Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Direct final rule.
EPA is announcing it is approving a revision to the Missouri State Implementation Plan (SIP) which limits emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOC) from lithographic printing facilities in the Kansas City, Missouri, area. This revision provides a correction and clarification to the applicability portion of the rule, and also reorganizes the rule into the state's standardized rule format. Approval of this revision will ensure consistency between the state and Federally-approved rules, and ensure Federal enforceability of the current state rules.
This direct final rule will be effective December 29, 2003, unless EPA receives adverse comments by December 1, 2003. If adverse comments are received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take effect.
Comments may be submitted either by mail or electronically. Written comments should be submitted to Wayne Kaiser, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101. Electronic comments should be sent either to Wayne Kaiser at email@example.com. or to http://www.regulations.gov, which is an alternative method for submitting electronic comments to EPA. To submit comments, please follow the detailed instructions described in “What action is EPA taking” in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.
Copies of documents relative to this action are available for public inspection during normal business hours at the above-listed Region 7 location. The interested persons wanting to examine these documents should make an appointment with the office at least 24 hours in advance.Start Further Info
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Wayne Kaiser at (913) 551-7603, or by e-mail at firstname.lastname@example.org.End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information
Throughout this document whenever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, we mean EPA. This section provides additional information by addressing the following questions:
What is a SIP?
What is the Federal approval process for a SIP?
What does Federal approval of a state regulation mean to me?
What is being addressed in this document?
Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?
What action is EPA taking?
What Is a SIP?
Section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires states to develop air pollution regulations and control strategies to ensure that state air quality meets the national ambient air quality standards established by EPA. These ambient standards are established under section 109 of the CAA, and they currently address six criteria pollutants. These pollutants are: carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, lead, particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide.
Each state must submit these regulations and control strategies to us for approval and incorporation into the Federally-enforceable SIP.
Each Federally-approved SIP protects air quality primarily by addressing air pollution at its point of origin. These SIPs can be extensive, containing state regulations or other enforceable documents and supporting information such as emission inventories, monitoring networks, and modeling demonstrations.
What Is the Federal Approval Process for a SIP?
In order for state regulations to be incorporated into the Federally-enforceable SIP, states must formally Start Printed Page 61757adopt the regulations and control strategies consistent with state and Federal requirements. This process generally includes a public notice, public hearing, public comment period, and a formal adoption by a state-authorized rulemaking body.
Once a state rule, regulation, or control strategy is adopted, the state submits it to us for inclusion into the SIP. We must provide public notice and seek additional public comment regarding the proposed Federal action on the state submission. If adverse comments are received, they must be addressed prior to any final Federal action by us.
All state regulations and supporting information approved by EPA under section 110 of the CAA are incorporated into the Federally-approved SIP. Records of such SIP actions are maintained in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at Title 40, Part 52, entitled “Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans.” The actual state regulations which are approved are not reproduced in their entirety in the CFR outright but are “incorporated by reference,” which means that we have approved a given state regulation with a specific effective date.
What Does Federal Approval of a State Regulation Mean to Me?
Enforcement of the state regulation before and after it is incorporated into the Federally-approved SIP is primarily a state responsibility. However, after the regulation is Federally approved, we are authorized to take enforcement action against violators. Citizens are also offered legal recourse to address violations as described in section 304 of the CAA.
What Is Being Addressed in This Document?
This rule was first adopted by the Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) in 1991 to control volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions in the Kansas City, Missouri, ozone nonattainment area, specifically Clay, Platte, and Jackson counties. As such, it is a reasonably available control technology (RACT) rule which was approved in the SIP when we approved the redesignation request and maintenance plan for the Kansas City ozone nonattainment area. Consequently, EPA reviews any revisions to the rule in light of RACT guidelines and policy.
The state's intent in revising this rule was to clarify the applicability provisions in section (1). It was determined that the applicability formula in section (1)(B) was incorrect and inconsistent with the narrative portion of the rule which preceded it. Using the incorrect formula could have resulted in an under reporting of emissions and sources consequently determining that they were not subject to the rule itself. In addition, since the state was revising the rule for technical reasons, it also took this opportunity to renumber and reformat the rule into its revised, standardized, rule format.
The rule was simply revised to delete the formula in section (1)(B). This did not result in any changes to the applicability provisions, other than to clarify them, and thus the rule remains consistent with our RACT policy and guidance.
With respect to reorganizing the rule, relevant changes are: old section 5 Compliance provisions are now incorporated into new section 4(F), and old section 6 Calculations provisions are now incorporated into new section 1(B).
Have the Requirements for Approval of a SIP Revision Been Met?
The state submittal met the public notice requirements for SIP submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The submittal also satisfied the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. In addition, as explained above and in more detail in the technical support document which is part of this document, the revision meets the substantive SIP requirements of the CAA, including section 110 and implementing regulations.
What Action Is EPA Taking?
We are approving as an amendment to the Missouri SIP a revision to rule 10 CSR 10-2.340, Control of Emissions from Lithographic Printing Installations, which was effective in the state on September 30, 2003.
We are processing this action as a final action because the revisions make routine changes to the existing rules which are noncontroversial. Therefore, we do not anticipate any adverse comments. Please note that if EPA receives relevant adverse comment on part of this rule and if that part can be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those parts of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.
You may submit comments either electronically or by mail. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate rulemaking identification number, MO 196-1196a, in the subject line on the first page of your comment. Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified comment period. Comments received after the close of the comment period will be marked “late.” EPA is not required to consider these late comments.
1. Electronically. If you submit an electronic comment as prescribed below, EPA recommends that you include your name, mailing address, and an e-mail address or other contact information in the body of your comment. This ensures that you can be identified as the submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or needs further information on the substance of your comment. EPA's policy is that EPA will not edit your comment, and any identifying or contact information provided in the body of a comment will be included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment.
a. Electronic mail. Comments may be sent by e-mail to email@example.com. Please include identification number MO 196-1196a in the subject line. EPA's e-mail system is not an “anonymous access” system. If you send an e-mail comment directly without going through Regulations.gov, EPA's e-mail system automatically captures your e-mail address. E-mail addresses that are automatically captured by EPA's e-mail system are included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public docket.
b. Regulations.gov. Your use of Regulations.gov is an alternative method of submitting electronic comments to EPA. Go directly to http://www.regulations.gov, click on “To Search for Regulations,” then select Environmental Protection Agency and use the “go” button. The list of current EPA actions available for comment will be listed. Please follow the online instructions for submitting comments. The system is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity, e-mail address, or other contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
2. By Mail. Written comments should be sent to the name and address listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document.
Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is not a “significant regulatory action” and therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Start Printed Page 61758Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it 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).
This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the CAA. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045, “Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks” (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
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. 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. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. 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 December 29, 2003. 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).)Start List of Subjects
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
- Environmental protection
- Air pollution control
- Incorporation by reference
- Intergovernmental relations
- Reporting and recordkeeping requirements
- Volatile organic compounds
Dated: October 17, 2003.
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7.
Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:End Amendment Part Start Part
PART 52—[AMENDED]End Part Start Amendment Part
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:End Amendment Part
Subpart AA—MissouriStart Amendment Part
2. In § 52.1320(c) the table for Chapter 2 is amended by revising the entry for 10-2.340 to read as follows:End Amendment Part
(c) * * *
|Missouri citation||Title||State effective date||EPA approval date||Explanation|
|Missouri Department of Natural Resources|
|Chapter 2—Air Quality Standards and Air Pollution Control Regulations for the Kansas City Metropolitan Area|
|* * * * * * *|
|10-2.340||Control of emissions from lithographic printing facilities||9/30/03||10/30/03 [insert FR page citation]|
|* * * * * * *|
[FR Doc. 03-27261 Filed 10-29-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P