[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 52 (Thursday, March 18, 1999)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 13384-13391]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-6652]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 81

[MO 061-1061; IL187-1; FRL-6311-8]


Clean Air Reclassification and Notice of Potential Eligibility 
for Attainment Date Extension, Missouri and Illinois; St. Louis 
Nonattainment Area; Ozone

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA proposes to find that the St. Louis nonattainment area

[[Page 13385]]

(hereinafter referred to as the St. Louis area) has failed to attain 
the 1-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS or 
standard) by November 15, 1996, the date set forth in the Clean Air Act 
(CAA or Act) for moderate nonattainment areas. If EPA takes final 
action on the finding as proposed, the St. Louis area would be 
reclassified as a serious nonattainment area.
    EPA is also issuing a notice of the St. Louis area's potential 
eligibility for an attainment date extension, pursuant to EPA's 
``Guidance on Extension of Air Quality Attainment Dates for Downwind 
Transport Areas'' (hereinafter referred to as the extension policy) 
(Richard D. Wilson, Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and 
Radiation) issued July 16, 1998. The extension policy applies where 
pollution from upwind areas interferes with the ability of a downwind 
area to demonstrate attainment with the 1-hour ozone standard by the 
dates prescribed in the CAA. EPA proposes to finalize the 
reclassification of the St. Louis area only after the area has had an 
opportunity to qualify for an attainment date extension under the 
extension policy.
    As an alternative to reclassification for areas affected by 
transport, the extension policy provides that an area, such as St. 
Louis, is eligible for an attainment date extension if it can make 
submissions that meet certain conditions. Missouri and Illinois are 
working together to comply with the conditions for receiving an 
extension so that the St. Louis area can avoid reclassification. If 
Missouri and Illinois make submittals in response to the extension 
policy, EPA will address the adequacy of those submittals in a 
subsequent rulemaking action. If the submittals meet the provisions for 
an extension, the attainment date for the St. Louis area would be 
extended, and the area would not be reclassified.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 19, 1999.

ADDRESSES: All comments should be addressed to: Aaron J. Worstell, Air 
Planning and Development Branch, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
726 Minnesota Avenue, Kansas City, KS 66101; or to J. Elmer Bortzer, 
Chief, Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 
Chicago, IL 60604.
    Copies of the St. Louis area monitored air quality data analyses, 
guidance on extension of attainment dates in downwind transport areas, 
state submittals requesting attainment date extension, and other 
relevant documents used in support of this proposal are available at 
the following addresses for inspection during normal business hours: 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region VII, Air Planning and 
Development Branch, 726 Minnesota Avenue, Kansas City, KS 66101; U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region V, Air Programs Branch, Air and 
Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604-3507; 
and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Air and Radiation Docket 
and Information Center, Air Docket (6102), 401 M Street, SW, 
Washington, D.C. 20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Aaron J. Worstell, EPA Region VII, 
(913) 551-7787 or Jay Bortzer, EPA Region V, (312) 886-1430.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

What are the National Ambient Air Quality Standards?

    Since the CAA's inception in 1970, EPA has set NAAQS for six common 
air pollutants: carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, 
particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide. The CAA requires these 
standards be set at levels that protect public health and welfare with 
an adequate margin of safety. These standards present state and local 
governments with the air quality levels they must meet to achieve clean 
air. Also, these standards allow the American people to assess whether 
or not the air quality in their communities is healthful.

What is the NAAQS for ozone?

    The NAAQS for ozone is expressed in two forms which are referred to 
as the 1-hour and 8-hour standards. Table 1 summarizes the ozone 
standards.

                                      Table 1.--Summary of Ozone Standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Standard                  Value                    Type                     Method of Compliance
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-hour................  0.12 ppm..............  Primary and secondary...  Must not be exceeded on average more
                                                                           than one day per year over any 3-year
                                                                           period.
8-hour................  0.08 ppm..............  Primary and secondary...  The 3-year average of the annual
                                                                           fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour
                                                                           average ozone concentration measured
                                                                           at each monitor within an area.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 1-hour ozone standard of 0.12 ppm has existed since 1979 and 
was included with the 1990 CAA amendments. The 8-hour ozone standard, 
which replaces the 1-hour standard, was recently adopted by EPA on July 
18, 1997 (62 FR 38856). However, the 1-hour ozone standard continues to 
apply for existing nonattainment areas until such time as EPA 
determines that an area has attained the 1-hour ozone standard (40 CFR 
50.9(b)). It is the classification of the St. Louis area relative to 
the 1-hour ozone standard that is addressed in this document.

What is the St. Louis Ozone Nonattainment Area?

    The St. Louis ozone nonattainment area is an interstate area which 
includes cities and counties in both Missouri and Illinois as follows: 
Madison County, Monroe County, and St. Clair County in Illinois; and 
Franklin County, Jefferson County, St. Charles County, St. Louis City, 
and St. Louis County in Missouri.
    Under section 107(d)(1)(C) of the CAA, each ozone area designated 
nonattainment for the 1-hour ozone standard prior to enactment of the 
1990 CAA amendments, such as the St. Louis area, was designated 
nonattainment by operation of law upon enactment of the 1990 
amendments. Under section 181(a) of the Act, each ozone area designated 
nonattainment under section 107(d) was also classified by operation of 
law as ``marginal,'' ``moderate,'' ``serious,'' ``severe,'' or 
``extreme,'' depending on the severity of the area's air quality 
problem. The design value for an area, which characterizes the severity 
of the air quality problem, is represented by the highest design value 
at any individual ozone monitoring site (i.e., the highest of the 
fourth highest 1-hour daily maximums in a given three-year period with 
complete monitoring data). Table 2 provides the design value ranges for 
each nonattainment classification. Ozone nonattainment areas with 
design values between 0.138 and 0.160 ppm, such as the St. Louis area 
(which had a

[[Page 13386]]

design value of 0.156 ppm in 1989), were classified as moderate. These 
nonattainment designations and classifications were codified in 40 CFR 
Part 81 (see 56 FR 56694, November 6, 1991).

                                  Table 2.--Ozone Nonattainment Classifications
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Area class                        Design value (ppm)                    Attainment date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marginal................................  0.121 up to 0.138...............  November 15, 1993.
Moderate................................  0.138 up to 0.160...............  November 15, 1996.
Serious.................................  0.160 up to 0.180...............  November 15, 1999.
Severe..................................  0.180 up to 0.280...............  November 15, 2005.
Extreme.................................  0.280 and above.................  November 15, 2010.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, under section 182(b)(1)(A) of the CAA, states 
containing areas that were classified as moderate nonattainment were 
required to submit state implementation plans (SIPs) to provide for 
certain controls, to show progress toward attainment, and to provide 
for attainment of the ozone standard as expeditiously as practicable 
but no later than November 15, 1996. Moderate area SIP requirements are 
found primarily in section 182(b) of the CAA.

Why is EPA Proposing To Reclassify the St. Louis Area?

    In regard to reclassification for failure to attain, section 
182(b)(2)(A) of the Act provides that:
    Within 6 months following the applicable attainment date (including 
any extension thereof) for an ozone nonattainment area, the 
Administrator shall determine, based on the area's design value (as of 
the attainment date), whether the area attained the standard by that 
date. Except for any Severe or Extreme area, any area that the 
Administrator finds has not attained the standard by that date shall be 
reclassified by operation of law in accordance with table 1 of 
subsection (a) to the higher of--
    (i) the next higher classification for the area, or
    (ii) the classification applicable to the area's design value as 
determined at the time of the notice required under subparagraph (B).
    No area shall be reclassified as Extreme under clause (ii).
    Furthermore, section 182(b)(2)(B) of the Act provides that:
    The Administrator shall publish a notice in the Federal Register, 
no later than 6 months following the attainment date, identifying each 
area that the Administrator has determined under subparagraph (A) as 
having failed to attain and identifying the reclassification, if any, 
described under subparagraph (A).
    In the case of St. Louis, EPA has yet to make the determination 
described in section 182(b)(2)(B) of the Act.
    Table 3 lists the average number of days when ambient ozone 
concentrations exceeded the 1-hour ozone standard at each monitoring 
site in the St. Louis area for the period 1994-1996. The ozone design 
value for each monitor is also listed for the same period. A complete 
listing of the ozone exceedances for each monitoring site, as well as 
EPA's calculations of the design values, can be found in the docket 
file. The data in Table 3 show that for 1994-1996 seven monitoring 
sites in the St. Louis area averaged more than one exceedance day per 
year. Therefore, pursuant to section 181(b)(2)(B) of the CAA, EPA 
proposes to find that the St. Louis area did not attain the 1-hour 
standard by the November 15, 1996, deadline.

Table 3.--Air Quality Monitoring Data for the St. Louis Area (1994-1996)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Average
                                    Number of    number of
                                     expected     expected   Site design
               Site                 days over    exceedance  value (ppm)
                                     standard     days per
                                   (1994-1996)      year
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Missouri Sites:
    Arnold--29-099-0012..........          5.0        a 1.7        0.126
    West Alton--29-183-1002......          9.9        a 3.3      b 0.136
    Orchard Farms--29-183-1004...          3.6        a 1.2        0.133
    South Lindbergh--29-189-0001.          3.0          1.0        0.124
    Queeny Park--29-189-0006.....          6.1         a2.0        0.129
    55 Hunter--29-189-3001.......          3.0          1.0        0.123
    3400 Pershall--29-189-5001...          3.0          1.0        0.118
    Rock Road--29-189-7002.......          5.0         a1.7        0.125
    South Broadway--29-510-0007..          1.0          0.3        0.108
    River DesPeres c--29-510-0062          1.0          1.0        0.101
    1122 Clark--29-510-0072......          0.0          0.0        0.089
    Newstead--29-510-0080........          1.0          0.3        0.108
Illinois Sites:
    Alton--17-119-0008...........          4.0        a 1.3        0.127
    West Division--17-119-1009...          2.0          0.7        0.110
    Poag Road--17-119-2007.......          3.1          1.0        0.124
    North Walcott--17-119-3007...          4.0        a 1.3        0.125
    East St. Louis--17-163-0010..          1.0          0.3        0.108
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a A violation occurs when the average number of expected exceedances is
  greater than 1.05.
b Represents the 1996 design value for the St. Louis area.
c Site discontinued at end of 1995 ozone season.


[[Page 13387]]

    As discussed later in this document, because EPA has now 
interpreted the CAA to allow for an extension of the attainment date 
based on an understanding of transport data not available at the time 
of St. Louis' original attainment date, EPA believes it is fair to 
allow the states an opportunity to apply and qualify for an attainment 
date extension before EPA finalizes its finding and the area is 
reclassified.
    This proposal details the following reasons which support EPA's 
decision to proceed in this manner:
    1. The Agency has concluded that this is the best way of 
reconciling the Act's provisions with respect to ozone transport with 
the provisions governing graduated attainment dates and with the 
reclassification provisions. The Act shows congressional intent that 
transport be considered when the Agency acts to reclassify an area, and 
a reluctance to subject an area to greater controls than necessary to 
bring local sources into compliance.
    2. St. Louis has been shown to be affected by ozone transport from 
upwind areas.
    3. St. Louis is now monitoring air quality data that, were it being 
newly classified, would entitle it to the classification of a marginal 
nonattainment area. However, if it were reclassified, it would be 
required to impose the controls which are normally demanded only for an 
area with serious levels of air pollution.
    4. Missouri and Illinois have committed to submit an attainment 
demonstration by November 1999 which includes all the local control 
measures required under the Act for moderate nonattainment areas, 
demonstrating attainment when upwind controls are expected to be 
implemented.
    Furthermore, in this proposal EPA's recognition that the area 
should be given an opportunity to qualify for an extension is balanced 
by EPA's action in moving forward with the process of reclassification 
in the event that the states are unsuccessful in demonstrating that 
they satisfy the criteria for an extension.

Can an Extension of the Moderate Area Attainment Date Be Granted for 
the St. Louis Area?

    The attainment date specified in the Act for moderate nonattainment 
areas, such as St. Louis, is November 15, 1996. Two separate mechanisms 
exist for an area to obtain an extension of this date. First, pursuant 
to section 181(a)(5) of the CAA, the state may request, and EPA may 
grant, up to two one-year attainment date extensions. EPA may grant an 
extension if: (1) the state has complied with the requirements and 
commitments pertaining to the applicable implementation plan for the 
area, and (2) the area has measured no more than one exceedance of the 
ozone standard at any monitoring site in the nonattainment area in the 
year in which attainment is required.
    On October 2, 1996, Missouri submitted a request for a one-year 
extension of the attainment date. However, eight exceedances of the 1-
hour ozone standard occurred in the St. Louis area in 1996 (refer to 
Table 4). Two of these exceedances occurred at the Alton monitoring 
site in Illinois. Although this was the only monitoring site recording 
more than one exceedance in 1996, under section 181(a)(5) of the Act, 
the St. Louis area failed to qualify for an attainment date extension 
based on 1996 air quality data.

                             Table 4.--Ozone Exceedances in the St. Louis Area--1996
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Site ID                            Site type                       Date                 PPM
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Missouri Sites:
    Arnold--29-099-0012.................  SPM                           June 20, 1996..............        0.133
    West Alton--29-183-1002.............  NAMS                          June 13, 1996..............        0.135
    Orchard Farms--29-183-1004..........  SLAMS                         June 28, 1996..............        0.147
    S. Lindbergh--29-189-0001...........  SLAMS                         June 20, 1996..............        0.130
    S. Broadway--29-510-0007............  SLAMS                         June 20, 1996..............        0.131
Illinois Sites:
    North Walcott--17-119-3007..........  SLAMS                         June 13, 1996..............        0.135
    Alton--17-119-0008..................  SLAMS                         June 13, 1996..............        0.128
    Alton--17-119-0008..................  SLAMS                         June 14, 1996..............        0.127
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There exists, however, another mechanism for obtaining an extension 
of the attainment date under the extension policy for areas which are 
affected by downwind transport of ozone and ozone precursors. This 
extension policy reconciles section 181(b)(2) with other provisions of 
the CAA to authorize attainment date extensions for downwind transport 
areas that can make appropriate showings. The section that follows 
discusses the extension policy in detail.

What is EPA's new policy regarding extension of attainment dates for 
downwind transport areas?

    A number of areas in the country that have been classified as 
``moderate'' or ``serious'' are affected by pollutants that have 
traveled downwind from other areas. For these downwind areas, transport 
of pollutants from upwind areas has interfered with their ability to 
meet the ozone standard by the dates prescribed by the CAA. As a 
result, many of these areas, such as the St. Louis area, find 
themselves facing the prospect of being reclassified, or ``bumped up,'' 
to a higher classification (e.g., from ``moderate'' to ``serious'') for 
failing to meet the ozone standard by the specified date.
    For some time, EPA has recognized that pollutant transport can 
impair an area's ability to meet air quality standards. As a result, in 
March 1995 a collaborative, Federal-state process to assess the ozone 
transport problem was begun. Through a two-year effort known as the 
Ozone Transport Assessment

[[Page 13388]]

Group (OTAG), EPA worked in partnership with the 37 easternmost states 
and the District of Columbia, industry representatives, academia, and 
environmental groups to develop recommended strategies to address 
transport of ozone-forming pollutants across state boundaries.
    On November 7, 1997, EPA acted on OTAG's recommendations and issued 
a proposal (the proposed NOX SIP call, 62 FR 60318) 
requiring 22 states and the District of Columbia to submit state plans 
addressing the regional transport of ozone. These state plans, or SIPs, 
will decrease the transport of ozone across state boundaries in the 
eastern half of the United States by reducing emissions of nitrogen 
oxides (a precursor to ozone formation known as NOX). EPA 
took final action on the NOX SIP call on October 27, 1998 
(63 FR 57356). EPA expects the final NOX SIP call will 
assist many areas in attaining the 1-hour ozone standard.
    On July 16, 1998, in consideration of these factors and the 
realization that many areas are unable to meet the CAA mandated 
attainment dates due to transport, EPA issued the extension policy. In 
this policy the attainment date for an area may be extended provided 
that the following criteria are met: (1) the area must be identified as 
a downwind area affected by transport from either an upwind area in the 
same state with a later attainment date or an upwind area in another 
state that significantly contributes to downwind nonattainment (by 
``affected by transport,'' EPA means an area whose air quality is 
affected by transport from an upwind area to a degree that affects the 
area's ability to attain); (2) an approvable attainment demonstration 
must be submitted with any necessary, adopted local measures and with 
an attainment date that shows that it will attain the 1-hour standard 
no later than the date that the reductions are expected from upwind 
areas under the final NOX SIP call and/or the statutory 
attainment date for upwind nonattainment areas, i.e., assuming the 
boundary conditions reflecting those upwind reductions; (3) the area 
has adopted all applicable local measures required under the area's 
current classification and any additional measures necessary to 
demonstrate attainment, assuming the reductions occur as required in 
the upwind areas; (4) the area must provide that it will implement all 
adopted measures as expeditiously as practicable, but no later than the 
date by which the upwind reductions needed for attainment will be 
achieved.
    EPA contemplates that when it acts to approve such an area's 
attainment demonstration, it will, as necessary, extend that area's 
attainment date to a date appropriate for that area in light of the 
schedule for achieving the necessary upwind reductions. The area would 
no longer be subject to reclassification or ``bump-up'' for failure to 
attain by its original attainment date under section 181(b)(2).

Is the St. Louis Area Eligible for an Attainment Date Extension Under 
the Extension Policy?

    EPA believes that the St. Louis area is affected by upwind 
transport. In fact, according to the final NOX SIP call, the 
St. Louis area is affected by transport of pollutants from upwind areas 
to an extent that the area's ability to meet the 1-hour ozone standard 
is impaired. Therefore, EPA believes that the first of the transport 
criteria can be satisfied. However, before the St. Louis area can 
qualify for an attainment date extension under the extension policy, 
the remainder of the criteria specified in the extension policy must be 
met.
    In October 1998, EPA notified the Governors of Missouri and 
Illinois of the availability of the extension policy. EPA also 
requested that, if they wished to demonstrate their eligibility for the 
extension policy, the Governors respond to EPA with a letter committing 
their respective states to meet the requirements necessary to qualify 
for an attainment date extension under the policy by November 15, 1999.
    On November 23, 1998, Missouri submitted a letter to EPA providing 
a commitment to meet the requirements of the extension policy. 
Similarly, on December 15, 1998, Illinois submitted a letter to EPA 
providing a commitment to meet the requirements of the extension 
policy. (EPA's letters notifying the Missouri and Illinois Governors of 
the extension policy, and the respective responses are included in the 
docket for this rulemaking.)
    EPA's review of the Missouri and Illinois SIPs for the St. Louis 
area indicates that Missouri and Illinois must submit the following in 
order to meet the requirements set forth in the extension policy:
    1. A technical analysis establishing the influence of transport on 
ozone levels within the St. Louis area. This requirement can be met by 
citing the analysis contained in EPA's aforementioned NOX 
SIP call.
    2. Regulations or negative declarations addressing certain CAA 
requirements pertaining to reasonably available control technology 
(RACT) for major sources emitting volatile organic compounds (VOC). 
Note that this applies only to Missouri since the Illinois SIP has 
fully addressed VOC RACT.
    3. Regulations addressing the CAA's requirements pertaining to RACT 
for major sources of NOX. EPA believes that this requirement 
can be met by adopting regulations that will achieve reductions in 
NOX emissions consistent with the NOX SIP call.
    4. An attainment demonstration meeting the criteria set forth in 
the extension policy.
    In addition, the states must submit SIP revisions addressing all 
other local control measures required for moderate nonattainment areas 
and any additional measures necessary for attainment. All measures must 
also be implemented in accordance with the time frames set forth in the 
extension policy.

What Progress Has Been Made by Missouri and Illinois To Meet the 
Extension Policy So That an Attainment Date Extension Can Be Obtained?

    Missouri and Illinois have already done extensive work toward 
meeting the extension policy. Several major portions of the extension 
policy have already been satisfied, and Missouri and Illinois have 
already made substantial progress toward compliance with the criteria 
for obtaining an attainment date extension.
    Regarding the first item, EPA believes that Missouri and Illinois 
can establish the influence of transport on ozone levels within the St. 
Louis area by citing the analysis contained in EPA's NOX SIP 
call.
    Regarding the second item, Illinois has already submitted 
regulations or negative declarations fully addressing VOC RACT controls 
for major VOC sources. Missouri has also addressed VOC RACT for most 
major VOC sources, but there are some RACT categories for which 
Missouri has not yet submitted regulations or negative declarations.
    Regarding the third item, EPA believes that Missouri and Illinois 
will be able to meet NOX RACT by adopting regulations 
consistent with the NOX SIP call. Missouri and Illinois are 
currently developing an emissions inventory and drafting regulations in 
response to the NOX SIP call.
    Regarding the fourth item, Missouri and Illinois are currently 
working to develop an approvable attainment demonstration. The states 
have initiated the steps leading to a final attainment demonstration 
and have committed to completing and submitting the attainment 
demonstration by November 15, 1999.

[[Page 13389]]

What Actions Have Illinois and Missouri Taken to Improve Air Quality in 
the St. Louis Area?

    EPA has approved, and Illinois has implemented, VOC emission 
reductions as part of the states' 15 percent rate-of-progress plan 
(ROPP or 15 percent plan) (see 62 FR 66279). Illinois has implemented 
VOC controls including: (1) requiring the lowering of Reid Vapor 
Pressure of gasoline to 7.2 pounds per square inch (decreased 
volatility); (2) transportation control measures; (3) automobile 
refinishing emission control regulations; (4) marine vessel loading 
emission control regulations; (5) tightened RACT standards and emission 
cutoffs for various industrial source categories; (6) underground 
gasoline storage tank breathing emission controls; (7) organic chemical 
batch process RACT regulations; and (8) expansion of basic vehicle 
inspection and maintenance (I/M) area coverage. Illinois has 
implemented an enhanced vehicle I/M program and cold-cleaner degreasing 
regulations, which should further reduce VOC emissions in the Illinois 
portion of the St. Louis area. Illinois has adopted and implemented a 
contingency plan resulting in additional VOC control measures.
    The state of Missouri has also taken a number of actions to improve 
air quality in the St. Louis area. As part of its 15 percent ROPP, the 
state adopted many of the same VOC RACT regulations as Illinois. 
Missouri has also adopted and implemented a contingency plan which 
included additional VOC control measures. In July 1998, the Governor of 
Missouri requested to opt in to the reformulated gasoline (RFG) 
program. EPA proposed to establish an implementation date for RFG based 
on the Governor's request in a Federal Register notice published on 
September 15, 1998 (see 63 FR 49317). EPA expects to take final action 
on the RFG opt-in in the near future. In addition, the state of 
Missouri is proceeding with implementation of an upgraded I/M program 
for motor vehicles. The state released its request for proposals to 
operate the program in October 1998. Based on this request and on the 
previous I/M SIP submission, EPA proposed to conditionally approve the 
I/M program provided that it begins operation by April 2000 (see 64 FR 
9460). This program is a major part of the 15 percent plan and will 
result in a significant reduction in emissions when implemented in the 
coming years. EPA also notes that St. Louis is an area which 
implemented a Stage II vapor recovery program in the 1980s.

If EPA finalizes its proposed rulemaking reclassifying the St. Louis 
area, what would be the area's new classification?

    Section 181(b)(2)(A) of the Act requires that, when an area is 
reclassified for failure to attain, its reclassification be the higher 
of the next higher classification or the classification applicable to 
the area's ozone design value at the time the notice of 
reclassification is published in the Federal Register. The design value 
of the St. Louis area at the time of the proposed finding of failure to 
attain is based on air quality monitoring data from 1996 through 1998. 
This design value is 0.131 ppm, as derived from the West Alton 
monitoring site, and the classification of ``marginal'' nonattainment 
would be applicable to it. By contrast, the next higher classification 
for the St. Louis area is ``serious'' nonattainment. Since ``serious'' 
is a higher nonattainment classification than ``marginal,'' under the 
statutory scheme the area would be reclassified to serious 
nonattainment. Refer to Table 5 below.

                    Table 5.--Air Quality Monitoring Data for the St. Louis Area (1996-1998)e
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           Average number of
                                                      Number of expected       expected        Site design value
                        Site                          days over standard    exceedance days          (ppm)
                                                          (1996-1998)          per year
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Missouri Sites:
    Arnold--29-099-0012.............................                 3.2               b 1.1               0.118
    West Alton--29-183-1002.........................                 4.4               b 1.5             c 0.131
    Orchard Farms--29-183-1004......................                 2.3                 0.8               0.118
    S. Lindbergh-Gravois a--29-189-0001.............                 3.5               b 1.2               0.119
    Queeny Park--29-189-0006........................                 1.2                 0.4               0.110
    55 Hunter--29-189-3001..........................                 1.2                 0.4               0.109
    3400 Pershall--29-189-5001......................                 2.2                 0.7               0.117
    Rock Road--29-189-7002..........................                 1.2                 0.4               0.116
    South Broadway--29-510-0007.....................                 2.2                 0.7               0.107
    River DesPeres d--29-510-0062...................  ..................  ..................  ..................
    1122 Clark--29-510-0072.........................                 1.2                 0.4               0.094
    Newstead--29-510-0080...........................                 0.0                 0.0               0.107
Illinois Sites:
    Alton--17-119-0008..............................                 2.0                 0.6               0.116
    W. Division--17-119-1009........................                 0.0                 0.0               0.110
    Poag Road--17-119-2007..........................                 1.0                 0.3               0.118
    N. Walcott--17-119-3007.........................                 2.0                 0.6               0.117
    E. St. Louis--17-163-0010.......................                 1.2                 0.4               0.098
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a Data from the S. Lindbergh and Gravois monitoring sites have been combined.
b A violation occurs when the average number of expected exceedances is greater than 1.05.
c This value represents the current design value for the St. Louis area.
d Site discontinued at end of 1995 ozone season.
e Note that fourth quarter 1998 air quality data was not available and is not reflected in this table. Any
  change in the calculated design values or expected exceedances is insignificant.

What would reclassification mean for the St. Louis area?

    Under section 181(a)(1) of the Act, the new attainment deadline for 
moderate ozone nonattainment areas reclassified to serious under 
section 181(b)(2) would be as expeditious as practicable but no later 
than the date applicable to the new classification, i.e., November 15, 
1999. However, for the reasons given above, EPA does not expect to take 
final action on this proposed reclassification until

[[Page 13390]]

after November 15, 1999. This will allow the states adequate time to 
make a demonstration that an extension of the attainment date, instead 
of a reclassification, would be appropriate under the extension policy. 
As a practical matter, even if EPA were to reclassify the St. Louis 
area immediately, there would likely be insufficient time for the 
states to submit new attainment demonstrations and actually demonstrate 
attainment of the 1-hour ozone standard by November 15 of this year. If 
the St. Louis area is reclassified, and if EPA does not act to 
reclassify the area until after its November submittal, it will plainly 
be too late for the area to demonstrate attainment by a date that will 
have already passed. EPA believes that the practical impossibility of 
meeting the November 1999 deadline for serious areas requires EPA to 
establish a new attainment date for the area. Therefore, in this 
document EPA discusses options for establishing a new attainment date 
in the event that the area is reclassified to serious.
    November 1999 is a date that is impossible to set as a date for the 
area to attain and for the states to have made SIP submissions. Since 
it is impossible, the principles underlying what EPA does for areas 
that must submit 15 percent plans after the deadline for submission has 
passed should apply here. Consistent with what EPA has done with 
respect to setting new applicable deadlines for those plans, EPA 
believes that a deadline that is as expeditious as practicable would be 
appropriate.
    Section 182(i) states that the Administrator may adjust applicable 
deadlines (other than attainment dates) to the extent such adjustment 
is necessary or appropriate to assure consistency for submission of the 
new requirements applicable to an area which has been reclassified. (An 
area reclassified to serious is required to submit SIP revisions 
addressing the serious area requirements for the 1-hour ozone standard 
in section 182(c).) Where an attainment date has already passed or is 
otherwise impossible to meet, EPA believes that the Administrator may 
also adjust an attainment date to assure fair and equitable treatment 
consistent with the provisions in section 182(i), notwithstanding the 
parenthetical clause. EPA also notes another provision of the Act in 
section 110(k)(5) pertaining to findings of SIP inadequacy that allows 
the Administrator to adjust attainment dates when such dates have 
passed. Although this latter provision is not directly applicable to a 
reclassification, EPA believes that the provision illustrates a 
recognition by Congress of limited instances in which it becomes 
necessary to adjust attainment dates, particularly where it is 
otherwise impossible to meet the statutory date.
    One option is to construct a schedule consistent with recent 
reclassifications of other areas. EPA has recently reclassified other 
moderate ozone nonattainment areas, including Santa Barbara, 
California; Phoenix, Arizona; and Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas. In these 
cases, the new attainment date is November 15, 1999. The most recent 
reclassification was for the Dallas-Fort Worth area. EPA published the 
notice reclassifying this area on February 18, 1998, thereby providing 
approximately 21 months for the area to attain the standard. EPA thus 
concluded that 21 months was an adequate period for a moderate 
nonattainment area to attain the standard where the new attainment date 
had not yet lapsed but where there was less time remaining than the Act 
had contemplated. EPA here suggests, as an option, an attainment date 
that is in keeping with this time frame and that would allow the area 
an opportunity to make submissions to meet the serious area 
requirements and implement measures to attain the standard. Applying 
this approach to the St. Louis area would result in a new attainment 
date 21 months from publication of the final reclassification notice.
    Another option would be to set an attainment date that takes into 
account the impact of transport on the area, even though the area must 
be reclassified because it has failed to meet the criteria for the 
attainment date extension policy. This attainment date would coincide 
with the date set for upwind area reductions under the NOX 
SIP call, or 2003. Although the St. Louis area, if reclassified, would 
have to meet the requirements for a serious area, under this option it 
would not be held responsible for emission reductions necessary to 
compensate for transported pollution. This option would then be 
consistent with EPA's approach of allocating responsibility for 
pollution fairly among the states. EPA solicits comments on the 
appropriateness of the options discussed above and whether a shorter or 
later attainment date would be more appropriate.
    If the St. Louis area is reclassified, EPA must also address the 
schedule by which Illinois and Missouri are required to submit SIP 
revisions meeting the serious area requirements. One option is to 
require that the states submit SIP revisions containing all of the 
serious area requirements no later than one year after final action on 
the reclassification. This submission would include a new attainment 
demonstration and all additional measures required by section 182(c) of 
the Act. The additional measures include, but are not limited to, the 
following: (1) attainment and reasonable further progress 
demonstrations; (2) an enhanced vehicle I/M program; (3) clean-fuel 
vehicle program; (4) a 50 ton-per-year major source threshold; (5) more 
stringent new source review requirements; (6) an enhanced monitoring 
program; and (7) contingency provisions. If the submission shows that 
the area can attain the standard sooner than the attainment date 
established in a final reclassification notice, EPA would adjust the 
attainment date to reflect the earlier date, consistent with the 
requirement in section 181(a)(1) that the standard be attained as 
expeditiously as practicable. EPA solicits comments on the appropriate 
schedule for submitting these SIP revisions.

What action is being taken by EPA?

    Today EPA is proposing to find that the St. Louis area has failed 
to attain the ozone 1-hour air quality standard by the date prescribed 
by the CAA for moderate nonattainment areas, or November 15, 1996. If 
EPA finalizes this finding, the St. Louis area will be reclassified by 
operation of law from moderate nonattainment to serious nonattainment.
    If Missouri and Illinois fulfill the requirements of the extension 
policy by November 15, 1999, EPA will not finalize the proposed finding 
of failure to attain, and consequently, the St. Louis area will not be 
reclassified to serious nonattainment. However, if Missouri or Illinois 
fail to meet the requirements of the extension policy by November 15, 
1999, EPA will finalize the finding of failure to attain, and the St. 
Louis area will be reclassified to serious nonattainment at that time.
    EPA believes that this approach is reasonable since it (1) ensures 
that the local control measures mandated by the CAA for moderate 
nonattainment areas, such as VOC and NOx RACT, are achieved; 
(2) takes into consideration the transport of pollutants into the St. 
Louis area which impair the ability of the area to meet the air quality 
standards; and (3) harmonizes the St. Louis area attainment date with 
the schedule for emissions reductions in upwind areas associated with 
the NOx SIP call.
    Finally, if the St. Louis area does attain the 1-hour standard at 
some time in the future, then the area would be eligible for revocation 
of the 1-hour

[[Page 13391]]

standard, and any classification would no longer be applicable.

Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order (E.O.) 12866

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this 
regulatory action from E.O. 12866 entitled ``Regulatory Planning and 
Review.''

B. E.O. 12875

    Under E.O. 12875, Enhancing the Intergovernmental Partnership, EPA 
may not issue a regulation that is not required by statute and that 
creates a mandate upon a state, local, or tribal government, unless the 
Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct 
compliance costs incurred by those governments, or EPA consults with 
those governments. If EPA complies by consulting, E.O. 12875 requires 
EPA to provide to the OMB a description of the extent of EPA's prior 
consultation with representatives of affected state, local, and tribal 
governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of any written 
communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the 
need to issue the regulation. In addition, E.O. 12875 requires EPA to 
develop an effective process permitting elected officials and other 
representatives of state, local, and tribal governments ``to provide 
meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory proposals 
containing significant unfunded mandates.''
    Today's proposal would not create a mandate on state, local, or 
tribal governments. It would not impose any enforceable duties on these 
entities. The SIP submission requirements are not judicially 
enforceable. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1(a) of E.O. 
12875 do not apply to this proposal.

C. E.O. 13045

    Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that: (1) is 
determined to be ``economically significant'' as defined under E.O. 
12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or safety risk that EPA 
has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children. 
If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate 
the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on 
children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other 
potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered 
by the Agency.
    This proposal is not subject to E.O. 13045 because it is not an 
economically significant regulatory action as defined by E.O. 12866, 
and it does not establish a further health or risk-based standard 
because it implements a previously promulgated health or safety-based 
standard.

D. E.O. 13084

    Under E.O. 13084, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 
Governments, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not required by 
statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the communities of 
Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial direct 
compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal government 
provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs 
incurred by the tribal governments, or EPA consults with those 
governments. If EPA complies by consulting, E.O. 13084 requires EPA to 
provide to the OMB, in a separately identified section of the preamble 
to the rule, a description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation 
with representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the 
nature of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue 
the regulation. In addition, E.O. 13084 requires EPA to develop an 
effective process permitting elected officials and other 
representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful 
and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters 
that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.''
    Today's proposal would not significantly or uniquely affect tribal 
governments. Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) of E.O. 
13084 do not apply to this proposal.

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act generally requires an agency to 
conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice 
and comment rulemaking requirements, unless the agency certifies that 
the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, 
small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental jurisdictions. 
This proposal will not have a significant impact on a substantial 
number of small entities because a finding of failure to attain under 
section 182(b)(2) of the CAA, and the establishment of a SIP submittal 
schedule for the reclassified area, do not, in and of themselves, 
directly impose any new requirements on small entities. See Mid-Tex 
Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. FERC, 773 F.2d 327 (D.C. Cir. 1985) 
(agency's certification need only consider the rule's impact on 
entities subject to requirements of the rule). Instead, this proposal 
proposes to make a determination and to establish a schedule for states 
to submit SIP revisions and does not propose to directly regulate any 
entities. Therefore, I certify that this action will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

F. Unfunded Mandates

    Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA 
must, unless otherwise prohibited by law, prepare a budgetary impact 
statement to accompany any proposed or final rule that includes a 
Federal mandate that may result in estimated annual costs to state, 
local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to private sector, of 
$100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA must select the most cost-
effective and least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives 
of the rule and is consistent with statutory requirements. Section 203 
requires EPA to establish a plan for informing and advising any small 
governments that may be significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
    Sections 202 and 205 do not apply to today's action because the 
proposed determination that the St. Louis area failed to reach 
attainment does not, in-and-of-itself, constitute a Federal mandate 
because it does not impose an enforceable duty on any entity. In 
addition, the CAA does not permit EPA to consider the types of analyses 
described in section 202, in determining whether an area has attained 
the ozone standard or qualifies for an extension. Finally, section 203 
does not apply to today's proposal because the SIP submittal schedule 
would affect only the states of Missouri and Illinois, which are not 
small governments.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks, 
Wilderness areas.

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

    Dated: March 5, 1999.
Dennis Grams,
Regional Administrator, Region VII.

    Dated: March 10, 1999.
David A. Ullrich,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region V.
[FR Doc. 99-6652 Filed 3-17-99; 8:45 a.m.]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P