SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 		6560-50-P

	ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0510; FRL-        ]

RIN 2060-AN45

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Area
Sources: Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers Production, Primary Copper
Smelting, Secondary Copper Smelting, and Primary Nonferrous
Metals–Zinc, Cadmium, and Beryllium

AGENCY:  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:  Final rules.

SUMMARY:  EPA is issuing national emission standards for hazardous air
pollutants (NESHAP) for four area source categories.  These final NESHAP
include emissions limits and/or work practice standards that reflect the
generally available control technologies (GACT) and/or management
practices in each of these area source categories.

DATES:  These final rules are effective on [INSERT DATE OF PUBLICATION].
 The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in these
rules is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of [INSERT
DATE OF PUBLICATION].

ADDRESSES:  The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0510.  All documents in the docket are
listed in the Federal Docket Management System index at   HYPERLINK
"http://www.regulations.gov"  http://www.regulations.gov .  Although
listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g.,
confidential business information or other information whose disclosure
is restricted by statute.  Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form.  Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through   HYPERLINK
"http://www.regulations.gov"  www.regulations.gov  or in hard copy at
the EPA Docket Center, Public Reading Room, 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., 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<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Ms. Sharon Nizich, U.S. EPA, Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards, Sector Policies and Programs
Division, Metals and Minerals Group (D243-02), Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina 27711, telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax number (919)
541-3207, e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Outline.	The information presented in this preamble is organized as
follows:

I.  General Information

A.  Does this action apply to me?

B.  Where can I get a copy of this document?

C.  Judicial Review

II.  Background Information for Final Area Source Standards

III.  Summary of Final Rule and Changes Since Proposal

A.  NESHAP for Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers Production Area Sources

B.  NESHAP for Primary Copper Smelting Area Sources

C.  NESHAP for Secondary Copper Smelting Area Sources

D.  NESHAP for Primary Nonferrous Metals—Zinc, Cadmium, and Beryllium
Area Sources

IV.  Summary of Comments and Responses

A.  Existing Area Source Facilities

B.  Part 63 General Provisions

C.  Primary Copper Smelters

D.  Primary Zinc Smelters

E.  Basis for Area Source Standards

F.  Compliance Date

V.  Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A.  Executive Order 12866:  Regulatory Planning and Review

B.  Paperwork Reduction Act

C.  Regulatory Flexibility Act

D.  Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

E.  Executive Order 13132:  Federalism

F.  Executive Order 13175:  Consultation and Coordination with Indian
Tribal Governments

G.  Executive Order 13045:  Protection of Children from Environmental
Health and Safety Risks

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

I.  National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

J.  Congressional Review Act

I.  General Information

A.  Does this action apply to me?

	The regulated categories and entities potentially affected by these
final standards include:

Category	NAICS code1	Examples of regulated

entities

Industry:

Polyvinyl chloride and copolymers production 	325211	Area source
facilities that polymerize vinyl chloride monomer to produce vinyl
chloride and/or copolymer products.

Primary copper smelting	331411	Area source facilities that produce
copper from copper sulfide ore concentrates using pyrometallurgical
techniques.

Secondary copper smelting	3314232	Area source facilities that process
copper scrap in a blast furnace and converter or use another
pyrometallurgical purification process to produce anode copper from
copper scrap, including low-grade copper scrap.

Primary nonferrous metals – zinc, cadmium, and beryllium 	331419	Area
source facilities that produce zinc, zinc oxide, cadmium, or cadmium
oxide from zinc sulfide ore concentrates using pyrometallurgical
techniques and area source facilities that produce beryllium metal,
alloy, or oxide from beryllium ore.

Federal government	. . . . 	Not affected.

State/local/tribal government	. . . .	Not affected.

1 North American Industry Classification System.

2 This final rule applies only to secondary copper smelters and does not
apply to copper, brass, and bronze ingot makers or remelters that may
also be included under this NAICS code.

	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 is regulated by this action,
you should examine the applicability criteria in 40 CFR 63.11140 of
subpart DDDDDD (NESHAP for Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers Production
Area Sources), 40 CFR 63.11146 of subpart EEEEEE (NESHAP for Primary
Copper Smelting Area Sources), 40 CFR 63.11153 of subpart FFFFFF (NESHAP
for Secondary Copper Smelting Area Sources), or 40 CFR 63.11160 of
subpart GGGGGG (NESHAP for Primary Nonferrous Metals—-Zinc, Cadmium,
and Beryllium Area Sources).  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.  Where can I get a copy of this document?

	In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of
this final action will also be available on the Worldwide Web (WWW)
through the Technology Transfer Network (TTN).  Following signature, a
copy of this final action will be posted on the TTN’s policy and
guidance page for newly proposed or promulgated rules at the following
address:      HYPERLINK "http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/"
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/ .  The TTN provides information and
technology exchange in various areas of air pollution control.

C.  Judicial Review

	Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), judicial review of
these final rules is available only by filing a petition for review in
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit by
[INSERT DATE 60 DAYS FROM DATE OF PUBLICATION].  Under section
307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA, only an objection to these final rules that was
raised with reasonable specificity during the period for public comment
can be raised during judicial review.  Moreover, under section 307(b)(2)
of the CAA, the requirements established by these final rules may not be
challenged separately in any civil or criminal proceedings brought by
EPA to enforce these requirements.

II.  Background Information for Final Area Source Standards

	Sections 112(c)(3) and 112(k)(3)(B) of the CAA instruct EPA  to
identify not less than 30 HAP which, as a result of emissions from area
sources, present the greatest threat to public health in the largest
number of urban areas, and to list sufficient area source categories to
ensure that sources representing 90 percent or more of the emissions of
each of the 30 listed HAP (“area source HAP”) are subject to
regulation.  Sierra Club sued EPA, alleging a failure to complete
standards for the source categories listed pursuant to CAA sections
112(c)(3) and (k)(3)(B) within the timeframe specified by the statute.
See Sierra Club v. Johnston, 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 sections 112(c)(3) and (k)(3)(B).

	Among other things, the order requires that, by December 15, 2006, EPA
complete standards for four of the listed area source categories.  On
October 6, 2006 (71 FR 59302) we proposed NESHAP for the following four
listed area source categories that we have selected to meet the December
15, 2006 deadline:  (1) Primary Copper Smelting; (2) Secondary Copper
Smelting; (3) Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers Production; and (4)
Primary Nonferrous Metals – Zinc, Cadmium, and Beryllium.  These final
NESHAP complete the required regulatory action for four area source
categories.

	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 (GACT) or management practices in lieu of MACT.  As mentioned
in the proposed NESHAP for these four area source categories, we have
decided not to issue MACT standards and concluded that requirements that
provide for the use of GACT or generally available management practices
are appropriate for these four source categories (71 FR 59302, 59304,
October 6, 2006).

III.	 Summary of Final Rules and Changes Since Proposal

A. NESHAP for Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers Production Area Sources

	As proposed, we are adopting the requirements in 40 CFR part 61,
subpart F that apply to polyvinyl chloride (PVC) plants as the NESHAP
for the Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymer Production area source
category.  The only change since the proposed rule is that this final
rule does not adopt either the startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM)
requirements in 40 CFR 63.6(e)(3) or the preconstruction notification
requirements in 40 CFR 63.5.  As discussed in more detail in section
IV.B of this preamble, under the construct of part 61 standards, sources
must comply with the standards at all times, including periods of SSM.
Because in this final rule we are adopting the part 61 standards for PVC
plants as the area source standard, separate requirements governing SSM
are not necessary.  We have also determined that the preconstruction
notification requirements at 40 CFR 63.5 are not necessary because a
comparable preconstruction notification is already required under the
part 61 General Provisions (40 CFR part 61, subpart A), which apply to
this NESHAP.

1.  Applicability and Compliance Dates

	This final rule applies to both new and existing PVC and copolymer
plants that are area sources of HAP.  The owner or operator of an
existing source must comply with all the requirements of this area
source NESHAP by [INSERT Date of publication].  The owner or operator of
a new source must comply with this area source NESHAP by [INSERT date of
publication] or at startup, whichever is later.

2.  Emissions Limits and Work Practice Standards

	The Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers Production area source category
was listed for its contribution to the emissions of the area source HAP
vinyl chloride.  As proposed, we are adopting the requirements in 40 CFR
part 61, subpart F that are applicable to PVC plants as the NESHAP for
the Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymer Production area source category.
These requirements in subpart F include numerical emissions limits for
reactors; strippers; mixing, weighing, and holding containers; monomer
recovery systems; emissions sources following the stripper(s); and
reactors used as strippers.  In addition, they include emissions limits
and work practice requirements that apply to discharges from manual vent
valves on a PVC reactor and relief valves in vinyl chloride service,
fugitive emissions sources, and equipment leaks.  Subpart F also
requires a new or existing source to comply with the requirements at 40
CFR part 61, subpart V for the control of equipment leaks.  As discussed
in the proposal preamble, we have determined that these requirements
represent GACT for sources in this area source category.

3.  Compliance Requirements

	We are including in this NESHAP the monitoring, testing, recordkeeping,
and reporting requirements in 40 CFR part 61, subpart F.  This final
NESHAP requires a vinyl chloride continuous emissions monitoring system
(CEMS) for the regulated emissions sources (except for sources following
the stripper) and for any control system to which reactor emissions or
fugitive emissions must be ducted.  Plants using a stripper to comply
with this NESHAP must also determine the daily average vinyl chloride
concentration for each type of resin.  The owner or operator must submit
quarterly reports containing information on emissions or resin
concentrations that exceed the applicable limits.  Records are required
to demonstrate compliance, including a daily operating log for each
reactor.  Plants are required to comply with the testing, monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting requirements in the part 61 General
Provisions (40 CFR part 61, subpart A).  For the reasons discussed in
sections III.A and IV.B of this preamble, this final NESHAP does not
require that the owner or operator comply with the SSM requirements at
40 CFR 63.6(e)(3) and the preconstruction notification requirements at
40 CFR 63.5.

4.  Exemption from Title V Permit Requirements

	Section 502(a) of the CAA provides that EPA may exempt one or more area
sources from the requirements of title V if EPA finds that compliance
with such requirements is “impracticable, infeasible, or unnecessarily
burdensome” on such area sources.  EPA must determine whether to
exempt an area source from title V at the time we issue the relevant
section 112 standard (40 CFR 70.3(b)(2)).  For the reasons discussed in
the preamble to the proposed rule, we are exempting PVC and copolymers
production area sources from the requirements of title V.  PVC and
copolymers production area sources are not required to obtain title V
permits solely as a function of being the subject of the NESHAP;
however, if they were otherwise required to obtain title V permits, such
requirement(s) would not be affected by this exemption.  We received no
comments on our proposal to exempt PVC and copolymer production area
sources from the requirements of title V.

B.  NESHAP for Primary Copper Smelting Area Sources

	The Primary Copper Smelting area source category was listed for its
contribution to the emissions of the area source HAP arsenic, cadmium,
chromium, lead, and nickel.  As discussed in more detail in section IV.C
of this preamble, the major change since the proposed rule is that we
established a subcategory of primary copper smelters that use the batch
converting technology and developed separate standards for this
subcategory.  At the time of the proposed rule, we were not aware of any
area sources using the batch converting technology.  Since then, we
received comments indicating that there may or will be primary copper
smelting area sources that use the batch converting technology.  Because
batch technology is quite different from the continuous converting
technology we used to develop the proposed standards for the Primary
Copper Smelting area source category in terms of process operation,
emissions points, and achievable levels of control, we believe that the
proposed standards do not represent GACT for existing primary copper
smelting area sources that use the batch converting technology.
Accordingly, we developed a separate standard for existing sources that
use the batch converting technology, and we developed that standard
based on the title V permit of one batch converting facility that we
have determined to be effectively controlling its HAP emissions by
complying with its permit terms and conditions.

In response to comments, we also made several changes to the proposed
rule for primary copper smelters that do not use the batch converting
technology.  As explained in the preamble to the proposed rule, we have
determined that certain terms and conditions in the title V permit of
the only area source primary smelter of which we are aware provide
effective control of HAP emissions and represent GACT for these sources.
 We made changes in the proposed rule to more accurately capture the
relevant terms and conditions in this existing area source’s title V
permit.  Specifically, we clarified that capture and control systems are
not required for anode casting and holding operations; that the sampler
required for existing sources is a continuous PM sampler; that the
emissions limit is expressed as PM less than 10 microns in aerodynamic
diameter (PM10) rather than PM; and that a single gas collection system
could serve multiple process vessels.

As discussed in section IV.B of this preamble, we allow new and existing
sources to comply with either the SSM requirements in 40 CFR 63.6(e)(3)
or the detailed SSM requirements in the final rule that were developed
from the existing sources’ title V permits, which are substantially
equivalent to the SSM requirements in 40 CFR part 63.

1.  Applicability and Compliance Dates

	This final rule applies to each new or existing primary copper smelter
that is an area source of HAP.  The owner or operator of an existing
affected source must comply by [INSERT date of publication].  The owner
or operator of a new affected source must comply by [INSERT date of
publication] or upon initial startup, whichever is later.

2.  Emissions Limits and Work Practice Standards

 	As previously mentioned, we have developed separate standards for
existing sources that use the batch converting technology and for those
that do not.  However, the

standards for new sources apply to all new area source primary copper
smelters irrespective of the converting technology utilized.

Under this final rule, the owner or operator of an existing area source
using any converting technology is required to control HAP emissions
from copper concentrate drying, copper concentrate smelting, copper
matte drying and grinding, copper matte converting, and copper anode
refining.  As discussed in the proposal preamble, we are using PM as a
surrogate for HAP metals.  Gases and fumes generated by these processes
must be captured and vented through one or more PM control devices.  For
existing primary copper smelters that do not use the batch converting
process, the total emissions of PM10 from the captured gas streams from
all of these processes is limited to 89.5 pounds per hour (lb/hr) as
determined on a 24-hour average basis.

For existing primary copper smelters using the batch converting
technology, the exhaust gases from each smelter vessel and each
converter must be collected and sent to a PM control device and to a
sulfuric acid plant.  A secondary gas collection system must be
installed on each smelting vessel and converter, and PM emissions from
the secondary capture and control system must not exceed 0.02 grains per
dry standard cubic foot (gr/dscf).  The PM emissions from each copper
concentrate dryer must not exceed 0.022 gr/dscf.

	Similarly, the owner or operator of a new area source using any
converting technology must control HAP emissions from all primary copper
smelting processes, including but not limited to those processes
mentioned above that are applicable to the new source’s smelter
design.  Gases and fumes generated by these processes at a new source
must be captured and vented through one or more PM control devices.  We
are requiring a new source to achieve a facility input-based emissions
rate for total PM no greater than a daily (24-hour) average of 0.6
pounds per ton (lb/ton) of copper concentrate feed charged to the
smelting vessel.

	This final rule for new area source primary copper smelters also
requires a secondary gas system for each smelting vessel and converting
vessel that collects the gases and fumes released during the molten
material transfer operations and conveys the collected gas stream to a
control device.  Capture systems that collect gas and fumes and convey
them to a control device also are required for operations in the anode
refining.  These capture and control requirements apply to all new and
existing area sources using any copper smelting technology.

3.  Compliance Requirements

	In this final rule, we have adopted the testing, monitoring, operation
and maintenance, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements for PM
emissions that are in the title V permits of the existing area source
smelters.  Compliance with the emissions limit for existing area sources
not using the batch converting technology is based on the daily average
PM10 emissions measured by a continuous PM sampler.  For smelters using
the batch conversion technology, compliance is based on performance
tests at least every 2.5 years and continuous monitoring using
continuous opacity monitoring systems (COMS) for electrostatic
precipitators and bag leak detection systems for baghouses.

	The operation and maintenance requirements in this final rule for
existing sources using any converting technology are based on the one
existing source’s title V permits.  At all times, the owner or
operator must to the extent practicable, maintain and operate any
affected source, including associated air pollution control equipment,
in a manner consistent with good air pollution control practice for
minimizing emissions.  In addition, all pollution control equipment must
be installed, maintained, and operated properly.  Instructions from the
vendor or established maintenance practices that maximize pollution
control must be followed.  Maintenance records must be made available to
the permitting authority upon request.

This final rule allows any new or existing source to meet the SSM
requirements specified in this rule or the SSM requirements in 40 CFR
63.6(e)(3).  The SSM requirements that are specified in this final rule
were developed from the one existing source’s title V permit
requirements, and we believe these requirements are equally applicable
to new and existing area sources irrespective of the converting
technology used.  Sources may nevertheless choose to comply with the SSM
provisions in 40 CFR 63.6(e)(3), in lieu of the SSM requirements
specified in this final rule.  The SSM provisions in this final rule
require that all malfunctions be reported within two working days of the
event.  The report must include a description of the malfunction, steps
taken to mitigate emissions, and corrective actions taken.  In addition,
the owner or operator must show through signed contemporaneous logs or
other relevant evidence that:  (1) a malfunction occurred and the
probable cause can be identified, (2) the facility was being operated
properly at the time the malfunction occurred, and (3) all reasonable
steps were taken to minimize emissions that exceeded the emission
standards.  A malfunction or emergency does not include events caused by
improperly designed equipment, lack of preventative maintenance,
careless or improper operation, or operator error.

The owner or operator of an existing area source using any copper
smelting technology must comply with notification requirements in 40 CFR
63.9 of the General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A).  In the
notification of compliance status required in 40 CFR 63.9(h), the owner
or operator may certify initial compliance with the emissions limit
based on monitoring data collected during a previous compliance test.
The owner or operator also must certify initial compliance with the work
practice standards.

	The owner or operator of a new primary copper smelter must install,
operate, and maintain a CEMS to measure and record PM concentrations and
gas stream flow rates for each emissions source subject to the emissions
limit.  The standard requires that the PM CEMS meet EPA Performance
Specification 11 (40 CFR part 60, appendix B).  A device to measure and
record the weight of the copper concentrate feed charged to the smelting
furnace each day also is required.  The owner or operator must
continuously monitor PM emissions, determine and record the daily
(24-hour) value for each day, and calculate and record the daily average
pounds of total PM per ton of copper concentrate feed charged to the
smelting furnace.  A monthly summary report of the daily averages of PM
per ton of copper concentrate feed charged to the smelting vessel also
is required.  All notification, monitoring, testing, operation and
maintenance, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements of the part 63
General Provisions apply to the owner or operator of a new source.  This
final rule allows a new source to meet the specific SSM requirements
that were developed from the title V permit requirements for existing
sources or the SSM requirements in 40 CFR 63.6(e)(3).

C.  NESHAP for Secondary Copper Smelting Area Sources

	We did not receive any comments on our determination of GACT for
secondary copper smelters, and we are promulgating the standard as
proposed without any changes.

1.  Applicability and Compliance Dates

	This final rule applies to each new secondary copper smelter that is an
area source of HAP.  The owner or operator of a new affected source is
required to comply by [INSERT date of publication] or upon initial
startup, whichever is later.

2.  Emissions Limit and Work Practice Standards

	This final rule does not include requirements for existing area sources
of secondary copper smelters.  As we explained in the preamble to the
proposed rule, currently there are no existing major or area sources of
secondary copper smelters.  Therefore, there is not any, nor would there
ever be, an existing secondary copper smelter that would be subject to
this rule.  In this circumstance, we are not issuing standards for
existing area sources of secondary copper smelters.  However, this final
rule contains requirements for new area sources of secondary copper
smelters.  The Secondary Copper Smelting area source category was listed
for its contribution to the emissions of the area source HAP cadmium,
lead and dioxin.  We have established requirements for new sources in
this category to ensure that any potential emission of these area source
HAP from future secondary copper smelting area sources will be
appropriately controlled.

	We are requiring that the owner or operator of any new secondary copper
smelter operate a capture and control system for PM emissions from any
process operation that melts copper scrap, alloys, or other metals or
that processes molten material.  Emissions of PM from the control device
must not exceed 0.002 gr/dscf.  The owner or operator must also prepare
and follow a written plan for the selection, inspection, and
pretreatment of copper scrap to minimize, to the extent practicable, the
amount of oil and plastics in the scrap that is charged to smelting or
melting furnaces.  As we explained in the proposal preamble, we are
using PM as a surrogate for establishing standards for metal HAP, which
are cadmium and lead in this case.  The United Nations Environmental
Programme (UNEP) has also recommended using control devices with high
efficiency PM removal to reduce dioxin emissions.  The pollution
prevention measure described above (i.e., presorting and pretreating
materials) is another UNEP recommendation for reducing dioxin emissions.
 We have determined that these requirements represent GACT for new
sources of secondary copper smelters and requested comments on this
determination in the proposed rule.  We did not receive any comments on
this determination.

3.  Compliance Requirements

Fabric filters (baghouses) are expected to be needed to meet the NESHAP
emissions limit.  Consequently, the monitoring requirements include bag
leak detection systems when baghouses are used.  The owner or operator
must prepare a written plan for the selection, inspection, and
pretreatment of copper scrap and  keep records to document conformance
with the requirements in the written plan.  If a control device other
than a baghouse is used, the owner or operator must submit a monitoring
plan to the permitting authority for approval.  The monitoring plan must
include performance test results showing compliance with the PM
emissions limit, a plan for operation and maintenance of the control
device, a list of operating parameters that will be monitored, and
operating parameter limits that were established during the performance
test.

	The owner or operator must conduct a performance test to demonstrate
initial compliance with the PM emissions limit and report the results in
the notification of compliance status required by 40 CFR 63.9(h) of the
General Provisions.  If a baghouse is used, the PM concentration is to
be determined using EPA Method 5 (for negative pressure baghouses) or
Method 5D (for positive pressure baghouses) in 40 CFR part 60, appendix
A.  Repeat performance tests are required every 5 years to demonstrate
compliance with the PM emissions limit.  All requirements of the part 63
General Provisions apply to the owner or operator of a new source,
including the notification, monitoring, testing, operation and
maintenance, SSM, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements.

D.  NESHAP for Primary Nonferrous Metals – Zinc, Cadmium, and
Beryllium Area Sources

1.  NESHAP for Primary Zinc Production

	In this final rule, we have adopted a limit in grains per dry standard
cubic foot (gr/dscf) for certain melting furnaces at existing zinc
production area sources in addition to the proposed pound per hour
(lb/hr) limits for these furnaces at existing sources.  This gr/dscf
limit is the limit that we proposed for the same furnaces at new
sources.  Both the gr/dscf limit and the lb/hr limits reflect the level
of emission control that can be achieved based on the technology we
identified as GACT for these furnaces (i.e., a well-operated and
well-maintained baghouse).  However, whereas the lb/hr limits were based
on the specific operations at the two existing sources of which we are
aware, the gr/dscf emission limit is not operation specific and can
apply to these furnaces at any primary copper smelting area source
irrespective of its operation.  For this reason, we proposed this
gr/dscf emissions limit for these furnaces at new sources.  In this
final rule, we similarly allow an existing source to meet this gr/dscf
limit for these furnaces.  This final rule provides existing sources the
option of meeting either the lb/hr limits or the gr/dscf limit for these
furnaces.  We believe that including both the lb/hr and gr/dscf limits
in this final rule will ensure effective control of these furnaces at
all existing primary copper smelting area sources in the event that
there are facilities other than the two we know and with very different
operations from the two known sources.

In addition, as discussed in section IV.B of this preamble, we allow new
and existing sources to comply with either the SSM requirements in 40
CFR 63.6(e)(3) or with the detailed SSM requirements in the final rule
that were developed from the existing sources’ title V permits, which
are substantially equivalent to the SSM requirements in part 63.

	Applicability and compliance dates.  This final rule applies to each
new or existing primary zinc production facility that is an area source
of HAP.  The owner or operator of an existing affected source must
comply by [INSERT date of publication].  The owner or operator of a new
affected source must comply by [INSERT date of publication] or upon
initial startup, whichever is later.

	Emissions limits and work practice standards.  Primary zinc production
facilities were included as part of the Primary Nonferrous Metals area
source category due to their contributions to the emissions of the area
source HAP arsenic, cadmium, lead, manganese, manganese, and nickel, all
of which are metal HAP.  As we mentioned in the proposal preamble,
cadmium is produced as a by-product of zinc smelting processes.  There
are no primary cadmium smelters in the United States.  Accordingly, the
requirements for area sources of zinc production in this final rule also
address emissions associated with any cadmium production at these zinc
production facilities.

	As previously mentioned, we are using PM as a surrogate for
establishing standards for metal HAP.  Under this final rule, the owner
or operator of an area source of zinc production is required to exhaust
roaster off-gases to PM removal equipment and a sulfuric acid plant.
Bypassing the sulfuric acid plant during charging of the roaster is
prohibited.

	Emissions limits apply to the different types of melting furnaces at
primary zinc production facilities.  For existing sources, this NESHAP
limit PM emissions to 0.93 lb/hr for zinc cathode melting furnaces; 0.1
lb/hr for furnaces that melt zinc dust, chips, and off-specification
zinc materials; and 0.228 lb/hr for the combined exhaust from furnaces
that melt zinc scrap and alloys.  As an alternative to the lb/hr limits
for these furnaces at existing sources, the owner or operator may elect
to meet a limit of 0.005 gr/dscf.  For new sources, the PM limit is
0.005 gr/dscf for the furnaces mentioned above.  Other PM limits are
0.014 gr/dscf for anode casting furnaces and 0.015 gr/dscf for cadmium
melting furnaces at new and existing sources.

	Emissions limits also apply to any sintering machine at a new or
existing area source facility.  If there is a sintering machine, the
owner or operator must comply with the PM limit at 40 CFR 60.172 and the
opacity limit at 40 CFR 60.174(a) of the new source performance standard
(NSPS) for primary zinc smelters (40 CFR part 60, subpart Q).

	Compliance requirements.  We are adopting for existing area sources
certain monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements in the
title V permits of the two existing facilities that relate to PM
emissions control.  The owner or operator of an existing area source
must monitor baghouse pressure drop, perform routine baghouse
maintenance, and keep records to document compliance.  In addition, we
are requiring repeat performance tests (at least once every 5 years) for
existing sources.  This final rule also requires a continuous opacity
monitoring system (COMS) for any sintering machine in accordance with 40
CFR 60.175.

	The owner or operator of an existing area source must comply with
initial notification requirements in 40 CFR 63.9 of the General
Provisions.  In the notification of compliance status required by 40 CFR
63.9(h), the owner or operator may certify initial compliance with the
HAP emissions limits based on the results of a PM performance test for
each of the regulated emissions sources conducted within the past 5
years.  The owner or operator must also certify initial compliance with
the work practice standards.

	If an existing source has not conducted a performance test to
demonstrate compliance with the emissions limits for a furnace, the
facility must conduct a test according to the requirements at 40 CFR
63.7 using EPA Method 5 (40 CFR part 60, appendix A) to determine the PM
concentration or an alternative method previously approved by the
permitting authority.  For a sintering machine, the owner or operator
must conduct a performance test according to the procedures in 40 CFR
60.176(b) using EPA Method 5 to determine the PM concentration and EPA
Method 9 (40 CFR part 60, appendix B) to determine the opacity of
emissions.

	The operation and maintenance requirements in the final rule for
existing sources are based on the sources’ title V permits.  The owner
or operator must maintain all equipment covered under the subpart in
such a manner that the performance or operation of the equipment does
not cause a deviation from the applicable requirements.  A maintenance
record must be kept for each item of air pollution control equipment.
At a minimum, this record must show the dates of performing maintenance
and the nature of preventative maintenance activities.

 	This final rule allows any existing source to meet the specific SSM
requirements that were developed from the title V permit requirements
for existing sources or the SSM requirements in 40 CFR 63.6(e)(3).  The
specific SSM provisions in this final rule require that all malfunctions
be reported within two working days of the event.  The report must
include a description of the malfunction, steps taken to mitigate
emissions, and corrective actions taken.  In addition, the owner or
operator must show through signed contemporaneous logs or other relevant
evidence that:  (1) a malfunction occurred and the probable cause can be
identified, (2) the facility was being operated properly at the time the
malfunction occurred, and (3) all reasonable steps were taken to
minimize emissions that exceeded the emission standards.  A malfunction
or emergency does not include events caused by improperly designed
equipment, lack of preventative maintenance, careless or improper
operation, or operator error.

	As required in the existing permits, the owner or operator must submit
a notification to the permitting authority of any deviation from the
requirements of this final NESHAP.  The notification must describe the
probable cause of the deviation and any corrective actions or
preventative measures taken.  Existing facilities are also required to
submit semiannual monitoring reports which clearly describe any
deviations.  Records of baghouse maintenance, all required monitoring
data, and support information also are required.  The owner or operator
of an existing area source must also comply with the notification
requirements in 40 CFR 63.9 of the General Provisions.

	The owner or operator of a new area source is required to install and
operate a bag leak detection system for each baghouse used to comply
with a PM emissions limit.  In addition, we are requiring repeat PM
performance tests (once every 5 years) for each furnace at a new source.
 The owner or operator must also install, operate, and maintain a COMS
for each sintering machine according to EPA Performance Specification 1
(40 CFR part 60, appendix B).

	The owner or operator of a new affected source must demonstrate initial
compliance with the applicable emissions limits by conducting a
performance test according to the requirements at 40 CFR 63.7 and using
EPA 5 or 5D (40 CFR part 60, appendix A), as applicable, to determine
the PM concentration.  An initial performance test is also required for
a sintering machine according to the methods and procedures in 40 CFR
60.176(b).  All of the notification, testing, monitoring, operation and
maintenance, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements of the part 63
General Provisions apply to a new area source.  This final rule allows a
new source to meet the specific SSM requirements in this final rule or
the SSM requirements in 40 CFR 63.6(e)(3).

2.  NESHAP for Primary Beryllium Production Area Sources

	The only change since proposal is that this final rule does not adopt
the SSM requirements in 40 CFR 63.6(e)(3) and the preconstruction
notification requirements in 40 CFR 63.5.  As discussed in more detail
in section IV.B of this preamble, we have determined that the SSM
requirements are not necessary for standards under part 61 that must be
met at all times, and the preconstruction notification is already
required under the part 61 General Provisions.

Applicability and compliance dates.  For this final rule, we are
adopting all of the requirements in the National Emission Standard for
Beryllium at 40 CFR part 61, subpart C.  The owner or operator of an
existing area source must comply with this NESHAP by [INSERT date of
publication].  The owner or operator of a new area source must comply by
[INSERT date of publication] or at startup, whichever is later.

Emissions limits.  Primary beryllium production facilities were included
as part of the Primary Nonferrous Metals area source category due to
their contributions to the emissions of the area source HAP arsenic,
cadmium, lead, manganese, manganese, and nickel, all of which are metal
HAP.  We are adopting the 40 CFR part 61, subpart C standard as the
requirements for both new and existing primary beryllium production
facilities in this final rule.  The part 61, subpart C standard limits
emissions from extraction plants (i.e., primary beryllium production
facilities) to 10 grams (0.022 lb) of beryllium over a 24-hour period.
Alternatively, the owner or operator of a beryllium production facility
may request to meet an ambient concentration limit instead of the
emissions limit.  As discussed in the preamble to the proposed rule, the
part 61 standard is highly effective in controlling PM and metal HAP
emissions from the only existing beryllium production facility known to
us at the time of the proposal.  We have determined that these
requirements reflect GACT for area sources of beryllium production.  We
did not receive any comments on this determination.

	Compliance requirements.  This final rule requires the owner or
operator to comply with the testing, monitoring, recordkeeping, and
reporting requirements in 40 CFR part 61, subpart C.  An owner or
operator subject to the ambient concentration limit must operate air
sampling sites to continuously monitor the concentrations of beryllium
in the ambient air according to an EPA-approved plan.

	The owner or operator must comply with recordkeeping requirements in 40
CFR part 61, subpart C, as well as the testing, monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting requirements in the part 61 General
Provisions in 40 CFR part 61, subpart A.  For the reasons discussed in
section IV.B of this preamble, this final rule does not require that the
owner or operator comply with the requirements for SSM plans and reports
in 40 CFR 63.6(e)(3) or the preconstruction notification requirements in
40 CFR 63.5.

IV.  Summary of Comments and Responses

A.  Existing Area Source Facilities

	At proposal, we stated that we did not know of any existing sources in
the Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymer area source category, and we
requested comments on whether there are or ever will be any area sources
in this area source category.  We also stated that currently there is
only one area source of primary copper production in operation in the
United States and that there are no primary beryllium production area
sources.

	Comment:  One commenter informed us of an area source PVC plant in
Alabama.  In addition, two commenters stated that there are a few (at
least three) PVC plants that they believe may qualify as area sources.
According to the commenters, these were once major sources that have
reduced HAP emissions significantly or that are currently shut down but
are expected to start up again with significantly less emissions than
from previous operations as major sources.  The commenters requested
that EPA clarify the meaning of “potential to emit” in its
definition of an “area source” in the proposed rule, as well as the
proposed rule’s applicability to plants that have obtained or, for the
ones that are not currently operating, will obtain permits that limit
emissions to levels below the major source thresholds.  In addition, the
commenters requested clarification of the proposed rule’s
applicability to PVC plants co-located at chemical complexes that are
major sources.

	One commenter notified us of an area source primary beryllium plant in
Utah.  The commenter sought clarification of the proposed rule’s
applicability to a primary beryllium plant that is a major source
because of perchloroethylene emissions and that may become an area
source in the future by eliminating the use of perchloroethylene.

	We also received comments that there are two operating primary copper
smelters that are area sources rather than just one, as EPA stated in
the proposed rule.  The company operating this second source reported
that it was an area source (synthetic minor) based on a determination by
the permitting authority.  The company also stated that it is planning
to restart a primary copper smelter in Texas that has been shutdown and
under “care and maintenance” for several years.  This facility will
incorporate feedstock limitations to remain below major source
thresholds, and the company expects that this facility will qualify as
an area source when the renewed permits are issued.  The commenter
sought clarification of the applicability of the proposed rule to the
two primary copper smelters described above.

	Response:  Section 112(a) of the CAA defines the terms “major
source” and “area source.”  An “area source” is defined as any
stationary source that is not a major source.  In the proposed rule, we
included a definition for “area source” and that definition
attempted to summarize the statutory definitions of “major source”
and “area source”.  Commenters sought clarification of the meaning
of the term “potential to emit” contained in the proposed definition
of “area source.”  Based on the comment, it appears that the
proposed definition of “area source” has caused confusion.  Because
the proposed definition of “area source” was merely intended to
summarize the statutory definitions of “major source” and “area
source” and is redundant of the definition of “area source”
contained in the General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A), we have
decided not to finalize the proposed “area source” definition.
Instead, as noted in the NESHAP for each of these four area source
categories, the definitions of “major source,” “area source,”
and “potential to emit” in 40 CFR 63.2 apply to this final rule.
 To the extent the commenters have questions as to whether their
facility is a major source or an area source, EPA cannot answer these
site-specific applicability questions in the context of this national
rulemaking.  We refer the commenters to the definitions of “major
source,” “area source,” and “potential to emit” found in 40
CFR 63.2, and recommend that the commenters consult with the relevant
permitting authority or submit a request for an applicability
determination to the EPA regional office in the region where the source
is located.

	In addition, we want to clarify that a plant that is co-located with
other facilities that together qualify as a major source is part of that
major source and not an area source.

B.  Part 63 General Provisions

	Comment:  One commenter representing the two beryllium plants objected
to the part 63 SSM requirements in the proposed NESHAP for the Primary
Beryllium Production area source category.  The commenter stated that
these two beryllium plants are already subject to 40 CFR part 61,
subpart C, which EPA has adopted in this final rule, as well as the SSM
requirements in State implementation plans (SIP), State laws, and title
V permits.  According to the comment, because these plants are subject
to a strict ambient air standard for beryllium under the part 61 NESHAP,
which requires that the plants monitor continuously and meet the
required limits under all conditions, the part 63 SSM requirements are
not necessary.  Commenters representing facilities in the PVC industry
provided similar comments.  In addition, they stated that by requiring
compliance with part 61 and the SSM provisions in 40 CFR 63.6, the
proposed rule would impose two different SSM schemes in one standard.
It would also impose more burdensome reporting and recordkeeping
obligations on the lower emitting (area) sources.

	Representatives of two primary copper companies also stated that the
SSM requirements are unnecessary and duplicative of existing
requirements and should be deleted.  Their title V permits contain
existing functionally equivalent SSM provisions, including requirements
for timely notification and reporting.

	Response:  We agree that the SSM requirements in the 40 CFR part 63
General Provisions need not be included in the NESHAP for the PVC and
Copolymer Production and the Primary Beryllium Production area source
categories, both of which adopted the relevant part 61 standards for
these categories.  Under the construct of the part 61 standards, sources
must comply with the standards at all times, including periods of SSM.
Therefore, separate requirements governing SSM are not necessary.
Accordingly, we have revised the proposed rule to eliminate the part 63
SSM requirements for new and existing primary beryllium and PVC plants.

	We also examined the SSM requirements that are in title V permits for
other source categories.  The primary copper smelters and primary zinc
production plants have similar requirements in their permits.  Our
review indicates that these requirements are substantially equivalent to
the part 63 SSM requirements.  For example, the title V permits for
these plants require that all malfunctions be reported within two
working days of the event.  The report must include a description of the
malfunction, steps taken to mitigate emissions, and corrective actions
taken.  In addition, the permittee must show through signed
contemporaneous logs or other relevant evidence that:  (1) a malfunction
occurred and the permittee can identify the probable cause, (2) the
facility was being operated properly at the time the malfunction
occurred, and (3) all reasonable steps were taken to minimize emissions
that exceeded the emission standards or other requirements of the
permit.  The permit also makes it clear that a malfunction or emergency
does not include events caused by improperly designed equipment, lack of
preventative maintenance, careless or improper operation, or operator
error.

	Based on the comments and our review of title V permits, we are
including in this final rule alternative SSM requirements that we have
formulated based on our review of the title V permits mentioned above.
Under this final rule, a new or existing primary copper smelter or
primary zinc production facility may choose to meet the SSM requirements
in 40 CFR 63.6(e)(3) or the alternative SSM requirements provided in
this final rule.

	This final rule also includes operation and maintenance requirements
for existing sources that are based on the permits.  For primary copper
smelters, the owner or operator must to the extent practicable, maintain
and operate any affected source, including associated air pollution
control equipment, in a manner consistent with good air pollution
control practice for minimizing emissions.  In addition, all pollution
control equipment must be installed, maintained, and operated properly.
Instructions from the vendor or established maintenance practices that
maximize pollution control must be followed.  All necessary equipment
control and operating devices, such as pressure gauges, ampere meters,
volt meters, flow rate indicators, temperature gauges, continuous
emissions monitoring systems, etc., must be installed, operated properly
and easily accessible to compliance inspectors.  A copy of all
manufacturers' operating instructions for pollution control equipment
and pollution emitting equipment must be maintained at the facility
site.  These instructions must be available to all employees who operate
the equipment and must be made available to the permitting authority
upon request.  Maintenance records must be made available to the
permitting authority upon request.

	Comment:  One commenter stated that we should not adopt the
preconstruction application, review, permitting, and notification
requirements in the part 63 General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart
A) because they were unnecessary and duplicate the very similar
requirements already in the part 61 General Provisions (40 CFR part 61,
subpart A).  EPA should not impose the additional burden of submitting
and processing two duplicative applications and should just rely on the
provisions already in the part 61 General Provisions.

	Response:  We agree that if a preconstruction notification is submitted
under the part 61 General Provisions (40 CFR 61.07), it is not necessary
to submit another preconstruction notification under the part 63 General
Provisions.  We have revised the proposed rule to reflect this change.

	Comment:  One commenter stated that EPA should not incorporate any of
the part 63 General Provisions into area source standards that adopt the
part 61 NESHAP.  These provisions, including those in 40 CFR 63.1
(Applicability), are already addressed in the part 61 General Provisions
and enhanced by SIP requirements and title V permits.

	Response:  We have previously addressed the SSM requirements and
preconstruction notifications for facilities subject to part 61
standards.  The only other section of the part 63 General Provisions
that we have included for these sources deals with applicability in 40
CFR 63.1 (§§63.1(a)(1) through (10), 63.1(b)(1), 63.1(c), and
63.1(d)).  The provisions on applicability impose no burden on the
facility and provide clarity and useful information related to the
applicability of standards under part 63.  Consequently, the final rule
includes portions of §63.1 from the part 63 General Provisions.

C.  Primary Copper Smelters

	Comment:  Two commenters identified two primary copper smelters as area
sources in addition to the one smelter identified as an area source in
the proposal preamble.  One of these smelters is operating, and the
company stated that the facility is an area source (i.e., a synthetic
minor source).  The other smelter has been shut down for several years,
but it is in the process of obtaining permits to re-start and expects to
be an area source.  Both of these smelters use the batch converting
process, whereas the smelter that was identified as an area source at
proposal and was the basis for GACT uses flash continuous converting
technology.  The company pointed to the process descriptions in the
proposal preamble that noted the numerous differences in the two
technologies.  The company suggested that their two smelters fit into a
separate subcategory (batch converting technology) and should have rule
requirements based on that technology.  The requirements in the proposed
rule are not appropriate for their smelters because the proposed rule is
based on the flash continuous converting technology.

	Response:  The commenters asserted that there are two area source
primary copper smelters that use the batch converting technology.  As we
described in the proposal preamble (71 FR 59308, October 6, 2006), there
are numerous differences in process operation, emissions points, and
achievable levels of control.  We believe that our proposed standard for
existing sources, which is based on flash continuous converting
technology, would not be appropriate for existing sources of primary
copper smelting that use the batch converting technology and that
separate standards are needed to address the different technology used
by these existing smelters.  Solely for purposes of this analysis, we
accept, as true, the commenter’s assertion that they are existing area
source facilities that use batch processing.   As explained above, to
the extent the commenter has any question as to whether the smelters
identified above are major or area sources, they should consult with the
relevant permitting authority or submit a request for an applicability
determination to the EPA regional office in the region where the source
is located.

	In developing the requirements for sources using the batch converting
technology, we reviewed the title V permit of the currently operating
source identified in the comment.  The emissions from this facility are
controlled as a result of its title V permit requirements to capture and
control emissions of PM.  The vast majority of the gases from the
smelting furnace and converter are collected by a primary capture
system, sent to control equipment to remove PM, and then processed in a
sulfuric acid plant.  Fugitive emissions are collected by a secondary
capture system and sent to a baghouse for control of PM emissions.  We
determined that these current permit requirements represent GACT for
existing primary copper smelters using the batch converting process and
have included these requirements in this final rule as the requirements
for existing primary copper smelting area sources that use batch
converting technology.	According to these requirements, plants that use
batch converting technology must operate primary capture systems on each
smelting vessel and each copper converter.  Secondary capture systems
must be installed to capture emissions from tapping copper matte and
slag from the smelting vessel and emissions from charging, skimming,
pouring, and holding when the converter mouth is partially rotated out
from the primary collection hood.  All of the collected gases must be
routed to an emissions control system.  In addition, emissions from the
primary collection system for the smelting vessel and converter must be
routed to a sulfuric acid plant after PM removal.

	Emissions from each copper concentrate dryer must be controlled and
must not exceed 0.022 gr/dscf.  Emissions from secondary capture systems
that are not vented to a sulfuric acid plant must not exceed 0.02
gr/dscf.

	We also examined the monitoring requirements in the title V permit of
this primary smelter using the batch technology and found that they
would ensure that control devices are working properly on a continuous
basis.  We therefore included these monitoring requirements in this
final rule as requirements for primary copper smelting area sources that
use the batch converting technology.  Under these requirements, a COMS
meeting Performance Specification 1 (40 CFR part 60, appendix B) must be
installed on each electrostatic precipitator.  If the 24-hour rolling
average opacity exceeds 15 percent, the plant must investigate the cause
of the problem and take corrective action.  Each baghouse must be
equipped with and monitored by a bag leak detection system to ensure
proper operation.  We have also required performance tests every 2.5
years to determine compliance with PM limits.

	Comment:  A commenter representing the primary copper plant that was
the basis for GACT stated that EPA did not properly capture the
facility’s title V permit requirements in some cases.  The commenter
supplied additional details and clarifications.  Clarification is need
for the requirements for anode casting and holding operations, the
emissions limit should not be referred to as “smelter wide” but as
the limit for the main stack, the limit should be expressed as PM10
rather than PM, and the continuous PM sampler should not be referred to
as a CEMS.  The commenter also asked that EPA modify the proposed rule
to clearly state that a single secondary gas collection system can
capture and control emissions from multiple processing vessels (i.e.,
each vessel does not have to have its own separate collection system).
The commenter also requested more flexibility in the monitoring
requirements so that the permitting authority could approve improved
monitoring technology should it become available in the future.

	Response:  We agree with the commenter and will make most of the
suggested changes.  The facility’s title V permit was the basis for
our GACT determination, and we intended that the proposed area source
rule incorporate the permit requirements of this well-controlled
facility.  We understand that in some cases, a gas collection system may
be applied to multiple process vessels, and we have included this
clarification in this final rule.  We understand that flexibility in
monitoring is important, especially as improved monitoring techniques
become commercially available and demonstrated in metallurgical
operations.  That said, it is not necessary to revise the proposed rule
to allow a facility to request approval of an alternative monitoring
method because the procedure for making such requests is contained in 40
CFR 63.8, which applies to the NESHAP for the Primary Copper Smelting
area source category in this final rule.

	Comment:  One commenter noted that the new source standard for primary
copper was based on the newer flash continuous converter technology and
would not be appropriate for new plants using the batch converting
technology.  The commenter stated that continuous converting has more
limited applicability to ore concentrates that have high impurities
levels than does batch converting.  The commenter stated that because a
new smelter could use either of the technologies, the emission standards
for new sources should be reflective of the performance of either of
these technologies.  This can be achieved by providing flexibility in
the emission limits that are adopted.  The commenter recommended that
the standard for new smelters using the batch converting technology be
based on the best performing existing facility with the technology.  In
addition, a provision should be made to allow an alternate emissions
limit to be authorized by either EPA or the permitting authority that is
equally protective.

	Response:  The emissions limit that we proposed for new primary copper
smelters is in lb/ton of copper concentrate feed and is applied on a
facility wide basis.  The format and requirements of the standard can be
applied to and achieved by a facility using any primary copper smelting
technology if it is well controlled.  The format of the standard also
provides flexibility because multiple process vessels can have different
levels of emissions as long as they collectively meet the overall lb/ton
limit.  The limit has been demonstrated as achievable by an existing
area source that uses a continuous converting process.  Unlike existing
sources, new sources using any smelting technology have the opportunity
to incorporate state-of-the-art capture and control systems into their
design, construction, and operation.  Based on our engineering
experience with capture and control systems that have been applied to
primary copper processes and also those that have been applied to
similar processes in other metallurgical industries, we believe that the
emissions limit for new sources can be achieved by primary copper
smelters using any processing technology, including both the continuous
and batch converting processes.  The standard for new primary copper
smelters represents a level of control that is generally available for
new sources.  Consequently, we chose to promulgate the limit as proposed
as GACT for new primary copper smelters.

	Comment:  Three commenters objected to the requirement of using a PM
CEMS for monitoring at new primary copper smelter area sources.
Although improvements in PM CEMS have been made as they continue to be
developed, there is not sufficient operating history to prove its
feasibility for continuous monitoring at primary copper smelters.

	Response:  The PM CEMS have been demonstrated in many different
applications, including processes with exhaust gases similar to those
from primary copper smelters (e.g., at electric utilities where the
temperatures and exhaust gas compositions are similar).  The commenters
did not provide any information that the exhaust gases from primary
copper smelting are uniquely different.  We have included PM CEMS as the
monitoring technology for new sources in this final rule.

D.  Primary Zinc Smelters

	Comment:  One commenter asked if the proposed rule wan meant to apply
to any zinc refinery that processes any amount of zinc sulfide
concentrate.  If so, what is the timeframe for using zinc sulfide
concentrate and its percentage of the feed that qualifies a facility as
a primary zinc smelter?  Is EPA really trying to regulate zinc
refineries, which produce cathodes in a cathode melting furnace and use
zinc sulfide concentrate as a feed material, and not regulate thermal
zinc smelters, who do not produce cathodes and do not currently use zinc
sulfide concentrate?

	Response:  The commenter is correct in that this final rule applies to
any area source facility that produces zinc products from any amount of
zinc sulfide ore concentrates using pyrometallurgical processes (i.e., a
“primary zinc smelter”).   This final rule does not apply to thermal
zinc smelters if they do not process zinc sulfide concentrate.
(Facilities processing only zinc scrap and residues containing zinc
would be classified as secondary zinc smelters.)  If a facility meets
the definition of primary zinc smelter and is an area source on the
compliance date, it is subject to this final rule.  If the facility is
not processing zinc sulfide concentrate but subsequently begins
processing it, meets the definition of primary zinc smelter, and is an
area source, it is subject to this final rule when it begins processing
the zinc sulfide concentrate.  Under these facts, such a facility would
be subject to the standards for new sources if construction or
reconstruction of the primary zinc smelter (the affected source)
commenced on or after October 6, 2006.

	We are not making a distinction between zinc refineries and thermal
zinc smelters as described by the commenter.  Either type of facility is
subject to this final rule if it is an area source and meets the
definition of primary zinc smelter.

	Comment:  One commenter noted that that the proposed rule requires
demonstrating compliance by stack testing within 180 days after the
compliance date.  Their plant has a process that is not operating, it is
subject to the rule, but it may not restart until more than 180 days
after the compliance date.  As the proposed rule reads, they would have
to demonstrate compliance by a stack test even though the process is not
operating.

	Response:  We have clarified the proposed rule to indicate that if a
process subject to this final rule is not operating on the compliance
date and subsequently starts up, compliance testing must be performed
within 180 days after startup of the process.

	Comment:  One commenter noted that the proposed rule requires that
initial compliance must be demonstrated “for each furnace at your
facility.”  A zinc smelter may have other types of furnaces that are
not subject to emission limits.  The commenter assumes that this
requirement will have no impact on these furnaces.

	Response:  The commenter is correct.  We have clarified the proposed
rule to state that initial compliance must be demonstrated “for each
furnace at your facility that is subject to an emissions limit under
this subpart.”

	Comment:  One commenter stated that the emissions limit of 0.005
gr/dscf for certain furnaces at new sources is greater than the
emissions limit for the same furnaces at existing sources.  The
commenter suggested that the greater of the two values be applied in
this case to provide a level playing field for new and existing sources.

	Response:  We disagree with the comment that the emissions limit of
0.005 gr/dscf for certain furnaces at new sources is greater than the
emissions limits for the same furnaces at existing sources.  The
emissions limit of 0.005 gr/dscf for new sources is applied to the
exhaust vent of a zinc cathode melting furnace; scrap zinc melting
furnace; furnace melting zinc dust, zinc chips, and other materials
containing zinc; and alloy melting furnace.  For existing sources, the
limits are 0.1 lb/hr from the exhaust vent of a furnace that melts zinc
dust, zinc chips, and/or other materials containing zinc; and 0.228
lb/hr from the vent for the combined exhaust from a furnace melting zinc
scrap and an alloy furnace.  Although the limits for the furnaces
mentioned above are expressed in different formats for new and existing
sources, both formats reflect the level of emission control that can be
achieved based on the technology we identified as GACT for these
furnaces (i.e., a well-operated and well-maintained baghouse).  However,
whereas the lb/hr limits for the above-noted furnaces in the proposed
rule were based on the specific operations at the two existing sources
of which we are aware, the gr/dscf emission limit is not operation
specific and can apply to these furnaces at any primary copper smelting
area source.  We have therefore adopted the gr/dscf limit in addition to
the proposed lb/hr limit and sources can meet either the limit expressed
in lb/hr or the limit expressed in gr/dscf.

E.  Basis for Area Source Standards

	Comment:  We received a comment from the National Association of Clean
Air Agencies (NACAA) expressing concern with EPA’s establishment of
area source standards under section 112 of the CAA by adopting existing
Federal and/or State area source standards.  In the comment, the NACAA
stated that the existence of State and local regulations does not
relieve EPA of its obligation to establish area source standards under
the CAA.  The NACAA expressed concern that some States cannot have
requirements more stringent than those of the Federal government and
may, therefore, be required to change their regulations of area sources
to be consistent with EPA’s area source standards.  The NACAA stated
that, if the permit requirements that make these sources “well
controlled” are not contained within the Federal rule, the nonfederal
rules could be relaxed.  The NACAA further stated that, in the absence
of Federal requirements, there would be nothing to prevent “back
sliding” by these sources.

	The NACAA was particularly concerned with EPA’s proposed PVC rule,
which adopted the part 61 standards for PVC plants.  According to the
NACAA, the part 61 standards for PVC plants are outdated and
inappropriate as a model for GACT.  The NACAA submitted with its comment
a recommendation for the standards for area sources of PVC plants.  The
NACAA previously recommended these limits to EPA as the MACT standards
for major sources of PVC plants.  The NACAA believes the submittal
contains valuable information for EPA in developing PVC regulations for
area sources as well.

	Response:  We have traditionally reviewed operating permits and current
standards in the standards development process, and we used this
approach in developing the NESHAP for the four area source categories in
this final rule.  The NACAA did not explain why it would be
inappropriate for EPA to adopt existing Federal, State or local
standards that EPA has determined to be effective in controlling HAP
emissions.  Contrary to the commenter’s assertions, EPA is setting
final area source standards for the four source categories at issue in
this rule.  The emissions limits and/or work practice standards in each
of the four NESHAP in this final rule have been reviewed, determined by
EPA to be the appropriate standards for the relevant area source
category, and established by EPA in this final rule as the Federal
requirements for that category pursuant to section 112 of the CAA.

	It is conceivable that for those States with laws that preclude the
State from issuing regulations that are more stringent than EPA’s
regulations, a State may need to change its existing area source
regulation in response to this final rule.  However, the NACAA has not
identified any existing State regulation that would require modification
in this regard.    Further, as previously mentioned, we established the
area source standards in this final rule based on GACT, which may or may
not be reflected by a more stringent State or local requirements.  	The
NACAA also asserted that the part 61 standards for PVC plants are
outdated and inappropriate as GACT for area source PVC plants.
NACAA’s statement was apparently based on the fact that the part 61
standards were issued prior to the 1990 Amendments to the Clean Air Act
and were based on risk.  However, the fact that these are risk-based
standards are not per se evidence that they do not reflect GACT for area
sources of PVC plants.  We believe that the record supports our
determination as to what constitutes GACT for the four categories at
issue here.

	Moreover, we reviewed the information submitted by the commenter that
contained their “presumptive” determination of MACT that they issued
as guidance to State and local agencies.  These recommended limits were
based on the best-controlled plants, most if not all of which are major
sources.  We believe that these recommended limits may represent MACT or
something beyond MACT, but we do not believe that they are appropriate
for these particular area source categories.  As previously mentioned,
we have decided to establish the standards for the PVC and Copolymer
Production area source category based on GACT.  We do not believe that
NACAA’s recommended limits represent GACT for area sources of PVC
plants.  Because we expect PVC plants to be operating in accordance with
the part 61 standards for PVC plants, we believe that these standards
represent a level of control that is generally available and is
therefore a reasonable representation of GACT for area sources in this
source category.

	Comment:  One commenter stated that area source standards are not
needed for primary beryllium plants.  All of these plants, including
major and area sources, are already subject to NESHAP under 40 CFR part
61.  In addition, the proposed area source standard will not achieve any
reduction in HAP emissions.  A second commenter stated that absent
EPA’s statutory obligation to establish standards for area sources,
there would be no need to regulate PVC and copolymer plants because they
are already governed by the existing NESHAP.  However, the commenter
recognizes EPA’s obligation to regulate PVC and copolymer area sources
and supports the adoption of the part 61 NESHAP as the area source
standard.

	Response:  The second commenter has captured the issue and provides the
response to the first commenter:  EPA has a statutory obligation to
establish area source NESHAP for primary beryllium plants.

F.  Compliance Date

	Comment:  Two commenters stated that requiring compliance on the date
of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register does not allow
sufficient time for existing sources to develop a SSM plan.

	Response:  We believe that we have addressed the commenter’s concern
regarding existing sources’ abilities to develop SSM plans by the
compliance date.  With respect to primary copper smelting and primary
zinc production area sources, this final rule allows existing sources in
these two area source categories to address SSM according to the
relevant requirements in their title V permits, which do not require a
SSM plan.  As previously discussed in our response to the comments on
the necessity of the part 63 SSM requirements (section IV.B of this
preamble), we have reviewed the SSM requirements in the title V permits
for the existing sources of primary copper smelting and primary zinc
production area sources and have determined that these provisions are
adequate to replace the SSM requirements in the General Provisions,
which require a SSM plan.  See 40 CFR 63.6(e)(3).  We have therefore
included in the final NESHAP for primary copper smelting and primary
zinc production area sources requirements that are based on these title
V permit terms and conditions.  To provide flexibility, sources can
comply with the SSM requirements specified in this final rule or comply
with the provisions contained in the General Provisions at 40 CFR
63.6(e).   Accordingly, the existing sources in these two area source
categories are not required to develop SSM plans and may instead
continue to follow their title V permit requirements regarding SSM.

	In addition, as previously mentioned, we are not requiring SSM plans
and reports in 40 CFR 63.6(e)(3) for area source PVC plants and
beryllium production facilities.  Because the NESHAP for these source
categories in this final rule adopt part 61 standards, which require
compliance at all times, specific provisions governing SSM are
unnecessary.  For all of the reasons stated above, we believe that the
concern expressed in this comment has been addressed.

V.  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
the Office of Management and Budget (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 NESHAP for Polyvinyl and Copolymers Production Area Sources do not
impose any new information collection burden.  New and existing plants
that are area sources are required to comply with the same testing,
monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping requirements as those in the
National Emission Standards for Vinyl Chloride (40 CFR part 61, subpart
F), to which these area sources are currently subject, and the
information collection requirements in the part 61 NESHAP General
Provisions (40 CFR part 61, subpart A), which are incorporated into the
NESHAP.  The OMB has previously approved the information collection
requirements in 40 CFR part 61, subpart F, under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and has assigned OMB
control number 2060-0071, EPA Information Collection Request (ICR)
number 0186.10.

	A copy of the OMB-approved ICR for the National Emission Standards for
Vinyl Chloride may be obtained from Susan Auby, Collection Strategies
Division, U.S. EPA (2822T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC
20460, by e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.

	The requirements for primary beryllium production facilities in the
NESHAP for Primary Nonferrous Metals Area Sources do not impose any new
information collection burden.  New and existing plants that are area
sources are required to comply with the same testing, monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting requirements as those in the National
Emission Standards for Beryllium (40 CFR part 61, subpart C), to which
these area sources are currently subject, and the information collection
requirements in the part 61 General Provisions (40 CFR part 61, subpart
A), which are incorporated into the NESHAP for these sources.  The OMB
has previously approved the information collection requirements in 40
CFR part 61, subpart C, under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and has assigned OMB control number
2060-0092, EPA ICR number 0193.08.

	A copy of the OMB-approved ICR for the National Emission Standards for
Beryllium may be obtained from Susan Auby, Collection Strategies
Division, U.S. EPA (2822T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC
20460, by e-mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.

	The information requirements in the NESHAP for Polyvinyl Chloride and
Copolymers Production Area Sources, Primary Copper Smelting Area
Sources, Secondary Copper Smelting Area Sources, and Primary Nonferrous
Metals-Zinc, Cadmium, and Beryllium Area Sources have been submitted for
approval to OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq.  The information collection requirements are not enforceable until
OMB approves them.

	The information collection requirements for primary copper smelting and
primary zinc production are based on the current title V permitting
requirements for existing sources and the information collection
requirements in the part 63 General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart
A), most of which are incorporated into the NESHAP for new sources.  The
ICR document includes the burden estimates for all applicable General
Provisions.  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 CAA section 114(c) and the Agency’s implementing
regulations at 40 CFR part 2, subpart B.

	The PM testing, monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements
with which existing primary copper smelting and primary zinc smelting
area sources must comply are the same as the requirements that are in
these facilities’ current title V operating permits.  The only new
information collection requirements that apply to these area sources
consist of initial notifications.  There are no existing secondary
copper smelting facilities, and there are no requirements for existing
secondary copper smelting area sources.

	Any new primary zinc production facility, primary copper smelter, or
secondary copper smelter area source is subject to all information
collection requirements in the part 63 General Provisions.  No costs or
burden hours are estimated for new primary copper smelters, secondary
copper smelters, or primary zinc production area sources because no new
sources are estimated during the 3-year period of the ICR.  No new
sources have been constructed in more than 10 years, no new construction
has been announced, and we have no indication there will be any new
sources in the next 3 years.

	The annual burden for this information collection (including all four
source categories) averaged over the first 3 years of this ICR is
estimated to total 23 labor hours per year at a cost of $1,948 for the
three existing primary copper smelting area sources and 15.4 labor hours
per year at a cost of $1,305 for the two existing primary zinc smelting
area sources.  No capital/startup costs or operation and maintenance
costs are associated with the requirements.

	Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by
persons to generate, maintain, retain, disclose, or provide information
to or for a Federal agency.  This includes the time needed to review
instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and
systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying
information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and
providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any
previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to
be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources;
complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or
otherwise disclose the information.

	An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number.  The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations
in 40 CFR part 63 are listed in 40 CFR part 9.  When this ICR is
approved by OMB, the Agency will publish a technical amendments for the
approved information collection requirements contained in the final
rules.

C.  Regulatory Flexibility Act

	The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 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 area source NESHAP on
small entities, small entity is defined as:  (1) a small business that
meets the Small Business Administration size standards for small
businesses at 13 CFR 121.201 (less than 1,000 employees for primary
copper smelting and less than 750 employees for PVC and copolymers
production, secondary copper smelting, and primary nonferrous metals
manufacturing); (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.

	After considering the economic impacts of these final rules on small
entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.  The small
entities directly regulated by these final rules are small businesses.
We have determined that existing small businesses in these area source
categories will not incur any adverse impacts on existing area sources
of PVC and copolymer production facilities, primary copper smelters, and
non-ferrous metal production facilities because the rules do not create
any new requirements or burdens other than minimal notification
requirements.  There will be no adverse impacts on existing secondary
copper area sources because there are no existing sources in the
category.  Although these final NESHAP contain emission control
requirements for new area sources in all four source categories, we are
not aware of any new sources being constructed now or planned in the
near future, and consequently, we did not estimate any impacts for new
sources.

	Although this final rule will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities, EPA nonetheless has tried to
reduce the impact of this rule on small entities.  These final rules are
designed to harmonize with existing State or local requirements.  In
addition, we have deleted the proposed requirements for SSM plans and
reports.

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 final 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 the private
sector in any one year.  The estimated expenditures for the private
sector in any one year are less than $2,500.  Thus, the final rules are
not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.  In
addition, the final rules do not significantly or uniquely affect small
governments.  The final rules contain no requirements that apply to such
governments, impose no obligations upon them, and will not result in
expenditures by them of $100 million or more in any one year or any
disproportionate impacts on them.  Therefore, the final 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 ensure “meaningful and timely input
by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies
that have federalism implications.”  “Policies that have federalism
implications” 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.”

	These final rules do not have federalism implications.  They will not
have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132.  These final 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 these final rules.

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 ensure “meaningful and timely input
by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have
tribal implications.”  These final rules do not have tribal
implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175.  They will not have
substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship
between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities between the Federal government and Indian
tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175.  These final rules impose
requirements on owners and operators of specified area sources and not
tribal governments.  Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to these
final rules.

G.  Executive Order 13045:  Protection of Children from Environmental
Health and Safety Risks

	Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any rule
that:  (1) is determined to be “economically significant,” as
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental
health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children.  If the regulatory action meets
both criteria, 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.  These final rules are not
subject to the Executive Order.  They are based on control technology
and not on health or safety risks.

H.  Executive Order 13211:  Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use

	These final rules are not a “significant energy action” 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
final rules are not likely to have any adverse energy effects because
energy requirements would remain at existing levels.  No additional
pollution controls or other equipment that consume energy are required
by these final rules.

I.  National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

	Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
(NTTAA) of 1995 (Public Law No. 104-113, section 12(d), 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 the Agency does not use available and applicable VCS.

	This rule involves technical standards.  The EPA cites the following
standards:  EPA Methods 1, 1A, 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 2F, 2G, 3, 3A, 3B, 4, 5,
5D, and 9 in 40 CFR part 60, appendix A; and Performance Specifications
1 and 11 in 40 CFR part 60, appendix B.  The search identified one VCS
as an acceptable alternative to EPA Method 3B.  The method ASME PTC
19.10-1981, “Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses,” is cited in two of
these final rules 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 standard ASTM D6216 (1998), “Standard Practice for Opacity
Monitor Manufacturers to Certify Conformance with Design and Performance
Specifications,” was designated an acceptable alternative for the
design specifications given in EPA's Performance Specification 1.  As a
result, EPA incorporated ASTM D6216-98 by reference into Performance
Specification 1 as the design specifications for opacity monitors in
August 2000.

	The search for emissions measurement procedures identified 13 other
VCS.  The EPA determined that these 13 standards identified for
measuring emissions of the HAP or surrogates subject to emission
standards in these final rules were impractical alternatives to EPA test
methods for the purposes of the rules.  Therefore, EPA does not intend
to adopt these standards for this purpose.  The reasons for the
determinations for the 13 methods are in the docket for these rules.

For the methods required or referenced by these rules, 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 §§63.7(f) and
63.8(f) of subpart A of the General Provisions.

J.  Congressional Review Act

	The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801, et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the
rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to
each House of Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United
States.  The EPA will submit a report containing these final rules and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the final rules in the Federal Register.  A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register.  This action is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).  These final rules will be effective on [INSERT DATE OF
PUBLICATION].

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

	Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hazardous substances,
Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated:

Stephen L. Johnson,

Administrator.	For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40,
chapter I, part 63 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:

PART 63—-[AMENDED]

	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:

§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
§§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), and Table 5 of subpart DDDDD
of this part.

*  *  *  *  *

	3.  Part 63 is amended by adding subpart DDDDDD to read as follows:

Subpart DDDDDD-—National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers Production Area Sources

Sec.

Applicability and Compliance Dates

63.11140	Am I subject to this subpart?

63.11141	What are my compliance dates?

Standards and Compliance Requirements

63.11142	What are the standards and compliance requirements for new and
existing sources?

Other Requirements and Information

63.11143	What General Provisions apply to this subpart?

63.11144	What definitions apply to this subpart?

63.11145	Who implements and enforces this subpart?

Applicability and Compliance Dates

§63.11140  Am I subject to this subpart?

	(a)  You are subject to this subpart if you own or operate a plant
specified in 40 CFR 61.61(c) that produces polyvinyl chloride (PVC) or
copolymers and is an area source of hazardous air pollutant (HAP)
emissions.

	(b)  This subpart applies to each new or existing affected source.  The
affected source is the collection of all equipment and activities in
vinyl chloride service necessary to produce PVC and copolymers.  An
affected source does not include portions of your PVC and copolymers
production operations that meet the criteria in 40 CFR 61.60(b) or (c).

	(1)  An affected source is existing if you commenced construction or
reconstruction of the affected source before October 6, 2006.

	(2)  An affected source is new if you commenced construction or
reconstruction of the affected source on or after October 6, 2006.

	(c)  This subpart does not apply to research and development
facilities, as defined in section 112(c)(7) of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

	(d)  You are exempt from the obligation to obtain a permit under 40 CFR
part 70 or 40 CFR part 71, provided you are not otherwise required by
law to obtain a permit under 40 CFR 70.3(a) or 40 CFR 71.3(a).
Notwithstanding the previous sentence, you must continue to comply with
the provisions of this subpart.

§63.11141  What are my compliance dates?

	(a)  If you own or operate an existing affected source, you must
achieve compliance with the applicable provisions in this subpart by
[INSERT date of publication].

	(b)  If you own or operate a new affected source, you must achieve
compliance with the applicable provisions in this subpart by the dates
in paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this section.

	(1)  If you startup a new affected source on or before [INSERT date of
publication], you must achieve compliance with the applicable provisions
in this subpart not later than [INSERT date of publication].

	(2)  If you startup a new affected source after [INSERT date of
publication], you must achieve compliance with the provisions in this
subpart upon startup of your affected source.

Standards and Compliance Requirements

§63.11142	 What are the standards and compliance requirements for new
and existing sources?

	You must meet all the requirements in 40 CFR part 61, subpart F, except
for 40 CFR 61.62 and 40 CFR 61.63.

Other Requirements and Information

§63.11143  What General Provisions apply to this subpart?

	(a)  All the provisions in 40 CFR part 61, subpart A, apply to this
subpart.

	(b)  The provisions in 40 CFR part 63, subpart A, applicable to this
subpart are specified in paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this section.

(1)  §63.1(a)(1) through (10).

(2)  §63.1(b) except paragraph (b)(3), §63.1(c), and §63.1(e).

§63.11144  What definitions apply to this subpart?

	The terms used in this subpart are defined in the CAA; 40 CFR 61.02; 40
CFR 61.61; and §63.2 for terms used in the applicable provisions of
part 63, subpart A, as specified in §63.11143(b).

§63.11145  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 a State, local, or tribal agency.  If the
U.S. EPA Administrator has delegated authority to a 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 a State, local, or tribal
agency within your State.

	(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 approval authorities contained in paragraphs (b)(1)
through (4) of this section are retained by the Administrator of the
U.S. EPA and are not transferred to the State, local, or tribal agency.

	(1)  Approval of an alternative means of emissions imitation under 40
CFR 61.12(d).

   	(2)  Approval of a major change to test methods under 40 CFR
61.13(h).  A “major change to test method” is defined in §63.90.

	(3)  Approval of a major change to monitoring under 40 CFR 61.14(g).  A
“major change to monitoring” is defined in §63.90.

	(4)  Approval of a major change to recordkeeping/reporting under 40 CFR
61.10.  A “major change to recordkeeping/reporting” is defined in
§63.90.

4.  Part 63 is amended by adding subpart EEEEEE to read as follows:

Subpart EEEEEE-—National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Primary Copper Smelting Area Sources

Sec.

Applicability and Compliance Dates

63.11146  What are the applicability provisions and compliance dates?

Standards and Compliance Requirements

63.11147  What are the standards and compliance requirements for
existing sources not using batch copper converters?

63.11148  What are the standards and compliance requirements for
existing sources using batch copper converters?

63.11149  What are the standards and compliance requirements for new
sources?

Other Requirements and Information

63.11150	What General Provisions apply to this subpart?

63.11151	What definitions apply to this subpart?

63.11152	Who implements and enforces this subpart?

Tables to Subpart EEEEEE of Part 63

Table 1 to Subpart EEEEEE of Part 63—-Applicability of General
Provisions to Subpart EEEEEE

Applicability and Compliance Dates

§63.11146  What are the applicability provisions and compliance dates?

	(a)  You are subject to this subpart if you own or operate a primary
copper smelter that is an area source of hazardous air pollutant (HAP)
emissions.

  	(b)  This subpart applies to each new or existing affected source.
The affected source is each primary copper smelter.

	(1)  An affected source is existing if you commenced construction or
reconstruction of the affected source before October 6, 2006.

	(2)  An affected source is new if you commenced construction or
reconstruction of the affected source on or after October 6, 2006.

	(c)  This subpart does not apply to research and development
facilities, as defined in section 112(c)(7) of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

	(d)  If you own or operate an area source subject to this subpart, you
must obtain a permit under 40 CFR part 70 or 40 CFR part 71.

	(e)  If you own or operate an existing affected source, you must
achieve compliance with the applicable provisions of this subpart by
[INSERT DATE OF PUBLICATION].

	(f)  If you own or operate a new affected source, you must achieve
compliance with the applicable provisions of this subpart by the dates
in paragraphs (f)(1) and (2) of this section.

	(1)  If you startup a new affected source on or before [INSERT DATE OF
PUBLICATION], you must achieve compliance with the applicable provisions
of this subpart not later than [INSERT DATE OF PUBLICATION].

	(2)  If you startup a new affected source after [INSERT DATE OF
PUBLICATION], you must achieve compliance with the applicable provisions
of this subpart upon startup of your affected source.

Standards and Compliance Requirements

§63.11147  What are the standards and compliance requirements for
existing sources not using batch copper converters?

(a)  Emissions limits and work practice standards.  (1)  You must not
discharge to the atmosphere through any combination of stacks or other
vents captured process exhaust gases from the copper concentrate dryers,
smelting vessels, converting vessels, matte drying and grinding plants,
secondary gas systems, and anode refining department that contain
particulate matter less than 10 microns in aerodynamic diameter (PM10)
in excess of 89.5 pounds per hour (lb/hr) on a 24-hour average basis.

	(2)  You must operate a capture system that collects the gases and
fumes released during the transfer of molten materials from smelting
vessels and converting vessels and conveys the collected gas stream to a
control device.

	(3)  You must operate one or more capture systems that collect the
gases and fumes released from each vessel used to refine blister copper,
remelt anode copper, or remelt anode scrap and convey each collected gas
stream to a control device.  One control device may be used for multiple
collected gas streams.

	(b)  Compliance requirements.  For purposes of determining compliance
with the emissions limit in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, you must
comply with the requirements in paragraphs (b)(1) through (7) of this
section.

	(1)  You must calibrate, maintain and operate a system to continuously
measure emissions of particulate matter (PM) from the smelter’s main
stack.

	(2)  All PM collected by the smelter main stack continuous PM sampling
system is reported as PM10 unless you demonstrate to the satisfaction of
the permitting authority that, due to an infrequent event, the measured
PM contains a large fraction of particles greater than 10 microns in
diameter.

	(3)  To determine the mass emissions rate, the PM10 concentration as
determined by the smelter main stack continuous PM sampling system is
multiplied by the volumetric flow rate for the smelter main stack and
any necessary conversion factors.

 	(4)  Compliance with the PM10 emissions limit is demonstrated based on
the average mass PM10 emissions rate for each 24-hour period.

	(5)  The results of the PM monitoring and calculated average mass PM10
emissions rate for each 24-hour period must be recorded and the records
maintained for at least 5 years.  Collected data must be available for
inspection when the required laboratory analysis is completed.

 	(6)  You must submit to the permitting authority by the 20th day of
each month a report summarizing the 24-hour average mass PM10 emissions
rates for the previous month.

	(7)  You may certify initial compliance with the emissions limit in
paragraph (a)(1) of this section based on the results of PM sampling
conducted during the previous month.

	(c)  Operation and maintenance requirements.  (1)  At all times,
including periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction, you must to the
extent practicable, maintain and operate any affected source, including
associated air pollution control equipment, in a manner consistent with
good air pollution control practice for minimizing emissions.
Determination of whether acceptable operating and maintenance procedures
are being used will be based on information available to the permitting
authority which may include, but is not limited to, monitoring results,
opacity observations, review of operating and maintenance procedures,
and inspection of the source.

	(2)  All pollution control equipment must be installed, maintained, and
operated properly.  Instructions from the vendor or established
maintenance practices that maximize pollution control must be followed.
All necessary equipment control and operating devices, such as pressure
gauges, amp meters, volt meters, flow rate indicators, temperature
gauges, continuous emission monitors, etc., must be installed, operated
properly, and easily accessible to compliance inspectors.  A copy of all
manufacturers' operating instructions for pollution control equipment
and pollution emitting equipment must be maintained at your facility
site.  These instructions must be available to all employees who operate
the equipment and must be made available to the permitting authority
upon request.  Maintenance records must be made available to the
permitting authority upon request.

	(3)  You must document the activities performed to assure proper
operation and maintenance of the air pollution control equipment and
monitoring systems or devices.

	(4)  Except as provided in paragraph (c)(5) of this section, in the
event of an emergency situation the owner or operator must comply with
the requirements in paragraphs (c)(4)(i) through (iii) of this section.
For the purposes of complying with this paragraph, an emergency
situation is any situation arising from sudden and reasonably
unforeseeable events beyond the control of the facility owner or
operator that requires immediate corrective action to restore normal
operation, and that causes the affected source to exceed an applicable
emissions limitation under this subpart, due to unavoidable increases in
emissions attributable to the emergency.  An emergency must not include
noncompliance to the extent it is caused by improperly designed
equipment, lack of preventive maintenance, careless or improper
operation, or operator error.

	(i)  During the period of the emergency, you must implement all
reasonable steps to minimize levels of emissions that exceed the
emissions standards or other applicable requirements in this subpart.

	(ii)  You must document through signed contemporaneous logs or other
relevant evidence that an emergency occurred and you can identify the
probable cause, your facility was being operated properly at the time
the emergency occurred, and the corrective actions taken to minimize
emissions as required by paragraph (c)(4)(i) of this section.

	(iii)  You must submit a notice of the emergency to the permitting
authority within two working days of the time when emissions limitations
were exceeded due to the emergency (or an alternate timeframe acceptable
to the permitting authority).  This notice must contain a description of
the emergency, any steps taken to mitigate emissions, and corrective
actions taken.

	(5)  As an alternative to the requirements in paragraph (c)(4) of this
section, you must comply with the startup, shutdown, and malfunction
requirements in 40 CFR 63.6(e)(3).

	(d)  Deviations.  You must submit written notification to the
permitting authority of any deviation from the requirements of this
subpart, including the probable cause of such deviations and any
corrective actions or preventative measures taken.  You must submit this
notification within 14 days of the date the deviation occurred.

	(e)  Reports.  You must submit semiannual monitoring reports to your
permitting authority.  All instances of deviations from the requirements
of this subpart must be clearly identified in the reports.

	(f)  Records.  (1)  You must retain records of all required monitoring
data and support information.  Support information includes all
calibration and maintenance records, all original strip charts or
appropriate recordings for continuous monitoring instrumentation, and
copies of all reports required by this subpart.  For all monitoring
requirements, the owner or operator must record, where applicable, the
date, place, and time of sampling or measurement; the date analyses were
performed; the company or entity that performed the analyses; the
analytical techniques or methods used; the results of such analyses; and
the operating conditions existing at the time of sampling or
measurement.

	(2)  You must maintain records of the activities performed to assure
proper operation and maintenance of the air pollution control equipment
and monitoring systems or devices.  Records of these activities must be
maintained for at least 5 years.

§63.11148  What are the standards and compliance requirements for
existing sources using batch copper converters?

(a)  Emissions limits and work practice standards.  (1)  For each copper
concentrate dryer, you must not discharge to the atmosphere from the
dryer vent any gases that contain total particulate matter (PM) in
excess of 0.022 grains per dry standard cubic foot (gr/dscf).

	(2)  You must exhaust the process off gas from each smelting vessel to
a control device according to the requirements in paragraphs (a)(2)(i)
and (ii) of this section.

	(i)  During periods when copper ore concentrate feed is charged to and
smelted to form molten copper matte and slag layers in the smelting
vessel, you must exhaust the process off gas from the smelting vessel to
a gas cleaning system controlling PM and to a sulfuric acid plant prior
to discharge to the atmosphere.

	(ii)  During periods when no copper ore concentrate feed is charged to
or molten material tapped from the smelting vessel but the smelting
vessel remains in operation to temporarily hold molten material in the
vessel before resuming copper production, you must exhaust the process
off gas from the smelting vessel to an electrostatic precipitator or
baghouse prior to discharge to the atmosphere.

	(3)  You must control the process emissions released when tapping
copper matte or slag from a smelting vessel according to paragraphs
(a)(3)(i) and (ii) of this section.

	(i)  You must operate a capture system that collects the gases and
fumes released when copper matte or slag is tapped from the smelting
vessel.  The design and placement of this capture system must be such
that the tapping port opening, launder, and receiving vessel (e.g.,
ladle, slag pot) are positioned within the confines or influence of the
capture system's ventilation draft during those times when the copper
matte or slag is flowing from the tapping port opening.

	(ii)  You must not cause to be discharged to the atmosphere from the
capture system used to comply with paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this section
any gases that contain total PM in excess of 0.022 gr/dscf.

(4)  For each batch copper converter, you must meet the requirements in
paragraphs (a)(4)(i) through (iv) of this section.

(i)  You must operate a primary capture system that collects the process
off gas vented when one or more batch copper converters are blowing.  If
you operate a batch copper converter that does not use a “U”-shaped
side flue located at one end of the converter, then the capture system
design must include use of a primary hood that covers the entire mouth
of each batch copper converter vessel when the copper converter is
positioned for blowing.  The capture system may use multiple intake and
duct segments through which the ventilation rates are controlled
independently of each other.

(ii)  If you operate a batch copper converter that does not use a
“U”-shaped side flue located at one end of the converter, then you
must operate a secondary capture system that collects gases and fumes
released from the batch copper converter when the converter mouth is
rotated out partially or totally from within the confines or influence
of the primary capture system's ventilation draft during charging,
skimming, pouring, or holding.  The capture system design must use
additional hoods (e.g., sliding secondary hoods, air curtain hoods) or
other capture devices (e.g., building evacuation systems).  The capture
system may use multiple intake and duct segments through which the
ventilation rates are controlled independently of each other, and
individual duct segments may be connected to separate PM control
devices.

(iii)  You must exhaust the process off gas captured by the primary
capture system that is used to comply with paragraph (a)(4)(i) of this
section to a gas cleaning system controlling PM and to a sulfuric acid
plant prior to discharge to the atmosphere.

(iv)  For each secondary capture system that is used to comply with
paragraph (a)(4)(ii) of this section and is not vented to a gas cleaning
system controlling PM and a sulfuric acid plant, you must not cause to
be discharged to the atmosphere any gases that contain total particulate
matter in excess of 0.02 grains/dscf.

	(b)  Monitoring requirements for electrostatic precipitators.	 To
monitor the performance of each electrostatic precipitator used to
comply with the PM emissions limits in paragraph (a) of this section,
you must use a continuous opacity monitoring system (COMS) that is
installed at the outlet of each electrostatic precipitator or a common
duct at the outlet of multiple electrostatic precipitators.

(1)  Each COMS must meet Performance Specification 1 in 40 CFR part 60,
appendix B.

	(2)  You must comply with the quality assurance requirements in
paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (v) of this section.

	(i)  You must automatically (intrinsic to the opacity monitor) check
the zero and upscale (span) calibration drifts at least once daily.  For
a particular COMS, the acceptable range of zero and upscale calibration
materials is as defined in the applicable version of Performance
Specification 1 in 40 CFR part 60, appendix B.

	(ii)  You must adjust the zero and span whenever the 24-hour zero drift
or 24-hour span drift exceeds 4 percent opacity.  The COMS must allow
for the amount of excess zero and span drift measured at the 24-hour
interval checks to be recorded and quantified.  The optical surfaces
exposed to the effluent gases must be cleaned prior to performing the
zero and span drift adjustments, except for systems using automatic zero
adjustments.  For systems using automatic zero adjustments, the optical
surfaces must be cleaned when the cumulative automatic zero compensation
exceeds 4 percent opacity.

	(iii)  You must apply a method for producing a simulated zero opacity
condition and an upscale (span) opacity condition using a certified
neutral density filter or other related technique to produce a known
obscuration of the light beam.  All procedures applied must provide a
system check of the analyzer internal optical surfaces and all
electronic circuitry including the lamp and photodetector assembly.

	(iv)  Except during periods of system breakdowns, repairs, calibration
checks, and zero and span adjustments, the COMS must be in continuous
operation and must complete a minimum of one cycle of sampling and
analyzing for each successive 10 second period and one cycle of data
recording for each successive 6-minute period.

	(v)  You must reduce all data from the COMS to 6-minute averages.
Six-minute opacity averages must be calculated from 36 or more data
points equally spaced over each 6-minute period.  Data recorded during
periods of system breakdowns, repairs, calibration checks, and zero and
span adjustments must not be included in the data averages.  An
arithmetic or integrated average of all data may be used.

	(3)  You must evaluate opacity measurements from the COMS on a 24-hour
rolling average excluding periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction.
 If the 24-hour rolling average opacity exceeds 15 percent, you must
initiate investigation of the relevant controls or equipment within 24
hours of the first discovery of the high opacity incident and, if
necessary, take corrective action as soon as practicable to adjust or
repair the controls or equipment to reduce the opacity average to below
the 15 percent level.

	(4)  You must log in ink or electronic format and maintain a record of
24-hour opacity measurements performed in accordance with paragraph
(b)(3) of this section and any corrective actions taken, if any.  A
record of corrective actions taken must include the date and time during
which the 24-hour rolling average opacity exceeded 15 percent and the
date, time and type of the corrective action.

	(c)  Monitoring requirements for baghouses.  To monitor the performance
of each baghouse used to comply with PM emissions limits in paragraph
(a) of this section, you must use a bag leak detection system according
to the requirements in paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of this section.

	(1)  You must install, calibrate, maintain, and continuously operate a
bag leak detection system for the baghouse to monitor the baghouse
performance.

	(2)  The baghouse leak detection system must meet the specifications
and requirements in paragraphs (c)(2)(i) through (v) of this section.

	(i)  The bag leak detection system must be certified by the
manufacturer to be capable of detecting particulate matter emissions at
concentrations that can effectively discern any dysfunctional leaks of
the baghouse.

	(ii)  The bag leak detection system sensor must provide output of
relative or absolute particulate matter loadings.

	(iii)  The bag leak detection system must be equipped with an alarm
system that will sound automatically when an increase in relative
particulate emissions over a preset level is detected.  The alarm must
be located where it is easily heard by plant operating personnel.

	(iv)  The bag leak detection system must be installed downstream of the
baghouse.

	(v)  The bag leak detection system must be installed, operated,
calibrated, and maintained in a manner consistent with the
manufacturer’s written specifications and recommendations.  The
calibration of the system must, at a minimum, consist of establishing
the relative baseline output level by adjusting the sensitivity and the
averaging period of the device and establishing the alarm set points and
the alarm delay time.

	(3)  If the bag leak detection system alarm sounds, you must initiate
investigation of the baghouse within 24 hours of the first discovery of
the alarm and, if necessary, take corrective action as soon as
practicable to adjust or repair the baghouse to minimize possible
exceedances of the applicable PM emissions limits in paragraph (a) of
this section.

	(4)  You must log in ink or electronic format and maintain a record of
installation, calibration, maintenance, and operation of the bag leak
detection system.  If the bag leak detection system alarm sounds, the
records must include an identification of the date and time of all bag
leak detection alarms, their cause, and an explanation of the corrective
actions taken, if any.

	(d)  Alternative monitoring requirements for baghouses.  As an
alternative to the requirements in paragraph (c) of this section for bag
leak detection systems, you must monitor the performance of each
baghouse used to comply with a PM emissions limit in paragraph (a) of
this section using a COMS that is installed at the outlet on the
baghouse or a common duct at the outlet of multiple baghouses.  Each
COMS must meet the requirements in paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of this
section.

	(e)  Performance testing.  (1)  You must demonstrate initial compliance
with the applicable PM emissions limits in paragraph (a) of this section
based on the results of a performance test for each affected source.

	(i)  You may certify initial compliance for an affected source based on
the results of a previous performance test conducted within the past 12
months before your compliance date.

	(ii)  If you have not conducted a performance test to demonstrate
compliance with the applicable emissions limits within the past 12
months before your compliance date, you must conduct a performance test
within 180 days of your compliance date and report the results in your
notification of compliance status.

(2)  You must demonstrate subsequent compliance with the applicable PM
emissions limits in paragraph (a) of this section based on the results
of repeat performance tests conducted at least every 2.5 years for each
affected source.

	(3)  You must conduct each performance test according to §63.7(e)(1)
using the test methods and procedures in paragraphs (e)(3)(i) through
(v) of this section.

(i)  Method 1 or 1A (40 CFR part 60, appendix A) 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 (or
at the outlet of the emissions source if no control device is present)
prior to any releases to the atmosphere.

(ii)  Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 2F, or 2G (40 CFR part 60, appendix A) to
determine the volumetric flow rate of the stack gas.

(iii)  Method 3, 3A, or 3B (40 CFR part 60, appendix A) to determine the
dry molecular weight of the stack gas.  You may use ANSI/ASME PTC
19.10-1981, “Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses” (incorporated by
reference—see §63.14) as an alternative to EPA Method 3B.

(iv)  Method 4 (40 CFR part 60, appendix A) to determine the moisture
content of the stack gas.

(v)  Method 5 (40 CFR part 60, appendix A) to determine the PM
concentration for negative pressure baghouses or Method 5D (40 CFR part
60, appendix A) for positive pressure baghouses.  A minimum of three
valid test runs are needed to comprise a PM performance test.

	(f)  Operation and maintenance requirements.  (1)  At all times,
including periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction, you must to the
extent practicable, maintain and operate any affected source, including
associated air pollution control equipment, in a manner consistent with
good air pollution control practice for minimizing emissions.
Determination of whether acceptable operating and maintenance procedures
are being used will be based on information available to the permitting
authority which may include, but is not limited to, monitoring results,
opacity observations, review of operating and maintenance procedures,
and inspection of the source.

	(2)  All pollution control equipment must be installed, maintained, and
operated properly.  Instructions from the vendor or established
maintenance practices that maximize pollution control must be followed.
All necessary equipment control and operating devices, such as pressure
gauges, amp meters, volt meters, flow rate indicators, temperature
gauges, continuous emissions monitor, etc., must be installed, operated
properly and easily accessible to compliance inspectors.  A copy of all
manufacturers' operating instructions for pollution control equipment
and pollution emitting equipment must be maintained at your facility
site.  These instructions must be available to all employees who operate
the equipment and must be made available to the permitting authority
upon request.  Maintenance records must be made available to the
permitting authority upon request.

	(3)  You must document the activities performed to assure proper
operation and maintenance of the air pollution control equipment and
monitoring systems or devices.  Records of these activities must be
maintained as required by the permitting authority.

	(4)  Except as specified in paragraph (f)(5) of this section, in the
event of an emergency situation, you must comply with the requirements
specified in paragraphs (f)(4)(i) through (iii) of this section.  For
the purpose of complying with this paragraph, an emergency situation is
any situation arising from sudden and reasonably unforeseeable events
beyond the control of the facility owner or operator that requires
immediate corrective action to restore normal operation and that causes
the affected source to exceed applicable emission limitation under this