Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 61 / Wednesday, March 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules 17585 

Business Conference Center is available 

at no charge. 

The Tulsa open house and public 

hearing is scheduled to be held on 

Thursday, April 14, 2011, at the Tulsa 

Tech—Riverside Campus, in the 

Auditorium of the Alliance Conference 

Center, 801 East 91st Street, Tulsa, 

Oklahoma 74132, (918) 828–4000. 

Driving directions to the Tulsa Tech— 

Riverside Campus may also be found 

using the following address: 801 West K 

Place, Jenks, Oklahoma 74037. The 

Tulsa Tech—Riverside Campus is 

located on the south side of Tulsa, and 

is east of Highway 75 and north of the 

Creek Turnpike. Parking is available on 

campus at no charge. 

For both locations the open house 

will begin at 1 p.m. and end at 3 p.m. 

local time. The public hearing will be 

held from 4 p.m. until 6 p.m., and again 

from 7 p.m. until 9 p.m. Opening 

remarks for the public hearing will be 

provided at 4 p.m., and again at 7 p.m. 

The public hearing will provide 

interested parties the opportunity to 

present information and opinions to 

EPA concerning our proposal. Interested 

parties may also submit written 

comments, as discussed in the proposal. 

Written statements and supporting 

information submitted during the 

comment period will be considered 

with the same weight as any oral 

comments and supporting information 

presented at the public hearing. We will 

not respond to comments during the 

public hearing. When we publish our 

final action, we will provide written 

responses to all oral and written 

comments received on our proposal. To 

provide opportunities for questions and 

discussion, we will hold an open house 

prior to the public hearing. During the 

open house, EPA staff will be available 

to informally answer questions on our 

proposed action. Any comments made 

to EPA staff during the open house must 

still be provided formally in writing or 

orally during the public hearing in order 

to be considered in the record. 

At the public hearing, the hearing 

officer may limit the time available for 

each commenter to address the proposal 

to 5 minutes or less if the hearing officer 

determines it to be appropriate. We will 

not be providing equipment for 

commenters to show overhead slides or 

make computerized slide presentations. 

Any person may provide written or oral 

comments and data pertaining to our 

proposal at the Public Hearing. 

Verbatim transcripts, in English, of the 

hearing and written statements will be 

included in the rulemaking docket. 

Dated: March 23, 2011. 

Carl E. Edlund, 

Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division, 

Director, Region 6. 

[FR Doc. 2011–7459 Filed 3–29–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2011–0309; FRL–9287–9] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; State of 

Missouri 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

the State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

submittal from the state of Missouri 

addressing the requirements of Clean 

Air Act (CAA) sections 110(a)(1) and (2) 

for the 1997 revisions to the National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) for ozone. Section 110(a)(1) 

requires that each state adopt and 

submit a SIP to support implementation 

of each new or revised NAAQS 

promulgated by the EPA and these SIPs 

are commonly referred to as 

‘‘infrastructure’’ SIPs. EPA believes that 

Missouri’s infrastructure SIP adequately 

addresses the elements described in 

section 110(a)(2) and further described 

in the October 2, 2007, guidance for 

infrastructure SIPs issued by the EPA 

Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards. However, because EPA 

already approved the portion of 

Missouri’s SIP submittal relating to the 

interstate transport infrastructure 

element, section 110(a)(2)(D)(i), this 

proposed rulemaking does not address 

the interstate transport element, nor 

does this proposal reopen any aspect of 

EPA’s prior action on the interstate 

transport element. Furthermore, this 

action does not address infrastructure 

requirements with respect to the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS or the 2006 revisions to 

the NAAQS. Those requirements will be 

addressed in future rulemaking. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before April 29, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07– 

OAR–2011–0309 by one of the following 

methods: 

1. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. E-mail: kramer.elizabeth@epa.gov. 

3. Mail: Ms. Elizabeth Kramer, Air 

Planning and Development Branch, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 7, Air and Waste Management 

Division, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas 

City, Kansas 66101. 

4. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver 

your comments to Ms. Elizabeth 

Kramer, Air Planning and Development 

Branch, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 7, Air and Waste 

Management Division, 901 North 5th 

Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2011– 

0309. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at http:// 

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 through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. The http:// 

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 e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov, your e-mail 

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 should be free of any 

defects or viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

http://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. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 7, 901 North 5th Street, 

Kansas City, Kansas 66101, from 8 a.m. 

to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

17586 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 61 / Wednesday, March 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

1William T. Harnett, Director, Air Quality Policy 

Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards. ‘‘Guidance on SIP Elements Required 

Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8-hour 

Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards.’’ Memorandum to EPA Air Division 

Directors, Regions I–X, October 2, 2007. 

2As discussed in further detail below, subsection 

110(a)(2)(I) is not applicable for the infrastructure 

SIP approval process and therefore EPA will take 

action on the requirements of part D attainment 

plans separately. 

3As discussed in further detail below, subsection 

110(a)(2)(J), as it relates to visibility protection, is 

also not applicable for the infrastructure SIP 

approval process, and therefore EPA is not 

addressing it in today’s proposed rulemaking. 

4This action also does not address infrastructure 

requirements with respect to the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS or the 2006 revisions to the NAAQS. Those 

requirements will be addressed in future 

rulemaking. 

5 VOCs and NOX as precursors to ozone are also 

discussed in element (C). 

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: Ms. 

Elizabeth Kramer, Air Planning and 

Development Branch U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 7, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas 

City, Kansas 66101; telephone number: 

(913) 551–7186; fax number: (913) 551– 

7844; e-mail address: 

kramer.elizabeth@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we refer to 

EPA. This section provides additional 

information by addressing the following 

questions: 

I. What is a section 110(a)(1) and (2) 

infrastructure SIP? 

II. What elements are applicable under 

section 110(a)(1) and (2)? 

III. What is EPA’s evaluation of how the state 

addressed the relevant elements of 

section 110(a)(1) and (2)? 

IV. What action is EPA proposing? 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What is a section 110(a)(1) and (2) 

infrastructure SIP? 

Section 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA 

require, in part, that states submit to 

EPA plans to implement, maintain and 

enforce each of the NAAQS 

promulgated by EPA. These provisions 

require states to address basic SIP 

requirements including, for example, 

adequate provisions for emission 

inventory development, monitoring, and 

modeling to assure attainment and 

maintenance of the applicable 

standards. By statute, SIPs meeting the 

requirements of section 110(a)(1) and (2) 

are to be submitted by states within 

three years after promulgation of a new 

or revised standard. These SIPs are 

commonly referred to as ‘‘infrastructure’’ 

SIPs. 

II. What elements are applicable under 

section 110(a)(1) and (2)? 

On October 2, 2007, EPA issued 

guidance to address infrastructure SIP 

elements required under section 

110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS.1 EPA will 

address these elements below under the 

following headings: (A) Emission limits 

and other control measures; (B) Ambient 

air quality monitoring/data system; (C) 

Program for enforcement of control 

measures (PSD, New Source Review for 

nonattainment areas, and construction 

and modification of all stationary 

sources); (D) Interstate and international 

transport; (E) Adequate authority, 

resources, implementation, and 

oversight; (F) Stationary source 

monitoring system; (G) Emergency 

authority; (H) Future SIP revisions; (I) 

Nonattainment areas; 2 (J) Consultation 

with government officials, public 

notification, prevention of significant 

deterioration (PSD), and visibility 

protection; 3 (K) Air quality and 

modeling/data; (L) Permitting fees; and 

(M) Consultation/participation by 

affected local entities.4

III. What is EPA’s evaluation of how the 

state addressed the relevant elements of 

section 110(a)(1) and (2)? 

On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated 

new 8-hour ozone and new fine 

particulate matter primary and 

secondary NAAQS. (62 FR 38894; 62 FR 

38711.) On February 27, 2007, EPA 

Region 7 received the state of Missouri’s 

ozone and particulate matter 

infrastructure SIP submittal. The SIP 

submission was determined to be 

complete on March 27, 2007. EPA has 

reviewed the state’s formal submission 

and the relevant statutory and 

regulatory authorities and provisions 

generally referenced in the submittal 

from Missouri. 

As described below, today’s action 

only pertains to the 1997 ozone 

standard; it does not pertain to EPA’s 

1997 promulgation of the PM2.5

standards. In addition, it does not 

address issues relating to interstate 

transport under section 110(a)(2)(D)(i), 

which have already been addressed for 

the 1997 ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS in 

prior rulemaking (72 FR 25975). 

Missouri’s SIP submittal addresses the 

provisions of section 110(a)(1) and (2) as 

described below. EPA believes that 

Missouri has the adequate infrastructure 

needed to address all applicable 

elements of section 110(a)(1) and (2) for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

(A) Emission limits and other control 

measures: Section 110(a)(2)(A) requires 

SIPs to include enforceable emission 

limits and other control measures, 

means or techniques, schedules for 

compliance and other related matters as 

needed to implement, maintain and 

enforce each NAAQS. 

The state of Missouri’s Air 

Conservation Law and Air Pollution 

Control Rules authorize the Missouri 

Department of Natural Resources 

(MDNR) to regulate air quality and 

implement air quality control 

regulations. Section 643.030 of the 

Missouri Revised Statutes (‘‘Air 

Conservation Law’’) authorizes the ‘‘Air 

Conservation Commission of the State of 

Missouri’’ (MACC) to control air 

pollution, which is defined in Section 

643.020 to include air contaminants, 

which cause or contribute to injury to 

public health or welfare. Section 

643.050 authorizes the MACC to classify 

and identify air contaminants. 

State rule 10 Code of State 

Regulations (CSR) 10–6.010 (‘‘Ambient 

Air Quality Standards’’) adopts the 1997 

ozone standards promulgated by EPA. 

EPA also notes that emissions from new 

and existing sources of both volatile 

organic compounds (VOCs) and 

nitrogen oxides (NOX)—which are 

known ozone precursors 5—are also 

regulated (e.g., 10 CSR 10–2.360 relating 

to VOC emissions from bakery ovens in 

Kansas City, 10 CSR 10–5.510 relating to 

NOX emissions from various sources in 

the St. Louis area). In addition, 10 CSR 

10–6.040 incorporates by reference the 

relevant appendices in 40 CFR part 50 

for measuring and calculating the 

concentration of photochemical 

oxidants (ozone) in the atmosphere to 

determine whether the ozone standards 

have been met. Therefore, ozone is an 

air contaminant which may be regulated 

under Missouri law. 

Section 643.050 of the Air 

Conservation Law authorizes the MACC, 

among other things, to regulate the use 

of air contaminant sources and to 

establish emissions limitations for air 

contaminant sources. Missouri also 

establishes timetables for compliance in 

its rules, as appropriate. Appendix A of 

the state submittal contains a link to the 

Missouri Air Conservation Law and 

Appendix C contains a link to 

Missouri’s Effective State Rules and 

Forms. 

EPA notes that 10 CSR 10–6.050 

provides that sources may submit 

information relating to excess emissions 

during startup, shutdown or 

malfunction (SSM) events, but expressly 

provides that nothing in this rule limits 

the ability of MDNR or the MACC to 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 61 / Wednesday, March 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules 17587 

6Steven Herman, Assistant Administrator for 

Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, and 

Robert Perciasepe, Assistant Administrator for Air 

and Radiation. ‘‘State Implementation Plans (SIPs): 

Policy Regarding Excess Emissions During 

Malfunctions, Startup, and Shutdown.’’ 

Memorandum to EPA Air Division Directors, 

September 20, 1999. 

7With respect to Missouri, we note that the EPAapproved SIP rules do not contain variance 

provisions. In any event, any variances issued by 

the MACC under its statutory authority must be 

approved by EPA as revisions to the SIP before they 

can alter any requirements of the approved SIP (see, 

40 CFR 51.104(d)). 

8 J. Craig Potter, Assistant Administrator for Air 

and Radiation, Thomas L. Adams, Jr., Assistant 

Administrator for Enforcement and Compliance 

Monitoring, and Francis S. Blake, General Counsel, 

Office of General Counsel. ‘‘Review of State 

Implementation Plans and Revisions for 

Enforceability and Legal Sufficiency.’’ 

Memorandum, September 23, 1987. See also 52 FR 

45109 (November 24, 1987). 

9See http://www.dnr.mo.gov/env/esp/aqm/ 

critmap.htm, for a description of the monitoring 

network for all pollutants, including identification 

of locations for the ozone monitoring network. 

take appropriate enforcement action. In 

today’s proposed rulemaking, EPA is 

not proposing to approve or disapprove 

any existing state provisions with regard 

to excess emissions during a SSM of 

operations at a facility. EPA believes 

that a number of states have SSM 

provisions that are contrary to the Clean 

Air Act and existing EPA guidance,6

and the Agency plans to address such 

state regulations in the future. In the 

meantime, EPA encourages any state 

having a deficient SSM provision to take 

steps to correct it as soon as possible. 

EPA also notes that the Air 

Conservation Law contains provisions at 

Sections 643.055 and 643.110, which 

give the MACC the authority, under 

certain circumstances, to grant variances 

from rules and regulations established 

pursuant to the Clean Air Act.7

Furthermore, the Missouri air 

regulations contain provisions which 

allow the Director of MDNR to exercise 

his or her discretion to approve 

alternatives to the Missouri regulations 

(see, e.g., 10 CSR 10–6.030(19), which 

allows for the use of an alternative 

sampling method). In this action, EPA is 

not proposing to approve or disapprove 

any existing state rules with regard to 

‘‘variance’’ or ‘‘Director’s discretion’’ 

provisions. EPA believes that a number 

of states have such provisions that are 

contrary to the Clean Air Act and 

existing EPA guidance,8 and the Agency 

plans to take action in the future to 

address such state regulations. In the 

meantime, EPA encourages any state 

having a ‘‘variance’’ or ‘‘Director’s 

discretion’’ provision that is contrary to 

the Clean Air Act and EPA guidance to 

take steps to correct the deficiency as 

soon as possible. 

EPA believes that Missouri has 

statutory and regulatory authority to 

establish additional emissions 

limitations and other measures, as 

necessary to address attainment and 

maintenance of the ozone standards. 

Therefore, EPA believes that the 

Missouri SIP adequately addresses the 

requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

(B) Ambient air quality monitoring/ 

data system: Section 110(a)(2)(B) 

requires SIPs to include provisions to 

provide for establishment and operation 

of ambient air quality monitors, 

collection and analysis of ambient air 

quality data, and making these data 

available to EPA upon request. 

To address this element, section 

643.050 of the Air Conservation Law 

provides the enabling authority 

necessary for Missouri to fulfill the 

requirements of section 110(a)(2)(B). 

The Air Pollution Control Program and 

Air Quality Analysis Section, within 

MDNR, implement these requirements. 

Along with their other duties, the 

monitoring program collects air 

monitoring data, quality assures the 

results, and reports the data. 

MDNR submits annual monitoring 

network plans to EPA for approval, 

including plans for its ozone monitoring 

network, as required by 40 CFR 58.10.9

Prior to submission to EPA, Missouri 

makes the plans available for public 

review on MDNR’s Web site. See 

http://dnr.mo.gov/env/apcp/monitoring/ 

monitoringnetworkplan.pdf. MDNR also 

conducts five-year monitoring network 

assessments, including the ozone 

monitoring network, as required by 40 

CFR 58.10(d). On October 27, 2010, EPA 

approved Missouri’s 2010 Ambient Air 

Quality Monitoring Plan and Missouri’s 

Five-Year Air Monitoring Network 

Assessment. As mentioned previously 

under element (A), 10 CSR 10– 

6.040(4)(D) requires that ambient 

concentrations of ozone be measured in 

accordance with the applicable Federal 

regulations in 40 CFR Part 50, App. D, 

or equivalent methods as approved by 

EPA pursuant to 40 CFR Part 53. 

Missouri submits air quality data to 

EPA’s Air Quality System (AQS) system 

quarterly, pursuant to the provisions of 

work plans developed in conjunction 

with EPA grants to the state. 

Based on the foregoing, EPA believes 

that the Missouri SIP meets the 

requirements of section 110(a)(2)(B) for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

(C) Program for enforcement of 

control measures (PSD, New Source 

Review for nonattainment areas, and 

construction and modification of all 

stationary sources): Section 110(a)(2)(C) 

requires states to include the following 

elements in the SIP: (1) A program 

providing for enforcement of all SIP 

measures described in section 

110(a)(2)(A); (2) a program for the 

regulation of the modification and 

construction of stationary sources as 

necessary to protect the applicable 

NAAQS; and (3) a permit program to 

meet the major source permitting 

requirements of the Act (including the 

program for areas designated as not 

attaining the NAAQS, and a program for 

the prevention of significant 

deterioration of air quality program in 

other areas). As discussed in further 

detail below, this infrastructure SIP 

rulemaking will not address the 

Missouri program for nonattainment 

area-related provisions, since these 

submittals are not applicable for the 

infrastructure SIP approval process. 

(1) With respect to enforcement of 

requirements of the SIP, the Missouri 

statutes provide authority for MDNR to 

enforce the requirements of the Air 

Conservation Law, and any regulations, 

permits, or final compliance orders 

issued under the provisions of that law. 

For example, Section 643.080 of the Air 

Conservation Law authorizes MDNR to 

issue compliance orders for violations of 

the Air Conservation Law, rules 

promulgated thereunder (which 

includes rules comprising the Missouri 

SIP), and conditions of permits (which 

includes permits under SIP-approved 

permitting programs). Section 643.085 

authorizes MDNR to assess 

administrative penalties for violations of 

the statute, regulations, permit 

conditions, or administrative orders. 

Section 643.151 authorizes the MACC to 

initiate civil actions for these violations, 

and to seek penalties and injunctive 

relief to prevent any further violation. 

Section 643.191 provides for criminal 

penalties for knowing violations of the 

statute, regulations or permit 

conditions, in addition to other acts 

described in that section. 

(2) Section 110(a)(2)(C) also requires 

that the SIP include measures to 

regulate construction and modification 

of stationary sources to protect the 

NAAQS. With respect to smaller sources 

(Missouri’s major source permitting 

program is discussed in (3) below), 

Missouri has a program under rule 10 

CSR 10–6.060 to review such sources to 

ensure, among other requirements, that 

new and modified sources will not 

interfere with NAAQS attainment. The 

state rule contains two general 

categories of sources subject to the 

minor source permitting program. The 

first category is ‘‘de minimis’’ sources 

(regulated at 10 CSR 10–6.060(5))— 

sources which are not exempt by virtue 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

17588 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 61 / Wednesday, March 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

10Missouri proposed regulations, by notice dated 

February 15, 2011, to adopt EPA’s ‘‘tailoring rule’’ 

(75 FR 31514, June 3, 2010). 

11The narrowing rule, in effect, narrowed EPA’s 

approval of Missouri’s PSD program for GHGs so 

that the approved SIP would only cover sources of 

GHGs consistent with the timing and thresholds 

specified by EPA in the tailoring rule referenced 

previously. 

of rule 10–6.061, permit exemptions, 

and emit below specified levels (e.g., 40 

tons per year of VOCs). De minimis 

sources which emit above certain levels 

specified in rule 10–6.061 (e.g., 2.75 

pounds per hour of NOx or VOCs, and, 

for VOCs that do not contain hazardous 

air pollutants, more than 4 tons per 

year) are required to do an ambient air 

quality analysis to show that they are 

not adversely impacting the NAAQS. 

MDNR may also require impact analyses 

for other sources (sources lower than 

these levels) that may be likely to 

adversely affect air quality. 10 CSR 10– 

6.060(5). 

Missouri also requires 

preconstruction permits for a second 

category of sources above the de 

minimis levels, but below the major 

source levels. Permits for these sources 

may only be issued after a 

determination, among other 

requirements, that the proposed source 

or modification would not interfere with 

attainment or maintenance of a NAAQS. 

10 CSR 10–6.060(6). 

EPA has determined that Missouri’s 

minor new source review (NSR) 

program adopted pursuant to section 

110(a)(2)(C) of the Act regulates 

emissions of ozone and its precursors. 

EPA has also determined that certain 

provisions of the state’s minor NSR 

program adopted pursuant to section 

110(a)(2)(C) of the Act likely do not 

meet all the requirements found in 

EPA’s regulations implementing that 

provision. See 40 CFR 51.160–51.164. 

EPA previously approved Missouri’s 

minor NSR program into the SIP, and at 

the time there was no objection to the 

provisions of this program. See 61 FR 

7714 (February 29, 1996) (originally 

approved at 37 FR 10842 (May 31, 

1972). Since then, the state and EPA 

have relied on the existing state minor 

NSR program to assure that new and 

modified sources not captured by the 

major NSR permitting programs do not 

interfere with attainment and 

maintenance of the NAAQS. 

In this action, EPA is proposing to 

approve Missouri’s infrastructure SIP 

for ozone with respect to the general 

requirement in section 110(a)(2)(C) to 

include a program in the SIP that 

regulates the modification and 

construction of any stationary source as 

necessary to assure that the NAAQS are 

achieved. EPA is not proposing to 

approve or disapprove the state’s 

existing minor NSR program itself to the 

extent that it is inconsistent with EPA’s 

regulations governing this program. EPA 

believes that a number of states may 

have minor NSR provisions that are 

contrary to the existing EPA regulations 

for this program. EPA intends to work 

with states to reconcile state minor NSR 

programs with EPA’s regulatory 

provisions for the program. The 

statutory requirements of section 

110(a)(2)(C) provide for considerable 

flexibility in designing minor NSR 

programs, and EPA believes it may be 

time to revisit the regulatory 

requirements for this program to give 

the states an appropriate level of 

flexibility to design a program that 

meets their particular air quality 

concerns, while assuring reasonable 

consistency across the country in 

protecting the NAAQS with respect to 

new and modified minor sources. 

(3) Missouri also has a program 

approved by EPA as meeting the 

requirements of Part C, relating to 

prevention of significant deterioration of 

air quality. Missouri’s implementing 

rule, 10 CSR 10–6.060(8), incorporates 

the relevant portions of the Federal rule, 

40 CFR 52.21, by reference, including 

the relevant portions of EPA’s ‘‘NSR 

reform’’ rule promulgated by EPA on 

December 31, 2002. In this action, EPA 

is not proposing to approve or 

disapprove any state rules with regard 

to NSR reform requirements. EPA will 

act on NSR reform submittals through a 

separate rulemaking process. For 

Missouri, we have previously approved 

the relevant portions of Missouri’s NSR 

reform rules for attainment areas. See 71 

FR 36486 (June 27, 2006). 

The Missouri SIP also contains a 

permitting program for major sources 

and modifications in nonattainment 

areas; however, this requirement is not 

addressed in this rulemaking (see 

discussion of the section 110(a)(2)(I) 

requirements for nonattainment areas, 

below). 

With respect to the PSD program, EPA 

notes that the Missouri SIP provides 

that ozone precursors (volatile organic 

compounds—VOC and nitrogen 

oxides—NOx) are regulated. For 

example, a source that is major for NOx

is major for ozone under the state’s 

prevention of significant deterioration of 

air quality program in rule 10 CSR 10– 

6.060(8). In addition, rules 10 CSR 10– 

6.060(1)(A) and 10–6.060(8)(A) 

incorporate 40 CFR 52.21(b)(50)(i)(a) by 

reference. The latter regulation 

specifically identifies volatile organic 

compounds and nitrogen oxides as 

precursors to ozone in all attainment 

and unclassifiable areas. 

Finally, with respect to the 

applicability of the Missouri PSD 

program to greenhouse gas (GHG) 

emissions, EPA notes that Missouri 

promulgated an emergency amendment 

to its rules effective January 3, 2011, to 

ensure that it maintains full authority 

over its permitting program with respect 

to GHGs and avoids an overwhelming 

increase in the number of required 

permits and resulting burden on 

Missouri’s permitting resources. See 36 

Missouri Register 218–219 (January 18, 

2011). Although this emergency 

amendment expires on July 2, 2011, 

EPA understands that prior to that date, 

Missouri intends to take further 

regulatory action to more permanently 

address GHGs.10

In the interim, on March 8, 2011, 

Missouri informed EPA that the 

infrastructure SIP for the 1997 ozone 

standard that it submitted on February 

22, 2007 only covered the portion of 

Missouri’s PSD program that remained 

approved after promulgation of EPA’s 

GHG PSD ‘‘Narrowing Rule’’ (75 FR 

82536, December 30, 2010).11 Therefore, 

EPA believes that it can approve the SIP 

submission as meeting the applicable 

infrastructure SIP requirements for the 

PSD requirements referenced in section 

110(a)(2)(C). 

On the basis of the foregoing, EPA 

believes that the Missouri SIP and 

underlying statutory authority are 

adequate to meet the requirements of 

section 110(a)(2)(C) for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. 

(D) Interstate and international 

transport: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) 

requires SIPs to include provisions 

prohibiting any source or other type of 

emissions activity in one state from 

contributing significantly to 

nonattainment in, or interfering with 

maintenance by, another state with 

respect to the NAAQS, or from 

interfering with measures required in 

another state to prevent significant 

deterioration of air quality or to protect 

visibility. 

Missouri addressed the provisions of 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i), as it relates to the 

1997 ozone and PM standards, in the 

SIP submission received by EPA on 

February 27, 2007. EPA approved the 

portion of the Missouri SIP submittal 

relating to section 110(a)(2)(D)(i), on 

May 8, 2007 (72 FR 25975). Therefore, 

the proposed action addressed in this 

notice does not include the interstate 

transport elements, nor does this 

rulemaking reopen any aspect of EPA’s 

prior action on the transport elements 

for Missouri for the 1997 standards. 

Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires that 

the SIP insure compliance with the 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 61 / Wednesday, March 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules 17589 

12EPA notes that subsequent to the promulgation 

of the Clean Air Interstate Rule, on December 23, 

2008, the District of Columbia Circuit Court of 

Appeals remanded the rule back to EPA without 

vacatur. North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176 (DC 

Cir. 2008). EPA has since proposed the Transport 

Rule (75 FR 45210) that would replace CAIR when 

final. 

applicable requirements of Sections 126 

and 115, relating to interstate and 

international pollution abatement. 

Missouri sources have not been 

identified by EPA as having any 

interstate or international impacts under 

Section 126 or Section 115 in any 

pending actions relating to the 1997 

ozone standards. Missouri sources have 

been identified in findings under 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), relating to interstate 

impacts, in the NOx SIP call (63 FR 

57355) and the Clean Air Interstate Rule 

(70 FR 25162),12 and Missouri has 

satisfactorily revised its SIP to respond 

to these findings. 

Section 126(a) of the Act requires new 

or modified sources to notify 

neighboring states of potential impacts 

from sources within the state. Missouri 

regulations require that affected states 

receive notice prior to the 

commencement of any construction or 

modification of a source. Rule 10 CSR 

10–6.060(6) requires that the review of 

all PSD permit applications follow the 

procedures of 10 CSR 10–6.060(12)(A), 

Appendix A. Appendix A in turn 

requires that the permitting authority 

notify affected states once a draft permit 

goes out for public comment. 10 CSR 

10–6.060(12)(A)11. 

Based on the foregoing, EPA believes 

that Missouri has the adequate 

infrastructure needed to address section 

110(a)(2)(D)(ii) for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. 

(E) Adequate authority, resources, 

implementation, and oversight: Section 

110(a)(2)(E) requires that SIPs provide 

for the following: (1) Necessary 

assurances that the state (and other 

entities within the state responsible for 

implementing the SIP) have adequate 

personnel, funding, and authority under 

state or local law to implement the SIP, 

and that there are no legal impediments 

to such implementation; (2) 

requirements that the state comply with 

the requirements relating to state 

boards, pursuant to section 128 of the 

Act; and (3) necessary assurances that 

the state has responsibility for 

implementation of any plan provision 

for which it relies on local governments 

or other entities to carry out that portion 

of the plan. 

(1) With respect to adequate authority, 

we have previously discussed 

Missouri’s authority to implement the 

SIP for the 1997 ozone standards, 

primarily in the discussion of section 

110(a)(2)(A). Neither Missouri nor EPA 

has identified any legal impediments to 

implementation of those standards. 

With respect to adequate resources, 

MDNR asserts that it has adequate 

personnel to implement the SIP. The 

SIP submittal for the 1997 ozone 

standards describes the regulations 

governing the various functions of 

personnel within the Air Pollution 

Control Program, including the 

Technical Support (Air Quality 

Analysis), Air Quality Planning, 

Enforcement, and Permitting Sections of 

the program (10 CSR 10–1.010(2)(D)). 

With respect to funding, the Air 

Conservation Law requires the MACC to 

establish an annual emissions fee for 

sources in order to fund the reasonable 

costs of the implementing various air 

pollution control programs. Section 

643.079 of the Air Conservation Law 

provides for the deposit of the fees into 

various subaccounts (e.g., a subaccount 

for the Title V operating permit program 

used for Title V activities; a subaccount 

for non-Title V activities) for use in 

implementing the programs. The state 

uses funds in the non-Title V 

subaccounts, along with General 

Revenue funds and EPA grants under, 

for example, sections 103 and 105 of the 

Act, to fund the programs. EPA 

conducts periodic program reviews to 

ensure that the state has adequate 

resources and funding to, among others, 

implement the SIP. 

(2) Conflict of interest provisions— 

Section 128. 

Section 110(a)(2)(E) also provides that 

the state must meet the requirements of 

Section 128, relating to representation 

on state boards and conflicts of interest 

by members of such boards. We note 

that this particular provision is not 

related to promulgation or revision of 

any NAAQS, and we have not 

determined that Missouri must show 

specifically that it meets this 

requirement with respect to the ozone 

infrastructure SIP for the 1997 

standards. However, the following 

discussion shows how Missouri 

generally meets the requirements of 

Section 128. 

Section 128 requires that a SIPimplementing body which approves 

permits or enforcement orders under the 

Act must have at least a majority of 

members who represent the public 

interest and do not derive a ‘‘significant 

portion’’ of income from entities or 

individuals subject to permits and 

enforcement orders under the Act. In 

addition, Section 128 requires that 

members of such a body or the agency 

head with similar authorities adequately 

disclose any potential conflicts of 

interest. 

Section 643.040 of the Air 

Conservation Law generally tracks the 

language of section 128 of the Act, and 

requires that the Missouri Air 

Conservation Commission promulgate 

rules regarding conflict of interest. Rule 

10 CSR 10–1.020 provides the specific 

process for disclosure of potential 

conflicts of interest prior to discussion 

of, or voting on, a rule, variance, appeal 

or order, and rules for voting when a 

member has been excluded from 

participation. The MACC also has an 

operations manual which directs 

members to comply with statutory 

requirements relating to conflict of 

interest, including Chapter 105 of the 

Missouri Revised Statutes, which 

contains more general prohibitions 

relating to conflict of interest. 

MDNR officials, including the 

Director, are also subject to the conflict 

of interest provisions in Chapter 105 of 

the Missouri Revised Statutes. Sections 

105.452 and 105.454 contain 

prohibitions on actions which may 

result in a conflict of interest. 

(3) With respect to assurances that the 

state has responsibility to adequately 

implement the SIP when it authorizes 

local or other agencies to carry out 

portions of the plan, Section 643.190 

designates the MDNR as the air 

pollution control agency ‘‘for all 

purposes’’ of the Clean Air Act. 

Although Section 643.140 authorizes 

the MACC to allow local governments 

such as cities or counties to carry out 

their own air pollution control 

programs, the MACC retains authority to 

carry out the provisions of Missouri’s 

Air Conservation Law in local areas, 

notwithstanding any such authorization. 

The MDNR Air Program oversees the 

activities of the local agencies to ensure 

adequate implementation of the plan by 

the local agencies (Kansas City, City of 

St. Louis, St. Louis County, and 

Springfield-Greene County). MDNR 

utilizes subgrants to the local agencies 

both to provide adequate funding, and 

as an oversight mechanism with respect 

to the local agencies. EPA conducts 

reviews of the local program activities 

in conjunction with its oversight of the 

state program. 

Based on the foregoing, EPA believes 

that Missouri has the adequate 

infrastructure needed to address section 

110(a)(2)(E) for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. 

(F) Stationary source monitoring 

system: Section 110(a)(2)(F) requires 

states to establish a system to monitor 

emissions from stationary sources and 

to submit periodic emission reports. 

That section also requires that the state 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

17590 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 61 / Wednesday, March 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

correlate the source reports with 

emission limitations or standards 

established under the Act and make 

reports available for public inspection. 

To address this element, Section 

643.050.1(3)(a) of the Air Conservation 

Law authorizes the state to require 

persons engaged in operations which 

result in air pollution to monitor or test 

emissions and to file reports containing 

information relating to rate, period of 

emission and composition of effluent. 

Missouri rule 10 CSR 10–6.030 

incorporates various EPA reference 

methods for testing source emissions, 

including methods for NOX and VOCs. 

The Federal test methods are in 40 CFR 

Part 60, App. A. 

Missouri rule 10 CSR 10–6.110 also 

requires monitoring of emissions and 

filing of periodic reports on emissions, 

and Missouri makes this information 

available to the public. Missouri uses 

this information to track progress 

towards maintaining the NAAQS, 

developing control and maintenance 

strategies, identifying sources and 

general emission levels, and 

determining compliance with emission 

regulations and additional EPA 

requirements. Missouri rule 10 CSR 10– 

6.210, relating to treatment of 

confidential information, specifically 

excludes emissions data from 

confidential treatment. Under that rule 

emissions data includes information 

regarding monitoring results required to 

be reported by sources under Missouri’s 

air pollution control rules. Finally, 

Section 643.192.2 of the Air 

Conservation Law requires that MDNR 

provide an annual report that 

summarizes annual changes in air 

quality. 

EPA believes that Missouri has the 

adequate infrastructure needed to 

address section 110(a)(2)(F) for the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

(G) Emergency authority: Section 

110(a)(2)(G) requires states to provide 

for authority to address activities 

causing imminent and substantial 

endangerment to public health or 

welfare or the environment (comparable 

to the authorities provided in Section 

303 of the Act), including contingency 

plans to implement the emergency 

authorities. 

Section 643.090 of the Air 

Conservation Law authorizes the MACC 

or the Director of MDNR to declare an 

emergency where the ambient air, due 

to meteorological conditions and a 

buildup of air contaminants, may 

present an ‘‘emergency risk’’ to public 

health, safety, or welfare. The MACC or 

Director may, with the written approval 

of the governor, by order prohibit, 

restrict or condition all sources of air 

contaminants contributing to the 

emergency condition, during such 

periods of time necessary to alleviate or 

lessen the effects of the emergency 

condition. The statute also enables 

MDNR to promulgate implementing 

regulations. Even in the absence of an 

emergency condition, Section 643.090 

also authorizes the Director to issue 

‘‘cease and desist’’ orders to specific 

persons engaging in activities which 

involve a discharge of air contaminants, 

or a risk of air contamination, that 

presents a danger to public health or 

welfare. 

Missouri rule 10 CSR 10–6.130 

(‘‘Controlling Emissions During 

Episodes of High Air Pollution 

Potential’’) includes action levels and 

contingency measures for ozone and 

other pollutants. This rule specifies the 

conditions that establish an air 

pollution alert, watch or emergency and 

the associated procedures and emissions 

reduction objectives for dealing with 

each. The rule establishes action levels 

for one-hour and eight-hour average 

concentrations. The action levels and 

associated contingency measures vary 

depending on the level of ozone 

concentrations in a particular area. This 

rule is contained in the Federally 

approved SIP. 

EPA believes that the Missouri SIP 

adequately addresses section 

110(a)(2)(G) for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. 

(H) Future SIP revisions: Section 

110(a)(2)(H) requires states to have the 

authority to revise their SIPs in response 

to changes in the NAAQS, availability of 

improved methods for attaining the 

NAAQS, or in response to an EPA 

finding that the SIP is substantially 

inadequate to attain the NAAQS. 

In addition to Missouri’s general 

enabling authority in Section 643.050 of 

the Air Conservation Law, discussed 

previously, Section 643.055 and rules 

10 CSR 10–1.010(2)(B)9 and (D) grant 

MACC authority to promulgate rules, 

and establish standards and guidelines, 

to ensure that the state complies with 

the provisions of the Federal Clean Air 

Act. This includes authority to revise 

rules as necessary to respond to a 

revised NAAQS and to respond to EPA 

findings of substantial inadequacy (see, 

for example, 71 FR 46860, August 15, 

2006, in which EPA approved Missouri 

rules promulgated in response to EPA’s 

NOX SIP call for Missouri and other 

states). 

EPA believes that Missouri has the 

adequate authority to address section 

110(a)(2)(H) for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. 

(I) Nonattainment areas: Section 

110(a)(2)(I) requires that in the case of 

a plan or plan revision for areas 

designated as nonattainment areas, 

states must meet applicable 

requirements of Part D of the Act, 

relating to SIP requirements for 

designated nonattainment areas. 

The plan submitted by Missouri is a 

statewide ozone infrastructure SIP and 

was not intended by Missouri to meet 

its obligations for nonattainment areas. 

Missouri has one ozone nonattainment 

area (the St. Louis metropolitan area). 

EPA has not addressed Section 

110(a)(2)(I) in its recent infrastructure 

SIP guidance because Part D SIPs are 

due on a different schedule than the 

infrastructure SIP submittal schedule. 

(See, e.g., the infrastructure SIP 

guidance for the revised lead standard, 

73 FR 67034, n. 113, Nov. 12, 2008, and 

the infrastructure SIP guidance for the 

revised NO2 standards, 75 FR 6523, n. 

27, Feb. 9, 2010.) Therefore, this 

proposal does not address Section 

110(a)(2)(I). EPA will take action on any 

Part D nonattainment plans through a 

separate rulemaking. 

(J) Consultation with government 

officials, public notification, PSD and 

visibility protection: Section 110(a)(2)(J) 

requires SIPs to meet the applicable 

requirements of the following CAA 

provisions: (1) section 121, relating to 

interagency consultation regarding 

certain CAA requirements; (2) section 

127, relating to public notification of 

NAAQS exceedances and related issues; 

and (3) Part C of the Act, relating to 

prevention of significant deterioration of 

air quality and visibility protection. 

(1) With respect to interagency 

consultation, Section 643.050.3 of the 

Air Conservation Law requires the 

MACC to consult and cooperate with 

other Federal and state agencies, and 

with political subdivisions, for the 

purpose of implementing its air 

pollution control responsibilities. 

Missouri also has appropriate 

interagency consultation provisions in 

its preconstruction permit program. For 

instance, Missouri rule 10 CSR 10– 

6.060(12)(B) requires that when a permit 

goes out for public comment, the 

permitting authority must provide 

notice to local air pollution control 

agencies, the chief executive of the city 

and county where the installation or 

modification would be located, any 

comprehensive regional land use 

planning agency, any state air program 

permitting authority, and any Federal 

Land Manager whose lands may be 

affected by emissions from the 

installation or modification. 

(2) With respect to the requirements 

for public notification in Section 127, 

Missouri rule 10 CSR 10–6.130, 

discussed previously in connection with 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 61 / Wednesday, March 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules 17591 

the state’s authority to address 

emergency episodes, contains 

provisions for public notification of 

elevated ozone and other air pollutant 

levels, and measures which can be taken 

by the public to reduce concentrations. 

In addition, information regarding air 

pollution and related issues, is provided 

on an MDNR website, http:// 

www.dnr.mo.gov/pubs/index.html. 

(3) With respect to the applicable 

requirements of Part C, relating to 

prevention of significant deterioration of 

air quality and visibility protection, we 

previously noted in the discussion of 

section 110(a)(2)(C) (relating to 

enforcement of control measures) how 

the Missouri SIP meets the PSD 

requirements, incorporating the Federal 

rule by reference. With respect to the 

visibility component of section 

110(a)(2)(J), we reiterate the statutory 

requirement providing, in relevant part, 

that each plan must meet the 

‘‘applicable requirements’’ of Part C (of 

Title I of the Act) relating to visibility 

protection. We note that the other Part 

C requirements specified in Section 

110(a)(2)(J) (applicable requirements 

relating to prevention of significant 

deterioration of air quality), specifically 

relate to the 1997 and 2006 NAAQS (as 

well as other pollutants regulated under 

the CAA), and a state must be able to 

implement those requirements with 

respect to a new or revised NAAQS 

when promulgated. In contrast to the 

PSD program, the visibility protection 

requirements are not directly related to 

the promulgation of, or revision to, a 

NAAQS. While the SIP must 

independently meet the visibility 

protection requirements of Part C by 

virtue of the specific SIP requirements 

in Sections 169A and 169B of the Act, 

EPA believes that the visibility 

protection requirements are not 

‘‘applicable requirements’’ within the 

meaning of Section 110(a)(2)(J) and that 

the infrastructure SIP is not required to 

be revised with respect to visibility 

protection merely due to promulgation 

of, or revision to, these 1997 ozone 

NAAQS. 

For the reasons stated above, EPA 

believes that Missouri has met the 

applicable requirements of Section 

110(a)(2)(J) for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS in the state. 

(K) Air quality and modeling/data: 

Section 110(a)(2)(K) requires that SIPs 

provide for performing air quality 

modeling, as prescribed by EPA, to 

predict effects on ambient air quality of 

emissions of any NAAQS pollutant, and 

for submission of such data to EPA 

upon request. 

Missouri has authority to conduct air 

quality modeling and report the results 

of such modeling to EPA. Section 

643.050 of the Air Conservation Law 

provides Missouri with the general 

authority to develop a general 

comprehensive plan to prevent, abate, 

and control air pollution. EPA believes 

that this statutory authority, along with 

other authorities such as found in 

Section 643.055 discussed above, 

provides MDNR with authority to 

conduct modeling to address NAAQS 

issues. As an example of regulatory 

authority to perform modeling for 

purposes of determining NAAQS 

compliance, Missouri regulation 10 CSR 

10–6.060, App. F requires the use of 

EPA-approved air quality models (e.g., 

those found in 40 CFR part 51, App. W) 

for construction permitting. Rule 10 

CSR 10–6.110 requires specified sources 

of air pollution to report emissions to 

MDNR, which among other purposes 

may be utilized in modeling analyses. 

These data are available to any member 

of the public, upon request. 10 CSR 10– 

6.110(3)(D). 

EPA believes that Missouri has the 

adequate infrastructure needed to 

address section 110(a)(2)(K) for the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

(L) Permitting Fees: Section 

110(a)(2)(L) requires SIPs to require 

each major stationary source to pay 

permitting fees to the permitting 

authority to cover the cost of reviewing, 

approving, implementing and enforcing 

a permit. That section provides that the 

fee requirement applies until a fee 

program established by the state 

pursuant to Title V of the Act, relating 

to operating permits, is approved by 

EPA. 

Section 643.079 of the Air 

Conservation Law provides authority for 

MDNR to collect permit fees, including 

Title V fees. Missouri’s Title V program, 

including the fee program addressing 

the requirements of the Act and 40 CFR 

70.9 relating to Title V fees, was 

approved by EPA in May 1997 (62 FR 

26405, May 14, 1997). Therefore, EPA 

believes that the requirements of section 

110(a)(2)(L) are met. 

(M) Consultation/participation by 

affected local entities: Section 

110(a)(2)(M) requires SIPs to provide for 

consultation and participation by local 

political subdivisions affected by the 

SIP. 

Section 643.050.3(6) of the Air 

Conservation Law requires that the 

MACC encourage political subdivisions 

to handle air pollution control problems 

within their respective jurisdictions to 

the extent possible and practicable. 

Section 643.140 provides the 

mechanism for local political 

subdivisions to participate in plan 

development, while maintaining 

oversight of local programs within the 

MACC. The MDNR’s Air Pollution 

Control Program has signed State and 

Local Agreements with the air agencies 

with St. Louis City, St. Louis County, 

Kansas City and Springfield/Greene 

County. In addition, the program 

participates in community meetings, 

consults with, and participates in, 

interagency consultation groups such as 

the Metropolitan Planning 

Organizations in both Kansas City and 

St. Louis. In Kansas City, MDNR works 

with the Mid-America Regional Council 

and in St. Louis, MDNR works with 

East-West Gateway Coordinating 

Council of Governments. 

Therefore, EPA believes that Missouri 

has the adequate infrastructure needed 

to address Section 110(a)(2)(M) for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

IV. What action is EPA proposing? 

EPA proposes to approve the State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) submittal 

from the state of Missouri which 

addresses the requirements of Clean Air 

Act section 110 (a)(2) for the 1997 

revisions to the National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone. 

As described above, EPA believes that 

Missouri has the required infrastructure 

to address all elements of section 

110(a)(2) to ensure that the revised 

ozone standards are implemented in the 

state. 

We are hereby soliciting comment on 

this proposed action. Final rulemaking 

will occur after consideration of any 

comments. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Review 

Under the Clean Air Act, 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 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 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

17592 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 61 / Wednesday, March 30, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

Statutory Authority 

The statutory authority for this action 

is provided by Section 110 of the CAA, 

as amended (42 U.S.C. 7410). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Ozone. 

Dated: March 23, 2011. 

Karl Brooks, 

Regional Administrator, Region 7. 

[FR Doc. 2011–7470 Filed 3–29–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2011–0310; FRL–9287–8] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; State of 

Nebraska 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

the State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

submittal from the state of Nebraska 

addressing the requirements of Clean 

Air Act (CAA) sections 110(a)(1) and (2) 

for the 1997 revisions to the National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) for ozone. Section 110(a)(1) 

requires that each state adopt and 

submit a SIP to support implementation 

of each new or revised NAAQS 

promulgated by the EPA and these SIPs 

are commonly referred to as 

‘‘infrastructure’’ SIPs. EPA believes that 

Nebraska’s infrastructure SIP adequately 

addresses the elements described in 

section 110(a)(2) and further described 

in the October 2, 2007 guidance for 

infrastructure SIPs issued by the EPA 

Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards. However, because EPA 

already approved the portion of 

Nebraska’s SIP submittal relating to the 

interstate transport infrastructure 

element, section 110(a)(2)(D)(i), this 

proposed rulemaking does not address 

the interstate transport element, nor 

does this proposal reopen any aspect of 

EPA’s prior action on the interstate 

transport element. Furthermore, this 

action does not address infrastructure 

requirements with respect to the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS or the 2006 revisions to 

the NAAQS. Those requirements will be 

addressed in future rulemaking. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before April 29, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07– 

OAR–2011–0310 by one of the following 

methods: 

1. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. E-mail: kramer.elizabeth@epa.gov. 

3. Mail: Ms. Elizabeth Kramer, Air 

Planning and Development Branch, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 7, Air and Waste Management 

Division, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas 

City, Kansas 66101. 

4. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver 

your comments to Ms. Elizabeth 

Kramer, Air Planning and Development 

Branch, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 7, Air and Waste 

Management Division, 901 North 5th 

Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2011– 

0310. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at http:// 

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 through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. The http:// 

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 e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov, your e-mail 

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 should be free of any 

defects or viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

http://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. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 7, 901 North 5th Street, 

Kansas City, Kansas 66101, from 8 a.m. 

until 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

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: 

Ms. Elizabeth Kramer, Air Planning and 

Development Branch, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 7, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas 

City, Kansas 66101; telephone number: 

(913) 551–7186; fax number: (913) 551– 

7844; e-mail address: 

kramer.elizabeth@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we refer to 

EPA. This section provides additional 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS