Mr. Karl Brooks 

Page Two 

Thank you for your attention to this matter. If you have any questions regarding this 

submittal, please contact Wendy Vit, with the Department's Air Pollution Control Program at 

P.O. Box 176, Jefferson City, MO 65102 or by phone at (573) 751-7840. 

Sincerely, 

AIR POLLUTION CONTROL PROGRAM 

Kyra 

-<:C<-

L. Moore 

7fJJ~ Director 

KLM:abc 

Enclosures: 

Copy ofrule published in CSR 

Copy of commission signature page certifying Missouri Air Conservation Commission 

adoption 

Copy of technical support documentation for rule (if applicable) 

Copies of public hearing notices 

Copy of public hearing transcript introductory statement 

Copy ofMO Reg proposed rulemaking 

Copy ofMO Reg order ofrule making with comments/responses 

Mark-Up of Existing Federally-Approved State Regulation(s) - not applicable 

c: Missouri Air Conservation Commission 
any subsequent amendments or additions. 

(B) Definitions of certain terms specified

in this rule, other than those defined in this

rule section, may be found in 10 CSR 10-

6.020.

(3) General Provisions. Unless otherwise

noted in this section, 40 CFR 96.206, 96.207,

and 96.208 as well as all of the sections of 40

CFR 96 subparts BBB, CCC, DDD, FFF,

GGG, and III promulgated as of April 28,

2006 are hereby incorporated by reference in

this rule, as published by the Office of the

Federal Register, U.S. National Archives and

Records, 700 Pennsylvania Avenue NW,

Washington, D.C. 20408. This rule does not

incorporate any subsequent amendments or

additions. 

(4) Reporting and Record Keeping. Unless

otherwise noted in this section, all of the sections of 40 CFR 96 subpart HHH promulgated as of April 28, 2006 are hereby incorporated by reference in this rule, as published

by the Office of the Federal Register, U.S.

National Archives and Records, 700 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, D.C. 20408.

This rule does not incorporate any subsequent amendments or additions. 

(5) Test Methods. (Not Applicable)

AUTHORITY: section 643.050, RSMo 2000.

Original rule filed Oct. 2, 2006, effective

May 30, 2007. Amended: Filed June 25,

2009, effective Feb. 28, 2010.

*Original authority: 643.050, RSMo 1965, amended 1972,

1992, 1993, 1995.

10 CSR 10-6.368 Control of Mercury

Emissions From Electric Generating Units

(Rescinded May 30, 2013)

AUTHORITY: section 643.050, RSMo 2000.

Original rule filed Oct. 2, 2006, effective

May 30, 2007. Rescinded: Filed Aug. 20,

2012, effective May 30, 2013.

10 CSR 10-6.380 Control of NOx Emissions

From Portland Cement Kilns

PURPOSE: This rule reduces emissions of

oxides of nitrogen (NOx) to ensure compliance with the federal NOx control plan to

reduce the transport of air pollutants. The

rule establishes NOx control equipment and

NOx emission levels for cement kilns. The evidence supporting the need for this proposed

rulemaking per section 536.016, RSMo, is the

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency NOx

State Implementation Plan (SIP) Call dated

April 21, 2004.

(1) Applicability. This rule applies to any

cement kiln located in the counties of

Bollinger, Butler, Cape Girardeau, Carter,

Clark, Crawford, Dent, Dunklin, Franklin,

Gasconade, Iron, Jefferson, Lewis, Lincoln,

Madison, Marion, Mississippi, Montgomery,

New Madrid, Oregon, Pemiscot, Perry, Pike,

Ralls, Reynolds, Ripley, St. Charles, St.

Francois, St. Louis, Ste. Genevieve, Scott,

Shannon, Stoddard, Warren, Washington and

Wayne counties and the City of St. Louis

that—

(A) Is a long dry kiln with an actual process rate of at least twelve tons of clinker produced per hour (12 TPH);

(B) Is a long wet kiln with an actual process rate of at least ten (10) TPH;

(C) Is a preheater kiln with an actual process rate of at least sixteen (16) TPH; or

(D) Is a precalciner or preheater/precalciner kiln with an actual process rate of at least

twenty-two (22) TPH.

(2) Definitions.

(A) Clinker—The product of a Portland

cement kiln from which finished cement is

manufactured by milling and grinding.

(B) Long-dry kiln—A kiln fourteen feet

(14') or larger in diameter, four hundred feet

(400') or greater in length, which employs no

preheating of the feed and the inlet feed to the

kiln is dry.

(C) Long-wet kiln—A kiln fourteen feet

(14') or larger in diameter, four hundred feet

(400') or greater in length, which employs no

preheating of the feed and the inlet feed to the

kiln is a slurry. 

(D) Low-NOx burners—A type of cement

kiln burner (a device that functions as an

injector of fuel and combustion air into kiln

to produce a flame that burns as close as possible to the center line of the kiln) that has a

series of channels or orifices that 1) allow for

the adjustment of the volume, velocity, pressure, and/or direction of the air carrying the

fuel, known as primary air, into the kiln, and

2) impart high momentum and turbulence to

the fuel stream to facilitate mixing of the fuel

and secondary air.

(E) Mid-kiln firing—Secondary firing in

kiln systems by injecting fuel at an intermediate point in the kiln system using a specially designed fuel injection mechanism for the

purpose of decreasing NOx emissions

through—

1. The burning of part of the fuel at a

lower temperature; and 

2. The creation of reducing conditions at

the point of initial combustion. 

(F) Portland cement—A hydraulic cement

produced by pulverizing clinker consisting

essentially of hydraulic calcium silicates, usually containing one (1) or more of the forms

of calcium sulfate as an interground addition.

(G) Portland cement kiln—A system,

including any solid, gaseous or liquid fuel

combustion equipment, used to calcine and

fuse raw materials, including limestone and

clay, to produce Portland cement clinker.

(H) Preheater/precalciner kiln—A kiln

where the feed to the kiln system is preheated in cyclone chambers and that utilizes a

second burner to provide heat for calcination

of material prior to the material entering the

rotary kiln which forms clinker.

(I) Preheater kiln—A kiln where the feed

to the kiln system is preheated in cyclone

chambers prior to the final fusion, which

forms clinker.

(J) Recoverable fuel—Fuels that have been

permitted for use for energy recovery under

10 CSR 10-6.065.

(K) Renewable fuel—Renewable energy

resources that include but are not limited to

solar (photovoltaic), wind, and biomass.

Biomass includes but is not limited to: agricultural crops and crop waste, untreated wood

and wood wastes, livestock waste, wastepaper, and organic municipal solid waste. 

(L) Definitions of certain terms specified

in this rule, other than those defined in this

rule section, may be found in 10 CSR 10-

6.020.

(3) General Provisions.

(A) Beginning May 1, 2007 an owner or

operator of any Portland cement kiln subject

to this rule shall not operate the kiln during

the period starting May 1 and ending September 30 of each year, unless the kiln installs

and operates with one (1) of the following:

1. Low-NOx burners; 

2. Mid-kiln firing; 

3. An alternative control technology that

is approved by the staff director, and incorporated in the federally approved SIP, and is

proven to achieve emission reductions of thirty percent (30%) or greater; 

4. An emission rate of:

A. For long-wet kilns—6.8 pounds of

NOx per ton of clinker produced, averaged

over the period from May 1 through September 30 of each year.

B. For long-dry kilns—6.0 pounds of

NOx per ton of clinker produced, averaged

over the period from May 1 through September 30 of each year.

200 CODE OF STATE REGULATIONS (4/30/13) JASON KANDER

Secretary of State

10 CSR 10-6—DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Division 10—Air Conservation Commission
- - ---- ----- - ---- --- --

Order of Rulemaking 

Compliant with 643.055 RSMo, the Missouri Air Conservation Commission has 

determined that this action is needed to have a U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency approved State Implementation Plan. 

10 CSR 10-6.368 (rescission) Control of Mercury Emissions From Electric 

Generating Units is hereby ,RESCINDED by the Missouri Air Conservation 

Commission this 5th day of February, 2013. 

;6u//b0~-,Chairman 

.-+ , ,"" >-=-f'o......-..>. C-c Q3~-==---o.-->oc.-=---~--, Vice Chairman 

o 

---r-J-~c....:o............,~)-+-8- ..... --_-_-_- ____ ---__, Member


__ 'Member

___ _ _ ____ _________, Member 

________ ____ ______, Member 

, Member 
Jay Nixon, Governor 

Sara Parker Pauley, Director

Air Pollution Control Program

Rulemakings on Public Notice                                                    

The Missouri Department of Natural Resources filed the following proposed rulemakings with the 

secretary of state's office and comments are being accepted as noted at the end of the proposed 

rulemaking under the Notice of Public Hearing and Notice to Submit Comments heading. To submit 

comments electronically, use the links below the rule or to submit written comments see the address 

below.

10 CSR 10-6.191 (new rule) Sewage Sludge Incinerators

This proposed rule will incorporate by reference the regulatory requirements of 40 CFR 60, Subpart

MMMM—Emission Guidelines and Compliance Times for Existing Sewage Sludge Incineration Units which 

was promulgated by the U.S. Environmental Agency (EPA) in March 2011 (76 FR 15372). Incorporation of 

this federal regulation into a state rule will shift enforcement authority for existing sewage sludge 

incineration units from EPA to the state of Missouri.

Proposed Rulemaking - Published in October 1, 2012 Missouri Register. 

Additional Information on this rulemaking. 

Submit comments now

Submit written comments

Comments about this rulemaking will be accepted through close of business Dec. 12, 2012.

10 CSR 10-6.368 (rescission) Control of Mercury Emissions From Electric Generating Units

This rule is being proposed for rescission because the federal Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR) that is the 

basis for this rule has been vacated and removed from the Code of Federal Regulations.

Proposed Rulemaking - Published in October 1, 2012 Missouri Register. 

Submit comments now

Submit written comments

Comments about this rulemaking will be accepted through close of business Dec. 12, 2012.

Submit written comments about any rule development to:

Chief, Air Quality Planning Section 

Missouri Department of Natural Resources 

Air Pollution Control Program 

P.O. Box 176 

Jefferson City, MO 65102-0176

Back to top

Rulemakings on Public Notice - DNR Page 1 of 1

http://www.dnr.mo.gov/env/apcp/rulemaking.htm 10/30/2012
1

Bechtel, Cheri

From: Missouri DNR <MODNR@public.govdelivery.com>

Sent: Friday, November 02, 2012 4:22 PM

To: Bechtel, Cheri

Subject: Courtesy Copy: Missouri Air Conservation Commission to hold public hearing on 12/6/2012

This is a courtesy copy of an email bulletin sent by Cheri Bechtel.

This bulletin was sent to the following groups of people:

Subscribers of Air Public Notices (394 recipients) 

Having trouble viewing this email? View it as a Web page.

Below is a notice for items being presented for public hearing at the December 6, 2012 Missouri Air 

Conservation Commission meeting. If you have any questions, please contact Wendy Vit with the Air 

Pollution Control Program at (573) 526-3167 or wendy.vit@dnr.mo.gov. 

 

MISSOURI AIR CONSERVATION COMMISSION 

WILL HOLD PUBLIC HEARING 

JEFFERSON CITY, MO -- The Missouri Air Conservation Commission will hold a public hearing on 

Thursday, December 6, 2012 beginning at 9 a.m. at the Elm Street Conference Center, 1730 East Elm Street, 

Lower Level, Bennett Springs Conference Room, Jefferson City, Missouri. The commission will hear 

testimony related to the following proposed action(s): 

* 10 CSR 10-6.368 (rescission) Control of Mercury Emissions From Electric Generating Units 

 

* 10 CSR 10-6.191 (new rule) Sewage Sludge Incinerators 

 

* Clean Air Act Section 111(d)/129 State Plan Revision — Section 111(d)/129 State Plan for 

Implementation of the Sewage Sludge Incinerator Emission Guidelines for Missouri 

 

Documents for the above item(s) will be available for review at the Missouri Department of Natural 

Resources, Air Pollution Control Program, 1659 Elm Street, Jefferson City, (573) 751-4817 and in the Public 

Notices section of the program web site http://dnr.mo.gov/env/apcp/public-notices.htm. This information will 

be available at least 30 days prior to the public hearing date. 

 

The Department will accept written or email comments for the record until 5 p.m. on December 13, 2012. 

Please send written comments to Chief, Air Quality Planning Section, Air Pollution Control Program, P.O. 

Box 176, Jefferson City, MO 65102-0176. Email comments may be submitted via the program web site noted 

above. All written and email comments and public hearing testimony will be equally considered. 

 
2

Citizens wishing to speak at the public hearing should notify the secretary to the Missouri Air Conservation 

Commission, Missouri Department of Natural Resources, Air Pollution Control Program, P.O. Box 176, 

Jefferson City, Missouri 65102-0176, or telephone (573) 526-3420. The Department requests persons 

intending to give verbal presentations also provide a written copy of their testimony to the commission 

secretary at the time of the public hearing. 

 

Persons with disabilities requiring special services or accommodations to attend the meeting can make 

arrangements by calling the Program directly at (573) 751-4817, the Division of Environmental Quality's toll 

free number at (800) 361-4827, or by writing two weeks in advance of the meeting to: Missouri Department 

of Natural Resources, Air Conservation Commission Secretary, P.O. Box 176, Jefferson City, MO 65102. 

Hearing impaired persons may contact the program through Relay Missouri, (800) 735-2966. 

 

Update your subscriptions, modify your password or email address, or stop subscriptions at any time on your 

Subscriber Preferences Page. You will need to use your email address to log in. If you have questions or 

problems with the subscription service, please contact support@govdelivery.com. 

This service is provided to you at no charge by Missouri DNR. 
PUBLIC HEARING 12/6/2012

www.midwestlitigation.com Phone: 1.800.280.DEPO(3376) Fax: 314.644.1334

MIDWEST LITIGATION SERVICES

Page 1

1 STATE OF MISSOURI

 MISSOURI AIR CONSERVATION COMMISSION

2 Elm Street Conference Center

 1730 East Elm Street

3 Bennett Springs Conference Room

 Jefferson City, Missouri 65101

4

5

 TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

6

 PUBLIC HEARING

7

 BEFORE 

8 Ron Boyer, Vice Chairman

 Mark Garnett, Commissioner

9 Gary Pendergrass, Commissioner

 Jack Baker, Commissioner

10

 DECEMBER 6, 2012

11

 (Commencing at 9:30 a.m.)

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

REPORTED BY:

22 Patsy A. Hertweck, C. R.

Midwest Litigation Service

23 3432 West Truman Boulevard, Suite 207

Jefferson City, Missouri 65109

24 573-636-7551

800-280-3376

25
PUBLIC HEARING 12/6/2012

www.midwestlitigation.com Phone: 1.800.280.DEPO(3376) Fax: 314.644.1334

MIDWEST LITIGATION SERVICES

Page 6

1 Program distributed the public hearing notice to 

2 approximately 300 citizens, organizations, corporations, 

3 associations, and elected officials. We also notified the 

4 Kansas City, St. Louis County, and Springfield local air 

5 pollution control agencies, the states of Illinois and 

6 Kansas and other surrounding states and the U. S. 

7 Environmental Protection Agency of this public hearing.

8 This concludes my testimony. 

9 VICE CHAIRMAN BOYER: Our first staff 

10 presentation is by Aaron Basham. 

11 (Thereupon, the witness was sworn on 

12 his oath by the court reporter, and testified as 

13 follows:)

14 MR. BASHAM: Mr. Chairman, members of 

15 the Commission, my name is Aaron Basham.

16 I am employed with the Missouri Department 

17 of National Resources' Air Pollution Control Program. I 

18 work at 1659 East Elm Street in Jefferson City, Missouri.

19 I'm here to present testimony for the 

20 proposed rescission to 10 CSR 10-6.368, Control of Mercury 

21 Emissions from Electric Generating Units. The rule 

22 information begins on page 95 of the briefing document.

23 The Clean Air Mercury Rule restricted the 

24 emission of mercury from electric generating units at power 

25 plants through a regional mercury trading program. The 
PUBLIC HEARING 12/6/2012

www.midwestlitigation.com Phone: 1.800.280.DEPO(3376) Fax: 314.644.1334

MIDWEST LITIGATION SERVICES

Page 7

1 proposed rule-making will rescind this rule because the 

2 federal Clean Air Mercury Rule, which is the basis for this 

3 rule, has been vacated and removed from the Code of Federal 

4 Regulations. The Environmental Protection Agency replaced 

5 the Clean Air Mercury Rule with the new Mercury and Air 

6 Toxics Standards, or MATS rule, published in the "Federal 

7 Register" February 16th of 2012.

8 If the Commission adopts this rule action, 

9 it will be the Department's intention to submit this rule 

10 rescission which represents the 111(d) plan for electric 

11 generating unit mercury emissions to the U. S. 

12 Environmental Protection Agency for removal from the 

13 Missouri State Plan for Designated Facilities and 

14 Pollutants.

15 Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. 

16 I will be happy to answer any questions you might have 

17 specific to this rule rescission. 

18 VICE CHAIRMAN BOYER: Are there 

19 questions? (None voiced.) We have no questions. Thank 

20 you.

21 Our next staff presentation will be by Stan 

22 Payne.

23 (Thereupon, the witness was sworn on 

24 his oath by the court reporter, and testified as 

25 follows:)
Title 10—DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES

Division 10—Air Conservation Commission

Chapter 6—Air Quality Standards, Definitions, Sampling

and Reference Methods and Air Pollution Control 

Regulations for the Entire State of Missouri

PROPOSED RULE

10 CSR 10-6.191 Sewage Sludge Incinerators. If the commission

adopts this rule action, it will be the department’s intention to submit this new rule to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for

inclusion in the Missouri State Implementation Plan. The evidence

supporting the need for this proposed rulemaking is available for

viewing at the Missouri Department of Natural Resources’ Air

Pollution Control Program at the address listed in the Notice of

Public Hearing at the end of this rule. More information concerning

this rulemaking can be found at the Missouri Department of Natural

Resources’ Environmental Regulatory Agenda website,

www.dnr.mo.gov/regs/index.html.

PURPOSE: This rule incorporates by reference the federal regulatory requirements for existing sewage sludge incineration units in

Missouri. The evidence supporting the need for this proposed rulemaking, per 536.016, RSMo, is Federal Register Notice 76 FR

15372, dated March 21, 2011.

PUBLISHER’S NOTE: The secretary of state has determined that

the publication of the entire text of the material which is incorporated by reference as a portion of this rule would be unduly cumbersome

or expensive. This material as incorporated by reference in this rule

shall be maintained by the agency at its headquarters and shall be

made available to the public for inspection and copying at no more

than the actual cost of reproduction. This note applies only to the reference material. The entire text of the rule is printed here.

(1) Applicability.

(A) This rule applies to each sewage sludge incineration (SSI) unit,

as defined in section (2) of this rule, for which construction was commenced on or before October 14, 2010, except as provided in subsection (1)(C) of this rule. 

(B) If the owner or operator of an SSI unit makes physical or operational changes to an SSI unit for which construction commenced on

or before September 21, 2011, primarily to comply with this rule, 10

CSR 10-6.070 New Source Performance Regulations does not apply

to that unit.

(C) Exemptions to this rule are as follows:

1. Combustion units that incinerate sewage sludge and are not

located at a wastewater treatment facility designed to treat domestic

sewage sludge. Owners or operators of combustion units claiming

exemption under this paragraph must notify the director; and

2. Any SSI unit that becomes subject to 10 CSR 10-6.070 New

Source Performance Regulations because the owner or operator

made changes after September 21, 2011, that meet the definition of

modification, as defined in section (2) of this rule.

(2) Definitions.

(A) The provisions of 40 CFR 60.5250, promulgated as of July 1,

2011, shall apply and are hereby incorporated by reference in this

rule, as published by the Office of Federal Register, U.S. National

Archives and Records, 700 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington,

DC 20408. This rule does not incorporate any subsequent amendments or additions.

(B) Definitions of certain terms specified in this rule, other than

those defined in subsection (2)(A) of this rule, may be found in 10

CSR 10-6.020.

(3) General Provisions. The following references to 40 CFR 60.5085

through 60.5225, 40 CFR 60.5240 through 60.5245, and 40 CFR

60, Subpart MMMM Tables 1 through 6, promulgated as of July 1,

2011, shall apply and are hereby incorporated by reference in this

rule, as published by the Office of the Federal Register, U.S.

National Archives and Records, 700 Pennsylvania Avenue NW,

Washington, DC 20408. This rule does not incorporate any subsequent amendments or additions.

(A) Increments of Progress—40 CFR 60.5085 through 60.5125;

(B) Operator Training and Qualifications—40 CFR 60.5130

through 60.5160;

(C) Emission Limits, Emission Standards, and Operating Limits

and Requirements—40 CFR 60.5165 through 60.5181;

(D) Initial Compliance Requirements—40 CFR 60.5185 through

60.5200;

(E) Continuous Compliance Requirements—40 CFR 60.5205

through 60.5215;

(F) Performance Testing, Monitoring, and Calibration

Requirements—40 CFR 60.5220 through 60.5225;

(G) Title V Operating Permit—40 CFR 60.5240 through 60.5245;

and

(H) Table 1 though Table 6. The compliance dates for the increments of progress are—

1. For Increment 1, submit final control plan within one (1)

year of the effective date of this rule; and

2. For Increment 2, final compliance by March 21, 2016.

(4) Reporting and Record Keeping. The provisions of 40 CFR

60.5230 through 40 CFR 60.5235, promulgated as of July 1, 2011,

shall apply and are hereby incorporated by reference in this rule, as

published by the Office of Federal Register, U.S. National Archives

and Records, 700 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20408.

This rule does not incorporate any subsequent amendments or additions.

(5) Test Methods. (Not applicable)

AUTHORITY: section 643.050, RSMo Supp. 2011. Original rule filed

Aug. 27, 2012.

PUBLIC COST: This proposed rule will not cost state agencies or

political subdivisions more than five hundred dollars ($500) in the

aggregate.

PRIVATE COST: This proposed rule will not cost private entities

more than five hundred dollars ($500) in the aggregate.

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING AND NOTICE TO SUBMIT COMMENTS: A public hearing on this proposed rule will begin at 9:00

a.m., December 6, 2012. The public hearing will be held at the Elm

Street Conference Center, 1730 East Elm Street, Lower Level,

Bennett Springs Conference Room, Jefferson City, Missouri.

Opportunity to be heard at the hearing shall be afforded any interested person. Interested persons, whether or not heard, may submit

a written or email statement of their views until 5:00 p.m., December

13, 2012. Written comments shall be sent to Chief, Air Quality

Planning Section, Missouri Department of Natural Resources’ Air

Pollution Control Program, PO Box 176, Jefferson City, MO 65102-

0176. Email comments shall be sent to apcprulespn@dnr.mo.gov.

Title 10—DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES

Division 10—Air Conservation Commission

Chapter 6—Air Quality Standards, Definitions, Sampling

and Reference Methods and Air Pollution Control 

Regulations for the Entire State of Missouri

PROPOSED RESCISSION

10 CSR 10-6.368 Control of Mercury Emissions From Electric

Generating Units. This rule restricted the emission of mercury

from electric generating units at power plants through a regional

mercury trading program. This rulemaking will remove this rule

because the federal Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR) regulations

Page 1460 Proposed Rules

October 1, 2012

Vol. 37, No. 19
are being replaced with the new Mercury and Air Toxics Standards

(MATS). If the commission adopts this rule action, it will be the

department’s intention to submit this rule rescission to the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency for removal from the Missouri

State Implementation Plan. The evidence supporting the need for

this proposed rulemaking is available for viewing at the Missouri

Department of Natural Resources’ Air Pollution Control Program at

the address listed in the Notice of Public Hearing at the end of this

rule. More information concerning this rulemaking can be found at

the Missouri Department of Natural Resources’ Environmental

Regulatory Agenda website, www.dnr.mo.gov/regs/index.html.

PURPOSE: This rule restricted the emission of mercury from electric

generating units at power plants through a regional mercury trading

program. This rulemaking will remove this rule because the federal

Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR) regulations are being replaced with

the new non-trading Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) regulations. The evidence supporting the need for this proposed rulemaking, per 536.016, RSMo, is a Federal Register Notice dated

February 16, 2012, that removes the CAMR regulation.

AUTHORITY: section 643.050, RSMo 2000. Original rule filed Oct.

2, 2006, effective May 30, 2007. Rescinded: Filed Aug. 20, 2012.

PUBLIC COST: This proposed rescission will not cost state agencies

or political subdivisions more than five hundred dollars ($500) in the

aggregate.

PRIVATE COST: This proposed rescission will not cost private entities more than five hundred dollars ($500) in the aggregate.

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING AND NOTICE TO SUBMIT COMMENTS: A public hearing on this proposed rescission will begin at

9:00 a.m., December 6, 2012. The public hearing will be held at the

Elm Street Conference Center, 1730 East Elm Street, Lower Level,

Bennett Springs Conference Room, Jefferson City, Missouri.

Opportunity to be heard at the hearing shall be afforded any interested person. Interested persons, whether or not heard, may submit

a written or email statement of their views until 5:00 p.m., December

13, 2012. Written comments shall be sent to Chief, Air Quality

Planning Section, Missouri Department of Natural Resources’ Air

Pollution Control Program, PO Box 176, Jefferson City, MO 65102-

0176. Email comments shall be sent to apcprulespn@dnr.mo.gov.

Title 11—DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY

Division 45—Missouri Gaming Commission

Chapter 4—Licenses

PROPOSED RESCISSION

11 CSR 45-4.050 Application Period and Fees for Class A License.

This rule established an application period and fees.

PURPOSE: This rule is being rescinded because the commission is

no longer taking applications for Class A licenses. 

AUTHORITY: sections 313.004 and 313.812, RSMo 2000. Emergency

rule filed Sept. 1, 1993, effective Sept. 20, 1993, expired Jan. 17,

1994. Emergency rule filed Jan. 5, 1994, effective Jan. 18, 1994,

expired Jan. 30, 1994. Original rule filed Sept. 1, 1993, effective

Jan. 31, 1994. Amended: Filed Dec. 7, 1995, effective June 30,

1996. Amended: Filed Aug. 30, 1996, effective April 30, 1997.

Amended: Filed May 13, 1998, effective Oct. 30, 1998. Rescinded:

Filed Dec. 3, 2007, changed to amended April 25, 2008, effective

July 30, 2008. Rescinded: Filed Aug. 30, 2012.

PUBLIC COST: This proposed rescission will not cost state agencies

or political subdivisions more than five hundred dollars ($500) in the

aggregate.

PRIVATE COST: This proposed rescission will not cost private entities more than five hundred dollars ($500) in the aggregate. 

NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING AND NOTICE TO SUBMIT COMMENTS: Anyone may file a statement in support of or in opposition

to this proposed rescission with the Missouri Gaming Commission,

PO Box 1847, Jefferson City, MO 65102. To be considered, comments must be received within thirty (30) days after publication of

this notice in the Missouri Register. A public hearing is scheduled

for November 7, 2012, at 10:00 a.m., in the Missouri Gaming

Commission’s Hearing Room, 3417 Knipp Drive, Jefferson City,

Missouri.

Title 11—DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY

Division 45—Missouri Gaming Commission

Chapter 4—Licenses

PROPOSED AMENDMENT

11 CSR 45-4.055 Application Period and Fees for Class A and

Class B Licenses. The commission is amending sections (2) and (4),

deleting section (5), and renumbering sections (6) and (7).

PURPOSE: This amendment changes time for application period and

fees for Class A and Class B licenses. 

(2) The one (1)-time nonrefundable application fee for a Class B

license shall be fifty thousand dollars ($50,000). [, except that any

applicant for a Class A license shall be entitled to one (1)

Class B license with no additional fees other than fees

required to cover any additional costs of the investigation, if

the Class B application is submitted simultaneously with the

Class A application.] The applicant or licensee shall be assessed

fees, if any, to cover the additional costs of the investigation.

(4) The annual fee for a Class A license and a Class B license shall

be twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000) each[, except each

Class A licensee shall be entitled to one (1) Class B license

at no additional fee,] and is due upon issuance of the initial license

and thereafter is due [upon the application for renewal of the

license. When licenses are renewed for multiple years, fees

for all licensed years shall be paid with the application] annually. The Class A and all Class B licenses owned by the same Class

A license shall renew all licenses within the same month, after the

second year. The commission may adjust renewal dates of the Class

A and Class B licenses so as not to consume commission resources

in any particular month. Any such adjustments shall result in a pro

rata adjustment of fees. This fee is nonrefundable and is due regardless of whether the renewal applicant obtains a renewed license. The

applicant or licensee shall be assessed fees, if any, to cover the additional costs of the investigation.

[(5) Any holder of a Class A license, at the time these rules

become effective, shall without further investigation or fees

be granted a Class A and Class B license consistent with

these rules. The renewal dates for Class A and Class B

licenses issued under this rule shall remain the original

anniversary dates as existed prior to the adoption of this

rule.]

[(6)](5) A Class A license is not transferable except by change of

control as provided in Chapter 11 CSR 45-10.

[(7)](6) A Class B license is transferable to a Class A licensee with

prior approval of the commission as provided in Chapter 11 CSR 45-

10.

AUTHORITY: sections 313.004 and 313.812, RSMo 2000[.], and

section 313.807, HCS for HB 1644, Second Regular Session,

Page 1461 October 1, 2012

Vol. 37, No. 19 Missouri Register
than March 21, 2013. There is no provision in the federal rule for

deferral of the state plan pending the outcome of any known or future

legal proceedings. Therefore, the regulatory requirements of 40 CFR

60, subpart MMMM remain in effect even though legal action has

been initiated, and these provisions are enforceable until such time as

the court orders a stay, vacatur, or other similar action. As stated in

the response to comment #2, the department’s Air Pollution Control

Program will not enforce provisions of 10 CSR 10-6.191 that are

stayed at the federal level. No changes have been made to the rule

text as a result of this comment.

COMMENT #6: The Association of Missouri Cleanwater Agencies;

the City of Kansas City, Missouri, Water Services Department; and

the Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District requested that, if the

department proceeds with the rulemaking, language be added to the

rule to automatically stay its requirements if a court vacates or

remands the incorporated federal rule, or if parties to litigation agree

to a settlement agreement that invalidates all or part of the federal

rule.

RESPONSE: Similar language to exempt provisions of an incorporated federal rule that are stayed was proposed in amendments to 10

CSR 10-6.070, 6.075, and 6.080 in June 2012 (37 MoReg 966-971).

EPA objected to this language (37 MoReg 1610-1611) on the basis it

may create confusion and cause additional concerns or issues. In

addition, EPA noted that this language may function as a delegation

of state authority to EPA or federal courts in litigation to which the

department is not a party. Due to EPA’s objection, the language

exempting provisions of the incorporated federal rule was deleted

from the amendments to 10 CSR 10-6.070, 6.075, and 6.080 as

adopted and similar language will not be added to the SSI rule.

Regulated sources are assured they will not be expected to comply

with provisions of incorporated federal regulations that are stayed, as

stated in the response to comment #2. No changes have been made

to the rule text as a result of this comment.

Due to the similarity in the following three (3) comments, one (1)

response that addresses these comments is presented after the three

(3) comments.

COMMENT #7: The Association of Missouri Cleanwater Agencies

commented that it is important that Missouri’s publicly-owned treatment works are not asked to spend significant sums to address the

new emissions limits ahead of the court’s review of the validity of the

EPA final rule. They disagree with the contention in the proposed

rule that the public cost will be not more than five hundred dollars

($500) in the aggregate. If this is based on the department’s adoption

of the federal rule, then it should be qualified to require a revised

financial analysis for any aspects of EPA’s final rule which are adopted by the department but later invalidated through ongoing litigation.

COMMENT #8: The City of Kansas City, Missouri, Water Services

Department suggested that the lack of fiscal note is problematic

despite the department’s articulation that one is not necessary due to

the existence of the federal rule. Real costs of Missouri adoption and

permit implementation is not less than five hundred dollars ($500),

as stated in the proposed rule. They reference 536.200.1, RSMo,

which mandates the issuance of a fiscal note, and Attorney General

Opinion 21-92, which illustrates that fiscal notes are required for regulation that is imposed, mandated, or otherwise necessitated by third

parties. A natural and logical extension can be made for a purported federal mandate or the state’s election to adopt a federal model

rule.

COMMENT #9: The Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District commented that the proposed rule will have real and costly impact on the

facilities impacted by the proposed rule. Early estimates of the district’s cost of compliance with this proposed rule include an initial

cost of twenty-five to forty million dollars ($25M–40M) in addition

to an ongoing annual cost of about one hundred thousand dollars

($100,000) per year. These costs have not been accounted for with

the proposed rulemaking. 

RESPONSE: The proposed state rule adopts by reference the regulatory requirements of 40 CFR 60, subpart MMMM and imposes no

additional requirements. Compliance costs such as training, permitting, testing, record keeping, retrofitting controls, etc., were imposed

on the owners and operators of regulated SSI units with the federal

rule promulgated on March 21, 2011. The federal rule requires

Missouri to submit a state plan for regulation of existing SSI units

that is at least as protective as the federal rule, and the proposed state

rule is the legal mechanism for enforcement of the state plan. In the

absence of a state plan, EPA will develop a federal plan to implement

the provisions of 40 CFR 60, subpart MMMM, and owners and

operators of existing SSI units not covered under an approved state

plan would have to comply with the federal plan. Therefore, the proposed state rule does not contribute to the cost of compliance for the

owners and operators of the regulated SSI units and a fiscal note is

not required pursuant to 536.200.1, RSMo. Attorney General

Opinion (AGO) 21-92 addresses fiscal notes that are required by

536.200, RSMo, and is not relevant to this rulemaking since no fiscal note is required. However, this opinion does reconfirm that

536.200 fiscal notes only include estimated costs attributable to proposed state rulemakings and not costs associated with the mandate

requirements (in this case, the federal rule) which was subject to its

own cost analysis. The department rulemaking information on the

web clearly stated that public agency costs were included in the federal rulemaking and that the state rulemaking will not impose any

additional costs. No changes have been made to the rule text as a

result of this comment.

COMMENT #10: The Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District commented the state’s approach for complying with the rule should propose economically-feasible methods for compliance with the federal

rule in order to make it consistent with the general intent of the

MACL. The proposed rule should be more narrowly tailored to meet

the federal rule’s requirement of issuing a state plan outlining how

the state will comply with the federal rule.

RESPONSE: The federal rule implementing requirements for prevention, abatement, and control of SSI emissions is already promulgated, and incorporating its provisions into a state rule is the most

practical and economically-feasible method of regulating SSI emissions in Missouri. The federal rule requires any deviation from the

federal rule to be as protective as the federal rule, while MACL prevents the state from being sooner or stricter than federal regulations.

Therefore, the proposed state rule must implement the federal

requirements without being stricter or more lax. No changes have

been made to the rule text as a result of this comment.

Title 10—DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES

Division 10—Air Conservation Commission

Chapter 6—Air Quality Standards, Definitions, Sampling

and Reference Methods and Air Pollution Control 

Regulations for the Entire State of Missouri

ORDER OF RULEMAKING

By the authority vested in the Missouri Air Conservation

Commission under section 643.050, RSMo Supp. 2012, the commission rescinds a rule as follows:

10 CSR 10-6.368 Control of Mercury Emissions From Electric

Generating Units is rescinded.

A notice of proposed rulemaking containing the proposed rescission

was published in the Missouri Register on October 1, 2012 (37

MoReg 1460–1461). No changes have been made in the proposed

rescission, so it is not reprinted here. This proposed rescission

becomes effective thirty (30) days after publication in the Code of

State Regulations.

Page 659 April 15, 2013

Vol. 38, No. 8 Missouri Register
April 15, 2013

Vol. 38, No. 8

SUMMARY OF COMMENTS: The Missouri Department of

Natural Resources’ Air Pollution Control Program received no comments on the proposed rescission.

Title 11—DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY

Division 45—Missouri Gaming Commission

Chapter 5—Conduct of Gaming

ORDER OF RULEMAKING

By the authority vested in the Missouri Gaming Commission (MGC)

under section 313.805, RSMo Supp. 2012, the commission adopts a

rule as follows:

11 CSR 45-5.193 is adopted.

A notice of proposed rulemaking containing the text of the proposed

rule was published in the Missouri Register on November 1, 2012 (37

MoReg 1583). Changes have been made to the text of the proposed

rule, so it is reprinted here. This proposed rule becomes effective

thirty (30) days after publication in the Code of State Regulations. 

SUMMARY OF COMMENTS: A public hearing was held on this

proposed rule on December 12, 2012. Written comments were

received from Thompson Coburn LLP on behalf of Bally

Technologies, and International Gaming Technology (IGT). The

MGC staff also commented on the rule.

COMMENT #1: A staff member requested adding “the bet with the

lowest amount of the non-linear pay table” to the last sentence in subsection (1)(A). 

RESPONSE AND EXPLANATION OF CHANGE: The staff agreed

to a modified version of the suggested language and the change was

made to subsection (1)(A).

Comments from Thompson Coburn LLP on behalf of Bally

Technologies:

COMMENT #2: For the sake of clarity, additional parentheses

should be added in subsection (1)(A), in the standard deviation calculation as follows:

((Net Payi − E.V. )2 × probabilityi

)

We suggest this so that it is clear the summation operation applies to

the full term under the radical and not just the first portion. It is also

worth noting that there are alternate methods of calculating the standard deviation of a game which are mathematically equivalent to the

one indicated.

The more customary calculation is as shown, but with Net Payi

defined as “the amount of each individual pay divided by the number of coins wagered” (note that the “1 minus” is not included here)

and with E.V. defined as “the game’s payback percentage.” 

We suggest that these alternate (but mathematically equivalent)

methods, including the more customary calculation detailed above,

should also be considered acceptable under this standard.

RESPONSE AND EXPLANATION OF CHANGE: This rule has

been changed to add the parentheses to the equation, and to reword

the key. 

COMMENT #3: Subsection (1)(B)—Regarding Probability Accounting Report (PAR) sheets—“Calculate PAR sheets to a ninety-nine

percent (99%) confidence value utilizing theoretical analysis” is not

a mathematically correct statement. If the game is calculated theoretically, then it is one hundred percent (100%) correct, and there is

no “confidence value” involved. For fully theoretical calculations,

either the calculation is correct or it is not. Please see the final comment on subsection (1)(B) for Bally’s suggested language.

RESPONSE AND EXPLANATION OF CHANGE: MGC agreed to

incorporate the changes to make it mathematically correct.

COMMENT #4: Subsection (1)(B)—The ninety-nine percent (99%)

confidence requirement for games is especially stringent. Many

industry standards utilize a similar policy that applies a ninety-five

percent (95%) confidence interval; Bally recommends that for this

standard, Missouri also adopt the ninety-five percent (95%) confidence value. This will provide a clear requirement, consistent with

industry, which manufacturers are prepared to work toward. Please

see the final comment on subsection (1)(B) for Bally’s suggested language.

RESPONSE AND EXPLANATION OF CHANGE: MGC agrees to

change the confidence value to ninety-five percent (95%).

COMMENT #5: Subsection (1)(B)—We request clarification be

added within the standard for the following: By “tolerance of

0.01%”, is the intent that the half-width of the confidence interval

must be ≤ 0.01% (so a 90.00% game would be 90.00% ± 0.01%)

or that the full width of the confidence interval must be ≤ 0.01%

(so a 90.00% game would be 90.00% ± 0.005%)? Again, by comparison, the independent test lab Bally employs applies a policy

which uses the latter ± 0.005%, but at ninety-five percent (95%)

confidence). Please see Bally’s suggested language for subsection

(1)(B) in the next comment section.

Taking all the comments on subsection (1)(B) together, Bally suggests the following change: “(B) Calculate PAR sheets utilizing theoretical analysis where feasible. When the Return to Player (RTP)

percentage cannot be feasibly computed using theoretical analysis,

the RTP percentage shall be computed such that the half-width of the

ninety-five percent (95%) confidence interval is not more than

0.005%.” 

COMMENT #6: Subsection (1)(B)—We assert that the “at least

one hundred (100) million simulations” requirement is unnecessary

and recommend that it not be included in the rule. Proper calculation of the confidence interval already includes consideration for

the sample size:

where:

κ is the z-value for the confidence level 

σ is the standard deviation 

n is the number of samples

COMMENT # 7: If a game meets the confidence interval requirements with fewer than one hundred (100) million games, it still meets

the confidence interval requirements. And although experience shows

that more than one hundred (100) million games are required for

even the ninety-five percent (95%) confidence interval (Bally’s internal baseline is greater), we would recommend that the one hundred

(100) million simulations requirement not be included, if for no other

reason that it is an unnecessary requirement in the context of the

math.

It is also worth noting that as currently written, the requirement of

“one hundred (100) million simulations” is unclear. We understand

the intent to be some number of simulation runs totaling one hundred

(100) million games played. If this requirement is kept in the standard, it should be reworded to read “. . . using at least one hundred

(100) million simulated games.”

RESPONSE AND EXPLANATION OF CHANGE: Taking the comments into consideration, the staff made changes to clarify the intent

of the rule. The staff agrees with the last comment and the phrase “at

least one hundred (100) million simulations” has been removed from

subsection (1)(B).

COMMENT #8: Subsection (1)(C)—This requirement is very unclear.

Bally requests clarification and example(s) regarding “features which

Page 660 Orders of Rulemaking

Confidence Interval =