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 control 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 associated information 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 facility enclose 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 continue to 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 with a minimum height 

of 65 meters for this exhaust stream.]Emissions will be routed to the main stack 

(EP8). Installation of the above controls 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 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 of the 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 provide the stack test report or results within one 

hundred and twenty (120) days after the date of 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 to the 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 a U.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 OF MISSOURI 

STATE OF MISSOURI ex reI., ) 

Attorney General Chris Koster ) 

and the Missouri Department ofNatural ) 

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 Consent Judgment. 

WHEREAS, the State of Missouri, through MDNR, in consideration of BRRF'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 

agreement to 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 from 
1.5 micrograms per cubic meter (J.lglm3

) to 0.15 Jlglm3

. On November 22, 2010, EPA designated 

portions of Iron, 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 Lead NAAQS in the 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 of this 

Consent Judgment and agree to be bound thereby. In the event that the Court does not approve of this 

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 of this 

Consent Judgment are enforceable by further order of this Court, and that this Court retains jurisdiction 

ofthe matter in order to enforce the terms ofthis Consent Judgment. 

WHEREAS, this Consent Judgment takes into account all federally enforceabJe requirements, 

including injunctive relief provisions of the 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 Consent Decree"), and entered on December 21,2011. 

WHEREAS, this matter comes before the Court on the petition filed by the State of Missouri 

(the "State") and MDNR concurrently with this Consent Judgment. 

2 

WHEREAS, by agreeing to the terms of this Consent Judgment, BRRF and Doe Run do not 

admit any liability arising from the allegations set forth 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 of the Parties 

1. The objectives of the parties to this Consent Judgment are to implement control measures 

set forth herein in furtherance of attainment ofthe 2008 Lead NAAQS. 

II. Jurisdiction 

2. This Court has jurisdiction over this matter and of the parties consenting hereto pursuant 

to Section 643.151, RSMo, ofthe Missouri Air Conservation Law. 

III. Parties Bound 

3. The provisions of this 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 other entities who are, or who will be, acting in concert or privity with, or on behalfof 

the parties to this action or their 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. Injunctive Relief 

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). 

3 

6. 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 February 4,2013, 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 improve reverberatory 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 of 300,000 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 of January 5, 2012, and any subsequent 

revision; or, (2) January 5, 2015. 

4 

H. By December 31,2013, install a 40-foot extension on the 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, or covers 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 of breakdown or maintenance of the 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 of the 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 of the 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 of January 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 of the lead processing units within a given 

building have been turned offfor a 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. 

6 

I 

D. BRRF must preclude public access at a minimum distance from the facility as 

indicated in Appendix I of the 2013 Lead NAAQS Attainment Demonstration SIP. BRRF 

shall notify MDNR of its intent to modify the location of any fencelines used to demonstrate 

compliance with this paragraph ninety (90) days prior to the commencement of construction. 

E. Doe Run shaH notify MDNR of its intent to modify the location of any fencelines 

used to demonstrate compliance with paragraphs 7.B.-D. ninety (90) days prior to the 

commencement of construction. 

F. Recordkeeping and Reporting. Recordkeeping and reporting under this Consent 

Judgment are addressed by the recordkeeping and reporting requirements applicable to the 

facility pursuant to the Secondary Lead MACT, 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 of the 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 Blast Furnace Process and Building 
 EP 100 0.71blhour

Ventilation Baghouse 


Drum Shredder Bagbouse 
 EP3lC 0.025 Iblhour 


Reverbemtory Furnace 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 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 provide the stack test report or results within one hundred and 

twenty (120) days after the date of 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 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 air network 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 

8 

collection 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 of entry ofthis Consent Judgment. 

E. BRRF shall provide to MDNR the air monitoring data analysis within thirty (30) 

days after the end of each calendar month. 

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 quarter electronically 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 of continuing the 2008 Lead NAAQS monitoring. 

H. BRRF and Doe Run shall notify MDNR of any 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 

9 

within thirty (30) days of the transaction being filed with the local Recorder of Deeds. This 

notification shall include a copy of the Warranty Deed and legal description of the property. 

10. Projects Required as Contingency Control Measures 

A. If the 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 of projects 

and control measures identified in paragraph 6, or any extension date granted by the MDNR, 

BRRF shall begin implementation of these 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 of the projects and control measures identified in paragraph 6. 

Additionally, if BRRF fai1s to make Reasonable Further Progress (defined as the completion 

and operation of the Projects Required in paragraph 6 of this 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 if an exceedance of the 

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. 

1 For example, ifproject B(i) is completed and operational on February 15,2016, the next contingency measure could be 

triggered only if and after the three month calendar period ofMarch, April and May ofthat year showed an ambient 

monitored exceedance ofthe 2008 Lead NAAQS. As such, in that scenario the contingency could not be triggered before 

June 1,2016. 

10 

11. If in 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 of receipt ofthe notice. 

IV. If in any three-month rolling average period after completing and 

operating proj ects 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 of receipt of the 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 of best 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 

11 

the study shall be completed and delivered to MDNR within one hundred and 

eighty (180) days of approval 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 of each. Within 

sixty (60) days of its receipt of the study, MDNR will advise BRRF whether the 

projects and timelines proposed by BRRF are acceptable and if MDNR agrees that 

any of the 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 

of this Consent Judgment and fully enforceable hereunder as contingency measures 

and shall be completed pursuant to the deadlines. 

iii. Pave inbound truck parking lot. 

iv. Evaluation of ventilation capacity at Main Baghouse. Within a timeframe 

to be determined by BRRF and MDNR, BRRF shall submit an evaluation of the 

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 of the 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 

12 

BRRF and the dead1ines therein shall become a part of this Consent Judgment and 

fully enforceable hereunder as contingency measures. 

C. BRRF shall notifY MDNR within ten (10) business days ofBRRF's completion of 

the contingency measures. Within sixty (60) days of such 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 of implementation of the contingency measure(s) 

and time frames for completion identified above, upon approval of the 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 of these 

contingency measures prior to receiving notification from MDNR. 

VI. Stipulated Penalties and Force Majeure 

11. If the defendants fail to complete construction of the control measures set out in this 

Consent Judgment by the dates specified, defendants may be subject to stipulated penalties according to 

the following schedu1e. The penalties are per day, per violation, and may be assessed by MDNR 

beginning with the first day of violation after the scheduled deadline date. 

Period ofNoncompliance Penalty per Day ofViolation 

13 
First through 30th day of noncompliance $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 

If a perfonnance test, conducted per the 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 

If BRRF or Doe Run fails to comply with any other requirements of this 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 of violation after the 

scheduled deadline date. 

Period ofNoncompliance Penalty per Day of Violation 

First through 30th day ofnoncompliance $200.00 

31 st through 60th day ofnoncompliance $400.00 

61 st through 90th day of noncompliance $600.00 

91st day ofnoncompliance and beyond $800.00 

12. If any violation is enforceable by more than one agreement or regulatory requirement, 

MDNR agrees that it may only seek to enforce either the stipulated penalties discussed in paragraph 11 

14 

of this Consent Judgment, or the penalty for violation of the 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. If defendants exercise their right to appeal a decision of the 

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 of Missouri (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 if not assessed within two (2) years after MDNR is aware of a violation. 

16. The penalties set forth herein shall not apply in the event of a force majeure, as defined in 

this section. For the purposes of this Consent Judgment, force majeure shall be defined as any event 

arising from causes beyond the control of defendants and of any 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 of any force majeure 

event (I) as it is occurring, and (2) fol1owing the force majeure event such that the adverse effect or 

15 

delay 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 or budgetary 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 of this 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 MDNR by telephone within five (5) business days of defendant becoming knowledgeable ofsuch 

event. Within ten (l0) business days thereafter, defendant shall provide in writing to the State an 

explanation and description of the reasons for the delay, the anticipated duration ofthe delay; all actions 

taken or to be taken to prevent or minimize its effects; a schedule for implementation of any measures to 

be taken to mitigate the event; and a statement as to whether, in the opinion of defendant, 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 of force 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 of the length of the extension, if granted, for 

performance of the obligation(s) affected by the force majeure event. An extension of the time for 

16 

perfonnance of the obligation(s) affected by the force majeure event shall not, by itself, extend the time 

for performance ofany other obligations. 

19. If the State does not agree that a force majeure event has occurred, or does not agree on 

the length of any 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 of demonstrating by a preponderance of the 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 of this Consent 

Judgment. 

VII. Dispute Resolution 

20. Any dispute that arises with respect to the meaning, application or implementation for 

any provision of this Consent Judgment may be subject to dispute resolution as provided herein, unless 

the Consent Judgment provision provides that dispute resolution is not available. Any dispute that arises 

with respect to the meaning, application or implementation of this Consent Judgment shall in the first 

instance be the subject of infonnal 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 of the notice of 

the dispute to resolve the dispute. If agreement is reached, the resolution shall be reduced to writing and 

17 
this 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 if needed 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 of Missouri. The filing of a 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 of the party's obligations 

under this Consent Judgment. 

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 of an "exceptional event" as the term is defined at 40 C.F.R. 

50.10). IfMDNR agrees that the demonstration supports the characterization of the monitored data as 

the result of an "exceptional event" as set forth in 40 C.F.R 50.14, MDNR may flag the monitored data 

to be used as informational purposes only and may submit a demonstration to the Environmental 

Protection Agency. Nothing in this 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 

18 

as 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 of any obligation of defendants 

or as a permit to defendants under any other environmental laws applicable to defendants. 

X. Modifications 

25. This Consent Judgment may be modified or amended 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 Consent Judgment by written 

agreement. 

27. In the event BRRF or Doe Run ceases operation of lead emission units subject to this 

Consent Judgment, Doe Run or BRRF shall notify MDNR and will be relieved ofthe injunctive relief or 

other required practices that were for the purpose ofreducing lead emissions from the subject unit. 

XII. Effective Date 

28. This Consent Judgment is effective upon entry by the Court. 

XIII. Notices 

29. Unless otherwise specified herein, whenever notifications, submissions, or 

communications are made pursuant to the Consent Judgment they shall be made in writing and 

addressed as follows: 

19 

To 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 

Buick Resource 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 

20 

SIGNATURES 

BUICK RESOURCE RECYCLING FACILITY, LLC 

BY; 

DATE: 

Steve Arnold, 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 

21 
SIGNATURES 

BUICK RESOURCE RECYCLING FACILITY, LLC 

BY: 

DATE: 


Steve Amold~ Plant Manager 

TIIE DOE RUN RESOURCES CORPORA nON 

BY: 

DATE: 


Aaron Miller, Chief Operating Officer 

MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 

Leanne Tippett Mosby, Director 

Division ofEnvironmental Quality 

MISSOURI AIR CONSERVATION COMMISSION 

BY: 

DATE: 

&cu:! CL .~ ~ 1kM J13= ~O{3 

2] 

, 1 

ATIORNEY GENERAL OF MISSOURI 

Chris Koster, Attorney General 

DATE: 

J 

Kara Valentine} Assistant Attorney General 

22 
State of Missouri ) 

) SS CERTIFICA TE OF TRUE COpy 

County of Iron ) 

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 

of record and on file in thi~jl\ U~:~ES;;ry hand and seal of V¥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 remove the 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 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, the Air Pollution Control Program 

considers this modification to 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 Register findings of failure to submit for several states, including 

Missouri, that had not made any submission to address the applicable elements of Section 110 for 

the 2008 Ozone NAAQS (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 

State Plan Actions on Public Notice - DNR Page 1 of 2

http://www.dnr.mo.gov/env/apcp/stateplanrevisions.htm 5/24/2013
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 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. 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 2010 SO2 NAAQS

Submit Comments

Back to top

Proposed for Adoption

None at this time. 

State Plan Actions on Public Notice - DNR Page 2 of 2

http://www.dnr.mo.gov/env/apcp/stateplanrevisions.htm 5/24/2013
1

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 Public Notices (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 services or accommodations to attend the meeting can make 

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

This service is provided to you at no charge by Missouri DNR. 
 PUBLIC HEARING 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

25
 PUBLIC 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 2008 Lead 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 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 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.