Document ID: EPA-R07-OAR-2006-0286-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of Missouri
Posted Date: 2006-06-26T04:00Z

[Federal Register: June 26, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 122)]
[Rules and Regulations]               
[Page 36210-36213]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr26jn06-15]                         

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2006-0286; FRL-8188-6]

 
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of 
Missouri

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are taking final action to approve a revision to the 
maintenance plan prepared by Missouri to maintain the national ambient 
air quality standard for ozone in the Missouri portion of the Kansas 
City maintenance area. This plan is applicable to Clay, Jackson and 
Platte Counties. The effect of this approval is to ensure Federal 
enforceability of the state air program plan and to maintain 
consistency between the state-adopted plan and the approved SIP.

DATES: This direct final rule will be effective August 25, 2006, 
without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by July 26, 
2006. If adverse comment is received, EPA will publish a timely 
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register informing 
the public that the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2006-0286, by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for 

submitting comments.
    2. E-mail: algoe-eakin.amy@epa.gov.
    3. Mail: Amy Algoe-Eakin, Environmental Protection Agency, Air 
Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, 
Kansas 66101.
    4. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to Amy Algoe-
Eakin, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development 
Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-
2006-0286. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
http://www.regulations. gov, including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through http://www.regulations.gov
 or e-mail information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an 

``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your 
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of 
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without 
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be 

automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is 
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you 
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name 
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any 
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to 
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA 
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid 
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of 
any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the 
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be 
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket 
materials are available either electronically in http://www.regulations.gov
 or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection 

Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, 
Kansas City, Kansas 66101. The Regional Office's official hours of 
business are Monday through Friday, 8 to 4:30 excluding Federal 
holidays. The interested persons wanting to examine these documents 
should make an appointment with the office at least 24 hours in 
advance.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amy Algoe-Eakin at (913) 551-7942, or 
by e-mail at algoe-eakin.amy@epa.gov.

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

What Is a SIP?
What Is the Federal Approval Process for a SIP?
What Does Federal Approval of a State Regulation Mean to Me?
What Are the Criteria for Approval of a Maintenance Plan?
What Is Being Addressed in This Document?
What Is in the Contingency Measure Portion of the Mainentance Plan 
and Is It Approvable?
Does the 8-Hour Ozone Implementation Rule Have Any Bearing on This 
Revision?
Have the Requirements for Approval of a SIP Revision Been Met?
What Action Is EPA Taking?

What Is a SIP?

    Section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires states to develop 
air pollution regulations and control strategies to ensure that state 
air quality meets the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) 
established by EPA. These ambient standards are established under 
section 109 of the CAA, and they currently address six criteria 
pollutants. These pollutants are: Carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, 
ozone, lead, particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide.
    Each state must submit these regulations and control strategies to 
us for approval and incorporation into the Federally-enforceable SIP.

[[Page 36211]]

    Each Federally-approved SIP protects air quality primarily by 
addressing air pollution at its point of origin. These SIPs can be 
extensive, containing state regulations or other enforceable documents 
and supporting information such as emission inventories, monitoring 
networks, and modeling demonstrations.

What Is the Federal Approval Process for a SIP?

    In order for state regulations to be incorporated into the 
Federally-enforceable SIP, states must formally adopt the regulations 
and control strategies consistent with state and Federal requirements. 
This process generally includes a public notice, public hearing, public 
comment period, and a formal adoption by a state-authorized rulemaking 
body.
    Once a state rule, regulation, or control strategy is adopted, the 
state submits it to us for inclusion into the SIP. We must provide 
public notice and seek additional public comment regarding the proposed 
Federal action on the state submission. If adverse comments are 
received, they must be addressed prior to any final Federal action by 
us.
    All state regulations and supporting information approved by EPA 
under section 110 of the CAA are incorporated into the Federally-
approved SIP. Records of such SIP actions are maintained in the Code of 
Federal Regulations (CFR) at title 40, part 52, entitled ``Approval and 
Promulgation of Implementation Plans.'' The actual state regulations 
which are approved are not reproduced in their entirety in the CFR 
outright but are ``incorporated by reference,'' which means that we 
have approved a given state regulation with a specific effective date.

What Does Federal Approval of a State Regulation Mean to Me?

    Enforcement of the state regulation before and after it is 
incorporated into the Federally-approved SIP is primarily a state 
responsibility. However, after the regulation is Federally approved, we 
are authorized to take enforcement action against violators. Citizens 
are also offered legal recourse to address violations as described in 
section 304 of the CAA.

What Are the Criteria for Approval of a Maintenance Plan?

    The requirements for the approval and revision of a maintenance 
plan are found in section 175A of the CAA. In general, a maintenance 
plan must provide a demonstration of continued attainment including the 
control measures relied upon, provide contingency measures for the 
prompt correction of any violation of the standard, provide for 
continued operation of the ambient air quality monitoring network, 
provide a means of tracking the progress of the plan, and include the 
attainment emissions inventory and new budgets for motor vehicle 
emissions. The requirement for a motor vehicle emissions budget is no 
longer applicable to the Kansas City area as explained below.

What Is Being Addressed in this Document?

    By letter dated September 6, 2005, Missouri submitted a SIP 
revision that revised the prior plan for maintaining the 1-hour ozone 
standard in Kansas City. The maintenance plan includes Clay, Jackson 
and Platte Counties in Missouri. The Kansas City area is designated 
attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard and is a ``maintenance'' area 
for the 1-hour standard (an area which has been redesignated from 
nonattainment to attainment with an approved maintenance plan). The 
revision makes five changes to the maintenance plan. The plan was 
revised to provide information about the 8-hour ozone standard, provide 
updated information about the scope of the monitoring network, and 
provide 8-hour ozone air quality data. A statement is included that 
transportation conformity ended when the 1-hour standard was revoked on 
June 15, 2005. It is appropriate to remove all language relating to 
transportation conformity as the 1-hour ozone standard was revoked and 
the area was designated as an attainment area for the 8-hour standard. 
The only substantive revision made was the addition of contingency 
measure triggers relating to the 8-hour ozone standard. The contingency 
measures and schedule for implementing them were not changed.
    Thus, four of the five principal components of the maintenance 
plan, noted above, have not changed; and, therefore, the approvability 
of those sections is not addressed here. EPA took final action on these 
components on January 13, 2004 (69 FR 1921). The changes made to the 
contingency measures portion of the plan are addressed below.

What Is in the Contingency Measure Portion of the Maintenance Plan and 
Is It Approvable?

    The contingency measures listed have not changed, and the schedule 
for implementing measures has not changed (adoption of measures within 
18 months and full implementation within 24 months). Revision to the 
maintenance plan also retains triggers previously approved and adds 
triggers for the 8-hour ozone standard.
    We believe it is appropriate to include a trigger relating to the 
8-hour ozone standard, since that is the relevant standard which 
applies to Kansas City. However, because Missouri has not yet adopted, 
and EPA has not yet approved a maintenance plan for the area as 
required by section 110(a) of the CAA (the submission is due in June 
2007), Missouri must also retain the 1-hour ozone standard triggers 
previously approved in the maintenance plan. (See, 40 CFR 
51.905(e)(2)). Therefore, Missouri has included both 1-hour and 8-hour 
contingency measure triggers in its SIP.

Does the 8-Hour Ozone Implementation Rule Have Any Bearing on This 
Revision?

    The Phase-1 Implementation Rule for the 8-hour ozone standard 
promulgated in April 2004 requires that former 1-hour maintenance 
areas, areas such as Kansas City, prepare and submit no later than June 
15, 2007, a plan under section 110 of the CAA to maintain the 8-hour 
ozone standard for a ten-year period from the date of designation. The 
revisions submitted by Missouri are revisions to the existing 1-hour 
maintenance plan to provide interim protection for violations of the 8-
hour standard. These revisions do not address requirements in the 
implementation rule for the 8-hour ozone standard. We anticipate that 
Missouri will address the latter requirements in a subsequent 
submittal.

Have the Requirements for Approval of a SIP Revision Been Met?

    The state submittal has met the public notice requirements for SIP 
submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The submittal also 
satisfied the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. In 
addition, 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.
    The requirements for maintenance plans are established in section 
175A of the CAA. With the maintenance plan revisions identified above, 
the plan continues to meet these requirements.

What Action Is EPA Taking?

    Our review of the material submitted indicates that the state has 
revised the maintenance plan in accordance with the requirements of the 
CAA. We are fully approving Missouri's revised

[[Page 36212]]

maintenance plan for the Missouri portion of the Kansas City 
maintenance area.
    We are processing this action as a direct final action because the 
revisions make routine changes to the existing SIP which are 
noncontroversial. Therefore, we do not anticipate any adverse comments. 
Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on part of this rule 
and if that part can be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may 
adopt as final those parts of the rule that are not the subject of an 
adverse comment.

Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not 
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this 
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, 
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action 
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes 
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. 
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because 
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does 
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by 
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).
    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will 
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on 
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or 
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism 
implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the 
States, on the relationship between the national government and the 
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule 
implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or 
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the CAA. 
This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of 
Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this 
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State 
to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to 
disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP 
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section 
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not impose an 
information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other 
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by August 25, 2006. Filing a 
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule 
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial 
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial 
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such 
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings 
to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental 
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: June 15, 2006.
James B. Gulliford,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.

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

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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

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

Subpart AA--Missouri

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

Sec.  52.1320  Identification of Plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                               EPA-Approved Missouri Nonregulatory SIP Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Applicable
  Name of nonregulatory SIP      geographic or        State
          provision              nonattainment   submittal date      EPA approval date          Explanation
                                     area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
(50) Revision to Maintenance   Kansas City.....        10/28/05  6/26/06 [insert FR page   .....................
 Plan for the 1-hour ozone                                        number where the docu-
 standard in the Missouri                                         ment begins].
 portion of the Kansas City
 maintenance area for the
 second the ten-year period.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 36213]]

[FR Doc. 06-5625 Filed 6-23-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P