[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 114 (Friday, June 13, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 32266-32267]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-15571]



[[Page 32266]]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[AD-FRL-5839-1]
RIN 2060-AH07


National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, from 
Secondary Lead Smelting

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule; amendments to rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends the national emission standards for 
hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for new and existing secondary lead 
smelters. Changes to the NESHAP are being made to address comments 
received in petitions to reconsider sent to the EPA following 
promulgation of the final rule. These changes affect several aspects of 
the final rule including applicability of the THC limit for collocated 
blast and reverberatory furnaces, minimum baghouse standard operating 
procedure (SOP) requirements, and bag leak detection system 
specifications and requirements. Several minor changes are also being 
made to clarify the intent of the rule.
    In the Final Rules Section of this Federal Register, the EPA is 
also making these amendments as a direct final rule without prior 
proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment 
and anticipates no significant adverse comments. A detailed rationale 
for the action is set forth in the direct final rule. If no significant 
adverse comments are received by the due date (see DATES section 
below), no further action will be taken with respect to this proposal, 
and the direct final rule will become final on the date provided in 
that action. If the EPA receives significant adverse comments, the 
direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received 
will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed 
rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period on this 
notice. Any parties interested in commenting on this notice should do 
so at this time.

DATES: Comments. Comments must be received on or before July 14, 1997, 
unless a hearing is requested by June 23, 1997. If a hearing is 
requested, written comments must be received by July 28, 1997.
    Public Hearing. Anyone requesting a public hearing must contact the 
EPA no later than June 23, 1997. If a hearing is held, it will take 
place on June 30, 1997, beginning at 10:00 a.m.

ADDRESSES: Docket. Docket No. A-92-43, containing information 
considered by the EPA in development of the promulgated standards, is 
available for public inspection and copying between 8:00 a.m. and 5:30 
p.m., Monday through Friday except for Federal holidays, at the 
following address: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Air and 
Radiation Docket and Information Center (MC-6102), 401 M Street, SW, 
Washington, DC 20460; telephone (202) 260-7548. The docket is located 
at the above address in Room M-1500, Waterside Mall (ground floor). A 
reasonable fee may be charged for copying.
    Comments. Written comments should be submitted to: Docket A-92-43, 
U.S. EPA, Air & Radiation Docket & Information Center, 401 M. Street, 
S.W., Room 1500, Washington, D.C. 20460.
    Public Hearing. If a public hearing is held, it will be held at the 
EPA's Office of Administration Auditorium, Research Triangle Park, 
North Carolina. Persons interested in attending the hearing or wishing 
to present oral testimony should notify Mr. Kevin Cavender, Metals 
Group, Emission Standards Division (MD-13), U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; 
telephone (919) 541-2364.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Kevin Cavender, Metals Group, 
Emission Standards Division (MD-13), U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone (919) 
541-2364.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: If no significant, adverse comments are 
received by July 14, 1997 no further activity is contemplated in 
relation to this proposed rule and the direct final rule in the final 
rules section of this Federal Register will automatically go into 
effect on August 4, 1997. If significant adverse comments are timely 
received, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public 
comment received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule. Because 
the EPA will not institute a second comment period on this proposed 
rule, any parties interested in commenting should do so during this 
comment period.
    For further supplemental information, the detailed rationale, and 
the rule provisions, see the information provided in the direct final 
rule in the final rules section of this Federal Register.

Administrative Requirements

Docket

    The docket is an organized and complete file of all the information 
considered by the EPA in the development of this rulemaking. The docket 
is a dynamic file, since material is added throughout the rulemaking 
development. The docket system is intended to allow members of the 
public and affected industries to readily identify and locate documents 
so that they can effectively participate in the rulemaking process. 
Along with the BID's and preambles to the proposed and promulgated 
standards, the contents of the docket will serve as the official record 
in case of judicial review (section 307(d)(7)(A) of the Act).

Executive Order 12866

    The Agency must determine whether a regulatory action is 
``significant'' and therefore subject to OMB review and the 
requirements of the E.O. 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). The 
Executive Order defines ``significant regulatory action'' as one that 
is likely to result in a rule that may:
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or 
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the 
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or 
communities;
    (2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, 
user fees, or loan programs, or the rights and obligations of 
recipients thereof; or
    (4) raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal 
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in 
the Executive Order.
    It has been determined that this amendment to the final rule is not 
a ``significant regulatory action'' under the terms of the Executive 
Order and is therefore not subject to OMB review.

Unfunded Mandates Act

    Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (``Unfunded 
Mandates Act'') requires that the Agency prepare a budgetary impact 
statement before promulgating a rule that includes a Federal mandate 
that may result in expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, 
in aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any 
1 year. Section 203 requires the Agency to establish a plan for 
obtaining input from and informing, educating, and advising

[[Page 32267]]

any small governments that may be significantly or uniquely affected by 
the rule.
    Under section 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Act, the Agency must 
identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives 
before promulgating a rule for which a budgetary impact statement must 
be prepared. The Agency must select from those alternatives the least 
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative that 
achieves the objectives of the rule, unless the Agency explains why 
this alternative is not selected or the selection of this alternative 
is inconsistent with law.
    This amendment reduces the costs of complying with the final rule, 
it will not increase expenditures by State, local, and tribal 
governments or the private sector. Therefore, the Agency has not 
prepared a budgetary impact statement or specifically addressed the 
selection of the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome 
alternative. Because small governments will not be significantly or 
uniquely affected by this rule, the Agency is not required to develop a 
plan with regard to small governments.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C 3501 et seq., the EPA 
must consider the paperwork burden imposed by any information 
collection request in a proposed or final rule. This amendment to the 
rule will not impose any new information collection requirements.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act generally requires an agency to 
conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice 
and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies that 
the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, 
small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental jurisdictions. 
This proposed rule would not have a significant impact on a substantial 
number of small entities because this proposed rule will not result in 
increased economic impacts to small entities, and will result in 
reduced impacts in all cases. Therefore, I certify that this action 
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 
small entities.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hazardous 
substances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Secondary lead 
smelters.

    Dated: June 4, 1997.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 97-15571 Filed 6-12-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P