500 New Jersey Avenue, NW

7 th Floor Washington, D.C. 20001 June 8, 2010

Mr. George Faison Program Implementation and Information Division

Office of Resource Conservation and Re c overy U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20460

- 0002

Ms. Charlene Spells Natural Resource and Commerce Group Sector Policies and Programs Division (E

- 143

- 03) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Research Triangle Park, NC 27711

Re: Request for Extension to Comment Period for Proposed Rules

Dear Mr. Faison and Ms. Spells:

I am writing on behalf of the Portland Cement Association (PCA) regarding the EPA proposed rule s , titled “ Identification of Non

- Hazardous Secondary Materials that are Solid Waste; Proposed Rule ” and “ Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources and Emission Guidelines for Existing Sources; Commercial and Industrial Sol id Waste Incineration Units; Proposed Rule. ” which w ere published in the Federal Register on Friday, June 4, 20 10 (7 5 Fed. Reg. 31844 and 75 Fed. Reg. 31938 , respectively ) . The rule s

propose new criteria for determining whether a material is a solid waste and new emissions

standards for facilities that incinerate solid waste.

The cement industry, which is represented in this instance by PCA, has a long history of using alternatives to conventional fuels and raw mate rials and is therefore very interested in preparing thoughtful and responsive comments on these related proposals. The cement industry’s circumstance is particularly complicated, as the Agency is currently in the midst of revising the portland cement nati onal emission standard for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) and the portland cement new source performance standard (NSPS). Reconciling the differential impacts of these various regulatory proceedings on the industry will be but one significant part of the industry’s effort to prepare comments.

Beyond the regulatory reconciliation mentioned above, the proposals raise a number

of significant issue s of concern to PCA members, including :

H ow the scope of the solid wa s te definition will affect curren t industry recycling and reuse practices

### 2

T he foundation for

, and achievability of

, the proposed solid waste incinerator

emission standards

T he efficacy of applying the new emission control technologies

T he basis for the economic impact assessments

.

Many of these matters are highly technical and will require adequate time to consider,

collect and review relevant data

, and prepare responsive comments. PCA does not believe

that the 60

- day comment period

, initiated on June 4

, will be of sufficient duration to accomplish these tasks.

While PCA appreciates the 15

- day comment period extension announced yesterday (beyond the 45 days in the proposals themselves ), the association respectfully requests that the Agency extend the comment period by at least an additional 3 0

- days to approximately September 3 , 20 10 . This additional time will facilitate a comprehensive review of the proposal s and their implications

, and give PCA adequate time to develop a response of value to the agency’s rulemaking processes.

Thank you for con sidering the views of PCA on th is matter. You may reach me at (202) 408

- 9494 (or aohare@cement.org ) to address any questions

.

Sincerely,

Andrew T. O’Hare

Vice President , Regulatory Affairs