## Appendix R

Holcim-Clarksville BART Draft Consent Agreement August 18, 2008

### AUG 1 8 

### Z008

Mr. Alan Greer Plant Manager Holcim

- Clarksville 14738 Highway 79 Clarksville, MO 63336

Re: Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) finding and Consent Agreement for Clarksville's kiln system
Dear Mr. Greer:
The following is a summary of the Department of Natural Resources finding for BART on the Clarksville kiln system. With respect to oxides of nitrogen (NOx), the department has received a portion of this study from CINAR Company detailing the emission reductions achieved by midkiln firing of tire-derived fuel (TDF). The department is requesting the full study to complete the necessary technical review. Based on confinnation of the results from this study, the department will likely find that mid-kiln firing ofTDF will result in a cost-effective control on NOx that will satisfy BART for Holcim-Clarksville. This finding is supported by the following: (1) the kiln system already utilizes 10w-NOx burners in the kiln; (2) the kiln system already utilizes cenlent kiln dust insufflation for NOx control; (3) the department concurs with the finding of technical infeasibility for flue gas recirculation and selective catalytic reduction due to lack of commercial application for these technologies on the type of kiln system operated at Clarksville (long, wet); (4) the department concurs that selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR) and mid-kiln firing of tires are technically feasible (with some caveats regarding SNCR perfonnance in a long, wet kiln system); and (5) the cost effectiveness of the mid-kiln firing NOx control and the increased certainty of emission reduction supports its choice over SNCR in this specific case.
The evaluation for control of sulfur dioxide (S02) for the Clarksville kiln system included fuel substitution, raw material substitution, dry scrubbing, and wet scrubbing. The department
concurs with your finding that fuel substitution and dry/wet scrubbing are technically feasible for S02 control. The department has some reservations with the scrubbing technology cost analysis used in your proposal. However, the departnlent's analyses demonstrate the cost of scrubbing technology would significantly impact the Clarksville kiln's ability to compete in the cement production market (e.g. nearly $20/ton clinker produced). Therefore, the department has found 

# o Recycled Paper

••**~.** A_ 'Mr. Alan Greer Page Two

that switching to a lower sulfur fuel with the use ofTDF will satisfy the S02 BART requirements for the Clarksville kiln system.
The enclosed draft consent agreement documents the department's findings for BART. The department has determined the emission limits in the agreement should be expressed as 30-day rolling averages to allow for operational variability in the kiln system and to remain consistent with the averaging time utilized by the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) presumptive BART findings for electric generating units. This draft agreement has not been shared with EPA Region VII staff and will undergo their review before signature to ensure it is "approvable" for inclusion in the regional haze State Implementation Plan.
There are two specific issues in the agreement for your technical review: (1) missing continuous emission monitor data substitution and (2) calibration/quality assurance of the emission monitoring system. These two provisions have been designed to encourage a discussion between Holcim and the department regarding these important monitoring issues. Overall, Holcim's willingness to provide the necessary information to address the federal regional haze requirements has been encouraging. At this point, we look forward to finalizing the agreement and incorporating it into the regional haze State Implementation Plan. If you have questions about the emission limits or other technical details, please contact Jeffry D. Bennett with the department's Air Pollution Control Program at P.o. Box 176, Jefferson City, Missouri 65102 or by telephone at (573) 751-8406. If you have questions regarding the legal requirements of the agreen1ent, please contact Sarah Callier with the department's Division of Environmental Quality at (573) 522-9911. Sincerely,

es L. Kavanaugh lfector JLK:jbt
Enclosure

c: Ms. Sarah Callier, Division of Environmental Quality, Legal Counsel

### REGIONAL HAZE A'-JI.a'-l L.:l.&JJ.)I
The parties hereto, the Missouri Department of N Holcim (US) Incorporated- Clarksville, having agreed that**ent1 rNd[~ffis** **Rej~dII~~e** A greement (hereinafter "Agreement") is in the best inter e st th and the environment, hereby represent and state as

1. The Missouri Department of N duly authorized state agency cre a Missouri (as amended) to adm ini environmental control and the co nservati
2. Chapter 643 of the Director of the

3.

.. v.................... "Department") is a Revised Statutes of ed to it related to o f natural resources. provides that the Con servation

Mi ssouri in Co nservation is the legal and rightful

4.

. ty and jurisdiction to issue by the Department to to contest the authority or

t, it is the mutual objective of the Department and

t ions of emissions from the facility, listed in

at Mingo National Wildlife Refuge, Hercules

Buffalo Wilderness Area (in Arkansas), and to

... .LV'

.. ""....

. .... will achieve reductions in air pollution emissions pollutants. This Agreement establishes enforceable to the Department's requirements to comply with · the regional identified in this Agreement which require the
use of Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) to applicable emission
sources. This Agreement is not the result of any enforcement action or alleged non-compliance with any law, regulation, permit, or order and will enable Holcim

### to timely comply with the Environment al Department deadlines for BART and other**un~"""~1W'I**



### 7. This Agreement shall apply to and 1:) 

### successors, and assigns and u pon a under or for either the Depa rtm ent
8. The parties agree to**undert ~~r.**  

### .. conditions of this

### Agreeme**~ri"** 

### 9. Notwithstanding the terms of a with this Agreement and f o r insuri this Agreement.
10. The activities**co 1tQl[eJ~:(1**  

### Department.**HOl "'** **l1 "** **'-1"!~"'~'-' '-** **4!!...«U''''' aJIJ** **"' -I.leas** **Dna** 

### information**corls1 sten** **~**



### 11. Agency (EPA) and the

. es , 

### their agents,
u l tants acting

es ponsible for compliance
ors and agents comply with

. eet to ap proval by the vide all necessary

...**~~1 I"hn** **ent.**



### o ut as a party of any contract pu r suant to this Agreement.

In 19 77 ,**~.n~·ess~a.J1)tt~(1** 

### § 169 (42 U.S.C. 7491) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), se tti ib ility goal of restoring pristine conditions in national p arks an{ NIU'lldiem

. e ss 

### d esignated as Class I Areas. When the CAA 1990, Congress added §169B (42 U.S.C. 7492),**e!'~~** 

### and regular assessments of the progress made for

13. 40 CFR51.308 (Part P), was adopted July 1,1999**rml' ''** **eJTel~ -';** **f'll** 

### A ugust 30, 1999. The Regional Haze Rule aimed at

' ty goals by 2064. This rulemaking addresses the combined visi bili of various pollution sources over a wide geographic region. The 1999 Regional Haze Rule also singles out certain older emission
sources that have not been regulated under other provisions of the CAA foradditional controls. Therefore, older impainnent in Class I areas are required t o
14. On May 24, 2002, the 

# u.s. Court of challenge brought by' the American Regional Haze Rule of 1999. Ame F.3d 1. The Court denied the the Regional Haze Rule and r em EP A proposed revisions to the
15. to visibility

· ct Co urt ruled on a against EPA's
v. EP A, 291 l enge to and ,

Haze Rule, in cl ud nder the Regional Haze

16.**t~q~bl.ld~~ilil1fhg** which older sources may

identify sources**cat~ej;w .nes~**  including whether the

impact. In addition, the
were evaluated and were

Depa rtment requested ail evaluation of BART
a n d Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) emissions 

### at**K'1 l1!8eJ»~**  w as submitted by Holcim on April 20, 2008.**we~ m)~icjed**  which resulted in three additional

and explore additional control options. provided to ask for clarification of some additional**...,** ........**~,** ... ... t, Holcim has now provided sufficient information

""f'"ll : ."''!' ' ''' finding at the Clarksville facility for the kiln system

1"\ 'UJ'l

....**'l'~ ~i\Ii** **(.'sion** point ID).

18. The Depa rtment T finding is based on the use of mid-kiln firing of tires and reduced sulfur fuel sources (coal, tires, and synthetic fuel) to control NO x and 

### S02 respectively from kiln operation.

### AGREEMENT AND**COM PLJAl1~~I!t'P**  19. Holcim agrees to fire fuels containing

### les**A1 l,fee"** **lV'Io tJ** **ercent** sulfur by weight at

20.

21. all times in the Clarksville kiln system.
Unless otherwise specified in**th** 

### . ..**~.** following emission limits for th e no later than five years after appr
A. NO x ­ 42.287Ib/day B. S02

- 58, 787lb/day**=-r- .~nL** 

### ~I**· le,**  but

be based on the loyed as of the effective date**1'lI"'II"''''~rI** b y Holcim that has been

. . ed in subparagraphs A**"'''~'' ''''-**  miss ing CEM data
u rposes of this**".l ~""':;"'1!.**  kiln is heated

## ~I~**~, ~**  e l is being fired

.... '

.... .c"'.LJl.L.L""'L.L.L hourly emissions in

### ~~I1Jl**~rr** each missing hour; in'a:Xi'lhniril5lfdfirl y emissions in the preceding 12

SSliOD l mCl.nito ring system shall be calibrated quarterly for S02**W~~.n** in accordance with an approved Quality submitted no later than 

### 90 days after the The QAPP shall address collection of all**~'VJl~·IJITn,~T rn**  _ T- &_,_&ate S02 and NO x emissions, including flow-rate t'QI,, -P n nllutants in the exit stream (measured in, parts per

23.**perat j'()tll~ftUt'** **;U ~(~**  for Holcim

- Clarksville. Agreement shall be incorporated into any construction

24. This Agreement be proposed by the Department for incorporation into the Regional Haze State Implementation Plan for Missouri.

### CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
25

. Holcim is a person within the meaning**ofRS ~~tr-'** **.** 

### 26. RSMo 643.060.4 provides that the Natural Resources is responsible for**<:IIn'l"'l"'1n ll~**  

### Conservation Law, investigating**co mplaUl~)** **1K1. 1ng**  

### necessary to implement the Miss ouri provides that the Director is au t necessary for carrying out the In addition, the Missouri Air authority under RSMo 643.05

. into agreements to control air p o

27. D epartment of Missouri Air all actions .06 0.2**th ~~~~** **e~~l()~al** 

### judgment of tive d ate of this
a

ted to the to the there is a n , then the
as it deems haze regulations, provided that and an opportunity to submit

Holcim further reserves the

:e rrten1rs under this Agreement within the**~"'~l** 

### herein the performance is prevented or delayed**ev(m t5** **bJ'i' ~:n**  

### constitute a force majeure. For purposes of this**orl ~~** **l11'-le u:re**  

### is defined as any event beyond the control of

'-A1l'iI t.

....**,.** 

### be overcome by due diligence and which delays**perto ~LM** **J.qe** 

### by a date required by this Agreement. Such**incUl(le b'c** **]rea:sed** 

### costs of performance or changed economic caused in whole or in part by action or inaction
or · federal regulatory authorities or third parties unrelated to shall be considered a force majeure and shall not be deemed a violation of any obligation required by this Agreement.B. Holcim shall have the burden of pro vi v
..... , • .L.L.LU of force majeure. Failure to comply by reason of force ma teUlre 

### I not be construed as a violation of this Agreement.


## c. Holcim shall notify the Departmen tA.tlb

..**W1rJtlIU!. W1t1t1ur**  .. ten 

### (1 0) days**aft~r** becoming aware of an event ly should have known constituted force

. ate the anticipated length of delay , its the delay, and an estimated**im~~~! ~JU** **r** Failure to comply with the waiver of Holcim's ri grounds for the**D~O:::l rMi\1I**  extension of time for pe rfo

D.

the Departme n occurred or i f dispute shall b e**E~** n f'C lif

....**~iHerr** notic e from Holcim· of a

- ..**-~** __**'t".~.':l~ l'Io..:** **Hol cim**  of the extent to

### ~~~I~!lr.....**In** the event that event has**";{~~~ ~~~1'** **''''.L.L'o.>.L'''''.L.L'** the**mtltuaFaJ; ~e(~me~nt**  of the Department**iU1~iiDmq~~Jl** shall have as their

## !I~~I~~~~~~~~**mH: ~**  by both parties and shall

may arise between them regarding

as herein set forth or other terms or

parties will endeavor to settle it by informal**~rJllt emlselves.**  If the parties cannot resolve the issue

_ .. _ ..... ...., .......... U'

...... period of time, either of the parties may ti ng stating its position with regard to the dispute for e. A party receiving such a notice of dispute will within ten 

### (10) days stating its position. The Departmen t or cim shall then have an additional ten 

### (10) day period or such longer time as the parties agree to respond. If the parties are still unable to reach an agreement, the matter shall be referred to the Directorof the Division of Environmental Qua lity , decide the matter and provide a written statement of his de cis;'11 W ' l!Pl7tri"l"h shall be incorporated into the Agreement

B. This dispute resolution procedure

### i~;~:'~':~I;~ direct recourse to court if**otherwise ll~iWlble** 

30. Nothing in this Agreement shall S1\)lllSti1Jj'te claim, cause of action or**aet n~l.(I** **;~; UlI**  any person, partnership, or corporation not qolDllflat!;>ry for any liability it may have arising out of or rela ting**'A' -":** **~~~ ~"** **~;""":;..L** 

### t.

31. This Agreement

. Missouri Department**0~~~~~~~5~** 32. by a future

### "---'~~~l~~~ eq uivalent or t't'1,...lt-tao n notice to**~~",,~·an"'''** .... n,hl'':r withheld.

33. dates inserted below to The signatories to this**auunOrlZea-t1~:x e(;ute**  and to legally bind the