Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of Missouri, Control of Emissions From Hand-Fired Equipment, 62856-62859 [2014-24866]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
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
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
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
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:11 Oct 20, 2014
Jkt 235001
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?
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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
E:\FR\FM\21OCR1.SGM
21OCR1
62857
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 203 / Tuesday, October 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
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
Emissions
per device
(tons)
Pollutant
2008
Baseline
emissions
(tons)
5
Tons
Percent
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
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
1 The 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\21OCR1.SGM
0.00245
0.00043
0.00233
0.00146
0.00002
0.00005
21OCR1
4.0771
4.7347
7.8912
6.4445
0.3288
0.2236
Percent
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.
Jkt 235001
0.4077
0.4735
0.7891
0.6444
0.0329
0.0224
Tons
0.0815
0.0947
0.1578
0.1289
0.0066
0.0045
16:03 Oct 20, 2014
0.000489
0.000087
0.000466
0.000291
0.000003
0.000010
50
PM2.5 ........................................................
PM10 .........................................................
CO ............................................................
NOX ..........................................................
SOX ..........................................................
VOC .........................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16,670
109,306
33,867
44,285
213,756
43,430
Number of Devices
Increase per
device
(%)
0.02446
0.00433
0.02330
0.01455
0.00015
0.00051
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.
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:03 Oct 20, 2014
Jkt 235001
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);
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
• 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
E:\FR\FM\21OCR1.SGM
21OCR1
62859
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 203 / Tuesday, October 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
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.
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:
■
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:
■
§ 52.1320
*
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Identification of plan.
*
*
(c) * * *
*
*
EPA-APPROVED MISSOURI REGULATIONS
Missouri citation
State
effective
date
Title
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 ....
*
*
*
*
*
[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
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
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
asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:03 Oct 20, 2014
Jkt 235001
*
*
05/30/12
*
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
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4700
*
10/21/14 [Insert Federal
Register citation].
Sfmt 4700
*
*
*
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.
E:\FR\FM\21OCR1.SGM
21OCR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 203 (Tuesday, October 21, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 62856-62859]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-24866]
[[Page 62856]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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 environmentally-sound 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
Federally-enforceable 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 state-authorized 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
[[Page 62857]]
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\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The 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.
Table 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Devices
Emissions 2008 Increase ---------------------------------------------------
Pollutant per device Baseline per device 5 50
(tons) emissions (%) ---------------------------------------------------
(tons) 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
[[Page 62858]]
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
[[Page 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
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart AA--Missouri
0
2. In Sec. 52.1320, 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:
Sec. 52.1320 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
EPA-Approved Missouri Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State
Missouri citation Title effective EPA approval date Explanation
date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 05/30/12 10/21/14 [Insert
from Hand-Fired Federal Register
Equipment. citation].
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2014-24866 Filed 10-20-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
