62856 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 203 / Tuesday, October 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2014–0688; FRL–9918–10– 

Region 7] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; State of 

Missouri, Control of Emissions From 

Hand-Fired Equipment 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is taking direct final 

action to approve revisions to the State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by 

the State of Missouri on May 8, 2012, 

related to a Missouri rule titled ‘‘Control 

of Emissions from Hand-Fired 

Equipment.’’ Today’s action approves a 

revision to the Missouri SIP that allows 

the burning of discarded clean wood in 

non-residential (commercial owned and 

operated) heating devices, with 

restrictions to ensure environmentallysound operation, in the St. Louis 

metropolitan area. 

DATES: This direct final rule will be 

effective December 22, 2014, without 

further notice, unless EPA receives 

adverse comment by November 20, 

2014. If EPA receives adverse comment, 

we 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–2014–0688, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: gonzalez.larry@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or Hand Delivery: Larry 

Gonzalez, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Air Planning and Development 

Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard, 

Lenexa, Kansas 66219. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2014– 

0688. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.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 

www.regulations.gov or email 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. The 

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 email comment directly 

to EPA without going through 

www.regulations.gov, your email 

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 docket 

are listed in the 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, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically in 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Environmental Protection Agency, 

Air Planning and Development Branch, 

11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, 

Kansas 66219. The Regional Office’s 

official hours of business are Monday 

through Friday, 8:00 to 4:30 excluding 

legal holidays. The interested persons 

wanting to examine these documents 

should make an appointment with the 

office at least 24 hours in advance. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Larry Gonzalez, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Air Planning and 

Development Branch, 11201 Renner 

Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at 

913–551–7041 or by email at 

gonzalez.larry@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ 

or ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. This section 

provides additional information by 

addressing the following: 

I. What is a SIP? 

II. What is the Federal approval process for 

a SIP? 

III. What does Federal approval of a State 

regulation mean to me? 

IV. What is being addressed in this 

document? 

V. Have the requirements for approval of a 

SIP revision been met? 

VI. What action is EPA taking? 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. 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 (NAAQS) established by the 

EPA. These 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 EPA 

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. 

II. What is the Federal approval 

process for a SIP? 

In order for state regulations to be 

incorporated into the Federallyenforceable 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 stateauthorized rulemaking body. 

Once a state rule, regulation, or 

control strategy is adopted, the state 

submits it to EPA and requests that it be 

included into the state’s SIP. EPA must 

provide public notice and seek 

additional public comment before it 

takes final action on the state’s request 

to modify, or revise its implementation 

plan. 

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 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 203 / Tuesday, October 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 62857 

1The 2008 baseline emissions, used in the 

comparison shown in table 1, was collected from 

EPA’s 2008 emissions inventory for the St. Louis 

metropolitan area and includes emissions from 

point and nonpoint sources in the following 

counties and municipalities in MO: Franklin 

County; Jefferson County; St. Charles County; St. 

Louis County; and St. Louis City. 

approved a given state regulation with 

a specific effective date by referencing it 

directly in the CFR. 

III. 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. After the 

regulation is Federally-approved, EPA is 

authorized to take enforcement action 

against violators of the state 

requirement. As a result of Federal 

enforceability, citizens are also offered 

legal recourse to address violations as 

described in section 304 of the CAA. 

IV. What is being addressed in this 

document? 

EPA is taking direct final action to 

approve a revision to the SIP submitted 

by the State of Missouri on May 8, 2012, 

related to Missouri rule 10 CSR 10– 

5.040, ‘‘Control of Emissions from 

Hand-Fired Equipment.’’ This revision 

allows commercial facilities to burn 

clean scrap wood in hand-fired 

equipment operating in the St. Louis 

metropolitan area, as long as the device 

is operated at the same location that the 

clean scrap wood is generated. 

To ensure that emissions of pollutants 

that result from this provision will not 

affect the ability of the St. Louis 

metropolitan area to comply with the 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS), MDNR estimated the 

emission increases the area may 

experience as commercial facilities 

utilize the provision. The MDNR 

analysis first estimated the number of 

facilities that would take advantage of 

the provision, then estimated the 

amount of pollutants emitted from 

hand-fired heating equipment using 

clean scrap wood as a fuel. The MDNR 

analysis of emissions relied on EPA’s 

compilation of air pollution emission 

factors (AP–42) guidance to estimate the 

emissions from commercial facilities 

taking advantage of the new provision. 

The analysis submitted by MDNR 

determined that on a seasonal basis the 

greatest pollutant increase would be a 

less than 0.5 percent increase in carbon 

monoxide (CO), with other NAAQS 

pollutants showing increasing that are 

orders of magnitude lower. A 

description of the analysis and 

estimated emissions that result from the 

provision, prepared by MDNR, is 

included in the docket for this final 

rule. 

In EPA’s review of MDNR’s technical 

analysis, we agree that due to the 

limited number of commercial facilities 

utilizing the provision the resulting 

increase in emissions caused by burning 

clean wood in heating devices would be 

negligible. MDNR’s analysis assumed 

individual heating units using a mix of 

oak and pine with a moisture content 

indicative of ‘‘dry wood’’ over a normal 

heating season. The estimated emissions 

from this analysis show that the devices 

produce a negligible increase in NAAQS 

pollutants when compared to the 

current St. Louis metropolitan area 

emissions inventory. 

In the analysis, MDNR specifically 

estimated the emissions from the 

operation of up to 50 devices in the 

metropolitan area burning clean dry 

wood at commercial facilities. While it 

is difficult to establish realistic 

assumptions for this type of analysis, 

EPA believes this component of the 

analysis is reasonable. At the time 

MDNR submitted the SIP revision 

request to EPA for approval, there were 

three commercial facilities in the St. 

Louis metropolitan area known to be 

using clean scrap wood for heating 

purposes in five different combustion/

heating devices. These devices were 

operating at one pallet repair facility, 

one lumber yard, and one arborist. 

These facilities generate unadulterated, 

clean scrap wood waste as a normal 

course of doing business. 

To calculate the potential emissions 

from the devices, MDNR used EPA’s 

AP–42 guidance and assumed the 

device[s] would only operate during the 

heating season (22 weeks) for comfort 

heating at the facilities as opposed to 

operating year round for the purpose of 

destroying secondary materials 

generated by the commercial activity. 

EPA believes estimating emissions 

based on the use of heating devices only 

during the heating season is a 

reasonable assumption to make to 

increase the accuracy of the estimate. 

MDNR’s analysis estimated the 

emissions from six pollutants: 

Particulate Matter (PM) of 10 microns 

and less than 2.5 microns in size, CO, 

oxides of nitrogen (NOX), oxides of 

sulfur (SOX), and volatile organic 

compounds (VOCs). The analysis results 

are shown in table 1 below.1

TABLE 1 

Pollutant 

Emissions 

per device 

(tons) 

2008 

Baseline 

emissions 

(tons) 

Increase per 

device 

(%) 

Number of Devices 

5 50 

Tons Percent Tons Percent 

PM2.5 ........................................................ 0.0815 16,670 0.000489 0.4077 0.00245 4.0771 0.02446 

PM10 ......................................................... 0.0947 109,306 0.000087 0.4735 0.00043 4.7347 0.00433 

CO ............................................................ 0.1578 33,867 0.000466 0.7891 0.00233 7.8912 0.02330 

NOX .......................................................... 0.1289 44,285 0.000291 0.6444 0.00146 6.4445 0.01455 

SOX .......................................................... 0.0066 213,756 0.000003 0.0329 0.00002 0.3288 0.00015 

VOC ......................................................... 0.0045 43,430 0.000010 0.0224 0.00005 0.2236 0.00051 

The analysis shows that increases in 

emissions in the St. Louis metropolitan 

area produced through the use of this 

provision are insignificant, and will not 

meaningfully impact the attainment 

status of the area with respect to the 

NAAQS. 

The St. Louis metropolitan area is 

currently classified as moderate 

nonattainment for PM2.5 and marginal 

nonattainment for ozone. PM2.5, or fine 

particulate matter is produced by a 

variety of commercial and 

noncommercial sources in the St. Louis 

metropolitan area, and based on the 

analysis even if 50 commercial facilities 

were to begin heating with scrap wood 

generated onsite, the resulting emissions 

would only increase the current PM2.5

emission’s inventory by a factor of 

0.0002 (or 4.1 tons out of 16,670 tons). 

EPA agrees that this relatively slight 

increase in PM2.5 emissions will not 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
62858 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 203 / Tuesday, October 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

have a measurable impact on ambient 

PM2.5 concentrations in the area. 

Furthermore emissions trends for PM2.5

currently depict a decrease in ambient 

concentrations and this trending 

decrease in PM2.5 far exceeds the 

emissions increase in PM2.5 projected by 

MDNR’s analysis. 

Ozone, the other pollutant that the St. 

Louis metropolitan area is currently not 

attaining, is not directly emitted into the 

atmosphere like PM or NOX. MDNR’s 

analysis did not specifically address 

ozone concentrations; however, due to a 

number of factors assessed by EPA, we 

agree that the impact on attaining the 

ozone NAAQS will be minimal. In 

support of this position, EPA notes that 

the restrictions for the exceptions will 

greatly limit the number of commercial 

facilities using the provision and 

therefore limit additional pollutants 

released into the St. Louis metropolitan 

airshed. Also, EPA considered that 

additional building heating is needed 

during periods of the year in which 

colder temperatures and shorter periods 

of daylight exist (months preceding and 

following the winter solstice) thus, 

minimizing impacts on ambient ozone 

concentrations. In summary, EPA agrees 

with MDNR’s analysis that any 

additional ozone precursor emissions 

that the revised provision adds to the 

area will not contribute to the formation 

of ground level ozone in a meaningful 

way, because the emissions occur 

during a period of the year in which the 

conditions that favor ozone formation 

do not exist. 

MDNR solicited comments on the 

proposed provision during the process 

to finalize this revision. In response to 

these solicitations, MDNR received 

fifteen comments (two from EPA Region 

7, one from the commercial operator 

originally requesting the rule change, 

and the rest from the St. Louis Health 

Department). In general, the comments 

highlighted technical aspects of the 

provision that required modification to 

increase clarity and aid compliance. 

MDNR modified the proposed provision 

to address comments from EPA and the 

St. Louis Health Department. 

V. Have the requirements for approval 

of a SIP revision been met? 

The state submission has met the 

public notice requirements for SIP 

submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 

51.102. The submission also satisfied 

the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 

51, appendix V. and meets the 

substantive SIP requirements of the 

CAA, including section 110 and 

implementing regulations. 

VI. What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is taking direct final action to 

approve this SIP revision. We are 

publishing this rule without a prior 

proposed rule because we view this as 

a noncontroversial action and anticipate 

no adverse comment. However, in the 

‘‘Proposed Rules’’ section of today’s 

Federal Register, we are publishing a 

separate document that will serve as the 

proposed rule to approve this SIP 

revision, if adverse comments are 

received on this direct final rule. We 

will not institute a second comment 

period on this action. Any parties 

interested in commenting must do so at 

this time. For further information about 

commenting on this rule, see the 

ADDRESSES section of this document. If 

EPA receives adverse comment, we will 

publish a timely withdrawal in the 

Federal Register informing the public 

that this direct final rule will not take 

effect. We will address all public 

comments in any subsequent final rule 

based on the proposed rule. 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the 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, 

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’’ under the terms of Executive 

Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 

1993) and is therefore not subject to 

review under Executive Orders 12866 

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 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

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 action 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 22, 2014. 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. Parties with 

objections to this direct final rule are 

encouraged to file a comment in 

response to the parallel notice of 

proposed rulemaking for this action 

published in the proposed rules section 

of today’s Federal Register, rather than 

file an immediate petition for judicial 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 203 / Tuesday, October 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 62859 

review of this direct final rule, so that 

EPA can withdraw this direct final rule 

and address the comment in the 

proposed rulemaking. 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 24, 2014. 

Karl Brooks, 

Regional Administrator, Region 7. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, the Environmental Protection 

Agency amends 40 CFR part 52 as set 

forth below: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart AA—Missouri 

■ 2. In § 52.1320, the table in paragraph 

(c) is amended by revising the table 

heading entitled ‘‘Chapter 5—Air 

Quality Standards and Air Pollution 

Control Regulations for the St. Louis 

Metropolitan Area’’ and the entry under 

‘‘Chapter 5—Air Quality Standards and 

Air Pollution Control Regulations for 

the St. Louis Metropolitan Area’’ for 

‘‘10–5.040’’ to read as follows: 

§ 52.1320 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED MISSOURI REGULATIONS

Missouri citation Title 

State 

effective 

date 

EPA approval date Explanation 

Missouri Department of Natural Resources 

*******

Chapter 5—Air Quality Regulations and Air Pollution Control Regulations for the St. Louis Metropolitan Area 

*******

10–5.040 ........................... Control of Emissions from Hand-Fired Equipment .... 05/30/12 10/21/14 [Insert Federal 

Register citation].

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2014–24866 Filed 10–20–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R08–OAR–2014–0183; FRL–9918–20– 

Region 8] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Wyoming; 

Revisions to the Air Quality Standards 

and Regulations 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is approving changes to 

Wyoming’s State Implementation Plan 

(SIP). On February 10, 2014, the 

Wyoming Department of Environmental 

Quality (WDEQ) submitted to EPA 

revisions to the Wyoming SIP. These 

revisions included the removal of an 

exemption from Wyoming Air Quality 

Standards and Regulations (WAQSR) 

Chapter 3, section 2(d). In this action, 

EPA is approving the revision of this 

provision into the SIP because the 

revision is consistent with Clean Air Act 

(CAA) requirements. The revision will 

correct certain deficiencies related to 

the treatment of excess emissions from 

sources. EPA will address the remaining 

revisions from Wyoming’s February 10, 

2014 submission in a separate action. 

DATES: This final rule is effective 

November 20, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket 

Identification No. EPA–R08–OAR– 

2014–0183. All documents in the docket 

are listed in the www.regulations.gov 

index. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., CBI or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Air Program, Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 

1595 Wynkoop St., Denver, Colorado 

80202–1129. EPA requests that if at all 

possible, you contact the individual 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section to view the hard copy 

of the docket. You may view the hard 

copy of the docket Monday through 

Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., excluding 

Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Adam Clark, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 

Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, 

Denver, Colorado 80202–1129, (303) 

312–7104, clark.adam@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Definitions 

For the purpose of this document, we 

are giving meaning to certain words or 

initials as follows: 

(i) The words or initials Act or CAA 

mean or refer to the Clean Air Act, 

unless the context indicates otherwise. 

(ii) The words EPA, we, us or our 

mean or refer to the United States 

Environmental Protection Agency. 

(iii) The initials IBR mean or refer to 

incorporation by reference. 

(iv) The initials SIP mean or refer to 

state implementation plan. 

(v) The initials SSM mean or refer to 

startup, shutdown, and malfunction. 

(vi) The words State or Wyoming 

mean the State of Wyoming, unless the 

context indicates otherwise. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES