Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 2, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 21445

Final Action

In this action, EPA is approving the

Mississippi FESOP program. EPA is

publishing this action without prior

proposal because the Agency views this

as a noncontroversial amendment and

anticipates no adverse comments.

However, in a separate document in this

Federal Register publication, EPA is

proposing to approve the SIP revision

should adverse or critical comments be

filed. This action will be effective July

3, 1995 unless, within 30 days of its

publication, adverse or critical

comments are received. If EPA receives

such comments, this action will be

withdrawn before the effective date by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 this action serving as a

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a

second comment period on this action.

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 July 3, 1995.

The Agency has reviewed this request

for revision of the federally-approved

SIP for conformance with the provisions

of the 1990 Amendments enacted on

November 15, 1990. EPA has

determined that this action conforms

with those requirements.

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,

42 U.S.C. 7607(b)(1), petitions for

judicial review of this action must be

filed in the United States Court of

Appeals for the appropriate circuit by

July 3, 1995. Filing a petition for

reconsideration by the Administrator of

this final rule does not affect the finality

of this rule for 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) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C.

7607(b)(2).) The Office of Management

and Budget has exempted this action

from review under Executive Order

12866.

Nothing in this action shall be

construed as permitting or allowing or

establishing a precedent for any future

request for a revision to any SIP. 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.

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 CAA 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, I

certify 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

CAA, preparation of a regulatory

flexibility analysis would constitute

federal inquiry into the economic

reasonableness of state action. The CAA

forbids EPA to base its actions

concerning SIPs on such grounds.

Union Electric Co. v. U.S. E.P.A., 427

U.S. 246, 256–66 (S.Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C.

7410(a)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Air pollution control, Carbon

monoxide, Hydrocarbons, Incorporation

by reference, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide,

Intergovernmental relations, Particulate

matter, Ozone and Sulfur oxides.

Dated: March 1, 1995.

Patrick M. Tobin,

Acting Regional Administrator.

Part 52 of chapter I, title 40, 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 Z—Mississippi

2. Section 52.1270 is amended by

adding paragraph (c)(25) to read as

follows:

§ 52.1270 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(25) Revisions to minor source

operating permit rules submitted by the

Mississippi Department of

Environmental Quality on January 26,

1994.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Regulation APC–S–2, effective

January 9, 1994.

(ii) Other material. None.

[FR Doc. 95–10700 Filed 5–1–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 52

[KY–86–1–6932a; FRL–5189–6]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans State: Kentucky;

Approval of Revisions to State

Implementation Plan Regarding

Emission Statements

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is approving the State

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision

submitted by the Commonwealth of

Kentucky through the Natural Resources

and Environmental Protection Cabinet

(Cabinet) for the purpose of

implementing an emission statement

program. The SIP was submitted by the

Cabinet on January 15, 1993. As a result

of EPA comments, the Cabinet

submitted another SIP on December 29,

1994, to satisfy the Federal requirements

for an emission statement program.

DATES: This final rule will be effective

June 16, 1995 unless adverse or critical

comments are received by June 1, 1995.

If the effective date is delayed, timely

notice will be published in the Federal

Register.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this

action should be addressed to Scott

Southwick at the EPA Regional Office

listed below.

Copies of the documents relative to

this action are available for public

inspection during normal business

hours at the following locations. The

interested persons wanting to examine

these documents should make an

appointment with the appropriate office

at least 24 hours before the visiting day.

Air and Radiation Docket and

Information Center (Air Docket 6102),

U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, 401 M Street, SW.,

Washington, DC 20460.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 4, Air Programs Branch, 345

Courtland Street, NE., Atlanta,

Georgia 30365.

Division for Air Quality, Department for

Environmental Protection, Natural

Resources and Environmental

Protection Cabinet, 316 St. Clair Mall,

Frankfort, Kentucky 40601.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Scott Southwick, Regulatory Planning

and Development Section, Air Programs

Branch, Air, Pesticides & Toxics

Management Division, Region 4
21446 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 2, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

Environmental Protection Agency, 345

Courtland Street, NE, Atlanta, Georgia

30365. The telephone number is 404/

347–3555, X4207. Reference file KY–

86–1–6932a.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A SIP

revision was submitted by the

Commonwealth on January 15, 1993, to

satisfy section 182(a)(B) of the Clean Air

Act as amended in 1990 (CAA). A

second SIP revision was submitted on

December 29, 1994 and replaces the first

SIP submittal. The second SIP addresses

deficiencies of the first SIP revision.

The January 15, 1993, SIP revision

was reviewed by EPA to determine

completeness shortly after its submittal,

in accordance with the completeness

criteria set out at 40 CFR part 51,

appendix V (1991), as amended by 57

FR 42216 (August 26, 1991). The

submittal was found to be complete and

a letter dated April 27, 1993, was sent

to Mr. John Hornback, Director of the

Division for Air Quality, indicating the

submittal is administratively complete.

The December 29, 1994, SIP revision

was reviewed by EPA to determine

completeness and a letter dated March

3, 1995, was sent to Mr. John Hornback,

Director of the Division for Air Quality,

indicating the submittal is

administratively complete.

There are several key general and

specific components of an acceptable

emission statement program.

Specifically, the state must submit a

revision to its SIP and the emission

statement program must meet the

minimum requirements for reporting. In

general, the program must include, at a

minimum, provisions for applicability,

compliance, and specific source

requirements detailed below.

A. SIP Revision Submission

The Commonwealth of Kentucky

submitted their emission statement

regulation on January 15, 1993, which

meets the emission statement

requirement.

B. Program Elements

The Commonwealth emission

statement program must, at a minimum,

include provisions covering

applicability of the regulations, a

compliance schedule for sources

covered by the regulations, and the

specific reporting requirements for

sources—including a certification that

the information is accurate to the best

knowledge of the individual certifying

the statement. Kentucky included all of

the above, except for certification that

the information is accurate, within

regulation 401 KAR 50:037 Emission

fee. The Cabinet revised their emissions

statement program to include a

certification statement. The final revised

emission statement program was

submitted on December 29, 1994, within

regulation 401 KAR 50:035 Permits

regulation. This regulation contained all

of the required program elements.

C. Applicability

Section 182(a)(3)(B) requires that

states with areas designated as

nonattainment for ozone require

emission statement data from sources of

volatile organic compounds (VOCs) or

oxides of nitrogen (NOX) in the

nonattainment areas. This requirement

applies to all ozone nonattainment

areas, regardless of the classification

(Marginal, Moderate, etc.). Kentucky’s

regulation applies to each air pollution

source required to have a permit to

operate and emits either twenty-five (25)

tons per year of NOX or VOCs.

The states may waive, with EPA

approval, the requirement for emission

statements for classes or categories of

sources with less than 25 tons per year

of actual plant-wide of both NOX and

VOC emissions in nonattainment areas

if the class or category is included in the

base year and periodic inventories and

emissions are calculated using emission

factors established by EPA (such as

those found in EPA publication AP–42)

or other methods acceptable to EPA.

The Kentucky submittal waives the

emission statement requirement for

sources with less than 25 tons per year

of actual plant-wide of both NOX and

VOC emissions in their 1990 Base Year

Emissions Inventory.

Final Action

EPA is approving the plan revision

submitted by the Commonwealth of

Kentucky on December 29, 1994. This

submittal meets all of the requirements

of emission statements outlined in

section 182(a)(3)(B).

The EPA is publishing this action

without prior proposal because the

Agency views this as a noncontroversial

amendment and anticipates no adverse

comments. However, in a separate

document in this Federal Register

publication, the EPA is proposing to

approve the SIP revision should adverse

or critical comments be filed. This

action will be effective June 16, 1995

unless, by June 1, 1995, adverse or

critical comments are received.

If the EPA receives such comments,

this action will be withdrawn 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 this action serving as a

proposed rule. The EPA will not

institute a second comment period on

this action. 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 June 16, 1995.

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,

42 U.S.C. 7607(b)(1), petitions for

judicial review of this action must be

filed in the United States Court of

Appeals for the appropriate circuit by

July 3, 1995. Filing a petition for

reconsideration by the Administrator of

this final rule does not affect the finality

of this rule for 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) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 7607

(b)(2)).

The OMB has exempted these actions

from review under Executive Order

12866.

Nothing in this action shall be

construed as permitting or allowing or

establishing a precedent for any future

request for a revision to any state

implementation plan. Each request for

revision to the state implementation

plan shall be considered separately in

light of specific technical, economic,

and environmental factors and in

relation to relevant statutory and

regulatory requirements.

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 CAA 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, I

certify 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

CAA, preparation of a regulatory

flexibility analysis would constitute

Federal inquiry into the economic

reasonableness of state action. The CAA

forbids EPA to base its actions

concerning SIPs on such grounds.

Union Electric Co. v. U.S. E.P.A., 427
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 2, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 21447

U.S. 246, 256–66 (S.Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C.

section 7410(a)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Air pollution control, Carbon

monoxide, Hydrocarbons, Incorporation

by reference, Intergovernmental

relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide,

Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting

and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur

oxides.

Dated: April 3, 1995.

Patrick M. Tobin,

Acting Regional Administrator.

Part 52 of chapter I, title 40, 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 S—Kentucky

2. Section 52.920 is amended by

adding paragraph (c)(77) to read as

follows:

§ 52.920 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(77) Revisions to the Commonwealth

of Kentucky State Implementation Plan

(SIP) concerning emission statements

were submitted on December 29, 1994,

by the Kentucky Natural Resources and

Environmental Protection Cabinet.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Regulation 401 KAR 50:035

Permits. Section 1, Section 2(1) and

Section 10. Regulation became effective

September 28, 1994.

(ii) None.

[FR Doc. 95–10696 Filed 5–1–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 52

[MN29–1–6203a; FRL–5174–7]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans; Minnesota

AGENCY: United States Environmental

Protection Agency (USEPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: USEPA is approving a

revision to the Minnesota State

Implementation Plan (SIP) to

incorporate new permitting regulations.

This revision consists of the State Rules

in Chapter 7007, entitled ‘‘Air Emission

Permits,’’ in conjunction with other rule

changes relating to the repeal of prior air

permitting rules. Although these rules

have been submitted previously to

satisfy the requirements of Title V of the

Clean Air Act, the purpose of this

submittal is (1) to support federally

enforceable permit conditions for

limiting sources’ potential to emit, (2) to

allow the use of permits as vehicles for

future SIP revisions, and (3) to update

the procedural rules governing the

issuance of air permits in Minnesota.

USEPA concludes that all three

purposes are satisfied.

DATES: This action will be effective July

3, 1995 unless adverse or critical

comments are received by June 1, 1995.

If the effective date is delayed, timely

notice will be published in the Federal

Register.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be sent to:

William L. MacDowell, Chief,

Regulation Development Section (AE–

17J), U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,

Chicago, Illinois 60604.

Copies of the SIP revision request and

USEPA’s analysis are available for

inspection at the following addresses:

(It is recommended that you

telephone John Summerhays at (312)

886–6067, before visiting the Region 5

Office.)

United States Environmental Protection

Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation

Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard

(AE–17J), Chicago, Illinois 60604; and

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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John

Summerhays, Regulation Development

Section, Air Enforcement Branch, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 5, Chicago, Illinois 60604.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Summary of State Submittal

On November 23, 1993, the Minnesota

Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)

submitted revised air permitting rules

for approval as part of the State

Implementation Plan (SIP). These rules

represent Minnesota’s consolidated

permitting regulations, which include

provisions for operating permits for

major sources pursuant to Title V of the

Clean Air Act, construction permits for

major new sources and major source

modifications pursuant to Parts C and D

of Title I, and operating and

construction permits for minor sources

and minor modifications pursuant to

State law. Thus, this submittal

complements Minnesota’s submittal

dated November 15, 1993, seeking

USEPA approval of the same regulations

as satisfying Title V requirements.

Separate rulemaking is being conducted

with respect to whether these

regulations satisfy Title V requirements.

(See the Federal Register of September

13, 1994, at 59 FR 46948.)

Minnesota’s submittal of November

23, 1993, does not seek to satisfy any

specific mandate under the Clean Air

Act. As noted above, a separate

submittal seeks to satisfy the

requirements of Title V. A pair of

submittals dated August 5, 1992, and

August 26, 1993, have been found to

satisfy nonattainment area major new

source review requirements (see 59 FR

8578, dated February 23, 1994). The

State has not sought to provide State

regulations to supersede Federal

regulations on attainment area new

source review (prevention of significant

deterioration).

Instead, the State’s submittal of

November 23, 1993, seeks approval of

updated State permitting regulations

which have superseded previously

approved regulations, including several

provisions to help the State implement

its Title V and Title I programs.

Minnesota intended with this submittal:

(1) to provide a mechanism for

intermediate size sources to obtain

federally enforceable limitations to

become ‘‘minor sources,’’ (2) to facilitate

future SIP revisions, and (3) to update

the federally approved regulations to

reflect the updated State permitting

regulations. Each of these purposes

requires evaluation under different

criteria. These purposes and the

associated United States Environmental

Protection Agency (USEPA) criteria for

approval are discussed individually in

subsequent sections.

A. Federally Enforceable Limitations on

Potential To Emit

The first purpose of Minnesota’s

submittal was to provide a mechanism

for intermediate size sources to obtain

federally enforceable limitations such

that the sources’ potential to emit would

be below the size thresholds at which

major source permits are required. This

mechanism involves federally

enforceable State operating permits

(FESOPs) incorporating the relevant

limitations. The State intends to write

such permits both in the context of new

source review and in the context of Title

V permitting. As clarified in a letter

from Charles Williams to Valdas

Adamkus dated November 21, 1994, the

State is requesting this authority with

respect to hazardous air pollutants

(HAPs) as well as for pollutants with air

quality standards (‘‘criteria pollutants’’).

Criteria for USEPA approval of FESOP

programs are given in the Federal