59302 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 63 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2006–0510; FRL–8226–8] 

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: Proposed rules. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing national 

emission standards for hazardous air 

pollutants (NESHAP) for four area 

source categories. The proposed 

NESHAP reflect EPA’s determination 

that existing facilities in three of these 

categories are well controlled and that 

the emission control devices and work 

practices at these facilities represent the 

generally available control technology 

(GACT) for these source categories. For 

secondary copper smelting, we are 

proposing NESHAP for new area 

sources because there is not, and never 

will be, any existing source in this 

category. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before November 6, 2006 unless a 

public hearing is requested by October 

16, 2006. If a hearing is requested on the 

proposed rules, written comments must 

be received by November 20, 2006. 

Public Hearing. If anyone contacts 

EPA requesting to speak at a public 

hearing concerning the proposed rules 

by October 16, 2006, we will hold a 

public hearing on October 23, 2006. If 

you are interested in attending the 

public hearing, contact Ms. Pamela 

Garrett at (919) 541–7966 to verify that 

a hearing will be held. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2006–0510, by one of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• E-mail: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (202) 566–1741. 

• Mail: National Emission Standards 

for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Four 

Area Source Categories, Docket No. 

EPA–HQ–OAR–2006–0510, 

Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 

Docket Center, Mailcode 6102T, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20460. Please include a total of two 

copies. In addition, please mail a copy 

of your comments on the information 

collection provisions to the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB), Attn: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 

17th St., NW., Washington, DC 20503. 

• Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center, 

Public Reading Room, EPA West, Room 

B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20460. Such deliveries 

are only accepted during the Docket’s 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. Note: 

The EPA Docket Center suffered damage 

due to flooding during the last week of 

June 2006. The Docket Center is 

continuing to operate. However, during 

the cleanup, there will be temporary 

changes to Docket Center telephone 

numbers, addresses, and hours of 

operation for people who wish to make 

hand deliveries or visit the Public 

Reading Room to view documents. 

Consult EPA’s Federal Register notice at 

71 FR 38147 (July 5, 2006) or the EPA 

Web site at http://www.epa.gov/ 

epahome/dockets.htm for current 

information on docket operations, 

locations and telephone numbers. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2006– 

0510. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be confidential business 

information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or e-mail. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an e-mail 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the 

comment that is placed in the public 

docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, EPA recommends that you 

include your name and other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters, any form 

of encryption, and be free of any defects 

or viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the Federal Docket 

Management System index at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Although listed in 

the index, some information is not 

publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically through 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the EPA Docket Center, Public Reading 

Room, EPA West, Room B102, 1301 

Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC. The Public Reading Room is open 

from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The telephone number for the 

Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, 

and the telephone number for the Air 

Docket is (202) 566–1742. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Bob Schell, 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: (919) 541– 

4116, fax number (919) 541–3207, email address: schell.bob@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Outline. 

The information presented in this 

preamble is organized as follows: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

B. What should I consider as I prepare my 

comments to EPA? 

C. Where can I get a copy of this document 

and other related information? 

II. Background Information for Proposed Area 

Source Standards 

III. Proposed NESHAP for Polyvinyl Chloride 

and Copolymers Production Area 

Sources 

A. What area source category is affected by 

the proposed NESHAP? 

B. What HAP are emitted from polyvinyl 

chloride and copolymers production? 

C. What are the proposed requirements for 

area sources? 

D. What is our rationale for selecting the 

proposed standards for area sources? 

E. What is our rationale for exempting 

polyvinyl chloride and copolymers 

production area sources from the CAA 

title V permit requirements? 

IV. Proposed NESHAP for Primary Copper 

Smelting Area Sources 

A. What area source category is affected by 

the proposed NESHAP? 

B. What HAP are emitted from primary 

copper smelters? 

C. What are the proposed requirements for 

area sources? 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 59303 

D. What is our rationale for selecting the 

proposed standards for area sources? 

V. Proposed NESHAP for Secondary Copper 

Smelting Area Sources 

A. What area source category is affected by 

the proposed NESHAP? 

B. What HAP are emitted from secondary 

copper smelters? 

C. What are the proposed requirements for 

area sources? 

D. What is our rationale for selecting the 

proposed standards for area sources? 

VI. Proposed NESHAP for Primary 

Nonferrous Metals-Zinc, Cadmium, and 

Beryllium Area Sources 

A. What area source category is affected by 

the proposed NESHAP? 

B. What is primary zinc production and 

what HAP are emitted? 

C. What are the proposed requirements for 

primary zinc production area sources? 

D. What is our rationale for selecting the 

proposed standards for primary zinc 

production area sources? 

E. What is primary beryllium production 

and what HAP are emitted? 

F. What are the proposed requirements for 

primary beryllium production area 

sources? 

G. What is our rationale for selecting the 

proposed standards for primary 

beryllium production area sources? 

VII. 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 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

The regulated categories and entities 

potentially affected by the proposed 

standards include: 

Category NAICS 

code 1 Examples of regulated entities 

Industry: 

Polyvinyl chloride and copolymers production.325211 Area source facilities that polymerize and copolymers vinyl chloride monomer to 

produce vinyl production 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 .................. 331423 2 Area source facilities that process smelting copper scrap in a blast furnace and converter or use another pyrometallurgical purification process to produce anode copper 

from copper scrap, including low-grade copper scrap. 

Primary nonferrous metals - zinc, cadmium, and beryllium.331419 Area source facilities that produce zinc, zinc oxide, cadmium, or cadmium oxide from 

zinc sulfide ore concentrates using pyrometallurgical techniques and area source facilities that produce beryllium metal, alloy, or oxide from beryllium ore. 

Federal government .............................. Not affected. 

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

1 North American Industry Classification System. 

2The proposed 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. There are no existing secondary copper smelters as defined in the proposed rule. 

This table is not intended to be 

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide 

for readers regarding entities likely to be 

affected by this action. To determine 

whether your facility would be 

regulated by this action, you should 

examine the applicability criteria in 40 

CFR 63.11140 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. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments to EPA? 

Do not submit information containing 

CBI to EPA through 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Send or 

deliver information identified as CBI 

only to the following address: Roberto 

Morales, OAQPS Document Control 

Officer (C404–02), U.S. EPA, Office of 

Air Quality Planning and Standards, 

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 

27711, Attention Docket ID EPA–HQ–

OAR–2006–0510. Clearly mark the part 

or all of the information that you claim 

to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk 

or CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark 

the outside of the disk or CD ROM as 

CBI and then identify electronically 

within the disk or CD ROM the specific 

information that is claimed as CBI. In 

addition to one complete version of the 

comment that includes information 

claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment 

that does not contain the information 

claimed as CBI must be submitted for 

inclusion in the public docket. 

Information so marked will not be 

disclosed except in accordance with 

procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. 

C. Where can I get a copy of this 

document and other related 

information? 

In addition to being available in the 

docket, an electronic copy of these 

proposed actions will also be available 

on the Worldwide Web (WWW) through 

the Technology Transfer Network 

(TTN). Following signature, a copy of 

the proposed actions 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. 

II. Background Information for 

Proposed Area Source Standards 

Section 112(d) of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA) requires us to establish NESHAP 

for both major and area sources of 

hazardous air pollutants (HAP) that are 

listed for regulation under CAA section 

112(c). A major source is a stationary 

source that emits or has the potential to 

emit 10 tons per year (tpy) or more of 

any HAP or 25 tpy or more of any 

combination of HAP. An area source is 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
59304 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

1Since its publication in the Integrated Urban Air 

Toxics Strategy in 1999, the area source category 

list has undergone several amendments. 

a stationary source that is not a major 

source (i.e., an area source does not emit 

and does not have the potential to emit 

either 10 tpy or more of any single HAP 

or 25 tpy or more of any combination of 

HAP). 

Requirements for area sources are 

described in CAA sections 112(c)(3) and 

112(k). These provisions direct EPA (1) 

to identify not less than 30 HAP that 

present the threat to public health in the 

largest number of urban areas and (2) to 

identify sufficient area source categories 

to ensure that sources representing 90 

percent or more of the emissions of each 

of the 30 ‘‘listed’’ HAP (‘‘urban HAP’’) 

are subject to regulation. We 

implemented these listing requirements 

through the Integrated Urban Air Toxics 

Strategy (64 FR 38715, July 19, 1999).1

However, EPA has not completed the 

required regulatory action for all of the 

listed area source categories. Pursuant to 

CAA section 304, Sierra Club brought 

suit in the district court for the District 

of Columbia to compel EPA to complete 

this action (Sierra Club v. U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, no. 

01–1537, DC Cir.). On March 31, 2006, 

the court issued an order requiring, 

among other things, that we complete 

regulatory action for a specified number 

of area source categories every 6 months 

starting December 15, 2006, and 

complete regulatory action of all 

remaining categories by June 15, 2009. 

The order requires that, by December 

15, 2006, we complete regulatory action 

for four area source categories. The four 

area source categories that we have 

selected to meet this obligation and are 

therefore subject of this proposal are as 

follows: (1) Primary Copper Smelting; 

(2) Secondary Copper Smelting; (3) 

Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers 

Production; and (4) Primary Nonferrous 

Metals—Zinc, Cadmium, and Beryllium. 

On June 26, 2002, we amended the 

area source category list by adding 

additional source categories, including 

Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers 

Production, Secondary Copper 

Smelting, and Cadmium Refining and 

Cadmium Oxide Production source 

categories (67 FR 43112, 43113). On 

November 22, 2002, we further 

amended the category list by, among 

other things, adding Primary Copper 

Smelting (67 FR 70427, 70428). We also 

expanded the Cadmium Refining and 

Cadmium Oxide Production source 

category to include primary zinc and 

beryllium production and renamed the 

category accordingly as Primary 

Nonferrous Metals—Zinc, Cadmium, 

and Beryllium. 

The inclusion of each of the four 

source categories on the area source 

category list is based on data from the 

CAA section 112(k) inventory, which 

represents 1990 urban air data. The 

Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers 

Production source category listing was 

based on vinyl chloride emissions. The 

Primary Copper Smelting source 

category listing was based on HAP metal 

emissions (arsenic, cadmium, 

chromium, lead, and nickel), while 

Secondary Copper Smelting was based 

on HAP emissions of cadmium, lead, 

and dioxin. The listing of the Primary 

Nonferrous Metals-Zinc, Cadmium, and 

Beryllium source category was based on 

emissions of arsenic, cadmium, lead, 

manganese, and nickel. 

Section 112(k)(3)(B) of the CAA 

requires that EPA ensure that sources 

representing 90 percent of the emissions 

of each of the 30 urban HAP are subject 

to standards pursuant to section 112(d). 

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 [‘‘GACT’’] 

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 GACT in lieu of 

MACT. Pursuant to section 112(d)(5), I 

have decided not to issue MACT 

standards and concluded that GACT is 

appropriate for these four source 

categories. 

Legislative history describes GACT as 

standards reflecting application of 

generally available control technology, 

that is, ‘‘methods, practices and 

techniques which are commercially 

available and appropriate for 

application by the sources in the 

category considering economic impacts 

and the technical capabilities of the 

firms to operate and maintain the 

emissions control systems’’ (Senate 

Report Number 101–228, December 20, 

1989). In addition to technical 

capabilities of the facilities and 

availabilities of control measures, 

legislative history suggests that we may 

consider costs and economic impacts in 

determining GACT, which is 

particularly important when developing 

regulations for source categories that 

may have few establishments and many 

small businesses, or when determining 

whether additional control is necessary 

for sources with emissions that are 

already well controlled as a result of 

other existing or applicable standards. 

Existing facilities in three of these 

source categories are currently well 

controlled as a result of State and 

national standards and permitting 

requirements for criteria pollutants that 

obtain co-control of HAP. There are no 

existing sources in the secondary copper 

smelting source category. New and 

existing area sources of polyvinyl 

chloride (PVC) and copolymer plants 

are subject to the National Emission 

Standard for Vinyl Chloride (40 CFR 

part 61, subpart F). The vinyl chloride 

standard requires that new and existing 

area sources also comply with the 

National Emission Standard for 

Equipment Leaks (Fugitive Emission 

Sources) in 40 CFR part 61, subpart V. 

New and existing area sources that 

process beryllium ore, beryllium, 

beryllium oxide, beryllium alloys, or 

beryllium-containing waste are subject 

to the National Emission Standard for 

Beryllium (40 CFR part 61, subpart C). 

One of the two primary zinc production 

area sources is subject to the new source 

performance standard (NSPS) at 40 CFR 

part 60, subpart Q, and primary copper 

smelting area sources are subject to the 

NSPS at 40 CFR part 60, subpart P. 

These NSPS, as well as other applicable 

Federal and State requirements, are 

incorporated into and enforced under 

these primary zinc production and 

primary copper smelting area sources’

title V permits. 

Except for dioxin emissions from 

secondary copper smelting, the urban 

HAP emissions from the three area 

source categories for nonferrous metals 

are all metal HAP. Under the Federal 

standards mentioned above that are 

applicable to these three categories, we 

are able to control the urban metal HAP 

emissions by controlling emissions of 

particulate matter (PM), which provide 

co-control of the HAP metals for PM. 

The Secondary Copper Smelting source 

category does not have any existing 

plants—plants that were operating in 

1990 have permanently closed, and no 

new plants have started. As discussed in 

more detail in sections III through VI of 

this preamble, we conclude that, with 

the exception of secondary copper 

smelting, GACT is equivalent to the 

levels of control that are currently 

required and being implemented by 

sources in the other three categories. 

Because there is not currently any, nor 

is there expected to be any existing 

source of secondary copper smelting, we 

are not proposing a standard for existing 

sources but are proposing a standard for 

new area sources of secondary copper 

smelting. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 59305 

III. Proposed NESHAP for Polyvinyl 

Chloride and Copolymers Production 

Area Sources 

A. What area source category is affected 

by the proposed NESHAP? 

The Polyvinyl Chloride and 

Copolymers Production area source 

category includes facilities that 

polymerize vinyl chloride monomer 

alone or in combination with other 

materials to produce PVC and 

copolymers. Sources in this area source 

category are currently subject to the 

National Emission Standard for Vinyl 

Chloride (40 CFR part 61, subpart F). 

The vinyl chloride standard applies to 

all new and existing major and area 

sources of PVC and copolymer 

production. 

We estimate that there are 

approximately 28 major sources of PVC 

and copolymer production facilities 

operating in the U.S. Although we do 

not know of any existing area sources in 

this category, we cannot say 

conclusively that there are not and 

never will be any area sources in this 

category. Consequently, we are 

proposing standards for both new and 

existing area sources. We are requesting 

comments on whether there are or ever 

will be any area sources in this source 

category. 

B. What HAP are emitted from polyvinyl 

chloride and copolymers production? 

The resins used to make PVC and 

copolymer products are produced in 

batch reactor processes where vinyl 

chloride is polymerized with itself as a 

homopolymer or copolymerized with 

varying amounts of vinyl acetate, 

ethylene, propylene, vinylidene 

chloride, or acrylates. The resulting 

resins are generally dried into nontoxic 

powders or granules that are 

compounded with auxiliary ingredients 

and converted into a variety of plastic 

end products. These end products can 

be used in a large number of 

applications, including latex paints, 

coatings, adhesives, clear plastics, rigid 

plastics, and flooring. 

The urban HAP emitted from PVC and 

copolymer production is vinyl chloride, 

which is used as a primary feedstock. 

The copolymer feedstocks (e.g., vinyl 

acetate and vinylidene chloride) are also 

HAP under CAA section 112(b) but are 

not listed as urban HAP. HAP may be 

released from an opening or leak in the 

process equipment. Residual HAP (i.e., 

unreacted vinyl chloride) in the product 

may also become airborne. 

C. What are the proposed requirements 

for area sources? 

1. Applicability and Compliance Dates 

The proposed NESHAP apply to both 

new and existing PVC and copolymer 

plants that are area sources. Because 

existing area sources, if there are any, 

would already be operating subject to 

emissions limits and work practice 

standards that are the same as those in 

this proposed NESHAP, we are 

proposing that owners or operators of 

existing sources comply with all the 

requirements of the area source 

NESHAP by [Date of publication of the 

final rule in the Federal Register]. The 

owner or operator of a new source 

would be required to comply with the 

area source NESHAP by [DATE OF 

PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE 

IN THE Federal Register] or at startup, 

whichever is later. 

2. Emissions Limitations and Work 

Practice Standards 

We are proposing to adopt as the 

NESHAP for the Polyvinyl Chloride and 

Copolymer Production area source 

category 40 CFR part 61, subpart F. 

Subpart F establishes 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. Subpart F also establishes 

both 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 

requires a new or existing source to 

comply with the requirements at 40 CFR 

part 61, subpart V for the control of 

equipment leaks. 

3. Compliance Requirements 

We are proposing to include in this 

proposed NESHAP the monitoring, 

testing, recordkeeping, and reporting 

requirements in 40 CFR part 61, subpart 

F. The proposed 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 the NESHAP must also 

determine the daily average vinyl 

chloride concentration for each type of 

resin. The proposed NESHAP requires 

the owner or operator to 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 also would 

be required to comply with the testing, 

monitoring, recordkeeping, and 

reporting requirements in the part 61 

General Provisions (40 CFR part 61, 

subpart A). We are also proposing that 

the owner or operator comply with the 

requirements for startup, shutdown, and 

malfunction (SSM) plans and reports in 

40 CFR 63.6(e)(3). We have explicitly 

identified in the proposed NESHAP the 

applicable General Provisions of both 40 

CFR parts 61 and 63. 

D. What is our rationale for selecting the 

proposed standards for area sources? 

1. Selection of Proposed Standards 

Stripping is the primary control 

measure used at major sources of PVC 

and copolymer production facilities to 

control HAP emissions and meet the 

vinyl chloride emissions limits required 

by 40 CFR part 61, subpart F, which 

applies to both major and area sources 

in this category. Stripping at the 

production stage to recover unreacted 

feedstock reduces the air emissions from 

the product by reducing the residual 

HAP in the product. In addition to 

stripping, other HAP control measures 

that may be employed to meet the 

subpart F standards include: (1) 

operating under a closed-vent system 

with add-on control (e.g., flare) to 

incinerate HAP gases not returning to 

the process, and (2) minimizing the 

presence of HAP before opening a 

reactor or piece of process equipment 

containing vinyl chloride monomer and 

other HAP. Subpart F also requires 

facilities to comply with the work 

practice standards for ongoing leak 

detection and repair prescribed in 40 

CFR part 61, subpart V. As shown in 

major source facilities, these 

conventional control techniques and 

work practices are readily available and 

highly effective in controlling vinyl 

chloride emissions at PVC and 

copolymer production facilities. 

Although we are not aware of any 

existing area source, we have no reason 

to believe that the conventional control 

techniques employed at major sources 

to meet the emissions limits and work 

practice standards in subpart F are 

infeasible, impractical, or inappropriate 

for area sources. Therefore, we have 

determined that the emissions control 

requirements at 40 CFR part 61, subpart 

F represent GACT for new and existing 

sources in the Polyvinyl Chloride and 

Copolymer Production area source 

category. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
59306 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

2The legislative histroy of section 502(a) suggests 

that EPA should not grant title V exemptions where 

doing so would adversely affect public health, 

welfare, or the environment. (See Chafee-Baucus 

Statement of Senate Managers, Environment and 

Natural Resources Policy Division 1990 CAA Leg. 

Hist. 905, Compiled November, 1993.) 

2. Selection of Proposed Compliance 

Requirements 

We have reviewed the compliance 

requirements in the vinyl chloride 

standard and part 61 General Provisions 

applicable to this proposed NESHAP 

and concluded that these requirements 

are sufficient to ensure compliance with 

the proposed emissions limits and work 

practice standards. Therefore, we are 

including the part 61, subpart F 

performance test, monitoring 

requirements, and recordkeeping 

requirements in this proposed rule. 

The General Provisions applicable to 

the subpart F standard (40 CFR part 61, 

subpart A), are necessary for effective 

application of the subpart F standard 

and are therefore incorporated into this 

proposed rule as well. We are also 

incorporating certain provisions in the 

General Provisions of part 63, subpart A 

to address aspects of this proposed rule 

not covered by the part 61 General 

Provisions. Specifically, we need to 

incorporate certain provisions in §§ 63.1 

and 63.5 of the part 63 General 

Provisions which delineate 

applicability, construction, and 

reconstruction. However, we are not 

applying provisions within 40 CFR 63.1 

and 63.5 that are already covered by 

part 61 General Provisions. We are 

proposing to apply the provisions in 40 

CFR 63.1(a) except for the provisions in 

40 CFR 63.1(a)(11) and (12) regarding 

notices, time periods, and postmarks; 40 

CFR 63.1(b) except paragraph (b)(3); 40 

CFR 63.1(c); 40 CFR 63.1(e); and 40 CFR 

63.5 except for the references to 40 CFR 

63.6 for compliance procedures and the 

references to 40 CFR 63.9 for 

notification procedures. Because the 

part 61 General Provisions do not 

include requirements for SSM plans and 

reports, we are also proposing to require 

the owner or operator of a new or 

existing area source to comply with the 

SSM requirements in 40 CFR 63.6(e)(3) 

except for the requirement in 40 CFR 

63.6(e)(3)(ix) to include the SSM 

provisions in the title V permit. 

E. What is our rationale for exempting 

polyvinyl chloride and copolymers 

production area sources from the CAA 

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)). We are proposing in 

this action to exempt PVC and 

copolymers production area sources 

from the requirements of title V. PVC 

and copolymers production area sources 

would not be required to obtain title V 

permits solely as a function of being the 

subject of the proposed NESHAP; 

however, if they were otherwise 

required to obtain title V permits, such 

requirement(s) would not be affected by 

the proposed exemption. 

Consistent with the statute, EPA has 

found that compliance with title V 

permitting is ‘‘unnecessarily 

burdensome’’ for PVC and copolymers 

production area sources. EPA’s inquiry 

into whether this criterion was satisfied 

was based primarily upon consideration 

of the following four factors: (1) 

Whether title V would result in 

significant improvements to the 

compliance requirements that we are 

proposing for this area source category; 

(2) whether title V permitting would 

impose a significant burden on these 

area sources and whether that burden 

would be aggravated by any difficulty 

these sources may have in obtaining 

assistance from permitting agencies; (3) 

whether the costs of title V permitting 

for these area sources would be 

justified, taking into consideration any 

potential gains in compliance likely to 

occur for such sources; and (4) whether 

there are implementation and 

enforcement programs in place that are 

sufficient to assure compliance with this 

NESHAP without relying on title V 

permits. 

Additionally, EPA also considered, 

consistent with the guidance provided 

by the legislative history of CAA section 

502(a),2 whether exempting PVC and 

copolymers production area sources 

would adversely affect public health, 

welfare or the environment. We first 

determined the extent to which these 

factors were present for this area source 

category. We then determined whether 

those factors collectively demonstrated 

that compliance with title V 

requirements would be unnecessarily 

burdensome for PVC and copolymer 

production area sources. 

The first factor is whether title V 

would result in significant 

improvements to the compliance 

requirements we are proposing for this 

area source category. We looked at the 

compliance requirements of the 

proposed NESHAP to see if they were 

substantially equivalent to the 

monitoring, recordkeeping and 

reporting requirements of title V (see 40 

CFR 70.6 and 71.6) that we believe are 

important for assuring compliance with 

the NESHAP. The purpose of this 

review was to determine if title V is 

‘‘unnecessary’’ to improve compliance 

with this NESHAP. A finding that title 

V would not result in significant 

improvements to the compliance 

requirements in the proposed NESAHP 

would support a conclusion that title V 

permitting is ‘‘unnecessary’’ for area 

sources in this category. One way that 

title V may improve compliance is by 

requiring monitoring (including 

recordkeeping designed to serve as 

monitoring) to assure compliance with 

the emission limitations and control 

technology requirements imposed in the 

standard. The authority for adding new 

monitoring in the permit is in the 

‘‘periodic monitoring’’ provisions of 40 

CFR 70.6(a)(3)(i)(B) and 40 CFR 

71.6(a)(3)(i)(B), which allow new 

monitoring to be added to the permit 

when the underlying standard does not 

already require ‘‘periodic testing or 

instrumental or noninstrumental 

monitoring (which may consist of 

recordkeeping designed to serve as 

monitoring).’’ In addition, title V 

imposes a number of recordkeeping and 

reporting requirements that may be 

important for assuring compliance. 

These include requirements for a 

monitoring report at least every 6 

months, prompt reports of deviations, 

and an annual compliance certification. 

See 40 CFR 70.6(a)(3) and 40 CFR 

71.6(a)(3), 40 CFR 70.6(c)(1) and 40 CFR 

71.6(c)(1), and 40 CFR 70.6(c)(5) and 40 

CFR 71.6(c)(5). 

To determine whether title V permits 

would add significant compliance 

requirements to the proposed NESHAP 

for PVC and copolymer area sources, we 

compared the title V monitoring, 

recordkeeping, and reporting 

requirements mentioned above to those 

requirements in the proposed NESHAP 

for the Polyvinyl Chloride and 

Copolymer Production area source 

category, which adopts the compliance 

requirements in the National Emission 

Standard for Vinyl Chloride. See 40 CFR 

61.60. We also reviewed the part 61 

compliance requirements (specifically 

40 CFR 61.67 through 61.71) applicable 

to this proposed NESHAP. The 

proposed NESHAP would require a 

vinyl chloride 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 the NESHAP must also 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 59307 

determine the daily average vinyl 

chloride concentration for each type of 

resin. Because both the continuous and 

noncontinuous monitoring methods 

required by the proposed NESHAP 

would provide periodic monitoring, title 

V would not add any monitoring to the 

proposed NESHAP. 

We also considered the extent to 

which title V could enhance compliance 

for area sources through recordkeeping 

or reporting requirements, including 

title V requirements for a 6-month 

monitoring report, deviation reports, 

and an annual compliance certification 

in 40 CFR 70.6 and 71.6. The proposed 

NESHAP requires the owner or operator 

to 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, all 

emissions measurements, and leak 

detection and repair. The information 

required in the proposed NESHAP is 

similar to the information that must be 

provided in the deviation reports and 

semiannual monitoring reports required 

under 40 CFR 70.6(a)(3) and 40 CFR 

71.6(a)(3). The proposed NESHAP does 

not require an annual compliance 

certification report, which is a 

requirement of a title V permit. See 40 

CFR 70.5(c)(9)(iii) and 40 CFR 

71.6(c)(5)(i). EPA believes that the 

annual certification reporting 

requirement is not a significant 

compliance requirement because the 

quarterly reports are adequate to ensure 

compliance. 

The monitoring, recordkeeping and 

reporting requirements in the proposed 

NESHAP for the Polyvinyl Chloride and 

Copolymers Production area source 

category are substantially equivalent to 

such requirements under title V. 

Therefore, we conclude that title V 

would not result in significant 

improvements to the compliance 

requirements we are proposing for this 

area source category. 

The second factor we considered is 

whether title V permitting would 

impose significant burdens on these 

area sources and whether that burden 

would be aggravated by any difficulty 

these sources may have in obtaining 

assistance from permitting agencies. The 

information collection request (ICR) for 

parts 70 and 71 describes the title V 

burdens and costs in the aggregate, and 

although they do not focus on area 

sources, they do describe the various 

activities undertaken by title V sources, 

including area sources, so many of the 

same burdens and costs described in the 

ICR will also apply to area sources. 

Some examples of this burden include 

reading and understanding permit 

program guidance and regulations, 

completing the permit application, 

preparing and submitting applications 

for permit revisions every 5 years, and 

paying permit fees. We believe that this 

cost is a significant burden for these 

area sources based on our general 

assessment of this area source category. 

The third factor we considered is 

whether the costs of title V permitting 

for these area sources would be 

justified, taking into consideration any 

potential gains in compliance likely to 

occur for such sources. We found above 

that the costs of title V would be a 

significant burden on these area sources. 

Also, based on our consideration of 

factor 1 (described above) and factor 4 

(described below), we did not identify 

potential gain in compliance with this 

proposed NESHAP from title V 

permitting. Therefore, we conclude that 

the costs of title V permitting for this 

area source category are not justified. 

The fourth factor we considered is 

whether there are implementation and 

enforcement programs in place that are 

sufficient to assure compliance with this 

NESHAP without relying on title V 

permits. A conclusion that this criteria 

can be met would support a conclusion 

that Title V permitting is ‘‘unnecessary’’

for these area sources. See 70 FR 15254. 

There are State programs in place to 

enforce this area source NESHAP. We 

believe that these programs are 

sufficient to assure compliance with this 

NESHAP. In addition, EPA retains 

authority to enforce this NESHAP 

anytime under CAA sections 112, 113 

and 114. In light of the above, we 

conclude that title V permitting is 

‘‘unnecessary’’ to assure compliance 

with this NESHAP because the statutory 

requirements for implementation and 

enforcement of this NESHAP by the 

delegated States and EPA are sufficient 

to assure compliance with this area 

source NESHAP, in all parts of the U.S., 

without title V permits. In addition, 

small business assistance programs 

required by CAA section 507 may be 

used to assist area sources that have 

been exempted from title V permitting. 

Also, States and EPA often conduct 

voluntary compliance assistance, 

outreach, and education programs 

(compliance assistance programs), 

which are not required by statute. These 

additional programs supplement and 

enhance the success of compliance with 

this area source NESHAP. In light of all 

of the above, we conclude that there are 

implementation and enforcement 

programs in place that are sufficient to 

assure compliance with this NESHAP 

without relying on title V permitting. 

In addition to evaluating whether 

compliance with title V requirements is 

‘‘unnecessarily burdensome’’, EPA also 

considered, consistent with guidance 

provided by the legislative history of 

section 502(a), whether exempting PVC 

and copolymer production area sources 

from title V requirements would 

adversely affect public health, welfare, 

or the environment. One of the primary 

purposes of the title V permitting 

program is to clarify, in a single 

document, the various and sometimes 

complex regulations that apply to 

sources in order to improve 

understanding of these requirements 

and to help sources to achieve 

compliance with the requirements. In 

this case, however, we do not believe 

that a title V permit is necessary for us 

to understand all requirements 

applicable to PVC and copolymers 

production area sources. To our 

knowledge, currently the only 

applicable requirements to these area 

sources are 40 CFR part 61, subpart F. 

This proposal would not add new 

requirements to PVC and copolymers 

production area sources. We have 

determined that the subpart F 

requirements reflect GACT and thus 

adopted them in this proposed rule. 

Furthermore, we do not find subpart F 

standards to be very complicated to 

understand or implement. For these 

reasons, we do not find that title V 

permitting is necessary to improve 

understanding of and achieve 

compliance with these standards. 

Therefore, we conclude that exempting 

these area sources from title V 

permitting requirements in this 

proposed rule would not adversely 

affect public health, welfare, or the 

environment. 

Based on the above analysis, we 

conclude that title V permitting would 

be ‘‘unnecessarily burdensome’’ for PVC 

and copolymer production area sources. 

We are, therefore, proposing that this 

area source category be exempt from 

title V permitting requirements. 

IV. Proposed NESHAP for Primary 

Copper Smelting Area Sources 

A. What area source category is affected 

by the proposed NESHAP? 

1. Source Category Description 

Copper metal produced directly from 

copper ore is referred to as ‘‘primary 

copper.’’ The primary copper smelting 

source category includes facilities that 

produce copper from copper sulfide ore 

concentrates using a pyrometallurgical 

process. 

Currently, there are three primary 

copper smelters operating in the U.S. 

Two of these smelters are major sources 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
59308 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

of HAP emissions and are subject to the 

NESHAP for primary copper smelters in 

40 CFR part 63, subpart QQQ. The third 

smelter is an area source and is not 

subject to the NESHAP in subpart QQQ, 

which only applies to major sources. 

Each of the three primary copper 

smelters is located in relatively close 

proximity to the copper mines 

supplying the copper ore. Copper ore 

excavated from mines is beneficiated to 

produce copper ore concentrate. The ore 

concentrates are first dried to reduce the 

moisture content. The dried concentrate 

then is blended with fluxes and 

secondary copper-bearing materials. 

This mixture is fed to a flash smelting 

furnace where the ore is melted and 

reacts to produce copper matte, a 

molten solution of copper sulfide mixed 

with iron sulfide. 

The copper matte from the smelting 

furnace is converted to blister copper 

(approximately 98 percent pure copper) 

by oxidization to remove the sulfur as 

sulfur dioxide (SO2) gas and the iron as 

a ferrous oxide slag. The molten slag 

from converting is cooled and may be 

processed in slag concentrators to 

remove residual copper before on-site 

disposal. The SO2 gases from smelting 

and converting are vented to a sulfuric 

acid plant. Copper converting is 

conducted as a batch process in which 

molten matte is charged to large 

horizontal, cylindrical vessels or as a 

continuous process in which solid matte 

granules are fed to a flash smelting 

furnace-like vessel. 

Molten blister copper is transferred 

from the converting vessel to an anode 

furnace for refining to further remove 

residual impurities and oxygen. The 

blister copper is reduced in the anode 

furnace to remove oxygen, typically by 

injecting natural gas and steam to 

produce a high purity copper. The 

molten copper from the anode furnace 

is poured into molds to produce solid 

copper ingots called anodes. The anode 

copper is sent to a copper refinery, 

either on-site or at another location, 

where it is further purified using an 

electrolytic process to obtain the highpurity copper that is sold as a product. 

The overall function of a primary 

copper smelter, regardless of the 

technologies used, is to produce anode 

copper from copper ore concentrates. 

However, there are key differences 

between how the anode copper is 

produced at a smelter using flash copper 

converting technology compared to 

smelters use batch copper converting 

technology. These differences allow a 

smelter using flash copper converting 

technology to have inherently lower 

potential HAP emissions than a smelter 

using batch copper converting 

technology. 

2. Existing Sources 

The primary copper smelter that is an 

area source uses flash copper converting 

technology. At this smelter, molten 

copper matte tapped from a flash 

smelting furnace is not transferred as 

molten material directly to the 

converting vessel as is performed at the 

two major source smelters that use batch 

copper converting technology. Instead, 

the matte is first quenched with water 

to form solid granules of copper matte. 

These matte granules are then ground to 

a finer texture and fed to the flash 

converting furnace. This furnace differs 

significantly in design and operation 

from the cylindrical batch converters 

operated at the other U.S. smelters. 

Also, only one flash converting furnace 

is needed at the area source smelter 

compared to multiple batch copper 

converter vessels at the other smelters. 

Most of the process fugitive emissions 

associated with smelters using batch 

copper converting do not occur in the 

flash copper converting process. There 

are no crane transfers of molten material 

in open ladles between the smelting, 

converting, and anode refining 

departments. In addition, because flash 

copper converting is conducted in an 

enclosed vessel as a continuous process, 

no process off-gases escape capture, 

which occurs during the cyclic rollingout of the batch copper converters for 

charging, skimming, and pouring. 

While potential HAP emissions are 

overall lower from flash copper 

converting due to the elimination of 

emissions points, the blister copper 

produced by the continuous flash 

copper converter may contain higher 

levels of residual metal HAP impurities 

than that produced by the batch copper 

converting technology. At the smelter 

using flash copper converting, however, 

the anode furnaces and casting 

operations are vented to emissions 

control equipment that is effective in 

controlling metal HAP emissions from 

these processes that follow the flash 

copper converting process. 

3. New Sources 

Record-high commodity prices for 

refined copper are motivating 

companies to expand copper production 

capacity in the U.S. and other countries 

to meet higher demand. The 

announcement of several new copper 

mine projects in the southwestern U.S. 

indicates that primary copper 

production will be increasing in the 

foreseeable future. For example, three 

copper mine projects currently are 

planned for development in 

southeastern Arizona. Production at two 

of these mines is planned to start within 

the next several years. 

Increased copper mine development 

in the U.S. does not automatically 

trigger the building of new primary 

copper smelters. For instance, there 

have been no announcements that new 

smelters are planned to be built or 

would be necessary to process the 

copper ore from the new mine 

developments. The output from these 

new mines will probably be processed 

using the alternative hydrometallurgical 

process because of economic and 

technological advantages. This wet 

process involves leaching, solvent 

extraction, and electrowinning steps 

instead of the high temperature smelting 

and converting steps used for the 

pyrometallurgical process. 

The hydrometallurgical process is 

conducted in facilities built near the 

mine site. This process is preferable for 

low copper content ores because of 

lower production costs compared to the 

costs of smelting and refining the ore. 

Further, because it is a wet process and 

does not use any operations involving 

high temperatures and the handling of 

molten materials, the potential for 

emission of HAP metals to the 

atmosphere is very low. 

Hydrometallurgical processes are not 

included in the Primary Copper 

Smelting area source category. 

Although smelters will not be used in 

association with the new mining 

projects mentioned above, we recognize 

that the record-high commodity prices 

for refined copper may encourage 

construction of new primary copper 

smelters in the U.S. Currently, copper 

smelting technologies other than the 

batch and flash copper converting 

technologies are commercially available 

and are being selected for new smelters 

in other countries. Because these 

smelting technologies are more 

technologically advanced and cost 

effective in producing copper than the 

technologies currently employed at the 

three existing U.S. smelters, they would 

likely be used in the U.S. if new 

smelters are constructed. 

B. What HAP are emitted from primary 

copper smelters? 

Metals other than copper naturally 

occur in copper ore deposits, and some 

of these metals are listed as HAP under 

CAA section 112(b). In general, the HAP 

metals that have been found in larger 

quantities in copper ore mined and 

smelted in the U.S. are lead and arsenic. 

Lesser quantities of antimony, 

beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, 

manganese, mercury, nickel, and 

selenium have also been detected. As 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 59309 

previously mentioned, the primary 

copper smelting area source category 

was listed for regulation under CAA 

sections 112(c)(3) and 112(k)(3)(B) due 

to emissions of the urban HAP arsenic, 

cadmium, chromium, nickel, and lead. 

HAP metals in the copper ore are 

released into the atmosphere in the form 

of PM during certain high temperature 

operations. The composition and 

quantity of the potential HAP emissions 

from a given smelter are directly related 

to the level of metal impurities in the 

copper concentrate processed at the 

smelter. 

C. What are the proposed requirements 

for area sources? 

1. Applicability and Compliance Dates 

The proposed NESHAP applies to 

each new or existing primary copper 

smelter that is an area source of HAP. 

Because the one existing area source is 

already operating subject to PM control 

requirements that are the same as those 

in this proposed NESHAP, we are 

proposing that an existing affected 

source comply by [DATE OF 

PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE 

IN THE Federal Register]. A new 

affected source would be required to 

comply by [DATE OF PUBLICATION 

OF THE FINAL RULE IN THE Federal 

Register] or upon initial startup, 

whichever is later. 

2. Emissions Limits and Work Practice 

Standards 

The owner or operator of an existing 

area source would be required to control 

HAP emissions from copper concentrate 

drying, copper concentrate smelting, 

copper matte drying and grinding, 

copper matte converting, and copper 

anode refining and casting operations. 

The proposed NESHAP requires that 

gases and fumes generated by these 

processes be captured and vented 

through one or more PM control 

devices. Total PM emissions from the 

captured gas streams from all of these 

processes would be limited on a 

smelter-wide basis to no greater than 

89.5 pounds per hour (lb/hr) as 

determined on a 24-hour average basis. 

Similarly, the owner or operator of a 

new area source would be required to 

control HAP emissions from all primary 

copper smelting processes, including 

but not limited to those processes 

mentioned above that are applicable to 

the new sources’s smelter design. The 

proposed standard requires that gases 

and fumes generated by these processes 

at a new source be captured and vented 

through one or more PM control 

devices. However, instead of the 89.5 lb/ 

hr emissions limit, we would require a 

new source to achieve a facility inputbased emission 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. 

The proposed NESHAP also require 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 

would be required for operations in the 

anode refining and casting department. 

3. Compliance Requirements 

For existing area sources, we are 

proposing to apply the testing, 

monitoring, recordkeeping, and 

reporting requirements for PM 

emissions currently applicable to the 

only existing area source smelter. 

Compliance with the proposed 

emissions limit for existing area sources 

would be based on the daily average PM 

emissions measured by a PM CEMS. 

The owner or operator would submit 

reports of deviations within two weeks 

of the date the deviation occurred, 

monthly summaries of monitoring data, 

and semiannual monitoring reports. We 

are also proposing that the owner or 

operator comply with the requirements 

in 40 CFR 63.6(e)(3) for SSM plans and 

reports. 

The owner or operator of an existing 

area source would be required to 

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 would be allowed to certify 

initial compliance with the proposed 

emissions limit based on monitoring 

data collected during the previous 

month. The owner or operator would 

also certify initial compliance with the 

work practice standards. 

The owner or operator of a new 

primary copper smelter would be 

required to 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 proposed 

NESHAP 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 would be 

required. The owner or operator would 

be required to 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 would be required. 

All notification, monitoring, testing, 

operation and maintenance, 

recordkeeping, and reporting 

requirements of the part 63 General 

Provisions would apply to the owner or 

operator of a new source. 

D. What is our rationale for selecting the 

proposed standards for area sources? 

1. Selection of Pollutants 

The HAP emissions from primary 

copper smelters originate primarily from 

metal impurities that naturally occur in 

copper ore concentrates. During the 

smelting process and the subsequent 

converting process to produce blister 

copper, these HAP metal species either 

are eliminated in the molten slag tapped 

from the process vessels or are 

vaporized and discharged in the offgases vented from the vessels. HAP 

metals may also be emitted from other 

processes that contain molten materials, 

such as anode refining and the casting 

operation. Upon cooling of the process 

off-gas, the volatilized HAP metal 

species condense, form aerosols, and 

behave as PM. 

The composition and amounts of 

metal HAP in the copper ore 

concentrates can vary from one smelter 

to another, as well as over time at 

individual smelters depending on the 

ore deposit from which the copper ore 

concentrate is obtained. This inherent 

variability and unpredictability of the 

metal HAP compositions and amounts 

in copper ore concentrates have a 

material effect on the composition and 

amount of HAP metals in the process 

off-gas emissions at the smelter. As a 

result, establishing individual 

numerical emissions limits for each 

HAP metal species is difficult given the 

level of uncertainty about the individual 

metal HAP compositions of the copper 

ores processed at a smelter. 

An emissions characteristic common 

to all smelters and similar source 

categories is that metal HAP are a 

component of the PM contained in the 

process off-gas discharged from 

smelting, converting, anode refining, 

and casting operations. Emissions limits 

established to achieve control of PM 

will also achieve control of metal HAP 

other than mercury. Consequently, we 

chose to use PM as a surrogate for the 

urban HAP, which are metal HAP, in 

establishing emissions limits. This 

approach is consistent with the 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
59310 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

approach we used for the emissions 

limits established in the NESHAP for 

primary copper smelters in 40 CFR part 

63, subpart QQQ. 

2. Selection of Proposed Standards 

We are aware of only one existing 

primary copper smelter that is an area 

source. This smelter was built in the 

mid-1990’s and uses flash copper 

converting technology. The smelter was 

originally designed to use the most 

advanced controls that were available at 

that time to achieve emissions 

reductions that met or exceeded levels 

required to comply with the existing 

State and Federal requirements to 

control PM emissions. Extensive 

emissions controls and work practices 

are used for all process and fugitive PM 

emissions sources at this smelter to 

control PM and therefore metal HAP 

emissions. 

The existing area source smelter 

operates emissions control systems that 

capture and control off-gases from the 

copper concentrate drying, smelting, 

converting, and anode refining and 

casting operations. All process gases 

from these copper smelting operations 

are routed to control devices (for many 

sources, a series of control devices) that 

achieve high-efficiency removal of PM 

and metal HAP from the gas stream 

before being discharged through a single 

main stack. Also included in the 

combined gas stream vented through 

this main stack are captured gases and 

fumes from the smelting and converting 

furnaces’ tapping ports and launders 

and from the matte drying and grinding 

operations. 

The work practices described above to 

control PM and metal HAP emissions 

are requirements in this area source 

smelter’s current title V permit. The 

smelter’s ability to demonstrate 

compliance with these requirements on 

a long-term basis indicates that the 

facility owner has the technical and 

economic capabilities to implement 

these requirements, which are highly 

effective in controlling PM and metal 

HAP emissions. Therefore, we conclude 

that these requirements reflect GACT for 

primary copper area source smelters. 

The source has a total PM emissions 

limit for the main stack gases. This 

facility-wide PM emissions limit for the 

smelter process off-gases is based on the 

operating practices and the emissions 

control system configurations used at 

this area source smelter. The maximum 

allowable PM emissions level for the 

smelter as measured at the main stack 

is 89.5 lb/hr based on a 24-hour average. 

A continuous sampling system that 

measures PM is installed in the main 

stack. Results from this continuous 

sampler are used to calculate the 24- 

hour average for each day of the month 

with a summary of the 24-hour averages 

reported to the State each month for the 

previous month. 

PM and metal HAP emissions are 

effectively controlled at this existing 

area source by its compliance with the 

facility-wide emissions limit and work 

practice standards mentioned above, 

which are requirements in its title V 

permit. Although these requirements in 

certain aspects are specific to this 

facility, we think it is appropriate to 

adopt these requirements as the 

standards for existing sources of 

primary copper production because this 

is the only existing area source in this 

source category. 

We are not certain that a new smelter 

would use flash copper converting 

technology, and if it did, that it would 

be in the configuration installed at the 

existing smelter. A new smelter may use 

one of the other commercially available 

continuous smelting and converting 

technologies that are based on bath 

smelting technology or an innovative 

new continuous copper smelting and 

converting process that is not yet in 

commercial operation. 

Because a new primary copper 

smelter may use a distinctly different 

converting technology from the flash 

copper converting technology, the 

format of the emissions limit we are 

proposing to adopt as an existing source 

requirement is not appropriate for a new 

source. For reasons set forth below, we 

believe that an input-based emissions 

limit is appropriate for new sources. 

Emissions limits based on production 

levels can be input-based (i.e., based on 

raw materials consumed in making a 

product) or output-based (i.e., based on 

amount of product made). Because the 

composition and quantity of the 

potential metal HAP emissions from a 

given smelter are directly related to the 

level of metal impurities in the copper 

concentrate, we decided that an inputbased emissions limit would be 

appropriate for new sources. Using the 

nominal design feed charge rate for the 

smelting furnace, we calculated that the 

89.5 lb/hr PM emissions limit for the 

primary copper smelter would 

correspond to an input-based PM 

emissions limit of 0.6 lb/ton of copper 

concentrate feed. We are proposing that 

compliance with this emissions limit be 

determined on a daily basis. Because 

this input-based emissions limit is 

derived from the 89.5 lb/hr daily 

average emissions limit, it would ensure 

that emissions from a new source are 

limited at a level equivalent to the 

emissions limit for the existing source. 

3. Selection of Proposed Compliance 

Requirements 

For existing area sources, we are 

proposing to adopt the testing, 

monitoring, recordkeeping, and 

reporting requirements for PM 

emissions currently applicable to the 

only existing area source smelter. We 

reviewed these requirements as 

specified in the source’s title V permit 

and concluded that these requirements 

are sufficient to ensure compliance with 

the proposed facility-wide emissions 

limit and work practice standards. 

These requirements include a PM 

CEMS, reports of deviations, monthly 

summaries of monitoring data, and 

semiannual monitoring reports. 

For new area sources, we would apply 

the notification, testing, monitoring, 

operation and maintenance, 

recordkeeping, and reporting 

requirements in the General Provisions 

(40 CFR part 63, subpart A). The 

General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, 

subpart A) are necessary for effective 

application of the standard for new area 

sources and are therefore incorporated 

into the proposed rule. These 

requirements are sufficient to ensure 

compliance with the proposed 

emissions limit and work practice 

standards. 

Because permit information for the 

existing facility does not identify 

requirements for an SSM plan, we are 

proposing that the owner or operator of 

an existing or new area source be 

required to comply with the SSM 

requirements in 40 CFR 63.6(e)(3). 

Section 63.6(e)(3)(ix) of the General 

Provisions requires that the title V 

permit for a source include provisions 

for an SSM plan. According to Section 

63.6(e)(3)(ix), the permit may fulfill this 

requirement by citing the relevant 

paragraphs of 40 CFR 63.6(e). Revisions 

made to the plan do not constitute 

permit revisions and the elements of the 

plan are not applicable requirements 

under 40 CFR 70.2 and 71.2. 

V. Proposed NESHAP for Secondary 

Copper Smelting Area Sources 

A. What source category is affected by 

the proposed NESHAP? 

1. Source Category Description 

A significant amount of copper metal 

consumed in the U.S. has been 

produced historically by remelting, 

smelting, and refining scrap materials 

containing copper. These scrap 

materials can be recycled post-industrial 

wastes, such as copper trimmings from 

manufacturing processes or postconsumer wastes such as recovered old 

consumer products containing copper. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 59311 

3There are no existing secondary copper smelters 

as defined in the proposed rule. 

Copper metal produced from copper 

scrap is referred to as ‘‘secondary 

copper.’’

There is a variety of types of copper 

scrap with varying copper contents. 

High-quality unalloyed copper scrap 

often contains more than 99 percent 

copper and is remelted directly. Other 

types of copper scrap have lower copper 

contents and must be processed before 

they can be reused in manufacturing 

copper products. Types of copper scrap 

with lower copper contents include 

scrap from copper alloys (e.g., brass and 

bronze scrap) and industrial residuals 

that contain copper (e.g., skimmings, 

ashes, refining slag, flue dusts). The 

prices paid for copper scrap materials 

depend on the commodity price for 

refined copper and the type of scrap. In 

general, prices for scrap copper track 

refined copper price trends with higher 

prices being paid for copper scrap 

categories with higher copper purity. 

Copper scrap referred to as old scrap 

is obtained from used, worn out, or 

obsolete copper products that are 

recycled or recovered. This scrap is 

obtained by collecting discarded, 

dismantled or obsolete coppercontaining products at the end of their 

service lives. Another source of old 

scrap is copper building materials 

salvaged from demolition sites. 

Examples of old scrap include recycled 

electrical cable and wiring, copper 

plumbing pipes from building 

demolitions, windings from worn 

electric motors, salvaged automobile 

radiators, dismantled printed circuit 

boards, obsolete telephone switching 

gear, recovered ammunition casings, 

and copper-based spent catalysts. In 

general, the copper content of old scrap 

ranges from less than 30 to more than 

98 percent copper depending on the 

source. Old scrap typically requires 

some pre-treatment, such as cleaning 

and consolidation, in preparation for 

smelting. 

The other major category of copper 

scrap, referred to as new scrap, is scrap 

generated during manufacturing 

processes and from other copper 

materials that have never entered the 

consumer markets. Examples of new 

scrap include machining turnings, 

stampings, and cuttings from 

manufacturing processes, as well as 

defective products pulled prior to 

shipment. New scrap can often be 

recycled directly with little or no 

pretreatment. New scrap may be 

collected and sold to third-party 

secondary copper processors or may be 

recycled directly within the 

manufacturing facility that generates the 

copper scrap. 

Facilities that process copper scrap 

can be classified into three general 

categories: smelters, ingot makers, and 

remelters. The listing of this source 

category included only secondary 

copper smelters, which are the subject 

of this proposed NESHAP. Secondary 

copper smelters 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. The distinguishing 

features of secondary copper smelters 

are the type of pyrometallurgical 

process used and the final product, 

which is anode copper. Most U.S. 

copper smelters charged low grade 

copper scrap along with fluxes into a 

cupola blast furnace followed by 

additional purification in copper 

converters. One facility processed lowgrade copper scrap using a combined 

smelting and converting process 

conducted in a top blown rotary 

converter. All of these plants fire refined 

the copper to produce anode copper.3

Secondary copper smelters may have 

on-site pretreatment processes to clean 

and consolidate the copper scrap in 

preparation for smelting. Concentrating 

can be performed either manually or 

mechanically and can include sorting, 

stripping, shredding, and magnetic 

separation. The scrap can be further 

refined using sweating, insulation 

burning, drying, flotation, and leaching. 

The type of pretreatment processes used 

depends on the type and source of the 

copper scrap. 

A similarity with primary copper 

producers is that the molten copper is 

transferred from the converting vessel to 

an anode furnace for additional fire 

refining to further remove residual 

impurities and oxygen. The molten 

copper from the anode furnace is 

poured into molds to produce solid 

copper called anodes. The anode copper 

is sent to a copper refinery, either onsite or at another location, where it is 

further purified using an electrolytic 

process to obtain the high-purity copper 

that is used for manufacturing products. 

Secondary copper smelters are part of 

the broad standard industrial 

classification (SIC) code 3341 

(secondary nonferrous metals), which 

also includes copper, brass, and bronze 

ingot makers as well as producers of 

several other secondary nonferrous 

metals. The area source category listing 

of secondary copper smelting, a small 

subset of SIC 3341, was based on the 

contribution of secondary copper 

smelters to emissions of the urban HAP 

cadmium, lead and dioxin. For several 

national emission standards, EPA has 

defined source categories and 

applicability based on the types of 

processes in place rather than defining 

applicability in terms of the broad 

definition of an SIC code. In this case, 

ingot makers and other producers of 

certain secondary nonferrous metals 

(other than secondary copper smelters 

as defined in this proposed rule) are not 

included in the secondary copper 

smelting area source category. 

2. Existing Sources 

The secondary copper smelting plants 

that served as the basis for emissions 

estimates for the secondary copper 

smelting area source category were 

Gaston Recycling Industries (Gaston, 

South Carolina), Franklin Smelting and 

Refining (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania), 

Cerro Copper Products (Sauget, Illinois), 

Southwire Company (Carrollton, 

Illinois), and Chemetco, Inc. (Hartford, 

Illinois). All of these plants have shut 

down, and no similar secondary copper 

smelters have been constructed. There 

are also no existing major source 

secondary copper smelters. 

Secondary copper smelting was once 

a thriving industrial sector in the U.S. 

with smelters operating in many regions 

of the country. However, the last of the 

smelters closed in the late 1990’s and 

early 2000’s during a period of 

depressed prices for refined copper, 

increased production costs, and other 

site-specific factors. In addition, scrap 

copper collected in the U.S. was 

increasingly exported to China and 

other countries with little or no 

processing, which increased the prices 

U.S. secondary copper smelters paid for 

scrap copper. The last U.S. secondary 

copper smelter (Chemetco) closed in 

2001. Our information indicates that 

equipment and operations for secondary 

copper production at these previously 

operating smelters have all been 

dismantled. Therefore, there is not any, 

nor would there ever be, an existing 

source secondary copper smelter that 

would be subject to the proposed rule. 

3. New Sources 

While there are no existing secondary 

copper smelters in the U.S., secondary 

copper smelters are operating in several 

other countries. Secondary copper 

smelting technologies currently being 

developed and utilized are significantly 

different from the processes once used 

at U.S. smelters. These new 

technologies provide better control of 

air emissions and produce inherently 

lower HAP emission levels because they 

do not have many of the fugitive 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
59312 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

emissions points associated with the 

older smelting technologies. 

Record-high commodity prices for 

refined copper are motivating 

companies to expand primary copper 

production capacity in the U.S. If the 

rebound in refined copper commodity 

prices is stimulating the development of 

primary copper production, it is 

possible that these higher copper prices 

will also encourage the return of the 

secondary copper smelting industry to 

the U.S. New secondary copper smelting 

operations could be built by 

independent companies to produce 

refined copper for sale or by companies 

that use copper as a raw material in 

their manufacturing processes (e.g., 

electrical wire and cable 

manufacturers). 

The average price spread between 

refined copper and copper scrap has 

returned to the levels in the mid-1990’s 

during which secondary copper 

smelters operated profitably in the U.S. 

The price spread levels that supported 

the U.S. secondary copper smelting 

industry in the past might have changed 

in the late 1990’s because of new cost 

considerations such as more stringent 

pollution abatement requirements, 

increased competition for the U.S. scrap 

copper supply by foreign smelters, and 

other factors. Based on the information 

we have collected, however, we 

conclude that the economic conditions 

for secondary copper smelters are more 

favorable today than they were in the 

late 1990’s and early 2000’s when the 

last U.S. smelters closed. Therefore, it is 

possible that the industry will reemerge 

in the U.S. 

B. What HAP are emitted from 

secondary copper smelters? 

Copper scrap that is collected and 

reprocessed may contain HAP metals, 

including the urban HAP metals 

cadmium and lead, for which secondary 

copper smelters are listed for regulation 

under CAA sections 112(c)(3) and 

112(k)(3)(B). HAP metals occur in the 

scrap as a result of other metals used in 

conjunction with copper for certain 

industrial and consumer applications, 

such as the use of lead solders for 

assembling copper plumbing pipes. 

Metal HAP can be released into the 

atmosphere in the form of PM during 

certain high-temperature copper scrap 

smelting operations. 

As with metal HAP emissions from 

primary copper smelters (see section 

IV.B of this preamble), the presence and 

concentrations of specific HAP metals 

in a copper scrap material vary 

depending on the material source. 

Consequently, the potential HAP 

emissions from a given secondary 

copper smelter are directly related to the 

level of HAP metals in the copper scrap 

material processed. 

Secondary copper smelters were also 

listed for emissions of the urban HAP 

dioxin. Dioxins may form when 

chlorinated plastics in the scrap are 

heated to high temperatures in smelting 

furnaces. 

In EPA’s March 2005 Dioxin 

Reassessment (available at http:// 

www.epa.gov/ncea/pdfs/dioxin/2kupdate/), secondary copper smelters 

were identified as contributors to the 

U.S. inventory of dioxin emissions in 

1995 when three secondary copper 

smelters were operating. Secondary 

copper smelters have a high potential 

for dioxin emissions because of the 

abundance of chlorinated plastics in the 

copper scrap that is used as feed 

material. 

C. What are the proposed requirements 

for area sources? 

1. Applicability and Compliance Dates 

The proposed NESHAP apply to each 

new secondary copper smelter that is an 

area source of HAP. A new affected 

source would be required to comply by 

[DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THE 

FINAL RULE IN THE Federal Register] 

or upon initial startup, whichever is 

later. 

2. Emission Limit and Work Practice 

Standards 

We are proposing that any new 

secondary copper smelter apply a 

capture and control system for PM 

emissions to 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 

grains per dry standard cubic feet (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. 

3. Compliance Requirements 

Fabric filters (baghouses) are expected 

to be needed to meet the proposed 

emission limit. Consequently, we are 

proposing monitoring requirements that 

include bag leak detection systems 

when baghouses are used. The owner or 

operator would keep records to 

document conformance with 

requirements in the written plan for the 

selection, inspection, and pretreatment 

of copper scrap. If a control device other 

than a baghouse is used, the owner or 

operator would submit a monitoring 

plan to the permitting authority for 

approval. The monitoring plan would 

include performance test results 

showing compliance with the PM 

emission 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 would 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. The 

PM concentration would 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 would be required 

every 5 years to demonstrate 

compliance with the PM emissions 

limit. All requirements of the part 63 

General Provisions would apply to the 

owner or operator of a new source. 

D. What is our rationale for selecting the 

proposed standards for area sources? 

1. Selection of Proposed Standards 

As discussed above, there is not and 

will never be any existing area source 

secondary copper smelter. Copper 

production processes at all of the 

previously existing secondary copper 

smelters have been dismantled. 

Construction or reconstruction would be 

necessary should there be an attempt to 

restart secondary copper production at 

any of these facilities. Currently there is 

not any such construction or 

reconstruction at these facilities, and 

construction or reconstruction that 

occurs after this proposal would qualify 

the operation as a new source. Because 

there is not, nor will there ever be, any 

existing area source secondary copper 

smelter, a standard for existing area 

sources of secondary copper smelters 

would never have any application. We 

do not believe that Congress intended 

that we issue regulations that will not 

have any application. Therefore, we are 

not proposing standards for existing 

area sources of secondary copper 

smelters. 

In the 1990 Amendments to the CAA, 

Congress directed EPA to identify 30 

HAP that present the greatest threat to 

public health in the largest number of 

urban areas (urban HAP). (See sections 

112(c)(3) and 112(k)(3)(B) of the CAA.) 

The 1990 Amendments also directed 

EPA to list sufficient area source 

categories to account for 90 percent or 

more of the emissions of each urban 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 59313 

HAP and to address the urban HAP 

emissions from the listed sources 

through regulation. Secondary copper 

smelting area sources contributed to 

emissions of the urban HAP dioxin, 

cadmium and lead; therefore, their 

urban HAP emissions are among those 

that EPA is directed to address. 

Pursuant to this statutory obligation, we 

have studied this area source category 

and have concluded that emissions of 

dioxin, cadmium and lead from these 

sources have been eliminated and 

therefore adequately addressed by the 

shutdown of these facilities. 

However, we are proposing standards 

for new sources to ensure that any 

potential emissions of these urban HAP 

from future secondary copper smelting 

area sources will be appropriately 

controlled. For new secondary copper 

smelters, we reviewed technologies that 

have been applied to similar scrap 

melting processes in the U.S. For 

example, almost all electric arc furnaces 

at steel mills that melt and recycle iron 

and steel scrap are controlled by 

baghouses, several are subject to a PM 

limit of 0.002 gr/dscf or less, and over 

90 percent of the PM test data collected 

for the entire industry show that PM 

emissions are less than 0.002 gr/dscf. In 

addition, baghouses were identified as 

the most effective PM control device 

used for emissions from cupolas (the 

same type of furnace as that used at 

secondary copper smelters) that melt 

metal scrap at iron and steel foundries. 

The NESHAP for iron and steel 

foundries (40 CFR part 63, subpart 

EEEEE) established a PM limit of 0.002 

gr/dscf for new cupolas that melt metal 

scrap. We chose to apply a PM limit of 

0.002 gr/dscf as GACT to all melting 

furnaces and other furnaces that process 

molten metal at a new secondary copper 

smelter. This limit has been 

demonstrated as achievable by both new 

and existing similar furnaces that 

process metal scrap, and it represents 

the level of performance provided by 

the recommended technology for PM in 

this application (i.e., a baghouse). The 

GACT determination for new sources is 

also consistent with the United Nations 

Environment Programme’s guidelines 

on performance standards for new 

secondary copper smelters (available at 

http://www.pops.int/documents/ 

batbep_advance/intersessional_work/ 

default.htm.) The guidelines 

recommend high efficiency PM removal 

systems (such as fabric filters or 

baghouses) and state that such systems 

should achieve a PM level of 5 

milligrams per cubic meter (0.002 gr/ 

dscf) for new secondary copper 

smelters. As discussed earlier, the last 

secondary copper smelter (as defined for 

this source category) shut down several 

years ago, and new secondary copper 

facilities are not likely to use the older 

technology that would subject them to 

this proposed rule. However, we are 

requesting comment on whether the 

proposed standard for new sources is 

accurate representation of GACT for 

new sources. 

The United Nations Environment 

Programme has published guidelines on 

best available techniques to reduce 

dioxin emissions from metallurgical 

processes, including secondary copper 

smelting available at http:// 

www.pops.int/documents/ 

batbep_advance/intersessional_work/ 

default.htm. One of the pollution 

prevention measures is pre-sorting of 

feed materials (scrap) to reduce the 

presence of oils, plastics, and chlorine. 

Other pollution prevention methods 

include thermal de-coating and deoiling, milling and grinding with 

density or pneumatic separation, and 

stripping cable insulation. Emission 

control devices include fume collection 

with high efficiency PM removal (such 

as fabric filters). The stringent proposed 

PM emissions limit (0.002 gr/dscf) 

would ensure that high efficiency 

control devices for PM would be used. 

We selected the pollution prevention 

measures and the PM emissions limit as 

GACT for dioxin emissions from new 

secondary copper smelters. The owner 

or operator of any new smelter must 

develop and implement 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 the smelting furnace. 

This is accomplished by preparing and 

following a scrap management plan, 

training scrap inspectors, and keeping 

records to show the plan is 

implemented. 

2. Selection of Proposed Compliance 

Requirements 

We are proposing to base the 

compliance requirements on the testing, 

monitoring, operation and maintenance, 

recordkeeping, and reporting 

requirements in the General Provisions 

(40 CFR part 63, subpart A). The 

General Provisions are necessary for 

effective application of the standard for 

new area sources and are therefore 

incorporated into the proposed rule. 

These requirements are sufficient to 

ensure compliance with the proposed 

emissions limit and work practice 

standards. 

VI. Proposed NESHAP for Primary 

Nonferrous Metals—Zinc, Cadmium, 

and Beryllium Area Sources 

A. What area source category is affected 

by the proposed NESHAP? 

The Primary Nonferrous Metals-Zinc, 

Cadmium, and Beryllium source 

category includes establishments 

primarily engaged in smelting and 

refining of three nonferrous metals—

zinc, cadmium, and beryllium. There 

are only two primary zinc smelters that 

are currently operating in the U.S., and 

both are area sources. One of the 

smelters is subject to the NSPS for 

primary zinc smelters (40 CFR part 60, 

subpart Q), which applies to SO2

emissions from roasters and PM 

emissions from sintering machines. 

Both facilities have title V operating 

permits including requirements for the 

control of PM and SO2. 

There are no cadmium smelters in the 

U.S., and we do not expect any to be 

built in the future. Cadmium minerals 

are not found alone in commercially 

viable deposits. Instead, cadmium is 

produced as a by-product of zinc 

smelting processes. Only one of the two 

U.S. primary zinc smelters produces 

cadmium as a by-product; the other 

plant shutdown and dismantled their 

cadmium recovery process equipment. 

All new and existing primary 

beryllium production facilities are 

subject to the National Emissions 

Standard for Beryllium at 40 CFR part 

61, subpart C. Recent data indicate that 

there are no primary beryllium 

production facilities (major or area 

sources) currently operating in the U.S. 

The last U.S. beryllium production 

facility, which was a major source due 

to emissions of tetrachloroethylene, 

shutdown all primary beryllium 

operations at its manufacturing plant in 

June 2000. In the event that this plant 

restarts the primary beryllium 

production operation, the plant would 

probably continue to be a major source 

rather than an area source due to 

tetrachloroethylene emissions. 

B. What is primary zinc production and 

what HAP are emitted? 

Primary zinc smelters process zinc 

sulfide ore concentrates to produce 

metallic zinc or zinc oxide. Primary zinc 

production facilities also process zinc 

scrap and zinc oxide materials, and 

although these may be considered 

secondary zinc processes, they are part 

of this area source category when they 

are located at the primary zinc 

production facility. The two U.S. 

primary zinc producers process zinc 

sulfide ore concentrate by smelting the 

ore in a roaster to produce impure zinc 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
59314 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

oxide (calcine) followed by 

hydrometallurgical reduction processes 

that include leaching, purification, and 

electrolysis to produce metallic zinc. 

During roasting, most of the sulfur in 

the ore concentrate is removed as SO2. 

The roaster off-gases containing PM and 

SO2 are processed through a series of 

gas cleaning devices to remove the PM 

(cyclones, electrostatic precipitators, 

and venturi scrubbers), and the cleaned 

gas is routed to a sulfuric acid plant 

where the SO2 is converted to sulfuric 

acid. Any HAP metals that volatilize 

during the roasting process are removed 

by the PM control equipment prior to 

the acid plant. The PM removal 

equipment is an important and inherent 

part of the production process because 

the PM must be removed before the gas 

is processed in the acid plant (e.g., to 

protect and maintain the catalyst in the 

acid plant). 

In the electrolytic deposition process, 

the desulfurized calcine from the roaster 

is first processed through a series of 

leaching and purification operations to 

dissolve the zinc oxide into an 

electrolyte solution. The solution is 

poured into cells where metallic zinc is 

recovered in a batch operation by 

passing current through the electrolyte 

solution causing zinc to deposit on an 

aluminum cathode. 

During the acid leaching step, 

cadmium is precipitated from the 

solution by adding zinc dust. The 

cadmium precipitate is filtered and 

formed into a cake. The cake may be 

sold as a recyclable product or further 

purified and cadmium metal recovered 

using an electrolytic process similar to 

that used for zinc. Recovered cadmium 

may be melted in a furnace and poured 

into casting molds. Molten cadmium 

can also be charged to a second 

oxidizing furnace that converts 

cadmium metal into cadmium oxide. 

Although HAP metals are present in 

the PM from the roaster’s exhaust, the 

roaster is not a significant source of 

HAP metal emissions because of the 

extensive cleaning of the gas to remove 

PM prior to the acid plant. Melting 

furnaces also generate metal HAP 

emissions and PM emissions because of 

the high temperatures used to heat the 

materials. These furnaces are used to 

melt the pure zinc from electrolysis, 

alloys, and zinc scrap and dust for 

recycling. Both plants use baghouses to 

control PM and HAP metal emissions 

from the various melting furnaces. The 

HAP metals that have been reported 

from primary zinc production include 

arsenic, cadmium, lead, manganese, 

mercury, and nickel, all of which are 

identified by EPA as urban HAP. As 

previously mentioned, the primary 

nonferrous area source category was 

listed for regulation under CAA sections 

112(c)(3) and 112(k)(3)(B) due to 

emissions of all of these HAP except for 

mercury. 

C. What are the proposed requirements 

for primary zinc production area 

sources? 

1. Applicability and Compliance Dates 

The proposed NESHAP applies to the 

owner or operator of a new or existing 

primary zinc production facility that is 

an area source of HAP emissions. 

Because the two existing sources are 

already operating subject to PM control 

requirements that are the same as those 

in the proposed NESHAP, we are 

proposing that an existing affected 

source comply by [DATE OF 

PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE 

IN THE Federal Register]. A new 

affected source would be required to 

comply by [DATE OF PUBLICATION 

OF THE FINAL RULE IN THE Federal 

Register] or upon initial startup, 

whichever is later. 

2. Emissions Limits and Work Practice 

Standards 

We are proposing a work practice 

standard for roasters at new and existing 

sources. The proposed NESHAP 

requires the owner or operator to 

exhaust roaster off-gases to PM removal 

equipment and a sulfuric acid plant. 

Bypassing the sulfuric acid plant during 

charging of the roaster would be 

prohibited. 

Emissions limits are proposed for the 

different types of melting furnaces at 

primary zinc production facilities. For 

existing sources, we are proposing PM 

limits of 0.93 lb/hr for zinc cathode 

melting furnaces; 0.1 lb/hr for furnaces 

that melt zinc dust, chips, and offspecification zinc materials; and 0.228 

lb/hr for the combined exhaust from 

furnaces that melt zinc scrap and alloys. 

For new sources, we are proposing a PM 

limit of 0.005 gr/dscf for the furnaces 

mentioned above. In addition, we are 

proposing limits of 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 are proposed for 

any sintering machine at a new or 

existing area source facility. If there is 

a sintering machine, the proposed 

NESHAP requires the owner or operator 

to comply with the PM limit at 40 CFR 

60.172 and the opacity limit at 40 CFR 

60.174(a) of the NSPS for primary zinc 

smelters (40 CFR part 60, subpart Q). 

3. Proposed Compliance Requirements 

We are proposing to adopt for existing 

area sources certain monitoring, 

recordkeeping, and reporting 

requirements already applicable to the 

two existing facilities that relate to PM 

emissions control. The owner or 

operator of an existing area source 

would monitor baghouse pressure drop, 

perform routine baghouse maintenance, 

and keep records to document 

compliance. In addition, we are 

proposing to require repeat performance 

tests (at least once every 5 years) for 

existing sources. The proposed NESHAP 

also would require 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 would be required to 

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 would be 

allowed to certify initial compliance 

with the proposed 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 would 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 

proposed NESHAP requires that the 

facility 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 would 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. 

As required in the existing permits, 

the owner or operator would be required 

to submit a notification to the 

permitting authority of any deviation 

from the requirements of the NESHAP. 

The notification must describe the 

probable cause of the deviation and any 

corrective actions or preventative 

measures taken. Existing facilities 

would also submit semiannual 

monitoring reports which clearly 

describe any deviations. Records of all 

required monitoring data and support 

information also would be required. The 

owner or operator of an existing area 

source would also be required to 

comply with the requirements in 40 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 59315 

CFR 63.6(e)(3) of the General Provisions 

for SSM plans and reports. 

The owner or operator of a new area 

source would be required to install and 

operate a bag leak detection system for 

each baghouse used to comply with a 

PM emissions limit. In addition, we are 

proposing to require repeat PM 

performance tests (once every 5 years) 

for each furnace at a new source. The 

owner or operator would also be 

required to 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 would 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 would also be required for a 

sintering machine according to the 

methods and procedures in 40 CFR 

60.176(b). All of the testing, monitoring, 

operation and maintenance, 

recordkeeping, and reporting 

requirements of the part 63 General 

Provisions would apply to a new area 

source. 

D. What is our rationale for selecting the 

proposed standards for primary zinc 

production area sources? 

1. Selection of PM as a Surrogate for 

Metal HAP 

Because the types and quantities of 

metal HAP vary in zinc ore, it is not 

practical to establish individual 

standards for each specific metal HAP 

listed as an urban HAP that could be 

present in zinc ore. Instead, we decided 

to establish standards using PM as a 

surrogate for these urban HAP metal 

emissions. Controlling PM emissions 

will also control the metal HAP since 

these compounds are contained within 

the PM, i.e., they are in the particulate 

form as opposed to the gaseous form. 

The available air pollution controls for 

the particulate HAP metals are the same 

as those used for PM controls at primary 

zinc production plants. These controls 

capture particulate HAP metals nonpreferentially along with other PM, thus 

making PM a reasonable surrogate for 

these HAP metals. We have used this 

approach in several other NESHAP in 

which PM was determined to be a 

surrogate for the HAP metals in the PM. 

2. Selection of Proposed Standards 

The release of metal HAP from 

primary zinc production occurs from 

three types of emissions sources: the 

roasting of the zinc sulfide ore; the use 

of furnaces to melt zinc, materials 

containing zinc (e.g., dust, scrap), 

alloys, and cadmium; and the operation 

of sintering machines. The high 

temperatures inherent in the roasters, 

melting furnaces, and sintering 

machines are sufficient to temporarily 

volatize metals that can then become 

entrained in the exhaust gases from the 

process. The other major processes 

performed at primary zinc production 

facilities include leaching, purification, 

and electrowinning. These are wet 

processes and are not considered to be 

sources of metal HAP emissions. 

Roasters. The proposed rule requires 

that metal HAP generated by roasters 

under high temperatures be removed 

with PM in the off-gases. The off-gases 

from roasters would be controlled by 

removing PM and HAP metals in the 

form of PM in a series of PM removal 

devices, and then the SO2-rich off-gases 

would be exhausted to a sulfuric acid 

plant. These controls, including a 

sulfuric acid plant, have been installed 

at the two existing sources to comply 

with the National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards for SO2, as well as the NSPS 

for primary zinc smelters (40 CFR part 

60, subpart Q) for one source. 

While the sulfuric acid plants were 

originally installed to recover sulfuric 

acid as a by-product and to control SO2

emissions, the inherent design and 

operating requirements of these plants 

also provide effective control of PM and 

metal HAP contained in roaster offgases. The sulfuric acid production 

process involves the catalytic 

conversion of the SO2 contained in the 

off-gases to produce liquid sulfuric acid. 

To optimize the process performance 

and prevent extensive damage to the 

catalysts and other critical process 

equipment, the first step of the process 

requires that the roaster off-gases be precleaned and conditioned. These 

operations involve first passing the gas 

stream through multiple control devices 

for the removal of PM and to reduce gas 

stream temperature. By using multiple 

PM control devices in series 

(multicyclones, electrostatic 

precipitators, and venturi scrubbers) to 

treat roaster exhaust gases before 

entering the sulfuric acid plant, very 

high overall PM and metal HAP removal 

efficiencies are achieved. Consequently, 

there is little or no PM or metal HAP 

emitted in the tail gas from the sulfuric 

acid plant. The primary constituent of 

the final tail gas from the acid plant is 

sulfuric acid mist, which is not a HAP. 

Both of the existing primary zinc 

production facilities treat their roaster 

off-gases using multiple control and 

conditioning technologies to remove PM 

and metal HAP prior to the roaster offgases entering the catalytic conversion 

beds. Because neither facility’s permit 

contains non-sulfuric acid PM limits 

and because we have no PM emissions 

test data, we determined that a work 

practice standard was appropriate for 

the control of roaster off-gases. The 

work practice standard requires the 

roaster’s off-gases be exhausted to PM 

removal equipment and a sulfuric acid 

plant, thus ensuring a consistently high 

level of metal HAP control for the offgases. In light of the effective control of 

PM and metal HAP at these two existing 

facilities, we decided that the work 

practice standard currently being 

implemented at these facilities 

represents GACT for existing and new 

area sources of primary zinc production. 

We are not proposing emissions limits 

for HAP metals or PM in the tail gases 

from the sulfuric acid plants because we 

do not believe such limits are necessary. 

The vast majority of PM exiting with the 

tail gas is sulfuric acid mist, which is 

not a HAP. Because rigorous treatment 

of the roaster off-gases to remove PM 

and metal HAP is a necessary operating 

condition for the sulfuric acid plant, 

requiring that cleaned gases be vented to 

a sulfuric acid plant ensures that 

emissions of HAP metals are either 

nonexistent or limited to trace amounts. 

Furnaces. Potential sources of metal 

HAP emissions at primary zinc 

production facilities include a variety of 

high temperature furnaces operated for 

the purpose of melting zinc; cadmium; 

zinc scrap, dust, or chips; alloying 

metals; and producing anodes used in 

the electrowinning process. All of the 

melting furnaces currently in operation 

at the two existing primary zinc 

production facilities control emissions 

with baghouses, which are highly 

effective in controlling PM and metal 

HAP emissions. Baghouses are widely 

used throughout the metallurgical 

industry to control emissions from 

primary and secondary metal processes. 

Therefore, we conclude that GACT for 

controlling metal HAP emissions from 

the furnaces at primary zinc production 

facilities is proper operation of a 

baghouse. We believe that the emissions 

limits for these furnaces that we are 

proposing to adopt reflect the level of 

emissions control that can be achieved 

by well-operated and well-maintained 

baghouses. 

The two existing primary zinc 

production facilities currently hold title 

V operating permits issued by their 

respective State permitting agencies; 

both permits contain PM emissions 

limits for all furnace operations. We 

determined that the PM emissions limits 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
59316 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

applicable to these emissions sources 

are consistent with the expected 

performance of such operations 

controlled by well-operated and 

maintained baghouses. The PM 

emissions limits vary somewhat among 

furnace operations, which is indicative 

of differences in processes associated 

with the function of each furnace rather 

than any real difference in performance 

of the baghouse control devices. 

Therefore, we decided that the PM 

emissions limits in the operating 

permits represent the performance 

capabilities of baghouses at existing 

affected sources. Because baghouse 

technology is the best technology that 

can be applied to these sources, the 

permit limits that apply to the existing 

furnaces controlled by baghouses also 

represent the performance that can be 

expected at new sources. 

We are proposing a PM emissions 

limit of 0.93 lb/hr for zinc cathode 

melting furnaces at existing facilities. 

This emissions limit is the permit limit 

in effect for the zinc cathode melting 

furnace at one of the primary zinc 

production facilities. The other facility 

has a permit limit for PM of 0.67 lb/hr. 

We selected the 0.93 lb/hr limit because 

it is achievable by zinc cathode melting 

furnaces at both facilities, both facilities 

use baghouses to reduce PM emissions, 

and there is very little difference in the 

magnitude of the PM emissions limits 

for the two plants. The proposed PM 

limit for zinc cathode melting furnaces 

at existing facilities will ensure that the 

baghouses will be operated and 

maintained in a manner that will 

continue to effectively reduce PM 

emissions and metal HAP emissions. 

We considered trying to develop an 

emissions limit in a PM concentration 

format, but decided against that 

approach because concentration limits 

were not available for both facilities, 

and there was no basis on which to 

derive a concentration-based limit that 

would be appropriate for zinc cathode 

melting furnaces at both plants. We also 

considered a limit expressed as lb/ton 

melted in the furnace. However, our 

review and discussions with plant 

personnel indicated that a short term 

melting rate is difficult to determine and 

can be subject to significant 

inaccuracies. The plants do not weigh 

the charge materials, and melting is a 

batch process that involves charging the 

furnace, melting, and tapping. Also, the 

furnaces are operated intermittently. All 

of these factors make it difficult to 

determine an accurate melting rate in 

tons per hour for the furnace during a 

performance test run that typically lasts 

for one hour. 

For new sources, it is not practical to 

prescribe an emissions limit in lb/hr 

because we do not know what the size 

and configuration of the process will be. 

One of the primary zinc facilities has a 

concentration limit of 0.005 gr/dscf for 

the zinc cathode melting furnace that is 

applied in combination with their lb/hr 

PM emissions limit. This concentration 

limit has been met by baghouses in 

many similar applications at existing 

sources, such as electric arc furnaces at 

steel plants (most are subject to a limit 

of 0.0052 gr/dscf), iron and steel 

foundries, and other metal processing 

operations. We chose the limit of 0.005 

gr/dscf as GACT for new zinc cathode 

melting furnaces because it can be 

achieved by properly designed and 

operated baghouses. 

One of the facilities has a baghouse 

applied to treat the combined exhaust 

from electric furnaces used to melt scrap 

zinc and zinc alloys. This baghouse is 

subject to a PM emissions limit of 0.228 

lb/hr. The other facility operates a 

smaller furnace for melting zinc dust, 

zinc chips, and off-specification zinc 

materials. This furnace is equipped with 

a baghouse and is subject to a PM 

emissions limit of 0.1 lb/hr. These 

emissions limits will ensure that the 

GACT technology (baghouses) or 

equally effective control device will be 

used, well-maintained, and welloperated to control PM and HAP metal 

emissions from these furnaces at 

existing sources. Therefore, we are 

proposing to adopt these emissions 

limits as the standards for existing 

sources of primary zinc production. 

As with a zinc cathode furnace at a 

new source, it is similarly impractical to 

prescribe PM emissions limits in lb/hr 

for any of the other melting furnaces 

because we do not know the size and 

configuration of any new process, which 

is necessary information for establishing 

such a limit. Further, we have no test 

data, nor do the title V permits for 

existing sources contain limits in 

concentration units that might be 

applied to these types of melting 

furnaces for new sources. However, like 

zinc cathode melting furnaces, these 

furnaces are used to melt materials 

containing zinc. Thus, the concentration 

of PM emissions is expected to be 

similar to that from the zinc cathode 

melting furnace. Consequently, we are 

proposing to adopt the 0.005 gr/dscf 

limit that is required for the zinc 

cathode melting furnace at one existing 

facility as the standard in the proposed 

rule for furnaces melting zinc scrap, 

alloys, dust, chips, or off-specification 

zinc materials at new sources. This limit 

has been demonstrated as achievable at 

other similar melting processes, and in 

this case, it can be achieved by properly 

designed and operated baghouses. 

Only one primary zinc production 

facility recovers cadmium and operates 

a cadmium melting furnace. The other 

facility has stopped cadmium 

production and dismantled the 

equipment. Emissions from the one 

cadmium melting furnace are controlled 

by a baghouse, which is subject to a PM 

limit of 0.015 gr/dscf. Similarly, only 

one facility operates an anode casting 

furnace, and this furnace is controlled 

by a baghouse and subject to a PM 

emissions limit of 0.014 gr/dscf. 

Because PM and metal HAP emissions 

are effectively controlled at these 

furnaces, we are proposing to include as 

the standards for both new and existing 

sources the PM limits of 0.015 gr/dscf 

for cadmium melting furnaces and 0.014 

gr/dscf for anode casting furnaces. 

These limits are achievable by using 

baghouses, the technology we have 

identified as GACT for new and existing 

sources, and will ensure effective 

control for PM and HAP metals. 

Sintering machine. Although neither 

of the existing primary zinc production 

facilities currently operates a sintering 

machine, it is possible that one could be 

installed at a new or existing facility. 

The NSPS for primary zinc production 

established a PM emission limit (0.022 

gr/dscf) for new sintering machines. We 

continue to believe that this PM 

emissions limit will ensure that HAP 

metals in the PM emissions from new 

sintering machines will be well 

controlled. We have no reason to believe 

that this limit is infeasible, impractical 

or inappropriate. Therefore, we chose 

this emissions limit as GACT for 

sintering machines at new and existing 

area sources. 

3. Selection of Proposed Compliance 

Requirements 

The title V permits of the two existing 

area source smelters include general 

recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements for the facility and 

detailed testing and monitoring 

requirements for PM emissions from the 

regulated emissions sources. We 

reviewed these requirements and 

concluded that they are sufficient to 

ensure proper operation and 

maintenance of baghouses and 

compliance with the proposed work 

practice standards for existing sources. 

For example, both plants monitor 

pressure drop to ensure baghouses are 

operating properly, and there is little 

benefit from retrofitting additional 

monitoring technology to these existing 

sources. 

We are proposing to require bag leak 

detection systems to monitor the 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 59317 

performance of baghouses at new area 

sources. These systems can be 

incorporated into the design and 

operation for new sources and would 

not require retrofitting or duplicative 

monitoring as would be the case if they 

were applied to existing sources. 

The part 63 General Provisions are 

necessary for effective application of the 

standard to existing sources and are 

therefore incorporated into the proposed 

rule. We would require that the plants 

comply with the initial notification 

requirements in 40 CFR 63.9. The initial 

notification requirements would be 

supplemented by other reporting 

requirements that include notification of 

any deviation and semiannual 

monitoring reports, along with 

recordkeeping requirements for 

baghouse maintenance, monitoring data, 

and other supporting information. 

Section 63.6(e)(3)(ix) of the General 

Provisions requires that the title V 

permit for a source include provisions 

for an SSM plan. Because permit 

information for the existing facilities do 

not identify requirements for an SSM 

plan, the proposed NESHAP require the 

owner or operator of an existing area 

source to comply with the SSM 

requirements in 40 CFR 63.6(e)(3). 

According to 40 CFR 63.6(e)(3), the 

permit may fulfill this requirement by 

citing the relevant paragraphs of 40 CFR 

63.6(e). Revisions made to the plan do 

not constitute permit revisions and the 

elements of the plan are not applicable 

requirements under 40 CFR 70.2 and 

71.2. 

The part 63 General Provisions are 

necessary for effective application of the 

standard for new area sources and are, 

therefore, incorporated into the 

proposed rule. For new area sources, we 

are proposing to apply the notification, 

testing, monitoring, operation and 

maintenance, recordkeeping, and 

reporting requirements in the part 63 

General Provisions. These requirements 

are sufficient to ensure compliance with 

the proposed emissions limit and work 

practice standards. 

E. What is primary beryllium production 

and what HAP are emitted? 

In the primary beryllium production 

process, the ores bertrandite and beryl 

are converted to a beryllium sulfate and 

processed into beryllium hydroxide at 

the mine site. A primary beryllium 

production facility processes the 

beryllium hydroxide to form metallic 

beryllium, beryllium alloy, and/or 

beryllium oxide. 

Primary beryllium production 

processes differ according to the end 

product (i.e., metallic beryllium, 

beryllium oxide, alloys). For metallic 

beryllium, the beryllium hydroxide is 

first dissolved in an ammonia-fluoride 

solution. The solution is neutralized, 

heated to remove aluminum, and 

filtered. The solution is then 

crystallized; using centrifugation and 

light washing, the crystals are 

continuously removed and remaining 

solution is sent to an evaporator. The 

crystals (ammonium fluoroberyllate) are 

charged into furnaces where they are 

decomposed to beryllium fluoride and 

ammonium fluoride. The ammonium 

fluoride is recycled to the process, and 

the molten beryllium fluoride is 

removed from the furnace and 

solidified; magnesium is added to 

facilitate reduction. The mixture is 

heated, causing beryllium to separate 

and float on top of the slag. Both the 

beryllium and slag are poured into a 

graphite pot to solidify. Afterwards, the 

product undergoes crushing and water 

leaching in a ball mill. The resulting 

beryllium pebbles contain 98 percent 

beryllium along with slag and unreacted 

magnesium. Impurities are removed by 

melting the pebbles in induction 

furnaces under vacuum. Excess 

magnesium and beryllium fluoride from 

the slag vaporize and are collected in 

filters. Nonvolatiles, such as beryllium 

oxide and magnesium fluoride, separate 

from the metal as dross by adhering to 

the bottom of the crucibles. The purified 

metal is then poured and cast into 

ingots. 

To make beryllium oxide, the 

beryllium hydroxide is dissolved in 

water and sulfuric acid, resulting in a 

beryllium sulfate solution. The solution 

is filtered, evaporated, and crystallized. 

The crystals are separated and the 

beryllium sulfate is calcined in furnaces 

to produce beryllium oxide. To make 

beryllium-copper master alloys, 

beryllium hydroxide, electrolytic 

copper, and carbon are melted in an 

electric arc furnace. The alloy is then 

melted and cast into ingots. The master 

alloy ingots are re-melted with 

additional copper and other elements to 

produce alloys with the desired metallic 

characteristics. 

The Toxics Release Inventory 

indicates that the metal HAP emitted 

from beryllium production processes 

include primarily beryllium with lower 

levels of the urban HAP nickel and lead. 

HAP metals are emitted from the high 

temperature furnaces that melt and 

process beryllium compounds and those 

that are used for producing beryllium 

alloys. These furnaces include fluoride 

decomposition furnaces that produce 

beryllium fluoride from crystals of 

ammonium fluoroberyllate, reduction 

furnaces that process beryllium fluoride 

to produce beryllium metal that is 

subsequently processed into pebbles, 

vacuum induction furnaces used to 

purify the beryllium pebbles, furnaces 

that calcine beryllium sulfate to produce 

beryllium oxide, and electric arc 

furnaces used to produce beryllium 

alloys such as beryllium-copper master 

alloys. Baghouses (some in combination 

with high efficiency particulate air 

filters) and scrubbers are used to control 

emissions of PM and HAP metals from 

these furnaces. 

F. What are the proposed requirements 

for primary beryllium production area 

sources? 

1. Applicability and Compliance Dates 

We are proposing to adopt as GACT 

for beryllium production area sources 

all of the requirements in the National 

Emission Standard for Beryllium at 40 

CFR part 61, subpart C. Because any 

existing area source would have already 

been operating in accordance with the 

part 61 standard, we are proposing that 

the owner or operator of an existing 

source comply with the area source 

NESHAP by [DATE OF PUBLICATION 

OF THE FINAL RULE IN THE Federal 

Register]. The owner or operator of a 

new area source would be required to 

comply by [DATE OF PUBLICATION 

OF THE FINAL RULE IN THE Federal 

Register] or at startup, whichever is 

later. 

2. Emissions Limits 

We are proposing to adopt the part 61, 

subpart C standard as the area source 

NESHAP for both new and existing 

primary beryllium production facilities. 

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. 

3. Compliance Requirements 

We are proposing to include in the 

proposed NESHAP the testing, 

monitoring, recordkeeping, and 

reporting requirements in 40 CFR part 

61, subpart C. The owner or operator 

would be required to conduct a 

performance test using EPA Method 103 

or 104 (40 CFR part 61, appendix B) to 

demonstrate initial compliance with the 

emissions limit. The proposed NESHAP 

would not allow any changes, which 

could potentially increase emissions 

above the level determined in the most 

recent performance test until a new 

emissions test has been estimated by 

calculation and reported to EPA. An 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
59318 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

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 EPAapproved plan. The owner or operator 

must comply with recordkeeping 

requirements in the proposed NESHAP 

and the testing, monitoring, 

recordkeeping, and reporting 

requirements in the part 61 General 

Provisions in 40 CFR part 61, subpart A. 

We are also proposing that the owner or 

operator comply with certain 

requirements in the part 63 General 

Provisions in 40 CFR part 63, subpart A, 

including the requirements for SSM 

plans and reports in 40 CFR 63.6(e)(3). 

We have explicitly identified in the 

proposed NESHAP the applicable 

General Provisions of both 40 CFR parts 

61 and 63. 

G. What is our rationale for selecting the 

proposed standards for primary 

beryllium area sources? 

1. Selection of Pollutants 

The major metal HAP reported by the 

only primary beryllium plant when it 

was operating its primary beryllium 

process was beryllium. Nickel and lead, 

which are urban HAP, were the only 

other metal HAP reported (at much 

smaller quantities than beryllium). Each 

of these metal HAP are components of 

PM, and the PM emission controls 

installed for beryllium control other 

metal HAP in the PM. Consequently, we 

chose to use beryllium as a surrogate for 

all of the HAP metal in the PM. The 

emissions limits for beryllium and the 

PM controls installed to meet the limits 

will ensure that all HAP metals in the 

PM from primary beryllium processes 

are well controlled. 

2. Selection of Proposed Standards 

Currently no primary beryllium 

production facilities operate in the U.S. 

In recent years, there has been only one 

U.S. producer, and this facility 

shutdown all primary beryllium 

operations in June 2000. This plant was 

a major source due to emissions of 

tetrachloroethylene. In the event this 

plant restarted the primary beryllium 

production operation, the plant would 

probably continue to be a major source 

rather than an area source due to 

emissions of tetrachloroethylene. 

Although all area source primary 

beryllium production facilities that 

previously existed have ceased to 

operate, we do not have information 

that would suggest that beryllium 

production cannot be restarted at these 

facilities. Therefore, we see a need to 

establish standards for existing sources 

in the proposed rule to regulate any 

previously existing source that may 

restart its beryllium production. 

Similarly, we do not have any 

information that would suggest that 

there are unlikely to be any new area 

source production facilities. Therefore, 

we also need to establish standards for 

new sources. 

We are proposing to adopt the part 61, 

subpart C standard as the NESHAP for 

the primary beryllium production area 

source category. The part 61, subpart C 

standard, which applies to new and 

existing major and area sources, is a 

stringent and effective air emissions 

regulation. As a result of the part 61, 

subpart C standard, the last primary 

beryllium production facility in the U.S. 

was highly effective in controlling 

beryllium, PM, and metal HAP 

emissions. As shown in this facility, to 

meet the part 61, subpart C standard, 

beryllium processing operations were 

controlled using multiple air cleaning 

systems that were also highly effective 

in controlling emissions of PM and HAP 

metals. For example, beryllium oxide 

furnaces were controlled by baghouses, 

packed tower scrubbers and demisters; 

alloy induction furnaces were 

controlled by baghouses and cartridge 

filters; reduction furnaces were 

controlled by wet cyclones and venturi 

scrubbers; and vacuum casting was 

controlled by cyclones, baghouses, and 

cartridge filters. The highly effective 

control of beryllium, PM, and metal 

HAP emissions at this last facility 

indicates that the part 61, subpart C 

emissions limits are effective as well as 

feasible. Although that facility was a 

major source, we have no reason to 

believe that such control is not 

appropriate for an area source. The fact 

that the part 61, subpart C standard 

already applies to both major and area 

sources suggest that they are appropriate 

for area sources as well. Therefore, we 

have determined that the emissions 

limits in the part 61, subpart C standard 

represents GACT for new and existing 

beryllium production area sources. 

3. Selection of Proposed Compliance 

Requirements 

We have reviewed the performance 

test and monitoring requirements in the 

part 61, subpart C standard and 

reconfirmed their adequacy and 

propriety for ensuring compliance with 

the proposed emission limits. Therefore, 

we are including the part 61, subpart C 

performance test and monitoring 

requirements in the proposed rule. 

The General Provisions applicable to 

the subpart C standard (40 CFR part 61, 

subpart A), are necessary for effective 

application of the subpart C standard 

and are therefore incorporated into the 

proposed rule as well. We are also 

incorporating certain provisions in the 

General Provisions of part 63, subpart A 

to address aspects of the proposed rule 

not covered by the part 61 General 

Provisions. Specifically, we need to 

incorporate certain provisions in 40 CFR 

63.1 and 63.5 that delineate 

applicability, construction, and 

reconstruction. However, we are not 

applying provisions within 40 CFR 63.1 

and 63.5 that are already covered by 

part 61 General Provisions. We are 

proposing to apply the provisions in 40 

CFR 63.1(a) except for the provisions in 

40 CFR 63.1(a)(11) and (12) regarding 

notices, time periods, and postmarks; 40 

CFR 63.1(b) except paragraph (b)(3); 40 

CFR 63.1(c); 40 CFR 63.1(e); and 40 CFR 

63.5 except for the references to 40 CFR 

63.6 for compliance procedures and the 

references to 40 CFR 63.9 for 

notification procedures. 

Because the part 61 General 

Provisions do not include requirements 

for SSM plans and reports, we are also 

proposing to require the owner or 

operator of a new or existing area source 

to comply with the requirements in 40 

CFR 63.6(e)(3). According to 40 CFR 

63.6(e)(3), the permit may fulfill this 

requirement by citing the relevant 

paragraphs of 40 CFR 63.6(e). Revisions 

made to the plan do not constitute 

permit revisions and the elements of the 

plan are not applicable requirements 

under 40 CFR 70.2 and 71.2. 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), this action is a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ because 

it may raise novel legal or policy issues. 

Accordingly, EPA submitted this action 

to OMB for review under Executive 

Order 12866, and any changes made in 

response to OMB recommendations 

have been documented in the docket for 

this action. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The proposed NESHAP for Polyvinyl 

and Copolymers Production Area 

Sources do not impose any new 

information collection burden. New and 

existing plants that are area sources 

would be 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 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 59319 

NESHAP General Provisions (40 CFR 

part 61, subpart A), which are 

incorporated into the proposed 

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 and 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 

auby.susan@epa.gov, or by calling (202) 

566–1672. 

Burden means the total time, effort, or 

financial resources expended by persons 

to generate, maintain, retain, 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. 

The proposed requirements for 

primary beryllium production facilities 

in the proposed NESHAP for Primary 

Nonferrous Metals Area Sources do not 

impose any new information collection 

burden. New and existing plants that are 

area sources would be 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 proposed NESHAP for these sources. 

The OMB has previously approved 

these 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 

Vinyl Chloride and 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 

auby.susan@epa.gov, or by calling (202) 

566–1672. 

Burden means the total time, effort, or 

financial resources expended by persons 

to generate, maintain, retain, 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. 

The information requirements in the 

proposed 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 ICR document prepared 

by EPA has been assigned EPA ICR 

number 2240.01. 

The proposed information collection 

requirements 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 proposed 

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 would be 

required to comply under the proposed 

NESHAP are the same as the 

requirements that are in these facilities’

current title V operating permits. The 

only new information collection 

requirements that would apply to these 

area sources would consist of initial 

notifications and SSM plan, reporting, 

and recordkeeping requirements. Any 

new primary zinc production facility, 

primary copper smelter, or secondary 

copper smelter area source would be 

subject to all information collection 

requirements in the part 63 General 

Provisions. 

The annual burden for this 

information collection averaged over the 

first 3 years of this ICR is estimated to 

total 9 labor hours per year at a cost of 

$771 for the one existing primary 

copper smelting area source and 18.5 

labor hours per year at a cost of $1,566 

for the two existing primary zinc 

smelting area sources. No capital/ 

startup costs or operation and 

maintenance costs are associated with 

the proposed requirements. 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. 

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. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
59320 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

An agency may not conduct or 

sponsor, and a person is not required to 

respond to, a collection of information 

unless it displays a currently valid OMB 

control number. The OMB control 

numbers for EPA’s regulations in 40 

CFR part 63 are listed in 40 CFR part 9. 

To comment on the Agency’s need for 

this information, the accuracy of the 

provided burden estimates, and any 

suggested methods for minimizing 

respondent burden, including the use of 

automated collection techniques, EPA 

has established a public docket for this 

action, which includes this ICR, under 

Docket ID number EPA-HQ-OAR–2006–

0510. Submit any comments related to 

the ICR for the proposed rules to EPA 

and OMB. See ADDRESSES section at the 

beginning of this notice for where to 

submit comments to EPA. Send 

comments to OMB at the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

Office of Management and Budget, 725 

17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503, 

Attention: Desk Officer for EPA. Since 

OMB is required to make a decision 

concerning the ICR between 30 and 60 

days after October 6, 2006, a comment 

to OMB is best assured of having its full 

effect if OMB receives it by November 

6, 2006. The final rule will respond to 

any OMB or public comments on the 

information collection requirements 

contained in this proposal. 

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 proposed 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 found 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-forprofit enterprise which is independently 

owned and operated and is not 

dominant in its field. 

After considering the economic 

impacts of the proposed rules on small 

entities, I certify that this action will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

There would not be adverse impacts on 

existing area sources of PVC and 

copolymer production facilities, 

primary copper smelters, and nonferrous metal production facilities 

because the proposed rules do not create 

any new requirements or burdens other 

than minimal notification requirements 

for existing sources. There would be no 

adverse impacts on existing secondary 

copper area sources because there are no 

existing sources in the category. 

Although the proposed 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. 

We continue to be interested in the 

potential impacts of the proposed action 

on small entities and welcome 

comments on issues related to such 

impacts. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 

Law 104–4, establishes requirements for 

Federal agencies to assess the effects of 

their regulatory actions on State, local, 

and tribal governments and the private 

sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, 

EPA generally must prepare a written 

statement, including a cost-benefit 

analysis, for proposed and final rules 

with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may 

result in expenditures by State, local, 

and tribal governments, in the aggregate, 

or to the private sector, of $100 million 

or more in any 1 year. Before 

promulgating an EPA rule for which a 

written statement is needed, section 205 

of the UMRA generally requires EPA to 

identify and consider a reasonable 

number of regulatory alternatives and 

adopt the least costly, most costeffective, or least burdensome 

alternative that achieves the objectives 

of the rule. The provisions of section 

205 do not apply when they are 

inconsistent with applicable law. 

Moreover, section 205 allows EPA to 

adopt an alternative other than the least 

costly, most cost-effective, or least 

burdensome alternative if the 

Administrator publishes with the final 

rule an explanation why that alternative 

was not adopted. Before EPA establishes 

any regulatory requirements that may 

significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments, including tribal 

governments, it must have developed 

under section 203 of the UMRA a small 

government agency plan. The plan must 

provide for notifying potentially 

affected small governments, enabling 

officials of affected small governments 

to have meaningful and timely input in 

the development of EPA regulatory 

proposals with significant Federal 

intergovernmental mandates, and 

informing, educating, and advising 

small governments on compliance with 

the regulatory requirements. 

EPA has determined that the 

proposed rules do not contain a Federal 

mandate that may result in expenditures 

of $100 million or more for State, local, 

and tribal governments, in the aggregate, 

or the private sector in any one year. As 

discussed earlier in this preamble, the 

estimated expenditures for the private 

sector in any 1 year are less than $2,500. 

Thus, the proposed rules are not subject 

to the requirements of sections 202 and 

205 of the UMRA. In addition, the 

proposed rules do not significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments. The 

proposed rules contain no requirements 

that apply to such governments, impose 

no obligations upon them, and would 

not result in expenditures by them of 

$100 million or more in any one year or 

any disproportionate impacts on them. 

Therefore, the proposed rules are not 

subject to section 203 of the UMRA. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999) requires EPA to 

develop an accountable process to 

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.’’

The proposed rules do not have 

federalism implications. They would 

not have substantial direct effects on the 

States, on the relationship between the 

national government and the States, or 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132. The proposed 

rules impose requirements on owners 

and operators of specified area sources 

and not State and local governments. 

Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not 

apply to the proposed rules. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 59321 

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.’’ The proposed rules do 

not have tribal implications, as specified 

in Executive Order 13175. They would 

not have substantial direct effects on 

tribal governments, on the relationship 

between the Federal government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal government and Indian tribes, 

as specified in Executive Order 13175. 

The proposed rules impose 

requirements on owners and operators 

of specified area sources and not tribal 

governments. Thus, Executive Order 

13175 does not apply to the proposed 

rules. 

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. The proposed 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 

The proposed 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 proposed 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 would 

consume energy are required by the 

proposed rules. 

I. National Technology Transfer 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act (NTTAA) of 1995 (Pub. L. No. 104–

113, section 12(d), 15 U.S.C. 272 note) 

directs EPA to use voluntary consensus 

standards (VCS) in its regulatory 

activities, unless to do so would be 

inconsistent with applicable law or 

otherwise impractical. The VCS are 

technical standards (e.g., materials 

specifications, test methods, sampling 

procedures, and business practices) that 

are developed or adopted by VCS 

bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to 

provide Congress, through OMB, 

explanations when the Agency does not 

use available and applicable VCS. 

The proposed rules involve 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 Specification (PS) 1 and 11 

in 40 CFR part 60, appendix B. 

Consistent with the NTTAA, EPA 

conducted searches to identify 

voluntary consensus standards in 

addition to these EPA methods. No 

applicable VCS were identified for EPA 

Methods 1A, 2A, 2D, 2F, 2G, 5D or 9. 

The search and review results are in the 

docket for this rule. 

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,’’

(incorporated by reference-see 40 CFR 

63.14) is cited in this rule 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 PS–1 

(promulgated in March 1983). As a 

result, EPA incorporated ASTM D6216–

98 by reference into PS–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 this proposed rule were impractical 

alternatives to EPA test methods. 

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 this 

proposed rule. 

For the methods required or 

referenced by the proposed rules, a 

source may apply to EPA for permission 

to use alternative test methods or 

alternative monitoring requirements in 

place of any required testing methods, 

performance specifications, or 

procedures under § 63.7(f) and § 63.8(f) 

of subpart A of the General Provisions. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Hazardous 

substances, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: September 27, 2006. 

Stephen L. Johnson, 

Administrator. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 63 of 

the Code of Federal Regulations is 

proposed to be amended as follows: 

PART 63—[AMENDED] 

1. The authority citation for part 63 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart A—[AMENDED] 

2. Section 63.14 is amended by 

revising paragraph (i)(1) to read as 

follows: 

§ 63.14 Incorporations by reference. 

* * * * * 

(i) * * * 

(1) ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10–1981, 

‘‘Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses [Part 

10, Instruments and Apparatus],’’ IBR 

approved for §§ 63.309(k)(1)(iii), 

63.865(b), 63.3166(a)(3), 

63.3360(e)(1)(iii), 63.3545(a)(3), 

63.3555(a)(3), 63.4166(a)(3), 

63.4362(a)(3), 63.4766(a)(3), 

63.4965(a)(3), 63.5160(d)(1)(iii), 

63.9307(c)(2), 63.9323(a)(3), 

63.11155(e)(3), 11162(f)(3)(iii) and (f)(4), 

11163(g)(1)(iii) and (g)(2), and Table 5 of 

subpart DDDDD of this part. 

* * * * * 

3. Part 63 is amended by adding 

subpart DDDDDD to read as follows: 

Subpart DDDDDD—National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

for Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers 

Production Area Sources 

Sec. 

Applicability and Compliance Dates 

63.11140 Am I subject to this subpart? 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
59322 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

63.11141 What are my compliance dates? 

Standards and Compliance Requirements 

63.11142 What are the standards and 

compliance requirements for new and 

existing sources? 

Other Requirements and Information 

63.11143 What General Provisions apply to 

this subpart? 

63.11144 What definitions apply to this 

subpart? 

63.11145 Who implements and enforces 

this subpart? 

Applicability and Compliance Dates 

§ 63.11140 Am I subject to this subpart? 

(a) You are subject to this subpart if 

you own or operate a plant specified in 

40 CFR 61.61(c) that produces polyvinyl 

chloride (PVC) or copolymers and is an 

area source of hazardous air pollutant 

(HAP) emissions. Your plant is an area 

source if it does not emit and does not 

have the potential to emit either 10 tons 

per year (tpy) or more of any single HAP 

or 25 tpy or more of any combination of 

HAP. 

(b) This subpart applies to each new 

or existing affected source. The affected 

source is the collection of all equipment 

and activities in vinyl chloride service 

necessary to produce PVC and 

copolymers. An affected source does not 

include portions of your PVC and 

copolymers production operations that 

meet the criteria in 40 CFR 61.60(b) or 

(c). 

(1) An affected source is existing if 

you commenced construction or 

reconstruction of the affected source 

before October 6, 2006. 

(2) An affected source is new if you 

commenced construction or 

reconstruction of the affected source on 

or after October 6, 2006. 

(c) This subpart does not apply to 

research and development facilities, as 

defined in section 112(c)(7) of the Clean 

Air Act (CAA). 

(d) You are exempt from the 

obligation to obtain a permit under 40 

CFR part 70 or 40 CFR part 71, provided 

you are not otherwise required by law 

to obtain a permit under 40 CFR 70.3(a) 

or 40 CFR 71.3(a). Notwithstanding the 

previous sentence, you must continue to 

comply with the provisions of this 

subpart. 

§ 63.11141 What are my compliance 

dates? 

(a) If you own or operate an existing 

affected source, you must achieve 

compliance with the applicable 

provisions in this subpart by [DATE OF 

PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN 

THE Federal Register]. 

(b) If you own or operate a new 

affected source, you must achieve 

compliance with the applicable 

provisions in this subpart by the dates 

in paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this 

section. 

(1) If you startup a new affected 

source on or before [DATE OF 

PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN 

THE Federal Register], you must 

achieve compliance with the applicable 

provisions in this subpart not later than 

[DATE OF PUBLICATION OF FINAL 

RULE IN THE Federal Register]. 

(2) If you startup a new affected 

source after [DATE OF PUBLICATION 

OF FINAL RULE IN THE Federal 

Register], you must achieve compliance 

with the provisions in this subpart upon 

startup of your affected source. 

Standards and Compliance 

Requirements 

§ 63.11142 What are the standards and 

compliance requirements for new and 

existing sources? 

You must meet all the requirements in 

40 CFR part 61, subpart F, except for 40 

CFR 61.62 and 40 CFR 61.63. 

Other Requirements and Information 

§ 63.11143 What General Provisions apply 

to this subpart? 

(a) All the provisions in 40 CFR part 

61, subpart A, apply to this subpart. 

(b) The provisions in 40 CFR part 63, 

subpart A, applicable to this subpart are 

specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through 

(4) of this section. 

(1) Section 63.1(a)(1) through (10). 

(2) Section 63.1(b) except paragraph 

(b)(3), § 63.1(c), and (e). 

(3) Section 63.5 (preconstruction 

review and notification requirements) 

except for the references to § 63.6 

(compliance with standards and 

maintenance requirements) procedures 

and the references to § 63.9 (notification 

requirements). 

(4) Section 63.6(e)(3) except for 

§ 63.6(e)(3)(ix). 

§ 63.11144 What definitions apply to this 

subpart? 

The terms used in this subpart are 

defined in the CAA; 40 CFR 61.02; 40 

CFR 61.61; and § 63.2 for terms used in 

the applicable provisions of part 63, 

subpart A, as specified in § 63.11143(b). 

§ 63.11145 Who implements and enforces 

this subpart? 

(a) This subpart can be implemented 

and enforced by the U.S. EPA or a 

delegated authority such as a State, 

local, or tribal agency. If the U.S. EPA 

Administrator has delegated authority to 

a State, local, or tribal agency, then that 

Agency has the authority to implement 

and enforce this subpart. You should 

contact your U.S. EPA Regional Office 

to find out if this subpart is delegated 

to a State, local, or tribal agency within 

your State. 

(b) In delegating implementation and 

enforcement authority of this subpart to 

a State, local, or tribal agency under 40 

CFR part 63, subpart E, the approval 

authorities contained in paragraphs 

(b)(1) through (4) of this section are 

retained by the Administrator of the 

U.S. EPA and are not transferred to the 

State, local, or tribal agency. 

(1) Approval of an alternative means 

of emission limitation under 40 CFR 

61.12(d). 

(2) Approval of a major change to test 

methods under 40 CFR 61.13(h). A 

‘‘major change to test method’’ is 

defined in § 63.90. 

(3) Approval of a major change to 

monitoring under 40 CFR 61.14(g). A 

‘‘major change to monitoring’’ is defined 

in § 63.90. 

(4) Approval of a major change to 

recordkeeping/reporting under 40 CFR 

61.10. A ‘‘major change to 

recordkeeping/reporting’’ is defined in 

§ 63.90. 

4. Part 63 is amended by adding 

subpart EEEEEE to read as follows: 

Subpart EEEEEE—National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

for Primary Copper Smelting Area 

Sources 

Sec. 

Applicability and Compliance Dates 

63.11146 Am I subject to this subpart? 

63.11147 What are my compliance dates? 

Standards and Compliance Requirements 

63.11148 What are the standards and 

compliance requirements for existing 

sources? 

63.11149 What are the standards and 

compliance requirements for new 

sources? 

Other Requirements and Information 

63.11150 What General Provisions apply to 

this subpart? 

63.11151 What definitions apply to this 

subpart? 

63.11152 Who implements and enforces 

this subpart? 

Tables to Subpart EEEEEE of Part 63 

Table 1 to Subpart EEEEEE of Part 63—

Applicability of General Provisions to 

Subpart EEEEEE 

Applicability and Compliance Dates 

§ 63.11146 Am I subject to this subpart? 

(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. Your primary copper smelter 

is an area source if it does not emit and 

does not have the potential to emit 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 59323 

either 10 tons per year (tpy) or more of 

any single HAP or 25 tpy or more of any 

combination of HAP. 

(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. 

§ 63.11147 What are my compliance 

dates? 

(a) If you own or operate an existing 

affected source, you must achieve 

compliance with the applicable 

provisions of this subpart by [DATE OF 

PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN 

THE Federal Register]. 

(b) 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 (b)(1) and (2) of this 

section. 

(1) If you startup a new affected 

source on or before [DATE OF 

PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN 

THE Federal Register], you must 

achieve compliance with the applicable 

provisions of this subpart not later than 

[DATE OF PUBLICATION OF FINAL 

RULE IN THE Federal Register]. 

(2) If you startup a new affected 

source after [DATE OF PUBLICATION 

OF FINAL RULE IN THE Federal 

Register], you must achieve compliance 

with the applicable provisions of this 

subpart upon startup of your affected 

source. 

Standards and Compliance 

Requirements 

§ 63.11148 What are the standards and 

compliance requirements for existing 

sources? 

(a) 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 and casting 

department that contain total particulate 

matter (PM) in excess of 89.5 pounds 

per hour (24-hour average). 

(b) For each smelting vessel and 

converting vessel at your primary 

copper smelter, you must operate a 

secondary gas system that collects the 

gases and fumes released during the 

molten material transfer operations and 

conveys the collected gas stream to a 

control device. 

(c) For operations in the anode 

refining and casting department at your 

primary copper smelter, you must meet 

the requirements in paragraphs (c)(1) 

and (2) of this section. 

(1) For each vessel used to refine 

blister copper, remelt anode copper or 

anode scrap, or hold molten anode 

copper, you must collect the gases and 

fumes vented from the vessel and 

convey the collected gas stream to a 

control device. 

(2) For each anode casting wheel, you 

must collect gases and fumes vented 

when casting molten anode copper and 

convey the collected gas stream to a 

control device. 

(d) You must operate a continuous 

emissions monitoring system (CEMS) to 

measure and record PM concentrations 

and gas stream flow rates for the exhaust 

gases discharged to the atmosphere from 

each emissions source subject to the 

emissions limit in paragraph (a) of this 

section. A single PM CEMS may be used 

for the combined exhaust gas streams at 

a point before the gases are discharged 

to the atmosphere. Measured results 

must be expressed as pounds of PM 

emitted per hour calculated at the end 

of each calendar day for the preceding 

24-hour period. Collected PM CEMS 

data must be made available for 

inspection on a daily basis. 

(e) You must demonstrate initial 

compliance with the PM emissions limit 

in paragraph (a) of this section based on 

the results of a 24-hour average from the 

PM CEMS. You may certify initial 

compliance with the PM emissions limit 

based on the results of sampling 

conducted during the previous month. 

(f) You must submit to the permitting 

authority by the 20th day of each month 

a summary of the 24-hour averages for 

the previous month. 

(g) You must submit written 

notification to the permitting authority 

of any deviation from the requirements 

of this subpart, including those 

attributable to upset conditions, 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. 

(h) 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. 

(i) 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 the following information, 

where applicable: 

(1) 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) Records of activities performed to 

assure proper operation and 

maintenance of air emissions control 

systems and monitoring systems or 

devices. 

§ 63.11149 What are the standards and 

compliance requirements for new sources? 

(a) You must not discharge to the 

atmosphere through any combination of 

stacks or other vents process exhaust 

gases from the copper concentrate 

dryers, smelting vessels, converting 

vessels, matte drying and grinding 

plants, secondary gas systems, and 

anode refining and casting department 

that contain total PM in excess of 0.6 

pound per ton of copper concentrate 

feed charged to the smelting vessel (24- 

hour average). 

(b) For each smelting vessel and 

converting vessel at your primary 

copper smelter, you must operate a 

secondary gas system that collects the 

gases and fumes released during molten 

material transfer operations and convey 

the collected gas stream to a control 

device. 

(c) For operations in the anode 

refining and casting department at your 

primary copper smelter, you must meet 

the requirements in paragraphs (c)(1) 

and (2) of this section. 

(1) For each vessel used to refine 

blister copper, remelt anode copper or 

anode scrap, or hold molten anode 

copper, you must collect the gases and 

fumes vented from the vessel and 

convey the collected gas stream to a 

control device. 

(2) For each anode casting wheel, you 

must collect gases and fumes vented 

when casting molten anode copper and 

convey the collected gas stream to a 

control device. 

(d) You must install, operate, and 

maintain a PM CEMS to measure and 

record PM concentrations and gas 

stream flow rates for the exhaust gases 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
59324 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

discharged to the atmosphere from each 

emissions source subject to the 

emissions limit in paragraph (a) of this 

section. You must also install, operate, 

and maintain a weight measurement 

system to measure and record the 

weight of the copper concentrate feed 

charged to the smelting furnace on a 

daily basis. A single PM CEMS may be 

used for the combined exhaust gas 

streams at a point before the gases are 

discharged to the atmosphere. For each 

PM CEMS used to comply with this 

paragraph, you must meet the 

requirements specified in paragraphs 

(d)(1) through (3) of this section. 

(1) You must install, certify, operate, 

and maintain the PM CEMS according 

to the applicable specification and 

testing requirements of EPA 

Performance Specification 11 in 40 CFR 

part 60, appendix B, and the quality 

assurance requirements of Procedure 2 

in 40 CFR part 60, appendix F. 

(2) You must conduct an initial 

performance evaluation of the PM 

CEMS according to the requirements of 

Performance Specification 11 in 40 CFR 

part 60, appendix B. Thereafter, you 

must perform the performance 

evaluations as required by Procedure 2 

in 40 CFR part 60, appendix F. 

(3) You must perform quarterly 

accuracy determinations and daily 

calibration drift tests for the PM CEMS 

according to Procedure 2 in 40 CFR part 

60, appendix F. 

(e) To demonstrate compliance with 

the PM emissions limit in paragraph (a) 

of this section, you must continuously 

monitor and record 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. 

The daily average must be calculated at 

the end of each calendar day for the 

preceding 24-hour period. You must 

maintain records of the calculations of 

daily averages with supporting 

information and data, including 

measurements of the weight of copper 

concentrate feed charged to the smelting 

vessel. Collected PM CEMS data must 

be made available for inspection on a 

daily basis. 

(f) You must demonstrate initial 

compliance with the emissions limit in 

paragraph (a) of this section using the 

procedures in paragraph (e) of this 

section. You must complete this initial 

compliance demonstration within 180 

days after startup and report the results 

in your notification of compliance status 

no later than 30 days after the end of the 

compliance demonstration. 

(g) You must submit to the permitting 

authority by the 20th day of each month 

a summary of the daily average PM per 

ton of copper concentrate feed charged 

to the smelting vessel for the previous 

month. 

Other Requirements and Information 

63.11150 What General Provisions apply 

to this subpart? 

(a) If you own or operate an existing 

or new affected source, you must 

comply with the requirements of the 

General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, 

subpart A) as specified in Table 1 to this 

subpart and paragraphs (a)(1) through 

(4) of this section. 

(1) If you own or operate an existing 

affected source and you certify initial 

compliance with the PM emissions limit 

in § 63.11148(a) based on monitoring 

data from the previous month, your 

notification of compliance status 

required by § 63.9(h) must include this 

certification of compliance, signed by a 

responsible official: ‘‘This facility 

complies with the PM emissions limit in 

§ 63.11148(a) based on monitoring data 

that were collected during the previous 

month.’’

(2) If you conduct a new performance 

test to demonstrate initial compliance 

with the PM emissions limit in 

§ 63.11148(a), your notification of 

compliance status required by § 63.9(h) 

must include the results of the 

performance test, including required 

monitoring data. 

(3) Your notification of compliance 

status required by § 63.9(h) must 

include this certification of compliance, 

signed by a responsible official, for the 

work practice standard in § 63.11148(b): 

‘‘This facility complies with the 

requirement to operate a secondary gas 

system for each smelting vessel and 

converting vessel in accordance with 

§ 63.11148(b).’’

(4) Your notification of compliance 

status required by § 63.9(h) must 

include this certification of compliance, 

signed by a responsible official, for the 

work practice standard in § 63.11148(c): 

‘‘This facility complies with the 

requirement to capture gases from 

operations in the anode refining and 

casting department and duct them to a 

control device in accordance with 

§ 63.11148(c).’’

(b) If you own or operate a new 

affected source, you must comply with 

the requirements of the General 

Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A) 

as specified in Table 1 to this subpart 

and paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) of this 

section. 

(1) Your notification of compliance 

status required by § 63.9(h) must 

include the results of the initial 

performance test and monitoring data 

collected during the test that 

demonstrate compliance with the 

emissions limit in § 63.11149(a). 

(2) Your notification of compliance 

status required by § 63.9(h) must 

include this certification of compliance, 

signed by a responsible official, for the 

work practice standard in § 63.11149(b): 

‘‘This facility complies with the 

requirement to operate a secondary gas 

system for each smelting vessel and 

converting vessel in accordance with 

§ 63.11149(b).’’

(3) Your notification of compliance 

status required by § 63.9(h) must 

include this certification of compliance, 

signed by a responsible official, for the 

work practice standard in § 63.11149(c): 

‘‘This facility complies with the 

requirement to capture gases from 

operations in the anode refining and 

casting department and duct them to a 

control device in accordance with 

§ 63.11149(c).’’

§ 63.11151 What definitions apply to this 

subpart? 

Terms used in this subpart are 

defined in the CAA, in 40 CFR 63.2, and 

in this section as follows: 

Anode refining and casting 

department means the area at a primary 

copper smelter in which anode copper 

refining and casting operations are 

performed. Emissions sources in the 

anode refining and casting department 

include anode refining furnaces, anode 

shaft furnaces, anode holding furnaces, 

and anode casting wheels. 

Capture system means the collection 

of components used to capture gases 

and fumes released from one or more 

emissions points and then convey the 

captured gas stream to a control device. 

A capture system may include, but is 

not limited to, the following 

components as applicable to a given 

capture system design: Duct intake 

devices, hoods, enclosures, ductwork, 

dampers, manifolds, plenums, and fans. 

Control device means air pollution 

control equipment used to remove PM 

from a gas stream. 

Converting vessel means a furnace, 

reactor, or other type of vessel in which 

copper matte is oxidized to form blister 

copper. 

Copper concentrate means copper ore 

that has been beneficiated or treated to 

remove waste and increase the copper 

content of the treated material. 

Copper concentrate dryer means a 

vessel in which copper concentrates are 

heated in the presence of air to reduce 

the moisture content of the material. 

Supplemental copper-bearing feed 

materials and fluxes may be added or 

mixed with the copper concentrates fed 

to a copper concentrate dryer. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 59325 

Copper concentrate feed means the 

mixture of copper concentrate, 

secondary copper-bearing materials, 

recycled slags and dusts, fluxes, and 

other materials blended together for 

feeding to the smelting vessel. 

Copper matte means a material 

predominately composed of copper and 

iron sulfides produced by smelting 

copper ore concentrates. 

Deviation means any instance in 

which an affected source subject to this 

subpart, or an owner or operator of such 

a source: 

(1) Fails to meet any requirement or 

obligation established by this subpart, 

including but not limited to any 

emissions limitation or work practice 

standard; 

(2) Fails to meet any term or condition 

that is adopted to implement an 

applicable requirement in this subpart 

and that is included in the operating 

permit for any affected source required 

to obtain such a permit; or 

(3) Fails to meet any emissions 

limitation or work practice standard in 

this subpart during startup, shutdown, 

or malfunction, regardless of whether or 

not such failure is permitted by this 

subpart. 

Matte drying and grinding plant 

means the area at a primary copper 

smelter in which wet granulated matte 

copper is ground in a mill, dried by 

blowing heated air through the mill, and 

then separated from the drying air 

stream using a control device such as a 

baghouse. 

Primary copper smelter means any 

installation or any intermediate process 

engaged in the production of copper 

from copper sulfide ore concentrates 

through the use of pyrometallurgical 

techniques. 

Responsible official means 

responsible official as defined at 40 CFR 

70.2. 

Secondary gas system means a 

capture system that collects the gases 

and fumes released when removing and 

transferring molten materials from 

smelting vessels and converting vessels 

using tapping ports, launders, and other 

openings in the vessels. Examples of 

molten material include, but are not 

limited to: copper matte, slag, and 

blister copper. 

Smelting vessel means a furnace, 

reactor, or other type of vessel in which 

copper ore concentrate and fluxes are 

melted to form a molten mass of 

material containing copper matte and 

slag. Other copper-bearing materials 

may also be charged to the smelting 

vessel. 

Work practice standard means any 

design, equipment, work practice, or 

operational standard, or combination 

thereof. 

§ 63.11152 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 authorities 

contained in paragraph (c) of this 

section are retained by the 

Administrator of the U.S. EPA and are 

not transferred to the State, local, or 

tribal agency. 

(c) The authorities that will not be 

delegated to State, local, or tribal 

agencies are listed in paragraphs (c)(1) 

through (4) of this section. 

(1) Approval of an alternative nonopacity emission standard under 

§ 63.6(g). 

(2) Approval of a major change to a 

test method under § 63.7(e)(2)(ii) and (f). 

A ‘‘major change to test method’’ is 

defined in § 63.90. 

(3) Approval of a major change to 

monitoring under § 63.8(f). A ‘‘major 

change to monitoring’’ is defined in 

§ 63.90. 

(4) Approval of a major change to 

recordkeeping/ reporting under 

§ 63.10(f). A ‘‘major change to 

recordkeeping/reporting’’ is defined in 

§ 63.90. 

Tables to Subpart EEEEEE of Part 63 

As required in § 63.11150(a) and (b), 

you must comply with the requirements 

of the NESHAP General Provisions (40 

CFR part 63, subpart A) as shown in the 

following table. 

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART EEEEEE OF PART 63.—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS TO SUBPART EEEEEE 

Citation Subject 

Applies to 

Subpart 

EEEEEE? 

Explanation 

63.1(a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(3), (a)(4), (a)(6), 

(a)(10)–(a)(12) (b)(1), (b)(3), (c)(1), 

(c)(2), (c)(5), (e).

Applicability ............................................... Yes.

63.1(a)(5), (a)(7)–(a)(9), (b)(2), (c)(3), 

(c)(4), (d).

Reserved ................................................... No.

63.2 ............................................................ Definitions .................................................. Yes.

63.3 ............................................................ Units and Abbreviations ............................ Yes.

63.4 ............................................................ Prohibited Activities and Circumvention ... Yes.

63.5 ............................................................ Preconstruction Review and Notification 

Requirements.

No.

63.6(a), (b)(1)–(b)(5), (b)(7), (c)(1), (c)(2), 

(c)(5), (e)(1), (e)(3)(i), (e)(3)(iii)– 

(e)(3)(ix), (f), (g), (i), (j).

Compliance with Standards and Maintenance Requirements.Yes.

63.6(b)(6), (c)(3), (c)(4), (d), (e)(2), 

(e)(3)(ii), (h)(3), (h)(5)(iv).

Reserved ................................................... No.

63.6(h)(1)–(h)(4), (h)(5)(i)–(h)(5)(iii), 

(h)(6)–(h)(9).

No ............ Subpart EEEEEE does not include opacity or visible emissions standards. 

63.7(a), (e), (f), (g), (h) .............................. Performance Testing Requirements ......... Yes.

63.7(b), (c) ................................................. Yes/No ..... Notification of performance tests and 

quality assurance program apply to 

new sources but not existing sources. 

63.8(a)(1), (a)(2), (b), (c), (f), (g) ............... Monitoring Requirements .......................... Yes.

63.8(a)(3) ................................................... Reserved ................................................... No.

63.8(a)(4) ................................................... No ............ Subpart EEEEEE does not require flares. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
59326 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART EEEEEE OF PART 63.—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS TO SUBPART EEEEEE—

Continued 

Citation Subject 

Applies to 

Subpart 

EEEEEE? 

Explanation 

63.8(d), (e) ................................................. Yes/No ..... Requirements for quality control program 

and performance evaluations apply to 

new sources but not existing sources. 

63.9(a), (b)(1), (b)(2), (b)(5), (c), (d), 

(h)(1)–(h)(3), (h)(5), (h)(6), (i), (j).

Notification Requirements ......................... Yes.

63.9(b)(3), (h)(4) ........................................ Reserved ................................................... No.

63.9(b)(4), (f) .............................................. No.

63.9(e), (g) ................................................. Yes/No ..... Requirement for notification of performance test and for use of continuous 

monitoring systems apply to new 

sources but not existing sources. 

63.10(a), (b)(1), (d)(1), (d)(2), (d)(4), 

(d)(5), (f).

Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements.Yes.

63.10(b)(2), (b)(3), (c)(1) (c)(5)–(c)(8), 

(c)(10)–(c)(15), (e)(1), (e)(2).

Yes/No ..... Recordkeeping and reporting requirements apply to new sources but not existing sources. 

63.10(c)(2)–(c)(4), (c)(9) ............................ Reserved ................................................... No.

63.10(d)(3), (e)(4) ...................................... No ............ Subpart EEEEE does not contain opacity 

or visible emissions standards. 

63.10(e)(3) ................................................. Yes/No ..... Reporting requirements apply to new 

sources but not existing sources. 

63.11 .......................................................... Control Device Requirements ................... No ............ Subpart EEEEEE does not require flares. 

63.12 .......................................................... State Authorities and Delegations ............ Yes.

63.13 .......................................................... Addresses ................................................. Yes.

63.14 .......................................................... Incorporations by Reference ..................... Yes.

63.15 .......................................................... Availability of Information and Confidentiality.Yes.

63.16 .......................................................... Performance Track Provisions .................. Yes.

5. Part 63 is amended by adding 

subpart FFFFFF to read as follows: 

Subpart FFFFFF—National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

for Secondary Copper Smelting Area 

Sources 

Sec. 

Applicability and Compliance Dates 

63.11153 Am I subject to this subpart? 

63.11154 What are my compliance dates? 

Standards and Compliance Requirements 

63.11155 What are the standards and 

compliance requirements for new 

sources? 

63.11156 [Reserved] 

Other Requirements and Information 

63.11157 What General Provisions apply to 

this subpart? 

63.11158 What definitions apply to this 

subpart? 

63.11159 Who implements and enforces 

this subpart? 

Tables to Subpart FFFFFF of Part 63 

Table 1 to Subpart FFFFFF of Part 

63—Applicability of General Provisions 

to Subpart FFFFFF 

Applicability and Compliance Dates 

§ 63.11153 Am I subject to this subpart? 

(a) You are subject to this subpart if 

you own or operate a new secondary 

copper smelter that is an area source of 

hazardous air pollutant (HAP) 

emissions. Your secondary copper 

smelter is an area source if it does not 

emit and does not have the potential to 

emit either 10 tons per year (tpy) or 

more of any single HAP or 25 tpy or 

more of any combination of HAP. 

(b) This subpart applies to each new 

affected source. The affected source is 

each secondary copper smelter. Your 

secondary copper smelter is a new 

affected source if you commenced 

construction or reconstruction of the 

affected source before October 6, 2006. 

(c) This subpart does not apply to 

research and development facilities, as 

defined in section 112(c)(7) of the 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. 

§ 63.11154 What are my compliance 

dates? 

(a) If you start up a new affected 

source on or before [Date of publication 

of final rule in the Federal Register], 

you must achieve compliance with the 

applicable provisions of this subpart not 

later than [DATE OF PUBLICATION OF 

FINAL RULE IN THE Federal Register]. 

(b) If you start up a new affected 

source after [DATE OF PUBLICATION 

OF FINAL RULE IN THE Federal 

Register], you must achieve compliance 

with the applicable provisions of this 

subpart upon startup of your affected 

source. 

Standards and Compliance 

Requirements 

§ 63.11155 What are the standards and 

compliance requirements for new sources? 

(a) You must not discharge to the 

atmosphere any gases which contain 

particulate matter (PM) in excess of 

0.002 grains per dry standard cubic foot 

(gr/dscf) from the exhaust vent of any 

capture system for a smelting furnace, 

melting furnace, or other vessel that 

contains molten material and any 

capture system for the transfer of molten 

material. 

(b) For each smelting furnace, melting 

furnace, or other vessel that contains 

molten material, you must install and 

operate a capture system that collects 

the gases and fumes from the vessel and 

from the transfer of molten material and 

convey the collected gas stream to a 

control device. 

(c) You must prepare and operate at 

all times according to 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 the smelting furnace. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 59327 

Your plan must include a training 

program for scrap inspectors. You must 

keep records to demonstrate continuous 

compliance with the requirements of 

your plan. You must keep a current 

copy of your pollution prevention plan 

onsite and available for inspection. 

(d) You must install, operate, and 

maintain a bag leak detection system on 

all baghouses used to comply with the 

PM emissions limit in paragraph (a) of 

this section according to paragraph 

(d)(1) of this section, prepare and 

operate by a site-specific monitoring 

plan according to paragraph (d)(2) of 

this section, take corrective action 

according to paragraph (d)(3) of this 

section, and record information 

according to paragraph (d)(4) of this 

section. 

(1) Each bag leak detection system 

must meet the specifications and 

requirements in paragraphs (d)(1)(i) 

through (viii) of this section. 

(i) The bag leak detection system must 

be certified by the manufacturer to be 

capable of detecting PM emissions at 

concentrations of 1 milligram per actual 

cubic meter (0.00044 grains per actual 

cubic foot) or less. 

(ii) The bag leak detection system 

sensor must provide output of relative 

PM loadings. The owner or operator 

shall continuously record the output 

from the bag leak detection system using 

electronic or other means (e.g., using a 

strip chart recorder or a data logger.) 

(iii) The bag leak detection system 

must be equipped with an alarm system 

that will sound when the system detects 

an increase in relative particulate 

loading over the alarm set point 

established according to paragraph 

(d)(1)(iv) of this section, and the alarm 

must be located such that it can be 

heard by the appropriate plant 

personnel. 

(iv) In the initial adjustment of the bag 

leak detection system, you must 

establish, at a minimum, the baseline 

output by adjusting the sensitivity 

(range) and the averaging period of the 

device, the alarm set points, and the 

alarm delay time. 

(v) Following initial adjustment, you 

shall not adjust the averaging period, 

alarm set point, or alarm delay time 

without approval from the 

Administrator or delegated authority 

except as provided in paragraph 

(d)(1)(vi) of this section. 

(vi) Once per quarter, you may adjust 

the sensitivity of the bag leak detection 

system to account for seasonal effects, 

including temperature and humidity, 

according to the procedures identified 

in the site-specific monitoring plan 

required by paragraph (d)(2) of this 

section. 

(vii) You must install the bag leak 

detection sensor downstream of the 

baghouse and upstream of any wet 

scrubber. 

(viii) Where multiple detectors are 

required, the system’s instrumentation 

and alarm may be shared among 

detectors. 

(2) You must develop and submit to 

the Administrator or delegated authority 

for approval a site-specific monitoring 

plan for each bag leak detection system. 

You must operate and maintain the bag 

leak detection system according to the 

site-specific monitoring plan at all 

times. For each bag leak detection 

system that operates on the triboelectric 

effect, the monitoring plan must be 

consistent with the recommendations 

contained in the ‘‘Fabric Filter Bag Leak 

Detection Guidance’’ (EPA–454/R–98–

015) currently available at http:// 

www.epa.gov/ttn.emc01/cem/tribo.pdf. 

Each monitoring plan must describe the 

items in paragraphs (d)(2)(i) through (vi) 

of this section. 

(i) Installation of the bag leak 

detection system; 

(ii) Initial and periodic adjustment of 

the bag leak detection system, including 

how the alarm set-point will be 

established; 

(iii) Operation of the bag leak 

detection system, including quality 

assurance procedures; 

(iv) How the bag leak detection 

system will be maintained, including a 

routine maintenance schedule and spare 

parts inventory list; 

(v) How the bag leak detection system 

output will be recorded and stored; and 

(vi) Corrective action procedures as 

specified in paragraph (d)(3) of this 

section. In approving the site-specific 

monitoring plan, the Administrator or 

delegated authority may allow owners 

and operators more than 3 hours to 

alleviate a specific condition that causes 

an alarm if the owner or operator 

identifies in the monitoring plan this 

specific condition as one that could lead 

to an alarm, adequately explains why it 

is not feasible to alleviate this specific 

condition within 3 hours of the time the 

alarm occurs, and demonstrates that the 

requested time will ensure alleviation of 

this condition as expeditiously as 

practicable. 

(3) For each bag leak detection 

system, you must initiate procedures to 

determine the cause of every alarm 

within 1 hour of the alarm. Except as 

provided in paragraph (d)(2)(vi) of this 

section, you must alleviate the cause of 

the alarm within 3 hours of the alarm by 

taking whatever corrective action(s) are 

necessary. Corrective actions may 

include, but are not limited to the 

following: 

(i) Inspecting the baghouse for air 

leaks, torn or broken bags or filter 

media, or any other condition that may 

cause an increase in particulate 

emissions; 

(ii) Sealing off defective bags or filter 

media; 

(iii) Replacing defective bags or filter 

media or otherwise repairing the control 

device; 

(iv) Sealing off a defective baghouse 

compartment; 

(v) Cleaning the bag leak detection 

system probe or otherwise repairing the 

bag leak detection system; or 

(vi) Shutting down the process 

producing the particulate emissions. 

(4) You must maintain records of the 

information specified in paragraphs 

(d)(4)(i) through (iii) of this section for 

each bag leak detection system. 

(i) Records of the bag leak detection 

system output; 

(ii) Records of bag leak detection 

system adjustments, including the date 

and time of the adjustment, the initial 

bag leak detection system settings, and 

the final bag leak detection system 

settings; and 

(iii) The date and time of all bag leak 

detection system alarms, the time that 

procedures to determine the cause of an 

alarm were initiated, whether 

procedures were initiated within 1 hour 

of the alarm, the cause of the alarm, an 

explanation of the actions taken, the 

date and time the cause of the alarm was 

alleviated, and whether the alarm was 

alleviated within 3 hours of the alarm. 

(e) You must conduct a performance 

test to demonstrate initial compliance 

with the PM emissions limit within 180 

days after startup and report the results 

in your notification of compliance 

status. You must conduct each PM test 

according to § 63.7(e)(1) using the test 

methods and procedures in paragraphs 

(e)(1) through (5) of this section. 

(1) Method 1 or 1A (40 CFR part 60, 

appendix A) to select sampling port 

locations and the number of traverse 

points in each stack or duct. Sampling 

sites must be located at the outlet of the 

control device (or at the outlet of the 

emissions source if no control device is 

present) prior to any releases to the 

atmosphere. 

(2) Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 2F, or 2G 

(40 CFR part 60, appendix A) to 

determine the volumetric flow rate of 

the stack gas. 

(3) Method 3, 3A, or 3B (40 CFR part 

60, appendix A) to determine the dry 

molecular weight of the stack gas. You 

may use ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10–1981, 

‘‘Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses 

(incorporated by reference—see § 63.14) 

as an alternative to EPA Method 3B. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
59328 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

(4) Method 4 (40 CFR part 60, 

appendix A) to determine the moisture 

content of the stack gas. 

(5) Method 5 (40 CFR part 60, 

appendix A) to determine the PM 

concentration for negative pressure 

baghouses and Method 5D (40 CFR part 

60, appendix A) for positive pressure 

baghouses. The sampling time and 

volume for each run must be at least 60 

minutes and 0.85 dry standard cubic 

meters (30 dry standard cubic feet). A 

minimum of three valid test runs are 

needed to comprise a PM performance 

test. 

(f) You must conduct subsequent 

performance tests to demonstrate 

compliance with the PM emissions limit 

at least once every 5 years. 

(g) If you use a control device other 

than a baghouse, you must prepare and 

submit a monitoring plan to the 

Administrator for approval. Each plan 

must contain the information in 

paragraphs (g)(1) through (5) of this 

section. 

(1) A description of the device; 

(2) Test results collected in 

accordance with paragraph (e) of this 

section verifying the performance of the 

device for reducing PM to the levels 

required by this subpart; 

(3) Operation and maintenance plan 

for the control device (including a 

preventative maintenance schedule 

consistent with the manufacturer’s 

instructions for routine and long-term 

maintenance) and continuous 

monitoring system. 

(4) A list of operating parameters that 

will be monitored to maintain 

continuous compliance with the 

applicable emission limits; and 

(5) Operating parameter limits based 

on monitoring data collected during the 

performance test. 

§ 63.11156 [Reserved] 

Other Requirements and Information 

§ 63.11157 What General Provisions apply 

to this subpart? 

(a) If you own or operate a new 

affected source, you must comply with 

the requirements of the General 

Provisions in 40 CFR part 63, subpart A 

as specified in Table 1 to this subpart. 

(b) Your notification of compliance 

status required by § 63.9(h) must 

include the results of the initial 

performance tests and monitoring data 

collected during the test. 

(c) Your notification of compliance 

status required by § 63.9(h) must 

include this certification of compliance, 

signed by a responsible official, for the 

work practice standard in § 63.11155(c): 

‘‘This facility complies with the 

requirement for a written plan for the 

selection, inspection, and pretreatment 

of copper scrap in accordance with 

§ 63.11155(c).’’

(d) Your notification of compliance 

status required by § 63.9(h) must 

include this certification of compliance, 

signed by a responsible official, for the 

work practice standard in 

§ 63.11155(d)(2): ‘‘This facility has an 

approved monitoring plan in 

accordance with § 63.11155(d)(2).’’

(e) If you use control devices other 

than baghouses, your notification of 

compliance status required by § 63.9(h) 

must include this certification of 

compliance, signed by a responsible 

official for the monitoring plan 

requirements in § 63.11157(g): ‘‘This 

facility has an approved monitoring 

plan in accordance with § 63.11157(g).’’

§ 63.11158 What definitions apply to this 

subpart? 

Terms used in this subpart are 

defined in the CAA, in 40 CFR 63.2, and 

in this section as follows: 

Anode copper means copper that is 

cast into anodes and refined in an 

electrolytic process to produce high 

purity copper. 

Capture system means the collection 

of components used to capture gases 

and fumes released from one or more 

emissions points and then convey the 

captured gas stream to a control device. 

A capture system may include, but is 

not limited to, the following 

components as applicable to a given 

capture system design: duct intake 

devices, hoods, enclosures, ductwork, 

dampers, manifolds, plenums, and fans. 

Melting furnace means any furnace, 

reactor, or other type of vessel that heats 

solid materials and produces a molten 

mass of material. 

Secondary copper smelter means a 

facility that processes copper scrap in a 

blast furnace and converter or that uses 

another pyrometallurgical purification 

process to produce anode copper from 

copper scrap, including low-grade 

copper scrap. A facility where recycled 

copper scrap or copper alloy scrap is 

melted to produce ingots or for direct 

use in a manufacturing process is not a 

secondary copper smelter. 

Smelting furnace means any furnace, 

reactor, or other type of vessel in which 

copper scrap and fluxes are melted to 

form a molten mass of material 

containing copper and slag. 

Work practice standard means any 

design, equipment, work practice, or 

operational standard, or combination 

thereof. 

§ 63.11159 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. 

(b) In delegating implementation and 

enforcement authority of this subpart to 

a State, local, or tribal agency under 40 

CFR part 63, subpart E, the authorities 

contained in paragraph (c) of this 

section are retained by the 

Administrator of the U.S. EPA and are 

not transferred to the State, local, or 

tribal agency. 

(c) The authorities that will not be 

delegated to State, local, or tribal 

agencies are listed in paragraphs (c)(1) 

through (4) of this section. 

(1) Approval of an alternative nonopacity emissions standard under 

§ 63.6(g). 

(2) Approval of a major change to test 

methods under § 63.7(e)(2)(ii) and (f). A 

‘‘major change to test method’’ is 

defined in § 63.90. 

(3) Approval of a major change to 

monitoring under § 63.8(f). A ‘‘major 

change to monitoring’’ is defined in 

§ 63.90. 

(4) Approval of a major change to 

recordkeeping/reporting under 

§ 63.10(f). A ‘‘major change to 

recordkeeping/reporting’’ is defined in 

§ 63.90. 

Tables to Subpart FFFFFF of Part 63 

As required in § 63.11157(a), you 

must comply with the requirements of 

the General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, 

subpart A) as shown in the following 

table. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 59329 

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART FFFFFF OF PART 63.—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS TO SUBPART FFFFFF 

Citation Subject 

Applies to 

Subpart 

FFFFFF? 

Explanation 

63.1(a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(3), (a)(4), (a)(6), 

(a)(10)–(a)(12) (b)(1), (b)(3), (c)(1), 

(c)(2), (c)(5), (e).

Applicability ............................................... Yes ..........

63.1(a)(5), (a)(7)–(a)(9), (b)(2), (c)(3), 

(c)(4), (d).

Reserved ................................................... No ............

63.2 ............................................................ Definitions .................................................. Yes ..........

63.3 ............................................................ Units and Abbreviations ............................ Yes ..........

63.4 ............................................................ Prohibited Activities and Circumvention ... Yes ..........

63.5 ............................................................ Preconstruction Review and Notification 

Requirements.

No ............

63.6(a), (b)(1)–(b)(5), (b)(7), (c)(1), (c)(2), 

(c)(5), (e)(3)(i), (e)(3)(iii)–(e)(3)(ix), 

(f),(g), (i), (j).

Compliance with Standards and Maintenance Requirements.Yes ..........

63.6(b)(6), (c)(3), (c)(4), (d), (e)(2), 

(e)(3)(ii), (h)(3), (h)(5)(iv).

Reserved ................................................... No ............

63.6(h)(1)–(h)(4), (h)(5)(i)–(h)(5)(iii), 

(h)(6)–(h)(9).

No ............ Subpart FFFFFF does not include opacity 

or visible emissions standards. 

63.7 ............................................................ Performance Testing Requirements ......... Yes ..........

63.8(a)(1), (a)(2), (b), (f)(1)–(5) ................. Monitoring Requirements .......................... Yes ..........

63.8(a)(3) ................................................... Reserved ................................................... No ............

63.8(c), (d), (e), (f)(6), (g) .......................... No ............ Subpart FFFFFF does not require a continuous monitoring system. 

63.8(a)(4) ................................................... No ............ Subpart FFFFFF does not require flares. 

63.9(a), (b)(1), (b)(2), (b)(5), (c), (d), (e), 

(f), (g), (h)(1)–(h)(3), (h)(5), (h)(6),(i), (j).

Notification Requirements ......................... Yes ..........

63.9(b)(3), (h)(4) ........................................ Reserved ................................................... No ............

63.9(b)(4) ................................................... No ............

63.9(f) ......................................................... No ............ Subpart FFFFFF does not include opacity 

or visible emissions standards. 

63.9(g) ........................................................ No ............ Subpart FFFFFF does not require a continuous monitoring system. 

63.10(a), (b)(2)(i)–(b)(2)(v), (b)(2)(xiv), 

(d)(1), (d)(2), (d)(4), (d)(5), (e)(1), (e)(2), 

(f).

Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements.Yes ..........

63.10(c)(2)–(c)(4), (c)(9) ............................ Reserved ................................................... No ............

63.10(b)(2)(vi)–(b)(2)(xiii), (c)(1), (c)(5)–

(c)(14), (e)(1)–(e)(2), (e)(4).

Subpart FFFFFF does not require a continuous monitoring system. 

63.10(d)(3) ................................................. No ............ Subpart FFFFFF does not include opacity 

or visible emissions standards. 

63.10(e)(3) ................................................. Yes ..........

63.11 .......................................................... Control Device Requirements ................... No ............ Subpart FFFFFF does not require flares. 

63.12 .......................................................... State Authorities and Delegations ............ Yes ..........

63.13 .......................................................... Addresses ................................................. Yes ..........

63.14 .......................................................... Incorporations by Reference ..................... Yes ..........

63.15 .......................................................... Availability of Information and Confidentiality.Yes ..........

63.16 .......................................................... Performance Track Provisions .................. Yes ..........

6. Part 63 is amended by adding 

subpart GGGGGG to read as follows: 

Subpart GGGGGG—National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

for Primary Nonferrous Metals Area 

Sources—Zinc, Cadmium, and 

Beryllium 

Sec. 

Applicability and Compliance Dates 

63.11160 Am I subject to this subpart? 

63.11161 What are my compliance dates? 

Primary Zinc Production Facilities 

63.11162 What are the standards and 

compliance requirements for existing 

sources? 

63.11163 What are the standards and 

compliance requirements for new 

sources? 

63.11164 What General Provisions apply to 

primary zinc production facilities? 

Primary Beryllium Production Facilities 

63.11165 What are the standards and 

compliance requirements for new and 

existing sources? 

63.11166 What General Provisions apply to 

primary beryllium production facilities? 

Other Requirements and Information 

63.11167 What definitions apply to this 

subpart? 

63.11168 Who implements and enforces 

this subpart? 

Applicability and Compliance Dates 

§ 63.11160 Am I subject to this subpart? 

(a) You are subject to this subpart if 

you own or operate a primary zinc 

production facility or primary beryllium 

production facility that is an area source 

of hazardous air pollutant (HAP) 

emissions. Your primary zinc or 

primary beryllium production facility is 

an area source if it does not emit and 

does not have the potential to emit 

either 10 tons per year (tpy) or more of 

any single HAP or 25 tpy or more of any 

combination of HAP. 

(b) The affected source is each 

existing or new primary zinc production 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
59330 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

facility or primary beryllium production 

facility. 

(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) If you own or operate a new or 

existing affected source, you must 

obtain a permit under 40 CFR part 70 or 

71. 

§ 63.11161 What are my compliance 

dates? 

(a) If you have an existing affected 

source, you must achieve compliance 

with applicable provisions in this 

subpart by [DATE OF PUBLICATION 

OF THE FINAL RULE IN THE Federal 

Register]. If you startup a new sintering 

machine at an existing affected source 

after [DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THE 

FINAL RULE IN THE Federal Register], 

you must achieve compliance with the 

applicable provisions in this subpart not 

later than 180 days after startup. 

(b) If you have a new affected source, 

you must achieve compliance with 

applicable provisions in this subpart 

according to the dates in paragraphs 

(b)(1) and (2) of this section. 

(1) If you startup a new affected 

source on or before [DATE OF 

PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN 

THE Federal Register], you must 

achieve compliance with applicable 

provisions in this subpart not later than 

[DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THE 

FINAL RULE IN THE Federal Register]. 

(2) If you startup a new affected 

source after [DATE OF PUBLICATION 

OF THE FINAL RULE IN THE Federal 

Register], you must achieve compliance 

with applicable provisions in this 

subpart upon initial startup. 

Primary Zinc Production Facilities 

§ 63.11162 What are the standards and 

compliance requirements for existing 

sources? 

(a) You must exhaust the off-gases 

from each roaster to a particulate matter 

(PM) control device and to a sulfuric 

acid plant, including during the 

charging of the roaster. 

(b) You must not discharge to the 

atmosphere any gases which contain PM 

in excess of the emissions limits in 

paragraphs (b)(1) through (5) of this 

section. 

(1) 0.93 pound per hour (lb/hr) from 

the exhaust vent of a zinc cathode 

melting furnace. 

(2) 0.1 lb/hr from the exhaust vent of 

a furnace that melts zinc dust, zinc 

chips, and/or other materials containing 

zinc. 

(3) 0.228 lb/hr from the vent for the 

combined exhaust from a furnace 

melting zinc scrap and an alloy furnace. 

(4) 0.014 grains per dry standard 

cubic foot (gr/dscf) from the exhaust 

vent of an anode casting furnace. 

(5) 0.015 gr/dscf from the exhaust 

vent of a cadmium melting furnace. 

(c) You must establish an operating 

range for pressure drop for each 

baghouse applied to a furnace subject to 

an emissions limit in paragraph (b) of 

this section based on the minimum and 

maximum values recorded during a 

performance test that demonstrates 

compliance with the applicable PM 

emissions limit. Alternatively, you may 

use an operating range that has been 

previously established and approved by 

your permitting authority within the 

past 5 years. You must monitor the 

pressure drop daily, maintain the 

pressure drop for each baghouse within 

the established operating range, and 

record the pressure drop measurement 

in a daily log. You must perform routine 

maintenance on each baghouse and 

record maintenance activities in a 

baghouse maintenance log. Baghouse 

maintenance logs must include, but are 

not limited to, inspections, criteria for 

changing bag filters, and dates on which 

the bag filters are replaced. Both logs 

must be maintained in a suitable 

permanent form and kept available for 

inspection. 

(d) If you own or operate a sintering 

machine at your facility, you must 

comply with the PM emissions limit in 

40 CFR 60.172(a) and the opacity 

emissions limit in 40 CFR 60.174(a) for 

that sintering machine. 

(e) If you own or operate a sintering 

machine at your facility, you must 

install and operate a continuous opacity 

monitoring system (COMS) for each 

sintering machine according to the 

requirements in 40 CFR 60.175(a). Each 

COMS must meet Performance 

Specification 1 (40 CFR part 60, 

appendix B). 

(f) For each furnace at your facility, 

you must demonstrate initial 

compliance with the applicable PM 

emissions limit in paragraph (b) of this 

section based on the results of a 

performance test for that furnace. If you 

own or operate a sintering machine, you 

must also demonstrate initial 

compliance with the PM and opacity 

emissions limits in paragraph (d) of this 

section based on the results of a 

performance test for that sintering 

machine. 

(1) You may certify initial compliance 

for a furnace (and sintering machine, if 

applicable) based on the results of a 

previous performance test conducted 

during the past 5 years. 

(2) If you have not conducted a 

performance test to demonstrate 

compliance with the applicable 

emissions limits during the past 5 years, 

you must conduct a performance test 

within 180 days of your compliance 

date and report the results in your 

notification of compliance status. 

(3) You must conduct each PM test for 

a furnace according to § 63.7(e)(1) using 

the test methods and procedures in 

paragraphs (f)(3)(i) through (v) of this 

section. 

(i) Method 1 or 1A (40 CFR part 60, 

appendix A) to select sampling port 

locations and the number of traverse 

points in each stack or duct. Sampling 

sites must be located at the outlet of the 

control device (or at the outlet of the 

emissions source if no control device is 

present) prior to any releases to the 

atmosphere. 

(ii) Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 2F, or 2G 

(40 CFR part 60, appendix A) to 

determine the volumetric flow rate of 

the stack gas. 

(iii) Method 3, 3A, or 3B (40 CFR part 

60, appendix A) to determine the dry 

molecular weight of the stack gas. You 

may use ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10–1981, 

‘‘Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses’’

(incorporated by reference—see § 63.14) 

as an alternative to EPA Method 3B. 

(iv) Method 4 (40 CFR part 60, 

appendix A) to determine the moisture 

content of the stack gas. 

(v) Method 5 (40 CFR part 60, 

appendix A) to determine the PM 

concentration for a negative pressure 

baghouse, Method 5D (40 CFR part 60, 

appendix A) for a positive pressure 

baghouse, or an alternative method 

previously approved by your permitting 

authority. A minimum of three valid test 

runs are needed to comprise a PM 

performance test. 

(4) You must conduct each PM test for 

a sintering machine according to 

§ 63.7(e)(1) and 40 CFR 60.176(b)(1) 

using the test methods in paragraph 

(f)(3) of this section. You must 

determine the PM concentration using 

EPA Method 5 (40 CFR part 60, 

appendix A). You may use ANSI/ASME 

PTC 19.10–1981, ‘‘Flue and Exhaust Gas 

Analyses’’ (incorporated by reference—

see § 63.14) as an alternative to EPA 

Method 3B. 

(5) You must conduct each opacity 

test for a sintering machine according to 

the requirements in § 63.6(h)(7). You 

must determine the opacity of emissions 

using EPA Method 9 (40 CFR part 60, 

appendix A). 

(g) For each furnace subject to an 

emissions limit in paragraph (b) of this 

section, you must conduct subsequent 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 59331 

performance tests according to the 

requirements in paragraph (f)(3) of this 

section to demonstrate compliance with 

the applicable PM emissions limit for 

the furnace every 5 years. 

(h) You must submit a notification to 

your permitting authority of any 

deviation from the requirements of this 

subpart within 30 days after the 

deviation. The notification must 

describe the probable cause of the 

deviation and any corrective actions or 

preventative measures taken. 

(i) You must submit semiannual 

monitoring reports to your permitting 

authority containing the results for all 

monitoring required by this subpart. All 

deviations that occur during the 

reporting period must be clearly 

identified. 

(j) You must keep records of all 

required monitoring data and support 

information. Support information 

includes all calibration and 

maintenance records and all original 

strip chart recordings for continuous 

monitoring instrumentation and copies 

of all reports required by this subpart. 

§ 63.11163 What are the standards and 

compliance requirements for new sources? 

(a) You must exhaust the off-gases 

from each roaster to a PM control device 

and to a sulfuric acid plant, including 

the charging of the roaster. 

(b) You must not discharge to the 

atmosphere any gases which contain PM 

in excess of the emissions limits in 

paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) of this 

section. 

(1) 0.005 gr/dscf from 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. 

(2) 0.014 gr/dscf from the exhaust 

vent of an anode casting furnace. 

(3) 0.015 gr/dscf from the exhaust 

vent of a cadmium melting furnace. 

(c) For each melting furnace, you 

must install and operate a capture 

system that collects gases and fumes 

from the melting furnace and from the 

transfer of molten materials and conveys 

the collected gases to a control device. 

(d) You must install, operate, and 

maintain a bag leak detection system on 

all baghouses used to comply with the 

PM emissions limit in paragraph (b) of 

this section according to paragraph 

(d)(1) of this section, prepare and 

operate by a site-specific monitoring 

plan according to paragraph (d)(2) of 

this section, take corrective action 

according to paragraph (d)(3) of this 

section, and record information 

according to paragraph (d)(4) of this 

section. 

(1) Each bag leak detection system 

must meet the specifications and 

requirements in paragraphs (d)(1)(i) 

through (viii) of this section. 

(i) The bag leak detection system must 

be certified by the manufacturer to be 

capable of detecting PM emissions at 

concentrations of 1 milligram per actual 

cubic meter (0.00044 grains per actual 

cubic foot) or less. 

(ii) The bag leak detection system 

sensor must provide output of relative 

PM loadings. The owner or operator 

shall continuously record the output 

from the bag leak detection system using 

electronic or other means (e.g., using a 

strip chart recorder or a data logger.) 

(iii) The bag leak detection system 

must be equipped with an alarm system 

that will sound when the system detects 

an increase in relative particulate 

loading over the alarm set point 

established according to paragraph 

(d)(1)(iv) of this section, and the alarm 

must be located such that it can be 

heard by the appropriate plant 

personnel. 

(iv) In the initial adjustment of the bag 

leak detection system, you must 

establish, at a minimum, the baseline 

output by adjusting the sensitivity 

(range) and the averaging period of the 

device, the alarm set points, and the 

alarm delay time. 

(v) Following initial adjustment, you 

shall not adjust the averaging period, 

alarm set point, or alarm delay time 

without approval from the 

Administrator or delegated authority 

except as provided in paragraph 

(d)(1)(vi) of this section. 

(vi) Once per quarter, you may adjust 

the sensitivity of the bag leak detection 

system to account for seasonal effects, 

including temperature and humidity, 

according to the procedures identified 

in the site-specific monitoring plan 

required by paragraph (d)(2) of this 

section. 

(vii) You must install the bag leak 

detection sensor downstream of the 

baghouse and upstream of any wet 

scrubber. 

(viii) Where multiple detectors are 

required, the system’s instrumentation 

and alarm may be shared among 

detectors. 

(2) You must develop and submit to 

the Administrator or delegated authority 

for approval a site-specific monitoring 

plan for each bag leak detection system. 

You must operate and maintain the bag 

leak detection system according to the 

site-specific monitoring plan at all 

times. For each bag leak detection 

system that operates on the triboelectric 

effect, the monitoring plan must be 

consistent with the recommendations 

contained in the ‘‘Fabric Filter Bag Leak 

Detection Guidance’’ (EPA–454/R–98–

015) currently available at http:// 

www.epa.gov/ttn.emc01/cem/tribo.pdf. 

Each monitoring plan must describe the 

items in paragraphs (d)(2)(i) through (vi) 

of this section. 

(i) Installation of the bag leak 

detection system; 

(ii) Initial and periodic adjustment of 

the bag leak detection system, including 

how the alarm set-point will be 

established; 

(iii) Operation of the bag leak 

detection system, including quality 

assurance procedures; 

(iv) How the bag leak detection 

system will be maintained, including a 

routine maintenance schedule and spare 

parts inventory list; 

(v) How the bag leak detection system 

output will be recorded and stored; and 

(vi) Corrective action procedures as 

specified in paragraph (d)(3) of this 

section. In approving the site-specific 

monitoring plan, the Administrator or 

delegated authority may allow owners 

and operators more than 3 hours to 

alleviate a specific condition that causes 

an alarm if the owner or operator 

identifies in the monitoring plan this 

specific condition as one that could lead 

to an alarm, adequately explains why it 

is not feasible to alleviate this condition 

within 3 hours of the time the alarm 

occurs, and demonstrates that the 

requested time will ensure alleviation of 

this condition as expeditiously as 

practicable. 

(3) For each bag leak detection 

system, you must initiate procedures to 

determine the cause of every alarm 

within 1 hour of the alarm. Except as 

provided in paragraph (d)(2)(vi) of this 

section, you must alleviate the cause of 

the alarm within 3 hours of the alarm by 

taking whatever corrective action(s) are 

necessary. Corrective actions may 

include, but are not limited to the 

following: 

(i) Inspecting the baghouse for air 

leaks, torn or broken bags or filter 

media, or any other condition that may 

cause an increase in particulate 

emissions; 

(ii) Sealing off defective bags or filter 

media; 

(iii) Replacing defective bags or filter 

media or otherwise repairing the control 

device; 

(iv) Sealing off a defective baghouse 

compartment; 

(v) Cleaning the bag leak detection 

system probe or otherwise repairing the 

bag leak detection system; or 

(vi) Shutting down the process 

producing the particulate emissions. 

(4) You must maintain records of the 

information specified in paragraphs 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
59332 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

(d)(4)(i) through (iii) of this section for 

each bag leak detection system. 

(i) Records of the bag leak detection 

system output; 

(ii) Records of bag leak detection 

system adjustments, including the date 

and time of the adjustment, the initial 

bag leak detection system settings, and 

the final bag leak detection system 

settings; and 

(iii) The date and time of all bag leak 

detection system alarms, the time that 

procedures to determine the cause of the 

alarm were initiated, if procedures were 

initiated within 1 hour of the alarm, the 

cause of the alarm, an explanation of the 

actions taken, the date and time the 

cause of the alarm was alleviated, and 

if the alarm was alleviated within 3 

hours of the alarm. 

(e) If there is a sintering machine at 

your primary zinc production facility, 

you must comply with the PM 

emissions limit in 40 CFR 60.172(a) and 

the opacity emissions limit in 40 CFR 

60.174(a) for that sintering machine. 

(f) If there is a sintering machine at 

your primary zinc production facility, 

you must install and operate a COMS 

for each sintering machine according to 

the requirements in 40 CFR 60.175(a). 

Each COMS must meet EPA 

Performance Specification 1 (40 CFR 

part 60, appendix B). 

(g) For each furnace (and sintering 

machine, if applicable) at your facility, 

you must conduct a performance test to 

demonstrate initial compliance with 

each applicable PM emissions limit for 

that furnace (and the PM and opacity 

limits for a sintering machine, if 

applicable) within 180 days after startup 

and report the results in your 

notification of compliance status. 

(1) You must conduct each PM test for 

a furnace according to § 63.7(e)(1) using 

the test methods and procedures in 

paragraphs (g)(1)(i) through (v) of this 

section. 

(i) Method 1 or 1A (40 CFR part 60, 

appendix A) to select sampling port 

locations and the number of traverse 

points in each stack or duct. Sampling 

sites must be located at the outlet of the 

control device (or at the outlet of the 

emissions source if no control device is 

present) prior to any releases to the 

atmosphere. 

(ii) Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 2F, or 2G 

(40 CFR part 60, appendix A) to 

determine the volumetric flow rate of 

the stack gas. 

(iii) Method 3, 3A, or 3B (40 CFR part 

60, appendix A) to determine the dry 

molecular weight of the stack gas. You 

may use ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10–1981, 

‘‘Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses 

(incorporated by reference-see § 63.14) 

as an alternative to EPA Method 3B. 

(iv) Method 4 (40 CFR part 60, 

appendix A) to determine the moisture 

content of the stack gas. 

(v) Method 5 (40 CFR part 60, 

appendix A) to determine the PM 

concentration for negative pressure 

baghouses or Method 5D (40 CFR part 

60, appendix A) for positive pressure 

baghouses. A minimum of three valid 

test runs are needed to comprise a PM 

performance test. 

(2) You must conduct each PM test for 

a sintering machine according to 

§ 63.7(e)(1) and 40 CFR 60.176(b)(1) 

using the test methods in paragraph 

(g)(1) of this section. You must 

determine the PM concentration using 

EPA Method 5 (40 CFR part 60, 

appendix A). You may use ANSI/ASME 

PTC 19.10–1981, ‘‘Flue and Exhaust Gas 

Analyses’’ (incorporated by referencesee § 63.14) as an alternative to EPA 

Method 3B. 

(3) You must conduct each opacity 

test for a sintering machine according to 

the requirements in § 63.6(h)(7). You 

must determine the opacity of emissions 

using EPA Method 9 (40 CFR part 60, 

appendix A). 

(h) You must conduct subsequent 

performance tests according to the 

requirements in paragraph (g)(1) of this 

section for each furnace subject to an 

emissions limit in paragraph (b) of this 

section to demonstrate compliance at 

least once every 5 years. 

(i) If you use a control device other 

than a baghouse, you must prepare and 

submit a monitoring plan to the 

Administrator for approval. Each plan 

must contain the information in 

paragraphs (i)(1) through (5) of this 

section. 

(1) A description of the device; 

(2) Test results collected in 

accordance with paragraph (g) of this 

section verifying the performance of the 

device for reducing PM and opacity to 

the levels required by this subpart; 

(3) Operation and maintenance plan 

for the control device (including a 

preventative maintenance schedule 

consistent with the manufacturer’s 

instructions for routine and long-term 

maintenance) and continuous 

monitoring system; 

(4) A list of operating parameters that 

will be monitored to maintain 

continuous compliance with the 

applicable emission limits; and 

(5) Operating parameter limits based 

on monitoring data collected during the 

performance test. 

63.11164 What General Provisions apply 

to primary zinc production facilities? 

(a) If you own or operate an existing 

affected source, you must comply with 

the requirements of the General 

Provisions in 40 CFR part 63, subpart A, 

according to Table 1 to this subpart and 

paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of this 

section. 

(1) Your notification of compliance 

status required by § 63.9(h) must 

include this certification of compliance, 

signed by a responsible official, for the 

work practice standards in 

§ 63.11162(a): ‘‘This facility complies 

with the work practice standards in 

§ 63.11162(a).’’

(2) If you certify compliance with the 

PM emissions limits in § 63.11162(b) 

based on a previous performance test, 

your notification of compliance status 

required by § 63.9(h) must include this 

certification of compliance, signed by a 

responsible official: ‘‘This facility 

complies with the PM emissions limits 

in § 63.11162(b) based on a previous 

performance test.’’

(3) If you conduct a new performance 

test to demonstrate compliance with the 

PM emissions limits for a furnace in 

§ 63.11162(b), your notification of 

compliance status required by § 63.9(h) 

must include the results of the 

performance test, including required 

monitoring data. 

(b) If you own or operate a new 

affected source, you must comply with 

the requirements of the General 

Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A) 

as provided in Table 1 to this subpart 

and paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of this 

section. 

(1) Your notification of compliance 

status required in § 63.9(h) must include 

the results of the initial performance 

tests, including required monitoring 

data. 

(2) Your notification of compliance 

status required by § 63.9(h) must 

include this certification of compliance, 

signed by a responsible official, for the 

work practice standard in § 63.11163(a): 

‘‘This facility complies with the work 

practice standards in § 63.11163(a).’’

(3) Your notification of compliance 

status required by § 63.9(h) must 

include this certification of compliance, 

signed by a responsible official, for the 

capture system requirements in 

§ 63.11163(c): ‘‘This facility has 

installed capture systems according to 

§ 63.11163(c).’’

(4) If you use a baghouse that is 

subject to the requirements in 

§ 63.11163(d), your notification of 

compliance status required by § 63.9(h) 

must include this certification of 

compliance, signed by a responsible 

official, for the bag leak detection 

system requirements in § 63.11163(d): 

‘‘This facility has an approved 

monitoring plan in accordance with 

§ 63.11163(d).’’


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 59333 

(5) If you use control devices other 

than baghouses, your notification of 

compliance status required by § 63.9(h) 

must include this certification of 

compliance, signed by a responsible 

official for the monitoring plan 

requirements in § 63.11163(i): ‘‘This 

facility has an approved monitoring 

plan in accordance with § 63.11163(i).’’

Primary Beryllium Production 

Facilities 

§ 63.11165 What are the standards and 

compliance requirements for new and 

existing sources? 

You must comply with the 

requirements in 40 CFR 61.32 through 

40 CFR 61.34 of the National Emission 

Standards for Beryllium (40 CFR part 

61, subpart C). 

§ 63.11166 What General Provisions apply 

to primary beryllium production facilities? 

(a) You must comply with all of the 

requirements of the General Provisions 

in 40 CFR part 61, subpart A. 

(b) You must comply with the 

requirements of the General Provisions 

in 40 CFR part 63, subpart A, that are 

specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through 

(4) of this section. 

(1) Section 63.1(a)(1) through (10). 

(2) Section 63.1(b) except paragraph 

(b)(3), § 63.1(c), and § 63.1(e). 

(3) Section 63.5 (preconstruction 

review and notification requirements) 

except for the references to § 63.6 for 

compliance procedures and the 

references to § 63.9 for notification 

procedures. 

(4) Section 63.6(e)(3). 

Other Requirements and Information 

§ 63.11167 What definitions apply to this 

subpart? 

Terms used in this subpart are 

defined in the CAA; 40 CFR 60.2; 

60.171; 61.02; 61.31; 61.61; 63.2; and in 

this section as follows: 

Alloy furnace means any furnace used 

to melt alloys or to produce zinc that 

contains alloys. 

Anode casting furnace means any 

furnace that melts materials to produce 

the anodes used in the electrolytic 

process for the production of zinc. 

Bag leak detection system means a 

system that is capable of continuously 

monitoring the relative particulate 

matter (dust) loadings in the exhaust of 

a baghouse to detect bag leaks and other 

conditions that result in increases in 

particulate loadings. A bag leak 

detection system includes, but is not 

limited to, an instrument that operates 

on triboelectric, electrodynamic, light 

scattering, light transmittance, or other 

effect to continuously monitor relative 

particulate matter loadings. 

Cadmium melting furnace means any 

furnace used to melt cadmium or 

produce cadmium oxide from the 

cadmium recovered in the zinc 

production process. 

Capture system means the collection 

of equipment used to capture gases and 

fumes released from one or more 

emissions points and then convey the 

captured gas stream to a control device. 

A capture system may include, but is 

not limited to, the following 

components as applicable to a given 

capture system design: duct intake 

devices, hoods, enclosures, ductwork, 

dampers, manifolds, plenums, and fans. 

Deviation means any instance in 

which an affected source subject to this 

subpart, or an owner or operator of such 

a source: 

(1) Fails to meet any requirement or 

obligation established by this subpart, 

including but not limited to any 

emissions limitation or work practice 

standard; 

(2) Fails to meet any term or condition 

that is adopted to implement an 

applicable requirement in this subpart 

and that is included in the operating 

permit for any affected source required 

to obtain such a permit; or 

(3) Fails to meet any emissions 

limitation or work practice standard in 

this subpart during startup, shutdown, 

or malfunction, regardless of whether or 

not such failure is permitted by this 

subpart. 

Primary beryllium production facility 

means any establishment engaged in the 

chemical processing of beryllium ore to 

produce beryllium metal, alloy, or 

oxide, or performing any of the 

intermediate steps in these processes. A 

primary beryllium production facility 

may also be known as an extraction 

plant. 

Primary zinc production facility 

means an installation engaged in the 

production, or any intermediate process 

in the production, of zinc or zinc oxide 

from zinc sulfide ore concentrates 

through the use of pyrometallurgical 

techniques. 

Responsible official means 

responsible official as defined in 40 CFR 

70.2. 

Roaster means any facility in which a 

zinc sulfide ore concentrate charge is 

heated in the presence of air to 

eliminate a significant portion (more 

than 10 percent) of the sulfur contained 

in the charge. 

Sintering machine means any furnace 

in which calcines are heated in the 

presence of air to agglomerate the 

calcines into a hard porous mass called 

sinter. 

Sulfuric acid plant means any facility 

producing sulfuric acid from the sulfur 

dioxide (SO2) in the gases from the 

roaster. 

Work practice standard means any 

design, equipment, work practice, or 

operational standard, or combination 

thereof. 

Zinc cathode melting furnace means 

any furnace used to melt the pure zinc 

from the electrolytic process. 

§ 63.11168 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 your State, local, or tribal agency. 

(b) In delegating implementation and 

enforcement authority of this subpart to 

a State, local, or tribal agency under 40 

CFR part 63, subpart E, the authorities 

contained in paragraphs (c) and (d) of 

this section are retained by the 

Administrator of the U.S. EPA and are 

not transferred to the State, local, or 

tribal agency. 

(c) For primary zinc production 

facilities subject to this subpart, the 

authorities that will not be delegated to 

State, local, or tribal agencies are listed 

in paragraphs (c)(1) through (5) of this 

section. 

(1) Approval of an alternative nonopacity emissions standard under 

§ 63.6(g). 

(2) Approval of an alternative opacity 

emissions standard under § 63.6(h)(9). 

(3) Approval of a major change to test 

methods under § 63.7(e)(2)(ii) and (f). A 

‘‘major change to test method’’ is 

defined in § 63.90. 

(4) Approval of a major change to 

monitoring under § 63.8(f). A ‘‘major 

change to monitoring’’ is defined in 

§ 63.90. 

(5) Approval of a major change to 

recordkeeping/reporting under 

§ 63.10(f). A ‘‘major change to 

recordkeeping/reporting’’ is defined in 

§ 63.90. 

(d) For primary beryllium 

manufacturing facilities subject to this 

subpart, the authorities that will not be 

delegated to State, local, or tribal 

agencies are listed in paragraphs (d)(1) 

through (4) of this section. 

(1) Approval of an alternative nonopacity emissions standard under 40 

CFR 61.12(d). 

(2) Approval of a major change to test 

methods under 40 CFR 61.13(h). A 

‘‘major change to test method’’ is 

defined in § 63.90. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
59334 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 194 / Friday, October 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules 

(3) Approval of a major change to 

monitoring under 40 CFR 61.14(g). A 

‘‘major change to monitoring’’ is defined 

in § 63.90. 

(4) Approval of a major change to 

recordkeeping/reporting under 40 CFR 

61.10. A ‘‘major change to 

recordkeeping/reporting’’ is defined in 

§ 63.90. 

Tables to Subpart GGGGGG of Part 63 

As required in § 63.11164(a) and (b), 

you must comply with the requirements 

of the NESHAP General Provisions (40 

CFR part 63, subpart A) as shown in the 

following table. 

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART GGGGGG OF PART 63.—APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS TO PRIMARY ZINC PRODUCTION

AREA SOURCES

Citation Subject 

Applies to 

Subpart 

GGGGGG 

Explanation 

63.1(a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(3), (a)(4), (a)(6), 

(a)(10)–(a)(12), (b)(1), (b)(3), (c)(1), 

(c)(2), (c)(5), (e).

Applicability ............................................... Yes.

63.1(a)(5), (a)(7)–(a)(9), (b)(2), (c)(3), 

(c)(4), (d).

Reserved ................................................... No.

63.2 ............................................................ Definitions .................................................. Yes.

63.3 ............................................................ Units and Abbreviations ............................ Yes.

63.4 ............................................................ Prohibited Activities and Circumvention ... Yes.

63.5 ............................................................ Preconstruction Review and Notification 

Requirements.

No.

63.6(a), (b)(1)–(b)(5), (b)(7), (c)(1), (c)(2), 

(c)(5), (e)(1), (e)(3)(i), (e)(3)(iii)–

(e)(3)(ix), (f), (g), (h)(1), (h)(2),(h)(5)–

(h)(9), (i), (j).

Compliance with Standards and Maintenance Requirements.Yes.

63.6(b)(6), (c)(3), (c)(4), (d), (e)(2), 

(e)(3)(ii), (h)(3), (h)(5)(iv).

Reserved ................................................... No.

63.7(a), (e), (f), (g), (h) .............................. Performance Testing Requirements ......... Yes.

63.7(b), (c) ................................................. Yes/No ..... Notification of performance tests and 

quality assurance program apply to 

new sources but not existing sources. 

63.8(a)(1), (a)(2), (b), (c), (f), (g) ............... Monitoring Requirements .......................... Yes .......... Requirements in § 63.6(c)(4)(i)–(ii), (c)(5), 

(c)(6), (d), (e), (f)(6), and (g) apply if a 

COMS is used. 

63.8(a)(3) ................................................... Reserved ................................................... No.

63.8(a)(4) ................................................... No ............ Subpart GGGGGG does not require 

flares. 

63.8(d), (e) ................................................. Yes/No ..... Requirements for quality control program 

and performance evaluations apply to 

new sources but not existing sources. 

63.9(a), (b)(1), (b)(2), (b)(5), (c), (d), (f), 

(g), (h)(1)–(h)(3), (h)(5), (h)(6), (i), (j).

Notification Requirements ......................... Yes/No ..... Notification of performance tests and 

opacity or visible emissions observations apply to new sources but not existing sources. 

63.9(b)(3), (h)(4) ........................................ Reserved ................................................... No.

63.9(b)(4) ................................................... No.

63.10(a), (b)(1), (b)(2)(i)–(v), (d)(4), 

(d)(5)(i), (f).

Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements.Yes.

63.10(b)(2), (b)(3), (c)(1), (c)(5)–(c)(8), 

(c)(10)–(c)(15), (d)(1)–(d)(3), (d)(5)(ii), 

(e)(1), (e)(2), (e)(4).

Yes/No ..... Recordkeeping and reporting requirements apply to new sources but not existing sources. 

63.10(c)(2)–(c)(4), (c)(9) ............................ Reserved ................................................... No.

63.10(e)(3) ................................................. Yes/No ..... Reporting requirements apply to new 

sources but not existing sources 

63.11 .......................................................... Control Device Requirements ................... No ............ Subpart GGGGGG does not require 

flares. 

63.12 .......................................................... State Authorities and Delegations ............ Yes.

63.13 .......................................................... Addresses ................................................. Yes.

63.14 .......................................................... Incorporations by Reference ..................... Yes.

63.15 .......................................................... Availability of Information and Confidentiality.Yes.

63.16 .......................................................... Performance Track Provisions .................. Yes.

[FR Doc. 06–8434 Filed 10–5–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS