[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 92 (Tuesday, May 13, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 26230-26235]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-11994]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 81

[MN41-01-7266a; FRL-5820-8]


Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Minnesota

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this action, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is 
approving the St. Paul Park Area redesignation request submitted by the 
State of Minnesota on October 31, 1995. Minnesota requested that 
portions of Dakota and Washington Counties (the areas surrounding the 
Ashland Petroleum Company) be redesignated to attainment for the 
National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for sulfur dioxide (SO2). 
All future references to the areas surrounding the Ashland Petroleum 
Company will be made using St. Paul Park. Subsequent to this approval, 
Dakota and Washington Counties are each designated attainment in their 
entirety.

DATES: This ``Direct final''is effective July 14, 1997 unless EPA 
receives adverse or critical comments by June 13, 1997. If the 
effective date is delayed, timely notice will be published in the 
Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the revision request are available for inspection 
at the following address: Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 
Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 
Illinois 60604. (It is recommended that you telephone Todd Nettesheim 
at (312) 353-9153 before visiting the Region 5 Office.)
    Written comments should be addressed to: Carlton Nash, Chief, 
Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), United 
States Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 
Chicago, Illinois 60604.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Todd Nettesheim, Air Programs Branch, 
Regulation Development Section (AR-18J), United States Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 W. Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 
60604, (312) 353-9153.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The NAAQS for SO2 consist of two standards: a primary standard for 
the protection of public health and a secondary standard for the 
protection of public welfare. The primary SO2 standard consists of a 
24-hour maximum of 0.14 particles per million (ppm) and an annual 
arithmetic mean ambient SO2 concentration of 0.030 ppm. The secondary 
standard consists of a 3-hour maximum ambient SO2 concentration of 0.5 
ppm. (40 CFR 50.2-50.5)
    Monitored violations of the primary SO2 NAAQS from 1975 through 
1977 led the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) to recommend EPA 
to designate Air Quality Control Region (AQCR) 131 as nonattainment for 
the SO2 NAAQS. The AQCR 131 includes Anoka, Carver, Dakota, Hennepin, 
Ramsey, Scott, and Washington Counties in the State of Minnesota. On 
March 3, 1978, EPA published the designation of AQCR 131 as a primary 
nonattainment area for SO2 based on these initial exceedences (43 FR 
8962).

[[Page 26231]]

During 1980, the MPCA submitted an SO2 State Implementation Plan (SIP) 
revision which the EPA approved in 1981. In 1983, the MPCA requested 
redesignation to attainment for all of AQCR 131 except for an area 
surrounding the emission sources in the Pine Bend Area of Dakota 
County. The redesignation request was made this way because all of AQCR 
131, except the Pine Bend Area, demonstrated monitored attainment of 
the SO2 NAAQS for 2 years following EPA approval of the AQCR 131 SO2 
SIP. EPA delayed action while they reassessed their nonattainment 
policy.
    During 1986 and 1987, the MPCA submitted SO2 SIP revisions for the 
St. Paul Park Area, the Pine Bend Area, and the rest of AQCR 131. From 
1988 through early 1990, the MPCA and EPA focused on resolving issues 
in the Pine Bend Area. EPA suspended actions on SO2 SIPs during 1990 
pending the passage of the Clean Air Act (Act) Amendments of 1990.
    On December 22, 1992, Minnesota submitted an SO2 SIP revision for 
the St. Paul Park Area. EPA required changes to the SIP before it could 
be approved. Minnesota submitted the required changes on September 30, 
1994. EPA approved the St. Paul Park SO2 SIP on January 18, 1995 (60 FR 
3544).

II. Evaluation Criteria

    Title I, section 107(d)(3)(D) of the Act, as amended in 1990, 
authorizes the Governor of a State to request the redesignation of any 
area within the State from nonattainment to attainment. The criteria 
used to review redesignation requests are derived from the Act. An area 
can be redesignated to attainment if all of the following conditions 
are met:
    (1) EPA has determined that the NAAQS have been attained;
    (2) The applicable implementation plan has been fully approved by 
EPA under section 110(k) of the Act;
    (3) EPA has determined that the improvement in air quality is due 
to permanent and enforceable reductions;
    (4) The State has met all applicable requirements for the area 
under section 110 and Part D of the Act; and
    (5) EPA has fully approved a maintenance plan, including a 
contingency plan, for the area under section 175A of the Act.

III. Summary of State Submittal

    The following paragraphs discuss how the State's redesignation 
request for the St. Paul Park Area address the Act's requirements.

A. Demonstrated Attainment of the NAAQS

    As explained in the April 21, 1983, memorandum ``Section 107 
Designation Policy Summary'' from the Director of the Office of Air 
Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS), eight consecutive quarters of 
data showing SO2 NAAQS attainment are required for redesignation. A 
violation of the SO2 NAAQS occurs when more than one exceedence of the 
SO2 NAAQS is recorded in any year (40 CFR 50.4). Minnesota's October 
31, 1995, submittal includes ambient monitoring data showing that the 
St. Paul Park Area has met the SO2 NAAQS from 1989 to 1994, which is 
more than enough time of clean air to promulgate a redesignation to 
attainment. Additionally, preliminary monitoring data for the period of 
1995 to 1996 indicate that the SO2 NAAQS are still being met. The 
highest monitored SO2 values during this time have been well below the 
SO2 standards. The initial exceedences of the SO2 NAAQS in the St. Paul 
Park Area occurred between 1976 and 1978; while, the only other 
possible exceedences in this area occurred in 1987 and 1988. In both 
1987 and 1988, the 75 percent sampling criteria for SO2 was not met at 
the monitor located by the City Garage near Seventh Avenue and Fifth 
Street. A monitor in the St. Paul Park Area was then established across 
the street at 649 Fifth Street on February 28, 1989. There have been no 
exceedences of the SO2 NAAQS at this monitor, and no additional SO2 
exceedences have been recorded in the Aerometric Information and 
Retrieval System database through June 1996.
    Dispersion modeling is also required to demonstrate attainment of 
the SO2 NAAQS. A September 4, 1992, EPA policy memorandum titled 
``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to 
Attainment'' (the Calcagni memo) explains that additional dispersion 
modeling is not required in support of an SO2 redesignation request if 
an adequate modeled attainment demonstration was submitted and approved 
as part of the fully implemented SIP, and no indication of an existing 
air quality deficiency exists. This required modeling data was 
submitted to EPA with SIP revisions on December 22, 1992. The modeled 
demonstration evaluates the SO2 source's impact and provides the areas 
of expected high concentration of SO2 based on current meteorological 
conditions at the Ashland Petroleum Company. The modeling data 
demonstrate modeled attainment of the SO2 NAAQS in the St. Paul Park 
Area with all control measures in operation.

B. Fully Approved SIP

    The SIP for the area must be fully approved under section 110(k) of 
the Act and must satisfy all requirements that apply to the area. EPA's 
guidance for implementing section 110 of the Act is discussed in the 
General Preamble to Title I (57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992). The SO2 SIP 
for the St. Paul Park Area met the requirements of section 110 of the 
Act and was approved by EPA on January 18, 1995 (60 FR 3544).

C. Permanent and Enforceable Reductions in Emissions

    The St. Paul Park Area attainment of the SO2 standards can be 
attributed to the permanent and enforceable control measures 
implemented at the Ashland Petroleum Company. SO2 emission limits and 
operating restrictions are imposed on the Ashland Petroleum Company by 
means of a non-expiring Administrative Order. This Order was submitted 
to EPA in the 1992 SIP submittal and was approved on January 18, 1995, 
which rendered the Order enforceable. The regulations are permanent and 
any future revisions to the rules must be submitted to and approved by 
EPA.
    The Calcagni memo says that States should estimate the percent 
reductions from the year that determined the design value in SO2 
emissions. The original SO2 violations that resulted in AQCR 131 (which 
includes the St. Paul Park Area) being designated nonattainment 
occurred between 1975 and 1977. However, it would be unrealistic to go 
back approximately 20 years to compare SO2 reductions. In addition, 
reliable data from the mid-1970's is not readily available. Therefore, 
improvements in air quality were measured based on reductions in SO2 
emissions since the June 30, 1987, SIP submittal for the St. Paul Park 
Area.
    The June 30, 1987, SIP submittal included a permit for the Ashland 
Petroleum Company, while the 1992 SIP submittal included the 
Administrative Order. The following table illustrates the reductions 
made as a result of the 1992 SIP submittal.

[[Page 26232]]



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Administrative order                           
          Type of equipment                 Permit limit                limit             Percent SO2 reduction 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SRU/SCOT............................  500 lb/hr..............  15 lb/hr...............  97%.                    
FCC.................................  800 lb/hr..............  793.65 lb/hr...........  Negligible.             
All oil-fired sources...............  1.6 lb/MMBtu...........  0.9 lb/MMBtu...........  44%.                    
All gas-fired sources...............  0.0234 lb/MMBtu........  Same...................  None.                   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    SO2 emissions from the Ashland Petroleum Company were modeled with 
all these post-Administrative Order control measures in place. The 
resulting data showed modeled attainment of the SO2 NAAQS. The 
Administrative Order has been approved at the State and Federal level, 
and is non-expiring. Consequently, the reductions in emissions in the 
St. Paul Park Area are permanent and enforceable.

D. Fully Approved Maintenance Plan

    Under section 107(d)(3)(E) and section 175A of the Act, the State 
must submit a SIP revision to provide for a maintenance plan in order 
for an area to be redesignated to attainment. Section 175A of the Act 
sets forth the maintenance plan requirements for areas seeking 
redesignation from nonattainment to attainment. The maintenance plan 
must demonstrate continued attainment of the applicable NAAQS for at 
least 10 years after the area is redesignated as well as contain such 
additional measures, if any, as may be necessary to ensure maintenance. 
Eight years after the redesignation date, the State is required to 
revise its SIP to provide for maintenance of the standard in the 
affected area for an additional ten-year period (section 175A(b) of the 
Act).
    In addition, the maintenance plan should contain such contingency 
measures as the Administrator deems necessary to ensure prompt 
correction of any violation of the NAAQS (section 175A(d) of the Act). 
The Act provides that, at a minimum, the contingency measures must 
include a requirement that the State will implement all measures 
contained in the nonattainment SIP prior to redesignation. Failure to 
maintain the NAAQS and triggering of the contingency plan will not 
necessitate a revision of the SIP unless required by the Administrator, 
as stated in section 175A(d) of the Act.
    EPA redesignation policy stated in the September 4, 1992, 
memorandum lists the five core provisions that a plan must contain in 
order to ensure maintenance of the standards: (1) an attainment 
inventory, (2) a maintenance demonstration, (3) a monitoring network, 
(4) verification of continued attainment, and (5) a contingency plan. 
The following paragraphs will discuss Minnesota's submittal with regard 
to EPA's requirements to ensure maintenance of the standards.
1. Attainment Inventory
    The State is required to develop an attainment inventory to 
identify the level of emissions in the area at the time of 
redesignation. However, the attainment inventory associated with this 
redesignation will be the actual inventory at the time the St. Paul 
Park Area attained the standard because Minnesota has made an adequate 
demonstration that air quality has improved as a result of their 
December 22, 1992, SIP submittal. Minnesota's air dispersion modeling 
included in the 1992 SIP submittal contains the emission inventory of 
SO2 sources in the St. Paul Park Area. The modeling methodology and 
predicted SO2 concentrations based on the SO2 emissions inventory in 
the 1992 SIP submittal are summarized in the following sections.
    The modeling results provided below demonstrate that Minnesota's 
attainment inventory included in their 1992 SIP submittal is sufficient 
to meet the SO2 standards in the future.
2. Maintenance Demonstration
    The State is required to demonstrate maintenance of the NAAQS by 
either showing that future emissions of a pollutant or its precursors 
will not exceed the level of the attainment inventory, or by modeling 
to show that the future mix of sources and emission rates will not 
cause a violation of the NAAQS.
    In the 1992 St. Paul Park SIP submittal, a modeled attainment 
demonstration was included to show that the reductions in emissions as 
a result of this SIP would be sufficient to attain the applicable 
NAAQS. The St. Paul Park Area's related maintenance demonstration is 
based on the same modeling that was included in that 1992 SIP 
submittal. A summary of the air quality model used by Minnesota in the 
1992 SIP submittal and the resulting ambient SO2 concentrations 
expected from the application of various control strategies are 
contained below. Details of the modeled demonstration are contained in 
the proposed action on the St. Paul Park SIP (59 FR 45653).
    Dispersion modeling for the 3-hour, 24-hour, and annual standards 
was conducted according to modeling guidance in effect at the time. The 
Industrial Source Complex Short-Term (ISCST) model was run using the 
regulatory option switch. SO2 impacts were calculated over a 4 km by 4 
km area with 100 meter resolution (i.e., 1,681 receptors). Other (non-
St. Paul Park) larger Twin Cities SO2 sources were modeled explicitly 
while other (non-St. Paul Park) smaller Twin Cities SO2 sources 
including area sources were accounted for using a background SO2 
concentration of 8 /m3 (0.003 ppm). This simple terrain SO2 
modeling indicates maximum second-highest 3-hour and 24-hour SO2 
concentrations of 1186.26 and 332.16 /m3 (0.45 and 0.127 ppm), 
and maximum annual SO2 concentrations of 79.6 /m3 (0.030 ppm). 
All three of these modeled maximum SO2 concentrations fall at or below 
the SO2 NAAQS.
    Complex terrain dispersion modeling for 24-hour averaging time was 
performed using the COMPLEX1 model in VALLEY mode modified for urban 
conditions (i.e., stability E and urban wind profile coefficients). 
This complex terrain SO2 modeling indicates maximum second-highest 24-
hour SO2 concentrations of 195 g/m3 (0.074 ppm). Because the 
COMPLEX1/VALLEY model 24-hour concentration was less than ISCST model 
result, the simple terrain (ISCST model) results were used for 
establishing the SO2 emission limits in the Ashland Petroleum Company 
Administrative Order.
    In either the modeled approach or the attainment inventory 
approach, the maintenance demonstration requires the State to project 
emissions for the 10-year period following redesignation. This 
requirement is used for the purpose of showing that emissions will not 
increase over the attainment inventory. The St. Paul Park Area's 
emissions inventory is contained in the air dispersion modeling for 
Minnesota's 1992 SIP revision submittal. According to this inventory, 
there is approximately a 10 percent growth margin for the 3-hour and 
24-hour standards and approximately a 1 percent growth margin for the 
annual standard.

[[Page 26233]]

3. Monitoring Network
    In accordance with 40 CFR Part 58, after an area has been 
redesignated to attainment, the State must continue to operate an 
appropriate air quality network to verify the attainment status of the 
area. The current SO2 monitoring network in the St. Paul Park Area will 
remain operating in accordance with this regulation.
4. Verification of Continued Attainment
    Each State should ensure that it has the legal authority to 
implement and enforce all measures necessary to attain and maintain the 
NAAQS. Descriptions of the MPCA's authority to enforce the orders were 
included in previous SIP submittal as letters from the Minnesota 
Attorney General's office.
    Regardless of whether the maintenance demonstration is based on a 
showing that future emission inventories will not exceed the attainment 
inventory or on modeling, the State submittal should indicate how the 
State will track the progress of the maintenance plan. This is 
necessary because emission projections made for the maintenance 
demonstration depend on assumptions of point and area source growth.
    Minnesota plans to use their permitting program to track the 
progress of the maintenance plan. The permitting program will be able 
to monitor the growth in the St. Paul Park Area by keeping track of new 
permit applications, keeping track of requests for permit amendments, 
and observing the annual emission inventories that all facilities with 
permits must submit to the MPCA. In order to thoroughly monitor the 
growth in the area with their permitting program, Minnesota has lowered 
their potential to emit threshold for SO2 sources needing a permit to 
50 tons per year (the Federal limit is 100 tons per year).
    The frequency of these monitoring activities will depend on the 
timing of requests for new permits and permit amendments. Facilities 
operating under permits must submit their emission inventories in the 
spring of every year.
    Furthermore, future emissions are not predicted to increase for 
several qualitative reasons. First, the Clean Fuel Fleets Project 
initiated by Minnesota's refineries is producing diesel fuel with 0.05 
percent sulfur instead of the standard 0.5 percent sulfur. This will 
decrease SO2 emissions for companies using this cleaner fuel. Second, 
Minnesota has a ``registration permit'' rule that encourages facilities 
to reduce emissions, thereby avoiding the need for a Title V permit. 
Third, Minnesota intends to require dispersion modeling of all major 
(Part 70) SO2 sources with a potential to emit at least 100 tons per 
year. The final reason relates to the possible overestimate of 
predicted SO2 concentrations due to the use of conservative stack base 
elevations for many of the smaller SO2 emissions sources (i.e., the 
Mississippi River elevation which is the lowest point in the Twin 
Cities area).
    The incentives to reduce SO2 emissions, Minnesota's permitting 
program, requirements for dispersion modeling, and the overestimates of 
predicted SO2 concentrations jointly illustrate that SO2 emissions are 
not likely to increase in the St. Paul Park Area. These factors will 
also provide for continued attainment of the SO2 NAAQS in the St. Paul 
Park Area.
5. Contingency Plan
    Section 175A of the Act requires that a maintenance plan include 
contingency provisions, as necessary, to promptly correct any violation 
of the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation of that area. These 
contingency measures are distinguished from those generally required 
for nonattainment areas under section 172(c)(9). For the purposes of 
section 175A, a State is not required to have fully adopted contingency 
measures that will take effect without further action by the State in 
order for the maintenance plan to be approved. However, the contingency 
plan is considered to be an enforceable part of the SIP and should 
ensure that the contingency measures are adopted expediently once they 
are triggered. The plan should clearly identify the measures to be 
adopted, a schedule and procedure for adoption and implementation, and 
a specific time limit for action by the State. As a necessary part of 
the plan, the State should also identify specific indicators, or 
triggers, which will be used to determine when the contingency measures 
need to be implemented.
    The General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Act 
published in the Federal Register on April 16, 1992 (57 FR 13498), 
states that SO2 SIPs present ``special considerations'' when referring 
to contingency plans. As stated in the Preamble, the modeling of SO2 
sources is considered reliable for predicting the amount of SO2 emitted 
from sources in the nonattainment area. There is not such confidence 
with other pollutants. Also, the Preamble states that control measures 
for SO2 emissions are ``well understood and far less prone to 
uncertainty.'' Therefore, it would be unlikely for an SO2 area to 
implement emission controls but fail to attain the NAAQS. For the 
reasons stated above, EPA concluded that contingency measures in SO2 
SIPs where a comprehensive program exists in the State ``to identify 
sources of violations of the SO2 NAAQS and to undertake an aggressive 
follow-up for compliance and enforcement'' need not submit contingency 
plans with their SO2 SIPs.
    MPCA does have comprehensive enforcement and compliance programs 
that meet the above stated requirements.
    The attainment inventory, maintenance demonstration, monitoring 
network, verification of continued attainment, and contingency plan 
submitted for the St. Paul Park Area constitute sound maintenance plans 
and satisfy EPA's requirements.

E. Part D and Other Section 110 Requirements

    EPA approved the SO2 SIP revision for the St. Paul Park Area on 
January 18, 1995, after having concluded that the plan satisfied the 
requirements of Part D and section 110 of the Act. Once the SO2 
nonattainment area is redesignated to attainment, the Part D new source 
review program requirements will not apply. However, the sources in the 
area will now be required to comply with the prevention of significant 
deterioration (PSD) program. Minnesota has been delegated the Federal 
PSD program as published in the Code of Federal Regulations at 40 CFR 
52.1234 (1994).
1. Section 176 Conformity Requirements
    Section 176 of the Act requires States to revise their SIPs to 
establish criteria and procedures to ensure that individual Federal 
actions will conform to the overall air quality planning goals in the 
applicable State SIP. Section 176 further provides that the State's 
conformity revisions must be consistent with the Federal conformity 
regulations promulgated by EPA under the Act. The requirement used by 
Federal agencies to determine conformity is defined in 40 CFR part 93 
subpart B (``general conformity'').
    EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret the conformity 
requirements as not being applicable requirements for purposes of 
evaluating redesignation requests under section 107(d) of the Act. The 
rationale for this is based on a combination of two factors. First, the 
requirement to submit SIP revisions to comply with the conformity 
provisions of the Act continues to apply to areas after redesignation 
to attainment, since such areas would be subject to a section 175A 
maintenance plan. Second, EPA's Federal conformity rules require the 
performance of conformity analyses in

[[Page 26234]]

the absence of federally approved State rules. Therefore, because areas 
are subject to the conformity requirements regardless of whether they 
are redesignated to attainment, and must implement conformity under 
Federal rules if State rules are not yet approved, EPA believes it is 
reasonable to view these requirements as not being applicable 
requirements for purposes of evaluation of a redesignation request. 
Consequently, the SO2 redesignation requests for the St. Paul Park Area 
may be approved notwithstanding the lack of fully approved general 
conformity rules. Refer to EPA's action in the Tampa, Florida, ozone 
redesignation finalized on December 7, 1995 (60 FR 627428).

IV. Final Rulemaking Action

    EPA is approving the St. Paul Park Area redesignation request from 
the State of Minnesota submitted on October 31, 1995. Therefore, EPA is 
redesignating the St. Paul Park Area in Washington and Dakota Counties 
to attainment. Consequently, Washington and Dakota Counties in their 
entireties will be designated as attainment for the SO2 NAAQS. EPA has 
completed an analysis of this SIP revision request based on a review of 
the materials presented, and has determined that they met the 
requirements of the Act.
    EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because the 
EPA views this as a noncontroversial issue and anticipates no adverse 
comments. However, in a separate document in this Federal Register 
publication, EPA is proposing to approve the redesignation request 
should adverse or critical comments be filed. This action will be 
effective July 14, 1997 unless, by June 12, 1997, adverse or critical 
comments are received.
    If EPA receives such comments, the actions affecting the St. Paul 
Park Area will be withdrawn before the effective date by publishing a 
subsequent document. All public comments received will be addressed in 
a subsequent final rule based on applicable parts of this action 
serving as a proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment 
period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting on this 
action should do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the 
public is advised that this action will be effective July 14, 1997.
    Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or 
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for 
revision to any SIP. Each request for revision to the SIP shall be 
considered separately in light of specific technical, economic, and 
environmental factors and in relation to relevant statutory and 
regulatory requirements.

V. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

    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 D. Nichols, Assistant Administrator 
for Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget has exempted 
this regulatory action from Executive Order 12866 review.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    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. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 42 
U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
    Redesignation of an area to attainment under section 107(d)(3)(E) 
of the Act does not impose any new requirements on small entities. 
Redesignation is an action that affects the status of a geographical 
area and does not impose any regulatory requirements on sources. The 
Administrator certifies that the approval of a redesignation request 
will not affect a substantial number of small entities.

C. Unfunded Mandates

    Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 
signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must undertake various actions 
in association with 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. This Federal action approves pre-existing requirements under 
state or local law, and imposes no new Federal requirements. 
Accordingly, no additional costs to state, local, or tribal 
governments, or the private sector, result from this action.

D. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office

    Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) as added by the Small Business 
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA submitted a report 
containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, 
the U.S. House of Representatives and the Controller General of the 
General Accounting Office prior to publication of the rule in the 
Federal Register. This rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 
U.S.C. 804(2).

E. Petitions for Judicial Review

    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 July 14, 1997. 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.

Executive Order 12866

    The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this rule from the 
requirements of Section 6 of Executive Order 12866.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control.

    Dated: April 23, 1997.
Valdas V. Adamkus,
Regional Administrator.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, part 81, chapter I, title 
40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 81--[AMENDED]

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

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


[[Page 26235]]


    2. Section 81.324 is amended by revising the entry for AQCR 131 in 
the table entitled ``Minnesota-SO2'' to read as follows:


Sec. 81.324  Minnesota.

* * * * *

                                                  Minnesota-SO2                                                 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Does not     Does not                            
                                                                 meet         meet      Cannot be    Better than
                      Designated area                          primary     secondary    classified    national  
                                                              standards    standards                  standards 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AQCR 131:                                                                                                       
    Anoka County...........................................  ...........  ...........  ...........            X 
    Carver County..........................................  ...........  ...........  ...........            X 
    Dakota County..........................................  ...........  ...........  ...........            X 
    Hennepin County........................................  ...........  ...........  ...........            X 
    Ramsey County..........................................  ...........  ...........  ...........            X 
    Scott County...........................................  ...........  ...........  ...........            X 
    Washington County......................................  ...........  ...........  ...........            X 
                                                                                                                
*                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *                
                                                        *                                                       
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 97-11994 Filed 5-12-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P