Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 42 / Tuesday, March 4, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 12079 

1A conformity SIP includes a state’s specific 

criteria and procedures for certain aspects of the 

Continued 

TABLE 1—WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY REGULATIONS—Continued 

State citation Title/subject State 

effective date EPA approval date Explanations 

173–476–130 .... Ambient Air Quality Standards for Sulfur Oxides (Sulfur Dioxide).12/22/13 3/4/14 [Insert page number where the document begins].........................

173–476–140 .... Ambient Air Quality Standards for Nitrogen 

Oxides (Nitrogen Dioxide).

12/22/13 3/4/14 [Insert page number where the document begins].........................

173–476–150 .... Ambient Air Quality Standard for Ozone ...... 12/22/13 3/4/14 [Insert page number where the document begins].........................

173–476–160 .... Ambient Air Quality Standards for Carbon 

Monoxide.

12/22/13 3/4/14 [Insert page number where the document begins].........................

173–476–170 .... Monitor Siting Criteria ................................... 12/22/13 3/4/14 [Insert page number where the document begins].........................

173–476–180 .... Reference Conditions .................................... 12/22/13 3/4/14 [Insert page number where the document begins].........................

173–476–900 .... Table of Standards ........................................ 12/22/13 3/4/14 [Insert page number where the document begins].........................

*******

[FR Doc. 2014–04615 Filed 3–3–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R08–0AR–2011–0562; FRL–9905–67- 

Region 8] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; State of 

Colorado; Revised Transportation 

Conformity Consultation Process 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is approving a State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 

submitted by the State of Colorado on 

May 11, 2012. The May 11, 2012 

submittal addresses updates to 

Regulation Number 10 ‘‘Criteria for 

Analysis of Conformity’’ of the Colorado 

SIP including revisions to transportation 

conformity requirements, transportation 

conformity criteria and procedures 

related to interagency consultation, and 

enforceability of certain transportation 

related control and mitigation measures. 

The submittal also removes certain 

provisions from the SIP so that federal 

rules will govern conformity of general 

federal actions. EPA is approving the 

submission in accordance with the 

requirements of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA). 

DATES: This final rule is effective April 

3, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R08–OAR–2011–0562. 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., Confidential Business Information 

(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. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically through 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Air Program, Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 

1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 

80202–1129. EPA requests that if at all 

possible, you contact the individual 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section to 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: Tim 

Russ, Air Program, Mailcode 8P–AR, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, 

Colorado 80202–1129, telephone 

number (303) 312–6479, fax number 

(303) 312–6064, or email 

russ.tim@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. What is the State’s process to submit SIP 

revisions to EPA? 

III. EPA’s Evaluation of the State’s May 11, 

2012 Submittal 

IV. Consideration of Section 110(l) of the 

Clean Air Act 

V. Final Action 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

Definitions 

For the purpose of this document, the 

following definitions apply: 

(i) The word Act or initials CAA mean 

or refer to the Clean Air Act, unless the 

context indicates otherwise. 

(ii) The words EPA, we, us or our 

mean or refer to the United States 

Environmental Protection Agency. 

(iii) The initials NAAQS mean 

national ambient air quality standard. 

(iv) The initials SIP mean or refer to 

State Implementation Plan. 

(v) The words State or Colorado mean 

the State of Colorado, unless the context 

indicates otherwise. 

I. Background 

EPA is approving revisions to 

Colorado’s Regulation Number 10, 

‘‘Criteria for Analysis of Conformity,’’ 

(hereafter, ‘‘Regulation No. 10’’) of the 

Colorado SIP that address transportation 

conformity SIP requirements of section 

176(c) of the CAA and Title 40, part 

51.390(b) of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR). Specifically, a 

conformity SIP must address the 

following transportation conformity 

requirements: 40 CFR 93.105, which 

formalizes the consultation procedures; 

40 CFR 93.122(a)(4)(ii), which addresses 

written commitments to control 

measures that are not included in a 

metropolitan planning organization’s 

transportation plan and transportation 

improvement program (TIP) that must 

be obtained prior to a conformity 

determination; and 40 CFR 93.125(c), 

which addresses written commitments 

to mitigation measures that must be 

obtained prior to a project-level 

conformity determination.1


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
12080 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 42 / Tuesday, March 4, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

transportation conformity process consistent with 

the federal conformity rule. A conformity SIP does 

not contain motor vehicle emissions budgets, 

emissions inventories, air quality demonstrations, 

or control measures. See EPA’s Guidance for 

Developing Transportation Conformity State 

Implementation Plans (SIPs) for further 

background: www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/ 

transconf/policy/420b09001.pdf. 

2 ‘‘40 CFR 93 Transportation Conformity Rule 

PM2.5 and PM10 Amendments; Final Rule’’, March 

24, 2010, 75 FR 14260. 

3 ‘‘40 CFR 93 Transportation Conformity Rule 

Restructuring Amendments; Final Rule’’, March 14, 

2012, 77 FR 14979. 

4See: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/ 

transconf/policy/420b09001.pdf. 

EPA notes that the State submitted 

prior SIP revisions to Regulation No. 10 

by a letter dated June 18, 2009. The June 

18, 2009 SIP submittal addressed 

revisions to numerous aspects and 

sections in Regulation No. 10. Those 

prior revisions to Regulation No. 10 are 

contained in the May 11, 2012 revisions 

to Regulation No. 10. In addition to 

further clarifying transportation 

conformity consultation procedures, the 

May 11, 2012 revision responded to 

changes in federal law by removing SIP 

provisions related to general conformity. 

EPA had initially determined that the 

June 18, 2009 revisions to Regulation 

No. 10 were fully approvable. As EPA 

has determined that the May 11, 2012 

revisions to Regulation No. 10 are also 

fully approvable, we are, therefore, only 

acting on the May 11, 2012 Regulation 

No. 10 revisions as they supersede and 

replace the June 18, 2009 revisions. By 

approving these May 11, 2012 revisions 

to Regulation No. 10, EPA will be 

making them part of the federally 

enforceable SIP for Colorado under the 

CAA. EPA also notes that the May 11, 

2012 SIP submission is also intended to 

revise and supersede the conformity SIP 

that was previously approved by EPA in 

2001 (66 FR 48561). 

Our November 12, 2013 notice of 

proposed rulemaking (78 FR 67327) 

invited comment on our proposal and 

provided a 30-day comment period. The 

comment period ended on December 12, 

2013. We did not receive any comments. 

Accordingly, we are finalizing our 

actions as proposed. 

II. What is the State’s process to submit 

SIP revisions to EPA? 

Section 110(k) of the CAA addresses 

our actions on submissions of revisions 

to a SIP. The CAA requires states to 

observe certain procedural requirements 

in developing SIP revisions for 

submittal to us. Section 110(a)(2) of the 

CAA requires that each SIP revision be 

adopted after reasonable notice and 

public hearing. This must occur prior to 

the revision being submitted by a state 

to us. 

With regard to the prior June 18, 2009 

revisions to Regulation No. 10, the 

Colorado Air Quality Control 

Commission (AQCC) held a public 

hearing for those revisions on November 

20, 2008. There were no public 

comments. The AQCC adopted the 

revisions to Regulation No. 10 directly 

after the hearing. This SIP revision 

became state effective on December 30, 

2008, and was submitted by James B. 

Martin, on behalf of the Governor, to us 

on June 18, 2009. 

For the May 11, 2012 revisions to 

Regulation No. 10, the AQCC held a 

public hearing for those revisions on 

December 15, 2011. There were no 

public comments. The AQCC adopted 

the revisions to Regulation No. 10 

directly after the hearing. This SIP 

revision became state effective on 

January 30, 2012 and was submitted by 

Christopher E. Urbina, on behalf of the 

Governor, to us on May 11, 2012. 

We have evaluated the Governor’s 

May 11, 2012 submittal for Regulation 

No. 10 and have determined that the 

State met the requirements for 

reasonable notice and public hearing 

under section 110(a)(2) of the CAA. By 

operation of law under section 

110(k)(1)(B) of the CAA, the Governor’s 

May 11, 2012 submittal was deemed 

complete on November 11, 2012. 

III. EPA’s Evaluation of the State’s May 

11, 2012 Submittal 

EPA has reviewed the revisions to 

Regulation No. 10, which is Colorado’s 

Transportation Conformity Consultation 

(Conformity SIP) element of the SIP, 

that were submitted by the Governor on 

May 11, 2012 and we have found that 

our approval is warranted. We reviewed 

the State’s submittal for consistency 

with the conformity requirements in 40 

CFR 51.390(b), that establish the 

requirements for conformity 

consultation SIPs, and with the 

conformity requirements in 40 CFR 

sections 93.105, 93.122(a)(4)(ii), and 

93.125(c).2,3 We also consulted our 

document ‘‘Guidance for Developing 

Transportation Conformity State 

Implementation Plans (SIPs),’’ EPA– 

420–B–09–001, dated January, 2009.4

Our review and conclusions regarding 

the revisions to Regulation No. 10 are 

detailed in a memorandum in the 

docket and include the following: 

(a) Section I ‘‘Requirement to comply 

with the Federal rule.’’ EPA has 

reviewed and finds satisfactory the 

revisions to section I of Regulation No. 

10. Section I states that the consultation 

procedures described in section III 

address the requirements in 40 CFR 

93.105(a) through (e), that the 

provisions in section IV address the 

requirements in 40 CFR 93.122(a)(4)(ii), 

and that the provisions in section V 

address the requirements in 40 CFR 

93.125(c). 

(b) Section II ‘‘Definitions.’’ EPA has 

reviewed and finds acceptable the 

revisions and clarifications that the 

State made to several definitions in 

section II of Regulation No. 10. 

(c) Section III ‘‘Interagency 

Consultation.’’ For section III we note 

that 40 CFR 51.390(b) provides that each 

state is required to address three 

specific sections in EPA’s transportation 

conformity rule in 40 CFR Part 93, 

Subpart A. The relevant provisions that 

are required to be addressed are: 93.105 

(Consultation), 93.122(a)(4)(ii) 

(Procedures for determining regional 

transportation-related emissions), and 

93.125(c) (Enforceability of design 

concept and scope and project-level 

mitigation and control measures). The 

following is a summary of the key 

aspects of Regulation No. 10 to address 

the above requirements, with our 

evaluation and conclusion of each: 

(1) 40 CFR 93.105, ‘‘Consultation,’’ 

contains five subsections, (a) through 

(e). In summary, the general provisions 

of 93.105(a) state that a conformity SIP 

shall include procedures for interagency 

consultation, conflict resolution, and 

public consultation. Subsection 

93.105(b) provides general requirements 

and factors for well defined interagency 

consultation procedures in the 

implementation plan. Organizations 

such as metropolitan planning 

organizations (MPO), state and local air 

quality planning agencies, and state and 

local transportation agencies with 

responsibilities for developing, 

submitting or implementing provisions 

of an implementation plan must consult 

with each other. These organizations 

must also consult with local or regional 

offices of EPA, the Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA), and the 

Federal Transit Administration (FTA). 

The provisions of 93.105(c) detail 

specific processes that must be 

addressed in interagency consultation 

procedures. The provisions of 93.105(d) 

require specific procedures for resolving 

conflicts, and the provisions of 

93.105(e) require specific public 

consultation procedures. 

EPA has concluded that the above 

requirements are satisfactorily 

addressed in the revisions to Regulation 

No. 10 in section III ‘‘Interagency 

Consultation’’ which includes; section 

III.A ‘‘Roles and Responsibilities for 

Transportation Conformity 

Determinations and Related SIP 

Development,’’ section III.B 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 42 / Tuesday, March 4, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 12081 

‘‘Establishing a Forum for Regional 

Conformity Consultation,’’ section III.C 

‘‘Topics for Consultation,’’ section III.D 

‘‘Process for assuming the location and 

design concept and scope of projects 

disclosed to the MPO as required by 

paragraph (E) of this section, but whose 

sponsors have not yet decided these 

features in sufficient detail to perform 

the regional emissions analysis 

according to the requirements of 40 CFR 

93.122,’’ section III.E ‘‘Process to ensure 

that plans for construction of regionally 

significant projects which are not 

FHWA/FTA projects (including projects 

for which alternative locations, design 

concept and scope, or the no-build 

options are still being considered), 

including those by recipients of funds 

designated under Title 23 U.S.C. or the 

Federal Transit Act, are disclosed on a 

regular basis, and to ensure that any 

changes to those plans are immediately 

disclosed,’’ section III.F ‘‘Consultation 

procedures for development of State 

Implementation Plans,’’ section III.G 

‘‘Agreements further describing 

consultation procedures,’’ and section 

III.H ‘‘Review of Conformity 

Determinations by the public, Air 

Quality Control Commission, and 

resolution of conflicts.’’ 

(2) 40 CFR 93.122(a)(4)(ii) requires 

enforceable written commitments for 

emission reduction credits. Emissions 

reduction credits from any control 

measures that are not included in the 

transportation plan and TIP, and do not 

require a regulatory action in order to be 

implemented, may not be included in 

the emissions analysis unless the 

conformity determination includes 

written commitments for 

implementation from the appropriate 

entities. EPA has concluded that this 

requirement is satisfactorily addressed 

in section IV ‘‘Emission reduction credit 

for certain control measures’’ of 

Regulation No. 10. 

(3) 40 CFR 93.125(c) addresses the 

enforceability of design concept and 

scope and project-level mitigation and 

control measures. Before a conformity 

determination is made, written 

commitments must be obtained for any 

project-level mitigation or control 

measures. EPA has concluded that this 

requirement is satisfactorily addressed 

in section V ‘‘Enforceability of design 

concept and scope and project-level 

mitigation and control measures’’ of 

Regulation No. 10. 

(d) Section VI ‘‘Statements of Basis, 

Specific Statutory Authority, and 

Purpose.’’ EPA notes this section VI in 

the State’s regulation merely provides 

information for the State regarding the 

SIP revision and is not necessary for an 

approvable Transportation Conformity 

Consultation SIP element revision 

whose purpose is to meet the 

requirements of CAA section 

176(c)(4)(E) and 40 CFR 51.390. 

Therefore, EPA is not taking any action 

on this section. 

(e) The May 11, 2012 revision 

removes former Part A, ‘‘Determining 

Conformity of General Federal Actions 

to State or Federal Implementation 

Plans,’’ from the SIP. After amendments 

to 40 CFR 51.851 that EPA promulgated 

on April 5, 2010 (75 FR 17254), 

provisions governing general conformity 

are now an optional component of a SIP. 

The State’s removal of Part A is thus 

consistent with the 2010 amendments. 

With the removal of Part A from the SIP, 

the federal rules in Subpart B of 40 CFR 

Part 93 will directly govern conformity 

of general federal actions. 

IV. Consideration of Section 110(1) of 

the Clean Air Act 

Section 110(1) of the CAA states that 

a SIP revision cannot be approved if the 

revision would interfere with any 

applicable requirement concerning 

attainment and reasonable further 

progress towards attainment of a 

NAAQS or any other applicable 

requirement of the CAA. EPA has 

concluded that the above-described 

revisions to Regulation No. 10 will not 

interfere with attainment, reasonable 

further progress, or any other applicable 

requirement of the CAA. 

V. Final Action 

EPA is approving the May 11, 2012 

SIP revision that was submitted by 

Christopher E. Urbina, Executive 

Director of the Colorado Department of 

Public Health and Environment, and on 

behalf of the Governor of the State of 

Colorado. The May 11, 2012 revision 

updates sections I, II, III, IV, V of 

Regulation Number 10 ‘‘Criteria for 

Analysis of Conformity’’ of the Colorado 

SIP so as to meet the federal 

transportation conformity consultation 

requirements under section 176 of the 

CAA and 40 CFR 51.390(b), 40 CFR 

93.105(a) through (e), 40 CFR 

93.122(a)(4)(ii), and 40 CFR 93.125(c). 

EPA is also approving the removal of 

former Part A, ‘‘Determining Conformity 

of General Federal Actions to State or 

Federal Implementation Plans,’’ from 

the SIP. EPA notes that revisions were 

also made to Colorado’s Regulation 

Number 10, section VI ‘‘Statements of 

Basis, Specific Statutory Authority, and 

Purpose’’; however, EPA is not taking 

any action on the revisions to this 

section. EPA’s approval of the State’s 

May 11, 2012 revisions to Regulation 

Number 10 eliminates the need for EPA 

to take action on the State’s June 18, 

2009 revisions to Regulation Number 

10. 

VI. 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, 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 SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
12082 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 42 / Tuesday, March 4, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

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 May 5, 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 CAA 

section 307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen 

dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, and 

Volatile Organic Compounds. 

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

Dated: January 8, 2014. 

Howard M. Cantor, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8. 

For the reason stated in the preamble, 

the Environmental Protection Agency 

amends 40 CFR Part 52 as follows: 

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 G—Colorado 

■ 2. Amend § 52.320 by revising 

paragraph (c)(92) to read as follows: 

§ 52.320 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(92) On May 11, 2012, Colorado 

submitted a revision to its State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) that 

addresses updates to Colorado’s 

Regulation Number 10, Criteria for 

Analysis of Conformity, of the Colorado 

SIP. EPA is approving the May 11, 2012 

revisions to Regulation No. 10 that 

update sections I, II, III, IV, and V so as 

to meet federal transportation 

conformity consultation requirements. 

EPA is also approving the removal of 

former Part A, Determining Conformity 

of General Federal Actions to State or 

Federal Implementation Plans, from the 

SIP. 

(i) Incorporation by reference. 

(A) Colorado’s Regulation Number 10, 

Criteria for Analysis of Conformity, 

except section VI, Statements of Basis, 

Specific Statutory Authority, and 

Purpose, as adopted by the Colorado Air 

Quality Control Commission on 

December 15, 2011 and state effective 

on January 30, 2012. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2014–04323 Filed 3–3–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R02–OAR–2013–0734, FRL–9907–02– 

Region–2] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; New York State 

Ozone Implementation Plan Revision 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is approving a revision to 

the New York State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) for ozone concerning the 

control of volatile organic compounds. 

The SIP revision consists of 

amendments to Part 228, ‘‘Surface 

Coating Processes, Commercial and 

Industrial Adhesives, Sealants and 

Primers.’’ The intended effect of this 

action is to approve control techniques, 

required by the Clean Air Act, which 

will result in emission reductions that 

will help attain and maintain the 

national ambient air quality standards 

for ozone. 

DATES: This rule will be effective on 

April 3, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under the Federal 

Docket Management System (FDMS) 

which replaces the Regional Materials 

in EDOCKET (RME) docket system. The 

new FDMS is located at 

www.regulations.gov and the docket ID 

for this action is EPA–R02–OAR–2013– 

0734. All documents in the docket are 

listed in the FDMS index. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in FDMS or in hard 

copy at the Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 2 Office, Air Programs 

Branch, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New 

York, New York 10007–1866. Copies of 

the documents relevant to this action 

are also available for public inspection 

during normal business hours, by 

appointment at the Air and Radiation 

Docket and Information Center, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue 

NW., Washington, DC; and the New 

York State Department of 

Environmental Conservation, Division 

of Air Resources, 625 Broadway, 

Albany, New York 12233. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kirk 

J. Wieber, Air Programs Branch, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 290 

Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New 

York 10007–1866, (212) 637–3381. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. What was included in New York’s 

submittals? 

On July 15, 2013, the New York State 

Department of Environmental 

Conservation (NYSDEC), submitted to 

EPA revisions to the State 

Implementation Plan (SIP), which 

included State adopted revisions to 

Title 6 of the New York Code of Rules 

and Regulations (6 NYCRR) Part 228, 

‘‘Surface Coating Processes, Commercial 

and Industrial Adhesives, Sealants and 

Primers,’’ with an effective date June 5, 

2013. These revisions are applicable 

statewide and will therefore provide 

volatile organic compound (VOC) 

emission reductions statewide and will 

help in achieving attainment of the 

ozone standards in the New York 

portion of the New York-Northern New 

Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-CT 

nonattainment area and in meeting the 

reasonably available control technology 

(RACT) requirements. The revisions to 

Part 228 are also intended to satisfy 

certain control technique guideline 

(CTG) documents issued by EPA 

pursuant to section 182(b)(2)(A) of the 

Clean Air Act (CAA). 

New York also included a negative 

declaration in its July 15, 2013 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES