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: 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 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 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.

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)).

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 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.

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

40 CFR Part 63

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

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:

3. Section 60.285a is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(1) and (d)(1) to read as follows:

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

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:

8. Section 63.867 is amended by revising paragraph (c)(3)(iii)(C)( 1) to read as follows:

Footnotes