[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 107 (Friday, June 4, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30194-30208]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-12757]



[[Page 30193]]

_______________________________________________________________________

Part III





Environmental Protection Agency





_______________________________________________________________________



40 CFR Part 63



National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Primary 
Lead Smelting; Final Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 107 / Friday, June 4, 1999 / Rules 
and Regulations  

[[Page 30194]]



ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[AD-FRL-6345-8]
RIN 2060-AE97


National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for 
Primary Lead Smelting

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

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