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

**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


### 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-A PPROVED 

### M ISSOURI 

### R EGULATIONS

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**


### 15019 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Rules and Regulations

EPA-A PPROVED 

### M ISSOURI 

### R EGULATIONS

### —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 (PM 2.5 ) 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 PM 2.5 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 PM 2.5 and nitrogen oxides (NO X) emissions to the West Virginia portion of the Area for both the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM 2.5 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 PM 2.5 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 PM 2.5 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 WestVirginia portion of the SteubenvilleWeirton Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour PM 2.5 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 PM 2.5 , sulfur dioxide (SO 2) and NO X for the 2006 24- hour PM 2.5 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 PM 2.5 NAAQS. EPA also proposed approval of the associated maintenance plans as SIP revisions for the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM 2.5 standards, which included insignificance determinations for PM 2.5 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 PM 2.5 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 tovacate 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 PM 2.5 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 PM 2.5 standards. First, EPA is