636 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 4 / Friday, January 5, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

factors of the employees of Business I 

violates § 2590.702(c) of this chapter and, 

consequently, the requirement in paragraph 

(d)(3) of this section. 

Example 5. (i) Facts. Association J 

sponsors a group health plan that is available 

to all members. According to the bylaws of 

Association J, membership is open to any 

entity whose principal place of business is in 

State K, which has only one major 

metropolitan area, the capital city of State K. 

Members whose principal place of business 

is in the capital city of State K are charged 

more for premiums than members whose 

principal place of business is outside of the 

capital city. 

(ii) Conclusion. In this Example 5, making 

a distinction between members whose 

principal place of business is in the capital 

city of State K, as compared to some other 

area in State K, is a permitted distinction 

between similarly situated individuals under 

§ 2590.702(d) of this chapter, provided the 

distinction is not directed at individuals 

under § 2590.702(d)(3) of this chapter. 

Accordingly, Association J’s rule for charging 

different premiums based on principal place 

of business does not violate paragraph (d)(3) 

of this section. 

Example 6. (i) Facts. Association L 

sponsors a group health plan, available to all 

members. According to the bylaws of 

Association L, membership is open to any 

entity whose principal place of business is in 

State M. Sole Proprietor N’s principal place 

of business is in City O, within State M. It 

is the only member whose principal place of 

business is in City O, and it is otherwise 

similarly situated with respect to all other 

members of the association. After learning 

that Sole Proprietor N has been diagnosed 

with cancer, based on the cancer diagnosis, 

Association L changes its premium structure 

to charge higher premiums for members 

whose principal place of business is in City 

O. 

(ii) Conclusion. In this Example 6, cancer 

is a health factor under § 2590.702(a) of this 

chapter. Making a distinction based on a 

health factor, between members that are 

otherwise similarly situated is in this case a 

distinction directed at an individual under 

§ 2590.702(d)(3) of this chapter and is not a 

permitted distinction. Accordingly, by 

charging higher premiums to members whose 

principal place of business is City O, 

Association L violates § 2590.702(c) of this 

chapter and, consequently, paragraph (d)(4) 

of this section. 

(e) Dual treatment of working owners 

as employers and employees—(1) A 

working owner of a trade or business 

may qualify as both an employer and as 

an employee of the trade or business for 

purposes of the requirements in 

paragraph (b) of this section, including 

paragraph (b)(2) that each employer 

member of the group or association 

participating in the group health plan 

must be a person acting directly as an 

employer of one or more employees 

who are participants covered under the 

plan, and paragraph (b)(6) that the group 

or association does not make health 

coverage offered to employer members 

through the association available other 

than to employees and former 

employees of employer members and 

the family members or other 

beneficiaries of those employees and 

former employees. 

(2) The term ‘‘working owner’’ as used 

in this paragraph (e) means any 

individual: 

(i) Who has an ownership right of any 

nature in a trade or business, whether 

incorporated or unincorporated, 

including partners and other selfemployed individuals; 

(ii) Who is earning wages or selfemployment income from the trade or 

business for providing personal services 

to the trade or business; 

(iii) Who is not eligible to participate 

in any subsidized group health plan 

maintained by any other employer of 

the individual or of the spouse of the 

individual; and 

(iv) Who either: 

(A) Works at least 30 hours per week 

or at least 120 hours per month 

providing personal services to the trade 

or business, or 

(B) Has earned income from such 

trade or business that at least equals the 

working owner’s cost of coverage for 

participation by the working owner and 

any covered beneficiaries in the group 

health plan sponsored by the group or 

association in which the individual is 

participating. 

(3) Absent knowledge to the contrary, 

the group or association sponsoring the 

group health plan may reasonably rely 

on written representations from the 

individual seeking to participate as a 

working owner as a basis for concluding 

that the conditions in paragraph (e)(2) 

are satisfied. 

Jeanne Klinefelter Wilson, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary, Employee 

Benefits Security Administration, Department 

of Labor. 

[FR Doc. 2017–28103 Filed 1–4–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–29–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2017–0734; FRL 9972–64– 

Region 7] 

Air Plan Approval and Air Quality 

Designation; MO; Redesignation of the 

Missouri Portion of the St. Louis 

Missouri-Illinois Area to Attainment of 

the 1997 Annual Standard for Fine 

Particulate Matter and Approval of 

Associated Maintenance Plan 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Advanced notice of proposed 

rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is issuing this Advanced 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) 

to inform the public of currently 

available information that will be used 

by the Administrator to issue a 

subsequent action to propose 

redesignation of the Missouri portion of 

the St. Louis MO-IL nonattainment area 

for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, (hereafter 

referred to as the ‘‘St. Louis area’’ or 

‘‘area’’). On September 2, 2011, 

Missouri, through the Missouri 

Department of Natural Resources 

(MDNR) submitted a request for EPA to 

redesignate the Missouri portion of the 

St. Louis MO-IL nonattainment area to 

attainment for the 1997 Annual National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) for fine particulate matter 

(PM2.5) and approve a state 

implementation plan (SIP) revision 

containing a maintenance plan for the 

Missouri portion of the area. In advance 

of any potential rulemaking to address 

the state of Missouri’s request, EPA is 

specifically requesting early input and 

comments on its interpretation that 

currently available data support a 

finding that the area will be attaining 

the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS based 

on air quality monitoring data from 

2015–2017, and on EPA’s advanced 

notice of its expectation that the state’s 

plan for maintaining the 1997 Annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS for the St. Louis Area 

(maintenance plan) including the 

associated motor vehicle emission 

budgets (MVEBs) for nitrogen oxides 

(NOX) and PM2.5 for the years 2008– 

2025 is approvable. EPA will take any 

information received from this ANPR 

into consideration when developing a 

proposed action for redesignating the 

Missouri portion of the St. Louis Area 

to attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5

NAAQS. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before February 5, 2018. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 4 / Friday, January 5, 2018 / Proposed Rules 637 

1The date of the original submission is 

September 2, 2011. Missouri supplemented and 

revised their request on March 31, 2014, September 

17, 2014, and May 23, 2017. The May 27, 2017, 

letter requested EPA to take action on prior 

submission, but did not include additional 

documentation. EPA considered all submissions in 

reviewing and proposing this action. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07– 

OAR–2017–0734 to https://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 

The EPA may publish any comment 

received to its public docket. Do not 

submit electronically any information 

you consider to be Confidential 

Business Information (CBI) or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, the full 

EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Lachala Kemp, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Air Planning and 

Development Branch, 11201 Renner 

Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at 

(913) 551 7214, or by email at 

kemp.lachala@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

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

provides additional information by 

addressing the following: 

Table of Contents 

I. What is the purpose of this Advanced 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking? 

II. What future EPA action is discussed in 

this Advanced Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking? 

III. What is the background for EPA’s 

advanced notice? 

IV. What is EPA’s initial analysis of the 

state’s request? 

V. What is EPA’s initial analysis of the state’s 

MVEBs? 

VI. What is EPA’s initial analysis of the 

state’s 2008 emissions inventory? 

VII. Summary of Advanced Notice of 

Proposed Actions 

I. What is the purpose of this Advanced 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking? 

The primary purpose of this 

Advanced Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking or ANPR is to provide the 

public an opportunity to provide input 

on the EPA’s approach and initial 

review of Missouri’s request to 

redesignate the Missouri portion of the 

St. Louis bi-state nonattainment area to 

attainment for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Once the 2015–2017 quality assured and 

certified air monitoring data for the 

entire bi-state nonattainment area is 

available, EPA intends to take action 

determining if the area has met the 

standard and if the state of Missouri has 

satisfied the other requirements for 

redesignating a nonattainment area to 

attainment as provided by the Clean Air 

Act (CAA or Act). Specifically, section 

107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA allows for 

redesignation to attainment provided 

the following criteria are met: (1) The 

Administrator determines that the area 

has attained the applicable NAAQS, (2) 

the Administrator has fully approved 

the applicable implementation plan for 

the area under CAA section 110(k), (3) 

the Administrator determines that the 

improvement in air quality is due to 

permanent and enforceable reductions 

in emissions resulting from 

implementation of the applicable SIP 

and applicable Federal air pollutant 

control regulations and other permanent 

and enforceable reductions, (4) the 

Administrator has fully approved a 

maintenance plan for the area as 

meeting the requirements of CAA 

section 175A, and (5) the state 

containing such area has met all 

requirements applicable to the area 

under section 110 and part D of title I 

of the CAA. 

EPA has reviewed Missouri’s 

submittal and additional information 

and recognizes that the state’s 

information supports the St. Louis area’s 

redesignation for the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS. Based on historical and air 

quality data collected for the majority of 

2017, it is extremely likely the area will 

have an attaining design value based on 

2015–2017 air quality data. Provided air 

quality data for the remainder of the 

2017 calendar year continues to support 

a finding of attainment and EPA 

approves the emissions inventory 

submitted with the maintenance plan, 

EPA expects to approve the area’s 

redesignation. 

II. What future EPA action is discussed 

in this Advanced Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking? 

EPA is providing advanced notice on 

future actions related to Missouri’s 

request that the Agency determine that 

the St. Louis bi-state nonattainment area 

for the 1997 annual PM2.5 National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard attains 

the standard and the Agency officially 

redesignate the area from nonattainment 

to attainment. Missouri submitted their 

first request to determine attainment 

and redesignation on September 1, 

2011. The state then supplemented and 

revised their request on March 31, 2014, 

and on September 17, 2014.1 In this 

notice, when EPA refers to Missouri’s 

submission, we are referring to 

information provided in the 2011 and 

2014 submissions and the additional 

clarifying information together unless 

otherwise specified. EPA is providing 

advanced notice related to information 

that supports redesignation from 

nonattainment to attainment for the 

Missouri portion of the St. Louis area for 

the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS and 

evaluation of Missouri’s 1997 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS maintenance plan, which 

includes the 2008 and 2025 NOX and 

PM2.5 MVEBs for the St. Louis area. EPA 

evaluated Missouri’s request and plan 

consistent with section 175A of the 

CAA and EPA’s supplemental analysis 

that the area will continue to maintain 

for ten years following redesignation. 

The Missouri counties comprising the 

St. Louis area are Franklin, Jefferson, St. 

Charles and St. Louis. The City of St. 

Louis is also part of the nonattainment 

area. 

III. What is the background for EPA’s 

advanced notice? 

Fine particle pollution can be emitted 

directly or formed secondarily in the 

atmosphere. The main precursors of 

secondary PM2.5 are sulfur dioxide 

(SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOX), ammonia 

(NH3), and volatile organic compounds 

(VOC). See, e.g., 72 FR 20586, 72 FR 

20589. Sulfates are a type of secondary 

particle formed from SO2 emissions of 

power plants and industrial facilities. 

Nitrates, another common type of 

secondary particle, are formed from 

NOX emissions of power plants, 

automobiles, and other combustion 

sources of fossil fuel. 

On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated 

the first air quality standards for PM2.5. 

62 FR 38652. EPA promulgated an 

annual standard at a level of 15 

micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m3), 

based on a three-year average of annual 

mean PM2.5 concentrations. In the same 

rulemaking, EPA promulgated a 24-hour 

standard of 65 mg/m3, based on a threeyear average of the 98th percentile of 24- 

hour concentrations. On October 17, 

2006, at 71 FR 61144, EPA retained the 

annual average NAAQS at 15 mg/m3 but 

revised the 24-hour NAAQS to 35 mg/ 

m3, based again on the three-year 

average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
638 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 4 / Friday, January 5, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

2 In response to legal challenges of the annual 

standard promulgated in 2006, the United States 

Courts of Appeals for the District of Columbia 

Circuit (D.C. Cir.) remanded that NAAQS to EPA for 

further consideration. See American Farm Bureau 

Federation and National Pork Producers Council, et 

al. v. EPA, 559 F.3d (D.C. Cir. 2009). However, 

given that the 1997 and 2006 annual NAAQS are 

essentially identical, attainment of the 1997 annual 

NAAQS would also indicate attainment of the 

remanded 2006 annual NAAQS. 

3CAA Section 175A(a) established the 

requirements that must be fulfilled by 

nonattainment areas in order to be redesignated to 

attainment. That section only requires that 

nonattainment areas for the primary standard 

submit a plan addressing maintenance of the 

primary NAAQS in order to be redesignated to 

attainment; it does not require nonattainment areas 

for secondary NAAQS to submit maintenance plans 

in order to be redesignated to attainment. 

concentrations.2 Under EPA regulations 

at 40 CFR part 50, the primary and 

secondary 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

are attained when the annual arithmetic 

mean concentration, as determined in 

accordance with 40 CFR part 50, 

appendix N, is less than or equal to 15.0 

mg/m3 at all relevant monitoring sites in 

the subject area over a three-year period. 

On January 5, 2005, at 70 FR 944, and 

supplemented on April 14, 2005, at 70 

FR 19844, EPA designated the St. Louis 

area as nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5

annual NAAQS. In that action, EPA 

defined the 1997 annual PM2.5 St. Louis 

nonattainment area to include Jefferson, 

Franklin, St. Charles, and St. Louis 

Counties along with the City of St. Louis 

on the Missouri side, and Madison, 

Monroe, and St. Clair Counties as well 

as the Baldwin Township of Randolph 

County on the Illinois side of the 

nonattainment area. 

On November 13, 2009, EPA 

promulgated designations for the 24- 

hour standard established in 2006, 

designating the St. Louis area as 

attainment for that NAAQS (74 FR 

58688). That action clarified that the St. 

Louis area was classified as 

unclassifiable/attainment for the 1997 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA did not 

promulgate designations for the 2006 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS because that 

NAAQS was essentially identical to the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, and today’s 

action only addresses the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS designation. 

All 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS areas were 

designated under subpart 1. Subpart 1 

contains the general requirements for 

nonattainment areas for any pollutant 

governed by a NAAQS and is less 

prescriptive than the other subparts of 

title I, part D. On April 25, 2007 (72 FR 

20586), EPA promulgated its Clean Air 

Fine Particle Implementation Rule, 

codified at 40 CFR part 52, subpart Z, 

in which the Agency provided guidance 

for state and tribal plans to implement 

the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. The DC Circuit 

remanded the Clean Air Fine Particle 

Implementation Rule and the final rule 

entitled ‘‘Implementation of the New 

Source Review (NSR) Program for 

Particulate Matter Less than 2.5 

Micrometers (PM2.5)’’ (73 FR 28321, 

May 16, 2008) (collectively, ‘‘1997 PM2.5

Implementation Rules’’) to EPA on 

January 4, 2013, in Natural Resources 

Defense Council v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 

(D.C. Cir. 2013). The Court found that 

EPA erred implementing the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS pursuant to the general 

implementation provisions of subpart 1, 

rather than the particulate matterspecific provisions of subpart 4. 

On July 29, 2016, EPA issued a rule 

entitled, ‘‘Fine Particulate Matter 

National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards: State Implementation Plan 

Requirements’’ (PM2.5 SIP Requirements 

Rule) that clarifies how states should 

meet the statutory SIP requirements that 

apply to areas designated nonattainment 

for any PM2.5 NAAQS under subparts 1 

and 4. See 81 FR 58010 (August 24, 

2016). It does so by establishing 

regulatory requirements and providing 

guidance that is applicable to areas that 

are currently designated nonattainment 

for existing PM2.5 NAAQS and areas that 

are designated nonattainment for any 

PM2.5 NAAQS in the future. In addition, 

the rule responds to the D.C. Circuit’s 

remand of the 1997 PM2.5

Implementation Rules. As a result, the 

requirements of the rule also govern 

future actions associated with states’ 

ongoing implementation efforts for the 

1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

In the PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule, 

EPA revoked the 1997 primary Annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS in areas that had always 

been attainment for that NAAQS, and in 

areas that had been designated as 

nonattainment but that were 

redesignated to attainment before 

October 24, 2016, the rule’s effective 

date. See 81 FR 58010 (August 24, 

2016). EPA also finalized a provision 

that revokes the 1997 primary Annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS in areas that are 

redesignated to attainment for that 

NAAQS after October 24, 2016, effective 

on the effective date of the redesignation 

of the area to attainment for that 

NAAQS. See 40 CFR 50.13(d). EPA is 

providing advanced notice of its 

expectation to redesignate the St. Louis 

area to attainment for the 1997 Annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS and to approve the CAA 

175A maintenance plan for the 1997 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS in a future action, 

for the reasons described elsewhere in 

this advanced notice.3 If the action is 

finalized, the 1997 primary Annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS will be revoked in the 

Missouri portion of the St. Louis Area 

on the effective date of the 

redesignation. Beginning on that date, 

the Missouri portion of the St. Louis 

Area will no longer be subject to 

transportation or general conformity 

requirements for the 1997 Annual PM2.5

NAAQS due to the revocation of the 

primary NAAQS. See 81 FR 58125. The 

Missouri portion of the St. Louis Area 

will be required to implement the CAA 

section 175A maintenance plan for the 

1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS and the 

prevention of significant deterioration 

(PSD) program for the 1997 Annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS. Once approved, the 

maintenance plan can only be revised if 

the revision meets the requirements of 

CAA Section 110(l) and, if applicable 

CAA section 193. The Area would not 

be required to submit a second 10-year 

maintenance plan for the 1997 Annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS. See 81 FR 58144. 

IV. What is EPA’s initial analysis of the 

state’s request? 

As stated above, EPA is providing 

advanced notice that in a future action 

it intends to formally act on Missouri’s 

request to redesignate the Missouri 

portion of the St. Louis area to 

attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS and Missouri’s plan for 

maintaining the 1997 Annual PM2.5

NAAQS for the St. Louis portion of the 

area, including finding the associated 

MVEBs for 2008 and 2025 as adequate 

using criteria in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and 

(5). EPA is issuing this advanced notice 

of proposed rulemaking because the 

information currently before the agency 

strongly supports a redesignation of the 

St. Louis area to attainment for the 1997 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS, with the 

exception of a small amount of air 

quality data for the 2017 calendar year, 

which EPA expects the states of 

Missouri and Illinois to certify in early 

2018. Assuming, as EPA fully expects, 

that the remaining air quality data 

continue to support a finding that the 

area will have attained the 1997 

standard based on monitoring data from 

2015–2017, EPA intends to propose 

approval of Missouri’s redesignation 

request for its portion of the St. Louis 

1997 PM2.5 nonattainment area. EPA’s 

evaluation of whether Missouri’s 

request for the area satisfies the five 

redesignation criteria provided under 

CAA section 107(d)(3)(E), based on 

currently available information, is 

discussed in greater detail in the 

following paragraphs of this section. 

Criteria (1)—Attainment of the 1997 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

For redesignating a nonattainment 

area to attainment, the CAA requires 

EPA to determine that the area has 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 4 / Friday, January 5, 2018 / Proposed Rules 639 

attained the applicable NAAQS (CAA 

section 107(d)(3)(E)(i)). An area’s 

attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS is determined in accordance 

with 40 CFR 50.7 and appendix N of 

part 50, which requires three complete, 

consecutive calendar years of qualityassured air quality monitoring data. To 

attain this NAAQS, the three-year 

average of the annual arithmetic mean 

concentration, as determined in 

accordance with 40 CFR part 50, 

appendix N, must be less than or equal 

to 15.0 mg/m3 at all relevant monitoring 

sites in the subject area over a three-year 

period. The relevant data must be 

collected and quality-assured in 

accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and 

recorded in the EPA Air Quality System 

(AQS) database. 

On May 23, 2011, EPA determined 

that the St. Louis area was attaining the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS (76 FR 

29652). In that action, EPA reviewed 

PM2.5 monitoring data from monitoring 

stations in the area for the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS for 2007–2009. This data 

was quality-assured and recorded in 

AQS. The design value for 2007–2009 

was 14.1 mg/m3 for the St. Louis area 

which met the NAAQS. On June 27, 

2012 (77 FR 38183), EPA also finalized 

a determination that the St. Louis area 

attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

by the applicable attainment date of 

April 5, 2010. 

In August of 2014, EPA Region 7 

received notice that EPA Region 5 

conducted a technical systems audit 

regarding the weighing of PM2.5 samples 

in Illinois. The audit revealed that the 

Cook County Department of 

Environmental Control, which weighs 

all of the filters in Illinois’ monitoring 

network, did not have the appropriate 

equipment for determining whether the 

laboratory conditions met the 

temperature and humidity criteria in 40 

CFR 50 appendix L for proper 

conditioning of filters. The 

instantaneous temperature and 

humidity information collected during 

the audit suggested that many of the 

sample weighings failed to meet these 

criteria. As a result, no filter-based PM2.5

site in Illinois has sufficient, valid 

Federal Reference Method (FRM) data 

from 2011 through 2013. EPA is aware 

that the monitors in the Illinois portion 

of the St. Louis area started recording 

valid data in AQS in the 3rd quarter of 

2014 and that a valid annual mean can 

only be determined, to date, for the 

years 2015 and 2016 from those Illinois 

monitors. EPA completed a review of 

the recorded data from the entire 

nonattainment area from 2015, 2016, 

and the first two quarters of 2017 and 

believes that this data is indicative of air 

quality that will support a finding that 

the area is attaining the 1997 PM2.5

annual NAAQS based on 2015–2017 air 

quality monitoring data. Assuming the 

complete, quality assured data for 2017 

continues to support that finding, EPA 

in a future action intends to take future 

action regarding Missouri’s request to 

redesignate the Missouri portion of the 

St. Louis area to attainment for the 1997 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS. 

To evaluate how likely it is that the 

area will have an attaining design value, 

once all air quality data for the 2017 

calendar year is complete and certified, 

EPA calculated critical values that 

would be required for the area to be in 

violation of the NAAQS. EPA has 

calculated the critical values in two 

ways; for the entire year of 2017 and for 

the remaining two quarters of 2017. 

Table 1 provides the area’s critical 

values. Both the annual and quarterly 

critical values greatly exceed recently 

recorded levels, indicating that it is 

extremely unlikely that the area’s design 

value will be in violation of the NAAQS 

based on 2015–2017 air quality data. 

The data analysis of critical values in 

2017 demonstrates that all the monitors 

should easily attain the PM2.5 NAAQS 

as the critical values are well above 

what is currently measured or 

historically measured at any of the St. 

Louis PM2.5 monitors. 

TABLE 1—CRITICAL VALUES FOR THE ST. LOUIS AREA FOR THE 1997 ANNUAL PM2.5 NAAQS 

[μg/m3] 

State County Monitor AQS site ID 2015 2016 2017 1 DV2 Critical 

value 3

Critical 

value 

3rd/4th qtrs 4

Missouri .............. St. Louis City ....... Blair Street 

(FRM).

29–510–0085 10.4 8.5 7.4 8.8 26.1 44.8 

Missouri .............. St. Louis City ....... South Broadway 29–510–0007 11.1 8.1 7.0 8.7 25.8 44.6 

Missouri .............. Jefferson .............. Arnold West ....... 29–099–0019 11.6 8.3 8.0 9.3 25.1 42.2 

Missouri .............. St. Louis County .. Ladue ................. 29–189–3001 10.3 8.7 9.2 9.4 26.0 42.8 

Missouri .............. St. Louis City ....... Forest Park ........ 29–510–0094 9.2 8.7 7.7 8.5 27.1 46.5 

Illinois ................. Madison ............... Alton ................... 17–119–2009 9.0 8.8 8.6 8.8 27.2 45.8 

Illinois ................. Madison ............... Wood River ........ 17–119–3007 9.1 8.7 8.2 8.7 27.2 46.2 

Illinois ................. Madison ............... Granite City ........ 17–119–1007 10.4 9.1 8.8 9.4 25.5 42.2 

Illinois ................. St. Clair ............... East St. Louis .... 17–163–0010 10.7 10.0 8.3 9.7 24.3 40.3 

Illinois ................. Jersey .................. Jerseyville .......... 17–083–1001 7.7 7.9 8.9 8.2 29.4 49.9 

1Only first 2 quarters of 2017 data are complete and reported to AQS. 

2 2015–2017 design values not yet valid since only the first 2 quarters of 2017 data being reported to AQS. 

3To determine the critical value for the 2012 NAAQS, and knowing that the average annual value over 3 years must be less than or equal to 

15 μg/m3, EPA used the following formula (y1 + y2 + y3)/3 <= 15 solving for year 3 (y3). Where y3 = 45 ¥ y1 ¥ y2 is the critical value for y3 in 

the equation. 4 Having 2 quarters of data in 2017 (y3), EPA was able to determine how high the average of the last two quarters could be by utilizing the following formula (Q12 + Q34)/2 <= annual critical value where Q34 <= 2 * CV ¥ Q12. 

If there is any indication that the area 

is not attaining the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS, EPA will not go forward with 

acting on Missouri’s request to 

redesignate the area. MDNR has 

committed to continue monitoring in 

this area in accordance with 40 CFR part 

58. 

In summary, EPA is providing for the 

public’s review the currently available 

air quality data, including all data 

submitted by Missouri to AQS, as well 

as EPA’s analysis of the critical values 

for both 2017 and the last two quarters 

of 2017 which indicate it is extremely 

likely that the area will have an 

attaining design value once the 2017 

data are complete and quality-assured. 

EPA is requesting the public’s 

comments and feedback on the data and 

analysis provided, and is providing 

advanced notice that it intends to use 

this information in support of a 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
640 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 4 / Friday, January 5, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

4EPA’s longstanding guidance on redesignations, 

entitled ‘‘Processing Redesignations to Attainment,’’ 

John Calcagni 1992, notes that the subpart 1 

emissions inventory requirement is satisfied by the 

maintenance plan inventory requirements. 

proposal for redesignation of the St. 

Louis area. 

Criteria (2)—the Area Has a Fully 

Approved SIP Under Section 110(k); 

and Criteria (5)—The Missouri Portion 

of the St. Louis Area Has Met All 

Applicable Requirements Under Section 

110 and Part D of the CAA 

For redesignating a nonattainment 

area to attainment, the CAA requires 

EPA to determine that the state has met 

all applicable requirements under 

section 110 and part D of title I of the 

CAA (CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(v)) and 

that the state has a fully approved SIP 

under section 110(k) for the area (CAA 

section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii)). EPA is 

providing advanced notice of its review 

of Missouri’s redesignation and believes 

Missouri has submittal all applicable 

SIP requirements for purposes of 

redesignation for the Missouri portion of 

the St. Louis area under section 110 of 

the CAA (general SIP requirements) and 

part D of title I. 

EPA has ascertained which 

requirements are applicable to the 

Missouri portion of the St. Louis area 

and, if applicable, determined that they 

are, or will be, fully approved through 

this action under section 110(k) of the 

CAA. See sections (a) and (b) below. 

EPA notes that SIPs must be fully 

approved only with respect to 

requirements that were due prior to 

submittal of the complete redesignation 

request. 

a. The Missouri Portion of the St. Louis 

Area Has Met All Applicable 

Requirements for Purposes of 

Redesignation Under Section 110 and 

Part D of the CAA 

General SIP requirements. Section 

110(a)(2) of title I of the CAA delineates 

the general requirements for a SIP, 

which include enforceable emissions 

limitations and other control measures, 

means, or techniques; provisions for the 

establishment and operation of 

appropriate devices necessary to collect 

data on ambient air quality; and 

programs to enforce the limitations. 

General SIP elements and requirements 

are delineated in section 110(a)(2). 

These ‘‘infrastructure’’ requirements 

include, but are not limited to, the 

following: (1) Submittal of a SIP that has 

been adopted by the state after 

reasonable public notice and hearing; 

(2) provisions for establishment and 

operation of appropriate procedures 

needed to monitor ambient air quality; 

(3) implementation of a source permit 

program; provisions for the 

implementation of part C requirements 

(Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD)); (4) provisions for the 

implementation of part D requirements 

(Nonattainment New Source Review 

(NNSR) permit programs); (5) provisions 

for air pollution modeling; and (6) 

provisions for public and local agency 

participation in planning and emission 

control rule development. 

EPA has long interpreted section 

110(a)(2) elements that are neither 

connected with nonattainment plan 

submissions nor linked with an area’s 

attainment status not to be applicable 

requirements for purposes of 

redesignation, under the theory that 

states were required to fulfill these 

obligations as to a particular NAAQS 

regardless of the designation status of 

any specific area. As noted above, this 

advanced notice of redesignation also 

has the effect of revoking the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS for the St. Louis Area, and thus 

the section 110(a)(2) general SIP 

requirements will no longer be in force 

for the 1997 standard upon the effective 

date of the redesignation. However, the 

1997 standard was superseded by the 

more stringent 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, and 

all states are required to comply with 

section 110(a)(2) for that more stringent 

standard. The Missouri portion of the 

St. Louis area (and Missouri in general) 

continues to be subject to the section 

110(a)(2) general SIP requirements for 

the more stringent 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 

notwithstanding the expected 

redesignation and revocation. In any 

case, EPA has previously approved 

provisions of Missouri’s SIP addressing 

CAA section 110(a)(2) requirements 

including provisions addressing the 

1997 PM2.5 NAAQS on May 8, 2007 (72 

FR 25975), and June 21, 2013 (78 FR 

37457). In summary, EPA does not 

interpret the section 110(a)(2) 

requirements to be applicable for 

purposes of redesignation under 

sections 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and (v), and in 

any case those provisions have been 

fully approved. 

Part D Requirements. EPA is 

providing advanced notice that upon 

final approval of the 2008 

comprehensive emissions inventory 

discussed in section VII of this 

rulemaking, the Missouri SIP will meet 

the applicable SIP requirements for the 

Missouri portion of the St. Louis area for 

purposes of redesignation under part D 

of the CAA. Subpart 1 of part D, found 

in sections 171–179 of the CAA, sets 

forth the basic nonattainment 

requirements applicable to all 

nonattainment areas. For purposes of 

evaluating this redesignation request, 

the applicable part D, subpart 1 SIP 

requirements for all nonattainment areas 

are contained in sections 172(c)(1)–(9) 

and in section 176. A thorough 

discussion of the applicable 

requirements contained in section 172 

can be found in the General Preamble 

for Implementation of title I (57 FR 

13498, April 16, 1992). In section V of 

this proposed rulemaking, EPA 

discusses the relationship between this 

proposed redesignation action and 

subpart 4 of part D. 

Subpart 1 section 172 Requirements. 

Sections 172 to 175 of the CAA, set forth 

the basic nonattainment plan 

requirements applicable to PM2.5

nonattainment areas. Under CAA 

section 172, states with nonattainment 

areas must submit plans providing for 

timely attainment and meet a variety of 

other requirements. On May 23, 2011 

(76 FR 29652), EPA made a 

determination that the St. Louis area 

had attained the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS. This determination was based 

upon complete, quality-assured, and 

certified ambient air monitoring data 

that showed that the area monitored 

attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS during the 2007–2009 

monitoring period. Pursuant to 40 CFR 

51.1004(c), upon determination by EPA 

that an area designated nonattainment 

for the PM2.5 NAAQS has attained the 

standard, the requirement for such an 

area to submit an attainment 

demonstration and associated 

reasonably achievable control 

technology (RACT)/reasonably 

achievable control measures (RACM), a 

reasonable further progress (RFP) plan, 

contingency measures, and other 

planning SIPs related to the attainment 

of the PM2.5 NAAQS are suspended 

until the area is redesignated to 

attainment or EPA determines that the 

area has violated the PM2.5 NAAQS, at 

which time such plans are again 

required to be submitted. As a result of 

the determination of attainment, the 

only remaining requirement under CAA 

section 172 to be considered is the 

emissions inventory required to be 

submitted and approved by EPA under 

CAA section 172(c)(3). 

In this advanced notice, as discussed 

further in section VI, EPA is providing 

advanced notice of Missouri’s 2008 base 

year emissions inventory and intends to 

approve the emissions inventory in a 

future action in accordance with section 

172(c)(3) of the CAA.4 Because Missouri 

withdrew their nonattainment SIP 

submittal, which included the 2002 

baseyear emissions inventory after EPA 

finalized the Clean Data Determination 

(76 FR 29652) for the Missouri portion 

of the St. Louis nonattainment area in 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 4 / Friday, January 5, 2018 / Proposed Rules 641 

5These planning requirements include the 

attainment demonstration, quantitative milestone 

requirements, and RACM analysis. 6The potential effect of section 189(e) on section 

189(a)(1)(A) for purposes of evaluating this 

redesignation is discussed below. 

2011, EPA believes the 2008 base year 

emissions inventory is an appropriate 

baseyear emissions inventory 

requirement under section 172(c)(3) of 

the CAA. For more information on 

EPA’s analysis of the 2008 base year 

emissions inventory, see EPA’s 

‘‘Emissions Inventory and Motor 

Vehicle Emissions Budget (MVEB) 

Technical Support Document (TSD) for 

the Redesignation Request and 

Maintenance Plan for the St Louis, 

Missouri 1997 PM2.5 Nonattainment 

Area’’, available online at 

www.regulations.gov, Docket ID No. 

EPA–R07–OAR–2017–0734. 

The General Preamble for 

Implementation of title I also discusses 

the evaluation of these requirements in 

the context of EPA’s consideration of a 

redesignation request. The General 

Preamble sets forth EPA’s view of 

applicable requirements for purposes of 

evaluating redesignation requests when 

an area is attaining the standard. See 

General Preamble for Implementation of 

title I (57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992). 

Because attainment has been reached 

for the area, no additional measures are 

needed for attainment, and CAA section 

172(c)(1) requirements for an attainment 

demonstration and RACT/RACM are no 

longer considered to be applicable for 

purposes of redesignation as long as the 

area continues to attain the standard 

until redesignation. See 40 CFR 

51.1004(c). The RFP requirement under 

CAA section 172(c)(2) and contingency 

measures requirement under CAA 

section 172(c)(9) are similarly not 

relevant for purposes of redesignation. 

Section 172(c)(4) of the CAA requires 

the identification and quantification of 

allowable emissions for new and 

modified major stationary sources in an 

area, and CAA section 172(c)(5) requires 

source permits for the construction and 

operation of new and modified major 

stationary sources anywhere in the 

nonattainment area. EPA has 

determined that, since the PSD 

requirements will apply after 

redesignation, areas being redesignated 

need not comply with the requirement 

that a nonattainment NSR (NNSR) 

program be approved prior to 

redesignation, provided that the area 

demonstrates maintenance of the 

NAAQS without part D NSR. A more 

detailed rationale for this view is 

described in a memorandum from Mary 

Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air 

and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, 

entitled, ‘‘Part D New Source Review 

Requirements for Areas Requesting 

Redesignation to Attainment.’’ 

Nevertheless, Missouri currently has an 

approved NNSR program and Missouri’s 

PSD program for the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS will become effective in the 

Missouri portion of the St. Louis area 

upon redesignation to attainment. 

Section 172(c)(6) of the CAA requires 

the SIP to contain control measures 

necessary to provide for attainment of 

the NAAQS. Because attainment has 

been reached for the Missouri portion of 

the St. Louis area, no additional 

measures are needed to provide for 

attainment. 

Section 172(c)(7) of the CAA requires 

the SIP to meet the applicable 

provisions of CAA section 110(a)(2). As 

noted previously, we believe the 

Missouri SIP meets the requirements of 

CAA section 110(a)(2) that are 

applicable for purposes of 

redesignation. 

Subpart 1 Section 176 Conformity 

Requirements. Section 176(c) of the 

CAA requires states to establish criteria 

and procedures to ensure that Federally 

supported or funded projects conform to 

the air quality planning goals in the 

applicable SIP. The requirement to 

determine transportation conformity 

applies to transportation plans, 

programs, and projects developed, 

funded or approved under Title 23 of 

the United States Code (U.S.C.) and the 

Federal Transit Act (transportation 

conformity) as well as to all other 

Federally supported or funded projects 

(general conformity). EPA approved the 

most recent revisions to the 

transportation conformity SIP for the 

Missouri portion of the St. Louis area on 

August 29, 2013 (78 FR 53247). 

Thus, for purposes of redesignating 

the Missouri portion of the St. Louis 

area to attainment, EPA is providing 

advanced notice of our determination 

and believes Missouri has satisfied all 

applicable requirements for purposes of 

redesignation for the Missouri portion of 

the St. Louis area under CAA section 

110, and upon final approval of the 

2008 base year emissions inventory, also 

will have satisfied all applicable 

requirements under part D of title I of 

the CAA. 

Subpart 4 Requirements. As discussed 

above, in NRDC v. EPA, the Circuit held 

that EPA should have implemented the 

1997 PM2.5 NAAQS pursuant to the 

particulate matter-specific provisions of 

subpart 4. On remand, EPA identified 

all areas designated nonattainment for 

either the 1997 or the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS, including the St. Louis Area, 

as moderate nonattainment areas for 

purposes of Subpart 4 in the 

Classification and Deadlines Rule. 

Moderate nonattainment areas are 

subject to the requirements of sections 

189(a), (c), and (e), including: (1) An 

approved permit program for 

construction of new and modified major 

stationary sources (section 189(a)(1)(A)); 

(2) an attainment demonstration (section 

189(a)(1)(B)); (3) provisions for RACM 

(section 189(a)(1)(C)); (4) quantitative 

milestones demonstrating RFP toward 

attainment by the applicable attainment 

date (section 189(c)); and (5) precursor 

control (section 189(e)).14 

With respect to the specific 

attainment planning requirements under 

subpart 4,5 EPA applies the same 

interpretation that it applies to 

attainment planning requirements under 

Subpart 1 or any of the other pollutantspecific subparts. That is, under its 

long-standing interpretation of the CAA, 

where an area is already attaining the 

standard, EPA does not consider those 

attainment planning requirements to be 

applicable for purposes of evaluating a 

request for redesignation, that is, CAA 

section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) or (v), because 

requirements that are designed to help 

an area achieve attainment no longer 

have meaning where an area is already 

meeting the standard. EPA has proposed 

to determine that the area has attained 

the 1997 Annual PM2.5 Standard. 

Therefore, under its longstanding 

interpretation, EPA is providing 

advance notice that the requirements to 

submit an attainment demonstration 

under section 189(a)(1)(B) and a RFP 

demonstration under section 189(c)(1) 

are not applicable for purposes of 

evaluating Missouri’s redesignation 

request. 

The permit requirements of subpart 4, 

contained in section 189(a)(1)(A), refer 

to and apply the subpart 1 permit 

provisions requirements of sections 172 

and 173 to PM10, without adding to 

them. Consequently, EPA believes that 

section 189(a)(1)(A) does not itself 

impose for redesignation purposes any 

additional requirements for moderate 

areas beyond those contained in subpart 

1.6 As discussed above, EPA has long 

relied on the interpretation that a fully 

approved nonattainment new source 

review program is not considered an 

applicable requirement for 

redesignation, provided the area can 

maintain the standard with a PSD 

program after redesignation. A detailed 

rationale for this view is described in 

the Nichols Memorandum. See also 

rulemakings for the Illinois portion of 

the St. Louis Area (77 FR 34819, 77 FR 

34826, June 12, 2012); Louisville, 

Kentucky (66 FR 53665–66 FR 53669, 

October 23, 2001); Grand Rapids, 

Michigan (61 FR 31831, 61 FR 31834– 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
642 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 4 / Friday, January 5, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

7The Missouri portion the St. Louis area contains 

no major stationary sources of ammonia, and 

existing major stationary sources of VOC are 

adequately controlled under other provisions of the 

CAA regulating the ozone NAAQS. The St. Louis 

area has reduced VOC emissions through the 

implementation of various control programs 

including VOC Reasonably Available Control 

Technology regulations and various on-road and 

non-road motor vehicle control programs. 

8 It should be noted that the mobile source 

controls discussed below also provide reductions in 

VOC and/or SO2 emissions. While those emissions 

may be reduced, the submitted maintenance plan 

and redesignation request do not rely on these 

emission reductions. 

61 FR 31837, June 21, 1996); ClevelandAkron-Lorain, Ohio 61 FR 20458, 61 FR 

20469–61 FR 20470, May 7, 1996); 

Detroit, Michigan (60 FR, 12467–60 FR 

12468, March 7, 1995). 

Subpart 4 and the Control of PM2.5

Precursors. CAA section 189(e) provides 

that control requirements for major 

stationary sources of direct PM10

(including PM2.5) shall also apply to PM 

precursors from those sources, except 

where EPA determines that major 

stationary sources of such precursors 

‘‘do not contribute significantly to PM10

levels which exceed the standard in the 

area.’’ The CAA does not explicitly 

address whether it would be appropriate 

to include a potential exemption from 

precursor controls for all source 

categories under certain circumstances. 

In implementing subpart 4 with regard 

to controlling PM10, EPA permitted 

states to determine that a precursor was 

‘‘insignificant’’ where the state could 

show in its attainment plan that it 

would expeditiously attain without 

adoption of emission reduction 

measures aimed at that precursor. This 

approach was upheld in Association of 

Irritated Residents v. EPA, 423 F.3d 989 

(9th Cir. 2005) and extended to PM2.5

implementation in the PM 

Implementation Rule. A state may 

develop its attainment plan and adopt 

reasonably available control measures 

that target only those precursors that are 

necessary to control for purposes of 

timely attainment. See 81 FR 58020. In 

the rule, EPA also finalized application 

of 189(e) to the NNSR permitting 

program, requiring states to determine 

whether a new major source of a 

precursor might have a significant 

contribution to air quality before 

allowing exemption of controls of a 

precursor from a new major stationary 

source or major modification in the text 

of that program. See 81 FR 58026. 

Therefore, because the requirement of 

section 189(e) is primarily actionable in 

the context of addressing precursors in 

an attainment plan and in NNSR 

permitting, a precursor exemption 

analysis under section 189(e) and EPA’s 

implementing regulations is not an 

applicable requirement that needs to be 

fully approved in the context of a 

redesignation under CAA section 

107(d)(3)(E)(ii). As discussed above, for 

areas that are attaining the standard, 

EPA does not interpret attainment 

planning requirements of subparts 1 and 

4 to be applicable requirements for the 

purposes of redesignating an area to 

attainment nor does it interpret NNSR to 

be an applicable requirement if the area 

can maintain the NAAQS with a PSD 

program after redesignation. However, 

to the extent that Missouri is required to 

conduct a precursor exemption analysis 

in order to satisfy 189(e) in the context 

of its RACM determination for the St. 

Louis Area, which is required pursuant 

to the Sixth Circuit’s decision in Sierra 

Club, EPA proposes to find that the 

requirements of section 189(e), as 

interpreted by EPA’s regulations, are 

met in this case. The area has attained 

the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS, and 

therefore, no additional controls of any 

pollutant, including any PM2.5

precursors, are necessary to bring the 

area into attainment.7 For these reasons, 

EPA is providing advance notice that it 

believes Missouri has satisfied all 

applicable requirements for purposes of 

redesignation of it portion of the St. 

Louis area under section 110 and part D 

of the CAA. 

b. The Missouri Portion of the St. Louis 

Area Has a Fully Approved Applicable 

SIP Under Section 110(k) of the CAA 

Upon final approval of the 

comprehensive emissions inventory in a 

future notice, EPA will have fully 

approved the state’s SIP for the Missouri 

portion of the St. Louis area for the 1997 

annual PM2.5 nonattainment area under 

section 110(k) of the CAA for all 

requirements applicable for purposes of 

redesignation. EPA may rely on prior 

SIP approvals in approving a 

redesignation request (see Calcagni 

Memorandum at p. 3; Southwestern 

Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v. 

Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989–90 (6th Cir. 

1998); Wall, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001, 

upholding this interpretation)) plus any 

additional measures it may approve in 

conjunction with a redesignation action 

(see 68 FR 25426 (May 12, 2003) and 

citations therein). Following passage of 

the CAA of 1970, Missouri has adopted 

and submitted, and EPA has fully 

approved at various times, provisions 

addressing the various SIP elements 

applicable for the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS in the St. Louis area (e.g., 78 FR 

37457, June 21, 2013). 

As indicated above, EPA believes that 

the section 110 elements not connected 

with nonattainment plan submissions 

and not linked to the area’s 

nonattainment status are not applicable 

requirements for purposes of 

redesignation. EPA has previously 

approved all part D subpart 1 

requirements applicable for purposes of 

this redesignation. 

Criteria (3)—The Air Quality 

Improvement Is Due to Permanent and 

Enforceable Reductions in Emissions 

Resulting From Implementation of the 

SIP and Applicable Federal Air 

Pollution Control Regulations and Other 

Permanent and Enforceable Reductions 

(Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii)) 

For redesignating a nonattainment 

area to attainment, section 

107(d)(3)(E)(iii) of the CAA requires 

EPA to determine that the air quality 

improvement in the area is due to 

permanent and enforceable reductions 

in emissions resulting from 

implementation of the SIP and 

applicable Federal air pollution control 

regulations and other permanent and 

enforceable reductions. EPA is 

providing advanced notice that it 

believes that Missouri has demonstrated 

that the observed air quality 

improvement in the St. Louis area is due 

to permanent and enforceable 

reductions in emissions resulting from 

implementation of the SIP, Federal 

measures, and other state adopted 

measures discussed below. 

In making this demonstration, MDNR 

has calculated the change in emissions 

from a nonattainment year inventory to 

an attainment year inventory. For the 

nonattainment inventory, Missouri 

developed a 2002 base year emissions 

inventory, which the state subsequently 

withdrew once a Clean Data 

Determination was finalized for the 

Missouri portion of the St. Louis 

nonattainment area. For purposes of 

their redesignation request, Missouri 

developed a baseyear emissions 

inventory for 2008, one of the years the 

St. Louis area monitored attainment of 

the standard. See section b. below for 

discussion on development of these 

inventories. The reduction in emissions 

and the corresponding improvement in 

air quality over this time period can be 

attributed to a number of permanent and 

enforceable regulatory control measures 

that St. Louis and upwind areas have 

implemented in recent years. 

a. Permanent and Enforceable Controls 

Implemented 

The following is a discussion on the 

permanent and enforceable measures 

that have been implemented in the 

area.8 Reductions in PM2.5 precursor 

emissions have occurred statewide and 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 4 / Friday, January 5, 2018 / Proposed Rules 643 

9CAIR addressed the 1997 PM2.5 annual standard 

and the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. CSAPR 

addresses contributions from upwind states to 

downwind nonattainment and maintenance of the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard as well as the ozone 

and PM2.5 NAAQS addressed by CAIR. 

in upwind areas as a result of Federal 

emission control measures, with 

additional emission reductions expected 

to occur in the future. Federal emission 

control measures include the following: 

Tier 2 vehicle standards and lowsulfur gasoline. Implementation of the 

Tier 2 vehicle standards began in 2004, 

and as newer, cleaner cars enter the 

national fleet, these standards continue 

to significantly reduce NOX emissions. 

The standards require all classes of 

passenger vehicles in any 

manufacturer’s fleet to meet an average 

standard of 0.07 grams of NOX per mile. 

In addition, starting in January of 2006, 

the Tier 2 rule reduced the allowable 

sulfur content of gasoline to 30 parts per 

million (ppm). Most gasoline sold prior 

to this had a sulfur content of 

approximately 300 ppm. EPA expects 

that these standards will reduce NOX

emissions from vehicles by 

approximately 74 percent by 2030, 

translating to nation-wide reductions of 

nearly 3 million tons annually by 2030. 

Heavy-duty gasoline and diesel 

highway vehicle standards and ultralow-sulfur diesel rule. On October 6, 

2000, EPA promulgated a rule to reduce 

NOX and VOC emissions from heavyduty gasoline and diesel highway 

vehicles that began to take effect in 2004 

(65 FR 59896). On January 18, 2001, (66 

FR 5002) EPA promulgated a second 

phase of standards and testing 

procedures began in 2007 to reduce 

particulate matter from heavy-duty 

highway engines, and reduce highway 

diesel fuel sulfur content to 15 ppm 

since the sulfur in fuel damages high 

efficiency catalytic exhaust emission 

control devices. The total program is 

estimated to achieve a ninety percent 

reduction in PM2.5 emissions and a 

ninety-five percent reduction in NOX

emission for new engines using lowsulfur diesel fuel, compared to existing 

engines using higher-content sulfur 

diesel fuel. EPA expects that this rule 

will reduce NOX emissions by 2.6 

million tons nation-wide by 2030 when 

the heavy-duty vehicle fleet is 

completely replaced with newer heavyduty vehicles that comply with these 

emission standards. 

Tier 4 Non-Road Diesel Engine Rule. 

This rule, which applies to diesel 

engines used in industries such as 

construction, agriculture, and mining, 

was promulgated in 2004 and fully 

phased in 2014. This rule reduced 

allowable non-road diesel fuel sulfur 

levels from approximately 3,000 ppm to 

500 ppm in 2007 and further reduced 

those levels to 15 ppm starting in 2010 

(a 99 percent reduction). This rule also 

achieved significant reductions for up to 

90 percent for NOX and particulate 

matter emissions nationwide. 

Nonroad Large spark-ignition engines 

and recreational engines standards. The 

nonroad spark-ignition and recreational 

engine standards, effective in July 2003, 

regulate NOX, and hydrocarbons, and 

carbon monoxide from groups of 

previously unregulated non-road 

engines. (67 FR 68242). These engine 

standards apply to large spark-ignition 

engines (e.g., forklifts and airport 

ground service equipment), recreational 

vehicles (e.g., off-highway motorcycles 

and all-terrain-vehicles), and 

recreational marine diesel engines sold 

in the United States and imported after 

the effective date of these standards. 

When all of the nonroad sparkignition and recreational engine 

standards are fully implemented, an 

overall seventy-two percent reduction in 

hydrocarbons, eighty percent reduction 

in NOX, and fifty-six percent reduction 

in carbon monoxide emissions is 

expected by 2020. These controls will 

help reduce ambient concentrations of 

fine particulate matter. 

Tier 3 Motor Vehicles Emission and 

Fuel Standards: On April 24, 2014 (79 

FR 23414), EPA finalized a rule 

designed to reduce air pollution from 

passenger cars and trucks. The vehicle 

emissions standard began in 2017, and 

combined with the reduction of gasoline 

sulfur content will significantly reduce 

motor vehicle emissions including NOX, 

VOC, PM2.5, Carbon Monoxide and air 

toxics by 2030, which will help the area 

maintain the 1997 PM2.5 annual 

NAAQS. 

NOX SIP Call. On October 27, 1998 

(63 FR 57356), EPA issued the NOX SIP 

Call pursuant to the CAA to require 

twenty-two states and the District of 

Columbia to reduce NOX, a precursor to 

ozone and PM2.5 pollution, and 

providing a mechanism (the NOX

Budget Trading Program) that states 

could use to achieve those reductions. 

Affected states were required to comply 

with Phase I of the SIP Call beginning 

in 2004, and Phase II beginning in 2007. 

By the end of 2008, ozone season NOX

emissions from sources subject to the 

NOX SIP Call dropped by sixty-two 

percent from 2000 emissions levels. All 

NOX SIP Call states have SIPs that 

currently satisfy their obligations under 

the NOX SIP Call, and the emission 

reductions required under the SIP Call 

are permanent and enforceable. 

As part of the NOX SIP Call, the 

eastern third of Missouri was required 

to comply with Phase II of the program. 

In response, Missouri developed rules 

governing the control of NOX emissions 

from EGUs, major non-EGU industrial 

boilers, major cement kilns, and large 

internal combustion engines. EPA 

approved Missouri’s Phase II NOX SIP 

Call rules on August 15, 2006 (71 FR 

46860). Implementation of the Phase II 

rules was projected to result in an 

eighty-two percent NOX reduction from 

1995 levels. Missouri rules which 

address the NOX SIP call include: 

• 10 CSR 10–6.350, ‘‘Emissions 

limitations and Emissions Trading of 

Oxides of Nitrogen’’ 

• 10 CSR 10–6.360, ‘‘Controlling NOX

Emissions From Electric Generating 

Units and Non-Electric Generating 

Boilers’’ 

• 10 CSR 10–6.380, ‘‘Control of NOX

Emissions From Portland Cement Kilns’’ 

• 10 CSR 10–6.390, ‘‘Control of NOX

Emissions From Large Stationary 

Internal Combustion Engines’’ 

Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) and 

the Cross State Air Pollution Rule 

(CSAPR). The Clean Air Interstate Rule 

(CAIR) was promulgated in 2005 and 

required twenty-eight eastern states and 

the District of Columbia to significantly 

reduce emissions of SO2 and NOX from 

electric generating units (EGUs) in order 

to limit the interstate transport of these 

pollutants and the ozone and fine 

particulate matter these pollutants form 

in the atmosphere. 70 FR 25162 (May 

12, 2005). In 2008, the D.C. Circuit 

initially vacated CAIR and ordered EPA 

to replace CAIR in its entirety, North 

Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (D.C. Cir. 

2008), but ultimately remanded the rule 

to EPA without vacatur in order to 

preserve the environmental benefits 

provided by CAIR, North Carolina v. 

EPA, 550 F.3d 1176, 1178 (D.C. Cir. 

2008). On August 8, 2011, acting on the 

Court’s remand, EPA promulgated 

CSAPR in order to replace CAIR and 

address interstate transport of emissions 

and the resulting secondary formation of 

ozone and fine particulate matter (76 FR 

48208).9 CSAPR requires substantial 

reductions of SO2 and NOX emissions 

from EGUs in twenty-eight states in the 

eastern United States. As a general 

matter, because CSAPR is CAIR’s 

replacement, emissions reductions 

associated with CAIR will for most areas 

be made permanent and enforceable 

through implementation of CSAPR. 

Implementation of the rule was 

scheduled to begin on January 1, 2012, 

when CSAPR’s cap-and-trade programs 

would have superseded the CAIR capand-trade programs. Numerous parties 

filed petitions for review of CSAPR in 

the D.C. Circuit and on August 21, 2012, 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
644 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 4 / Friday, January 5, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

the court issued its ruling vacating and 

remanding CSAPR to EPA and ordering 

continued implementation of CAIR. 

EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. 

EPA, 696 F.3d 7, 38 (D.C. Cir. 2012). The 

D.C. Circuit’s vacatur of CSAPR was 

reversed by the United States Supreme 

Court on April 29, 2014, and the case 

was remanded to the D.C. Circuit to 

resolve remaining issues in accordance 

with the Supreme Court’s ruling. EPA v. 

EME Homer City Generation, L.P., 134 S. 

Ct. 1584 (2014). On remand, the D.C. 

Circuit affirmed CSAPR in most 

respects, but invalidated without 

vacating some of the CSAPR budgets as 

to a number of states. EME Homer City 

Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 795 F.3d 118. 

(D.C. Cir. 2015) (EME Homer City II). 

The CSAPR budgets for Missouri are not 

affected by the Court’s decision. The 

litigation over CSAPR ultimately 

delayed implementation of that rule for 

three years, from January 1, 2012, when 

CSAPR’s cap-and-trade programs were 

originally scheduled to replace the CAIR 

cap-and-trade programs, to January 1, 

2015. Thus, the rule’s Phase 2 budgets 

were originally promulgated to begin on 

January 1, 2014, but began on January 1, 

2017. 

As noted above, CAIR was 

promulgated in 2005 and incentivized 

early reductions from sources in all 

covered states, including those upwind 

of the St. Louis area. On December, 14, 

2007, EPA approved Missouri’s CAIR 

rules into the SIP and the state’s CAIR 

rules became effective in 2009 (72 FR 

71073). The Missouri rule written to 

comply with the NOX SIP Call 

requirements for EGUs was replaced 

with the CAIR NOX regulations, 10 CSR 

10–6.362, Clean Air Interstate Rule 

Annual NOX Trading program and 10 

CSR 10–6.364, Clean Air Interstate Rule 

Seasonal NOX Trading program, and 

include limits for non-EGU boilers, 

specifically Trigen Units 5 and 6 and 

Anheuser Busch Unit 6. However, these 

three units have all been retired, and 

received retired unit exemptions that 

prohibit these units from operating. 

Missouri’s SIP redesignation request 

lists CAIR as a control measure. CAIR 

was in effect and achieving emission 

reductions in Missouri when the St. 

Louis area began monitoring attainment 

of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The 

quality-assured, certified monitoring 

data used to demonstrate the area’s 

attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS by the April 5, 2010, attainment 

deadline was influenced by reductions 

achieved by CAIR. Furthermore, 

because PM2.5 concentrations in the St. 

Louis area are likely impacted by the 

transport SO2 and NOX emissions 

produced upwind, the area’s air quality 

is likely affected by regulation of 

emissions from power plants in other 

states. 

On November 21, 2014, the 

Administrator signed an action that 

published in the Federal Register on 

December 3, 2014 (79 FR 71163), 

amending the regulatory text of CSAPR 

to reflect the Court’s October 23, 2014, 

order tolling all deadlines in CSAPR by 

three years, including provisions 

governing the sunsetting of CAIR. CAIR 

therefore sunset at the end of 2014 and 

was replaced by CSAPR beginning 

January 1, 2015, which continue to 

remain in place. Relative to CAIR, 

CSAPR required similar or greater 

emission reductions from relevant 

upwind areas starting in 2015 and 

beyond, and Missouri’s emissions 

budgets were not affected by the Court’s 

remand of some of the ozone-season and 

SO2 budgets. The emission reductions 

associated with CAIR that helped the St. 

Louis area achieve attainment of the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS can 

therefore be considered permanent and 

enforceable for purposes of 

redesignation under section 

107(d)(3)(E)(iii) of the CAA. 

State and Local Measures. In addition 

to the above Federal measures, Missouri 

has several other state regulations that 

provide permanent and enforceable 

controls for PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursor 

emissions in the St. Louis area. These 

SIP approved rules include: 

• 10 CSR 10–6.405 ‘‘Restriction of 

Particulate Matter Emissions from Fuel 

Burning Equipment Used for Indirect 

Heating’’ 

• 10 CSR 10–5.040 ‘‘Use of Fuel in 

Hand-Fired Equipment Prohibited’’ 

• 10 CSR 10–5.070 ‘‘Open Burning 

Restrictions’’ 

• 10 CSR 10–6.170 ‘‘Restriction of 

Particulate Matter to the Ambient Air 

Beyond the Premises of Origin’’ 

• 10 CSR 10–6.220 ‘‘Restriction of 

Emission of Visible Air Contaminants’’ 

• 10 CSR 10–6.260 ‘‘Restriction of 

Emission of Sulfur Compounds’’ 

• 10 CSR 10–6.330 ‘‘Restriction of 

Emissions from Batch-Type Charcoal 

Kilns’’ 

• 10 CSR 10–6.400 ‘‘Restriction of 

Emission of Particulate Matter from 

Industrial Processes’’ 

Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance 

Program. To meet nonattainment area 

requirements for the one-hour ozone 

standard, Missouri implemented an 

inspection and maintenance program 

beginning in 2000 in the counties of St. 

Louis, St. Charles, and Jefferson and the 

City of St. Louis. Missouri codified the 

program through state rule 10 CSR 10– 

5.380, ‘‘Motor Vehicle Emissions 

Inspection,’’ and EPA approved an 

additional revision this rule on May 12, 

2003 (68 FR 25414). While this program 

was established to address ozone 

formation, the reduction in NOX

emissions impact PM2.5 in this area. The 

mobile source emissions inventory 

projections used in this demonstration 

incorporates the inspection and 

maintenance program rule, 10 CSR 10– 

5.381, which replaced the 10–5.380 

rule. The state has implemented 10 CSR 

10–5.381 since 2007 and EPA approved 

this rule in 80 FR 11323, March 3, 2015. 

Permanent and Enforceable Controls 

Used to Attain the Standard for the 

Illinois portion of the nonattainment 

area. The same Federal control 

measures listed above for the Missouri 

side of the area are also applicable to the 

Illinois side of the St. Louis area 

(defined as Madison, Monroe, and St. 

Clair Counties as well as the Baldwin 

Township of Randolph County). These 

include the Federal mobile source 

measures and Federal upwind trading 

programs. Illinois also operates an 

Inspection/Maintenance (I/M) program, 

and has adopted a state rule to control 

NOX and SO2 from EGUs. Illinois also 

has a number of other state regulations 

in place to control PM2.5 and PM2.5

precursors. Additional information 

regarding NOX and VOC emissions 

controls for the Illinois portion of the 

area can be found in the Illinois 

maintenance plan for the nonattainment 

area under the 1997 ozone standard. See 

docket ID EPA–R05–OAR–2010–0523; 

FRL–9619–8 for more information. 

b. Emission Reductions 

The St. Louis area attained the 1997 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS based on 

monitoring data for the three-year 

period from 2007–2009. During the 

development of the nonattainment SIP, 

which was subsequently withdrawn by 

the state, MDNR selected 2002 as the 

baseyear and since then has selected 

2008 as the attainment emission 

inventory year. The attainment 

inventory identifies a level of emissions 

in the area that is sufficient to attain the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS for direct 

PM2.5 and the PM2.5 precursors SO2,

NOX, NH3 and VOC. Point source 

information was compiled from the 

2008 NEI and the annual emissions 

reports submitted to MDNR by sources 

and EPA’s Clean Air Markets Division 

database for electric utilities. Area, 

nonroad and onroad attainment year 

inventories originated from the 2008 

NEI v1.5 provided by EPA. For more 

information on EPA’s analysis of the 

2002 and 2008 emissions inventories, 

see EPA’s ‘‘Emissions Inventory and 

Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget 

(MVEB) Technical Support Document 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 4 / Friday, January 5, 2018 / Proposed Rules 645 

10This facility shut down in 2011 pursuant to a 

federally enforceable Consent Decree. https://

www.epa.gov/enforcement/doe-run-resourcescorporation-settlement. 

(TSD) for the Redesignation Request and 

Maintenance Plan for the St Louis, 

Missouri 1997 PM2.5 Nonattainment 

Area,’’ or appendix B, E and F of the 

state submittal, available on line at 

www.regulations.gov, Docket ID No. 

EPA–R07–OAR–2017–0734. 

Using the inventory described above, 

as well as emissions inventories 

provided by Illinois, Missouri has 

documented changes in emissions from 

2002 NEI to 2008 for the St. Louis area 

as shown in table 3 below. This table 

demonstrates that the entire St. Louis 

area has reduced emissions during the 

period except as described below. 

TABLE 3—COMPARISON OF 2002 NEI AND 2008 BASEYEAR INVENTORY FOR THE ST. LOUIS NONATTAINMENT AREA

[tpy] 

County name Source category NH3 NOX PM2.5-Pri SO2 VOC 

Missouri .............................. Point Sources ..................... ¥7.11 ¥13,095.20 ¥1,113.84 +44,701.42 ¥6,569.97 

Illinois .................................. ............................................. 164.12 ¥17,471.79 +134.22 ¥3,811.29 ¥816.76 

Totals ........................... ............................................. 157.01 ¥30,566.99 ¥979.62 +40,890.13 ¥7,386.76 

Missouri .............................. Area Sources ...................... ¥453.09 ¥5,546.29 ¥799.57 ¥5,721.41 ¥7,169.82 

Illinois .................................. ............................................. ¥433.02 ¥1,967.73 ¥2,757.16 ¥141.18 ¥16,890.58 

Totals ........................... ............................................. ¥886.11 ¥7,514.02 ¥3,556.73 ¥5,862.59 ¥24,060.40 

Missouri .............................. On-Road Mobile Sources ... ¥177.76 ¥31,503.01 ¥631.79 ¥1,452.91 ¥18,830.40 

Illinois .................................. ............................................. 6.88 ¥4,646.94 ¥102.62 ¥556.81 ¥2,555.87 

Totals ........................... ............................................. ¥170.88 ¥36,149.95 ¥734.41 ¥2,009.72 ¥21,386.27 

Missouri .............................. Off-Road Mobile Sources ... +5.84 ¥6,714.58 ¥386.84 ¥1,531.01 ¥3,962.38 

Illinois .................................. ............................................. ¥1.24 +1,063.95 +33.13 ¥93.56 131.75 

Totals ........................... ............................................. +4.60 ¥5,650.63 ¥353.71 ¥1,624.57 ¥3,830.63 

Missouri Totals ..... ............................................. ¥632.13 ¥56,859.08 ¥2,932.04 +35,996.09 ¥36,532.57 

Illinois Totals ........ ............................................. ¥263.26 ¥23,022.51 ¥2,692.43 ¥4,602.84 ¥20,131.46 

Grand Total ... ............................................. ¥895.39 ¥79,881.59 ¥5,624.47 +31,393.25 ¥56,664.03 

There is an increase of total SO2

emissions from 2002 to 2008 of 

35,996.09 tons on the Missouri side of 

the nonattainment area. This increase is 

a result of two factors described below. 

First, over 20,700 tons of the SO2

increase can be attributed to a change in 

emission factors between 2002 and 2008 

for the Doe Run Primary Lead Smelter 

in Herculaneum, MO, but that source 

has since shut down.10 The second 

factor which contributes to the increase 

in SO2 emissions is a ten percent 

increase in electricity demand at four 

Missouri EGUs. Between 2002 and 2008 

a 10 percent increase in electricity 

demand coupled with increases in SO2

emission rates from the Ameren utilities 

lead to increasing SO2 emissions 

between 2002 and 2008. Overall 

emissions from 2002 to 2008 are 

trending down for direct PM2.5 and the 

three other PM2.5 precursors and EPA 

believes that the effect of these 

decreases cumulatively outweigh the 

increase seen in SO2 emissions during 

the same time, thus supporting EPA’s 

position set forth in this ANPR. In 

addition, in the years following 2008, 

substantial SO2 reductions have been 

realized in the St. Louis utility sector 

within the nonattainment area from a 

combination of controls, fuel switching 

and shutdowns, and EPA believes SO2

emissions from the utility sector will 

not increase back to 2002 or 2008 levels 

further supporting EPA’s position in 

this ANPR. 

Based on the information summarized 

above, and information provided in the 

technical support, which is a part of the 

docket for this action, EPA is providing 

advanced notice of its determination 

that Missouri has adequately 

demonstrated that the improvement in 

air quality is due to permanent and 

enforceable emissions reductions. 

Criteria (4)—The Area Has a Fully 

Approved Maintenance Plan Pursuant 

to Section 175A of the CAA (Section 

107(d)(3)(E)(iv)) 

In conjunction with its request to 

redesignate the St. Louis area to 

attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS, MDNR submitted a SIP 

revision on September 1, 2011, 

supplemented on March 31, 2014, and 

further clarified on September 17, 2014, 

to provide for the maintenance of the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS for at least 

ten years after the effective date of 

redesignation to attainment. EPA is 

providing advanced notice that it 

believes this maintenance plan meets 

the requirements for approval under 

section 175A of the CAA. 

a. Maintenance Plan Requirements 

Section 175A of the CAA sets forth 

the elements of a maintenance plan for 

areas seeking redesignation from 

nonattainment to attainment. Under 

section 175A, the plan must 

demonstrate continued attainment of 

the applicable NAAQS for at least ten 

years after the Administrator approves a 

redesignation to attainment. Because the 

1997 p.m.2.5 NAAQS will be revoked 

for the area if the area is redesignated to 

attainment, Missouri is not required 

submit a revised maintenance plan eight 

years after the redesignation. To address 

the possibility of future NAAQS 

violations, the maintenance plan must 

contain such contingency measures, as 

EPA deems necessary, to assure prompt 

correction of any future 1997 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS violations. The Calcagni 

Memorandum provides further guidance 

on the content of a maintenance plan, 

explaining that a maintenance plan 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
646 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 4 / Friday, January 5, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

should address five requirements: (1) 

The attainment emissions inventory, (2) 

a maintenance demonstration, (3) a 

commitment to maintain the existing 

monitoring network, (4) verification of 

continued attainment, and (5) a 

contingency plan to plan or prevent or 

correct future violations. As discussed 

below, EPA is proposing that MDNR’s 

maintenance plan includes all the 

necessary components and is thus 

proposing to approve it as a revision to 

the Missouri SIP. 

b. Maintenance Plan Base Year 

Inventory 

As discussed previously, the 2008 

inventory is referenced as the baseyear 

and is used for the year of attainment is 

called the Attainment Year Inventory. 

The 2008 inventory is the inventory 

which all future years will be compared 

to in order to show maintenance. 

However, MDNR created a different 

2008 onroad inventory for the 

comparison to future years in the 

maintenance plan. As explained 

previously, for the 2008 onroad 

attainment inventory, MDNR used NEI 

data which was developed using 

Mobile6.2 to compare with the 2002 

nonattainment base year. A second 2008 

onroad inventory was developed 

utilizing MOVES2010 to establish a 

maintenance base year for comparison 

to the future 2017 and 2025 MOVESbased future year inventories. This 

allows for a smooth transition to the 

updated model and to prevent 

comparing a MOVES2010 version of 

2008 attainment year with the Mobile6.2 

version of the 2002 nonattainment base 

year inventory. Therefore, the 2008 

onroad mobile source inventory used for 

supporting maintenance was developed 

using the most current version of EPA’s 

highway mobile source emissions 

model, MOVES2010a. 

Emissions projections to support 

maintenance through 2025 have been 

prepared for the years 2017 and 2025. 

While Missouri’s maintenance plan 

projects maintenance of the 1997 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS through 2025, as 

noted above, EPA believes that the St. 

Louis area will continue to maintain the 

standard through 2027 for several 

reasons: All of the Federal regulatory 

requirements that enabled the area to 

attain the NAAQS will continue to be in 

effect and enforceable after the ten-year 

maintenance period. Overall emissions 

are projected to decline steadily through 

2025. Because it is unlikely that 

emissions will suddenly increase in 

2026 and 2027 in an amount that results 

in overall emissions in the area 

exceeding an attainment year inventory 

levels. EPA expects that the St. Louis 

area will continue to maintain the 1997 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS through 2027. 

EPA has reviewed the documentation 

provided by MDNR and is providing 

advanced notice that the EPA believes 

the emissions inventory is acceptable. 

For more information on EPA’s analysis 

of the 2008 emissions inventory, see 

EPA’s TSD as part of this advanced 

notice of proposed rulemaking, or 

Appendix B, E and F of the state’s 2014 

submittal and additional clarifying 

information provided on September 17, 

2014, available on line at 

www.regulations.gov, Docket ID No. 

EPA–R07–OAR–2017–0734. 

c. Maintenance Demonstration 

Section 175A requires a state seeking 

redesignation to attainment to submit a 

SIP revision to provide for the 

maintenance of the NAAQS in the Area 

‘‘for at least ten years after the 

redesignation.’’ EPA has interpreted this 

as a showing of maintenance ‘‘for a 

period of ten years following 

redesignation.’’ Calcagni Memorandum, 

p. 9. Where the emissions inventory 

method of showing maintenance is 

used, the purpose is to show that 

emissions during the maintenance 

period will not increase over the 

attainment year inventory. Calcagni 

Memorandum, pp. 9–10. 

As discussed in detail in the 

subsection below, Missouri’s 

maintenance plan submission expressly 

documents that the area’s emissions 

inventories will remain below the 

attainment year inventories through 

2025. For a demonstration of 

maintenance, emissions inventories are 

required to be projected to future dates 

to assess the influence of future growth 

and controls; however, the maintenance 

demonstration need not be based on air 

quality modeling. See Wall v. EPA, 265 

F.3d 426 (6th Cir.2001); Sierra Club v. 

EPA, 375 F. 3d 537 [(7th Cir.2004)]. See 

also 66 FR 53099–66 FR 53100; 68 FR 

25430–68 FR 25432. MDNR uses 

projection inventories to show that the 

Missouri portion of the St. Louis area 

will remain in attainment. MDNR 

developed projection inventories for an 

interim year of 2017 and a maintenance 

plan end year of 2025 to show that 

future emissions of direct PM2.5, NOX,

SO2, NH3 and VOC will remain at or 

below the attainment year 2008 

emissions levels in the St. Louis area 

through the year 2025. In light of more 

recent information on CSAPR, Missouri 

submitted on September 17, 2014, a 

revision that updated their future year 

projections for EGU facilities using the 

presumption that CSAPR will be in 

place to control emissions from sources. 

Non-EGU Point source and nonpoint 

sources were developed using growth 

factors created from the EGAS model 

(https://www.epa.gov/economic-andcost-analysis-air-pollution-regulations) 

using economic growth projections from 

the Policy Insight® Model for Regional 

Economic Model, Inc. (REMI) to project 

the future year inventory. EPA’s 

Nonroad Model and EPA’s onroad 

mobile model, MOVES, were utilized to 

project mobile source future inventories. 

EPA has reviewed the documentation 

provided by MDNR and is providing 

advanced notice that it finds the 

methodologies acceptable. Table 4–6 

below shows the inventory summaries 

for the 2008 attainment year, 2017 

interim year, and the 2025 maintenance 

plan end year for the entire area. 

TABLE 4—2008 EMISSIONS INVENTORY SUMMARY

[tpy] 

State Source category NH3 NOX PM2.5-Pri SO2 VOC 

Missouri ..............................

Illinois ..................................

Point Sources .....................

.............................................

1,308.64 

208.31 

31,103.26 

16,981.51 

3,493.39 

2,448.15 

201,700.73 

21,853.56 

5,067.89 

4,277.72 

Totals ........................... ............................................. 1,516.95 48,084.77 5,941.54 252,431.33 9,345.61 

Missouri ..............................

Illinois ..................................

Area Sources ......................

.............................................

3,514.98 

3,354.13 

4,382.94 

1,638.36 

14,033.64 

5,161.76 

11,510.48 

246.67 

38,215.34 

7,796.34 

Totals ........................... ............................................. 6,869.11 6,021.30 19,195.40 11,757.15 46,011.68 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 4 / Friday, January 5, 2018 / Proposed Rules 647 

TABLE 4—2008 EMISSIONS INVENTORY SUMMARY—Continued 

[tpy] 

State Source category NH3 NOX PM2.5-Pri SO2 VOC 

Missouri ..............................

Illinois ..................................

On-Road Mobile Sources ...

.............................................

1,056.17 

250.58 

58,819.58 

15,012.94 

2,179.28 

577.99 

426.65 

116.76 

23,793.80 

5,069.55 

Totals ........................... ............................................. 1,306.75 73,832.52 2,757.27 543.41 28,863.35 

Missouri ..............................

Illinois ..................................

Off-Road Mobile Sources ...

.............................................

15.68 

2.89 

20,722.57 

8,475.24 

1,199.82 

425.71 

544.3 

300.72 

11,545.53 

2,972.77 

Totals ........................... ............................................. 18.57 29,197.81 1,625.53 845.02 14,518.30 

Grand Total .......... ............................................. 9,711.38 157,136.40 29,515.74 265,576.91 98,738.94 

TABLE 5—2017 EMISSIONS INVENTORY SUMMARY

[tpy] 

State Source category NH3 NOX PM2.5-Pri SO2 VOC 

Missouri ..............................

Illinois ..................................

Point Sources .....................

.............................................

1,308.64 

221.12 

31,661.08 

11,891.31 

3,692.74 

2,601.95 

107,713.00 

20,221.18 

6,363.13 

4,962.34 

Totals ........................... ............................................. 1,529.76 43,552.39 6,294.69 127,934.18 11,325.47 

Missouri ..............................

Illinois ..................................

Area Sources ......................

.............................................

3,514.98 

3,364.32 

4,446.97 

1,694.82 

14,165.78 

4,706.63 

11,534.82 

258.36 

44,057.17 

8,607.70 

Totals ........................... ............................................. 6,879.30 6,141.79 18,872.41 11,793.18 52,664.87 

Missouri ..............................

Illinois ..................................

On-Road Mobile Sources ...

.............................................

722.47 

186.79 

22,904.99 

5,623.42 

913.15 

231.68 

191.12 

49.31 

10,867.41 

2,364.85 

Totals ........................... ............................................. 909.26 28,528.41 1,144.83 240.43 13,232.26 

Missouri ..............................

Illinois ..................................

Off-Road Mobile Sources ...

.............................................

15.75 

3.46 

10,505.88 

8,673.75 

787.35 

370.28 

193.55 

390.79 

7,398.02 

2,303.43 

Totals ........................... ............................................. 19.21 19,179.63 1,157.63 584.34 9,701.45 

Grand Total .......... ............................................. 9,337.53 97,402.22 27,469.56 140,552.13 86,924.05 

TABLE 6—2025 EMISSIONS INVENTORY SUMMARY

[tpy] 

State Source category NH3 NOX PM2.5-Pri SO2 VOC 

Missouri ..............................

Illinois ..................................

Point Sources .....................

.............................................

1,308.64 

242.69 

32,603.86 

12,822.94 

4,403.28 

2,865.19 

108,617.07 

21,853.56 

7,809.01 

5,541.80 

Totals ........................... ............................................. 1,551.33 45,426.80 7,268.47 130,470.63 13,350.81 

Missouri ..............................

Illinois ..................................

Area Sources ......................

.............................................

3,514.98 

3,374.17 

4,531.02 

1,735.20 

14,314.86 

4,668.15 

11,606.89 

268.04 

49,458.63 

9,249.75 

Totals ........................... ............................................. 6,889.15 6,266.22 18,983.01 11,874.93 58,708.38 

Missouri ..............................

Illinois ..................................

On-Road Mobile Sources ...

.............................................

691.88 

178.80 

16,568.44 

3,616.52 

533.34 

181.73 

189.22 

49.15 

8,035.80 

1,592.92 

Totals ........................... ............................................. 870.68 20,184.96 715.07 238.37 9,628.72 

Missouri ..............................

Illinois ..................................

Off-Road Mobile Sources ...

.............................................

17.63 

3.99 

8,895.81 

9,028.03 

640.68 

331.2 

219.9 

438.02 

7,178.29 

2,037.10 

Totals ........................... ............................................. 21.62 17,923.84 971.88 657.92 9,215.39 

Grand Total .......... ............................................. 9,332.78 89,801.82 27,938.43 143,241.85 90,903.30 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
648 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 4 / Friday, January 5, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

11One monitor in the Missouri portion of the St. 

Louis area is a middle scale monitor and is not 

comparable to the 1997 PM2.5 Annual NAAQS. 

Table 7 below compares the 2008 base 

year to the 2025 projection year and 

shows that the St. Louis area is 

projected to reduce SO2 emissions by 

122,335 tpy, NOX emissions by 67,335 

tpy, direct PM2.5 emissions by 1,577 tpy, 

NH3 emissions by 379 tpy, and VOC 

emissions by 7,836 tpy. 

TABLE 7—COMPARISON OF 2008 BASE YEAR AND 2025 PROJECTION YEAR

[tpy] 

State Source category NH3 NOX PM2.5-Pri SO2 VOC 

Missouri ..............................

Illinois ..................................

Point Sources .....................

.............................................

0.00 

34.38 

+1,500.60 

¥4,158.57 

+909.89 

+417.04 

¥93,083.66 

¥28,877.04 

+2,741.12 

+1,264.08 

Totals ........................... ............................................. 34.38 ¥2,657.97 1,326.93 ¥121,960.70 +4,005.20 

Missouri ..............................

Illinois ..................................

Area Sources ......................

.............................................

0.00 

20.04 

+148.08 

+96.84 

+281.22 

¥493.61 

+96.41 

+21.37 

+11,243.29 

+1,453.41 

Totals ........................... ............................................. 20.04 244.92 ¥212.39 117.78 +12,696.70 

Missouri ..............................

Illinois ..................................

On-Road Mobile Sources ...

.............................................

¥364.29 

¥71.78 

¥42,251.14 

¥11,396.42 

¥1,645.94 

¥396.26 

¥237.43 

¥67.61 

¥15,758.00 

¥3,476.63 

Totals ........................... ............................................. ¥436.07 ¥53,647.56 ¥2,042.20 ¥305.04 ¥19,234.63 

Missouri ..............................

Illinois ..................................

Off-Road Mobile Sources ...

.............................................

1.95 

1.10 

¥11,826.76 

+552.79 

¥559.14 

¥94.51 

¥324.40 

+137.30 

¥4,367.24 

¥935.67 

Totals ........................... ............................................. +3.05 ¥11,273.97 ¥653.65 ¥187.10 ¥5,302.91 

Missouri Totals 

(Safety Margin).

............................................. ¥362.34 ¥52,429.22 ¥1,013.97 ¥93,549.08 ¥6,140.83 

Illinois Totals 

(Safety Margin).

............................................. ¥16.26 ¥14,905.36 ¥567.34 ¥28,785.98 ¥1,694.81 

Grand Total ... ............................................. ¥378.60 ¥67,334.58 ¥1,577.31 ¥122,335.06 ¥7,835.64 

* Note: A negative value indicates a projected decrease in emissions from 2008 to 2025. A positive value indicates a projected increase in 

emissions from 2008 to 2025. 

Table 5–4 of Missouri’s September 17, 

2014 submittal shows that in the 2017 

interim year, emissions levels in the 

area will remain below the 2008 base 

year for all pollutant categories. 

While MDNR’s maintenance plan 

projects maintenance of the 1997 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS through 2025, as 

noted above, EPA is providing advanced 

notice that it expects St. Louis Area will 

continue to maintain the standard 

through 2028 for several reasons: All of 

the Federal regulatory requirements that 

enabled the Area to attain the NAAQS 

will continue to be in effect and 

enforceable after the ten-year 

maintenance period and overall 

emissions are projected to decline 

significantly through 2025. Again, 

because there is no indication that 

emissions will suddenly increase in 

2026, 2027 and 2028 in an amount that 

results in overall emissions in the area 

exceeding attainment year inventory 

levels, EPA is providing advanced 

notice that it expects that the St. Louis 

Area will continue to maintain the 1997 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS through 2028. 

d. Monitoring Network 

There are currently 6 monitors 

measuring PM2.5 in the Missouri portion 

of the St. Louis area.11 MDNR has 

committed to continue operation of the 

network in the area in compliance with 

40 CFR part 58 and have thus addressed 

the requirement for monitoring. EPA 

approved Missouri’s 2016 monitoring 

plan on December 29, 2016, see https:// 

www.epa.gov/ks/region-7-air-qualityprogram. 

e. Verification of Continued Attainment 

MDNR has the legal authority to 

enforce and implement the 

requirements of the Missouri portion of 

the St. Louis area 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS maintenance plan. This 

includes the authority to adopt, 

implement and enforce any subsequent 

emissions control contingency measures 

determined to be necessary to correct 

future PM2.5 attainment problems. 

MDNR will track the progress of the 

maintenance plan by performing future 

reviews of triennial emission 

inventories for the St. Louis area as 

required in the Air Emissions Reporting 

Rule (AERR). For these periodic 

inventories, MDNR will review the 

assumptions made for the purpose of 

the maintenance demonstration 

concerning projected growth of activity 

levels. 

f. Contingency Measures in the 

Maintenance Plan. 

Section 175A of the CAA requires that 

a maintenance plan include such 

contingency measures as EPA deems 

necessary to assure that the state will 

promptly correct a violation of the 

NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. 

The maintenance plan should identify 

the contingency measures to be adopted, 

a schedule and procedure for adoption 

and implementation, and a time limit 

for action by the state. A state should 

also identify specific indicators to be 

used to determine when the 

contingency measures need to be 

implemented. The maintenance plan 

must include a requirement that a state 

will implement all measures with 

respect to control of the pollutant that 

were contained in the SIP before 

redesignation of the area to attainment 

in accordance with section 175A(d). 

The contingency plan included in the 

submittal includes a triggering 

mechanism to determine when 

contingency measures are needed and a 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 4 / Friday, January 5, 2018 / Proposed Rules 649 

process of developing and 

implementing appropriate control 

measures. MDNR will use actual 

ambient monitoring data as the 

triggering event to determine when 

contingency measures should be 

implemented. 

Missouri has identified two different 

levels of corrective responses should the 

annual PM2.5 level exceed the NAAQS 

in any year. A level I trigger occurs 

when the annual average monitored 

PM2.5 concentration exceeds 15.0 mg/m3

in any year at any monitoring station in 

the nonattainment area as described in 

the state’s submittal for the St. Louis 

area. 

MDNR will evaluate a level I 

condition, if it occurs, as expeditiously 

as practicable to determine the causes of 

the ambient PM2.5 increase. If adverse 

emission trends are likely to continue, 

MDNR will first evaluate and 

subsequently adopt and implement 

control measures, taking into 

consideration the ease of 

implementation and the technical and 

economic feasibility of selected 

measures, as outlined in the state’s plan 

no later than twenty-four months after 

quality-assured ambient data has been 

entered into EPA’s Air Quality System 

(AQS) database indicating a level I 

trigger. 

A level II trigger is activated when 

any violation of the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS at any Federal reference 

method monitor in the St. Louis 

maintenance area is recorded, based on 

quality-assured monitoring data. In this 

event, MDNR will conduct a 

comprehensive study to determine the 

cause of the violation within six months 

of the triggering event. Selected 

measures will be implemented as 

expeditiously as practicable, taking into 

consideration the ease of 

implementation and the technical and 

economic feasibility of selected 

measures, as outlined in the state’s plan 

no later than twenty-four months after 

quality-assured ambient data has been 

entered into EPA’s AQS database 

indicating a level II trigger. 

The comprehensive measures will be 

selected from the following types of 

measures, as further detailed in the 

state’s submission, or from any other 

measure deemed appropriate and 

effective at the time the selection is 

made by MDNR: 

• Controls for local individual 

sources with significant effects on the 

monitored violation; 

• Revisions to current rules that 

control PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursor 

emissions such as lowering limits and 

broadening applicability thresholds of 

current rules; and 

• Establishing new rules that control 

PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursor emissions. 

In addition to the triggers indicated 

above, Missouri commits to compiling 

and monitoring PM2.5 and PM2.5

precursor emissions inventories for the 

Missouri portion of the area every three 

years throughout the duration of the 

maintenance period to facilitate the 

emissions trends analysis included in 

the contingency plan under levels I and 

II. 

EPA is providing advanced notice of 

its analysis that that the maintenance 

plan adequately addresses the five basic 

components of a maintenance plan: 

Attainment emission inventory, 

maintenance demonstration, monitoring 

network, verification of continued 

attainment, and a contingency plan. 

Therefore, EPA is providing advanced 

notice that it in a future action, it 

intends to find that the maintenance 

plan SIP revision submitted by MDNR 

for the Missouri portion of the St. Louis 

area meets the requirements of section 

175A of the CAA and is approvable. 

In addition, EPA is providing 

advanced notice that it intends to 

determine that the state submission has 

met the public notice requirements for 

SIP submissions in accordance with 40 

CFR 51.102. The submission also 

satisfied the completeness criteria of 40 

CFR part 51, appendix V. As explained 

above and in more detail in the 

technical support document which is 

part of this document, the revision 

meets the substantive SIP requirements 

of the CAA, including section 110 and 

implementing regulations. 

V. What is EPA’s initial analysis of the 

state’s MVEBs? 

Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new 

transportation plans, programs, and 

projects, such as the construction of 

new highways, must ‘‘conform’’ to (i.e., 

be consistent with) the part of the state’s 

air quality plan that addresses pollution 

from cars and trucks. Conformity to the 

SIP means that transportation activities 

will not cause new air quality 

violations, worsen existing violations, or 

delay timely attainment of the NAAQS 

or any interim milestones. If a 

transportation plan does not conform, 

most new projects that would expand 

the capacity of roadways cannot go 

forward. Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 

set forth EPA policy, criteria, and 

procedures for demonstrating and 

assuring conformity of such 

transportation activities to a SIP. The 

regional emissions analysis is one, but 

not the only, requirement for 

implementing transportation 

conformity. Transportation conformity 

is a requirement for nonattainment and 

maintenance areas. Maintenance areas 

are areas that were previously 

nonattainment for a particular NAAQS 

but have since been redesignated to 

attainment with an approved CAA 

section 175A maintenance plan for that 

NAAQS. 

Under the CAA, states are required to 

submit at various times, control strategy 

SIPs and maintenance plans for 

nonattainment areas. These control 

strategy SIPs (including RFP and 

attainment demonstration) and 

maintenance plans create MVEBs for 

criteria pollutants and/or their 

precursors to address pollution from 

cars and trucks. Per 40 CFR part 93, a 

MVEB must be established for the last 

year of the maintenance plan. A state 

may adopt MVEBs for other years as 

well. A MVEB is the portion of the total 

allowable emissions in the maintenance 

demonstration that is allocated to 

highway and transit vehicle use and 

emissions. See 40 CFR 93.101. The 

MVEBs serve as a ceiling on emissions 

from an area’s planned transportation 

system. The MVEBs concept is further 

explained in the preamble to the 

November 24, 1993, Transportation 

Conformity Rule. See 58 FR 62188. The 

preamble also describes how to 

establish the MVEBs in the SIP and how 

to revise the MVEBs. 

After interagency consultation with 

the transportation partners for the St. 

Louis area, Missouri developed MVEBs 

for NOX and PM2.5 for the Missouri 

portion of the St. Louis nonattainment 

area. Missouri has developed these 

MVEBs for 2008 and 2025. The MVEBs 

reflect the total on-road emissions for 

2008 and 2025, plus an allocation from 

the available NOX and PM2.5 safety 

margin. Under 40 CFR 93.101, the term 

‘‘safety margin’’ is the difference 

between the attainment level (from all 

sources) and the projected level of 

emissions (from all sources) in the 

maintenance plan. All or a portion of 

the safety margin can be allocated to the 

transportation sector; however, the total 

emissions from all sources must remain 

below the attainment level (40 CFR 

93.124(a)). The NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs 

and allocation from the safety margin 

were developed in consultation with the 

transportation partners and were added 

to account for uncertainties in 

population growth, changes in modeled 

vehicle miles traveled, and new 

emission factor models. The NOX and 

PM2.5 MVEBs for the Missouri portion of 

the St. Louis area are identified in Table 

9, below. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
650 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 4 / Friday, January 5, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

12For additional information on the adequacy 

process, refer to 40 CFR 93.118(f) and the 

discussion of the adequacy process in the preamble 

to the 2004 final transportation conformity rule. (69 

FR 40039–40043) 

TABLE 8—MISSOURI PORTION OF THE

ST. LOUIS AREA PM2.5 AND NOX

2008 AND 2025 MVEBS

[tpy] 

PM2.5 NOX

2008 Motor Vehicle Emissions 

Budgets .................................... 2,179 58,820 

2025 Mobile Emissions ............... 533 16,568 

2025 Safety Margin Allocated 

(20%) ....................................... 107 3,314 

2025 Motor Vehicle Emissions 

Budgets .................................... 640 19,882 

In an effort to accommodate future 

variations in travel demand models 

(TDM) results and the vehicle miles 

traveled forecast when no change to the 

network is planned, MDNR consulted 

with the interagency consultation group, 

including U.S. EPA Region 7, to 

determine a reasonable approach to 

address this variation. The projected 

2025 annual on-road motor vehicle 

emissions for direct PM2.5 and NOX are 

533 and 16,568 tons, respectively. 

A safety margin is necessary to 

accommodate the variability, or worstcase scenarios that can occur due to 

future planning assumptions. The 

Missouri portion of the St. Louis area’s 

available total safety margin for NOX is 

52,429 and direct PM2.5 is 1,014. 

However, Missouri is only using a 

portion of this available safety margin. 

The worst-case daily motor vehicle 

emissions projection for PM2.5 is twenty 

percent above the projected 2025 onroad emissions. For the PM2.5 MVEB, 

the needed annual safety margin would 

be twenty percent above the projected 

533 tons for 2025 onroad emissions. 

Therefore, the needed annual safety 

margin for PM2.5 would be 107 tons 

resulting in an overall MVEB of 640 tons 

per year. The worst-case daily motor 

vehicle emissions projection for NOX is 

twenty percent above the projected 

16,568 tons for 2025 on-road emissions. 

Therefore, the needed annual safety 

margin for the NOX MVEB would be 

3,314 tons, resulting in an overall MVEB 

of 19,882 tons per year. 

The maintenance plan establishes 

2008 and 2025 MVEBs for direct PM2.5

and NOX for the St. Louis area. EPA is 

providing advanced notice that in a 

future action it will initiate the process 

for determining whether or not the 

MVEBs are adequate for transportation 

conformity purposes. The publication of 

the future notice starts a 30-day public 

comment period on the adequacy of the 

submitted MVEBs. The comment period 

will be concurrent with the comment 

period on of the future action and 

comments should be submitted to the 

docket for that rulemaking. EPA may 

choose to make its determination on the 

adequacy of the budgets either in the 

final rulemaking on this maintenance 

plan and redesignation request or by 

informing the state of the determination 

in writing, and publishing a notice in 

the Federal Register. EPA will also 

update its adequacy web page to reflect 

the decision on the adequacy of the 

budgets (https://www.epa.gov/state-andlocal-transportation).12 EPA, through is 

providing advanced notice, that it 

intends to propose to approve the 

MVEBs for use to determine 

transportation conformity in the 

Missouri portion of the St. Louis area. 

EPA has reviewed the budgets and the 

entire maintenance plan and 

redesignation request. In conducting 

that review we applied the adequacy 

criteria found in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) 

and found that the budgets satisfy all of 

these criteria. For more information on 

EPA’s review, see EPA’s ‘‘Emissions 

Inventory and Motor Vehicle Emissions 

Budget (MVEB) Technical Support 

Document (TSD) for the Redesignation 

Request and Maintenance Plan for the St 

Louis, Missouri 1997 PM2.5

Nonattainment Area’’ available on line 

at www.regulations.gov, Docket ID No. 

EPA–OAR–R07–2017–0734. 

As discussed throughout this notice 

EPA’s review of the redesignation 

request and maintenance plan for this 

area shows that the area has attained the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS and will 

continue to maintain that NAAQS 

through 2028. While budgets were 

submitted for 2008 and 2025, EPA is 

providing advanced notice that the 

submitted motor vehicle emissions 

budgets for NOX and PM2.5 for 2025 are 

consistent with maintenance of the 1997 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS through at least 

2028 for the reasons discussed above. 

We are providing advanced notice 

that we intend to approve the 

redesignation request, maintenance plan 

and the NOX and PM2.5 budgets 

contained in the maintenance plan in a 

subsequent action. 

VI. What is EPA’s initial analysis of the 

state’s 2008 emissions inventory? 

EPA has reviewed Missouri’s 

documentation of the emissions 

inventory techniques and data sources 

used for the derivation of the 2008 

emissions estimates and has found that 

Missouri has thoroughly documented 

the derivation of these emissions 

inventories. The submittal from the state 

shows that at the time the 2008 

emissions inventory was the most 

complete emissions inventory for PM2.5

and PM2.5 precursors in the St. Louis 

area. Based upon EPA’s review, we 

propose to find that 2008 emissions 

inventories are as complete and accurate 

as possible given the input data 

available to Missouri. Therefore, we are 

providing advanced notice and taking 

comment on the 2008 NH3, VOC, NOX, 

direct PM2.5 and SO2 emissions 

inventories as a base year inventory. 

Final approval of the 2008 base year 

emissions inventory will satisfy the 

emissions inventory requirement under 

section 172(c)(3) of the CAA. For more 

information on EPA’s analysis of the 

2008 base year emissions inventory, see 

EPA’s ‘‘Emissions Inventory and Motor 

Vehicle Emissions Budget (MVEB) 

Technical Support Document (TSD) for 

the Redesignation Request and 

Maintenance Plan for the St, Louis, 

Missouri 1997 PM2.5 Nonattainment 

Area’’ available on line at 

www.regulations.gov, Docket ID No. 

EPA–OAR–R07–2017–0734. 

VII. Summary of Advanced Notice of 

Proposed Actions 

EPA is providing advanced notice on 

several actions regarding the area’s 

redesignation and maintenance of the 

1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. We are processing 

this as an advanced notice of proposed 

action because we are soliciting 

comments on the information provided 

in this notice and the appropriate of 

EPA’s future action. First, EPA is giving 

advanced notice that in a future action 

it intends to determine, based on data 

for the 2015–2017 monitoring period, 

and after review of all available data in 

AQS, that the Missouri portion of the St. 

Louis area is attaining the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is also providing 

advanced notice that it believes the St. 

Louis area has met the criteria under 

CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) for 

redesignation from nonattainment to 

attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS. Therefore, EPA is providing 

advanced notice and taking comment on 

Missouri’s request to redesignate the St. 

Louis area and change the legal 

designation of Franklin, Jefferson, St. 

Charles, and St. Louis and the City of St. 

Louis from nonattainment to attainment 

for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Second, EPA is providing advanced 

notice and taking comment on the 

maintenance plan for the St. Louis area, 

including the PM2.5 and NOX MVEBs for 

2008 and 2025 submitted by Missouri. 

The maintenance plan demonstrates 

that the area will continue to maintain 

the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, and the 

budgets meet all of the adequacy criteria 

contained in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and 

(5). 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 4 / Friday, January 5, 2018 / Proposed Rules 651 

In addition, EPA is providing 

advanced notice of proposed approval 

of Missouri’s 2008 base year emissions 

inventory in accordance with section 

172(c)(3) of the CAA. If finalized, 

approval of the redesignation request 

would change the official designation of 

St. Louis area for the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS, found at 40 CFR part 81, from 

nonattainment to attainment. 

Dated: December 15, 2017. 

James B. Gulliford, 

Regional Administrator, Region 7. 

[FR Doc. 2018–00037 Filed 1–4–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 81 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2017–0548; FRL–9972–84– 

OAR] 

EPA Responses to Certain State 

Designation Recommendations for the 

2015 Ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards: Notice of 

Availability and Public Comment 

Period 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notification of availability and 

public comment period. 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that 

the Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) has posted on our public 

electronic docket and internet website 

responses to certain state and tribal area 

designation recommendations for the 

2015 Ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS) (2015 

Ozone NAAQS). These responses 

include our intended designations for 

the affected areas. The EPA invites the 

public to review and provide input on 

our intended designations during the 

comment period specified in the DATES

section. The EPA sent its responses 

directly to the states and tribes on or 

about December 20, 2017. The EPA 

intends to make final designation 

determinations for the areas of the 

country addressed by these responses 

no earlier than 120 days from the date 

the EPA notified states and tribes of the 

agency’s intended designations. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before February 5, 2018. Please refer 

to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for 

additional information on the comment 

period. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2017–0548, at http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from regulations.gov. 

The EPA may publish any comment 

received to our public docket. Do not 

submit electronically any information 

you consider to be Confidential 

Business Information (CBI) or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e., on the Web, Cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, the full 

EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

general questions concerning this 

action, please contact Denise Scott, U.S. 

EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards, Air Quality Policy Division, 

C539–01, Research Triangle Park, NC 

27709, telephone (919) 541–4280, email 

at scott.denise@epa.gov. The EPA 

contacts listed at the beginning of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION can answer 

questions regarding areas in a particular 

EPA Regional office. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regional Office Contacts: 

Region I—Richard Burkhart (617) 918– 

1664 

Region II—Omar Hammad (212) 637– 

3347 

Region III—Maria Pino (215) 814–2181 

Region IV—Jane Spann (404) 562–9029 

Region V—Kathleen D’Agostino (312) 

886–1767 

Region VI—Carrie Paige (214) 665–6521 

Region VII—Lachala Kemp (913) 551– 

7214 

Region VIII—Chris Dresser (303) 312– 

6385 

Region IX—Laura Lawrence (415) 972– 

3407 

Region X—Karl Pepple (206) 553–1778 

The public may inspect the 

recommendations from the states and 

tribes, our recent letters notifying the 

affected states and tribes of our intended 

designations, and area-specific technical 

support information at the following 

locations: 

Regional offices States 

Dave Conroy, Chief, Air Programs Branch, EPA New England, 1 Congress Street, Suite 1100, Boston, MA 02114–2023, (617) 918–1661.Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, 

and Vermont. 

Richard Ruvo, Chief, Air Programs Branch, EPA Region II, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, NY 10007–1866, (212) 637–4014.New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico, and Virgin Islands. 

Cynthia H. Stahl, Acting Associate Director, Office of Air Program Planning, EPA Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103– 

2187, (215) 814–2180.

Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and 

West Virginia. 

R. Scott Davis, Chief, Air Planning Branch, EPA Region IV, Sam Nunn 

Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street SW, 12th Floor, Atlanta, 

GA 30303, (404) 562–9127.

Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, 

South Carolina, and Tennessee. 

John Mooney, Chief, Air Programs Branch, EPA Region V, 77 West 

Jackson Street, Chicago, IL 60604, (312) 886–6043.

Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin. 

Alan Shar, Acting Chief, Air Planning Section, EPA Region VI, 1445 

Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX 75202, (214) 665–6691.

Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas. 

Mike Jay, Chief, Air Programs Branch, EPA Region VII, 11201 Renner 

Blvd., Lenexa, KS 66129, (913) 551–7460.

Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska. 

Monica Morales, Air Program Director, EPA Region VIII, 1595 

Wynkoop Street, Denver, CO 80202–1129, (303) 312–6936.

Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming. 

Doris Lo, Air Planning Office, EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, CA 94105, (415) 972–3959.

American Samoa, Arizona, California, Guam, Hawaii, Nevada, Northern 

Mariana Islands, Navajo Nation, and the Hopi Tribe. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS