# Missouri State Implementation Plan Revision

________________ Modification to the Attainment Demonstration for the 2008 Lead National Ambient Air Quality Standard

________________ Buick/Viburnum Trend Lead Nonattainment Area Missouri Air Conservation Commission Adopted July 24, 2013

Missouri Department of Natural Resources Division of Environmental Quality Air Pollution Control Program P.O. Box 176 1659 East Elm Street Jefferson City, Missouri 65102 Telephone (573) 751-4817

### MISSOURI STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN REVISION MODIFICATION TO THE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION FOR THE 2008 LEAD NAAQS FOR THE BUICK/VIBURNUM TREND LEAD NONATTAINMENT AREA Modification of 2013 Consent Judgment for Stack Provisions The Missouri Department of Natural Resources’ Air Pollution Control Program (Air Program) proposes to revise the 2013 Attainment Demonstration and associated 2013 Consent Judgment for the attainment of the 2008 Lead National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for the Buick/Viburnum Trend Lead Nonattainment Area. The purpose of this proposed State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision is to remove the requirement for a new stack that is not yet constructed at this lead nonattainment area’s secondary lead smelter. This stack is currently required by the SIP and 2013 Consent Judgment as Emission Point 100 (EP100). Reevaluation of the design demonstrates that that this new stack is no longer necessary since the building enclosure baghouse exhaust stream will now be routed to the main stack and the main stack shall continue to meet the required emission limitation. On March 28, 2013, The Missouri Air Conservation Commission (MACC) adopted a SIP revision for the Buick/Viburnum Trend Lead Nonattainment Area to demonstrate attainment of the 2008 Lead NAAQS by the required compliance date. Among other requirements, compliance with this standard is based on ambient monitoring data with concentrations less than 0.15 micrograms per cubic meter (g/m3

### ) based on a 3-month rolling average. At the core of the 2013 Lead NAAQS SIP is the 2013 Consent Judgment, a binding agreement among The Doe Run Resources Corporation (Doe Run), the Buick Resource Recycling Facility, LLC (BRRF), the State of Missouri, and the Missouri Department of Natural Resources. This 2013 Consent Judgment details numerous lead emission cont rol technology projects, work practices, and strategies used to demonstrate attainment of the 2008 Lead NAAQS, many of which have been completed. The SIP revision and associatedinformation and documents, including the 2013 Consent Judgment, were submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in correspondence dated April 17, 2013 for review and approval. In particular, the 2013 Consent Judgment requires that the BRRF facilityenclose the refinery, blast furnace, reverberatory furnace, and dross plant building and install a baghouse to achieve negative pressure as further specified and on a schedule articulated in the judgment. The 2013 Consent Judgment further states that the facility shall install a new 65 meter stack for this exhaust stream and requires an emission limit of 0.7 pounds per hour for this new emission point (stack). After further analysis to verify the need for the new stack (EP 100), BRRF has determined, and the Air Program concurs, that construction of EP100 is not necessary to achieve its required emission reductions and therefore no longer intends to construct a separate new emission point (i.e., a new stack) for this baghouse exhaust stream. Instead, this exhaust stream will be routed

### to the existing main stack (EP 8). The BRRF facility shall continueto satisfy the requirement for the main stack emission limitation of 0.7 pounds per hour, even with the routing of this additional exhaust stream to the main stack. This change will result in no increase in, or impact on, emissions and will realize reduced capital costs since construction of the new stack is no longer required. Further, this modification does not impact remaining provisions such as implementation timelines or the requirement to conduct stack testing to demonstrate compliance with the 0.7 pounds per hour emission limit for the main stack. Therefore, the Air Program considers this modification to be administrative in nature and thus does not require additional modeling. The 2013 Consent Judgment states that the judgment may be modified by written agreement among the parties. This proposed modification to the 2013 Consent Judgment removes the reference to the construction of a new stack in Paragraph 6.G. and removes the emission point and corresponding limit in Paragraph 8.G. The new Consent Judgment language, including proposed deletions and additions, is reflected as follows: 6.G. Enclose the refinery, blast furnace, reverberatory furnace, and dross plant buildings and install a baghouse with a minimum design of 300,000 acfm to achieve negative pressure consistent with the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Secondary Lead Smelting, 40 C.F.R. 63 Subpart X ("Secondary Lead MACT"), revised as of January 5, 2012. [Install a new stack witha minimum height of 65 meters for this exhaust stream.]Emissions will be routed to the main stack (EP8).Installation of the above controlsmust be completed and operation commenced by the earlier of (1) the date the facility must comply with the total enclosure standards in the Secondary Lead MACT, revised as of January 5, 2012, and any subsequent revision;or, (2) January 5, 2015. 8.G. Stack Emission Limits. BRRF will limit lead emissions to the atmosphere from certain stacks as set forth in the following table. BRRF is subject to the limit for [EP100 and]EP 8 after the completion ofthe project in paragraph 6.G. The limits for EP 31C, EP 71, and EP 72 are effective consistent with the Secondary Lead MACT at 40 C.F.R. 63.546.

### Stack Name Stack ID Emission Limitation Main Stack EP 8 0.7 lb/hour [New Blast Furnace Process and Building Ventilation Baghouse] [EP 100] [0.7 lb/hour] Drum Shredder Baghouse EP 31C 0.025 lb/hour Reverberatory Furnace Slag Tap Ventilation Baghouse EP 71 0.08 lb/hour North Refinery Baghouse EP 72 0.006 lb/hour

Compliance will be determined via stack testing requirements and on a schedule that is consistent with the Secondary Lead MACT, revised as of January 5, 2012 except as follows. If any test does not show compliance with the limits herein, the facility will test the stack that tested above the limit and providethe stack test report or results within one hundred and twenty (120) days after the dateof the test that failed to demonstrate compliance. If this subsequent test shows compliance, the prior exceedance will not be considered a violation of this Consent Judgment and compliance testing will return to a schedule consistent with the Secondary Lead MACT, revised as of January 5, 2012.

This proposed modification accurately reflects the projects and the emission points at the facility. Attached is the proposed First Modification tothe Consent Judgment. The Air Program, the Missouri Attorney General's Office, Doe Run, and BRRF coordinated on the development of this proposed plan revision. If this proposed plan revision is adopted by the MACC, the parties have agreed to sign this modification to the 2013 Consent Judgment and we intend to submit this Consent Judgment modification and SIP revision to EPA as a supplement to the April 17, 2013 submittal mentioned previously.

## Compliant with 643.055 RSMo, the Missouri Air Conservation Commission has determined that this action is needed to have aU.S. Environmental Protection Agency approved State Implementation Plan. The Revision to the State Implementation Plan

- Modification to the Attainment Demonstration for the 

### 2008 Lead NAAQS for the BuicklViburnum Trend Lead Nonattainment Area is hereby adopted by the Missouri Air Conservation Commission this 

### 24th ofJuly, 

### 2013.

# -J.-r-'-":;"A.-vf==f--~--J--I-t_O-_-~---------' Vice Chairman

# &!JJ/IQ@~, Member 

# /1**--L..-&-'-----~ --"--~~~_-.**  Member

________________.Member

________________.Member

________________.Member

### •

, '

. ...,. <.

I , i ' IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF IRON COUNTY " J j / STATE OFMISSOURI STATE OF MISSOURI ex reI., ) Attorney General Chris Koster ) and the Missouri DepartmentofNatural ) Resources and the Missouri Air Conservation ) Commission, ) ) Plaintiff )**~** 

### ) 

### ) Case No. 

# \3-s.& 

# (toao**\~** ) The Buick Resource Recycling Facility, LLC ) and The Doe Run Resources Corporation, ) ) Defendants. ) CONSENT JUDGMENT Plaintiff, State of Missouri, at the relation of Chris Koster, Attorney General, the Missouri Department of Natural Resources ("MDNR"), and the MisSouri Air Conservation Commission ("Commission"), and defendants, the Buick Resource Recycling Facility, LLC ("BRRFJI) and The Doe Run Resources Corporation d/b/a The 

### Doe Run Company 

### ("Doe RunJl), by and through counsel, hereby consent to the entry ofthis ConsentJudgment. 

### WHEREAS, the State ofMissouri, through MDNR, in consideration ofBRRF's 

### and Doe Run's agreement to comp1ete the implementation of control strategies upon the time schedules as more :fully set forth in the Consent Judgment below, and defendants, in consideration of the State of Missouri's agreementto accept the implementation ofsaid control strategies as sufficient, under current information and belief, to attain the 2008 National Ambient Air Quality Standard for lead and 

### to accept the time schedules for completion ofsuch control strategies as being as expeditious as practicable, agree to entry ofthis Consent Judgment. WHEREAS, in 2008, EPA revised the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for lead ("2008 Lead NAAQSff). 73 Fed. Reg. 66,964 (Nov. 12,2008). The revision reduced the NAAQS for lead from1.5 micrograms per cubic meter (J.lglm 3) to 0.15 Jlglm3

. On November 22, 2010, EPA designated portions ofIron, Dent and Reynolds Counties, Missouri (hereafter "BuicklViburnum Trend"), as a 2008 Lead NAAQS nonattainment area. 75 Fed. Reg. 71,033,71,042-43 (Nov. 22, 2010). WHEREAS, MDNR and the Commission are preparing a State Implementation Plan ("SIP") revision to achieve attainment and maintenance ofthe 2008 LeadNAAQS 

### inthe BuickIViburnum Trend nonattainment area ("2013 Lead NAAQS Attainment Demonstration SIP"). WHEREAS, as part of the 2013 Lead NAAQS Attainment Demonstration SIP, MDNR, the Commission, BRRF and Doe Run hereby agree that the Court may enter the Consent Judgment set forth below, to be binding on the parties, providing for a lead emission reduction program, which BRRF and Doe Run hereby agree to undertake and complete on the schedule set forth in this Consent Judgment. The parties, by their signatures hereto, acknowledge that they have read and lIDderstand the terms ofthis Consent Judgment and agree to be bound thereby. In the event that the Court does not approve ofthis Consent Judgment in 

### its entirety and as agreed by the parties, the Consent Judgment shall be null and void and have no effect in this or any other proceedings. The parties understand that the terms ofthis Consent Judgment are enforceable by further order ofthis Court, and that this Court retains jurisdiction ofthe matter in orderto enforce the terms ofthis Consent Judgment. WHEREAS, this Consent Judgment takes into account all federally enforceabJe requirements, including injunctive reliefprovisions ofthe Consent Decree between BRRF, Doe Run, MDNR and the Environmental Protection Agency filed in the United States District Court in the Eastern District of Missouri, Case No. 4:10-cv"()1895-JCH ("2011 ConsentDecree"), and entered on December21,2011. WHEREAS, this matter comes before the Court on the petition filed by the State ofMissouri (the "State") and MDNR concurrently with 

### this Consent Judgment.



### 2WHEREAS, by agreeing to the terms ofthis Consent Judgment, BRRF and Doe Run do not admit any liability arising from the allegations setforth in the Petition. NOW THEREFORE, without adjudication or admission ofany issue offact and with the consent ofthe parties, IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED as follows: 

### I. Objectives ofthe Parties 1. The objectives ofthe parties to this Consent Judgment are to implement control measures set forth herein in furtherance ofattainment ofthe 2008 Lead NAAQS. II.

### Jurisdiction 2. This Court hasjurisdiction over this matter and ofthe parties consenting hereto pursuant to Section 643.151, RSMo, ofthe Missouri Air Conservation Law. 

### III. Parties Bound 3. The provisions ofthis Consent Judgment shaH be binding upon the parties to this action

as well as their agents, servants, employees, heirs, successors, assigns, and to all persons, finns, corporations, and otherentities who are, or who will be, acting 

### in concert orprivity with, or on behalfof the parties to this action ortheir agents, servants, employees, heirs, successors, and assigns. 

### IV. Satisfaction 4. Upon completion ofthe tenus ofthis Consent Judgment, BRRF and Doe Run are relieved ofliability for violations alleged in the State's and MDNR's Petition. 

### V. InjunctiveRelief 5. BRRF and Doe Run (as specifically indicated below) shall undertake and complete the following lead emission reduction program on the schedule set forth below. These control measures and the associated schedules are the reasonably available control measures to 

### be implemented to attain the 2008 Lead NAAQS (as required by Section 172(c) ofthe Clean 

### Air Act).



### 36. Projects Required: BRRF shall install the following lead emission control measures: A. By February 4, 2013, at the south refinery, install a baghouse with a minimum design of60,000 actual cubic feet per minute ("acfm") to improve refinery ventilation. S. By February 4, 2013, relocate the baghouse with a minimum design of 38,000 acfm from the sweat furnace to blast furnace storage feed building. C. By February 4, 2013, at the north refinery, remove the rotary melter and connect its baghouse to the north refinery process ducts to improve refinery ventilation. D. By February4,2013, install a truck tire wash system for outbound traffic. E. By February 4, 2013, install a pulse-jet baghouse with a minimum design of 75,000 acfm to improvereverberatory furnace process ventilation. F. By February 4,2013, after the 75,000 acfm (minimum) designed baghouse, install

a dry lime SO:! scrubber (reaction chamber followed by an associated minimum 65,000-acfm design baghouse) to further process exit gas stream before routing reverberatory furnace process gases to the main stack. O. Enclose the refinery, blast furnace, reverberatory furnace, and dross plant buildings and install a baghouse with a minimum design of300,000 acfm to achieve negative pressure consistent with the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Secondary Lead Smelting, 40 C.ER. 63 Subpart X ("Secondary Lead MACT"), revised as of January 5, 2012. Install a new stack with a minimum height of 65 meters for this exhaust stream. Installation of the projects in paragraph 6.0. must be completed and operation commenced by the earlier of (1) the date the facility must comply with the total enclosure standards in the Secondary Lead MACT, revised as ofJanuary 5, 2012, and any subsequent revision; or, (2) January 5, 2015.



### 4

### H. 

### By December 31,2013, install a 40-foot extension onthe breaking separation and neutralization scrubber stack. 1. By December 31, 2013 construct an approximately 30,000 square foot building extension to the existing blast furnace feed storage building. J. By October 31, 2014, improve process hood capture efficiency by insta1ling batwing style ventilation covers, orcovers with equivalent or better capture efficiency, on all refinery kettles. K. 

### By December 31, 2013, install quick closing powered doors at the door located at the north refinery warehouse, the door located at the south refinery warehouse, and the door at the reverberatory feed storage equipment entrance to minimize 

### fugitive dust emissions from the buildings, to improve fugitive emission capture and to increase building negative pressure. After installation, these doors will be closed except for necessary service traffic or equipment sorties within these buildings, during periods not representative of nonnal operations, during periods ofbreakdown ormaintenance ofthe 

### doors, or when necessary for worker bealth and safety. 7. Projects Required: Doe Run shall install the following lead emission control measures: A By June 1,2013, modify Buick Mine updraft vent 1 at UTM coordinates 

### 665597 4165248, vent 2 at UTM 

### 6658674162535, vent 3 at UTM 

### 666234 4160599, and vent 6 at UTM 665627 4165742 to achieve a vertical release, defmed as 45 degrees from horizontal or greater. B. 

### By June 1, 2013, preclude public access at 

### Casteel 

### at a minimum distance from the facility as indicated in Appendix I ofthe 2013 Lead NAAQS Attainment Demonstration SIP.



### 5

### C. By June 1, 2013, preclude public access at Buick Mine Vents 1, 2, 3, & 

### 6 at a minimum distance from the facility as indicated in 

### Appendix I of the 2013 Lead NAAQS Attainment Demonstration SIP. D. By June 1, 2013, preclude public access at Buick MinelMill at a minimum distance from the facility as indicated in Appendix I ofthe 2013 Lead NAAQS Attainment Demonstration SlP. 8. Required Practices and Procedures. A. 

### Baghouse Standard Operating Procedures (SOP): BRRF has an MDNR-approved Baghouse SOP pursuant to 

### the Secondary 

### Lead MACT, revised as ofJanuary 5, 2012 for

sources at the facility subject to the Secondary Lead MACT. After the applicable deadline for any baghouse projects installed pursuant to paragraph 6 (Projects Required) or paragraph 10 (Projects Required as Contingency Control Measures) and that is not otherwise subject to the Secondary Lead MACT, any such newly installed baghouse(s) shall be subject to the Baghouse SOP. 

### B. Baghouse Maintenance or Extended Periods of Non-Production (Shut Downs): BRRF 

### may cease the operation of any of the ventilation system units used to 

### achieve the appropriate amounts of negative pressure as required by paragraph 

### 6.0 above to perfonn maintenance on the ventilation system or if all ofthe lead processing units within a given building have been turned offfora minimum oftwenty-four (24) consecutive hours. C. Local Exhaust Ventilation (LEV) Operation: BRRF will operate LEVs at the following emission units, when the units are operating: (1) the reverberatory furnace; (2) FS3300 and 3301 dross kettles; (3) refinery dross screw; (4) R-1 to R-lO refinery kettles; (5) the blast furnace; and, (6) the sweat furnaces.



### 6I D. BRRF must preclude public access at a minimum distance from the facility as indicated in Appendix I ofthe 2013 Lead NAAQS Attainment Demonstration SIP. BRRF shall notify MDNR ofits intent to modify the location ofany fencelines used to demonstrate compliance with thisparagraph ninety (90) days priorto the commencement ofconstruction. E. Doe 

### Run shaH notify MDNR ofits intent to modify the location ofany fencelines used to demonstrate compliance with paragraphs 7.B.-D. ninety (90) days prior to the commencement ofconstruction. F. Recordkeeping and Reporting. Recordkeeping and reporting under this Consent Judgment are addressed by the recordkeeping and reporting requirements applicable to the facility pursuant tothe Secondary LeadMACT, revised as ofJanuary 5, 2012. 

### O. Stack Emission Limits. BRRF will limit lead emissions to the atmosphere from certain stacks as set forth in the following table. BRRF is subject to the limit for EPlOO and EP 8 after the completion ofthe project in paragraph 6.0. The limits for EP 31C, EPA 71, and EP 72 are effective consistent with the Secondary Lead MACT at 40 C.F.R. 63.546.

Emission Limitation Main Stack Stack Name Stack ID EP8 O.71blhour New BlastFurnace Process andBuilding 0.71blhour EP 100 Ventilation Baghouse Drum Shredder Bagbouse EP3lC 0.025 Iblhour ReverbemtoryFurnace Slag Tap EP71 0.081blbour Ventilation Baghouse North Relmery Bagbouse EP72 0.006 Iblhour



### 7

### Compliance will be determined via stack testing requirements and on a schedule that is consistent with the Secondary Lead MACT, revised as ofJanuary 5, 2012 except as follows. Ifany test does not show compliance with the limits herein, the facility will test the stack that tested above the limit and provide the stack test report or results within one hundred and twenty (120) days after the date ofthe test that failed to demonstrate compliance. If this subsequent test shows compliance, the prior exceedance will not be considered a violation of this Consent Judgment and compliance testing will return to a schedule consistent with the Secondary Lead MACT, revised as ofJanuary 5, 2012. 9. Monitoring A. Missouri has 

### a lead monitoring site network, the 2011 Missouri Ambient Air QuaJity Monitoring Network Plan, which was approved by EPA on December 12, 2011. MDNR will monitor consistent with the Monitoring Plan and any amendments thereto. Data from any MDNR, BRRF or Doe Run monitor that is not located within ambient air will be used solely for informational purposes and not for determining attainment with the 2008 LeadNAAQS. B. 

### BRRF has two non-ambient monitors at the sites known as the North and South BRRF monitoring sites. BRRF shall continue data collection from these monitors until data collected from the ambient airnetwork for 36 three-month rolling averages shows continuous attainment with the 2008 Lead NAAQS, until BRRF or Doe 

### Run no longer owns or operates the property where the monitors are located, or upon approval by MDNR that continued monitoring is not necessary. C. 

### BRRF has a meteorological station and shall continue to monitor meteorological data to support future 

### dispersion modeling or other episode analysis. Meteorological data

8collection shall include ten (10) meter wind speed, ten (10) meter wind direction, ten (10) meter ambient temperature, ambient barometric pressure, ten (10) meter sigma theta, ten (10) meter delta temperature, relative humidity, and precipitation. Meteorological data will also include two (2) meter ambient and delta temperature and incoming solar radiation within six (6) months after the effective date. Doe Run shall continue data collection from these monitors until data collected from the ambient air network for thirty-six (36) three-month rolling averages shows continuous attainment with the 2008 Lead NAAQS, until BRRF or Doe Run no longer owns or operates the property, or upon approval by MDNR that the continued monitoring is not necessary. D. Meteorological monitoring shall be conducted pursuant to an MDNR-approved Quality Assurance Project Plan ("QAPP"). BRRF shall submit the QAPP to MDNR for review and approval within sixty (60) days ofentry ofthis Consent Judgment. E. BRRF shall provide to MDNR the air monitoring data analysis within thirty (30) days afterthe end ofeachcalendarmonth. F. BRRF shall provide to MDNR the meteorological monitoring data and quality

assurance summaries in a quarterly report within forty-five (45) days after the end of each calendar quarterelectronically in the format identified in the QAPP. G. If BRRF or Doe Run purchases property where the MDNR Buick North East monitor is located, Doe Run or BRRF shall allow MDNR access to the property for the purposes ofcontinuing the 2008 Lead NAAQS monitoring. H. BRRF and Doe Run shall notify MDNR ofany real property acquired or released from its possession in the BuicklVibumum trend nonattainment area where an MDNR monitor is located or within where a BRRF fenceline to preclude public access is located



### 9within thirty (30) days ofthe transaction being filed with the local Recorder ofDeeds. This notification shall include a copy ofthe Warranty Deed and legal description ofthe property. 10. Projects Required as Contingency Control Measures A. Ifthe air quality data for any three-month rolling average period exceeds the 0.15 J,.1g/m3 three-month rolling average lead standard 

### after completion and operation ofprojects and control measures identified in paragraph 6, or any extension date granted by the MDNR, BRRF shall begin implementation ofthese contingency measures upon written notification from MDNR, and shall complete the projects according to the following schedule. The triggering period for purposes of this provision will be the three-month calendar period following the implementation ofthe projects and control measures identified in paragraph 6. Additionally, ifBRRF fai1s 

### to make Reasonable Further Progress (defined as the completion and operation ofthe Projects Required in paragraph 6 ofthis Consent Judgment or required pursuant to this paragraph 1O.B within the time frames set forth), BRRF shall begin implementation of the contingency measures upon written notification from MDNR, and shall complete the projects according to the following schedule. Any of the contingency projects listed herein may only be triggered at the earliest (and only ifan exceedance ofthe 2008 Lead NAAQS is monitored) after a full three-month calendar period following the completion and operation ofthe preceding control project 1 

### i. Project B(i) shall be completed within nine (9) months from the date BRRF receives notification from MDNR to complete the contingency measure.

1Forexample, ifproject B(i) is completed and operational on February 15,2016, the next contingency measure couldbe triggered only ifand after the three month calendarperiod ofMarch, April and May ofthat year showed an ambient monitored exceedance ofthe 2008 Lead NAAQS. As such, inthat scenario the contingency couldnot be triggered before June 1,2016. 1011. Ifin any three-month rolling period after completing and operating project B(i), the 0.15 llg/m3 rolling three-month average lead standard is exceeded or BRRF fails to mak:e Reasonable Further Progress, MDNR shall notify BRRF of such exceedance or failure and BRRF will complete project B(ii) within a timeframe to be detennined by BRRF and MDNR

iii. If in any three-month rolling average period after completing and operating projects B(i) and B(ii), the 0.15 llg/m3 rolling three-month average lead standard is exceeded or BRRF fails to make Reasonable Further Progress, MDNR shall notify BRRF of such exceedance or failure and project B(iii) shall be completed within eighteen (18) months ofreceipt ofthe notice.

IV. If in any three-month rolling average period after completing and operating projects B(i) B(ii), and B(iii), the 0.15 llg/m3 rolling three-month average lead standard is exceeded or BRRF fails to make Reasonable Further Progress, MDNR shall notify BRRF of such exceedance or failure and project B(iv) shall be completed within twelve (12) months ofreceipt ofthe notice. B. Contingency Projects.

L Ventilate reverberatory feed storage building with a minimum design to achieve negative pressure ofat least .007 inches ofwater column.

11. Projects Technology Study for Fugitive Dust Control. Within a timeframe to be determined by BRRF and MDNR, BRRF shall submit a work plan to MDNR for a study ofbest practices and best available technology for industrial smelter or metal manufacturing facilities with similar fugitive emissions control challenges. The work plan is subject to approval by MDNR. The work plan shall provide that



### 11the study shall be completed and delivered to MDNR within one hundred and eighty (180) days ofapproval ofthe work plan. The study will list all best practices and 

### best available technologies identified and, for each technology or practice, will identify those technologies and/or practices that BRRF deems technically feasible and cost-effective for inclusion as Contingency Project B(ii), quantify associated emissions reductions, and provide a time frame for implementation ofeach. Within sixty (60) days of its receipt ofthe study, MDNR will advise BRRF whether the projects and timelines proposed by BRRF are acceptable and ifMDNR agrees that any ofthe identified technologies or practices are not technically feasible or costeffective. Upon approval or after sixty (60) days with no comment, those projects identified in the Study for completion and the deadlines therein shall become a part ofthis Consent Judgment and fully enforceable hereunder as contingency measures and shall be completed pursuant to the deadlines.



### iii. Pave inbound truckparking lot. iv. Evaluation ofventilation capacity at Main Baghouse. Within a timeframe to be determined by BRRF and MDNR, BRRF shall submit an evaluation ofthe Main Baghouse capacity and will identify any projects that are deemed technically feasible and cost-effective to redistribute any excess capacity identified in the evaluation and for inclusion as contingency measures and provide a time frame for implementation. Within sixty (60) days ofits receipt ofthe evaluation, MDNR will advise BRRF whether the timelines proposed by BRRF are acceptable. Upon approval or after sixty (60) days with no comment, those projects identified by

12BRRF and the dead1ines therein shall become a part ofthis Consent Judgment and fully enforceable hereunder ascontingency measures. C. BRRF shall notifY MDNR within ten (10) business days ofBRRF's completion of the contingency measures. Within sixty (60) days ofsuch completion, BRRF shaH propose

an additional quantified contingency measure and a proposed timeframe for completion to be added to this Consent Judgment. Upon approval by MDNR., the additional contingency

measure shall become a part of this Consent Judgment 

### and shall be fully enforceable hereunder. Do If BRRF or Doe Run identifies and demonstrates to MDNR's satisfaction alternative control measure(s) that would achieve attainment with the 2008 Lead NAAQS, BRRF or Doe Run may substitute the new measure(s) for the contingency measure(s) identified above, or may change the order ofimplementation ofthe contingency measure(s) and time frames for completion identified above, upon approval ofthe MDNR's Director of the Air Pollution Control Program. Any substitute contingency measure shall include a schedule for completion. E. Nothing 

### in this agreement shall prevent BRRF from implementing any ofthese contingency measures prior to receivingnotification from MDNR. VI. Stipulated Penalties and ForceMajeure 11. Ifthe defendants fail to complete construction of the control measures set out 

### in this Consent Judgment by the dates specified, defendants may be subject to stipulatedpenalties according to the following schedu1e. The penalties are per day, per violation, and may be assessed by MDNR beginning with the first day ofviolation afterthe scheduled deadline date. Period ofNoncompliance Penalty perDay ofViolation

13First through 30th day ofnoncompliance $1,000.00 31 st through 60th day ofnoncompliance $2,000.00 61 st through 90th day ofnoncompliance $3,000.00 91 st day ofnoncompliance and beyond $5,000.00 Ifa perfonnance test, conducted perthe requirements ofparagraph 8.G. ofthis Consent Judgment, fails to demonstrate compliance with the emission limits stated therein, BRRF may be subject to stipulated penalties according to the following schedule: First test failure

- $1,000 Second test failure

- $2,000 Third test failure

- $3,000 Fourth (and beyond) test failure

- $5,000 IfBRRF or Doe Run fails to comply with any other requirements ofthis Consent Judgment, BRRF or Doe Run may be subject to stipulated penalties according to the following schedule. The penalties are per day, per violation, and may be assessed by MDNR beginning with the first day ofviolation after the scheduled deadline date. Period ofNoncompliance Penalty per Day ofViolation First through 30th day ofnoncompliance $200.00 31 st through 60th day ofnoncompliance $400.00 61 stthrough 90th day ofnoncompliance $600.00 91st day ofnoncompliance and beyond $800.00 12. Ifany violation is enforceable by more than one agreement orregulatory requirement, MDNRagrees that it may only seek to enforce either the stipulated penalties discussed in paragraph 11

14ofthis Consent Judgment, or the penalty for violation ofthe specified regulatory requirement, not both, against BRRF and/or Doe Run. 13. All penalties shall be paid within forty-five (45) days of the date of receipt of written notification of the assessment of stipulated penalty from MDNR unless the defendants challenge the penalty pursuant to the dispute resolution procedure outlined in Section VII. If the penalty is challenged, it shall not be paid until thirty (30) days after the Commission's determination that one or both defendants owe the stipulated penalty, and defendants have failed to use, or have exhausted, their rights to review the Commission's decision. Ifdefendants exercise their right to appeal a decision ofthe Commission, payment will be due thirty (30) days after a final decision. 14. All penalties shall be paid by check made payable to the State ofMissouri (Iron County Treasurer), and delivered to the Collections Specialist, Attorney General of Missouri, P.O. Box 899, Jefferson City, Missouri 65102-0899. 15. Upon the request of BRRF or Doe Run, MDNR may in its unreviewable discretion impose a lesser penalty or no penalty at all for violations subject to stipulated penalties. Stipulated penalties are deemed waived ifnot assessed within two (2) years after MDNR is aware ofa violation. 16. The penalties set forth herein shall not apply in the event ofa force majeure, as defined in this section. For the purposes ofthis Consent Judgment, force majeure shall be defined as any event arising from causes beyond the control ofdefendants and ofany entity controlled by defendants, which delays or interferes with the performance of any obligation under this Consent Judgment notwithstanding defendants' best efforts to avoid such an event and fulfill the obligation. The requirement that defendants exercise "best efforts to avoid such an event" includes using best efforts to anticipate any potential force majeure event and best efforts to address the effects ofany force majeure event (I) as it is occurring, and (2) fol1owing the force majeure event such that the adverse effect or

15delay is minimized to the greatest extent practicable. Examples of events that are not force majeure events include, but are not limited to, increased costs or expenses of any work to be performed under this Consent Judgment, changed financial circmnstances, or other financial orbudgetary issues. Failure to apply for a required permit or approval, or to provide in a timely manner all information required to obtain a permit or approval necessary to meet the requirements ofthis Consent Judgment, are not force majeure events. 17. If any event occurs that is likely to delay or interfere with the perfonnance of an obligation under this Consent Judgment, whether or not caused by a force majeure event, defendant shall notify MDNRby telephone within five (5) business days ofdefendant becoming knowledgeable ofsuch event. Within ten (l0) business days thereafter, defendant shall provide in writing to the State an explanation and description ofthe reasons for the delay, the anticipated duration ofthe delay; all actions taken orto be taken to prevent orminimize its effects; a schedule for implementation ofany measures to be taken to mitigate the event; and a statement as to whether, in the opinion ofdefendant, such an event may cause or contribute to the endangerment of pubJic health, public welfare, or the environment. Defendants shall include with any notice all available documentation supporting the claims that the delay was attributable to a force majeure. Failure to comply with these requirements shall preclude defendant from asserting any claim offorce majeure. 18. If the State agrees that the delay or anticipated delay is attributable to a force majeure event, then the State may agree to extend the time for performance of any obligation(s) under this Consent Judgment that is affected by the force majeure event for the time necessary to complete the obligation(s). The State will notify defendants in writing ofthe length ofthe extension, ifgranted, for performance of the obligation(s) affected by the force majeure event. An extension ofthe time for

16perfonnance ofthe obligation(s) affected by the force majeure event shall not, by itself, extend the time for performance ofany other obligations. 19. Ifthe State does not agree that a force majeure event has occurred, or does not agree on the length ofany time extension sought by defendant, the issue shall be subject to the dispute resolution procedures set forth 

### in Section VII. In any such proceeding, to qualify for force majeure defense, defendant shall have the burden ofdemonstrating by a preponderance ofthe evidence that the delay or noncompliance has been or will be caused by a force majeure event, that its duration was or will be warranted under the circumstances, that defendant exercised or is exercising due diligence by using its best efforts to avoid and mitigate its effects, and that defendant complied with the requirements of paragraph 15-16 above. Should defendant carry the burden set forth in this section, the delay or noncompliance at issue shall be deemed not to be a violation ofthe affected obligation ofthis Consent Judgment. VII. Dispute Resolution 20. Any dispute that arises with respect to the meaning, application or implementation for any provision ofthis Consent Judgment may be subject to dispute resolution as provided herein, unless the ConsentJudgment provision provides that dispute resolution is not available. Any dispute that arises with respect to the meaning, application or implementation ofthis Consent Judgment shall in the first instance be the subject ofinfonnal negotiations between defendants and MDNR. Notice of a dispute shall be given by the party alleging the dispute, shall be addressed in writing to the MDNR Director, and copied to the opposing party. Such notice shall state the specific grounds for the dispute, including any supporting documentation and the reliefrequested. 21. The MDNR and defendants shaH have thirty (30) days from the receipt ofthe notice of the dispute to resolve the dispute. Ifagreement is reached, the resolution shall be reduced to writing and

17this Consent Judgment modified, if appropriate. If the parties to the dispute are unable to reach agreement within the thirty-day period and this period is not extended in writing by mutual agreement of the parties, the matter will be submitted to the Commission. The opposing party may file suggestions in opposition and include any documentation relevant to deciding the dispute. Said suggestions and documentation 

### shall be submitted within fourteen (14) days of submission of the matter to the Commission. The Commission may hear evidence ifneeded to reach a decision. The Commission will issue a written decision following its review ofthe record submitted by the parties. 12. The parties will then be entitled to judicial review pursuant to Chapter 536, Revised Statutes ofMissouri. The filing ofa notice ofdispute shall not automatically suspend, extend, postpone,

or affect any parties' obligations under this Consent Judgment with respect to the disputed issue unless expressly provided herein or unless the parties agree to the extension, postponement or affect. This provision shall not be construed to prevent either party from requesting a stay ofthe party's obligations under this ConsentJudgment. VID. Exceptional Events 23. Doe Run or BRRF may provide a demonstration to MDNR that a monitored exceedance at an ambient 

### air monitor was the result ofan "exceptional event" as the term is defined at 40 C.F.R. 50.10). If MDNR agrees that the demonstration supports the characterization ofthe monitored data as the result ofan "exceptional event" as set forth in 40 C.F.R 50.14, MDNRmay flag the monitored data to be used as informational purposes only and may submit a demonstration to the Environmental Protection Agency. Nothing inthis paragraph would preclude MDNR from tagging data that was due to

an exceptional event and submitting a demonstration to EPA on 

### its own accord or at the request of another party. Any data that is tagged by MDNR to be used for informational purposes cannot be used

18as a basis to trigger contingency projects. This provision is not subject to Section VII hDispute Resolution. n 

### IX. Reservation 24. Nothing in this agreement shall be construed as a waiver ofany obligation ofdefendants

oras a permit to defendants under any otherenvironmental laws applicable to defendants. 

### X. Modifications 25. This ConsentJudgmentmay be modified oramended only by written agreement between the parties, which shall be 

### filed with this Court. 

### XI. Termination 26. This Consent Judgment and the obligations herein shall terminate upon the payment of any stipulated penalties due and redesignation by the Environmental Protection Agency of the BuicklVibumum Trend Lead Nonattairunent Area as an attainment area for the 2008 Lead NAAQS. 

### If the SIP revision is not approved by the EPA, the parties may tenninate this ConsentJudgment by written agreement. 27. In the event BRRF or Doe Run ceases operation of lead emission units subject to this Consent Judgment, Doe Run orBRRF shall notify MDNR and will be relieved ofthe injunctive reliefor otherrequired practices that were for the purpose ofreducing lead emissions from the subject unit. XII. Effective Date 28. This ConsentJudgment is effective upon entry by the Court. 

### XIII. Notices 29. Unless otherwise specified herein, whenevernotifications, submissions, or communications are made pursuant

### to the Consent Judgmentthey shall be made in writing and addressed as follows:

19To the Missouri Department ofNatural Resources: Planning Section Chief Air Pollution Control Program Missouri Department ofNaturaI Resources 1659 East Elm Street Jefferson City, Missouri 65101 To The Doe Run Resources Corporation Environmental Manager The Doe Run Company SEMO Mining Milling Division P.O. Box 500 Viburnum, Missouri 65566 With a copy to: Vice President ofEnvironmental Health & Safety The Doe Run Company 1801 Park 270 Drive, Suite 300 St. Louis, Missouri 63146 To Buick Resource Recycling Facility, LLC: Environmental & Health Manager The Doe Run Company BuickResource Recycling Facility 18594 Highway KK Boss, Missouri 65440 With a copy to: Vice President ofEnvironmental Health & Safety The Doe Run Company 1801 Park 270 Drive, Suite 300 St. Louis, Missouri 63146

20SIGNATURES

BUICKRESOURCE RECYCLING FACILITY, LLC
BY; DATE: SteveArnold, Plant Manager

TIlE DOE RUN RESOURCES CORPORAnON BY;

# ~~~ DATE: 

### L/-

# &-- 1.:3 Aaron Miller, ChiefOperating Officer MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES

BY: DATE: Leanne Tippett Mosby, Director Division ofEnyironmcntal Quality MISSOURI AIR CONSERVATION COMMISSION
BY: DATE: David Zimmerman. Chairperson

21SIGNATURES

BUICK RESOURCE RECYCLING FACILITY, LLC

BY: DATE: Steve**Amold~** 

### Plant Manager

TIIE DOERUN RESOURCES CORPORAnON

BY: DATE: Aaron Miller, ChiefOperating Officer

MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES

Leanne Tippett Mosby, Director Division ofEnvironmental Quality

MISSOURI AIR CONSERVATION COMMISSION

BY: 

# CL

# .~ 

# &cu:!**~** DATE: 

# 1kM 

# J13=**~O{3**

2], 1

ATIORNEY GENERAL OF MISSOURI Chris Koster, Attorney General

DATE: J Kara Valentine}AssistantAttorney General



### 22State ofMissouri ) ) SS CERTIFICATE OF TRUE COpy County ofIron ) I, Sammye G. White, Clerk of the Circuit Court for said County, which said court is a court of record, having ea!, ertify hat is is a tie, .-t accurate and complete copy of**-~~.L.1-'-..-'-;~==--~=::;:)¥"""'-j'r-'** r"l\..J. in the above entitled case, as the sam appears ofrecord and on file in**thi~jl\ U~:~ES;;ry**  hand and seal ofV¥0urt affixed hereto on __**~ ~**  ? _**~------'** 20_LL.

### Jay Nixon, Governor Sara Parker Pauley, Director 

# Air Pollution Control Program

State Plan Actions On Public Notice| Proposed for Adoption On Public Notice Missouri State Implementation Plan – Modification to the Attainment Demonstration for the 2008 Lead NAAQS for the Buick/Viburnum trend Lead Nonattainment Area The purpose of this plan is to modify the Attainment Demonstration for the 2008 Lead National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) – Buick/Viburnum Trend Lead Nonattainment Area (and the corresponding Consent Judgment) that was adopted by the Missouri Air Conservation Commission on March 28, 2013. This plan proposes to removethe requirement for a new stack that is not yet constructed at the secondary smelter operated by Buick Resource Recycling Facility, LLC. Reevaluation of the design demonstrates that this new stack is no longer necessary since the building enclosure baghouse exhaust stream will now be routed to the main stack and the main stack shall continue to meetthe required emission limitation. This modification will result in no increase in, or impact on, emissions and will realize reduced capital costs since construction of the new stack is no longer required. Therefore, the Air Pollution Control Program considers this modificationto be administrative in nature and thus does not require additional modeling. A public hearing is scheduled for this plan action on June 27, 2013. Comments about this plan action will be accepted through the close of business on July 5, 2013 Modification to the Attainment Demonstration for the 2008 Lead National Ambient Air Quality Standard- Buick Consent Judgment Modification Missouri State Implementation Plan Revision – Section 110 Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard This plan was developed to fulfill the requirements of Section 110(a) of the Clean Air Act for the revised 2008 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone. Section 110(a)(1) requires states to submit a state implementation plan (SIP) revision such as this after the promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS to address the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement infrastructure elements of Section 110(a)(2) for that NAAQS. On January 15, 2013, the EPA published in the Federal Registerfindings of failure to submitfor several states, including Missouri, that had not made any submission to address the applicable elements of Section 110 for the 2008 Ozone NAAQ S (78 FR 2882). However, this finding did not apply to Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) (I), the “interstate transport” provisions of the infrastructure SIP. This plan is administrative in nature and demonstrates Missouri’s ability and authority to implement all Section 110 elements Page 1 of 2 State Plan Actions onPublic Notice - DNR

5/24/2013 http://www.dnr.mo.gov/env/apcp/stateplanrevisions.htm

### for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS for which EPA has issued this finding of failure to submit via the referencing of specific corresponding applicable state statutes, regulations, programs or resources. A public hearing is scheduled for this plan action on May 30, 2013. Comments about this plan action will be accepted through the close of business on June 6, 2013. Section 110 Infrastructure SIP for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS Submit Comments Back to top Missouri State Implementation Plan Revision – Section 110 Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) National Ambient Air Quality Standard This plan was developed to fulfill the requirements of Section 110(a) of the Clean Air Act for the newly revised 2010 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for Sulfur Dioxide (SO2). Section 110(a)(1) requires states tosubmit a state implementation plan (SIP) revision such as this after the promulgation of a new or revised NAAQ S to address the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement infrastructure elementsof Section 110(a)(2) for that NAAQS. This plan is administrative in nature and demonstrates Missouri’s ability and authority to implement these infrastructure elements for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS via the referencing of specific corresponding applicable state statutes, regulations, programs or resources. A public hearing is scheduled for this plan action on May 30, 2013. Comments about this plan action will be accepted through the close of business on June 6, 2013. Section 110 Infrastructure SIP for the 201 0 SO2 NAAQS Submit Comments Back to top Proposed for Adoption None at this time. Page 2 of 2 State Plan Actions onPublic Notice - DNR

5/24/2013 http://www.dnr.mo.gov/env/apcp/stateplanrevisions.htm1 

### Bechtel, Cheri From: Missouri DNR <MODNR@public.govdelivery.com> Sent: Friday, May 24, 2013 2:45 PM To: Bechtel, Cheri Subject: Courtesy Copy: Public Hearing Notice



### 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 PublicNotices (459 recipients)

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

. MISSOURI AIR CONSERVATION COMMISSION WILL HOLD PUBLIC HEARING JEFFERSON CITY, MO -- The Missouri Air Conservation Commission will hold a public hearing on Thursday, June 27, 2013 beginning at 9 a.m. at the Sheraton St. Louis City Center, 400 South 14th Street, Colonnade Salon D, St. Louis, Missouri. The commission will hear testimony related to the following proposed action(s): * 10 CSR 10-6.040 (amendment) Reference Methods * Missouri State Implementation Plan Revision - Modification to the Attainment Demonstration for the 2008 Lead National Ambient Air Quality Standard- Buick/Viburnum Trend Nonattainment Area If the Commission adopts the action(s), it will be the Department’s intention to submit the action(s) to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to be included in Missouri’s State Implementation Plan unless otherwise noted above. Documents for the above item(s) will be available for review at the Missouri Department of Natural Resources, Air Pollution Control Program, 1659 East Elm Street, Jefferson City, Missouri, (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 July 5, 2013. 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. 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 176,2 

### 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 servicesor 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 inadvance 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 6/27/2013

www.midwestlitigation.com Phone: 1.800.280.3376 Fax: 314.644.1334 MIDWEST LITIGATION SERVICES Page 1 1 MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 2 3 4 5 6 MISSOURI AIR CONSERVATION COMMISSION MEETING 7 8 PUBLIC HEARING 9 June 27, 2013 10 9:00 A.M. 11 12 Sheraton St. Louis City Center 13 St. Louis, Missouri 14 15 TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25PUBLIC HEARING 6/27/2013

www.midwestlitigation.com Phone: 1.800.280.3376 Fax: 314.644.1334 MIDWEST LITIGATION SERVICES Page 3 1 CHAIRMAN BAKER: I call the public hearing to 2 order. The hearing will come to order. Let the record 3 show the following Commissioners are present: Jack 4 Baker, Mark Garnett, Gary Pendergrass, and David 5 Zimmermann. 6 The Air Conservation Commission of the State 7 of Missouri has called this public hearing pursuant to 8 Section 643.070, Revised Statutes of Missouri; EPA 9 promulgated rule 40 CFR 51.102, for the purpose of 10 hearing testimony relating to: 11 10CSR 10-6.040 (Amendment) Reference Methods 12 Missouri State Implementation Plan - 13 Modification to the Attainment Demonstration for 14 the 2008 Lead NAAQS for the Buick/Viburnum Trend 15 Lead Nonattainment Area. 16 The hearing record will close at 5:00 P.M. on 17 July 4, 2013. Anyone who has not been scheduled to 18 appear, but who wishes to be heard, should indicate that 19 you wish to speak on the sign-in sheets available at the 20 door. 21 Section 643.100 of the Missouri Statutes 22 provides that all oral testimony be given under oath. 23 Accordingly, when you are called to testify, please 24 present yourself to the court reporter first to be sworn 25 in.PUBLIC HEARING 6/27/2013

www.midwestlitigation.com Phone: 1.800.280.3376 Fax: 314.644.1334 MIDWEST LITIGATION SERVICES Page 6 1 requirements. The ASTM Methods for determining 2 parameters such as fuel sulfur and heat content are also 3 being updated to the latest versions available. 4 If the Commission adopts this rule action, it 5 will be the Department's intention to submit this rule 6 amendment to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to 7 replace the current rule that is in the Missouri State 8 Implementation Plan. 9 This concludes my prepared testimony. 10 CHAIRMAN BAKER: Thank you. Mr. Joe. 11 ================================ 12 MR. WINKELMANN: Chairman, Members of the 13 Commission, my name is Joe Winkelmann. I am employed as 14 an Environmental Engineer with the Air Pollution Control 15 Program located at 1659 East Elm Street, Jefferson City, 16 Missouri. I am here today to present testimony for a 17 proposed revision to the State Implementation Plan, or 18 SIP, for the Buick/Viburnum Trend Nonattainment Area 19 under the 2008 Lead National Ambient Air Quality 20 Standard, or NAAQS. 21 The original Buick/Viburnum Trend Attainment 22 Demonstration was adopted by this Commission on March 28, 23 2013 and submitted to the United States Environmental 24 Protection Agency on April 17th of this year. This plan 25 revision starts on Page 79 of your briefing document and

### COMMENTS AND RESPONSES PROPOSED REVISION TO THE MISSOURI STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

— MODIFICATION TO THE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION FOR THE 2008 LEAD NAAQS – BUICK / VIBURNUM TREND LEAD NONATTAINMENT AREA On June 27, 2013 the Missouri Air Conservation Commission held a public hearing concerning the proposed revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the Buick/Viburnum Trend Nonattainment Area under the 2008Lead National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) in regards to a modification of stack provisions to the corresponding 2013 Consent Judgment. The purpose of this SIP action is to remove the requirement for a new stack thatis not yet constructed at the secondary smelter operated by Buick Resource Recycling Facility, LLC. Reevaluation of the design demonstrates that this new stack is no longer necessary since the building enclosure baghouse exhaust stream will now be routed to the main stack and the main stack shall continue to meet the required emission limitation. This modification will result in no increase in, or impact on, emissions and will realize reduced capital costs since construction of the new stack is no longer required. Therefore, Missouri Department of Natural Resources’Air Pollution Control Program (program) considers this modification to be administrative in nature and thus does not require additional modeling. No written or verbal comments were received during the public comment period concerning this proposed revision. If the commission adopts this plan revision, it will be the program’s intention to submit this revision to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for inclusion in the Missouri State Implementation Plan. SUMMARY OF COMMENTS: No written or verbal comments were received concerning this proposed SIP revision.