[Federal Register: September 20, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 182)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 53837-53870]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr20se07-30]
[[Page 53837]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part III
Environmental Protection Agency
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR Part 63
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Area
Sources: Clay Ceramics Manufacturing, Glass Manufacturing, and
Secondary Nonferrous Metals Processing; Proposed Rule
[[Page 53838]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0424; EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0360; EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0940; FRL-
8469-9]
RIN 2060-AM12
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Area
Sources: Clay Ceramics Manufacturing, Glass Manufacturing, and
Secondary Nonferrous Metals Processing
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing national emission standards for the Clay
Ceramics Manufacturing, Glass Manufacturing, and Secondary Nonferrous
Metals Processing area source categories. The proposed emissions
standards for new and existing sources are based on EPA's proposed
determination as to what constitutes the generally available control
technology or management practices for each area source category.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 22, 2007 unless a
public hearing is requested by October 1, 2007. If a hearing is
requested on the proposed rules, written comments must be received by
November 5, 2007. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, comments on the
information collection provisions must be received by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) on or before October 22, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2006-0424 (for Clay Ceramics Manufacturing), Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2006-0360 (for Glass Manufacturing), or Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2006-0940 (for Secondary Nonferrous Metals Processing) by one of the
following methods:
http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
E-mail: a-and-r-Docket@epa.gov.
Fax: (202) 566-9744.
Mail: National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Area Sources: Clay Ceramics Manufacturing, Glass
Manufacturing, and Secondary. Nonferrous Metals Processing,
Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. Please include a total of two copies.
In addition, please mail a copy of your comments on the information
collection provisions to the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Attn: Desk Officer for
EPA, 725 17th St., NW., Washington, DC 20503.
Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center, Public Reading Room, EPA
West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
Instructions. Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2006-0424 (for Clay Ceramics Manufacturing), Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2006-0360 (for Glass Manufacturing), or Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-
0940 (for Secondary Nonferrous Metals Processing). EPA's policy is that
all comments received will be included in the public docket without
change and may be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information provided, unless the comment
includes information claimed to be confidential business information
(CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The
http://www.regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment
directly to EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
Docket. All documents in the docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy
form. Publicly available docket materials are available either
electronically in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Docket
Center, Public Reading Room, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST), Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air
Docket is (202) 566-1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions about the proposed rule
for Clay Ceramics Manufacturing, contact Mr. Bill Neuffer, Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards, Sector Policies and Programs
Division, Metals and Minerals Group (D243-02), Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone number: (919) 541-
5435; fax number: (919) 541-3207; e-mail address: Neuffer.Bill@epa.gov.
For questions about the proposed rule for Glass Manufacturing or
Secondary Nonferrous Metals Processing, contact Ms. Susan Fairchild,
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Sector Policies and
Programs Division, Metals and Minerals Group (D243-02), Research
Triangle Park, NC 27711, telephone number: (919) 541-5167, fax number:
(919) 541-3207, e-mail address: Fairchild.Susan@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The supplementary information presented in
this preamble is organized as follows:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments to EPA?
C. Where can I get a copy of this document?
D. When would a public hearing occur?
II. Background Information for Proposed Area Source Standards
A. What is the statutory authority for the proposed NESHAP?
B. What criteria did EPA use in developing the proposed NESHAP?
III. Proposed Area Source NESHAP for Clay Ceramics Manufacturing
A. What area source category is affected by the proposed rule?
B. What are the production processes and emissions points at
facilities that manufacture clay ceramics?
C. How did EPA subcategorize spray glaze operations?
D. How was GACT determined?
E. What are the proposed requirements for area sources?
IV. Proposed Area Source NESHAP for Glass Manufacturing
A. What area source category is affected by the proposed rule?
B. What are the production processes and emissions points at
facilities that manufacture glass?
C. How was GACT determined?
[[Page 53839]]
D. What are the proposed requirements for area sources?
V. Proposed Area Source NESHAP for Secondary Nonferrous Metals
Processing
A. What area source category is affected by the proposed rule?
B. What are the production processes and emissions points at
facilities that process secondary nonferrous metals?
C. How was GACT determined?
D. What are the proposed requirements for area sources?
VI. Proposed Exemption of Certain Area Source Categories from Title
V Permitting Requirements
A. Clay Ceramics Manufacturing
B. Secondary Nonferrous Metal Processing
VII. What are the impacts of the proposed standards for area
sources?
VIII. 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. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
The regulated categories and entities potentially affected by the
proposed standards include:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NAICS Examples of regulated
Category code \1\ entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry:
Clay Ceramics Manufacturing... 327122 Area source facilities
327111 that manufacture ceramic
327112 wall and floor tile,
vitreous plumbing
fixtures, vitreous china
tableware and
kitchenware, and/or
pottery.
Glass Manufacturing........... 327211 Area source facilities
327212 that manufacture flat
327213 glass, glass containers,
and other pressed and
blown glass and
glassware.
Secondary Nonferrous Metals 331492 Area source brass and
Processing. 331423 bronze ingot making,
secondary magnesium
processing, or secondary
zinc processing plant
that melts post-consumer
nonferrous metal scrap
to make products
including bars, ingots,
and blocks, or metal
powders.\2\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ North American Industry Classification System.
\2\ The Secondary Nonferrous Metals Processing area source category was
originally established under SIC code 3341, a broader classification
which included brass and bronze ingot makers. The corresponding NAICS
code for brass and bronze ingot makers is 331423.
This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. To determine whether your facility would be regulated by this
action, you should examine the applicability criteria in 40 CFR
63.11435 of subpart RRRRRR (national emissions standards for hazardous
air pollutants (NESHAP) for Clay Ceramics Manufacturing Area Sources),
40 CFR 63.11448 of subpart SSSSSS (NESHAP for Glass Manufacturing Area
Sources), and 40 CFR 63.11462 of subpart TTTTTT (NESHAP for Secondary
Nonferrous Metals Processing). 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 of subpart A (General Provisions).
B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments to EPA?
Do not submit CBI to EPA through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail.
Send or deliver information identified as CBI only to the following
address: Roberto Morales, OAQPS Document Control Officer (C404-02),
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, Attention Docket
ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0424 (for Clay Ceramics Manufacturing), or
Docket ID EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0360 (for Glass Manufacturing), or Docket ID
EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0940 (for Secondary Nonferrous Metals Processing).
Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be
CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark
the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify
electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that
is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment
that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that
does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for
inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be
disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part
2.
C. Where can I get a copy of this document?
In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of
this proposed action will also be available on the WorldWide Web (WWW)
through the Technology Transfer Network (TTN). Following signature, a
copy of the proposed action 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.
D. When would a public hearing occur?
If anyone contacts EPA requesting to speak at a public hearing
concerning the proposed rules by October 1, 2007, we will hold a public
hearing on October 5, 2007. If you are interested in attending the
public hearing, contact Ms. Pamela Garrett at (919) 541-7966 to verify
that a hearing will be held.
II. Background Information for Proposed Area Source Standards
A. What is the statutory authority for the proposed NESHAP?
Section 112(k)(3)(B) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) requires EPA to
identify at least 30 hazardous air pollutants (HAP) which, as the
result of emissions from area sources,\1\ pose the greatest threat to
public health in urban areas. Consistent with this provision, in 1999,
in the Integrated Urban Air Toxics Strategy, EPA identified the 30 HAP
that pose the greatest potential health threat in urban
[[Page 53840]]
areas, and these HAP are referred to as the ``urban HAP.'' See 64 FR
38706, 38715-716, July 19, 1999. Section 112(c)(3) requires EPA to list
sufficient categories or subcategories of area sources to ensure that
area sources representing 90 percent of the emissions of the 30 urban
HAP are subject to regulation. EPA listed the source categories that
account for 90 percent of the urban HAP emissions in the Integrated
Urban Air Toxics Strategy.\2\ Sierra Club sued EPA, alleging a failure
to complete standards for the source categories listed pursuant to CAA
section 112(c)(3) and 112(k)(3)(B) within the timeframe specified by
the statute. See Sierra Club v. Johnson, No. 01-1537, (D.D.C.). On
March 31, 2006, the court issued an order requiring EPA to promulgate
standards under CAA section 112(d) for those area source categories
listed pursuant to CAA section 112(c)(3) and 112(k)(3)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ An area source is a stationary source of HAP emissions that
is not a major source. A major source is a stationary source that
emits or has the potential to emit 10 tons per year (tpy) or more of
any HAP or 25 tpy or more of any combination of HAP.
\2\ Since its publication in the Integrated Urban Air Toxics
Strategy in 1999, the area source category list has undergone
several amendments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Among other things, the order requires that, by December 15, 2007,
EPA complete standards for 10 area source categories. As part of our
effort to meet the December 15, 2007 deadline, we are proposing in this
action the NESHAP for the following three listed area source
categories: (1) Clay Ceramics Manufacturing; (2) Glass Manufacturing;
and (3) Secondary Nonferrous Metals Processing. The standards for the
other categories are being proposed in separate actions.
We added Glass Manufacturing and Secondary Nonferrous Metals
Processing to the Integrated Urban Air Toxics Strategy area source
category list on June 26, 2002 (67 FR 43112). The Glass Manufacturing
area source category is comprised of three distinct industry sectors:
(1) Flat Glass Manufacturing; (2) Container Glass Manufacturing; and
(3) Pressed and Blown Glass Manufacturing. On November 22, 2002, we
added Clay Products Manufacturing to the area source category list (67
FR 70428). The Clay Products Manufacturing area source category was
later split into the two categories of Brick and Structural Clay
Products (BSCP) Manufacturing and Clay Ceramics Manufacturing to better
match the categories already scheduled to be regulated by major source
NESHAP. The Clay Ceramics Manufacturing area source category is being
addressed in this proposed rule, while the BSCP Manufacturing area
source category will be addressed in a future action. (For more
information on the area source categories, see http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/area/arearules.html.
)
The inclusion of the Clay Ceramics Manufacturing, Glass
Manufacturing, and Secondary Nonferrous Metals Processing area source
categories on the section 112(c)(3) area source category list is based
on 1990 emissions data, as EPA used 1990 as the baseline year for that
listing. Specifically, the Clay Products Manufacturing area source
category was listed based on emissions of compounds of chromium, lead,
manganese, and nickel that represent part of the 90 percent of those
urban HAP emissions in the 1990 inventory and are hereafter referred to
as ``clay ceramics metal HAP.'' The Glass Manufacturing area source
category was listed based on emissions of compounds of arsenic,
cadmium, chromium, lead, manganese, and nickel that represent part of
the 90 percent of those urban HAP emissions in the 1990 inventory and
are hereafter referred to as ``glass manufacturing metal HAP.'' The
Secondary Nonferrous Metals Processing area source category was listed
based on emissions of compounds of arsenic, chromium, lead, manganese,
and nickel that represent part of the 90 percent of those urban HAP
emissions in the 1990 inventory and are hereafter referred to as
``secondary nonferrous metal HAP.''
B. What criteria did EPA use in developing the proposed NESHAP?
Under CAA section 112(d)(5), the Administrator may, in lieu of
standards requiring maximum achievable control technology (MACT) under
section 112(d)(2), elect to promulgate standards or requirements for
area sources ``which provide for the use of generally available control
technologies or management practices by such sources to reduce
emissions of hazardous air pollutants.'' Under section 112(d)(5), the
Administrator has the discretion to use generally available control
technology or management practices (GACT) in lieu of MACT. Pursuant to
section 112(d)(5), we have decided not to issue MACT standards and
concluded that GACT is appropriate for these three source categories.
Additional information on the definition of GACT is found in the
Senate report on the legislation (Senate Report Number 101-228,
December 20, 1989), which indicates GACT means:
* * * methods, practices and techniques which are commercially
available and appropriate for application by the sources in the
category considering economic impacts and the technical capabilities
of the firms to operate and maintain the emissions control systems.
Consistent with the legislative history, in addition to considering
technical capabilities of the facilities and the availability of
control measures, we may consider costs and economic impacts in
determining GACT, which is particularly important when developing
regulations for source categories that may have few establishments and
many small businesses.
Determining what constitutes GACT involves considering the control
technologies and management practices that are generally available to
the area sources in the source category. We also consider the standards
applicable to major sources in the same industrial sector to determine
if the control technologies and management practices are transferable
and generally available to area sources. In appropriate circumstances,
we may also consider technologies and practices at area and major
sources in similar categories to determine whether such technologies
and practices could be considered generally available for the area
source category at issue. Finally, as noted above, in determining GACT
for a particular area source category, we consider the costs and
economic impacts of available control technologies and management
practices on that category.
III. Proposed Area Source NESHAP for Clay Ceramics Manufacturing
A. What area source category is affected by the proposed rule?
The Clay Ceramics Manufacturing area source category includes those
facilities that process greater than 45 megagrams per year (Mg/yr) (50
tons per year (tpy)) wet clay to manufacture pressed floor tile,
pressed wall tile, and other pressed tile; sanitaryware (toilets and
sinks); dinnerware; or pottery. Clay ceramics are primarily composed of
clay and shale, and may include many different additives, including
silica, talc, and various high purity powders produced by chemical
synthesis.
To estimate the number of facilities in the Clay Ceramics
Manufacturing area source category, we gathered detailed information
from the NESHAP for Clay Ceramics Manufacturing major sources. Also, we
compiled information from other sources, including site visits,
Internet searches, and industry submittals. Based on this information
and taking into account recent facility shutdowns, we have identified
51 area source facilities with spray glaze operations or kilns that
fire glazed ceramic ware that would be subject to the final clay
ceramics manufacturing area source NESHAP.
[[Page 53841]]
With this action, we are also clarifying that artisan potters,
small ceramics studios, noncommercial entities, and schools and
universities with ceramic arts programs, which typically have annual
production rates of 45 Mg/yr (50 tpy) or less, are not a part of the
source category listed pursuant to section 112(c)(3) and (k)(3)(B), and
are, therefore, not covered by this area source standard. Urban HAP
emissions from these facilities were not included in the 1990 baseline
emissions inventory that was used as the basis for the area source
category listing. Specifically, in reviewing the inventory on which we
based the listing of this source category, we determined that the
sources that were the basis of the listing decision were those with an
annual production rate in excess of 45 Mg/yr (50 tpy).
B. What are the production processes and emissions points at facilities
that manufacture clay ceramics?
Clay ceramics manufacturing generally includes raw material
processing and handling and forming of the clay product shapes,
followed by drying, glazing, and firing. Some tile products and most
dinnerware/pottery are fired in a kiln prior to some type of glazing
operation. More than 95 percent of all clay ceramic products are coated
with a glaze and then fired in a kiln.
Spray glaze operations and kilns that fire glazed ceramic ware
account for most of the particulate matter (PM) and urban metal HAP
emitted from clay ceramics manufacturing facilities (about 80 to 90
percent from spray glaze operations and 10 to 20 percent from kilns).
Overspray accounts for most of the PM and clay ceramics metal HAP
emitted during spray glaze operations. Emissions from kilns firing
glazed ceramic ware consist primarily of volatilized materials from the
glaze. The type and volume of HAP emissions vary according to the glaze
materials. Emissions of PM from spray glaze operations and kilns firing
glazed ceramic ware are estimated at about 407 Mg/yr (449 tpy)
nationwide, with about 7.1 Mg/yr (7.9 tpy) of clay ceramics metal HAP
(mostly lead and chromium, with smaller quantities of nickel and
manganese). Lead emissions are estimated at about 4.1 Mg/yr (4.5 tpy),
and most of those emissions come from the two dinnerware facilities
still using leaded glazes. Since 1990, most clay ceramics facilities
have ceased using leaded glazes because of potential environmental and
worker exposure issues.
Spray glazing operations at area source facilities are currently
controlled in terms of clay ceramics metal HAP emissions as a result of
state and local air pollution standards, permit requirements, and/or
management practices already implemented by the industry to reduce clay
ceramics metal HAP from spray glaze operations. Capture systems for
spray glaze operations typically include spray booths; partial or total
enclosures; and process area ventilation systems. Several different
types of air pollution control devices (APCD) are used to control
overspray emissions from glaze spray booths, including wet scrubbers,
fabric filters, water curtains, and water-wash systems.
Most, if not all, facilities practice waste minimization in their
glazing operations to minimize glaze cost and cleanup downtime.
Examples of waste minimization practices include, but are not limited
to, minimizing glaze overspray emissions using high-volume, low
pressure (HVLP) spray equipment or similar spray equipment; minimizing
HAP emissions during cleanup of spray glazing equipment; operating and
maintaining spray glazing equipment according to manufacturer's
instructions; and minimizing spills through careful handling of HAP-
containing glaze materials. HVLP spray equipment operates at low
atomizing air pressure--0.69 to 69 kilopascals (0.1 to 10 pounds per
square inch) at the air nozzle and use 0.42 to 0.85 cubic meters per
minute (15 to 30 cubic feet per minute) of air.
No APCD are used by area sources in the clay ceramics manufacturing
industry to control emissions from kilns. However, available operating
permit information shows that most, if not all, clay ceramics kilns
firing glazed ceramic ware are fired with natural gas or some other
clean-burning, low-HAP fuel (e.g., propane). Some clay ceramics
manufacturing facilities use electric-powered kilns. Furthermore, clay
ceramics manufacturing facilities maintain the peak firing temperatures
of their kilns firing glazed ceramic ware well below the volatilization
temperatures of the clay ceramics metal HAP in their spray glazes.
1. Selection of Affected Source
Affected source means the collection of equipment and processes in
the source category or subcategory to which the subpart applies. In
selecting the affected source for regulation, we identified the clay
ceramics metal HAP-emitting operations, the clay ceramics metal HAP
emitted, and the quantity of clay ceramics metal HAP emissions from the
individual or groups of emissions points. We concluded that designating
the group of atomized spray glaze operations and kilns firing glazed
ceramic ware within the clay ceramics manufacturing operation as the
affected source was the most appropriate approach and consistent with
the basis for the original listing. This proposed rule includes
requirements for the control of emissions from all atomized spray glaze
operations and all curing operations involving kilns firing glazed
ceramic ware.
2. Selection of Pollutants
For this proposed rule, we decided that it was not practical to
establish individual standards for each specific type of clay ceramics
metal HAP that could be present in the various processes. A sufficient
correlation exists between PM and these clay ceramics metal HAP to rely
on PM as a surrogate for both the presence of the HAP and for their
control.\3\ When released, each of the clay ceramics metal HAP
compounds behaves as PM. The control technologies used for the control
of PM emissions achieve comparable levels of performance on the
individual clay ceramics metal HAP emissions. Therefore, standards
requiring good control of PM also achieve good control of clay ceramics
metal HAP emissions. Furthermore, establishing separate standards for
each individual metal HAP would impose costly and significantly more
complex compliance and monitoring requirements and achieve little, if
any, HAP emissions reductions beyond what would be achieved using the
surrogate pollutant approach based on total PM. Based on these
considerations, we decided to establish standards for Clay Ceramics
Manufacturing based on control of total PM as a surrogate pollutant for
the individual clay ceramics metal HAP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ National Lime Association v. EPA. 233 F.3d 625, 639-640
(D.C. Cir. 2000) and Sierra Club v. EPA, 353 F.3d 976 (D.C. Cir.
2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. How did EPA subcategorize spray glaze operations?
As part of the GACT analysis, we considered whether there were
differences in processes, sizes, or other factors affecting emissions
that would warrant subcategorization. Under section 112(d)(1) of the
CAA, EPA ``may distinguish among classes, types, and sizes within a
source category or subcategory in establishing such standards* * *''.
In our review of the available data, we observed significant
differences between spray glaze operations based on the level of wet
glaze usage and clay ceramics metal HAP emissions. For these reasons,
we
[[Page 53842]]
are proposing two subcategories for spray glaze operations based on
annual wet glaze usage: those facilities with annual wet glaze usage of
more than 227 Mg/yr (250 tpy) and facilities with annual wet glaze
usage of 227 Mg/yr (250 tpy) or less. These subcategories differentiate
between general sizes of glazing operations at clay ceramics
manufacturing facilities, but do not differentiate clay product types
or other processes.
Those facilities with wet glaze usage above the threshold level
would be subject to a different set of management practices than those
facilities at or below the threshold level, which are more likely to be
small businesses and comprise a much smaller fraction of total
production, glaze usage, and clay ceramics metal HAP emissions. Our
analysis indicates that approximately 88 percent of wet glaze usage and
75 percent of clay ceramics metal HAP emissions are associated with 11
clay ceramic manufacturing area source facilities in the subcategory
with wet glaze usage levels greater than 227 Mg/yr (250 tpy) and the
other 12 percent of wet glaze usage and 25 percent of clay ceramics
metal HAP emissions come from 40 facilities in the subcategory with wet
glaze usage at or below 227 Mg/yr (250 tpy). To account for those
facilities that use non-HAP glazes in some or all of their processes,
we have included a provision allowing sources to exclude glazes that
contain less than 0.1 (weight) percent clay ceramics metal HAP in
determining their total wet glaze usage relative to the 227 Mg/yr (250
tpy) subcategorization threshold.
D. How was GACT determined?
As provided in CAA section 112(d)(5), we are proposing standards
representing GACT for the clay ceramics metal HAP. As noted in section
II of this preamble, the statute allows the Agency to establish
standards for area sources listed pursuant to section 112(c) based on
GACT. The statute does not set any condition precedent for issuing
standards under section 112(d)(5) other than that the area source
category or subcategory at issue must be one that EPA listed pursuant
to section 112(c), which is the case here.
Moreover, most of the facilities in this source category have good
operational controls in-place and use small quantities of clay ceramics
metal HAP in their glazes. We evaluated the control technologies and
management practices that reduce HAP emissions that are generally
available for the clay ceramics manufacturing area source category. We
also considered costs and economic impacts in determining GACT. We
believe the consideration of costs and economic impacts is especially
important for the well-controlled clay ceramics manufacturing area
sources because, given current well-controlled levels, requiring
additional controls would result in only marginal reductions in
emissions at very high costs for modest incremental improvement in
control for this area source category. We explain below in detail our
proposed GACT determinations.
1. GACT for Kilns
As noted previously, we are not aware of any APCD used by clay
ceramics manufacturing area source facilities to control emissions from
kilns, but most, if not all, clay ceramics kilns firing glazed ceramic
ware are fired with natural gas or some other clean-burning, low-HAP
fuel (e.g., propane). Based on the available information for all types
and sizes of kilns in this industry, we are not aware of any add-on
control techniques being used to reduce PM emissions from kilns.
Consequently, we determined GACT for kilns to be using natural gas, or
an equivalent fuel, for all firing of glazed ceramic ware. For
simplicity, we are proposing GACT for all kilns that fire glazed
ceramic ware at a given facility and not differentiating between the
subcategories identified in the following sections of this preamble
involving glazing operations. There are no differences in control
equipment or control levels associated with kilns firing different
amounts of glazed ceramic ware; therefore, GACT is the same for all
kilns.
As noted previously, clay ceramics manufacturing facilities also
maintain the peak firing temperatures of their kilns firing glazed
ceramic ware well below the volatilization temperatures of the clay
ceramics metal HAP in their spray glazes. For those clay ceramics metal
HAP that would be present in the kiln exhaust, the lowest
volatilization temperature is approximately 1740[deg]C (3160[deg]F) for
lead. Based on available information, the highest peak firing
temperature used in the clay ceramics manufacturing industry is
approximately 1370[deg]C (2500[deg]F). In order to keep peak firing
temperatures well below the volatilization temperatures for the
relevant clay ceramics metal HAP, we are conservatively proposing GACT
as requiring that facilities maintain the peak firing temperatures of
their kilns firing glazed ceramic ware below 1540[deg]C (2800[deg]F).
2. GACT for Glaze Spray Booths at Facilities with Wet Glaze Usage Above
227 Mg/yr (250 tpy)
All of the known area source facilities above the threshold of 227
Mg/yr (250 tpy) with atomized spray glaze operations are controlled for
PM emissions (e.g., water-wash system or wet scrubber). Many of the
glaze spray systems and associated control equipment are custom-
designed and -built, depending on product type/size and glaze
application spray rates. We lack empirical data for a majority of the
facilities in this subcategory for performance testing or actual
emission rates associated with spray glaze booths.
In evaluating GACT options, we found that major source clay
ceramics manufacturing facilities also utilize similar PM controls on
their spray glazing operations. Based on the existing operating permit
requirements for clay ceramics facilities, we found a variety of
formats and units, e.g., percent opacity, allowable PM or
PM10 emission rates (pounds per hour (lbs/hr) or tpy),
percent removal efficiency, and outlet concentrations (grains per dry
standard cubic foot (gr/dscf)). While these requirements cover a wide
range of spray glazing processes and products, we believe that they
achieve a similar level of control and are generally available. (See
technical memorandum in the docket for more details on spray booth
permit requirements and estimated clay ceramics metal HAP emissions).
Therefore, we determined GACT for the subcategory for glaze spray
booths at facilities with wet glaze usage above 227 Mg/yr (250 tpy) to
be an equipment requirement: wet control systems for PM emissions. Per
the legislative history, a management practice in the form of an
equipment requirement is an appropriate standard under section
112(d)(5).
3. GACT for Glaze Spray Booths at Facilities with Wet Glaze Usage At or
Below 227 Mg/yr (250 tpy)
Area source facilities at or below the threshold of 227 Mg/yr (250
tpy) typically practice waste minimization in their glazing operations
to minimize glaze cost and cleanup downtime. We evaluated the potential
costs and emission reductions for APCD for facilities with lower glaze
usage and found the cost effectiveness to be unreasonable, e.g.,
average cost of approximately $71,000/Mg ($64,000/ton) of PM and $10
million/Mg ($9 million/ton) of metal HAP. Therefore, for the
subcategory for glaze spray booths at facilities with wet glaze usage
at or below 227 Mg/yr (250 tpy), we
[[Page 53843]]
determined GACT for spray glaze operations to be waste minimization
practices.
E. What are the proposed requirements for area sources?
1. Applicability and Compliance Dates
The proposed standards would apply to any new or existing affected
source at a clay ceramics manufacturing facility that is an area source
and uses more than 45 Mg/yr (50 tpy) of clay. The affected source
includes all kilns that fire glazed ceramic ware and all atomized spray
glaze operations located at such a facility.
The owner or operator of an existing affected source would have to
comply with the standards by the date of promulgation of the final
rule. The owner or operator of a new affected source would be required
to comply with the standards by the date of promulgation of the final
rule, or upon startup, whichever is later.
2. Proposed Standards
For each kiln firing glazed ceramic ware, the proposed standards
would require the facility owner or operator to maintain the kiln peak
temperature below 1540[deg]C (2800[deg]F) and either use natural gas,
or an equivalent clean-burning fuel, as the kiln fuel. The facility
owner or operator would also have the option of using an electric-
powered kiln.
The requirements for atomized spray glaze operations at clay
ceramic manufacturing area source facilities differ depending on
whether a facility has annual wet glaze usage above or below 227 Mg/yr
(250 tpy). Consequently, we are proposing that the facility owner or
operator maintain annual wet glaze usage records in order to document
whether they are above or below 227 Mg/yr (250 tpy) wet glaze usage.
For each atomized spray glaze operation located at a clay ceramics
manufacturing facility that uses more than 227 Mg/yr (250 tpy) of wet
glaze(s), the proposed standards would require the facility owner or
operator to have an APCD on their glazing operations and operate and
maintain the control device according to the equipment manufacturer's
specifications. As a pollution prevention alternative to this proposed
requirement, we are also providing the option to use glazes containing
less than 0.1 (weight) percent clay ceramics metal HAP for those
facilities above the threshold, which is expected to provide emissions
reductions equivalent or greater than those obtained using PM controls.
For each atomized spray glaze operation located at a clay ceramics
manufacturing facility that uses 227 Mg/yr (250 tpy) or less of wet
glaze(s), the proposed standards would require the facility owner or
operator to employ waste minimization practices in their glazing
operations. As an alternative to this proposed requirement, we are also
providing the option to comply with the equipment standard or
management practices for facilities with glaze usage greater than 227
Mg/yr (250 tpy) the threshold (i.e., PM controls or the use of glazes
containing less than 0.1 (weight) percent clay ceramics metal HAP),
which is expected to provide emissions reductions equivalent or greater
than those obtained using waste minimization practices.
3. Proposed Compliance Requirements
Initial compliance demonstration requirements. The owner or
operator would be required to include compliance certifications for the
proposed standards in their Notification of Compliance Status. For any
wet spray glaze operations controlled with an APCD, an initial
inspection of the control equipment must be conducted within 60 days of
the compliance date and the results of the inspection included in the
Notification of Compliance Status.
Monitoring requirements. For each kiln firing glazed ceramic ware,
the proposed standards would require the owner or operator to conduct a
check of the kiln peak firing temperature on a daily basis. If the peak
firing temperature exceeds 1540 [deg]C (2800 [deg]F), the owner or
operator would be required to take corrective action according to the
facility's standard operating procedures.
Based on available permit information, there are several clay
ceramic manufacturing area source facilities with weekly monitoring
requirements associated with APCD used for PM emissions. For all
sources that operate one or more APCD for their atomized spray glaze
operations, we are proposing daily and weekly visual APCD inspections,
daily EPA Method 22 visible emissions (VE) tests, or an EPA-approved
alternative monitoring program to ensure that the APCD is kept in a
satisfactory state of maintenance and repair and continues to operate
effectively.
The owner or operator would be allowed to use existing operating
permit documentation to meet the monitoring requirements, provided it
includes the necessary monitoring records (e.g., the date, place, and
time of the monitoring; the person conducting the monitoring; the
monitoring technique or method; the operating conditions during
monitoring; and the monitoring results).
Notification and recordkeeping requirements. We are proposing that
affected sources submit Initial Notifications and Notifications of
Compliance Status under this proposed rule because they are consistent
with the part 63 General Provisions and are needed to identify the
affected sources subject to the standards and confirm the compliance
status of the sources. To ensure that facilities have sufficient time
to submit the notifications once the rule was promulgated, we are
proposing that facilities submit the notifications 120 days after the
promulgation date. (The promulgation date is also the compliance date
for this rule.) The submittal date for the notifications is based on
the requirement for submitting Initial Notifications specified in the
part 63 General Provisions.
We are soliciting information on any control technologies or
management practices used to limit emissions of PM or metal HAP from
clay ceramics manufacturing area sources and any cost information
associated with such control approaches. We also request comment on
GACT and the proposed standards.
IV. Proposed Area Source NESHAP for Glass Manufacturing
A. What area source category is affected by the proposed rule?
The glass manufacturing area source category consists of plants
that operate one or more glass melting furnaces that produce at least
45 Mg/yr (50 tpy) of glass and are charged with one or more of the
glass manufacturing metal HAP.
Pressed and Blown Glass and Glassware Manufacturing was listed as
an area source category on June 26, 2002 (67 FR 43112). The inclusion
of this source category on the area source category list was based on
emissions of the six glass manufacturing metal HAP. These HAP are
emitted from glass melting furnaces.
The proposed glass manufacturing rule would apply to manufacturers
producing glass by melting a mixture of minerals and other compounds,
then cooling the melt in a manner that prevents it from crystallizing.
The primary constituent of all glass is silica, but most glass contains
several other minerals and substances. Examples include soda ash,
potash, limestone, feldspar, potassium nitrate, boric acid, iron oxide,
and sodium nitrate. Metal oxides can be included in the glass
manufacturing formulation to produce colored or tinted glass. Some
examples include iron oxide, chromium oxide,
[[Page 53844]]
cobalt oxide, nickel, and selenium. Other compounds, such as lead oxide
and arsenic compounds, can be added to enhance or modify the final
product. Recycled glass, also known as cullet, is a primary ingredient
of many glass formulations.
Glass manufacturing plants can be broadly classified by product
type as one of the following: Flat glass, container glass, or pressed
and blown glass. Flat glass includes plate glass used for building
windows and automobile windshields. Container glass includes soda,
beer, and wine bottles, jars, and other glass containers. Pressed and
blown glass includes a wide variety of products such as light bulbs,
glass tubing, optical glass, glass cooking ware, and industrial
glassware.
As noted previously, the glass manufacturing area source category
was listed based on emissions of the six glass manufacturing metal HAP.
The Section 112(k) inventory included emissions of these metal HAP from
glass manufacturing plants that use compounds of one or more of the
metal HAP as raw materials that are added to the glass manufacturing
formulation to impart specific characteristics to the final glass
product. We estimate that there currently are 21 such plants in
operation in the U.S., and these 21 plants comprise the glass
manufacturing area source category.
B. What are the production processes and emission points at facilities
that manufacture glass?
Regardless of the type of glass, the process of manufacturing glass
entails batch measuring and mixing raw materials in specified
proportions, charging the raw material batch mix into a furnace, where
it is melted to form molten glass, forming the molten glass into the
desired shapes, and finishing and packaging the final product.
Compounds of the glass manufacturing metal HAP are incorporated
into glass manufacturing batch formulations to either color, tint, or
impart certain characteristics, such as clarity and brilliance, to the
final glass product. Lead oxide is used as a clarifier, former,
stabilizer, and for radiation shielding in glass. Arsenic is used as a
fining agent to facilitate the removal of bubbles from molten glass.
The other four glass manufacturing metal HAP compounds are used
primarily to color or tint the glass.
Other metal HAP may also be emitted from glass manufacturing
furnaces. These include antimony, selenium, and cobalt. Although the
source category was not listed for these other metal HAP, the air
pollution controls used to obtain reductions of the glass manufacturing
metal HAP also reduce emissions of other metal HAP where they are used
in the same process.
1. Selection of Source Category
Although listed originally as ``Pressed and Blown Glass and
Glassware Manufacturing,'' the Glass Manufacturing area source category
listing was based upon data from all of the three primary sectors of
the glass manufacturing industry: Flat glass, container glass, and
pressed and blown glass. We are clarifying that the Glass Manufacturing
area source category includes any glass manufacturing facility that
operates one or more furnaces which produce at least 45 Mg/yr (50 tpy)
of glass per furnace and use the glass manufacturing metal HAP
compounds as raw materials, regardless of the type of glass product
manufactured. This clarification does not change the universe of
sources that were the basis of the original listing notice.
2. Selection of Affected Sources
The affected source includes glass manufacturing furnaces that meet
two criteria: The furnaces are charged with one or more of the glass
manufacturing metal HAP as raw materials, and the furnaces have annual
production rates of at least 45 Mg/yr (50 tpy). We selected furnaces as
the affected source because glass melting furnaces emit the HAP for
which this source category was listed pursuant to sections 112(c)(3)
and (k)(3)(B) (i.e., arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead, manganese, and
nickel).
C. How was GACT determined?
While most of the facilities that would be subject to the proposed
rule have good operational controls in place to control emissions of
glass manufacturing metal HAP, a few facilities would have to install
emission controls or change their glass formulation to meet the
emission limits in the proposed rule. We considered costs and economic
impacts in determining GACT and found that the cost effectiveness of
reducing PM-10 using add-on control is excellent for PM as well as for
reducing glass manufacturing metal HAP. While we believe the
consideration of costs and economic impacts is important for area
sources, we found that the emission reductions achieved by the proposed
rule were compelling. Our analyses show that the proposed rule would
result in substantial reductions in emissions at reasonable costs for
this area source category, achieving 28 tons per year reductions in
glass manufacturing metal HAP and 415 tons per year reductions in PM.
We explain below in detail our proposed GACT determinations.
1. Background
Section 112(d)(5) of the CAA allows us to develop area source
standards based on GACT. In identifying GACT for the affected sources
in the Glass Manufacturing area source category, we compiled data on
existing glass manufacturing plants through a series of site visits, a
Section 114 information collection request (ICR), operating permits and
permit applications, emission inventory reports, emission test reports,
published reports on the industry, and databases such as the Toxic
Release Inventory and National Emission Inventory (NEI) databases.
Detailed data on approximately 80 glass manufacturing plants were
compiled in a database, which we then used for subsequent analyses to
determine GACT.
The data compiled on existing glass manufacturing facilities
included permit limits for PM emissions for approximately 150 furnaces.
When converted to a common format (e.g., pounds per ton (lbs/ton)) the
data show a wide range in PM emission limits. To meet the most
stringent PM emission limits specified in title V permits, plants
typically use electrostatic precipitators (ESPs) or fabric filters.
The data also show that many existing glass furnaces are subject to
40 CFR 60, subpart CC, Standards of Performance for Glass Manufacturing
Plants (Glass NSPS). The Glass NSPS establishes emission limits for PM
and applies to all glass manufacturing plants constructed or modified
since 1980 that produce or have the design capacity to produce at least
4,550 kilograms (kg) (about 5 tons) of glass in one day. Depending on
the glass recipe, fuel, and process used, the NSPS limits range from
0.2 to 2.0 lbs of PM/ton of glass produced. To comply with the NSPS,
plants typically use ESP, fabric filters, or process modifications.
Based on the data compiled, approximately 40 percent of container glass
furnaces, 50 percent of flat glass furnaces, and 25 percent of pressed
and blown glass furnaces are subject to the NSPS.
2. Selection of PM as a Surrogate for Glass Manufacturing Metal HAP
For glass manufacturing furnaces that are charged with any of the
glass manufacturing metal HAP as raw materials, PM emissions contain
those glass manufacturing metal HAP, and emissions control equipment
that is
[[Page 53845]]
designed and operated to control PM emissions also control emissions of
the glass manufacturing metal HAP. Furthermore, many glass
manufacturing plants have title V operating permits that require PM
emissions controls and establish emissions limits for PM. For these
reasons, we are proposing to establish standards using PM as a
surrogate for the glass manufacturing metal HAP. Controlling PM
emissions will control emissions of the glass manufacturing metal HAP
since the metals are contained within the PM--they are in the
particulate form as opposed to the gaseous form. Particulate matter
controls used at existing glass manufacturing plants are the same
controls available to control particulate metal HAP such as the six
glass manufacturing metal HAP. These controls capture particulate metal
HAP non-preferentially along with other PM, thus making PM a reasonable
surrogate for the metal HAP. We have used this approach in several
other NESHAP in which PM was determined to be a surrogate for the metal
HAP in the PM.
3. Selection of Emission Factor Format
The data compiled on existing glass manufacturing facilities
included permit limits for PM emissions for approximately 150 furnaces.
The permit limits are expressed in a variety of formats (units), such
as emission factors or production-based mass emission rates (e.g., lbs
emitted per ton of glass produced), emission concentrations (e.g., gr/
dscf of exhaust), and emission rates (e.g., lbs/hr). Due to the wide
range in furnace sizes, we are proposing to use the emission factor
format because this format normalizes emissions as a function of
production rate. Furthermore, of the 150 permit limits reviewed, the
permits for 55 furnaces specified emission limits in the format of an
emission factor. In addition, the Glass NSPS specifies emission limits
as emission factors.
4. Selection of GACT for Glass Melting Furnaces
In evaluating GACT for the glass manufacturing area source
category, we reviewed the available data for glass melting furnaces
that have installed emission controls to reduce emissions of PM and
metal HAP. Electrostatic precipitators are by far the most commonly
used device for controlling emissions of PM or metal HAP from glass
furnaces. Among the furnaces that produce glass using metal HAP
compounds as raw materials, approximately 35 percent are controlled
with ESPs. This includes all of the controlled furnaces in the flat
glass and container glass sectors that are charged with metal HAP. For
furnaces in the pressed and blown glass sector that produce glass using
metal HAP, approximately 38 percent are controlled with ESPs and 24
percent are controlled with fabric filters.
The available test data on controlled emissions of PM and/or metal
HAP from furnaces were reviewed. The resulting data set includes the
results from 19 tests of PM emissions on ESP-controlled furnaces. The
emission factors developed from the data ranged from 0.032 to 0.25 lb
PM/ton of glass produced, and the average emission factor was
determined to be 0.11 lb PM/ton of glass produced. In order to
establish an emission limit representing the variation in normal
process operation and emissions from a well-controlled glass furnace,
we utilized a statistical approach by calculating the 99th percentile
of the data set. This resulted in a PM emission limit of 0.2 lb/ton.
As an alternative to expressing the identified limit in terms of
PM, we evaluated expressing the limit in terms of an equivalent
emission limit for metal HAP. In this regard, we reviewed the available
data on controlled furnaces that were charged with the glass
manufacturing metal HAP as raw materials. The resulting data set
included the results from 15 emission tests. The emission factors
developed from the data ranged from 0.0001 to 0.023 lb metal HAP/ton
and averaged 0.008 lb metal HAP/ton. Applying the same methodology that
we used to determine the PM emission limit for GACT, we developed GACT
in terms of an equivalent metal HAP emission limit to be 0.02 lb metal
HAP/ton of glass produced. We consider the PM emission factor of 0.2
lb/ton of glass produced and the glass manufacturing metal HAP emission
factor of 0.02 lb/ton of glass produced to be equivalent measures of
GACT for well-controlled glass manufacturing furnaces.
The estimated cost effectiveness for requiring furnaces charged
with glass manufacturing metal HAP to meet the 0.2 lb/ton PM emission
limit ranges from approximately $2,000 to $6,300 per ton of PM removed.
In terms of metal HAP removed, the cost effectiveness of meeting the
0.2 lb/ton PM emission limit depends largely on the amount of metal HAP
included in the batch formulation. For example, for furnaces that
produce glass containing 30 percent lead, the cost effectiveness would
be approximately $6,500 per ton of metal HAP removed. However, some
facilities produce glass using metal HAP in very small amounts; some
plants also use a glass manufacturing formulation that retains most of
the metal HAP in the glass product. In both cases, the cost
effectiveness for installing controls to meet the proposed 0.2 lb/ton
PM emission limit could exceed several million dollars per ton of metal
HAP removed. In such cases, the equivalent metal HAP emission limit of
0.02 lb/ton would allow plants to comply with the proposed rule by
using glass formulations with very low metal HAP emissions.
Our GACT determinations reflect the levels of emissions reductions
that are being achieved by well-controlled sources, and we have
concluded that the proposed rule would achieve significant reductions
of metal HAP and PM when applied to this source category. We considered
the costs and economic impacts of the proposed emission limits. We also
considered whether an emission limit more stringent than the 0.2 lb PM/
ton or 0.02 lb metal HAP/ton could be achieved by facilities using the
technologies described above. We are proposing that requiring more
stringent emission limits would not result in significantly greater
emission reductions than what we project the proposed rule would
achieve. Requiring additional controls would result in only marginal
reductions of emissions at very high costs for modest incremental
improvement in control for this area source category.
D. What are the proposed requirements for area sources?
1. Applicability and Compliance Dates
The proposed NESHAP would apply to any glass manufacturing plant
that is an area source of HAP emissions and operates one or more
furnaces which produce at least 50 tpy of glass per furnace by melting
a mixture of raw materials that includes compounds of one or more of
the glass manufacturing metal HAP.
Under this proposed rule, the compliance date for existing sources
would be 2 years following promulgation of the final rule. However,
owners or operators of affected sources could request an extension of
an additional one year to comply with the proposed rule, as allowed
under section 112(i)(3)(B) of the CAA and under Sec. 63.6(i)(4)(A), if
the additional time is needed to install emission controls. The request
for an extension of the compliance date would have to be submitted to
the permitting agency no later than 12 months prior to the compliance
date. In addition, the owner or operator would have to apply for a
revision of the facility's title V permit to
[[Page 53846]]
incorporate the conditions of the compliance date extension. The
compliance date for new or reconstructed sources would be the date of
promulgation of the final rule or the startup date for the source,
whichever is later. The compliance date for facilities with no affected
sources at the time of promulgation and which later change processes or
increase production and trigger applicability of the proposed rule,
would be 2 years following the date on which the facility made the
process changes or increased production and thereby became subject to
the proposed NESHAP.
2. Proposed Standards for New, Existing, and Reconstructed Sources
This proposed rule would require new and existing affected furnace
to comply with a PM emission limit of 0.2 lb/ton of glass produced or
an equivalent metal HAP emission limit of 0.02 lb/ton of glass
produced. We selected these emission limits based on GACT for glass
manufacturing furnaces, as explained in Section IV.C. of this preamble.
3. Initial Testing Requirements
The proposed rule would require an initial one-time performance
test on each affected furnace unless the furnace had been tested during
the previous 5 years, and the previous test demonstrated compliance
with the emission limits in this proposed rule using the same test
methods and procedures specified in this proposed rule. The initial
performance test is needed to demonstrate that affected sources meet
the emission limits.
To demonstrate compliance with the PM emission limits, the proposed
rule would require testing using Methods 5 or 17. Method 5 is a
standard method for measuring PM and is the test method specified in
the Glass NSPS. Method 17 is a standard alternative method for PM where
in-stack testing is appropriate. To meet the metal HAP emission limit,
plants would be required to test using Method 29, which is the standard
method for measuring any metal HAP.
4. Monitoring Requirements
Under the proposed rule, the owner or operator of an existing
affected glass furnace that is controlled with an ESP would be required
to monitor the secondary voltage and secondary electrical current to
each field of the ESP continuously and record the results at least once
every 8 hours. This proposed rule would require the owner or operator
of a new or reconstructed affected furnace equipped with an ESP to
install and operate one or more continuous parameter monitoring systems
to continuously measure and record the secondary voltage and electrical
current to each field of the ESP. We selected these parameter
monitoring requirements because secondary voltage and secondary
electrical current are reliable indicators of ESP performance. Either
of these parameters dropping below established levels provides an
indication that the electrical power to the ESP field in question has
decreased and collection efficiency may have decreased accordingly.
The proposed rule would require owners or operators of an existing
affected glass furnace that is controlled with a fabric filter to
monitor the fabric filter inlet temperature continuously and record the
results at least once every 8 hours. We selected this monitoring
requirement because it is important to ensure that the exhaust gas
temperature does not exceed the maximum allowable temperature for the
filter bags. This proposed rule would require the owner or operator of
a new or reconstructed affected furnace that is equipped with a fabric
filter to install and operate a bag leak detector. Bag leak detectors
provide a reliable and cost-effective indicator of tears and other
damage to fabric filter bags.
As an alternative to monitoring ESP secondary voltage and
electrical current or fabric filter inlet temperature, owners or
operators of affected furnaces equipped with either of these control
devices would have the option of requesting alternative monitoring, as
allowed under Sec. 63.8(f). The alternative monitoring request would
have to include a description of the monitoring device or monitoring
method that would be used; instrument location; inspection procedures;
quality assurance and quality control measures; the parameters that
would be monitored; and the frequency with which the operating
parameter values would be measured and recorded. The owner or operator
of an affected furnace that is equipped with a control device other
than an ESP or fabric filter, or that uses other methods to reduce
emissions, would be required to submit a request for alternative
monitoring, as described in Sec. 63.8(f).
5. Control Device Inspections
Under this proposed rule, the owner or operator of an affected
furnace would be required to conduct initial and periodic inspections
of the furnace control device. For fabric filters, the proposed rule
would require annual inspections of the ductwork, housing, and fabric
filter interior. For ESP, the proposed rule would require annual
inspections of the ductwork, hopper, and housing, and inspections of
the ESP interior every 2 years.
6. Notification and Recordkeeping Requirements
Under this proposal, owners and operators of all affected glass
manufacturing plants that operate at least one furnace that produces at
least 45 Mg/yr (50 tpy) of glass using any of the glass manufacturing
metal HAP as raw materials would be required to submit an Initial
Notification, as required under Sec. 63.9(b). Any facility with an
affected source would also have to submit a Notification of Compliance
Status, as specified in Sec. 63.9(h).
Owners and operators of glass manufacturing facilities would be
required to keep records of all notifications, as well as supporting
documentation for the notifications. In addition, they would be
required to keep records of performance tests; parameter monitoring
data; monitoring system audits and evaluations; operation and
maintenance of control devices and monitoring systems; control device
inspections; and glass manufacturing batch formulation and production.
We selected the requirement for submitting Initial Notifications
and Notifications of Compliance Status under this proposed rule because
these requirements are specified in the part 63 General Provisions
(subpart A). The specific recordkeeping requirements were selected
because they are consistent with the part 63 General Provisions and are
needed to document compliance with the requirements of this proposed
rule.
V. Proposed Area Source NESHAP for Secondary Nonferrous Metals
Processing
A. What area source category is affected by the proposed rule?
Secondary nonferrous metals processing facilities are facilities
that use furnaces to melt post-consumer nonferrous metal scrap to make
products including bars, ingots, blocks, and metal powders. The
Secondary Nonferrous Metals Processing area source category consists of
brass and bronze ingot makers, secondary magnesium processors, and
secondary zinc processors. This area source category was listed
pursuant to the Urban Air Toxics Strategy (67 FR 43112, June 26, 2002)
due to the emissions of the urban HAP arsenic, chromium, lead,
manganese, and nickel, all of which are metal HAP.
[[Page 53847]]
In May 2006, we sent an ICR to 98 secondary nonferrous metal
processing facilities identified by TRI, NEI and Internet searches, as
well as contact with trade associations. Of the 98 facilities receiving
the ICR, the ICR was determined to be applicable to 10 facilities.
Therefore there are 10 facilities in this area source category. These
facilities include brass and bronze ingot makers, secondary magnesium
processors, and secondary zinc processors. Reasons for why the ICR was
not applicable to many facilities that received the initial ICR mailing
included: (1) The facilities were no longer operating, (2) the
facilities were included in another secondary nonferrous category such
as secondary lead, secondary aluminum, or secondary copper, (3) the
facilities reported no emissions of the urban HAP arsenic, chromium,
lead, manganese, or nickel, (4) the facilities processed ferrous
material, or (5) the facilities performed no urban HAP-emitting
processing operations (e.g., scrap wholesalers).
B. What are the production processes and emissions points at facilities
that process secondary nonferrous metals?
Basic production processes at secondary nonferrous metals
processing facilities are: (1) Material handling and pretreatment,
which may include crushing and screening operations, (2) metal charging
and melting, (3) metal pouring and cooling, (4) removal of cooled metal
from molds, and (5) finishing.
Brass and bronze ingot makers include facilities where secondary
copper scrap (e.g., number 1 copper scrap) is used to supplement copper
alloy scrap that is remelted and poured into ingots. Furnaces used in
secondary brass and bronze ingot making include natural gas-fired
rotary kilns and electric induction furnaces.
Furnaces used in brass and bronze ingot making emit PM containing
metals. The PM emissions are totally dependent upon the incoming scrap
metal which may contain the following urban HAP: lead and smaller
amounts of cadmium, nickel, and manganese. In some brass and bronze
ingot making processes, exhaust gases are drawn through a quench
chamber to cool the gases prior to entering the baghouses to prevent
the gases from damaging or destroying the bag filters.
Furnaces in secondary magnesium processing emit PM which may
contain the urban HAP manganese. Furnaces used in secondary magnesium
processing include natural gas-fired crucibles and electric induction
furnaces. One secondary magnesium processor is currently in operation
in the U.S. and that facility is equipped with a baghouse on the
furnace exhaust.
Secondary zinc processors also emit PM that may contain lead during
crushing and screening operations and melting operations. Furnaces used
in secondary zinc processing include natural gas-fired kettle,
crucible, and retort furnaces and electric induction furnaces.
Furnace distillation with oxidation produces zinc oxide dust.
Distillation involves vaporization of zinc at temperatures from 982 to
1249 [deg]C (1800 to 2280 [deg]F). The zinc vapor discharges directly
into an air stream leading to a refractory-lined combustion chamber.
Excess air completes the oxidation and cools the zinc oxide dust which
is then collected in a fabric filter as the final product. Because the
zinc oxide dust is the product, well-performing fabric filters are used
to optimize product recovery.
According to the information we received, emissions from furnace
operations at the secondary nonferrous metals processing facilities and
secondary zinc crushing and screening operations are all currently
controlled by fabric filters or baghouses, and the collection
efficiency of these fabric filters or baghouses during normal
operations all exceed 99 percent.
1. Selection of Affected Source
Affected source means the collection of equipment and processes in
the source category or subcategory to which the subpart applies. The
affected source may be the same collection of equipment and processes
as the source category or it may be a subset of the source category.
For each rule, we must decide which individual pieces of equipment and
processes warrant standards in the context of the CAA section 112
requirements and the industry operating practices.
We are proposing to designate as the affected source in this
proposed area source NESHAP all secondary nonferrous metal HAP-emitting
operations at brass and ingot making, secondary magnesium processing,
and secondary zinc processing facilities. Specifically, based on data
from ICR responses, we are designating as the affected source all
crushing or screening operations at secondary zinc processing
facilities and furnace melting operations at all secondary nonferrous
metal processing facilities. This proposed rule includes requirements
for the control of emissions from all crushing or screening operations
at secondary zinc processing facilities and furnace melting operations
at all secondary nonferrous metal processing facilities.
2. Selection of Pollutants
For this proposed rule, we decided that it was impractical to
establish individual standards for each specific secondary nonferrous
metal HAP that could be present in the various processes (e.g.,
separate standards arsenic, chromium, lead, manganese, and nickel).
Establishing separate standards for each individual metal HAP would
impose costly and significantly more complex compliance and monitoring
requirements.
All of the urban HAP emitted by sources in this area source
category are metal HAP. When released, each of these secondary
nonferrous metal HAP compounds behaves as PM. Accordingly, standards
requiring good control of PM (e.g., requiring a baghouse) will also
effectively control the secondary nonferrous metal HAP emissions from
sources in this area source category. Based on these considerations, we
are proposing standards for Secondary Nonferrous Metals Processing
based on control of total PM as a surrogate pollutant for the
individual secondary nonferrous metal HAP.
A sufficient correlation exists between PM and these secondary
nonferrous metal HAP to rely on PM as a surrogate for both the presence
of the HAP and for their control. When released, each of the secondary
nonferrous metal HAP compounds behaves as PM. The control technologies
used for the control of PM emissions achieve comparable levels of
performance on the individual secondary nonferrous metal HAP.
Further, as previously mentioned, the amount of secondary
nonferrous metal HAP emissions from brass and bronze ingot making,
secondary magnesium processing, and secondary zinc processing can vary
depending on the HAP content in the incoming scrap metals. Because of
the inherent variability and unpredictability of the HAP compositions
and amounts in incoming scrap material, it is difficult to establish
individual numerical emissions for each secondary nonferrous metal HAP.
C. How was GACT determined?
All of the facilities in this source category have good operational
controls in-place and most incoming materials contain small quantities
of secondary nonferrous metal HAP. We evaluated the control
technologies and management practices that reduce HAP emissions that
are generally available for the secondary nonferrous metals
[[Page 53848]]
processing area source category. We also considered costs and economic
impacts in determining GACT. We believe the consideration of costs and
economic impacts is especially important for the well-controlled
secondary nonferrous metals processing area sources because, given
current well-controlled levels, requiring an additional level of
control would result in only marginal reductions in emissions at very
high costs for modest incremental improvement in control for this area
source category. We explain below in detail our proposed GACT
determinations.
1. GACT for Existing Sources
In identifying GACT for existing affected sources in the Secondary
Nonferrous Metals Processing area source category, we considered the
available data on the 10 existing facilities. In their ICR responses,
these facilities reported using baghouses on crushing or screening
operations at secondary zinc facilities and on furnace melting
operations at all facilities and that such baghouses performed at a PM
collection efficiency of at least 99 percent or achieved an outlet
concentration of at least 0.050 grams per dry standard cubic meter
(0.022 gr/dscf) where collection efficiency was not reported.
We are proposing using a baghouse or fabric filter that achieves a
PM control efficiency of at least 99 percent as GACT for existing
sources because we determined that this level of control is generally
available, is cost effective, and is effective for controlling
emissions of PM and secondary nonferrous metal HAP.
2. GACT for New Sources
In identifying GACT for new affected sources in the Secondary
Nonferrous Metals Processing area source category, we considered the
available data on the 10 existing facilities. The best performing
facilities reported that each baghouse used at their facilities
performed at a PM collection efficiency of at least 99.5 percent.
We contacted baghouse manufacturers to gather information on design
parameters and performance for new baghouse installations in the
secondary nonferrous metals processing industry. Furthermore, we also
considered the performance of baghouses at similar sources (e.g.,
melting furnaces used in other industries).
Based on available data on the 10 existing facilities, contact with
baghouse manufacturers, and consideration of baghouse performance at
similar sources, we are proposing using a baghouse or fabric filter
that achieves a PM control efficiency of at least 99.5 percent as GACT
for new affected sources.
D. What are the proposed requirements for area sources?
1. Applicability and Compliance Dates
The proposed standards would apply to any new or existing affected
source at an area source secondary nonferrous metals processing
facility. The affected source includes all crushing or screening
operations at a secondary zinc processing facility and all furnace
melting operations located at a secondary nonferrous metals processing
facility.
The owner or operator of an existing affected source would have to
comply with the standards by the date of promulgation of the final
rule. The owner or operator of a new affected source would be required
to comply with the standards by the date of promulgation of the final
rule, or upon initial startup, whichever is later.
2. Proposed Standards
The proposed standards would require the owner or operator of an
existing affected source to route the emissions from the affected
source through a fabric filter or baghouse that achieves a control
efficiency of at least 99.0 percent.
The proposed standards would require the owner or operator of a new
affected source to route the emissions from the affected source through
a fabric filter or baghouse that achieves a control efficiency of at
least 99.5 percent.
3. Proposed Compliance Requirements
Performance test requirements. The owner or operator of any
existing or new affected source would be required to conduct a one-time
initial performance test on the affected source. Existing affected
sources that were tested within the past 5 years of the compliance date
would be exempt from this one-time test if the test were conducted
using the same procedures specified in the proposed standards and
either no process changes had been made since the test, or the owner or
operator must demonstrate that the results of the performance test,
with or without adjustments, reliably demonstrated compliance despite
process changes.
Existing and new affected sources would have to be tested using
Methods 5 or 17. Method 5 is a standard method for measuring PM and
Method 17 is a standard alternative method for PM where in-stack
testing is appropriate.
Initial compliance demonstration requirements. The owner or
operator of any existing or new affected source would be required to
include initial compliance certifications for the proposed standard in
their Notification of Compliance Status.
The owner or operator of each existing and new affected source
would be required to conduct an initial inspection of each baghouse.
The owner or operator would be required to visually inspect the system
ductwork and baghouse unit for leaks and inspect the inside of each
baghouse for structural integrity and fabric filter condition. The
owner or operator would be required to record the results of the
inspection and any maintenance action taken.
For each installed baghouse which has been operated within 60 days
of the compliance date, the owner or operator would be required to
conduct the initial inspection no later than 60 days after the
applicable compliance date. For an installed baghouse which has not
been operated within 60 days of the compliance date, the owner or
operator would be required to conduct an initial inspection prior to
startup of the baghouse.
An initial inspection of the internal components of a baghouse is
not required if an inspection has been performed within the past 12
months.
Monitoring requirements. For existing affected sources, the owner
or operator would be required to conduct either daily EPA Method 22 VE
tests or weekly visual inspections of the baghouse system ductwork for
leaks, as well as yearly inspections of the interior of the baghouse to
determine its structural integrity and to determine the condition of
the fabric filter. These monitoring requirements would ensure that the
baghouse is kept in a satisfactory state of maintenance and repair and
continues to operate efficiently.
For new affected sources, the owner or operator would be required
to operate and maintain a bag leak detection system for each baghouse
used to comply with the proposed standards. We decided to require bag
leak detection systems because these systems can be incorporated into
the design and operation of new sources without retrofitting, as would
be the case if they were to be incorporate into existing sources. Bag
leak detection systems are typical requirements in our regulations of
new sources that are of the size and complexity as secondary nonferrous
metals processing facilities.
The proposed standards would require the owner or operator to keep
records of the date, place, and time of the monitoring; the person
conducting the monitoring; the monitoring
[[Page 53849]]
technique or method; the operating conditions during monitoring; and
the monitoring results.
Notification and recordkeeping requirements. We are proposing that
affected sources submit Initial Notifications and Notifications of
Compliance Status because they are needed to identify the affected
sources subject to the proposed standards and to confirm the compliance
status of the sources. To ensure that facilities have sufficient time
to submit the notifications once the rule is promulgated, we are
proposing that facilities submit the notifications no later than 120
days after the compliance date for this rule. The submittal date for
the notifications is based on the requirement for submitting Initial
Notifications specified in the part 63 General Provisions.
We are soliciting information on any control technologies or
management practices used to limit emissions of PM or metal HAP from
secondary nonferrous metals processing area sources and any cost
information associated with such control approaches. We also request
comment on GACT and the proposed standards.
VI. Proposed Exemption of Certain Area Source Categories From Title V
Permitting Requirements
We are proposing exemptions from title V permitting requirements
for affected facilities in the clay ceramics and secondary nonferrous
metals processing area source categories for the reasons described
below. Glass manufacturers that would be subject to this proposed rule
are already subject to title V requirements because they are major
sources of PM, NOX, or both. Therefore, we are not proposing
to exempt the glass manufacturing area source category from title V.
Section 502(a) of the CAA provides that the Administrator may
exempt an area source category from title V if he determines that
compliance with title V requirements is ``impracticable, infeasible, or
unnecessarily burdensome'' on an area source category. See CAA section
502(a). In December 2005, in a national rulemaking, EPA interpreted the
term ``unnecessarily burdensome'' in CAA section 502 and developed a
four-factor balancing test for determining whether title V is
unnecessarily burdensome for a particular area source category, such
that an exemption from title V is appropriate. See 70 FR 75320,
December 19, 2005 (``Exemption Rule'').
The four factors that EPA identified in the Exemption Rule for
determining whether title V is ``unnecessarily burdensome'' on a
particular area source category include: (1) Whether title V would
result in significant improvements to the compliance requirements,
including monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting, that are proposed
for an area source category (70 FR 75323); (2) whether title V
permitting would impose significant burdens on the area source category
and whether the burdens would be aggravated by any difficulty the
sources may have in obtaining assistance from permitting agencies (70
FR 75324); (3) whether the costs of title V permitting for the area
source category would be justified, taking into consideration any
potential gains in compliance likely to occur for such sources (70 FR
75325); and (4) whether there are implementation and enforcement
programs in place that are sufficient to assure compliance with the
NESHAP for the area source category, without relying on title V permits
(70 FR 75326).
In discussing the above factors in the Exemption Rule, we explained
that we considered on ``a case-by-case basis the extent to which one or
more of the four factors supported title V exemptions for a given
source category, and then we assessed whether considered together those
factors demonstrated that compliance with title V requirements would be
`unnecessarily burdensome' on the category, consistent with section
502(a) of the Act.'' See 70 FR 75323. Thus, in the Exemption Rule, we
explained that not all of the four factors must weigh in favor of
exemption for EPA to determine that title V is unnecessarily burdensome
for a particular area source category. Instead, the factors are to be
considered in combination, and EPA determines whether the factors,
taken together, support an exemption from title V for a particular
source category.
We examined the four factors for both of the area source categories
that we are proposing an exemption. As explained below, after
evaluating the relevant factors, we concluded that the requirements of
title V would be unnecessarily burdensome on the area source categories
for which we are proposing an exemption from title V.
In the Exemption Rule, in addition to determining whether
compliance with title V requirements would be unnecessarily burdensome
on an area source category, we considered, consistent with the guidance
provided by the legislative history of section 502(a), whether
exempting the area source category would adversely affect public
health, welfare or the environment. See 70 FR 15254-15255, March 25,
2005. As discussed below in sections VI.A and VI.B of this preamble, we
have determined that the proposed exemptions from title V would not
adversely affect public health, welfare and the environment.
A. Clay Ceramics Manufacturing
We compared the title V monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements (factor one) to the requirements in the proposed NESHAP
for the Clay Ceramics Manufacturing area source category. EPA
determined that the management practices currently used at most
facilities is GACT, and the proposed rule requires recordkeeping that
serves as monitoring and deviation reporting to assure compliance with
the NESHAP. The monitoring component of the first factor favors title V
exemption because this proposed standard provides monitoring that
assures compliance with the requirements of the proposed rule. For
atomized glaze spray operations, the proposed NESHAP requires the use
of PM control systems (e.g., water-wash system or wet scrubber) or
management practices (e.g., HVLP spray equipment); and periodic visual
APCD inspections at existing sources; daily VE tests; or an EPA-
approved alternate monitoring program. For kilns that fire glazed
ceramic ware, the proposed NESHAP requires management practices (i.e.,
kiln fuel and firing temperature) and a daily peak firing temperature
check. For those compliance options involving management practices,
monitoring other than recordkeeping is not practical or appropriate.
Records are required to assure that the management practices are
followed, including records of the type of air pollution control used,
the types and quantities of wet glazes used, the type of fuel used in
the kilns, and the kiln peak firing temperature.
As part of the first factor, we have considered the extent to which
title V could potentially enhance compliance for area sources covered
by this proposed rule through recordkeeping or reporting requirements.
We have considered the various title V recordkeeping and reporting
requirements, including requirements for a 6-month monitoring report,
deviation reports, and an annual certification in 40 CFR 70.6 and 71.6.
For any affected clay ceramics manufacturing area source facility, the
proposed NESHAP requires an initial notification and a notification of
compliance status. The proposed clay ceramics manufacturing NESHAP also
requires affected facilities to maintain records showing compliance
with the required equipment standard and management practices. The
information
[[Page 53850]]
required in the notifications and records is similar to the information
that must be provided in the deviation reports required under 40 CFR
70.6(a)(3) and 40 CFR 71.6(a)(3). We acknowledge that title V might
impose additional compliance requirements on this category, but we have
determined that the monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting
requirements of the proposed NESHAP for clay ceramics manufacturing are
sufficient to assure compliance with the provisions of the NESHAP, and
title V would not significantly improve those compliance requirements.
For the second factor, we determine whether title V permitting
would impose a significant burden on the area sources in the category
and whether that burden would be aggravated by any difficulty the
source may have in obtaining assistance from the permitting agency.
Subjecting any source to title V permitting imposes certain burdens and
costs that do not exist outside of the title V program. EPA estimated
that the average cost of obtaining and complying with a title V permit
was $38,500 per source for a 5-year permit period, including fees. See
Information Collection Request for Part 70 Operating Permit
Regulations, January 2000, EPA ICR Number 1587.05. EPA does not have
specific estimates for the burdens and costs of permitting clay
ceramics manufacturing area sources; however, there are certain
activities associated with the part 70 and 71 rules. These activities
are mandatory and impose burdens on the facility. They include reading
and understanding permit program guidance and regulations; obtaining
and understanding permit application forms; answering follow-up
questions from permitting authorities after the application is
submitted; reviewing and understanding the permit; collecting records;
preparing and submitting monitoring reports on a 6-month or more
frequent basis; preparing and submitting prompt deviation reports, as
defined by the State, which may include a combination of written,
verbal, and other communications methods; collecting information,
preparing, and submitting the annual compliance certification;
preparing applications for permit revisions every 5 years; and, as
needed, preparing and submitting applications for permit revisions. In
addition, although not required by the permit rules, many sources
obtain the contractual services of consultants to help them understand
and meet the permitting program's requirements. The ICR for part 70
provides additional information on the overall burdens and costs, as
well as the relative burdens of each activity described here. Also, for
a more comprehensive list of requirements imposed on part 70 sources
(hence, burden on sources), see the requirements of 40 CFR 70.3, 70.5,
70.6, and 70.7.
In assessing the second factor for clay ceramics manufacturing
facilities, we found that 34 of the 51 plants affected by the proposed
rule are small businesses, most with only 100 or fewer employees. These
small sources lack the technical resources needed to comprehend and
comply with permitting requirements and the financial resources needed
to hire the necessary staff or outside consultants. As discussed above,
title V permitting would impose significant costs on these area
sources, and, accordingly, we conclude that title V is a significant
burden for sources in this category. Most are small businesses with
limited resources, and under title V they would be subject to numerous
mandatory activities with which they would have difficulty complying,
whether they were issued a standard or a general permit. Furthermore,
given the number of sources in the category and the relatively small
size of many of those sources, it would likely be difficult for them to
obtain assistance from the permitting authority. Thus, we find that
factor two strongly supports title V exemption for clay ceramics
manufacturing facilities.
The third factor, which is closely related to the second factor, is
whether the costs of title V permitting for these area sources would be
justified, taking into consideration any potential gains in compliance
likely to occur for such sources. We explained above under the second
factor that the costs of compliance with title V would impose a
significant burden on most of the 51 clay ceramics manufacturing
facilities affected by the proposed rule. We also concluded in
considering the first factor that, while title V might impose
additional requirements, the monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting
requirements in the proposed NESHAP assure compliance with the
equipment standard and management practices imposed in the NESHAP. In
addition, below in our consideration of the fourth factor, we find that
there are adequate implementation and enforcement programs in place to
assure compliance with the NESHAP. Because the costs of compliance with
title V are so high, and the potential for gains in compliance is low,
title V permitting is not justified for this source category.
Accordingly, the third factor supports title V exemptions for clay
ceramics manufacturing area sources.
The fourth factor we considered in determining if title V is
unnecessarily burdensome is whether there are implementation and
enforcement programs in place that are sufficient to assure compliance
with the NESHAP without relying on title V permits. There are State
programs in place to enforce this area source NESHAP, and we believe
that the State programs are sufficient to assure compliance with this
NESHAP. We also noted that EPA retains authority to enforce this NESHAP
anytime under CAA sections 112, 113 and 114. We further noted that
small business assistance programs required by CAA section 507 may be
used to assist area sources that have been exempted from title V
permitting. Also, States and EPA often conduct voluntary compliance
assistance, outreach, and education programs (compliance assistance
programs), which are not required by statute. We determined that these
additional programs will supplement and enhance the success of
compliance with this area source NESHAP. We believe that the statutory
requirements for implementation and enforcement of this NESHAP by the
delegated States and EPA and the additional assistance programs
described above together are sufficient to assure compliance with this
area source NESHAP without title V permits.
In applying the fourth factor in the Exemption Rule, where EPA had
deferred action on the title V exemption for several years, we had
enforcement data available to demonstrate that States were not only
enforcing the provisions of the area source NESHAP that we exempted,
but that the States were also providing compliance assistance to assure
that the area sources were in the best position to comply with the
NESHAP. See 70 FR 75325-75326. In proposing this rule, we do not have
similar data available on the specific enforcement as in the Exemption
rule, but we have no reason to think that States will be less diligent
in enforcing this NESHAP. See 70 FR 75326. In fact, States must have
adequate programs to enforce the section 112 regulations and provide
assurances that they will enforce all NESHAP before EPA will delegate
the program. See 40 CFR part 63, subpart E.
In light of all of the above, we conclude that there are
implementation and enforcement programs in place that are sufficient to
assure compliance with the Clay Ceramics Manufacturing NESHAP without
relying on title V permitting.
[[Page 53851]]
Balancing the four factors for this area source category strongly
supports the proposed finding that title V is unnecessarily burdensome.
While title V might add additional compliance requirements if imposed,
we conclude that there would not be significant improvements to the
compliance requirements in the NESHAP because the requirements in this
proposed rule are specifically designed to assure compliance with the
standards and management practices imposed on this area source
category. We also conclude that the costs of compliance with title V,
in conjunction with the likely difficulty this number of small sources
would have obtaining assistance from the permitting authority, would
impose a significant burden on the sources. We determined that the high
relative costs would not be justified given that there is likely to be
little or no potential gain in compliance if title V were required.
And, finally, there are adequate implementation and enforcement
programs in place to assure compliance with the NESHAP. Thus, we
conclude that title V permitting is ``unnecessarily burdensome'' for
the Clay Ceramics Manufacturing area source category.
In addition to evaluating whether compliance with title V
requirements is ``unnecessarily burdensome'', EPA also considered,
consistent with guidance provided by the legislative history of section
502(a), whether exempting the Clay Ceramics Manufacturing area source
category from title V requirements would adversely affect public
health, welfare, or the environment. Exemption of the Clay Ceramics
Manufacturing area source category from title V requirements would not
adversely affect public health, welfare, or the environment because the
level of control would remain the same if a permit were required. The
title V permit program does not impose new substantive air quality
control requirements on sources, but instead requires that certain
procedural measures be followed, particularly with respect to
determining compliance with applicable requirements. As stated in our
consideration of factor one for this category, title V would not lead
to significant improvements in the compliance requirements applicable
to existing or new area sources.
Furthermore, one of the primary purposes of the title V permitting
program is to clarify, in a single document, the various and sometimes
complex regulations that apply to sources in order to improve
understanding of these requirements and to help sources achieve
compliance with the requirements. In this case, however, placing all
requirements for the sources in a title V permit would do little to
clarify the requirements applicable to the sources or assist them in
compliance with those requirements because of the simplicity of the
sources and the NESHAP, and the fact that these sources are not subject
to other NESHAP. We have no reason to think that new sources would be
substantially different from the existing sources. In addition, we
explained in the Exemption Rule that requiring permits for the large
number of area sources could, at least in the first few years of
implementation, potentially adversely affect public health, welfare, or
the environment by shifting State agency resources away from assuring
compliance for major sources with existing permits to issuing new
permits for these area sources, potentially reducing overall air
program effectiveness. Based on the above analysis, we conclude that
title V exemptions for the clay ceramics manufacturing area sources
will not adversely affect public health, welfare, or the environment
for all of the reasons explained above.
For the foregoing reasons, we are proposing to exempt the Clay
Ceramics Manufacturing area source category from title V permitting
requirements.
B. Secondary Nonferrous Metal Processing
We compared the title V monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements (factor one) to such requirements in the NESHAP for the
Secondary Nonferrous Metal Processing area source category. The
proposed rule requires that the affected sources conduct weekly
monitoring of the required control device (i.e., baghouse or fabric
filter) for existing sources and continuous monitoring of the required
control device for new sources. As discussed above, we believe that
these monitoring requirements are adequate to assure compliance with
the control requirements specified in the proposed NESHAP. The
monitoring component of the first factor favors title V exemption
because this proposed standard provides monitoring that assures
compliance with the requirements of the proposed rule.
We also considered the extent to which title V could potentially
enhance compliance for area sources covered by this NESHAP through
recordkeeping or reporting requirements. For any affected secondary
nonferrous metal processing area source facility, the proposed NESHAP
requires an initial notification and a compliance status report, which
would include certifications by responsible officials that the
facilities are in compliance and will continue to comply with the
NESHAP. In addition, the affected facilities must maintain records
showing compliance with the required monitoring. The required records
are similar to the information that must be provided in the deviation
reports required under 40 CFR 70.6(a)(3) and 40 CFR 71.6(a)(3). We
believe that these requirements are adequate to assure compliance with
the provisions of the NESHAP.
We acknowledge that title V includes some reporting requirements
that are not in the proposed NESHAP, including requirements for a 6-
month monitoring report, deviation reports, and an annual certification
in 40 CFR 70.6 and 71.6. However, as described above, we have
determined that the monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting
requirements under the proposed NESHAP are sufficient to assure
compliance with the provisions of the NESHAP. Therefore, we do not
believe that these additional title V reporting requirements would
result in significant improvements to the compliance requirements.
Under the second factor, we determined whether title V permitting
would impose a significant burden on the area sources in the category
and whether that burden would be aggravated by any difficulty the
source may have in obtaining assistance from the permitting agency.
Subjecting any source to title V permitting imposes certain burdens and
costs that do not exist outside of the title V program. EPA estimated
that the average cost of obtaining and complying with a title V permit
was $38,500 per source for a 5-year permit period, including fees. (See
Information Collection Request for Part 70 Operating Permit
Regulations, January 2000, EPA ICR Number 1587.05.) EPA does not have
specific estimates for the burdens and costs of permitting secondary
nonferrous metal processing area sources; however, there are certain
source activities associated with the part 70 and 71 rules. These
activities are mandatory and impose burdens on the source. They include
reading and understanding permit program guidance and regulations;
obtaining and understanding permit application forms; answering follow-
up questions from permitting authorities after the application is
submitted; reviewing and understanding the permit; collecting records;
preparing and submitting monitoring reports on a 6-month or more
frequent basis; preparing and submitting prompt deviation reports, as
defined by the
[[Page 53852]]
State, which may include a combination of written, verbal, and other
communications methods; collecting information, preparing, and
submitting the annual compliance certification; preparing applications
for permit revisions every 5 years; and, as needed, preparing and
submitting applications for permit revisions. In addition, although not
required by the permit rules, many sources obtain the contractual
services of professional scientists and engineers (consultants) to help
them understand and meet the permitting program's requirements. The ICR
for part 70 provides additional information on the overall burdens and
costs, as well as the relative burdens of each activity described here.
Also, for a more comprehensive list of requirements imposed on part 70
sources (hence, burden on sources), see the requirements of 40 CFR
70.3, 70.5, 70.6, and 70.7.
In assessing the second factor for secondary nonferrous metal
processing facilities, we found that 6 of the 10 plants are small
businesses, most with only a few employees. These small sources lack
the technical resources needed to comply with permitting requirements
and the financial resources needed to hire the necessary staff or
outside consultants. As discussed above, title V permitting would
impose significant economic and non-economic costs on these area
sources, and, accordingly, we conclude that title V is a significant
burden for sources in this category. In addition, many of the sources
in this area source category are small businesses. Under title V, they
would be subject to numerous mandatory activities, and because of
limited resources, they would have difficulty complying, whether they
were issued a standard or a general permit. Thus, we find that factor
two supports title V exemption for secondary nonferrous metal
processing facilities.
The third factor, which is closely related to the second factor, is
whether the costs of title V permitting for these area sources would be
justified, taking into consideration any potential gains in compliance
likely to occur for such sources. We explained above under the second
factor that the economic and non-economic costs of compliance with
title V would impose a significant burden on many secondary nonferrous
metal processing facilities. We also concluded in considering the first
factor that the monitoring and recordkeeping requirements in the NESHAP
are adequate to assure compliance with the management practices
proposed in the NESHAP and that the additional title V compliance
requirements would not significantly improve compliance with this
NESHAP. In addition, in our consideration of the fourth factor as
discussed below, we find that there are adequate implementation and
enforcement programs in place to assure compliance with the NESHAP.
Because the costs, both economic and non-economic, of compliance with
title V are so high, and the potential for gains in compliance is low,
title V permitting is not justified for this source category.
Accordingly, the third factor supports title V exemptions for secondary
nonferrous metal processing area sources.
The fourth factor we considered in determining whether title V
permitting for the Secondary Nonferrous Metals Processing area source
category is unnecessarily burdensome is whether there are
implementation and enforcement programs in place that are sufficient to
assure compliance with this NESHAP without relying on title V permits.
There are State programs in place to enforce this area source NESHAP,
and we believe that these State programs are sufficient to assure
compliance with this NESHAP. Furthermore, EPA retains authority to
enforce this NESHAP anytime under CAA sections 112, 113 and 114. In
addition to the State programs and EPA's authorities to implement and
enforce this NESHAP, small business assistance programs required by CAA
section 507 may be used to assist area sources that have been exempted
from title V permitting. Also, States and EPA often conduct voluntary
compliance assistance, outreach, and education programs (compliance
assistance programs), which are not required by statute. We believe
that the statutory requirements for implementation and enforcement of
this NESHAP by the delegated States and EPA and the additional
assistance programs described above together are sufficient to assure
compliance with this area source NESHAP without title V permits.
Furthermore, in applying the fourth factor in the Exemption Rule,
where EPA had deferred action on the title V exemption for several
years, we had enforcement data demonstrating that States were not only
enforcing the provisions of those area source NESHAP, but that the
States were also providing compliance assistance to assure that the
area sources were in the best position to comply with the NESHAP. See
70 FR 75325-75326. Although we do not have similar data in this case
because the Secondary Nonferrous Metals Processing area source NESHAP
has yet to be promulgated and enforced, we have no reason to think that
States will be less diligent in enforcing NESHAP.
In light of all of the above, we conclude that there are
implementation and enforcement programs in place that are sufficient to
assure compliance with the Secondary Nonferrous Metal Processing NESHAP
without relying on title V permitting.
Based on our assessment of the four factors as described above, we
find that, when considered together, the four factors demonstrate that
compliance with title V would be unnecessarily burdensome for sources
in the Secondary Nonferrous Metals Processing area source category.
While title V might add additional compliance requirements, we believe
that there would not be significant improvements to compliance with the
NESHAP because the requirements in this proposed rule assure compliance
with the standards. Furthermore, there are adequate implementation and
enforcement programs in place to assure compliance with the NESHAP. On
the other hand, the economic and non-economic costs of compliance with
title V, would impose a significant burden on the sources. We believe
that the high relative costs would not be justified given that there is
likely to be little or no potential gain in compliance if title V were
required. Based on these considerations, we conclude that title V
permitting is ``unnecessarily burdensome'' for the Secondary Nonferrous
Metal Processing area source category.
In addition to evaluating whether compliance with title V
requirements is ``unnecessarily burdensome'', EPA considered,
consistent with guidance provided by the legislative history of section
502(a), whether exempting the Secondary Nonferrous Metal Processing
area source category from title V requirements would adversely affect
public health, welfare, or the environment. Exemption of the Secondary
Nonferrous Metal Processing area source category from title V
requirements would not adversely affect public health, welfare, or the
environment because the level of control would remain the same even if
a permit were required. The title V permit program does not impose new
substantive air quality control requirements on sources, but instead
requires that certain procedural measures be followed, particularly
with respect to determining compliance with applicable requirements. As
stated in our consideration of factor one for this category, title V
would not lead to significant improvements in the
[[Page 53853]]
compliance requirements applicable to existing or new area sources.
Furthermore, one of the primary purposes of the title V permitting
program is to clarify, in a single document, the various and sometimes
complex regulations that apply to sources in order to improve
understanding of these requirements and to help sources to achieve
compliance with the requirements. In this case, however, placing all
requirements for the sources in a title V permit would do little to
clarify the requirements applicable to the sources or assist them in
compliance with those requirements because of the simplicity of the
sources and the NESHAP, and the fact that these sources are not subject
to other NESHAP or to other requirements under the CAA. We have no
reason to think that new sources would be substantially different from
the existing sources. In addition, we explained in the Exemption Rule
that requiring permits could, at least in the first few years of
implementation, potentially adversely affect public health, welfare, or
the environment by shifting State agency resources away from assuring
compliance for major sources with existing permits to issuing new
permits for these area sources, potentially reducing overall air
program effectiveness. We therefore conclude that title V exemptions
for the secondary nonferrous metal processing area sources will not
adversely affect public health, welfare, or the environment for all of
the reasons explained above.
For the foregoing reasons, we are proposing to exempt the Secondary
Nonferrous Metal Processing area source category from title V
permitting requirements.
VII. What are the impacts of the proposed standards for area sources?
A. Glass Manufacturing
1. Air Quality Impacts
For the three sources that would be required to install emission
controls to meet the emission limits specified in this proposed rule,
we estimated nationwide emissions of the glass manufacturing metal HAP
to be 26.2 Mg/yr (28.9 tpy). We estimate that the rule as proposed
would reduce nationwide emissions of the glass manufacturing metal HAP
by about 25.6 Mg/yr (28.2 tpy). This proposed rule would also reduce
emissions of PM by 377 Mg/yr (415 tpy). These estimates are based on
the assumption that an ESP would be installed on one pressed and blown
glass furnace, and that fabric filters would be installed on two
pressed and blown glass furnaces.
We project that, during the first 3 years of the proposed standard,
nine new furnaces would be constructed and that all nine furnaces would
be in the container glass sector. Because none of these new furnaces
are expected to use any of the glass manufacturing metal HAP as raw
materials, we project that none of the nine new furnaces would be
affected by this proposed rule. Therefore, we estimate that this
proposed rule would have no air quality impacts on new sources.
Indirect or secondary air impacts of this rule as proposed would
result from the increased electricity usage associated with the
operation of control devices. Assuming that plants would purchase
electricity from a power plant, we estimate that the standards as
proposed would increase secondary emissions of criteria pollutants,
including PM, sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides
(NOX), and carbon monoxide (CO) from power plants. For three
existing sources that would be required to install emission controls,
the proposed rule would increase secondary PM emissions by 0.28 Mg/yr
(0.31 tpy); secondary SO2 emissions by about 11.1 Mg/yr
(12.2 tpy); secondary NOX emissions by about 5.5 Mg/yr (6.1
tpy); and secondary CO emissions by about 0.18 Mg/yr (0.20 tpy).
For the estimated nine new sources within the Glass Manufacturing
industry over the next 3 years, we estimate no secondary air impacts
because we project that none of the new sources would be affected
sources under this proposed rule.
2. Water and Solid Waste Impacts
To comply with the rule as proposed, we expect that affected
facilities would control emissions by installing and operating ESP or
fabric filters, neither of which generates wastewater. Therefore, we
project that this rule as proposed would have no water impacts. Glass
manufacturers typically purchase highly refined and purified raw
materials, and they usually recycle internal captured baghouse and ESP
fines into the raw material to be fed back into the furnace. Therefore,
we expect the solid waste impacts to be far less than if facilities
were to dispose of their ESP and baghouse fines. We estimate that the
proposed rule would generate 37.7 Mg/yr (41.6 tpy) of solid waste from
existing sources. These estimates are based on the assumption that an
ESP would be installed on one pressed and blown glass furnace, and that
fabric filters would be installed on two pressed and blown glass
furnaces. For new sources, we estimate that this proposed rule would
have no impacts on solid waste generation.
3. Energy Impacts
Energy impacts consist of the electricity and fuel needed to
operate control devices and other equipment that would be required
under the proposed rule. We assume that affected facilities would
comply with the rule as proposed by installing and operating either ESP
or fabric filters which require electricity to operate. Specifically,
we assumed that an ESP would be installed on one pressed and blown
glass furnace, and that fabric filters would be installed on two
pressed and blown glass furnaces. Under this scenario, we project that
this rule as proposed would increase overall energy demand (i.e.,
electricity demand) for existing sources by about 1,160 megawatt-hours
per year, or 7.1 thousand gigajoules per year (6.7 billion British
thermal units per year). We estimate that none of the nine new sources
projected to go into operation during the first 3 years of the standard
would be affected by this proposed rule. Therefore, we are not
expecting any energy impacts for new sources.
4. Cost Impacts
The estimated total capital costs of this proposed rule for
existing sources are $1.42 million. These capital costs include the
costs to purchase and install ESP or fabric filters on the three
affected furnaces that are not currently controlled. The estimated
annualized cost of the proposed rule for existing sources would be
$491,000 per year. The annualized costs account for the annualized
capital costs of the control and monitoring equipment, operation and
maintenance expenses, performance testing, and recordkeeping costs for
the three existing facilities within the source category that would be
required to install new emission controls. The other affected
facilities would incur costs only for submitting the notifications and
for annual control device inspections because those facilities already
meet the testing, monitoring, and recordkeeping requirements that would
be required under the proposed rule.
We estimate that none of the nine new sources projected to go into
operation during the first 3 years of the standard would be affected
sources under this proposed rule. Therefore, we estimate no cost
impacts for new sources.
5. Economic Impacts
Both the magnitude of control costs needed to comply with the
proposed rule and the distribution of these costs
[[Page 53854]]
among affected facilities can have an impact in determining how the
market would change in response to the rule. Total annualized costs for
this proposed rule are estimated to be approximately $0.48 million.
Only three facilities are estimated to require additional capital costs
because of the proposed rule.
We obtained revenue data for two of the three companies that
operate facilities that would be required to install emission controls
under this proposed rule. Based on those data, cost-to-sales estimates
for those two affected facilities would be 0.66 percent and 1.0
percent, respectively. Revenue data were not available for the other
facility that would be affected by the proposed rule, so the national
average value of shipments per worker from the 2002 Census of
Manufacturers was used along with the average number of workers per
facility to estimate revenues. The resulting costs for this and the
other two facilities are relatively small and are not expected to
result in a significant market impact whether they are passed on to the
purchaser or absorbed by the company.
B. Clay Ceramics Manufacturing
Unlike the glass manufacturing industry, which still has some
uncontrolled sources of urban HAP, sources in the clay ceramics
manufacturing source category have made significant emission reductions
through process changes and installation of control equipment. Affected
sources are well-controlled and our proposed GACT determination
reflects such controls. We estimate that the only impact to affected
sources is the labor burden associated with the proposed reporting and
recordkeeping requirements. The cost associated with recordkeeping and
the one-time reporting requirements is estimated to be $974 per
facility.
C. Secondary Nonferrous Metals Processing
Similar to the clay ceramics manufacturing industry, all of the
affected sources in the secondary nonferrous metal processing category
have installed control equipment on their furnace melting operations
and are well-controlled. Affected sources are well-controlled and our
proposed GACT determinations reflect such controls. We estimate that
the only impact associated with the proposed rule is the reporting and
recordkeeping requirements. The cost associated with recordkeeping and
the one-time reporting requirements is estimated to be $390 per
facility.
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is a ``significant regulatory action'' because it may raise
novel legal or policy issues. Accordingly, EPA submitted this action to
OMB for review under Executive Order 12866, and any changes made in
response to OMB recommendations have been documented in the docket for
this action.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection requirements in the proposed NESHAP for
Clay Ceramics Manufacturing Area Sources, Glass Manufacturing Area
Sources, and Secondary Nonferrous Metals Processing Area Sources have
been submitted for approval to OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act,
44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The Information Collection Request (ICR)
document prepared by EPA has been assigned EPA ICR No. 2274.01.
The recordkeeping and reporting requirements in the proposed rule
is based on the information collection requirements in the part 63
General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A). These recordkeeping and
reporting requirements are mandatory pursuant to section 114 of the CAA
(42 U.S.C. 7414). All information submitted to EPA pursuant to the
information collection requirements for which a claim of
confidentiality is made is safeguarded according to EPA's implementing
regulations at 40 CFR part 2, subpart B.
The proposed NESHAP for Clay Ceramics Manufacturing area sources
requires applicable one-time notifications required by the NESHAP
General Provisions. Plant owners or operators would be required to
include compliance certifications for the management practices in their
Notifications of Compliance Status. The affected facilities are
expected to already have the required control and monitoring equipment
in place and already conduct the required monitoring and recordkeeping
activities.
The annual burden for this information collection averaged over the
first 3 years of this ICR is estimated to total 196 labor hours per
year at a cost of approximately $16,600 for 17 existing clay ceramics
manufacturing area sources (51 existing sources averaged over 3 years).
No capital/startup costs or operation and maintenance costs are
associated with the proposed information collection requirements. No
costs or burden hours are estimated for new clay ceramics manufacturing
area sources because no new area sources are projected for the next 3
years.
The proposed NESHAP for Glass Manufacturing also would require
applicable one-time notifications required by the NESHAP General
Provisions, monitoring of control device parameters, and recordkeeping.
The annual burden for this collection of information averaged over the
first 3 years of this ICR is estimated to total 190 labor hours per
year at a cost of $16,130 for the 21 glass manufacturing area source
facilities that would be subject to this proposed rule. This burden
estimate includes time for acquisition, installation, and use of
monitoring technology and systems, one-time notifications, and
recordkeeping. Total capital/startup costs associated with the
monitoring requirements (e.g., costs for hiring performance test
contractors and purchase of monitoring and file storage equipment) over
the 3-year period of the ICR are estimated at $15,990, with operation
and maintenance costs of $9,850/yr. No costs or burden estimates are
estimated for new sources because no new sources are project for the
next 3 years.
The proposed NESHAP for Secondary Nonferrous Metals Processing area
sources requires one-time notifications required by the NESHAP General
Provisions. Plant owners or operators would be required to conduct
performance tests and include compliance certifications for the percent
PM reduction achieved by the required control device in their
Notifications of Compliance Status. The affected facilities are
expected to already have the required control and monitoring equipment
in place and already conduct the required monitoring and recordkeeping
activities.
The annual burden for this information collection averaged over the
first 3 years of this ICR is estimated to total 15 labor hours per year
at a cost of approximately $1,300 for 3 existing secondary nonferrous
metals processing area sources (10 existing sources averaged over 3
years). No capital/startup costs or operation and maintenance costs are
associated with the proposed information collection requirements. No
costs or burden hours are estimated for new secondary nonferrous metals
processing area sources because no new area sources are projected for
the next 3 years.
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
[[Page 53855]]
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information;
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to, respond to a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in 40 CFR part 63 are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
To comment on EPA's need for this information, the accuracy of the
provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing
respondent burden, including the use of automated collection
techniques, EPA has established a public docket for this action, which
includes this ICR, under Docket ID numbers EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0424 (for
Clay Ceramics Manufacturing), EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0360 (for Glass
Manufacturing), and EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0940 (for Secondary Nonferrous
Metals Processing). Submit any comments related to the ICR for the
proposed rule to EPA and OMB. See the ADDRESSES section at the
beginning of this preamble for where to submit comments to EPA. Send
comments to OMB at the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC
20503, Attention: Desk Office for EPA. Because OMB is required to make
a decision concerning the ICR between 30 and 60 days after September
20, 2007, a comment to OMB is best assured of having its full effect if
OMB receives it by October 22, 2007. The final rules will respond to
any OMB or public comments on the information collection requirements
contained in the proposal.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act generally requires an agency to
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of 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
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. Small entities include small businesses, small not-for-
profit enterprises, and small governmental jurisdictions.
For the purposes of assessing the impacts of the proposed area
source NESHAP on small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A
small business whose parent company meets the Small Business
Administration size standards for small businesses found at 13 CFR
121.201 (less than 500 to 750 employees for Clay Ceramics
Manufacturing, less than 750 to 1,000 employees for Glass
Manufacturing, and less than 750 employees for Secondary Nonferrous
Metals Processing, depending on the size definition for the affected
NAICS code); (2) a small governmental 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 is not dominant in its field.
Based on our estimates, EPA does not expect any new clay ceramic or
secondary nonferrous metal processing sources to be constructed in the
foreseeable future and so therefore did not estimate the impacts for
new clay ceramics manufacturing or secondary nonferrous metal
processing sources. After considering the economic impacts of today's
proposed rules on small entities, I certify that this action will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. There would be no significant impacts on new or existing clay
ceramics manufacturing facilities or secondary nonferrous metals
processing facilities because these proposed rules do not create any
new requirements or burdens other than minimal notification
requirements. The minimal notification requirements consist of reading
the rule and providing two initial notifications to EPA: One notifying
EPA that the facility is subject to the rule and one notifying EPA that
the facility is in compliance with the rule. These notifications may be
submitted together. We estimate the cost of these one time notification
requirements to be $974 for each clay ceramics manufacturing facility
and $390 for each secondary nonferrous metals processing facility.
These costs were estimated based on the costs of technical, management,
and clerical support salaries. We also estimate that 34 clay ceramics
facilities and 6 secondary nonferrous metals processing facilities are
owned and operated by small businesses. These notification costs would
be less than 0.25 percent for any of these small businesses.
Twenty one glass manufacturing facilities are estimated to require
additional costs because of the proposed rule. None of these facilities
are small businesses. Therefore, there is no significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
We continue to be interested in the potential impacts of the
proposed action on small entities and welcome comments on issues
related to such impacts.
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 to 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 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 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 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 proposed rules 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 to the
private sector in any 1 year.
[[Page 53856]]
Thus, the proposed rules are not subject to the requirements of
sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. In addition, the proposed rules do
not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The proposed
rules contain no requirements that apply to such governments, impose no
obligations upon them, and would not result in expenditures by them of
$100 million or more in any 1 year or any disproportionate impacts on
them. Therefore, the proposed rules are not subject to 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 assure ``meaningful and timely
input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have
federalism implications'' are 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 rules do not have federalism implications. They would
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. The proposed rules impose
requirements on owners and operators of specified area sources and not
State and local governments. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply
to the proposed rules.
In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with EPA
policy to promote communications between EPA and State and local
governments, EPA specifically solicits comments on these proposed rules
from State and local officials.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000), requires EPA
to develop an accountable process to assure ``meaningful and timely
input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies
that have tribal implications.'' The proposed rules do not have tribal
implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. They would 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.
The proposed rules impose requirements on owners and operators of
specified area sources and not tribal governments. Thus, Executive
Order 13175 does not apply to the proposed rules. EPA specifically
solicits additional comments on the proposed rules from tribal
officials.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045: ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies
to any rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant''
as defined under 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, 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 EPA.
EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that
the analysis required under section 5-501 of the Executive Order has
the potential to influence the regulation. The proposed rules are not
subject to Executive Order 13045 because they are based on technology
performance and not on health or safety risks.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
The glass manufacturing rule is not a ``significant energy action''
as defined in Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not likely to have a significant
adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Further,
we have concluded that this proposed rule is not likely to have any
significant adverse energy effects. Existing energy requirements for
this industry would not be significantly impacted by the additional
pollution controls or other equipment that may be required by this
proposed rule.
The clay ceramics manufacturing and the secondary nonferrous metals
processing proposed rules are not ``significant energy actions'' as
defined in Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because
they are not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. Further, we have concluded that these
proposed rules are not likely to have any adverse energy effects. The
energy requirements for these industries would remain at existing
levels. No additional pollution controls or other equipment that would
consume energy are required by these proposed rules.
I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-113, 15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA
to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS) in its regulatory
activities, unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law
or otherwise impractical. The VCS are technical standards (e.g.,
materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and
business practices) that are developed or adopted by VCS bodies. The
NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when
EPA does not use available and applicable VCS.
The proposed rule as it applies to glass manufacturing involves
technical standards. EPA cites the following standards: EPA Methods 1,
1A, 2, 2A, 2C, 2F, 2G, 3, 3A, 3B, 4, 5, 17, and 22 in 40 CFR part 60,
appendix A.
Consistent with the NTTAA, EPA conducted searches to identify VCS
in addition to these EPA methods. No applicable VCS were identified for
EPA Methods 1A, 2A, 2F, 2G, and 22. The search and review results are
in the dockets for the proposed rules.
The search identified one VCS as an acceptable alternative to EPA
methods. The standard ASME PTC 19.10-1981, ``Flue and Exhaust Gas
Analyses,'' is cited in the proposed rule for glass manufacturing area
sources for its manual method for measuring the oxygen, carbon dioxide,
and carbon monoxide content of the exhaust gas. This part of ASME PTC
19.10-1981 is an acceptable alternative to EPA Method 3B.
The search for emissions measurement procedures identified 14 other
VCS. EPA determined that these 14 standards identified for measuring
emissions of the HAP or surrogates subject to emission standards in the
Glass Manufacturing proposed rule were impractical alternatives to EPA
test methods for the purposes of the rule. Therefore, EPA does not
intend to adopt these standards for this purpose. The reasons for the
determinations for the 14
[[Page 53857]]
methods are included in the docket for the Glass Manufacturing proposed
rule.
Sections 63.11440 and 63.11452 list the test methods included in
the proposed rule. For the methods required or referenced by the
proposed rule, a source may apply to EPA for permission to use
alternative test methods or alternative monitoring requirements in
place of any required testing methods, performance specifications, or
procedures under Sec. Sec. 63.7(f) and 63.8(f) of subpart A of the
General Provisions. EPA welcomes comments on this aspect of the
proposed rulemaking and, specifically, invites the public to identify
potentially-applicable voluntary consensus standards and to explain why
such standards should be used in this regulation.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) establishes
Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
EPA has determined that these proposed rules will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because they increase the
level of environmental protection for all affected populations without
having any disproportionately high and adverse human health or
environmental effects on any population, including any minority or low-
income population. These proposed rules establish national standards
for each area source category. EPA welcomes comments on this aspect of
the proposed rulemaking and, specifically, invites the public to
identify potentially-applicable voluntary consensus standards and to
explain why such standards should be used in this regulation.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hazardous
substances, Incorporations by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: September 12, 2007.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part
63 of the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as
follows:
PART 63--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart A--[AMENDED]
2. Section 63.14 is amended by revising paragraph (i)(1) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.14 Incorporations by reference.
* * * * *
(i) * * *
(1) ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10-1981, ``Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses [Part
10, Instruments and Apparatus],'' IBR approved for Sec. Sec.
63.309(k)(1)(iii), 63.865(b), 63.3166(a)(3), 63.3360(e)(1)(iii),
63.3545(a)(3), 63.3555(a)(3), 63.4166(a)(3), 63.4362(a)(3),
63.4766(a)(3), 63.4965(a)(3), 63.5160(d)(1)(iii), 63.9307(c)(2),
63.9323(a)(3), 63.11148(e)(3)(iii), 63.11155(e)(3), 63.11162(f)(3)(iii)
and (f)(4), 63.11163(g)(1)(iii) and (g)(2), 63.11410(j)(1)(iii), Table
5 of subpart DDDDD of this part, 63.11452(b)(12), and
63.11466(c)(1)(iii).
* * * * *
3. Part 63 is amended by adding subpart RRRRRR to read as follows:
Subpart RRRRRR--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Clay Ceramics Manufacturing Area Sources
Applicability and Compliance Dates
Sec.
63.11435 Am I subject to this subpart?
63.11436 What parts of my plant does this subpart cover?
63.11437 What are my compliance dates?
Standards, Compliance, and Monitoring Requirements
63.11438 What are the standards for new and existing sources?
63.11439 What are the initial compliance demonstration requirements
for new and existing sources?
63.11440 What are the monitoring requirements for new and existing
sources?
63.11441 What are the notification requirements?
63.11442 What are the recordkeeping requirements?
Other Requirements and Information
63.11443 What General Provisions apply to this subpart?
63.11444 What definitions apply to this subpart?
63.11445 Who implements and enforces this subpart?
63.11446--63.11447 [Reserved]
Tables to Subpart RRRRRR of Part 63
Table 1 to Subpart RRRRRR of Part 63--Applicability of General
Provisions to Subpart RRRRRR
Subpart RRRRRR--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Clay Ceramics Manufacturing Area Sources
Applicability and Compliance Dates
Sec. 63.11435 Am I subject to this subpart?
(a) You are subject to this subpart if you own or operate a clay
ceramics manufacturing facility (as defined in Sec. 63.11444), with an
atomized glaze spray booth or kiln that fires glazed ceramic ware, that
processes more than 45 megagrams per year (Mg/yr) (50 tons per year
(tpy)) wet clay and is an area source of hazardous air pollutant (HAP)
emissions.
(b) If you are an owner or operator of an area source subject to
this subpart, you are exempt from the obligation to obtain a permit
under 40 CFR part 70 or 71, provided you are not required to obtain a
permit under 40 CFR 70.3(a) or 71.3(a) for a reason other than your
status as an area source under this subpart. Notwithstanding the
previous sentence, you must continue to comply with the provisions of
this subpart applicable to area sources.
63.11436 What parts of my plant does this subpart cover?
(a) This subpart applies to any existing, new, or reconstructed
affected source located at a clay ceramics manufacturing facility.
(b) The affected source includes all atomized glaze spray booths
and kilns that fire glazed ceramic ware located at a clay ceramics
manufacturing facility.
(c) An affected source is existing if you commenced construction or
reconstruction of the affected source before September 20, 2007.
(d) An affected source is new if you commenced construction or
reconstruction of the affected source on or after September 20, 2007.
Sec. 63.11437 What are my compliance dates?
(a) If you have an existing affected source, you must comply with
the standards no later than the date of publication of the final rule
in the Federal Register.
(b) If you have a new or reconstructed affected source, you must
comply with this subpart according to paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this
section.
[[Page 53858]]
(1) If you start up your affected source on or before the date of
publication of the final rule in the Federal Register, you must comply
with this subpart no later than the date of publication of the final
rule in the Federal Register.
(2) If you start up your affected source after the date of
publication of the final rule in the Federal Register, you must comply
with this subpart upon initial startup of your affected source.
Standards, Compliance, and Monitoring Requirements
Sec. 63.11438 What are the standards for new and existing sources?
(a) For each kiln that fires glazed ceramic ware, you must maintain
the peak temperature below 1540 [deg]C (2800 [deg]F) and comply with
one of the management practices in paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this
section:
(1) Use natural gas, or equivalent clean-burning fuel, as the kiln
fuel; or
(2) Use an electric-powered kiln.
(b) You must maintain annual wet glaze usage records for your
facility.
(c) For each atomized glaze spray booth located at a clay ceramics
manufacturing facility that uses more than 227 Mg/yr (250 tpy) of wet
glaze(s), you must comply with the equipment standard requirements in
paragraph (c)(1) of this section or the management practice in
paragraph (c)(2) of this section.
(1) Route the emissions from the atomized glaze spray booth through
an APCD, as defined in Sec. 63.11444.
(i) Operate and maintain the APCD in accordance with the equipment
manufacturer's specifications;
(ii) Monitor the APCD according to the applicable requirements in
Sec. 63.11440.
(2) Alternatively, use wet glazes containing less than 0.1 (weight)
percent clay ceramics metal HAP.
(d) For each atomized glaze spray booth located at a clay ceramics
manufacturing facility that uses 227 Mg/yr (250 tpy) or less of wet
glaze(s), you must comply with one of the management practices in
paragraphs (d)(1) and (2) of this section.
(1) Employ waste minimization practices, as defined in Sec.
63.11444; or
(2) Alternatively, comply with the equipment standard requirements
described in paragraph (c)(1) of this section or the management
practice described in paragraph (c)(2) of this section.
(e) Surface applications (e.g., wet glazes) containing less than
0.1 (weight) percent clay ceramics metal HAP do not have to be
considered in determination of the 227 Mg/yr (250 tpy) threshold for
wet glaze usage.
Sec. 63.11439 What are the initial compliance demonstration
requirements for new and existing sources?
(a) You must demonstrate initial compliance with the applicable
management practices in Sec. 63.11438 by submitting a Notification of
Compliance Status. For any wet spray glaze operations controlled with
an APCD, you must conduct an initial inspection of the control
equipment as described in Sec. 63.11440(b)(1) within 60 days of the
compliance date and include the results of the inspection in the
Notification of Compliance Status.
(b) You must demonstrate initial compliance with the applicable
management practices in Sec. 63.11438 by submitting the Notification
of Compliance Status within 120 calendar days after the applicable
compliance date specified in Sec. 63.11437.
Sec. 63.11440 What are the monitoring requirements for new and
existing sources?
(a) For each kiln firing glazed ceramic ware, you must conduct a
daily check of the peak firing temperature. If the peak temperature
exceeds 1540 [deg]C (2800 [deg]F), you must take corrective action
according to your standard operating procedures.
(b) For each existing, new, or reconstructed affected source with
an atomized glaze spray booth equipped with an APCD, you must
demonstrate compliance by conducting the monitoring activities in
paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) of this section:
(1) Initial control device inspection. You must conduct an initial
inspection of each particulate matter (PM) control device according to
the requirements in paragraphs (b)(1)(i) or (ii) of this section. You
must conduct each inspection no later than 60 days after your
applicable compliance date for each installed control device which has
been operated within 60 days of the compliance date. For an installed
control device which has not been operated within 60 days of the
compliance date, you must conduct an initial inspection prior to
startup of the control device.
(i) For each wet control system, you must verify the presence of
water flow to the control equipment. You must also visually inspect the
system ductwork and control equipment for leaks and inspect the
interior of the control equipment (if applicable) for structural
integrity and the condition of the control system. An initial
inspection of the internal components of a wet control system is not
required if an inspection has been performed within the past 12 months.
(ii) For each baghouse, you must visually inspect the system
ductwork and baghouse unit for leaks. You must also inspect the inside
of each baghouse for structural integrity and fabric filter condition.
You must record the results of the inspection and any maintenance
action in the logbook required in paragraph (d) of this section. An
initial inspection of the internal components of a baghouse is not
required if an inspection has been performed within the past 12 months.
(2) Periodic inspections/maintenance. Following the initial
inspections, you must perform periodic inspections and maintenance of
each PM control device according to the requirements in paragraphs
(b)(2)(i) or (ii) of this section.
(i) You must inspect and maintain each wet control system according
to the requirements in paragraphs (b)(2)(i)(A) through (C) of this
section.
(A) You must conduct a daily inspection to verify the presence of
water flow to the wet control system.
(B) You must conduct weekly visual inspections of the system
ductwork and control equipment for leaks.
(C) You must conduct inspections of the interior of the wet control
system (if applicable) to determine the structural integrity and
condition of the control equipment every 12 months.
(ii) You must inspect and maintain each baghouse according to the
requirements in paragraphs (b)(2)(ii)(A) and (B) of this section.
(A) You must conduct weekly visual inspections of the system
ductwork for leaks.
(B) You must conduct inspections of the interior of the baghouse
for structural integrity and to determine the condition of the fabric
filter every 12 months.
(3) As an alternative to the monitoring activities in paragraph
(b)(2) of this section, you may demonstrate compliance by:
(i) Conducting a daily 30-minute visible emissions (VE) test (i.e.,
no visible emissions) using EPA Method 22 (40 CFR part 60, appendix A-
7); or
(ii) Using an approved alternative monitoring technique under Sec.
63.8(f).
(c) If the results of the visual inspection, VE test, or
alternative monitoring technique conducted under paragraph (b) of this
section indicate an exceedance, you must take corrective action
according to the equipment manufacturer's specifications or
instructions.
(d) You must maintain records of your monitoring activities
described in paragraphs (a) through (c) of this section. You may use
your existing operating permit documentation to meet the monitoring
requirements if it includes, but is not limited to, the
[[Page 53859]]
monitoring records listed in paragraphs (d)(1) through (5) of this
section related to any kiln peak temperature checks, visual
inspections, VE tests, or alternative monitoring:
(1) The date, place, and time;
(2) Person conducting the activity;
(3) Technique or method used;
(4) Operating conditions during the activity; and
(5) Results.
Sec. 63.11441 What are the notification requirements?
(a) You must submit an Initial Notification required by Sec.
63.9(a)(2) no later than 120 calendar days after the applicable
compliance date specified in Sec. 63.11437. The Initial Notification
must include the information specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (4)
of this section and may be combined with the Notification of Compliance
Status required in paragraph (b) of this section.
(1) The name and address of the owner or operator;
(2) The address (i.e., physical location) of the affected source;
and
(3) An identification of the relevant standard, or other
requirement, that is the basis of the notification and source's
compliance date.
(b) You must submit a Notification of Compliance Status required by
Sec. 63.9(h) no later than 120 calendar days after the applicable
compliance date specified in Sec. 63.11437. In addition to the
information required in Sec. 63.9(h)(2), your notification(s) must
include each compliance certification in paragraphs (b)(1) through (3)
of this section that applies to you and may be combined with the
Initial Notification required in paragraph (a) of this section.
(1) For each kiln firing glazed ceramic ware, you must certify that
you are maintaining the peak temperature below 1540[deg]C (2800[deg]F)
and complying with one of the management practices in paragraphs
(b)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section:
(i) Using natural gas, or equivalent clean-burning fuel, as the
kiln fuel; or
(ii) Using an electric-powered kiln.
(2) For atomized glaze spray booths, you must certify that your
facility's annual wet glaze usage is above or below 227 Mg/yr (250
tpy).
(3) For atomized glaze spray booths located at a clay ceramics
manufacturing facility that uses more than 227 Mg/yr (250 tpy) of wet
glaze(s), you must certify that:
(i) You are operating and maintaining an APCD in accordance with
the equipment manufacturer's specifications, and you have conducted an
initial control device inspection for each wet control system and
baghouse associated with wet spray glaze operations; or
(ii) Alternatively, you are using wet glazes containing less than
0.1 (weight) percent clay ceramics metal HAP.
(4) For atomized glaze spray booths located at a clay ceramics
manufacturing facility that uses 227 Mg/yr (250 tpy) or less of wet
glaze(s), you must certify that:
(i) You are employing waste minimization practices, as defined in
Sec. 63.11444; or
(ii) You are complying with the requirements in Sec.
63.11441(b)(3)(i) or (ii).
Sec. 63.11442 What are the recordkeeping requirements?
(a) You must keep the records specified in paragraphs (a)(1) and
(2) of this section.
(1) A copy of each notification that you submitted to comply with
this subpart, including all documentation supporting any Initial
Notification or Notification of Compliance Status that you submitted,
according to the requirements in Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xiv).
(2) Records of all required measurements needed to document
compliance with management practices as required in Sec.
63.10(b)(2)(vii), including records of monitoring and inspection data
required by Sec. Sec. 63.11440.
(b) Your records must be in a form suitable and readily available
for expeditious review, according to Sec. 63.10(b)(1).
(c) As specified in Sec. 63.10(b)(1), you must keep each record
for 5 years following the date of each occurrence, measurement,
maintenance, corrective action, report, or record.
(d) You must keep each record onsite for at least 2 years after the
date of each occurrence, measurement, maintenance, corrective action,
report, or record, according to Sec. 63.10(b)(1). You may keep the
records offsite for the remaining 3 years.
Other Requirements and Information
Sec. 63.11443 What General Provisions apply to this subpart?
Table 1 to this subpart shows which parts of the General Provisions
in Sec. Sec. 63.1 through 63.16 apply to you.
Sec. 63.11444 What definitions apply to this subpart?
Terms used in this subpart are defined in the Clean Air Act, in
Sec. 63.2, and in this section as follows:
Air pollution control device (APCD) means any equipment that
reduces the quantity of a pollutant that is emitted to the air.
Examples of APCD currently used on glaze spray booths include, but are
not limited to, wet scrubbers, fabric filters, water curtains, and
water-wash systems.
Atomization means the conversion of a liquid into a spray or mist
(i.e., collection of drops), often by passing the liquid through a
nozzle.
Clay ceramics manufacturing facility means a plant site that
manufactures pressed tile, sanitaryware, dinnerware, or pottery. For
the purposes of this area source rule, the following types of
facilities are not part of the regulated category: artisan potters, art
studios, school and university ceramic arts programs, and any facility
that uses less than 45 Mg/yr (50 tpy) of wet clay.
Clay ceramics metal HAP means an oxide or other compound of
chromium, lead, manganese, or nickel, which were listed for Clay
Ceramics Manufacturing in the Revised Area Source Category List (67 FR
70428, November 22, 2002).
Glaze means a coating of colored, opaque, or transparent material
applied to ceramic products before firing.
Glaze spray booth means a type of equipment used for spraying glaze
on ceramic products.
High-volume, low-pressure (HVLP) spray equipment means a type of
air atomized spray equipment that operates at low atomizing air
pressure (0.1 to 10 pounds per square inch (psi) at the air nozzle) and
uses 15 to 30 cubic feet per minute (cfm) of air to minimize the amount
of overspray and bounce back.
Kiln means equipment used for the initial curing or firing of glaze
on ceramic ware. A kiln may operate continuously or by batch.
Nonatomizing glaze application technique means the application of
glaze in the form of a liquid stream without atomization. Such
techniques include, but are not limited to, dipping, centrifugal disc,
waterfall, flow coaters, curtain coaters, silk-screening, and any
direct application by roller, brush, pad, or other means facilitating
direct transfer of glaze.
Plant site means all contiguous or adjoining property that is under
common control, including properties that are separated only by a road
or other public right-of-way. Common control includes properties that
are owned, leased, or operated by the same entity, parent entity,
subsidiary, or any combination thereof.
Waste minimization practices mean those routine procedures employed
to minimize material losses and prevent unnecessary waste generation,
for example, minimizing glaze overspray emissions using HVLP spray
equipment (defined in this section) or similar spray equipment;
minimizing HAP emissions during cleanup of spray glazing
[[Page 53860]]
equipment; operating and maintaining spray glazing equipment according
to manufacturer's instructions; and minimizing spills through careful
handling of HAP-containing glaze materials.
Water curtain means an APCD that draws the exhaust stream through a
continuous curtain of moving water to scrub out suspended particulate.
Also called a drip curtain or waterfall.
Water-wash system means an APCD that uses a series of baffles to
redirect the upward exhaust stream through a water wash chamber with
downward water flow to scrub out suspended particulate.
Sec. 63.11445 Who implements and enforces this subpart?
(a) This subpart can be implemented and enforced by the U.S. EPA or
a delegated authority such as your State, local, or tribal agency. If
the U.S. EPA Administrator has delegated authority to your State,
local, or tribal agency, then that agency has the authority to
implement and enforce this subpart. You should contact your U.S. EPA
Regional Office to find out if this subpart is delegated to your State,
local, or tribal agency.
(b) In delegating implementation and enforcement authority of this
subpart to a State, local, or tribal agency under 40 CFR part 63,
subpart E, the authorities contained in paragraph (c) of this section
are retained by the Administrator of the U.S. EPA and are not
transferred to the State, local, or tribal agency.
(c) The authorities that will not be delegated to State, local, or
tribal agencies are listed in paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of this
section.
(1) Approval of alternatives to the applicability requirements in
Sec. Sec. 63.11435 and 63.11436, the compliance date requirements in
Sec. 63.11437, and the management practices in Sec. 63.11438.
(2) Approval of a major change to a test method under Sec.
63.7(e)(2)(ii) and (f). A ``major change to test method'' is defined in
Sec. 63.90.
(3) Approval of a major change to monitoring under Sec. 63.8(f). A
``major change to monitoring'' is defined in Sec. 63.90.
(4) Approval of a major change to recordkeeping/reporting under
Sec. 63.10(f). A ``major change to recordkeeping/reporting'' is
defined in Sec. 63.90.
Sec. Sec. 63.11446-63.11447 [Reserved]
Tables to Subpart RRRRRR of Part 63
As stated in Sec. 63.11443, you must comply with the requirements
of the NESHAP General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A) shown in
the following table:
Table 1 to Subpart RRRRRR of Part 63.--Applicability of General
Provisions to Subpart RRRRRR
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Citation Subject
------------------------------------------------------------------------
63.1(a)(1)-(a)(4), (a)(6), (a)(10)- Applicability.
(a)(12), (b)(1), (b)(3), (c)(1),
(c)(2)\1\, (c)(5), (e).
63.2................................... Definitions.
63.3................................... Units and Abbreviations.
63.4................................... Prohibited Activities and
Circumvention.
63.6(a), (b)(1)-(b)(5), (b)(7), (c)(1), Compliance with Standards and
(c)(2), (c)(5), (e)(1), (f), (g), (i), Maintenance Requirements.
(j).
63.8(a)(1), (a)(2), (b), (c)(1)(i)- Monitoring Requirements.
(c)(1)(ii), (c)(2), (c)(3), (f).
63.9(a), (b)(1), (b)(2), (b)(5), (c), Notification Requirements.
(d), (h)(1)-(h)(3), (h)(5), (h)(6),
(i), (j).
63.10(a), (b)(1), (b)(2)(vii), Recordkeeping and Reporting
(b)(2)(xiv), (b)(3), (c), (c)(1), (f). Requirements.
63.12.................................. State Authority and
Delegations.
63.13.................................. Addresses.
63.14.................................. Incorporations by Reference.
63.15.................................. Availability of Information and
Confidentiality.
63.16.................................. Performance Track Provisions.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Section 63.11435(b) of this subpart exempts area sources from the
obligation to obtain title V operating permits.
4. Part 63 is amended by adding subpart SSSSSS to read as follows:
Subpart SSSSSS--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Glass Manufacturing Area Sources
Applicability and Compliance Dates
Sec.
63.11448 Am I subject to this subpart?
63.11449 What parts of my plant does this subpart cover?
63.11450 What are my compliance dates?
Standards, Compliance, and Monitoring Requirements
63.11451 What are the standards for new and existing sources?
63.11452 What are the performance test requirements for new and
existing sources?
63.11453 What are the initial compliance demonstration requirements
for new and existing sources?
63.11454 What are the monitoring requirements for new and existing
sources?
63.11455 What are the continuous compliance requirements for new and
existing sources?
Notifications and Records
63.11456 What are the notification requirements?
63.11457 What are the recordkeeping requirements?
Other Requirements and Information
63.11458 What General Provisions apply to this subpart?
63.11459 What definitions apply to this subpart?
63.11460 Who implements and enforces this subpart?
63.11461 [Reserved]
Tables to Subpart SSSSSS of Part 63
Table 1 to Subpart SSSSSS of Part 63--Emission Limits
Table 2 to Subpart SSSSSS of Part 63--Applicability of General
Provisions to Subpart SSSSSS
Subpart SSSSSS--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Glass Manufacturing Area Sources
Applicability and Compliance Dates
Sec. 63.11448 Am I subject to this subpart?
(a) You are subject to this subpart if you own or operate a glass
manufacturing facility that is an area source of hazardous air
pollutant (HAP) emissions and meets the criteria specified in
paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of this section.
(1) A glass manufacturing facility is a plant site that
manufactures flat glass, glass containers, or pressed and blown glass
by melting a mixture of raw materials, as defined in Sec. 63.11459, to
produce molten glass and forming the molten glass into sheets,
containers, or other shapes.
(2) An area source of HAP emissions is any stationary source or
group of
[[Page 53861]]
stationary sources within a contiguous area under common control that
does not have the potential to emit any single HAP at a rate of 9.07
megagrams per year (Mg/yr) (10 tons per year (tpy)) or more and any
combination of HAP at a rate of 22.68 Mg/yr (25 tpy) or more.
(3) Your glass manufacturing facility produces glass that contains
compounds of one or more glass manufacturing metal HAP, as defined in
Sec. 63.11459, as raw materials in a glass manufacturing batch
formulation.
(b) [Reserved]
Sec. 63.11449 What parts of my plant does this subpart cover?
(a) This subpart applies to each existing, new, or reconstructed
affected glass melting furnace that is located at a glass manufacturing
facility and satisfies the requirements specified in paragraphs (a)(1)
and (2) of this section.
(1) The furnace is charged with compounds of one or more glass
manufacturing metal HAP as raw materials.
(2) The furnace is used to produce glass at a rate of at least 45
Mg/yr (50 tpy).
(b) An affected source is an existing source if you commenced
construction or reconstruction of the affected source before September
20, 2007.
(c) An affected source is a new (or reconstructed) source if you
commenced construction (or reconstruction) of the affected source on or
after September 20, 2007.
Sec. 63.11450 What are my compliance dates?
(a) If you have an existing affected source, you must comply with
the applicable emission limits specified in Sec. 63.11451 of this
subpart no later than 2 years after the date of publication of the
final rule in the Federal Register. As specified in section
112(i)(3)(B) of the Clean Air Act and in Sec. 63.6(i)(4)(i)(A), you
may request that the Administrator or delegated authority grant an
extension allowing up to 1 additional year to comply with the
applicable emission limits if such additional period is necessary for
the installation of emission controls.
(b) If you have a new or reconstructed affected source, you must
comply with this subpart according to paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this
section.
(1) If you start up your affected source on or before the date of
publication of the final rule in the Federal Register, you must comply
with the applicable emission limits specified in Sec. 63.11451 of this
subpart no later than the date of publication of the final rule in the
Federal Register.
(2) If you start up your affected source after the date of
publication of the final rule in the Federal Register, you must comply
with the applicable emission limits specified in Sec. 63.11451 of this
subpart upon initial startup of your affected source.
(c) If you own or operate a furnace that produces glass at an
annual rate of less than 45 Mg/yr (50 tpy), and you increase glass
production for that furnace to an annual rate of at least 45 Mg/yr (50
tpy), and the furnace is charged with compounds of one or more glass
manufacturing metal HAP, you must comply with the applicable emission
limits specified in Sec. 63.11451 within 2 years of the date on which
you increased the glass production rate for the furnace to at least 45
Mg/yr (50 tpy).
(d) If you own or operate a furnace that produces glass at an
annual rate of at least 45 Mg/yr (50 tpy) and is not charged with glass
manufacturing metal HAP, and you begin production of a glass product
that includes one or more glass manufacturing metal HAP as raw
materials, you must comply with the applicable emission limits
specified in Sec. 63.11451 within 2 years of the date on which you
introduced production of the glass product that contains glass
manufacturing metal HAP.
(e) You must meet the notification requirements in Sec. 63.11456
according to the schedule in Sec. 63.11456 and in 40 CFR part 63,
subpart A. Some of the notifications must be submitted before you are
required to comply with emission limits specified in this subpart.
Standards, Compliance, and Monitoring Requirements
Sec. 63.11451 What are the standards for new and existing sources?
If you are an owner or operator of an affected furnace, as defined
in Sec. 63.11449(a), you must meet the applicable emission limits
specified in Table 1 to this subpart.
Sec. 63.11452 What are the performance test requirements for new and
existing sources?
(a) If you own or operate an affected furnace that is subject to an
emission limit specified in Table 1 to this subpart, you must conduct a
performance test according to paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) and paragraph
(b) of this section.
(1) For each affected furnace, you must conduct a performance test
within 180 days after your compliance date and report the results in
your Notification of Compliance Status, except as specified in
paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(2) You are not required to conduct a performance test on the
affected furnace if you satisfy the conditions described in paragraphs
(a)(2)(i) through (iii) of this section.
(i) You conducted a performance test on the affected furnace within
the past 5 years of the compliance date using the same test methods and
procedures specified in paragraph (b) of this section.
(ii) The performance test demonstrated that the affected furnace
met the applicable emission limits specified in Table 1 to this
subpart.
(iii) Either no process changes have been made since the test, or
you can demonstrate that the results of the performance test, with or
without adjustments, reliably demonstrate compliance with the
applicable emission limit.
(b) You must conduct each performance test according to the
requirements in Sec. 63.7 and paragraphs (b)(1) through (20) of this
section.
(1) Install and validate all monitoring equipment required by this
subpart before conducting the performance test.
(2) Conduct the performance test according to the requirements in
Sec. 63.7 and under the conditions specified in this section.
(3) You may not conduct performance tests during periods of
startup, shutdown, or malfunction, as specified in Sec. 63.7(e)(1).
(4) Conduct the test while the source is operating at the maximum
production rate.
(5) Conduct at least three separate test runs with a minimum
duration of 1 hour for each test run, as specified in Sec. 63.7(e)(3).
(6) Record the test date.
(7) Identify the emission source tested.
(8) Collect and record the emission test data listed in this
section for each run of the performance test.
(9) Locate all sampling sites at the outlet of the control device
or at the stack prior to any releases to the atmosphere.
(10) Select the locations of sampling ports and the number of
traverse points using Method 1 or 1A of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-1.
(11) Measure the gas velocity and volumetric flow rate using Method
2, 2A, 2C, 2F, or 2G of 40 CFR part 60, appendices A-1 and A-2, during
each test run.
(12) Conduct gas molecular weight analysis using Methods 3, 3A, or
3B of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-2, or ASME PTC 19.10-1981--Part 10,
during each test run.
(13) Measure gas moisture content using Method 4 of 40 CFR part 60,
appendix A-3, during each test run.
[[Page 53862]]
(14) Measure the particulate matter (PM) mass emission rate at the
outlet of the control device or at the stack using Method 5 or 17 of 40
CFR part 60, appendices A-3 or A-6, for each test run.
(15) Calculate the PM mass emission rate in the exhaust stream for
each test run.
(16) Measure and record the glass production rate (kilograms (tons)
per hour of product) for each test run.
(17) To meet the PM emission limit, calculate the production-based
PM mass emission rate (g/kg (lbs/ton)) for each test run using Equation
1.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP20SE07.001
Where:
MP = production-bass PM mass emission rate, grams of PM per kilogram
(pounds of PM per ton) of glass produced.
ER = PM mass emission rate measured using Methods 5 or 17 during
each performance test run, grams (pounds) per hour.
P = average glass production rate for the performance test,
kilograms (tons) of glass produced per hour.
(18) Calculate the 3-hour block average production-based PM mass
emission rate as the average of the production-based PM mass emission
rates for each test run.
(19) To meet the metal HAP emission limit, calculate the
production-based metal HAP mass emission rate (g/kg (lbs/ton)) for each
test run using Equation 2.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP20SE07.002
Where:
MPM = production-bass metal HAP mass emission rate, grams of metal
HAP per kilogram (pounds of metal HAP per ton) of glass produced.
ERM = Metal HAP mass emission rate measured using Method 29 of 40
CFR part 60, appendix A-8 during each performance test run, grams
(pounds) per hour.
P = average glass production rate for the performance test,
kilograms (tons) of glass produced per hour.
(20) Calculate the 3-hour block average production-based metal HAP
mass emission rate as the average of the production-based metal HAP
mass emission rates for each test run.
Sec. 63.11453 What are the initial compliance demonstration
requirements for new and existing sources?
(a) If you own or operate an affected source, you must submit a
Notification of Compliance Status in accordance with Sec. 63.9(h) and
63.11456(b).
(b) For each existing affected furnace that is subject to the
emission limits specified in Table 1 to this subpart, you must
demonstrate initial compliance according to the requirements in
paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of this section.
(1) For each fabric filter that is used to meet the emission limits
specified in Table 1 to this subpart, you must visually inspect the
system ductwork and fabric filter unit for leaks. You must also inspect
the inside of each fabric filter for structural integrity and fabric
filter condition. You must record the results of the inspection and any
maintenance action as required in Sec. 63.11457.
(2) For each electrostatic precipitator (ESP) that is used to meet
the emission limits specified in Table 1 to this subpart, you must
verify the proper functioning of the electronic controls for corona
power and rapper operation, that the corona wires are energized, and
that adequate air pressure is present on the rapper manifold. You must
also visually inspect the system ductwork and ESP housing unit and
hopper for leaks and inspect the interior of the ESP to determine the
condition and integrity of corona wires, collection plates, hopper, and
air diffuser plates.
(3) You must conduct each inspection specified in paragraphs (b)(1)
and (2) of this section no later than 60 days after your applicable
compliance date specified in Sec. 63.11450, except as specified in
paragraph (b)(3)(i) and (ii) of this section.
(i) An initial inspection of the internal components of a fabric
filter is not required if an inspection has been performed within the
past 12 months.
(ii) An initial inspection of the internal components of an ESP is
not required if an inspection has been performed within the past 24
months.
(4) You must satisfy the applicable requirements for performance
tests specified in Sec. 63.11452.
(c) For each new or reconstructed affected furnace that is subject
to the emission limits specified in Table 1 to this subpart and is
controlled with a fabric filter, you must install, operate, and
maintain a bag leak detection system according to paragraphs (c)(1)
through (3) of this section.
(1) Each bag leak detection system must meet the specifications and
requirements in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) through (viii) of this section.
(i) The bag leak detection system must be certified by the
manufacturer to be capable of detecting PM emissions at concentrations
of 1 milligram per dry standard cubic meter (0.00044 grains per actual
cubic foot) or less.
(ii) The bag leak detection system sensor must provide output of
relative PM loadings. 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).
(iii) The bag leak detection system must be equipped with an alarm
system that will sound when the system detects an increase in relative
particulate loading over the alarm set point established according to
paragraph (c)(1)(iv) of this section, and the alarm must be located
such that it can be heard by the appropriate plant personnel.
(iv) In the initial adjustment of the bag leak detection system,
you must establish, at a minimum, the baseline output by adjusting the
sensitivity (range) and the averaging period of the device, the alarm
set points, and the alarm delay time.
(v) Following initial adjustment, you shall not adjust the
averaging period, alarm set point, or alarm delay time without approval
from the Administrator or delegated authority except as provided in
paragraph (c)(1)(vi) of this section.
(vi) Once per quarter, you 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 by paragraph (c)(2) of this
section.
(vii) You must install the bag leak detection sensor downstream of
the fabric filter.
(viii) Where multiple detectors are required, the system's
instrumentation and alarm may be shared among detectors.
(2) You must develop and submit to the Administrator or delegated
authority for approval a site-specific monitoring plan for each bag
leak detection system. You must operate and maintain the bag leak
detection system according to the site-specific monitoring plan at all
times. Each monitoring plan must describe the items in paragraphs
(c)(2)(i) through (vi) of this section.
(i) Installation of the bag leak detection system;
(ii) Initial and periodic adjustment of the bag leak detection
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;
[[Page 53863]]
(v) How the bag leak detection system output will be recorded and
stored; and
(vi) Corrective action procedures as specified in paragraph (c)(3)
of this section. In approving the site-specific monitoring plan, the
Administrator or delegated authority may allow owners and operators
more than 3 hours to alleviate a specific condition that causes an
alarm if the owner or operator identifies in the monitoring plan this
specific condition as one that could lead to an alarm, adequately
explains why it is not feasible to alleviate this condition within 3
hours of the time the alarm occurs, and demonstrates that the requested
time will ensure alleviation of this condition as expeditiously as
practicable.
(3) For each bag leak detection system, you must initiate
procedures to determine the cause of every alarm within 1 hour of the
alarm. Except as provided in paragraph (c)(2)(vi) of this section, you
must alleviate the cause of the alarm within 3 hours of the alarm by
taking whatever corrective action(s) are necessary. Corrective actions
may include, but are not limited to the following:
(i) Inspecting the fabric filter for air leaks, torn or broken bags
or filter media, or any other condition that may cause an increase in
PM emissions;
(ii) Sealing off defective bags or filter media;
(iii) Replacing defective bags or filter media or otherwise
repairing the control device;
(iv) Sealing off a defective fabric filter compartment;
(v) Cleaning the bag leak detection system probe or otherwise
repairing the bag leak detection system; or
(vi) Shutting down the process producing the PM emissions.
(d) For each new or reconstructed affected furnace that is subject
to the emission limits specified in Table 1 to this subpart and is
controlled with an ESP, you must install, operate, and maintain
according to the manufacturer's specifications, one or more continuous
parameter monitoring systems (CPMS) for measuring and recording the
secondary voltage and secondary electrical current to each field of the
ESP according to paragraphs (d)(1) through (13) of this section.
(1) The CPMS must have an accuracy of 1 percent of the secondary
voltage and secondary electrical current, or better.
(2) Your CPMS must be capable of measuring the secondary voltage
and secondary electrical current over a range that extends from a value
that is at least 20 percent less than the lowest value that you expect
your CPMS to measure, to a value that is at least 20 percent greater
than the highest value that you expect your CPMS to measure.
(3) The signal conditioner, wiring, power supply, and data
acquisition and recording system of your CPMS must be compatible with
the output signal of the sensors used in your CPMS.
(4) The data acquisition and recording system of your CPMS must be
able to record values over the entire range specified in paragraph
(d)(2) of this section.
(5) The data recording system associated with your CPMS must have a
resolution of one-half of the required overall accuracy of your CPMS,
as specified in paragraph (d)(1) of this section, or better.
(6) Your CPMS must be equipped with an alarm system that will sound
when the system detects a decrease in secondary voltage or secondary
electrical current below the alarm set point established according to
paragraph (d)(7) of this section, and the alarm must be located such
that it can be heard by the appropriate plant personnel.
(7) In the initial adjustment of the CPMS, you must establish, at a
minimum, the baseline output by adjusting the sensitivity (range) and
the averaging period of the device, the alarm set points, and the alarm
delay time.
(8) You must install each sensor of the CPMS in a location that
provides representative measurement of the appropriate parameter over
all operating conditions, taking into account the manufacturer's
guidelines.
(9) You must perform an initial calibration of your CPMS based on
the procedures specified in the manufacturer's owner's manual.
(10) Your CPMS must be designed to complete a minimum of one cycle
of operation for each successive 15-minute period. To have a valid hour
of data, you must have at least three of four equally-spaced data
values (or at least 75 percent of the total number of values if you
collect more than four data values per hour) for that hour (not
including startup, shutdown, malfunction, or out of control periods).
(11) You must record valid data from at least 90 percent of the
hours during which the affected source or process operates.
(12) You must record the results of each inspection, calibration,
initial validation, and accuracy audit.
(13) At all times, you must maintain your CPMS including, but not
limited to, maintaining necessary parts for routine repairs of the
CPMS.
(e) For each new or reconstructed affected furnace that is subject
to the emission limits specified in Table 1 to this subpart and is
controlled a device other than a fabric filter or an ESP, you must
prepare and submit a monitoring plan to EPA or the delegated authority
for approval. Each plan must contain the information in paragraphs
(e)(1) through (5) of this section.
(1) A description of the device;
(2) Test results collected in accordance with Sec. 63.11452
verifying the performance of the device for reducing PM to the levels
required by this subpart;
(3) Operation and maintenance plan for the control device
(including a preventative maintenance schedule consistent with the
manufacturer's instructions for routine and long-term maintenance) and
continuous monitoring system;
(4) A list of operating parameters that will be monitored to
maintain continuous compliance with the applicable emission limits; and
(5) Operating parameter limits based on monitoring data collected
during the performance test.
Sec. 63.11454 What are the monitoring requirements for new and
existing sources?
(a) For each monitoring system required by this subpart, you must
install, calibrate, operate, and maintain the monitoring system
according to the manufacturer's specifications and the requirements
specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (6) of this section.
(1) You must install each sensor of your monitoring system in a
location that provides representative measurement of the appropriate
parameter over all operating conditions, taking into account the
manufacturer's guidelines.
(2) You must perform an initial calibration of your monitoring
system based on the manufacturer's recommendations.
(3) You must use a monitoring system that is designed to complete a
minimum of one cycle of operation for each successive 15-minute period.
(4) For each existing affected furnace, you must record the value
of the monitored parameter at least every 8 hours. The value can be
recorded electronically or manually.
(5) You must record the results of each inspection, calibration,
monitoring system maintenance, and corrective action taken to return
the monitoring system to normal operation.
(6) At all times, you must maintain your monitoring system
including, but not limited to, maintaining necessary parts for routine
repairs of the system.
[[Page 53864]]
(b) For each existing furnace that subject to the emission limits
specified in Table 1 to this subpart and is controlled with an ESP, you
must meet the requirements specified in paragraphs (b)(1) or (2) of
this section.
(1) You must monitor the secondary voltage and secondary electrical
current to each field of the ESP according to the requirements of this
section, or
(2) You must submit a request for alternative monitoring, as
described in paragraph (g) of this section.
(c) For each existing furnace that is subject to the emission
limits specified in Table 1 to this subpart and is controlled with a
fabric filter, you must meet the requirements specified in paragraphs
(c)(1) or (2) of this section.
(1) You must monitor the inlet temperature to the fabric filter
according to the requirements of this section, or
(2) You must submit a request for alternative monitoring, as
described in paragraph (g) of this section.
(d) For each new or reconstructed furnace that is subject to the
emission limits specified in Table 1 to this subpart and is controlled
with an ESP, you must monitor the voltage and electrical current to
each field of the ESP on a continuous basis using one or more CPMS
according to the requirements for CPMS specified in Sec. 63.11453(d).
(e) For each new or reconstructed furnace that is subject to the
emission limits specified in Table 1 to this subpart and is controlled
with a fabric filter, you must install and operate a bag leak detection
system according to the requirements for CPMS specified in Sec.
63.11453(c).
(f) For each new, reconstructed, or existing furnace that is
subject to the emission limits specified in Table 1 to this subpart and
is equipped with a control device other than an ESP or fabric filter,
you must meet the requirements in Sec. 63.8(f) and paragraph (f)(1) of
this section.
(1) Submit a request for approval of alternative monitoring methods
to the Administrator no later than the submittal date for the
Notification of Compliance Status, as specified in Sec. 63.11456(b).
The request must contain the information specified in paragraphs
(f)(1)(i) through (v) of this section.
(i) Description of the alternative add-on air pollution control
device (APCD).
(ii) Type of monitoring device or method that will be used,
including the sensor type, location, inspection procedures, quality
assurance and quality control (QA/QC) measures, and data recording
device.
(iii) Operating parameters that will be monitored.
(iv) Frequency that the operating parameter values will be measured
and recorded.
(v) Procedures for inspecting the condition and operation of the
control device and monitoring system.
(g) If you wish to use a monitoring method other than those
specified in paragraphs (b)(1) or (c)(1) of this section, you must meet
the requirements in Sec. 63.8(f) and paragraph (g)(1) of this section.
(1) Submit a request for approval of alternative monitoring methods
to the Administrator no later than the submittal date for the
Notification of Compliance Status, as specified in Sec. 63.11456(b).
The request must contain the information specified in paragraphs
(g)(1)(i) through (v) of this section.
(i) Type of monitoring device or method that will be used,
including the sensor type, location, inspection procedures, QA/QC
measures, and data recording device.
(ii) Operating parameters that will be monitored.
(iii) Frequency that the operating parameter values will be
measured and recorded.
(v) Procedures for inspecting the condition and operation of the
monitoring system.
(vi) Explanation for how the alternative monitoring method will
provide assurance that the emission control device is operating
properly.
(2) [Reserved]
Sec. 63.11455 What are the continuous compliance requirements for new
and existing sources?
(a) You must be in compliance with the applicable emission limits
and work practices in this subpart at all times, except during periods
of startup, shutdown, and malfunction.
(b) You must always operate and maintain your affected source,
including air pollution control and monitoring equipment, according to
the provisions in Sec. 63.6(e)(1)(i).
(c) For each affected furnace that is subject to the emission
limits specified in Table 1 to this subpart, you must monitor the
performance of the furnace emission control device according to the
requirements in Sec. Sec. 63.6(e)(1) and 63.8(c) and paragraphs (c)(1)
through (4) of this section.
(1) For each affected furnace that is controlled with an ESP, you
must monitor the parameters specified in Sec. 63.11454(b) in
accordance with the requirements of Sec. 63.11454(a) or as specified
in your approved alternative monitoring plan.
(2) For each affected furnace that is controlled with a fabric
filter, you must monitor the parameter specified in Sec. 63.11454(c)
in accordance with the requirements of Sec. 63.11454(a) or as
specified in your approved alternative monitoring plan.
(3) For each affected furnace that is controlled with a device
other than a fabric filter or ESP, you must comply with the
requirements of your approved alternative monitoring plan, as required
in Sec. 63.11454(g).
(4) For each monitoring system that is required under this subpart,
you must keep the records specified in Sec. 63.11457.
(d) Following the initial inspections, you must perform periodic
inspections and maintenance of each affected furnace control device
according to the requirements in paragraphs (d)(1) through (4) of this
section.
(1) For each fabric filter, you must conduct inspections at least
every 12 months according to paragraphs (d)(1)(i) through (iii) of this
section.
(i) You must inspect the ductwork and fabric filter unit for
leakage.
(ii) You must inspect the interior of the fabric filter for
structural integrity and to determine the condition of the fabric
filter.
(iii) If an initial inspection is not required, as specified in
Sec. 63.11453(b)(3)(i), the first inspection must not be more than 12
months from the last inspection.
(2) For each ESP, you must conduct inspections according to the
requirements in paragraphs (d)(2)(i) through (iii) of this section.
(i) You must conduct visual inspections of the system ductwork,
housing unit, and hopper for leaks at least every 12 months.
(ii) You must conduct inspections of the interior of the ESP to
determine the condition and integrity of corona wires, collection
plates, plate rappers, hopper, and air diffuser plates every 24 months.
(iii) If an initial inspection is not required, as specified in
Sec. 63.11453(b)(3)(ii), the first inspection must not be more than 24
months from the last inspection.
(3) You must record the results of each periodic inspection
specified in this section in a logbook (written or electronic format),
as specified in Sec. 63.11457.
(4) If the results of a required inspection indicate a problem with
the operation of the emission control system, you must take immediate
corrective action to return the control device to normal operation
according to the equipment manufacturer's specifications or
instructions.
[[Page 53865]]
Notifications and Records
Sec. 63.11456 What are the notification requirements?
(a) If you own or operate an affected furnace, as defined in Sec.
63.11449(a), you must submit an Initial Notification in accordance with
Sec. 63.9(b) and paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of this section by the
dates specified.
(1) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(2) and (3), if you start up your
affected source before the date of publication of the final rule in the
Federal Register, you must submit an Initial Notification not later
than 120 calendar days after the date of publication of the final rule
in the Federal Register.
(2) The Initial Notification must include the information specified
in Sec. 63.9(b)(2)(i) to (iv).
(3) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(3), if you start up your new or
reconstructed affected source on or after the date of publication of
the final rule in the Federal Register, you must submit an Initial
Notification not later than 120 calendar days after you become subject
to this subpart.
(b) You must submit a Notification of Compliance Status in
accordance with Sec. 63.9(h) and the requirements in paragraphs (b)(1)
and (2) of this section.
(1) If you own or operate an affected furnace and are required to
conduct a performance test, you must submit a Notification of
Compliance Status, including the performance test results, before the
close of business on the 60th calendar day following the completion of
the performance test, according to Sec. 60.8 or Sec. 63.10(d)(2).
(2) If you own or operate an affected furnace and satisfy the
conditions specified in Sec. 63.11452(a)(2) and are not required to
conduct a performance test, you submit a Notification of Compliance
Status, including the results of the previous performance test, before
the close of business on the compliance date specified in Sec.
63.11450, according to Sec. 63.10(d)(2).
Sec. 63.11457 What are the recordkeeping requirements?
(a) You must keep the records specified in paragraphs (a)(1)
through (9) of this section.
(1) A copy of any Initial Notification and Notification of
Compliance Status that you submitted and all documentation supporting
those notifications, according to the requirements in Sec.
63.10(b)(2)(xiv).
(2) The records in Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(iii) through (v) related to
startup, shutdown, and malfunction.
(3) The records specified in Sec. 63.10(b)(2) and (c)(1) through
(13).
(4) The records required to show continuous compliance with each
emission limit that applies to you, as specified in Sec. 63.11455.
(5) For each affected source, records of production rate on a
process throughput basis (either feed rate to the process unit or
discharge rate from the process unit).
(i) The production data must include the amount (weight or weight
percent) of each ingredient in the batch formulation, including all
glass manufacturing metal HAP compounds.
(ii) [Reserved]
(6) Records of maintenance activities and inspections performed on
control devices as specified in Sec. Sec. 63.11453(b) and 63.11455(d),
according to paragraphs (a)(6)(i) through (v) of this section.
(i) The date, place, and time of inspections of control device
ductwork, interior, and operation.
(ii) Person conducting the inspection.
(iii) Technique or method used to conduct the inspection.
(iv) Control device operating conditions during the time of the
inspection.
(v) Results of the inspection and description of any corrective
action taken.
(7) Records of all required monitoring data and supporting
information including all calibration and maintenance records.
(8) For each bag leak detection system, the records specified in
paragraphs (a)(8)(i) through (iii) of this section.
(i) Records of the bag leak detection system output;
(ii) Records of bag leak detection system adjustments, including
the date and time of the adjustment, the initial bag leak detection
system settings, and the final bag leak detection system settings; and
(iii) The date and time of all bag leak detection system alarms,
the time that procedures to determine the cause of the alarm were
initiated, the cause of the alarm, an explanation of the actions taken,
the date and time the cause of the alarm was alleviated, and whether
the alarm was alleviated within 3 hours of the alarm.
(9) Records of any approved alternative monitoring method(s) or
test procedure(s).
(b) Your records must be in a form suitable and readily available
for expeditious review, according to Sec. 63.10(b)(1).
(c) You must record the results of each inspection and maintenance
action in a logbook (written or electronic format). You must keep the
logbook onsite and make the logbook available to the permitting
authority upon request.
(d) As specified in Sec. 63.10(b)(1), you must keep each record
for a minimum of 5 years following the date of each occurrence,
measurement, maintenance, corrective action, report, or record.
You must keep each record onsite for at least 2 years after the
date of each occurrence, measurement, maintenance, corrective action,
report, or record, according to Sec. 63.10(b)(1). You may keep the
records offsite for the remaining 3 years.
Other Requirements and Information
Sec. 63.11458 What General Provisions apply to this subpart?
You must satisfy the requirements of the General Provisions in 40
CFR part 63, subpart A, as specified in Table 2 to this subpart.
Sec. 63.11459 What definitions apply to this subpart?
Terms used in this subpart are defined in the Clean Air Act, in
Sec. 63.2, and in this section as follows:
Air pollution control device (APCD) means any equipment that
reduces the quantity of a pollutant that is emitted to the air.
Cullet means recycled glass that is mixed with raw materials and
charged to a glass melting furnace to produce glass.
Electrostatic precipitator (ESP) means an APCD that removes PM from
an exhaust gas stream by applying an electrical charge to particles in
the gas stream and collecting the charged particles on plates carrying
the opposite electrical charge.
Fabric filter means an APCD used to capture PM by filtering a gas
stream through filter media.
Glass manufacturing metal HAP means an oxide or other compound of
any of the following metals included in the list of urban HAP for the
Integrated Urban Air Toxics Strategy and for which Glass Manufacturing
was listed as an area source category: arsenic, cadmium, chromium,
lead, manganese, and nickel.
Glass melting furnace means a unit comprising a refractory-lined
vessel in which raw materials are charged, melted at high temperature,
refined, and conditioned to produce molten glass. The unit includes
foundations, superstructure and retaining walls, raw material charging
system, heat exchangers, melter cooling system, exhaust system,
refractory brick work, fuel supply and electrical boosting equipment,
integral control systems and instrumentation, and appendages for
conditioning and transferring molten glass to forming apparatuses.
[[Page 53866]]
Particulate matter (PM) means, for purposes of this subpart,
emissions of PM that serve as a measure of total particulate emissions,
as measured by Methods 5 or 17 (40 CFR part 60, appendices A-3 and A-
6), and as a surrogate for glass manufacturing metal HAP compounds
contained in the PM including, but not limited to, arsenic, cadmium,
chromium, lead, manganese, and nickel.
Plant site means all contiguous or adjoining property that is under
common control, including properties that are separated only by a road
or other public right-of-way. Common control includes properties that
are owned, leased, or operated by the same entity, parent entity,
subsidiary, or any combination thereof.
Raw material means minerals, such as silica sand, limestone, and
dolomite; inorganic chemical compounds, such as soda ash (sodium
carbonate), salt cake (sodium sulfate), and potash (potassium
carbonate); metal oxides and other metal-based compounds, such as lead
oxide, chromium oxide, and sodium antimonate; metal ores, such as
chromite and pyrolusite; and other substances that are intentionally
added to a glass manufacturing batch and melted in a glass melting
furnace to produce glass. Metals that are naturally-occurring trace
constituents or contaminants of other substances are not considered to
be raw materials.
Sec. 63.11460 Who implements and enforces this subpart?
(a) This subpart can be implemented and enforced by us, the U.S.
EPA, or a delegated authority such as your State, local, or tribal
agency. If the U.S. EPA Administrator has delegated authority to your
State, local, or tribal agency, then that agency has the authority to
implement and enforce this subpart. You should contact your U.S. EPA
Regional Office to find out if this subpart is delegated to your State,
local, or tribal agency.
(b) In delegating implementation and enforcement authority of this
subpart to a State, local, or tribal agency under 40 CFR part 63,
subpart E, the authorities contained in paragraph (c) of this section
are retained by the Administrator of the U.S. EPA and are not
transferred to the State, local, or tribal agency.
(c) The authorities that will not be delegated to State, local, or
tribal agencies are listed in paragraphs (c)(1) through (3) of this
section.
(1) Approval of alternatives to the applicability requirements in
Sec. Sec. 63.11448 and 63.11449, the compliance date requirements in
Sec. 63.11450, and the emission limits specified in Sec. 63.11451.
(2) Approval of major alternatives to monitoring under Sec.
63.8(f) and as defined in Sec. 63.90.
(3) Approval of major alternatives to recordkeeping under Sec.
63.10(f) and as defined in Sec. 63.90.
Sec. 63.11461 [Reserved]
Tables to Subpart SSSSSS of Part 63
As required in Sec. 63.11451, you must comply with each emission
limit that applies to you according to the following table:
Table 1 to Subpart SSSSSS of Part 63.--Emission Limits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You must meet the following
For each . . . emission limits . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. New or existing glass melting a. The 3-hour block average
furnace that produces glass at an production-based PM mass
annual rate of at least 45 Mg/yr (50 emission rate must not exceed
tpy) AND is charged with compounds of 0.2 pounds per ton (lb/ton) of
arsenic, cadmium, chromium, manganese, glass produced; OR
lead, or nickel as raw materials. b. The 3-hour block average
production-based metal HAP
mass emission rate must not
exceed 0.02 lb/ton of glass
produced.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As stated in Sec. 63.11458, you must comply with the requirements
of the NESHAP General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A), as shown
in the following table:
Table 2 to Subpart SSSSSS of Part 63.--Applicability of General
Provisions to Subpart SSSSSS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Citation Subject
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.1(a), (b), (c)(1), (c)(2), Applicability.
(c)(5), (e).
Sec. 63.2............................ Definitions.
Sec. 63.3............................ Units and Abbreviations.
Sec. 63.4............................ Prohibited Activities.
Sec. 63.5............................ Construction/Reconstruction.
Sec. 63.6(a), (b)(1)-(b)(5), (b)(7), Compliance with Standards and
(c)(1), (c)(2), (c)(5), (e)-(j). Maintenance Requirements.
Sec. 63.7............................ Performance Testing
Requirements.
Sec. 63.8(a)(1), (a)(2), (b), (c)(1)- Monitoring Requirements.
(c)(4), (c)(7)(i)(B), (c)(7)(ii),
(c)(8), (d), (e)(1), (e)(4), (f).
Sec. 63.9(a), (b)(1)(i)-(b)(2)(v), Notification Requirements.
(b)(5), (c), (d), (h)-(j).
Sec. 63.10(a), (b)(1), (b)(2)(i)- Recordkeeping and Reporting
(b)(2)(xii). Requirements.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xiv), (c), (f)...... Documentation for Initial
Notification and Notification
of Compliance Status.
Sec. 63.12........................... State Authority and
Delegations.
Sec. 63.13........................... Addresses.
Sec. 63.14........................... Incorporation by Reference.
Sec. 63.15........................... Availability of Information.
Sec. 63.16........................... Performance Track Provisions.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 53867]]
5. Part 63 is amended by adding subpart TTTTTT to read as follows:
Subpart TTTTTT--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Secondary Nonferrous Metals Processing Area Sources
Applicability and Compliance Dates
Sec.
63.11462 Am I subject to this subpart?
63.11463 What parts of my plant does this subpart cover?
63.11464 What are my compliance dates?
Standards, Compliance, and Monitoring Requirements
63.11465 What are the standards for new and existing sources?
63.11466 What are the performance test requirements for new and
existing sources?
63.11467 What are the initial compliance demonstration requirements
for new and existing sources?
63.11468 What are the monitoring requirements for new and existing
sources?
63.11469 What are the notification requirements?
63.11470 What are the recordkeeping requirements?
Other Requirements and Information
63.11471 What General Provisions apply to this subpart?
63.11472 What definitions apply to this subpart?
63.11473 Who implements and enforces this subpart?
63.11474 [Reserved]
Tables to Subpart TTTTTT of Part 63
Table 1 to Subpart TTTTTT of Part 63--Applicability of General
Provisions to Subpart TTTTTT
Subpart TTTTTT--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Secondary Nonferrous Metals Processing Area Sources
Applicability and Compliance Dates
Sec. 63.11462 Am I subject to this subpart?
(a) You are subject to this subpart if you own or operate a
secondary nonferrous metals processing facility (as defined in Sec.
63.11472) that is an area source of hazardous air pollutant (HAP)
emissions.
(b) If you are an owner or operator of an area source subject to
this subpart, you are exempt from the obligation to obtain a permit
under 40 CFR part 70 or 71, provided you are not required to obtain a
permit under 40 CFR 70.3(a) or 71.3(a) for a reason other than your
status as an area source under this subpart. Notwithstanding the
previous sentence, you must continue to comply with the provisions of
this subpart applicable to area sources.
Sec. 63.11463 What parts of my plant does this subpart cover?
(a) This subpart applies to any existing, new, or reconstructed
affected source located at a secondary nonferrous metals processing
facility.
(b) The affected source includes all crushing and screening
operations at a secondary zinc processing facility and all furnace
melting operations located at any secondary nonferrous metals
processing facilities.
(c) An affected source is existing if you commenced construction or
reconstruction of the affected source before September 20, 2007.
(d) An affected source is new if you commenced construction or
reconstruction of the affected source on or after September 20, 2007.
Sec. 63.11464 What are my compliance dates?
(a) If you have an existing affected source, you must comply with
the standards no later than the date of publication of the final rule
in the Federal Register.
(b) If you have a new or reconstructed affected source, you must
comply with this subpart according to paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of
this section.
(1) If you start up your affected source on or before the date of
publication of the final rule in the Federal Register, you must comply
with this subpart no later than the date of publication of the final
rule in the Federal Register.
(2) If you start up your affected source after the date of
publication of the final rule in the Federal Register, you must comply
with this subpart upon initial startup of your affected source.
Standards, Compliance, and Monitoring Requirements
Sec. 63.11465 What are the standards for new and existing sources?
(a) You must route the emissions from each existing affected source
through a fabric filter or baghouse that achieves a PM control
efficiency of at least 99.0 percent.
(b) You must route the emissions from each new affected source
through a fabric filter or baghouse that achieves a PM control
efficiency of at least 99.5 percent.
Sec. 63.11466 What are the performance test requirements for new and
existing sources?
(a) Except as specified in paragraph (b) of this section, if you
own or operate an existing or new affected source, you must conduct a
performance test for each affected source within 180 days of your
compliance date and report the results in your notification of
compliance status.
(b) If you own or operate an existing affected source, you are not
required to conduct a performance test if a prior performance test was
conducted within the past 5 years of the compliance date using the same
methods specified in paragraph (c) of this section and you meet either
of the following two conditions:
(1) No process changes have been made since the test; or
(2) You demonstrate that the results of the performance test, with
or without adjustments, reliably demonstrates compliance despite
process changes.
(c) Test methods. You must conduct each performance test according
to the requirements in Sec. 63.7 and paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this
section.
(1) Determine the concentration of PM according to the following
test methods in 40 CFR part 60, appendices:
(i) Method 1 or 1A (Appendix A-1) to select sampling port locations
and the number of traverse points in each stack or duct. Sampling sites
must be located at the outlet of the control device and prior to any
releases to the atmosphere.
(ii) Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 2F, or 2G (Appendices A-1 and A-2) to
determine the volumetric flow rate of the stack gas.
(iii) Method 3, 3A, 3B(Appendix A-2), or ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10-1981,
``Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses (incorporated by reference--see Sec.
63.14) to determine the dry molecular weight of the stack gas.
(iv) Method 4 (Appendix A-3) to determine the moisture content of
the stack gas.
(v) Method 5 or 5D (Appendix A-3) to determine the concentration of
particulate matter (front half filterable catch only). Three valid test
runs are needed to comprise a performance test.
(2) During the test, you must operate each emissions source within
10 percent of its normal process rate. You must monitor and
record the process rate during the test.
Sec. 63.11467 What are the initial compliance demonstration
requirements for new and existing sources?
(a) You must demonstrate initial compliance with the applicable
standards in Sec. 63.11465 by submitting a Notification of Compliance
Status in accordance with Sec. 63.11469(b).
(b) You must conduct the inspection specified in paragraph (c) of
this section and include the results of the inspection in the
Notification of Compliance Status.
(c) For each existing and new affected source, you must conduct an
initial inspection of each baghouse. You must visually inspect the
system ductwork and baghouse unit for leaks. Except as
[[Page 53868]]
specified in paragraph (e) of this section, you must also inspect the
inside of each baghouse for structural integrity and fabric filter
condition. You must record the results of the inspection and any
maintenance action as required in Sec. 63.11470.
(d) For each installed baghouse that is in operation during the 60
days after the applicable compliance date, you must conduct the
inspection specified in paragraph (c) of this section no later than 60
days after your applicable compliance date. For an installed baghouse
that is not in operation during the 60 days after the applicable
compliance date, you must conduct an initial inspection prior to
startup of the baghouse.
(e) An initial inspection of the internal components of a baghouse
is not required if an inspection has been performed within the past 12
months.
(f) You must submit the Notification of Compliance Status within
120 calendar days after the applicable compliance date specified in
Sec. 63.11464.
Sec. 63.11468 What are the monitoring requirements for new and
existing sources?
(a) For an existing affected source, you must demonstrate
compliance by conducting the monitoring activities in paragraph (a)(1)
or (a)(2) of this section:
(1) Periodic inspections/maintenance. You must perform periodic
inspections and maintenance of each baghouse according to the
requirements in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section.
(i) You must conduct weekly visual inspections of the system
ductwork for leaks.
(ii) You must conduct inspections of the interior of the baghouse
for structural integrity and to determine the condition of the fabric
filter every 12 months.
(2) As an alternative to the monitoring requirements in paragraph
(a)(1) of this section, you may demonstrate compliance by conducting a
daily 30-minute visible emissions (VE) test (i.e., no visible
emissions) using EPA Method 22 (40 CFR part 60, appendix A-7).
(b) If the results of the visual inspection or VE test conducted
under paragraph (a) of this section indicate a problem with the
operation of the baghouse, including but not limited to air leaks, torn
or broken bags or filter media, or any other condition that may cause
an increase in PM emissions, you must take immediate corrective action
to return the baghouse to normal operation according to the equipment
manufacturer's specifications or instructions and record the corrective
action taken.
(c) For each new affected source, you must install, operate, and
maintain a bag leak detection system according to paragraphs (c)(1)
through (3) of this section.
(1) Each bag leak detection system must meet the specifications and
requirements in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) through (viii) of this section.
(i) The bag leak detection system must be certified by the
manufacturer to be capable of detecting PM emissions at concentrations
of 1 milligram per dry standard cubic meter (0.00044 grains per actual
cubic foot) or less.
(ii) The bag leak detection system sensor must provide output of
relative PM loadings. 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).
(iii) The bag leak detection system must be equipped with an alarm
system that will sound when the system detects an increase in relative
particulate loading over the alarm set point established according to
paragraph (c)(1)(iv) of this section, and the alarm must be located
such that it can be heard by the appropriate plant personnel.
(iv) In the initial adjustment of the bag leak detection system,
you must establish, at a minimum, the baseline output by adjusting the
sensitivity (range) and the averaging period of the device, the alarm
set points, and the alarm delay time.
(v) Following initial adjustment, you shall not adjust the
averaging period, alarm set point, or alarm delay time without approval
from the Administrator or delegated authority except as provided in
paragraph (c)(1)(vi) of this section.
(vi) Once per quarter, you 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 by paragraph (c)(2) of this
section.
(vii) You must install the bag leak detection sensor downstream of
the fabric filter.
(viii) Where multiple detectors are required, the system's
instrumentation and alarm may be shared among detectors.
(2) You must develop and submit to the Administrator or delegated
authority for approval a site-specific monitoring plan for each bag
leak detection system. You must operate and maintain the bag leak
detection system according to the site-specific monitoring plan at all
times. Each monitoring plan must describe the items in paragraphs
(c)(2)(i) through (vi) of this section.
(i) Installation of the bag leak detection system;
(ii) Initial and periodic adjustment of the bag leak detection
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;
(v) How the bag leak detection system output will be recorded and
stored; and
(vi) Corrective action procedures as specified in paragraph (c)(3)
of this section. In approving the site-specific monitoring plan, the
Administrator or delegated authority may allow owners and operators
more than 3 hours to alleviate a specific condition that causes an
alarm if the owner or operator identifies in the monitoring plan this
specific condition as one that could lead to an alarm, adequately
explains why it is not feasible to alleviate this condition within 3
hours of the time the alarm occurs, and demonstrates that the requested
time will ensure alleviation of this condition as expeditiously as
practicable.
(3) For each bag leak detection system, you must initiate
procedures to determine the cause of every alarm within 1 hour of the
alarm. Except as provided in paragraph (c)(2)(vi) of this section, you
must alleviate the cause of the alarm within 3 hours of the alarm by
taking whatever corrective action(s) are necessary. Corrective actions
may include, but are not limited to the following:
(i) Inspecting the fabric filter for air leaks, torn or broken bags
or filter media, or any other condition that may cause an increase in
PM emissions;
(ii) Sealing off defective bags or filter media;
(iii) Replacing defective bags or filter media or otherwise
repairing the control device;
(iv) Sealing off a defective fabric filter compartment;
(v) Cleaning the bag leak detection system probe or otherwise
repairing the bag leak detection system; or
(vi) Shutting down the process producing the PM emissions.
Sec. 63.11469 What are the notification requirements?
(a) You must submit the Initial Notification required by Sec.
63.9(a)(2) no later than 120 calendar days after the applicable
compliance date specified in Sec. 63.11464. The Initial Notification
must
[[Page 53869]]
include the information specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of
this section and may be combined with the Notification of Compliance
Status required in Sec. 63.11467 and paragraph (b) of this section.
(1) The name and address of the owner or operator;
(2) The address (i.e., physical location) of the affected source;
and
(3) An identification of the relevant standard, or other
requirement, that is the basis of the notification and source's
compliance date.
(b) You must submit a Notification of Compliance Status required by
Sec. 63.9(h) no later than 120 days after the applicable compliance
date specified in Sec. 63.11464. In addition to the information
required in Sec. 63.9(h)(2)and Sec. 63.11367, your notification must
include the following certification(s) of compliance, as applicable,
and signed by a responsible official:
(1) This certification of compliance by the owner or operator of an
existing affected source who is relying on a previous performance test:
``This facility complies with the control efficiency requirement in
Sec. 63.11465 based on a previous performance test in accordance with
Sec. 63.11466.''
(2) This certification of compliance by the owner or operator of
any new or existing affected source: ``This facility has conducted an
initial inspection of each control device according to the requirements
in Sec. 63.11467, will conduct periodic inspections and maintenance of
control devices in accordance with Sec. 63.11468, and will maintain
records of each inspection and maintenance action required by Sec.
63.11470.''
(3) This certification of compliance by the owner or operator of a
new affected source: ``This facility has an approved bag leak detection
system monitoring plan in accordance with Sec. 63.11468(c)(2).''
Sec. 63.11470 What are the recordkeeping requirements?
(a) You must keep the records specified in paragraphs (a)(1) and
(2) of this section.
(1) As required in Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xiv), you must keep a copy of
each notification that you submitted to comply with this subpart and
all documentation supporting any Initial Notification or Notification
of Compliance Status that you submitted.
(2) You must keep the records of all inspection and monitoring data
required by Sec. 63.11467 and Sec. 63.11468, and the information
identified in paragraphs (a)(2)(i) through (a)(2)(v) for each required
inspection or monitoring.
(i) The date, place, and time;
(ii) Person conducting the activity;
(iii) Technique or method used;
(iv) Operating conditions during the activity; and
(v) Results.
(b) Your records must be in a form suitable and readily available
for expeditious review, according to Sec. 63.10(b)(1).
(c) As specified in Sec. 63.10(b)(1), you must keep each record
for 5 years following the date of each recorded action.
(d) You must keep each record onsite for at least 2 years after the
date of each recorded action according to Sec. 63.10(b)(1). You may
keep the records offsite for the remaining 3 years.
Other Requirements and Information
Sec. 63.11471 What General Provisions apply to this subpart?
Table 1 to this subpart shows which parts of the General Provisions
in Sec. Sec. 63.1 through 63.16 apply to you.
Sec. 63.11472 What definitions apply to this subpart?
Terms used in this subpart are defined in the Clean Air Act, in
Sec. 63.2, and in this section as follows:
Bag leak detection system means a system that is capable of
continuously monitoring relative particulate matter (dust loadings) in
the exhaust of a baghouse to detect bag leaks and other upset
conditions. A bag leak detection system includes, but is not limited
to, an instrument that operates on triboelectric, light scattering,
light transmittance, or other effect to continuously monitor relative
particulate matter loadings.
Furnace melting operation means the collection of processes used to
charge post-consumer nonferrous scrap material to a furnace, melt the
material, and transfer the molten material to a forming medium.
Secondary nonferrous metals processing facility means a brass and
bronze ingot making, secondary magnesium processing, or secondary zinc
processing plant that uses furnace melting operations to melt post-
consumer nonferrous metal scrap to make products including bars,
ingots, and blocks, or metal powders.
Sec. 63.11473 Who implements and enforces this subpart?
(a) This subpart can be implemented and enforced by the U.S. EPA or
a delegated authority such as your State, local, or tribal agency. If
the U.S. EPA Administrator has delegated authority to your State,
local, or tribal agency, then that agency has the authority to
implement and enforce this subpart. You should contact your U.S. EPA
Regional Office to find out if this subpart is delegated to your State,
local, or tribal agency.
(b) In delegating implementation and enforcement authority of this
subpart to a State, local, or tribal agency under 40 CFR part 63,
subpart E, the authorities contained in paragraph (c) of this section
are retained by the Administrator of the U.S. EPA and are not
transferred to the State, local, or tribal agency.
(c) The authorities that will not be delegated to State, local, or
tribal agencies are listed in paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of this
section.
(1) Approval of alternatives to the applicability requirements in
Sec. 63.11462 and 63.11463, the compliance date requirements in Sec.
63.11464, and the applicable standards in Sec. 63.11465.
(2) Approval of a major change to a test method under Sec.
63.7(e)(2)(ii) and (f). A ``major change to test method'' is defined in
Sec. 63.90.
(3) Approval of a major change to monitoring under Sec. 63.8(f). A
``major change to monitoring'' is defined in Sec. 63.90.
(4) Approval of a major change to recordkeeping/reporting under
Sec. 63.10(f). A ``major change to recordkeeping/reporting'' is
defined in Sec. 63.90.
Sec. 63.11474 [Reserved]
Tables to Subpart TTTTTT of Part 63
As stated in Sec. 63.11470, you must comply with the requirements
of the NESHAP General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A) shown in
the following table:
Table 1 to Subpart TTTTTT of Part 63.--Applicability of General
Provisions to Subpart TTTTTT
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Citation Subject
------------------------------------------------------------------------
63.1(a)(1)-(a)(4), (a)(6), (a)(10)- Applicability.
(a)(12), (b)(1), (b)(3), (c)(1) \1\,
(c)(2), (c)(5), (e).
63.2................................... Definitions.
[[Page 53870]]
63.3................................... Units and Abbreviations.
63.4................................... Prohibited Activities and
Circumvention.
63.6(a), (b)(1)-(b)(5), (b)(7), (c)(1), Compliance with Standards and
(c)(2), (c)(5), (e)(1), (f), (g), (i), Maintenance Requirements.
(j).
63.8(a)(1), (a)(2), (b), (c)(1)(i)- Monitoring Requirements.
(c)(1)(ii), (c)(2), (c)(3), (f).
63.9(a), (b)(1), (b)(2), (b)(5), (c), Notification Requirements.
(d), (h)(1)-(h)(3), (h)(5), (h)(6),
(i), (j).
63.10(a), (b)(1), (b)(2)(vii), Recordkeeping and Reporting
(b)(2)(xiv), (b)(3), (c), (f). Requirements.
63.12.................................. State Authority and
Delegations.
63.13.................................. Addresses.
63.14.................................. Incorporations by Reference.
63.15.................................. Availability of Information and
Confidentiality.
63.16.................................. Performance Track Provisions.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Section 63.11462(b) of this subpart exempts area sources from the
obligation to obtain title V operating permits.
[FR Doc. E7-18344 Filed 9-19-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P