National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Chemical Recovery Combustion Sources at Kraft, Soda, Sulfite, and Stand-Alone Semichemical Pulp Mills; Standards of Performance for Kraft Pulp Mill Affected Sources for Which Construction, Reconstruction, or Modification Commenced After May 23, 2013, 58356-58362 [2019-23616]

Download as PDF 58356 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 211 / Thursday, October 31, 2019 / Proposed Rules and the requirements for presenting new evidence are very specifically laid out. Petitions for reopening may be filed much later by someone who had the chance to participate in the initial probate proceeding but did not do so. Time spent processing a reopening request reduces the time available for other probate cases. • Potential Regulatory Change: Revise the current regulations to: (1) Limit the ability of a party who did not use the opportunity to participate in an initial probate proceeding to later file a petition for reopening; and (2) in a rehearing and reopening proceedings, make clear the circumstances under which new evidence may be presented. khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Issue 12: Even Small, Simple Estates Must Undergo a Probate Proceeding Heirs and devisees often express frustration at how long it takes the Department to process a decedent’s estate. One reason that probate takes time is that the current regulations require cases with any amount of trust funds to be adjudicated by an OHA decision maker. • Potential Regulatory Changes: Increase the scope of estates that are subject to OHA’s summary process, which does not require a formal hearing (see 43 CFR part 30 subpart I), and/or determine what would be considered a small estate and, for estates within that definition, create a streamlined distribution scheme for such estates. Issue 13: Current Regulations Fail To Address Implementation of the AIPRA Provision Regarding Descent of OffReservation Lands AIPRA distinctly addresses the descent of interests in trust or restricted lands that are located outside the boundaries of an Indian reservation and are not subject to the jurisdiction of a Tribe. See 25 U.S.C. 2206(d)(2). The current regulations fail to address implementation of this statutory provision, however, which may be applied inconsistently or not at all. • Potential Regulatory Changes: Address implementation of an AIPRA provision (25 U.S.C. 2206(d)(2)) concerning off-reservation lands. The purpose of such a change would be to ensure consistency and transparency in OHA decisions, and to increase the public’s awareness about exceptions to the AIPRA rules that exist. Authority The Department is issuing this ANPRM under the authority of 5 U.S.C. 301, 25 U.S.C. 2, 9, 372, 373 and the Indian Land Consolidation Act of 2000 (ILCA) as amended by the American VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Oct 30, 2019 Jkt 250001 Indian Probate Reform Act of 2004 (AIPRA), 25 U.S.C. 2201 et seq. Susan Combs, Assistant Secretary—Policy, Management and Budget. [FR Doc. 2019–23748 Filed 10–30–19; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4334–63–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 60 and 63 [EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0741; FRL–10001–62– OAR] RIN 2060–AU53 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Chemical Recovery Combustion Sources at Kraft, Soda, Sulfite, and Stand-Alone Semichemical Pulp Mills; Standards of Performance for Kraft Pulp Mill Affected Sources for Which Construction, Reconstruction, or Modification Commenced After May 23, 2013 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to amend the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Chemical Recovery Combustion Sources at Kraft, Soda, Sulfite, and Stand-alone Semichemical Pulp Mills and the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for Kraft Pulp Mills constructed, reconstructed, or modified after May 23, 2013. This proposed rule clarifies how operating limits are required to be established for smelt dissolving tank scrubbers and corrects cross-reference errors in both rules. DATES: Comments. Comments must be received on or before December 30, 2019. Public Hearing. If anyone contacts us requesting a public hearing on or before November 5, 2019, we will hold a hearing. Additional information about the hearing, if requested, will be published in a subsequent Federal Register document and posted at https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sourcesair-pollution/kraft-soda-sulfite-andstand-alone-semichemical-pulp-millsmact-ii. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for information on requesting and registering for a public hearing. SUMMARY: You may send comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– ADDRESSES: PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 OAR–2014–0741, by any of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov/ (our preferred method). Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. • Email: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov. Include Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR– 2014–0741 in the subject line of the message. • Fax: (202) 566–9744. Attention Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2014– 0741. • Mail: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center, Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2014– 0741, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460. • Hand/Courier Delivery: EPA Docket Center, WJC West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004. The Docket Center’s hours of operation are 8:30 a.m.–4:30 p.m., Monday–Friday (except federal holidays). Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket ID No. for this rulemaking. Comments received may be posted without change to https:// www.regulations.gov/, including any personal information provided. For detailed instructions on sending comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions about this proposed action, contact Dr. Kelley Spence, Sector Policies and Programs Division (E143– 03), Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone number: (919) 541–3158; fax number: (919) 541–0516; and email address: spence.kelley@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Public Hearing. Please contact Ms. Virginia Hunt at (919) 541–0832 or by email at hunt.virginia@epa.gov to request a hearing, to register to speak at the hearing, or to inquire as to whether a public hearing will be held. Docket. The EPA has established a docket for this rulemaking under Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0741. All documents in the docket are listed in Regulations.gov. Although listed, some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information (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 E:\FR\FM\31OCP1.SGM 31OCP1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 211 / Thursday, October 31, 2019 / Proposed Rules available docket materials are available either electronically in 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. Instructions. Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2014– 0741. 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 https:// www.regulations.gov/, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through https:// www.regulations.gov/ or email. This type of information should be submitted by mail as discussed below. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the Web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ commenting-epa-dockets. The https://www.regulations.gov/ website allows you to submit your comment anonymously, 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 https:// 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 digital storage media you submit. If the EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Oct 30, 2019 Jkt 250001 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 https:// www.epa.gov/dockets. Submitting CBI. Do not submit information containing CBI to the EPA through https://www.regulations.gov/ or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information on any digital storage media that you mail to the EPA, mark the outside of the digital storage media as CBI and then identify electronically within the digital storage media the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comments that includes information claimed as CBI, you must submit a copy of the comments that does not contain the information claimed as CBI directly to the public docket through the procedures outlined in Instructions above. If you submit any digital storage media that does not contain CBI, mark the outside of the digital storage media clearly that it does not contain CBI. Information not marked as CBI will be included in the public docket and the EPA’s electronic public docket without prior notice. Information marked as CBI will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 2. Send or deliver information identified as CBI only to the following address: OAQPS Document Control Officer (C404–02), OAQPS, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, Attention Docket ID No. EPA– HQ–OAR–2014–0741. Preamble acronyms and abbreviations. We use multiple acronyms and terms in this preamble. While this list may not be exhaustive, to ease the reading of this preamble and for reference purposes, the EPA defines the following terms and acronyms here: ADI Applicability Determination Index CAA Clean Air Act CBI Confidential Business Information CFR Code of Federal Regulations EPA Environmental Protection Agency ESP electrostatic precipitator HAP hazardous air pollutant(s) NAICS North American Industry Classification System NESHAP national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants NSPS new source performance standards NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act OMB Office of Management and Budget PFLA percent full load amperage PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 58357 PM particulate matter RPM revolutions per minute SDT smelt dissolving tank Organization of this document. The information in this preamble is organized as follows: I. General Information A. Why is the EPA issuing this proposed action? B. Does this action apply to me? C. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related information? II. Proposed Amendments A. What are the proposed amendments to the NESHAP? B. What are the proposed amendments to the NSPS? III. Summary of Cost, Environmental, and Economic Impacts A. What are the affected sources? B. What are the air quality impacts? C. What are the cost impacts? D. What are the economic impacts? E. What are the benefits? IV. Request for Comments V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations I. General Information A. Why is the EPA issuing this proposed action? This document proposes to amend the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Chemical Recovery Combustion Sources at Kraft, Soda, Sulfite, and Stand-Alone Semichemical Pulp Mills (40 CFR part 63, subpart MM), and the Standards of Performance for Kraft Pulp Mill Affected Sources for Which Construction, Reconstruction, or Modification Commenced After May 23, 2013 (40 CFR part 60, subpart BBa). We are proposing this action to clarify how smelt dissolving tank (SDT) scrubber fan E:\FR\FM\31OCP1.SGM 31OCP1 58358 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 211 / Thursday, October 31, 2019 / Proposed Rules amperage limits should be determined and amend these rules to correct crossreference errors. We explain our reasons for this action in this preamble. B. Does this action apply to me? Table 1 of this preamble lists the NESHAP, NSPS, and associated regulated industrial source categories that are the subject of this proposal. Table 1 is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding the entities that this proposed action is likely to affect. The proposed amendments, once promulgated, will be directly applicable to the affected sources. Federal, state, local, and tribal government entities will not be affected by this proposed action. As defined in the Initial List of Categories of Sources Under Section 112(c)(1) of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (see 57 FR 31576, July 16, 1992) and Documentation for Developing the Initial Source Category List, Final Report (see EPA–450/3–91–030, July 1992), the Pulp and Paper Production source category is any facility engaged in the production of pulp and/or paper. This category includes, but is not limited to, integrated mills (where pulp alone or pulp and paper or paperboard are manufactured on-site), nonintegrated mills (where paper or paperboard are manufactured, but no pulp is manufactured on-site), and secondary fiber mills (where waste paper is used as the primary raw material). Examples of pulping methods include kraft, soda, sulfite, semichemical, and mechanical. The pulp and paper production process units include operations such as pulping, bleaching, and chemical recovery. A kraft pulp mill is defined as a facility engaged in kraft pulping and includes digester systems, brown stock washer systems, multiple-effect evaporator systems, condensate stripper systems, recovery furnaces, SDTs, and lime kilns. TABLE 1—REGULATIONS AND INDUSTRIAL SOURCE CATEGORIES AFFECTED BY THIS PROPOSED ACTION Source category Name of action NAICS code 1 Pulp and Paper Production ...... Chemical Recovery Combustion Sources at Kraft, Soda, Sulfite, and Stand-Alone Semichemical Pulp Mills (40 CFR part 63, subpart MM). Standards of Performance for Kraft Pulp Mill Affected Sources for Which Construction, Reconstruction, or Modification Commenced After May 23, 2013 (40 CFR part 60, subpart BBa). 32211, 32212, 32213 3221 Kraft Pulp Mills ......................... 1 North American Industry Classification System. C. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related information? In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of this action is available on the internet. Following signature by the EPA Administrator, the EPA will post a copy of this proposed action at https://www.epa.gov/ stationary-sources-air-pollution/kraftsoda-sulfite-and-stand-alonesemichemical-pulp-mills-mact-ii and https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sourcesair-pollution/kraft-pulp-mills-newsource-performance-standards-nsps-40cfr-60. Following publication in the Federal Register, the EPA will post the Federal Register version of the proposal at this same website. A redline version of the regulatory language that incorporates the proposed changes in this action is available in the docket (Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR– 2014–0741). II. Proposed Amendments khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS A. What are the proposed amendments to the NESHAP? With this action, the EPA is proposing to clarify how SDT scrubber fan amperage operating limits should be determined. A technical-feasibility issue with implementing the residual risk and technology review amendments to 40 CFR part 63, subpart MM, published in 2017 (82 FR 47328, October 11, 2017) was brought to the EPA’s attention VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Oct 30, 2019 Jkt 250001 through alternative monitoring requests the Agency received. The 2017 NESHAP amendment that added the fan amperage 1 alternative parameter to 40 CFR 63.864(e)(10)(iii) was based on the EPA’s review of alternative monitoring requests for SDTs available in the EPA’s Applicability Determination Index (ADI) (81 FR 97074, December 30, 2016). In these previously approved alternative monitoring requests, the EPA acknowledged that pressure drop is not the best indicator of particulate matter (PM)/hazardous air pollutant (HAP) control device performance when the SDT scrubber is a low-energy entrainment scrubber or a dynamic scrubber that operates near atmospheric pressure. Low-energy entrainment scrubbers use the rotation of the fan blade to shatter the scrubbing liquid into fine droplets, while at the same time accelerating the particles into the airstream. The PM removal efficiency of these scrubbers is a function of the number of liquid droplets produced (to create a large contacting surface area) and the velocity of the particulates imparted by the fan blade, which in turn is a function of the amount of scrubbing liquid introduced and the tip speed of the fan blade. Therefore, the most important parameters to continuously monitor are the scrubbing liquid flow rate and the fan rotational speed (as 1 Fan amperage refers to the amperage delivered to the fan motor. PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 indicated by the amperage of the fan motor or revolutions per minute (RPM)). The 2017 NESHAP amendment also specified a method in 40 CFR 63.864(j)(5)(i)(A) for setting the fan motor amperage operating limit, requiring that the minimum fan amperage operating limit be set as the lowest of the 1-hour average fan amperage values associated with each run demonstrating compliance with the applicable emission limit. The intent of establishing the operating limit as the lowest 1-hour average fan amperage was to demonstrate that the scrubber was operating as intended and removing HAP accordingly, because fan amperage values can be correlated with fan speed. This seemed reasonable during the development of the 2017 NESHAP amendments because the fan on these units are constant speed fans and changes in the load to the fan motor (e.g., changes in gas density/pressure or fan belt issues) result in changes in the amperage needed to maintain the constant speed. For example, a scrubber operating without any scrubbing liquid or exhaust gas would pull a certain amount of amperage on the fan motor to maintain a constant speed. When the exhaust gas and scrubbing liquid are added, the fan motor amperage will increase to maintain that speed. Based on this concept, the basis for the fan motor amperage operating limit in the 2017 NESHAP amendments was that a drop in fan motor amperage below a certain point showed that the motor E:\FR\FM\31OCP1.SGM 31OCP1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 211 / Thursday, October 31, 2019 / Proposed Rules would no longer turn the fan properly (because, for example, the belt that connects the motor to the fan was slipping or broken), which in turn would mean the scrubber was not operating as well as it was during the emissions performance test. As facilities began to plan their repeat performance test required by the 2017 NESHAP amendments and determine the appropriate operating parameters, they discovered that the method dictated to set the fan motor amperage did not accurately represent proper scrubber performance and submitted alternative monitoring requests. The alternative monitoring requests that EPA has received explained that setting the fan amperage operating limit as outlined in the 2017 NESHAP amendments at 40 CFR 63.864(j)(5)(i)(A) could result in a minimum limit that does not correlate with scrubber emissions-reduction performance and cannot be achieved at all times, leading to deviations of the amperage operating parameter even when the fan is turning as designed and the scrubber is operating properly to achieve the required HAP reduction. More details on these alternative monitoring requests are available in the memorandum titled Smelt Dissolving Tank Scrubber Operating Parameter Review, in the docket for this rulemaking (EPA Docket ID No. EPA– HQ–OAR–2014–0741). After reviewing how the SDT scrubbers in question operate, the EPA agrees that use of the average fan motor amperage measured during the performance test to establish the fan amperage limit as dictated in 40 CFR 63.864(j)(5)(i)(A) of the 2017 NESHAP amendments can be problematic because it does not necessarily correlate with proper operation of the scrubber. The EPA’s intent with adding the fan motor amperage alternative as part of the 2017 NESHAP amendments was to add regulatory flexibility while ensuring proper scrubber operation, not to arbitrarily set an operating limit that may not be met, even while the SDT scrubber is operating properly. The requirement for determining the fan motor amperage during the performance test to set the minimum limit was included in the 2017 NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, subpart MM) amendments for new and existing sources and in the NSPS (40 CFR part 60, subpart BBa) promulgated in 2014 (79 FR 18952, April 4, 2014) which applies to new sources only. The issue was not identified in public comments on either rule but was discovered as existing sources began to implement the 2017 NESHAP amendments. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Oct 30, 2019 Jkt 250001 Upon further review of the EPA’s responses to historical alternative monitoring requests included in the ADI, recent requests for alternative monitoring and other available information, we recognize that the requirement to monitor fan amperage directly and establish a minimum fan amperage limit based on the average amperage measured during the performance test may result in deviations even when the scrubber is properly operating. Some facilities were approved by the EPA to use indicators of fan operation closely related to fan amperage (e.g., RPM) and engineering design considerations when setting the site-specific fan amperage limit indicative of proper scrubber operation. For more details, see the memorandum titled Smelt Dissolving Tank Scrubber Operating Parameter Review, in the docket for this rulemaking (EPA Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0741). To continue with our original intent to measure scrubber performance with an alternative method in these rules, this action is proposing to modify the language at 40 CFR 63.864(e)(10)(iii) and (j)(5)(i) to clarify how wet scrubber parameter limits are to be established and that fan amperage or RPM can be used to demonstrate compliance for the SDT scrubbers in question. Specifically, we are proposing to replace 40 CFR 63.864(j)(5)(i)(A) with a requirement to set the minimum scrubbing liquid flow rate operating limit as the lowest of the 1-hour average scrubbing liquid flow rate values associated with each test run demonstrating compliance with the applicable emission limit. This requirement was inadvertently left out of the 2017 NESHAP amendment but was required by other sections of the rule. Additionally, we are proposing to add a new subsection, 40 CFR 63.864(j)(5)(i)(B) to clarify how wet scrubber fan amperage operating limits should be established. The proposed text in 40 CFR 63.864(j)(5)(i)(B) would have the same requirements that were previously in the 40 CFR 63.864(j)(5)(i) introductory paragraph, which states the scrubber pressure drop operating limit must be set as the lowest of the 1-hour average pressure drop values associated with each test run demonstrating compliance with the applicable emission limit and provides alternatives for determining parameters for dynamic or low energy entrainment scrubbers. The proposed new 40 CFR 63.864(j)(5)(i)(B)(1) would clarify that, for SDT dynamic wet scrubbers operating at ambient pressure or for low energy entrainment scrubbers where fan speed does not vary, the minimum fan amperage operating limit PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 58359 must be set as the midpoint between the lowest of the 1-hour average fan amperage values associated with each test run demonstrating compliance with the applicable emission limit and the no-load amperage value. Additionally, the proposed regulatory text specifies that the no-load amperage value must be determined using manufacturers specifications or by performing a noload test of the fan motor, and that it must be verified that the scrubber fan is operating within 5 percent of the design RPM during the emissions performance test. The proposed 40 CFR 63.864(j)(5)(i)(B)(2) would allow for the use of percent full load amperage (PFLA) to demonstrate compliance. The minimum PFLA to the fan motor must be set as the percent of full load amps under no-load, plus 10 percent. Because the no-load value represents the amperage pulled by the motor without a fan belt (i.e., the fan is not engaged), the additional 10 percent will ensure that the belt has not broken and the fan is engaged during operation. This proposed subsection also would require verification that the scrubber fan is operating within 5 percent of the design RPM during the emissions performance test. Further, we are proposing 40 CFR 63.864(j)(5)(i)(B)(3) to allow the use of RPM to demonstrate compliance. The minimum RPM must be set at 95 percent of the design RPM. Finally, we are proposing a conforming amendment in 40 CFR 63.867(c)(3)(iii)(C)(1) to incorporate this language. In addition to clarifying how to set SDT fan amperage operating limits, the EPA is also proposing to correct the following cross-reference errors in the promulgated Combustion Source NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, subpart MM): • An incorrect paragraph reference in the definition of ‘‘modification’’ in 40 CFR 63.861; • An incorrect paragraph reference in 40 CFR 63.864(e)(10)(iii), referring to 40 CFR 63.864(e)(3)(i) instead of 40 CFR 63.864(e)(10)(i) as intended; • Incorrect paragraph references in 40 CFR 63.864(j)(1), (3), and (5) which cross-referenced requirements that were proposed (81 FR 97046, December 30, 2016) but not finalized for establishing site-specific electrostatic precipitator (ESP) operating limits. Instead, the EPA finalized a requirement to maintain proper operation of the ESP’s automatic voltage control (82 FR 47328, October 11, 2017), but inadvertently kept the cross-references to the proposed requirements in the final rule; and • Omission of reference to wet scrubber liquid flow rate in 40 CFR 63.864(j)(5) which specifies how to establish operating limits. E:\FR\FM\31OCP1.SGM 31OCP1 58360 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 211 / Thursday, October 31, 2019 / Proposed Rules B. What are the proposed amendments to the NSPS? With this action, the EPA is proposing similar amendments to the fan amperage requirements as discussed in section II.A of this preamble to 40 CFR 60.284a(b)(2)(iii), (c)(4), and (d)(4)(ii) and 40 CFR 60.287(b)(4)(i) for consistency between the two rules that apply to the same scrubbers. Additionally, the EPA is also proposing to correct a cross-reference error in the promulgated Kraft Pulp Mills NSPS (40 CFR part 60, subpart BBa). Specifically, the EPA is proposing to amend incorrect paragraph references in 40 CFR 60.285a(b)(1) and 60.285a(d)(1) intended to cross-reference the rule’s oxygen correction equation. III. Summary of Cost, Environmental, and Economic Impacts A. What are the affected sources? The sources affected by this proposal are chemical pulp mills that use SDTs equipped with low-energy entrainment scrubbers or dynamic scrubbers that operate near atmospheric pressure. We estimate that there are 54 facilities that utilize these types of scrubbers. government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. The EPA does not know of any pulp mills owned or operated by Indian tribal governments or located within tribal lands. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action. Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders can be found at https://www.epa.gov/lawsregulations/laws-and-executive-orders. A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review This action is not a significant regulatory action and was, therefore, not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs This action is not expected to be an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action because this action is not significant under Executive Order 12866. B. What are the air quality impacts? C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) There are no air quality impacts associated with the proposed amendments. This action does not impose any new information collection burden under the PRA. OMB has previously approved the information collection activities contained in the existing regulation (40 CFR part 63, subpart MM) and has assigned OMB control number 2060– 0377. This action does not change the information collection requirements. C. What are the cost impacts? No cost impacts are estimated to be associated with this proposed action because the proposal serves only to provide regulatory clarity. This proposed action reduces the likelihood that facilities will choose to submit sitespecific alternative monitoring requests but does not change the scope of any regulatory requirements. D. What are the economic impacts? There are no economic impacts associated with the proposed amendments. E. What are the benefits? khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS parameter calculations needed to determine compliance. Such data should include supporting documentation in sufficient detail to allow characterization of the quality and representativeness of the data or information. Because these proposed amendments are not considered economically significant, as defined by Executive Order 12866, and because we did not estimate any emission reductions associated with the proposal, we did not estimate any benefits from reducing emissions. IV. Request for Comments We solicit comments on this proposed action. In addition to general comments on this action, we are also interested in any additional SDT scrubber performance data that may improve the VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Oct 30, 2019 Jkt 250001 D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This action will not impose any requirements on small entities. This action does not create any new requirements or burdens, and no costs are associated with this proposed action. E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local, or tribal governments or the private sector. G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying to those regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect children, per the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory action’’ in section 2–202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not concern an environmental health risk or safety risk. I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) This rulemaking does not involve technical standards. K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations The EPA believes that this action does not have disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority populations, lowincome populations, and/or indigenous peoples, as specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). This action does not affect the level of protection provided to human health or the environment. List of Subjects F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 40 CFR Part 60 This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedures, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Monitoring requirements. PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\31OCP1.SGM 31OCP1 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 211 / Thursday, October 31, 2019 / Proposed Rules 40 CFR Part 63 Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedures, Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Dated: October 22, 2019. Andrew R. Wheeler, Administrator. For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Environmental Protection Agency proposes to amend 40 CFR part 60 and 63 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, et seq. Subpart BBa—Standards of Performance for Kraft Pulp Mill Affected Sources for Which Construction, Reconstruction, or Modification Commenced After May 23, 2013 2. Section 60.284a is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(2)(iii), (c)(3)(i), (c)(4), and (d)(4)(ii) to read as follows: ■ § 60.284a Monitoring of emissions and operations. khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS * * * * * (b) * * * (2) * * * (iii) As an alternative to pressure drop measurement under paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section, a monitoring device for measurement of fan amperage or revolutions per minute (RPM) may be used for smelt dissolving tank dynamic scrubbers that operate at ambient pressure or for low-energy entrainment scrubbers where the fan speed does not vary. * * * * * (c) * * * (3) * * * (i) Calculate 12-hour block averages from the recorded measurements of wet scrubber pressure drop (or smelt dissolving tank scrubber fan amperage or RPM) and liquid flow rate (or liquid supply pressure), as applicable. * * * * * (4) During the initial performance test required in § 60.285a, the owner or operator must establish site-specific operating limits for the monitoring parameters in paragraphs (b)(2) through (4) of this section by continuously monitoring the parameters and determining the arithmetic average value of each parameter during the VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Oct 30, 2019 Jkt 250001 performance test. The arithmetic average of the measured values for the three test runs establishes your minimum site-specific operating limit for each wet scrubber or ESP parameter (except for smelt dissolving tank scrubber fan amperage or RPM). For smelt dissolving tank scrubber fan amperage, see 40 CFR 63.864(j)(5)(i)(B). For smelt dissolving tank scrubber RPM, the minimum RPM must be set as 5 percent lower than the design RPM. Multiple performance tests may be conducted to establish a range of parameter values. The owner or operator may establish replacement operating limits for the monitoring parameters during subsequent performance tests using the test methods in § 60.285a. * * * * * (d) * * * (4) * * * (ii) All 12-hour block average scrubber pressure drop (or fan amperage or RPM, if used as an alternative under paragraph (b)(2)(iii) of this section) measurements below the minimum sitespecific limit established during performance testing during times when BLS or lime mud is fired (as applicable), except during startup and shutdown. * * * * * ■ 3. Section 60.285a is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(1) and (d)(1) to read as follows: § 60.285a Test methods and procedures. * * * * * (b) * * * (1) Method 5 of appendix A–3 of this part must be used to determine the filterable particulate matter concentration. The sampling time and sample volume for each run must be at least 60 minutes and 0.90 dscm (31.8 dscf). Water must be used as the cleanup solvent instead of acetone in the sample recovery procedure. The particulate concentration must be corrected to the appropriate oxygen concentration according to § 60.284a(c)(1)(iii). * * * * * (d) * * * (1) Method 16 of appendix A–6 of this part must be used to determine the TRS concentration. The TRS concentration must be corrected to the appropriate oxygen concentration using the procedure in § 60.284a(c)(1)(iii). The sampling time must be at least 3 hours, but no longer than 6 hours. * * * * * ■ 4. Section 60.287a is amended by revising paragraph (b)(4)(i) to read as follows: * * * * * (b) * * * PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 58361 (4) * * * (i) Records of the pressure drop of the gas stream through the control equipment (or smelt dissolving tank scrubber fan amperage or RPM), and * * * * * PART 63—NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES 5. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq. Subpart MM—National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Chemical Recovery Combustion Sources at Kraft, Soda, Sulfite, and Stand-Alone Semichemical Pulp Mills 6. Section 63.861 is amended by revising the definition of ‘‘modification’’ and adding in alphabetical order the definition of ‘‘no-load fan amperage’’ to read as follows: * * * * * Modification means, for the purposes of § 63.862(a)(1)(ii)(D)(1), any physical change (excluding any routine part replacement or maintenance) or operational change that is made to the air pollution control device that could result in an increase in PM emissions. No-load fan amperage means, for purposes of this subpart, the amperage pulled by the fan motor when the fan is operating under no-load, specifically the amperage value the motor would use if the fan belt was removed. * * * * * ■ 7. Section 63.864 is amended by revising paragraphs (e)(10)(iii), (j)(1), (3), and (5) to read as follows: ■ § 63.864 Monitoring requirements. * * * * * (e) * * * (10) * * * (iii) As an alternative to pressure drop measurement under paragraph (e)(10)(i) of this section, a monitoring device for measurement of fan amperage or fan revolutions per minute (RPM) may be used for smelt dissolving tank dynamic scrubbers that operate at ambient pressure or for low-energy entrainment scrubbers where the fan speed does not vary. * * * * * (j) * * * (1) During the initial or periodic performance test required in § 63.865, the owner or operator of any affected source or process unit must establish operating limits for the monitoring parameters in paragraphs (e)(2) and (10) E:\FR\FM\31OCP1.SGM 31OCP1 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS 58362 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 211 / Thursday, October 31, 2019 / Proposed Rules through (14) of this section, as appropriate; or * * * * * (3) The owner or operator of an affected source or process unit may establish expanded or replacement operating limits for the monitoring parameters listed in paragraphs (e)(2) and (10) through (14) of this section and established in paragraph (j)(1) or (2) of this section during subsequent performance tests using the test methods in § 63.865. * * * * * (5) New, expanded, or replacement operating limits for the monitoring parameter values listed in paragraphs (e)(2) and (10) through (14) of this section should be determined as described in paragraphs (j)(5)(i) and (ii) of this section. (i) The owner or operator of an affected source or process unit that uses a wet scrubber must set minimum operating limits as described in paragraph (j)(5)(i)(A) and (B) of this section. (A) Set the minimum scrubbing liquid flow rate operating limit as the lowest of the 1-hour average scrubbing liquid flow rate values associated with each test run demonstrating compliance with the applicable emission limit in § 63.862. (B) Set the minimum scrubber pressure drop operating limit as the lowest of the 1-hour average pressure drop values associated with each test run demonstrating compliance with the applicable emission limit in § 63.862; or for a smelt dissolving tank dynamic wet scrubber operating at ambient pressure or for low energy entrainment scrubbers where fan speed does not vary, set the minimum operating limit using one of the methods in paragraph (j)(5)(i)(B)(1) through (3) of this section. (1) The minimum fan amperage operating limit must be set as the midpoint between the lowest of the 1hour average fan amperage values associated with each test run demonstrating compliance with the applicable emission limit in § 63.862 and the no-load amperage value. The no-load amperage value must be determined using manufacturers specifications, or by performing a noload test of the fan motor for each smelt dissolving tank scrubber. It must be verified that the scrubber fan is operating within 5 percent of the design RPM during the emissions performance test; or (2) The minimum percent full load amperage (PFLA) to the fan motor must be set as the percent of full load amps under no-load, plus 10 percent. The VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Oct 30, 2019 Jkt 250001 PFLA is calculated by dividing the noload amperage value by the highest of the 1-hour average fan amperage values associated with each test run demonstrating compliance with the applicable emission limit in § 63.862 multiplied by 100. The no-load amperage value must be determined using manufacturers specifications, or by performing a no-load test of the fan motor for each smelt dissolving tank scrubber. It must be verified that the scrubber fan is operating within 5 percent of the design RPM during the emissions performance test; or (3) The minimum RPM must be set as 95 percent of the design RPM. * * * * * ■ 8. Section 63.867 is amended by revising paragraph (c)(3)(iii)(C)(1) to read as follows: § 63.867 Reporting requirements. * * * * * (c) * * * (3) * * * (iii) * * * (C) * * * (1) The operating limits established during the performance test for scrubbing liquid flow rate and pressure drop across the scrubber (or alternatively, fan amperage or RPM if used for smelt dissolving tank scrubbers). * * * * * [FR Doc. 2019–23616 Filed 10–30–19; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Defense Acquisition Regulations System Comments on the proposed rule should be submitted in writing to the address shown below on or before December 30, 2019, to be considered in the formation of a final rule. ADDRESSES: Submit comments identified by DFARS Case 2018–D050, using any of the following methods: Æ Regulations.gov: https:// www.regulations.gov. Submit comments via the Federal eRulemaking portal by entering ‘‘DFARS Case 2018–D050’’ under the heading ‘‘Enter keyword or ID’’ and selecting ‘‘Search.’’ Select the link ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ that corresponds with ‘‘DFARS Case 2018– D050.’’ Follow the instructions provided at the ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ screen. Please include your name, company name (if any), and ‘‘DFARS Case 2018– D050’’ on your attached document. Æ Email: osd.dfars@mail.mil. Include DFARS Case 2018–D050 in the subject line of the message. Æ Fax: 571–372–6094. Æ Mail: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Attn: Carrie Moore, OUSD(A&S)DPC/DARS, Room 3B941, 3060 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301–3060. Comments received generally will be posted without change to https:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. To confirm receipt of your comment(s), please check www.regulations.gov, approximately two to three days after submission to verify posting, except allow 30 days for posting of comments submitted by mail. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Carrie Moore, telephone 571–372–6093. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DATES: I. Background 48 CFR Parts 204 and 252 [Docket DARS–2019–0049] RIN 0750–AK14 Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement: Modification of DFARS Clause, ‘‘Payment for Subline Items Not Separately Priced’’ (DFARS Case 2018–D050) Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense (DoD). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: DoD is proposing to amend the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to modify the text of an existing DFARS clause to clarify its intent and conform its language to current DFARS terminology, pursuant to action taken by the Regulatory Reform Task Force. SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 This rule proposes to modify the clause at DFARS 252.204–7002, Payment for Subline Items Not Separately Priced, to simplify the clause text and conform terminology used in the text to current Government contract line item structure terminology. This update will clarify the intent of the clause, as it pertains to payment on contracts that contain not separately priced (NSP) items, when applicable. The rule also adds a prescription for DFARS 252.204–7002 in the applicable DFARS subpart 204.7109, Contract Clauses. II. Discussion and Analysis DFARS clause 252.204–7002 is included in solicitations and contracts when the value of a NSP contract line or subline item is included in the price of another contract line or subline item, and it is necessary to withhold payment E:\FR\FM\31OCP1.SGM 31OCP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 211 (Thursday, October 31, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 58356-58362]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-23616]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 60 and 63

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0741; FRL-10001-62-OAR]
RIN 2060-AU53


National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for 
Chemical Recovery Combustion Sources at Kraft, Soda, Sulfite, and 
Stand-Alone Semichemical Pulp Mills; Standards of Performance for Kraft 
Pulp Mill Affected Sources for Which Construction, Reconstruction, or 
Modification Commenced After May 23, 2013

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
amend the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 
(NESHAP) for Chemical Recovery Combustion Sources at Kraft, Soda, 
Sulfite, and Stand-alone Semichemical Pulp Mills and the New Source 
Performance Standards (NSPS) for Kraft Pulp Mills constructed, 
reconstructed, or modified after May 23, 2013. This proposed rule 
clarifies how operating limits are required to be established for smelt 
dissolving tank scrubbers and corrects cross-reference errors in both 
rules.

DATES: 
    Comments. Comments must be received on or before December 30, 2019.
    Public Hearing. If anyone contacts us requesting a public hearing 
on or before November 5, 2019, we will hold a hearing. Additional 
information about the hearing, if requested, will be published in a 
subsequent Federal Register document and posted at https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/kraft-soda-sulfite-and-stand-alone-semichemical-pulp-mills-mact-ii. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for 
information on requesting and registering for a public hearing.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2014-0741, by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov/ 
(our preferred method). Follow the online instructions for submitting 
comments.
     Email: [email protected]. Include Docket ID No. EPA-
HQ-OAR-2014-0741 in the subject line of the message.
     Fax: (202) 566-9744. Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2014-0741.
     Mail: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket 
Center, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0741, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 
Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460.
     Hand/Courier Delivery: EPA Docket Center, WJC West 
Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004. 
The Docket Center's hours of operation are 8:30 a.m.-4:30 p.m., Monday-
Friday (except federal holidays).
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket ID 
No. for this rulemaking. Comments received may be posted without change 
to https://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal information 
provided. For detailed instructions on sending comments and additional 
information on the rulemaking process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY 
INFORMATION section of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions about this proposed 
action, contact Dr. Kelley Spence, Sector Policies and Programs 
Division (E143-03), Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 
27711; telephone number: (919) 541-3158; fax number: (919) 541-0516; 
and email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    Public Hearing. Please contact Ms. Virginia Hunt at (919) 541-0832 
or by email at [email protected] to request a hearing, to register 
to speak at the hearing, or to inquire as to whether a public hearing 
will be held.
    Docket. The EPA has established a docket for this rulemaking under 
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0741. All documents in the docket are 
listed in Regulations.gov. Although listed, some information is not 
publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information (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

[[Page 58357]]

available docket materials are available either electronically in 
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.
    Instructions. Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2014-0741. 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 https://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal 
information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed 
to be CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by 
statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or 
otherwise protected through https://www.regulations.gov/ or email. This 
type of information should be submitted by mail as discussed below.
    The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. 
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a 
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment 
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA 
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located 
outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the Web, cloud, or other 
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA 
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, 
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
    The https://www.regulations.gov/ website allows you to submit your 
comment anonymously, 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 
https://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 
digital storage media 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 https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Submitting CBI. Do not submit information containing CBI to the EPA 
through https://www.regulations.gov/ or email. Clearly mark the part or 
all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information on 
any digital storage media that you mail to the EPA, mark the outside of 
the digital storage media as CBI and then identify electronically 
within the digital storage media the specific information that is 
claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comments 
that includes information claimed as CBI, you must submit a copy of the 
comments that does not contain the information claimed as CBI directly 
to the public docket through the procedures outlined in Instructions 
above. If you submit any digital storage media that does not contain 
CBI, mark the outside of the digital storage media clearly that it does 
not contain CBI. Information not marked as CBI will be included in the 
public docket and the EPA's electronic public docket without prior 
notice. Information marked as CBI will not be disclosed except in 
accordance with procedures set forth in 40 Code of Federal Regulations 
(CFR) part 2. Send or deliver information identified as CBI only to the 
following address: OAQPS Document Control Officer (C404-02), OAQPS, 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North 
Carolina 27711, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0741.
    Preamble acronyms and abbreviations. We use multiple acronyms and 
terms in this preamble. While this list may not be exhaustive, to ease 
the reading of this preamble and for reference purposes, the EPA 
defines the following terms and acronyms here:

ADI Applicability Determination Index
CAA Clean Air Act
CBI Confidential Business Information
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
ESP electrostatic precipitator
HAP hazardous air pollutant(s)
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
NESHAP national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants
NSPS new source performance standards
NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
OMB Office of Management and Budget
PFLA percent full load amperage
PM particulate matter
RPM revolutions per minute
SDT smelt dissolving tank

    Organization of this document. The information in this preamble is 
organized as follows:

I. General Information
    A. Why is the EPA issuing this proposed action?
    B. Does this action apply to me?
    C. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related 
information?
II. Proposed Amendments
    A. What are the proposed amendments to the NESHAP?
    B. What are the proposed amendments to the NSPS?
III. Summary of Cost, Environmental, and Economic Impacts
    A. What are the affected sources?
    B. What are the air quality impacts?
    C. What are the cost impacts?
    D. What are the economic impacts?
    E. What are the benefits?
IV. Request for Comments
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and 
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
    B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulation and Controlling 
Regulatory Costs
    C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
    D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
    E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
    F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With 
Indian Tribal Governments
    H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From 
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
    I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
    K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address 
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations

I. General Information

A. Why is the EPA issuing this proposed action?

    This document proposes to amend the National Emission Standards for 
Hazardous Air Pollutants for Chemical Recovery Combustion Sources at 
Kraft, Soda, Sulfite, and Stand-Alone Semichemical Pulp Mills (40 CFR 
part 63, subpart MM), and the Standards of Performance for Kraft Pulp 
Mill Affected Sources for Which Construction, Reconstruction, or 
Modification Commenced After May 23, 2013 (40 CFR part 60, subpart 
BBa). We are proposing this action to clarify how smelt dissolving tank 
(SDT) scrubber fan

[[Page 58358]]

amperage limits should be determined and amend these rules to correct 
cross-reference errors. We explain our reasons for this action in this 
preamble.

B. Does this action apply to me?

    Table 1 of this preamble lists the NESHAP, NSPS, and associated 
regulated industrial source categories that are the subject of this 
proposal. Table 1 is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides 
a guide for readers regarding the entities that this proposed action is 
likely to affect. The proposed amendments, once promulgated, will be 
directly applicable to the affected sources. Federal, state, local, and 
tribal government entities will not be affected by this proposed 
action. As defined in the Initial List of Categories of Sources Under 
Section 112(c)(1) of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (see 57 FR 
31576, July 16, 1992) and Documentation for Developing the Initial 
Source Category List, Final Report (see EPA-450/3-91-030, July 1992), 
the Pulp and Paper Production source category is any facility engaged 
in the production of pulp and/or paper. This category includes, but is 
not limited to, integrated mills (where pulp alone or pulp and paper or 
paperboard are manufactured on-site), non-integrated mills (where paper 
or paperboard are manufactured, but no pulp is manufactured on-site), 
and secondary fiber mills (where waste paper is used as the primary raw 
material). Examples of pulping methods include kraft, soda, sulfite, 
semi-chemical, and mechanical. The pulp and paper production process 
units include operations such as pulping, bleaching, and chemical 
recovery. A kraft pulp mill is defined as a facility engaged in kraft 
pulping and includes digester systems, brown stock washer systems, 
multiple-effect evaporator systems, condensate stripper systems, 
recovery furnaces, SDTs, and lime kilns.

             Table 1--Regulations and Industrial Source Categories Affected by This Proposed Action
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Source category                            Name of action                      NAICS code \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pulp and Paper Production..............  Chemical Recovery Combustion Sources at    32211, 32212, 32213
                                          Kraft, Soda, Sulfite, and Stand-Alone
                                          Semichemical Pulp Mills (40 CFR part 63,
                                          subpart MM).
Kraft Pulp Mills.......................  Standards of Performance for Kraft Pulp    3221
                                          Mill Affected Sources for Which
                                          Construction, Reconstruction, or
                                          Modification Commenced After May 23,
                                          2013 (40 CFR part 60, subpart BBa).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ North American Industry Classification System.

C. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related 
information?

    In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of 
this action is available on the internet. Following signature by the 
EPA Administrator, the EPA will post a copy of this proposed action at 
https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/kraft-soda-sulfite-and-stand-alone-semichemical-pulp-mills-mact-ii and https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/kraft-pulp-mills-new-source-performance-standards-nsps-40-cfr-60. Following publication in 
the Federal Register, the EPA will post the Federal Register version of 
the proposal at this same website.
    A redline version of the regulatory language that incorporates the 
proposed changes in this action is available in the docket (Docket ID 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0741).

II. Proposed Amendments

A. What are the proposed amendments to the NESHAP?

    With this action, the EPA is proposing to clarify how SDT scrubber 
fan amperage operating limits should be determined. A technical-
feasibility issue with implementing the residual risk and technology 
review amendments to 40 CFR part 63, subpart MM, published in 2017 (82 
FR 47328, October 11, 2017) was brought to the EPA's attention through 
alternative monitoring requests the Agency received.
    The 2017 NESHAP amendment that added the fan amperage \1\ 
alternative parameter to 40 CFR 63.864(e)(10)(iii) was based on the 
EPA's review of alternative monitoring requests for SDTs available in 
the EPA's Applicability Determination Index (ADI) (81 FR 97074, 
December 30, 2016). In these previously approved alternative monitoring 
requests, the EPA acknowledged that pressure drop is not the best 
indicator of particulate matter (PM)/hazardous air pollutant (HAP) 
control device performance when the SDT scrubber is a low-energy 
entrainment scrubber or a dynamic scrubber that operates near 
atmospheric pressure. Low-energy entrainment scrubbers use the rotation 
of the fan blade to shatter the scrubbing liquid into fine droplets, 
while at the same time accelerating the particles into the airstream. 
The PM removal efficiency of these scrubbers is a function of the 
number of liquid droplets produced (to create a large contacting 
surface area) and the velocity of the particulates imparted by the fan 
blade, which in turn is a function of the amount of scrubbing liquid 
introduced and the tip speed of the fan blade. Therefore, the most 
important parameters to continuously monitor are the scrubbing liquid 
flow rate and the fan rotational speed (as indicated by the amperage of 
the fan motor or revolutions per minute (RPM)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Fan amperage refers to the amperage delivered to the fan 
motor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 2017 NESHAP amendment also specified a method in 40 CFR 
63.864(j)(5)(i)(A) for setting the fan motor amperage operating limit, 
requiring that the minimum fan amperage operating limit be set as the 
lowest of the 1-hour average fan amperage values associated with each 
run demonstrating compliance with the applicable emission limit. The 
intent of establishing the operating limit as the lowest 1-hour average 
fan amperage was to demonstrate that the scrubber was operating as 
intended and removing HAP accordingly, because fan amperage values can 
be correlated with fan speed. This seemed reasonable during the 
development of the 2017 NESHAP amendments because the fan on these 
units are constant speed fans and changes in the load to the fan motor 
(e.g., changes in gas density/pressure or fan belt issues) result in 
changes in the amperage needed to maintain the constant speed. For 
example, a scrubber operating without any scrubbing liquid or exhaust 
gas would pull a certain amount of amperage on the fan motor to 
maintain a constant speed. When the exhaust gas and scrubbing liquid 
are added, the fan motor amperage will increase to maintain that speed. 
Based on this concept, the basis for the fan motor amperage operating 
limit in the 2017 NESHAP amendments was that a drop in fan motor 
amperage below a certain point showed that the motor

[[Page 58359]]

would no longer turn the fan properly (because, for example, the belt 
that connects the motor to the fan was slipping or broken), which in 
turn would mean the scrubber was not operating as well as it was during 
the emissions performance test.
    As facilities began to plan their repeat performance test required 
by the 2017 NESHAP amendments and determine the appropriate operating 
parameters, they discovered that the method dictated to set the fan 
motor amperage did not accurately represent proper scrubber performance 
and submitted alternative monitoring requests. The alternative 
monitoring requests that EPA has received explained that setting the 
fan amperage operating limit as outlined in the 2017 NESHAP amendments 
at 40 CFR 63.864(j)(5)(i)(A) could result in a minimum limit that does 
not correlate with scrubber emissions-reduction performance and cannot 
be achieved at all times, leading to deviations of the amperage 
operating parameter even when the fan is turning as designed and the 
scrubber is operating properly to achieve the required HAP reduction. 
More details on these alternative monitoring requests are available in 
the memorandum titled Smelt Dissolving Tank Scrubber Operating 
Parameter Review, in the docket for this rulemaking (EPA Docket ID No. 
EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0741).
    After reviewing how the SDT scrubbers in question operate, the EPA 
agrees that use of the average fan motor amperage measured during the 
performance test to establish the fan amperage limit as dictated in 40 
CFR 63.864(j)(5)(i)(A) of the 2017 NESHAP amendments can be problematic 
because it does not necessarily correlate with proper operation of the 
scrubber. The EPA's intent with adding the fan motor amperage 
alternative as part of the 2017 NESHAP amendments was to add regulatory 
flexibility while ensuring proper scrubber operation, not to 
arbitrarily set an operating limit that may not be met, even while the 
SDT scrubber is operating properly. The requirement for determining the 
fan motor amperage during the performance test to set the minimum limit 
was included in the 2017 NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, subpart MM) amendments 
for new and existing sources and in the NSPS (40 CFR part 60, subpart 
BBa) promulgated in 2014 (79 FR 18952, April 4, 2014) which applies to 
new sources only. The issue was not identified in public comments on 
either rule but was discovered as existing sources began to implement 
the 2017 NESHAP amendments.
    Upon further review of the EPA's responses to historical 
alternative monitoring requests included in the ADI, recent requests 
for alternative monitoring and other available information, we 
recognize that the requirement to monitor fan amperage directly and 
establish a minimum fan amperage limit based on the average amperage 
measured during the performance test may result in deviations even when 
the scrubber is properly operating. Some facilities were approved by 
the EPA to use indicators of fan operation closely related to fan 
amperage (e.g., RPM) and engineering design considerations when setting 
the site-specific fan amperage limit indicative of proper scrubber 
operation. For more details, see the memorandum titled Smelt Dissolving 
Tank Scrubber Operating Parameter Review, in the docket for this 
rulemaking (EPA Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0741).
    To continue with our original intent to measure scrubber 
performance with an alternative method in these rules, this action is 
proposing to modify the language at 40 CFR 63.864(e)(10)(iii) and 
(j)(5)(i) to clarify how wet scrubber parameter limits are to be 
established and that fan amperage or RPM can be used to demonstrate 
compliance for the SDT scrubbers in question. Specifically, we are 
proposing to replace 40 CFR 63.864(j)(5)(i)(A) with a requirement to 
set the minimum scrubbing liquid flow rate operating limit as the 
lowest of the 1-hour average scrubbing liquid flow rate values 
associated with each test run demonstrating compliance with the 
applicable emission limit. This requirement was inadvertently left out 
of the 2017 NESHAP amendment but was required by other sections of the 
rule. Additionally, we are proposing to add a new subsection, 40 CFR 
63.864(j)(5)(i)(B) to clarify how wet scrubber fan amperage operating 
limits should be established.
    The proposed text in 40 CFR 63.864(j)(5)(i)(B) would have the same 
requirements that were previously in the 40 CFR 63.864(j)(5)(i) 
introductory paragraph, which states the scrubber pressure drop 
operating limit must be set as the lowest of the 1-hour average 
pressure drop values associated with each test run demonstrating 
compliance with the applicable emission limit and provides alternatives 
for determining parameters for dynamic or low energy entrainment 
scrubbers. The proposed new 40 CFR 63.864(j)(5)(i)(B)(1) would clarify 
that, for SDT dynamic wet scrubbers operating at ambient pressure or 
for low energy entrainment scrubbers where fan speed does not vary, the 
minimum fan amperage operating limit must be set as the midpoint 
between the lowest of the 1-hour average fan amperage values associated 
with each test run demonstrating compliance with the applicable 
emission limit and the no-load amperage value. Additionally, the 
proposed regulatory text specifies that the no-load amperage value must 
be determined using manufacturers specifications or by performing a no-
load test of the fan motor, and that it must be verified that the 
scrubber fan is operating within 5 percent of the design RPM during the 
emissions performance test. The proposed 40 CFR 63.864(j)(5)(i)(B)(2) 
would allow for the use of percent full load amperage (PFLA) to 
demonstrate compliance. The minimum PFLA to the fan motor must be set 
as the percent of full load amps under no-load, plus 10 percent. 
Because the no-load value represents the amperage pulled by the motor 
without a fan belt (i.e., the fan is not engaged), the additional 10 
percent will ensure that the belt has not broken and the fan is engaged 
during operation. This proposed subsection also would require 
verification that the scrubber fan is operating within 5 percent of the 
design RPM during the emissions performance test. Further, we are 
proposing 40 CFR 63.864(j)(5)(i)(B)(3) to allow the use of RPM to 
demonstrate compliance. The minimum RPM must be set at 95 percent of 
the design RPM. Finally, we are proposing a conforming amendment in 40 
CFR 63.867(c)(3)(iii)(C)(1) to incorporate this language.
    In addition to clarifying how to set SDT fan amperage operating 
limits, the EPA is also proposing to correct the following cross-
reference errors in the promulgated Combustion Source NESHAP (40 CFR 
part 63, subpart MM):
     An incorrect paragraph reference in the definition of 
``modification'' in 40 CFR 63.861;
     An incorrect paragraph reference in 40 CFR 
63.864(e)(10)(iii), referring to 40 CFR 63.864(e)(3)(i) instead of 40 
CFR 63.864(e)(10)(i) as intended;
     Incorrect paragraph references in 40 CFR 63.864(j)(1), 
(3), and (5) which cross-referenced requirements that were proposed (81 
FR 97046, December 30, 2016) but not finalized for establishing site-
specific electrostatic precipitator (ESP) operating limits. Instead, 
the EPA finalized a requirement to maintain proper operation of the 
ESP's automatic voltage control (82 FR 47328, October 11, 2017), but 
inadvertently kept the cross-references to the proposed requirements in 
the final rule; and
     Omission of reference to wet scrubber liquid flow rate in 
40 CFR 63.864(j)(5) which specifies how to establish operating limits.

[[Page 58360]]

B. What are the proposed amendments to the NSPS?

    With this action, the EPA is proposing similar amendments to the 
fan amperage requirements as discussed in section II.A of this preamble 
to 40 CFR 60.284a(b)(2)(iii), (c)(4), and (d)(4)(ii) and 40 CFR 
60.287(b)(4)(i) for consistency between the two rules that apply to the 
same scrubbers. Additionally, the EPA is also proposing to correct a 
cross-reference error in the promulgated Kraft Pulp Mills NSPS (40 CFR 
part 60, subpart BBa). Specifically, the EPA is proposing to amend 
incorrect paragraph references in 40 CFR 60.285a(b)(1) and 
60.285a(d)(1) intended to cross-reference the rule's oxygen correction 
equation.

III. Summary of Cost, Environmental, and Economic Impacts

A. What are the affected sources?

    The sources affected by this proposal are chemical pulp mills that 
use SDTs equipped with low-energy entrainment scrubbers or dynamic 
scrubbers that operate near atmospheric pressure. We estimate that 
there are 54 facilities that utilize these types of scrubbers.

B. What are the air quality impacts?

    There are no air quality impacts associated with the proposed 
amendments.

C. What are the cost impacts?

    No cost impacts are estimated to be associated with this proposed 
action because the proposal serves only to provide regulatory clarity. 
This proposed action reduces the likelihood that facilities will choose 
to submit site-specific alternative monitoring requests but does not 
change the scope of any regulatory requirements.

D. What are the economic impacts?

    There are no economic impacts associated with the proposed 
amendments.

E. What are the benefits?

    Because these proposed amendments are not considered economically 
significant, as defined by Executive Order 12866, and because we did 
not estimate any emission reductions associated with the proposal, we 
did not estimate any benefits from reducing emissions.

IV. Request for Comments

    We solicit comments on this proposed action. In addition to general 
comments on this action, we are also interested in any additional SDT 
scrubber performance data that may improve the parameter calculations 
needed to determine compliance. Such data should include supporting 
documentation in sufficient detail to allow characterization of the 
quality and representativeness of the data or information.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

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

B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulation and Controlling 
Regulatory Costs

    This action is not expected to be an Executive Order 13771 
regulatory action because this action is not significant under 
Executive Order 12866.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose any new information collection burden 
under the PRA. OMB has previously approved the information collection 
activities contained in the existing regulation (40 CFR part 63, 
subpart MM) and has assigned OMB control number 2060-0377. This action 
does not change the information collection requirements.

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

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

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

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

F. 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.

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

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in 
Executive Order 13175. The EPA does not know of any pulp mills owned or 
operated by Indian tribal governments or located within tribal lands. 
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

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

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

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

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

J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

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

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

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 60

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedures, 
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Monitoring 
requirements.

[[Page 58361]]

40 CFR Part 63

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

    Dated: October 22, 2019.
Andrew R. Wheeler,
Administrator.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Environmental 
Protection Agency proposes to amend 40 CFR part 60 and 63 as follows:

PART 60--STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE FOR NEW STATIONARY SOURCES

0
1. The authority citation for part 60 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart BBa--Standards of Performance for Kraft Pulp Mill Affected 
Sources for Which Construction, Reconstruction, or Modification 
Commenced After May 23, 2013

0
2. Section 60.284a is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(2)(iii), 
(c)(3)(i), (c)(4), and (d)(4)(ii) to read as follows:


Sec.  60.284a   Monitoring of emissions and operations.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (iii) As an alternative to pressure drop measurement under 
paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section, a monitoring device for 
measurement of fan amperage or revolutions per minute (RPM) may be used 
for smelt dissolving tank dynamic scrubbers that operate at ambient 
pressure or for low-energy entrainment scrubbers where the fan speed 
does not vary.
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (i) Calculate 12-hour block averages from the recorded measurements 
of wet scrubber pressure drop (or smelt dissolving tank scrubber fan 
amperage or RPM) and liquid flow rate (or liquid supply pressure), as 
applicable.
* * * * *
    (4) During the initial performance test required in Sec.  60.285a, 
the owner or operator must establish site-specific operating limits for 
the monitoring parameters in paragraphs (b)(2) through (4) of this 
section by continuously monitoring the parameters and determining the 
arithmetic average value of each parameter during the performance test. 
The arithmetic average of the measured values for the three test runs 
establishes your minimum site-specific operating limit for each wet 
scrubber or ESP parameter (except for smelt dissolving tank scrubber 
fan amperage or RPM). For smelt dissolving tank scrubber fan amperage, 
see 40 CFR 63.864(j)(5)(i)(B). For smelt dissolving tank scrubber RPM, 
the minimum RPM must be set as 5 percent lower than the design RPM. 
Multiple performance tests may be conducted to establish a range of 
parameter values. The owner or operator may establish replacement 
operating limits for the monitoring parameters during subsequent 
performance tests using the test methods in Sec.  60.285a.
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (4) * * *
    (ii) All 12-hour block average scrubber pressure drop (or fan 
amperage or RPM, if used as an alternative under paragraph (b)(2)(iii) 
of this section) measurements below the minimum site-specific limit 
established during performance testing during times when BLS or lime 
mud is fired (as applicable), except during startup and shutdown.
* * * * *
0
3. Section 60.285a is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(1) and (d)(1) 
to read as follows:


Sec.  60.285a   Test methods and procedures.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) Method 5 of appendix A-3 of this part must be used to determine 
the filterable particulate matter concentration. The sampling time and 
sample volume for each run must be at least 60 minutes and 0.90 dscm 
(31.8 dscf). Water must be used as the cleanup solvent instead of 
acetone in the sample recovery procedure. The particulate concentration 
must be corrected to the appropriate oxygen concentration according to 
Sec.  60.284a(c)(1)(iii).
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1) Method 16 of appendix A-6 of this part must be used to 
determine the TRS concentration. The TRS concentration must be 
corrected to the appropriate oxygen concentration using the procedure 
in Sec.  60.284a(c)(1)(iii). The sampling time must be at least 3 
hours, but no longer than 6 hours.
* * * * *
0
4. Section 60.287a is amended by revising paragraph (b)(4)(i) to read 
as follows:
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (4) * * *
    (i) Records of the pressure drop of the gas stream through the 
control equipment (or smelt dissolving tank scrubber fan amperage or 
RPM), and
* * * * *

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

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

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

Subpart MM--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 
Pollutants for Chemical Recovery Combustion Sources at Kraft, Soda, 
Sulfite, and Stand-Alone Semichemical Pulp Mills

0
6. Section 63.861 is amended by revising the definition of 
``modification'' and adding in alphabetical order the definition of 
``no-load fan amperage'' to read as follows:
* * * * *
    Modification means, for the purposes of Sec.  
63.862(a)(1)(ii)(D)(1), any physical change (excluding any routine part 
replacement or maintenance) or operational change that is made to the 
air pollution control device that could result in an increase in PM 
emissions.
    No-load fan amperage means, for purposes of this subpart, the 
amperage pulled by the fan motor when the fan is operating under no-
load, specifically the amperage value the motor would use if the fan 
belt was removed.
* * * * *
0
7. Section 63.864 is amended by revising paragraphs (e)(10)(iii), 
(j)(1), (3), and (5) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.864  Monitoring requirements.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (10) * * *
    (iii) As an alternative to pressure drop measurement under 
paragraph (e)(10)(i) of this section, a monitoring device for 
measurement of fan amperage or fan revolutions per minute (RPM) may be 
used for smelt dissolving tank dynamic scrubbers that operate at 
ambient pressure or for low-energy entrainment scrubbers where the fan 
speed does not vary.
* * * * *
    (j) * * *
    (1) During the initial or periodic performance test required in 
Sec.  63.865, the owner or operator of any affected source or process 
unit must establish operating limits for the monitoring parameters in 
paragraphs (e)(2) and (10)

[[Page 58362]]

through (14) of this section, as appropriate; or
* * * * *
    (3) The owner or operator of an affected source or process unit may 
establish expanded or replacement operating limits for the monitoring 
parameters listed in paragraphs (e)(2) and (10) through (14) of this 
section and established in paragraph (j)(1) or (2) of this section 
during subsequent performance tests using the test methods in Sec.  
63.865.
* * * * *
    (5) New, expanded, or replacement operating limits for the 
monitoring parameter values listed in paragraphs (e)(2) and (10) 
through (14) of this section should be determined as described in 
paragraphs (j)(5)(i) and (ii) of this section.
    (i) The owner or operator of an affected source or process unit 
that uses a wet scrubber must set minimum operating limits as described 
in paragraph (j)(5)(i)(A) and (B) of this section.
    (A) Set the minimum scrubbing liquid flow rate operating limit as 
the lowest of the 1-hour average scrubbing liquid flow rate values 
associated with each test run demonstrating compliance with the 
applicable emission limit in Sec.  63.862.
    (B) Set the minimum scrubber pressure drop operating limit as the 
lowest of the 1-hour average pressure drop values associated with each 
test run demonstrating compliance with the applicable emission limit in 
Sec.  63.862; or for a smelt dissolving tank dynamic wet scrubber 
operating at ambient pressure or for low energy entrainment scrubbers 
where fan speed does not vary, set the minimum operating limit using 
one of the methods in paragraph (j)(5)(i)(B)(1) through (3) of this 
section.
    (1) The minimum fan amperage operating limit must be set as the 
midpoint between the lowest of the 1-hour average fan amperage values 
associated with each test run demonstrating compliance with the 
applicable emission limit in Sec.  63.862 and the no-load amperage 
value. The no-load amperage value must be determined using 
manufacturers specifications, or by performing a no-load test of the 
fan motor for each smelt dissolving tank scrubber. It must be verified 
that the scrubber fan is operating within 5 percent of the design RPM 
during the emissions performance test; or
    (2) The minimum percent full load amperage (PFLA) to the fan motor 
must be set as the percent of full load amps under no-load, plus 10 
percent. The PFLA is calculated by dividing the no-load amperage value 
by the highest of the 1-hour average fan amperage values associated 
with each test run demonstrating compliance with the applicable 
emission limit in Sec.  63.862 multiplied by 100. The no-load amperage 
value must be determined using manufacturers specifications, or by 
performing a no-load test of the fan motor for each smelt dissolving 
tank scrubber. It must be verified that the scrubber fan is operating 
within 5 percent of the design RPM during the emissions performance 
test; or
    (3) The minimum RPM must be set as 95 percent of the design RPM.
* * * * *
0
8. Section 63.867 is amended by revising paragraph (c)(3)(iii)(C)(1) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  63.867   Reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (iii) * * *
    (C) * * *
    (1) The operating limits established during the performance test 
for scrubbing liquid flow rate and pressure drop across the scrubber 
(or alternatively, fan amperage or RPM if used for smelt dissolving 
tank scrubbers).
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2019-23616 Filed 10-30-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.