26628 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 90 / Friday, May 9, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

satisfies the requirements of (c)(1)(iii) 

and (iv) of this section. 

(d) Effect of indemnification on 

qualified mortgage status. An 

indemnification demand or resolution 

of a demand that relates to whether the 

loan satisfied relevant eligibility and 

underwriting requirements at the time 

of consummation may result from facts 

that could allow a change to qualified 

mortgage status, but the existence of an 

indemnification does not per se remove 

qualified mortgage status. 

(Authority: 15 U.S.C. 1639C(b)(3)(B)(ii), 38 

U.S.C. 3710, 3720) 

(e) Restatement. * * * 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Amend § 36.4340 by: 

■ a. Revising paragraph (a). 

■ b. Redesignating paragraph (b) as 

paragraph (b)(1). 

■ c. Adding a new paragraph (b)(2). 

The revision and addition read as 

follows: 

§ 36.4340 Underwriting standards, 

processing procedures, lender 

responsibility, and lender certification. 

(a) Use of standards. The standards 

contained in paragraphs (c) through (j) 

of this section will be used to determine 

whether the veteran’s present and 

anticipated income and expenses, and 

credit history, are satisfactory. These 

standards do not apply to loans 

guaranteed pursuant to 38 U.S.C. 

3710(a)(8) except for cases where the 

Secretary is required to approve the loan 

in advance under § 36.4307. 

(b)(1) * * * 

(2) Exemption from income 

verification for certain refinance loans. 

Notwithstanding paragraphs (a) and 

(b)(1) of this section, a streamlined 

refinance loan to be guaranteed 

pursuant to 38 U.S.C. 3710(a)(8) and (e) 

is exempt from income verification 

requirements of the Truth-in-Lending 

Act (15 U.S.C. 1639C) and its 

implementing regulations only if all of 

the following conditions are met: 

(i) The veteran is not 30 days or more 

past due on the prior existing residential 

mortgage loan; 

(ii) The proposed streamlined 

refinance loan would not increase the 

principal balance outstanding on the 

prior existing residential mortgage loan, 

except to the extent of fees and charges 

allowed by VA; 

(iii) Total points and fees payable in 

connection with the proposed 

streamlined refinance loan are in 

accordance with 12 CFR 1026.32, will 

not exceed 3 percent of the total new 

loan amount, and are in compliance 

with VA’s allowable fees and charges 

found at 38 CFR 36.4313; 

(iv) The interest rate on the proposed 

streamlined refinance loan will be lower 

than the interest rate on the original 

loan, unless the borrower is refinancing 

from an adjustable rate to a fixed-rate 

loan, under guidelines that VA has 

established; 

(v) The proposed streamlined 

refinance loan will be subject to a 

payment schedule that will fully 

amortize the IRRRL in accordance with 

VA regulations; 

(vi) The terms of the proposed 

streamlined refinance loan will not 

result in a balloon payment, as defined 

in TILA; and 

(vii) Both the residential mortgage 

loan being refinanced and the proposed 

streamlined refinance loan satisfy all 

other VA requirements. 

(Authority: 15 U.S.C. 1639C(a)(5), 38 U.S.C. 

3710) 

* * * * * 

■ 4. Amend § 36.4500 by: 

■ a. Revising the section heading. 

■ b. Adding a heading to paragraph (a). 

■ c. Adding a heading to paragraph (b). 

■ d. Redesignating paragraph (c) as 

paragraph (d). 

■ e. Adding a new paragraph (c). 

■ f. Adding a heading to newly 

redesignated paragraph (d). 

The revision and additions read as 

follows: 

§ 36.4500 Applicability and qualified 

mortgage status. 

(a) Applicability to direct loans. * * * 

(b) Applicability to direct loans to 

Native Americans. * * * 

(c) Safe harbor qualified mortgage. (1) 

Defined. A safe harbor qualified 

mortgage meets the Ability-to-Repay 

requirements of sections 129B and 129C 

of the Truth-in-Lending Act (TILA) 

regardless of whether the loan might be 

considered a high cost mortgage 

transaction as defined by section 103bb 

of TILA (15 U.S.C. 1602bb). 

(2) Applicability of safe harbor 

qualified mortgage. All VA direct loans 

made pursuant to 38 U.S.C. 3711, Native 

American Direct Loans made pursuant 

to 38 U.S.C. 3761, et seq., and vendee 

loans made pursuant to 38 U.S.C. 3720 

and 3733 are safe harbor qualified 

mortgages. 

(Authority: 15 U.S.C. 1639C(b)(3)(B)(ii), 38 

U.S.C. 3710) 

(d) Restatement. * * * 

* * * * * 

■ 5. In § 36.4501, add the term ‘‘Vendee 

loan’’ immediately after the definition of 

‘‘Trust land’’ to read as follows: 

§ 36.4501 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Vendee loan means a loan made by 

the Secretary for the purpose of 

financing the purchase of a property 

acquired pursuant to chapter 37 of title 

38, United States Code. 

(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 3720, 3733) 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2014–10600 Filed 5–8–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8320–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R10–OAR–2013–0707; FRL–9910–54- 

Region 10] 

Revision to the Washington State 

Implementation Plan; Update to the 

Solid Fuel Burning Devices 

Regulations 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The EPA is approving a State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 

submitted by the Washington State 

Department of Ecology (Ecology) on 

January 30, 2014. The SIP submission 

contains revisions to Washington’s solid 

fuel burning device rules to control fine 

particulate matter (PM2.5) from 

residential wood combustion. The 

updated regulations reflect Washington 

State statutory changes made in 2012, 

setting revised PM2.5 trigger levels for 

impaired air quality burn bans and 

setting criteria for prohibiting solid fuel 

burning devices that are not certified. 

The submission also contains updates to 

the regulations to improve the clarity of 

the language. 

DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is 

effective June 9, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R10–OAR–2013–0707. 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 

(CBI) or other information the disclosure 

of which is restricted by statute. Certain 

other material, such as copyrighted 

material, is not placed on the Internet 

and will be publicly available only in 

hard copy form. Publicly available 

docket materials are available either 

electronically through 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Air Programs Unit, Office of Air 

Waste and Toxics, EPA Region 10, 1200 

Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA, 98101. The 

EPA requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the individual listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 90 / Friday, May 9, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 26629 

view the hard copy of the docket. You 

may view the hard copy of the docket 

Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 

4:00 p.m., excluding Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff 

Hunt at (206) 553–0256, hunt.jeff@

epa.gov, or the above EPA, Region 10 

address. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, wherever 

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

intended to refer to the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background Information 

II. Response to Comments 

III. Final Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Orders Review 

I. Background Information 

An explanation of the Clean Air Act 

requirements and implementing 

regulations that are met by this SIP 

submittal, a detailed explanation of the 

revisions, and the EPA’s reasons for 

approving it were provided in the notice 

of proposed rulemaking published on 

March 4, 2014, and will not be restated 

here (79 FR 12136). On March 25, 2014, 

the EPA received one comment via the 

www.regulations.gov Web site. 

II. Response to Comments 

Comment: ‘‘Wood stoves are now 

designed to re-burn the smoke and get 

98 percent of particle matter out of the 

air. By more complete and efficient 

burning, the heat derived from wood is 

maximized and the particle matter is 

minimized. In a metro city, an 

inefficient stove or fireplace will cause 

neighbors to get upset at the smoke from 

using such a unit. If a smoke reburning 

unit is used, the smoke is considerably 

less and with less particles there is less 

irritation and problems for neighbors. I 

suggest that any reburning stove or 

fireplace be exempted from any such 

rules.’’ 

Response: Under section 110 of the 

Clean Air Act states are responsible for 

developing regulations and control 

measures to address air pollution for 

incorporation into the SIP. The EPA’s 

role is to evaluate these state choices to 

determine if the revisions meet the 

requirements of the Clean Air Act. To 

the extent that the commenter wants to 

influence these state choices, the 

comments are best submitted during the 

state public comment period rather than 

as part of the EPA’s approval or 

disapproval process. The EPA has 

determined that Washington’s January 

30, 2014 submittal meets all Clean Air 

Act requirements for approval. The EPA 

provided a copy of the comment to 

Ecology for consideration during future 

state rulemaking, but is otherwise taking 

no further action on the comment. 

III. Final Action 

The EPA is approving Washington’s 

SIP revision submitted on January 30, 

2014. Specifically, the EPA is approving 

and incorporating by reference into the 

SIP the rules shown in the Table below. 

We have made the determination that 

this action is consistent with section 

110 of the Clean Air Act. 

APPROVED RULES

Agency Citation 

(WAC) Title State effective date Submitted 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ecology ........ 173–433–155 Criteria for Prohibiting the Use of Solid Fuel Burning Devices that Are Not 

Certified.

02/23/14 01/30/14 

IV. Statutory and Executive Orders 

Review 

Under the Clean Air Act, the 

Administrator is required to approve a 

SIP submission that complies with the 

provisions of the Act and applicable 

Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 

40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP 

submissions, the EPA’s role is to 

approve state choices, provided that 

they meet the criteria of the Clean Air 

Act. 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 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

this action does not involve technical 

standards; and 

• does not provide the EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the rule 

neither imposes substantial direct 

compliance costs on tribal governments, 

nor preempts tribal law. Therefore, the 

requirements of section 5(b) and 5(c) of 

the Executive Order do not apply to this 

rule. Consistent with EPA policy, the 

EPA nonetheless provided a 

consultation opportunity to the 

Puyallup Tribe in a letter dated 

September 3, 2013, and to all other 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
26630 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 90 / Friday, May 9, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

tribes located in Washington State in 

letters dated December 24, 2013. The 

EPA did not receive a request for 

consultation. 

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 July 8, 2014. 

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, Particulate matter, 

Incorporation by reference, and 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: April 15, 2014. 

Dennis J. McLerran, 

Regional Administrator, Region 10. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for Part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart WW—Washington 

■ 2. Section 52.2470 is amended in 

paragraph (c) Table 1—Washington 

Department of Ecology Regulations by: 

■ a. Revising the heading ‘‘Washington 

Administrative Code, Chapter 173– 

433—Solid Fuel Burning Device 

Standards’’ to read ‘‘Washington 

Administrative Code, Chapter 173– 

433—Solid Fuel Burning Devices’’; 

■ b. Revising entries 173–433–010 

through 173–433–120; 

■ c. Revising entries 173–433–140 and 

173–433–150; 

■ d. Adding in numerical order entry 

173–433–155. 

The revisions and additions read as 

follows: 

§ 52.2470 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

TABLE 1—WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY REGULATIONS

State citation Title/subject State effective 

date EPA approval date Explanations 

*******

Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173–433—Solid Fuel Burning Devices 

173–433–010 .... Purpose ......................................................... 02/23/14 05/09/14 [Insert page number where the 

document begins].

........................

173–433–020 .... Applicability ................................................... 02/23/14 05/09/14 [Insert page number where the 

document begins].

........................

173–433–030 .... Definitions ...................................................... 02/23/14 05/09/14 [Insert page number where the

document begins].

........................

173–433–100 .... Emission Performance Standards ................ 02/23/14 05/09/14 [Insert page number where the 

document begins].

........................

173–433–110 .... Opacity Standards ......................................... 02/23/14 05/09/14 [Insert page number where the 

document begins].

........................

173–433–120 .... Prohibited Fuel Types ................................... 02/23/14 05/09/14 [Insert page number where the 

document begins].

........................

*******

173–433–140 .... Criteria for Impaired Air Quality Burn Bans .. 02/23/14 05/09/14 [Insert page number where the 

document begins].

........................

173–433–150 .... Restrictions on the Operation of Solid Fuel 

Burning Devices.

02/23/14 05/09/14 [Insert page number where the 

document begins].

........................

173–433–155 .... Criteria for Prohibiting the Use of Solid Fuel 

Burning Devices that Are Not Certified.

02/23/14 05/09/14 [Insert page number where the 

document begins].

........................

*******


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 90 / Friday, May 9, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 26631 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2014–10581 Filed 5–8–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE 

ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES 

National Endowment for the 

Humanities 

45 CFR Part 1172 

RIN 3136–AA33 

Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Age 

in Federally Assisted Programs or 

Activities 

AGENCY: National Endowment for the 

Humanities. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: In this final rule, the National 

Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) is 

issuing Age Discrimination Act of 1975 

(the Act or the Age Act) regulations. 

These regulations implement provisions 

of the Act and the general, governmentwide age discrimination regulations 

promulgated by the United States 

Department of Health and Human 

Services (HHS). 

These regulations are designed to 

guide the actions of recipients of 

Federal financial assistance from NEH 

and incorporate the basic standards set 

forth in the general, government-wide 

regulations for determining what 

constitutes age discrimination. These 

regulations also discuss the 

responsibilities of NEH recipients and 

the investigations, conciliation, and 

enforcement procedures NEH has been 

using and will continue to use to ensure 

compliance with the Act. 

DATES: The final rule will be effective 

June 9, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mara Campbell, Office of the General 

Counsel, NEH, at 202–606–8322, 202– 

606–8282 (TDD), or mcampbell@

neh.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

General Information 

The Age Discrimination Act of 1975, 

as amended, 42 U.S.C. 6101 et seq., (the 

Act or the Age Act), prohibits 

discrimination on the basis of age in 

programs or activities receiving Federal 

financial assistance. The Act, which 

applies to persons of all ages, also 

contains certain exceptions that permit, 

under limited circumstances, use of age 

distinctions or factors other than age 

that may have a disproportionate effect 

on the basis of age. 

The Act however, does not cover 

employment discrimination on the basis 

of age, which is addressed by a different 

statute, the Age Discrimination in 

Employment Act of 1967, as amended, 

29 U.S.C. 621 et seq., (ADEA). The 

ADEA applies specifically to 

employment practices and programs, 

both in the public and private sectors, 

and only applies to persons who are age 

forty and over. Complaints of 

employment discrimination based on 

age by recipients of Federal financial 

assistance are subject to the ADEA—and 

not the Act or these regulations—and 

should instead be filed with the Equal 

Employment Opportunity Commission 

(EEOC) (29 CFR part 1626). 

Rulemaking History 

The Act required the former 

Department of Health, Education and 

Welfare (HEW) to issue general, 

government-wide regulations setting 

standards to be followed by all Federal 

agencies implementing the Act. These 

government-wide regulations, issued on 

June 12, 1979 and codified at 45 CFR 

part 90, require each agency to publish 

agency-specific regulations 

implementing the Act and to submit 

such final agency regulations to HEW 

(now HHS) before publication in the 

Federal Register. (See 45 CFR 90.31). 

The Act became effective on July 1, 

1979—the effective date of HEW’s final 

government-wide regulations—and NEH 

has enforced the provisions of the Act 

since that time. 

NEH first proposed agency-specific 

regulations implementing the Act on 

October 4, 1979 (44 FR 57130), but did 

not publish the final regulations. As a 

practical matter, however, the absence 

of such regulations has not affected 

NEH’s enforcement of prohibitions 

against discrimination on the basis of 

age in programs or activities receiving 

financial assistance from NEH. 

Since a significant amount of time 

had passed, and because regulatory 

development guidelines had changed, 

NEH began the regulatory process anew 

and published a proposed rule, 

including a full regulatory analysis 

under the Administrative Procedure 

Act, in the Federal Register on May 15, 

2013 (78 FR 28569). The public 

comment period ended on July 15, 2013, 

and the only comments NEH received 

were from the EEOC. 

Comments From EEOC 

The majority of the EEOC’s comments 

were intended to address potential 

confusion among the employment 

community and employees who may be 

unaware that the Age Act and the ADEA 

are separate statutes with different 

purposes, procedures, and remedies. In 

order to address this concern, NEH 

created a new ‘‘General Information’’ 

section under the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION heading. This new section 

provides information on the ADEA and 

how it differs from the Age Act. 

In addition to inserting this general 

overview, NEH amended specific 

sections of the rule to more clearly 

distinguish the two Acts: 

Section 1172.1 has been amended to 

state that complaints of employment 

discrimination based on age by 

recipients of Federal financial assistance 

are subject to the ADEA and should be 

filed administratively with the EEOC. 

Section 1172.2(b) has been amended 

to include subsection (3) which states 

that these regulations do not in any way 

affect any rights or responsibilities 

under the ADEA, the EEOC’s regulations 

under the ADEA, or any statements of 

policy promulgated by EEOC under the 

ADEA. 

Section 1172.3 has been amended to 

include a definition of the ADEA. 

HHS Review 

As part of the clearance process 

required by the government-wide Age 

Act regulations, NEH submitted its draft 

final rule to HHS for review prior to 

publication. In response to this review, 

NEH updated the following sections: 

Section 1172.12 has been amended to 

include subsection (e) which states that 

any age distinction issued by NEH in a 

regulation is presumed to be necessary 

to achieve a statutory objective, 

notwithstanding the provisions of 

§ 1172.12(a). 

Sections 1172.24 and 1172.33 have 

been amended to replace the word 

‘‘must’’ with ‘‘shall.’’ 

Section 1172.33(a) has been amended 

to include the words, ‘‘Unless the age 

distinction complained of is clearly 

within an exception,’’ at the beginning 

of the sentence. Additionally, the 

second sentence of subpart (b) has been 

deleted. 

Sections 1172.33(c) and 1124.34(a)(1) 

have been amended to replace the word 

‘‘settlement’’ with ‘‘mediation.’’ 

Section 1172.36(d) has been amended 

to include subsection (3) which states 

that deferrals will be limited to the 

particular recipient and particular 

program or activity. 

Additional Changes 

In addition to the changes noted 

above, NEH updated the following 

section of the final rule: 

Section 1172.2(b) has been amended 

to delete the words ‘‘any program or 

activity receiving Federal financial 

assistance under the Workforce 

Investment Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 9201 

et seq.)’’ as Congress eliminated this 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES