81 FR 4886 - Approval of Missouri's Air Quality Implementation Plans; Americold Logistics, LLC 24-Hour Particulate Matter (PM10
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 18 (January 28, 2016)
Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 18 (January 28, 2016)
| Page Range | 4886-4889 | |
| FR Document | 2016-01660 |
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 18 (Thursday, January 28, 2016)] [Rules and Regulations] [Pages 4886-4889] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2016-01660] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R07-OAR-2015-0644; FRL-9941-68-Region 7] Approval of Missouri's Air Quality Implementation Plans; Americold Logistics, LLC 24-Hour Particulate Matter (PM10) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) Consent Judgment AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency. ACTION: Direct final rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct final action to approve a revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the State of Missouri on June 2, 2014. This SIP revision incorporates a consent judgment to address violations of the 24-hour particulate matter (PM10 ) NAAQS near the Americold Logistics, LLC, Carthage Crushed Limestone (CCL) facility near Carthage, Missouri. CCL is a limestone quarry operation. The consent judgment between the State of Missouri and CCL includes measures that will control PM10 emissions from the facility. This approval will make the consent judgment Federally-enforceable. DATES: This direct final rule will be effective March 28, 2016, without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by February 29, 2016. 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-2015-0644, to www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 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/commenting-epa-dockets. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Heather Hamilton, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at 913-551-7039 or by email at [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' or ``our'' refer to EPA. This section provides additional information by addressing the following: I. Background II. What is being addressed in this document? III. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met? IV. What action is EPA taking? V. Incorporation by Reference VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews [[Page 4887]] I. Background EPA's current health-based PM10 NAAQS was set in 1987 at a level of 150 [micro]g/m\3\ measured over 24 hours. 40 CFR 50.6(a). An exceedance of the NAAQS is a daily (24-hour average) PM10 concentration that is above the level of the standard. A violation of the NAAQS occurs when an exceedance occurs more than once per year on average over three years. 40 CFR part 50, appendix K. Exceedances and violations of the PM10 NAAQS at the Carthage monitor date back to 2001. In October 2003, the Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) Air Pollution Control Program and Americold Logistics, LLC, Carthage Crushed Limestone (CCL) entered into a settlement agreement that contained measures for reducing CCL's fugitive particulate matter emissions for exceedances of the PM10 NAAQS. The measures put in place from the settlement agreement reduced the number of PM10 exceedances at the Carthage monitor for several years. There were no exceedances in 2009 and 2010; however, based on validated air quality data from 2011 to 2013, the Carthage monitor again experienced a number of exceedances as evidenced in the following table: Carthage PM10 Air Quality System Data Validity and Certification Through June 30, 2013 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 24-Hour PM10 exceedance Date ([micro]g/ m\3\) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ June 23, 2011........................................... 174 September 9, 2011....................................... 159 September 26, 2011...................................... 258 November 30, 2011....................................... 192 January 16, 2012........................................ 222 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ After an internal analysis to identify potential sources of emissions for the exceedances, the MDNR Air Pollution Control Program contacted CCL regarding their operations at the facility. On June 8, 2012, CCL proposed additional control measures that were necessary due to malfunctioning equipment and processing issues at the facility. II. What is being addressed in this document? EPA is taking direct final action to approve a revision to the SIP submitted by the State of Missouri on June 2, 2014. Missouri requested that EPA approve Americold Logistics, LLC, Carthage Crushed Limestone (CCL) consent judgment for inclusion into the Missouri SIP. The consent judgment between the state of Missouri and CCL was entered on May 3, 2014, and effective May 13, 2014. The consent judgment requires CCL to apply specific measures and work practices to reduce PM10 emissions generated at the facility. These measures and practices were required to be operational by March 31, 2014. CCL has implemented and made operational these measures in accordance with the consent judgment timelines. As a result, CCL worked cooperatively with MDNR who developed an enforceable consent judgment for implementing controls to further reduce PM10 emissions at the facility. CCL proactively put several controls in place during 2012 and 2013 prior to finalization of the consent judgment. Control measures to reduce fugitive PM10 emissions in the 2014 consent judgment include the following: (1) Installation of wet suppression for crushers; (2) eliminate screen and install a hopper to reduce free fall of rock; (3) install a CFM compressor for the baghouse controlling the Cedar Rapids dryer; (4) design and install a new drop point/transition to improve seal at conveyor transfer points; (5) install a new bin top in the west lime hopper; (6) fabricate a new transition on elevator head where it drops on to tail of the line to the conveyor belt, and install a new head house and boot that seals to the elevator; (7) rebuild a water truck to contain eight thousand gallons of water for haul roads; (8) enclose the bed of the haul truck that hauls waste fines to stock pile area; (9) develop an operation and maintenance plan for MDNR approval, and, (10) submit a full emissions inventory questionnaire for the calendar year 2012. The aforementioned control measures were completed according to schedule. The consent judgment also includes contingency measures in the event of an exceedance of the PM10 NAAQS. Contingency measures include investigating and addressing any exceedance to the extent possible in a timely manner including a detailed report to the MDNR Air Pollution Control Program within ten days. Additional contingency measures outlined in the consent judgment are to be reported no later than ninety days after the calendar quarter in which the monitoring data was measured. In addition to the measures outlined in the consent judgment, CCL has voluntarily agreed to participate in a near-real-time PM10 concentration alarm notification system for monitored hourly PM10 levels that exceed the 150 [micro]g/m\3\. This activity is strictly voluntary and the MDNR Air Pollution Control Program is not submitting requirements for CCL to participate in the alarm notification for inclusion in this SIP action. Since entering into the consent judgment with the MDNR, there was one exceedance of the PM10 standard on December 8, 2014. There have been no other exceedances recorded since that date. CCL, in accordance with the consent judgment contingency measures, notified the MDNR Air Pollution Control Program about the exceedance. The MDNR Air Pollution Control Program continues to monitor air quality and to work with the facility as necessary to implement the contingency measures of the consent judgment through a corrective action plan that addresses the 2014 exceedance. The control and contingency measures identified in the consent judgment, and included in MDNR's SIP revision request, is a significant strengthening of the current requirements applicable to this source to control fugitive PM emissions. EPA believes that these requirements will reduce or potentially eliminate future exceedances of the PM10 NAAQS and lead to improvements in the air quality in the area surrounding CCL's facility. The work practice revisions and mechanical upgrades along with the contingency measures put into action by the consent judgment and this SIP revision provide for permanent modifications that deal with past and future exceedances in a manner that limits their potential and represent an effective short term and long term control strategy for fugitive emissions of coarse particulate matter. III. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met? The June 2, 2014, 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. 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 [[Page 4888]] 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 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. V. Incorporation by Reference In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the Missouri Source Specific Permits and Orders described in the direct final amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth below. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents generally available electronically through www.regulations.gov and at the appropriate EPA office (see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble for more information). VI. 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 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). 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 CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by March 28, 2016. 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, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides. Dated: January 11, 2016. Mark Hague, 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 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. Section 52.1320(d) is amended by adding entry (30) at the end of the table to read as follows: Sec. 52.1320 Identification of plan. * * * * * (d) * * * [[Page 4889]] EPA-Approved Missouri Source-Specific Permits and Orders ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- State Name of source Order/Permit No. effective date EPA Approval date Explanation ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * * * * * * * (30) Americold Logistics, LLC 24- Consent Judgment 14AP- 4/27/14 1/28/16, [insert .............. Hour Particulate Matter (PM10) CC00036. Federal Register National Ambient Air Quality citation]. (NAAQS) Consent Judgment. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [FR Doc. 2016-01660 Filed 1-27-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
![4886 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 18 / Thursday, January 28, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
report containing this action and other such rule or action. Parties with Dated: January 13, 2016.
required information to the U.S. Senate, objections to this direct final rule are Susan Hedman,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and encouraged to file a comment in Regional Administrator, Region 5.
the Comptroller General of the United response to the parallel notice of
States prior to publication of the rule in proposed rulemaking for this action 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
the Federal Register. A major rule published in the proposed rules section
cannot take effect until 60 days after it of today’s Federal Register, rather than PART 52—APPROVAL AND
is published in the Federal Register. file an immediate petition for judicial PROMULGATION OF
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as review of this direct final rule, so that IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). EPA can withdraw this direct final rule
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, and address the comment in the ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52
petitions for judicial review of this proposed rulemaking. This action may continues to read as follows:
action must be filed in the United States not be challenged later in proceedings to Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Court of Appeals for the appropriate enforce its requirements. (See section
circuit by March 28, 2016. Filing a 307(b)(2).) ■ 2. In § 52.1220, the table in paragraph
petition for reconsideration by the (d) is amended by revising the entry for
Administrator of this final rule does not List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 ‘‘Xcel Energy-Inver Hills Generating
affect the finality of this action for the Environmental protection, Air Plant’’ to read as follows:
purposes of judicial review nor does it pollution control, Incorporation by
§ 52.1220 Identification of plan.
extend the time within which a petition reference, Intergovernmental relations,
for judicial review may be filed, and Reporting and recordkeeping * * * * *
shall not postpone the effectiveness of requirements, Sulfur dioxide. (d) * * *
EPA-APPROVED MINNESOTA SOURCE-SPECIFIC PERMITS
State
Name of Source Permit No. effective EPA Approval date Comments
date
* * * * * * *
Xcel Energy-Inver Hills 03700015–004 07/16/14 01/28/16, [Insert Federal Only conditions cited as ‘‘Title I condition: SIP for
Generating Plant. Register citation]. SO2 NAAQS.’’
* * * * * * *
* * * * * facility near Carthage, Missouri. CCL is considered the official comment and
[FR Doc. 2016–01577 Filed 1–27–16; 8:45 am] a limestone quarry operation. The should include discussion of all points
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P consent judgment between the State of you wish to make. EPA will generally
Missouri and CCL includes measures not consider comments or comment
that will control PM10 emissions from contents located outside of the primary
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION the facility. This approval will make the submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or
AGENCY consent judgment Federally-enforceable. other file sharing system). For
DATES: This direct final rule will be
additional submission methods, the full
40 CFR Part 52 EPA public comment policy,
effective March 28, 2016, without
further notice, unless EPA receives information about CBI or multimedia
[EPA–R07–OAR–2015–0644; FRL–9941–68–
Region 7] adverse comment by February 29, 2016. submissions, and general guidance on
If EPA receives adverse comment, we making effective comments, please visit
Approval of Missouri’s Air Quality http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
will publish a timely withdrawal of the
Implementation Plans; Americold commenting-epa-dockets.
direct final rule in the Federal Register
Logistics, LLC 24-Hour Particulate informing the public that the rule will FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Matter (PM10) National Ambient Air not take effect. Heather Hamilton, Environmental
Quality Standard (NAAQS) Consent Protection Agency, Air Planning and
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, Development Branch, 11201 Renner
Judgment
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07– Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at
AGENCY: Environmental Protection OAR–2015–0644, to 913–551–7039 or by email at
Agency. www.regulations.gov. Follow the online hamilton.heather@epa.gov.
ACTION: Direct final rule. instructions for submitting comments. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Once submitted, comments cannot be Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection edited or removed from Regulations.gov. or ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. This section
Agency (EPA) is taking direct final EPA may publish any comment received provides additional information by
action to approve a revision to the State to its public docket. Do not submit addressing the following:
Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by electronically any information you
wgreen on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
the State of Missouri on June 2, 2014. consider to be Confidential Business I. Background
This SIP revision incorporates a consent Information (CBI) or other information II. What is being addressed in this document?
III. Have the requirements for approval of a
judgment to address violations of the whose disclosure is restricted by statute. SIP revision been met?
24-hour particulate matter (PM10) Multimedia submissions (audio, video, IV. What action is EPA taking?
NAAQS near the Americold Logistics, etc.) must be accompanied by a written V. Incorporation by Reference
LLC, Carthage Crushed Limestone (CCL) comment. The written comment is VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
VerDate Sep<11>2014 13:11 Jan 27, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\28JAR1.SGM 28JAR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_4904/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 18 / Thursday, January 28, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 4889
EPA-APPROVED MISSOURI SOURCE-SPECIFIC PERMITS AND ORDERS
State effective
Name of source Order/Permit No. EPA Approval date Explanation
date
* * * * * * *
(30) Americold Logistics, LLC 24-Hour Particulate Consent Judgment 14AP– 4/27/14 1/28/16, [insert Federal ........................
Matter (PM10) National Ambient Air Quality CC00036. Register citation].
(NAAQS) Consent Judgment.
[FR Doc. 2016–01660 Filed 1–27–16; 8:45 am] action was proposed in the Federal some may not be publicly available in
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Register on November 24, 2015 and either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the
concerns rules regulating Vehicle hard copy materials, please schedule an
Scrapping, Employee Trip Reduction, appointment during normal business
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION and procedures for the hearing board hours with the contact listed in the FOR
AGENCY concerning variances and subpoenas. FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
The submitted SCAQMD rules are FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
40 CFR Part 52 discretionary and this disapproval does Idalia Pérez, EPA Region IX, (415) 972–
[EPA–R09–OAR–2015–0545; FRL–9941–72– not reveal a deficiency in the SIP. 3248, perez.idalia@epa.gov.
Region 9] DATES: Effective Date: This rule is SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
effective on February 29, 2016. Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
Disapproval of California Air Plan ADDRESSES: The EPA has established and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
Revisions, South Coast Air Quality docket number EPA–R09–OAR–2015–
Management District 0545 for this action. Generally, Table of Contents
AGENCY: Environmental Protection documents in the docket for this action
I. Proposed Action
Agency (EPA). are available electronically at II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
ACTION: Final rule. www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at III. EPA Action
EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection San Francisco, California 94015–3901.
Agency (EPA) is finalizing disapproval While all documents in the docket are I. Proposed Action
of revisions to the South Coast Air listed at www.regulations.gov, some On November 24, 2015 (80 FR 73156),
Quality Management District information may be publicly available the EPA proposed to disapprove the
(SCAQMD) portion of the California only at the hard copy location (e.g., following rules that were submitted for
State Implementation Plan (SIP). This copyrighted material, large maps), and incorporation into the California SIP.
Adopted or
Local agency Rule # Rule title Submitted
amended
SCAQMD .................................... 1610 Old-Vehicle Scrapping .................................................................... 05/09/97 .. 06/03/97
SCAQMD .................................... 2202 On-Road Motor Vehicle Mitigation Options .................................... 10/09/98 .. 06/03/99
SCAQMD .................................... 503.1 Ex Parte Petitions for Variances .................................................... 02/05/88 .. 02/07/89
SCAQMD .................................... 504 Rules from which Variances Are Not Allowed ............................... 01/05/90 .. 05/13/91
SCAQMD .................................... 511.1 Subpoenas ...................................................................................... 02/05/88 ... 02/07/89
We proposed to disapprove these with the Section (g)(1) requirement that We proposed to disapprove the SIP
rules because some rule provisions do vehicles be driven under their own revision for Rules 503.1 and 504
not satisfy the requirements of section power to the scrapping site. because they conflict with CAA sections
110 and part D of the Act. 5. There is no requirement to 110(a) and (i) and fail to address that a
We proposed to disapprove the SIP maintain records for the life of Mobile state- or district-issued variance has no
revision for Rule 1610 based at least in Source Emission Reduction Credits. effect on enforcing the underlying
part on the following deficiencies: We proposed to disapprove the SIP
revision for Rule 2202 based at least in federal requirement unless the variance
1. The Section (e)(2) requirement that is submitted to and approved by EPA as
engines of scrapped vehicles be part on the following deficiencies:
1. Per Section (f)(1), the rule relies on a SIP revision.
destroyed is insufficiently federally
Regulation XVI, which is not currently We proposed to disapprove the SIP
enforceable for various reasons.
in the SIP. revision for Rule 511.1 to avoid
2. The Section (f)(2)(A) requirement 2. Per Section (f)(3), the rule relies on
that the vehicle be registered for two potential conflict with EPA’s
the Air Quality Investment Program independent authorities provided in
years within SCAQMD is not fully (Rule 2501), which is not currently in
enforceable by allowing the Executive CAA section 113, section 114 and
the SIP.
Officer to approve different 3. Per Section (f)(4), the rule relies on elsewhere.
documentation. Our proposed action contains more
wgreen on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
emission reduction strategies approved
3. The Section (g) requirement of a on a case-by-case basis by the Executive information on the basis for this
visual and functional inspection of the Officer. rulemaking and on our evaluation of the
vehicle has no recordkeeping 4. Per Section (g)(4), the rule relies on submittal.
requirements. vehicle miles travelled reduction
4. There is no recordkeeping programs approved on a case-by-case
requirement to demonstrate compliance basis by the Executive Officer.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:24 Jan 27, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\28JAR1.SGM 28JAR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_4904/page/4.svg)
Document Created: 2018-02-02 12:40:57
Document Modified: 2018-02-02 12:40:57
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Rules and Regulations | |
| Action | Direct final rule. | |
| Dates | This direct final rule will be effective March 28, 2016, without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by February 29, 2016. 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. | |
| Contact | Heather Hamilton, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at 913-551-7039 or by email at [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 81 FR 4886 | |
| CFR Associated | Environmental Protection; Air Pollution Control; Carbon Monoxide; Incorporation by Reference; Intergovernmental Relations; Nitrogen Dioxide; Particulate Matter; Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements and Sulfur Oxides |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR