[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 85 (Wednesday, May 2, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 25901-25903]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-10339]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2012-0271; FRL-9664-2]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Maryland; Removal of the 1980 Consent Order for the Maryland Slag 
Company

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve a revision to the 
Maryland State Implementation Plan (SIP). The revision removes a 1980 
Consent Order issued to the Maryland Slag Company (now known as 
MultServ). The 1980 Consent Order is no longer required to satisfy any 
applicable Federal regulations and the Clean Air Act (CAA). EPA is 
approving this revision in accordance with the requirements of the CAA.

DATES: This rule is effective on July 2, 2012 without further notice, 
unless EPA receives adverse written comment by June 1, 2012. If EPA 
receives such comments, it will publish a timely withdrawal of the 
direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public that 
the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2012-0271 by one of the following methods:
    A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    B. Email: [email protected].
    C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2012-0271, Marcia L. Spink, Associate Director 
for Policy and Science, Air Protection Division, Mailcode 3AP00, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
    D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address. 
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of 
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of 
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2012-0271. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online 
at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, 
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential 
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is 
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to 
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The 
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which 
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you 
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment 
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email 
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the 
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the 
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you 
include your name and other contact information in the body of your 
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your 
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for 
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic 
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of 
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the 
www.regulations.gov index. Although

[[Page 25902]]

listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., 
CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 
Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on 
the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. 
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically 
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business hours at 
the Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies 
of the State submittal are available at the Maryland Department of the 
Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore, Maryland 
21230.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marcia L. Spink, (215) 814-2104, or by 
email at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background

    The Maryland Slag Company (now MultiServ) operates a blast furnace 
slag processing plant at the Bethlehem Steel Corporation's (now ISG 
Sparrows Point) steel mill located in Sparrows Point, Baltimore County. 
Hot metal slag from Bethlehem Steel's blast furnace that is not 
processed by the Atlantic Cement Company's (now LaFarge North America) 
granulated slag cement plant is allowed to cool before being sent to 
the Maryland Slag processing facility. At the slag processing facility, 
slag is reduced in size with a crusher and segregated into different 
group sizes by a screening operation. The processed slag material is 
used as an aggregate material in road construction and parking lots. 
The slag processing facility is subject to the requirements under SIP-
approved regulation COMAR 26.11.10.04B(1) which prohibits the discharge 
of fugitive particulate matter emissions from iron and steel production 
installations unless reasonably available control measures are employed 
to minimize emissions.
    In 1980, the Atlantic Cement Company proposed to construct a slag 
cement processing facility within the confines of the Bethlehem Steel 
Corporation's Sparrows Point steel mill. At the time of the proposed 
project, the Sparrows point area was nonattainment for total suspended 
particulates (TSP). In order to construct the plant, the Atlantic 
Cement Company was required to secure particulate matter emission 
offsets. These offsets were obtained from the Maryland Slag Company and 
were formalized and made enforceable in the October 31, 1980 Consent 
Order. The October 31, 1980 Consent Order was approved as a SIP 
revision by EPA on September 8, 1981 (41 FR 44757).

II. Summary of SIP Revision

    On February 13, 2007, the Maryland Department of the Environment 
submitted a formal revision to its SIP. The SIP revision consists of a 
request to remove the Consent Order, issued on October 31, 1980, to the 
Maryland Slag Company (now MultiServ). The Consent Order provided 
particulate matter offsets from the Maryland Slag Company to the 
Atlantic Cement Company. The 1980 Consent Order is no longer necessary 
because the affected facilities are no longer located in a 
nonattainment area for TSP, and the Atlantic Cement Company (now 
Lafarge North America) was re-permitted in 2001 demonstrating 
compliance with the more stringent national ambient air quality 
standard for particulate matter with a diameter of 10 microns or less 
(PM10). In addition, the Maryland Slag Company (now 
MultiServ) has reduced its annual PM emissions by reducing the material 
it processes from one million tons annually in 1980 to less than 
100,000 tons annually today.

III. Final Action

    EPA is approving MDE's February 13, 2007 SIP revision to remove the 
October 31, 1980 Consent Order issued to the Maryland Slag Company (now 
MultiServ) because it is no longer required to satisfy any applicable 
Federal regulations and the Clean Air Act (CAA). EPA is publishing this 
rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a 
noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no adverse comment. However, 
in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's Federal Register, EPA is 
publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to 
approve the SIP revision if adverse comments are filed. This rule will 
be effective on July 2, 2012 without further notice unless EPA receives 
adverse comment by June 1, 2012. If EPA receives adverse comment, EPA 
will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the 
public that the rule will not take effect. EPA will address all public 
comments in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. EPA 
will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties 
interested in commenting must do so at this time.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. General Requirements

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP 
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable 
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in 
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, 
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this 
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and 
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state 
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as 
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), 
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in 
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct

[[Page 25903]]

costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. Section 804, however, exempts from section 801 the 
following types of rules: Rules of particular applicability; rules 
relating to agency management or personnel; and rules of agency 
organization, procedure, or practice that do not substantially affect 
the rights or obligations of non-agency parties. 5 U.S.C. 804(3). 
Because this is a rule of particular applicability, EPA is not required 
to submit a rule report regarding this action under section 801.

C. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the appropriate circuit by July 2, 2012. Filing a petition for 
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect 
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor 
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may 
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or 
action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are 
encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of 
proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules 
section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an immediate 
petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can 
withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed 
rulemaking. This action to remove the 1980 Consent Order for the 
Maryland Slag Company may not be challenged later in proceedings to 
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Particulate matter.

    Dated: April 12, 2012.
W.C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

     Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart V--Maryland

0
2. In Sec.  52.1070, the table in paragraph (d) is amended by removing 
the entry for Maryland Slag Co.

[FR Doc. 2012-10339 Filed 5-1-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P