[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 41 (Thursday, February 29, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 7711-7714]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-4565]



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


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52

[MO-29-1-7151a; FRL-5425-2]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of 
Missouri

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This document takes final action to approve the State 
Implementation Plans (SIP) submitted by the state of Missouri for the 
purpose of fulfilling the requirements set forth in EPA's 
Transportation Conformity rule. The SIPs were submitted by the state to 
satisfy the Federal requirements in 40 CFR 51.396.

DATES: This action is effective April 29, 1996 unless by April 1, 1996 
adverse or critical comments are received.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents relevant to this action are 
available for public inspection during normal business hours at the: 
Environmental Protection Agency, Air Branch, 726 Minnesota Avenue, 
Kansas City, Kansas 66101; and EPA Air & Radiation Docket and 
Information Center, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa V. Haugen at (913) 551-7877.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Section 176(c)(4) of the Clean Air Act, as amended (CAA), requires 
the EPA to promulgate criteria and procedures for demonstrating and 
ensuring conformity of Federal actions to an applicable implementation 
plan developed pursuant to section 110 and part D of the CAA. 
Conformity to an implementation plan is defined by the CAA as 
conformity to an implementation plan's purpose of eliminating or 
reducing the severity and number of violations of the National Ambient 
Air Quality Standards, and achieving expeditious attainment of such 
standards. On November 23, 1993, the EPA promulgated the final rule 
(hereafter referred to as the Transportation Conformity rule), which 
established the process by which the Federal Highway Administration 
(FHWA), the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), and metropolitan 
planning organizations (MPO) determine conformity of highway and 
transit projects.
    The Transportation Conformity rule also establishes the criteria 
for EPA approval of SIPs. See 40 CFR Sec. 51.396. These criteria 
provide that the state provisions must be at least as stringent as the 
requirements specified in EPA's Transportation Conformity rule, and 
that they can be more stringent only if they apply equally to 
nonfederally funded transportation projects as well as those using 
Federal funds (section 51.396(a)).
    The St. Louis area was designated nonattainment for ozone and 
carbon monoxide (CO) in 1978. On November 6, 1991, EPA promulgated a 
rule which classified the St. Louis area as a moderate ozone 
nonattainment area, and as an unclassified nonattainment area for CO. 
Kansas City was redesignated to attainment for ozone, and a maintenance 
plan was approved, in a June 23, 1992, Federal Register notice. Section 
51.396 of the Transportation Conformity rule requires that states with 
areas subject to the rule submit an SIP revision containing the 
criteria and procedures for FHWA, FTA, MPOs, and other state or local 
agencies to assess the conformity of transportation plans, 
Transportation Improvement Programs (TIP), and projects to the 
applicable SIP, within 12 months after November 23, 1993. As the rule 
applies to all ozone and CO nonattainment and maintenance areas, SIP 
revisions for the St. Louis and Kansas City areas, addressing the 
requirements of the Transportation Conformity rule, became due on 
November 24, 1994.

II. Review of State Submittal

    On February 14, 1995, the state of Missouri submitted 
Transportation Conformity SIP revisions for Kansas City and St. Louis. 
The submission included an SIP revision for Kansas City along with 
Missouri rule 10 CSR 10-2.390 (10-2.390), and an SIP revision, 
including Missouri rule 10 CSR 10-5.480 (10-5.480), which applies to 
St. Louis. Section 51.396 requires that, for the SIP revision to be 
approvable by EPA, certain sections of the Transportation Conformity 
rule be incorporated verbatim.
    The state of Missouri chose to use the model Transportation 
Conformity rule developed by the State and Territorial Air Pollution 
Program Administrators (STAPPA)/Association of Local Air Pollution 
Control Officials (ALAPCO). The STAPPA/ALAPCO model rule added 
clarifying changes consistent with the intent of the Federal rule. For 
instance, 10-5.480(10)(B) and 10-2.390(10)(B) include examples of the 
types of planning assumptions which must be considered in making 
conformity determinations. The examples are added to the language in 
section 51.412 of the Federal rule, but do not change the section's 
intent. The 

[[Page 7712]]
STAPPA/ALAPCO rule also contains ``more stringent'' and ``lateral'' 
options which change the substance of the Federal rule. Provisions in 
the STAPPA/ALAPCO rule which are more stringent than the Federal rule 
are identified as ``Optional More Stringent Version,'' ``Optional More 
Stringent Additional Provision,'' or ``Optional More Stringent and 
Potentially Discriminatory Versions.'' Options which address subjects 
not covered by the Federal Conformity rule, or which expand the 
coverage of the Federal rule's requirements, are identified as 
``Lateral Expansion Option'' in the STAPPA/ALAPCO rule. Missouri did 
not adopt any of these options from the model rule. Therefore, except 
as noted below, EPA finds that the Missouri submissions meet the 
criteria set forth in section 51.396 of the Transportation Conformity 
rule.
    On February 8, 1995, EPA published an interim final rule entitled, 
``Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments: Transition to the Control 
Strategy Period.'' This interim final rule, which modified the language 
in sections 51.448 and 93.128 of the Federal rule, was effective 
immediately and applied until August 8, 1995. A proposed rule for these 
language modifications was also published February 8, 1995, and a final 
rule was published on August 7, 1995. Missouri rules 10 CSR 10-
5.480(22) and 10-2.390(20) reflect the Federal rule requirements before 
the publication of the interim final rule. Specifically, the Missouri 
rule provides that conformity will lapse 12 months from the date of an 
EPA finding of specific SIP deficiencies. Therefore, EPA is approving 
the state's Transportation Conformity SIP revisions with the exception 
of the aforementioned portions of the Missouri rules. Section 93.128 of 
the Federal Transportation Conformity rule, as amended on August 7, 
1995, will remain in effect until the state of Missouri submits an SIP 
revision which incorporates the changes in the Federal rule. Section 
93.128, as amended, states that a conformity lapse resulting from a 
finding of certain SIP deficiencies is delayed until CAA section 179(b) 
highway sanctions for these deficiencies are applied.
    On August 29, 1995, EPA published an interim final rulemaking 
amending the November 24, 1993, final Transportation Conformity rule to 
remove the statutory reference relating to exempting certain areas from 
certain NOX provisions of the Transportation Conformity rule. 
Specifically, the interim final rule removed the reference to NOX 
waivers under Sec. 182(f) to ensure that the waivers had to be approved 
as part of the implementation plan revision process discussed in 
Sec. 182(b) of the CAA, in order to exempt areas from the requirement 
to make conformity determinations for NOX. Missouri rules 10 CSR 
10-2.390 and 10 CSR 10-5.480 specifically reference waivers approved 
under Sec. 182(f) as the statutory authority which would relieve areas 
from the NOX conformity requirements. In a letter dated December 
7, 1995, from David Shorr, Director, Missouri Department of Natural 
Resources to Dennis Grams, Regional Administrator, EPA, the state of 
Missouri confirms its understanding that, should EPA approve an 
NOX waiver under Sec. 182(f), this waiver does not relieve the 
state from the NOX conformity requirements in the Transportation 
Conformity rule. The letter further states that Missouri intends to 
implement its rule in a manner consistent with EPA's interim final 
rule, so that the conformity requirements will continue to apply until 
any NOX waiver request has undergone a public hearing, has been 
submitted to EPA, and has been subsequently approved as an SIP 
revision.
    On November 14, 1995, the EPA promulgated a final rule which 
amended certain provisions of the Federal Transportation Conformity 
rule. These changes include allowing any transportation control measure 
from an approved SIP to proceed during a conformity lapse; aligning the 
date of conformity lapses with the date of application of the CAA 
highway sanctions for any failure to submit or submission of an 
incomplete control strategy SIP; extension of the grace period before 
which areas must determine conformity to a submitted control strategy 
SIP; establishment of a grace period before which transportation plan 
and program conformity must be determined in newly designated 
nonattainment areas; and a correction of the nitrogen oxides provisions 
of the Transportation Conformity rule so they are consistent with the 
CAA and previous commitments made by EPA. As the state adopted and 
submitted its Transportation Conformity rules prior to the publication 
of the November 14, 1995, rule amendments, and a Transportation 
Conformity SIP revision consistent with these amendments must be 
submitted to EPA by 12 months from November 14, 1995, EPA believes it 
is reasonable to approve the state's submittal. EPA expects Missouri to 
amend its conformity rules consistent with the November 1995 rule 
amendments and submit the amendments to EPA for approval by November 
1996.
    The Missouri SIP revisions, including 10-2.390 and 10-5.480, were 
adopted by the Missouri Air Conservation Commission, after proper 
notice and public hearing, on January 12, 1995, and became effective on 
May 28, 1995. These rules apply in all nonattainment and maintenance 
areas for transportation-related criteria pollutants for which the area 
is designated nonattainment, or has a maintenance plan as required by 
sections 51.394 and 93.102 of the Transportation Conformity rule.
    Because the Missouri rules meet the substantive requirements of 
EPA's Transportation Conformity rule, EPA has determined that these 
submissions meet the requirements for an approvable Transportation 
Conformity SIP.

III. Specific Language Changes

    The Missouri Transportation Conformity rules include changes which 
clarify the text of the Federal rule, as explained below. Other changes 
reflect guidance issued by EPA in the Preamble of the final 
Transportation Conformity rule.
    A. The preamble to the November 1993 Transportation Conformity rule 
states that there must be consistency between the SIP and the 
conformity analysis regarding modeling parameters such as temperature, 
season, etc. This regulatory requirement is incorrectly stated only in 
sections 51.452(b)(5) and 93.130(b)(5), which apply to serious, severe, 
and extreme ozone nonattainment areas and serious carbon monoxide areas 
after January 1, 1995. In an October 14, 1994, EPA memorandum, it is 
indicated that it was EPA's intent for this requirement to apply to all 
areas. This memorandum also cited an incorrect reference in sections 
51.452(c)(1) and 93.130(c)(1) to paragraph (a) of the same section. The 
reference should have been to paragraph (b). The corrections are made 
in 10-2.390(24)(A)6., 10-2.390(24)(C)1., 10-5.480(26)(A)6., and 10-
5.480(26)(C)1. of the Missouri rules.
    B. Sections 51.458 and 93.133 require the Transportation Conformity 
SIP revisions to provide that written commitments to mitigation 
measures must be obtained prior to a positive conformity determination, 
and that project sponsors must comply with such commitments. The 
Missouri rules modify this language to make it appropriate for the 
state rules in 10-2.390(26)(C) and 10-5.480(29)(C).
    C. In part IV(L)(1) of the Preamble to the final Transportation 
Conformity 

[[Page 7713]]
rule, EPA stated that Transportation Conformity SIPs should specify 
what action by an affected recipient of funds designated under Title 23 
U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Act, constitutes adoption or approval of 
a nonfederal transportation project for inclusion in a regional 
emissions analysis. ``Adoption and approval'' are defined in 10-
2.390(5)(C)4.C. and 10-5.480(5)(C)3.D.
    D. Part IV(F)(1) of the Preamble to the final Transportation 
Conformity rule discusses the ``timely implementation'' of 
transportation control measures as being a criteria for a conformity 
determination. Specifically, EPA uses the term ``maximum priority.'' 
10-2.390(13)(C) and 10-5.480(13)(C) add language which clarifies the 
term ``maximum priority.''

IV. Consultation

    Section 51.402 (93.105) requires the state to include procedures 
for interagency consultation and resolution of conflicts in the 
Transportation Conformity SIPs. The SIPs are to provide ``well-defined 
consultation procedures whereby representatives of the MPOs, state and 
local air quality planning agencies, state and local transportation 
agencies * * * must consult with each other and with local or regional 
offices of EPA, FHWA, and FTA on the development of the implementation 
plan, the TIP, and associated conformity determinations.'' Both 10-
2.390(5) and 10-5.480(5) establish consultation procedures which meet 
EPA's consultation criteria.
    Both St. Louis and Kansas City are bistate areas. 10-2.390(5) and 
10-5.480(5) establish the consultation, conflict resolution and public 
participation procedures for conformity determinations, SIPs, 
transportation plans, and TIPs, and clearly state the agencies that 
will be involved in the consultation process in Kansas and Missouri for 
the Kansas City area, and in Illinois and Missouri for the St. Louis 
area. The roles and responsibilities of each agency are outlined in 
detail.
    The consultation process established in 10-2.390(5) and 10-5.480(5) 
incorporate the basic principle behind sections 51.402 and 93.105 in 
the Federal Transportation Conformity rule. Missouri has established a 
mechanism by which every agency with any responsibility for any key 
transportation or air quality decision must consult with every other 
agency with an interest in that decision. Each interested party is 
provided with all the necessary information needed for meaningful input 
and, prior to taking any action, the views of the party are considered 
and responded to in a substantive manner. The reader is referred to the 
Technical Support Document for information on specific processes within 
the interagency consultation procedures, including conflict resolution 
procedures and the public participation process. EPA has determined 
that sections 10-2.390(5) and 10-5.480(5) meet the requirements of 
52.402 and 93.105 of the Federal Transportation Conformity rule.
    EPA Action: The effect of this action is that EPA grants full 
approval of Missouri's February 14, 1995, submittals. These SIP 
revisions meet the requirements set forth in 40 CFR Sec. 51.396. As 
explained above, Missouri will be required to revise its rules 
consistent with revisions promulgated by EPA subsequent to Missouri's 
adoption of its rules.
    The EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because 
the Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates 
no adverse comments. However, in a separate document in the Federal 
Register publication, the EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision 
should adverse or critical comments be filed.
    If the EPA receives such comments, this action will be withdrawn 
before the effective date by publishing a subsequent notice that will 
withdraw the final action. All public comments received will then be 
addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this action serving as a 
proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period on 
this action. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should 
do so at this time.
    Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or 
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for 
revision to any SIP. Each request for revision to the SIP shall be 
considered separately in light of specific technical, economic, and 
environmental factors, and in relation to relevant statutory and 
regulatory requirements.
    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. Sec. 600 et seq., 
EPA must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact 
of any proposed or final rule on small entities (5 U.S.C. Secs. 603 and 
604). Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a 
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small 
entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, 
and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than 
50,000.
    SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the CAA 
do not create any new requirements, but simply approve requirements 
that the state is already imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP 
approval does not impose any new requirements, EPA certifies that it 
does not have a significant impact on any small entities affected. 
Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-state relationship under the 
CAA, preparation of a regulatory flexibility analysis would constitute 
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The 
CAA forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds 
(Union Electric Co. v. U.S. E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (S.Ct. 1976); 
42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2)).
    This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature 
by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the 
Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a 
July 10, 1995, memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator 
for Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has 
exempted this regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.

Unfunded Mandates

    Under sections 202, 203, and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act of 1995 (``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 
1995, EPA must undertake various actions in association with proposed 
or final rules that include a Federal mandate that may result in 
estimated costs of $100 million or more to the private sector, or to 
state, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate.
    Through submission of this state implementation plan, the state has 
elected to adopt the program provided for under section 110 of the CAA. 
These rules may bind state and local governments to perform certain 
actions and also require the private sector to perform certain duties. 
To the extent that the rules being finalized for approval by this 
action will impose new requirements, sources are already subject to 
these regulations under state law. Accordingly, no additional costs to 
state or local governments, or to the private sector, result from this 
final action. EPA has also determined that this final action does not 
include a mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100 million or 
more to state or local governments in the aggregate or to the private 
sector. EPA has determined that these rules result in no additional 
costs to tribal government.
    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 April 29, 1996. Filing a petition for 
reconsideration by the 

[[Page 7714]]
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, Carbon monoxide, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, 
Reporting and record keeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: February 6, 1996.
Dennis Grams,
Regional Administrator.

    Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is 
amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Subpart AA--Missouri

    2. Section 52.1320 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(92) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 52.1320  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (92) On February 14, 1995, the Missouri Department of Natural 
Resources submitted two new rules which pertain to transportation 
conformity in Kansas City and St. Louis.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) New rule 10 CSR 10-2.390 (except section (20) Criteria and 
Procedures: Interim Period Reductions in Ozone Areas (TIP)) and 10 CSR 
10-5.480 (except section (22) Criteria and Procedures: Interim Period 
Reductions in Ozone Areas (TIP)), both entitled Conformity to State 
Implementation Plans of Transportation Plans, Programs, and Projects 
Developed, Funded, or Approved Under Title 23 U.S.C. or the Federal 
Transit Act, effective May 28, 1995.
    (ii) Additional material.
    (A) Missouri's Air Pollution Control Plan, St. Louis Metropolitan 
Area Ozone and Carbon Monoxide Transportation Conformity, January 12, 
1995.
    (B) Missouri's Air Pollution Control Plan, Kansas City Metropolitan 
Area Ozone Transportation Conformity, January 12, 1995.
    (C) Policy agreement, entered into between the Missouri Department 
of Natural Resources, the Mid-America Regional Council, and the Highway 
and Transportation Commission of the state of Missouri, dated August 
31, 1993.
    (D) Letter from the state of Missouri to EPA, dated December 7, 
1995, in which the state commits to implementing its state rule 
consistent with the Federal Transportation Conformity rule, as amended 
on August 29, 1995, with regards to the granting of an NOx waiver 
and the NOx conformity requirements.

[FR Doc. 96-4565 Filed 2-28-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P