Document ID: EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0663-0011
Agency: epa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Disapprovals: Nevada; Infrastructure Requirements for Lead (Pb)
Posted Date: 2014-03-21T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 55 (Friday, March 21, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 15697-15702]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-06053]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0663; FRL-9908-09-Region9]

Partial Approval and Partial Disapproval of Air Quality State 
Implementation Plans; Nevada; Infrastructure Requirements for Lead (Pb)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving in part 
and disapproving in part State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions 
submitted by the State of Nevada pursuant to the requirements of the 
Clean Air Act (CAA) for the 2008 lead (Pb) national ambient air quality 
standards (NAAQS). The CAA requires that each state adopt and submit a 
SIP for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of each NAAQS 
promulgated by the EPA, and that EPA act on such SIPs. Nevada has met 
most of the applicable requirements. Where EPA is disapproving, in 
part, Nevada's SIP revisions, most of the deficiencies have already 
been addressed by a federal implementation plan (FIP). For one 
remaining deficiency, this final rule sets a two-year deadline for EPA 
to promulgate a FIP, unless EPA approves an adequate SIP revision prior 
to that time. EPA remains committed to working with Nevada's 
environmental agencies to develop such a SIP revision.

DATES: This final rule is effective on April 21, 2014.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action, identified by 
Docket ID Number EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0663. The index to the docket for 
this action is available electronically at http://www.regulations.gov 
and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, 
California. While all documents in the docket are listed in the index, 
some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy 
location (e.g., copyrighted material), and some may not be publicly 
available in either location (e.g., confidential business information 
(CBI)). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an 
appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed 
directly below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rory Mays, Air Planning Office (AIR-
2), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, (415) 972-3227, 
mays.rory@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, the terms ``we,'' 
``us,'' and ``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. EPA's Response to Comments
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA requires each state to submit to EPA, 
within three years (or such shorter period as the Administrator may 
prescribe) after the promulgation of a primary or secondary NAAQS or 
any revision thereof, a SIP that provides for the ``implementation, 
maintenance, and enforcement'' of such NAAQS. EPA refers to these 
specific submissions as ``infrastructure'' SIPs because they are 
intended to address basic structural SIP requirements for new or 
revised NAAQS.
    On October 15, 2008, EPA issued a revised NAAQS for Pb.\1\ This 
NAAQS

[[Page 15698]]

revision triggered a requirement for states to submit an infrastructure 
SIP to address the applicable requirements of section 110(a)(2) within 
three years. The Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) 
submitted infrastructure SIP revisions for Pb to EPA on October 12, 
2011, for the NDEP and Washoe County portions of the SIP; July 23, 
2012, for the Clark County portion of the SIP; and August 30, 2012, 
which amended several of the state's infrastructure SIP submittals, 
including the October 12, 2011 submittal for the 2008 Pb NAAQS. We 
refer to them collectively herein as ``Nevada's Pb Infrastructure 
Submittal.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 73 FR 66964. The final rule was signed on October 15, 2008 
and published in the Federal Register on November 12, 2008. The 1978 
Pb standard (1.5 [mu]g/m3 as a quarterly average) was modified to a 
rolling 3-month average not to exceed 0.15 [mu]g/m3. EPA also 
revised the secondary NAAQS to 0.15 [mu]g/m3 and made it identical 
to the revised primary standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 29, 2013 (78 FR 64430), EPA proposed to approve in part, 
and disapprove in part, these SIP revisions addressing the 
infrastructure requirements of CAA section 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 
2008 Pb NAAQS. We are taking final action on all three submittals since 
they collectively address the applicable infrastructure SIP 
requirements for the 2008 Pb NAAQS.
    The rationale supporting EPA's action is explained in our October 
29, 2013 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (proposed rule) \2\ and the two 
associated technical support documents (TSDs) \3\ and will not be 
restated here. The proposed rule and TSDs are available online at 
http://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID number EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0663.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 78 FR 64430, October 29, 2013.
    \3\ The two TSDs are as follows: (1) ``Pb Infrastructure SIP 
Technical Support Document: EPA Evaluation of Nevada Infrastructure 
SIP for 2008 Pb NAAQS,'' September 2013 (``Pb TSD''); and (2) 
``Technical Support Document: EPA Evaluation of Nevada Provisions 
for Section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii)/Section 128 Conflict of Interest 
Requirements,'' July 2012 (``Section 128 TSD''), which was prepared 
for our 2012 rulemaking on Nevada's infrastructure SIPs for the 1997 
ozone, 1997 fine particulate matter (PM2.5), and 2006 
PM2.5 NAAQS (77 FR 64737, October 23, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. EPA's Response to Comments

    The public comment period on EPA's proposed rule opened on October 
29, 2013, the date of its publication in the Federal Register, and 
closed on November 29, 2013. During this period, EPA received one 
comment letter from NDEP on November 27, 2013 (herein ``NDEP's comment 
letter''). This letter is available in the docket to today's final 
rule.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See document number EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0663-0010 at http://www.regulations.gov under docket ID number EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0663.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comment:
    NDEP notes that EPA proposed to disapprove the portion of Nevada's 
Pb Infrastructure Submittal related to prevention of significant 
deterioration (PSD) permit programs for NDEP and Washoe County because 
the programs do not completely satisfy the statutory and regulatory 
requirements for PSD permit programs. NDEP also notes, however, that 
EPA recognizes that the deficiencies related to the PSD programs are 
adequately addressed by the existing federal implementation plan (FIP), 
for which EPA has delegated enforcement authority to NDEP and Washoe 
County District Health Department (WCDHD). Moreover, NDEP argues that 
``its PSD program is ultimately SIP-based'' \5\ and refers to page 4 of 
its October 12, 2011 submittal wherein NDEP states that it has full 
delegation of the federal PSD program at 40 CFR 52.21, including 
provisions that tailored the PSD permitting thresholds for greenhouse 
gases. NDEP's comment letter then asserts that the portion of Nevada's 
SIP found at 40 CFR 52.1485(b), which incorporates EPA's PSD FIP 
provisions in the Nevada SIP, make EPA's PSD FIP a part of the SIP, 
with the exception of the portion applicable to Clark County. As such, 
NDEP believes that the elements of Nevada's Pb Infrastructure Submittal 
related to PSD programs under the jurisdiction of NDEP and WCDHD should 
be approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ NDEP's comment letter, p 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Response:
    We disagree with NDEP's argument that Nevada's Pb Infrastructure 
Submittal should be approved for PSD-related infrastructure SIP 
requirements for the NDEP and WCDHD jurisdictions. We note that NDEP 
and WCDHD submitted similar comments in 2012 with respect to EPA's 
proposed rulemaking on infrastructure SIPs for the 1997 ozone, 1997 
fine particulate matter (PM2.5), and 2006 PM2.5 
NAAQS. Our response to NDEP's comment largely reiterates our response 
to NDEP and WCDHD's comments on delegated PSD FIP programs during our 
2012 rulemaking on Nevada's infrastructure SIPs.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 77 FR 64737, October 23, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The CAA requires each state to adopt and submit a plan which 
provides for implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the NAAQS. 
See CAA section 110(a)(1). Section 110(a)(2) sets forth the content 
requirements for such plans, including the requirement for a permit 
program as required in part C (``Prevention of Significant 
Deterioration of Air Quality,'' or ``PSD'') of title I of the CAA. Such 
plans are referred to as state implementation plans or SIPs.
    EPA's authority to promulgate a FIP derives from EPA's 
determination that a state has failed to submit a complete, required 
SIP submission or from EPA's disapproval of a state submission of a SIP 
or SIP revision. See CAA section 110(c)(1). The SIP, viewed broadly, 
thus includes both portions of the plan submitted by the state and 
approved by EPA as well as any FIP promulgated by EPA to substitute for 
a state plan disapproved by EPA or not submitted by a state.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 40 CFR 52.02(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 1974, EPA disapproved each state's SIP with respect to PSD and 
promulgated a FIP as a substitute for the SIP deficiency (``PSD 
FIP'').\8\ In 1975, EPA codified the PSD FIP in each state's subpart in 
40 CFR part 52.\9\ In 1978 and 1980, EPA amended the PSD regulations 
following the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977 and related court 
decisions and amended the codification of the PSD FIP in each state's 
subpart, including 40 CFR 52.1485, accordingly.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 39 FR 42510, December 5, 1974.
    \9\ 40 FR 25004, June 12, 1975, adding 40 CFR 52.1485 to Subpart 
DD--Nevada.
    \10\ 43 FR 26380, June 19, 1978 and 45 FR 52676, August 7, 1980.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Since then, EPA has approved the PSD SIP for the sources and 
geographic area that lie within the jurisdiction of Clark County 
Department of Air Quality (DAQ), and has delegated responsibility for 
conducting PSD review, as per the PSD FIP, to NDEP and WCDHD. 
Notwithstanding the delegation, however, the Nevada SIP remains 
deficient with respect to PSD for the geographic areas and stationary 
sources that lie within NDEP and WCDHD's jurisdictions. As such, EPA's 
disapproval of the infrastructure SIP submittals for those elements 
that require states to have a SIP that includes a PSD permit program, 
including CAA sections 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), and (J), is 
appropriate because EPA disapproved the state's submitted plan as not 
adequately addressing PSD program requirements. To conclude otherwise 
would be inconsistent with the long-standing and current disapproval of 
the SIP for PSD for the applicable areas, with the statutory foundation 
upon which the PSD FIP is authorized, and with the obligation under 
section 110(a) for each state to adopt and submit a plan for 
implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the NAAQS that includes 
a PSD program. EPA's delegation of the PSD FIP is not the same as state 
adoption and submittal of state or district rules meeting PSD 
requirements and EPA's approval thereof.

[[Page 15699]]

III. Final Action

    Under CAA section 110(k)(3), and based on the evaluation and 
rationale presented in the proposed rule, the related TSDs, and this 
final rule, EPA is approving in part and disapproving in part Nevada's 
Pb Infrastructure Submittal for the 2008 Pb NAAQS. In the following 
subsections, we list the elements for which we are finalizing approval 
or disapproval and provide a summary of the basis for those elements 
that are partially disapproved. We also describe the consequences of 
our disapprovals.

A. Summary of Approvals

    EPA is approving Nevada's Pb Infrastructure Submittal with respect 
to the following requirements:
     Section 110(a)(2)(A): Emission limits and other control 
measures.
     Section 110(a)(2)(B): Ambient air quality monitoring/data 
system.
     Section 110(a)(2)(C) (in part): Program for enforcement of 
control measures and regulation of new and modified stationary sources.
     Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) (in part): Interstate pollution 
transport.
     Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) (in part): Interstate pollution 
abatement and international air pollution.
     Section 110(a)(2)(E): Adequate resources and authority, 
conflict of interest, and oversight of local and regional government 
agencies.
     Section 110(a)(2)(F) (in part): Stationary source 
monitoring and reporting.
     Section 110(a)(2)(G): Emergency episodes.
     Section 110(a)(2)(H): SIP revisions.
     Section 110(a)(2)(J) (in part): Consultation with 
government officials, public notification, and prevention of 
significant deterioration (PSD) and visibility protection.
     Section 110(a)(2)(K): Air quality modeling and submission 
of modeling data.
     Section 110(a)(2)(L): Permitting fees.
     Section 110(a)(2)(M): Consultation/participation by 
affected local entities.

B. Summary of Disapprovals

    EPA is disapproving Nevada's Pb Infrastructure Submittal with 
respect to the following infrastructure SIP requirements:
     Section 110(a)(2)(C) (in part): Program for enforcement of 
control measures and regulation of new and modified stationary sources.
     Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) (in part): Interstate pollution 
transport.
     Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) (in part): Interstate pollution 
abatement and international air pollution.
     Section 110(a)(2)(F) (in part): Stationary source 
monitoring and reporting.
     Section 110(a)(2)(J) (in part): Consultation with 
government officials, public notification, and prevention of 
significant deterioration (PSD) and visibility protection.
    As explained in our proposed rule, Pb TSD, and section II of this 
final rule, we are disapproving Nevada's Pb Infrastructure Submittal 
for the NDEP and Washoe County portions of the SIP with respect to the 
PSD-related requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(2)(C), 
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), 110(a)(2)(D)(ii), and 110(a)(2)(J) because the 
Nevada SIP does not fully satisfy the statutory and regulatory 
requirements for PSD permit programs under part C, title I of the Act. 
Both NDEP and WCDHD implement the Federal PSD program in 40 CFR 52.21 
for all regulated new source review (NSR) pollutants, pursuant to 
delegation agreements with EPA.\11\ Accordingly, although the Nevada 
SIP remains deficient with respect to PSD requirements in both the NDEP 
and Washoe County portions of the SIP, these deficiencies are 
adequately addressed in both areas by the federal PSD program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 40 CFR 52.1485.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We are disapproving the Clark County portion of Nevada's Pb 
Infrastructure Submittal with respect to the PSD-related requirements 
of CAA sections 110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), and 110(a)(2)(J) 
because Clark County's SIP-approved PSD permit program does not contain 
provisions that satisfy the statutory and regulatory requirements 
concerning condensable PM and PM2.5 increments under part C, 
title I of the Act and in 40 CFR 51.166.\12\ As discussed in our 
proposed rule, we address these PSD requirements for PM2.5 
as part of this final rule on Nevada's Pb Infrastructure Submittal for 
the 2008 Pb NAAQS because section 110(a)(2) of the Act requires that 
each SIP contain a comprehensive PSD permitting program that addresses 
all regulated NSR pollutants, including greenhouse gases (GHGs).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Requirements for condensable PM were promulgated in EPA's 
NSR/PSD implementation rule for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. See 
73 FR 28321, May 16, 2008; codified at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49). 
Requirements for PSD increments for PM2.5 were 
promulgated in EPA's PSD implementation rule for the 1997 
PM2.5 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. See 75 FR 64864, 
October 20, 2010; codified at 40 CFR 51.166(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We are also disapproving the NDEP and Clark County portions of 
Nevada's Pb Infrastructure Submittal with respect to section 
110(a)(2)(C) because of unique circumstances regarding NDEP and Clark 
County's minor NSR permit programs. Specifically, the NDEP and Clark 
County minor NSR programs, as approved into the Nevada SIP, lack 
provisions to address the 2008 Pb NAAQS, and thus we cannot rely on 
these programs to ensure that new and modified sources regulated under 
minor NSR do not interfere with attainment and maintenance of the 2008 
Pb NAAQS.\13\ Note, however, that within this final rule, we are not 
approving or disapproving any existing or new minor NSR regulation.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Regarding NDEP's minor NSR permit program, see our proposal 
(77 FR 38557 at 38564, June 28, 2012) and final rule (77 FR 59321 at 
59325-59326, September 27, 2012). Regarding Clark County's NSR 
permit programs, see our proposal (77 FR 43206, July 24, 2012) and 
final rule (77 FR 64309, October 18, 2012). These final rules and 
their context specific to the 2008 Pb NAAQS are discussed further in 
our Pb TSD.
    \14\ The Nevada State Environmental Commission revised Nevada 
Administrative Code 445B.22097 (``Standards of quality for ambient 
air''), effective December 23, 2013, such that the state ambient air 
quality standards for Pb and ozone would reflect the 2008 Pb and 
2008 ozone NAAQS. NDEP submitted the revised rule to EPA as a 
revision to the Nevada SIP on January 3, 2014. It was submitted, in 
part, to address the minor NSR requirement of CAA section 
110(a)(2)(C) for the 2008 Pb NAAQS for the NDEP portion of the 
Nevada SIP. While EPA may determine this SIP revision to be adequate 
for purposes of minor NSR for the 2008 Pb NAAQS for the NDEP portion 
of the SIP, EPA is still required to partially disapprove Nevada's 
Pb Infrastructure Submittal for section 110(a)(2)(C) due to other 
permit program deficiencies discussed in this section (section 
III.B) of this final rule for each of the three jurisdictions in 
Nevada.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We are disapproving the Clark County portion of the SIP for section 
110(a)(2)(F)(iii) because Clark County has repealed its regulation, 
Section 24, that formerly addressed the correlation requirement of this 
subsection, without submitting a SIP revision to replace it.

C. Consequences of Disapprovals

    EPA takes very seriously a disapproval of a state plan, as we 
believe that it is preferable, and preferred in the provisions of the 
Clean Air Act, that these requirements be implemented through state 
plans. A state plan need not contain exactly the same provisions that 
EPA might require, but EPA must be able to find that the state plan is 
consistent with the requirements of the Act in accordance with its 
obligations under section 110(k). Further, EPA's oversight role 
requires that it assure consistent implementation of Clean Air Act 
requirements by states across the country, even while acknowledging 
that individual decisions from source to source or state to state may 
not have identical outcomes. EPA believes these

[[Page 15700]]

disapprovals are the only path that is consistent with the Act at this 
time.
    Under section 179(a) of the CAA, final disapproval of a submittal 
that addresses a requirement of part D of title I of the CAA (CAA 
sections 171-193) or is required in response to a finding of 
substantial inadequacy as described in CAA section 110(k)(5) (SIP Call) 
starts a sanctions clock. Nevada's Pb Infrastructure Submittal was not 
submitted to meet either of these requirements. Therefore, our partial 
disapproval of Nevada's Pb Infrastructure Submittal does not trigger 
mandatory sanctions under CAA section 179.
    In addition, CAA section 110(c)(1) provides that EPA must 
promulgate a FIP within two years after finding that a state has failed 
to make a required submission or disapproving a SIP submission in whole 
or in part, unless EPA approves a SIP revision correcting the 
deficiencies within that two-year period. As discussed in section III.B 
of this final rule and in our Pb TSD, we are finalizing several partial 
disapprovals. With one exception, however, these disapprovals do not 
result in new FIP obligations, either because EPA has already 
promulgated a FIP to address the identified deficiency or because a FIP 
clock has been triggered by EPA's disapproval of a prior SIP submission 
based on the same identified deficiency. The provisions for which our 
final partial disapproval do not result in a new FIP obligation 
include:
     PSD-related requirements in sections 110(a)(2)(C), 
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), 110(a)(2)(D)(ii), and 110(a)(2)(J): For NDEP and 
Washoe County, EPA has already promulgated the federal PSD program (see 
40 CFR 52.1485);
     PSD-related requirements in sections 110(a)(2)(C), 
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), and 110(a)(2)(J): For Clark County, EPA's October 
18, 2012 final action on Clark County's PSD regulations triggered a 
November 19, 2014 deadline for EPA to promulgate a FIP addressing this 
requirement (77 FR 64039);
     Minor NSR requirement in section 110(a)(2)(C): EPA's 
September 27, 2012 final action on NDEP's minor NSR regulations (77 FR 
59321) and October 18, 2012 final action on Clark County's minor NSR 
regulations (77 FR 64039) triggered deadlines of October 29, 2014 and 
November 19, 2014, respectively, for EPA to promulgate FIPs addressing 
the identified deficiencies;
     Section 110(a)(2)(F)(iii): For Clark County, EPA's October 
23, 2012 final action on Nevada's Infrastructure SIP submittals for the 
1997 ozone, 1997 PM2.5, and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS (77 
FR 64737) triggered a November 23, 2014 deadline for EPA to promulgate 
a FIP addressing the requirement for correlation of stationary source 
emissions with emission limits.
    The one disapproval that triggers a new FIP clock concerns the 
requirement under sections 110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) and 
110(a)(2)(J) regarding PSD increments for PM2.5 in Clark 
County. EPA has not previously promulgated a FIP or triggered a FIP 
clock through disapproval of a prior SIP submission based on this 
deficiency. Thus, under CAA section 110(c)(1), our partial disapproval 
of the Clark County portion of Nevada's Pb Infrastructure Submittal 
based on this deficiency requires EPA to promulgate a FIP establishing 
PM2.5 increments for Clark County within two years after the 
effective date of this final rule, unless the state submits and EPA 
approves a SIP revision that corrects this deficiency prior to the 
expiration of this two-year period.
    We anticipate that NDEP will submit SIP revisions to address the 
deficiencies identified in EPA's 2012 actions on NDEP's minor NSR 
program,\15\ Clark County's NSR permit programs (i.e., both PSD and 
minor NSR),\16\ Nevada's infrastructure SIPs for the 1997 ozone, 1997 
PM2.5, and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, and today's final 
action on Nevada's Pb Infrastructure Submittal prior to expiration of 
the two-year FIP deadline triggered by each of these actions. EPA 
approval of such revisions would serve to address the partial 
disapprovals of the Nevada Pb Infrastructure Submittal where no FIP is 
currently in place (i.e., the disapprovals finalized herein, except for 
those tied to the federal PSD programs for sources under NDEP and 
WCDHD's jurisdiction).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ NDEP submitted a SIP revision on January 3, 2014 to address 
some of the deficiencies identified in EPA's 2012 action on NDEP's 
minor NSR program, as noted in section III.B of this final rule. If 
EPA determines that this SIP revision is adequate for purposes of 
minor NSR for the 2008 Pb NAAQS, EPA approval would remove the 
obligation for EPA to promulgate a FIP by October 29, 2014 for minor 
NSR for the 2008 Pb NAAQS for the NDEP portion of the Nevada SIP 
only.
    \16\ On February 2, 2014, Clark County DAQ issued a 30-day 
public notice of proposed amendments to air quality regulations 
related primarily to permitting of new stationary sources. These 
proposed rule amendments are intended to address the deficiencies 
identified in EPA's 2012 rulemaking on Nevada's permit program and 
infrastructure SIP submittals for Clark County and other new source 
review requirements that have come due since those rulemakings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review

    This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the 
terms of Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 
is therefore not subject to review under the EO.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under 
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., 
because this partial approval and partial disapproval of SIP revisions 
under CAA section 110 will not in-and-of itself create any new 
information collection burdens but simply approves certain State 
requirements, and disapproves certain other State requirements, for 
inclusion into the SIP. Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency 
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 
notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies 
that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small 
businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental 
jurisdictions. For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's rule on 
small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as 
defined by the Small Business Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13 
CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government 
of a city, county, town, school district or special district with a 
population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is 
any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated 
and is not dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of today's rule on small 
entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant impact 
on a substantial number of small entities. This rule does not impose 
any requirements or create impacts on small entities. This partial SIP 
approval and partial SIP disapproval under CAA section 110 will not in-
and-of itself create any new requirements but simply approves certain 
State requirements, and disapproves certain other State requirements, 
for inclusion into the SIP. Accordingly, it affords no opportunity for 
EPA to fashion for small entities less burdensome compliance or 
reporting

[[Page 15701]]

requirements or timetables or exemptions from all or part of the rule. 
Therefore, this action will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This action contains no Federal mandates under the provisions of 
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 
1531-1538 for State, local, or tribal governments or the private 
sector. EPA has determined that the partial approval and partial 
disapproval action does not include a Federal mandate that may result 
in estimated costs of $100 million or more to either State, local, or 
tribal governments in the aggregate, or to the private sector. This 
action approves certain pre-existing requirements, and disapproves 
certain other pre-existing requirements, under State or local law, and 
imposes no new requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, 
local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from 
this action.

E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August 
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure 
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the 
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' 
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the 
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct 
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have 
substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between 
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power 
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as 
specified in Executive Order 13132, because it merely approves certain 
State requirements, and disapproves certain other State requirements, 
for inclusion into the SIP and does not alter the relationship or the 
distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air 
Act. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this action.

F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in 
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP 
on which EPA is proposing action would not apply in Indian country 
located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial 
direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law. Thus, 
Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    EPA interprets EO 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as applying 
only to those regulatory actions that concern health or safety risks, 
such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of the EO has the 
potential to influence the regulation. This action is not subject to EO 
13045 because it is not an economically significant regulatory action 
based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997). This partial approval and partial disapproval 
under CAA section 110 will not in-and-of itself create any new 
regulations but simply approves certain State requirements, and 
disapproves certain other State requirements, for inclusion into the 
SIP.

H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 
22, 2001) because it is not a significant regulatory action under 
Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) 
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory 
activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or 
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical 
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling 
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by 
voluntary consensus standards bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to provide 
Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use 
available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    EPA believes that this action is not subject to requirements of 
Section 12(d) of NTTAA because application of those requirements would 
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Population

    Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR 7629, Feb. 16, 1994) establishes 
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision 
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and 
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission 
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high 
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, 
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income 
populations in the United States.
    EPA lacks the discretionary authority to address environmental 
justice in this rulemaking.

K. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. section 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 
rule 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. 
section 804(2). This rule will be effective on April 21, 2014.

L. Petitions for Judicial Review

    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 20, 2014. Filing a 
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule 
does not affect the finality of this rule 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 section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations,

[[Page 15702]]

Lead, Pb, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: February 28, 2014.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region 9.
    Therefore, 40 CFR Chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart DD--Nevada

0
2. In Sec.  52.1470, in paragraph (e), the table is amended by adding 
entries for:
0
a. ``Nevada's Clean Air Act Sec.  110(a)(1) and (2) State 
Implementation Plan for the 2008 Lead NAAQS, excluding appendices A-G 
for NDEP; and excluding the Washoe County District Board of Health 
Agenda, Minutes, Certificate of Adoption, Cover Letter to NDEP, and 
Proof of Publication''; and
0
b. ``Clark County Portion of Nevada's Clean Air Act Sec.  110(a)(1) and 
(2) State Implementation Plan for the 2008 Lead NAAQS, excluding Cover 
Letter to NDEP and Clark County Air Quality Regulations'' after the 
entry for ``Section 12--Resources''.
    The additions as follows:

Sec.  52.1470  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                   EPA-Approved Nevada Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Applicable
      Name of SIP provision           geographic or          State       EPA approval date       Explanation
                                    nonattainment area  submittal date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             Air Quality Implementation Plan for the State of Nevada
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Nevada's Clean Air Act Sec.        State-wide, within       10/12/2011  [Insert Federal      ``Infrastructure''
 110(a)(1) and (2) State            NDEP jurisdiction                    Register page        SIP for NDEP and
 Implementation Plan for the 2008   and Washoe County.                   number where the     Washoe County for
 Lead NAAQS, excluding appendices                                        document begins]     the 2008 Pb
 A-G for NDEP; and excluding the                                         03/21/2014.          standard.
 Washoe County District Board of
 Health Agenda, Minutes,
 Certificate of Adoption, Cover
 Letter to NDEP, and Proof of
 Publication.
Clark County Portion of Nevada's   Clark County.......       7/23/2012  [Insert Federal      ``Infrastructure''
 Clean Air Act Sec.   110(a)(1)                                          Register page        SIP for Clark
 and (2) State Implementation                                            number where the     County for the
 Plan for the 2008 Lead NAAQS,                                           document begins]     2008 Pb standard.
 excluding Cover Letter to NDEP                                          03/21/2014.
 and Clark County Air Quality
 Regulations.
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

0
3. Section 52.1472 is amended by adding paragraph (g) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  52.1472  Approval status.

* * * * *
    (g) 2008 Pb NAAQS: The SIPs submitted on October 12, 2011, July 23, 
2012, and August 30, 2012 are partially disapproved for Clean Air Act 
(CAA) elements 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), and (J) for the Nevada 
Division of Environmental Quality (NDEP), Clark County, and Washoe 
County portions of the Nevada SIP; for CAA element (D)(ii) for the NDEP 
and Washoe County portions of the Nevada SIP; and for CAA element 
110(a)(2)(F)(iii) for the Clark County portion of the Nevada SIP.
[FR Doc. 2014-06053 Filed 3-20-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P