[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significant adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn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