[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 174 (Friday, September 7, 2001)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 46727-46729]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-22366]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[MD011/108-3056a; FRL-7040-8]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Maryland; Revisions to the Control of Iron and Steel Production 
Installations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the 
Maryland State Implementation Plan (SIP). The revisions consist of 
amendments to the applicable test methods for use at iron and steel 
facilities. The revisions also establish a visible emission standard 
for Basic Oxygen Furnace (BOF) Shops at integrated steel mills. Finally 
the revisions remove certain obsolete requirements related to coke 
ovens and hearth furnaces. These SIP revisions were submitted by the 
Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) on April 2, 1992 and 
October 10, 2000. EPA is approving these revisions to the Maryland SIP 
in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act.

DATES: This rule is effective on November 6, 2001 without further 
notice, unless EPA receives adverse written comment by October 9, 2001. 
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 David L. Arnold, Chief, 
Air Quality Planning and Information Services Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, 
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; Maryland 
Department of the Environment, 2500 Broening Highway, Baltimore, 
Maryland, 21224.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ruth E. Knapp, (215) 814-2191, or by 
e-mail at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever ``we,'' 
``us'' or ``our'' are used we mean EPA.

Table of Contents

I. What is EPA Approving?
II. What new stack test methods will apply to these iron and steel 
installations?
III. What visible emission test methods are going to apply to iron 
and steel installations?
IV. What is the visible emission limit for the BOF shop?
V. How often will compliance with the opacity standard for the BOF 
shop be determined?
VI. What regulations are being removed because they are obsolete?
VII. What are the environmental effects of this action?
VIII. EPA Rulemaking Action
IX. Administrative Requirements

I. What Is EPA Approving?

    We are approving as a SIP revision the use of the stack testing 
methods for particulates and sulfur oxides, and the test methods for 
visible emission tests contained in Supplement 3 of the Maryland 
document Technical Memorandum 91-01 Test Methods and Equipment 
Specifications for Stationary Sources (TM-91) for use at iron and steel 
facilities in Maryland. This reference can be found in COMAR 
26.11.10.06 (formerly COMAR 26.11.10.07). COMAR 26.11.01 General 
Administrative Provisions is also being revised to refer to TM-91. TM-
91 is incorporated by reference in COMAR 26.11.01.04C and this 
reference may now refer to Supplement 3 of TM-91 which contains the new 
visible emissions test method for the BOF shop. In addition we are 
approving as a SIP revision a visible emission standard for basic 
oxygen furnace shops (BOF) and the removal of obsolete regulations 
regarding hearth shops and coke ovens in COMAR 26.11.10 Control of Iron 
and Steel Production Installations.

II. What New Stack Test Methods Will Apply to These Iron and Steel 
Installations?

    The stack test methods in the Air Management Administration 
Technical Memorandum: Stack Test Methods for Stationary Sources (June 
1983) are being replaced by the Federally enforceable updated methods 
found in TM-91. These Federally enforceable methods are Method 5 for 
particulates, and Method 8 for sulfur oxides as found in 40 CFR part 
60, appendix A.

III. What Visible Emission Test Methods Are Going To Apply to Iron 
and Steel Installations?

    Several of the visible emission test methods that currently apply 
to these facilities will continue to apply. The following methods found 
in AMA-TM 81-04 Procedures for Observing and Evaluating Visible 
Emissions from Stationary Sources (the current SIP approved visible 
test method document) are also found in TM-91: Method 9 Determination 
of Visible Emissions from Stationary Sources; and Methods 9H 
Determination of the Opacity of Visible Fugitive Emissions from the 
``G'', ``H'' , ``J'' and ``K'' Blast Furnace Casthouses; Method 9I 
Determination of the Opacity of Visible Fugitive Emissions from the 
``L'' Blast Furnace Casthouses; and Method 9J Determination of Opacity 
of Visible Fugitive Emissions from the No. 7 Sinter Plant. These 
methods are contained in Supplement 3 of TM 91-01 with the following 
identification: Method 1004, Methods 1004 F-H respectively. They have 
essentially been included in TM-91 without substantive changes. However 
Supplement 3 of TM-91 include one new method, Method 1004I that has not 
previously been included in the State Implementation Plan. Method 1004I 
was specifically developed to be used in conjunction with the opacity 
standard developed for BOF shops and currently only applies to BOF 
shops at Bethlehem Steel's Sparrow Point facility in Baltimore. The 
method varies somewhat from Method 9 found in 40 CFR part 60, appendix 
A since Method 9 is not directly applicable to fugitive emissions. This 
particular method was agreed to as part of a consent agreement between 
EPA, MDE and Bethlehem Steel.

IV. What Is the Visible Emission Limit for the BOF Shop?

    According to the SIP revision, visible emissions cannot be greater 
than 15

[[Page 46728]]

percent opacity from the basic oxygen furnace shop roof monitor based 
on a three observation rolling arithmetic average of the opacity 
records recorded on each of three (3) calendar days. One exceedance of 
the 15 percent standard during a calendar year is allowed. However, all 
further exceedances are violations of the standard.

V. How Often Will Compliance With the Opacity Standard for the BOF 
Shop Be Determined?

    At a minimum, visible emission observations shall be made weekly on 
three different calendar days during the week.

VI. What Regulations Are Being Removed Because They Are Obsolete?

    Regulations pertaining to hearth shops and coke ovens are being 
removed from COMAR 26.11.10. Coke oven regulations were only applicable 
to the Bethlehem Steel facility at Sparrows Point. As of March 17, 
1999, all coke ovens were being demolished and there are no plans to 
produce coke at this facility. If new coke ovens are constructed, they 
would have to comply with Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) 
requirements and New Source Review (NSR) requirements. Maryland 
retained some coke oven regulations related to pushing emissions and 
limiting the sulfur content of coke oven gas pending promulgation of 
future MACT standards. The limitation on sulfur in coke oven gas that 
remains in the SIP is technically a relaxation since it allows the use 
of coke oven gas with a concentration of 1 percent sulfur in the gas 
instead of 0.3 percent sulfur. Based on the old regulations which are 
being removed, an old existing facility had to meet the limit of 1 
percent sulfur while any new coke oven capacity from a modification or 
construction of an oven needed to meet the 0.3 percent sulfur limit.
    The 1 percent limit that remains is therefore less restrictive. 
However, as mentioned above there are no operating coke ovens in the 
state, and it is highly unlikely that any new ovens will be built. If 
new coke ovens are built, they will need to comply with more recent 
regulations such as MACT and NSR. NSR requires that new sources 
demonstrate that good air quality will be maintained. For all practical 
purposes, this change regarding sulfur in coke oven gas and removal of 
other coke oven regulations is unlikely to result in any adverse 
environmental effects. Regarding the open hearth furnace regulations, 
the only affected facilities are located at the Sparrows Point 
facility. These furnaces have not operated since 1989 and the company 
requested that their registration be deleted.

VII. What Are the Environmental Effects of This Action?

    By establishing a visible emissions limit for the BOF shop these 
fugitive particulate emissions are now limited and the opacity standard 
provides more protection for the environment. Although some of the 
regulations regarding coke ovens and open hearth furnaces are being 
removed or modified, this will have no practical effect on the 
environment since these facilities either do not exist or are 
officially no longer operating. If new facilities of these types were 
to be constructed or to restart operations, they would have to comply 
with more recent environmental regulations of MACT and NSR.

VIII. EPA's Rulemaking Action

    We are approving revisions to the Maryland SIP submitted on April 
2, 1992 and October 10, 2000. The revisions allow for the use of 
Supplement 3 of TM-91 for iron and steel facilities, establish an 
opacity standard for BOF shops, and remove obsolete regulations 
pertaining to coke ovens and open hearth furnaces from COMAR 26.11.10. 
We are publishing this action without prior proposal because we view 
this as a noncontroversial revision and anticipate no adverse comment. 
However, in a separate document in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of 
today's Federal Register, we are 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 November 6, 2001 
without further notice unless we receive adverse comment by October 9, 
2001. Should we receive such comments, we will publish a timely 
withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule 
will not take effect. We will address all public comments in a 
subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. We will not institute 
a second comment period on this action. Any parties interested in 
commenting must do so at this time. Please note that if EPA receives 
adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and 
if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA 
may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the 
subject of an adverse comment.

IX. 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. For this 
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, 
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)). This 
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and 
imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. 
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because 
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does 
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by 
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4). This rule also does not 
have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the 
relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on 
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it 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 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

[[Page 46729]]

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. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other 
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This rule is not a 
``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

C. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by November 6, 2001. 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 regarding changes to Maryland's control of 
iron and steel production installations 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, Particulate matter, Reporting 
and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.

    Dated: August 10, 2001.
Donald S. Welsh,
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 V--Maryland

    2. Section 52.1070 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(153) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 52.1070  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (153) Revisions to the Maryland State Implementation Plan submitted 
on April 2, 1992 and October 10, 2000 by the Maryland Department of the 
Environment:
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) Letter dated April 2, 1992 from the Maryland Department of the 
Environment transmitting revisions to the testing and observation 
procedures for iron and steel production operations
    (B) The following revised Maryland provisions, effective February 
17, 1992.
    (1) Revised COMAR 26.11.10.07.
    (2) Technical Memorandum 91-01, Supplement 1--Appendix A, Test 
Method 5 and Method 8.
    (C) Letter dated October 10, 2000 from the Maryland Department of 
the Environment transmitting revisions to regulations and technical 
memoranda governing control of iron and steel production operations.
    (D) The following revised Maryland provisions, effective November 
2, 1998.
    (1) Revisions to COMAR 26.11.01.04C(2).
    (2) Revisions to the following provisions of COMAR 26.11.10: 
Paragraphs .02A., .02B(2), .02B(3), .03A(2)(a) through (c), .03A(2)(e), 
.03B [introductory paragraph], .03B(5) [formerly cited as .03B(6)], 
.04B(2) introductory paragraph [combined with provision formerly cited 
as .04B(2)(a)], .04B(2)(c)(i) and .04B(2)(c)(ii) [formerly cited as 
.04B(2)(e)(i) and .04B(2)(e)(ii) respectively], .04B(2)(f), .04B(3) 
through(5), and.05.
    (3) Removal of the following provisions: COMAR 26.11.10.01B(1) 
[existing provision .01B(2) is renumbered as .01B(1)], .03B(1) 
[existing provisions .03B(2) through(5) are renumbered as .03B(1) 
through (4)], .03B(7), .03B(8), .03C, .03D, .04A(2) and .04A(3) 
[existing provision .04A(1) is renumbered as .04A], .04B(2)(b), and 
.04B(2)(h) [existing provisions .04B(2)(c) through (g) and (i) are 
renumbered as .04B(2)(a) through (f)].
    (4) Addition of COMAR 26.11.10.01B(2) and new .03C.
    (5) Technical Memorandum 91-01, Supplement 3--Test Methods 1004, 
1004F, 1004G, 1004H, and 1004I.
    (E) Revisions to COMAR 26.11.10.03C(1) [formerly cited as .03C], 
and the addition of Paragraphs .03C(2) and .03C(3); effective October 
2, 2000.
    (ii) Additional Materials--Remainder of the state submittals 
pertaining to the revisions listed in paragraph (c)(153) (i) of this 
section.

[FR Doc. 01-22366 Filed 9-6-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P