[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 153 (Thursday, August 9, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44781-44784]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-15251]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2007-0620; FRL-8450-5]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of 
Kansas

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is approving a revision to the Kansas State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) prepared by Kansas to maintain the 8-hour 
national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for ozone in the Kansas 
portion of the Kansas City area. The Kansas City area is designated 
attainment for the ozone NAAQS. This revision is required by the Clean 
Air Act. A similar final rulemaking pertaining to the Missouri portion 
of the Kansas City maintenance area is being done in conjunction with 
this rulemaking. The effect of this approval is to ensure Federal 
enforceability of the state air program plan and to maintain 
consistency between the state-adopted plan and the approved SIP.

DATES: This direct final rule will be effective October 9, 2007, 
without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by 
September 10, 2007. If adverse comment is received, EPA will publish a 
timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register 
informing the public that the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2007-0620, by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    2. E-mail: [email protected].
    3. Mail: Amy Algoe-Eakin, Environmental Protection Agency, Air 
Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, 
Kansas 66101.
    4. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to Amy Algoe-
Eakin, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development 
Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-
2007-0620. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information 
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail information that you consider to be CBI 
or otherwise protected. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an 
``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your 
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of 
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without 
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be 
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is 
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you 
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name 
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any 
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to 
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA 
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid 
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of 
any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the 
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.

[[Page 44782]]

Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on 
the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. 
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically 
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental 
Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th 
Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101. The Regional Office's official hours 
of business are Monday through Friday, 8 to 4:30 excluding Federal 
holidays. The interested persons wanting to examine these documents 
should make an appointment with the office at least 24 hours in 
advance.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amy Algoe-Eakin at (913) 551-7942, or 
by e-mail at [email protected].

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 Section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan?
    What are the components of a Section 110(a)(1) 8-hour ozone 
maintenance plan?

How has the state addressed the components of a Section 110(a)(1) 8-
hour ozone maintenance plan? What action is EPA taking?

What is a Section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan?

    Section 110(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) requires, in 
part, that states submit to EPA plans to maintain any NAAQS promulgated 
by EPA. EPA interprets this provision to require that areas that were 
maintenance areas for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS but attainment for the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS submit a plan to demonstrate the continued maintenance 
of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA established June 15, 2007, three years 
after the effective date of the initial 8-hour ozone designations, as 
the deadline for submission of plans for these areas. Kansas's Section 
110(a)(1) maintenance plan was received by EPA on May 23, 2007.

What are the components of a Section 110(a)(1) 8-hour ozone maintenance 
plan?

    On May 20, 2005, EPA issued guidance that applies, in part, to 
areas that are designated attainment/unclassifiable for the 8-hour 
ozone standard and that had an approved 1-hour ozone maintenance plan. 
The purpose of the guidance, referred to as Section 110(a)(1) guidance, 
is to assist the states in the development of a SIP which addresses the 
maintenance requirements found in Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA. There 
are five components of the Section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan which 
are: (1) An attainment inventory, which is based on actual typical 
summer day emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides of 
nitrogen (NOX) for a ten-year period from a base year as 
chosen by the state; (2) a maintenance demonstration which shows how 
the area will remain in compliance with the 8-hour ozone standard for 
10 years after the effective date of designations (June 15, 2004); (3) 
a commitment to continue to operate air quality monitors; (4) a 
contingency plan that will ensure that a violation of the 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS is promptly addressed; and (5) an explanation of how the state 
will track the progress of the maintenance plan.

How has the state addressed the components of a Section 110(a)(1) 8-
hour ozone maintenance plan?

    The Kansas Department of Health and Environment's (KDHE) 8-hour 
ozone maintenance plan addresses the components of the Section 
110(a)(1) 8-hour ozone maintenance plan as outlined in EPA's May 20, 
2005, guidance. Kansas has requested that the Section 110(a)(1) 8-hour 
ozone maintenance plan replace the existing Section 175A 1-hour ozone 
maintenance plan.
    Emissions Inventory: An emissions inventory is an itemized list of 
emission estimates for sources of air pollution in a given area for a 
specified time period. KDHE has provided a comprehensive and current 
emissions inventory for ozone precursors (NOX, and VOCs) in 
the area. KDHE has chosen to use 2002 as the base year from which they 
project emissions. The maintenance plan also includes an explanation of 
the methodology used for determining the anthropogenic (point, area, 
and mobile sources) emissions in the maintenance area. The inventory is 
based on emissions for a typical ozone season day. The term ``typical'' 
refers to emissions expected on a typical weekday during the months 
where ozone concentrations are typically the highest. For Kansas City, 
these months are June through August.
    Maintenance Demonstration and Tracking Progress: With regard to 
demonstrating continued maintenance of the 8-hour ozone standard, 
Kansas projects that the total emissions from the entire Kansas City 
Maintenance Area (KCMA) will decrease during the ten-year maintenance 
period. KDHE has projected emissions for 10 years from the effective 
date of initial designations, or 2014. In 2002, the total anthropogenic 
emissions in the entire KCMA were 226.42 tons/ozone season day for VOCs 
and 316.09 tons/ozone season day for NOX. The projected 2014 
anthropogenic emissions from the entire KCMA are 181.07 tons/ozone 
season day for VOCs and 180.08 tons/ozone season day for 
NOX. As such, the plan demonstrates that, from an emissions 
projections standpoint, emissions are projected to decrease.
    It is important to note that the formation of ozone is dependent on 
a number of variables which cannot be estimated through emissions 
growth and reduction calculations. A few of these variables include 
weather and the transport of ozone precursors from outside the 
maintenance area. In the Section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan, KDHE has 
indicated that the state will track the progress of the maintenance 
plan by updating the emissions inventory for the KCMA approximately 
every three years. The years of 2005, 2008, and 2011 were chosen as the 
years in which emissions will be reviewed. A review of the 2005 
emissions inventory is underway. The emissions inventory update will 
include point, area, and onroad and offroad emissions. Information from 
these future updates will be compared with the projected growth 
estimates for the 2002 base inventory data to track maintenance of the 
standard.
    Ambient Monitoring: With regard to the ambient air monitoring 
component of the maintenance plan, Kansas's plan describes the ozone 
monitoring network in Kansas City and explains that states and local 
air agencies are responsible for the operation, maintenance and data 
collection at these monitoring sites. KDHE commits to continue 
operating air quality monitors in accordance with 40 CFR Part 58 to 
verify maintenance of the 8-hour ozone standard. If any changes to the 
monitoring locations become necessary, KDHE commits to working with EPA 
to ensure that the adequacy of the monitoring network is maintained.
    Contingency Measures: EPA interprets Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA 
to require that the state develop a contingency plan which will ensure 
that any violation of an NAAQS is promptly corrected. The purposes of 
the contingency measures, outlined in KDHE's maintenance plan, are to 
achieve sufficient VOC and/or NOX emissions to reduce ozone 
monitored concentrations. Kansas and Missouri worked to design a two-
phased approach for the contingency measure portion of the maintenance 
plan. The approach includes specific triggers for

[[Page 44783]]

each phase. The triggers are the same for both states, although the 
measures vary slightly. For Phase 1, the Kansas plan provides that a 
violation of the 8-hour ozone standard, once quality assured, would 
trigger two control measures, which are, (1) reduction in 
NOX emission from point sources greater than 1000 tons of 
actual annual emissions from the entire facility averaged over the last 
three years of complete, quality-assured inventory data in Wyandotte 
and Johnson Counties. This would be accomplished through either 
NOX Reasonable Available Control Technology (RACT) rules or 
signed agreements with affected sources, and (2) diesel idle reduction 
in Wyandotte and Johnson Counties through administrative regulations or 
local ordinances. If this measure is implemented, KDHE would develop 
the enforcement mechanism through contracts with local agencies.
    Phase 2 contingency measures would be triggered by the occurrences 
of either of the following two events: (1) A three-year design value 
for the area equaling or exceeding 0.089 parts per million (ppm) which 
would become active one year following the end of the ozone season that 
triggered the Phase 1 contingency measures or (2) three consecutive 
years following the Phase 1 trigger year with a design value greater 
than 0.084 ppm. Either of these events would implement the selection of 
control measures of Phase 2. Following the implementation of Phase 1, 
if any one year has a three-year design value equaling or exceeding 
0.085 ppm, an evaluation to determine appropriate action will be 
undertaken by KDHE. The purpose of delaying the potential 
implementation of Phase 2 control measures for a period of time 
following the implementation of Phase 1 is to allow for Phase 1 
controls to be initiated and have an effect on air quality in the 
region before Phase 2 is implemented. It also allows for further 
evaluation of the various control measures that could be implemented 
under Phase 2. Below are a few of the control options being considered 
for Phase 2:
     Reductions in NOX emissions from point sources 
that exceed 100 tons of actual annual emissions from the entire 
facility averaged over the last three years of complete, quality-
assured inventory data in Wyandotte and Johnson Counties. This would be 
accomplished through either NOX RACT rules or signed 
agreements with affected sources.
     Reductions in NOX emissions from point sources 
greater than 1000 tons of actual annual emissions from the entire 
facility averaged over the last three years of complete, quality-
assured inventory data in areas located south of and outside the KCMA 
(Miami and Linn Counties). Based on current emissions inventory, this 
would affect two sources. Reductions would be accomplished through 
either a regional NOX administrative regulation or signed 
agreements with affected sources.
     Open burning restrictions in Wyandotte and Johnson 
Counties.
     Lower threshold for major sources of VOC to 75 tons per 
year (tpy) in Wyandotte and Johnson Counties. The KDHE would evaluate 
remaining large VOC emitters subject to existing VOC RACT rules to 
determine if further reductions could be achieved (VOC RACT rules).
     VOC control for 46 Architectural and Industrial 
Maintenance Coatings, including traffic coatings in Wyandotte and 
Johnson Counties.
     Diesel Engine Chip Re-Flashing regulations in Wyandotte 
and Johnson Counties.
    If triggered, the Phase 2 measures will be selected based on 
emission reduction benefits, cost effectiveness and timeframe for 
implementation. KDHE also would consider additional potential measures 
if other beneficial emission reduction methods are determined to be 
useful to the air quality in the KCMA.

What action is EPA taking?

    Kansas has addressed the components of a maintenance plan pursuant 
to EPA's May 20, 2005, guidance. The section 110(a)(1) 8-hour ozone 
Kansas City maintenance plan approved in this action will replace the 
existing section 175A 1-hour ozone maintenance plan. Kansas has 
committed to continue implementation of the VOC control measures in the 
1-hour maintenance plan. Kansas has also committed to implementing the 
contingency measures no later than 24 months after the trigger date and 
will take action to maintain the standard in the event the contingency 
measures are triggered.
    We are processing this action as a direct final action because we 
do not anticipate any adverse comments. Please note that if EPA 
receives adverse comment on part of this rule and if that part can be 
severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those 
parts of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.

Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not 
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this 
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, 
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This 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 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 approves pre-existing 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).
    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will 
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on 
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or 
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism 
implications because it does 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). This action 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 rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of 
Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997), because it approves a State rule implementing a 
Federal standard.
    In reviewing state 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 state submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a state 
submission, to use VCS in place of a state submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section 
12(d) of the

[[Page 44784]]

National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) do not apply. This 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.).
    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 U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by October 9, 2007. 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 in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: July 27, 2007.
John B. Askew,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.

0
Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as 
follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart R--Kansas

0
2. In Sec.  52.870(e) the table is amended by adding an entry at the 
end of the table to read as follows:


Sec.  52.870  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                                  EPA-Approved Kansas Nonregulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Applicable
    Name of nonregulatory SIP         geographic or          State       EPA approval date       Explanation
            provision              nonattainment area   submittal date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
(31) Maintenance Plan for the 8-  Kansas City.........         5/23/07  8/9/07 [insert FR    This plan replaces
 hour ozone standard in the                                              page number where    numbers (28) and
 Kansas portion of the Kansas                                            the document         (29).
 City area.                                                              begins].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 [FR Doc. E7-15251 Filed 8-8-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P