[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 64 (Friday, April 3, 1998)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 16435-16437]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-8790]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[MN49-01-7274a; MN50-01-7275a; FRL-5990-6]
Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans;
Minnesota
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action approves two State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revisions for the State of Minnesota which were submitted November 26,
1996. These SIP revisions modify Administrative Orders for Federal
Hoffman Incorporated located in Anoka, Minnesota and J. L. Shiely
Company located in St. Paul, Minnesota which are part of the Minnesota
SIP to attain and maintain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) for sulfur dioxide and particulate matter, respectively.
In the proposed rules section of this Federal Register,
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing approval of, and
soliciting comments on, these SIP revisions. If adverse comments are
received on this action, EPA will withdraw this final rule and address
the comments received in response to this action in a final rule on the
related proposed rule, which is being published in the proposed rules
section of this Federal Register. A second public comment period will
not be held. Parties interested in commenting on this action should do
so at this time.
DATES: This ``direct final'' rule will be effective on June 2, 1998,
unless EPA receives adverse or critical comments by May 4, 1998. If the
effective date is delayed, timely notice will be published in the
Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent to: Carlton T. Nash, Chief,
Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), United
States Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604. (It is recommended that you telephone Madeline
Rucker at (312) 886-0661 before visiting the Region 5 Office.)
A Copy of these SIP revisions are available for inspection at the
following location: Office of Air and Radiation (OAR) Docket and
Information Center (Air Docket 6102), room M1500, United States
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street S.W., Washington, D.C.
20460, (202) 260-7548.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Madeline Rucker, Regulation
Development Section (AR-18J), Air Programs Branch, Air and Radiation
Division, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, Telephone Number (312)
886-0661.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Federal Hoffman, Inc.
On May 29, 1992, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)
submitted a revision to the sulfur dioxide (SO2) SIP for
Minneapolis-St. Paul, which included a demonstration of attainment and
maintenance of the NAAQS for SO2. Included in this
attainment demonstration was an Administrative Order for Federal
Hoffman, Inc. The State submitted a supplemental SIP revision on July
12, 1993. A revised Administrative Order for Federal Hoffman, Inc., was
included in this submittal, and on April 14, 1994, at 59 FR 17703, EPA
took final action
[[Page 16436]]
to approve the SO2 SIP revisions for the Minneapolis-St.
Paul area.
The revision to the Administrative Order submitted on November 26,
1996, consists of a new equation to calculate the amount of residual
fuel oil Federal Hoffman, Inc., can use on a daily basis. The old Order
limited the sulfur content of the residual fuel oil to two percent by
weight and residual fuel usage to less than 2500 gallons per day. The
revised Order retains the sulfur content limit of the residual fuel oil
at two percent by weight and includes the following equation for the
amount of residual fuel oil which can be used by the Company on a daily
basis:
5000 gallons of fuel oil % of sulfur in the fuel oil = amount
of fuel allowed in gallons on a daily basis
This new fuel consumption calculation allows Federal Hoffman, Inc.,
the flexibility to use lower sulfur fuel in larger quantities without
increasing sulfur emissions. The revised Administrative Order contains
changes as to how daily residual fuel oil consumption is calculated.
These changes will not result in an increase of SO2
emissions in the area and do not jeopardize the attainment
demonstration submitted by the State on May 29, 1992, and approved by
EPA on April 14, 1994.
J. L. Shiely Company
Upon enactment of the Clean Air Act (Act) Amendments of 1990,
certain areas were designated nonattainment for particulate matter (PM)
and classified as moderate under sections 107(d) (4) (B) and 188 (a) of
the amended Act. See 56 FR 56694 (November 6, 1991) and 57 FR 13498,
13537 (April 16, 1992). A portion of the St. Paul area was designated
nonattainment, thus requiring the State to submit SIP revisions which
satisfy the attainment demonstration requirements of the Act. The State
submitted SIP revisions to meet these requirements in 1991 and 1992.
The enforceable elements of the State's submittal were Administrative
Orders for facilities in the St. Paul area (J. L. Shiely Company is one
of these facilities). On February 15, 1994 at 59 FR 7218, EPA took
final action to approve Minnesota's submittals as satisfying the
requirements for the St. Paul PM nonattainment area. MPCA issued J. L.
Shiely amended Findings and Orders which were subsequently submitted
to, and approved by EPA as part of Minnesota's SIP on February 15, 1994
(59 FR 7218), December 8, 1994 40 CFR 52.1220 (c)(37) and June 13, 1995
(60 FR 31088).
On November 26, 1996, Minnesota submitted additional minor
amendments (Amendment Three) to the original Order by replacing
emission points No. 1 and No. 10 (barge unloading) and No. 2 and No. 11
(surge bin) with emission points Nos. 20-22 (hopper, directional
conveyor, and diesel backhoe). Amendment Three was adopted and
effective at the State on November 26, 1996. The new emission points
(Nos. 20-22) are not expected to cause any further environmental
degradation because they have more restrictive opacity limits than the
emission points they replaced. The hopper, directional conveyor, and
diesel backhoe unloading system are not to exceed any opacity limit of
20 percent; whereas, the previous barge unloading and surge bin system
was permitted to have a maximum of 40 percent opacity for four minutes
in any 60 minute period, while not exceeding a 20 percent opacity limit
for the remainder of the time. The new emission points are also
required to adhere to the same opacity compliance determination
methods, minimum frequencies, and testing procedures as the other
emission points. The new emission points at J. L. Shiely are not
expected to cause any further environmental degradation; therefore,
Amendment Three to original Order as requested by the State of
Minnesota is deemed approvable.
Action
EPA is approving the Administrative Order Amendments for Federal
Hoffman, Inc., and J. L. Shiely, Company. These Orders are included as
part of Minnesota's SIP to attain and maintain the NAAQS for PM, and
S02. EPA has evaluated these SIP revisions and adopted the provisions
set forth at 40 CFR part 51, Appendix V. Because EPA considers this
action noncontroversial and routine, we are approving it without prior
proposal. This action will become effective on June 2, 1998. However,
if we receive adverse comments by May 4, 1998, EPA will publish a
notice that withdraws this action.
This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature
by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the
Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a
July 10, 1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for
Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
exempted this regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of
any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.
Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small
entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises,
and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than
50,000.
SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the Act
do not create any new requirements but simply approve requirements that
the State is already imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP
approval does not impose any new requirements, the Administrator
certifies that it does not have a significant impact on any small
entities affected. Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State
relationship under the Act, preparation of a flexibility analysis would
constitute Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of State
action. The Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such
grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U. S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976);
42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or
final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated
costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to
the private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA
must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with
statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan
for informing and advising any small governments that may be
significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated does not
include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100
million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in the
aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action approves
preexisting requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new
requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or
tribal governments or to the private sector, result from this action.
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
[[Page 16437]]
copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller
General of the United States. Section 804, however, exempts from
section 801 the following types of rules: rules of particular
applicability; rules relating to agency management or personnel; and
rules of agency organization, procedure, or practice that do not
substantially affect the rights or obligations of non-agency parties. 5
U.S.C. 804(3). EPA is not required to submit a rule report regarding
this action under section 801 because this is a rules of particular
applicability.
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by June 2, 1998. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this rule 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, Hydrocarbons,
Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Sulfur dioxide, Volatile organic
compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Dated: March 17, 1998.
David A. Ullrich,
Acting Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 98-8790 Filed 4-2-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
