Frequent Questions

How is EPA addressing the issues raised in the ?petitions for reconsideration? that were submitted to the Administrator following promulgation of the October 12, 2005 final rule?

Following promulgation of the MACT final rule, issued on October 12, 2005, the EPA Administrator received four petitions for reconsideration pursuant to section 307(d)(7)(B) of the Clean Air Act. Under this section of the Clean Air Act, the Administrator shall initiate reconsideration proceedings if the petitioner can show that it was impracticable to raise an objection to a rule within the public comment period or that the grounds for the objection arose after the public comment period. For each issue raised in the petitions of reconsideration, EPA must either grant or deny reconsideration, based on a determination of whether EPA provided adequate notice during the rulemaking.

EPA granted reconsideration of eight issues raised by the petitioners and provided the public with an opportunity to comment on them by issuing two proposed rules. In the first notice published on March 23, 2006, EPA granted reconsideration of one issue – the particulate matter standard for new cement kilns – and requested comment on a revised standard. In two related actions, EPA also amended the final rule by changing the effectiveness of the particulate matter standard for new cement kilns while EPA reconsiders the standard. On March 23, 2006, EPA first issued a three-month administrative stay of the standard. Later, in October 2006, EPA amended the effective date of the particulate matter standard for new cement kilns so that it will not take effect until EPA takes final action on the March 2006 proposal to revise the standard.

In the second reconsideration notice published on September 6, 2006, EPA provided the public with an opportunity to comment on seven additional issues:

1. subcategorization of liquid fuel boilers;
2. correcting total chlorine emissions data below 20 ppmv;
3. use of Performance Specification 11 as a reference to develop alarm set-point extrapolation procedures for particulate matter detection systems;
4. approach to identify the best performing single source when two or more sources are tied for the lowest aggregate system removal efficiency/feedrate score;
5. beyond-the-floor analyses to consider multiple HAP that are controlled by a single control mechanism;
6. use of post-proposal data to identify the dioxin/furan standard for incinerators with dry air pollution control devices or waste heat boilers; and
7. three provisions of the health-based compliance alternative for total chlorine.
EPA also decided not to reconsider several issues raised in the petitions for reconsideration. Included in the docket to this rulemaking are letters to the petitioners explaining our rationale to deny reconsideration..

For more information ,visit

Have more questions? Submit a request