[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 78 (Wednesday, April 22, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 22378-22380]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-07474]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2019-0400; FRL-10007-36-Region 7]


Air Plan Approval; Missouri; Removal of Control of Emissions From 
Bakery Ovens

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing 
approval of a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the 
State of Missouri on December 3, 2018, and supplemented by letter on 
May 22, 2019. Missouri requests that the EPA remove from its SIP a rule 
related to control of emissions from bakery ovens in the Kansas City, 
Missouri area. This rescission does not have an adverse effect on air 
quality. The EPA's proposed approval of this rule revision is in 
accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 22, 2020.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2019-0400 to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 
instructions for submitting comments.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket ID 
No. for this rulemaking. Comments received will be posted without 
change to https://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal 
information provided. For detailed instructions on sending comments and 
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the ``Written 
Comments'' heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this 
document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William Stone, Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region 7 Office, Air Quality Planning Branch, 11201 
Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219; telephone number (913) 551-
7714; email address [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' and 
``our'' refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Written Comments
II. What is being addressed in this document?
III. Background
IV. What is the EPA's analysis of Missouri's SIP revision request?
V. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?
VI. What action is the EPA taking?
VII. Incorporation by Reference
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Written Comments

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2019-
0400 at https://www.regulations.gov. Once submitted, comments cannot be 
edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment 
received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any 
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) 
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a 
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment 
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA 
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located 
outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other 
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA 
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, 
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

II. What is being addressed in this document?

    The EPA is proposing to approve the removal of 10 Code of State 
Regulation (CSR) 10-2.360, Control of Emissions from Bakery Ovens, from 
the Missouri SIP.
    According to the May 22, 2019, letter from the Missouri Department 
of Natural Resources, available in the docket for this proposed action, 
Missouri rescinded 10 CSR 10-2.360, Control of Emissions from Bakery 
Ovens because the only source subject to the

[[Page 22379]]

rule ceased operations in 2001. The state asserts in their submission 
to the Agency that this rule is no longer necessary for attainment and 
maintenance of the 1979, 1997, or 2008 National Ambient Air Quality 
Standards (NAAQS) for Ozone.

III. Background

    The EPA established a 1-hour ozone NAAQS in 1971. 36 FR 8186 (April 
30, 1971). On March 3, 1978, the EPA designated Clay, Platte and 
Jackson counties (hereinafter referred to in this document as the 
``Kansas City Area'') in nonattainment of the 1971 1-hour ozone 
NAAQS,\1\ as required by the CAA Amendments of 1977. 43 FR 8962 (March 
3, 1978). On February 8, 1979, the EPA revised the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, 
referred to as the 1979 ozone NAAQS. 44 FR 8202 (February 8, 1979). On 
February 20, 1985, the EPA notified Missouri that the SIP was 
substantially inadequate (hereinafter referred to as the ``SIP Call'') 
to attain the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in the Kansas City Area. See 50 FR 
26198 (July 25, 1985).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Missouri's May 22, 2019 letter incorrectly states that the 
Kansas City area was designated as a nonattainment area for the 1979 
ozone NAAQS in 1978.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To address the SIP Call, Missouri submitted an attainment 
demonstration on May 21, 1986, and volatile organic compound (VOC) 
control regulations on December 18, 1987. See 54 FR 10322 (March 13, 
1989) and 54 FR 46232 (November 2, 1989). The EPA subsequently approved 
the revised control strategy for the Kansas City Area. Id. The EPA 
redesignated the Kansas City Area to attainment of the 1979 1-hour 
ozone standard on July 23, 1992. 57 FR 27939 (June 23, 1992). Pursuant 
to section 175A of the CAA, the first 10-year maintenance period for 
the 1-hour ozone standard began on July 23, 1992, the effective date of 
the redesignation approval.
    Following the 1992 redesignation, a large uncontrolled commercial 
bakery located in Kansas City was identified by the state of Missouri. 
Since bakery operations emit significant amounts of ethanol, which is a 
VOC, Missouri developed a regulation based on EPA's Alternative Control 
Technology (ACT) \2\ document which is designed to provide states with 
background information to assist them in developing RACT rules for this 
source category. Unlike a control technique guideline (CTG) document, 
however, the Bakery Oven ACT does not identify a presumptive norm for 
RACT. An achievable control level is identified, and states are given 
the flexibility to select control strategies. 10 Code of State 
Regulation (CSR) 10-2.360, Control of Emissions from Bakery Ovens was 
proposed June 6, 1995, and became effective in Missouri on November 30, 
1995. The State submitted the rule as a SIP revision March 6, 1996. The 
EPA proposed to approve the SIP revision. 61 FR 40591 (August 5, 1996). 
As required by CAA section 172(b)(2), the rule was approved into the 
Missouri SIP. 63 FR 38755 (July 20, 1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/ctg_act/199212_voc_epa453_r-92-017_bakery_ovens.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted, 10 CSR 10-2.360, Control of Emissions from Bakery Ovens, 
was approved into the Missouri SIP as a RACT rule on July 20, 1998. 63 
FR 38755 (July 20, 1998). At the time that the rule was approved into 
the SIP, 10 CSR 10-2.360 applied to new or modified or existing 
commercial bakeries whose potential emissions of VOCs are greater than 
one hundred (100) tons per year (tpy) in Clay, Jackson and Platte 
Counties in Missouri.
    By letter dated December 3, 2018, Missouri requested that the EPA 
remove 10 CSR 10-2.360 from the SIP. Section 110(l) of the CAA 
prohibits EPA from approving a SIP revision that interferes with any 
applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further 
progress (RFP), or any other applicable requirement of the CAA. On May 
22, 2019, the state supplemented its SIP revision with a letter in 
order to address the requirements of section 110(l) of the CAA.

IV. What is the EPA's analysis of Missouri's SIP revision request?

    In its May 22, 2019 letter, Missouri states that it intended its 
RACT rules, such as 10 CSR 10-2.360, to solely apply to existing 
sources in accordance with section 172(c)(1) of the CAA \3\. Missouri 
clarified that although the applicability section of 10 CSR 10-2.360 
states that the rule applies to new and existing installations (located 
within the Clay, Jackson and Platte Counties), the rule applied to a 
single existing source, the Wonder Bread factory in Kansas City, 
Missouri. This assertion is confirmed in the State Implementation Plan 
record in which the EPA approved this rule into the SIP in 1998.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The EPA agrees with Missouri's interpretation of CAA Section 
172(c)(1) in regards to whether RACT is required for existing 
sources, but also notes that the State regulation establishing RACT 
may apply to new sources as well, dependent upon the State 
regulation's language.
    \4\ https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-1998-07-20/html/98-19134.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Missouri, in its May 22, 2019 letter, indicates that the Wonder 
Bread factory in Kansas City, Missouri ceased operations in 2001 and 
the emitting equipment was subsequently decommissioned. The EPA has 
confirmed that the facility was completely dismantled and is no longer 
operating.
    As stated above, Missouri clarified that 10 CSR 10-2.360 may be 
removed from the SIP because section 172(c)(1) of the CAA requires RACT 
for existing sources, and because 10 CSR 10-2.360 was applicable to a 
single source that has permanently ceased operations and therefore the 
rule no longer reduces VOC emissions. Because the Wonder Bread factory 
in Kansas City, Missouri was the only source that was subject to the 
rule, and because the facility has been shut-down and dismantled and 
since 2001 no new bakery oven facilities have commenced operation in 
the area since Missouri developed this rule, the EPA is proposing to 
find that the rule no longer provides an emission reduction benefit to 
the Kansas City Area and is proposing to remove it from the SIP.
    Missouri's May 22, 2019 letter states that any new sources or major 
modifications of existing sources are subject to new source review 
(NSR) permitting. Under NSR, a new major source or major modification 
of an existing source with a (potential to emit) PTE of 250 tons per 
year (tpy) or more of any NAAQS pollutant is required to obtain a 
Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permit when the area is 
in attainment or unclassifiable, which requires an analysis of Best 
Available Control Technology (BACT) in addition to an air quality 
analysis and an additional impacts analysis. Sources with a PTE greater 
than 100 tpy, but less than 250 tpy, are required to obtain a minor 
permit in accordance with Missouri's New Source Review permitting 
program, which is approved into the SIP.\5\ The EPA agrees with this 
analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ EPA's latest approval of Missouri's NSR permitting program 
rule was published in the Federal Register on October 11, 2016. 81 
FR 70025.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Missouri's May 22, 2019, letter also includes information 
concerning ozone air quality in the Kansas City area from 1996 through 
2018 that indicates a downward trend in monitored ozone design values. 
Missouri states that despite promulgation of more stringent ozone NAAQS 
in 1997, 2008 and 2015, the Kansas City area continues to monitor 
attainment. The EPA has confirmed that certified ambient air quality 
data for Kansas City Area as monitored at the Rocky Creek, Clay County 
State and local air monitoring station is compliant with the most 
recent ozone standard--the 2015 ozone

[[Page 22380]]

NAAQS.\6\ The 2016-2018 design value for that monitor is 70 parts per 
million.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ In accordance 40 CFR part 50.19(b), the 2015 8-hour primary 
O3 NAAQS is met at an ambient air quality monitoring site 
when 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-
hour average O3 concentration is less than or equal to 
0.070 ppm, as determined in accordance with appendix U to 40 CFR 
part 50.
    \7\ The monitoring data was reported, quality assured, and 
certified in accordance with the requirements set forth in 40 CFR 
part 58.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because Missouri has demonstrated that removal of 10 CSR 10-2.360 
will not interfere with attainment of the NAAQS, Reasonable Further 
Progress (RRF) \8\ or any other applicable requirement of the CAA 
because the single source subject to the rule has permanently ceased 
operations and removal of the rule will not cause VOC emissions to 
increase, and any new source would be required to go through the 
appropriate permitting process that is protective of the NAAQS, the EPA 
proposes to approve removal of 10 CSR 10-2.360 from the SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ RFP is not applicable to the Kansas City Area because the 
area is in attainment of all applicable ozone standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?

    The State submission has met the public notice requirements for SIP 
submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The submission also 
satisfied the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. The 
State provided public notice on this SIP revision from February 28, 
2018, to April 5, 2018 and held a public hearing on March 29, 2018. 
Missouri received five comments from the EPA that related to Missouri's 
lack of an adequate demonstration that the rule could be removed from 
the SIP in accordance with section 110(l) of the CAA. Missouri's May 
22, 2019 letter addressed the EPA's comments. In addition, the revision 
meets the substantive SIP requirements of the CAA, including section 
110 and implementing regulations.

VI. What action is the EPA taking?

    The EPA is proposing to approve Missouri's request to rescind 10 
CSR 2.360 from the SIP because the rule applied to a single source that 
has permanently ceased operations. Any new sources or major 
modifications of existing sources in the Kansas City Area are subject 
to NSR permitting. Additionally, the maintenance period for the 1979 
ozone NAAQS for the Kansas City Area ended in 2014 and the area 
continues to monitor attainment of the 2015 Ozone NAAQS. We are 
processing this as a proposed action because we are soliciting comments 
on this proposed action. Final rulemaking will occur after 
consideration of any comments.

VII. Incorporation by Reference

    In this document, the EPA is proposing to amend regulatory text 
that includes incorporation by reference. As described in the proposed 
amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth below, the EPA is proposing to 
remove provisions of the EPA-Approved Missouri Regulations from the 
Missouri State Implementation Plan, which is incorporated by reference 
in accordance with the requirements of 1 CFR part 51.

VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP 
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable 
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in 
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state choices, 
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this 
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and 
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state 
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review 
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under 
Executive Order 12866.
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     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);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of the National Technology 
Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTA) because this rulemaking does not 
involve technical standards; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or 
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does 
not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct 
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified by 
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic 
compounds.

     Dated: April 3, 2020.
Edward Chu,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the EPA proposes to amend 
40 CFR part 52 as set forth below:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

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

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

Subpart AA--Missouri


Sec.  52.1320  [Amended]

0
2. In Sec.  52.1320, the table in paragraph (c) is amended by removing 
the entry ``10-2.360'' under the heading ``Chapter 2-Air Quality 
Standards and Air Pollution Control Regulations for the Kansas City 
Metropolitan Area''.

[FR Doc. 2020-07474 Filed 4-21-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P