Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 223 / Wednesday, November 19, 2014 / Proposed Rules 68821 

feature at: www.federalregister.gov. 

Specifically, through the advanced 

search feature at this site, you can limit 

your search to documents published by 

the Department. 

Dated: November 13, 2014. 

Nadya Chinoy Dabby, 

Assistant Deputy Secretary for Innovation and 

Improvement. 

[FR Doc. 2014–27264 Filed 11–18–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 60 and 63 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0817; FRL–9918–60– 

OAR] 

RIN 2060–AQ93 

National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants for the 

Portland Cement Manufacturing 

Industry and Standards of 

Performance for Portland Cement 

Plants: Amendments 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: On February 12, 2013, the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

finalized amendments to the national 

emission standards for the control of 

hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) 

from the new and existing Portland 

cement manufacturing industry at major 

sources of hazardous air pollutants 

(HAP). Subsequently, the EPA has 

become aware of certain minor technical 

errors in those amendments, and is, 

accordingly, proposing amendments 

and technical corrections to the final 

rule. In addition, the EPA plans to 

remove rule provisions establishing an 

affirmative defense in the final technical 

correction rule. 

DATES: Comments. Comments must be 

received on or before January 20, 2015, 

or 30 days after date of public hearing, 

if later. 

Public Hearing. If anyone contacts the 

EPA requesting to speak at a public 

hearing by November 24, 2014, we will 

hold a public hearing on December 4, 

2014 on the EPA campus at 109 T.W. 

Alexander Drive, Research Triangle 

Park, North Carolina. 

ADDRESSES: Comments. Submit your 

comments, identified by Docket ID 

Number EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0817, by 

one of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov: Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Email: A-and-R-Docket@epa.gov. 

Include Attention Docket ID No. EPA– 

HQ–OAR–2011–0817 in the subject line 

of the message. 

• Fax: (202) 566–9744, Attention 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2011– 

0817. 

• Mail: Environmental Protection 

Agency, EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), 

Mail Code 28221T, Attention Docket ID 

No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0817, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, 

DC 20460. In addition, please mail a 

copy of your comments on the 

information collection provisions to the 

Office of Information and Regulatory 

Affairs, Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB), Attn: Desk Officer for 

EPA, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, 

DC 20503. 

• Hand/Courier Delivery: EPA Docket 

Center, Room 3334, EPA WJC West 

Building, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., 

Washington, DC 20004, Attention 

Docket ID Number EPA–HQ–OAR– 

2011–0817. Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Docket’s normal 

hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions. Direct your comments to 

Docket ID Number EPA–HQ–OAR– 

2011–0817. The EPA’s policy is that all 

comments received will be included in 

the public docket without change and 

may be made available online at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be confidential business 

information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through http://

www.regulations.gov or email. The 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is 

an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means the EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to the EPA without 

going through http://

www.regulations.gov, your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, the EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If the EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, the EPA may not 

be able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should not include 

special characters or any form of 

encryption and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional information 

about the EPA’s public docket, visit the 

EPA Docket Center homepage at: http:// 

www.epa.gov/dockets. 

Docket. The EPA has established a 

docket for this rulemaking under Docket 

ID Number EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0817. 

All documents in the docket are listed 

in the http://www.regulations.gov index. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., CBI or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in http://

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the EPA Docket Center, Room 3334, 

EPA WJC West Building, 1301 

Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, 

DC. The Public Reading Room is open 

from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The telephone number for the 

Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, 

and the telephone number for the EPA 

Docket Center is (202) 566–1742. 

Public Hearing. If anyone contacts the 

EPA requesting a public hearing by 

November 24, 2014, the public hearing 

will be held on December 4, 2014 at the 

EPA’s campus at 109 T.W. Alexander 

Drive, Research Triangle Park, North 

Carolina. The hearing will begin at 1:00 

p.m. (Eastern Standard Time) and 

conclude at 5:00 p.m. (Eastern Standard 

Time). Please contact Ms. Pamela 

Garrett at (919) 541–7966 or to register 

to speak at the hearing, or to inquire 

about whether a hearing will be held. 

The last day to pre-register in advance 

to speak at the hearings will be 

December 1, 2014. Additionally, 

requests to speak will be taken the day 

of the hearing at the hearing registration 

desk, although preferences on speaking 

times may not be able to be fulfilled. If 

you require the service of a translator or 

special accommodations such as audio 

description, please let us know at the 

time of registration. If you require an 

accommodation, we ask that you preregister for the hearing, as we may not 

be able to arrange such accommodations 

without advance notice. 

The hearing will provide interested 

parties the opportunity to present data, 

views or arguments concerning the 

proposed action. The EPA will make 

every effort to accommodate all speakers 

who arrive and register. Because this 

hearing is being held at a U.S. 

government facility, individuals 

planning to attend the hearing should be 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
68822 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 223 / Wednesday, November 19, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

prepared to show valid picture 

identification to the security staff in 

order to gain access to the meeting 

room. Please note that the REAL ID Act, 

passed by Congress in 2005, established 

new requirements for entering federal 

facilities. If your driver’s license is 

issued by Alaska, American Samoa, 

Arizona, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, 

Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, 

New York, Oklahoma or the state of 

Washington, you must present an 

additional form of identification to enter 

the federal building. Acceptable 

alternative forms of identification 

include: Federal employee badges, 

passports, enhanced driver’s licenses 

and military identification cards. In 

addition, you will need to obtain a 

property pass for any personal 

belongings you bring with you. Upon 

leaving the building, you will be 

required to return this property pass to 

the security desk. No large signs will be 

allowed in the building, cameras may 

only be used outside of the building and 

demonstrations will not be allowed on 

federal property for security reasons. 

The EPA may ask clarifying questions 

during the oral presentations, but will 

not respond to the presentations at that 

time. Written statements and supporting 

information submitted during the 

comment period will be considered 

with the same weight as oral comments 

and supporting information presented at 

the public hearing. Commenters should 

notify Ms. Garrett if they will need 

specific equipment, or if there are other 

special needs related to providing 

comments at the hearings. Verbatim 

transcripts of the hearing and written 

statements will be included in the 

docket for the rulemaking. The EPA will 

make every effort to follow the schedule 

as closely as possible on the day of the 

hearing; however, please plan for the 

hearing to run either ahead of schedule 

or behind schedule. 

Again, a hearing will only be held if 

requested by November 24, 2014. Please 

contact Ms. Pamela Garrett at (919) 541– 

7966 or at garrett.pamela@epa.gov or 

visit http://www.epa.gov/airquality/

cement/actions.html to determine if a 

hearing will be held. If the EPA holds 

a public hearing, the EPA will keep the 

record of the hearing open for 30 days 

after completion of the hearing to 

provide an opportunity for submission 

of rebuttal and supplementary 

information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Sharon Nizich, Minerals and 

Manufacturing Group, Sector Policies 

and Programs Division (D243–04), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 

27711; telephone number: (919) 541– 

2825; facsimile number: (919) 541–5450; 

email address: nizich.sharon@epa.gov. 

For information about the applicability 

of the NESHAP or NSPS contact Mr. 

Patrick Yellin, Monitoring, Assistance 

and Media Programs Division (2227A), 

Office of Enforcement and Compliance 

Assurance, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Avenue, Washington, DC 20460; 

telephone number (202) 564–2970; 

email address yellin.patrick@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Organization of this Document. The 

following outline is provided to aid in 

locating information in the preamble. 

I. General Information 

A. What is the source of authority for this 

action? 

B. What entities are potentially affected by 

this action? 

C. What should I consider as I prepare my 

comments for the EPA? 

II. Background 

III. Discussion of the Issues Under 

Consideration 

IV. Plan To Remove Affirmative Defense 

V. Solicitation of Public Comment on 

Proposed Amendments 

VI. Technical Corrections and Clarifications 

VII. 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 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

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 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions 

To Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations 

I. General Information 

A. What is the source of authority for 

this action? 

The statutory authority for this action 

is provided by sections 111, 112 and 

301(a) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) as 

amended (42 U.S.C. 7411, 7412 and 

7601(a)). 

B. What entities are potentially affected 

by this action? 

Categories and entities potentially 

regulated by this proposed rule include: 

TABLE 1—NESHAP AND INDUSTRIAL SOURCE CATEGORIES AFFECTED BY THIS PROPOSED ACTION

Category NAICS code a Examples of regulated entities 

Industry ....................................................................................... 327310 Portland cement manufacturing plants. 

Federal government ................................................................... ........................ Not affected. 

State/local/tribal government ...................................................... ........................ Portland cement manufacturing plants. 

a North American Industry Classification System. 

Table 1 of this preamble is not 

intended to be exhaustive, but rather 

provides a guide for readers regarding 

entities likely to be regulated by this 

action. To determine whether your 

facility could be regulated by this 

action, you should examine the 

applicability criteria in 40 CFR 60.60 

(subpart F) or in 40 CFR 63.1340 

(subpart LLL). If you have any questions 

regarding the applicability of this action 

to a particular entity, contact the 

appropriate person listed in the 

preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section. 

C. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments for the EPA? 

Submitting CBI. Do not submit this 

information to the EPA through 

regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark 

the part or all of the information that 

you claim to be CBI. For CBI 

information in 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 comment that 

includes information claimed as CBI, a 

copy of the comment 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 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 223 / Wednesday, November 19, 2014 / Proposed Rules 68823 

accordance with procedures set forth in 

40 CFR part 2. Send or deliver 

information identified as CBI to only the 

following address: Ms. Sharon Nizich, 

c/o OAQPS Document Control Officer 

(Room C404–02), U.S. EPA, Research 

Triangle Park, NC 27711, Attention 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2011– 

0817. 

Docket. The docket number for this 

document is Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2011–0817. 

World Wide Web (WWW). In addition 

to being available in the docket, an 

electronic copy of this document will be 

posted on the WWW through the 

Technology Transfer Network (TTN) 

Web site. Following signature, the EPA 

will post a copy of this document at 

http://www.epa.gov/airquality/cement/

actions.html. The TTN provides 

information and technology exchange in 

various areas of air pollution control. 

II. Background 

In 2010, the EPA established NESHAP 

for the Portland Cement source category. 

75 FR 54970 (September 9, 2010). 

Specifically, the EPA established 

emission standards for mercury (Hg), 

hydrogen chloride (HCl), total 

hydrocarbons (THC) (or in the 

alternative, organic HAP (oHAP), and 

particulate matter (PM). These 

standards, established pursuant to 

section 112 (d) of the Act (CAA), 

reflected performance of maximum 

available control technology. Following 

court remand, Portland Cement Ass’n v. 

EPA, 665 F. 3d 177 (D.C. Cir. 2011), the 

EPA amended some of these standards 

in 2013, and established a new 

compliance date for the amended 

standards. 78 FR 10006 (Feb. 12, 2013). 

All of these actions were upheld by the 

United States Court of Appeals for the 

District of Columbia Circuit. Natural 

Resources Defense Council v. EPA, 749 

F. 3d 1055 (D.C. Cir. 2014). The court, 

however, also vacated a provision of the 

rule establishing an affirmative defense 

when violations of the standards 

occurred because of malfunctions. 749 

F. 3d at 1063–64. In light of the court’s 

vacatur, the regulatory provisions 

establishing the affirmative defense are 

null and void. Thus, the EPA plans to 

remove the affirmative defense 

regulatory text (40 CFR 63.1344) as part 

of the final technical corrections rule. 

The EPA also adopted standards of 

performance for new Portland cement 

sources as part of the same regulatory 

action establishing the 2010 NESHAP. 

75 FR 54970(Sept. 9, 2010); see also 

Portland Cement Ass’n v. EPA, 665 F. 

3d at 190–92 (upholding these 

standards). The EPA is proposing 

certain technical changes to these 

standards as part of today’s action. 

These changes do not affect the 

standards nor do they affect the 

expected cost of compliance. 

III. Discussion of the Issues Under 

Consideration 

The EPA is proposing certain 

clarifying changes and corrections to the 

2013 final rule. Specifically, these 

amendments would: (1) Clarify the 

definition of rolling average, operating 

day and run average; (2) restore the table 

of emission limits which apply until the 

September 9, 2015, compliance date; (3) 

correct equation 8 regarding sources 

with an alkali bypass or inline coal mill 

that include a separate stack; (4) provide 

a scaling alternative for sources that 

have a wet scrubber, tray tower or dry 

scrubber relative to the HCl compliance 

demonstration; (5) add a temperature 

parameter to the startup and shutdown 

requirements; (6) clarify language 

related to span values for both Hg and 

HCl measurements; and (7) correct 

inadvertent typographical errors. The 

EPA also proposes to clarify and correct 

certain inadvertent inconsistencies in 

the final rule regulatory text, such as 

correction of the compliance date for 

new sources and correction to the 

compliance date regarding monitoring 

and recordkeeping requirements to 

reflect the effective date of the final rule 

for the NSPS. 

In both the NSPS and the NESHAP, 

we are proposing language to clarify the 

existing definitions of Operating Day, 

Rolling Average and Run Average to 

promote consistent and clear monitoring 

data recording and emissions reporting. 

The clarifications below are in response 

to industry questions and neither is 

intended to change the meaning of the 

final rule. We propose to clarify that 

‘‘Operating Day’’ is any 24-hour period 

where clinker is produced. This 

clarification is necessary to specify that 

during any day with both operations 

and emissions, an emissions value or an 

average of emissions values representing 

those operations is included in the 30- 

day rolling average calculation. We also 

propose to clarify that ‘‘Rolling 

Average’’ means a weighted average of 

all monitoring data collected during a 

specified time period divided by all 

production of clinker during those same 

hours of operation. This clarification is 

necessary to specify the way a long term 

rolling average value is calculated such 

that different facilities are not using 

different approaches to demonstrate 

compliance with the rule. In addition, 

we propose to revise the definition of 

‘‘Run Average’’ to clarify that the run 

average means the average of the 

recorded parameter values, not the 1- 

minute parameter values, for a run. 

We are proposing to amend 40 CFR 

63.1349(b)(8)(vii) that includes a 

provision describing performance 

testing requirements when a source 

demonstrates compliance with the 

emissions standard using a continuous 

emissions monitoring system (CEMS) 

for sulfur dioxide (SO2) measurement 

and reporting. 

We are proposing to add a scaling 

alternative whereby if a source uses a 

wet scrubber, tray tower or dry scrubber, 

and where the test run average of the 

three HCl compliance tests 

demonstrates compliance below 2.25 

parts per million by volume (ppmv) 

(which is 75 percent of the HCl 

emission limit), the source may 

calculate an operating limit by 

establishing a relationship of the 

average SO2 CEMS signal to the HCl 

concentration (corrected to 7 percent 

oxygen). The operating limit would be 

established at a point where the SO2

CEMS indicates the source would be at 

2.25 ppmv. Since the 2.25 ppmv is 

below the actual limit of 3.0 ppmv, the 

source will continue to demonstrate 

compliance with the HCl standard. 

Given the fact that SO2 controls 

preferentially remove HCl, an increase 

in SO2 emissions would not indicate an 

increase in HCl emissions as long as 

some SO2 emissions reductions are 

occurring. Adding this compliance 

flexibility should not result in any 

increase in HCl emissions. We solicit 

comment on this approach. 

We also propose, under 40 CFR 

63.1346(g)(3), to revise language related 

to the use of air pollution control 

devices (APCD). During startup, fuel 

feed is increased over time until normal 

operating temperatures are achieved. 

According to industry, during both 

startup and shutdown, the gas stream to 

the APCD will be above 12-percent 

oxygen because the system is being 

operated at reduced fuel combustion 

rates. The minimal temperature at 

which oxygen content is below 12 

percent and thereby assuring the stream 

is nonexplosive, is 300 degrees 

Fahrenheit. There are also issues with 

activated carbon and hydrated lime 

being injected into large ducts with low 

gas flows. With low gas flows, these 

materials fall out of the stream and 

accumulate in the duct work. In 

addition, lime affected by water vapor 

condensation present during startup and 

shutdown conditions will cause the 

lime to harden and reduce the efficiency 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
68824 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 223 / Wednesday, November 19, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

1These issues are further discussed in the docket, 

via communication with John Holmes dated 

September 24, 2014. 

for dust removal.1 Therefore, we 

propose to require the APCD be turned 

on when the temperature of the APCD 

reaches 300 degrees Fahrenheit. We also 

propose to clarify that this section is 

applicable to HAP control devices, a 

requirement inadvertently missing from 

the promulgated rule. 

We propose to modify the 

measurement span criteria for HCl 

CEMS to include better quality 

assurance/quality control (QA/QC) for 

measurements of elevated HCl 

emissions that may result from ‘‘mill 

off’’ operations. This slight increase in 

measurement span (from 5 parts per 

million (ppm) to 10 ppm) provides for 

an improved balance between 

accurately quantifying measurements at 

low emissions levels (the majority of 

operating time) and improving QA/QC 

for brief periods of elevated emissions 

observed during ‘‘mill off’’ operation 

(the majority of HCl mass emissions). 

We propose to remove 40 CFR 

60.64(c)(2), which applied when sources 

did not have valid 15-minute CEMS 

data. This provision allowed for 

inclusion of the average emission rate 

from the previous hour for which data 

were available. This provision was 

inadvertently added to the final rule, 

but this substitution is not an allowable 

action. We solicit comment on removal 

of this subsection. 

We are also proposing to revise 40 

CFR 63.1350(o) (Alternative Monitoring 

Requirements Approval), since language 

in this section, which does not allow an 

operator to apply for alternative THC 

monitoring, is now obsolete. Since there 

is now alternative monitoring allowed 

in 40 CFR 63.1350(j) due to the 2013 

amendments (see 78 FR 10015), the 

exception is largely no longer needed. A 

source that emits a high amount of THC 

due to methane emissions, for example, 

can follow the alternative oHAP 

monitoring requirements. For any other 

reason that an alternative THC 

monitoring protocol is warranted, we 

are proposing the source be allowed to 

submit an application to the 

Administrator subject to the provisions 

of 40 CFR 63.1350(o)(1) through (6). 

IV. Plan To Remove Affirmative 

Defense 

As noted above, the United States 

Court of Appeals for the District of 

Columbia Circuit vacated the affirmative 

defense provisions contained in the 

Portland Cement NESHAP rule. (NRDC 

v. EPA, 749 F. 3d at 1063–64 (D.C. Cir. 

2014). The court found that the EPA 

lacked authority to establish an 

affirmative defense for private civil suits 

and held that under the CAA, the 

authority to determine civil penalty 

amounts in such cases lies exclusively 

with the courts, not the EPA. 

Specifically, the court found: ‘‘As the 

language of the statute makes clear, the 

courts determine, on a case-by-case 

basis, whether civil penalties are 

‘appropriate.’’’ Id. at 1063. In light of 

this decision, the affirmative defense 

provisions are null and void. The EPA 

plans to remove the regulatory 

affirmative defense provisions as part of 

the final technical corrections rule to 

reflect the court’s vacatur. In the event 

that a source fails to comply with the 

applicable CAA section 112 standards 

as a result of a malfunction event, the 

EPA would determine an appropriate 

response based on, among other things, 

the good faith efforts of the source to 

minimize emissions during malfunction 

periods, including preventative and 

corrective actions, as well as root cause 

analyses, to ascertain and rectify excess 

emissions. The EPA would also 

consider whether the source’s failure to 

comply with the CAA section 112 

standard was, in fact, ‘‘sudden, 

infrequent, not reasonably preventable’’ 

and was not instead ‘‘caused in part by 

poor maintenance or careless 

operation.’’ 40 CFR 63.2 (definition of 

malfunction). 

Further, to the extent the EPA files an 

enforcement action against a source for 

violation of an emission standard, the 

source can raise any and all defenses in 

that enforcement action and the federal 

district court will determine what, if 

any, relief is appropriate. The same is 

true for citizen enforcement actions. 

Similarly, the presiding officer in an 

administrative proceeding can consider 

any defense raised and determine 

whether administrative penalties are 

appropriate. 

V. Solicitation of Public Comment on 

Proposed Amendments 

At this time, the EPA is only 

proposing specific technical corrections 

and clarifications to the final rule’s 

requirements, and is seeking comment 

on these corrections and clarifications. 

The EPA is not proposing any other 

revisions to the final rule. The EPA is 

seeking comment only on the specific 

proposed technical corrections 

proposed in this document. The EPA 

will not respond to any comments 

addressing any other issues or any other 

provisions of the final rule or any other 

rule. The EPA is not seeking comment 

on its plan to remove the affirmative 

defense regulatory text. The removal of 

the affirmative defense merely corrects 

the regulation to reflect that the 

provisions have no legal effect in light 

of the court’s vacatur and, thus, notice 

and comment is not required (See 5 

U.S.C 553(b)(B)). 

VI. Technical Corrections and 

Clarifications 

These technical corrections and 

clarifications are being proposed to 

correct inaccuracies and oversights that 

were promulgated in the final rule and 

to make the rule language consistent 

with provisions addressed through this 

reconsideration. We are soliciting 

comment only on whether the proposed 

changes provide the intended accuracy, 

clarity and consistency. These proposed 

changes are described in Tables 2 and 

3 of this preamble. We request comment 

on all of these proposed changes. 

TABLE 2—MISCELLANEOUS PROPOSED TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO 40 CFR PART 60, SUBPART F 

Section of subpart F Description of proposed correction 

40 CFR 60.61(f) ......................................... Revise the definition of ‘‘operating day’’ to clarify that the 24 hour period beginning at 12:00 midnight covers the time the kiln produces any amount of clinker. 

40 CFR 60.61(g) ........................................ Add the definition of ‘‘rolling average’’ to clarify the length of time considered in developing the average. 

40 CFR 60.61(h) ........................................ Add the definition of ‘‘run average’’ to clarify that the run average means the average of the recorded parameter values, not the 1-minute parameter values, for a run. 

40 CFR 60.62(a)(1)(i) ................................ Add the missing paragraph listing the current PM mission limit for kilns constructed, reconstructed or 

modified after August 17, 1971, but on or before June 16, 2008. 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 223 / Wednesday, November 19, 2014 / Proposed Rules 68825 

TABLE 2—MISCELLANEOUS PROPOSED TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO 40 CFR PART 60, SUBPART F—Continued 

Section of subpart F Description of proposed correction 

40.CFR 60.62(a)(2) .................................... Add the missing paragraph listing the opacity limit for kilns constructed, reconstructed, or modified 

after August 17, 1971 but on or before June 16, 2008. 

40 CFR 60.62(b)(1)(iii) ............................... Add the missing paragraph listing the current PM emission limit for clinker coolers constructed, reconstructed or modified after August 17, 1971, but on or before June 16, 2008. 

40 CFR 60.62(b)(1)(iv) .............................. Add the missing paragraph listing the opacity limit for clinker coolers constructed, reconstructed or 

modified after August 17, 1971, but on or before June 16, 2008. 

40 CFR 60.62(d) ........................................ Revise this paragraph to clarify that you are subject to an applicable less stringent requirement until 

the time you are in compliance with an applicable more stringent requirement: Under NSPS, CAA 

section 111, you are not subject to two different subparts at the same time for a given pollutant. 

40 CFR 60.62(e) ........................................ Add a paragraph to clarify that the compliance date for all revised monitoring and recordkeeping requirements contained in the rule will be the same as listed in 40 CFR 63.1351(c) unless you commenced construction as of June 16, 2008, at which time the compliance date is November 8, 

2010, or upon startup, whichever is later. 

40 CFR 60.63(c)(1) .................................... Revise this paragraph to change reference paragraph from Section 60.8 to Sections 60.62(a)(1)(ii) 

and 60.62(a)(1)(iii). 

40 CFR 60.63(c)(2)(i) and (iii) ................... Revise these paragraphs to clarify that your PM continuous parameter monitoring system (CPMS) 

must provide either a milliamp or digital signal output. 

40 CFR 60.63(c)(3) .................................... Revise this paragraph to clarify that your PM CPMS must provide either a milliamp or digital signal 

output. 

40 CFR 60.63(c)(4)(ii), (iii) and (iv), and 

60.63(c)(5) and (6).

Revise these paragraphs to clarify that your PM CPMS must provide either a milliamp or digital signal output, replace terms X1 and Y2 with subscripts X1 and Y2; and revise definition of the term 

X1 to correct a typographical error, changing the word ‘‘you’’ to ‘‘your’’. 

40 CFR 60.63(c)(7) .................................... Revise this paragraph to clarify that for each performance test, you must conduct at least three separate test runs each while the mill is on and the mill is off. 

40 CFR 60.63(c)(7) .................................... Revise this paragraph to clarify that you must use a time weighted average of the results from three 

consecutive runs to determine compliance. 

40 CFR 60.64(c)(2) .................................... Remove this paragraph since this is not an allowable action. 

TABLE 3—MISCELLANEOUS, PROPOSED TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART LLL 

Section of subpart LLL Description of proposed correction 

40 CFR 63.1341 ........................................ Revise the definition of ‘‘rolling average’’ to clarify the length of time considered in developing the 

average. 

40 CFR 63.1341 ........................................ Revise the definition of ‘‘operating day’’ to clarify that the 24 hour period beginning at 12:00 midnight covers the time the kiln produces any amount of clinker. 

40 CFR 63.1341 ........................................ Revise the definition of ‘‘run average’’ to clarify that the run average means the average of the recorded parameter values, not the 1-minute parameter values, for a run. Also add this definition to 

the NSPS. 

40 CFR 63.1343(a) .................................... Revise this paragraph to clarify that the 30-day period means all operating hours within 30 consecutive kiln operating days. 

40 CFR 63.1343(b) .................................... Revise footnote (1) of the table to clarify PM performance tests are based on three test runs using 

Method 5 or 5I. 

40 CFR 63.1343(b) .................................... Add footnote (1) to item number 4 in Table 1, which references the use of Method 5 or 5I for PM 

performance tests. 

40 CFR 63.1343(b)(2) ............................... Revise this paragraph to clarify that Equation 2 applies both to kilns that combine kiln exhaust, 

clinker cooler gas, and/or coal mill and alkali bypass exhaust. 

40 CFR 63.1343(d) .................................... Revise this paragraph to include a reference to emission limits applicable until September 9, 2015. 

40 CFR 63.1346(g)(3) ............................... Add the term ‘‘hazardous air pollutants’’ to this paragraph to clarify that referenced air pollution control devices are HAP control devices, and revise paragraph to include a temperature parameter. 

40 CFR 63.1348(a)(4)(iv) and (v) .............. Revise this paragraph to clarify that the requirement is based on a time weighted average. 

40 CFR 63.1348(b)(1)(iii) ........................... Revise this paragraph to clarify you may not use data recorded during control device malfunctions 

to report emissions or operating levels. 

40 CFR 63.1349(b)(1)(i)(C) ....................... Remove ‘‘2 hour’’ reference in this paragraph, which was just an example and not a requirement for 

duration of test runs. 

40 CFR 63.1349(b)(1)(i), (ii), and (iii) ........ Revise paragraphs to clarify that your PM CPMS must provide either a milliamp or digital signal output. 

40 CFR 63.1349(b)(1)(iii)(C) ...................... Revise definition of the term X1 to correct a typographical error, changing the word ‘‘you’’ to ‘‘your.’’ 

40 CFR 63.1349(b)(1)(iii)(D) through 

63.1349(b)(1)(v).

Revise these paragraphs to clarify that your operating limit must be expressed in milliamps or the 

digital equivalent. 

40 CFR 63.1349(b)(1)(vi) .......................... Revise this paragraph to clarify that for each performance test, you must conduct at least three separate test runs each while the mill is on and the mill is off, and also clarify that you must calculate 

a time weighted average. 

40 CFR 63.1349(b)(1)(viii) ......................... Revise Equation 8 to correct the label for combined hourly emission rate of PM from Ec to Ecm. 

40 CFR 63.1349(b)(1)(ix) .......................... Revise this paragraph to clarify the time weighted average emissions are to be calculated using 40 

CFR 63.1349(b)(1)(i). 

40 CFR 63.1349(b)(3)(iii) ........................... Revise this paragraph to clarify that average temperatures must be calculated for each run instead 

of hourly temperatures. 

40 CFR 63.1349(b)(4)(iii) ........................... Revise equation 9 to correct a typographical error by adding the terms, ‘‘Qab’’ and ‘‘Qcm’’ to the denominator. 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
68826 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 223 / Wednesday, November 19, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 3—MISCELLANEOUS, PROPOSED TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART LLL—Continued 

Section of subpart LLL Description of proposed correction 

40 CFR 63.1349(b)(5)(ii) ........................... Revise definitions of ‘‘n’’ and ‘‘P’’ to clarify hours used in the calculation are for the previous 30 kiln 

operating day periods and include requirement that data must be based on qualified data. 

40 CFR 63.1349(b)(6)(iii) ........................... Revise this paragraph to clarify that the SO2 operating limit used must be based on an average recorded during the HCl stack test run that demonstrates compliance with the emission limit. 

40 CFR 63.1349(b)(6)(iv) .......................... Revise equation 11 to correct a typographical error by adding the terms, ‘‘Qab’’ and ‘‘Qcm’’ to the 

denominator. 

40 CFR 63.1349(b)(7) ............................... Revise this paragraph to correct a typographical error by changing reference to paragraph (a)(4) to 

paragraph (b)(4). 

40 CFR 63.1349(b)(7)(ii) and (iii) .............. Revise these two paragraphs to clarify calculations are from the output recorded during the 3 hour 

test, which also must be from both the three raw mill on and three raw mill off test runs. 

40 CFR 63.1349(b)(7)(v) ........................... Add this paragraph to clarify that if you have an inline coal mill, you must measure at the coal mill 

inlet and calculate a weighted average for all emission sources including the coal mill and the alkali bypass. Note adding this paragraph changes the subsequent numbering of paragraphs in this 

section. 

40 CFR 63.1349(b)(7)(vii) .......................... Revise this paragraph to add the word ‘‘that’’ for clarity regarding the demonstration that average organic HAP emission levels are at or above 75 percent of your emission limit. 

40 CFR 63.1349(b)(7)(viii)(B) .................... Revise this paragraph to remove a comma after the word ‘‘value.’’ 

40 CFR 63.1349(b)(7)(xii) .......................... Remove the term ‘‘highest load or capacity’’ since the load level is already defined under the performance testing requirements, general provisions, 40 CFR 60.8(c). 

40 CFR 63.1349(b)(7)(xiii)(B) .................... Clarify the compliance test is based on a 30 month test instead of an annual test. 

40 CFR 63.1349(b)(8) ............................... Revise this paragraph to clarify that you must establish an SO2 operating limit equal to the average 

recorded output during the HCl stack test. 

40 CFR 63.1349(b)(8)(ii) ........................... Revise this paragraph to clarify that the average SO2 concentration must be calculated from the recorded output instead of the 1-minute averages. 

40 CFR 63.1349(b)(8)(vi) .......................... Revise this paragraph to correct a typographical error by replacing ‘‘THC’’ with ‘‘HCl’’ when calculating the limit as the weighted average of HCl levels measured. 

40 CFR 63.1349(b)(8)(vii) .......................... Revise this paragraph to include a proposed scaling alternative if the average of the three HCl compliance tests determines that the HCl emissions are below 75 percent of the HCl emissions limit. 

40 CFR 63.1349(b)(8)(x)(B) ...................... Revise this paragraph to replace ‘‘annual’’ with ‘‘periodic’’ which is more relevant to the timing of the 

performance test. 

40 CFR 63.1350(a)(2) ............................... Remove this provision since it no longer applies. See 78 FR 10015. 

40 CFR 63.1350(i)(1) ................................. Revise this paragraph to clarify that both Performance Specification 8 and Performance Specification 8a are acceptable performance specifications for compliance with this paragraph. 

40 CFR 63.1350(i)(2) ................................. Revise this paragraph to clarify that performance tests on alkali bypass and coal mill stacks must be 

repeated every 30 months instead of annually. 

40 CFR 63.1350(j) ..................................... Revise this paragraph to clarify that both Performance Specification 8 and Performance Specification 8a are acceptable performance specifications for compliance with this paragraph. 

40 CFR 63.1350(k)(2) ................................ Revise this paragraph to clarify that you must use one of the three options, not one of the two options in paragraphs (k)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section to quality assure data measured above the 

span value. 

40 CFR 63.1350(k)(5)(iv) ........................... Revise this paragraph to add the alkali bypass as being subject to this requirement. 

40 CFR 63.1350(l) ..................................... Revise paragraphs in this section to clarify the measurement span value range is 0 to 10 ppmvw, 

and to add one more option in paragraphs (l)(1)(ii)(A through C) to quality assure data measured 

above the span value. 

40 CFR 63.1350(n) .................................... Amend this paragraph to clarify that this section is applicable when use of a CEMS is required. 

40 CFR 63.1350(n)(1) ............................... Amend this paragraph to remove reference to the location for installing each sensor of the flow rate 

monitoring system relative to the sampling location of the PM CEMS, since the sensor of each 

flow rate monitoring system is not applicable for PM in this section. 

40 CFR 63.1350(o) .................................... Remove the phrase, ‘‘except for emission standards for THC’’ from the section. 

40 CFR 63.1350(o)(3) ............................... Revise this paragraph to correct a typographical error by replacing the term ‘‘(m)(3)(i)’’ with 

‘‘(o)(3)(i).’’ 

40 CFR 63.1354(b)(9) ............................... Revise this paragraph to clarify reports to be submitted semiannually to the Compliance and Emissions Data Reporting Interface (CEDRI). 

40 CFR 63.1354(b)(9)(i) ............................ Revise this paragraph to clarify intent of section and to correct a typographical error by replacing the 

reference ‘‘1344’’ with ‘‘1346.’’ 

40 CFR 63.1354(b)(9)(ii) ........................... Revise this paragraph to clarify intent of section and to correct a typographical error by replacing the 

reference ‘‘1350(f)(7)’’ with ‘‘1350(g)(1)(iii).’’ 

40 CFR 63.1354(b)(9)(iii) ........................... Revise this paragraph to clarify intent of section and to correct a typographical error by replacing the 

reference ‘‘63.1344(c)’’ with ‘‘63.1346(c)(2.)’’ 

40 CFR 63.1354(b)(9)(iv) .......................... Revise this paragraph to clarify intent of section and to correct a typographical error by replacing the 

reference ‘‘63.1350(i)’’ with ‘‘63.1347(a)(3).’’ 

40 CFR 63.1354(b)(9)(v) ........................... Revise this paragraph to clarify intent of section and to correct a typographical error by replacing the 

reference ‘‘63.1350(a)’’ with ‘‘63.1347(a).’’ 

40 CFR 63.1354(b)(9)(vi) .......................... Revise this paragraph to clarify that Dioxin/Furans and PM CPMS monitoring systems are subject to 

this section. 

40 CFR 63.1354(b)(9)(viii) through (x) ...... Add these paragraphs of requirements listed in the NSPS, 40 CFR 60.64, but were inadvertently left 

out of 40 CFR 63.1354. 

40 CFR 63.1356 ........................................ Revise this section to clarify that you are subject to an applicable less stringent requirement until the 

time you are in compliance with an applicable more stringent requirement: Under NSPS, Section 

111, you are not subject to two different subparts at the same time for a given pollutant. 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 223 / Wednesday, November 19, 2014 / Proposed Rules 68827 

TABLE 3—MISCELLANEOUS, PROPOSED TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART LLL—Continued 

Section of subpart LLL Description of proposed correction 

40 CFR 63.1357 ........................................ Remove this provision since it no longer applies: PM CEMS was replaced with PM CPMS in the 

February 2013 amendments. See 78 FR 10007. 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

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’’ under the terms of 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and is therefore not 

subject to review under Executive 

Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011). 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This action does not impose any new 

information collection burden. The EPA 

is not proposing any new information 

collection activities (e.g., monitoring, 

reporting, recordkeeping) as part of this 

action. The Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) has previously approved 

the information collection requirements 

contained in the existing regulations 

under the provisions of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. 

and has assigned OMB control number 

2060–0416. The OMB control numbers 

for the EPA’s regulations in 40 CFR are 

listed in 40 CFR part 9. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act 

generally requires an agency to prepare 

a regulatory flexibility analysis of any 

rule subject to notice and comment 

rulemaking requirements under the 

Administrative Procedure Act or any 

other statute unless the agency certifies 

that the rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. Small entities 

include small businesses, small 

organizations and small governmental 

jurisdictions. 

For purposes of assessing the impacts 

of this action on small entities, small 

entity is defined as: (1) A small business 

as defined by the Small Business 

Administration’s regulations at 13 CFR 

121.201; (2) a small governmental 

jurisdiction that is a government of a 

city, county, town, school district or 

special district with a population of less 

than 50,000; and (3) a small 

organization that is any not-for-profit 

enterprise which is independently 

owned and operated and is not 

dominant in its field. 

After considering the economic 

impacts of this proposed rule on small 

entities, I certify that this action will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

This proposed rule will not impose any 

new requirements on small entities. We 

continue to be interested in the 

potential impacts of the proposed rule 

on small entities and welcome 

comments on issues related to such 

impacts. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

This action does not contain a federal 

mandate that may result in expenditures 

of $100 million or more for state, local 

and tribal governments, in the aggregate, 

or the private sector in any one year. 

This action proposes minor changes to 

the rule to correct and clarify technical 

issues raised by stakeholders and, thus, 

does not exceed estimated costs 

developed for the final rule (refer to 

final Technical Support Document 

EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0817–0845). 

Thus, this rule is not subject to the 

requirements of section 202 and 205 of 

the UMRA. This rule is also not subject 

to the requirements of section 203 of 

UMRA because it contains no regulatory 

requirements that might significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments. This 

action contains no requirements that 

apply to such governments, imposes no 

obligations upon them and will not 

result in expenditures by them of $100 

million or more in any one year or incur 

any disproportionate impacts on them. 

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, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132. This action 

seeks comment on proposed technical 

corrections to the NESHAP for Portland 

Cement Manufacturing sources located 

at major sources of HAP without 

proposing any changes to the rule. Thus, 

Executive Order 13132 does not apply 

to this action. 

In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, 

and consistent with EPA policy to 

promote communications between the 

EPA and state and local governments, 

the EPA specifically solicits comment 

on this proposed action from state and 

local officials. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications, as specified in Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000). This action will not have 

substantial direct effects on tribal 

governments, on the relationship 

between the federal government and 

Indian tribes or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

federal government and Indian tribes, as 

specified in Executive Order 13175. 

Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not 

apply to this action. 

The EPA specifically solicits 

additional comment on this proposed 

action from tribal officials. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

The EPA interprets Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as 

applying to those regulatory actions that 

concern health or safety risks, such that 

the analysis required under section 5– 

501 of the Executive Order has the 

potential to influence the regulation. 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13045 because it is based solely 

on technology performance. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211 (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 

2001) because it is not a significant 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act (NTTAA) of 1995, Public Law 104– 

113, 12(d), (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs 

the EPA to use voluntary consensus 

standards (VCS) in its regulatory 

activities, unless to do so would be 

inconsistent with applicable law or 

otherwise impractical. The VCS are 

technical standards (e.g., materials 

specifications, test methods, sampling 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
68828 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 223 / Wednesday, November 19, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

procedures and business practices) that 

are developed or adopted by VCS 

bodies. The NTTAA directs the EPA to 

provide Congress, through OMB, 

explanations when the agency does not 

use available and applicable VCS. 

This proposed rule does not involve 

technical standards. Therefore, the EPA 

is not considering the use of any VCS. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, 

Feb. 16, 1994) establishes federal 

executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs 

federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their 

mission by identifying and addressing, 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, 

policies and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. 

An analysis of demographic data was 

prepared for the 2010 final rule and can 

be found in the docket for that 

rulemaking (See docket item EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2011–0817). The impacts of the 

2010 rule, which assumed full 

compliance, are expected to be 

unchanged as a result of this action. 

Therefore, beginning from the date of 

full compliance, the EPA has 

determined that the proposed rule will 

not have disproportionately high and 

adverse human health or environmental 

effects on minority or low-income 

populations because it increases the 

level of environmental protection for all 

affected populations without having any 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects 

on any population, including any 

minority or low-income populations. In 

addition, the full benefits of this final 

rule will not result until 2015 due to the 

final amended compliance date but the 

demographic analysis showed that the 

average of populations in close 

proximity to the sources, and thus most 

likely to be affected by the sources, were 

similar in demographic composition to 

national averages. 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 60 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

40 CFR Part 63 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Hazardous 

substances, Intergovernmental relations, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: November 4, 2014. 

Gina McCarthy, 

Administrator. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, title 40, chapter I, of the Code 

of Federal Regulations is proposed to be 

amended as follows: 

PART 60—STANDARDS OF 

PERFORMANCE FOR NEW 

STATIONARY SOURCES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 60 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401. 

Subpart F—[Amended] 

■ 2. Section 60.61 is amended by: 

■ a. Revising paragraph (f). 

■ b. Adding paragraphs (g) and (h). 

The revision and addition read as 

follows: 

* * * * * 

§ 60.61 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

(f) Operating day means a 24-hour 

period beginning at 12:00 midnight 

during which the kiln produces clinker 

at any time. For calculating Rolling 

Average emissions, an operating day 

does not include the hours of operation 

during startup or shutdown. 

(g) Rolling average means the 

weighted average of all data, meeting 

QA/QC requirements or otherwise 

normalized, collected during the 

applicable averaging period. The period 

of a rolling average stipulates the 

frequency of data averaging and 

reporting; a thirty-day rolling average 

period requires calculation of a new 

average value each day that includes the 

average emissions over the previous 

thirty days divided by the total 

production during these same periods. 

A twelve month rolling average 

stipulates a new average value 

calculated each month that includes the 

average emissions over the previous 

twelve months divided by the total 

production during the same periods. 

(h) Run average means the average of 

the recorded parameter values for a run. 

■ 3. Section 60.62 is amended by: 

■ a. Adding paragraphs (a)(1)(i), (a)(2), 

(b)(1)(iii), (b)(1)(iv), and (e). 

■ b. Revising paragraph (d). 

The additions and revision read as 

follows: 

§ 60.62 Standards. 

(a) * * * 

(1) Contain particulate matter (PM) in 

excess of: 

(i) 0.30 pounds per ton of feed (dry 

basis) to the kiln for kilns constructed, 

reconstructed, or modified after August 

17, 1971 but on or before June 16, 2008. 

* * * * * 

(2) Exhibit greater than 20 percent 

opacity for kilns constructed, 

reconstructed, or modified after August 

17, 1971 but on or before June 16, 2008, 

except that this opacity limit does not 

apply to any kiln subject to a PM limit 

in paragraph (a)(1) of this section that 

uses a PM continuous parametric 

monitoring system (CPMS). 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(iii) 0.10 lb per ton of feed (dry basis) 

for clinker coolers constructed, 

reconstructed, or modified after August 

17, 1971 but on or before June 16, 2008. 

(iv) 10 percent opacity for clinker 

coolers constructed, reconstructed, or 

modified after August 17, 1971 but on 

or before June 16, 2008. 

* * * * * 

(d) If you have an affected source 

subject to this subpart with a different 

emissions limit or requirement for the 

same pollutant under another regulation 

in title 40 of this chapter, once you are 

in compliance with the most stringent 

emissions limit or requirement, you are 

not subject to the less stringent 

requirement. Until you are in 

compliance with the more stringent 

limit, the less stringent limit continues 

to apply. 

(e) The compliance date for all revised 

monitoring and recordkeeping 

requirements contained in this rule will 

be the same as listed in 63.1351(c) 

unless you commenced construction as 

of June 16, 2008, at which time the 

compliance date is November 8, 2010 or 

upon startup, whichever is later. 

■ 4. Section 60.63 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2)(i), 

(c)(2)(iii), (c)(3), (c)(4)(ii), (c)(4)(iii), 

(c)(4)(iv), (c)(5), (c)(6), and (c)(7) to read 

as follows: 

§ 60.63 Monitoring of operations. 

* * * * * 

(c) *** (1) For each kiln or clinker 

cooler subject to a PM emissions limit 

in § 60.62(a)1(ii) and 60.62(a)1(iii), you 

must demonstrate compliance through 

an initial performance test. You will 

conduct your performance test using 

Method 5 or Method 5I at appendix A– 

3 to part 60 of this chapter. You must 

also monitor continuous performance 

through use of a PM CPMS. 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 223 / Wednesday, November 19, 2014 / Proposed Rules 68829 

(2) * * * 

(i) Your PM CPMS must provide a 4– 

20 milliamp or digital signal output and 

the establishment of its relationship to 

manual reference method measurements 

must be determined in units of 

milliamps or the monitors digital 

equivalent. 

* * * * * 

(iii) During the initial performance 

test or any such subsequent 

performance test that demonstrates 

compliance with the PM limit, record 

and average all milliamp or digital 

output values from the PM CPMS for the 

periods corresponding to the 

compliance test runs (e.g., average all 

your PM CPMS output values for three 

corresponding 2-hour Method 5I test 

runs). 

(3) Determine your operating limit as 

specified in paragraphs (c)(4)(i) through 

(c)(5) of this section. If your PM 

performance test demonstrates your PM 

emission levels to be below 75 percent 

of your emission limit, you will use the 

average PM CPMS value recorded 

during the PM compliance test, the 

milliamp or digital equivalent of zero 

output from your PM CPMS, and the 

average PM result of your compliance 

test to establish your operating limit. If 

your PM compliance test demonstrates 

your PM emission levels to be at or 

above 75 percent of your emission limit, 

you will use the average PM CPMS 

value recorded during the PM 

compliance test to establish your 

operating limit. You must verify an 

existing or establish a new operating 

limit after each repeated performance 

test. You must repeat the performance 

test at least annually and reassess and 

adjust the site-specific operating limit in 

accordance with the results of the 

performance test. 

(4) * * * 

(ii) * * * 

X1 = The PM CPMS data points for the three 

runs constituting the performance test. 

Y1 = The PM concentration value for the 

three runs constituting the performance 

test, and 

n = The number of data points. 

(iii) With your PM CPMS instrument 

zero expressed in milliamps or a digital 

value, your three run average PM CPMS 

milliamp or digital signal value, and 

your three run average PM 

concentration from your three PM 

performance test runs, determine a 

relationship of lb/ton-clinker per 

milliamp with equation 2. 

Where: 

R = The relative lb/ton clinker per milliamp 

for your PM CPMS. 

Y1 = The three run average PM lb/ton clinker. 

X1 = The three run average milliamp output 

from your PM CPMS. 

z = the milliamp equivalent of your 

instrument zero determined from (c)(4)(i) 

of this section. 

(iv) Determine your source specific 

30-day rolling average operating limit 

using the lb/ton-clinker per milliamp or 

digital signal value from Equation 2 

above in Equation 3, below. This sets 

your operating limit at the PM CPMS 

output value corresponding to 75 

percent of your emission limit. 

Where: 

Ol = The operating limit for your PM CPMS 

on a 30-day rolling average, in milliamps 

or the digital equivalent. 

L = Your source emission limit expressed in 

lb/ton clinker. 

z = Your instrument zero in milliamps or a 

digital equivalent, determined from 

(1)(i). 

R = The relative lb/ton-clinker per milliamp 

or digital equivalent, for your PM CPMS, 

from Equation 2. 

(5) If the average of your three PM 

compliance test runs is at or above 75 

percent of your PM emission limit, you 

must determine your operating limit by 

averaging the PM CPMS milliamp 

output corresponding to your three PM 

performance test runs that demonstrate 

compliance with the emission limit 

using Equation 4. 

Where: 

X1 = The PM CPMS data points for all runs 

i. 

n = The number of data points. 

Oh = Your site specific operating limit, in 

milliamps or digital equivalent. 

(6) To determine continuous 

compliance, you must record the PM 

CPMS output data for all periods when 

the process is operating, and use all the 

PM CPMS data for calculations when 

the source is not out-of-control. You 

must demonstrate continuous 

compliance by using all quality-assured 

hourly average data collected by the PM 

CPMS for all operating hours to 

calculate the arithmetic average 

operating parameter in units of the 

operating limit (milliamps or the digital 

equivalent) on a 30 operating day rolling 

average basis, updated at the end of 

each new kiln operating day. Use 

Equation 5 to determine the 30 kiln 

operating day average. 

Where: 

Hpvi = The hourly parameter value for hour 

i. 

n = The number of valid hourly parameter 

values collected over the previous 30 

kiln operating days. 

(7) Use EPA Method 5 or Method 5I 

of appendix A to part 60 of this chapter 

to determine PM emissions. For each 

performance test, conduct at least three 

separate runs each while the mill is on 

and the mill is off under the conditions 

that exist when the affected source is 

operating at the highest load or capacity 

level reasonably expected to occur. 

Conduct each test run to collect a 

minimum sample volume of 2 dscm for 

determining compliance with a new 

source limit and 1 dscm for determining 

compliance with an existing source 

limit. Calculate the time weighted 

average of the results from three 

consecutive runs to determine 

compliance. You need not determine 

the particulate matter collected in the 

impingers (‘‘back half’’) of the Method 5 

or Method 5I particulate sampling train 

to demonstrate compliance with the PM 

standards of this subpart. This shall not 

preclude the permitting authority from 

requiring a determination of the ‘‘back 

half’’ for other purposes. 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALSEP19NO14.019</GPH> EP19NO14.041</GPH> EP19NO14.020</GPH> EP19NO14.021</GPH>
68830 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 223 / Wednesday, November 19, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

(8) * * * 

* * * * * 

■ 5. Section 60.64 is amended by 

removing and reserving paragraph (c)(2) 

to read as follows: 

§ 60.64 Test methods and procedures. 

* * * * * 

(2) [Reserved] 

* * * * * 

PART 63—NATIONAL EMISSION 

STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR 

POLLUTANTS FOR SOURCE 

CATEGORIES 

■ 6. The authority citation for part 63 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart LLL—[Amended] 

■ 7. Section 63.1341 is amended by 

revising the definitions for ‘‘Operating 

day’’, ‘‘Rolling average’’, and ‘‘Run 

average’’ to read as follows: 

§ 63.1341 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Operating day means any 24-hour 

period beginning at 12:00 midnight 

during which the kiln produces any 

amount of clinker. For calculating the 

rolling average emissions, kiln operating 

days do not include the hours of 

operation during startup or shutdown. 

* * * * * 

Rolling average means the weighted 

average of all data, meeting QA/QC 

requirements or otherwise normalized, 

collected during the applicable 

averaging period. The period of a rolling 

average stipulates the frequency of data 

averaging and reporting; a thirty-day 

rolling average period requires 

calculation of a new average value each 

day that includes the average emissions 

over the previous thirty days divided by 

the total production during these same 

periods. A twelve month rolling average 

stipulates a new average value 

calculated each month that includes the 

average emissions over the previous 

twelve months divided by the total 

production during the same periods. 

Run average means the average of the 

recorded parameter values for a run. 

* * * * * 

■ 8. Section 63.1343 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (a), Table 1 in 

paragraph (b)(1), (b)(2), and (d) to read 

as follows: 

§ 63.1343 What standards apply to my 

kilns, clinker coolers, raw material dryers, 

and open clinker storage piles? 

(a) General. The provisions in this 

section apply to each kiln and any alkali 

bypass associated with that kiln, clinker 

cooler, raw material dryer, and open 

clinker storage pile. All D/F, HCl, and 

total hydrocarbon (THC) emissions limit 

are on a dry basis. The D/F, HCl, and 

THC limits for kilns are corrected to 7 

percent oxygen. All THC emissions 

limits are measured as propane. 

Standards for mercury and THC are 

based on a rolling 30-day average. If 

using a CEMS to determine compliance 

with the HCl standard, this standard is 

based on a rolling 30-day average. You 

must ensure appropriate corrections for 

moisture are made when measuring 

flow rates used to calculate mercury 

emissions. The 30-day period means all 

operating hours within 30 consecutive 

kiln operating days excluding periods of 

startup and shutdown. All emissions 

limits for kilns, clinker coolers, and raw 

material dryers currently in effect that 

are superseded by the limits below 

continue to apply until the compliance 

date of the limits below, or until the 

source certifies compliance with the 

limits below, whichever is earlier. 

(b)(1) * * * 

TABLE 1—EMISSIONS LIMITS FOR KILNS, CLINKER COOLERS, RAW MATERIAL DRYERS, RAW AND FINISH MILLS

If your source is a 

(an): 

And the operating 

mode is: And if is located at a: Your emissions limits are: 

And the units of the 

emissions limit are: 

The oxygen 

correction factor is: 

1. Existing kiln ............ Normal operation ...... Major or area source PM 1 0.07 .................. lb/ton clinker .............. NA. 

D/F 2 0.2 .................... ng/dscm (TEQ) ......... 7 percent. 

Mercury 55 ................ lb/MM tons ................ NA. 

THC 3 4 24 ................. clinker ppmvd ............ 7 percent. 

2. Existing kiln ............ Normal operation ...... Major source ............. HCl 3 ......................... ppmvd ....................... 7 percent. 

3. Existing kiln ............ Startup and shutdown Major or area source Work practices 

(63.1346(f)).

NA ............................. NA. 

4. New kiln ................. Normal operation ...... Major or area source PM 1 0.02 .................. lb/ton clinker .............. NA. 

D/F 2 0.2 .................... ng/dscm (TEQ) ......... 7 percent. 

Mercury 21 ................ lb/MM tons ................ NA. 

THC 3 4 24 ................. clinker ppmvd ............ 7 percent. 

5. New kiln ................. Normal operation ...... Major source ............. HCl 3 ......................... ppmvd ....................... 7 percent. 

6. New kiln ................. Startup and shutdown Major or area source Work practices 

(63.1346(f)).

NA ............................. NA. 

7. Existing clinker 

cooler.

Normal operation ...... Major or area source PM 0.07 .................... lb/ton clinker .............. NA. 

8. Existing clinker 

cooler.

Startup and shutdown Major or area source Work practices 

(63.1348(b)(9)).

NA ............................. NA. 

9. New clinker cooler .. Normal operation ...... Major or area source PM 0.02 .................... lb/ton clinker .............. NA. 

10. New clinker cooler Startup and shutdown Major or area source Work practices 

(63.1348(b)(9)).

NA ............................. NA. 

11. Existing or new 

raw material dryer.

Normal operation ...... Major or area source THC 3 4 24 ................. ppmvd ....................... NA. 

12. Existing or new 

raw material dryer.

Startup and shutdown Major or area source Work practices 

(63.1348(b)(9)).

NA ............................. NA. 

13. Existing or new 

raw or finish mill.

All operating modes .. Major source ............. Opacity 10 ................. percent ...................... NA. 

1The initial and subsequent PM performance tests are performed using Method 5 or 5I and consist of three test runs. 

2 If the average temperature at the inlet to the first PM control device (fabric filter or electrostatic precipitator) during the D/F performance test 

is 400 °F or less, this limit is changed to 0.40 ng/dscm (TEQ). 3 Measured as propane. 

4Any source subject to the 24 ppmvd THC limit may elect to meet an alternative limit of 12 ppmvd for total organic HAP. 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 223 / Wednesday, November 19, 2014 / Proposed Rules 68831 

(2) When there is an alkali bypass 

and/or an inline coal mill with a 

separate stack associated with a kiln, the 

combined PM emissions from the kiln 

and the alkali bypass stack and/or the 

inline coal mill stack are subject to the 

PM emissions limit. Existing kilns that 

combine the clinker cooler exhaust and/ 

or coal mill exhaust with the kiln 

exhaust and send the combined exhaust 

to the PM control device as a single 

stream may meet an alternative PM 

emissions limit. This limit is calculated 

using Equation 1 of this section: 

Where: 

PMalt = Alternative PM emission limit for 

commingled sources. 

0.006 = The PM exhaust concentration (gr/

dscf) equivalent to 0.070 lb per ton 

clinker where clinker cooler and kiln 

exhaust gas are not combined. 

1.65 = The conversion factor of ton feed per 

ton clinker. 

Qk = The exhaust flow of the kiln (dscf/ton 

feed). 

Qc = The exhaust flow of the clinker cooler 

(dscf/ton feed). 

Qab = The exhaust flow of the alkali bypass 

(dscf/ton feed). 

Qcm = The exhaust flow of the coal mill (dscf/ 

ton feed). 

7000 = The conversion factor for grains (gr) 

per lb. 

For new kilns that combine kiln 

exhaust, clinker cooler gas and/or coal 

mill and alkali bypass exhaust, the limit 

is calculated using the Equation 2 of this 

section: 

Where: 

PMalt = Alternative PM emission limit for 

commingled sources. 

0.002 = The PM exhaust concentration (gr/

dscf) equivalent to 0.020 lb per ton 

clinker where clinker cooler and kiln 

exhaust gas are not combined. 

1.65 = The conversion factor of ton feed per 

ton clinker. 

Qk = The exhaust flow of the kiln (dscf/ton 

feed). 

Qc = The exhaust flow of the clinker cooler 

(dscf/ton feed). 

Qab = The exhaust flow of the alkali bypass 

(dscf/ton feed). 

Qcm = The exhaust flow of the coal mill (dscf/ 

ton feed). 

7000 = The conversion factor for gr per lb. 

* * * * * 

(d) Emission limits in effect prior to 

September 9, 2010. Any source defined 

as an existing source in § 63.1351, and 

that was subject to a PM, mercury, THC, 

D/F, or opacity emissions limit prior to 

September 9, 2010, must continue to 

meet the limits as shown in 76 FR 2836 

until September 9, 2015. 

* * * * * 

■ 9. Section 63.1346 is amended by 

revising paragraph (g)(3)to read as 

follows: 

§ 63.1346 Operating limits for kilns. 

* * * * * 

(g) * * * 

(3) All air pollution control devices 

that control hazardous air pollutants 

must be turned on and operating at the 

time the gas stream to the air pollution 

control device reaches 300 degrees 

Fahrenheit. Temperature content to be 

measured at the inlet of the baghouse or 

ESP every fifteen minutes during startup 

until all HAP control devices are 

operating, and every fifteen minutes 

during shutdown until any activated 

carbon or lime injection systems are not 

operating. 

* * * * * 

■ 10. Section 63.1348 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (a)(4)(iv), (a)(4)(v), 

and (b)(1)(iii) to read as follows: 

§ 63.1348 Compliance requirements. 

* * * * * 

(iv) The time weighted average total 

organic HAP concentration measured 

during the separate initial performance 

test specified by § 63.1349(b)(7) must be 

used to determine initial compliance. 

(v) The time weighted average THC 

concentration measured during the 

initial performance test specified by 

§ 63.1349(b)(4) must be used to 

determine the site-specific THC limit. 

Using the fraction of time the inline 

kiln/raw mill is on and the fraction of 

time that the inline kiln/raw mill is off, 

calculate this limit as a time weighted 

average of the THC levels measured 

during raw mill on and raw mill off 

testing using one of the two approaches 

in § 63.1349(b)(7)(vii) or (viii) 

depending on the level of organic HAP 

measured during the compliance test. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(iii) You may not use data recorded 

during monitoring system malfunctions 

or repairs associated with monitoring 

system malfunctions in calculations 

used to report emissions or operating 

levels. A monitoring system 

malfunction is any sudden, infrequent, 

not reasonably preventable failure of the 

monitoring system to provide valid data. 

Monitoring system failures that are 

caused in part by poor maintenance or 

careless operation are not malfunctions. 

You must use all the data collected 

during all other periods in assessing the 

operation of the control device and 

associated control system. 

* * * * * 

■ 10. Section 63.1349 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b) to read as follows: 

§ 63.1349 Performance testing 

requirements. 

* * * * * 

(b)(1) PM emissions tests. The owner 

or operator of a kiln subject to 

limitations on PM emissions shall 

demonstrate initial compliance by 

conducting a performance test using 

Method 5 or Method 5I at appendix A– 

3 to part 60 of this chapter. You must 

also monitor continuous performance 

through use of a PM continuous 

parametric monitoring system (PM 

CPMS). 

(i) For your PM CPMS, you will 

establish a site-specific operating limit. 

If your PM performance test 

demonstrates your PM emission levels 

to be below 75 percent of your emission 

limit you will use the average PM CPMS 

value recorded during the PM 

compliance test, the milliamp 

equivalent of zero output from your PM 

CPMS, and the average PM result of 

your compliance test to establish your 

operating limit. If your PM compliance 

test demonstrates your PM emission 

levels to be at or above 75 percent of 

your emission limit you will use the 

average PM CPMS value recorded 

during the PM compliance test to 

establish your operating limit. You will 

use the PM CPMS to demonstrate 

continuous compliance with your 

operating limit. You must repeat the 

performance test annually and reassess 

and adjust the site-specific operating 

limit in accordance with the results of 

the performance test. 

(A) Your PM CPMS must provide a 4– 

20 milliamp or digital signal output and 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALSEP19NO14.044</GPH> EP19NO14.045</GPH>
68832 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 223 / Wednesday, November 19, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

the establishment of its relationship to 

manual reference method measurements 

must be determined in units of 

milliamps or the monitors digital 

equivalent. 

(B) Your PM CPMS operating range 

must be capable of reading PM 

concentrations from zero to a level 

equivalent to three times your allowable 

emission limit. If your PM CPMS is an 

auto-ranging instrument capable of 

multiple scales, the primary range of the 

instrument must be capable of reading 

PM concentration from zero to a level 

equivalent to three times your allowable 

emission limit. 

(C) During the initial performance test 

or any such subsequent performance 

test that demonstrates compliance with 

the PM limit, record and average all 

milliamp or digital output values from 

the PM CPMS for the periods 

corresponding to the compliance test 

runs (e.g., average all your PM CPMS 

output values for three corresponding 

Method 5I test runs). 

(ii) Determine your operating limit as 

specified in paragraphs (b)(1)(iii) 

through (iv) of this section. If your PM 

performance test demonstrates your PM 

emission levels to be below 75 percent 

of your emission limit you will use the 

average PM CPMS value recorded 

during the PM compliance test, the 

milliamp or digital equivalent of zero 

output from your PM CPMS, and the 

average PM result of your compliance 

test to establish your operating limit. If 

your PM compliance test demonstrates 

your PM emission levels to be at or 

above 75 percent of your emission limit 

you will use the average PM CPMS 

value recorded during the PM 

compliance test to establish your 

operating limit. You must verify an 

existing or establish a new operating 

limit after each repeated performance 

test. You must repeat the performance 

test at least annually and reassess and 

adjust the site-specific operating limit in 

accordance with the results of the 

performance test. 

(iii) If the average of your three 

Method 5 or 5I compliance test runs is 

below 75 percent of your PM emission 

limit, you must calculate an operating 

limit by establishing a relationship of 

PM CPMS signal to PM concentration 

using the PM CPMS instrument zero, 

the average PM CPMS values 

corresponding to the three compliance 

test runs, and the average PM 

concentration from the Method 5 or 5I 

compliance test with the procedures in 

(a)(1)(iii)(A) through (D) of this section. 

(A) Determine your PM CPMS 

instrument zero output with one of the 

following procedures. 

(1) Zero point data for in-situ 

instruments should be obtained by 

removing the instrument from the stack 

and monitoring ambient air on a test 

bench. 

(2) Zero point data for extractive 

instruments should be obtained by 

removing the extractive probe from the 

stack and drawing in clean ambient air. 

(3) The zero point may also be 

established by performing manual 

reference method measurements when 

the flue gas is free of PM emissions or 

contains very low PM concentrations 

(e.g., when your process is not 

operating, but the fans are operating or 

your source is combusting only natural 

gas) and plotting these with the 

compliance data to find the zero 

intercept. 

(4) If none of the steps in paragraphs 

(a)(1)(iii)(A)(1) through (3) of this 

section are possible, you must use a zero 

output value provided by the 

manufacturer. 

(B) Determine your PM CPMS 

instrument average in milliamps, and 

the average of your corresponding three 

PM compliance test runs, using 

equation 3. 

Where: 

X1 = The PM CPMS data points for the three 

runs constituting the performance test. 

Y1 = The PM concentration value for the 

three runs constituting the performance 

test. 

n = The number of data points. 

(C) With your instrument zero 

expressed in milliamps or a digital 

value, your three run average PM CPMS 

milliamp or digital signal value, and 

your three run PM compliance test 

average, determine a relationship of lb/ 

ton-clinker per milliamp with Equation 

4. 

Where: 

R = The relative lb/ton-clinker per milliamp 

for your PM CPMS. 

Y1 = The three run average lb/ton-clinker PM 

concentration. 

X1 = The three run average milliamp output 

from your PM CPMS. 

z = The milliamp equivalent of your 

instrument zero determined from 

(b)(1)(iii)(A). 

(D) Determine your source specific 30- 

day rolling average operating limit using 

the lb/ton-clinker per milliamp or 

digital signal value from Equation 4 in 

Equation 5, below. This sets your 

operating limit at the PM CPMS output 

value corresponding to 75 percent of 

your emission limit. 

Where: 

Ol = The operating limit for your PM CPMS 

on a 30-day rolling average, in milliamps 

or the digital equivalent. 

L = Your source emission limit expressed in 

lb/ton clinker. 

z = Your instrument zero in milliamps, or 

digital equivalent, determined from 

(1)(i). 

R = The relative lb/ton-clinker per milliamp, 

or digital equivalent, for your PM CPMS, 

from Equation 4. 

(iv) If the average of your three PM 

compliance test runs is at or above 75 

percent of your PM emission limit you 

must determine your operating limit by 

averaging the PM CPMS milliamp 

output corresponding to your three PM 

performance test runs that demonstrate 

compliance with the emission limit 

using Equation 6. 

Where: 

X1 = The PM CPMS data points for all runs 

i. 

n = The number of data points. 

Oh = Your site specific operating limit, in 

milliamps or the digital equivalent. 

(v) To determine continuous 

operating compliance, you must record 

the PM CPMS output data for all periods 

when the process is operating, and use 

all the PM CPMS data for calculations 

when the source is not out-of-control. 

You must demonstrate continuous 

compliance by using all quality-assured 

hourly average data collected by the PM 

CPMS for all operating hours to 

calculate the arithmetic average 

operating parameter in units of the 

operating limit (milliamps or the digital 

equivalent) on a 30 operating day rolling 

average basis, updated at the end of 

each new kiln operating day. Use 

Equation 7 to determine the 30 kiln 

operating day average. 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALSEP19NO14.022</GPH> EP19NO14.023</GPH> EP19NO14.024</GPH> EP19NO14.025</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 223 / Wednesday, November 19, 2014 / Proposed Rules 68833 

Where: 

Hpvi = The hourly parameter value for hour 

i. 

n = The number of valid hourly parameter 

values collected over 30 kiln operating 

days. 

(vi) For each performance test, 

conduct at least three separate test runs 

each while the mill is on and the mill 

is off, under the conditions that exist 

when the affected source is operating at 

the highest load or capacity level 

reasonably expected to occur. Conduct 

each test run to collect a minimum 

sample volume of 2 dscm for 

determining compliance with a new 

source limit and 1 dscm for determining 

compliance with an existing source 

limit. Calculate the time weighted 

average of the results from three 

consecutive runs, including applicable 

sources as required by (D)(viii), to 

determine compliance. You need not 

determine the particulate matter 

collected in the impingers (‘‘back half’’) 

of the Method 5 or Method 5I 

particulate sampling train to 

demonstrate compliance with the PM 

standards of this subpart. This shall not 

preclude the permitting authority from 

requiring a determination of the ‘‘back 

half’’ for other purposes. 

(vii) For PM performance test reports 

used to set a PM CPMS operating limit, 

the electronic submission of the test 

report must also include the make and 

model of the PM CPMS instrument, 

serial number of the instrument, 

analytical principle of the instrument 

(e.g. beta attenuation), span of the 

instruments primary analytical range, 

milliamp value equivalent to the 

instrument zero output, technique by 

which this zero value was determined, 

and the average milliamp signals 

corresponding to each PM compliance 

test run. 

(viii) When there is an alkali bypass 

and/or an inline coal mill with a 

separate stack associated with a kiln, the 

main exhaust and alkali bypass and/or 

inline coal mill must be tested 

simultaneously and the combined 

emission rate of PM from the kiln and 

alkali bypass and/or inline coal mill 

must be computed for each run using 

Equation 8 of this section. 

Where: 

ECm = Combined hourly emission rate of PM 

from the kiln and bypass stack and/or 

inline coal mill, lb/ton of kiln clinker 

production. 

EK = Hourly emissions of PM emissions from 

the kiln, lb. 

EB = Hourly PM emissions from the alkali 

bypass stack, lb. 

EC = Hourly PM emissions from the inline 

coal mill stack, lb. 

P = Hourly clinker production, tons. 

(ix) The owner or operator of a kiln 

with an in-line raw mill and subject to 

limitations on PM emissions shall 

demonstrate initial compliance by 

conducting separate performance tests 

while the raw mill is under normal 

operating conditions and while the raw 

mill is not operating, and calculate the 

time weighted average emissions using 

63.1349(b)(1)(i) of this section. 

(2) Opacity tests. If you are subject to 

limitations on opacity under this 

subpart, you must conduct opacity tests 

in accordance with Method 9 of 

appendix A–4 to part 60 of this chapter. 

The duration of the Method 9 

performance test must be 3 hours (30 6- 

minute averages), except that the 

duration of the Method 9 performance 

test may be reduced to 1 hour if the 

conditions of paragraphs (b)(2)(i) 

through (b)(2)(ii) of this section apply. 

For batch processes that are not run for 

3-hour periods or longer, compile 

observations totaling 3 hours when the 

unit is operating. 

(i) There are no individual readings 

greater than 10 percent opacity; 

(ii) There are no more than three 

readings of 10 percent for the first 1- 

hour period. 

(3) D/F Emissions Tests. If you are 

subject to limitations on D/F emissions 

under this subpart, you must conduct a 

performance test using Method 23 of 

appendix A–7 to part 60 of this chapter. 

If your kiln or in-line kiln/raw mill is 

equipped with an alkali bypass, you 

must conduct simultaneous 

performance tests of the kiln or in-line 

kiln/raw mill exhaust and the alkali 

bypass. You may conduct a performance 

test of the alkali bypass exhaust when 

the raw mill of the in-line kiln/raw mill 

is operating or not operating. 

(i) Each performance test must consist 

of three separate runs conducted under 

representative conditions. The duration 

of each run must be at least 3 hours, and 

the sample volume for each run must be 

at least 2.5 dscm (90 dscf). 

(ii) The temperature at the inlet to the 

kiln or in-line kiln/raw mill PMCD, and, 

where applicable, the temperature at the 

inlet to the alkali bypass PMCD must be 

continuously recorded during the 

period of the Method 23 test, and the 

continuous temperature record(s) must 

be included in the performance test 

report. 

(iii) Average temperatures must be 

calculated for each run of the 

performance test. 

(iv) The run average temperature must 

be calculated for each run, and the 

average of the run average temperatures 

must be determined and included in the 

performance test report and will 

determine the applicable temperature 

limit in accordance with § 63.1344(b). 

(v)(A) If sorbent injection is used for 

D/F control, you must record the rate of 

sorbent injection to the kiln exhaust, 

and where applicable, the rate of 

sorbent injection to the alkali bypass 

exhaust, continuously during the period 

of the Method 23 test in accordance 

with the conditions in § 63.1350(m)(9), 

and include the continuous injection 

rate record(s) in the performance test 

report. Determine the sorbent injection 

rate parameters in accordance with 

paragraphs (b)(3)(vi) of this section. 

(B) Include the brand and type of 

sorbent used during the performance 

test in the performance test report. 

(C) Maintain a continuous record of 

either the carrier gas flow rate or the 

carrier gas pressure drop for the 

duration of the performance test. If the 

carrier gas flow rate is used, determine, 

record, and maintain a record of the 

accuracy of the carrier gas flow rate 

monitoring system according to the 

procedures in appendix A to part 75 of 

this chapter. If the carrier gas pressure 

drop is used, determine, record, and 

maintain a record of the accuracy of the 

carrier gas pressure drop monitoring 

system according to the procedures in 

§ 63.1350(m)(6). 

(vi) Calculate the run average sorbent 

injection rate for each run and 

determine and include the average of 

the run average injection rates in the 

performance test report and determine 

the applicable injection rate limit in 

accordance with § 63.1346(c)(1). 

(4) THC emissions test. (i) If you are 

subject to limitations on THC emissions, 

you must operate a CEMS in accordance 

with the requirements in § 63.1350(i). 

For the purposes of conducting the 

accuracy and quality assurance 

evaluations for CEMS, the THC span 

value (as propane) is 50 ppmvd and the 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALSEP19NO14.026</GPH> EP19NO14.027</GPH>
68834 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 223 / Wednesday, November 19, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

reference method (RM) is Method 25A 

of appendix A to part 60 of this chapter. 

(ii) Use the THC CEMS to conduct the 

initial compliance test for the first 30 

kiln operating days of kiln operation 

after the compliance date of the rule. 

See 63.1348(a). 

(iii) If kiln gases are diverted through 

an alkali bypass or to a coal mill and 

exhausted through a separate stack, you 

must calculate a kiln-specific THC limit 

using Equation 9: 

Where: 

Cks = Kiln stack concentration (ppmvd). 

Qab = Alkali bypass flow rate (volume/hr). 

Cab = Alkali bypass concentration (ppmvd). 

Qcm = Coal mill flow rate (volume/hr). 

Ccm = Coal mill concentration (ppmvd). 

Qks = Kiln stack flow rate (volume/hr). 

(iv) THC must be measured either 

upstream of the coal mill or the coal 

mill stack. 

(v) Instead of conducting the 

performance test specified in paragraph 

(b)(4) of this section, you may conduct 

a performance test to determine 

emissions of total organic HAP by 

following the procedures in paragraphs 

(b)(7) of this section. 

(5) Mercury Emissions Tests. If you 

are subject to limitations on mercury 

emissions, you must operate a mercury 

CEMS or a sorbent trap monitoring 

system in accordance with the 

requirements of § 63.1350(k). The initial 

compliance test must be based on the 

first 30 kiln operating days in which the 

affected source operates using a mercury 

CEMS or a sorbent trap monitoring 

system after the compliance date of the 

rule. See § 63.1348(a). 

(i) If you are using a mercury CEMS 

or a sorbent trap monitoring system, you 

must install, operate, calibrate, and 

maintain an instrument for 

continuously measuring and recording 

the exhaust gas flow rate to the 

atmosphere according to the 

requirements in § 63.1350(k)(5). 

(ii) Calculate the emission rate using 

Equation 10 of this section: 

Where: 

E30D = 30-day rolling emission rate of 

mercury, lb/MM tons clinker. 

Ci = Concentration of mercury for operating 

hour i, mg/scm. 

Qi = Volumetric flow rate of effluent gas for 

operating hour i, where Ci and Qi are on 

the same basis (either wet or dry), scm/ 

hr. 

k = Conversion factor, 1 lb/454,000,000 mg. 

n = Number of kiln operating hours in the 

previous 30 kiln operating day period 

where both C and Qi qualified data are 

available. 

P = Total runs from the previous 30 days of 

clinker production during the same time 

period as the mercury emissions 

measured, million tons. 

(6) HCl emissions tests. For a source 

subject to limitations on HCl emissions 

you must conduct performance testing 

by one of the following methods: 

(i)(A) If the source is equipped with 

a wet scrubber, tray tower or dry 

scrubber, you must conduct 

performance testing using Method 321 

of appendix A to this part unless you 

have installed a CEMS that meets the 

requirements § 63.1350(l)(1). For kilns 

with inline raw mills, testing should be 

conducted for the raw mill on and raw 

mill off conditions. 

(B) You must establish site specific 

parameter limits by using the CPMS 

required in § 63.1350(l)(1). For a wet 

scrubber or tray tower, measure and 

record the pressure drop across the 

scrubber and/or liquid flow rate and pH 

in intervals of no more than 15 minutes 

during the HCl test. Compute and record 

the 24-hour average pressure drop, pH, 

and average scrubber water flow rate for 

each sampling run in which the 

applicable emissions limit is met. For a 

dry scrubber, measure and record the 

sorbent injection rate in intervals of no 

more than 15 minutes during the HCl 

test. Compute and record the 24-hour 

average sorbent injection rate and 

average sorbent injection rate for each 

sampling run in which the applicable 

emissions limit is met. 

(ii)(A) If the source is not controlled 

by a wet scrubber, tray tower or dry 

sorbent injection system, you must 

operate a CEMS in accordance with the 

requirements of § 63.1350(l)(1). See 

§ 63.1348(a). 

(B) The initial compliance test must 

be based on the 30 kiln operating days 

that occur after the compliance date of 

this rule in which the affected source 

operates using a HCl CEMS. Hourly HCl 

concentration data must be obtained 

according to § 63.1350(l). 

(iii) As an alternative to paragraph 

(b)(6)(i)(B) of this section, you may 

choose to monitor SO2 emissions using 

a CEMS in accordance with the 

requirements of § 63.1350(l)(3). You 

must establish an SO2 operating limit 

equal to the average recorded during the 

HCl stack test where the HCl stack test 

run result demonstrates compliance 

with the emission limit. This operating 

limit will apply only for demonstrating 

HCl compliance. 

(iv) If kiln gases are diverted through 

an alkali bypass or to a coal mill and 

exhausted through a separate stack, you 

must calculate a kiln-specific HCl limit 

using Equation 11: 

Where: 

Cks = Kiln stack concentration (ppmvd). 

Qab = Alkali bypass flow rate (volume/hr). 

Cab = Alkali bypass concentration (ppmvd). 

Qcm = Coal mill flow rate (volume/hr). 

Ccm = Coal mill concentration (ppmvd). 

Qks = Kiln stack flow rate (volume/hr). 

(7) Total Organic HAP Emissions 

Tests. Instead of conducting the 

performance test specified in paragraph 

(b)(4) of this section, you may conduct 

a performance test to determine 

emissions of total organic HAP by 

following the procedures in paragraphs 

(b)(7)(i) through (v) of this section. 

(i) Use Method 320 of appendix A to 

this part, Method 18 of Appendix A of 

part 60, ASTM D6348–03 or a 

combination to determine emissions of 

total organic HAP. Each performance 

test must consist of three separate runs 

under the conditions that exist when the 

affected source is operating at the 

representative performance conditions 

in accordance with § 63.7(e). Each run 

must be conducted for at least 1 hour. 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALSEP19NO14.028</GPH> EP19NO14.029</GPH> EP19NO14.030</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 223 / Wednesday, November 19, 2014 / Proposed Rules 68835 

(ii) At the same time that you are 

conducting the performance test for 

total organic HAP, you must also 

determine a site-specific THC emissions 

limit by operating a THC CEMS in 

accordance with the requirements of 

§ 63.1350(j). The duration of the 

performance test must be at least 3 

hours and the average THC 

concentration (as calculated from the 

recorded output) during the 3-hour test 

must be calculated. You must establish 

your THC operating limit and determine 

compliance with it according to 

paragraphs (a)(7)(vii) through (viii) of 

this section. It is permissible to extend 

the testing time of the organic HAP 

performance test if you believe extended 

testing is required to adequately capture 

organic HAP and/or THC variability 

over time. 

(iii) If your source has an in-line kiln/ 

raw mill you must use the fraction of 

time the raw mill is on and the fraction 

of time that the raw mill is off and 

calculate this limit as a weighted 

average of the THC levels measured 

during three raw mill on and three raw 

mill off tests. 

(iv) If your organic HAP emissions are 

below 75 percent of the organic HAP 

standard and you determine your 

operating limit with paragraph 

(b)(7)(vii) of this section your THC 

CEMS must be calibrated and operated 

on a measurement scale no greater than 

180 ppmvw, as carbon, or 60 ppmvw as 

propane. 

(v) If your kiln has an inline coal mill, 

and you are required to measure at the 

coal mill inlet, you must also measure 

oHAP at the coal mil inlet and calculate 

a weighted average for all emission 

sources including the inline coal mill 

and the alkali bypass. 

(vi) Your THC CEMS measurement 

scale must be capable of reading THC 

concentrations from zero to a level 

equivalent to two times your highest 

THC emissions average determined 

during your performance test, including 

mill on or mill off operation. 

Note: This may require the use of a dual 

range instrument to meet this requirement 

and paragraph (b)(7)(iv) of this section. 

(vii) Determine your operating limit as 

specified in paragraphs (a)(7)(vii) and 

(viii) of this section. If your organic HAP 

performance test demonstrates your 

average organic HAP emission levels are 

below 75 percent of your emission limit 

(9 ppmv) you will use the average THC 

value recorded during the organic HAP 

performance test, and the average total 

organic HAP result of your performance 

test to establish your operating limit. If 

your organic HAP compliance test 

results demonstrate that your average 

organic HAP emission levels are at or 

above 75 percent of your emission limit, 

your operating limit is established as the 

average THC value recorded during the 

organic HAP performance test. You 

must establish a new operating limit 

after each performance test. You must 

repeat the performance test no later than 

30 months following your last 

performance test and reassess and adjust 

the site-specific operating limit in 

accordance with the results of the 

performance test. 

(viii) If the average organic HAP 

results for your three Method 18 and/or 

Method 320 performance test runs are 

below 75 percent of your organic HAP 

emission limit, you must calculate an 

operating limit by establishing a 

relationship of THC CEMS signal to the 

organic HAP concentration using the 

average THC CEMS value corresponding 

to the three organic HAP compliance 

test runs and the average organic HAP 

total concentration from the Method 18 

and/or Method 320 performance test 

runs with the procedures in 

(a)(7)(vii)(A) and (B) of this section. 

(A) Determine the THC CEMS average 

values in ppmvw, and the average of 

your corresponding three total organic 

HAP compliance test runs, using 

Equation 12. 

Where: 

x = The THC CEMS average values in 

ppmvw. 

Xi = The THC CEMS data points for all three 

runs i. 

Yi = The sum of organic HAP concentrations 

for test runs i. and 

n = The number of data points. 

(B) You must use your three run 

average THC CEMS value and your 

three run average organic HAP 

concentration from your three Method 

18 and/or Method 320 compliance tests 

to determine the operating limit. Use 

equation 13 to determine your operating 

limit in units of ppmvw THC, as 

propane. 

Where: 

Tl = The 30-day operating limit for your THC 

CEMS, ppmvw. 

Y1 = The average organic HAP concentration 

from Eq. 12, ppmv. 

X1 = The average THC CEMS concentration 

from Eq. 12, ppmvw. 

(ix) If the average of your three 

organic HAP performance test runs is at 

or above 75 percent of your organic HAP 

emission limit, you must determine 

your operating limit using Equation 14 

by averaging the THC CEMS output 

values corresponding to your three 

organic HAP performance test runs that 

demonstrate compliance with the 

emission limit. If your new THC CEMS 

value is below your current operating 

limit, you may opt to retain your current 

operating limit, but you must still 

submit all performance test and THC 

CEMS data according to the reporting 

requirements in paragraph (d)(1) of this 

section. 

Where: 

X1 = The THC CEMS data points for all runs 

i. 

n = The number of data points. 

Th = Your site specific operating limit, in 

ppmvw THC. 

(x) If your kiln has an inline kiln/raw 

mill, you must conduct separate 

performance tests while the raw mill is 

operating (‘‘mill on’’) and while the raw 

mill is not operating (‘‘mill off’’). Using 

the fraction of time the raw mill is on 

and the fraction of time that the raw 

mill is off, calculate this limit as a 

weighted average of the THC levels 

measured during raw mill on and raw 

mill off compliance testing with 

Equation 15. 

Where: 

R = Operating limit as THC, ppmvw. 

y = Average THC CEMS value during mill on 

operations, ppmvw. 

t = Percentage of operating time with mill on. 

x = Average THC CEMS value during mill off 

operations, ppmvw. 

(1-t) = Percentage of operating time with mill 

off. 

(xi) To determine continuous 

compliance with the THC operating 

limit, you must record the THC CEMS 

output data for all periods when the 

process is operating and the THC CEMS 

is not out-of-control. You must 

demonstrate continuous compliance by 

using all quality-assured hourly average 

data collected by the THC CEMS for all 

operating hours to calculate the 

arithmetic average operating parameter 

in units of the operating limit (ppmvw) 

on a 30 operating day rolling average 

basis, updated at the end of each new 

kiln operating day. Use Equation 16 to 

determine the 30 kiln operating day 

average. 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALSEP19NO14.031</GPH> EP19NO14.032</GPH> EP19NO14.033</GPH> EP19NO14.043</GPH>
68836 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 223 / Wednesday, November 19, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

Where: 

Hpvi = The hourly parameter value for hour 

i, ppmvw. 

n = The number of valid hourly parameter 

values collected over 30 kiln operating 

days. 

(xii) Use EPA Method 18 or Method 

320 of appendix A to part 60 of this 

chapter to determine organic HAP 

emissions. For each performance test, 

conduct at least three separate runs 

under the conditions that exist when the 

affected source is operating at the level 

reasonably expected to occur. If your 

source has an in-line kiln/raw mill you 

must conduct three separate test runs 

with the raw mill on, and three separate 

runs under the conditions that exist 

when the affected source is operating at 

the level reasonably expected to occur 

with the mill off. Conduct each Method 

18 test run to collect a minimum target 

sample equivalent to three times the 

method detection limit. Calculate the 

average of the results from three runs to 

determine compliance. 

(xiii) If the THC level exceeds by 10 

percent or more your site-specific THC 

emissions limit, you must 

(A) As soon as possible but no later 

than 30 days after the exceedance, 

conduct an inspection and take 

corrective action to return the THC 

CEMS measurements to within the 

established value; and 

(B) Within 90 days of the exceedance 

or at the time of the 30 month 

compliance test, whichever comes first, 

conduct another performance test to 

determine compliance with the organic 

HAP limit and to verify or re-establish 

your site-specific THC emissions limit. 

(8) HCl Emissions Tests with SO2

Monitoring. If you choose to monitor 

SO2 emissions using a CEMS to 

demonstrate HCl compliance, follow the 

procedures in (b)(8)(i) through (ix) of 

this section and in accordance with the 

requirements of § 63.1350(l)(3). You 

must establish an SO2 operating limit 

equal to the average recorded during the 

HCl stack test. This operating limit will 

apply only for demonstrating HCl 

compliance. 

(i) Use Method 321 of appendix A to 

this part to determine emissions of HCl. 

Each performance test must consist of 

three separate runs under the conditions 

that exist when the affected source is 

operating at the representative 

performance conditions in accordance 

with § 63.7(e). Each run must be 

conducted for at least one hour. 

(ii) At the same time that you are 

conducting the performance test for 

HCl, you must also determine a sitespecific SO2 emissions limit by 

operating an SO2 CEMS in accordance 

with the requirements of § 63.1350(l). 

The duration of the performance test 

must be three hours and the average SO2

concentration (as calculated from the 

average output) during the 3-hour test 

must be calculated. You must establish 

your SO2 operating limit and determine 

compliance with it according to 

paragraphs (b)(8)(vii) and (viii)of this 

section. 

(iii) If your source has an in-line kiln/ 

raw mill you must use the fraction of 

time the raw mill is on and the fraction 

of time that the raw mill is off and 

calculate this limit as a weighted 

average of the SO2 levels measured 

during raw mill on and raw mill off 

testing. 

(iv) Your SO2 CEMS must be 

calibrated and operated according to the 

requirements of § 60.63(f). 

(v) Your SO2 CEMS measurement 

scale must be capable of reading SO2

concentrations consistent with the 

requirements of § 60.63(f), including 

mill on or mill off operation. 

(vi) If your kiln has an inline kiln/raw 

mill, you must conduct separate 

performance tests while the raw mill is 

operating (‘‘mill on’’) and while the raw 

mill is not operating (‘‘mill off’’). Using 

the fraction of time the raw mill is on 

and the fraction of time that the raw 

mill is off, calculate this limit as a 

weighted average of the HCl levels 

measured during raw mill on and raw 

mill off compliance testing with 

Equation 17. 

Where: 

R = Operating limit as SO2, ppmvw. 

y = Average SO2 CEMS value during mill on 

operations, ppmvw. 

t = Percentage of operating time with mill on, 

expressed as a decimal. 

x = Average SO2 CEMS value during mill off 

operations, ppmvw. 

t¥1 = Percentage of operating time with mill 

off, expressed as a decimal. 

(vii) If the average of your three HCl 

compliance test runs is below 75 

percent of your HCl emission limit, you 

must calculate an operating limit by 

establishing a relationship of SO2 CEMS 

signal to your HCl concentration 

corrected to 7% O2 by using the SO2

CEMS instrument zero, the average SO2

CEMS values corresponding to the three 

compliance test runs, and the average 

HCl concentration from the HCl 

compliance test with the procedures in 

(a)(1)(iii)(A) through (D) of this section. 

(A) Determine your SO2 CEMS 

instrument zero output with one of the 

following procedures. 

(1) Zero point data for in-situ 

instruments should be obtained by 

removing the instrument from the stack 

and monitoring ambient air on a test 

bench. 

(2) Zero point data for extractive 

instruments may be obtained by 

removing the extractive probe from the 

stack and drawing in clean ambient air. 

(3) The zero point may also be 

established by performing probe-flood 

introduction of high purity nitrogen or 

certified zero air free of SO2. 

(4) If none of the steps in paragraphs 

(a)(1)(iii)(A)(1) through (3) of this 

section are possible, you must use a zero 

output value provided by the 

manufacturer. 

(B) Determine your SO2 CEMS 

instrument average ppm, and the 

average of your corresponding three HCl 

compliance test runs, using equation 18. 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALSEP19NO14.034</GPH> EP19NO14.042</GPH> EP19NO14.035</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 223 / Wednesday, November 19, 2014 / Proposed Rules 68837 

Where: 

X1 = The SO2 CEMS data points for the three 

runs constituting the performance test. 

Y1 = The HCl emission concentration 

expressed as ppmv corrected to 7% O2

for the three runs constituting the 

performance test. 

n = The number of data points. 

(C) With your instrument zero 

expressed in ppmv, your three run 

average SO2 CEMS expressed in ppmv, 

and your three run HCl compliance test 

average in ppm corrected to 7% O2,

determine a relationship of ppm HCl 

corrected to 7% O2 per ppm SO2 with 

Equation 19. 

Where: 

R = The relative HCl ppmv corrected to 7% 

O2 per ppm SO2 for your SO2 CEMS. 

Y1 = The three run average HCl concentration 

corrected to 7% O2. 

X1 = The three run average ppm recorded by 

your SO2 CEMS. 

z = The instrument zero output ppm value. 

(D) Determine your source specific 30- 

day rolling average operating limit using 

ppm HCl corrected to 7% O2 per ppm 

SO2 value from Equation 19 in Equation 

20, below. This sets your operating limit 

at the SO2 CEMS ppm value 

corresponding to 75 percent of your 

emission limit. 

Where: 

Ol = The operating limit for your SO2 CEMS 

on a 30-day rolling average, in ppmv. 

L = Your source HCl emission limit 

expressed in ppmv corrected to 7% O2. 

z = Your instrument zero in ppmv, 

determined from (1)(i). 

R = The relative oxygen corrected ppmv HCl 

per ppmv SO2, for your SO2 CEMS, from 

Equation 19. 

(viii) To determine continuous 

compliance with the SO2 operating 

limit, you must record the SO2 CEMS 

output data for all periods when the 

process is operating and the SO2 CEMS 

is not out-of-control. You must 

demonstrate continuous compliance by 

using all quality-assured hourly average 

data collected by the SO2 CEMS for all 

operating hours to calculate the 

arithmetic average operating parameter 

in units of the operating limit (ppmvw) 

on a 30 operating day rolling average 

basis, updated at the end of each new 

kiln operating day. Use Equation 18 to 

determine the 30 kiln operating day 

average. 

Where: 

Hpvi = The hourly parameter value for hour 

i, ppmvw. 

n = The number of valid hourly parameter 

values collected over 30 kiln operating 

days. 

(ix) Use EPA Method 321 of appendix 

A to part 60 of this chapter to determine 

HCl emissions. For each performance 

test, conduct at least three separate runs 

under the conditions that exist when the 

affected source is operating at the 

highest load or capacity level reasonably 

expected to occur. If your source has an 

in-line kiln/raw mill you must conduct 

three separate test runs with the raw 

mill on, and three separate runs under 

the conditions that exist when the 

affected source is operating at the 

highest load or capacity level reasonably 

expected to occur with the mill off. 

(x) If the SO2 level exceeds by 10 

percent or more your site-specific SO2

emissions limit, you must 

(A) As soon as possible but no later 

than 30 days after the exceedance, 

conduct an inspection and take 

corrective action to return the SO2

CEMS measurements to within the 

established value. and 

(B) Within 90 days of the exceedance 

or at the time of the periodic 

compliance test, whichever comes first, 

conduct another performance test to 

determine compliance with the HCl 

limit and to verify or re-establish your 

site-specific SO2 emissions limit. 

* * * * * 

■ 11. Section 63.1350 is amended by: 

■ a. Removing and reserving paragraph 

(a)(2). 

■ b. Revising paragraphs (i)(1) through 

(i)(2), (j), (k)(2), (k)(2)(ii), (l), (n), (n)(1), 

(o), and (o)(3). 

■ c. Adding paragraphs (k)(2)(iii) and 

(k)(2)(iv). 

The revisions read as follows: 

§ 63.1350 Monitoring requirements. 

(a) * * * 

(2) [Reserved] 

* * * * * 

(i) * * * 

(1) You must install, operate, and 

maintain a THC continuous emission 

monitoring system in accordance with 

Performance Specification 8 or 

Performance Specification 8A of 

appendix B to part 60 of this chapter 

and comply with all of the requirements 

for continuous monitoring systems 

found in the general provisions, subpart 

A of this part. The owner or operator 

must operate and maintain each CEMS 

according to the quality assurance 

requirements in Procedure 1 of 

appendix F in part 60 of this chapter. 

(2) Performance tests on alkali bypass 

and coal mill stacks must be conducted 

using Method 25A in appendix A to 40 

CFR part 60 and repeated every 30 

months. 

(j) Total organic HAP monitoring 

requirements. If you are complying with 

the total organic HAP emissions limits, 

you must continuously monitor THC 

according to paragraph (i)(1) and (2) or 

in accordance with Performance 

Specification 8 or Performance 

Specification 8A of appendix B to part 

60 of this chapter and comply with all 

of the requirements for continuous 

monitoring systems found in the general 

provisions, subpart A of this part. You 

must operate and maintain each CEMS 

according to the quality assurance 

requirements in Procedure 1 of 

appendix F in part 60 of this chapter. In 

addition, your must follow the 

monitoring requirements in paragraphs 

(m)(1) through (m)(4) of this section. 

You must also develop an emissions 

monitoring plan in accordance with 

paragraphs (p)(1) through (p)(4) of this 

section. 

(k) * * * 

(2) In order to quality assure data 

measured above the span value, you 

must use one of the three options in 

paragraphs (k)(2)(i) through (iii) of this 

section. 

* * * * * 

(ii) Quality assure any data above the 

span value by proving instrument 

linearity beyond the span value 

established in paragraph (k)(1) of this 

section using the following procedure. 

Conduct a weekly ‘‘above span 

linearity’’ calibration challenge of the 

monitoring system using a reference gas 

with a certified value greater than your 

highest expected hourly concentration. 

The ‘‘above span’’ reference gas must 

meet the requirements of PS 12A, 

Section 7.1 and must be introduced to 

the measurement system at the probe. 

Record and report the results of this 

procedure as you would for a daily 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALSEP19NO14.036</GPH> EP19NO14.037</GPH> EP19NO14.038</GPH>
68838 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 223 / Wednesday, November 19, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

calibration. The ‘‘above span linearity’’ 

challenge is successful if the value 

measured by the Hg CEMS falls within 

10 percent of the certified value of the 

reference gas. If the value measured by 

the Hg CEMS during the above span 

linearity challenge exceeds 10 percent 

of the certified value of the reference 

gas, the monitoring system must be 

evaluated and repaired and a new 

‘‘above span linearity’’ challenge met 

before returning the Hg CEMS to 

service, or data above span from the Hg 

CEMS must be quality assured using the 

procedure established in (k)(2)(iii). 

(iii) Quality assure any data above the 

span value established in paragraph 

(k)(1) of this section using the following 

procedure. Any time two consecutive 

one-hour average measured 

concentration of Hg exceeds the span 

value you must, within 24 hours before 

or after, introduce a higher, ‘‘above 

span’’ Hg reference gas standard to the 

Hg CEMS. The ‘‘above span’’ reference 

gas must meet the requirements of PS 

12A, Section 7.1, must target a 

concentration level between 50 and 150 

percent of the highest expected hourly 

concentration measured during the 

period of measurements above span, 

and must be introduced at the probe. 

Record and report the results of this 

procedure as you would for a daily 

calibration. The ‘‘above span’’ 

calibration is successful if the value 

measured by the Hg CEMS is within 20 

percent of the certified value of the 

reference gas. If the value measured by 

the Hg CEMS exceeds 20 percent of the 

certified value of the reference gas, then 

you must normalize the one-hour 

average stack gas values measured above 

the span during the 24-hour period 

preceding or following the ‘‘above span’’ 

calibration for reporting based on the Hg 

CEMS response to the reference gas as 

shown in equation 22: 

Only one ‘above span’ calibration is 

needed per 24 hour period. 

(iv) If mercury emissions from the 

coal mill and alkali bypass are below 

the method detection limit for two 

consecutive annual performance tests, 

you may reduce the frequency of the 

performance tests of coal mills and 

alkali bypasses to once every 30 months. 

If the measured mercury concentration 

exceeds the method detection limit, you 

must revert to testing annually until two 

consecutive annual tests are below the 

method detection limit. 

* * * * * 

(l) HCl Monitoring Requirements. If 

you are subject to an emissions 

limitation on HCl emissions in 

§ 63.1343, you must monitor HCl 

emissions continuously according to 

paragraph (l)(1) or (2) and paragraphs 

(m)(1) through (4) of this section or, if 

your kiln is controlled using a wet or 

dry scrubber or tray tower, you 

alternatively may parametrically 

monitor SO2 emissions continuously 

according to paragraph (l)(3) of this 

section. You must also develop an 

emissions monitoring plan in 

accordance with paragraphs (p)(1) 

through (4) of this section. 

(1) If you monitor compliance with 

the HCl emissions limit by operating an 

HCl CEMS, you must do so in 

accordance with Performance 

Specification 15 (PS 15) of appendix B 

to part 60 of this chapter, or, upon 

promulgation, in accordance with any 

other performance specification for HCl 

CEMS in appendix B to part 60 of this 

chapter. You must operate, maintain, 

and quality assure a HCl CEMS installed 

and certified under PS 15 according to 

the quality assurance requirements in 

Procedure 1 of appendix F to part 60 of 

this chapter except that the Relative 

Accuracy Test Audit requirements of 

Procedure 1 must be replaced with the 

validation requirements and criteria of 

sections 11.1.1 and 12.0 of PS 15. If you 

install and operate an HCl CEMS in 

accordance with any other performance 

specification for HCl CEMS in appendix 

B to part 60 of this chapter, you must 

operate, maintain and quality assure the 

HCl CEMS using the procedure of 

appendix F to part 60 of this chapter 

applicable to the performance 

specification. You must use Method 321 

of appendix A to part 63 of this chapter 

as the reference test method for 

conducting relative accuracy testing. 

The span value and calibration 

requirements in paragraphs (l)(1)(i) and 

(ii) of this section apply to HCl CEMS 

other than those installed and certified 

under PS 15. 

(i) You must use a measurement span 

value for any HCl CEMS of 0–10 

ppmvw. The HCl CEMS data recorder 

output range must include the full range 

of expected HCl concentration values 

which would include those expected 

during ‘‘mill off’’ conditions. The 

corresponding data recorder range shall 

be documented in the site-specific 

monitoring plan and associated records. 

(ii) In order to quality assure data 

measured above the span value, you 

must use one of the three options in 

paragraphs (l)(1)(ii)(A) through (C) of 

this section. 

(A) Include a second span that 

encompasses the HCl emission 

concentrations expected to be 

encountered during ‘‘mill off’’ 

conditions. This second span may be 

rounded to a multiple of 5 mg/m3 of total 

HCl. The requirements of the 

appropriate HCl monitor performance 

specification shall be followed for this 

second span with the exception that a 

RATA with the mill off is not required. 

(B) Quality assure any data above the 

span value by proving instrument 

linearity beyond the span value 

established in paragraph (I)(1)(i) of this 

section using the following procedure. 

Conduct a weekly ‘‘above span 

linearity’’ calibration challenge of the 

monitoring system using a reference gas 

with a certified value greater than your 

highest expected hourly concentration. 

The ‘‘above span’’ reference gas must 

meet the requirements of the applicable 

performance specification and must be 

introduced to the measurement system 

at the probe. Record and report the 

results of this procedure as you would 

for a daily calibration. The ‘‘above span 

linearity’’ challenge is successful if the 

value measured by the HCl CEMS falls 

within 10 percent of the certified value 

of the reference gas. If the value 

measured by the HCl CEMS during the 

above span linearity challenge exceeds 

10 percent of the certified value of the 

reference gas, the monitoring system 

must be evaluated and repaired and a 

new ‘‘above span linearity’’ challenge 

met before returning the HCl CEMS to 

service, or data above span from the HCl 

CEMS must be quality assured using the 

procedure established in (I)(1)(C). 

(C) Quality assure any data above the 

span value established in paragraph 

(1)(1)(i) of this section using the 

following procedure. Any time the 

average measured concentration of HCl 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALSEP19NO14.039</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 223 / Wednesday, November 19, 2014 / Proposed Rules 68839 

exceeds or is expected to exceed the 

span value for greater than two hours 

you must, within a period 24 hours 

before or after the ‘above span’ period, 

introduce a higher, ‘above span’ HCl 

reference gas standard to the HCl CEMS. 

The ‘above span’ reference gas must 

meet the requirements of the applicable 

performance specification and target a 

concentration level between 50 and 100 

percent of the highest expected hourly 

concentration measured during the 

period of measurements above span, 

and must be introduced at the probe. 

Record and report the results of this 

procedure as you would for a daily 

calibration. The ‘above span’ calibration 

is successful if the value measured by 

the HCl CEMS is within 20 percent of 

the certified value of the reference gas. 

If the value measured by the HCl CEMS 

is not within 20 percent of the certified 

value of the reference gas, then you 

must normalize the stack gas values 

measured above span as described in 

paragraph (l)(1)(ii)(D) below. If the 

‘above span’ calibration is conducted 

during the period when measured 

emissions are above span and there is a 

failure to collect the required minimum 

number of data points in an hour due to 

the calibration duration, then you must 

determine the emissions average for that 

missed hour as the average of hourly 

averages for the hour preceding the 

missed hour and the hour following the 

missed hour. 

(D) In the event that the ‘above span’ 

calibration is not successful (i.e., the 

HCl CEMS measured value is not within 

20 percent of the certified value of the 

reference gas), then you must normalize 

the one-hour average stack gas values 

measured above the span during the 24- 

hour period preceding or following the 

‘above span’ calibration for reporting 

based on the HCl CEMS response to the 

reference gas as shown in Equation 23: 

Only one ‘above span’ calibration is 

needed per 24-hour period. 

(2) Install, operate, and maintain a 

CMS to monitor wet scrubber or tray 

tower parameters, as specified in 

paragraphs (m)(5) and (7) of this section, 

and dry scrubber, as specified in 

paragraph (m)(9) of this section. 

(3) If the source is equipped with a 

wet or dry scrubber or tray tower, and 

you choose to monitor SO2 emissions, 

monitor SO2 emissions continuously 

according to the requirements of 

§ 60.63(e) through (f) of part 60 subpart 

F of this chapter. If SO2 levels increase 

above the 30-day rolling average SO2

operating limit established during your 

performance test, you must: 

(i) As soon as possible but no later 

than 48 hours after you exceed the 

established SO2 value conduct an 

inspection and take corrective action to 

return the SO2 emissions to within the 

operating limit; and 

(ii) Within 60 days of the exceedance 

or at the time of the next compliance 

test, whichever comes first, conduct an 

HCl emissions compliance test to 

determine compliance with the HCl 

emissions limit and to verify or reestablish the SO2 CEMS operating limit. 

* * * * * 

(n) Continuous Flow Rate Monitoring 

System. You must install, operate, 

calibrate, and maintain instruments, 

according to the requirements in 

paragraphs (n)(1) through (10) of this 

section, for continuously measuring and 

recording the stack gas flow rate to 

allow determination of the pollutant 

mass emissions rate to the atmosphere 

from sources subject to an emissions 

limitation that has a pounds per ton of 

clinker unit and that is required to be 

monitored by a CEMS. 

(1) You must install each sensor of the 

flow rate monitoring system in a 

location that provides representative 

measurement of the exhaust gas flow 

rate at the sampling location of the 

mercury CEMS, taking into account the 

manufacturer’s recommendations. The 

flow rate sensor is that portion of the 

system that senses the volumetric flow 

rate and generates an output 

proportional to that flow rate. 

* * * * * 

(o) Alternate monitoring requirements 

approval. You may submit an 

application to the Administrator for 

approval of alternate monitoring 

requirements to demonstrate 

compliance with the emission standards 

of this subpart subject to the provisions 

of paragraphs (o)(1) through (6) of this 

section. 

* * * * * 

(3) You must submit the application 

for approval of alternate monitoring 

requirements no later than the 

notification of performance test. The 

application must contain the 

information specified in paragraphs 

(o)(3)(i) through (iii) of this section: 

* * * * * 

■ 12. 63.1354 is amended by: 

■ a. Revising paragraphs (b)(9) through 

(b)(9)(vi). 

■ b. Adding paragraphs (b)(9)(viii) 

through (b)(9)(x). 

The revisions and additions read as 

follows: 

§ 63.1354 Reporting requirements. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(9) The owner or operator shall 

submit a summary report semiannually 

to the EPA via the Compliance and 

Emissions Data Reporting Interface 

(CEDRI). (CEDRI can be accessed 

through the EPA’s Central Data 

Exchange (CDX) (www.epa.gov/cdx).) 

You must use the appropriate electronic 

report in CEDRI for this subpart. Instead 

of using the electronic report in CEDRI 

for this subpart, you may submit an 

alternate electronic file consistent with 

the extensible markup language (XML) 

schema listed on the CEDRI Web site 

(http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/cedri/

index.html), once the XML schema is 

available. If the reporting form specific 

to this subpart is not available in CEDRI 

at the time that the report is due, you 

must submit the report the 

Administrator at the appropriate 

address listed in § 63.13. You must 

begin submitting reports via CEDRI no 

later than 90 days after the form 

becomes available in CEDRI. The reports 

must be submitted by the deadline 

specified in this subpart, regardless of 

the method in which the reports are 

submitted. 

The report must contain the 

information specified in 

§ 63.10(e)(3)(vi). In addition, the 

summary report shall include: 

(i) All exceedances of maximum 

control device inlet gas temperature 

limits specified in § 63.1346(a) and (b); 

(ii) Notification of any failure to 

calibrate thermocouples and other 

temperature sensors as required under 

§ 63.1350(g)(1)(iii) of this subpart; and 

(iii) Notification of any failure to 

maintain the activated carbon injection 

rate, and the activated carbon injection 

carrier gas flow rate or pressure drop, as 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALSEP19NO14.040</GPH>
68840 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 223 / Wednesday, November 19, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

applicable, as required under 

§ 63.1346(c)(2). 

(iv) Notification of failure to conduct 

any combustion system component 

inspections conducted within the 

reporting period as required under 

§ 63.1347(a)(3). 

(v) Any and all failures to comply 

with any provision of the operation and 

maintenance plan developed in 

accordance with § 63.1347(a). 

(vi) For each PM CPMS, HCl, Hg, and 

THC CEMS, D/F temperature 

monitoring system, or Hg sorbent trap 

monitoring system, within 60 days after 

the reporting periods, you must report 

all of the calculated 30-operating day 

rolling average values derived from the 

CPMS, CEMS, CMS, or Hg sorbent trap 

monitoring systems. 

* * * * * 

(viii) Within 60 days after the date of 

completing each CEMS performance 

evaluation test as defined in § 63.2, you 

must submit relative accuracy test audit 

(RATA) data to the EPA’s CDX by using 

CEDRI in accordance with paragraph (9) 

of this section. Only RATA pollutants 

that can be documented with the ERT 

(as listed on the ERT Web site) are 

subject to this requirement. For any 

performance evaluations with no 

corresponding RATA pollutants listed 

on the ERT Web site, you must submit 

the results of the performance 

evaluation to the Administrator at the 

appropriate address listed in § 63.13. 

(ix) For PM performance test reports 

used to set a PM CPMS operating limit, 

the electronic submission of the test 

report must also include the make and 

model of the PM CPMS instrument, 

serial number of the instrument, 

analytical principle of the instrument 

(e.g. beta attenuation), span of the 

instruments primary analytical range, 

milliamp value equivalent to the 

instrument zero output, technique by 

which this zero value was determined, 

and the average milliamp signals 

corresponding to each PM compliance 

test run. 

(x) All reports required by this 

subpart not subject to the requirements 

in paragraphs (b)(9) and (b)(9)(viii) of 

this section must be sent to the 

Administrator at the appropriate 

address listed in § 63.13. The 

Administrator or the delegated authority 

may request a report in any form 

suitable for the specific case (e.g., by 

commonly used electronic media such 

as Excel spreadsheet, on CD or hard 

copy). The Administrator retains the 

right to require submittal of reports 

subject to paragraph (b)(9) and 

(b)(9)(viii) of this section in paper 

format. 

* * * * * 

■ 13. Revise § 63.1356 to read as 

follows: 

§ 63.1356 Sources with multiple emissions 

limit or monitoring requirements. 

If you have an affected source subject 

to this subpart with a different 

emissions limit or requirement for the 

same pollutant under another regulation 

in title 40 of this chapter, once you are 

in compliance with the most stringent 

emissions limit or requirement, you are 

not subject to the less stringent 

requirement. Until you are in 

compliance with the more stringent 

limit, the less stringent limit continues 

to apply. 

§ 63.1357 [Remove and reserve] 

■ 14. Remove and reserve § 63.1357. 

[FR Doc. 2014–26905 Filed 11–18–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 63 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0234; FRL–9919–20– 

OAR] 

RIN 2060–AS39 

National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants: Coal- and 

Oil-Fired Electric Steam Generating 

Units 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to amend the 

National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants: Coal- and OilFired Electric Steam Generating Units 

(Mercury and Air Toxics Standards 

(MATS)). In addition to this proposed 

rule the EPA is publishing a direct final 

rule that amends the reporting 

requirements of the MATS rule by 

temporarily requiring affected sources to 

submit all required emissions and 

compliance reports to the EPA through 

the Emissions Collection and 

Monitoring Plan System Client Tool and 

temporarily suspending the requirement 

for affected sources to submit certain 

reports using the Electronic Reporting 

Tool and the Compliance and Emissions 

Data Reporting Interface. If we receive 

no adverse comment, we will not take 

further action on this proposed rule. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received by December 19, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Comments. Submit your 

comments, identified by Docket ID 

Number EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0234, by 

one of the following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov. 

Attention Docket ID Number EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2009–0234. 

• Fax: (202) 566–9744. Attention 

Docket ID Number EPA–HQ–OAR– 

2009–0234. 

• Mail: U.S. Postal Service, send 

comments to: U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center, 

Mail Code: 28221T, Attention Docket ID 

Number EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0234, 

1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., 

Washington, DC 20460. 

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center, 

Room 3334, EPA WJC West Building, 

1301 Constitution Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20004. Attention 

Docket ID Number EPA–HQ–OAR– 

2009–0234. Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Docket’s normal 

hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions. Direct your comments to 

Docket ID Number EPA–HQ–OAR– 

2009–0234. The EPA’s policy is that all 

comments received will be included in 

the public docket without change and 

may be made available online at 

http://www.regulations.gov, including 

any personal information provided, 

unless the comment includes 

information claimed to be confidential 

business information (CBI) or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Do not submit 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected through http://

www.regulations.gov or email. The 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is 

an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means the EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to the EPA without 

going through http://

www.regulations.gov, your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, the EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If the EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, the EPA may not 

be able to consider your comment. 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS