[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 76 (Friday, April 19, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 16406-16407]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-07797]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 62
[EPA-R07-OAR-2018-0837; FRL-9992-09-Region 7]
Approval of State Plans for Designated Facilities and Pollutants;
Missouri; Diammonium Phosphate Fertilizer Units
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final
action to rescind the current state plan and associated regulation and
to accept the negative declaration submitted by the State of Missouri
for Diammonium Phosphate Fertilizer units. The negative declaration
submitted by the Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MoDNR)
certifies that Diammonium Phosphate Fertilizer (DPF) units subject to
section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) do not operate within the
jurisdiction of the State of Missouri. The EPA is accepting the
negative declaration in accordance with the requirements of the CAA.
DATES: This final rule is effective on May 20, 2019.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2018-0837. All documents in the docket are
listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although 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 through https://www.regulations.gov or please contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Gonzalez, Environmental
Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner
Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at (913) 551-7041 or by email at
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' or
``our'' refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. What action is the EPA taking?
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
The Clean Air Act (CAA) requires that state regulatory agencies
implement emission guidelines and associated compliance times using a
state plan developed under sections 111(d) of the CAA. The general
provisions for the submittal and approval of state plans are codified
in 40 CFR part 60, subpart B and 40 CFR part 62, subpart A. Section
111(d) establishes general requirements and procedures on state plan
submittals for the control of designated pollutants. States have
options other than submitting a state plan in order to fulfill their
obligations under CAA section 111(d). If a state does not have any
existing units for the relevant emission guidelines, a letter can be
submitted certifying that no such units exist within the state (i.e., a
negative declaration) in lieu of a state plan, in accordance with 40
CFR 60.5010. The negative declaration exempts the state from the
requirements of subpart B that would otherwise require the submittal of
a CAA section 111(d) plan.
On August 6, 1975, the EPA finalized standards of performance for
new stationary sources from the phosphate fertilizer industry which
included diammonium phosphate fertilizer production plants under the
authority of section 111 of the CAA. As required by the CAA 111(d) and
40 CFR part 60, subpart B, each state must adopt and submit a plan for
the control of pollutants from existing facilities regulated under
section 111(b) New Source Performance Standards following publication
of a notice of availability of an applicable emission control guideline
unless no such facilities exist within the state. If there are no
facilities in the state, the state is required to submit a letter of
certifying that fact.
In response to these requirements, the State of Missouri submitted
a plan for the control of fluoride emissions from phosphate fertilizer
plants on January 3, 1985. The state plan was based on the state
regulation 10 CSR 10-3.160 ``Restriction of Emissions from Diammonium
Phosphate Fertilizer Plants''. At the time of the submittal there was a
single operating phosphate fertilizer plant in the State located in
Joplin, Missouri. On March 14, 1986, the EPA approved the state plan
and associated regulation submitted by the State of Missouri pursuant
to CAA section 111(d) and 40 CFR part 60, subpart B. Subsequent to this
state plan approval, the single phosphate fertilizer plant operating in
Joplin, Missouri ceased fertilizer production and dismantled its
fertilizer production equipment in between the years of 2003 and 2004.
On December 3, 2018, MoDNR submitted a negative declaration to the
EPA, certifying that there are no operating phosphate fertilizer plants
in Missouri, and requested that the EPA rescind its previous state plan
applicable to phosphate fertilizer production facilities. Additionally,
MoDNR notified the EPA that it would rescind its 10 CSR 10-3.160 rule
that controlled emissions of fluoride from diammonium phosphate
fertilizer plants.
On February 4, 2019, the EPA published in the Federal Register (84
FR 1039) a rule proposing to accept
[[Page 16407]]
MoDNR's certification that there are no diammonium phosphate fertilizer
production units operating in the State of Missouri subject to 40 CFR
part 60, subpart V. In response to the proposal, the EPA received no
adverse comments.
II. What action is the EPA taking?
The EPA is taking final action to amend 40 CFR part 62 by accepting
withdrawal of Missouri's 111(d) plan for control of fluoride emissions
from existing phosphate fertilizer plants and accepting MoDNR's
negative declaration certifying that there are no phosphate fertilizer
production facilities operating in Missouri subject to 40 CFR part 60,
subpart V. This action applies to the state's regulatory requirements
for existing facilities and not new sources. Simultaneously, we are
amending 40 CFR part 62, subpart AA, to remove phosphate fertilizer
plants from the list of affected source categories found at 40 CFR
62.6350(c)(1).
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011). This final 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
action merely approves the state's negative declaration as meeting
Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies
that this rulemaking 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 action does not impose an
enforceable duty upon State, local, or tribal governments, and does not
reduce or eliminate the amount of authorization of Federal
appropriations, and because it contains no regulatory requirements
applicable to small governments, this action 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).
This action is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land
or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated
that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the
rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial
direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 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
government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999). Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this action.
This action merely approves a state negative declaration submitted in
response to a Federal standard and does not alter the relationship or
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the CAA.
This rulemaking 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 approves a state
submission in response to a Federal standard.
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
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. The EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by June 18, 2019. 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. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 62
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Phosphate fertilizer plants.
Dated: April 12, 2019.
James Gulliford,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the EPA is amending 40 CFR
part 62 as set forth below:
PART 62--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF STATE PLANS FOR DESIGNATED
FACILITIES AND POLLUTANTS
0
1. The authority citation for part 62 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart AA--Missouri
0
2. Amend Sec. 62.6350 by adding paragraph (b)(7) and revising
paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 62.6350 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(7) A withdrawal of Missouri's 111(d) plan, including state rule 10
CSR 10.3.160, for control of fluoride emissions from existing phosphate
fertilizer plants was state effective on September 30, 2018 and was
submitted on December 3, 2018.
(c) Designated facilities. The plan applies to existing facilities
in the following categories of sources:
(1) Primary aluminum reduction plants.
(2) Sulfuric acid production plants.
0
3. Section 62.6351 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 62.6351 Identification of plan--negative declaration.
Letter from the Missouri Department of Natural Resources, submitted
December 3, 2018, certifying that there are no Diammonium Phosphate
Fertilizer Units subject to 40 CFR part 60, subpart V of this chapter.
Effective date: The effective date of the negative declaration and EPA
withdrawal of the prior plan approval is May 20, 2019.
[FR Doc. 2019-07797 Filed 4-18-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P