![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of Missouri
Related Material
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: December 5, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 234)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 63204-63208]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr05de01-24]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[MO 0134-1134; FRL-7112-9]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of
Missouri
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA proposes to approve the State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the state of Missouri for the Doe Run primary
lead smelters in Herculaneum and Glover, Missouri (Doe Run-Herculaneum
and Doe Run-Glover). The SIP submitted by the state satisfies the
applicable requirements under the Clean Air Act (CAA) and demonstrates
attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for
lead for the Doe Run-Herculaneum area. Approval of this revision will
ensure that the Federally approved requirements are current and
consistent with state regulations and requirements. The revision for
Doe Run-Glover merely reflects a change in ownership of the smelter. If
EPA receives adverse comments, the comments will be addressed in the
subsequent final rule.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 4, 2002.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be mailed to James F. Hirtz,
Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch,
901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101.
Copies of documents relative to this action are available for
public inspection during normal business hours at the above-listed
Region 7 location. Interested persons wanting to examine these
documents should make an appointment with the office at least 24 hours
in advance.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Hirtz at (913) 551-7472, or E-
Mail him at hirtz.james@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever, ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This section provides
additional information by addressing the following questions:
Background and Submittal Information
What is a SIP?
What is the background for Doe Run-Herculaneum?
What is the Federal Approval process for a SIP?
What does Federal approval of a state regulation mean to me?
What is being addressed in this document?
EPA's Proposed Actions
Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met under
section 172 of the CAA?
What actions are we proposing today?
Background and Submittal Information
What Is a SIP?
Section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires states to develop
air pollution regulations and control strategies to ensure that state
air quality meets the national ambient air quality standards
established by EPA. These ambient standards are established under
section 109 of the CAA, and they currently address six criteria
pollutants. These pollutants are: Carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide,
ozone, lead, particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide.
Each state must submit these regulations and control strategies to
us for approval and incorporation into the Federally enforceable SIP.
Each Federally approved SIP protects air quality primarily by
addressing air pollution at its point of origin. These SIPs can be
extensive, containing state regulations or other enforceable documents
and supporting information such as emission inventories, monitoring
networks, and modeling demonstrations.
What Is the Background for Doe Run-Herculaneum?
On June 3, 1986, EPA issued a call for a revision to the Missouri
SIP in response to violations of the NAAQS for lead in the vicinity of
the Doe Run primary lead smelter in Herculaneum, Missouri. Doe Run-
Herculaneum is the largest primary lead smelter in the United States
with a production capacity of 250,000 tons of refined lead per year.
The NAAQS for lead is 1.5 micrograms (µg) of lead per cubic
meter (m\3\) of air averaged over a calendar quarter. The state
submitted a SIP revision on September 6, 1990, and EPA granted limited
approval for Missouri's 1990 SIP revision on March 6, 1992 (57 FR
8076), pending submission of a supplemental SIP revision meeting the
applicable requirements (Part D of Title I of the CAA as amended in
1990).
A revised SIP meeting the part D requirements was subsequently
submitted in 1994. The plan established June 30, 1995, as the date by
which the Herculaneum area was to have attained compliance with the
lead standard. However, the plan did not result in attainment of the
standard, and observed lead concentrations in the Herculaneum area
continued to show violations of the standard. Therefore, on August 15,
1997, after taking and responding to public comments, EPA published a
document in the Federal Register finding that the Herculaneum
nonattainment area had failed to attain the lead standard by the June
30, 1995, deadline (62 FR 43647).
On January 10, 2001, Missouri submitted a revised SIP to EPA for
the Doe Run-Herculaneum area. The SIP revision was found complete on
January 12, 2001. The SIP establishes August 14, 2002, as the
attainment date for the area and satisfies the part D requirements of
the CAA. The revised plan also contains a control strategy to address
the violations of the NAAQS which occurred after implementation of the
control measures in the 1995 SIP revision. EPA believes that the
dispersion and receptor modeling demonstrate that the selected control
measures will result in attainment of the NAAQS for lead.
What Is the Federal Approval Process for a SIP?
In order for state regulations to be incorporated into the
Federally enforceable SIP, states must formally adopt the regulations
and control strategies consistent with state and Federal requirements.
This process generally includes a public notice, public hearing, public
comment period, and a formal adoption by a state-authorized rulemaking
body.
Once a state rule, regulation, or control strategy is adopted, the
state submits it to us for inclusion into the SIP. We must provide
public notice and seek additional public comment regarding the proposed
Federal action on the state submission. If adverse comments are
received, they must be addressed prior to any final Federal action by
us.
All state regulations and supporting information approved by EPA
under section 110 of the CAA are incorporated into the Federally
approved SIP. Records of such SIP actions are maintained in the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) at Title 40, part 52, entitled ``Approval and
Promulgation of Implementation Plans.'' The actual state regulations
which are approved are not reproduced in their entirety in the CFR
outright but are ``incorporated by reference,'' which means that we
have approved a given state regulation with a specific effective date.
What Does Federal Approval of a State Regulation Mean to Me?
Enforcement of the state regulation before and after it is
incorporated into the Federally approved SIP is primarily a state
responsibility. However, after the regulation is Federally approved, we
are authorized to take enforcement action against violators. Citizens
are also offered legal recourse to address violations as described in
section 304 of the CAA.
[[Page 63206]]
What Is Being Addressed in This Document?
Doe Run-Herculaneum
1. Control Strategy
As required by 40 CFR part 51, subpart N, each SIP must contain
legally enforceable compliance schedules and provide for compliance as
soon as practicable. The Doe Run-Herculaneum SIP calls for full
implementation of the control strategy by July 31, 2002. Implementation
of the control strategy will result in approximately a 99 percent
reduction in fugitive lead emissions from sources that are modeled as
contributing significantly to nonattainment in the Herculaneum area.
The SIP contains two regulatory documents: (1) A Missouri
Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) lead rule, (10 CSR 10-6.120)
adopted by Missouri Air Conservation Commission (MACC) on December 7,
2000, containing emission limits and a Work Practice Manual which
specifies operating procedures for specific plant processes at the Doe
Run-Herculaneum facility; and (2) an executed Consent Judgment between
the state of Missouri, Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MDNR),
and MACC with Doe Run-Herculaneum. This judgment sets forth the
administrative requirements for the implementation of the control
measures at the Doe Run-Herculaneum facility. The plan includes
contingency measures to be implemented within 6 months following a
violation of the lead standard, after the attainment date of August 14,
2002. The reader is referred to the EPA prepared technical support
document for a more complete discussion of the specific control
measures to be implemented in the SIP.
2. Attainment Demonstration
Section 192(a) of the CAA requires that SIPs must provide for
attainment of the lead NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable but no
later than five years from the date of an area's nonattainment
designation. This five-year period also applies as the new attainment
date following a finding of failure to attain the lead NAAQS. (See
sections 179(d)(3), 172(a)(d), and 192(a).) MDNR submitted a revised
SIP that met the part D requirements in 1994, and which established
June 30, 1995, as the new attainment date for the Herculaneum area.
Violations of the NAAQS for lead were still observed and EPA published
a notice in the Federal Register on August 15, 1997, finding that the
Herculaneum area failed to attain the lead standard. The determination
became effective on September 14, 1997. The SIP submitted established
an attainment date of August 14, 2002, which is within the statutory
five-year period. EPA has determined that the state's attainment date
is as expeditious as practicable.
In support of the revision to the Doe Run-Herculaneum lead SIP, a
dispersion and receptor modeling methodology was developed to predict
ambient lead concentrations. The dispersion model that was chosen was
the steady state EPA Gaussian plume Industrial Source Complex Short-
Term model (ISCST3, version 99155). The receptor modeling that was
chosen was Chemical Mass Balance (CMB) receptor model version 7. The
CMB model was used to qualititavely evaluate the dispersion model to
increase confidence in the modeling results and the control strategy.
The 2000 SIP revision emission inventory relies heavily on source
testing and the utilization of the CMB receptor model to provide
probable source contribution estimates (SCE) for the major source
categories. These categories were defined by common chemistry of the
source's particulate emissions. The model is a ``best fit'' statistical
model that estimates the most probable source contribution by comparing
the finger prints, or characteristics, of the emission sources with the
measured ambient values.
Actual value dispersion modeling was conducted in order to (1)
determine the model's ability to replicate actual lead concentrations
monitored during the study, and thereby serve as a basis for developing
future control strategies, and (2) provide a set of SCEs for
reconciliation with those obtained from the CMB receptor model. The
actual value modeling was conducted with the actual emission rates,
stack parameters, and local meteorological data collected during the
study period. The background value of 0.13 µg/m\3\ was added to
the predicted air dispersion concentrations. The maximum predicted
concentration by the ISCST3 model, including background, is 1.456
µg/m\3\, which is below the NAAQS for lead at 1.5 µg/
m\3\.
3. Emission Inventory and Air Quality Data
Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires that nonattainment plan
provisions include a comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of
actual emissions from all sources of relevant pollutants in the
nonattainment area.
Development of a comprehensive and accurate emissions inventory was
necessary to support modeling and control strategy efforts. An hourly
emissions inventory was developed in order to provide input to the
ISCST3 dispersion model. These rates were estimated using equations
developed from source testing at the facility or from published
emission factors.
Speciated emissions data was necessary to provide input to the CMB
receptor model. Where possible, these data were obtained during source
sampling efforts to identify fugitive emission sources located at the
facility. In other cases, it was obtained from grab samples collected
at various locations within the facility or from representative
sources.
The state submittal provides a historical summary of the air
quality from 1982 through the second calendar quarter of 2000. The
average quarterly ambient lead concentrations at several monitors
continue to remain above the NAAQS. The reader is referred to the EPA
prepared technical support document for a summary of ambient monitoring
data collected for the Doe-Run Herculaneum site.
4. Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Including Reasonable
Available Control Technology (RACT)
The submittal must contain provisions to assure that RACM
(including RACT) are implemented (see section 172(c)(1) of the CAA).
(See 57 FR 13498 and 57 FR 13560 dated April 1, 1992, for EPA's
interpretation of the RACM and RACT requirements.) Section 172(c)(1) of
the CAA requires the implementation of all RACM which include emissions
reduction through the adoption of RACT as expeditiously as practicable
for all areas in nonattainment to attain the national primary ambient
air quality standard. EPA interprets this requirement to impose a duty
on all nonattainment areas to consider all available control measures
and to adopt and implement such measures as are reasonably available to
demonstrate attainment for the area. EPA believes that measures which
do not advance the date for attainment need not be implemented.
In the previous SIP (1993), Doe Run-Herculaneum prepared a RACT/
RACM evaluation, and the plant has not changed significantly nor is it
expected to significantly increase its emissions through production
increases. All RACT/RACM measures were implemented as part of the
previous SIP. In addition, the requirements under 40 CFR part 63,
subpart TTT, the Federal Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT)
Standards for Primary Lead Smelters, now apply for Doe Run-Herculaneum.
This MACT required the preparation and use of a
[[Page 63207]]
standard operating procedures manual for all baghouses used to control
process, process fugitive, or fugitive dust emission sources for lead.
We note that Missouri is currently in the process of addressing a
number of issues relating to the delivery of lead concentrate to the
Doe Run-Herculaneum facility for processing, and is considering
measures to decrease or eliminate lead fugitive emissions from truck
hauling. Missouri has analyzed the air quality impact of the delivery
system (primarily involving the transport and unloading of concentrate
from trucks) and has determined that the air quality impacts of
fugitive emissions from this process are minimal. Missouri also reran
the attainment demonstration modeling to determine the impact, if any,
due to the contribution of fugitive emissions from the truck hauling
operation. Missouri concluded that the air quality impact was
insignificant, and did not impact the attainment demonstration.
Missouri continues to address other environmental concerns relating to
truck hauling, primarily relating to soil contamination. However, based
on the state's conclusions that the air quality impacts are negligible,
and therefore further air pollution controls would not expedite
attainment, EPA does not believe that further consideration of the
emissions associated with truck hauling is necessary for purposes of
the CAA requirements regarding RACT/RACM. In light of the above MACT
requirements as well as enforceable limitations for fugitive emissions
and the installation of process controls imposed by the state rule and
Consent Judgement referenced previously, it would be unnecessary for
EPA to have Doe Run-Herculaneum reevaluated RACT/RACM requirements. An
assessment of these control measures with dispersion and receptor
modeling indicate no additional measures will expedite attainment.
5. Reasonable Further Progress (RFP)
Section 172(c)(2) of the CAA requires that the SIP must provide for
RFP as defined in section 171(1) of the CAA. Section 171(1) defines RFP
as annual incremental reductions in emissions of the relevant air
pollutants as are required by Part D, or may reasonably be required by
EPA to ensure attainment of the applicable NAAQS by the applicable
date. Part D does not further require specific RFP measures for lead.
Doe Run-Herculaneum has demonstrated RFP as required by section
172(c)(2) of the CAA. For example, Doe Run-Herculaneum is under a
compliance schedule, required by regulation and by the Consent
Judgement, for implementing (1) installation of emission control
equipment; (2) enclosure and ventilation projects to reduce lead
emissions; (3) process throughput restrictions and hours of operation
limitation; (4) work practice standards; and (5) contingency measures.
EPA does not believe that additional incremental reductions are needed
to meet the RFP requirement, since all controls to reduce lead
emissions are to be implemented within the year, and must be fully
implemented by July 31, 2002. The Work Practice Manual establishes
process limits and control requirements for the plant and provides a
guide to plant operators on how to minimize emissions from certain
plant operations. This manual was incorporated into the lead rule (10
CSR 10-6.120), and adopted by the MACC on December 7, 2000, with the
effective date of the rule being March 30, 2001.
6. New Source Review (NSR)
Part D of Title I of the CAA requires that the submittal include a
permit program for the construction and operation of new and modified
major stationary sources. Missouri rule 10 CSSR 10-6.020 identifies the
current specific descriptions of the lead nonattainment areas in
Missouri, including the area in which the Doe Run facility is located.
Rule 10 CSR 10-6.020 is utilized in conjunction with Missouri rule 10
CSR 10-6.060 which requires a permit for construction of, or major
modification to, an installation with potential to annually emit one
hundred (100) tons or more of a nonattainment pollutant, or a permit
for a modification at a major source with potential to annually emit
one thousand two hundred (1,200) pounds of lead. These rules have
previously been approve by EPA as part of the SIP.
7. Contingency Measures
Pursuant to section 172(c)(9) of the CAA, contingency measures have
been prepared that can be implemented if EPA determines that the
nonattainment area has failed to make reasonable further progress or
fails to attain the NAAQS by the statutory deadline.
The state submission specifies an attainment date for the
Herculaneum area of August 14, 2002, as set in the state SIP. If the
area has a violation of the NAAQS during this quarter (July 1 to
September 30, 2002), or any quarter thereafter, the contingency
controls will be implemented after Doe Run-Herculaneum is notified by
EPA and/or MDNR. Contingency measures which include enclosures and
installing additional process controls will be implemented within 6
months following the calendar quarter in which the violation occurred.
In the event there is a second violation of the quarterly lead
standard of 1.5 µ/m3, after implementation of the
initial contingency measures, Doe Run-Herculaneum has also agreed to
curtail production utilizing one of three emission and/or production
curtailing methods: Method (1), reduce main non-stack emissions by 20
percent; Method (2), limit production to 50,000 short tons/quarter of
refined lead produced; and, Method (3), adopt Method 1 and limit
production of refined lead production based upon the following formula:
P = 50,000 + (500 x (1-A/E) x 100)
P = refined lead production in short tons/quarter
A = The aggregate actual quarterly emissions from all fugitive and
stack lead emission sources at the facility in tons; except from the
main stack (30001)
E = the aggregate estimated quarterly emissions from all fugitive and
stack lead emission sources at the facility in tons; except from the
main stack (30001); where A/E can't be less than .8 or more than 1.0.
Doe Run-Herculaneum will also maintain current bids on the
materials necessary to implement each contingency measure. Doe Run-
Herculaneum also may substitute any such controls if Doe Run-
Herculaneum can demonstrate to MDNR and EPA that the alternative
control measures would equal or exceed controls in the current SIP.
Changes to these contingency measures would require a public hearing at
the state level, and EPA approval as a formal SIP revision. These
measures will help ensure compliance with the lead NAAQS and meet the
requirements of section 172(c)(9) of the CAA.
8. Enforceability
All measures and other elements in the SIP must be enforceable by
the state and EPA (see sections 172(c)(6), and 110(a)(2)(A) of the CAA,
and 57 FR 13556). The state submittal includes a Consent Judgement and
the lead rule (10 CSR 10-6.120). The lead rule also incorporates a Work
Practice Manual, which specifies operating procedures for specific
plant processes.
The state submittal includes a Consent Judgment entered into by the
state and the Company which contains all of the control and contingency
measures with enforceable dates for implementation. Control measures
employed by Doe Run-Herculaneum
[[Page 63208]]
involve engineering modifications to the facility which include:
Enclosure projects, improved ventilation systems being routed to
stacks, improved material handling conveyors, and installation of air
pollution control equipment (baghouses). The Company expects to spend
approximately $8,500,000 on these projects to control and reduce
fugitive air emissions of lead that are affecting the ambient air
standard for lead in the Herculaneum area. These control measures will
be implemented by July 31, 2002.
Doe Run-Glover
The Missouri SIP submission contains a state rule and a Consent
Decree which pertain to the Doe Run Company's Glover lead smelter in
Iron County, Missouri. Until 1998, this facility was owned by the
ASARCO Company. Due to the change in ownership, the state found it
necessary to revise a state rule and the Consent Decree which referred
to the facility by ownership name.
The state rule, 10 CSR 10-6.120, ``Restriction of Emissions of Lead
From Specific Lead Smelter-Refinery Installations,'' was revised in
paragraph (2)(A) to change the owner name from ASARCO to Doe Run
Company. No other revisions pertaining to this facility were made in
this rule revision. This revision was adopted by the Missouri Air
Conservation Commission on December 7, 2000, and became effective in
the state on March 30, 2001.
There was also a SIP-approved Consent Decree for this facility with
ASARCO. This Consent Decree was also revised to reflect the change in
ownership and to update certain provisions. These changes included: (1)
Recognizing that the required capital improvements made by ASARCO had
indeed already been made; (2) adding language that will terminate the
Consent Decree upon redesignation of the Glover area attainment with
the understanding that a new enforceable agreement will be in place at
that time to ensure continued operation of the controls. This is
acceptable to EPA since a maintenance plan would be required prior to
any redesignation of the area to attainment, and the maintenance plan
would contain all requirements, including enforceable requirements of
any document which replaces the Consent Decree, which are necessary to
ensure continued attainment of the area for the lead NAAQS; and (3)
provision was added which allows the Consent Decree to be modified if
both parties agree, or if there is a change in ownership. These
provisions were added to avoid having to go back to court to amend the
Consent Decree.
EPA's Proposed Actions
Have the Requirements for Approval of a SIP Revision Been Met Under
Section 172 of the CAA?
The state submittal has met the public notice requirements for SIP
submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The submittal also
satisfied the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. In
addition, as explained above and in more detail in the technical
support document which is part of this document, the revision meets the
substantive SIP requirements of the CAA, including section 110 and
implementing regulations and part D and is consistent with the guidance
set forth in the ``State Implementation Plans for Lead Nonattainment
Areas; Addendum to the General Preamble for the Implementation of the
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990'' (58 FR 67748).
What Actions Are We Proposing Today?
EPA is proposing to find that the Doe Run-Herculaneum nonattainment
area SIP submitted by Missouri on January 10, 2001, meets the
requirements of section 110, and part D of the CAA and 40 CFR part 51.
EPA is also proposing to approve the SIP submission which relates to
the Doe Run-Glover facility which is described above.
Administrative Requirements
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
proposed action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and
therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and
Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive
Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This
proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that
this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule proposes to approve pre-
existing requirements under state law and does not impose any
additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does
not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect
small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995 (Public Law 104-4).
This proposed rule also does not have tribal implications because
it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian
tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive
Order 13175 (59 FR 22951, November 9, 2000). This action also does not
have Federalism implications because it does not have substantial
direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of governments, as specified
in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action
merely proposes to approve a state rule implementing a Federal
standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of
power and responsibilities established in the CAA. This proposed rule
also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection of Children
from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' ( 62 FR 19885, April
23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State
to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to
disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This proposed rule does not impose
an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: November 23, 2001.
Nat Scurry,
Acting Regional Administration, Region 7.
[FR Doc. 01-30102 Filed 12-4-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P