Document ID: EPA_FRDOC_0001-15406
Agency: epa
Document Type: Notice
Title: Clean Air Act Operating Permit Program; Objections: State Operating Permits for Consolidated Environmental Management, Inc. - Nucor Steel Louisiana
Posted Date: 2014-03-21T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 55 (Friday, March 21, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15740-15741]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-06224]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9908-22-Region-6]

Clean Air Act Operating Permit Program; Petitions for Objection 
To State Operating Permits for Consolidated Environmental Management, 
Inc.--Nucor Steel Louisiana

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of final action.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to Clean Air Act (CAA) Section 505(b)(2) and 40 CFR 
70.8(d), the EPA Administrator signed an Order, dated January 30, 2014, 
partially granting and partially denying three petitions asking EPA to 
object to operating permits (Permit Numbers 2560-00281-V0, 2560-00281-
V1, and 3086-V0) issued by the Louisiana Department for Environmental 
Quality (LDEQ) to Consolidated Environmental Management, Inc.--Nucor 
Steel Louisiana (Nucor) relating to a facility located near Convent, 
Saint James Parish, Louisiana. Pursuant to CAA Section 505(b)(2) and 40 
CFR 70.8(d), the EPA Administrator also signed an Order, dated June 19, 
2013, denying one issue (``Specific Objection I'') raised in two of 
those petitions. Together, EPA's June 19, 2013 Order and January 30, 
2014 Order respond to the three petitions submitted by Louisiana 
Environmental Action Network and Sierra Club (collectively, the 
Petitioners on June 25, 2010 (the 2010 Petition), May 3, 2011 (the 2011 
Petition) and October 3, 2012 (the 2012 Petition), respectively. 
Sections 307(b) and 505(b)(2) of the Act provide that a petitioner may 
ask for judicial review of those portions of the Orders that deny 
objections raised in the petitions by the United States Court of 
Appeals for the appropriate circuit. Any petition for review shall be 
filed within 60 days from the date this notice appears in the Federal 
Register, pursuant to section 307(b) of the Act.

ADDRESSES: You may review copies of the final Orders, the petitions, 
and other supporting information at EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, 
Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.
    EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the individual 
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to view copies of 
the final Orders, petitions, and other supporting information. You may 
view the hard copies Monday through Friday, from 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 
p.m., excluding Federal holidays. If you wish to examine these 
documents, you should make an appointment at least 24 hours before the 
visiting day. Additionally, the final June 19, 2013 Order and January 
30, 2014 Orders are available electronically at: http://www.epa.gov/Region7/air/title5/petitiondb/petitions/nucor_steel_partialresponse2011.pdf and http://www.epa.gov/Region7/air/title5/petitiondb/petitions/nucor_steel_response2012.pdf, respectively.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dinesh Senghani at (214) 665-7221, 
email address: senghani.dinesh@epa.gov or the above EPA, Region 6 
address.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The CAA affords EPA a 45-day period to 
review, and object, as appropriate, to a title V operating permit 
proposed by a state permitting authority. Section 505(b)(2) of the CAA 
authorizes any person to petition the EPA Administrator, within 60 days 
after the expiration of this review period, to object to a title V 
operating permit if EPA has not done so. Petitions must be based only 
on objections to the permit that were raised with reasonable 
specificity during the public comment period provided by the state, 
unless the petitioner demonstrates that it was impracticable to raise 
these issues during the comment period or unless the grounds for the 
issue arose after this period.
    EPA received three petitions from the Petitioners, dated June 25, 
2010, May 3, 2011, and October 3, 2012, to object to operating permits 
issued to Consolidated Environmental Management, Inc.--Nucor Steel 
Louisiana relating to a facility located near Convent, Saint James 
Parish, Louisiana.
    The 2010 Petition requested that the Administrator object to a 
Nucor operating permit (Permit Number 2560-00281-V0) on the basis that: 
(1) The permit fails to apply the appropriate maximum achievable 
control technology (MACT) standards; (2) the modeling submitted by 
Nucor to support its PSD analysis is flawed, and (3) the title V permit 
fails to incorporate conditions sufficient to assure compliance with 
PSD. The 2011 Petition requested that the Administrator object to two 
Nucor operating permits (Permit Numbers 2560-00281-V1 and 3086-V0) on 
the following bases: (1) LDEQ failed to aggregate PSD permitting for 
emissions from the entire facility (this issue is also known as 
``Specific Objection I'' in this matter); (2) the modified pig iron 
permit fails to apply MACT standards for the topgas boilers; (3) LDEQ 
failed to include emission limits for particulate matter less than 2.5 
microns; (4) the limit for natural gas consumption is not the best 
available control technology for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from 
the Direct Reduced Iron (DRI) process; and (5) the DRI permits must 
specify procedures estimating GHG emissions. The 2012 Petition 
requested that the Administrator object to the Nucor operating permits 
for the reasons expressed in the 2010 and 2011 Petitions, which were 
incorporated by reference and attached to the 2012 Petition.
    On June 19, 2013, the Administrator issued a partial Order denying 
Specific Objection I of the 2011 Petition and as re-raised in the 2012 
Petition. On January 30, 2014, the Administrator issued an Order 
partially granting and partially denying the 2010, 2011, and 2012 
Petitions, (except Specific Objection I). These Orders explain the 
reasons behind EPA's conclusion to grant in part and deny in part these 
three petitions. Together, the June 19, 2013 Order and January 30, 2014 
Order

[[Page 15741]]

address all the objections originally raised in the 2010 Petition and 
the 2011 Petition, which were all re-raised in the 2012 Petition, as 
well as addressing the claims in the 2012 Petition.

    Dated: March 7, 2014.
Ron Curry,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2014-06224 Filed 3-20-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P