Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 191 / Friday, October 2, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 59611 

is therefore not subject to review by the 

Office of Management and Budget. In 

addition, this action does not impose 

any enforceable duty or contain any 

unfunded mandate as described in the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

(Pub. L. 104–4), or require prior 

consultation with State officials as 

specified by Executive Order 12875 (58 

FR 58093, October 28, 1993), or involve 

special consideration of environmental 

justice related issues as required by 

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, 

February 16, 1994). 

Because this action is not subject to 

notice-and-comment requirements 

under the Administrative Procedure Act 

or any other statute, it is not subject to 

the provisions of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) 

Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) as added 

by the Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, the 

EPA will submit a report containing this 

rule and other required information to 

the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 

Representatives and the Comptroller 

General of the General Accounting 

Office prior to publication of this rule in 

the Federal Register. This rule 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, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: September 14, 2015. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

Accordingly, 40 CFR part 52 is 

corrected by making the following 

correcting amendments: 

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 52.220 is amended by: 

■ a. Revising paragraph (c)(168)(i)(A)(7); 

and 

■ b. Revising paragraph (c)(457)(i)(C). 

The revised text reads as follows: 

§ 52.220 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(168) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(A) * * * 

(7) Previously approved on February 

3, 1987 in paragraph (c)(168)(i)(A)(1) of 

this section and now deleted with 

replacement in paragraph 

(c)(457)(i)(C)(1): Rule 101 ‘‘Title’’ and 

Rule 102 ‘‘Definitions’’, except for the 

following definitions from existing SIP 

BCAPCD Rule 102: ‘‘approved ignition 

devices,’’ ‘‘open out-door fire’’, 

‘‘permissive burn day,’’ ‘‘range 

improvement burning,’’ ‘‘submerged fill 

pipe,’’ and ‘‘vapor recovery system.’’. 

* * * * * 

(457) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(C) Butte County Air Quality 

Management District. 

(1) Rule 101, ‘‘Definitions,’’ amended 

on April 24, 2014. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2015–24953 Filed 10–1–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2015–0513; FRL–9934–98– 

Region 7] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; State of 

Missouri, Limited Maintenance Plan for 

the St. Louis Nonclassifiable 

Maintenance Area for the 8-Hour 

Carbon Monoxide 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 relating to the 

Limited Maintenance Plan for the St. 

Louis area for the 8-Hour Carbon 

Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard (NAAQS). On April 8, 

2014, the Missouri Department of 

Natural Resources (MDNR) submitted to 

EPA a second 10-year maintenance plan 

for the St. Louis area for the CO 

NAAQS. This maintenance plan 

addresses maintenance of the CO 

NAAQS for a second 10-year period 

beyond the original redesignation. In 

accordance with the requirements of the 

Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA is approving 

the revision because the State 

adequately demonstrates that the St. 

Louis Maintenance area will maintain 

air quality standards for CO through the 

year 2022. 

DATES: This direct final rule will be 

effective December 1, 2015, without 

further notice, unless EPA receives 

adverse comment by November 2, 2015. 

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–2015–0513, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: brown.steven@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or Hand Delivery: Steven 

Brown, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Air Planning and Development 

Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard, 

Lenexa, Kansas 66219. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2015– 

0513. 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/commentingepa-dockets. The www.regulations.gov 

Web site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ 

system, which means EPA will not 

know your identity or contact 

information unless you provide it in the 

body of your comment. If you send an 

email comment directly to EPA without 

going through www.regulations.gov, 

your email address will be 

automatically captured and included as 

part of the comment that is placed in the 

public docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, EPA recommends that you 

include your name and other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
59612 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 191 / Friday, October 2, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

comment. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters, any form 

of encryption, and be free of any defects 

or viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the www.regulations.gov 

index. 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, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically in 

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 

through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., 

excluding legal holidays. The interested 

persons wanting to examine these 

documents should make an 

appointment with the office at least 24 

hours in advance. 

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 being addressed in this document? 

II. What is the background for this action? 

III. Have the requirements for approval of a 

SIP revision been met? 

IV. Evaluation of Missouri’s Submittal 

V. Transportation and General Conformity 

VI. What action is EPA taking? 

I. What is being addressed in this 

document? 

The EPA is taking direct final action 

to approve revisions to the SIP 

submitted by the State of Missouri 

relating to the Limited Maintenance 

Plan for the St. Louis area for the 8-hour 

CO NAAQS. 

Eight years after an area is 

redesignated to attainment, CAA section 

175A(b) requires the state to submit a 

subsequent maintenance plan to EPA, 

covering a second 10-year period. This 

maintenance plan must demonstrate 

continued compliance with the NAAQS 

during this second 10-year period. 

On April 8, 2014, the MDNR 

submitted to EPA a second 10-year 

maintenance plan for the St. Louis area 

for the CO NAAQS and requested that 

EPA approve this revision as meeting 

the CAA section 175A requirements. 

This maintenance plan addresses 

maintenance of the CO NAAQS for a 

second 10-year period beyond the 

original redesignation. 

This revision to Missouri’s SIP does 

not have an adverse effect on air quality 

and EPA’s approval of this SIP revision 

is being done in accordance with the 

requirements of the CAA. 

II. What is the background for this 

action? 

Under section 107(d)(1)(C) of the Act, 

any area designated before the date of 

enactment of the CAA Amendments of 

1990 was to be designated upon 

enactment by operation of law. CO 

nonattainment areas that had not 

violated the CO standard in either year 

for the two-year period 1988–1989 were 

to be designated nonattainment and 

identified as ‘‘not classified’’ 

nonattainment areas. Accordingly, 

because the St. Louis area had not 

violated the standard in the 1988–1989 

period, on November 6, 1991, the St. 

Louis area was designated 

nonattainment for the CO NAAQS and 

identified as ‘‘not classified’’ on 

November 6, 1991 (56 FR 56786). 

On June 13, 1997, the State requested 

EPA to redesignate the St. Louis 

nonattainment area to attainment and 

submitted a limited maintenance plan to 

demonstrate maintenance of the 

standard for a 10-year period. EPA 

published approval of the redesignation 

request and maintenance plan on 

January 26, 1999 (64 FR 3855). The State 

has maintained the standard since and 

recently submitted a second 10-year 

maintenance plan to EPA on April 8, 

2014. 

An areas design value (DV) for the 8- 

hour CO NAAQS is calculated by 

finding the second maximum 8 hour 

average value at each monitor, for each 

year, for two years. The higher second 

maximum is used as the areas DV and 

the 8-hour CO standard is attained when 

the daily average 8-hour CO 

concentration of 9.0 parts per million 

(ppm) is not exceeded more than once 

a year. 

Since the redesignation of the St. 

Louis area to attainment for CO on 

January 26, 1999, the second highest 

concentration in any calendar year 

measured by the EPA approved 

monitoring network was 5.7 ppm, 

which is less than 9.0 ppm. 

In addition, areas that can 

demonstrate design values at or below 

7.65 ppm (85 percent of the 9.0 ppm CO 

NAAQS) for 8 consecutive quarters may 

use a limited maintenance plan option. 

The State has opted to develop a limited 

maintenance plan to fulfill the second 

10-year maintenance plan required by 

the CAA. The base year in the State’s 

second 10-year maintenance plan is 

2008, which has a design value of 2.8 

ppm. EPA also reviewed air quality 

monitoring data (2011–2012) and the 8- 

hour CO design value for the St. Louis 

area is 1.8 ppm. Thus, the area is well 

below the 7.65 ppm (85 percent of the 

9.0 ppm CO NAAQS) for 8 consecutive 

quarters and qualifies to use the limited 

maintenance plan option. 

III. Have the requirements for approval 

of a SIP revision been met? 

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. Evaluation of Missouri’s Submittal 

EPA has reviewed the St. Louis area 

second 10-year CO maintenance plan 

and concludes that the submittal meets 

the requirements of section 175A(b) of 

the Act. The following is a summary of 

the requirements and EPA’s evaluation 

of how each requirement is met. 

A. Base Year Emissions Inventory 

The plan must contain an attainment 

year emissions inventory to identify a 

level of emissions in the area which is 

sufficient to attain the CO NAAQS. The 

St. Louis area second 10-year CO 

maintenance plan contains an emissions 

inventory for the base year 2008 that is 

consistent with EPA’s most recent 

guidance on maintenance plan emission 

inventories. The emissions inventory is 

a list, by source, of the air contaminants 

directly emitted into the St. Louis area. 

The data in the emissions inventory is 

based on calculations using emission 

factors, which is a method for 

converting source activity levels into an 

estimate of emissions contributions for 

those sources. Because violations of the 

CO NAAQS are most likely to occur on 

winter weekdays, the inventory 

prepared is in a ‘‘typical winter day’’ 

format. The table below shows the tons 

of CO emitted per winter day in 2008 by 

source category. 

County Source category 

CO 

Emissions 

(tons per 

winter day) 

St. Louis ....... Point Sources ... 17.26 

St. Louis ....... Area Sources .... 70.26 

St. Louis ....... On Road Mobile 532.42 

St. Louis ....... Off Road Mobile 250.48 

St. Louis ....... Total .......... 870.42 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 191 / Friday, October 2, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 59613 

B. Demonstration of Maintenance 

The maintenance plan demonstration 

requirement is considered to be satisfied 

for areas using the limited maintenance 

plan option, which are required to 

demonstrate design values at or below 

7.65 ppm (85 percent of the 9.0 ppm CO 

NAAQS) for 8 consecutive quarters. The 

State has opted to develop a limited 

maintenance plan to fulfill the St. Louis 

area second 10-year maintenance plan 

required by the CAA. 

With the limited maintenance plan 

option, there is no requirement to 

project emissions of air quality over the 

maintenance period. EPA believes that 

if the area begins the maintenance 

period at, or below, 85 percent of the 9.0 

ppm of the CO 8-hour NAAQS, the 

applicability of prevention of significant 

deterioration requirements, the control 

measures already in the SIP, and 

Federal measures, should provide 

adequate assurance of maintenance over 

the 10-year maintenance period. The 

last monitored exceedance occurred in 

1994 and previous to that, 1987. The St. 

Louis area met the requirements for the 

Limited Maintenance Plan option in the 

original redesignation and maintenance 

plan approval in 1999. The design value 

at that time (1994–1995) was 5.7 ppm 

and the monitored CO levels have been 

steadily in decline ever since. The 8- 

hour CO design value for the St. Louis 

area is 1.8 ppm based on 2011–2012 

data, which is below the limited 

maintenance plan requirement of 7.65 

ppm. Therefore, the St. Louis area has 

adequately demonstrated that it will 

maintain the CO NAAQS into the 

future. 

C. Monitoring Network and Verification 

of Continued Attainment 

To verify the attainment status of the 

area over the maintenance period, the 

maintenance plan should contain 

provisions for continued operation of an 

appropriate, EPA-approved monitoring 

network in accordance with 40 CFR part 

58. The State has an approved 

monitoring network that includes the St. 

Louis area. The monitoring network was 

most recently approved by EPA on 

October 23, 2014. In the St. Louis 

second 10-year CO maintenance plan, 

MDNR commits to verify continued 

attainment through the EPA-approved 

monitoring network in accordance with 

40 CFR part 58. 

D. Contingency Plan 

Section 175A(d) of the Act requires 

that a maintenance plan include 

contingency provisions. The St. Louis 

second 10-year CO limited maintenance 

plan contains a contingency plan that 

would institute lowering CO limits on 

existing rules that control CO emissions. 

The contingency plan is triggered either 

when (Level I) an exceedance of the 8 

hour CO standard is recorded on any 

monitor, or (Level II) when a violation 

occurs at any monitor CO monitoring 

stations in the nonattainment area. EPA 

finds that the contingency measures 

provided in the maintenance plan are 

adequate to ensure prompt correction of 

a violation. 

V. Transportation and General 

Conformity 

Transportation conformity is required 

by section 176(c) of the CAA. EPA’s 

conformity rule requires that 

transportation plans, programs, and 

projects that are funded under 23 U.S.C. 

or the Federal Transit Act conform to 

SIPs. Conformity to a SIP means that 

transportation activities will not 

produce new air quality violations, 

worsen existing violations, or delay 

timely attainment of the NAAQS. The 

transportation conformity rule (40 CFR 

parts 51 and 93) and the general 

conformity rule (40 CFR parts 51 and 

93) apply to nonattainment areas and 

maintenance areas covered by an 

approved maintenance plan. Under 

either conformity rule, an acceptable 

method of demonstrating that a Federal 

action conforms to the applicable SIP is 

to demonstrate that expected emissions 

from the planned action are consistent 

with the emissions budget for the area. 

While EPA’s limited maintenance plan 

option does not exempt an area from the 

need to affirm conformity, it explains 

that the area may demonstrate 

conformity without submitting an 

emissions budget. Under the limited 

maintenance plan option, emissions 

budgets are essentially treated as not 

constraining for the length of the 

maintenance period because it is 

unreasonable to expect that the 

qualifying areas would experience so 

much growth in that period that a 

violation of the CO NAAQS would 

result. Similarly, Federal actions subject 

to the general conformity rule could be 

considered to satisfy the ‘‘budget test’’ 

specified in section 93.158(a)(5)(i)(A) for 

the same reasons that the budgets are 

essentially considered to be unlimited. 

While areas with maintenance plans 

approved under the limited 

maintenance plan option are not subject 

to the budget test, the areas remain 

subject to other transportation 

conformity requirements of 40 CFR part 

93, subpart A. Thus, the metropolitan 

planning organization (MPO) in the area 

or the State must document and ensure 

that: 

a. Transportation plans and projects 

provide for timely implementation of 

SIP transportation control measures in 

accordance with 40 CFR 93.113; 

b. Transportation plans and projects 

comply with the fiscal constraint 

element per 40 CFR 93.108; 

c. The MPO’s interagency 

consultation procedures meet applicable 

requirements of 40 CFR 93.105; 

d. Conformity of transportation plans 

is determined no less frequently than 

every four years, and conformity of plan 

amendments and transportation projects 

is demonstrated in accordance with the 

timing requirements specified in 40 CFR 

93.104; 

e. The latest planning assumptions 

and emissions model are used as set 

forth in 40 CFR 93.110 and 40 CFR 

93.111; 

f. Projects do not cause or contribute 

to any new localized CO or particulate 

matter violations, in accordance with 

procedures specified in 40 CFR 93.123; 

and 

g. Project sponsors and/or operators 

provide written commitments as 

specified in 40 CFR 93.125. 

The MPO and lead transportation 

agency in St. Louis is the East-West 

Gateway Council of Governments 

(EWG). EWG oversees transportation 

conformity determinations of the 

Interagency Consultation Committee 

established in Missouri Administrative 

Rule 10 CSR 10–5.480, which includes 

MDNR, the Missouri Transportation 

Department, the Federal Highway 

Administration, Federal Transit 

Administration, City of St. Louis 

Department of Health, St. Louis County 

Department of Health, St. Louis County 

Department of Highways and the EPA; 

as specified under 40 CFR part 93. St. 

Louis is currently meeting the 

requirements under 40 CFR part 93, 

subpart A. 

VI. 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 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
59614 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 191 / Friday, October 2, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

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 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 December 1, 

2015. 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: September 21, 2015. 

Mark Hague, 

Acting 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. 

Subpart AA—Missouri 

■ 2. Section 52.1320(e) is amended by 

adding new entry (67) 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 area 

or Nonattainment 

area 

State submittal 

date 

EPA approval 

date Explanation 

*******

(67) Missouri 8-Hour CO Second Ten year Limited Maintenance Plan. .......................................................................... St. Louis 4/8/14 10/2/15, [Insert 

FEDERAL REGISTER

citation] 

EPA–R07–OAR– 

2015–0513; FRL– 

9934–98-Region 

7] 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 191 / Friday, October 2, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 59615 

[FR Doc. 2015–25037 Filed 10–1–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2015–0470; FRL–9934–91– 

Region 3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania; 

Approval of the Base Year Emissions 

Inventory for the Liberty-Clairton 

Nonattainment Area for the 2006 24- 

Hour Fine Particulate Matter Standard 

and Approval of Transportation 

Conformity Insignificance Findings for 

the 1997 Annual and 2006 24-Hour Fine 

Particulate Matter Standards for the 

Liberty-Clairton Nonattainment Area 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is taking direct final 

action to approve two revisions to the 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 

(Pennsylvania) State Implementation 

Plan (SIP). The first revision consists of 

the 2007 base year emissions inventory 

for the Liberty-Clairton nonattainment 

area (hereafter ‘‘the Liberty-Clairton 

Area’’ or ‘‘the Area’’) with respect the 

2006 24-hour fine particulate matter 

(PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality 

Standard (NAAQS or standard). The 

second revision consists of 

insignificance findings for the mobile 

source contribution of PM2.5 and 

nitrogen oxides (NOX) emissions for the 

Liberty-Clairton Area for both the 1997 

annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5

standards. EPA is approving the 2007 

base year emissions inventory for the 

Liberty-Clairton Area for the 2006 24- 

hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Furthermore, EPA 

is finding the motor vehicle emission 

inventories adequate for transportation 

conformity purposes and is approving 

the insignificance findings for the 

mobile source contribution of PM2.5 and 

NOX emissions for the Liberty-Clairton 

Area for both the 1997 annual and 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 standards. EPA is 

approving these revisions in accordance 

with the requirements of the Clean Air 

Act (CAA). 

DATES: This rule is effective on 

December 1, 2015 without further 

notice, unless EPA receives adverse 

written comment by November 2, 2015. 

If EPA receives such comments, it will 

publish a timely withdrawal of the 

direct final rule in the Federal Register 

and inform the public that the rule will 

not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R03–OAR–2015–0470 by one of the 

following methods: 

A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

B. Email: Fernandez.cristina@epa.gov. 

C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2015–0470, 

Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director, 

Office of Air Program Planning, 

Mailcode 3AP30, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 

Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

19103. 

D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2015– 

0470. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received 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 information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI, or otherwise 

protected, through www.regulations.gov 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through www.regulations.gov, your 

email address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the 

comment that is placed in the public 

docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, EPA recommends that you 

include your name and other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. 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: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. 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 in www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy during normal business 

hours at the Air Protection Division, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

Copies of the State submittal are 

available at the Pennsylvania 

Department of Environmental 

Protection, Bureau of Air Quality 

Control, P.O. Box 8468, 400 Market 

Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105; 

and at the Allegheny County Health 

Department, Bureau of Environmental 

Quality, Division of Air Quality, 301 

39th Street, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 

15201. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Emlyn Ve ́lez-Rosa, (215) 814–2038, or 

by email at velez-rosa.emlyn@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 

21, 2013, the Commonwealth 

Pennsylvania submitted, on behalf of 

Allegheny County, a formal revision to 

its SIP. The SIP revision consisted of the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS attainment 

plan for the Liberty-Clairton Area, 

which included among other things, an 

attainment demonstration, a 2007 base 

year emissions inventory, a reasonably 

available control measures (RACM) 

analysis, and a description of 

contingency measures. On July 31, 2014, 

the SIP revision was supplemented to 

include additional information 

regarding control measures as part of the 

attainment demonstration and 

insignificance findings for 

transportation conformity purposes for 

both the 1997 and 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS. 

Today’s action only pertains to the 

approval of the 2007 base year 

emissions inventory to satisfy the 

requirement of section 172(c)(3) of the 

CAA and the transportation conformity 

insignificance findings to satisfy EPA’s 

requirements at 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and 

40 CFR 93.109(f). 

I. Background 

On July 16, 1997, EPA established an 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS at 15.0 

micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m3) 

(hereafter referred to as ‘‘the 1997 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS’’), based on a 3- 

year average of annual mean PM2.5

concentrations (62 FR 38652, July 18, 

1997). At that time, EPA also 

established a 24-hour standard of 65 mg/ 

m3 (hereafter referred to as ‘‘the 1997 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES