[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 88 (Thursday, May 7, 1998)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 25191-25192]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-12149]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[MO 047-1047; FRL-6010-8]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of 
Missouri

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to approve the State Implementation Plan 
(SIP) revisions submitted by the state of Missouri to broaden the 
current visible emission rule exceptions to include smoke generating 
devices. This revision would allow smoke generators to be used for 
military and other types of training when operated under applicable 
requirements.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 8, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to Kim Johnson, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Air Branch, 726 Minnesota Avenue, Kansas City, 
Kansas 66101.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim Johnson at (913) 551-7975.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This amendment broadens the current visible 
emission rule exceptions to include smoke generating devices in 
general, when a required permit or a written determination that a 
permit is not required has been issued. The visible emission rule 10 
CSR 10-3.080 is a general limit on opacity from all contaminated 
sources located in certain geographic areas in Missouri. The amendment 
adds certain categories such as smoke-generating devices to the list of 
sources exempted from the opacity limit. The amendment defines a smoke 
generating device as a specialized piece of equipment which is not an 
integral part of a commercial, industrial, or manufacturing process, 
and whose sole purpose is the creation and dispersion of fine solid or 
liquid particles in a gaseous medium. This revision would allow smoke 
generators to be used for military training at such facilities as Fort 
Leonard Wood, as long as such facilities are subject to applicable 
permit requirements.
    A modeling analysis was used to predict air quality impacts for 
Fort Leonard Wood Smoke Training School. Based on the modeling 
analysis, the proposed smoke training at Fort Leonard Wood, if operated 
under the requirements listed in the prevention of significant 
deterioration (PSD) permit, will not exceed the maximum allowable PSD 
PM<INF>10</INF> increment of 30 <greek-m>g/m\3\ based on a 24-hour 
average, and will not cause or contribute to a violation of the 
PM<INF>10</INF> national ambient air quality standards.
    The amendment only exempts units which are subject to permit limits 
containing restrictions which ensure that air quality standards will 
not be violated, and units with de minimis emissions which have been 
determined by Missouri to be exempt from permitting. The EPA believes 
that the exemption will not interfere with attainment and maintenance 
of the ambient air quality standards.

Proposed Action

    The EPA is proposing to approve as a revision to the SIP the 
amendment to rule 10 CSR 10-3.080, ``Restriction of Emission of Visible 
Air Contaminants,'' submitted by the state of Missouri on July 10, 
1996.
    Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or 
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for 
revision to any SIP. Each request for revision to the SIP shall be 
considered separately in light of specific technical, economic, and 
environmental factors, and in relation to relevant statutory and 
regulatory requirements.

Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

    The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this regulatory 
action from Executive Order 12866 review.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., the EPA 
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of 
any proposed or final rule on small entities (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604). 
Alternatively, the EPA may certify that the rule will not have a 
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small 
entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, 
and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than 
50,000.
    SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, Part D of the 
Clean Air Act (CAA) do not create any new requirements but simply 
approve requirements that the state is already imposing. Therefore, 
because the Federal SIP approval does not impose any new requirements, 
the Administrator certifies that it does not have a significant impact 
on any small entities affected. Moreover, due to the nature of the 
Federal-state relationship under the CAA, preparation of a regulatory 
flexibility analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic 
reasonableness of state action. The CAA forbids the EPA to base its 
actions concerning SIPs on such grounds (Union Electric Co. v. U.S. 
E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (S.Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2)).

C. Unfunded Mandates

    Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, the EPA 
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or 
final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated 
costs to state, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate, or to 
private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, the EPA 
must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative 
that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with 
statutory requirements. Section 203 requires the EPA to establish a 
plan for informing and advising any small governments that may be 
significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
    The EPA has determined that the approval action proposed does not 
include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100 
million or more to either state, local, or tribal governments in the 
aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action approves 
preexisting requirements under state or local law, and imposes no new 
requirements. Accordingly, no

[[Page 25192]]

additional costs to state, local, or tribal governments, or to the 
private sector, result from this action.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

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

    Dated: April 14, 1998.
Dennis Grams,
Regional Administrator, Region VII.
[FR Doc. 98-12149 Filed 5-6-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P