[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 230 (Wednesday, November 27, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 60191-60197]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-30324]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[FRL-5644-2]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
West Virginia; SO2: New Manchester-Grant Magisterial District,
Hancock County Implementation Plan
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State implementation plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the State of West Virginia. This revision provides for,
and demonstrates, the attainment of the national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS) for sulfur oxides, measured as sulfur dioxide
(SO2), in the New Manchester-Grant Magisterial District, Hancock
County nonattainment area. The implementation plan was submitted by
West Virginia to satisfy the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA)
pertaining to nonattainment areas. This action is being taken under
section 110 of the Clean Air Act.
DATES: This action is effective January 27, 1997 unless notice is
received on or before December 27, 1996 that adverse or critical
comments will be submitted. If the effective date is delayed, timely
notice will be published in the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to Makeba A. Morris, Chief, Technical
Assessment Section (3AT22), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region III, 841 Chestnut Building, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107.
Copies of the documents relevant to this action are available for
public inspection during normal business hours at the Air, Radiation,
and Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III,
841 Chestnut Building, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107; the Air and
Radiation Docket and Information Center, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460; and, West Virginia
Division of Environmental Protection, 1558 Washington Street, East,
Charleston, West Virginia 25311.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David J. Campbell, Technical
Assessment Section (3AT22), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region III, 841 Chestnut Building, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107,
phone: 215 566-2196.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On February 17, 1995, as amended on May 3,
1996, the State of West Virginia submitted a revision to its State
implementation plan (SIP) for sulfur dioxide (SO2). The revision
pertains to the SO2 nonattainment area in New Manchester-Grant
Magisterial District, Hancock County, West Virginia.
[[Page 60192]]
Background
The Clean Air Act, as amended in 1977, required EPA to establish
the attainment status of areas with respect to the national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQS). On March 3, 1978 (43 FR 8962), as amended on
September 12, 1978 (43 FR 40502), EPA published the initial attainment
designations for each State in Region III. Areas within each State were
designated as nonattainment, attainment, or unclassifiable and these
designations are depicted in 40 CFR part 81.
As part of EPA Region III's initial designations, the New
Manchester-Grant Magisterial District, Hancock County, West Virginia
was designated as nonattainment for the primary NAAQS for SO2. EPA
acted on the recommendation of West Virginia to designate this area as
nonattainment for SO2. The basis of the recommendation was ambient
air quality monitoring data collected at the New Manchester monitor
located in Hancock County that indicated violations of the primary
NAAQS for SO2 in the northern portion of the County.
The cause of the violations of the NAAQS was primarily attributed
to Ohio Edison Company's W. H. Sammis Power Plant in nearby Jefferson
County, Ohio. On July 24, 1979 (44 FR 43298) and August 14, 1980 (45 FR
54042), EPA proposed and finalized, respectively, a revision to the
West Virginia State Implementation Plan (SIP) for SO2. The
revision contained a control strategy and attainment demonstration for
the New Manchester-Grant area.
The control strategy indicated that the New Manchester-Grant
Magisterial District nonattainment area would attain the NAAQS when the
Sammis Power Plant complies with the applicable SO2 emission
limitations of the Ohio SIP. This strategy did not require West
Virginia to revise its SO2 regulations. The control strategy was
supported by a modeling demonstration and air quality data which showed
that the area would attain the NAAQS if the Sammis Power Plant complied
with its SIP emission limitation. Although a SIP revision for the
nonattainment area was approved, the State did not submit a request for
redesignation to attainment.
On February 5, 1990, EPA issued a SIP call to West Virginia which,
in part, required the submission of a SIP revision to attain and
maintain the NAAQS for SO2 in all of Hancock County, including the
New Manchester-Grant nonattainment area. The SIP call was issued
because monitored violations of the NAAQS in Hancock County indicated
that the current SIP was inadequate. Later that year, the Clean Air Act
was amended and provided that any area designated with respect to the
NAAQS, as in effect immediately before November 15, 1990, shall retain
that designation ``by operation of law'' (section 107(d)(1)(C)).
Therefore, the New Manchester-Grant Magisterial District, Hancock
County, West Virginia remained classified as nonattainment for SO2
by operation of law after November 15, 1990.
Initially, EPA misinterpreted the new requirements of the Clean Air
Act as they applied to the New Manchester-Grant nonattainment area. EPA
had erroneously informed the State that a SIP revision for the
nonattainment area was due by May 15, 1992. On June 13, 1994, EPA
informed West Virginia of its misinterpretation of the Act and
established, via the SIP call authorities outlined in section 110(k), a
SIP submittal due date of December 1, 1994. EPA also explained that
section 192(c) is applicable in this situation and it mandates the
attainment of the NAAQS within five (5) years from the determination of
SIP inadequacy. Therefore, the required SIP must provide for attainment
by February 5, 1995.
On February 17, 1995, West Virginia submitted a formal SIP revision
for the New Manchester-Grant Magisterial District nonattainment area.
The SIP revision contains, among other things, individual consent
orders between West Virginia and Quaker State Refinery and Weirton
Steel Corporation limiting their SO2 emissions and allowing for
the demonstration of attainment in the New Manchester-Grant
nonattainment area. EPA determined that the submittal was
administratively and technically complete. Subsequent to this
determination, West Virginia identified potential minor errors with
regard to the emissions inventory for a number of sources located in
Ohio and the possible amendment of emission limits for two other Ohio
sources. On May 3, 1996, West Virginia submitted an amended attainment
demonstration that accounts for the identified changes in the Ohio
emissions inventory. The consent orders between the State and principle
sources did not require revision in order to demonstrate attainment.
It should be noted that the remainder of Hancock County, Clay and
Butler Magisterial Districts and the City of Weirton (the ``Weirton
Area'), was redesignated as nonattainment for SO2 on December 21,
1993 (58 FR 67334). This action required the State to submit a SIP
revision for the Weirton Area by July 20, 1995. On July 21, 1995, EPA
received a SIP revision submittal for the Weirton Area and that
submittal is currently under Agency review.
Summary of SIP Revision
On February 17, 1995, as amended on May 3, 1996, Mr. Laidley Eli
McCoy, Ph.D., Director, West Virginia Division of Environmental
Protection submitted to EPA Region III a SIP revision for the New
Manchester-Grant Magisterial District, Hancock County SO2
nonattainment area. The SIP revision consists primarily of consent
orders entered into by and between the State of West Virginia and the
Quaker State Refinery in Congo, West Virginia and the Weirton Steel
Corporation in Weirton, West Virginia. The consent orders establish
SO2 emission limits for numerous emission points at both
facilities. The submittal contains an air quality dispersion modeling
demonstration that indicates that the allowable emission limits will
provide for the attainment of the NAAQS for SO2 in the New
Manchester-Grant area.
The consent orders stipulate the following emission limitations for
the Quaker State Corporation refinery and the Weirton Steel Corporation
facility:
Quaker State Corporation, Congo Refinery SO2 Emission Limits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2 emission unit SO2 emission limit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coal-fired, Fluidized-bed Boiler 1.2 lbs-SO2/MMBtu of heat input, at
No. 1. any time.
Coal-fired, Fluidized-bed Boiler 1.2 lbs-SO2/MMBtu of heat input, at
No. 2. any time.
Oil-fired Package Boiler A......... 1.2 lbs-SO2/MMBtu of heat input, at
any time.
Oil-fired Package Boiler B......... 1.2 lbs-SO2/MMBtu of heat input, at
any time.
Simultaneous operation of Coal- 192 lbs-SO2/hour, each boiler.
fired, Fluidized-bed Boilers Nos.1
and 2.
Simultaneous operation of Oil-fired 264 lbs-SO2/hour, combined.
Package Boilers A and B.
Simultaneous operation of one Coal- 264 lbs-SO2/hour, combined.
fired, Fluidized-bed Boiler and
one Oil-fired Package Boiler.
[[Page 60193]]
Process Heaters H-101 and H-102.... 1.1 lbs-SO2/MMBtu.
Process Heaters H-501/6 and H-601/4 0.8 lbs-SO2/MMBtu.
Vacuum Fractionator Heater H-701... Shall burn natural gas and/or
treated refinery gas that contains
10 grains of hydrogen
sulfide per 100 dry standard cubic
feet of gas, and 0.8 lbs-SO2/
MMBtu.
Process Heater H-201............... Shall burn fuel oil, desulfurized
fuel gas and/or natural gas, and
1.1 lbs-SO2/MMBtu.
Hydrogen Unit Heater H-605......... Shall burn natural gas only.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weirton Steel Corporation, Weirton Facility SO2 Emission Limits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2 Emission Unit SO2 Emission Limit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
High Pressure Boilers 1, 2, 3, 4... 1.6 lbs-SO2/MMBtu and 864 lbs-SO2/
hour, per boiler. No more than
three boilers may be operated
simultaneously.
High Pressure Boiler 5............. 0.8 lbs-SO2/MMBtu and 480 lbs-SO2/
hour.
Sinter Plant....................... 250 lbs-SO2/hour.
Slag Granulator.................... 100 lbs-SO2/hour.
Basic Oxygen Process Waste Heat 300 lbs-SO2/hour.
Boilers.
Hot Mill Reheat Furnaces, Foster- Shall burn blast furnace gas, mixed
Wheeler Boilers and combustion gas (approximately 70 percent
sources at the Hydrochloric Acid natural gas and 30 percent air),
Regeneration Plant, Continuous or natural gas.
Annealing Facility, Jumbo
Annealing Facility, and Blast
Furnace Stoves.
Low Pressure Boilers LP1, LP2, LP3, Shall be permanently shut down.
LP4 and LP15.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evaluation of State Submittal
The Clean Air Act requires States to submit implementation plans
that indicate how each State intends to attain and maintain the NAAQS.
The 1977 Amendments established specific requirements for
implementation plans in nonattainment areas in part D, sections 171-
178. The 1990 Amendments did not change these requirements in any
significant way with regard to SO2 nonattainment areas and
existing guidance remains valid. On April 16, 1992 (57 FR 13498), EPA
issued ``General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990'' describing EPA's preliminary views
on how it intends to interpret various provisions of title I, primarily
those concerning revisions required for nonattainment areas.
In order to approve the SIP revision, each of the part D
requirements must be evaluated and the revision must ensure that (1)
the revised allowable emission limitations demonstrate attainment and
maintenance of the NAAQS for SO2 in the nonattainment area; (2)
the emission limitations are clearly enforceable; and (3) that all
applicable procedural and substantive requirements of 40 CFR part 51
are met. The following is an evaluation of the part D requirements as
described in the ``General Preamble''; a more detailed evaluation is
provided in a Technical Support Document available upon request from
the Regional EPA office listed in the ADDRESSES section of this
document:
1. Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT)
West Virginia's SIP revision provides for reasonably available
control technology (RACT). The SIP revision indicates that SO2
emissions are controlled at the Quaker State Corporations facility in
Congo, West Virginia and the Weirton Steel Corporation facility in
Weirton, West Virginia largely through fuel specification and
operations modifications. The revision establishes allowable SO2
emission limitations at both plants and also defines allowable fuel
usage for a number of processes. With regard to Quaker State, the
revision includes a schedule for the construction of taller smokestakes
for emissions from a number of boilers at the facility. The limits
contained in the revision were effective upon execution of the
individual consent orders entered into with West Virginia by Quaker
State and Weirton Steel on January 9, 1995. The SIP revision provides a
demonstration that these limits will provide for the attainment of the
NAAQS in the nonattainment area by the statutory attainment date.
2. Reasonable Further Progress (RFP)
West Virginia's SIP revision provides for reasonable further
progress (RFP). The SIP revision provides that the allowable emission
rates are achievable by the required attainment date.
3. Contingency Measures
West Virginia's SIP revision provides for adequate contingency
measures. The SIP revision contains a comprehensive action plan to
quickly identify and address SO2 impacts that may affect
attainment of the NAAQS in the New Manchester-Grant area. The State's
plan includes the continuous review of air quality monitoring data in
the area of concern, including the two monitors located in the
nonattainment area. In the event of a certified violation, West
Virginia intends to contact all potential contributors to the
violations both locally and in neighboring Ohio and Pennsylvania. West
Virginia has provided assurances that appropriate mitigation measures
will be pursued to remedy the causes of any violations.
4. Stack Height Issues and Remand
West Virginia has adequately addressed any potential stack height
issues. The only stack height issues contained in the SIP revision
pertain to the construction of new smokestacks at the Quaker State
facility. In the consent order with Quaker State, West Virginia
requires that any modifications to the existing stacks or replacement
of those stacks shall comply with the provisions of federally-approved
West Virginia regulation 45CSR20 ``Good Engineering Practice as
Applicable to Stack Heights''. There are no stack height issues at the
Weirton Steel facility.
[[Page 60194]]
5. Existing Modeling Protocols
West Virginia's SIP revision is supported by a modeling
demonstration using regulatory air dispersion models as defined by 40
CFR part 51, appendix W--``Guideline on Air Quality Models (Revised),''
(hereinafter, the Guideline). The model protocol employed by West
Virginia to perform the attainment demonstration was developed by an
EPA contractor. The model protocol was amended and refined by West
Virginia and EPA as necessary. As mentioned, the allowable emission
limitations established by the SIP revision are supported by Guideline
modeling which indicates that the limits are adequate to attain and
maintain the NAAQS for SO2 in the nonattainment area by the
statutory attainment date. West Virginia employed the Guideline models
Integrated Gaussian Model (IGM) and CTSCREEN, the screening mode of
Complex Terrain Dispersion Model Plus Algorithms for Unstable
Situations (CTDMPLUS). The IGM modeling analysis relied on the
predictions of Industrial Source Complex Short Term (ISCST2) for simple
terrain and COMPLEX1 and Rough Terrain Diffusion Model (RTDM) for
complex terrain predictions. The results of this demonstration will be
discussed below.
6. Test Methods and Averaging Times
West Virginia's SIP revision principally relies on the use of
continuous emissions monitoring (CEM) as the means of monitoring
compliance at the Quaker State and Weirton Steel facilities. The
revision stipulates short-term averaging times for determining
compliance with the allowable emission limits.
The SIP revision requires the Quaker State facility to operate
continuous emissions monitoring (CEM) systems to test for compliance
with the applicable SO2 emission limitations at each of its coal-
and oil-fired boilers. The SIP revision stipulates averaging times
based on rolling, 3-hour averages for the boilers. For Quaker State's
process heaters, fuel sampling and analysis is required to determine
compliance. The revision also requires that all refinery fuel gas
streams be monitored for hydrogen sulfide concentrations using a CEM
system. The SIP revision further stipulates that in the event of CEM
malfunction or outage, certain fuel specification requirements and
alternative compliance test methodologies must be employed to ensure
compliance. All CEM systems must be operated according to the relevant
portions of 40 CFR part 60.
At the Weirton Steel facility, the SIP revision also relies heavily
on CEM systems as the main test method. The principal emission sources
at the plant, the boilers, must operate CEM systems and must assure
compliance of the relevant emission limitations based on a rolling,
three-hour average. The SIP also provides contingency test methods in
the event that the CEM systems are inoperable. For the other emission
sources at the facility, the sinter plant and the slag granulator,
Weirton Steel must conduct a specified number of emissions tests in
accordance with the reference test procedures detailed at 40 CFR part
60, appendix A. Specifically, compliance testing should be conducted
according to Methods 6, 6A, 6B, 6C, and 19.
7. Emission Inventory
West Virginia's SIP revision provides an adequate actual emissions
inventory from all relevant sources of SO2 in the nonattainment
area. The revision contains a current inventory of actual emissions
data and stack parameter information for the Quaker State and Weirton
Steel facilities as well as numerous nearby emission sources in West
Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Ohio.
Shortly after submitting the February 17, 1995 SIP revision, West
Virginia identified what it believed to be erroneous data contained in
the emission inventory for certain Ohio emission sources. At this same
time, the State of Ohio was pursuing a revision to its SIP with regard
to the Sammis Power Plant. The Sammis Power Plant significantly impacts
the New Manchester-Grant area. As a result of these two factors, West
Virginia acknowledged that the emission inventory for the attainment
demonstration would require revision to correct the errors and to
reflect any changes to the Ohio SIP with regard to the Sammis Plant
and/or any other relevant sources. As part of the May 3, 1996 SIP
revision amendment, West Virginia provided the appropriate corrections
and amendments to the emission inventory.
8. Attainment Demonstration
West Virginia's SIP revision provides an adequate attainment
demonstration, including appropriate air quality dispersion modeling.
EPA regulations, 40 CFR 51.112, require nonattainment plans to include
a demonstration of the adequacy of the plan's control strategy. The
demonstration must employ the applicable air quality models, data
bases, and other requirements specified at 40 CFR part 51, appendix W--
``Guideline on Air Quality Models (Revised)''. This demonstration must
include the following information: model selection and descriptions;
model application and assumptions made during application of selected
models; receptor grids; meteorological data; ambient air monitoring
data and background concentration; model source input; and modeling
results.
Model Descriptions--The air quality dispersion modeling analysis
performed for this demonstration employed the Integrated Gaussian Model
(IGM) and screening mode of the Complex Terrain Dispersion Model Plus
Algorithms for Unstable Situations (CTDMPLUS) named CTSCREEN. Both
models are considered recommended models according to Appendix W. IGM
is capable of calculating emission concentrations for simple,
intermediate and complex terrain situations. IGM is able to execute
algorithms from four other Guideline models to predict concentrations:
Industrial Source Complex Short Term (ISCST2) for simple terrain and
COMPLEX1, Rough Terrain Dispersion Model (RTDM), and SHORTZ for complex
terrain. CTSCREEN is a Gaussian model that requires actual terrain
feature data as input. CTSCREEN is able to calculate concentrations
estimations using a data set of predetermined meteorological conditions
as input in lieu of recorded meteorological data.
Model Application--The area contained within the modeling domain,
comprising most of Hancock County, can be characterized as primarily
rural terrain with some intermediate terrain features. Three model
analyses were performed in the modeling domain. A domain-wide
application of IGM was used to characterize all non-Quaker State
emission sources in the inventory. In this IGM analysis, ISCST2 was
employed as the simple terrain model and RTDM or COMPLEX1, as
appropriate, was used as the complex terrain model. CTSCREEN was
applied in the complex terrain surrounding the Quaker State facility to
describe that source's impacts on the domain in complex terrain.
CTSCREEN does not predict concentrations at receptors located below
stack top, therefore, ISCST2 was run to determine concentrations at
those receptors. There were no intermediate terrain receptors in the
two Quaker State specific analyses.
Receptor Grids--The principal receptor grid covers the New
Manchester-Grant Magisterial District nonattainment area with one-
kilometer spacing between each receptor. A more refined receptor grid
was developed for the area surrounding the only
[[Page 60195]]
significant source located in the defined nonattainment area, Quaker
State. This refined grid augmented the one-kilometer grid by using 200-
meter receptor spacing. The entire receptor grid consisted of 245
receptors. The overall grid was developed to adequately assess the
impacts of the Quaker State facility as well as the other nearby
emission sources. The demonstration also included the required terrain
arrays employed by RTDM (within IGM) and the digitized terrain profiles
required as input for CTSCREEN. West Virginia developed these arrays
and profiles according to the appropriate procedures.
Meteorological Data--On-site meteorological data was not available
within the modeling domain, therefore, West Virginia relied on data
collected at the National Weather Service (NWS) meteorological site
located at Pittsburgh International Airport. Appendix W recommends that
the five most recent years of NWS data be employed if on-site data is
unavailable. West Virginia used data collected from 1989 through 1993.
A portion of the data collected in 1988 and 1991 were determined
incomplete by EPA. West Virginia replaced the missing data using a
substitution procedure approved by EPA.
Background Concentration--The demonstration uses monitored air
quality data for determining that portion of the background
concentrations attributable to sources other than those nearby that are
to be explicitly modeled. Seventeen SO2 monitoring sites in and
around the nonattainment area were available for evaluation. West
Virginia employed an appropriate methodology for using the data
collected at those monitors for developing hourly background
concentration values to be used as model input.
Source Inputs--The source inventory for the demonstration consists
of the two major sources of SO2 located in Hancock County, Quaker
State and Weirton Steel, as well as other significant sources located
in West Virginia, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. West Virginia explicitly
modeled all significant sources of SO2 located within 50
kilometers of nonattainment area. For all 20 sources included in the
emission inventory, model input data were developed for parameters such
as stack height, stack temperature, exit velocity, etc. Maximum
allowable emission rates were used for each source with continuous
operation assumed for evaluation of the short-term standards and actual
operation data was used to adjust the emission rates for evaluation of
the annual standard.
As mentioned above, certain changes were made to the emission
inventory relevant to a number of Ohio sources after initial submittal
of the SIP revision on February 17, 1995. Ohio Edison operates the
Sammis and Toronto Power Plants in nearby Jefferson County, Ohio. The
State of Ohio has recently proposed approval of a revision to its SIP
as it applies to these two plants to allow for new allowable SO2
emission limitations. Ohio has proposed to change the Sammis Plant's
allowable emission limits for units 1-4 from 1.61 lbs-SO2/
mmBtu and units 5-7 from 4.46 lbs-SO2/mmBtu to a single,
plant-wide emission rate of 2.91 lbs-SO2/mmBtu. For the
Toronto Power Plant, Ohio has proposed an emission limit reduction from
8.1 lbs-SO2/mmBtu to 2.0 lbs-SO2/mmBtu. While both
changes represent gross emission reductions, the change in operating
conditions at the Sammis Plant considering the variable stack
parameters at each unit requires that the new emission limits be
examined for their expected impacts on the New Manchester-Grant
nonattainment area. West Virginia re-visited its original attainment
demonstration to evaluate these revised conditions. West Virginia
provides modeling results that reflect both the current SIP allowable
conditions and the proposed conditions at the Sammis and Toronto
Plants.
Modeling Results--The results of the modeling analyses indicate
that no exceedances of the NAAQS for SO2 are expected in the New
Manchester-Grant nonattainment area when the Quaker State and Weirton
Steel Corporation facilities are operating at the emission rates
contained in their respective consent orders and the other significant
sources comply with their allowable emission rates.
The demonstration present results of analyses examining both the
current SIP situation for the Sammis and Toronto Power Plants and for
the proposed conditions. The emission inventory for all of the other
modeled sources remained constant for each scenario. Under both
scenarios, the demonstration indicates that the primary NAAQS, the
annual [80 g/m3] and 24-hour [365 g/m3]
standards will be attained under the terms of the SIP revision. The
three-hour [1300 g/m3] standard will also be protected at
all receptors under both scenarios.
Discussion of Weirton Area Nonattainment Area
On December 21, 1993, EPA promulgated the redesignation of areas as
nonattainment for SO2 and particulate matter (PM-10). The Federal
Register (58 FR 67334) document identifies the Clay and Butler
Magisterial Districts and the City of Weirton in Hancock County, West
Virginia, the ``Weirton Area'', as being redesignated as nonattainment
for SO2 under section 107 of the Clean Air Act. Pursuant to
section 191(a) of the Act, the State of West Virginia was required to
submit to EPA an implementation plan for this area within 18 months of
the effective date of the redesignation to nonattainment. The State
submitted a SIP revision for the Weirton Area on July 21, 1995 and the
revision is currently under Agency review.
As discussed briefly above, the basis of EPA's determination to
redesignate this area as nonattainment for SO2 was air quality
monitor data collected in the late 1980's and early 1990's that
indicated violations of the primary and secondary standards in Hancock
County. West Virginia and EPA were aware of the air quality issues in
the Weirton Area for some time and considered completing a County-wide
attainment demonstration and SIP revision. However, certain logistical
and technical issues arose such that it was determined that individual
SIP revisions for each nonattainment area would be the most prudent
course.
It is recognized that many of the sources that influence air
quality in the New Manchester-Grant nonattainment area will play a
significant role in the Weirton Area. This is particularly true for the
Weirton Steel Corporation's facility in Weirton, as well as, the Sammis
and Toronto Power Plants. Therefore, the contribution of these sources
on the Weirton Area nonattainment area will have to be closely assessed
in any attainment demonstration for the Weirton Area. There is a strong
potential that emission reductions above and beyond those contained in
the consent order in the New Manchester-Grant SIP revision may be
required from Weirton Steel in order to demonstrate attainment of the
NAAQS in the Weirton Area. It should also be noted that the currently
proposed emission limits for the Sammis and Toronto Plants may need to
be reconsidered if it is determined that these sources must play a role
in any control strategy for the Weirton Area. Based on the modeling
that is included in the New Manchester-Grant SIP revision, it is
doubtful that the Quaker State facility causes significant impact in
the Weirton Area and it is therefore unlikely that its emission
limitations will require future amendment. However, all sources in the
emission inventory that significantly impact the Weirton Area
nonattainment area
[[Page 60196]]
should not be excluded from consideration for control strategy
purposes. All of these issues will be more fully discussed during the
formal review of the Weirton Area SIP revision.
EPA's review of the entire submittal indicates that West Virginia's
SIP revision provides for the attainment of the NAAQS for SO2 in
New Manchester-Grant Magisterial District, Hancock County and satisfies
the requirements of part D of the Clean Air Act. The revision is
supported by a modeling analysis which clearly demonstrates the
adequacy of emission limits in providing for the attainment and
maintenance of NAAQS for SO2 in the nonattainment area. The
consent orders between West Virginia and Quaker State Corporation and
Weirton Steel Corporation at the center of the SIP revision establish
enforceable SO2 emission limits at these two facilities. The
submittal clearly fulfills the procedural and substantive requirements
of 40 CFR part 51. Therefore, EPA is approving the West Virginia SIP
revision for the New Manchester-Grant Magisterial District, Hancock
County SO2 nonattainment area.
EPA is approving this SIP revision 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 January 27, 1997 unless, by December 27, 1996, 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 on January 27, 1997.
Final Action
EPA is approving the West Virginia SIP revision for the New
Manchester-Grant Magisterial District, Hancock County SO2
nonattainment area.
Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for
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.
Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866
This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature
by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the
Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a
July 10, 1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for
Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
exempted this regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
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
Clean Air Act 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, the Regional
Administrator certifies 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 flexibility
analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic
reasonableness of state action. The Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base
its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S.
EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
C. Unfunded Mandates
Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or
final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated
costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to
private sector, of $100 million or more. Under Section 205, EPA must
select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative that
achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with statutory
requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan for
informing and advising any small governments that may be significantly
or uniquely impacted by the rule.
EPA has determined that the approval action proposed/promulgated
does not include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs
of $100 million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments
in the aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action
approves pre-existing requirements under State or local law, and
imposes no new Federal requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs
to State, local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector,
result from this action.
D. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office
Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) as added by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA submitted a report
containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives and the Comptroller General of the
General Accounting Office prior to publication of the rule in today's
Federal Register. This rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).
E. Petitions for Judicial Review
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 January 27, 1997. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Regional Administrator of this
final rule does not affect the finality of this rule 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 to approve a revision
to West Virginia's SIP for SO2 in New Manchester-Grant Magisterial
District, Hancock County 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, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.
[[Page 60197]]
Dated: October 17, 1996.
Stanley L. Laskowski,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
40 CFR part 52, subpart XX of chapter I, title 40, 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 XX--West Virginia
2. Section 52.2520 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(35) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.2520 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(35) Revisions to the West Virginia implementation plan for sulfur
dioxide (SO2) in New Manchester Grant-Magisterial District,
Hancock County submitted on February 17, 1995, as amended on May 3,
1996 by West Virginia Division of Environmental Protection:
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Letter of February 17, 1995 from Mr. David C. Callaghan,
Director, West Virginia Division of Environmental Protection
transmitting a SIP revision for the New Manchester-Grant Magisterial
District, Hancock County SO2 nonattainment area.
(B) Letter of May 3, 1996 from Mr. Laidley Eli McCoy, Ph.D.,
Director, West Virginia Division of Environmental Protection
transmitting an amendment to the February 17, 1995 SIP revision
submittal for the New Manchester-Grant Magisterial District, Hancock
County SO2 nonattainment area.
(C) Implementation plan document (as amended, May 3, 1996),
entitled ``Revision to the West Virginia State Implementation Plan to
Achieve and Maintain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for
Sulfur Dioxide in the New Manchester-Grant Magisterial District''.
(D) Consent order entered into by and between the State of West
Virginia and the Quaker State Corporation on January 9, 1995. The
consent order was effective on January 9, 1995.
(E) Consent order entered into by and between the State of West
Virginia and the Weirton Steel Corporation on January 9, 1995. The
consent order was effective on January 9, 1995.
(ii) Additional material.
(A) Remainder of West Virginia's February 17, 1995 submittal, as
amended on May 3, 1996.
[FR Doc. 96-30324 Filed 11-26-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
