[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 149 (Wednesday, August 2, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47339-47342]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-19371]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[WV045-6012; FRL-6730-1]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
West Virginia; Revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) 
Addressing Sulfur Dioxide in Marshall County

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action on revisions to the West 
Virginia State Implementation Plan (SIP). The revisions consist of 
Consent Orders modifying the sulfur dioxide (SO2) allowable 
emissions at three stationary sources in Marshall County, West 
Virginia. The Orders are separate, enforceable agreements between PPG 
Industries, Inc.; Bayer Corporation; and Columbian Chemicals Company, 
and the West Virginia Office of Air Quality (WVOAQ). EPA is approving 
these revisions to incorporate the three Consent Orders into the 
federally approved State Implementation Plan (SIP). The intention of 
this action is to regulate SO2 emissions in accordance with 
the requirements of the Clean Air Act.

DATES: This rule is effective on October 2, 2000 without further 
notice, unless EPA receives adverse written comment by September 1, 
2000. 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: Written comments should be mailed to Ms. Makeba Morris, 
Chief, Technical Assessment Branch, Mailcode 3AP22, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, 
Pennsylvania 19103. 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, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460, or West Virginia 
Division of Environmental Protection, Office of Air Quality, 1558 
Washington Street, East, Charleston, West Virginia, 25311.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Denis Lohman, (215) 814-2192, or by e-
mail at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On February 17, 2000, the West Virginia Division of Environmental 
Protection submitted a formal revision to its State Implementation Plan 
(SIP). The SIP revision consists of Consent Orders prescribing sulfur 
dioxide (SO2) emission limits and operating practices for 
three facilities in Marshall County, West Virginia.

A. What Action Is EPA Taking in This Rulemaking?

    The EPA is approving as a SIP revision, and incorporating by 
reference into the West Virginia SIP, three Consent Orders containing 
new SO2 emission limits for three facilities located in 
Marshall County. The facilities are PPG Industries, Bayer Corporation, 
and Columbian Chemicals Company. Changes to the emission limits were 
enforceably established by the WVOAQ through Consent Orders. This 
action approves these Consent Orders into the SIP and makes them 
federally enforceable.

B. Why Were Changes in Emission Rates Necessary?

    These three sources, and others, were modeled as ``nearby 
background sources'' in the preliminary modeling of the Kammer power 
plant in Marshall County. The preliminary modeling indicated that these 
sources, at their existing allowable emission rates, were substantial 
contributors to predicted violations of the national ambient air 
quality standards (NAAQS) for SO2. The WVOAQ initiated 
action to complete a refined modeling analysis and determine 
appropriate emission limits for these sources and other sources in and 
near to Marshall County.
    With the emission limits and work practice requirements being 
approved for these three facilities and the existing SIP-approved 
emission rates for the other sources modeled, the refined modeling 
results predict worst-case concentrations for the 3-hour, 24-hour, and 
annual averaging periods of 1294 micrograms per cubic meter of air 
(g/m3), (for the secondary 3-hour), 352 g/m3, (for 
the primary 24-hour standard) and 62 g/m3, (for the primary 
annual standard) respectively. Therefore, upon approval of this SIP 
revision, the West

[[Page 47340]]

Virginia SIP for SO2 in Marshall County ensures that all 
ambient concentrations are below the applicable NAAQS of 1300 
g/m3, 365 g/m3, and 80 g/m3, respectively.

C. What Is a SIP?

    Section 110 of the Clean Air Act requires states to develop air 
pollution regulations and control strategies to ensure that State air 
quality meets the NAAQS established by the EPA. These ambient air 
quality standards are established under the Clean Air Act and they 
address six criteria air pollutants: carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, 
ozone, lead, particulate matter and sulfur dioxide.
    Each State must submit regulations and control strategies to us for 
approval and incorporation into the federally enforceable SIP. Each 
State has a SIP designed to protect its air quality. These SIPs are 
extensive, containing regulations, enforceable emission limits, 
emission inventories, monitoring networks, and modeling demonstrations. 
The West Virginia SIP contains various ``Consent Orders'' (Orders) to 
meet the SIP requirements and other State statutory requirements. The 
Orders are developed to contain specific conditions for a particular 
source and can provide specific conditions such as, emission limits, 
hours of operation, record keeping requirements, production rates, 
compliance demonstration requirements, etc. Once properly issued State-
enforceable Consent Orders are approved by EPA as SIP revisions, those 
Orders are incorporated by reference into the SIP, and become federally 
enforceable.

D. What Are the Procedural Requirements West Virginia Must Follow for 
EPA Approval?

    The Clean Air Act requires States to observe certain procedural 
requirements while developing SIP revisions for submission to and 
approval by the EPA. Section 110(l) of the Clean Air Act requires that 
a revision to a SIP must be adopted by such State after reasonable 
notice and public hearing. The EPA must also determine whether a 
submittal is complete and warrants further action (see Section 
110(k)(1) and 57 FR 13565). The EPA's completeness criteria for SIP 
revision submittals are found at 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 
Part 51, appendix V.
    West Virginia's February 17, 2000 SIP submittal for Marshall County 
was determined to be administratively complete by EPA through a letter 
to the Chief of the WVOAQ dated March 6, 2000.
    The State of West Virginia held a public hearing on this SIP 
revision on July 22, 1999. The SIP revision request was then submitted 
by the Director of the West Virginia Division of Environmental 
Protection to the EPA by cover letter dated February 17, 2000. The SIP 
revision demonstrates attainment of the SO2 NAAQS in 
Marshall County, West Virginia.
    All State regulations and supporting information approved by the 
EPA under Section 110 of the Act are incorporated into the federally 
approved SIP. Records of such SIP actions are maintained in the 40 CFR 
Part 52. The actual State regulations and Orders which are approved as 
SIP revisions are not reproduced in their entirety in the CFR but are 
``incorporated by reference,'' with a specific effective date.

E. What Are the Health Effects Associated With This Criteria Pollutant?

    Sulfur dioxide belongs to the family of sulfur oxide gases. These 
gases are formed when fuel containing sulfur, such as coal and oil, is 
burned and during metal smelting, and other industrial processes. 
Sulfur dioxide is a rapidly-diffusing reactive gas that is very soluble 
in water. Sulfur dioxide and oxides of nitrogen are the major 
precursors to acidic deposition (acid rain), and are associated with 
the acidification of lakes and streams, corrosion of buildings and 
monuments. They are also associated with reduced visibility. Sulfur 
dioxide in the Marshall County area is emitted principally from 
combustion, or processing, of sulfur-containing fossil fuels and ores. 
At elevated concentrations, sulfur dioxide can adversely affect human 
health. The major health concerns associated with exposure to high 
concentrations of SO2 include effects on breathing, 
respiratory illness, alterations in the lungs' defenses, and 
aggravation of existing cardiovascular disease. Sulfur dioxide can also 
produce damage to the foliage of trees and agricultural crops.

F. What Are the NAAQS for SO2?

    The primary national ambient air quality standards for sulfur 
oxides, measured as SO2, are 0.14 parts per million (ppm), 
or 365 g/m3, averaged over a period of 24 hours and not to be 
exceeded more than once per year, and an annual standard of 0.030 ppm, 
or 80 g/m3, never to be exceeded. The secondary standard for 
SO2 is 0.50 ppm, or 1300 g/m3 averaged over a 
three-hour period. The secondary standard may not be exceeded more than 
once per year.

II. Summary of This SIP Revision

    The purpose of this revision is to ensure the federal 
enforceability of Consent Orders entered between the West Virginia 
Division of Environmental Protection, Office of Air Quality, and three 
facilities in Marshall County, West Virginia. The essential compliance 
provisions of the three Consent Orders are presented below. Each 
Consent Order also contains generic provisions requiring compliance 
with 45CSR10, the West Virginia regulation to prevent and control air 
pollution from the emissions of sulfur oxides as well as good air 
pollution control practice.

A. CO-SIP-2000-1, PPG Industries, Inc., Dated January 25, 2000

    1. Effective immediately:
    a. Emissions of sulfur dioxide from Process #004, Inorganics 
Flare, shall not exceed 91.3 lbs. SO2/hour.
    b. Process #014 CS3, Vaporizer A; Process #015, 
CS3 Vaporizer B; Process #018, Molten Salt Furnace; and 
Process #019, Chlorine Recovery shall be fired only with natural 
gas.
    c. Process #016, CS3 Flare, shall only be operated 
during periods limited to start-up, shutdown or malfunctions for 
periods no greater than a total of one hour in any three-hour 
period. The flare shall not be operated for more than three non-
contiguous hours in a calendar day. Emissions of sulfur dioxide 
shall not exceed 1011.6 lbs. SO2/hour during periods of 
start-ups and shutdowns.
    d. Emissions of sulfur dioxide from Process #017, Raw Brine 
Flare, shall not exceed 11.65 lbs. SO2/hour.
    e. Emissions of sulfur dioxide from Process #036, CS3 
Sulfur Recovery Unit, shall not exceed 300 lbs. SO2/hour. 
The CS3 Sulfur Recovery Unit shall not process more than 
2.5 tons of sulfur per hour nor more than 60 tons of sulfur per day.
    2. Effective on or after June 1, 2002:
    a. All exhaust gases from Process #004, Inorganics Flare; 
Process #036, CS3 Sulfur Recovery Unit; and Process #016, 
CS3 Flare shall be exhausted from stacks having heights 
of 65 meters above grade, and all exhaust gases from Process #017, 
Raw Brine Flare, shall be exhausted from a stack having a height of 
40 meters above grade.

B. CO-SIP-2000-2, Bayer Corporation, Dated January 26, 2000

    1. Effective immediately:
    a. The Company shall not operate Boiler Number 3.
    b. The Company shall burn only natural gas in Boilers Number 4, 
Number 6, Number 7, and Number 8.
    c. SO2 emissions from Boiler Number 9 and Boiler 
Number 10 shall not exceed 86 lbs./hour and 62.5 lbs./hour 
respectively.
    i. Sulfur content of the fuel oil burned in Boilers Number 9 and 
10 shall not exceed 0.72%.
    ii. The total combined fuel oil burn rate to Boilers Number 9 
and 10 shall not exceed 22 gallons per minute.
    d. SO2 emissions from Incinerator #1, Solids 
Incinerator, shall not exceed 9.5 lbs./

[[Page 47341]]

hour. The unit's burners shall only fire natural gas.
    e. SO2 emissions from Incinerator #4, Fluidized Bed 
Incinerator, shall not exceed 7.1 lbs./hour and 28.4 tons per year.
    f. SO2 emissions from the Iron Oxide Pigment Kiln 
shall not exceed 10.4 lbs./hour.
    i. Sulfur content of the #2 fuel oil burned at the Iron Oxide 
Pigment Kiln shall not exceed 0.5%.
    ii. Total combined fuel oil burn rate to the Iron Oxide Pigment 
Kiln shall not exceed 146 gallons per hour.

C. CO-SIP-2000-3, Columbian Chemicals Company, Dated January 31, 2000

    1. Effective immediately:
    a. Boilers #1 and #2 shall be fired only with natural gas
    b. The sulfur content of the feedstock used in the reactor 
furnaces shall not exceed 2.5% by weight.
    2. Within 180 days the Company shall submit a permit application 
to the WVOAQ under 45CSR14.

    The California Puff model (CALPUFF) was selected as the tool for 
the attainment demonstration. CALPUFF is a multi-layer, multi-species 
non-steady-state puff dispersion model that simulates the effects of 
time- and space-varying meteorological conditions on pollutant 
transport, transformation and removal. CALPUFF can be applied on scales 
of tens of meters to hundreds of kilometers. CALPUFF is a Lagrangian 
puff model. The model is programmed to simulate continuous puffs of 
pollutants being emitted from a source into the ambient wind flow. As 
the wind flow changes from hour to hour, the path each puff takes 
changes to the new wind flow direction. Puff diffusion is Gaussian and 
concentrations are based on the contributions of each puff as it passes 
over or near a receptor point.
    CALPUFF is not a recommended model in EPA's Guideline on Air 
Quality Models [40 CFR Part 51, Appendix W], and, therefore, EPA 
approval of its use is required. This approval is generally given on a 
case-specific basis for an individual permit or SIP. In a joint 
memorandum to the EPA Model Clearinghouse, EPA Regions III and V 
recommended the use of CALPUFF for the Marshall County application. In 
a letter dated May 5, 1998 to the State of West Virginia, Marcia L. 
Spink, Associate Director, Air Programs, Air Protection Division, 
Region III, approved the modeling protocol and the use of the CALPUFF 
model for the development of the Marshall County SIP.
    The final dispersion modeling, based upon current SIP allowable 
SO2 emission limits and the SO2 emission limits 
of sources amended through Consent Orders, demonstrates that the 
maximum SO2 impacts do not exceed the SO2 NAAQS. 
The maximum modeled impacts, including background concentrations, are 
presented in Table 1 below:

 Table 1.--Predicted Sulfur Dioxide Impacts (Micrograms per Cubic Meter)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Percent
                 Period                   CALPUFF     NAAQS     of NAAQS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3-Hour.................................    1293.95       1300      99.53
24-Hour................................     352.22        365      96.50
Annual.................................      61.54         80      76.93
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, as part of the study leading to the development of 
this SIP revision, emission limitations were determined for the Ormet 
Aluminum facility in Monroe County, Ohio. An attachment to the SIP 
revision request is a letter from Ormet Primary Aluminum Corporation to 
the Ohio EPA consenting to the development of an appropriate rulemaking 
to establish allowable emission limits as modeled under Table 8, of 
Dispersion Modeling of Sulfur Dioxide Emissions in and Near Marshall 
County, West Virginia (Revised, October 1999). The Ohio EPA has agreed 
to revise the Ohio SIP as it pertains to Ormet.
    Finally, of special note, Attachment VI to the SIP Revision request 
contains a proposed revision to West Virginia State Regulation X at 
45CSR10 ``To Prevent and Control Air Pollution From the Emission of 
Sulfur Oxides'' and a January 12, 2000, letter from American Electric 
Power to the USEPA certifying compliance with Civil Action No. 5:94-CV-
100. The revision to West Virginia State Regulation X at 45CSR10 will 
once again make it consistent with the applicable SIP limit of 2.7 
lbs.(SO2)/mmBTU for the Kammer power plant.
    EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the 
Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no 
adverse comment given the fact that the affected sources have all 
agreed to the SIP revision's provisions. This rule approving a SIP 
revision based upon a cooperative study in which all stakeholders and 
their respective interests were considered. Furthermore, the comments 
from the public hearing on this rule do not indicate any 
dissatisfaction with the rule. 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 October 
2, 2000 without further notice unless EPA receives adverse comment by 
September 1, 2000. 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.

III. Final Action

    EPA is approving a revision to the West Virginia State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the West Virginia Division of 
Environmental Protection on February 17, 2000. The revision consists of 
Consent Orders modifying the sulfur dioxide (SO2) allowable 
emissions at three stationary sources in Marshall County, West 
Virginia.

IV. Administrative Requirements

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. 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). For the same 
reason, this rule also does not significantly or uniquely affect the 
communities of tribal governments, as specified by Executive Order 
13084 (63 FR 27655, May 10, 1998). This rule will 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), because it 
merely approves a state rule implementing a federal standard, and does 
not alter the relationship or the distribution of power

[[Page 47342]]

and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This rule also 
is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (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. As required by Section 3 
of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing 
this rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate drafting 
errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and provide a 
clear legal standard for affected conduct. EPA has complied with 
Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the 
takings implications of the rule in accordance with the ``Attorney 
General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and 
Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings'' issued under the executive order.
    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. Section 804 exempts from Section 801 the following types 
of rules: (1) Rules of particular applicability; (2) rules relating to 
agency management or personnel; and (3) 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.

C. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under Section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action approving a revision to the Marshall 
County, West Virginia, SO2 SIP, must be filed in the United 
States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by October 2, 2000. 
Filing a petition for reconsideration by the 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 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, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and record keeping 
requirements, Sulfur oxides.

    Dated: June 23, 2000.
Bradley M. Campbell,
Regional Administrator, Region III.

    40 CFR Part 52 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 2520--West Virginia

    2. Section 52.2520 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(44) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 52.2520  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (44) Revisions to the West Virginia Regulations to attain and 
maintain the sulfur dioxide national ambient air quality standards in 
Marshall County submitted on February 17, 2000, by the Director, West 
Virginia Division of Environmental Protection:
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) Letter of February 17, 2000, from the Division of Environmental 
Protection transmitting a revision to the State Implementation Plan 
(SIP) for Attainment and Maintenance of Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient 
Air Quality Standards.
    (B) Consent Orders entered between the West Virginia Office of Air 
Quality and:
    (1) CO-SIP-2000-1, PPG Industries, Inc., Dated January 25, 2000.
    (2) CO-SIP-2000-2, Bayer Corporation, Dated January 26, 2000.
    (3) CO-SIP-2000-3, Columbian Chemicals Company, Dated January 31, 
2000.
    (ii) Additional Material.--Remainder of February 17, 2000 SIP 
revision submittal.
[FR Doc. 00-19371 Filed 8-1-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P