[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 4 (Wednesday, January 7, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 834-837]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-00014]


 ========================================================================
 Proposed Rules
                                                 Federal Register
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of 
 the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these 
 notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in 
 the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
 
 ========================================================================
 

  Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 4 / Wednesday, January 7, 2015 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 834]]



ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R10-OAR-2014-0477, FRL-9921-41-Region 10]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Idaho

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to partially approve the May 22, 2014, 
State Implementation Plan (SIP) submittal from Idaho to revise the SIP 
to update the incorporation by reference of Federal air quality 
regulations into the SIP. In addition, the EPA is proposing to 
partially disapprove Idaho's incorporation by reference of certain 
provisions of the Federal prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) 
permitting rules that have been vacated by a Federal Court. Upon final 
action, the Idaho SIP would incorporate by reference certain Federal 
regulations as of July 1, 2013.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before February 6, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-
OAR-2014-0477, by any of the following methods:
     www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
     Email: [email protected].
     Mail: Heather Valdez, EPA Region 10, Office of Air, Waste 
and Toxics (AWT-150), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101.
     Hand Delivery: EPA Region 10 Mailroom, 9th Floor, 1200 
Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101. Attention: Heather Valdez, 
Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, (AWT-150). 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-
2014-0477. 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 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 
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. 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: Heather Valdez at: (206) 553-6220, 
[email protected], or the above EPA, Region 10 address.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever ``we'', 
``us'' or ``our'' is used, it is intended to refer to the EPA. 
Information is organized as follows:

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. Analysis of State Submittal
    A. Summary and Analysis of Submittal
    B. Effect of Court Decisions Vacating and Remanding Certain 
Federal Rules
    1. PM2.5 Nonattainment NSR Provisions
    2. PM2.5 PSD Provisions
    3. PSD Deferral of Certain Emissions From Biogenic Sources
    4. PSD Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule
III. Proposed Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    Section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) specifies the general 
requirements for states to submit SIPs to implement, maintain and 
enforce the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and the 
EPA's actions regarding approval of those SIPs. On May 22, 2014, the 
State of Idaho (the State) submitted a SIP revision to the EPA to 
account for regulatory updates adopted by the Idaho Board of 
Environmental Quality on October 17, 2013. Idaho incorporates by 
reference (IBR) various portions of Federal regulations codified in the 
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) into the Rules for the Control of Air 
Pollution in Idaho (IDAPA 58.01.01). Idaho then submits parts of IDAPA 
58.01.01 to the EPA for approval into the Federally-approved Idaho SIP 
(generally those provisions that relate to the criteria pollutants 
regulated under section 110 of the CAA for which the EPA has 
promulgated NAAQS or other specific requirements of section 110). To 
ensure that its rules remain consistent with the EPA requirements, 
Idaho generally updates the IBR citations in IDAPA 58.01.01 on an 
annual basis and submits a SIP revision to reflect any changes made to 
the Federal regulations during that year. Idaho's current SIP includes 
the approved incorporation by reference of specific Federal 
regulations, revised as of July 1, 2012, at IDAPA 58.01.01.107 
``Incorporation by Reference.''

II. Analysis of State Submittal

A. Summary and Analysis of Submittal

    On May 22, 2014, the State submitted for approval into the Idaho 
SIP updates

[[Page 835]]

to the incorporation by reference of specific Federal regulations 
revised as of July 1, 2013. The submitted provisions are found in IDAPA 
58.01.01.107 ``Incorporations by Reference.'' A description of the 
submitted provisions and how they meet the requirements of section 110 
of the CAA is provided below.
    In IDAPA 58.01.01.107.02 ``Availability of Reference Materials,'' 
paragraph (b) was revised to include a reference to the State of Idaho 
statutes. This is an informational provision describing where documents 
that are incorporated by reference elsewhere in the rules are 
available. This revision to IDAPA 58.01.01.107.02(b) is consistent with 
CAA requirements as the revision merely identifies where reference 
materials can be obtained and does not itself impose any regulatory 
requirements.
    IDAPA 58.01.01.107.03 ``Documents Incorporated by Reference'' 
updates the citation dates of specific Federal provisions incorporated 
by reference. Paragraph (a) incorporates by reference the Requirements 
for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of Implementation Plans, 40 
CFR part 51, with the exception of certain visibility-related 
provisions, as of July 1, 2013. This updated incorporation by reference 
of Federal regulations makes paragraph (a) consistent with Federal law. 
The incorporation by reference date of July 1, 2013, includes the 
portion of 40 CFR part 51 relating to nonattainment New Source Review 
(NSR) requirements at 40 CFR 51.165, which is relied on as part of 
Idaho's nonattainment area major stationary source permit provisions in 
IDAPA 58.01.01.204. On January 4, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for 
the District of Columbia issued a decision related to 40 CFR 51.165. 
The effect of this decision is discussed below in Section II.B.1. For 
the reasons above and for the reasons provided in Section II.B.1 
relating to 40 CFR 51.165, the EPA proposes to find that paragraph (a) 
is consistent with CAA requirements.
    Paragraph (c) of IDAPA 58.01.01.107.03 incorporates by reference 
the Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans, 40 CFR part 52 
subparts A and N and appendices D and E, including the Federal PSD 
permitting rules in part 52 subpart A at 40 CFR 52.21, as of July 1, 
2013. This updated incorporation by reference, except for the 
incorporation by reference of 40 CFR 52.21(i)(5)(i)(c) (relating to the 
PM2.5 significant monitoring level) and 40 CFR 
52.21(k)(2)(relating to the PM2.5 significant impact level), 
make the Idaho SIP consistent with Federal law. The excepted 
provisions, 40 CFR 52.21(i)(5)(i)(c) and 52.21(k)(2), are the subject 
of a Court decision and the effect of that decision is discussed in 
Section II.B.2 below. Idaho's incorporation by reference of 40 CFR 
52.21(b)(49)(ii)(a) related to a deferral of permitting requirements 
from bioenergy and other biogenic stationary sources and 40 CFR 52.21 
related to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are also the subject of 
recent court decisions and are discussed in Sections II.B.3 and II.B.4, 
respectively, below. For the reasons above and for the reasons provided 
in Section II.B.2, II.B.3 and II.B.4, the EPA proposes to determine 
that paragraph (c) is consistent with CAA requirements, except for the 
portion of paragraph (c) that incorporates by reference 40 CFR 
52.21(i)(5)(i)(c) and 52.21(k)(2), which the EPA proposes to disapprove 
as inconsistent with CAA requirements.
    Paragraphs (b), (d), (e), and (q) of IDAPA 58.01.01.107.03 
incorporate by reference the following provisions revised as of July 1, 
2013: (b) National Primary and Secondary Ambient Air Quality Standards, 
40 CFR part 50; (d) Ambient Air Monitoring Reference and Equivalent 
Methods, 40 CFR part 53; (e) Ambient Air Quality Surveillance, 40 CFR 
part 58; and (q) Determining Conformity of Federal Actions to State or 
Federal Implementation Plans, 40 CFR part 93, subpart A, sections 
93.100 through 93.129, although certain subsections are specifically 
excluded from the State's incorporation by reference. The EPA proposes 
to determine that paragraphs (b), (d), (e), and (q) are consistent with 
CAA requirements.

B. Effect of Court Decisions Vacating and Remanding Certain Federal 
Rules

1. PM2.5 Nonattainment NSR Provisions
    On January 4, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of 
Columbia, in Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) v. EPA,\1\ issued 
a decision that remanded the EPA's 2007 and 2008 rules implementing the 
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. Relevant here, the EPA's 2008 
implementation rule addressed by the Court decision, ``Implementation 
of New Source Review (NSR) Program for Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 
Micrometers (PM2.5)'' (the 2008 NSR PM2.5 
Rule),\2\ promulgated NSR requirements for implementation of 
PM2.5 in both nonattainment areas (nonattainment NSR) and 
attainment/unclassifiable areas (PSD). The Court concluded that the EPA 
had improperly based the implementation rule for the 1997 
PM2.5 NAAQS solely upon the requirements of part D, subpart 
1 of the CAA, and had failed to address the requirements of part D, 
subpart 4, which establishes additional provisions for particulate 
matter nonattainment areas. The Court ordered the EPA to ``repromulgate 
these rules pursuant to subpart 4 consistent with this opinion.'' Id. 
at 437. As a result of the Court's decision, the EPA withdrew its 
guidance for implementing the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS \3\ because 
the guidance was based largely on the remanded rule promulgated to 
implement the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS.\4\ In response to the Court 
decision, on June 2, 2014, the EPA promulgated the Identification of 
Nonattainment Classification and Deadlines for Submission of State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) Provisions for the 1997 Fine Particle 
(PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) and 
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS (79 FR 31566). This rule promulgated 
classifications and deadlines under subpart 4, part D, title I of the 
CAA for 2006 PM2.5 nonattainment areas, including the only 
PM2.5 nonattainment area in Idaho, Franklin County (Logan 
UT-ID 2006 PM2.5 nonattainment area). In light of the EPA's 
response to the Court decision, we are proposing to approve into the 
Idaho SIP Idaho's incorporation by reference at IDAPA 
58.01.01.107.03(a) of the Federal nonattainment NSR requirements at 40 
CFR 51.165 for purposes of meeting the subpart 1 requirements. Because 
the EPA has not yet proposed revisions to the nonattainment NSR 
permitting requirements in response to the remand, the EPA is not 
evaluating at this time whether Idaho's submittal for Franklin County 
will require additional revisions to satisfy the subpart 4 
requirements.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir.).
    \2\ 73 FR 28321 (May 16, 2008).
    \3\ Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, Implementation Guidance for 
the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particulate (PM2.5) National 
Ambient Air Quality Standards (Mar. 2, 2012).
    \4\ Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, Withdrawal of 
Implementation Guidance for the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particle 
(PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (Jun. 6, 
2013).
    \5\ As discussed above, Idaho's submittal also includes 
revisions to the Idaho SIP to update the incorporation by reference 
of the Federal PSD permitting rule at 40 CFR 52.21. Because the 
requirements of subpart 4 only pertain to nonattainment areas, the 
EPA does not consider the portions of the 2008 NSR PM2.5 
Rule that address requirements for PM2.5 attainment and 
unclassifiable areas (including PSD permitting rules) to be affected 
by the Court's decision in NRDC v. EPA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. PM2.5 PSD Provisions
    As discussed above, IDAPA 58.01.01.107.03(c) incorporates by 
reference the Federal PSD permitting

[[Page 836]]

rules at 40 CFR 52.21. The current Idaho SIP incorporates 40 CFR 52.21 
by reference as of July 1, 2012. Idaho's submittal updates the 
incorporation by reference date of the PSD permitting rules to July 1, 
2013 and includes revisions to 40 CFR 52.21(i) (relating to the 
significant monitoring concentration (SMC)) and 40 CFR 52.21(k) 
(relating to the significant impact level (SIL)) that added a SMC and 
SIL for PM2.5 as part of the 2010 PSD PM2.5 
Implementation Rule (October 20, 2010, 75 FR 64864).
    On January 22, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of 
Columbia, in Sierra Club v. EPA,\6\ issued, with respect to the SMC, a 
judgment that, inter alia, vacated the provisions adding the 
PM2.5 SMC to the Federal regulations at 40 CFR 
51.166(i)(5)(i)(c) and 52.21(i)(5)(i)(c). In its decision, the Court 
held that the EPA did not have the authority to use SMCs to exempt 
permit applicants from the statutory requirement in section 165(e)(2) 
of the CAA that ambient monitoring data for PM2.5 be 
included in all PSD permit applications. Thus, although the 
PM2.5 SMC was not a required element of a state's PSD 
program, where a state PSD program contains such a provision and allows 
issuance of new permits without requiring ambient PM2.5 
monitoring data, such application of the vacated SMC would be 
inconsistent with the Court's opinion and the requirements of section 
165(e)(2) of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 703 F.3d 458 (D.C. Cir. 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At the EPA's request, the decision also vacated and remanded to the 
EPA for further consideration the portions of the 2010 PSD 
PM2.5 Implementation Rule that revised 40 CFR 51.166 and 40 
CFR 52.21 related to SILs for PM2.5. The EPA requested this 
vacatur and remand of two of the three provisions in the EPA 
regulations that contain SILs for PM2.5 because the wording 
of these two SIL provisions (40 CFR 51.166(k)(2) and 40 CFR 
52.21(k)(2)) is inconsistent with the explanation of when and how SILs 
should be used by permitting authorities that we provided in the 
preamble to the Federal Register publication when we promulgated these 
provisions. The third SIL provision (40 CFR 51.165(b)(2)) was not 
vacated and remains in effect. We also note that the Court's decision 
does not affect the PSD increments for PM2.5 promulgated as 
part of the 2010 PSD PM2.5 Implementation Rule. The EPA has 
amended its regulations to remove the vacated PM2.5 SILs and 
SMC provisions from the PSD regulations (December 9, 2013, 78 FR 
73698). The EPA will initiate a separate rulemaking in the future 
regarding the PM2.5 SILs that will address the Court's 
remand. In the meantime, the EPA is advising states to begin 
preparations to remove the vacated provisions from state PSD 
regulations.
    In response to the vacatur of the EPA regulations as they relate to 
the PM2.5 SMC and the PM2.5 SILs, Idaho stated in 
the Idaho 2013 IBR Update submittal cover letter dated May, 22, 2014 
that the State will not apply either the PM2.5 SMC 
provisions at 40 CFR 52.21(i)(5)(i)(c) or the PM2.5 SIL 
provisions at 40 CFR 52.21(k)(2) in Idaho's implementation of the PSD 
program. In addition, the May, 22, 2014, cover letter stated that Idaho 
intends to remove the vacated provisions to ensure consistency with 
Federal law as soon as practicable. Therefore, consistent with our 
action on Idaho's most recent IBR update (March 3, 2014, 79 FR 11712), 
we are proposing to partially disapprove the Idaho submittal with 
respect to the incorporation by reference at IDAPA 58.01.01.107.03(c) 
of the vacated provisions of 40 CFR 52.21 (namely, 40 CFR 
52.21(i)(5)(i)(c) and 40 CFR 52.21(k)(2)).
3. PSD Deferral of Certain Emissions From Biogenic Sources
    In 2011, the EPA revised the definition of ``subject to 
regulation'' at 40 CFR 52.21(b)(49)(ii)(a) to defer for three years 
(until July 21, 2014) PSD permitting requirements to carbon dioxide 
(CO2) emissions from bioenergy and other biogenic stationary 
sources (Deferral for CO2 Emissions from Bioenergy and Other 
Biogenic Sources under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration 
(PSD) and Title V Programs; Final Rule (July 20, 2011, 76 FR 43490) 
(Biogenic CO2 Deferral Rule)). Idaho's update to incorporate 
by reference the EPA's PSD permitting rules as of July 1, 2013, 
includes this revision to 40 CFR 52.21(b)(49)(ii)(a).
    On July 12, 2013 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of 
Columbia, in Center for Biological Diversity v. EPA,\7\ vacated the 
provisions of the Biogenic CO2 Deferral Rule. While the 
opportunity to seek rehearing of this D.C. Circuit decision remains 
open and thus the ultimate disposition of the Federal regulations 
implementing the Biogenic CO2 Deferral Rule has not yet been 
determined, the deferral expired on July 21, 2014, and by its terms is 
no longer in effect.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 722 F.3d 401 (D.C. Cir. 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. PSD Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule
    As discussed above, IDAPA 58.01.01.107.03(c) incorporates by 
reference the Federal PSD permitting rules at 40 CFR 52.21. The current 
Idaho SIP incorporates 40 CFR 52.21 by reference as of July 1, 2012. 
Idaho's submittal updates the incorporation by reference date of the 
PSD permitting rules to July 1, 2013. Therefore Idaho's submittal 
includes revisions to 40 CFR 52.21(b)(49)(v) (relating to the 
application of PSD permitting requirements to GHG emissions) 
promulgated under the Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule (June 3, 2010, 75 
FR 31514) (Tailoring Rule).
    On June 23, 2014, the United States Supreme Court, in Utility Air 
Regulatory Group v. Environmental Protection Agency,\8\ issued a 
decision addressing the application of PSD permitting requirements to 
GHG emissions. The Supreme Court said that the EPA may not treat GHGs 
as an air pollutant for purposes of determining whether a source is a 
major source (or modification thereof) required to obtain a PSD permit. 
The Court also said that the EPA could continue to require that PSD 
permits, otherwise required based on emissions of pollutants other than 
GHGs, contain limitations on GHG emissions based on the application of 
Best Available Control Technology (BACT). In order to act consistently 
with its understanding of the Court's decision pending further judicial 
action before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to 
effectuate the decision, the EPA is not continuing to apply the EPA 
regulations that would require that SIPs include permitting 
requirements that the Supreme Court found impermissible. Specifically, 
the EPA is not applying the requirement that a state's SIP-approved PSD 
program require that sources obtain PSD permits when GHGs are the only 
pollutant (i) that the source emits or has the potential to emit above 
the major source thresholds, or (ii) for which there is a significant 
emissions increase and a significant net emissions increase from a 
modification (e.g. 40 CFR 51.166(b)(48)(v)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 134 S.Ct. 2427 (2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA anticipates a need to revise Federal PSD rules in light of 
the Supreme Court decision. In addition, the EPA anticipates that many 
states will revise their existing SIP-approved PSD programs in light of 
the Supreme Court's decision. The timing and content of subsequent EPA 
actions with respect to the EPA regulations is expected to be informed 
by additional legal processes before the D.C. Circuit. The EPA is not 
expecting states to have revised their existing PSD program regulations 
at this juncture, before the D.C. Circuit has addressed these issues 
and before the EPA has revised its

[[Page 837]]

regulations at 40 CFR 51.166 and 52.21. However, the EPA is evaluating 
PSD program submissions to assure that the state's program correctly 
addresses GHGs consistent with the Supreme Court's decision.
    Idaho's existing approved SIP contains the GHG permitting 
requirements reflected in 40 CFR 52.21, as amended in the Tailoring 
Rule. As a result, the PSD permitting program in Idaho previously 
approved by the EPA into the SIP continues to require that PSD permits 
(otherwise required based on emissions of pollutants other than GHGs) 
contain limitations on GHG emissions based on the application of BACT 
when sources emit or increase GHGs in the amount of 75,000 tons per 
year (measured as carbon dioxide equivalent). Although the approved 
Idaho PSD permitting program may also currently contain provisions that 
are no longer necessary in light of the Supreme Court decision, this 
does not prevent the EPA from approving this SIP submission. Idaho's 
May 22, 2014, SIP submission does not add any GHG permitting 
requirements that are inconsistent with the Supreme Court decision. 
While Idaho's submission incorporates all of 40 CFR 52.21 for 
completeness, the submission mostly reincorporates PSD permitting 
requirements for GHGs that are already in the Idaho SIP.
    This revision does add to the Idaho SIP the elements of the EPA's 
2012 rule implementing Step 3 of the phase-in of PSD permitting 
requirements for GHGs described in the Tailoring Rule. 77 FR 41051 
(July 12, 2012). This rule became effective on August 13, 2012. 
Specifically, the incorporation of the Step 3 rule provisions will 
allow GHG-emitting sources to obtain plantwide applicability limits 
(PALs) for their GHG emissions on a carbon dioxide equivalent 
(CO2e) basis. The GHG PAL provisions, as currently written, 
include some provisions that may no longer be appropriate in light of 
the Supreme Court decision. Since the Supreme Court has determined that 
sources and modifications may not be defined as ``major'' solely on the 
basis of the level of GHGs emitted or increased, PALs for GHGs may no 
longer have value in some situations where a source might have 
triggered PSD based on GHG emissions alone. However, PALs for GHGs may 
still have a role to play in determining whether a modification that 
triggers PSD for a pollutant other than GHGs should also be subject to 
BACT for GHGs. These provisions, like the other GHG provisions 
discussed previously, will likely be revised pending further legal 
action. However, these provisions do not add new requirements for 
sources or modifications that only emit or increase GHGs above the 
major source threshold or the 75,000 tons per year GHG level in 40 CFR 
52.21(b)(49)(iv). Rather, the PALs provisions provide increased 
flexibility to sources that wish to address their GHG emissions in a 
PAL. Since this flexibility may still be valuable to sources in at 
least one context described above, we believe that it is appropriate to 
approve these provisions into the Idaho SIP at this juncture.

III. Proposed Action

    The EPA is proposing to partially approve the May 22, 2014, 
submittal from Idaho to update the incorporation by reference of 
Federal air quality regulations into the SIP. Specifically, we are 
proposing to approve the revisions to IDAPA 58.01.01.107.02 
``Availability of Reference Materials'' and IDAPA 58.01.01.107.03 
``Incorporations by Reference,'' except that we are proposing to 
partially disapprove the revision to IDAPA 58.01.01.107.03(c) as it 
relates to the incorporation by reference of specific vacated 
provisions at 40 CFR 52.21 (namely, 40 CFR 52.21(i)(5)(i)(c) and 40 CFR 
52.21(k)(2)) for the reasons discussed in Section II.B.2 of this 
proposal. Upon final action, the Idaho SIP would incorporate by 
reference specific Federal regulations as of July 1, 2013.

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 (Public Law 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 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).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or 
in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated 
that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the 
rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 
13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it 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, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Particulate matter, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

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

     Dated: December 23, 2014.
Michelle L. Pirzadeh,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2015-00014 Filed 1-6-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P