly, the amendment to 40 

CFR 52.2020(e)(1) and the additions of 

40 CFR 52.2043 and 40 CFR 52.2052, 

published on August 8, 2013 (78 FR 

48323), are withdrawn as of September 

26, 2013. 

[FR Doc. 2013–23384 Filed 9–25–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2011–0596; FRL–9901–09– 

Region5] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Ohio; 

Redesignation of the DaytonSpringfield Area to Attainment of the 

1997 Annual Standard for Fine 

Particulate Matter 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is granting, under the 

Clean Air Act (CAA), the State of Ohio’s 

June 1, 2011, request to redesignate the 

Dayton-Springfield (Dayton) 

nonattainment area (Clark, Greene, and 

Montgomery Counties) to attainment for 

the 1997 annual national ambient air 

quality standard (NAAQS or standard) 

for fine particulate matter (PM2.5). EPA 

is approving the related state 

implementation plan (SIP) elements 

including comprehensive emissions 

inventories, the maintenance plan, and 

the motor vehicle emissions budgets 

(MVEBs). EPA has determined that the 

area has attained the standard and 

proposed to approve Ohio’s request on 

July 26, 2013. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

September 26, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R05–OAR–2011–0596. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the www.regulations.gov Web site. 

Although listed in the index, 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 at 

the Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We 

recommend that you telephone Matt 

Rau, Environmental Engineer, at (312) 

886–6524 before visiting the Region 5 

office. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt 

Rau, Environmental Engineer, Control 

Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch 

(AR–18J), Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, 

(312) 886–6524, rau.matthew@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

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

EPA. This supplementary information 

section is arranged as follows: 

I. Background Information 

II. What are the Responses to Comments? 

III. What final action is epa taking? 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background Information 

On June 1, 2011, Ohio submitted a 

request for EPA to redesignate the 

Dayton-Springfield, Ohio nonattainment 

area to attainment of the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS. Ohio also requested EPA 

approval of the SIP revision containing 

an emissions inventory and a 

maintenance plan for the area. 

In a supplemental submission to EPA 

on April 30, 2013, Ohio submitted 

ammonia (NH3) and volatile organic 

compounds (VOC) emissions 

inventories to supplement the emissions 

inventories for PM2.5, nitrogen oxides 

(NOX), and sulfur dioxide (SO2) that 

were submitted on June 1, 2011. 

EPA proposed to redesignate the 

Dayton area and to approve related 

elements on July 26, 2013 (78 FR 

45135). This action included the 

proposed approval of a comprehensive 

emissions inventory for PM2.5, NOX, 

SO2, NH3, and VOC, a maintenance 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES