[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 67 (Thursday, April 7, 2022)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 20324-20329]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-07288]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2021-0411; FRL-9547-02-R5]


Air Plan Approval; Minnesota; Bulk Silos PM10 FESOP Update

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a site-
specific revision to the Minnesota State Implementation Plan (SIP) for 
particulate matter less than 10 microns (PM<INF>10</INF>) for the 
portland cement distribution terminal owned and operated by Bulk Silos, 
LLC (Bulk Silos), formerly known as Lafarge North America Corporation 
on Childs Road Terminal (Lafarge-Childs Road Terminal), located in 
Saint Paul, Ramsey County, Minnesota. In its June 16, 2021, submittal, 
the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) requested that EPA 
approve certain conditions contained in Bulk Silos' federally 
enforceable state operating permit (FESOP) into the Minnesota PM SIP. 
The request is approvable because it satisfies the requirements of the 
Clean Air Act (CAA). MPCA's submission

[[Page 20325]]

included an updated modeling demonstration to show the construction 
changes incorporated in the title I SIP Conditions will not interfere 
with the ability to maintain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards 
(NAAQS), as Bulk Silos' allowable PM<INF>10</INF> emissions limits will 
be decreased with this action.

DATES: This direct final rule will be effective June 6, 2022, unless 
EPA receives adverse comments by May 9, 2022. If adverse comments are 
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: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2021-0411 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#14756666753a677566757c547164753a737b62"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="9bfae9e9fab5e8fae9faf3dbfeebfab5fcf4ed">[email protected]</span></a>. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow 
the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, 
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either 
manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its 
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you 
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other 
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia 
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written 
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and 
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will 
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of 
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing 
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person 
identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full 
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia 
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please 
visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Olivia Davidson, Physical Scientist, 
Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-
18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson 
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-0266, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#6d090c1b04091e0203430201041b040c2d081d0c430a021b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="593d382f303d2a3637773635302f3038193c2938773e362f">[email protected]</span></a>. The EPA Region 5 office is open from 8:30 a.m. 
to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays and 
facility closures due to COVID-19.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.

I. What is the background for this action?

    Bulk Silos is a portland cement distribution terminal in the Ramsey 
County PM<INF>10</INF> maintenance area, also known as the Red Rock 
Road maintenance area, in St. Paul (Ramsey County), Minnesota. The area 
was designated nonattainment for the 1987 PM<INF>10</INF> standard on 
March 15, 1991 (56 FR 11101), and was redesignated to attainment on 
July 26, 2002 (67 FR 48787). On June 16, 2021, MPCA submitted a request 
to EPA to approve into the Minnesota SIP the conditions cited as 
``Title I Condition: 40 CFR 50.6 (PM<INF>10</INF> SIP).'' The 
submission contains measures for Bulk Silos to implement changes that 
increase efficiency through new and existing equipment, as well as 
clarifying amendments to the document's language. MPCA posted a 
background document and permit issuance notice for public comment in 
the Minnesota State Register on April 30, 2021, and the comment period 
ended on June 1, 2021. MPCA received no comments on the document or 
permit.
    Bulk Silos currently operates six silos with pollution control 
equipment; the silos are used for storage and distribution of 
cementitious products. The material is currently received by rail, 
stored in silos, and distributed by truck. The facility is subject to a 
State Individual Permit containing title I PM<INF>10</INF> SIP 
conditions (Permit No. 12300391-002, published September 11, 2007, 72 
FR 51713), which will continue to apply until this SIP revision is 
approved by the EPA. These conditions are intended to ensure that the 
Red Rock Road area continues to maintain the PM<INF>10</INF> NAAQS.
    The previous SIP revision, approved September 11, 2007 (72 FR 
51713), consisted of a FESOP issued to Lafarge-Childs Road Terminal 
which serves as a joint title I/FESOP document. In the September 11, 
2007, action, EPA approved into the Minnesota PM<INF>10</INF> SIP the 
portions of Minnesota Air Emission Permit No. 12300391-002 issued to 
Lafarge-Childs Road Terminal on November 17, 2006, cited as ``Title I 
condition: SIP for PM<INF>10</INF> NAAQS.'' As part of that action, EPA 
approved Minnesota's request to revoke from the SIP several 
Administrative Orders for Lafarge-Childs Road Terminal that had been 
approved on February 15, 1994 (60 FR 7218), June 13, 1995 (60 FR 
31088), and February 8, 1999 (64 FR 5936).
    The 2007 title I SIP revisions approved the installation of a new 
rail siding for rail delivery of material to the silos, the 
installation of a related railcar-to-silo pneumatic conveyance, the 
redesign of the pneumatic conveyance system to allow dedicated use of 
Silos Nos. 1 and 2, and the installation of new pollution control 
devices (a low temperature fabric filter) on each of the two dedicated 
silos. The modeling results demonstrated that to comply with the FESOP, 
Lafarge-Childs Road Terminal was limited to a maximum daily throughput 
of 1,100 tons per day (tpd) using a 24-hour rolling average and an 
annual throughput of 100,000 tons per year (tpy), using a 12-month 
rolling average.
    This SIP revision is being approved in conjunction with a major 
amendment to a State Individual Permit containing federally enforceable 
title I SIP conditions (Air Emission Permit No. 12300391-102), 
submitted to EPA on June 16, 2021. The submittal included the 
replacement of three existing fabric filters, the construction of three 
new silos, a new bucket elevator, twelve new fabric filters, paving of 
roads, and new barge unloading operations. The suggested facility 
changes in operation require increased throughput limits for overall 
facility operations, truck loading operations, and bucket elevator 
operations. To offset increases in throughput limits, Bulk Silos' new 
permit allows unloading of product from one silo at a time, and the 
emission limits of unloading will be decreased after approval of the 
updated title I SIP conditions. Further, MPCA included updated modeling 
with improved emission factors demonstrating decreased allowable 
PM<INF>10</INF> emissions with the proposed facility changes and 
reduced emission limits. New equipment would not be operable by Bulk 
Silos until EPA approves the requirements into Minnesota's SIP.

II. What is EPA's analysis of the SIP revision?

    MPCA's June 16, 2021, submission contains amended SIP conditions 
that, when combined, decrease total allowable emission rates of 
PM<INF>10</INF> from Bulk Silos while increasing throughput limits, 
adding/improving fabric filters, and constructing three new silos. See 
Table 1 at the end of this review for a list of detailed changes to 
PM<INF>10</INF> allowable emissions limits associated with this action. 
Additionally, see ``Process flow diagram'' included at the end of 
MPCA's Background document submission for a detailed diagram of the 
facility's operations. The amended SIP conditions in the provided 
background document include:

[[Page 20326]]

A. New Fabric Filters, New Construction

    New construction in the SIP revision would include the installation 
of twelve new fabric filters: Replacement of three fabric filters 
(Treatment ``TREA'' 5, 6 and 9 replacing TREA 1-3) and installation of 
nine new fabric filters (TREA 7, 8, 10-16). Additionally, the revised 
SIP would authorize construction and operation of a new bucket elevator 
(Equipment ``EQUI'' 5) and three new silos (EQUI 8-10). Further, 
because Bulk Silos' roadways have been paved since the issuance of 
Permit No. 123000391-102, the SIP revision will remove the emission 
limit requirements for unpaved roads at the permit condition addressing 
fugitive emissions at ``FUGI'' 2. The facility will be subject to 
emission limit requirements for paved roads that were previously SIP-
approved on July 27, 2020 (85 FR 45094), and contain permit content 
requirements in Minnesota Rule (Minn. R.) 7007.0800, subpart 2(A) and 
subpart 5, prevention of airborne particulate matter in Minn. R. 
7011.0150, and standards for dry bulk agricultural commodity 
requirements in Minn. R. 7011.1005, subpart 1(A).

B. Throughput Limits

    Throughput limits for facility operations, specifically silo 
unloading (COMG 2), truck loading operations (EQUI 4), and bucket 
elevator operations (EQUI 5), will be increased or established for new 
processes with this SIP revision. Previously, unloading operations were 
limited to rail and required throughput limits of 1,100 tpd/100,000 
tpy, truck loading operations had no emission limits, and the facility 
did not include bucket elevator operations or barge unloading. The 
proposed revisions add barge unloading to the facility's operations, 
incorporate throughput limits of 2,500 tpd/740,000 tpy each for 
unloading and truck loading, and 1,100 tpd/100,000 tpy for the proposed 
bucket elevator operations. Facility-specific emission factors and 
other proposed facility changes demonstrate no increased emissions of 
PM<INF>10</INF> from increased throughput limits based on improved 
modeling. Permit No. 12300391-102 includes language specifying ``This 
requirement expires upon startup of the Project'' for current 
operational throughput, or silo unloading (COMG 2, 5.3.1 and 5.3.2). 
Additionally, the permit states the increased limits would go into 
effect ``Upon startup of the Project'' (COMG 2, 5.3.3 and 5.3.4) for 
operational throughput, and similarly for the newly established truck 
loading throughput limits (EQUI 4, 5.7.3 and 5.7.4) and bucket elevator 
throughput limits (EQUI 5, 5.8.1 and 5.8.2). See Table 1 for equipment-
specific emission limit changes from the effective permit (No. 
12300391-002, 72 FR 51713) to the new permit (No. 12300391-102).

C. Changes to Modeling Requirements

    To approve the new conditions listed in Permit No. 12300391-102, 
the MPCA conducted Significant Impact Level (SIL) modeling to determine 
compliance with the PM<INF>10</INF> NAAQS using both existing and new 
PM<INF>10</INF> emissions sources. The permit update replaces 
equivalent-or-better modeling demonstration requirements at the permit 
condition titled Total Facility ``TFAC'' 1, 5.1.1 and 6.1.1 to include 
specific modeling triggers when future changes are made in the 
parameters contained in Appendix A or emission sources. Specifically, 
TFAC 5.1.1 indicates no change can be made to the facility that would 
result in an increase in PM<INF>10</INF> or PM<INF>2.5</INF> emissions 
until it can be demonstrated that it would not cause an exceedance of 
the NAAQS and 6.1.1 contains corrective actions for failed emission 
rate performance tests.

D. Facility-Specific Emissions Factors

    The required modeling exercise to review and reissue Permit No. 
12300391-102 to Bulk Silos included new, significantly lower process-
specific factors not identified in prior modeling demonstrations for 
the facility, provided by Bulk Silos through performance testing \1\ 
and reference from EPA's Compilation of Air Pollutant Emissions Factors 
(AP-42).\2\ The SIL modeling demonstration allowed MPCA to increase 
throughput limits while decreasing the allowable PM<INF>10</INF> 
emission rate (Table 1). Performance testing requirements at a minimum 
of once every 60 months will be used to demonstrate continued 
compliance and verify the updated emission factors (see 6.2.1 (permit 
condition titled Component Group ``COMG'' 2 unloading silos), 6.3.1 
(COMG 3 existing unloading silos), 6.4.1 (COMG 4, bucket elevator and 
silo 3 operations), 6.5.1 (EQUI 4, truck loading operations)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ New emission factors were calculated based on methods 
contained in AP-42 (Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Factors) 
Section 11.12 and an emission factor created using the results of 
Bulk Silos' self-reported performance test (https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2020-09/documents/toc_kwrd.pdf).
    \2\ See EPA's documentation of AP-42 at https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-factors-and-quantification/ap-42-compilation-air-emissions-factors#5thed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. PM10 SIP and Emissions Impacts

    The approval of MPCA's submittal would strengthen the Minnesota SIP 
by requiring more stringent emission limits, counteracting the revision 
of increased throughput limits. Table 1, below, shows the previous 
emission limit and new emission limit applicable to each unit at the 
facility. Considered together, allowable emissions will be decreased by 
1.18 lb/hr and 0.45 lb/hr for the 24-hour limit and the annual limit, 
respectively. These changes become effective upon the effective date of 
EPA's approval of MPCA's June 16, 2021, request.

    Table 1--Summary of Changes to Allowable PM10 Emissions in Revised Title I SIP Conditions for Bulk Silos
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Previous PM10       New emission PM10
        Unit description          Previous unit ID     New unit ID       emission limit            limit
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pneumatic Conveyance to Silo 6.  EQUI 1...........  COMG 2 (EQUI 11    0.25 lb/hr *.....  0.009 lb/hr.*
                                                     excluded).
Pneumatic Conveyance to Silo 5.  EQUI 2...........                     0.25 lb/hr. *
Unloading Silos................  EQUI 3 (EQUI 6,                       0.84 lb/hr. *
                                  7, 11, AND 12).
New Silos......................  EQUI 8, 9, 10....                     NA...............
Silo 3 (storage silo)..........  EQUI 11..........  EQUI 11..........  0.84 lb/hr *.....  0.0008 lb/hr.*
Truck loading..................  EQUI 4...........  EQUI 4...........  .04 lb/hr, * 0.15  .009 lb/hr.*
                                                                        tpy **.
New Bucket Elevator............  NA...............  EQUI 5 (bucket     NA...............  .0031 lb/hr.*
                                                     elevator.

[[Page 20327]]

 
Unpaved roads..................  FUGI 2...........  FUGI 2...........  0.3 tpy **.......  NA.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Daily average.
** 24-Hour rolling average and 12 month rolling average.

    The approval of the SIP revisions allows the unloading of product 
into EQUIs 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, or 12, contained in COMG 2. Product 
would no longer be loaded into Silo 3 (EQUI 11). Instead, Silo 3 would 
serve as a storage silo to transfer cementitious product between silos 
7-9 (EQUI 8, 9 and 10). Units contained in COMG 2 are collectively 
subject to the Unloading Process Throughput limits and the ``New SIP 
PM<INF>10</INF> Limit'' of 0.009 lb/hr. Previously, EQUI 3 contained 
EQUI 6, EQUI 7, EQUI 11, and EQUI 12. These four units are subject to 
the combined PM<INF>10</INF> limit of 0.84 lb/hr at COMG 1 until 
startup of the Project. Then, the PM<INF>10</INF> limit for EQUIs 6, 7, 
and 12 will be encompassed by the PM<INF>10</INF> limit at COMG 2 and 
the PM<INF>10</INF> limit for EQUI 11 will be at EQUI 11.

IV. Section 110(l) Obligations

    In this action, EPA is approving MPCA's request to update title I 
SIP Conditions related to the Bulk Silos' portland cement distribution 
terminal. MPCA's submission includes a noninterference demonstration 
clarification letter included within the docket of this rulemaking 
intended to show that its SIP revision is approvable under Section 
110(l) of the CAA; such a demonstration is sometimes called an anti-
backsliding demonstration. Section 110(l) provides that EPA cannot 
approve a SIP revision if the revision would interfere with any 
applicable requirement concerning attainment or reasonable further 
progress (RFP), or any other applicable requirement of the CAA.
    Additionally, Section 110(l) makes clear that each SIP revision is 
subject to the requirements of Section 110(l). A state may demonstrate 
the revision will not interfere with attainment of the NAAQS through an 
air quality modeling analysis. As previously mentioned, MPCA performed 
a SIL modeling demonstration to determine compliance with the 
PM<INF>10</INF> NAAQS, concluding that the facility changes at Bulk 
Silos will not interfere with the facility's ability to maintain the 
PM<INF>10</INF> NAAQS and total allowable PM<INF>10</INF> emissions 
will be decreased. The modeling demonstration included updated 
facility-specific emission factors developed through performance 
testing. Further, MPCA has made updates to the modeling requirements in 
the Bulk Silos' permit, specifically, TFAC 5.1.1 states no change can 
be made to the facility that would result in an increase in 
PM<INF>10</INF> or PM<INF>2.5</INF> emissions until it can be 
demonstrated that it would not cause an exceedance of the NAAQS. For 
these reasons, we conclude that the revisions will not interfere with 
attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS, RFP, or any other applicable 
requirement of the CAA. EPA has determined that MPCA's SIP submission 
meets the requirements of section 110(l) of the CAA.

V. 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 consolidated permitting regulations, approved into the 
State SIP on May 2, 1995 (60 FR 21447), include 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 also initiated using joint title I/title V-FESOP 
documents as the enforceable document for imposing emission limitations 
and compliance requirements in SIPs. The SIP requirements in joint 
title I/title V-FESOP documents submitted by MPCA are cited as ``Title 
I conditions,'' therefore ensuring that SIP requirements remain 
permanent and enforceable. EPA reviewed the State's procedure for using 
joint title I/title V-FESOP documents 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).

VI. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is approving a revision to Minnesota's PM<INF>10</INF> SIP for 
Bulk Silos, as submitted by MPCA on June 16, 2021, and reflected in 
conditions labeled ``40 CFR pt. 51, Title I Condition: 40 CFR 50.6 
(PM<INF>10</INF> SIP), Title I Condition: 40 CFR pt. 52, subp. Y'' in 
the background document and permit (No. 12300391-102).
    We are 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 
written comments are filed. This rule will be effective June 6, 2022 
without further notice unless we receive relevant adverse written 
comments by May 9, 2022. 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. EPA will not institute a second comment period. Any 
parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at this 
time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, 
paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed 
from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions 
of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. If we do 
not receive any

[[Page 20328]]

comments, this action will be effective June 6, 2022.

VII. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes 
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the Minnesota 
Regulations described in this preamble and set forth in the amendments 
to 40 CFR part 52 below. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these 
documents generally available through www.regulations.gov and at the 
EPA Region 5 Office (please contact the person identified in the FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more 
information). Therefore, these materials have been approved by EPA for 
inclusion in the SIP, have been incorporated by reference by EPA into 
that plan, are fully federally enforceable under sections 110 and 113 
of the CAA as of the effective date of the final rulemaking of EPA's 
approval, and will be incorporated by reference in the next update to 
the SIP compilation.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA the Administrator is required to approve a SIP 
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable 
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in 
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, 
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this 
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and 
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state 
law. For that reason, this action:
    <bullet> Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review 
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
    <bullet> Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
    <bullet> Is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
    <bullet> 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);
    <bullet> Does not have federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
    <bullet> Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
    <bullet> Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
    <bullet> Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the Clean Air Act; and
    <bullet> Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian 
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has 
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian 
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose 
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as 
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    This action is subject to the Congressional Review Act, and EPA 
will submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the 
Comptroller General of the United States. This action is not a ``major 
rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the appropriate circuit by June 6, 2022. Filing a petition for 
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect 
the finality of this action 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. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are 
encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of 
proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules 
section of this Federal Register, rather than file an immediate 
petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can 
withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed 
rulemaking. 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, Particulate matter, Reporting 
and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: March 31, 2022.
Debra Shore,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA amends 40 CFR part 52 
as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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


0
2. In Sec.  52.1220, the table in paragraph (d) is amended by:
0
a. Adding an entry for ``Bulk Silos'' immediately following the entry 
for ``BAE Technology Center''; and
0
b. Removing the entry for ``Lafarge North America Corporation, Childs 
Road Terminal''.
    The addition reads as follows:


Sec.  52.1220   Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *

[[Page 20329]]



                                 EPA-Approved Minnesota Source-Specific Permits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       State
         Name of source             Permit No.       effective       EPA approval date           Comments
                                                       date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Bulk Silos.....................     12300391-102        6/3/2021  4/7/2022, [INSERT       Only conditions cited
                                                                   Federal Register        as ``Title I
                                                                   CITATION].              Condition: 40 CFR
                                                                                           50.6 (PM10 SIP).''
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2022-07288 Filed 4-6-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>