Submitted: October 2, 2013

BEFORE THE UNITED STATES

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

In re:

Air Quality Designations for the 2010

Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Primary National

Ambient Air Quality Standard, 78 Fed.

Reg. 47191 (August 5, 2013)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

EPA Docket No.

EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0233; FRL 9841-4

PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND FOR STAY PENDING

RECONSIDERATION OF THE AIR QUALITY DESIGNATIONS FOR THE 2010

SULFUR DIOXIDE (SO2) PRIMARY NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY

STANDARD

Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 7607, United States Steel Corporation (“U. S. Steel”) respectfully

requests that the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) reconsider the abovecaptioned final rule pursuant to § 307(d)(7)(B) of the Clean Air Act (“CAA”), 42 U.S.C.

§ 7607(d)(7)(B). This petition is submitted because new information justifies an expanded

nonattainment boundary for the Detroit, Michigan, area to include its largest source of SO2

emissions. Specifically, U. S. Steel requests that EPA reconsider its approval of the designation

of the boundary for the “Wayne County” nonattainment area in Michigan in light of the

information included in and attached to this Petition, which demonstrates that DTE Energy

Company’s (“DTE’s”) coal-fired power plant in adjacent Monroe County (the “Monroe Coal

Plant”), contributes to the monitor that measures ambient air concentrations in excess of the onehour SO2 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (“NAAQS”) in Wayne County.

This change would result in a modest extension of the nonattainment boundary to

properly include the largest nearby source of SO2 emissions among those sources that will be

responsible under the CAA to reduce SO2 emissions to bring the area into attainment with the

SO2 NAAQS and replace an arbitrary boundary based on a rough estimate with a boundary
- 2 -

supported by more reliable new information and an accepted methodology that considers the

influence of weather.

INTRODUCTION

The Monroe Coal Plant is one of the largest sources of SO2 in the State of Michigan (and

the second largest coal-fired power plant in the nation). It is located only 31 miles from the

Southwestern High School (“SWHS”) monitor that EPA has used as its basis for finding portions

of Wayne County, Michigan in nonattainment with the SO2 NAAQS (the “Wayne County

nonattainment area”). EPA recognized in its Final Technical Support Document (“Final TSD”)1

that the Monroe Coal Plant is a significant source of SO2 adjacent to Wayne County.

Historically, EPA has extended nonattainment boundaries over state objections to include nearby

power plants on the basis that they contribute to the ambient air quality deficiency of the adjacent

area.

2 U. S. Steel asked that EPA apply this same approach to expand Michigan’s proposed

nonattainment boundaries to bring the portion of Monroe County containing the Monroe Coal

Plant within the nonattainment area.3

EPA nonetheless approved boundaries that excluded the Monroe Coal Plant based on

what the agency described as a “rough estimate” that the power plant’s emissions had declined

sufficiently to mitigate its contribution to the nonattaining monitor given its distance from the

monitor.4EPA’s “emissions divided by distance” methodology did not consider the effect of

weather, seasonal variations, stack height, or the velocity and temperature of emissions from the

stack – the factors that are used to more reliably predict the transport of emissions for estimating

1

Final Technical Support Document, July 2013, Michigan First Round of Nonattainment Area Designations for the

2010 SO2 Primary NAAQS, prepared by the Region 5 USEPA, EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0233-0312, at 6 (“Monroe

County has a power plant with by far the most emissions of any facility in the area. . . .”).

2

See, e.g., Air Quality Designations for the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality

Standards, 74 Fed. Reg. 58688 (November 13, 2009).

3 Comment submitted by David W. Hacker, General Attorney-Environmental, United States Steel Corporation,

EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0233-0249 (March 18, 2013).

4

Final TSD at 7.
- 3 -

source contributions to the monitor. EPA’s rough estimate methodology, when applied

consistently to all nearby sources, does not support the nonattainment boundary determination.

In the Air Modeling Summary attached hereto as Attachment A, the assumed contribution from

the Monroe Coal Plant is greater than the contribution from most of the sources included in

the nonattainment area. Since EPA has determined these other sources belong in the

nonattainment area, EPA’s “emissions/distance” methodology also supports extending the

nonattainment area to include the Monroe Coal Plant.

Additional support is provided by new air dispersion modeling results presented with this

Petition for Reconsideration and attached hereto as Attachment B. Specifically, modeling runs

using both AERMOD and CALPUFF (both well-accepted models approved by EPA for purposes

of predicting ambient air contributions from a designated source) show that a straight-line

emissions/distance calculation does not accurately reflect the SO2 dispersion patterns in the

Wayne County area. The air dispersion models account for the unique weather patterns adjacent

to the significant water bodies (Lake Erie, the Detroit River, and Lake St. Clair) that affect the

transport of the Monroe Coal Plant’s emissions into Wayne County. These models show that

current emissions from the Monroe Coal Plant clearly contribute to the SO2 levels monitored at

the nearby SWHS monitor. The models also demonstrate the determination of the current

boundary for the nonattainment area is arbitrary because the contributions to the SWHS monitor

from the Monroe Coal Plant are the same or higher than the contributions of DTE’s Trenton

Channel Power Plant, a source included in the current non-attainment area, 90% of the time. See

infra at 15, Table 2.

As these new modeling data were not reasonably available during the comment period

and they demonstrate a material flaw in the methodology EPA employed in excluding the
- 4 -

Monroe Coal Plant from the Wayne County nonattainment area, EPA has a statutory obligation

to reconsider its final rulemaking in light of the attached data. U. S. Steel further respectfully

requests that, in light of this new data, EPA’s reconsideration should include initiation of a

rulemaking to extend the boundaries of the Wayne County nonattainment area to include those

portions of Monroe County containing the Monroe Coal Plant and grant an administrative stay of

the existing rulemaking pending reconsideration to ensure that the nonattainment boundaries are

corrected and lawfully established before Michigan expends SIP development resources on an

arbitrary subset of the sources contributing to nonattainment in this area.

BACKGROUND

A. Statutory Framework

The CAA requires EPA to issue NAAQS “for each air pollutant that cause[s] or

contribute[s] to air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or

welfare [and] the presence of which in the ambient air results from numerous or diverse mobile

or stationary sources.” North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896, 901 (D.C. Cir. 2008) (quoting 42

U.S.C. § 7408(a)(1)(A), (B); alterations in original). Within two years of development of a

NAAQS (extendable by up to an additional year), EPA is required to designate areas as

“attainment,” “nonattainment,” or “unclassifiable.” 42 U.S.C. § 7407.

Pursuant to CAA § 107, an area is to be designated as “nonattainment” when it “does not

meet . . . [a] national primary or secondary ambient air quality standard” or when it “contributes

to ambient air quality in a nearby area that does not meet” a national primary or secondary

ambient air quality standard. 42 U.S.C. § 7407(d)(1)(A)(i). States have one year following

development of a NAAQS to make recommendations for this designation, after which EPA is

required to make any necessary changes before issuing a final decision on designations. Id. at

§ 7407(d)(1)(B). As EPA has stated, a change for this purpose is “necessary” when the
- 5 -

designation “did not meet the statutory requirement or were otherwise inconsistent with the facts

or analysis deemed appropriate by the EPA.” Air Quality Designations for the 2010 Sulfur

Dioxide (SO2) Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard, 78 Fed. Reg. 47191, 47194

(August 5, 2013) (“Final Rule”).

A designation of nonattainment confers significant obligations on the affected state,

including the obligation to develop a SIP that will bring nonattainment areas into attainment “as

expeditiously as practicable but no later than 5 years from the date of the nonattainment

designation.” 42 U.S.C. § 7514(a). This SIP must be submitted to EPA within 18 months after

the designation and contain provisions “for the implementation of all reasonably available

control measures as expeditiously as practicable (including such reductions in emissions from

existing sources in the area as may be obtained through the adoption, at a minimum, of

reasonably available control technology) and shall provide for attainment of the national primary

ambient air quality standards.” Id. at § 7502(c)(1) (emphasis added); id. at § 7514(a) (modifying

the time to submit a SIP to 18 months). Moreover, while a SIP must include an emissions

inventory and may include enforceable inventory reductions in the “pipeline,” a state is only

required to analyze “all sources of the relevant pollutant or pollutants in such area.” Id. at

§ 7502(c)(3) (emphasis added). In other words, if a significant contributing source is left outside

the nonattainment area, it may also be left outside of the SIP and excused from the required

analysis of reasonable emission reductions that can be mandated in the SIP to achieve

compliance with the NAAQS.

It is therefore imperative that designations encompass all sources within the state

contributing to nonattainment, not only to comply with the statutory requirements of the CAA

but to ensure that sources within the designated nonattainment area are not overburdened with a
- 6 -

disproportionate obligation to reduce emissions to compensate for contributions to a monitor

from sources left outside the nonattainment area.

B. The Final Rule

On June 22, 2012, EPA issued a revised primary NAAQS for SO2, replacing the thenexisting 24-hour and annual SO2 NAAQS for a new 1-hour SO2 standard of 75 parts per billion

(ppb), based on the 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of 1-hour daily maximum

concentrations. Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard for Sulfur Dioxide, 75 Fed. Reg.

35520 (June 22, 2010). The State of Michigan submitted its proposed nonattainment boundaries

to EPA on June 1, 2011. The letter from Dan Wyant, Director, Michigan Department of

Environmental Quality, to Susan Hedman, Regional Administrator, USEPA Region 5, providing

recommendations for the boundaries of areas in Michigan attaining and not attaining the 2010

SO2 NAAQS, EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0233-0057 (June 1, 2011), included a recommendation for a

Wayne County nonattainment area boundary terminating on the south at the border between

Wayne and Monroe Counties, omitting the largest nearby source of SO2. On August 5, 2013,

EPA issued its Final Rule adopting the Wayne County boundary without modification,

identifying the boundary limits as:

The area bounded on the east by the Michigan-Ontario border, on the south by the

Wayne County-Monroe County border, on the west by interstate 75 north to

Southfield Road, Southfield Road to interstate 94, and interstate 94 north to

Michigan Avenue, and on the north by Michigan Avenue to Woodward Avenue

and a line on Woodward Avenue extended to the Michigan-Ontario border.

Final Rule, 78 Fed. Reg. at 47201.

EPA’s Final TSD recognized that “Monroe County has a power plant with by far the

most emissions of any facility in the area based on the NEI08V3.”5Final TSD at 6 (emphasis

added). EPA nonetheless excluded the Monroe Coal Plant from the Wayne County

5

2008 National Emissions Inventory emissions data (“NEI08V3”).
- 7 -

nonattainment area by noting that “this facility installed wet limestone scrubbing systems on two

of its four units in 2009, reducing SO2 emissions from the 2008 level of 118,382 tons to a 2010

level of 47,608 tons.” Final TSD at 7. Given “this decline in emissions, and the distance of the

facility from the monitor,” EPA concluded that “the Monroe plant is likely to have significantly

less impact on the monitor’s design value than sources in Wayne County that are much closer to

the violating monitor.” Id. EPA did not complete its analysis, however, by deciding whether,

even with lowered emissions, the Monroe Coal Plant still contributes to the ambient air quality at

the SWHS monitor.

Even accepting the emissions reductions associated with installing wet scrubbers on two

of the Monroe Coal Plant’s four units, the Monroe Coal Plant remains the largest source of SO2

in both Wayne County and Monroe County, emitting over 72% more SO2 than the second largest

source in either county6and more than 65% of the total SO2 emissions evaluated by EPA for

both counties combined.7EPA did not estimate the impact of the Monroe Coal Plant’s emissions

on the SWHS monitor further, however, stating instead that, based on the Monroe Coal Plant’s

emissions reduction and distance, EPA was “not yet prepared to conclude that the emissions

from [the Monroe Coal Plant] contribute to the monitored violation. . . .” Id. at 7. EPA must

conclude this analysis to properly establish the nonattainment boundaries and the new

information provided with this petition justify expanding those boundaries to include the Monroe

Coal Plant.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

CAA § 307(d)(7)(B) provides, in pertinent part, that, if a person raising an objection to a

promulgated rule can “demonstrate to the Administrator that it was impracticable to raise such

6 The second largest source identified in EPA’s Final TSD is DTE’s Trenton Channel Power Plant, listed at 27,622

tons SO2 in the NEI08V3. See Final TSD at 6, Table 3.

7

See id.
- 8 -

objection within [the time provided for public comment] or if the grounds for such objection

arose after the period for public comment (but within the time specified for judicial review) and

if such objection is of central relevance to the outcome of the rule, the Administrator shall

convene a proceeding for reconsideration of the rule and provide the same procedural rights as

would have been afforded had the information been available at the time the rule was proposed.”

42 U.S.C. § 7607(d)(7)(B) (emphasis added).

If the statutory requirements for reconsideration are met, EPA lacks discretion to decline

a petition. See Coalition for Responsible Regulation, Inc. v. EPA, 684 F.3d 102, 125 (D.C. Cir.

2012) (“EPA is required to convene a proceeding for reconsideration of a rule if a party raising

an objection to the rule ‘can demonstrate to the Administrator that it was impracticable to raise

such objection within such time or if the grounds for such objection arose after the period for

public comment (but within the time specified for judicial review) and if such objection is of

central relevance to the outcome of the rule.’”) (quoting 42 U.S.C. § 7607(d)(7)(B); emphasis

added).

A. U. S. Steel’s petition is based on new information that was impracticable to

obtain during the public comment period.

The grounds for U. S. Steel’s petition arise from new information, including modeling

data, not available during the public comment period. The attached modeling analysis was not

complete until the end of September 2013, well past the public comment period, which closed

April 8, 2013.

Moreover, it would have been impracticable for U. S. Steel to obtain similar information

during the public comment period. EPA did not publish its recommended boundary for the

Wayne County nonattainment area and draft technical support for its boundary determinations

until February 15, 2013. See EPA Responses to State and Tribal 2010 Sulfur Dioxide
- 9 -

Designation Recommendations: Notice of Availability and Public Comment Period, 78 Fed. Reg.

11124 (February 15, 2013). In that publication, EPA stated its position that “the Monroe plant is

likely to have significantly less impact than sources in Wayne County that are much closer to the

violating monitor, so that the plant may reasonably be judged not to be a significant nearby

contributor to the violations.” Preliminary Technical Support Document, February 2013,

Michigan Preliminary Nonattainment Area Designations for the 2010 SO2 Primary NAAQS,

prepared by the Region 5 USEPA, at 7, EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0233-0177 (February 2013)

(“Draft TSD”). EPA, however, provided no analysis to support this conclusion. The only

information EPA provided was that the Monroe Coal Plant reduced SO2 emissions from 118,382

tons in 2008 to 47,608 tons in 2010 and that it is located 54 km8from the SWHS monitor. Id. at

6-7.

U. S. Steel provided timely comments on EPA’s recommendation and Draft TSD, noting

that the information EPA had provided did not support its conclusion that the Wayne County

nonattainment boundary should exclude the Monroe Coal Plant. U. S. Steel referred EPA to an

existing analysis of the data—performed by DTE—that showed that the Monroe Coal Plant was

contributing to the SWHS monitor’s measured SO2 levels, even at a distance of 54 km and even

after reducing annual SO2 emissions to 47,608 tons by 2010. U. S. Steel Comments on EPA

Responses to State and Tribal 2010 Sulfur Dioxide Designation Recommendations; Notice of

Availability and Public Comment Period, EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-0233-0249 (March 18, 2013)

(“U. S. Steel’s Comments”).

U. S. Steel had no reasonable basis to expect that EPA would reject DTE’s own analysis,

and U. S. Steel reasonably concluded that EPA would, if not adopt DTE’s analysis, conduct its

8 As noted below, EPA’s 54 km number overstates that distance by about 4.1 km.
- 10 -

own investigation into the impact of the Monroe Coal Plant’s emissions on the SWHS monitor

consistent with EPA’s own guidance and past practices in other NAAQS designations.

It was not until EPA published its response to comments and final rule on August 5, 2013,

well past the April 8, 2013, close of public comment, that EPA announced its intention to both

reject DTE’s analysis and decline to perform its own analysis of whether the Monroe Coal

Plant’s SO2 emissions contribute to nonattainment in Wayne County.

B. U. S. Steel’s objection is of central relevance to the Final Rule.

The issues raised by U. S. Steel go to the heart of EPA’s designation of boundaries for

the Wayne County nonattainment area and are therefore of “central relevance” to the outcome of

EPA’s Final Rule.

EPA has stated that it considers an objection to be of “central relevance” “if it provides

substantial support for the argument that the regulation should be revised.” Coalition for

Responsible Regulation, 684 F.3d at 125 (quoting EPA’s Denial of the Petitions to Reconsider

the Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases under Section 202(a)

of the Clean Air Act, 75 Fed. Reg. 49556, 49561 (August 13, 2010)).

The CAA requires that a nonattainment boundary include both areas that are in

nonattainment and any area that “contributes to ambient air quality in a nearby area that does not

meet” the NAAQS. 42 U.S.C. § 7407. The newly-available modeling data provided in

Attachment B shows that EPA’s initial “rough estimate” assumptions about the contributions of

the Monroe Coal Plant to Wayne County’s nonattainment status were incorrect and that

emissions from Monroe County contribute to the SO2 levels measured at the SWHS monitor.

These new data require a different conclusion from EPA on the nonattainment boundaries for

Wayne County to be consistent with the CAA.
- 11 -

C. U. S. Steel’s petition is timely.

The CAA provides that the grounds for an objection to a final rule are timely if they arose

“within the time specified for judicial review.” 42 U.S.C. § 7607(d)(7)(B). The deadline for

judicial review is October 4, 2013. U. S. Steel’s petition relies on new information developed in

September 2013, well within the time provided for in CAA § 307. U. S. Steel’s petition is

therefore timely.

ANALYSIS

A. EPA must reconsider its Wayne County nonattainment designation because

new data demonstrate that EPA’s rough contribution analysis was incorrect.

The modeling data now available show that EPA’s “rough estimate” approach to

determining the contribution of the Monroe Coal Plant to Wayne County’s nonattainment status

was incorrect and resulted in arbitrary boundaries for the nonattainment area.

EPA’s initial analysis of the contribution of the Monroe Coal Plant supported including it

within the nonattainment boundary. EPA stated that, based on the available 2008 emissions data,

the Monroe Coal Plant should have had “less impact than DTE’s River Rouge plant and USS’

Great Lakes Works9but more impact on the violating monitor’s design value than other sources

in the area.” Final TSD at 6. In other words, despite EPA treating the Monroe Coal Plant as 54

kilometers away, EPA’s own estimates indicated the Monroe Coal Plant was the third largest

contributor to monitored values at the SWHS monitor in 2008. EPA did not provide any

calculations to support this determination.

EPA discounted the contribution of the Monroe Coal Plant to the current readings at the

SWHS monitor because of a reduction in SO2 emissions from 118,382 tons in 2008 to 47,608

tons in 2010 following the installation of wet limestone scrubbers on two units in 2009. Id. at 7.

9 EPA’s estimation of Great Lakes Works’ SO2 emissions for this comparison includes SO2 generated by EES Coke,

a company not affiliated with U. S. Steel.
- 12 -

Without providing any further analysis, EPA concluded that the Monroe Coal Plant’s reduced

emission rate and the distance to the SWHS monitor justified excluding it from the

nonattainment area. Applying EPA’s rough “emissions divided by distance” methodology to the

rest of the SO2 sources listed in EPA’s TSD, however, the Monroe Coal Plant remains the fourth

largest contributor to the SWHS monitor after its emission reduction in 2010, over five times

larger than the Wyandotte Municipal Power Plant that EPA chose to include within the

nonattainment area. Applying EPA’s methodology consistently, the Monroe Coal Plant would

have to be considered a nearby source contributing to nonattainment.

Table 1. Emissions Divided by

Distance10

Source Emissions

(ppb)

Distance

(km)

Emissions

(ppb)/Distance

(km)

DTE River Rouge 14,491 3 4,830.33

USS Great Lakes 6,75511 2 3,377.50

DTE Trenton Channel 27,622 21 1,315.33

DTE Monroe 47,608 5412 881.63

Wyandotte Muni 1,793 11 163.00

Carmeuse Lime/River

Rouge 395 3 131.67

Severstal 558 5 111.60

Dearborn Industrial

Generation 401 4 100.25

Further, EPA’s “emissions/distance” method was inappropriate to use in this context

because it does not address the significant impacts on emissions concentrations from geography

10 For all except Monroe, emissions and distance numbers obtained from Table 3 of EPA’s Final TSD. Monroe

emissions data based on 2010 emission level provided in Final TSD at 7.

11 EPA’s total for Great Lakes Works includes SO2 emissions generated by EES Coke, a company not affiliated with

U. S. Steel.

12 While Table 1 uses the numbers provided by EPA, the distance from Monroe to the SWHS monitor as measured

by their coordinates is only 49.9 km, see Attachment A at 2, which if used would further increase Monroe’s ratio to

just over 954 ppb/km.
- 13 -

and meteorology, making it inconsistent with EPA’s published guidance. See Memorandum

from Stephen D. Page, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards to Regional Air

Division Directors, Regions I-X, re: Area Designations for the 2010 Revised Primary Sulfur

Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standards (March 24, 2011) (“EPA’s Designation

Guidance”). In that guidance, EPA sets forth a five-factor approach to designating

nonattainment areas: (1) air quality data; (2) emissions-related data (location of sources and

potential contribution to ambient SO2 concentrations); (3) meteorology (weather/transport

patterns); (4) geography/topography (mountain ranger or other air basin boundaries); and (5)

jurisdictional boundaries (e.g., counties, air districts, pre-existing nonattainment areas,

reservations, metropolitan planning organizations). See EPA’s Designation Guidance at

Attachment 2, p. 1. As EPA’s Designation Guidance states:

We intend to evaluate meteorological data to help determine how weather conditions,

including wind speed and direction, affect the plume of sources contributing to

ambient SO2 concentrations. Where feasible, we would consider results from sourceoriented dispersion modeling.

. . . .

We intend to examine the physical features of the land that might affect the

distribution of SO2 over an area. Mountains or other physical features may affect the

distribution of emissions, and may help define boundaries.

Id. at Attachment 2, p.2.

EPA’s analysis of the Monroe Coal Plant includes a discussion of the emissions-related

data associated with its historic emissions and current emissions based on existing emissions

controls. Once EPA established that the Monroe Coal Plant’s current emissions were

approximately 47,608 tons of SO2 per year, however, EPA did not go on to evaluate whether the

local geography (which includes both Lake Erie and the Detroit River) or local meteorology

(which includes wind patterns that distinctly funnel emissions from Monroe County along Lake
- 14 -

Erie and up the Detroit River toward Lake St. Claire). See Attachment A at 3-5. As required by

EPA’s guidance, the impact of these factors on pollutant dispersion patterns from the Monroe

Coal Plant had to be considered. The new information provided by U. S. Steel presents the

opportunity to use a more refined approach to predicting the ambient impact of emissions from

the Monroe Coal Plant on the SWHS monitor. The modeling results provided in Attachment B

invalidates EPA’s “emissions divided by distance” basis for excluding the Monroe Coal Plant. If,

for example, such a relationship existed between Monroe County and the SWHS monitor, the

Monroe Coal Plant would necessarily have consistently less contribution at the SWHS monitor

than DTE’s Trenton Power Plant, which emits 58% of the SO2 generated by the Monroe Coal

Plant at only 39% of the distance and therefore has a higher emissions/distance ratio, as exhibited

in Table 1 above. Use of both AERMOD and CALPUFF, on the other hand, consistently show

that the opposite is true for a significant portion of the year.
- 15 -

Table 2. Modeled Monroe and Trenton Channel Impacts on the SWHS Monitor13

Model Run

Monroe Impacts > Trenton Channel Impacts

All Modeled

Hours

Only Hours with Pairs of

Predicted Impacts >0.1 ppb

# of

Hours % # of Hours %

2010 CALPUFF 7882 90.0 422 32.5

2011 CALPUFF 7788 88.9 416 30.0

2010 AERMOD- Grosse Ile 6568 88.2 203 18.8

2011 AERMOD- Grosse Ile 6566 88.5 275 24.4

2010 AERMOD- Detroit Metro 6985 91.1 273 28.5

2011 AERMOD- Detroit Metro 7069 91.9 374 37.6

2010 AERMOD- Custer Airport 6200 91.1 259 29.9

2011 AERMOD- Custer Airport 6424 92.7 314 38.2

As the figures in Table 2 show, when considering the effect of weather, seasonal

variations, and actual stack emissions characteristics using EPA’s approved AERMOD or

CALPUFF models, the Monroe Coal Plant has a larger impact than Trenton approximately 30%

of the time and an equivalent or greater impact than Trenton 90% of the time. These results

demonstrate that, in using the contribution of the Monroe Coal Plant to the SWHS monitor as an

example, emissions from Monroe County to Wayne County do not obey EPA’s simple

emissions/distance relationship. EPA’s emissions/distance estimate, therefore, should not have

been used to support excluding the Monroe Coal Plant from the Wayne County nonattainment

area.

13 Table derived from Air Modeling Analysis, Attachment A at 7, Table 5.
- 16 -

B. The new data provided by U. S. Steel show that the Monroe Coal Plant has a

significant impact on Wayne County’s nonattaining monitor.

The SWHS monitor measured ambient SO2 concentrations above 75 ppb on 54 days in

2010 and 2011. Michigan attributes approximately 20 ppb to mobile sources and other

background contributions. If the stationary sources in the area contribute more than 55 ppb of

SO2 to the monitor, an exceedance of the 75 ppb NAAQS is expected. Air dispersion models are

validated based on how well they predict maximum values – not how well they predict the hour

when that maximum value will occur. EPA has confirmed, however, that AERMOD and

CALPUFF models can identify maximum contributions from a source with relative accuracy.

As discussed further in the Air Modeling Analysis provided in Attachment A, both AERMOD

and CALPUFF models identify a maximum contribution from the Monroe Coal Plant at the

SWHS monitor that consumes a significant portion of the 55 ppb of SO2 available for stationary

sources at the monitor.

Specifically, CALPUFF and AERMOD models were run on both 2010 and 2011 actual

hourly emissions data for the Monroe Coal Plant (in other words, data from time periods after the

installation of wet flue gas desulfurization on two of its four units), using actual meteorological

data from three different airports, Detroit Metropolitan Airport, Grosse Ile Airport, and Custer

Airport. As the following tables show, the modeling results consistently indicate that the

Monroe Coal Plant contributes a maximum hourly SO2 concentration of between 10-16 parts per

billion of SO2 at the SWHS monitor in each modeling run, even after the Monroe Coal Plant

reduced its annual SO2 emissions from over 118,000 tons to approximately 47,000 tons.
- 17 -

Table 3. Summary of 2010 and 2011

Maximum 1-Hour Model Predictions

Model Run

Monroe Max SO2

(ppb)

CALPUFF 16.35

AERMOD- Detroit Metro 12.75

AERMOD- Grosse Ile 11.57

AERMOD- Monroe County 13.23

Table 4. Summary of 2011 Maximum 1-Hour

Model Predictions

Model Run

Monroe Max SO2

(ppb)

CALPUFF 10.61

AERMOD- Detroit Metro 12.08

AERMOD- Grosse Ile 11.33

AERMOD- Monroe County 12.90

Factoring in a conservative background SO2 level of 20 ppb, 14 actual emissions

contributed by the Monroe Coal Plant consume up to 30% of the available emissions for all of

the stationary sources in the Detroit area contributing to this Wayne County monitor. If the

Monroe Coal Plant were to emit at the allowable SO2 level in its air permit,15 the impact on the

monitor would be even greater.

14 MDEQ itself, for example, applied a 63 microgram per cubic meter background SO2 concentration in its recent

evaluation of a Monroe permit, which translates to approximately 24 ppb SO2. Air Dispersion Analysis Summary,

Strategy Development Unit, Air Quality Division, Michigan Department of Environment Quality, from Julie

Brunner, Permit Section, to Jim Haywood, Strategy Development Unit, at 3 (December 13, 2011) (attached hereto as

Attachment C).

15 See Monroe Permits (attached hereto as Attachment D).
- 18 -

Figure 1. Comparison of Maximum Predicted 1-Hour SO2 Concentrations for Monroe Stack

Emissions at the SW High School Monitor for 2010 and 2011 Modeling Analyses with the

Wayne County Background Level and US EPA NAAQS1

2010 2011 2010 2011 2010 2011 2010 2011

1-H

our S

O2 C

onc. (p

p

b)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Wayne County Background

Maximum Predicted Monroe Impacts

Remaining SO2Increment Available for All Other Sources

US EPA 1-Hour SO2 NAAQS

CALPUFF AERMOD (DTW) AERMOD (ONZ) AERMOD (TTF)

C. EPA has extended nonattainment boundaries to nearby sources that have

demonstrated far less impact than the Monroe Coal Plant.

EPA’s decision to exclude the Monroe Coal Plant from the Wayne County nonattainment

area is a departure from EPA’s established practice of including significant emission sources,

even at distances up to 60 miles, within the boundaries of a monitored nonattainment area absent

a clear explanation for why their emissions are not contributing to nonattainment.

1. Indiana County Pennsylvania Non-Attainment Area

In the current Final Rule, EPA rejected the State of Pennsylvania’s recommendation that

the Indiana County SO2 Nonattainment Area exclude the Keystone Power Station in Armstrong,

Pennsylvania (approximately 37.1 km from the monitor in Indiana County). Final Technical
- 19 -

Support Document, July 2013, Pennsylvania First Round of Nonattainment Area Designations

for the 2010 SO2 Primary NAAQS, prepared by the Region 3 USEPA, EPA-HQ-OAR-2012-

0233-0321 (July 2013) (“Pennsylvania TSD”). Like the Monroe Coal Plant, the Keystone Power

Station had installed wet scrubbers in 2009 and, according to EPA’s Pennsylvania TSD, emitted

only 29,420 tons per year of SO2 in 2012 (less than 62% of the emissions calculated for the

Monroe Coal Plant in the Final TSD). See Pennsylvania TSD at 27, Table 11. EPA nonetheless

included the portion of Armstrong County containing the Keystone Power Station in its final

nonattainment area for Indiana County, stating that “[t]he nearby Keystone power plant in

neighboring Armstrong County likely contributes to nonattainment in Indiana County. . . .” Id.

at 31.

2. The Charleston and Huntington-Ashland Nonattainment Areas

In its designation of the boundaries of the Charleston and Huntington-Ashland

Nonattainment Areas for the PM2.5 annual NAAQS,16 EPA rejected the State of West Virginia’s

recommendation for a smaller nonattainment area designation in favor of expanding the

boundaries to include parts of Mason County largely because of the emissions from two power

plants, Mountaineer and Philip Sporn, both over 40 miles away. See Technical Support

Document for 2006 24-Hour PM2.5 NAAQS Designations, Chapter 4.0 “Technical Analyses of

Individual Nonattainment Areas” Section 4.3 “Region 3 Nonattainment Areas” Section 4.3.4

“West Virginia,” EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0562-0422 (November 13, 2009).

16 Air Quality Designations for the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards, 74

Fed. Reg. 58688 (November 13, 2009).
- 20 -

3. The Birmingham Nonattainment Area

In its designation of the boundaries of the Birmingham Nonattainment Area for the PM2.5

24-hour NAAQS, 17 EPA rejected the State of Alabama’s recommendation for a smaller

nonattainment area designation in favor of expanding the boundaries to include portions of

Walker County (despite a Contributing Emissions Score only 17% that of Jefferson County)

because of the Gorgas Power Plant, approximately 25 miles away. See Technical Support

Document for 2006 24-Hour PM2.5 NAAQS Designations, Chapter 4.0 “Technical Analyses of

Individual Nonattainment Areas” Section 4.4 “Region 4 Nonattainment Areas” Part 4.4.1

“Alabama,” EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0562-0423 (November 2009).

4. The Columbus Nonattainment Area

In its designation of the boundaries of the Columbus nonattainment area for the annual

PM2.5 NAAQS,18 EPA rejected the State of Ohio’s recommendation for a smaller nonattainment

area designation in favor of expanding the boundaries to include portions of Coshocton County

specifically to embrace the Conesville Power Plant in Franklin Township, over 60 miles from

Columbus, despite Coshocton County having total emissions 35% lower than Franklin County.

See EPA Technical Support Document for PM-2.5 Designations, Chapter 6 Region 5, EPA-HQOAR-2003-0061-0616 (December 2004).

5. Dallas-Fort Worth Nonattainment Area

In its designation of the Dallas-Fort Worth nonattainment area for the 2008 ozone

NAAQS,19 EPA rejected the State of Texas’ attainment designation for Wise County based on a

modeled maximum impact on nearby monitors of only 5 ppb (roughly 6% of the 75 ppb

17 Air Quality Designations for the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards, 74

Fed. Reg. 58688.

18 Air Quality Designations and Classifications for the Fine Particles (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality

Standards, 70 Fed. Reg. 944 (January 5, 2005).

19 Air Quality Designations for the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards; Final Rule, 77 Fed. Reg.

30088 (May 21, 2012).
- 21 -

standard). See Region 6 Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas Final Technical Support Document (TSD),

EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0476-0673 (May 2012). As EPA stated, “[o]ften in attainment

demonstration modeling, controlling of sources is evaluated and results in only a few tenths of a

ppb change, therefore we used a 1% of the standard cut point for days where we would consider

Hood or Wise County’s impact to be significant.” Id. at 17 (emphasis added).

6. Chicago-Naperville Non-Attainment Area

Similarly, in its designation of the Chicago-Naperville nonattainment area for the 2008

ozone NAAQS, EPA adopted a non-attainment boundary including Lake County, Indiana and

Porter County, Indiana, based on a modeled contribution from those counties of only 4 ppb and 2

ppb respectively at the Zion, Illinois monitor over 60 miles away. See Region 5 - ChicagoNaperville, IL-IN-WI Final TSD, EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0476-0684, at 18 (June 2012).

These determinations to extend the nonattainment boundaries to include nearby power

plants were consistent with EPA’s Designation Guidance. EPA acknowledges that modeling

may be used to support nonattainment boundary designations by identifying the nearby sources

contributing to the nonattaining monitor. The nominal distance for applying AERMOD is 50 km.

Id. at Attachment 3, p. 5. The distance between the coordinates for Monroe Coal Plant and the

SWHS monitor measures 49.9 km, making AERMOD an appropriate model. In the TSD,

however, EPA indicates the distance between the Monroe Coal Plant and the monitor is 54 km.

While we believe this overstates the distance, we also ran modeling using CALPUFF, which is a

model validated for distances greater than 50 km.

Even if EPA’s 54 km measurement were correct, however, EPA’s Designation Guidance

supports including the Monroe Coal Plant in modeling to determine the nonattainment

boundaries:
- 22 -

In some cases where large SO2 sources are scattered outside of the 50 km radius,

it may be necessary to extend the modeling domain beyond 50 km or conduct

multiple AERMOD modeling exercises with the overall region broken down to

several AERMOD runs covering different areas of the potential nonattainment

area.

Id. at Attachment 3, p. 5. As a result, it is consistent with EPA guidance and practice to examine

through modeling the effects of the Monroe Coal Plant’s current emissions on the SWHS

monitor and to consider the results of that modeling in setting the nonattainment boundaries.

The newly-available modeling data provided by U. S. Steel demonstrates both that, when

wind patterns and geography are considered, the Monroe Coal Plant clearly contributes to the

nonattainment status of the SWHS monitor. The maximum contribution from the Monroe Coal

Plant is far above the 1% standard used by EPA to determine a significant contribution in other

nonattainment designations. If one percent is enough to establish a significant contribution,

Monroe’s maximum contribution of over 20% (16 of 75 ppb) is certainly sufficient here. For

these reasons, EPA must reconsider its current designation for Wayne County and revise the

boundaries to include the portion of Monroe County containing DTE’s Monroe Coal Plant.

D. A stay of the rule pending reconsideration is appropriate.

EPA has broad statutory authority to delay the effective date of a regulation under the

CAA for up to three months. 42 U.S.C. § 7607(d)(7)(B). EPA may also extend the stay using its

authority under the Administrative Procedure Act to cover the entire rulemaking period.

The CAA itself sets no standard for granting a stay other than that a petition for

reconsideration itself has been granted. See id. At a minimum, however, a stay pending agency

reconsideration is proper when “an agency finds that justice so requires.” 5 U.S.C. § 705; see

also Ohio: Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans, 46 Fed. Reg. 8581, 8582 n.1

(January 27, 1981) (applying § 705 of the APA to petitions for reconsideration and stay under 42
- 23 -

U.S.C. § 7607(d)(7)(B)). Moreover, EPA has considered several factors in determining whether

a stay should apply, including:

a) Whether a stay will provide sufficient time to reconsider an agency action. See

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Categories:

Gasoline Distribution (Stage 1), 60 Fed. Reg. 62991 (December 8, 1994).

b) Whether a stay will prevent “undue hardship” and “possible harm” to the

requestor. See Standards of Performance for Petroleum Refineries, 73 Fed. Reg.

55751, 55752 (September 26, 2008); see also Protection of Stratospheric Ozone,

60 Fed. Reg. 24676, 24678 (May 9, 1995); National Emissions Standards for

Hazardous Air Pollutants, 57 Fed. Reg. 56877, 56878 (December 1, 1992).

c) The environmental impacts of a stay. See Protection of Stratospheric Ozone, 60

Fed. Reg. 24676, 24678 (May 9, 1995).

Justice requires that a stay be put in place while the agency completes reconsideration

and a corresponding rulemaking to correct the nonattainment boundary.

First, under the current rule, Michigan is required to propose a state implementation plan

within 18 months containing the emission reductions necessary to bring the SWHS monitor into

compliance. Issuance of the stay would ensure that Michigan was developing this plan based on

a boundary drawn using the best available information.

A stay would not hinder the State of Michigan’s ability to demonstrate attainment within

the required five-year timeframe. In fact, by including portions of Monroe County and the

Monroe Coal Plant in the nonattainment area, it is likely that the State of Michigan’s burden of

demonstrating attainment would be reduced.
- 24 -

Second, the current improper nonattainment area for Wayne County will have a direct

and undue impact on both U. S. Steel and the State of Michigan. As an identified source of SO2

emissions in the currently-drawn nonattainment area, some of the burden of achieving the

reductions needed to accomplish this result will be placed on U. S. Steel, which will need to take

action promptly in order to accommodate the deadlines Michigan is likely to impose to achieve

its own five-year compliance deadline.

If the Monroe Coal Plant is included in the Wayne County nonattainment area, on the

other hand, tens of thousands of tons of SO2 emission reductions would be available to help the

State demonstrate progress toward attainment in Wayne County. The Monroe Coal Plant has

already demonstrated on two of its four units that scrubbers are reasonably available to control

SO2 emissions at the plant. If included in the nonattainment area, the Monroe Coal Plant would

be required to install reasonably available controls on the remaining units thereby reducing

another 40,000 tons or more of SO2 emissions from the sources within the nonattainment area.

As the following figures indicate, this alone will reduce contributions to the SWHS monitor by

up to 12.8 ppb, which will contribute significantly to progress toward SO2 attainment at the

monitor and ensure that U. S. Steel and other sources within the Wayne County nonattainment

area are not forced to make extra SO2 emission reductions to compensate for the absence of the

Monroe Coal Plant from the sources in the area.
- 25 -

Figure 3. Trendline for Estimated Monroe Coal Plant Contribution to Max. 1-Hour SO2

Conc. (ppb) at the SW High School Monitor

Time Period

pre-2009 2010-2011 post-2014

M

a

x. 1-H

our S

O2 C

onc. (p

p

b)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35 Estimates Based on 2010-2011

CALPUFF Model Predictions and

Total SO2 Emissions

CALPUFF Model Prediction

31.1

13.5

0.7

Trends in Monroe Coal Plant Annual SO2 Emissions

Time Period

pre-2009 2010-2011 post-2014

Annual S

O2 E

missions (tons)

0.0

2.0e+4

4.0e+4

6.0e+4

8.0e+4

1.0e+5

1.2e+5

Reported SO2 Emissions

Estimated SO2 Emissions

111,677*

48,339

2,655**

* Average of 2004-2008 reported emissions

** Estimated assuming similar % reduction for Units 1 and 2 as observed for Units 3 and 4 (as

comparing the average of 2010-2011 controlled emissions to the average of 2004-2008

uncontrolled emissions)
- 26 -

Third, an administrative stay will have no appreciable impact on the environment. U. S.

Steel’s Petition for Reconsideration will not result in any increase in emissions. EPA’s timely

action on this Petition for Reconsideration will ensure that the boundaries for the nonattainment

designation can be corrected without significant delay in the implementation of the SO2

attainment plan for Wayne County. Rather, the stay will allow for a more equitable distribution

of the burden for achieving the SO2 reductions the State of Michigan must achieve to bring the

SWHS monitor into compliance with the revised SO2 NAAQS.

Since a stay will help alleviate significant burdens that the current nonattainment

designation will place on U. S. Steel and other sources in Wayne County, as well as have no

appreciably impact on the State of Michigan’s ability to achieve attainment in Wayne County

within the time prescribed by the CAA and will have no other adverse effect on the environment,

justice requires that EPA use its authority under § 307 of the CAA to stay the effective date of its

nonattainment designation for Wayne County for three months pending its reconsideration of the

attached new information and exercise its discretion under the APA to extend that stay to the

extent necessary to allow EPA sufficient time to evaluate the attached data and prepare a new

designation incorporating all nearby sources contributing to the current nonattainment status of

the SWHS monitor.

CONCLUSION

Given the lack of data supporting EPA’s exclusion of DTE’s Monroe Coal Plant from the

Wayne County nonattainment boundary and the current availability of modeling data showing

that the Monroe Coal Plant contributes to nonattainment at the Southwestern High School

monitor, EPA is obligated to reconsider its nonattainment area boundaries and, in light of this

newly-available modeling data, should extend the Wayne County nonattainment area to include

those portions of Monroe County containing the Monroe Coal Plant.

Attachment A: Air Modeling Summary

Attachment B: CALPUFF and AERMOD Modeling Data

Attachment C: MDEQ Air Dispersion Analysis Summary

Attachment D: Monroe Permits