
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 120 (Friday, June 23, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 28562-28565]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-13185]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0442; FRL-9964-14-OAR]
RIN 2060-AT57


National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants From the 
Portland Cement Manufacturing Industry: Alternative Monitoring Method

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is taking direct final action to amend the National 
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants From the Portland 
Cement Manufacturing Industry. This direct final rule provides a 
compliance alternative for sources that would otherwise be required to 
use a hydrogen chloride (HCl) continuous emissions monitoring system 
(CEMS) to demonstrate compliance with the HCl emissions limit. This 
compliance alternative is needed due to the current unavailability of 
the HCl calibration gases used for CEMS quality assurance purposes.

DATES: This rule is effective on July 5, 2017 without further notice, 
unless the EPA receives significant adverse comment by July 3, 2017. If 
the EPA receives significant adverse comment, we will publish a timely 
withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule 
will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2016-0442, at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot 
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any 
comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any 
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) 
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a 
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment 
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA 
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located 
outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the Web, cloud, or other 
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA 
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, 
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Brian Storey, Sector Policies and 
Programs Division (D243-04), Office of Air Quality Planning and 
Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle 
Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone number: (919) 541-1103; fax 
number: (919) 541-5450; and email address: storey.brian@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Organization of This Document. The 
information in this preamble is organized as follows:

I. General Information
    A. Why is the EPA using a direct final rule?
    B. Does this direct final rule apply to me?
    C. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for the EPA?
II. What are the amendments made by this direct final rule?
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and 
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With 
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From 
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address 
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations
    K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

I. General Information

A. Why is the EPA using a direct final rule?

    The EPA is publishing this direct final rule without a prior 
proposed rule because we view this as a noncontroversial action and do 
not anticipate significant adverse comment. However, in the ``Proposed 
Rules''

[[Page 28563]]

section of this Federal Register, we are publishing a separate document 
that will serve as the proposed rule to amend the National Emission 
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants From the Portland Cement 
Manufacturing Industry, if the EPA receives significant adverse 
comments on this direct final rule. We will not institute a second 
comment period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting 
must do so at this time. For further information about commenting on 
this rule, see the ADDRESSES section of this document.
    If the EPA receives significant adverse comment on all or a 
distinct portion of this direct final rule, we will publish a timely 
withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that some or 
all of this direct final rule will not take effect. We would address 
all public comments in any subsequent final rule based on the proposed 
rule.

B. Does this direct final rule apply to me?

    Categories and entities potentially regulated by this direct final 
rule include:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Category                          NAICS code \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Portland cement manufacturing            327310
 facilities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ North American Industry Classification System.

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this 
direct final rule. To determine whether your facility is affected, you 
should examine the applicability criteria in 40 CFR 63.1340. If you 
have questions regarding the applicability of any aspect of this action 
to a particular entity, consult either the air permitting authority for 
the entity or your EPA Regional representative as listed in 40 CFR 
63.13.

C. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for the EPA?

    Do not submit information containing CBI to the EPA through http://www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the 
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information on a disk or 
CD-ROM that you mail to the EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM 
as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the 
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one 
complete version of the comments that includes information claimed as 
CBI, a copy of the comments that does not contain the information 
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. 
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with 
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. Send or deliver information 
identified as CBI only to the following address: OAQPS Document Control 
Officer (C404-02), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research 
Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2016-0442.

II. What are the amendments made by this direct final rule?

    Under the rule published in 2013 (78 FR 10006, February 12, 2013), 
the owner or operator of a kiln subject to the emission limits for HCl 
in 40 CFR 63.1343 may demonstrate compliance by one of the following 
methods:
     Option 1--An owner or operator of a kiln may demonstrate 
compliance by operating a CEMS meeting the requirements of performance 
specification (PS) 15, PS-18, or any other PS for HCl CEMS in appendix 
B to part 60, with compliance based on a 30-kiln operating day rolling 
average.
     Option 2--If the kiln is controlled using a wet scrubber, 
tray tower, or dry scrubber, the owner or operator, as an alternative 
to using a CEMS, may demonstrate compliance with the HCl limit using 
one of two options, described below.
    Under Option 2, a performance test must be conducted by the owner 
or operator using Method 321. While conducting the Method 321 
performance test (note Method 321 is the HCl stack testing performance 
method required by this rule), the owner or operator must 
simultaneously measure a control device parameter in order to 
establishe a site-specific parameter limit that must be continuously 
monitored to determine compliance. If the kiln is controlled using a 
wet scrubber or tray tower, the owner or operator must also monitor the 
pressure drop across the scrubber and/or liquid flow rate and pH during 
the HCl performance test. If the kiln is controlled using a dry 
scrubber, the sorbent injection rate must be monitored during the 
performance test. As an alternative under Option 2, the owner or 
operator may establish sulfur dioxide (SO2) as the operating 
parameter by measuring SO2 emissions using a CEMS 
simultaneously with the Method 321 test and establishing the site-
specific SO2 limit that must then be continuously monitored 
to determine compliance with the HCl limit.
    The 2013 rule requires that if a source chooses to (or is required 
to) monitor HCl emissions using a CEMS (Option 1), they must do so in 
accordance with PS-15, PS-18, or any other PS for HCl CEMS in appendix 
B to part 60 of this chapter. (See 40 CFR part 60, appendix B.) Quality 
assurance procedures for HCl CEMS require that they be capable of 
reading HCl concentrations that span a range of possible emission 
levels below as well as above expected HCl emission concentrations. 
These quality assurance procedures require the use of National 
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)-traceable calibration 
gases for HCl.
    Following our decision to create PS-18 and Procedure 6 for HCl 
continuous monitoring in 2012, the EPA worked with NIST and commercial 
gas vendors on development of NIST-traceable HCl gas standards to 
support the PS-18 in the 2013 rulemaking. While some of the low HCl 
concentration (<10 parts per million, or ppm) NIST-traceable gases have 
been available on a limited basis since 2013, the full range of HCl 
concentrations required to support all HCl emissions monitoring 
technologies (including integrated path that requires concentrations 
100 times higher) are not widely available at this time.
    The approach used by NIST in 2013 was to certify the Research Gas 
Material (RGM) cylinders as primary gas standards. These cylinders 
contain HCl gas and are provided to NIST by vendors for NIST 
certification, and subsequently used by the vendors as transfer 
standards to prepare the Gas Manufacturer Intermediate Standards 
(GMIS). The GMIS cylinders are then used to produce NIST-traceable gas 
cylinders that are sold commercially.\1\ The initial approach used by 
NIST to certify the RGM cylinders was not viable in the long term as 
the instrumentation used by NIST largely depleted the HCl RGM gas 
volume, leaving little gas in the cylinder for the vendors to use in 
preparing GMIS materials. Because of this concern, NIST initiated 
development of an improved RGM certification procedure. The development 
has been hampered by the challenges presented in handling HCl gas. HCl 
gas is extremely reactive and difficult to handle in both gas cylinders 
and analytically. As such, it has taken considerable time for NIST to 
optimize the analytical equipment and approach to achieve the necessary 
uncertainty requirements (e.g., <1 percent uncertainty).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ EPA Traceability Protocol for Assay and Certification of 
Gaseous Calibration Standards, U.S. EPA, Office of Research and 
Development, EPA/600/R-12/531, May 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the commercial establishment of NIST-traceable gases 
is dependent on collaboration between

[[Page 28564]]

NIST and the specialty gas vendors. There are a limited number of 
vendors providing the stable, accurate, low and high concentration 
cylinder gases to NIST to certify as RGMs. Once the RGMs are available, 
the specialty gas vendors must complete a series of procedures to 
establish the certainty of their products which adds to the time to 
achieve wide commercial availability.
    As a result, on July 25, 2016 (81 FR 48356), the EPA provided an 
additional compliance alternative for sources that would otherwise be 
required to use an HCl CEMS (Option 1). The alternative was provided 
for a period of 1 year. In the alternative, the HCl CEMS was still 
required to be installed and operated, but actual compliance with the 
HCl emissions limit was determined by a three-run stack test. The HCl 
CEMS still provided a continuous readout of HCl emissions, but because 
the CEMS was not calibrated with the required NIST-traceable 
calibration gases, the HCl measurement was not considered to be 
sufficiently accurate on an absolute basis for compliance. However, it 
was found to be sufficient to indicate any relative change in HCl 
emissions occurring subsequent to the compliance test. Therefore, the 
HCl CEMS under the compliance alternative functioned as a continuous 
parameter monitoring system (CPMS), as in the case of the particulate 
matter (PM) CPMS requirement (see 78 FR 10014-10015, 10019-10020, 
February 12, 2013).
    It is the EPA's understanding that the availability of NIST-
traceable calibration gases for HCl has not changed since the 
compliance alternative approval in 2016. Thus, the EPA intends to 
extend the use of this compliance alternative until such time as the 
NIST-traceable calibration gases for HCl become readily available.
    Under this extension of the compliance alternative, the owner or 
operator will demonstrate initial compliance by conducting a 
performance test using Method 321 and will monitor compliance with an 
operating parameter limit through use of the HCl CEMS operating as a 
HCl CPMS. For the HCl CPMS, the owner or operator will use the average 
HCl CPMS indicated output, typically displayed as parts per million by 
volume (ppmv), wet basis HCl recorded at in-stack oxygen concentration 
during the HCl performance test to establish the operating limit. To 
determine continuous compliance with the operating limit, the owner or 
operator will record the indicated HCl CPMS output data for all periods 
when the process is operating and use all the HCl CPMS data, except 
data obtained during times of monitor malfunctions. Thus, continuous 
compliance with the operating limit will be demonstrated by using all 
valid hourly average data collected by the HCl CPMS for all operating 
hours to calculate the arithmetic average operating parameter in units 
of the operating limit (indicated ppm) on a 30-kiln operating day 
rolling average basis, updated at the end of each new kiln operating 
day. An exceedance of the kiln 30-day operating limit would trigger 
evaluation of the control system operation and resetting the operating 
limit based on a new correlation with performance testing. For kilns 
with inline raw mills, performance testing and monitoring HCl to 
establish the site specific operating limit must be conducted during 
both raw mill on and raw mill off conditions.
    As is the case for the PM CPMS requirements (see 40 CFR 
63.1349(b)(1)(i)), this alternative for HCl compliance monitoring 
includes a scaling factor of 75 percent of the emission standard as a 
benchmark (2.25 ppmv, dry basis at 7-percent oxygen). Sources that 
choose this option will conduct a Method 321 test to determine 
compliance with the HCl emissions standard and during this testing will 
also monitor their HCl CPMS output in indicated ppm to determine where 
their HCl CPMS output would intersect 75 percent of their allowed HCl 
emissions, and set their operating level at that ppm output. This 
scaling procedure alleviates re-testing concerns for sources that 
operate well below the emission limit and provides greater operational 
flexibility while assuring continuous compliance with the HCl emission 
standard. For sources whose Method 321 compliance tests place them at 
or above 75 percent of the emission standard, their operating limit is 
determined by the average of three Method 321 test runs (for sources 
with no inline raw mill) or the time weighted average of six Method 321 
test runs (for kilns with inline raw mills). By adopting a scaling 
factor as well as the use of 30 days of averaged HCl CPMS measurements, 
the parametric limit in no way imposes a stringency level higher than 
the level of the HCl emissions standard and will avoid triggering 
unnecessary retests for many facilities, especially for the lower-
emitting sources.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders 
can be found at http://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive 
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a significant regulatory action and was, 
therefore, not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
for review.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose any new information collection burden 
under the PRA. OMB has previously approved the information collection 
activities contained in the existing regulation (40 CFR part 63, 
subpart LLL) and has assigned OMB control number 2060-0416. This action 
does not change the information collection requirements.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This 
action will not impose any requirements on small entities. This action 
does not create any new requirements or burdens and no costs are 
associated with this direct final action.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain an unfunded mandate as described in 
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect 
small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state, 
local, or tribal governments or the private sector.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have 
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between 
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power 
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in 
Executive Order 13175. It will neither impose substantial direct 
compliance costs on federally recognized tribal governments, nor 
preempt tribal law. The EPA is aware of one tribally owned Portland 
cement facility currently subject to 40 CFR part 63, subpart LLL that 
will be subject to this direct final rule. However, the provisions of 
this direct final rule are not expected to impose new or substantial 
direct compliance costs on tribal governments since the provisions in 
this direct final rule are

[[Page 28565]]

extending the use of an alternative to the HCl monitoring provisions, 
including an option which provides operational flexibility. Thus, 
Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying to those 
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks 
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect 
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in 
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to 
Executive Order 13045 because it does not concern an environmental 
health risk or safety risk.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 because it is 
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    The EPA believes that this action does not have disproportionately 
high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority 
populations, low-income populations, and/or indigenous peoples, as 
specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 
This action does not affect the level of protection provided to human 
health or the environment.

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

    This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule 
report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of 
the United States. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 
U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedures, 
Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental 
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: June 19, 2017.
E. Scott Pruitt,
Administrator.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Environmental 
Protection Agency is amending title 40, chapter I, part 63 of the Code 
of Federal Regulations (CFR), as follows:

PART 63--NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS 
FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES

0
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart LLL--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 
Pollutants From the Portland Cement Manufacturing Industry


Sec.  63.1349  [Amended]

0
2. Section 63.1349 is amended by removing paragraph (b)(6)(v)(H).

0
3. Section 63.1350 is amended by revising paragraph (l)(4) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  63.1350  Monitoring requirements.

* * * * *
    (l) * * *
    (4) If you monitor continuous performance through the use of an HCl 
CPMS according to Sec.  63.1349(b)(6)(v)(A) through (G), for any 
exceedance of the 30-kiln operating day HCl CPMS average value from the 
established operating limit, you must:
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2017-13185 Filed 6-22-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


