Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of Missouri

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[MO 042-1042(a); FRL-5979-4]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of

Missouri

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is approving revisions submitted by the state of

Missouri on March 20, 1997, which are designed to consolidate

applicable requirements contained in its State Implementation Plan

(SIP). These revisions will simplify compliance for Part 70

installations and many other Missouri sources.

DATES: This action is effective June 22, 1998 unless by May 22, 1998

relevant adverse comments are received. Should the agency receive such

comment, it will publish notification withdrawing this rule.

ADDRESSES: Comments must be mailed to Joshua Tapp at EPA, Air Branch,

726 Minnesota Avenue, Kansas City, Kansas 66101. Copies of the

documents relevant to this action are available for public inspection

during normal business hours at the: Environmental Protection Agency,

Air Planning and Development Branch, 726 Minnesota Avenue, Kansas City,

Kansas 66101; and the EPA Air & Radiation Docket and Information

Center, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joshua A. Tapp at (913) 551-7606.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: With the advent of the Clean Air Act (CAA)

operating permit program, the EPA, the Missouri Department of Natural

Resources (MDNR), the City of St. Louis'--Division of Air Pollution

Control, the St. Louis County Department of Health, the Kansas City

Health Department'--Air Pollution Control Program, and the City of

Springfield'--Air Pollution Control Program have coordinated the review

of the local agency codes and ordinances contained in the current

Federally approved SIP. Consistency between these codes and ordinances

and the state regulations contained in the SIP has always been

important, but the operating permit program has brought this issue to

the forefront. The basic concept of the operating permit program is to

combine all air requirements to which one particular source is subject

into one cohesive document so that the public, the source, and the

regulatory agencies can clearly understand the compliance obligations.

However, when the SIP contains outdated, overlapping, and sometimes

conflicting applicable requirements, combining all requirements into

one document may not achieve this goal.

This coordinated review revealed numerous discrepancies between

Federally approved local ordinances and Federally approved state rules.

The review also uncovered the fact that some local agencies have long

since revised their regulations and, in many cases, the current version

of the local agency regulations is very different from the Federally

approved version.

In response to this review, MDNR and its local agencies developed

recommendations for SIP action to correct these issues. This request is

for the retention of some sections, the removal of some sections, and

the addition of other sections. Five criteria were used to determine

which sections should be recommended for removal from the SIP: (1) The

sections are administrative only, (2) the sections apply to no known

sources, (3) the requirements of the sections are covered by equivalent

or more stringent Federally approved state rules, (4) the sections have

no bearing on attainment or maintenance of the National Ambient Air

Quality Standards, or (5) the sections are being concurrently replaced

by current local ordinance, code, or permit requirements. Sections not

meeting these criteria were recommended for retention. MDNR and its

local agencies also requested that certain sections located in new or

revised ordinances be added to replace outdated versions of Federally

approved sections.

The following are examples of local ordinance provisions which are

being retained in the SIP. MDNR and the City of Springfield Air

Pollution Control Department have requested that Air Pollution Control

Standard No. 1890, Chapter 2A, section 35 entitled ``Maximum Emission

Limitations from Incinerators'' and related sections be retained in the

SIP. These sections were retained because the state does not have an

equally stringent rule in place which addresses incinerator emissions.

The following are examples of local ordinance provisions which are

being removed from the SIP. MDNR and the city of St. Louis have

requested that St. Louis Ordinance 50163 be completely removed from the

SIP. Sections such as section 4 entitled ``Division of Air Pollution

Control Created'' and section 19 entitled ``Labels to be Affixed to

Approved Installations'' are

[[Page 19824]]

administrative only, and are therefore being rescinded from the SIP.

Section 17, entitled ``Registration of Sources of Air Pollution'' is an

example of a rule which is being rescinded because the state SIP rules

are at least equally as stringent. A final example is section 5

entitled ``When Emissions of Pollutants Become Nuisance.'' This section

does not have a bearing on attainment or maintenance of the national

ambient air quality standards and is being removed for that reason.

The following are examples of the limited number of local ordinance

provisions which are being added to the SIP. MDNR and the city of

Kansas City have requested that the EPA add the most recent version of

the Kansas City open burning provisions contained in Chapter 8 of the

Air Quality Control Code. Section 8-1 entitled ``Definitions'' and

section 8-4 entitled ``Open Burning'' are being added to the SIP,

because they now take the place of comparable provisions from the

previous version of the Code which are currently in the SIP. By adding

the current version of the Code and concurrently rescinding the old

version of the Code, the EPA, the state, and Kansas City will be able

to maintain Kansas City air quality in a consistent manner.

On September 26, 1996, Missouri held a public hearing on these

revisions and on October 31, 1997, the Missouri Air Conservation

Commission adopted these revisions for submittal to the EPA. On March

12, 1997, MDNR submitted the revisions with a request to revise the SIP

under the signature of David Shorr (the Governor's designee) and under

the signatures of each of the local air pollution control agencies. The

revisions include the removal of 157 local ordinance or code sections,

the retention of 12 sections, and the addition of 7 sections. The

reader should refer to the Technical Support Document for more

information regarding the analysis which supports this recommendation.

This consolidation will simplify compliance for many Missouri

sources without changing the stringency of the control requirements.

I. Final Action

This is a direct final action which approves the request submitted

by MDNR and its local agencies to consolidate the Federally approved

local ordinance and codes in the Federally approved SIP.

The EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the

Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no

adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this

Federal Register publication, the EPA is publishing a separate document

that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should

relevant adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective June

22, 1998 without further notice unless the Agency receives relevant

adverse comments by May 22, 1998.

If the EPA receives such comments, then the EPA will publish a

notice withdrawing the final rule and informing the public that the

rule did not take effect. All public comments received will then be

addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The

EPA will not institute a second comment period on the proposed rule.

Only parties interested in commenting on the proposed rule should do so

at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is advised

that this rule will be effective on June 22, 1998 and no further action

will be taken on the proposed rule.

Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or

allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for

revision to any SIP. Each request for revision to the SIP shall be

considered separately in light of specific technical, economic, and

environmental factors, and in relation to relevant statutory and

regulatory requirements.

II. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this regulatory

action from Executive Order 12866 review.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., the EPA

must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of

any proposed or final rule on small entities (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604).

Alternatively, the EPA may certify that the rule will not have a

significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small

entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises,

and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than

50,000.

SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, Part D of the CAA

do not create any new requirements but simply approve requirements that

the state is already imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP

approval does not impose any new requirements, the Administrator

certifies that it does not have a significant impact on any small

entities affected. Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-state

relationship under the CAA, preparation of a regulatory flexibility

analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic

reasonableness of state action. The CAA forbids the EPA to base its

actions concerning SIPs on such grounds (Union Electric Co. v. U.S.

E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (S.Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2)).

C. Unfunded Mandates

Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, the EPA

must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or

final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated

costs to state, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to

private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, the EPA

must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative

that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with

statutory requirements. Section 203 requires the EPA to establish a

plan for informing and advising any small governments that may be

significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.

The EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated does

not include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of

$100 million or more to either state, local, or tribal governments in

the aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action approves

preexisting requirements under state or local law, and imposes no new

requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to state, local, or

tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.

D. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally

provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating

the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,

to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the

United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this rule and

other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of

Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior

to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This rule is not a

``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

[[Page 19825]]

E. Petitions for Judicial Review

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 June 22, 1998. Filing a petition for

reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect

the finality of this rule 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,

Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations,

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

Dated: February 25, 1998.

William Rice,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region VII.

Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is

amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart AA--Missouri

2. Section 52.1320 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(103) to read

as follows:

Sec. 52.1320 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(103) Revisions to the Missouri plan were submitted by the Governor

on March 20, 1997.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) St. Louis City Ordinance 59270, Section 4--Definitions, numbers

80. ``Open Burning,'' 100. ``Refuse,'' 108. ``Salvage Operation,'' and

126. ``Trade Waste'' only; and Section 12, effective October 23, 1984.

(B) St. Louis City Permit No. 96-10-084, issued to Washington

University School of Medicine Medical Waste Incinerator, 500 S. Euclid

Avenue, effective February 20, 1997.

(C) St. Louis City Permit No. 96-10-083, issued to Washington

University School of Medicine Pathological Incinerator, 4566 Scott

Avenue, effective February 20, 1997.

(D) St. Louis City Operating Permit, issued to St. Louis University

Medical Center Medical Waste Incinerator, 3628 Rutger Avenue, effective

August 3, 1992.

(E) Kansas City Air Quality Control Code C.S. No. 56726, Chapter 8,

Sections: 8-2, definitions for ``Open burning,'' ``Refuse,'' ``Salvage

operation,'' and ``Trade waste''; and 8-4, only, effective August 2,

1984.

(F) Remove St. Louis City Ordinance 50163, effective June 11, 1968.

(G) Remove St. Louis City Ordinance 54699, effective March 27,

1967.

(H) Remove St. Louis County Air Pollution Control Code SLCRO, Title

VI, Chapter 612, effective February 22, 1967.

(I) Remove Kansas City Air Pollution Control Code C.S. No. 36539,

Chapter 18, except sections: 18.83--Definitions, subsections (13)

``Incinerators'' and (15) ``Multiple Chamber Incinerators''; and

18.91--Incinerators, effective August 31, 1972.

(J) Remove City of Springfield Air Pollution Control Standard G.O.

No. 1890, Chapter 2A, except sections: 2A-2--Definitions, the

definitions for ``Director of Health,'' ``Existing Equipment,''

``Incinerator,'' ``Multiple-chamber incinerator,'' ``New equipment,''

``Open burning,'' ``Particulate matter,'' ``Refuse,'' and ``Trade

waste''; 2A-25; 2A-34; 2A-35; 2A-36; 2A-37; 2A-38; 2A-51; 2A-55; and

2A-56, effective October 12, 1969.

[FR Doc. 98-10510 Filed 4-21-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P