[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 96 (Wednesday, May 20, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 23632-23635]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-11638]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2008-0786; FRL-8907-3]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Minnesota

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a request submitted by the Minnesota 
Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) on October 9, 2008, to revise the 
Minnesota State Implementation Plan (SIP) for particulate matter less 
than 10 microns (PM<INF>10</INF>). The approval revises the Minnesota 
SIP by updating information regarding the steel mini-mill facility 
located at 1678 Red Rock Road, St. Paul, Minnesota. The approval 
acknowledges the change of ownership and operation of the source from 
North Star Steel Company to Gerdau Ameristeel US Inc. The revision also 
amends the SIP by removing the Administrative Order issued to North 
Star Steel Company, and replacing the SIP conditions from the 
Administrative Order and placing those SIP requirements in a joint 
Title I/Title V document for Gerdau Ameristeel US, Inc. These revisions 
will not result in an increase in PM<INF>10</INF> emissions because no 
emission limits were increased.

DATES: This direct final rule will be effective July 20, 2009, unless 
EPA receives adverse comments by June 19, 2009. 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-2008-0786, by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    2. E-mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#600d0f0f0e05194e0a0f080e200510014e070f16"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="19747676777c603773767177597c6978377e766f">[email protected]</span></a>.
    3. Fax: (312) 886-5824.
    4. Mail: John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air 
Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West 
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
    5. Hand Delivery: John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria Pollutant 
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such 
deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office normal hours of 
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of 
boxed information. The Regional Office official hours of business are 
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding Federal 
holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-
2008-0786. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information 
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you 
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site 
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your 
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of 
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without 
going through http://www.regulations.gov your e-mail address will be 
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is 
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you 
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name 
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any 
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to 
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA 
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid 
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of 
any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. 
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically 
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West 
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal 
holidays. We recommend that you telephone Charles Hatten, Environmental 
Engineer, at (312) 886-6031 before visiting the Region 5 office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles Hatten, Environmental 
Engineer, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson 
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-6031, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#8de5ecf9f9e8e3a3eee5ecffe1e8fecde8fdeca3eae2fb"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="234b425757464d0d404b42514f4650634653420d444c55">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information 
section is arranged as follows:

I. General Information
II. What Revision did the State Request Be Incorporated into the 
SIP?
III. What is EPA's Analysis of the State Submission?
IV. What Action is EPA Taking?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

[[Page 23633]]

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

    This action applies only to the Gerdau Ameristeel US, Inc. (Gerdau) 
steel mini-mill facility located at 1678 Red Rock Road, St. Paul, 
Minnesota (Ramsey County).

B. Has Public Notice been Provided?

    Minnesota published a public notice of the revisions to the SIP on 
July 25, 2008. The comment period began on July 26, 2008, and ended on 
August 25, 2008. In the public notice, Minnesota stated it would hold a 
public hearing if one were requested during the comment period. This 
follows the alternative public participation process EPA approved on 
June 5, 2006 (71 FR 32274). For limited types of SIP revisions that the 
public has shown little interest in, a public hearing is not 
automatically required. Because no one requested a public hearing, 
Minnesota did not hold a public hearing.

C. What is the Background to this Action?

    Gerdau owns and operates a steel mini-mill formerly owned and 
operated by North Star Steel Company. The mill receives recycled 
automobile bodies, tin cans from refuse-derived fuel recycling 
operations, recycled white goods, and other grades of scrap steel. 
These materials are shredded in a hammer mill and the shredded steel is 
separated from the non-ferrous materials. The scrap steel is refined 
and converted into a large number of steel alloys in an electric arc 
furnace (EAF) and ladle refining station (LRS). The molten steel is 
cast into billets by a continuous casting machine. The billets are sold 
as such or reheated in a reheat furnace and hot-rolled into various 
structural shapes in a rolling mill.
    Gerdau is planning to make some physical changes at the steel mini-
mill, generally, to update the facility. The changes at the facility 
will include: (1) Replacing the current additive silos with new lime 
additive silos, (2) replacing the current conveyor system with a new 
pneumatic system transferring the lime from the silos to the EAF, (3) 
the addition of lime injection ports on the EAF, and (4) removal of the 
fluff landfill and slag crushing operation (no longer in operation).
    The State provided a modeling analysis of the effect of the above-
mentioned changes at the facility on local PM<INF>10</INF> 
concentrations. Below in section III, a more detailed discussion of the 
modeling analysis and its results can be found.

II. What Revision did the State Request Be Incorporated into the SIP?

    The State has requested that EPA approve as a revision to the 
Minnesota SIP: (1) A change in the ownership of the source from North 
Star Steel Company to Gerdau Ameristeel US, Inc., (2) the replacement 
of the SIP conditions from the Administrative Order with the SIP 
conditions in the joint Title I/Title V document for Gerdau, and (3) 
the removal of the Administrative Order issued to North Star Steel 
Company.

A. What Prior SIP Actions are Pertinent to this Action?

    The Gerdau mini-mill steel facility, previously owned and operated 
by North Star Steel Company, was found to be a culpable source in the 
Red Rock Road area's nonattainment plan for the PM<INF>10</INF> 
National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). However, the area 
currently meets the NAAQS for PM<INF>10</INF>, and was officially 
redesignated as attainment on September 24, 2002.
    The facility has been subject to an Administrative Order (Third 
Amended Findings and Order) as part of Minnesota's SIP for attaining 
the PM<INF>10</INF> NAAQS. The Administrative Order (Order) to control 
PM<INF>10</INF> emissions was issued on April 22, 1993, and was 
approved into the SIP on February 15, 1994 (59 FR 7218). MPCA 
subsequently amended the Order: Amendment One was approved on June 13, 
1995 (60 FR 31088) and Amendment Two on February 8, 1999 (64 FR 5936).

B. What are Title I Conditions and Joint Title I/Title V Documents?

    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. Minnesota then issued permanent Administrative Orders to 
culpable sources in nonattainment areas from 1991 to February of 1996.
    Minnesota's consolidated permitting regulations, approved into its 
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 initiated using joint Title I/Title V documents as 
the enforceable document for imposing emission limitations and 
compliance requirements in SIPs. The SIP requirements in joint Title I/
Title V 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 documents to implement site-specific SIP requirements 
and found it to be acceptable under both Titles I and V of the Clean 
Air Act (CAA) (July 3, 1997 letter from David Kee, EPA, to Michael J. 
Sandusky, MPCA). Further, a June 15, 2006, letter from EPA to MPCA 
clarifies procedures to transfer requirements from Administrative 
Orders to joint Title I/Title V documents.

III. What is EPA's Analysis of the State Submission?

    In late 2004, the steel mini-mill facility formerly owned and 
operated by North Star Steel Company was purchased by Gerdau. Gerdau 
operates the facility in an area that currently meets the NAAQS for 
PM<INF>10</INF>. Pursuant to paragraph VI.D. of the Administrative 
Order previously issued to North Star Steel Company, Gerdau's facility 
is subject to all of the same requirements of the Administrative Order 
for attaining the NAAQS for PM<INF>10</INF>. The requirements of the 
Order have been incorporated into a joint Title I/Title V document as 
non-expiring Title I conditions.
    In order to replace the Administrative Order, MPCA has placed all 
the conditions necessary for maintaining the NAAQS for PM<INF>10</INF>, 
including those from the Administrative Order, in Air Permit No. 
12300055-004. The permit serves as a joint Title I/Title V document to 
be incorporated into Minnesota's SIP, replacing the conditions from the 
Administrative Order. The SIP requirements in the joint Title I/Title V 
document submitted by MPCA are designated as ``Title I Condition: SIP 
for PM<INF>10</INF> NAAQS'' making it clear that the term is part of 
the SIP's source-specific requirements.
    The SIP revision does not include any increases in PM<INF>10</INF> 
emission limits but, because some of the changes being made

[[Page 23634]]

to the facility may affect the release and dispersion of 
PM<INF>10</INF> emissions, Gerdau performed an air quality analysis to 
address the facility's impact on the PM<INF>10</INF> NAAQS. The 
facility was modeled with the AERMOD air dispersion model using the 
urban option and five years of meteorological data from Minneapolis. 
Gerdau modeled only the impact of its own facility and added a 
background concentration provided by MPCA. The background 
concentrations were 28 micrograms/cubic meter ([micro]g/m\3\) for the 
annual PM<INF>10</INF> averaging time and 70 [micro]g/m\3\ for the 24-
hour averaging time. There is a PM<INF>10</INF> monitor very close to 
the Gerdau facility, which is likely to capture PM<INF>10</INF> 
emissions from Gerdau and its neighbors. From 2000 to 2006, that 
monitor recorded 24-hour values which averaged about 35 [micro]g/m\3\, 
half the magnitude of the background value used in the modeling. The 
monitor did not record any exceedances of the PM<INF>10</INF> standards 
during this period.
    The following table shows the maximum annual and high, sixth high 
24-hour PM<INF>10</INF> levels from the modeling of Gerdau's facility.

                      Table--Maximum Modeled PM10 Concentration, Pre- and Post-Modification
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Averaging time                  Current operating scenario       Post-modification operating scenario
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Max PM10                              Max PM10
                                           Max PM10        concentration         Max PM10        concentration
                                        concentration         Gerdau +        concentration         Gerdau +
                                            Gerdau           background           Gerdau           background
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual..............................              13.75              41.75              12.44              40.44
24-hour.............................              63.70             133.70              62.24             132.24
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The modeling results show that Gerdau's contribution to the ambient 
PM<INF>10</INF> concentrations will decrease from the current 
operations to the post-modification scenario. A full modeled attainment 
demonstration was performed for Gerdau's surrounding area in 1996. 
There have been only limited changes to the other nearby sources since 
then, and the existing SIP is expected to remain protective of the 
PM<INF>10</INF> NAAQS. Since Gerdau's modifications will decrease 
PM<INF>10</INF> impacts in the area, Gerdau's SIP revision will 
strengthen the existing PM<INF>10</INF> SIP.

IV. What Action is EPA Taking?

    EPA is approving a revision to Minnesota's SIP changing the 
ownership of the steel mini-mill from North Star Steel Company to 
Gerdau Ameristeel US, Inc., and incorporating into the SIP those 
provisions in the joint Title I/Title V document No. 12300055-004 
labeled as ``Title I Condition: SIP for PM<INF>10</INF> NAAQS.'' EPA is 
also removing the Administrative Order issued to North Star Steel 
Company from the SIP. These revisions will not result in an increase in 
PM<INF>10</INF> emissions because no emission limits were increased.
    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 July 20, 2009 
without further notice unless we receive relevant adverse written 
comments by June 19, 2009. 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 20, 2009.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a 
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act 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 Clean Air Act. 
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 Order 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
    <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, this rule does not have Tribal implications as 
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), 
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in 
the State, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct 
costs on Tribal governments or preempt Tribal law.
    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

[[Page 23635]]

copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller 
General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this 
action 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 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 action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 
5 U.S.C. 804(2).
    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 20, 2009. 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. 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, Lead, Particulate matter, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: May 5, 2009.
Walter W. Kovalick Jr,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

0
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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

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

Subpart Y--Minnesota

0
2. In Sec.  52.1220 the table in paragraph (d) is amended by removing 
the entry for ``North Star Steel Co.'' and adding in alphabetical order 
an entry for ``Gerdau Ameristeel US, Inc.'' to read as follows:


Sec.  52.1220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *

                                                     EPA-Approved Minnesota Source-Specific Permits
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              State
             Name of source                Permit No.    effective date             EPA approval date                            Comments
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                                    * * * * * * * * *
Gerdau Ameristeel US, Inc..............    12300055-004        09/10/08  05/20/09, [Insert page number where the  Only conditions cited as ``Title I
                                                                          document begins].                        condition: SIP for PM10 NAAQS.''
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. E9-11638 Filed 5-19-09; 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>