Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Idaho: State Board Requirements, 46549-46552 [2013-18538]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Proposed Rules
this program. Local entities should refer
to the Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance Program Number 20.205,
Highway Planning and Construction, for
further information. Accordingly, the
FHWA solicits comments on this issue.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The FHWA has analyzed this
proposed rule under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C.
3501, et seq.) and has determined
preliminarily that this proposal does not
contain collection of information
requirements for the purposes of the
PRA.
National Environmental Policy Act
The FHWA has analyzed this action
for the purpose of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), and
has determined that this action would
not have any effect on the quality of the
environment and meets the criteria for
the categorical exclusion at 23 CFR
771.117(c)(20).
Executive Order 12630 (Taking of
Private Property)
The FHWA has analyzed this
proposed rule under Executive Order
12630, Governmental Actions and
Interference with Constitutionally
Protected Property Rights. The FHWA
does not anticipate that this proposed
action would affect a taking of private
property or otherwise have taking
implications under Executive Order
12630.
Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice
Reform)
This action meets applicable
standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice
Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce
burden.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Executive Order 13045 (Protection of
Children)
The FHWA has analyzed this
proposed rule under Executive Order
13045, Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks. The FHWA certifies that this
proposed action would not cause an
environmental risk to health or safety
that might disproportionately affect
children.
Executive Order 13175 (Tribal
Consultation)
The FHWA has analyzed this action
under Executive Order 13175, dated
November 6, 2000, and believes that the
proposed action would not have
substantial direct effects on one or more
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:23 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
Indian tribes; would not impose
substantial direct compliance costs on
Indian tribal governments; and would
not preempt tribal laws. The proposed
rulemaking addresses obligations of
Federal funds to States for Federal-aid
highway projects and would not impose
any direct compliance requirements on
Indian tribal governments. Therefore, a
tribal summary impact statement is not
required.
46549
PART 636—DESIGN-BUILD
CONTRACTING
1. The authority citation for part 636
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: Sec. 1503 of Pub. L. 109–59,
119 Stat. 1144; Sec. 1307 of Pub. L. 105–178,
112 Stat. 107; 23 U.S.C. 101, 109, 112, 113,
114, 115, 119, 128, and 315; 49 CFR 1.85(b).
2. Amend § 636.209 by revising
paragraph (b) to read as follows:
■
Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects)
§ 636.209 What items must be included in
a phase-two solicitation?
The FHWA analyzed this proposed
rule under Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. The FHWA has
determined that this rule is not a
significant energy action because the
rule is not a significant regulatory action
under Executive Order 12866, and the
rule is not likely to have a significant
adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. Therefore,
a Statement of Energy Effects is not
required.
*
Executive Order 12898 (Environmental
Justice)
Executive Order 12898 requires that
each Federal agency make achieving
environmental justice part of its mission
by identifying and addressing, as
appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or
environmental effects of its programs,
policies, and activities on minorities
and low-income populations. The
FHWA has determined that this rule
does not raise any environmental justice
issues.
Regulation Identification Number
A regulation identification number
(RIN) is assigned to each regulatory
action listed in the Unified Agenda of
Federal Regulations. The Regulatory
Information Service Center publishes
the Unified Agenda in April and
October of each year. The RIN number
contained in the heading of this
document can be used to cross-reference
this action with the Unified Agenda.
List of Subjects in 23 CFR Part 636
Construction, Construction manager,
General contractor, Grant programs,
Transportation, Highways, and Roads.
Issued on: July 16, 2013.
Victor M. Mendez,
Administrator.
In consideration of the foregoing, the
FHWA proposes to revise title 23, Code
of Federal Regulations, part 636 as
follows:
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
*
*
*
*
(b)(1) At your discretion, you may
allow proposers to submit alternative
technical concepts (ATCs) in their
proposals if:
(i) The alternative concepts do not
conflict with criteria agreed upon in the
environmental decision making process,
and
(ii) The RFP document clearly
describes the contracting agency’s
requirements for ATC:
(A) Content,
(B) Submission,
(C) Review,
(D) Confidential meetings procedures
(if used), and
(E) Evaluation in the proposal review
process.
(2) The confidentiality of ATCs will
be maintained, except to the extent
disclosure is necessary to maintain
compliance with Federal or State
permitting or other legal requirements
necessary for the delivery of the project.
[FR Doc. 2013–18514 Filed 7–31–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–22–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[Docket EPA–R10–OAR–2013–0548; FRL—
9842–1]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; Idaho: State
Board Requirements
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The EPA is proposing to
approve the State Implementation Plan
(SIP) revision submitted by the State of
Idaho for parallel processing on July 16,
2013, for purposes of meeting the state
board requirements of the Clean Air Act
(CAA). The EPA is also proposing to
approve the submittal as meeting the
corresponding state board infrastructure
requirements of the CAA for the 1997
ozone National Ambient Air Quality
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\01AUP1.SGM
01AUP1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
46550
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Proposed Rules
Standards (NAAQS). If the final SIP
revision submitted by the State to the
EPA is consistent with the July 16, 2013,
submittal, the State’s SIP will, upon
final approval, contain the required
provisions regarding board composition
and disclosure of potential conflicts of
interest.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before September 3, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10–
OAR–2013–0548, by any of the
following methods:
A. www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
B. Email: R10Public_Comments@epa.gov.
C. Mail: Kristin Hall, EPA Region 10,
Office of Air, Waste and Toxics (AWT–
107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900,
Seattle, WA 98101.
D. Hand Delivery: EPA Region 10
Mailroom, 9th Floor, 1200 Sixth
Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101.
Attention: Kristin Hall, Office of Air,
Waste and Toxics, AWT–107. Such
deliveries are only accepted during
normal hours of operation, and special
arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R10–OAR–2013–
0548. The 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
the disclosure of which 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 the 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 the 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, the 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 the EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
the EPA may not be able to consider
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:23 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
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 the disclosure of which 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 during normal business
hours at the Office of Air, Waste and
Toxics, EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth
Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kristin Hall at (206) 553–6357,
hall.kristin@epa.gov, or by using the
above EPA, Region 10 address.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document wherever
‘‘we’’, ‘‘us’’, or ‘‘our’’ are used, it is
intended to refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. The State’s Submittal
III. The EPA’s Evaluation
A. Evaluation of Board Composition
Requirements
B. Evaluation of Disclosure Requirements
IV. Proposed Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
CAA section 128, titled ‘‘State
Boards,’’ requires each SIP ‘‘to contain
requirements that (1) any board or body
which approves permits or enforcement
orders under this chapter shall have at
least a majority of members who
represent the public interest and do not
derive any significant portion of their
income from persons subject to permits
or enforcement orders under this
chapter, and (2) any potential conflicts
of interest by members of such board or
body or the head of an executive agency
with similar powers be adequately
disclosed.’’ 42 U.S.C. 7428.
On July 18, 1997, the EPA issued a
revised NAAQS for ozone.1 This action
triggered a requirement for states to
submit an infrastructure SIP to address
the applicable requirements of CAA
section 110(a)(2) within three years of
issuance of the new or revised NAAQS.
CAA section 110(a)(2) includes a list of
specific elements that each such plan
1 The eight-hour averaging period replaced the
previous one-hour averaging period, and the level
of the NAAQS was changed from 0.12 parts per
million (ppm) to 0.08 ppm (62 FR 38856).
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
submittal must meet, including section
110(a)(2)(E)(ii), which requires
compliance with the state board
requirements of CAA section 128.
On March 27, 2008, EPA issued a
finding that the State of Idaho had failed
to make a complete submittal to satisfy
the requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS (73
FR 16205). On September 15, 2008, the
State of Idaho made a SIP submittal to
the EPA for purposes of meeting the
requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)
for the 1997 ozone NAAQS. On April
11, 2012, we proposed to approve the
Idaho SIP as meeting the requirements
of CAA section 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C),
(D)(ii), (E)(i), (E)(iii), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K),
(L), and (M) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS
(77 FR 21702). In the notice, we stated
that Idaho’s SIP submission did not
address all of the requirements of CAA
section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii), which requires
that infrastructure SIPs meet the
requirements of CAA section 128, and
that we would address the requirements
of CAA section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) in a
separate action (77 FR at 21710). On
July 17, 2012, we took final action to
approve the Idaho SIP as meeting the
requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(ii), (E)(i),
(E)(iii), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M)
for the 1997 ozone NAAQS (77 FR
41916).
II. The State’s Submittal
On July 16, 2013, the State submitted
a SIP revision 2 for purposes of meeting
the state board requirements of CAA
section 128 and the corresponding state
board infrastructure SIP requirements
for the 1997 ozone NAAQS.
Specifically, the State submitted
Executive Order 2013–06, dated June
26, 2013, and Idaho Code §§ 59–701
through 705, Ethics in Government Act,
and requested parallel processing on the
submittal. Under the parallel processing
procedure, a State submits a SIP
revision to the EPA before final
adoption by the State. The EPA reviews
this proposed State action and prepares
a notice of proposed rulemaking. The
EPA publishes its notice of proposed
rulemaking in the Federal Register and
solicits public comment in
approximately the same time frame
during which the State is completing its
rulemaking action. For Idaho’s SIP
submittal, the State provided a schedule
for finalizing the SIP revision, including
public review and submittal of the final
SIP package to the EPA. If changes are
made to the SIP revision after this
proposal, such changes will be
2 The letter accompanying the submittal was
dated July 9, 2012.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP1.SGM
01AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Proposed Rules
described in the EPA’s final rulemaking
action and, if such changes are
significant, the EPA may re-propose the
action and provide an additional public
comment period.
In this action, we are proposing to
approve the July 16, 2013, submittal as
meeting the requirements of CAA
section 128 and CAA section
110(a)(2)(E)(ii) for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS, if the final SIP revision
submitted by the State to the EPA is
consistent with the July 16, 2013,
submittal. The EPA’s proposed
determination that Idaho’s SIP, as
amended, meets the CAA section 128
requirements for purposes of CAA
section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) with respect to
the 1997 ozone NAAQS is also
applicable to CAA section
110(a)(2)(E)(ii) requirements for other
infrastructure SIP submittals for Idaho.
Our evaluation of the State’s submittal
is presented below.
III. The EPA’s Evaluation
A. Evaluation of Board Composition
Requirements
Idaho Code § 39–107, Board—
Composition—Officers—
Compensation—Powers—Subpoena—
Depositions—Review, was originally
approved into the Idaho SIP on July 28,
1982 (47 FR 32530), and subsequently
approved on January 16, 2003 (68 FR
2217). Idaho Code § 39–107(1)(a)
establishes compositional requirements
of the Idaho Board of Environmental
Quality (Board), namely, that it consist
of seven members who shall be
appointed by the governor and further
that:
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Each member of the board shall be a citizen
of the United States, a resident of the state
of Idaho, and a qualified elector, and shall be
appointed to assure appropriate geographic
representation of the state of Idaho. No more
than four (4) members of the board shall be
from any one (1) political party. Two (2)
members of the board shall be chosen with
due regard to their knowledge of and interest
in solid waste; two (2) members shall be
chosen for their knowledge of and interest in
air quality; two (2) members shall be chosen
for their knowledge of and interest in water
quality; and one (1) member shall be chosen
with due regard for his knowledge of and
interest in air, water and solid waste issues.
To meet the requirements of CAA
section 128(a)(1), Idaho has submitted
Executive Order 2013–06, dated June
26, 2013, which orders that ‘‘the
appointment of members to the Idaho
board of environmental quality shall be
made in conformance with the
requirements of Idaho Code section 39–
107(1)(a), and section 128 of the Clean
Air Act.’’ The EPA believes that
Executive Order 2013–06 meets the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:23 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
46551
requirements of CAA section 128(a)(1).
Thus, if the final SIP revision submitted
by Idaho is consistent with the July 16,
2013, submittal, the EPA proposes to
find that Idaho’s SIP revision meets the
requirements of that CAA section
128(a)(1) and the corresponding board
infrastructure requirements of CAA
section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) for the 1997
ozone NAAQS.
The EPA notes, however, that as
provided in Idaho Code § 67–802,
executive orders in Idaho cease to be
effective four calendar years from the
date of issuance unless an earlier
termination date is specified in the
order or unless the order is renewed by
subsequent executive order. Because
Executive Order 2013–06 does not
specify an earlier termination date, it
will expire on June 26, 2017, unless it
is renewed by subsequent executive
order. The EPA therefore notes that if
Executive Order 2013–06 is not
renewed, or if it is not replaced with
legislation or some other legal authority
meeting the requirements of CAA
section 128(a)(1) and submitted to and
approved by EPA as a SIP revision,
Idaho’s SIP will no longer meet the
requirements of CAA section 128(a)(1).
At that time, the EPA will consider
appropriate action.
conflicts of interest by a member of the
Board or the Director of the IDEQ in
their approvals of permits and
enforcement orders and is thus
consistent with the requirements of
CAA section 128(a)(2). Therefore, if the
final SIP revision submitted by Idaho is
consistent with the July 16, 2013,
submittal, the EPA proposes to approve
Idaho’s final SIP revision as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 128(a)(2)
and the corresponding board
infrastructure requirements of CAA
section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) for the 1997
ozone NAAQS.
B. Evaluation of Disclosure
Requirements
The July 16, 2013, submittal also
includes the Idaho statutes governing
disclosure of conflicts of interest for
public officials, specifically, Idaho Code
§§ 59–701 through 59–705, Ethics in
Government. Idaho Code § 59–704 is the
heart of these disclosure provisions and
establishes required action in the case of
conflicts of interest. That section
provides that ‘‘A public official shall not
take any official action or make a formal
decision or formal recommendation
concerning any matter where he has a
conflict of interest and has failed to
disclose such conflict as provided in
this section.’’ Under Idaho Code § 59–
703(10), ‘‘public official’’ is defined to
include ‘‘any person holding public
office of a governmental entity by virtue
of formal appointment as required by
law’’ and ‘‘any person holding public
office of a governmental entity by virtue
of employment, or a person employed
by a governmental entity on a consultive
basis.’’ Thus, the disclosure
requirements in Idaho Code § 59–704
apply to Board members and the
Director of the Idaho Department of
Environmental Quality (IDEQ). In
conjunction with the definition of
‘‘official action’’ in Idaho Code § 59–
703(1), the EPA believes that Idaho
Code § 59–704 requires the disclosure of
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
CAA and applicable Federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. 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);
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
IV. Proposed Action
Pursuant to CAA sections 110 and
128, if the final SIP revision submitted
by Idaho to address the requirements of
CAA section 128 is consistent with
Idaho’s July 16, 2013, submittal, the
EPA is proposing to approve Idaho’s SIP
revision as meeting the requirements of
CAA sections 128 and also the
requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(E)(ii) for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS. This approval, once finalized,
would also serve as a determination that
Idaho meets the CAA section 128
requirements for purposes of CAA
section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) for other
infrastructure SIP submittals for Idaho.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP1.SGM
01AUP1
46552
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Proposed Rules
• 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 the requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
this action does not involve technical
standards; and
• does not provide the 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 the 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, Incorporation by
reference, Ozone, and Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: July 25, 2013.
Dennis J. McLerran,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2013–18538 Filed 7–31–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
submitted to EPA a Clean Air Act (CAA)
section 175A(b) second 10-year
maintenance plan for the Colorado
Springs area for the carbon monoxide
(CO) National Ambient Air Quality
Standard (NAAQS). This limited
maintenance plan (LMP) addresses
maintenance of the CO NAAQS for a
second 10-year period beyond the
original redesignation. This action is
being taken under sections 110 and
175A of the CAA.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before September 3,
2013.
Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08–
OAR–2011–0659, by one of the
following methods:
• https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• Email: clark.adam@epa.gov.
• Fax: (303) 312–6064 (please alert
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing
comments).
• Mail: Carl Daly, Director, Air
Program, EPA, Region 8, Mailcode 8P–
AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street Denver,
Colorado 80202–1129.
• Hand Delivery: Carl Daly, Director,
Air Program, EPA, Region 8, Mailcode
8P–AR, 1595 Wynkoop, Denver,
Colorado 80202–1129. Such deliveries
are only accepted Monday through
Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
federal holidays. Special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
Please see the direct final rule which
is located in the Rules and Regulations
section of this Federal Register for
detailed instruction on how to submit
comments.
ADDRESSES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R08–OAR–2011–0659; FRL–9840–6]
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; State of
Colorado; Second Ten-Year Carbon
Monoxide Maintenance Plan for
Colorado Springs
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing to approve
a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the State of
Colorado. On March 31, 2010, the
Governor of Colorado’s designee
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:23 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
Adam Clark, Air Program, EPA, Region
8, Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595 Wynkoop,
Denver, Colorado 80202–1129, (303)
312–7104, clark.adam@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the
‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ section of this
Federal Register, EPA is approving
Colorado’s SIP revision as a direct final
rule without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial
SIP revision and anticipates no adverse
comments. A detailed rationale for the
approval is set forth in the preamble to
the direct final rule. If EPA receives no
adverse comments, EPA will not take
further action on this proposed rule. If
EPA receives adverse comments, EPA
will withdraw the direct final rule and
it will not take effect. EPA will address
all public comments in a subsequent
final rule based on this proposed rule.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
EPA will not institute a second
comment period on this action. Any
parties interested in commenting must
do so at this time. 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. See the information
provided in the Direct Final action of
the same title which is located in the
Rules and Regulations section of this
Federal Register.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: July 16, 2013.
Judith Wong,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2013–18436 Filed 7–31–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R01–OAR–2008–0446; A–1–FRL–
9842–2]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans;
Massachusetts; Regulations Limiting
Emissions of Volatile Organic
Compounds and Nitrogen Oxides
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The EPA is proposing to
approve State Implementation Plan
(SIP) revisions submitted by the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts. These
are revisions to existing air pollution
control requirements for stationary
sources of volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NOX). This
action is being taken under the Clean
Air Act.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before September 3,
2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID Number EPA–
R01–OAR–2008–0446 by one of the
following methods:
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. Email: arnold.anne@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (617) 918–0047.
4. Mail: ‘‘Docket Identification
Number EPA–R01–OAR–2008–0446,’’
Anne Arnold, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA New England
Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem
Protection, Air Quality Planning Unit, 5
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\01AUP1.SGM
01AUP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 148 (Thursday, August 1, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 46549-46552]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-18538]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[Docket EPA-R10-OAR-2013-0548; FRL--9842-1]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Idaho: State
Board Requirements
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to approve the State Implementation Plan
(SIP) revision submitted by the State of Idaho for parallel processing
on July 16, 2013, for purposes of meeting the state board requirements
of the Clean Air Act (CAA). The EPA is also proposing to approve the
submittal as meeting the corresponding state board infrastructure
requirements of the CAA for the 1997 ozone National Ambient Air Quality
[[Page 46550]]
Standards (NAAQS). If the final SIP revision submitted by the State to
the EPA is consistent with the July 16, 2013, submittal, the State's
SIP will, upon final approval, contain the required provisions
regarding board composition and disclosure of potential conflicts of
interest.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 3, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-
OAR-2013-0548, by any of the following methods:
A. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
B. Email: R10-Public_Comments@epa.gov.
C. Mail: Kristin Hall, EPA Region 10, Office of Air, Waste and
Toxics (AWT-107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101.
D. Hand Delivery: EPA Region 10 Mailroom, 9th Floor, 1200 Sixth
Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101. Attention: Kristin Hall, Office
of Air, Waste and Toxics, AWT-107. Such deliveries are only accepted
during normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be
made for deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R10-OAR-
2013-0548. The 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 the
disclosure of which 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 the 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 the 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, the 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 the EPA cannot read your comment due
to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the
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
the disclosure of which 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 during normal business hours at the
Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue,
Seattle, WA 98101.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristin Hall at (206) 553-6357,
hall.kristin@epa.gov, or by using the above EPA, Region 10 address.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever ``we'',
``us'', or ``our'' are used, it is intended to refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. The State's Submittal
III. The EPA's Evaluation
A. Evaluation of Board Composition Requirements
B. Evaluation of Disclosure Requirements
IV. Proposed Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
CAA section 128, titled ``State Boards,'' requires each SIP ``to
contain requirements that (1) any board or body which approves permits
or enforcement orders under this chapter shall have at least a majority
of members who represent the public interest and do not derive any
significant portion of their income from persons subject to permits or
enforcement orders under this chapter, and (2) any potential conflicts
of interest by members of such board or body or the head of an
executive agency with similar powers be adequately disclosed.'' 42
U.S.C. 7428.
On July 18, 1997, the EPA issued a revised NAAQS for ozone.\1\ This
action triggered a requirement for states to submit an infrastructure
SIP to address the applicable requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)
within three years of issuance of the new or revised NAAQS. CAA section
110(a)(2) includes a list of specific elements that each such plan
submittal must meet, including section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii), which requires
compliance with the state board requirements of CAA section 128.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The eight-hour averaging period replaced the previous one-
hour averaging period, and the level of the NAAQS was changed from
0.12 parts per million (ppm) to 0.08 ppm (62 FR 38856).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 27, 2008, EPA issued a finding that the State of Idaho had
failed to make a complete submittal to satisfy the requirements of CAA
section 110(a)(2) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS (73 FR 16205). On September
15, 2008, the State of Idaho made a SIP submittal to the EPA for
purposes of meeting the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2) for the
1997 ozone NAAQS. On April 11, 2012, we proposed to approve the Idaho
SIP as meeting the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C),
(D)(ii), (E)(i), (E)(iii), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M) for
the 1997 ozone NAAQS (77 FR 21702). In the notice, we stated that
Idaho's SIP submission did not address all of the requirements of CAA
section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii), which requires that infrastructure SIPs meet
the requirements of CAA section 128, and that we would address the
requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) in a separate action (77
FR at 21710). On July 17, 2012, we took final action to approve the
Idaho SIP as meeting the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(A), (B),
(C), (D)(ii), (E)(i), (E)(iii), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M)
for the 1997 ozone NAAQS (77 FR 41916).
II. The State's Submittal
On July 16, 2013, the State submitted a SIP revision \2\ for
purposes of meeting the state board requirements of CAA section 128 and
the corresponding state board infrastructure SIP requirements for the
1997 ozone NAAQS. Specifically, the State submitted Executive Order
2013-06, dated June 26, 2013, and Idaho Code Sec. Sec. 59-701 through
705, Ethics in Government Act, and requested parallel processing on the
submittal. Under the parallel processing procedure, a State submits a
SIP revision to the EPA before final adoption by the State. The EPA
reviews this proposed State action and prepares a notice of proposed
rulemaking. The EPA publishes its notice of proposed rulemaking in the
Federal Register and solicits public comment in approximately the same
time frame during which the State is completing its rulemaking action.
For Idaho's SIP submittal, the State provided a schedule for finalizing
the SIP revision, including public review and submittal of the final
SIP package to the EPA. If changes are made to the SIP revision after
this proposal, such changes will be
[[Page 46551]]
described in the EPA's final rulemaking action and, if such changes are
significant, the EPA may re-propose the action and provide an
additional public comment period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The letter accompanying the submittal was dated July 9,
2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this action, we are proposing to approve the July 16, 2013,
submittal as meeting the requirements of CAA section 128 and CAA
section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS, if the final SIP
revision submitted by the State to the EPA is consistent with the July
16, 2013, submittal. The EPA's proposed determination that Idaho's SIP,
as amended, meets the CAA section 128 requirements for purposes of CAA
section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS is also
applicable to CAA section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) requirements for other
infrastructure SIP submittals for Idaho. Our evaluation of the State's
submittal is presented below.
III. The EPA's Evaluation
A. Evaluation of Board Composition Requirements
Idaho Code Sec. 39-107, Board--Composition--Officers--
Compensation--Powers--Subpoena--Depositions--Review, was originally
approved into the Idaho SIP on July 28, 1982 (47 FR 32530), and
subsequently approved on January 16, 2003 (68 FR 2217). Idaho Code
Sec. 39-107(1)(a) establishes compositional requirements of the Idaho
Board of Environmental Quality (Board), namely, that it consist of
seven members who shall be appointed by the governor and further that:
Each member of the board shall be a citizen of the United
States, a resident of the state of Idaho, and a qualified elector,
and shall be appointed to assure appropriate geographic
representation of the state of Idaho. No more than four (4) members
of the board shall be from any one (1) political party. Two (2)
members of the board shall be chosen with due regard to their
knowledge of and interest in solid waste; two (2) members shall be
chosen for their knowledge of and interest in air quality; two (2)
members shall be chosen for their knowledge of and interest in water
quality; and one (1) member shall be chosen with due regard for his
knowledge of and interest in air, water and solid waste issues.
To meet the requirements of CAA section 128(a)(1), Idaho has
submitted Executive Order 2013-06, dated June 26, 2013, which orders
that ``the appointment of members to the Idaho board of environmental
quality shall be made in conformance with the requirements of Idaho
Code section 39-107(1)(a), and section 128 of the Clean Air Act.'' The
EPA believes that Executive Order 2013-06 meets the requirements of CAA
section 128(a)(1). Thus, if the final SIP revision submitted by Idaho
is consistent with the July 16, 2013, submittal, the EPA proposes to
find that Idaho's SIP revision meets the requirements of that CAA
section 128(a)(1) and the corresponding board infrastructure
requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS.
The EPA notes, however, that as provided in Idaho Code Sec. 67-
802, executive orders in Idaho cease to be effective four calendar
years from the date of issuance unless an earlier termination date is
specified in the order or unless the order is renewed by subsequent
executive order. Because Executive Order 2013-06 does not specify an
earlier termination date, it will expire on June 26, 2017, unless it is
renewed by subsequent executive order. The EPA therefore notes that if
Executive Order 2013-06 is not renewed, or if it is not replaced with
legislation or some other legal authority meeting the requirements of
CAA section 128(a)(1) and submitted to and approved by EPA as a SIP
revision, Idaho's SIP will no longer meet the requirements of CAA
section 128(a)(1). At that time, the EPA will consider appropriate
action.
B. Evaluation of Disclosure Requirements
The July 16, 2013, submittal also includes the Idaho statutes
governing disclosure of conflicts of interest for public officials,
specifically, Idaho Code Sec. Sec. 59-701 through 59-705, Ethics in
Government. Idaho Code Sec. 59-704 is the heart of these disclosure
provisions and establishes required action in the case of conflicts of
interest. That section provides that ``A public official shall not take
any official action or make a formal decision or formal recommendation
concerning any matter where he has a conflict of interest and has
failed to disclose such conflict as provided in this section.'' Under
Idaho Code Sec. 59-703(10), ``public official'' is defined to include
``any person holding public office of a governmental entity by virtue
of formal appointment as required by law'' and ``any person holding
public office of a governmental entity by virtue of employment, or a
person employed by a governmental entity on a consultive basis.'' Thus,
the disclosure requirements in Idaho Code Sec. 59-704 apply to Board
members and the Director of the Idaho Department of Environmental
Quality (IDEQ). In conjunction with the definition of ``official
action'' in Idaho Code Sec. 59-703(1), the EPA believes that Idaho
Code Sec. 59-704 requires the disclosure of conflicts of interest by a
member of the Board or the Director of the IDEQ in their approvals of
permits and enforcement orders and is thus consistent with the
requirements of CAA section 128(a)(2). Therefore, if the final SIP
revision submitted by Idaho is consistent with the July 16, 2013,
submittal, the EPA proposes to approve Idaho's final SIP revision as
meeting the requirements of CAA section 128(a)(2) and the corresponding
board infrastructure requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) for
the 1997 ozone NAAQS.
IV. Proposed Action
Pursuant to CAA sections 110 and 128, if the final SIP revision
submitted by Idaho to address the requirements of CAA section 128 is
consistent with Idaho's July 16, 2013, submittal, the EPA is proposing
to approve Idaho's SIP revision as meeting the requirements of CAA
sections 128 and also the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii)
for the 1997 ozone NAAQS. This approval, once finalized, would also
serve as a determination that Idaho meets the CAA section 128
requirements for purposes of CAA section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) for other
infrastructure SIP submittals for Idaho.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. 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);
[[Page 46552]]
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 the requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because this action does not involve technical standards; and
does not provide the 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 the 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, Incorporation by
reference, Ozone, and Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: July 25, 2013.
Dennis J. McLerran,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2013-18538 Filed 7-31-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P