Approval of State Plans for Designated Facilities and Pollutants; Missouri; Diammonium Phosphate Fertilizer Units, 1039-1041 [2019-00782]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 22 / Friday, February 1, 2019 / Proposed Rules As for the revised exemption language concerning other emergency/safety equipment used to fight fires or train fire fighters or other emergency personnel, EPA believes such use would also be time-limited and any emissions increases associated with its exclusion from minor source permitting requirements would also be insignificant. For these reasons, EPA is proposing to approve these revisions and is proposing to find that they are consistent with the CAA, including 110(l), and with federal regulations. III. Incorporation by Reference In this document, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule, regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by reference a portion of Georgia EPD’s Rule 391–3–1– .03—‘‘Permits,’’ specifically section (6)—‘‘Exemptions,’’ which became state effective July 23, 2018. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials generally available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 4 office (please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more information). IV. Proposed Action EPA is proposing to approve Georgia EPD’s November 13, 2017, and July 31, 2018, SIP revisions. Specifically, EPA is proposing to approve these SIP revisions that modify Georgia’s Rule 391–3–1–.03(6). The proposed changes exempt fire pumps and other equipment used by firefighters and other emergency personnel to fight fires from the Act’s preconstruction review requirement. EPA believes that any air quality impacts from these activities are de minimis, and will often lead to net emissions reductions by mitigating or eliminating the air quality impacts of uncontrolled fires. EPA is proposing to approve these SIP revisions because the Agency has determined that they are consistent with the CAA, and would not interfere with attainment or maintenance of any NAAQS, reasonable further progress, or any other applicable requirement. V. 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. See 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 VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:27 Jan 31, 2019 Jkt 247001 the CAA. This action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed 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); • Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under Executive Order 12866. • 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 as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 1039 Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: December 17, 2018. Mary S. Walker, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. [FR Doc. 2019–00792 Filed 1–31–19; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 62 [EPA–R07–OAR–2018–0837; FRL–9988–95– Region 7] Approval of State Plans for Designated Facilities and Pollutants; Missouri; Diammonium Phosphate Fertilizer Units Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to rescind the current state plan and associated regulation and accept the negative declaration submitted by the State of Missouri for Diammonium Phosphate Fertilizer units. This 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: Comments must be received on or before March 4, 2019. ADDRESSES: You may send comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07– OAR–2018–0837 to https:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket ID No. for this rulemaking. Comments received will be posted without change to https:// www.regulations.gov/, including any personal information provided. For detailed instructions on sending comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the ‘‘Written Comments’’ heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Gonzalez, Environmental SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\01FEP1.SGM 01FEP1 1040 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 22 / Friday, February 1, 2019 / Proposed Rules Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at (913) 551–7041 or by email at gonzalez.larry@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. Table of Contents I. Written Comments II. Background III. What action is the EPA proposing to take? IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Written Comments Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2018– 0837, at https://www.regulations.gov. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The 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. The 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 https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ commenting-epa-dockets. II. 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 sections 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 VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:27 Jan 31, 2019 Jkt 247001 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, 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 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. The EPA is proposing to accept MoDNR’s negative declaration submission made on December 3, 2018 and rescind the State’s plan and associated regulation. This action applies to the state’s regulatory requirements for existing facilities and not new sources. PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 III. What action is the EPA proposing to take? The EPA proposes to amend 40 CFR part 62 to reflect receipt of MoDNR’s negative declaration letter certifying that there are no phosphate fertilizer production facilities operating in Missouri subject to 40 CFR part 60, subpart V, in accordance with section 111(d) of the CAA. Simultaneously, we are proposing to amend 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). IV. Statutory and Executive Orders 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 proposed 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 proposes to approve 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 proposed 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 proposed 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 proposed action 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). 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 E:\FR\FM\01FEP1.SGM 01FEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 22 / Friday, February 1, 2019 / Proposed Rules 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 proposes to approve 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 proposes to approve a state submission in response to a Federal standard. This proposed 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). Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Administrative practice and procedure, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, phosphate fertilizer plants. Dated: December 26, 2018. Edward H. Chu, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7. 48 CFR Part 806 RIN 2900–AQ21 Department of Veterans Affairs. Proposed rule. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is proposing to amend and update its VA Acquisition Regulation (VAAR) in phased increments to revise or remove any policy superseded by changes in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), to remove procedural guidance that is internal to VA into the VA Acquisition Manual (VAAM), and to incorporate any new agency specific regulations or policies. These changes seek to streamline and align the VAAR with the FAR and remove outdated and duplicative requirements and reduce burden on contractors. The VAAM incorporates portions of the removed VAAR as well as other internal agency acquisition policy. VA will rewrite certain parts of the VAAR and VAAM, and as VAAR parts are rewritten, will publish them in the Federal Register. VA will combine related topics, as appropriate. In particular, this rulemaking revises the VAAR concerning Competition Requirements. DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 2, 2019 to be considered in the formulation of the final rule. SUMMARY: 1. The authority citation for part 62 continues to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Subpart AA—Missouri 2. Amend § 62.6350 by adding paragraph (b)(7) and revising paragraph (c) to read as follows: ■ Identification of plan. * * * * (b) * * * (7) A revision to Missouri’s 111(d) plan for control of fluoride emissions from existing phosphate fertilizer plants was state effective on September 30, 2018 and was submitted to the EPA on December 3, 2018. Submission included a negative declaration, dated December 3, 2018, supporting state documentation, and request for the EPA to withdraw the EPA’s prior plan Jkt 247001 DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS ACTION: ■ 16:27 Jan 31, 2019 [FR Doc. 2019–00782 Filed 1–31–19; 8:45 am] AGENCY: PART 62—APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF STATE PLANS FOR DESIGNATED FACILITIES AND POLLUTANTS VerDate Sep<11>2014 Letter from the Missouri Department of of Natural Resources, submitted December 3, 2018, certifying that there are no Diammonium Phosphate Ferilizer Units subject to 40 CFR part 60, subpart V. Effective date: The effective date of the negative declaration and EPA withdrawal of the prior plan approval is [DATE 60 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE IN THE Federal Register]. VA Acquisition Regulation: Competition Requirements For the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA proposes to amend 40 CFR part 62 as set forth below: * § 62.6351 Identification of plan—negative declaration. BILLING CODE 6560–50–P List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 62 § 62.6350 approval for existing Diammonium Phosphate Fertilizer Units. (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. ■ 3. Section 62.6351 is revised to read as follows: PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 1041 Written comments may be submitted through www.Regulations.gov; by mail or handdelivery to Director, Regulation Policy and Management (00REG), Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue NW, Room 1063B, Washington, DC 20420; or by fax to (202) 273–9026. (This is not a toll-free number.) Comments should indicate that they are submitted in response to ‘‘RIN 2900– AQ21 VA Acquisition Regulation: Competition Requirements.’’ Copies of comments received will be available for public inspection in the Office of Regulation Policy and Management, Room 1063B, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday (except holidays). Please call (202) 461–4902 for an appointment. (This is not a toll-free number.) In addition, during the comment period, comments may be viewed online through the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) at www.Regulations.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Rafael N. Taylor, Senior Procurement Analyst, Procurement Policy and Warrant Management Services, 003A2A, 425 I Street NW, Washington, DC 20001, (202) 382–2787. (This is not a toll-free number.) SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ADDRESSES: Background This rulemaking is issued under the authority of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP) Act which provides the authority for an agency head to issue agency acquisition regulations that implement or supplement the FAR. VA is proposing to revise the VAAR to add new policy or regulatory requirements and to remove any redundant guidance and guidance that is applicable only to VA’s internal operating processes or procedures. Codified acquisition regulations may be amended and revised only through rulemaking. All amendments, revisions, and removals have been reviewed and concurred with by VA’s Integrated Product Team of agency stakeholders. The VAAR uses the regulatory structure and arrangement of the FAR and headings and subject areas are consistent with the FAR content. The VAAR is divided into subchapters, parts (each of which covers a separate aspect of acquisition), subparts, and sections. The Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act, as codified in 41 U.S.C. 1707, provides the authority for the Federal Acquisition Regulation and for the issuance of agency acquisition regulations consistent with the FAR. When Federal agencies acquire supplies and services using E:\FR\FM\01FEP1.SGM 01FEP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 22 (Friday, February 1, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 1039-1041]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-00782]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 62

[EPA-R07-OAR-2018-0837; FRL-9988-95-Region 7]


Approval of State Plans for Designated Facilities and Pollutants; 
Missouri; Diammonium Phosphate Fertilizer Units

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
rescind the current state plan and associated regulation and accept the 
negative declaration submitted by the State of Missouri for Diammonium 
Phosphate Fertilizer units. This 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: Comments must be received on or before March 4, 2019.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2018-0837 to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 
instructions for submitting comments.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket ID 
No. for this rulemaking. Comments received will be posted without 
change to https://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal 
information provided. For detailed instructions on sending comments and 
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the ``Written 
Comments'' heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this 
document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Gonzalez, Environmental

[[Page 1040]]

Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 11201 Renner 
Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at (913) 551-7041 or by email at 
gonzalez.larry@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' or 
``our'' refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Written Comments
II. Background
III. What action is the EPA proposing to take?
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Written Comments

    Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-2018-
0837, at https://www.regulations.gov. Once submitted, comments cannot 
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The 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. The 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 https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

II. 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 sections 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, 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 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.
    The EPA is proposing to accept MoDNR's negative declaration 
submission made on December 3, 2018 and rescind the State's plan and 
associated regulation. This action applies to the state's regulatory 
requirements for existing facilities and not new sources.

III. What action is the EPA proposing to take?

    The EPA proposes to amend 40 CFR part 62 to reflect receipt of 
MoDNR's negative declaration letter certifying that there are no 
phosphate fertilizer production facilities operating in Missouri 
subject to 40 CFR part 60, subpart V, in accordance with section 111(d) 
of the CAA. Simultaneously, we are proposing to amend 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).

IV. Statutory and Executive Orders

    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 proposed 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 proposes to approve 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 proposed 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 proposed 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 proposed action 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).
    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

[[Page 1041]]

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 proposes to approve 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 proposes to approve a state submission in response to 
a Federal standard.
    This proposed 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).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 62

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Administrative 
practice and procedure, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, phosphate fertilizer plants.

    Dated: December 26, 2018.
Edward H. Chu,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA proposes to amend 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 revision to Missouri's 111(d) plan for control of fluoride 
emissions from existing phosphate fertilizer plants was state effective 
on September 30, 2018 and was submitted to the EPA on December 3, 2018. 
Submission included a negative declaration, dated December 3, 2018, 
supporting state documentation, and request for the EPA to withdraw the 
EPA's prior plan approval for existing Diammonium Phosphate Fertilizer 
Units.
    (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 of Natural Resources, 
submitted December 3, 2018, certifying that there are no Diammonium 
Phosphate Ferilizer Units subject to 40 CFR part 60, subpart V. 
Effective date: The effective date of the negative declaration and EPA 
withdrawal of the prior plan approval is [DATE 60 DAYS AFTER DATE OF 
PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE IN THE Federal Register].

[FR Doc. 2019-00782 Filed 1-31-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P