[Federal Register: December 23, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 247)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 78637-78647]
[DOCID:fr23de08-13]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0154; FRL-8755-4]
RIN 2060-AO13

Revision of Source Category List for Standards Under Section
112(k) of the Clean Air Act; and National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants for Area Sources: Ferroalloys Production
Facilities

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is revising the area source category list by changing the
name of the ferroalloys production category to clarify that it includes
all types of ferroalloys. We are also adding two additional products
(calcium carbide and silicon metal) to the source category. EPA is
issuing final national emissions standards for control of hazardous air
pollutants (HAP) for area source ferroalloys production facilities. The
final emissions standards for new and existing sources reflect EPA's
determination regarding the generally available control technology
(GACT) or management practices for the source category.

DATES: This final rule is effective on December 23, 2008.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0154. All documents in the docket are listed in the
Federal Docket Management System index at 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
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Area Source National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for
Ferroalloys Production Facilities Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is
open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is
(202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air Docket is (202)
566-1742.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Conrad Chin, Sector Policies and
Programs Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (D243-
02), Environmental Protection Agency, 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 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 This Final Rule
III. Revision to the Source Category List
IV. Summary of Major Changes Since Proposal
V. Summary of Final Standards
    A. Do these final standards apply to my source?
    B. When must I comply with these standards?
    C. What are the final standards?
    D. What are the initial and subsequent testing requirements?
    E. What are the monitoring requirements?
    F. What are the notification, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements?
    G. What are the title V permit requirements?
VI. Summary of Comments and Responses
    A. Electrometallurgical Operation VE Limit
    B. Furnace Building Opacity Limit
    C. Daily VE Inspections
    D. Activities Subject to the GACT Rule
VII. Impacts of the Final Standards
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
    K. Congressional Review Act

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    The regulated categories and entities potentially affected by this
final rule include:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Examples of regulated
            Category              NAICS code\1\          entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry:
    Electrometallurgical                 331112  Area source facilities
     Ferroalloy Product                           that manufacture
     Manufacturing.                               ferroalloys.
    Primary Smelting and                 331419  Area source facilities
     Refining of Nonferrous                       that manufacture
     Metal (except Copper and                     silicon metal.
     Aluminum).
    All Other Basic Inorganic            325188  Area source facilities
     Chemical Manufacturing.                      that manufacture
                                                  calcium carbide.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ North American Industry Classification System.

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. To determine whether your facility would be regulated by this
final action, you should examine the applicability criteria in 40 CFR
63.11524 of subpart YYYYYY (NESHAP for Area Sources: Ferroalloys
Production Facilities). If you have any questions regarding the
applicability of this final 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: 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 this final rule is available only by filing a petition for review in
the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
by February 23, 2009. Under section 307(b)(2) of the CAA, the
requirements established by this final rule may not be challenged
separately in any civil or criminal proceedings brought by EPA to
enforce these requirements.
    Section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA further provides that ``[o]nly an
objection to a rule or procedure which was raised with reasonable
specificity during the period for public comment (including any public
hearing) may be raised during judicial review.'' This section also
provides a mechanism for EPA to convene a proceeding for
reconsideration, ``[i]f the person raising an objection can demonstrate
to EPA that it was impracticable to raise such objection within [the
period for public comment] or if the grounds for such objection arose
after the period for public comment (but within the time specified for
judicial review) and if such objection is of central relevance to the
outcome of the rule.'' Any person seeking to make such a demonstration
to us should submit a Petition for Reconsideration to the Office of the
Administrator, U.S. EPA, Room 3000, Ariel Rios Building, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, with a copy to both the
person(s) listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section, and the Associate General Counsel for the Air and Radiation
Law Office, Office of General Counsel (Mail Code 2344A), U.S. EPA, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.

II. Background Information for This Final Rule

    Section 112(d) of the CAA requires us to establish NESHAP for both
major and area sources of HAP that are listed for regulation under CAA
section 112(c). A major source emits or has the potential to emit 10
tons per year (tpy) or more of any single HAP or 25 tpy or more of any
combination of HAP. An area source is a stationary source that is not a
major source.
    Section 112(k)(3)(B) of the CAA calls for EPA to identify at least
30 HAP which, as the result of emissions from area sources, pose the
greatest threat to public health in the largest number of urban areas.
EPA implemented this provision in 1999 in the Integrated Urban Air
Toxics Strategy, (64 FR 38715, July 19, 1999). Specifically, in the
Strategy, EPA identified 30 HAP that pose the greatest potential health
threat in urban areas, and these HAP are referred to as the ``30 urban
HAP.'' Section 112(c)(3) requires EPA to list sufficient categories or
subcategories of area sources to ensure that area sources representing
90 percent of the emissions of the 30 urban HAP are subject to
regulation. We implemented these requirements through the Strategy and
subsequent updates to the source category list. The ferroalloys
production source category was listed pursuant to section 112(c)(3) for
its contributions toward meeting the 90 percent requirement of chromium
compounds, manganese compounds, and nickel compounds.
    Under CAA section 112(d)(5), we may elect to promulgate standards
or requirements for area sources ``which provide for the use of
generally available control technology [GACT] or management practices
by such sources to reduce emissions of hazardous air pollutants.'' As
explained in the preamble to the proposed NESHAP, we are issuing
standards based on GACT.
    We are issuing these final national emission standards for
ferroalloys production area sources in response to a court-ordered
deadline that requires EPA to issue standards for one source category
listed pursuant to section 112(c)(3) and (k) by December 15, 2008
(Sierra Club v. Johnson, no. 01-1537, D.D.C., March 2006).

III. Revision to the Source Category List

    This final rule announces a revision to the area source category
list developed under our Integrated Urban Air Toxics Strategy pursuant
to CAA section 112(c)(3). The revision includes changing the name of
the source category ``Ferroalloys Production: Ferromanganese and
Silicomanganese'' to ``Ferroalloys Production Facilities.'' We are also
adding two additional products (calcium carbide and silicon metal) to
the source category.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ We did not receive any adverse comments on the proposed
revisions to the list.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Summary of Major Changes Since Proposal

    We have made three significant changes to the proposed rule based
on public comments.
    Electrometallurgical Operation Visible Emissions. In response to
comments, we have increased the level of the allowable accumulated
occurrences of visible emissions (VE) from the electrometallurgical
operation using EPA Method 22 from 3 percent in a 60-minute observation
period to 5 percent in a 60-minute observation period.
    Furnace Building Opacity. While we have retained the 20 percent
opacity limit for the discharge of fugitive particulate matter (PM)
emissions from the furnace building containing the

electrometallurgical operations, we have increased the limit of the
allowed single 6-minute average above 20 percent from 40 percent to 60
percent.
    Frequency of VE Observations. Under this final rule, sources that
conduct daily visual monitoring of the electric arc furnace (EAF) or
other reaction vessel control equipment would be allowed to decrease
this frequency to a weekly observation upon achieving 90 consecutive
operating days of observation with no presence of any VE noted. If VE
is noted after the source converts to a weekly schedule, the source
must revert to daily observations for the affected control equipment
until it achieves an additional 90 consecutive operating days of
observation with no presence of any VE noted. At that point, the source
may convert to weekly observations. We have also clarified this final
rule to specify that such observations only need to be made on days (or
weeks) when the electrometallurgical operations and associated control
devices are operating.

V. Summary of Final Standards

A. Do these final standards apply to my source?

    This final rule (subpart YYYYYY) applies to each existing or new
electrometallurgical operation located at an area source that produces
silicon metal, ferrosilicon, ferrotitanium using the aluminum reduction
process, ferrovanadium, ferromolybdenum, calcium silicon,
silicomanganese zirconium, ferrochrome silicon, silvery iron, high-
carbon ferrochrome, charge chrome, standard ferromanganese,
silicomanganese, ferromanganese silicon, calcium carbide or other
ferroalloy products. These standards do not apply to research and
development facilities, as defined in section 112(c)(7) of the CAA.

B. When must I comply with these standards?

    All existing area source facilities subject to this final rule must
comply with the rule requirements no later than June 22, 2009. New
sources must comply with these final rule requirements on December 23,
2008 or upon startup of the facility, whichever is later.

C. What are the final standards?

1. Electrometallurgical Operation VE Limit
    These final standards establish a limit, as measured by Method 22
(Appendix A-7 of 40 CFR part 60), on the duration of VE from the
control device(s) on the electrometallurgical operations. The Method 22
test is designed to measure the amount of time that any VE are observed
during an observation period. The owner or operator must demonstrate
that the control device outlet emissions do not exceed 5 percent of
accumulated occurrences in a 60-minute observation period. We refer to
this as the 5 percent limit throughout this document.
2. Furnace Building Opacity Limit
    These final standards establish a limit for fugitive emissions, as
determined by Method 9 (Appendix A-4 of 40 CFR part 60), from the
furnace building due solely to electrometallurgical operations. The
owner or operator must demonstrate that the furnace building emissions
do not exhibit opacity greater than 20 percent (6-minute average),
except for one 6-minute period per hour for which the average opacity
does not exceed 60 percent during the 1-hour observation period. The
observation period must include product tapping.

D. What are the initial and subsequent testing requirements?

1. Electrometallurgical Operations VE Limit
    For each control device on an electrometallurgical operation, the
owner or operator must conduct an initial Method 22 (Appendix A-7 of 40
CFR part 60) VE test for at least 60 minutes. A semiannual Method 22
test is required thereafter. In the case of a fabric filter control
device, emissions would be observed at the monovent or outlet stack(s),
as applicable. For ferroalloy facilities using wet scrubbers for PM
control, the observations would be conducted at the scrubber outlet
stack. For example, scrubber outlet emissions may be directed to a
flare or to another combustion source such as a dryer. In this case the
outlet of the downstream device or process would be observed.
2. Furnace Building Opacity
    In order to demonstrate compliance with the furnace building
opacity requirements, the owner or operator must conduct an initial 60-
minute (ten 6-minute averages) opacity test for fugitive emissions from
the furnace building according to the procedures in Sec.  63.6(h)
(subpart A of the 40 CFR part 63 General Provisions) and Method 9 of
Appendix A-4 of 40 CFR part 60. The owner or operator must conduct a
follow up Method 9 test every 6 months.
    In order to provide flexibility to sources and reduce the costs of
demonstrating compliance, this final rule allows sources to monitor VE
using a Method 22 test in place of the semiannual Method 9 test. The
Method 22 test is successful if no VE are observed for 90 percent of
the readings over the furnace cycle (tap to tap) or 60 minutes,
whichever is more. If VE are observed greater than 10 percent of the
time over the furnace cycle or 60 minutes, whichever is more, then the
facility must conduct a Method 9 performance test as soon as possible,
but no later than 15 calendar days after the Method 22 test.

E. What are the monitoring requirements?

    For existing ferroalloy facilities, the owner or operator must
conduct and record the results of daily visual inspection of the
control device outlet on days when the electrometallurgical operation
is operating. In the case of a fabric filter, the source would observe
the monovent or fabric filter outlet stack(s) for any VE. In the case
of a wet scrubber, the source would observe the scrubber outlet stack.
Should any of the daily observations reveal any VE, the owner or
operator must conduct a Method 22 test as described earlier within 24
hours.
    The source would have the option to decrease the frequency of
observations from daily to weekly if the source collects at least 90
consecutive operating days of observations with no VE. If, after the
source converts to a weekly schedule, any VE is observed, the source
must revert to a daily schedule, until another consecutive 90 operating
days of data are obtained that demonstrate there was no VE during the
period observed. Then, the source may convert to a weekly observation
schedule.
    The owner or operator of a new electrometallurgical operation
equipped with a new fabric filter is required to install and operate a
bag leak detection system and prepare a site-specific monitoring plan
instead of complying with the daily (or weekly) visual inspection
requirements for existing sources. In addition, existing sources have
the option of complying with the bag leak detection system requirements
as an alternative to the daily (weekly) visual inspections.
    In case of bag leak detection system alarm, the source must conduct
a visual inspection within 1 hour of the alarm sounding. If the visual
monitoring reveals the presence of any VE, the source must conduct a
Method 22 test within 24 hours of determining the presence of any VE.
    The owner or operator of a new sealed EAF equipped with a wet
scrubber must install, operate and maintain a

continuous parameter monitoring system (CPMS) to measure and record the
3-hour average pressure drop and scrubber water flow rate instead of
complying with the daily (weekly) visual inspection requirements.
Existing sources have the option of conducting CPMS monitoring in place
of the daily (weekly) visual inspection requirements, as well.
    When operating a CPMS, if the 3-hour average pressure drop or
scrubber water flow rate is below the minimum levels that indicate
normal operation of the control device, the source must conduct visual
monitoring of the outlet stack(s) within 1 hour of determining that the
3-hour average parameter value is below the required minimum levels.
Manufacturer's specifications will be used to provide the values for
normal operation. If the visual monitoring reveals the presence of any
VE, the source must conduct a Method 22 test within 24 hours of
determining the presence of any VE.

F. What are the notification, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements?

    The affected new and existing sources are required to comply with
certain requirements of the General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart
A), which are identified in Table 1 of this final rule. The General
Provisions include specific requirements for notifications,
recordkeeping, and reporting, including provisions for a startup,
shutdown, and malfunction (SSM) plan and reports required by 40 CFR
63.6(e). Each facility is required to submit an Initial Notification
and a Notification of Compliance Status according to the requirements
in 40 CFR 63.9 in the General Provisions. The owner or operator is
required to submit the Initial Notification within 120 days after
publication of this final rule in the Federal Register. The owner or
operator is required to submit a Notification of Compliance Status
within 90 days after the applicable compliance date to demonstrate
initial compliance with this final rule.
    In addition to the records required by 40 CFR 63.10, owners and
operators are required to maintain records of all monitoring data
including:
     Date, place, and time of the monitoring event
     Person conducting the monitoring
     Technique or method used
     Operating conditions during the activity
     Results, including the date, time, and duration of the
period from the time the monitoring indicated a problem to the time
that monitoring indicated proper operation.

G. What are the title V permit requirements?

    This final rule exempts the ferroalloys production area source
category from title V permitting requirements unless the affected
source is otherwise required by law to obtain a title V permit. For
example, sources that have title V permits because they are major
sources under the criteria pollutant program would maintain those
permits.

VI. Summary of Comments and Responses

    We received six comments from industry representatives on the
proposed rule during the comment period. Sections VI.A. through VI.D.
summarize the significant comments and explain our response. Some of
the comments we received requested clarification or only addressed
minor source-specific issues. These comments are summarized and
addressed in a memorandum to the project docket.

A. Electrometallurgical Operation VE Limit

    Comment: Some commenters suggested that this final rule should
allow a 5 percent accumulation of VE at the control device outlet
instead of the proposed 3 percent limit. Some commenters disagreed with
using data from the cement kiln industry to select a 3 percent VE limit
for furnace or reaction vessel emissions (emitted from a baghouse or
scrubber).\2\ Instead, they said the limit should be comparable to the
maximum achievable control technology (MACT) standard for baghouse
emissions of ``35 milligrams per dry standard cubic meter, or 0.015
grains per dry standard cubic foot (gr/dscf)'' (40 CFR 63.1652(a)). The
commenters added that 5 percent VE translates to a 3-minute
accumulation period, vs. a 1.8-minute accumulation period at 3 percent,
which is more practical to implement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ In the proposal preamble (73 FR 53169, September 15, 2008)
we cited an example of a test at a wet cement kiln with a fabric
filter that showed when outlet concentrations were less than 0.009
gr/dscf, opacity was less than 2 percent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Response: As described at proposal, we determined that GACT is
either a well controlled baghouse or wet scrubber, which is correlated
with low particulate concentration in the exhaust gas. We selected 3
percent as the proposed VE limit instead of stack sampling to minimize
the burden of compliance demonstration. However, we agree with
commenters that a 5 percent accumulation is more practical to implement
and, as such, is GACT. Because this change will not have a significant
impact on emissions and will be simpler to implement, we are changing
this final rule to allow a 5 percent accumulation.

B. Furnace Building Opacity Limit

    Comment: Commenters argued that the proposed furnace building
opacity limit is too restrictive in terms of the proposed upper bound
of 40 percent for no more than one 6-minute period during the 60-minute
observation period. Commenters provided additional information that
some sources have existing permits that allow excursions up to 60
percent. For example, one ferrosilicon manufacturing facility is
subject to a range of opacity limits depending on the operation being
observed. Commenters also noted that some of the rules that EPA
referenced in the proposed GACT determination were not for ferroalloys
operations. They suggested that EPA should look to States like Kentucky
and Ohio that have ferroalloys-specific rules and are based on a 60
percent upper limit.
    Response: We agree with the commenters that there is evidence that
the GACT for the 1-minute excursion level is 60 percent. In response to
comments, we reviewed the permit limits for existing ferroalloys
production area sources and found a range of allowed excursion levels
ranging from 0 to 60 percent. We also looked at State rules in those
States that have existing ferroalloys production sources. All had
baseline opacity limits of 15 to 20 percent, and all allowed excursions
of 40 to 60 percent or specified conditions that could be excluded from
the observation. In the case of New York, there is a provision for the
source to petition for an alternative limit. Therefore, based on
existing permit requirements and relevant State regulations, we believe
that a single 6-minute excursion level of 60 percent is GACT for this
category. Because sources are, in fact, operating up to an excursion
level of 60 percent, and this level presumably accounts for different
normal operating conditions, we are making the change requested by the
commenter.

C. Daily VE Inspections

    The proposed rule required sources to conduct daily visual
monitoring of the monovent or control device outlet stack(s) for any
VE.
    Comment: Some commenters said this final rule does not allow for
any deviation from daily visible inspections of all control device
outlets, even if the equipment is not operating. Some

commenters also suggested a step-down process similar to that found in
other programs, where in the absence of noting emissions during daily
observations over a specified time period (e.g., one month), the source
could step down to weekly observations. They said that this approach is
consistent with federal leak detection and repair rules and would
reduce the ``substantial burden on the affected facilities with no
benefit to the environment.''
    Response: First, we agree with commenters that observations are
meaningful only on days when the source equipment (and control device)
are operating. This final rule clarifies this point.
    Also, based on a closer inspection of existing permit requirements
for area sources in this industry, we did find some permits that
required either weekly monitoring and/or allowed a step down from daily
to weekly. While we estimate that the overall burden associated with
the monitoring requirement is minimal, we are also sensitive to the
fact that these are generally operations with a small number of staff
with many other responsibilities. The intent of the VE inspection is to
have ongoing assurance that the control device is operating properly.
We are comfortable that a demonstration that shows good performance
over at least 90 consecutive operating days, followed by weekly
inspections, is sufficient for the type of controls (generally
baghouses) used in this industry. Therefore we are changing this final
rule to include a provision for stepped down observations after
demonstrating good ongoing performance. Should a source subsequently
observe VE on a weekly schedule, the source would have to revert to a
daily schedule until another 90-day block of observations could be used
to justify returning to a weekly schedule.
    Comment: Another commenter said that the initial and semi-annual
observations are ``entirely adequate'' to show compliance with the
proposed standards. The commenter said area sources do not have the
resources to send out personnel on a daily basis during operations to
perform observations, nor should the same be required as a GACT
standard or work practice. They added that title V does not require
daily monitoring of any parameter.
    Response: We disagree with the commenter that an initial and semi-
annual observation alone provides sufficient assurance of compliance
with the VE limit. While this final rule exempts sources from the title
V permit requirement if the source is otherwise not subject to title V,
we note that part of the basis for the exemption is that subjecting
sources to the permit requirement would not lead to better monitoring
and enforceability. PM control device monitoring provisions have
historically been based on the use of either continuous opacity
monitoring, bag leak detection, or parametric monitoring (e.g.,
pressure drop). Parametric monitoring requirements may be continuous,
or, in some cases, daily in the form of a meter reading. With this
final rule, we have replaced such requirements with daily VE monitoring
that we believe provide data indicative of a well operated and
maintained control device. In addition, the daily VE observation we
require should not take more than 5 minutes, a burden we deem as
minimal. As discussed above, we have provided the opportunity to reduce
the frequency of such monitoring to weekly, but believe this is the
minimum frequency that would demonstrate ongoing compliance. A facility
always has the option to install the bag leak detection system or CPMS
in lieu of the daily VE monitoring.

D. Activities Subject to the GACT Rule

    Comment: Some commenters disagreed with our contention in the
proposal preamble that blowing taps, poling, and oxygen lancing should
be considered upsets or malfunctions and handled under the General
Provisions SSM provisions. One commenter added that requiring an area
source to treat a blowing tap or other operation associated with
tapping as events that would require reporting to the administrative
agency through an SSM plan adds unnecessary regulatory burden.
    Response: We have reviewed our statements in the proposal preamble
that such events should be treated under a source's SSM plan. Upon
further discussions with the commenters we realized that some events
such as poling can be quite frequent (e.g., daily), and may be
difficult to define for all operations and product types. It was a
mischaracterization on our part to imply that all such events are
always malfunctions. We did not intend to require that sources include
these events in their SSM plan such that the result would be daily
reports of events that are not actual malfunctions. The content of the
SSM plan is left to the discretion of the source and this final rule
does not specify that such events should be included in a plan.
    Comment: Commenters contended that blowing taps, poling, and oxygen
lancing should be exempted from the area source GACT rule. They noted
that such events are exempt from the ferroalloys MACT opacity standard
(40 CFR 63.1653(b)) and requested that EPA provide the same exemption
for area sources.
    Response: We note that blowing taps, poling, and oxygen lancing
activities emit the same urban HAP for which the source category was
listed under section 112(c)(3). As we explained in the proposed rule,
we listed the ferroalloys production area source category under section
112(c)(3) because we needed the category to meet the section 112(c)(3)
90 percent requirement for emissions of chromium compounds, manganese
compounds, and nickel compounds. The record adequately supports and the
commenters do not question that there are HAP emissions related to
poling, oxygen lancing, and blowing taps, and that these emissions are
from emission points in this source category. Because poling, oxygen
lancing, and blowing taps emit chromium compounds, manganese compounds,
and nickel compounds, we are appropriately setting standards for these
activities in this GACT rule.
    Based on discussions with the commenters, they indicated that they
can meet the furnace building opacity standard without resorting to
such exemptions. The availability of the increased excursion level
provides a level of operation that does not require an exemption of the
activities discussed above.\3\ In fact, the purpose of the excursion
level is to address variable operations and/or emissions. Because we
believe that all companies can meet the opacity limit with the revised
60 percent excursion level, we do not believe an exemption of blowing
taps, poling, and oxygen lancing events to be appropriate, since these
events are HAP-emitting normal operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See docket memos dated October 22, 2008 that summarize
discussions with commenters on this topic.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, we have established that the controls required under this
final rule are generally available within the source category. As more
thoroughly discussed in the proposal and in Section IV (Summary of
Major Changes Since Proposal), above, we have assessed the control
technologies currently in place in this source category, reviewed the
economics of this industry, and identified low cost methods to assure
that HAP are well controlled. As described above, none of the
commenters objected to the feasibility of

meeting the building opacity limit, and none said it was prohibitive in
cost or otherwise not an available technique. In light of the need to
meet the requirements of section 112(c)(3) and the record basis for
saying the control measures required today are generally available, we
have decided to retain coverage of blowing taps, poling, and oxygen
lancing. There is additional discussion on our decision to regulate
these activities in the docket memorandum.

VII. Impacts of the Final Standards

    Affected sources are well-controlled and our GACT determination
reflects such controls. Compared to the early 1990s when we evaluated
this industry as part of the development of the major source rule, we
believe that sources have improved their level of control and reduced
emissions due to State permitting requirements or actions taken to
improve efficiency and/or reduce costs. For example, sources have
reported improved capture of tapping emissions, improved process
controls that minimize upset conditions, and installed improvements in
fabric filter technology such as Goretex[supreg] bags. We estimate that
the only impact associated with this final rule is for the compliance
requirements (monitoring, reporting, recordkeeping and testing), which
is estimated to be approximately $3,600 per facility.

VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    This final action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
the terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and
is therefore not subject to review under the Executive Order.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection requirements in this final rule have
been submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget
(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 recordkeeping and reporting requirements in this final rule are
based on the requirements in EPA's NESHAP General Provisions (40 CFR
part 63, subpart A). The recordkeeping and reporting requirements in
the General Provisions are mandatory pursuant to section 114 of the CAA
(42 U.S.C. 7414). All information other than emissions data 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.
    This final NESHAP requires ferroalloys production area sources to
submit an Initial Notification and a Notification of Compliance Status
according to the requirements in 40 CFR 63.9 of the General Provisions
(subpart A). Records are required to demonstrate compliance with the
opacity and VE requirements. The owner or operator of a ferroalloys
production facility also is subject to notification and recordkeeping
requirements in 40 CFR 63.9 and 63.10 of the General Provisions
(subpart A), although we have deemed that annual compliance reports are
sufficient instead of semiannual reports.
    The annual burden for this information collection averaged over the
first 3 years of this ICR is estimated to be a total of 387 labor hours
per year at a labor cost of $35,662 or approximately $3,600 per
facility. The average annual reporting burden is 26 hours per response,
with approximately 3 responses per facility for 10 respondents. There
are no capital and operating and maintenance costs associated with this
final rule requirements for existing sources. Burden is defined at 5
CFR 1320.3(b).
    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. EPA displays OMB control numbers
various ways. For example, EPA lists OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in 40 CFR part 9, which we amend periodically.
Additionally, we may display the OMB control number in another part of
the CFR, or in a valid Federal Register notice, or by other appropriate
means. The OMB control number display will become effective the
earliest of any of the methods authorized in 40 CFR part 9.
    When this ICR is approved by OMB, the Agency will publish a Federal
Register notice announcing this approval and displaying the OMB control
number for the approved information collection requirements contained
in this final rule. If necessary, we will also publish a technical
amendment to 40 CFR part 9 in the Federal Register to consolidate the
display of the OMB control number with other approved information
collection requirements.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act generally requires an agency to
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice
and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure
Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. Small entities include small businesses, small not-for-
profit enterprises, and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For the purposes of assessing the impacts of this final rule on
small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business that
meets the Small Business Administration size standards for small
businesses found at 13 CFR 121.201 (less than 750 employees for NAICS
331112 and 331419 and less than 1,000 employees for NAICS 325188); (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 this final rule on small
entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This final
rule is estimated to impact 10 area source ferroalloys production
facilities that are currently operating. We estimate that five of these
facilities may be small entities. We have determined that small entity
compliance costs, as assessed by the facilities' cost-to-sales ratio,
are expected to be less than 0.02 percent. The costs are so small that
the impact is not expected to be significant. Although this final rule
contains requirements for new area sources, we are not aware of any new
area sources being constructed now or planned in the next 3 years, 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 final rule on small entities. These
standards represent practices and controls that are common throughout
the ferroalloys production industry. These standards also require only
the essential recordkeeping and reporting needed to demonstrate and
verify compliance. These standards were developed based on information
obtained from small businesses in our surveys, consultation with small
business representatives on the State and national level, and industry

representatives that are affiliated with small businesses.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This final rule does not contain a Federal mandate that may result
in expenditures of $100 million or more for State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector in any one year.
This final rule is not expected to impact State, local, or tribal
governments. Thus, this action is not subject to the requirements of
sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
    This final rule is also not subject to the requirements of section
203 of UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This final rule
contains no requirements that apply to such governments, imposes no
obligations upon them, and would not result in expenditures by them of
$100 million or more in any one year or any disproportionate impacts on
them.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) requires EPA
to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely
input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have
federalism implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include
regulations that have ``substantial direct effects on the States, on
the relationship between the national government and the States, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels
of government.''
    This final rule does not have federalism implications. It 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. This final rule does not impose
any requirements on State and local governments. Thus, Executive Order
13132 does not apply to this final rule.

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

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This final rule
imposes no requirements on tribal governments. Thus, Executive Order
13175 does not apply to this final action.

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

    EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997)
as applying to those regulatory actions that concern health or safety
risks, such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of the Order
has the potential to influence the regulation. This final action is not
subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is based solely on
technology performance.

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

    This final action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355 (May 22, 2001)), because it is not a significant regulatory
action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law 104-113 (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS) in its
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical. VCS are technical standards
(e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and
business practices) that are developed or adopted by VCS bodies. NTTAA
directs EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the
Agency decides not to use available and applicable VCS.
    This final rule involves technical standards. Therefore, the Agency
conducted a search to identify potentially applicable VCS. However, we
identified no such standards, and none were brought to our attention in
comments. Therefore, EPA has decided to use EPA Methods 9 and 22 in
this final rule.
    Under Sec.  63.7(f) and Sec.  63.8(f) of subpart A of the General
Provisions, 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.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) establishes
Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
    EPA has determined that this final rule will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it would not
affect the level of protection provided to human health or the
environment.

K. 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. EPA will submit a report containing this final
rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House
of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States
prior to publication of this final rule in the Federal Register. A
major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in
the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by
5 U.S.C. 804(2). This final rule will be effective on December 23,
2008.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

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

    Dated: December 15, 2008.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.

0
For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 63 of
the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 63--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart A--[Amended]

0
2. Part 63 is amended by adding subpart YYYYYY to read as follows:

Subpart YYYYYY--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Area Sources: Ferroalloys Production Facilities

Applicability and Compliance Dates

Sec.
63.11524 Am I subject to this subpart?
63.11525 What are my compliance dates?

Standards, Monitoring, and Compliance Requirements

63.11526 What are the standards for new and existing ferroalloys
production facilities?
63.11527 What are the monitoring requirements for new and existing
sources?
63.11528 What are the performance test and compliance requirements
for new and existing sources?
63.11529 What are the notification, reporting, and recordkeeping
requirements?

Other Requirements and Information

63.11530 What parts of the General Provisions apply to my facility?
63.11531 Who implements and enforces this subpart?
63.11532 What definitions apply to this subpart?
63.11533-63.11543 [RESERVED]
Table 1 to Subpart YYYYYY of Part 63--Applicability of General
Provisions to Subpart YYYYYY

Subpart YYYYYY--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Area Sources: Ferroalloys Production Facilities

Applicability and Compliance Dates

Sec.  63.11524  Am I subject to this subpart?

    (a) You are subject to this subpart if you own or operate a
ferroalloys production facility that is an area source of hazardous air
pollutant (HAP) emissions. A ferroalloys production facility
manufactures silicon metal, ferrosilicon, ferrotitanium using the
aluminum reduction process, ferrovanadium, ferromolybdenum, calcium
silicon, silicomanganese zirconium, ferrochrome silicon, silvery iron,
high-carbon ferrochrome, charge chrome, standard ferromanganese,
silicomanganese, ferromanganese silicon, calcium carbide or other
ferroalloy products using electrometallurgical operations including
electric arc furnaces (EAFs) or other reaction vessels.
    (b) The provisions of this subpart apply to each existing and new
electrometallurgical operation affected source as defined in paragraphs
(b)(1) and (b)(2) of this section.
    (1) An electrometallurgical operation affected source is existing
if you commenced construction or reconstruction of the EAF or other
reaction vessel on or before September 15, 2008.
    (2) An electrometallurgical operation affected source is new if you
commenced construction or reconstruction of the EAF or other reaction
vessel after September 15, 2008.
    (c) This subpart does not apply to research or laboratory
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.
Notwithstanding the previous sentence, you must continue to comply with
the provisions of this subpart.

Sec.  63.11525  What are my compliance dates?

    (a) If you own or operate an existing affected source, you must
achieve compliance with the applicable provisions of this subpart by
June 22, 2009.
    (b) If you start up a new affected source on or before December 23,
2008, you must achieve compliance with the applicable provisions of
this subpart by no later than December 23, 2008.
    (c) If you start up a new affected source after December 23, 2008,
you must achieve compliance with the applicable provisions of this
subpart upon startup of your affected source.

Standards, Monitoring, and Compliance Requirements

Sec.  63.11526  What are the standards for new and existing ferroalloys
production facilities?

    (a) You must not discharge to the atmosphere visible emissions (VE)
from the control device that exceed 5 percent of accumulated
occurrences in a 60-minute observation period.
    (b) You must not discharge to the atmosphere fugitive PM emissions
from the furnace building containing the electrometallurgical
operations that exhibit opacity greater than 20 percent (6-minute
average), except for one 6-minute average per hour that does not exceed
60 percent.

Sec.  63.11527  What are the monitoring requirements for new and
existing sources?

    (a) EAF Equipped with Fabric Filters.
    (1) Visual Monitoring. You must conduct visual monitoring of the
monovent or fabric filter outlet stack(s) for any VE according to the
schedule specified in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and (a)(1)(ii) of this
section.
    (i) Daily Visual Monitoring. Perform visual determination of
fugitive emissions once per day, on each day the process is in
operation, during operation of the process.
    (ii) Weekly Visual Monitoring. If no visible fugitive emissions are
detected in consecutive daily visual monitoring performed in accordance
with paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section for 90 days of operation of
the process, you may decrease the frequency of visual monitoring to
once per calendar week of time the process is in operation, during
operation of the process. If visible fugitive emissions are detected
during these inspections, you must resume daily visual monitoring of
that operation during each day that the process is in operation, in
accordance with paragraph (a)(1)(i) of this section until you satisfy
the criteria of this section to resume conducting weekly visual
monitoring.
    (2) If the visual monitoring reveals the presence of any VE, you
must conduct a Method 22 (Appendix A-7 of 40 CFR part 60) test
following the requirements of Sec.  63.11528(b)(1) within 24 hours of
determining the presence of any VE.
    (3) If you own or operate an existing affected source, you may
install, operate, and maintain a bag leak detection system for each
fabric filter as an alternative to the monitoring requirements in
paragraph (a)(1) of this section. If you own or operate a new affected
source, you must install, operate, and maintain a bag leak detection
system for each fabric filter according to the requirements in
paragraphs (a)(3)(i) through (a)(3)(vii) of this section. Such source
is not subject to the requirements in paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of
this section.
    (i) The system must be certified by the manufacturer to be capable
of detecting emissions of PM at concentrations of 10 milligrams per
actual cubic meter (0.00044 grains per actual cubic foot) or less.
    (ii) The bag leak detection system sensor must provide output of
relative PM loadings and the owner or operator shall continuously
record the output from the bag leak detection system using a strip
chart recorder, data logger, or other means.
    (iii) The system must be equipped with an alarm that will sound
when an increase in relative PM loadings is detected over the alarm set
point established in the operation and maintenance plan, and the alarm
must be located such that it can be heard, seen, or otherwise detected
by the appropriate plant personnel.
    (iv) The initial adjustment of the system must, at minimum, consist
of establishing the baseline output by adjusting the sensitivity
(range) and the averaging period of the device, and

establishing the alarm set points. If the system is equipped with an
alarm delay time feature, you also must establish a maximum reasonable
alarm delay time.
    (v) Following the initial adjustment, do not adjust the sensitivity
or range, averaging period, alarm set point, or alarm delay time,
except that, once per quarter, you may adjust the sensitivity of the
bag leak detection system to account for seasonal effects including
temperature and humidity.
    (vi) For fabric filters that are discharged to the atmosphere
through a stack, the bag leak detector sensor must be installed
downstream of the fabric filter and upstream of any wet scrubber.
    (vii) Where multiple detectors are required, the system's
instrumentation and alarm may be shared among detectors.
    (4) When operating a bag leak detection system, if an alarm sounds,
conduct visual monitoring of the monovent or fabric filter outlet
stack(s) as required in paragraph (a)(1) of this section within 1 hour.
If the visual monitoring reveals the presence of any VE, you must
conduct a Method 22 test following the requirements of Sec.
63.11528(b)(1) within 24 hours of determining the presence of any VE.
    (5) You must prepare a site-specific monitoring plan for each bag
leak detection system. You must operate and maintain each bag leak
detection system according to the plan at all times. Each plan must
address all of the items identified in paragraphs (a)(5)(i) through
(a)(5)(v)of this section.
    (i) Installation of the bag leak detection system.
    (ii) Initial and periodic adjustment of the bag leak detection
system including how the alarm set-point and alarm delay time will be
established.
    (iii) Operation of the bag leak detection system including quality
assurance procedures.
    (iv) Maintenance of the bag leak detection system including a
routine maintenance schedule and spare parts inventory list.
    (v) How the bag leak detection system output will be recorded and
stored.
    (b) EAF Equipped with Wet Scrubbers.
    (1) Visual Monitoring. You must conduct visual monitoring of the
wet scrubber outlet stack(s) for any VE according to the schedule
specified in paragraphs (b)(1)(i) and (b)(1)(ii) of this section.
    (i) Daily Visual Monitoring. Perform visual determination of
fugitive emissions once per day, on each day the process is in
operation, during operation of the process.
    (ii) Weekly Visual Monitoring. If no visible fugitive emissions are
detected in consecutive daily visual monitoring performed in accordance
with paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section for 90 days of operation of
the process, you may decrease the frequency of visual monitoring to
once per calendar week of time the process is in operation, during
operation of the process. If visible fugitive emissions are detected
during these inspections, you must resume daily visual monitoring of
that operation during each day that the process is in operation, in
accordance with paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section until you satisfy
the criteria of this section to resume conducting weekly visual
monitoring.
    (2) If the visual monitoring reveals the presence of any VE, you
must conduct a Method 22 (Appendix A-7 of 40 CFR part 60) test
following the requirements of Sec.  63.11528(b)(1) within 24 hours of
determining the presence of any VE.
    (3) If you own or operate an existing affected source, you may
install, operate and maintain a continuous parameter monitoring system
(CPMS) to measure and record the 3-hour average pressure drop and
scrubber water flow rate as an alternative to the monitoring
requirements specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section. If you own
or operate a new sealed EAF affected source, you must install, operate,
and maintain a CPMS for each wet scrubber. Such source is not subject
to the requirements in paragraph (b)(1) of this section.
    (4) When operating a CPMS, if the 3-hour average pressure drop or
scrubber water flow rate is below the minimum levels that indicate
normal operation of the control device, conduct visual monitoring of
the outlet stack(s) as required by paragraph (b)(1) of this section
within 1 hour of determining that the 3-hour average parameter value is
below the required minimum levels. Manufacturer's specifications for
pressure drop and liquid flow rate will be used to determine normal
operations. If the visual monitoring reveals the presence of any VE,
you must conduct a Method 22 (Appendix A-7 of 40 CFR part 60) test
following the requirements of Sec.  63.11528(b)(1) within 24 hours of
determining the presence of any VE.

Sec.  63.11528  What are the performance test and compliance
requirements for new and existing sources?

    (a) Initial Compliance Demonstration Deadlines. You must conduct an
initial Method 22 (Appendix A-7 of 40 CFR part 60) test following the
requirements of paragraph (b)(1) of this section of each existing
electrometallurgical operation control device and an initial Method 9
observation following the requirements of paragraph (c)(1) of this
section from the furnace building due to electrometallurgical
operations no later than 60 days after your applicable compliance date.
For any new electrometallurgical operation control device, you must
conduct an initial Method 22 test following the requirements of
paragraph (b)(1) of this section within 15 days of startup of the
control device.
    (b) Visible Emissions Limit Compliance Demonstration.
    (1) You must conduct a Method 22 (Appendix A-7 of 40 CFR part 60)
test to determine that VE from the control device do not exceed the
emission standard specified in Sec.  63.11526(a). For a fabric filter,
conduct the test for at least 60 minutes at the fabric filter monovent
or outlet stack(s), as applicable. For a wet scrubber, conduct the test
for at least 60 minutes at the outlet stack(s).
    (2) You must conduct a semiannual Method 22 test using the
procedures specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section.
    (c) Furnace Building Opacity.
    (1) You must conduct an opacity test for fugitive emissions from
the furnace building according to the procedures in Sec.  63.6(h) and
Method 9 (Appendix A-4 of 40 CFR part 60). The test must be conducted
for at least 60 minutes and shall include tapping the furnace or
reaction vessel. The observation must be focused on the part of the
building where electrometallurgical operation fugitive emissions are
most likely to be observed.
    (2) Conduct subsequent Method 9 tests no less frequently than every
6 months and each time you make a process change likely to increase
fugitive emissions.
    (3) After the initial Method 9 performance test, as an alternative
to the Method 9 performance test, you may monitor VE using Method 22
(Appendix A-7 of 40 CFR part 60) for subsequent semi-annual compliance
demonstrations. The Method 22 test is successful if no VE are observed
for 90 percent of the readings over the furnace cycle (tap to tap) or
60 minutes, whichever is longer. If VE are observed greater than 10
percent of the time over the furnace cycle or 60 minutes, whichever is
longer, then the facility must conduct another test as soon as
possible, but no later than 15 calendar days after the Method 22 test
using Method 9 (Appendix A-4 of 40 CFR part 60) as specified in
paragraph (c)(1) of this section.

Sec.  63.11529  What are the notification, reporting, and recordkeeping
requirements?

    (a) Initial Notification. You must submit the Initial Notification
required by Sec.  63.9(b)(2) of the General Provisions no later than
120 days after the date of publication of this final rule in the
Federal Register. The Initial Notification must include the information
specified in Sec.  63.9(b)(2)(i) through (b)(2)(iv).
    (b) Notification of Compliance Status. You must submit a
Notification of Compliance Status in accordance with Sec.  63.9(h) of
the General Provisions before the close of business on the 30th day
following the completion of the initial compliance demonstration. This
notification must include the following:
    (1) The results of Method 22 (Appendix A-7 of 40 CFR part 60) test
for VE as required by Sec.  63.11528(a);
    (2) If you have installed a bag leak detection system,
documentation that the system satisfies the design requirements
specified in Sec.  63.11527(a)(3) and that you have prepared a site-
specific monitoring plan that meets the requirements specified in Sec.
63.11527(a)(5);
    (3) The results of the Method 9 (Appendix A-4 of 40 CFR part 60)
test for building opacity as required by Sec.  63.11528(a).
    (c) Annual Compliance Certification. If you own or operate an
affected source, you must submit an annual certification of compliance
according to paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(4) of this section.
    (1) The results of any daily or weekly visual monitoring events
required by Sec.  63.11527(a)(1) and (b)(1), alarm-based visual
monitoring at sources equipped with bag leak detection systems as
required by Sec.  63.11527(a)(4), or readings outside of the operating
range at sources using CPMS on wet scrubbers required by Sec.
63.11527(b)(4).
    (2) The results of the follow up Method 22 (Appendix A-7 of 40 CFR
part 60) tests that are required if VE are observed during the daily or
weekly visual monitoring, alarm-based visual monitoring, or out-of-
range operating readings as described in paragraph (c)(1) of this
section.
    (3) The results of the Method 22 (Appendix A-7 of 40 CFR part 60)
or Method 9 (Appendix A-4 of 40 CFR part 60) tests required by Sec.
63.11528(b) and (c), respectively.
    (4) If you operate a bag leak detection system for a fabric filter
or a CPMS for a wet scrubber, submit annual reports according to the
requirements in Sec.  63.10(e) and include summary information on the
number, duration, and cause (including unknown cause, if applicable)
for monitor downtime incidents (other than downtime associated with
zero and span or other calibration checks, if applicable).
    (d) You must keep the records specified in paragraphs (d)(1)
through (d)(2) of this section.
    (1) As required in Sec.  63.10(b)(2)(xiv), you must keep a copy of
each notification that you submitted to comply with this subpart and
all documentation supporting any Initial Notification, Notification of
Compliance Status, and annual compliance certifications that you
submitted.
    (2) You must keep the records of all daily or weekly visual, Method
22 (Appendix A-7 of 40 CFR part 60), and Method 9 (Appendix A-4 of 40
CFR part 60) monitoring data required by Sec.  63.11527 and the
information identified in paragraphs (d)(2)(i) through (d)(2)(v) of
this section.
    (i) The date, place, and time of the monitoring event;
    (ii) Person conducting the monitoring;
    (iii) Technique or method used;
    (iv) Operating conditions during the activity; and
    (v) Results, including the date, time, and duration of the period
from the time the monitoring indicated a problem (e.g., VE) to the time
that monitoring indicated proper operation.
    (e) Your records must be in a form suitable and readily available
for expeditious review, according to Sec.  63.10(b)(1).
    (f) As specified in Sec.  63.10(b)(1), you must keep each record
for 5 years following the date of each recorded action.
    (g) You must keep each record onsite for at least 2 years after the
date of each recorded action according to Sec.  63.10(b)(1). You may
keep the records offsite for the remaining 3 years.

Other Requirements and Information

Sec.  63.11530  What parts of the General Provisions apply to my
facility?

    Table 1 of this subpart shows which parts of the General Provisions
in Sec. Sec.  63.1 through 63.16 apply to you.

Sec.  63.11531  Who implements and enforces this subpart?

    (a) This subpart can be implemented and enforced by EPA or a
delegated authority such as your State, local, or tribal agency. If the
EPA Administrator has delegated authority to your State, local, or
tribal agency, then that agency has the authority to implement and
enforce this subpart. You should contact your EPA Regional Office to
find out if implementation and enforcement of this subpart is delegated
to your State, local, or tribal agency.
    (b) In delegating implementation and enforcement authority of this
subpart to a State, local, or tribal agency under 40 CFR part 63,
subpart E, the authorities contained in paragraph (c) of this section
are retained by the EPA Administrator and are not transferred to the
State, local, or tribal agency.
    (c) The authorities that cannot be delegated to State, local, or
tribal agencies are specified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (5) of this
section.
    (1) Approval of an alternative nonopacity emissions standard under
Sec.  63.6(g).
    (2) Approval of an alternative opacity emissions standard under
Sec.  63.6(h)(9).
    (3) Approval of a major change to test methods under Sec.
63.7(e)(2)(ii) and (f). A ``major change to test method'' is defined in
Sec.  63.90.
    (4) Approval of a major change to monitoring under Sec.  63.8(f). A
``major change to monitoring'' under is defined in Sec.  63.90.
    (5) Approval of a major change to recordkeeping and reporting under
Sec.  63.10(f). A ``major change to recordkeeping/reporting'' is
defined in Sec.  63.90.

Sec.  63.11532  What definitions apply to this subpart?

    Terms used in this subpart are defined in the CAA, in Sec.  63.2,
and in this section.
    Bag leak detection system means a system that is capable of
continuously monitoring relative PM (i.e., dust) loadings in the
exhaust of a fabric filter to detect bag leaks and other upset
conditions. A bag leak detection system includes, but is not limited
to, an instrument that operates on triboelectric, electrodynamic, light
scattering, or other effect to monitor relative PM loadings
continuously.
    Capture system means the collection of components used to capture
gases and fumes released from one or more emissions points and then
convey the captured gas stream to a control device or to the
atmosphere. A capture system may include, but is not limited to, the
following components as applicable to a given capture system design:
Duct intake devices, hoods, enclosures, ductwork, dampers, manifolds,
plenums, and fans.
    Charging means introducing materials to an EAF or other reaction
vessel, which may consist of, but are not limited to, ores, slag,
carbonaceous material, and/or limestone.
    Control device means the air pollution control equipment used to
remove PM from the effluent gas stream generated by an EAF furnace or
other reaction vessel.

    Electric arc furnace means any furnace wherein electrical energy is
converted to heat energy by transmission of current between electrodes
partially submerged in the furnace charge.
    Electrometallurgical operations means the use of electric and
electrolytic processes to purify metals or reduce metallic compounds to
metals.
    Fugitive emissions means any pollutant released to the atmosphere
that is not discharged through a ventilation system that is
specifically designed to capture pollutants at the source, convey them
through ductwork, and exhausts them from a control device. Fugitive
emissions include pollutants released to the atmosphere through
windows, doors, vents, or other building openings. Fugitive emissions
also include pollutants released to the atmosphere through other
general building ventilation or exhaust systems not specifically
designed to capture pollutants at the source.
    Sealed EAF means a furnace equipped with the cover with seals
around the electrodes and outer edges of the cover to eliminate air
being drawn in under the cover.
    Tapping means the removal of product from the EAF or other reaction
vessel under normal operating conditions, such as removal of metal
under normal pressure and movement by gravity down the spout into the
ladle.

Sec.  63.11533-63.11543  [Reserved]

    As required in Sec.  63.11530, you must meet each requirement in
the following table that applies to you.

                    Table 1 to Subpart YYYYYY of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          Citation                                                  Subject
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
63.1\1\.....................................................  Applicability.
63.2........................................................  Definitions.
63.3........................................................  Units and abbreviations.
63.4........................................................  Prohibited activities.
63.5........................................................  Construction/reconstruction.
63.6........................................................  Compliance with standards and maintenance.
63.8........................................................  Monitoring.
63.9........................................................  Notification.
63.10.......................................................  Recordkeeping and reporting.
63.12.......................................................  State authority and delegations.
63.13.......................................................  Addresses of State air pollution control agencies
                                                               and EPA regional offices.
63.14.......................................................  Incorporation by reference.
63.15.......................................................  Availability of information and confidentiality.
63.16.......................................................  Performance track provisions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Sec.   63.11524(d), ``Am I subject to this subpart?'' exempts affected sources from the obligation to obtain
  title V operating permits.

[FR Doc. E8-30424 Filed 12-22-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P