sRI&zSaltRiverMaterialsGroup100%AMERlNovember3,2014SentEmail(.pdO.HandDelivered,andCertifiedMail<ReturnReceiptRequested)TheHonorableGinaMcCarthyAdministrator,U.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgencyOfficeoftheAdministrator,MailCode1101A1200PennsylvaniaAvenue,N.W.Washington,DC20460Email:mccarthy.gina@epa.govRe:DOCKETIDNo.EPA-R09-0AR-2013-0588PhoenixCementCompanyPetitionforAdministrativeReconsiderationandStay:"PromulgationofAirQualityImplementationPlans;Arizona;RegionalHazeandInterstateVisibilityTransportFederalImplementationPlan;FinalRule,"79Fed.Reg.52420(Sept.3,2014)DearAdministratorMcCarthy:PhoenixCementCompany("PCC"),anenterprisedivisionoftheSaltRiverPima-MaricopaIndianCommunity,respectfullyrequeststhattheEPAreconsiderandstay40C.F.R.§52.145(k)(6)andAppendixAoftheabove-referencedregionalhazerule("RHR")federalimplementationplan("FIP"),whichrequire"optimization"ofcertainoperatingparametersatPCC'scementmanufacturingfacilityinClarkdale,Arizona("Facility"):1.TheOptimizationRequirementsTheFIP,at40C.F.R.§52.145(k)(6)andAppendixA,imposesonPCC"controltechnologydemonstrationrequirements"thatostensiblyareintendedtooptimizethelbsnitrogenoxides("NOx")pertonofclinkerproducedemissionlimitation,whichtheFIP,at§52.145(3),capsat2.12lbs/tonfortheFacility,basedontheFIP'sconclusionthatselectivenon-catalyticreductiontechnology("SNCR")isrequiredattheFacilityinordertosatisfytheregionalhazestatutesandrules,42U.S.C.§7491,40C.F.R.§51.308.The"optimization"requirementsincludethefollowingelements:(i)PCCmustsubmittotheEPAtheSNCRdesignfortheFacility,priorto"commencingconstruction"oftheSNCRsystem;(ii)PCC'sSNCRdesignmustsatisfycertaindesignelementsindicatedintherule;(iii)PCCmustcollect180daysworthofbaselineemissionsandoperationaldata,specifiedintherule,beforecommencingcontinuousoperationoftheSNCRsystem("BaselineDataCollectionPeriod");(iv)PCCmustsubmittotheEPAawrittenprotocolforoptimizingtheSNCRsystem'scapabilities,consistingofincrementaladjustmentsoftheSNCRsystems'operatingparameters,specifiedintherule,andcollectionofcontinuousemissionsmonitoringsystem("CEMS")data,toassesstheeffectivenessoftheadjustments;(v)PCCmustoperatetheSNCRsystemaccordingtotheprotocolforaminimumof165daysandcollectCEMSdatatoassesstheeffectivenessoftheSASALTRIVER"SAND6RDCMTel:48Q-85Q-5757•Fax:480-850-5758•8800EChaparralRd•Ste155•Scottsdale,AZ85250HonorableGinaMcCarthy,Administrator,U.S.EPAPhoenixCementCompanyPetitionforReconsiderationandStayofRHRFIPNovember3,2014Page2operatingparametersinreducingNOxemissions("OptimizationPeriod");(vi)PCCmustsubmittotheEPAareportthatdemonstratesPCCcompliedwiththeprotocolsandestablishes"optimizedoperatingparametersfortheammoniainjectionsystemaswellasotherfacilityprocesses";(vii)PCCmustoperatetheSNCRsystemaccordingtotheoptimizedoperatingparametersforaperiodof270daysandgatherthesamekindsofdatarequiredtobegatheredduringtheBaselineDataCollectionPeriod("DemonstrationPeriod");(viii)PCCmustproposetotheEPA,basedontheCEMSdata,andona"1.65sigma"statisticalequationthatismandatedintheFIP,arolling"30-kilnoperatingdayemissionlimit"thatismorestringentthanthe2.12lbs/tonlimitsimposedbytheFIP,whichtheEPAwouldthenpromulgateinasubsequentrulemaking.See40C.F.R.§52.145(k)(6)andAppendixA,79Fed.Reg.at52485-89,52494-96.Theseoptimizationrequirementswouldbeburdensometoimplement,tothedetrimentoftheSaltRiverPima-MaricopaIndianCommunity,whichreliesmateriallyonrevenuefromtheFacilitytofundbasicservicesformembersoftheCommunity.Additionally,themeasuresthatwouldneedtobetakentoimplementtheoptimizationrequirementswouldsubstantiallyinterferewiththecementmanufacturingoperationsattheFacilityandcouldcompromisePCC'sabilitytomanufacturethesamehighqualityofcementthatitcurrentlydeliverstoitscustomers, especiallyduringthe180-dayBaselineDataCollectionPeriod,165-dayOptimizationPeriod,and270-dayDemonstrationPeriod,duringwhichundertherulePCCwouldbefocusedmateriallyonmanufacturingcementforpurposesofcomplyingwiththeoptimizationrequirementsratherthanproducinghighqualitycement.Therefore,theoptimizationrequirements,ifleftinplacewithintherule,wouldirreparablyharmPCCand,byextension,theSaltRiverPima-MaricopaIndianCommunity.2.NoOpportunitytoCommentontheOptimizationRequirementsandNoTribalConsultationRegardingtheRequirementsTheaboveandbalanceoftheoptimizationrequirementsimposedby40C.F.R.§52.145(k)(6)andAppendixAwherenottoanydegreeincluded,orevenanticipated,intheproposedFIP,79Fed.Reg.9318-9378(February18,2014).ThefirsttimePCCbecameawareoftheoptimizationrequirementswaswhenitreadthepre-publicationversionofthefmalFIP.1HadPCCbeengiventheopportunitytocommentonaproposaloftheoptimizationrequirements,itwouldhavecommented,firstandforemost,thatsuchrequirementsdonotfallwithintheEPA'sauthoritytoimposerequirementsonreasonableprogresssourcesundertheregionalhazestatutesand1WhiletheEPAassertedthattheoptimizationrequirementsare"inresponsetoconcernsraisedbyEarthjustice,"79Fed.Reg.at52455/3,theEPAmaynot"bootstrapnoticefromacomment."Fertilizerlnst.v.EPA,935F.2d1303,1312(D.C.Cir.1991)."EPAmustitselfprovidenoticeofaregulatoryproposal."SmallRefinerLeadPhase-DownTaskForcev.EPA,705F.2d506,549(D.C.Cir.1983)(emphasisintheoriginal);seealsoAss'nofPrivateSectorCollegesv.Duncan,681F.3d427,462(D.C.Cir.2012)(agencycouldnotshowadequatenoticebecauseithadnotraisedtheissueandparties'commentsdidnotsignificantlyengagetheissue);NaturalRes.DefCouncilv.EPA,863F.2d1420,1429(9thCir.1988)("EPA...mustprovidenoticesufficientto'fairlyappriseinterestedpersonsofthe"subjectsandissues"beforetheAgency"')(citationsomitted);NaturalRes.DefCouncilv.EPA,279F.3d1180,1186(9thCir.2002)("Adecisionmadewithoutadequatenoticeandcommentisarbitrarvoranabuseofdiscretion.")(emphasisadded).MEMTSASRLTRIVER'"SANDE;ROCKTel:480-850-5757•Fax:480-850-5758•8800EChaparralRd•Ste155•Scottsdale,AI.85250HonorableGinaMcCarthy,Administrator,U.S.EPAPhoenixCementCompanyPetitionforReconsiderationandStayofRHRFIPNovember3,2014Page3rules,i.e.,theyareultravires?Secondly,PCCwouldhavecommentedthat,evenifsuchoptimizationrequirementsdofallwithintheEPA'sregulatoryauthorityundertheregionalhazelaws,thereisnothingintherulemakingdockettosuggestthattherequirementsarisefromtheEPA'sconsiderationofthefourfactorsspecifiedat40C.F.R.§51.308(d)(1)(i)forreasonableprogressanalyses-including,withoutlimitation,thecostsofcompliance-orarenecessaryorappropriatetoimprovevisibilityinClassIareas.3Thirdly,PCCwouldhavecommentedthat,evenifsuchoptimizationrequirementsfallwithintheEPA'sregulatoryauthorityundertheregionalhazelaws,thereareseveralelementsoftheoptimizationrequirementsthatarenotappropriateforacementmanufacturingfacilitysuchasPCC's;4would,ifimplemented,leadtoinappropriateresults;5andcouldcausePCCtosacrifice(i.e.,diminish)thequalityofthecementthatitprovidestoitscustomers,bysubordinatingcementqualityassuranceandcontroltothedeterminationoftheabilitytoreducefurthertheFacility'sNOxemissions,includingduringtheBaselineDataCollectionPeriod,OptimizationPeriodandDemonstrationPeriod.6Fourthly,PCCwouldhavecommentedthatthetribalconsultationmandatesofExecutiveOrder13175andcorrespondingdirectivesregardingrulesandpoliciesthathave"tribalimplications"werenotfollowedwithrespecttothedevelopmentofthe2TheEPA'sstatutoryandregulatoryauthoritytopromulgatethistypeoffederalplanislimitedtoemissionlimitationsandothermeasuresthatmakereasonableprogresstowardsthegoalofrestoringArizonatonaturalvisibility.Theoptimizationprotocoldoesnotconstituteanemissionlimitationoralternativework practiceordesignstandardthatwouldimprovevisibilityinthestate.Instead,itconstitutesaprotocolthatcouldleadtomorestringentemissionrequirementsinaseparaterulemaking,andthatmayactuallyleadtoworseperformanceandlessvisibilityimprovement.3See79Fed.Reg.at52456/2("whilevisibilityimprovementisnotlistedintheCAAorRHRasarequiredfactorforevaluatingindividualRPsources,weconsiderittoberelevant...asasupplementalfactorinourRPanalysis").4Thereisnojustificationintherulemakingdocket,forinstance,ofwhyitisappropriatetomonitorduringtheBaselineDataCollectionPeriodandDemonstrationPeriodcarbonmonoxideconcentrationsandsulfateinthefeed,orwhytheseparametersarerelevanttotherepresentativenessofthedatabeingcollectedforpurposesoftheoptimizationexercise.See40C.F.R.§52.145,Appendix8.5Forexample,thestatisticalequationthatisimposedat40C.F.R.§52.145(k)(6)(vi)andAppendix21,andtherequirementtoapplytheequationtothe270days-worthofDemonstrationPerioddatatocalculatea"rolling30-dayemissionslimit"thatismorestringentthan2.12lbs/ton,areinappropriateinatleasttworespects:(1)theequation,whichisa1.65sigmaequation,computesaone-sided95thpercentileofemissions,suchthatactualemissionswillexceedthelimit5%ofthetimeduetoemissionsvariability,evenwhentheFacility'sprocessesarewell-controlled;and(2)therequirementsdonotaddresstheneedtodeterminewhethertheemissionsdataconformtoanormaldistributionbeforeapplyingtheequation.Ifoneassumesnormalitybutthedataareactuallylognormal,theequationwillunderestimatetheemissionlevelcorrespondingtothe99thpercentile.Anerrorindeterminingthestatisticaldistributionwillleadtoaninappropriatevalueforare-determinedlbs/tonstandard.Thereisnoinformationintherulemakingdocketthataddressesorresolvestheseconcerns.6Itisnotclearfromthefinalrulestowhatextent,ifany,PCCwouldberequiredtosubordinatetheQA/QCofitscementproductstothenecessitiesoftestingfor,andestablishing,operationalparametersfortheammoniainjectionsystemthatresult"intheminimizationofemissionsofNOxtothegreatestextentpracticable."40C.F.R.§52.145(k)(6)(vi),AppendixA10.Anyadjustmentof"thebalancebetweenfuelsuppliedtotheexistingriserductburnerandtheexistingcalcinerburners,"id.10(a)(i),adjustmentstothe"proportionsofprimary,secondaryandtertiaryairsuppliedtothekilnsystem,"id.10(a)(ii)(2),andadjustmentstothe"chemicalandphysicalproperties"oftherawmixfedintothekiln,id.10(a)(iii),relativetoPCC'scurrentQA/QCpractices,wouldadverselyaffectthecementproducts'quality,therule'squalifications tothecontrarynotwithstanding.PCCisinthebusinessofmakingcement;italreadyoptimizestheseparametersasamatterofcourse,bothasafunctionofapplicableASTMstandards(e.g.,ASTMC150)andPCC'sclients'specifications.SRSRLTRIVER'"SAND6ROCKTel:480-850-5757•Fax:480-85Q-5758•8800EChaparralRd•Ste155•Scottsdale,AZ85250HonorableGinaMcCarthy,Administrator,U.S.EPAPhoenixCementCompanyPetitionforReconsiderationandStayofRHRFIPNovember3,2014Page4optimizationrequirementsasamaterialfeatureoftheFIP,giventheSaltRiverPima-MaricopaIndianCommunity'sfinancialrelianceonrevenuefromtheFacilityandPCC'sstatusasadivisionoftheCommunity.7ItwasimpracticabletoraisesuchcommentsduringthepubliccommentperiodontheproposedFIP,astheoptimizationrequirementswerenotpresentedaspartoftheproposalandcouldnotreasonablybeanticipatedfromthebalanceoftherulemakingdocketpriortotheissuanceofthefinalFIP.Moreover,themattersassertedinthispetitionforreviewareofcentralrelevancetotheFIP.TheappropriateresultoftheEPA'sconsiderationofsuchcommentswouldhavebeentheexclusionofanyoptimizationrequirementsfromthefmalFIP,fornotfallingwithinthefourcomersoftheEPA'sregulatoryauthorityundertheregionalhazestatutesandrulesandbeinginappropriateforPCC'scementmanufacturingfacility.3.RequestedActionPCCrespectfullyrequeststhattheEPAreconsider40C.F.R.§52.145(k)(6)andAppendixAandremovethemfromthefederalplanintheirentirety,astheyarenotauthorizedbytheregionalhazestatutesandrulesandareinappropriate,inwholeandinpart,forPCC'scementmanufacturingfacility.PCCisfilingapetitionforreviewoftheFIPandalsorequeststhattheEPAimmediatelystaytheeffectivenessof40C.F.R.§52.145(k)(6)andAppendixA,intheirentirety.See5U.S.C.§705("Whenanagencyfindsthatjusticesorequires,itmaypostponetheeffectivedateofactiontakenbyit,pendingjudicialreview.");cf42U.S.C.§7607(d)(7)(b).87Section5(b)ofExecutiveOrder13175providesthat,"[t]otheextentpracticableandpermittedbylaw,noagencyshallpromulgateanyregulationthathastribalimplications,thatimposessubstantialdirectcompliancecostsonIndiantribalgovernments,andthatisnotrequiredbystatute,unless:(1)fundsnecesscuytopaythedirectcostsincurredbytheIndiantribalgovernmentorthetribeincomplyingwiththeregulationareprovidedbytheFederalGovernment;or(2)theagency,priortotheformalpromulgationoftheregulation,(A)consultedwithtribalofficialsearlyinthenrocessofdevelopingtheproposedregulation;(B)inaseparatelyidentifiedportionofthepreambletotheregulationasitistobeissuedintheFederalRegister,providestotheDirectorofOMBatribalsummarvimpactstatement,whichconsistsofadescriptionoftheextentoftheagency'spriorconsultationwithtribalofficials,asummaryofthenatureoftheirconcernsandtheagency'spositionsupportingtheneedtoissuetheregulation,andastatementoftheextenttowhichtheconcernsoftribalofficialshavebeenmet;and(C)makesavailabletotheDirectorofOMBanywrittencommunicationssubmittedtotheagencybytribalofficials.65Fed.Reg.67249,67250(November9,2000)(emphasesadded.);seealso"MemorandumfortheHeadsofExecutiveDepartmentsandAgencies,SUBJECT:TribalConsultation,"byPresidentBarackObama(November5,2009)("MyAdministrationiscommittedtoregularandmeaningfulconsultationandcollaborationwithtribalofficialsinpolicydecisionsthathavetribalimplicationsincluding,asaninitialstep,throughcompleteandconsistentimplementationofExecutiveOrder13175.").8PCCbelievesthatitmeetsthecriteriaforajudicialstayof40C.F.R.§52.145(kX6)andAppendixA,basedontherelevantfactorsfordecidingwhetherastayisjustified.HumaneSocyv.Gutierrez,558F.3d896,896(9thCir.2009)(citingWinterv.NaturalRes.DefCouncil,555U.S.7(2008)).First,PCCwouldbelikelytosucceedonthemeritsofitsCEMENTSRSRLTRIVER'"SAND6RDCI-iTel:480-850-5757•Fax:480-850-5758•8800EChaparralRd•Ste155•Scottsdale,tv..85250HonorableGinaMcCarthy,Administrator,U.S.EPAPhoenixCementCompanyPetitionforReconsiderationandStayofRHRFIPNovember3,2014Page5VerleC.MartzVicePresidentEngineering&PhoenixCementCompany,aivisionoftheSaltRiverPima-MaricopaIndianCommunitycc:JoAnnChase,Director,U.S.EPAAmericanIndianEnvironmentalOffice(chase.joann@epamail.epa.gov)JaredBlumenfeld,Administrator,U.S.EPARegion9(blumenfeld.jared@epa.gov)ThomasWebb,AirDivisionPlanningOffice,U.S.EPARegion9(r9azreghaze@epa.gov)DianeEnos,President,SaltRiverPima-MaricopaIndianCommunityMartinHarvier,Vice-President,SaltRiverPima-MaricopaIndianCommunityJohnCarroll,Treasurer,SaltRiverPima-MaricopaIndianCommunityGaryBohnee,Congressional&LegislativeAffairs,SaltRiverPima-MaricopaIndianCommunityJenniferGiff,OfficeoftheGeneralCounsel,SaltRiverPima-MaricopaIndianCommunityRogerSmith,President,PhoenixCementCompanyPeteKuehner,SeniorVice-President,PhoenixCementCompanyBrettLindsay,EnvironmentalManager,PhoenixCementCompanyMarkW.DeLaquil,Baker&HostetlerLLPAndrewM.Grossman,Baker&HostetlerLLPGeorgeA.Tsiolis,AttorneyatLawpetitionforjudicialreview,forthereasonsindicatedinSection2ofthispetition.Second,PCCand,byextension,theSaltRiverPima-MaricopaIndianCommunity,wouldsuffer irreparableinjuryiftheEPAdoesnotstay40C.F.R.§52.145(k)(6)andAppendixA,inthatPCCmustbeginasearlyasSpring2015tocomplywiththeoptimizationrequirements,theoptimizationprotocolthreatenstounderminethequalityofcementproduced,andresourcesspenttocomplywiththeoptimizationprotocolwillbedivertedfromthebeneficialpurposetowhichtheCommunityputsthem.Third,thebalanceofequitiesfavorsissuingastay,since,despitethesignificantharmsPCCwouldsufferandexpendituresthatPCCwouldhavetomaketocomplywiththeoptimizationrequirements,thereisnothingintherulemakingdocketthatsupportsanyconclusionthattherequirementsfallwithinthefourcomersoftheEPA'sregulatoryauthorityundertheregionalhazestatutesorrulesorthattherequirementsarisefromtheEPA'sconsiderationofthefactorsthatarespecifiedforreasonableprogressanalyses,at40C.F.R.§51.308(d)(1)(i)and79Fed.Reg.at52456/2.Fourth,astaywouldbeinthepublicinterest,astheCleanAirActdoesnotdemandvisibilityimprovementatanycost,letalonecostthatisnotdefmedorassessedpursuantto40C.F.R.§51.308(d)(1)(i),whereasitisclearpublicpolicytonotimpedeunnecessarilyorarbitrarily,butrathertofoster,theeconomicself-sufficiencyofIndiantribessuchastheSaltRiverPima-MaricopaIndianCommunity.See,e.g.,WhiteMountainApacheTribev.Bracker,448U.S.136,143-44(1980)(noting"afirmfederalpolicyofpromotingtribalself-sufficiencyandeconomicdevelopment"asevidencedbyvariouscongressionalenactments);Washingtonv.ConfederatedTribesoftheColvilleIndianReservation,447U.S.134,155(1980)(recognizing"varyingdegrees[of]congressionalconcernwithfosteringtribalself-governmentandeconomicdevelopment").SRSRLTRIVER-SAND6ROCKTel:480-850-5757•Fax:480-850-5758•8800EChaparralRd•Ste155•Scottsdale,Al.85250