[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 148 (Thursday, August 1, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 46549-46552]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing 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: [email protected].
    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, 
[email protected], 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