Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 25 / Thursday, February 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 7065 

Guard; telephone 504–671–2128, email 

David.M.Frank@uscg.mil. If you have 

questions on viewing the docket, call 

Cheryl F. Collins, Program Manager, 

Docket Operations, telephone 202–366– 

9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The BNSF 

Railway Company requested a 

temporary deviation from the operating 

schedule on the Galveston Causeway 

Railroad Vertical Lift Bridge across the 

Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, mile 357.2 

west of Harvey Locks, at Galveston, 

Galveston County, Texas. 

The bridge has a vertical clearance of 

8 feet above mean high water, elevation 

3.0 feet NAVD88, in the closed-tonavigation position and 73 feet above 

mean high water in the open-tonavigation position. In accordance with 

33 CFR 117.5, the draw shall open on 

signal for the passage of vessels. 

This temporary deviation allows the 

vertical lift bridge to remain closed to 

navigation from 8 a.m. until 11 a.m. and 

from 12:30 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. on 

Thursday, February 27, 2014. During 

this time, the bridge owner will 

troubleshoot the bridge to attempt to 

correct a popping noise when trains 

cross the bridge. 

Navigation at the site of the bridge 

consists mainly of tows with barges and 

some recreational pleasure craft. Due to 

prior experience, as well as 

coordination with waterway users, it 

has been determined that this closure 

will not have a significant effect on 

these vessels. No alternate routes are 

available. 

In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35, 

the draw bridge must return to its 

regular operating schedule immediately 

at the end of the effective period of this 

temporary deviation. 

This deviation from the operating 

regulations is authorized under 33 CFR 

117.35. 

Dated: January 27, 2014. 

David M. Frank, 

Bridge Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2014–02577 Filed 2–5–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Department of the Army, Corps of 

Engineers 

33 CFR Part 211 

Real Estate Activities of the Corps of 

Engineers in Connection With Civil 

Works Projects 

AGENCY: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 

DoD. 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers is rescinding its regulation 

addressing Real Estate Activities of the 

Corps of Engineers in Connection with 

Civil Works Projects. Each rescinded 

section is obsolete, exempt from 

publication, or otherwise covers internal 

agency operations that have no public 

compliance component or adverse 

public impact. Regulations governing 

internal agency operations can be found 

on file with the agency. 

DATES: This rule is effective April 7, 

2014 without further notice, unless the 

Corps receives adverse comment by 

March 10, 2014. If we receive such 

adverse comment, we will publish a 

timely withdrawal in the Federal 

Register informing the public that this 

rule will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by docket number COE– 

2014–0001, by any of the following 

methods: 

Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Email: tom.angel@usace.army.mil. 

Include the docket number, COE–2014– 

0001, in the subject line of the message. 

Mail: Department of the Army, U.S. 

Army Corps of Engineers, ATTN: CECC– 

R (Tom Angel), 441 G Street NW., 

Washington, DC 20314–1000. 

Hand Delivery/Courier: Due to 

security requirements, we cannot 

receive comments by hand delivery or 

courier. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

docket number COE–2014–0001. All 

comments received will be included in 

the public docket without change and 

may be made available on-line at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the commenter indicates that the 

comment includes information claimed 

to be Confidential Business Information 

(CBI) or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. Do 

not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI, or otherwise 

protected, through regulations.gov or 

email. The regulations.gov Web site is 

an anonymous access system, which 

means we will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an email directly to the 

Corps without going through 

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, we recommend 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 we cannot read your 

comment because of technical 

difficulties and cannot contact you for 

clarification, we may not be able to 

consider your comment. Electronic 

comments should avoid the use of any 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to 

www.regulations.gov. All documents in 

the docket are listed. Although listed in 

the index, some information is not 

publicly available, such as CBI 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. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

J. Thomas Angel at (202) 761–7426 or by 

email at tom.angel@usace.army.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Executive Summary 

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is 

rescinding 33 CFR Part 211, Real Estate 

Activities of the Corps of Engineers in 

Connection with Civil Works Projects. 

Each rescinded section is obsolete, 

exempt from publication, or otherwise 

covers internal agency operations that 

have no public compliance component 

or adverse public impact. Regulations 

governing internal agency operations 

can be found on file with the agency. 

Administrative Requirements 

Plain Language 

In compliance with the principles in 

the President’s Memorandum of June 1, 

1998, regarding plain language, this 

preamble is written using plain 

language. The use of ‘‘we’’ in this rule 

refers to the Corps and the use of ‘‘you’’ 

refers to the reader. We have also used 

the active voice, short sentences, and 

common everyday terms except for 

necessary technical terms. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This action does not impose any new 

information collection burden under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Production 

Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Therefore, 

this action is not subject to the 

Paperwork Reduction Act. 

Executive Order 12866 and Executive 

Order 13563, ‘‘Improving Regulation 

and Regulatory Review’’ 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), the Corps must 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
7066 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 25 / Thursday, February 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

determine whether the regulatory action 

is ‘‘significant’’ and therefore subject to 

review by the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) and the requirements of 

the Executive Order. The Executive 

Order defines ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ as one that is likely to result in 

a rule that may: 

(1) Have an annual effect on the 

economy of $100 million or more or 

adversely affect in a material way the 

economy, a sector of the economy, 

productivity, competition, jobs, the 

environment, public health or safety, or 

State, local, or Tribal governments or 

communities; 

(2) Create a serious inconsistency or 

otherwise interfere with an action taken 

or planned by another agency; 

(3) Materially alter the budgetary 

impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, 

or loan programs or the rights and 

obligations of recipients thereof; or 

(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues 

arising out of legal mandates, the 

President’s priorities, or the principles 

set forth in these Executive Orders. 

Pursuant to the terms of Executive 

Order 12866, we have determined that 

this rule is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ because it does not meet any of 

these four criteria. 

Executive Order 13132 

Executive Order 13132, entitled 

‘‘Federalism’’ (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999), requires the Corps 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.’’ The phrase ‘‘policies that 

have Federalism implications’’ is 

defined in the Executive Order to 

include regulations that 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.’’ 

This rule does not have Federalism 

implications. We do not believe that this 

action will have substantial direct 

effects on the States, on the relationship 

between the Federal government and 

the States, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government. This rule 

does not impose new substantive 

requirements. In addition, this rule will 

not impose any additional substantive 

obligations on State or local 

governments. Therefore, Executive 

Order 13132 does not apply to this rule. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as 

Amended by the Small Business 

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 

1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. 

The RFA generally requires an agency 

to prepare a regulatory flexibility 

analysis of any rule subject to noticeand-comment rulemaking requirements 

under the Administrative Procedure Act 

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 purposes of assessing the impacts 

of this rule on small entities, a small 

entity is defined as: (1) A small business 

based on Small Business Administration 

size standards; (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; or (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 rule on small entities, we 

believe that this action will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 

Law 104–4, establishes requirements for 

Federal agencies to assess the effects of 

their regulatory actions on State, local, 

and Tribal governments and the private 

sector. Under Section 202 of the UMRA, 

the agencies generally must prepare a 

written statement, including a costbenefit analysis, for proposed and final 

rules with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may 

result in expenditures to State, local, 

and Tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or to the private sector, of 

$100 million or more in any one year. 

Before promulgating a rule for which a 

written statement is needed, section 205 

of the UMRA generally requires the 

agencies to identify and consider a 

reasonable number of regulatory 

alternatives and adopt the least costly, 

most cost-effective or least burdensome 

alternative that achieves the objectives 

of the rule. The provisions of section 

205 do not apply when they are 

inconsistent with applicable law. 

Moreover, section 205 allows the Corps 

to adopt an alternative other than the 

least costly, most cost-effective, or least 

burdensome alternative if the agency 

publishes with the final rule an 

explanation why that alternative was 

not adopted. Before the Corps 

establishes any regulatory requirements 

that may significantly or uniquely affect 

small governments, including Tribal 

governments, they must have developed 

under Section 203 of the UMRA a small 

government agency plan. The plan must 

provide for notifying potentially 

affected small governments, enabling 

officials of affected small governments 

to have meaningful and timely input in 

the development of regulatory proposals 

with significant Federal 

intergovernmental mandates, and 

informing, educating, and advising 

small governments on compliance with 

the regulatory requirements. 

We have determined that this rule 

does not contain a Federal mandate that 

may result in expenditures of $100 

million or more for State, local, and 

Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or 

the private sector in any one year. This 

rule removes regulations that are 

obsolete, exempt from publication, or 

otherwise cover internal agency 

operations that have no public 

compliance component or adverse 

public impact. This rule does not 

impose new substantive requirements 

and therefore does not contain a Federal 

mandate that may result in expenditures 

of $100 million or more for State, local, 

and Tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or the private sector in any 

one year. Therefore, this rule is not 

subject to the requirements of Sections 

202 and 205 of the UMRA. For the same 

reasons, we have determined that this 

rule contains no regulatory 

requirements that might significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments. 

Therefore, this rule is not subject to the 

requirements of Section 203 of UMRA. 

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 us to use voluntary consensus 

standards in our regulatory activities, 

unless to do so would be inconsistent 

with applicable law or otherwise 

impractical. Voluntary consensus 

standards are technical standards (e.g., 

materials specifications, test methods, 

sampling procedures, and business 

practices) that are developed or adopted 

by voluntary consensus standards 

bodies. The NTTAA directs us to 

provide Congress, through OMB, 

explanations when we decide not to use 

available and applicable voluntary 

consensus standards. 

This rule does not involve technical 

standards. Therefore, we did not 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 25 / Thursday, February 6, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 7067 

consider the use of any voluntary 

consensus standards. 

Executive Order 13045 

Executive Order 13045, ‘‘Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997), applies to any rule that: 

(1) Is determined to be ‘‘economically 

significant’’ as defined under Executive 

Order 12866, and (2) concerns an 

environmental health or safety risk that 

we have reason to believe may have a 

disproportionate effect on children. If 

the regulatory action meets both criteria, 

we must evaluate the environmental 

health or safety effects of the rule on 

children, and explain why the 

regulation is preferable to other 

potentially effective and reasonably 

feasible alternatives. 

This rule is not subject to this 

Executive Order because it is not 

economically significant as defined in 

Executive Order 12866. In addition, it 

does not concern an environmental or 

safety risk that we have reason to 

believe may have a disproportionate 

effect on children. 

Executive Order 13175 

Executive Order 13175, entitled 

‘‘Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR 

67249, November 6, 2000), requires 

agencies to develop an accountable 

process to ensure ‘‘meaningful and 

timely input by tribal officials in the 

development of regulatory policies that 

have tribal implications.’’ The phrase 

‘‘policies that have tribal implications’’ 

is defined in the Executive Order to 

include regulations that have 

‘‘substantial direct effects on one or 

more Indian tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal government and 

the Indian tribes, or on the distribution 

of power and responsibilities between 

the Federal government and Indian 

tribes.’’ 

This rule does not have tribal 

implications. It will not have substantial 

direct effects on tribal governments, on 

the relationship between the Federal 

government and the Indian tribes, or on 

the distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

government and Indian tribes. 

Therefore, Executive Order 13175 does 

not apply to this rule. 

Environmental Documentation 

This action will not have any adverse 

environmental impact and therefore 

environmental documentation under the 

National Environmental Policy Act is 

not required for this rule. 

Congressional Review Act 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as amended 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. We 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. A major rule cannot take effect 

until 60 days after it is published in the 

Federal Register. This rule is not a 

‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 

804(2). 

Executive Order 12898 

Executive Order 12898 requires that, 

to the greatest extent practicable and 

permitted by law, each Federal agency 

must make achieving environmental 

justice part of its mission. Executive 

Order 12898 provides that each Federal 

agency conduct its programs, policies, 

and activities that substantially affect 

human health or the environment in a 

manner that ensures that such programs, 

policies, and activities do not have the 

effect of excluding persons (including 

populations) from participation in, 

denying persons (including 

populations) the benefits of, or 

subjecting persons (including 

populations) to discrimination under 

such programs, policies, and activities 

because of their race, color, or national 

origin. This rule is not expected to 

negatively impact any community, and 

therefore is not expected to cause any 

disproportionately high and adverse 

impacts. 

Executive Order 13211 

This rule is not a ‘‘significant energy 

action’’ as defined in Executive Order 

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. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 211 

Claims, Flood control, Public lands, 

Real property acquisition, Reservoirs, 

Rights-of-way, Waterways. 

Dated: January 31, 2014. 

Scott Whiteford, 

Director of Real Estate. 

PART 211—[REMOVED] 

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, under the authority of 5 

U.S.C. 301, the Corps amends 33 CFR 

chapter II by removing part 211. 

[FR Doc. 2014–02604 Filed 2–5–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3720–58–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R08–OAR–2012–0746; FRL–9902–49- 

Region 8] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Utah; Revisions 

to Utah Rule R307–107; General 

Requirements; Breakdowns 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is approving changes to 

Utah’s rule R307–107, which pertains to 

source emissions during breakdowns. 

Utah’s prior version of rule R307–107 

had several deficiencies related to the 

treatment of excess emissions from 

sources during malfunction events. On 

April 18, 2011, EPA finalized a 

rulemaking which found that the Utah 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) was 

substantially inadequate to attain or 

maintain the national ambient air 

quality standards (NAAQS) or to 

otherwise comply with the requirements 

of the Clean Air Act (CAA) because it 

included rule R307–107. Concurrent 

with this finding, EPA issued a SIP call 

that required the State to revise its SIP 

by either removing R307–107 or 

correcting its deficiencies, and to submit 

the revised SIP to EPA by November 18, 

2012. On August 16, 2012, the State 

submitted to EPA revisions to R307– 

107. EPA is approving these revisions 

because they correct the identified SIP 

deficiencies concerning the treatment of 

excess emissions during malfunctions 

and, therefore, satisfy EPA’s April 18, 

2011 SIP call. This final approval 

eliminates all potential clocks for 

sanctions and for EPA to promulgate a 

federal implementation plan (FIP) 

related to the April 18, 2011 SIP call. 

DATES: This final rule is effective March 

10, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R08–OAR–2012–0746. 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 whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES