80 FR 28215 - Reconsideration Petition From Dyno Nobel Inc. on the New Source Performance Standards Review for Nitric Acid Plants; Final Action

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 95 (May 18, 2015)

This action provides notice that on May 11, 2015, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator, Gina McCarthy, signed a letter denying a petition for reconsideration of the final New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for Nitric Acid Plants published in the Federal Register on August 14, 2012. (77 FR 48433)

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 95 (Monday, May 18, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 28215-28217]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2015-11958]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 60

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0750; FRL-9927-58-OAR]
RIN 2060-AQ60


Reconsideration Petition From Dyno Nobel Inc. on the New Source 
Performance Standards Review for Nitric Acid Plants; Final Action

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of final action denying petition for reconsideration.

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

[[Page 28216]]

SUMMARY: This action provides notice that on May 11, 2015, the U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator, Gina McCarthy, 
signed a letter denying a petition for reconsideration of the final New 
Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for Nitric Acid Plants published in 
the Federal Register on August 14, 2012. (77 FR 48433)

DATES: Effective May 18, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Nathan Topham, Sector Policies and 
Programs Division (D243-02), Office of Air Quality Planning and 
Standards, Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, 
North Carolina 27711; telephone number: (919) 541-0483; fax number: 
(919) 541-3207; email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    This Federal Register document, the petition for reconsideration, 
and the letter denying the petition for reconsideration are available 
in the docket the EPA established under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-
0750. All documents in the docket are listed on the www.regulations.gov 
Web site. Although listed in the index, some information is not 
publicly available, e.g., confidential business information 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 either electronically through 
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), 
EPA WJC West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., 
Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone 
number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744 and the telephone 
number for the Air Docket is (202) 566-1742. This Federal Register 
document, the petition for reconsideration, and the letter denying the 
petition can also be found on the EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg.

II. Judicial Review

    Any petitions for review of the letter and enclosure denying the 
petition for reconsideration described in this document must be filed 
in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia 
Circuit by July 17, 2015.

III. Description of Action

A. Background

    The initial Nitric Acid Plants NSPS were promulgated on December 
23, 1971 (36 FR 24881) and codified at 40 CFR part 60, subpart G 
pursuant to section 111 of the Clean Air Act (CAA). Pursuant to section 
111(b)(1)(B) of the CAA, we reviewed the NSPS three times over the past 
few decades. Based on the results of the third review, which we 
completed in August 2012, we determined it was appropriate to revise 
the NSPS. The revised NSPS were published in the Federal Register on 
August 14, 2012 (77 FR 48433). The revised NSPS (also referred to as 
the ``final rule'' in this document) included a change in the nitrogen 
oxides (NOX) emission limit, from 3.0 pounds of 
NOX per ton of nitric acid production (3.0 lb/T) on a 3-hour 
basis to 0.5 lb/T on a 30-day average basis, and additional testing and 
monitoring requirements. The final rule applies to new, modified or 
reconstructed nitric acid production units (NAPU) that commence 
construction, modification or reconstruction after October 14, 2011.
    Throughout the rulemaking process, we received comments, data and 
information that supported these revisions. This information is 
available in the docket for this action. The revisions were proposed on 
October 14, 2011 (76 FR 63878). We received additional data and 
comments during the comment period. These data and comments were 
considered and analyzed and, where appropriate, revisions to the NSPS 
were made and incorporated into the final rule published on August 14, 
2012.
    On October 10, 2012, Dyno Nobel Inc. (DNI) submitted a petition for 
reconsideration of the final rule for nitric acid plants. Under section 
307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA, a petitioner seeking reconsideration must show 
that the objection or objections raised in its reconsideration petition 
``is of central relevance to the outcome of the rule.'' In the EPA's 
view, an objection is of central relevance to the outcome of the rule 
only if it provides substantial support for the argument that the 
promulgated regulation should be revised.
    After carefully considering the petition and supporting 
information, the EPA Administrator, Gina McCarthy, denied the petition 
for reconsideration on May 11, 2015, in a letter to the petitioner. The 
EPA denied the petition because the information and analysis submitted 
by DNI is not of central relevance to the outcome of the rule, in that 
it does not demonstrate that the rule should be reconsidered. A summary 
of the petition issues and the EPA's responses are provided below. The 
letter from Administrator McCarthy and the accompanying enclosure, 
which are available in the docket for this action, explain in greater 
detail the issues presented in the petition, the EPA's responses to 
those issues, and the EPA's reasons for the denial.

B. Summary of Petition and the EPA's Responses

    The main issues raised by DNI in their petition for reconsideration 
are the following: They believe the EPA should have established a 
subcategory and a different emissions limit for modified or 
reconstructed nitric acid plants that use non-selective catalytic 
reduction (NSCR); and they argue the EPA did not meet the legal 
requirement of having representative emission data to establish a new 
emission limit.
    Regarding the petitioner's argument that the EPA should establish a 
subcategory for modified or reconstructed plants that use NSCR, we have 
several reasons why we disagree with this request.
    First, the EPA believes it is inappropriate to establish 
subcategories based on differences in control technologies, so it is 
inappropriate to establish a subcategory for plants using NSCR.
    Second, regarding the petitioner's argument that the EPA did not 
meet the legal requirement of having representative emission data to 
set an emission limit, we believe the agency had ample test data to 
support selective catalytic reduction as the best system of emission 
reduction and to establish a revised emission limit.
    Third, although some units with NSCR may not be able to meet the 
limit without improving their controls, based on available data we 
believe it is feasible for some units with NSCR to comply with this 
NSPS without the need for any additional controls as some existing 
units with NSCR are already achieving the NSPS emission limit.
    Finally, we believe other units with NSCR that are modified or 
reconstructed, could comply with the NSPS limit by improving their 
controls at reasonable costs.
    Therefore, based on our review and evaluation of all issues raised 
by the petitioner and relevant available data and information, we have 
concluded that reconsideration is not warranted.


[[Page 28217]]


    Dated: May 11, 2015.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2015-11958 Filed 5-15-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P