[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 65 (Tuesday, April 6, 1999)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16659-16661]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-8482]



[[Page 16659]]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 70

[MO 063-1063; FRL-6320-5]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and State 
Operating Permits Programs; State of Missouri

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is announcing the proposed approval of the Missouri 
``Definitions and Common Reference Tables'' rule and certain portions 
of the Missouri ``Operating Permits'' rule as amendments to the 
Missouri State Implementation Plan (SIP) and as revisions to the Part 
70 (operating permits) program. These revisions clarify the Missouri 
rules, update the rules for consistency with Federal regulations and 
other state rules, and are consistent with EPA guidance.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 6, 1999.

ADDRESSES: All comments should be addressed to: Kim Johnson, 
Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 
726 Minnesota Avenue, Kansas City, Kansas 66101.
    Copies of the state submittals are available at the following 
addresses for inspection during normal business hours: Environmental 
Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 726 Minnesota 
Avenue, Kansas City, Kansas 66101; and the 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: Kim Johnson, Environmental Protection 
Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 726 Minnesota Avenue, 
Kansas City, Kansas 66101. (913) 551-7975.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

What Is a SIP?

    Section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires states to develop 
air pollution regulations and control strategies to ensure that state 
air quality meets the national ambient air quality standards 
established by EPA. These ambient standards are established under 
section 109 of the CAA, and they currently address six criteria 
pollutants. These pollutants are: carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, 
ozone, lead, particulate matter (PM), and sulfur dioxide.
    Each state must submit these regulations and control strategies to 
EPA for approval and incorporation into the Federally enforceable SIP.
    The CAA requires each state to have a Federally approved SIP which 
protects air quality primarily by addressing air pollution at its point 
of origin. These SIPs can be extensive, containing state regulations or 
other enforceable documents and supporting information such as emission 
inventories, monitoring networks, and modeling demonstrations.

What Is the Federal Approval Process for a SIP?

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

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

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

What Is the Part 70 (Operating Permits) Program?

    The CAA amendments of 1990 require all states to develop operating 
permits programs that meet certain Federal criteria. In implementing 
this program, the states are to require certain sources of air 
pollution to obtain permits that contain all applicable requirements 
under the CAA. One purpose of the Part 70 (operating permits) program 
is to improve enforcement by issuing each source a single permit that 
consolidates all of the applicable CAA requirements into a Federally 
enforceable document. By consolidating all of the applicable 
requirements for a facility into one document, the source, the public, 
and the permitting authorities can more easily determine what CAA 
requirements apply and how compliance with those requirements is 
determined.
    Sources required to obtain an operating permit under this program 
include: ``major'' sources of air pollution and certain other sources 
specified in the CAA or in EPA's implementing regulations. For example, 
all sources regulated under the acid rain program, regardless of size, 
must obtain permits. Examples of major sources include those that emit 
100 tons per year or more of volatile organic compounds, carbon 
monoxide, lead, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, or PM10; 
those that emit 10 tons per year of any single hazardous air pollutant 
(HAP) (specifically listed under the CAA); or those that emit 25 tons 
per year or more of a combination of HAPs.
    Revisions to the state operating permits program are also subject 
to public notice, comment, and EPA approval.

What Are the Changes That EPA Is Proposing to Approve?

    The revisions include changes to the definitions rule 10 CSR 10-
6.020 which (1) add a de minimis emission level for municipal solid 
waste landfills (any source which has emissions below this de minimis 
level is not required to obtain a new source permit), (2) remove 
caprolactam from the list of HAPs, and (3) revise the PM definition and 
the definition for particulate matter less than 10-microns in diameter 
(PM10). These changes are all consistent with Federal 
regulations and EPA guidance.
    The changes to the operating permits rule 10 CSR 10-6.065 include 
revising the exemption for grain-handling facilities by including an 
exemption from Part 70 permitting requirements for country grain 
elevators. Also included are operating permit rule updates to

[[Page 16660]]

make the exemptions consistent with the Missouri construction permits 
rule requirements, 10 CSR 10-6.060. For example, the sand and gravel 
operations exemption is revised to include operations with a production 
rate of less than 17.5 tons per hour instead of 150,000 tons per year. 
These changes are consistent with EPA guidance and add consistency 
between the applicable rules which reduces confusion. For more 
information regarding these changes, the reader is referred to the 
technical support document for this notice.

What Action Is EPA Taking?

    EPA is proposing to approve, as an amendment to the SIP and the 
Part 70 program, the revisions to Missouri rules 10 CSR 10-6.020, 
``Definitions and Common Reference Tables,'' and 10 CSR 10-6.065, 
``Operating Permits.'' These revisions clarify the Missouri rules, 
update the rules for consistency with Federal regulations and other 
state rules, and are consistent with EPA guidance.
    Therefore, EPA is seeking public comment regarding the proposed 
approval of this state submittal as an amendment to the SIP and the 
Part 70 (operating permits) program.
    EPA is also taking comments on minor changes made to rule 6.020 
(submitted to EPA on July 10, 1996) that were approved in a Federal 
Register notice dated May 14, 1997. The primary purpose of the May 14, 
1997, notice was to give final approval to revisions which were 
submitted for approval on August 3, 1996. As a result, the May 14, 
1997, notice did not fully discuss the minor changes submitted on July 
10, 1996. These changes include revising the volatile organic compounds 
definition to exempt acetone for consistency with Federal regulations 
and revising the installation definition for clarity.
    Therefore, EPA is taking comments on this revision at this time. If 
EPA receives adverse comments specifically relating to the two 
definition changes identified, EPA would withdraw its approval of one 
or both definition changes and take a new final action on the changes.
    EPA also notes that sections (4)(A), (4)(B), and (4)(H) of Missouri 
rule 6.065 are not part of the SIP or Part 70 program and will not be 
acted on in this rulemaking.

Conclusion

Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve, as an amendment to the Federally 
approved SIP and the Part 70 program, the revisions to Missouri rules 
10 CSR 10-6.020, ``Definitions and Common Reference Tables,'' and 10 
CSR 10-6.065, ``Operating Permits,'' effective on April 30, 1998.

Administration 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 rule does not create a mandate on State, local or tribal 
governments. The rule does not impose any enforceable duties on these 
entities. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1(a) of E.O. 12875 
do not apply to this rule.

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 rule 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 address an environmental health or safety risk that 
would have a disproportionate effect on children.

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 rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the 
communities of Indian tribal governments. Accordingly, the requirements 
of section 3(b) of E.O. 13084 do not apply to this rule.

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 final rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial 
number of small entities because 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 create any new 
requirements, I certify that this action will not have a significant

[[Page 16661]]

economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Moreover, 
due to the nature of the Federal-state relationship under the CAA, 
preparation of 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. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

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 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.
    EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated does not 
include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated annual costs of 
$100 million or more to either state, local, or tribal governments in 
the aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action approves 
pre-existing requirements under state or local law, and imposes no new 
requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to state, local, or 
tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

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

40 CFR Part 70

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Operating permits, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

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

    March 26, 1999.
Dennis Grams, P.E.,
Regional Administrator, Region VII.
[FR Doc. 99-8482 Filed 4-5-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P