Air Plan Approval; Missouri; St. Louis Area Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program, 55918-55925 [2022-19621]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
55918
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 13, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by November 14,
2022. 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. Parties with objections to this
direct final rule are encouraged to file a
comment in response to the parallel
notice of proposed rulemaking for this
action published in the proposed rules
section of this issue of the Federal
Register, rather than file an immediate
petition for judicial review of this direct
final rule, so that EPA can withdraw
this direct final rule and address the
comment in the proposed rulemaking.
This action may not be challenged later
in proceedings to enforce its
requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
■
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: September 7, 2022.
David Cash,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1.
Part 52 of chapter I, title 40 of the
Code of Federal Regulations is amended
as follows:
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart OO—Rhode Island
2. In § 52.2070, in paragraph (e),
amend the table by revising the entry for
‘‘Infrastructure SIP and Transport SIP
for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS’’, to read as
follows:
■
§ 52.2070
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(e) * * *
*
*
RHODE ISLAND NON REGULATORY
Name of non regulatory SIP
provision
Applicable
geographic or
nonattainment
area
State
submittal
date/
effective date
*
*
*
Infrastructure SIP and Trans- Statewide ...............
port SIP for the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS.
[FR Doc. 2022–19693 Filed 9–12–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R07–OAR–2022–0419; FRL–9830–02–
R7]
Air Plan Approval; Missouri; St. Louis
Area Vehicle Inspection and
Maintenance Program
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is taking final action to
approve, through parallel processing,
revisions to the Missouri State
Implementation Plan (SIP) relating to
the St. Louis area’s vehicle Inspection
and Maintenance (I/M) Program
received on November 12, 2019, March
2, 2022, and May 24, 2022. In the
submissions, Missouri requests the
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:30 Sep 12, 2022
Jkt 256001
12/6/2017
EPA approved date
Explanations
*
*
May 31, 2022, 87 FR 32320
and September 13, 2022
[Insert Federal Register
citation].
*
*
This submittal is approved with respect to
the following CAA elements: 110(a)(2)
(A); (B); (C); (D); (E); (F); (G); (J); (K);
(L); and (M). This submittal is disapproved for (H). This approval includes
the Transport SIP for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS, which shows that Rhode Island
does not significantly contribute to PM2.5
nonattainment or maintenance in any
other state.
EPA’s approval of revisions to a
regulation and related plan that
implement the St. Louis area’s
Inspection and Maintenance program
called, Gateway Vehicle Inspection
Program (GVIP). We are approving
Missouri’s removal of vehicles
registered in Franklin County, unless
the vehicle is primarily operated in the
rest of the area, from the Gateway
Vehicle Inspection Program. The
revisions to this rule include amending
the rule exemption section for vehicles
subject to the rule, removing
unnecessary words, amending
definitions specific to the rule, updates
due to technology changes, and other
minor edits. These revisions do not
interfere with attainment or
maintenance of any National Ambient
Air Quality Standard (NAAQS),
reasonable further progress, or other
Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements.
Approval of these revisions will ensure
consistency between state and federally
approved rules.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
October 13, 2022.
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
The EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–R07–OAR–2022–0419. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov web site.
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 www.regulations.gov
or please contact the person identified
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section for additional
information.
ADDRESSES:
Jed
D. Wolkins, Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 7 Office, Air Quality
Planning Branch, 11201 Renner
Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219;
telephone number: (913) 551–7588;
email address: wolkins.jed@epa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
E:\FR\FM\13SER1.SGM
13SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 13, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Parallel Processing
II. History and Current Status of St. Louis
Area Air Quality
III. Background of Missouri’s I/M Program
IV. What is being addressed in this
document?
V. Have the requirements for approval of a
SIP revision been met?
VI. The EPA’s Response to Comments
VII. What action is the EPA taking?
VIII. Environmental Justice Considerations
IX. Incorporation by Reference
X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES
I. Parallel Processing
The EPA is using parallel processing
to approve this SIP. Parallel processing
refers to a process that utilizes
concurrent state and federal proposed
rulemaking actions, consistent with the
provisions of 40 CFR part 51, appendix
V. Generally, the state submits a copy of
the proposed regulation or other
revisions to the EPA before conducting
its public hearing and completing its
public comment process under state
law. The EPA reviews this proposed
state action and prepares a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) under
federal law.1 If, after the state completes
its public comment process and after the
EPA’s public comment process, the state
changes its final submittal from the
proposed submittal, the EPA evaluates
those changes and decides whether to
publish another NPRM in light of those
changes or to proceed to taking final
action on its proposed action and
describe the state’s changes in its final
rulemaking action. Final rulemaking
action by the EPA only occurs after the
final submittal has been adopted by the
state and formally submitted to the EPA.
Missouri provided its state-approved
nonregulatory changes to the EPA on
November 12, 2019. On March 2, 2022,
Missouri submitted a supplemental
revision, containing the not yet finalized
revised regulation and supplemental
emission controls to the EPA. Missouri’s
public comment process was completed
for this revision, but the implementing
state regulation in the submittal had not
been formally submitted by the state to
the EPA at the time of our May 19, 2022,
proposed approval.
In accordance with the parallel
processing provisions in section 2.3.1 of
40 CFR part 51, appendix V, the State
has been provided an opportunity to
consider the EPA’s comments prior to
submission of a final plan for the EPA’s
review and has submitted a schedule for
final submittal of the state regulation.
Specifically, Missouri’s schedule
included publication of the order of
rulemaking in the Missouri Register on
April 15, 2022. The final state regulation
was published in Missouri’s Code of
State Regulations (CSR) on April 30,
2022 and became effective on May 30,
2022.
Because the State had satisfied all
requirements for parallel processing
concerning the March 2, 2022,
submittal, the EPA proposed to approve
the submittal through parallel
processing on May 19, 2022.
Missouri formally submitted the final
regulation package to the EPA on May
24, 2022. The May 24, 2022, submittal
contained two changes to 10 CSR 10–
5.381. The changes are:
1. In 10 CSR 10–5.381 (1)(B)8.
Missouri changed ‘‘biennial’’ to
‘‘biennially’’. The sentence in the March
2, 2022 submittal was ‘‘Motor vehicles
driven fewer than twelve thousand
(12,000) miles biennial that receive a
mileage based exemption described in
subsection (4)(H) of this rule;’’
(emphasis added). The sentence now is
‘‘Motor vehicles driven fewer than
twelve thousand (12,000) miles
biennially that receive a mileage based
exemption described in subsection
(4)(H) of this rule;’’ (emphasis added).
2. 10 CSR 10–5.381 (2)(O) Missouri
moved ‘‘pounds’’ behind the numeric
version of 8,500. The sentence in the
March 2, 2022 submission was ‘‘Light
Duty Truck (LDT)—Any motor vehicle
rated at eight thousand five hundred
pounds (8,500). . .’’ (emphasis added).
The sentence is now ‘‘Light Duty Truck
(LDT)—Any motor vehicle rated at eight
thousand five hundred (8,500) pounds
. . .’’(emphasis added).
The EPA has evaluated these
revisions and finds them to be
grammatical in nature, not substantially
changing the purpose and intent of the
rule, and not requiring another proposal
or comment period. Therefore, in this
final action, the EPA is approving these
changes to the rule.
II. History and Current Status of St.
Louis Area Air Quality
A. The Ozone NAAQS
Although not the case in our proposed
rulemaking on May 19, 2022, in some instances, the
EPA’s NPRM is published in the Federal Register
during the same time frame that the state is holding
its public hearing and conducting its public
comment process. The state and the EPA then
provide for concurrent public comment periods on
both the state action and federal action.
1
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:30 Sep 12, 2022
Jkt 256001
The St. Louis, Missouri-Illinois bistate area, which has been designated as
nonattainment for several Ozone
NAAQS, has historically included the
counties of Franklin, Jefferson, St.
Charles, and St. Louis, and St. Louis
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
55919
City in Missouri, and the counties of
Madison, Monroe and St. Clair in
Illinois (hereafter referred to as the St.
Louis area unless otherwise noted). For
all Ozone NAAQS, except for the 2015
Ozone NAAQS, the St. Louis area has
been redesignated to attainment as
described in this section.
On May 12, 2003, the EPA
redesignated the St. Louis area from
Serious nonattainment to attainment for
the 1979 Ozone NAAQS. (68 FR 25418).
On June 15, 2005, the EPA revoked the
1979 1-hour Ozone NAAQS for all areas
except the 8-hour Ozone nonattainment
early action compact (EAC) areas. (70
FR 44470). The St. Louis area did not
participate in the EAC and therefore, the
1-hour standard was revoked for all
areas in Missouri effective June 15,
2005.
On February 20, 2015, the EPA
redesignated the St. Louis area from
Moderate nonattainment to attainment
for the 1997 8-hour Ozone NAAQS. (80
FR 9207). On March 6, 2015, the EPA
revoked the 1997 8-hour Ozone
NAAQS. (80 FR 12264).
On September 20, 2018, the EPA
redesignated the St. Louis area from
Moderate nonattainment to attainment
and approved a maintenance plan for
the 2008 8-hour Ozone NAAQS. (83 FR
47572). The 2008 8-hour Ozone NAAQS
has not been revoked.
On November 16, 2017, the EPA
designated all areas of Missouri except
the St. Louis area as attainment/
unclassifiable for the 2015 8-hour Ozone
NAAQS. (82 FR 54232). On April 30,
2018, the EPA designated Boles
Township of Franklin County, St.
Charles County, St. Louis County, and
St. Louis City as Marginal
nonattainment for the 2015 Ozone
NAAQS. (83 FR 25776). As part of that
same action, the EPA designated
Jefferson County and the remaining
portion of Franklin County as
attainment/unclassifiable. On July 10,
2020, the District of Columbia Circuit
Court remanded the Jefferson County
designation (among other designations)
back to the EPA. The Court upheld the
EPA’s designation of Boles Township as
nonattainment and the remainder of
Franklin County as attainment/
unclassifiable.2 In response to the Court
remand, the EPA revised the Jefferson
County designation to nonattainment on
May 26, 2021. (86 FR 31438).
B. Other NAAQS
On March 29, 1999, the EPA
redesignated a portion of St. Louis
County and St. Louis City from
2 Clean Wisconsin v. EPA, 964 F.3d 1145 (D.C.
Cir. 2020).
E:\FR\FM\13SER1.SGM
13SER1
55920
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 13, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
nonattainment to attainment for the
1971 Carbon Monoxide (CO) NAAQS
(64 FR 3855).
On August 3, 2018, the EPA
redesignated Franklin County, Jefferson
County, St. Charles County, St. Louis
County, and St. Louis City from
nonattainment to attainment for the
1997 Annual Fine Particulate Matter
(PM2.5) NAAQS (83 FR 38033).
A portion of Jefferson County is
currently designated nonattainment for
both the 2008 and 1978 Lead NAAQS.
This nonattainment area is currently
monitoring compliance with both the
1978 and 2008 Lead NAAQS.3 The rest
of the St. Louis Area is designated
attainment/unclassifiable for both the
2008 and 1978 Lead NAAQS.
On January 28, 2022, the EPA
redesignated a portion of Jefferson
County from nonattainment to
attainment for the 2010 1-hour SO2
NAAQS (87 FR 4508). The rest of the St.
Louis Area is designated as either
attainment or unclassifiable for the 2010
SO2 NAAQS.
The St. Louis Area is designated
attainment/unclassifiable for all other
NAAQS.
III. Background of Missouri’s I/M
Program
Under sections 182 (b)(4) and (c)(3) of
the CAA, vehicle I/M programs are
required for areas that are classified as
Moderate or above nonattainment for
Ozone. As a result, Missouri has
previously submitted, and the EPA has
previously approved into the SIP an I/
M program for the St. Louis Area of
Franklin County, Jefferson County, St.
Charles County, St. Louis County, and
St. Louis City.4 At the time of the
program’s inception, the program was
based on tailpipe testing. In 2000, the
EPA approved Missouri’s switch to
Onboard Diagnostic testing for the same
geographic area, consistent with our
regulations and section 182 of the
CAA.5 In 2015, the EPA approved
revising and recodification of the I/M
program.6
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES
IV. What is being addressed in this
document?
The EPA is approving, through
parallel processing, revisions to the
Missouri SIP received on November 12,
2019, March 2, 2022, and May 24, 2022.
In the November 12, 2019, submission,
Missouri requested the EPA’s approval
3 See file titled Herculaneum AQS Report in
Docket.
4 50 FR 32411, August 12, 1985.
5 65 FR 62295, May, 18, 2000.
6 Missouri recodified the I/M regulations from 10
CSR 10–5.380 to 10 CSR 10–5.381. 80 FR 11323,
March 3, 2015.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:30 Sep 12, 2022
Jkt 256001
of revisions to the vehicle I/M Program
also known as GVIP, for the St. Louis
area. The revisions remove both
Franklin and Jefferson Counties from
the GVIP; however, the EPA is only
taking action on the removal of Franklin
County from the GVIP in accordance
with a subsequent request from
Missouri.
At the time of the November 12, 2019
submission, Missouri had not yet
revised the implementing GVIP
regulations nor provided supplemental
emission controls to offset the emission
increases resulting from ceasing vehicle
emission inspections in the Boles
Township portion of the nonattainment
area, in accordance with CAA section
110(l), 42 U.S.C. 7410(l).
At the time of Missouri’s November
12, 2019, submission, Jefferson County
was designated as attainment/
unclassifiable for the 2015 Ozone
NAAQS. When the EPA designated
Jefferson County to nonattainment on
May 26, 2021 (86 FR 31438), Missouri
requested that the EPA act on the
removal of Franklin County from the
GVIP plan and postpone action on the
removal of Jefferson County from the
GVIP plan by letter dated December 6,
2021.7 As stated in the EPA’s comments
during Missouri’s public notice on their
draft rulemaking, Missouri would need
to provide further supplemental
emission controls for the EPA to be able
to propose approving the removal of I/
M in Jefferson County as long as the
County remains designated
nonattainment.8 The EPA’s
longstanding position is that the
implementing rule revision and
supplemental emission controls, for the
nonattainment area, are needed for the
EPA’s approval. This position is
consistent with the CAA, our
implementing regulations, and our
previous approvals of I/M removal
across the nation. Additionally, in
response to comment from the EPA on
the draft rulemaking, Missouri limited
the implementing regulation’s
exemption to Franklin County as
opposed to exempting both Franklin
and Jefferson Counties.
On March 2, 2022, Missouri
submitted a draft SIP revision
supplementing the November 12, 2019,
submittal, along with a parallel
processing request. The March 2, 2022,
submittal included both the revised
implementing rule, 10 CSR 10–5.381,
and supplemental emission controls to
7 Missouri’s December 6, 2021 letter to EPA is
included in the docket for this action.
8 A summary of the EPA’s comments and
Missouri’s response can be found in the docket for
this action in the November 12, 2019 submittal.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
offset the increased emissions in the
Boles Township portion of Franklin
County that is designated as
nonattainment for the 2015 Ozone
NAAQS. The revision to 10 CSR 10–
5.381 adds an exemption for vehicles
registered in Franklin County from the
program unless the vehicles are
primarily operated in the remainder of
nonattainment area. The revisions to
this rule include amending the rule
exemption section for vehicles subject
to the rule, removing unnecessary
words, amending definitions specific to
the rule, and other minor edits. The EPA
is approving the portion of the
November 12, 2019, March 2, 2022, and
May 24, 2022, GVIP Plan relating to
Franklin County, St. Charles County, St.
Louis County, and St. Louis City, by
approving the removal of Franklin
County from the I/M Program, and fully
approving the revisions to 10 CSR 10–
5.381.
In accordance with Missouri’s
December 6, 2021, letter, the EPA is not
taking action on Missouri’s November
12, 2019, request to remove Jefferson
County from the I/M Program for the St.
Louis Area. Missouri states in the 2021
letter that it views the requests in the
2019 SIP revision to remove inspection
and maintenance requirements in
Franklin and Jefferson Counties as
severable. The EPA agrees the removal
of inspection and maintenance
requirements in Franklin and Jefferson
Counties are severable. Missouri also
states in the letter that the implementing
regulation, 10 CSR 10–5.381, continues
to require the inspection and
maintenance program to operate in
Jefferson County.
As a result of this action, the
nonregulatory 1999 Implementation
Plan for the Missouri Inspection and
Maintenance Program, originally
approved into the SIP on May 18, 2000,
65 FR 31480, remains approved into the
SIP for Jefferson County. The EPA
approves the nonregulatory Inspection
and Maintenance Program for the St.
Louis Area—2019 Revision, into the
SIP, which removes requirements for
Franklin County. The EPA also
approves the revisions to 10 CSR 10–
5.381.
The EPA’s analysis of the revisions
can be found in the ‘‘What is the EPA’s
analysis of Missouri’s SIP request?’’
section of our proposed approval and in
the technical support document (TSD),
which is included in this docket.9
9 87
E:\FR\FM\13SER1.SGM
FR 30437, May 19, 2022.
13SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 13, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
V. Have the requirements for approval
of a SIP revision been met?
Both the 2019 and 2022 State
submissions have met the public notice
requirements for SIP submissions in
accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The
submissions also satisfied the
completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51,
appendix V. The State provided public
notice on the November 12, 2019 SIP
revision from July 29, 2019 to August
29, 2019 and on the March 2, 2022 10
SIP revision from October 15, 2021 to
December 9, 2021. The State received
ten comments during the 2019 public
notice. The State received four
comments on the 2021 public notice.
The EPA finds Missouri has adequately
addressed the comments received in its
submissions. Please see the TSD for our
proposal for more discussion on
Missouri’s responses to comments.11 In
addition, as explained in our proposal
and in more detail in the TSD which is
part of this docket, the revision meets
the substantive SIP requirements of the
Clean Air Act (CAA), including section
110 and implementing regulations.12
VI. The EPA’s Response to Comments
The public comment period on the
EPA’s proposed rule opened May 19,
2022, the date of its publication in the
Federal Register and closed on June 21,
2022. During this period, the EPA
received one comment letter from an
anonymous commenter.
Comment 1: The commenter states
that the state lacks the legal authority or
rule necessary to implement and enforce
the vehicle coverage requirement.
Response 1: The EPA disagrees. The
Missouri Department of Natural
Resources (MoDNR) has legal authority
to implement and enforce the vehicle
inspection and maintenance program as
stated in 10 CSR 10–5.381, which it
submitted on March 2, 2022, and May
24, 2022. The MoDNR relies on the
Missouri Department of Revenue
(MDOR) for registration denial. MoDNR
is identified as the agency responsible
for implementing the GVIP along with
the MDOR for registration data and
enforcement of registration denial. 10
CSR 10–5.381 (2)(S), specifies MDOR as
responsible for registration denial.
In Missouri’s December 14, 2007,
submittal, approved March 3, 2015,
Missouri states that MDOR handles
registration denial and ‘‘all remaining I/
M program enforcement actions are the
responsibility of MDNR.’’ State law
provides that any person who violates a
requirement of sections 643.300 to
643.355 or a rule promulgated to enforce
sections 643.300 to 643.355 shall be
guilty of either an infraction for the first
offense, a class C misdemeanor for the
second offense, or a class B
misdemeanor for any subsequent
offenses (subsections 1–6 section
643.355, RSMo). State law also provides
that any person who violates any
procedural requirement of sections
643.300 to 643.355 shall be subject to a
fine of not less than five times the
amount of the fee charged pursuant to
section 643.350 or one hundred dollars,
whichever is greater (subsection 7 of
section 643.355, RSMo). The state has
the legal authority necessary to
implement the I/M program.
Comment 2: The commenter claims
the SIP lacks detailed description of the
number and types of vehicles to be
covered by the program, how many
vehicles registered in Franklin County
may ultimately be exempt from or
subject to the I/M requirements, and a
description of and accounting for all
classes of exempt vehicles.
Response 2: The EPA disagrees. 10
CSR 10–5.381(1)(A) describes the
number and types of vehicles to be
covered by the program. 10 CSR 10–
5.381 (1)(A) states that all vehicles
either registered in the St. Louis Area or
primarily operated in the Area unless
exempted by 10 CSR 10–5.381 (1)(B) are
55921
covered by the rule. 10 CSR 10–5.381
(1)(B) exempts the classes of:
• Heavy duty gasoline and diesel
vehicles,
• Light duty gasoline and diesel
vehicles manufactured prior to 1996,
• Motorcycles,
• Motorized tricycles,
• 100% electric powered vehicles,
• Plug-in hybrid vehicles,
• 100% hydrogen fueled vehicles,
• Vehicles fueled by something other
than:
Æ gasoline,
Æ E10–E85, or
Æ diesel,
• Vehicles registered in the St. Louis
Area but receive an out of area
exemption (for situations like a person
off to college or deployed as a member
of the armed forces),
• Registered historic vehicles,
• School buses,
• Tactical military vehicles, and
• Specially constructed vehicles.
10 CSR 10–5.381(B.) also has four
exemptions for either low total mileage,
low usage, low age, or short-term visit,
work, or deployment to a federal
installation.
While the types of vehicles covered is
important for implementation of rule,
the purpose of the EPA requiring the
State to provide the numbers and types
of vehicles either included or exempted
is to facilitate emission calculations
either for a program demonstration on
establishment 13 or CAA section 110(l)
demonstration that EPA’s approval of a
SIP revision would not interfere with
maintenance or attainment of the
NAAQS, reasonable further progress, or
any other applicable CAA requirement.
As discussed in our proposal, Missouri
submitted a CAA section 110(l)
demonstration to EPA based on MOVES
emission modeling.
Missouri in their submittal included
the following data on the number of
vehicles.14
TABLE 1—LIGHT DUTY VEHICLE POPULATION
Franklin
County
Year
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES
2017
2020
2025
2030
.....................................................................................
.....................................................................................
.....................................................................................
.....................................................................................
10 Final
Formal submission on May 24, 2022.
www.regulations.gov, document id: EPA–
R07–OAR–2022–0419–0013.
12 87 FR 30437, May 19, 2022.
11 See
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:30 Sep 12, 2022
Jkt 256001
Jefferson
County
109,775
120,300
141,326
167,655
222,144
241,869
281,277
330,622
13 It is possible for an established I/M program to
need to do a program demonstration again, most
often based on a new designation of Moderate or
higher nonattainment.
14 See the November 12, 2019, Missouri
submittal, Attachment 3. Attachment 3 also
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
St. Charles
County
369,863
400,161
460,691
536,485
St. Louis
County
966,358
1,038,921
1,183,889
1,365,411
St. Louis City
194,677
207,875
234,632
257,972
contains population numbers for other categories of
vehicles. The numbers in Table 1 are the sum of
passenger car, passenger truck, and light
commercial truck. For St. Louis City, Jefferson
County, St Charles County, St. Louis County, these
are the maximum of the subject vehicle population.
E:\FR\FM\13SER1.SGM
13SER1
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES
55922
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 13, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
Missouri also provided vehicle age
distributions. Missouri made the most
conservative assumption that all
Franklin County vehicles will be
exempted from the GVIP. Specifically,
Missouri used the maximum number of
vehicles that could be exempted—the
entire light duty Franklin County
vehicle population. The EPA finds that
using this assumption was appropriate.
Missouri’s modeling demonstration of
all light duty vehicles in Franklin
County not participating in the I/M
program increased emissions, and is
consistent with the I/M requirements of
40 CFR 51.356(b). Missouri provided the
requisite MOVES modeling
demonstration to analyze the projected
emissions change associated with
exempting these vehicles from the I/M
program. The EPA review of Missouri’s
analysis is in the Technical Support
Document (TSD) in the docket to this
action. The EPA believes MoDNR’s
analysis correctly accounts for all
potential vehicle emissions that may
occur from the removal of Franklin
County from the I/M program. The
modeling demonstrates that the removal
of Franklin County from the I/M
program will not interfere with
attainment or maintenance of the
NAAQS, reasonable further progress or
any other CAA requirement consistent
with the requirements of CAA section
110(l).
Comment 3: The commenter states the
SIP lacks a plan for how Franklin
County registered vehicles that are
primarily operated in the I/M coverage
area are to be identified, who (i.e.,
registration authorities or individual
motorists) will be responsible for
determining whether a vehicle
registered in Franklin County ‘‘is
primarily operated’’ in the St. Louis
nonattainment area and thus subject to
the GVIP, how Missouri, the EPA, or
individual citizens can determine which
Franklin County vehicles will continue
to be subject to the I/M requirements,
and how the determinations will be
documented. The commenter references
a 1992 Federal Register document
regarding how I/M programs should
easily identify vehicles.
Response 3: Vehicle owners have a
responsibility to comply with 10 CSR
10–5.381. The Missouri Department of
Natural Resources relies on tips to learn
about non-compliant individual private
owners and has the authority to enforce
the rule.
The core of the SIP revision is the
removal of Franklin County registered
vehicles from the I/M program, and
therefore, has the effect of defining
Franklin County registered vehicles as
‘‘elsewhere registered’’ vehicles. As
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:30 Sep 12, 2022
Jkt 256001
discussed in more detail in response to
Comment 2, Missouri did not rely on
any emission reductions from Franklin
County registered vehicles for
attainment or reasonable further
progress purposes in their CAA section
110(l) demonstration. Because
Missouri’s demonstration shows they
will not interfere with attainment or
maintenance of the NAAQS, reasonable
further progress, or any other CAA
requirement without claiming emissions
reductions from elsewhere registered
vehicles, Missouri’s existing steps to
identify and document elsewhere
registered vehicles that primarily
operate in the area are acceptable.
The commenter references a 1992
Federal Register document regarding
how I/M programs should easily
identify vehicles (57 FR 52950,
November 5, 1992). In the referenced
document, the EPA stated that an
alternative to registration denial for
vehicles registered in the coverage area
needs to ‘‘easily identify the subject
vehicles.’’ Registration denial is our
preferred method for identifying and
enforcing I/M on vehicles registered in
the I/M coverage area. Registration
denial works by having the state
registration agency only register a
vehicle in the I/M coverage area if that
vehicle has passed an I/M check or is
exempt. Registration denial continues to
be an acceptable enforcement method
for vehicles registered in the area. For
any I/M program, the vehicles registered
outside of the county are not as easy to
identify. However, as shown above,
exempting all vehicle in Franklin
County from I/M requirements will not
interfere with attainment or
maintenance of the NAAQS, reasonable
further progress, or any other CAA
requirement.
Comment 4: The commenter asserts
the proposed Missouri SIP provision
turns on when 51% of annual mileage
of a vehicle registered in Franklin
County occur in the coverage area.
Response 4: The EPA disagrees. The
proposed action does not turn on when
51% of annual mileage of a vehicle
registered in Franklin County occurs in
Jefferson County, St. Charles County, St.
Louis County, and the City of St. Louis.
The proposed action is based on the
EPA’s evaluation under section 110(l) of
the CAA, of the removal of Franklin
County registered vehicles from the I/M
program, with the caveat that if Franklin
County registered vehicles are primarily
operated in the I/M coverage area, then
those vehicles are also required to meet
I/M requirements. The elsewhereregistered provisions in 10 CSR 10–
5.381 (1)(A)2., 3., and 4 are a previously
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
SIP-approved part of Missouri’s GVIP
plan and implementing regulation.
The language, in 10 CSR 10–5.381
(1)(B)15., ‘‘exempt unless the vehicle is
primarily operated in the area of
Jefferson County, St. Charles County, St.
Louis County, and the City of St. Louis,’’
makes the Franklin County registered
vehicle exemption conform to the
elsewhere provisions in 10 CSR 10–
5.381 (1)(A)2., 3., and 4. The language
‘‘a vehicle is primarily operated in the
area if at least fifty-one percent (51%) of
the vehicle’s annual miles are in the
area’’ is the same language used to
define ‘‘primarily operated’’ throughout
the rule. Missouri included the phrase
‘‘primarily operated’’ to the newly
added exemption at 10 CSR 10–5.381
(1)(B)15. to conform with the previously
SIP-approved provisions in 10 CSR 10–
5.381 (1)(A)2., 3., and 4. Franklin
County is no longer part of the I/M
coverage area and is now defined as
‘‘elsewhere.’’ As stated above,
Missouri’s 110(l) demonstration shows
that the revisions will not interfere with
attainment of the NAAQS.
Comment 5: The commenter states
Missouri needs to ensure that all
Franklin County vehicle owners are
aware of the law and their potential
responsibilities under it.
Response 5: Missouri has met the
public notice provisions required by the
CAA. The rules are published on
Missouri’s Secretary of State website.15
Comment 6: The commenter states
that the SIP submission appears to be
requesting approval of 10 CSR 10–5 as
revised generally and thus is arguably
being submitted for reapproval of 10
CSR 10–5.381(1)(A)(3). While 10 CSR
10–5.381(1)(A)(3) was previously
approved into the SIP and has not been
specifically revised in this submission,
it presents the same implementation
and enforceability issues regarding
‘‘primarily operated’’ as noted for above
for 10 CSR 10–5.381(1)(B)(15). The
commenter states that the EPA should
not re-approve 10 CSR 10–5.381(1)(A)(3)
into the Missouri SIP.
Response 6: The EPA disagrees.
Missouri did not request such an action
and therefore the EPA is not
reapproving all of 10 CSR 10–5.16
Further, Missouri did not request, and
the EPA is not reapproving, all of 10
CSR 10–5.381. Consistent with
Missouri’s submittal, the EPA solicited
15 https://www.sos.mo.gov/adrules/csr/current/
10csr/10csr.
16 We do note the commenter may have made a
typographical error in stating ‘‘10 CSR 10–5’’.
Regardless, even if the commenter meant some
other specific part of 10 CSR 10–5, such specificity
does not change our answer or our approval of the
SIP submission.
E:\FR\FM\13SER1.SGM
13SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 13, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
comment on our proposed approval of
the substantive and administrative
revisions detailed in the proposal and
the TSD.
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES
VII. What action is the EPA taking?
The EPA is taking final action to
approve revisions to the Missouri SIP
received on November 12, 2019, March
2, 2022, and May 24, 2022. The EPA is
approving portions of the November 12,
2019 GVIP Plan, by approving the
removal of Franklin County from the I/
M program, and fully approving the
revisions to 10 CSR 10–5.381 received
on March 2 and May 24, 2022. The EPA
is not taking action on the remainder of
the November 12, 2019 GVIP Plan, at
this time.
VIII. Environmental Justice
Considerations
Executive Order 12898 (Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
Feb. 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies
to identify and address
‘‘disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects’’
of their actions on minority populations
and low-income populations to the
greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law. The EPA defines
environmental justice (EJ) as ‘‘the fair
treatment and meaningful involvement
of all people regardless of race, color,
national origin, or income with respect
to the development, implementation,
and enforcement of environmental laws,
regulations, and policies.’’ The EPA
further defines the term fair treatment to
mean that ‘‘no group of people should
bear a disproportionate burden of
environmental harms and risks,
including those resulting from the
negative environmental consequences of
industrial, governmental, and
commercial operations or programs and
policies.’’ 17 The EPA is providing
additional analysis of environmental
justice associated with this action for
the purpose of providing information to
the public and not as a basis of our final
action.
The EPA utilized the EJSCREEN tool
to evaluate environmental and
demographic indicators within Franklin
County, Jefferson County, St. Charles
County, St. Louis County, and St. Louis
City. The tool outputs reports are
contained in the docket for this action.
Looking specifically at Franklin County,
the EPA’s EJSCREEN tool demonstrates
that demographic indicators are
consistent with national averages,
17 https://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/
learn-about-environmental-justice.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:30 Sep 12, 2022
Jkt 256001
however there are vulnerable
populations in Franklin County
including low-income populations and
persons over 64 years of age. In
addition, emissions from Boles
Township impact populations in the
other portions of the non-attainment
area. St. Louis City has demographic
indicators significantly above national
averages for low-income and minority
populations. While the other counties’
demographic indicators are consistent
with or lower than national averages,
there are vulnerable populations in
these Counties including low-income
populations and persons over 64 years
of age.
When the EPA reviews a state’s
desired change to their SIP for a
NAAQS, the CAA requires the EPA to
ensure that the change will not cause
‘‘backsliding’’ of the air quality or
delaying attainment of air quality. SIP
revisions address environmental justice
concerns by ensuring that the public is
properly informed about the Plan and
regulations to attain and maintain air
quality. As described in our proposal,18
the EPA finds these supplemental
emission controls provided by Missouri
are sufficient to address the projected
emissions increase from ceasing GVIP in
Franklin County.
This action addresses the EPA’s
determination for the removal of
Franklin County registered vehicles
from the GVIP, unless they are
predominately operated in the rest of
the St. Louis Area. This action approves
the removal of these Franklin County
registered vehicles from the GVIP and
finds such removal will not have an
adverse impact to air quality or interfere
with attainment or maintenance of the
NAAQS. For these reasons, this action
does not result in disproportionately
high and adverse human health or
environmental effects on minority
populations, low-income populations
and/or indigenous peoples.
IX. Incorporation by Reference
In this document, the EPA is
finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In
accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, the EPA is finalizing the
incorporation by reference of the
Missouri 10 CSR 10–5.381 discussed in
Section IV. of this preamble and as set
forth below in the amendments to 40
CFR part 52. The EPA has made, and
will continue to make, these materials
generally available through
www.regulations.gov and at the EPA
Region 7 Office (please contact the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER
18 87
PO 00000
FR 30437, May 19, 2022.
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
55923
section of this
preamble for more information).
Therefore, these materials have been
approved by the EPA for inclusion in
the State Implementation Plan, have
been incorporated by reference by the
EPA into that plan, are fully federally
enforceable under sections 110 and 113
of the CAA as of the effective date of the
final rulemaking of the EPA’s approval,
and will be incorporated by reference in
the next update to the SIP
compilation.19
INFORMATION CONTACT
X. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act (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 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
19 62
E:\FR\FM\13SER1.SGM
FR 27968, May 22, 1997.
13SER1
55924
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 13, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
• This action does not have
disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects
on minority populations, low-income
populations and/or indigenous peoples,
as specified in Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). The
basis for this determination is contained
in Section VIII of this action,
‘‘Environmental Justice
Considerations.’’
• 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).
• This action is subject to the
Congressional Review Act, and the EPA
will submit a rule report to each House
of the Congress and to the Comptroller
General of the United States. 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 14, 2022. 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)).
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:
a. The table in paragraph (c) is
amended by revising the entry ‘‘10–
5.381’’.
■ b. The table in paragraph (e) is
amended by revising the entry ‘‘(38)’’
and adding the entry ‘‘(84)’’ in
numerical order.
The revisions and addition read as
follows:
■
■
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
§ 52.1320
*
Dated: September 6, 2022.
Meghan A. McCollister,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
Identification of plan.
*
*
(c) * * *
*
*
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, the EPA amends 40 CFR part
52 as set forth below:
EPA-APPROVED MISSOURI REGULATIONS
Missouri
citation
State effective
date
Title
EPA approval date
Explanation
Missouri Department of Natural Resources
*
*
*
*
*
*
Chapter 5—Air Quality Standards and Air Pollution Control Regulations for the St. Louis Metropolitan Area
*
10–5.381 ........
*
*
On-Board Diagnostics Motor Vehicle Emissions Inspection.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
5/30/2022
*
*
9/13/2022, [insert Federal Register citation]
*
*
*
*
*
*
(e) * * *
EPA-APPROVED MISSOURI NONREGULATORY SIP PROVISIONS
Name of nonregulatory
SIP provision
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES
*
(38) Implementation plan
for the Missouri inspection maintenance program.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Applicable geographic or
nonattainment area
*
*
Jefferson County ..............
16:30 Sep 12, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
State submittal
date
*
11/12/1999
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
EPA approval date
Explanation
*
5/18/2000, 65 FR 31480 ..
*
*
[MO 096–1096b; FRL–6701–6]. Approved for Jefferson County only.
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\13SER1.SGM
13SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 13, 2022 / Rules and Regulations
55925
EPA-APPROVED MISSOURI NONREGULATORY SIP PROVISIONS—Continued
Name of nonregulatory
SIP provision
*
(84) Implementation plan
for the Missouri inspection maintenance program.
Applicable geographic or
nonattainment area
*
*
St. Charles County, St.
Louis County, and St.
Louis City.
[FR Doc. 2022–19621 Filed 9–12–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 679
[Docket No. 220216–0049]
RTID 0648–XC366
Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic
Zone Off Alaska; Pacific Ocean Perch
in the Western Regulatory Area of the
Gulf of Alaska
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Temporary rule; closure.
AGENCY:
NMFS is prohibiting directed
fishing for Pacific ocean perch in the
Western Regulatory Area of the Gulf of
Alaska (GOA). This action is necessary
to prevent exceeding the 2022 total
allowable catch of Pacific ocean perch
in the Western Regulatory Area of the
GOA.
DATES: Effective 1200 hours, Alaska
local time (A.l.t.), September 8, 2022,
through 2400 hours, A.l.t., December 31,
2022.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Steve Whitney, 907–586–7228.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS
manages the groundfish fishery in the
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:30 Sep 12, 2022
Jkt 256001
State submittal
date
*
11/12/2019
3/2/2022
EPA approval date
Explanation
*
9/13/2022, [insert Federal
Register citation].
*
*
[EPA–R07–OAR–2022–0419;
FRL–
9830–02–R7]. Approved for St.
Charles County, St. Louis County,
and St. Louis City and removal of
Franklin County. No action on Jefferson County. Please see item (38) of
this paragraph.
GOA exclusive economic zone
according to the Fishery Management
Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of
Alaska (FMP) prepared by the North
Pacific Fishery Management Council
under authority of the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act. Regulations governing
fishing by U.S. vessels in accordance
with the FMP appear at subpart H of 50
CFR part 600 and 50 CFR part 679.
The 2022 total allowable catch (TAC)
of Pacific ocean perch in the Western
Regulatory Area of the GOA is 2,602
metric tons (mt) as established by the
final 2022 and 2023 harvest
specifications for groundfish of the GOA
(87 FR 11599, March 2, 2022).
In accordance with § 679.20(d)(1)(i),
the Administrator, Alaska Region,
NMFS (Regional Administrator), has
determined that the 2022 TAC of Pacific
ocean perch in the Western Regulatory
Area of the GOA will soon be reached.
Therefore, the Regional Administrator is
establishing a directed fishing
allowance of 2,502 mt, and is setting
aside the remaining 100 mt as bycatch
to support other anticipated groundfish
fisheries. In accordance with
§ 679.20(d)(1)(iii), the Regional
Administrator finds that this directed
fishing allowance has been reached.
Consequently, NMFS is prohibiting
directed fishing for Pacific ocean perch
in the Western Regulatory Area of the
GOA.
While this closure is in effect, the
maximum retainable amounts at
§ 679.20(e) and (f) apply at any time
during a trip.
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
Classification
NMFS issues this action pursuant to
section 305(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens
Act. This action is required by 50 CFR
part 679, which was issued pursuant to
section 304(b), and is exempt from
review under Executive Order 12866.
Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), there
is good cause to waive prior notice and
an opportunity for public comment on
this action, as notice and comment
would be impracticable and contrary to
the public interest, as it would prevent
NMFS from responding to the most
recent fisheries data in a timely fashion,
and would delay the closure of directed
fishing of Pacific ocean perch in the
Western Regulatory Area of the GOA.
NMFS was unable to publish a notice
providing time for public comment
because the most recent, relevant data
only became available as of September
6, 2022.
The Assistant Administrator for
Fisheries, NOAA also finds good cause
to waive the 30-day delay in the
effective date of this action under 5
U.S.C. 553(d)(3). This finding is based
upon the reasons provided above for
waiver of prior notice and opportunity
for public comment.
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
Dated: September 8, 2022.
Jennifer M. Wallace,
Acting Director, Office of Sustainable
Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2022–19756 Filed 9–8–22; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
E:\FR\FM\13SER1.SGM
13SER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 176 (Tuesday, September 13, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 55918-55925]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-19621]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R07-OAR-2022-0419; FRL-9830-02-R7]
Air Plan Approval; Missouri; St. Louis Area Vehicle Inspection
and Maintenance Program
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final
action to approve, through parallel processing, revisions to the
Missouri State Implementation Plan (SIP) relating to the St. Louis
area's vehicle Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) Program received on
November 12, 2019, March 2, 2022, and May 24, 2022. In the submissions,
Missouri requests the EPA's approval of revisions to a regulation and
related plan that implement the St. Louis area's Inspection and
Maintenance program called, Gateway Vehicle Inspection Program (GVIP).
We are approving Missouri's removal of vehicles registered in Franklin
County, unless the vehicle is primarily operated in the rest of the
area, from the Gateway Vehicle Inspection Program. The revisions to
this rule include amending the rule exemption section for vehicles
subject to the rule, removing unnecessary words, amending definitions
specific to the rule, updates due to technology changes, and other
minor edits. These revisions do not interfere with attainment or
maintenance of any National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS),
reasonable further progress, or other Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements.
Approval of these revisions will ensure consistency between state and
federally approved rules.
DATES: This final rule is effective on October 13, 2022.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2022-0419. All documents in the docket are
listed on the www.regulations.gov web site. 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 www.regulations.gov or
please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section for additional information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jed D. Wolkins, Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 7 Office, Air Quality Planning Branch, 11201
Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219; telephone number: (913) 551-
7588; email address: [email protected].
[[Page 55919]]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Parallel Processing
II. History and Current Status of St. Louis Area Air Quality
III. Background of Missouri's I/M Program
IV. What is being addressed in this document?
V. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?
VI. The EPA's Response to Comments
VII. What action is the EPA taking?
VIII. Environmental Justice Considerations
IX. Incorporation by Reference
X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Parallel Processing
The EPA is using parallel processing to approve this SIP. Parallel
processing refers to a process that utilizes concurrent state and
federal proposed rulemaking actions, consistent with the provisions of
40 CFR part 51, appendix V. Generally, the state submits a copy of the
proposed regulation or other revisions to the EPA before conducting its
public hearing and completing its public comment process under state
law. The EPA reviews this proposed state action and prepares a notice
of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) under federal law.\1\ If, after the state
completes its public comment process and after the EPA's public comment
process, the state changes its final submittal from the proposed
submittal, the EPA evaluates those changes and decides whether to
publish another NPRM in light of those changes or to proceed to taking
final action on its proposed action and describe the state's changes in
its final rulemaking action. Final rulemaking action by the EPA only
occurs after the final submittal has been adopted by the state and
formally submitted to the EPA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Although not the case in our proposed rulemaking on May 19,
2022, in some instances, the EPA's NPRM is published in the Federal
Register during the same time frame that the state is holding its
public hearing and conducting its public comment process. The state
and the EPA then provide for concurrent public comment periods on
both the state action and federal action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Missouri provided its state-approved nonregulatory changes to the
EPA on November 12, 2019. On March 2, 2022, Missouri submitted a
supplemental revision, containing the not yet finalized revised
regulation and supplemental emission controls to the EPA. Missouri's
public comment process was completed for this revision, but the
implementing state regulation in the submittal had not been formally
submitted by the state to the EPA at the time of our May 19, 2022,
proposed approval.
In accordance with the parallel processing provisions in section
2.3.1 of 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, the State has been provided an
opportunity to consider the EPA's comments prior to submission of a
final plan for the EPA's review and has submitted a schedule for final
submittal of the state regulation. Specifically, Missouri's schedule
included publication of the order of rulemaking in the Missouri
Register on April 15, 2022. The final state regulation was published in
Missouri's Code of State Regulations (CSR) on April 30, 2022 and became
effective on May 30, 2022.
Because the State had satisfied all requirements for parallel
processing concerning the March 2, 2022, submittal, the EPA proposed to
approve the submittal through parallel processing on May 19, 2022.
Missouri formally submitted the final regulation package to the EPA
on May 24, 2022. The May 24, 2022, submittal contained two changes to
10 CSR 10-5.381. The changes are:
1. In 10 CSR 10-5.381 (1)(B)8. Missouri changed ``biennial'' to
``biennially''. The sentence in the March 2, 2022 submittal was ``Motor
vehicles driven fewer than twelve thousand (12,000) miles biennial that
receive a mileage based exemption described in subsection (4)(H) of
this rule;'' (emphasis added). The sentence now is ``Motor vehicles
driven fewer than twelve thousand (12,000) miles biennially that
receive a mileage based exemption described in subsection (4)(H) of
this rule;'' (emphasis added).
2. 10 CSR 10-5.381 (2)(O) Missouri moved ``pounds'' behind the
numeric version of 8,500. The sentence in the March 2, 2022 submission
was ``Light Duty Truck (LDT)--Any motor vehicle rated at eight thousand
five hundred pounds (8,500). . .'' (emphasis added). The sentence is
now ``Light Duty Truck (LDT)--Any motor vehicle rated at eight thousand
five hundred (8,500) pounds . . .''(emphasis added).
The EPA has evaluated these revisions and finds them to be
grammatical in nature, not substantially changing the purpose and
intent of the rule, and not requiring another proposal or comment
period. Therefore, in this final action, the EPA is approving these
changes to the rule.
II. History and Current Status of St. Louis Area Air Quality
A. The Ozone NAAQS
The St. Louis, Missouri-Illinois bi-state area, which has been
designated as nonattainment for several Ozone NAAQS, has historically
included the counties of Franklin, Jefferson, St. Charles, and St.
Louis, and St. Louis City in Missouri, and the counties of Madison,
Monroe and St. Clair in Illinois (hereafter referred to as the St.
Louis area unless otherwise noted). For all Ozone NAAQS, except for the
2015 Ozone NAAQS, the St. Louis area has been redesignated to
attainment as described in this section.
On May 12, 2003, the EPA redesignated the St. Louis area from
Serious nonattainment to attainment for the 1979 Ozone NAAQS. (68 FR
25418). On June 15, 2005, the EPA revoked the 1979 1-hour Ozone NAAQS
for all areas except the 8-hour Ozone nonattainment early action
compact (EAC) areas. (70 FR 44470). The St. Louis area did not
participate in the EAC and therefore, the 1-hour standard was revoked
for all areas in Missouri effective June 15, 2005.
On February 20, 2015, the EPA redesignated the St. Louis area from
Moderate nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 8-hour Ozone NAAQS.
(80 FR 9207). On March 6, 2015, the EPA revoked the 1997 8-hour Ozone
NAAQS. (80 FR 12264).
On September 20, 2018, the EPA redesignated the St. Louis area from
Moderate nonattainment to attainment and approved a maintenance plan
for the 2008 8-hour Ozone NAAQS. (83 FR 47572). The 2008 8-hour Ozone
NAAQS has not been revoked.
On November 16, 2017, the EPA designated all areas of Missouri
except the St. Louis area as attainment/unclassifiable for the 2015 8-
hour Ozone NAAQS. (82 FR 54232). On April 30, 2018, the EPA designated
Boles Township of Franklin County, St. Charles County, St. Louis
County, and St. Louis City as Marginal nonattainment for the 2015 Ozone
NAAQS. (83 FR 25776). As part of that same action, the EPA designated
Jefferson County and the remaining portion of Franklin County as
attainment/unclassifiable. On July 10, 2020, the District of Columbia
Circuit Court remanded the Jefferson County designation (among other
designations) back to the EPA. The Court upheld the EPA's designation
of Boles Township as nonattainment and the remainder of Franklin County
as attainment/unclassifiable.\2\ In response to the Court remand, the
EPA revised the Jefferson County designation to nonattainment on May
26, 2021. (86 FR 31438).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Clean Wisconsin v. EPA, 964 F.3d 1145 (D.C. Cir. 2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Other NAAQS
On March 29, 1999, the EPA redesignated a portion of St. Louis
County and St. Louis City from
[[Page 55920]]
nonattainment to attainment for the 1971 Carbon Monoxide (CO) NAAQS (64
FR 3855).
On August 3, 2018, the EPA redesignated Franklin County, Jefferson
County, St. Charles County, St. Louis County, and St. Louis City from
nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 Annual Fine Particulate Matter
(PM2.5) NAAQS (83 FR 38033).
A portion of Jefferson County is currently designated nonattainment
for both the 2008 and 1978 Lead NAAQS. This nonattainment area is
currently monitoring compliance with both the 1978 and 2008 Lead
NAAQS.\3\ The rest of the St. Louis Area is designated attainment/
unclassifiable for both the 2008 and 1978 Lead NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See file titled Herculaneum AQS Report in Docket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 28, 2022, the EPA redesignated a portion of Jefferson
County from nonattainment to attainment for the 2010 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS (87 FR 4508). The rest of the St. Louis Area is
designated as either attainment or unclassifiable for the 2010
SO2 NAAQS.
The St. Louis Area is designated attainment/unclassifiable for all
other NAAQS.
III. Background of Missouri's I/M Program
Under sections 182 (b)(4) and (c)(3) of the CAA, vehicle I/M
programs are required for areas that are classified as Moderate or
above nonattainment for Ozone. As a result, Missouri has previously
submitted, and the EPA has previously approved into the SIP an I/M
program for the St. Louis Area of Franklin County, Jefferson County,
St. Charles County, St. Louis County, and St. Louis City.\4\ At the
time of the program's inception, the program was based on tailpipe
testing. In 2000, the EPA approved Missouri's switch to Onboard
Diagnostic testing for the same geographic area, consistent with our
regulations and section 182 of the CAA.\5\ In 2015, the EPA approved
revising and recodification of the I/M program.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 50 FR 32411, August 12, 1985.
\5\ 65 FR 62295, May, 18, 2000.
\6\ Missouri recodified the I/M regulations from 10 CSR 10-5.380
to 10 CSR 10-5.381. 80 FR 11323, March 3, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. What is being addressed in this document?
The EPA is approving, through parallel processing, revisions to the
Missouri SIP received on November 12, 2019, March 2, 2022, and May 24,
2022. In the November 12, 2019, submission, Missouri requested the
EPA's approval of revisions to the vehicle I/M Program also known as
GVIP, for the St. Louis area. The revisions remove both Franklin and
Jefferson Counties from the GVIP; however, the EPA is only taking
action on the removal of Franklin County from the GVIP in accordance
with a subsequent request from Missouri.
At the time of the November 12, 2019 submission, Missouri had not
yet revised the implementing GVIP regulations nor provided supplemental
emission controls to offset the emission increases resulting from
ceasing vehicle emission inspections in the Boles Township portion of
the nonattainment area, in accordance with CAA section 110(l), 42
U.S.C. 7410(l).
At the time of Missouri's November 12, 2019, submission, Jefferson
County was designated as attainment/unclassifiable for the 2015 Ozone
NAAQS. When the EPA designated Jefferson County to nonattainment on May
26, 2021 (86 FR 31438), Missouri requested that the EPA act on the
removal of Franklin County from the GVIP plan and postpone action on
the removal of Jefferson County from the GVIP plan by letter dated
December 6, 2021.\7\ As stated in the EPA's comments during Missouri's
public notice on their draft rulemaking, Missouri would need to provide
further supplemental emission controls for the EPA to be able to
propose approving the removal of I/M in Jefferson County as long as the
County remains designated nonattainment.\8\ The EPA's longstanding
position is that the implementing rule revision and supplemental
emission controls, for the nonattainment area, are needed for the EPA's
approval. This position is consistent with the CAA, our implementing
regulations, and our previous approvals of I/M removal across the
nation. Additionally, in response to comment from the EPA on the draft
rulemaking, Missouri limited the implementing regulation's exemption to
Franklin County as opposed to exempting both Franklin and Jefferson
Counties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Missouri's December 6, 2021 letter to EPA is included in the
docket for this action.
\8\ A summary of the EPA's comments and Missouri's response can
be found in the docket for this action in the November 12, 2019
submittal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 2, 2022, Missouri submitted a draft SIP revision
supplementing the November 12, 2019, submittal, along with a parallel
processing request. The March 2, 2022, submittal included both the
revised implementing rule, 10 CSR 10-5.381, and supplemental emission
controls to offset the increased emissions in the Boles Township
portion of Franklin County that is designated as nonattainment for the
2015 Ozone NAAQS. The revision to 10 CSR 10-5.381 adds an exemption for
vehicles registered in Franklin County from the program unless the
vehicles are primarily operated in the remainder of nonattainment area.
The revisions to this rule include amending the rule exemption section
for vehicles subject to the rule, removing unnecessary words, amending
definitions specific to the rule, and other minor edits. The EPA is
approving the portion of the November 12, 2019, March 2, 2022, and May
24, 2022, GVIP Plan relating to Franklin County, St. Charles County,
St. Louis County, and St. Louis City, by approving the removal of
Franklin County from the I/M Program, and fully approving the revisions
to 10 CSR 10-5.381.
In accordance with Missouri's December 6, 2021, letter, the EPA is
not taking action on Missouri's November 12, 2019, request to remove
Jefferson County from the I/M Program for the St. Louis Area. Missouri
states in the 2021 letter that it views the requests in the 2019 SIP
revision to remove inspection and maintenance requirements in Franklin
and Jefferson Counties as severable. The EPA agrees the removal of
inspection and maintenance requirements in Franklin and Jefferson
Counties are severable. Missouri also states in the letter that the
implementing regulation, 10 CSR 10-5.381, continues to require the
inspection and maintenance program to operate in Jefferson County.
As a result of this action, the nonregulatory 1999 Implementation
Plan for the Missouri Inspection and Maintenance Program, originally
approved into the SIP on May 18, 2000, 65 FR 31480, remains approved
into the SIP for Jefferson County. The EPA approves the nonregulatory
Inspection and Maintenance Program for the St. Louis Area--2019
Revision, into the SIP, which removes requirements for Franklin County.
The EPA also approves the revisions to 10 CSR 10-5.381.
The EPA's analysis of the revisions can be found in the ``What is
the EPA's analysis of Missouri's SIP request?'' section of our proposed
approval and in the technical support document (TSD), which is included
in this docket.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 87 FR 30437, May 19, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 55921]]
V. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?
Both the 2019 and 2022 State submissions have met the public notice
requirements for SIP submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The
submissions also satisfied the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51,
appendix V. The State provided public notice on the November 12, 2019
SIP revision from July 29, 2019 to August 29, 2019 and on the March 2,
2022 \10\ SIP revision from October 15, 2021 to December 9, 2021. The
State received ten comments during the 2019 public notice. The State
received four comments on the 2021 public notice. The EPA finds
Missouri has adequately addressed the comments received in its
submissions. Please see the TSD for our proposal for more discussion on
Missouri's responses to comments.\11\ In addition, as explained in our
proposal and in more detail in the TSD which is part of this docket,
the revision meets the substantive SIP requirements of the Clean Air
Act (CAA), including section 110 and implementing regulations.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Final Formal submission on May 24, 2022.
\11\ See www.regulations.gov, document id: EPA-R07-OAR-2022-
0419-0013.
\12\ 87 FR 30437, May 19, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. The EPA's Response to Comments
The public comment period on the EPA's proposed rule opened May 19,
2022, the date of its publication in the Federal Register and closed on
June 21, 2022. During this period, the EPA received one comment letter
from an anonymous commenter.
Comment 1: The commenter states that the state lacks the legal
authority or rule necessary to implement and enforce the vehicle
coverage requirement.
Response 1: The EPA disagrees. The Missouri Department of Natural
Resources (MoDNR) has legal authority to implement and enforce the
vehicle inspection and maintenance program as stated in 10 CSR 10-
5.381, which it submitted on March 2, 2022, and May 24, 2022. The MoDNR
relies on the Missouri Department of Revenue (MDOR) for registration
denial. MoDNR is identified as the agency responsible for implementing
the GVIP along with the MDOR for registration data and enforcement of
registration denial. 10 CSR 10-5.381 (2)(S), specifies MDOR as
responsible for registration denial.
In Missouri's December 14, 2007, submittal, approved March 3, 2015,
Missouri states that MDOR handles registration denial and ``all
remaining I/M program enforcement actions are the responsibility of
MDNR.'' State law provides that any person who violates a requirement
of sections 643.300 to 643.355 or a rule promulgated to enforce
sections 643.300 to 643.355 shall be guilty of either an infraction for
the first offense, a class C misdemeanor for the second offense, or a
class B misdemeanor for any subsequent offenses (subsections 1-6
section 643.355, RSMo). State law also provides that any person who
violates any procedural requirement of sections 643.300 to 643.355
shall be subject to a fine of not less than five times the amount of
the fee charged pursuant to section 643.350 or one hundred dollars,
whichever is greater (subsection 7 of section 643.355, RSMo). The state
has the legal authority necessary to implement the I/M program.
Comment 2: The commenter claims the SIP lacks detailed description
of the number and types of vehicles to be covered by the program, how
many vehicles registered in Franklin County may ultimately be exempt
from or subject to the I/M requirements, and a description of and
accounting for all classes of exempt vehicles.
Response 2: The EPA disagrees. 10 CSR 10-5.381(1)(A) describes the
number and types of vehicles to be covered by the program. 10 CSR 10-
5.381 (1)(A) states that all vehicles either registered in the St.
Louis Area or primarily operated in the Area unless exempted by 10 CSR
10-5.381 (1)(B) are covered by the rule. 10 CSR 10-5.381 (1)(B) exempts
the classes of:
Heavy duty gasoline and diesel vehicles,
Light duty gasoline and diesel vehicles manufactured prior
to 1996,
Motorcycles,
Motorized tricycles,
100% electric powered vehicles,
Plug-in hybrid vehicles,
100% hydrogen fueled vehicles,
Vehicles fueled by something other than:
[cir] gasoline,
[cir] E10-E85, or
[cir] diesel,
Vehicles registered in the St. Louis Area but receive an
out of area exemption (for situations like a person off to college or
deployed as a member of the armed forces),
Registered historic vehicles,
School buses,
Tactical military vehicles, and
Specially constructed vehicles.
10 CSR 10-5.381(B.) also has four exemptions for either low total
mileage, low usage, low age, or short-term visit, work, or deployment
to a federal installation.
While the types of vehicles covered is important for implementation
of rule, the purpose of the EPA requiring the State to provide the
numbers and types of vehicles either included or exempted is to
facilitate emission calculations either for a program demonstration on
establishment \13\ or CAA section 110(l) demonstration that EPA's
approval of a SIP revision would not interfere with maintenance or
attainment of the NAAQS, reasonable further progress, or any other
applicable CAA requirement. As discussed in our proposal, Missouri
submitted a CAA section 110(l) demonstration to EPA based on MOVES
emission modeling.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ It is possible for an established I/M program to need to do
a program demonstration again, most often based on a new designation
of Moderate or higher nonattainment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Missouri in their submittal included the following data on the
number of vehicles.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See the November 12, 2019, Missouri submittal, Attachment
3. Attachment 3 also contains population numbers for other
categories of vehicles. The numbers in Table 1 are the sum of
passenger car, passenger truck, and light commercial truck. For St.
Louis City, Jefferson County, St Charles County, St. Louis County,
these are the maximum of the subject vehicle population.
Table 1--Light Duty Vehicle Population
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Franklin Jefferson St. Charles St. Louis
Year County County County County St. Louis City
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017............................ 109,775 222,144 369,863 966,358 194,677
2020............................ 120,300 241,869 400,161 1,038,921 207,875
2025............................ 141,326 281,277 460,691 1,183,889 234,632
2030............................ 167,655 330,622 536,485 1,365,411 257,972
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 55922]]
Missouri also provided vehicle age distributions. Missouri made the
most conservative assumption that all Franklin County vehicles will be
exempted from the GVIP. Specifically, Missouri used the maximum number
of vehicles that could be exempted--the entire light duty Franklin
County vehicle population. The EPA finds that using this assumption was
appropriate. Missouri's modeling demonstration of all light duty
vehicles in Franklin County not participating in the I/M program
increased emissions, and is consistent with the I/M requirements of 40
CFR 51.356(b). Missouri provided the requisite MOVES modeling
demonstration to analyze the projected emissions change associated with
exempting these vehicles from the I/M program. The EPA review of
Missouri's analysis is in the Technical Support Document (TSD) in the
docket to this action. The EPA believes MoDNR's analysis correctly
accounts for all potential vehicle emissions that may occur from the
removal of Franklin County from the I/M program. The modeling
demonstrates that the removal of Franklin County from the I/M program
will not interfere with attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS,
reasonable further progress or any other CAA requirement consistent
with the requirements of CAA section 110(l).
Comment 3: The commenter states the SIP lacks a plan for how
Franklin County registered vehicles that are primarily operated in the
I/M coverage area are to be identified, who (i.e., registration
authorities or individual motorists) will be responsible for
determining whether a vehicle registered in Franklin County ``is
primarily operated'' in the St. Louis nonattainment area and thus
subject to the GVIP, how Missouri, the EPA, or individual citizens can
determine which Franklin County vehicles will continue to be subject to
the I/M requirements, and how the determinations will be documented.
The commenter references a 1992 Federal Register document regarding how
I/M programs should easily identify vehicles.
Response 3: Vehicle owners have a responsibility to comply with 10
CSR 10-5.381. The Missouri Department of Natural Resources relies on
tips to learn about non-compliant individual private owners and has the
authority to enforce the rule.
The core of the SIP revision is the removal of Franklin County
registered vehicles from the I/M program, and therefore, has the effect
of defining Franklin County registered vehicles as ``elsewhere
registered'' vehicles. As discussed in more detail in response to
Comment 2, Missouri did not rely on any emission reductions from
Franklin County registered vehicles for attainment or reasonable
further progress purposes in their CAA section 110(l) demonstration.
Because Missouri's demonstration shows they will not interfere with
attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS, reasonable further progress, or
any other CAA requirement without claiming emissions reductions from
elsewhere registered vehicles, Missouri's existing steps to identify
and document elsewhere registered vehicles that primarily operate in
the area are acceptable.
The commenter references a 1992 Federal Register document regarding
how I/M programs should easily identify vehicles (57 FR 52950, November
5, 1992). In the referenced document, the EPA stated that an
alternative to registration denial for vehicles registered in the
coverage area needs to ``easily identify the subject vehicles.''
Registration denial is our preferred method for identifying and
enforcing I/M on vehicles registered in the I/M coverage area.
Registration denial works by having the state registration agency only
register a vehicle in the I/M coverage area if that vehicle has passed
an I/M check or is exempt. Registration denial continues to be an
acceptable enforcement method for vehicles registered in the area. For
any I/M program, the vehicles registered outside of the county are not
as easy to identify. However, as shown above, exempting all vehicle in
Franklin County from I/M requirements will not interfere with
attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS, reasonable further progress, or
any other CAA requirement.
Comment 4: The commenter asserts the proposed Missouri SIP
provision turns on when 51% of annual mileage of a vehicle registered
in Franklin County occur in the coverage area.
Response 4: The EPA disagrees. The proposed action does not turn on
when 51% of annual mileage of a vehicle registered in Franklin County
occurs in Jefferson County, St. Charles County, St. Louis County, and
the City of St. Louis. The proposed action is based on the EPA's
evaluation under section 110(l) of the CAA, of the removal of Franklin
County registered vehicles from the I/M program, with the caveat that
if Franklin County registered vehicles are primarily operated in the I/
M coverage area, then those vehicles are also required to meet I/M
requirements. The elsewhere-registered provisions in 10 CSR 10-5.381
(1)(A)2., 3., and 4 are a previously SIP-approved part of Missouri's
GVIP plan and implementing regulation.
The language, in 10 CSR 10-5.381 (1)(B)15., ``exempt unless the
vehicle is primarily operated in the area of Jefferson County, St.
Charles County, St. Louis County, and the City of St. Louis,'' makes
the Franklin County registered vehicle exemption conform to the
elsewhere provisions in 10 CSR 10-5.381 (1)(A)2., 3., and 4. The
language ``a vehicle is primarily operated in the area if at least
fifty-one percent (51%) of the vehicle's annual miles are in the area''
is the same language used to define ``primarily operated'' throughout
the rule. Missouri included the phrase ``primarily operated'' to the
newly added exemption at 10 CSR 10-5.381 (1)(B)15. to conform with the
previously SIP-approved provisions in 10 CSR 10-5.381 (1)(A)2., 3., and
4. Franklin County is no longer part of the I/M coverage area and is
now defined as ``elsewhere.'' As stated above, Missouri's 110(l)
demonstration shows that the revisions will not interfere with
attainment of the NAAQS.
Comment 5: The commenter states Missouri needs to ensure that all
Franklin County vehicle owners are aware of the law and their potential
responsibilities under it.
Response 5: Missouri has met the public notice provisions required
by the CAA. The rules are published on Missouri's Secretary of State
website.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ https://www.sos.mo.gov/adrules/csr/current/10csr/10csr.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment 6: The commenter states that the SIP submission appears to
be requesting approval of 10 CSR 10-5 as revised generally and thus is
arguably being submitted for reapproval of 10 CSR 10-5.381(1)(A)(3).
While 10 CSR 10-5.381(1)(A)(3) was previously approved into the SIP and
has not been specifically revised in this submission, it presents the
same implementation and enforceability issues regarding ``primarily
operated'' as noted for above for 10 CSR 10-5.381(1)(B)(15). The
commenter states that the EPA should not re-approve 10 CSR 10-
5.381(1)(A)(3) into the Missouri SIP.
Response 6: The EPA disagrees. Missouri did not request such an
action and therefore the EPA is not reapproving all of 10 CSR 10-5.\16\
Further, Missouri did not request, and the EPA is not reapproving, all
of 10 CSR 10-5.381. Consistent with Missouri's submittal, the EPA
solicited
[[Page 55923]]
comment on our proposed approval of the substantive and administrative
revisions detailed in the proposal and the TSD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ We do note the commenter may have made a typographical
error in stating ``10 CSR 10-5''. Regardless, even if the commenter
meant some other specific part of 10 CSR 10-5, such specificity does
not change our answer or our approval of the SIP submission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VII. What action is the EPA taking?
The EPA is taking final action to approve revisions to the Missouri
SIP received on November 12, 2019, March 2, 2022, and May 24, 2022. The
EPA is approving portions of the November 12, 2019 GVIP Plan, by
approving the removal of Franklin County from the I/M program, and
fully approving the revisions to 10 CSR 10-5.381 received on March 2
and May 24, 2022. The EPA is not taking action on the remainder of the
November 12, 2019 GVIP Plan, at this time.
VIII. Environmental Justice Considerations
Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
Feb. 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies to identify and address
``disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects'' of their actions on minority populations and low-income
populations to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law.
The EPA defines environmental justice (EJ) as ``the fair treatment and
meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color,
national origin, or income with respect to the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies.'' The EPA further defines the term fair treatment to mean
that ``no group of people should bear a disproportionate burden of
environmental harms and risks, including those resulting from the
negative environmental consequences of industrial, governmental, and
commercial operations or programs and policies.'' \17\ The EPA is
providing additional analysis of environmental justice associated with
this action for the purpose of providing information to the public and
not as a basis of our final action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ https://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/learn-about-environmental-justice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA utilized the EJSCREEN tool to evaluate environmental and
demographic indicators within Franklin County, Jefferson County, St.
Charles County, St. Louis County, and St. Louis City. The tool outputs
reports are contained in the docket for this action. Looking
specifically at Franklin County, the EPA's EJSCREEN tool demonstrates
that demographic indicators are consistent with national averages,
however there are vulnerable populations in Franklin County including
low-income populations and persons over 64 years of age. In addition,
emissions from Boles Township impact populations in the other portions
of the non-attainment area. St. Louis City has demographic indicators
significantly above national averages for low-income and minority
populations. While the other counties' demographic indicators are
consistent with or lower than national averages, there are vulnerable
populations in these Counties including low-income populations and
persons over 64 years of age.
When the EPA reviews a state's desired change to their SIP for a
NAAQS, the CAA requires the EPA to ensure that the change will not
cause ``backsliding'' of the air quality or delaying attainment of air
quality. SIP revisions address environmental justice concerns by
ensuring that the public is properly informed about the Plan and
regulations to attain and maintain air quality. As described in our
proposal,\18\ the EPA finds these supplemental emission controls
provided by Missouri are sufficient to address the projected emissions
increase from ceasing GVIP in Franklin County.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ 87 FR 30437, May 19, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This action addresses the EPA's determination for the removal of
Franklin County registered vehicles from the GVIP, unless they are
predominately operated in the rest of the St. Louis Area. This action
approves the removal of these Franklin County registered vehicles from
the GVIP and finds such removal will not have an adverse impact to air
quality or interfere with attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS. For
these reasons, this action does not result in disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority
populations, low-income populations and/or indigenous peoples.
IX. Incorporation by Reference
In this document, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that
includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of
1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the
Missouri 10 CSR 10-5.381 discussed in Section IV. of this preamble and
as set forth below in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52. The EPA has
made, and will continue to make, these materials generally available
through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 7 Office (please
contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section of this preamble for more information).
Therefore, these materials have been approved by the EPA for
inclusion in the State Implementation Plan, have been incorporated by
reference by the EPA into that plan, are fully federally enforceable
under sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of the effective date of the
final rulemaking of the EPA's approval, and will be incorporated by
reference in the next update to the SIP compilation.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ 62 FR 27968, May 22, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act (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 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
[[Page 55924]]
This action does not have disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental effects on minority populations,
low-income populations and/or indigenous peoples, as specified in
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). The basis for
this determination is contained in Section VIII of this action,
``Environmental Justice Considerations.''
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).
This action is subject to the Congressional Review Act,
and the EPA will submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and
to the Comptroller General of the United States. 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 14, 2022. 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, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: September 6, 2022.
Meghan A. McCollister,
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:
0
a. The table in paragraph (c) is amended by revising the entry ``10-
5.381''.
0
b. The table in paragraph (e) is amended by revising the entry ``(38)''
and adding the entry ``(84)'' in numerical order.
The revisions and addition read as follows:
Sec. 52.1320 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
EPA-Approved Missouri Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State
Missouri citation Title effective date EPA approval date Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Missouri Department of Natural Resources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Chapter 5--Air Quality Standards and Air Pollution Control Regulations for the St. Louis Metropolitan Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
10-5.381................ On-Board Diagnostics 5/30/2022 9/13/2022, [insert ........................
Motor Vehicle Federal Register
Emissions Inspection. citation].
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
(e) * * *
EPA-Approved Missouri Nonregulatory SIP Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable
Name of nonregulatory SIP geographic or State EPA approval date Explanation
provision nonattainment area submittal date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
(38) Implementation plan for the Jefferson County... 11/12/1999 5/18/2000, 65 FR [MO 096-1096b; FRL-
Missouri inspection maintenance 31480. 6701-6]. Approved
program. for Jefferson
County only.
[[Page 55925]]
* * * * * * *
(84) Implementation plan for the St. Charles County, 11/12/2019 9/13/2022, [insert [EPA-R07-OAR-2022-0
Missouri inspection maintenance St. Louis County, 3/2/2022 Federal Register 419; FRL-9830-02-
program. and St. Louis City. citation]. R7]. Approved for
St. Charles
County, St. Louis
County, and St.
Louis City and
removal of
Franklin County.
No action on
Jefferson County.
Please see item
(38) of this
paragraph.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2022-19621 Filed 9-12-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
