Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 9 / Thursday, January 14, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1887 

reference, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

Organic Compounds. 

Dated: December 30, 2015. 

Samuel Coleman, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

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 E—Arkansas 

■ 2. In § 52.170(e), the third table titled 

‘‘EPA-Approved Nonregulatory 

Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory 

Measures’’ is amended by adding an 

entry for ‘‘Crittenden County Base Year 

Emission Inventory for the 2008 Ozone 

Standard’’ to the end of the table. 

The addition reads as follows: 

§ 52.170 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS AND QUASI-REGULATORY MEASURES IN THE ARKANSAS SIP 

Name of SIP provision Applicable geographic or 

nonattainment area 

State 

submittal/ 

effective 

date 

EPA approval date Explanation 

*******

Crittenden County Base Year Emission Inventory 

for the 2008 Ozone Standard.

Crittenden County .......... 8/28/2015 1/13/2016 [Insert Federal Register citation].

[FR Doc. 2016–00559 Filed 1–13–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2015–0587; FRL 9941–01– 

Region 7] 

Approval of Missouri’s Air Quality 

Implementation Plans; Early Progress 

Plan of the St. Louis Nonattainment 

Area for the 2008 Ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard 

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 State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by 

the State of Missouri consisting of the 

Early Progress Plan and motor vehicle 

emissions budgets (MVEBs) for volatile 

organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides 

of nitrogen (NOX) for the St. Louis 

Nonattainment area under the 2008 

8-hour National Ambient Air Quality 

Standard (NAAQS). On August 26, 

2013, EPA received from the Missouri 

Department of Natural Resources 

(MDNR) an Early Progress Plan for the 

St. Louis area showing progress toward 

attainment under the 2008 Ozone 

NAAQS. This submittal was developed 

to establish MVEBs for the St. Louis 

8-hour ozone nonattainment area. This 

approval of the Early Progress Plan for 

the St. Louis 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area fulfills EPA’s 

requirement to act on the MDNR SIP 

submission and to formalize that the 

MVEB is approved, and when 

considered with the emissions from all 

sources, demonstrates progress toward 

attainment from the 2008 base year 

through a 2015 target year. EPA found 

these MVEBs adequate for 

transportation conformity purposes in 

an earlier action on March 5, 2014. 

DATES: This direct final rule will be 

effective March 14, 2016, without 

further notice, unless EPA receives 

adverse comment by February 16, 2016. 

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–2015–0587, to http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 

EPA may publish any comment received 

to its public docket. Do not submit 

electronically any information you 

consider to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Multimedia submissions (audio, video, 

etc.) must be accompanied by a written 

comment. The written comment is 

considered the official comment and 

should include discussion of all points 

you wish to make. EPA will generally 

not consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, the full 

EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Steven Brown, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Air Planning and 

Development Branch, 11201 Renner 

Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at 

913–551–7718 or by email at 

brown.steven@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 the background for this action? 

II. What are the criteria for early progress 

plans? 

III. What is EPA’s analysis of the request? 

IV. What are the MVEB’s for the St. Louis 

8-hour ozone area? 

V. What action is EPA taking? 

I. What is the background for this 

action? 

EPA’s final rule designating 

nonattainment areas and associated 

classifications for the 2008 ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) was published in the Federal 

Register on May 21, 2012 (77 FR 30088). 

The St. Louis area was designated as 

marginal nonattainment. The St. Louis 

ozone area had previously been 

designated nonattainment for the 1-hour 

ozone standard and had 1-hour motor 

vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) for 

NOX and VOC established in the St. 

Louis 1-hour maintenance plan SIP (66 

FR 33996). The 1-hour MVEBs were the 

only approved MVEBs for St. Louis and 

were based on EPA’s MOBILE6.2 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

1888 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 9 / Thursday, January 14, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

emissions model. Consequently, the 

transportation partners in St. Louis were 

required to use the 1-hour MVEB test to 

demonstrate transportation conformity 

for the 8-hour ozone standard until new 

MVEBs were approved or found 

adequate, as required by the 

transportation conformity rule at 40 CFR 

93.109(c)(2)(i). Missouri submitted this 

plan to establish new 8 hour MVEBs 

developed with EPA’s current 

MOVES2014 model. 

EPA allows for the establishment of 

MVEBs for the 8-hour ozone standard 

prior to a state submitting its first 

required 8-hour ozone SIP that would 

include new MVEBs. Although 

voluntary, these ‘‘early’’ MVEBs must be 

established through a plan, known as 

the ‘‘Early Progress Plan,’’ that meets all 

the requirements of a SIP submittal. The 

preamble of the July 1, 2004, final 

transportation conformity rule (see, 69 

FR 40019) reads as follows: 

‘‘The first 8-hour ozone SIP could be 

a control strategy SIP required by the 

Clean Air Act (e.g., rate-of-progress SIP 

or attainment demonstration) or a 

maintenance plan. However, 8-hour 

ozone nonattainment areas are free to 

establish, through the SIP process, a 

motor vehicle emissions budget or 

budgets that addresses the new NAAQS 

in advance of a complete SIP attainment 

demonstration. That is, a state could 

submit a motor vehicle emission budget 

that does not demonstrate attainment 

but is consistent with projections and 

commitments to control measures and 

achieves some progress toward 

attainment (August 15, 1997, 62 FR 

43799). A SIP submitted earlier than 

otherwise required can demonstrate a 

significant level of emissions reductions 

from current level of emissions, instead 

of a specific percentage required by the 

Clean Air Act for moderate and above 

ozone areas.’’ 

II. What are the criteria for early 

progress plans? 

The Early Progress Plan must 

demonstrate that the SIP revision 

containing the MVEBs, when 

considered with emissions from all 

sources, and when projected from the 

base year to a future year, shows some 

progress toward attainment. EPA has 

previously indicated that a 5 percent to 

10 percent reduction in emissions from 

all sources could represent a significant 

level of emissions reductions from 

current levels (69 FR 40019). This 

allowance is provided so that areas have 

an opportunity to use the budget test to 

demonstrate conformity as opposed to 

the interim conformity tests (i.e., 2002 

baseline test and/or action versus 

baseline test). The budget test with an 

adequate or approved MVEB budget is 

generally more protective of air quality 

and provides a more relevant basis for 

conformity determinations than the 

interim emissions test. (69 FR 40026). 

It should also be noted that the Early 

Progress Plan is not a required plan and 

does not substitute for required 

submissions such as an attainment 

demonstration or rate-of-progress plan, 

if such plans become required for the St. 

Louis 8-hour ozone area. 

III. What is EPA’s analysis of the 

request? 

In August 2013, the State submitted to 

EPA an Early Progress Plan for the 

purpose of establishing MVEBs for the 

St. Louis 8-hour ozone area. The 

submittal utilizes a base year of 2008, 

and a projected year of 2015 to establish 

NOX and VOC MVEBs. The planning 

assumptions used to develop the 

MVEBs were discussed and agreed to by 

the St. Louis interagency consultation 

group, East West Gateway (EWG), which 

consists of the transportation and air 

quality partners in the St. Louis 8-hour 

ozone nonattainment area. Tables 1 and 

2 below show the differences by source 

categories between the 2008 base year 

and 2015 forecast year. The NOX and 

VOC emissions in tons per day (tpd) 

within the St. Louis nonattainment area 

are expected to decrease significantly, 

31 percent and 12 percent, respectively, 

between 2008 and 2015. These emission 

trends demonstrate that progress will be 

made towards attainment of the 2008 

8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

Source 2008 NOX

(tpd) 

2015 NOX

(tpd) 

Point ......................................................................................................................................................................... 88.84 86.32 

Area ......................................................................................................................................................................... 6.52 6.64 

On-road .................................................................................................................................................................... 161.25 76.70 

Non-road .................................................................................................................................................................. 65.18 53.72 

Total .................................................................................................................................................................. 321.79 223.38 

Total Percent Reduction ............................................................................................................................ 31% 

Source 2008 VOC 

(tpd) 

2015 VOC 

(tpd) 

Point ......................................................................................................................................................................... 18.01 21.60 

Area ......................................................................................................................................................................... 99.47 111.73 

On-road .................................................................................................................................................................... 60.86 32.70 

Non-road .................................................................................................................................................................. 45.08 30.67 

Total .................................................................................................................................................................. 223.42 196.70 

Total Percent Reduction ............................................................................................................................ 12% 

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, the revision 

meets the substantive SIP requirements 

of the CAA, including Section 110 and 

implementing regulations. 

IV. What are the MVEB’s for the St. 

Louis 8-hour ozone area? 

Through this rulemaking, EPA is 

approving the 2015 regional MVEBs for 

NOX and VOC for the St. Louis 8-hour 

ozone area. EPA has determined that the 

MVEBs contained in the Early Progress 

Plan SIP revision are consistent with 

emission reductions from all sources 

within the nonattainment area and are 

showing progress toward attainment. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 9 / Thursday, January 14, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 1889 

The 2015 MVEBs in tpd for VOCs and NOX for the St. Louis, Missouri area are 

as follows: 

2015 NOX

(tons per day) 

2015 VOC 

(tons per day) 

St. Louis Area MVEB ............................................................................................................................................... 76.70 32.70 

EPA found these MVEBs adequate for 

transportation conformity purposes in 

an earlier action (March 5, 2014, 79 FR 

12504). As of March 19, 2014, the 

effective date of EPA’s adequacy finding 

for these MVEBs, conformity 

determinations in St. Louis must meet 

the budget test using these 8-hour 

MVEBs, instead of the 1-hour ozone 

MVEBs. It should be noted that the 

previous adequacy finding does not 

relate to the merits of the SIP submittal, 

nor does it indicate whether the 

submittal meets the requirements for 

approval. This EPA rulemaking action 

takes formal action on the Early Progress 

Plan SIP revision. 

V. What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is taking direct final action to 

approve this SIP revision. 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 this 

Federal Register, we are publishing a 

separate document that will serve as the 

proposed rule to approve this SIP 

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 

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 Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• 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, 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 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 and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

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 March 14, 2016. 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. 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: December 23, 2015. 

Mark Hague, 

Regional Administrator, Region 7. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, EPA amends 40 CFR part 52 

as set forth below: 

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. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

1890 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 9 / Thursday, January 14, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

Subpart AA—Missouri 

■ 2. Section 52.1320(e) is amended by 

adding new entry (68) at the end of the 

table to read as follows: 

§ 52.1320 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED MISSOURI NONREGULATORY SIP PROVISIONS

Name of nonregulatory SIP 

provision 

Applicable geographic or nonattainment area State submittal 

date EPA approval date Explanation 

*******

(68) Missouri Early Progress 

Plan.

St. Louis ................................. 8/26/13 1/14/16 [Insert Federal Register citation].[EPA–R07–OAR–2015–0587; 

FRL–9941–01–Region 7]. 

[FR Doc. 2016–00428 Filed 1–13–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 70 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2013–0765; FRL–9940–97– 

Region 7] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; State of 

Kansas; Annual Emissions Fee and 

Annual Emissions Inventory 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule; technical 

amendment. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) inadvertently approved 

and codified this action under both part 

52 (Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans) and part 70 

(State Operating Permit Programs). This 

technical amendment removes the part 

52 approval and codification and makes 

a clarification to part 70. 

DATES: This action is effective January 

14, 2016. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Lachala Kemp at (913) 551–7214, or by 

email at kemp.lachala@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

January 27, 2014 (79 FR 4274), EPA 

published a direct final rule approving 

a SIP revision for Kansas that included 

revisions to K.A.R. 28–19–202 ‘‘Annual 

Emission Fees.’’ The rule revision 

amended KAR 28–19–202 ‘‘Annual 

Emissions Fees’’ to align the state’s 

reporting requirements with EPA’s 

reporting requirements, and was 

incorrectly approved and codified under 

part 52 and part 70. 

This rule also included revisions to 

the operating permits program, K.A.R 

28–19–517 ‘‘Class I Operating Permits; 

Annual Emissions Inventory.’’ This part 

70 appendix A revision added new 

paragraph (f) ‘‘The Kansas Department 

of Health and Environment submitted 

revisions to Kansas Administrative 

Record (KAR) 28–19–202 and 28–19– 

517 on April 15, 2011; approval of 

section (c) effective March 28, 2014.’’ 

This technical amendment removes 

the erroneous part 52 approval of KAR 

28–19–202 ‘‘Annual Emissions Fees’’ 

and recodifies the table. This action also 

revises paragraph (f) to read as follows: 

(f) ‘‘The Kansas Department of Health 

and Environment submitted revisions to 

Kansas Administrative Record (KAR) 

28–19–202 and 28–19–517 on April 15, 

2011; effective March 28, 2014.’’ 

List of Subjects 

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. 

40 CFR Part 70 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Air pollution control, 

Intergovernmental relations, Operating 

permits, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: December 23, 2015. 

Becky Weber, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7. 

Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations is amended as 

follows: 

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. 

§ 52.870 [Amended] 

■ 2. In § 52.870, paragraph(c) is 

amended by removing the table entry 

‘‘K.A.R. 28–19–202.’’ 

PART 70—STATE OPERATING PERMIT 

PROGRAMS 

■ 3. The authority citation for part 70 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 4. Appendix A is amended by revising 

paragraph (f) under Kansas to read as 

follows: 

Appendix A to Part 70—Approval 

Status of State and Local Operating 

Permits Programs 

* * * * * 

Kansas 

* * * * * 

(f) The Kansas Department of Health and 

Environment submitted revisions to Kansas 

Administrative Record (KAR) 28–19–202 and 

28–19–517 on April 15, 2011; effective March 

28, 2014. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2016–00573 Filed 1–13–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 180 

[EPA–HQ–OPP–2015–0538; FRL–9939–53] 

Aspergillus flavus AF36; Time Limited 

Exemption From the Requirement of a 

Tolerance 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes a 

time-limited exemption from the 

Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act 

(FFDCA) section 408(a) requirement of a 

tolerance for residues of the pesticide 

Aspergillus flavus AF36 in or on dried 

figs resulting from use in accordance 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES