[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


