Skip to Content

Rule

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of Missouri

Document Details

Information about this document as published in the Federal Register.

Published Document

This document has been published in the Federal Register. Use the PDF linked in the document sidebar for the official electronic format.

Start Preamble

AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:

Direct final rule.

SUMMARY:

EPA is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the state of Missouri. EPA is approving a request to amend the Missouri SIP to include revisions to the St. Louis Solvent Metal Cleaning rule. The revisions to this rule include consolidating exemptions in the applicability section, adding new exemptions, adding definitions of new and previously undefined terms, and clarifying rule language regarding operating procedure requirements for spray gun cleaners and air-tight and airless cleaning systems. This revision will ensure consistency between the state and the Federally-approved rules.

DATES:

This direct final rule will be effective May 8, 2007, without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by April 9, 2007. If adverse comment is 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.

ADDRESSES:

Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2007-0083, by one of the following methods:

1. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.

2. E-mail: algoe-eakin.amy@epa.gov.

3. Mail: Amy Algoe-Eakin, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101.

4. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to Amy Algoe-Eakin, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101.

Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2007-0083. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at http://Start Printed Page 10611www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. 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. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.

Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. 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 either electronically in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding Federal holidays. 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:

Amy Algoe-Eakin at (913) 551-7942, or by e-mail at algoe-eakin.amy@epa.gov.

End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information

SUPPLEMENTARY 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 adopt 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?

On January 17, 2007, Missouri requested that EPA approve a revision to the SIP to include changes to Missouri rule 10 CSR 10-5.300, Control of Emissions From Solvent Metal Cleaning. This rule specifies equipment, operating procedures, and training requirements for the reduction of volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from solvent metal cleaning operations in the St. Louis, Missouri, metropolitan area. Generally, the revisions to this rule include: (1) Consolidating exemptions in the applicability section, (2) adding new exemptions, (3) adding definitions of new and previously undefined terms, and (4) clarifying rule language regarding operating procedure requirements for spray gun cleaners and air-tight and airless cleaning systems.

More specifically, the revisions to the applicability section include revisions to subsection (1)(C), which describes the processes which use nonaqueous solvents to clean and remove soils from metal parts which are subject to this rule, and subsection (1)(D), which lists the solvents which are exempt from this rule. Subsection (1)(D) consolidates existing exemptions into one section and adds three new exemptions. The first new exemption is the exemption of solvent metal cleaning operations which are regulated under 40 CFR part 63, subpart T, the National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Halogenated Solvent Cleaning. The Missouri Department of Natural Resources' Air Pollution Control Program (MDNR/APCP) states that the solvents used in this practice are required to comply with the Federal NESHAP for Halogenated Solvent Cleaning and states that in general the NESHAP for Halogenated Solvent Start Printed Page 10612Cleaning work practices, solvent loss limits, equipment specifications, and solvent recordkeeping/reporting requirements exceed the requirements in the existing Missouri solvent metal cleaning rule. Based on review of Missouri's analysis, we believe it is appropriate to exempt this source category because the Federal NESHAP is at least as stringent and sources must comply with this Federal NESHAP in order to be exempt from the Missouri rule.

The second and third new exemptions added were for flush cleaning operations and hand cleaning/wiping operations. These exemptions were also added because industry conducting these activities were already regulated by Federal standard 40 CFR part 63, subpart GG, the NESHAP for Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework Facilities and by Missouri rule 10 CSR 10-5.455, Control of Emissions From Solvent Cleanup Operations. Based on the review of this analysis, we believe that revision of this rule to exempt these source categories because the Federal NESHAP and existing state rule, 10 CSR 10-5.455, are at least as stringent and sources must comply with this Federal NESHAP and existing state rule.

The MDNR/APCP also added several new definitions and evaluated the air quality impact of these new definitions. These definitions include: (2)(E) Flush cleaning, (2)(I) hand cleaning/wiping operation, (2)(M) nonaqueous solvent, and (2)(P) spray gun cleaner. These definitions were added to provide clarity to the rule, and Missouri has provided an analysis showing that this revision will not cause any increase in emissions.

The MDNR/APCP also reorganized the General Provisions section. Specifically subsection (3)(A) of the rule was reorganized into subparagraphs for cold cleaners, open-top vapor degreasers, conveyorized degreasers, and air-tight or airless cleaning systems. Subsection (3)(B) outlines operating procedures for the four operations mentioned above. The spray gun cleaner, subparagraph (3)(B)4., and the air-tight and airless cleaning systems, subparagraph (3)(B)5., were added to provide more clarity to the rule's application for these two operations. Subsection 3(C) was revised to add clarifying language to the operator and supervisor training portion of this rule, and subsection (4)(A), reporting and record keeping language, was revised to require the records to be kept current and made available for review on a monthly basis.

The Solvent Metal Cleaning rule is part of the St. Louis 15% Rate of Progress (ROP) Plan, which was required as part of the 1-hour ozone moderate nonattainment area requirements. Therefore, Missouri is currently developing an attainment demonstration and reasonable further progress plan for the 8-hour ozone SIP for the area but has not completed that work. Missouri has prepared documentation which demonstrates that these rule revisions will not negatively impact air quality in the St. Louis area. The demonstration consists of (1) an explanation of the rationale for the revisions to the rule's format, and (2) an evaluation of the revisions to the applicability section, definitions section, general provisions section, the reporting and record keeping section, and test methods section. The reformatting of the rule makes this rule consistent with the general format of Missouri air rules. The rule reformatting does not change any requirements and, therefore, does not impact emissions. As explained above, the additional exemptions in the rule do not significantly change the emissions limits to which the affected sources are subject.

Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?

The submittal satisfied the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. In addition, the state submittal has met the public notice requirements for SIP submission in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102 and met the substantive SIP requirements of the CAA including section 110.

What action is EPA taking?

We are approving the request to amend the Missouri SIP to include revisions to the St. Louis Solvent Metal Cleaning rule, 10 CSR 10-5.300.

We are processing this action as a direct final action because the revisions make routine changes to the existing rules which are noncontroversial and make regulatory revisions, required by state statute. Therefore, we do not anticipate any adverse comments. Please note that if EPA receives 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.

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, Distribution, 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 approves a state rule implementing a Federal standard.

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 state submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA when it reviews a state submission, to use VCS in place of a state submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Start Printed Page 10613Advancement 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 May 8, 2007. 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

End List of Subjects Start Signature

Dated: February 27, 2007.

John B. Askew,

Regional Administrator, Region 7.

End Signature Start Amendment Part

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 Start Authority

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

End Authority

Subpart AA—Missouri

Start Amendment Part

2. In § 52.1320(c) the table is amended under Chapter 5 by revising the entry for “10-5.300” to read as follows: § 52.1320 Identification of plan.

End Amendment Part
* * * * *

(c) * * *

EPA-Approved Missouri Regulations

Missouri citationTitleState effective dateEPA approval dateExplanation
Missouri Department of Natural Resources
*         *         *         *         *         *         *
Chapter 5—Air Quality Standards and Air Pollution Control Regulations for the St. Louis Metropolitan Area
*         *         *         *         *         *         *
10-5.300Control of Emissions from Solvent Metal Cleaning11/30/063/9/07 [insert FR page number where the document begins ]
*         *         *         *         *         *         *
* * * * *
End Supplemental Information

[FR Doc. E7-4300 Filed 3-8-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P