45112 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 144 / Friday, July 26, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

1The St. Louis metropolitan area was also 

recently designated as a ‘‘marginal’’ nonattainment 

area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2012–0767; FRL–9838–7] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Missouri; Reasonably Available 

Control Technology (RACT) for the 8- 

Hour Ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard (NAAQS) 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

a State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision submitted by the State of 

Missouri to EPA in a letter dated May 

4, 2012. The purpose of the SIP revision 

is to amend Missouri’s regulation for the 

Control of Volatile Organic Compounds 

(VOC) and meet the requirement to 

adopt reasonably available control 

technology (RACT) for sources covered 

by EPA’s Control Technique Guidelines 

(CTG) for Industrial Cleaning Solvents. 

We are proposing to approve this 

revision because it satisfies the 

applicable requirements of the Clean Air 

Act (CAA) with respect to RACT for the 

Missouri portion of the St. Louis 

Metropolitan 1997 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before August 26, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07– 

OAR–2012–0767, by one of the 

following methods: 

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

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: kemp.lachala@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or Hand Delivery or Courier: 

Lachala Kemp, Air Planning and 

Development Branch, Environmental 

Protection Agency Region 7, 11201 

Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 

66219. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2012– 

0767. 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 information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or email. 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 email comment directly 

to EPA without going through 

www.regulations.gov, your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Docket. All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

http://www.regulations.gov index. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., CBI or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region 7, 11201 Renner 

Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219, from 

8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding Federal holidays. EPA 

requests that you contact the person 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section to schedule your 

inspection. The interested persons 

wanting to examine these documents 

should make an appointment with the 

office at least 24 hours in advance. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Lachala Kemp, Air Planning and 

Development Branch, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Region 7, 11201 Renner Boulevard, 

Lenexa, Kansas 66219; telephone 

number (913) 551–7214; email address: 

kemp.lachala@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ 

or ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. This section 

provides additional information by 

addressing the following questions: 

Table of Contents 

I. What action is EPA proposing? 

II. Statutory and Regulatory Background 

III. Summary of Missouri’s SIP Revision 

IV. EPA’s Proposed Action 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What action is EPA proposing? 

EPA is proposing to approve a SIP 

revision submitted by the State of 

Missouri to EPA on May 4, 2012. The 

purpose of this revision is to control the 

emissions of VOCs, consistent with 

Control Techniques Guidelines (CTGs) 

issued by EPA, and to satisfy the RACT 

requirements of the CAA for the 

Missouri portion of the St. Louis 

metropolitan 1997 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area. Specifically, the 

revision incorporates an amendment to 

an existing SIP-approved Missouri 

regulation 10 Code of State Regulations 

10–5.455 to control emissions from 

Industrial Solvent Cleaning Operations 

in the St. Louis metropolitan area. The 

revision includes lowering the 

allowable emissions threshold for VOCs 

released per day from the use, storage 

and disposal of industrial cleaning 

solvents, and adds requirements for 

facilities that exceed the applicability 

threshold. EPA is proposing to approve 

this revision because the adoption by 

Missouri of this regulation represents 

RACT control levels for CTGs issued by 

EPA after 2006. In addition, EPA is 

proposing to approve this revision 

because it meets the requirements of the 

conditional approval the EPA issued on 

January 10, 2012. See 77 FR 3144 

(January 23, 2012). 

II. Statutory and Regulatory 

Background 

CAA section 172(c)(1) requires that 

SIPs for nonattainment areas ‘‘provide 

for the implementation of all reasonably 

available control measures as 

expeditiously as practicable (including 

such reductions in emissions from 

existing sources in the area as may be 

obtained through the adoption, at a 

minimum, of reasonably available 

control technology) and shall provide 

for attainment of the national primary 

ambient air quality standards.’’ The St. 

Louis metropolitan area—which 

includes the counties of Franklin, 

Jefferson, St. Charles and St. Louis and 

the city of St. Louis in Missouri—is 

currently designated as a moderate 

nonattainment area under the 1997 8- 

hour ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard (NAAQS).1 For areas 

in moderate nonattainment with the 

ozone NAAQS, section 182(b)(2) 

requires states to submit SIP revisions to 

EPA that require sources of VOCs that 

are subject to a CTG issued by EPA, and 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 144 / Friday, July 26, 2013 / Proposed Rules 45113 

2For a moderate nonattainment area, a major 

stationary source is one which emits, or has the 

potential to emit, one hundred tons per year or 

more of VOCs. See CAA section 302(j). 

3Under section 183(b), EPA is required to 

periodically review and, as necessary, update CTGs. 

all other major stationary sources,2 in 

the nonattainment area to implement 

RACT. 

EPA has defined RACT as the lowest 

emissions limitation that a particular 

source is capable of meeting by the 

application of control technology that is 

reasonably available, considering 

technological and economic feasibility. 

See 44 FR 53761 (September 17, 1979). 

EPA provides states with guidance 

concerning what types of controls could 

constitute RACT for certain source 

categories through the issuance of CTGs. 

See 71 FR 58745, at 58747 (October 5, 

2006). 

Section 183(e) of the CAA provides 

that EPA may issue a CTG in lieu of a 

national regulation for categories of 

consumer or commercial products 

where the Administrator determines 

that such guidance will be substantially 

as effective as regulations in reducing 

VOC emissions in ozone nonattainment 

areas. 

III. Summary of Missouri’s SIP 

Revision 

On January 10, 2012, EPA took final 

action to conditionally approve a SIP 

revision submitted by the State of 

Missouri to EPA on January 17, 2007, 

with a supplemental revision submitted 

to EPA on June 1, 2011. See 77 FR 3144 

(January 23, 2012). As part of that 

action, EPA also approved several VOC 

rules adopted by Missouri and 

submitted to EPA in a letter dated 

August 16, 2011. All of these rules 

addressed VOC RACT requirements for 

sources in categories for which EPA 

issued CTGs during 2006–2008. 

However, in August 2011, Missouri did 

not submit a RACT rule for inclusion 

into the Missouri SIP to address one 

CTG: Solvent Cleanup Operations. 

Based on Missouri’s commitment to 

submit a rule for inclusion into the SIP 

to address this remaining CTG by 

December 31, 2012, EPA conditionally 

approved the Missouri SIP revisions 

that address the requirements of RACT. 

On May 4, 2012, the Missouri 

Department of Natural Resources 

(MDNR) submitted to EPA a proposed 

SIP revision demonstrating compliance 

with the RACT requirements set forth by 

the CAA under the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. This submittal addressed 

source categories for Industrial Cleaning 

Solvents, a new CTG issued by EPA on 

October 5, 2006, for which states were 

required to address by October 5, 2007 

(71 FR 58745).3

This revision will ensure that the 

requirements of this CTG will be 

incorporated into the VOC RACT rules 

for the St. Louis moderate ozone 

nonattainment area. EPA has reviewed 

this new VOC rule revision with respect 

to the RACT requirements and the 

recommendations in the new CTG and 

proposes to find that this revision meets 

RACT. Moreover, this rule is designed 

to fulfill the requirements of EPA’s 

conditional approval of Missouri’s VOC 

RACT SIP. A brief description of the 

VOC rule that is proposed for approval 

in this action is provided below. 

10 CSR 10–5.455 Control of Emissions 

From Industrial Solvent Cleaning 

Operations 

This rule is intended to reduce the 

VOC emissions from industrial cleaning 

operations that use organic solvents. 

The rule amendment adopted by 

Missouri on April 28, 2011, and 

submitted to EPA for inclusion into the 

Missouri SIP lowered the allowable 

emissions threshold for volatile organic 

compounds released per day from the 

use, storage and disposal of industrial 

cleaning solvents, and added 

requirements for facilities that exceed 

the applicability threshold. The rule 

amendment adopted by Missouri on 

February 2, 2012, incorporated 

equipment cleaning work practices as a 

compliance option for manufacturers of 

coatings, inks and resins. EPA believes 

that these changes make the limits 

consistent with the recommendations in 

the Federal CTG for this source 

category. 

As discussed above, EPA published a 

final rulemaking which approved 

Missouri’s submittal with respect to 

several other VOC rules to address 

RACT requirements. See 77 FR 3144. 

Therefore, today’s action only addresses 

the Industrial Cleaning Solvents source 

category. This proposal does not reopen 

any other aspect of Missouri’s VOC 

RACT SIP. 

IV. EPA’s Proposed Action 

In today’s action, EPA is proposing to 

approve a revision to Missouri’s VOC 

rule 10 CSR 10–5.455 into Missouri’s 

SIP, as EPA believes that this rule 

satisfies RACT for the Missouri portion 

of the St. Louis nonattainment area for 

Industrial Cleaning Solvents. EPA also 

believes that this rule satisfies the 

requirements of the conditional 

approval of Missouri’s VOC RACT SIP 

referenced above. This action, if final, 

would mean that the Missouri SIP meets 

all of the applicable VOC RACT 

requirements for St. Louis under section 

182(b)(2) of the Act, as they relate to the 

1997 ozone NAAQS. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable Federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed 

action merely approves state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (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 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
45114 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 144 / Friday, July 26, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

1The 1984 SIP approval of Rule 431.1 was 

actually for the South Coast Air Quality 

Management District (SCAQMD). The Antelope 

Valley Air Pollution Control District (AVAPCD) was 

formed on July 1, 1997 from the SCAQMD. All 

South Coast rules in effect at the time remain in 

effect under the newly formed AVAPCD until such 

time that Antelope Valley amended or rescinded 

the rule. On January 1, 2002, Antelope Valley Air 

Quality Management District replaced the 

AVAPCD. 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the State, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: July 8, 2013. 

Karl Brooks, 

Regional Administrator, Region 7. 

[FR Doc. 2013–18056 Filed 7–25–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2013–0508; FRL–9838–3] 

Revisions to the California State 

Implementation Plan, Antelope Valley 

Air Quality Management District 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

revisions to the Antelope Valley Air 

Quality Management District 

(AVAQMD) portion of the California 

State Implementation Plan (SIP). These 

revisions concern standards for 

continuous emissions monitoring 

systems and oxides of sulfur (SOX)

emissions. We are approving local rules 

that regulate continuous emissions 

monitoring systems and standards for 

gaseous sulfur emission sources under 

the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act). We 

are taking comments on this proposal 

and plan to follow with a final action. 

DATES: Any comments must arrive by 

August 26, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2013–0508, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions. 

2. Email: steckel.andrew@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel 

(Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Instructions: All comments will be 

included in the public docket without 

change and may be made available 

online at www.regulations.gov, 

including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through 

www.regulations.gov or email. 

www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous 

access’’ system, and EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send email 

directly to EPA, your email address will 

be automatically captured and included 

as part of the public comment. 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: Generally, documents in the 

docket for this action are available 

electronically at www.regulations.gov 

and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, 

California 94105–3901. While all 

documents in the docket are listed at 

www.regulations.gov, some information 

may be publicly available only at the 

hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted 

material, large maps), and some may not 

be publicly available in either location 

(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy 

materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stanley Tong, EPA Region IX, (415) 

947–4122, tong.stanley@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rules did the State submit? 

B. Are there other versions of these rules? 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rule revisions? 

II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules? 

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

C. EPA Recommendations To Further 

Improve the Rules 

D. Public Comment and Proposed Action 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rules did the State submit? 

Table 1 lists the rules addressed by 

this proposal with the dates that they 

were adopted by the local air agency 

and submitted by the California Air 

Resources Board. 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULES

Local agency Rule No. Rule title Adopted Submitted 

AVAQMD .......... 218 Continuous Emission Monitoring .................................................................. 07/17/12 02/06/13 

AVAQMD .......... 218.1 Continuous Emission Monitoring Performance Specifications ..................... 07/17/12 02/06/13 

AVAQMD .......... 431.1 Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels ................................................................. 08/21/12 04/22/13 

On April 9, 2013 for AVAQMD Rules 

218 and 218.1, and on June 26, 2013 for 

AVAQMD Rule 431.1, EPA determined 

the submittals met the completeness 

criteria in 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix V, 

which must be met before formal EPA 

review. 

B. Are there other versions of these 

rules? 

We approved an earlier version of 

Rule 218 into the SIP on September 2, 

2008 (73 FR 51226). AVAQMD adopted 

revisions to the SIP-approved version on 

July 17, 2012 and CARB submitted them 

to us on February 6, 2013. 

There is no previous version of Rule 

218.1 in the SIP. AVAQMD adopted 

Rule 218.1 on July 17, 2012 and CARB 

submitted it to us on February 6, 2013. 

We approved an earlier version of 

Rule 431.1 into the SIP on October 19, 

1984 (49 FR 41028).1 AVAQMD adopted 

revisions to Rule 431.1 on August 21, 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS