Oxford Press, Sunday, March 15, 2009
Alleged emissions violations at SunCoke Energy's Haverhill, Ohio, facility have cast a shadow of doubt for some over the company's capability to operate responsibly at their new Middletown plant currently under construction.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency sent a notice of violation to SunCoke for allegedly emitting excess sulfur dioxide from its P901 Haverhill plant. The facility is similar to the one to open in Butler County.
The Environmental Review Appeals Commission, also known as ERAC, is an appellate review commission which is separate and distinct from the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. The Environmental Review Appeals Commission hears appeals pursuant to Chapter 3745 of the Ohio Revised Code. According to Section 3745.04 of the revised code:
...Any person who was a party to a proceeding before the Director may participate in an appeal to the Environmental Review Appeals Commission for an order vacating or modifying the action fo the Director of Environmental Protection or local Board of Health to perform an act. The Environmental Review Appeals Commission has exclusive original jurisdiction over any matter which may, under this section be brought before it...
The appeal shall be filed...within thirty days after notice of the action. [Emphasis Added].
According to Section 3745.07 of the Revised Code:
...If the Director issues, denies, modifies, revokes, or reviews a permit, license, or variance without issuing a proposed action, an officer of an agency of the state or of a political sub-division, acting in a representative capacity, or any person who would be aggrieved or adversely affected thereby, may appeal to the Environmental Review Appeals Commissioni, within thrity days of the issuance, denial, modification, revocation, or renewal. [emphasis added].
The Environmental Review Appeals Commission
Alexander J. Sagady & Associates
657 Spartan Avenue, East Lansing, MI 48823-3624
VIA EMAILED PDF FILE
August 19, 2008
Ms. Cheryl Newton, Director -Acting
Air and Radiation Division
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Region V
RE: Middletown [OH] Coke Company & Ohio EPA Division of Air Pollution Control -
Violation of Netting Requirements for a Draft Air Permit and Impermissible Minor
Source Permitting of a Major Stationary Source
Dear Ms. Newton:
We are writing on behalf of the Sierra Club of Ohio concerning the proposed Middletown Coke
Company Draft Air Permit to Install that has been published by the Ohio EPA. The public
comment period on the application and draft permit are presently running.
This communication is intended as an air pollution complaint against Middletown Coke Company
and the State of Ohio. The complaint is that those respondents have either applied for or plan to
approve a plainly impermissible and unlawful minor modification air permit to install for
Middletown Coke Company. In reality, what is planned here is the impermissible construction of a
major stationary source of emissions without the required major modification/source permit
covering both prevention of significant deterioration and nonattainment NSR program requirements.
Middletown Coke Company proposes 100 heat recovery coke ovens arranged in 3 batteries, along
with quenching, materials handling and other related operations at a site in Middletown, OH near
AK Steel. The Applicant is seeking a permit to install on the basis of the Applicant’s claim that the
proposed coke oven batteries would be a minor modification, net-out source.
FOR RELEASE: August 14, 2008
CONTACT: Heather Lauer, (614) 644-2160
Ohio EPA Offers Guidelines for Testifying at the Middletown Coke Hearing
PUBLIC NOTICE PUBLIC HEARING
Issuance Of Draft Air Pollution Permit-To-Install Middletown Coke
Company Issue Date: 7/18/2008
Permit Number: 14-06023
Permit Type: Initial installation
Permit Description: Heat Recovery Coke Plant - 100 Ovens.
Facility ID: 1409011031
Facility Location: Middletown Coke Company
7014 Hamilton Middletown Road,
Middletown, OH 45044
Facility Description: Iron and Steel Mills
May 2, 2008
To: Middletown City Council
From: Robert Snook
This is a summary of some of the 20 complaints that have been filed by nearby residents.
In addition the Haverhill Coke Plant has reported 46 violations from June 15, 2005 to
March 28, 2008.
1. Complaint No. 2005-20: Mitchell Wheeler said the 3 stacks closest US 52 had 20-30
ft. flames. He said when he walked outside his eyes were burning. There was black
smoke at the top of the flame, trailing off. He said they have a pressure problem and