[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 204 (Tuesday, October 22, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 56385-56389]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-22909]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2019-0044; EPA-R05-OAR-2015-0699; FRL-10001-26-Region 5]


Approval of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Ohio and West 
Virginia; Attainment Plans for the Steubenville, Ohio-West Virginia 
2010 Sulfur Dioxide Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving, under 
the Clean Air Act (CAA), two State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 
submittals, submitted by Ohio and West Virginia, respectively. The Ohio 
and West Virginia submittals include each State's attainment 
demonstration for the Steubenville Ohio-West Virginia sulfur dioxide 
(SO2) nonattainment area (hereinafter ``Steubenville Area'' 
or ``Area''). Each SIP contains an attainment demonstration, 
enforceable emission limits, control measures and other elements 
required under the CAA to address the nonattainment area requirements 
for the Steubenville Area. EPA concludes that the Ohio and West 
Virginia attainment plan submittals demonstrate that the provisions in 
the respective SIPs provide for attainment of the 2010 primary 
SO2 national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) in the 
entire Steubenville Area and meet the requirements of the CAA. EPA is 
also approving into the West Virginia SIP new emissions limits, 
operational restrictions, and associated compliance requirements for 
Mountain State Carbon, and approving into the Ohio SIP the limits on 
emissions from Mingo Junction Energy Center, JSW Steel, and the 
Cardinal Power Plant.

DATES: This final rule is effective on November 21, 2019.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established dockets for this action under Docket ID 
Nos. EPA-R03-OAR-2019-0044 and EPA-R05-OAR-2015-0699. All documents in 
the docket are listed on the www.regulations.gov website. Although 
listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as 
copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be 
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket 
materials are available through www.regulations.gov, or please contact 
the applicable Region III or Region V person identified in the For 
Further Information Contact section for additional availability 
information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marilyn Powers at EPA Region III, 
Planning & Implementation Branch (3AD30), Air & Radiation Division, 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103, (215) 814-2308, 
powers.marilyn@epa.gov. John Summerhays at EPA Region V, Attainment 
Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), 
Environmental Protection Agency,

[[Page 56386]]

Region V, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 
886-6067, summerhays.john@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following outline is provided to aid in 
locating information in this preamble.

Table of Contents

I. Summary of EPA's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
II. Comments and EPA's Responses
III. EPA's Final Action
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Summary of EPA's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    Following the promulgation in 2010 of a 1-hour primary 
SO2 NAAQS, EPA designated a two-State Steubenville, Ohio-
West Virginia area (among other areas) as nonattainment for this NAAQS. 
Ohio and West Virginia submitted SIP revision requests to address the 
attainment planning requirements that then applied for this area. 
Ohio's requested SIP revision was submitted to EPA through the Ohio 
Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA) on April 1, 2015 with 
supplemental submissions on October 13, 2015, March 25, 2019, and June 
25, 2019. West Virginia's requested SIP revision was submitted to EPA 
through the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection 
(WVDEP) on April 25, 2016, with a supplemental submission from WVDEP on 
November 27, 2017 and a clarification letter on May 1, 2019.
    On June 24, 2019, at 84 FR 29456, EPA published a notice of 
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on Ohio's and West Virginia's plans for 
assuring that the Steubenville Area attains the 2010 SO2 
NAAQS. Because the Area includes portions in both Ohio and West 
Virginia, each State was required to submit plans that in combination 
provided for attainment throughout the two-State area. EPA published a 
combined NPRM on the two States' submittals addressing whether these 
submittals satisfied applicable requirements throughout the Area. 
Ohio's submittal included proposed rules with a proposed emission limit 
for the Cardinal Power Plant. EPA's NPRM proposed to approve the two 
States' submittals contingent upon Ohio adopting and submitting these 
rules in final form.
    The NPRM provided extensive discussion of EPA's rationale for 
proposing to approve the two States' submittals as meeting these 
requirements. The NPRM described the requirements that nonattainment 
plans are designed to meet. Notably, Ohio's plan included a 30-day 
average SO2 emission limit for the Cardinal Power Plant 
(Cardinal), and the West Virginia plan included 24-hour average 
SO2 emission limits for the Mountain State Carbon facility. 
The NPRM included an extensive discussion of EPA's guidance on the use 
of such longer term average emission limits, including a full 
discussion of EPA's rationale for concluding that properly set longer 
term average SO2 emission limits (in particular, longer term 
emission limits that are comparably stringent to the 1-hour limits that 
would otherwise be established) can be effective in providing for 
attainment. The NPRM then described EPA's review of the modeling that 
the States submitted to demonstrate that the limits they adopted would 
provide for attainment of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS and described 
EPA's review of whether the submittals met other applicable 
requirements such as the requirements for an emissions inventory and 
for reasonably available control measures.
    On this basis, EPA proposed to conclude that, in combination with 
the other limits in Ohio's and West Virginia's plans, these longer term 
average SO2 emission limits assure attainment in the 
Steubenville Area. More generally, EPA proposed to approve Ohio's and 
West Virginia's SIP submittals as addressing the nonattainment planning 
requirements, provided Ohio adopted and submitted in final form its 
proposed rules limiting emissions from the Cardinal power plant.

II. Comments and EPA's Responses

    EPA received two comment letters on the NPRM, from owners of two of 
the facilities affected by these plans. JSW Steel provided brief 
comments supporting EPA's proposed action. Mountain State Carbon also 
expressed support for EPA's proposed action but identified various 
alleged factual errors in the NPRM that it sought to correct for the 
record. The following paragraph describes Mountain State Carbon's 
requested corrections and EPA's responses.
    Mountain State Carbon identified several emission rates listed in 
the NPRM as inconsistent with the emissions reflected in Ohio's and 
West Virginia's plans. These claims are summarized in Table 1. For 
convenience, EPA's response is also listed in the table. In each case, 
EPA agrees with Mountain State Carbon's requested correction.

                              Table 1--Emission Rates Identified as Being in Error
                                           [Abbreviations shown below]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                            Does EPA agree with
       Source                Unit(s)               NPRM value         Recommended value             MSC?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MJEC...............  4 units...............  20.34 lb/hr each.....  0.5 lb/hr each (total  Yes.
                                                                     of 2 lb/hr).
MSC................  Battery #8 pushing,     15.72 lb/hr..........  9.8 lb/hr............  Yes.
                      outage operation.
MSC................  Battery #1 combustion.  241.5lb#/hr..........  76.8 lb/hr...........  Yes.
MSC................  At issue *............  Limit (1.32 g/s or     Emission limit         Yes.
                                              10.48 lb/hr) applies   (correct value)
                                              to power boilers.      applies to Battery 1/
                                                                     2/3 pushing baghouse.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The commenter states that the NPRM (the footnote to Table 4) assigns a limit incorrectly, that the limit of
  1.32 g/s (10.32 lb/hr) applies not to the power boilers but instead to the Battery 1/2/3 pushing baghouse. EPA
  agrees.
Abbreviations: MJEC--Mingo Junction Energy Center; MSC--Mountain State Carbon; NPRM Value--Value cited in NPRM;
  Recommended Value--Value that MSC cites as the correct value; lb/hr--pounds per hour; g/s--grams per second.

    EPA is correcting the record accordingly. Mountain State Carbon 
states that it does not believe that its comments are material to the 
proposed approval of the SIP, and that it supports EPA's action. 
Moreover, Mountain State Carbon explains that the corrected values are 
provided in West Virginia's submission. EPA agrees, and concludes that 
making these corrections, which more accurately characterizes the 
emission rates in Ohio's and West Virginia's modeled attainment plans, 
and which in the aggregate reflect lower allowable emission rates than 
EPA had

[[Page 56387]]

presented in the NPRM, does not necessitate reconsidering the validity 
of the attainment demonstration.

III. EPA's Final Action

    EPA is approving two SIP revision submittals, one submitted by the 
State of Ohio on April 1, 2015, which Ohio supplemented on October 13, 
2015, March 25, 2019, and June 25, 2019, and the other submitted by the 
State of West Virginia on April 25, 2016, which West Virginia 
supplemented on November 27, 2017, with a clarification letter 
submitted on May 1, 2019. The proposed approval was contingent on Ohio 
adopting and submitting in final form the limit for Cardinal that it 
submitted in proposed form on March 25, 2019. Ohio has adopted the 
limit it had proposed, effective July 5, 2019, and submitted this limit 
to EPA on June 25, 2019.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In conjunction with the newly adopted limit for Cardinal and 
resubmitted limits for other Ohio sources, in Ohio Administrative 
Code (OAC) 3745-18-47, Ohio also adopted and submitted associated 
compliance deadlines and compliance determination procedures, in OAC 
3745-18-03 and 3745-18-04, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Ohio's and West Virginia's submittals represent their plans for 
attaining the 2010 SO2 NAAQS and how they are meeting other 
nonattainment area planning requirements. EPA is approving the 
attainment demonstrations, emissions limitations and control measures, 
the base year emissions inventory, nonattainment new source review 
program, reasonable further progress, and reasonably available control 
technology/reasonably available control measures, and contingency 
measures submitted by Ohio and West Virginia for the Steubenville Area. 
In the West Virginia SIP, EPA is approving the consent order between 
West Virginia and Mountain State Carbon identified as CO-SIP-C-2017-9, 
effective September 29, 2017, containing emission limits and other 
measures for Mountain State Carbon, including operational restrictions 
and sulfur content limits during the periods in which the 
desulfurization unit for Mountain State Carbon is shut down for 
maintenance purposes, and their associated compliance requirements. In 
the Ohio SIP, EPA is approving OAC Rule 3745-18-03, the pertinent 
sections of 3745-18-04,\2\ and 3745-18-47.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ EPA has historically not taken action on several paragraphs 
of OAC 3745-18-04. Ohio requested that EPA approve ``the revisions 
to . . . 3745-18-04 . . ., with the exception of [several listed 
portions of OAC 3745-18-04 that mostly have not previously been 
approved].'' Although Ohio's rulemaking for this submittal only 
revised paragraph (D)(11) of this rule, for administrative 
convenience EPA is reapproving all of OAC 3745-18-04 except for the 
listed paragraphs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes 
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the Ohio and 
West Virginia Regulations described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 
set forth below. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these 
documents generally available through www.regulations.gov, and at the 
EPA Region III and Region V Offices (please contact the applicable 
person identified in the For Further Information Contact section of 
this preamble for more information). Therefore, these materials have 
been approved by EPA for inclusion in the SIP, have been incorporated 
by reference by EPA into that plan, are fully federally enforceable 
under sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of the effective date of the 
final rulemaking of EPA's approval, and will be incorporated by 
reference in the next update to the SIP compilation.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP 
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable 
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in 
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, 
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this 
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and 
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state 
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review 
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under 
Executive Order 12866;
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian 
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has 
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian 
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose 
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as 
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    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 action 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. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the appropriate circuit by December 23, 2019. Filing a petition for 
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect 
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor 
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may 
be filed, and

[[Page 56388]]

shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action.
    This action to approve the Steubenville Area attainment plans for 
Ohio and West Virginia 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.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: September 23, 2019
Cosmo Servidio,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
    Dated: October 7, 2019
Cathy Stepp,
Regional Administrator, Region V.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.


0
2. Section 52.1870 is amended:
0
a. In the table in paragraph (c), under ``Chapter 3745-18 Sulfur 
Dioxide Regulations,'' by revising the entries for ``3745-18-03'', 
``3745-18-04'' (with a State effective date of 2/16/2017), and ``3745-
18-47''; and
0
b. In the table in paragraph (e), under the heading ``Summary of 
Criteria Pollutant Attainment Plans,'' by adding a second entry for 
``SO2 (2010)'' after the entry for ``SO2 (2010)'' 
(with a State date of 2/16/2017).
    The revisions and additions read as follows:


Sec.  52.1870  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                          EPA-Approved Ohio Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Ohio effective
        Ohio citation            Title/subject          date        EPA approval date             Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Chapter 3745-18 Sulfur Dioxide Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
3745-18-03..................  Compliance Time            7/5/2019  10/22/2019, [insert  ........................
                               Schedules.                           Federal Register
                                                                    citation].
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
3745-18-04..................  Measurement Methods        7/5/2019  10/22/2019, [insert  Except (D)(2), (D)(3),
                               and Procedures.                      Federal Register     (D)(5), (D)(6),
                                                                    citation].           (D)(9)(c), (E)(2),
                                                                                         (E)(3), and (E)(4).
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
3745-18-47..................  Jefferson County           7/5/2019  10/22/2019, [insert  ........................
                               Emission Limits.                     Federal Register
                                                                    citation].
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                         EPA-Approved Ohio Nonregulatory and Quasi-Regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Applicable
                                 geographical or
             Title                non-attainment     State date         EPA approval              Comments
                                       area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 Summary of Criteria Pollutant Attainment Plans
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
SO2 (2010)....................  Steubenville.....         6/25/19  10/22/2019, [insert     .....................
                                                                    Federal Register
                                                                    citation].
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

0
3. Section 52.2520 is amended:
0
a. In the table in paragraph (d) by adding an entry at the end of the 
table for ``Mountain State Carbon''; and
0
b. In the table in paragraph (e) by adding an entry at the end of the 
table for ``2010 Sulfur Dioxide Attainment Plan''.
    The additions read as follows:


Sec.  52.2520  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *

[[Page 56389]]



                                    EPA-Approved Source Specific Requirements
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 Permit/order or                                                 Additional
          Source name              registration         State         EPA approval date     explanation/citation
                                      number       effective date                            at 40 CFR 52.2565
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Mountain State Carbon.........  Consent Order CO-         9/29/17  10/22/2019, [insert     .....................
                                 SIP-C-2017-9.                      Federal Register
                                                                    citation].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (e) * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Name of non-regulatory SIP          Applicable           State                                Additional
             revision               geographical area   submittal date   EPA approval date       explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
2010 Sulfur Dioxide Attainment     Steubenville Area           4/25/16  10/22/2019, [insert  52.2525(c).
 Plan.                              (Brooke County).                     Federal Register
                                                                         citation].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



0
4. Section 52.2525 is amended by adding paragraph (c) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.2525  Control strategy: Sulfur dioxide.

* * * * *
    (c) EPA approves the attainment plan for Brooke County, West 
Virginia, submitted by the Department of Environmental Protection on 
April 25, 2016, supplemented on November 27, 2017, and with a 
clarification letter submitted on May 1, 2019.

[FR Doc. 2019-22909 Filed 10-21-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


