[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 18 (Thursday, January 28, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 4886-4889]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-01660]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R07-OAR-2015-0644; FRL-9941-68-Region 7]
Approval of Missouri's Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Americold Logistics, LLC 24-Hour Particulate Matter (PM10) National
Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) Consent Judgment
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct
final action to approve a revision to the State Implementation Plan
(SIP) submitted by the State of Missouri on June 2, 2014. This SIP
revision incorporates a consent judgment to address violations of the
24-hour particulate matter (PM10) NAAQS near the Americold
Logistics, LLC, Carthage Crushed Limestone (CCL) facility near
Carthage, Missouri. CCL is a limestone quarry operation. The consent
judgment between the State of Missouri and CCL includes measures that
will control PM10 emissions from the facility. This approval
will make the consent judgment Federally-enforceable.
DATES: This direct final rule will be effective March 28, 2016, without
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by February 29,
2016. If EPA receives adverse comment, we will publish a timely
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register informing
the public that the rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2015-0644, to www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions
for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or
removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment received to
its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general
guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Heather Hamilton, Environmental
Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner
Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at 913-551-7039 or by email at
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' or
``our'' refer to EPA. This section provides additional information by
addressing the following:
I. Background
II. What is being addressed in this document?
III. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?
IV. What action is EPA taking?
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
[[Page 4887]]
I. Background
EPA's current health-based PM10 NAAQS was set in 1987 at
a level of 150 [micro]g/m\3\ measured over 24 hours. 40 CFR 50.6(a). An
exceedance of the NAAQS is a daily (24-hour average) PM10
concentration that is above the level of the standard. A violation of
the NAAQS occurs when an exceedance occurs more than once per year on
average over three years. 40 CFR part 50, appendix K.
Exceedances and violations of the PM10 NAAQS at the
Carthage monitor date back to 2001. In October 2003, the Missouri
Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) Air Pollution Control Program
and Americold Logistics, LLC, Carthage Crushed Limestone (CCL) entered
into a settlement agreement that contained measures for reducing CCL's
fugitive particulate matter emissions for exceedances of the
PM10 NAAQS. The measures put in place from the settlement
agreement reduced the number of PM10 exceedances at the
Carthage monitor for several years.
There were no exceedances in 2009 and 2010; however, based on
validated air quality data from 2011 to 2013, the Carthage monitor
again experienced a number of exceedances as evidenced in the following
table:
Carthage PM10 Air Quality System Data Validity and Certification Through
June 30, 2013
------------------------------------------------------------------------
24-Hour PM10
exceedance
Date ([micro]g/
m\3\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
June 23, 2011........................................... 174
September 9, 2011....................................... 159
September 26, 2011...................................... 258
November 30, 2011....................................... 192
January 16, 2012........................................ 222
------------------------------------------------------------------------
After an internal analysis to identify potential sources of
emissions for the exceedances, the MDNR Air Pollution Control Program
contacted CCL regarding their operations at the facility. On June 8,
2012, CCL proposed additional control measures that were necessary due
to malfunctioning equipment and processing issues at the facility.
II. What is being addressed in this document?
EPA is taking direct final action to approve a revision to the SIP
submitted by the State of Missouri on June 2, 2014. Missouri requested
that EPA approve Americold Logistics, LLC, Carthage Crushed Limestone
(CCL) consent judgment for inclusion into the Missouri SIP. The consent
judgment between the state of Missouri and CCL was entered on May 3,
2014, and effective May 13, 2014. The consent judgment requires CCL to
apply specific measures and work practices to reduce PM10
emissions generated at the facility. These measures and practices were
required to be operational by March 31, 2014. CCL has implemented and
made operational these measures in accordance with the consent judgment
timelines.
As a result, CCL worked cooperatively with MDNR who developed an
enforceable consent judgment for implementing controls to further
reduce PM10 emissions at the facility. CCL proactively put
several controls in place during 2012 and 2013 prior to finalization of
the consent judgment.
Control measures to reduce fugitive PM10 emissions in
the 2014 consent judgment include the following: (1) Installation of
wet suppression for crushers; (2) eliminate screen and install a hopper
to reduce free fall of rock; (3) install a CFM compressor for the
baghouse controlling the Cedar Rapids dryer; (4) design and install a
new drop point/transition to improve seal at conveyor transfer points;
(5) install a new bin top in the west lime hopper; (6) fabricate a new
transition on elevator head where it drops on to tail of the line to
the conveyor belt, and install a new head house and boot that seals to
the elevator; (7) rebuild a water truck to contain eight thousand
gallons of water for haul roads; (8) enclose the bed of the haul truck
that hauls waste fines to stock pile area; (9) develop an operation and
maintenance plan for MDNR approval, and, (10) submit a full emissions
inventory questionnaire for the calendar year 2012. The aforementioned
control measures were completed according to schedule.
The consent judgment also includes contingency measures in the
event of an exceedance of the PM10 NAAQS. Contingency
measures include investigating and addressing any exceedance to the
extent possible in a timely manner including a detailed report to the
MDNR Air Pollution Control Program within ten days. Additional
contingency measures outlined in the consent judgment are to be
reported no later than ninety days after the calendar quarter in which
the monitoring data was measured.
In addition to the measures outlined in the consent judgment, CCL
has voluntarily agreed to participate in a near-real-time
PM10 concentration alarm notification system for monitored
hourly PM10 levels that exceed the 150 [micro]g/m\3\. This
activity is strictly voluntary and the MDNR Air Pollution Control
Program is not submitting requirements for CCL to participate in the
alarm notification for inclusion in this SIP action.
Since entering into the consent judgment with the MDNR, there was
one exceedance of the PM10 standard on December 8, 2014.
There have been no other exceedances recorded since that date. CCL, in
accordance with the consent judgment contingency measures, notified the
MDNR Air Pollution Control Program about the exceedance. The MDNR Air
Pollution Control Program continues to monitor air quality and to work
with the facility as necessary to implement the contingency measures of
the consent judgment through a corrective action plan that addresses
the 2014 exceedance.
The control and contingency measures identified in the consent
judgment, and included in MDNR's SIP revision request, is a significant
strengthening of the current requirements applicable to this source to
control fugitive PM emissions. EPA believes that these requirements
will reduce or potentially eliminate future exceedances of the
PM10 NAAQS and lead to improvements in the air quality in
the area surrounding CCL's facility. The work practice revisions and
mechanical upgrades along with the contingency measures put into action
by the consent judgment and this SIP revision provide for permanent
modifications that deal with past and future exceedances in a manner
that limits their potential and represent an effective short term and
long term control strategy for fugitive emissions of coarse particulate
matter.
III. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?
The June 2, 2014, submission has met the public notice requirements
for SIP submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The submission
also satisfied the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, appendix V.
In addition, the revision meets the substantive SIP requirements of the
CAA, including section 110 and implementing regulations.
IV. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is taking direct final action to approve this SIP revision. We
are publishing this rule without a prior proposed rule because we view
this as a noncontroversial action and anticipate no adverse comment.
However, in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of this Federal Register, we
are publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposed rule
to approve this SIP revision, if adverse comments are
[[Page 4888]]
received on this direct final rule. We will not institute a second
comment period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting
must do so at this time. For further information about commenting on
this rule, see the ADDRESSES section of this document. If EPA receives
adverse comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal
Register informing the public that this direct final rule will not take
effect. We will address all public comments in any subsequent final
rule based on the proposed rule.
V. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the Missouri
Source Specific Permits and Orders described in the direct final
amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth below. EPA has made, and will
continue to make, these documents generally available electronically
through www.regulations.gov and at the appropriate EPA office (see the
ADDRESSES section of this preamble for more information).
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act 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 Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
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).
The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where 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).
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. 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 CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by March 28, 2016. 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 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Sulfur oxides.
Dated: January 11, 2016.
Mark Hague,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA amends 40 CFR part 52
as set forth below:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart AA--Missouri
0
2. Section 52.1320(d) is amended by adding entry (30) at the end of the
table to read as follows:
Sec. 52.1320 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
[[Page 4889]]
EPA-Approved Missouri Source-Specific Permits and Orders
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State
Name of source Order/Permit No. effective date EPA Approval date Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
(30) Americold Logistics, LLC 24- Consent Judgment 14AP- 4/27/14 1/28/16, [insert ..............
Hour Particulate Matter (PM10) CC00036. Federal Register
National Ambient Air Quality citation].
(NAAQS) Consent Judgment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2016-01660 Filed 1-27-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P