Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of Missouri, 72608-72609 [2013-28947]

Download as PDF 72608 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 232 / Tuesday, December 3, 2013 / Proposed Rules with a written determination that the route is open for public use and that such bicycle use is consistent with the protection of the park area’s natural, scenic and aesthetic values, safety considerations and management objectives, and will not disturb wildlife or park resources. Notice may be provided by posting signs and identifying routes on maps which shall be available in the office of the Superintendent and on the park’s Web site. (3) The Superintendent may open or close designated bicycle routes, or portions thereof, or impose conditions or restrictions for bicycle use after taking into consideration public health and safety, natural and cultural resource protection, carrying capacity, and other management activities and objectives. (i) The Superintendent will provide public notice of all such actions through one or more of the methods listed in § 1.7 of this chapter. (ii) Violating a closure, condition, or restriction is prohibited. Dated: November 20, 2013. Rachel Jacobson, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks. [FR Doc. 2013–28894 Filed 12–2–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4312–EJ–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R07–OAR–2013–0698; FRL–9903–73– Region 7] Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of Missouri Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: EPA is proposing to approve a revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the State of Missouri which revises the written reporting requirements for maintenance, start-up, or shutdown activities; updates the information a source operator must provide to the department when a notice of excess emissions is received; and corrects references in the reporting and record keeping section. DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 2, 2014. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07– OAR–2013–0698, by one of the following methods: emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:28 Dec 02, 2013 Jkt 232001 1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. 2. Email: bhesania.amy@epa.gov. 3. Mail or Hand Delivery or Courier: Amy Bhesania, 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–2013– 0698. 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, e.g., 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. 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. EPA requests that you contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The interested persons PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 wanting to examine these documents should make an appointment with the office at least 24 hours in advance. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amy Bhesania, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at (913) 551–7147, or by email at bhesania.amy@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. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met? III. What action is EPA taking? I. What is being addressed in this document? EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Missouri SIP submitted to EPA on July 8, 2010 which amend 10 CSR 10– 6.050 Start-up, Shutdown, and Malfunction Conditions. Specifically, Missouri amended subsection 3(B) to remove the option for verbal notification and therefore only written notification is allowed for any maintenance, startup, or shutdown activity which is expected to cause an excess release of emissions that exceeds one hour. This change makes the written notification requirements consistent for subsections 3(B) which covers maintenance, start-up and shutdown, and 3(A) which covers malfunctions. Subparagrah 3(B)3 was removed because the requirement was only applicable to malfunctions which is addressed in subsection 3(A). The remaining revisions to the rule are administrative changes which revise the rule to be consistent with the state’s standard rule format or make other minor clarifying changes. Subparagraphs 3(B)3 through 3(B)9 were renumbered to adjust for the removal of item 3(B)3. Subparagraph 3(C)2 includes minor administrative changes to meet the state’s standard rule format. Subparagraph 3(C)2A and 3(C)2B were removed because they were redundant and replaced with references to the appropriate applicable subsections of the rule. Subsection 4(B) was revised to be consistent with the state’s standard rule format. In a separate action on February 22, 2013, EPA has proposed to address a petition by Sierra Club related to SSM provisions, including 10 CSR 10– 6.050(3)(C) (78 FR 12459). In this separate action, EPA proposed to deny the petitioner’s request that EPA take action under Clean Air Act (CAA) section 110 (k)(5) or (6) to direct the E:\FR\FM\03DEP1.SGM 03DEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 232 / Tuesday, December 3, 2013 / Proposed Rules state to revise this provision. The revisions proposed in today’s action do not address the sections of the regulation challenged by the Sierra Club in its petition. The revisions proposed in today’s action clarify and strengthen the Missouri SIP. By removing the option for oral notification in 10 CSR 10–6.050(3)(B), and requiring written notification, the Missouri SIP is more stringent. The revision in 10 CSR 10– 6.050(3)(C)2. A. clarifies the notification requirements for malfunctions by referring to section 10 CSR 10– 6.050(3)(A). The revision in 10 CSR 10– 6.050 (3)(C)2.B. clarifies the general notification requirements for maintenance, startup, or shutdown activities by referring to the general notification requirements set forth in 10 CSR 10–6.050(3)(B). The revisions proposed in today’s action are consistent with CAA requirements for SIP provisions and do not violate the anti-backsliding provisions in section 110(l) or section 193 of the CAA because they are SIP strengthening and do not interfere with any applicable requirements concerning attainment or reasonable further progress nor do they affect control measures in effect prior to the 1990 CAA Amendments related to nonattainment areas. Further, these proposed revisions are consistent with the action proposed by EPA on February 22, 2013 as mentioned above (78 FR 12459). emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS II. 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, as explained above, the revision meets the substantive SIP requirements of the CAA, including section 110 and implementing regulations. III. What action is EPA taking? EPA is proposing to approve the request to amend the Missouri SIP by approving the state’s request to amend 10 CSR 10–6.050 Start-Up, Shutdown, and Malfunction to update written reporting requirements, correct references, and other minor clarifying changes. Approval of these revisions will ensure consistency between state and Federally-approved rules. EPA has determined that these changes will not relax the SIP or adversely impact air emissions. We are processing this as a proposed action because we are soliciting comments on this proposed action. VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:28 Dec 02, 2013 Jkt 232001 72609 Final rulemaking will occur after consideration of any comments. costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 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 proposed 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 proposed 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 (Public Law 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 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. PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Dated: November 20, 2013. Karl Brooks, Regional Administrator, Region 7. [FR Doc. 2013–28947 Filed 12–2–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 62 [EPA–R03–OAR–2013–0164; FRL–9903–75– Region 3] Approval and Promulgation of State Air Quality Plans for Designated Facilities and Pollutants; Commonwealth of Virginia; Control of Emissions From Existing Sewage Sludge Incineration Units Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: EPA is proposing to approve a section plan submitted by the Commonwealth of Virginia for sewage sludge incineration (SSI) units. The section plan contains a state rule for existing SSI units and was submitted as a result of the March 21, 2011 promulgation of Federal new source performance standards (NSPS) and emission guidelines for SSI units. This action is being taken under sections of the Clean Air Act (CAA). DATES: Written comments must be received on or before January 2, 2014. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA– R03–OAR–2013–0164 by one of the following methods: A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. B. Email: cox.kathleen@epa.gov. C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2013–0164, Kathleen Cox, Associate Director, Office of Air Permits and Toxics, Mailcode 3AP10, 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 SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\03DEP1.SGM 03DEP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 232 (Tuesday, December 3, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 72608-72609]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-28947]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2013-0698; FRL-9903-73-Region 7]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of 
Missouri

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a revision to the State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the State of Missouri which 
revises the written reporting requirements for maintenance, start-up, 
or shutdown activities; updates the information a source operator must 
provide to the department when a notice of excess emissions is 
received; and corrects references in the reporting and record keeping 
section.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 2, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2013-0698, by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    2. Email: bhesania.amy@epa.gov.
    3. Mail or Hand Delivery or Courier: Amy Bhesania, 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-
2013-0698. 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, e.g., 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. 
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. EPA requests that you contact the person listed 
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your 
inspection. 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: Amy Bhesania, Environmental Protection 
Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard, 
Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at (913) 551-7147, or by email at 
bhesania.amy@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. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?
III. What action is EPA taking?

I. What is being addressed in this document?

    EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Missouri SIP submitted 
to EPA on July 8, 2010 which amend 10 CSR 10-6.050 Start-up, Shutdown, 
and Malfunction Conditions. Specifically, Missouri amended subsection 
3(B) to remove the option for verbal notification and therefore only 
written notification is allowed for any maintenance, start-up, or 
shutdown activity which is expected to cause an excess release of 
emissions that exceeds one hour. This change makes the written 
notification requirements consistent for subsections 3(B) which covers 
maintenance, start-up and shutdown, and 3(A) which covers malfunctions. 
Subparagrah 3(B)3 was removed because the requirement was only 
applicable to malfunctions which is addressed in subsection 3(A).
    The remaining revisions to the rule are administrative changes 
which revise the rule to be consistent with the state's standard rule 
format or make other minor clarifying changes. Subparagraphs 3(B)3 
through 3(B)9 were renumbered to adjust for the removal of item 3(B)3. 
Subparagraph 3(C)2 includes minor administrative changes to meet the 
state's standard rule format. Subparagraph 3(C)2A and 3(C)2B were 
removed because they were redundant and replaced with references to the 
appropriate applicable subsections of the rule. Subsection 4(B) was 
revised to be consistent with the state's standard rule format.
    In a separate action on February 22, 2013, EPA has proposed to 
address a petition by Sierra Club related to SSM provisions, including 
10 CSR 10-6.050(3)(C) (78 FR 12459). In this separate action, EPA 
proposed to deny the petitioner's request that EPA take action under 
Clean Air Act (CAA) section 110 (k)(5) or (6) to direct the

[[Page 72609]]

state to revise this provision. The revisions proposed in today's 
action do not address the sections of the regulation challenged by the 
Sierra Club in its petition. The revisions proposed in today's action 
clarify and strengthen the Missouri SIP. By removing the option for 
oral notification in 10 CSR 10-6.050(3)(B), and requiring written 
notification, the Missouri SIP is more stringent. The revision in 10 
CSR 10-6.050(3)(C)2. A. clarifies the notification requirements for 
malfunctions by referring to section 10 CSR 10-6.050(3)(A). The 
revision in 10 CSR 10-6.050 (3)(C)2.B. clarifies the general 
notification requirements for maintenance, startup, or shutdown 
activities by referring to the general notification requirements set 
forth in 10 CSR 10-6.050(3)(B).
    The revisions proposed in today's action are consistent with CAA 
requirements for SIP provisions and do not violate the anti-backsliding 
provisions in section 110(l) or section 193 of the CAA because they are 
SIP strengthening and do not interfere with any applicable requirements 
concerning attainment or reasonable further progress nor do they affect 
control measures in effect prior to the 1990 CAA Amendments related to 
nonattainment areas. Further, these proposed revisions are consistent 
with the action proposed by EPA on February 22, 2013 as mentioned above 
(78 FR 12459).

II. 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, as explained above, the revision meets the substantive SIP 
requirements of the CAA, including section 110 and implementing 
regulations.

III. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is proposing to approve the request to amend the Missouri SIP 
by approving the state's request to amend 10 CSR 10-6.050 Start-Up, 
Shutdown, and Malfunction to update written reporting requirements, 
correct references, and other minor clarifying changes. Approval of 
these revisions will ensure consistency between state and Federally-
approved rules. EPA has determined that these changes will not relax 
the SIP or adversely impact air emissions.
    We are processing this as a proposed action because we are 
soliciting comments on this proposed action. Final rulemaking will 
occur after consideration of any comments.

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 
proposed 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 proposed 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 (Public Law 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.

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: November 20, 2013.
Karl Brooks,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
[FR Doc. 2013-28947 Filed 12-2-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P