Jump to main content.


69 FR 56363-56364 September 21, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 182) 40 CFR Part 281 [FRL-7816-1] Missouri: Final Approval of Missouri Underground Storage Tank Program



[Federal Register: September 21, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 182)]
[Rules and Regulations]               
[Page 56363-56364]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr21se04-6]                         

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 281

[FRL-7816-1]

 
Missouri: Final Approval of Missouri Underground Storage Tank 
Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule; final determination on application of State of 
Missouri for final approval.

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

SUMMARY: Missouri has applied to EPA for final approval of its 
Underground Storage Tank (UST) program under Subtitle I of the Resource 
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). EPA has reviewed the Missouri 
application and has made a final determination that Missouri's UST 
program satisfies all of the requirements necessary to qualify for 
final approval. Thus, EPA is granting final approval to the State of 
Missouri to operate its program.

DATES: Final approval for Missouri shall be effective October 21, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Linda Garwood, EPA Region 7, ARTD/
STOP, 901 N. 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101, (913) 551-7268, or 
by e-mail at garwood.linda@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background

    Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), as 
amended, requires that EPA develop standards for Underground Storage 
Tanks (UST) systems as may be necessary to protect human health and the 
environment, and procedures for approving state programs in lieu of the 
Federal program. EPA promulgated state program approval procedures at 
40 CFR part 281. Program approval may be granted by EPA pursuant to 
RCRA section 9004(b), if the Agency finds that the state program is 
``no less stringent'' than the Federal program for the seven elements 
set forth at RCRA section 9004(a)(1) through (7); includes the 
notification requirements of RCRA section 9004(a)(8); and provides for 
adequate enforcement of compliance with UST standards of RCRA section 
9004(a). Note that RCRA sections 9005 (information-gathering) and 9006 
(Federal enforcement) by their terms apply even in states with programs 
approved by EPA under RCRA section 9004. Thus, the Agency retains its 
authority under RCRA sections 9005 and 9006, 42 U.S.C. 6991d and 6991e, 
and other applicable statutory and regulatory provisions to undertake 
inspections and enforcement actions in approved states. With respect to 
such an enforcement action, the Agency will rely on Federal sanctions, 
Federal inspection authorities, and Federal procedures rather than the 
state authorized analogues to these provisions.

II. Missouri UST Program

    The Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) is the lead 
implementing agency for the UST program in Missouri. MDNR has broad 
statutory authority to regulate UST releases under Sections 260.500 
through 260.550 of the Revised Statutes of Missouri (RSMo.) and more 
specific authority to regulate the installation, operation, 
maintenance, and closure of USTs under sections 319.100 through 
319.139, RSMo., the Missouri UST Law. Additional authorities, in 
particular the appeals process through the Missouri Clean Water 
Commission, are found at Chapter 644, RSMo., the Missouri Clean Water 
Law.
    The State of Missouri submitted a state program approval 
application to EPA by letter dated July 28, 2003. EPA evaluated the 
information provided and determined the application package met all 
requirements for a complete program application. On December 11, 2003, 
EPA notified Missouri that the application package was complete.
    Included in the state's Application is an Attorney General's 
statement. The Attorney General's statement provides an outline of the 
state's statutory and regulatory authority and details concerning areas 
where the state program is broader in scope or more stringent than the 
Federal program. Also included was a transmittal letter from the 
Governor of Missouri requesting program approval, a description of the 
Missouri UST program, a demonstration of Missouri's procedures to 
ensure adequate enforcement, a Memorandum of Agreement outlining the 
roles and responsibilities of EPA and the Missouri Department of 
Natural Resources, and copies of all applicable state statutes and 
regulations.
    Specifically, the Missouri UST program has requirements that are no 
less stringent than the Federal requirements at 40 CFR 281.30 New UST 
system design, construction, installation, and notification; 40 CFR 
281.31 Upgrading existing UST systems; 40 CFR 281.32 General operating 
requirements; 40 CFR 281.33 Release detection; 40 CFR 281.34 Release 
reporting, investigation, and confirmation; 40 CFR 281.35 Release 
response and corrective action; 40 CFR 281.36 Out-of-service UST 
systems and closure; 40 CFR 281.37 Financial responsibility for UST 
systems

[[Page 56364]]

containing petroleum; and 40 CFR 281.39 Lender Liability.
    Additionally, the Missouri UST program has adequate enforcement of 
compliance, as described at 40 CFR 281.40 Requirements for compliance 
monitoring program and authority; 40 CFR 281.41 Requirements for 
enforcement authority; 40 CFR 281.42 Requirements for public 
participation; and 40 CFR 281.43 Sharing of information.
    On May 5, 2004 (69 FR 25053), EPA published a tentative decision 
announcing its intent to grant Missouri final approval. Further 
background on the tentative decision to grant approval is available by 
contacting Linda Garwood, EPA Region 7, ARTD/USTB, 901 North 5th 
Street, Kansas City, Kansas, 66101, (913) 551-7268, or by e-mail at 
garwood.linda@epa.gov.

    Along with the tentative determination, EPA announced the 
opportunity for public comment. All comments needed to be received at 
EPA by June 4, 2004. Also, EPA provided notice that a public hearing 
would be provided but only if significant public interest on 
substantive issues was shown. EPA did not receive any significant 
comments and no public hearing was held.

III. Decision

    EPA concludes that the State of Missouri's application for final 
approval meets all the statutory and regulatory requirements 
established by Subtitle I of RCRA. Accordingly, Missouri is granted 
final approval to operate its UST program. The State of Missouri now 
has responsibility for managing all regulated UST facilities within its 
borders and carrying out all aspects of the UST program, except with 
regard to Indian lands, where EPA will retain and otherwise exercise 
regulatory authority. Missouri also has primary enforcement 
responsibility, for the USTs it regulates, although EPA retains the 
right to conduct inspections under section 9005 of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 
6991d, and to take enforcement actions under section 9006 of RCRA, 42 
U.S.C. 6991e.

Statutory and Executive Order Review

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this action 
from the requirements of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 
1993), and therefore this action is not subject to review by OMB. 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 
authorizes State requirements for the purpose of RCRA 9004 and imposes 
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law. 
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this action 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 action authorizes 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 (Public Law 104-4).
    This action 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 authorizes State 
requirements as part of the State underground storage tank program 
without altering the relationship or the distribution of power and 
responsibilities established by RCRA. This action 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.
    Under RCRA 9004, EPA grants approval of a State's program as long 
as the State meets the criteria required by RCRA. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a State 
program application, to require the use of any particular voluntary 
consensus standard in place of another standard that otherwise 
satisfies the requirements of RCRA. 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 document 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 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).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 281

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Hazardous materials, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

    Authority: This notice is issued under the authority of Section 
9004 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act as amended 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 
6926, 6974(b).

    Dated: September 13, 2004.
James B. Gulliford,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
[FR Doc. 04-21183 Filed 9-20-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

Top of page


Local Navigation


Jump to main content.