Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 9 / Tuesday, January 14, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 2375 

facility in a safety zone without the 

permission of the Captain of the Port. 

(c) Definitions. (1) Captain of the Port 

means the Commander, Coast Guard 

Sector Delaware Bay, or any Coast 

Guard commissioned, warrant or petty 

officer who has been authorized by the 

Captain of the Port to act on her behalf. 

(2) Designated representative means 

any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant 

or petty officer who has been authorized 

by the Captain of the Port Delaware Bay 

to assist in enforcing the safety zone 

described in paragraph (a) of this 

section. 

(d) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast 

Guard may be assisted by Federal, State, 

and local agencies in the patrol and 

enforcement of the zone. 

(e) Enforcement period. This section 

will be enforced from January 1, 2014 

until February 28, 2014 unless cancelled 

earlier by the Captain of the Port. 

Dated: December 30, 2013. 

Steven H. Ratti, 

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, 

Fifth Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. 2014–00438 Filed 1–13–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2013–0753; FRL–9905–29- 

Region 9] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan, El Dorado 

County Air Quality Management 

District 

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 El 

Dorado County Air Quality Management 

District (EDAQMD) portion of the 

California State Implementation Plan 

(SIP). These revisions concern negative 

declarations for volatile organic 

compound (VOC) source categories for 

the EDAQMD. We are approving these 

negative declarations under the Clean 

Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the 

Act). 

DATES: This rule is effective on March 

17, 2014 without further notice, unless 

EPA receives adverse comments by 

February 13, 2014. If we receive such 

comments, we will publish a timely 

withdrawal in the Federal Register to 

notify the public that this direct final 

rule will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2013–0753, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions. 

2. Email: steckel.andrew@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel 

(Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Instructions: All comments 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 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through 

www.regulations.gov or email. 

www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous 

access’’ system, and EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send email 

directly to EPA, your email address will 

be automatically captured and included 

as part of the public comment. 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: Generally, documents in the 

docket for this action 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: 

Stanley Tong, EPA Region IX, (415) 

947–4122, tong.stanley@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What negative declarations did the State 

submit? 

B. Are there other versions of these 

negative declarations? 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

negative declarations? 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is EPA evaluating the negative 

declarations? 

B. Do the negative declarations meet the 

evaluation criteria? 

C. Public Comment and Final Action 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What negative declarations did the 

State submit? 

Table 1 lists the negative declarations 

we are approving with the dates that 

they were adopted by the EDAQMD and 

submitted by the California Air 

Resources Board (CARB). 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS

Local agency Title Adopted Submitted 

EDAQMD .......... EPA–450/2–78–015—Control of VOC Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources, 

Volume VI: Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products.

12/11/12 09/30/13 

EDAQMD .......... EPA–450/2–77–022—Control of VOC Emissions from Solvent Metal Cleaning ............. 12/11/12 09/30/13 

EDAQMD .......... EPA–450/2–78–033—Control of VOC Emissions from Existing Stationary Sources, 

Volume VIII: Graphic Arts—Rotogravure and Flexography.

12/11/12 09/30/13 

On November 25, 2013, EPA 

determined that the EDAQMD negative 

declarations submitted on September 

30, 2013, met the completeness criteria 

in 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix V, which 

must be met before formal EPA review. 

B. Are there other versions of these 

negative declarations? 

There are no previous versions of 

these negative declarations. 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
2376 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 9 / Tuesday, January 14, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

negative declarations? 

The negative declarations were 

submitted to meet the requirements of 

CAA section 182(b)(2). Ozone 

nonattainment areas classified at 

moderate and above are required to 

adopt VOC regulations for the published 

Control Technique Guidelines (CTG) 

categories and for major non-CTG 

sources of VOC or NOX. If an ozone 

nonattainment area does not have 

stationary sources covered by an EPA 

published CTG, then the area is required 

to submit a negative declaration. The 

negative declarations were submitted 

because there are no stationary sources 

exceeding the CTG’s applicability 

threshold within the EDAQMD 

jurisdiction. EPA’s technical support 

document (TSD) has more information 

about these negative declarations. 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is EPA evaluating the negative 

declarations? 

The negative declarations are 

submitted as SIP revisions and must be 

consistent with CAA requirements for 

Reasonably Available Control 

Technology (RACT) (see section 

182(b)(2)) and SIP relaxation (see 

sections 110(l) and 193.) To do so, the 

submittal should provide reasonable 

assurance that no sources subject to the 

CTG requirements currently exist or are 

planned for the EDAQMD. 

B. Do the negative declarations meet the 

evaluation criteria? 

We believe these negative 

declarations are consistent with the 

relevant policy and guidance regarding 

RACT and SIP relaxations. The TSD has 

more information on our evaluation. 

C. Public Comment and Final Action 

As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of 

the Act, EPA is fully approving the 

submitted negative declarations as 

additional information to the SIP 

because we believe they fulfill all 

relevant requirements. We do not think 

anyone will object to this approval, so 

we are finalizing it without proposing it 

in advance. However, in the Proposed 

Rules section of this Federal Register, 

we are simultaneously proposing 

approval of these negative declarations. 

If we receive adverse comments by 

February 13, 2014, we will publish a 

timely withdrawal in the Federal 

Register to notify the public that the 

direct final approval will not take effect 

and we will address the comments in a 

subsequent final action based on the 

proposal. If we do not receive timely 

adverse comments, the direct final 

approval will be effective without 

further notice on March 17, 2014. 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Clean Air Act, 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 Clean Air Act. 

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 Clean Air Act; 

and 

• does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address 

disproportionate human health or 

environmental effects with practical, 

appropriate, 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 Clean 

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of 

this action must be filed in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the 

appropriate circuit by March 17, 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, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: December 16, 2013. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code 

of Federal Regulations is amended as 

follows: 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 9 / Tuesday, January 14, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 2377 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart F—California 

■ 2. Section 52.222 is amended by 

adding paragraph (a)(7)(ii) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.222 Negative declarations. 

* * * * * 

(a) * * * 

(7) * * * 

(ii) Control of VOC Emissions from 

Existing Stationary Sources, Volume VI: 

Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal 

Parts and Products; Control of VOC 

Emissions from Solvent Metal Cleaning; 

and Control of VOC Emissions from 

Existing Stationary Sources, Volume 

VIII: Graphic Arts—Rotogravure and 

Flexography submitted on September 

30, 2013 and adopted on December 11, 

2012. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2014–00398 Filed 1–13–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration 

49 CFR Part 391 

[Docket No. FMCSA–1997–2210] 

RIN 2126–AB71 

Medical Certification Requirements as 

Part of the Commercial Driver’s 

License (CDL); Extension of Certificate 

Retention Requirements 

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration (FMCSA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The FMCSA amends its 

regulations to keep in effect until 

January 30, 2015, the requirement that 

interstate drivers subject to: either the 

commercial driver’s license (CDL) or the 

commercial learner’s permit (CLP) 

regulations: as well as the Federal 

physical qualification requirements, 

must retain paper copies of their 

medical examiner’s certificate when 

operating a commercial motor vehicle. 

Interstate motor carriers are also 

required to retain copies of their drivers’ 

medical certificates in their driver 

qualification files. This action is being 

taken to ensure that the medical 

qualification of CDL and CLP holders 

are documented adequately until all 

State driver licensing agencies (SDLAs) 

are able to post the drivers’ selfcertification whether the physical 

qualifications standards are applicable 

to them and the medical examiner’s 

certificate information, on the 

Commercial Driver’s License 

Information System (CDLIS) driver 

record. This rule does not, however, 

extend the compliance dates for the 

SDLA to collect and to post to the 

CDLIS driver record the CDL holder’s 

self-certification about applicable 

standards and the medical examiner’s 

certificate. 

DATES: This rule is effective January 14, 

2014. 

ADDRESSES: You may search background 

documents or comments to the docket 

for this rule, identified by docket 

number FMCSA–1997–2210, by visiting 

the: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for reviewing documents 

and comments. Regulations.gov is 

available electronically 24 hours each 

day, 365 days a year; or 

• DOT Docket Management Facility: 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

(DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

West Building, Ground Floor, Room 12– 

140, Washington, DC 20590–0001. 

Privacy Act 

Anyone may search the electronic 

form of all comments received into any 

of our dockets by the name of the 

individual submitting the comment (or 

of the person signing the comment, if 

submitted on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). You may 

review DOT’s Privacy Act Statement for 

the Federal Docket Management System 

published in the Federal Register on 

January 17, 2008 (73 FR 3316), or you 

may visit http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/

pkg/FR-2008-01-17/pdf/E8-785.pdf. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this rule, email 

or call Mr. Robert Redmond, Senior 

Transportation Specialist, Office of 

Safety Programs, Commercial Driver’s 

License Division (MC–ESL), Federal 

Motor Carrier Safety Administration, 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590–001; Telephone 

(202) 366–5014; Email 

Robert.Redmond@dot.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Legal Basis 

The legal basis of the final rule titled 

Medical Certification Requirements as 

Part of the Commercial Driver’s License, 

(2008 final rule) (73 FR 73096–73097), 

is also applicable to this rule. 

The legal basis for issuing this final 

rule without an opportunity for public 

comment, and without an effective date 

at least 30 days after publication, are the 

two ‘‘good cause’’ exceptions under the 

Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 

U.S.C. 553(b) and (d)(3). The APA 

specifically provides exceptions to its 

notice and comment rulemaking 

procedures when the Agency finds that 

there is good cause (and incorporates 

the finding and a brief statement of 

reasons therefore in the rules issued) to 

dispense with them. Generally, good 

cause exists when the agency 

determines that notice and comment 

procedures are impractical, 

unnecessary, or contrary to the public 

interest. 5 U.S.C. 553(b). The Agency 

finds it necessary to take this action 

without notice and comment because of 

delays in implementation caused by 

those SDLAs not yet in compliance with 

the requirements of the 2008 final rule 

required by January 30, 2014. It would 

be impractical to conduct notice and 

comment procedures in the short time 

remaining before that date. 

Moreover, under similar 

circumstances in 2011, when notice and 

an opportunity for public comment was 

provided, no comments were submitted 

either for or against the extension issued 

at that time. Most SDLAs will be in 

compliance by January 30, 2014, but 

obviously unless all of the SDLAs 

issuing CDLs and CLPs are in 

compliance, it will still be necessary for 

drivers and their employers to rely on 

the paper medical examiner’s certificate 

to verify that the driver is physically 

qualified. Under these circumstances, 

FMCSA believes that no comments 

about this additional extension would 

likely be submitted, and therefore the 

notice and comment procedure is 

unnecessary. Delaying this extension 

beyond January 30, 2014 while 

comments are received would create 

uncertainty within the CDL and CLP 

program and potential inconsistencies 

in requirements and capabilities among 

States, however briefly. In this instance, 

notice and comment is therefore also 

contrary to the public interest. 

The APA also provides for an 

exception to the required publication of 

a final rule on not less than 30 days’ 

notice before its effective date. 5 U.S.C. 

553(d)(3). The same reasons that justify 

dispensing with notice and comment 

procedures also justify making this final 

rule effective immediately, as well as 

the need to provide sufficient notice to 

the SDLAs and the affected carriers and 

drivers. FMCSA finds that there is good 

cause for making this final rule effective 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES