Approval and promulgation of State Implementation Plans; Minnesota

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[MN38-01-6971a; FRL-6339-5]

Approval and promulgation of State Implementation Plans;

Minnesota

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action approves revisions to the Minnesota State

Implementation Plan (SIP) permitting program which add new sections to

Minnesota's Air Emission Permits Rule 7007 and Standards for Stationary

Sources Rule 7011. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency

(MPCA)submitted these new sections to the Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) on January 12, 1995. The new permitting rules will

streamline the permitting process in Minnesota and, thereby, reduce the

permitting burden on both sources within the State and the MPCA. Rules

7007 and 7011 are revised, respectively, by the addition of the

Registration Permit Rule and the Control Equipment Rule. In the

proposed rules section of this Federal Register, 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. 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 July 19, 1999,

unless EPA receives adverse or critical comments by June 17, 1999. If

adverse comment is received, 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 should be sent to Robert Miller, Chief,

Permits and Grants Section, Air Programs Branch(AR-18J), United

Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,

Illinois 60604. (It is recommended that you telephone Rachel Rineheart

at (312) 886-7017 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: Rachel Rineheart, Permits and Grants

Section(AR-18J), Air Programs Branch, Air and Radiation Division,

United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West

Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-7017.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Minnesota has created two new permitting rules to the Minnesota SIP

permitting program. The first rule, Registration Permit Rule, specifies

certain limitations under which sources may elect to operate. If an

owner or operator elects to comply with the rule, it must register with

the State, and the State will issue a generic permit that requires

operation in compliance with the applicable sections of the Minnesota

Rules. The second addition to the Minnesota SIP permitting program is

the Control Equipment Rule. This rule establishes control efficiencies

for add-on pollution control equipment that can be used in determining

a source's potential to emit, and requires the source to use the

control equipment.

A. Registration Permit Rule

This rule establishes regulatory options for certain categories of

smaller sources. MPCA has developed four categories of options under

this rule. A source qualifying under one of these options will register

with the State, indicating that it has accepted the limitations

contained in the rule for that option. EPA is approving options A, B,

and D, but is disapproving option C.

Option A. To qualify for permitting under Option A, a source must

have a potential to emit less than the major source thresholds without

emission control equipment or other limitations on production or

operation. Qualifying owners or operators of stationary sources are

only required to obtain a permit if the source is subject to one of the

New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) listed below:

1. 40 CFR part 60, subpart Dc, Standards of Performance for

Small Industrial-Commercial-Institutional Stream Generating Units.

2. 40 CFR part 60, subpart K, Standards of Performance for

Storage Vessels for Petroleum Liquids for which Construction,

Reconstruction or Modification Commenced

[[Page 26881]]

After June 11, 1973 and Prior to May 19, 1978.

3. 40 CFR part 60, subpart Ka, Standards of Performance for

Storage Vessels for Petroleum Liquids for Which Construction,

Reconstruction or Modification Commenced After May 19, 1978 and

Prior to July 23, 1984.

4. 40 CFR part 60, subpart Kb, Standards of Performance for

Volatile Organic Liquid Storage Vessels (including Petroleum Storage

Vessels) for which Construction, Reconstruction or Modification

Commenced after July 23, 1984.

5. 40 CFR part 60, subpart DD, Standards of Performance for

Grain Elevators.

6. 40 CFR part 60, subpart EE, Standards of Performance for

Surface Coating of Metal Furniture.

7. 40 CFR part 60, subpart SS, Standards of Performance for

Industrial Surface Coating: Large Appliances.

8. 40 CFR part 60, subpart JJJ, Standards of Performance for

Petroleum Dry Cleaners.

9. 40 CFR part 60, subpart OOO, Standards of Performance for

Nonmetallic Mineral Processors.

10. 40 CFR part 60, subpart TTT, Standards of Performance for

Industrial Cleaning of Plastic Parts for Business Machines.

Sources that qualify for a permit under this option must submit an

application to the MPCA which describes the facility and lists the

applicable NSPS, and provide a copy of the applicable portion of the

NSPS.

Option B. Sources that purchase or use less than 2000 gallons per

year of volatile organic compound (VOC) containing materials, and whose

sole emissions are from the use of these chemicals, may apply for

permitting under Option B. Assuming worst case conditions, the VOC

emissions from these sources are less than 10 tons per year, which is

significantly less than the major source threshold. To apply for a

permit under Option B, an owner or operator must provide to MPCA a

description of the facility, a copy of any NSPS that would apply with

the relevant portions highlighted, a statement of whether compliance

will be based on purchase or use records, and the actual or estimated

gallons of VOC containing material purchased or used over the last 12

month period. The rule requires sources operating under a permit issued

pursuant to this option to record each month the amount of VOC

containing material purchased or used during the month, to record and

calculate the 12 month rolling sum of material purchased or used, and

to comply with all applicable requirements.

Option C and Basis for Disapproval. Owners or operators of sources

that consist solely of indirect heating units, reciprocating internal

combustion engines, and/or VOC emissions from use of VOC-containing

material may apply for permitting under this option provided that they

meet certain criteria regarding operation outlined in the rule. The

rule attempts to allow the maximum flexibility possible in the types

and quantities of fossil fuel that may be burned at a facility, while

still ensuring that emissions do not exceed major sources thresholds.

Qualification for the rule is determined by a series of equations based

on AP-42 emission factors that estimate emissions from each type of

activity at the facility for its highest emitted pollutant. If the sum

of emissions from all activities are less than 100 tons per year, then

the source can qualify for permitting under this option and avoid

permitting under major source programs. In a situation where a facility

burns a combination of fuels with different worst case pollutants, the

rule would certainly limit a facility's emissions to less than major

source levels since applicability is determined on a per pollutant

basis, and MPCA's method totals all worst case pollutant emissions.

However, if a facility burns a single fuel or a combination of fuels

that have the same worst case pollutant, this rule would allow a source

to emit up to just under the 100 ton major source threshold level.

Because option C fails to provide specific limitations on fuel

combustion and uses a test method that lacks reliability for these

purposes, EPA finds that option C does not satisfactorily restrict

emissions. Therefore, EPA is disapproving option C.

Option D. Option D provides that any source with actual emissions

less than or equal to 50 percent of the major source threshold

qualifies for permitting under this option. In the January 25, 1995

memorandum entitled ``Options for Limiting the Potential to Emit (PTE)

of a Stationary Source Under Section 112 and Title V of the Clean Air

Act (Act),'' signed by John S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality

Planning and Standards, EPA provided a 2 year transition period for

sources with actual emissions below 50 percent of the major source

threshold for every consecutive 12 month period. During the transition

period these sources were not required to obtain Title V permits. This

2 year transition period was extended twice, first in a memorandum

dated August 27, 1996, and again in a memorandum dated July 10, 1998.

The purpose of the transition periods was to provide States with

adequate time to develop similar rules to limit the potential to emit

of these sources.

B. Control Equipment Rule

This rule provides that the owner or operator of a stationary

source which uses the control efficiencies listed in the rule to

determine its potential to emit is subject to the requirements of the

Control Equipment Rule found at Minnesota Rules 7011.0060-7011.0080. In

other words, a facility must either comply with Minn. Rules 7011.0060-

7011.0080, or it may not use the control efficiencies listed in the

rule to determine its potential to emit. There are two exceptions to

applicability. The first is that an owner or operator who has been

issued a part 70, State or general permit issued under Minnesota Rules

7007, which specifically allows either non-use of the equipment or a

different control efficiency, is not subject to the rule. The second

exemption to applicability is for sources which have emissions below

the major source level without the use of the control equipment. The

rule contains control equipment requirements for certain devices for

the control of Particulate Matter (PM) and VOC emissions. For PM, the

listed control equipment are as follows: high, medium, and low

efficiency centrifugal collectors; multiple cyclone without fly ash

reinjection; multiple cyclone with fly ash reinjection; wet cyclone

separators or cyclonic scrubbers; electrostatic precipitators; fabric

filters; spray towers; venturi scrubbers; impingement plate scrubbers;

and HEPA and wall filters. VOC control devices include afterburners

(thermal or catalytic oxidation), and flaring or direct combustors. For

each type of listed control equipment, the rule establishes a control

efficiency to be used, maintenance requirements, and monitoring and

recordkeeping requirements. In addition, the rule requires that anyone

subject to the rule must operate the listed control equipment at all

times. The rule establishes control efficiencies for both total

enclosures and for systems using hoods to capture pollutants.

II. Final Determination

Based on the rationale set forth above and in EPA's Technical

Support Document, EPA is approving Minnesota rules 7007.1110-7007.1120,

7007.1130, and 7011.0060-7011.0080, to be incorporated into the

Minnesota SIP and that Minnesota rule 7007.1125 be disapproved.

EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because EPA

views this as a noncontroversial revision and anticipates no adverse

comments. However, in a separate document in this

[[Page 26882]]

Federal Register publication, EPA is proposing to approve the State

Plan should adverse written comments be filed. This action will be

effective without further notice unless EPA receives adverse written

comments by June 17, 1999. Should EPA receive such comments, it will

publish a final rule informing the public that this action will not

take effect. 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 on July 19, 1999.

III. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this

regulatory action from Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, entitled

``Regulatory Planning and Review.''

B. Executive Order 12875: Enhancing Intergovernmental Partnerships

Under E.O. 12875, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not

required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a State local or

tribal government, unless the Federal government provides the funds

necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those

governments. If the mandate is unfunded, EPA must provide to the OMB a

description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with

representatives of affected State, local and tribal governments, the

nature of their concerns, copies of any written communications from the

governments, and a statement supporting the need to issue the

regulation. In addition, E.O. 12875 requires EPA to develop an

effective process permitting elective officials and other

representatives of State, local and tribal governments ``to provide

meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory proposals

containing significant unfunded mandates.'' This rule does not create a

mandate on State, local or tribal governments. The rule does not impose

any enforceable duties on these entities. Accordingly, the requirements

of section 1(a) of E.O. 12875 do not apply to this rule.

C. Executive Order 13084: Consultation and Coordination With Indian

Tribal Governments

Under E.O. 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not

required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the

communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial

direct compliance costs on these communities, unless the Federal

government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance

costs incurred by the tribal governments. If the mandate is unfunded,

EPA must provide to the OMB in a separately identified section of the

preamble to the rule, a description of the extent of EPA's prior

consultation with representatives of affected tribal governments, a

summary of the nature of their concerns, and a statement supporting the

need to issue the regulation. In addition, E.O. 13084 requires EPA to

develop an effective process permitting elected and other

representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful

and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters

that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.'' This rule

does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities of Indian

Tribal Governments. Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) of

E.O. 13084 do not apply to this rule.

D. Executive Order 13045

Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety

Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that: (1) is

determined to be ``economically significant'' as defined under E.O.

12066, and (2) concerns an environmental health or safety risk that EPA

has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children.

If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate

the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on

children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other

potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered

by the Agency. This rule is not subject to E.O. 13045 because it does

not involve decisions intended to mitigate environmental health or

safety risks.

E. Regulatory Flexibility

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency

to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to

notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies

that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small

businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental

jurisdictions. This direct final rule will not have a significant

impact on a substantial number of small entities because plan approvals

under section 110(a) do not create any new requirements but simply

approve requirements that the State is already imposing. Therefore,

because the Federal approval does not create any new requirements I

certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities. Moreover, due to the nature of

the Federal-State relationship under the Clean Air Act (ACT)

preparation of a flexibility analysis would constitute Federal inquiry

into the economic reasonableness of a State action. The Act forbids EPA

to base its actions on such grounds. Union Electric Co., v. USEPA, 427

U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

F. Unfunded Mandates

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

annual costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate;

or to 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.

The EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated does

not include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated annual 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 pre-existing 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.

G. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

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 copy of the rule,

to each House of Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United

States. The EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other

required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of

Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior

to the

[[Page 26883]]

publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot

take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal

Register. This rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.

804(2).

H. 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 19, 1999. 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, Particulate matter, Volatile organic compound, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: April 23, 1999.

David A. Ullrich,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations 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.

Subpart Y--Minnesota

2. Section 52.1220 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(48) to read

as follows:

Sec. 52.1220 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(48) On January 12, 1995, Minnesota submitted revisions to its air

permitting rules. The submitted revisions provide generally applicable

limitations on potential to emit for certain categories of sources.

(i) Incorporation by reference. Submitted portions of Minnesota

regulations in Chapter 7007, and 7011.0060 through 7011.0080 effective

December 27, 1994.

[FR Doc. 99-12366 Filed 5-17-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P