BEFORE THE ADMINISTRATOR U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY In the Matter of Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality's Proposed Operating Permit and Prevention of Significant Deterioration Permit for Consolidated Environmental Management, Inc./Nucor Steel, Louisiana, St. James Parish, Louisiana LDEQ Agency Interest No. 157847 Activity Nos. PER2008000 1 and PER20080002 Permit Nos. 2560-00281-VO; PSD-LA-740 Proposed to Nucor Steel, Louisiana By the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality on October 15 ,2008 PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE ADMINISTRATOR OBJECT TO THE TITLE V OPERATING AND PREVENTION OF SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION PERMITS PROPOSED FOR NUCOR STEEL, LOUISIANA Pursuant to Section 505(b) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7661 deb )(2) and 40 C.F.R. §70.8( d) , Zen-Noh Grain Corporation ("Zen-Noh") petitions the Administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ("Administrator") to object to Title V Air Operating Permit (No. 2560-00281 -VO) ("Operating Permit"). Zen-Noh also petitions the Administrator to reopen or revise Prevention of Significant Deterioration Permit (No. PSD-LA-740) ("PSD Pennit"). And, Zen-Noh petitions the Administrator to direct Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality ("LDEQ") to provide Zen-Noh and the public with all information necessary to the issuance or denial of the Operating Pennit and PSD Permit, provide a meaningful period for public review, and reopen the public comment period. Both the Operating Permit and PSD Permit were proposed on or about October 15, 2008 by LDEQ for issuance to Consolidated Environmental Management, Inc.INucor Steel Louisiana ("Nucor") for a Pig Iron Manufacturing Plant in St. James Parish, Louisiana. The grounds for Zen-Noh's Petition are based on comments filed by Zen-Noh with LDEQ on November 24,2008 during the public comment period, and expansions on those comments, as well as additional comments/objections filed with LDEQ on December 12, 2008 and January 28,2008 ("Public Comments"). EPA Region 6 and United States Department ofthe Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service were unable to conduct a complete analysis of the proposed Operating Permit and PSD Permit, and both recommended to LDEQ that it provide a new public comment period to evaluate new modeling analyses to be provided LDEQ.' These new modeling analyses were not provided to Zen-Noh or the general public. As is more fully discussed in Zen-Noh's Public Comments, the refusal by LDEQ to follow the federal law and federally enforceable , See, letter of December I, 2008 from EPA to LDEQ attached as Exhibit I, and letter of November 20, 2008 from United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service to LDEQ attached as Exhibit 2. 2 SIP has deprived Zen-Noh and others of their right under the Clean Air Act to review and comment upon all of the information necessary to the issuance or denial of the Operating Permit and PSD Permit. Zen-Noh incorporates by reference to this petition its Public Comments and attaches them here as Exhibits 3, 4 and 5. Respectfully submitted this 30th day of January, 2009 by: PAUL N . VANCE, .A.,-(#-l 007) JAMES G. BURKE, JR. (#3676) 1100 Poydras Street Suite 2200 New Orleans, LA 70163 [email protected] [email protected] Telephone: 504.569.2900 Facsimile: 504.569.2099 Of Counsel: J. Michael Bowman PLEWS SHADLEY RACHER & BRAUN LLP 1346 N. Delaware Street Indianapolis, IN 46202 [email protected] Telephone: 317.637.0700 Facsimile: 317.637.0710 Attorneys for Zen-Noh Grain Corporation 3 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I have this 30th day of January, 2009 served a copy of this Petition 10 tho", j;,~d below. ~ = PAm?N. VANCE - Lisa Jackson, Administrator (Via Certified Mail) U.S . EPA Headquarters Ariel Rios Building 1200 Penn Avenue, N.W. Mail Code l101A Washington, D.C. 20460 Harold Leggett, Ph.D., Secretary (Via Certified Mail) Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality P. O. Box 4301 Baton Rouge, LA 70821-4301 Jeff Braun (Via Certified Mail) Manager, Environmental Affairs Nucor Corporation 1915 Rexford Road Charlotte, NC 28211 Ms. Cheryl S. Nolan Administrator LDEQ, Air Pem1its Division P. O. Box 4313 Baton Rouge, LA 70821 -4313 Mr. Jeffrey Robinson Chief, Air Permits Section (6PD-R) U.S . Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200 Dallas, TX 75202-2733 Ms. Shannon Snyder U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200 Mail Code 6PDR Dallas, TX 75202-2733 4 LDEQ-EDM S Document 3921990 4 , Pag e 1 or 4 , ortg/Mafte b'O£: 'UNITED STATESr~~yIR(lNMENTAl ~OTECllON AGENG6.,)iJJ . /8 iiJ" HI'JUll\lUU~~E~10Nr~ /r' CcipJIir ~ m ~ 'a; , t445 ROSS AVENlJE, SUITE t200 , ""'W DALLAS, TX 75202·2733 , December I, 2008 /Ie IY, 79((1 Mr. Bryan Johnston c::, . Administrator .' , \ ,/ Air P~nnits Division I 0:> OOlce of Environmenllli Services (-, Louisiana Department ,of Environmenlal Quality ~ r ' ~ (,. P,O. Box 4313 9 BalOn Rouge, LA 708:! 1-4313 c.1' RE: Louisiana Depurtmenl or Environmental Quolity's (LDEQ's) Proposed Operaling Permit ~ ·,l ~ ; ; ~ ry~: . 25{;0 ~ ~ ~~ )2 fl.}. VO ~U it ; · F·rCVr:'.I1t! I~ :} of Si.f.::~F~~ n; ~~ · ~;.~~ i ;r ~ ~ :· ! ·n60n (PSD) Pen'nit Number PSD .. I..A-74(1: Consolidatod Environmentai Management Inc" Nuc!>r Steel Louisiana: CO rivenl , 51. James Parish, Louisiana Dcar Mr. Johnston: The Environmental Protection Agen9Y (EPA) Region" appreciate~ the oppimunity to comment on the proposed operating permit and PSD permit for Nucor Ste~1 Louisiana, -'The draft permits were evaluated to ensure consi stcncy wilh th~ Louisiana State Implemcntation Plan and Fc'(h:ral Clean Air ACI ,(CAA) requiremems. We havc two principal concerns: a) the application dil1 not contain enough information to show i(there will be an adverse impact 'on air quality in the Smon Rouge Nonattainment Area, areas that are currently in attainmcliL and Class I areaS: ami b) the applicant's Bcst Available COlitroJ'Technology (BACT) deternlination did not provid~ enough infonnation fo:- EI'A to evaluate ihe technical feasiLility/infeasibiljty of the selccted control methods. We ,equest that LDEQ provide a more detailed analysis of the applicant's BACT determination, I he company has promised to submit revised modeling to help add ress our first conc~m . Our specific comments on Ihc pennies arc enclosed. These commenr,; are being submitted to assist LDEQ in the evaluation of the proposed permit. and this is no!." fimll position by EPA. The puhlic comment perio,d for th is permit dosed " r.Yi··t· II:- ',"-\: ·,Tll.-,t.:· i 41h, ~J:·~ .\·li· ~ _. _\ fT1(; t! r::1C \.; ();~~t) an:/ ;'.. m !itl ~nnit :: ?',;,- rrn.:~;,Lii ::,c: ~D 1:. ;'. n·:': : ·i oJ !. h': ~ rC·,01;: :l. appiicalion, we rcco.mmend tilat LDEQ provide a new public c'omment period' Oil the <lll1en,kd applic.,tion. Please contact ' l ie ul (2 I 4) 665-6435, Or Shannoll Snyder or my starr at (214) 665-3134, if )'o.U have further qll", ~ ;tions . Thank you for your cooperaTion. ' Jel'ti'cy Robinson Chief Air Pcnll i~s Section Encl osure RKyc:l~ecyclatM •• Printed with Vegelabkl on 6a.wd Inks on 100% Aecyded Paper (40% Postoonsumer) EXHIBIT I ~-----------,-- , - , .- LDEQ - EDMS Document 39219904 , Page 2 of 4 ,'. '!". Enclosure · General Comm'ent I) Did NUFor consider alternative manufacturing processcs, cmplqycd within and .. , outside ·the United States? For instance, did ·Nucor consider building a Direct Reduced, Iron (DRI) Plant? [f so, . why was this type of plant clilninated, trom consideration? DRI plants such as th e New Steel International Plant in Haverhill, OH, ani! thc Iron Dynamics, Inc, Plam in Butler, IN, produce pig iron using this type or'process and the emissions are far lower than what Nuc~r Louisiana has proposed using the blast furnace proce'ss. LDEQ has the discretion to require the applicant to consider alternative prodilction processes as part or the BACT Dctermination.. , ': . " Spe'cific Comments 2) It is no\ clear from thc application and' the proposed permit if Slartup, .Shutdown, and Majntenance (SSM) emissions ~ere included in the Potential to Eli,it (PTE). Please provide the BACT analysis for emissions from SSM. A~ditionally , it is unclear,if alternate operating scenarios sllch as the Heat Recov~ry Steam . Genera\or (HRSG) bypass operations, were included in the PTE and if BACT will apply during these operations. Emissions ti·om alJ.bypass scena~ios are considered. mainteliance operations. Please darify:if elilission limits apply ~uring bypass operations and are supported by adequate monitoring and reeorakeeping, . provisions in the PSDpermit. If the limits in the permit are infeasible during SSM, the LDEQ sho~lid outline what design, control, methodolbgy, work practice (such as a limitation on total startup and shutdown event time) br other change . approp~iate for inclusion in the.pennit to minimize excess emis~ions during those · periods! ln addition, please clarify if those emissions will be inlcluded in the · ann~al Emissions r'nventory reporting. :' The proposed 'permit al~o doe~not provide J details 9n the numberand nature of startups, shutdowns and malfunctions. .. .. I. _ .... 3) It was not clear from the application and thc proposed permit iflParticulate Matter (PM) 2:5 was evaluated. Did LDEQ consider PM 2.5 in this permitting action? 4) Based on the information provided in 'the PSD application, it is!diftiCult to verify the BACT Detennination provided in the Preliminary Deternlination Summary, · specificill ly, the technical feasibility/irrfeasibilty of add-on cont~o l s for each el11iss i o~s unit/pollutant c·valuated. The'BACT eval uatio;, procJss involves reviewing not only the EPA's BA'CTI Lowest Achievable Enlishions Rate (LAERj Clearinghouse (RBLC), but also Federal/State/Local New Source Review: (NSR) permits across the cOUliTly.