[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