Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 154 / Monday, August 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 46703 

review by OMB under section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866. 

We have also reviewed this final 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

13563, which supplements and 

explicitly reaffirms the principles, 

structures, and definitions governing 

regulatory review established in 

Executive Order 12866. To the extent 

permitted by law, Executive Order 

13563 requires that an agency— 

(1) Propose or adopt regulations only 

upon a reasoned determination that 

their benefits justify their costs 

(recognizing that some benefits and 

costs are difficult to quantify); 

(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the 

least burden on society, consistent with 

obtaining regulatory objectives and 

taking into account—among other things 

and to the extent practicable—the costs 

of cumulative regulations; 

(3) In choosing among alternative 

regulatory approaches, select those 

approaches that maximize net benefits 

(including potential economic, 

environmental, public health and safety, 

and other advantages; distributive 

impacts; and equity); 

(4) To the extent feasible, specify 

performance objectives, rather than the 

behavior or manner of compliance a 

regulated entity must adopt; and 

(5) Identify and assess available 

alternatives to direct regulation, 

including economic incentives—such as 

user fees or marketable permits—to 

encourage the desired behavior, or 

provide information that enables the 

public to make choices. 

Executive Order 13563 also requires 

an agency ‘‘to use the best available 

techniques to quantify anticipated 

present and future benefits and costs as 

accurately as possible.’’ The Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs of 

OMB has emphasized that these 

techniques may include ‘‘identifying 

changing future compliance costs that 

might result from technological 

innovation or anticipated behavioral 

changes.’’ 

We are issuing this final priority only 

on a reasoned determination that its 

benefits justify its costs. In choosing 

among alternative regulatory 

approaches, we selected those 

approaches that maximize net benefits. 

Based on the analysis that follows, the 

Department believes that this regulatory 

action is consistent with the principles 

in Executive Order 13563. 

We also have determined that this 

regulatory action does not unduly 

interfere with State, local, and tribal 

governments in the exercise of their 

governmental functions. 

In accordance with both Executive 

orders, the Department has assessed the 

potential costs and benefits, both 

quantitative and qualitative, of this 

regulatory action. The potential costs 

are those resulting from statutory 

requirements and those we have 

determined as necessary for 

administering the Department’s 

programs and activities. 

An IDEA Fiscal Data Center funded 

under the priority established by this 

regulatory action will assist States in 

complying with Federal laws and 

regulations. Without this regulatory 

action, the burden of improving State 

capacity to collect, report, and analyze 

IDEA data will fall solely on the 

responsible State and local entities. 

Intergovernmental Review: This 

program is subject to Executive Order 

12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR 

part 79. One of the objectives of the 

Executive order is to foster an 

intergovernmental partnership and a 

strengthened federalism. The Executive 

order relies on processes developed by 

State and local governments for 

coordination and review of proposed 

Federal financial assistance. 

This document provides early 

notification of our specific plans and 

actions for this program. 

Accessible Format: Individuals with 

disabilities can obtain this document in 

an accessible format (e.g., braille, large 

print, audiotape, or compact disc) by 

contacting the Grants and Contracts 

Services Team, U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., 

Room 5075, PCP, Washington, DC 

20202–2550. Telephone: (202) 245– 

7363. If you use a TDD or a TTY, call 

the FRS, toll free, at 1–800–877–8339. 

Electronic Access to This Document: 

The official version of this document is 

the document published in the Federal 

Register. Free Internet access to the 

official edition of the Federal Register 

and the Code of Federal Regulations is 

available via the Federal Digital System 

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

can view this document, as well as all 

other documents of this Department 

published in the Federal Register, in 

text or Adobe Portable Document 

Format (PDF). To use PDF you must 

have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is 

available free at the site. 

You may also access documents of the 

Department published in the Federal 

Register by using the article search 

feature at: www.federalregister.gov. 

Specifically, through the advanced 

search feature at this site, you can limit 

your search to documents published by 

the Department. 

Dated: August 6, 2014. 

Michael K. Yudin, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Special 

Education and Rehabilitative Services. 

[FR Doc. 2014–18968 Filed 8–8–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–01 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2014–0517; FRL–9914–95– 

Region–5] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Wisconsin; Finding of Failure To 

Submit a PSD State Implementation 

Plan Revision for PM2.5

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) finds that the State of 

Wisconsin has not made a necessary 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD) State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

submission to address the PSD 

permitting of Particulate Matter of less 

than 2.5 micrometers (PM2.5) emissions, 

as required by the Clean Air Act (CAA). 

Specifically, EPA has determined that 

Wisconsin has not submitted a SIP 

revision to address the PM2.5 PSD 

increments and implementing 

regulations as promulgated by EPA on 

October 20, 2010, by the required 

deadline of July 20, 2012. The CAA 

requires EPA to promulgate a Federal 

Implementation Plan (FIP) to address 

the outstanding PSD SIP elements by no 

later than 24 months after the effective 

date of this finding. EPA is making this 

finding in accordance with section 110 

and part C of the CAA. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

August 11, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R05–OAR–2014–0517. 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, 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
46704 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 154 / Monday, August 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

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 Andrea 

Morgan, Environmental Engineer, at 

(312) 353–6058 before visiting the 

Region 5 office. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Andrea Morgan, Environmental 

Engineer, Air Permits Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–6058, 

@morgan.andrea@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 

553 of the Administrative Procedures 

Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), provides 

that, when an agency for good cause 

finds that notice and public procedure 

are impracticable, unnecessary, or 

contrary to the public interest, the 

agency may issue a rule without 

providing notice and an opportunity for 

public comment. EPA has determined 

that there is good cause for making this 

rule final without prior proposal and 

opportunity for comment because no 

significant EPA judgment is involved in 

making a finding of failure to submit 

SIPs, or elements of SIPs, required by 

the CAA, where States have made no 

submissions to meet the requirement. 

No additional fact gathering is 

necessary. Thus, notice and public 

procedure are unnecessary. 

Furthermore, providing notice and 

comment would be impracticable 

because of the limited time provided 

under the CAA for making such 

determinations. EPA believes that 

because of the limited time and noncontroversial nature of this finding, 

Congress did not intend that it be 

subject to notice-and-comment 

rulemaking. Finally, notice and 

comment would be contrary to the 

public interest because it would divert 

Agency resources from the critical 

substantive review of submitted SIPs. 

See 58 FR 51270, 51272, note 17 

(October 1, 1993); 59 FR 39832, 39853 

(August 4, 1994). EPA finds that these 

constitute good cause under 5 U.S.C. 

553(b)(B). 

EPA has also determined that today’s 

finding of failure to submit for 

Wisconsin is effective upon publication 

because this final action falls under the 

good cause exemption in 5 U.S.C. 

553(d)(3) of the APA. The expedited 

effective date for this action is 

authorized under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), 

which allows an effective date less than 

30 days after publication ‘‘as otherwise 

provided by the agency for good cause 

found and published with the rule.’’ 

EPA has determined that there is good 

cause for making this rule effective 

upon publication because the PSD SIP 

element is already overdue and the State 

has been made aware of applicable 

provisions of the CAA relating to 

overdue SIP revisions. The State of 

Wisconsin failed to submit a required 

PSD SIP revision by the mandated 

deadline of July 20, 2012. We have 

previously alerted Wisconsin through 

meetings that it has failed to make the 

submittal by the deadline. 

Consequently, the State has been on 

notice that today’s action was pending. 

The State and general public are aware 

of applicable provisions of the CAA that 

relate to failure to submit a required 

implementation plan. In addition, this 

action simply starts a 24-month ‘‘clock’’ 

wherein EPA must promulgate a Federal 

Implementation Plan (FIP) as required 

by CAA section 110(c). Additionally, 

the purpose of the 30-day waiting 

period prescribed in 5 U.S.C. 553(d) is 

to give affected parties a reasonable time 

to prepare before the final rule takes 

effect. Whereas here, the affected 

parties, such as the State of Wisconsin 

and sources within the State, do not 

need time to adjust and prepare before 

the finding of failure to submit takes 

effect. EPA finds that the above reasons 

support an effective date prior to 30 

days after the date of publication and 

constitute good cause under 5 U.S.C. 

553(d)(3). 

Throughout this document whenever 

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

EPA. This supplementary information 

section is arranged as follows: 

I. Overview of the PM2.5 National Ambient 

Air Quality Standards Requirements 

II. What action Is EPA taking? 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Overview of the PM2.5 National 

Ambient Air Qquality Standards 

Requirements 

To implement the PM2.5 National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS), EPA issued two separate final 

rules that establish the New Source 

Review (NSR) permitting requirements 

for PM2.5: the NSR PM2.5

Implementation Rule promulgated on 

May 16, 2008 (73 FR 28321), and the 

PM2.5 PSD Increments—Significant 

Impact Levels (SILs)—Significant 

Monitoring Concentration (SMC) Rule 

promulgated on October 20, 2010 (75 FR 

64864). EPA’s 2008 NSR PM2.5

Implementation Rule required States to 

submit applicable SIP revisions to EPA 

no later than May 16, 2011, to address 

this rule’s PSD and nonattainment NSR 

SIP requirements. The Wisconsin 

Department of Natural Resources 

(WDNR) first submitted provisions 

addressing the 2008 PM2.5 NSR 

Implementation Rule on May 12, 2011, 

and on July 25, 2013, EPA issued a final 

disapproval of the submittal because it 

did not include all of the required 

elements (78 FR 44881). WDNR 

submitted a revised SIP revision to EPA 

on March 12, 2014, and EPA proposed 

approval of the revised provisions on 

June 30, 2014 (79 FR 36689), because 

EPA found the submittal addressed all 

the required elements of the 2008 NSR 

PM2.5 Implementation Rule. As 

Wisconsin made a submission that fully 

addressed the 2008 PM2.5 NSR 

Implementation Rule, today’s finding of 

failure to submit only addresses the 

required elements of the 2010 PM2.5 PSD 

Increments—SILs—SMC Rule. 

The PM2.5 PSD Increments—SILs— 

SMC Rule required States to submit SIP 

revisions to EPA by July 20, 2012, 

adopting provisions equivalent to or at 

least as stringent as the PM2.5 PSD 

increments and associated 

implementing regulations. Specifically, 

the rule requires a State’s submitted 

PSD SIP revision to adopt and submit 

for EPA approval the PM2.5 increments 

issued pursuant to section 166(a) of the 

CAA to prevent significant deterioration 

of air quality in areas meeting the 

NAAQS. States were also required to 

adopt and submit for EPA approval 

revisions to the definitions for ‘‘major 

source baseline date,’’ ‘‘minor source 

baseline date,’’ and ‘‘baseline area’’ as 

part of the implementing regulations for 

the PM2.5 increments. 

The PM2.5 PSD Increments—SILs— 

SMC Rule also allowed States to 

discretionarily adopt and submit for 

EPA approval: (1) SILs, which are used 

as a screening tool to evaluate the 

impact a proposed new major source or 

major modification may have on the 

NAAQS or PSD increment; and (2) a 

SMC (also a screening tool), which is 

used to determine the subsequent level 

of data gathering required for a PSD 

permit application for emissions of 

PM2.5. However, on January 22, 2013, 

the United States Court of Appeals for 

the District of Columbia Circuit (Court) 

granted a request from EPA to vacate 

and remand to EPA the portions of the 

PM2.5 PSD Increments — SILs—SMC 

Rule PM2.5 addressing the SILs for PM2.5

so that EPA could voluntarily correct an 

error in these provisions. The Court also 

vacated the parts of the PM2.5 PSD 

Increments — SILs—SMC Rule 

establishing a PM2.5 SMC, finding that 

EPA was precluded from using the 

PM2.5 SMCs to exempt permit applicants 

from the statutory requirement to 

compile preconstruction monitoring 

data. Sierra Club v. EPA, 705 F.3d 458, 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 154 / Monday, August 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 46705 

463–69. On December 9, 2013, EPA 

issued a good cause final rule formally 

removing the affected SILs and SMC 

provisions from the CFR. See 78 FR 

73698. As such, SIP submittals should 

no longer include the vacated PM2.5 SILs 

at 40 CFR 51.166(k)(2) and 52.21(k)(2) 

and vacated PM2.5 SMC provisions at 40 

CFR 51.166(i)(5)(i)(c) and 

52.21(i)(5)(i)(c) for PM2.5 PSD 

permitting. EPA notes that today’s 

finding of failure to submit for the State 

of Wisconsin only applies to PM2.5

increments and the supporting 

regulations and does not include the 

optional SILs and SMC component of 

the PM2.5 PSD Increments—SILs—SMC 

Rule. 

II. What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is making a finding that the State 

of Wisconsin has failed to submit a 

required PSD SIP revision to address the 

implementation and permitting of PM2.5

emissions in the Wisconsin PSD 

program. Specifically, we are finding 

that Wisconsin failed to submit a SIP 

revision, addressing the required PM2.5

PSD elements establishing increments 

and the implementing regulations by the 

specified deadline of July 20, 2012, as 

required by the 2010 PM2.5 PSD 

Increments—SILs—SMC Rule. By no 

later than 24 months after the effective 

date of this ruling, EPA is required by 

the CAA to promulgate a FIP for 

Wisconsin to address the PM2.5 PSD 

requirements for increments. In 

addition, CAA section 110(c) provides 

that EPA can promulgate a FIP 

immediately after making the finding of 

failure to submit a required SIP, as late 

as two years after making the finding, or 

any time in between. This finding of 

failure to submit does not impose 

sanctions or set deadlines for imposing 

sanctions as described in section 179 of 

the CAA, because this finding does not 

pertain to the elements of a part D, title 

I, plan for nonattainment areas as 

required under section 110(a)(2)(I), and 

because this action is not a SIP call 

pursuant to section 110(k)(5). This 

action will be effective on August 11, 

2014. 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews. 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Executive Order 13563: 

Improving Regulation and Regulatory 

Review 

This action is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under the terms of 

Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993) and is therefore 

not subject to review under EO 12866 

and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 

2011). 

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. This final 

rule does not establish any new 

information collection requirement 

apart from what is already required by 

law. This rule relates to the requirement 

in the CAA for States to submit PSD 

SIPs under section 166(b) to satisfy 

certain PSD requirements under the 

CAA for the PM2.5 NAAQS. Burden 

means the total time, effort or financial 

resources expended by persons to 

generate, maintain, retain or disclose or 

provide information to or for a federal 

agency. This includes the time needed 

to review instructions; develop, acquire, 

install and utilize technology and 

systems for the purposes of collecting, 

validating and verifying information, 

processing and maintaining information 

and disclosing and providing 

information; adjust the existing ways to 

comply with any previously applicable 

instructions and requirements; train 

personnel to be able to respond to a 

collection of information; search data 

sources; complete and review the 

collection of information; and transmit 

or otherwise disclose the information. 

An agency may not conduct or sponsor, 

and a person is not required to respond 

to a collection of information unless it 

displays a currently valid Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) control 

number. The OMB control numbers for 

EPA’s regulations in the CFR are listed 

in 40 CFR part 9. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

generally requires an agency to prepare 

a regulatory flexibility analysis of any 

rule subject to notice and comment 

rulemaking requirements under the 

APA or any other statute 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 organizations and small 

governmental jurisdictions. For the 

purpose of assessing the impacts of this 

final rule on small entities, small entity 

is defined as: (1) A small business that 

is a small industry entity as defined in 

the U.S. Small Business Administration 

size standards (See 13 CFR 121); (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-forprofit enterprise which is independently 

owned and operated and is not 

dominant in its field. 

After considering the economic 

impacts of this final rule on small 

entities, I certify that this rule will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

This final rule will not impose any 

requirements on small entities. This 

action relates to the requirement in the 

CAA for States to submit PSD SIPs 

under section 166(b) to satisfy certain 

prevention of significant deterioration 

requirements of the CAA for the PM2.5

NAAQS. Because EPA has made a 

‘‘good cause’’ finding that this action is 

not subject to notice-and-comment 

requirements under the APA and any 

other statute, it is not subject to the 

regulatory flexibility provisions of the 

RFA. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995 (UMRA) 

This action contains no federal 

mandate under the provisions of Title II 

of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538 for State, 

local and tribal governments and the 

private sector. The action imposes no 

enforceable duty on any State, local or 

tribal governments or the private sector. 

Therefore, this action is not subject to 

the requirements of section 202 and 205 

of the UMRA. This action is also not 

subject to the requirements of section 

203 of UMRA because it contains no 

regulatory requirements that might 

significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. This action relates to the 

requirement in the CAA for States to 

submit PSD SIPs under section 166(b) to 

satisfy certain prevention of significant 

deterioration requirements under the 

CAA for the PM2.5 NAAQS. This rule 

merely finds that Arkansas has not met 

that requirement. Accordingly, no 

additional costs to State, local, or tribal 

governments, or to the private sector 

result from this action. 

Additionally, because EPA has made 

a ‘‘good cause’’ that this action is not 

subject to notice-and-comment 

requirements under the APA or any 

other statute, it is not subject to sections 

202 and 205 of the UMRA. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

EO 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 EO to include regulations 

that have ‘‘substantial direct effects on 

the States, or the relationship between 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
46706 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 154 / Monday, August 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

the national government and the States 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government.’’ This final rule 

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 EO 13132. The CAA 

establishes the scheme whereby States 

take the lead in developing plans to 

meet the NAAQS. This rule will not 

modify the relationship of the States 

and EPA for purposes of developing 

programs to implement the NAAQS. 

Thus, EO 13132 does not apply to this 

rule. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

EO 13175, entitled ‘‘Consultation and 

Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments’’ (65 FR 67249, November 

9, 2000), requires EPA to develop an 

accountable process to ensure 

‘‘meaningful and timely input by Tribal 

officials in the development of 

regulatory policies that have Tribal 

implications.’’ This final rule does not 

have tribal implications, as specified in 

EO 13175. This rule responds to the 

requirement in the CAA for States to 

submit PSD SIPs under section 166(b) to 

satisfy certain prevention of significant 

deterioration requirements under the 

CAA for PM2.5 NAAQS. No tribe is 

subject to the requirement to submit an 

implementation plan under section 

166(b) within 21 months of 

promulgation of PSD regulations under 

section 166(a). 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

EPA interprets EO 13045 (62 FR 

19885, April23, 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 EO has the potential to influence the 

regulation. This action is not subject to 

EO 13045 because it merely finds that 

Wisconsin has failed to make a 

submission that is required under the 

CAA to implement the PM2.5 NAAQS. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution or Use 

This rule is not a ‘‘significant energy 

action’’ as defined in EO 13211, 

‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 

22, 2001), because it is not likely to have 

a significant adverse effect on the 

supply, distribution or use of energy. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law No. 

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

note), directs EPA to use voluntary 

consensus standards (VCS) in its 

regulatory activities unless to do so 

would be inconsistent with applicable 

law or otherwise impracticable. VCS are 

technical standards (e.g., materials 

specifications, test methods, sampling 

procedures and business practices) that 

are developed or adopted by VCS 

bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to 

provide Congress, through OMB, 

explanations when the agency decides 

not to use available and applicable VCS. 

This action does not involve technical 

standards. Therefore, EPA did not 

consider the use of any VCS. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions to Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

EO 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 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 

has determined that this final rule will 

not have disproportionately high and 

adverse human health or environmental 

effects on minority or low-income 

populations because it does not directly 

affect the level of protection provided to 

human health or the environment. This 

action is making a finding that the State 

of Wisconsin failed to submit a SIP 

revision that provides certain basic 

permitting requirements for the PM2.5

NAAQS. 

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. Section 808 allows 

the issuing agency to make any rule 

effective ‘‘at such time as the Federal 

agency promulgating the rule 

determines’’ if the agency makes a good 

cause finding that notice and public 

procedure is impracticable, unnecessary 

or contrary to the public interest. This 

determination must be supported by a 

brief statement. 5 U.S.C. 808(2). As 

stated previously, EPA has made such a 

good cause finding, including the 

reasons therefor, and established an 

effective date of August 11, 2014. EPA 

submitted a report containing this rule 

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. This action is not a ‘‘major 

rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This 

rule will be effective August 11, 2014. 

L. 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 October 10, 2014. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this action for the 

purposed 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, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides. 

Dated: July 28, 2014. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2014–18827 Filed 8–8–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES