[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 215 (Thursday, November 5, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 70487-70494]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-22938]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 60 and 63

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0741; FRL-10015-72-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: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing 
amendments to 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. The final rule clarifies 
how to set operating limits for smelt dissolving tank (SDT) scrubbers 
used at these mills and corrects cross-reference errors in both rules.

DATES: This final rule is effective on November 5, 2020.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under 
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0741. All documents in the docket are 
listed on the https://www.regulations.gov/ website. Although listed, 
some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business 
Information 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 
form. Publicly available docket materials are available electronically 
through https://www.regulations.gov/. Out of an abundance of caution 
for members of the public and our staff, the EPA Docket Center and 
Reading Room are closed to the public, with limited exceptions, to 
reduce the risk of transmitting COVID-19. Our Docket Center staff will 
continue to provide remote customer service via email, phone, and 
webform.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions about this final 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: 
    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
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CRA Congressional Review Act
EPA U.S. Environnemental 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
PRA Paperwork Reduction Act
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
RPM revolutions per minute
SDT smelt dissolving tank
UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Background information. On October 31, 2019, the EPA proposed 
revisions to the NESHAP for Chemical Recovery Combustion Sources at 
Kraft, Soda, Sulfite, and Stand-Alone Semichemical Pulp Mills (40 CFR 
part 63, subpart MM) and the NSPS for Kraft Pulp Mills Constructed, 
Reconstructed, or Modified After May 23, 2013 (40 CFR part 60, subpart 
BBa) clarifying how to set operating limits for SDT scrubbers used at 
these mills and correcting cross-reference errors in both rules. The 
rules have similar requirements for setting operating limits for SDT 
scrubbers, therefore, similar revisions were proposed for both rules. 
See 84 FR 58356. In this action, the EPA is finalizing the proposed 
revisions with minor edits. The preamble includes a summary of the 
comments the EPA received and our responses resulting in improvements 
to the proposed rule. A summary of all public comments on the proposal 
and the EPA's specific responses to those comments is provided in the 
memorandum, ``Response to Comments to Proposed Rule Amending 40 CFR 
part 63 Subpart MM and 40 CFR part 60 Subpart BBa,'' included in the 
docket for this action. Redline versions of the regulatory language for 
40 CFR part 63, subpart MM, and 40 CFR part 60, subpart BBa showing the 
final amendments resulting from this action and are also available in 
the docket.
    Organization of this document. The information in this preamble is 
organized as follows:

I. General Information
    A. Does this action apply to me?
    B. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related 
information?
    C. Judicial Review and Administrative Reconsideration
II. Final Amendments

[[Page 70488]]

    A. What are the final amendments to the NESHAP?
    B. What are the final 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. 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 Regulations 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
    L. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

I. General Information

A. 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 
final rule. Table 1 is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather 
provides a guide for readers regarding the entities that this final 
action is likely to affect. The final amendments, once promulgated, 
will be directly applicable to the affected sources. Federal, state, 
local, and tribal government entities will not be affected by this 
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 Final Action
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Source category                       Name of action                      NAICS \1\ code
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pulp and Paper Production...............  Chemical Recovery Combustion     32211, 32212, 32213
                                           Sources at Kraft, Soda,
                                           Sulfite, and Stand-Alone
                                           Semichemical Pulp Mills (40
                                           CFR part 63, subpart MM).
Kraft Pulp Mills........................  Standards of Performance for     322110
                                           Kraft Pulp 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.

B. 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 the 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 
final rule at this same website.

C. Judicial Review and Administrative Reconsideration

    Under Clean Air Act (CAA) section 307(b)(1), judicial review of 
this action is available only by filing a petition for review in the 
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit 
(the court) by January 4, 2021. Under CAA section 307(b)(2), the 
requirements established by this final rule may not be challenged 
separately in any civil or criminal proceedings brought by the EPA to 
enforce the requirements.
    Section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA further provides that only an 
objection to a rule or procedure which was raised with reasonable 
specificity during the period for public comment (including any public 
hearing) may be raised during judicial review. This section also 
provides a mechanism for the EPA to reconsider the rule if the person 
raising an objection can demonstrate to the Administrator that it was 
impracticable to raise such objection within the period for public 
comment or if the grounds for such objection arose after the period for 
public comment (but within the time specified for judicial review) and 
if such objection is of central relevance to the outcome of the rule. 
Any person seeking to make such a demonstration should submit a 
Petition for Reconsideration to the Office of the Administrator, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Room 3000, WJC South Building, 1200 
Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20460, with a copy to both the 
person(s) listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section, and the Associate General Counsel for the Air and Radiation 
Law Office, Office of General Counsel (Mail Code 2344A), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, 
DC 20460.

II. Final Amendments

    With this action, the EPA is finalizing amendments to the NESHAP 
for Chemical Recovery Combustion Sources at Kraft, Soda, Sulfite, and 
Stand-Alone Semichemical Pulp Mills (referred to hereafter as ``the 
NESHAP'') and the NSPS for Kraft Pulp Mills constructed, reconstructed, 
or modified after May 23, 2013 (referred to hereafter as ``the NSPS''). 
The amendments (referred to hereafter as the ``2019 proposed 
amendments'') were proposed on October 31, 2019 (84 FR 58356) to 
clarify how to set operating limits for SDT scrubbers used at these 
mills and correct cross-reference errors in both

[[Page 70489]]

rules. As explained in this section, clarification was needed to 
address parameter monitoring issues that arose during implementation of 
the 2017 amendments to the NESHAP (referred to hereafter as the ``2017 
NESHAP amendments'') as a result of the Agency's residual risk and 
technology review. See 82 FR 47328, October 11, 2017.

A. What are the final amendments to the NESHAP?

1. Alternative To Monitoring Pressure Drop for Certain SDT Scrubbers
    The 2017 NESHAP amendments added fan amperage \1\ to 40 CFR 
63.864(e)(10)(iii) as an alternative to monitoring pressure drop for 
SDT dynamic scrubbers that operate at ambient pressure and low-energy 
entrainment scrubbers where the fan speed does not vary. Fan amperage 
was added as an alternative monitoring parameter based on the EPA's 
review of alternative monitoring requests for these types of SDT 
scrubbers 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 PM imparted by the fan blade, 
which in turn, are functions 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to adding fan amperage as a monitoring parameter, the 
2017 NESHAP amendments 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 fans 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 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 were provided in the 
memorandum titled, Smelt Dissolving Tank Scrubber Operating Parameter 
Review, in the docket for the 2019 proposed amendments (EPA Docket Item 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0741-0277).
    As explained in the preamble to the 2019 proposed amendments, 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 amendments (40 CFR part 63, subpart MM) 
which apply to new and existing sources (see 82 FR 47328, October 11, 
2017) and in the NSPS promulgated in 2014 (40 CFR part 60, subpart BBa) 
which applies to new sources only (see 79 FR 18952, April 4, 2014). 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 the 2019 
proposed amendments (EPA Docket Item No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0741-0277).
    To continue with our original intent to measure scrubber 
performance with an alternative method in these rules, the EPA proposed 
this rule 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

[[Page 70490]]

SDT scrubbers in question. Specifically, the EPA proposed 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 amendments 
but was required by other sections of the rule. Additionally, we 
proposed 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) included the same 
requirement that was previously in the 40 CFR 63.864(j)(5)(i) 
introductory paragraph, which stated that 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, but also added that for 
dynamic or low-energy entrainment scrubbers, operating limits could be 
set using one of three methods specified in paragraphs 40 CFR 
63.864(j)(5)(i)(B)(1) through (3).
     In 40 CFR 63.864(j)(5)(i)(B)(1), the EPA proposed to 
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 specified 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. A definition of ``no-load fan amperage'' 
was proposed in 40 CFR 63.861.
     In 40 CFR 63.864(j)(5)(i)(B)(2), the EPA proposed to allow 
use of percent full load amperage (PFLA) to demonstrate compliance and 
require that the minimum PFLA to the fan motor be set as the percent of 
full load amperage 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 was proposed 
to ensure that the belt has not broken, and the fan is engaged during 
operation. This new subsection also proposed requiring verification 
that the scrubber fan is operating within 5 percent of the design RPM 
during the emissions performance test.
     In 40 CFR 63.864(j)(5)(i)(B)(3), the EPA proposed to allow 
use of RPM to demonstrate compliance and a requirement that the minimum 
RPM be set at 95 percent of the design RPM. The EPA also proposed a 
conforming amendment in 40 CFR 63.867(c)(3)(iii)(C)(1) to incorporate 
this language.
    Commenters on the 2019 proposed amendments supported the proposed 
methods for setting minimum operating limits in 40 CFR 
63.864(j)(5)(i)(B)(1) and (2), except for the requirement to verify 
that the scrubber fan is operating within 5 percent of the design RPM 
during the emissions performance test. Commenters strongly opposed the 
requirement to verify the design RPM for reasons detailed in the 
response-to-comments memorandum, Response to Comments to Proposed Rule 
Amending 40 CFR part 63 Subpart MM and 40 CFR part 60 Subpart BBa, in 
the docket for this action. In brief, the commenters explained that 
facilities monitoring fan amperage may not have instrumentation in 
place to monitor fan RPM and may not have the design RPM value 
available; that there are safety issues associated with attempting to 
obtain a one-time measurement of RPM; and that operating within 5 
percent of the design RPM during the emissions performance test is 
irrelevant if the performance test shows compliance with the PM 
emission limit and fan amperage (which is proportional to RPM) is 
monitored. In response to these comments, the requirement to verify 
that the scrubber fan is operating within 5 percent of the design RPM 
during the emissions performance test was removed from the final rule. 
All other requirements in 40 CFR 63.864(j)(5)(i)(B)(1) and (2) were 
finalized as proposed.
    One commenter requested that the EPA modify the proposed definition 
of ``no load fan amperage'' by adding the following language to the end 
of the definition, ``or the coupling to a direct drive fan was 
disconnected.'' The phrase was added as requested for the final rule.
    Regarding the proposed 40 CFR 63.864(j)(5)(i)(B)(2), a commenter 
requested clarification on how the minimum PFLA operating limit should 
be calculated for an SDT scrubber fan and suggested that the EPA 
present an example PLFA calculation in the preamble to the final rule. 
In response to this request, we clarified in the final rule that 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 
40 CFR 63.862 multiplied by 100 and then adding 10 percent (emphasis 
added). We are including the following example of how to calculate the 
minimum PFLA. However, we are not including this equation in the final 
rule to avoid the need to renumber several subsequent rule equations.

Minimum PFLA = (No-load fan amperage/highest 1-hour average of fan 
amperages) x 100% + 10%

Where:
     The no-load fan amperage represents the amperage pulled by 
the fan motor when the fan is operating under no-load determined using 
manufacturers specifications or by performing a no-load test of the fan 
motor.
     The highest 1-hour average of fan amperages is the highest 
of the 1-hour average fan amperage values associated with each test run 
demonstrating compliance with the applicable emission limit in 40 CFR 
63.862.
    For example, assume Facility ``A'' performs a no-load test of their 
SDT scrubber's fan motor by running the motor without the fan belt 
attached. The measured fan amperage during the no-load test is 70 
amperage. During a performance test of the SDT scrubber, the highest 1-
hour average of the fan amperage values associated with each of the 
three test runs demonstrating compliance with the applicable emission 
limit is 179 amperage. Using these two amperage values, Facility A 
would calculate the PFLA alternative operating parameter limit for 
their SDT scrubber fan as follows:

Minimum PFLA = (70/179) x 100% + 10% = 49%

    One commenter addressed the proposed 40 CFR 63.864(j)(5)(i)(B)(3), 
which would require the minimum fan RPM limit to be set as 5 percent 
lower than the design RPM. The commenter stated that the EPA should 
revise this requirement to be 5 percent lower than the lowest 1-hour 
average RPM measured during each test run demonstrating compliance with 
the applicable emission limit. The commenter explained that a facility 
could have modified the fan motor such that it is no longer operating 
at the design RPM, or it could have no documentation of the design RPM, 
but it is the performance of the scrubber during the stack test that 
matters. In response to this comment, 40 CFR

[[Page 70491]]

63.864(j)(5)(i)(B)(3) was finalized by revising it to require that the 
minimum RPM be set as 5 percent lower than the lowest 1-hour average 
RPM associated with each test run demonstrating compliance with the 
applicable emission limit, as requested. The EPA agrees that an 
operating limit based on the lowest 1-hour average RPM measured during 
each test run (for facilities that measure RPM) is adequate to 
demonstrate ongoing operation of the SDT scrubber. The 5-percent margin 
suggested by the commenter will allow for variability. The conforming 
revisions to 40 CFR 63.867(c)(3)(iii)(C)(1) that acknowledge RPM as an 
operating parameter for SDT dynamic or low-energy scrubbers were also 
finalized as proposed.
2. Other NESHAP Amendments
    In addition to clarifying how to set SDT fan amperage operating 
limits, the EPA also proposed to correct the following cross-reference 
errors in the promulgated 40 CFR part 63, subpart MM NESHAP:
     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;
     Omission of reference to wet scrubber liquid flow rate in 
40 CFR 63.864(j)(5) which specifies how to establish operating limits; 
and
     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 for 
secondary voltage and secondary current (or total secondary power) for 
each ESP collection field. Instead of finalizing site-specific ESP 
operating limits, 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 
ESP operating limits in the final rule.
    The EPA did not receive any comments on the first three corrections 
noted above and is finalizing these amendments as proposed.
    A comment was received regarding the EPA's proposal to eliminate 
the reference to 40 CFR 63.864(e)(1) in 40 CFR 63.864(j)(1), (3), and 
(5) which pertain to determination of operating limits. The commenter 
stated that the EPA should also eliminate reference to 40 CFR 
63.864(e)(2) in these sections because 40 CFR 63.864(e)(2) references 
40 CFR 63.864(e)(1). The EPA agrees with the commenter's suggestion and 
eliminated the cross-reference to 40 CFR 63.864(e)(2) in 40 CFR 
63.864(j)(1), (3), and (5) for the final amendments. 40 CFR 
63.864(e)(2) specifies parameter monitoring requirements for kraft or 
soda recovery furnaces or lime kilns using an ESP followed by a wet 
scrubber. 40 CFR 63.864(e)(2) refers to 40 CFR 63.864(e)(1) to require 
facilities to maintain proper ESP automatic voltage control and refers 
to 40 CFR 63.864(e)(10) to require facilities to monitor wet scrubber 
parameters. While 40 CFR 63.864(j)(1), (3), and (5) no longer reference 
40 CFR 63.864(e)(1) and (2), these sections retain the reference to 40 
CFR 63.864(e)(10) with respect to wet scrubber operating limits.

B. What are the final amendments to the NSPS?

1. Alternative To Monitoring Pressure Drop for Certain SDT Scrubbers
    The EPA proposed similar amendments to the fan amperage 
requirements in the NSPS as discussed in section II.A of this preamble 
for consistency between the NESHAP and NSPS that apply to the same 
scrubbers. Specifically, NSPS amendments were proposed for 40 CFR 
60.284a(b)(2)(iii), (c)(3)(i), (c)(4), and (d)(4)(ii) and 40 CFR 
60.287a(b)(4)(i) to add RPM language. As proposed, 40 CFR 60.284a(c)(4) 
referred to the procedures for establishing the SDT fan amperage 
operating limit in the NESHAP (40 CFR 63.864(j)(5)(i)(B)). A commenter 
requested that 40 CFR 60.284a(c)(4) specify how scrubber fan amperage 
operating limits should be set rather than referencing 40 CFR 
63.864(j)(5)(i)(B) of the NESHAP (as proposed). The commenter noted 
that incorporation of the NESHAP reference is inappropriate because it 
requires the operating parameter limit to be set based on a performance 
test that demonstrates compliance with the applicable emission limit in 
40 CFR 63.862, not 40 CFR 60.282a. In response to this comment, the EPA 
removed the reference to 40 CFR 63.864(j)(5)(i)(B) in 40 CFR 
60.284a(c)(4) and replaced it with specific language describing how to 
set scrubber fan amperage operating parameter limits. The procedures 
added to the NSPS in 40 CFR 60.284a(c)(4) are consistent with the 
procedures specified in the NESHAP. The EPA also added the definition 
of ``no-load fan amperage'' to 40 CFR 60.281a because the definition is 
referenced in the language added in 40 CFR 63.864(j)(5)(i)(B).
2. Other NSPS Amendments
    The EPA proposed to correct a cross-reference error in the 
promulgated Kraft Pulp Mills NSPS (40 CFR part 60, subpart BBa). 
Specifically, the EPA proposed 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. No comments were received on 
these changes so the EPA is finalizing these amendments as proposed.

III. Summary of Cost, Environmental, and Economic Impacts

A. What are the affected sources?

    The sources affected by this action 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 final 
amendments.

C. What are the cost impacts?

    No cost impacts are estimated to be associated with this action 
because the action serves only to provide regulatory clarity. This 
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 final amendments.

E. What are the benefits?

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

IV. 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 Regulations 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.

[[Page 70492]]

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

    This action is not 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 final 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.

L. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

    This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule 
report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of 
the United States. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 
U.S.C. 804(2).

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.

Andrew Wheeler,
Administrator.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Environmental 
Protection Agency amends 40 CFR parts 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. In Sec.  60.281a, add in alphabetical order the definition for ``No-
load fan amperage'' to read as follows:


Sec.  60.281a   Definitions.

* * * * *
    No-load fan amperage means, for the 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 or the coupling to a direct drive fan was 
disconnected.
* * * * *

0
3. In Sec.  60.284a, revise 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

[[Page 70493]]

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, set the minimum 
operating limit using one of the methods in paragraphs (c)(4)(i) or 
(ii) of this section. For smelt dissolving tank scrubber RPM, the 
minimum RPM must be set as specified in paragraph (c)(4)(iii) of this 
section. 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.
    (i) 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.  60.282a 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; or
    (ii) The minimum percent full load amperage (PFLA) to the fan motor 
must be set as the percent of full load amperage 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.  60.282a multiplied by 100 and then adding 10 
percent. 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.
    (iii) The minimum RPM must be set as 5 percent lower than the 
lowest 1-hour average RPM associated with each test run demonstrating 
compliance with the applicable emission limit.
* * * * *
    (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
4. In Sec.  60.285a, revise 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
5. In Sec.  60.287a, revise paragraph (b)(4)(i) to read as follows:


Sec.  60.287a   Recordkeeping.

* * * * *
    (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
6. 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
7. In Sec.  63.861, revise the definition for ``Modification'' and add 
in alphabetical order the definition for ``No-load fan amperage'' to 
read as follows:


Sec.  63.861   Definitions.

* * * * *
    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 or the coupling to a direct drive fan was 
disconnected.
* * * * *

0
8. In Sec.  63.864, revise 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)(10) 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)(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)(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

[[Page 70494]]

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; or
    (2) The minimum percent full load amperage (PFLA) to the fan motor 
must be set as the percent of full load amperage 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 and then adding 10 
percent. 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; or
    (3) The minimum RPM must be set as 5 percent lower than the lowest 
1-hour average RPM associated with each test run demonstrating 
compliance with the applicable emission limit.
    (ii) [Reserved]
* * * * *

0
9. In Sec.  63.867, revise 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. 2020-22938 Filed 11-4-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P