Air Plan Approval; Minnesota; Flint Hills Sulfur Dioxide (SO2, 18255-18257 [2018-08807]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 81 / Thursday, April 26, 2018 / Proposed Rules
limitations, in pounds per million
British thermal units (lb/MMBtu),
averaged over a rolling 30-day period:
Source name
NOX Emission
limit
(lb/MMBtu)
Antelope Valley Station, Unit
1 ........................................
Antelope Valley Station, Unit
2 ........................................
0.17
0.17
(2) * * *
(d) Compliance date. The owners and
operators of Antelope Valley Station
shall comply with the emissions
limitations and other requirements of
this section as expeditiously as
practicable, but no later than July 31,
2018, unless otherwise indicated in
specific paragraphs.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2018–08623 Filed 4–25–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R05–OAR–2017–0099 FRL–9977–21—
Region 5]
Air Plan Approval; Minnesota; Flint
Hills Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Revision
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a
revision to the Minnesota sulfur dioxide
(SO2) State Implementation Plan (SIP)
for the Flint Hills Resources, LLC Pine
Bend Refinery (FHR) as submitted on
February 8, 2017. The proposed SIP
revision pertains to the introduction and
removal of certain equipment at the
refinery as well as amendments to
certain emission limits, resulting in an
overall decrease of SO2 emissions from
FHR.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before May 29, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
OAR–2017–0099 at https://
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
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:23 Apr 25, 2018
Jkt 244001
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:
Anthony Maietta, Environmental
Protection Specialist, Control Strategies
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J),
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–8777,
maietta.anthony@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. What is the background for this action?
II. What is EPA’s analysis of the SIP revision?
a. Coker Replacement
b. #4 Hydrogen Plant Reformer—30H401
Furnace
c. Diesel Fire Water Pump at #4 Cooling
Tower
d. #3 Crude/Coker Improvements
e. Cleanup
III. SO2 SIP and Emissions Impacts
IV. What action is EPA proposing?
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What is the background for this
action?
FHR operates an oil refinery located
in the Pine Bend Area of Rosemount,
Dakota County, Minnesota. On February
8, 2017, the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency (MPCA) submitted a
request to EPA to approve into the
Minnesota SIP the conditions 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’’ in
FHR’s revised joint Title I/Title V
document, Permit No. 03700011–101 1
1 In 1995, EPA approved consolidated permitting
regulations into the Minnesota SIP. (60 FR 21447,
May 2, 1995). The consolidated permitting
regulations included the term ‘‘Title I condition’’
which was written, in part, to satisfy EPA
requirements that SIP control measures remain
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
18255
(joint document 101). Joint document
101 contains measures for FHR to
implement changes that improve
technology at the plant and increase
efficiency through new and existing
equipment, as well as clarifying
amendments to the document’s
language. MPCA posted joint document
101 for public comment in the
Minnesota State Register on November
21, 2016, and the comment period
ended on December 23, 2016. MPCA
received no comments on the document.
II. What is EPA’s analysis of the SIP
revision?
Joint document 101, issued by MPCA
on January 13, 2017, contains amended
SIP conditions that, when combined,
provide FHR with the ability to more
efficiently upgrade hydrocarbons that
are distilled from FHR’s crude units into
transportation fuels, primarily diesel.
The amended SIP conditions allow FHR
to increase fuel production and operate
more efficiently and closer to the
facility’s overall distillation capacity.
See Table 1 at the end of our review for
a list of detailed changes to SO2
allowable emissions limits associated
with this action. The amended SIP
conditions in joint document 101
include:
a. Coker Replacement.
A coker replacement project consists
of the installation of a new coker
process unit (#4 Coker Unit Charge
Heater/EQUI1456) into joint document
101. The new #4 Coker will replace the
#1 and #2 Cokers, which will be
permanently retired. In addition to their
retirement, the SIP condition that lists
the decoking scenario in which the #1
and #2 cokers’ associated process units
permanent and enforceable. A ‘‘Title I condition’’
is defined, in part, as ‘‘any condition based on
source specific determination of ambient impacts
imposed for the purpose of achieving or
maintaining attainment with a national ambient air
quality standard and which was part of a [SIP]
approved by the EPA or submitted to the EPA
pending approval under section 110 of the act. . .’’
MINN. R. 7007.1011 (2013). The regulations also
state 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.’’ MINN. R. 7007.0450 (2007). Minnesota has
initiated using the joint Title I/Title V document as
the enforceable document for imposing emission
limitations and compliance requirements in SIPs.
The SIP requirements in the joint Title I/Title V
document 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 Title I and Title V of the Clean Air Act
(July 3, 1997 letter from David Kee, EPA, to Michael
J. Sandusky, MPCA).
E:\FR\FM\26APP1.SGM
26APP1
18256
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 81 / Thursday, April 26, 2018 / Proposed Rules
operate simultaneously with 21H1
Steam/Air Heater Decoking unit (EQUI
493) and 21H2 Steam/Air Heater
Decoking unit (EQUI 494) is being
removed from joint document 101.
b. #4 Hydrogen Plant Reformer—
30H401 Furnace.
The allowable SO2 emissions limit on
the 30H401 furnace for the #4 Hydrogen
Plant Reformer is being lowered. This is
because the originally approved
allowable SO2 limit for the heater
assumed that it would operate on
refinery fuel gas. Since start-up, the unit
has primarily been operated on pressure
swing adsorption offgas, which
originates as a natural gas ahead of the
reformer and does not contain sulfur.
Because of the dual-fuel operation of the
heater, its allowable SO2 limit has been
reduced to meet actual operating
conditions.
c. Diesel Fire Water Pump at #4 Cooling
Tower.
The diesel fire water pump at the #4
cooling tower was decommissioned and
so its SO2 emission limits are removed
from joint document 101.
d. #3 Crude/Coker Improvements.
Improvements to the #3 crude/coker
that were incorporated 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’’
conditions in a previous joint Title I/
Title V document (Permit No.
03700011–010) have been completed
and as a result, SIP conditions for three
process heaters (EQUI495/EU034,
EQUI496/EU035, and EQUI500/EU040)
and two process heaters for steam-air
decoking activities (EQUI498/EU037
and EQUI499/EU038) are being removed
from joint document 101.
e. Cleanup.
MPCA also requested to remove from
the Minnesota SIP an emission limit for
the ammonium thiosulfate process unit
that was erroneously labeled as a ‘‘Title
I Condition: 40 CFR 50.4(SO2 SIP); Title
I Condition: 40 CFR 51; Title I
Condition: 40 CFR pt. 52, subp. Y’’
condition in the prior joint Title I/Title
V document, Permit No. 3700011–12
(joint document 12). EPA had approved
joint document 12 into the Minnesota
SIP on June 27, 2016 (81 FR 41447). The
state-based SO2 limit for EQUI574 at
condition 5.162.4 in joint document 12
are revised to be labeled a ‘‘Minn. R.
7009.0080’’ Title V condition in joint
document 101. This is acceptable
because the federal SO2 standards are
still contained in joint document 101
and the erroneous condition
incorporated into joint document 12 at
81 FR 41447 does not affect FHR’s
ability to meet the SO2 NAAQS.
III. SO2 SIP and Emissions Impacts
Joint document 101 removes SIP
conditions for equipment that have been
approved for shutdown and
decommissioning in joint document 12,
and that have been decommissioned
from FHR and are no longer necessary.
Joint document 101 also strengthens the
Minnesota SIP by requiring new or more
stringent limits on equipment. As
shown in Table 1, for the 3-hour, 24hour, and annual SO2 standards,
allowable emissions are decreased by
95.402 lb/hr, 95.402 lb/hr, and 249.169
tpy, respectively, from the impact of the
revisions to joint document 101. Joint
document 101 becomes effective upon
the effective date of EPA’s approval of
MPCA’s February 8, 2017, request.
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF CHANGES TO ALLOWABLE SO2 EMISSIONS IN JOINT DOCUMENT 101
Section in
permit
Unit
Change to
allowable in
lb/hr
(1-hr and 24hr standards)
Change to
allowable in
tpy
(annual standard)
COMG 28/GP 011/Diesel engines w/SIP conditions ..................................................................
EQUI 471/EU 296/#4 Hydrogen Plant Reformer—Refining Equipment .....................................
5.23.3
5.122.4
¥0.002
¥69.4
¥0.009
¥243.3
EQUI 495/EU 034/#3 Coker Heater—Process Heater ...............................................................
EQUI496/EU 035/#3 Coker Heater—Process Heater .................................................................
EQUI 498/EU 037/Steam/Air Heater Decooking 23H–1—Process Heater ................................
EQUI 500/EU 040/#3 Crude Unit Charge Heater—Process Heater ...........................................
EQUI 1456/EQUI 24H–1/no description ......................................................................................
5.122.8
5.133.1
5.134.1
5.135.1
5.137.1
5.163.13
22.7
¥12.7
¥9.4
¥20.2
¥19.5
13.1
79.7
¥44.6
¥13.4
¥4.26
¥54.3
31
Total Change ........................................................................................................................
........................
¥95.402
¥249.169
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with PROPOSALS
Joint document 101 is approvable
because EPA’s review of the revised
document shows that reductions of
allowable SIP-based SO2 emissions, and
strengthening of the Minnesota SIP will
occur through corrections, clarifications,
and revisions made since approval of
joint document 12.
IV. What action is EPA proposing?
EPA is proposing to approve a
revision to Minnesota’s SO2 SIP for
FHR, as submitted by MPCA on
February 8, 2017, and reflected in
conditions labeled ‘‘Title I Condition: 40
CFR 50.4(SO2 SIP); Title I Condition: 40
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:23 Apr 25, 2018
Jkt 244001
CFR 51; Title I Condition: 40 CFR pt. 52,
subp. Y’’ in joint document 101.
V. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, EPA proposes to include
in a final EPA rule regulatory text that
includes incorporation by reference. In
accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, EPA proposes to incorporate by
reference all the conditions in
Minnesota Permit No. 03700011–101
cited as ‘‘Title I Condition: 40 CFR
50.4(S02 SIP); Title I Condition: 40 CFR
51; Title I Condition: 40 CFR pt. 52,
subp. Y’’, effective January 13, 2017.
EPA has made, and will continue to
make, these documents generally
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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).
VI. 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 Clean Air 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
E:\FR\FM\26APP1.SGM
26APP1
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 81 / Thursday, April 26, 2018 / Proposed Rules
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:
• 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);
• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82
FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory
action because SIP approvals are
exempted under Executive Order 12866;
• 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 (Public Law 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 Clean Air Act;
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
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).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:23 Apr 25, 2018
Jkt 244001
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: April 18, 2018.
Cathy Stepp,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 10
[PS Docket Nos. 15–91, 15–94; DA 18–302]
Parties Asked To Refresh the Record
on Facilitating Multimedia Content in
Wireless Emergency Alerts
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
[FR Doc. 2018–08807 Filed 4–25–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
In this document, the Public
Safety and Homeland Security Bureau
(Bureau) seeks to refresh the record on
the issue of facilitating multimedia
content (such as photos and maps) in
Wireless Emergency Alert (WEA)
messages raised in the 2016 Report and
Order and Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking in this proceeding.
DATES: Comments are due on or before
May 29, 2018 and reply comments are
due on or before June 11, 2018.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by PS Docket Nos. 15–91 and
15–94, by any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Federal Communications
Commission’s Website: https://
www.fcc.gov/ecfs/. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail: Filings can be sent by hand or
messenger delivery, by commercial
overnight courier, or by first-class or
overnight U.S. Postal Service mail
(although the Commission continues to
experience delays in receiving U.S.
Postal Service mail). All filings must be
addressed to the Commission’s
Secretary, Office of the Secretary,
Federal Communications Commission.
• People With Disabilities: Contact
the FCC to request reasonable
accommodations (accessible format
documents, sign language interpreters,
CART, etc.) by Email: FCC504@fcc.gov
or phone: (202) 418–0530 or TTY: (202)
418–0432.
For detailed instructions for
submitting comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process,
see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John
A. Evanoff, Attorney-Advisor, Policy
and Licensing Division, Public Safety
and Homeland Security Bureau, (202)
418–0848 or john.evanoff@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
summary of the Commission’s
document in PS Docket Nos. 15–91, 15–
94; DA 18–302, released on March 28,
2018. It is available on the
SUMMARY:
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Administration for Children and
Families
45 CFR Part 1355
RIN 0970–AC76
Adoption and Foster Care Analysis
and Reporting System
Children’s Bureau (CB),
Administration on Children Youth and
Families (ACYF), Administration for
Children and Families (ACF),
Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
AGENCY:
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking;
correction.
ACTION:
This document corrects the
Regulatory Identification Number (RIN)
that appeared in the heading of a Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking published in
the Federal Register of March 15, 2018.
Through that document, the Children’s
Bureau proposed to delay the
compliance and effective dates in the
Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and
Reporting System (AFCARS) 2016 final
rule for title IV–E agencies to comply
with agency rules for an additional two
fiscal years.
SUMMARY:
DATES:
April 26, 2018.
In the
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking FR Doc
2018–05038, beginning on page 11450
in the issue of March 15, 2018, the RIN
appeared incorrectly in the heading of
the document as RIN 0970–AC47. The
RIN is corrected to read ‘‘RIN 0970–
AC76’’.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Dated: April 20, 2018.
Ann C. Agnew,
Executive Secretary to the Department,
Department of Health and Human Services.
[FR Doc. 2018–08736 Filed 4–25–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4184–25–P
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
18257
E:\FR\FM\26APP1.SGM
26APP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 81 (Thursday, April 26, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 18255-18257]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-08807]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R05-OAR-2017-0099 FRL-9977-21--Region 5]
Air Plan Approval; Minnesota; Flint Hills Sulfur Dioxide (SO2)
Revision
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a revision to the Minnesota sulfur dioxide (SO2)
State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the Flint Hills Resources, LLC Pine
Bend Refinery (FHR) as submitted on February 8, 2017. The proposed SIP
revision pertains to the introduction and removal of certain equipment
at the refinery as well as amendments to certain emission limits,
resulting in an overall decrease of SO2 emissions from FHR.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 29, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2017-0099 at https://www.regulations.gov or via email to
[email protected]. 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: Anthony Maietta, Environmental
Protection Specialist, Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch
(AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-8777,
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
I. What is the background for this action?
II. What is EPA's analysis of the SIP revision?
a. Coker Replacement
b. #4 Hydrogen Plant Reformer--30H401 Furnace
c. Diesel Fire Water Pump at #4 Cooling Tower
d. #3 Crude/Coker Improvements
e. Cleanup
III. SO2 SIP and Emissions Impacts
IV. What action is EPA proposing?
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What is the background for this action?
FHR operates an oil refinery located in the Pine Bend Area of
Rosemount, Dakota County, Minnesota. On February 8, 2017, the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) submitted a request to EPA to approve
into the Minnesota SIP the conditions 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'' in FHR's revised joint Title I/
Title V document, Permit No. 03700011-101 \1\ (joint document 101).
Joint document 101 contains measures for FHR to implement changes that
improve technology at the plant and increase efficiency through new and
existing equipment, as well as clarifying amendments to the document's
language. MPCA posted joint document 101 for public comment in the
Minnesota State Register on November 21, 2016, and the comment period
ended on December 23, 2016. MPCA received no comments on the document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In 1995, EPA approved consolidated permitting regulations
into the Minnesota SIP. (60 FR 21447, May 2, 1995). The consolidated
permitting regulations included the term ``Title I condition'' which
was written, in part, to satisfy EPA requirements that SIP control
measures remain permanent and enforceable. A ``Title I condition''
is defined, in part, as ``any condition based on source specific
determination of ambient impacts imposed for the purpose of
achieving or maintaining attainment with a national ambient air
quality standard and which was part of a [SIP] approved by the EPA
or submitted to the EPA pending approval under section 110 of the
act. . .'' MINN. R. 7007.1011 (2013). The regulations also state
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.'' MINN. R.
7007.0450 (2007). Minnesota has initiated using the joint Title I/
Title V document as the enforceable document for imposing emission
limitations and compliance requirements in SIPs. The SIP
requirements in the joint Title I/Title V document 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 Title I and Title V of the Clean Air Act (July
3, 1997 letter from David Kee, EPA, to Michael J. Sandusky, MPCA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. What is EPA's analysis of the SIP revision?
Joint document 101, issued by MPCA on January 13, 2017, contains
amended SIP conditions that, when combined, provide FHR with the
ability to more efficiently upgrade hydrocarbons that are distilled
from FHR's crude units into transportation fuels, primarily diesel. The
amended SIP conditions allow FHR to increase fuel production and
operate more efficiently and closer to the facility's overall
distillation capacity. See Table 1 at the end of our review for a list
of detailed changes to SO2 allowable emissions limits
associated with this action. The amended SIP conditions in joint
document 101 include:
a. Coker Replacement.
A coker replacement project consists of the installation of a new
coker process unit (#4 Coker Unit Charge Heater/EQUI1456) into joint
document 101. The new #4 Coker will replace the #1 and #2 Cokers, which
will be permanently retired. In addition to their retirement, the SIP
condition that lists the decoking scenario in which the #1 and #2
cokers' associated process units
[[Page 18256]]
operate simultaneously with 21H1 Steam/Air Heater Decoking unit (EQUI
493) and 21H2 Steam/Air Heater Decoking unit (EQUI 494) is being
removed from joint document 101.
b. #4 Hydrogen Plant Reformer--30H401 Furnace.
The allowable SO2 emissions limit on the 30H401 furnace
for the #4 Hydrogen Plant Reformer is being lowered. This is because
the originally approved allowable SO2 limit for the heater
assumed that it would operate on refinery fuel gas. Since start-up, the
unit has primarily been operated on pressure swing adsorption offgas,
which originates as a natural gas ahead of the reformer and does not
contain sulfur. Because of the dual-fuel operation of the heater, its
allowable SO2 limit has been reduced to meet actual
operating conditions.
c. Diesel Fire Water Pump at #4 Cooling Tower.
The diesel fire water pump at the #4 cooling tower was
decommissioned and so its SO2 emission limits are removed
from joint document 101.
d. #3 Crude/Coker Improvements.
Improvements to the #3 crude/coker that were incorporated 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''
conditions in a previous joint Title I/Title V document (Permit No.
03700011-010) have been completed and as a result, SIP conditions for
three process heaters (EQUI495/EU034, EQUI496/EU035, and EQUI500/EU040)
and two process heaters for steam-air decoking activities (EQUI498/
EU037 and EQUI499/EU038) are being removed from joint document 101.
e. Cleanup.
MPCA also requested to remove from the Minnesota SIP an emission
limit for the ammonium thiosulfate process unit that was erroneously
labeled as a ``Title I Condition: 40 CFR 50.4(SO2 SIP);
Title I Condition: 40 CFR 51; Title I Condition: 40 CFR pt. 52, subp.
Y'' condition in the prior joint Title I/Title V document, Permit No.
3700011-12 (joint document 12). EPA had approved joint document 12 into
the Minnesota SIP on June 27, 2016 (81 FR 41447). The state-based
SO2 limit for EQUI574 at condition 5.162.4 in joint document
12 are revised to be labeled a ``Minn. R. 7009.0080'' Title V condition
in joint document 101. This is acceptable because the federal
SO2 standards are still contained in joint document 101 and
the erroneous condition incorporated into joint document 12 at 81 FR
41447 does not affect FHR's ability to meet the SO2 NAAQS.
III. SO2 SIP and Emissions Impacts
Joint document 101 removes SIP conditions for equipment that have
been approved for shutdown and decommissioning in joint document 12,
and that have been decommissioned from FHR and are no longer necessary.
Joint document 101 also strengthens the Minnesota SIP by requiring new
or more stringent limits on equipment. As shown in Table 1, for the 3-
hour, 24-hour, and annual SO2 standards, allowable emissions
are decreased by 95.402 lb/hr, 95.402 lb/hr, and 249.169 tpy,
respectively, from the impact of the revisions to joint document 101.
Joint document 101 becomes effective upon the effective date of EPA's
approval of MPCA's February 8, 2017, request.
Table 1--Summary of Changes to Allowable SO2 Emissions in Joint Document 101
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Change to
allowable in Change to
Unit Section in lb/hr (1-hr allowable in
permit and 24-hr tpy (annual
standards) standard)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMG 28/GP 011/Diesel engines w/SIP conditions.................. 5.23.3 -0.002 -0.009
EQUI 471/EU 296/#4 Hydrogen Plant Reformer--Refining Equipment.. 5.122.4 -69.4 -243.3
-----------------------------------------------
5.122.8 22.7 79.7
EQUI 495/EU 034/#3 Coker Heater--Process Heater................. 5.133.1 -12.7 -44.6
EQUI496/EU 035/#3 Coker Heater--Process Heater.................. 5.134.1 -9.4 -13.4
EQUI 498/EU 037/Steam/Air Heater Decooking 23H-1--Process Heater 5.135.1 -20.2 -4.26
EQUI 500/EU 040/#3 Crude Unit Charge Heater--Process Heater..... 5.137.1 -19.5 -54.3
EQUI 1456/EQUI 24H-1/no description............................. 5.163.13 13.1 31
-----------------------------------------------
Total Change................................................ .............. -95.402 -249.169
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joint document 101 is approvable because EPA's review of the
revised document shows that reductions of allowable SIP-based
SO2 emissions, and strengthening of the Minnesota SIP will
occur through corrections, clarifications, and revisions made since
approval of joint document 12.
IV. What action is EPA proposing?
EPA is proposing to approve a revision to Minnesota's
SO2 SIP for FHR, as submitted by MPCA on February 8, 2017,
and reflected in conditions labeled ``Title I Condition: 40 CFR
50.4(SO2 SIP); Title I Condition: 40 CFR 51; Title I
Condition: 40 CFR pt. 52, subp. Y'' in joint document 101.
V. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, EPA proposes to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA proposes to incorporate by
reference all the conditions in Minnesota Permit No. 03700011-101 cited
as ``Title I Condition: 40 CFR 50.4(S02 SIP); Title I Condition: 40 CFR
51; Title I Condition: 40 CFR pt. 52, subp. Y'', effective January 13,
2017. 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).
VI. 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 Clean Air 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
[[Page 18257]]
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:
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);
Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
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 (Public Law 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 Clean Air Act; 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 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).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: April 18, 2018.
Cathy Stepp,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2018-08807 Filed 4-25-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
