[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 163 (Monday, August 24, 1998)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 45036-45037]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-22649]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[AD-FRL-6145-7]
RIN 2060-AE04


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 following promulgation of the final rule. Four changes are 
being made to the final rule. Two are minor typographical corrections, 
while two are technical corrections. 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significant adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn 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 September 23, 
1998, unless a hearing is requested by September 5, 1998. If a hearing 
is requested, written comments must be received by October 8, 1998.
    Public Hearing. Anyone requesting a public hearing must contact the 
EPA no later than September 5, 1998. If a hearing is held, it will take 
place on September 8, 1998, 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, 
SW, Room 1500, Washington, DC 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 
timely received, 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 the date 
specified in that rule. 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 background information documents 
(BIDs) 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 Sec. 100 million or 
more or

[[Page 45037]]

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 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.
    Because this proposed rule is estimated to result in the 
expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments or the private 
sector of significantly less than $100 million in any 1 year, 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 (or RFA, Pub. L. 96-354, September 
19, 1980) requires Federal agencies to give special consideration to 
the impact of regulation on small businesses. The RFA specifies that a 
regulatory flexibility analysis must be prepared if a screening 
analysis indicates a regulation will have a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities. Therefore, I certify that 
this action will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.

National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (NTTAA) directs all federal agencies to use voluntary 
consensus standards instead of government-unique standards in their 
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with 
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards 
are technical standards (e.g., material specifications, test methods, 
sampling and analytical procedures, business practices, etc.) that are 
developed or adopted by one or more voluntary consensus standards 
bodies. Examples of organizations generally regarded as voluntary 
consensus standards bodies include the American Society for Testing and 
Materials (ASTM), the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), and 
the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE). The NTTAA requires federal 
agencies like EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, with explanations 
when an agency decides not to use available and applicable voluntary 
consensus standards. This action does not involve the proposal of any 
new technical standards, or incorporate by reference existing technical 
standards.

Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risk 
Under Executive Order 13045

    The Executive Order 13045 applies to any rule that (1) OMB 
determine is ``economically significant'' as defined under Executive 
Order 12866, and (2) EPA determine the environmental health or safety 
risk addressed by the rule has a disproportionate effect on children. 
If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate 
the environmental health or safety aspects of the planned rule on 
children; and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other 
potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered 
by the Agency.
    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045, entitled 
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks 
(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it does not involve decisions on 
environmental health risks or safety risks that may disproportionately 
affect children.

Enhancing the Intergovernmental Partnership Under Executive Order 12875

    Under the executive order EPA must consult with representatives of 
affected State, local, and Tribal governments. The EPA consulted with 
State and local governments at the time of promulgation of subpart X 
(60 FR 32587), and no tribal governments are believed to be affected by 
this action. Today's changes are minor and will not impose costs on 
governments entities or the private sector. Consequently, the EPA has 
not consulted with State, local, or Tribal governments on this 
amendment.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

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

    Dated: August 11, 1998.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 98-22649 Filed 8-21-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-M