Air Plan Approval; State of Missouri; Restriction of Particulate Matter to the Ambient Air Beyond the Premises of Origin, 22976-22978 [2023-07682]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
22976
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 72 / Friday, April 14, 2023 / Proposed Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R07–OAR–2023–0193; FRL–10815–
01–R7]
Air Plan Approval; State of Missouri;
Restriction of Particulate Matter to the
Ambient Air Beyond the Premises of
Origin
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing approval of
a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the State of
Missouri on March 7, 2019. Missouri
requests that the EPA approve revisions
to a state regulation for the Restriction
of Particulate Matter to the Ambient Air
Beyond the Premises of Origin. These
revisions include adding definitions
that are specific to the rule, restructures
the rule into the standard rule
organization format, and removes
unnecessary words. The revisions are
administrative in nature and do not
impact the stringency of the SIP or air
quality. The EPA’s proposed approval of
this rule revision is in accordance with
the requirements of the Clean Air Act
(CAA).
SUMMARY:
Comments must be received on
or before May 15, 2023.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07–
OAR–2023–0193 to
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the Docket ID No. for this
rulemaking. Comments received will be
posted without change to
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. For
detailed instructions on sending
comments and additional information
on the rulemaking process, see the
‘‘Written Comments’’ heading of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Steven Brown, Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 7 Office, Air
Quality Planning Branch, 11201 Renner
Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219;
telephone number: (913) 551–7718;
email address: brown.steven@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
DATES:
Table of Contents
I. Written Comments
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:22 Apr 13, 2023
Jkt 259001
II. What is being addressed in this document?
III. Have the requirements for approval of a
SIP revision been met?
IV. What action is the EPA taking?
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Written Comments
Submit your comments, identified by
Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2023–
0193, at www.regulations.gov. Once
submitted, comments cannot be edited
or removed from Regulations.gov. The
EPA may publish any comment received
to its public docket. Do not submit
electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video,
etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is
considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points
you wish to make. The EPA will
generally not consider comments or
comment contents located outside of the
primary submission (i.e., on the web,
cloud, or other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, the full
EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epadockets.
II. What is being addressed in this
document?
The EPA is proposing to approve a
SIP revision submitted by the State of
Missouri on March 7, 2019. Missouri
requests the EPA approve revisions to
their SIP by replacing the existing rule,
Title 10, Division 10 of the Code of State
Regulations (CSR), (10 CSR 10–6.170)
‘‘Restriction of Particulate Matter to the
Ambient Air Beyond the Premises of
Origin’’, with a revised and restructured
version of the same rule. The state has
revised the rule to add definitions
specific to this rule, organize the rule
into state standard rule organizational
format, and remove unnecessary words.
After review and analysis of the
revisions, the EPA concludes that these
changes do not have adverse effects on
air quality. The full text of these
changes can be found in the State’s
submission, which is included in the
docket for this action. The EPA’s
analysis of the revisions can be found in
the technical support document (TSD),
also included in the docket.
III. Have the requirements for approval
of a SIP revision been met?
The State submission has met the
public notice requirements for SIP
submissions in accordance with 40 CFR
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
51.102. The submission also satisfied
the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part
51, appendix V. The State provided
public notice on this SIP revision from
8/01/2018 to 8/30/2018 and received a
total of eight comments. The comments
and responses are summarized herein.
Comment 1: The EPA commented that
they previously recommended that the
department add provisions to the rule to
make it clear what a ‘‘reasonable
degree’’ is, which ‘‘techniques’’ the
director might approve, and how the
director might make that determination.
Response: The state responded saying
the necessary measures for determining
the origin and nature of particulate
matter emissions that travel beyond a
property line are handled on a case-bycase basis. In many cases the nature and
origin of fugitive particulate matter
emissions is obvious and does not
require any scientific measurements.
After further review, the EPA agrees that
this type of review is done on a case-bycase basis and since the rule applies to
any operation, process, or activity,
specific techniques or scientific
methods would not always apply to
determine the nature and origins of the
particulate matter fugitive emissions.
An example an application of this rule
may be the evaluation of the handling
or transporting of materials that cause
dust to be seen in the air or dust residue
left on surfaces after this type of
activity. In this example, the state air
program would investigate and decide
on the nature and origin of the
particulate matter emissions based on
the evidence available. Applying a
specific scientific methodology to
investigate the origin and nature of the
particulate matter is not pertinent in
this situation. EPA believes these are the
types of case-by-case scenarios that this
rule was primarily intended to address.
No changes were made to the rule text
as a result of this comment. Comment 2:
The EPA recommended that the
department provide regulatory language
on what record keeping and reporting
requirements would exist for a facility
to determine compliance with the rule.
Response: The state responded that
since the rule does not prescribe
monitoring or control requirements the
department cannot designate record
keeping or reporting requirements.
Since the rule is not necessarily subject
to a facility but to an action or
processes, the EPA agrees that
recordkeeping and reporting are not
required. No changes were made to the
rule text as a result of this comment.
Comment 3: The St. Louis County
Department of Public Health
commented on a semi colon placed after
E:\FR\FM\14APP1.SGM
14APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 72 / Friday, April 14, 2023 / Proposed Rules
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
the word facility. No changes were
made to the rule text as a result of this
comment. Comment 4 and 5: The St.
Louis County Department of Public
Health, and Newman, Comley, and Ruth
P.C., commented that the rule did not
include an upper particle size limit.
Response: As a result of those
comments, the state added an upper size
limit to the definition of particulate
matter in subsection (2)(F) of this rule
that particles greater than one hundred
micrometers (100 mm) are not defined as
particulate matter. Comment 6:
Newman, Comley, and Ruth P.C.
commented that facilities constructed
before November 30, 1990, and located
within the city limits of any
municipality should be exempt from
this rule. Response: Since the
commenter did not provide justification
for this exemption, and the state was not
able to justify this exemption, no
changes were made to the rule text as a
result of the comment. Comment 7 and
8: Newman, Comley, and Ruth P.C., and
the St. Louis County Department of
Public Health commented that removing
the word ‘‘shall’’ from a rule
requirement could be interpreted that
the requirement is no longer necessary.
The commenter stated that regulations
must be clear and concise as to the
intent of the regulation. The department
should review all instances of deleting
the word ‘‘shall’’ and consider retaining
it. Response: As a result of those
comments, the state revised the
language in paragraphs (3)(A)1. and
(3)(A)2. to retain the word ‘‘shall’’ in
order to clarify the obligation for
facilities.
In addition, as explained above and in
more detail in the technical support
document, which is part of this docket,
the revision meets the substantive SIP
requirements of the CAA, including
section 110 and implementing
regulations.
IV. What action is the EPA taking?
The EPA is proposing to amend the
Missouri SIP by approving the State’s
request to revise 10 CSR 10–6.170
‘‘Restriction of Particulate Matter to the
Ambient Air Beyond the Premises of
Origin.’’ We are processing this as a
proposed action because we are
soliciting comments on this proposed
action. Final rulemaking will occur after
consideration of any comments.
V. Incorporation by Reference
In this document, the EPA is
proposing to include regulatory text in
an EPA final rule that includes
incorporation by reference. In
accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, the EPA is finalizing the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:22 Apr 13, 2023
Jkt 259001
incorporation by reference of the
Missouri rule 10 CSR 10–6.170
discussed in section II of this preamble
and as set forth below in the proposed
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).
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Clean Air Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42
U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus,
in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s
role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the Clean Air Act. 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); and
• Is not subject to requirements of
section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act;
In addition, the SIP is not approved
to apply on any Indian reservation land
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
22977
or in any other area where EPA or an
Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have
tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
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. 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.’’ 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.’’
Missouri did not evaluate
environmental justice considerations as
part of its SIP submittal; the CAA and
applicable implementing regulations
neither prohibit nor require such an
evaluation. EPA did not perform an EJ
analysis and did not consider EJ in this
action. Consideration of EJ is not
required as part of this action, and there
is no information in the record
inconsistent with the stated goal of E.O.
12898 of achieving environmental
justice for people of color, low-income
populations, and Indigenous peoples.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Particulate matter.
Dated: April 6, 2023.
Meghan A. McCollister,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, the EPA proposes to amend
40 CFR part 52 as set forth below:
E:\FR\FM\14APP1.SGM
14APP1
22978
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 72 / Friday, April 14, 2023 / Proposed Rules
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
§ 52.1320
*
Subpart AA—Missouri
2. In § 52.1320, the table in paragraph
(c) is amended by revising the entry
‘‘10–6.170’’ to read as follows:
■
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Identification of plan.
*
*
(c) * * *
*
*
EPA-APPROVED MISSOURI REGULATIONS
Missouri citation
State
effective date
Title
EPA approval date
Explanation
Missouri Department of Natural Resources
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Chapter 6—Air Quality Standards, Definitions, Sampling and Reference Methods, and Air Pollution Control Regulations for the State of
Missouri
*
10–6.170 .................
*
*
Restriction of Particulate Matter
to the Ambient Air Beyond the
Premises of Origin.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2023–0076; FRL–10663–
01–R9]
Air Plan Revisions; California; San
Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution
Control District
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a
revision to the San Joaquin Valley
Unified Air Pollution Control District
(SJVUAPCD) portion of the California
State Implementation Plan (SIP). This
revision concerns emissions of
particulate matter (PM) from wood
burning devices. We are proposing to
approve a local measure to regulate
these emission sources under the Clean
Air Act (CAA or the Act). We are taking
comments on this proposal and plan to
follow with a final action.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before May 15, 2023.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
SUMMARY:
17:22 Apr 13, 2023
*
[Date of publication of the final
rule in the Federal Register],
[Federal Register citation of
the final rule].
*
*
Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09–
OAR–2023–0076 at https://
www.regulations.gov. For comments
submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments
cannot be edited or removed from
Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish
any comment received to its public
docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. The EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, please
contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
For the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets. If you need
assistance in a language other than
English or if you are a person with a
ADDRESSES:
[FR Doc. 2023–07682 Filed 4–13–23; 8:45 am]
VerDate Sep<11>2014
*
3/30/2019
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
*
*
*
*
disability who needs a reasonable
accommodation at no cost to you, please
contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Elijah Gordon, EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA
94105. By phone: (415) 972–3158 or by
email at gordon.elijah@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What measure did the State submit?
B. Are there other versions of this measure?
C. What is the purpose of the submitted
measure?
II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Proposed
Action
A. How is the EPA evaluating the measure?
B. Does the measure meet the evaluation
criteria?
C. Public Comment and Proposed Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. The State’s Submittal
A. What measure did the State submit?
Table 1 lists the measure addressed by
this proposal with the dates that it was
adopted by the local air agency and
submitted by the California Air
Resources Board (CARB). We will refer
to this measure as the ‘‘Burn Cleaner
Incentive Measure.’’
E:\FR\FM\14APP1.SGM
14APP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 72 (Friday, April 14, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 22976-22978]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-07682]
[[Page 22976]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R07-OAR-2023-0193; FRL-10815-01-R7]
Air Plan Approval; State of Missouri; Restriction of Particulate
Matter to the Ambient Air Beyond the Premises of Origin
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing
approval of a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the
State of Missouri on March 7, 2019. Missouri requests that the EPA
approve revisions to a state regulation for the Restriction of
Particulate Matter to the Ambient Air Beyond the Premises of Origin.
These revisions include adding definitions that are specific to the
rule, restructures the rule into the standard rule organization format,
and removes unnecessary words. The revisions are administrative in
nature and do not impact the stringency of the SIP or air quality. The
EPA's proposed approval of this rule revision is in accordance with the
requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 15, 2023.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2023-0193 to www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions
for submitting comments.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket ID
No. for this rulemaking. Comments received will be posted without
change to www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided. For detailed instructions on sending comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process, see the ``Written Comments''
heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven Brown, Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 7 Office, Air Quality Planning Branch, 11201 Renner
Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219; telephone number: (913) 551-7718;
email address: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' and
``our'' refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Written Comments
II. What is being addressed in this document?
III. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?
IV. What action is the EPA taking?
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Written Comments
Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2023-
0193, at www.regulations.gov. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited
or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions,
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit
www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
II. What is being addressed in this document?
The EPA is proposing to approve a SIP revision submitted by the
State of Missouri on March 7, 2019. Missouri requests the EPA approve
revisions to their SIP by replacing the existing rule, Title 10,
Division 10 of the Code of State Regulations (CSR), (10 CSR 10-6.170)
``Restriction of Particulate Matter to the Ambient Air Beyond the
Premises of Origin'', with a revised and restructured version of the
same rule. The state has revised the rule to add definitions specific
to this rule, organize the rule into state standard rule organizational
format, and remove unnecessary words. After review and analysis of the
revisions, the EPA concludes that these changes do not have adverse
effects on air quality. The full text of these changes can be found in
the State's submission, which is included in the docket for this
action. The EPA's analysis of the revisions can be found in the
technical support document (TSD), also included in the docket.
III. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?
The State submission has met the public notice requirements for SIP
submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The submission also
satisfied the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. The
State provided public notice on this SIP revision from 8/01/2018 to 8/
30/2018 and received a total of eight comments. The comments and
responses are summarized herein. Comment 1: The EPA commented that they
previously recommended that the department add provisions to the rule
to make it clear what a ``reasonable degree'' is, which ``techniques''
the director might approve, and how the director might make that
determination. Response: The state responded saying the necessary
measures for determining the origin and nature of particulate matter
emissions that travel beyond a property line are handled on a case-by-
case basis. In many cases the nature and origin of fugitive particulate
matter emissions is obvious and does not require any scientific
measurements. After further review, the EPA agrees that this type of
review is done on a case-by-case basis and since the rule applies to
any operation, process, or activity, specific techniques or scientific
methods would not always apply to determine the nature and origins of
the particulate matter fugitive emissions. An example an application of
this rule may be the evaluation of the handling or transporting of
materials that cause dust to be seen in the air or dust residue left on
surfaces after this type of activity. In this example, the state air
program would investigate and decide on the nature and origin of the
particulate matter emissions based on the evidence available. Applying
a specific scientific methodology to investigate the origin and nature
of the particulate matter is not pertinent in this situation. EPA
believes these are the types of case-by-case scenarios that this rule
was primarily intended to address. No changes were made to the rule
text as a result of this comment. Comment 2: The EPA recommended that
the department provide regulatory language on what record keeping and
reporting requirements would exist for a facility to determine
compliance with the rule. Response: The state responded that since the
rule does not prescribe monitoring or control requirements the
department cannot designate record keeping or reporting requirements.
Since the rule is not necessarily subject to a facility but to an
action or processes, the EPA agrees that recordkeeping and reporting
are not required. No changes were made to the rule text as a result of
this comment. Comment 3: The St. Louis County Department of Public
Health commented on a semi colon placed after
[[Page 22977]]
the word facility. No changes were made to the rule text as a result of
this comment. Comment 4 and 5: The St. Louis County Department of
Public Health, and Newman, Comley, and Ruth P.C., commented that the
rule did not include an upper particle size limit. Response: As a
result of those comments, the state added an upper size limit to the
definition of particulate matter in subsection (2)(F) of this rule that
particles greater than one hundred micrometers (100 [mu]m) are not
defined as particulate matter. Comment 6: Newman, Comley, and Ruth P.C.
commented that facilities constructed before November 30, 1990, and
located within the city limits of any municipality should be exempt
from this rule. Response: Since the commenter did not provide
justification for this exemption, and the state was not able to justify
this exemption, no changes were made to the rule text as a result of
the comment. Comment 7 and 8: Newman, Comley, and Ruth P.C., and the
St. Louis County Department of Public Health commented that removing
the word ``shall'' from a rule requirement could be interpreted that
the requirement is no longer necessary. The commenter stated that
regulations must be clear and concise as to the intent of the
regulation. The department should review all instances of deleting the
word ``shall'' and consider retaining it. Response: As a result of
those comments, the state revised the language in paragraphs (3)(A)1.
and (3)(A)2. to retain the word ``shall'' in order to clarify the
obligation for facilities.
In addition, as explained above and in more detail in the technical
support document, which is part of this docket, the revision meets the
substantive SIP requirements of the CAA, including section 110 and
implementing regulations.
IV. What action is the EPA taking?
The EPA is proposing to amend the Missouri SIP by approving the
State's request to revise 10 CSR 10-6.170 ``Restriction of Particulate
Matter to the Ambient Air Beyond the Premises of Origin.'' We are
processing this as a proposed action because we are soliciting comments
on this proposed action. Final rulemaking will occur after
consideration of any comments.
V. Incorporation by Reference
In this document, the EPA is proposing to include regulatory text
in an EPA final rule 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 rule 10 CSR 10-6.170
discussed in section II of this preamble and as set forth below in the
proposed 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).
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Clean Air Act
and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
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); and
Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act;
In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
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.
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.'' 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.''
Missouri did not evaluate environmental justice considerations as
part of its SIP submittal; the CAA and applicable implementing
regulations neither prohibit nor require such an evaluation. EPA did
not perform an EJ analysis and did not consider EJ in this action.
Consideration of EJ is not required as part of this action, and there
is no information in the record inconsistent with the stated goal of
E.O. 12898 of achieving environmental justice for people of color, low-
income populations, and Indigenous peoples.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Particulate matter.
Dated: April 6, 2023.
Meghan A. McCollister,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the EPA proposes to amend
40 CFR part 52 as set forth below:
[[Page 22978]]
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart AA--Missouri
0
2. In Sec. 52.1320, the table in paragraph (c) is amended by revising
the entry ``10-6.170'' to 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 6--Air Quality Standards, Definitions, Sampling and Reference Methods, and Air Pollution Control
Regulations for the State of Missouri
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
10-6.170...................... Restriction of 3/30/2019 [Date of publication ....................
Particulate Matter of the final rule
to the Ambient Air in the Federal
Beyond the Premises Register], [Federal
of Origin. Register citation
of the final rule].
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2023-07682 Filed 4-13-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
