Proposed Settlement Agreement, Clean Air Act Citizen Suit

Federal RegisterMar 28, 1996

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-5448-3]

Proposed Settlement Agreement, Clean Air Act Citizen Suit

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice of proposed settlement; request for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with section 113(g) of the Clean Air Act, as

amended, (``Act''), notice is hereby given of a proposed partial

consent order, which was lodged with the United States District Court

for the District of Columbia by the United States Environmental

Protection Agency (``EPA'') on November 29, 1995, in a lawsuit filed by

the Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund. This lawsuit, which was filed

pursuant to section 304(a) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 7604(a), concerns,

among other things, EPA's alleged failure to meet mandatory deadlines

under section 112 (d), (e), and (n)(1)(B) of the Clean Air Act.

Since the time that the initial proposed consent order was lodged

with the Court, the EPA was shut-down for three weeks due to a lack of

appropriated funds. For this and other reasons, EPA and Sierra Club

have agreed to reassess the feasibility of the dates in the proposed

order.

After providing notice to plaintiff, EPA did not submit the mercury

study to Congress pursuant to section 112(n)(1)(B) of the CAA, in

accordance with the date in the proposed order. The parties have agreed

that such study shall be submitted by April 15, 1996. The revised date

will be included in a new proposed consent order that will be lodged

with the Court.

With respect to the dates for issuing the maximum achievable

control technology (MACT) standards, as established in paragraph 2 of

the proposed order, the parties have agreed to revise the dates to

provide two additional months for issuance of the standards. The

parties plan to lodge an amended proposed order with the Court, which

will revise the list in paragraph 2 as follows:

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

Source category Date

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

Acrylonitrile-Butadiene-Styrene Production 5/15/96

Butyl Rubber Production................... 7/15/96

Epichlorohydrin Elastomers Production..... 7/15/96

Ethylene-Propylene Rubber Production...... 7/15/96

Hypalon (TM) Production................... 7/15/96

Methyl Methacrylate-Acrylonitrile- 5/15/96

Butadiene-Styrene Production.

Neoprene Production....................... 7/15/96

Nitrile Butadiene Rubber Production....... 7/15/96

Polybutadiene Rubber Production........... 7/15/96

Polystyrene Production.................... 5/15/96

Polysulfide Rubber Production............. 7/15/96

Styrene-Butadiene Rubber and Latex 7/15/96

Production.

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

The parties plan to file the amended proposed consent order with

the Court shortly. The new order will incorporate the revisions

described above concerning the submission of the mercury study to

Congress and the issuance of twelve MACT standards under section 112(d)

of the CAA. Because today's notice provides the schedules that will be

incorporated into the revised order, it will not matter if this notice

is published before the new consent order is filed with the Court,

because this notice will provide adequate notice under section 113(g)

of the CAA with respect to the new dates for the mercury study and the

twelve MACT categories.

For a period of thirty (30) days following the date of publication

of this notice, the Agency will receive written comments relating to

the proposed partial consent order, as modified by this notice, from

persons who were not named as parties to the litigation in question.

EPA or the Department of Justice may withhold or withdraw consent to

the proposed partial consent order if the comments disclose facts or

circumstances that indicate that such consent is inappropriate,

improper, inadequate, or inconsistent with the requirements of the Act.

Unless EPA or the Department of Justice determines, following the

comment period, that consent is inappropriate, the final consent order

will establish deadlines for the regulations covered by Sec. 112(d) and

the study provided for by Sec. 112(n)(1)(B).

A copy of the proposed consent order was lodged with the Clerk of

the United States District Court for the District of Columbia on

November 29, 1995. The dates in that draft consent order will be

modified to reflect the date identified in this notice. A revised

consent order will be lodged with the Court shortly. Copies of the

current November 29, 1995 draft consent order are also available from

Sonja Lee, Air and Radiation Division (2344), Office of General

Counsel, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401

[[Page 13859]]

M Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460, (703) 235-5330. A copy of the

revised consent order will be available from Ms. Lee once such draft is

filed with the Court. Written comments should be sent to Jan M. Tierney

at the address above and must be submitted on or before April 29, 1996.

Dated: March 4, 1996.

Jonathan Z. Cannon,

General Counsel.

[FR Doc. 96-7605 Filed 3-22-96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-M

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.