Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of Missouri; St. Louis Inspection and Maintenance Program, 77996-77998 [2014-29869]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
77996
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 248 / Monday, December 29, 2014 / Proposed Rules
(3) Representatives of seafarers’
welfare and labor organizations; and
(4) Other authorized individuals in
accordance with the Declaration of
Security (DoS) or other arrangement
between the vessel and facility.
(c) Timely Access. The facility owner
or operator must provide the access
described in this section without
unreasonable delay, subject to review by
the Captain of the Port (COTP). The
facility owner or operator must consider
the following when establishing timely
access without unreasonable delay:
(1) Length of time the vessel is in port.
(2) Distance of egress/ingress between
the vessel and facility gate.
(3) The vessel watch schedules.
(4) The facility’s safety and security
procedures as required by law.
(5) Any other factors specific to the
vessel or facility that could affect access
to and from the vessel.
(d) Access Methods. The facility
owner or operator must ensure that the
access described in this section is
provided through one or more of the
following methods:
(1) Regularly scheduled escort
between the vessel and the facility gate
that conforms to the vessel’s watch
schedule as agreed upon between the
vessel and facility.
(2) An on-call escort between the
vessel and the facility gate.
(3) Arrangements with taxi services,
ensuring that any costs for providing the
access described in this section, above
the taxi’s standard fees charged to any
customer, are not charged to the
individual to whom such access is
provided. If a facility provides
arrangements with taxi services as the
only method for providing the access
described in this section, the facility is
responsible to pay the taxi fees for
transit within the facility.
(4) Arrangements with seafarers’
welfare organizations to facilitate the
access described in this section.
(5) Monitored pedestrian access
routes between the vessel and facility
gate.
(6) A method, other than those in
paragraphs (d)(1) through (d)(5) of this
section, approved by the COTP.
(7) If an access method relies on a
third party, a back-up access method
that will be used if the third-party is
unable to or does not provide the
required access in any instance. An
owner or operator must ensure that the
access required in paragraph (a) of this
section is actually provided in all
instances.
(e) No cost to individuals. The facility
owner or operator must provide the
access described in this section at no
cost to the individual to whom such
access is provided.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:49 Dec 24, 2014
Jkt 235001
(f) Described in the Facility Security
Plan (FSP). On or before [INSERT DATE
10 MONTHS AFTER PUBLICATION OF
THE FINAL RULE], the facility owner or
operator must document the facility’s
system for providing the access
described in this section in the
approved FSP in accordance with 33
CFR 105.410 or 33 CFR 105.415. The
description of the facility’s system must
include—
(1) Location of transit area(s) used for
providing the access described in this
section;
(2) Duties and number of facility
personnel assigned to each duty
associated with providing the access
described in this section;
(3) Methods of escorting and/or
monitoring individuals transiting
through the facility;
(4) Agreements or arrangements
between the facility and private parties,
nonprofit organizations, or other parties,
to facilitate the access described in this
section; and
(5) Maximum length of time an
individual would wait for the access
described in this section, based on the
provided access method(s).
■ 6. Amend § 105.405 as follows:
■ a. In paragraph (a), at the end of the
first sentence, remove the text ‘‘(a)’’;
■ b. Redesignate paragraphs (a)(9)
through (a)(18) as (a)(10) through (a)(19);
■ c. In newly designated paragraphs
(a)(18) and (a)(19), at the beginning of
the paragraphs, add the word ‘‘The’’
before the word ‘‘Facility’’; and
■ d. Add new paragraph (a)(9) as
follows:
§ 105.405 Format and content of the
Facility Security Plan (FSP).
(a) * * *
(9) System for seafarers’ access;
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: December 17, 2014.
J.C. Burton,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Director of
Inspections & Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2014–30013 Filed 12–24–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R07–OAR–2014–0399; FRL–9920–67–
Region 7]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; State of
Missouri; St. Louis Inspection and
Maintenance Program
AGENCY:
Environmental Protection
Agency.
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
ACTION:
Proposed rule.
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) proposes to approve State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions
submitted by the State of Missouri
relating to the Inspection and
Maintenance (I/M) Program. On August
16, 2007, and December 7, 2007, the
Missouri Department of Natural
Resources (MDNR) requested to amend
the SIP to replace the St. Louis
centralized transient I/M240 vehicle test
program Gateway Clean Air Program
(GCAP) and associated state rule with a
de-centralized, OBD only vehicle I/M
program called, the Gateway Vehicle
Inspection Program (GVIP), and a new I/
M rule reflecting these changes. In this
action, EPA is also proposing approval
of three additional SIP revisions
submitted by Missouri related to the
state’s I/M program including minor
clarification edits to the new I/M rule,
exemptions for specially constructed
vehicles or ‘‘kit-cars,’’ exemptions for
Plugin Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEV),
and rescission of Missouri State
Highway Patrol rules from the Missouri
SIP.
These revisions to Missouri’s SIP do
not have an adverse effect on air quality
as demonstrated in the technical
support document which is a part of
this docket. EPA’s approval of these SIP
revisions is being done in accordance
with the requirements of the Clean Air
Act (CAA).
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before January 28, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07–
OAR–2014–0399, 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 or Courier:
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–2014–
0399. 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
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\29DEP1.SGM
29DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 248 / Monday, December 29, 2014 / Proposed Rules
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
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:
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?
II. Have the requirements for approval of a
SIP revision been met?
III. What action is EPA taking?
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What is being addressed?
EPA is proposing approval into the
SIP, revisions to St. Louis vehicle I/M
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:49 Dec 24, 2014
Jkt 235001
program to replace the centralized,
transient I/M240 vehicle I/M program
(GCAP) with the de-centralized, OBD
only, vehicle I/M program (GVIP).
MDNR submitted to EPA five SIP
revision submissions to address the
vehicle I/M program replacement and
associated state rule plus one
supplemental demonstration. They are
as follows:
On August 16, 2007, MDNR requested
that Missouri Rule 10 CSR 10–5.380,
‘‘Motor Vehicle Emissions Inspection’’
be rescinded and replaced with the new
rule 10 CSR 10–5.381, ‘‘On-Board
Diagnostics Motor Vehicle Emissions
Inspection.’’ In that same submittal
letter, MDNR also requested that
Missouri Rule 10 CSR 10–5.375, ‘‘Motor
Vehicles Emissions Inspection Waiver’’
be rescinded. EPA does not plan on
taking any action on 10 CSR 10–5.375
as it is not a part of the SIP.
On December 14, 2007, MDNR
submitted the new GVIP plan and
performance standard demonstration to
show that the GVIP program meets the
basic requirements as described in 40
CFR part 51 subpart S. This submission
also requests that EPA approve the plan
to replace the GCAP I/M program with
the new GVIP program.
On December 21, 2007, Missouri
submitted a revision requesting that the
Missouri State Highway Patrol rules be
removed from the Missouri SIP because
the new rule 10 CSR 10–5.381 does not
rely on the Missouri Highway Patrol
rules for enforcement. More details can
be found in the technical support
document that is a part of this docket.
On January 2, 2009, MDNR submitted
a required supplemental demonstration
for I/M network type and program
evaluation as required by 40 CFR
51.353. This demonstration is required
within one year after the I/M program
begins.
On June 17, 2009, Missouri submitted
a revision to I/M rule 10 CSR 10–5.381
which includes minor clarification edits
and exempts specially constructed
vehicles or ‘‘kit-cars’’ from the rule.
On December 10, 2012, Missouri
submitted another revision to exempt
Plugin Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEV)
from the I/M program as codified in rule
10 CSR 10–5.381. As part of our review,
EPA performed a separate analysis of all
the state’s SIP submissions and a
cumulative analysis as documented in
the technical support document that is
part of this docket.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
77997
51.102. The submission also satisfied
the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part
51, appendix V. In addition, as
explained in this proposed action and in
more detail in the technical support
document which is part of this docket,
the revisions meet the substantive SIP
requirements of the CAA, including
section 110(l) and implementing
regulations. EPA has determined that
the revisions meet all applicable CAA
regulations, policy and guidance as
detailed in the technical support
document.
III. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is proposing to approve these SIP
revisions. While these SIP revisions
were submitted in separate requests,
they are direct changes to the St. Louis
Vehicle Inspection Program and are
being addressed in one SIP action. We
are processing this as a proposed action.
Final rulemaking will occur after
consideration of any comments
provided in response to this proposal.
IV. 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’’ under the terms of Executive
Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4,
1993) and is therefore not subject to
review under Executive Orders 12866
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);
E:\FR\FM\29DEP1.SGM
29DEP1
77998
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 248 / Monday, December 29, 2014 / Proposed Rules
• 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
Agency proposes to amend 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:
■
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.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et. seq.
Subpart AA—Missouri
2. In § 52.1320, the table in paragraph
(c) is amended by removing the entry
‘‘10–5.380’’ and adding the entry ‘‘10–
5.381’’ to read as follows:
■
Dated: December 10, 2014.
Becky Weber,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7.
§ 52.1320
*
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, the Environmental Protection
Identification of Plan.
*
*
(c) * * *
*
*
EPA-APPROVED MISSOURI REGULATIONS
Missouri citation
State effective
date
Title
EPA approval date
Explanation
Missouri Department of Natural Resources
*
*
*
*
*
*
Chapter 5—Air Quality Standards and Air Pollution Control Regulations for the St. Louis Metropolitan Area
*
10–5.381 ..........
*
*
On-Board Diagnostics Motor Vehicle Emissions Inspection.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 224
[Docket No. 130808698–4999–02]
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
RIN 0648–XC809
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Notice of 12-Month Finding
on Petitions To List the Pinto Abalone
as Threatened or Endangered Under
the Endangered Species Act (ESA)
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of 12-month finding and
availability of a status review report.
AGENCY:
18:49 Dec 24, 2014
*
*
12/29/14 [Insert Federal Register citation].
*
*
We, NMFS, announce a 12month finding on two petitions to list
the pinto abalone (Haliotis
kamtschatkana) as threatened or
endangered under the Endangered
Species Act (ESA). We have completed
a comprehensive status review of the
pinto abalone in response to these
petitions. Based on the best scientific
and commercial information available,
we have determined that the species
does not warrant listing at this time. We
conclude that the pinto abalone is not
currently in danger of extinction
throughout all or a significant portion of
its range and is not likely to become so
within the foreseeable future. The
species will remain on the NMFS
Species of Concern list, with one
revision to apply the Species of Concern
status throughout the species’ range
(Alaska to Mexico). We also announce
the availability of the pinto abalone
status review report.
*
*
*
The pinto abalone status
review report is available electronically
at: https://www.westcoast.fisheries.
noaa.gov/. You may also receive a copy
by submitting a request to the Protected
Resources Division, West Coast Region,
NMFS, 501 West Ocean Blvd., Suite
4200, Long Beach, CA 90802–4213,
Attention: Pinto Abalone 12-month
Finding.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Melissa Neuman, NMFS, West Coast
Region (562) 980–4115; or Lisa
Manning, NMFS, Office of Protected
Resources (301) 427–8466.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
[FR Doc. 2014–29869 Filed 12–24–14; 8:45 am]
VerDate Sep<11>2014
*
12/30/12
*
Jkt 235001
ADDRESSES:
This finding was made on
December 29, 2014.
Background
The pinto abalone (Haliotis
kamtschatkana) was added to the
National Marine Fisheries Service’s
(NMFS’) ‘‘Species of Concern’’ list on
April 15, 2004 (69 FR 19975). On July
1, 2013, the National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS) received a petition from
the Natural Resources Defense Council
(NRDC) requesting that the pinto
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\29DEP1.SGM
29DEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 248 (Monday, December 29, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 77996-77998]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-29869]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R07-OAR-2014-0399; FRL-9920-67-Region 7]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of
Missouri; St. Louis Inspection and Maintenance Program
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposes to approve
State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the State of
Missouri relating to the Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) Program. On
August 16, 2007, and December 7, 2007, the Missouri Department of
Natural Resources (MDNR) requested to amend the SIP to replace the St.
Louis centralized transient I/M240 vehicle test program Gateway Clean
Air Program (GCAP) and associated state rule with a de-centralized, OBD
only vehicle I/M program called, the Gateway Vehicle Inspection Program
(GVIP), and a new I/M rule reflecting these changes. In this action,
EPA is also proposing approval of three additional SIP revisions
submitted by Missouri related to the state's I/M program including
minor clarification edits to the new I/M rule, exemptions for specially
constructed vehicles or ``kit-cars,'' exemptions for Plugin Hybrid
Electric Vehicles (PHEV), and rescission of Missouri State Highway
Patrol rules from the Missouri SIP.
These revisions to Missouri's SIP do not have an adverse effect on
air quality as demonstrated in the technical support document which is
a part of this docket. EPA's approval of these SIP revisions is being
done in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 28, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2014-0399, 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 or Courier: 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-
2014-0399. 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
[[Page 77997]]
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: 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?
II. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?
III. What action is EPA taking?
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What is being addressed?
EPA is proposing approval into the SIP, revisions to St. Louis
vehicle I/M program to replace the centralized, transient I/M240
vehicle I/M program (GCAP) with the de-centralized, OBD only, vehicle
I/M program (GVIP). MDNR submitted to EPA five SIP revision submissions
to address the vehicle I/M program replacement and associated state
rule plus one supplemental demonstration. They are as follows:
On August 16, 2007, MDNR requested that Missouri Rule 10 CSR 10-
5.380, ``Motor Vehicle Emissions Inspection'' be rescinded and replaced
with the new rule 10 CSR 10-5.381, ``On-Board Diagnostics Motor Vehicle
Emissions Inspection.'' In that same submittal letter, MDNR also
requested that Missouri Rule 10 CSR 10-5.375, ``Motor Vehicles
Emissions Inspection Waiver'' be rescinded. EPA does not plan on taking
any action on 10 CSR 10-5.375 as it is not a part of the SIP.
On December 14, 2007, MDNR submitted the new GVIP plan and
performance standard demonstration to show that the GVIP program meets
the basic requirements as described in 40 CFR part 51 subpart S. This
submission also requests that EPA approve the plan to replace the GCAP
I/M program with the new GVIP program.
On December 21, 2007, Missouri submitted a revision requesting that
the Missouri State Highway Patrol rules be removed from the Missouri
SIP because the new rule 10 CSR 10-5.381 does not rely on the Missouri
Highway Patrol rules for enforcement. More details can be found in the
technical support document that is a part of this docket.
On January 2, 2009, MDNR submitted a required supplemental
demonstration for I/M network type and program evaluation as required
by 40 CFR 51.353. This demonstration is required within one year after
the I/M program begins.
On June 17, 2009, Missouri submitted a revision to I/M rule 10 CSR
10-5.381 which includes minor clarification edits and exempts specially
constructed vehicles or ``kit-cars'' from the rule.
On December 10, 2012, Missouri submitted another revision to exempt
Plugin Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEV) from the I/M program as codified
in rule 10 CSR 10-5.381. As part of our review, EPA performed a
separate analysis of all the state's SIP submissions and a cumulative
analysis as documented in the technical support document that is part
of this docket.
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 in this proposed action and in more detail in
the technical support document which is part of this docket, the
revisions meet the substantive SIP requirements of the CAA, including
section 110(l) and implementing regulations. EPA has determined that
the revisions meet all applicable CAA regulations, policy and guidance
as detailed in the technical support document.
III. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is proposing to approve these SIP revisions. While these SIP
revisions were submitted in separate requests, they are direct changes
to the St. Louis Vehicle Inspection Program and are being addressed in
one SIP action. We are processing this as a proposed action. Final
rulemaking will occur after consideration of any comments provided in
response to this proposal.
IV. 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'' under the terms
of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is
therefore not subject to review under Executive Orders 12866 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);
[[Page 77998]]
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: December 10, 2014.
Becky Weber,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Environmental
Protection Agency proposes to amend 40 CFR part 52 as set forth below:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et. seq.
Subpart AA--Missouri
0
2. In Sec. 52.1320, the table in paragraph (c) is amended by removing
the entry ``10-5.380'' and adding the entry ``10-5.381'' to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.1320 Identification of Plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
EPA-Approved Missouri Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State
Missouri citation Title effective date EPA approval date Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Missouri Department of Natural Resources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Chapter 5--Air Quality Standards and Air Pollution Control Regulations for the St. Louis Metropolitan Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
10-5.381................. On-Board Diagnostics 12/30/12 12/29/14 [Insert
Motor Vehicle Federal Register
Emissions citation].
Inspection.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2014-29869 Filed 12-24-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
