Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; Washington: Puget Sound Ozone Maintenance Plan, 25010-25014 [2014-09878]

Download as PDF TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 25010 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 85 / Friday, May 2, 2014 / Rules and Regulations round census reporting. Further, on April 8, 2009, the Judges published a notice of inquiry (NOI) to obtain additional information concerning the likely costs and benefits stemming from the adoption of the proposed census reporting provision as well as information on any alternatives to the proposal that might accomplish the same goals as the proposal in a less burdensome way, particularly with respect to small entities. 74 FR 15901. On October 13, 2009, the Judges published a final rule amending the interim regulations and establishing requirements for census reporting for all but those broadcasters who pay no more than the minimum fee for their use of the license. 74 FR 52418. The Judges adopted the regulations substantially as proposed in the NPRM with minor modifications in response to comments received. The final regulations established requirements by which copyright owners may receive reasonable notice of the use of their sound recordings and under which records of use were to be kept and made available by entities of all sizes performing sound recordings. See, e.g., 17 U.S.C. 114 (f)(4)(A). As with the interim regulations adopted in 2006, the final regulations adopted in 2009 represented baseline requirements. In other words, digital audio services remained free to negotiate other formats and technical standards for data maintenance and delivery and to use those in lieu of regulations adopted by the Judges, upon agreement with the Collective. The Judges indicated that they had no intention of codifying these negotiated variances in the future unless and until they come into such standardized use as to effectively supersede the existing regulations. On October 28, 2009, College Broadcasters, Inc. (CBI), American Council on Education and Intercollegiate Broadcasting Systems, Inc. (collectively, Petitioners) made a motion with the Judges for clarification with respect to one issue raised by the final regulation. Petitioners noted that the final regulation exempted minimum-fee webcasters that are FCClicensed broadcasters from the census reporting requirement, but did not appear to exempt minimum-fee educational stations that are not FCClicensed broadcasters from the same requirement. Petitioners asked the Judges to ‘‘clarify’’ that the exemption extended to minimum fee unlicensed educational stations. On November 12, 2009, before the Judges ruled on this motion, CBI filed a Petition for Review of the final regulation with the United States Court VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:05 May 01, 2014 Jkt 232001 of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) (Appeal No. 09– 1276). This appeal was held in abeyance pending the outcome of an appeal of the Judges’ final determination in Docket No. 2009–1 CRB Webcasting III. The D.C. Circuit concluded that appeal on July 6, 2012, holding that the manner by which the Judges were appointed was unconstitutional, and dictating a statutory remedy. Intercollegiate Broad. Sys. v. Copyright Royalty Bd., 684 F.3d 1332, 1340–41 (D.C. Cir. 2012), cert. denied, 133 S. Ct. 2735 (2013). The D.C. Circuit remanded the final determination to the Judges,1 and also transferred CBI’s appeal to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. See Order in Appeal No. 09– 1276 (D.C. Cir. October 28, 2013). In light of the foregoing proceedings, the Judges recognize the need to clarify the effectiveness of the final regulation. Consequently, the Judges performed a de novo review of the comments underlying the final regulation and affirm the adoption of this regulation as published at 74 FR 52418 on October 11, 2009, in its entirety and without change (including the reasons set forth in the preamble thereto), thereby removing any doubt as to the effectiveness of the final regulation. Such affirmation also ensures the continuous effectiveness of the rules concerning notice and recordkeeping for users of copyrighted sound recordings. On October 21, 2013, the Judges received a petition from SoundExchange seeking modifications to the notice and recordkeeping final regulation. The Judges will address the Petitioner’s motion for clarification, as well as SoundExchange’s petition, in a separate notice also published today in the Federal Register. List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 370 Copyright, Sound recordings. Final Regulation For the reasons set forth in the foregoing preamble, the Copyright Royalty Judges affirm adoption of the final rule revising 37 CFR part 370, which was published at 74 FR 52418 on October 13, 2009, without change. 1 The Judges issued their Initial Determination on Remand in the Webcasting III proceeding, see Determination After Remand of Rates and Terms for Royalty Years 2011–2015, Docket No. 2009–1 CRB Webcasting III (Jan. 9, 2014). PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Dated: February 20, 2014. Suzanne M. Barnett, Chief U.S. Copyright Royalty Judge. James H. Billington, Librarian of Congress. [FR Doc. 2014–09799 Filed 5–1–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 1410–72–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R10–OAR–2008–0122; FRL 9910–02– Region 10] Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; Washington: Puget Sound Ozone Maintenance Plan Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Direct Final rule. AGENCY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking a direct final action to approve a maintenance plan for the Central Puget Sound area to maintain the 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) through 2015. This plan was submitted by the Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology or ‘‘the State’’) as a revision to its State Implementation Plan (SIP) on January 10, 2008. This action finds that the maintenance plan for this area meets all relevant Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements for approval, and demonstrates that the Central Puget Sound area will remain in attainment with the 1997 and 2008 ozone NAAQS through 2015. DATES: This rule is effective on July 1, 2014, without further notice, unless the EPA receives adverse comment by June 2, 2014. If the EPA receives adverse comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take effect. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10– OAR–2008–0122, by any of the following methods: • www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. • Email: R10-Public_Comments@ epa.gov. • Mail: Keith Rose, U.S. EPA Region 10, Office of Air, Waste and Toxics (AWT–107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101. • Hand Delivery/Courier: U.S. EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101. Attention: Keith Rose, Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, AWT–107. Such deliveries are SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\02MYR1.SGM 02MYR1 TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 85 / Friday, May 2, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 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–2008– 0122. 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 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 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 docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business hours at the Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, U.S. EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Keith Rose at telephone number: (206) 553–1949, email address: rose.keith@ epa.gov, or the above EPA, Region 10 address. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:05 May 01, 2014 Jkt 232001 ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean the EPA. Information is organized as follows: Table of Contents I. Background A. Regulatory Context B. Requirements of CAA Section 110(a)(1) Maintenance Plans C. How have the Tribal Governments been involved in this process? II. Summary of SIP Revision and the EPA’s Evaluation III. Final Action IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Background A. Regulatory Context On November 15, 1990, the CAA Amendments of 1990 were enacted. Under section 107(d)(1) of the CAA, the EPA designated the Central Puget Sound area, also called the Seattle-Tacoma area (which includes all of Pierce County, almost all of King County except the northeast corner, and part of Snohomish County), as nonattainment because the area violated the 1-hour ozone standard during the years 1989–1991. As a result, the EPA classified the Central Puget Sound area as ‘‘marginal’’ under section 181(a)(1) of the CAA (56 FR 56847, November 6, 1991). On January 28, 1993, the State of Washington submitted a SIP demonstrating compliance with the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. On August 21, 1995, the State submitted a revision to the Washington Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) Program to satisfy the requirements of sections 182(b)(4) and 182(c)(3) of the CAA and 40 CFR part 51, subpart S. This SIP revision requires vehicle owners in the Central Puget Sound area to comply with the Washington I/M program. The EPA approved this I/M program revision on September 25, 1996 (61 FR 50235). On March 4, 1996, the State submitted to the EPA a request to redesignate the Central Puget Sound area to attainment for the 1-hour ozone standard, and a maintenance plan demonstrating maintenance of the ozone standard through 2010. On September 26, 1996, the EPA determined that the Puget Sound area had attained the ozone NAAQS, redesignated the Central Puget Sound area to attainment for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, and approved the associated maintenance plan (61 FR 50438). On December 17, 2003, Ecology submitted a second 10-year maintenance plan demonstrating that the Central Puget Sound area would maintain air quality standards for ozone through the year 2016. The EPA approved the second 10-year maintenance plan on August 5, 2004 (69 FR 47365). PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 25011 In 2008, the EPA revised the level of the 8-hour ozone standard to 0.075 ppm (73 FR 16436, March 27, 2008). The Central Puget Sound area was subsequently designated attainment/ unclassifiable for the new 8-hour standard (77 FR 30088, May 21, 2012). B. Requirements of CAA Section 110(a)(1) Maintenance Plans Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA requires, in part, that states submit to the EPA plans to maintain any NAAQS promulgated by the EPA. Areas like the Central Puget Sound area that were maintenance areas for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, but unclassifiable/attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, are required to submit a plan to demonstrate the continued maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The EPA established a deadline of three years after the effective date of the 1997 8hour ozone designations as the deadline for submission of these plans. On May 20, 2005, the EPA issued guidance for States in preparing maintenance plans under section 110(a)(1) of the CAA for areas that are required to do so under 40 CFR 51.905.1 At a minimum, the maintenance plan should include the following five components: 1. An attainment inventory, which is based on actual typical summer day emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides of nitrogen (NOX) from a base year chosen by the State; 2. A maintenance demonstration which shows how the area will remain in compliance with the 8-hour ozone standard for 10 years after the effective date of the designation; 3. A commitment to continue to operate ambient air quality monitors to verify maintenance of the 8-hour ozone standard; 4. A contingency plan that will ensure that any violation of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS will be promptly corrected; and 5. An explanation of how the State will verify continued attainment of the standard under the maintenance plan. On January 10, 2008, the EPA received a SIP submittal from Ecology to approve a maintenance plan submitted under section 110(a)(1) of the CAA to maintain the 8-hour NAAQS for ozone for the Central Puget Sound area. The EPA prepared a Technical Support Document (TSD) with more detailed information about this SIP submittal, 1 Memorandum titled ‘‘Maintenance Plan Guidance Document for Certain 8-hour Ozone Areas Under Section 110(a)(l) of Clean Air Act’’ by Lydia Wegman, Director, EPA Air Quality Strategies and Standards Division, May 20, 2005. E:\FR\FM\02MYR1.SGM 02MYR1 25012 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 85 / Friday, May 2, 2014 / Rules and Regulations which is available for review as part of the docket for this action. purposes of a Section 110(a)(1) ozone maintenance plan. C. How have the Tribal Governments been involved in this process? 2. Maintenance Demonstration The key element of a Section 110(a)(1) ozone maintenance plan is a demonstration of how an area will remain in compliance with the 8-hour ozone standard for the 10-year period following the effective date of designation as unclassifiable/ attainment. The end projection year is 10 years from the effective date of the 8-hour attainment designation, which for the Central Puget Sound area was June 15, 2004 (69 FR 23858). Therefore, this plan must demonstrate attainment through year 2014. Ecology has projected emissions for the year 2015, which is more than 10 years from the effective date of initial designations. With regard to demonstrating continued maintenance of the 8-hour ozone standard, Ecology projected that the total emissions of ozone precursors in the Central Puget Sound area will significantly decrease from 2002 (the base year) through 2015. In 2002, the total anthropogenic emissions of VOCs in the Central Puget Sound area were 474 tons/day, and 446 tons/day for NOX. The 2015 anthropogenic emissions from the Central Puget Sound area are projected to be 346 tons/day for VOCs, and 411 tons/day for NOX. Thus, the total emissions of VOCs in 2015 are projected to be about 27% lower than the 2002 level, and total NOX emissions in 2015 are projected to be about 8% lower than the 2002 level. The formation of ozone is dependent on a number of variables which cannot be estimated only through emissions growth and reduction calculations. These variables include weather and the transport of ozone precursors from outside the maintenance area. In order to demonstrate continued maintenance of the standards, a state may utilize more sophisticated tools such as air quality dispersion modeling to support their analysis. In the SIP submittal, Ecology used air quality dispersion modeling to assess the comprehensive impacts of growth through 2015 on ozone levels in the area. The results of this modeling demonstrate that the highest predicted design value (the 3year average of the fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone value) for the Central Puget Sound area in 2015 would be 0.068 ppm, which is below both the 1997 and the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and would therefore be in compliance with both ozone NAAQS. Based on the estimated emissions of VOCs and NOX submitted with this maintenance plan, the EPA concludes that this maintenance plan would not Consistent with the EPA’s tribal policy, the EPA offered government-togovernment consultations to the Tulalip Tribes, the Puyallup Tribe of Indians, the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, the Stillaguamish Tribe, and the Nisqually Indian Tribe, regarding the action in this notice, because these tribes are located in the Central Puget Sound ozone area and may be affected by this action. II. Summary of SIP Revision and the EPA’s Evaluation Ecology’s 8-hour 110(a)(1) ozone maintenance plan for the Central Puget Sound area addresses all five maintenance plan components outlined in the EPA’s guidance of May 20, 2005. All of the 1-hour ozone control measures previously approved into the SIP for the Central Puget Sound area remain in place in this 8-hour 110(a)(1) maintenance plan and are used in the maintenance demonstration. The five components of the maintenance plan and how they meet the EPA’s criteria, are described below. TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES 1. Attainment Inventory An emissions inventory is an itemized list of emission estimates for sources of air pollution in a given area for a specified time period. An attainment inventory is a projection of an emission inventory in a base year, when an area was in attainment with the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, to an appropriate attainment year. Ecology provided a comprehensive base year emissions inventory for NOX and VOCs for the Central Puget Sound area with the SIP submittal. Ecology chose to use 2002 as the base year from which it projected emissions. The SIP submittal also includes an explanation of the methodology used for determining the anthropogenic (point, area and mobile sources) emissions of NOX and VOCs. On-road vehicle emission controls required by the State I/M program were included in the attainment inventory. The inventory is based on emissions on a ‘‘typical summer day.’’ The term ‘‘typical summer day’’ refers to a typical weekday during the months when ozone concentrations are typically the highest. Based on our review of the documentation submitted, the EPA concludes that the attainment inventory has been developed for the appropriate season of an acceptable attainment year, is based on appropriate factors and methods, and is thus acceptable for the VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:05 May 01, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 cause an increase of direct emissions or precursor emissions that would interfere with the maintenance of any criteria pollutant NAAQS in the Central Puget Sound area. Therefore, the EPA concludes that the maintenance demonstration submitted by the State meets the requirement of a section 110(a)(1) ozone maintenance plan. 3. Ambient Air Quality Monitoring With regard to the ambient air monitoring component of the maintenance plan, Ecology commits to continue operating the current Puget Sound ozone monitoring network in accordance with all of the applicable requirements of 40 CFR part 58 throughout the maintenance period to verify maintenance of the 8-hour ozone standard. Ecology will also submit quality-assured ozone data to the EPA’s Air Quality System within 90 days of the end of each quarter. The State of Washington’s ambient air monitoring network meets all applicable EPA air monitoring regulations, and was most recently approved by the EPA on March 10, 2014. The EPA therefore finds that the State’s ambient air monitoring network satisfies the requirements of CAA section 110(a). 4. Contingency Plan Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA requires the State to develop a contingency plan that will ensure that any violation of a NAAQS is promptly corrected. The purpose of the contingency plan is to provide a range of response actions that may be selected for implementation in the event of any violation of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. There are two regulations adopted by the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency, the local air agency with jurisdiction in the Central Puget Sound area, on December 19, 2002, that are identified as contingency measures in this maintenance plan. These regulations were included as contingency measures in the ozone second 10-year maintenance plan for the Central Puget Sound area that was approved by the EPA on August 5, 2004 (69 FR 47364 and 69 FR 47365). These contingency measures are: (1) Regulation I, Section 8.06, Outdoor Burning Ozone Contingency Measure, and (2) Regulation II, Section 2.10, Gasoline Station Ozone Contingency Measure. Both the outdoor burning and the gasoline station contingency regulations would be triggered by a written finding from the EPA of a quality-assured violation of the ozone NAAQS and a determination that future violations can reasonably be addressed through implementing these regulations. The E:\FR\FM\02MYR1.SGM 02MYR1 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 85 / Friday, May 2, 2014 / Rules and Regulations EPA finds that these contingency measures satisfy the requirements of CAA section 110(a). 5. Verification of Continued Attainment Since 1991, there have been no violations of either the 1997 or 2008 8hour ozone standards at any ozone monitoring site in the Central Puget Sound ozone area. Ecology will continue to monitor ambient air quality ozone levels in the Central Puget Sound area and verify attainment of the ozone NAAQS as described in the maintenance plan. The State commits to preparing summer day emission inventories for the interim years of 2008, 2011 and 2014, and will compare these emission inventory results with the modeling emission inventories to ensure continued compliance with the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The EPA finds that these methods to verify continued attainment of the ozone NAAQS satisfy the requirements of CAA section 110(a). The EPA finds that the maintenance plan for the Central Puget Sound ozone area adequately addresses all five components outlined in the EPA’s guidance of May 20, 2005, for developing maintenance plans under 110(a)(1) of the CAA. TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES III. Final Action The EPA is approving a maintenance plan to maintain the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the Central Puget Sound ozone area that was submitted by the State of Washington as a revision to its SIP on January 10, 2008. The maintenance plan for this area meets all CAA 110(a)(1) requirements and demonstrates that the Central Puget Sound ozone area will remain in attainment with the 1997 and 2008 ozone NAAQS through 2015. This decision was reached after offering consultation to the Tulalip Tribes, the Puyallup Tribe of Indians, the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, the Stillaguamish Tribe, and the Nisqually Indian Tribe. The EPA did not receive any requests for consultation from these tribes. IV. 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 VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:05 May 01, 2014 Jkt 232001 those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action: • Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993); • Does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); • Is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); • Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); • Does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999); • Is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); • Is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); • Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the CAA ; 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 it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law. The SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the State, except for non-trust land within the exterior boundaries of the Puyallup Indian Reservation, also known as the 1873 Survey Area. Under the Puyallup Tribe of Indians Settlement Act of 1989, 25 U.S.C. 1773, Congress explicitly provided state and local agencies in Washington authority over activities on non-trust lands within the 1873 Survey Area and the EPA is therefore approving this SIP on such lands. Consistent with EPA policy, the EPA provided a consultation opportunity to the Tulalip Tribes, the Puyallup Tribe of Indians, the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, the Stillaguamish Tribe, and the Nisqually PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 25013 Indian Tribe in letters dated December 24, 2013. The EPA did not receive a request for consultation from these tribes. The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801, et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this action and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by July 1, 2014. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules section of today’s Federal Register, rather than file an immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that the EPA can withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements (See CAA section 307(b)(2).). List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds. Dated: April 10, 2014. Michelle L. Pirzadeh, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10. 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: E:\FR\FM\02MYR1.SGM 02MYR1 25014 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 85 / Friday, May 2, 2014 / Rules and Regulations Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq. PART 52—APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS Plan’’ at the end of the section with the heading ‘‘Attainment and Maintenance Planning—Ozone.’’ to read as follows: Subpart WW—Washington 2. Section 52.2470 is amended in table 2 of paragraph (e) by adding an entry ‘‘8Hour Ozone 110(a)(1) Maintenance ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: ■ § 52.2470 * Identification of plan. * * (e) * * * * * TABLE 2—ATTAINMENT, MAINTENANCE, AND OTHER PLANS Applicable geographic or nonattainment area Name of SIP provision * * * State submittal date * EPA approval date * Comments * * * * * * Attainment and Maintenance Planning—Ozone * * 8-Hour Ozone 110(a)(1) Maintenance Plan. * * Seattle-Tacoma ...................... * * [FR Doc. 2014–09878 Filed 5–1–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R09–OAR–2013–0599; FRL–9909–16– Region 9] Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California San Francisco Bay Area and Chico Nonattainment Areas; Fine Particulate Matter Emissions Inventories; Correction Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Direct final rule; correction. AGENCY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a direct final rule that appeared in the Federal Register on March 14, 2014. The document approved revisions to the California State Implementation Plan (SIP) concerning emissions inventories for the 2006 24-hour fine particle National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for the San Francisco Bay Area and Chico PM2.5 nonattainment areas. We are approving these emissions inventories under the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act). An error in the amendatory instruction is identified and corrected in this action. DATES: This rule is effective on May 13, 2014 without further notice. ADDRESSES: Docket: Generally, documents in the docket for this action TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 * 16:05 May 01, 2014 Jkt 232001 * 2/5/08 * 5/2/14 [Insert page number where the document begins]. * are available electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California 94105–3901. While all documents in the docket are listed at www.regulations.gov, some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material, large maps), and some may not be publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa Tharp, EPA Region IX, (415) 947–4142, tharp.lisa@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA published a direct final rule on March 14, 2014 (79 FR 14404) approving revisions to the California State Implementation Plan (SIP) concerning emissions inventories. In that approval EPA erroneously added the incorrect paragraph numbers to § 52.220, paragraph (c). Therefore the amendatory instruction is being corrected to reflect the corrected section paragraph numbering. 2. On page 14409, third column, third line under the section heading § 52.220 Identification Plan, correct paragraph number ‘‘(434)’’ to read ‘‘(435)’’; and 3. On page 14409, third column, line twenty-two under the section heading § 52.220 Identification Plan, correct paragraph number ‘‘(435)’’ to read ‘‘(436)’’. Dated: April 18, 2014. Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX. [FR Doc. 2014–09721 Filed 5–1–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R03–OAR–2012–0753; FRL–9910–32– Region 3] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Pennsylvania; Determination of Attainment of the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particulate Matter Standard for the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Nonattainment Area Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. Correction AGENCY: In the direct final rule published in the Federal Register on March 14, 2014 (79 FR 14404), the following corrections are made: 1. On page 14409, third column, line 2 of amendatory instruction number 2, correct ‘‘adding paragraphs (c)(434) and (435) to’’ to read ‘‘adding paragraphs (c)(435) and (436) to’’; The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is making a determination of attainment regarding the PittsburghBeaver Valley, Pennsylvania fine particulate matter (PM2.5) nonattainment area (hereafter referred to as ‘‘the Pittsburgh Area’’ or ‘‘the Area’’). EPA PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\02MYR1.SGM 02MYR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 85 (Friday, May 2, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 25010-25014]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-09878]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R10-OAR-2008-0122; FRL 9910-02-Region 10]


Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; 
Washington: Puget Sound Ozone Maintenance Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking a direct 
final action to approve a maintenance plan for the Central Puget Sound 
area to maintain the 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard 
(NAAQS) through 2015. This plan was submitted by the Washington 
Department of Ecology (Ecology or ``the State'') as a revision to its 
State Implementation Plan (SIP) on January 10, 2008. This action finds 
that the maintenance plan for this area meets all relevant Clean Air 
Act (CAA) requirements for approval, and demonstrates that the Central 
Puget Sound area will remain in attainment with the 1997 and 2008 ozone 
NAAQS through 2015.

DATES: This rule is effective on July 1, 2014, without further notice, 
unless the EPA receives adverse comment by June 2, 2014. If the EPA 
receives adverse comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the 
Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take 
effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-
OAR-2008-0122, by any of the following methods:
     www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
     Email: R10-Public_Comments@epa.gov.
     Mail: Keith Rose, U.S. EPA Region 10, Office of Air, Waste 
and Toxics (AWT-107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101.
     Hand Delivery/Courier: U.S. EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth 
Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101. Attention: Keith Rose, Office of 
Air, Waste and Toxics, AWT-107. Such deliveries are

[[Page 25011]]

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-
2008-0122. 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 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 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 docket are listed in the 
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be 
publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket 
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or 
in hard copy during normal business hours at the Office of Air, Waste 
and Toxics, U.S. EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Keith Rose at telephone number: (206) 
553-1949, email address: rose.keith@epa.gov, or the above EPA, Region 
10 address.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean the EPA. Information is organized 
as follows:

Table of Contents

I. Background
    A. Regulatory Context
    B. Requirements of CAA Section 110(a)(1) Maintenance Plans
    C. How have the Tribal Governments been involved in this 
process?
II. Summary of SIP Revision and the EPA's Evaluation
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

A. Regulatory Context

    On November 15, 1990, the CAA Amendments of 1990 were enacted. 
Under section 107(d)(1) of the CAA, the EPA designated the Central 
Puget Sound area, also called the Seattle-Tacoma area (which includes 
all of Pierce County, almost all of King County except the northeast 
corner, and part of Snohomish County), as nonattainment because the 
area violated the 1-hour ozone standard during the years 1989-1991. As 
a result, the EPA classified the Central Puget Sound area as 
``marginal'' under section 181(a)(1) of the CAA (56 FR 56847, November 
6, 1991). On January 28, 1993, the State of Washington submitted a SIP 
demonstrating compliance with the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. On August 21, 
1995, the State submitted a revision to the Washington Vehicle 
Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) Program to satisfy the requirements of 
sections 182(b)(4) and 182(c)(3) of the CAA and 40 CFR part 51, subpart 
S. This SIP revision requires vehicle owners in the Central Puget Sound 
area to comply with the Washington I/M program. The EPA approved this 
I/M program revision on September 25, 1996 (61 FR 50235). On March 4, 
1996, the State submitted to the EPA a request to redesignate the 
Central Puget Sound area to attainment for the 1-hour ozone standard, 
and a maintenance plan demonstrating maintenance of the ozone standard 
through 2010. On September 26, 1996, the EPA determined that the Puget 
Sound area had attained the ozone NAAQS, redesignated the Central Puget 
Sound area to attainment for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, and approved the 
associated maintenance plan (61 FR 50438). On December 17, 2003, 
Ecology submitted a second 10-year maintenance plan demonstrating that 
the Central Puget Sound area would maintain air quality standards for 
ozone through the year 2016. The EPA approved the second 10-year 
maintenance plan on August 5, 2004 (69 FR 47365).
    In 2008, the EPA revised the level of the 8-hour ozone standard to 
0.075 ppm (73 FR 16436, March 27, 2008). The Central Puget Sound area 
was subsequently designated attainment/unclassifiable for the new 8-
hour standard (77 FR 30088, May 21, 2012).

B. Requirements of CAA Section 110(a)(1) Maintenance Plans

    Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA requires, in part, that states submit 
to the EPA plans to maintain any NAAQS promulgated by the EPA. Areas 
like the Central Puget Sound area that were maintenance areas for the 
1-hour ozone NAAQS, but unclassifiable/attainment for the 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS, are required to submit a plan to demonstrate the continued 
maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The EPA established a deadline 
of three years after the effective date of the 1997 8-hour ozone 
designations as the deadline for submission of these plans.
    On May 20, 2005, the EPA issued guidance for States in preparing 
maintenance plans under section 110(a)(1) of the CAA for areas that are 
required to do so under 40 CFR 51.905.\1\ At a minimum, the maintenance 
plan should include the following five components:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Memorandum titled ``Maintenance Plan Guidance Document for 
Certain 8-hour Ozone Areas Under Section 110(a)(l) of Clean Air 
Act'' by Lydia Wegman, Director, EPA Air Quality Strategies and 
Standards Division, May 20, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    1. An attainment inventory, which is based on actual typical summer 
day emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides of 
nitrogen (NOX) from a base year chosen by the State;
    2. A maintenance demonstration which shows how the area will remain 
in compliance with the 8-hour ozone standard for 10 years after the 
effective date of the designation;
    3. A commitment to continue to operate ambient air quality monitors 
to verify maintenance of the 8-hour ozone standard;
    4. A contingency plan that will ensure that any violation of the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS will be promptly corrected; and
    5. An explanation of how the State will verify continued attainment 
of the standard under the maintenance plan.
    On January 10, 2008, the EPA received a SIP submittal from Ecology 
to approve a maintenance plan submitted under section 110(a)(1) of the 
CAA to maintain the 8-hour NAAQS for ozone for the Central Puget Sound 
area. The EPA prepared a Technical Support Document (TSD) with more 
detailed information about this SIP submittal,

[[Page 25012]]

which is available for review as part of the docket for this action.

C. How have the Tribal Governments been involved in this process?

    Consistent with the EPA's tribal policy, the EPA offered 
government-to-government consultations to the Tulalip Tribes, the 
Puyallup Tribe of Indians, the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, the 
Stillaguamish Tribe, and the Nisqually Indian Tribe, regarding the 
action in this notice, because these tribes are located in the Central 
Puget Sound ozone area and may be affected by this action.

II. Summary of SIP Revision and the EPA's Evaluation

    Ecology's 8-hour 110(a)(1) ozone maintenance plan for the Central 
Puget Sound area addresses all five maintenance plan components 
outlined in the EPA's guidance of May 20, 2005. All of the 1-hour ozone 
control measures previously approved into the SIP for the Central Puget 
Sound area remain in place in this 8-hour 110(a)(1) maintenance plan 
and are used in the maintenance demonstration. The five components of 
the maintenance plan and how they meet the EPA's criteria, are 
described below.

1. Attainment Inventory

    An emissions inventory is an itemized list of emission estimates 
for sources of air pollution in a given area for a specified time 
period. An attainment inventory is a projection of an emission 
inventory in a base year, when an area was in attainment with the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS, to an appropriate attainment year. Ecology provided a 
comprehensive base year emissions inventory for NOX and VOCs 
for the Central Puget Sound area with the SIP submittal. Ecology chose 
to use 2002 as the base year from which it projected emissions. The SIP 
submittal also includes an explanation of the methodology used for 
determining the anthropogenic (point, area and mobile sources) 
emissions of NOX and VOCs. On-road vehicle emission controls 
required by the State I/M program were included in the attainment 
inventory. The inventory is based on emissions on a ``typical summer 
day.'' The term ``typical summer day'' refers to a typical weekday 
during the months when ozone concentrations are typically the highest. 
Based on our review of the documentation submitted, the EPA concludes 
that the attainment inventory has been developed for the appropriate 
season of an acceptable attainment year, is based on appropriate 
factors and methods, and is thus acceptable for the purposes of a 
Section 110(a)(1) ozone maintenance plan.

2. Maintenance Demonstration

    The key element of a Section 110(a)(1) ozone maintenance plan is a 
demonstration of how an area will remain in compliance with the 8-hour 
ozone standard for the 10-year period following the effective date of 
designation as unclassifiable/attainment. The end projection year is 10 
years from the effective date of the 8-hour attainment designation, 
which for the Central Puget Sound area was June 15, 2004 (69 FR 23858). 
Therefore, this plan must demonstrate attainment through year 2014. 
Ecology has projected emissions for the year 2015, which is more than 
10 years from the effective date of initial designations. With regard 
to demonstrating continued maintenance of the 8-hour ozone standard, 
Ecology projected that the total emissions of ozone precursors in the 
Central Puget Sound area will significantly decrease from 2002 (the 
base year) through 2015. In 2002, the total anthropogenic emissions of 
VOCs in the Central Puget Sound area were 474 tons/day, and 446 tons/
day for NOX. The 2015 anthropogenic emissions from the 
Central Puget Sound area are projected to be 346 tons/day for VOCs, and 
411 tons/day for NOX. Thus, the total emissions of VOCs in 
2015 are projected to be about 27% lower than the 2002 level, and total 
NOX emissions in 2015 are projected to be about 8% lower 
than the 2002 level.
    The formation of ozone is dependent on a number of variables which 
cannot be estimated only through emissions growth and reduction 
calculations. These variables include weather and the transport of 
ozone precursors from outside the maintenance area. In order to 
demonstrate continued maintenance of the standards, a state may utilize 
more sophisticated tools such as air quality dispersion modeling to 
support their analysis. In the SIP submittal, Ecology used air quality 
dispersion modeling to assess the comprehensive impacts of growth 
through 2015 on ozone levels in the area. The results of this modeling 
demonstrate that the highest predicted design value (the 3-year average 
of the fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone value) for the 
Central Puget Sound area in 2015 would be 0.068 ppm, which is below 
both the 1997 and the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and would therefore be in 
compliance with both ozone NAAQS.
    Based on the estimated emissions of VOCs and NOX 
submitted with this maintenance plan, the EPA concludes that this 
maintenance plan would not cause an increase of direct emissions or 
precursor emissions that would interfere with the maintenance of any 
criteria pollutant NAAQS in the Central Puget Sound area. Therefore, 
the EPA concludes that the maintenance demonstration submitted by the 
State meets the requirement of a section 110(a)(1) ozone maintenance 
plan.

3. Ambient Air Quality Monitoring

    With regard to the ambient air monitoring component of the 
maintenance plan, Ecology commits to continue operating the current 
Puget Sound ozone monitoring network in accordance with all of the 
applicable requirements of 40 CFR part 58 throughout the maintenance 
period to verify maintenance of the 8-hour ozone standard. Ecology will 
also submit quality-assured ozone data to the EPA's Air Quality System 
within 90 days of the end of each quarter. The State of Washington's 
ambient air monitoring network meets all applicable EPA air monitoring 
regulations, and was most recently approved by the EPA on March 10, 
2014. The EPA therefore finds that the State's ambient air monitoring 
network satisfies the requirements of CAA section 110(a).

4. Contingency Plan

    Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA requires the State to develop a 
contingency plan that will ensure that any violation of a NAAQS is 
promptly corrected. The purpose of the contingency plan is to provide a 
range of response actions that may be selected for implementation in 
the event of any violation of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
    There are two regulations adopted by the Puget Sound Clean Air 
Agency, the local air agency with jurisdiction in the Central Puget 
Sound area, on December 19, 2002, that are identified as contingency 
measures in this maintenance plan. These regulations were included as 
contingency measures in the ozone second 10-year maintenance plan for 
the Central Puget Sound area that was approved by the EPA on August 5, 
2004 (69 FR 47364 and 69 FR 47365). These contingency measures are: (1) 
Regulation I, Section 8.06, Outdoor Burning Ozone Contingency Measure, 
and (2) Regulation II, Section 2.10, Gasoline Station Ozone Contingency 
Measure. Both the outdoor burning and the gasoline station contingency 
regulations would be triggered by a written finding from the EPA of a 
quality-assured violation of the ozone NAAQS and a determination that 
future violations can reasonably be addressed through implementing 
these regulations. The

[[Page 25013]]

EPA finds that these contingency measures satisfy the requirements of 
CAA section 110(a).

5. Verification of Continued Attainment

    Since 1991, there have been no violations of either the 1997 or 
2008 8-hour ozone standards at any ozone monitoring site in the Central 
Puget Sound ozone area. Ecology will continue to monitor ambient air 
quality ozone levels in the Central Puget Sound area and verify 
attainment of the ozone NAAQS as described in the maintenance plan. The 
State commits to preparing summer day emission inventories for the 
interim years of 2008, 2011 and 2014, and will compare these emission 
inventory results with the modeling emission inventories to ensure 
continued compliance with the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The EPA finds that 
these methods to verify continued attainment of the ozone NAAQS satisfy 
the requirements of CAA section 110(a).
    The EPA finds that the maintenance plan for the Central Puget Sound 
ozone area adequately addresses all five components outlined in the 
EPA's guidance of May 20, 2005, for developing maintenance plans under 
110(a)(1) of the CAA.

III. Final Action

    The EPA is approving a maintenance plan to maintain the 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS in the Central Puget Sound ozone area that was submitted by 
the State of Washington as a revision to its SIP on January 10, 2008. 
The maintenance plan for this area meets all CAA 110(a)(1) requirements 
and demonstrates that the Central Puget Sound ozone area will remain in 
attainment with the 1997 and 2008 ozone NAAQS through 2015. This 
decision was reached after offering consultation to the Tulalip Tribes, 
the Puyallup Tribe of Indians, the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, the 
Stillaguamish Tribe, and the Nisqually Indian Tribe. The EPA did not 
receive any requests for consultation from these tribes.

IV. 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);
     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 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 it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal 
governments or preempt tribal law. The SIP is not approved to apply in 
Indian country located in the State, except for non-trust land within 
the exterior boundaries of the Puyallup Indian Reservation, also known 
as the 1873 Survey Area. Under the Puyallup Tribe of Indians Settlement 
Act of 1989, 25 U.S.C. 1773, Congress explicitly provided state and 
local agencies in Washington authority over activities on non-trust 
lands within the 1873 Survey Area and the EPA is therefore approving 
this SIP on such lands. Consistent with EPA policy, the EPA provided a 
consultation opportunity to the Tulalip Tribes, the Puyallup Tribe of 
Indians, the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, the Stillaguamish Tribe, and the 
Nisqually Indian Tribe in letters dated December 24, 2013. The EPA did 
not receive a request for consultation from these tribes.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801, et seq., as added by 
the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, 
generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency 
promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy 
of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller 
General of the United States. The EPA will submit a report containing 
this action and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. 
House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United 
States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A 
major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in 
the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 
5 U.S.C. 804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the appropriate circuit by July 1, 2014. Filing a petition for 
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect 
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor 
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may 
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or 
action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are 
encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of 
proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules 
section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an immediate 
petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that the EPA 
can withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the 
proposed rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in 
proceedings to enforce its requirements (See CAA section 307(b)(2).).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, 
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 
Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: April 10, 2014.
Michelle L. Pirzadeh,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

[[Page 25014]]

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 WW--Washington

0
2. Section 52.2470 is amended in table 2 of paragraph (e) by adding an 
entry ``8-Hour Ozone 110(a)(1) Maintenance Plan'' at the end of the 
section with the heading ``Attainment and Maintenance Planning--
Ozone.'' to read as follows:


Sec.  52.2470  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                                Table 2--Attainment, Maintenance, and Other Plans
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Applicable           State
      Name of SIP provision           geographic or        submittal     EPA approval date         Comments
                                    nonattainment area       date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Attainment and Maintenance Planning--Ozone
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8-Hour Ozone 110(a)(1)             Seattle-Tacoma.....          2/5/08  5/2/14 [Insert page
 Maintenance Plan.                                                       number where the
                                                                         document begins].
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2014-09878 Filed 5-1-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P