                                       
       Coke Ovens NESHAP Risk and Technology Review (RTR) Proposed Rules
Summary of EPA's July 2023 Draft Proposed Rule for Coke Ovens Undergoing OMB and Interagency Review
Briefing for OMB, Executive Office of the President, and the National Economic Council 
      
PURPOSE OF ACTION  -  in This action the epa is:
    Proposing amendments based on the technology review mandated by Clean Air Act (CAA) section 112(d)(6) for two source categories: (1) National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Coke Ovens: Pushing, Quenching, and Battery Stacks (PQBS, subpart CCCCC); and (2) NESHAP for Coke Oven Batteries (COB, subpart L); 
    Proposing results of mandated risk review pursuant to CAA section 112(f) for one source category: Coke Ovens: PQBS (subpart CCCCC), and;
    Proposing new emissions standards pursuant to CAA sections 112(d)(2) and (3) for several unregulated hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) or processes as mandated by the recent LEAN v. EPA court decision. 

BACKGROUND
    A coke oven facility manufactures metallurgical coke from coal in coke ovens.
    Coke ovens are connected in groups of 100 or more to form coke oven "batteries."
    There are two types of facilities: by-product recovery (ByP) and heat and nonrecovery (HNR), based on whether chemicals are recovered from the coke oven process exhaust.
    The Coke PQBS NESHAP, subpart CCCCC (promulgated in 2003) includes particulate matter (PM) emission limits and opacity limits for pushing coke out of ovens, opacity limits for battery stacks, and a work practice standard to limit HAP emissions for quenching. PM limits and opacity limits are surrogates for PM metal HAP.
    The Coke Oven Battery (COB) NESHAP, subpart L (promulgated in 1993) includes: PM emissions limits for charging  and limits for leaks of coke oven emissions (COE), which is a listed HAP, from coke oven doors, lids, and offtakes. 
    There are 14 coke oven facilities in the U.S., located in eight states. 
        Nine facilities are ByP (three are idle), and five are HNR facilities. Four HNR facilities process coke oven gas (COG) in on-site heat recovery steam generators (HRSG). The other HNR facility does not use heat recovery. 

data collection and STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
    In 2016, EPA sent a CAA section 114 request to 11 facilities to obtain test data and other information for subpart 5C sources (e.g., pushing, quenching) and subpart L sources (e.g., door leaks). 
        HAP from subpart CCCCC (5C) sources include acid gases (HCl, HF), metals, hydrogen cyanide (HCN) and PAHs.
        For subpart L, we obtained data on visible emissions (VE) from lids, doors, offtakes and developed estimates of COE, which is main HAP from subpart L. 
    In June 2022, EPA sent another CAA section 114 request to obtain: (1) additional data for subparts 5C and L; (2) data for co-located chemical ByP recovery plants (CBRPs); (3) fenceline and fugitive monitoring for 6 months; and (4) a requirement to redo a 1981 door leak study at two facilities.
       We intend to address the CBRPs under CAA section 112 in a separate action in the next few years.
    We met with industry representatives (i.e., Coke Oven Environmental Task Force and companies) numerous times to discuss development of the section 114 request (including test methods, which HAP to test, timing, etc.).
    Also met with environmental groups (i.e., Earthjustice, Citizens for Pennsylvania's Future, Greater Birmingham Alliance to Stop Pollution, and Ohio Citizens).
    Shared a summary of the draft 2022 section 114 request with both the industry and environmental groups and we solicited and received comments, input, and suggestions from them.
    Considered all comments as we developed the final section 114 request that we sent to industry in June 2022.
    Received all requested data, including fenceline monitoring data from five facilities.
    We had follow-up communications in 2023 with the stakeholders and provided access to all test reports and other data. 


OVERVIEW OF THE COKE OVEN PROPOSED RULES
 TECHNOLOGY REVIEW
     Technologies for controlling HAP from subpart 5C sources include baghouses or scrubbers for pushing, and baffles for quenching. HRSG main stacks have flue-gas desulfurization units, which include baghouses. 
     WE did not identify cost-effective options to reduce actual emissions from currently regulated subpart 5C sources. However, we are asking for comment on whether a 1-hr opacity standard would be beneficial to control battery stack emissions further than the current 24-hr standard of 15% opacity. 
     Regarding subpart L, work practices effectively minimize leaks from coke oven doors, lids, and offtakes. 
     We have not identified cost-effective options to reduce actual HAP emissions further from subpart L sources; however, we are proposing three actions that reflect technology developments, as described below.
 
    Regulatory Approach for COB Coke Oven Doors under the Technology Review:
     Current emissions limit for doors is 4% leaking doors for tall doors (more than 20 feet) and 3.3% for "not-tall" doors (less than 20 feet), as visible from the yard (based on Method 303 for VE).
     ALL facilities are below the limits, with most facilities operating well below limits, so we are proposing to lower the limits to reflect current performance for two subcategories: (1) 1.5% for tall doors and 1% for "not tall" doors that only applies to ByP facilities with production capacity >3M tpy coke; and (2) 3% for all other ByP facilities.
     The 1.5%/1% limits would only apply to the Clairton (PA) facility, which is by far the largest facility. Based on available data, Clairton can meet these limits without additional control costs. 
     The other COB facilities can meet the 3% limit without additional controls. 
     There would be no costs impacts and no reduction of actual emissions but would reduce allowable emissions.
                     
    Regulatory Approach for COB Leaks from Lids & Offtakes under Technology Review:
     Reported leaks at all facilities are 35% or lower of current limits, which are 0.4% for lids, 2.5% for offtakes.
     We are proposing revised limits for offtakes and lids that are 50% of the current limits to reflect improved performance of all facilities (lids 0.2%; offtakes 1.2%).
     All facilities can meet the revised limits with no additional costs. Reduces allowable emissions. 

    Regulatory Approach for Fenceline Monitoring under Technology Review for COB:
     We are proposing a fenceline monitoring requirement (for benzene, as a surrogate for COE), with no subcategories, and an action level of 3 ug/m[3], which is the highest modeled annual fenceline concentration. 
     Facilities would be required to perform continuous fenceline monitoring for benzene using Methods 325A&B. 
     If any 12-month rolling average exceeds the action level, the facility would need to do root cause analyses and corrective actions to lower the fenceline measurements below the action level within 80 days.
     Total costs for monitoring are estimated as: $116,000 per year per facility; $1.3M annually for the industry.
     This approach is very similar to the fenceline monitoring requirements in Petroleum Refineries NESHAP, and in the recent proposed rule for Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing (commonly known as the HON).
     Fenceline concentrations (6-month averages for 4 facilities and 3-month average for 1 facility) measured as part of CAA section 114 testing ranged from 0.1 to 30 ug/m[3] for benzene (more details in Appendix A).











d.    Regulatory Approach to Address LEAN Gaps (unregulated HAP) under Technology Review

Table 1. Regulatory Gaps Addressed under Technology Review for Coke PQBS
                                       
                                Emission Source
                                Unregulated HAP
                              No. MACT Standards
1
Pushing (ByP and HNR)
AG, HCN, Hg, PAH
                                       4
2
ByP Battery Stack (ByP)
AG, HCN, Hg, PM metals
                                       4
3
HNR HRSG MAIN Stack
AG, Hg, PM metals, PAH
                                       4
4
HNR HRSG Bypass/Waste Heat Stacks
AG, formaldehyde, PAH, Hg, PM metals
                                       5

Total Number of MACT Standards 
                                      17

Note: AG = acid gases,; Hg = mercury; PM metals include lead, arsenic, chromium, and other non-Hg metals.

    We calculated MACT Floor limits for the 17 HAP. We expect all sources can meet the MACT Floor limits. The only costs would be testing. We also evaluated beyond-the-floor (BTF) options for all 17 unregulated HAP. 
    For 15 of the 17 HAP, we did not identify any potential cost-effective BTF options; therefore, we are proposing MACT Floor limits for these 15 unregulated HAP.
    The two exceptions are for HAP metals (Hg and PM metals) from bypass/waste heat (B/W) stacks, discussed below. 
   
 HRSG Bypass/Waste Heat (B/W) Stacks:
    Emissions from B/W stacks are the exhaust after combustion in the coke ovens.
    Four of five HNR facilities have "bypass" stacks, which are only used when HRSG are bypassed for maintenance. One facility (Vansant) without HRSG only has waste stacks and emits PM and HAP continuously.
    Permits limit the number of hours per year that PM and HAP can be emitted from bypass stacks.
    Emissions of organic HAP are very low. However, there are no controls for HAP metals or acid gases (HCl and HF). 
    As shown in following table, the biggest difference across 5 facilities is their permitted use of B/W stacks.
   
Table 2.  Estimated HAP Emissions from B/W Stacks, in tons per year (tpy) or pounds per year (lbs/yr)
                               SunCoke Facility
           Max Hours Per Year B/W Stack Can Be Used Based on Permits
                                Total HAP (tpy)
                                   HCl (tpy)
                                   HF (tpy)
                                   HCN (tpy)
                                      Hg
                                   (lbs/yr)
                              Non-Hg Metals (tpy)
                              Formalde-hyde (tpy)
                              All Other HAP (tpy)
EastChicago-IN
                                     1,139
                                      280
                                      271
                                      7.3
                                     0.22
                                      46
                                      1.2
                                     0.83
                                    < 1
Franklin-OH
                                      192
                                      34
                                      33
                                     0.96
                                     0.023
                                      5.3
                                     0.12
                                     0.17
                                    < 1
GraniteCity-IL
                                      312
                                      24
                                      24
                                     0.57
                                     0.022
                                      4.4
                                     0.12
                                    0.0017
                                    < 1
Middletown-OH
                                      312
                                      24
                                      23
                                     0.63
                                     0.018
                                      4.0
                                     0.10
                                     0.071
                                    < 1
Vansant-VA
                                     8,760
                                      964
                                      931
                                      25
                                     0.74
                                      160
                                      4.0
                                      2.9
                                     0.20
Total
                                      NA
                                     1,326
                                     1,281
                                      35
                                      1.0
                                      220
                                      5.6
                                      3.9
                                     0.27

 B/W Stacks Non-Hg metals (PM metals) and Hg:
    Non-Hg metals from B/W stacks consist mainly of lead (58%) and arsenic (18%). The Vansant facility accounts for about 70% of total non-Hg metals (4 of 5.6 tpy) from HNR facilities, as shown in the table above.
    We are proposing BTF limits for Hg and non-Hg metals (PM HAP metals) from HNR waste stacks at facilities that do not have HRSG units.
    Costs and emission reductions for the BTF limits are shown in Table 3:
        
Table 3. Estimated Control Costs and Emissions Reductions with BTF Limits for PM metals and Hg from Waste Stacks
                                  BTF Limits
                                   Controls 
                                 Capital Costs
                                Annualized Cost
                                  Reductions
                              Cost Effectiveness
Apply to HNR facilities without HRSG (1 facility, Vansant)
Baghouse (BH) for non-Hg metals, & activated carbon injection (ACI) for Hg
                      $7.2M [BH+ductwork]
$314,000 [ACI]
                                 Total = $7.5M
                              $3.0M [BH+ductwork]
                                  $1.6M [ACI]
                                 Total = $4.7M
                                    4 tpy 
                                   PM metals
                                 144 lb/yr Hg
$756K/ton non-Hg metals, 
$11K/lb Hg, ACI 
$1.1M/ton for all metals, 

 Risk Review 
   
Table 4. Summary of Estimated Baseline Inhalation Risks and Post-Control Inhalation Risks
                                    Source
                            Inhalation Cancer Risk
                            Population Cancer Risk
                          Max Chronic Noncancer Risk
                                    Acute 

                               MIR in 1 million
                                  Risk Driver
                                    Cases 
                                    per yr
                             >= 1-in-100 million
                              >= 1-in-1 million
                               Hazard Index (HI)
                                  Risk Driver
                                    Max HQ
Actual Emissions (Baseline)
Subpart 5C Category
                                     9[a]
                                 Arsenic (As)
                                     0.02
                                       0
                                     2,900
                                      0.1
                                      As
                                      0.6
Whole Facility
                                     50[b]
                                      COE
                                      0.2
                                       0
                                     2.7M
                                      2b 
                                      HCN
                                      0.6
Actual Emissions (Post-Control)
Subpart 5C Category
                                     2[a]
                                 Arsenic (As)
                                    0.02[c]
                                       0
                                      390
                                      0.1
                                      As
                                      0.3
Whole Facility
                                     50[b]
                                      COE
                                      0.2
                                       0
                                     2.7M
                                       2
                                     HCN 
                                     0.6 
Allowable Emissions (Baseline)
Subpart 5C Category 
                                      10
                                      As
                                     0.05
                                       0
                                    440,000
                                      0.2
                                      As
                                      ---
[a] The subpart 5C Maximum Individual Risk (MIR) is driven by arsenic emissions from the HRSG bypass/waste heat stacks at the Vansant facility. 
[b] Whole facility MIR driven by COE from door leaks at Clairton. 2[nd] highest risk facility is Tarrant-AL, with MIR of 20-in-1 million based on actuals, also driven by COE. Whole facility HI is 2 at Clairton, driven by HCN from co-located CBRP. 
[c] The estimated incidence of cancer due to inhalation exposures is 0.02 excess cancer case per year (or 1 case every 50 years) and stays approximately the same due to emission reductions as a result of this proposed action.

    Multipathway risks:  Tier 2 screening analysis indicates multipathway risks are not significant.
    The BTF MACT limit for B/W stacks (described above) will reduce MIR from 9-in-1 million to about 2-in-1.
    We have not identified other options to further reduce risks from subpart 5C sources.
    Therefore, we are proposing that risks are acceptable, and the NESHAP provides an ample margin of safety.

Table 5. Estimated Costs and Emissions Reductions of All the Proposed Requirements
Proposed Amendments
Total Capital Cost 
Total Annualized Costs
Emission Reductions (TPY)
Compliance Testing for the new limits
                                       0
                                     $3.2M
BTF Limit For HNR Waste Stacks
                                     $7.5M
                                     $4.7M
Metal HAP: 4.1; PM2.5: 11
Fenceline Monitoring (11 facilities)
                                       0
                                     $1.3M
TOTAL
                                     $7.5M
                                     $9.1M
Metal HAP: 4.1; PM2.5: 11
INTERSECTION OF COKE OVENS NESHAPS WITH OTHER NESHAPS
    We identified two NESHAP that have some "intersection" (relationship) with the Coke Ovens RTR:  Taconite Iron Ore Processing 2023 proposed rule; and Integrated Iron and Steel Manufacturing (II&S) 2023 proposed rule.
    The main intersection is related to Parent Company ownership.  
    Cleveland-Cliffs owns 5 taconite facilities, 5 II&S facilities, and 5 coke facilities (of which 1 is idle and 1 is closing). 
    The idle Cleveland-Cliffs coke facility (in Middletown, OH) is co-located with its II&S facility. 
    One of Cleveland-Cliffs' operating facilities (Burns Harbor, IN) has both a coke oven and II&S facility. 
    The Cleveland-Cliffs taconite facilities are not co-located with any other of their facilities.
    US Steel owns two taconite facilities, three II&S facilities, and one coke facility. None are co-located. 
    We did not identify any significant risks due to co-location, as indicated by the whole facility risk assessment described above.
    The cost and economic impacts are summarized in the following table.


Table 6. Summary of Estimated Costs of Taconite/Iron & Steel/Coke 2023 Proposed Rules by Firm
                                    Company
                              2023 Proposed Rule
                   Total Capital Investment (million 2022$)
                     Total Annualized Cost (million 2022$)
                               Cleveland-Cliffs
                                   Taconite
                                     $76 
                                     $44 

                           Integrated Iron and Steel
                                     $3.4 
                                     $2.9 

                                  Coke Ovens 
                                       -
                                   $1.1[a] 

                                     Total
                                     $79 
                                     $48 
                                   US Steel
                                   Taconite
                                     $15 
                                     $10 

                           Integrated Iron and Steel
                                     $2.8 
                                     $2.1 

                                  Coke Ovens 
                                       -
                                    $0.46 

                                     Total
                                     $18 
                                     $13 
[a] Includes potential costs for 2 idled or closed facilities.

    Annualized cost-to-sales ratios across all three rules using 2021 revenue:
        Cleveland-Cliffs: 0.22%
        US Steel: 0.06%
    ESTIMATED rule costs are low relative to facility sizes, so it is not expected that any particular facility would close due to any of the three rulemakings.
  
ANTICIPATED SCHEDULE
Milestones
                                     Dates
Administrator's Signature of Proposed Rule
Summer 2023
Administrator's Signature of Final Rule (Court Ordered Deadline)
May 23, 2024
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                       
                                  APPENDIX A
   Fenceline monitoring results from the 2022 section 114 request measurements:
 We obtained fugitive fenceline and interior sampling measurements using EPA Methods 325A&B, and EPA TO-13A and 15A from 5 coke oven facilities (4 ByP and 1 HNR) for six months (three months for the HNR facility).
 The table below shows results for benzene, which comprises approximately 70% of the total measured HAP; and naphthalene, a higher toxicity HAP. We believe benzene is a good surrogate for COE.
 Overall average concentrations (ug/m[3]) per facility and method were calculated by taking difference between the highest and lowest concentration for each pollutant and method and taking the average across all sampling periods.
 As shown in the table, fenceline concentrations ranged from 1 to 33 ug/m[3] for benzene at ByP facilities and was 0.1 to 0.2 ug/m[3] for one HNR facility. Highest modeling value for benzene at the fenceline at any facility was 3 ug/m[3]. In most cases, naphthalene was much lower than benzene.

Table A-1. Coke Ovens Fugitive Monitoring Results At Fenceline (Fenceline Concentration, ug/m3 ) [a][,][b]
                                    Method
                             Coke Oven Facilities

                                      ABC
                                 (ByP facility)
                                 Burns Harbor
                                (ByP facility)
                                    DTE/EES
                                 (ByP facility)
                                 USS Clairton 
                                (ByP facility)
                               SunCoke-Haverhill
                                (HNR facility)

                                 Naph-thalene
                                    Benzene
                                 Naph-thalene
                                    Benzene
                                 Naph-thalene
                                    Benzene
                                 Naph-thalene
                                    Benzene
                                 Naph-thalene
                                    Benzene
325A&B
                                       
                                      16
                                       
                                       3
                                       
                                       3
                                       
                                      33

                                      0.1
TO-15A
                                       1
                                       8
                                      1.1
                                       1
                                      0.4
                                       1
                                       9
                                      35
                                    0.00 
                                      0.2
TO-13A
                                       1
                                       
                                      0.4
                                       
                                      0.6
                                       
                                      12
                                       
                                     0.01
                                       
[a] Difference the between measured value and background concentration ("delta C").
[b] 6 months of data, except for SunCoke-Haverhill, which is 3 months. 


Table A-2. List of Coke Oven Facilities

                                    Company
                                     City
                                     State
                                    Status
Bluestone Coke 
Birmingham
                                      AL
idle
Cleveland Cliffs
Burns Harbor
                                      IN
operating
Cleveland Cliffs
Follansbee
                                      WV
closed
Cleveland Cliffs
Middletown
                                      OH
idle
Cleveland Cliffs
Monessen
                                      PA
operating
Cleveland Cliffs
Warren
                                      OH
operating
Drummond Co. (ABC ByP facility)
Tarrant
                                      AL
operating
DTE Energy
Detroit/River Rouge
                                      MI
operating
Suncoke Energy 
East Chicago
                                      IN
operating
Suncoke Energy (Haverhill facility)
Franklin Furnace
                                      OH
operating
Suncoke Energy
Granite City
                                      IL
operating
Suncoke Energy
Middletown
                                      OH
operating
Suncoke Energy
Vansant
                                      VA
operating
U.S. Steel Corp.
Clairton
                                      PA
operating
   
   



