Air Plan Approval; Missouri; Infrastructure State Implementation Plan Requirements for the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard, 51413-51415 [2019-20671]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 189 / Monday, September 30, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
5090.1. A Record of Environmental
Consideration supporting this
determination is available in the docket
where indicated under ADDRESSES.
G. Protest Activities
The Coast Guard respects the First
Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to
coordinate protest activities so that your
message can be received without
jeopardizing the safety or security of
people, places or vessels.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Security measures,
Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 165 as follows:
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
16, to request authorization. If
authorization to enter, transit through,
anchor in, or remain within the
regulated area is granted by the COTP
Savannah or a designated
representative, all persons and vessels
receiving such authorization must
comply with the instructions of the
COTP Savannah or a designated
representative.
(3) The Coast Guard will provide
actual notice of the regulated area by
Local Notice to Mariners, Broadcast
Notice to Mariners, Marine Safety
Information Bulletin, on-scene
designated representatives, and an
INMARSAT C message to NAVAREA
IV.
(e) Enforcement period. This section
will be enforced starting September 19,
2019, and will be in effect until further
notice.
Dated: September 19, 2019.
Norm C. Witt,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of
the Port Savannah.
[FR Doc. 2019–20781 Filed 9–27–19; 8:45 am]
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR
1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
■
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
■
2. Add § 2019–0794 to read as follows:
40 CFR Part 52
§ 2019–0794 Safety Zone; M/V GOLDEN
RAY; Saint Simons Sound, GA.
[EPA–R07–OAR–2019–0334; FRL–10000–
15–Region 7]
(a) Regulated area. The following
areas are established as safety zones: All
navigable waters within a 150-yard
radius surrounding the M/V GOLDEN
RAY, which is, grounded in position
31°07′39.66 North, 081°24′10.58 West,
between Saint Simons lighthouse and
the north end of Jekyll Island, in the
vicinity of green buoy #19. All
coordinates are North American Datum
1983 (NAD 83).
(b) Definition. As used in this section,
‘‘designated representative’’ means
Coast Guard Patrol Commanders,
including Coast Guard coxswains, petty
officers, and other officers operating
Coast Guard vessels or aircraft, and
federal, state, and local officers
designated by or assisting the Captain of
the Port (COTP) Savannah in the
enforcement of the regulated areas.
(c) Regulations. (1) No vessel is
authorized access within 150 yards of
the M/V GOLDEN RAY, unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port.
(2) Persons or vessels desiring to
enter, transit through, anchor in, or
remain within the safety zone may
contact COTP Savannah by telephone at
(912) 652–4353, or a designated
representative via VHF radio on channel
Air Plan Approval; Missouri;
Infrastructure State Implementation
Plan Requirements for the 2015 Ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standard
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Sep 27, 2019
Jkt 247001
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is approving elements of
a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submission from the State of
Missouri addressing the applicable
requirements of section 110 of the Clean
Air Act (CAA) for the 2015 Ozone (O3)
National Ambient Air Quality Standard
(NAAQS). Section 110 requires that
each state adopt and submit a SIP
revision to support the implementation,
maintenance, and enforcement of each
new or revised NAAQS promulgated by
the EPA. These SIPs are commonly
referred to as ‘‘infrastructure’’ SIPs. The
infrastructure requirements are designed
to ensure that the structural components
of each state’s air quality management
program are adequate to meet the state’s
responsibilities under the CAA. The
EPA is also approving a request from the
State to exempt all counties in the
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
51413
Metropolitan Kansas City Interstate Air
Quality Control Region (Kansas City
AQCR) and all of Jefferson and most of
Franklin (except Boles Township)
counties in the Metropolitan St. Louis
Interstate (St. Louis AQCR) from
needing an ozone contingency plan
meeting the EPA’s requirements.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
October 30, 2019.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–R07–OAR–2019–0334. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the https://www.regulations.gov
website. 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 through https://
www.regulations.gov or please contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section for
additional information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Tracey Casburn, Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 7 Office, Air
Quality and Planning Branch, 11201
Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas
66219; telephone number (913) 551–
7016; email address casburn.tracey@
epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. What is being addressed in this document?
III. Have the requirements for approval of a
SIP revision been met?
IV. What is the EPA’s response to comment
received?
V. What action is the EPA taking?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
On June 25, 2019, the EPA proposed
to approve the State’s infrastructure SIP
submittal for the 2015 O3 NAAQS and
to approve a request to exempt all
counties in the Kansas City AQCR, and
Jefferson and Franklin (except Bowles
Township) counties in the St. Louis
AQCR, from needing to meet the
requirement to have an ozone
contingency plan found in at 40 CFR
part 51, subpart H, in the Federal
Register.1 See 84 FR 29826. The EPA
1 51.152(d) (1) allows the Administrator to
exempt portions of a Priority I, IA, or II AQCR
which have been designated as attainment or
E:\FR\FM\30SER1.SGM
Continued
30SER1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
51414
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 189 / Monday, September 30, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
solicited comments on the proposed SIP
revisions and received one comment.
III. Have the requirements for approval
of a SIP revision been met?
II. What is being addressed in this
document?
The submission has met the public
notice requirements of 40 CFR 51.102.
The submission also satisfied the
completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51,
appendix V. The State provided a public
comment period for the submission
from December 31, 2018, to February 7,
2019, and held a public hearing on
January 31, 2019. The State received
comments from the EPA during the
public comment period; the EPA was
the only commenter. The State
addressed the EPA’s comments. As
explained in more detail in the TSD, the
submission meets the substantive SIP
requirements of the CAA, including
section 110 and implementing
regulations.
The EPA is approving the
infrastructure SIP submission received
from the State on April 11, 2019, in
accordance with section 110(a)(1) of the
CAA. Specifically, the EPA is approving
the following infrastructure elements of
section 110(a)(2) of the CAA: (A)
through (C), (D)(i)(II)—prevention of
significant deterioration of air quality
(prong 3) and protection of visibility
(prong 4), (D)(ii), (E) through (H), and (J)
through (M). Elements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)—significant
contribution to nonattainment (prong 1)
and interfering with maintenance of the
NAAQs (prong 2) were addressed in a
separate SIP submission and are not
addressed in this document. Section
110(a)(2)(I) was also not addressed in
the submission, however, the EPA does
not expect infrastructure SIP
submissions to address element (I).
Section 110(a)(2)(I) requires states to
meet the applicable SIP requirements of
part D of the CAA relating to designated
nonattainment areas. The specific part D
submissions for designated
nonattainment areas are subject to
different submission schedules than
those for section 110 infrastructure
elements. The EPA will act on part D
attainment plan SIP submissions
through a separate rulemaking governed
by the requirements for nonattainment
areas, as described in part D.
The EPA is also approving a request
from the State to exempt all counties in
the Kansas City AQCR, and Jefferson
and Franklin (except Bowles Township)
counties in the St. Louis AQCR, from
needing to meet the requirement to have
an ozone contingency plan found in at
40 CFR part 51, subpart H.
A technical support document (TSD)
is included as part of the docket to this
action and it includes an analysis of
how the EPA determined that the
submission met the applicable 110(a)(1)
and (2) requirements for infrastructure
SIPs and the criteria for an exemption
from needing an ozone contingency
plan for all counties in the Kansas City
AQCR, and for Jefferson and Franklin
(except Bowles Township) counties in
the St. Louis AQCR. A detailed
discussion of the submission was
provided in the EPA’s June 25, 2019,
Federal Register document. See 84 FR
29826.
unclassifiable for national primary and secondary
standards under section 107 of the Act from the
requirement to have a contingency plan.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Sep 27, 2019
Jkt 247001
IV. What is the EPA’s response to
comment received?
The public comment period for the
EPA’s proposed action opened the date
of its publication in the Federal
Register, June 25, 2019, and closed on
July 25, 2019. During this period, the
EPA received one comment.
Comment: The commenter asked the
EPA to clarify what it is exempting,
stating that the proposed exemption was
for emergency episode planning
requirements but that EPA seemed to be
proposing to eliminate contingency
measures required by nonattainment
area planning.
Response: The EPA proposed to
approve elements of a SIP revision
submission addressing the applicable
requirements of section 110 of the CAA
for the 2015 O3 NAAQS, commonly
referred to an ‘‘infrastructure’’ SIP, and
to approve a request to exempt all
counties in the Kansas City AQCR and
all of Jefferson and most of Franklin
(except Boles Township) counties in the
St. Louis AQCR from needing an ozone
contingency plan meeting the
requirements of 40 CFR part 51, subpart
H (please see the technical support
document, provided in the docket to
this rulemaking, and notice of proposed
rulemaking, for the EPA’s rational for
approving the exemption request).
Although it is not clear from the
comment, the EPA believes the
commenter may have confused the CAA
part A 110(a)(2) infrastructure planning
requirement to have a contingency plan
addressing emergency episodes
(element (G)) with the CAA part D
172(c)(9) nonattainment planning
requirements to have contingency
measures to be undertaken if the area
fails to make reasonable further
progress, or to attain the NAAQS by the
attainment date.
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
40 CFR part 51, subpart H, includes
criteria for classification of areas into
AQCRs based on ambient air
concentrations of the pollutant being
addressed. If an AQCR is classified as a
Priority I, IA, or II region for a specified
pollutant, then the infrastructure SIP
(under element (G)) should contain an
emergency contingency plan meeting
the specific requirements of 40 CFR
51.151 and 51.152, as appropriate, with
respect to that pollutant. The priority
classifications for the AQCRs in
Missouri can be found at 40 CFR
52.1321.
There is a possibility for all or just
some of the counties in an AQCR to also
be designated as nonattainment of a
NAAQS; an AQCR boundary is not
always equivalent to a nonattainment
boundary. Nonattainment area
designations in Missouri can be found at
40 CFR 81.326. Areas that are
designated as nonattainment must fulfill
CAA part D requirements. The proposal
notice stated that although
infrastructure element (I) requires states
to meet the applicable part D SIP
requirements (related to designated
nonattainment areas), because the
specific part D section 172 SIP
submissions are subject to different
submission schedules than those for
part A section 110 infrastructure
elements, the EPA will act on part D
attainment plan SIP submissions
through a separate rulemaking governed
by the requirements for nonattainment
areas, as described in part D.
To be clear the EPA proposed an
exemption from 110(a)(2)(G) emergency
contingency planning obligations for the
named AQCRs. The EPA did not
propose to exempt the State from
meeting part D section 172 contingency
measure requirements (110(a)(2)(I)).
V. What action is the EPA taking?
The EPA is approving the April 11,
2019, SIP submission addressing the
infrastructure elements for the 2015 O3
NAAQS. Specifically, the EPA is
approving the following infrastructure
elements of section 110(a)(2): (A)
through (C), (D)(i)(II)—prong 3 and
prong 4, (D)(ii), (E) through (H), and (J)
through (M). The EPA is not acting on
the elements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)—prong 1 and prong 2
because those elements were not
addressed in the submission. Section
110(a)(2)(I) was not addressed in the
submission and the EPA would not
expect it to be.
The EPA is also approving a request
from the State to exempt all counties in
the Kansas City AQCR, and Jefferson
and Franklin (except Bowles Township)
counties in the St. Louis AQCR, from
E:\FR\FM\30SER1.SGM
30SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 189 / Monday, September 30, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
needing to meet the requirement to have
an ozone contingency plan found in at
40 CFR part 51, subpart H.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
Act and applicable Federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, this action
merely approves state law as meeting
Federal requirements and does not
impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For that
reason, this action:
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82
FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory
action because SIP approvals are
exempted under Executive Order 12866.
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of the
National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTA) because this
rulemaking does not involve technical
standards; and
• Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, the SIP is not approved
to apply on any Indian reservation land
or in any other area where the EPA or
an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have
tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
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 action 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).
51415
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 November 29, 2019. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not
affect the finality of this action 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, Air quality control
region, Contingency plan, Exemption,
Incorporation by reference,
Infrastructure, Intergovernmental
relations, Ozone.
Dated: September 18, 2019.
James Gulliford,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, the EPA amends 40 CFR part
52 as set forth below:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart—AA Missouri
2. In § 52.1320, the table in paragraph
(e) is amended by adding entry ‘‘(78)’’
in numerical order to read as follows:
■
§ 52.1320
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(e) * * *
*
*
EPA-APPROVED MISSOURI NONREGULATORY SIP PROVISIONS
Applicable
geographic or
nonattainment area
Name of non-regulatory SIP provision
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES
*
(78) Sections 110 (a)(1) and
110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2015 Ozone NAAQS.
Ozone Contingency Plan Exemptions.
*
Statewide .........................
State
submittal
date
*
4/11/2019
EPA
approval
date
Explanation
*
*
*
*
9/30/2019, [insert Federal Reg- This action approves the following CAA elements: 110(a)(1) and
ister citation].
110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(II)—prongs 3 and 4, (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G),
(H), (J), (K), (L), and (M). 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)—prongs 1 and 2 were not
included in the submission. 110(a)(2)(I) is not applicable.
This action approves the ozone contingency plan exemptions for all
counties in the Kansas City AQCR and Jefferson and Franklin (except
Bowles Township) counties in the St. Louis AQCR.
[EPA–R07–OAR–2019–0334; FRL–1000–15–Region 7].
[FR Doc. 2019–20671 Filed 9–27–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:42 Sep 27, 2019
Jkt 247001
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\30SER1.SGM
30SER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 189 (Monday, September 30, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 51413-51415]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-20671]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R07-OAR-2019-0334; FRL-10000-15-Region 7]
Air Plan Approval; Missouri; Infrastructure State Implementation
Plan Requirements for the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standard
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving
elements of a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submission from
the State of Missouri addressing the applicable requirements of section
110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the 2015 Ozone (O3)
National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). Section 110 requires
that each state adopt and submit a SIP revision to support the
implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of each new or revised
NAAQS promulgated by the EPA. These SIPs are commonly referred to as
``infrastructure'' SIPs. The infrastructure requirements are designed
to ensure that the structural components of each state's air quality
management program are adequate to meet the state's responsibilities
under the CAA. The EPA is also approving a request from the State to
exempt all counties in the Metropolitan Kansas City Interstate Air
Quality Control Region (Kansas City AQCR) and all of Jefferson and most
of Franklin (except Boles Township) counties in the Metropolitan St.
Louis Interstate (St. Louis AQCR) from needing an ozone contingency
plan meeting the EPA's requirements.
DATES: This final rule is effective on October 30, 2019.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2019-0334. All documents in the docket are
listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. 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 through https://www.regulations.gov or please contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tracey Casburn, Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 7 Office, Air Quality and Planning Branch,
11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219; telephone number (913)
551-7016; email address [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. What is being addressed in this document?
III. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?
IV. What is the EPA's response to comment received?
V. What action is the EPA taking?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
On June 25, 2019, the EPA proposed to approve the State's
infrastructure SIP submittal for the 2015 O3 NAAQS and to
approve a request to exempt all counties in the Kansas City AQCR, and
Jefferson and Franklin (except Bowles Township) counties in the St.
Louis AQCR, from needing to meet the requirement to have an ozone
contingency plan found in at 40 CFR part 51, subpart H, in the Federal
Register.\1\ See 84 FR 29826. The EPA
[[Page 51414]]
solicited comments on the proposed SIP revisions and received one
comment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 51.152(d) (1) allows the Administrator to exempt portions of
a Priority I, IA, or II AQCR which have been designated as
attainment or unclassifiable for national primary and secondary
standards under section 107 of the Act from the requirement to have
a contingency plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. What is being addressed in this document?
The EPA is approving the infrastructure SIP submission received
from the State on April 11, 2019, in accordance with section 110(a)(1)
of the CAA. Specifically, the EPA is approving the following
infrastructure elements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA: (A) through
(C), (D)(i)(II)--prevention of significant deterioration of air quality
(prong 3) and protection of visibility (prong 4), (D)(ii), (E) through
(H), and (J) through (M). Elements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)--
significant contribution to nonattainment (prong 1) and interfering
with maintenance of the NAAQs (prong 2) were addressed in a separate
SIP submission and are not addressed in this document. Section
110(a)(2)(I) was also not addressed in the submission, however, the EPA
does not expect infrastructure SIP submissions to address element (I).
Section 110(a)(2)(I) requires states to meet the applicable SIP
requirements of part D of the CAA relating to designated nonattainment
areas. The specific part D submissions for designated nonattainment
areas are subject to different submission schedules than those for
section 110 infrastructure elements. The EPA will act on part D
attainment plan SIP submissions through a separate rulemaking governed
by the requirements for nonattainment areas, as described in part D.
The EPA is also approving a request from the State to exempt all
counties in the Kansas City AQCR, and Jefferson and Franklin (except
Bowles Township) counties in the St. Louis AQCR, from needing to meet
the requirement to have an ozone contingency plan found in at 40 CFR
part 51, subpart H.
A technical support document (TSD) is included as part of the
docket to this action and it includes an analysis of how the EPA
determined that the submission met the applicable 110(a)(1) and (2)
requirements for infrastructure SIPs and the criteria for an exemption
from needing an ozone contingency plan for all counties in the Kansas
City AQCR, and for Jefferson and Franklin (except Bowles Township)
counties in the St. Louis AQCR. A detailed discussion of the submission
was provided in the EPA's June 25, 2019, Federal Register document. See
84 FR 29826.
III. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?
The submission has met the public notice requirements of 40 CFR
51.102. The submission also satisfied the completeness criteria of 40
CFR part 51, appendix V. The State provided a public comment period for
the submission from December 31, 2018, to February 7, 2019, and held a
public hearing on January 31, 2019. The State received comments from
the EPA during the public comment period; the EPA was the only
commenter. The State addressed the EPA's comments. As explained in more
detail in the TSD, the submission meets the substantive SIP
requirements of the CAA, including section 110 and implementing
regulations.
IV. What is the EPA's response to comment received?
The public comment period for the EPA's proposed action opened the
date of its publication in the Federal Register, June 25, 2019, and
closed on July 25, 2019. During this period, the EPA received one
comment.
Comment: The commenter asked the EPA to clarify what it is
exempting, stating that the proposed exemption was for emergency
episode planning requirements but that EPA seemed to be proposing to
eliminate contingency measures required by nonattainment area planning.
Response: The EPA proposed to approve elements of a SIP revision
submission addressing the applicable requirements of section 110 of the
CAA for the 2015 O3 NAAQS, commonly referred to an
``infrastructure'' SIP, and to approve a request to exempt all counties
in the Kansas City AQCR and all of Jefferson and most of Franklin
(except Boles Township) counties in the St. Louis AQCR from needing an
ozone contingency plan meeting the requirements of 40 CFR part 51,
subpart H (please see the technical support document, provided in the
docket to this rulemaking, and notice of proposed rulemaking, for the
EPA's rational for approving the exemption request).
Although it is not clear from the comment, the EPA believes the
commenter may have confused the CAA part A 110(a)(2) infrastructure
planning requirement to have a contingency plan addressing emergency
episodes (element (G)) with the CAA part D 172(c)(9) nonattainment
planning requirements to have contingency measures to be undertaken if
the area fails to make reasonable further progress, or to attain the
NAAQS by the attainment date.
40 CFR part 51, subpart H, includes criteria for classification of
areas into AQCRs based on ambient air concentrations of the pollutant
being addressed. If an AQCR is classified as a Priority I, IA, or II
region for a specified pollutant, then the infrastructure SIP (under
element (G)) should contain an emergency contingency plan meeting the
specific requirements of 40 CFR 51.151 and 51.152, as appropriate, with
respect to that pollutant. The priority classifications for the AQCRs
in Missouri can be found at 40 CFR 52.1321.
There is a possibility for all or just some of the counties in an
AQCR to also be designated as nonattainment of a NAAQS; an AQCR
boundary is not always equivalent to a nonattainment boundary.
Nonattainment area designations in Missouri can be found at 40 CFR
81.326. Areas that are designated as nonattainment must fulfill CAA
part D requirements. The proposal notice stated that although
infrastructure element (I) requires states to meet the applicable part
D SIP requirements (related to designated nonattainment areas), because
the specific part D section 172 SIP submissions are subject to
different submission schedules than those for part A section 110
infrastructure elements, the EPA will act on part D attainment plan SIP
submissions through a separate rulemaking governed by the requirements
for nonattainment areas, as described in part D.
To be clear the EPA proposed an exemption from 110(a)(2)(G)
emergency contingency planning obligations for the named AQCRs. The EPA
did not propose to exempt the State from meeting part D section 172
contingency measure requirements (110(a)(2)(I)).
V. What action is the EPA taking?
The EPA is approving the April 11, 2019, SIP submission addressing
the infrastructure elements for the 2015 O3 NAAQS.
Specifically, the EPA is approving the following infrastructure
elements of section 110(a)(2): (A) through (C), (D)(i)(II)--prong 3 and
prong 4, (D)(ii), (E) through (H), and (J) through (M). The EPA is not
acting on the elements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)--prong 1 and prong
2 because those elements were not addressed in the submission. Section
110(a)(2)(I) was not addressed in the submission and the EPA would not
expect it to be.
The EPA is also approving a request from the State to exempt all
counties in the Kansas City AQCR, and Jefferson and Franklin (except
Bowles Township) counties in the St. Louis AQCR, from
[[Page 51415]]
needing to meet the requirement to have an ozone contingency plan found
in at 40 CFR part 51, subpart H.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866.
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTA) because this rulemaking does not
involve technical standards; and
Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal
law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000).
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 action 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 November 29, 2019. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action 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, Air quality
control region, Contingency plan, Exemption, Incorporation by
reference, Infrastructure, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone.
Dated: September 18, 2019.
James Gulliford,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the EPA amends 40 CFR part
52 as set forth below:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart--AA Missouri
0
2. In Sec. 52.1320, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by adding
entry ``(78)'' in numerical order to read as follows:
Sec. 52.1320 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
EPA-Approved Missouri Nonregulatory SIP Provisions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable geographic or State
Name of non-regulatory SIP provision nonattainment area submittal date EPA approval date Explanation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
(78) Sections 110 (a)(1) and Statewide....................... 4/11/2019 9/30/2019, [insert This action approves the following CAA
110(a)(2) Infrastructure Federal Register elements: 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2)(A),
Requirements for the 2015 Ozone citation]. (B), (C), (D)(i)(II)--prongs 3 and 4,
NAAQS. Ozone Contingency Plan (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J),
Exemptions. (K), (L), and (M).
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)--prongs 1 and 2
were not included in the submission.
110(a)(2)(I) is not applicable.
This action approves the ozone
contingency plan exemptions for all
counties in the Kansas City AQCR and
Jefferson and Franklin (except Bowles
Township) counties in the St. Louis
AQCR.
[EPA-R07-OAR-2019-0334; FRL-1000-15-
Region 7].
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2019-20671 Filed 9-27-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
