Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Pennsylvania; Source Specific Control Measures and a Revised Episode Plan for USX Clairton in the Liberty Borough PM-10 Nonattainment Area

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[SIPTRAX NO. PA 108-4073; FRL-6107-8]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;

Pennsylvania; Source Specific Control Measures and a Revised Episode

Plan for USX Clairton in the Liberty Borough PM-10 Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision

submitted by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection

(PADEP) for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. This revision establishes

and requires control measures at USX's Clairton Coke Works in Clairton,

Pennsylvania and enhances the Allegheny County Health Department's

(ACHD) episode plan by requiring the USX to develop and maintain a

source-specific episode plan subject to ACHD approval.

DATES: This direct final rule will become effective on August 11, 1998

without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment on the

notice of proposed rulemaking by July 13, 1998. If adverse comment is

received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule

in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to Makeba Morris, Chief, Technical

Assessment Branch, Mailcode 3AP22, 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

Protection 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 the Allegheny

County Health Department, Bureau of Environmental Quality, Division of

Air Quality, 301 39th Street, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15201.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Denis M. Lohman, (215) 566-2192, or by

e-mail at [email protected]. While requests for information

may be made via e-mail, comments for EPA consideration regarding this

proposal must be submitted in writing to the address indicated above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

On February 21, 1996, the Group Against Smog and Pollution (GASP),

a citizen's environmental group, filed suit against EPA. This suit

1 pertained to certain Clean Air Act (Act) mandated planning

activities for Allegheny County, Pennsylvania's Liberty Borough PM-10

nonattainment area. This suit was settled in a Settlement Agreement

signed by GASP, USX, ACHD, PADEP, EPA, and the United States Department

of Justice. The Settlement Agreement provided for, among other things,

ACHD and PADEP proposal of and EPA action on revisions to the Allegheny

County portion of the Pennsylvania SIP applicable to USX Clairton. The

Technical Support document (TSD) prepared for this rulemaking includes

a detailed summary of the settlement provisions. Copies of the TSD are

available, upon request, from the EPA Regional Office listed in the

ADDRESSES section of this document.

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

\1\ GASP v. Browner, Civil Action No. 96-322, Western District

of Pennsylvania.

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

On October 30, 1997, PADEP submitted ACHD-adopted measures to EPA

as revisions to the Allegheny County portion of the Pennsylvania SIP.

The purpose of these revisions is to incorporate into the SIP the

control measures required by USX by the Settlement Agreement. These

control measures include a revised air quality episode plan, the

prohibition of coal combustion (except during certain emergencies),

improved coal handling procedures, the installation of a mist

eliminator on cooling tower, and ``big plug'' doors on most coke ovens.

II. Contents of the State Submittal

The submittal is comprised of several revisions to Allegheny

County's Article XXI and administrative material. Specifically, section

2104.02, 2105.21, and 2106.05 were revised as follows:

A. Revisions to section 2104.02 of Article XXI, limit USX

Clairton's Boiler #1 to 0.02 pounds of particulate matter per million

British thermal units of actual heat input, except for fuel

emergencies; require specific improvements to coal handling at USX

Clairton's #2 Secondary Pulverizer; and require the operation of a mist

eliminator on USX Clairton's Keystone cooling tower.

B. Revisions to section 2105.21, Coke Ovens and Coke Oven Gas,

require the installation of ``big plug'' coke oven doors (i.e., doors

with a minimum thickness of refractory material) on most coke oven

batteries.

C. The adoption of section 2106.05, USX Clairton Works PM-10 Self

Audit Emergency Episode Plan strengthens ACHD's air quality episode

planning by requiring USX Clairton to develop and maintain a source-

specific episode plan subject to ACHD approval. Unlike general episode

plans required by 40 CFR 51 Subpart H, which are designed to guide the

state and local air pollution control agencies in undertaking certain

actions to protect the public from acute danger from ambient pollutant

concentrations greatly exceeding the NAAQS, the County's plan for USX

is designed to effect timely action by USX in order to prevent

exceedances of the 24-hour PM-10 NAAQS.

III. Analysis of State Submittal

As stated above, the purpose of the October 1997 SIP revision

submittal was to fulfill certain requirements of the Settlement

Agreement and to strengthen the PM-10 SIP for the Liberty Borough area.

The SIP revision imposes source specific requirements on the USX

Clairton Coke Works including the development of a source-specific air

quality episode plan, the prohibition of coal combustion (except during

certain emergencies), improved coal handling procedures, the

installation of a mist eliminator on its cooling tower, and ``big

plug'' doors on all coke ovens.

The rules were properly adopted by Allegheny County and submitted

to EPA as a SIP revision by PADEP. The rule revisions contained in the

submittal serve to strengthen the Liberty Borough PM-10 nonattainment

area plan in the Allegheny County portion of the Pennsylvania SIP.

Furthermore, the submittal fulfills the Allegheny County's and

Pennsylvania's obligations under sections 6, 9, 12, 15, and 18 of the

Settlement Agreement.

EPA has determined that the SIP revision is approvable and fulfills

ACHD's and PADEP's obligations under the Settlement Agreement to

propose and submit measures to reduce particulate matter emissions in

the Liberty Borough area. This SIP revision is being approved pursuant

to section 110 of the Act.

IV. Final Action

EPA is approving the revisions to the Allegheny County portion of

the Pennsylvania SIP submitted by PADEP on October 30, 1997 which

impose source-specific requirements on USX Clairton Coke Works to

reduce PM-10 emissions. EPA is approving this rule without prior

proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial

[[Page 32127]]

amendment and anticipates no adverse comments. However, in the proposed

rules section of this Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a

separate document that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP

revision should EPA receive relevant comments on the notice of proposed

rulemaking. This rule will become effective August 11, 1998 without

further notice unless the Agency receives relevant adverse comments by

July 13, 1998.

Should EPA receive such comments, it will publish a notice

informing the public that this rule did not take effect. All public

comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule

based on the proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment

period on the proposed rule. 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 rule will become effective on August 11,

1998 and no further action will be taken on the proposed rule.

If adverse comments are received that do not pertain to all

paragraphs in this rule, those paragraphs not affected by the adverse

comments will be finalized in the manner described here. Only those

paragraphs which receive adverse comments will be withdrawn in the

manner described here.

Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or

allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for

revision to any SIP. Each request for revision to the SIP shall be

considered separately in light of specific technical, economic, and

environmental factors and in relation to relevant statutory and

regulatory requirements.

V. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this

regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.

B. Executive Order 13045

The final rule is not subject to E.O. 13045, entitled ``Protection

of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks,'' because

it is not an ``economically significant'' action under E.O. 12866.

C. 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 does 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

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).

D. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office

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. Section 804, however, exempts from section 801 the

following types of rules: rules of particular applicability; rules

relating to agency management or personnel; and rules of agency

organization, procedure, or practice that do not substantially affect

the rights or obligations of non-agency parties. 5 U.S.C. 804(3). EPA

is not required to submit a rule report regarding today's action under

section 801 because this is a rule of particular applicability because

it is applicable to only one entity, the USX Clairton Coke Works.

E. 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.

F. 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 August 11, 1998. Filing a

petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule,

approving control measures at USX Clairton 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, Incorporation by

reference, Particulate matter.

Dated: May 28, 1998.

W. Michael McCabe,

Regional Administrator, Region III.

40 CFR part 52, subpart 2020 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 et seq.

Subpart NN--Pennsylvania

2. Section 52.2020 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(133) to read

as follows:

Sec. 52.2020 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(133) Revisions to the Pennsylvania State Implementation Plan

consisting of Source-Specific Control Measures and a Revised Episode

Plan for USX Clairton in the Liberty Borough PM-10 Nonattainment Area,

submitted on October 30, 1997 by the Pennsylvania Department of

Environmental Protection:

(I) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Letter of October 30, 1997 from the Pennsylvania Department of

Environmental Protection transmitting a SIP revision for source

specific control measures for USX Clairton located in the Liberty

Borough PM-10 nonattainment area of Allegheny County.

(B) Revisions to Allegheny County's Article XXI applicable to USX's

Clairton

[[Page 32128]]

Coke Works, effective August 15, 1997, specifically:

(1) Revisions to section 2104.02. limiting particulate matter

emission from Boiler #1, requiring specific improvements to coal

handling at Secondary Pulverizer #2, and requiring the operation of a

mist eliminator at the Keystone cooling tower.

(2) Revisions to section 2105.21 requiring the installation of

``big plug'' doors on most coke ovens by January 1, 2000.

(3) The adoption of section 2106.05 requiring a source-specific

``self audit emergency action plan.''

(ii) Additional Material--Remainder of the October 30, 1997 State

submittal.

[FR Doc. 98-15585 Filed 6-11-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P