![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Minnesota
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: June 5, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 108)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 33631-33633]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr05jn03-9]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[MN81-7306a; FRL-7493-9]
Approval and Promulgation of 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 Flint Hills Resources, L.P.
(formerly known as Koch Petroleum Group, L.P.). The Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency (MPCA) submitted the SIP revision request on March 13,
2003. 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 August 4, 2003, unless
EPA receives adverse comment by July 7, 2003. 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.)
[[Page 33632]]
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?
3. What is the background for this action?
II. Review of State Implementation Plan Revision
1. Why did the State submit this SIP Revision?
2. What did Minnesota submit for approval into the SIP?
3. How does the SIP revision show attainment of the
SO2 standards?
III. Final Rulemaking Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. General Information
1. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?
In this action, EPA is approving into the Minnesota SO2
SIP a site-specific revision for Flint Hills Resources L.P. (FHR),
located in the Pine Bend Area of Rosemount, Dakota County, Minnesota.
Specifically, EPA is approving and thereby incorporating Amendment No.
6 to FHR's administrative order (order) into the Minnesota
SO2 SIP.
2. Why Is EPA Taking this Action?
EPA is taking this action because the state's submittal for FHR is
fully approvable. The SIP revision provides for attainment and
maintenance of the SO2 National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) and satisfies the applicable SO2
requirements of the Act. A more detailed explanation of how the state's
submittal meets these requirements is in EPA's March 20, 2003 Technical
Support Document (TSD).
3. What Is the Background for this Action?
EPA redesignated the Pine Bend area from a primary SO2
nonattainment area to attainment of the SO2 NAAQS in a
direct final notice published on May 31, 1995 (60 FR 28339).
On December 20, 2000, MPCA submitted a SIP revision consisting of
Amendment No. 4 to FHR's order. EPA approved Amendment No. 4 into the
SO2 SIP on June 12, 2001 (66 FR 31545). On May 2, 2001, MPCA
submitted a SIP revision consisting of Amendment No. 5 to FHR's order.
EPA approved Amendment No. 5 into the SO2 SIP on February
21, 2002 (67 FR 7957). Amendment No. 4 and Amendment No. 5 were
required to reduce emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOX) and
SO2 at FHR.
Koch Petroleum Group, L.P. changed its corporate name to Flint
Hills Resources, L.P. on January 1, 2002.
II. Review of State Implementation Plan Revision
1. Why Did the State Submit this SIP Revision?
This is the third revision to the order initiated by FHR to reduce
emissions of NOX and SO2 pursuant to a December
22, 2000 consent decree in United States v. Koch Petroleum Group, L.P.,
Civil Action No. 00-2756-PAM-SRN. The revised order contains changes
needed to reduce emissions as required by the consent decree, changes
supporting the production of lower-sulfur fuels, and changes affecting
the refinery that have occurred since the Order was first issued.
2. What Did Minnesota Submit for Approval into the SIP?
The March 13, 2003 revision submitted by MPCA requests that EPA
approve Amendment No. 6 to FHR's order into the Minnesota
SO2 SIP. Amendment No. 6 will allow FHR to modify its
refinery in order to meet the requirements established in the consent
decree and to make other changes, such as allowing FHR to make lower
sulfur gasoline (Tier 2 gasoline) and lower-sulfur diesel fuels. The
revised order also reflects other changes previously made at the
refinery, such as the removal or addition of equipment, the elimination
of fuel oil combustion, limiting the sulfur content of diesel fuel used
at the refinery, and reducing the number of locations for decoking.
3. How Does the SIP Revision Show Attainment of the SO2
Standards?
The MPCA submitted air quality modeling in support of FHR's
SO2 SIP revision. The modeled attainment demonstration
included all significant SO2 emission sources at FHR and
included emissions from several nearby facilities. A background
concentration was also added to the modeled values for comparison to
the NAAQS. The modeling demonstrates attainment and maintenance of the
SO2 NAAQS in the Pine Bend area. A more detailed discussion
is in EPA's March 20, 2003 TSD.
III. Final Rulemaking Action
EPA is approving the site-specific SIP revision for Flint Hills
Resources, L.P., located in the Pine Bend area of Rosemount, Dakota
County, Minnesota. Specifically, EPA is incorporating Amendment No. 6
to FHR's Administrative Order into the Minnesota SO2 SIP.
The State submitted this SIP revision on March 13, 2003 as a result of
negotiations to a consent decree between EPA, MPCA and FHR, in which
FHR proposed a series of modifications at the Pine Bend refinery. The
revised Order contains changes needed to reduce emissions as required
by the Consent Decree, changes supporting the production of lower-
sulfur fuels, and changes affecting the refinery that have occurred
since the Order was first issued. As described above, this project
provides for attainment and maintenance of the SO2 NAAQS in
the Pine Bend area and is therefore fully approvable.
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 August 4, 2003 without
further notice unless we receive relevant adverse comments by July 7,
2003. 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. We will then address all public comments
received 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 August 4, 2003.
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. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
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
[[Page 33633]]
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 (Public Law 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. section 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 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.
section 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 August 4, 2003. 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.
Dated: April 17, 2003.
Bharat Mathur,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
? Title 40, chapter I 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 et seq.
? 2. Section 52.1220 is amended by removing and reserving paragraphs
(c)(57) and (c)(60) and adding paragraph (c)(62) to read as follows:
Sec. 52.1220 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(57) [Reserved]
* * * * *
(60) [Reserved]
* * * * *
(62) On March 13, 2003, the State of Minnesota submitted a site-
specific State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision for the control of
emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) for Flint Hills Resources,
L.P., located in the Pine Bend Area of Rosemount, Dakota County,
Minnesota. Specifically, EPA is approving into the SO2 SIP
Amendment No. 6 to the Administrative Order previously approved in
paragraph (c)(35) and revised in paragraphs (c)(57) and (c)(60) of this
section.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) An administrative order identified as Amendment Six to Findings
and Order by Stipulation, for Flint Hills Resources, L.P., dated and
effective March 11, 2003, submitted March 13, 2003.
[FR Doc. 03-13570 Filed 6-4-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P