### 21142 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 72 / Tuesday, April 15, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

be effective on June 16, 2014 without further notice unless we receive relevant adverse comments by May 15, 2014. If we receive relevant adverse comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take effect. We will address all public comments in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. We will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so now. Please note that if we receive a relevant adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, we may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

This action makes a determination based on air quality data. For that reason, this action:

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);

• does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. );

• is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. );

• does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);

• does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);

• is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);

• is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);

• is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the CAA; and

• 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 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because it merely makes a determination based on air quality data.

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 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 . A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register

. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by June 16, 2014. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this rule 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, Ozone, Incorporation by reference.

Dated: April 1, 2014. Samuel Coleman, Acting 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 T—Louisiana**

■ 2. Amend § 52.977 to add a new paragraph (e) to read as follows:

**§ 52.977 Control strategy and regulations: Ozone.** 
* * * * * (e) Clean Data Determination. Effective June 16, 2014 EPA has determined that the Baton Rouge, Louisiana, marginal 2008 8-hour ozone nonattainment area is currently attaining the 2008 8-hour NAAQS for

ozone.
[FR Doc. 2014–08369 Filed 4–14–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R06–OAR–2011–0500; FRL–9909–57– Region–6]** 

**Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Louisiana;**  **Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter** 

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a portion of a State Implementation Plan (SIP) submittal, and technical supplement from the State of Louisiana to address Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) that prohibit air emissions which will contribute significantly to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance in any other state for the 2006 fine particulate matter (PM2.5 ) national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). EPA has determined that the existing SIP for Louisiana contains adequate provisions to prohibit air pollutant emissions from significantly contributing to nonattainment or interfering with maintenance of the 2006 24-hour PM 2.5 NAAQS (2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS) in any other state as required by section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA.

**DATES :**  This final rule is effective on May 15, 2014.

**ADDRESSES :**  EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA–R06–OAR–2011–0500. 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 Planning Section (6PD–L),


### 21143 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 72 / Tuesday, April 15, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. Contact the person listed in the **FOR FURTHER INFORMATION**
**CONTACT** paragraph below to make an appointment.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Carl Young, (214) 665–6645, young.carl@
epa.gov

. **SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Throughout this document wherever ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean the EPA.

Table of Contents
I. Background II. Final Action III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Background

The background for today’s action is discussed in detail in our January 28, 2014 proposal (79 FR 4436). In that notice, we proposed to approve a portion of a Louisiana SIP submittal that the state submitted on May 16, 2011, and the technical supplement submitted on May 21, 2013, that determined the existing SIP for Louisiana contains adequate provisions to prohibit air emissions from contributing significantly to nonattainment or interfering with maintenance of the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS in any other state as required by CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). We did not receive any comments regarding our proposal.

II. Final Action

We are approving a portion of a SIP submittal for the State of Louisiana submitted on May 16, 2011, and the technical supplement submitted on May 21, 2013, to address interstate transport for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. Based on our evaluation, we approve the portion of the SIP submittal and technical supplement determining the existing SIP for Louisiana contains adequate provisions to prohibit air emissions from contributing significantly to nonattainment or interfering with maintenance of the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS in any other state as required by CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). This action is being taken under section 110 of the CAA. III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);

• Does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. );

• Is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. );

• Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104–4);

• Does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);

• Is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);

• Is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);

• Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the CAA; and

• 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 (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 CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by June 16, 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, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

Dated: April 1, 2014. Samuel Coleman, Acting 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 T—Louisiana**

■ 2. In § 52.970(e) the second table entitled ‘‘EPA Approved LouisianaNonregulatory Provisions and QuasiRegulatory Measures’’ is amended by adding an entry at the end for ‘‘Interstate transport for the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS (contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance)’’. The addition reads as follows:

**§ 52.970 Identification of plan.**
* * * * *

(e) * * *

* * * * *


### 21144 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 72 / Tuesday, April 15, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

EPA-A PPROVED 

### LOUISIANA 

### N ONREGULATORY 

### P ROVISIONS AND 

### Q UASI 

### -R EGULATORY 

### M EASURES

Name of SIP provision Applicable geographic or nonattainment area State submittal/effective date EPA approval date Explanation

******* Interstate transport for the 2006

PM 2.5 NAAQS (contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance). Statewide ..................... 5/16/2011 5/21/2013 4/15/2014 [Insert FR page number where document begins]. SIP submission dated 5/16/2011, technical supplement dated 5/21/ 2013.

[FR Doc. 2014–08484 Filed 4–14–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R06–OAR–2012–0100; FRL–9909–51– Region 6]** 

**Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Texas;**  **Reasonably Available Control Technology for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone**  **National Ambient Air Quality Standard**

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing its proposal to approve revisions to the Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the Houston/Galveston/Brazoria (HGB) 1997 8-Hour ozone nonattainment Area (Area). The HGB Area consists of Brazoria, Chambers, Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, Liberty, Montgomery and Waller counties. Specifically, we are finalizing our proposed approval of portions of two revisions to the Texas SIP submitted by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) as meeting certain Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) requirements for Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) in the HGB Area. This action is in accordance with section 110 of the federal Clean Air Act (the Act, CAA).

**DATES :**  This rule will be effective on May 15, 2014.

**ADDRESSES :**  The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA–R06–OAR–2012–0100. 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, 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 www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Planning Section (6PD–L), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. The file will be made available by appointment for public inspection in the Region 6 FOIA Review Room between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. weekdays except for legal holidays. Contact the person listed in the **FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT** paragraph below to make an appointment.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Mr. Alan Shar (6PD–L), telephone (214) 665–2164, email shar.alan@epa.gov

. **SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.

Outline
I. Background

A. What actions are we finalizing? 1. The June 13, 2007 Submittal 2. The April 6, 2010 Submittal B. When did the public comment period

expire? II. Evaluation

A. What are the public comments and

EPA’s response to them? B. What is TCEQ’s approach and analysis

to RACT? C. What source categories are we

addressing in this action? D. Are there any negative declarations

associated with the VOC source categories in the HGB Area? E. Is Texas’ approach to RACT

determination for VOC sources based on the June 13, 2007 and April 6, 2010 submittals acceptable? III. Final Action IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Background A. What actions are we finalizing?

We are finalizing our January 9, 2014 (79 FR 1612) proposal to approve portions of revisions to the Texas SIP submitted to EPA with two separate letters dated June 13, 2007 and April 6, 2010 from TCEQ. These two separate submittals are described below. 1. The June 13, 2007 Submittal The June 13, 2007 submittal concerns revisions to 30 TAC, Chapter 115 Control of Air Pollution from Volatile Organic Compounds. In addition, the June 13, 2007 submittal included an analysis intended to demonstrate RACT was being implemented in the HGB Area as required by the CAA (Appendix D of the submittal). We approved selected revisions as meeting RACT under the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for some, but not all of the submitted industry source categories in the HGB Area, on April 2, 2013 at 78 FR 19599. In our January 9, 2014 (79 FR 1612) proposal, we addressed additional source categories covered in this SIP submittal. 2. The April 6, 2010 Submittal

In conjunction with the June 13, 2007 submittal, we are also finalizing our proposal to approve a part of the April 6, 2010 revision to the Texas SIP for VOC RACT purposes. Specifically, we find that Texas has met certain RACT requirements under section 182(b). For more information on RACT evaluation for the HGB Area see section B of the January 9, 2014 (79 FR 1612) proposal. B. When did the public comment period expire?

The public comment period for the January 9, 2014 (79 FR 1612) proposal expired on February 10, 2014.

II. Evaluation A. What are the public comments and EPA’s response to them?

Comment: An individual commented that pollution has to stop at the source, there should be zero waste, and the polluter has to pay.

Response: EPA is not aware of a reasonably available and technologically feasible method to achieve zero waste for the source categories identified in Table 1 of the January 9, 2014 (79 FR 1612) proposal. The commenter did not provide any information to this effect, and no contact information was made available by the commenter in order for EPA to pursue an inquiry regarding