[Federal Register: November 2, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 211)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 66280-66285]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr02no05-14]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[OAR-2002-0031; FRL-7992-8]
RIN 2060-AK50
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Primary Aluminum Reduction Plants
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule; amendments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is amending the national emission standards for hazardous
air pollutants (NESHAP) for primary aluminum reduction plants. The
amendments will revise the emission limit for polycyclic organic matter
(POM) applicable to one potline subcategory. The amendments will revise
the compliance provisions to clarify the dates by which all plants must
meet the NESHAP requirements, and to specify the time allowed to
demonstrate initial compliance for a new or reconstructed potline,
anode bake furnace, or pitch storage tank as well as an existing
potline or anode bake furnace that has been shutdown and subsequently
restarted. We are making these amendments to reduce compliance
uncertainties and improve understanding of the NESHAP requirements.
EFFECTIVE DATE: November 2, 2005.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. OAR-2002-0031. All documents in the docket at listed in
the EDOCKET index at http://docket.epa.gov/edkpub/index.jsp. Although
listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e.,
confidential business information or other information whose disclosure
is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically in EDOCKET or in hard copy at the EPA
Docket Center, Docket ID Number OAR-2002-0031, EPA West Building, Room
B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading
Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading
Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the EPA Docket
Center is (202) 566-1742. A reasonable fee may be charged for copying
docket materials.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Donna Lee Jones, EPA, Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards, Emission Standards Division, Metals
Group (C439-02), Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, telephone number
(919) 541-5251, fax number (919) 541-3207, e-mail address:
Jones.DonnaLee@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulated Entities. The regulated categories and entities affected
by the NESHAP include:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of regulated
Category NAICS code 1 entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry....................... 331312 Establishments
primarily engaged in
producing primary
aluminum by
electrolytically
reducing alumina.
Federal government............. .............. Not affected.
State/local/tribal government.. .............. Not affected.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ North American Industry Classification System.
[[Page 66281]]
This table 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 40 CFR 63.840 of
subpart LL (NESHAP for Primary Aluminum Reduction Plants). If you have
any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a
particular entity, consult either the air permit authority for the
entity or your EPA regional representative as listed in 40 CFR 63.13
(General Provisions).
Worldwide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket,
an electronic copy of today's final amendments will also be available
on the Worldwide Web through the Technology Transfer Network (TTN).
Following signature, a copy of the final amendments will be posted on
the TTN's policy and guidance page for newly proposed or promulgated
rules at the following address: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/. The TTN
provides information and technology exchange in various areas of air
pollution control.
Judicial Review. Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act
(CAA), judicial review of the final amendments is achievable only by
filing a petition for review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit by January 3, 2006. Under CAA section
307(d)(7)(B), only an objection to the amendments which was raised with
reasonable specificity during the period for public comment can be
raised during judicial review. Under CAA section 307(b)(2), the
requirements that are established by this final action may not be
challenged later in civil or criminal proceedings brought by EPA to
enforce these requirements.
Outline. The information presented in this preamble is organized as
follows:
I. Background
II. Summary of the Final Amendments
A. What Is the Final POM Emission Limit for VSS2 Potlines?
B. What are the final changes to the compliance provisions?
III. Response to Comments on the Proposed Amendments
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
J. Congressional Review Act
I. Background
Section 112 of the CAA establishes a technology-based program to
reduce stationary source emissions of hazardous air pollutants (HAP)
from major sources. Major sources of HAP are those that have the
potential to emit greater than 10 tons/year of any one HAP or 25 tons/
year of any combination of HAP. The CAA requires the national emission
standards to reflect the maximum degree of reduction in HAP emissions
that is achievable. This level of control is commonly known as the
maximum achievable control technology (MACT).
We issued the NESHAP for primary aluminum plants (40 CFR part 63,
subpart LL) on October 7, 1997 (62 FR 52384). The NESHAP contain
emission limits and standards for total fluorides (TF), which is a
surrogate for hydrogen fluoride, and POM. These limits apply to each
new or existing potline, paste production plant, and anode bake furnace
and to each new pitch storage tank associated with primary aluminum
production and located at a major source.
After promulgation, industry representatives identified two
significant compliance-related issues:
Review of the POM emission limit for the vertical stud
Soderberg-2 (VSS2) subcategory of existing potlines, based on the
availability of additional data; and
The date by which the owner or operator must conduct a
performance test to demonstrate initial compliance for an existing
potline or anode bake furnace that has been shut down and subsequently
restarted.
We received a petition from the industry requesting amendments to
revise the POM emission limits for VSS2 potlines. As part of the
request, the petition included additional test data (collected from
1999 through 2000) for all VSS2 potlines. We agreed to analyze the
additional data and evaluate the achievability of the existing MACT
limit for POM.
We proposed amendments to the existing rule on March 17, 2003 (68
FR 12645). We provided a 60-day comment period for the proposed
amendments and received a total of five comment letters. Three of the
comment letters were from interested private citizens, one was
unrelated to this rulemaking, and one was from the industry trade
association. A copy of each of these comment letters is available in
the docket for this rulemaking (Docket ID No. OAR-2002-0031). The final
amendments reflect full consideration of all the comments we received.
II. Summary of the Final Amendments
A. What Is the Final POM Emission Limit for VSS2 Potlines?
The VSS2 subcategory includes all existing vertical stud Soderberg
potlines. Section 63.843(a)(2)(i) of the existing rule limits POM
emissions from each existing VSS2 potline to 1.8 kilograms per Megagram
(kg/Mg) or 3.6 pounds per ton (lb/ton) of aluminum produced for each
potline. The final amendments change the POM limit to 2.85 kg/Mg (5.7
lb/ton) of aluminum produced. Table 2 to subpart LL gives the POM
emission limits for potlines at those plants that comply by emissions
averaging. The final POM emission averaging limits for VSS2 potlines
are:
Quarterly POM Limit (lb/ton)
[For a given number of potlines]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 lines 3 lines 4 lines 5 lines 6 lines 7 lines 8 lines
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5.0 4.7 4.5 4.4 4.3 4.2 4.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. What are the final changes to the compliance provisions?
Section 63.847(a) of the existing rule currently requires the owner
or operator to demonstrate initial compliance by specified dates. The
final amendments clarify the introductory text of paragraph (a) by
replacing the phrase ``demonstrate initial compliance'' with the word
``comply.'' This change distinguishes the compliance date of the rule
from the date by which a plant
[[Page 66282]]
must actually conduct their initial performance test.
Section 63.847(c) of the existing rule currently requires the owner
or operator to conduct an initial performance test during the first
month following the applicable compliance date. For a new or
reconstructed affected source, the final amendments require that the
owner or operator conduct the initial performance test by:
The 180th day after startup for a potline (or potroom
group). The 180-day period starts when the first pot in a potline (or
potroom group) is energized.
The 45th day from the start of the second anode bake cycle
(but no later than the 180th day from the startup of the anode bake
furnace).
The 30th day after startup for a pitch storage tank (if
the owner or operator elects to conduct an initial performance test
rather than a design evaluation).
Today's final amendments will not change the timing of the initial
performance test for existing affected sources (i.e., the initial
performance test must still be conducted during the first month after
the compliance date).
We are also adding performance test dates following startup of an
existing potline or anode bake furnace that was shut down at the time
compliance would have otherwise been required and subsequently
restarted. Again, the final amendments will require 180 days after
startup for a potline (or potroom group) and 45 days from the start of
the second anode bake cycle (but no later than 180 days from the
startup of the anode bake furnace). The amendments will also change the
notification requirements in 40 CFR 63.850(a) of the existing rule to
require advance notice to the Administrator at least 30 days before
restart of an affected source that has been shut down.
Appendix A to 40 CFR part 63, subpart LL, shows the requirements in
the NESHAP General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A) that do not
apply to primary aluminum reduction plants. We are also amending
appendix A to reflect the changes in performance test dates and the new
notification requirement.
III. Response to Comments on the Proposed Amendments
We received only two substantive comments on the proposed
amendments. Two other commenters simply stated a concern that the
proposed emission limit for VSS2 potlines was too high. However, these
commenters provided no additional information or rationale that would
allow further consideration.
Comment: One commenter stated the 45-day period to complete startup
and performance tests for an anode bake furnace is insufficient to
ensure testing under normal operating conditions. The startup typically
includes a refractory drying/curing cycle that may take from 45 to 120
days, depending on several factors. During the drying/curing cycle,
firing rates are retarded, and in some cases, the drying cycle is
performed with baked or partially-baked anodes, which results in POM
emissions that are lower than normal. Consequently, a performance test
conducted during the refractory drying/curing cycle is not
representative of normal operation. The commenter offered two options
to ensure testing under normal operating conditions: (1) start the 45-
day period at the beginning of the ``first anode bake cycle,'' which is
defined as the cycle that occurs after the ``refractory drying/curing
cycle''; or (2) define ``anode bake cycle'' to include the curing/
drying step and start the 45-day period at the beginning of the second
anode bake cycle.
Response: We agree with the commenter's suggestion for clarifying
the time period for startup of anode bake furnaces to ensure that the
performance tests are performed under normal operating conditions. We
agree that anode production during the drying/curing cycle is not
representative of normal operating conditions. Consequently, we changed
the rule provisions in 40 CFR 63.847(c)(2)(ii) and (c)(3)(ii) to state
that the 45-day period starts at the beginning of the second anode bake
cycle instead of the first anode bake cycle. However, we believe that
performance testing should always be completed within 180 days from the
beginning of the first anode bake cycle. With this change, performance
testing will occur during normal anode production after the refractory
has dried and cured. We also added a definition of ``anode bake cycle''
to the existing rule. ``Anode bake cycle'' means the period during
which the regularly repeated sequence of loading, preheating, firing,
cooling, and removing anodes from all sections within an anode bake
furnace occurs one time.
Comment: One commenter stated that increased POM emissions are not
justifiable because of the serious human health effects and the
potential environmental and ecological effects due to POM's persistence
in the environment, potential for accumulation, and toxicity. This
commenter estimates that the revised VSS2 limit will increase POM
emissions by 5.6 million lbs/year based on nationwide aluminum
production of 2.7 million tons/year. The commenter asks how such
emissions can be considered ``not economically significant'' and not in
need of an environmental health assessment.
Response: We do not agree with the commenter's estimate of
increased POM emissions. No increase in POM emissions will occur
because the limit reflects the actual level of control that has been
achieved by the one plant in the VSS2 category. The POM emissions limit
will ensure that this plant's POM emissions do not increase in the
future. In addition, the commenter's use of total nationwide aluminum
production to generate emission estimates is inappropriate because the
POM limit for VSS2 potlines will affect only one plant out of over 20
primary aluminum plants. Consequently, the commenter's assertion of
increased emissions from primary aluminum plants has no basis in fact.
The revised emission limit correctly reflects MACT for potlines in
the VSS2 subcategory based on CAA requirements. Our rationale for the
revised POM limit for VSS2 potlines is detailed in the preamble to the
proposed amendments (51 FR 12645, 12648; March 17, 2003), and a copy of
our analysis of the data is included in the docket.
We understand the commenter's concern about the potential health
effects of POM. Section 112(f) of the CAA requires that we evaluate
health risks and ecological effects within 8 years after the
promulgation of the MACT standards. If the technology-based standards
are found not to be protective of public health and the environment,
CAA section 112(f) requires us to promulgate more stringent standards
that protect the public health with an ample margin of safety and
reasonably prevent adverse environmental effects. These potential
impacts will be fully evaluated in our upcoming review of the existing
rule.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), 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 a ``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to
result in a rule that may:
[[Page 66283]]
(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 entitlement, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
It has been determined that the final amendments are not a
``significant regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order
12866 and are, therefore, not subject to OMB review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose any new information collection burden.
The requirement for advance notification of startup for an existing
affected source that has been shut down has no impact because similar
advance notification is already required for a new or reconstructed
affected source. However, OMB has previously approved the information
collection requirements contained in the existing rule (40 CFR part 63,
subpart LL) under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq., and has assigned OMB control number 2060-0360, EPA
Information Collection Request (ICR) No. 1767.04. A copy of the OMB-
approved ICR may be obtained from Susan Auby by mail at the Office of
Environmental Information, Collection Strategies Division, EPA (2822T),
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, by e-mail at
Auby.Susan@epa.gov, or by calling (202) 566-1672.
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; 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 in 40 CFR part 63 are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The EPA has determined that it is not necessary to prepare a
regulatory flexibility analysis in connection with the final
amendments. For the purposes of assessing the impact of today's final
amendments on small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small
business as defined by the Small Business Administration's regulations
at 13 CFR 121.201; (2) a small government jurisdiction that is a
government of a city, county, town, school district or special district
with a population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization
that is any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and
operated and that is not dominant in its field.
After considering the economic impacts of today's final rule
amendments on small entities, EPA has concluded that this action will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The final amendments will not impose any requirements on
small entities. None of the plants in this industry is classified as a
small entity.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
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, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures by State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
1 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.
EPA has determined that the final amendments do 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. No costs are attributable to the final
amendments. Thus, the final amendments are not subject to the
requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. The EPA has also
determined that the final amendments contain no regulatory requirements
that might significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Thus,
today's final amendments are not subject to the requirements of section
203 of the UMRA.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) requires EPA
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 final 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. Thus, Executive Order 13132
does not apply to the final amendments.
[[Page 66284]]
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) requires EPA
to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely
input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies
that have tribal implications.'' The final amendments do not have
tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. 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. No tribal governments own facilities
subject to the rule. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to the
final amendments.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health 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 EPA has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets
both criteria, the EPA must evaluate the environmental health or safety
effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned
regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably
feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to 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 regulation. The final amendments are not
subject to Executive Order 13045 because they are based on control
technology and not on health or safety risks.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
The final amendments are not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66
FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because they are not a significant regulatory
action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) of 1995 (Public Law 104-113; 15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs
EPA to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS) in their regulatory
activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impracticable. The VCS are technical standards (e.g.,
material specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and
business practices) that are developed or adopted by one or more
voluntary consensus bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress,
through OMB, explanations when the Agency does not use available and
applicable VCS.
The final amendments do not involve technical standards. Therefore,
EPA is not considering the use of any VCS.
J. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 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 the final amendments
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 final amendments 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. 804(2). The amendments will be effective on November 2, 2005.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hazardous
substances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: October 25, 2005.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
0
For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 63 of
the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 63--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart LL--[Amended]
0
2. Section 63.842 is amended by adding, in alphabetical order, a
definition for the term, ``Anode bake cycle'' to read as follows:
Sec. 63.842 Definitions.
* * * * *
Anode bake cycle means the period during which the regularly
repeated sequence of loading, preheating, firing, cooling, and removing
anodes from all sections within an anode bake furnace occurs one time.
* * * * *
0
3. Section 63.843 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(2)(iii) to read
as follows:
Sec. 63.843 Emission limits for existing sources.
(a) * * *
(2) * * *
(iii) 2.85 kg/Mg (5.7 lb/ton) of aluminum produced for each VSS2
potline.
* * * * *
0
4. Section 63.847 is amended by revising paragraph (a) introductory
text and paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.847 Compliance provisions.
(a) Compliance dates. The owner or operator of a primary aluminum
plant must comply with the requirements of this subpart by:
* * * * *
(c) Performance test dates. Following approval of the site-specific
test plan, the owner or operator must conduct a performance test to
demonstrate initial compliance according to the procedures in paragraph
(d) of this section. If a performance test has been conducted on the
primary control system for potlines or for the anode bake furnace
within the 12 months prior to the compliance date, the results of that
performance test may be used to demonstrate initial compliance. The
owner or operator must conduct the performance test:
(1) During the first month following the compliance date for an
existing potline (or potroom group) or anode bake furnace;
(2) By the date determined according to the requirements in
paragraph (c)(2)(i), (ii), or (iii) of this section for a new or
reconstructed potline, anode bake furnace, or pitch storage tank (for
which the owner or operator elects to conduct an initial performance
test):
(i) By the 180th day following startup for a potline or potroom
group. The 180-day period starts when the first pot in a potline or
potroom group is energized.
(ii) By the 45th day from the start of the second anode bake cycle
(but no later than the 180th day from the startup of the anode bake
furnace).
(iii) By the 30th day following startup for a pitch storage tank.
The 30-day period starts when the tank is first used to store pitch.
[[Page 66285]]
(3) By the date determined according to the requirements in
paragraph (c)(3)(i) or (ii) of this section for an existing potline or
anode bake furnace that was shut down at the time compliance would have
otherwise been required and is subsequently restarted:
(i) By the 180th day following startup for a potline or potroom
group. The 180-day period starts when the first pot in a potline or
potroom group is energized.
(ii) By the 45th day from the start of the second anode bake cycle
(but no later than the 180th day from the startup of the anode bake
furnace).
* * * * *
0
5. Section 63.850 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a)(7);
0
b. Revising paragraph (a)(8); and
0
c. Adding paragraph (a)(9) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.850 Notification, reporting, and recordkeeping requirements.
(a) * * *
(7) One-time notification for each affected source of the intent to
use an HF continuous emission monitor;
(8) Notification of compliance approach. The owner or operator
shall develop and submit to the applicable regulatory authority, if
requested, an engineering plan that describes the techniques that will
be used to address the capture efficiency of the reduction cells for
gaseous hazardous air pollutants in compliance with the emission limits
in Sec. Sec. 63.843, 63.844, and 63.846; and
(9) One-time notification of startup of an existing potline or
potroom group, anode bake furnace, or paste production plant that was
shut down for a long period and subsequently restarted. The owner or
operator must provide written notice to the Administrator at least 30
days before the startup.
* * * * *
0
6. Table 2 to subpart LL is amended by revising the entry for ``VSS2
potlines'' to read as follows:
Table 2 to Subpart LL of Part 63.--Potline POM Limits for Emission Averaging
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quarterly POM limit (lb/ton) [for given number of potlines]
Type --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 lines 3 lines 4 lines 5 lines 6 lines 7 lines 8 lines
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
VSS2 5.0 4.7 4.5 4.4 4.3 4.2 4.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
7. Appendix A to subpart LL is amended by revising the title of
appendix A and by adding new entries, in numerical order, for Sec.
63.7(a)(2)(ii) and (iii) and Sec. 63.9(b)(1)-(5) to read as follows:
Appendix A to Subpart LL of Part 63.--Applicability of General Provisions
[40 CFR part 63, subpart A]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General provisions citation Requirement Applies to subpart LL Comment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
63.7(a)(2)(ii) and (iii)........... Performance testing No.................... Subpart LL specifies
requirements. performance test dates.
* * * * * * *
63.9(b)(1)-(5)..................... Initial notifications. Yes, except as noted Sec. 63.850(a)(9)
in ``comment'' column. includes requirement for
startup of an existing
affected source that has
been shut down.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 05-21840 Filed 11-1-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P