Air Plan Approval; Missouri; Removal of Control of Emission From Solvent Cleanup Operations, 56193-56196 [2020-19009]

Download as PDF khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 177 / Friday, September 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules outbound non-NSA parcel mail categories bearing PC Postage indicia with census data provided by reports from the Accounting Data Mart (ADM). Petition, Proposal Five at 4. The Postal Service notes that ‘‘[d]ata collection is always challenging in the fast-moving timeframe around mail arrival to U.S. International Service Centers and distribution to outbound international flights, which is when SIRVO tests are conducted.’’ Id. at 3. For this reason, ‘‘[u]nintended errors could occur in the sampling of mail, and in the recording of the data elements observed[,]’’ resulting in SIRVO point estimates with sampling errors that are not present in census data. Id. Rationale and impact. The Postal Service states that the proposed methodology ‘‘provides a complete census source of transactional-level data for PC Postage international outbound mailpieces.’’ Id. at 4. The Postal Service contends that the proposed methodology will provide ‘‘equal or improved data quality.’’ Id. at 3. The Postal Service avers that the proposed methodology will result in ‘‘the improved reporting of PC Postage noncontract revenue and volume both in terms of the level and measures of precision.’’ Id. at 6. Furthermore, the Postal Service argues that the proposed methodology ‘‘will also allow for more granularity in the underlying report data.’’ Id. The Postal Service reports that its examination of potential changes suggests that the proposed methodology would directly affect two major international outbound mail categories: PMI and FCPIS. Id. at 5. Outbound PMI revenue would increase 2.3 percent and volume would decrease 5.8 percent. Id. FCPIS would experience revenue and volume changes of the ‘‘same general percentage magnitude as Outbound Priority Mail International, but in each instance in the opposite direction.’’ Id. The Postal Service also notes indirect effects of the proposal which would occur when estimates of mail categories other than PMI and FCPIS are scaled to the remaining known dispatch weights. Id. Among those, Outbound First-Class Mail International revenue would decrease 4.8 percent and volume would decrease by 5.7 percent. Id. Additionally, U.S. Postal Service Mail, Free Mail, and International Ancillary Services would experience indirect effects on revenue and volume. Id. at 5– 6. The Postal Service notes that ultimately, indirect effects of the proposal will be spread over other types of mail, not listed above. Id. at n.4. The Postal Service reports that ‘‘[o]verall, outbound international revenue and VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:05 Sep 10, 2020 Jkt 250001 56193 volume for Quarters 1 and 2 of FY 2020 would have been reduced by 0.3 percent and 2.7 percent, respectively.’’ Id. at 6 (footnote omitted). ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY III. Notice and Comment [EPA–R07–OAR–2020–0439; FRL–10014– 17–Region 7] The Commission establishes Docket No. RM2020–12 for consideration of matters raised by the Petition. More information on the Petition may be accessed via the Commission’s website at https://www.prc.gov. Interested persons may submit comments on the Petition and Proposal Five no later than September 8, 2020. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Jennaca D. Upperman is designated as an officer of the Commission (Public Representative) to represent the interests of the general public in this proceeding. IV. Ordering Paragraphs It is ordered: 1. The Commission establishes Docket No. RM2020–12 for consideration of the matters raised by the Petition of the United States Postal Service for the Initiation of a Proceeding to Consider Proposed Changes in Analytical Principles (Proposal Five), filed August 5, 2020. 2. Comments by interested persons in this proceeding are due no later than September 8, 2020.3 3. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, the Commission appoints Jennaca Upperman to serve as an officer of the Commission (Public Representative) to represent the interests of the general public in this docket. 4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this order in the Federal Register. By the Commission. Erica A. Barker, Secretary. [FR Doc. 2020–17663 Filed 9–10–20; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P 3 The Commission reminds interested persons that its revised and reorganized Rules of Practice and Procedure became effective April 20, 2020, and should be used in filings with the Commission after April 20, 2020. The new rules are available on the Commission’s website and can be found in Order No. 5407. See Docket No. RM2019–13, Order Reorganizing Commission Regulations and Amending Rules of Practice, January 16, 2020 (Order No. 5407). PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 40 CFR Part 52 Air Plan Approval; Missouri; Removal of Control of Emission From Solvent Cleanup Operations Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing approval of a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Missouri on January 15, 2019 and supplemented by letter on July 11, 2019. Missouri requests that the EPA remove a rule related to the control of emissions from solvent cleanup operations in the St. Louis, Missouri area from its SIP. This removal does not have an adverse effect on air quality. The EPA’s proposed approval of this rule revision is in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA). DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 13, 2020. ADDRESSES: You may send comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07– OAR–2020–0439 to https:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket ID No. for this rulemaking. Comments received will be posted without change to https:// www.regulations.gov/, including any personal information provided. For detailed instructions on sending comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the ‘‘Written Comments’’ heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Peter, Environmental Protection Agency, Region 7 Office, Air Permitting and Standards Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219; telephone number: (913) 551–7397; email address: peter.david@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. SUMMARY: Table of Contents I. Written Comments II. What is being addressed in this document? III. Background IV. What is the EPA’s analysis of Missouri’s SIP revision request? V. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met? VI. What action is the EPA taking? E:\FR\FM\11SEP1.SGM 11SEP1 56194 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 177 / Friday, September 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules VII. Incorporation by Reference VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Written Comments Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2020– 0439 at https://www.regulations.gov. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ commenting-epa-dockets. khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS II. What is being addressed in this document? The EPA is proposing to approve the removal of 10 Code of State Regulations (CSR) 10–5.455, Control of Emission from Solvent Cleanup Operations, from the Missouri SIP. According to the July 11, 2019 letter from the Missouri Department of Natural Resources, available in the docket for this proposed action, Missouri stated that it rescinded the rule because of the three facilities that were once subject to the rule, two facilities shutdown and the other facility no longer meets the applicability of the rule. Therefore, the rule is no longer necessary for attainment and maintenance of the 1979, 1997, 2008, or 2015 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for Ozone. III. Background The EPA established a 1-hour ozone NAAQS in 1971. 36 FR 8186 (April 30, 1971). On March 3, 1978, the entire St. Louis Air Quality Control Region (AQCR) (070) was identified as being in nonattainment of the 1971 1-hour ozone NAAQS, as required by the CAA Amendments of 1977. 43 FR 8962 (March 3, 1978). On the Missouri side, the St. Louis nonattainment area included the city of St. Louis and Jefferson, St. Charles, Franklin and St. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:05 Sep 10, 2020 Jkt 250001 Louis Counties (hereinafter referred to in this document as the ‘‘St. Louis Area’’). On February 8, 1979, the EPA revised the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, referred to as the 1979 ozone NAAQS. 44 FR 8202 (February 8, 1979). On May 26, 1988, the EPA notified Missouri that the SIP was substantially inadequate (hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘SIP Call’’) to attain the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in the St. Louis Area. See 54 FR 43183 (October 23, 1989).To address the inadequacies identified in the SIP Call, Missouri submitted volatile organic compound (VOC) control regulations on June 14, 1985; November 19, 1986; and March 30, 1989. The EPA subsequently approved the revised control regulations for the St. Louis Area on March 5, 1990 and February 17, 2000. The VOC control regulations approved by EPA into the SIP included reasonably available control technology (RACT) rules as required by CAA section 172(b)(2), including 10 CSR 10–5.455 Control of Emission from Solvent Cleanup Operations. The EPA redesignated the St. Louis Area to attainment of the 1979 1-hour ozone standard on May 12, 2003. 68 FR 25418. Pursuant to section 175A of the CAA, the first 10-year maintenance period for the 1-hour ozone standard began on May 12, 2003, the effective date of the redesignation approval. On April 30, 2004, the EPA published a final rule in the Federal Register stating the 1-hour ozone NAAQS would no longer apply (i.e., would be revoked) for an area one year after the effective date of the area’s designation for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 69 FR 23951 (April 30, 2004). The effective date of the revocation of the 1979 1-hour ozone standard for the St. Louis Area was June 15, 2005. See 70 FR 44470 (August 3, 2005). As noted above, 10 CSR 10–5.455, Control of Emission from Solvent Cleanup Operations, was approved into the Missouri SIP as a RACT rule on February 17, 2000. 65 FR 8060 (February 17, 2000). At the time the rule was approved into the SIP, 10 CSR 10– 5.455 applied to all installations throughout St. Louis City and Jefferson, St. Charles, Franklin and St. Louis Counties that allowed the performance of any cleaning operation involving the use of organic solvents or solvent solutions. By letter dated January 15, 2019, Missouri requested that the EPA remove 10 CSR 10–5.455 from the SIP. Section 110(l) of the CAA prohibits EPA from approving a SIP revision that interferes with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress (RFP), or any other PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 applicable requirement of the CAA. The State supplemented its SIP revision with a July 11, 2019, letter in order to address the requirements of section 110(l) of the CAA. IV. What is the EPA’s analysis of Missouri’s SIP revision request? In its July 11, 2019 letter, Missouri states that it intended its RACT rules, such as 10 CSR 10–5.455, to solely apply to existing sources in accordance with section 172(c)(1) of the CAA.1 Missouri states that although the applicability section of 10 CSR 10–5.455 specifies that the rule applies to all installations located throughout St. Louis City and Jefferson, St. Charles, Franklin and St. Louis Counties, the only facilities that met the applicability criteria of the rule were Ford Motor Company, St. Louis Assembly Plant; Chrysler Group LLC South Assembly Plant; and General Motors LLC Wentzville Center (hereinafter referred to as ‘‘Ford’’, ‘‘Chrysler’’, and ‘‘General Motors’’, respectively). Missouri, in its July 11, 2019 letter, indicated that MDNR ‘‘marked’’ the Ford plant as shutdown in 2008 and the Chrysler plant as shutdown in 2011. The EPA confirmed that Ford and Chrysler are no longer in operation 2 and are therefore no longer subject to 10 CSR 10–5.455. Missouri further indicated in the July 11, 2019 letter that General Motors is no longer subject to 10 CSR 10–5.455 in accordance with paragraph (1)(C)8.B. which exempts cleaning operations for emission units within the auto and light duty truck assembly coatings category listed for regulation under section 183(e) of the Clean Air Act.3 As stated above, Missouri contends that 10 CSR 10–5.455 may be removed from the SIP because section 172(c)(1) of the CAA requires RACT for existing sources, and because 10 CSR 10–5.455 was applicable to only three sources 4 1 The EPA agrees with Missouri’s interpretation of CAA section 172(c)(1) in regard to whether RACT is required for existing sources, but also notes that the State regulation establishing RACT may apply to new sources as well, dependent upon the State regulation’s language. 2 The EPA reviewed MDNR’s website that lists active, issued permits to facilities in Missouri and did not observe a permit for Ford or Chrysler. Further, the EPA reviewed EPA’s ICIS-Air database which indicated that both facilities are ‘‘permanently closed’’. 3 The Title V Operating Permit issued to General Motors by Missouri on December 4, 2017, which is included in docket, supports the interpretation that paragraph (1)(C)8.B. exempts the facility from 10 CSR 10–5.455. 4 The EPA indicated in the March 18, 1996 Federal Register document (61 FR 10968), which proposed to approve 10 CSR 10–5.455 into Missouri’s SIP, that three ‘‘automobile E:\FR\FM\11SEP1.SGM 11SEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 177 / Friday, September 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS that are no longer subject to the rule and, therefore, the rule no longer reduces VOC emissions. Because these three facilities are no longer subject to the rule, the EPA believes the rule no longer provides an emission reduction benefit to the St. Louis Area and is proposing to remove it from the SIP. Missouri’s July 11, 2019 letter states that any new sources or major modifications of existing sources are subject to new source review (NSR) permitting. Under NSR, a new major source or major modification of an existing source with a PTE of 250 tons per year (tpy) 5 or more of any NAAQS pollutant is required to obtain a Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permit when the area is in attainment or unclassifiable, which requires an analysis of Best Available Control Technology (BACT) in addition to an air quality analysis and an additional impacts analysis. Sources with a PTE greater than 100 tpy, but less than 250 tpy,6 are required to obtain a minor permit in accordance with Missouri’s New Source Review permitting program, which is approved into the SIP.7 Further, a new major source or major modification of an existing source with a PTE of 100 tpy or more of any NAAQS pollutant is required to obtain a nonattainment (NA) NSR permit when the area is in nonattainment, which requires an analysis of Lowest Achievable Emission Rate (LAER) in addition to an air quality analysis, an additional impacts analysis and emission offsets. The EPA agrees with this analysis. Missouri has demonstrated that removal of 10 CSR 10–5.455 will not interfere with attainment of the NAAQS, RFP 8 or any other applicable requirement of the CAA because the only three sources that were subject to the rule are no longer subject and the removal of the rule will not cause VOC emissions to increase. Therefore, the manufacturers’’ were subject to this rule but did not specifically name the three facilities. 5 The PSD major source threshold for certain sources is 100 tpy rather than 250 tpy (see 40 CFR 52.21(b)(1)(i)(a) and 10 C.S.R. 10–6.060(8)(A)). 6 Except for those sources with a PSD major source threshold of 100 tpy. 7 EPA’s latest approval of Missouri’s NSR permitting program rule was published in the Federal Register on October 11, 2016. 81 FR 70025. 8 RFP is not applicable to the St. Louis Area because for marginal ozone nonattainment areas, such as the St. Louis Area, the specific requirements of section 182(a) apply in lieu of the attainment planning requirements that would otherwise apply under section 172(c), including the attainment demonstration and reasonably available control measures (RACM) under section 172(c)(1), reasonable further progress (RFP) under section 172(c)(2), and contingency measures under section 172(c)(9). VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:05 Sep 10, 2020 Jkt 250001 EPA proposes to approve the removal of 10 CSR 10–5.455 from the SIP. V. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met? The State submission has met the public notice requirements for SIP submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The submission also satisfied the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. The State provided public notice on this SIP revision from May 15, 2018 to August 2, 2018 and received twelve comments from the EPA that related to Missouri’s lack of an adequate demonstration that the rule could be removed from the SIP in accordance with section 110(l) of the CAA, whether the rule applied to new sources and other implications related to rescinding the rule. Missouri’s July 11, 2019 letter and December 3, 2018 response to comments on the state rescission rulemaking addressed the EPA’s comments. In addition, the revision meets the substantive SIP requirements of the CAA, including section 110 and implementing regulations. VI. What action is the EPA taking? The EPA is proposing to approve Missouri’s request to rescind 10 CSR 10–5.455 from the SIP because the rule applied to three facilities that are no longer subject and because the rule is not applicable to any other source. Therefore, the rule no longer serves to reduce emissions in the St. Louis Area. Furthermore, any new sources or major modifications of existing sources in the St. Louis Area are subject to NSR permitting.9 We are processing this as a proposed action because we are soliciting comments on this proposed action. Final rulemaking will occur after consideration of any comments. VII. Incorporation by Reference In this document, the EPA is proposing to amend regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. As described in the proposed amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth below, the EPA is proposing to remove provisions of the EPA-Approved Missouri Regulation from the Missouri State Implementation Plan, which is incorporated by reference in accordance with the requirements of 1 CFR part 51. VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission 9 ‘‘NSR Permitting’’ includes PSD permitting in areas designated attainment and unclassifiable, NA NSR in areas designated nonattainment and minor source permitting. PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 56195 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). The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where 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 E:\FR\FM\11SEP1.SGM 11SEP1 56196 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 177 / Friday, September 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds. Dated: August 24, 2020. James Gulliford, Regional Administrator, Region 7. For the reasons stated in the preamble, the EPA proposes to amend 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 § 52.1320 [Amended] 2. In § 52.1320, the table in paragraph (c) is amended by removing the entry ‘‘10–5.455’’ under the heading ‘‘Chapter 5—Air Quality Standards and Air Pollution Control Regulations for the St. Louis Metropolitan Area’’. ■ [FR Doc. 2020–19009 Filed 9–10–20; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Table of Contents ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY I. Background II. Evaluation of Submissions III. Proposed Action IV. Incorporation by Reference V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R10–OAR–2019–0401, FRL–10012– 52–Region 10] Air Plan Approval; ID, Incorporation by Reference Updates and Rule Revisions Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposes to approve State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by Idaho on June 5, 2019 and May 27, 2020. The submitted revisions update the incorporation by reference of specific Federal requirements and clarify source permitting requirements. The EPA proposes to find that the changes are consistent with Clean Air Act requirements. DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 13, 2020. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10– OAR–2019–0401, at https:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the online khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:05 Sep 10, 2020 Jkt 250001 instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from https:// www.regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not electronically submit any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information the disclosure of which is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ commenting-epa-dockets. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristin Hall, EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 155, Seattle, WA 98101, at (206) 553–6357 or hall.kristin@ epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, wherever ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, it refers to the EPA. I. Background Section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) specifies the general requirements for states to submit SIPs to attain and maintain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and the EPA’s actions regarding approval of those SIPs. Idaho incorporates by reference various portions of Federal regulations codified in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) into the Rules for the Control of Air Pollution in Idaho (Idaho Administrative Procedures Act (IDAPA) 58.01.01). Idaho then submits parts of IDAPA 58.01.01 to the EPA for approval into the Federally approved Idaho SIP (generally those provisions that relate to the criteria pollutants regulated under section 110 of the CAA for which the EPA has promulgated NAAQS or other specific requirements of section 110). To ensure that its rulemakings remain consistent with EPA requirements, Idaho updates the incorporation by PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 reference citations in IDAPA 58.01.01 on an annual basis and submits a SIP revision to reflect any changes made to Federal regulations during that year. Idaho also makes periodic changes to permitting regulations for clarity or to improve implementation and submits the changes to the EPA along with the annual update SIP revision. II. Evaluation of Submissions On June 5, 2019 and May 27, 2020, Idaho submitted SIP revisions to update the incorporation by reference of Federal regulations. Idaho also submitted rule changes to clarify permitting requirements. This evaluation section discusses how the submitted rule revisions differ from the current Federally approved Idaho SIP and why the EPA believes the rule changes are approvable.1 As such, our discussion focuses on the most recently submitted change to any particular rule provision. A. Incorporation by Reference The Idaho SIP incorporates by reference the following Federal regulations into the Idaho SIP (IDAPA 58.01.01.107.03.a through .e.): • National Primary and Secondary Ambient Air Quality Standards, 40 CFR part 50; • Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of Implementation Plans, 40 CFR part 51, with the exception of certain visibilityrelated provisions; • Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans, 40 CFR part 52, subparts A and N, and appendices D and E; • Ambient Air Monitoring Reference and Equivalent Methods, 40 CFR part 53; and • Ambient Air Quality Surveillance, 40 CFR part 58. The submitted SIP revisions update the incorporation by reference citation date for these provisions from July 1, 2017 to July 1, 2019. During this time period, there were no changes to 40 CFR parts 50, 53, and 58. There were, however, changes to the State-adopted portions of 40 CFR parts 51 and 52, specifically: A change to the Federal definition of volatile organic compounds; 2 updates to compliance 1 The EPA approved a portion of the June 5, 2019 SIP revision on December 9, 2019 (84 FR 67189). Specifically, we approved IDAPA 58.01.01.620 and Section 4 of Senate Bill 1024, codified at Idaho Code Section 39–114, state effective April 11, 2019. 2 Air Quality: Revision to the Regulatory Definition of Volatile Organic Compounds— Exclusion of cis1,1,1,4,4,4-hexafluorobut-2-ene (HFO–1336mzz–Z), final rule published November 28, 2018 (83 FR 61127). E:\FR\FM\11SEP1.SGM 11SEP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 177 (Friday, September 11, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 56193-56196]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-19009]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2020-0439; FRL-10014-17-Region 7]


Air Plan Approval; Missouri; Removal of Control of Emission From 
Solvent Cleanup Operations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing 
approval of a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the 
State of Missouri on January 15, 2019 and supplemented by letter on 
July 11, 2019. Missouri requests that the EPA remove a rule related to 
the control of emissions from solvent cleanup operations in the St. 
Louis, Missouri area from its SIP. This removal does not have an 
adverse effect on air quality. The EPA's proposed approval of this rule 
revision is in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act 
(CAA).

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 13, 2020.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2020-0439 to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 
instructions for submitting comments.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket ID 
No. for this rulemaking. Comments received will be posted without 
change to https://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal 
information provided. For detailed instructions on sending comments and 
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the ``Written 
Comments'' heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this 
document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Peter, Environmental Protection 
Agency, Region 7 Office, Air Permitting and Standards Branch, 11201 
Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219; telephone number: (913) 551-
7397; email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' and 
``our'' refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Written Comments
II. What is being addressed in this document?
III. Background
IV. What is the EPA's analysis of Missouri's SIP revision request?
V. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?
VI. What action is the EPA taking?

[[Page 56194]]

VII. Incorporation by Reference
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Written Comments

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2020-
0439 at https://www.regulations.gov. Once submitted, comments cannot be 
edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment 
received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any 
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) 
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a 
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment 
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA 
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located 
outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other 
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA 
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, 
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

II. What is being addressed in this document?

    The EPA is proposing to approve the removal of 10 Code of State 
Regulations (CSR) 10-5.455, Control of Emission from Solvent Cleanup 
Operations, from the Missouri SIP.
    According to the July 11, 2019 letter from the Missouri Department 
of Natural Resources, available in the docket for this proposed action, 
Missouri stated that it rescinded the rule because of the three 
facilities that were once subject to the rule, two facilities shutdown 
and the other facility no longer meets the applicability of the rule. 
Therefore, the rule is no longer necessary for attainment and 
maintenance of the 1979, 1997, 2008, or 2015 National Ambient Air 
Quality Standards (NAAQS) for Ozone.

III. Background

    The EPA established a 1-hour ozone NAAQS in 1971. 36 FR 8186 (April 
30, 1971). On March 3, 1978, the entire St. Louis Air Quality Control 
Region (AQCR) (070) was identified as being in nonattainment of the 
1971 1-hour ozone NAAQS, as required by the CAA Amendments of 1977. 43 
FR 8962 (March 3, 1978). On the Missouri side, the St. Louis 
nonattainment area included the city of St. Louis and Jefferson, St. 
Charles, Franklin and St. Louis Counties (hereinafter referred to in 
this document as the ``St. Louis Area''). On February 8, 1979, the EPA 
revised the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, referred to as the 1979 ozone NAAQS. 44 
FR 8202 (February 8, 1979). On May 26, 1988, the EPA notified Missouri 
that the SIP was substantially inadequate (hereinafter referred to as 
the ``SIP Call'') to attain the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in the St. Louis 
Area. See 54 FR 43183 (October 23, 1989).To address the inadequacies 
identified in the SIP Call, Missouri submitted volatile organic 
compound (VOC) control regulations on June 14, 1985; November 19, 1986; 
and March 30, 1989. The EPA subsequently approved the revised control 
regulations for the St. Louis Area on March 5, 1990 and February 17, 
2000. The VOC control regulations approved by EPA into the SIP included 
reasonably available control technology (RACT) rules as required by CAA 
section 172(b)(2), including 10 CSR 10-5.455 Control of Emission from 
Solvent Cleanup Operations.
    The EPA redesignated the St. Louis Area to attainment of the 1979 
1-hour ozone standard on May 12, 2003. 68 FR 25418. Pursuant to section 
175A of the CAA, the first 10-year maintenance period for the 1-hour 
ozone standard began on May 12, 2003, the effective date of the 
redesignation approval. On April 30, 2004, the EPA published a final 
rule in the Federal Register stating the 1-hour ozone NAAQS would no 
longer apply (i.e., would be revoked) for an area one year after the 
effective date of the area's designation for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 69 
FR 23951 (April 30, 2004). The effective date of the revocation of the 
1979 1-hour ozone standard for the St. Louis Area was June 15, 2005. 
See 70 FR 44470 (August 3, 2005).
    As noted above, 10 CSR 10-5.455, Control of Emission from Solvent 
Cleanup Operations, was approved into the Missouri SIP as a RACT rule 
on February 17, 2000. 65 FR 8060 (February 17, 2000). At the time the 
rule was approved into the SIP, 10 CSR 10-5.455 applied to all 
installations throughout St. Louis City and Jefferson, St. Charles, 
Franklin and St. Louis Counties that allowed the performance of any 
cleaning operation involving the use of organic solvents or solvent 
solutions.
    By letter dated January 15, 2019, Missouri requested that the EPA 
remove 10 CSR 10-5.455 from the SIP. Section 110(l) of the CAA 
prohibits EPA from approving a SIP revision that interferes with any 
applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further 
progress (RFP), or any other applicable requirement of the CAA. The 
State supplemented its SIP revision with a July 11, 2019, letter in 
order to address the requirements of section 110(l) of the CAA.

IV. What is the EPA's analysis of Missouri's SIP revision request?

    In its July 11, 2019 letter, Missouri states that it intended its 
RACT rules, such as 10 CSR 10-5.455, to solely apply to existing 
sources in accordance with section 172(c)(1) of the CAA.\1\ Missouri 
states that although the applicability section of 10 CSR 10-5.455 
specifies that the rule applies to all installations located throughout 
St. Louis City and Jefferson, St. Charles, Franklin and St. Louis 
Counties, the only facilities that met the applicability criteria of 
the rule were Ford Motor Company, St. Louis Assembly Plant; Chrysler 
Group LLC South Assembly Plant; and General Motors LLC Wentzville 
Center (hereinafter referred to as ``Ford'', ``Chrysler'', and 
``General Motors'', respectively).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The EPA agrees with Missouri's interpretation of CAA section 
172(c)(1) in regard to whether RACT is required for existing 
sources, but also notes that the State regulation establishing RACT 
may apply to new sources as well, dependent upon the State 
regulation's language.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Missouri, in its July 11, 2019 letter, indicated that MDNR 
``marked'' the Ford plant as shutdown in 2008 and the Chrysler plant as 
shutdown in 2011. The EPA confirmed that Ford and Chrysler are no 
longer in operation \2\ and are therefore no longer subject to 10 CSR 
10-5.455. Missouri further indicated in the July 11, 2019 letter that 
General Motors is no longer subject to 10 CSR 10-5.455 in accordance 
with paragraph (1)(C)8.B. which exempts cleaning operations for 
emission units within the auto and light duty truck assembly coatings 
category listed for regulation under section 183(e) of the Clean Air 
Act.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The EPA reviewed MDNR's website that lists active, issued 
permits to facilities in Missouri and did not observe a permit for 
Ford or Chrysler. Further, the EPA reviewed EPA's ICIS-Air database 
which indicated that both facilities are ``permanently closed''.
    \3\ The Title V Operating Permit issued to General Motors by 
Missouri on December 4, 2017, which is included in docket, supports 
the interpretation that paragraph (1)(C)8.B. exempts the facility 
from 10 CSR 10-5.455.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As stated above, Missouri contends that 10 CSR 10-5.455 may be 
removed from the SIP because section 172(c)(1) of the CAA requires RACT 
for existing sources, and because 10 CSR 10-5.455 was applicable to 
only three sources \4\

[[Page 56195]]

that are no longer subject to the rule and, therefore, the rule no 
longer reduces VOC emissions. Because these three facilities are no 
longer subject to the rule, the EPA believes the rule no longer 
provides an emission reduction benefit to the St. Louis Area and is 
proposing to remove it from the SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The EPA indicated in the March 18, 1996 Federal Register 
document (61 FR 10968), which proposed to approve 10 CSR 10-5.455 
into Missouri's SIP, that three ``automobile manufacturers'' were 
subject to this rule but did not specifically name the three 
facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Missouri's July 11, 2019 letter states that any new sources or 
major modifications of existing sources are subject to new source 
review (NSR) permitting. Under NSR, a new major source or major 
modification of an existing source with a PTE of 250 tons per year 
(tpy) \5\ or more of any NAAQS pollutant is required to obtain a 
Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permit when the area is 
in attainment or unclassifiable, which requires an analysis of Best 
Available Control Technology (BACT) in addition to an air quality 
analysis and an additional impacts analysis. Sources with a PTE greater 
than 100 tpy, but less than 250 tpy,\6\ are required to obtain a minor 
permit in accordance with Missouri's New Source Review permitting 
program, which is approved into the SIP.\7\ Further, a new major source 
or major modification of an existing source with a PTE of 100 tpy or 
more of any NAAQS pollutant is required to obtain a nonattainment (NA) 
NSR permit when the area is in nonattainment, which requires an 
analysis of Lowest Achievable Emission Rate (LAER) in addition to an 
air quality analysis, an additional impacts analysis and emission 
offsets. The EPA agrees with this analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The PSD major source threshold for certain sources is 100 
tpy rather than 250 tpy (see 40 CFR 52.21(b)(1)(i)(a) and 10 C.S.R. 
10-6.060(8)(A)).
    \6\ Except for those sources with a PSD major source threshold 
of 100 tpy.
    \7\ EPA's latest approval of Missouri's NSR permitting program 
rule was published in the Federal Register on October 11, 2016. 81 
FR 70025.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Missouri has demonstrated that removal of 10 CSR 10-5.455 will not 
interfere with attainment of the NAAQS, RFP \8\ or any other applicable 
requirement of the CAA because the only three sources that were subject 
to the rule are no longer subject and the removal of the rule will not 
cause VOC emissions to increase. Therefore, the EPA proposes to approve 
the removal of 10 CSR 10-5.455 from the SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ RFP is not applicable to the St. Louis Area because for 
marginal ozone nonattainment areas, such as the St. Louis Area, the 
specific requirements of section 182(a) apply in lieu of the 
attainment planning requirements that would otherwise apply under 
section 172(c), including the attainment demonstration and 
reasonably available control measures (RACM) under section 
172(c)(1), reasonable further progress (RFP) under section 
172(c)(2), and contingency measures under section 172(c)(9).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?

    The State submission has met the public notice requirements for SIP 
submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The submission also 
satisfied the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. The 
State provided public notice on this SIP revision from May 15, 2018 to 
August 2, 2018 and received twelve comments from the EPA that related 
to Missouri's lack of an adequate demonstration that the rule could be 
removed from the SIP in accordance with section 110(l) of the CAA, 
whether the rule applied to new sources and other implications related 
to rescinding the rule. Missouri's July 11, 2019 letter and December 3, 
2018 response to comments on the state rescission rulemaking addressed 
the EPA's comments. In addition, the revision meets the substantive SIP 
requirements of the CAA, including section 110 and implementing 
regulations.

VI. What action is the EPA taking?

    The EPA is proposing to approve Missouri's request to rescind 10 
CSR 10-5.455 from the SIP because the rule applied to three facilities 
that are no longer subject and because the rule is not applicable to 
any other source. Therefore, the rule no longer serves to reduce 
emissions in the St. Louis Area. Furthermore, any new sources or major 
modifications of existing sources in the St. Louis Area are subject to 
NSR permitting.\9\ We are processing this as a proposed action because 
we are soliciting comments on this proposed action. Final rulemaking 
will occur after consideration of any comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ ``NSR Permitting'' includes PSD permitting in areas 
designated attainment and unclassifiable, NA NSR in areas designated 
nonattainment and minor source permitting.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VII. Incorporation by Reference

    In this document, the EPA is proposing to amend regulatory text 
that includes incorporation by reference. As described in the proposed 
amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth below, the EPA is proposing to 
remove provisions of the EPA-Approved Missouri Regulation from the 
Missouri State Implementation Plan, which is incorporated by reference 
in accordance with the requirements of 1 CFR part 51.

VIII. 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).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or 
in any other area where 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

[[Page 56196]]

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic 
compounds.

    Dated: August 24, 2020.
James Gulliford,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the EPA proposes to amend 
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


Sec.  52.1320  [Amended]

0
2. In Sec.  52.1320, the table in paragraph (c) is amended by removing 
the entry ``10-5.455'' under the heading ``Chapter 5--Air Quality 
Standards and Air Pollution Control Regulations for the St. Louis 
Metropolitan Area''.
[FR Doc. 2020-19009 Filed 9-10-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.