Air Plan Approval; Missouri; Removal of Control of Emissions From the Application of Deadeners and Adhesives, 26450-26452 [2021-10124]

Download as PDF 26450 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 92 / Friday, May 14, 2021 / Proposed Rules requirements, Volatile organic compounds. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. Dated: May 6, 2021. Diana Esher, Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 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? VII. Incorporation by Reference VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews [FR Doc. 2021–10203 Filed 5–13–21; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R07–OAR–2021–0332; FRL–10023– 72–Region 7] Air Plan Approval; Missouri; Removal of Control of Emissions From the Application of Deadeners and Adhesives 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 control of emissions from the application of deadeners and adhesives in the St. Louis, Missouri area from its SIP. This rescission does not have an adverse effect on air quality and meets the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA). The EPA’s proposed approval of this rule revision is in accordance with the requirements of the CAA. DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 14, 2021. ADDRESSES: You may send comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07– OAR–2021–0332 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: Ashley Keas, Environmental Protection Agency, Region 7 Office, Air Quality Planning Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219; telephone number: (913) 551–7629; email address: keas.ashley@epa.gov. khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:54 May 13, 2021 Jkt 253001 I. Written Comments Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2021– 0332 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) 10–5.370, Control of Emissions from the Application of Deadeners and Adhesives, 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 rescinded the rule because the only source once subject to the rule ceased operations in 2009. 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, PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 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 St. Louis City 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 the EPA into the SIP included reasonably available control technology (RACT) rules as required by CAA section 172(b)(2), including 10– 5.370, Control of Emissions from the Application of Deadeners and Adhesives. 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 previously, 10 CSR 10– 5.370, Control of Emissions from the Application of Deadeners and Adhesives, was approved into the Missouri SIP as a RACT rule on March 5, 1990 (55 FR 7712, March 5, 1990). At the time that the rule was approved into the SIP, 10 CSR 10–5.370 applied to all installations in St. Louis City and Franklin, Jefferson, St. Charles, and St. Louis Counties in Missouri that had the E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 92 / Friday, May 14, 2021 / Proposed Rules khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS uncontrolled potential to emit more than 100 tons per year or 250 kilograms per day of VOCs from the application of deadeners and adhesives. By letter dated January 15, 2019, Missouri requested that the EPA remove 10 CSR 10–5.370 from the SIP. Section 110(l) of the CAA prohibits the 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. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met? In its July 11, 2019 letter, Missouri states that it intended its RACT rules, such as 10 CSR 10–5.370, 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 10–5.370 states that the rule applies to all installations (located within the St. Louis area), the rule applied to a single existing source, the Chrysler Corporation, consisting of the north and south assembly plants, as indicated in the general provisions and emission limit sections of the rule. In addition, Missouri states that the rule does not impose an emission limit for any other source besides the Chrysler Corporation. Missouri, in its July 11, 2019 letter, indicates that the Chrysler north plant (189–0231) ceased operations in 2009 with demolition of structures occuring between 2010 and 2011; and the Chrysler south plant (189–0002) similarly ceased operations in 2009 and was demolished in 2010. The EPA has confirmed that the facility is decommissioned and is not subject to 10 CSR 10–5.370. As stated previously, Missouri asserts that 10 CSR 10–5.370 may be removed from the SIP because section 172(c)(1) of the CAA requires RACT for existing sources, and because 10 CSR 10–5.370 was applicable to a single source that has permanently ceased operations and therefore the rule no longer reduces VOC emissions. Because the Chrysler Corporation was the only source that was subject to the rule, and because the facility has been shut-down and dismantled since 2011, the EPA is proposing to find that the rule no longer 1 The EPA agrees with Missouri’s interpretation of CAA section 172(c)(1) in regards 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. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:54 May 13, 2021 Jkt 253001 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 potential to emit (PTE) of 250 tons per year (tpy) 2 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,3 are required to obtain a minor permit in accordance with Missouri’s New Source Review permitting program, which is approved into the SIP.4 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 10–5.370 will not interfere with attainment of the NAAQS, RFP 5 or any other applicable requirement of the CAA because the single source subject to the rule has permanently ceased operations and removal of the rule will not cause VOC emissions to increase. Therefore, the EPA proposes to approve removal of 10 CSR 10–5.370 from the Missouri SIP. 2 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)). 3 Except for those sources with a PSD major source threshold of 100 tpy. 4 The EPA’s latest approval of Missouri’s NSR permitting program rule was published in the Federal Register on October 11, 2016 (81 FR 70025). 5 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). PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 26451 V. What is the EPA’s analysis of Missouri’s SIP revision request? 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 June 25, 2018, to August 2, 2018, and held a public hearing on July 26, 2018. Missouri received five 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. Missouri’s July 11, 2019 letter 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 10–5.370 from the SIP because the rule applied to a single source that has permanently ceased operations and because the rule was not applicable to additional sources, it 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.6 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 Regulations 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, the EPA’s role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of 6 ‘‘NSR Permitting’’ includes PSD permitting in areas designated attainment and unclassifiable, NA NSR in areas designated nonattainment and minor source permitting. E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS 26452 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 92 / Friday, May 14, 2021 / Proposed Rules 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); • 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 the 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 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. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:54 May 13, 2021 Jkt 253001 Dated: May 7, 2021. Edward H. Chu, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7. and five-year reviews, where applicable, have been completed. However, this deletion does not preclude future actions under Superfund. For the reasons stated in the DATES: Comments regarding this preamble, the EPA proposes to amend proposed action must be submitted on 40 CFR part 52 as set forth below: or before June 14, 2021. PART 52—APPROVAL AND ADDRESSES: EPA has established a PROMULGATION OF docket for this action under the Docket IMPLEMENTATION PLANS Identification number included in Table 1 in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION ■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 section of this document. Submit your continues to read as follows: comments, identified by the appropriate Docket ID number, by one of the Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq. following methods: Subpart AA—Missouri • https://www.regulations.gov. Follow on-line instructions for ■ 2. In § 52.1320, the table in paragraph submitting comments. Once submitted, (c) is amended by removing the entry ‘‘10–5.370’’ under the heading ‘‘Chapter comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may 5—Air Quality Standards and Air Pollution Control Regulations for the St. publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit Louis Metropolitan Area’’. electronically any information you [FR Doc. 2021–10124 Filed 5–13–21; 8:45 am] consider to be Confidential Business BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION etc.) must be accompanied by a written AGENCY comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and 40 CFR Part 300 should include discussion of all points [EPA–HQ–SFUND–1983–0002, EPA–HQ– you wish to make. The EPA will SFUND–1986–0005, EPA–HQ–SFUND–1987– generally not consider comments or 0002, EPA–HQ–SFUND–1989–0011, EPA– comment contents located outside of the HQ–SFUND–1990–0010, EPA–HQ–SFUND– primary submission (i.e. on the web, 1990–0011, EPA–HQ–SFUND–1993–0001, cloud, or other file sharing system). For EPA–HQ–SFUND–2000–0004, EPA–HQ– SFUND–2002–0008, EPA–HQ–SFUND–2003– additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, 0010, EPA–HQ–SFUND–2005–0011, EPA– HQ–SFUND–2006–0759, EPA–HQ–SFUND– information about CBI or multimedia 2009–0587, EPA–HQ–SFUND–2011–0076, submissions, and general guidance on EPA–HQ–SFUND–2011–0077; FRL–10023– making effective comments, please visit 77–OLEM] https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ commenting-epa-dockets. Proposed Deletion From the National • Email: Table 2 in the Priorities List SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document provides an email AGENCY: Environmental Protection address to submit public comments for Agency (EPA). the proposed deletion action. ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of intent. Instructions: Direct your comments to SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection the Docket Identification number included in Table 1 in the Agency (EPA) is issuing a Notice of Intent to delete nine sites and partially SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of delete eleven sites from the National this document. EPA’s policy is that all Priorities List (NPL) and requests public comments received will be included in comments on this proposed action. The the public docket without change and NPL, promulgated pursuant to section may be made available online at https:// 105 of the Comprehensive www.regulations.gov, including any Environmental Response, personal information provided, unless Compensation, and Liability Act the comment includes information (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is an claimed to be Confidential Business appendix of the National Oil and Information (CBI) or other information Hazardous Substances Pollution whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Contingency Plan (NCP). The EPA and Do not submit information that you the state, through its designated state consider to be CBI or otherwise agency, have determined that all protected through https:// appropriate response actions under www.regulations.gov or email. The CERCLA, other than operations and https://www.regulations.gov website is maintenance of the remedy, monitoring an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\14MYP1.SGM 14MYP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 92 (Friday, May 14, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 26450-26452]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-10124]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R07-OAR-2021-0332; FRL-10023-72-Region 7]


Air Plan Approval; Missouri; Removal of Control of Emissions From 
the Application of Deadeners and Adhesives

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 
control of emissions from the application of deadeners and adhesives in 
the St. Louis, Missouri area from its SIP. This rescission does not 
have an adverse effect on air quality and meets the requirements of the 
Clean Air Act (CAA). The EPA's proposed approval of this rule revision 
is in accordance with the requirements of the CAA.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 14, 2021.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2021-0332 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: Ashley Keas, Environmental Protection 
Agency, Region 7 Office, Air Quality Planning Branch, 11201 Renner 
Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219; telephone number: (913) 551-7629; 
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?
VII. Incorporation by Reference
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Written Comments

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2021-
0332 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) 10-5.370, Control of Emissions from the Application 
of Deadeners and Adhesives, 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 rescinded the rule because the only source once subject to the 
rule ceased operations in 2009. 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 St. Louis City 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 the EPA into the SIP 
included reasonably available control technology (RACT) rules as 
required by CAA section 172(b)(2), including 10-5.370, Control of 
Emissions from the Application of Deadeners and Adhesives.
    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 previously, 10 CSR 10-5.370, Control of Emissions from the 
Application of Deadeners and Adhesives, was approved into the Missouri 
SIP as a RACT rule on March 5, 1990 (55 FR 7712, March 5, 1990). At the 
time that the rule was approved into the SIP, 10 CSR 10-5.370 applied 
to all installations in St. Louis City and Franklin, Jefferson, St. 
Charles, and St. Louis Counties in Missouri that had the

[[Page 26451]]

uncontrolled potential to emit more than 100 tons per year or 250 
kilograms per day of VOCs from the application of deadeners and 
adhesives.
    By letter dated January 15, 2019, Missouri requested that the EPA 
remove 10 CSR 10-5.370 from the SIP. Section 110(l) of the CAA 
prohibits the 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. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?

    In its July 11, 2019 letter, Missouri states that it intended its 
RACT rules, such as 10 CSR 10-5.370, 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 10-5.370 
states that the rule applies to all installations (located within the 
St. Louis area), the rule applied to a single existing source, the 
Chrysler Corporation, consisting of the north and south assembly 
plants, as indicated in the general provisions and emission limit 
sections of the rule. In addition, Missouri states that the rule does 
not impose an emission limit for any other source besides the Chrysler 
Corporation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The EPA agrees with Missouri's interpretation of CAA section 
172(c)(1) in regards 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, indicates that the Chrysler 
north plant (189-0231) ceased operations in 2009 with demolition of 
structures occuring between 2010 and 2011; and the Chrysler south plant 
(189-0002) similarly ceased operations in 2009 and was demolished in 
2010. The EPA has confirmed that the facility is decommissioned and is 
not subject to 10 CSR 10-5.370.
    As stated previously, Missouri asserts that 10 CSR 10-5.370 may be 
removed from the SIP because section 172(c)(1) of the CAA requires RACT 
for existing sources, and because 10 CSR 10-5.370 was applicable to a 
single source that has permanently ceased operations and therefore the 
rule no longer reduces VOC emissions. Because the Chrysler Corporation 
was the only source that was subject to the rule, and because the 
facility has been shut-down and dismantled since 2011, the EPA is 
proposing to find that 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 potential to emit (PTE) of 
250 tons per year (tpy) \2\ 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,\3\ are required to obtain 
a minor permit in accordance with Missouri's New Source Review 
permitting program, which is approved into the SIP.\4\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 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)).
    \3\ Except for those sources with a PSD major source threshold 
of 100 tpy.
    \4\ The 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 10-5.370 will not 
interfere with attainment of the NAAQS, RFP \5\ or any other applicable 
requirement of the CAA because the single source subject to the rule 
has permanently ceased operations and removal of the rule will not 
cause VOC emissions to increase. Therefore, the EPA proposes to approve 
removal of 10 CSR 10-5.370 from the Missouri SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 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. What is the EPA's analysis of Missouri's SIP revision request?

    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 June 25, 2018, 
to August 2, 2018, and held a public hearing on July 26, 2018. Missouri 
received five 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. Missouri's July 11, 2019 
letter 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 10-5.370 from the SIP because the rule applied to a single source 
that has permanently ceased operations and because the rule was not 
applicable to additional sources, it 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.\6\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ ``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 Regulations 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, the EPA's role is to approve state choices, 
provided that they meet the criteria of

[[Page 26452]]

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);
     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 the 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 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: May 7, 2021.
Edward H. Chu,
Acting 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

0
2. In Sec.  52.1320, the table in paragraph (c) is amended by removing 
the entry ``10-5.370'' under the heading ``Chapter 5--Air Quality 
Standards and Air Pollution Control Regulations for the St. Louis 
Metropolitan Area''.

[FR Doc. 2021-10124 Filed 5-13-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.