Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Missouri; Interstate Transport of Pollution, 25975-25978 [E7-8774]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 88 / Tuesday, May 8, 2007 / Rules and Regulations receive timely adverse comments, the direct final approval will be effective without further notice on July 9, 2007. This will incorporate the rule into the federally enforceable SIP. cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with RULES III. 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 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 approves a state rule implementing a Federal standard. VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:51 May 07, 2007 Jkt 211001 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. section 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 July 9, 2007. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).) List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 25975 Dated: March 23, 2007. Laura Yoshii, Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. Part 52, 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 D—Arizona 2. Section 52.120 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(135) to read as follows: I § 52.120 Identification of plan. * * * * * (c) * * * (135) An amended regulation was submitted on June 8, 2006, by the Governor’s designee. (i) Incorporation by reference. (A) Maricopa County Environmental Services Department. (1) Rule 314, adopted on July 13, 1988 and amended on April 20, 2005. * * * * * [FR Doc. E7–8689 Filed 5–7–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R07–OAR–2007–0249; FRL–8310–6] Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Missouri; Interstate Transport of Pollution Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Direct final rule. AGENCY: SUMMARY: EPA is revising the Missouri State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the purpose of approving the Missouri Department of Natural Resources’ (MDNR) actions to address requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the Clean Air Act. Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) requires each state to submit a SIP that prohibits emissions that adversely affect another state’s air quality through interstate transport. MDNR has adequately addressed the four distinct elements related to the impact of interstate transport of air pollutants. These include prohibiting significant contribution to downwind nonattainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), interference with maintenance of the NAAQS, interference with plans in E:\FR\FM\08MYR1.SGM 08MYR1 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with RULES 25976 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 88 / Tuesday, May 8, 2007 / Rules and Regulations another state to prevent significant deterioration of air quality, and interference with efforts of other states to protect visibility. The requirements for public notification were also met by MDNR. DATES: This direct final rule will be effective July 9, 2007, without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by June 7, 2007. If adverse comment is received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take effect. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07– OAR–2007–0249, by one of the following methods: 1. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. 2. E-mail: hamilton.heather@epa.gov. 3. Mail: Heather Hamilton, 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 Heather Hamilton, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101. Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2007– 0249. EPA’s policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at http:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through http:// www.regulations.gov or e-mail information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected. The http:// www.regulations.gov Web site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through http:// www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:51 May 07, 2007 Jkt 211001 technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in http:// www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101. The Regional Office’s official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8 p.m. 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: Heather Hamilton at (913) 551–7039, or by e-mail at hamilton.heather@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 being addressed in this document? What action is EPA taking? What is being addressed in this document? EPA is revising the SIP for the purpose of approving MDNR’s actions to address the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). In its request to revise the SIP, Missouri has also outlined the other provisions of section 110(a)(2) (the infrastructure SIP, to support the implementation, maintenance and enforcement of the NAAQS) and described how the state implements the infrastructure requirements. In this rule, EPA is only acting on the portion of the SIP addressing section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). EPA is taking separate action on this portion of the submission because EPA is obligated to promulgate a Federal plan if the state plan is not approved by May 27, 2007. EPA intends to act on the other portion of the submission in the near future. PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) requires each state to submit a SIP that prohibits emissions that adversely affect another state’s air quality through interstate transport. The SIP must prevent sources in the state from emitting pollutants in amounts which will: (1) Contribute significantly to nonattainment of the NAAQS, (2) interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS in another state, (3) interfere with provisions to prevent significant deterioration of air quality, and (4) interfere with efforts to protect visibility. The EPA issued guidance on August 15, 2006, relating to SIP submissions to meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). As discussed below, Missouri’s analysis of its SIP with respect to the statutory requirements is consistent with the guidance. The MDNR has addressed the first two of these elements by the adoption of the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) model rules that require Missouri sources to participate in the EPAadministered cap and trade program for nitrogen oxides (NOX) and sulfur dioxide. Participation in this program will prohibit emissions from the state that would contribute significantly to nonattainment or interfere with the maintenance of the particulate matter and ozone NAAQS in any downwind state. As previously determined by EPA, submittal of a SIP revision to satisfy CAIR (submitted to EPA on March 13, 2007) also fulfills the state’s obligations that pertain to ‘‘significant contribution’’ and ‘‘interference with maintenance’’ (70 FR 25162). It should be noted that EPA will act on Missouri’s CAIR SIP in a separate rulemaking, and this action makes no conclusion with respect to approvability of that submittal. The third element MDNR addressed was prevention of significant deterioration (PSD). For 8-hour ozone, the state has met the obligation, consistent with EPA’s guidance described previously, by confirming that major sources in the state are currently subject to PSD programs that implement the 8-hour ozone standard and that the state is on track to meet the June 15, 2007, deadline for SIP submissions adopting any relevant requirements of the Phase II ozone implementation rule. For PM2.5, the state has confirmed that the state’s PSD program is being implemented in accordance with EPA’s interim guidance calling for the use of PM10 as a surrogate for PM2.5 for the purposes of PSD and nonattainment New Source Review (NSR). Controlling PM10 emissions and analyzing impacts on the environment serves as a surrogate approach for reducing PM2.5 emissions E:\FR\FM\08MYR1.SGM 08MYR1 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 88 / Tuesday, May 8, 2007 / Rules and Regulations and minimizing impacts to air quality. Although EPA has finalized major portions of the PM2.5 implementation rule, we have not yet finalized the portion relating to New Source Review. Once the NSR portion of the PM2.5 implementation rule is finalized by EPA, MDNR commits to transitioning from use of the interim PM2.5 guidance to the final PM2.5 implementation requirements after approval of the PM2.5 SIP revision (The submittal is due April 5, 2008). It should be noted that most of Missouri is currently designated attainment/unclassifiable for both the 8hour ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS. However, St. Louis City, St. Louis County, St. Charles County, Franklin County, and Jefferson County are designated as nonattainment for the 8hour ozone and annual fine particulate matter NAAQS. At this time, it is not possible for MDNR to accurately determine whether there is interference with measures in another state’s SIP designed to protect visibility, which is the fourth element that was addressed. Technical projects relating to visibility degradation sourcereceptor relationships are under development. Missouri will be in a more advantageous position to address the visibility projection requirements once the initial regional haze SIP has been developed. MDNR intends to meet the December 17, 2007, submittal deadline for the regional haze SIP. A public hearing with regard to this action was held by the state, and only EPA provided comments on this SIP revision. With this action, the non-regulatory text in 40 CFR 52.1320(e) is revised to reflect that MDNR addressed the elements of the CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with RULES What action is EPA taking? The EPA is taking direct final action to approve this revision as MDNR has adequately addressed the required elements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). EPA intends to act on the portion of Missouri’s submittal addressing all other elements of section 110(a)(2), which addresses the infrastructure necessary to implement the 8-hour ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS in the state of Missouri, in a future rulemaking. 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. VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:51 May 07, 2007 Jkt 211001 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 action 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 action 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 action 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 action also is not subject to Executive Order 13045, ‘‘Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it approves a state rule implementing a Federal standard. In reviewing state submissions, EPA’s role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the state to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 25977 to disapprove a state submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a state submission, to use VCS in place of a state submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This action 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 CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by July 9, 2007. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).) List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds. Dated: April 30, 2007. John B. Askew, Regional Administrator, Region 7. Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows: I E:\FR\FM\08MYR1.SGM 08MYR1 25978 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 88 / Tuesday, May 8, 2007 / Rules and Regulations PART 52—[AMENDED] § 52.1320 Subpart AA—Missouri 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: I 2. In § 52.1320(e) the table is amended by adding an entry in numerical order to read as follows: I Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. * Identification of plan. * * (e) * * * * * EPA-APPROVED MISSOURI NONREGULATORY SIP PROVISIONS Applicable geographic or nonattainment area Name of nonregulatory SIP provision * * * (51) CAA 110(a)(2)(D)(i) ................................. SIP—Interstate Transport ............................... [FR Doc. E7–8774 Filed 5–7–07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 62 [EPA–R07–OAR–2007–0258; FRL–8310–8] Approval and Promulgation of State Plans for Designated Facilities and Pollutants; States of Iowa, Kansas, and Missouri Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Direct final rule. cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with RULES AGENCY: SUMMARY: EPA is approving the Other Solid Waste Incineration (OSWI) section 111(d) negative declarations submitted by the states of Iowa, Kansas, and Missouri. These negative declarations certify that OSWI units subject to the requirements of sections 111(d) and 129 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) do not exist in these states. DATES: This direct final rule will be effective July 9, 2007, without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by June 7, 2007. If adverse comment is received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take effect. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07– OAR–2007–0258, by one of the following methods: 1. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. 2. E-mail: hamilton.heather@ep.gov. 3. Mail: Heather Hamilton, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101. VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:51 May 07, 2007 Jkt 211001 State submittal date * Statewide ................... .................................... * 2/27/07 ....................... .................................... 4. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to Heather Hamilton, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101. Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2007– 0258. EPA’s policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at http:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through http:// www.regulations.gov or e-mail information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected. The http:// www.regulations.gov Web site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through http:// www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4700 EPA approval date Sfmt 4700 Explanation * * 5/8/07 ......................... [insert FR page number where the document begins]. 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 in http:// www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101. The Regional Office’s official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8 to 4:30 excluding Federal holidays. The interested persons wanting to examine these documents should make an appointment with the office at least 24 hours in advance. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Heather Hamilton at (913) 551–7039, or by e-mail at hamilton.heather@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 111(d) Plan? What are the regulatory requirements for OSWI units? Why is this action necessary? What action are we taking in this document? What is a 111(d) Plan? Section 111(d) of the CAA requires states to submit plans to control certain pollutants (designated pollutants) at existing facilities (designated facilities) whenever standards of performance have been established under section 111(b) for new sources of the same type, and EPA has established emission guidelines for such existing sources for certain designated pollutants. E:\FR\FM\08MYR1.SGM 08MYR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 88 (Tuesday, May 8, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 25975-25978]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-8774]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2007-0249; FRL-8310-6]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Missouri; 
Interstate Transport of Pollution

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is revising the Missouri State Implementation Plan (SIP) 
for the purpose of approving the Missouri Department of Natural 
Resources' (MDNR) actions to address requirements of section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the Clean Air Act. Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) requires 
each state to submit a SIP that prohibits emissions that adversely 
affect another state's air quality through interstate transport. MDNR 
has adequately addressed the four distinct elements related to the 
impact of interstate transport of air pollutants. These include 
prohibiting significant contribution to downwind nonattainment of the 
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), interference with 
maintenance of the NAAQS, interference with plans in

[[Page 25976]]

another state to prevent significant deterioration of air quality, and 
interference with efforts of other states to protect visibility. The 
requirements for public notification were also met by MDNR.

DATES: This direct final rule will be effective July 9, 2007, without 
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by June 7, 2007. If 
adverse comment is received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of 
the direct final rule in the Federal Register informing the public that 
the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2007-0249, by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    2. E-mail: hamilton.heather@epa.gov.
    3. Mail: Heather Hamilton, 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 Heather 
Hamilton, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development 
Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-
2007-0249. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information 
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through http://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail information that you consider to be CBI 
or otherwise protected. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an 
``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your 
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of 
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without 
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be 
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is 
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you 
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name 
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any 
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to 
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA 
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid 
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of 
any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the 
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be 
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket 
materials are available either electronically in http://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection 
Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, 
Kansas City, Kansas 66101. The Regional Office's official hours of 
business are Monday through Friday, 8 p.m. 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: Heather Hamilton at (913) 551-7039, or 
by e-mail at hamilton.heather@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 being addressed in this document?
    What action is EPA taking?

What is being addressed in this document?

    EPA is revising the SIP for the purpose of approving MDNR's actions 
to address the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i). In its request to revise the SIP, Missouri has also 
outlined the other provisions of section 110(a)(2) (the infrastructure 
SIP, to support the implementation, maintenance and enforcement of the 
NAAQS) and described how the state implements the infrastructure 
requirements. In this rule, EPA is only acting on the portion of the 
SIP addressing section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). EPA is taking separate action 
on this portion of the submission because EPA is obligated to 
promulgate a Federal plan if the state plan is not approved by May 27, 
2007. EPA intends to act on the other portion of the submission in the 
near future.
    Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) requires each state to submit a SIP that 
prohibits emissions that adversely affect another state's air quality 
through interstate transport. The SIP must prevent sources in the state 
from emitting pollutants in amounts which will: (1) Contribute 
significantly to nonattainment of the NAAQS, (2) interfere with 
maintenance of the NAAQS in another state, (3) interfere with 
provisions to prevent significant deterioration of air quality, and (4) 
interfere with efforts to protect visibility.
    The EPA issued guidance on August 15, 2006, relating to SIP 
submissions to meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). As 
discussed below, Missouri's analysis of its SIP with respect to the 
statutory requirements is consistent with the guidance.
    The MDNR has addressed the first two of these elements by the 
adoption of the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) model rules that 
require Missouri sources to participate in the EPA-administered cap and 
trade program for nitrogen oxides (NOX) and sulfur dioxide. 
Participation in this program will prohibit emissions from the state 
that would contribute significantly to nonattainment or interfere with 
the maintenance of the particulate matter and ozone NAAQS in any 
downwind state. As previously determined by EPA, submittal of a SIP 
revision to satisfy CAIR (submitted to EPA on March 13, 2007) also 
fulfills the state's obligations that pertain to ``significant 
contribution'' and ``interference with maintenance'' (70 FR 25162). It 
should be noted that EPA will act on Missouri's CAIR SIP in a separate 
rulemaking, and this action makes no conclusion with respect to 
approvability of that submittal.
    The third element MDNR addressed was prevention of significant 
deterioration (PSD). For 8-hour ozone, the state has met the 
obligation, consistent with EPA's guidance described previously, by 
confirming that major sources in the state are currently subject to PSD 
programs that implement the 8-hour ozone standard and that the state is 
on track to meet the June 15, 2007, deadline for SIP submissions 
adopting any relevant requirements of the Phase II ozone implementation 
rule. For PM2.5, the state has confirmed that the state's 
PSD program is being implemented in accordance with EPA's interim 
guidance calling for the use of PM10 as a surrogate for 
PM2.5 for the purposes of PSD and nonattainment New Source 
Review (NSR). Controlling PM10 emissions and analyzing 
impacts on the environment serves as a surrogate approach for reducing 
PM2.5 emissions

[[Page 25977]]

and minimizing impacts to air quality. Although EPA has finalized major 
portions of the PM2.5 implementation rule, we have not yet 
finalized the portion relating to New Source Review. Once the NSR 
portion of the PM2.5 implementation rule is finalized by 
EPA, MDNR commits to transitioning from use of the interim 
PM2.5 guidance to the final PM2.5 implementation 
requirements after approval of the PM2.5 SIP revision (The 
submittal is due April 5, 2008).
    It should be noted that most of Missouri is currently designated 
attainment/unclassifiable for both the 8-hour ozone and 
PM2.5 NAAQS. However, St. Louis City, St. Louis County, St. 
Charles County, Franklin County, and Jefferson County are designated as 
nonattainment for the 8-hour ozone and annual fine particulate matter 
NAAQS.
    At this time, it is not possible for MDNR to accurately determine 
whether there is interference with measures in another state's SIP 
designed to protect visibility, which is the fourth element that was 
addressed. Technical projects relating to visibility degradation 
source-receptor relationships are under development. Missouri will be 
in a more advantageous position to address the visibility projection 
requirements once the initial regional haze SIP has been developed. 
MDNR intends to meet the December 17, 2007, submittal deadline for the 
regional haze SIP.
    A public hearing with regard to this action was held by the state, 
and only EPA provided comments on this SIP revision.
    With this action, the non-regulatory text in 40 CFR 52.1320(e) is 
revised to reflect that MDNR addressed the elements of the CAA section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i).

What action is EPA taking?

    The EPA is taking direct final action to approve this revision as 
MDNR has adequately addressed the required elements of CAA section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i). EPA intends to act on the portion of Missouri's 
submittal addressing all other elements of section 110(a)(2), which 
addresses the infrastructure necessary to implement the 8-hour ozone 
and PM2.5 NAAQS in the state of Missouri, in a future 
rulemaking.
    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 action 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 action 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 action 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 action also is not subject to Executive Order 13045, ``Protection 
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997), because it approves a state rule implementing a 
Federal standard.
    In reviewing state submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this 
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the state 
to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to 
disapprove a state submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a state 
submission, to use VCS in place of a state submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section 
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This action 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 CAA, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the appropriate circuit by July 9, 2007. Filing a petition for 
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect 
the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does 
it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be 
filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. 
This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its 
requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental 
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: April 30, 2007.
John B. Askew,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.

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

[[Page 25978]]

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(e) the table is amended by adding an entry in 
numerical order to read as follows:


Sec.  52.1320  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                               EPA-Approved Missouri Nonregulatory SIP Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Applicable
    Name of nonregulatory SIP        geographic or      State submittal    EPA approval date      Explanation
            provision             nonattainment area         date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(51) CAA 110(a)(2)(D)(i)........  Statewide.........  2/27/07...........  5/8/07............  ..................
SIP--Interstate Transport.......  ..................  ..................  [insert FR page     ..................
                                                                           number where the
                                                                           document begins].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 [FR Doc. E7-8774 Filed 5-7-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P