[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 33 (Thursday, February 17, 2000)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 8092-8094]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-3471]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[Region VII Tracking No. MO 094-1094; FRL-6537-3]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of 
Missouri

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a nitrogen oxides (NOX) 
reasonably available control technology (RACT) rule which is applicable 
to the St. Louis, Missouri, ozone nonattainment area. This rule reduces 
NOX emissions in the St. Louis area by requiring major 
sources to install or comply with RACT as required by the Clean Air Act 
(Act).

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 20, 2000.

ADDRESSES: All comments should be addressed to: Kim Johnson, Air 
Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, 
Kansas 66101.
    Copies of the state submittal(s) 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, SW, Washington, D.C. 20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim Johnson at (913) 551-7975.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we, us, 
or our'' is used, we mean EPA.
    This section provides additional information by addressing the 
following questions:

What is a State Implementation Plan (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 document?
Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?
What has the state done previously to address this issue?
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 us. 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 
us 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

[[Page 8093]]

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 us for inclusion into the SIP. We 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 
us.
    All state regulations and supporting information approved by us 
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 
outright but are ``incorporated by reference,'' which means that we 
have 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, we 
are authorized to take enforcement action against violators. Citizens 
are also offered legal recourse to address violations as described in 
the CAA.

What Has the State Done Previously to Address This Issue?

    NOX emissions combine with volatile organic compound 
emissions on hot, sunny days to form ground level ozone, commonly known 
as smog. The purpose of the following rule is to establish RACT 
requirements for major sources of NOX which will reduce 
NOX emissions to help achieve reductions in ozone levels in 
the St. Louis ozone nonattainment area. The St. Louis ozone 
nonattainment area includes Franklin, Jefferson, St. Charles, and St. 
Louis counties, and St. Louis City in Missouri and Madison, St. Clair, 
and Monroe counties in Illinois.
    The Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) submitted a 
NOX RACT waiver petition dated April 25, 1996. The state 
requested a determination by EPA under section 182(f) of the CAA that 
NOX RACT controls were not necessary in St. Louis for 
attainment of the ozone NAAQS. EPA has not acted on that request. 
However, in its demonstration of the attainment of the ozone standard 
on which EPA will act in a separate rulemaking, Missouri has determined 
that NOX RACT controls are needed to attain the ozone 
standard and the NOX RACT controls for sources in the 
Missouri portion of the nonattainment area are utilized in the control 
strategy for the attainment demonstration. Therefore, now that Missouri 
has determined that local NOX reductions are necessary for 
attainment, the NOX RACT rule has been submitted 
accordingly.
    On July 1, 1996, Missouri submitted an earlier NOX RACT 
SIP. EPA has not acted on the 1996 NOX RACT SIP. The 
November 1999 submission supercedes the former SIP submittal.

What Is Being Addressed in This Document?

    We are proposing to approve as an amendment to the Missouri SIP, 
rule 10 CSR 10-5.510, Control of Emissions of Nitrogen Oxides, 
submitted to us on November 12, 1999. This NOX RACT rule is 
applicable to all sources with the potential to emit one hundred (100) 
tons per year or more of nitrogen oxides in the Missouri portion of the 
St. Louis nonattainment area. The rule establishes emission limits, 
work practices, monitoring, testing, recordkeeping and reporting 
requirements for boilers, stationary internal combustion (IC) turbines, 
stationary IC engines, incinerators, regenerative container melting 
glass furnaces, and portland cement kilns.
    To provide additional flexibility, the rule allows for emissions 
averaging, on a monthly basis, between two or more emissions units with 
similar design and emissions characteristics provided that they are 
subject to the requirements of the rule and that they are located in 
the St. Louis nonattainment area.
    As explained in more detail in the technical support document (TSD) 
for this proposal, we have reviewed the NOX controls and 
averaging provisions in this rule and have determined that they are 
consistent with relevant EPA guidance and with NOX controls 
approved as RACT for other states.
    The rule also requires any other stationary source with the 
potential to emit one hundred (100) tons per year or more of 
NOX emissions, for which an emission limit has not been set, 
to complete a ``case-by-case'' RACT study to evaluate appropriate 
controls to minimize NOX emissions. This ``case-by-case'' 
analysis must be completed in accord with the procedures established in 
the rule for identifying all available control technologies and 
selecting the technology that provides the most effective, cost 
reasonable reduction technique. The ``case-by-case'' studies must be 
submitted to MDNR by July 1, 2000. The rule requires all ``case-by-
case'' RACT determinations must be approved by MDNR and submitted to 
EPA.
    Missouri has provided documentation showing that all known major 
NOX sources are subject to specific RACT rules, so that the 
``case-by-case'' RACT requirements would cover sources which may become 
subject to NOX RACT in the future due to increases in 
NOX emissions.
    Therefore, EPA believes that the ``case-by-case'' rule is 
consistent with EPA policy which provides that, among other reasons, 
EPA may fully approve a ``generic'' or ``case-by-case'' RACT rule where 
the state has established specific RACT limits for all known major 
sources and has determined that, to the best of its knowledge, there 
are no remaining unregulated sources (November 7, 1996, memorandum from 
Sally Shaver, Director, Air Quality Strategies and Standards Division, 
entitled ``Approval Options for Generic RACT Rules Submitted to meet 
the Non-CTG VOC RACT Requirements and Certain NOX RACT 
Requirements.'')
    Full approval of this generic RACT rule will not relieve sources or 
the state of the obligation to ensure that all sources within the 
regulated area comply with the RACT requirement of the CAA, by adopting 
and implementing emission limitations. All ``case-by-case'' RACT 
determinations must be submitted to EPA for inclusion in the Federally 
approved SIP to ensure that the requirements are acceptable as 
representing RACT and are enforceable by EPA.
    Also, any remaining sources which are currently ``unknown'' are 
required to determine and comply with RACT. This requirement is 
enforceable by EPA and by citizen groups under section 304 of the Act. 
Although this rule is proposed for approval as meeting RACT, if EPA 
later determines that sources remain unregulated under the Federally 
approved SIP, EPA could issue a SIP call or, possibly, a finding of 
nonimplementation of the SIP.

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 section 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 TSD

[[Page 8094]]

which is part of this notice, the revision meets the substantive SIP 
requirements of the CAA, including section 110 and Part D of Title I. 
The revision is also consistent with the EPA guidance, including the 
guidance referenced previously and the ``Nitrogen Oxides Supplement to 
the General Preamble,'' 57 FR 55620, November 25, 1992.

What Action Is EPA Taking?

    We are proposing to approve as an amendment to the Missouri SIP 
rule 10 CSR 10-5.510, Control of Emissions of Nitrogen Oxides, as 
meeting the requirement for NOX RACT which is applicable to 
the Missouri portions of the St. Louis ozone nonattainment area.

Administrative Requirements

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
proposed action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and 
therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and 
Budget. This proposed action merely approves state law as meeting 
Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond 
those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies 
that this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on 
a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility 
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule proposes to approve 
preexisting requirements under state law and does not impose any 
additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does 
not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect 
small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 
1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). For the same reason, this proposed rule also does 
not significantly or uniquely affect the communities of tribal 
governments, as specified by Executive Order 13084 (63 FR 27655, May 
10, 1998). This proposed 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 
(64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it merely approves a state rule 
implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or 
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the CAA. 
This proposed rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this 
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the state 
to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to 
disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP 
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section 
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. As required by section 3 of 
Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing this 
proposed rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate drafting 
errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and provide a 
clear legal standard for affected conduct. EPA has complied with 
Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the 
takings implications of the rule in accordance with the ``Attorney 
General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and 
Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings'' issued under the Executive Order. 
This proposed rule does not impose an information collection burden 
under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 
3501 et seq.).

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.

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

    Dated: February 1, 2000.
Leo Alderman,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region VII.
[FR Doc. 00-3471 Filed 2-16-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P