[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 200 (Tuesday, October 18, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-25681]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: October 18, 1994]


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


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[MN25-1-6002a, MN-1-6093a; FRL-5083-2]

 

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation 
of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes: Minnesota

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: On June 22, 1993, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 
(MPCA) submitted a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision and request 
for redesignation from nonattainment to attainment to the United States 
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). This submittal was in response 
to a designation to nonattainment, effective January 6, 1992, for an 
area in Dakota County, Minnesota. The MPCA submittal consisted of an 
administrative order for the Gopher Smelting and Refining Company, a 
secondary lead smelter located in Eagan, Minnesota. The submittal also 
contained technical support information in the form of air dispersion 
modeling an ambient air monitoring data. The proposed SIP revision and 
request for redesignation was submitted to satisfy the requirements of 
the Clean Air Act (CAA). A letter, identifying specific issues 
pertaining to the proposed SIP revision, was sent to the MPCA on April 
8, 1994. In response to those issues, the MPCA amended the original 
administrative order and has submitted it to USEPA. In this action, 
USEPA is granting direct final approval of the SIP revision and 
redesignation requests.

DATES: This final rule is effective December 19, 1994 unless notice is 
received by November 17, 1994, that someone wishes to submit adverse or 
critical comments. If the effective date is delayed, timely notice will 
be published in the Federal Register.

.ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to: William L. 
MacDowell, Chief, Regulation Development Section, Air Enforcement 
Branch (AE-17J), United States Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West 
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
    Copies of the State submittal and USEPA's analysis are available 
for public inspection during normal business hours at the following 
address: United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air 
and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard (AE-17J), Chicago, 
Illinois 60604; and Air Docket (6102), United States Environmental 
Protection Agency, 401 M Street SW., Washington, DC 20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Randy Robinson, Air Enforcement 
Branch, Regulation Development Section (AE-17J), United States 
Environmental Protection, Region 5, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-
6713.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Summary of State Submittal

    On November 6, 1991, USEPA, in accordance with the Clean Air Act 
(CAA), title I, section 107(d)(3), designated an area in Dakota County, 
Minnesota as nonattainment for the primary and secondary National 
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for lead of 1.5 micrograms per 
cubic meter (g/m\3\). The nonattainment area is bounded by 
Lone Oak Road (County Road 26) to the north, County Road 63 to the 
east, Westcott Road to the south, and Lexington Avenue (County Road 43) 
to the west. The basis for the nonattainment designation was monitored 
violations of the NAAQS. The major lead source in the area is the 
Gopher Smelting and Refining Company (Gopher Smelting), located in 
Eagan, Minnesota. As a result of this nonattainment designation, the 
State of Minnesota was required to submit to the USEPA a revised SIP 
for the area within 18 months from January 6, 1992, which was the 
effective date of the redesignation.
    The State submitted to USEPA, a SIP revision and a request for 
redesignation to attainment, dated June 22, 1993. The submittal was 
determined to be complete, in accordance with the requirements found in 
40 CFR part 51, appendix V, on September 1, 1993. The submittal 
consisted of an administrative order which includes specific 
information pertaining to emission limits and operating restrictions, 
compliance demonstrations, and recording/reporting requirements. In 
addition, the submittal contained technical support pertaining to the 
attainment demonstration and ambient air monitoring data. Initial 
review of the proposed SIP revision identified several issues which 
needed to be addressed by the State before the revision could be 
approved. The issues were detailed in an April 8, 1994, letter from 
George Czerniak, Chief, Air Enforcement Branch, USEPA, to David 
Thornton, Administrator, Program Development and Air Analysis Section, 
MPCA. The issues involved clarification of language pertaining to 
source descriptions and sweeping requirements and additional 
information regarding negative pressure testing methodology and stack 
testing conditions. The issues identified in the April 8, 1994, letter 
were adequately addressed by the State and an amended administrative 
order, dated September 13, 1994, was submitted to USEPA. The remainder 
of this rulemaking summarizes USEPA's review of the Minnesota lead SIP 
revision package, followed by a review of the request for 
redesignation, and then the final rulemaking action.

II. Analysis of SIP Revision Submittal

    The State SIP revision submittal consisted of four major sections: 
(1) The completeness review material; (2) the SIP revision request 
providing background information and citing statutory requirements; (3) 
materials from the MPCA including the administrative order issued to 
Gopher Smelting and Refining Company and public hearing material; and 
(4) technical information supporting the attainment demonstration. This 
section will discuss the modeling analysis of the attainment 
demonstration, provisions of the administrative order, and whether the 
submittal meets the requirements of sections 172(c), 191, and 192, of 
the CAA. Section 172(c), pertaining to nonattainment plan provisions, 
and sections 191 and 192 pertaining to lead nonattainment plan 
deadlines and attainment dates.

Administrative Order Provisions

    The administrative order submitted by MPCA on June 22, 1993, was 
amended, pursuant to comments by USEPA, on September 13, 1994. The 
comments were identified in a previous section. The following analysis 
refers to the amended administrative order.

Emission Limits and Operating Restrictions

    Gopher Smelting emits lead through two stacks: Emission points 1 
and 3. Emissions point 1 is limited to no more than 7000 micrograms of 
lead per dry standard cubic meter (g/dscm) (0.00306 grains per 
dry standard cubic foot); emission point 3 is limited to no more than 
5720 g/dscm (0.00250 grains per dry standard cubic foot). In 
addition, emission points 1 and 3 are subject to a 5 percent opacity 
limit.
    The Gopher Smelting facility is also subject to numerous operating 
restrictions. These restrictions are designed to control fugitives from 
building openings, reentrained traffic dust, and wind erosion. 
Additionally, Gopher Smelting must store slag material inside the 
facility building and must apply water as a suppressant when the 
material is transported. Gopher Smelting must store other raw material 
inside the facility building. Further operating restrictions affect the 
maintenance of air pollution control equipment.

Compliance Demonstration

    Gopher Smelting must demonstrate compliance with the emission 
limits and operating restrictions by annual stack tests and opacity 
tests, negative pressure testing, inspections, and recordkeeping.
    Gopher Smelting will demonstrate compliance with the operating 
restrictions to control fugitives through negative pressure testing and 
mandatory monthly inspections of vegetative cover and railway ballast 
and pavement to insure cover is continuous. Additionally, the 
administrative order requires regularly scheduled inspections and 
maintenance of control monitoring equipment and property access 
restrictions.

Reporting

    Pursuant to the administrative order, the Company is required to 
report the results of any performance stack test as well as report each 
shutdown or breakdown of any control equipment or process equipment if 
that process equipment shutdown causes increased lead emissions.

Contingency Measures

    Section 172(c)(9) of the Clean Air Act defines contingency measures 
as measures in a SIP which are to be implemented if an area fails to 
make reasonable further progress or to attain the NAAQS by the 
applicable attainment date. These measures should become effective 
without further action by the State or the Administrator and should 
consist of available control measures that are not included in the 
primary control strategy.
    The administrative order contains contingency measures which shall 
be implemented by the Company within 30 days following notification by 
the MPCA or USEPA. Since the submittal provides for immediate 
attainment, it therefore satisfies reasonable further progress 
requirements. Implementation of the contingency measures would result 
from a finding that the area has failed to attain the NAAQS. The 
measures consist of increased frequency (twice daily) sweeping with a 
vacuum equipped road sweeper over areas that are normally daily swept 
and daily sweeping with a vacuum sweeper over areas that are normally 
swept on a weekly basis.

Modeling Analysis

    In order to demonstrate that the limits and restrictions imposed by 
the administrative order are sufficient to demonstrate attainment of 
the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for lead, air 
dispersion modeling must be conducted. The dispersion modeling 
accompanying this submittal was performed using the Industrial Source 
Complex--Long Term (ISCLT2) model, version 92062. The modeling 
methodology used was compared against the guidance contained in the 
``Guideline on Air Quality Models (Revised)''; July 1986, including 
Supplement A.
    The Gopher Smelting and Refining Company facility is located just 
south of St. Paul in Eagan, Minnesota. The modeling analysis used five 
years (1985 through 1989) of surface meteorological data from the 
Minneapolis/St. Paul National Weather Service station, and upper air 
data from the St. Cloud, Minnesota, National Weather Service station. 
The data sets are representative of the meteorological conditions at 
Gopher Smelting.
    The process sources at Gopher Smelting which discharge lead into 
the atmosphere are: Two reverberatory furnaces, a blast furnace, six 
refining kettles, a flue dust agglomeration furnace, a scrap dryer for 
the feed desulfurization system, and the central vacuum system. 
Fugitive emissions are also generated from raw material handling. Lead 
emissions from these sources are vented to four dust collectors 
(baghouses or cartridge filters). The lead emissions passing through 
these dust collectors are emitted through two stacks.
    The dispersion modeling also took into account fugitive emissions 
generated from vehicular traffic at the facility as well as emissions 
generated by wind erosion of the area surrounding the facility. The 
lead emissions from unpaved areas at the facility were estimated using 
the ``PM10 Open Fugitive Dust Source Computer Model'' package 
distributed by USEPA. The lead content of emissions due to wind erosion 
was based on soil sample analyses conducted at the facility. Snowcover 
was assumed for the months of November through March, therefore 
fugitives from grassy areas was considered to be zero for these months.
    The receptor grid used in the analysis consisted of a cartesian 
coordinate system with various spacing resolutions. After initial 
screening runs with receptor grids extending as far as 50 kilometers, a 
refined receptor grid, with 100 meter spacing, was established for a 
1.0 kilometer square area surrounding the facility. Lead impacts at the 
fenceline of the property were modeled.
    Background levels of lead were estimated in order to consider the 
contribution to the total ambient air concentration made by sources 
other than Gopher Smelting. The background value was determined using a 
wind direction analysis which identified when air monitors were upwind 
of the Gopher Smelting Facility. The resulting value of 0.11 micrograms 
per cubic meter (g/m\3\) is representative of background lead 
concentrations in the area. The background concentration was added to 
the maximum modeled concentration for a total maximum lead 
concentration of 0.97 g/m\3\. This is well below the NAAQS 
value of 1.5 g/m\3\.

General Statutory Requirements

    The purpose of this section is to discuss whether the SIP revision 
submittal meets the statutory requirements set forth in the Clean Air 
Act. The Gopher Smelting area of Dakota County, Minnesota is designated 
nonattainment for lead. Therefore, the SIP for this area must meet the 
applicable requirements of Subpart 1 and 5 of Part D of Title 1 of the 
Clean Air Act, specifically, Sections 172(c), 191, and 192.
    Section 172(c)(1) states that Part D plans must require reasonably 
available control measures, including reasonably available control 
technology (RACT). The submittal includes modeling which demonstrates 
that the Gopher Smelting area of Dakota County will achieve attainment 
of the lead NAAQS with the control measures fully implemented. The 
control measures were required to be fully implemented on June 22, 1993 
(the effective date of the order). Consequently, the application of 
additional available measures would not result in attainment any 
faster. Therefore, the control measures included in the SIP revision 
satisfy the RACT requirements.
    Section 172(c)(2) states that plans shall require reasonable 
further progress. The Minnesota submittal provides for immediate 
attainment.
    Section 172(c)(3) requires a suitable emission inventory. A 
suitable inventory of actual and allowable lead emissions from the 
Gopher Smelting facility was provided in Attachment C.1 of the 
submittal.
    Section 172(c)(4) mandates that any stationary source growth margin 
included in the submittal be expressly identified and quantified. The 
submittal provides for a zero growth margin.
    Section 172(c)(5) mandates a suitable permit program for new and 
modified major stationary sources. A new source permitting program for 
nonattainment areas has been approved by USEPA on April 4, 1994 (59 FR 
21939). In addition, MPCA has been delegated authority to implement the 
Federal Prevention of Significant Deterioration rules in attainment 
areas.
    Section 172(c)(6) requires enforceable limitations sufficient to 
provide for attainment. The administrative order contains emission and 
operating limits which, when implemented, provide for attainment.
    Section 172(c)(7) mandates satisfaction of Section 110(a)(2). The 
USEPA has determined that the submittal meets the applicable provisions 
of Section 110(a)(2).
    Section 172(c)(8) states that the Administrator, in some 
circumstances, may allow the use of equivalent modeling emission 
inventory, and planning procedures. In the Gopher Smelting submittal, 
no equivalent techniques were used for modeling, emission inventory, or 
planning procedures.
    Section 172(c)(9) requires the plan to provide for implementation 
of specific measures to be undertaken if the area fails to make 
reasonable further progress or to attain the primary NAAQS by the 
attainment date applicable under this part (i.e., contingency 
measures). The administrative order for Gopher Smelting contains 
measures to be taken if the area fails to attain the NAAQS. The 
administrative order provides for immediate attainment which precludes 
the need for a schedule by which the company would demonstrate 
reasonable further progress toward attainment. Therefore, any future 
violations of the NAAQS in the area would require the Company to 
implement the contingency measures.
    Section 191(a) requires a State with an area designated as 
nonattainment subsequent to the date of enactment of the CAA, to submit 
an applicable plan to the Administrator within 18 months. A part of 
Dakota County, Minnesota was designated nonattainment for lead, 
effective January 6, 1992. The SIP revision was submitted on June 23, 
1993; in accordance with the 18 month schedule.
    Section 192(a) requires that a plan submitted pursuant to section 
191(a) provide for attainment of the relevant standard no later than 5 
years from the date of the nonattainment designation. The limits and 
restrictions in the Minnesota lead plan revision are effective 
immediately and have been demonstrated to provide for immediate 
attainment.

III. Analysis of the Redesignation Request

    The State redesignation request consisted primarily of a 
maintenance plan and air quality monitoring data. The request also 
referenced the provisions and technical information in the SIP revision 
submittal. The State submitted this information to comply with title I, 
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, which requires that USEPA determine 
whether certain criteria have been met before a redesignation of a 
nonattainment area to attainment can be promulgated. The CAA criteria 
and the State responses are discussed below.

Redesignation Request Requirements

    Section 107(d)(3)(E)(i) requires a determination of whether the 
area has attained the NAAQS. The State used both air quality monitoring 
data and a dispersion modeling analysis to show that the area has 
attained the NAAQS for lead of 1.5 g/m\3\ based on a quarterly 
average.
    Monitoring data for four ambient air monitors was included in the 
June 22, 1993, redesignation submittal. Additional ambient air 
monitoring data was submitted by the State on December 3, 1993. The 
additional data set replaced some 1992 data for two monitors due to 
problems identified by the State with the testing method used 
(flameless atomic absorption). The revised 1992 data was analyzed using 
flame atomic absorption (atomic absorption using an air-acetylene flame 
is the 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 50 Appendix G 
reference method). The flame atomic absorption method had much better 
recovery results with spiked samples of lead. The monitors are all 
located near the Gopher facility. The data collected from the four 
monitors has been quality assured according to the procedures specified 
in 40 (CFR) Part 58, and is submitted to USEPA Aerometric Information 
Retrieval System (AIRS).
    The Lead Guideline Document (EPA-452/R-93-009), April 1993, states 
that in demonstrating, through monitoring data, that an area is 
attaining the lead NAAQS, the area must show no exceedances on a 
quarterly basis. Based on a April 21, 1983, memorandum from Meyers, S., 
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, the demonstration should 
consist of ``the most recent eight quarters of quality-assured 
representative air quality data.'' The State has submitted ambient 
monitoring data for the period from first quarter 1990 to the third 
quarter 1993. The first quarter of 1990 shows the NAAQS violation which 
precipitated the nonattainment designation. No violations of the NAAQS 
for lead have been recorded at any of the monitors since that time.
    The State also submitted an air dispersion modeling analysis to 
demonstrate that the Gopher facility, with the emission limits and 
operating restrictions applied, attains the NAAQS for lead. The 
modeling demonstration was an integral part of the proposed SIP 
revision submittal and has been assessed as part of the regulatory 
review process pertaining to the SIP revision.
    The dispersion modeling accompanying the submittal was performed 
using the Industrial Source Complex--Long Term (ISCLT2) model, version 
92062. The modeling methodology used was compared against the guidance 
contained in the ``Guideline on Air Quality Models (Revised)''; July 
1986. The modeling analysis used surface meteorological data from the 
Minneapolis/St. Paul National Weather Service station, and upper air 
data from the St. Cloud, Minnesota, National Weather Service station. 
The data sets are considered to be representative of the meteorological 
conditions at Gopher Smelting. The sources that were modeled included 
both process and fugitive. Concentrations of lead were predicted around 
the Gopher facility through the use of a receptor grid with 100 meter 
spacing near identified areas of maximum concentrations. Background 
levels of lead, determined from the ambient air monitors, were added to 
the maximum modeled concentration. The resulting value of 0.97 
g/m\3\ is well below the NAAQS value of 1.5 g/m\3\.
    Based on the monitoring and modeling information included in the 
June 22, 1993 proposed SIP revision and redesignation request 
submittal, USEPA has determined that the State has demonstrated that 
the area around the Gopher facility, which encompasses the current 
nonattainment area, has attained the NAAQS for lead.
    Section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) states that USEPA may not promulgate a 
redesignation request to attainment unless USEPA has fully approved the 
area SIP under section 110(k). The June 22, 1993 package consisted of a 
proposed SIP revision and a redesignation request. The SIP revision was 
submitted to meet the Clean Air Act requirements of Title I, Part D. 
The SIP revision was discussed earlier in this notice and is being 
approved in this notice.
    Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) states that USEPA may not promulgate a 
redesignation request to attainment unless USEPA determines that ``the 
improvement in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable 
reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of the applicable 
implementation plan and applicable Federal air pollutant control 
regulations and other permanent and enforceable reductions.'' In the 
first quarter of 1990, three of the four ambient air monitors sited 
around the Gopher facility recorded a violation of the lead NAAQS. Lead 
violations were also recorded in the fourth quarter of 1988 and the 
second quarter of 1989. As a result, the area near the Gopher facility 
was designated nonattainment, effective on January 6, 1992. An 
investigation into the cause of the violations concluded that fugitive 
emissions from process sources and also from general work practices 
were the primary reason for the high monitored values. The Gopher 
Smelting and Refining Company implemented a program that included 
improved materials handling procedures and work practices. These 
initial procedures and practices, among other controls, are included in 
the Federally enforceable Administrative Order, which was discussed 
earlier. No violations of the lead NAAQS have been recorded at any of 
the ambient air monitors surrounding the Gopher facility since the 
first quarter of 1990. The State has reasonably attributed the 
improvement in air quality to the changes in work practices at the 
Gopher facility. Additionally, the Gopher facility has installed 
control equipment (i.e., baghouses and a negative pressure system 
vented through cartridge filters) to further limit process fugitive 
emissions. The operation, testing, and maintenance of this control 
equipment is required in the administrative order for the facility. The 
administrative order for the Gopher facility has no expiration date. 
Therefore, USEPA agrees with the State that the improvement in air 
quality over the last four years in the nonattainment area surrounding 
the Gopher facility is attributable to permanent and enforceable lead 
emission reductions.
    Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv) states that USEPA may not promulgate a 
redesignation request to attainment unless USEPA has fully approved a 
maintenance plan for the area as meeting the requirements of section 
175A. The redesignation request submitted on June 22, 1993 by the 
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), was accompanied by a 
proposed SIP revision affecting the primary lead source in the 
nonattainment area. The measures required in the proposed SIP revision 
(i.e., administrative order for Gopher Smelting and Refining Company), 
provided for attainment of the lead NAAQS as demonstrated by the 
modeling analysis performed for the area. The limits and operating 
restrictions detailed in the administrative order do not expire. 
Furthermore, once the SIP revision is promulgated, it cannot be revised 
without approval of USEPA. Therefore, attainment of the lead NAAQS has 
been projected for the required 10 year period as is discussed in 
Section 175A.
    Section 175A(d) requires contingency provisions be submitted to 
assure that the State will promptly correct any violation of the lead 
standard which occurs after the area has been redesignated to 
attainment. The current monitoring network is continuing to operate in 
order to verify the attainment status of the area. The proposed SIP 
revision, discussed earlier, contained specific measures which the 
Gopher facility will implement, without further action to be taken by 
the State or USEPA, upon notification that a violation of lead NAAQS 
has occurred. These measures consist of sweeping with a wet vacuum 
sweeper areas that are swept daily and daily sweeping with a vacuum 
sweeper areas that are normally swept on a weekly basis. The 
contingency measures are designed to immediately reduce emissions from 
areas likely to be causing the violation. The administrative order 
became effective on June 22, 1993, and enforced by the authority of 
MPCA. The changes included in the amended administrative order, dated 
September 13, 1994, did not affect the contingency measures. Therefore, 
the limits and restrictions in the administrative order will have been 
implemented prior to promulgation of redesignation to attainment.
    Section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) states that USEPA may not promulgate a 
redesignation request to attainment unless the State has met all the 
requirements applicable to the nonattainment area under section 110 and 
part D. The Gopher Smelting area of Dakota County, Minnesota is 
designated nonattainment for lead. Therefore, the SIP revision for this 
area must meet the requirements of Subpart 1 and 5 of Part D of Title 1 
of the Clean Air Act, specifically Section 172(c) and Sections 191 and 
192. Based on the regulatory review, the SIP revision is being approved 
as having satisfied the requirements of the applicable CAA sections.

IV. Rulemaking Action

    This action has evaluated the approvability of the Minnesota Lead 
SIP revision submittal and request for redesignation to attainment for 
the area around Gopher Smelting and Refining Company, located in the 
city of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota. It has been determined that 
the submittal meets the applicable requirements of the CAA.
    Because U.S. EPA considers this action noncontroversial and 
routine, we are approving it without prior proposal. The action will 
become effective on December 19, 1994. However, if we receive notice by 
November 17, 1994 that someone wishes to submit adverse comments, then 
USEPA will publish a document that withdraws this action and will 
address the comments received in the final rule on the requested 
redesignation and SIP revision which have been proposed for approval in 
the proposed rules section of this Federal Register.
    Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting, allowing 
or establishing a precedent for any future request for revision to any 
SIP. U.S. EPA shall consider each request for revision to the SIP in 
light of specific technical, economic, and environmental factors and in 
relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.
    This action has been classified as a Table 2 action by the Regional 
Administrator under the procedures published in the Federal Register on 
January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225). A revision to the SIP processing 
review tables was approved by the Acting Assistant Administrator for 
Office of Air and Radiation on October 4, 1993 (Michael Shapiro's 
memorandum to Regional Administrators). A future document will inform 
the general public of these tables. Under the revised tables this 
action remains classified as a Table 2 action. On January 6, 1989, the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) waived Table 2 and Table 3 SIP 
revisions (54 FR 222) from the requirements of section 3 of Executive 
Order 12291 for a period of 2 years. The USEPA has submitted a request 
for a permanent waiver for Table 2 and 3 SIP revisions. The OMB has 
agreed to continue the temporary waiver until such time as it rules on 
USEPA's request. This request continued in effect under Executive Order 
12866 which superseded Executive Order 12291 on September 30, 1993.
    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., USEPA 
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, USEPA 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 CAA 
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, I certify 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 CAA, 
preparation of a regulatory flexibility analysis would constitute 
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of State action. The 
CAA forbids USEPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. 
Union Electric Co. v. USEPA, 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (S.Ct. 1976); 42 
U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by December 19, 1994. 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

40 CFR Part 52

    Air Pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Lead, Reporting 
and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 81

    Air pollution control.

    Dated: September 20, 1994.
Valdas V. Adamkus,
Regional Administrator.

    Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, chapter I, is amended 
as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

    1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

    2. Section 52.1220 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(36) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 52.1220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (36) On June 22, 1993, and September 13, 1994, the State of 
Minnesota submitted revisions to its State Implementation Plan for lead 
for a portion of Dakota County.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) For Gopher Smelting and Refining Company, located in the city 
of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota:
    (1) An administrative order, dated, submitted, and effective June 
22, 1993.
    (2) Amendment One to the administrative order, dated, submitted, 
and effective, September 13, 1994.
    (ii) Additional material.
    (A) A letter from Charles W. Williams to Valdas V. Adamkus, dated 
June 22, 1993, with enclosures providing technical support (e.g., 
computer modeling) for the revisions to the State Implementation Plan 
for lead.
    (B) A letter from Charles W. Williams to Valdas V. Adamkus, dated 
September 13, 1994, with enclosures providing technical support for the 
revised administrative order for Gopher Smelting and Refining Company.

PART 81--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

    2. In Sec. 81.324 the table ``Minnesota Lead'' is revised to read 
as follows:


Sec. 81.324  Minnesota.

* * * * *

                                                                     Minnesota--Lead                                                                    
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Designation                                            Classification                    
             Designated area             ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Date                        Type                        Date                        Type           
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dakota County (part) ... Lone Oak Road    Dec. 19, 1994.............                                                                                    
 (County Road 26) to the north, County                                                                                                                  
 Road 63 to the east, Westcott Road to                                                                                                                  
 the south, and Lexington Avenue (County                                                                                                                
 Road 43) to the west.                                                                                                                                  
Rest of State not designated.                                                                                                                           
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 94-25681 Filed 10-17-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P