13256 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 46 / Monday, March 10, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart EE—New Hampshire 

■ 2. Section 52.1528 is amended by 

adding paragraph (e) to read as follows: 

§ 52.1528 Control strategy: Carbon 

monoxide. 

* * * * * 

(e) Approval—On August 1, 2012, the 

New Hampshire Department of 

Environmental Services submitted 

modifications to the Manchester and 

Nashua maintenance plans approved in 

paragraph (b) and (c) respectively of this 

section. The Manchester and Nashua 

current carbon monoxide maintenance 

plans are both converted to limited 

maintenance plans for the remainder of 

their second-ten year maintenance 

periods which terminate on January 29, 

2021. Future carbon monoxide 

transportation conformity evaluations 

for Manchester and Nashua will for the 

length of their limited maintenance 

plans be considered to satisfy the 

regional emissions analysis and ‘‘budget 

test’’ requirements. In addition, New 

Hampshire will no longer conduct CO 

monitoring in Manchester, New 

Hampshire as addressed in paragraph 

(d) of this section. The Manchester 

monitoring site is replaced with the 

Londonderry Moose Hill station in 

Londonderry, New Hampshire with 

triggers to reestablish CO monitoring 

sites in Manchester and Nashua if 

elevated CO levels are recorded in 

Londonderry. 

[FR Doc. 2014–04948 Filed 3–7–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R08–OAR–2011–0834; FRL–9907–57– 

Region 8] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; State of 

Colorado; Second Ten-Year PM10

Maintenance Plan for Pagosa Springs 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is taking final action 

partially approving and partially 

disapproving State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) revisions submitted by the State of 

Colorado. On March 31, 2010, the 

Governor of Colorado’s designee 

submitted to EPA a revised maintenance 

plan for the Pagosa Springs area for the 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) for particulate matter with an 

aerodynamic diameter less than or equal 

to 10 microns (PM10). The State adopted 

the revised maintenance plan on 

November 19, 2009. As required by 

Clean Air Act (CAA) section 175A(b), 

this revised maintenance plan addresses 

maintenance of the PM10 standard for a 

second 10-year period beyond the area’s 

original redesignation to attainment for 

the PM10 NAAQS. EPA is taking final 

action approving the revised 

maintenance plan with the exception of 

one aspect of the plan’s contingency 

measures. EPA’s approval includes the 

revised maintenance plan’s 2021 

transportation conformity motor vehicle 

emissions budget (MVEB) for PM10. In 

taking final action to approve the 

revised maintenance plan, we are taking 

final action to exclude from use in 

determining whether or not Pagosa 

Springs continues to attain the 24-hour 

PM10 NAAQS, exceedances of the 24- 

hour PM10 NAAQS that were recorded 

at the Pagosa Springs PM10 monitor on 

March 22, 2009, April 3, 2009, April 5, 

2010, April 28, 2010, April 29, 2010, 

May 11, 2010, and May 22, 2010 

because the exceedances meet the 

criteria for exceptional events caused by 

high wind natural events. This action is 

being taken under sections 110 and 

175A of the CAA. 

DATES: This final rule is effective April 

9, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R08–OAR–2011–0834. 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, 

e.g., 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 at 

the Air Program, Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 

1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 

80202–1129. EPA requests that if at all 

possible, you contact the individual 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section to view the hard copy 

of the docket. You may view the hard 

copy of the docket Monday through 

Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., excluding 

Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kyle 

Olson, Air Program, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 8, Mailcode 

8P–AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, 

Colorado 80202–1129, (303) 312–6002, 

olson.kyle@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Definitions 

For the purpose of this document, we 

are giving meaning to certain words or 

initials as follows: 

i. The words or initials Act or CAA 

mean or refer to the Clean Air Act, 

unless the context indicates otherwise. 

ii. The words Colorado and State 

mean or refer to the State of Colorado. 

iii. The words EPA, we, us or our 

mean or refer to the United States 

Environmental Protection Agency. 

iv. The initials MVEB mean or refer to 

motor vehicle emissions budget. 

v. The initials NAAQS mean or refer 

to National Ambient Air Quality 

Standard. 

vi. The initials NPR mean or refer to 

notice of proposed rulemaking. 

vii. The initials PM10 mean or refer to 

particulate matter with an aerodynamic 

diameter of less than or equal to 10 

micrometers (coarse particulate matter). 

viii. The initials SIP mean or refer to 

State Implementation Plan. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. Final Action 

III. Statutory and Executive Orders Review 

I. Background 

On December 27, 2013, we published 

a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) 

in which we proposed to partially 

approve and partially disapprove the 

revised Pagosa Springs PM10

Maintenance Plan that Colorado 

submitted to us on March 31, 2010. (See 

78 FR 78797.) We proposed to approve 

the revised maintenance plan, with the 

exception of one of its listed 

contingency measures, because it 

demonstrates maintenance through 2021 

as required by CAA section 175A(b), 

retains the control measures from the 

initial PM10 maintenance plan that EPA 

approved in June of 2001, and meets 

other CAA requirements for a section 

175A maintenance plan. We proposed 

to disapprove ‘‘voluntary coal and/or 

wood burning curtailment’’ as a 

potential contingency measure in 

section 5.F.3 of the revised Pagosa 

Springs PM10 Maintenance Plan. While 

we have not required that potential 

contingency measures be effective 

without further action by the state, we 

interpret the CAA as requiring measures 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 46 / Monday, March 10, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 13257 

1As noted in our NPR, the 2012 PM10 MVEB of 

7,486 lbs/day from the original PM10 maintenance 

plan must continue to be used for analysis years 

2012 through 2020 (as long as such years are within 

the timeframe of the transportation plan), unless the 

State elects to submit a SIP revision to revise the 

2012 PM10 MVEB and EPA approves the SIP 

revision. 78 FR 78801–78802. 

that will be enforceable. Voluntary 

measures may not be widely 

implemented and, thus, cannot be relied 

on to ensure prompt emission 

reductions to correct a violation. We 

also proposed to exclude from use in 

determining whether or not Pagosa 

Springs continues to attain the 24-hour 

PM10 NAAQS exceedances of the 24- 

hour PM10 NAAQS that were recorded 

at the Pagosa Springs PM10 monitor on 

March 22, 2009, April 3, 2009, April 5, 

2010, April 28, 2010, April 29, 2010, 

May 11, 2010, and May 22, 2010 

because they meet the criteria for 

exceptional events caused by high wind 

natural events. In addition, we proposed 

to approve the revised maintenance 

plan’s 2021 transportation conformity 

MVEB for PM10 of 946 lbs/day. 

We received no comments regarding 

our proposed actions and are finalizing 

those actions as proposed. For further 

details regarding the bases for our 

actions, please see our NPR at 78 FR 

78797 (December 27, 2013). 

II. Final Action 

We are approving the revised Pagosa 

Springs PM10 Maintenance Plan that 

was submitted to us on March 31, 2010, 

with one exception. We are 

disapproving ‘‘voluntary coal and/or 

wood burning curtailment’’ as a 

potential contingency measure in 

section 5.F.3 of the revised Pagosa 

Springs PM10 Maintenance Plan. We are 

approving the remainder of the revised 

maintenance plan because it 

demonstrates maintenance through 2021 

as required by CAA section 175A(b), 

retains the control measures from the 

initial PM10 maintenance plan that EPA 

approved on June 15, 2001, and meets 

other CAA requirements for a section 

175A maintenance plan. We are 

excluding from use in determining that 

Pagosa Springs continues to attain the 

24-hour PM10 NAAQS exceedances of 

the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS that were 

recorded at the Pagosa Springs PM10

monitor on March 22, 2009, April 3, 

2009, April 5, 2010, April 28, 2010, 

April 29, 2010, May 11, 2010, and May 

22, 2010 because they meet the criteria 

for exceptional events caused by high 

wind natural events. We are also 

approving the revised maintenance 

plan’s 2021 transportation conformity 

MVEB for PM10 of 946 lbs/day.

1

III. Statutory and Executive Orders 

Review 

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. 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 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 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 May 9, 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. This action may 

not be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See CAA 

section 307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile Organic 

Compounds. 

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

Dated: February 20, 2014. 

Shaun L. McGrath, 

Regional Administrator, Region 8. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended to read 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 G—Colorado 

■ 2. Section 52.332 is amended by 

adding paragraph (t) to read as follows: 

§ 52.332 Control strategy: Particulate 

matter. 

* * * * * 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
13258 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 46 / Monday, March 10, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

(t) Revisions to the Colorado State 

Implementation Plan, Final Revised 

PM10 Maintenance Plan for the Pagosa 

Springs Attainment/Maintenance Area, 

as adopted by the Colorado Air Quality 

Control Commission on November 19, 

2009, and submitted by the Governor’s 

designee on March 31, 2010. The 

revised maintenance plan satisfies all 

applicable requirements of the Clean Air 

Act. 

[FR Doc. 2014–05009 Filed 3–7–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

49 CFR Parts 573, 577, and 579 

[Docket No. NHTSA—2012–0068; Notice 4] 

RIN 2127–AK72 

Early Warning Reporting, Foreign 

Defect Reporting, and Motor Vehicle 

and Equipment Recall Regulations 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of Availability of 

Technical Specifications for Vehicle 

Identification Number (VIN) Look-up 

Interface. 

SUMMARY: On January 22, 2014, NHTSA 

held a public meeting to review and 

discuss the technical specifications that 

vehicle manufacturers will need in 

order to support the VIN-based safety 

recalls look-up tool that will be housed 

on the NHTSA Web site 

www.safercar.gov. Numerous members 

of the auto industry, as well as 

consumer advocacy groups, vehicle 

history service providers, and others 

attended. This notice announces the 

availability of the final technical 

specification for the VIN interface. 

DATES: March 10, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Previously submitted 

comments and petitions for 

reconsideration can be found in the 

docket. 

For access to the docket to read 

background documents or comments 

received, go to http://

www.regulations.gov and follow the 

online instructions for accessing the 

docket. You may also visit DOT’s 

Docket Management Facility, 1200 New 

Jersey Avenue SE., West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590–0001 for on-line 

access to the docket. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jennifer Timian, Chief, Recall 

Management Division, National 

Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 

telephone 202–366–0209, email 

jennifer.timian@dot.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 

20, 2013, NHTSA published a final rule 

requiring certain vehicle manufacturers 

to allow the secure electronic transfer of 

manufacturer recall data to NHTSA 

when a consumer submits VIN 

information to the agency’s Web site for 

purposes of learning vehicle recall 

information. See 78 FR 51382, 51401. 

This requirement applies to 

manufacturers who manufacture 25,000 

light vehicles annually or 5,000 

motorcycles annually. Further 

information about the requirement to 

transfer recall data to NHTSA based 

upon a consumer’s VIN may be found in 

the August 20, 2013 final rule. 

In the final rule, NHTSA committed 

to hosting a public meeting to discuss 

the technical specification that would 

facilitate the secure transfer of recall 

information. That public meeting was 

held on January 22, 2014, and was 

attended by vehicle manufacturers, 

equipment manufacturers, industry 

trade groups, safety advocates, vehicle 

history report providers, and members 

of the public. NHTSA reviewed a VIN 

look-up tool technical specification 

document it previously made available 

to the public for discussion at the 

meeting, and attendees offered their 

commentary and suggestions, asked 

questions, and sought clarification on 

various points. 

Based on the information we received 

from the public meeting, as well as our 

review of the specifications, we have 

adjusted the technical specifications 

and are making available the final 

technical specifications. We note that 

these technical specifications may 

change to address problems, issues or 

difficulties that arise from time-to-time 

during the operation of the VIN-look-up 

tool. In those situations, the agency will 

provide notice of its remedies to 

covered manufacturers through EWR 

and place the technical specifications 

on the agency’s Web site, 

www.safercar.gov. 

The following summarizes the public 

meeting: 

1. Several manufacturers voiced 

concern regarding server maintenance 

scheduling and the technical 

specifications’ instruction for 

manufacturers to provide information 

about scheduled server maintenance 

times to NHTSA. Manufacturers were 

concerned these set times would not 

offer enough flexibility to properly 

maintain their servers. Also, some 

manufacturers questioned how often 

their systems were allowed to be off-line 

for maintenance. The original technical 

specifications document did not specify 

how often a manufacturer’s servers must 

be available for VIN look-up searches. 

With the revised technical 

specifications we are announcing today, 

we are discarding defined maintenance 

windows in favor of a performancebased requirement. This new 

requirement is intended to ensure 

manufacturers’ servers are available to 

report recall results with regularity and 

during time frames when U.S. users can 

be expected to send inquiries through 

our Web site. We have devised a 

specific error code to be used if and 

when a manufacturer’s servers are 

unable to accept a request so that we 

can monitor and track performance, and 

that will also report out a message to the 

user that the search cannot be 

completed at that time, and to try again 

at another time. 

2. Some manufacturers suggested that 

the technical specifications contain 

optional fields to include their 

manufacturer-assigned recall numbers 

and their contact information (such as 

toll-free numbers and Web site 

information) for display on any recall 

results shown on NHTSA’s VIN look-up 

tool. NHTSA has amended its technical 

specifications document to add optional 

data fields to support the transfer of this 

information. 

3. Some manufacturers noted 

inconsistencies between the information 

required to be provided on the 

manufacturer’s Web site (or that of a 

third party to whom consumers are 

redirected), See 49 CFR 573.15, and 

NHTSA’s VIN look-up tool. We have 

updated the technical specifications to 

ensure consistency between the two 

notification systems. 

4. Also discussed were the measures 

for ensuring the secure transfer of 

information between a manufacturer 

and the agency. Consistent with the 

final rule, the technical specifications 

required use of SSL and unique API 

keys to ensure VIN requests and 

responses are encrypted adequately. Use 

of SSL and unique API keys is 

consistent with standard security 

practices. As noted in the earlier 

technical specifications, NHTSA will 

also validate VIN requests by requiring 

a CAPTCHA, or similar user validation, 

before contacting manufacturer servers 

for VIN results. 

Manufacturers with early warning 

reporting (EWR) accounts may obtain a 

copy of the VIN look-up interface 

technical specifications through the 

agency’s Web site. To obtain the 

technical specifications, these 

manufacturers can use their EWR 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES