Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; West Virginia: Limited Approval and Disapproval of PM-10 Implementation Plan for the Follansbee Area

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[WV 5-1-6307; FRL-4888-7]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;

West Virginia: Limited Approval and Disapproval of PM-10 Implementation

Plan for the Follansbee Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking simultaneous limited approval and limited

disapproval action on a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision

submitted by the State of West Virginia. West Virginia submitted the

plan revisions in order to achieve the national ambient air quality

standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter

less than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometers (PM-10) and to fulfill

other Clean Air Act (Act) requirements for the Follansbee, West

Virginia area. The limited approval makes bilateral consent orders

between the West Virginia Office of Air Quality and six companies

federally enforceable and fulfills some of the requirements of the Act

applicable to the Follansbee area. The limited disapproval disapproves

West Virginia's submittal for the purpose of fulfilling its

requirements under sections 172 and 189 of the Act to demonstrate that

the SIP will provide for the attainment of the NAAQS. These actions are

being taken under section 110 of the Act in light of EPA's authority

pursuant to section 301(a) to adopt regulations necessary to further

air quality improvement by strengthening the SIP.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule will become effective on August 24, 1994.

ADDRESSES: 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; Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street SW, Washington, DC 20460;

and West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection, Office of Air

Quality, 1558 Washington Street, East, Charleston, West Virginia,

25311.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas A. Casey, (215) 597-2746.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The air quality planning requirements for

PM-10 nonattainment areas, such as the Follansbee area, are set out in

subparts 1 and 4 of Title I of the Act. Among other requirements, the

Act requires that SIPs provide for reasonably available control

measures (RACM) including reasonably available control technology

(RACT), emissions inventories, and demonstrations (including air

quality modeling) that the SIP will provide for attainment of the NAAQS

by the statutory attainment date.

On January 7, 1994 (59 FR 988), EPA published a Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking (NPR) that proposed limited approval and limited disapproval

West Virginia's November 15, 1991 PM-10 SIP submittal for the

Follansbee, West Virginia PM-10 nonattainment area. The submittal is

not fully approvable because it does not demonstrate attainment of

NAAQS, and, therefore, does not satisfy the requirements of section

189(a)(1)(B) of the Clean Air Act. Specifically, the modeling is

unapprovable as a demonstration of attainment because of deficiencies

in estimating emissions from coke oven batteries and other sources, the

lack of an approvable analysis of intermediate terrain, and the

nonguideline use of the Gaussian Plume Multiple Source Air Quality

Algorithm (RAM) dispersion model in a meteorologically rural area.

While the submittal does not meet specific provisions of Part D, it

does contain some provisions (enforceable consent orders) which advance

the NAAQS-related air quality protection goals of the Act. Therefore,

EPA is approving the submittal for the limited purpose of approving the

consent agreements and making them part of the SIP. EPA has evaluated

the consent agreements for consistency with the Act and EPA regulations

and has found that they provide State and federally enforceable

provisions to decrease PM-10 emissions in the nonattainment area.

While approving the consent orders for incorporation by reference

into the SIP, EPA is taking no action at this time on the contingency

measures contained therein with respect to the requirements of section

172(c)(9) of the Act. The General Preamble to Title I of the Clean Air

Act Amendments established a November 15, 1993 deadline for state

submittal of contingency plans (57 FR 13498).

In addition to the limited approval and limited disapproval, EPA

proposed to determine that PM-10 precursors, such as sulfur dioxide,

nitrogen oxides, and volatile organic compounds, do not contribute

significantly to PM-10 concentrations in the Follansbee area. (See

section 189(e).) EPA based this proposal an air quality data presented

by West Virginia in its submittal.

The rationale for today's action is presented in more detail in the

NPR and in the Technical Support Document (TSD) which is available at

the addresses indicated above.

Summary of Public Comments

EPA received two letters of comment; comments were submitted by the

West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection and by the

Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Corporation (WPS).

1. In correspondence dated February 4, 1994, West Virginia

described its ``planned action'' to correct the deficiencies in its

submittal. West Virginia stated its intent to correct PM-10 emission

rates, perform an analysis of intermediate terrain, and replace RAM

with an approvable technique for modeling certain area sources under

rural meteorological conditions. Additionally, West Virginia also

related its intent to alter the characterizations of certain buoyant

volume sources.

EPA Response West Virginia did not comment on EPA's proposed action

or its underlying rationale, so no response is necessary. EPA intends

to provide technical guidance to West Virginia to assist in the

submittal of a fully approvable SIP revision.

2. EPA received comments from WPS dated February 4, 1994. WPS

commented on and disputed deficiencies identified by EPA in the NPR.

WPS also provided its own air quality analysis. WPS's comments are

summarized and responses are provided below.

a. Coke Oven Emissions

WPS Comment. WPS agrees that the coke oven emissions estimations

are in error and provided revised estimates attributed to the West

Virginia Office of Air Quality.

EPA Response. As described above, EPA intends to provide technical

guidance to West Virginia to assist in the submittal of a fully

approvable SIP revision.

b. Intermediate Terrain1

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

\1\``Intermediate terrain'' is a term used to describe terrain

with an elevation between stack height and plume height. It is a

subset of complex terrain and is defined separately for each stack.

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

WPS Comment. WPS comments that at the time of the West Virginia SIP

submittal, there was no single, EPA-approved model applicable to

intermediate terrain; that its consultant had developed a post-

processor to combine the results of simple and complex terrain models;

and that EPA had approved the use of this post-processor in two permit

applications in West Virginia in 1988. WPS continues to comment that

its submittals to West Virginia and Ohio were consistent with EPA's

intermediate terrain policy, including, in 1991, an analysis employing

a model that integrates simple and complex terrain models. Finally, WPS

comments that the deficiency relating to intermediate terrain is not

identified in EPA's August 3, 1993 notice of proposed rulemaking for

the Ohio PM-10 SIP (58 FR 41218).

EPA Response. West Virginia's attainment demonstration did not

address intermediate terrain as required by the Guideline on Air

Quality Models as revised in 1986 (EPA-450/2-78-027R)2 and

clarified in 1989.3 WPS's comments do not dispute this fact. The

consultant's post-processor and integrated model were two of several

approaches available at the time to implement EPA's intermediate

terrain policy. (See, for example, EPA's widely available post-

processor, POSTIT). The development of these techniques by WPS or its

consultant does not alter the fact that no such analysis was included

in the West Virginia SIP submittal. Therefore, this comment does not

affect today's action or its underlying rationale.

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

\2\This document has subsequently been revised (Supplement B)

and incorporated into federal regulations at 40 CFR part 51 appendix

W.

\3\June 8, 1989 memorandum from Joseph Tikvart to Alan

Cimorelli.

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

As matter of clarification, EPA's August 3, 1993 notice for Ohio

affected the regulation of PM-10 emissions state-wide.4 Today's

action applies only to the West Virginia SIP. Because of the broader

scope of that notice, some issues that were presented in the NPR for

the Follansbee, West Virginia nonattainment area were relegated to the

technical support document5 in EPA's rulemaking on the Ohio SIP.

The NPR for the Ohio SIP clearly referred interested readers to the TSD

for further information regarding EPA's underlying rationale for that

notice, generally, and the deficiencies in Ohio's attainment

demonstration, specifically. That TSD clearly articulated EPA's concern

over Ohio's lack of an intermediate terrain analysis and other

deficiencies in Ohio's November 4, 1991 and January 8, 1992 SIP

submittals.

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

\4\West Virginia and Ohio collaborated on parts of the

attainment demonstration, but each submittal stands alone.

\5\Memorandum from John Summerhays and Randall Robinson to

``Files'' dated November 17, 1992.

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

c. The Use of RAM

WPS Comment. WPS commented that the use of RAM was discussed with

the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA) before the West

Virginia SIP was submitted. WPS also comments that this deficiency was

not articulated in EPA's NPR for the Ohio PM-10 SIP referenced above

(58 FR 41218).

EPA Response. Conversations between WPS and OEPA do not exempt or

ameliorate the deficiencies in West Virginia submittal or invalidate

today's action or its underlying rationale. As noted above, EPA's

notice regarding the Ohio SIP addressed this deficiency through its

technical support document.

d. WPS's Air Quality Analysis

WPS Comment. WPS supplied an alternative air quality analysis that

concluded, ``Controls resulting in the PM-10 emissions in Attachment 2

are shown to meet the NAAQS for PM-10 when naturally occurring buoyancy

of several process fugitives is included in the dispersion modeling.''

Attachment 2 lists the PM-10 emissions rates for model input.

EPA Response. Setting aside the problem that this analysis was not

submitted by the State of West Virginia and, therefore, does not

satisfy the requirement of section 189(a)(2), this analysis is not

approvable as an attainment demonstration for at least two reasons.

First, the emissions estimations used as model input are flawed.

While an attempt was made to correct the unapprovable aspects of

emissions from coke ovens, estimates of emissions from WPS's basic

oxygen furnaces (BOF) in Mingo Junction, Ohio remain profoundly

underestimated. Deficiencies in BOF emissions estimation were outlined

in the TSD and described in more detail in EPA's notice and TSD

regarding the Ohio SIP.

Second, the buoyancy of emissions from certain large volume sources

(coke oven battery fugitives, the BOF, and blast furnace cast houses)

was only incorporated in the estimation of impacts at receptors

(locations) where a more conventional methodology failed to show

attainment. This approach is unapprovable because incorporation of

buoyancy effects, by design, will disturb the spatial distribution of

estimated PM-10 impacts. Therefore, it is necessary to model using a

more extensive array of receptors than was employed in the WPS

analysis.

For these reasons, WPS's air quality analysis does not effect

today's action or its underlying rationale.

Final Action

EPA is approving West Virginia's submittal for the limited purpose

of incorporating the enforceable provisions into the SIP and

disapproving the submittal for the purpose of fulfilling the attainment

demonstration requirements of Part D of Title I of the Act. EPA is also

formally finding that PM-10 precursors do not contribute significantly

to PM-10 concentrations exceeding the NAAQS in the Follansbee area (see

section 189(e)).6

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

\6\ Note that while EPA is making a general finding for this

area, today's finding is based on the current character of the area

including, for example, the existing mix of sources in the area. It

is possible, therefore, that future growth could change the

significance of precursors in the area. EPA intends to issue future

guidance addressing such potential differences in the significance

of precursor emissions in PM-10 nonattainment areas.

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

This limited disapproval constitutes a disapproval under section

179(a)(2) of the Act (see generally 57 FR 13566-67). As provided under

section 179(a) of the Act, the State of West Virginia has up to 18

months after a final SIP disapproval to correct the deficiencies that

are the subject of the disapproval before EPA is required to impose

either the highway funding sanction or the requirement to provide two-

to-one new source review offsets. If the State has not corrected its

deficiency within 6 months thereafter, EPA must impose the second

sanction. Any sanction EPA imposes must remain in place until EPA

determines that the State has come into compliance. Note also that any

final disapproval would trigger the requirement for EPA to impose a

federal implementation plan within 24 months as provided under section

110(c)(1) of the Act.

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.

This action has been classified as a Table 2 action for signature

by the Acting Regional Administrator under the procedures published in

the Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised

by an October 4, 1993 memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting

Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation. A future notice will

inform the general public of these tables. On January 6, 1989, the

Office of Management and Budget (OMB) waived Table 2 and Table 3 SIP

revisions (54 FR 2222) from the requirements of Section 3 of Executive

Order 12291 for a period of two years. The U.S. EPA has submitted a

request for a permanent waiver for Table 2 and 3 SIP revisions. The OMB

has agreed to continue the temporary waiver until such time as it rules

on U.S. EPA's request. This request continues in effect under Executive

Order 12866, which superseded Executive Order 12291 on September 30,

1993.

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 September 23, 1994. Filing a

petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of the Follansbee,

West Virginia PM-10 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 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, Hydrocarbons,

Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen

dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,

Sulfur oxides.

Editorial Note: This document was received by the Office of the

Federal Register on July 19, 1994.

Dated: March 30, 1994.

Stanley L. Laskowski,

Acting Regional Administrator, EPA 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. 7401-7642.

Subpart XX--West Virginia

2. Section 52.2520 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(26) to read

as follows:

Sec. 52.2520 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(26) Bilateral consent orders between the West Virginia Air

Pollution Control Commission and six companies to limit emissions of

particulate matter. The effective date of the consent order with

Koppers is November 15, 1991; the effective date of the five other

orders cited in paragraph (i)(B), below, is November 14, 1991.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Letter dated November 12, 1991 from the West Virginia

Department of Commerce, Labor, and Environmental Resources transmitting

six consent orders.

(B) Consent orders with the following companies (West Virginia

order number and effective date in parentheses): Follansbee Steel

Corporation (CO-SIP-91-31, November 14, 1991); International Mill

Service, Incorporated (CO-SIP-91-33, November 14, 1991); Koppers

Industries, Incorporated (CO-SIP-91-32, November 15, 1991); Standard

Lafarge (CO-SIP-91-29, November 14, 1991); Starvaggi Industries,

Incorporated (CO-SIP-91-34, November 14, 1991); and Wheeling-Pittsburgh

Steel Corporation (CO-SIP-91-29, November 14, 1991).

3. Section 52.2522 of chapter I, title 40 is amended by adding

paragraph (f) to read as follows as follows:

Sec. 52.2522 Approval Status.

* * * * *

(f) The Administrator approves West Virginia's November 15, 1991

SIP submittal for fulfilling all PM-10-specific requirements of part D

of the Clean Air Act applicable to the Follansbee, West Virginia PM-10

nonattainment area, except for the section 189(a)(1)(B) requirement for

a demonstration that the plan is sufficient to attain the PM-10 NAAQS,

which the Administrator is disapproving, and the section 172(c)(9)

requirement for contingency measures, which the Administrator has yet

to act upon.

[FR Doc. 94-17935 Filed 7-22-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P