Docstoc

Environmental Protection Agency

Document Sample
Environmental Protection Agency Powered By Docstoc
					                                                                                                    Vol. 76                           Monday,
                                                                                                    No. 59                            March 28, 2011




                                                                                                    Part III


                                                                                                    Environmental Protection Agency

                                                                                                    40 CFR Parts 72 and 75
                                                                                                    Protocol Gas Verification Program and Minimum Competency Requirements
                                                                                                    for Air Emission Testing; Final Rule
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010   19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00001   Fmt 4717   Sfmt 4717   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM   28MRR3
                                               17288                     Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

                                               ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION                                                   pertaining to mercury monitoring and                                materials are available either
                                               AGENCY                                                                     reporting, removing certain                                         electronically in http://
                                                                                                                          requirements associated with a class-                               www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
                                               40 CFR Parts 72 and 75                                                     approved alternative monitoring system,                             the Air and Radiation Docket, EPA/DC,
                                               [EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0837; FRL–9280–9]                                         disallowing the use of a particular                                 EPA West Building, EPA Headquarters
                                                                                                                          quality assurance option in EPA                                     Library, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution
                                               RIN 2060–AQ06                                                              Reference Method 7E, adding two                                     Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. The
                                                                                                                          incorporation by references that were                               Public Reading Room is open from
                                               Protocol Gas Verification Program and
                                                                                                                          inadvertently left out of the January 24,                           8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
                                               Minimum Competency Requirements
                                                                                                                          2008 final rule, adding two new                                     Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
                                               for Air Emission Testing
                                                                                                                          definitions, revising certain compliance                            telephone number for the Public
                                               AGENCY:  Environmental Protection                                          dates, and clarifying the language and                              Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, and
                                               Agency (EPA).                                                              applicability of certain provisions.                                the telephone number for the Air and
                                               ACTION: Final rule; Reconsideration.                                       DATES: This final rule is effective on                              Radiation Docket is (202) 566–1742.
                                                                                                                          April 27, 2011. The incorporation by
                                               SUMMARY:   EPA is finalizing rule                                          reference of certain publications listed                            FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:     John
                                               revisions that modify existing                                             in the rule is approved by the Director                             Schakenbach, U.S. Environmental
                                               requirements for sources affected by the                                   of the Federal Register as of April 27,                             Protection Agency, Clean Air Markets
                                               federally administered emission trading                                    2011.                                                               Division, MC 6204J, Ariel Rios Building,
                                               programs including the NOX Budget                                                                                                              1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
                                               Trading Program, the Acid Rain                                             ADDRESSES:   The EPA has established a                              Washington, DC 20460, telephone (202)
                                               Program, and the Clean Air Interstate                                      docket for this action under Docket ID                              343–9158, e-mail at
                                               Rule.                                                                      No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0837 (which                                     schakenbach.john@epa.gov. Electronic
                                                 EPA is amending its Protocol Gas                                         includes Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–                                  copies of this document can be accessed
                                               Verification Program (PGVP) and the                                        2005–0132, and Docket ID No. EPA–                                   through the EPA Web site at: http://
                                               minimum competency requirements for                                        HQ–OAR–2008–0800). All documents                                    epa.gov/airmarkets.
                                               air emission testing (formerly air                                         in the docket are listed in the http://
                                               emission testing body requirements) to                                     www.regulations.gov index. Although                                 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:      Regulated
                                               improve the accuracy of emissions data.                                    listed in the index, some information is                            Entities. Entities regulated by this action
                                               EPA is also amending other sections of                                     not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other                          primarily are fossil fuel-fired boilers,
                                               the Acid Rain Program continuous                                           information whose disclosure is                                     turbines, and combined cycle units that
                                               emission monitoring system regulations                                     restricted by statute. Certain other                                serve generators that produce electricity
                                               by adding and clarifying certain                                           material, such as copyrighted material,                             for sale or cogenerate electricity for sale
                                               recordkeeping and reporting                                                will be publicly available only in hard                             and steam. Regulated categories and
                                               requirements, removing the provisions                                      copy. Publicly available docket                                     entities include:

                                                                                                                                                                                                                          Examples of potentially
                                                                                   Category                                                                           NAICS code                                           regulated industries

                                               Industry .............................................................................   221112 and others ...........................................................   Electric service providers.



                                                  This table is not intended to be                                        proposed or promulgated rules at                                    comment period or if the grounds for
                                               exhaustive, but rather to provide a guide                                  http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN                               such objection arose after the comment
                                               for readers regarding entities likely to be                                provides information and technology                                 period (but within the time for judicial
                                               regulated by this action. This table lists                                 exchange in various areas of air                                    review) and if the objection is of central
                                               the types of entities which EPA is now                                     pollution control.                                                  relevance to the rule. Any person
                                               aware could potentially be regulated by                                       Judicial Review. Under CAA section                               seeking to make such a demonstration to
                                               this action. Other types of entities not                                   307(b), judicial review of this final                               EPA should submit a Petition for
                                               listed in this table could also be                                         action is available only by filing a                                Reconsideration, clearly labeled as such,
                                               regulated. To determine whether your                                       petition for review in the U.S. Court of                            to the Office of the Administrator, U.S.
                                               facility, company, business,                                               Appeals for the District of Columbia                                EPA, Room 3000, Ariel Rios Building,
                                               organization, etc., is regulated by this                                   Circuit on or before May 27, 2011.                                  1200 Pennsylvania Ave., Washington,
                                               action, you should carefully examine                                       Under CAA section 307(d)(7)(B), only                                DC 20460, with a copy to the Associate
                                               the applicability provisions in §§ 72.6,                                   those objections to the final rule that                             General Counsel for the Air and
                                               72.7, and 72.8 of title 40 of the Code of                                  were raised with specificity during the                             Radiation Law Office, Office of General
                                               Federal Regulations. If you have                                           period for public comment may be                                    Counsel, Mail Code 2344A, U.S. EPA,
                                               questions regarding the applicability of                                   raised during judicial review. Moreover,                            1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
                                               this action to a particular entity, consult                                under CAA section 307(b)(2), the                                    Washington, DC 20460.
                                               the person listed in the preceding FOR                                     requirements established by today’s                                   Outline. The following outline is
                                               FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.                                       final rule may not be challenged                                    provided to aid in locating information
                                                  World Wide Web (WWW). In addition                                       separately in any civil or criminal
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                                                                                                                                                                              in this preamble.
                                               to being available in the docket, an                                       proceedings brought by EPA to enforce
                                                                                                                          these requirements. Section 307(d)(7)(B)                            I. Detailed Discussion of Rule Revisions and
                                               electronic copy of the final rule is also
                                                                                                                                                                                                    Responses to Major Comments
                                               available on the WWW through the                                           also provides a mechanism for the EPA                                  A. Amendments to the Protocol Gas
                                               Technology Transfer Network Web site                                       to convene a proceeding for                                               Verification Program (PGVP)
                                               (TTN Web). Following signature, a copy                                     reconsideration if the petitioner                                      1. Need for the PGVP
                                               of the rule will be posted on the TTN’s                                    demonstrates that it was impracticable                                 2. Cost
                                               policy and guidance page for newly                                         to raise an objection during the public                                3. Effective Dates



                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010         19:16 Mar 25, 2011         Jkt 223001      PO 00000        Frm 00002     Fmt 4701      Sfmt 4700    E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM            28MRR3
                                                                  Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations                                         17289

                                                  4. Recordkeeping/Reporting                           air emission testing bodies (AETBs). The              A. Amendments to the Protocol Gas
                                                  5. ISO 17025                                         PGVP and AETB provisions became                       Verification Program
                                                  6. Credit/Invoice Cancellation                       effective on January 1, 2009.
                                                  7. Gas Type Codes                                                                                             EPA encourages any EPA Protocol gas
                                                  8. Use of 95% Confidence Interval in Tag                The Administrator received a Petition              production site that is interested in
                                                     Values                                            for Review, and a Petition for                        participating in the PGVP to notify EPA
                                                  9. Uncertainty of Results                            Reconsideration, claiming that EPA had                as soon as possible after this final rule
                                                  10. Implementation Options                           not properly promulgated the PGVP.                    is published in the Federal Register by
                                                  11. Use of Existing Cylinders
                                                                                                       The Agency also received a Petition for               submitting the contact information
                                                  12. If NIST Withdraws From Participation
                                                  B. Amendments to the Minimum                         Review challenging the AETB                           described in 75.21(g)(1) by following the
                                                     Competency Requirements for Air                   requirements. Subsequently, EPA                       instructions on the CAMD Web site:
                                                     Emission Testing                                  published a final rule in the Federal                 http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/
                                                  1. Need for the Minimum Competency                   Register staying the AETB requirements                emissions/pgvp.html.
                                                     Requirements                                      (73 FR 65554, November 4, 2008). EPA
                                                  2. Cost                                                                                                    1. Need for the PGVP
                                                                                                       also posted a notice on an Agency Web
                                                  3. Effective Dates                                                                                         Background
                                                  4. Accreditation
                                                                                                       site stating that the PGVP is not in
                                                  5. Scope of Testing                                  effect, and a revised PGVP would not be                  EPA proposed to add § 75.21(g) to
                                                  6. Affect on Validity of Test Data                   effective until EPA goes through notice               establish a refined EPA Protocol gas
                                                  7. Exams                                             and comment rulemaking on any                         verification program to better ensure the
                                                  8. Posting Non-Compliant Air Emission                revised procedure. EPA is today                       accuracy of EPA Protocol gases.
                                                     Testing Body (AETB) Names                         announcing its reconsideration of the
                                                  C. Other Amendments                                                                                           Every recent audit of EPA Protocol
                                                                                                       PGVP provisions of the January 24, 2008               gases has found cylinders that fail the
                                                  1. Compliance Dates for Units Adding New
                                                     Stack or Control Device
                                                                                                       final rule and is finalizing amendments               part 75 required ± 2% performance
                                                  2. Reference Method 7E                               to both the PGVP and AETB                             specification. A 2003 EPA audit (see
                                                  3. Removal of Mercury Provisions                     requirements. Today’s final rule                      Document ID#s EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–
                                                  4. Miscellaneous Amendments                          replaces the existing AETB                            0837–0011, –0074, –0075, and –0076 in
                                               II. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews               requirements, effectively removing the                the docket) of EPA Protocol gases found
                                                  A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory                 stay.                                                 an unacceptably high failure rate (11%
                                                     Planning and Review
                                                  B. Paperwork Reduction Act                              EPA is also finalizing amendments to               of all components analyzed, with 57%
                                                  C. Regulatory Flexibility Act                        other sections of Part 75 by adding                   of the production sites failing at least
                                                  D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act                      several data elements associated with                 one gaseous component) with respect to
                                                  E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism                 EPA’s Emissions Collection and                        the ± 2% standard in Part 75. A 2009
                                                  F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation               Monitoring Plan System (ECMPS)                        EPA Inspector General (IG) audit (see
                                                     and Coordination With Indian Tribal               software, clarifying the requirements for             Document ID# EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–
                                                     Governments                                                                                             0837–0064 in the docket) also found an
                                                  G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
                                                                                                       including cover letters with monitoring
                                                                                                       plan submittals, certification                        11% failure rate over all components
                                                     Children From Environmental Health
                                                                                                       applications, and recertification                     analyzed, with 39% of the production
                                                     and Safety Risks
                                                  H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That               applications, removing the 90 unit                    sites failing at least one gaseous
                                                     Significantly Affect Energy Supply,               operating days provision pertaining to                component. The IG recommended that
                                                     Distribution, or Use                              the monitoring system certification                   EPA implement an ongoing PGVP. A
                                                  I. National Technology Transfer                      deadline for new Acid Rain Program                    2010 audit of EPA Protocol gases found
                                                     Advancement Act
                                                                                                       (ARP) units and newly-affected units                  a 10% failure rate over all components
                                                  J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions                                                                  analyzed, with 40% of the production
                                                     To Address Environmental Justice in               that lose their ARP-exempt status,
                                                                                                       removing the provisions pertaining to                 sites failing at least one gaseous
                                                     Minority Populations and Low-Income                                                                     component.
                                                     Populations                                       mercury monitoring and reporting,
                                                  K. Congressional Review Act                          removing certain requirements                            These failures were found using a
                                                  L. Petitions for Judicial Review                     associated with a class-approved                      small blind sample of cylinders from
                                                                                                       alternative monitoring system,                        each specialty gas company in the U.S.
                                               I. Detailed Discussion of Rule Revisions                                                                      There is no reason to think these
                                               and Responses to Major Comments                         disallowing the use of a particular
                                                                                                                                                             samples were not random. Therefore, it
                                                                                                       quality assurance option in EPA
                                                  On January 24, 2008, revisions to 40                                                                       is likely that for the companies that had
                                                                                                       Reference Method 7E, adding two
                                               CFR part 75, the Acid Rain Program                                                                            failed audited cylinders, other cylinders
                                                                                                       incorporation by references that were
                                               continuous emission monitoring                                                                                from those companies would fail.
                                                                                                       inadvertently left out of the January 24,
                                               regulations, were published in the                      2008 final rule and updating others,                  Summary of Comments and Responses
                                               Federal Register (see 73 FR 4340,                       adding two new definitions, updating
                                               January 24, 2008). To better ensure the                                                                          Comment: Eleven commenters,
                                                                                                       recordkeeping/reporting formats, and                  including one representing seven
                                               accuracy of EPA Protocol gases used for
                                                                                                       clarifying the language and applicability             specialty gas companies that provide the
                                               Part 75 purposes, these amendments
                                                                                                       of certain provisions.                                vast majority of EPA Protocol gases in
                                               required that these gases be obtained
                                               from specialty gas producers that                          Today’s preamble provides responses                the U.S., supported the PGVP, and three
                                               participate in a Protocol Gas                           to the major comments received on the                 commenters opposed it. The accuracy of
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                               Verification Program (PGVP). The final                  proposed rule and discusses any                       EPA Protocol gases is important because
                                               rule further provided that only PGVP                    resulting rule changes. The response to               these gases are used to help ensure that
                                               participants were allowed to market                     comments document (see Docket EPA–                    the national emission reduction goals of
                                               calibration gas as ‘‘EPA Protocol gas’’.                HQ–OAR–2009–0837) provides Agency                     the Clean Air Act are met.
                                               The January 24, 2008 rulemaking also                    responses to all of the relevant                         Response: Many of the proposed rule
                                               included a provision requiring                          comments received on the proposed                     provisions of § 75.21(g) have been
                                               minimum competency requirements for                     rule.                                                 finalized as proposed. Significant


                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010   19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00003   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM   28MRR3
                                               17290              Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

                                               changes to the PGVP provisions in                       not hold from year-to-year, but believes                 To maintain these costs, scheduling of
                                               § 75.21(g) are discussed below.                         that the following cost estimates are                 the PGVP audit activity during the year
                                                                                                       generally conservative. The 2010 audit                must be strictly followed by all the
                                               2. Cost
                                                                                                       consumed 715 hours of time to analyze                 companies involved in the audit.
                                               Background                                              and report on 57 cylinders. NIST                      Economy of batching similar gas
                                                  EPA proposed several rule changes                    believes they have designed a better                  cylinders and receipt of all similar
                                               that added a small number of PGVP-                      sampling system and can reduce that                   cylinders within a specific time frame
                                               related recordkeeping and reporting                     time to 550 hours for the same 57                     will enable NIST to control costs. Those
                                               requirements. An information collection                 cylinders. This amount of resources                   cylinders with the appropriate funding
                                               request (ICR) supporting statement was                  equals $1,500 per cylinder analysis and               documents that arrive within that time
                                               developed, as required by the                           report production, and is NIST’s                      frame will be part of the audit. Those
                                               Paperwork Reduction Act.                                estimate for those activities for a similar           that do not will be excluded. That is the
                                                  EPA Protocol gas production sites                    PGVP audit in 2011. Assuming the                      only way NIST will be able to control
                                               selling EPA Protocol gases to part 75                   above assumptions hold, NIST has                      costs.
                                               affected sources will be required to have               agreed to commit to this cost estimate                   The costs are minimized by the 4
                                               a small number of their cylinders                       for three years, until 2013 (see                      cylinder limit per production site, and
                                               analyzed each year, and provide annual                  Document ID# EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–                         the cost containment measures
                                               notification to EPA with basic                          0837–0058 in the docket).                             implemented by NIST and described in
                                               information on their facility and other                    The following costs are based on                   the preamble to the proposed rule.
                                               information relevant to the PGVP. EPA                   EPA’s 2010 Protocol gas audit. If NIST                3. Effective Dates
                                               anticipates that these costs will be                    analyzes 4 cylinders from each
                                               passed through to the customers, which                  production site, the total annual cost                Background
                                               are generally sources subject to part 75,               due to the PGVP would be                                EPA proposed to add
                                               including large electric utility and                    approximately $7,200 per production                   § 75.59(a)(9)(x)(A) to require that PGVP
                                               industrial companies.                                   site (see Document ID# EPA–HQ–OAR–                    recordkeeping start on and after the date
                                                                                                       2009–0837–0007 in the docket). This                   that is six months from the effective
                                               Summary of Comments and Responses                       cost includes cylinder analysis and                   date of the final rule. The PGVP
                                                 Comment: Several commenters                           report production by NIST ($1,667/                    reporting would start prior to or
                                               suggested that the ICR for the proposed                 cylinder), average one-way shipping                   concurrent with the submittal of the
                                               rule did not include sufficient detail                  costs back to the production site ($91/               relevant quarterly electronic data report
                                               and omitted certain costs associated                    cylinder), and average rental cost ($7/               on and after January 1, 2011.
                                               with part 75 recordkeeping and                          cylinder/month). The $1,667/cylinder
                                               reporting requirements. Another                         cost estimate covers some deviations,                 Summary of Comments, Responses and
                                               commenter stated that the proposed                      e.g., there may be carbon monoxide in                 Rule Changes
                                               PGVP program was ‘‘exorbitantly                         the gas mixtures, from the assumptions                   Comment: Several commenters
                                               expensive because it uses the analytical                made for the 2010 audit, and is therefore             requested clarification of the effective
                                               services of NIST.’’                                     higher than the $1,500/cylinder NIST                  dates for the PGVP provisions. One
                                                 Response: No rule changes were                        commitment. The total cost of NIST                    commenter requested that the Agency
                                               required to address the commenter’s                     analysis, report production, six months               provide enough time for production
                                               concerns. However, the Agency has                       cylinder rental, and shipping back to the             sites to submit the information required
                                               revised the ICR for the final rule to                   production site is approximately $1,800               to participate in the PGVP and for EPA
                                               include additional details and costs                    per cylinder (see Document ID# EPA–                   to notify Part 75 sources of the
                                               associated with part 75 recordkeeping                   HQ–OAR–2009–0837–0007 in the                          participating production sites.
                                               and reporting requirements. For a more                  docket).                                                 Response: EPA agrees that the
                                               detailed discussion of this issue, refer to                EPA estimates that the average                     wording in the proposed rule should be
                                               the ICR for the final rule.                             increased cost due to the PGVP will be                clearer. The effective date of the final
                                                 EPA performed an audit of EPA                         approximately $2 per cylinder (see                    rule will be 30 days from the date it is
                                               Protocol gases in 2010 and the National                 Table 3 in the ICR for the final rule, in             published in the Federal Register.
                                               Institute of Standards and Technology                   Docket EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0837).                            To provide more time for production
                                               (NIST) analyzed the cylinders EPA                       This estimate was derived from                        sites to submit necessary information to
                                               collected in the audit. NIST provided an                correspondence with both large and                    participate in the PGVP and for the
                                               initial estimate of $2,000 per cylinder to              small specialty gas companies, which                  Agency to inform Part 75 sources of the
                                               analyze tri-blend gas mixtures in the                   based their estimates on the number of                PGVP participants, EPA has amended
                                               2010 audit. The following costs for the                 cylinders they sold per year and the                  § 75.21(g)(6) to take effect 60 days from
                                               PGVP are based on assumptions similar                   above cost estimates. For a small                     publication of the final rule in the
                                               to those made for the 2010 audit. These                 company that sells fewer cylinders per                Federal Register. On and after that date,
                                               assumptions are: (a) That only NO, SO2                  year, the cost per cylinder will be higher            sources subject to Part 75 that use EPA
                                               and CO2 will be analyzed; (b) that only                 than for a larger company. However,                   Protocol gas will need to purchase such
                                               these compounds are within the gas                      even for a small company, the increased               gas from PGVP participants (or from a
                                               mixture along with balance gas nitrogen                 $2.00 per cylinder cost due to the PGVP               reseller that sells unaltered gas from a
                                               (additional compounds within the gas                    is insignificant in comparison to the                 PGVP participant). However,
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                               mixture, even if they are not analyzed,                 wide range of cost for the same type of               § 75.21(g)(7) allows EPA Protocol gas
                                               complicate the analysis of the primary                  EPA Protocol gas cylinder (EPA found                  cylinders certified by or ordered from
                                               components); and (c) that the                           the 2010 cost of the same tri-blend EPA               any production site prior to 60 days
                                               concentrations will all fall within a                   Protocol cylinder ranged from                         from publication of the final rule in the
                                               relatively narrow band that can be                      approximately $225–$665 in the U.S.                   Federal Register to be used up.
                                               defined in the low, mid and high ranges.                (see Document ID# EPA–HQ–OAR–                            Section 75.59(a)(9)(x)(A) and
                                               EPA notes that these assumptions may                    2009–0837–0009 in the docket)).                       § 75.64(a)(5) of the final rule require


                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010   19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00004   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM   28MRR3
                                                                  Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations                                           17291

                                               PGVP recordkeeping and reporting for                    information in the quarterly electronic               ISO 17025 ‘‘General Requirements for
                                               sources subject to part 75 to commence                  reports. Therefore, start and end dates               the Competence of Testing and
                                               180 calendar days from the date of                      and times are not needed. Further, the                Calibration Laboratories’’, but
                                               publication of the final rule in the                    reporting of low, mid or high-level gas               encourages companies to participate in
                                               Federal Register.                                       concentrations is already required by                 the PGVP. Certifying or accrediting to
                                                                                                       § 75.59(a)(3). In view of these                       ISO 17025 can be beneficial. However,
                                               4. Recordkeeping/Reporting                                                                                    the purpose of the ISO standard is
                                                                                                       considerations, the only additional
                                               Background                                              ECMPS reporting required by the final                 different from the purpose of the PGVP.
                                                 EPA proposed to add                                   rule consists of: (a) A code for the type             The purpose of ISO 17025 is to better
                                               § 75.59(a)(9)(x)(A) and to revise                       of EPA Protocol gas used; (b) the PGVP                assure that a laboratory has proper
                                               § 75.64(a)(5) to require Part 75 affected               vendor ID; (c) the cylinder expiration                quality assurance and quality control
                                               sources using EPA Protocol gas to                       date; and (d) the cylinder number. The                (QA/QC) practices in place. The idea is
                                               record and report, respectively: (1) Gas                reporting of Protocol gas type code is                that if proper QA/QC practices are in
                                               level code; (2) a code for the type of EPA              important for informing future PGVP                   place, better products will result.
                                               Protocol gas used; (3) start date and                   audits. The reporting of the PGVP                     However, this may not always be the
                                                                                                       vendor ID is essential to allow EPA to                case. As a matter of fact, one
                                               hour for EPA Protocol gas type code;
                                                                                                       determine that each EPA Protocol gas                  manufacturer (Scott Specialty Gases,
                                               (4) end date and hour (if applicable) for
                                                                                                       cylinder used by a Part 75 source is                  now a part of Air Liquide) pointed out
                                               EPA Protocol gas type code; (5) the
                                                                                                       from a participating EPA Protocol gas                 that ISO 17025 certification is not only
                                               PGVP vendor ID issued by EPA for the
                                                                                                       production site. See the response to the              extremely expensive, but it does not
                                               EPA Protocol gas production site that
                                                                                                       next comment for the reasons why we                   guarantee that a better protocol product
                                               supplied the gas cylinder; (6) start date
                                                                                                       are requiring cylinder expiration dates               will be manufactured. For example, one
                                               and hour for PGVP vendor ID; and (7)
                                                                                                       and cylinder numbers to be reported.                  gas manufacturer which held
                                               end date and hour (if applicable) for
                                                                                                          Comment: Two commenters desired                    certification to the ISO standard
                                               PGVP vendor ID. EPA also proposed to
                                                                                                       the PGVP program to be more rigorous.                 registered at least 1 failure in a blind
                                               revise § 75.59(a)(9)(x)(B) and                                                                                audit (see Document ID#s EPA–HQ–
                                               § 75.64(a)(5) to require the recording                     Response: With respect to
                                                                                                       recordkeeping and reporting, EPA has                  OAR–2009–0837–0069 and –0070_in
                                               and reporting, respectively, of the                                                                           the docket).
                                               information in (1), (2) and (5) above for               added electronic recordkeeping and
                                                                                                       reporting of cylinder expiration dates                  The only audits that ISO 17025
                                               each usage of Reference Method 3A or                                                                          requires are internal audits of
                                               Method 6C or 7E performed using EPA                     and cylinder numbers for all cylinders
                                                                                                       used for any certification,                           procedures, not products. The ISO
                                               Protocol gas for the certification,                                                                           standard states that these internal audits
                                               recertification, routine quality assurance              recertification, diagnostic, or quality
                                                                                                       assurance test required under Part 75.                are to be conducted ‘‘periodically’’, with
                                               or diagnostic testing (reportable                                                                             no time frame specified. The results of
                                               diagnostics only) of a Part 75 monitoring               The Agency believes that this will
                                                                                                       strengthen the PGVP by reducing or                    these audits are to be provided to clients
                                               system.                                                                                                       of the laboratory, but it is not clear that
                                                                                                       eliminating the use of expired cylinders,
                                               Summary of Comments, Responses and                      and by improving the tracking of                      the results would be publicly available.
                                               Rule Changes                                            cylinder information. It also will assist             Thus potential future clients may not be
                                                                                                                                                             aware of how the laboratory was
                                                  Comment: One commenter requested                     inspectors in their preparation for field
                                                                                                                                                             performing. The Agency believes that
                                               that EPA explain why such detailed                      audits of the CEMS. Sections
                                                                                                                                                             the PGVP audit results should be
                                               reporting of start and end dates and                    75.59(a)(7)(iv)(X) and 75.59(a)(9)(v)
                                                                                                                                                             publicly available to allow potential
                                               hours corresponding to use of a                         already require these two items to be
                                                                                                                                                             EPA Protocol gas customers to make a
                                               particular type of Protocol gas is                      recorded in limited situations or in
                                                                                                                                                             more informed purchasing decision.
                                               required and why the reporting of                       hardcopy only, and section 75.60(b)(6)                  The accuracy of EPA Protocol gases is
                                               Protocol gas type codes is important.                   already requires these two items to be                important because these gases are used
                                               The commenter generally believes that                   provided to the State, local agency or                to help ensure that the national
                                               tracking of information on individual                   EPA Regional Office in hardcopy RATA                  emission reduction goals of the Clean
                                               gas cylinders is not necessary and EPA                  and emission test reports, when such                  Air Act are met. The Agency’s goal is to
                                               has provided no justification for it. The               reports are requested.                                implement a cylinder audit program to
                                               commenter is also concerned that the                    5. ISO 17025                                          better ensure the quality of these gases.
                                               level of specificity may result in                                                                            EPA believes the best way to do that is
                                               implementation issues or errors that                    Background                                            to implement a PGVP and have a blind
                                               complicate reporting. For example, EPA                    The Agency proposed to add                          sample of cylinders analyzed by an
                                               proposes to require sources to record                   § 75.21(g) to establish a refined PGVP                independent, nationally recognized
                                               not only the start and end date, but also               rather than relying on ISO 17025.                     laboratory such as the National Institute
                                               the hour corresponding to use of a                                                                            of Standards and Technology. A blind
                                               particular type of protocol gas and a                   Summary of Comments, Responses and
                                                                                                                                                             sample is necessary to ensure that the
                                               particular PGVP vendor. In the past,                    Rule Changes
                                                                                                                                                             cylinders analyzed are more
                                               recorded start and end dates and hours                     Comment: One commenter suggested                   representative of routine production at
                                               have been problematic because of                        that EPA rely on ISO 17025 instead of                 each production site rather than
                                               differences between the way sources                     establishing a refined PGVP.
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                                                                                                                                             representative of the best possible
                                               interpret the rule and the way EPA’s                       Response: The Agency disagrees with                performance that would likely occur if
                                               software has been programmed.                           the commenter and has decided to                      the production site knew that its
                                                  Response: It was originally envisioned               finalize a refined PGVP in § 75.21(g)                 cylinder was being audited.
                                               that the PGVP related information                       instead of requiring compliance with                    Small and large specialty gas
                                               would be reported in the monitoring                     ISO 17025.                                            companies commented that requiring
                                               plan. However, § 75.64(a)(5) of the final                  EPA has no objection to specialty gas              conformance to ISO 17025 would be
                                               rule requires reporting of this                         companies certifying or accrediting to                significantly more expensive than


                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010   19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00005   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM   28MRR3
                                               17292              Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

                                               complying with the PGVP (see                            Summary of Comments, Responses and                       Response: Section 6.3.1 of Appendix
                                               Document ID#s EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–                          Rule Changes                                          A to Part 75 has been revised to clarify
                                               0837–0057, –0065, –0066, –0067, –0068,                     Comment: Several commenters                        that a Protocol gas blend may be used
                                               –0069, –0070, and –0073 in the docket).                 suggested that EPA use the code ‘‘C’’ for             as both a zero gas and span gas where
                                               One large specialty gas company stated                  a single-blend CO, ‘‘C2’’ for a single-               appropriate.
                                               that the PGVP would be more cost                        blend CO2, and ‘‘NSCC’’ for an EPA                       Comment: One commenter objected to
                                               effective and would provide an actual                   Protocol gas quad-blend standard                      certain multiple combination codes for
                                               representation of the quality of EPA                    consisting of four certified components,              Protocol gas mixtures, especially code
                                               Protocol gas cylinders.                                 NOX, SO2, CO2, and CO, and a balance                  SN1, which represents a bi-blend of SO2
                                                                                                       gas.                                                  and NOX because this gas mixture could
                                               6. Credit/Invoice Cancellation
                                                                                                          Response: Under Part 75, carbon                    potentially include sulfur dioxide and
                                               Background                                              monoxide is not required to be recorded               nitrogen dioxide in the same cylinder.
                                                                                                       or reported. Therefore, a code for that               According to the commenter, the
                                                  We proposed to add § 75.21(g)(5)(ii) to
                                                                                                       single blend gas cylinder will not be                 combination of nitrogen dioxide and
                                               require that EPA receive written proof of
                                                                                                       included in the reporting instructions.               sulfur dioxide mixtures cannot be
                                               a credit receipt or of cancellation of the
                                                                                                       EPA must use ‘‘CO2’’ as the code for CO2              manufactured because the nitrogen
                                               invoice for the cylinders being audited
                                                                                                       because it is used thoughout EPA’s                    dioxide and sulfur dioxide will react
                                               from the EPA Protocol gas production
                                                                                                       database to describe that parameter and               with each other causing stability issues
                                               site within two weeks of notifying the
                                                                                                       EPA wants to maintain consistent code                 with the mixture. The commenter
                                               EPA Protocol gas production site that its
                                                                                                       conventions in the ECMPS reporting                    questioned whether the SN1 mixture
                                               cylinders are being audited by EPA.
                                                                                                       software. Because NOX can be certified                means sulfur dioxide, and nitric oxide
                                               Summary of Comments, Responses and                      as NO, NO2 or NO and NO2, EPA has                     with the oxides of nitrogen reported.
                                               Rule Changes                                            added three codes to the list to represent               Response: Based on an August 2, 2010
                                                                                                       the quad blend NOX, CO2, SO2 and CO                   telephone call from EPA to a specialty
                                                  Comment: Several commenters                                                                                gas company, the Agency believes that
                                                                                                       and a balance gas: SNCC representing
                                               requested that EPA allow 30–45 days for                 SO2, NO, CO and CO2 and a balance gas,                an SO2 and NO2 combination may be
                                               submittal of the invoice nullification or               SN2CC representing SO2, NO2, CO and                   possible. However, if an SO2 and NO2
                                               credit receipt, claiming that two weeks                 CO2 and a balance gas, and SNXCC                      combination cannot be properly
                                               is insufficient time for large                          representing SO2, NO, NO2, CO and CO2                 manufactured, it probably will not be,
                                               organizations handling hundreds of                      and a balance gas.                                    and any such cylinders that are
                                               transactions and multiple accounts. One                    Comment: Several commenters                        improperly manufactured will likely fail
                                               commenter suggested that if EPA does                    suggested that EPA should make clear in               if audited in the PGVP. To clarify the
                                               not allow 30–45 days it should include                  the electronic reporting instructions that            meaning of the ‘‘SN1’’ code that was in
                                               the cost of purchasing the cylinders in                 the list of Protocol gas codes is not                 the proposed rule preamble, the ECMPS
                                               the bill that is presented to the Protocol              exclusive, meaning that these are not                 PGVP reporting instructions at http://
                                               gas manufacturers instead of a credit                   the only formulations of EPA Protocols,               www.epa.gov/airmarkets/business/
                                               being issued to them. Another                           and that other types of EPA Protocols                 ecmps/docs/pgvp_aetb.pdf now include
                                               commenter added that because a                          could be made to meet customer needs.                 cylinder gas type codes: ‘‘SN’’ for SO2
                                               producer’s participation in the PGVP is                    Response: EPA agrees and will                      and NO, ‘‘SN2’’ for SO2 and NO2, and
                                               contingent on meeting this requirement                  provide this clarification in the ECMPS               ‘‘SNX’’ for SO2, NO, and NO2 instead of
                                               in a timely manner, the time period                     electronic reporting instructions.                    ‘‘SN1’’.
                                               should not be so short as to jeopardize                    Comment: Several commenters
                                               a producer’s status as an EPA protocol                  requested that EPA provide an option                  8. Use of 95% Confidence Interval in
                                               gas producer. In addition, the                          for ‘‘other,’’ which would indicate a                 Tag Values
                                               commenter opined that the rule should                   formulation other than those identified               Background
                                               expressly permit the electronic                         on the list.
                                               transmission of proof of cancellation of                   Response: The Protocol gas type codes                EPA proposed to revise section 5.1.4
                                               the invoice or crediting the purchaser’s                have been revised to include an ‘‘Other               (EPA Protocol Gases) of Appendix A to
                                               account.                                                EPA-Approved EPA Protocol Gas Blend’’                 Part 75 to remove the reference to the
                                                                                                       category. However, sources will need to               95-percent confidence interval, and to
                                                  Response: EPA agrees that two weeks
                                                                                                       receive EPA approval to use it. EPA has               revise sections 5.1.4 and 5.1.5 (Research
                                               for submitting a credit receipt or a
                                                                                                       found that if an ‘‘Other’’ category is                Gas Mixtures) to remove the reference to
                                               cancellation of the invoice is
                                                                                                       allowed, sources will sometimes simply                calculating uncertainty using the
                                               insufficient time, and that electronic as
                                                                                                       use that category instead of selecting the            statistical procedures (or equivalent
                                               well as written credit receipt or
                                                                                                       correct one. EPA will add new codes to                statistical techniques) that are listed in
                                               cancellation of the invoice is acceptable.
                                                                                                       ECMPS as needed. The ECMPS system                     Section 2.1.8 of the ‘‘EPA Traceability
                                               Section 75.21(g)(5)(ii) of the final rule
                                                                                                       allows these types of additions to be                 Protocol for Assay and Certification of
                                               allows up to 45 calendar days for
                                                                                                       made quickly and easily.                              Gaseous Calibration Standards’’ (EPA
                                               production sites to provide EPA with
                                                                                                          Comment: One commenter questioned                  Traceability Protocol), September 1997,
                                               electronic or written credit receipt or
                                                                                                       the need for EPA Protocol gas type                    as amended August 25, 1999, EPA–600/
                                               invoice cancellation.
                                                                                                       codes.                                                R–97/121.
                                                                                                                                                               Summary of Comments, Responses
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                               7. Gas Type Codes                                          Response: The reporting of Protocol
                                               Background                                              gas type code is important for informing              and Rule Changes
                                                                                                       the cylinder selection for the annual                   Comment: Several commenters
                                                 EPA proposed to include EPA                           PGVP audits.                                          suggested that the current provisions
                                               Protocol gas type codes in the ECMPS                       Comment: One commenter requested                   regarding uncertainty in sections 5.1.4
                                               electronic reporting instructions to                    that EPA clarify that it is still allowing            and 5.1.5 of Appendix A to part 75 are
                                               inform cylinder selection for the annual                the use of a blend of gases as both zero              scientifically defensible and should
                                               PGVP audits.                                            gas and span gas.                                     remain. To tighten the confidence


                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010   19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00006   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM   28MRR3
                                                                  Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations                                           17293

                                               interval would require the enlargement                  vendor concentration values is greater                Summary of Comments, Responses and
                                               of the uncertainty which the entire gas                 than 2.2%. The 2.2% value is                          Rule Changes
                                               industry (including NIST and specialty                  determined by using the ‘‘paired t test’’                Comment: One commenter stated that
                                               gas manufacturers) have long                            at 95% confidence, with an uncertainty                Option 1 could result in a specialty gas
                                               encountered. For example, instead of                    of plus or minus 2.0% (fixed by Part 75,              company, which is removed after
                                               +/¥2% at the 95% confidence interval                    Appendix A, section 5.1.4(b)) and plus                December 31, being unable to be relisted
                                               it might change to +/-3% at the 99%                     or minus 1.0% (expanded uncertainty                   for a length of time that is more than
                                               confidence interval.                                    with coverage factor k=2) for the gas                 intended.
                                                  Response: The Agency is persuaded                    vendor and audit, respectively. If the                   Response: EPA agrees that if the NIST
                                               by these comments and has decided to                    plus or minus 1.0% audit expanded                     audit report takes longer than one year
                                               retain the references in sections 5.1.4                 uncertainty value changes, the 2.2%                   to complete so that EPA receives the
                                               and 5.1.5 to a 95% confidence interval                  value may change.                                     audit report in the first half of a
                                               and calculation of uncertainty using the                                                                      calendar year and a production site was
                                               statistical procedures (or equivalent                      Comment: ‘‘EPA should adopt a 2%
                                                                                                                                                             not in the audit report, that production
                                               statistical techniques) that are listed in              uncertainty for the NIST analysis of the
                                                                                                                                                             site might not be re-listed for up to two
                                               Section 2.1.8 of the EPA Traceability                   cylinders.’’
                                                                                                                                                             years. In this situation, section
                                               Protocol.                                                  Response: The Agency disagrees. An                 75.21(g)(5)(iii) of the proposed rule did
                                               9. Uncertainty of Results                               expanded uncertainty (coverage factor                 not allow re-listing until December 31 of
                                                                                                       k=2) of plus or minus 1.0 percent                     the next year. This period of time before
                                               Background                                              (calculated combined standard                         relisting is longer than was intended. In
                                                  The Agency proposed to add                           uncertainty of plus or minus 0.5%),                   addition, EPA understands that it would
                                               § 75.21(g)(9)(ii) to require that the                   inclusive, or better in the NIST analysis             be unfair not to re-list a production site
                                               concentration of each audited cylinder                  was assumed when the PGVP costs were                  due to circumstances beyond the
                                               be analyzed by NIST with an                             estimated in the proposed rule. A 2010                production site’s control. Therefore, the
                                               uncertainty of plus or minus 1.0 percent                EPA audit of EPA Protocol gases                       Agency has revised sections
                                               (inclusive) or better, unless otherwise                 required a 0.5% uncertainty in the NIST               75.21(g)(5)(ii) and (iii) to address these
                                               approved by EPA. EPA also proposed to                   analysis for gas concentrations                       concerns. For the two relevant
                                               add a Figure 3 in Appendix B to part 75                 commonly used by Part 75 sources. If                  situations in sections 75.21(g)(5)(ii) and
                                               with explanatory text at the bottom of                  EPA were to allow the uncertainty of the              (iii), a production site is eligible for
                                               the figure stating that ‘‘A gaseous                     NIST analysis to be up to ±2.0%, the                  relisting 180 calendar days after the date
                                               component is said to fail only if all                   audit results would need to allow for                 of notice of its delisting, provided that
                                               available analytical techniques used in                                                                       the information required by § 75.21(g)(1)
                                                                                                       approximately a 4.0% difference
                                               the audit indicate greater than a 2.0%                                                                        is submitted to EPA.
                                                                                                       between the NIST result and the vendor
                                               difference from the cylinder tag value.’’                                                                        Comment: One commenter opposed
                                                                                                       result before a cylinder could be said to             Option 2 because it reduced the number
                                               Summary of Comments, Responses and                      fail. A ±2.0% uncertainty for the NIST                of cylinders per site selected for
                                               Rule Changes                                            audit results defeats the purpose of the              verification. This commenter also stated
                                                 Comment: One commenter suggested                      PGVP. The Part 75 accuracy standard for               that while the proposed four cylinders
                                               that EPA revise the text at the bottom of               EPA Protocol gases is ±2.0% (see Part                 do not constitute a representative
                                               Figure 3 of Appendix B of Part 75 so                    75, Appendix A, section 5.1.4(b)). To                 sample, two cylinders would be even
                                               that any overlap between the original                   verify that a gas meets this standard,                less so. Two commenters opposed
                                               tag error band and the audit analysis                   ideally NIST would need to have a 0.0%                Option 3 stating that it would benefit
                                               error band be considered when                           uncertainty. The further away the NIST                large specialty gas companies and
                                               determining the pass/fail basis of a                    audit results are from a 0.0%                         would assume that all production sites
                                               cylinder. For example, if the original tag              uncertainty, the less certain it is that              for a specialty gas company would have
                                               had an error band of 2%, and the audit                  this standard is achieved. Section                    equivalent capabilities. This commenter
                                               analysis had an error band of 1%, then                  75.21(g)(9)(ii) in the final rule allows              also stated as was shown in the IG’s
                                               more than a 3% difference would fail                    EPA to approve a greater NIST                         report it is possible, indeed, likely, that
                                               the PGVP. If the error band concept is                  analytical uncertainty if required, e.g.,             a manufacturer with multiple sites will
                                               not used, the assumption is there is no                 for certain low concentration gases. EPA              have some production sites that pass
                                               propagation of the two errors and the                   has added two new definitions in                      and some that fail.
                                               NIST audit analysis is error free (has an               section 72.2 to help clarify the terms                   Response: While the Agency
                                               uncertainty of zero). The uncertainty of                ‘‘expanded uncertainty’’ and ‘‘coverage               understands the shortcomings of Option
                                               the PGVP begins at the NIST                             factor’’ (see http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/            1, 2 and 3, EPA believes that these
                                               metrological institute level where even                                                                       options are necessary to preserve the
                                                                                                       Uncertainty/coverage.html).
                                               their internal standards have                                                                                 ability of producers to sell EPA Protocol
                                               uncertainties associated with the tag                   10. Implementation Options                            gases in possible (but unlikely)
                                               value. The Protocol gas manufacturer’s                                                                        situations where cylinder procurement,
                                                                                                       Background
                                               uncertainties and the NIST uncertainties                                                                      shipping, or analyses take longer than
                                               must be propagated in order to achieve                     EPA proposed four implementation                   expected to complete, and for EPA to
                                               a combined error band. We cannot                                                                              implement the PGVP under a variety of
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                                                                                       options for the PGVP in the preamble to
                                               assume one or the other analytical                      the June 11, 2010 proposed rule                       possible conditions. However, note that
                                               process is error free.                                  regarding the number of production                    all three of these options are
                                                 Response: EPA has amended the                         sites and cylinders that are audited each             incorporated in Option 4. Two
                                               statement at the bottom of Figure 3 in                  year and the length of time allotted to               commenters supported Option 4 and
                                               part to read: A gaseous component is                                                                          two commenters supported Option 4 but
                                                                                                       NIST to analyze the cylinders and to
                                               said to fail when the absolute value of                                                                       without Option 1. For the reasons
                                                                                                       report the results.
                                               the difference between the audit and                                                                          previously stated, EPA will retain the


                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010   19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00007   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM   28MRR3
                                               17294              Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

                                               maximum flexibility of Option 4 when                    Appendix A to part 75 to state that an                   (A) Have no conflict of interest with
                                               implementing the final rule. Consistent                 EPA Protocol gas cylinder certified by or             any participating EPA Protocol gas
                                               with the preamble discussion in the                     ordered from any production site no                   production site;
                                               proposed rule (see 75 FR 33395, June                    later than 60 days after the date of                     (B) Be capable of analyzing EPA
                                               11, 2010), the Agency has also revised                  publication of the final rule in the                  Protocol gas cylinders with an expanded
                                               section 75.21(g)(10) to allow a                         Federal Register may be used for the                  uncertainty (coverage factor k=2) of plus
                                               participating EPA Protocol gas                          purposes of this part until the earlier of            or minus 1.0 percent (calculated
                                               production site to continue to sell EPA                 the cylinder’s expiration date or the date            combined standard uncertainty of plus
                                               Protocol gas cylinders in the event that                on which the cylinder gas pressure                    or minus 0.5%) or better;
                                               none of its cylinders are audited.                      reaches 150 psig. The Agency chose to                    (C) Use NIST-certified analytical
                                                  Comment: Two commenters preferred                    use ‘‘certified by’’ instead of                       reference standards of appropriate
                                               that the PGVP be more rigorous.                         ‘‘manufactured by’’ because a cylinder                mixtures;
                                                  Response: With respect to                            could be manufactured and certified for,                 (D) Have no analytical interferences or
                                               implementation options, EPA has added                   e.g., two years, and then re-certified for            correct for them;
                                               the following text in section                           up to another two years if it was not                    (E) Identify equipment and calibration
                                               75.21(g)(9)(iv) to expedite the posting of              consumed. EPA does not want cylinders                 procedures that will be used to conduct
                                               audit results: ‘‘To be considered in the                to be re-certified by an EPA Protocol gas             the testing;
                                               final posted audit report, EPA must                     production site that was not                             (F) Provide credentials of key
                                               receive comments, and any cylinder re-                  participating in the PGVP and continue                personnel conducting the testing and
                                               analyses from participating EPA                         to be used for potentially four years or              analysis;
                                               Protocol gas production sites within 45                 more after the PGVP takes effect.
                                               days of the participating EPA Protocol                                                                           (G) Provide assurances that the
                                               gas production site’s receipt of the draft                 Section 75.21(g)(7) and section 6.5.10             analytical lab will adhere to cost-
                                               redacted audit report sent by EPA.’’                    in Appendix A to part 75 have also been               containment provisions in any contract
                                                                                                       slightly revised to allow that in the                 it signs, and a description of the cost
                                               11. Use of Existing Cylinders                           event that an EPA Protocol gas                        containment provisions it would agree
                                               Background                                              production site is removed from the list              to; and
                                                                                                       of PGVP participants on the same date                    (H) Provide a date on which the
                                                  The Agency proposed to add
                                                                                                       as or after the date on which a particular            analytical lab will be available to begin
                                               § 75.21(g)(6) and to revise section 6.5.10
                                                                                                       cylinder has been certified or ordered,               PGVP cylinder analyses.
                                               in Appendix A to Part 75 to allow for
                                                                                                       that gas cylinder may continue to be                     EPA is interested in determining: (a)
                                               the situation when an EPA Protocol gas
                                                                                                       used for the purposes of this part until              Whether the above acceptance criteria
                                               production site is removed from the list
                                                                                                       the earlier of the cylinder’s expiration              are sufficient; (b) how many labs could
                                               of PGVP participants after their gases
                                                                                                       date or the date on which the cylinder                meet the above criteria or other
                                               are procured, but before the gases have
                                               been consumed. In that event, the gas                   gas pressure reaches 150 psig.                        suggested criteria; (c) how compliance
                                               cylinders may continue to be used for                      As an example, a gas cylinder can be               with the acceptance criteria can be
                                               the purposes of this part until the earlier             certified for two years and then be re-               verified; and (d) contact information for
                                               of the cylinder’s expiration date or the                certified for another two years, if it has            the labs that could meet appropriate
                                               date on which the cylinder gas pressure                 not been consumed and its pressure is                 criteria.
                                               reaches 150 psig. EPA also proposed to                  still above 500 psig. EPA does not want                  Would use of multiple labs be
                                               add Section 75.21(g)(7) and to revise                   cylinders obtained from production                    appropriate under the PGVP? Please
                                               section 6.5.10 in Appendix A to Part 75                 sites that are not participating in the               consider that use of multiple labs would
                                               to allow EPA Protocol gas cylinders                     PGVP to potentially be used for four                  mean: (a) Different analysts, reference
                                               purchased prior to the effective date of                years (or more) after the PGVP takes                  material, equipment, and analytical
                                               the final rule from a production site that              effect. To prevent this from occurring,               techniques would be used by the
                                               is not participating in the PGVP to be                  statements have been added to                         different labs; (b) possible logistical
                                               used for the purposes of this part until                § 75.21(g)(7) and section 6.5.10 of                   problems with EPA contractors
                                               the earlier of the cylinder’s expiration                Appendix A, prohibiting a production                  mistakenly shipping cylinders to the
                                               date or the date on which the cylinder                  site that is not participating in the PGVP            wrong lab, causing delays and possibly
                                               gas pressure reaches 150 psig.                          from recertifying such cylinders to                   lost cylinders; (c) possible problem with
                                                                                                       extend their useful life and providing                intercomparison of results because there
                                               Summary of Comments, Responses and                                                                            would not be a common reference
                                                                                                       those cylinders to a source subject to
                                               Rule Changes                                                                                                  standard, analyst, equipment, or
                                                                                                       part 75.
                                                  Comment: Several commenters                                                                                analytical technique; and (d) possible
                                               supported these provisions, but                         12. If NIST Withdraws From                            increase in the chance of collusion
                                               requested that the Agency clarify that all              Participation                                         between a lab and a production site that
                                               cylinders ordered before the effective                  Request for Comment                                   pays the lab.
                                               date of the final rule be allowed for part
                                                                                                         In the unlikely event that the National             B. Amendments to the Minimum
                                               75 purposes through their stated
                                                                                                       Institute of Standards and Technology                 Competency Requirements for Air
                                               expiration date or a final pressure of 150
                                                                                                       (NIST) withdraws from participation in                Emission Testing
                                               psi. Clear, definitive wording on this
                                                                                                       the PGVP, EPA requests comments on
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                               subject will prevent the waste—both                                                                           1. Need for the AETB Requirements
                                               economic and environmental—of                           how an analytical lab should be selected
                                                                                                       to analyze cylinders collected under the              Background
                                               potentially thousands of cylinders that
                                               may be in use or may have valid service                 PGVP. Comments should be sent to                        EPA proposed to add § 75.21(f) and to
                                               lives as of the effective date of the final             Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–                        revise section 6.1.2 of Appendix A to
                                               rule.                                                   0837. The Agency suggests that such an                part 75 to replace the existing air
                                                  Response: EPA agrees and has revised                 analytical lab should meet the following              emission testing body (AETB)
                                               § 75.21(g)(7) and section 6.5.10 in                     minimum criteria:                                     requirements.


                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010   19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00008   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM   28MRR3
                                                                  Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations                                          17295

                                               Summary of Comments, Responses and                      compliance with the ASTM standard                     someone unfamiliar with the business
                                               Rule Changes                                            will not prevent mistakes.                            side of the industry, but this commenter
                                                                                                          Voluntary compliance with any                      did not provide any supporting data.
                                                  Comment: Several commenters                          minimum competency standard has not                   This commenter further stated that the
                                               supported the AETB minimum                              worked for the past 30 years, which is                proposed AETB requirements will not
                                               competency requirements. However,                       how long EPA and other organizations                  drive prices down, and whatever
                                               several commenters questioned the need                  have tried to develop an acceptable                   increase in price there is cannot
                                               for these requirements. These                           standard for stack testers. There are                 necessarily be passed on to the
                                               commenters suggested that the ASTM D                    many reasons why voluntary                            customer. In addition, smaller testing
                                               7036–04 provisions are subjective,                      compliance has not worked, including                  firms suffer more from this increased
                                               arbitrary or unclear and are not                        disagreement among stack test                         cost, even though they may be the better
                                               designed such that each provision could                 companies on a minimum competency                     choice in many cases. The same
                                               be a federally enforceable regulatory                   standard, and the sources’ often used                 commenter noted that EPA ‘‘assumes in
                                               requirement; and that there is no                       practice of hiring the lowest bidder. The             its economic analysis that the majority
                                               evidence that compliance with the                       lack of voluntary compliance with a                   of tests done are for part 75. That is
                                               ASTM standard will prevent mistakes.                    minimum competency standard is also                   patently false, at least for many if not
                                               These commenters suggested a more                       why various States, including                         most companies.’’
                                               appropriate approach is to encourage                    Louisiana, have developed their own                      Response: The economic analysis
                                               voluntary compliance.                                   stack testing regulatory standards. A                 only included Part 75 tests because the
                                                  Response: Small and large stack                      driving force for the development of the              proposed rule only applies to Part 75
                                               testing companies, sources subject to                   ASTM standard was to prevent the                      sources. Unless a stack test company
                                               part 75, and State and EPA regulators in                patchwork of standards that was                       accredits to ASTM D 7036–04 through,
                                               the ASTM D 7036–04 work group                           beginning to occur throughout the U.S.                e.g., the Stack Testing Accreditation
                                               believe that implementation of the                      If each State were to develop its own                 Council, the stack test company does
                                               ASTM Practice will result in improved                   standard for stack testing, testing costs             not have to meet ASTM D 7036–04 for
                                               data quality. EPA believes the evidence                 would increase as stack testers                       non-part 75 testing. The Agency notes
                                               is strong that unqualified, under-trained               performing work in multiple States                    that if a company chooses to accredit to
                                               and inexperienced testers are routinely                 would have to qualify in and abide by                 the ASTM standard, it may be possible
                                               deployed on testing projects. EPA has                   differing requirements in multiple                    to limit the scope of accreditation to
                                               had experiences with tests that have                    jurisdictions. EPA notes that the                     Part 75 testing. In any case, the
                                               been invalidated or called into question                Louisiana DEQ has agreed to cancel its                proposed rule does not require
                                               due to poor performance by testing                      stack testing accreditation program (see              accreditation. A letter of certification
                                               contractors (see Document ID#s EPA–                     Document ID# EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–                         signed by senior management of the
                                               HQ–OAR–2009–0837–0015, –0016,                           0837–0072 in the docket) and in its                   AETB will suffice.
                                               –0062, and –0063, and Document ID#                                                                               Comment: One commenter suggested
                                                                                                       place substitute accreditation to ASTM
                                               EPA–HQ–OAR–2005–0132–0035 in the                                                                              that EPA include: (1) The cost for staff
                                                                                                       D 7036–04. Louisiana DEQ also agrees
                                               dockets). For example, an EPA Office of                                                                       time to develop and implement the
                                                                                                       to recognize third party accreditors such
                                                                                                                                                             quality manual required by the ASTM
                                               Inspector General Audit Report ‘‘Report                 as the Stack Testing Accreditation
                                                                                                                                                             practice, including document control
                                               of EPA’s Oversight of State Stack                       Council.
                                                                                                                                                             procedures, hiring of additional
                                               Testing Programs’’, Report Number                          Many of the proposed rule provisions
                                                                                                                                                             personnel, performance of annual
                                               2000–P–00019, September 11, 2000,                       of § 75.21(f) and section 6.1.2 have been             audits, and documentation of corrective
                                               states that the New Jersey Department of                finalized as proposed. Significant                    action, (2) application fees and the cost
                                               Environmental Protection (NJDEP) made                   changes to these sections are discussed               of preparing applications for
                                               significant corrections to 57 percent of                below.                                                accreditation and/or QI qualification, (3)
                                               stack tests, that 86 percent of the test
                                                                                                       2. Cost                                               the cost of QI exams, including tuition
                                               protocols were deficient, 28 percent of
                                                                                                                                                             for preparatory courses, exam fees, and
                                               the test programs had to be repeated for                Background
                                                                                                                                                             travel expenses, (4) any new costs
                                               at least one parameter, and 26 percent                    EPA proposed to add § 75.21(f) and to               associated with preparation of test plans
                                               of the test reports required significant                revise section 6.1.2 of Appendix A to                 and reports to comply with the specific
                                               correction, clarification, or were rejected             part 75 to require AETBs that perform                 criteria in the practice, and (5) cost of
                                               by the NJDEP. The NJDEP states they                     certain part 75 QA tests to provide a                 required records storage and backup.
                                               have seen errors in approximately 50                    certification that they conform with                     Response: The Agency believes that
                                               percent of recent stack tests.                          ASTM D 7036–04. EPA also revised                      AETBs should already be operating in a
                                                  While EPA believes that meeting the                  § 75.59 and § 75.64 to include a small                manner consistent with ASTM D 7036–
                                               requirements of ASTM D7036 and                          number of AETB-related recordkeeping                  04. However, EPA revised the ICR to
                                               having a Qualified Individual on site                   and reporting requirements. For these                 include additional supporting detail for
                                               during testing does not guarantee proper                requirements, an information collection               the estimated burden associated with
                                               performance of any individual test,                     request (ICR) supporting statement was                increased annual quality-assurance and
                                               these actions will likely result in proper              developed, as required by the                         maintenance costs that would be passed
                                               test execution and high quality data                    Paperwork Reduction Act.                              on to a unit subject to Part 75. Based on
                                               generation. EPA also believes that third                                                                      information provided by stack testing
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                               party (e.g., State agency) oversight helps              Summary of Comments, Responses and                    firms, a conservative one percent
                                               ensure that testing is properly                         Rule Changes                                          increase was applied to the previously
                                               conducted and strongly encourages such                     Comments: Several commenters                       established annual O&M costs per unit
                                               oversight to continue. Although there                   suggested that AETB costs were                        at each respondent facility. This is
                                               might be no evidence that compliance                    underestimated. One commenter stated                  based on the average stack testing
                                               with the ASTM standard will prevent                     that EPA’s economic analysis is highly                industry costs of preparing a QA/QC
                                               mistakes, there is also no evidence that                flawed and was clearly prepared by                    manual ($6,000), obtaining QSTI


                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010   19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00009   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM   28MRR3
                                               17296              Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

                                               certification ($1,200), and annual                      even less time for companies to come                  Agency could consider proposing
                                               operating costs of maintaining the                      into compliance with the AETB                         revisions of the rule to require
                                               quality control system ($5,000–$50,000                  provisions. Therefore, to better ensure               accreditation.
                                               depending on size). The increased stack                 that every stack test company has a
                                                                                                                                                             5. Scope of Testing
                                               testing overhead costs translate into an                reasonable time to comply with ASTM
                                               increased performance test cost of $68                  D 7036–04, EPA has extended both the                  Background
                                               to $549 per RATA test depending on the                  compliance date in § 75.21(f) and the                   EPA proposed to add § 75.21(f) and to
                                               size of the company. The increased cost                 commencement date in section 6.1.2(a)                 revise section 6.1.2(b) in Appendix A to
                                               per test drops even further if applied to               of Appendix A to 365 days after the date              Part 75, among other things, to limit the
                                               all types of tests performed by typical                 of publication of the final rule in the               scope of testing required to be
                                               stack testing companies. EPA assumes                    Federal Register. Section 75.64(a)(5) has             performed by AETBs, as defined in
                                               that the costs will be passed through to                also been revised to require the                      § 72.2 of this chapter. Section 75.21(f)
                                               the customers, which are generally                      information in §§ 75.59(a)(15), (b)(6),               and section 6.1.2(b) would require
                                               sources subject to part 75, including                   and (d)(4) to be provided commencing                  AETBs that perform relative accuracy
                                               large electric utility and industrial                   365 days after the publication date of                testing under 75.74(c)(2)(ii), section 6.5
                                               companies.                                              the final rule in the Federal Register.               of Appendix A to Part 75, and section
                                               3. Effective Dates                                      4. Accreditation                                      2.3.1 of Appendix B to Part 75, and
                                                                                                                                                             stack testing under § 75.19 and section
                                               Background                                              Background                                            2.1 of Appendix E to Part 75 to provide
                                                  EPA proposed to add § 75.59(a)(9)(xi),                  EPA proposed to revise section                     a certification that they conform with
                                               § 75.59(a)(15), § 75.59(b)(6), and                      6.1.2(b) in Appendix A to part 75 to                  ASTM D 7036–04. Conformance to the
                                               § 75.59(d)(4) to require that AETB-                     require a part 75 source owner or                     requirements of ASTM D 7036–04
                                               related recordkeeping start on and after                operator to obtain from an AETB a                     would apply only to these tests
                                               the date that is six months from the                    certification that as of the time of testing          performed on Part 75 affected sources.
                                               effective date of the final rule. The                   the AETB is operating in conformance
                                                                                                                                                             Summary of Comments, Responses and
                                               Agency proposed to revise Section                       with ASTM D 7036–04. This
                                                                                                                                                             Rule Changes
                                               75.64(a)(5) to require the AETB-related                 certification must be provided in the
                                               reporting to start prior to or concurrent               form of either (1) a certificate of                      Comment: One commenter suggested
                                               with the submittal of the relevant                      accreditation for the relevant test                   that if an AETB fails to declare a limit
                                               quarterly electronic data report on and                 methods issued by a recognized,                       on the applicability of ASTM D 7036–
                                               after January 1, 2011.                                  national accreditation body; or (2) a                 04 and fails to perform any work in full
                                                                                                       letter of certification for the relevant test         conformance to ASTM D 7036–04, this
                                               Summary of Comments, Responses and                                                                            would jeopardize even that work that
                                                                                                       methods signed by a member of the
                                               Rule Changes                                                                                                  may have been performed in accordance
                                                                                                       senior management staff of the AETB.
                                                  Comment: The Agency received                         EPA also requested comment on                         with the standard. The preamble to the
                                               requests to extend the AETB compliance                  whether the Agency should require                     proposed rule indicates that an AETB
                                               deadline from three commenters. One of                  accreditation.                                        would be evaluated against its quality
                                               those commenters suggested that EPA                                                                           manual when assessing AETB
                                               extend the AETB compliance deadline                     Summary of Comments, Responses and                    conformance to the standard. The
                                               to January 2012. None of the                            Rule Changes                                          commenter recommends that the final
                                               commenters thought that EPA was                            Comment: Several commenters                        rule clarify the limits of applicability of
                                               providing too much time. Several                        opposed requiring accreditation. One                  ASTM D 7036–04 when evaluating an
                                               commenters requested that EPA clarify                   commenter requested that EPA                          AETB’s conformance to ASTM D 7036–
                                               the effective dates of the AETB-related                 eventually require third party                        04.
                                               provisions.                                             accreditation for all AETBs. The                         Response: Section 4.1, Note 3 in
                                                  Response: EPA agrees that the                        commenter recognizes, however, that                   ASTM D 7036–04 states: ‘‘There is no
                                               wording in the proposed rule could be                   the U.S. accreditation program is just                requirement to define a scope of testing.
                                               clearer. The effective date of the final                beginning and that the requirement for                It is a requirement of this practice that
                                               rule is 30 days from the date it is                     all AETBs to be accredited may be                     prior to performing a test method for the
                                               published in the Federal Register. The                  premature, and suggested the following                first time, the AETB has in place
                                               Agency agrees that a compliance                         approach: Section 6.1.2(b)(2) should be               resources, training, and QA/QC
                                               deadline for the AETB-related                           amended to include a ‘‘sunset clause’’                consistent with this practice to insure
                                               provisions of 365 days from publication                 for self-certified AETBs. Specifically,               data of acceptable quality are
                                               of the final rule in the Federal Register               five years after the effective date of the            produced.’’ It is EPA’s intent in this
                                               is more reasonable for several reasons.                 final rule AETBs should not have the                  rulemaking that the ASTM D 7036–04
                                               There are approximately 400 stack test                  option to self-certify and must have a                scope of testing be limited to Part 75
                                               companies in the U.S. Only about 30                     certificate of accreditation from a third             relative accuracy test audits, and Part 75
                                               percent of them have at least one                       party accreditation body. This five year              stack tests related to Appendix E and
                                               qualified individual. But even these                    period provides more than ample time                  low mass emitters. However, EPA
                                               companies may not yet be fully                          for the maturation of U.S. AETB                       understands the concern of the
                                               compliant with ASTM D 7036–04.                          accreditation programs.                               commenter and has revised section
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                               Further, the large amount of near term                     Response: The commenter did not                    6.1.2(a) of Appendix A to part 75 to
                                               stack testing that must be performed to                 provide any evidence to suggest that                  allow an AETB to limit its conformance
                                               respond to the Agency’s requests for                    accreditation is any better at assuring               to ASTM D 7036–04 to units subject to
                                               information collection under Section                    compliance with ASTM D 7036–04 than                   this part and to the test methods
                                               114 of the Clean Air Act to assess the                  self-certification. Over time, if evidence            required by this part. Section 6.1.2(b)
                                               emissions of hazardous air pollutants                   is found that self-certification is no                has been similarly revised. Unless a
                                               from electric generating units provides                 longer appropriate, then at that time the             stack test company accredits to ASTM D


                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010   19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00010   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM   28MRR3
                                                                  Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations                                           17297

                                               7036–04 through, e.g., the Stack Testing                test results. Do not give this false impression.      regardless of whether an AETB fully
                                               Accreditation Council, the stack test                   It will lead to worse testing and more                conforms to ASTM D7036–04.’’
                                               company does not have to meet ASTM                      acceptance of invalid testing.                          The Agency also wishes to clarify that
                                                                                                          ‘‘(3) Accreditation does not mean a test is
                                               D 7036–04 for non-part 75 testing. The                  valid. Some regulatory agencies will believe
                                                                                                                                                             an AETB’s failure to conform to ASTM
                                               Agency notes that even if a company                     this section means this. This section then            D 7036–04 with respect to testing at a
                                               chooses to accredit to the ASTM                         leads to lack of review and of enforcement of         particular unit does not affect its ability
                                               standard, it may be possible to limit the               valid testing; the incentive for testers will be      to certify conformance prior to
                                               scope of accreditation to Part 75 testing.              to get accreditation, then cut corners. We all        conducting testing at another unit as
                                               In any case, the proposed rule does not                 know unplanned things happen while source             long as it is following the procedures in
                                               require accreditation. A letter of                      testing that may require method                       ASTM D 7036–04 for addressing
                                                                                                       modification. However, source testers seem
                                               certification signed by senior                                                                                nonconformance.
                                                                                                       to forget or not realize they are actually
                                               management of the AETB will suffice.                    modifying the test method.’’                          7. Exams
                                               6. Effect on Validity of Test Data                         Response: EPA understands that it                  Background
                                               Background                                              may be unfair to hold an owner or
                                                                                                       operator of a source subject to Part 75                 EPA proposed to add section 6.1.2(e)
                                                 EPA proposed to add section 6.1.2(f)                                                                        in Appendix A to Part 75 to require
                                                                                                       responsible for certain actions (or
                                               in Appendix A to Part 75, which states                  inactions) related to an external AETB’s              having at least one Qualified Individual
                                               that meeting two conditions (1)                         compliance with ASTM D7036–04 and                     (QI) on site conducting or overseeing
                                               providing to the owner or operator of a                 attempted to address this in section                  applicable tests. A QI must pass
                                               part 75 source with a certificate of                    6.1.2(f) of the proposed rule by limiting             appropriate exam(s), described in ASTM
                                               accreditation or letter of certification                the responsibility of the owner or                    D 7036–04, covering the test methods
                                               that an AETB is operating in                            operator of a part 75 source.                         the QI will perform.
                                               conformance with ASTM D 7036–04;                           As the commenter states, several
                                               and (2) having at least one Qualified                                                                         Summary of Comments and Responses
                                                                                                       sections of Part 75 require units subject
                                               Individual on site conducting or                        to part 75 to meet certification and                     No rule changes were required.
                                               overseeing the applicable tests would be                ongoing QA/QC requirements: § 75.4(f)                    Comment: Several commenters
                                               sufficient proof of validity of test data               requires sources using Appendix E to                  requested that the QI exams be better
                                               that otherwise meet the requirements of                 meet those requirements. Section 75.4(j)              targeted to the test methods the QI will
                                               part 75.                                                requires successful completion of                     actually perform, and not include
                                                                                                       certification tests or use of maximum                 additional test methods. A
                                               Summary of Comments, Responses and
                                                                                                       potential concentration, maximum                      representative comment stated that the
                                               Rule Changes
                                                                                                       potential flow, maximum potential NOX                 test program developed for QIs is
                                                 Comment: One commenter strongly                       emission rate, or use appropriate                     excessive. The methods are grouped,
                                               supported section 6.1.2(f), but explained               reference methods or another procedure                and may not represent the type of work
                                               that the provision should not be                        approved by the Administrator. Section                an individual or firm will conduct. For
                                               understood to validate data that do not                 75.5(b) states that no affected unit shall            example, if a company elects not to
                                               otherwise meet the requirements of part                 be operated without complying with the                perform 3–D probe work in Method 2F,
                                               75. Another commenter strongly                          requirements of §§ 75.2–75.75 and                     there is no way to exclude these
                                               objected to inclusion of the provision in               Appendices A–G to part 75. Section                    questions from the current QI test which
                                               the rule and requested that EPA remove                  75.10(b) requires that sources meet the               puts this individual at a disadvantage if
                                               section 6.1.2(f). This commenter                        performance specifications in Appendix                there are questions on the exam
                                               provided the following rationale:                       A to part 75. (The Appendix A relative                concerning a method the firm will not
                                                  ‘‘(1) This section has no legal consequence          accuracy performance specifications are               conduct.
                                               and no benefit. Certification of testers and of         also required for the ongoing relative                   Response: The QI exams provided by
                                               a Qualified Individual on or leading the test           accuracy tests in Appendix B to part                  the Source Evaluation Society (SES) are
                                               team will not change evaluations and use of             75.)                                                  created with the knowledge and wisdom
                                               tests and test reports: with or without it,                EPA believes that the language in                  of many experienced stack testers.
                                               regulators should evaluate tests and test
                                               reports, and, if they find the work and
                                                                                                       Appendix A, section 6.1.2(f) is clear that            Periodically, these exams are modified
                                               records valid, accept the ‘validity of test data        all part 75 testing requirements must be              using feedback from people who have
                                               that otherwise meet the requirements of this            met. However, the Agency understands                  taken the exams.
                                               part’. This rule accomplishes requiring                 the concern of the commenter, and has                    The interdependency of emissions
                                               certified people to do the test. Once such              amended 6.1.2(f) in the final rule to read            testing methods is inherent in any
                                               people have performed the test, it has no               as follows: ‘‘Except as provided in                   emissions testing program. EPA and the
                                               more legal effect.                                      paragraph (e), no RATA performed                      SES membership, which includes large
                                                  ‘‘(2) This section will give the false               pursuant to § 75.74(c)(2)(ii), section 6.5            and small stack test companies, believe
                                               impression to those who do not know that
                                               Part 75 requires correct test performance that
                                                                                                       of appendix A to this part or section                 that an individual who can pass a
                                               review is superseded by tester accreditation            2.3.1 of appendix B to this part, and no              multiple method group exam is one who
                                               and QI participation, that their testing must           stack test under § 75.19 or Appendix E                understands emissions testing
                                               be accepted as valid.                                   to this part (or portion of such a RATA               principles broadly enough to lead a test
                                                  ‘‘(a) It is unfair and a disservice to all to        or stack test) conducted by an AETB (as               team and can be expected to address the
                                               give this impression to facilities and testers.         defined in § 72.2) shall be invalidated               myriad of complicating issues that arise
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                               It will lead to substandard testing, which              under this part as a result of the failure            during a source test.
                                               may get approved anyway and costs everyone              of the AETB to conform to ASTM D                         It is EPA’s understanding that the SES
                                               involved extra effort, time, and expense.
                                                  ‘‘(b) Many regulatory agencies will have
                                                                                                       7036–04. Validation of such tests is                  membership can and has evaluated and
                                               this impression and will not reject invalid             determined based on the other part 75                 adjusted the qualifications approach
                                               testing performed by accredited testers with            testing requirements. EPA recommends                  from time to time. Commenters are
                                               QIs on their teams because they will believe            that proper observation of tests and                  welcome to work with SES to address
                                               that this section says they have to accept the          review of test results continue,                      concerns they may have. While


                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010   19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00011   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM   28MRR3
                                               17298              Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

                                               recognizing that there might be                         Summary of Comments, Responses and                    provided the AETB a description of the
                                               opportunities for improvement, the                      Rule Changes                                          deficiencies to be remedied, the AETB
                                               Agency supports the QI qualification                       Comment: Several commenters agreed                 does not satisfactorily respond to the
                                               exam program in its current form.                       with the concept of posting the name of               source and notify the Administrator of
                                                 Comment: Several commenters stated                    an offending AETB on Agency Web                       the response via electronic mail. The
                                               that it makes no sense for an individual                sites. One commenter agreed that                      AETB need not submit the information
                                               to sit for an exam that covers material                 posting the names of offending AETBs                  it provides to the owner or operator to
                                               for which the candidate is not qualified                on the EPA Web site would provide a                   the Administrator, unless specifically
                                               to perform or intends to perform. This                  deterrent for non-conformance with                    requested by the Administrator. If after
                                               means that an AETB that performs a                      ASTM D7036–04 and generally agrees                    the AETB’s name is posted, the
                                               limited scope of testing may legitimately               with this approach. However, the                      Administrator determines that the
                                               argue that a qualified external exam                    commenter asserted that paragraph                     AETB’s response is sufficient, the
                                               provider is not available and may                       6.1.2(g) should be amended to ensure                  AETB’s name will be removed from the
                                               choose to offer internal exams. The                     that an AETB is notified and has the                  EPA Web sites.
                                               current language in the preamble to the                                                                          If, upon request by the Administrator,
                                                                                                       opportunity to correct any deficiencies
                                               proposed rule favors an external exam                                                                         the AETB or the owner or operator
                                                                                                       before the name is posted on the Web
                                               provider. EPA should recognize the                                                                            provides to the Administrator any
                                                                                                       site. The commenter was also concerned
                                               validity of internal examination                                                                              information identified as confidential
                                                                                                       about the responsiveness of EPA in
                                               providers when suggesting that sources                                                                        business information (CBI), the
                                                                                                       updating this list once the AETB has
                                               obtain information about examination                                                                          Administrator will treat the information
                                                                                                       provided EPA with the required
                                               providers.                                                                                                    according to the provisions of 40 CFR
                                                                                                       information. Therefore, the commenter
                                                 Response: Three comments were                                                                               part 2, subpart B. Note that the
                                                                                                       suggested that a requirement should be
                                               received on the subject of external as                                                                        modifications to section 6.1.2(g) make
                                                                                                       added for EPA to respond to an AETB’s
                                               opposed to internal exams. Internally                                                                         section 6.1.2(h) redundant and it has
                                                                                                       submittal within 30 days, indicating
                                               administered exams are allowed only if                                                                        been removed.
                                                                                                       whether the submittal is sufficient to
                                               an external exam for that test method is                remedy the problem. If so, the name of                C. Other Amendments
                                               not available. The current format of                    the AETB would be removed from the
                                               external exams covers a group of related                                                                      1. Compliance Dates for Units Adding
                                                                                                       list. If EPA failed to respond within 30              New Stack or Control Device
                                               test methods. If a QI desires to be                     days, the submittal would be assumed
                                               certified for a particular test method and              to be sufficient to remedy the problem                Background
                                               that test method is part of an external                 and the name is removed from the list.                  Section 75.4(e)(2) only applies to
                                               exam for a group of methods, that QI                    Another commenter requested that the                  existing Acid Rain Program units that
                                               must take that external exam. An                        determination of accuracy and                         are building a new stack, or adding
                                               individual that has been qualified with                 completeness in section 6.1.2(g) be                   control equipment. EPA proposed to
                                               an internal exam must re-qualify with                   solely based on the provisions of ASTM                extend the provision to include both
                                               an external exam within three years of                  D 7036–04.                                            existing and new units. For a project
                                               the availability of an external exam or                    Response: EPA believes that the                    involving both a new stack or flue and
                                               when a re-test is required, whichever is                determination of accuracy and                         installation of add-on emission controls,
                                               sooner. The ASTM D 7036–04                              completeness should be based on ASTM                  EPA proposed to revise § 75.4(e)(2) to
                                               workgroup (in part, made up of small                    D7036–04 and Part 75 taken together                   require that the compliance window for
                                               and large stack test companies)                         because Part 75 limits the application of             required CEMS certification and/or
                                               confirmed that, in general, an external                 ASTM D 7036–04 to only certain tests                  recertification and/or diagnostic tests
                                               exam is a better indication of                          performed on part 75 sources. The                     start on the date that emissions first exit
                                               qualification than an internal exam. The                Agency agrees that an AETB should                     to the atmosphere through the new stack
                                               Agency agrees with this view because                    have the opportunity to correct any                   or flue. The end of the compliance
                                               an externally administered exam may be                  deficiencies before its name is posted on             window would be the 90th operating
                                               more impartial, provide exam questions                  the Web site and has therefore revised                day or the 180th calendar day
                                               that have been better vetted, and may be                section 6.1.2(g) accordingly. If an owner             (whichever occurs first) after the start
                                               less subject to abuse than an internally                or operator has requested information                 date.
                                               developed and administered exam.                        from an AETB and believes that the
                                                                                                       information provided by the AETB is                   Summary of Comments, Responses and
                                               8. Posting Non-Compliant AETB Names                                                                           Rule Changes
                                                                                                       either incomplete or inaccurate, the
                                               Background                                              owner or operator may request the                       Comment: One commenter stated that
                                                  In section 6.1.2(g) of Appendix A to                 Administrator’s assistance in remedying               the proposed revisions to § 75.4(e) are
                                               Part 75, EPA proposed that if the                       the alleged deficiencies. Upon such                   consistent with the original intent of the
                                               Administrator finds that the information                request, if the Administrator concurs                 provision, which was to address
                                               submitted to an affected source by an                   that the information submitted to the                 compliance deadlines for units that
                                               AETB under this section or the                          source is either incomplete or                        must relocate, replace, or retest
                                               information requested by an affected                    inaccurate, the Administrator will                    monitoring systems as a result of the
                                               source under this section is either                     provide the AETB a description of the                 addition of new controls, regardless of
                                               incomplete or inaccurate, the                           deficiencies to be remedied. The                      when the unit commenced construction.
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                               Administrator could post the name of                    Administrator’s determination of                      This commenter further stated that the
                                               the offending AETB on Agency Web                        completeness and accuracy of the                      provision was never intended to draw a
                                               sites, and provide the AETB a                           information will be solely based on the               distinction between ‘‘existing’’ units as
                                               description of the failures to be                       provisions of ASTM D 7036–04 and this                 that term is defined under § 72.2 and
                                               remedied. The AETB name would be                        part. The Administrator may post the                  other units with previously certified
                                               removed from the EPA Web sites once                     name of the offending AETB on Agency                  monitoring systems. The commenter
                                               the failures were remedied.                             Web sites if, within 30 days of having                suggested that the addition of


                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010   19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00012   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM   28MRR3
                                                                  Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations                                           17299

                                               recertification and diagnostic tests also               window of time applicable to such                        Revised § 75.4(e)(2)(ii) allows
                                               is consistent with EPA’s intent and past                event provided under § 75.4 (e)(1).                   conditional data validation procedures
                                               implementation of the provision                            EPA also revised § 75.4(e) to address              in § 75.20(b)(3) to be used for the entire
                                               through guidance. However, the                          the reporting of CEMS data, in cases                  90 operating day/180 calendar day
                                               commenter objected to EPA’s proposal                    where only one compliance window is                   window associated with new stack
                                               to hold units that are constructing both                used, and where both windows are                      construction or addition of a new
                                               a new stack and a control device to a                   used. Section 75.4(e)(2), as revised,                 emissions control device, rather than
                                               single testing deadline based on use of                 addresses how to report emissions or                  limiting the amount of time available to
                                               the new stack. The commenter                            flow rate data after emissions first pass             complete the required testing to the
                                               concluded that although most sources                    through the new stack or flue, or reagent             shorter timelines in § 75.20(b)(3)(iv).
                                               likely would try to meet the testing                    is first injected into the flue gas                   This is appropriate for new stack
                                               deadline under § 75.4(e) associated with                desulfurization system or add-on NOX                  construction because the monitoring
                                               the use of the new stack by timing the                  emission controls, until all required                 systems on the new stack are brand new
                                                                                                       certification and/or recertification and/             systems that must undergo certification
                                               initial operation of the control device to
                                                                                                       or diagnostic tests are successfully                  testing. The provisions of § 75.20(b)(3)
                                               coincide as closely as possible with the
                                                                                                       completed. For example, if section 2 of               and sections 6.3.1(a), 6.3.2(a), 6.6.4(a),
                                               time that gases first exit to the
                                                                                                       Appendix A to Part 75 requires two                    and 6.5(f) of Appendix A to Part 75
                                               atmosphere through the new stack, there                 spans and ranges for the monitor that
                                               is no valid reason for limiting an owner                                                                      clearly allow conditional data validation
                                                                                                       measures the pollutant being removed                  to be used for the entire window of time
                                               or operator to a single deadline or set of              by the add-on SO2 or NOX controls,
                                               tests to validate data from the                                                                               specified in § 75.4, for the initial
                                                                                                       certification of the high measurement                 certification of monitoring systems. For
                                               monitoring systems.                                     scale is sufficient to initiate reporting of          the installation and operation of add-on
                                                  Response: EPA agrees in part with the                quality-assured data from that monitor.               emissions controls, it is also appropriate
                                               commenter. As noted above, § 75.4(e)(2),                All data recorded on the certified high               to allow the use of conditional data
                                               on its face, applies only to existing units             scale, including data that would                      validation for the entire 90 operating
                                               (which are generally units commencing                   ordinarily be required to be recorded on              day/180 calendar day window, because
                                               commercial operation before November                    the low scale, may be reported as                     instability during the shakedown period
                                               1, 1990 and serving a generator with a                  quality-assured for up to 60 unit or stack            prevents the required RATAs associated
                                               nameplate capacity greater than 25                      operating days after the first injection of           with the control device addition from
                                               MWe) and thus was not intended to                       reagent into the control device. Then, all            being done during that time period, and
                                               cover new units. However, EPA agrees                    required tests of the low measurement                 the shakedown period often extends
                                               that it is appropriate to expand                        scale must be completed within the 90                 beyond the shorter conditional data
                                               § 75.4(e)(2) to provide a similar                       operating day/180 calendar day                        validation timelines provided in
                                               approach for monitoring compliance                      compliance window of time associated                  § 75.20(b)(3)(iv).
                                               deadlines and missing data substitution                 with the first injection of reagent into
                                                                                                       the control device.                                      A new paragraph, (e)(4), has also been
                                               for new stack construction and add-on                                                                         added to § 75.4(e) to address special
                                               SO2 or NOX control installation at both                    EPA believes that it is appropriate to
                                                                                                       allow temporary reporting of data on a                requirements that apply, in addition to
                                               existing and new units and to cover                                                                           the requirements in paragraph (e)(2), to
                                               recertification and diagnostic tests, in                certified high measurement scale in the
                                                                                                       case of installing and operating new                  a project involving both a new stack and
                                               addition to the certification tests                                                                           a new add-on SO2 or NOX control
                                                                                                       add-on SO2 or NOX controls, primarily
                                               covered by the existing provision. In                                                                         device. For such a project, the emissions
                                                                                                       because it often takes several days or
                                               addition, EPA agrees that in cases where                                                                      data recorded by each CEMS on the new
                                                                                                       weeks to stabilize a new add-on
                                               a project involves both new stack                                                                             stack, starting on the date and hour on
                                                                                                       emissions control device so that the
                                               construction and installation of add-on                                                                       which emissions first exit to the
                                                                                                       desired percentage reduction in the SO2
                                               SO2 or NOX controls, the initial routing                or NOX emission levels is consistently                atmosphere through the new stack and
                                               of flue gas through the new stack and                   achieved. During this period of time                  ending on the hour before the date and
                                               the initial operation of an add-on                      (known as the ‘‘shakedown’’ period), a                hour on which reagent is first injected
                                               control device (i.e., when reagent is first             significant percentage of the data from               into the control device, may be reported
                                               injected) should, if necessary, be treated              the SO2 or NOX monitor (as applicable)                as quality assured (as provided in
                                               as two separate events, each of which is                is likely to be too high to be read on the            paragraph (e)(2)(ii) and (iv)) only if (1)
                                               allotted a flexible 90 operating day/180                low scale. Further, even data that can be             a RATA of the CEMS (as described in
                                               calendar day window to complete all                     recorded on the low scale during the                  paragraph (e)(4)(i)(A) or (ii)(A),
                                               required certification and/or                           shakedown period cannot be reported as                depending on the CEMS involved) is
                                               recertification and/or diagnostic testing               quality-assured, because a RATA must                  successfully completed either prior to
                                               of the monitoring systems installed on                  be performed on the low scale in order                the first injection of reagent into the
                                               the new stack. Two separate compliance                  to certify it, and this test cannot be done           control device or in a period after the
                                               windows may be needed in cases where                    until the control device has been                     first injection when the control device is
                                               there is a long interval of time between                stabilized. The Agency believes that                  not operating; and (2) the rest of the
                                               the starting dates of the two events.                   accepting low readings recorded on a                  required certification tests are
                                               Therefore, a new paragraph, (e)(3), has                 certified high scale for a short period of            successfully completed within the 90
                                               been added to § 75.4(e) to allow for                                                                          operating day/180 calendar day
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                                                                                       time will not adversely impact the
                                               completion of CEMS certification and/or                 overall accuracy of the emissions data.               compliance window that begins with
                                               recertification and/or diagnostic testing               Other certified CEMS that have only one               the initial routing of flue gas through the
                                               requirements for both new stack                         (high) measurement scale record data on               new stack. For example, if the
                                               construction and new add-on SO2 or                      the lower part of the scale during short-             certification testing is done this way and
                                               NOX controls either: (a) Within the                     term events such as startup and                       conditional data validation is used in
                                               window of time provided for new stack                   shutdown, and these data are accepted                 accordance with paragraph (e)(2)(ii), the
                                               construction; or (b) within the separate                as quality-assured.                                   CEMS data may be reported as quality-


                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010   19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00013   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM   28MRR3
                                               17300              Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

                                               assured, starting at the hour of the                    accurate drift corrections without                    checks only at the beginning and end of
                                               probationary calibration error test,                    needlessly adding to the length of the                a series of test runs, rather than
                                               provided that all of the major tests are                test. EPA should limit the number of                  conducting these checks before and after
                                               passed in sequence, with no failures.                   runs allowed before performing a post-                each individual run. The rationale is
                                               The RATA must be performed prior to                     run check to three, rather than                       that if the tester can pass the quality
                                               the initial injection of reagent into the               prohibiting multiple runs altogether.                 assurance at the beginning and end of
                                               control device, or in a period after the                    Two other commenters stated that                  the series of runs, then the intermediate
                                               first injection when the control device is              Method 7E already requires all test runs              runs must be valid, and the quality of
                                               not operating, because the                              conducted since the previous bias check               the reference method data has not been
                                               characteristics of the stack gas matrix                 to be invalidated if the subsequent bias              compromised. However this assumption
                                               (e.g., gas concentrations, temperature,                 check reveals drift in excess of the                  is not necessarily true; therefore,
                                               moisture content, and concentration and                 required specification. These                         multiple runs should not be allowed
                                               flow profiles) when the control device is               commenters further stated that                        between bias and drift checks, as further
                                               brought on-line will differ significantly               invalidation of multiple test runs would              explained in the response to the next
                                               from the stack characteristics of the                   extend the duration of the test period,               comment, immediately below.
                                               uncontrolled unit. Therefore, to validate               leading to additional expense and                        Comment: Two commenters favor
                                               CEMS data in the uncontrolled time                      potential operational difficulties (i.e.,             allowing 63 minutes of continuous
                                               period between the first use of the new                 billing of additional hours by the test               sampling time between bias and drift
                                               stack and the initial injection of reagent,             contractor, overtime for plant employees              checks. According to the commenters,
                                               a RATA that represents the actual stack                 responsible for monitoring the testing,               sampling for 63 consecutive minutes at
                                               conditions during that time interval                    continuing to run the unit at the                     a time is desirable because 63 minutes
                                               must be performed and passed. The                       specified operating level rather than                 corresponds to the time needed to
                                               other, required certification tests, i.e., 7-           releasing the unit back to load control,              perform three 21-minute runs of a CEMS
                                               day calibration error tests, cycle time                 and in some cases continuing to run the               relative accuracy test audit (RATA) and
                                               tests, and linearity checks, are not                    unit solely for the purpose of                        also is long enough to obtain a complete
                                               affected by the characteristics of the                  conducting the required test). According              compliance test (i.e., stack test) run.
                                               stack gas matrix, and can be performed                  to the commenters, the potential for                  Compliance tests often consist of three
                                               at any time during the allotted window                  invalidation of multiple test runs is                 one-hour runs, and many sources have
                                               of time, whether or not reagent is being                enough of a deterrent to discourage the               both RATA requirements and
                                               injected.                                               use of equipment and/or testing firms                 compliance test requirements. The
                                                  Of course, under § 75.4(e)(2), to the                that would have difficulty meeting the                commenters favor eliminating the bias
                                               extent additional testing requirements                  applicable bias and drift specifications.             and drift checks after each RATA run
                                               are triggered by the installation of the                These two commenters also thought that                because it reduces the amount of time
                                               new add-on SO2 or NOX controls in a                     the ability to validate multiple runs                 required to perform the testing.
                                                                                                       with one pair of bias and drift checks is                Response: No rule changes were
                                               project involving both a new stack and
                                                                                                       of great value to facilities that are                 required. Generally speaking, it is good
                                               such new controls, these tests must be
                                                                                                       required to conduct both RATA and                     practice to perform emission testing in
                                               successfully completed during the 90
                                                                                                       compliance tests. The ability through                 the most efficient manner possible
                                               unit operating day/180 calendar day
                                                                                                       this provision to combine RATA and                    without sacrificing data quality.
                                               window that begins with the initial
                                                                                                       compliance testing reduces the overall                However, EPA believes that the added
                                               injection of reagent. Note that EPA
                                                                                                       amount of time required for testing and               assurance of data quality provided by
                                               intends to revise Questions 15.4, 15.6,                                                                       performing bias and drift checks after
                                                                                                       is of value to the industry as it prevents
                                               and 15.7 in the ‘‘Part 75 Emissions                                                                           each 21-minute RATA run far outweighs
                                                                                                       additional expense and potential
                                               Monitoring Policy Manual’’ to be                                                                              the small amount of time that could be
                                                                                                       operational difficulties. The
                                               consistent with today’s revisions to                                                                          saved by skipping the intermediate QA
                                                                                                       commenters thought that the existing
                                               § 75.4(e).                                                                                                    checks. Further, there is no reason why
                                                                                                       provision does not complicate the bias
                                               2. Reference Method          7E                         and drift correction calculations. Once               three 21-minute RATA runs cannot be
                                                                                                       these calculations are programmed into                averaged together to make one 63-
                                               Background
                                                                                                       a spreadsheet, they are easy to apply.                minute compliance test run.
                                                 EPA proposed to add § 75.22(a)(5)(v)                  The commenters stated that EPA has not                   For typical compliance test
                                               to disallow multiple sampling runs to be                provided any substantive evidence for                 applications of the method where the
                                               conducted before performing the post-                   its reasoning that less accurate results              user is only concerned with showing
                                               run system bias check or system                         will occur other than the statement that              compliance with an emissions limit, the
                                               calibration error check described in                    ‘‘less accurate gas concentration                     accuracy of the individual test runs is
                                               section 8.5 of EPA Reference Method 7E                  measurements are likely to result’’ (75               not as essential as it is for Part 75
                                               (40 CFR part 60, Appendix A–4), when                    FR 33400). Finally, the commenters                    applications. The Agency does not
                                               this method is used to perform testing                  asserted that EPA should provide field                object to the change made to Method 7E
                                               on part 75 affected sources.                            evidence which shows that less accurate               when the method is used for
                                                                                                       results have occurred as a result of this             compliance test applications. Since the
                                               Summary of Comments and Responses                                                                             average of all test runs is used to assess
                                                                                                       less time-consuming procedure before it
                                                 Comment: One commenter thought                        proceeds with any rulemaking on this                  compliance, the run-by-run percent
                                               that although drift corrections at some                                                                       inaccuracies due to changing bias and
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                                                                                       issue.
                                               point may become less accurate                              Response: No rule changes were                    drift over the course of the testing will
                                               following multiple runs, it is not                      required. The Agency understands that                 tend to cancel, resulting in acceptable
                                               significant enough to require a post-run                under an existing provision of Method                 overall average that is only slightly
                                               check after every run. A requirement to                 7E, multiple test runs may be quality                 different from the average value that
                                               perform a post run bias or system                       assured for bias and drift as a group,                would have been obtained had the more
                                               calibration error check after every three               rather than individually. This provision              stringent run-by-run quality assurance
                                               runs would be sufficient to ensure                      allows the user to conduct bias and drift             procedures been followed. Thus, for


                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010   19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00014   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM   28MRR3
                                                                  Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations                                           17301

                                               compliance testing purposes, the                        adding bias and uncertainty to the                    longer in effect, to be consistent with
                                               commenters are correct in asserting that                CEMS data through the RATA process.                   the other proposed revisions and to
                                               little is gained from performing the                       EPA does not collect the actual                    avoid confusion, the commenter stated
                                               quality assurance testing before and                    reference method test data for Method                 that EPA should revise and re-
                                               after each run, so long as the overall                  7E electronically in a manner that can                promulgate these provisions again
                                               specifications for bias and drift are met               be further analyzed. Therefore, we                    without the references to Hg. The
                                               at the beginning and end of each test                   cannot properly assess how reducing                   commenter also requested that EPA
                                               series.                                                 the number of required bias and drift                 ensure that these requirements are
                                                                                                       checks will impact data quality. We                   removed from the electronic data
                                                  However, under Part 75 the reference
                                                                                                       have no way of knowing how many test                  reporting format, schema, and
                                               method measurements are generally                                                                             instructions.
                                                                                                       runs that should be invalidated would
                                               used for a very different purpose and                                                                            Response: The proposed rule
                                                                                                       be assumed to be valid if we were to
                                               the inaccuracy that can be introduced                                                                         revisions that would remove all
                                                                                                       allow bias and drift checks to be done
                                               by not following the run-by-run quality                 only before and after a series of runs.               references to mercury (Hg) monitoring
                                               assurance is unacceptable. For Part 75,                 However, we do know that we can avoid                 from Part 75 have been finalized
                                               the reference methods are primarily                     that issue entirely by requiring the                  without modification. However, the
                                               used to directly assess the accuracy of                 quality assurance checks to be                        commenter has correctly identified two
                                               a continuous emissions monitoring                       performed before and after each run for               references to Hg monitoring in § 75.53(e)
                                               system on a run-by-run basis. The                       part 75 applications.                                 which EPA apparently overlooked. In
                                               purpose of the relative accuracy test                      In summary, EPA maintains that in                  addition, the Agency has identified a
                                               audits (RATA) is to conduct at least                    view of the way that Method 7E data are               third reference in § 75.53(e) and one
                                               nine quality-assured independent                        used in the part 75 programs, run-by-                 other reference in § 75.57 that were
                                               reference measurements and compare                      run system bias and drift checks are                  inadvertently overlooked. Section
                                               those measurements to nine                              necessary to eliminate measurement                    75.53(e)(1)(i)(E) refers to Hg emission
                                               simultaneous measurements made by a                     error that would otherwise be                         controls, and Method of Determination
                                               continuous emissions monitoring                         introduced by not quality-assuring each               Code (MODC) ‘‘15’’ in Table 4a in
                                               system in its normal mode of operation.                 run individually. This QA approach                    § 75.57 refers to ‘‘Hg concentration’’. The
                                               Since each run directly compares CEMS                   also applies to Method 6C (the                        final rule removes all four of these
                                               measurements to reference method                        instrumental reference method for SO2)                references to Hg monitoring from part
                                               measurements, any drift in the reference                and to Method 3A (the instrumental                    75. All references to Hg monitoring and
                                               monitor during the course of the run                    method for O2 and CO2), when those                    reporting have also been removed from
                                               must be assessed and accounted for.                     methods are used for part 75                          the ‘‘ECMPS Reporting Instructions’’ (see
                                               Method 7E provides a means of                           applications. For a more detailed                     the June 17, 2009 version and
                                               adjusting the reference method                          discussion of this issue, refer to the                September 16, 2009 addendum, which
                                               measurements for moderate drift (less                   Response to Comments document.                        are posted on the Clean Air Markets
                                               than 3.0% of the span gas value over the                                                                      Division Web site at the following
                                               course of a run). This correction is                    3. Removal of Mercury Provisions                      address: http://www.epa.gov/
                                               intended to tie the resulting reference                 Background                                            airmarkets/business/ecmps/reporting-
                                               value more closely to the EPA Protocol                                                                        instructions.html. However, certain
                                                                                                         As a result of the Clean Air Mercury                schema elements had already been
                                               calibration gas standards which are                     Rule (CAMR) having been vacated by
                                               traceable to the National Institute of                                                                        incorporated by the time of the court
                                                                                                       the DC Circuit in New Jersey v. EPA, 517              vacatur of CAMR, (e.g., the
                                               Standards and Technology (NIST). The                    F.3d 574 (D.C. Cir. 2008), EPA proposed
                                               correction assumes that over the                                                                              <CalibrationStandardData> record,
                                                                                                       to remove provisions of part 75 that                  which indicates whether elemental or
                                               duration of the test run, the profile of                were adopted in support of CAMR. To                   oxidized mercury standards are used for
                                               any drift observed is linear. The longer                achieve this, sections dealing                        daily calibration). EPA continues to
                                               the interval between bias/drift checks,                 exclusively with mercury monitoring                   affirm that it is unnecessary to remove
                                               the less likely it is that this linear                  (CEMS and sorbent trap systems) would                 such records from the reporting format
                                               approximation will hold true. Because                   be removed, and other sections that                   (or schema) since there are no
                                               the RATA is intended to compare nine                    applied both to mercury monitoring                    requirements to use these fields or any
                                               independent, quality-assured reference                  systems and other types of CEMS would                 of the mercury specific codes. As such
                                               measurements to nine simultaneous                       be revised and re-promulgated, minus                  these records are essentially vestigial
                                               measurements from a CEMS, EPA finds                     the references to mercury.                            and need not be revised.
                                               that performing a bias and drift                                                                                 Finally, note that minor changes have
                                               evaluation before and after a series of                 Summary of Comments, Responses and
                                                                                                       Rule Changes                                          been made to a few of the rule sections
                                               runs increases the uncertainty in the                                                                         in which the Hg monitoring provisions
                                               individual run measurements and has                       Comment: One commenter found two                    were found. These changes were
                                               the potential to introduce error that                   provisions not included in EPA’s                      described under ‘‘Miscellaneous
                                               would otherwise be eliminated by                        proposal that should be re-promulgated                Corrections and Additions’’ in the
                                               performing the bias and drift evaluation                because the portions referencing                      preamble to the proposed rule, and have
                                               before and after each run. EPA believes                 mercury (Hg) monitoring were vacated                  been finalized without modification.
                                               that mass-based regulatory programs,                    in CAMR. The provisions in question
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                               such as the trading programs supported                  are found at § 75.53(e)(1)(iv), which                 4. Miscellaneous Amendments
                                               by Part 75 monitoring, need the added                   refers to reporting of information on Hg                 EPA proposed to revise the
                                               assurance of data quality provided by                   monitors and sorbent trap monitoring                  Incorporation by Reference section
                                               run-by-run bias and drift evaluations.                  systems, and § 75.53(e)(1)(x), which                  75.6(f)(3) to add Section 3—Small
                                               The run-by-run quality assurance is                     refers to information on each stack using             Volume Provers, First Edition, but
                                               consistent with Method 7E as it was                     an Hg component monitor. Although the                 inadvertently omitted the publication
                                               originally written, and avoids the risk of              Hg portions of these provisions are no                date, and failed to revise section 2.1.5.1


                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010   19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00015   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM   28MRR3
                                               17302              Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

                                               of appendix D to part 75 to include                      Verification Program (PGVP), and to                              CFR parts 72, and 75 and thus does not
                                               Section 3 in the American Petroleum                      inform the gas cylinder selection for the                        significantly change the existing
                                               Institute (API) Manual of Petroleum                      PGVP audits. This same type of                                   information collection burden. The total
                                               Measurement Standards citation. The                      information will be collected when EPA                           annual respondent burden is estimated
                                               final rule includes the Section 3                        Protocol gases are used to perform                               to be 2,254 hours, with total annual
                                               publication dates of July 1988,                          certain EPA test methods. The Agency                             labor and O&M costs estimated to be
                                               reaffirmed Oct 1993, and includes                        anticipates that this will help improve                          $1,460,489. This estimate includes the
                                               Section 3 in the API citation in section                 the quality of results when these test                           burden associated with the increase in
                                               2.1.5.1 of appendix D to part 75.                        methods are used.                                                fees from AETBs and PGVP vendors
                                                  EPA has added definitions in section                     EPA has added simple recordkeeping                            resulting from their compliance with the
                                               72.2 for ‘‘Coverage Factor k’’ and                       and reporting requirements to enable
                                                                                                                                                                         new requirements in the rule as well as
                                               ‘‘Expanded Uncertainty’’. These                          the Agency to verify that Qualified
                                                                                                                                                                         the small labor burden for sources to
                                               definitions are consistent with the                      Individuals and Air Emission Testing
                                                                                                        Bodies meet the requirements of this                             review the new requirements and
                                               language used by the National Institute                                                                                   comply with the modified
                                               of Standards and Technology.                             rule. EPA maintains that the main costs
                                                                                                        for air emission testing bodies to comply                        recordkeeping and reporting
                                               II. Statutory and Executive Order                        with the minimum competency                                      requirements (See Exhibits 1 and 2).
                                               Reviews                                                  requirements in ASTM D7036–04 are                                Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
                                               A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory                     associated with taking qualified                                 The respondent burden for this
                                               Planning and Review                                      individual (QI) competency exams, and                            collection of information is estimated to
                                                                                                        the development and revision of quality                          be a small fraction of both the 124,976
                                                 This action is not a ‘‘significant                     assurance manuals. The costs will be                             labor hours, and the $8,581,420 total
                                               regulatory action’’ under the terms of                   passed through to the customers                                  cost that were calculated for the existing
                                               Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735                       (sources subject to part 75, primarily                           supporting statement (ICR 2203.02) for
                                               (Oct. 4, 1993)) and is therefore not                     large electric utility and industrial                            revisions to 40 CFR parts 72 and 75.
                                               subject to review under the Executive                    companies), and the Agency notes that
                                               Order.                                                                                                                      Most of these costs are expected to be
                                                                                                        these costs will be partially offset by the                      borne by the private sector and will be
                                               B. Paperwork Reduction Act                               savings generated by fewer failed or                             passed through to the customers
                                                                                                        incorrectly performed relative accuracy                          (sources subject to part 75, primarily
                                                  The information collection
                                                                                                        test audits (RATAs), and fewer repeat
                                               requirements in this rule have been                                                                                       large electric utility and industrial
                                                                                                        tests required.
                                               submitted for approval to the Office of                     EPA is also requiring certain                                 companies, or the rate payers). The
                                               Management and Budget (OMB) under                        recordkeeping and reporting provisions                           Agency notes that some of the overall
                                               the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C.                   for various data elements that were                              cost will be offset by the savings
                                               3501 et seq. The information collection                  inadvertently left out of the August 22,                         generated by fewer failed or incorrectly
                                               requirements are not enforceable until                   2006 proposed rule and the January 24,                           performed daily calibration error tests,
                                               OMB approves them. The Information                       2008 final rule. These data elements                             quarterly linearity checks, and relative
                                               Collection Request (ICR) document                        have already been incorporated in the                            accuracy test audits (RATAs), and fewer
                                               prepared by EPA has been assigned EPA                    data acquisition and handling systems                            repeat tests required.
                                               ICR number 2203.04. The currently                        of units subject to part 75, and are                               Exhibits 1 and 2 summarize the
                                               approved Information Collection                          required to make EPA’s new reporting
                                               Request (ICR) document prepared by                                                                                        respondent burden and cost estimates
                                                                                                        software data requirements consistent                            performed for the ICR (2203.04)
                                               EPA reflects the January 24, 2008 rule                   with the regulatory requirements.
                                               (EPA ICR Number 2203.02; OMB No.:                                                                                         supporting statement for revisions to 40
                                                                                                           All of the above data collections are                         CFR parts 72 and 75. EPA estimates
                                               2060–0626). (OMB control numbers for                     mandatory under 40 CFR part 75. None
                                               EPA regulations are listed in 40 CFR                                                                                      that: (a) 1,249 ARP sources and 253
                                                                                                        of the data are considered confidential                          additional CAIR sources will need to
                                               part 9.) The information requirements                    business information under 40 CFR part
                                               covered by EPA ICR Number 2203.04                                                                                         review the revised requirements and
                                                                                                        2, subpart B.
                                               reflect the revisions to the requirements                   EPA received several comments that                            comply with the modified reporting
                                               in 40 CFR Parts 72, and 75 that are being                the costs were underestimated in the                             requirements; and (b) 3,736 ARP sources
                                               finalized in this action.                                ICR and that more supporting detail was                          and 777 additional CAIR sources will
                                                  Basic information on the identity of                  needed. The Agency has revised the ICR                           need to perform quality assurance
                                               EPA Protocol gas production sites and                    for the final rule to include (a) 600                            testing and maintenance tasks. Low
                                               on the type of cylinders used by sources                 hours of contractor time in Agency costs                         mass emissions units will not have to
                                               subject to part 75 will be collected by                  to account for ECMPS software changes,                           modify their DAHS, and sources with
                                               the Agency. These data will allow the                    (b) additional one time DAHS upgrade                             only new units already have their initial
                                               Agency to verify that a source subject to                respondent costs of $378,500, and (c)                            startup burdens and costs accounted for
                                               part 75 is using EPA Protocol gases from                 additional supporting detail.                                    in the underlying program ICRs. Exhibit
                                               EPA Protocol gas production sites that                      The final rule does not significantly                         1 shows the total burden and total cost
                                               are participating in the Protocol Gas                    change the existing requirements in 40                           based on this respondent universe.

                                                   EXHIBIT 1—INCREASED RESPONDENT BURDEN/COST (LABOR ONLY) ESTIMATES RELATED TO REVISIONS OF 40 CFR
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                                                                          PARTS 72 AND 75
                                                                                                                                                        Hours per         Number of       Respondent    Total labor
                                                       Information collection activity                          Mean hourly rate                         activity/       respondents      hours/year     cost/year
                                                                                                                                                          year             (facilities)

                                               ARP Respondents One Time Rule Review                 $80.71/Hr .......................................                1            1,249         1,249     $100,807




                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010   19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000    Frm 00016      Fmt 4701      Sfmt 4700    E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM     28MRR3
                                                                         Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations                                                                                                    17303

                                                    EXHIBIT 1—INCREASED RESPONDENT BURDEN/COST (LABOR ONLY) ESTIMATES RELATED TO REVISIONS OF 40 CFR
                                                                                      PARTS 72 AND 75—Continued
                                                                                                                                                                                  Hours per                Number of                 Respondent              Total labor
                                                         Information collection activity                                            Mean hourly rate                               activity/              respondents                hours/year               cost/year
                                                                                                                                                                                    year                    (facilities)

                                               ARP Respondents Compliance with Modi-                                  $80.71/Hr .......................................                        0.5                     1,249                      624.5           50,444
                                                fied Reporting Requirements.
                                               CAIR Respondents One Time Rule Review                                  $80.71/Hr .......................................                           1                       253                     253             20,420
                                               CAIR Respondents Compliance with Modi-                                 $80.71/Hr .......................................                         0.5                       253                    126.5            10,210
                                                fied Reporting Requirements.
                                                   Total ......................................................       ........................................................   ....................                 1,502                       2,254         181,881


                                                EXHIBIT 2—INCREASED RESPONDENT BURDEN/COST (QA AND MAINTENANCE) ESTIMATES RELATED TO REVISIONS OF 40
                                                                                       CFR PARTS 72 AND 75
                                                                                                                                                                            Previously                   Increased                Number of
                                                                                                                                                                            established                 cont./O&M                                         Increased total
                                                                                   Information collection activity                                                                                                               respondents
                                                                                                                                                                            cont./O&M                   cost per re-                                         cost/year
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    (units)
                                                                                                                                                                                cost                      spondent

                                                                                                                           ARP Perform QA Testing and Maintenance

                                               Model A (CEMS) ..............................................................................................                        $31,949                         $319                      1,046            $333,674
                                               Model C (App D—NOX CEM) .........................................................................                                      17,818                         178                      2,107             375,046
                                               Model D (App D and E) ...................................................................................                                1,843                         19                        438               8,322
                                               Model E (LME) .................................................................................................                          1,991                         20                        145               2,900
                                               One Time DAHS Upgrade1 .............................................................................                      ........................                    500                        631             315,500

                                                                                                                           CAIR Perform QA Testing and Maintenance

                                               • Non ARP Sources in PM/O3 and PM Only States:
                                                  —Solid Fuel: SO2, NOX, and Flow CEMS (units) ....................................                                                   31,200                          312                       102               31,824
                                                  —Gas-Oil: NOX CEMS and App D (units) ...............................................                                                17,400                          174                       493               85,782
                                                  —Gas-Oil Peaking Units: App D, App E, or LME methods (units) ..........                                                               1,800                          18                       150                2,700
                                               One Time DAHS Upgrade 1 .............................................................................                     ........................                     500                       119               59,500

                                               • Non ARP Sources in O3 Only States:
                                                  —Solid Fuel: SO2, NOX, and Flow CEMS (units) ....................................                                                   20,800                          208                           4                832
                                                  —Gas-Oil: NOX CEMS and App D (units) ...............................................                                               17, 400                          174                          28              4,872
                                               One Time DAHS Upgrade 1 .............................................................................                     ........................                     500                           7              3,500
                                                  —Gas-Oil Peaking Units: App D, App E, or LME methods (units) ..........                                                               1,800                          18                           0                  0

                                                                                                                                            PGVP Increased Costs

                                               ($2 per cylinder at an assumed average of 6 cylinders per year) ..................                                        ........................                       12                    4,513               54,156

                                                            Total ...................................................................................................    ........................   ........................   ........................        1,278,608
                                                  1 To
                                                     calculate the number of units required to perform a DAHS upgrade, it was assumed that 80% of applicable CEMS units would be covered
                                               by an existing service contract and not subject to the annualized $1500 fee.


                                                 An agency may not conduct or                                              rule subject to notice and comment                                            than 50,000; or (3) a small organization
                                               sponsor, and a person is not required to                                    rulemaking requirements under the                                             that is any not-for-profit enterprise
                                               respond to, a collection of information                                     Administrative Procedure Act or any                                           which is independently owned and
                                               unless it displays a currently valid OMB                                    other statute unless the agency certifies                                     operated and is not dominant in its
                                               control number. The OMB control                                             that the rule will not have a significant                                     field.
                                               numbers for EPA’s regulations in 40                                         economic impact on a substantial                                                 EPA conducted a screening analysis
                                               CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.                                            number of small entities. Small entities                                      of today’s rule on small entities in the
                                                 When this ICR is approved by OMB,                                         include small businesses, small                                               following manner. The SBA defines
                                               the Agency will publish a technical                                         organizations, and small governmental                                         small utilities as any entity and
                                               amendment to 40 CFR part 9 in the                                           jurisdictions.                                                                associated affiliates whose total electric
                                               Federal Register to display the OMB                                            For purposes of assessing the impacts                                      output for the preceding fiscal year did
                                               control number for the approved                                             of today’s rule on small entities, small                                      not exceed 4 million megawatt hours.
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                               information collection requirements                                         entity is defined as: (1) A small business                                    The SBA 4 million megawatt hour
                                               contained in this final rule.                                               as defined by the Small Business                                              threshold was applied to the Energy
                                               C. Regulatory Flexibility Act                                               Administration’s (SBA) regulations at 13                                      Information Administration (EIA)
                                                                                                                           CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental                                         Annual Form EIA–923, ‘‘Power Plant
                                                  The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)                                     jurisdiction that is a government of a                                        Operations Report’’ 2008 net generation
                                               generally requires an agency to prepare                                     city, county, town, school district or                                        megawatt hour data and results in an
                                               a regulatory flexibility analysis of any                                    special district with a population of less                                    estimated 1169 facilities. This data is


                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010        19:16 Mar 25, 2011          Jkt 223001       PO 00000        Frm 00017        Fmt 4701       Sfmt 4700       E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM               28MRR3
                                               17304              Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

                                               then paired with facility owner and                     information is estimated to be a small                (first promulgated on January 24, 2008
                                               associated affiliates data (owners with                 fraction of both the 124,976 labor hours,             (See 73 FR 4340, 4364, and 4365)) by
                                               net generation over 4 million were                      and the $8,581,420 total cost that were               having specialty gas company funds go
                                               disregarded) resulting in a total of 620                calculated for the existing supporting                to the National Institute of Standards
                                               small entities with a 2008 average net                  statement (ICR 2203.02) for revisions to              and Technology, who has statutory
                                               generation of 650,169 megawatt hours.                   40 CFR parts 72 and 75. The costs                     authority to receive such funds, to fund
                                               Multiplying net generation by the 2009                  incurred by AETBs and PGVP vendors                    gas cylinder analyses, by changing the
                                               EIA average retail price of electricity                 will be passed through to their                       rule language to rely on certain
                                               (9.72 cents per kilowatt hour), the                     customers (sources subject to Part 75,                documentation provided at the time of
                                               average revenue stream per small entity                 primarily large electric utility and                  stack testing as sufficient proof of
                                               was determined to be $63,196,427                        industrial companies, or the rate                     validity of test data that otherwise meets
                                               dollars. In contrast the average                        payers). The Agency notes that much of                the requirements of part 75, by adding
                                               respondent costs burden for this rule                   the costs will be offset by the savings               simple recordkeeping/reporting
                                               was determined to be $972.36 per year,                  generated by fewer failed or incorrectly              requirements, and by extending relevant
                                               which is considerably less than one                     performed daily calibration error tests,              compliance deadlines. Thus, Executive
                                               percent of the estimated average                        quarterly linearity checks, and relative              Order 13175 does not apply to this final
                                               revenue stream per entity. All of the 620               accuracy test audits (RATAs), and fewer               rule.
                                               small entities except for one had                       repeat tests required. Thus, this rule is
                                                                                                                                                             G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
                                               respondent costs that were less than one                not subject to the requirements of
                                                                                                                                                             Children From Environmental Health
                                               percent of the estimated revenue stream.                sections 202 or 205 of UMRA.
                                                  After considering the economic                          This rule is also not subject to the               Risks and Safety Risks
                                               impacts of today’s rule on small entities,              requirements of section 203 of UMRA                      EPA interprets EO 13045 (62 FR
                                               I certify that this action will not have a              because it contains no regulatory                     19885, April 23, 1997) as applying only
                                               significant economic impact on a                        requirements that might significantly or              to those regulatory actions that concern
                                               substantial number of small entities. All               uniquely affect small governments. This               health or safety risks, such that the
                                               but one of the 620 small electric utilities             rule would generally affect large electric            analysis required under section 5–501 of
                                               directly affected by this final rule are                utility or industrial companies.                      the EO has the potential to influence the
                                               expected to experience costs that are                                                                         regulation. This final rule is not subject
                                                                                                       E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
                                               well under one percent of their                                                                               to EO 13045 because it does not
                                               estimated revenues.                                       This final rule does not have                       establish an environmental standard
                                                  The rule revisions represent minor                   federalism implications. It will not have             intended to mitigate health or safety
                                               changes to existing monitoring                          substantial direct effects on the States,             risks.
                                               requirements under part 75. There will                  on the relationship between the national
                                               be some small level of annual costs to                  government and the States, or on the                  H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
                                               participate in a gas audit program,                     distribution of power and                             Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
                                               taking a qualified stack test individual                responsibilities among the various                    Distribution, or Use
                                               competency exam and developing or                       levels of government, as specified in                   This rule is not subject to Executive
                                               revising a quality assurance manual,                    Executive Order 13132. This final rule                Order 13211, entitled ‘‘Actions
                                               and a slight up-front cost to reprogram                 primarily amends the Protocol Gas                     Concerning Regulations That
                                               existing electronic data reporting                      Verification Program, and the minimum                 Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
                                               software used under Part 75. The                        competency requirements for air                       Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355 (May
                                               Agency notes that these costs will be                   emission testing (first promulgated on                22, 2001)), because it is not a significant
                                               partially offset by the savings generated               January 24, 2008 (See 73 FR 4340, 4364,               regulatory action under Executive Order
                                               by fewer failed or incorrectly performed                and 4365)) by having specialty gas                    12866.
                                               daily calibration error tests, quarterly                company funds go to the National
                                                                                                       Institute of Standards and Technology,                I. National Technology Transfer
                                               linearity checks, and relative accuracy
                                               test audits (RATAs), and fewer repeat                   who has statutory authority to receive                Advancement Act
                                               tests required.                                         such funds, to fund gas cylinder                         Section 12(d) of the National
                                                                                                       analyses, by changing the rule language               Technology Transfer and Advancement
                                               D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act                                                                               Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law
                                                                                                       to rely on certain documentation
                                                 This rule does not contain a Federal                  provided at the time of stack testing as              104–113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
                                               mandate that may result in expenditures                 sufficient proof of validity of test data             directs EPA to use voluntary consensus
                                               of $100 million or more for State, local,               that otherwise meets the requirements                 standards in its regulatory activities
                                               and tribal governments, in the aggregate,               of Part 75, by adding simple                          unless to do so would be inconsistent
                                               or the private sector in any one year.                  recordkeeping/reporting requirements,                 with applicable law or otherwise
                                               The total annual respondent burden is                   and by extending relevant compliance                  impractical. Voluntary consensus
                                               estimated to be 2,254 hours, with total                 deadlines. Thus, Executive Order 13132                standards are technical standards (e.g.,
                                               annual labor and O&M costs estimated                    does not apply to this final rule.                    materials specifications, test methods,
                                               to be $1,460,489. This estimate includes                                                                      sampling procedures, and business
                                               the burden associated with the increase                 F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation                practices) that are developed or adopted
                                               in fees from AETBs and PGVP vendors                     and Coordination With Indian Tribal                   by voluntary consensus standards
                                               resulting from their compliance with the                Governments
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                                                                                                                                             bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to provide
                                               new requirements in the rule as well as                   This final rule does not have tribal                Congress, through OMB, explanations
                                               the small labor burden for sources to                   implications, as specified in Executive               when the Agency decides not to use
                                               review the new requirements and                         Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,                 available and applicable voluntary
                                               comply with the modified                                2000). This final rule primarily amends               consensus standards.
                                               recordkeeping and reporting                             the Protocol Gas Verification Program,                   This rulemaking involves technical
                                               requirements (See Exhibits 1 and 2). The                and the minimum competency                            standards. Therefore, the Agency
                                               respondent burden for this collection of                requirements for air emission testing                 conducted a search to identify


                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010   19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00018   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM   28MRR3
                                                                  Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations                                            17305

                                               potentially applicable voluntary                        that before a rule may take effect, the               PART 72—PERMITS REGULATION
                                               consensus standards. The Agency found                   Agency promulgating the rule must
                                               an applicable voluntary consensus                       submit a rule report, which includes a                ■ 1. The authority citation for part 72
                                               standard, ASTM D 7036–04, Standard                      copy of the rule, to each House of the                continues to read as follows:
                                               Practice for Competence of Air Emission                 Congress and to the Comptroller General                 Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7601 and 7651, et
                                               Testing Bodies, for use with the air                    of the United States. EPA will submit a               seq.
                                               emission testing body provisions of the                 report containing this rule and other
                                               final rule. However, EPA could not                      required information to the U.S. Senate,              ■  2. Section 72.2 is amended by:
                                               identify any applicable voluntary                       the U.S. House of Representatives, and                ■  a. Revising the definitions of ‘‘Air
                                               consensus standard for the Protocol Gas                 the Comptroller General of the United                 Emission Testing Body (AETB)’’, ‘‘EPA
                                               Verification Program. Therefore, for the                States prior to publication of the rule in            Protocol Gas’’, ‘‘EPA Protocol Gas
                                               PGVP, EPA has decided to use ‘‘EPA                      the Federal Register. A major rule                    Verification Program’’, and ‘‘Qualified
                                               Traceability Protocol for Assay and                     cannot take effect until 60 days after it             individual’’;
                                               Certification of Gaseous Calibration                    is published in the Federal Register.                 ■ b. Revising the introductory text of the
                                               Standards,’’ September 1997, as                         This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as                definition of ‘‘Continuous emission
                                               amended August 25, 1999, EPA–600/R–                     defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This rule                 monitoring system or CEMS’’;
                                               97/121 or such revised procedure as                     will be effective on April 27, 2011.                  ■ c. Removing paragraph (7) of the
                                               approved by the Administrator.                                                                                definition of ‘‘Continuous emission
                                                                                                       L. Petitions for Judicial Review
                                               J. Executive Order 12898: Federal                                                                             monitoring system or CEMS’’;
                                               Actions To Address Environmental                           Under Clean Air Act section 307(b)(1),             ■ d. Removing the definitions of ‘‘NIST
                                               Justice in Minority Populations and                     petitions for judicial review of this                 traceable elemental Hg standards’’,
                                               Low-Income Populations                                  action must be filed in the United States             ‘‘NIST traceable source of oxidized Hg’’,
                                                  Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR                    Court of Appeals for the appropriate                  ‘‘Sorbent trap monitoring system’’, and
                                               7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes Federal               circuit by May 27, 2011. Filing a                     ‘‘Specialty Gas Producer’’; and
                                               executive policy on environmental                       petition for reconsideration by the                   ■ e. Adding in alphabetical order
                                               justice. Its main provision directs                     Administrator of this final rule does not             definitions for ‘‘Coverage Factor k’’,
                                               Federal agencies, to the greatest extent                affect the finality of this rule for the              ‘‘EPA Protocol Gas Production Site’’,
                                               practicable and permitted by law, to                    purposes of judicial review, nor does it              ‘‘Expanded uncertainty’’, and ‘‘Specialty
                                               make environmental justice part of their                extend the time within which a petition               Gas Company’’, to read as follows:
                                               mission by identifying and addressing,                  for judicial review may be filed, and
                                                                                                       shall not postpone the effectiveness of               § 72.2   Definitions.
                                               as appropriate, disproportionately high
                                               and adverse human health or                             such a rule or action. This action may                *       *     *    *     *
                                               environmental effects of their programs,                not be challenged later in proceedings to                Air Emission Testing Body (AETB)
                                               policies, and activities on minority                    enforce its requirements. (See section                means a company or other entity that
                                               populations and low-income                              307(b)(2) of the Administrative                       provides to the owner or operator the
                                               populations in the United States.                       Procedures Act.)                                      certification required by section 6.1.2(b)
                                                  EPA has determined that this final                   List of Subjects                                      of appendix A to part 75 of this chapter.
                                               rule will not have disproportionately                                                                         *       *     *    *     *
                                               high and adverse human health or                        40 CFR Part 72
                                                                                                                                                                Continuous emission monitoring
                                               environmental effects on minority or                                                                          system or CEMS means the equipment
                                                                                                         Environmental protection, Acid rain,
                                               low-income populations because it does                                                                        required by part 75 of this chapter used
                                                                                                       Administrative practice and procedure,
                                               not affect the level of protection                                                                            to sample, analyze, measure, and
                                                                                                       Air pollution control, Electric utilities,
                                               provided to human health or the                                                                               provide, by means of readings recorded
                                                                                                       Carbon dioxide, Continuous emission
                                               environment. This final rule primarily                                                                        at least once every 15 minutes (using an
                                                                                                       monitoring, Intergovernmental relations,
                                               amends the Protocol Gas Verification                                                                          automated data acquisition and
                                                                                                       Nitrogen oxides, Reporting and
                                               Program, and the minimum competency                                                                           handling system (DAHS)), a permanent
                                                                                                       recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
                                               requirements for air emission testing                                                                         record of SO2, NOX, or CO2 emissions or
                                                                                                       oxides, Reference test methods,
                                               (first promulgated on January 24, 2008                                                                        stack gas volumetric flow rate. The
                                                                                                       Incorporation by reference.
                                               (See 73 FR 4340, 4364, and 4365)) by                                                                          following are the principal types of
                                               having specialty gas company funds go                   40 CFR Part 75                                        continuous emission monitoring
                                               to the National Institute of Standards                                                                        systems required under part 75 of this
                                               and Technology, who has statutory                         Environmental protection, Acid rain,
                                                                                                       Administrative practice and procedure,                chapter. Sections 75.10 through 75.18,
                                               authority to receive such funds, to fund                                                                      and § 75.71(a) of this chapter indicate
                                               gas cylinder analyses, by changing the                  Air pollution control, Electric utilities,
                                                                                                       Carbon dioxide, Continuous emission                   which type(s) of CEMS is required for
                                               rule language to rely on certain                                                                              specific applications:
                                               documentation provided at the time of                   monitoring, Intergovernmental relations,
                                               stack testing as sufficient proof of                    Nitrogen oxides, Reporting and                        *       *     *    *     *
                                               validity of test data that otherwise meets              recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur                       Coverage Factor k means, in general,
                                               the requirements of Part 75, by adding                  oxides, Reference test methods,                       a value chosen on the basis of the
                                               simple recordkeeping/reporting                          Incorporation by reference.                           desired level of confidence to be
                                                                                                                                                             associated with the interval defined by
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                               requirements, and by extending relevant                   Dated: March 10, 2011.
                                               compliance deadlines.                                   Lisa P. Jackson,                                      U = kuc. Typically, k is in the range 2
                                                                                                       Administrator.
                                                                                                                                                             to 3. When the normal distribution
                                               K. Congressional Review Act                                                                                   applies and uc is a reliable estimate of
                                                 The Congressional Review Act, 5                         For the reasons set forth in the                    the standard deviation of y, U = 2 uc
                                               U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small               preamble, parts 72 and 75 of chapter I                (i.e., k = 2) defines an interval having a
                                               Business Regulatory Enforcement                         of title 40 of the Code of Federal                    level of confidence of approximately
                                               Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides                Regulations are amended as follows:                   95%, and U = 3 uc (i.e., k = 3) defines


                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010   19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00019   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM   28MRR3
                                               17306              Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

                                               an interval having a level of confidence                ■ a. Revising paragraph (a) introductory              or Federal pollutant mass emissions
                                               greater than 99%.                                       text;                                                 reduction program that adopts the
                                               *     *     *     *     *                               ■ b. Adding paragraph (a)(5); and                     emission monitoring and reporting
                                                  EPA Protocol Gas means a calibration                 ■ c. Adding paragraph (b), to read as                 provisions of this part. In accordance
                                               gas mixture prepared and analyzed                       follows:                                              with § 75.20, for an affected unit which,
                                               according to section 2 of the ‘‘EPA                                                                           on the applicable compliance date, is
                                                                                                       § 72.13    Incorporation by reference.
                                               Traceability Protocol for Assay and                                                                           either in long-term cold storage (as
                                               Certification of Gaseous Calibration                    *      *    *     *     *                             defined in § 72.2 of this chapter) or is
                                               Standards,’’ September 1997, as                            (a) The following materials are                    shut down as the result of a planned
                                               amended August 25, 1999, EPA–600/R–                     available for purchase from the                       outage or a forced outage, thereby
                                               97/121 (incorporated by reference, see                  following address: American Society for               preventing the required continuous
                                               § 72.13) or such revised procedure as                   Testing and Material (ASTM)                           monitoring system certification tests
                                               approved by the Administrator.                          International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive,                 from being completed by the
                                                  EPA Protocol Gas Production Site                     P.O. Box C700, West Conshohocken,                     compliance date, the owner or operator
                                               means a site that produces or blends                    Pennsylvania 19428–2959, phone: 610–                  shall provide notice of such unit storage
                                               calibration gas mixtures prepared and                   832–9585, http://www.astm.org/                        or outage in accordance with
                                               analyzed according to section 2 of the                  DIGITAL_LIBRARY/index.shtml.                          § 75.61(a)(3) or § 75.61(a)(7), as
                                               ‘‘EPA Traceability Protocol for Assay                   *      *    *     *     *                             applicable. For the planned and
                                               and Certification of Gaseous Calibration                   (5) ASTM D 7036–04, Standard                       unplanned unit outages described in
                                               Standards,’’ September 1997, as                         Practice for Competence of Air Emission               this paragraph (d), the owner or operator
                                               amended August 25, 1999, EPA–600/R–                     Testing Bodies, for § 72.2.                           shall ensure that all of the continuous
                                               97/121 (incorporated by reference, see                     (b) A copy of the following material               monitoring systems for SO2, NOX, CO2,
                                               § 72.13) or such revised procedure as                   is available from http://www.epa.gov/                 opacity, and volumetric flow rate
                                               approved by the Administrator.                          ttn/emc/news.html (see postings for                   required under this part (or under the
                                                  EPA Protocol Gas Verification                        Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, Appendices,                      applicable State or Federal mass
                                               Program or PGVP means a calibration                     Spreadsheets, and the ‘‘Read before                   emissions reduction program) are
                                               gas audit program described in                          downloading Section 2’’ revision posted               installed and that all required
                                               § 75.21(g) of this chapter and                          August 27, 1999): EPA–600/R–97/121,                   certification tests are completed no later
                                               implemented by EPA in cooperation                       EPA Traceability Protocol for Assay and               than 90 unit operating days or 180
                                               with the National Institute of Standards                Certification of Gaseous Calibration                  calendar days (whichever occurs first)
                                               and Technology (NIST).                                  Standards, September 1997, as amended                 after the date that the unit recommences
                                               *     *     *     *     *                               August 25, 1999, U.S. Environmental                   commercial operation, notice of which
                                                  Expanded uncertainty means a                         Protection Agency, for § 72.2.                        date shall be provided under
                                               measure of uncertainty that defines an                                                                        § 75.61(a)(3) or § 75.61(a)(7), as
                                               interval about the measurement result y                 PART 75—CONTINUOUS EMISSION                           applicable. The owner or operator shall
                                               within which the value of the                           MONITORING                                            determine and report SO2 concentration,
                                               measurand Y can be confidently                                                                                NOX emission rate, CO2 concentration,
                                               asserted to lie. Although the combined                  ■ 4. The authority citation for part 75
                                                                                                       continues to read as follows:                         and flow rate data (as applicable) for all
                                               standard uncertainty uc is used to                                                                            unit operating hours after the applicable
                                               express the uncertainty of many                           Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7601, 7651k, and               compliance date until all of the required
                                               measurement results, for some                           7651k note.                                           certification tests are successfully
                                               commercial, industrial, and regulatory                                                                        completed, using either:
                                                                                                       § 75.2    [Amended]
                                               applications (e.g., when health and                                                                              (1) The maximum potential
                                               safety are concerned), what is often                    ■ 5. Section 75.2 is amended by                       concentration of SO2 (as defined in
                                               required is an expanded uncertainty,                    removing paragraph (d).                               section 2.1.1.1 of appendix A to this
                                               suggested symbol U, and is obtained by                  ■ 6. Section 75.4 is amended by:
                                                                                                                                                             part), the maximum potential NOX
                                               multiplying uc(y) by a coverage factor,                 ■ a. Revising paragraphs (b)(2) and
                                                                                                                                                             emission rate, as defined in § 72.2 of
                                               suggested symbol k. Thus U = kuc(y)                     (c)(2);
                                                                                                                                                             this chapter, the maximum potential
                                               and it is confidently believed that Y is                ■ b. Revising paragraph (d) introductory
                                                                                                                                                             flow rate, as defined in section 2.1.4.1
                                               greater than or equal to y ¥ U, and is                  text; and
                                                                                                                                                             of appendix A to this part, or the
                                               less than or equal to y + U, which is                   ■ c. Revising paragraphs (d)(1) and (e),
                                                                                                                                                             maximum potential CO2 concentration,
                                               commonly written as Y = y ± U.                          to read as follows:
                                                                                                                                                             as defined in section 2.1.3.1 of appendix
                                               *     *     *     *     *                               § 75.4    Compliance dates.                           A to this part; or
                                                  Qualified individual (QI) means an                                                                         *      *     *      *    *
                                                                                                       *      *    *     *    *
                                               individual who is identified by an                                                                               (e) In accordance with § 75.20, if the
                                                                                                          (b) * * *
                                               AETB as meeting the requirements                                                                              owner or operator of an affected unit
                                                                                                          (2) 180 calendar days after the date
                                               described in ASTM D 7036–04                                                                                   completes construction of a new stack
                                                                                                       the unit commences commercial
                                               ‘‘Standard Practice for Competence of                                                                         or flue, or a flue gas desulfurization
                                                                                                       operation, notice of which date shall be
                                               Air Emission Testing Bodies’’                                                                                 system or add-on NOX emission
                                                                                                       provided under subpart G of this part.
                                               (incorporated by reference, see § 72.13),                  (c) * * *                                          controls, after the applicable deadline in
                                               as of the date of testing.                                 (2) 180 calendar days after the date on            paragraph (a), (b), or (c) of this section:
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                               *     *     *     *     *                               which the unit becomes subject to the                    (1) Except as otherwise provided in
                                                  Specialty Gas Company means an                       requirements of the Acid Rain Program,                paragraph (e)(3) of this section, the
                                               organization that wholly or partially                   notice of which date shall be provided                owner or operator shall ensure that all
                                               owns or operates one or more EPA                        under subpart G of this part.                         required certification and/or
                                               Protocol gas production sites.                             (d) This paragraph (d) applies to                  recertification and/or diagnostic tests of
                                               *     *     *     *     *                               affected units under the Acid Rain                    the monitoring systems required under
                                               ■ 3. Section 72.13 is amended by:                       Program and to units subject to a State               this part (i.e., the SO2, NOX, CO2,


                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010   19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00020   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM   28MRR3
                                                                  Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations                                               17307

                                               opacity, and volumetric flow rate                       or stack operating days after the date                   (2) The hour of the probationary
                                               monitoring systems, as applicable) are                  and hour that reagent is first injected               calibration error test (see
                                               completed not later than 90 unit                        into the control device, all required tests           § 75.20(b)(3)(ii)), if conditional data
                                               operating days or 180 calendar days                     of the low measurement scale must be                  validation is used and all of the
                                               (whichever occurs first) after:                         performed and passed within the                       certification tests are successfully
                                                  (i) For the event of construction of a               window of time provided under                         completed in accordance with
                                               new stack or flue, the date that                        paragraph (e)(1)(ii) of this section; or              paragraph (e)(4)(i)(A) of this section,
                                               emissions first exit to the atmosphere                     (v) Another procedure approved by                  with no test failures. If any required test
                                               through the new stack or flue, notice of                the Administrator pursuant to a petition              is failed or aborted or is otherwise not
                                               which date shall be provided under                      under § 75.66.                                        in accordance with paragraph
                                               subpart G of this part; or                                 (3) If a particular project involves both          (e)(4)(i)(A) of this section, data
                                                  (ii) For the event of installation of a              the event of new stack or flue                        validation shall be done according to
                                               flue gas desulfurization system or add-                 construction and the event of                         § 75.20(b)(3)(vii).
                                               on NOX emission controls, the date that                 installation of a flue gas desulfurization               (ii) For a CEMS other than one
                                               reagent is first injected into the flue gas             system or add-on NOX emission                         addressed in paragraph (e)(4)(i) of this
                                               desulfurization system or the add-on                    controls, the owner or operator shall                 section:
                                               NOX emission controls, as applicable,                   either:                                                  (A) Only if the relative accuracy test
                                               notice of which date shall be provided                     (i) Complete all of the monitoring                 audit (RATA) of the CEMS is
                                               under subpart G of this part.                           system certification and/or                           successfully completed either prior to
                                                  (2) The owner or operator shall                      recertification and/or diagnostic testing             the date and hour of the first injection
                                               determine and report SO2 concentration,                 requirements of both events within the                of reagent into the emission control
                                               NOX emission rate, CO2 concentration,                   window of time provided under                         device, or after that date and hour
                                               and volumetric flow rate data for all                   paragraph (e)(1)(i) of this section; or               during a period when the control device
                                               unit or stack operating hours after                        (ii) Complete all of the monitoring                is not operating, but still within the
                                               emissions first pass through the new                    system certification and/or                           window of time provided under
                                               stack or flue, or reagent is first injected             recertification and/or diagnostic testing             paragraph (e)(1)(i) of this section, and
                                               into the flue gas desulfurization system                requirements of each event within the                 the rest of the certification tests required
                                               or add-on NOX emission controls, as                     separate window of time applicable to                 under § 75.20(c) and section 6 of
                                               applicable, until all required                          such event provided under paragraph                   appendix A to this part for the CEMS
                                               certification and/or recertification and/               (e)(1) of this section.                               are successfully completed within the
                                               or diagnostic tests are successfully                       (4) For the project described in
                                                                                                                                                             window of time provided under
                                               completed, using:                                       paragraph (e)(3) of this section, the
                                                  (i) The applicable missing data                                                                            paragraph (e)(1)(i) of this section;
                                                                                                       emissions data from each CEMS
                                               substitution procedures under §§ 75.31                                                                           (B) Beginning with:
                                                                                                       installed on the new stack recorded in
                                               through 75.37;                                                                                                   (1) The first unit or stack operating
                                                                                                       the interval of time starting on the date
                                                  (ii) The conditional data validation                                                                       hour after successful completion of all
                                                                                                       and hour on which emissions first exit
                                               procedures of § 75.20(b)(3), except that                                                                      of the certification tests in accordance
                                                                                                       to the atmosphere through the new stack
                                               conditional data validation may, if                                                                           with paragraph (e)(4)(ii)(A) of this
                                                                                                       and ending on the hour before the date
                                               necessary, be used for the entire                                                                             section; or
                                                                                                       and hour on which reagent is first
                                               window of time provided under                                                                                    (2) The hour of the probationary
                                                                                                       injected into the control device may be
                                               paragraph (e)(1) of this section in lieu of                                                                   calibration error test (see
                                                                                                       reported as quality assured:
                                               the periods specified in § 75.20(b)(3)(iv);                (i) For the CEMS that includes the                 § 75.20(b)(3)(ii)), if conditional data
                                                  (iii) Reference methods under                        monitor that measures the pollutant                   validation is used and all of the
                                               § 75.22(b);                                             being removed by the add-on emission                  certification tests are successfully
                                                  (iv) Quality-assured data recorded on                controls (i.e., SO2 or NOX, as                        completed in accordance with
                                               the high measurement scale of the                       applicable):                                          paragraph (e)(4)(ii)(A) of this section,
                                               monitor that measures the pollutant                        (A) Only if the relative accuracy test             with no test failures. If any required test
                                               being removed by the add-on emission                    audit (RATA) of the high measurement                  is failed or aborted or is otherwise not
                                               controls (i.e., SO2 or NOX, as                          scale of the monitor is successfully                  in accordance with paragraph
                                               applicable), if, pursuant to section 2 of               completed either prior to the date and                (e)(4)(ii)(A) of this section, data
                                               appendix A to this part, two spans and                  hour of the first injection of reagent into           validation shall be done according to
                                               ranges are required for that monitor and                the emission control device, or after that            § 75.20(b)(3)(vii).
                                               if the high measurement scale of the                    date and hour during a period when the                *       *     *    *     *
                                               monitor has been certified according to                 control device is not operating, but still            ■ 7. Section 75.6 is amended by:
                                               § 75.20(c), section 6 of appendix A to                  within the window of time provided                    ■ a. Revising paragraph (a) introductory
                                               this part, and, if applicable, paragraph                under paragraph (e)(1)(i) of this section,            text;
                                               (e)(4)(i) of this section. Data recorded on             and the rest of the certification tests               ■ b. Removing and reserving paragraphs
                                               the certified high scale, including data                required under § 75.20(c) and section 6               (a)(38), (a)(43), and (a)(44);
                                               that ordinarily would be required to be                 of appendix A to this part for the high               ■ c. Revising paragraphs (a)(48) and
                                               recorded on the low scale, pursuant to                  measurement scale of the monitor are                  (f)(3); and
                                               section 2.1.1.4(g) or 2.1.2.4(f) of                     successfully completed within the                     ■ d. Adding paragraph (g), to read as
                                               appendix A to this part, may be reported
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                                                                                       window of time provided under                         follows:
                                               as quality-assured for a period not to                  paragraph (e)(1)(i) of this section;
                                               exceed 60 unit or stack operating days                     (B) Beginning with:                                § 75.6   Incorporation by reference.
                                               after the date and hour that reagent is                    (1) The first unit or stack operating              *     *     *    *    *
                                               first injected into the control device. In              hour after successful completion of all                 (a) The following materials are
                                               order for the high and low scale                        of the certification tests in accordance              available for purchase from the
                                               readings from the monitor to be reported                with paragraph (e)(4)(i)(A) of this                   following address: American Society for
                                               as quality-assured for more than 60 unit                section; or                                           Testing and Material (ASTM)


                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010   19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00021   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM   28MRR3
                                               17308              Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

                                               International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive,                   average in paragraph (d)(1) of this                   appendix A to part 60 of this chapter is
                                               P.O. Box C700, West Conshohocken,                       section shall result in the failure to                used to determine NOX emission rate,
                                               Pennsylvania, 19428–2959, phone: 610–                   obtain a valid hour of data and the loss              the maximum potential moisture
                                               832–9585, http://www.astm.org/                          of such component data for the entire                 percentage, as defined in section 2.1.6 of
                                               DIGITAL_LIBRARY/index.shtml.                            hour. * * *                                           appendix A to this part; and
                                               *     *     *     *      *                              *     *    *     *      *                             *       *     *     *    *
                                                 (38) [Reserved]                                                                                                (b) Recertification approval process.
                                                                                                       § 75.15   [Removed and reserved]
                                               *     *     *     *      *                                                                                    Whenever the owner or operator makes
                                                 (43) [Reserved]                                       ■ 9. Section 75.15 is removed and                     a replacement, modification, or change
                                                 (44) [Reserved]                                       reserved.                                             in a certified continuous emission
                                                                                                       ■ 10. Section 75.20 is amended by:                    monitoring system or continuous
                                               *     *     *     *      *
                                                                                                       ■ a. Revising paragraph (a)(5)(i);                    opacity monitoring system that may
                                                 (48) ASTM D7036–04, Standard
                                                                                                       ■ b. Revising the first sentence of                   significantly affect the ability of the
                                               Practice for Competence of Air Emission
                                                                                                       paragraph (b) introductory text;                      system to accurately measure or record
                                               Testing Bodies, for § 75.21, § 75.59, and               ■ c. Revising paragraph (c)(1)
                                               appendix A to this part.                                                                                      the SO2 or CO2 concentration, stack gas
                                                                                                       introductory text;                                    volumetric flow rate, NOX emission rate,
                                               *     *     *     *      *                              ■ d. Revising paragraphs (c)(1)(ii) and
                                                                                                                                                             NOX concentration, percent moisture, or
                                                 (f) * * *                                             (c)(1)(iii);                                          opacity, or to meet the requirements of
                                                 (3) American Petroleum Institute                      ■ e. Removing paragraph (c)(1)(vi);
                                                                                                                                                             § 75.21 or appendix B to this part, the
                                               (API) Manual of Petroleum                               ■ f. Removing and reserving paragraph
                                                                                                                                                             owner or operator shall recertify the
                                               Measurement Standards, Chapter 4—                       (c)(9); and
                                                                                                       ■ g. Removing paragraph (d)(2)(ix), to
                                                                                                                                                             continuous emission monitoring system
                                               Proving Systems, Section 2—Pipe
                                                                                                       read as follows:                                      or continuous opacity monitoring
                                               Provers (Provers Accumulating at Least
                                                                                                                                                             system, according to the procedures in
                                               10,000 Pulses), Second Edition, March
                                                                                                       § 75.20 Initial certification and                     this paragraph. * * *
                                               2001, Section 3—Small Volume Provers,                   recertification procedures.
                                               First Edition, July 1988, Reaffirmed Oct                                                                      *       *     *     *    *
                                                                                                         (a) * * *                                              (c) * * *
                                               1993, and Section 5—Master-Meter
                                                                                                         (5) * * *                                              (1) For each SO2 pollutant
                                               Provers, Second Edition, May 2000, for                    (i) Until such time, date, and hour as
                                               appendix D to this part.                                                                                      concentration monitor, each NOX
                                                                                                       the continuous emission monitoring
                                               *     *     *     *      *                                                                                    concentration monitoring system used
                                                                                                       system can be adjusted, repaired, or
                                                 (g) A copy of the following material is                                                                     to determine NOX mass emissions, as
                                                                                                       replaced and certification tests
                                               available from http://www.epa.gov/ttn/                                                                        defined under § 75.71(a)(2), and each
                                                                                                       successfully completed (or, if the
                                               emc/news.html (see postings for                                                                               NOX-diluent continuous emission
                                                                                                       conditional data validation procedures
                                               Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, Appendices,                                                                              monitoring system:
                                                                                                       in paragraphs (b)(3)(ii) through (b)(3)(ix)
                                               Spreadsheets, and the ‘‘Read before                     of this section are used, until a                     *       *     *     *    *
                                               downloading Section 2’’ revision posted                 probationary calibration error test is                   (ii) A linearity check, where, for the
                                               August 27, 1999): EPA–600/R–97/121,                     passed following corrective actions in                NOX-diluent continuous emission
                                               EPA Traceability Protocol for Assay and                 accordance with paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of               monitoring system, the test is performed
                                               Certification of Gaseous Calibration                    this section), the owner or operator shall            separately on the NOX pollutant
                                               Standards, September 1997, as amended                   substitute the following values, as                   concentration monitor and the diluent
                                               August 25, 1999, U.S. Environmental                     applicable, for each hour of unit                     gas monitor;
                                               Protection Agency, for § 75.21, and                     operation during the period of invalid                   (iii) A relative accuracy test audit. For
                                               appendix A to this part.                                data specified in paragraph (a)(4)(iii) of            the NOX-diluent continuous emission
                                               ■ 8. Section 75.10 is amended by:                       this section or in § 75.21: the maximum               monitoring system, the RATA shall be
                                               ■ a. Revising the second sentence of                    potential concentration of SO2, as                    done on a system basis, in units of lb/
                                               paragraph (d)(1); and                                   defined in section 2.1.1.1 of appendix A              mmBtu. For the NOX concentration
                                               ■ b. Revising the first sentence of                     to this part, to report SO2 concentration;            monitoring system, the RATA shall be
                                               paragraph (d)(3), to read as follows:                   the maximum potential NOX emission                    done on a ppm basis;
                                                                                                       rate, as defined in § 72.2 of this chapter,           *       *     *     *    *
                                               § 75.10   General operating requirements.               to report NOX emissions in lb/mmBtu;                     (9) [Reserved]
                                               *     *     *     *    *                                the maximum potential concentration of                *       *     *     *    *
                                                 (d) * * *                                             NOX, as defined in section 2.1.2.1 of
                                                 (1) * * * The owner or operator shall                 appendix A to this part, to report NOX                ■ 11. Section 75.21 is amended by:
                                               reduce all SO2 concentrations,                          emissions in ppm (when a NOX                          ■ a. Revising paragraph (a)(3); and
                                               volumetric flow, SO2 mass emissions,                    concentration monitoring system is used               ■ b. Adding paragraphs (f) and (g), to
                                               CO2 concentration, O2 concentration,                    to determine NOX mass emissions, as                   read as follows:
                                               CO2 mass emissions (if applicable), NOX                 defined under § 75.71(a)(2)); the
                                               concentration, and NOX emission rate                    maximum potential flow rate, as defined               § 75.21 Quality assurance and quality
                                               data collected by the monitors to hourly                in section 2.1.4.1 of appendix A to this              control requirements.
                                               averages. * * *                                         part, to report volumetric flow; the                    (a) * * *
                                               *     *     *     *    *                                maximum potential concentration of                      (3) The owner or operator shall
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                                 (3) Failure of an SO2, CO2, or O2                     CO2, as defined in section 2.1.3.1 of                 perform quality assurance upon a
                                               emissions concentration monitor, NOX                    appendix A to this part, to report CO2                reference method backup monitoring
                                               concentration monitor, flow monitor,                    concentration data; and either the                    system according to the requirements of
                                               moisture monitor, or NOX-diluent                        minimum potential moisture                            Method 2, 6C, 7E, or 3A in Appendices
                                               continuous emission monitoring system                   percentage, as defined in section 2.1.5 of            A–1, A–2 and A–4 to part 60 of this
                                               to acquire the minimum number of data                   appendix A to this part or, if Equation               chapter (supplemented, as necessary, by
                                               points for calculation of an hourly                     19–3, 19–4 or 19–8 in Method 19 in                    guidance from the Administrator),


                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010   19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00022   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM   28MRR3
                                                                  Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations                                          17309

                                               instead of the procedures specified in                     (iv) The name, e-mail address, and                 the list and until it submits to EPA the
                                               appendix B to this part.                                telephone number of a contact person                  information required by paragraph (g)(1)
                                               *       *    *     *     *                              for that participating EPA Protocol gas               of this section;
                                                  (f) Requirements for Air Emission                    production site.                                         (iii) For any EPA Protocol gas
                                               Testing. On and after March 27, 2012,                      (2) An EPA Protocol gas production                 production site which is notified by
                                               relative accuracy testing under                         site that elects to continue participating            EPA that its cylinders are being audited
                                               § 75.74(c)(2)(ii), section 6.5 of appendix              in the PGVP in the next calendar year                 and cannot provide to EPA upon
                                               A to this part, and section 2.3.1 of                    must notify the Administrator of its                  demand proof of payment to NIST and
                                               appendix B to this part, and stack                      intent to continue in the program by                  a valid contract with NIST, the
                                               testing under § 75.19 and section 2.1 of                December 31 of the current year by                    cylinders may either be kept by NIST or
                                               appendix E to this part shall be                        submitting to EPA the information                     returned to the EPA Protocol gas
                                               performed by an ‘‘Air Emission Testing                  described in paragraph (g)(1) of this                 production site free of any demurrage
                                               Body’’, as defined in § 72.2 of this                    section.                                              and at no cost to NIST, and that EPA
                                               chapter. Conformance to the                                (3) A list of the names, contact                   Protocol gas production site shall not be
                                               requirements of ASTM D7036–04                           information, and vendor IDs of EPA                    eligible for relisting for 180 calendar
                                               (incorporated by reference, see § 75.6),                Protocol gas production sites                         days from the date of notice that it was
                                               referred to in section 6.1.2 of appendix                participating in the PGVP will be made                removed from the list and until it
                                                                                                       publicly available by posting on EPA                  submits to EPA the information required
                                               A to this part, shall apply only to these
                                                                                                       Web sites (see the CAMD Web site                      by paragraph (g)(1) of this section.
                                               tests. Section 1.1.4 of appendix B to this
                                                                                                       http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/                           (6) On and after May 27, 2011 for each
                                               part, and section 2.1 of appendix E to                                                                        unit subject to this part that uses EPA
                                               this part require compliance with                       emissions/pgvp.html).
                                                                                                          (4) EPA may remove an EPA Protocol                 Protocol gases, the owner or operator
                                               section 6.1.2 of appendix A to this part.                                                                     must obtain such gases from either an
                                                                                                       gas production site from the list of
                                               Tests and activities under this part not                                                                      EPA Protocol gas production site that is
                                                                                                       PGVP participants and give notice to the
                                               required to be performed by an AETB as                                                                        on the EPA list of sites participating in
                                                                                                       production site for any of the following
                                               defined in § 72.2 of this chapter include                                                                     the PGVP on the date the owner or
                                                                                                       reasons:
                                               daily CEMS operation, daily calibration                    (i) If the EPA Protocol gas production             operator procures such gases or from a
                                               error checks, daily flow interference                   site fails to provide all of the                      reseller that sells to the owner or
                                               checks, quarterly linearity checks,                     information required by paragraph (g)(1)              operator unaltered EPA Protocol gases
                                               routine maintenance of CEMS,                            of this section in accordance with                    produced by an EPA Protocol gas
                                               voluntary emissions testing, or                         paragraph (g)(2) of this section;                     production site that was on the EPA list
                                               emissions testing required under other                     (ii) If, after being notified that its EPA         of participating sites on the date the
                                               regulations.                                            Protocol gas cylinders are being audited              reseller procured such gases.
                                                  (g) Requirements for EPA Protocol Gas                by EPA, the EPA Protocol gas                             (7) An EPA Protocol gas cylinder
                                               Verification Program. Any EPA Protocol                  production site fails to cancel its invoice           certified by or ordered from any non-
                                               gas production site that chooses to                     or to credit the purchaser’s account for              participating EPA Protocol gas
                                               participate in the EPA Protocol Gas                     the cylinders within 45 calendar days of              production site no later than May 27,
                                               Verification Program (PGVP) must                        such notification; or                                 2011 may be used for the purposes of
                                               notify the Administrator of its intent to                  (iii) If, after being notified that its EPA        this part until the earlier of the
                                               participate. An EPA Protocol gas                        Protocol gas cylinders are being audited              cylinder’s expiration date or the date on
                                               production site’s participation shall                   by EPA, the EPA Protocol gas                          which the cylinder gas pressure reaches
                                               commence immediately upon                               production site cannot provide to EPA                 150 psig. In the event that an EPA
                                               notification to EPA and shall extend                    upon demand proof of payment to the                   Protocol gas production site is removed
                                               through the end of the calendar year in                 National Institute of Standards and                   from the list of PGVP participants on the
                                               which notification is provided. EPA will                Technology (NIST) and a valid contract                same date as or after the date on which
                                               issue a vendor ID to each participating                 with NIST;                                            a particular cylinder has been certified
                                               EPA Protocol gas production site. In                       (5) EPA may relist an EPA Protocol                 or ordered, that gas cylinder may
                                               each year of the PGVP, EPA may audit                    gas production site as follows:                       continue to be used for the purposes of
                                               up to four EPA Protocol gas cylinders                      (i) An EPA Protocol gas production                 this part until the earlier of the
                                               from each participating EPA Protocol                    site may be relisted immediately after its            cylinder’s expiration date or the date on
                                               gas production site.                                    failure is remedied if the only reason for            which the cylinder gas pressure reaches
                                                  (1) A production site participating in               removal from the list of PGVP                         150 psig. However, in no case shall a
                                               the PGVP shall provide the following                    participants is failure to provide all of             cylinder described in this paragraph
                                               information in its initial and ongoing                  the information required by paragraph                 (g)(7) be recertified by a non-
                                               notifications to EPA in an electronic                   (g)(1) of this section;                               participating EPA Protocol gas
                                               format prescribed by the Administrator                     (ii) If EPA does not receive hardcopy              production site to extend its useful life
                                               (see the CAMD Web site http://                          or electronic proof of a credit receipt or            and be used by a source subject to this
                                               www.epa.gov/airmarkets/emissions/                       of cancellation of the invoice for the                part.
                                               pgvp.html):                                             cylinders from the EPA Protocol gas                      (8) If EPA notifies a participating EPA
                                                  (i) The specialty gas company name                   production site within 45 calendar days               Protocol gas production site that its EPA
                                               which owns or operates the                              of notifying the EPA Protocol gas                     Protocol gas cylinders are being audited
                                               participating production site;                          production site that its cylinders are
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                                                                                                                                             and identifies the purchaser as an EPA
                                                  (ii) The name, e-mail address, and                   being audited by EPA, the cylinders                   representative or contractor
                                               telephone number of a contact person                    shall be returned to the EPA Protocol                 participating in the audit process, the
                                               for that specialty gas company;                         gas production site free of any                       production site shall:
                                                  (iii) The name and address of that                   demurrage, and that EPA Protocol gas                     (i) Either cancel that purchaser’s
                                               participating EPA Protocol gas                          production site shall not be eligible for             invoice or credit that purchaser’s
                                               production site, owned or operated by                   relisting for 180 calendar days from the              account for the purchase of those EPA
                                               the specialty gas company; and                          date of notice that it was removed from               Protocol gas cylinders;


                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010   19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00023   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM   28MRR3
                                               17310              Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

                                                  (ii) Not charge for demurrage for those                 (iv) Each participating EPA Protocol               the PGVP, such cylinders must be
                                               EPA Protocol gas cylinders;                             gas production site shall have NIST                   analyzed by NIST for both the NO and
                                                  (iii) Arrange for and pay for the return             provide all of the information required               NOX components (where total NOX is
                                               shipment of its cylinders from NIST;                    by paragraphs (g)(9)(ii) through (g)(9)(v)            determined by NO plus NO2) and the
                                               and                                                     of this section in draft and final                    results of the analyses shall be included
                                                  (iv) Provide sufficient funding to                   electronic audit reports on all cylinders             in the audit report.
                                               NIST for:                                               in the current audit, and in a draft                     (10) An EPA Protocol gas production
                                                  (A) The analysis of those EPA                        redacted electronic audit report                      site shall continue to be on the EPA list
                                               Protocol gas cylinders by NIST;                         containing just that production site’s                of sites participating in the PGVP and
                                                  (B) The production site’s pro rata                   information. The draft audit report on                may continue to sell EPA Protocol gases
                                               share of draft and final NIST electronic                all cylinders in the current audit and                to sources subject to part 75 if it is not
                                               audit reports as specified in paragraphs                each draft redacted version of the audit              notified by EPA that its cylinders are
                                               (g)(9)(ii) through (g)(9)(v) of this section            report shall be submitted electronically              being audited under the PGVP if it
                                               on all cylinders in the current audit; and              by NIST to pgvp@epa.gov, unless                       provides the information described in
                                                  (C) The full cost of a draft redacted                otherwise provided by the                             paragraph (g)(1) of this section in
                                               electronic audit report containing just                 Administrator, within four weeks of                   accordance with paragraph (g)(2) of this
                                               that production site’s results and the                  completion of all cylinder analyses or as             section.
                                               information as specified in paragraphs                  soon as possible thereafter. The draft                   (11) The data validation procedures
                                               (g)(9)(ii) through (g)(9)(v) of this section;           and final audit report on all cylinders in            under §§ 2.1.4, 2.2.3, and 2.3.2 of
                                                  (9) If EPA notifies a participating EPA              the current audit shall only be sent to               appendix B to this part apply.
                                               Protocol gas production site that its EPA               EPA. EPA will send the applicable draft               ■ 12. Section 75.22 is amended by:
                                               Protocol gas cylinders are being audited                redacted audit report to each                         ■ a. Revising paragraph (a) introductory
                                               then:                                                   participating production site for                     text;
                                                  (i) Each participating EPA Protocol                  comment. To be considered in the final                ■ b. Revising paragraph (a)(5)(iv);
                                               gas production site must have NIST                      posted audit report, EPA must receive                 ■ c. Adding paragraph (a)(5)(v)
                                               analyze its EPA Protocol gas cylinders                  comments, and any cylinder re-analyses                ■ d. Removing paragraph (a)(7);
                                               provided for audit as soon after NIST                   from participating EPA Protocol gas                   ■ e. Revising paragraph (b) introductory
                                               receives the batch containing those                     production sites within 60 days of the                text; and
                                               cylinders as possible, preferably within                participating EPA Protocol gas                        ■ f. Removing paragraphs (b)(5) through
                                                                                                       production site’s receipt of the draft                (b)(8), to read as follows:
                                               two weeks of NIST’s receipt, using
                                                                                                       redacted audit report. All comments
                                               analytical procedures consistent with                                                                         § 75.22    Reference test methods.
                                                                                                       from production sites, including any
                                               metrology institute practices and at least
                                                                                                       cylinder re-analyses, on the draft                       (a) The owner or operator shall use
                                               as rigorous as the ‘‘EPA Traceability
                                                                                                       redacted versions of the audit report                 the following methods, which are found
                                               Protocol for Assay and Certification of
                                                                                                       shall be submitted electronically to                  in appendices A–1 through A–4 to part
                                               Gaseous Calibration Standards’’
                                                                                                       pgvp@epa.gov, unless otherwise                        60 of this chapter, to conduct the
                                               (Traceability Protocol), September 1997,
                                                                                                       provided by the Administrator. The                    following tests: Monitoring system tests
                                               as amended August 25, 1999, EPA–600/
                                                                                                       final audit report on all cylinders in the            for certification or recertification of
                                               R–97/121, (incorporated by reference,
                                                                                                       current audit shall be submitted                      continuous emission monitoring
                                               see § 75.6) or equivalent written                       electronically by NIST to pgvp@epa.gov,               Systems; NOX emission tests of low
                                               cylinder analysis protocol that has been                unless otherwise provided by the                      mass emission units under
                                               approved by EPA.                                        Administrator, within 90 days of the                  § 75.19(c)(1)(iv); NOX emission tests of
                                                  (ii) Each cylinder’s concentration                   participating EPA Protocol gas                        excepted monitoring systems under
                                               must be determined by NIST and the                      production site’s receipt of the draft                appendix E to this part; and required
                                               results compared to each cylinder’s                     redacted audit report sent by EPA or as               quality assurance and quality control
                                               certification documentation and tag                     soon as possible thereafter. EPA will                 tests:
                                               value to establish conformance with                     post the final results of the NIST
                                               section 5.1 of appendix A to this part.                                                                       *      *     *     *     *
                                                                                                       analyses on EPA Web sites (see the                       (5) * * *
                                               After NIST analysis, each cylinder must                 CAMD Web site http://www.epa.gov/
                                               be provided with a NIST analyzed                                                                                 (iv) Section 8.6 of the method
                                                                                                       airmarkets/emissions/pgvp.html). Each                 allowing for the use of ‘‘Dynamic
                                               concentration with an expanded                          audit report shall include:
                                               uncertainty, as defined in § 72.2,                                                                            Spiking’’ as an alternative to the
                                                                                                          (A) A table with the information and               interference and system bias checks of
                                               (coverage factor, as defined in § 72.2,                 in the format specified by Figure 3 (or
                                               k=2) of plus or minus 1.0 percent                                                                             the method. Dynamic spiking may be
                                                                                                       the Note below Figure 3, as applicable)               conducted (optionally) as an additional
                                               (calculated combined standard                           of appendix B to this part or such
                                               uncertainty of plus or minus 0.5%),                                                                           quality assurance check; and
                                                                                                       revised format as approved by the                        (v) That portion of Section 8.5 of the
                                               inclusive, or better, unless otherwise                  Administrator; and
                                               approved by EPA.                                                                                              method allowing multiple sampling
                                                                                                          (B) Complete documentation of the
                                                  (iii) The certification documentation                                                                      runs to be conducted before performing
                                                                                                       NIST procedures used to analyze the
                                               accompanying each cylinder must be                                                                            the post-run system bias check or
                                                                                                       cylinders, including the analytical
                                               verified in the audit report as meeting                                                                       system calibration error check.
                                                                                                       reference standards, analytical method,
                                               the requirements of ‘‘EPA Traceability                                                                        *      *     *     *     *
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                                                                                       analytical method uncertainty,
                                               Protocol for Assay and Certification of                 analytical instrumentation, and                          (b) The owner or operator may use
                                               Gaseous Calibration Standards,’’                        instrument calibration procedures.                    any of the following methods, which are
                                               September 1997, as amended August 25,                      (v) For EPA Protocol gas production                found in appendices A–1 through A–4
                                               1999, EPA–600/R–97/121 (incorporated                    sites that produce EPA Protocol gas                   to part 60 of this chapter, as a reference
                                               by reference, see § 75.6) or a revised                  cylinders claiming NIST traceability for              method backup monitoring system to
                                               procedure approved by the                               both NO and NOX concentrations in the                 provide quality-assured monitor data:
                                               Administrator.                                          same cylinder, if analyzed by NIST for                *      *     *     *     *


                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010   19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00024   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM    28MRR3
                                                                        Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations                                                                                   17311

                                               ■ 13. Section 75.24 is amended by                                      concentration, or flow monitoring                                  the minimum potential moisture
                                               revising paragraph (d) to read as                                      system(s) at the unit or stack location,                           percentage, as specified, respectively, in
                                               follows:                                                               the owner or operator shall provide                                sections 2.1.1.1, 2.1.3.1, 2.1.3.2 and
                                                                                                                      substitute data required under this                                2.1.5 of appendix A to this part. If
                                               § 75.24 Out-of-control periods and                                     subpart according to the procedures in                             Equation 19–3, 19–4 or 19–8 in Method
                                               adjustment for system bias.
                                                                                                                      paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section.                            19 in appendix A–7 to part 60 of this
                                               *      *    *      *     *                                             The owner or operator of a unit shall                              chapter is used to determine NOX
                                                  (d) When the bias test indicates that                               use these procedures for no longer than                            emission rate, substitute the maximum
                                               an SO2 monitor, a flow monitor, a NOX-                                 three years (26,280 clock hours)                                   potential moisture percentage, as
                                               diluent continuous emission monitoring                                 following initial certification.                                   specified in section 2.1.6 of appendix A
                                               system, or a NOX concentration                                            (b) SO2, CO2, or O2 concentration data,                         to this part.
                                               monitoring system used to determine                                    and moisture data. For each hour of                                *     *     *     *     *
                                               NOX mass emissions, as defined in                                      missing SO2 or CO2 emissions                                       ■ 15. Section 75.32 is amended by
                                               § 75.71(a)(2), is biased low (i.e., the                                concentration data (including CO2 data
                                               arithmetic mean of the differences                                                                                                        revising the first sentence of paragraph
                                                                                                                      converted from O2 data using the                                   (a) introductory text, to read as follows:
                                               between the reference method value and                                 procedures in appendix F of this part),
                                               the monitor or monitoring system                                       or missing O2 or CO2 diluent                                       § 75.32 Determination of monitor data
                                               measurements in a relative accuracy test                               concentration data used to calculate                               availability for standard missing data
                                               audit exceed the bias statistic in section                             heat input, or missing moisture data, the                          procedures.
                                               7 of appendix A to this part), the owner                               owner or operator shall calculate the                                 (a) Following initial certification of
                                               or operator shall adjust the monitor or                                substitute data as follows:                                        the required SO2, CO2, O2, or moisture
                                               continuous emission monitoring system                                     (1) Whenever prior quality-assured                              monitoring system(s) at a particular unit
                                               to eliminate the cause of bias such that                               data exist, the owner or operator shall                            or stack location (i.e., the date and time
                                               it passes the bias test or calculate and                               substitute, by means of the data                                   at which quality assured data begins to
                                               use the bias adjustment factor as                                      acquisition and handling system, for                               be recorded by CEMS(s) at that
                                               specified in section 2.3.4 of appendix B                               each hour of missing data, the average                             location), the owner or operator shall
                                               to this part.                                                          of the hourly SO2, CO2, or O2                                      begin calculating the percent monitor
                                               *      *    *      *     *                                             concentrations or moisture percentages                             data availability as described in
                                               ■ 14. Section 75.31 is amended by                                      recorded by a certified monitor for the                            paragraph (a)(1) of this section, and
                                               revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to read                                unit operating hour immediately before                             shall, upon completion of the first 720
                                               as follows:                                                            and the unit operating hour                                        quality-assured monitor operating
                                                                                                                      immediately after the missing data                                 hours, record, by means of the
                                               § 75.31      Initial missing data procedures.                          period.                                                            automated data acquisition and
                                                  (a) During the first 720 quality-                                      (2) Whenever no prior quality assured                           handling system, the percent monitor
                                               assured monitor operating hours                                        SO2, CO2, or O2 concentration data or                              data availability for each monitored
                                               following initial certification of the                                 moisture data exist, the owner or                                  parameter.* * *
                                               required SO2, CO2, O2, or moisture                                     operator shall substitute, as applicable,                          *      *    *     *      *
                                               monitoring system(s) at a particular unit                              for each hour of missing data, the                                 ■ 16. Section 75.33 is amended by:
                                               or stack location (i.e., the date and time                             maximum potential SO2 concentration                                ■ a. Revising the section heading; and
                                               at which quality assured data begins to                                or the maximum potential CO2                                       ■ b. Revising Table 1 and the footnotes
                                               be recorded by CEMS(s) installed at that                               concentration or the minimum potential                             below Table 1, to read as follows:
                                               location), and during the first 2,160                                  O2 concentration or (unless Equation
                                               quality assured monitor operating hours                                19–3, 19–4 or 19–8 in Method 19 in                                 § 75.33 Standard missing data procedures
                                               following initial certification of the                                 appendix A–7 to part 60 of this chapter                            for SO2, NOX, and flow rate.
                                               required NOX-diluent, NOX                                              is used to determine NOX emission rate)                            *        *        *         *          *

                                                   TABLE 1—MISSING DATA PROCEDURE FOR SO2 CEMS, CO2 CEMS, MOISTURE CEMS, AND DILUENT (CO2 OR O2)
                                                                               MONITORS FOR HEAT INPUT DETERMINATION
                                                                                    Trigger conditions                                                                                   Calculation routines

                                                                                                                            Duration (N) of
                                                           Monitor data availability (percent)                              CEMS outage                                           Method                                            Lookback period
                                                                                                                               (hours) 2

                                               95 or more ...............................................................   N ≤ 24                 Average ..................................................................   HB/HA.
                                                                                                                            N > 24                 For SO2, CO2, and H2O**, the greater of:
                                                                                                                                                   Average ..................................................................   HB/HA.
                                                                                                                                                   90th percentile ........................................................     720 hours.*
                                                                                                                                                   For O2 and H2OX, the lesser of:                                              HB/HA.
                                                                                                                                                   10th percentile ........................................................     720 hours.*
                                               90 or more, but below 95 ........................................            N≤8                    Average ..................................................................   HB/HA.
                                                                                                                            N>8                    For SO2, CO2, and H2O **, the greater of:
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                                                                                                                                   Average ..................................................................   HB/HA.
                                                                                                                                                   95th percentile ........................................................     720 hours.*
                                                                                                                                                   For O2 and H2OX, the lesser of:
                                                                                                                                                   Average ..................................................................   HB/HA.
                                                                                                                                                   5th Percentile .........................................................     720 hours.*
                                               80 or more, but below 90 ........................................            N>0                    For SO2, CO2, and H2O **,
                                                                                                                                                   Maximum value1 .....................................................         720 hours.*
                                                                                                                                                   For O2 and H2OX:



                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010        19:16 Mar 25, 2011       Jkt 223001      PO 00000      Frm 00025   Fmt 4701     Sfmt 4700      E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM             28MRR3
                                               17312                    Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

                                                   TABLE 1—MISSING DATA PROCEDURE FOR SO2 CEMS, CO2 CEMS, MOISTURE CEMS, AND DILUENT (CO2 OR O2)
                                                                           MONITORS FOR HEAT INPUT DETERMINATION—Continued
                                                                                     Trigger conditions                                                                                Calculation routines

                                                                                                                             Duration (N) of
                                                            Monitor data availability (percent)                              CEMS outage                                         Method                                      Lookback period
                                                                                                                                (hours) 2

                                                                                                                                                    Minimum value1 ......................................................   720 hours.*
                                               Below 80 ..................................................................   N>0                    Maximum potential concentration3 or % (for SO2,
                                                                                                                                                      CO2, and H2O**) or
                                                                                                                                                    Minimum potential concentration or % (for O2 and                        None.
                                                                                                                                                      H2OX).
                                                 HB/HA = hour before and hour after the CEMS outage.
                                                 * Quality-assured, monitor operating hours, during unit operation. May be either fuel-specific or non-fuel-specific. For units that report data only
                                               for the ozone season, include only quality assured monitor operating hours within the ozone season in the lookback period. Use data from no
                                               earlier than 3 years prior to the missing data period.
                                                 1 Where a unit with add-on SO emission controls can demonstrate that the controls are operating properly during the missing data period, as
                                                                                  2
                                               provided in § 75.34, the unit may use the maximum controlled concentration from the previous 720 quality-assured monitor operating hours.
                                                 2 During unit operating hours.
                                                 3 Where a unit with add-on SO emission controls can demonstrate that the controls are operating properly during the missing data period, the
                                                                                  2
                                               unit may report the greater of: (a) the maximum expected SO2 concentration or (b) 1.25 times the maximum controlled value from the previous
                                               720 quality-assured monitor operating hours (see § 75.34).
                                                 X Use this algorithm for moisture except when Equation 19–3, 19–4 or 19–8 in Method 19 in appendix A–7 to part 60 of this chapter is used for
                                               NOX emission rate.
                                                 ** Use this algorithm for moisture only when Equation 19–3, 19–4 or 19–8 in Method 19 in appendix A–7 to part 60 of this chapter is used for
                                               NOX emission rate.


                                               *     *     *    *       *                                              ■ b. Removing paragraphs (b)(3) and (c),                        identifiable components, such as
                                               ■ 17. Section 75.34 is amended by:                                      to read as follows:                                             analyzer and/or probe) in the CEMS
                                               ■ a. Revising paragraph (a)(2)(ii); and                                                                                                 (e.g., SO2 pollutant concentration
                                                                                                                       § 75.47   Criteria for a class of affected
                                               ■ b. Revising the first sentence of
                                                                                                                                                                                       monitor, flow monitor, moisture
                                                                                                                       units.
                                               paragraph (d), to read as follows:                                                                                                      monitor; NOX pollutant concentration
                                                                                                                       *      *     *      *      *                                    monitor, and diluent gas monitor), the
                                               § 75.34 Units with add-on emission
                                                                                                                          (b) * * *                                                    continuous opacity monitoring system,
                                                                                                                          (2) A description of the class of
                                               controls.                                                                                                                               or the excepted monitoring system (e.g.,
                                                                                                                       affected units, including data describing
                                                  (a) * * *                                                                                                                            fuel flowmeter, data acquisition and
                                                                                                                       all of the affected units that will
                                                  (2) * * *                                                                                                                            handling system), including:
                                                                                                                       comprise the class.
                                                  (ii) For the purposes of the missing                                                                                                 *      *     *    *     *
                                                                                                                       ■ 20. Section 75.53 is amended by:
                                               data lookback periods described under                                                                                                      (x) For each parameter monitored:
                                                                                                                       ■ a. Revising paragraphs (e)(1)(i)(E),
                                               §§ 75.33 (c)(1), (c)(2), (c)(3) and (c)(5) of                                                                                           Scale, maximum potential concentration
                                                                                                                       (e)(1)(iv) introductory text, (e)(1)(x),
                                               this section, the substitute data values                                                                                                (and method of calculation), maximum
                                                                                                                       (g)(1)(i)(A), (g)(1)(i)(C), (g)(1)(i)(E),
                                               shall be taken from the appropriate                                                                                                     expected concentration (if applicable)
                                                                                                                       (g)(1)(i)(F), (g)(1)(iii) introductory text,
                                               database, depending on the date(s) and                                                                                                  (and method of calculation), maximum
                                                                                                                       (g)(1)(v)(F), (g)(1)(v)(G), (g)(1)(vi)(H), and
                                               hour(s) of the missing data period. That                                                                                                potential flow rate (and method of
                                                                                                                       (g)(1)(vi)(I);
                                               is, if the missing data period occurs                                   ■ b. Adding paragraph (g)(1)(vi)(J); and
                                                                                                                                                                                       calculation), maximum potential NOX
                                               inside the ozone season, the ozone                                      ■ c. Revising paragraphs (h)(2)(i) and                          emission rate, span value, full-scale
                                               season data shall be used to provide                                    (h)(5), to read as follows:                                     range, daily calibration units of
                                               substitute data. If the missing data                                                                                                    measure, span effective date/hour, span
                                               period occurs outside the ozone season,                                 § 75.53   Monitoring plan.                                      inactivation date/hour, indication of
                                               data from outside the ozone season shall                                *      *     *     *     *                                      whether dual spans are required, default
                                               be used to provide substitute data.                                        (e) * * *                                                    high range value, flow rate span, and
                                                                                                                          (1) * * *                                                    flow rate span value and full scale value
                                               *       *    *     *      *                                                (i) * * *                                                    (in scfh) for each unit or stack using
                                                  (d) In order to implement the options                                   (E) Type(s) of emission controls for                         SO2, NOX, CO2, O2, or flow component
                                               in paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(3) and (a)(5) of                              SO2, NOX, and particulates installed or                         monitors.
                                               this section; and §§ 75.31(c)(3) and                                    to be installed, including specifications
                                               75.72(c)(3), the owner or operator shall                                                                                                *      *     *    *     *
                                                                                                                       of whether such controls are pre-                                  (g) * * *
                                               keep records of information as described                                combustion, post-combustion, or                                    (1) * * *
                                               in § 75.58(b)(3) to verify the proper                                   integral to the combustion process;                                (i) * * *
                                               operation of all add-on SO2 or NOX                                      control equipment code, installation                               (A) A representation of the exhaust
                                               emission controls, during all periods of                                date, and optimization date; control                            configuration for the units in the
                                               SO2 or NOX emission missing data.                                       equipment retirement date (if                                   monitoring plan. On and after April 27,
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                               * * *                                                                   applicable); primary/secondary controls                         2011, provide the activation date and
                                               §§ 75.38–75.39           [Removed and reserved]                         indicator; and an indicator for whether                         deactivation date (if applicable) of the
                                                                                                                       the controls are an original installation;                      configuration. Provide the ID number of
                                               ■ 18. Sections 75.38 and 75.39 are                                      *      *     *     *     *                                      each unit and assign a unique ID
                                               removed and reserved.                                                      (iv) Identification and description of                       number to each common stack, common
                                               ■ 19. Section 75.47 is amended by:                                      each monitoring system component                                pipe multiple stack and/or multiple
                                               ■ a. Revising paragraph (b)(2); and                                     (including each monitor and its                                 pipe associated with the unit(s)


                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010        19:16 Mar 25, 2011        Jkt 223001      PO 00000      Frm 00026   Fmt 4701     Sfmt 4700     E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM           28MRR3
                                                                              Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations                                        17313

                                               represented in the monitoring plan. For                         (e.g., sample probe, PLC, data logger,                data. On and after April 27, 2011,
                                               common and multiple stacks and/or                               etc.) may also be represented in the                  provide the activation date and
                                               pipes, provide the activation date and                          monitoring plan, if necessary. Provide                deactivation date (if applicable) for the
                                               deactivation date (if applicable) of each                       the following specific information about              peaking unit qualification information
                                               stack and/or pipe;                                              each component and monitoring system:                 in this paragraph (h)(2)(i).
                                               *       *     *    *     *                                      *      *     *     *     *                            *      *    *      *    *
                                                  (C) The stack exit height (ft) above                            (v) * * *                                             (5) For qualification as a gas-fired
                                               ground level and ground level elevation                            (F) Effective date/hour, and (if                   unit, as defined in § 72.2 of this part, the
                                               above sea level, and the inside cross-                          applicable) inactivation date/hour of                 designated representative shall include
                                               sectional area (ft2) at the flue exit and                       each span value. On and after April 27,               in the monitoring plan, in electronic
                                               at the flow monitoring location (for                            2011, provide the activation date and                 format, the following: current calendar
                                               units with flow monitors, only). Also                           deactivation date (if applicable) for the             year, fuel usage data for three calendar
                                               use appropriate codes to indicate the                           measurement scale and dual span                       years (or ozone seasons) as specified in
                                               material(s) of construction and the                             information in paragraphs (g)(1)(v)(A),               the definition of gas-fired in § 72.2 of
                                               shape(s) of the stack or duct cross-                            (g)(1)(v)(G), and (g)(1)(v)(H) of this                this chapter, the method of qualification
                                               section(s) at the flue exit and (if                             section;                                              used, and an indication of whether the
                                               applicable) at the flow monitor location.                          (G) An indication of whether dual                  data are actual or projected data. On and
                                               On and after April 27, 2011, provide the                        spans are required. If two span values                after April 27, 2011, provide the
                                               activation date and deactivation date (if                       are required, then, on and after April 27,            activation date and deactivation date (if
                                               applicable) for the information in this                         2011, indicate whether an autoranging                 applicable) for the gas-fired unit
                                               paragraph (g)(1)(i)(C);                                         analyzer is used to represent the two                 qualification information in this
                                               *       *     *    *     *                                      measurement scales; and                               paragraph (h)(5).
                                                  (E) The type(s) of emission controls                         *      *     *     *     *                            *      *    *      *    *
                                               that are used to reduce SO2, NOX, and                              (vi) * * *
                                                                                                                                                                     ■ 21. Section 75.57 is amended by:
                                               particulate emissions from each unit.                              (H) Date and hour that the value is no
                                                                                                                                                                     ■ a. Revising paragraph (a)(5);
                                               Also provide the installation date,                             longer effective (if applicable);
                                                                                                                  (I) For units using the excepted                   ■ b. Revising paragraph (a)(6);
                                               optimization date, and retirement date
                                               (if applicable) of the emission controls,                       methodology under § 75.19, the                        ■ c. Adding paragraph (a)(7);
                                               and indicate whether the controls are an                        applicable SO2 emission factor; and                   ■ d. Revising Table 4a; and
                                               original installation;                                             (J) On and after April 27, 2011, group             ■ e. Removing paragraphs (i) and (j), to
                                                  (F) Maximum hourly heat input                                identification code.                                  read as follows:
                                               capacity of each unit. On and after April                       *      *     *     *     *                            § 75.57    General recordkeeping provisions.
                                               27, 2011, provide the activation date                              (h) * * *
                                               and deactivation date (if applicable) for                                                                             *     *     *     *    *
                                                                                                                  (2) * * *
                                               this parameter; and                                                (i) Electronic. Unit operating and                   (a) * * *
                                               *       *     *    *     *                                      capacity factor information                             (5) The current monitoring plan as
                                                  (iii) For each required continuous                           demonstrating that the unit qualifies as              specified in § 75.53, beginning with the
                                               emission monitoring system, each fuel                           a peaking unit, as defined in § 72.2 of               initial submission required by § 75.62;
                                               flowmeter system, and each continuous                           this chapter for the current calendar                   (6) The quality control plan as
                                               opacity monitoring system, identify and                         year or ozone season, including:                      described in section 1 of appendix B to
                                               describe the major monitoring                                   capacity factor data for three calendar               this part, beginning with the date of
                                               components in the monitoring system                             years (or ozone seasons) as specified in              provisional certification; and
                                               (e.g., gas analyzer, flow monitor, opacity                      the definition of peaking unit in § 72.2                (7) The information required by
                                               monitor, moisture sensor, fuel                                  of this chapter; the method of                        sections 6.1.2(b) and (c) of appendix A
                                               flowmeter, DAHS software, etc.). Other                          qualification used; and an indication of              to this part.
                                               important components in the system                              whether the data are actual or projected              *     *     *     *    *

                                                                                       TABLE 4A—CODES FOR METHOD OF EMISSIONS AND FLOW DETERMINATION
                                                        Code                                                         Hourly emissions/flow measurement or estimation method

                                               1   ........................    Certified primary emission/flow monitoring system.
                                               2   ........................    Certified backup emission/flow monitoring system.
                                               3   ........................    Approved alternative monitoring system.
                                               4   ........................    Reference method:
                                                                               SO2: Method 6C.
                                                                               Flow: Method 2 or its allowable alternatives under appendix A to part 60 of this chapter.
                                                                               NOX: Method 7E.
                                                                               CO2 or O2: Method 3A.
                                               5 ........................      For units with add-on SO2 and/or NOX emission controls: SO2 concentration or NOX emission rate estimate from Agency
                                                                                  preapproved parametric monitoring method.
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                               6 ........................      Average of the hourly SO2 concentrations, CO2 concentrations, O2 concentrations, NOX concentrations, flow rates, moisture
                                                                                  percentages or NOX emission rates for the hour before and the hour following a missing data period.
                                               7 ........................      Initial missing data procedures used. Either: (a) the average of the hourly SO2 concentration, CO2 concentration, O2 con-
                                                                                  centration, or moisture percentage for the hour before and the hour following a missing data period; or (b) the arithmetic av-
                                                                                  erage of all NOX concentration, NOX emission rate, or flow rate values at the corresponding load range (or a higher load
                                                                                  range), or at the corresponding operational bin (non-load-based units, only); or (c) the arithmetic average of all previous
                                                                                  NOX concentration, NOX emission rate, or flow rate values (non-load-based units, only).




                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010           19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00027   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM    28MRR3
                                               17314                         Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

                                                                              TABLE 4A—CODES FOR METHOD OF EMISSIONS AND FLOW DETERMINATION—Continued
                                                       Code                                                         Hourly emissions/flow measurement or estimation method

                                               8 ........................     90th percentile hourly SO2 concentration, CO2 concentration, NOX concentration, flow rate, moisture percentage, or NOX
                                                                                emission rate or 10th percentile hourly O2 concentration or moisture percentage in the applicable lookback period (moisture
                                                                                missing data algorithm depends on which equations are used for emissions and heat input).
                                               9 ........................     95th percentile hourly SO2 concentration, CO2 concentration, NOX concentration, flow rate, moisture percentage, or NOX
                                                                                emission rate or 5th percentile hourly O2 concentration or moisture percentage in the applicable lookback period (moisture
                                                                                missing data algorithm depends on which equations are used for emissions and heat input).
                                               10 ......................      Maximum hourly SO2 concentration, CO2 concentration, NOX concentration, flow rate, moisture percentage, or NOX emission
                                                                                rate or minimum hourly O2 concentration or moisture percentage in the applicable lookback period (moisture missing data
                                                                                algorithm depends on which equations are used for emissions and heat input).
                                               11 ......................      Average of hourly flow rates, NOX concentrations or NOX emission rates in corresponding load range, for the applicable
                                                                                lookback period. For non-load-based units, report either the average flow rate, NOX concentration or NOX emission rate in
                                                                                the applicable lookback period, or the average flow rate or NOX value at the corresponding operational bin (if operational
                                                                                bins are used).
                                               12 ......................      Maximum potential concentration of SO2, maximum potential concentration of CO2, maximum potential concentration of NOX
                                                                                maximum potential flow rate, maximum potential NOX emission rate, maximum potential moisture percentage, minimum po-
                                                                                tential O2 concentration or minimum potential moisture percentage, as determined using § 72.2 of this chapter and section
                                                                                2.1 of appendix A to this part (moisture missing data algorithm depends on which equations are used for emissions and
                                                                                heat input).
                                               13 ......................      Maximum expected concentration of SO2, maximum expected concentration of NOX,, or maximum controlled NOX emission
                                                                                rate. (See § 75.34(a)(5)).
                                               14 ......................      Diluent cap value (if the cap is replacing a CO2 measurement, use 5.0 percent for boilers and 1.0 percent for turbines; if it is
                                                                                replacing an O2 measurement, use 14.0 percent for boilers and 19.0 percent for turbines).
                                               15 ......................      1.25 times the maximum hourly controlled SO2 concentration, NOX concentration at the corresponding load or operational bin,
                                                                                or NOX emission rate at the corresponding load or operational bin, in the applicable lookback period (See § 75.34(a)(5)).
                                               16 ......................      SO2 concentration value of 2.0 ppm during hours when only ‘‘very low sulfur fuel‘‘, as defined in § 72.2 of this chapter, is com-
                                                                                busted.
                                               17   ......................    Like-kind replacement non-redundant backup analyzer.
                                               19   ......................    200 percent of the MPC; default high range value.
                                               20   ......................    200 percent of the full-scale range setting (full-scale exceedance of high range).
                                               21   ......................    Negative hourly CO2 concentration, SO2 concentration, NOX concentration, percent moisture, or NOX emission rate replaced
                                                                                with zero.
                                               22 ......................      Hourly average SO2 or NOX concentration, measured by a certified monitor at the control device inlet (units with add-on emis-
                                                                                sion controls only).
                                               23 ......................      Maximum potential SO2 concentration, NOX concentration, CO2 concentration, or NOX emission rate, or minimum potential O2
                                                                                concentration or moisture percentage, for an hour in which flue gases are discharged through an unmonitored bypass
                                                                                stack.
                                               24 ......................      Maximum expected NOX concentration, or maximum controlled NOX emission rate for an hour in which flue gases are dis-
                                                                                charged downstream of the NOX emission controls through an unmonitored bypass stack, and the add-on NOx emission
                                                                                controls are confirmed to be operating properly.
                                               25 ......................      Maximum potential NOX emission rate (MER). (Use only when a NOX concentration full-scale exceedance occurs and the dil-
                                                                                uent monitor is unavailable.)
                                               26 ......................      1.0 mmBtu/hr substituted for Heat Input Rate for an operating hour in which the calculated Heat Input Rate is zero or nega-
                                                                                tive.
                                               40 ......................      Fuel specific default value (or prorated default value) used for the hour.
                                               53 ......................      Other quality-assured data approved through petition. These are treated as available hours for percent monitor availability cal-
                                                                                culations and are included in missing data lookback.
                                               54 ......................      Other quality assured methodologies approved through petition. These hours are included in missing data lookback and are
                                                                                treated as unavailable hours for percent monitor availability calculations.
                                               55 ......................      Other substitute data approved through petition. These hours are not included in missing data lookback and are treated as
                                                                                unavailable hours for percent monitor availability calculations.



                                               *     *      *   *      *                                         (i) Parametric data which                          quality control program, or that the add-
                                               ■ 22. Section 75.58 is amended by:                             demonstrate, for each hour of missing                 on emission controls are not operating
                                               ■ a. Revising paragraphs (b)(3) and                            SO2 or NOX emission data, the proper                  properly.
                                               (d)(4)(ii); and                                                operation of the add-on emission                      *      *    *     *      *
                                               ■ b. Adding paragraph (d)(4)(iii), to read                     controls, as described in the quality                   (d) * * *
                                               as follows:                                                    assurance/quality control program for                   (4) * * *
                                                                                                              the unit. The parametric data shall be                  (ii) For boilers, hourly average boiler
                                               § 75.58 General recordkeeping provisions                       maintained on site and shall be                       O2 reading (percent, rounded to the
                                               for specific situations.                                       submitted, upon request, to the                       nearest tenth) (flag if value exceeds by
                                               *     *      *    *     *                                      Administrator, EPA Regional office,
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                                                                                                                                                    more than 2 percentage points the O2
                                                 (b) * * *                                                    State, or local agency;                               level recorded at the same heat input
                                                 (3) Except as otherwise provided in                             (ii) A flag indicating, for each hour of           during the previous NOX emission rate
                                               § 75.34(d), for units with add-on SO2 or                       missing SO2 or NOX emission data,                     test); and
                                               NOX emission controls following the                            either that the add-on emission controls                (iii) On and after April 27, 2011,
                                               provisions of §§ 75.34(a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(3)                   are operating properly, as evidenced by               operating condition codes for the
                                               or (a)(5), the owner or operator shall                         all parameters being within the ranges                following:
                                               record:                                                        specified in the quality assurance/                     (A) Unit operated on emergency fuel;


                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010          19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00028   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM   28MRR3
                                                                  Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations                                           17315

                                                  (B) Correlation curve for the fuel                   and 7-day calibration error tests, and all            failed the bias test (except as otherwise
                                               mixture has expired;                                    off-line calibration demonstrations,                  provided in section 7.6.5 of appendix A
                                                  (C) Operating parameter is outside of                including any follow-up tests after                   to this part) and 1.000 for any
                                               normal limits;                                          corrective action:                                    monitoring system that passed the bias
                                                  (D) Uncontrolled hour;                               *       *    *     *     *                            test; and
                                                  (E) Operation above highest tested                      (iii) On and after April 27, 2011, date,              (H) On and after April 27, 2011,
                                               heat input rate point on the curve;                     hour, and minute;                                     RATA frequency code.
                                                  (F) Operating parameter data missing                                                                       *      *    *      *     *
                                                                                                       *       *    *     *     *
                                               or invalid;                                                                                                      (6) For each SO2, NOX, or CO2
                                                                                                          (3) For each SO2 or NOX pollutant
                                                  (G) Designated operational and                                                                             pollutant concentration monitor, each
                                                                                                       concentration monitor, CO2 emissions
                                               control equipment parameters within                                                                           component of a NOX-diluent continuous
                                                                                                       concentration monitor (including O2
                                               normal limits; and                                                                                            emission monitoring system, and each
                                                  (H) Operation below lowest tested                    monitors used to determine CO2
                                                                                                       emissions), or diluent gas monitor                    CO2 or O2 monitor used to determine
                                               heat input rate point on the curve.                                                                           heat input, the owner or operator shall
                                                                                                       (including wet- and dry-basis O2
                                               *       *    *     *     *                              monitors used to determine percent                    record the following information for the
                                               ■ 23. Section 75.59 is amended by:                      moisture), the owner or operator shall                cycle time test:
                                               ■ a. Revising paragraph (a)(1)                          record the following for the initial and              *      *    *      *     *
                                               introductory text;                                      all subsequent linearity check(s),                      (7) * * *
                                               ■ b. Revising paragraph (a)(1)(iii);                    including any follow-up tests after                     (vii) [Reserved]
                                               ■ c. Revising paragraphs (a)(3)                         corrective action.                                      (viii) [Reserved]
                                               introductory text, (a)(5) introductory                                                                        *      *    *      *     *
                                                                                                       *       *    *     *     *
                                               text, and (a)(5)(ii) introductory text;                                                                         (9) When hardcopy relative accuracy
                                                                                                          (5) For each SO2 pollutant
                                               ■ d. Revising paragraph (a)(5)(ii)(L);                                                                        test reports, certification reports,
                                               ■ e. Revising paragraphs (a)(5)(iii)(F)
                                                                                                       concentration monitor, flow monitor,
                                                                                                       each CO2 emissions concentration                      recertification reports, or semiannual or
                                               and (G);                                                                                                      annual reports for gas or flow rate CEMS
                                               ■ f. Adding paragraph (a)(5)(iii)(H);
                                                                                                       monitor (including any O2
                                                                                                       concentration monitor used to                         are required or requested under
                                               ■ g. Revising paragraph (a)(6)                                                                                § 75.60(b)(6) or § 75.63, the reports shall
                                               introductory text;                                      determine CO2 mass emissions or heat
                                                                                                       input), each NOX-diluent continuous                   include, at a minimum, the following
                                               ■ h. Removing and reserving paragraph                                                                         elements (as applicable to the type(s) of
                                               (a)(7)(vii);                                            emission monitoring system, each NOX
                                                                                                       concentration monitoring system, each                 test(s) performed):
                                               ■ i. Removing the heading of reserved
                                                                                                       diluent gas (O2 or CO2) monitor used to               *      *    *      *     *
                                               paragraph (a)(7)(viii);
                                                                                                       determine heat input, each moisture                     (vi) Laboratory calibrations of the
                                               ■ j. Removing paragraph (a)(7)(x);
                                                                                                       monitoring system, and each approved                  source sampling equipment.
                                               ■ k. Revising paragraph (a)(9)
                                               introductory text;                                      alternative monitoring system, the                    *      *    *      *     *
                                               ■ l. Revising paragraph (a)(9)(vi);                     owner or operator shall record the                      (x) For testing involving use of EPA
                                               ■ m. Adding paragraphs (a)(9)(x) and                    following information for the initial and             Protocol gases, the owner or operator
                                               (xi);                                                   all subsequent relative accuracy test                 shall record in electronic and hardcopy
                                               ■ n. Revising paragraphs (a)(12)(iv)(E)                 audits:                                               format the following information, as
                                               and (F);                                                *       *    *     *     *                            applicable:
                                               ■ o. Adding paragraph (a)(12)(iv)(G);                      (ii) Individual test run data from the               (A) On and after September 26, 2011,
                                               ■ p. Removing and reserving paragraph                   relative accuracy test audit for the SO2              for each gas monitor, for both low and
                                               (a)(14);                                                concentration monitor, flow monitor,                  high measurement ranges, record the
                                               ■ q. Adding paragraph (a)(15);                          CO2 emissions concentration monitor,                  following information for the mid-level
                                               ■ r. Adding paragraph (b)(6);                           NOX-diluent continuous emission                       or high-level EPA Protocol gas (as
                                               ■ s. Revising paragraph (c) introductory                monitoring system, diluent gas (O2 or                 applicable) that is used for daily
                                               text;                                                   CO2) monitor used to determine heat                   calibration error tests, and the low-,
                                               ■ t. Revising paragraphs (d)(3)(x) and                  input, NOX concentration monitoring                   mid-, and high-level gases used for
                                               (xi);                                                   system, moisture monitoring system, or                quarterly linearity checks. For O2, if
                                               ■ u. Adding paragraphs (d)(3)(xii) and                  approved alternative monitoring system,               purified air is used as the high-level gas
                                               (xiii);                                                 including:                                            for daily calibrations or linearity checks,
                                               ■ v. Adding paragraph (d)(4);                                                                                 record the following information for the
                                                                                                       *       *    *     *     *
                                               ■ w. Removing paragraph (e); and                                                                              low- and mid-level EPA Protocol gas
                                                                                                          (L) Average gross unit load, expressed
                                               ■ x. Redesignating paragraph (f) as                                                                           used for linearity checks, instead:
                                                                                                       as a total gross unit load, rounded to the
                                               paragraph (e), to read as follows:                                                                              (1) Gas level code;
                                                                                                       nearest MWe, or as steam load, rounded                  (2) A code for the type of EPA
                                               § 75.59 Certification, quality assurance,               to the nearest thousand lb/hr; on and                 Protocol gas used;
                                               and quality control record provisions.                  after April 27, 2011, for units that do not             (3) The PGVP vendor ID issued by
                                               *      *    *     *    *                                produce electrical or thermal output,                 EPA for the EPA Protocol gas
                                                  (a) * * *                                            record, instead, the average stack gas                production site that supplied the EPA
                                                  (1) For each SO2 or NOX pollutant                    velocity at the operating level being                 Protocol gas cylinder;
                                               concentration monitor, flow monitor,                    tested; and
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                                                                                                                                               (4) The expiration date for the EPA
                                               CO2 emissions concentration monitor                     *       *    *     *     *                            Protocol gas cylinder; and
                                               (including O2 monitors used to                             (iii) * * *                                          (5) The cylinder number.
                                               determine CO2 emissions), or diluent                       (F) Bias test results as specified in                (B) On and after September 26, 2011,
                                               gas monitor (including wet- and dry-                    section 7.6.4 of appendix A to this part;             for each usage of Reference Method 3A
                                               basis O2 monitors used to determine                        (G) Bias adjustment factor from                    in appendix A–2 to part 60 of this
                                               percent moisture), the owner or operator                Equation A–12 in appendix A to this                   chapter, or Method 6C or 7E in
                                               shall record the following for all daily                part for any monitoring system that                   appendix A–4 to part 60 of this chapter


                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010   19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00029   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM   28MRR3
                                               17316              Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

                                               performed using EPA Protocol gas for                    section 2.1 of appendix E to this part,               ■ b. Revising the first sentence of
                                               the certification, recertification, routine             the owner or operator shall record in                 paragraph (a)(5) introductory text; and
                                               quality assurance or diagnostic testing                 electronic format the following                       ■ c. Revising paragraph (a)(8), to read as
                                               (reportable diagnostics, only) of a Part                information as provided by the AETB:                  follows:
                                               75 monitoring system, record the                           (i) The name, telephone number and
                                               information required by paragraphs                      e-mail address of the Air Emission                    § 75.61    Notifications.
                                               (a)(9)(x)(A)(1) through (5) of this section.            Testing Body;                                            (a) * * *
                                                  (xi) On and after March 27, 2012, for                   (ii) The name of each on-site                         (1) Initial certification and
                                               all RATAs performed pursuant to                         Qualified Individual, as defined in                   recertification test notifications. The
                                               § 75.74(c)(2)(ii), section 6.5 of appendix              § 72.2 of this chapter;                               owner or operator or designated
                                               A to this part and section 2.3.1 of                        (iii) For the reference method(s) that             representative for an affected unit shall
                                               appendix B to this part, and for all NOX                were performed, the date(s) that each                 submit written notification of initial
                                               emission testing performed pursuant to                  on-site Qualified Individual took and                 certification tests and revised test dates
                                               section 2.1 of appendix E to this part, or              passed the relevant qualification                     as specified in § 75.20 for continuous
                                               § 75.19(c)(1)(iv), the owner or operator                exam(s) required by ASTM D7036–04                     emission monitoring systems, for
                                               shall record the following information                  (incorporated by reference, see § 75.6);              alternative monitoring systems under
                                               as provided by the AETB:                                and                                                   subpart E of this part, or for excepted
                                                  (A) The name, telephone number and                      (iv) The name and e-mail address of                monitoring systems under appendix E to
                                               e-mail address of the Air Emission                      each qualification exam provider.                     this part, except as provided in
                                               Testing Body;                                              (c) Except as otherwise provided in                paragraphs (a)(1)(iii), (a)(1)(iv) and (a)(4)
                                                  (B) The name of each on-site                         § 75.58(b)(3)(i), for units with add-on               of this section. The owner or operator
                                               Qualified Individual, as defined in                     SO2 or NOX emission controls following                shall also provide written notification of
                                               § 72.2 of this chapter;                                 the provisions of § 75.34(a)(1) or (a)(2),            testing performed under
                                                  (C) For the reference method(s) that                 the owner or operator shall keep the                  § 75.19(c)(1)(iv)(A) to establish fuel-and-
                                               were performed, the date(s) that each                   following records on-site in the quality              unit-specific NOX emission rates for low
                                               on-site Qualified Individual took and                   assurance/quality control plan required               mass emissions units. Such notifications
                                               passed the relevant qualification                       by section 1 of appendix B to this part:              are not required, however, for initial
                                               exam(s) required by ASTM D7036–04                       *       *     *     *    *                            certifications and recertifications of
                                               (incorporated by reference, see § 75.6);                   (d) * * *                                          excepted monitoring systems under
                                               and                                                        (3) * * *                                          appendix D to this part.
                                                  (D) The name and e-mail address of                      (x) Documentation supporting the                   *      *     *      *     *
                                               each qualification exam provider.                       qualification of all units in the group for              (5) Periodic relative accuracy test
                                               *       *     *     *    *                              reduced testing, in accordance with the               audits, appendix E retests, and low
                                                  (12) * * *                                           criteria established in                               mass emissions unit retests. The owner
                                                  (iv) * * *                                           § 75.19(c)(1)(iv)(B)(1);                              or operator or designated representative
                                                  (E) Type of extension;                                  (xi) Purpose of group tests;                       of an affected unit shall submit written
                                                  (F) Quarter and year; and                               (xii) On and after April 27, 2011, the             notice of the date of periodic relative
                                                  (G) On and after April 27, 2011, fuel                number of tests for group; and                        accuracy testing performed under
                                               code for Ozone Season Only reporters                       (xiii) On and after April 27, 2011, the            section 2.3.1 of appendix B to this part,
                                               under § 75.74(c).                                       number of units in group.                             of periodic retesting performed under
                                               *       *     *     *    *                                 (4) On and after March 27, 2012, for               section 2.2 of appendix E to this part,
                                                  (14) [Reserved]                                      all NOX emission testing performed                    and of periodic retesting of low mass
                                                  (15) On and after March 27, 2012, for                pursuant to § 75.19(c)(1)(iv), the owner              emissions units performed under
                                               all RATAs performed pursuant to                         or operator shall record in electronic                § 75.19(c)(1)(iv)(D), no later than 21
                                               § 75.74(c)(2)(ii), section 6.5 of appendix              format the following information as                   days prior to the first scheduled day of
                                               A to this part or section 2.3.1 of                      provided by the AETB:                                 testing. * * *
                                               appendix B to this part, the owner or                      (i) The name, telephone number and
                                                                                                                                                             *      *     *      *     *
                                               operator shall record in electronic                     e-mail address of the Air Emission
                                                                                                       Testing Body;                                            (8) Certification deadline date for new
                                               format the following information as                                                                           or newly affected units. The designated
                                               provided by the AETB:                                      (ii) The name of each on-site
                                                                                                       Qualified Individual, as defined in                   representative of a new or newly
                                                  (i) The name, telephone number and                                                                         affected unit shall provide notification
                                               e-mail address of the Air Emission                      § 72.2 of this chapter;
                                                                                                          (iii) For the reference method(s) that             of the date on which the relevant
                                               Testing Body;                                                                                                 deadline for initial certification is
                                                  (ii) The name of each on-site                        were performed, the date(s) that each
                                                                                                       on-site Qualified Individual took and                 reached, either as provided in § 75.4(b)
                                               Qualified Individual, as defined in
                                                                                                       passed the relevant qualification                     or § 75.4(c), or as specified in a State or
                                               § 72.2 of this chapter;
                                                                                                       exam(s) required by ASTM D7036–04                     Federal SO2 or NOX mass emission
                                                  (iii) For the reference method(s) that
                                                                                                       (incorporated by reference, see § 75.6);              reduction program that incorporates by
                                               were performed, the date(s) that each
                                                                                                       and                                                   reference, or otherwise adopts, the
                                               on-site Qualified Individual took and
                                                                                                          (iv) The name and e-mail address of                monitoring, recordkeeping, and
                                               passed the relevant qualification
                                                                                                       each qualification exam provider.                     reporting requirements of subpart F, G,
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                               exam(s) required by ASTM D7036–04
                                                                                                                                                             or H of this part. The notification shall
                                               (incorporated by reference, see § 75.6);                § 75.60   [Amended]                                   be submitted no later than 7 calendar
                                               and
                                                                                                       ■ 24. Section 75.60 is amended by                     days after the applicable certification
                                                  (iv) The name and e-mail address of
                                                                                                       removing paragraph (b)(8).                            deadline is reached.
                                               each qualification exam provider.
                                                  (b) * * *                                            ■ 25. Section 75.61 is amended by:                    *      *     *      *     *
                                                  (6) On and after March 27, 2012, for                 ■ a. Revising paragraph (a)(1)                        ■ 26. Section 75.62 is amended by
                                               all stack testing performed pursuant to                 introductory text;                                    adding paragraph (d) to read as follows:


                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010   19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00030   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM    28MRR3
                                                                  Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations                                              17317

                                               § 75.62   Monitoring plan submittals.                   always be included in the electronic                  ■ j. Removing section 5.1.9;
                                               *     *     *    *      *                               quarterly emissions report. All other                 ■ k. Revising section 6.1.2;
                                                 (d) On and after April 27, 2011,                      certification, quality assurance, and                 ■ l. Revising the first sentence of section
                                               consistent with § 72.21 of this chapter,                quality control information in § 75.59                6.2 introductory text;
                                               a hardcopy cover letter signed by the                   that is not excluded from electronic                  ■ m. Removing paragraphs (g) and (h) of
                                               Designated Representative (DR) shall                    reporting under paragraph (a)(2) or (a)(7)            section 6.2;
                                               accompany each hardcopy monitoring                      of this section shall be submitted                    ■ n. Revising the introductory text of
                                               plan submittal. The cover letter shall                  separately, either prior to or concurrent             section 6.3.1;
                                               include the certification statement                     with the submittal of the relevant                    ■ o. Revising the introductory text of
                                               described in § 72.21(b) of this chapter,                electronic quarterly emissions report.                sections 6.4 and 6.5;
                                               and shall be submitted to the applicable                However, reporting of the information                 ■ p. Revising paragraphs (c), (e), and (g)
                                               EPA Regional Office and to the                          in § 75.59(a)(9)(x) is not required until             of section 6.5;
                                               appropriate State or local air pollution                September 26, 2011, and reporting of                  ■ q. Revising section 6.5.1;
                                               control agency. For electronic                          the information in § 75.59(a)(15), (b)(6),            ■ r. Removing paragraph (c) of section
                                               monitoring plan submittals to the                       and (d)(4) is not required until March                6.5.6;
                                                                                                       27, 2012.                                             ■ s. Revising paragraphs (a) and (b) of
                                               Administrator, a cover letter is not
                                               required. However, at his or her                                                                              section 6.5.7;
                                                                                                       *      *     *     *     *
                                                                                                                                                             ■ t. Revising section 6.5.10;
                                               discretion, the DR may include                             (7) * * *
                                                                                                                                                             ■ u. Revising the heading and
                                               important explanatory text or comments                     (xi) Data and results of RATAs that
                                               with an electronic monitoring plan                                                                            introductory text of section 7.3;
                                                                                                       are aborted or invalidated due to
                                                                                                                                                             ■ v. Revising section 7.3.1;
                                               submittal, so long as the information is                problems with the reference method or
                                                                                                                                                             ■ w. Revising the introductory text of
                                               provided in an electronic format that is                operational problems with the unit and
                                                                                                                                                             section 7.6;
                                               compatible with the other data required                 data and results of linearity checks that
                                                                                                                                                             ■ x. Revising section 7.6.1; and
                                               to be reported under this section.                      are aborted or invalidated due to                     ■ y. Revising paragraphs (b) and (f) of
                                               ■ 27. Section 75.63 is amended by                       problems unrelated to monitor                         section 7.6.5, to read as follows:
                                               adding paragraph (d) to read as follows:                performance;
                                                                                                          (xii) * * *                                        Appendix A to Part 75—Specifications
                                               § 75.63 Initial certification or recertification           (D) The data under § 75.59(a)(7)(ix)(A)            and Procedures
                                               application.                                            through (F) shall be reported for all flow            1. Installation and Measurement Location
                                               *      *    *     *     *                               RATAs at rectangular stacks or ducts in
                                                  (d) Consistent with § 72.21 of this                  which Method 2 in appendices A–1 and                  1.1 Gas Monitors
                                               chapter, a hardcopy cover letter signed                 A–2 to part 60 of this chapter is used                   (a) Following the procedures in section
                                               by the Designated Representative (DR)                   and a wall effects adjustment factor is               8.1.1 of Performance Specification 2 in
                                               shall accompany the hardcopy portion                    applied; and                                          appendix B to part 60 of this chapter, install
                                               of each certification or recertification                   (xiii) The certification required by               the pollutant concentration monitor or
                                               application. The cover letter shall                     section 6.1.2(b) of appendix A to this                monitoring system at a location where the
                                               include the certification statement                     part and recorded under § 75.57(a)(7).                pollutant concentration and emission rate
                                                                                                                                                             measurements are directly representative of
                                               described in § 72.21(b) of this chapter,                *      *     *     *     *                            the total emissions from the affected unit.
                                               and shall be submitted to the applicable                   (g) At his or her discretion, the DR               Select a representative measurement point or
                                               EPA Regional Office and to the                          may include important explanatory text                path for the monitor probe(s) (or for the path
                                               appropriate State or local air pollution                or comments with an electronic                        from the transmitter to the receiver) such that
                                               control agency. For the electronic                      quarterly report submittal, so long as the            the SO2, CO2, O2, or NOX concentration
                                               portion of a certification or                           information is provided in a format that              monitoring system or NOX-diluent CEMS
                                               recertification application submitted to                is compatible with the other data                     (NOX pollutant concentration monitor and
                                               the Administrator, a cover letter is not                                                                      diluent gas monitor) will pass the relative
                                                                                                       required to be reported under this
                                               required. However, at his or her                                                                              accuracy test (see section 6 of this appendix).
                                                                                                       section.                                                (b) It is recommended that monitor
                                               discretion, the DR may include
                                                                                                                                                             measurements be made at locations where
                                               important explanatory text or comments                  Subpart I—[Removed]                                   the exhaust gas temperature is above the
                                               with the electronic portion of a                                                                              dew-point temperature. If the cause of failure
                                               certification or recertification                        ■ 29. Subpart I, consisting of §§ 75.80               to meet the relative accuracy tests is
                                               application, so long as the information                 through 75.84, is removed.                            determined to be the measurement location,
                                               is provided in an electronic format                     ■ 30. Appendix A to part 75 is amended                relocate the monitor probe(s).
                                               compatible with the other data required                 by:                                                   *        *   *     *     *
                                               to be reported under this section.                      ■ a. Revising section 1.1;
                                               ■ 28. Section 75.64 is amended by:                      ■ b. Removing sections 2.1.7, 2.1.7.1                 4. Data Acquisition and Handling Systems
                                               ■ a. Revising paragraph (a)(5);                         through 2.1.7.4, and 2.2.3;                              (a) Automated data acquisition and
                                               ■ b. Revising paragraph (a)(7)(xi);                     ■ c. Removing paragraph (c) of section                handling systems shall read and record the
                                               ■ c. Revising paragraph (a)(7)(xii)(D);                 3.1 and paragraph (3) of section 3.2;                 entire range of pollutant concentrations and
                                               ■ d. Adding paragraph (a)(7)(xiii);                     ■ d. Removing sections 3.3.8 and 3.4.3;               volumetric flow from zero through full-scale
                                               ■ e. Redesignating paragraph (a)(127) as                ■ e. Removing the introductory text of                and provide a continuous, permanent record
                                                                                                       section 4 and adding paragraphs (a), (b),             of all measurements and required
                                               paragraph (a)(12); and
                                                                                                                                                             information in an electronic format. These
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                               ■ f. Revising paragraph (g), to read as                 and (c) in its place;
                                                                                                                                                             systems also shall have the capability of
                                               follows:                                                ■ f. Revising paragraph (6) of section 4;
                                                                                                                                                             interpreting and converting the individual
                                                                                                       ■ g. Revising paragraphs (a) and (b) of
                                               § 75.64   Quarterly reports.                                                                                  output signals from an SO2 pollutant
                                                                                                       Section 5.1.4;                                        concentration monitor, a flow monitor, a CO2
                                                 (a) * * *                                             ■ h. Removing paragraphs (c) and (d) of               monitor, an O2 monitor, a NOX pollutant
                                                 (5) The daily calibration error test and              Section 5.1.4;                                        concentration monitor, a NOX-diluent CEMS,
                                               daily interference check information                    ■ i. Revising the first sentence in                   and a moisture monitoring system to produce
                                               required in § 75.59(a)(1) and (a)(2) must               Section 5.1.5;                                        a continuous readout of pollutant emission



                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010   19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00031   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM   28MRR3
                                               17318              Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

                                               rates or pollutant mass emissions (as                   by an Air Emission Testing Body (AETB)                QI who is overseeing and supervising a test,
                                               applicable) in the appropriate units (e.g., lb/         which has provided to the owner or operator           e.g., bathroom breaks, meal breaks, and
                                               hr, lb/mmBtu, tons/hr).                                 of a unit subject to this part the                    emergencies that may arise during a test.
                                                 (b) Data acquisition and handling systems             documentation required in paragraph (b) of               (f) Except as provided in paragraph (e), no
                                               shall also compute and record: Monitor                  this section, demonstrating its conformance           RATA performed pursuant to § 75.74(c)(2)(ii),
                                               calibration error; any bias adjustments to              to ASTM D7036–04 (incorporated by                     section 6.5 of appendix A to this part or
                                               SO2, NOX, flow rate, or NOX emission rate               reference, see § 75.6).                               section 2.3.1 of appendix B to this part, and
                                               data; and all missing data procedure statistics            (b) The owner or operator shall obtain from        no stack test under § 75.19 or Appendix E to
                                               specified in subpart D of this part.                    the AETB a certification that as of the time          this part (or portion of such a RATA or stack
                                                 (c) For an excepted monitoring system                 of testing the AETB is operating in                   test) conducted by an AETB (as defined in
                                               under appendix D or E of this part, data                conformance with ASTM D7036–04                        § 72.2) shall be invalidated under this part as
                                               acquisition and handling systems shall:                 (incorporated by reference, see § 75.6). The          a result of the failure of the AETB to conform
                                               *      *     *       *      *                           AETB’s certification may be limited in scope          to ASTM D7036–04 (incorporated by
                                                 (6) Provide a continuous, permanent record            to the tests identified under paragraph (a).          reference, see § 75.6). Validation of such tests
                                               of all measurements and required                        The AETB’s certification need not extend to           is determined based on the other part 75
                                               information in an electronic format.                    other work it may perform. This certification         testing requirements. EPA recommends that
                                                                                                       shall be provided in the form of either:              proper observation of tests and review of test
                                               *      *     *       *      *                              (1) A certificate of accreditation or interim      results continue, regardless of whether an
                                               5.1   Reference Gases                                   accreditation for the relevant test methods           AETB fully conforms to ASTM D7036–04.
                                                                                                       issued by a recognized, national accreditation           (g) An owner or operator who has
                                               *      *     *       *      *                           body; or                                              requested information from an AETB under
                                               5.1.4 EPA Protocol Gases                                   (2) A letter of certification for the relevant     paragraph (d) of this part who believes that
                                                                                                       test methods signed by a member of the                the information provided by the AETB was
                                                  (a) An EPA Protocol gas is a calibration gas                                                               either incomplete or inaccurate may request
                                               mixture prepared and analyzed according to              senior management staff of the AETB.
                                                                                                          (c) The owner or operator shall obtain from        the Administrator’s assistance in remedying
                                               Section 2 of the ‘‘EPA Traceability Protocol                                                                  the alleged deficiencies. Upon such a request,
                                               for Assay and Certification of Gaseous                  the AETB the information required under
                                                                                                       §§ 75.59(a)(15), (b)(6), and (d)(4), as               if the Administrator concurs that the
                                               Calibration Standards,’’ September 1997, as                                                                   information submitted to a source subject to
                                               amended on August 25, 1999, EPA–600/R–                  applicable.
                                                                                                          (d) While under no obligation to request           part 75 by an AETB under this section is
                                               97/121 (incorporated by reference, see § 75.6)                                                                either incomplete or inaccurate, the
                                               or such revised procedure as approved by the            the following information from an AETB, to
                                                                                                       review the information provided by the                Administrator will provide the AETB a
                                               Administrator.                                                                                                description of the deficiencies to be
                                                  (b) EPA Protocol gas concentrations must             AETB in response to such a request, or to
                                                                                                       take any other action related to the response,        remedied. The Administrator’s determination
                                               be certified by an EPA Protocol gas                                                                           of completeness and accuracy of information
                                               production site to have an analytical                   the owner or operator may find it useful to
                                                                                                       request that AETBs complying with                     will be solely based on the provisions of
                                               uncertainty (95-percent confidence interval)                                                                  ASTM D7036–04 (incorporated by reference,
                                               to be not more than plus or minus 2.0 percent           paragraph (b)(2) of this section provide a
                                                                                                       copy of the following:                                see § 75.6) and this part. The Administrator
                                               (inclusive) of the certified concentration (tag                                                               may post the name of the offending AETB on
                                               value) of the gas mixture. The uncertainty                 (1) The AETB’s quality manual. For the
                                                                                                       purpose of application of 40 CFR part 2,              Agency Web sites (including the CAMD Web
                                               must be calculated using the statistical                                                                      site http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/
                                               procedures (or equivalent statistical                   subpart B, AETB’s concerned about the
                                                                                                       potential for public access to confidential           emissions/aetb.html) if within 30 days of the
                                               techniques) that are listed in Section 2.1.8 of                                                               Administrator having provided the AETB a
                                               the ‘‘EPA Traceability Protocol for Assay and           business information (CBI) may identify any
                                                                                                       information subject to such a claim in the            description of the deficiencies to be
                                               Certification of Gaseous Calibration                                                                          remedied, the AETB does not satisfactorily
                                               Standards,’’ September 1997, as amended on              copy provided;
                                                                                                          (2) The results of any internal audits             respond to the source and notify the
                                               August 25, 1999, EPA–600/R–97/121                                                                             Administrator of the response by submitting
                                               (incorporated by reference, see § 75.6).                performed by the AETB and any external
                                                                                                       audits of the AETB during the 12 month                the notification to aetb@epa.gov, unless
                                               5.1.5 Research Gas Mixtures                             period through the previous calendar quarter;         otherwise provided by the Administrator.
                                                                                                          (3) Performance data (as defined in ASTM           The AETB need not submit the information
                                                  Concentrations of research gas mixtures, as
                                                                                                       D7036–04 (incorporated by reference, see              it provides to the owner or operator to the
                                               defined in § 72.2 of this chapter, must be
                                                                                                       § 75.6)) collected by the AETB, including             Administrator, unless specifically requested
                                               certified by the National Institute of
                                                                                                                                                             by the Administrator. If after the AETB’s
                                               Standards and Technology to have an                     corrective actions implemented, during the
                                                                                                                                                             name is posted, the Administrator, in
                                               analytical uncertainty (95-percent confidence           12 month period through the previous
                                                                                                                                                             consultation with the source, determines that
                                               interval) calculated using the statistical              calendar quarter; and
                                                                                                                                                             the AETB’s response is sufficient, the AETB’s
                                               procedures (or equivalent statistical                      (4) Training records for all on-site technical
                                                                                                                                                             name will be removed from the EPA Web
                                               techniques) that are listed in Section 2.1.8 of         personnel, including any Qualified
                                                                                                                                                             sites.
                                               the ‘‘EPA Traceability Protocol for Assay and           Individuals, for the 12 month period through
                                               Certification of Gaseous Calibration                    the previous calendar quarter.                        6.2 Linearity Check (General Procedures)
                                               Standards,’’ September 1997, as amended on                 (e) All relative accuracy testing performed           Check the linearity of each SO2, NOX, CO2,
                                               August 25, 1999, EPA–600/R–97/121                       pursuant to § 75.74(c)(2)(ii), section 6.5 of         and O2 monitor while the unit, or group of
                                               (incorporated by reference, see § 75.6) to be           appendix A to this part or section 2.3.1 of           units for a common stack, is combusting fuel
                                               not more than plus or minus 2.0 percent                 appendix B to this part, and stack testing            at conditions of typical stack temperature
                                               (inclusive) of the concentration specified on           under § 75.19 and Appendix E to this part             and pressure; it is not necessary for the unit
                                               the cylinder label (i.e., the tag value) in order       shall be overseen and supervised on site by           to be generating electricity during this test.
                                               to be used as calibration gas under this                at least one Qualified Individual, as defined         * * *
                                               part.* * *                                              in § 72.2 of this chapter with respect to the
                                                                                                       methods employed in the test project. If the          *        *    *    *      *
                                               *      *     *       *      *
                                                                                                       source owner or operator, or a State, local, or
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                                                                                                                                             6.3   * * *
                                               6.1   General Requirements                              EPA observer, discovers while the test team
                                               *      *     *       *      *                           is still on site, that at least one QI did not        6.3.1 Gas Monitor 7-Day Calibration Error
                                                                                                       oversee and supervise the entire test (as             Test
                                               6.1.2 Requirements for Air Emission Testing             qualified by this paragraph (e)), only those            The following monitors and ranges are
                                                 (a) On and after March 27, 2012, all relative         portions of the test that were overseen and           exempted from the 7-day calibration error
                                               accuracy test audits (RATAs) of CEMS under              supervised by at least one QI as described            test requirements of this part: the SO2, NOX,
                                               this part, and stack testing under § 75.19 and          above may be used under this part. However,           CO2 and O2 monitors installed on peaking
                                               Appendix E to this part shall be conducted              allowance is made for normal activities of a          units (as defined in § 72.2 of this chapter);



                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010   19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00032   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM   28MRR3
                                                                  Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations                                             17319

                                               and any SO2 or NOX measurement range with               procedures given in this section. The results         component analyzer separately (as
                                               a span value of 50 ppm or less. In all other            of a 7-day calibration error test are acceptable      applicable). On and after January 1, 2009,
                                               cases, measure the calibration error of each            for monitor or monitoring system                      record the cycle time for each component
                                               SO2 monitor, each NOX monitor, and each                 certification, recertification or diagnostic          analyzer separately. For time-shared systems,
                                               CO2 or O2 monitor while the unit is                     testing if none of these daily calibration error      perform the cycle time tests at each probe
                                               combusting fuel (but not necessarily                    test results exceed the applicable                    locations that will be polled within the same
                                               generating electricity) once each day for 7             performance specifications in section 3.1 of          15-minute period during monitoring system
                                               consecutive operating days according to the             this appendix. The status of emission data            operations. To determine the cycle time for
                                               following procedures. (In the event that unit           from a gas monitor prior to and during a 7-           time-shared systems, at each monitoring
                                               outages occur after the commencement of the             day calibration error test period shall be            location, report the sum of the cycle time
                                               test, the 7 consecutive unit operating days             determined as follows:                                observed at that monitoring location plus the
                                               need not be 7 consecutive calendar days).               *      *      *      *       *                        sum of the time required for all purge cycles
                                               Units using dual span monitors must perform                                                                   (as determined by the continuous emission
                                               the calibration error test on both high- and            6.4 Cycle Time Test                                   monitoring system manufacturer) at each of
                                               low-scales of the pollutant concentration                  Perform cycle time tests for each pollutant        the probe locations of the time-shared
                                               monitor. The calibration error test procedures          concentration monitor and continuous                  systems. For monitors with dual ranges,
                                               in this section and in section 6.3.2 of this            emission monitoring system while the unit is          report the test results for each range
                                               appendix shall also be used to perform the              operating, according to the following                 separately. Cycle time test results are
                                               daily assessments and additional calibration            procedures. Use a zero-level and a high-level         acceptable for monitor or monitoring system
                                               error tests required under sections 2.1.1 and           calibration gas (as defined in section 5.2 of         certification, recertification or diagnostic
                                               2.1.3 of appendix B to this part. Do not make           this appendix) alternately. To determine the          testing if none of the cycle times exceed 15
                                               manual or automatic adjustments to the                  downscale cycle time, measure the                     minutes. The status of emissions data from a
                                               monitor settings until after taking                     concentration of the flue gas emissions until         monitor prior to and during a cycle time test
                                               measurements at both zero and high                      the response stabilizes. Record the stable            period shall be determined as follows:
                                               concentration levels for that day during the            emissions value. Inject a zero-level                  *        *   *    *      *
                                               7-day test. If automatic adjustments are made           concentration calibration gas into the probe
                                               following both injections, conduct the                  tip (or injection port leading to the                 6.5 Relative Accuracy and Bias Tests
                                               calibration error test such that the magnitude          calibration cell, for in situ systems with no         (General Procedures)
                                               of the adjustments can be determined and                probe). Record the time of the zero gas                 Perform the required relative accuracy test
                                               recorded. Record and report test results for            injection, using the data acquisition and             audits (RATAs) as follows for each CO2
                                               each day using the unadjusted concentration             handling system (DAHS). Next, allow the               emissions concentration monitor (including
                                               measured in the calibration error test prior to         monitor to measure the concentration of the           O2 monitors used to determine CO2
                                               making any manual or automatic adjustments              zero gas until the response stabilizes. Record        emissions concentration), each SO2 pollutant
                                               (i.e., resetting the calibration). The                  the stable ending calibration gas reading.            concentration monitor, each NOX
                                               calibration error tests should be                       Determine the downscale cycle time as the             concentration monitoring system used to
                                               approximately 24 hours apart, (unless the 7-            time it takes for 95.0 percent of the step            determine NOX mass emissions, each flow
                                               day test is performed over nonconsecutive               change to be achieved between the stable              monitor, each NOX-diluent CEMS, each O2 or
                                               days). Perform calibration error tests at both          stack emissions value and the stable ending           CO2 diluent monitor used to calculate heat
                                               the zero-level concentration and high-level             zero gas reading. Then repeat the procedure,          input, and each moisture monitoring system.
                                               concentration, as specified in section 5.2 of           starting with stable stack emissions and              For NOX concentration monitoring systems
                                               this appendix. Alternatively, a mid-level               injecting the high-level gas, to determine the        used to determine NOX mass emissions, as
                                               concentration gas (50.0 to 60.0 percent of the          upscale cycle time, which is the time it takes        defined in § 75.71(a)(2), use the same general
                                               span value) may be used in lieu of the high-            for 95.0 percent of the step change to be             RATA procedures as for SO2 pollutant
                                               level gas, provided that the mid-level gas is           achieved between the stable stack emissions           concentration monitors; however, use the
                                               more representative of the actual stack gas             value and the stable ending high-level gas            reference methods for NOX concentration
                                               concentrations. A calibration gas blend may             reading. Use the following criteria to assess         specified in section 6.5.10 of this appendix:
                                               be used as both a zero-level gas and an                 when a stable reading of stack emissions or
                                               upscale (mid- or high-level) gas, where                 calibration gas concentration has been                *        *   *    *      *
                                               appropriate. In addition, repeat the                    attained. A stable value is equivalent to a             (c) For monitoring systems with dual
                                               procedure for SO2 and NOX pollutant                     reading with a change of less than 2.0 percent        ranges, perform the relative accuracy test on
                                               concentration monitors using the low-scale              of the span value for 2 minutes, or a reading         the range normally used for measuring
                                               for units equipped with emission controls or            with a change of less than 6.0 percent from           emissions. For units with add-on SO2 or NOX
                                               other units with dual span monitors. Use                the measured average concentration over 6             controls that operate continuously rather
                                               only calibration gas, as specified in section           minutes. Alternatively, the reading is                than seasonally, or for units that need a dual
                                               5.1 of this appendix. Introduce the                     considered stable if it changes by no more            range to record high concentration ‘‘spikes’’
                                               calibration gas at the gas injection port, as           than 0.5 ppm or 0.2% CO2 or O2 (as                    during startup conditions, the low range is
                                               specified in section 2.2.1 of this appendix.            applicable) for two minutes. (Owners or               considered normal. However, for some dual
                                               Operate each monitor in its normal sampling             operators of systems which do not record              span units (e.g., for units that use fuel
                                               mode. For extractive and dilution type                  data in 1-minute or 3-minute intervals may            switching or for which the emission controls
                                               monitors, pass the calibration gas through all          petition the Administrator under § 75.66 for          are operated seasonally), provided that both
                                               filters, scrubbers, conditioners, and other             alternative stabilization criteria). For              monitor ranges are connected to a common
                                               monitor components used during normal                   monitors or monitoring systems that perform           probe and sample interface, either of the two
                                               sampling and through as much of the                     a series of operations (such as purge, sample,        measurement ranges may be considered
                                               sampling probe as is practical. For in-situ             and analyze), time the injections of the              normal; in such cases, perform the RATA on
                                               type monitors, perform calibration, checking            calibration gases so they will produce the            the range that is in use at the time of the
                                               all active electronic and optical components,           longest possible cycle time. Refer to Figures         scheduled test. If the low and high
                                               including the transmitter, receiver, and                6a and 6b in this appendix for example                measurement ranges are connected to
                                               analyzer. Challenge the pollutant                       calculations of upscale and downscale cycle           separate sample probes and interfaces, RATA
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                               concentration monitors and CO2 or O2                    times. Report the slower of the two cycle             testing on both ranges is required.
                                               monitors once with each calibration gas.                times (upscale or downscale) as the cycle             *        *   *    *      *
                                               Record the monitor response from the data               time for the analyzer. Prior to January 1, 2009         (e) Complete each single-load relative
                                               acquisition and handling system. Using                  for the NOX-diluent continuous emission               accuracy test audit within a period of 168
                                               Equation A–5 of this appendix, determine the            monitoring system test, either record and             consecutive unit operating hours, as defined
                                               calibration error at each concentration once            report the longer cycle time of the two               in § 72.2 of this chapter (or, for CEMS
                                               each day (at approximately 24-hour intervals)           component analyzers as the system cycle               installed on common stacks or bypass stacks,
                                               for 7 consecutive days according to the                 time or record the cycle time for each                168 consecutive stack operating hours, as



                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010   19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00033   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM   28MRR3
                                               17320              Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

                                               defined in § 72.2 of this chapter). For 2-level         per run shall be 5 minutes. Flow rate                 accuracy test audits under this part: Method
                                               and 3-level flow monitor RATAs, complete                reference method measurements allowed in              1 or 1A in appendix A–1 to part 60 of this
                                               all of the RATAs at all levels, to the extent           section 6.5.10 of this appendix may be made           chapter for siting; Method 2 in appendix A–
                                               practicable, within a period of 168                     either sequentially from port-to-port or              1 to part 60 of this chapter or its allowable
                                               consecutive unit (or stack) operating hours;            simultaneously at two or more sample ports.           alternatives in appendices A–1 and A–2 to
                                               however, if this is not possible, up to 720             The velocity measurement probe may be                 part 60 of this chapter (except for Methods
                                               consecutive unit (or stack) operating hours             moved from traverse point to traverse point           2B and 2E in appendix A–1 to part 60 of this
                                               may be taken to complete a multiple-load                either manually or automatically. If, during a        chapter) for stack gas velocity and volumetric
                                               flow RATA.                                              flow RATA, significant pulsations in the              flow rate; Methods 3, 3A or 3B in appendix
                                               *      *     *       *      *                           reference method readings are observed, be            A–2 to part 60 of this chapter for O2 and CO2;
                                                                                                       sure to allow enough measurement time at              Method 4 in appendix A–3 to part 60 of this
                                                  (g) For each SO2 or CO2 emissions
                                                                                                       each traverse point to obtain an accurate             chapter for moisture; Methods 6, 6A or 6C in
                                               concentration monitor, each flow monitor,
                                                                                                       average reading when a manual readout                 appendix A–4 to part 60 of this chapter for
                                               each CO2 or O2 diluent monitor used to
                                                                                                       method is used (e.g., a ‘‘sight-weighted’’            SO2; and Methods 7, 7A, 7C, 7D or 7E in
                                               determine heat input, each NOX
                                                                                                       average from a manometer). Also, allow                appendix A–4 to part 60 of this chapter for
                                               concentration monitoring system used to
                                                                                                       sufficient measurement time to ensure that            NOX, excluding the exceptions to Method 7E
                                               determine NOX mass emissions, as defined in
                                                                                                       stable temperature readings are obtained at           identified in § 75.22(a)(5). When using
                                               § 75.71(a)(2), each moisture monitoring
                                                                                                       each traverse point, particularly at the first        Method 7E for measuring NOX concentration,
                                               system, and each NOX-diluent CEMS,
                                                                                                       measurement point at each sample port,                total NOX, including both NO and NO2, must
                                               calculate the relative accuracy, in accordance
                                                                                                       when a probe is moved sequentially from               be measured. When using EPA Protocol gas
                                               with section 7.3 or 7.4 of this appendix, as                                                                  with Methods 3A, 6C, and 7E, the gas must
                                               applicable. In addition (except for CO2, O2,            port-to-port. A minimum of one set of
                                                                                                       auxiliary measurements for stack gas                  be from an EPA Protocol gas production site
                                               or moisture monitors), test for bias and                                                                      that is participating in the EPA Protocol Gas
                                               determine the appropriate bias adjustment               molecular weight determination (i.e., diluent
                                                                                                       gas data and moisture data) is required for           Verification Program, pursuant to
                                               factor, in accordance with sections 7.6.4 and                                                                 § 75.21(g)(6). An EPA Protocol gas cylinder
                                               7.6.5 of this appendix, using the data from             every clock hour of a flow RATA or for every
                                                                                                       three test runs (whichever is less restrictive).      certified by or ordered from a non-
                                               the relative accuracy test audits.                                                                            participating production site no later than
                                                                                                       Alternatively, moisture measurements for
                                               6.5.1 Gas Monitoring System RATAs                       molecular weight determination may be                 May 27, 2011 may be used for the purposes
                                               (Special Considerations)                                performed before and after a series of flow           of this part until the earlier of the cylinder’s
                                                                                                       RATA runs at a particular load level (low,            expiration date or the date on which the
                                                 (a) Perform the required relative accuracy                                                                  cylinder gas pressure reaches 150 psig;
                                               test audits for each SO2 or CO2 emissions               mid, or high), provided that the time interval
                                                                                                       between the two moisture measurements                 however, in no case shall the cylinder be
                                               concentration monitor, each CO2 or O2                                                                         recertified by a non-participating EPA
                                               diluent monitor used to determine heat                  does not exceed three hours. If this option is
                                                                                                       selected, the results of the two moisture             Protocol gas production site to extend its
                                               input, each NOX-diluent CEMS, and each                                                                        useful life and be used by a source subject
                                               NOX concentration monitoring system used                determinations shall be averaged
                                                                                                       arithmetically and applied to all RATA runs           to this part. In the event that an EPA Protocol
                                               to determine NOX mass emissions, as defined                                                                   gas production site is removed from the list
                                               in § 75.71(a)(2), at the normal load level or           in the series. Successive flow RATA runs
                                                                                                       may be performed without waiting in                   of PGVP participants on the same date as or
                                               normal operating level for the unit (or                                                                       after the date on which a particular cylinder
                                               combined units, if common stack), as defined            between runs. If an O2 diluent monitor is
                                                                                                       used as a CO2 continuous emission                     is certified or ordered, that gas cylinder may
                                               in section 6.5.2.1 of this appendix. If two                                                                   continue to be used for the purposes of this
                                               load levels or operating levels have been               monitoring system, perform a CO2 system
                                                                                                                                                             part until the earlier of the cylinder’s
                                               designated as normal, the RATAs may be                  RATA (i.e., measure CO2, rather than O2,
                                                                                                                                                             expiration date or the date on which the
                                               done at either load (or operating) level.               with the applicable reference method
                                                                                                                                                             cylinder gas pressure reaches 150 psig;
                                                 (b) For the initial certification of a gas            allowed in section 6.5.10 of this appendix).
                                                                                                                                                             however, in no case shall the cylinder be
                                               monitoring system and for recertifications in           For moisture monitoring systems, an
                                                                                                                                                             recertified by a non-participating EPA
                                               which, in addition to a RATA, one or more               appropriate coefficient, ‘‘K’’ factor or other        Protocol gas production site to extend its
                                               other tests are required (i.e., a linearity test,       suitable mathematical algorithm may be                useful life and be used by a source subject
                                               cycle time test, or 7-day calibration error             developed prior to the RATA, to adjust the            to this part.
                                               test), EPA recommends that the RATA not be              monitoring system readings with respect to
                                               commenced until the other required tests of             the applicable reference method allowed in            *        *   *     *      *
                                               the CEMS have been passed.                              section 6.5.10 of this appendix. If such a            7.3 Relative Accuracy for SO2 and CO2
                                                                                                       coefficient, K-factor or algorithm is                 Emissions Concentration Monitors, O2
                                               *      *     *       *      *
                                                                                                       developed, it shall be applied to the CEMS            Monitors, NOX Concentration Monitoring
                                               6.5.7 Sampling Strategy                                 readings during the RATA and (if the RATA             Systems, and Flow Monitors
                                                  (a) Conduct the reference method tests               is passed), to the subsequent CEMS data, by
                                                                                                                                                               Analyze the relative accuracy test audit
                                               allowed in section 6.5.10 of this appendix so           means of the automated data acquisition and
                                                                                                                                                             data from the reference method tests for SO2
                                               they will yield results representative of the           handling system. The owner or operator shall
                                                                                                                                                             and CO2 emissions concentration monitors,
                                               pollutant concentration, emission rate,                 keep records of the current coefficient, K
                                                                                                                                                             CO2 or O2 monitors used for heat input rate
                                               moisture, temperature, and flue gas flow rate           factor or algorithm, as specified in                  determination, NOX concentration
                                               from the unit and can be correlated with the            § 75.59(a)(5)(vii). Whenever the coefficient, K       monitoring systems used to determine NOX
                                               pollutant concentration monitor, CO2 or O2              factor or algorithm is changed, a RATA of the         mass emissions under subpart H of this part,
                                               monitor, flow monitor, and SO2 or NOX                   moisture monitoring system is required.               and flow monitors using the following
                                               CEMS measurements. The minimum                             (b) To properly correlate individual SO2 or        procedures. Summarize the results on a data
                                               acceptable time for a gas monitoring system             NOX CEMS data (in lb/mmBtu) and                       sheet. An example is shown in Figure 2.
                                               RATA run or for a moisture monitoring                   volumetric flow rate data with the applicable         Calculate the mean of the monitor or
                                               system RATA run is 21 minutes. For each                 reference method data, annotate the                   monitoring system measurement values.
                                               run of a gas monitoring system RATA, all                beginning and end of each reference method            Calculate the mean of the reference method
                                               necessary pollutant concentration                       test run (including the exact time of day) on         values. Using data from the automated data
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                               measurements, diluent concentration                     the individual chart recorder(s) or other             acquisition and handling system, calculate
                                               measurements, and moisture measurements                 permanent recording device(s).                        the arithmetic differences between the
                                               (if applicable) must, to the extent practicable,        *      *      *      *       *                        reference method and monitor measurement
                                               be made within a 60-minute period. For                                                                        data sets. Then calculate the arithmetic mean
                                               NOX-diluent monitoring system RATAs, the                6.5.10 Reference Methods                              of the difference, the standard deviation, the
                                               pollutant and diluent concentration                       The following methods are from appendix             confidence coefficient, and the monitor or
                                               measurements must be made simultaneously.               A to part 60 of this chapter, and are the             monitoring system relative accuracy using
                                               For flow monitor RATAs, the minimum time                reference methods for performing relative             the following procedures and equations.



                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010   19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00034   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM   28MRR3
                                                                  Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations                                               17321

                                               7.3.1 Arithmetic Mean
                                                 Calculate the arithmetic mean of the
                                               differences of a data set as follows:




                                               *      *     *       *      *                           section 6.5.2 of this appendix and sections           ■ a. Revising section 1.1.4;
                                                                                                       2.3.1.3(b) and 2.3.1.3(c) of appendix B to this
                                               7.6 Bias Test and Adjustment Factor                                                                           ■ b. Removing sections 1.5 and 1.5.1
                                                                                                       part, the appropriate BAF is determined
                                                 Test the following relative accuracy test             directly from the RATA results at normal              through 1.5.6;
                                               audit data sets for bias: SO2 pollutant                 load, using Equation A–12. Notwithstanding,           ■ c. Revising paragraph (a) of section
                                               concentration monitors; flow monitors; NOX              when a NOX concentration CEMS or an SO2               2.1.4;
                                               concentration monitoring systems used to                CEMS or a NOX-diluent CEMS installed on               ■ d. Adding paragraph (c) to section
                                               determine NOX mass emissions, as defined in             a low-emitting affected unit (i.e., average SO2
                                               75.71(a)(2); and NOX-diluent CEMS using the             or NOX concentration during the RATA ≤ 250
                                                                                                                                                             2.1.4;
                                               procedures outlined in sections 7.6.1 through           ppm or average NOX emission rate ≤ 0.200 lb/          ■ e. Revising section 2.2.1;
                                               7.6.5 of this appendix. For multiple-load flow          mmBtu) meets the normal 10.0 percent                  ■ f. Adding paragraph (i) to section
                                               RATAs, perform a bias test at each load level           relative accuracy specification (as calculated        2.2.3;
                                               designated as normal under section 6.5.2.1 of           using Equation A–10) or the alternate relative
                                               this appendix.                                          accuracy specification in section 3.3 of this         ■ g. Revising paragraph (a) of section
                                                                                                       appendix for low-emitters, but fails the bias         2.3.1.1, paragraph (a) of section 2.3.1.3,
                                               7.6.1 Arithmetic Mean                                   test, the BAF may either be determined using          and paragraphs (d) and (i) of section
                                                  Calculate the arithmetic mean of the                 Equation A–12, or a default BAF of 1.111              2.3.2;
                                               differences of the data set using Equation A–           may be used.                                          ■ h. Adding paragraph (k) to section
                                               7 of this appendix. To calculate bias for an            *      *      *      *       *
                                               SO2 or NOX pollutant concentration monitor,                                                                   2.3.2;
                                                                                                         (f) Use the bias-adjusted values in
                                               ‘‘di’’ is, for each paired data point, the                                                                    ■ i. Revising section 2.3.4;
                                                                                                       computing substitution values in the missing
                                               difference between the SO2 or NOX                       data procedure, as specified in subpart D of          ■ j. Removing section 2.6;
                                               concentration value (in ppm) obtained from              this part, and in reporting the concentration         ■ k. Revising Figures 1 and 2; and
                                               the reference method and the monitor. To                of SO2, the flow rate, the average NOX
                                               calculate bias for a flow monitor, ‘‘di’’ is, for                                                             ■ e. Adding Figure 3, to read as follows:
                                                                                                       emission rate, the unit heat input, and the
                                               each paired data point, the difference                  calculated mass emissions of SO2 and CO2
                                               between the flow rate values (in scfh)                                                                        Appendix B to Part 75—Quality
                                                                                                       during the quarter and calendar year, as              Assurance and Quality Control
                                               obtained from the reference method and the              specified in subpart G of this part. In
                                               monitor. To calculate bias for a NOX-diluent                                                                  Procedures
                                                                                                       addition, when using a NOX concentration
                                               continuous emission monitoring system, ‘‘di’’
                                                                                                       monitoring system and a flow monitor to               1. Quality Assurance/Quality Control
                                               is, for each paired data point, the difference
                                                                                                       calculate NOX mass emissions under subpart            Program
                                               between the NOX emission rate values (in lb/
                                                                                                       H of this part, use bias-adjusted values for          *        *   *    *       *
                                               mmBtu) obtained from the reference method
                                                                                                       NOX concentration and flow rate in the mass             1.1.4 The provisions in section 6.1.2 of
                                               and the monitoring system.
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                                                                                       emission calculations and use bias-adjusted           appendix A to this part shall apply to the
                                               *      *     *       *      *                           NOX concentrations to compute the                     annual RATAs described in § 75.74(c)(2)(ii)
                                               7.6.5 * * *                                             appropriate substitution values for NOX               and to the semiannual and annual RATAs
                                                                                                       concentration in the missing data routines
                                                  (b) For single-load RATAs of SO2 pollutant                                                                 described in section 2.3 of this appendix.
                                                                                                       under subpart D of this part.
                                               concentration monitors, NOX concentration                                                                     *        *   *    *       *
                                               monitoring systems, and NOX-diluent                     *     *   *    *     *
                                               monitoring systems, and for the single-load             ■ 31. Appendix B to part 75 is amended                2. Frequency of Testing
                                                                                                                                                                                                            ER28MR11.000</GPH>




                                               flow RATAs required or allowed under                    by:                                                   *        *   *    *       *


                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010   19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00035   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM   28MRR3
                                               17322              Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations

                                               2.1.4 Data Validation                                   on the range(s) used to record and report              normal, the required RATA(s) may be done
                                                  (a) An out-of-control period occurs when             emission data during the QA operating                  at either load level (or operating level).
                                               the calibration error of an SO2 or NOX                  quarter. Conduct the linearity checks no less          *        *    *     *      *
                                               pollutant concentration monitor exceeds 5.0             than 30 days apart, to the extent practicable.
                                               percent of the span value, when the                     The data validation procedures in section              2.3.2    Data Validation
                                               calibration error of a CO2 or O2 monitor                2.2.3(e) of this appendix shall be followed.           *        *    *     *      *
                                               (including O2 monitors used to measure CO2              *       *      *      *       *                           (d) For single-load (or single-level) RATAs,
                                               emissions or percent moisture) exceeds 1.0                                                                     if a daily calibration error test is failed during
                                               percent O2 or CO2, or when the calibration              2.2.3     Data Validation                              a RATA test period, prior to completing the
                                               error of a flow monitor exceeds 6.0 percent             *       *      *      *       *                        test, the RATA must be repeated. Data from
                                               of the span value, which is twice the                      (i) The results of any certification,               the monitor are invalidated prospectively
                                               applicable specification of appendix A to this          recertification, diagnostic, or quality                from the hour of the failed calibration error
                                               part. Notwithstanding, a differential                   assurance test required under this part may            test until the hour of completion of a
                                               pressure-type flow monitor for which the                not be used to validate the emissions data             subsequent successful calibration error test.
                                               calibration error exceeds 6.0 percent of the            required under this part, if the test is               The subsequent RATA shall not be
                                               span value shall not be considered out-of-                                                                     commenced until the monitor has
                                                                                                       performed using EPA Protocol gas that was
                                               control if |R–A|, the absolute value of the             not from an EPA Protocol gas production site
                                                                                                                                                              successfully passed a calibration error test in
                                               difference between the monitor response and                                                                    accordance with section 2.1.3 of this
                                                                                                       participating in the PGVP on the date the gas
                                               the reference value in Equation A–6 of                                                                         appendix. For multiple-load (or multiple-
                                                                                                       was procured either by the tester or by a              level) flow RATAs, each load level (or
                                               appendix A to this part, is < 0.02 inches of            reseller that sold to the tester the unaltered
                                               water. In addition, an SO2 or NOX monitor                                                                      operating level) is treated as a separate RATA
                                                                                                       EPA Protocol gas, except as provided in                (i.e., when a calibration error test is failed
                                               for which the calibration error exceeds 5.0
                                                                                                       § 75.21(g)(7) or if the cylinder(s) are analyzed       prior to completing the RATA at a particular
                                               percent of the span value shall not be
                                                                                                       by an independent laboratory and shown to              load level (or operating level), only the RATA
                                               considered out-of-control if |R–A| in Equation
                                                                                                       meet the requirements of section 5.1.4(b) of           at that load level (or operating level) must be
                                               A–6 does not exceed 5.0 ppm (for span
                                                                                                       appendix A to this part.                               repeated; the results of any previously-passed
                                               values ≤ 50 ppm), or if |R–A|; does not exceed
                                               10.0 ppm (for span values > 50 ppm, but ≤               *       *      *      *       *                        RATA(s) at the other load level(s) (or
                                               200 ppm). The out-of-control period begins                                                                     operating level(s)) are unaffected, unless the
                                                                                                       2.3.1.1     Standard RATA Frequencies                  monitor’s polynomial coefficients or K-
                                               upon failure of the calibration error test and
                                               ends upon completion of a successful                       (a) Except as otherwise specified in                factor(s) must be changed to correct the
                                               calibration error test. Note, that if a failed          § 75.21(a)(6) or (a)(7) or in section 2.3.1.2 of       problem that caused the calibration failure,
                                               calibration, corrective action, and successful          this appendix, perform relative accuracy test          in which case a subsequent 3-load (or 3-level)
                                               calibration error test occur within the same            audits semiannually, i.e., once every two              RATA is required), except as otherwise
                                               hour, emission data for that hour recorded by           successive QA operating quarters (as defined           provided in section 2.3.1.3 (c)(5) of this
                                               the monitor after the successful calibration            in § 72.2 of this chapter) for each primary and        appendix.
                                               error test may be used for reporting purposes,          redundant backup SO2 pollutant                         *        *    *     *      *
                                               provided that two or more valid readings are            concentration monitor, flow monitor, CO2                 (i) Each time that a hands-off RATA of an
                                               obtained as required by § 75.10. A NOX-                 emissions concentration monitor (including             SO2 pollutant concentration monitor, a
                                               diluent CEMS is considered out-of-control if            O2 monitors used to determine CO2                      NOx-diluent monitoring system, a NOX
                                               the calibration error of either component               emissions), CO2 or O2 diluent monitor used             concentration monitoring system, or a flow
                                               monitor exceeds twice the applicable                    to determine heat input, moisture monitoring           monitor is passed, perform a bias test in
                                               performance specification in appendix A to              system, NOX concentration monitoring                   accordance with section 7.6.4 of appendix A
                                               this part. Emission data shall not be reported          system, or NOX-diluent CEMS. A calendar                to this part. Apply the appropriate bias
                                               from an out-of-control monitor.                         quarter that does not qualify as a QA                  adjustment factor to the reported SO2, NOX,
                                                                                                       operating quarter shall be excluded in                 or flow rate data, in accordance with section
                                               *      *     *       *      *
                                                                                                       determining the deadline for the next RATA.            7.6.5 of appendix A to this part.
                                                  (c) The results of any certification,
                                               recertification, diagnostic, or quality                 No more than eight successive calendar                 *        *    *     *      *
                                               assurance test required under this part may             quarters shall elapse after the quarter in                (k) The results of any certification,
                                               not be used to validate the emissions data              which a RATA was last performed without                recertification, diagnostic, or quality
                                               required under this part, if the test is                a subsequent RATA having been conducted.               assurance test required under this part may
                                               performed using EPA Protocol gas from a                 If a RATA has not been completed by the end            not be used to validate the emissions data
                                               production site that is not participating in the        of the eighth calendar quarter since the               required under this part, if the test is
                                               PGVP, except as provided in § 75.21(g)(7) or            quarter of the last RATA, then the RATA                performed using EPA Protocol gas from a
                                               if the cylinder(s) are analyzed by an                   must be completed within a 720 unit (or                production site that is not participating in the
                                               independent laboratory and shown to meet                stack) operating hour grace period (as                 PGVP, except as provided in § 75.21(g)(7) or
                                               the requirements of section 5.1.4(b) of                 provided in section 2.3.3 of this appendix)            if the cylinder(s) are analyzed by an
                                               appendix A to this part.                                following the end of the eighth successive             independent laboratory and shown to meet
                                                                                                       elapsed calendar quarter, or data from the             the requirements of section 5.1.4(b) of
                                               *      *     *       *      *                                                                                  appendix A to this part.
                                                                                                       CEMS will become invalid.
                                               2.2.1 Linearity Check                                   *       *      *      *       *                        *        *    *     *      *
                                                  Unless a particular monitor (or monitoring                                                                  2.3.4 Bias Adjustment Factor
                                                                                                       2.3.1.3 RATA Load (or Operating) Levels
                                               range) is exempted under this paragraph or
                                                                                                       and Additional RATA Requirements                         Except as otherwise specified in section
                                               under section 6.2 of appendix A to this part,
                                               perform a linearity check, in accordance with             (a) For SO2 pollutant concentration                  7.6.5 of appendix A to this part, if an SO2
                                               the procedures in section 6.2 of appendix A             monitors, CO2 emissions concentration                  pollutant concentration monitor, a flow
                                               to this part, for each primary and redundant            monitors (including O2 monitors used to                monitor, a NOX-diluent CEMS, or a NOX
                                               backup SO2, and NOx pollutant                           determine CO2 emissions), CO2 or O2 diluent            concentration monitoring system used to
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                               concentration monitor and each primary and              monitors used to determine heat input, NOX             calculate NOX mass emissions fails the bias
                                               redundant backup CO2 or O2 monitor                      concentration monitoring systems, and NOX-             test specified in section 7.6 of appendix A to
                                               (including O2 monitors used to measure CO2              diluent monitoring systems, the required               this part, use the bias adjustment factor given
                                               emissions or to continuously monitor                    semiannual or annual RATA tests shall be               in Equations A–11 and A–12 of appendix A
                                               moisture) at least once during each QA                  done at the load level (or operating level)            to this part or the allowable alternative BAF
                                               operating quarter, as defined in § 72.2 of this         designated as normal under section 6.5.2.1(d)          specified in section 7.6.5(b) of appendix A of
                                               chapter. For units using both a low and high            of appendix A to this part. If two load levels         this part, to adjust the monitored data.
                                               span value, a linearity check is required only          (or operating levels) are designated as                *        *    *     *      *


                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010   19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00036    Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM   28MRR3
                                                                         Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations                                                                                                   17323

                                                                                 FIGURE 1 TO APPENDIX B OF PART 75—QUALITY ASSURANCE TEST REQUIREMENTS
                                                                                                                                                                                                             Basic QA test frequency requirements
                                                                                                                        Test                                                                                                                             Semiannual
                                                                                                                                                                                                                Daily *            Quarterly *           or annual *

                                               Calibration Error Test (2 pt.) ....................................................................................................................                  X             ....................   ....................
                                               Interference Check (flow) ........................................................................................................................                   X             ....................   ....................
                                               Flow-to-Load Ratio ..................................................................................................................................       ....................            X             ....................
                                               Leak Check (DP flow monitors) ...............................................................................................................               ....................            X             ....................
                                               Linearity Check * (3 pt.) ............................................................................................................................      ....................            X             ....................
                                               RATA (SO2, NOX, CO2, O2, H2O)1 .........................................................................................................                    ....................   ....................            X
                                               RATA (flow) 1 2 .........................................................................................................................................   ....................   ....................            X
                                                  * ‘‘Daily’’ means operating days, only. ‘‘Quarterly’’ means once every QA operating quarter. ‘‘Semiannual’’ means once every two QA operating
                                               quarters. ‘‘Annual’’ means once every four QA operating quarters.
                                                  1 Conduct RATA annually (i.e., once every four QA operating quarters) rather than semiannually, if monitor meets accuracy requirements to
                                               qualify for less frequent testing.
                                                  2 For flow monitors installed on peaking units, bypass stacks, or units that qualify for single-level RATA testing under section 6.5.2(e) of this
                                               part, conduct all RATAs at a single, normal load (or operating level). For other flow monitors, conduct annual RATAs at two load levels (or oper-
                                               ating levels). Alternating single-load and 2-load (or single-level and 2-level) RATAs may be done if a monitor is on a semiannual frequency. A
                                               single-load (or single-level) RATA may be done in lieu of a 2-load (or 2-level) RATA if, since the last annual flow RATA, the unit has operated at
                                               one load level (or operating level) for ≥ 85.0 percent of the time. A 3-level RATA is required at least once every five years (20 calendar quarters)
                                               and whenever a flow monitor is re-characterized, except for flow monitors exempted from 3-level RATA testing under section 6.5.2(b) or 6.5.2(e)
                                               of appendix A to this part.

                                                                  FIGURE 2 TO APPENDIX B OF PART 75—RELATIVE ACCURACY TEST FREQUENCY INCENTIVE SYSTEM
                                                                   RATA                                                            Semiannual W                                                                             Annual W

                                               SO2 or NOXY ...............................           7.5%     <   RA   ≤   10.0%    or   ±   15.0 ppmX ...........................        RA    ≤   7.5%   or   ±   12.0 ppmX.
                                               NOX-diluent .................................         7.5%     <   RA   ≤   10.0%    or   ±   0.020 lb/mmBtuX .................            RA    ≤   7.5%   or   ±   0. 015 lb/mmBtuX.
                                               Flow .............................................    7.5%     <   RA   ≤   10.0%    or   ±   2.0 fpsX ...............................     RA    ≤   7.5%   or   ±   1.5 fpsX.
                                               CO2 or O2 ....................................        7.5%     <   RA   ≤   10.0%    or   ±   1.0% CO2/O2X .....................           RA    ≤   7.5%   or   ±   0.7% CO2/O2X.
                                               Moisture .......................................      7.5%     <   RA   ≤   10.0%    or   ±   1.5% H2OX ..........................         RA    ≤   7.5%   or   ±   1.0% H2OX.
                                                 W The deadline for the next RATA is the end of the second (if semiannual) or fourth (if annual) successive QA operating quarter following the
                                               quarter in which the CEMS was last tested. Exclude calendar quarters with fewer than 168 unit operating hours (or, for common stacks and by-
                                               pass stacks, exclude quarters with fewer than 168 stack operating hours) in determining the RATA deadline. For SO2 monitors, QA operating
                                               quarters in which only very low sulfur fuel as defined in § 72.2 of this chapter, is combusted may also be excluded. However, the exclusion of
                                               calendar quarters is limited as follows: the deadline for the next RATA shall be no more than 8 calendar quarters after the quarter in which a
                                               RATA was last performed. A 720 operating hour grace period is available if the RATA cannot be completed by the deadline.
                                                 X The difference between monitor and reference method mean values applies to moisture monitors, CO , and O monitors, low emitters of
                                                                                                                                                           2       2
                                               SO2, NOX, and low flow, only.
                                                 Y A NO concentration monitoring system used to determine NO mass emissions under § 75.71.
                                                         X                                                        X



                                               BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010         19:36 Mar 25, 2011        Jkt 223001        PO 00000      Frm 00037        Fmt 4701      Sfmt 4700      E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM               28MRR3
                                               17324              Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations




                                               BILLING CODE 6560–50–C                                  of flowmeter: ASME MFC–3M–2004,                       (excluding the modified flow-calculation
                                               ■ 32. Appendix D to part 75 is amended                  Measurement of Fluid Flow in Pipes Using              method in part 3); Section 8, Calibration from
                                                                                                       Orifice, Nozzle, and Venturi; ASME MFC–               American Gas Association Transmission
                                               by revising Section 2.1.5.1 to read as
                                                                                                       4M–1986 (Reaffirmed 1997), Measurement of
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                               follows:                                                                                                      Measurement Committee Report No. 7:
                                                                                                       Gas Flow by Turbine Meters; American Gas              Measurement of Gas by Turbine Meters
                                               Appendix D to Part 75—Optional SO2                      Association Report No. 3, Orifice Metering of         (Second Revision, April 1996); ASME–MFC–
                                               Emissions Data Protocol for Gas-Fired                   Natural Gas and Other Related Hydrocarbon             5M–1985 (Reaffirmed 1994), Measurement of
                                               and Oil-Fired Peaking Units                             Fluids Part 1: General Equations and                  Liquid Flow in Closed Conduits Using
                                                                                                       Uncertainty Guidelines (October 1990                  Transit-Time Ultrasonic Flowmeters; ASME
                                               *      *     *       *      *                           Edition), Part 2: Specification and                   MFC–6M–1998, Measurement of Fluid Flow
                                                 2.1.5.1 Use the procedures in the                     Installation Requirements (February 1991              in Pipes Using Vortex Flowmeters; ASME
                                                                                                                                                                                                              ER28MR11.001</GPH>




                                               following standards to verify flowmeter                 Edition), and Part 3: Natural Gas
                                               accuracy or design, as appropriate to the type          Applications (August 1992 edition)

                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010   19:36 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00038   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 4700   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM   28MRR3
                                                                  Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 59 / Monday, March 28, 2011 / Rules and Regulations                                                17325

                                               MFC–7M–1987 (Reaffirmed 1992),                          procedures that use equipment traceable to            2.1 Initial Performance Testing
                                               Measurement of Gas Flow by Means of                     National Institute of Standards and                     * * * The requirements in section 6.1.2 of
                                               Critical Flow Venturi Nozzles; ISO 8316:                Technology standards. Document such                   appendix A to this part shall apply to any
                                               1987(E) Measurement of Liquid Flow in                   procedures, the equipment used, and the               stack testing performed to obtain O2 and NOX
                                               Closed Conduits—Method by Collection of                 accuracy of the procedures in the monitoring          concentration measurements under this
                                               the Liquid in a Volumetric Tank; American                                                                     appendix, either for units using the excepted
                                                                                                       plan for the unit, and submit a petition
                                               Petroleum Institute (API) Manual of                                                                           methodology in this appendix or for units
                                               Petroleum Measurement Standards, Chapter                signed by the designated representative
                                                                                                       under § 75.66(c). If the flowmeter accuracy           using the low mass emissions excepted
                                               4—Proving Systems, Section 2—Pipe Provers                                                                     methodology in § 75.19.
                                               (Provers Accumulating at Least 10,000                   exceeds 2.0 percent of the upper range value,
                                               Pulses), Second Edition, March 2001, Section            the flowmeter does not qualify for use under          *     *     *    *    *
                                               3—Small Volume Provers, First Edition, July             this part.                                            ■ 34. Appendix F to Part 75 is amended
                                               1988, Reaffirmed October 1993, and Section                                                                    by removing and reserving section 9 to
                                                                                                       *      *      *      *       *
                                               5—Master-Meter Provers, Second Edition,                                                                       read as follows:
                                               May 2000; American Petroleum Institute                  ■ 33. In Appendix E to Part 75, Section
                                               (API) Manual of Petroleum Measurement                   2.1 is amended by revising the last                   Appendix F to Part 75—Conversion
                                               Standards, Chapter 22—Testing Protocol,                                                                       Procedures
                                               Section 2—Differential Pressure Flow
                                                                                                       sentence to read as follows:
                                               Measurement Devices, First Edition, August                                                                    *        *    *     *     *
                                                                                                       Appendix E to Part 75—Optional NOX                        9. [Reserved]
                                               2005; or ASME MFC–9M–1988 (Reaffirmed                   Emissions Estimation Protocol for Gas-
                                               2001), Measurement of Liquid Flow in                                                                          *       *   *    *     *
                                               Closed Conduits by Weighing Method, for all             Fired Peaking Units and Oil-Fired
                                                                                                       Peaking Units                                         ■   35. Appendix K to part 75 is removed.
                                               other flowmeter types (all incorporated by
                                               reference under § 75.6 of this part). The                                                                     [FR Doc. 2011–6216 Filed 3–25–11; 8:45 am]
                                                                                                       *      *      *      *       *
                                               Administrator may also approve other                                                                          BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES3




                                          VerDate Mar<15>2010   19:16 Mar 25, 2011   Jkt 223001   PO 00000   Frm 00039   Fmt 4701   Sfmt 9990   E:\FR\FM\28MRR3.SGM   28MRR3

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Tags: Generators
Stats:
views:42
posted:3/31/2011
language:English
pages:39