Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 186 / Thursday, September 25, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 57445 

Steam Generators, and Process Heaters,’’ 

amended November 1, 2013. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2014–22482 Filed 9–24–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2013–0297; FRL–9912–69– 

Region 9] 

Revisions to the Arizona State 

Implementation Plan, Maricopa County 

Air Quality Department 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is taking direct final 

action to approve a revision to the 

Maricopa County Air Quality 

Department (MCAQD) portion of the 

Arizona State Implementation Plan 

(SIP). This revision concerns particulate 

matter (PM) emissions from 

incinerators, burn-off ovens and 

crematories. We are approving a local 

rule that regulates these emission 

sources under the Clean Air Act (CAA 

or the Act). 

DATES: This rule is effective on 

November 24, 2014 without further 

notice, unless EPA receives adverse 

comments by October 27, 2014. If we 

receive such comments, we will publish 

a timely withdrawal in the Federal 

Register to notify the public that this 

direct final rule will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2013–0297, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions. 

2. Email: steckel.andrew@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel 

(Air–4), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Instructions: All comments 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 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through 

www.regulations.gov or email. 

www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous 

access’’ system, and EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send email 

directly to EPA, your email address will 

be automatically captured and included 

as part of the public comment. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, 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: Generally, documents in the 

docket for this action are available 

electronically at www.regulations.gov 

and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, 

California 94105–3901. While all 

documents in the docket are listed at 

www.regulations.gov, some information 

may be publicly available only at the 

hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted 

material, large maps), and some may not 

be publicly available in either location 

(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy 

materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Idalia Pe ́rez, EPA Region IX, (415) 972– 

3248, perez.idalia@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rule did the State submit? 

B. Are there other versions of this rule? 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rule? 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is EPA evaluating the rule? 

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

C. EPA Recommendations To Further 

Improve the Rule 

D. Public Comment and Final Action 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rule did the State submit? 

Table 1 lists the rule we are approving 

with the dates that it was adopted by the 

local air agency and submitted by the 

Arizona Department of Environmental 

Quality (ADEQ). 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULE

Local 

agency Rule No. Rule title Adopted Submitted 

MCAQD 313 Incinerators, Burn-Off Ovens and Crematories ..................................................................... 05/09/12 08/27/12 

On February 27, 2013, the submittal 

for MCAQD Rule 313 was deemed by 

operation of law to meet the 

completeness criteria in 40 CFR Part 51 

Appendix V, which must be met before 

formal EPA review. 

B. Are there other versions of this rule? 

The MCAQD adopted an earlier 

version of Rule 313 on July 13, 1988 and 

ADEQ submitted it to us on January 4, 

1990. EPA never took action on this 

version of the rule. While we can only 

act on the most recently submitted 

version, we have reviewed materials 

provided with previous submittals. 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rule? 

PM contributes to effects that are 

harmful to human health and the 

environment, including premature 

mortality, aggravation of respiratory and 

cardiovascular disease, decreased lung 

function, visibility impairment, and 

damage to vegetation and ecosystems. 

Section 110(a) of the CAA requires 

States to submit regulations that control 

PM emissions. Rule 313 limits PM 

emissions from incinerators, burn-off 

ovens and crematories through a 

combination of emission standards and 

work practices. EPA’s technical support 

document (TSD) has more information 

about this rule. 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is EPA evaluating the rule? 

Generally, SIP rules must be 

enforceable (see section 110(a) of the 

Act) and must not relax existing 

requirements (see sections 110(l) and 

193). In addition, areas designated and 

classified as moderate nonattainment for 

PM–10 must implement Reasonably 

Available Control Measures (RACM), 

and areas designated and classified as 

serious nonattainment for PM–10 must 

implement Best Available Control 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
57446 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 186 / Thursday, September 25, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

Measures (BACM) (see CAA sections 

189(a)(1) and 189(b)(1)). The MCAQD 

regulates a PM–10 nonattainment area 

classified as serious (see 40 CFR Part 

81.303). 

Guidance and policy documents that 

we used to evaluate this rule include the 

following: 

1. ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation 

Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations; 

Clarification to Appendix D of November 24, 

1987 Federal Register Notice,’’ (Blue Book), 

notice of availability published in the May 

25, 1988 Federal Register. 

2. ‘‘Guidance Document for Correcting 

Common VOC & Other Rule Deficiencies,’’ 

EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little 

Bluebook). 

3. ‘‘State Implementation Plans; General 

Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of 

the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,’’ 57 

FR 13498 (April 16, 1992); 57 FR 18070 

(April 28, 1992). 

4. ‘‘State Implementation Plans for Serious 

PM–10 Nonattainment Areas, and 

Attainment Date Waivers for PM–10 

Nonattainment Areas Generally; Addendum 

to the General Preamble for the 

Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act 

Amendments of 1990,’’ 59 FR 41998 (August 

16, 1994). 

5. ‘‘PM–10 Guideline Document,’’ EPA 

452/R–93–008, April 1993. 

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

We believe this rule is consistent with 

the relevant requirements and policy 

regarding enforceability, BACM and SIP 

revisions. The TSD has more 

information on our evaluation. 

C. EPA Recommendations To Further 

Improve the Rule 

The TSD describes additional 

revisions that we recommend for the 

next time the local agency modifies the 

rule. 

D. Public Comment and Final Action 

As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of 

the Act, EPA is fully approving the 

submitted rule because we believe it 

fulfills all relevant requirements. We do 

not think anyone will object to this 

approval, so we are finalizing it without 

proposing it in advance. However, in 

the Proposed Rules section of this 

Federal Register, we are simultaneously 

proposing approval of the same 

submitted rule. If we receive adverse 

comments by October 27, 2014, we will 

publish a timely withdrawal in the 

Federal Register to notify the public 

that the direct final approval will not 

take effect and we will address the 

comments in a subsequent final action 

based on the proposal. If we do not 

receive timely adverse comments, the 

direct final approval will be effective 

without further notice on November 24, 

2014. This will incorporate the rule into 

the federally enforceable SIP. 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

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, 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 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address 

disproportionate human health or 

environmental effects with practical, 

appropriate, 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 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 November 24, 

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. Parties with objections to this 

direct final rule are encouraged to file a 

comment in response to the parallel 

notice of proposed rulemaking for this 

action published in the Proposed Rules 

section of today’s Federal Register, 

rather than file an immediate petition 

for judicial review of this direct final 

rule, so that EPA can withdraw this 

direct final rule and address the 

comment in the proposed rulemaking. 

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, 

Particulate matter, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: May 30, 2014. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code 

of Federal Regulations is amended as 

follows: 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 186 / Thursday, September 25, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 57447 

1According to Subsection 62–302.400(1), Florida 

Administrative Code (F.A.C.): 

Class I Potable Water Supplies. 

Class III Fish Consumption; Recreation, 

Propagation and Maintenance of a Healthy, WellBalanced Population of Fish and Wildlife. 

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 D—Arizona 

■ 2. Section 52.120 is amended by 

adding paragraph (c)(163) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.120 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(163) The following plan was 

submitted on August 27, 2012 by the 

Governor’s Designee. 

(i) Incorporation by Reference. 

(A) Maricopa County Air Quality 

Department. 

(1) Rule 313, ‘‘Incinerators, Burn-Off 

Ovens and Crematories,’’ revised May 9, 

2012. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2014–22743 Filed 9–24–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 131 

[EPA–HQ–OW–2009–0596; FRL–9916–62– 

OW] 

RIN 2040–AF50 

Water Quality Standards for the State 

of Florida’s Lakes and Flowing Waters; 

Withdrawal 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is finalizing its 

withdrawal of federal water quality 

standards applicable to waters of the 

state of Florida now that Florida has 

adopted and EPA has approved relevant 

state standards. On December 6, 2010, 

EPA published a rule finalizing numeric 

nutrient standards for Florida’s lakes, 

springs, and flowing waters outside of 

the South Florida Nutrient Watershed 

Region. The EPA established these 

water quality standards to protect 

Florida’s Class I and III freshwaters from 

nitrogen and phosphorus pollution. On 

November 30, 2012, June 27, 2013, and 

September 26, 2013, EPA approved 

numeric nutrient standards adopted by 

the state of Florida for certain waters in 

the state. 

Some of the water body types and 

provisions covered by state-adopted 

water quality standards were also 

included in EPA’s final inland waters 

rule (criteria for Florida’s lakes and 

springs, approaches to protect 

downstream lakes, and a provision for 

developing Site-Specific Alternative 

Criteria). The EPA is now withdrawing 

the overlapping federally-promulgated 

water quality standards to allow Florida 

to implement its state-adopted, EPAapproved water quality standards to 

address nutrient pollution in Florida’s 

waters. Additionally, this rule serves as 

final notice that EPA is not finalizing 

three 2012 federal proposed rules 

related to nutrient pollution in Florida. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

October 27, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–OW–2009–0596. 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 of which 

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 EPA Docket Center, EPA West Room 

3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW, 

Washington, DC 20004, Attention: 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OW–2009– 

0596. The Office of Water (OW) Docket 

Center is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 

p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding 

legal holidays. The OW Docket Center 

telephone number is 202–566–1744. 

The Public Reading Room is open from 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding legal holidays. The 

telephone number for the Public 

Reading Room is 202–566–1744. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

information concerning this rulemaking, 

contact: Erica Fleisig, U.S. EPA, Office 

of Water, Mailcode 4305T, 1200 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, 

DC 20460; telephone number 202–566– 

1057; email address: fleisig.erica@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final 

rule is organized as follows: 

I. General Information 

A. Which water bodies are affected by this 

action? 

B. What entities may be affected by this 

action? 

C. How can I get copies of this document 

and other related information? 

II. Background 

A. Background on EPA’s Inland Rule, 

Amended Determinations, and Approval 

of State Criteria 

B. 2014 District Court Ruling and 

Modification of Consent Decree 

C. Summary of and Response to Public 

Comments on the Proposed Rule 

D. Withdrawal of Federal Criteria for 

Lakes, Springs, and DPVs 

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 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

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 

Advancement Act of 1995 

J. Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions 

To Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations) 

K. Congressional Review Act 

I. General Information 

A. Which water bodies are affected by 

this action? 

In this final rule, EPA is withdrawing 

federally promulgated water quality 

standards (WQS) from a group of inland 

waters of the United States within 

Florida. Specifically, as defined below 

and in EPA’s December 6, 2010 final 

inland waters rule (40 CFR 131.43), EPA 

is withdrawing the federal criteria for 

Florida’s Class I and III 1 freshwater 

lakes and springs, as well as 

downstream protection values (DPVs) to 

protect downstream lakes and a 

provision for developing site-specific 

alternative criteria (SSAC) in all water 

bodies. 

The EPA’s final inland waters rule 

defined ‘‘Predominantly fresh waters’’ 

to mean surface waters in which the 

chloride concentration at the surface is 

less than 1,500 milligrams per liter (mg/ 

L). The EPA defined ‘‘Lake’’ as a slowmoving or standing body of freshwater 

that occupies an inland basin that is not 

a stream, spring, or wetland. Finally, 

EPA defined ‘‘Spring’’ as a site at which 

ground water flows through a natural 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES