### 21668 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 74 / Thursday, April 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules

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 proposed 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 have also 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.

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) on request to the contact person listed under **FOR FURTHER INFORMATION**
**CONTACT**

.

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: April 14, 2014. Michael K. Yudin, Acting Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 2014–08796 Filed 4–16–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4000–01–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R06–OAR–2009–0594; FRL–9909–55– Region 6]** 

**Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; States of**  **Arkansas and Louisiana; Clean Air Interstate Rule State Implementation**  **Plan Revisions**

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). **ACTION :**  Proposed rule.

**SUMMARY :**  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve revisions submitted to the applicable State Implementation Plans (SIPs) addressing the requirements of EPA’s Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) for Arkansas and Louisiana. EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the CAIR NOX Ozone Season allocation methodology adopted on December 5, 2008, by the Arkansas Pollution Control and Ecology Commission and submitted as revisions to the Arkansas SIP on September 16, 2009. EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the CAIR NO X Annual and Ozone Season Abbreviated SIP for the annual and ozone season NO X allocation methodologies and the CAIR SO 2 SIP adopted on June 20, 2008 by the State of Louisiana and submitted as revisions to the Louisiana SIP on July 1, 2009. EPA has evaluated the CAIR SIP revisions for Arkansas and Louisiana and made the preliminary determination that these revisions are consistent with the requirements of CAIR and the Clean Air Act. Therefore we are proposing to approve the revisions to the Arkansas and Louisiana SIPs under section 110 of the Act.

**DATES :**  Written comments should be received on or before May 19, 2014.

**ADDRESSES :**  Comments may be mailed to Ms. Adina Wiley, Air Permits Section (6PD–R), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. Comments may also be submitted electronically or through hand delivery/courier by following the detailed instructions in the **ADDRESSES** section of the direct final rule located in the rules section of this Federal Register

. **FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Ms. Adina Wiley (6PD–R), telephone (214) 665–2115, email address wiley.adina@
epa.gov

.
**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  In the final rules section of this Federal Register , EPA is approving the State’s SIP submittal as a direct rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. A detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to this action no further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period. Any parties


### 21669 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 74 / Thursday, April 17, 2014 / Proposed Rules

1 Stephen D. Page, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. ‘‘Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2).’’ Memorandum to EPA Air Division Directors, Regions 1–10, September 13, 2013. interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time.

For additional information, see the direct final rule which is located in the rules section of this Federal Register

.

Dated: April 2, 2014. Samuel Coleman, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2014–08646 Filed 4–16–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R10–OAR–2013–0708, FRL–9909–47– Region 10]** 

**Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Idaho:**  **Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide and 2010 Sulfur**  **Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standards** 

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

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule.

**SUMMARY :**  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to find that the Idaho State Implementation Plan (SIP) meets the infrastructure requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) promulgated for nitrogen dioxide (NO 2) on January 22, 2010, and sulfur dioxide (SO 2) on June 2, 2010. Whenever a new or revised NAAQS is promulgated, the CAA requires states to submit a plan for the implementation, maintenance and enforcement of such NAAQS. The plan is required to address basic program elements, including but not limited to regulatory structure, monitoring, modeling, legal authority, and adequate resources necessary to assure attainment and maintenance of the standards. These elements are referred to as infrastructure requirements.

**DATES :**  Comments must be received on or before May 19, 2014.

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10– OAR–2013–0708, by any of the following methods:

• www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.

• Email: R10-Public

_Comments@
epa.gov

• Mail: Kristin Hall, EPA Region 10, Office of Air, Waste and Toxics (AWT– 107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101

• Hand Delivery/Courier: EPA Region 10 Mailroom, 9th floor, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101. Attention: Kristin Hall, Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, AWT–107. Such deliveries are only accepted during normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.

Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA–R10–OAR–2013– 0708. The EPA’s policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information the disclosure of which is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which means the EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment directly to the EPA without going through www.regulations.gov your email address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, the EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD–ROM you submit. If the EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.

Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., 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. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business hours at the Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Kristin Hall at (206) 553–6357, hall.kristin@epa.gov, or the above EPA, Region 10 address. **SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Throughout this document wherever ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, it is intended to refer to the EPA. Information is organized as follows:

Table of Contents

I. Background II. CAA Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Elements III. EPA Approach to Review of Infrastructure SIP Submittals IV. Analysis of the Idaho Submittals V. Proposed Action VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

The EPA first set standards for NO 2 in 1971, setting both a primary standard (to protect health) and a secondary standard (to protect the public welfare) at 53 parts per billion (53 ppb), averaged annually. The EPA reviewed the standards in 1985 and 1996, deciding to retain the standards at the conclusion of each review. In 2005, the EPA began another review, resulting in the January 22, 2010, rulemaking to establish an additional primary NO 2 standard at 100 ppb, averaged over one hour (75 FR 6474).

Primary standards for SO 2 were first set in 1971, at 0.14 parts per million (ppm) averaged over a 24-hour period, not to be exceeded more than once per year, and 0.030 ppm, annual arithmetic mean. The EPA subsequently reviewed the primary standards and determined to retain them in 1996 at the conclusion of the review. More recently, on June 2, 2010, the EPA promulgated a revised primary SO 2 standard at 75 ppb, based on a three-year average of the annual 99th percentile of one-hour daily maximum concentrations (75 FR 35520).

The CAA requires that states submit SIPs meeting the requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and (2) within three years after promulgation of a new or revised standard. CAA sections 110(a)(1) and (2) require states to address basic SIP elements, including emissions inventories, monitoring, and modeling to assure attainment andmaintenance of the standards, the socalled ‘‘infrastructure’’ requirements. To help states, the EPA issued guidance on September 13, 2013, addressing infrastructure SIP elements for certain NAAQS, including the 2010 NO 2 and 2010 SO 2 NAAQS. 1 As noted in the guidance, to the extent an existing SIP already meets the CAA section 110(a)(2)