[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 200 (Wednesday, October 16, 2002)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 64014-64022]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-26303]



[[Page 64013]]

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

Part IV





Environmental Protection Agency





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



40 CFR Part 60



Standards of Performance for Steel Plants: Electric Arc Furnaces 
Constructed After October 21, 1974, and On or Before August 17, 1983; 
and Standards of Performance for Steel Plants: Electric Arc Furnaces 
and Argon-Oxygen Decarburization Vessels Constructed After August 17, 
1983; Proposed Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 16, 2002 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 64014]]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 60

[AD-FRL-7394-3]
RIN 2060-AJ68


Standards of Performance for Steel Plants: Electric Arc Furnaces 
Constructed After October 21, 1974, and On or Before August 17, 1983; 
and Standards of Performance for Steel Plants: Electric Arc Furnaces 
and Argon-Oxygen Decarburization Vessels Constructed After August 17, 
1983

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule; amendments.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to amend certain provisions in the new 
source performance standards (NSPS) for electric arc furnaces (EAF) 
constructed after October 21, 1974, and on or before August 17, 1983, 
and the NSPS for EAF constructed after August 17, 1983. The proposed 
changes add alternative requirements for monitoring emissions from EAF 
exhausts. In addition, minor editorial corrections are being made.

DATES: Comments. Comments must be received on or before December 16, 
2002.
    Public Hearing. If anyone contacts the EPA requesting to speak at a 
public hearing by November 5, 2002, a public hearing will be held on 
November 15, 2002.

ADDRESSES: Comments. By U.S. Postal Service, send comments (in 
duplicate if possible) to: Air and Radiation Docket and Information 
Center (6102), Attention Docket Number A-79-33, U.S. EPA, 1200 
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460. In person or by 
courier, deliver comments (in duplicate if possible) to: Air and 
Radiation Docket and Information Center (6102), Attention Docket Number 
A-79-33, U.S. EPA, Room Number M1500, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 
20460. Effective August 27, 2002, send comments (in duplicate if 
possible) to: Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center (6102T), 
Attention Docket Number A-79-33, U.S. EPA, 1301 Constitution Avenue, 
NW., Room Number B108, Washington, DC 20460. We request that a separate 
copy of each public comment be sent to the contact person listed below 
(see For Further Information Contact).
    Public Hearing. If a public hearing is held, it will be held at the 
new EPA facility complex in Research Triangle Park, NC.
    Docket. Docket No. A-79-33 contains supporting information used in 
developing the standards. The docket is located at the U.S. EPA, 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 5:30 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. Effective August 27, 
2002, the docket will be located at: U.S. EPA, 1301 Constitution 
Avenue, NW., Room Number B108, Washington, DC 20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Kevin Cavender, Metals Group, 
Emission Standards Division (C439-02), U.S. EPA, Research Triangle 
Park, NC 27711, telephone number: (919) 541-2364, electronic mail 
address: [email protected].
    To request a public hearing, to request to speak at a public 
hearing, or to find out if a public hearing will be held, contact Ms. 
Cassie Posey, Metals Group, Emission Standards Division (C439-02), U.S. 
EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, telephone number (919) 541-0069, 
electronic mail address: [email protected].
    For information concerning applicability and rule determinations, 
contact your State or local permitting authority or the appropriate EPA 
regional office representatives.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments. Comments and data may be submitted 
by electronic mail (e-mail) to: [email protected]. Electronic 
comments must be submitted as an ASCII file to avoid the use of special 
characters and encryption problems and will also be accepted on disks 
in WordPerfect format. All comments and data submitted in electronic 
form must note the docket number: Docket No. A-79-33. No confidential 
business information (CBI) should be submitted by e-mail. Electronic 
comments may be filed online at many Federal Depository Libraries.
    Commenters wishing to submit proprietary information for 
consideration must clearly distinguish such information from other 
comments and clearly label it as CBI. Send submissions containing such 
proprietary information directly to the following address, and not to 
the public docket, to ensure that proprietary information is not 
inadvertently placed in the docket: OAQPS Document Control Office 
(C404-02), Attention: Mr. Kevin Cavender, Emission Standards Division, 
U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711. The EPA will disclose 
information identified as CBI only to the extent allowed by the 
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. If no claim of confidentiality 
accompanies a submission when it is received by the EPA, the 
information may be made available to the public without further notice 
to the commenter.
    Public Hearing. Persons interested in presenting oral testimony or 
inquiring as to whether a hearing is to be held should contact Ms. 
Cassie Posey, telephone number: (919) 541-0069. Persons interested in 
attending the public hearing must also contact Cassie Posey to verify 
the time, date, and location of the hearing. The address, telephone 
number, and e-mail address for Ms. Posey are listed in the preceding 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. A public hearing, if held, 
will provide interested parties the opportunity to present data, views, 
or arguments concerning the proposed emission standards.
    Docket. The docket is an organized and complete file of all the 
information considered by the EPA in rule development. 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 Clean Air Act (CAA).) 
The regulatory text and other materials related to the 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.
    World Wide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket, 
an electronic copy of today's proposed rule will also be available on 
the WWW through the Technology Transfer Network (TTN). Following 
signature, a copy of the proposed rule will be posted on the TTN's 
policy and guidance page for newly proposed or promulgated rules at 
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN provides information and 
technology exchange in various areas of air pollution control. If more 
information regarding the TTN is needed, call the TTN HELP line at 
(919) 541-5384.
    Regulated Entities. Entities potentially regulated by this action 
include steel manufacturing facilities who operate electric arc 
furnaces. Affected categories and entities include certain sources in

[[Page 64015]]

the North American Information Classification System code 331111.
    This description is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather 
provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated 
by this action. To determine whether your facility is regulated by this 
action, you should examine the applicability criteria in the rule. If 
you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a 
particular entity, consult the person listed in the preceding FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
    Outline. The information presented in this preamble is organized as 
follows:

I. Background
    A. What is an EAF?
    B. What are the current NSPS requirements for an EAF?
    C. Why are the current NSPS requirements being amended?
    D. What is a bag leak detection system, and how is it used to 
monitor baghouse performance?
II. Summary of Proposed Amendment
    A. What is the alternative monitoring option being proposed?
    B. What are the editorial corrections being made?
III. Administrative Requirements
    A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
    C. Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with 
Indian Tribal Governments
    D. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from 
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
    E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
    F. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as Amended by the Small 
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5 
U.S.C. 601 et seq.
    G. Paperwork Reduction Act
    H. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
    I. Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations that 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use

I. Background

A. What Is an EAF?

    An EAF is a metallurgical furnace used to produce carbon and alloy 
steels. The input material to an EAF is typically 100 percent scrap 
steel. Cylindrical, refractory lined EAF are equipped with carbon 
electrodes to be raised or lowered through the furnace roof. With 
electrodes retracted, the furnace roof can be rotated to permit the 
charge of scrap steel by overhead crane. Alloying agents and fluxing 
materials usually are added through doors on the side of the furnace. 
Electric current is passed between the electrodes and through the 
scrap, generating arcing and the generation of enough heat to melt the 
scrap steel charge. After the melting and refining periods, impurities 
(in the form of a slag) and the refined steel are poured from the 
furnace.
    The production of steel in an EAF is a batch process. Cycles, or 
heats, range from about 1\1/2\ to 5 hours to produce carbon steel and 
from 5 to 10 hours to produce alloy steel. Scrap steel is charged to 
begin a cycle, and alloying agents and slag forming materials are added 
for refining. Stages of each cycle normally are charging, melting, 
refining (which usually includes oxygen blowing), and tapping.
    All of those operations generate particulate matter (PM) emissions. 
Emission control techniques involve an emission capture system and a 
gas cleaning system. Emission capture systems used in the industry 
include direct shell (fourth hole) evacuation, side draft hoods, 
combination hoods, canopy hoods, scavenger ducts, and furnace 
enclosures. Direct shell evacuation (DEC) consists of ductwork attached 
to a separate opening, or ``fourth hole'', in the furnace roof which 
draws emissions to a gas cleaner. The direct shell evacuation system 
works only when the furnace is up-right and the roof is in place. The 
side draft hoods collect furnace offgases from around the electrode 
holes and the work doors after the gases leave the furnace. The 
combination hood incorporates elements from the side draft and direct 
shell evacuation systems. Canopy hoods and scavenger ducts are used to 
address charging and tapping emissions. Baghouses are typically used as 
the gas cleaning system.

B. What Are the Current NSPS Requirements for an EAF?

    The NSPS for EAF constructed after October 21, 1974, and on or 
before August 17, 1983 (40 CFR part 60, subpart AA) were first 
promulgated in the Federal Register on September 23, 1975 (40 FR 
43850). The NSPS for EAF constructed after August 17, 1983 (40 CFR part 
60, subpart AAa) were first promulgated in the Federal Register on 
October 31, 1984 (49 FR 43845). Both subparts limit the allowable PM 
concentration in the exhaust of an EAF emission control device to 12 
milligrams per dry standard cubic meter (mg/dscm). In addition to the 
PM emission limit, both subparts limit visible emissions from the EAF 
control device to less than 3 percent opacity, as determined by EPA 
Method 9 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A.
    In both subparts, if the control device is equipped with a single 
stack, the owner or operator is required to install, calibrate, 
maintain, and operate a continuous opacity monitoring system (COMS). 
The owner and operator must report each 6-minute average COM reading of 
3 percent or greater as an excess emission. A COMS is not required on 
any modular or multiple-stack fabric filter if opacity readings are 
taken at least once per day during a melting and refining period, in 
accordance with EPA Method 9.
    The subparts also contain requirements for the EAF capture systems. 
However, those requirements are not being amended by today's action. As 
such, we do not discuss the capture system requirements here.

C. Why Are the Current NSPS Requirements Being Amended?

    Today's action is being taken in response to a petition to reopen 
the NSPS that we received from the American Iron and Steel Institute 
(AISI), the Specialty Steel Industry of North America (SSINA), and the 
Steel Manufacturers Association (SMA), who jointly will be referred to 
as ``the Petitioner.'' In their request to reopen the EAF NSPS, the 
Petitioner argues that COMS are not capable of accurately monitoring 
opacity emissions from an EAF shop at the 3 percent excess emissions 
threshold level and that the EAF NSPS should be amended to address the 
technological shortcomings associated with COMS. In making their 
argument, the Petitioner points to our recent revision to the 
performance specification for COMS (PS-1, 65 FR 48914) in which we 
acknowledge that there is potential for measurement error associated 
with COM readings. A conservative approach to estimating the upper 
range of the potential measurement error resulted in an estimate of 
approximately 4 percent opacity. The Petitioner also points out that 
the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard for COMS 
(ASTM D 6216-98), which is incorporated in PS-1, expressly limits the 
scope of the ASTM Standard to COMS used to monitor opacity subject to 
an opacity limit of 10 percent or greater due to the potential error 
associated with opacity measurements.
    The Petitioner argues that COMS generate inaccurate data which can 
trigger Federal and State reporting requirements and expose a facility 
to potential liability even when the facility is meeting the opacity 
standard. As pointed out above, owners and operators are required by 
the NSPS to report all 6-minute average COMS readings above 3 percent 
as periods of excess emissions. Since the potential COMS measurement 
error is high in comparison to the 3 percent opacity

[[Page 64016]]

standard, the Petitioner believes that the COMS can and do produce 
readings above the 3 percent excess emissions threshold when the actual 
opacity is below 3 percent. The Petitioner points out that the credible 
evidence revisions (62 FR 8313, February 24, 1997) clarify our intent 
to use COMS data as evidence of a potential emissions violation. 
Therefore, the Petitioner argues, COMS data falsely indicating 
emissions above 3 percent opacity could be used as evidence of 
violations of the opacity standard. Even if the erroneous COMS data are 
eventually determined not to be credible, the Petitioner argues, 
companies must bear the burden and cost of defending against such 
allegations.
    The revisions to PS-1 explained that we did not believe it was 
appropriate to limit the applicability of PS-1 based on the level of 
the emission limit that would be monitored. Instead of limiting the 
applicability of PS-1, we determined that PS-1 should acknowledge the 
measurement uncertainty associated with COMS measurements below 10 
percent opacity, and allow for a consideration of the potential error 
(through statistical procedures or otherwise) when evaluating 
compliance with opacity standards below 10 percent.
    We agree that it is appropriate to provide an alternative 
monitoring option for EAF owners and operators who are concerned with 
the accuracy of COMS measurements at levels below 10 percent opacity. 
In addition, we believe that bag leak detection systems, the 
alternative monitoring option being proposed, are a viable alternative 
to COMS for the purpose of monitoring the performance of baghouses.

D. What Is a Bag Leak Detection System, and How Is It Used To Monitor 
Baghouse Performance?

    A bag leak detection system is a device that is used to measure 
relative particulate loadings in the exhaust of a baghouse on a 
continuous basis in order to detect bag leaks and other conditions that 
result in increases in particulate loadings. Bag leak detection systems 
have been developed based on a number of principles including 
triboelectric effect, electrodynamic effect, and light scattering. A 
bag leak detection system does not need to provide an output in terms 
of particulate concentration, but must provide an output that is 
proportionate to the particulate concentration such that if particulate 
concentrations increase the output from the bag leak detection system 
increases.
    A bag leak detection system identifies leaks by the resulting 
increase in particulate loadings. A properly designed baghouse will 
control particulate emissions to very low levels when in good operating 
condition. However, if the baghouse develops a leak, due to a torn bag 
or seal, there will be a measurable increase in particulate emissions. 
A bag leak detection system is capable of quickly (within a few 
seconds) determining that an abnormal increase in particulate 
concentrations has occurred and can then trigger an alarm to alert the 
operator so that the leak can be stopped as soon as possible. Bag leak 
detection systems are capable of detecting small leaks while 
particulate emissions are well below the levels that would result in 
observable opacity. For that reason, we believe that bag leak detection 
systems are well suited for monitoring the performance of a baghouse.

II. Summary of Proposed Amendment

A. What Is the Alternative Monitoring Option Being Proposed?

    We are proposing bag leak detection coupled with a once per day 
opacity observation as an alternative monitoring option to COMS. Under 
the proposed alternative, a facility could elect to install, calibrate, 
maintain, and operate a bag leak detection system. Owners or operators 
would be required to develop a site specific monitoring plan describing 
how the system would be selected, installed, and operated, including 
how the alarm levels would be established. Within 30 minutes of an 
alarm, the owner or operator would be required to initiate procedures 
to determine the cause of the alarm and alleviate the cause of the 
alarm within 3 hours. In addition, the owner or operator would be 
required to maintain and operate their baghouse such that the alarm on 
the bag leak detector does not alarm for more than 3 percent of the 
operating hours in any 6-month reporting period.
    The owner or operator would also be required to conduct an opacity 
observation at least once per day when the furnace is in the melting or 
refining operation day, in accordance with EPA Method 9. All opacity 
observations greater than 3 percent opacity would be reported as a 
violation of the opacity standard. In addition, if the alarm on the bag 
leak detection system was not alarming during the time the opacity was 
observed to be greater than 3 percent, the alarm on the bag leak 
detection system would have to be lowered to a point that an alarm 
would have occurred during the observation.

B. What Are the Editorial Corrections Being Made?

    Two typographical errors are being corrected in the amendment. In 
40 CFR 60.274(c) and in 40 CFR 60.274a(c), the references to paragraphs 
(b)(1) and (2) are being corrected to refer to paragraph (b). The 
paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of 40 CFR 60.274(c) and 40 CFR 60.274a(c) 
were incorporated into paragraph (b) during the last revision to the 
NSPS (64 FR 10105, March 2, 1999). In 40 CFR 60.274a(b), the reference 
to paragraph (d) is being corrected to refer to paragraph (e).
    In addition, 40 CFR 60.274a(d) and 40 CFR 60.274a(e) are being 
revised to clarify that owners and operators may petition the 
Administrator to approve alternatives to the monitoring requirements 
specified in 40 CFR 60.274a(b), as well as alternatives to the monthly 
operational status inspections specified in 40 CFR 60.274a(d). This 
revision does not change the rule requirements because owners and 
operators are currently allowed to petition for alternative monitoring 
requirements under 40 CFR 60.13(i) of the General Provisions.

III. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), we 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 the proposed rule amendments are not a ``significant 
regulatory action'' because none of the listed criteria apply

[[Page 64017]]

to the action. Consequently, the action was not submitted to OMB for 
review under Executive Order 12866.

B. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August 
10, 1999), requires us to develop an accountable process to ensure 
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the 
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' 
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the 
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct 
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
    The proposed rule amendments do not have federalism implications. 
They will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the 
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government, as specified in Executive Order 13132. None of the affected 
facilities are owned or operated by State governments, and the 
requirements of the proposed rule amendments will not supercede State 
regulations that are more stringent. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does 
not apply to the proposed rule amendments.
    In the spirit of Executive Order 13132 and consistent with our 
policy to promote communications between us and State and local 
governments, we specifically solicit comments on the proposed rule 
amendments from State and local officials.

C. Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian 
Tribal Governments

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination 
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000), 
requires us to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful 
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory 
policies that have tribal implications.'' ``Policies that have tribal 
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations 
that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on 
the relationship between the Federal government and the Indian tribes, 
or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the 
federal government and Indian tribes.''
    The proposed rule amendments do not have tribal implications. They 
will not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the 
relationship between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on 
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175. No 
tribal governments own or operate an affected source. Thus, Executive 
Order 13175 does not apply to the proposed rule amendments.

D. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any 
rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as 
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental 
health or safety risk that we have reason to believe may have a 
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets 
both criteria, we must evaluate the environmental health or safety 
effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned 
rule is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably 
feasible alternatives that we considered.
    We interpret Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those 
regulatory actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that 
the analysis required under section 5-501 of the Executive Order has 
the potential to influence the rule. The proposed rule amendments are 
not subject to Executive Order 13045 because they are based on 
technology performance and not on health or safety risks. No children's 
risk analysis was performed because the action only provides affected 
EAF owners and operators with alternative monitoring options. 
Furthermore, the proposed rule amendments have been determined not to 
be ``economically significant'' as defined under Executive Order 12866.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 
Law 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, we 
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit 
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that 
may result in expenditures by State, local, and tribal governments, in 
the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any 
1 year. Before promulgating a rule for which a written statement is 
needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires us 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 us 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 we establish any regulatory 
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments, including tribal governments, we 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 our regulatory proposals with significant 
Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and 
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory 
requirements.
    We have determined that the proposed rule amendments do not contain 
a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs 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 the 
proposed rule amendments for any year has been estimated to be less 
than $62,000. Thus, today's proposed rule amendments are not subject to 
the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. In addition, we 
have determined that the proposed rule amendments contain no regulatory 
requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments because they contain no requirements that apply to such 
governments or impose obligations upon them. Therefore, today's 
proposed rule amendments are not subject to the requirements of section 
203 of the UMRA.

F. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as Amended by the Small Business 
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1966 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et 
seq.

    The RFA generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory 
flexibility analysis for any rule subject to notice and comment 
rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any 
other statute 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,

[[Page 64018]]

small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. The proposed 
amendments will not have a significant impact on a substantial number 
of small entities because the amendments only provide alternative 
compliance options designed to provide facilities with increased 
flexibility. Therefore, I certify that the action will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

G. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection requirements in the proposed rule 
amendments have been submitted for approval to OMB under the Paperwork 
Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. We have prepared an Information 
Collection Request (ICR) document (ICR No. 1060.11), and you may obtain 
a copy from Susan Auby by mail at the Office of Environmental 
Information, Collection Strategies Division, U.S. EPA (2822), 1200 
Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460; by e-mail at 
[email protected]; or by calling (202) 566-1672. You may also download 
a copy 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 NSPS General 
Provisions (40 CFR part 60, subpart A), which are mandatory for all 
operators subject to NSPS. The recordkeeping and reporting requirements 
are specifically authorized by section 114 of the CAA (42 U.S.C. 7414). 
All information submitted to us pursuant to the recordkeeping and 
reporting requirements for which a claim of confidentiality is made is 
safeguarded according to our policies set forth in 40 CFR part 2, 
subpart B.
    The annual increase to monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting 
burden for the proposed rule amendments are estimated at 1750 labor 
hours at a total cost of $61,267 nationwide, and the annual average 
increase in burden is 175 labor hours and $6,127 per source. We 
estimate that there will be no increase in the annualized capital costs 
due to the proposed rule amendments. We estimate that the annualized 
costs associated with purchasing and installing a bag leak detection 
system are equal to the offsetting annualized cost savings associated 
with the discontinued use and periodic replacement of a COMS. In making 
the estimates, it was assumed that ten existing facilities currently 
required to install and operate COMS would elect to use the proposed 
alternative monitoring option. The cost estimates reflect increased 
costs associated with the installation and operation of a bag leak 
detection system and with daily opacity observations partially offset 
by the cost savings from no longer having to operate and maintain a 
COMS.
    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 existing 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 our 
regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.
    Comments are requested on our need for the information, the 
accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods 
for minimizing respondent burden, including through the use of 
automated collection techniques. Send comments on the ICR to the 
Director, Collection Strategies Division, U.S. EPA (2822), 1200 
Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460; and to the Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 
725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503; marked ``Attention: Desk 
Officer for EPA.'' Include the ICR number in any correspondence. Since 
OMB is required to make a decision concerning the ICR between 30 and 60 
days after October 16, 2002, a comment to OMB is best assured of having 
its full effect if OMB receives it by November 15, 2002. The final 
action will respond to any OMB or public comments on the information 
collection requirements contained in this proposal.

H. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (NTTAA) Public Law 104-113 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs us 
to use voluntary consensus standards in our regulatory and procurement 
activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or 
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical 
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling 
procedures, business practices) developed or adopted by one or more 
voluntary consensus bodies. The NTTAA directs us to provide Congress, 
through annual reports to OMB, with explanations when an agency does 
not use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. The 
proposed rulemaking does not involve a technical standard.

I. Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use

    The proposed rule amendments are not subject to Executive Order 
13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a significant 
regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: October 9, 2002.
Christine Todd Whitman,
Administrator.
    For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 
63 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 60--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 60 continues to read as follows:

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


    2. Section 60.271 is amended by adding new paragraphs (o) and (p) 
to read as follows:


Sec.  60.271  Definitions.

* * * * *
    (o) Bag Leak detection system means a system that is capable of 
continuously monitoring relative particulate matter (dust) loadings in 
the exhaust of a baghouse to detect bag leaks and other conditions that 
result in increases in particulate loadings. A bag leak detection 
system includes, but is not limited to, an instrument that operates on 
triboelectric, electrodynamic, light scattering, light transmittance, 
or other effect to continuously monitor relative particulate matter 
loadings.
    (p) 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.

[[Page 64019]]

    3. Section 60.273 is amended by revising paragraph (c) and adding 
new paragraphs (e), (f), (g), and (h) to read as follows:


Sec.  60.273  Emission monitoring.

* * * * *
    (c) A continuous monitoring system for the measurement of the 
opacity of emissions discharged into the atmosphere from the control 
device(s) is not required on any modular, multi-stack, negative-
pressure or positive-pressure fabric filter if observations of the 
opacity of the visible emissions from the control device are performed 
by a certified visible emission observer; or on any single-stack fabric 
filter if visible emissions from the control device are performed by a 
certified visible emission observer and the owner installs and 
continuously operates a bag leak detection system according to 
paragraph (e) of this section. Visible emission observations shall be 
conducted at least once per day for at least three 6-minute periods 
when the furnace is operating in the melting and refining period. All 
visible emissions observations shall be conducted in accordance with 
Method 9 of appendix A to this part. If visible emissions occur from 
more than one point, the opacity shall be recorded for any points where 
visible emissions are observed. Where it is possible to determine that 
a number of visible emission sites relate to only one incident of the 
visible emission, only one set of three 6-minute observations will be 
required. In that case, the Method 9 observations must be made for the 
site of highest opacity that directly relates to the cause (or 
location) of visible emissions observed during a single incident. 
Records shall be maintained of any 6-minute average that is in excess 
of the emission limit specified in Sec.  60.272(a).
* * * * *
    (e) A bag leak detection system must be installed and continuously 
operated on all single-stack fabric filters if the owner or operator 
elects not to install and operate a continuous opacity monitoring 
system as provided for under paragraph (c) of this section. In 
addition, the owner or operator shall meet the visible emissions 
observation requirements in paragraph (c) of this section. The bag leak 
detection system must meet the specifications and requirements of 
paragraphs (e)(1) through (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 milligrams 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 using 
electronic or other means (e.g., using a strip chart recorder or a data 
logger.)
    (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 the alarm set point established according to paragraph 
(e)(4) of this section, and the alarm must be located such that it can 
be heard by the appropriate plant personnel.
    (4) For each bag leak detection system required by paragraph (e) of 
this section, the owner or operator shall develop and submit, to the 
Administrator or delegated authority, for approval, a site-specific 
monitoring plan that addresses the items identified in paragraphs 
(e)(4)(i) through (v) of this section. For each bag leak detection 
system that operates based on the triboelectric effect, the monitoring 
plan shall be consistent with the recommendations contained in the U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency guidance document ``Fabric Filter Bag 
Leak Detection Guidance'' (EPA-454/R-98-015). The owner or operator 
shall operate and maintain the bag leak detection system according to 
the site-specific monitoring plan at all times. The plan shall 
describe:
    (i) Installation of the bag leak detector system;
    (ii) Initial and periodic adjustment of the bag leak detector 
system including how the alarm set-point will be established;
    (iii) Operation of the bag leak detection system including quality 
assurance procedures;
    (iv) How the bag leak detection system will be maintained including 
a routine maintenance schedule and spare parts inventory list; and
    (v) How the bag leak detection system output shall be recorded and 
stored.
    (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 (if 
applicable).
    (6) Following initial adjustment, the owner or operator shall not 
adjust the averaging period, alarm set point, or alarm delay time 
without approval from the Administrator or delegated authority except 
as provided for in paragraphs (e)(6)(i) and (ii) of this section.
    (i) Once per quarter, the owner or operator may adjust the 
sensitivity of the bag leak detection system to account for seasonal 
effects including temperature and humidity according to the procedures 
identified in the site-specific monitoring plan required under 
paragraph (e)(4) of this section.
    (ii) If opacities greater than zero percent are observed over four 
consecutive 15-second observations during the daily opacity 
observations required under paragraph (c) of this section and the alarm 
on the bag leak detection system does not sound, the owner or operator 
shall lower the alarm set point on the bag leak detection system to a 
point where the alarm would have sounded during the period when the 
opacity observations were made.
    (7) For negative pressure, induced air baghouses, and positive 
pressure baghouses that are discharged to the atmosphere through a 
stack, the bag leak detector sensor must be installed downstream of the 
baghouse and upstream of any wet scrubber.
    (8) Where multiple detectors are required, the system's 
instrumentation and alarm may be shared among detectors.
    (f) For each bag leak detection system installed according to 
paragraph (e) of this section, the owner or operator shall initiate 
procedures to determine the cause of all alarms within 30 minutes of an 
alarm. The cause of the alarm must be alleviated within 3 hours of the 
time the alarm occurred by taking whatever corrective action(s) are 
necessary. If additional time is required to alleviate the cause of the 
alarm, the owner or operator shall notify the Administrator or 
delegated authority. Corrective actions 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 
particulate 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; or
    (6) Shutting down the process producing the particulate emissions.
    (g) The owner or operator shall maintain each baghouse monitored by 
a bag leak detection system such that the alarm on the bag leak 
detection system does not sound for more than 3 percent

[[Page 64020]]

of the total operating time in a 6-month reporting period.
    (h) The percentage of time the alarm on a bag leak detection system 
sounds shall be determined according to paragraphs (h)(1) through (5) 
of this section.
    (1) An alarm that occurs due solely to a malfunction of the bag 
leak detection system shall not be included in the calculation.
    (2) An alarm that occurs during startup, shutdown, or malfunction 
shall not be included in the calculation if the owner or operator 
follows all requirements contained in Sec.  60.11(d).
    (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.
    4. Section 60.274 is amended by revising the first sentence of 
paragraph (c) to read as follows:


Sec.  60.274  Monitoring of operations.

* * * * *
    (c) When the owner or operator of an affected facility is required 
to demonstrate compliance with the standards under Sec.  60.272(a)(3) 
and at any other time the Administrator may require that (under section 
114 of the CAA, as amended) either: the control system fan motor 
amperes and all damper positions; the volumetric flow rate through each 
separately ducted hood; or the volumetric flow rate at the control 
device inlet and all damper positions shall be determined during all 
periods in which a hood is operated for the purpose of capturing 
emissions from the affected facility subject to paragraph (b) of this 
section. * * *
* * * * *
    5. Section 60.275 is amended by revising paragraph (i) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  60.275  Test methods and procedures.

* * * * *
    (i) If visible emissions observations are made in lieu of using a 
continuous opacity monitoring system, as allowed for by Sec.  
60.273(c), visible emission observations shall be conducted at least 
once per day for at least three 6-minute periods when the furnace is 
operating in the melting and refining period. All visible emissions 
observations shall be conducted in accordance with Method 9. If visible 
emissions occur from more than one point, the opacity shall be recorded 
for any points where visible emissions are observed. Where it is 
possible to determine that a number of visible emission sites relate to 
only one incident of the visible emission, only one set of three 6-
minute observations will be required. In that case, the Method 9 
observations must be made for the site of highest opacity that directly 
relates to the cause (or location) of visible emissions observed during 
a single incident. Records shall be maintained of any 6-minute average 
that is in excess of the emission limit specified in Sec.  60.272(a).
* * * * *
    6. Section 60.276 is amended by adding new paragraphs (e) and (f) 
to read as follows:


Sec.  60.276  Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (e) The owner or operator shall maintain the following records for 
each bag leak detection system required under Sec.  60.273(e):
    (1) Records of the bag leak detection system output;
    (2) Records of bag leak detection system adjustments, including the 
date and time of the adjustment, the initial bag leak detector 
settings, and the final bag leak detector settings;
    (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, if procedures were initiated within 
30 minutes of the alarm, the cause of the alarm, an explanation of the 
actions taken, the date and time the cause of the alarm was alleviated, 
and if the alarm was alleviated within 3 hours of the alarm; and
    (4) The calculation of the percent of time the alarm on the bag 
leak detection system sounded during each 6-month reporting period.
    (f) In addition to the information required by Sec.  60.7(c), the 
percent of time the alarm on the bag leak detection system sounded 
during each 6-month reporting period shall be reported to the 
Administrator semi-annually.
    7. Section 60.271(a) is amended by adding, in alphabetical order, 
definitions for ``Bag leak detection system'' and ``Operating time'' as 
follows:


Sec.  60.271a  Definitions.

    Bag leak detection system means a system that is capable of 
continuously monitoring relative particulate matter (dust) loadings in 
the exhaust of a baghouse to detect bag leaks and other conditions that 
result in increases in particulate loadings. A bag leak detection 
system includes, but is not limited to, an instrument that operates on 
triboelectric, electrodynamic, light scattering, light transmittance, 
or other effect to continuously monitor relative particulate matter 
loadings.
* * * * *
    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.
* * * * *
    8. Section 60.273a is amended by revising paragraph (c) and adding 
new paragraphs (e), (f), (g), and (h) to read as follows:


Sec.  60.273a  Emission monitoring.

* * * * *
    (c) A continuous monitoring system for the measurement of the 
opacity of emissions discharged into the atmosphere from the control 
device(s) is not required on any modular, multi-stack, negative-
pressure or positive-pressure fabric filter if observations of the 
opacity of the visible emissions from the control device are performed 
by a certified visible emission observer; or on any single-stack fabric 
filter if visible emissions from the control device are performed by a 
certified visible emission observer and the owner installs and 
continuously operates a bag leak detection system according to 
paragraph (e) of this section. Visible emission observations shall be 
conducted at least once per day for at least three 6-minute periods 
when the furnace is operating in the melting and refining period. All 
visible emissions observations shall be conducted in accordance with 
Method 9. If visible emissions occur from more than one point, the 
opacity shall be recorded for any points where visible emissions are 
observed. Where it is possible to determine that a number of visible 
emission sites relate to only one incident of the visible emission, 
only one set of three 6-minute observations will be required. In that 
case, the Method 9 observations must be made for the site of highest 
opacity that directly relates to the cause (or location) of visible 
emissions observed during a single incident. Records shall be 
maintained of any 6-minute average that

[[Page 64021]]

is in excess of the emission limit specified in Sec.  60.272a(a).
* * * * *
    (e) A bag leak detection system must be installed and continuously 
operated on all single-stack fabric filters if the owner or operator 
elects not to install and operate a continuous opacity monitoring 
system as provided for under paragraph (c) of this section. In 
addition, the owner or operator shall meet the visible emissions 
observation requirements in paragraph (c) of this section. The bag leak 
detection system must meet the specifications and requirements of 
paragraphs (e)(1) through (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 milligrams 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 using 
electronic or other means (e.g., using a strip chart recorder or a data 
logger.)
    (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 the alarm set point established according to paragraph 
(e)(4) of this section, and the alarm must be located such that it can 
be heard by the appropriate plant personnel.
    (4) For each bag leak detection system required by paragraph (e) of 
this section, the owner or operator shall develop and submit, to the 
Administrator or delegated authority, for approval, a site-specific 
monitoring plan that addresses the items identified in paragraphs 
(e)(4)(i) through (v) of this section. For each bag leak detection 
system that operates based on the triboelectric effect, the monitoring 
plan shall be consistent with the recommendations contained in the U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency guidance document ``Fabric Filter Bag 
Leak Detection Guidance'' (EPA-454/R-98-015). The owner or operator 
shall operate and maintain the bag leak detection system according to 
the site-specific monitoring plan at all times. The plan shall describe 
the following:
    (i) Installation of the bag leak detector system;
    (ii) Initial and periodic adjustment of the bag leak detector 
system including how the alarm set-point will be established;
    (iii) Operation of the bag leak detection system including quality 
assurance procedures;
    (iv) How the bag leak detection system will be maintained including 
a routine maintenance schedule and spare parts inventory list; and
    (v) How the bag leak detection system output shall be recorded and 
stored.
    (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 (if 
applicable).
    (6) Following initial adjustment, the owner or operator shall not 
adjust the averaging period, alarm set point, or alarm delay time 
without approval from the Administrator or delegated authority except 
as provided for in paragraphs (e)(6)(i) and (ii) of this section.
    (i) Once per quarter, the owner or operator may adjust the 
sensitivity of the bag leak detection system to account for seasonal 
effects including temperature and humidity according to the procedures 
identified in the site-specific monitoring plan required under 
paragraph (e)(4) of this section.
    (ii) If opacities greater than zero percent are observed over four 
consecutive 15-second observations during the daily opacity 
observations required under paragraph (c) of this section and the alarm 
on the bag leak detection system does not sound, the owner or operator 
shall lower the alarm set point on the bag leak detection system to a 
point where the alarm would have sounded during the period when the 
opacity observations were made.
    (7) For negative pressure, induced air baghouses, and positive 
pressure baghouses that are discharged to the atmosphere through a 
stack, the bag leak detector sensor must be installed downstream of the 
baghouse and upstream of any wet scrubber.
    (8) Where multiple detectors are required, the system's 
instrumentation and alarm may be shared among detectors.
    (f) For each bag leak detection system installed according to 
paragraph (e) of this section, the owner or operator shall initiate 
procedures to determine the cause of all alarms within 30 minutes of an 
alarm. The cause of the alarm must be alleviated within 3 hours of the 
time the alarm occurred by taking whatever corrective action(s) are 
necessary. If additional time is required to alleviate the cause of the 
alarm, the owner or operator shall notify the Administrator or 
delegated authority. Corrective actions 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 
particulate 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; and
    (6) Shutting down the process producing the particulate emissions.
    (g) The owner or operator shall maintain each baghouse monitored by 
a bag leak detection system such that the alarm on the bag leak 
detection system does not sound for more than 3 percent of the total 
operating time in a 6-month reporting period.
    (h) The percentage of time the alarm on a bag leak detection system 
sounds shall be determined according to paragraphs (h)(1) through (5) 
of this section.
    (1) An alarm that occurs due solely to a malfunction of the bag 
leak detection system shall not be included in the calculation.
    (2) An alarm that occurs during startup, shutdown, or malfunction 
shall not be included in the calculation if the owner or operator 
follows all requirements contained in Sec.  60.11(d).
    (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.
    9. Section 60.274a is amended by revising the first sentence of 
paragraph (b), revising the first sentence of paragraph (c), revising 
the first sentence of paragraph (d), and revising paragraph (e) to read 
as follows:


Sec.  60.274a  Monitoring of operations.

* * * * *
    (b) Except as provided under paragraph (e) of this section, the 
owner

[[Page 64022]]

or operator subject to the provisions of this subpart shall check and 
record on a once-per-shift basis the furnace static pressure (if DEC 
system is in use, and a furnace static pressure gauge is installed 
according to paragraph (f) of this section) and either: check and 
record the control system fan motor amperes and damper position on a 
once-per-shift basis; install calibrate, and maintain a monitoring 
device that continuously records the volumetric flow rate through each 
separately ducted hood; or install, calibrate, and maintain a 
monitoring device that continuously records the volumetric flow rate at 
the control device inlet and check and record damper positions on a 
once-per-shift basis. * * *
    (c) When the owner or operator of an affected facility is required 
to demonstrate compliance with the standards under Sec.  60.272a(a)(3) 
and at any other time the Administrator may require that (under section 
114 of the CAA, as amended) either: the control system fan motor 
amperes and all damper positions; the volumetric flow rate through each 
separately ducted hood; or the volumetric flow rate at the control 
device inlet and all damper positions shall be determined during all 
periods in which a hood is operated for the purpose of capturing 
emissions from the affected facility subject to paragraph (b) of this 
section. * * *
    (d) Except as provided under paragraph (e) of this section, the 
owner or operator shall perform monthly operational status inspections 
of the equipment that is important to the performance of the total 
capture system (i.e., pressure sensors, dampers, and damper switches). 
* * *
    (e) The owner or operator may petition the Administrator to approve 
any alternative to either the monitoring requirements specified in 
paragraph (b) of this section or the monthly operational status 
inspections specified in paragraph (d) of this section if the 
alternative will provide a continuous record of operation of each 
emission capture system.
* * * * *
    10. Section 60.276a is amended by adding new paragraphs (h) and (i) 
to read as follows:


Sec.  60.276a  Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.

* * * * *
    (h) The owner or operator shall maintain the following records for 
each bag leak detection system required under Sec.  60.273a(e):
    (1) Records of the bag leak detection system output;
    (2) Records of bag leak detection system adjustments, including the 
date and time of the adjustment, the initial bag leak detector 
settings, and the final bag leak detector settings;
    (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, if procedures were initiated within 
30 minutes of the alarm, the cause of the alarm, an explanation of the 
actions taken, the date and time the cause of the alarm was alleviated, 
and if the alarm was alleviated within 3 hours of the alarm; and
    (4) The calculation of the percent of time the alarm on the bag 
leak detection system sounded during each 6-month reporting period.
    (i) In addition to the information required by Sec.  60.7(c), the 
percent of time the alarm on the bag leak detection system sounded 
during each 6-month reporting period shall be reported to the 
Administrator semi-annually.

[FR Doc. 02-26303 Filed 10-15-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P