### 11321 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 41 / Tuesday, March 3, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701,
44702, 44704. The Special Conditions

Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the following special conditions are issued as part of the type certification basis for Cessna, Model 650, Citation VII airplanes modified by Universal Avionics Systems Corporation.
Installed Rechargeable Lithium Batteries and Battery Systems.

These special conditions require that (1) all characteristics of the rechargeable lithium batteries and battery installation that could affect safe operation of the Cessna, Model 650, Citation VII airplanes are addressed; and (2) appropriate instructions for continued airworthiness, which include maintenance requirements, are established to ensure the availability of electrical power, when needed, from the batteries.

In lieu of the requirements of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) 25.1353(b)(1) through (b)(4) at amendment 25–123, all rechargeable lithium batteries and battery systems on Cessna, Model 650, Citation VII airplanes, modified by Universal Avionics Systems Corporation, must be designed and installed as follows:

1. Safe cell temperatures and pressures must be maintained during any foreseeable charging or discharging condition and during any failure of the charging or battery monitoring system not shown to be extremely remote. The rechargeable lithium battery installation must preclude explosion in the event of those failures.

2. Design of the rechargeable lithium batteries must preclude the occurrence of self-sustaining, uncontrolled increases in temperature or pressure.

3. No explosive or toxic gases emitted by any rechargeable lithium battery in normal operation, or as the result of any failure of the battery charging system, monitoring system, or battery installation which is not shown to be extremely remote, may accumulate in hazardous quantities within the airplane.

4. Installations of rechargeable lithium batteries must meet the requirements of § 25.863(a) through (d).

5. No corrosive fluids or gases that may escape from any rechargeable lithium battery may damage surrounding structure or any adjacent systems, equipment, or electrical wiring of the airplane in such a way as to cause a major or more severe failure condition, in accordance with § 25.1309(b) and applicable regulatory guidance.

6. Each rechargeable lithium battery installation must have provisions to prevent any hazardous effect on structure or essential systems caused by the maximum amount of heat the battery can generate during a short circuit of the battery or of its individual cells.

7. Rechargeable lithium battery installations must have a system to control the charging rate of the battery automatically, so as to prevent battery overheating or overcharging, and:

a. A battery temperature sensing and over-temperature warning system with a means for automatically disconnecting the battery from its charging source in the event of an over-temperature condition, or,

b. A battery failure sensing and warning system with a means for automatically disconnecting the battery from its charging source in the event of battery failure.

8. Any rechargeable lithium battery installation, the function of which is required for safe operation of the airplane, must incorporate a monitoring and warning feature that will provide an indication to the appropriate flightcrewmembers whenever the state-ofcharge of the batteries has fallen below levels considered acceptable for dispatch of the airplane.

9. The instructions for continued airworthiness required by § 25.1529 must contain maintenance requirements to assure that the battery is sufficiently charged at appropriate intervals specified by the battery manufacturer and the equipment manufacturer that contain the rechargeable lithium battery or rechargeable lithium battery system. This is required to ensure that lithium rechargeable batteries and lithium rechargeable battery systems will not degrade below specified ampere-hour levels sufficient to power the airplane systems for intended applications. The instructions for continued airworthiness must also contain procedures for the maintenance of batteries in spares storage to prevent the replacement of batteries with batteries that have experienced degraded charge retention ability or other damage due to prolonged storage at a low state of charge. Replacement batteries must be of the same manufacturer and part number as approved by the FAA. Precautions should be included in the instructions for continued airworthiness maintenance instructions to prevent mishandling of the rechargeable lithium battery and rechargeable lithium batterysystems, which could result in shortcircuit or other unintentional impact damage caused by dropping or other destructive means that could result in personal injury or property damage.

Note 1: The term ‘‘sufficiently charged’’ means that the battery will retain enough of a charge, expressed in ampere-hours, to ensure that the battery cells will not be damaged. A battery cell may be damaged by lowering the charge below a point where the battery experiences a reduction in the ability to charge and retain a full charge. This reduction would be greater than the reduction that may result from normal operational degradation.

Note 2: These special conditions are not intended to replace § 25.1353(b) in the certification basis of Cessna, Model 650, Citation VII airplanes. These special conditions apply only to rechargeable lithium batteries, lithium battery systems, and their installations. The requirements of § 25.1353(b) remain in effect for batteries and battery installations on Cessna, Model 650, Citation VII airplanes that do not use lithium batteries.

Issued in Renton, Washington, on February
23, 2015. Michael Kaszycki, Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 2015–04366 Filed 3–2–15; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 4910–13–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R06–OAR–2014–0871; FRL–9923–80– Region 6]** 

**Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans: Texas;**  **Approval of Substitution for Transportation Control Measures** 

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Final rule; notice of administrative change.

**SUMMARY :**  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is making an administrative change to update the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) to reflect a change made to the Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP) on November 3, 2014, as a result of EPA’s concurrence on a substitute transportation control measure (TCM) for the Dallas/Ft. Worth (DFW) portion of the Texas SIP. On November 24, 2014, the State of Texas, through the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), submitted a revision to the Texas SIP


### 11322 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 41 / Tuesday, March 3, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

requesting that EPA update its SIP to reflect a substitution of a TCM. The substitution was made pursuant to the TCM substitution provisions contained in Clean Air Act (CAA). EPA concurred on this substitution on November 3, 2014. In this administrative action, EPA is updating the non-regulatory provisions of the Texas SIP to reflect the substitution. In summary, the substitution was a replacement of environmental speed limits (ESLs) within the DFW 8-hour ozone nonattainment area with traffic signalization projects. EPA has determined that this action falls under the ‘‘good cause’’ exemption in the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) which, upon finding ‘‘good cause,’’ authorizes an agency to make an action effective immediately, thereby avoiding the 30-day delayed effective date otherwise provided for in the APA.

**DATES :**  This action is effective March 3,

2015.

**ADDRESSES :**  SIP materials which are incorporated by reference into 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 52 are available for inspection at the following location: Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, TX 75202. Publicly available materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Region 6 office. The Regional Office hours are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding Federal holidays.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Mr. Jeffrey Riley at (214) 665–8542 or via electronic mail at riley.jeffrey@epa.gov.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  On November 3, 2014, EPA issued a concurrence letter to TCEQ stating that the substitution of DFW area ESL TCMs with traffic signalization project TCMs met the CAA section 176(c)(8) requirements for substituting TCMs in an area’s approved SIP. See also EPA’s Guidance for Implementing the CAA section 176(c)(8) Transportation Control Measure Substitution and Addition Provision contained in the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users which was signed into law on August 10, 2005, dated January 2009. The DFW area ESLs were originally approved into the SIP as control measures on October 11, 2005 (70 FR 58978). On January 9, 2014, EPA approved re-categorization of the DFW area ESL control measures to TCMs, making the measures eligible for substitution under the provisions of CAA section 176(c)(8) (79 FR 1596).

As a part of the concurrence process, the public was provided an opportunity to comment on the proposed TCM substitution. Public notice and comment was provided by the DFW metropolitan planning organization, the North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG), during Regional Transportation Council meetings held on July 14, 2014 and July 17, 2014. Public notice for these meetings was published in 20 DFW area newspapers and circulars.

Through this concurrence process, EPA determined that the requirements of CAA section 176(c)(8) were met, including the requirement that the substitute measures achieve equivalent or greater emission reductions than the control measure to be replaced. Upon EPA’s concurrence, the ESL substitution took effect as a matter of federal law. A copy of EPA’s concurrence letter is included in the Docket for this action. This letter can be accessed at www.regulations.gov using Docket ID
No. EPA–R06–OAR–2014–0871. In accordance with the requirements for TCM substitution, on November 24, 2014, TCEQ submitted a request for EPA to update the DFW portion of the Texas SIP to reflect EPA’s previous approval of the TCM substitution of the ESLs with the traffic signalization project TCMs in its SIP (the subject of this administrative change). Today, EPA is takingadministrative action to update the nonregulatory provisions of the Texas SIP in 40 CFR 52.2270(e) to reflect EPA’s concurrence on the substitution of a TCM for the conversion of ESLs to traffic signalization projects:

Name of nonregulatory SIP provision Applicable geographic or nonattainment area State submittal date/effective date

DFW nine-county area ESL TCMs to traffic signalization TCMs. Affected

counties are Dallas, Tarrant, Collin, Denton, Parker, Johnson, Ellis, Kaufman, Rockwall. Dallas-Fort Worth ................................. 9/16/2010

Under section 553 of the APA, an agency may find good cause where procedures are ‘‘impractical, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.’’ The substitution was made through the process included in CAA section 176(c)(8). Effective immediately, today’s action codifies provisions which are already in effect. The public had an opportunity to comment on this substitution during the public comment period prior to approval of the substitution. Immediate notice of this action in the Federal Register benefits the public by providing the updated Texas SIP Compilation and ‘‘Identification of Plan’’ portion of the Federal Register

. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. General Requirements

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this administrative action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and is therefore not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. Because the Agency has made a ‘‘good cause’’ finding that this action is not subject to notice-and-comment requirements under the APA or any other statute as indicated in the

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION** section above, it is not subject to the regulatory flexibility provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. ), or to sections 202 and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4). In addition, this action does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments or impose a significant intergovernmental mandate, as described in sections 203 and 204 of

UMRA.

This administrative action also does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the federal government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the federal government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999).


### 11323 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 41 / Tuesday, March 3, 2015 / Rules and Regulations

This administrative action also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant. This administrative action does not involve technical standards; thus the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. The administrative action also does not involve special consideration of environmental justice related issues as required by Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). This administrative action does not impose an information collection burden under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. ).
B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

The Congressional Review Act (CRA) (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. Section 808 allows the issuing agency to make a rule effective sooner than otherwise provided by the CRA if the agency makes a good cause finding that notice and public procedure is impracticable, unnecessary or contrary to the public interest. Today’s administrative action simply codifies a provision which is already in effect as a matter of law in Federal and approved state programs. 5 U.S.C. 808(2). These announced actions were effective upon EPA’s concurrence. 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 this action in the Federal Register. This update to Texas’ SIP Compilation is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.

Dated: February 19, 2015. Ron Curry, Regional Administrator, Region 6.

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 SS—Texas**

■ 2. In § 52.2270(e), the table titled ‘‘EPA Approved Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures in the Texas SIP’’ is amended by adding an entry at the end for ‘‘DFW nine-county area ESL TCM to traffic signalization TCMs’’.

The addition reads as follows:

**§ 52.2270 Identification of plan.**

* * * * *

(e) * * *



### EPA-APPROVED 

### N ONREGULATORY 

### P ROVISIONS AND 

### Q UASI 

### -R EGULATORY 

### M EASURES IN THE 

### TEXAS 

### SIP

Name of SIP provision Applicable geographic or nonattainment area State submittal/ effective date EPA approval date Comments

******* DFW nine-county area ESL

TCM to traffic signalization TCMs. Dallas-Fort Worth: Dallas, Tarrant, Collin, Denton,Parker, Johnson, Ellis, Kaufman and Rockwall Counties. 9/16/2010 1/9/2014, 79 FR 1596 ........ DFW ESLs recategorized as TCM 1/9/2014, substituted withtraffic signalization TCMs 11/3/2014.

[FR Doc. 2015–04269 Filed 3–2–15; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R07–OAR–2014–0399; FRL–9923–66– Region 7]** 

**Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approval and Promulgation:**  **Missouri; St. Louis Inspection and Maintenance Program** 

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency.

**ACTION :**  Final rule.

**SUMMARY :**  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final action to approve revisions to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the State of Missouri relating to its vehicle Inspection and Maintenance (I/ M) Program. On August 16, 2007, and December 7, 2007, the Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) requested to amend the SIP to replace the St. Louis centralized vehicle test program, called the Gateway CleanAir Program (GCAP), with a decentralized, OBD-only vehicle I/M program called the Gateway Vehicle Inspection Program (GVIP). In this action, EPA is also approving three additional SIP revisions submitted by Missouri related to the state’s I/M program including: Exemptions forspecially constructed vehicles or ‘‘kitcars,’’ exemptions for Plugin Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEV), and rescission of Missouri State Highway Patrol rules from the Missouri SIP.

These revisions to Missouri’s SIP do not have an adverse effect on air quality as demonstrated in the technical support document which is a part of this docket. EPA’s approval of these SIP revisions is being done in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

**DATES :**  This final rule is effective on April 2, 2015.

**ADDRESSES :**  EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2014–0399. All documents in the docket are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. 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, 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 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