[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 72 (Friday, April 14, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 22976-22978]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-07682]
[[Page 22976]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R07-OAR-2023-0193; FRL-10815-01-R7]
Air Plan Approval; State of Missouri; Restriction of Particulate
Matter to the Ambient Air Beyond the Premises of Origin
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 March 7, 2019. Missouri requests that the EPA
approve revisions to a state regulation for the Restriction of
Particulate Matter to the Ambient Air Beyond the Premises of Origin.
These revisions include adding definitions that are specific to the
rule, restructures the rule into the standard rule organization format,
and removes unnecessary words. The revisions are administrative in
nature and do not impact the stringency of the SIP or 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 15, 2023.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2023-0193 to 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 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: Steven Brown, Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 7 Office, Air Quality Planning Branch, 11201 Renner
Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219; telephone number: (913) 551-7718;
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. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?
IV. What action is the EPA taking?
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Written Comments
Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2023-
0193, at 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
www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
II. What is being addressed in this document?
The EPA is proposing to approve a SIP revision submitted by the
State of Missouri on March 7, 2019. Missouri requests the EPA approve
revisions to their SIP by replacing the existing rule, Title 10,
Division 10 of the Code of State Regulations (CSR), (10 CSR 10-6.170)
``Restriction of Particulate Matter to the Ambient Air Beyond the
Premises of Origin'', with a revised and restructured version of the
same rule. The state has revised the rule to add definitions specific
to this rule, organize the rule into state standard rule organizational
format, and remove unnecessary words. After review and analysis of the
revisions, the EPA concludes that these changes do not have adverse
effects on air quality. The full text of these changes can be found in
the State's submission, which is included in the docket for this
action. The EPA's analysis of the revisions can be found in the
technical support document (TSD), also included in the docket.
III. 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 8/01/2018 to 8/
30/2018 and received a total of eight comments. The comments and
responses are summarized herein. Comment 1: The EPA commented that they
previously recommended that the department add provisions to the rule
to make it clear what a ``reasonable degree'' is, which ``techniques''
the director might approve, and how the director might make that
determination. Response: The state responded saying the necessary
measures for determining the origin and nature of particulate matter
emissions that travel beyond a property line are handled on a case-by-
case basis. In many cases the nature and origin of fugitive particulate
matter emissions is obvious and does not require any scientific
measurements. After further review, the EPA agrees that this type of
review is done on a case-by-case basis and since the rule applies to
any operation, process, or activity, specific techniques or scientific
methods would not always apply to determine the nature and origins of
the particulate matter fugitive emissions. An example an application of
this rule may be the evaluation of the handling or transporting of
materials that cause dust to be seen in the air or dust residue left on
surfaces after this type of activity. In this example, the state air
program would investigate and decide on the nature and origin of the
particulate matter emissions based on the evidence available. Applying
a specific scientific methodology to investigate the origin and nature
of the particulate matter is not pertinent in this situation. EPA
believes these are the types of case-by-case scenarios that this rule
was primarily intended to address. No changes were made to the rule
text as a result of this comment. Comment 2: The EPA recommended that
the department provide regulatory language on what record keeping and
reporting requirements would exist for a facility to determine
compliance with the rule. Response: The state responded that since the
rule does not prescribe monitoring or control requirements the
department cannot designate record keeping or reporting requirements.
Since the rule is not necessarily subject to a facility but to an
action or processes, the EPA agrees that recordkeeping and reporting
are not required. No changes were made to the rule text as a result of
this comment. Comment 3: The St. Louis County Department of Public
Health commented on a semi colon placed after
[[Page 22977]]
the word facility. No changes were made to the rule text as a result of
this comment. Comment 4 and 5: The St. Louis County Department of
Public Health, and Newman, Comley, and Ruth P.C., commented that the
rule did not include an upper particle size limit. Response: As a
result of those comments, the state added an upper size limit to the
definition of particulate matter in subsection (2)(F) of this rule that
particles greater than one hundred micrometers (100 [mu]m) are not
defined as particulate matter. Comment 6: Newman, Comley, and Ruth P.C.
commented that facilities constructed before November 30, 1990, and
located within the city limits of any municipality should be exempt
from this rule. Response: Since the commenter did not provide
justification for this exemption, and the state was not able to justify
this exemption, no changes were made to the rule text as a result of
the comment. Comment 7 and 8: Newman, Comley, and Ruth P.C., and the
St. Louis County Department of Public Health commented that removing
the word ``shall'' from a rule requirement could be interpreted that
the requirement is no longer necessary. The commenter stated that
regulations must be clear and concise as to the intent of the
regulation. The department should review all instances of deleting the
word ``shall'' and consider retaining it. Response: As a result of
those comments, the state revised the language in paragraphs (3)(A)1.
and (3)(A)2. to retain the word ``shall'' in order to clarify the
obligation for facilities.
In addition, as explained above and in more detail in the technical
support document, which is part of this docket, the revision meets the
substantive SIP requirements of the CAA, including section 110 and
implementing regulations.
IV. What action is the EPA taking?
The EPA is proposing to amend the Missouri SIP by approving the
State's request to revise 10 CSR 10-6.170 ``Restriction of Particulate
Matter to the Ambient Air Beyond the Premises of Origin.'' 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.
V. Incorporation by Reference
In this document, the EPA is proposing to include regulatory text
in an EPA final rule that includes incorporation by reference. In
accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is finalizing the
incorporation by reference of the Missouri rule 10 CSR 10-6.170
discussed in section II of this preamble and as set forth below in the
proposed amendments to 40 CFR part 52. The EPA has made, and will
continue to make, these materials generally available through
www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 7 Office (please contact the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this preamble for more information).
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Clean Air Act
and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
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);
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); and
Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act;
In addition, 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).
Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
Feb. 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies to identify and address
``disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects'' of their actions on minority populations and low-income
populations to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law.
EPA defines environmental justice (EJ) as ``the fair treatment and
meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color,
national origin, or income with respect to the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies.'' EPA further defines the term fair treatment to mean that
``no group of people should bear a disproportionate burden of
environmental harms and risks, including those resulting from the
negative environmental consequences of industrial, governmental, and
commercial operations or programs and policies.''
Missouri did not evaluate environmental justice considerations as
part of its SIP submittal; the CAA and applicable implementing
regulations neither prohibit nor require such an evaluation. EPA did
not perform an EJ analysis and did not consider EJ in this action.
Consideration of EJ is not required as part of this action, and there
is no information in the record inconsistent with the stated goal of
E.O. 12898 of achieving environmental justice for people of color, low-
income populations, and Indigenous peoples.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Particulate matter.
Dated: April 6, 2023.
Meghan A. McCollister,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the EPA proposes to amend
40 CFR part 52 as set forth below:
[[Page 22978]]
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
0
2. In Sec. 52.1320, the table in paragraph (c) is amended by revising
the entry ``10-6.170'' to read as follows:
Sec. 52.1320 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
EPA-Approved Missouri Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State
Missouri citation Title effective date EPA approval date Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Missouri Department of Natural Resources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Chapter 6--Air Quality Standards, Definitions, Sampling and Reference Methods, and Air Pollution Control
Regulations for the State of Missouri
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
10-6.170...................... Restriction of 3/30/2019 [Date of publication ....................
Particulate Matter of the final rule
to the Ambient Air in the Federal
Beyond the Premises Register], [Federal
of Origin. Register citation
of the final rule].
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2023-07682 Filed 4-13-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P