[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 97 (Monday, May 20, 2002)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 35437-35439]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-12414]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[MN66-01-7291a; FRL-7206-3]


Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; 
Minnesota

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency is approving a site-
specific revision to the Minnesota Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) 
State Implementation Plan (SIP) for Marathon Ashland Petroleum, LLC. 
(Marathon Ashland). By its submittal dated February 6, 2000, the 
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) requested that EPA approve 
Marathon Ashland's Title V Operating Permit into the Minnesota 
SO2 SIP and remove the Marathon Ashland Administrative Order 
from the state SO2 SIP. The request is approvable because it 
satisfies the requirements of the Clean Air Act (Act). The rationale 
for the approval and other information are provided in this notice.

DATES: This direct final rule will be effective July 19, 2002, unless 
EPA receives adverse comment by June 19, 2002. If EPA receives adverse 
comments, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule 
in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not 
take effect.

ADDRESSES: Written comments may be mailed to: Carlton Nash, Chief, 
Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), United 
States Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 
Chicago, Illinois 60604. Copies of the documents relevant to this 
action are available for inspection during normal business hours at the 
above address. (Please telephone Christos Panos at (312) 353-8328, 
before visiting the Region 5 office.)
    A copy of the SIP revision is available for inspection at the 
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, DC 20460, (202) 260-7548.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christos Panos, Regulation Development 
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Air and Radiation Division, 
United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West 
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-8328.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This supplemental information section is 
organized as follows:

I. General Information:
    1. What action is EPA taking today?
    2. Why is EPA taking this action?
II. Background on Minnesota Submittal
    1. What is the background for this action?
    2. What information did Minnesota submit, and what were its 
requests?
    3. What is a ``Title I Condition?''
III. Final Rulemaking Action
IV. Administrative Requirements

I. General Information

1. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?

    In this action, EPA is approving into the Minnesota SO2 
SIP certain portions of the Title V permit for Marathon Ashland, 
located in the cities of St. Paul Park and Newport, Washington County, 
Minnesota. Specifically, EPA is only approving into the SIP those 
portions of the permit cited as ``Title I condition: SIP for 
SO2 NAAQS 40 CFR pt.50 and Minnesota State Implementation 
Plan (SIP).'' In this same action, EPA is removing the Marathon Ashland 
Administrative Order from the state SO2 SIP.

2. Why Is EPA Taking This Action?

    EPA is taking this action because the state's request does not 
change any of the emission limitations currently in the SIP or their 
accompanying supportive documents, such as the SO2 air 
dispersion modeling. The revision to the SIP does not approve any new 
construction or allow an increase in emissions, thereby providing for 
attainment and maintenance of the SO2 National Ambient Air 
Quality Standards (NAAQS) and satisfying the applicable SO2 
requirements of the Act. The only change to the SO2 SIP is 
the enforceable document for Marathon Ashland, from the Administrative 
Order to the federal Title V permit.

II. Background on Minnesota Submittal

1. What Is the Background for This Action?

    Marathon Ashland is located in the cities of St. Paul Park and 
Newport, Washington County, Minnesota. Monitored violations of the 
primary SO2 NAAQS from 1975 through 1977 led EPA to 
designate Air Quality Control Region (AQCR) 131 as a primary 
SO2 nonattainment area on March 3, 1978 (43 FR 8962). AQCR 
131 includes Washington County. In response to Part D requirements of 
the Clean Air Act, MPCA submitted an SO2 plan on August 4, 
1980. EPA approved the Minnesota Part D SO2 SIP for AQCR 131 
on April 8, 1981 (46 FR 20996).
    The promulgation of the Stack Height Rule on July 8, 1985, required 
MPCA to review existing emission limitations to determine if any 
sources were affected by the new Rule. The MPCA determined that 
Marathon Ashland would require additional permit revisions due to 
modeled violations of the SO2 NAAQS using the reduced 
creditable stack heights. A SIP revision for Marathon Ashland was 
submitted on June 30, 1987, which MPCA later withdrew because the 
company could not meet one of the emission limits listed in the permit.
    On December 11, 1992, the MPCA submitted an SO2 SIP 
revision for the St. Paul Park/Ashland area, which included an 
administrative order for Marathon Ashland. Minnesota submitted a 
revised plan on September 30, 1994, in response to changes EPA required 
to the proposed SIP revision before it could be approved. EPA approved 
the St. Paul Park/Ashland SO2 SIP on January 18, 1995 (60 FR 
3544).
    The state requested that portions of Dakota and Washington Counties 
(the areas surrounding Marathon Ashland) be redesignated to attainment 
of the SO2 NAAQS on October 31, 1995. EPA approved the St. 
Paul Park Area redesignation request on May 13, 1997 (62 FR 26230).
    On December 31, 1998, the MPCA submitted to EPA Amendment Four to 
Marathon Ashland's order as a site-specific SO2 SIP 
revision. EPA determined that Amendment Four to Marathon Ashland's 
order provided for attainment and maintenance of the SO2 
NAAQS and approved the revised order into the state SIP on August 16, 
1999 (64 FR 44408).

2. What Information Did Minnesota Submit, and What Were its Requests?

    The SIP revision submitted by MPCA on February 6, 2000, consists of 
a Title V operating permit issued to Marathon Ashland. The state has 
requested that EPA approve the following:
    (1) The inclusion into the Minnesota SO2 SIP only the 
portions of the NSP Riverside Plant Title V permit cited as ``Title I 
condition: SIP for SO2 NAAQS

[[Page 35438]]

40 CFR pt.50 and Minnesota State Implementation Plan (SIP)'; and,
    (2) the removal from the Minnesota SO2 SIP of the 
Administrative Order for Marathon Ashland previously approved into the 
SIP.

3. What is a ``Title I Condition?'

    SIP control measures were contained in permits issued to culpable 
sources in Minnesota until 1990 when EPA determined that limits in 
state-issued permits are not federally enforceable because the permits 
expire. The state then issued permanent Administrative Orders to 
culpable sources in nonattainment areas from 1991 to February of 1996.
    Minnesota's Title V permitting rule, approved into the state SIP on 
May 2, 1995 (60 FR 21447), includes the term ``Title I condition'' 
which was written, in part, to satisfy EPA requirements that SIP 
control measures remain permanent. A ``Title I condition'' is defined 
as ``any condition based on source-specific determination of ambient 
impacts imposed for the purposes of achieving or maintaining attainment 
with the national ambient air quality standard and which was part of 
the state implementation plan approved by EPA or submitted to the EPA 
pending approval under section 110 of the act * * *.'' The rule also 
states that ``Title I conditions and the permittee's obligation to 
comply with them, shall not expire, regardless of the expiration of the 
other conditions of the permit.'' Further, ``any title I condition 
shall remain in effect without regard to permit expiration or 
reissuance, and shall be restated in the reissued permit.''
    Minnesota has since resumed using permits as the enforceable 
document for imposing emission limitations and compliance requirements 
in SIPs. The SIP requirements in the permits submitted by MPCA are 
cited as ``Title I condition: State Implementation Plan for 
SO2,'' therefore assuring that the SIP requirements will 
remain permanent and enforceable. In addition, EPA reviewed the state's 
procedure for using permits to implement site-specific SIP requirements 
and found it to be acceptable under both Titles I and V of the Act 
(July 3, 1997 letter from David Kee, EPA, to Michael J. Sandusky, 
MPCA). The MPCA has committed to using this procedure if the Title I 
SIP conditions in the permit issued to Marathon Ashland and included in 
the SIP submittal need to be revised in the future.

III. Final Rulemaking Action

    EPA is approving the site-specific SIP revision for Marathon 
Ashland, located in the cities of St. Paul Park and Newport, Washington 
County, Minnesota. Specifically, EPA is approving into the SIP only 
those portions of Marathon Ashland's Title V permit cited as ``Title I 
condition: SIP for SO2 NAAQS 40 CFR pt.50 and Minnesota 
State Implementation Plan (SIP).'' In this same action, EPA is also 
removing from the state SO2 SIP the Marathon Ashland 
Administrative Order which had previously been approved into the SIP on 
January 18, 1995 and revised on August 16, 1999.
    The EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because we 
view this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse 
comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal 
Register publication, we are publishing a separate document that will 
serve as the proposal to approve the state plan if relevant adverse 
comments are filed. This rule will be effective July 19, 2002 without 
further notice unless we receive relevant adverse comments by June 19, 
2002. If we receive such comments, we will withdraw this action before 
the effective date by publishing a subsequent document that will 
withdraw the final action. All public comments received will then be 
addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed action. The 
EPA will not institute a second comment period. Any parties interested 
in commenting on this action should do so at this time. If we do not 
receive any comments, this action will be effective July 19, 2002.
    Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or 
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future implementation 
plan. 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.

IV. Administrative Requirements

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not 
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this 
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, 
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action 
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes 
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. 
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because 
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does 
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by 
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).
    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will 
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on 
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or 
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism 
implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the 
States, on the relationship between the national government and the 
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule 
implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or 
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean 
Air Act. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically 
significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In 
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the 
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP 
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements 
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not 
impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
    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

[[Page 35439]]

agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes 
a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the 
Comptroller General of the United States. Section 804 exempts from 
section 801 the following types of rules: (1) Rules of particular 
applicability; (2) rules relating to agency management or personnel; 
and (3) 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 rule of 
particular applicability.
    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 July 19, 2002. 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, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Sulfur dioxide.

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: March 8, 2002.
Robert Springer,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

    Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, chapter I, part 52, is 
amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

    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 removing and reserving paragraphs 
(c)(38) and (c)(49) and adding paragraph (c)(55) to read as follows:
    Sec. 52.1220 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (38) [Reserved]
* * * * *
    (49) [Reserved]
* * * * *
    (55) On February 6, 2000, the State of Minnesota submitted a site-
specific revision to the Minnesota Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) SIP 
for Marathon Ashland Petroleum, LLC (Marathon Ashland), located in the 
cities of St. Paul Park and Newport, Washington County, Minnesota. 
Specifically, EPA is only approving into the SIP only those portions of 
the Marathon Ashland Title V Operating permit cited as ``Title I 
condition: SIP for SO2 NAAQS 40 CFR pt.50 and Minnesota 
State Implementation Plan (SIP).'' In this same action, EPA is removing 
from the state SO2 SIP the Marathon Ashland Administrative 
Order previously approved in paragraph (c)(38) and revised in paragraph 
(c)(49) of this section.
    (i) Incorporation by reference
    (A) AIR EMISSION PERMIT NO. 16300003-003, issued by the Minnesota 
Pollution Control Agency to Marathon Ashland Petroleum, LLC on October 
26, 1999, Title I conditions only.

[FR Doc. 02-12414 Filed 5-17-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P