Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of Missouri, 44778-44781 [E7-15264]
Download as PDF
44778
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 153 / Thursday, August 9, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
DEMARCATION (See 33 CFR 80.1470).
The 100-yard security zone around each
LPV is activated and enforced whether
the LPV is underway, moored, positionkeeping, or anchored.
(b) Definitions. As used in this
section, large passenger vessel or LPV
means a cruise ship more than 300 feet
in length that carries passengers for hire,
and any passenger ferry more than 300
feet in length that carries passengers for
hire.
(c) Regulations. (1) Under 33 CFR
165.33, entry into the security zones
created by this section is prohibited
unless authorized by the Coast Guard
Captain of the Port, Honolulu or his or
her designated representative. When
authorized passage through a large
passenger vessel security zone, all
vessels must operate at the minimum
speed necessary to maintain a safe
course and must proceed as directed by
the Captain of the Port or his or her
designated representatives. No person is
allowed within 100 yards of a large
passenger vessel that is underway,
moored, position-keeping, or at anchor,
unless authorized by the Captain of the
Port or his or her designated
representatives.
(2) When conditions permit, the
Captain of the Port, or his or her
designated representatives, may permit
vessels that are at anchor, restricted in
their ability to maneuver, or constrained
by draft to remain within an LPV
security zone in order to ensure
navigational safety.
*
*
*
*
*
I 5. Amend § 165.1410 to revise
paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), (b), (c)(1), and
(c)(2) to read as follows:
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
§ 165.1410
Security Zones; Kauai, HI.
17:01 Aug 08, 2007
Jkt 211001
Dated: July 30, 2007.
Sally Brice-O’Hara,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
Fourteenth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E7–15508 Filed 8–8–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
(a) * * *
(1) Nawiliwili Harbor, Lihue, Kauai.
All waters extending 100 yards in all
directions from each large passenger
vessel in Nawiliwili Harbor, Kauai, HI
or within 3 nautical miles seaward of
the Nawiliwili Harbor COLREGS
DEMARCATION (See 33 CFR 80.1450).
This is a moving security zone when the
LPV is in transit and becomes a fixed
zone when the LPV is anchored,
position-keeping, or moored.
(2) Port Allen, Kauai. All waters
extending 100 yards in all directions
from each large passenger vessel in Port
Allen, Kauai, HI or within 3 nautical
miles seaward of the Port Allen
COLREGS DEMARCATION (See 33 CFR
80.1440). This is a moving security zone
when the LPV is in transit and becomes
a fixed zone when the LPV is anchored,
position-keeping, or moored.
(b) Definitions. As used in this
section, large passenger vessel or LPV
VerDate Aug<31>2005
means a cruise ship more than 300 feet
in length that carries passengers for hire,
and any passenger ferry more than 300
feet in length that carries passengers for
hire.
(c) Regulations. (1) Under 33 CFR
165.33, entry into the security zones
created by this section is prohibited
unless authorized by the Coast Guard
Captain of the Port, Honolulu or his or
her designated representative. When
authorized passage through an LPV
security zone, all vessels must operate at
the minimum speed necessary to
maintain a safe course and must
proceed as directed by the Captain of
the Port or his or her designated
representative. No person is allowed
within 100 yards of a large passenger
vessel that is underway, moored,
position-keeping, or at anchor, unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port or
his or her designated representative.
(2) When conditions permit, the
Captain of the Port, or his or her
designated representative, may permit
vessels that are at anchor, restricted in
their ability to maneuver, or constrained
by draft to remain within an LPV
security zone in order to ensure
navigational safety.
*
*
*
*
*
[EPA–R07–OAR–2007–0619; FRL–8450–7]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; State of
Missouri
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The EPA is approving a
revision to the maintenance plan
prepared by Missouri to maintain the 8hour national ambient air quality
standard (NAAQS) for ozone in the
Missouri portion of the Kansas City
area. The Kansas City area is designated
attainment for the ozone NAAQS. This
revision is required by the Clean Air
Act. A similar final action pertaining to
the Kansas portion of the Kansas City
maintenance area is being done in
conjunction with this rulemaking. The
effect of this approval is to ensure
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Federal enforceability of the state air
program plan and to maintain
consistency between the state-adopted
plan and the approved SIP.
DATES: This direct final rule will be
effective October 9, 2007, without
further notice, unless EPA receives
adverse comment by September 10,
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–2007–0619, 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–2007–
0619. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available on-line 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 website 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
E:\FR\FM\09AUR1.SGM
09AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 153 / Thursday, August 9, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
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. 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 Section 110(a)(1) maintenance
plan?
What are the components of a Section
110(a)(1) 8-hour ozone maintenance plan?
How has the state addressed the
components of a Section 110(a)(1) 8-hour
ozone maintenance plan?
What action is EPA taking?
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
What is a Section 110(a)(1)
maintenance plan?
Section 110(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act
(CAA or Act) requires, in part, that
states submit to EPA plans to maintain
any NAAQS promulgated by EPA. EPA
interprets this provision to require that
areas that were maintenance areas for
the 1-hour ozone NAAQS but
attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
submit a plan to demonstrate the
continued maintenance of the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. EPA established June
15, 2007, three years after the effective
date of the initial 8-hour ozone
designations, as the deadline for
submission of plans for these areas.
Missouri’s Section 110(a)(1)
maintenance plan was received by EPA
on May 23, 2007.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:01 Aug 08, 2007
Jkt 211001
What are the components of a Section
110(a)(1) 8-hour ozone maintenance
plan?
On May 20, 2005, EPA issued
guidance that applies, in part, to areas
that are designated attainment/
unclassifiable for the 8-hour ozone
standard and that had an approved 1hour ozone maintenance plan. The
purpose of the guidance, referred to as
Section 110(a)(1) guidance, is to assist
the states in the development of a SIP
which addresses the maintenance
requirements found in Section 110(a)(1)
of the CAA. There are five components
of the Section 110(a)(1) maintenance
plan which are: (1) An attainment
inventory, which is based on actual
typical summer day emissions of
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and
oxides of nitrogen (NOX) for a ten-year
period from a base year as chosen by the
state; (2) a maintenance demonstration
which shows how the area will remain
in compliance with the 8-hour ozone
standard for 10 years after the effective
date of designations (June 15, 2004); (3)
a commitment to continue to operate air
quality monitors; (4) a contingency plan
that will ensure that a violation of the
8-hour ozone NAAQS is promptly
addressed; and (5) an explanation of
how the state will track the progress of
the maintenance plan.
How has the state addressed the
components of a Section 110(a)(1) 8hour ozone maintenance plan?
Missouri Department of Natural
Resources’ (MDNR) 8-hour ozone
maintenance plan addresses the
components of the Section 110(a)(1) 8hour ozone maintenance as outlined in
EPA’s May 20, 2005, guidance. Missouri
has requested that the Section 110(a)(1)
8-hour ozone maintenance plan replace
the existing Section 175A 1-hour ozone
maintenance plan.
Emissions Inventory: An emissions
inventory is an itemized list of emission
estimates for sources of air pollution in
a given area for a specified time period.
MDNR has provided a comprehensive
and current emissions inventory for
ozone precursors (NOX and VOCs) in
the area. MDNR has chosen to use 2002
as the base year from which it projects
emissions. The maintenance plan also
includes an explanation of the
methodology used for determining the
anthropogenic (point, area, and mobile
sources) emissions in the maintenance
area. The inventory is based on
emissions for a typical ozone season
day. The term ‘‘typical’’ refers to
emissions expected on a typical
weekday during the months where
ozone concentrations are typically the
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
44779
highest. For Kansas City, these months
are June through August.
Maintenance Demonstration and
Tracking Progress: With regard to
demonstrating continued maintenance
of the 8-hour ozone standard, Missouri
projects that the total emissions from
the entire Kansas City Maintenance
Area (KCMA) will decrease during the
ten-year maintenance period. MDNR has
projected emissions for 10 years from
the effective date of initial designations,
or 2014. In 2002, the total anthropogenic
emissions in the entire KCMA were
226.42 tons/ozone season day for VOCs
and 316.09 tons/ozone season day for
NOX. The projected 2014 anthropogenic
emissions from the entire KCMA are
181.07 tons/ozone season day for VOCs
and 180.08 tons/ozone season day for
NOX. As such, the plan demonstrates
that, from an emissions projections
standpoint, emissions are projected to
decrease.
It is important to note that the
formation of ozone is dependent on a
number of variables which cannot be
estimated through emissions growth and
reduction calculations. A few of these
variables include weather and the
transport of ozone precursors from
outside the maintenance area. In the
Section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan,
MDNR has indicated that the state will
track the progress of the maintenance
plan by updating the emissions
inventory for the KCMA approximately
every three years. The years of 2005,
2008, and 2011 were chosen as the years
in which emissions will be reviewed. A
review of the 2005 emissions inventory
is underway. The emissions inventory
update will include point, area, and
onroad and offroad emissions.
Information from these future updates
will be compared with the projected
growth estimates for the 2002 base
inventory data to track maintenance of
the standard.
Ambient Monitoring: With regard to
the ambient air monitoring component
of the maintenance plan, Missouri’s
plan describes the ozone monitoring
network in Kansas City and explains
that states and local air agencies are
responsible for the operation,
maintenance and data collection at
these monitoring sites. MDNR commits
to continue operating air quality
monitors in accordance with 40 CFR
Part 58 to verify maintenance of the 8hour ozone standard. If any changes to
the monitoring locations become
necessary, MDNR commits to working
with EPA to ensure that the adequacy of
the monitoring network is maintained.
Contingency Measures: EPA interprets
Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA to require
that the state develop a contingency
E:\FR\FM\09AUR1.SGM
09AUR1
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
44780
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 153 / Thursday, August 9, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
plan that will ensure that any violation
of a NAAQS is promptly corrected. The
purposes of the contingency measures,
outlined in MDNR’s maintenance plan,
are to achieve sufficient VOC and/or
NOX emissions to reduce further ozone
monitored concentrations. Missouri and
Kansas worked together to design a twophased approach for the contingency
measure portion of the maintenance
plan. The approach includes specific
triggers for each phase. The triggers are
the same for both states although the
measures vary slightly. For Phase 1, the
Missouri plan provides that a violation
of the 8-hour ozone standard, once
quality assured, would trigger two
control measures, which are (1) early
implementation of control devices on
Clean Air Interstate Rule-(CAIR) affected
coal-fired electric generating units; and
(2) an idle reduction regulation.
Phase 2 contingency measures would
be triggered by the occurrences of either
of the following two events: (1) A threeyear design value for the area equaling
or exceeding 0.089 parts per million
(ppm) which would become active one
year following the end of the ozone
season that triggered the Phase 1
contingency measures or (2) three
consecutive years following the Phase 1
trigger year with a design value greater
than 0.084 ppm. Either of these events
would implement the selection of
control measures of Phase 2. Following
the implementation of Phase 1, if any
one year has a three-year design value
equaling or exceeding 0.085 ppm, an
evaluation to determine appropriate
action will be undertaken by MDNR.
The purpose of delaying the potential
implementation of Phase 2 control
measures for a period of time following
the implementation of Phase 1 is to
allow for Phase 1 controls to be initiated
and have an effect on air quality in the
region before Phase 2 is implemented. It
also allows for further evaluation of the
various control measures that could be
implemented under Phase 2. Below are
a few of the controls options being
considered for Phase 2: NOX reductions
to coal-fired electric generating units
(EGUs) not covered under CAIR that
exceed 100 tons of NOX emissions per
year; NOX reductions from industrial
boilers and process heaters that exceed
100 tons of NOX emissions per year;
NOX reductions from cement kilns that
exceed 100 tons of NOX emissions per
year; lowering the threshold for major
sources of VOCs to 75 tons per year;
enacting regulations to reduce VOC
emissions from 46 architectural and
industrial maintenance coatings,
including traffic coatings; enacting
emissions offsets of 1.1:1.0 for new
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:01 Aug 08, 2007
Jkt 211001
sources; diesel Engine Chip Re-Flashing
regulations; or enacting the gas-cap
testing program. If triggered, the Phase
2 measures will be selected based on
emission reduction benefits, cost
effectiveness and timeframe for
implementation. MDNR also would
consider additional potential measures
if other beneficial emission reduction
methods are determined to be useful to
the air quality in the KCMA.
What action is EPA taking?
Missouri has addressed the
components of a maintenance plan
pursuant to EPA’s May 20, 2005,
guidance. The Section 110(a)(1) 8-hour
ozone Kansas City maintenance plan
approved in this action will replace the
existing Section 175A 1-hour ozone
maintenance plan. Existing VOC control
rules included in the 1-hour
maintenance plan will remain in place.
Missouri has committed to
implementing the contingency measures
within 24 months of the trigger date and
will take action to maintain the standard
in the event the contingency measures
are triggered.
We are processing this action as a
direct final action because 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).
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 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 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
E:\FR\FM\09AUR1.SGM
09AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 153 / Thursday, August 9, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
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 October 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).)
44781
PART 52—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
I
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: July 27, 2007.
John B. Askew,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart AA—Missouri
2. In § 52.1320(e) the table is amended
by adding an entry in numerical order
to read as follows:
I
§ 52.1320
*
Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of
Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
I
Identification of plan.
*
*
(e) * * *
*
*
EPA-APPROVED MISSOURI NONREGULATORY SIP PROVISIONS
Name of nonregulatory SIP
provision
Applicable geographic or nonattainment area
State submittal
date
*
*
*
(53) Maintenance Plan for the Kansas City ............................
8-hour ozone standard in
the Missouri portion of the
Kansas City area.
*
5/23/07
[FR Doc. E7–15264 Filed 8–8–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R07–OAR–2007–0620; FRL–8450–5]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; State of Kansas
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The EPA is approving a
revision to the Kansas State
Implementation Plan (SIP) prepared by
Kansas to maintain the 8-hour national
ambient air quality standard (NAAQS)
for ozone in the Kansas portion of the
Kansas City area. The Kansas City area
is designated attainment for the ozone
NAAQS. This revision is required by the
Clean Air Act. A similar final
rulemaking pertaining to the Missouri
portion of the Kansas City maintenance
area is being done in conjunction with
this rulemaking. The effect of this
approval is to ensure Federal
enforceability of the state air program
plan and to maintain consistency
between the state-adopted plan and the
approved SIP.
DATES: This direct final rule will be
effective October 9, 2007, without
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:01 Aug 08, 2007
Jkt 211001
EPA approval date
*
8/9/07 [insert FR page number where the document
begins].
further notice, unless EPA receives
adverse comment by September 10,
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–2007–0620, 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–2007–
0620. 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
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Explanation
*
*
This plan replaces numbers
(46) and (50).
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\09AUR1.SGM
09AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 153 (Thursday, August 9, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44778-44781]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-15264]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R07-OAR-2007-0619; FRL-8450-7]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of
Missouri
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA is approving a revision to the maintenance plan
prepared by Missouri to maintain the 8-hour national ambient air
quality standard (NAAQS) for ozone in the Missouri portion of the
Kansas City area. The Kansas City area is designated attainment for the
ozone NAAQS. This revision is required by the Clean Air Act. A similar
final action pertaining to the Kansas portion of the Kansas City
maintenance area is being done in conjunction with this rulemaking. The
effect of this approval is to ensure Federal enforceability of the
state air program plan and to maintain consistency between the state-
adopted plan and the approved SIP.
DATES: This direct final rule will be effective October 9, 2007,
without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by
September 10, 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-2007-0619, 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-
2007-0619. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available on-line
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 website 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
[[Page 44779]]
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. 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 Section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan?
What are the components of a Section 110(a)(1) 8-hour ozone
maintenance plan?
How has the state addressed the components of a Section
110(a)(1) 8-hour ozone maintenance plan?
What action is EPA taking?
What is a Section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan?
Section 110(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) requires, in
part, that states submit to EPA plans to maintain any NAAQS promulgated
by EPA. EPA interprets this provision to require that areas that were
maintenance areas for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS but attainment for the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS submit a plan to demonstrate the continued maintenance
of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA established June 15, 2007, three years
after the effective date of the initial 8-hour ozone designations, as
the deadline for submission of plans for these areas. Missouri's
Section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan was received by EPA on May 23, 2007.
What are the components of a Section 110(a)(1) 8-hour ozone maintenance
plan?
On May 20, 2005, EPA issued guidance that applies, in part, to
areas that are designated attainment/unclassifiable for the 8-hour
ozone standard and that had an approved 1-hour ozone maintenance plan.
The purpose of the guidance, referred to as Section 110(a)(1) guidance,
is to assist the states in the development of a SIP which addresses the
maintenance requirements found in Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA. There
are five components of the Section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan which
are: (1) An attainment inventory, which is based on actual typical
summer day emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides of
nitrogen (NOX) for a ten-year period from a base year as
chosen by the state; (2) a maintenance demonstration which shows how
the area will remain in compliance with the 8-hour ozone standard for
10 years after the effective date of designations (June 15, 2004); (3)
a commitment to continue to operate air quality monitors; (4) a
contingency plan that will ensure that a violation of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS is promptly addressed; and (5) an explanation of how the state
will track the progress of the maintenance plan.
How has the state addressed the components of a Section 110(a)(1) 8-
hour ozone maintenance plan?
Missouri Department of Natural Resources' (MDNR) 8-hour ozone
maintenance plan addresses the components of the Section 110(a)(1) 8-
hour ozone maintenance as outlined in EPA's May 20, 2005, guidance.
Missouri has requested that the Section 110(a)(1) 8-hour ozone
maintenance plan replace the existing Section 175A 1-hour ozone
maintenance plan.
Emissions Inventory: An emissions inventory is an itemized list of
emission estimates for sources of air pollution in a given area for a
specified time period. MDNR has provided a comprehensive and current
emissions inventory for ozone precursors (NOX and VOCs) in
the area. MDNR has chosen to use 2002 as the base year from which it
projects emissions. The maintenance plan also includes an explanation
of the methodology used for determining the anthropogenic (point, area,
and mobile sources) emissions in the maintenance area. The inventory is
based on emissions for a typical ozone season day. The term ``typical''
refers to emissions expected on a typical weekday during the months
where ozone concentrations are typically the highest. For Kansas City,
these months are June through August.
Maintenance Demonstration and Tracking Progress: With regard to
demonstrating continued maintenance of the 8-hour ozone standard,
Missouri projects that the total emissions from the entire Kansas City
Maintenance Area (KCMA) will decrease during the ten-year maintenance
period. MDNR has projected emissions for 10 years from the effective
date of initial designations, or 2014. In 2002, the total anthropogenic
emissions in the entire KCMA were 226.42 tons/ozone season day for VOCs
and 316.09 tons/ozone season day for NOX. The projected 2014
anthropogenic emissions from the entire KCMA are 181.07 tons/ozone
season day for VOCs and 180.08 tons/ozone season day for
NOX. As such, the plan demonstrates that, from an emissions
projections standpoint, emissions are projected to decrease.
It is important to note that the formation of ozone is dependent on
a number of variables which cannot be estimated through emissions
growth and reduction calculations. A few of these variables include
weather and the transport of ozone precursors from outside the
maintenance area. In the Section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan, MDNR has
indicated that the state will track the progress of the maintenance
plan by updating the emissions inventory for the KCMA approximately
every three years. The years of 2005, 2008, and 2011 were chosen as the
years in which emissions will be reviewed. A review of the 2005
emissions inventory is underway. The emissions inventory update will
include point, area, and onroad and offroad emissions. Information from
these future updates will be compared with the projected growth
estimates for the 2002 base inventory data to track maintenance of the
standard.
Ambient Monitoring: With regard to the ambient air monitoring
component of the maintenance plan, Missouri's plan describes the ozone
monitoring network in Kansas City and explains that states and local
air agencies are responsible for the operation, maintenance and data
collection at these monitoring sites. MDNR commits to continue
operating air quality monitors in accordance with 40 CFR Part 58 to
verify maintenance of the 8-hour ozone standard. If any changes to the
monitoring locations become necessary, MDNR commits to working with EPA
to ensure that the adequacy of the monitoring network is maintained.
Contingency Measures: EPA interprets Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA
to require that the state develop a contingency
[[Page 44780]]
plan that will ensure that any violation of a NAAQS is promptly
corrected. The purposes of the contingency measures, outlined in MDNR's
maintenance plan, are to achieve sufficient VOC and/or NOX
emissions to reduce further ozone monitored concentrations. Missouri
and Kansas worked together to design a two-phased approach for the
contingency measure portion of the maintenance plan. The approach
includes specific triggers for each phase. The triggers are the same
for both states although the measures vary slightly. For Phase 1, the
Missouri plan provides that a violation of the 8-hour ozone standard,
once quality assured, would trigger two control measures, which are (1)
early implementation of control devices on Clean Air Interstate Rule-
(CAIR) affected coal-fired electric generating units; and (2) an idle
reduction regulation.
Phase 2 contingency measures would be triggered by the occurrences
of either of the following two events: (1) A three-year design value
for the area equaling or exceeding 0.089 parts per million (ppm) which
would become active one year following the end of the ozone season that
triggered the Phase 1 contingency measures or (2) three consecutive
years following the Phase 1 trigger year with a design value greater
than 0.084 ppm. Either of these events would implement the selection of
control measures of Phase 2. Following the implementation of Phase 1,
if any one year has a three-year design value equaling or exceeding
0.085 ppm, an evaluation to determine appropriate action will be
undertaken by MDNR. The purpose of delaying the potential
implementation of Phase 2 control measures for a period of time
following the implementation of Phase 1 is to allow for Phase 1
controls to be initiated and have an effect on air quality in the
region before Phase 2 is implemented. It also allows for further
evaluation of the various control measures that could be implemented
under Phase 2. Below are a few of the controls options being considered
for Phase 2: NOX reductions to coal-fired electric
generating units (EGUs) not covered under CAIR that exceed 100 tons of
NOX emissions per year; NOX reductions from
industrial boilers and process heaters that exceed 100 tons of
NOX emissions per year; NOX reductions from
cement kilns that exceed 100 tons of NOX emissions per year;
lowering the threshold for major sources of VOCs to 75 tons per year;
enacting regulations to reduce VOC emissions from 46 architectural and
industrial maintenance coatings, including traffic coatings; enacting
emissions offsets of 1.1:1.0 for new sources; diesel Engine Chip Re-
Flashing regulations; or enacting the gas-cap testing program. If
triggered, the Phase 2 measures will be selected based on emission
reduction benefits, cost effectiveness and timeframe for
implementation. MDNR also would consider additional potential measures
if other beneficial emission reduction methods are determined to be
useful to the air quality in the KCMA.
What action is EPA taking?
Missouri has addressed the components of a maintenance plan
pursuant to EPA's May 20, 2005, guidance. The Section 110(a)(1) 8-hour
ozone Kansas City maintenance plan approved in this action will replace
the existing Section 175A 1-hour ozone maintenance plan. Existing VOC
control rules included in the 1-hour maintenance plan will remain in
place. Missouri has committed to implementing the contingency measures
within 24 months of the trigger date and will take action to maintain
the standard in the event the contingency measures are triggered.
We are processing this action as a direct final action because 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 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 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
[[Page 44781]]
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 October 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, Carbon monoxide,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides,
Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: July 27, 2007.
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(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 EPA approval date Explanation
provision nonattainment area submittal date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
(53) Maintenance Plan for the 8- Kansas City........ 5/23/07 8/9/07 [insert FR This plan replaces
hour ozone standard in the page number where numbers (46) and
Missouri portion of the Kansas the document (50).
City area. begins].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. E7-15264 Filed 8-8-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P