[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