Document ID: EPA-R05-OAR-2016-0136-0002
Agency: epa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Direct Final Approval of Minnesota SO2 revision for GPT Fridley Owner LLC's BAE Technology Center
Posted Date: 2016-06-09T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 111 (Thursday, June 9, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37162-37164]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-13604]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2015-0136; FRL-9947-48-Region 5]

Air Plan Approval; Minnesota; Sulfur Dioxide

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a 
revision to the Minnesota sulfur dioxide (SO2) State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) for ELT Minneapolis, LLC's (ELT) River Road 
Industrial Center located in Fridley, Anoka County, Minnesota. The 
revision, submitted by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency on 
February 24, 2016, updates information to reflect both administrative 
and equipment changes at the facility. The name of the facility has 
changed to BAE Technology Center (BAE). The revision will result in a 
significant decrease in SO2 emissions and will support the 
continued attainment and maintenance of the SO2 national 
ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) in the Twin Cities area.

DATES: This rule is effective on August 8, 2016, unless EPA receives 
adverse written comments by July 11, 2016. If EPA receives adverse 
comments, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the rule in the 
Federal Register and inform the public that the rule will not take 
effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2016-0136 at http://www.regulations.gov or via email to 
blakley.pamela@epa.gov. 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 http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles Hatten, Environmental 
Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312)886-6031, hatten.charles@epa.gov.

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

I. Background Information
II. How is the SIP being revised?
III. What is EPA's analysis of the state's submission?
IV. What action is EPA taking?
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background Information

    In the SIP, the ELT River Road Industrial Center is subject to 
specific restrictions as part of Minnesota's SIP for SO2 in 
the Twin Cities Seven County SO2 area (Twin Cities area).\1\ 
The SIP for ELT's River Road Industrial Center was most recently 
approved by EPA on August 3, 2010, (75 FR 148).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The area was officially designated attainment of the 
SO2 NAAQS on July 31, 1995 (60 FR 28339).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, four fossil fuel-fired boilers (#1, #2, #3, and #4) and 
four emergency generators (#5, #6, #7, and #8) are the primary emission 
units at the facility. Boilers #1, #2, and #3 use natural gas as their 
primary fuel with distillate oil as a backup fuel. Boiler #4 uses 
natural gas for fuel. All the emergency generators use low sulfur 
diesel fuel. In addition, the facility is subject to fuel usage 
limitations to restrict the total facility SO2 emissions.

II. How is the SIP being revised?

    On February 24, 2016, the MPCA submitted a revision to Minnesota's 
SO2 SIP for the ELT River Road Industrial Center. The 
revision, most specifically, reflects changes as a result of new 
ownership.
    In 2015, as part of a purchase agreement, corporate ownership 
transferred from ELT to the Gramercy Property Trust Fridley Owner LLC 
(GPT Fridley). GPT Fridley changed the name of the facility from River 
Road Industrial Center to BAE.
    Under new ownership, BAE will be used for office and warehouse 
space. The emergency generators are used for stand-by power, for both 
life-safety, and

[[Page 37163]]

communications in the event of electrical power is lost.
    The revised SIP identifies the boilers and emergency generators as 
both emission units (EU) and numbered equipment (EQUI). For example, 
boiler #4 (EU 004) is now identified as boiler #4 (EU 004/EQUI 1).
    Because part of the BAE facility had been demolished, boilers #1, 
#2, and #3, and emergency generators #7 and #8 were decommissioned and 
removed from the facility. Boiler #4, and emergency generators #5 and 
#6 were relocated within the facility.
    As part of the recent changes to the facility, boiler #4, which 
burns natural gas, has been modified to burn fuel oil as a backup fuel. 
Boiler #4 has a design capacity rated at 10.46 million British thermal 
units per hour (MMBtu/hr). BAE has imposed limits on boiler #4 to 
restrict its fuels to natural gas and distillate fuel oil, with a 
sulfur content limit on the fuel oil of less than or equal to 0.05 
percent by weight.
    Boilers #1, #2, and #3, which had design capacities rated at 69.8, 
69.8, and 35.1 MMBtu/hr, respectively, have been replaced with a newer, 
more efficient boiler. The new boiler #5 has a design capacity rated at 
19.674 MMBtu/hr. Boiler #5 is restricted to combusting natural gas and 
distillate fuel oil with a sulfur content limit on the fuel oil of less 
than or equal to 0.05 percent by weight as a backup fuel.

III. What is EPA's analysis of the state's submission?

    The SO2 emission units operating at the BAE facility are 
boilers #4 and #5 and two emergency generators (#5 and #6). Boilers #1, 
#2, and #3, and emergency generators #7 and #8 have been removed from 
the facility.
    Boiler #4's potential SO2 emissions increase by 2.33 
tons per year.\2\ Boiler #5's potential SO2 emissions using 
distillate fuel as a backup fuel are 4.37 tons per year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Section 3 of Minnesota's technical support document provides 
a full analysis of the emission calculations and the results of the 
emission changes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Overall, the emissions change from replacing the three older 
boilers (#1, #2, and #3) with a new, more efficient boiler #5, coupled 
with modifications to boiler #4 to burn fuel oil as a backup fuel, 
result in a significant decrease in SO2 emissions at the BAE 
facility. This action reduces the facility's total SO2 
emissions from 39.76 tons per year to 7.25 tons per year. The net 
emissions change is a reduction of 32.51 tons of SO2 per 
year for the BAE facility.
    SO2 monitors near the BAE facility are currently 
measuring values less than 10 parts per billion (ppb), well below the 
1-hour SO2 NAAQS of 75 ppb. EPA expects the air quality in 
the Twin Cities area to remain protected with the revisions being 
approved.
    The revised SO2 SIP for the BAE facility provides for 
reductions in allowable emissions, and therefore, strengthens the 
SO2 SIP for the Twin Cities area. Thus, EPA believes the BAE 
facility revision request is approvable.

IV. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is approving the request by Minnesota to revise the 
SO2 SIP as it applies to the BAE Technology Center. 
Specifically, EPA is approving into the SIP those portions of the BAE 
Technology Center facility Joint Title I/Title V document, permit No. 
00300245-003, cited as ``[Title I Condition: 40 CFR 50.4(SO2 
SIP), Title I Condition: 40 CFR 51, Title I Condition: 40 CFR pt. 52, 
subp. Y].'' This replaces the current SO2 SIP for ELT 
Minneapolis, LLC.
    This revision will result in an overall reduction of SO2 
emissions at the facility, which supports the continued attainment and 
maintenance of the SO2 NAAQS in the Twin Cities area.
    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 August 8, 2016 
without further notice unless we receive relevant adverse written 
comments by July 11, 2016. 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. If we do not receive any comments, this action will be 
effective August 8, 2016.

V. 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 the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth 
below. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents 
generally available through www.regulations.gov and/or at the 
appropriate EPA office (see the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section 
of this preamble for more information).

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act (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:
     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);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     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.);
     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);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     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 CAA; and
     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

[[Page 37164]]

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).
    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 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 CAA, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the appropriate circuit by August 8, 2016. 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 today's 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, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Sulfur dioxide.

    Dated: May 31, 2016.
Robert A. Kaplan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended 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 removing 
the entry for ``ELT Minneapolis, LLC'' and adding in alphabetical order 
an entry for ``BAE Technology Center'' 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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
BAE Technology Center............    00300245-003        01/20/16  6/9/16, [Insert      Only conditions cited as
                                                                    Federal Register     ``[Title I Condition:
                                                                    citation].           40 CFR 50.4(SO2 SIP),
                                                                                         Title I Condition: 40
                                                                                         CFR 51, Title I
                                                                                         Condition: 40 CFR pt.
                                                                                         52, subp. Y]''.
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-13604 Filed 6-8-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P