From: "Carol Conley" <carol.conley@cherokeebrick.com>

To: Jeff Telander/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Cc: Alexander Cristofaro/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, <cortney_higgins@omb.eop.gov>, 

<keith.holman@sba.gov>, "'Susan Miller'" <SMiller@bia.org>

Date: 05/10/2010 04:10 PM

Subject: SER Response to Questions 4-20-10

Our responses are attached. We appreciate the opportunity to participate as a Small Entity 

Representative in the Brick Rule.

Carol H. Conley

VP HR/Environmental Affairs

Cherokee Brick & Tile Co

3250 Waterville Road

Macon GA 31206

Telephone: 478-781-6801 ext 104

Email: carol.conley@cherokeebrick.com

(See attached file: SER Response to EPA questions New Brick MACT 4-27-10.doc)
May 03, 2010

Jeff Telander

US EPA

Mail Code D243-02

109 TW Alexander Drive

RTP, NC 27709

RE: Brick and Structural Clay Rule

Material for Small Business Regulatory Fairness Act 

Pre-Panel Outreach 

Dear Mr. Telander:

We appreciate the opportunity to participate as a Small Entity Representative in this Small Business 

Regulatory Fairness Act process. 

We were unable to attend the April 20th meeting in Washington, DC; however we did participate in the 

teleconference and was disappointed as we were not able to hear all the discussions.

We have reviewed all the material you supplied in your email on April 8th and will attempt to respond to 

the questions based on the information provided.

Compliance:

1. Do you use any monitors (e.g., emissions monitors or process parameter monitors) to ensure 

that our kilns are operating properly? If yes, what types of monitors and how many?

We do have process monitors on our kilns; however, we do not understand exactly what 

information is requesting.

2. Are these monitors in place for environmental regulatory reasons? Insurance reasons? Or 

both?

The monitors are for kiln operations. 

3. What are the costs to the facility of these monitors? What percentage of overall facility costs do 

these represent?

The kilns use process monitors and we do not have the costs associated with these monitors. 
4. If you operate any periodic kilns, do you currently conduct any work or operating practices (i.e., 

other than the use of an air pollution control device) that would have an impact on hazardous 

air pollutant (HAP) emissions from these kilns? If yes, please explain.

Not applicable. 

5. If your tunnel kilns were subject to emission limits, are there testing ports available for 

conducting compliance tests? If not, what do you estimate the costs to be of modifying the 

stack for testing? Do you foresee any other problems with conducting stack tests on your tunnel 

kilns? If so, please explain.

Our large tunnel kilns (> 10 tph) do have testing ports available for conducting compliance tests, 

except for PM 2.5 test, which would require a 4 in port.

Please note that in 2007, we added a used baghouse including ductwork, fans, tear out, and 

installation totaling $269,008.30 for PM emissions. Since 2007, we have purchased new bags 

twice and new cages, costing $52,955.35. The bags have an efficiency of over 80% for PM.

The small tunnel kilns (< 10 tph) do not have testing ports which does present problems 

especially costs as we do not have permanent access structures or work platforms. We would 

need additional time in order to place a cost estimate factor on this.

6. What do you estimate the costs to be of conducting stack tests for HAP emissions from your 

tunnel kilns?

We estimate the cost to be in excess of $10,000.00 per test. 

7. If your tunnel kilns were subject to emission limits, are there alternatives to monitoring 

emissions or stack testing that would be less costly to demonstrate compliance? If so, please 

explain the alternatives and estimate how much it would cost to conduct them.

We are exploring options that may work. We need additional time in order to respond to this 

question.

8. Do you have any kilns that are controlled with a dry limestone adsorber (DLA)? If so, please 

explain the feasibility and estimate the costs of replacing the DLA with a dry injection fabric filter 

(DIFF) or other type of control device that might be more effective in controlling emissions of 

HAP.

We installed our DLA in good faith after promulgation of the previous MACT in 2006. The capital 

investments plus the associated expenses through March 2010 were approximately $2.6 million. 

The cost associated with putting in a new control mechanism, we would estimate to be an 

additional $3 to $6 million depending on the system or systems placed in service.

9. Are there any subcategories (e.g., product type, kiln size) that you would recommend for your 

industry? If so, please identify them and document the basis for your recommendation.
EPA should continue to distinguish between small and large tunnel kilns. The small tunnel kilns 

(<10 tph):

• Generally are older kilns;

• Older kilns are more labor intense, more likely to be less air tight, less likely to be as 

completely controlled/vented;

• Older kilns will eventually reach the end of their lives and be replaced by newer kilns. 

However, given the financial crisis of the last three years capital investments are being 

delayed.

Permitting/Inspections:

1. Are your kilns required to be permitted by the state? If so, what is the cost for permitting? If 

not, what would you estimate the burden to be in terms of costs and hours if the kilns are 

required to be permitted? What is the magnitude of these costs compared to the costs of kiln 

operation and the facility as a whole? Are your permitting activities done by in-house staff or by 

outside contractors?

Yes, we are required to be permitted by the state. 

2. Are your kilns required to be inspected for safety or insurance reasons? If so, how often is this 

performed? What is the cost of these inspections? What is the magnitude of these costs 

compared to the cost of kiln operation and the facility as a whole?

No, our kilns are not required to be inspected for safety or insurance reasons.

Capital Availability/Regulatory Impact:

1. Are your firm’s expenses for the activities listed above largely paid for out of equity, earnings, or 

debt?

These expenses are being paid out of debt and especially in the future considering the economy 

for the last three years.

2. Considered together, how much of your firm’s revenues or budget are the costs of the activities 

listed above in percentage terms?

We appreciate having the opportunity to work with EPA on this critical rulemaking.

Sincerely,

Carol H. Conley

VP HR/Environmental Affairs