Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 206 / Thursday, October 24, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 63383 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian tribes. 

12. Energy Effects 

This rule is not a ‘‘significant energy 

action’’ under Executive Order 13211, 

Actions Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. 

13. Technical Standards 

This rule does not use technical 

standards. Therefore, we did not 

consider the use of voluntary consensus 

standards. 

14. Environment 

We have analyzed this rule under 

Department of Homeland Security 

Management Directive 023–01 and 

Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, 

which guide the Coast Guard in 

complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and 

have determined that this action is one 

of a category of actions that do not 

individually or cumulatively have a 

significant effect on the human 

environment. This rule will evacuate 

commercial harbors which anticipate 

tsunami impact. 

This rule is categorically excluded 

from further review under paragraph 

34(g) of Figure 2–1 of the Commandant 

Instruction. An environmental analysis 

checklist supporting this determination 

and a Categorical Exclusion 

Determination are available in the 

docket where indicated under 

ADDRESSES. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation 

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Security measures, 

Waterways. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 

CFR part 165 as follows: 

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 

AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 165 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 46 U.S.C. 

Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 

1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; Pub. L. 

107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of 

Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 

■ 2. Add § 165. 14–1414 to read as 

follows: 

§ 165. 14–1414 Safety Zones; Hawaiian 

Islands Commercial Harbors; HI. 

(a) Location. The following 

commercial harbors are safety zones: 

(1) All waters of Nawiliwili Harbor, 

Kauai inland from a line drawn between 

21° 56′58′′ N, 159° 21′28′′ W and 21° 

57′11′′ N, 159° 21′10′′ W; 

(2) All waters of Port Allen, Kauai 

immediately adjacent to the Department 

of Transportation commercial pier 

(located at 21° 53′59′′ N, 157° 35′21′′ W) 

extending out to 100 yards from the 

piers faces; 

(3) All waters of Barber’s Point 

Harbor, Oahu inland from a line drawn 

between 21° 19′30′′ N, 158° 07′14′′ W 

and 21° 19′18′′ N, 158° 07′18′′ W; 

(4) All waters of Honolulu Harbor, 

Oahu inland from a line drawn between 

21° 17′56′′ N, 157° 52′15′′ W and 21° 

17′45′′ N, 157° 52′10′′ W; 

(5) All waters of Kaunakakai Harbor, 

immediately adjacent to the Interisland 

Cargo Terminal or Ferry Terminal Pier 

out to 100 yards of the west face of the 

pier; 

(6) All waters of Kaumalapau Harbor, 

Lanai inland from a line drawn between 

20° 47′10′′ N, 156° 59′32′′ W and 21° 

47′01′′ N, 156° 59′31′′ W; 

(7) All waters of Kahului Harbor, 

Maui inland from a line drawn between 

20° 54′01′′ N, 156° 28′26′′ W and 20° 

54′02′′ N, 156° 28′18′′ W; 

(8) All waters of Kawaihae Harbor, 

Hawaii immediately adjacent to 

commercial piers 1 and 2 extending out 

to 100 yards from the piers faces. 

(9) All waters of Hilo Harbor, Hawaii 

immediately adjacent to commercial 

piers 1 and 2 extending out to 100 yards 

from the piers faces. 

(10) The activation of these safety 

zones may include any combination of 

these harbors, or all of these harbors, 

dependent upon details in the tsunami 

warning. These safety zones extend 

from the surface of the water to the 

ocean floor. 

(b) Regulations. When the safety 

zones are activated and, therefore, 

subject to enforcement, no person or 

vessel may enter or remain in the safety 

zone except for support vessels, support 

personnel, and other vessels authorized 

by the Captain of the Port, Sector 

Honolulu (COTP), or a designated 

representative of the COTP. All 

commercial vessels must evacuate the 

harbor and transit seaward beyond the 

50 fathom (300 foot) curve. These 

commercial harbors will remain closed 

to all transiting vessels until the Captain 

of the Port Honolulu lifts the evacuation 

order. All other applicable regulations 

in 33 CFR 165 remain in effect and 

subject to enforcement. You may contact 

the Coast Guard on VHF Channel 16 

(156.800 MHz) or at telephone number 

808–842–2600 to obtain clarification on 

safety zone transits and locations. Coast 

Guard patrol boats will be enforcing the 

safety zones and providing on-scene 

direction. Any vessel not capable of 

evacuating must contact the Coast 

Guard Sector Command Center at (808) 

842–2601 to request a waiver from 

evacuating the harbor. 

(c) Enforcement period. Paragraph (b) 

of this section will be enforced when a 

tsunami warning has been issued for the 

Hawaiian Islands. The COTP will notify 

the public of any enforcement through 

the following means to ensure the 

widest publicity: Broadcast notice to 

mariners, notices of enforcement, press 

releases and the Coast Guard’s 

Homeport Web site. Following the 

passage of the tsunami or tsunami threat 

and harbor assessments as required, deactivation of these safety zones will be 

conducted through radio broadcast by 

the U.S. Coast Guard. 

(d) Penalties. Vessels or persons 

violating this rule would be subject to 

the penalties set forth in 33 U.S.C. 1232. 

Dated: September 16, 2013. 

S.N. Gilreath, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port Honolulu. 

[FR Doc. 2013–24904 Filed 10–23–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R01–OAR–2011–0148; A–1–FRL– 

9901–71–Region 1] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Rhode 

Island: Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration; Greenhouse Gas 

Permitting Authority and Tailoring Rule 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final 

action to approve certain revisions to 

the Rhode Island State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) primarily relating to 

regulation of Greenhouse Gases (GHGs) 

under Rhode Island’s Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration (PSD) 

preconstruction permitting program. 

EPA is also taking direct final action to 

approve the State’s definition of ‘‘PM2.5’’ 

(fine particulate matter) specific to 

permitting. Certain of the State’s 

revisions consist of definitions that also 

relate more broadly to the State’s PSD 

and nonattainment new source review 

(NSR) preconstruction permitting 

requirements, i.e., to stationary sources 

that also emit regulated new source 

review pollutants other than GHGs. EPA 


Emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
63384 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 206 / Thursday, October 24, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

1 ‘‘Limitation of Approval of Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration Provisions Concerning 

Greenhouse Gas Emitting-Sources in State 

Implementation Plans; Final Rule.’’ 75 FR 82536 

(Dec. 30, 2010). 

2 ‘‘Endangerment and Cause or Contribute 

Findings for Greenhouse Gases Under Section 

202(a) of the Clean Air Act.’’ 74 FR 66496 (Dec. 15, 

2009). 

3 ‘‘Interpretation of Regulations that Determine 

Pollutants Covered by Clean Air Act Permitting 

Programs.’’ 75 FR 17004 (Apr. 2, 2010). 

4 ‘‘Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission 

Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy 

Standards; Final Rule.’’ 75 FR 25324 (May 7, 2010). 

is also taking direct final action to 

conditionally approve those definitions 

as they relate to the non-GHG 

pollutants, for the reasons described in 

more detail later in this notice. All of 

the revisions in question were 

submitted by Rhode Island, through the 

Rhode Island Department of 

Environmental Management (RI DEM) 

Office of Air Resources, on January 18, 

2011. They are primarily intended to 

align Rhode Island’s regulations with 

EPA’s ‘‘Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration and Title V Greenhouse 

Gas Tailoring Rule.’’ Finally, EPA is not 

taking action on certain other SIP 

revisions contained in RI DEM’s January 

18, 2011 submittal. 

DATES: This direct final rule will be 

effective December 23, 2013, unless EPA 

receives adverse comments by 

November 25, 2013. If adverse 

comments are received, EPA will 

publish a timely withdrawal of the 

direct final rule in the Federal Register 

informing the public that the rule will 

not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R01–OAR–2011–0148 by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: dahl.donald@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (617) 918–0167. 

4. Mail: ‘‘Docket Identification 

Number EPA–R01–OAR–2011–0148’’, 

Donald Dahl, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, EPA New England 

Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem 

Protection, Air Permits, Toxics, and 

Indoor Programs Unit, 5 Post Office 

Square—Suite 100, (Mail code OEP05– 

2), Boston, MA 02109–3912. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver 

your comments to: Donald Dahl, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 

New England Regional Office, Office of 

Ecosystem Protection, Air Permits, 

Toxics, and Indoor Programs Unit, 5 

Post Office Square—Suite 100, (mail 

code OEP05–2), Boston, MA 02109— 

3912. Such deliveries are only accepted 

during the Regional Office’s normal 

hours of operation. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, 

excluding legal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R01–OAR–2011– 

0148. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit through 

www.regulations.gov, or email, 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. The 

www.regulations.gov Web site is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an email comment directly 

to EPA without going through 

www.regulations.gov your email address 

will be automatically captured and 

included as part of the comment that is 

placed in the public docket and made 

available on the Internet. If you submit 

an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If 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: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, i.e., 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. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy at Office of Ecosystem 

Protection, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, EPA New England 

Regional Office, 5 Post Office Square— 

Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA requests 

that if at all possible, you contact the 

contact listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, 

excluding legal holidays. 

In addition, copies of the state 

submittal and EPA’s technical support 

document are also available for public 

inspection during normal business 

hours, by appointment at the State Air 

Agency; Office of Air Resources, 

Department of Environmental 

Management, 235 Promenade Street, 

Providence, RI 02908–5767. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

information regarding the Rhode Island 

SIP, contact Donald Dahl, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 

New England Regional Office, Office of 

Ecosystem Protection, Air Permits, 

Toxics, and Indoor Programs Unit, 5 

Post Office Square—Suite 100, (mail 

code OEP05–2), Boston, MA 02109— 

3912. Mr. Dahl’s telephone number is 

(617) 918–1657; email address: 

dahl.donald@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

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

EPA. 

Organization of this document. The 

following outline is provided to aid in 

locating information in this preamble. 

Table of Contents 

I. What is the background for the action by 

EPA in this notice? 

A. GHG-Related Actions 

B. Rhode Island’s Actions 

II. What is EPA’s analysis of Rhode Island’s 

SIP revision? 

III. Final Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What is the background for the action 

by EPA in this notice? 

The following sections briefly 

summarize EPA’s recent GHG-related 

actions that provide the background for 

today’s action as it relates to permitting 

requirements for GHGs. More detailed 

discussion of the background is found 

in the preambles for those actions. In 

particular, the background is contained 

in what we call the GHG PSD SIP 

Narrowing Rule,1 and in the preambles 

to the actions cited therein. 

A. GHG-Related Actions 

EPA has recently undertaken a series 

of actions pertaining to the regulation of 

GHGs that, although for the most part 

distinct from one another, establish the 

overall framework for today’s action on 

the Rhode Island SIP. Four of these 

actions include, as they are commonly 

called, the ‘‘Endangerment Finding’’ 

and ‘‘Cause or Contribute Finding,’’ 

which EPA issued in a single final 

action,2 the ‘‘Johnson Memo 

Reconsideration,’’ 3 the ‘‘Light-Duty 

Vehicle Rule,’’ 4 and the ‘‘Tailoring 


Emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 206 / Thursday, October 24, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 63385 

5 ‘‘Prevention of Significant Deterioration and 

Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule; Final Rule.’’ 

75 FR 31514 (June 3, 2010). 

6Specifically, by notice dated December 13, 2010, 

EPA finalized a ‘‘SIP Call’’ that would require those 

states with SIPs that have approved PSD programs 

but do not authorize PSD permitting for GHGs to 

submit a SIP revision providing such authority. 

‘‘Action To Ensure Authority To Issue Permits 

Under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

Program to Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions: 

Finding of Substantial Inadequacy and SIP Call,’’ 75 

FR 77698 (Dec. 13, 2010). EPA has made findings 

of failure to submit that would apply in any state 

unable to submit the required SIP revision by its 

deadline, and finalized FIPs for such states. See, 

e.g., ‘‘Action To Ensure Authority To Issue Permits 

Under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

Program to Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions: 

Finding of Failure To Submit State Implementation 

Plan Revisions Required for Greenhouse Gases,’’ 75 

FR 81874 (Dec. 29, 2010); ‘‘Action To Ensure 

Authority To Issue Permits Under the Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration Program to Sources of 

Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Federal Implementation 

Plan,’’ 75 FR 82246 (Dec. 30, 2010). Because Rhode 

Island’s SIP already authorizes Rhode Island to 

regulate GHGs once GHGs became subject to PSD 

requirements on January 2, 2011, Rhode Island was 

not subject to the proposed SIP Call or FIP. 

7 ‘‘Limitation of Approval of Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration Provisions Concerning 

Greenhouse Gas Emitting-Sources in State 

Implementation Plans; Final Rule.’’ 75 FR 82536 

(Dec. 30, 2010). 8Tailoring Rule, 75 FR 31517. 

9SIP Narrowing Rule, 75 FR 82540. 

10 Id. at 82542. 

11 Id. at 82544. 

12 Id. at 82540. 

Rule.’’ 5 Taken together and in 

conjunction with the CAA, these actions 

established regulatory requirements for 

GHGs emitted from new motor vehicles 

and new motor vehicle engines; 

determined that such regulations, when 

they took effect on January 2, 2011, 

subjected GHGs emitted from stationary 

sources to PSD requirements; and 

limited the applicability of PSD 

requirements to GHG sources on a 

phased-in basis. EPA took this last 

action in the Tailoring Rule, which, 

more specifically, established 

appropriate GHG emission thresholds 

for determining the applicability of PSD 

requirements to GHG-emitting sources. 

PSD is implemented through the SIP 

system. In December 2010, EPA 

promulgated several rules to implement 

the new GHG PSD SIP program. 

Recognizing that some states had 

approved SIP PSD programs that did not 

apply PSD to GHGs, EPA issued a SIP 

call and, for some of these states, a 

Federal Implementation Plan (FIP).6

Recognizing that other states had 

approved SIP PSD programs that do 

apply PSD to GHGs, but that do so for 

sources that emit as little as 100 or 250 

tpy of GHG, and that do not limit PSD 

applicability to GHGs to the higher 

thresholds in the Tailoring Rule, EPA 

issued the GHG PSD SIP Narrowing 

Rule. Under that rule, EPA withdrew its 

approval of the affected SIPs to the 

extent those SIPs covered GHG-emitting 

sources below the Tailoring Rule 

thresholds. EPA based its action 

primarily on the ‘‘error correction’’ 

provisions of CAA section 110(k)(6). 

B. Rhode Island’s Actions 

On August 3, 2010, Rhode Island 

provided a letter to EPA, in accordance 

with a request to all States from EPA in 

the Tailoring Rule, with confirmation 

that the State has the authority to 

regulate GHGs in its PSD program. The 

letter also confirmed that current Rhode 

Island rules require regulating GHGs at 

the existing 100/250 tpy threshold, 

rather than at the higher thresholds set 

in the Tailoring Rule. See the docket for 

this rulemaking for a copy of Rhode 

Island’s letter. 

In the SIP Narrowing Rule, published 

on December 30, 2010, EPA withdrew 

its approval of Rhode Island’s SIP 

(among other SIPs) to the extent the SIP 

applies PSD permitting requirements to 

GHG emissions from sources emitting at 

levels below those set in the Tailoring 

Rule.7 As a result, Rhode Island’s 

current approved SIP provides the state 

with authority to regulate GHGs, but 

only at and above the Tailoring Rule 

thresholds; and requires new and 

modified sources to receive a PSD 

permit based on GHG emissions only if 

they emit at or above the Tailoring Rule 

thresholds. 

The basis for this SIP revision is that 

limiting PSD applicability to GHG 

sources to the higher thresholds in the 

Tailoring Rule is consistent with the SIP 

provisions that provide required 

assurances of adequate resources, and 

thereby addresses the flaw in the SIP 

that led to the SIP Narrowing Rule. 

Specifically, CAA section 110(a)(2)(E) 

includes as a requirement for SIP 

approval that States provide ‘‘necessary 

assurances that the State . . . will have 

adequate personnel [and] funding . . . 

to carry out such [SIP].’’ In the Tailoring 

Rule, EPA established higher thresholds 

for PSD applicability to GHG-emitting 

sources on grounds that the states 

generally did not have adequate 

resources to apply PSD to GHG-emitting 

sources below the Tailoring Rule 

thresholds,8 and no State, including 

Rhode Island, asserted that it did have 

adequate resources to do so.9 In the SIP 

Narrowing Rule, EPA found that the 

affected states, including Rhode Island, 

had a flaw in their SIPs at the time they 

submitted their PSD programs, which 

was that the applicability of the PSD 

programs was potentially broader than 

the resources available to them under 

their SIPs.10 Accordingly, for each 

affected state, including Rhode Island, 

EPA concluded that EPA’s action in 

approving the SIP was in error, under 

CAA section 110(k)(6), and EPA 

rescinded its approval to the extent the 

PSD program applies to GHG-emitting 

sources below the Tailoring Rule 

thresholds.11 EPA recommended that 

States adopt a SIP revision to 

incorporate the Tailoring Rule 

thresholds, thereby (i) assuring that 

under State law, only sources at or 

above the Tailoring Rule thresholds 

would be subject to PSD; and (ii) 

avoiding confusion under the federally 

approved SIP by clarifying that the SIP 

applies to only sources at or above the 

Tailoring Rule thresholds.12

II. What is EPA’s analysis of Rhode 

Island’s SIP revision? 

Rhode Island is currently a SIPapproved state for the PSD program. In 

a letter provided to EPA on August 3, 

2010, Rhode Island notified EPA of its 

interpretation that the State currently 

has the authority to regulate GHGs 

under its PSD regulations. The current 

Rhode Island program (adopted prior to 

the promulgation of EPA’s Tailoring 

Rule) applies to major stationary sources 

(having the potential to emit at least 100 

tpy or 250 tpy or more of any air 

pollutant, depending on the type of 

source) or modifications constructing in 

areas designated attainment or 

unclassifiable with respect to the 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS). 

The regulatory revisions that RI DEM 

submitted on January 18, 2011 included 

Air Pollution Control (APC) Regulations 

9, 28, and 29, each in their entirety. In 

correspondence dated February 11, 

2011, however, RI DEM clarified that it 

was withdrawing its SIP revision 

request in relation to APC Regulations 

28 and 29 because those regulations 

establish the State’s CAA Title V 

operating permit program, which is not 

a SIP program under the CAA. 

Consequently, EPA’s action today does 

not include taking action to approve 

Rhode Island’s changes to Regulations 

28 and 29, but only includes certain 

changes to APC Regulation 9. 

The State’s January 18, 2011 submittal 

also contained amendments to several 

other sections of APC Regulation 9 as 

last approved into Rhode Island’s SIP on 

December 2, 1999 (64 FR 67495). With 

the exception of the State’s definition of 

‘‘PM2.5,’’ EPA is not taking action on 

these revisions, which do not affect 

GHG PSD permitting requirements. 


Emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
63386 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 206 / Thursday, October 24, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

13Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) 

and Nonattainment New Source Review (NSR): 

Baseline Emissions Determination, Actual-toFuture-Actual Methodology, Plantwide 

Applicability Limitations, Clean Units, Pollution 

Control Projects; Final Rule’’ 67 FR 80186 (Dec. 31, 

2002). 

14Note that Rhode Island’s definition of 

‘‘regulated NSR pollutant’’ does not explicitly 

contain the language in 40 CFR 51.166((b)(49)(i) 

addressing the inclusion of the gaseous, 

condensable portions of PM2.5 and PM10 for the 

purposes of major stationary source preconstruction 

permitting applicability determinations and 

establishing permit limits. However, by letter 

submitted to EPA Region 1 and dated September 18, 

2013, Rhode Island explained that its major 

stationary source preconstruction permitting 

program does, in fact, require inclusion of the 

condensable portion of PM10 and PM2.5. That is 

because APC Regulation 9 of the State’s regulations 

defines those two pollutants in terms of an amount 

measured at ambient air conditions. Consequently, 

because the gaseous, condensable portions of PM10

and PM2.5 would have converted to condensed form 

at ambient air conditions, Rhode Island’s 

requirements meet the corresponding federal 

requirements. 

The SIP revisions EPA is taking action 

on today consist (with one exception) of 

definitions within APC Regulation 9 

that are necessary for the purpose of the 

GHG PSD permitting requirements 

discussed in this notice. Some of these 

definitions also apply to PSD and 

nonattainment new source review 

permitting requirements applicable to 

regulated new source review pollutants 

other than GHG. One of the definitions 

only relates to PM2.5 (fine particulate 

matter). Specifically, the changes that 

EPA is taking action on today are 

definitions of the following terms 

contained in APC Regulation 9: (1) 

‘‘Major modification’’; (2) ‘‘Net 

emissions increase’’; (3) ‘‘Regulated NSR 

pollutant’’; (4) ‘‘Significant emissions 

increase’’; (5) ‘‘Subject to Regulation’’; 

(6) ‘‘Baseline actual emissions’’; (7) 

‘‘Significant’’; (8) ‘‘PM2.5’’; and (9) 

‘‘Major Stationary Source’’. Definitions 

for the first eight of these terms appear 

in APC Regulation Section 9.1, while 

the last definition appears in APC 

Regulation Section 9.5.1(f). These 

changes to Rhode Island’s 

preconstruction permitting program 

regulations include the same 

amendments to the federal PSD 

regulatory provisions found in EPA’s 

Tailoring Rule for GHG, with the 

exception that Rhode Island’s PSD and 

nonattainment new source review 

preconstruction permitting programs do 

not include the new source review 

reforms (NSR Reforms) promulgated by 

EPA in 2002.13 Because of that 

exception, Rhode Island has submitted 

to EPA, pursuant to 40 CFR 51.166(a)(7), 

a technical demonstration, dated 

September 18, 2013 and entitled ‘‘State 

Implementation Plan Equivalency 

Demonstration For Greenhouse Gas 

Emissions under the PSD Program,’’ 

showing that its PSD permitting 

requirements, as they apply to 

stationary sources of GHGs, are more 

stringent than, or are at least as stringent 

in all respects as, the corresponding 

provisions of EPA’s NSR Reforms. See 

40 CFR 51.166(a)(7). EPA is therefore 

taking action to approve fully Rhode 

Island’s PSD GHG SIP revisions. Rhode 

Island’s September 18, 2013 technical 

demonstration can be found in the 

Docket for this action. EPA is also taking 

action to approve fully the State’s 

definition of ‘‘PM2.5.’’ 14

However, insofar as those same 

definitions also apply to PSD and 

nonattainment new source review for 

major stationary sources and 

modifications involving regulated NSR 

pollutants other than GHGs, EPA is 

today conditionally approving Rhode 

Island’s requested SIP revisions pending 

submission by Rhode Island of a 

technical demonstration, pursuant to 40 

CFR 51.166(a)(7), that Rhode Island’s 

PSD and nonattainment new source 

review permitting programs are more 

stringent than, or at least as stringent in 

all respects as, EPA’s NSR Reform 

provisions for stationary sources of 

regulated NSR pollutants other than 

GHGs. 

Under section 110(k)(4) of the Act, 

EPA may conditionally approve a plan 

based on a commitment from a State to 

adopt specific enforceable measures by 

a date certain, but not later than one 

year from the date of approval. EPA is 

conditionally approving in this direct 

final rulemaking Rhode Island’s SIP 

revisions (as they apply to major 

stationary sources of regulated NSR 

pollutants other than GHGs) based on 

the State’s commitment to submit the 

technical demonstration identified 

above within one year of the approval. 

If Rhode Island fails to do so in a timely 

manner, our conditional approval will, 

by operation of law, become a 

disapproval one year from this direct 

final conditional approval. EPA would 

notify Rhode Island by letter that such 

action had occurred. At that time, the 

SIP revisions in question would not be 

a part of Rhode Island’s approved SIP. 

If that were to occur, EPA would 

subsequently publish a document in the 

Federal Register notifying the public 

the conditional approval automatically 

converts to a disapproval. If Rhode 

Island meets its commitment within the 

applicable time frame, however, EPA 

would subsequently publish a 

document in the Federal Register 

notifying the public that EPA intends to 

convert the conditional approval to a 

full approval. By letter dated September 

18, 2013, Rhode Island committed to 

submitting that demonstration to EPA 

no later than one year from the effective 

date of this approval. On December 29, 

2005, Rhode Island submitted a 

technical demonstration to EPA Region 

1 asserting the State’s PSD and 

nonattainment new source review 

permitting programs were, at that time, 

at least as stringent as the federal 

program (including NSR Reform). EPA 

concluded, however, that the State’s 

technical demonstration did not contain 

all of the elements needed and so could 

not be accepted for its intended 

purpose. Hence, EPA’s conclusion, 

described in this notice, that the State 

must submit a revised technical 

demonstration within one year of 

today’s action. The December 29, 2005 

submittal can be found in the Docket for 

this action. 

III. Final Action 

Pursuant to section 110 of the CAA, 

EPA is fully approving Rhode Island’s 

January 18, 2011 SIP revisions as they 

relate to major new and modified 

stationary sources of GHG. EPA is also 

fully approving the State’s definition of 

‘‘PM2.5’’. The GHG-related revisions 

establish appropriate emissions 

thresholds for determining PSD 

applicability with respect to major new 

or modified GHG-emitting stationary 

sources, in accordance with EPA’s June 

3, 2010, Tailoring Rule. With this 

approval, EPA also amends 40 CFR 

52.2072 by removing subsection (b). 

Pursuant to section 110(k)(4) of the 

CAA, EPA is conditionally approving 

Rhode Island’s January 18, 2011 SIP 

revisions as they relate to major new 

and modified stationary sources of 

regulated NSR pollutants other than 

GHGs (with the exception, noted earlier 

in this notice, that EPA is fully 

approving the State’s definition of 

‘‘PM2.5’’). 

The EPA is publishing this action 

without prior proposal because the 

Agency views this as a noncontroversial 

amendment and anticipates no adverse 

comments. However, in the proposed 

rules section of this Federal Register 

publication, EPA is publishing a 

separate document that will serve as the 

proposal to approve the SIP revisions 

should relevant adverse comments be 

filed. This rule will be effective 

December 23, 2013 without further 

notice unless the Agency receives 

relevant adverse comments by 

November 25, 2013. 

If the EPA receives such comments, 

then EPA will publish a notice 

withdrawing today’s final rule and 

informing the public that the rule will 


Emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 206 / Thursday, October 24, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 63387 

not take effect. All public comments 

received will then be addressed in a 

subsequent final rule based on the 

proposed rule. The EPA will not 

institute a second comment period on 

the proposed rule. All parties interested 

in commenting on the proposed rule 

should do so at this time. If no such 

comments are received, the public is 

advised that this rule will be effective 

on December 23, 2013 and no further 

action will be taken on the proposed 

rule. Please note that if EPA receives 

adverse comment on an amendment, 

paragraph, or section of this rule and if 

that provision may be severed from the 

remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt 

as final those provisions of the rule that 

are not the subject of an adverse 

comment. 

IV. 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 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

this rule 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 December 23, 

2013. 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: September 20, 2013. 

H. Curtis Spalding, 

Regional Administrator, EPA New England. 

Part 52 of chapter I, title 40 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations is amended 

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 OO—Rhode Island 

■ 2. In § 52.2070 the table in paragraph 

(c) is amended by revising entry for ‘‘Air 

Pollution Control Regulation 9’’ to read 

as follows: 

§ 52.2070 Identification of plan. 

(c) EPA Approved regulations. 


Emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
63388 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 206 / Thursday, October 24, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

EPA-APPROVED RHODE ISLAND REGULATIONS

State citation Title/subject 

State 

effective 

date 

EPA approval date Explanations 

*******

Air Pollution Control 

Regulation 9.

Air pollution control permits.1/31/2011 10/24/2013 [Insert FEDERAL REGISTER page 

number where the 

document begins].

Definitions of ‘‘Major modification’’; ‘‘Significant’’; and ‘‘Net emissions increase’’ are 

amended in Section 9.1. Definitions of ‘‘Regulated NSR pollutant’’; ‘‘Significant emissions 

increase’’; ‘‘Baseline actual emissions’’; and 

‘‘Subject to Regulation’’ are added to Section 

9.1. Definition of ‘‘Major stationary source’’ is 

amended in Section 9.5.1(f). Definition of 

‘‘PM2.5’’ is added to Section 9.1. 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

§ 52.2072 [Amended] 

■ 3. Section 52.2072 is amended by 

removing and reserving paragraph (b). 

[FR Doc. 2013–24847 Filed 10–23–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2013–0136, EPA–R05– 

OAR–2013–0215, EPA–R05–OAR–2013– 

0344, EPA–R05–OAR–2013–0378; FRL– 

9901–61–Region5] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Ohio; 

Dayton-Springfield, SteubenvilleWeirton, Toledo, and ParkersburgMarietta; 1997 8-Hour Ozone 

Maintenance Plan Revision to 

Approved Motor Vehicle Emissions 

Budgets 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: Under the Clean Air Act 

(CAA), EPA is approving requests by 

Ohio to revise the 1997 8-hour ozone 

maintenance air quality state 

implementation plan (SIP) for the 

Dayton-Springfield area, the Toledo 

area, and the Ohio portions of the 

Parkersburg-Marietta and SteubenvilleWeirton, West Virginia-Ohio areas, to 

replace onroad emissions inventories 

and motor vehicle emissions budgets 

(budgets) with inventories and budgets 

developed using EPA’s Motor Vehicle 

Emissions Simulator (MOVES) 

emissions model. The DaytonSpringfield area consists of Clark, 

Greene, Miami, and Montgomery 

Counties. The Ohio portion of the 

Steubenville-Weirton, West VirginiaOhio area consists of Jefferson County, 

Ohio. The Toledo area consists of Lucas 

and Wood Counties. The Ohio portion 

of the Parkersburg-Marietta, West 

Virginia-Ohio area consists of 

Washington County. Ohio submitted the 

SIP revision requests on the following 

dates: Dayton-Springfield on February 

11, 2013; Steubenville-Weirton on 

March 15, 2013; Toledo on April 18, 

2013; Parkersburg-Marietta on April 26, 

2013. 

DATES: This direct final rule will be 

effective December 23, 2013, unless EPA 

receives adverse comments by 

November 25, 2013. If adverse 

comments are received, EPA will 

publish a timely withdrawal of the 

direct final rule in the Federal Register 

informing the public that the rule will 

not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Nos. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2013–0136 (Dayton-Springfield), 

EPA–R05–OAR–2013–0215 

(Steubenville-Weirton), EPA–R05– 

OAR–2013–0344 (Toledo), EPA–R05– 

OAR–2013–0378 (Parkersburg-Marietta), 

by one of the following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: blakley.pamela@epa.gov 

3. Fax: (312) 692–2450. 

4. Mail: Pamela Blakley, Chief, 

Control Strategies Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 

5. Hand Delivery: Pamela Blakley, 

Chief, Control Strategies Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Regional Office 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. The 

Regional Office official hours of 

business are Monday through Friday, 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding 

Federal holidays. Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID Nos. EPA–R05–OAR–2013– 

0136, EPA–R05–OAR–2013–0215, EPA– 

R05–OAR–2013–0344, EPA–R05–OAR– 

2013–0378. EPA’s policy is that all 

comments received will be included in 

the public docket without change and 

may be made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through www.regulations.gov your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If 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: All documents in the 

docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 


Emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES