29352 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2013–0794; FRL–9911–24– 

Region 4] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Kentucky; 

Stage II Requirements for Hertz 

Corporation Facility at Cincinnati/

Northern Kentucky International 

Airport in Boone County 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is taking final action to 

approve a source-specific State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 

submitted to EPA by the 

Commonwealth of Kentucky, through 

the Kentucky Division for Air Quality 

(KDAQ) on January 17, 2014, for the 

purpose of exempting a Hertz 

Corporation facility from the Clean Air 

Act (CAA or Act) Stage II vapor control 

requirements. The subject Hertz 

Corporation facility is currently being 

constructed at the Cincinnati/Northern 

Kentucky International Airport in Boone 

County, Kentucky. EPA’s approval of 

this revision to Kentucky’s SIP is based 

on the December 12, 2006, EPA policy 

memorandum from Stephen D. Page, 

entitled ‘‘Removal of Stage II Vapor 

Recovery in Situations Where 

Widespread Use of Onboard Refueling 

Vapor Recovery is Demonstrated.’’ This 

action is being taken pursuant to the 

CAA. 

DATES: This rule will be effective June 

23, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket 

Identification No. EPA–R04–OAR– 

2013–0794. 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., Confidential Business 

Information 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 Regulatory Development Section, 

Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30 

excluding Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

information regarding this source 

specific SIP revision, contact Ms. Kelly 

Sheckler, Air Quality Modeling and 

Transportation Section, Air Planning 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Ms. 

Sheckler’s telephone number is (404) 

562–9222; email address: 

sheckler.kelly@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

Under the CAA Amendments of 1990, 

EPA designated and classified three 

Kentucky Counties (Boone, Campbell 

and Kenton) and four Ohio Counties 

(Butler, Clermont, Hamilton and 

Warren) (collectively referred to as the 

‘‘Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky Area’’) 

as a ‘‘moderate’’ nonattainment area for 

the 1-hour ozone national ambient air 

quality standards (NAAQS). See 56 FR 

56694, effective January 6, 1992. The 

designation was based on the Area’s 1- 

hour ozone design value of 0.157 parts 

per million for the three year period of 

1988–1990. 

Pursuant to the requirements of 

section 182(b)(3) of the CAA, KDAQ 

developed the Kentucky Administrative 

Regulation (KAR) 401 KAR 59:174 Stage 

II controls at gasoline dispensing 

facilities, and submitted the rule to EPA 

for approval as part of Kentucky’s ozone 

SIP. The rule was adopted by Kentucky 

on January 12, 1998, and approved by 

EPA into the SIP on December 8, 1998. 

See 63 FR 675896. Under this 

regulation, gasoline dispensing facilities 

with a monthly throughput of 25,000 

gallons or more located in a Kentucky 

County in which the entire County is 

classified as severe, serious, or moderate 

nonattainment for ozone are required to 

install Stage II vapor recovery systems. 

On October 29, 1999, KDAQ 

submitted to EPA an ozone maintenance 

plan and request for redesignation to 

attainment for the Kentucky portion of 

the Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky Area. 

At that time the Kentucky portion of the 

Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky Area had 

three years of attaining data (1996–1998) 

and Kentucky had implemented all 

measures then required by the CAA for 

a moderate 1-hour ozone nonattainment 

area. The maintenance plan, as required 

under section 175A of the CAA, showed 

that nitrogen oxides and volatile organic 

compounds (VOC) emissions in the 

Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati/

Northern Kentucky Area would remain 

below the 1990 ‘‘attainment year’s’’ 

levels. In making these projections, 

KDAQ factored in the emissions benefit 

(primarily VOC) of the Kentucky portion 

of the Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky 

Area’s Stage II program, and did not 

remove this program from the Kentucky 

SIP. The redesignation request and 

maintenance plan were approved by 

EPA, effective June 19, 2000 (65 FR 

37879). Since the Kentucky Stage II 

program was already in place and had 

been included in the Commonwealth’s 

October 29, 1999, redesignation request 

and 1-hour ozone maintenance plan for 

the Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati/ 

Northern Kentucky Area, KDAQ elected 

not to remove the program from the SIP 

at that time. 

On April 6, 1994, EPA promulgated 

regulations requiring the phase-in of 

onboard refueling vapor recovery 

(ORVR) systems on new motor vehicles. 

Under section 202(a)(6) of the CAA, 

moderate ozone nonattainment areas are 

not required to implement Stage II vapor 

recovery programs after promulgation of 

ORVR standards. 

KDAQ submitted a SIP revision on 

January 17, 2014, to exempt Stage II 

vapor control requirements for the Hertz 

Corporation facility located at the 

Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky 

International Airport in Boone County. 

On February 14, 2014, EPA published a 

proposed rulemaking to approve 

Kentucky’s January 17, 2014, SIP 

revision related to Stage II requirements 

at the Hertz Corporation facility. 

Detailed background for today’s final 

rulemaking can be found in EPA’s 

February 14, 2014, proposed 

rulemaking. See 79 FR 8923. The 

comment period for this proposed 

rulemaking closed on March 17, 2014. 

EPA did not receive any comments, 

adverse or otherwise, during the public 

comment period. 

II. Final Action 

EPA is taking final action to approve 

the aforementioned source-specific SIP 

revision request from Kentucky. VOC 

emissions from vehicles at the 

Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky 

International Airport Hertz Corporation 

facility are controlled by ORVR, 

therefore, EPA has concluded that 

removal of Stage II requirements at this 

facility would not result in an increase 

of VOC emissions, and thus would not 

contribute to ozone formation. The 

Commonwealth has requested removal 

of this requirement for this facility and 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 29353 

EPA has determined that Kentucky has 

fully satisfied the requirements of 

section 110(l) of the CAA. Therefore, 

EPA is taking final action to approve 

this source-specific SIP revision, as 

being consistent with section 110 of the 

CAA. 

III. 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 (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 CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by July 21, 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 section 

307(b)(2). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: May 9, 2014. 

Heather McTeer Toney, 

Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart S—Kentucky 

■ 2. Section 52.920(c) is amended, 

under Table 1, by revising the entry for 

‘‘401 KAR 59:174’’ to read as follows: 

§ 52.920 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

TABLE 1—EPA-APPROVED KENTUCKY REGULATIONS

State citation Title/Subject State effective 

date EPA Approval date Explanation 

*******

Chapter 59 New Source Standards 

*******

401 KAR 59:174 ............ Stage II controls at gasoline dispensing facilities.01/17/14 05/22/2014 [Insert citation of publication].Exemption from Stage II vapor control requirements for rental fleet vehicle refueling at the 

Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International 

Airport Enterprise Holdings, Inc., facility and 

Hertz Corporation facility. 

*******

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

29354 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 99 / Thursday, May 22, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2014–11781 Filed 5–21–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R06–OAR–2014–0380; FRL–9911–25– 

Region 6] 

Finding of Failure To Submit a 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

State Implementation Plan Revision for 

Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 

Micrometers (PM2.5); Arkansas 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is finding that the State 

of Arkansas has not made a necessary 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD) State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

submission to address the PSD 

permitting of PM2.5 emissions, as 

required by the Clean Air Act (CAA). 

Specifically, the EPA is determining 

that Arkansas has not submitted a SIP 

revision to address the PM2.5 PSD 

increments and implementing 

regulations as promulgated by EPA on 

October 20, 2010. The deadline for the 

State to make the required submittal 

was July 20, 2012. The CAA requires 

EPA to promulgate a Federal 

Implementation Plan (FIP) to address 

the outstanding PSD SIP elements by no 

later than 24 months after the effective 

date of this finding. EPA is making this 

finding in accordance with section 110 

and part C of the CAA. 

DATES: The effective date of this rule is 

May 22, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Adina Wiley, Air permits Section (6PD– 

R), Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 

1200, Dallas, TX 75202–2733. The 

telephone number is (214) 665–2115. 

Ms. Wiley can also be reached via 

electronic mail at wiley.adina@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 

553 of the Administrative Procedures 

Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), provides 

that, when an agency for good cause 

finds that notice and public procedure 

are impracticable, unnecessary, or 

contrary to the public interest, the 

agency may issue a rule without 

providing notice and an opportunity for 

public comment. The EPA has 

determined that there is good cause for 

making this rule final without prior 

proposal and opportunity for comment 

because no significant EPA judgment is 

involved in making a finding of failure 

to submit SIPs, or elements of SIPs, 

required by the CAA, where states have 

made no submissions to meet the 

requirement. No additional fact 

gathering is necessary. Thus, notice and 

public procedure are unnecessary. 

Furthermore, providing notice and 

comment would be impracticable 

because of the limited time provided 

under the CAA for making such 

determinations. EPA believes that 

because of the limited time provided to 

make findings of failure to submit 

regarding SIP submissions, Congress did 

not intend such findings to be subject to 

notice-and-comment rulemaking. 

Finally, notice and comment would be 

contrary to the public interest because it 

would divert Agency resources from the 

critical substantive review of submitted 

SIPs. See 58 FR 51270, 51272, note 17 

(October 1, 1993); 59 FR 39832, 39853 

(August 4, 1994). The EPA finds that 

these constitute good cause under 5 

U.S.C. 553(b)(B). 

EPA has also determined that today’s 

Finding of Failure to Submit for 

Arkansas is effective immediately upon 

publication because this final action 

falls under the good cause exemption in 

5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) of the APA. The 

expedited effective date for this action 

is authorized under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), 

which allows an effective date less than 

30 days after publication ‘‘as otherwise 

provided by the agency for good cause 

found and published with the rule.’’ 

The EPA has determined that there is 

good cause for making this rule effective 

upon publication because the PSD SIP 

element is already overdue and the state 

has been made aware of applicable 

provisions of the CAA relating to 

overdue SIP revisions. The State of 

Arkansas failed to submit a required 

PSD SIP revision by the mandated 

deadline of July 20, 2012. We have 

previously alerted Arkansas through 

meetings that it has failed to make the 

submittal by the deadline. Also on May 

9, 2014, we sent a letter to Arkansas, 

explaining that we were planning to 

take the action we are finalizing today. 

Consequently, the State has been on 

notice that today’s action was pending. 

The State and general public are aware 

of applicable provisions of the CAA that 

relate to failure to submit a required 

implementation plan. In addition, this 

action only starts a 24-month ‘‘clock’’ 

wherein the EPA must promulgate a 

Federal Implementation Plan. 

Furthermore, the purpose of the 30-day 

waiting period prescribed in 5 U.S.C. 

553(d) is to give affected parties a 

reasonable time to prepare before the 

final rule takes effect. Whereas here, the 

affected parties, such as the State of 

Arkansas and sources within the State, 

do not need time to adjust and prepare 

before the Finding of Failure to Submit 

takes effect. After numerous discussions 

with the Arkansas Department of 

Environmental Quality to resolve 

outstanding issues, the EPA has 

determined that moving as 

expeditiously as practicable on this 

finding is in the best interest of the 

implementation of the required PSD 

permitting program. The EPA finds that 

the above reasons support an effective 

date prior to thirty days after the date of 

publication and constitute good cause 

under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). 

Throughout this document wherever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background and Overview 

A. Overview of the PM NAAQS 

Requirements 

B. Revisions to the PSD Program To 

Implement the PM NAAQS 

1. Required Components of the 2008 NSR 

PM2.5 Implementation Rule 

2. Required Components of the 2010 PM2.5

PSD Increment—SILs—SMC Rule 

3. Optional Components of the 2010 PM2.5

PSD Increment—SILs—SMC Rule 

II. Finding of Failure To Submit 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

C Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

(UMRA) 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution or Use 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions 

To Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations 

K. Congressional Review Act 

L. Judicial Review 

I. Background and Overview 

A. Overview of the PM NAAQS 

Requirements 

The EPA initially established National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) for particulate matter (PM) 

under section 109 of the CAA in 1971. 

Since then, the EPA has made a number 

of changes to these standards to reflect 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES