National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Primary Lead Smelting

SUMMARY: This action promulgates national emission standards for

hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for new and existing primary lead

smelters pursuant to section 112 of the Clean Air Act (Act) as amended

in November 1990. Primary lead smelters have been identified by the EPA

as significant emitters of lead compounds, and other metal hazardous

air pollutants (HAP) including arsenic, antimony, and cadmium. Exposure

to lead compounds may result in adverse effects on the blood, central

nervous system and kidneys. Chronic exposure to arsenic is associated

with skin, bladder, liver and lung cancer and other developmental and

reproductive effects. This NESHAP provides protection to the public by

requiring all primary lead smelters to meet emission standards that

reflect the application of maximum achievable control technology

(MACT).

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 4, 1999.

ADDRESSES: Docket. Docket No. A-97-33 contains supporting information

used in developing the standards. The docket is located at the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC.

20460 in room M-1500, Waterside Mall (ground floor), and may be

inspected from 8:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. and 1:00 to 3:00 p.m., Monday

through Friday. The regulatory text and other materials related to this

rulemaking are available for review in the docket or copies may be

mailed on request from the Air Docket by calling (202) 260-7548. A

reasonable fee may be charged for copying docket materials.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information concerning these

standards and technical aspects of primary lead smelting emissions and

control, contact Mr. Kevin Cavender, Environmental Protection Agency,

MD-13, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, telephone number (919) 541-

2364, facsimile number (919) 541-5600, electronic mail address

``[email protected].''.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulated Entities. The regulated category and entities affected by

this action include primary lead smelters (SIC 3339). This action will

affect three existing primary lead smelting facilities and any new

primary lead smelting facilities built in the future.

Technology Transfer Network. The text of today's notice will also

be available on the Technology Transfer Network (TTN), one of EPA's

electronic bulletin boards. The TTN provides information and technology

exchange in various areas of air pollution control. The service is

free, except for the cost of a phone call. Dial (919) 541-5742 for up

to a 14,400 BPS modem. The TTN also is accessible through the Internet

at ``http://www.epa.gov/ttn''. If more information on the TTN is

needed, call the HELP line at (919) 541-5348. The HELP desk is staffed

from 11 a.m. to 5 p.m.; a voice menu system is available at other

times.

Outline.

The information presented in this preamble is organized as follows:

I. Background

II. Summary

A. Summary of the Promulgated Standards

B. Summary of Major Changes Since Proposal

C. Summary of Environmental, Energy, and Economic Impacts

III. Public Participation

IV. Summary of Comments and Responses

A. Comments on April 1998 Proposal

B. Comments on February 1999 Supplemental Proposal

V. Administrative Requirements

A. Docket

B. Executive Order 12866

C. Executive Order 12875

D. Executive Order 13084

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

F. Regulatory Flexibility Act

G. Paperwork Reduction Act

H. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

J. Pollution Prevention Considerations

K. Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and

Safety Risk Under Executive Order 13045

L. Judicial Review

I. Background

Section 112 of the Act requires that the EPA promulgate regulations

requiring the control of HAP emissions from major and certain area

sources. The control of HAP's is achieved through promulgation of

emission standards under sections 112(d) and (f) and, in appropriate

circumstances, work practice standards under section 112(h).

An initial list of categories of major and area sources of HAP's

selected for regulation in accordance with section 112(c) of the Act

was published in the Federal Register on July 16, 1992 (57 FR 31576).

Primary lead smelting is one of the 174 categories of sources listed.

The category consists of smelters that process lead bearing ore

concentrates into lead metal. The listing was based on the

Administrator's determination that primary lead smelters may reasonably

be anticipated to emit several of the 188 listed HAP's in quantities

sufficient to designate them as major sources. Information subsequently

collected by the EPA as part of this rulemaking confirms that all three

operating primary lead smelters have the potential to emit greater than

9.1 megagrams per year (Mg/yr) (10 tons per year (tpy)) of a single HAP

or greater than 22.7 Mg/yr (25 tpy) of a combination of HAP's (Docket

ID No. II-B-4). Therefore, all three primary lead smelters are major

sources.

This NESHAP was proposed in the Federal Register on April 17, 1998

(63 FR 19200). The EPA received 2 letters commenting on the proposed

rule. The EPA received no requests for a public hearing.

A supplemental proposal was published in the Federal Register on

February 12, 1999 (64 FR 7149). This notice proposed an operating limit

that would require owners and operators of a primary lead smelter

(referred to as operators in the remainder of this preamble) to operate

and maintain each affected baghouse such that the required bag leak

detection system would not sound more than five percent of the

operating time. The EPA received three letters commenting on the

supplemental proposal. The EPA received no requests for a public

hearing on the supplemental proposal.

II. Summary

A. Summary of the Promulgated Standards

Standards are being promulgated to limit metal HAP emissions from:

(1) process sources, (2) process fugitive sources, and (3) fugitive

dust sources at primary lead smelters. Process source emissions are

discharged as the main exhaust of a sinter machine or smelting furnace

through a chimney, flue, or ductwork. Process sources that are

regulated include sinter machines, blast furnaces, and dross furnaces.

Process fugitive emission sources that are regulated include sinter

machine charging and discharging, sinter crushing and sizing, blast

furnace tapping, and dross furnace charging and tapping.

Fugitive dust sources that are regulated include plant yards and

roadways subject to wind and vehicle traffic, process areas, and

materials handling and storage areas.

[[Page 30195]]

1. Process and Process Fugitive Sources

A ``plant wide'' emission limit is being promulgated for lead

compounds from process and process fugitive emission sources. The lead

compound emission limit is a surrogate for all metal HAP's and will

apply to both existing and new sources. The aggregated lead emissions

from the following process and process fugitive sources are limited to

500 g/Mg of lead produced (1.0 lb/ton of lead produced):

(1) Sinter machine;

(2) Blast furnace;

(3) Dross furnace;

(4) Dross furnace charging location;

(5) Blast and dross furnace tapping locations;

(6) Sinter machine charging location;

(7) Sinter machine discharge end;

(8) Sinter crushing and sizing equipment; and

(9) Sinter machine area.

In addition to the emission limit, work practice standards are

required for the above listed fugitive sources (items 4 through 9). The

charging, tapping, and sinter handling sources identified above (items

4 through 8) shall be equipped with a hood ventilated to an air

pollution control device. The hood design and ventilation rate shall be

consistent with the American Conference of Governmental Industrial

Hygienists (ACGIH) recommended practices. In addition, the sinter

machine and sinter crushing and sizing equipment shall be located in a

building ventilated to a baghouse or equivalent device at a rate that

maintains in-draft through any doorway opening.

The operator must install a bag leak detection system for each

baghouse used on a process or process fugitive source. The bag leak

detection system shall be equipped with an audible alarm that

automatically sounds when an increase in particulate matter (PM)

emissions above a predetermined level is detected. Operators are

further required to maintain and operate each affected baghouse such

that the bag leak detection device does not sound more than five

percent of the total operating time in any 6-month period. Alarms

caused by startups, shutdowns, or malfunctions are not included in the

alarm time calculation if the condition is described in the startup,

shutdown, and malfunction plan and the operator follows all the

procedures in the plan prescribed for the subject condition. Alarms

caused by a malfunction of the bag leak detection system are also

excluded from the alarm time calculation.

2. Standards for Fugitive Dust Sources

The standards for fugitive dust sources are in the form of work

practice and operating standards. The EPA is setting work practice and

operating standards based on the determination in accordance with

section 112 (h)(2)(A) that the HAPs controlled by those standards

cannot be emitted through a conveyance designed and constructed to emit

or capture those HAP. Again, the standards apply to fugitive dust

sources at both new and existing smelters. Each primary lead smelter

shall develop a Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) manual for fugitive

dust sources that details procedures to limit fugitive dust emissions.

Each smelter's SOP manual shall be reviewed and subject to approval by

the Administrator. Existing manuals developed as part of a control

strategy to meet a facility's State implementation plan (SIP) may be

used to meet this requirement if the existing manuals address the

identified fugitive dust sources.

3. Compliance Dates

Compliance with the standards must be achieved by June 4, 2001 for

existing primary lead smelters, and upon startup for new and

reconstructed smelters.

4. Compliance Test Methods

The following EPA test methods will be used to measure the lead

emissions from the process and process fugitive sources included in the

plant wide emission limit. Testing of lead compound emissions from

process and process fugitive emission control devices shall be

conducted according to EPA reference method 12 (40 CFR part 60,

appendix A). Sampling locations for all compliance tests shall be

determined by EPA reference method 1. Stack gas velocity and volumetric

flow rate shall be determined by EPA reference method 2. Gas analysis

shall be conducted according to EPA reference method 3 for carbon

dioxide, oxygen, excess air, and molecular weight on a dry basis.

The plant wide emission rate will be calculated as follows. The

previous 12 calender months production data shall be used to calculate

lead production based on the mass produced, and the lead content of

lead products, copper speiss, and copper matte. Plant records will be

used to determine the facility operating hours for the previous 12

calender months. The plant wide emission rate is calculated by dividing

the sum of lead emission rates, determined through stack testing, for

the process and process fugitive sources by the average hourly lead

production rate for the previous 12 calender months.

Operators are required to perform an initial compliance

demonstration for the sinter machine building in-draft requirement.

Operators are required to demonstrate in-draft at all doorway openings

using an anemometer or equivalent device. The demonstration is to be

conducted when wind speed is less than two meters per second (five

miles per hour.)

5. Monitoring Requirements

Each operator subject to the NESHAP shall be required to develop

and operate according to a SOP manual for operation and maintenance of

the control devices used to comply with the emission limits. Each

smelter's SOP manual shall be reviewed and subject to approval by the

Administrator. The minimum SOP requirements identified in the rule

shall serve as the criteria by which the Administrator would decide

whether to approve a smelter's SOP.

Minimum requirements for the bag leak detection system required in

the process and process fugitive standards section are detailed. The

bag leak detection system shall be equipped with an audible alarm that

automatically sounds when an increase in particulate emissions above a

predetermined level is detected. The system shall be capable of

detecting PM emissions at concentrations of 10 milligrams per actual

cubic meter (0.004 grains per actual cubic foot) and provide an output

of relative PM emissions. Operators shall continuously record the bag

leak detection system output. Such a device shall serve as an indicator

of the performance of the baghouse and shall provide an indication of

when maintenance of the baghouse is needed. An alarm by itself will not

necessarily indicate noncompliance with the lead limit, but would

indicate an increase in PM emissions and trigger an inspection of the

baghouse to determine the cause of the alarm. The operator would

initiate corrective actions according to the procedures in their

operation, maintenance, and monitoring plan. The operator would be

considered out of compliance upon failure to initiate within one hour

the procedures to determine the cause of the alarm, as specified in the

baghouse operation and maintenance SOP manual.

Operators are given three options for the monitoring of sinter

building in-draft. Under the first option, operators may elect to

perform daily checks for in-draft at all doorway openings using an

anemometer or equivalent device. Checks are only to be conducted when

ambient wind speed is less than two meters per second (five miles per

hour).

[[Page 30196]]

Under the second option, operators are required to establish and

maintain the ventilation exhaust rate and damper positions at settings

that result in an in-draft at each open doorway. Operators are required

to install and operate a flow monitor device on the ventilation system

that would continuously record the ventilation exhaust rate. Operators

are required to conduct an initial demonstration of in-draft at all

doorway openings using an anemometer or equivalent device while

simultaneously recording the ventilation system exhaust rate and damper

positions. Operators are then required to maintain the ventilation rate

at or above the average rate recorded during the in-draft

demonstration, and check and record daily the damper positions to

ensure that they are maintained in the position they were in when the

in-draft demonstration was performed.

As a third option, operators may petition the administrator or

delegated authority for an alternative monitoring method by following

the procedures and requirements in Sec. 63.8(f) of the General

Provisions.

6. Notification Requirements

The operator of a primary lead smelter is required to submit the

notifications described in Sec. 63.9 of the General Provisions to part

63, (40 CFR part 63, subpart A). These will include the initial

notification, notifications of performance tests, and the notification

of compliance status. In addition, each operator will be required to

submit the baghouse operation and maintenance SOP manual and the

fugitive dust control SOP manual along with a notification to the

Administrator requesting review and approval of the smelter's SOP

manuals.

7. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements

The operator of a primary lead smelter will be required to comply

with the recordkeeping and reporting requirements described in

Sec. 63.10 of the General Provisions to part 63, (40 CFR part 63,

subpart A). In addition, the operator of a primary lead smelter will be

required to retain for 5 years records of: (1) production data of the

weight and lead content of lead products, copper matte, and copper

speiss; (2) records of bag leak detection system output; (3) an

identification of the date and time of all bag leak detection system

alarms, the time procedures to determine the cause of the alarm were

initiated, their cause, and an explanation of the corrective actions

taken; (4) records of daily in-draft checks (if applicable); (5)

records of the output from the flow monitoring system (if applicable);

(6) records of the daily damper position checks (if applicable); (7)

records demonstrating implementation of the baghouse SOP; and (8)

records demonstrating implementation of the fugitive dust controls

contained in the smelter's SOP manual.

In addition to the information required by the General Provisions

to part 63, (40 CFR part 63, subpart A), the operator of a primary lead

smelter will be required to submit semi-annual reports containing: (1)

records of all alarms from the bag leak detection system including a

description of the procedures taken following each bag leak detection

system alarm; (2) the percent of operating time the bag leak detection

alarmed; (3) a summary of the records maintained as part of the

practices described in the baghouse SOP, including an explanation of

the periods when the procedures were not followed and the corrective

actions taken; (4) an identification of the periods when the in-draft

was 0.0 meters per second or less, and an explanation of the corrective

actions taken (if applicable); (5) an identification of the periods

when the 15-minute volumetric flow rate(s) dropped below the minimum

established during the most recent in-draft determination (if

applicable); (6) an identification of the days that the damper

positions were not in the positions established during the most recent

in-draft determination, and an explanation of the corrective actions

taken (if applicable); and (7) a summary of the fugitive dust control

measures performed during the required reporting period, including when

procedures outlined in the fugitive dust control SOP were not followed

and the corrective actions taken.

B. Summary of Major Changes Since Proposal

Based on public comments received in response to both the initial

notice of proposal and the supplemental notice, the EPA has made

several changes to the proposed rule. A summary of the major changes is

presented below.

1. Definitions

A definition of bag leak detection system has been added to the

final rule. Based on the definition, a ``bag leak detection system

means a system that is capable of monitoring particulate matter (dust)

loadings in the exhaust of a baghouse in order to detect bag failures.

A bag leak detection system includes, but is not limited to, an

instrument that operates on triboelectric, light scattering,

transmittance or other effect to monitor relative particulate matter

loadings.''

The definition of total enclosure has been replaced with a

definition of a building. For the purpose of this subpart, a ``building

means a roofed and walled structure with limited openings to allow

access and egress for people and vehicles.''

The definition of malfunction included in the General Provisions

has been added to the subpart for clarity. A ``malfunction means any

sudden, infrequent, and not reasonably preventable failure of air

pollution control equipment, process equipment, or a process to operate

in a normal or usual manner. Failures that are caused in part by poor

maintenance or careless operation are not malfunctions.''

A definition of operating time has been added. For the purpose of

this subpart, ``operating time means the period of time in hours that

an affected source is in operation beginning at a startup and ending at

the next shutdown.''

A definition of plant operating time has been added. For the

purpose of this subpart, ``plant operating time means the period of

time in hours that either a sinter machine or blast furnace is in

operation.''

The definition of shutdown in the General Provisions has been added

to the subpart for clarity. A ``shutdown means the cessation of

operation of an affected source for any purpose.''

The definition of startup in the General Provisions has been added

to the subpart for clarity. A ``startup means the setting in operation

of an affected source for any purpose.''

2. Standards for Process and Process Fugitive Sources

The requirements for annual compliance tests have been changed.

Upon demonstrating compliance for 3 consecutive years, operators will

be allowed up to 24 months between compliance tests. Operators will

retain the 24 month compliance test schedule as long as each subsequent

test demonstrates that the facility is in compliance with the plant

wide emission limit.

An operating limit has been added that requires operators to

maintain and operate each affected baghouse such that the bag leak

detection system does not alarm more than five percent of the time in

any 6-month period. Alarms caused by startups, shutdowns, or

malfunctions are not included if the condition is described in the

startup, shutdown, malfunction plan and the operators follow all the

procedures in the plan prescribed for the subject

[[Page 30197]]

condition. Alarms caused by a malfunction of the bag leak detection

system are also excluded from the alarm time calculation.

3. Monitoring Requirements

The monitoring requirements for baghouses have been modified.

Operators will be required to identify, and monitor against, the normal

pressure drop range across each baghouse cell. Also, the requirement

for a quarterly check of bag tension has been changed to a quarterly

visual check of bag tension.

The requirements for demonstrating compliance with the sinter

machine building in-draft requirements have been changed. Operators are

given three options for the continuous monitoring of in-draft. Under

the first option, operators may elect to perform daily checks for in-

draft at all doorway openings using an anemometer or equivalent device.

Under the second option, operators are required to establish and

maintain the ventilation exhaust rate and damper positions at settings

that result in an in-draft at each open doorway. Operators are required

to install and operate a flow monitor device on the ventilation system

that would continuously record the ventilation exhaust rate. Operators

are required to conduct an initial demonstration of in-draft at all

doorway openings using an anemometer or equivalent device while

simultaneously recording the ventilation system exhaust rate and damper

positions. Operators are then required to maintain the ventilation rate

at or above the average rate recorded during the in-draft

demonstration, and check and record daily the damper positions to

ensure that they are maintained in the position they were in when the

in-draft demonstration was performed.

As a third option, operators may petition the Administrator or

delegated authority for an alternative monitoring method by following

the procedures and requirements in Sec. 63.8(f) of the General

Provisions.

C. Summary of Environmental, Energy, and Economic Impacts

There are only three existing primary lead smelters that will be

subject to the standards, and no new facilities are anticipated to be

constructed in the next 5 years. The required levels of control are

based on existing SIP emission limits for lead. No additional emission

controls will be required to comply with the standards. Therefore, no

quantifiable emission reduction or other environmental impacts are

anticipated to result from this rulemaking. However, it is anticipated

that improved baghouse operation and maintenance procedures coupled

with continuous bag leak detection will result in unquantifiable

reductions in emissions of lead compounds and other metal HAP.

Similarly, cost and economic impacts are expected to be minimal.

The only costs associated with the standards are those required to

perform compliance assurance activities such as performance testing,

monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping. These costs are minimal, and

will not result in any significant economic impact.

III. Public Participation

Prior to proposal of the standards, the EPA met with

representatives from the only operators of primary lead smelters. The

EPA discussed the standards being evaluated for proposal. Comments

submitted following this meeting were incorporated into the proposed

rule as appropriate.

The standards were proposed and published in the Federal Register

on April 17, 1998 (63 FR 19200). The preamble to the proposed standards

described the technical basis, purpose, and impacts of the proposed

standards. Public comments were solicited at the time of proposal.

To provide interested persons the opportunity for oral presentation

of data, views, or arguments concerning the proposed standards, the

opportunity for a public hearing was offered at proposal; however, no

requests for a hearing were received. The public comment period was

from April 17, 1998 to June 16, 1998. Two comment letters were

received. The comments were carefully considered in formulating the

final rule.

A supplemental proposal was published in the Federal Register on

February 12, 1999 (64 FR 7149). That notice proposed an operating limit

that would require owners and operators of a primary lead smelter

(referred to as operators in the remainder of this preamble) to operate

and maintain each affected baghouse such that the required bag leak

detection system would not sound more than five percent of the

operating time. Again the opportunity for a public hearing was offered

at proposal; however, no requests for a hearing were received. The

public comment period was from February 12, 1999 to March 15, 1999.

Three comment letters were received. Again, the comments were carefully

considered in formulating the final rule.

IV. Summary of Comments and Responses

The EPA received two comment letters (one letter contained joint

comments from two commenters) on the initial proposal, and three

letters commenting on the supplemental proposal (again, one letter

contained joint comments from two commenters). Comment summaries and

EPA responses are presented below.

A. Comments on April 1998 Proposal

The comments contain both favorable and adverse comments. Topics

and requirements which received favorable and supportive comments

include the following:

--The use of lead as a surrogate pollutant for all metal HAP,

--The conclusion that organic HAP emissions from blast furnaces are

not significant enough to warrant regulation,

--The use of a plant-wide emission limit,

--The requirement that sinter plants be enclosed and ventilated to

a baghouse or equivalent control device,

--The requirement that certain process fugitive emission sources be

equipped with a hood and ventilated to a baghouse or equivalent control

device,

--Allowing 2 years to achieve compliance, and

--The requirement for an approved plan for the control of fugitive

dust emissions.

Topics and provisions of the proposed rule which received adverse

comments are summarized below with the EPA's responses.

Comment. One commenter stated that it is not possible to maintain a

sinter machine building ``at a lower than ambient pressure to ensure

in-draft through any doorway opening'' at all times. They argue that

static pressure measured at any one point in a building is the sum of

the pressures caused by the combination of several effects including

mechanical or forced ventilation, stack effects, wind influences and

local effects. A ventilation system that is designed and operated for a

specific building can effectively control the escape of most fugitive

emissions. However, the variable influence of stack draft, wind, and

local effects will cause the actual building static pressure to vary

over space and time, thereby making it impossible to comply with a

standard that requires maintaining a building at lower than ambient

pressure at all times.

The commenter suggested that the EPA give operators the following

three

[[Page 30198]]

alternatives. First, require operators to submit to the Administrator

or delegated authority a statement from a professional engineer

certifying that the design of the ventilation system in the sinter

buildings is sufficient to attain in-draft with all doorways in their

customary position during normal operation. Each operator would be

required to design and operate its ventilation system to meet a minimum

exhaust flow rate, and would have to restrict the total surface area of

doorways open during normal operation to some maximum.

Second, allow for more flexible performance tests (i.e., use of

anemometers) to account for wind effects. The commenter suggested that

the performance demonstrations be limited to periods when the wind

speed is less than five miles per hour.

The third suggestion was to allow operators flexibility in

developing site-specific methods to demonstrate compliance with the in-

draft requirement. All site specific alternatives would be subject to

approval of the Administrator or delegated authority.

Response. The EPA has considered the comment, and agrees to modify

the requirements for sinter building in-draft. The EPA believes that

with some modification, the alternatives suggested by the commenter are

better than the negative pressure requirements contained in the

proposal. As such, the EPA is making the following changes to the

proposed rule.

Operators are required to perform an initial compliance

demonstration for the sinter machine building in-draft requirement.

Operators are required to demonstrate in-draft at all doorway openings

using an anemometer or equivalent device. The demonstration is to be

conducted when wind speed is less than two meters per second (five

miles per hour.)

Operators are given three options for the continued monitoring of

in-draft. Under the first option, operators may elect to perform daily

checks for in-draft at all doorway openings using an anemometer or

equivalent device. This option is similar to the option given in the

proposed rule, however, the checks for in-draft are limited to days

when the ambient wind speed is less than two meters per second (five

miles per hour.)

Under the second option, operators are required to establish and

maintain the ventilation exhaust rate and damper positions at settings

that result in an in-draft at each open doorway. Operators are required

to install and operate a flow monitor device on the ventilation system

that would continuously record the ventilation exhaust rate. Operators

are required to conduct an initial demonstration of in-draft at all

doorway openings using an anemometer or equivalent device while

simultaneously recording the ventilation system exhaust rate and damper

positions. Again, the demonstration is not to be conducted when wind

speeds are greater than two meters per second (five miles per hour.)

Operators are then required to maintain the ventilation rate at or

above the average rate recorded during the in-draft demonstration, and

check and record daily the damper positions to ensure that they are

maintained in the position they were in when the in-draft demonstration

was performed.

As a third option, the EPA is adding a reference to the section of

the General Provisions which describes the procedures for requesting an

alternative monitoring method, 40 CFR 63.8(f). This reference is being

added to highlight the availability of this option.

Comment. One commenter identified an error in the proposed rule.

Section 63.1546(b) states ``Operators shall determine compliance with

the doorway in-draft requirements for buildings in 63.1543(b) and

63.1544(c) * * *'' However, building in-draft requirements are

contained in Sec. 63.1543(c).

Response. This error is corrected in the final rule.

Comment. One commenter stated that they are required to test for

particulate matter and lead as part of their SIP requirements. The

commenter requests that operators be given the flexibility to use the

``hybrid Method 5-12'' to test for particulate matter and lead

simultaneously.

Response. The rule specifies that EPA Method 12 be used to measure

lead emission rates. There is no EPA Method 5-12. However, section 8.1

of EPA Method 12 allows for the simultaneous measurement of both lead

and particulate matter. As such, no change is being made to address

this comment.

Comment. The proposed rule requires quarterly checks of bag tension

on certain types of baghouses. One commenter stated that none of their

facilities are currently required to check bag tension under existing

SIPs. They claim that measuring bag tension would be a time-consuming

process resulting in extended periods of worker exposure to high

temperatures and potentially lead. They recommend that the requirement

for bag tension testing be eliminated, or at a minimum modified to an

annual visual check to make certain bags are not kinked (kneed or bent)

or lying on their sides.

Response. The EPA agrees with the commenter that measuring bag

tension is a time-consuming process that can create increased risks of

worker exposures to lead. The EPA also agrees that a visual check is

sufficient to determine adequate bag tension. As such, the EPA is

amending Sec. 63.1547(c)(6) to require quarterly visual inspections of

bag tension to make certain bags are not kinked or lying on their

sides.

Comment. One commenter stated that the proposed requirement for bag

leak detection devices does not provide for alternative/equivalent

methods, such as opacity monitors, which are already in use at some

facilities. As such, the regulation would impose unnecessary additional

costs by not including other compliance methods.

Response. The EPA is adding a definition of bag leak detection

system in the final rule. This definition was inadvertently left out of

the proposal. Based on the definition, a ``bag leak detection system

means a system that is capable of monitoring particulate matter (dust)

loadings in the exhaust of a baghouse in order to detect bag failures.

A bag leak detection system includes, but is not limited to, an

instrument that operates on triboelectric, light scattering,

transmittance or other effect to monitor relative particulate matter

loadings.'' This is the same definition that appears in the final rule

for secondary lead smelters (40 CFR part 63, subpart X) and several

other currently proposed rules which include bag leak detection

requirements.

Based on the definition and the requirements of Sec. 63.1547(e)(1),

an opacity monitor can be used as a bag leak detection system if the

manufacturer of the opacity monitor certifies that it is capable of

detecting particulate matter emissions at concentrations of 10

milligram per actual cubic meter or less. However, due to the poor

correlation between opacity and particulate matter at low grain

loadings, it is doubtful that any conventional opacity monitors have

the sensitivity necessary to meet this requirement. Bag leak detection

systems based on triboelectric or light scattering effects are capable

of detecting particulate matter emissions well below the level of

visible emissions, and are believed to be more reliable, accurate, and

cost effective than opacity monitors for detecting broken bags in

baghouses.

Comment. One commenter stated that the condition of the fan has

little, if any, direct effect on baghouse performance. They suggested

that this requirement be on an annual basis rather than a quarterly

basis.

Response. The EPA concurs that fan condition may have little effect

on

[[Page 30199]]

baghouse performance. However, fan condition can greatly affect hood

capture efficiency and consequently fugitive emissions. The rule allows

for the use of vibration detectors to conduct the inspection, which

does not require the operator to shutdown the fan or remove it from

service. As such, the EPA believes that requiring quarterly inspection

of fan condition does not place an undue burden on the industry. No

change to the final rule is being made to address this comment.

Comment. One commenter stated that the benefits associated with the

suite of monitoring requirements are unclear and at best very low. They

suggest that the proposed bag leak detection system requirements alone

should be adequate to ensure proper baghouse functioning.

Response. The EPA's proposed operating procedures requirements for

baghouses represent a two-pronged approach to baghouse operation--

preventative maintenance and baghouse failure monitoring, coupled with

timely corrective action. The inspection and maintenance requirements

in the proposed rule are intended to ensure the proper operation of the

baghouse and to reduce the number of baghouse upsets through

prevention. The bag leak detection requirements are intended to assist

in early detection of baghouse failures allowing for timely corrective

action.

The proposed inspection and maintenance requirements represent a

minimal, yet practical, strategy for ensuring proper baghouse

operation. The EPA believes that good inspection and maintenance

practices are critical to achieving and maintaining the high level of

control that baghouses are capable of. Furthermore, these requirements

do not result in significant costs or burden.

Comment. One commenter stated that the time limits for initiating

corrective action may be impossible to fulfill. With regard to the bag

leak detection alarm, the preamble to the proposed rule states, ``An

alarm by itself does not indicate noncompliance with the lead limit,

but would indicate an increase in emissions and trigger an inspection

of the baghouse to determine the cause of the alarm.'' The preamble

goes on to state, ``The owner or operator would be considered out of

compliance upon failure to initiate corrective actions within 1 hour of

the alarm.'' They also point out that the rule states in section

63.1547(f)(1) that ``the procedures used to determine the cause of the

alarm must be initiated within 30 minutes of the alarm.'' They comment

that reading these provisions together suggests that facilities must

always initiate procedures to determine the cause of the alarm within

30 minutes, and to identify the needed repair or response and begin

corrective action within 1 hour.

Response. The 30-minute reference in the preamble to the proposed

rule is an error. Both the preamble and the rule were intended to refer

to the same time period, i.e., the period of time allowed between the

time an alarm occurs and the time when procedures to determine the

cause of the alarm are initiated. The rule requires facilities to

initiate the procedures outlined in their corrective action plan within

1 hour of the alarm and correct the problem as soon as practicable.

Comment. One commenter stated that compliance testing should be

required on a less than annual basis. Proposed section 63.1543(d)

requires facilities to conduct compliance tests for lead compounds on

an annual basis. The commenter suggests that the EPA should permit a

reduction in the frequency of testing on a site-by-site basis, based

upon the results of annual testing. For example, if 3 years of testing

shows the standard is consistently being met, they suggest that a

facility be able to reduce the frequency of its testing.

Response. The EPA agrees that less frequent testing should be

allowed when facilities are able to demonstrate compliance

consistently. As such, the final rule allows operators up to 24 months

between compliance tests if the results of the three most recent

compliance tests demonstrate compliance.

Comment. One commenter stated that the recordkeeping requirements

for the bag leak detection system are inconsistent with recordkeeping

requirements for fugitive dust and baghouse inspection and maintenance.

Proposed section 63.1549(b)(3) and (4), which refers to control of

fugitive dust emissions and baghouse inspection and maintenance

procedures, requires recordkeeping if it is part of the practices

described in the respective SOP manual. The commenter also stated that

the recordkeeping requirements proposed in section 63.1549(b)(2) for

the bag leak detection system are not contingent on such requirements

being part of the SOP manual, and are thus inconsistent with section

63.1549(b)(3) and (4).

Response. The rule requires facilities to develop site specific SOP

manuals for baghouse inspection and maintenance procedures. Since these

SOP manuals are site-specific, the EPA has left it up to the operator

to work with the Administrator or delegated authority to develop

appropriate site specific recordkeeping and reporting requirements.

However, the EPA has specified recordkeeping and reporting requirements

for bag leak detector system alarms since these records are necessary

to demonstrate compliance with the operating standards for bag leak

detection (section 63.1543(f) and (g)). No change is being made to the

rule to address this comment.

Comment. One commenter stated that a minimum differential pressure

should be specified and continuously monitored to ensure the baghouse

or equivalent control device is maintained at a pressure that is lower

than ambient pressure.

Response. The rule requires daily monitoring of the pressure drop

across each baghouse cell. The EPA agrees that a minimum pressure drop

should be identified and monitored against. However, several factors

affect the pressure drop across a baghouse cell including filter

material, cell geometry, cleaning cycles, and air-to-cloth ratio. As

such, the minimum pressure drop across the cell is baghouse specific,

if not cell specific. Furthermore, there is little or no correlation

between baghouse pressure drop and emissions. Therefore, it would be

inappropriate for the rule to identify a minimum pressure drop.

However, the EPA has amended the rule to require operators to monitor

the pressure drop across each cell to ensure that it is within the

normal operating range for that cell. Operators will be required to

identify the normal operating range for each baghouse cell in the

baghouse operation and maintenance SOP.

Comment. One commenter stated that the lead production rate should

be calculated on data from the previous 12 months of operation. The

commenter adds that the requirement does not consider plant shutdown,

when lead production is zero; hence, artificially low emissions could

result from the recommended calculation.

Response. Based on the proposed rule, lead production is calculated

based on production data for the 12 months prior to conducting the

test, including periods when the facility is shut down. The EPA

believes that this is in agreement with this statement.

As noted, plant shutdowns would result in lower lead production.

However, the result of lower lead production would be to increase the

calculated, production-based, lead compound emission rate, not reduce

it as suggested by the commenter. In fact, if a facility were to

experience a prolonged shutdown, it may be impossible to meet the

emission limit based on the proposed calculation.

[[Page 30200]]

Upon further review, the EPA has decided to amend the procedure for

calculation of the production-based, lead compound emission rate to

account for periods when the facility is shut down. As amended, the

production-based, lead compound emission rate will be calculated by

multiplying the sum of lead emission rates (determined through stack

testing, in units of grams per hour) from the nine listed sources by

the plant operating hours (in units of hours/year) and dividing by the

lead production rate (in units of megagrams per year). Plant operating

hours are defined as the period of time in hours that either a sinter

machine or blast furnace is in operation.

Comment. One commenter suggested that the bag leak detection system

alarms should be set at 75 percent or 80 percent of the previous 12-

month average. Alternatively the commenter suggests that the system be

equipped with two alarms: a high level set at 75 percent to 80 percent

of scale, and a high-high alarm that sounds when the maximum value is

reached. The commenter also commented that a requirement for time

averaging of the emissions should be added. The commenter suggested the

use of 1-minute time averages for monitoring the particulate emissions.

Response. The EPA has developed guidance on the use of bag leak

detectors based on information provided by bag leak detection system

vendors, industry representatives with bag leak detection experience,

and an EPA-sponsored field study. The EPA believes that this guidance

provides the most appropriate methods for selecting, installing,

initializing, and operating bag leak detection systems. No changes to

the rule are being made to address this comment.

Comment. One commenter stated that the differential pressure across

baghouses equipped with high efficiency particulate arrestor (HEPA)

filters should be monitored once per operating shift and at least 8

hours apart or every 24 hours 4 hours. The commenter

states that monitoring once a day allows operators to take readings at

0100 hours one day, and at 2300 hours the next day, allowing up to 46

hours to pass between readings.

Response. An exemption to the bag leak detection system

requirements is provided in the rule if a baghouse is equipped with a

secondary HEPA filter. The exemption is not given if the HEPA filter is

the only filter in the system.

Under this configuration, the primary filter collects the bulk of

the particulates, while the secondary HEPA filter acts as a finishing

filter. Based on discussions with personnel at a secondary lead smelter

using secondary HEPA filters, HEPA filters last several months when

used as a secondary filter. As such, the EPA believes that daily checks

of the differential pressure across the HEPA filter is adequate. No

changes to the rule are being made to address this comment.

Comment. One commenter stated that the rule should specify the

building ventilation requirements in a definitive way, e.g., by

requiring an exhaust system capable of a given number of air changes

per hour.

Response. While air changes per hour may be an important

consideration in addressing indoor air quality and worker exposure, it

has little meaning when assessing the capture effectiveness of a

building. The EPA believes that the requirement that the sinter machine

building be ventilated at a rate that ensures in-draft through all open

doors provides the best assurance that emissions escaping the building

are minimized. No changes to the rule are being made to address this

comment.

Comment. One commenter stated that for total enclosures there

should be a monitoring device on the exhaust fan (e.g., motor current)

to verify continuously that the ventilation system is in operation, and

added that failure of the ventilation system should be recorded and

included in the reporting requirements.

Response. As discussed above, the EPA has amended the rule to

require that operators either (1) install, calibrate, and operate a

flow monitor to continuously measure and record total exhaust rate out

of the enclosure; or (2) perform daily checks for in-draft, with a vane

anemometer or equivalent device, at each doorway normally open.

Failure of the ventilation system would be considered a malfunction

of the air pollution control equipment. The rule requires that

operators develop a start-up, shut-down, and malfunction plan for all

air pollution control equipment. In addition, the rule requires

operators to record the occurrence and duration of each malfunction of

the source or air pollution control equipment. No additional changes

are being made to address this comment.

Comment. One commenter stated that there should be some specified

limits on the number of allowable violations (alarms) during a given

time period.

Response. On February 12, 1999 (64 FR 7149), the EPA proposed an

operating limit that would require operators of primary lead smelters

to operate and maintain their baghouses such that the bag leak

detection system did not alarm more than five percent of the time over

a 6-month period. The EPA also added the requirement that operators

continuously record the output of the bag leak detection system. The

EPA added these requirements to help ensure that baghouses are properly

operated and maintained, and that enforcement officials will have

adequate data to assess compliance with the bag leak detection system

requirements.

B. Comments on February 1999 Supplemental Proposal

Comment. One commenter stated that the term ``initiate corrective

actions'' as used in section 63.1547(e)(9) was somewhat ambiguous, and

requested that the EPA clarify what constitutes the initiation of

corrective action. Furthermore, they noted that, as required in section

63.1547(f), the first steps in the corrective action process is to

acknowledge the alarm and determine its cause. It was suggested that

the term ``initiate corrective action'' be changed to ``initiate

procedures to acknowledge the alarm and determine its cause, as

specified in the corrective actions plan.''

Response. The EPA is concerned that the term ``initiate corrective

action'' could be misinterpreted to mean the beginning of a physical

repair. As pointed out by the commenter, the first step in the

corrective action process is to acknowledge (or record) the alarm and

to begin procedures for determining the cause of the alarm. As such,

the EPA is changing the proposed rule language to capture more

accurately what is intended. The new language requires facilities to

``record the date and time of the alarm and initiate procedures to

determine the cause of a bag leak detection system alarm'' within 1

hour.

Comment. The commenters stated that they believe the addition of

section 63.1547(e)(9) makes the provision in section 63.1547(f)(1)

redundant. They suggest that section 63.1547(f)(1) be removed.

Response. The EPA does not believe that the requirements of section

63.1547(e)(9) and section 63.1547(f)(1) are redundant. The purpose of

the operating limit in section 63.1547(e)(9) is to require operators to

operate and maintain an affected baghouse such that upset events are

limited to a level that the EPA considers acceptable both in terms of

number of occurrences and duration. The intent of the requirement that

operators record and initiate procedures to determine the cause of the

alarm within 1 hour (section 63.1547(f)(1)) is to ensure that operators

acknowledge and respond to each alarm in a timely manner.

[[Page 30201]]

Please note that the requirements contained in section

63.1547(e)(9) of the supplemental proposal have been revised in the

final rule. The requirement to maintain and operate each baghouse such

that the alarm on a bag leak detection system does not sound for more

than five percent of the total operating time in a 6-month reporting

period has been moved to section 63.1543(f) in the final rule. The

methodology to be used in calculating the percent of the total

operating time that the alarm sounds has been clarified and moved to

section 63.1547(g) in the final rule. In addition, the requirements

contained in section 63.1547(f)(1) of the original proposal have been

moved to section 63.1543(g) in the final rule.

Comment. One commenter stated that it appears that the EPA is

proposing to penalize operators for a rapid response to initiate

corrective actions by setting 1 hour as a minimum time counted for each

alarm while using the actual time for periods which exceed 1 hour. The

commenter proposes that the EPA simplify the requirement such that the

alarm time should be counted as the actual amount of time taken by the

owner or operator to initiate corrective actions for all cases.

Response. As discussed above, the intent of the operating limit on

bag leak detection system alarm time is to limit not only the duration,

but also the number of alarm-causing events. By rounding the amount of

alarm time counted up to 1 hour for any alarm where the operator

responds within 1 hour, the total number of potential alarm-causing

events is limited to roughly 220 alarms in a 6-month reporting period.

Counting fractions of an hour per event could allow for an unlimited

number of events. For example, at 10 minutes per event, the total

number of alarm-causing events could be as high as 1,300 in a 6-month

reporting period.

Comment. One commenter suggested that the operating limit on bag

leak detection system alarm time be reviewed and considered for

application to other MACT standards using common add-on emissions

control technologies (i.e., baghouses).

Response. The EPA intends to incorporate the operating limit on bag

leak detection system alarm time in the rules that EPA is currently

developing and any future rules where baghouses are used to control HAP

emissions. In addition, the EPA is considering amending existing NESHAP

where baghouses are used to control HAP emissions to include the

operating limit on bag leak detection system alarm time.

Comment. One commenter stated that by limiting the cumulative time

that a source may operate before initiating corrective action, rather

than before completing corrective action, the proposed changes would

provide an incentive for the operator to indefinitely delay completion

of corrective action.

Response. The commenter is mistaken. Section 63.6(e)(1)(ii) of the

General Provisions requires that malfunctions be corrected as soon as

practicable after their occurrence. As such, an operator cannot delay

completion of corrective action without being in violation of the

General Provisions. However, the EPA has changed section 63.1543(g) of

the final rule to require that ``The cause of the alarm shall be

corrected as soon as practicable.'' No other changes are being made to

the rule to address this comment.

Comment. One commenter stated that the MACT technology should be

reanalyzed to account for the particulate HAP control which is

achievable during a one-time performance test conducted on a newly

constructed or reconstructed baghouse. The commenter continues to state

that while some operators might choose to maintain and promptly repair

their air pollution control devices, the rules could not be enforced to

require this level of control.

Response. The EPA believes that the commenter has misinterpreted

the rule. The commenter infers that the lead emission limits should be

based on the level of control that a brand new baghouse can achieve

since only a one-time test is required. However, the rule requires

annual compliance testing, not a one-time compliance test. Furthermore,

the rule contains federally enforceable requirements for the operation

and maintenance of each affected baghouse. No change is being made to

the rule to address this comment.

V. Administrative Requirements

A. Docket

The docket is an organized and complete file of all the information

considered by the EPA in the development of this rulemaking. The docket

is a dynamic file because material is added throughout the rulemaking

process. The docketing system is intended to allow members of the

public and industries involved to readily identify and locate documents

so that they can effectively participate in the rulemaking process.

Along with the proposed and promulgated standards and their preambles,

the contents of the docket will serve as the record in the case of

judicial review. (See section 307(d)(7)(A) of the Act.)

B. Executive Order 12866

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the EPA

must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' and

therefore subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Executive Order

defines ``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to

result in a rule that may:

(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or

adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the

economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public

health or safety, or state, local, or tribal governments or

communities;

(2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an

action taken or planned by another agency;

(3) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,

user fees, or loan programs, or the rights and obligation of recipients

thereof; or

(4) raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal

mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in

the Executive Order.

Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, it has been

determined that this rule is not a ``significant regulatory action''

because none of the listed criteria apply to this action. Consequently,

this action was not submitted to OMB for review under Executive Order

12866.

C. Executive Order 12875

Under Executive Order 12875, EPA may not issue a regulation that is

not required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a State, local

or tribal government, unless the Federal government provides the funds

necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those

governments, or EPA consults with those governments. If EPA complies by

consulting, Executive Order 12875 requires EPA to provide to the Office

of Management and Budget a description of the extent of EPA's prior

consultation with representatives of affected State, local and tribal

governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of any written

communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the

need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 12875

requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected

officials and other representatives of State, local and tribal

governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development

of

[[Page 30202]]

regulatory proposals containing significant unfunded mandates.''

Today's rule does not create a mandate on State, local or tribal

governments. The rule does not impose any enforceable duties on these

entities. None of these entities own or operate an affected source.

Accordingly, the requirements of section 1(a) of Executive Order 12875

do not apply to this rule.

D. Executive Order 13084

Under Executive Order 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is

not required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the

communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial

direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal

government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance

costs incurred by the tribal governments, or EPA consults with those

governments. If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13084

requires EPA to provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a

separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a

description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with

representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature

of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the

regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop

an effective process permitting elected officials and other

representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful

and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters

that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.'' Today's rule

does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities of Indian

tribal governments. No tribal governments own or operate an affected

source. Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) of Executive

Order 13084 do not apply to this action.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Pub.

L. 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the

effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal

governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, the

EPA generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-

benefit analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal

mandates'' that may result in expenditures by State, local, and tribal

governments, in aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or

more in any one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a

written statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires

the EPA to identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory

alternatives and adopt the least costly, most cost-effective, or least

burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The

provisions of section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with

applicable law. Moreover, section 205 allows the EPA to adopt an

alternative other than the least costly, most cost-effective, or least

burdensome alternative if the Administrator publishes with the final

rule an explanation why that alternative was not adopted. Before the

EPA establishes any regulatory requirements that may significantly or

uniquely affect small governments, including tribal governments, it

must have developed under section 203 of the UMRA a small government

agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying potentially affected

small governments, enabling officials of affected small governments to

have meaningful and timely input in the development of EPA regulatory

proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and

informing, educating, and advising small governments on compliance with

the regulatory requirements.

The EPA has determined that this rule does not contain a Federal

mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for

State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private

sector in any 1 year. The maximum total annual cost of this rule for

any year has been estimated to be less than $250,000. Thus, today's

rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the

UMRA. In addition, the EPA has determined that this rule contains no

regulatory requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect

small governments because it contains no requirements that apply to

such governments or impose obligations upon them. Therefore, today's

rule is not subject to the requirements of section 203 of the UMRA.

F. Regulatory Flexibility Act

As amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness

Act (SBREFA), the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires

an agency to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule

subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements, as well as take

other actions intended to minimize the rule's potential impact on small

entities, unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a

significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

Small entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit

enterprises, and small government jurisdictions.

The EPA has determined that none of the existing primary lead

smelters are small entities, and has concluded that this proposed rule

would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of

small entities. Therefore, I certify that this action will not have a

significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

G. Paperwork Reduction Act

The information collection requirements in this rule will be

submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget under the

Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. An Information

Collection Request (ICR) document has been prepared by EPA (ICR No.

1856.02) and a copy may be obtained from Sandy Farmer by mail at OPPE

Regulatory Information Division; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

(2137); 401 M St., SW, Washington, DC 20460, by email at

[email protected], or by calling (202) 260-2740. A copy may

also be downloaded off the internet at http://www.epa.gov/icr. The

information requirements are not effective until OMB approves them.

The information requirements are based on notification,

recordkeeping, and reporting requirements in the NESHAP General

Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A), which are mandatory for all

operators subject to national emission standards. These recordkeeping

and reporting requirements are specifically authorized by section 114

of the Act (42 U.S.C. Sec. 7414). All information submitted to the EPA

pursuant to the recordkeeping and reporting requirements for which a

claim of confidentiality is made is safeguarded according to Agency

policies set forth in 40 CFR part 2, subpart B.

The rule would require maintenance inspections of the control

devices but would not require any notifications or reports beyond those

required by the General Provisions. The recordkeeping requirements

require only the specific information needed to determine compliance.

The annual monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping burden for this

collection (averaged over the first 3 years after the effective date of

the rule) is estimated to be 2,002 labor hours per year at a total

annual cost of $114,900. This estimate includes a one-time performance

test and report (with repeat tests where needed); one-time purchase and

[[Page 30203]]

installation of bag leak detection systems; one-time submission of a

startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan with semiannual reports for any

event when the procedures in the plan were not followed; semiannual

excess emission reports; maintenance inspections; notifications; and

recordkeeping. Total capital/startup costs associated with the

monitoring requirements over the 3-year period of the ICR are estimated

at $107,500, with operation and maintenance costs of $5,500/yr.

Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources

expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or

provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time

needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize

technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and

verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and

disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to

comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;

train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;

search data sources; complete and review the collection of information;

and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.

An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required

to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a

currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's

regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

H. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. Sec. 801 et seq., as added

by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996,

generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency

promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy

of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller

General of the United States. The EPA will submit a report containing

this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S.

House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United

States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A

major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in

the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by

5 U.S.C. Sec. 804(2).

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement

Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Pub. L. No. 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272

note), directs all Federal agencies to use voluntary consensus

standards instead of government-unique standards in their regulatory

activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or

otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical

standards (e.g., material specifications, test method, sampling and

analytical procedures, business practices, etc.) that are developed or

adopted by one or more voluntary consensus standards bodies. Examples

of organizations generally regarded as voluntary consensus standards

bodies include the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM),

the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), and the Society of

Automotive Engineers (SAE). The NTTAA requires Federal agencies like

EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, with explanations when an agency

decides not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus

standards.

During this rulemaking the Agency searched for voluntary consensus

standards that might be applicable. The search has identified no

applicable voluntary standards. Accordingly, the NTTAA requirement to

use applicable voluntary consensus standards does not apply to this

rule.

As part of a larger effort, the EPA is undertaking a project to

cross-reference existing voluntary consensus standards on testing,

sampling, and analysis, with current and future EPA test methods. When

completed, this project will assist the EPA in identifying potentially-

applicable voluntary consensus standards which can then be evaluated

for equivalency and applicability in determining compliance with future

regulations.

J. Pollution Prevention Considerations

The Pollution Prevention Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 13101 et seq., Pub.

L. 101-508, November 5, 1990) establishes the national policy of the

United States for pollution prevention. This act declares that: (1)

pollution should be prevented or reduced whenever feasible, (2)

pollution that cannot be prevented or reduced should be recycled or

reused in an environmentally-safe manner wherever feasible, (3)

pollution that cannot be recycled or reused should be treated, and (4)

disposal or release into the atmosphere should be chosen only if none

of the other options is available.

The plant wide emission limit approach in this final rule promotes

the use of pollution prevention alternatives by giving facilities full

credit for source reduction in determining compliance with the emission

limit. Furthermore, the focus of the fugitive dust requirements is on

work practice and operating standards that reduce emission potential,

rather than capture and treatment options.

K. Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety

Risk Under Executive Order 13045

Executive Order 13045: ``Protection of Children from Environmental

Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies

to any rule that: (1) is determined to be ``economically significant''

as defined under E.O. 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health

or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a

disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets

both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or

safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the

planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and

reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.

The EPA interprets Executive Order (E.O.) 13045 as applying only to

those regulatory actions that are based on health or safety risks, such

that the analysis required under section 5-501 of the E.O. has the

potential to influence the regulation. This rule is not subject to E.O.

13045 because it does not establish an environmental standard intended

to mitigate health or safety risks. Furthermore, this rule has been

determined not to be ``economically significant'' as defined under E.O.

12866.

L. Judicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act, judicial review of a NESHAP is

available only by filing a petition for review in the U.S. Court of

Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit within 60 days of today's

publication of this final rule. Under section 307(b)(2) of the Act, the

requirements that are the subject of today's action may not be

challenged later in civil or criminal proceedings brought by the EPA to

enforce these requirements.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hazardous

substances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Primary lead

smelters.

[[Page 30204]]

Dated: May 13, 1999.

Carol M. Browner,

Administrator.

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

For reasons set out in the preamble, 40 CFR part 63 is amended as

follows:

PART 63--NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS

FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES

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

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

2. Part 63 is amended by adding subpart TTT, to read as follows:

Subpart TTT--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air

Pollutants for Primary Lead Smelting

Sec.

63.1541 Applicability.

63.1542 Definitions.

63.1543 Standards for process and process fugitive sources.

63.1544 Standards for fugitive dust sources.

63.1545 Compliance dates.

63.1546 Test methods.

63.1547 Monitoring requirements.

63.1548 Notification requirements.

63.1549 Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.

63.1550 Delegation of authority.

Subpart TTT--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air

Pollutants for Primary Lead Smelting

Sec. 63.1541 Applicability.

(a) The provisions of this subpart apply to the following affected

sources at primary lead smelters: sinter machine, blast furnace, dross

furnace, process fugitive sources, and fugitive dust sources. The

provisions of this subpart do not apply to secondary lead smelters,

lead refiners, or lead remelters.

(b) Table 1 of this subpart specifies the provisions of subpart A

that apply and those that do not apply to owners and operators of

primary lead smelters. The following sections of part 63 apply to this

subpart as stated in subpart A and Table 1: Sec. 63.1 (Applicability),

Sec. 63.2 (Definitions), Sec. 63.3 (Units and abbreviations), Sec. 63.4

(Prohibited activities and circumvention), Sec. 63.5 (Construction and

reconstruction), Sec. 63.7 (Performance testing requirements),

Sec. 63.8 (Monitoring requirements), Sec. 63.12 (State authority and

delegations), Sec. 63.13 (Addresses of State air pollution control

agencies and EPA Regional Offices), Sec. 63.14 (Incorporations by

reference), and Sec. 63.15 (Availability of information

confidentiality). The following sections of part 63 apply to the extent

specified in this subpart and Table 1: Sec. 63.6 (Compliance with

standards and maintenance requirements), Sec. 63.9 (Notification

requirements), and Sec. 63.10 (Recordkeeping and reporting

requirements). Section Sec. 63.11 (Control device requirements) does

not apply to this subpart.

Sec. 63.1542 Definitions.

Terms used in this subpart are defined in the Act, in subpart A of

this part, or in this section as follows:

Bag leak detection system means a system that is capable of

continuously monitoring relative particulate matter (dust) loadings in

the exhaust of a baghouse in order to detect bag leaks and other upset

conditions. A bag leak detection system includes, but is not limited

to, an instrument that operates on triboelectric, light scattering,

light transmittance, or other effect to continuously monitor relative

particulate matter loadings.

Blast furnace means any reduction furnace to which sinter is

charged and which forms separate layers of molten slag and lead

bullion.

Building means a roofed and walled structure with limited openings

to allow access and egress for people and vehicles.

Charging location means the physical opening through which raw

materials are introduced into a sinter machine, blast furnace, or dross

furnace.

Dross furnace means any smelting furnace to which drosses are

charged and which chemically and physically separates lead from other

impurities.

Drossing and refining kettle means an open-top vessel that is

constructed of cast iron or steel and is indirectly heated from below

and contains molten lead for the purpose of drossing, refining, or

alloying lead. Included are pot furnaces, receiving kettles, and

holding kettles.

Fugitive dust source means a stationary source of hazardous air

pollutant emissions at a primary lead smelter resulting from the

handling, storage, transfer, or other management of lead-bearing

materials where the source is not associated with a specific process,

process vent, or stack. Fugitive dust sources include roadways, storage

piles, materials handling transfer points, and materials transport

areas.

Furnace area means any area of a primary lead smelter in which a

blast furnace or dross furnace is located.

Malfunction means any sudden, infrequent, and not reasonably

preventable failure of air pollution control equipment, process

equipment, or a process to operate in a normal or usual manner.

Failures that are caused in part by poor maintenance or careless

operation are not malfunctions.

Materials storage and handling area means any area of a primary

lead smelter in which lead-bearing materials (including ore

concentrate, sinter, granulated lead, dross, slag, and flue dust) are

stored or handled between process steps, including areas in which

materials are stored in piles, bins, or tubs, and areas in which

material is prepared for charging to a sinter machine or smelting

furnace.

Operating time means the period of time in hours that an affected

source is in operation beginning at a startup and ending at the next

shutdown.

Plant operating time means the period of time in hours that either

a sinter machine or blast furnace is in operation.

Plant roadway means any area of a primary lead smelter that is

subject to vehicle traffic, including traffic by fork lifts, front-end

loaders, or vehicles carrying ore concentrates or cast lead ingots.

Excluded from this definition are employee and visitor parking areas,

provided they are not subject to traffic by vehicles carrying lead-

bearing materials.

Primary lead smelter means any facility engaged in the production

of lead metal from lead sulfide ore concentrates through the use of

pyrometallurgical techniques.

Process fugitive source means a source of hazardous air pollutant

emissions at a primary lead smelter that is associated with lead

smelting or refining but is not the primary exhaust stream and is not a

fugitive dust source. Process fugitive sources include sinter machine

charging locations, sinter machine discharge locations, sinter crushing

and sizing equipment, furnace charging locations, furnace taps,

drossing kettles, and refining kettles.

Refining and casting area means any area of a primary lead smelter

in which drossing or refining operations occur, or casting operations

occur.

Shutdown means the cessation of operation of an affected source for

any purpose.

Sinter machine means any device in which a lead sulfide ore

concentrate charge is heated in the presence of air to eliminate sulfur

contained in the charge and to agglomerate the charge into a hard

porous mass called sinter.

Sinter machine area means any area of a primary lead smelter where

a sinter machine, or sinter crushing and sizing equipment is located.

Sinter machine discharge end means the physical opening at the end

of a sinter machine where the sinter exits the sinter machine.

[[Page 30205]]

Startup means the setting in operation of an affected source for

any purpose.

Tapping location means the opening thru which lead and slag are

removed from the furnace.

Sec. 63.1543 Standards for process and process fugitive sources.

(a) No owner or operator of any existing, new, or reconstructed

primary lead smelter shall discharge or cause to be discharged into the

atmosphere lead compounds in excess of 500 grams of lead per megagram

of lead metal produced (1.0 pounds of lead per ton of lead metal

produced) from the aggregation of emissions discharged from the air

pollution control devices used to control emissions from the sources

listed in paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(9) of this section.

(1) Sinter machine;

(2) Blast furnace;

(3) Dross furnace;

(4) Dross furnace charging location;

(5) Blast furnace and dross furnace tapping location;

(6) Sinter machine charging location;

(7) Sinter machine discharge end;

(8) Sinter crushing and sizing equipment; and

(9) Sinter machine area.

(b) The process fugitive sources listed in paragraphs (a)(4)

through (a)(8) of this section shall be equipped with a hood and shall

be ventilated to a baghouse or equivalent control device. The hood

design and ventilation rate shall be consistent with American

Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists recommended practices.

(c) The sinter machine area shall be enclosed in a building that is

ventilated to a baghouse or equivalent control device at a rate that

maintains a positive in-draft through any doorway opening.

(d) Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section, following

the initial test to demonstrate compliance with paragraph (a) of this

section, the owner or operator of a primary lead smelter shall conduct

a compliance test for lead compounds on an annual basis (no later than

12 calendar months following any previous compliance test).

(e) If the three most recent compliance tests demonstrate

compliance with the emission limit specified in paragraph (a) of this

section, the owner or operator of a primary lead smelter shall be

allowed up to 24 calendar months from the last compliance test to

conduct the next compliance test for lead compounds.

(f) The owner or operator of a primary lead smelter shall maintain

and operate each baghouse used to control emissions from the sources

listed in paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(9) of this section such that

the alarm on a bag leak detection system required under

Sec. 63.1547(c)(9) does not sound for more than five percent of the

total operating time in a 6-month reporting period.

(g) The owner or operator of a primary lead smelter shall record

the date and time of a bag leak detection system alarm and initiate

procedures to determine the cause of the alarm according to the

corrective action plan required under Sec. 63.1547(c)(9) within 1 hour

of the alarm. The cause of the alarm shall be corrected as soon as

practicable.

Sec. 63.1544 Standards for fugitive dust sources.

(a) Each owner or operator of a primary lead smelter shall prepare,

and at all times operate according to, a standard operating procedures

manual that describes in detail the measures that will be put in place

to control fugitive dust emissions from the sources listed in

paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(5) of this section:

(1) Plant roadways;

(2) Material storage and handling area(s);

(3) Sinter machine area(s);

(4) Furnace area(s); and

(5) Refining and casting area(s).

(b) Not withstanding paragraph (c) of this section, the standard

operating procedures manual shall be submitted to the Administrator or

delegated authority for review and approval.

(c) Existing manuals that describe the measures in place to control

fugitive dust sources required as part of a State implementation plan

for lead shall satisfy the requirements of paragraph (a) of this

section provided they address the sources listed in paragraphs (a)(1)

through (a)(5) of this section.

Sec. 63.1545 Compliance dates.

(a) Each owner or operator of an existing primary lead smelter

shall achieve compliance with the requirements of this subpart no later

than May 4, 2001.

(b) Each owner or operator of a primary lead smelter that commences

construction or reconstruction after April 17, 1998, shall achieve

compliance with the requirements of this subpart by June 4, 1999 or

upon startup of operations, whichever is later.

Sec. 63.1546 Test methods.

(a) The following procedure shall be used to determine compliance

with the emissions standard for lead compounds under Sec. 63.1543(a):

(1) The lead compound emission rate, in units of grams of lead per

hour, for each source listed in Sec. 63.1543(a)(1) through

Sec. 63.1543(a)(9) shall be determined according to the following test

methods in appendix A of part 60 of this chapter:

(i) Method 1 shall be used to select the sampling port location and

the number of traverse points.

(ii) Method 2 shall be used to measure volumetric flow rate.

(iii) Method 3 shall be used for gas analysis.

(iv) Method 4 shall be used to determine moisture content of the

stack gas

(v) Method 12 shall be used to measure the lead emission rate of

the stack gas. The minimum sample volume shall be 0.85 dry standard

cubic meters (30 dry standard cubic feet) and the minimum sampling time

shall be 60 minutes for each run. Three runs shall be performed and the

average of the three runs shall be used to determine compliance.

(2) The lead production rate, in units of megagrams per hour, shall

be determined based on production data for the previous 12 calendar

months according to the procedures detailed in paragraphs (a)(2)(i)

through (a)(2)(v) of this section:

(i) Total lead products production multiplied by the fractional

lead content shall be determined in units of megragrams.

(ii) Total copper matte production multiplied by the fractional

lead content shall be determined in units of megragrams.

(iii) Total copper speiss production multiplied by the fractional

lead content shall be determined in units of megragrams.

(iv) Total lead production shall be determined by summing the

values obtained in paragraphs (a)(2)(i) through (a)(2)(iii) of this

section.

(v) The lead production rate, in units of megragrams per hours,

shall be calculated based on the total lead production, as determined

in accordance with paragraph (a)(2)(iv) of this section, divided by the

total plant operating time, in hours, for the previous 12 months.

(3) The sum of lead compound emission rates for the sources in

Sec. 63.1543(a)((1) through (a)(9), as determined in accordance with

paragraph (a)(1) of this section, shall be divided by the lead

production rate, as determined in accordance with paragraph (a)(2)(v)

of this section, to obtain a production-based, lead compound emission

rate in units of grams of lead per megagram of lead metal produced. The

production-based, lead compound emission rate shall be used to

determine compliance with the

[[Page 30206]]

emissions standard for lead compounds under Sec. 63.1543(a).

(b) Owner and operators shall perform an initial compliance test to

demonstrate compliance with the sinter building in-draft requirements

of Sec. 63.1543(c) at each doorway opening in accordance with

paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(4) of this section.

(1) Use a propeller anemometer or equivalent device.

(2) Determine doorway in-draft by placing the anemometer in the

plane of the doorway opening near its center.

(3) Determine doorway in-draft for each doorway that is open during

normal operation with all remaining doorways in their customary

position during normal operation.

(4) Do not determine doorway in-draft when ambient wind speed

exceeds 2 meters per second.

Sec. 63.1547 Monitoring requirements.

(a) Owners and operators of primary lead smelters shall prepare,

and at all times operate according to, a standard operating procedures

manual that describes in detail the procedures for inspection,

maintenance, and bag leak detection and corrective action for all

baghouses that are used to control process, process fugitive, or

fugitive dust emissions from any source subject to the lead emission

standards in Secs. 63.1543 and 63.1544, including those used to control

emissions from general ventilation systems.

(b) The standard operating procedures manual for baghouses required

by paragraph (a) of this section shall be submitted to the

Administrator or delegated authority for review and approval.

(c) The procedures specified in the standard operating procedures

manual for inspections and routine maintenance shall, at a minimum,

include the requirements of paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(9) of this

section.

(1) Daily monitoring of pressure drop across each baghouse cell to

ensure pressure drop is within the normal operating range identified in

the standard operating procedures manual.

(2) Weekly confirmation that dust is being removed from hoppers

through visual inspection or equivalent means of ensuring the proper

functioning of removal mechanisms.

(3) Daily check of compressed air supply for pulse-jet baghouses.

(4) An appropriate methodology for monitoring cleaning cycles to

ensure proper operation.

(5) Monthly check of bag cleaning mechanisms for proper functioning

through visual inspection or equivalent means.

(6) Quarterly visual check of bag tension on reverse air and

shaker-type baghouses to ensure that bags are not kinked (kneed or

bent) or laying on their sides. Such checks are not required for

shaker-type baghouses using self-tensioning (spring loaded) devices.

(7) Quarterly confirmation of the physical integrity of the

baghouse through visual inspection of the baghouse interior for air

leaks.

(8) Quarterly inspection of fans for wear, material buildup, and

corrosion through visual inspection, vibration detectors, or equivalent

means.

(9) Except as provided in paragraph (h) of this section, continuous

operation of a bag leak detection system.

(d) The procedures specified in the standard operating procedures

manual for maintenance shall, at a minimum, include a preventative

maintenance schedule that is consistent with the baghouse

manufacturer's instructions for routine and long-term maintenance.

(e) The bag leak detection system required by paragraph (c)(9) of

this section shall meet the specifications and requirements of (e)(1)

through (e)(8) of this section.

(1) The bag leak detection system must be certified by the

manufacturer to be capable of detecting particulate matter emissions at

concentrations of 10 milligram per actual cubic meter (0.0044 grains

per actual cubic foot) or less.

(2) The bag leak detection system sensor must provide output of

relative particulate matter loadings, and the owner or operator shall

continuously record the output from the bag leak detection system.

(3) The bag leak detection system must be equipped with an alarm

system that will sound when an increase in relative particulate loading

is detected over a preset level, and the alarm must be located such

that it can be heard by the appropriate plant personnel.

(4) Each bag leak detection system that works based on the

triboelectric effect shall be installed, calibrated, and maintained in

a manner consistent with guidance provided in the U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency guidance document ``Fabric Filter Bag Leak Detection

Guidance'' (EPA-454/R-98-015). Other bag leak detection systems shall

be installed, calibrated, and maintained in a manner consistent with

the manufacturer's written specifications and recommendations.

(5) The initial adjustment of the system shall, at a minimum,

consist of establishing the baseline output by adjusting the

sensitivity (range) and the averaging period of the device, and

establishing the alarm set points and the alarm delay time.

(6) Following initial adjustment, the owner or operator shall not

adjust the sensitivity or range, averaging period, alarm set points, or

alarm delay time, except as detailed in the approved SOP required under

paragraph (a) of this section. In no event shall the sensitivity be

increased by more than 100 percent or decreased more than 50 percent

over a 365-day period unless a responsible official certifies that the

baghouse has been inspected and found to be in good operating

condition.

(7) For negative pressure, induced air baghouses, and positive

pressure baghouses that are discharged to the atmosphere through a

stack, the bag leak detector must be installed downstream of the

baghouse and upstream of any wet acid gas scrubber.

(8) Where multiple detectors are required, the system's

instrumentation and alarm may be shared among detectors.

(f) The standard operating procedures manual required by paragraph

(a) of this section shall include a corrective action plan that

specifies the procedures to be followed in the event of a bag leak

detection system alarm. The corrective action plan shall include, at a

minimum, procedures to be used to determine the cause of an alarm, as

well as actions to be taken to minimize emissions, which may include,

but are not limited to, the following.

(1) Inspecting the baghouse for air leaks, torn or broken bags or

filter media, or any other condition that may cause an increase in

emissions.

(2) Sealing off defective bags or filter media.

(3) Replacing defective bags or filter media, or otherwise

repairing the control device.

(4) Sealing off a defective baghouse compartment.

(5) Cleaning the bag leak detection system probe, or otherwise

repairing the bag leak detection system.

(6) Shutting down the process producing the particulate emissions.

(g) The percentage of total operating time the alarm on the bag

leak detection system sounds in a 6-month reporting period shall be

calculated in order to determine compliance with the five percent

operating limit in Sec. 63.1543(f). The percentage of time the alarm on

the bag leak detection system sounds shall be determined according to

paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(5) of this section.

(1) Alarms that occur due solely to a malfunction of the bag leak

detection system shall not be included in the calculation.

(2) Alarms that occur during startup, shutdown, or malfunction

shall not be included in the calculation if the

[[Page 30207]]

condition is described in the startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan

and the owner or operator follows all the procedures in the plan

defined for this condition.

(3) For each alarm where the owner or operator initiates procedures

to determine the cause of an alarm within 1 hour of the alarm, 1 hour

of alarm time shall be counted.

(4) For each alarm where the owner or operator does not initiate

procedures to determine the cause of the alarm within 1 hour of the

alarm, alarm time will be counted as the actual amount of time taken by

the owner or operator to initiate procedures to determine the cause of

the alarm.

(5) The percentage of time the alarm on the bag leak detection

system sounds shall be calculated as the ratio of the sum of alarm

times to the total operating time multiplied by 100.

(h) Baghouses equipped with HEPA filters as a secondary filter used

to control process or process fugitive sources subject to the lead

emission standards in Sec. 63.1543 are exempt from the requirement in

Sec. 63.1543(c)(9) to be equipped with a bag leak detector. The owner

or operator of an affected source that uses a HEPA filter shall monitor

and record the pressure drop across the HEPA filter system daily. If

the pressure drop is outside the limit(s) specified by the filter

manufacturer, the owner or operator must take appropriate corrective

measures, which may include, but not be limited to, the following:

(1) Inspecting the filter and filter housing for air leaks and torn

or broken filters.

(2) Replacing defective filter media, or otherwise repairing the

control device.

(3) Sealing off a defective control device by routing air to other

control devices.

(4) Shutting down the process producing the particulate emissions.

(i) Owners and operators shall monitor sinter machine building in-

draft to demonstrate continued compliance with the operating standard

specified in Sec. 63.1543(c) in accordance with either paragraph

(i)(1), (i)(2), or (i)(3) of this section.

(1) Owners and operators shall check and record on a daily basis

doorway in-draft at each doorway in accordance with the methodology

specified in Sec. 63.1546(b).

(2) Owners and operators shall establish and maintain baseline

ventilation parameters which result in a positive in-draft according to

paragraphs (i)(2)(i) through (i)(2)(iv) of this section.

(i) Owners and operators shall install, calibrate, maintain, and

operate a monitoring device that continuously records the actual

volumetric flow rate through each separately ducted hood; or install,

calibrate, maintain, and operate a monitoring device that continuously

records the volumetric flow rate at the control device inlet of each

exhaust system ventilating the building. The flow rate monitoring

device(s) can be installed in any location in the exhaust duct such

that reproducible flow rate monitoring will result. The flow rate

monitoring device(s) shall have an accuracy of plus or minus 10 percent

over its normal operating range and shall be calibrated according to

manufacturer's instructions.

(ii) During the initial demonstration of sinter building in-draft,

and at any time the owner or operator wishes to re-establish the

baseline ventilation parameters, the owner or operator shall

continuously record the volumetric flow rate through each separately

ducted hood, or continuously record the volumetric flow rate at the

control device inlet of each exhaust system ventilating the building

and record exhaust system damper positions. The owner or operator shall

determine the average volumetric flow rate(s) corresponding to the

period of time the in-draft compliance determinations are being

conducted.

(iii) The owner or operator shall maintain the volumetric flow

rate(s) at or above the value(s) established during the most recent in-

draft determination at all times the sinter machine is in operation.

Volumetric flow rate(s) shall be calculated as a 15-minute average.

(iv) If the volumetric flow rate is monitored at the control device

inlet, the owner or operator shall check and record damper positions

daily to ensure they are in the positions they were in during the most

recent in-draft determination.

(3) An owner or operator may request an alternative monitoring

method by following the procedures and requirements in Sec. 63.8(f) of

the General Provisions.

Sec. 63.1548 Notification requirements.

(a) The owner or operator of a primary lead smelter shall comply

with all of the notification requirements of Sec. 63.9 of subpart A,

General Provisions.

(b) The owner or operator of a primary lead smelter shall submit

the fugitive dust control standard operating procedures manual required

under Sec. 63.1544(a) and the standard operating procedures manual for

baghouses required under Sec. 63.1547(a) to the Administrator or

delegated authority along with a notification that the smelter is

seeking review and approval of these plans and procedures. Owners or

operators of existing primary lead smelters shall submit this

notification no later than November 6, 2000. The owner or operator of a

primary lead smelter that commences construction or reconstruction

after April 17, 1998, shall submit this notification no later than 180

days before startup of the constructed or reconstructed primary lead

smelter, but no sooner than September 2, 1999.

Sec. 63.1549 Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.

(a) The owner or operator of a primary lead smelter shall comply

with all of the recordkeeping requirements of Sec. 63.10 of subpart A,

General Provisions.

(b) In addition to the general records required by paragraph (a) of

this section, each owner or operator of a primary lead smelter shall

maintain for a period of 5 years, records of the information listed in

paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(8) of this section.

(1) Production records of the weight and lead content of lead

products, copper matte, and copper speiss.

(2) Records of the bag leak detection system output.

(3) An identification of the date and time of all bag leak

detection system alarms, the time that procedures to determine the

cause of the alarm were initiated, the cause of the alarm, an

explanation of the actions taken, and the date and time the cause of

the alarm was corrected.

(4) Any recordkeeping required as part of the practices described

in the standard operating procedures manual required under

Sec. 63.1544(a) for the control of fugitive dust emissions.

(5) Any recorkeeping required as part of the practices described in

the standard operating procedures manual for baghouses required under

Sec. 63.1547(a).

(6) If an owner or operator chooses to demonstrate continuous

compliance with the sinter building in-draft requirement under

Sec. 63.1543(c) by employing the method allowed in Sec. 63.1546(i)(1),

the records of the daily doorway in-draft checks, an identification of

the periods when there was not a positive in-draft, and an explanation

of the corrective actions taken.

(7) If an owner or operator chooses to demonstrate continuous

compliance with the sinter building in-draft requirement under

Sec. 63.1543(c) by employing the method allowed in Sec. 63.1546(i)(2),

the records of the output from the continuous volumetric flow

monitor(s), an identification of the periods when the 15-minute

volumetric

[[Page 30208]]

flow rate dropped below the minimum established during the most recent

in-draft determination, and an explanation of the corrective actions

taken.

(8) If an owner or operator chooses to demonstrate continuous

compliance with the sinter building in-draft requirement under

Sec. 63.1543(c) by employing the method allowed in Sec. 63.1546(i)(2),

and volumetric flow rate is monitored at the baghouse inlet, records of

the daily checks of damper positions, an identification of the days

that the damper positions were not in the positions established during

the most recent in-draft determination, and an explanation of the

corrective actions taken.

(c) Records for the most recent 2 years of operation must be

maintained on site. Records for the previous 3 years may be maintained

off site.

(d) The owner or operator of a primary lead smelter shall comply

with all of the reporting requirements of Sec. 63.10 of subpart A,

General Provisions.

(e) In addition to the information required under Sec. 63.10 of the

General Provisions, the owner or operator shall provide semi-annual

reports containing the information specified in paragraphs (e)(1)

through (e)(7) of this section to the Administrator or designated

authority.

(1) The reports shall include records of all alarms from the bag

leak detection system specified in Sec. 63.1547(e).

(2) The reports shall include a description of the actions taken

following each bag leak detection system alarm pursuant to

Sec. 63.1547(f).

(3) The reports shall include a calculation of the percentage of

time the alarm on the bag leak detection system sounded during the

reporting period pursuant to Sec. 63.1547(g).

(4) If an owner or operator chooses to demonstrate continuous

compliance with the sinter building in-draft requirement under

Sec. 63.1543(c) by employing the method allowed in Sec. 63.1546(i)(1),

the reports shall contain an identification of the periods when there

was not a positive in-draft, and an explanation of the corrective

actions taken.

(5) If an owner or operator chooses to demonstrate continuous

compliance with the sinter building in-draft requirement under

Sec. 63.1543(c) by employing the method allowed in Sec. 63.1546(i)(2),

the reports shall contain an identification of the periods when the 15-

minute volumetric flow rate(s) dropped below the minimum established

during the most recent in-draft determination, and an explanation of

the corrective actions taken.

(6) If an owner or operator chooses to demonstrate continuous

compliance with the sinter building in-draft requirement under

Sec. 63.1543(c) by employing the method allowed in Sec. 63.1546(i)(2),

and volumetric flow rate is monitored at the baghouse inlet, the

reports shall contain an identification of the days that the damper

positions were not in the positions established during the most recent

in-draft determination, and an explanation of the corrective actions

taken.

(7) The reports shall contain a summary of the records maintained

as part of the practices described in the standard operating procedures

manual for baghouses required under Sec. 63.1547(a), including an

explanation of the periods when the procedures were not followed and

the corrective actions taken.

(8) The reports shall contain a summary of the fugitive dust

control measures performed during the required reporting period,

including an explanation of any periods when the procedures outlined in

the standard operating procedures manual required by Sec. 63.1544(a)

were not followed and the corrective actions taken. The reports shall

not contain copies of the daily records required to demonstrate

compliance with the requirements of the standard operating procedures

manuals required under Secs. 63.1544(a) and Sec. 63.1547(a).

Sec. 63.1550 Delegation of authority

(a) In delegating implementation and enforcement authority to a

State under section 112(1) of the act, the authorities contained in

paragraph (b) of this section shall be retained by the Administrator

and not transferred to a State.

(b) Authorities which will not be delegated to States: no

restrictions.

Table 1 of Subpart TTT--General Provisions Applicability to Subpart TTT

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

Applies to subpart

Reference TTT Comment

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

Sec. 63.1................... Yes

Sec. 63.2................... Yes

Sec. 63.3................... Yes

Sec. 63.4................... Yes

Sec. 63.5................... Yes

Sec. 63.6(a), (b), (c), (e), Yes

(f), (g), (i) and (j).

Sec. 63.6(d) and (h)........ No No opacity limits in

rule.

Sec. 63.7................... Yes

Sec. 63.8................... Yes

Sec. 63.9 (a), (b), (c), Yes

(d), (e), (g), (h)(1)

through (3), (h)(5) and (6),

(i) and (j).

Sec. 63.9(f) and (h)(4)..... No No opacity or visible

emission limits in

rule.

Sec. 63.10.................. Yes

Sec. 63.11.................. No Flares will not be

used to comply with

the emission limits.

Sec. 63.12 through 63.15.... Yes

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

[FR Doc. 99-12757 Filed 6-3-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-M