Air Plan Approval; West Virginia; Redesignation and Maintenance Plan for the West Virginia Portion of the Steubenville Sulfur Dioxide Nonattainment Area, 41925-41928 [2020-13452]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 134 / Monday, July 13, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
(1) The area is redesignated to
attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, at which time the requirements
no longer apply; or (2) EPA determines
that the area has violated the 2008 8hour ozone NAAQS, at which time the
area is again required to submit such
plans.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
III. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Act 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 Clean Air Act.
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
regulatory action because this action is
not significant 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 Clean Air Act;
and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:48 Jul 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
• 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 action 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 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 September 11,
2020. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of
this final action 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 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, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: June 22, 2020.
Dennis Deziel,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1.
[FR Doc. 2020–13787 Filed 7–10–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
41925
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA–R03–OAR–2019–0577; FRL–10010–
63–Region 3]
Air Plan Approval; West Virginia;
Redesignation and Maintenance Plan
for the West Virginia Portion of the
Steubenville Sulfur Dioxide
Nonattainment Area
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is approving the request
from the State of West Virginia to
redesignate to attainment its respective
portion of the Steubenville, Ohio-West
Virginia multi-state sulfur dioxide (SO2)
nonattainment area (referred to as the
‘‘Steubenville Nonattainment Area’’ or
the ‘‘Area’’) for the 2010 1-hour SO2
primary national ambient air quality
standard (NAAQS) (also referred to as
the ‘‘2010 SO2 NAAQS’’). EPA is also
approving, as a revision to the West
Virginia state implementation plan
(SIP), West Virginia’s maintenance plan
for its portion of the Steubenville
Nonattainment Area. Emissions of SO2
in the Area have been reduced, and
monitored ambient SO2 readings in the
nonattainment area are currently well
below the 2010 SO2 NAAQS.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
August 12, 2020.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
Number EPA–R03–OAR–2019–0577. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the https://www.regulations.gov
website. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, e.g., 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 https://
www.regulations.gov, or please contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section for
additional availability information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sara
Calcinore, Planning & Implementation
Branch (3AD30), Air & Radiation
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. The
telephone number is (215) 814–2043.
Ms. Calcinore can also be reached via
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\13JYR1.SGM
13JYR1
41926
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 134 / Monday, July 13, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
electronic mail at calcinore.sara@
epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The Steubenville Nonattainment Area
is comprised of a portion of Jefferson
County, Ohio and a portion of Brooke
County, West Virginia.1 On October 22,
2019 (84 FR 56385), EPA approved the
attainment plans for the Steubenville
Nonattainment Area as well as new
emissions limits for the primary SO2
sources in the Area. These sources
include: (1) The American Electric
Power (AEP) Cardinal Power Plant
(referred to as ‘‘Cardinal Power Plant’’)
located in Brilliant, Ohio; (2) the JSW
Steel USA Ohio facility (JSW Steel) in
Mingo Junction, Ohio; (3) the Mingo
Junction Energy Center, also in Mingo
Junction, Ohio; and (4) Mountain State
Carbon (MSC) in Follansbee, West
Virginia.2 EPA redesignated the Ohio
portion of the Steubenville
Nonattainment Area to attainment on
November 29, 2019 (84 FR 65683).
On August 22, 2019, West Virginia
submitted a request to redesignate the
West Virginia portion of the
Steubenville Nonattainment Area. On
March 20, 2020 (85 FR 16038), EPA
published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) for the State of
West Virginia. In the NPRM, EPA
proposed approval of West Virginia’s
request to redesignate to attainment its
portion of the Steubenville
Nonattainment Area as well as West
Virginia’s corresponding maintenance
plan for the Area.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA
Analysis
EPA reviewed West Virginia’s
redesignation request and found that
West Virginia’s portion of the
Steubenville Nonattainment Area
satisfies the Clean Air Act (CAA) section
1 The Ohio portion of the nonattainment area
included Cross Creek Township, Steubenville
Township, Warren Township, Wells Township, and
Steubenville City in Jefferson County. 40 CFR
81.336. The West Virginia portion of the
nonattainment area is the Cross Creek Tax District
in Brooke County. 40 CFR 81.349.
2 The attainment plan for the Steubenville
Nonattainment Area included dispersion modeling
demonstrating that the Steubenville Nonattainment
Area had attained the 2010 SO2 NAAQS based on
the allowable emissions from Cardinal Power Plant,
JSW Steel, Mingo Junction Energy Center, and MSC.
The emissions limits for Cardinal Power Plant, JSW
Steel, and Mingo Junction Energy Center are
approved into the Ohio SIP under Chapter 3745–
18. See 40 CFR 52.1870(c). The emissions limits for
MSC are included in a consent order dated
September 29, 2017 (Consent Order Number CO–
SIP–C–2017–9), which is approved into the West
Virginia SIP. 84 FR 56385 (October 22, 2019); 40
CFR 52.2520(d). The emissions limits for all four
facilities are permanent and Federally enforceable.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:48 Jul 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
107(d)(3)(E) requirements for
redesignation. EPA also found that West
Virginia’s maintenance plan for the Area
satisfies the requirements of CAA
section 175A. EPA’s rationale for this
action can be found in the March 20,
2020 NPRM.
EPA received one adverse comment
on the proposal. As discussed in section
III in this final rule’s preamble, EPA
concludes that West Virginia has
satisfied the relevant requirements of
CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) for the
redesignation of its portion of the
Steubenville Nonattainment Area.
Therefore, EPA is redesignating West
Virginia’s portion of the Steubenville
Nonattainment Area to attainment for
the 2010 SO2 NAAQS and is approving,
as a revision to the West Virginia SIP,
the corresponding maintenance plan for
the Area.
III. Public Comments and EPA
Response
EPA received one comment on the
March 20, 2020 NPRM. The comment
and EPA’s response are discussed
below. The comment is included in the
docket for this action, available online
at www.regulations.gov, Docket ID:
EPA–R03–OAR–2019–0577.
Comment: On April 20, 2020, EPA
received an anonymous comment on the
NPRM. The commenter questioned how
West Virginia can confirm the current
compliance of the modeled facilities
(i.e., Cardinal Power Plant, JSW Steel,
Mingo Junction Energy Center, and
MSC) in the Steubenville
Nonattainment Area when three of the
four facilities are not within West
Virginia’s jurisdiction. The commenter
requests that EPA independently
determine whether all four facilities are
currently in compliance with their
modeled limits.
EPA Response: States generally have
the best information on the compliance
status of sources within their
jurisdiction. Therefore, EPA is primarily
relying on Ohio to provide information
on the compliance status of the Ohio
sources and West Virginia to provide
information on the compliance status of
the West Virginia source. Ohio
Environmental Protection Agency
(OEPA)’s request for redesignation
confirmed that the modeled facilities
located in its portion of the Area (i.e.,
Cardinal Power Plant, JSW Steel, and
Mingo Junction Energy Center) are in
full compliance with their emission
limits.3 EPA accepted and concurred
3 See also Appendix D of West Virginia’s August
22, 2019 submittal included in the docket for this
rulemaking action, available online at https://
www.regulations.gov, Docket ID: EPA–R03–OAR–
2019–0577.
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
with this statement regarding
compliance by Ohio sources explicitly
in its September 20, 2019 NPRM
proposing approval of Ohio’s
redesignation request and implicitly in
its November 29, 2019 final rulemaking
notice (FRN). See 84 FR 49492 and 84
FR 65683.
West Virginia has provided adequate
assurance that MSC, the only primary
SO2 source within West Virginia’s
portion of the Steubenville
Nonattainment Area, is in compliance
with its emissions limits as well as other
conditions of the September 29, 2017
consent order (Consent Order Number
CO–SIP–C–2017–9).4 Appendix C of
West Virginia’s August 22, 2019
submittal includes documentation of
MSC’s compliance with the consent
order, including an August 9, 2016 letter
from MSC confirming the disconnection
of the coke oven gas (COG) pipeline to
Mingo Junction Energy Center and a
February 1, 2017 letter verifying that the
data acquisition and monitoring system
required by the consent order is
operational.5 In the February 1, 2017
letter, MSC also commits to submitting
the quarterly reports required by the
consent order. EPA has reviewed the
quarterly reports submitted by MSC to
the WVDEP from October 1, 2017 to
March 31, 2020,6 and finds that MSC is
complying with the emissions limits, in
accordance with the SIP-approved
consent order, that were used in the
modeling demonstration for the
Steubenville Nonattainment Area.7
4 As stated previously, the emissions limits in the
September 29, 2017 consent order were used for the
modeling included in the attainment demonstration
for the Steubenville Nonattainment Area. The
consent order is approved in the West Virginia SIP
and is permanent and Federally enforceable.
5 The September 29, 2017 consent order (Consent
Order Number CO–SIP–C–2017–9) supersedes and
replaces a previous consent order (Consent Order
Number CO–SIP–2015–14). Consent Order Number
CO–SIP–2015–14 required MSC to physically
disconnect the COG pipeline leading to Mingo
Junction Energy Center by January 1, 2017. It also
required MSC to install, operate, and maintain a
continuous monitoring system (CMS) and submit
quarterly reports to the West Virginia Department
of Environmental Protection (WVDEP) beginning
with the January 1 through March 31, 2017 quarter.
MSC submitted the August 9, 2016 and February 1,
2017 letters to WVDEP in order to demonstrate
compliance with these requirements of Consent
Order Number CO–SIP–2015–14. These
requirements are also included in the September 29,
2017 consent order that replaced Consent Order
Number CO–SIP–2015–14 and was approved into
the West Virginia SIP. 84 FR 56385 (October 22,
2019); 40 CFR 52.2520(d).
6 Consent Order Number CO–SIP–C–2017–9 was
effective September 29, 2017. Therefore, the
applicable period for determining compliance with
the emissions limits contained in the September 29,
2017 consent order is October 1, 2017 to March 31,
2020, which is the most recent completed quarter.
7 The quarterly reports are included in the docket
for this rulemaking, available online at https://
E:\FR\FM\13JYR1.SGM
13JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 134 / Monday, July 13, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
As mentioned previously, the
emissions limits on Cardinal Power
Plant, JSW Steel, Mingo Junction Energy
Center, and MSC are all permanent and
federally enforceable. These four
sources are all subject to monitoring,
testing, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements to assure compliance with
the SO2 emissions limits. WVDEP and
OEPA have comprehensive programs to
identify sources of violations of the SO2
NAAQS and approved compliance and
enforcement programs to address
violations. WVDEP has committed to
continuing the enforcement of all rules
related to SO2 emissions in the
Steubenville Nonattainment Area and
has verified that it has the legal
authority and necessary resources to
actively enforce any violations of its
rules or permit provisions.
EPA finds that MSC is complying
with the emissions limits set forth in the
September 29, 2017 consent order. EPA
also continues to believe that the
sources in the Ohio portion of the area
are complying with limits in the
approved attainment plan, which West
Virginia and EPA rely upon in
concluding that West Virginia’s portion
of the area is attaining the standard.
EPA continues to find that West
Virginia’s August 22, 2019 submittal
satisfies the CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)
requirements for the redesignation of
the West Virginia portion of the
Steubenville Nonattainment Area.
Therefore, EPA is finalizing the
redesignation of the West Virginia
portion of the Steubenville
Nonattainment Area for the 2010 SO2
NAAQS.
IV. Final Action
EPA is approving the redesignation of
the West Virginia portion of the
Steubenville Nonattainment Area (i.e.,
Cross Creek Tax District in Brooke
County) from nonattainment to
attainment of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS.
EPA is also approving, as a revision to
the West Virginia SIP, West Virginia’s
maintenance plan for the Steubenville
Nonattainment Area. EPA has found
that the maintenance plan demonstrates
maintenance of the SO2 NAAQS
through 2030 in the Steubenville
Nonattainment Area and satisfies the
requirements of CAA section 175A.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
A. General Requirements
Under the CAA, redesignation of an
area to attainment and the
accompanying approval of the
www.regulations.gov, Docket ID: EPA–R03–OAR–
2019–0577.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:48 Jul 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
maintenance plan under CAA section
107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the
status of a geographical area and do not
impose any additional regulatory
requirements on sources beyond those
required by state law. A redesignation to
attainment does not in and of itself
impose any new requirements, but
rather results in the application of
requirements contained in the CAA for
areas that have been redesignated to
attainment. Moreover, the Administrator
is required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
Act 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 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
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
41927
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
The SIP is not approved to apply on
any Indian reservation land as defined
in 18 U.S.C. 1151 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).
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 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).
C. Petitions for Judicial Review
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 September 11, 2020. 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
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. This action
approving the redesignation of the
Steubenville Nonattainment Area and
associated maintenance plan may not be
challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section
307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter,
E:\FR\FM\13JYR1.SGM
13JYR1
41928
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 134 / Monday, July 13, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: June 16, 2020.
Cosmo Servidio,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
40 CFR Part 81
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, EPA amends 40 CFR parts 52
and 81 as follows:
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
§ 52.2520
*
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
*
*
*
Steubenville Area (Cross Creek Tax District, Brooke County).
3. Section 52.2525 is amended by
adding paragraph (d) to read as follows:
Control strategy: Sulfur dioxide.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) EPA approves the maintenance
plan for Cross Creek Tax District,
Brooke County, West Virginia,
submitted by the Department of
Environmental Protection on August 22,
2019.
Identification of plan.
*
*
(e) * * *
State submittal
date
Applicable geographic area
*
2. In § 52.2520, amend paragraph (e)
by adding in the table an entry for ‘‘2010
Sulfur Dioxide Maintenance Plan’’ at
the end of the table to read as follows:
■
■
■
§ 52.2525
Subpart XX—West Virginia
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
Name of non-regulatory SIP
revision
*
2010 Sulfur Dioxide Maintenance Plan.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
PART 81—DESIGNATION OF AREAS
FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING
PURPOSES
08/22/19
*
*
EPA approval
date
Additional
explanation
*
7/10/2020, [insert Federal
Register citation].
*
Docket No.
2019–0577.
Subpart C—Section 107 Attainment
Status Designations
5. In § 81.349 amend the table ‘‘West
Virginia—2010 Sulfur Dioxide NAAQS
[Primary]’’ by revising the entry for
‘‘Steubenville, OH-WV’’ to read as
follows:
■
4. The authority citation for part 81
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
§ 81.349
*
West Virginia.
*
*
*
*
WEST VIRGINIA—2010 SULFUR DIOXIDE NAAQS
[Primary]
Designation
Designated area 1 3
Date 2
Steubenville, OH-WV ...............................................................................................................................................
Brooke County (part) ........................................................................................................................................
Area bounded by the Cross Creek Tax District ........................................................................................
*
*
*
*
*
8/12/2020
8/12/2020
8/12/2020
*
1 Includes
Type
Attainment.
*
any Indian country in each county or area, unless otherwise specified. EPA is not determining the boundaries of any area of Indian
country in this table, including any area of Indian country located in the larger designation area. The inclusion of any Indian country in the designation area is not a determination that the state has regulatory authority under the Clean Air Act for such Indian country.
2 This date is April 9, 2018, unless otherwise noted.
3 Mineral County will be designated by December 31, 2020.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2020–13452 Filed 7–10–20; 8:45 am]
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:48 Jul 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\13JYR1.SGM
13JYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 134 (Monday, July 13, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 41925-41928]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-13452]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R03-OAR-2019-0577; FRL-10010-63-Region 3]
Air Plan Approval; West Virginia; Redesignation and Maintenance
Plan for the West Virginia Portion of the Steubenville Sulfur Dioxide
Nonattainment Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving the
request from the State of West Virginia to redesignate to attainment
its respective portion of the Steubenville, Ohio-West Virginia multi-
state sulfur dioxide (SO2) nonattainment area (referred to
as the ``Steubenville Nonattainment Area'' or the ``Area'') for the
2010 1-hour SO2 primary national ambient air quality
standard (NAAQS) (also referred to as the ``2010 SO2
NAAQS''). EPA is also approving, as a revision to the West Virginia
state implementation plan (SIP), West Virginia's maintenance plan for
its portion of the Steubenville Nonattainment Area. Emissions of
SO2 in the Area have been reduced, and monitored ambient
SO2 readings in the nonattainment area are currently well
below the 2010 SO2 NAAQS.
DATES: This final rule is effective on August 12, 2020.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
Number EPA-R03-OAR-2019-0577. All documents in the docket are listed on
the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, e.g., 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
https://www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in
the For Further Information Contact section for additional availability
information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sara Calcinore, Planning &
Implementation Branch (3AD30), Air & Radiation Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. The telephone number is (215) 814-
2043. Ms. Calcinore can also be reached via
[[Page 41926]]
electronic mail at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The Steubenville Nonattainment Area is comprised of a portion of
Jefferson County, Ohio and a portion of Brooke County, West
Virginia.\1\ On October 22, 2019 (84 FR 56385), EPA approved the
attainment plans for the Steubenville Nonattainment Area as well as new
emissions limits for the primary SO2 sources in the Area.
These sources include: (1) The American Electric Power (AEP) Cardinal
Power Plant (referred to as ``Cardinal Power Plant'') located in
Brilliant, Ohio; (2) the JSW Steel USA Ohio facility (JSW Steel) in
Mingo Junction, Ohio; (3) the Mingo Junction Energy Center, also in
Mingo Junction, Ohio; and (4) Mountain State Carbon (MSC) in
Follansbee, West Virginia.\2\ EPA redesignated the Ohio portion of the
Steubenville Nonattainment Area to attainment on November 29, 2019 (84
FR 65683).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Ohio portion of the nonattainment area included Cross
Creek Township, Steubenville Township, Warren Township, Wells
Township, and Steubenville City in Jefferson County. 40 CFR 81.336.
The West Virginia portion of the nonattainment area is the Cross
Creek Tax District in Brooke County. 40 CFR 81.349.
\2\ The attainment plan for the Steubenville Nonattainment Area
included dispersion modeling demonstrating that the Steubenville
Nonattainment Area had attained the 2010 SO2 NAAQS based
on the allowable emissions from Cardinal Power Plant, JSW Steel,
Mingo Junction Energy Center, and MSC. The emissions limits for
Cardinal Power Plant, JSW Steel, and Mingo Junction Energy Center
are approved into the Ohio SIP under Chapter 3745-18. See 40 CFR
52.1870(c). The emissions limits for MSC are included in a consent
order dated September 29, 2017 (Consent Order Number CO-SIP-C-2017-
9), which is approved into the West Virginia SIP. 84 FR 56385
(October 22, 2019); 40 CFR 52.2520(d). The emissions limits for all
four facilities are permanent and Federally enforceable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On August 22, 2019, West Virginia submitted a request to
redesignate the West Virginia portion of the Steubenville Nonattainment
Area. On March 20, 2020 (85 FR 16038), EPA published a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for the State of West Virginia. In the NPRM,
EPA proposed approval of West Virginia's request to redesignate to
attainment its portion of the Steubenville Nonattainment Area as well
as West Virginia's corresponding maintenance plan for the Area.
II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA Analysis
EPA reviewed West Virginia's redesignation request and found that
West Virginia's portion of the Steubenville Nonattainment Area
satisfies the Clean Air Act (CAA) section 107(d)(3)(E) requirements for
redesignation. EPA also found that West Virginia's maintenance plan for
the Area satisfies the requirements of CAA section 175A. EPA's
rationale for this action can be found in the March 20, 2020 NPRM.
EPA received one adverse comment on the proposal. As discussed in
section III in this final rule's preamble, EPA concludes that West
Virginia has satisfied the relevant requirements of CAA section
107(d)(3)(E) for the redesignation of its portion of the Steubenville
Nonattainment Area. Therefore, EPA is redesignating West Virginia's
portion of the Steubenville Nonattainment Area to attainment for the
2010 SO2 NAAQS and is approving, as a revision to the West
Virginia SIP, the corresponding maintenance plan for the Area.
III. Public Comments and EPA Response
EPA received one comment on the March 20, 2020 NPRM. The comment
and EPA's response are discussed below. The comment is included in the
docket for this action, available online at www.regulations.gov, Docket
ID: EPA-R03-OAR-2019-0577.
Comment: On April 20, 2020, EPA received an anonymous comment on
the NPRM. The commenter questioned how West Virginia can confirm the
current compliance of the modeled facilities (i.e., Cardinal Power
Plant, JSW Steel, Mingo Junction Energy Center, and MSC) in the
Steubenville Nonattainment Area when three of the four facilities are
not within West Virginia's jurisdiction. The commenter requests that
EPA independently determine whether all four facilities are currently
in compliance with their modeled limits.
EPA Response: States generally have the best information on the
compliance status of sources within their jurisdiction. Therefore, EPA
is primarily relying on Ohio to provide information on the compliance
status of the Ohio sources and West Virginia to provide information on
the compliance status of the West Virginia source. Ohio Environmental
Protection Agency (OEPA)'s request for redesignation confirmed that the
modeled facilities located in its portion of the Area (i.e., Cardinal
Power Plant, JSW Steel, and Mingo Junction Energy Center) are in full
compliance with their emission limits.\3\ EPA accepted and concurred
with this statement regarding compliance by Ohio sources explicitly in
its September 20, 2019 NPRM proposing approval of Ohio's redesignation
request and implicitly in its November 29, 2019 final rulemaking notice
(FRN). See 84 FR 49492 and 84 FR 65683.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See also Appendix D of West Virginia's August 22, 2019
submittal included in the docket for this rulemaking action,
available online at https://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID: EPA-R03-
OAR-2019-0577.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
West Virginia has provided adequate assurance that MSC, the only
primary SO2 source within West Virginia's portion of the
Steubenville Nonattainment Area, is in compliance with its emissions
limits as well as other conditions of the September 29, 2017 consent
order (Consent Order Number CO-SIP-C-2017-9).\4\ Appendix C of West
Virginia's August 22, 2019 submittal includes documentation of MSC's
compliance with the consent order, including an August 9, 2016 letter
from MSC confirming the disconnection of the coke oven gas (COG)
pipeline to Mingo Junction Energy Center and a February 1, 2017 letter
verifying that the data acquisition and monitoring system required by
the consent order is operational.\5\ In the February 1, 2017 letter,
MSC also commits to submitting the quarterly reports required by the
consent order. EPA has reviewed the quarterly reports submitted by MSC
to the WVDEP from October 1, 2017 to March 31, 2020,\6\ and finds that
MSC is complying with the emissions limits, in accordance with the SIP-
approved consent order, that were used in the modeling demonstration
for the Steubenville Nonattainment Area.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ As stated previously, the emissions limits in the September
29, 2017 consent order were used for the modeling included in the
attainment demonstration for the Steubenville Nonattainment Area.
The consent order is approved in the West Virginia SIP and is
permanent and Federally enforceable.
\5\ The September 29, 2017 consent order (Consent Order Number
CO-SIP-C-2017-9) supersedes and replaces a previous consent order
(Consent Order Number CO-SIP-2015-14). Consent Order Number CO-SIP-
2015-14 required MSC to physically disconnect the COG pipeline
leading to Mingo Junction Energy Center by January 1, 2017. It also
required MSC to install, operate, and maintain a continuous
monitoring system (CMS) and submit quarterly reports to the West
Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (WVDEP) beginning
with the January 1 through March 31, 2017 quarter. MSC submitted the
August 9, 2016 and February 1, 2017 letters to WVDEP in order to
demonstrate compliance with these requirements of Consent Order
Number CO-SIP-2015-14. These requirements are also included in the
September 29, 2017 consent order that replaced Consent Order Number
CO-SIP-2015-14 and was approved into the West Virginia SIP. 84 FR
56385 (October 22, 2019); 40 CFR 52.2520(d).
\6\ Consent Order Number CO-SIP-C-2017-9 was effective September
29, 2017. Therefore, the applicable period for determining
compliance with the emissions limits contained in the September 29,
2017 consent order is October 1, 2017 to March 31, 2020, which is
the most recent completed quarter.
\7\ The quarterly reports are included in the docket for this
rulemaking, available online at https://www.regulations.gov, Docket
ID: EPA-R03-OAR-2019-0577.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 41927]]
As mentioned previously, the emissions limits on Cardinal Power
Plant, JSW Steel, Mingo Junction Energy Center, and MSC are all
permanent and federally enforceable. These four sources are all subject
to monitoring, testing, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements to
assure compliance with the SO2 emissions limits. WVDEP and
OEPA have comprehensive programs to identify sources of violations of
the SO2 NAAQS and approved compliance and enforcement
programs to address violations. WVDEP has committed to continuing the
enforcement of all rules related to SO2 emissions in the
Steubenville Nonattainment Area and has verified that it has the legal
authority and necessary resources to actively enforce any violations of
its rules or permit provisions.
EPA finds that MSC is complying with the emissions limits set forth
in the September 29, 2017 consent order. EPA also continues to believe
that the sources in the Ohio portion of the area are complying with
limits in the approved attainment plan, which West Virginia and EPA
rely upon in concluding that West Virginia's portion of the area is
attaining the standard. EPA continues to find that West Virginia's
August 22, 2019 submittal satisfies the CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)
requirements for the redesignation of the West Virginia portion of the
Steubenville Nonattainment Area. Therefore, EPA is finalizing the
redesignation of the West Virginia portion of the Steubenville
Nonattainment Area for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS.
IV. Final Action
EPA is approving the redesignation of the West Virginia portion of
the Steubenville Nonattainment Area (i.e., Cross Creek Tax District in
Brooke County) from nonattainment to attainment of the 2010
SO2 NAAQS. EPA is also approving, as a revision to the West
Virginia SIP, West Virginia's maintenance plan for the Steubenville
Nonattainment Area. EPA has found that the maintenance plan
demonstrates maintenance of the SO2 NAAQS through 2030 in
the Steubenville Nonattainment Area and satisfies the requirements of
CAA section 175A.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. General Requirements
Under the CAA, redesignation of an area to attainment and the
accompanying approval of the maintenance plan under CAA section
107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the status of a geographical area
and do not impose any additional regulatory requirements on sources
beyond those required by state law. A redesignation to attainment does
not in and of itself impose any new requirements, but rather results in
the application of requirements contained in the CAA for areas that
have been redesignated to attainment. Moreover, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions
of the Act 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 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).
The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land as
defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151 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).
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 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).
C. Petitions for Judicial Review
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 September 11, 2020. 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 shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action approving the redesignation of the Steubenville
Nonattainment Area and associated maintenance plan may not be
challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See
section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter,
[[Page 41928]]
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: June 16, 2020.
Cosmo Servidio,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA amends 40 CFR parts 52
and 81 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.
Subpart XX--West Virginia
0
2. In Sec. 52.2520, amend paragraph (e) by adding in the table an
entry for ``2010 Sulfur Dioxide Maintenance Plan'' at the end of the
table to read as follows:
Sec. 52.2520 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name of non-regulatory SIP Applicable geographic State Additional
revision area submittal date EPA approval date explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
2010 Sulfur Dioxide Maintenance Steubenville Area 08/22/19 7/10/2020, [insert Docket No. 2019-
Plan. (Cross Creek Tax Federal Register 0577.
District, Brooke citation].
County).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
3. Section 52.2525 is amended by adding paragraph (d) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.2525 Control strategy: Sulfur dioxide.
* * * * *
(d) EPA approves the maintenance plan for Cross Creek Tax District,
Brooke County, West Virginia, submitted by the Department of
Environmental Protection on August 22, 2019.
PART 81--DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES
0
4. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart C--Section 107 Attainment Status Designations
0
5. In Sec. 81.349 amend the table ``West Virginia--2010 Sulfur Dioxide
NAAQS [Primary]'' by revising the entry for ``Steubenville, OH-WV'' to
read as follows:
Sec. 81.349 West Virginia.
* * * * *
West Virginia--2010 Sulfur Dioxide NAAQS
[Primary]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Designation
Designated area 1 3 ---------------------------------------
Date \2\ Type
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steubenville, OH-WV............. 8/12/2020
Brooke County (part)........ 8/12/2020 Attainment.
Area bounded by the 8/12/2020
Cross Creek Tax
District.
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes any Indian country in each county or area, unless otherwise
specified. EPA is not determining the boundaries of any area of Indian
country in this table, including any area of Indian country located in
the larger designation area. The inclusion of any Indian country in
the designation area is not a determination that the state has
regulatory authority under the Clean Air Act for such Indian country.
\2\ This date is April 9, 2018, unless otherwise noted.
\3\ Mineral County will be designated by December 31, 2020.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2020-13452 Filed 7-10-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P