[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 245 (Wednesday, December 22, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 71663-71666]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-32860]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[Region VII Tracking No. MO-074-1074a; FRL-6512-2]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of
Missouri
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is announcing a revision to the State Implementation Plan
(SIP) which incorporates portions of new Kansas City rules contained in
the Kansas City Air Pollution Control Ordinance in Sections 8-2 and 8-
5. These Sections pertain to the emission of particulate matter from
incinerators. This revision will concurrently remove incinerator SIP
provisions contained in Chapter 18 of the 1972 version of the Kansas
City Code. This action will unify the local, state, and Federal
requirements for Kansas City incinerators.
DATES: This direct final rule is effective on February 22, 2000 without
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by January 21,
2000. If adverse comment is received, EPA will publish a timely
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform
the public that the rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: All comments should be addressed to: Wayne A. Kaiser at the
Environmental Protection Agency, Air Branch, 901 North 5th Street,
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, 901 North 5th
Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101; and the Environmental Protection
Agency, Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, Air Docket
(6102), 401 M Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wayne A. Kaiser at the Environmental
Protection Agency at (913) 551-7603.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
This section provides additional information by addressing the
following questions:
What is an SIP?
What is the Federal approval process for a SIP?
What does Federal approval of a state regulation mean to me?
What is being addressed in this action?
Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?
What action is EPA taking?
What Is a SIP?
Section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires states to develop
air pollution regulations and control strategies to ensure that state
air quality meets the national ambient air quality standards
established by EPA. These ambient standards are established under
section 109 of the CAA, and they currently address six criteria
pollutants. These pollutants are: carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide,
ozone, lead, particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide.
Each state must submit these regulations and control strategies to
EPA for approval and incorporation into the Federally enforceable SIP.
Each Federally approved SIP protects air quality primarily by
addressing air pollution at its point of origin. These SIPs can be
extensive, containing state regulations or other enforceable documents
and supporting information such as emission inventories, monitoring
networks, and modeling demonstrations.
What Is the Federal Approval Process for a SIP?
In order for state regulations to be incorporated into the
Federally enforceable SIP, states must formally adopt the regulations
and control strategies consistent with state and Federal requirements.
This process generally includes a public notice, public hearing, public
comment period, and a formal adoption by a state-authorized rulemaking
body.
Once a state rule, regulation, or control strategy is adopted, the
state submits it to 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
[[Page 71664]]
Regulations (CFR) at Title 40, Part 52, entitled ``Approval and
Promulgations of Implementation Plans.'' The actual state regulations
which are approved are not reproduced in their entirety in the CFR
outright but are ``incorporated by reference,'' which means that 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 violations as
described in the CAA.
What Is Being Addressed in This Action?
The Kansas City Air Pollution Control Code (KCAPCC) was originally
submitted to EPA for approval in 1972. The incinerator provisions which
were approved in 1972 are still in the Federally approved SIP today.
The SIP contains two different particulate matter requirements for
incinerators based on the capacity of the incinerator. Large capacity
incinerators (with a charging capacity equal to or greater than 4166
pounds per hour) are required to meet an emission limit of 0.1 grains
per dry standard cubic foot. Small capacity incinerators (with a
charging capacity less than 4166 pounds per hour) are required to meet
an emission limit of 0.2 grains per dry standard cubic foot.
The KCAPCC was amended in 1984; however, the SIP was not updated at
that time. Consequently, two separate versions of the Kansas City
incinerator regulations were in force at that time. The Kansas City
Health Department Environmental Program enforced the 1984 version while
EPA enforced the 1972 version in the SIP.
In 1996, the Air Pollution Control Code was again revised by the
Kansas City Health Department. This time, a more stringent version of
the incinerator rule was adopted which required incinerators of any
charging capacity to meet a 0.1 grains per dry standard cubic foot
particulate matter emission limit. Other limits were also included in
the 1996 rule for pollutants such as hydrogen chloride, mercury, and
dioxin and furans.
The Missouri Department of Natural Resources held a public hearing
before the Missouri Air Conservation Commission (MACC) on October 29,
1998, on the replacement of the 1972 KCAPCC requirements for
incinerators with the 1996 KCAPCC provisions which pertain to
incinerators. After considering comments on this issue, on December 10,
1998, the MACC approved the submission of certain provisions of Section
8-2, ``Definitions,'' which pertain to incinerators and certain
provisions of Section 8-5, ``Emission of particulate matter,''
pertaining to the emission of particulate matter from incinerators with
a request to amend the SIP to incorporate this submission. The MACC
also approved the submittal of a request to remove the 1972 Kansas City
incinerator requirements contained in KCAPCC Chapter 18, Sections
18.83, ``Definitions,'' and 18.91, ``Incinerators.''
Have the Requirements for Approval of a SIP Revision Been Met?
The state submittal has met the public notice requirements for SIP
submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The submittal also
satisfied the completeness criteria of 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix V. In
addition, as explained above and in more detail in the technical
support document which is part of this notice, the revision meets the
substantive SIP requirements of the CAA, including section 110 and
implementing regulations. The revision constitutes a slight increase in
the stringency of requirements which pertain to incinerators operating
in Kansas City, Missouri.
What Action Is EPA Taking?
EPA is processing this action as a direct final action to approve
the replacement of the 1972 KCAPCC incinerator provisions contained in
Chapter 18, Sections 18.83, and 18.91, with the incinerator particulate
matter provisions contained in the 1996 KCAPCC in Chapter 8, Sections
8-2, ``Definitions,'' and 8-5, ``Emission of particulate matter.''
Specifically, the following definitions are being approved from Section
8-2: Air contaminant, Ambient air, Building, Construction, Emission,
Fugitive emissions, Incinerator, Installation, Open burning, Owner,
Particulate matter, Refuse, Smoke, Source, Stack, Trade waste, and
Uncombined water. EPA is approving the following provisions of Section
8-5: ``Emission of Particulate Matter''; subsection 8-5(c)(1)b.,
``Emission of Particulate Matter, Incinerators--Test Schedule'';
subsection 8-5(c)(1)c., ``Emission of Particulate Matter,
Incinerators--Capacity''; subsection 8-5(c)(2)a., ``Emission of
Particulate Matter, Incinerators--Particulate and Opacity
Limitations''; subsection 8-5(c)(3)a., ``Emission of Particulate
Matter, Incinerators--Performance Testing, Representative Sample'';
subsection 8-5(c)(3)b., ``Emission of Particulate Matter,
Incinerators--Performance Testing, Procedure''; subsection 8-5(c)(3)c.,
``Emission of Particulate Matter, Incinerators--Performance Testing,
Compliance''; and subsection 8-5(c)(3)d., ``Emission of Particulate
Matter, Incinerators--Performance Testing, When Required.''
EPA's direct final approval of this submittal incorporates
incinerator provisions which are already in force under the authority
of the Kansas City Health Department. These revisions make routine
changes to the existing SIP rules to make them consistent with the
local agency rules. EPA views these revisions as noncontroversial.
Therefore, we do not anticipate any adverse comments.
EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no
adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this
Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document
that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should
adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective February 22,
2000 without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments
by January 21, 2000.
If EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a document
withdrawing the final rule and informing the public that the rule will
not take effect. All public comments received will then be addressed in
a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. EPA will not
institute a second comment period. Parties interested in commenting
should do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public
is advised that this rule will be effective on February 22, 2000 and no
further action will be taken on the proposed rule.
Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this
regulatory action from Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory
Planning and Review.''
B. Executive Order 13132
Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) revokes and replaces
Executive Order 12612 (Federalism) and Executive Order 12875 (Enhancing
the Intergovernmental Partnership). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA
to develop an accountable process to
[[Page 71665]]
ensure ``meaningful and timely input by state and local officials in
the development of regulatory policies that have federalism
implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism implications'' is
defined in the Executive Order to include regulations that have
``substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.'' Under
Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a regulation that has
federalism implications, that imposes substantial direct compliance
costs, and that is not required by statute, unless the Federal
Government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by state and local governments, or EPA consults with
state and local officials early in the process of developing the
proposed regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation that has
federalism implications and that preempts state law unless the Agency
consults with state and local officials early in the process of
developing the proposed regulation.
This final rule will not have substantial direct effects on the
states, on the relationship between the national government and the
states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132.
Thus, the requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order do not apply
to this rule.
C. Executive Order 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
Executive Order 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 Executive Order 13045 because it is not
an economically significant regulatory action as defined by Executive
Order 12866, and it does not establish a further health or risk-based
standard because it approves state rules which implement a previously
promulgated health or safety-based standard.
D. Executive Order 13084
Under Executive Order 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, Executive Order 13084
requires EPA to provide to 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, Executive Order 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. This action does not involve
or impose any requirements that affect Indian tribes. Accordingly, the
requirements of section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084 do not apply to
this rule.
E. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
The RFA 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, I certify that this
action will not have a significant 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 the 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
preexisting 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.
G. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the United States Senate, the United States
House of Representatives, and the United States Comptroller General
prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This rule is
not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
H. Petitions for Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States
[[Page 71666]]
Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by February 22, 2000.
Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this
final rule does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes
of judicial review, nor does it extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the
effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged
later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. [See section
307(b)(2).]
List of Subjects 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: December 2, 1999.
William A. Spratlin,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region VII.
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 et seq.
Subpart AA--Missouri
2. In Sec. 52.1320 in paragraph (c), the table for ``Kansas City
Article III--Air Pollution'' is removed and to the table for ``Kansas
City Chapter 8--Air Quality 17'' is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 52.1320 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) EPA-approved regulations.
EPA-Approved Missouri Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State EPA
MISSOURI citation Title effective approval Explanations
date date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * *
*
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kansas City Chapter 8--Air Quality
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8-2...................... Definitions..... 12/10/98 12/22/99
* * * * * *
*
8-5...................... Emission of 12/10/98 12/22/99 Only subsections 8-5(c)(1)b, 8-5(c)(1)c,
Particulate 8-5(c)(2)a, 8-5(c)(3)a, 8-5(c)(3)b, 8-
Matter. 5(c)(3)c, 8-5(c)(3)d are approved in the
SIP.
* * * * * *
*
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 99-32860 Filed 12-21-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P