29354 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2014–11781 Filed 5–21–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R06–OAR–2014–0380; FRL–9911–25– 

Region 6] 

Finding of Failure To Submit a 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

State Implementation Plan Revision for 

Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 

Micrometers (PM2.5); Arkansas 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is finding that the State 

of Arkansas has not made a necessary 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD) State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

submission to address the PSD 

permitting of PM2.5 emissions, as 

required by the Clean Air Act (CAA). 

Specifically, the EPA is determining 

that Arkansas has not submitted a SIP 

revision to address the PM2.5 PSD 

increments and implementing 

regulations as promulgated by EPA on 

October 20, 2010. The deadline for the 

State to make the required submittal 

was 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: The effective date of this rule is 

May 22, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Adina Wiley, Air permits Section (6PD– 

R), Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 

1200, Dallas, TX 75202–2733. The 

telephone number is (214) 665–2115. 

Ms. Wiley can also be reached via 

electronic mail at wiley.adina@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. The 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 provided to 

make findings of failure to submit 

regarding SIP submissions, Congress did 

not intend such findings to 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). The 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 

Arkansas is effective immediately 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.’’ 

The 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 

Arkansas failed to submit a required 

PSD SIP revision by the mandated 

deadline of July 20, 2012. We have 

previously alerted Arkansas through 

meetings that it has failed to make the 

submittal by the deadline. Also on May 

9, 2014, we sent a letter to Arkansas, 

explaining that we were planning to 

take the action we are finalizing today. 

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 only starts a 24-month ‘‘clock’’ 

wherein the EPA must promulgate a 

Federal Implementation Plan. 

Furthermore, 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 

Arkansas and sources within the State, 

do not need time to adjust and prepare 

before the Finding of Failure to Submit 

takes effect. After numerous discussions 

with the Arkansas Department of 

Environmental Quality to resolve 

outstanding issues, the EPA has 

determined that moving as 

expeditiously as practicable on this 

finding is in the best interest of the 

implementation of the required PSD 

permitting program. The EPA finds that 

the above reasons support an effective 

date prior to thirty days after the date of 

publication and constitute good cause 

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

Throughout this document wherever 

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

the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background and Overview 

A. Overview of the PM NAAQS 

Requirements 

B. Revisions to the PSD Program To 

Implement the PM NAAQS 

1. Required Components of the 2008 NSR 

PM2.5 Implementation Rule 

2. Required Components of the 2010 PM2.5

PSD Increment—SILs—SMC Rule 

3. Optional Components of the 2010 PM2.5

PSD Increment—SILs—SMC Rule 

II. Finding of Failure To Submit 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

C Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

(UMRA) 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution or Use 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions 

To Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations 

K. Congressional Review Act 

L. Judicial Review 

I. Background and Overview 

A. Overview of the PM NAAQS 

Requirements 

The EPA initially established National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) for particulate matter (PM) 

under section 109 of the CAA in 1971. 

Since then, the EPA has made a number 

of changes to these standards to reflect 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 29355 

continually expanding scientific 

information. The revisions to the PM 

NAAQS are briefly summarized below. 

• In 1971, the EPA established 

NAAQS for PM, measured as Total 

Suspended Particles (TSP) (36 FR 8186). 

The primary standards were 260 mg/m3

24-hour average, not to be exceeded 

more than once per year, and 75 mg/m3, 

annual geometric mean. The secondary 

standard was 150 mg/m3, 24-hour, not to 

be exceeded more than once per year. 

• In July 1987, the EPA changed the 

indicator for PM from TSP to PM10, the 

latter including particles with an 

aerodynamic diameter less than or equal 

to a nominal 10 mm. (52 FR 24634). The 

EPA also revised the primary standards 

by (1) replacing the 24-hour TSP 

standard with a 24-hour PM10 standard 

of 150 mg/m3 with no more than one 

expected exceedance per year, and (2) 

replacing the annual TSP standard with 

a PM10 standard of 50 mg/m3, annual 

arithmetic mean. The secondary 

standard was revised by replacing it 

with 24-hour and annual PM10

standards identical in all respects to the 

primary standards. 

• In July 1997, the EPA determined 

that although the PM NAAQS should 

continue to focus on PM10, the fine and 

coarse fractions of PM10 should be 

considered separately (62 FR 38652). 

New standards were added, using PM2.5

as the indicator for fine particles. The 

PM10 standards were retained for the 

purpose of regulating the coarse fraction 

of PM10. The EPA established two new 

PM2.5 standards: an annual standard of 

15 mg/m3, based on the 3-year average of 

annual arithmetic mean PM2.5

concentrations from single or multiple 

monitors sited to represented 

community-wide air quality and a 24- 

hour standard of 65 mg/m3, based on the 

3-year average of the 98th percentile of 

24-hour PM2.5 concentrations at each 

population-oriented monitor within the 

area. 

• On October 17, 2006, the EPA 

promulgated revisions to the NAAQS 

for PM2.5 and PM10 with an effective 

date of December 18, 2006 (71 FR 

61144). We lowered the 24-hour 

NAAQS for PM2.5 from 65 mg/m3 to 35 

mg/m3, and retained the existing annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS of 15 mg/m3. In addition, 

we retained the existing PM10 24-hour 

NAAQS of 150 mg/m3, and revoked the 

annual PM10 NAAQS (set at 50 mg/m3). 

• On January 15, 2013, the EPA 

promulgated revisions to the NAAQS 

for PM2.5 and PM10 with an effective 

date of March 18, 2013 (78 FR 3086). We 

lowered the annual standard for PM2.5 to 

12 mg/m3 and retained the 24-hour PM2.5

standard at the level of 35 mg/m3. For 

PM10, the EPA retained the current 24- 

hour PM10 primary and secondary 

standards. 

B. Revisions to the PSD Program To 

Implement the PM NAAQS 

To implement the PM NAAQS for 

PSD purposes, 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). 

1. Required Components of the 2008 

NSR PM2.5 Implementation Rule 

EPA’s final 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. With respect to PSD 

permitting, the SIP revision submittals 

are required to: (1) Address directly 

emitted PM2.5 and precursor pollutants 

(including sulfur dioxide (SO2) and 

nitrogen oxides (NOX)) that contribute 

to the secondary formation of PM2.5; (2) 

establish significant emission rates for 

direct PM2.5 and precursor pollutants; 

and (3) account for gases that condense 

to form particles (condensables) in PM2.5

and PM10 applicability determinations 

and emission limits in PSD permits. 

2. Required Components of the 2010 

PM2.5 PSD Increment—SILs—SMC Rule 

The PM2.5 PSD Increment—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 SIP 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 increment. 

3. Optional Components of the 2010 

PM2.5 PSD Increment—SILs—SMC Rule 

The PM2.5 PSD Increment—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 U.S. Court of Appeals for the District 

of Columbia granted a request from the 

EPA to vacate and remand portions of 

the federal PSD regulations (40 CFR 

51.166(k)(2) and 52.21(k)(2)) 

establishing the SILs for PM2.5 so that 

the EPA could reconcile the 

inconsistency between the regulatory 

text and certain statements in the 

preamble to the 2010 final rule. Sierra 

Club v. EPA, 705 F.3d 458, 463–64. The 

court declined to vacate the portion of 

the federal PSD regulations (40 CFR 

51.165(b)(2)) establishing SILs for PM2.5

that did not contain the same 

inconsistency in the regulatory text. Id. 

at 465–66. The court further vacated the 

portions of the PSD regulations (40 CFR 

51.166(i)(5)(i)(c) and 52.21(i)(5)(i)(c)) 

establishing a PM2.5 SMC, finding that 

the EPA lacked legal authority to adopt 

and use the PM2.5 SMC to exempt 

permit applicants from the statutory 

requirement to compile and submit 

ambient monitoring data. Id. at 468–69. 

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 Arkansas does not include 

the optional SILs and SMC component 

of the PM2.5 PSD Increment—SILs— 

SMC Rule. 

II. Finding of Failure To Submit 

The EPA is making a finding that the 

State of Arkansas has failed to submit a 

required PSD SIP revision to address the 

implementation and permitting of PM2.5

emissions in the Arkansas PSD program. 

Specifically, we are finding that 

Arkansas 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, the EPA is required 

by the Act to promulgate a FIP for 

Arkansas to address the PM2.5 PSD 

requirements for increment. In addition, 

CAA section 110(c) provides that EPA 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

29356 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

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 May 22, 2014. 

This action also does not make a 

finding of failure to submit for Arkansas 

regarding the required PM2.5 PSD SIP 

revision due on May 19, 2011, pursuant 

to the 2008 NSR PM2.5 Implementation 

Rule. EPA previously promulgated a 

partial approval and partial disapproval 

of the Arkansas infrastructure SIP for 

the 1997 ozone NAAQS and the 1997 

and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS on August 20, 

2012. See 77 FR 50033. The partial 

disapproval was specific to the 

Arkansas PSD program for failing to 

include the required PSD elements from 

the May 16, 2008 NSR PM2.5

Implementation Rule. EPA’s 

disapproval as to these required SIP 

revisions started a separate FIP clock 

because the Arkansas PSD program 

lacked the PM2.5 PSD revisions as 

required by the 2008 rule. This separate 

FIP clock will expire on September 19, 

2014. 

EPA recognizes that the PM2.5 PSD 

elements from 2008 and 2010 are 

necessary for proper functioning of the 

PSD program for issuing permits for 

PM2.5. As described above, we also 

acknowledge that we now have two 

separate FIP clocks running for PM2.5

PSD elements with respect to Arkansas. 

The first clock, expiring on September 

19, 2014, is for the PSD revisions 

required by the 2008 NSR PM2.5

Implementation Rule. The second clock, 

ending 24-months from the effective 

date of today’s finding, addresses the 

PSD revisions required by the 2010 

PM2.5 PSD Increments—SILs—SMC 

Rule. Pursuant to the CAA, EPA will 

promulgate a FIP to address the entirety 

of the PM2.5 PSD permitting 

requirements in order to satisfy both FIP 

clocks and section 110(c) of the CAA. 

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 

prevention of significant deterioration 

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 OMB control 

number. The OMB control numbers for 

the 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 

(SBA) 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-for-profit 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 the 

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 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 29357 

defined in the EO to include regulations 

that have ‘‘substantial direct effects on 

the states, or the relationship between 

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 

the 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 the 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 

The 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 

Arkansas has failed to make a 

submission that is required under the 

Act 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 104– 

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

directs the 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 the 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, the 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. The 

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 notice is making a 

finding that the State of Arkansas 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 May 22, 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 May 22, 2014. 

L. Judicial Review 

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 21, 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, 

Administrative practices and 

procedures, Air pollution control, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental Relations, Nitrogen 

dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur 

oxides. 

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

Dated: May 9, 2014. 

Samuel Coleman, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

[FR Doc. 2014–11785 Filed 5–21–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES