Document ID: EPA-R07-OAR-2014-0399-0009
Agency: epa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Missouri; St. Louis Inspection and Maintenance Program
Posted Date: 2015-03-03T05:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 41 (Tuesday, March 3, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 11323-11326]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-04271]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2014-0399; FRL-9923-66-Region 7]

Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approval and 
Promulgation: Missouri; St. Louis Inspection and Maintenance Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final 
action to approve revisions to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) 
submitted by the State of Missouri relating to its vehicle Inspection 
and Maintenance (I/M) Program. On August 16, 2007, and December 7, 
2007, the Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) requested to 
amend the SIP to replace the St. Louis centralized vehicle test 
program, called the Gateway Clean Air Program (GCAP), with a de-
centralized, OBD-only vehicle I/M program called the Gateway Vehicle 
Inspection Program (GVIP). In this action, EPA is also approving three 
additional SIP revisions submitted by Missouri related to the state's 
I/M program including: Exemptions for specially constructed vehicles or 
``kit-cars,'' exemptions for Plugin Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEV), 
and rescission of Missouri State Highway Patrol rules from the Missouri 
SIP.
    These revisions to Missouri's SIP do not have an adverse effect on 
air quality as demonstrated in the technical support document which is 
a part of this docket. EPA's approval of these SIP revisions is being 
done in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: This final rule is effective on April 2, 2015.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID 
No. EPA-R07-OAR-2014-0399. All documents in the docket are listed on 
the www.regulations.gov Web site. 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 through 
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection 
Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard, 
Lenexa, Kansas 66219. The Regional Office's official hours of business 
are Monday

[[Page 11324]]

through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. 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: Steven Brown, Environmental Protection 
Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard, 
Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at 913-551-7718, or by email at 
brown.steven@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' or 
``our'' refer to EPA. This section provides additional information by 
addressing the following:

I. What is being addressed in this document?
II. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?
III. EPA's response to comments.
IV. What action is EPA taking?

I. What is being addressed in this document?

    EPA is approving revisions to the St. Louis vehicle I/M program to 
replace the centralized, transient I/M240 vehicle I/M program (GCAP) 
with the de-centralized, OBD-only, vehicle I/M program (GVIP). MDNR 
submitted to EPA five SIP revision submissions to address the vehicle 
I/M program replacement and associated state rule, plus one 
supplemental demonstration. They are as follows:
    On August 16, 2007, MDNR requested that Missouri Rule 10 CSR 10-
5.380, ``Motor Vehicle Emissions Inspection'' be rescinded and replaced 
with rule 10 CSR 10-5.381, ``On-Board Diagnostics Motor Vehicle 
Emissions Inspection.'' In that same submittal letter, MDNR also 
requested that Missouri Rule 10 CSR 10-5.375, ``Motor Vehicles 
Emissions Inspection Waiver'' be rescinded. EPA is not taking any 
action on 10 CSR 10-5.375 as it is being replaced in its entirety with 
the GVIP I/M program, Missouri Rule 10 CSR 10-5.381.
    On December 14, 2007, MDNR submitted the new GVIP plan and 
performance standard demonstration to show that the GVIP program meets 
the basic requirements as described in 40 CFR part 51 subpart S. This 
submission also requests that EPA approve the plan to replace the GCAP 
I/M program with the new GVIP program.
    On December 21, 2007, Missouri submitted a revision requesting that 
the Missouri State Highway Patrol rules be removed from the Missouri 
SIP because the new rule, 10 CSR 10-5.381, does not rely on the 
Missouri Highway Patrol rules for enforcement. More details can be 
found in the technical support document that is a part of this docket.
    On January 2, 2009, MDNR submitted a required supplemental 
demonstration for I/M network type and program evaluation as required 
by 40 CFR 51.353. This demonstration is required within one year after 
the I/M program begins.
    On June 17, 2009, Missouri submitted a revision to I/M rule 10 CSR 
10-5.381 which includes minor clarification edits and exempts specially 
constructed vehicles or ``kit-cars'' from the rule.
    On December 10, 2012, Missouri submitted a revision to exempt 
Plugin Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEV) from the I/M program as codified 
in rule 10 CSR 10-5.381.
    As part of our review, EPA performed a separate analysis of all the 
state's SIP submissions and a cumulative air quality analysis as 
documented in the technical support document that is part of this 
docket. EPA's analysis shows that these SIP revisions do not adversely 
affect air quality in the St. Louis area and are approvable.

II. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?

    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. In 
addition, as explained above and in more detail in the technical 
support document which is part of this docket, the revision meets the 
substantive SIP requirements of the CAA, including section 110 and 
implementing regulations.

III. EPA's Response to Comments

    The public comment period on EPA's proposed rule opened December 
28, 2014, the date of its publication in the Federal Register, and 
closed on January 29, 2015. During this period, EPA received five 
comments from one anonymous commenter.
    Comment 1: The commenter contends that while no action is necessary 
with regards to removing Missouri Rule 10 CSR 10-5.375 from the SIP 
because Missouri is replacing the GCAP program with the GVIP program, 
EPA incorrectly stated that Missouri Rule 10 CSR 10-5.375 was not part 
of the SIP.
    Response 1: EPA agrees with the commenter that 10 CSR 10-5.375 was 
included in list number 47 in 40 CFR 52.1320(e) under ``Vehicle I/M 
Program'' and also should have been listed in 40 CFR 52.1320(c) but was 
not. EPA also agrees that no action is necessary to remove 10 CSR 10-
5.375 from the SIP as the GCAP I/M program is being wholly replaced 
with the GVIP I/M program. Therefore, no action is necessary on 
Missouri's request to remove Missouri rule CSR 10-5.375 from the SIP.
    Comment 2: The commenter contends that the analysis performed to 
show that the new I/M program meets the performance standard did not 
account for the removal of both the IM240 and single speed idle test 
and therefore was done improperly.
    Response 2: Missouri is not required to include a performance 
standard test for IM240 and single speed idle testing as Missouri is 
only required to meet the Basic Performance Standard test set forth by 
EPA. The reason for the performance standard testing was to give an 
indication of whether or not the GVIP program would satisfy the minimum 
requirements of EPA's I/M rule. The GVIP program's modeling parameters 
used by Missouri during this Basic Performance Standard test analysis 
were correctly identified and performed adequately. The technical 
support document (TSD) supplied in the docket reviews the performance 
standard test results and also includes a section 110(l) modeling 
exercise that compares the GCAP and GVIP I/M programs emissions 
results.
    Comment 3: The commenter states that portions of the St. Louis area 
are required to have an enhanced I/M program as part of the 1-hour 
ozone maintenance plan which covers the second ten-year maintenance 
plan and beyond. The commenter says that this means that until Missouri 
has demonstrated that the enhanced I/M program is no longer necessary, 
and EPA approves this demonstration, the St. Louis area is still 
required to have an enhanced I/M program.
    Response 3: Under the 1-hour standard, the St. Louis area was 
classified as moderate non-attainment and was only required to do a 
basic I/M program. At the time the GCAP was approved, its emission 
reductions were compared to those that would be achieved by the basic 
I/M performance standard and were found to exceed the performance 
standard. Because the GCAP program met the applicable performance 
standard as well as providing the additional emission reductions 
required under the attainment plan, it was approved. Today's action, 
among other things, is approving the replacement of the GCAP program 
with the GVIP program which has also been found to meet the minimum 
basic program requirements but also achieves greater emission 
reductions than the GCAP program it replaces as demonstrated by the 
section 110(l) analysis included in the TSD in the docket for today's 
action. The GVIP

[[Page 11325]]

program meets all the requirements previously met by the GCAP when it 
was approved into the SIP. Today's action does not weaken or remove the 
I/M program from the SIP as demonstrated in the TSD, contrary to what 
is implied by the commenter. Additionally, Missouri relies on the GVIP 
program and it is specifically relied upon in the St. Louis area's 1997 
8-hour ozone maintenance plan.
    Comment 4: The commenter states that Missouri's emissions analysis 
uses the outdated EPA mobile model, MOBILE-6, and that because Missouri 
submitted this SIP revision over five years ago and EPA has not acted 
on it, the burden should be on EPA to perform an additional analysis 
utilizing the updated EPA mobile model, MOVES2014.
    Response 4: EPA did perform an additional modeling analysis 
utilizing MOVES2014 to compare the GCAP and GVIP I/M program 
differences for control efficiency and emissions results for the St. 
Louis area. The results show that the GVIP program achieves greater 
emission reductions than the GCAP program. These results can be found 
in the TSD which is part of this docket.
    Comment 5: The commenter states that EPA should perform an 
additional modeling analysis that uses the performance standard in the 
February 2014 guidance document EPA-420-B-14-006. The commenter further 
states that by using this guidance any analysis will show that the 
removal of the IM240 test and single speed idle test will result in a 
loss of NOX and VOC emission reductions and that losses will 
need to be compensated for with other emission reduction measures.
    Response 5: Additional performance standard modeling is only 
required if changes are made to an approved I/M program prior to 
attaining the standard for which the program was adopted (section 4.0, 
EPA guidance document: EPA-420-B-14-006). Missouri has attained the 
standard(s) for which the program was adopted. Once an area goes from 
being a nonattainment area to an attainment and maintenance area, the 
only analysis required when changing an I/M program is to estimate the 
shortfall, if any, created by the change as part of a required 110(l) 
demonstration. The 110(l) demonstration modeling contained in the TSD, 
provided in the docket, was performed using the February 2014 guidance 
cited in the comment and shows that there was no shortfall created by 
the change from the GCAP to the GVIP which is being approved through 
this action.

IV. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is taking final action to amend the Missouri SIP to approve 
revisions to St. Louis vehicle I/M program. While these SIP revisions 
were submitted in separate requests, they are direct changes to the St. 
Louis Vehicle Inspection Program and are being addressed in one SIP 
action.

Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes 
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the Missouri 
rule 10-5.381 ``On Board Diagnostics Motor Vehicle Emissions 
Inspection'' described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth 
below.'' EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents 
generally available electronically through www.regulations.gov and/or 
in hard copy at the appropriate EPA office (see the ADDRESSES section 
of this preamble for more information).
    Under the Clean Air Act (CAA), the Administrator is required to 
approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act 
and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, 
this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements 
and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by 
state law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review 
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the Clean Air Act; and
     does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or 
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does 
not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct 
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by 
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    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 action and 
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the appropriate circuit by May 4, 2015. Filing a petition for 
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect 
the finality of this action 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).)

[[Page 11326]]

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen 
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: February 18, 2015.
Karl Brooks,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Environmental 
Protection Agency amends 40 CFR part 52 as set forth below:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

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(c) the table is amended by:
0
a. Removing the entry for ``10-5.380'';
0
b. Adding in numerical order the entry for ``10-5.381''; and
0
c. Removing the chapter title ``Missouri Department of Public Safety 
Division 50-State Highway Patrol Chapter 2--Motor Vehicle Inspection'' 
and its entries for ``50-2.010 through 50-2.420''.
    The addition reads as follows:

Sec.  52.1320  Identification of Plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                        EPA-Approved Missouri Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      State
   Missouri  citation              Title            effective      EPA approval date           Explanation
                                                       date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Missouri Department of Natural Resources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Chapter 5--Air Quality Regulations and Air Pollution Control Regulations for the St. Louis Metropolitan Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
10-5.381................  On-Board Diagnostics        12/30/12  3/3/15 [Insert Federal   .......................
                           Motor Vehicle                         Register citation].
                           Emissions Inspection.
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2015-04271 Filed 3-2-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P