[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 79 (Monday, April 24, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21649-21651]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-10031]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[Region VII Tracking No. MO 098-1098b; FRL-6583-4]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of 
Missouri

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve the Eagle-Picher 
Technologies' LLC Consent Agreement as a revision to the Missouri State 
Implementation Plan (SIP). This Consent Agreement ensures that the 
operation of their newly installed emissions controls at the Chemicals 
Divisions in Joplin, Missouri, are permanent, enforceable, and 
measurable.

DATES: This rule is effective on June 23, 2000 without further notice, 
unless EPA receives adverse written comment by May 24, 2000. If EPA 
receives such comments, it will publish a timely withdrawal of the 
direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public that 
the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be mailed to Kim Johnson, Air 
Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, 
Kansas 66101.
    Copies of the state submittal(s) are available at the following 
address for inspection during normal business hours: Environmental 
Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th 
Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim Johnson at (913) 551-7975.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we, us, 
or our'' is used, we mean EPA. This section provides additional 
information by addressing the following questions:

    What is a SIP?
    What is the Federal approval process for a SIP?
    What does Federal approval of a state regulation mean to me?
    What is being addressed in this document?
    Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?
    What action is EPA taking?

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 EPA. These ambient 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.

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 for inclusion into the SIP. EPA must provide 
public notice and seek additional public comment regarding the proposed 
Federal action on the state submission. If adverse comments are 
received, they must be addressed prior to any final Federal action by 
EPA.
    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 EPA 
has approved a given state regulation with a specific effective date.

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. However, after the regulation is Federally approved, 
EPA is authorized to take enforcement action against violators. 
Citizens are also offered legal recourse to address violations as 
described in the CAA.

What Is Being Addressed in This Document?

    In 1995, the Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) and 
EPA initiated a review of small lead sources with the potential to emit 
five tons of lead per year or more. The purpose of this review is to 
determine whether or not the sources have the potential to cause or 
contribute to violations of the lead NAAQS of 1.5 <greek-m>g/
m<SUP>3</SUP>. The first review consisted of an emissions inventory 
review and preliminary screening modeling.
    Preliminary modeling of the emissions at Eagle-Picher, Chemicals 
Division in Joplin, Missouri, predicted ambient air lead values near 
this facility which exceeded the NAAQS for lead of 1.5 <greek-m>g/
m<SUP>3</SUP>.
    As a result of this modeling, the state of Missouri planned to 
place an ambient air lead monitor in the area. In order to effectively 
locate a monitor, additional information was needed for a more refined 
modeling analysis.
    On March 25, 1998, EPA issued an order under section 114 of the CAA 
requesting additional facility information and stack testing of three 
of the facility's major emissions points. These three points accounted 
for 71 percent of the lead emissions from the facility.
    Shortly after the 114 Order was issued, Eagle-Picher informed EPA 
and MDNR that as a result of an internal environmental review, they 
planned to install controls in August 1998, on the Basic Silicate White 
Lead (BSWL) scrubber drier exhaust, their most significant lead source 
which contributed almost 60 percent of the lead emissions from this 
facility.
    Eagle-Picher agreed to enter into a Consent Agreement with the 
state of Missouri to ensure these controls are permanent, enforceable, 
and measurable. This Consent Agreement defines control specifications, 
operation parameters, and testing and reporting requirements for the 
BSWL baghouse at

[[Page 21650]]

the Eagle-Picher facility in Joplin, Missouri. The operation of this 
baghouse reduces lead emissions from the most significant lead source 
at the facility by 99.85 percent or an equivalent decrease of 2.8 tons/
year.

Have the Requirements for Approval of a SIP Revision Been Met?

    The state submittal has met the public notice requirements for SIP 
submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The submittal also 
satisfied the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. In 
addition, as explained above and in more detail in the technical 
support document which is part of this document, the revision meets the 
substantive SIP requirements of the CAA, including section 110 and 
implementing regulations.

What Action Is EPA Taking?

    EPA is processing this action as a direct final action because the 
Consent Agreement affects only one source and does not appear to be 
controversial; therefore, we do not anticipate any adverse comments.

Administrative Requirements

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not 
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. This action 
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes 
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. 
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because 
this rule approves preexisting requirements under state law and does 
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by 
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4). For the same reason, 
this rule also does not significantly or uniquely affect the 
communities of tribal governments, as specified by Executive Order 
13084 (63 FR 27655, May 10, 1998). This rule will not have substantial 
direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national 
government and the states, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified 
in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it 
merely approves a state rule implementing a Federal standard, and does 
not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and 
responsibilities established in the CAA. This rule also is not subject 
to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is 
not economically significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this 
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the state 
to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to 
disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP 
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section 
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. As required by section 3 of 
Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing this 
rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate drafting errors 
and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and provide a clear legal 
standard for affected conduct. EPA has complied with Executive Order 
12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the takings 
implications of the rule in accordance with the ``Attorney General's 
Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of 
Unanticipated Takings'' issued under the Executive Order. This rule 
does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions 
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. Section 804, however, exempts from section 801 the 
following types of rules: rules of particular applicability; rules 
relating to agency management or personnel; and rules of agency 
organization, procedure, or practice that do not substantially affect 
the rights or obligations of nonagency parties. 5 U.S.C. 804(3). The 
EPA is not required to submit a rule report regarding this action under 
section 801 because this is a rule of particular applicability. 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 June 23, 2000. Filing a petition for 
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect 
the finality of this rule 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. 
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, 
Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, 
Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.

    Dated: April 6, 2000.
Dennis Grams,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.

    Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended 
as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart AA--Missouri

    2. Section 52.1320 is amended in paragraph (d), table titled EPA-
APPROVED MISSOURI SOURCE SPECIFIC PERMITS AND ORDERS, to add the 
following entry at the end of the table:


Sec. 52.1320  Identification of plan.

* * * * *

[[Page 21651]]



                          (d) EPA-Approved Missouri Source Specific Permits and Orders
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   State         EPA
               Name of source                   Order/permit     effective     approval         Explanation
                                                   number           date         date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
*                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *
                                                        *
Eagle-Picher Technologies Joplin, MO.......  Consent Agreement     08/26/99      4/24/00
                                                                             65 FR 21651
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 00-10031 Filed 4-21-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P