[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 88 (Tuesday, May 8, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 25975-25978]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-8774]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2007-0249; FRL-8310-6]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Missouri; 
Interstate Transport of Pollution

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is revising the Missouri State Implementation Plan (SIP) 
for the purpose of approving the Missouri Department of Natural 
Resources' (MDNR) actions to address requirements of section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the Clean Air Act. Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) requires 
each state to submit a SIP that prohibits emissions that adversely 
affect another state's air quality through interstate transport. MDNR 
has adequately addressed the four distinct elements related to the 
impact of interstate transport of air pollutants. These include 
prohibiting significant contribution to downwind nonattainment of the 
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), interference with 
maintenance of the NAAQS, interference with plans in

[[Page 25976]]

another state to prevent significant deterioration of air quality, and 
interference with efforts of other states to protect visibility. The 
requirements for public notification were also met by MDNR.

DATES: This direct final rule will be effective July 9, 2007, without 
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by June 7, 2007. If 
adverse comment is received, EPA 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-2007-0249, by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    2. E-mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f098919d999c849f9ede98959184989582b0958091de979f86"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="93fbf2fefaffe7fcfdbdfbf6f2e7fbf6e1d3f6e3f2bdf4fce5">[email protected]</span></a>.
    3. Mail: Heather Hamilton, Environmental Protection Agency, Air 
Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, 
Kansas 66101.
    4. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver your comments to Heather 
Hamilton, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development 
Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-
2007-0249. 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 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, is not placed on the Internet and will be 
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket 
materials are available either electronically in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection 
Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, 
Kansas City, Kansas 66101. The Regional Office's official hours of 
business are Monday through Friday, 8 p.m. to 4:30, excluding Federal 
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: Heather Hamilton at (913) 551-7039, or 
by e-mail at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#dbb3bab6b2b7afb4b5f5b3bebaafb3bea99bbeabbaf5bcb4ad"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="aac2cbc7c3c6dec5c484c2cfcbdec2cfd8eacfdacb84cdc5dc">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This section provides 
additional information by addressing the following questions:

    What is being addressed in this document?
    What action is EPA taking?

What is being addressed in this document?

    EPA is revising the SIP for the purpose of approving MDNR's actions 
to address the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i). In its request to revise the SIP, Missouri has also 
outlined the other provisions of section 110(a)(2) (the infrastructure 
SIP, to support the implementation, maintenance and enforcement of the 
NAAQS) and described how the state implements the infrastructure 
requirements. In this rule, EPA is only acting on the portion of the 
SIP addressing section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). EPA is taking separate action 
on this portion of the submission because EPA is obligated to 
promulgate a Federal plan if the state plan is not approved by May 27, 
2007. EPA intends to act on the other portion of the submission in the 
near future.
    Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) requires each state to submit a SIP that 
prohibits emissions that adversely affect another state's air quality 
through interstate transport. The SIP must prevent sources in the state 
from emitting pollutants in amounts which will: (1) Contribute 
significantly to nonattainment of the NAAQS, (2) interfere with 
maintenance of the NAAQS in another state, (3) interfere with 
provisions to prevent significant deterioration of air quality, and (4) 
interfere with efforts to protect visibility.
    The EPA issued guidance on August 15, 2006, relating to SIP 
submissions to meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). As 
discussed below, Missouri's analysis of its SIP with respect to the 
statutory requirements is consistent with the guidance.
    The MDNR has addressed the first two of these elements by the 
adoption of the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) model rules that 
require Missouri sources to participate in the EPA-administered cap and 
trade program for nitrogen oxides (NO<INF>X</INF>) and sulfur dioxide. 
Participation in this program will prohibit emissions from the state 
that would contribute significantly to nonattainment or interfere with 
the maintenance of the particulate matter and ozone NAAQS in any 
downwind state. As previously determined by EPA, submittal of a SIP 
revision to satisfy CAIR (submitted to EPA on March 13, 2007) also 
fulfills the state's obligations that pertain to ``significant 
contribution'' and ``interference with maintenance'' (70 FR 25162). It 
should be noted that EPA will act on Missouri's CAIR SIP in a separate 
rulemaking, and this action makes no conclusion with respect to 
approvability of that submittal.
    The third element MDNR addressed was prevention of significant 
deterioration (PSD). For 8-hour ozone, the state has met the 
obligation, consistent with EPA's guidance described previously, by 
confirming that major sources in the state are currently subject to PSD 
programs that implement the 8-hour ozone standard and that the state is 
on track to meet the June 15, 2007, deadline for SIP submissions 
adopting any relevant requirements of the Phase II ozone implementation 
rule. For PM<INF>2.5</INF>, the state has confirmed that the state's 
PSD program is being implemented in accordance with EPA's interim 
guidance calling for the use of PM<INF>10</INF> as a surrogate for 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> for the purposes of PSD and nonattainment New Source 
Review (NSR). Controlling PM<INF>10</INF> emissions and analyzing 
impacts on the environment serves as a surrogate approach for reducing 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> emissions

[[Page 25977]]

and minimizing impacts to air quality. Although EPA has finalized major 
portions of the PM<INF>2.5</INF> implementation rule, we have not yet 
finalized the portion relating to New Source Review. Once the NSR 
portion of the PM<INF>2.5</INF> implementation rule is finalized by 
EPA, MDNR commits to transitioning from use of the interim 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> guidance to the final PM<INF>2.5</INF> implementation 
requirements after approval of the PM<INF>2.5</INF> SIP revision (The 
submittal is due April 5, 2008).
    It should be noted that most of Missouri is currently designated 
attainment/unclassifiable for both the 8-hour ozone and 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. However, St. Louis City, St. Louis County, St. 
Charles County, Franklin County, and Jefferson County are designated as 
nonattainment for the 8-hour ozone and annual fine particulate matter 
NAAQS.
    At this time, it is not possible for MDNR to accurately determine 
whether there is interference with measures in another state's SIP 
designed to protect visibility, which is the fourth element that was 
addressed. Technical projects relating to visibility degradation 
source-receptor relationships are under development. Missouri will be 
in a more advantageous position to address the visibility projection 
requirements once the initial regional haze SIP has been developed. 
MDNR intends to meet the December 17, 2007, submittal deadline for the 
regional haze SIP.
    A public hearing with regard to this action was held by the state, 
and only EPA provided comments on this SIP revision.
    With this action, the non-regulatory text in 40 CFR 52.1320(e) is 
revised to reflect that MDNR addressed the elements of the CAA section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i).

What action is EPA taking?

    The EPA is taking direct final action to approve this revision as 
MDNR has adequately addressed the required elements of CAA section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i). EPA intends to act on the portion of Missouri's 
submittal addressing all other elements of section 110(a)(2), which 
addresses the infrastructure necessary to implement the 8-hour ozone 
and PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS in the state of Missouri, in a future 
rulemaking.
    Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on part of this 
rule, and if that part can be severed from the remainder of the rule, 
EPA may adopt as final those parts of the rule that are not the subject 
of an adverse comment.

Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not 
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this 
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, 
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action 
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes 
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. 
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this action will not have 
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because 
this action approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does 
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by 
state law, it 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).
    This action also does not have tribal implications because it will 
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on 
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or 
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism 
implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the 
States, on the relationship between the national government and the 
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule 
implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or 
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the CAA. 
This action also is not subject to Executive Order 13045, ``Protection 
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997), because it approves a state rule implementing a 
Federal standard.
    In reviewing state submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this 
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the state 
to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to 
disapprove a state submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a state 
submission, to use VCS in place of a state submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section 
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This action does not impose an 
information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
    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 rule 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 July 9, 2007. Filing a petition for 
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect 
the finality of this rule 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, Intergovernmental 
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: April 30, 2007.
John B. Askew,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.

0
Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as 
follows:

[[Page 25978]]

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart AA--Missouri

0
2. In Sec.  52.1320(e) the table is amended by adding an entry in 
numerical order to read as follows:


Sec.  52.1320  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                               EPA-Approved Missouri Nonregulatory SIP Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Applicable
    Name of nonregulatory SIP        geographic or      State submittal    EPA approval date      Explanation
            provision             nonattainment area         date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(51) CAA 110(a)(2)(D)(i)........  Statewide.........  2/27/07...........  5/8/07............  ..................
SIP--Interstate Transport.......  ..................  ..................  [insert FR page     ..................
                                                                           number where the
                                                                           document begins].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 [FR Doc. E7-8774 Filed 5-7-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>