Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 15017 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2013–0817; FRL– 

9908–02–Region 7] Approval and 

Promulgation of Implementation Plans; 

State of Missouri 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is taking direct final 

action to approve revisions to the 

Missouri State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) which were submitted to EPA on 

July 12, 2012. This submission revises 

two heavy duty diesel vehicle idling 

rules that are applicable in Kansas City 

and St. Louis. This revision provides 

clarity to the rules in the applicability 

section by listing owners and operators 

of passenger load/unload locations 

where commercial, public and 

institutional heavy-duty vehicles load or 

unload passengers. The affected parties 

were unintentionally omitted from the 

applicability section of the rule even 

though they are required to comply with 

the rule in the general provisions 

section. These revisions do not have an 

adverse affect on air quality. EPA’s 

approval of these SIP revisions is being 

done in accordance with the 

requirements of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA). 

DATES: This direct final rule will be 

effective May 19, 2014, without further 

notice, unless EPA receives adverse 

comment by April 17, 2014. If EPA 

receives adverse comment, we will 

publish a timely withdrawal of the 

direct final rule in the Federal Register 

informing the public that the rule will 

not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07– 

OAR–2013–0817, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: higbee.paula@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or Hand Delivery: Paula 

Higbee, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Air Planning and Development 

Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard, 

Lenexa, Kansas 66219. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2013– 

0817. 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 through 

www.regulations.gov or email 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. The 

www.regulations.gov Web site is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means 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 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, 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 EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, 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, i.e., CBI or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, 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 at 

the Environmental Protection Agency, 

Air Planning and Development Branch, 

11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, 

Kansas 66219. The Regional Office’s 

official hours of business are Monday 

through Friday, 8:00 to 4:30 excluding 

Federal holidays. The interested persons 

wanting to examine these documents 

should make an appointment with the 

office at least 24 hours in advance. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Paula Higbee, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Air Planning and Development 

Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard, 

Lenexa, Kansas 66219, or at 913–551– 

7028, or by email at higbee.paula@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ 

or ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. This section 

provides additional information by 

addressing the following: 

I. What is being addressed in this document? 

II. Have the requirements for approval of a 

SIP revision been met? 

III. What action is EPA taking? 

I. What is being addressed in this 

document? 

EPA is taking direct final action to 

amend Missouri’s SIP by approving the 

state’s requests to amend 10 CSR 10– 

2.385 and 10 CSR 10–5.385, Control of 

Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicle Idling 

Emissions. Specifically, Missouri is 

inserting additional clarifying language 

to subsection, (1)(C) to both rules, as 

follows, ‘‘This regulation applies to 

owners and operators of load/unload 

locations where commercial, public, 

and institutional heavy duty diesel 

vehicles load or unload passengers.’’ 

The purpose of this revision is to clarify 

the rule by listing owners and operators 

of passenger load/unload locations 

where commercial, public and 

institutional heavy-duty vehicles load or 

unload passengers. The affected parties 

were unintentionally omitted from the 

applicability section of the rule even 

though they are required to comply with 

the rule in the general provisions 

section. EPA has determined that these 

changes will not relax the SIP or 

adversely impact air emissions. 

II. Have the requirements for approval 

of a SIP revision been met? 

The state submission has met the 

public notice requirements for SIP 

submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 

51.102. The submission also satisfied 

the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 

51, appendix V. In addition, as 

explained above, the revision meets the 

substantive SIP requirements of the 

CAA, including section 110 and 

implementing regulations. 

III. What action is EPA taking? 

We are publishing this rule without a 

prior proposed rule because we view 

this as a noncontroversial action and 

anticipate no adverse comment. 

However, in the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ 

section of today’s Federal Register, we 

are publishing a separate document that 

will serve as the proposed rule to 

approve the SIP and operating permits 

revision if adverse comments are 

received on this direct final rule. We 

will not institute a second comment 

period on this action. Any parties 

interested in commenting must do so at 

this time. For further information about 

commenting on this rule, see the 

ADDRESSES section of this document. If 

EPA receives adverse comment, we will 

publish a timely withdrawal in the 

Federal Register informing the public 

that this direct final rule will not take 

effect. We will address all public 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
15018 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

comments in any subsequent final rule 

based on the proposed rule. 

Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable Federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

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 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 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 EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

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. 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 May 19, 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 

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 section 

307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: March 3, 2014. 

Karl Brooks, 

Regional Administrator, Region 7. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart AA—Missouri 

■ 2. In § 52.1320 the table in paragraph 

(c) is amended by revising the entries 

for 10–2.385 and 10–5.385 to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.1320 Identification of plan. 

(c) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED MISSOURI REGULATIONS

Missouri citation Title State effective 

date 

EPA approval 

date Explanation 

Missouri Department of Natural Resources 

*******

Chapter 2 Air Quality Standards and Air Pollution Control Rules Specific to the Kansas City Metropolitan Area 

*******

10–2.385 .......... Control of Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicle Idling 

Emissions.

7/30/2012 3/18/2014 [insert FR page number where 

the document begins].

*******

Chapter 5 Air Quality Standards and Air Pollution Control Rules Specific to the St. Louis Metropolitan Area 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 15019 

EPA-APPROVED MISSOURI REGULATIONS—Continued 

Missouri citation Title State effective 

date 

EPA approval 

date Explanation 

*******

10–5.385 .......... Control of Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicle Idling 

Emissions.

7/30/2012 3/18/2014 [insert FR page number where 

the document begins].

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2014–05821 Filed 3–17–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2013–0498; FRL–9908–05– 

Region–3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; West 

Virginia; Approval of Redesignation 

Requests of the West Virginia Portion 

of the Steubenville-Weirton, OH–WV 

Nonattainment Area for the 1997 

Annual and 2006 24-Hour Fine 

Particulate Matter Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is approving the State of 

West Virginia’s requests to redesignate 

to attainment the West Virginia portion 

of the Steubenville-Weirton, OH–WV 

nonattainment area (hereafter ‘‘the 

Steubenville-Weirton Area’’ or ‘‘the 

Area’’) for both the 1997 annual and the 

2006 24-hour fine particulate matter 

(PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards (NAAQS or standards). EPA 

is also approving as a revision to the 

West Virginia State Implementation 

Plan (SIP), the associated maintenance 

plans to show maintenance of the 1997 

annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS through 2025 for the West 

Virginia portion of the Area. West 

Virginia’s maintenance plans include 

insignificance findings for the mobile 

source contribution of PM2.5 and 

nitrogen oxides (NOX) emissions to the 

West Virginia portion of the Area for 

both the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 standards, which EPA agrees with 

and is approving for transportation 

conformity purposes. In addition, EPA 

is approving the 2008 emissions 

inventory for the West Virginia portion 

of the Area for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS. EPA has taken a separate 

rulemaking action to approve the 

redesignation of the Ohio portion of the 

Steubenville-Weirton Area for the 1997 

annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 

These actions are being taken under the 

Clean Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: 

This final rule is effective on April 17, 

2014. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

Number EPA–R03–OAR–2013–0498. All 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the www.regulations.gov Web site. 

Although listed in the electronic docket, 

some information is not publicly 

available, i.e., confidential business 

information (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 form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically through 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy for 

public inspection during normal 

business hours at the Air Protection 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

Copies of the State submittal are 

available at the West Virginia 

Department of Environmental 

Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601 

57th Street SE., Charleston, West 

Virginia 25304. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Emlyn Ve ́lez-Rosa, (215) 814–2038, or 

by email at velez-rosa.emlyn@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

On April 13, 2012 and June 8, 2012, 

the West Virginia Department of 

Environmental Protection (WVDEP) 

formally submitted two separate 

requests to redesignate the West 

Virginia portion of the SteubenvilleWeirton Area from nonattainment to 

attainment for the 1997 annual and the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, 

respectively. Each submittal included a 

maintenance plan as a SIP revision to 

ensure continued attainment of the 

standards throughout the West Virginia 

portion of the Area over the next 10 

years. The June 8, 2012 submittal also 

includes a 2008 comprehensive 

emissions inventory for PM2.5, sulfur 

dioxide (SO2) and NOX for the 2006 24- 

hour PM2.5 NAAQS, which WVDEP 

supplemented on June 24, 2013 to 

include emissions of volatile organic 

compounds (VOC) and ammonia. The 

Steubenville-Weirton Area is comprised 

of Brooke County and Hancock County 

in West Virginia (the West Virginia 

portion of the Area), and Jefferson 

County in Ohio. 

On December 9, 2013 (78 FR 73769), 

EPA published a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPR) for the State of West 

Virginia. In the NPR, EPA proposed 

approval of West Virginia’s 

redesignation requests for its portion of 

the Steubenville-Weirton Area for the 

1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS. EPA also proposed approval of 

the associated maintenance plans as SIP 

revisions for the 1997 annual and 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 standards, which 

included insignificance determinations 

for PM2.5 and NOx for both standards for 

purposes of transportation conformity. 

Also, EPA proposed approval of the 

2008 comprehensive emissions 

inventory for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

standard to meet the requirement of 

section 172(c)(3) of the CAA. EPA 

proposed to find that the Area continues 

to attain both standards. 

In the NPR, EPA addressed the effects 

of two decisions of the United States 

Court of Appeals for the District of 

Columbia (DC Circuit or Court): The 

Court’s August 21, 2012 decision to 

vacate and remand to EPA the CrossState Air Pollution Control Rule 

(CSAPR); and the Court’s January 4, 

2013 decision to remand to EPA two 

final rules implementing the 1997 

annual PM2.5 standard. Specific details 

of West Virginia’s submittals and the 

rationale for EPA’s proposed actions are 

explained in the NPR and will not be 

restated here. No public comments were 

received on the NPR. 

II. Final Action 

EPA is taking final actions on the 

redesignations requests and SIP 

revisions submitted by the State of West 

Virginia on April 13, 2012 and June 8, 

2012 for the 1997 annual and 2006 24- 

hour PM2.5 standards. First, EPA is 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES