Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of Missouri, 70315-70318 [E6-20436]
Download as PDF
70315
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 232 / Monday, December 4, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
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 February 2, 2007.
Filing a petition for reconsideration by
the Administrator of this final rule does
not affect the finality of this rule for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section
307(b)(2).)
PART 52—[AMENDED]
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.
1. The authority citation for Part 52
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart AA—Missouri
2. In § 52.1320(d) the table is amended
by adding entry (23) at the end of the
table for Grossman Iron and Steel
Company, to read as follows:
I
Dated: November 24, 2006.
John B. Askew,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
§ 52.1320
Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of
Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
I
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(d) * * *
*
*
EPA-APPROVED MISSOURI SOURCE-SPECIFIC PERMITS AND ORDERS
Name of source
Order/Permit
No.
*
*
(23) Grossman Iron and Steel Company .....
*
*
Permit No. SR00.045A .................................
*
*
*
*
*
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R07–OAR–2006–0883; FRL–8251–2]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; State of
Missouri
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the state of Missouri for
the inclusion of revisions to the
Construction Permit Exemptions rule.
The Construction Permit Exemptions
rule lists specific construction or
modification projects that are not
required to obtain permits under the
Construction Permits Required rule.
Revisions to this rule include updating
the insignificance levels, adding a new
exemption for manufacturing operations
(which produce insignificant
emissions), clarifying the grain handling
facilities exemption, and restructuring
of the record keeping portion of the rule.
Missouri developed the revisions to this
rule under two separate state
rulemaking processes.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
12:11 Dec 01, 2006
Jkt 211001
EPA approval date
*
*
December 4, 2006
[insert FR page
number where
the document
begins]
This direct final rule will be
effective February 2, 2007, without
further notice, unless EPA receives
adverse comment by January 3, 2007. If
adverse comment is received, EPA will
publish a timely withdrawal of the
direct final rule in the Federal Register
informing the public that the rule will
not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07OAR–2006–0883, by one of the
following methods:
1. https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. E-mail: algoe-eakin.amy@epa.gov.
3. Mail: Amy Algoe-Eakin,
Environmental Protection Agency, Air
Planning and Development Branch, 901
North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas
66101.
4. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver
your comments to Amy Algoe-Eakin,
Environmental Protection Agency, Air
Planning and Development Branch, 901
North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas
66101.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2006–
0883. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
DATES:
[FR Doc. E6–20433 Filed 12–1–06; 8:45 am]
State effective
date
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
7/19/06
Explanation
*
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit through https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail
information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The https://
www.regulations.gov Web site is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an e-mail comment directly
to EPA without going through https://
www.regulations.gov, your e-mail
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
Docket: All documents in the
electronic docket are listed in the
https://www.regulations.gov index.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
i.e., CBI or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
E:\FR\FM\04DER1.SGM
04DER1
70316
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 232 / Monday, December 4, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically in https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Environmental Protection Agency,
Air Planning and Development Branch,
901 North 5th Street, Kansas City,
Kansas 66101. The Regional Office’s
official hours of business are Monday
through Friday, 8 to 4:30, excluding
Federal holidays. The interested persons
wanting to examine these documents
should make an appointment with the
office at least 24 hours in advance.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Amy Algoe-Eakin at (913) 551–7942, or
by e-mail at algoe-eakin.amy@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA. This section provides additional
information by addressing the following
questions:
What is a SIP?
What is the Federal approval process for a
SIP?
What does Federal approval of a state
regulation mean to me?
What is being addressed in this document?
Have the requirements for approval of a SIP
revision been met?
What action is EPA taking?
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with RULES
What is a SIP?
Section 110 of the Clean Air Act
(CAA) requires states to develop air
pollution regulations and control
strategies to ensure that state air quality
meets the national ambient air quality
standards established by EPA. These
ambient standards are established under
section 109 of the CAA, and they
currently address six criteria pollutants.
These pollutants are: Carbon monoxide,
nitrogen dioxide, ozone, lead,
particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide.
Each state must submit these regulations
and control strategies to us for approval
and incorporation into the Federallyenforceable SIP.
Each Federally-approved SIP protects
air quality primarily by addressing air
pollution at its point of origin. These
SIPs can be extensive, containing state
regulations or other enforceable
documents and supporting information
such as emission inventories,
monitoring networks, and modeling
demonstrations.
What is the Federal approval process
for a SIP?
In order for state regulations to be
incorporated into the Federallyenforceable SIP, states must formally
adopt the regulations and control
VerDate Aug<31>2005
12:11 Dec 01, 2006
Jkt 211001
strategies consistent with state and
Federal requirements. This process
generally includes a public notice,
public hearing, public comment period,
and a formal adoption by a stateauthorized rulemaking body.
Once a state rule, regulation, or
control strategy is adopted, the state
submits it to us for inclusion into the
SIP. We must provide public notice and
seek additional public comment
regarding the proposed Federal action
on the state submission. If adverse
comments are received, they must be
addressed prior to any final Federal
action by us.
All state regulations and supporting
information approved by EPA under
section 110 of the CAA are incorporated
into the Federally-approved SIP.
Records of such SIP actions are
maintained in the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) at title 40, part 52,
entitled ‘‘Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans.’’ The actual state
regulations which are approved are not
reproduced in their entirety in the CFR
outright but are ‘‘incorporated by
reference,’’ which means that we have
approved a given state regulation with
a specific effective date.
What does Federal approval of a state
regulation mean to me?
Enforcement of the state regulation
before and after it is incorporated into
the Federally-approved SIP is primarily
a state responsibility. However, after the
regulation is Federally approved, we are
authorized to take enforcement action
against violators. Citizens are also
offered legal recourse to address
violations as described in section 304 of
the CAA.
What is being addressed in this
document?
On April 6, 2005, and July 24, 2006,
Missouri requested that EPA approve
revisions to the SIP to include revisions
to the Construction Permit Exemptions
rule, 10 CSR 10–6.061. The
Construction Permit Exemptions rule
lists specific construction or
modification projects that are not
required to obtain permits under the
Construction Permits Required rule. The
intent of the Construction Permit
Exemptions rule is to exempt minor
and/or de minimis sources from
permitting requirements. Sources which
would emit at or above major source
levels are not eligible for the
exemptions.
Missouri made four revisions to this
rule. The revisions to the Construction
Permit Exemptions rule include (1)
revising subparagraph (3)(A)2.E., (2)
adding subparagraph (3)(A)2.DD., (3)
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
revising subsection(3)(A)3., and (4)
restructuring section (4) of this rule.
One of the revisions includes revising
subparagraph (3)(A)2.E.,the grain
handling, storage, and drying facilities
exemption. Missouri added the word
‘‘commercial’’ into this subsection,
which clarifies which grain handling
facilities are exempt from construction
permits.
Another revision includes Missouri
adding subparagraph (3)(A)2.DD. to
include a new exemption for ‘‘carving,
cutting, routing, turning, drilling,
machining, sawing, sanding, planing,
buffing, or polishing solid materials,
other than materials containing any
asbestos, beryllium or lead greater than
one percent by weight as determined by
Material Safety Data Sheets, vendor
material specifications, and/or purchase
order specifications with specific
operating parameters for equipment.’’
Missouri states that the inclusion of this
exemption will not have a negative
impact on air quality and included this
exemption in the technical analysis
which demonstrates that the significant
revisions to this rule do not negatively
impact air quality.
For revisions to subparagraph(3)(A)3.,
Missouri revised the insignificant
emission exemption levels. Missouri
regulations exempt installations from
the requirement to obtain a construction
permit if emissions of criteria pollutants
(except lead) from the proposed
construction or modification are below
a significance level. For the non-lead
criteria pollutants, the state retained the
876 pounds per year level, except for
volatile organic compounds (VOCs),
which was raised to 4,000 pounds per
year. The state also increases the shortterm limit from 0.5 pounds per hour for
all pollutants to 1.0 pound for PM10,
2.75 pounds for sulfur oxides (SOX),
nitrogen oxides (NOX), and VOCs, and
6.88 pounds for carbon monoxide (CO).
Missouri evaluated the significance
levels and conducted an analysis which
assumed emissions below these de
minimis levels and average emission
stack parameters collected from
Missouri’s Emission Inventory
Questionnaire data and modeling
software. Missouri evaluated the results
in light of the ambient air quality
standards and concluded that raising
existing insignificance levels will not
result in a significant negative impact
on air quality. Missouri also included
the new exemption in subparagraph
(3)(A)2.DD. in this analysis. In addition,
the construction permit exemption rule
specifies that the MDNR Air Pollution
Control Program director has the
discretion to require review if the
construction or modification will
E:\FR\FM\04DER1.SGM
04DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 232 / Monday, December 4, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
appreciably affect air quality or exceed
air quality standards or complaints
involving air pollution have been filed
in the vicinity of the proposed
construction of modification. Missouri
can use this authority if a specific
source might have air quality impacts of
concern.
The final revision to this rule is the
addition of language to Section (4),
‘‘Reporting and Record Keeping’’. This
revision moves the recording keeping
provisions from subsection (3)(A)3.E. to
Section (4).
Have the requirements for approval of
a SIP revision been met?
The state submittal has met the public
notice requirements for SIP submissions
in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The
submittal also satisfied the
completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51,
appendix V. In addition, as explained
above and in more detail in the
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.
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with RULES
What action is EPA taking?
We are approving Missouri’s revisions
to the Construction Permit Exemptions
rule, 10 CSR 10–6.061, with the
exception of the livestock markets and
livestock operations exemption, Section
(3)(A)2.D., which was withdrawn in an
October 25, 2005, request by the state of
Missouri.
We are processing this action as a
direct final action because the revisions
make routine changes to the existing
rules which are noncontroversial.
Therefore, we do not anticipate any
adverse comments. Please note that if
EPA receives adverse comment on part
of this rule and if that part can be
severed from the remainder of the rule,
EPA may adopt as final those parts of
the rule that are not the subject of an
adverse comment.
Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), this action is
not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and
therefore is not subject to review by the
Office of Management and Budget. For
this reason, this action is also not
subject to Executive Order 13211,
‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001). This action merely approves
state law as meeting Federal
requirements and imposes no additional
requirements beyond those imposed by
state law. Accordingly, the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
12:11 Dec 01, 2006
Jkt 211001
Administrator certifies that this rule
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this
rule approves pre-existing requirements
under state law and does not impose
any additional enforceable duty beyond
that required by state law, it does not
contain any unfunded mandate or
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, as described in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Pub. L. 104–4).
This rule also does not have tribal
implications because it will not have a
substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes,
as specified by Executive Order 13175
(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This
action also does not have Federalism
implications because it does not have
substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999). This action merely
approves a state rule implementing a
Federal standard, and does not alter the
relationship or the distribution of power
and responsibilities established in the
CAA. This rule also is not subject to
Executive Order 13045, ‘‘Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997), because it is not
economically significant.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s
role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. In this context, in the absence
of a prior existing requirement for the
State to use voluntary consensus
standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for
failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for
EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission,
to use VCS in place of a SIP submission
that otherwise satisfies the provisions of
the CAA. Thus, the requirements of
section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not
apply. 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
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
70317
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 February 2, 2007.
Filing a petition for reconsideration by
the Administrator of this final rule does
not affect the finality of this rule for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section
307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: November 17, 2006.
John B. Askew,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of
Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
I
PART 52—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for Part 52
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart AA—Missouri
2. In § 52.1320(c) the table is amended
under Chapter 6 by revising the entry
for 10–6.061 to read as follows:
I
§ 52.1320
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(c) * * *
E:\FR\FM\04DER1.SGM
04DER1
*
*
70318
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 232 / Monday, December 4, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
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
.
*
10–6.061 ......
*
*
Construction Permit Exemptions ....
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. E6–20436 Filed 12–1–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1990–0011; FRL–8249–8]
National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency
Plan; National Priorities List
Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Notice of partial deletion of the
Ellsworth Air Force Base National
Priorities List Site from the National
Priorities List.
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 8 (EPA) announces the
deletion of portions of the Ellsworth Air
Force Base (AFB) Site located in Meade
and Pennington Counties, South Dakota,
from the National Priorities List (NPL).
All areas originally proposed for
deletion under the Notice of Intent to
Partially Delete published in the
Federal Register on June 28, 2006 (71
FR 36736) are being deleted. The NPL
constitutes Appendix B to the National
Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan, 40 CFR Part 300,
which EPA promulgated pursuant to
Section 105 of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA).
EPA has determined, with the
concurrence of the State of South
Dakota through the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources that
the parcels pose no significant threat to
public health, welfare or the
environment and, therefore, no further
VerDate Aug<31>2005
12:11 Dec 01, 2006
7/30/06
Jkt 211001
*
*
12/4/06 [insert FR page number
where the document begins].
*
*
response action pursuant to CERCLA is
appropriate. This partial deletion
pertains to surface soil, unsaturated
subsurface soil, surface water, and
sediments at Operable Units 2, 3, 4, 5,
6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 12, and excludes the
ground water medium at these parcels.
The ground water medium at the
Ellsworth AFB Site (OU–11, Basewide
Ground Water), and the soil medium
(surface and unsaturated subsurface
soils) at OU–1, Fire Protection Training
Area, will remain on the NPL and
response activities will continue for
those OUs. Two additional areas not
associated with an operable unit, the
Gateway Lake Ash Study Area and the
Pride Hangar Study Area, are currently
under investigation and are also not part
of this partial deletion.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is
effective on December 4, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Jeff Mashburn, P.E., Remedial Project
Manager (8EPR-F), U.S. EPA, Region 8,
999 18th Street, Suite 300, Denver, CO
80202–2466, Phone: (303) 312–6665.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Ellsworth
AFB is a U.S. Air Force Air Combat
Command installation located 12 miles
east of Rapid City, South Dakota, and
adjacent to the small community of Box
Elder. The main Air Force Base covers
approximately 4,858 acres within
Meade and Pennington counties and
includes runways, airfield operations,
industrial areas, housing, and
recreational facilities.
On June 28, 2006 EPA published a
Notice of Intent of Partial Deletion in
the Federal Register (71 FR 36736) and
local newspapers which proposed to
delete the surface soil, unsaturated
subsurface soil, surface water and
sediment media at OU–2, OU–3, OU–4,
OU–5, OU–6, OU–7, OU–8, OU–9, OU–
10 and OU–12 (approximately 542
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4700
*
*
Section (3)(A)2.D. is not included in
the SIP.
Sfmt 4700
*
*
acres) and the surface soil, unsaturated
subsurface soil, surface water and
sediment media of an additional 4,300
acres which are not associated with an
operable unit and are not identified as
posing a risk to human health or the
environment. EPA received one
comment from the State of South Dakota
in support of the partial deletion. EPA
agrees that the completion of the
remedy requirements and ongoing
monitoring programs adequately
demonstrate that these parcels do not
present a threat to the environment or
human health and the deletion from the
NPL is appropriate.
EPA identifies sites that appear to
present a significant risk to public
health, welfare and the environment
and maintains the NPL as the list of
those sites. Deletion from the NPL does
not preclude further remedial action. If
a significant release occurs at a facility
deleted from the NPL, that facility is
restored to the NPL without application
of the Hazard Ranking System. Deletion
of the site from the NPL does not affect
responsible party liability for further
remedial actions, in the unlikely event
that future conditions warrant such
actions.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 300
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Chemicals, Hazardous
substances, Hazardous waste,
Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Superfund, Water
pollution control, Water supply.
Dated: November 22, 2006.
Kerrigan Clough,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8.
For reasons set out in the preamble, 40
CFR part 300 is amended as follows:
I
E:\FR\FM\04DER1.SGM
04DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 232 (Monday, December 4, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 70315-70318]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-20436]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R07-OAR-2006-0883; FRL-8251-2]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of
Missouri
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the state of Missouri for the inclusion of revisions to
the Construction Permit Exemptions rule. The Construction Permit
Exemptions rule lists specific construction or modification projects
that are not required to obtain permits under the Construction Permits
Required rule. Revisions to this rule include updating the
insignificance levels, adding a new exemption for manufacturing
operations (which produce insignificant emissions), clarifying the
grain handling facilities exemption, and restructuring of the record
keeping portion of the rule. Missouri developed the revisions to this
rule under two separate state rulemaking processes.
DATES: This direct final rule will be effective February 2, 2007,
without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by January
3, 2007. If adverse comment is received, EPA will publish a timely
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register informing
the public that the rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2006-0883, by one of the following methods:
1. https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
2. E-mail: algoe-eakin.amy@epa.gov.
3. Mail: Amy Algoe-Eakin, Environmental Protection Agency, Air
Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City,
Kansas 66101.
4. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver your comments to Amy Algoe-
Eakin, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development
Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-
2006-0883. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The https://www.regulations.gov Web site is an
``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through https://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
https://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
[[Page 70316]]
Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental
Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th
Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101. The Regional Office's official hours
of business are Monday through Friday, 8 to 4:30, excluding Federal
holidays. The interested persons wanting to examine these documents
should make an appointment with the office at least 24 hours in
advance.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amy Algoe-Eakin at (913) 551-7942, or
by e-mail at algoe-eakin.amy@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This section provides
additional information by addressing the following questions:
What is a SIP?
What is the Federal approval process for a SIP?
What does Federal approval of a state regulation mean to me?
What is being addressed in this document?
Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?
What action is EPA taking?
What is a SIP?
Section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires states to develop
air pollution regulations and control strategies to ensure that state
air quality meets the national ambient air quality standards
established by EPA. These ambient standards are established under
section 109 of the CAA, and they currently address six criteria
pollutants. These pollutants are: Carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide,
ozone, lead, particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide. Each state must
submit these regulations and control strategies to us for approval and
incorporation into the Federally-enforceable SIP.
Each Federally-approved SIP protects air quality primarily by
addressing air pollution at its point of origin. These SIPs can be
extensive, containing state regulations or other enforceable documents
and supporting information such as emission inventories, monitoring
networks, and modeling demonstrations.
What is the Federal approval process for a SIP?
In order for state regulations to be incorporated into the
Federally-enforceable SIP, states must formally adopt the regulations
and control strategies consistent with state and Federal requirements.
This process generally includes a public notice, public hearing, public
comment period, and a formal adoption by a state-authorized rulemaking
body.
Once a state rule, regulation, or control strategy is adopted, the
state submits it to us for inclusion into the SIP. We must provide
public notice and seek additional public comment regarding the proposed
Federal action on the state submission. If adverse comments are
received, they must be addressed prior to any final Federal action by
us.
All state regulations and supporting information approved by EPA
under section 110 of the CAA are incorporated into the Federally-
approved SIP. Records of such SIP actions are maintained in the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) at title 40, part 52, entitled ``Approval and
Promulgation of Implementation Plans.'' The actual state regulations
which are approved are not reproduced in their entirety in the CFR
outright but are ``incorporated by reference,'' which means that we
have approved a given state regulation with a specific effective date.
What does Federal approval of a state regulation mean to me?
Enforcement of the state regulation before and after it is
incorporated into the Federally-approved SIP is primarily a state
responsibility. However, after the regulation is Federally approved, we
are authorized to take enforcement action against violators. Citizens
are also offered legal recourse to address violations as described in
section 304 of the CAA.
What is being addressed in this document?
On April 6, 2005, and July 24, 2006, Missouri requested that EPA
approve revisions to the SIP to include revisions to the Construction
Permit Exemptions rule, 10 CSR 10-6.061. The Construction Permit
Exemptions rule lists specific construction or modification projects
that are not required to obtain permits under the Construction Permits
Required rule. The intent of the Construction Permit Exemptions rule is
to exempt minor and/or de minimis sources from permitting requirements.
Sources which would emit at or above major source levels are not
eligible for the exemptions.
Missouri made four revisions to this rule. The revisions to the
Construction Permit Exemptions rule include (1) revising subparagraph
(3)(A)2.E., (2) adding subparagraph (3)(A)2.DD., (3) revising
subsection(3)(A)3., and (4) restructuring section (4) of this rule.
One of the revisions includes revising subparagraph (3)(A)2.E.,the
grain handling, storage, and drying facilities exemption. Missouri
added the word ``commercial'' into this subsection, which clarifies
which grain handling facilities are exempt from construction permits.
Another revision includes Missouri adding subparagraph (3)(A)2.DD.
to include a new exemption for ``carving, cutting, routing, turning,
drilling, machining, sawing, sanding, planing, buffing, or polishing
solid materials, other than materials containing any asbestos,
beryllium or lead greater than one percent by weight as determined by
Material Safety Data Sheets, vendor material specifications, and/or
purchase order specifications with specific operating parameters for
equipment.'' Missouri states that the inclusion of this exemption will
not have a negative impact on air quality and included this exemption
in the technical analysis which demonstrates that the significant
revisions to this rule do not negatively impact air quality.
For revisions to subparagraph(3)(A)3., Missouri revised the
insignificant emission exemption levels. Missouri regulations exempt
installations from the requirement to obtain a construction permit if
emissions of criteria pollutants (except lead) from the proposed
construction or modification are below a significance level. For the
non-lead criteria pollutants, the state retained the 876 pounds per
year level, except for volatile organic compounds (VOCs), which was
raised to 4,000 pounds per year. The state also increases the short-
term limit from 0.5 pounds per hour for all pollutants to 1.0 pound for
PM10, 2.75 pounds for sulfur oxides (SOX),
nitrogen oxides (NOX), and VOCs, and 6.88 pounds for carbon
monoxide (CO). Missouri evaluated the significance levels and conducted
an analysis which assumed emissions below these de minimis levels and
average emission stack parameters collected from Missouri's Emission
Inventory Questionnaire data and modeling software. Missouri evaluated
the results in light of the ambient air quality standards and concluded
that raising existing insignificance levels will not result in a
significant negative impact on air quality. Missouri also included the
new exemption in subparagraph (3)(A)2.DD. in this analysis. In
addition, the construction permit exemption rule specifies that the
MDNR Air Pollution Control Program director has the discretion to
require review if the construction or modification will
[[Page 70317]]
appreciably affect air quality or exceed air quality standards or
complaints involving air pollution have been filed in the vicinity of
the proposed construction of modification. Missouri can use this
authority if a specific source might have air quality impacts of
concern.
The final revision to this rule is the addition of language to
Section (4), ``Reporting and Record Keeping''. This revision moves the
recording keeping provisions from subsection (3)(A)3.E. to Section (4).
Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?
The state submittal has met the public notice requirements for SIP
submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The submittal also
satisfied the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. In
addition, as explained above and in more detail in the 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.
What action is EPA taking?
We are approving Missouri's revisions to the Construction Permit
Exemptions rule, 10 CSR 10-6.061, with the exception of the livestock
markets and livestock operations exemption, Section (3)(A)2.D., which
was withdrawn in an October 25, 2005, request by the state of Missouri.
We are processing this action as a direct final action because the
revisions make routine changes to the existing rules which are
noncontroversial. Therefore, we do not anticipate any adverse comments.
Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on part of this rule
and if that part can be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may
adopt as final those parts of the rule that are not the subject of an
adverse comment.
Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).
This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism
implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the national government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule
implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the CAA.
This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of
Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State
to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to
disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. 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 February 2, 2007. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings
to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: November 17, 2006.
John B. Askew,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
0
Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart AA--Missouri
0
2. In Sec. 52.1320(c) the table is amended under Chapter 6 by revising
the entry for 10-6.061 to read as follows:
Sec. 52.1320 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
[[Page 70318]]
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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
10-6.061................ Construction Permit 7/30/06 12/4/06 [insert FR Section (3)(A)2.D. is
Exemptions. page number where the not included in the
document begins]. SIP.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E6-20436 Filed 12-1-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P