[Federal Register: January 23, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 14)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 2929-2961]
[DOCID:fr23ja07-9]

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

Part II

Environmental Protection Agency

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

40 CFR Part 63

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; Final Rule

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0510; FRL-8257-4]
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 January 23, 2007. The
incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in these
rules is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of January
23, 2007.

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 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 http://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<PHONE_NUMBER>, 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:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   NAICS code    Examples of regulated
             Category                  \1\              entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry:
    Polyvinyl chloride and             325211  Area source facilities
     copolymers production.                     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....  \2\ 331423  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--        331419  Area source facilities
     zinc, cadmium, and beryllium.              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: 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
March 26, 2007. 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
\1\ 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Under section 112(a) of the Clean Air Act, an area source is
defined as a stationary source that is not a major source. A major
source is defined as a stationary source or a group of stationary
sources located within a contiguous area and under common control
that emits or has the potential to emit considering controls, in the
aggregate, 10 tons per year or more of any HAP or 25 tons per year
or more of any combination of HAP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 January 23, 2007. The owner or operator of a new
source must comply with this area source NESHAP by January 23, 2007 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 January 23, 2007. The owner or
operator of a new affected source must comply by January 23, 2007 or
upon initial startup, whichever is later. An affected source is new if
construction or reconstruction of the affected source was commenced on
or after October 6, 2006.
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
existing sources' 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 final 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 existing sources' 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 January 23, 2007 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. For
additional information on bag leak detection systems that operate on
the triboelectric effect, see ``Fabric Filter Bag Leak Detection
Guidance'', U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, September 1997, EPA-454/R-98-015, NTIS
publication number PB98164676. This document is available from the
National Technical Information Service (NTIS), 5385 Port Royal Road,
Springfield, VA 22161. 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 zinc production 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 zinc production 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 January 23, 2007. The owner or operator of a new affected
source must comply by January 23, 2007 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, 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. For additional information on bag
leak detection systems that operate on the triboelectric effect, see
``Fabric Filter Bag Leak Detection Guidance'', U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
September 1997, EPA-454/R-98-015, NTIS publication number PB98164676.
This document is available from the National Technical Information
Service (NTIS), 5385 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161. 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 January 23, 2007.
The owner or operator of a new area source must comply by January 23,
2007 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, and nickel, all of which are metal
HAP. As discussed in the proposal preamble, we are using beryllium as a
surrogate for HAP metals. 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.\2\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ In 1995, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit reviewed the definition of ``potential to emit'' (PTE)
contained in 40 CFR in 40 CFR 63.2 (National Mining Ass'n v. EPA, 59
F.3d 1351 (D.C. Cir. 1995)). In July 2005, the D.C. Circuit remanded
the definition to EPA to the extent the definition required that
physical or operational limitations be ``federally enforceable''
(National Mining Ass'n v. EPA, 59 F.3d 1351 (D.C. Cir. 1995)). The
court did not vacate the 40 CFR part 63 regulations and therefore
the definition of ``potential to emit'' in 40 CFR part 63 remains in
place. EPA is currently in the process of developing a proposed rule
that responds to the court's remand. EPA has a transitional policy
that relates to PTE. See ``Options for Limiting the Potential to
Emit (PTE) of a Stationary Source Under Section 112 and Title V of
the Clean Air Act (Act)'' (Jan. 25, 1995), available at http://www.epa.gov/Region7/programs/artd/air/title5/t5memos/ptememo.pdf.

EPA has extended the transition policy several times. See ``Third
Extension of January 25, 1995 Potential to Emit Transition Policy''
(December 20, 1999), available at http://www.epa.gov/Region7/programs/artd/air/title5/t5memos/4thext.pdf.
 Under the Third

Extension, sources can rely on State-only enforceable PTE limits
until we finalize our response to the remand.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 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 (Sec. Sec.  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 Sec.  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 there 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 needed
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 was 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 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 zinc production
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
``backsliding'' 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 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.\3\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ It is not clear whether the one polyvinyl chloride area
source plant known to the National Association of Clean Air Agencies
(NACAA) was among the plants that the NACAA analyzed in developing
the recommended limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 (Pub. L. 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 Sec. Sec.
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 January 23,
2007.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

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

    Dated: December 11, 2006.
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. Section 63.14 is amended by revising paragraph (i)(1) to read as
follows:

Sec.  63.14  Incorporations by reference.

* * * * *
    (i) * * *
    (1) ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10-1981, ``Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses [Part
10, Instruments and Apparatus],'' IBR approved for Sec. Sec.
63.309(k)(1)(iii), 63.865(b), 63.3166(a)(3), 63.3360(e)(1)(iii),
63.3545(a)(3), 63.3555(a)(3), 63.4166(a)(3), 63.4362(a)(3),
63.4766(a)(3), 63.4965(a)(3), 63.5160(d)(1)(iii), 63.9307(c)(2),
63.9323(a)(3), 63.11148(e)(3)(iii), 63.11155(e)(3), 63.11162(f)(3)(iii)
and (f)(4), 63.11163(g)(1)(iii) and (g)(2), and Table 5 of subpart
DDDDD of this part.
* * * * *

0
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

Sec.  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.

Sec.  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
January 23, 2007.
    (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 start up a new affected source on or before January 23,
2007, you must achieve compliance with the

applicable provisions in this subpart not later than January 23, 2007.
    (2) If you start up a new affected source after January 23, 2007,
you must achieve compliance with the provisions in this subpart upon
startup of your affected source.

Standards and Compliance Requirements

Sec.  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

Sec.  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) Sec.  63.1(a)(1) through (10).
    (2) Sec.  63.1(b) except paragraph (b)(3), Sec.  63.1(c), and Sec.
63.1(e).

Sec.  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 Sec.  63.2 for terms used in the applicable
provisions of part 63, subpart A, as specified in Sec.  63.11143(b).

Sec.  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 Sec.  63.90.
    (3) Approval of a major change to monitoring under 40 CFR 61.14(g).
A ``major change to monitoring'' is defined in Sec.  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
Sec.  63.90.

0
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?
Table 1 to Subpart EEEEEE of Part 63--Applicability of General
Provisions to Subpart EEEEEE

Applicability and Compliance Dates

Sec.  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
January 23, 2007.
    (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 January 23,
2007, you must achieve compliance with the applicable provisions of
this subpart not later than January 23, 2007.
    (2) If you startup a new affected source after January 23, 2007,
you must achieve compliance with the applicable provisions of this
subpart upon startup of your affected source.

Standards and Compliance Requirements

Sec.  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.

Sec.  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