[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 29 (Friday, February 12, 1999)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 7149-7158]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-3531]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[FRL-6301-1]
RIN 2060-AE08


National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for 
Source Categories: Ferroalloys Production, Mineral Wool Production, 
Primary Lead Smelting, and Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing; Supplement To 
Proposed Rules

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Supplement to proposed rules; Notice of public hearing.

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

SUMMARY: Today's proposal would alter the national emission standards 
for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) previously proposed for the 
source categories of ferroalloys production, mineral wool production, 
primary lead smelting, and wool fiberglass manufacturing. Today's 
action proposes changes to the approach for determining compliance for 
owners or operators of fabric filters (i.e., baghouses) with bag leak 
detection systems, proposes changes to the approach for determining 
compliance through the use of defined monitoring parameters for air 
pollution control equipment and/or manufacturing processes, and 
proposes to add performance evaluation requirements for temperature 
monitoring devices. To determine which of these proposed changes would 
affect specific source categories, see the appropriate Summary of 
Proposed Changes section for each source category.
    Under section 112(j)(2) of the Clean Air Act (Act), the ``hammer'' 
date is the date by which affected facilities will be required to apply 
for a case-by-case emission limitation if the EPA has not promulgated a 
generally applicable emission standard. For these source categories, 
that date is May 15, 1999. The comment period for this action is 30 
days. If a public hearing is held, the comment period for this action 
will be extended to 45 days. The comment period for this action is 
shorter than the normal comment period of 60 days so that these NESHAP 
may be promulgated by the May 15, 1999 ``hammer'' date.

DATES: Comments are requested only on information presented in this 
action. Comments on today's supplementary proposal must be received on 
or before March 15, 1999, unless a request to speak at a public hearing 
is received by February 22, 1999. If a hearing is held, written 
comments must be received by March 29, 1999. If held, the hearing will 
take place at 10 a.m. on February 26, 1999.

ADDRESSES: Comments. Comments should be submitted (in duplicate) to the 
docket for the source category being addressed, Air and Radiation 
Docket and Information Center (6102), U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460. Docket numbers are as 
follows: ferroalloys production--Docket No. A-92-59; mineral wool 
production--Docket No. A-95-33; primary lead smelting--Docket No. A-97-
33; and wool fiberglass manufacturing--Docket No. A-95-24. The EPA 
requests that a separate copy of the comments also be sent to the 
appropriate contact person for the specific source category listed 
below in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Comments and data 
may also be submitted electronically by following the instructions 
provided in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section. No confidential 
business information should be submitted through electronic mail.
    Docket. The dockets, which contain supporting information used in 
developing the NESHAP, are located at the above address in Room M-1500, 
Waterside Mall (ground floor), and may be inspected from 8:00 a.m. to 
5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. Copies of 
this information may be obtained by request from the Air Docket by 
calling (202) 260-7548. A reasonable fee may be charged for copying 
docket materials.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ferroalloys production. Mr. Conrad 
Chin, Metals Group, Emission Standards Division (MD-13), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 
27711, telephone number (919)541-1512, electronic mail address 
``[email protected]''.
    Mineral wool production. Ms. Mary Johnson, Minerals and Inorganic 
Chemicals Group, Emission Standards Division (MD-13), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 
27711, telephone number (919)541-5025, electronic mail address 
``[email protected]''.
    Primary lead smelting. Mr. Kevin Cavender, Metals Group, Emission 
Standards Division (MD-13), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, telephone number 
(919)541-2364, electronic mail address 
``[email protected]''.

[[Page 7150]]

    Wool fiberglass manufacturing. Mr. Bill Neuffer, Minerals and 
Inorganic Chemicals Group, Emission Standards Division (MD-13), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 
27711, telephone number (919)541-5435, electronic mail address 
``[email protected]''.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Technology Transfer Network. In addition to 
being available in the dockets, an electronic copy of today's notice is 
available through the Technology Transfer Network (TTN). Following 
proposal, a copy of the supplement to the proposed rules, including the 
proposed regulatory text, will be posted at the TTN's policy and 
guidance page for newly proposed or promulgated rules (http://
www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t3pfpr.html). The TTN provides information and 
technology exchange in various areas of air pollution control. If more 
information regarding the TTN is needed, call the TTN HELP line at 
(919) 541-5384.
    Public hearing. If anyone contacts the EPA requesting to speak at a 
public hearing by the required date (see DATES), a public hearing will 
be held at the EPA's Office of Administration Auditorium, 79 T.W. 
Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. Persons 
interested in attending the hearing or in making an oral presentation 
should notify Ms. Mary Hinson, Metals Group, Emission Standards 
Division (MD-13), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research 
Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, telephone number (919)541-5601 by 
February 22, 1999.
    Electronic filing. Electronic comments can be sent directly to the 
EPA at ``[email protected]''. Electronic comments and data 
must be submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the use of special 
characters and any form of encryption. Comments and data will also be 
accepted on disks in WordPerfect 5.1 or 6.1 file format or ASCII file 
format. All comments and data in electronic form must be identified by 
the appropriate docket number. Electronic comments may be filed online 
at many Federal Depository Libraries.
    Confidential Business Information. Commenters wishing to submit 
proprietary information for consideration should clearly distinguish 
such information from other comments and clearly label it 
``Confidential Business Information.'' Submissions containing such 
proprietary information should be sent directly to the appropriate 
contact person, c/o Ms. Melva Toomer, Document Control Officer, OAQPS/
PRRMS (MD-11), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle 
Park, NC 27711, and not to the public docket, to ensure that 
proprietary information is not inadvertently placed in the docket. 
Information covered by such claim of confidentiality will be disclosed 
by the EPA only to the extent allowed and by the procedures set forth 
in 40 CFR part 2. If no claim of confidentiality accompanies a 
submission when it is received by the EPA, the submission may be made 
available to the public without further notice to the commenter.
    Regulated entities. Categories and entities potentially regulated 
by this action include:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Examples of regulated
                 Category                             entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry..................................  Ferroalloys production
                                             facilities (SIC 3313).
Industry..................................  Mineral wool production
                                             facilities (SIC 3296).
Industry..................................  Primary lead smelting
                                             facilities (SIC 3339).
Industry..................................  Wool fiberglass
                                             manufacturing facilities
                                             (SIC 3296).
Federal government........................  None.
State/local/tribal government.............  None.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by final 
action on this supplemental proposal. To determine whether your 
facility may be regulated by final action on this supplement to the 
proposed rules, you should carefully examine the applicability criteria 
in the proposed rule.
    Outline. The information in this preamble is organized as follows:

I. Statutory Authority
II. Background
    A. Ferroalloys Production NESHAP
    B. Mineral Wool Production NESHAP
    C. Primary Lead Smelting NESHAP
    D. Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing NESHAP
III. Summary of Proposed Changes
    A. Ferroalloys Production NESHAP
    B. Mineral Wool Production NESHAP
    C. Primary Lead Smelting NESHAP
    D. Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing NESHAP
IV. Rationale for Changes to the Proposed Rules
V. Administrative Requirements
    A. Docket
    B. Public Hearing
    C. Executive Order 12866--Regulatory Planning and Review
    D. Executive Order 12875--Enhancing the Intergovernmental 
Partnership
    E. Executive Order 13084--Consultation and Coordination with 
Indian Tribal Governments
    F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    G. Regulatory Flexibility
    H. Paperwork Reduction Act
    I. Pollution Prevention Act
    J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    K. Executive Order 13045--Protection of Children from 
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
    L. Clean Air Act

I. Statutory Authority

    The statutory authority for this supplement to the proposed rules 
is provided by sections 101, 112, 114, 116, and 301 of the Act, as 
amended (42 U.S.C. 7401, 7412, 7414, 7416, and 7601). This proposed 
rulemaking is also subject to section 307(d) of the Act (42 U.S.C. 
7407(d)).

II. Background

A. Ferroalloys Production NESHAP

    The proposed NESHAP for ferroalloys production was published in the 
Federal Register on August 4, 1998 (63 FR 41508). Only two existing 
facilities would be affected by the NESHAP, a producer of 
ferromagnesium alloys and a producer of ferronickel alloys. The 
proposed NESHAP would establish emission limits for particulate 
emissions from the two regulated facilities. The proposal requires 
owners and operators to develop and operate according to a Standard 
Operating Procedures (SOP) Manual for the operation and maintenance of 
baghouses. The proposal also requires owners and operators of new or 
reconstructed ferroalloys production facilities to install and operate 
a bag leak detection system as a part of the SOP for baghouses.

B. Mineral Wool Production NESHAP

    The EPA proposed NESHAP for new and existing sources in mineral 
wool production facilities on May 8, 1997 (62 FR 25370). The proposed 
rule would establish emission limits for particulate matter (PM) 
emissions from existing cupolas. In addition to PM, emissions of carbon 
monoxide (CO) would be regulated for new cupolas. Emissions of 
formaldehyde would be regulated for new and existing curing ovens. 
Particulate matter would serve as a surrogate for metal hazardous air 
pollutants (HAPs) and CO would be a surrogate for carbonyl sulfide 
(COS). As well as being a hazardous air pollutant (HAP), formaldehyde 
would serve as a surrogate for the HAP phenol. In addition to emission 
limits, the proposed rule specifies requirements for air pollution 
control equipment and/or manufacturing processes that would be

[[Page 7151]]

enforceable and would be used to determine compliance with the 
applicable emission standards. The proposed rule requires that each 
affected source perform an initial compliance test to demonstrate 
compliance with the emission limits. The initial compliance tests would 
also be used to establish levels of control device parameters and 
process parameters used to monitor compliance. The proposed rule 
requires that these control device parameters and process parameters be 
monitored on a regular basis in order to determine that the control 
device or process equipment is operating properly. The proposed rule 
also specifies requirements for notifications, reporting, and 
recordkeeping.

C. Primary Lead Smelting NESHAP

    The proposed NESHAP for primary lead smelting was published in the 
Federal Register on April 17, 1998 (63 FR 19200). Three existing 
primary lead facilities would be affected by the proposed rule. The 
proposal would establish a ``plant wide'' emission limit of 380 grams 
per megagram of lead produced from the aggregation of emissions 
discharged from eight identified process and process fugitive sources. 
The proposal also requires owners and operators of primary lead 
smelters to develop and operate according to SOP Manuals for the 
control of fugitive dust sources and for the operation and maintenance 
of baghouses. The SOP for baghouses requires owners and operators of 
primary lead smelters to install and operate bag leak detection 
systems.

D. Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing NESHAP

    On March 31, 1997 (62 FR 15228), the EPA proposed the NESHAP for 
new and existing sources in wool fiberglass manufacturing facilities. 
The proposed rule would establish emission limits for PM emissions from 
glass melting furnaces located at wool fiberglass manufacturing plants 
and formaldehyde emission limits for affected rotary spin and flame 
attenuation manufacturing lines. The PM emission limits would serve as 
a surrogate for metal HAPs (arsenic, chromium, and lead compounds). 
Formaldehyde is a HAP and would serve as a surrogate for the HAPs 
phenol and methanol. The proposed rule would require that each affected 
source perform an initial compliance test to demonstrate compliance 
with the emission limits. For air pollution control devices and process 
equipment used to comply with the emission limits, the initial 
compliance tests would also be used to establish levels of control 
device parameters and process parameters used to monitor compliance. 
The proposed rule would require that these control device parameters 
and process parameters be monitored on a regular basis in order to 
determine that the control device or process equipment is operating 
properly. The proposed rule would also specify requirements for 
notifications, reporting, and recordkeeping.

III. Summary of Proposed Changes

A. Ferroalloys Production NESHAP

    This supplement to the proposed rule would enhance the requirements 
regarding bag leak detection systems in Secs. 63.1625 and 63.1655 of 
the proposed rule to include an enforceable operating limit, such that 
the owner or operator would be in violation of the standard's operating 
limit if the alarm on a bag leak detection system sounds for more than 
five percent of the total operating time in each six-month reporting 
period. This supplementary proposal also specifies that each time the 
alarm sounds and the owner or operator initiates corrective actions 
within one hour of the alarm, one hour of alarm time would be counted. 
If the owner or operator takes longer than one hour to initiate 
corrective actions, the EPA proposes that alarm time would be counted 
as the actual amount of time taken by the owner or operator to initiate 
corrective actions. If inspection of the fabric filter system 
demonstrates that no corrective actions are necessary, no alarm time 
would be counted. This supplementary proposal also proposes that owners 
and operators be required to continuously record the output from a bag 
leak detection system and to maintain these records as specified in 
Sec. 63.10 of the general provisions in subpart A of this part.

B. Mineral Wool Production NESHAP

    This supplement to the proposed rule would enhance the requirements 
regarding bag leak detection systems in Sec. 63.1178 of the proposed 
rule to include an enforceable operating limit, such that the owner or 
operator would be in violation of the standard's operating limit if the 
alarm on a bag leak detection system sounds for more than five percent 
of the total operating time in each six-month reporting period. Section 
63.1178(b)(9) of the proposed rule specifies that a quality improvement 
plan (QIP) be developed and implemented when the alarm on a bag leak 
detection system sounds for more than five percent of the total 
operating time in each six-month reporting period. The EPA determined 
that this requirement is not necessary because the proposed enforceable 
operating limit would address the EPA's concerns that the fabric filter 
be properly operated and maintained, and would help assure that the 
emission limit would be met. Accordingly, this supplement to the 
proposed rule would delete the proposed requirement for a QIP.
    This supplement to the proposed rule also specifies that each time 
the alarm sounds and the owner or operator initiates corrective actions 
within one hour of the alarm, one hour of alarm time would be counted. 
If the owner or operator takes longer than one hour to initiate 
corrective actions, the EPA proposes that alarm time would be counted 
as the actual amount of time taken by the owner or operator to initiate 
corrective actions. If inspection of the fabric filter system 
demonstrates that no corrective actions are necessary, no alarm time 
would be counted. This supplementary proposal also proposes that owners 
and operators be required to continuously record the output from a bag 
leak detection system and to maintain these records as specified in 
Sec. 63.10 of the general provisions in subpart A of this part.
    This supplement to the proposed rule also would require the owner 
or operator to conduct a performance evaluation for each temperature 
monitoring device that is used to measure and record the operating 
temperature of an incinerator that is used to control formaldehyde 
emissions from new and existing curing ovens and CO emissions from new 
cupolas according to Sec. 63.8(e) of the general provisions in subpart 
A of this part. The following requirements are proposed:
    (1) The definitions, installation specifications, test procedures, 
and data reduction procedures for determining calibration drift, 
relative accuracy, and reporting described in sections 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 
9, and 10 of Performance Specification 2 of 40 CFR part 60 appendix B 
must be used to conduct the performance evaluation;
    (2) the recorder response range must include zero and 1.5 times the 
average temperature level used to monitor compliance;
    (3) the monitoring system calibration drift must not exceed two 
percent of 1.5 times the average temperature level used to monitor 
compliance;
    (4) the monitoring system relative accuracy must not exceed 20 
percent; and
    (5) the reference method must be a National Institute of Standards 
and

[[Page 7152]]

Technology calibrated reference thermocouple-potentiometer system, or 
an alternate reference system that must be approved by the 
Administrator.
    The table that specifies which general provisions apply, or do not 
apply, to owners and operators subject to the requirements of the 
proposed NESHAP is proposed to be revised as necessary to reflect 
today's proposed changes.

C. Primary Lead Smelting NESHAP

    This supplement to the proposed rule would enhance the requirements 
regarding bag leak detection systems in Sec. 63.1547 of the proposed 
rule to include an enforceable operating limit, such that the owner or 
operator would be in violation of the standard's operating limit if the 
alarm on a bag leak detection system sounds for more than five percent 
of the total operating time in each six-month reporting period. This 
supplementary proposal also specifies that each time the alarm sounds 
and the owner or operator initiates corrective actions within one hour 
of the alarm, one hour of alarm time would be counted. If the owner or 
operator takes longer than one hour to initiate corrective actions, the 
EPA proposes that alarm time would be counted as the actual amount of 
time taken by the owner or operator to initiate corrective actions. If 
inspection of the fabric filter system demonstrates that no corrective 
actions are necessary, no alarm time would be counted. This 
supplementary proposal also proposes that owners and operators be 
required to continuously record the output from a bag leak detection 
system and to maintain these records as specified in Sec. 63.10 of the 
general provisions in subpart A of this part.

D. Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing NESHAP

    This supplement to the proposed rule would enhance the monitoring 
requirements in Sec. 63.1386 of the proposed rule for control devices 
and process modifications that are used to comply with the PM emission 
limits for affected glass-melting furnaces and the formaldehyde 
emission limits for affected rotary spin and flame attenuation 
manufacturing lines. The proposed standard contains a number of 
operating parameters, the monitoring of which helps ensure continuous 
compliance with the emission limits through continuous emissions 
reductions. Several parameters (those associated with electrostatic 
precipitators (ESPs), glass-melting furnaces, and scrubbers, for 
instance) must be monitored during and after performance tests, which 
demonstrate on a site-specific basis that the source is complying with 
the emission limits under certain operating parameter conditions. 
Today's action would impose an enforceable operating limit, such that 
the owner or operator would be in violation of the standard's operating 
limits if the parameter(s) being monitored for a control device or a 
process modification deviate from the established limits for more than 
five percent of the total operating time, instead of the proposed ten 
percent of the total operating time, during each six-month reporting 
period.
    Today's supplement to the proposed rule also changes the proposed 
monitoring requirements for cold top electric furnaces. This 
supplementary proposal would require the owner or operator to operate 
each cold top electric furnace such that the air temperature, at a 
location 46 to 61 centimeters (18 to 24 inches) above the molten glass 
surface, does not exceed 120 deg.C (250 deg.F). The proposal does not 
specify that the air temperature above the glass melt must be 
monitored. The EPA has determined that because, by definition, a cold 
top electric furnace is designed and operated so that the air 
temperature, at a location 46 to 61 centimeters (18 to 24 inches) above 
the molten glass surface, does not exceed 120 deg.C (250 deg.F), it is 
not necessary to allow cold top electric furnaces to exceed this 
temperature for up to five percent of the total operating time in each 
six-month reporting period. Based on this proposed revision, a 
definition for cold top electric furnace is proposed to be added. The 
supplement to the proposed rule specifically requires that the air 
temperature above the molten glass surface of a cold top electric 
furnace be monitored and that records be maintained. This would not 
impose additional burden on the owner or operator since the proposed 
rule includes a general requirement to record numerous operating 
parameter data. See proposed Sec. 63.1386(d).
    Today's action would also enhance the proposed rule's requirements 
regarding bag leak detection systems to include an enforceable 
operating limit, such that the owner or operator would be in violation 
of the standard's operating limit if the alarm on a bag leak detection 
system sounds for more than five percent of the total operating time in 
each six-month reporting period. The proposed rule specifies that a QIP 
be developed and implemented when the alarm on a bag leak detection 
system sounds for more than five percent of the total operating time in 
each six-month reporting period, or when a monitored control device or 
process parameter is outside the level established during the 
performance test for more than five percent of the total operating time 
in each six-month reporting period. The EPA determined that this 
requirement is not necessary because the proposed enforceable operating 
limits would address the EPA's concerns that control devices and 
manufacturing processes be properly operated and maintained, and would 
help assure that the emission limits would be met. Accordingly, this 
supplement to the proposed rule would delete the proposed requirement 
for a QIP.
    This supplement to the proposed rule also specifies that each time 
the alarm sounds and the owner or operator initiates corrective actions 
within one hour of the alarm, one hour of alarm time would be counted. 
If the owner or operator takes longer than one hour to initiate 
corrective actions, the EPA proposes that alarm time would be counted 
as the actual amount of time taken by the owner or operator to initiate 
corrective actions. If inspection of the fabric filter system 
demonstrates that no corrective actions are necessary, no alarm time 
would be counted. This supplementary proposal also proposes that owners 
and operators be required to continuously record the output from a bag 
leak detection system and to maintain these records as specified in 
Sec. 63.10 of the general provisions in subpart A of this part.
    This supplement to the proposed rule also would require the owner 
or operator to conduct a performance evaluation for each temperature 
monitoring device that is used to measure and record the operating 
temperature of an incinerator that is used to control formaldehyde 
emissions from rotary spin or flame attenuation manufacturing lines and 
for each temperature monitoring device that is used to measure and 
record the temperature above the molten glass surface in a cold top 
electric furnace according to Sec. 63.8(e) of the general provisions in 
subpart A of this part. The following requirements are proposed:
    (1) The definitions, installation specifications, test procedures, 
and data reduction procedures for determining calibration drift, 
relative accuracy, and reporting described in sections 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 
9, and 10 of Performance Specification 2 of 40 CFR part 60 appendix B 
must be used to conduct the performance evaluation;
    (2) the recorder response range must include zero and 1.5 times the 
average temperature level used to monitor compliance;
    (3) the monitoring system calibration drift must not exceed two 
percent of 1.5

[[Page 7153]]

times the average temperature level used to monitor compliance;
    (4) the monitoring system relative accuracy must not exceed 20 
percent; and
    (5) the reference method must be a National Institute of Standards 
and Technology calibrated reference thermocouple-potentiometer system, 
or an alternate reference system that must be approved by the 
Administrator.
    The table that specifies which general provisions apply, or do not 
apply, to owners and operators subject to the requirements of the 
proposed NESHAP is proposed to be revised as necessary to reflect 
today's proposed changes.

IV. Rationale for Changes to the Proposed Rules

    The EPA is proposing the changes to the monitoring provisions of 
the proposed rules in conformance with its policy governing monitoring. 
When determining appropriate monitoring options for the purpose of 
demonstrating continuous compliance, the EPA considers the availability 
and feasibility of the following monitoring options in a ``top-down'' 
fashion: (1) continuous emissions monitoring system (CEMS) for the HAP 
emitted, (2) CEMS for HAP surrogates, (3) monitoring control device or 
process operating parameters, and (4) monitoring work practices. Thus, 
where available and feasible, the EPA specifies CEMS for continuous 
compliance monitoring of HAPs. This option allows continuous compliance 
with the emission limit to be determined directly. Where a CEMS for the 
regulated HAP is not available or feasible, the EPA specifies 
monitoring a surrogate pollutant with a CEMS or monitoring a control 
device or process operating parameter that is relevant to compliance 
status. Only when these options are not feasible does the EPA specify 
the monitoring of work practice requirements as a means of ensuring 
continuous compliance.
    When compliance with a HAP or HAP surrogate emission limit cannot 
be directly monitored on a continuous basis, the rule generally will 
include a control device or process operating limit with which 
continuous compliance can be assessed. The operating limit becomes an 
enforceable limit of the rule. Section 302(k) of the Act specifically 
defines ``emission standard'' and ``emission limitation'' to include 
``any requirement relating to the operation or maintenance of a source 
to assure continuous emission reduction.'' Monitoring of a control 
device or process operating parameter with an enforceable operating 
limit helps assure continuous compliance with the emission limit 
through continuous emission reduction. The operating limit is a 
separately enforceable requirement of the rule and is not secondary to 
the emission limit.
    By requiring sources to continuously monitor their compliance with 
specific control device and process operating parameters and by making 
deviations from such operating parameters for more than five percent of 
the total operating time in each six-month reporting period a violation 
of the operating limit, the monitoring requirements help assure 
continuous compliance with the emission limits through continuous 
emissions reductions. Likewise, the continuous monitoring of the fabric 
filter using a bag leak detection system, and the enforceable five 
percent threshold level, will help ensure that the fabric filter is 
being operated and maintained properly and thereby helps assure 
continuous compliance with the emission limit through continuous 
emission reduction. The EPA is proposing the requirement to 
continuously record bag leak detection system output to ensure that 
data necessary to assess compliance with the newly proposed operating 
limit for bag leak detection system alarms would be available. In the 
absence of such information, enforcement personnel would be unable to 
determine whether the operating limit is being met. The output records 
would also provide data necessary to assess the magnitude of the output 
level above the alarm set point, and would assist owners and operators 
in properly operating and maintaining the fabric filter and in 
diagnosing fabric filter upsets. As proposed, an alarm simply indicates 
that the set point was exceeded, but it does not relate to the 
deviation or magnitude of the output level above the set point.
    By requiring that each temperature monitoring device meet certain 
performance and equipment specifications, uniformity of requirements 
across the affected industry will be achieved. Also, by conducting a 
performance evaluation, the EPA can be sure that the temperature 
measurements and, therefore, the records being kept by the owner or 
operator, are accurate.

V. Administrative Requirements

A. Docket

    The docket is intended to be an organized and complete file of the 
administrative records compiled by the EPA. The docket is a dynamic 
file because material is added throughout the rulemaking development. 
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 docket 
will contain the record in case of judicial review. (See section 
307(d)(7)(A) of the Act.) The location of the dockets, which will 
include all public comments received regarding this supplement to the 
proposed rules, is in the ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this 
preamble.

B. Public Hearing

    If a request to speak at a public hearing is received, a public 
hearing will be held on this proposal in accordance with section 
307(d)(5) of the Act. If a public hearing is held, the EPA may ask 
clarifying questions during the oral presentation but will not respond 
to the presentations or comments. To provide an opportunity for all who 
may wish to speak, oral presentations will be limited to 15 minutes 
each. Any member of the public may file a written statement (see 
DATES). Written statements and supporting information will be 
considered with equivalent weight as any oral statement and supporting 
information subsequently presented at a public hearing, if held. A 
verbatim transcript of the hearing and any written statements will be 
placed in the docket and will be available for public inspection and 
copying, or mailed upon request, at the EPA's Air and Radiation Docket 
and Information Center (see ADDRESSES).

C. Executive Order 12866--Regulatory Planning and Review

    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;

[[Page 7154]]

    (3) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, 
user fees, or loan programs, or the rights and obligations 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.
    It has been determined that this action is not a ``significant 
regulatory action'' under the terms of the Executive Order and is 
therefore not subject to OMB review.

D. Executive Order 12875--Enhancing the Intergovernmental Partnership

    Under Executive Order 12875, the 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 the EPA consults with those 
governments. If the EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 12875 
requires the EPA to provide to the OMB a description of the extent of 
the 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 the 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 regulatory proposals containing significant unfunded mandates.''
    Today's supplement to the proposed rules does not create a mandate 
on State, local or tribal governments. The supplement to the proposed 
rules does not impose any enforceable duties on State, local or tribal 
governments, because they do not own or operate any sources that would 
be subject to this supplement to the proposed rules. Accordingly, the 
requirements of section 1(a) of Executive Order 12875 do not apply to 
this supplement to the proposed rules.

E. Executive Order 13084--Consultation and Coordination with Indian 
Tribal Governments

    Under Executive Order 13084, the 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 the EPA 
consults with those governments. If the EPA complies by consulting, 
Executive Order 13084 requires the EPA to provide to the OMB, in a 
separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a 
description of the extent of the 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 the 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 supplement to the proposed rules does not significantly or 
uniquely affect the communities of Indian tribal governments. No 
affected facilities are owned or operated by Indian tribal governments. 
Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084 
do not apply to this supplement to the proposed rules.

F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), P.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 the 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, 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 supplement to the proposed rules 
does not contain a Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of 
$100 million or more for State, local, and tribal governments, in the 
aggregate, or the private sector in any one year. This supplementary 
proposal would affect two ferroalloys production facilities, fifteen 
mineral wool production facilities, three primary lead smelting 
facilities, and twenty-seven wool fiberglass manufacturing facilities. 
The EPA projects that annual economic impacts would be far less than 
$100 million. Thus, today's supplement to the proposed rules is not 
subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. In 
addition, the EPA has determined that this supplement to the proposed 
rules contains no regulatory requirements that might significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments because it does not impose any 
enforceable duties on small governments; such governments own or 
operate no sources subject to these proposed rules and therefore would 
not be required to purchase control systems to meet the requirements of 
these proposed rules.

G. Regulatory Flexibility

    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 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 governmental 
jurisdictions. None of the firms in the ferroalloys production, primary 
lead smelting, or wool fiberglass manufacturing industries are small 
businesses. The EPA has determined that seven of the ten mineral wool 
production firms that potentially would be subject to this supplement 
to the proposed rules are small firms. The EPA has met with all of 
these small firms and their trade association. Also, a representative 
of the

[[Page 7155]]

EPA's Office of the Small Business Ombudsman participated in the 
development of the Mineral Wool Production NESHAP proposal as a work 
group member to ensure that the requirements of the standards were 
examined for potential adverse economic impacts.
    Due to the nature of this supplement to the proposed rules, it is 
anticipated that there will be very little additional cost associated 
with its implementation. Revision of the requirements regarding bag 
leak detection systems on fabric filters such that it is a violation of 
the operating limit if the alarm sounds for more than five percent of 
the total operating time in each six-month reporting period does not 
impose any cost on the affected firms. The only additional cost 
associated with the proposed requirement to continuously record bag 
leak detection system output would be the cost of a data recording 
system (e.g., strip chart) and the cost of maintaining the associated 
records. Capital and annual costs for a strip chart are estimated to be 
$1,500 and $1,550/year, respectively, per bag leak detection system.
    The EPA anticipates that no additional cost will result from the 
proposed performance evaluation requirements for temperature monitoring 
devices because the performance evaluation and calibration requirements 
simply provide uniform guidance on how to meet the requirements in the 
affected proposed rules to properly calibrate, operate, and maintain 
all monitoring devices. Therefore, based on this information, I certify 
that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.

H. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection requirements associated with each of the 
proposed NESHAP were submitted for approval to the OMB under the 
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. at 
proposal. Today's supplement to the proposed rules would require owners 
and operators of fabric filters with bag leak detection systems to 
continuously record the output from each bag leak detection system. The 
annual monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping burden for this 
requirement (averaged over the first three years after the effective 
date of the rule) is estimated to be 32 labor hours per year at a total 
annual cost of $880/year per bag leak detection system. This estimate 
includes one-time purchase and installation of a data recording system 
(e.g., strip chart), and recordkeeping and reporting. Upon promulgation 
of each NESHAP, its information collection requirements will be revised 
as necessary.
    An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required 
to respond to, a request for the collection of information unless it 
displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers 
for the EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR 
chapter 15.

I. Pollution Prevention Act

    The Pollution Prevention Act of 1990 states that pollution should 
be prevented or reduced at the source whenever feasible. During the 
development of the proposed NESHAP, the EPA explored opportunities to 
eliminate or reduce emissions through the application of new processes 
or work practices. Due to the nature of today's action, there are no 
additional opportunities to eliminate or reduce emissions through the 
application of new processes or work practices.

J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Under section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and 
Advancement Act (NTTAA), Pub. L. 104-113 (March 7, 1996), the EPA is 
required to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory and 
procurement activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with 
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards 
are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, 
sampling procedures, and business practices) which are developed or 
adopted by voluntary consensus standard bodies. Where available and 
potentially applicable voluntary consensus standards are not used by 
the EPA, the NTTAA requires the EPA to provide Congress, through the 
OMB, an explanation of the reasons for not using such standards. 
Today's action does not put forth any technical standards as part of 
the proposed revisions. Therefore, consideration of voluntary consensus 
standards was not required.

K. Executive Order 13045--Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any 
rule that (1) is determined to be ``economically significant'' as 
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns the environmental 
health or safety risk that the EPA has reason to believe may have a 
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets 
both criteria, the EPA 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 EPA.
    The EPA interprets Executive Order 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 Order has the 
potential to influence the regulation. This supplement to the proposed 
rules is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is not an 
economically significant regulatory action as defined by Executive 
Order 12866, and it is based on technology performance and not on 
health or safety risks.

L. Clean Air Act

    Pursuant to section 112(d)(6) of the Act, the affected NESHAP will 
be reviewed eight years from the date of promulgation. This review may 
include an evaluation of the residual health risks under section 
112(f), any overlap with other programs, the existence of alternative 
methods, enforceability, improvements in emission control technology 
and health data, and the recordkeeping and reporting requirements.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hazardous 
substances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Ferroalloys 
production, Mineral wool production, Primary lead smelting, Wool 
fiberglass manufacturing.

    Dated: February 8, 1999.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, part 63 of title 40, 
chapter I, of the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be 
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.

Subpart DDD--[Amended]

    2. Section 63.1178, as proposed at 62 FR 25370 on May 8, 1997, is 
amended by revising paragraph (b)(9), by adding new paragraph (b)(10), 
and by removing the word ``and'' at the end of paragraph (b)(8) to read 
as follows:

[[Page 7156]]

Sec. 63.1178  Monitoring requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (9) The owner or operator shall operate and maintain the fabric 
filter so that the alarm on the bag leak detection system does not 
sound for more than five percent of the total operating time in a six-
month reporting period. Each time the alarm sounds and the owner or 
operator initiates corrective actions within one hour of the alarm, one 
hour of alarm time will be counted. If the owner or operator takes 
longer than one hour to initiate corrective actions, alarm time will be 
counted as the actual amount of time taken by the owner or operator to 
initiate corrective actions. If inspection of the fabric filter system 
demonstrates that no corrective actions are necessary, no alarm time 
will be counted; and
    (10) The owner or operator shall continuously record the output 
from the bag leak detection system.
* * * * *
    3. Section 63.1181, as proposed at 62 FR 25370 on May 8, 1997, is 
amended by redesignating paragraphs (d)(3), (d)(4), and (d)(5) as 
paragraphs (d)(4), (d)(5), and (d)(6) and by adding a new paragraph 
(d)(3) to read as follows:


Sec. 63.1181  Notification, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (3) Procedures for properly operating and maintaining each 
monitoring device. These procedures must be consistent with the 
requirements for continuous monitoring systems in the general 
provisions in subpart A of this part and must include a performance 
evaluation for each temperature monitoring device according to 
Sec. 63.8(e) of the general provisions. The following requirements must 
be met:
    (i) The definitions, installation specifications, test procedures, 
and data reduction procedures for determining calibration drift, 
relative accuracy, and reporting described in sections 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 
9, and 10 of Performance Specification 2 of 40 CFR part 60 appendix B 
must be used to conduct the performance evaluation.
    (ii) The recorder response range must include zero and 1.5 times 
the average temperature identified in Sec. 63.1179(b)(5) of this 
subpart.
    (iii) The monitoring system calibration drift must not exceed two 
percent of 1.5 times the average temperature identified in 
Sec. 63.1179(b)(5) of this subpart.
    (iv) The monitoring system relative accuracy must not exceed 20 
percent.
    (v) The reference method must be a National Institute of Standards 
and Technology calibrated reference thermocouple-potentiometer system, 
or an alternate reference system that must be approved by the 
Administrator.
* * * * *
    4. Appendix B to Subpart DDD, as proposed at 62 FR 25370 on May 8, 
1997, is amended by revising the entries ``63.8(a)(2),'' ``63.8(d),'' 
``63.8(e),'' ``63.10(c)(6),'' and ``63.10(c)(14),'' by removing the 
entries ``63.8(c)(4)-(c)(8),'' ``63.9(g),'' and ``63.10(e)(1)-(e)(2),'' 
and by adding the entries ``63.8(c)(4),'' ``63.8(c)(5),'' ``63.8(c)(6)-
(c)(8),'' ``63.9(g)(1),'' ``63.9(g)(2)-(g)(3),'' ``63.10(e)(1),'' 
``63.10(e)(2)(i),'' and ``63.10(e)(2)(ii)'' to read as follows:

Appendix B To Subpart DDD of Part 63--Applicability of General 
Provisions (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart A) to Subpart DDD

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Citation                      Requirement         Applies to subpart DDD          Comment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
*                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *
                                                        *
63.8(a)(2)...........................    .....................  Yes....................
 
*                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *
                                                        *
63.8(c)(4)...........................    .....................  Yes....................
63.8(c)(5)...........................    .....................  No.....................  Subpart DDD does not
                                                                                          require COMS.
63.8(c)(6)-(c)(8)....................    .....................  Yes....................
63.8(d)..............................  Quality Control........  Yes....................
63.8(e)..............................  CMS Performance          Yes....................
                                        Evaluation.
 
*                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *
                                                        *
63.9(g)(1)...........................  Additional CMS           Yes....................
                                        Notifications.
63.9(g)(2)-(g)(3)....................    .....................  No.....................  Subpart DDD does not
                                                                                          require COMS or CEMs.
 
*                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *
                                                        *
63.10(c)(6)..........................    .....................  Yes....................
 
*                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *
                                                        *
63.10(c)(14).........................    .....................  Yes....................
 
*                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *
                                                        *
63.10(e)(1)..........................  Additional CMS Reports.  No.....................  Subpart DDD does not
                                                                                          require CEMS.
63.10(e)(2)(i).......................    .....................  Yes....................
63.10(e)(2)(ii)......................    .....................  No.....................  Subpart DDD does not
                                                                                          require COMS.
 
*                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *
                                                        *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subpart NNN--[Amended]

    5. Section 63.1381, as proposed at 62 FR 15228 on March 31, 1997, 
is amended by adding in alphabetical order the definition for ``Cold 
top electric furnace'' to read as follows:


Sec. 63.1381  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Cold top electric furnace means an all-electric glass-melting 
furnace that

[[Page 7157]]

operates with a temperature of 120  deg.C (250  deg.F) or less as 
measured at a location 46 to 61 centimeters (18 to 24 inches) above the 
molten glass surface.
* * * * *
    6. Section 63.1386, as proposed at 62 FR 15228 on March 31, 1997, 
is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(9), (c)(3), (d)(3), (d)(4), 
(e)(4), (f)(1), (h)(3), and (i)(3), by removing paragraphs (c)(4), 
(e)(5), (h)(4), and (i)(4), and by adding new paragraph (b)(10) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 63.1386  Monitoring requirements.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (9) The owner or operator shall operate and maintain the baghouse 
such that the alarm on the bag leak detection system does not sound for 
more than 5 percent of the total operating time in a 6-month block 
reporting period. Each time the alarm sounds and the owner or operator 
initiates corrective actions within one hour of the alarm, one hour of 
alarm time will be counted. If the owner or operator takes longer than 
one hour to initiate corrective actions, alarm time will be counted as 
the actual amount of time taken by the owner or operator to initiate 
corrective actions. If inspection of the baghouse demonstrates that no 
corrective actions are necessary, no alarm time will be counted.
    (10) The owner or operator shall continuously record the output 
from the bag leak detection system.
    (c) * * *
    (3) The owner or operator shall operate the ESP such that the 
monitored ESP parameter(s) is not outside the limit(s) established 
during the performance test for more than 5 percent of the total 
operating time in a 6-month block reporting period.
    (d) * * *
    (3) The owner or operator shall operate each glass-melting furnace, 
which uses no add-on controls and which is not a cold top electric 
furnace, such that the monitored parameter(s) is not outside the 
limit(s) established during the performance test for more than 5 
percent of the total operating time in a 6-month block reporting 
period.
    (4)(i) The owner or operator shall operate each cold top electric 
furnace such that the temperature does not exceed 120  deg.C (250 
deg.F) as measured at a location 46 to 61 centimeters (18 to 24 inches) 
above the molten glass surface.
    (ii) The owner or operator shall conduct a performance evaluation 
for each temperature monitoring device according to Sec. 63.8(e) of the 
general provisions. The definitions, installation specifications, test 
procedures, and data reduction procedures for determining calibration 
drift, relative accuracy, and reporting described in Performance 
Specification 2, 40 CFR part 60, appendix B, sections 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 
and 10 must be used to conduct the evaluation. The temperature 
monitoring device must meet the following performance and equipment 
specifications:
    (A) The recorder response range must include zero and 180  deg.C 
(375  deg.F).
    (B) The monitoring system calibration drift shall not exceed 2 
percent of 180  deg.C (375  deg.F).
    (C) The monitoring system relative accuracy shall not exceed 20 
percent.
    (D) The reference system shall be a National Institute of Standards 
and Technology calibrated reference thermocouple-potentiometer system 
or an alternate reference, subject to the approval of the 
Administrator.
    (e) * * *
    (4) The owner or operator shall operate each glass-melting furnace 
such that the glass pull rate does not exceed, by more than 20 percent, 
the average glass pull rate established during the performance test for 
more than 5 percent of the total operating time in a 6-month block 
reporting period.
    (f)(1)(i) The owner or operator who uses an incinerator to control 
formaldehyde emissions from forming or curing shall install, calibrate, 
maintain, and operate a monitoring device that continuously measures 
and records the operating temperature in the firebox of each 
incinerator.
    (ii) The owner or operator shall conduct a performance evaluation 
for each temperature monitoring device according to Sec. 63.8(e) of the 
general provisions. The definitions, installation specifications, test 
procedures, and data reduction procedures for determining calibration 
drift, relative accuracy, and reporting described in Performance 
Specification 2, 40 CFR part 60, appendix B, sections 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 
and 10 must be used to conduct the evaluation. The temperature 
monitoring device must meet the following performance and equipment 
specifications:
    (A) The recorder response range must include zero and 1.5 times the 
average temperature identified in Sec. 63.1385(a)(12).
    (B) The monitoring system calibration drift shall not exceed 2 
percent of 1.5 times the average temperature identified in 
Sec. 63.1387(a)(9).
    (C) The monitoring system relative accuracy shall not exceed 20 
percent.
    (D) The reference system shall be a National Institute of Standards 
and Technology calibrated reference thermocouple-potentiometer system 
or an alternate reference, subject to the approval of the 
Administrator.
* * * * *
    (h)* * *
    (3) The owner or operator shall operate the process such that the 
monitored process parameter(s) is not outside the limit(s) established 
during the performance test for more than 5 percent of the total 
operating time in a 6-month block reporting period.
    (i)* * *
    (3) The owner or operator shall operate each scrubber such that 
each monitored parameter is not outside the limit(s) established during 
the performance test for more than 5 percent of the total operating 
time in a 6-month block reporting period.
* * * * *
    7. Section 63.1389, as proposed at 62 FR 15228 on March 31, 1997, 
is amended by adding paragraph (e)(2)(ix), by removing the word ``and'' 
at the end of paragraph (e)(2)(vii), and by removing the period at the 
end of paragraph (e)(2)(viii) and adding in its place ``; and'' to read 
as follows:


Sec. 63.1389  Notification, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (ix) The temperature 46 to 61 centimeters (18 to 24 inches) above 
the molten glass surface for each cold top electric furnace that is not 
equipped with an add-on control device for PM emissions control 
including any period when the temperature exceeds 120  deg.C (250 
deg.F) and a brief explanation of the cause of the exceedance and the 
corrective action taken.
    8. Table 1 to Subpart NNN, as proposed at 62 FR 15228 on March 31, 
1997, is amended by removing the entries ``63.8(c),'' ``63.9(g),'' and 
``63.10(e)(1)-(e)(3),'' and by adding the entries ``63.8(c)(1)-
(c)(4),'' ``63.8(c)(5),'' ``63.8(c)(6)-(c)(8),'' ``63.9(g)(1),'' 
``63.9(g)(2)-(g)(3),'' ``63.10(e)(1),'' ``63.10(e)(2)(i),'' 
``63.10(e)(2)(ii),'' and ``63.10(e)(3)'' to read as follows:

[[Page 7158]]



                           Table 1 to Subpart NNN--Applicability of General Provisions
                                   [40 CFR Part 63, Subpart A to SUBPART NNN]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     General provisions citation             Requirement         Applies to subpart NNN          Comment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *
63.8(c)(1)-(c)(4)....................  CMS Operation/           Yes....................
                                        Maintenance.
63.8(c)(5)...........................  .......................  No.....................  Subpart NNN does not
                                                                                          require COMS.
63.8(c)(6)-(c)(8)....................  .......................  Yes....................
 
                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *
63.9(g)(1)...........................  Additional CMS           Yes....................
                                        Notifications.
63.9(g)(2)-(g)(3)....................  .......................  No.....................  Subpart NNN does not
                                                                                          require COMS or CEMS.
 
                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *
63.10(e)(1)..........................  Additional CMS Reports.  No.....................  Subpart NNN does not
                                                                                          require CEMS.
63.10(e)(2)(i).......................  .......................  Yes....................
63.10(e)(2)(ii)......................  .......................  No.....................  Subpart NNN does not
                                                                                          require COMS.
63.10(e)(3)..........................  Excess Emissions/CMS     Yes....................
                                        Reports.
 
                  *                  *                  *                  *                  *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subpart TTT--[AMENDED]

    9. Section 63.147, as proposed at 63 FR 19200 on April 17, 1998, is 
amended by adding new paragraphs (e)(9) and (e)(10) to read as follows:


Sec. 63.1547  Monitoring requirements.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (9) The owner or operator shall operate and maintain the fabric 
filter so that the alarm on the bag leak detection system does not 
sound for more than five percent of the total operating time in a six-
month reporting period. Each time the alarm sounds and the owner or 
operator initiates corrective actions within one hour of the alarm, one 
hour of alarm time will be counted. If the owner or operator takes 
longer than one hour to initiate corrective actions, alarm time will be 
counted as the actual amount of time taken by the owner or operator to 
initiate corrective actions. If inspection of the fabric filter system 
demonstrates that no corrective actions are necessary, no alarm time 
will be counted.
    (10) The owner or operator shall continuously record the output 
from the bag leak detection system.
* * * * *

Subpart XXX--[Amended]

    10. Section 63.1625, as proposed at 63 FR 41508 on August 4, 1998, 
is amended by adding new paragraphs (a)(4)(viii) and (a)(4)(ix) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 63.1625  Monitoring requirements.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (4) * * *
    (viii) The owner or operator shall operate and maintain the 
baghouse so that the alarm on the bag leak detection system does not 
sound for more than five percent of the total operating time in a six-
month reporting period. Each time the alarm sounds and the owner or 
operator initiates corrective actions within one hour of the alarm, one 
hour of alarm time will be counted. If the owner or operator takes 
longer than one hour to initiate corrective actions, alarm time will be 
counted as the actual amount of time taken by the owner or operator to 
initiate corrective actions. If inspection of the baghouse demonstrates 
that no corrective actions are necessary, no alarm time will be 
counted.
    (ix) The owner or operator shall continuously record the output 
from the bag leak detection system.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 99-3531 Filed 2-11-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P