27830 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 94 / Thursday, May 15, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

clinical services and support; referring 

and providing linkage to VA and nonVA resources, providing crisis 

management services and monitoring; 

and intervening and advocating on 

behalf of veterans to support 

transportation, credit, legal, and other 

needs. 

* * * * * 

Homeless has the meaning given that 

term in paragraphs (1) through (3) of the 

definition of homeless in 24 CFR 576.2. 

Non-VA community-based provider 

means a facility in a community that 

provides temporary, short-term housing 

(generally up to 6 months) for the 

homeless, as well as community 

outreach, case management, and 

rehabilitative services, and, as needed, 

basic mental health services. 

* * * * * 

(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, 2002, 2031) 

■ 4. Amend § 63.3 paragraph (a) to read 

as follows: 

§ 63.3 Eligible Veterans. 

(a) Eligibility. In order to serve as the 

basis for a per diem payment through 

the HCHV program, a veteran served by 

the non-VA community-based provider 

must be: 

(1) Enrolled in the VA health care 

system, or eligible for VA health care 

under 38 CFR 17.36 or 17.37; and 

(2) Homeless. 

* * * * * 

■ 5. Revise § 63.10 paragraph (a) to read 

as follows: 

(a) Who can apply. VA may award per 

diem contracts to non-VA communitybased providers who provide temporary 

residential assistance homeless persons, 

including but not limited to persons 

with serious mental illness, and who 

can provide the specific services and 

meet the standards identified in § 63.15 

and elsewhere in this part. 

■ 6. Revise § 63.15 paragraph (b) to read 

as follows: 

§ 63.15 Duties of, and standards 

applicable to, non-VA community-based 

providers. 

* * * * * 

(b) Treatment plans, therapeutic/

rehabilitative services, and case 

management. Individualized treatment 

plans are to be developed through a 

joint effort of the veteran, non-VA 

community-based provider staff, and 

VA clinical staff. Therapeutic and 

rehabilitative services, as well as case 

management and outreach services, 

must be provided by the non-VA 

community-based provider as described 

in the treatment plan. In some cases, VA 

may complement the non-VA 

community-based provider’s program 

with added treatment or other services, 

such as participation in VA outpatient 

programs or counseling. In addition to 

case management services, for example, 

to coordinate or address relevant issues 

related to a veteran’s homelessness and 

health as identified in the individual 

treatment plan, services provided by the 

non-VA community-based provider 

should generally include, as 

appropriate: 

(1) Structured group activities such as 

group therapy, social skills training, 

self-help group meetings, or peer 

counseling. 

(2) Professional counseling, including 

counseling on self-care skills, adaptive 

coping skills, and, as appropriate, 

vocational rehabilitation counseling, in 

collaboration with VA programs and 

community resources. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2014–11046 Filed 5–14–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8320–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA-R02-OAR-2014-0251, FRL-9910-63- 

Region 2] 

Rescission of Determination of 

Attainment and Call for Attainment 

Plans for New York, New Jersey and 

Connecticut for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality Standard 

for the NY-NJ-CT 1997 Ozone 

Nonattainment Area 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to rescind its 

previously issued determination of 

attainment (Clean Data Determination) 

for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard for 

the New York-N. New Jersey-Long 

Island, (NY-NJ-CT) ozone nonattainment 

area because recent complete, qualityassured monitoring data show that the 

area has subsequently violated the 1997 

8-hour ozone national ambient air 

quality standard (NAAQS). In addition, 

EPA is proposing to call for revisions to 

the State Implementation Plans (SIPs) 

for the States of New York, New Jersey 

and Connecticut. If finalized, this SIP 

call will require each of these States to 

submit a revised attainment SIP for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for its 

portion of the NY-NJ-CT moderate 

nonattainment area within 18 months of 

final action on this SIP call. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before June 16, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID number EPAR02-OAR-2014-0251, by one of the 

following methods: 

• www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: Ruvo.Richard@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (212) 637-3901. 

• Mail: Richard Ruvo, Chief, Air 

Programs Branch, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, 290 

Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New 

York 10007-1866. 

• Hand Delivery: Richard Ruvo, 

Chief, Air Programs Branch, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 2 Office, 290 Broadway, 25th 

Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866. 

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 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA-R02-OAR-2014- 

0251. 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. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http://

www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 94 / Thursday, May 15, 2014 / Proposed Rules 27831 

1EPA wishes to make clear that this proposed 

rulemaking would in no way alter or affect the 

determination contained in its June 18, 2012 notice 

(77 FR 36163), pursuant to CAA section 181(b)(2), 

that the NY-NJ-CT area attained the 1997 8–hour 

ozone standard by its applicable attainment date of 

June, 2010. Such a determination remains 

undisturbed by EPA’s evaluation of subsequent air 

quality. 

2 77 FR 36163, June 18, 2012, ‘‘Determinations of 

Failure To Attain the One-Hour Ozone Standard by 

2007, Current Attainment of the One-Hour Ozone 

Standard, and Attainment of the 1997 Eight-Hour 

Ozone Standards for the New York-Northern New 

Jersey-Long Island Nonattainment Area in 

Connecticut, New Jersey and New York.’’ 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the http://

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 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in hard 

copy. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in http://

www.regulations.gov 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. EPA requests, if 

at all possible, that 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, 8:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions concerning EPA’s 

proposed action related to New Jersey or 

New York, please contact Kirk J. Wieber, 

Air Programs Branch, Environmental 

Protection Agency, 290 Broadway, 25th 

Floor, New York, NY 10008-1866, 

telephone number (212) 637-3381, 

email—wieber.kirk@epa.gov. 

If you have questions concerning 

EPA’s proposed action related to 

Connecticut, please contact Richard 

Burkhart, Air Quality Planning Unit, 

Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 

New England Regional Office, 5 Post 

Office Square—Suite 100, Mail Code 

OEP05-02, Boston, MA 02109-3912, 

telephone number (617) 918–1664, fax 

number (617) 918–0664, email— 

burkhart.richard@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. What actions is the EPA proposing? 

II. Background 

III. Current Monitoring Data 

IV. Why is EPA proposing SIP calls to the 

States in the NY-NJ-CT Area? 

V. How should the States respond to a final 

SIP call? 

VI. What happens if any of the States (New 

York, New Jersey and Connecticut) do not 

submit a SIP responding to the SIP calls? 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What actions is the EPA proposing? 

The EPA is proposing to determine, 

based on complete, quality-assured 

monitoring data, that the air quality in 

the New York-N. New Jersey-Long 

Island, NY-NJ-CT 1997 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area (hereafter, the NYNJ-CT area) is no longer attaining the 

1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air 

quality standard (NAAQS or standard). 

Pursuant to the provisions of 40 CFR 

51.918, EPA is therefore proposing to 

rescind the clean data determination 

(CDD) for this area which was published 

in the Federal Register on June 18, 2012 

(77 FR 36163). 

EPA notes that it has previously 

determined that the NY-NJ-CT area 

attained the 1997 8-hour ozone standard 

by its applicable attainment date, June 

15, 2010.1 However, because EPA is 

proposing to determine that the area is 

no longer attaining the 1997 standard, 

EPA is proposing a State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) call pursuant 

to Clean Air Act (CAA) section 

110(k)(5), to require the States of New 

York, New Jersey and Connecticut to 

submit a SIP demonstrating how the 

area will re-attain the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable. 

EPA is proposing to issue this SIP call 

based on its proposed determination 

that certified data for 2010–2012, as 

well as data in EPA’s air quality data 

repository, the Air Quality System 

(AQS) for the most recent three-year 

period, 2011–2013, show that the area is 

currently no longer attaining the 1997 

ozone standard. The EPA is proposing 

that the required SIPs will be due 18 

months after the effective date of the 

final rule. 

II. Background 

On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38856), the 

EPA promulgated a new, more 

protective standard for ozone based on 

8-hour average concentrations (the 

‘‘1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS’’). The EPA 

designated and classified most areas of 

the country under the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS in an April 30, 2004 final rule 

(69 FR 23858). The NY-NJ-CT 1997 8- 

hour ozone nonattainment area was 

designated nonattainment and classified 

as moderate with an attainment 

deadline of June 15, 2010. The NY-NJCT area includes Fairfield, New Haven, 

and Middlesex Counties in Connecticut; 

Bergen, Essex, Hudson, Hunterdon, 

Middlesex, Monmouth, Morris, Passaic, 

Somerset, Sussex, Union, and Warren 

Counties in New Jersey; and Bronx, 

Kings, Nassau, New York, Queens, 

Richmond, Rockland, Suffolk, and 

Westchester Counties in New York. 

On April 30, 2004, EPA issued a final 

rule (69 FR 23951) entitled ‘‘Final Rule 

to Implement the 8-hour Ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard—Phase 

1,’’ referred to as the Phase 1 Rule. On 

November 29, 2005, EPA issued a final 

rule (70 FR 71612) entitled ‘‘Final Rule 

To Implement the 8-Hour Ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality 

Standard—Phase 2; Final Rule To 

Implement Certain Aspects of the 1990 

Amendments Relating to New Source 

Review and Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration as They Apply in Carbon 

Monoxide, Particulate Matter and Ozone 

NAAQS; Final Rule for Reformulated 

Gasoline,’’ referred to as the Phase 2 

Rule. The Phase 2 Rule incorporated the 

Clean Data Policy in 40 CFR 51.918. 

Upon EPA’s final determination that an 

area has attained the 1997 ozone 

NAAQS, the regulation operates to 

suspend the obligation to submit 

attainment-related planning SIP 

requirements for that standard. Affected 

SIP requirements include attainment 

demonstrations and associated 

reasonably available control measures, 

reasonable further progress plans, 

contingency measures, and other 

planning SIPs related to attainment of 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 40 CFR 

51.918 established that these SIP 

requirements are suspended until such 

time as the area is redesignated to 

attainment, at which time the 

requirements no longer apply; or until 

EPA determines that the area has 

violated the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

On June 18, 2012 (77 FR 36163), the 

EPA issued a CDD for the NY-NJ-CT 

area,2 based on complete, qualityassured and certified ozone monitoring 

data for 2008–2010. Quality assured 

data available in the AQS for 2011 

indicated that the area continued to 

attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

Pursuant to the Clean Data Policy 

established by 40 CFR 51.918 of the 

Phase 2 Rule for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, the requirements for the states 

to submit attainment demonstrations 

and associated reasonably available 

control measures (RACM), reasonable 

further progress plans (RFP), 

contingency measures, and other SIP 

revisions related to attainment of the 

standard were suspended. 

Although, pursuant to 40 CFR 51.918, 

EPA’s CDD suspended any outstanding 

obligations to submit attainment 

planning SIPs, the States of New York, 

New Jersey and Connecticut had already 

submitted to EPA their attainment 

demonstrations, RACM, RFP plans, and 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
27832 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 94 / Thursday, May 15, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

contingency measures for the 1997 8- 

hour ozone standard for the NY-NJ-CT 

area. EPA approved the RFP plan, 

RACM plan and contingency measures 

for New Jersey on May 15, 2009 (74 FR 

22837) and reasonably available control 

technology (RACT) plan for New Jersey 

on December 22, 2010 (75 FR 80340). 

EPA approved the RFP plan and 

contingency measures for New York on 

August 18, 2011 (76 FR 51264) and the 

RACM plan (including RACT) for New 

York on July 23, 2010 (75 FR 43066). 

EPA approved the RFP plan for 

Connecticut on August 22, 2012 (77 FR 

50595). EPA also approved the New 

York and New Jersey 1997 8-hour ozone 

attainment demonstration plans on 

February 11, 2013 (78 FR 9596). EPA 

proposed, but has not finalized, 

approval of the Connecticut ozone 

attainment plan for the NY-NJ-CT area. 

See 78 FR 27161; May 9, 2013. 

As noted above, separately and in 

addition to its CDD for the NY-NJ-CT 

area, pursuant to section 181(b)(2), EPA 

determined that the area attained the 

1997 8-hour ozone standard by its 

applicable attainment deadline, June 15, 

2010. This determination that the area 

attained by the applicable deadline was 

based on complete, quality-assured and 

certified ozone monitoring data for 

2007–2009. 

III. Current Monitoring Data 

Complete, quality-assured and 

certified ozone monitoring data for 

2010–2012, and data available in the 

AQS for 2013, indicate that the NY-NJCT area no longer attains the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS. EPA has reviewed 

the 2012 ozone design values, consisting 

of 2010–2012 data, and 2013 ozone 

design values, based on 2011–2013 

ambient air quality data in AQS (in 

accordance with 40 CFR 50.9, 40 CFR 

part 50 appendix I, and EPA policy and 

guidance, as well as data processing, 

data rounding and data completeness 

requirements) for the NY-NJ-CT area, 

and is proposing to determine that the 

area is no longer in attainment of the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Note that 

for purposes of the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, ozone design values are 

calculated based on the 3-year average 

of the annual 4th maximum 8-hour 

ozone concentration. An area is 

considered in nonattainment when the 

3-year design value is equal to or greater 

than 0.085 parts per million (ppm). For 

the 2010–2012 period, the 8-hour ozone 

design value for the NY-NJ-CT area was 

0.087 ppm. Data in AQS for the 2011– 

2013 period further indicate continued 

nonattainment. Table 1 below shows the 

2010–2012 design values, as well as the 

2011–2013 design values, for all of the 

ozone monitors in the NY-NJ-CT area. 

TABLE 1—DESIGN VALUES FOR OZONE MONITORS IN THE NY-NJ-CT AREA

State Site location Monitor ID 

2010–2012 

Design value 

(ppm) 

2011–2013 * 

Design value 

(ppm) 

Connecticut .................................. Danbury ................................................................. 090011123 0.083 0.081 

Connecticut .................................. Greenwich ............................................................. 090010017 0.082 0.083 

Connecticut .................................. Madison ................................................................. 090093002 0.087 0.089 

Connecticut .................................. Middletown ............................................................ 090070007 0.080 0.081 

Connecticut .................................. New Haven ............................................................ 090099005 0.076 0.078 

Connecticut .................................. Stratford ................................................................. 090013007 0.085 0.089 

Connecticut .................................. Westport ................................................................ 090019003 0.085 0.087 

New Jersey .................................. Bayonne ................................................................ 340170006 0.078 0.070 

New Jersey .................................. Chester .................................................................. 340273001 0.078 0.076 

New Jersey .................................. Flemington ............................................................. 340190001 0.080 0.077 

New Jersey .................................. Leonia .................................................................... 340030006 0.078 0.077 

New Jersey .................................. Monmouth University ............................................. 340250005 0.083 0.078 

New Jersey .................................. Newark .................................................................. 340130003 0.082 0.077 

New Jersey .................................. Ramapo ................................................................. 340315001 0.075 0.072 

New Jersey .................................. Rutgers University ................................................. 340230011 0.085 0.079 

New York ..................................... Babylon .................................................................. 361030002 0.085 0.081 

New York ..................................... CCNY .................................................................... 360610135 0.076 0.072 

New York ..................................... Pfizer Lab (Bronx) ................................................. 360050133 0.076 0.073 

New York ..................................... Holtsville ................................................................ 361030009 0.080 0.078 

New York ..................................... Queens College ..................................................... 360810124 0.080 0.079 

New York ..................................... Riverhead .............................................................. 361030004 0.079 0.080 

New York ..................................... Susan Wagner ....................................................... 360850067 0.083 0.078 

New York ..................................... White Plains .......................................................... 361192004 0.076 0.075 

* 2013 Data not yet certified and is subject to change. 

IV. Why is EPA proposing SIP calls to 

the States in the NY-NJ-CT Area? 

Although EPA recognizes that the NYNJ-CT area previously attained the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS by its original 

attainment date, EPA’s review of 

subsequent data has indicated that the 

area no longer continues to attain the 

1997 8-hour ozone standard. Section 

110(k)(5) of the CAA authorizes EPA to 

find that a SIP is substantially 

inadequate to attain or maintain a 

NAAQS, and to require (‘‘call for’’) the 

state to submit, within a specified 

period, a SIP revision to correct the 

inadequacy. This CAA requirement for 

a SIP revision is known as a ‘‘SIP call.’’ 

The CAA authorizes EPA to allow a 

state up to 18 months to respond to a 

SIP call. In the circumstances presented 

here, and in conjunction with EPA’s 

proposal to rescind its determination 

that the NY-NJ-CT area is attaining the 

NAAQS, EPA is proposing under 

section 110(k)(5) to find the SIPs 

substantially inadequate with respect to 

attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. EPA therefore proposes to 

issue SIP calls requiring the States of 

New York, New Jersey and Connecticut 

to develop SIP revisions demonstrating 

how the NY-NJ-CT area will re-attain 

the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. 

V. How should the States respond to a 

final SIP call? 

As noted above, EPA has previously 

approved attainment demonstrations for 

New York and New Jersey and proposed 

approval of Connecticut’s attainment 

demonstration for the NY-NJ-CT area. 

These approvals and proposed approval 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 94 / Thursday, May 15, 2014 / Proposed Rules 27833 

3On March 12, 2008 (73 FR 16436), the EPA 

revised the primary NAAQS for ozone, designed to 

protect public health, to a level of 0.075 parts per 

million (ppm) (annual fourth-highest daily 

maximum 8-hour concentration, averaged over 3 

years). In rules finalized on April 30, 2012 (77 FR 

30088), and May 21, 2012 (77 FR 34421), the EPA 

formally designated all areas of the country as 

attainment/unclassifiable, nonattainment or 

unclassifiable for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

In addition, on June 6, 2013 (78 FR 34178), EPA 

proposed a rule for implementing the 2008 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS which also included a proposal to 

revoke the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. 

4All three states (New York, New Jersey and 

Connecticut) of the NY-NJ-CT area must request the 

reclassification since it is a multi-state 

nonattainment area. 

were based on the fact that the plans 

showed that the NY-NJ-CT area would 

attain by the area’s June 15, 2010 

attainment date. Moreover, as stated 

previously, EPA, after notice-and 

comment rulemaking, determined the 

area did attain by that date (77 FR 

36163). However, based on the 

monitoring data discussed above for the 

NY-NJ-CT area, EPA is proposing to 

determine the area has since violated 

the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. 

Therefore, EPA is proposing that the 

States submit updated plans showing 

how the area will re-attain the standard. 

EPA is proposing that the States have 

two different ways of responding to the 

SIP call. 

First, EPA proposes that the States 

respond to the SIP call by submitting 

revisions to their respective SIPs 

showing how the States will re-attain 

the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. 

EPA is also proposing, as an 

alternative response to the SIP call, that 

the States develop and submit 

attainment plans demonstrating 

attainment of the current 2008 8-hour 

ozone standard.3 Currently, the NY-NJCT area is designated nonattainment 

and classified as ‘‘marginal’’ for the 

2008 8-hour ozone standard. An 

attainment plan is not required for areas 

classified as ‘‘marginal,’’ but these areas 

must still attain the ozone standard. 

Thus, under this option, New York, 

New Jersey and Connecticut may either: 

(1) Request that the entire NY-NJ-CT 

area be reclassified to ‘‘moderate’’ for 

the 2008 8-hour ozone standard 4 and 

prepare the required SIP elements 

pursuant to a ‘‘moderate’’ classification 

and attain as expeditiously as 

practicable, but, no later than 2018; or, 

(2) voluntarily prepare an attainment 

SIP for the NY-NJ-CT area for the 2008 

8-hour ozone standard, which 

demonstrates attainment by the current 

‘‘marginal’’ classification attainment 

date, i.e., 2015. EPA is proposing that 

this alternative response of submitting 

an attainment plan for the 2008 ozone 

standard would also satisfy EPA’s SIP 

call on the 1997 8-hour ozone standard 

being proposed in this action since it 

would be demonstrating compliance 

with a more stringent NAAQS. 

In order to provide a reasonable time 

for the states to develop and submit 

either of these two SIP revisions, EPA is 

proposing to provide the States of New 

York, New Jersey and Connecticut a 

period of 18 months from the effective 

date of a final SIP call to develop and 

submit to EPA the relevant SIPs for the 

1997 or 2008 ozone NAAQS. This 18 

months is the maximum period allowed 

pursuant to CAA section 110(k)(5) and 

EPA believes it is reasonable time for 

New York, New Jersey and Connecticut 

to develop and submit the relevant SIPs 

to EPA. 

EPA is proposing that the effective 

date for a final SIP call and rescission 

of the CDD will be 30 days after 

publication of the final rule in the 

Federal Register. 

VI. What happens if any of the States 

(New York, New Jersey and 

Connecticut) do not submit a SIP 

responding to the SIP calls? 

Section 179(a) sets forth four findings 

that form the basis for application of 

sanctions. The first finding, that a State 

has failed to submit a plan or one or 

more elements of a plan required under 

the CAA, is the finding that may be 

relevant to this rulemaking, should the 

States of New York, New Jersey and 

Connecticut fail to submit the required 

plan (i.e., a SIP revision showing how 

the state will re-attain the 1997 ozone 

standard, or under the alternative 

response discussed above, a SIP revision 

demonstrating attainment of the 2008 

ozone standard) in response to this SIP 

call. If any of the States fail to submit 

the required plan, EPA will issue a 

finding under section 179(a) of the CAA 

that the State or States failed to make a 

required SIP submittal. If within 18 

months of the finding, the State or 

States of New York, New Jersey and 

Connecticut have not submitted an 

attainment SIP that EPA determines is 

complete, then the emission offset 

sanction will apply automatically 

pursuant to CAA section 179(a) and 40 

CFR 52.31. Under this sanction, the 

ratio of emission reductions that must 

be obtained to offset increased 

emissions caused by new major sources 

or modifications to major sources in the 

NY-NJ-CT area must be at least two to 

one. If the State or States of New York, 

New Jersey and Connecticut do not 

make a complete submission within six 

months after the offset sanction applies, 

then the highway funding sanction will 

apply, in accordance with 40 CFR 52.31. 

In addition, sanctions would apply in 

the same manner if the State or States 

of New York, New Jersey and 

Connecticut submit a plan that EPA 

determines is incomplete or that EPA 

disapproves. Finally, CAA section 

110(c) provides that EPA promulgate a 

FIP no later than 24 months after a 

finding of failure to submit a SIP under 

section 179(a) unless the State or States 

of New York, New Jersey and 

Connecticut have submitted and EPA 

has approved the respective attainment 

plan. 

EPA is soliciting public comments on 

the issues discussed in this action. EPA 

will consider these comments before 

taking final action. Interested parties 

may participate in the Federal 

rulemaking procedure by submitting 

written comments to EPA as discussed 

in the ADDRESSES section of this Federal 

Register. 

Note that if EPA receives adverse 

comment on a portion of this action and 

if that portion can be severed from the 

remainder of the action, EPA may adopt 

as final those provisions that are not the 

subject of an adverse comment. In 

addition, EPA may take final action on 

one or more of these actions separately, 

depending on the circumstances 

involved with each State’s portion of the 

area. 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This action proposes a determination, 

i.e., that the NY-NJ-CT area is no longer 

attaining the 1997 ozone NAAQS, based 

on EPA’s review of air quality data 

provided by Connecticut, New York and 

New Jersey. This action also proposes a 

SIP call for the States of Connecticut, 

New York, and New Jersey. In proposing 

this SIP call, EPA is acting under 

Section 110(k)(5) of the CAA, which 

requires the Agency to require a state to 

correct a deficiency that EPA has found 

in the State Implementation Plan of the 

state. Accordingly, this action does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those required by the CAA itself. 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 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
27834 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 94 / Thursday, May 15, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

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 CAA; 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 States, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: April 23, 2014. 

Curt Spalding, 

Regional Administrator, Region 1. 

Dated: April 7, 2014. 

Judith A. Enck, 

Regional Administrator, Region 2. 

[FR Doc. 2014–10827 Filed 5–14–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2014–0165; FRL 9910–66– 

Region–7] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; State of Iowa 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

revisions to the State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) for the state of Iowa. This 

proposed rulemaking will amend the 

SIP to include revised permitting 

regulations that will allow facilities to 

construct or modify existing sources in 

areas that are not in attainment with the 

National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards. The rules being revised are 

Chapter 20, ‘‘Scope of Title-DefinitionsForms-Rules of Practice,’’ Chapter 22, 

‘‘Controlling Pollution,’’ Chapter 31, 

‘‘Nonattainment Areas,’’ and Chapter 

33, ‘‘Special Regulations and 

Construction Permit Requirements for 

Major Stationary Sources—Prevention 

for Significant Deterioration of Air 

Quality.’’ The provisions from previous 

nonattainment permitting rules are 

being retained and are now relocated to 

Chapter 31 ‘‘Nonattainment Areas’’. 

EPA is also proposing SIP approval to 

update the rule revisions for the 

definition of excess emissions and 

conformity of general actions rule. 

DATES: Comments on this proposed 

action must be received in writing by 

June 16, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07– 

OAR–2014–0165 by one of the following 

methods: 

1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: algoe-eakin.amy@epa.gov. 

3. Mail: Amy Algoe-Eakin, 

Environmental Protection Agency, Air 

Planning and Development Branch, 

11201 Renner Road, Lenexa, Kansas 

66219. 

4. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver 

your comments to: Amy Algoe-Eakin, 

Environmental Protection Agency, Air 

Planning and Development Branch, 

11201 Renner Road, Lenexa, Kansas 

66219. Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Regional Office’s 

normal hours of operations. The 

Regional Office’s official hours of 

business are Monday through Friday, 

8:00 to 4:30, excluding legal holidays. 

Please see the direct final rule which 

is located in the Rules section of this 

Federal Register for detailed 

instructions on how to submit 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Amy Algoe-Eakin at (913) 551–7942, or 

by email at algoe-eakin.amy@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

final rules section of the Federal 

Register, EPA is approving the state’s 

revision to the SIP as a direct final rule 

without prior proposal because the 

Agency views this as a noncontroversial 

revision amendment and anticipates no 

relevant adverse comments to this 

action. A detailed rationale for the 

approval is set forth in the direct final 

rule. If no relevant adverse comments 

are received in response to this action, 

no further activity is contemplated in 

relation to this action. If EPA receives 

relevant adverse comments, the direct 

final rule will be withdrawn and all 

public comments received will be 

addressed in a subsequent final rules 

based on this proposed action. EPA will 

not institute a second comment period 

on this action. Any parties interested in 

commenting on this action should do so 

at this time. Please note that if EPA 

receives adverse comments on part of 

this rule and if that part can be severed 

from the remainder of the rule, EPA may 

adopt as final those parts of the rule that 

are not the subject of an adverse 

comment. For additional information, 

see the direct final rule which is located 

in the rules section of this Federal 

Register. 

Dated: April 29, 2014. 

Karl Brooks, 

Regional Administrator, Region 7. 

[FR Doc. 2014–11089 Filed 5–14–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 73 

[MB Docket No. 14–69; RM–11716; DA 14– 

601] 

Radio Broadcasting Services; McCall, 

Idaho 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: This document requests 

comments on a Petition for Rule Making 

filed by Ashley A. Bruton, proposing the 

allotment of Channel 280A at McCall, 

Idaho, as the community’s eighth local 

service. A staff engineering analysis 

confirms that Channel 280A can be 

allotted to McCall, Idaho consistent 

with the minimum distance separation 

requirements of the rules with a site 

restriction 0.4 kilometers (0.2 miles) 

southwest of the community. The 

reference coordinates are 44–54–30 NL 

and 116–06–00 WL. 

DATES: Comments must be filed on or 

before June 23, 2014, and reply 

comments on or before July 8, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Secretary, Federal 

Communications Commission, 445 12th 

Street SW., Washington, DC 20554. In 

addition to filing comments with the 

FCC, interested parties should serve the 

petitioner as follows: Ashley A. Bruton, 


TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS