[Federal Register: May 5, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 87)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 24986-24992]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr05my04-21]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[WV065-6034a; FRL-7653-8]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
West Virginia; Sulfur Dioxide Attainment Demonstration for the City of
Weirton Including the Clay and Butler Magisterial Districts in Hancock
County
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 contains
enforceable emission limitations for the Weirton Steel Corporation, and
the Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Corporation in Hancock County, West
Virginia. The 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 City of
Weirton, including the Clay and Butler Magisterial Districts, Hancock
County nonattainment area. EPA is approving these revisions to the West
Virginia SIP in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act.
DATES: This rule is effective on July 6, 2004, without further notice,
unless EPA receives adverse written comment by June 4, 2004. If EPA
receives such comments, it will publish a timely withdrawal of the
direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public that
the rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by WV065-6034 by one of the
following methods:
A. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
B. E-mail: morris.makeba@epa.gov.
C. Mail: Makeba Morris, Chief, Air Quality Planning Branch,
Mailcode 3AP21, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650
Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No.WV065-6034.
EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through Regulations.gov or e-
mail. The Federal Regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access''
system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through
Regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and
included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment,
EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information
in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If
EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot
contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your
comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters,
any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
Copies of the documents relevant to this action are available for
public inspection during normal business hours at the Air Protection
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch
Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103; the Air and Radiation Docket
and Information Center, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1301
Constitution Avenue, NW., Room B108, Washington, DC 20460; and the West
Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Air
Quality, 7012 MacCorkle Avenue, SE., Charleston, West Virginia 25304-
2943.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Denis Lohman, at (215) 814-2192, or
Ellen Wentworth, at (215) 814-2034, or by e-mail at
lohman.denny@epa.gov or wentworth.ellen@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Following the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAA) of 1977, EPA published
a list of areas identified by the States as nonattainment, attainment,
or unclassifiable for SO2. The 1990 CAA Amendments provided
for designations of areas based on their status immediately before
enactment of the 1990 Amendments. For example, any area previously
designated as not attaining the primary or secondary NAAQS for
SO2 as of the date of enactment of the 1990 Amendments, was
designated nonattainment for SO2 by operation of law upon
enactment, pursuant to section 107(d)(1)(C)(i) of the Act. In addition,
any area designated as attainment or unclassifiable (or ``cannot be
classified'') immediately before the enactment of the 1990 Amendments,
was also designated as such upon the enactment of the Amendments
pursuant to sections 107(d)(1)(C)(ii) and (iii) of the Act.
As described above, EPA is authorized to initiate the redesignation
of additional areas or portions of areas as nonattainment for
SO2 pursuant to section 107(d)(3)(D) of the Act on the basis
of air quality data, planning and control considerations, or any other
air quality-related considerations the Administrator may deem
appropriate. On December 21, 1993 (58 FR 67334), EPA redesignated the
City of Weirton, including the Clay and Butler Magisterial Districts of
Hancock County, West Virginia to nonattainment for SO2 based
upon monitored values in the Weirton, West Virginia area. 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 including the Clay and Butler Magisterial
Districts of Hancock County, West Virginia. However, no applicable
model was available at the time to handle the intricate topography of
the area. Another major concern was the lack of comprehensive local
meteorological data that was representative of such a complex terrain.
Limited local meteorological data was obtained from the Browns Island
meteorological tower operated by the State. EPA commented on the SIP
submittal asking the West Virginia Department of Environmental
Protection (WVDEP) to consider using a refined air quality model
utilizing a new meteorological tower. A 60-meter meteorological tower
and acoustical Sound Detection and Ranging (SODAR) were installed in
Weirton, West Virginia as part of a Supplemental Environmental Project
(SEP) between Weirton Steel Corporation and EPA.
Additional air quality monitors were added to the area surrounding
Weirton Steel based on ``hot spot'' modeling locations identified by
EPA. Modeling
[[Page 24987]]
results indicated major contributors of SO2 in the local
area to be sources located within Weirton Steel Corporation and
Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Corporation. Modeled attainment of the NAAQS
required the drafting of a Consent Order (CO) entered into between
Weirton Steel Corporation and the WVDEP, and the modification of a
permit for Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Corporation issued by WVDEP to set
enforceable allowable limits on specific units within each of the
facilities.
II. Summary of SIP Revision
On December 29, 2003, West Virginia submitted a formal SIP revision
for the City of Weirton, including the Clay and Butler Magisterial
Districts nonattainment area in Hancock County, West Virginia. The SIP
revision consists of an enforceable operating permit for the Wheeling-
Pittsburgh Steel Corporation, and an individual CO entered into by and
between the State of West Virginia and the Weirton Steel Corporation in
Hancock County, West Virginia, establishing SO2 emission
limits for numerous emission points at both facilities. The SIP
submittal also 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
Weirton area including the Clay and Butler Magisterial Districts. A
summary of the essential compliance provisions of the consent order and
the operating permit are presented below:
Table 1 summarizes the requirements imposed upon the Weirton Steel
Corporation facility to reduce SO2:
Table 1.--Weirton Steel Corporation, Weirton Facility SO2 Reduction
Measures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2 emissions unit SO2 emission limit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sinter Plant....................... Shall not be operated by the
Company.
High Pressure Boilers 1 and 2...... Shall not be operated by the
Company.
Low Pressure Boilers LP1, LP2, LP3, Shall not be operated by the
LP4, and LP15. Company.
Coal............................... Shall not be fired at any boiler
operated by the Company.
SO2 emissions from High Pressure Shall be limited by restricting the
Boilers 3, 4 and 5. firing of fuel oil to a rate
dependent upon the sulfur content
of the fuel oil fired as described
in Appendix A to the Consent
Order. The allowable fuel oil
firing rate shall be the 3-hour
block average derived from
Appendix A expressed in total
gallons of fuel oil fired at High
Pressure Boilers 3, 4, and 5 over
a 3-hour period.
The percentage of sulfur contained Shall not exceed three percent.
in the fuel oil purchased to be
fired at the company's high
pressure boilers.
Total fuel oil and sulfur content Shall be limited to the product of
fired at boilers 3, 4 and 5. gallons per minute (gpm) x
(percent Sulfur) being less than
or equal to the emission factor of
91.7 as per the curve in Appendix
A of the Consent Order.
The BOP Waste Heat Boiler.......... Shall be pre-heated using steam
sparging. Fuel fired at the Waste
Heat Boiler shall be limited to
Natural Gas, Mixed Gas, or steel
making process gas.
Foster Wheeler Boilers 101 Shall have a combined limit of
and 102. 109.73 lbs. per hour of SO2. These
boilers shall be limited to firing
only blast furnace gas, natural
gas, and mixed gas (comprised of
approximately 70 percent natural
gas and 30 percent air).
Hot Mill Reheat Furnaces, Shall be limited to firing only
Hydrochloric Acid Regeneration natural gas and mixed gas
Plant combustion sources, and (comprised of approximately 70
Annealing Furnaces. percent natural gas and 30 percent
air).
Blast Furnaces designated < greek- Shall not recommence operation.
i>2 and 3.
Blast Furnace 1 Stoves.... Shall be limited to 60.1 lbs. per
hour of SO2.
Blast Furnace 1........... Shall be limited to 42.1 lbs. per
hour of SO2.
Blast Furnace 4 Stoves.... Shall be limited to 60.1 lbs per
hour of SO2.
Blast Furnace 4 Flare..... Shall be limited to 42.1 lbs per
hour of SO2.
Slag Granulator.................... Shall be limited to 50 lbs per hour
of SO2.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
With regard to the Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Corporation's revised
permit, as specified in Section B, Other Requirements, the permittee
shall comply with all the applicable provisions of West Virginia
regulations 45CSR4, 45CSR6, 45CSR10, 45CSR13, 45CSR14, and 45CSR30,
provided that the permittee shall comply with any more stringent
requirements as may be set forth under Section A, Specific
Requirements, of the permit.
The specific requirements of Section A of the operating permit
issued by the WVDEP to Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Corporation (the
permittee), are as follows:
A. Specific Requirements
1. Maximum emissions to the atmosphere from the Excess Coke Oven
Gas (COG) Flare (Emission Point 1EF) shall not exceed the limits listed
in Table 2:
Table 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum hourly
emissions Annual
Hourly emissions (lbs./hr) during the emissions
desulfurization (tpy)
outage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
39.8................................... *396 294.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Annual emissions account for the desulfurization unit being down 672
hours per year for scheduled maintenance and maximum hydrogen sulfide
concentration of 479 grains per 100 cu. ft. of COG.
2. In order to maintain compliance with the annual emission limit,
the daily flow rate of COG to the excess COG flare (emission point 1EF)
shall not exceed 7.1 MM standard cubic feet per
[[Page 24988]]
day over a thirty-day rolling average. The permittee shall keep daily
records of the flow rate of COG to the flare and correct the measured
flow rate to a standard temperature of 68[deg]F. Compliance shall be
determined using a thirty-day rolling average.
3. Maximum SO2 emissions to the atmosphere from boilers
6 and 7 (emission point) shall not exceed the
limits listed in Table 3:
Table 3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boiler Boiler
6 7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hourly SO2 Rate (lb/hr)....................... 20.4 20.4
Hourly SO2 Rate during Desulfurization Outage *203.1 *203.1
(lb/hr)......................................
Annual SO2 Rate* (TPY)........................ 150.7 150.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Annual Emission accounts for the desulfurization unit being down 672
hours per year for scheduled maintenance and maximum hydrogen sulfide
concentration of 479 grains per 100 cu. ft. of COG.
4. Boilers 5, 6 and 7 shall only combust COG.
5. In order to maintain compliance with the SO2 emission
limits specified in provisions 1 and 3 of the permit,
the hydrogen sulfide concentration level in the COG stream from the by-
products plant shall not exceed 50 grains of hydrogen sulfide per one
hundred (100) cubic feet of COG except as noted in provision
6 below. Compliance with the allowable hydrogen sulfide concentration
level shall be based on three (3) hour averaging periods.
6. In order to maintain compliance with the SO2 emission
limits specified in provisions 1 and 3 of the permit
while the desulfurization unit is down for scheduled maintenance, the
permittee shall calculate and record the hourly sulfur dioxide emission
rate of the flare and boilers 6 and 7 over a 24-hour
period using the recorded mean hydrogen sulfide concentration level and
the recorded standard flow rate for the respective day. These records
shall be kept on site for a period of at least five years.
7. The permittee shall be limited to a maximum of twenty-eight (28)
days in any calendar year for planned maintenance outages of the
desulfurization unit in the coke-by-products recovery plant. No single
outage period shall extend beyond 336 hours. The start of a planned
maintenance shall begin at the time of the first hour of a three-hour
average concentration that is greater than 50 grains of H2S/
100 cubic feet of COG. The planned maintenance shall be concluded at
the time of the first hour of a three-hour average concentration that
is less than or equal to 50 grains of H2S/100 cubic feet of
COG.
8. The permittee shall notify the Director in writing thirty (30)
days prior to undertaking any planned maintenance outage of the
desulfurization unit, which shall include a detailed explanation of
each and every maintenance and/or repair activity intended to be
undertaken.
9. The permittee shall select the period for the planned
maintenance outage that would prevent, to the greatest extent
practicable, any violation of the NAAQS for SO2 using, at a
minimum, air quality dispersion modeling to determine what periods
represent the most favorable dispersion of excess SO2
emissions. To ensure maintenance of the 24-hour NAAQS for
SO2, a modeling target for SO2 concentrations for
the high 24-hour value of 265 [mu]g/m\3\ shall be used to provide a
margin of 100 [mu]g/m\3\ for other source impacts within the immediate
vicinity of the facility.
10. Prior to any planned maintenance outage of the desulfurization
unit, the permittee shall prepare and submit an SO2
mitigation plan to the Director outlining what measures the permittee
will employ during the outage to ensure continued attainment of the
NAAQS. This plan shall include the employment of all feasible control
measures and process changes at the Follansbee facility to reduce
SO2 from the facility, including, but not limited to
reduction of the coke production rate at Coke Oven Batteries
1, 2, 3, and 8.
11. No later than thirty (30) days after completing a planned
maintenance outage of the desulfurization unit, the permittee shall
submit a report identifying the SO2 impacts associated with
the planned outage. The report shall include any deviation of the
SO2 mitigation plan that was submitted for the outage
period.
12. Visible emissions from the excess COG flare shall not exceed
twenty percent opacity except upon the first eight (8) minutes of
starting the thermal oxidizer. After this point, visible emissions from
this emission point shall not exceed forty percent opacity for this
time period. The permittee shall demonstrate compliance with this
condition by taking visual observations using EPA Method 22 once a
month. If the permittee observes visible emissions from the flare using
Method 22, the permittee shall conduct an additional observation within
24 hours using EPA Method 9 to determine the opacity of the visible
emissions being emitted from the flare.
13. The Sinter Plant shall not be operated by the permittee unless
the proper permit is obtained from the Director prior to restarting the
Sinter Plant.
14. The permittee shall operate and maintain a continuous hydrogen
sulfide monitor and recorder for the purpose of monitoring the hydrogen
sulfide concentration of the sweetened COG before it is routed to any
combustion unit or source utilizing COG. This monitor shall be
installed and maintained in accordance with Performance Specification 7
of Appendix B of 40 CFR 60.
15. The permittee shall maintain in accordance with the
manufacturer's instructions, flow-measuring devices for the purpose of
measuring and recording the amount of COG consumed by the excess COG
flare and Boilers 6 and 7. The permittee shall keep
daily records of the amount of COG consumed by the above mentioned
units. These units shall remain on site for a period of at least 5
years.
16. The permittee shall maintain the automatic re-ignition system
in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications.
17. The permittee shall not vent any noncombusted COG into the open
atmosphere through the excess COG flare. The permittee shall record the
date and time of an event when the flare was not in operation and COG
was being emitted to the atmosphere through the excess COG flare. The
permittee shall submit a report explaining the event and measures taken
to prevent a recurrence of the event. These records shall be maintained
on site for a period of at least five years.
18. No later than ninety (90) days after issuance of the permit,
the permittee shall continuously maintain a system around the facility
to prevent public access to the facility.
19. Compliance with the allowable emission limits of this permit
shall be calculated using the appropriate amount of COG combustion by
the excess COG flare on a volumetric basis, higher heat value of 568
Btu/cu. ft. for COG, and the following factors: Carbon Monoxide (0.37
lb/MM Btu), Nitrogen oxides (0.068 lb/MM Btu), Particulate Matter
(0.012 lb/MM Btu), Particulate Matter 10 microns (0.012 lb/MM Btu),
Volatile Organic Compounds (0.14 lb/MM Btu). The permittee shall
determine the amount of each pollutant emitted on a monthly basis using
the above mentioned information and appropriate engineering
calculations. The permittee shall keep a 12-month rolling total for
each of the above mentioned pollutants.
[[Page 24989]]
20. In the event of unforeseen circumstances beyond the control of
the permittee during an approved planned maintenance outage, the
permittee may exceed the SO2 emission limit for the flare as
stated in provision 1 of this permit in order to prevent an
anticipated excursion of the NAAQS for SO2 from occurring in
the local area, which includes the city of Weirton, West Virginia. The
permittee shall document in the Desulfurization System Outage Report,
the unforeseen circumstances, the SO2 emissions rate
calculation, and the modeling results, to document the necessity of the
temporary increase in the flare's SO2 allowable emissions
rate.
21. Boiler 5 (emission point 1D S11) shall not be
operated unless the permittee obtains the proper permit from the
Director prior to restarting the boiler.
22. The permittee shall fire only natural gas at coke plant boiler
8 (emission point 1D, S11), unless an applicable permit is
obtained from the Director.
23. Sulfur dioxide emissions from pushing Coke Oven Batteries
1, 2, and 3 shall not exceed 10.48 pounds
SO2 per hour (emission point SO5).
24. Sulfur dioxide emissions from pushing at Coke Oven Battery
8 shall not exceed 15.72 pounds per hour of SO2
(emission point SO6).
25. Compliance with the allowable emission limits established in
provisions 23 and 24 of the permit shall be
calculated using an emission factor of 0.1078 pounds per tons of coal
charged and multiplied by the hourly average tons of coal charged to
the batteries each month.
III. Evaluation of the State Submittal
The CAA 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.
A. Evaluation of the Part D Requirements as Described in the ``General
Preamble''
1. Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT)
West Virginia's SIP revision provides for reasonable available
control technology (RACT). The definition for RACT for SO2
is that control technology which is necessary to attain and maintain
the NAAQS. The technology must also be reasonably available considering
technological and economic feasibility. Furthermore, RACT must be that
technology which will provide for the achievement of the NAAQS within
the established statutory time frames. The SIP revision indicates that
SO2 emissions are controlled at the Weirton Steel
Corporation and the Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Corporation through fuel
specifications and operations. The revision establishes allowable
SO2 emission limits and also defines allowable fuel usage
for a number of processes. Modeling results indicate that major
contributors of SO2 in the area to be blast furnaces and
flares, high-pressure boilers, and Foster-Wheeler boilers at the
Weirton Steel facility, along with boilers and coke ovens at the
Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Corporation. The plan complies with the
requirements to implement RACT by providing for immediate attainment of
the NAAQS for SO2 through the emission limits and operating
restrictions imposed on specific units within each of the facilities by
the consent orders and permits. The SIP revision provides a
demonstration that these limits will provide for the attainment of the
NAAQS in the nonattainment area. Therefore, West Virginia has ensured
that reasonably available control technology, fuel specification and
operations modification is required, and that the control technology
provides for achievement of the NAAQS.
2. Reasonable Further Progress (RFP)
West Virginia's SIP revision provides for reasonable further
progress (RFP). Sulfur dioxide emission reductions that provide for
attainment in an area are achieved at a limited, readily-defined number
of sources, using control measures that immediately improve air
quality. Therefore, RFP for SO2 nonattainment implementation
plans is defined simply as the ``adherence to an ambitious compliance
plan.'' The SIP revision provides for RFP due to the immediate effect
of the emission limits required by the plan.
3. Emissions Inventory
West Virginia's SIP revision provides an adequate emissions
inventory from Weirton Steel Corporation and Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel
Corporation, as well as from all relevant sources of SO2 in
the nonattainment area. The revision contains an updated 2001
inventory.
4. Identification and Quantification
This information is unnecessary because the area has not been
identified as a zone for which economic development should be targeted.
5. Permits for New and Modified Major Stationary Sources
The Federal requirements for new source review (NSR) in
nonattainment areas are contained in section 172(c)(5). Any new or
modified source constructed in the area must comply with a state
submitted and federally approved New Source Review Program (NSR). No
modifications or installations have been made that detrimentally affect
the modeling results. Presently, any major sources wishing to construct
or make a major modification within the nonattainment area are required
to obtain an NSR permit through SIP-approved State Regulation 45CSR19.
Subsequent to redesignation of the area to attainment, any source
wishing to construct or modify will be required to obtain a Prevention
of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permit through SIP-approved State
Regulation 45CSR14. The PSD program would require that a modeling
demonstration be performed to ensure continued NAAQS attainment and
maintenance. These along with requirements of the minor source permit
program covered under State Regulation 45CSR13 would assure the
maintenance of the NAAQS.
6. Other Measures
The plan provides for immediate attainment of the NAAQS for
SO2 through the emission limitations, operating
requirements, and compliance schedules that are set forth within the
permits and consent orders.
7. Compliance With Section110(a)(2)
This submission complies with section 110(a)(2). All of the
applicable provisions of section 110(a)(2) are
[[Page 24990]]
already met by West Virginia's Federally-approved SIP.
8. Equivalent Techniques
The modeling for this SIP submittal was conducted using EPA's
``Guideline on Air Quality Models (Revised)'' (GAQM). Two models,
AERMOD and CALPUFF are designed to handle complex terrain features.
AERMOD was selected as the best performing model for this situation and
was chosen as the appropriate model for this SIP demonstration.
9. Contingency Measures
West Virginia's SIP revision provides for adequate contingency
measures. The State's plan includes the continuous review of air
quality monitoring data in the area of concern, the review of local
monitored meteorological data, and the assessment of compliance of
local targeted facilities to verify continued attainment of the area.
The State will review the annual emissions inventory for the Weirton
area at a minimum of once every three years. In the event of a
certified violation, West Virginia intends to assess all source
compliance with existing rules, regulations and permits, and assess
fuel switching at fuel burning units. The supporting documentation
(ambient air quality data) indicates that the Weirton, West Virginia
area has shown attainment of the NAAQS for SO2 since the
fourth quarter of 1994. At such time as West Virginia submits a
redesignation request and maintenance plan for this area, the
maintenance plan will also include a detailed contingency plan along
with triggering indicators.
B. The Attainment Demonstration
The SIP revision includes a dispersion modeling analysis which was
performed to demonstrate compliance with the NAAQS for SO2.
The model used in the compliance analysis was the American
Meteorological Society (AMS)/EPA Regulatory Model (AERMOD). The AERMOD
was proposed to be included as a preferred model in the ``Guideline on
Air Quality Models'' at the 7th Conference on Air Quality Modeling held
on June 28-29, 2000, in Washington, DC. Meteorological data collected
on-site at Weirton Steel from June 1, 1997 through May 31, 1999, were
processed with the AERMET preprocessor and used for the analysis.
(AERMET is the meteorological pre-processor for AERMOD). Since the
AERMOD model is not currently an approved model under the GAQM, but has
been proposed for inclusion and is undergoing the regulatory process
for inclusion, WVDEP made a request to EPA for the use of the AERMOD
model for the Weirton SO2 SIP revision in a letter dated May
25, 2001. The use of this model was approved by EPA in a letter dated
July 2, 2001.
The modeling inventory included all sources within the Weirton
nonattainment area, and all sources within 100 kilometers of the area
with a significant impact within the area. A significant impact was
defined by the Federal significance criteria of 1 microgram per cubic
meter ([mu]g/m3) annually, 5 [mu]g/m3 on a 24-
hour average, and 25 [mu]g/m3 on a 3-hour average. For
Weirton Steel, four operating scenarios were evaluated to provide for
flexibility with regard to fuel switching capabilities, fuel
consumption rates and sulfur content. The four modeling scenarios are:
a. Firing fuel oil containing 1.29% sulfur at HP Boilers 3, 4, and
5 with Foster Wheeler Boilers 101 & 102 firing Blast Furnace Gas.
b. Firing fuel oil containing 1.29% sulfur at HP Boilers 3, 4, and
5 with Foster Wheeler Boilers 101 & 102 off-line and flaring excess
Blast Furnace Gas.
c. Firing fuel oil containing 1.81% sulfur at HP Boilers 3 and 5
with Foster Wheeler Boilers 101 & 102 firing Blast Furnace Gas.
d. Firing fuel oil containing 1.81% sulfur at HP Boilers 3 and 5
with Foster Wheeler Boilers 101 & 102 off-line and flaring excess Blast
Furnace Gas.
The final dispersion modeling, based upon the SO2
emission limits of sources amended through Operating Permits in
addition to a representative background, demonstrates that the maximum
SO2 impacts do not violate the NAAQS for SO2. The
results of the modeling analyses indicate that no exceedances of the
NAAQS for SO2 are expected in the City of Weirton, including
the Clay and Butler Magisterial Districts nonattainment area when the
Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Corporation and the Weirton Steel Company are
operating at the emission rates contained in their respective operating
permits and consent orders, and the other significant sources comply
with their allowable emission rates. The maximum annual modeled
SO2 was 70.82 [mu]g/m3, which includes the
background of 5.24 [mu]g/m3 as compared to the 80 [mu]g/
m3 standard. The maximum modeled 24-hour SO2
value was 360.46 [mu]g/m3 which includes the background of
31.44 [mu]g/m3 as compared to the 365 [mu]g/m3
standard. The maximum modeled 3-hour SO2 value was 1297.23
[mu]g/m3 which includes the background of 81.22 [mu]g/
m3 as compared to the 1300 [mu]g/m3 standard.
These modeling results demonstrate attainment with respect to the NAAQS
for SO2.
The modeled impacts with the maximum Weirton Steel scenarios,
including background concentrations, are provided in Table 4.
Table 4.--Predicted Maximum Sulfur Dioxide Impacts
[Micrograms per cubic meter]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NAAQS
Period Armed Background Total NAAQS (percent)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3-Hour......................................... 1216.01 81.22 1297.23 1300 99.79
24-Hour........................................ 329.02 31.44 360.46 365 98.76
Annual......................................... 65.58 5.24 70.82 80 88.53
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal regulations, 40 CFR 51.112, require nonattainment plans to
include a demonstration of the adequacy of the plan's control strategy.
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. This information is described in
detail in the Technical Support Document (TSD) prepared for this
rulemaking.
The SO2 monitoring network in the Weirton area consists
of six monitors, Oak Street, Summit Circle, Maryland Heights, Williams
Country Club, McKims Ridge and Skyview. A number of the monitors were
added as a result of EPA modeled hot spots. Data collected and quality-
assured in
[[Page 24991]]
accordance with 40 CFR part 58, and recorded into EPA new ambient air
quality data system known as the Air Quality Subsystem (AQS), indicates
that there have been no monitored NAAQS violations recorded for a
period of time nearing 10 years. These sites have monitored no 24-hour
average values above 365 [mu]g/m3, no annual average values
above 80 [mu]g/m3, and no monitored 3-hour average values
above 1300 [mu]g/m3. Reductions in SO2 emissions
from both the Weirton Steel and Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel facilities
have contributed significantly to these ambient monitored attainment
values. Air quality measurements used in this analysis were performed
in accordance with appropriate regulations and guidance documents
including adherence to EPA quality assurance requirements. Monitoring
procedures were determined in accordance with 40 CFR parts 53 and 58.
EPA's review of the entire submittal indicates that West Virginia's
SIP revision provides for the attainment of the NAAQS for
SO2 in the City of Weirton, including Clay and Butler
Magisterial Districts, 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 the NAAQS for
SO2 in the nonattainment area. The consent order between
Weirton Steel Corporation and the permit between West Virginia and
Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Corporation, at the center of the SIP
revision, establish enforceable SO2 emission limits at these
two facilities. The submittal fulfills the procedural and substantive
requirements of 40 CFR part 51. Therefore, EPA is approving the West
Virginia SIP revision for the City of Weirton, including Clay and
Butler Magisterial Districts, Hancock County SO2
nonattainment area.
IV. Final Action
EPA is approving the SO2 SIP revision, including the
modeled attainment demonstration, submitted by the State of West
Virginia on December 29, 2003, for the City of Weirton, including the
Clay and Butler Magisterial Districts nonattainment area in Hancock
County. EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no
adverse comment. However, in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's
Federal Register, EPA is publishing a separate document that will serve
as the proposal to approve the SIP revision if adverse comments are
filed. This rule will be effective on July 6, 2004, without further
notice unless EPA receives adverse comment by June 4, 2004. If EPA
receives adverse comment, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take
effect. EPA will address all public comments in a subsequent final rule
based on the proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment
period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so
at this time.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. General Requirements
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by
state law, it 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). This rule also does not
have tribal implications because it will not have a substantial direct
effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes,
as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
This action also does not have Federalism implications because it does
not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government,
as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999).
This action merely approves a state rule implementing a Federal
standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of
power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This rule
also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection of Children
from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April
23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not
impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General
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 rule 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. This rule is not a
``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
C. 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 July 6, 2004.
Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this
final rule, approving the SO2 attainment plan for the City
of Weirton including the Clay and Butler Magisterial Districts
nonattainment area in Hancock County, does not affect the finality of
this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor
[[Page 24992]]
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: April 20, 2004.
James W. Newsom,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
0
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart XX--West Virginia
0
2. Section 52.2520 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(59) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.2520 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(59) Revisions to the West Virginia Regulations to attain and
maintain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for sulfur
dioxide in the City of Weirton, including Clay and Butler Magisterial
Districts, in Hancock County, West Virginia, submitted on December 29,
2003, by the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection:
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Letter of December 29, 2003, from the West Virginia Department
of Environmental Protection, transmitting a revision to the State
Implementation Plan (SIP) for attainment and maintenance of the sulfur
dioxide NAAQS for the City of Weirton, including the Clay and Butler
Magisterial Districts in Hancock County, West Virginia.
(B) The following Companies' Consent Order and Operating Permit:
(1) Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Corporation, Operating Permit R13-
1939A, effective August 19, 2003.
(2) Weirton Steel Corporation Consent Order, CO-SIP-C-2003-28,
effective August 4, 2003.
(ii) Additional Material.
(A) Remainder of the State submittal pertaining to the revision
listed in paragraph (c)(59)(i) of this section.
(B) Letter of February 10, 2004, from the West Virginia Department
of Environmental Protection providing clarification to permit R13-
1939A, condition B.4. issued to the Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel
Corporation.
0
3. Section 52.2525 is amended by adding paragraph (b) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.2525 Control strategy: Sulfur oxides.
* * * * *
(b) EPA approves the attainment demonstration State Implementation
Plan for the City of Weirton, including the Clay and Butler Magisterial
Districts area in Hancock County, West Virginia, submitted by the West
Virginia Department of Environmental Protection on December 29, 2003.
[FR Doc. 04-10095 Filed 5-4-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P