27048 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 88 / Friday, May 6, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

(b) Any application for interim 

extension under this section must be 

filed using the USPTO patent electronic 

filing system in accordance with the 

USPTO patent electronic filing system 

requirements. 

(c) Complete initial applications for 

interim extension under this section 

must: 

(1) Be filed during the period 

beginning 6 months and ending 15 days 

before the patent term is due to expire, 

and include a statement that the initial 

application is being submitted within 

the period and an identification of the 

date of the last day on which the initial 

application could be submitted; 

(2) Include all of the information 

required for a formal application under 

§ 1.740 and a complete application 

under § 1.741, except as follows: 

(i) Paragraphs (a)(1), (2), (4), and (6) 

through (15) of §§ 1.740 and 1.741 shall 

be read in the context of a product 

currently undergoing regulatory review; 

and 

(ii) Paragraphs (a)(3) and (5) of § 1.740 

are not applicable to an application for 

interim extension under this section; 

and 

(3) Include a statement that the 

applicable regulatory review period, 

described in 35 U.S.C. 156(g)(1)(B)(ii), 

(2)(B)(ii), (3)(B)(ii), (4)(B)(ii), or 

(5)(B)(ii), has begun for the product that 

is the subject of the patent, and identify 

the application, petition, or notice that 

caused the applicable regulatory review 

period to begin. 

(d) Each subsequent application for 

interim extension: 

(1) Must be filed during the period 

beginning 60 days before and ending 30 

days before the expiration of the 

preceding interim extension and 

include a statement that it is being 

submitted within the period and an 

identification of the date of the last day 

on which it could be submitted; 

(2) May be limited in content to a 

request for a subsequent interim 

extension along with any materials or 

information required under §§ 1.740 and 

1.741 that are not present in the 

preceding interim extension 

application; and 

(3) Must include a statement that the 

applicable regulatory review period, 

described in 35 U.S.C. 156(g)(1)(B)(ii), 

(2)(B)(ii), (3)(B)(ii), (4)(B)(ii), or 

(5)(B)(ii), has not been completed. 

Katherine K. Vidal, 

Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual 

Property and Director of the United States 

Patent and Trademark Office. 

[FR Doc. 2022–09535 Filed 5–5–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–16–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2022–0382; FRL–9767–01– 

R7] 

Air Plan Approval; Missouri; Removal 

of Control of Emissions From Bakery 

Ovens 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing approval of 

a State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision submitted by the State of 

Missouri on January 15, 2019 and 

supplemented by letter on July 11, 2019. 

Missouri requests that the EPA remove 

from its SIP a rule related to control of 

emissions from bakery ovens in St. 

Louis City and Jefferson, St. Charles, 

Franklin, and St. Louis Counties. The 

EPA’s proposed approval of this rule 

revision is in accordance with the 

requirements of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA). 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before June 6, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07– 

OAR–2022–0382 to https://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the Docket ID No. for this 

rulemaking. Comments received will be 

posted without change to https://

www.regulations.gov/, including any 

personal information provided. For 

detailed instructions on sending 

comments and additional information 

on the rulemaking process, see the 

‘‘Written Comments’’ heading of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this document. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

William Stone, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 7 Office, Air 

Quality Planning Branch, 11201 Renner 

Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219; 

telephone number: (913) 551–7714; 

email address: stone.william@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Written Comments 

II. What is being addressed in this document? 

III. What is the EPA’s analysis of missouri’s 

SIP revision request? 

IV. Have the requirements for approval of a 

SIP revision been met? 

V. What Action is the EPA taking? 

VI. Incorporation by Reference 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Written Comments 

Submit your comments, identified by 

Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2022– 

0382, at https://www.regulations.gov. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 

The EPA may publish any comment 

received to its public docket. Do not 

submit electronically any information 

you consider to be Confidential 

Business Information (CBI) or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, the full 

EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

II. What is being addressed in this 

document? 

The EPA is proposing to approve the 

removal of 10 Code of State Regulation 

(CSR) 10–5.440, Control of Emissions 

From Bakery Ovens, from the Missouri 

SIP. 

Section 110(l) of the CAA prohibits 

the EPA from approving a SIP revision 

that interferes with any applicable 

requirement concerning attainment and 

reasonable further progress (RFP), or 

any other applicable requirement of the 

CAA. The State supplemented its SIP 

revision with a July 11, 2019 letter in 

order to address the requirements of 

section 110(l) of the CAA. 

III. What is the EPA’s analysis of 

Missouri’s SIP revision request? 

According to the January 15, 2019, 

letter from the Missouri Department of 

Natural Resources (MoDNR), available 

in the docket for this proposed action, 

Missouri rescinded 10 CSR 10–5.440, 

Control of Emissions from Bakery Ovens 

because the only source subject to the 

rule ceased operations in 2012. The 

state asserts in their submission to the 

Agency that this rule is no longer 

necessary for controlling emissions of 

volatile organic compounds (VOC’s) 

because there are no existing sources 

subject to the rule and new sources 

would be controlled by other rules. 


JSPEARS on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 88 / Friday, May 6, 2022 / Proposed Rules 27049 

1These counties were previously designated for 

nonattainment for ozone for the 1979, 1997 and 

2008 standards. They are currently designated 

attainment for each of those standards. 

2https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/ 

2021/06/14/2021-11454/revised-air-qualitydesignations-for-the-2015-ozone-national-ambientair-quality-standards. 

3https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-40/chapter-I/ 

subchapter-C/part-51/subpart-I. 

4EPA’s latest approval of Missouri’s NSR 

permitting program rule was published in the 

Federal Register on October 11, 2016. 81 FR 70025. 

5https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2021-05/ 

documents/st._louis_mo-il_tsd_remand_final.pdf. 

6 ‘‘NSR Permitting’’ includes PSD permitting in 

areas designated attainment and unclassifiable, 

NANSR in areas designated nonattainment and 

minor source permitting. 

In its supplemental submission dated 

July 11, 2019, MoDNR notes that the 

purpose of 10 CSR 10–5.440, Control of 

Emissions From Bakery Ovens, was to 

reduce VOC emissions from bakery 

ovens located in the St. Louis 

nonattainment area, which at the time of 

promulgation (state effective Date: 

December 30, 1996), included the City 

of St. Louis and the counties of 

Franklin, Jefferson, St. Charles, and St. 

Louis (hereinafter referred to in this 

document as the ‘‘St. Louis Area’’).1 The 

rule applied to new or existing 

commercial bakeries with potential VOC 

emissions greater than 100 tons per year 

(tpy). 

MoDNR stated that following 

rescission of this rule, any new source 

is required to meet New Source Review 

(NSR) in attainment or attainment/ 

unclassifiable areas, and for 

nonattainment areas, Nonattainment 

New Source Review (NANSR) in the St. 

Louis Area. 

EPA agrees that in the St. Louis 

nonattainment area for the 2015 ozone 

standard, which includes St. Louis City 

and the counties of Franklin (partial; 

Boles Township), Jefferson, St. Charles, 

and St. Louis, any new sources or major 

modifications of existing sources are 

subject to NANSR permitting.2 Under 

NANSR, a new major source or major 

modification of an existing source with 

a PTE of 100 tpy or more of any NAAQS 

pollutant is required to obtain a NANSR 

permit when the area is in 

nonattainment, which requires an 

analysis of Lowest Achievable Emission 

Rate (LAER) in addition to an air quality 

analysis, an additional impacts analysis 

and emission offsets. LAER is defined in 

§ 51.165(a)(1)(xiii), in pertinent part, 

‘‘. . . for any source, the more stringent 

rate of emissions based on the 

following: (A) The most stringent 

emissions limitation which is contained 

in the implementation plan of any State 

for such class or category of stationary 

source, unless the owner or operator of 

the proposed stationary source 

demonstrates that such limitations are 

not achievable; or (B) The most stringent 

emissions limitation which is achieved 

in practice by such class or category of 

stationary sources. This limitation, 

when applied to a modification, means 

the lowest achievable emissions rate for 

the new or modified emissions units 

within or stationary source. In no event 

shall the application of the term permit 

a proposed new or modified stationary 

source to emit any pollutant in excess 

of the amount allowable under an 

applicable new source standard of 

performance.’’ 3

Therefore, any new bakery oven that 

would have been subject to 10 CSR 10– 

5.440, in the St. Louis ozone 

Nonattainment Area, will be subject to 

NANSR permitting which would result 

in a LAER limit at least as stringent as 

the limit in this rule in addition to the 

requirement to offset the emissions. 

In the rest of Franklin County (the 

portions that do not include Boles 

Township), any new sources or major 

modifications of existing sources are 

subject to NSR permitting. Under NSR, 

for attainment or attainment/ 

unclassifiable areas, a new major source 

or major modification of an existing 

source with a potential to emit (PTE) of 

250 tpy or more of any NAAQS 

pollutant is required to obtain a 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD) permit. Sources with a PTE 

greater than 100 tpy of VOC’s, but less 

than 250 tpy, are required to obtain a 

minor permit in accordance with 

Missouri’s NSR permitting program, 

which is approved into the SIP.4 In the 

Final Area Designations for the 2015 

Ozone National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards (NAAQS) Technical Support 

Document (TSD) EPA observes that 

emissions from sources outside Boles 

Township are relatively low, with levels 

less than the more densely populated 

City of St. Louis and five other counties 

in the area of analysis.5 As noted in the 

TSD, there are no other large sources of 

VOC or NOx in Franklin County, 

outside of Boles Township, which 

remains a nonattainment area and 

therefore subject to NANSR permitting. 

Therefore, EPA believes that any newly 

permitted NSR or minor NSR bakery 

ovens in Franklin County would have 

little to no impact on the St. Louis Area 

ozone levels. 

Therefore, EPA agrees with the State 

that approving this SIP revision will not 

have an adverse impact on air quality 

because the only source subject to the 

rule has permanently shutdown and 

new sources would be subject to 

NANSR, NSR and minor NSR in the St. 

Louis Area. As stated above, new bakery 

ovens with a PTE of 100 tpy or more of 

VOC’s would be very well controlled in 

all areas where 10 CSR 10–5.440 

previously applied. 

Further, the rescission of this rule 

from the SIP will have no impact on any 

approved maintenance plan. On 

September 20, 2018, the EPA 

redesignated the St. Louis, Missouri area 

to attainment of the 2008 ozone 

NAAQS. In the state’s maintenance plan 

submittal for this standard, this rule was 

not relied upon. The EPA agrees with 

this analysis. 

For these reasons, EPA proposes to 

determine that the SIP revision 

submission meets the substantive 

requirements of the CAA, including 

section 110 and implementing 

regulations. 

EPA is proposing to approve this SIP 

revision. 

IV. 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. The State provided 

public notice on this SIP revision from 

May 15, 2018 to August 2, 2018 and 

received 11 comments from the EPA. 

Missouri received 11 comments from 

the EPA that related to Missouri’s lack 

of an adequate demonstration that the 

rule could be removed from the SIP in 

accordance with section 110(l) of the 

CAA. Missouri’s July 11, 2019 letter 

addressed the EPA’s comments. In 

addition, as explained above, the 

revision meets the substantive SIP 

requirements of the CAA, including 

section 110 and implementing 

regulations. 

V. What action is the EPA taking? 

The EPA is proposing to approve 

Missouri’s request to rescind 10 CSR 

10–5.440 from the SIP because the rule 

applied to a single source that has 

permanently ceased operations and it 

therefore no longer serves to reduce 

emissions in the St. Louis Area. 

Furthermore, any new sources or major 

modifications of existing sources in the 

St. Louis Area are subject to NSR 

permitting.6 We are processing this as a 

proposed action because we are 

soliciting comments on this proposed 

action. Final rulemaking will occur after 

consideration of any comments. 

VI. Incorporation by Reference 

In this document, the EPA is 

proposing to amend regulatory text that 


JSPEARS on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
27050 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 88 / Friday, May 6, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

includes incorporation by reference. As 

described in Sections II, III, and V of 

this preamble and set forth below in the 

proposed amendments to 40 CFR part 

52, the EPA is proposing to remove 

provisions of the EPA-Approved 

Missouri Regulations from the Missouri 

State Implementation Plan, which is 

incorporated by reference in accordance 

with the requirements of 1 CFR part 51. 

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, 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 

• 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). 

The SIP is not approved to apply on 

any Indian reservation land or in any 

other area where 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). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Ozone, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: April 27, 2022. 

Meghan A. McCollister, 

Regional Administrator, Region 7. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, the EPA proposes to amend 

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 

§ 52.1320 [Amended] 

■ 2. In § 52.1320, the table in paragraph 

(c) is amended by removing the entry 

‘‘10–5.440’’ under the heading ‘‘Chapter 

5—Air Quality Standards and Air 

Pollution Control Regulations for the St. 

Louis Metropolitan Area’’. 

[FR Doc. 2022–09468 Filed 5–5–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R08–OAR–2019–0140; EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2021–0663; FRL–9782–01–R8] 

Air Plan Approval; Colorado; 

Addressing Remanded Portions of the 

Previously Approved Infrastructure 

Requirements for the 2015 Ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: On January 5, 2021, the 

United States Court of Appeals for the 

Tenth Circuit granted the 

Environmental Protection Agency’s 

(EPA) motion for a voluntary remand 

without vacatur of two parts of EPA’s 

2020 final rule approving Colorado’s 

infrastructure state implementation plan 

(SIP) submission for the 2015 8-hour 

ozone national ambient air quality 

standards (NAAQS) (2020 final rule). In 

this document, EPA proposes to address 

those two remanded parts of the 2020 

final rule: EPA’s conclusion that 

Colorado’s infrastructure SIP 

submission met the State’s good 

neighbor obligation under Clean Air Act 

(CAA) section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I); and 

EPA’s conclusion that Colorado’s 

infrastructure SIP submission provided 

‘‘necessary assurances’’ of the State’s 

authority to regulate agricultural sources 

under CAA section 110(a)(2)(E)(i). EPA 

is proposing to approve Colorado’s 

infrastructure SIP submission pursuant 

to CAA section 110. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before June 6, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, 

identified as Docket No. EPA–R08– 

OAR–2019–0140, using the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal at https://

www.regulations.gov, following the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Include Docket ID No. EPA– 

R08–OAR–2019–0140 in the subject line 

of the message. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include Docket ID No. EPA–R08– 

OAR–2019–0140. Comments received 

may be posted without change to 

https://www.regulations.gov, including 

any personal information provided. For 

detailed instructions on sending 

comments and additional information 

on the rulemaking process, see the 

‘‘Public participation’’ heading of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this document. Out of an abundance of 

caution for members of the public and 

our staff, EPA Docket Center and 

Reading Room are open to the public by 

appointment only to reduce the risk of 

transmitting COVID–19. Our Docket 

Center staff also continues to provide 

remote customer service via email, 

phone, and webform. For further 

information on EPA Docket Center 

services and the current status, please 

visit us online at https://www.epa.gov/ 

dockets. Please email or call a person 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section if you need to make 

alternative arrangements for access to 

the docket. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Amrita Singh, Air and Radiation 

Division, EPA, Region 8, Mailcode 

8ARD–IO, 1595 Wynkoop Street, 

Denver, Colorado, 80202–1129, 

telephone number: (303) 312–6103, 

email address: singh.amrita@epa.gov; or 


JSPEARS on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1