Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of Missouri, 46860-46864 [E6-13347]

Download as PDF 46860 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 157 / Tuesday, August 15, 2006 / Rules and Regulations List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Energy Effects We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ‘‘significant energy action’’ under that order because it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects under Executive Order 13211. mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with RULES Technical Standards The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress, through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. Environment We have analyzed this rule under Commandant Instruction M16475.lD and Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 5100.1, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)(42 U.S.C. 4321– 4370f), and have concluded that there are no factors in this case that would limit the use of a categorical exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, this rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph (34) (g) of the Instruction, from further environmental documentation. This rule is covered by paragraph (34) (g), because it would establish a safety zone. A final ‘‘Environmental Analysis Check List’’ and a final ‘‘Categorical Exclusion Determination’’ will be available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:50 Aug 14, 2006 Jkt 208001 Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows: Dated: August 1, 2006. James L. McDonald, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Boston, Massachusetts. [FR Doc. E6–13397 Filed 8–14–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–15–P I PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: I Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 2. Add temporary § 165.T01–095 to read as follows: I § 165.T01–095 Safety Zone; Celebrate Revere Fireworks, Broad Sound, Revere, MA (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters of Broad Sound, from surface to bottom, within a four hundred (400) yard radius of the fireworks launch site located at approximate position 42° 24.00′ N, 070° 59.00′ W. (b) Effective Date. This section is effective from 8:30 p.m. EDT until 10 p.m. EDT on August 19, 2006. (c) Definitions. (1) Designated representative means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast Guard vessel and a Federal, State, and local officer designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port (COTP). (2) [Reserved] (d) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in § 165.23 of this part, entry into or movement within this zone by any person or vessel is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP), Boston or the COTP’s designated representative. (2) The safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may be permitted by the COTP or the COTP’s designated representative. (3) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety zone must contact the COTP or the COTP’s designated representative to obtain permission to do so. Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the safety zone must comply with all directions given to them by the COTP or the COTP’s designated representative. PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R07–OAR–2006–0467; FRL–8209–9] Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of Missouri Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to approve Missouri’s nitrogen oxides (NOX) plan for the eastern one-third of the state. The plan consists of three rules, a budget demonstration, and supporting documentation. The plan will contribute to attainment and maintenance of the 8-hour ozone standard in several downwind areas. Missouri’s plan, which focuses on large electric generating units, large industrial boilers, large stationary internal combustion engines, and large cement kilns, was developed to meet the requirements of EPA’s April 21, 2004, Phase II NOX State Implementation Plan (SIP) Call. EPA is taking final action to approve the plan as a SIP revision fulfilling the NOX SIP Call requirements. The initial period for compliance under the plan will begin in 2007, and the emission monitoring and reporting requirements for sources holding allowances under the plan began on May 1, 2006. DATES: This rule is effective on September 14, 2006. ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR–2006–0467. All documents in the docket are listed on the https://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 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 through https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas E:\FR\FM\15AUR1.SGM 15AUR1 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 157 / Tuesday, August 15, 2006 / Rules and Regulations City, Kansas 66101. The Regional Office’s official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:00 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: Michael Jay at (913) 551–7460, or by email at jay.michael@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean EPA. mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with RULES I. Background II. Summary of State Submittal A. What Are the Basic Components of the State’s Plan? B. What Do the Rules Require? 1. What Are the Requirements of the EGU and Non-EGU Rule? 2. What Are the Requirements of the Cement Kiln Rule? 3. What Are the Requirements of the Large Stationary Internal Combustion Engine Rule? C. How Does Missouri Address Its NOX SIP Call Budget? III. What Action Is EPA Taking? IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Background By notice dated October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), we took final action to prohibit specified amounts of emissions of one of the main precursors of groundlevel ozone, NOX, in order to reduce ozone transport across state boundaries in the eastern half of the United States. We set forth requirements for each of the affected upwind states to submit SIP revisions prohibiting those amounts of NOX emissions during the five-month period from May 1 through September 30 which significantly contribute to downwind air quality problems. We established statewide NOX emissions budgets for the affected states. The budgets were calculated by assuming the emissions reductions that would be achieved by applying available, highly cost-effective controls to source categories of NOX, i.e., the amounts of reductions determined by EPA for large, fossil-fuel-fired electric generating units (EGUs), large, fossilfuel-fired industrial boilers, combustion turbines, and combined cycle systems (non-EGUs), large stationary internal combustion (IC) engines, and cement kilns. States have the flexibility to adopt the appropriate mix of controls for their state to meet the NOX emissions reductions requirements of the NOX SIP Call. A number of parties, including certain states as well as industry and labor groups, challenged our NOX SIP Call rule. A subsequent ruling by the Court VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:50 Aug 14, 2006 Jkt 208001 of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on March 3, 2000, vacated the inclusion of the entire state of Missouri. Michigan v. EPA, 213 F.3d 663 (DC Cir. 2000). In response to the Court’s decision, we issued the February 22, 2002, proposed rule to include only specified counties in the eastern onethird of Missouri in the NOX SIP Call (67 FR 8413). On April 21, 2004, we finalized our responses to the Court’s decision in a final rulemaking, ‘‘Interstate Ozone Transport: Response to Court Decisions on the NOX SIP Call, NOX SIP Call Technical Amendments, and Section 126 Rules,’’ also referred to as ‘‘Phase II of the NOX SIP Call’’ (69 FR 21604). This rulemaking made a number of revisions to the 1998 rule. Most relevant to this rulemaking, it finalized our earlier proposal to include only the eastern one-third of Missouri in the NOX SIP Call. Accordingly, consistent with the Court’s finding in Michigan, Missouri’s NOX emissions budget was revised to include only the eastern onethird of the state. The NOX SIP Call requires that states revise their SIPs to assure that sources in the state reduce their NOX emissions sufficiently to eliminate the amounts of NOX emissions that contribute significantly to ozone nonattainment, or that interfere with maintenance, downwind, as required under the Clean Air Act (CAA) section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). States must demonstrate that their SIP includes sufficient measures to eliminate the significant amount of emissions by providing documentation in the form of a budget demonstration that details how the reductions are to be achieved. The total amount of NOX emissions from all NOX sources remaining after the state prohibits the significant amount of NOX emissions, as identified in the NOX SIP Call, represents the emissions budget for the state. The NOX SIP Call provided states the flexibility to decide which source categories to regulate in order to meet the emissions budget. In order to provide assistance to the states, we suggested imposing a variety of control strategies that provide for a highly cost effective means for states to meet their NOX emissions budgets. These strategies include imposing NOX emissions caps and providing for an allowance trading program for large EGUs and large nonEGUs, as well as emission reduction requirements for cement kilns and large IC engines. EPA’s model NOX budget trading rule for SIPs, 40 CFR Part 96, Subparts A through I, sets forth a NOX allowance trading program for large EGUs and large non-EGUs. A state can PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 46861 voluntarily choose to adopt EPA’s model rule in order to allow sources within its borders to participate in regional allowance trading as a way to achieve the required emission reductions for large EGUs and large nonEGUs. The October 27, 1998, Federal Register document contains a full description of the EPA’s model NOX budget trading program (See 63 FR 57514–57538 and 40 CFR Part 96, Subparts A through I). It should be noted that Missouri currently has in place a SIP-approved statewide NOX Rule, 10 CSR 10–6.350, and is also in the process of adopting additional rules to meet the requirements of the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). The statewide NOX rule and the rules under development to meet CAIR are designed to meet different EPA requirements. II. Summary of State Submittal A. What Are the Basic Components of the State’s Plan? The main components of Missouri’s plan include three NOX rules and a budget demonstration with supporting materials. The rules include: 10 CSR 10–6.360, pertaining to large EGUs and large fossil-fuel-fired industrial boilers (industrial boilers), 10 CSR 10–6.380 for cement kilns, and 10 CSR 10–6.390 for large stationary internal combustion engines. The purpose of these rules is to prohibit NOX emissions as identified in the NOX SIP Call that significantly contribute to downwind ozone nonattainment. In the NOX SIP Call the required emissions reductions were determined based on the implementation of available, highly cost-effective controls for selected source categories. Therefore, Missouri has developed and adopted three rules generally covering the source categories (i.e., large EGUs, large industrial boilers, cement kilns, and large stationary IC engines) for which EPA found that costeffective controls were available.1 EPA has reviewed the three rules and has found that Missouri’s rules will achieve the emission reduction requirements of the NOX SIP Call and thus eliminate Missouri’s significant contribution to downwind 8-hour ozone nonattainment. A more detailed description of each rule follows under II(B). The purpose of the budget demonstration is to provide an 1 Although in the NO SIP Call, EPA found X generally that highly cost effective reductions were achievable at large industrial boilers, combustion turbines, and combined cycle systems, the fine grid portion of Missouri does not include existing large combustion turbines and combined cycle systems. The language of the applicability provisions for non-EGUs in Missouri’s trading rule expressly covers only large non-EGUs that are industrial boilers. E:\FR\FM\15AUR1.SGM 15AUR1 46862 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 157 / Tuesday, August 15, 2006 / Rules and Regulations accounting mechanism for ensuring that Missouri has adopted control measures that prohibit the significant amounts of NOX emissions targeted by CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). A more detailed discussion of the demonstration is provided below under II(C). B. What Do the Rules Require? mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with RULES 1. What Are the Requirements of the EGU and Non-EGU Rule? Missouri adopted 10 CSR 10–6.360 ‘‘Control of NOX Emissions From Electric Generating Units and NonElectric Generating Boilers.’’ The rule effectively adopts the essential elements of EPA’s NOX Budget Trading model rule set forth in the October 1998 Federal Register document for applicable sources found in the eastern one-third of the state covered by the NOX SIP Call. The Missouri rule affects large EGUs (in general, fossil-fuel-fired boilers, combustion turbines, and combined cycle systems that serve a generator with a nameplate capacity greater than 25 megawatts (MWe) producing electricity for sale) and large industrial boilers (generally, industrial fossil-fuel-fired boilers with a maximum design heat input greater than 250 million British thermal units per hour (mmBtu/hr)).2 The emissions cap on large EGUs for the eastern one-third of Missouri, as described in the Phase II notice, is set at 13,400 tons per ozone season, and was based on a baseline heat input (mmBtu/hr) and emissions rate of 0.15 NOX lbs/mmBtu. The EGU emissions budget is equivalent to the number of allowances that the state has authority to distribute. One percent of this budget, 134 tons, has been included in an ‘‘energy efficiency and renewable generation projects set-aside.’’ The purpose of this set-aside is to provide an incentive to save or generate electricity through the implementation of projects that reduce the consumption of fossilfuel. The rule contains a list of large EGUs and the number of remaining allowances that will be provided for each unit during the control periods beginning in the year 2007. The level of reduction for large industrial boilers was based on emissions decreases from uncontrolled 2 It should be noted that as described in the proposal, EPA interprets ‘‘nameplate capacity’’ to be the amount, specified by the manufacturer of the generator, as of initial installation and interprets ‘‘maximum design heat input’’ to be the amount, specified by the manufacturer of the unit, as of initial installation based on the physical design and physical characteristics of the equipment. Consequently, nameplate capacity and maximum design heat input are determined on a one-time basis and are not changed by subsequent modification of the generator or unit respectively. VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:50 Aug 14, 2006 Jkt 208001 levels. In accordance with the NOX SIP Call, Missouri based the number of NOX allowances for each unit on a 60 percent reduction from each unit’s estimated 2007 levels of emissions, which were adjusted for projected growth for large industrial boilers. Missouri identified three existing units in the eastern onethird of the state as meeting the applicability requirement for large industrial boilers and, based on reductions from their uncontrolled emissions adjusted for projected growth, established 59 tons as the large industrial boiler portion of the trading budget. The rule specifically allocates allowances to these three large industrial boilers. The NOX trading budget for Missouri is the sum of the large EGU budget (13,400) and the large industrial boiler budget (59) and totals 13,459 tons. Under 10 CSR 10–6.360, Missouri allocates NOX allowances to both its large EGUs and large industrial boilers. Each NOX allowance permits a unit to emit one ton of NOX during the ozone season control period. NOX allowances may be bought or sold. Unused NOX allowances may also be banked for future use, with certain limitations. Missouri’s rule requires each large EGU and large industrial boiler to hold allowances to cover its emissions after each control period. For each ton of NOX emitted in a control period, EPA will remove one allowance from the unit’s NOX Allowance Tracking System account after the end of the control period. Once the allowance has been used for compliance, no unit can use the allowance again. Monitoring requirements specify that owners and operators will be required to continuously monitor their NOX emissions by using systems that meet the requirements of 40 CFR part 75, subpart H. The monitoring requirements also include quarterly emission reporting. The compliance supplement pool (CSP) is a pool of allowances that can be used in the beginning of the program to provide certain NOX Budget units additional compliance flexibility. The CSP was created to address concerns raised by commenters on the NOX SIP Call proposal regarding electric reliability during the initial years of the program. Missouri may distribute its 5,630 ton allowance pool based on early reductions, a demonstrated need, or both. A unit making an application to the CSP based on early reductions must demonstrate that reductions were made beyond all applicable requirements sometime during the ozone seasons of 2002 through 2006. Missouri’s CSP may PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 be used to account for emissions during the 2007 and 2008 control periods. 2. What Are the Requirements of the Cement Kiln Rule? Missouri adopted 10 CSR 10–6.380, ‘‘Control of NOX Emissions From Portland Cement Kilns.’’ The rule effectively adopts the NOX SIP Call’s recommended approach of obtaining a 30 percent reduction from uncontrolled levels from large Portland cement kilns found in the NOX SIP Call region of the eastern one-third of the state. The rule applies only to kilns with process rates of at least the following: Long dry kilns—12 tons per hour (TPH) Long wet kilns—10 TPH Preheater kilns—16 TPH Precalciner and preheater/precalciner kilns—22 TPH In the NOX SIP Call, EPA cited its peer reviewed analysis, ‘‘EPA’s Alternative Control Techniques (ACT)’’ (EPA–453/R–94–004, March 1994) as demonstrating that cost-effective controls in the form of low-NOX burners and mid-kiln firing are available to the cement kiln industry and can achieve a 30 percent reduction from uncontrolled levels of emissions. Consistent with EPA’s approach in the NOX SIP Call, Missouri’s rule provides that compliance can be achieved by the installation and operation of low-NOX burners or mid-kiln firing or by alternative measures that are all designed to achieve the 30 percent costeffective reduction. 3. What Are the Requirements of the Large Stationary Internal Combustion Engine Rule? Missouri adopted 10 CSR 10–6.390, ‘‘Control of NOX Emissions From Large Stationary Internal Combustion Engines.’’ The rule effectively adopts the NOX SIP Call’s recommended approach of the establishment of emissions levels that obtain an 82 percent reduction from large natural gas-fired stationary IC engines and a 90 percent reduction from large diesel and dual fuel stationary IC engines found in the NOX SIP Call region of the eastern one-third of the state. C. How Does Missouri Address Its NOX SIP Call Budget? Missouri’s budget for the NOX SIP Call was contained in the Phase II rulemaking in April 2004. Today’s rulemaking finalizes EPA’s proposal to adopt corrections to the April 2004 budget for Missouri that were detailed in the June 5, 2006, proposal, as no comments were received on any of the proposed revisions. Based on EPA’s approach in the proposal, the NOX SIP E:\FR\FM\15AUR1.SGM 15AUR1 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 157 / Tuesday, August 15, 2006 / Rules and Regulations Call 2007 budget for the eastern onethird of Missouri is 60,235 tons per ozone season and represents the sum of EGU, Non-EGU Point, Area, Off-Road and Mobile source emissions. A breakdown of the emissions budget can be found in Table I. As explained in more detail in the NOX SIP Call, the NOX SIP Call requires that states revise their SIPs to assure that sources in the state reduce their NOX emissions sufficiently to eliminate the amounts of NOX emissions that contribute significantly to ozone nonattainment, or that interfere with maintenance, downwind. The amount of NOX emissions reductions required is the amount of emissions reductions that would be achieved by applying available, highly cost-effective controls to large EGUs, large non-EGUs, large stationary IC engines, and cement kilns. However, EPA structured the rule to give the upwind states a choice of which mix of measures to adopt in order to eliminate the significant amount of NOX emissions. To this end, EPA developed an emissions budget that was based on the aforementioned application of highly cost-effective controls. The emissions budget represents the amount of NOX emissions remaining after the state prohibits the significant amount. EPA finds that Missouri has demonstrated compliance with the budget demonstration, and thus the NOX SIP Call, by adopting control measures that are modeled after EPA’s recommended approach for controlling large EGUs, large non-EGUs, large IC engines, and cement kilns, and that implementation of these rules will achieve the emissions reductions necessary to eliminate the ‘‘significant contribution’’ to downwind ozone nonattainment identified under CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), as implemented by the NOX SIP Call. TABLE I.—CORRECTED NOX BUDGET FOR MISSOURI mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with RULES Source category 2007 Budget emissions (tpos) Large EGUs (>25 MW) ........ Other EGUs .......................... Other Non EGUs .................. Large non-EGUs (including large industrial boilers) (>250 MMBtu) ................... Cement Kilns ........................ Area ...................................... On Road Mobile ................... Off-Road Mobile ................... 13,400 241 5,903 Total ............................... 60,235 VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:50 Aug 14, 2006 59 7,483 2,199 21,318 9,632 Jkt 208001 III. What Action Is EPA Taking? EPA is taking final action to approve Missouri’s request to revise the SIP to include their NOX plan that includes three NOX rules and a budget demonstration to meet the requirements of the NOX SIP Call. EPA proposed to approve the rules and budget demonstration on June 5, 2006 (71 FR 32291). The comment period closed on EPA’s proposal on July 5, 2006. No comments were received. EPA is finalizing the approval as proposed, based on the rationale stated in the proposal and in this final action. Also, as explained in the proposal, EPA’s approval is premised on Missouri’s commitment to include in the Missouri trading rule any large industrial combustion turbines and large industrial combined cycle systems which may be constructed in the future. 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 (Public Law 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 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 46863 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 Clean Air Act. 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 is not economically significant. In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 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 Clean Air Act. 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. 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 16, 2006. 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 E:\FR\FM\15AUR1.SGM 15AUR1 46864 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 157 / Tuesday, August 15, 2006 / Rules and Regulations 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).) Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds. Subpart AA—Missouri Dated: August 8, 2006. William A. Spratlin, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 I Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 2. In § 52.1320(c) the table is amended under Chapter 6 by adding entries for ‘‘10–6.360,’’ ‘‘10–6.380,’’ and ‘‘10– 6.390’’ to read as follows: I PART 52—[AMENDED] Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows: § 52.1320 * 1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows: I Identification of plan. * * (c) * * * * * EPA-APPROVED MISSOURI REGULATIONS Missouri citation State effective date Title 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 * 10–6.360 ......... * * * Control of NOX Emissions From Electric Generating Units and Non-Electric Generating Boilers. * 10/30/05 10–6.380 ......... Control of NOX Emissions From Portland Cement Kilns ....... 10/30/05 10–6.390 ......... Control of NOX Emissions From Large Stationary Internal Combustion Engines. 10/30/05 * * * * * * * * [FR Doc. E6–13347 Filed 8–14–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 RIN 1018–AU21 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Special Rule for the Southwest Alaska Distinct Population Segment of the Northern Sea Otter Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Final rule. mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with RULES AGENCY: SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), under the Endangered Species Act (Act), as amended, create a special rule for the southwest Alaska distinct population segment (DPS) of the northern sea otter (Enhydra lutris kenyoni). This DPS of the northern sea otter is listed as threatened under the Act. This special rule allows for the limited, noncommercial import and export of items that qualify as authentic VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:50 Aug 14, 2006 Jkt 208001 * * native articles of handicrafts and clothing that were derived from sea otters legally taken for subsistence purposes by Alaska Natives from the listed population. This special rule also allows for cultural exchange by Alaska Natives and activities conducted by persons registered as an agent or tannery under existing law. We also amend our definition of ‘‘Authentic native articles of handicrafts and clothing’’ by striking the stipulation that such items were commonly produced on or before December 28, 1973. This definition change is appropriate in light of a court ruling on the Service’s definition of ‘‘Authentic native articles of handicrafts and clothing’’ and consistent with our current definition of ‘‘Authentic native articles of handicrafts and clothing’’ under the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) of 1972. This rule is effective on September 14, 2006. DATES: The complete file for this final rule is available for inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the Marine Mammals Management Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1011 East Tudor Road, Anchorage, Alaska 99503. ADDRESSES: PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4700 * 8/15/06 [insert FR page number where the document begins]. 8/15/06 [insert FR page number where the document begins]. 8/15/06 [insert FR page number where the document begins]. Sfmt 4700 * * * FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles Hamilton (see ADDRESSES), telephone, 907–786–3800; facsimile, 907–786–3816, e-mail, Charles_Hamilton@fws.gov. Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1– 800–877–8339, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On August 9, 2005, we published a final rule (70 FR 46366) to list the southwest Alaska DPS of the northern sea otter as threatened under the Act (Act), as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). Section 4(d) of the Act specifies that, for species listed as threatened, the Secretary shall develop such regulations as determined necessary and advisable for the conservation of the species. Our regulations at 50 CFR 17.31 provide that all the prohibitions for endangered wildlife under 50 CFR 17.21, with the exception of § 17.21(c)(5), will generally also be applied to threatened wildlife. Prohibitions include, among others, take, import, export, and shipment in interstate or foreign commerce in the course of a commercial activity. The E:\FR\FM\15AUR1.SGM 15AUR1

Agencies

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 157 (Tuesday, August 15, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 46860-46864]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-13347]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2006-0467; FRL-8209-9]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of
Missouri

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to approve Missouri's nitrogen
oxides (NOX) plan for the eastern one-third of the state.
The plan consists of three rules, a budget demonstration, and
supporting documentation. The plan will contribute to attainment and
maintenance of the 8-hour ozone standard in several downwind areas.
Missouri's plan, which focuses on large electric generating units,
large industrial boilers, large stationary internal combustion engines,
and large cement kilns, was developed to meet the requirements of EPA's
April 21, 2004, Phase II NOX State Implementation Plan (SIP)
Call. EPA is taking final action to approve the plan as a SIP revision
fulfilling the NOX SIP Call requirements. The initial period
for compliance under the plan will begin in 2007, and the emission
monitoring and reporting requirements for sources holding allowances
under the plan began on May 1, 2006.

DATES: This rule is effective on September 14, 2006.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R07-OAR-2006-0467. All documents in the docket are listed on
the https://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 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 through
https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental
Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th
Street, Kansas

[[Page 46861]]

City, Kansas 66101. The Regional Office's official hours of business
are Monday through Friday, 8:00 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: Michael Jay at (913) 551-7460, or by
e-mail at jay.michael@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.

I. Background
II. Summary of State Submittal
A. What Are the Basic Components of the State's Plan?
B. What Do the Rules Require?
1. What Are the Requirements of the EGU and Non-EGU Rule?
2. What Are the Requirements of the Cement Kiln Rule?
3. What Are the Requirements of the Large Stationary Internal
Combustion Engine Rule?
C. How Does Missouri Address Its NOX SIP Call Budget?
III. What Action Is EPA Taking?
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

By notice dated October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), we took final
action to prohibit specified amounts of emissions of one of the main
precursors of groundlevel ozone, NOX, in order to reduce
ozone transport across state boundaries in the eastern half of the
United States. We set forth requirements for each of the affected
upwind states to submit SIP revisions prohibiting those amounts of
NOX emissions during the five-month period from May 1
through September 30 which significantly contribute to downwind air
quality problems. We established statewide NOX emissions
budgets for the affected states. The budgets were calculated by
assuming the emissions reductions that would be achieved by applying
available, highly cost-effective controls to source categories of
NOX, i.e., the amounts of reductions determined by EPA for
large, fossil-fuel-fired electric generating units (EGUs), large,
fossil-fuel-fired industrial boilers, combustion turbines, and combined
cycle systems (non-EGUs), large stationary internal combustion (IC)
engines, and cement kilns. States have the flexibility to adopt the
appropriate mix of controls for their state to meet the NOX
emissions reductions requirements of the NOX SIP Call.
A number of parties, including certain states as well as industry
and labor groups, challenged our NOX SIP Call rule. A
subsequent ruling by the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit on March 3, 2000, vacated the inclusion of the entire state of
Missouri. Michigan v. EPA, 213 F.3d 663 (DC Cir. 2000). In response to
the Court's decision, we issued the February 22, 2002, proposed rule to
include only specified counties in the eastern one-third of Missouri in
the NOX SIP Call (67 FR 8413).
On April 21, 2004, we finalized our responses to the Court's
decision in a final rulemaking, ``Interstate Ozone Transport: Response
to Court Decisions on the NOX SIP Call, NOX SIP
Call Technical Amendments, and Section 126 Rules,'' also referred to as
``Phase II of the NOX SIP Call'' (69 FR 21604). This
rulemaking made a number of revisions to the 1998 rule. Most relevant
to this rulemaking, it finalized our earlier proposal to include only
the eastern one-third of Missouri in the NOX SIP Call.
Accordingly, consistent with the Court's finding in Michigan,
Missouri's NOX emissions budget was revised to include only
the eastern one-third of the state.
The NOX SIP Call requires that states revise their SIPs
to assure that sources in the state reduce their NOX
emissions sufficiently to eliminate the amounts of NOX
emissions that contribute significantly to ozone nonattainment, or that
interfere with maintenance, downwind, as required under the Clean Air
Act (CAA) section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). States must demonstrate that
their SIP includes sufficient measures to eliminate the significant
amount of emissions by providing documentation in the form of a budget
demonstration that details how the reductions are to be achieved. The
total amount of NOX emissions from all NOX
sources remaining after the state prohibits the significant amount of
NOX emissions, as identified in the NOX SIP Call,
represents the emissions budget for the state.
The NOX SIP Call provided states the flexibility to
decide which source categories to regulate in order to meet the
emissions budget. In order to provide assistance to the states, we
suggested imposing a variety of control strategies that provide for a
highly cost effective means for states to meet their NOX
emissions budgets. These strategies include imposing NOX
emissions caps and providing for an allowance trading program for large
EGUs and large non-EGUs, as well as emission reduction requirements for
cement kilns and large IC engines. EPA's model NOX budget
trading rule for SIPs, 40 CFR Part 96, Subparts A through I, sets forth
a NOX allowance trading program for large EGUs and large
non-EGUs. A state can voluntarily choose to adopt EPA's model rule in
order to allow sources within its borders to participate in regional
allowance trading as a way to achieve the required emission reductions
for large EGUs and large non-EGUs. The October 27, 1998, Federal
Register document contains a full description of the EPA's model
NOX budget trading program (See 63 FR 57514-57538 and 40 CFR
Part 96, Subparts A through I). It should be noted that Missouri
currently has in place a SIP-approved statewide NOX Rule, 10
CSR 10-6.350, and is also in the process of adopting additional rules
to meet the requirements of the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). The
statewide NOX rule and the rules under development to meet
CAIR are designed to meet different EPA requirements.

II. Summary of State Submittal

A. What Are the Basic Components of the State's Plan?

The main components of Missouri's plan include three NOX
rules and a budget demonstration with supporting materials. The rules
include: 10 CSR 10-6.360, pertaining to large EGUs and large fossil-
fuel-fired industrial boilers (industrial boilers), 10 CSR 10-6.380 for
cement kilns, and 10 CSR 10-6.390 for large stationary internal
combustion engines. The purpose of these rules is to prohibit
NOX emissions as identified in the NOX SIP Call
that significantly contribute to downwind ozone nonattainment. In the
NOX SIP Call the required emissions reductions were
determined based on the implementation of available, highly cost-
effective controls for selected source categories. Therefore, Missouri
has developed and adopted three rules generally covering the source
categories (i.e., large EGUs, large industrial boilers, cement kilns,
and large stationary IC engines) for which EPA found that cost-
effective controls were available.\1\ EPA has reviewed the three rules
and has found that Missouri's rules will achieve the emission reduction
requirements of the NOX SIP Call and thus eliminate
Missouri's significant contribution to downwind 8-hour ozone
nonattainment. A more detailed description of each rule follows under
II(B). The purpose of the budget demonstration is to provide an

[[Page 46862]]

accounting mechanism for ensuring that Missouri has adopted control
measures that prohibit the significant amounts of NOX
emissions targeted by CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). A more detailed
discussion of the demonstration is provided below under II(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ Although in the NOX SIP Call, EPA found generally
that highly cost effective reductions were achievable at large
industrial boilers, combustion turbines, and combined cycle systems,
the fine grid portion of Missouri does not include existing large
combustion turbines and combined cycle systems. The language of the
applicability provisions for non-EGUs in Missouri's trading rule
expressly covers only large non-EGUs that are industrial boilers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. What Do the Rules Require?

1. What Are the Requirements of the EGU and Non-EGU Rule?
Missouri adopted 10 CSR 10-6.360 ``Control of NOX
Emissions From Electric Generating Units and Non-Electric Generating
Boilers.'' The rule effectively adopts the essential elements of EPA's
NOX Budget Trading model rule set forth in the October 1998
Federal Register document for applicable sources found in the eastern
one-third of the state covered by the NOX SIP Call. The
Missouri rule affects large EGUs (in general, fossil-fuel-fired
boilers, combustion turbines, and combined cycle systems that serve a
generator with a nameplate capacity greater than 25 megawatts (MWe)
producing electricity for sale) and large industrial boilers
(generally, industrial fossil-fuel-fired boilers with a maximum design
heat input greater than 250 million British thermal units per hour
(mmBtu/hr)).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\2\ It should be noted that as described in the proposal, EPA
interprets ``nameplate capacity'' to be the amount, specified by the
manufacturer of the generator, as of initial installation and
interprets ``maximum design heat input'' to be the amount, specified
by the manufacturer of the unit, as of initial installation based on
the physical design and physical characteristics of the equipment.
Consequently, nameplate capacity and maximum design heat input are
determined on a one-time basis and are not changed by subsequent
modification of the generator or unit respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The emissions cap on large EGUs for the eastern one-third of
Missouri, as described in the Phase II notice, is set at 13,400 tons
per ozone season, and was based on a baseline heat input (mmBtu/hr) and
emissions rate of 0.15 NOX lbs/mmBtu. The EGU emissions
budget is equivalent to the number of allowances that the state has
authority to distribute. One percent of this budget, 134 tons, has been
included in an ``energy efficiency and renewable generation projects
set-aside.'' The purpose of this set-aside is to provide an incentive
to save or generate electricity through the implementation of projects
that reduce the consumption of fossil-fuel. The rule contains a list of
large EGUs and the number of remaining allowances that will be provided
for each unit during the control periods beginning in the year 2007.
The level of reduction for large industrial boilers was based on
emissions decreases from uncontrolled levels. In accordance with the
NOX SIP Call, Missouri based the number of NOX
allowances for each unit on a 60 percent reduction from each unit's
estimated 2007 levels of emissions, which were adjusted for projected
growth for large industrial boilers. Missouri identified three existing
units in the eastern one-third of the state as meeting the
applicability requirement for large industrial boilers and, based on
reductions from their uncontrolled emissions adjusted for projected
growth, established 59 tons as the large industrial boiler portion of
the trading budget. The rule specifically allocates allowances to these
three large industrial boilers. The NOX trading budget for
Missouri is the sum of the large EGU budget (13,400) and the large
industrial boiler budget (59) and totals 13,459 tons.
Under 10 CSR 10-6.360, Missouri allocates NOX allowances
to both its large EGUs and large industrial boilers. Each
NOX allowance permits a unit to emit one ton of
NOX during the ozone season control period. NOX
allowances may be bought or sold. Unused NOX allowances may
also be banked for future use, with certain limitations. Missouri's
rule requires each large EGU and large industrial boiler to hold
allowances to cover its emissions after each control period. For each
ton of NOX emitted in a control period, EPA will remove one
allowance from the unit's NOX Allowance Tracking System
account after the end of the control period. Once the allowance has
been used for compliance, no unit can use the allowance again.
Monitoring requirements specify that owners and operators will be
required to continuously monitor their NOX emissions by
using systems that meet the requirements of 40 CFR part 75, subpart H.
The monitoring requirements also include quarterly emission reporting.
The compliance supplement pool (CSP) is a pool of allowances that
can be used in the beginning of the program to provide certain
NOX Budget units additional compliance flexibility. The CSP
was created to address concerns raised by commenters on the
NOX SIP Call proposal regarding electric reliability during
the initial years of the program. Missouri may distribute its 5,630 ton
allowance pool based on early reductions, a demonstrated need, or both.
A unit making an application to the CSP based on early reductions must
demonstrate that reductions were made beyond all applicable
requirements sometime during the ozone seasons of 2002 through 2006.
Missouri's CSP may be used to account for emissions during the 2007 and
2008 control periods.
2. What Are the Requirements of the Cement Kiln Rule?
Missouri adopted 10 CSR 10-6.380, ``Control of NOX
Emissions From Portland Cement Kilns.'' The rule effectively adopts the
NOX SIP Call's recommended approach of obtaining a 30
percent reduction from uncontrolled levels from large Portland cement
kilns found in the NOX SIP Call region of the eastern one-
third of the state. The rule applies only to kilns with process rates
of at least the following:

Long dry kilns--12 tons per hour (TPH)
Long wet kilns--10 TPH
Preheater kilns--16 TPH
Precalciner and preheater/precalciner kilns--22 TPH

In the NOX SIP Call, EPA cited its peer reviewed
analysis, ``EPA's Alternative Control Techniques (ACT)'' (EPA-453/R-94-
004, March 1994) as demonstrating that cost-effective controls in the
form of low-NOX burners and mid-kiln firing are available to
the cement kiln industry and can achieve a 30 percent reduction from
uncontrolled levels of emissions. Consistent with EPA's approach in the
NOX SIP Call, Missouri's rule provides that compliance can be achieved
by the installation and operation of low-NOX burners or mid-
kiln firing or by alternative measures that are all designed to achieve
the 30 percent cost-effective reduction.
3. What Are the Requirements of the Large Stationary Internal
Combustion Engine Rule?
Missouri adopted 10 CSR 10-6.390, ``Control of NOX
Emissions From Large Stationary Internal Combustion Engines.'' The rule
effectively adopts the NOX SIP Call's recommended approach
of the establishment of emissions levels that obtain an 82 percent
reduction from large natural gas-fired stationary IC engines and a 90
percent reduction from large diesel and dual fuel stationary IC engines
found in the NOX SIP Call region of the eastern one-third of
the state.

C. How Does Missouri Address Its NOX SIP Call Budget?

Missouri's budget for the NOX SIP Call was contained in
the Phase II rulemaking in April 2004. Today's rulemaking finalizes
EPA's proposal to adopt corrections to the April 2004 budget for
Missouri that were detailed in the June 5, 2006, proposal, as no
comments were received on any of the proposed revisions. Based on EPA's
approach in the proposal, the NOX SIP

[[Page 46863]]

Call 2007 budget for the eastern one-third of Missouri is 60,235 tons
per ozone season and represents the sum of EGU, Non-EGU Point, Area,
Off-Road and Mobile source emissions. A breakdown of the emissions
budget can be found in Table I.
As explained in more detail in the NOX SIP Call, the
NOX SIP Call requires that states revise their SIPs to
assure that sources in the state reduce their NOX emissions
sufficiently to eliminate the amounts of NOX emissions that
contribute significantly to ozone nonattainment, or that interfere with
maintenance, downwind. The amount of NOX emissions
reductions required is the amount of emissions reductions that would be
achieved by applying available, highly cost-effective controls to large
EGUs, large non-EGUs, large stationary IC engines, and cement kilns.
However, EPA structured the rule to give the upwind states a choice of
which mix of measures to adopt in order to eliminate the significant
amount of NOX emissions. To this end, EPA developed an
emissions budget that was based on the aforementioned application of
highly cost-effective controls. The emissions budget represents the
amount of NOX emissions remaining after the state prohibits
the significant amount. EPA finds that Missouri has demonstrated
compliance with the budget demonstration, and thus the NOX
SIP Call, by adopting control measures that are modeled after EPA's
recommended approach for controlling large EGUs, large non-EGUs, large
IC engines, and cement kilns, and that implementation of these rules
will achieve the emissions reductions necessary to eliminate the
``significant contribution'' to downwind ozone nonattainment identified
under CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), as implemented by the
NOX SIP Call.

Table I.--Corrected NOX Budget for Missouri
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007 Budget
Source category emissions
(tpos)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Large EGUs (>25 MW)..................................... 13,400
Other EGUs.............................................. 241
Other Non EGUs.......................................... 5,903
Large non-EGUs (including large industrial boilers) 59
(>250 MMBtu)...........................................
Cement Kilns............................................ 7,483
Area.................................................... 2,199
On Road Mobile.......................................... 21,318
Off-Road Mobile......................................... 9,632
---------------
Total............................................... 60,235
------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. What Action Is EPA Taking?

EPA is taking final action to approve Missouri's request to revise
the SIP to include their NOX plan that includes three
NOX rules and a budget demonstration to meet the
requirements of the NOX SIP Call. EPA proposed to approve
the rules and budget demonstration on June 5, 2006 (71 FR 32291). The
comment period closed on EPA's proposal on July 5, 2006. No comments
were received. EPA is finalizing the approval as proposed, based on the
rationale stated in the proposal and in this final action. Also, as
explained in the proposal, EPA's approval is premised on Missouri's
commitment to include in the Missouri trading rule any large industrial
combustion turbines and large industrial combined cycle systems which
may be constructed in the future.

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 (Public Law 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 Clean
Air Act. 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 is not economically
significant.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 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 Clean Air Act. 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. 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 16, 2006. 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

[[Page 46864]]

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: August 8, 2006.
William A. Spratlin,
Acting 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 AA--Missouri

0
2. In Sec. 52.1320(c) the table is amended under Chapter 6 by adding
entries for ``10-6.360,'' ``10-6.380,'' and ``10-6.390'' 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

* * * * * * *
10-6.360....................... Control of NOX 10/30/05 8/15/06 [insert FR ..................
Emissions From page number where
Electric Generating the document
Units and Non-Electric begins].
Generating Boilers.
10-6.380....................... Control of NOX 10/30/05 8/15/06 [insert FR ..................
Emissions From page number where
Portland Cement Kilns. the document
begins].
10-6.390....................... Control of NOX 10/30/05 8/15/06 [insert FR ..................
Emissions From Large page number where
Stationary Internal the document
Combustion Engines. begins].

* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. E6-13347 Filed 8-14-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.