Ambient Air Monitoring Regulations: Correcting and Other Amendments, 32193-32212 [07-2201]
Download as PDF
32193
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
OHIO—OZONE
[8-Hour Standard]
Designation a
Classification
Designated area
Date 1
*
*
Youngstown-Warren-Sharon, PA-OH:
Columbiana County ...................
Mahoning County ......................
Trumbull County ........................
*
*
*
June 12, 2007.
............................................. Attainment
............................................. Attainment
............................................. Attainment
*
Date 1
Type
*
Type
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
a Includes
1 This
Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified.
date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted.
[FR Doc. E7–11229 Filed 6–11–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
the October 17, 2006, final rule is
correct.
This rule is effective on
September 10, 2007, without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse
comment by July 12, 2007. If we receive
adverse comment, we will publish a
timely withdrawal in the Federal
Register informing the public that some
or all of the amendments in this rule
will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified under Docket ID No. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2004–0018 by one of the
following methods:
• www.regulations.gov. Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• E-mail: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov.
• Fax: (202) 566–1741.
• Mail: Ambient Air Monitoring
Regulations: Correcting and Other
Amendments, Environmental Protection
Agency, Mailcode: 6102T, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20460. Please include a
total of 2 copies.
• Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center,
1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room
3334, Washington, DC. Such deliveries
are only accepted during the Docket’s
normal hours of operation, and special
arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2004–
0018. The EPA’s policy is that all
comments received will be included in
the public docket without change and
may be made available online at:
www.regulations.gov including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through www.regulations.gov
or e-mail. The www.regulations.gov
DATES:
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 53 and 58
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2004–0018; FRL–8308–7]
RIN 2060–AO06
Ambient Air Monitoring Regulations:
Correcting and Other Amendments
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC67 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The EPA is taking direct final
action on ‘‘Ambient Air Monitoring
Regulations: Correcting and Other
Amendments’’ to correct and clarify
parts of a recent final rule published on
October 17, 2006, that amended the
ambient air monitoring requirements for
criteria pollutants. These errors
included several instances where the
wording in the preamble and regulatory
text were not completely consistent,
several regulatory text passages that
contained some imprecise language, two
instances of regulatory text omission, an
outdated address reference, and
numerous publication errors in tables
and equations. EPA is also amending
the monitoring rule to allow EPA
Regional Administrators to approve
departures from the minimum number
of PM10 monitors otherwise specified in
the rule.
The October 17, 2006, final rule
revised requirements for reference and
equivalent method determinations,
modified requirements for general
monitoring network design, and
modified other requirements pertaining
to quality assurance, annual network
plans and assessments, data reporting,
monitoring methodology, and probe and
monitor siting criteria. All other
preamble and regulatory text printed in
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:39 Jun 11, 2007
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
website is an ‘‘anonymous access’’
system, which means EPA will not
know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send an
e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through www.regulations.gov,
your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as
part of the comment that is placed in the
public docket and made available on the
internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact
information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD–ROM
you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
EPA may not be able to consider your
comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form
of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the www.regulations.gov
index. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, will be publicly
available only in hard copy. Publicly
available docket materials are available
either electronically in
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Revisions to the Ambient Air
Monitoring Regulations Docket, EPA/
DC, EPA West, Room 3334, Constitution
Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the Public Reading Room is
(202) 566–1744, and the telephone
number for the Air Docket is (202) 566–
1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Lewis Weinstock, Air Quality
Assessment Division (C304–06), Office
E:\FR\FM\12JNR1.SGM
12JNR1
32194
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27711; telephone number: (919) 541–
3661; fax number: (919) 541–1903; email address: weinstock.lewis@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Why Is EPA Using a Direct Final Rule?
II. Does This Action Apply to Me?
III. Judicial Review
IV. Authority
V. Overview of the October 17, 2006 Rule
Changes
VI. This Action
A. Correction to Special Purpose Monitors
B. Clarification to Requirement for
Collocating Required Continuous Fine
Particle (PM2.5) Monitors
C. Clarification to Operating Schedule
Requirements for Filter-Based Manual
PM2.5 Samplers
D. Standard versus Daylight Savings Time
Reference
E. Corrections to Regulatory Text on
Particulate Matter (PM10) Network
Design Criteria
F. Additional Regional Administrator
Flexibility in Applying PM10 Minimum
Monitoring Requirements
G. Correction to Division Name and
Address Reference
H. Clarification to Conditions for Waiving
Regional Administrator Comment Period
on Submitted Annual Monitoring
Network Plans
Category
I. Typographical Corrections
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions
To Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
J. National Technology Transfer
Advancement Act
K. Congressional Review Act
I. Why Is EPA Using a Direct Final
Rule?
The EPA is publishing this rule
without a prior proposed rule because
we view this as a non-controversial
action and anticipate no adverse
comment. None of the proposed changes
creates additional regulatory
requirements on affected entities
compared to those that were
promulgated in the final rule that was
NAICS code 1
334513
541380
Federal Government .................
924110
State/territorial/local/tribal government.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC67 with RULES
II. Does This Action Apply to Me?
Categories and entities potentially
regulated by this action include:
Examples of regulated entities
Industry .....................................
924110
1 North
published in the Federal Register on
October 17, 2006. However, in the
‘‘Proposed Rules’’ section of this
Federal Register, we are publishing a
separate document that will serve as the
proposed rule to make corrections to the
Ambient Air Monitoring Regulations if
relevant adverse comments are received
on one or more of the amendments in
this direct final rule as described in
sections VI.A. through VI.I of this
preamble. We will not institute a second
comment period on this action. Any
parties interested in commenting must
do so at this time. For further
information about commenting on this
rule, see the ADDRESSES section of this
document. If EPA receives relevant
adverse comment on one or more of the
amendments included in this
rulemaking, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register
indicating which amendment or
amendments we are withdrawing. The
provisions that are not withdrawn will
become effective on the date set out
above, notwithstanding any relevant
adverse comment on any other
provision.
Manufacturer, supplier, distributor, or vendor of ambient air monitoring instruments; analytical
laboratories or other monitoring organizations that elect to submit an application for a reference or equivalent method determination under 40 CFR part 53.
Federal agencies (that conduct ambient air monitoring similar to that conducted by States
under 40 CFR part 58 and that wish EPA to use their monitoring data in the same manner
as State data) or that elect to submit an application for a reference or equivalent method
determination under 40 CFR part 53.
State, territorial, and local air quality management programs that are responsible for ambient
air monitoring under 40 CFR part 58 or that elect to submit an application for a reference
or equivalent method determination under 40 CFR part 53 or for an approved regional
method approved under 40 CFR part 58 appendix C. The proposal also may affect Tribes
that conduct ambient air monitoring similar to that conducted by States and that wish EPA
to use their monitoring data in the same manner as State monitoring data.
American Industry Classification System.
This table is not intended to be
exhaustive, but rather provides a guide
for readers regarding entities likely to be
regulated by this action. This table lists
the types of entities that EPA is now
aware could potentially be regulated by
this action. Other types of entities not
listed in the table could also be
regulated. To determine whether your
facility or Federal, State, local, tribal, or
territorial agency is regulated by this
action, you should carefully examine
the requirements for reference or
equivalent method determinations in 40
CFR part 53, subpart A (General
Provisions) and the applicability criteria
in 40 CFR 51.1 of EPA’s requirements
VerDate Aug<31>2005
11:36 Jun 11, 2007
Jkt 211001
for State Implementation Plans (SIPs). If
you have questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a
particular entity, consult the person
listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.
III. Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean
Air Act (CAA), judicial review of the
direct final rule amendments is
available only by filing a petition for
review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia by August 13,
2007. Under section 307(d)(7)(B) of the
CAA, only an objection to the direct
final rule amendments that was raised
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
with reasonable specificity during the
period for public comment can be raised
during judicial review. Moreover, under
section 307(b)(2) of the CAA, the
requirements established by the direct
final rule amendments may not be
challenged separately in any civil or
criminal proceedings brought by EPA to
enforce these requirements.
IV. Authority
The EPA rules for ambient air
monitoring are authorized under
sections 110, 301(a), and 319 of the
CAA. Section 110(a)(2)(B) of the CAA
requires that each SIP provide for the
establishment and operation of devices,
E:\FR\FM\12JNR1.SGM
12JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
methods, systems, and procedures
needed to monitor, compile, and
analyze data on ambient air quality and
for the reporting of air quality data to
EPA. Section 103 authorizes, among
others, research and investigations
relating to the causes, effects, extent,
prevention and control of air pollution.
Section 301(a) of the CAA authorizes
EPA to develop regulations needed to
carry out EPA’s mission and establishes
rulemaking requirements. Uniform
criteria to be followed when measuring
air quality and provisions for daily air
pollution index reporting are required
by CAA section 319.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC67 with RULES
V. Overview of the October 17, 2006
Rule Changes
On October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61236),
EPA amended the rules for ambient air
monitoring of criteria pollutants. The
rule amendments established limited
ambient air monitoring requirements for
particles between 2.5 and 10
micrometers (µm) in diameter (PM10–2.5)
to support continued research into these
particles’ distribution, sources, and
health effects. The rule amendments
required each State to operate one to
three ‘‘NCore’’ monitoring stations that
will take an integrated, multipollutant
approach to ambient air monitoring. In
addition, the rule amendments modified
the general monitoring network design
requirements for minimum numbers of
ambient air monitors to focus on
populated areas with air quality
problems and to reduce significantly the
requirements for criteria pollutant
monitors that have measured ambient
air concentrations well below the
applicable National Ambient Air
Quality Standards. The rule
amendments also revised certain
provisions regarding monitoring
network descriptions and periodic
assessments, quality assurance, and data
certifications. A number of the
amendments related specifically to
monitoring of fine particles (referring to
particles less than or equal to 2.5 µm in
diameter, PM2.5), revising the
requirements for reference and
equivalent method determinations
(including specifications and test
procedures) for fine particle monitors.
VI. This Action
EPA is taking the following actions:
• Correcting a statement in the
regulatory text pertaining to the
potential comparability of data collected
from Special Purpose Monitors (SPM)
with approved alternative quality
assurance plans to the National Ambient
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).
• Correcting a statement in the
preamble with regard to the requirement
VerDate Aug<31>2005
11:36 Jun 11, 2007
Jkt 211001
for collocating required continuous
PM2.5 monitors and clarifying associated
regulatory text.
• Clarifying several ambiguous
regulatory text passages pertaining to
operating schedules for manual PM2.5
samplers.
• Correcting a reference regarding
standard versus daylight savings time.
• Restoring two instances of
regulatory text that were inadvertently
omitted from the network design for
monitoring particles less than or equal
to 10 µm in diameter (PM10).
• Adding authority for the Regional
Administrator, consistent with the
authority that already exists for PM2.5
and ozone, to allow monitoring agencies
to deviate from PM10 monitoring
requirements.
• Updating an organizational address
reference within regulatory text
pertaining to quality assurance
requirements.
• Clarifying the conditions when the
EPA Regional Administrator is not
required to offer a public comment
opportunity prior to approving a State’s
annual monitoring network plan.
• Correcting numerous typographical
errors in tables and equations.
A. Correction to Special Purpose
Monitors
The intent of 40 CFR 58.20(c)
(published at 71 FR 61302) was to
describe the conditions when data from
an SPM using a Federal reference
method (FRM), Federal equivalent
method (FEM), or Approved Regional
Method (ARM) which has operated for
more than 24 months is eligible for
comparison to the relevant NAAQS. The
rule text states that all data from an SPM
is eligible for comparison to the relevant
NAAQS unless the data from the
particular monitor came from a period
when the requirements of appendix A to
part 58 (Quality Assurance
Requirements for SLAMS, SPMs, and
PSD Air Monitoring) or an approved
alternative, appendix C to part 58
(Ambient Air Quality Monitoring
Methodology), or appendix E to part 58
(Probe and Monitoring Path Siting
Criteria for Ambient Air Monitoring)
were not met in practice. This text does
not reflect EPA’s actual intention.
Instead, as discussed in the preamble
(71 FR 61253), the intention of the
October 17, 2006, final rule was that if
the Regional Administrator approved an
alternative quality assurance plan in
place of the requirements of appendix A
to part 58, the data from the affected
SPM would not be eligible for
comparison to the relevant NAAQS. The
unintentional inclusion in the rule text
of the phrase ‘‘or an approved
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
32195
alternative’’ implied that data from
SPMs operating during a period when
approved alternative quality assurance
requirements were in effect, rather than
appendix A requirements, would still be
eligible for comparison to the relevant
NAAQS.
The EPA provided the Regional
Administrator with the authority to
approve an alternative to the
requirements of appendix A to part 58
with respect to SPM sites when meeting
those requirements would be physically
and/or financially impractical due to
physical conditions at the monitoring
site and the requirements were not
essential to achieving the intended data
objectives of the SPM site.
Therefore, EPA is clarifying the
regulatory text by deleting the
aforementioned words referencing
alternative quality assurance plans. The
corrected rule text 40 CFR 58.20(c)
reads: ‘‘All data from an SPM using an
FRM, FEM, or ARM which has operated
for more than 24 months is eligible for
comparison to the relevant NAAQS,
subject to the conditions of § 58.30,
unless the air monitoring agency
demonstrates that the data came from a
particular period during which the
requirements of appendix A, appendix
C, or appendix E to this part were not
met in practice.’’
B. Clarification to Requirement for
Collocating Required Continuous Fine
Particle (PM2.5) Monitors
The regulatory text in 40 CFR part 58,
appendix D (Network Design Criteria for
Ambient Air Quality Monitoring),
section 4.7.2 (71 FR 61322) describes
the minimum requirements for
operating continuous PM2.5 analyzers.1
The text requires States to operate a
minimum number of continuous PM2.5
analyzers equal to at least one-half
(round up) the minimum required FRM/
FEM/ARM PM2.5 sites listed in Table D–
5 of appendix D to part 58. At least one
required FRM/FEM/ARM PM2.5 monitor
in each MSA must be collocated with a
continuous analyzer. For example, if a
MSA had three required FRM/FEM/
ARM PM2.5 monitors, then two
continuous monitors are required, and
at least one of those continuous
monitors must be collocated (placed at
the same site) with one of the FRM/
FEM/ARM PM2.5 monitors. The second
1 In 40 CFR part 58 and in this preamble, the
terms monitor, analyzer, and sampler are sometimes
used interchangeably. Monitor is the more general
term. Most often, analyzer means a self-contained
monitor which can produce concentration data onsite. Sampler means a device that collects a sample
(e.g., a filter) which must be further processed at an
outside laboratory to obtain the concentration
value.
E:\FR\FM\12JNR1.SGM
12JNR1
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC67 with RULES
32196
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
required continuous monitor could be
collocated with one of the remaining
two required FRM/FEM/ARM PM2.5
monitors at another site, or be located at
a separate site based on monitoring
objectives. The EPA did not intend that
the continuous analyzers required under
section 4.7.2 be required to be
collocated with each other.
The October 17, 2006, rule text
matches our intended meaning.
However, when referencing this rule
requirement in the preamble (71 FR
61263), EPA incorrectly stated that the
collocation requirement was adopted to
address concerns about whether
required continuous monitors needed to
be collocated with a matching second
continuous monitor, and that the final
rule only required one of all the
required PM2.5 continuous monitors in
each MSA to have ‘‘such a collocated
match.’’ This unintentional statement
could be construed as a requirement for
collocating two continuous monitors
with each other, in addition to the
requirement for collocation with at least
one required FRM/FEM/ARM monitor,
leading to the conclusion that EPA was
requiring three PM2.5 monitors (two
continuous, one filter-based) at the first
required site, subject to the
requirements of section 4.7.2. Moreover,
it was not our intention to require a
second continuous monitor be sited
with an FEM or ARM that itself
provides continuous data.
Therefore, EPA is clarifying the
regulatory text to make clear the
intentions described above. The EPA is
also clarifying that an associated
reference to quality assurance/quality
control procedures refers to the
continuous monitoring requirement by
adding the words ‘‘for these required
continuous analyzers.’’ The corrected
provision of 40 CFR part 58, appendix
D, section 4.7.2 now reads:
‘‘Requirement for Continuous PM2.5
Monitoring. The State, or where
appropriate, local agencies must operate
continuous PM2.5 analyzers equal to at
least one-half (round up) the minimum
required sites listed in Table D–5 of this
appendix. At least one required
continuous analyzer in each MSA must
be collocated with one of the required
FRM/FEM/ARM monitors, unless at
least one of the required FRM/FEM/
ARM monitors is itself a continuous
FEM or ARM monitor, in which case no
collocation requirement applies. State
and local air monitoring agencies must
use methodologies and quality
assurance/quality control (QA/QC)
procedures approved by the EPA
Regional Administrator for these
required continuous analyzers.’’
VerDate Aug<31>2005
11:36 Jun 11, 2007
Jkt 211001
C. Clarification to Operating Schedule
Requirements for Filter-Based Manual
PM2.5 Samplers
The regulatory text in 40 CFR 58.12(d)
(71 FR 61299) describes the required
sampling frequency for manual filterbased PM2.5 samplers. Manual PM2.5
samplers at SLAMS stations must
operate on at least a 1-in-3 day schedule
at sites which do not also have a
collocated continuously operating PM2.5
monitor. For SLAMS PM2.5 sites with
both manual and continuous PM2.5
monitors operating, other than NCore
stations, monitoring agencies may
request approval from the EPA Regional
Administrator for a reduction to 1-in-6
day PM2.5 sampling or for seasonal
sampling. The EPA Regional
Administrator may grant sampling
frequency reductions after consideration
of factors including, but not limited to,
the historical PM2.5 data quality
assessments, the location of current
PM2.5 design value sites, and the
regulatory data needs of States and EPA.
The regulatory text provides specific
criteria under which a manual PM2.5
sampler at a SLAMS station cannot be
exempted by the Regional Administrator
from at least 1-in-3 day sampling, and
also includes a separate provision
describing when a daily sampling
schedule is required. The textual length
of 40 CFR 58.12(d)(1) as well as the
specific wording of certain statements
could create difficulty in understanding
the intended operating schedule
requirements for manual PM2.5
samplers. Therefore, EPA is clarifying
40 CFR 58.12(d)(1) as described below.
The first sentence of 40 CFR
58.12(d)(1) stated that: ‘‘Manual PM2.5
samplers at SLAMS stations other than
NCore stations must operate on at least
a 1-in-3 day schedule at sites without a
collocated continuously operating PM2.5
monitor.’’ This statement could be
construed as meaning that manual PM2.5
samplers at NCore stations were not
required to maintain at least a 1-in-3 day
schedule. The rule in fact does require
manual PM2.5 samplers at NCore
stations to maintain at least a 1-in-3 day
sampling schedule, as later noted in 40
CFR 58.12(d)(2), and these samplers are
not eligible for sampling frequency
relief. Therefore, EPA is clarifying the
rule text by deleting the phrase ‘‘other
than NCore stations’’ from first sentence
of 40 CFR 58.12(d)(1).
Another potential ambiguity regarding
the 1-in-3 day sampling frequency
provision of 40 CFR 58.12(d)(1) is its
geographic applicability. Since the
regulatory language did not specify that
the 1-in-3 day sampling frequency
requirement be applied only in areas in
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
which PM2.5 monitoring is required, this
requirement could be interpreted as
applying to any manual PM2.5 sampler
within a State that recorded the highest
design value ‘‘in an area’’ whether or
not any PM2.5 monitors were even
required in that area according to 40
CFR part 58, appendix D. The EPA is
concerned that such an interpretation
would create a disincentive to
monitoring by potentially requiring
States that operated discretionary
SLAMS monitors to sample on a 1-in-3
day frequency even though the monitor
was in excess of minimum monitoring
requirements. Therefore, the first
sentence of 40 CFR 58.12(d)(1)(i) is
amended to read: ‘‘Manual PM2.5
samplers at required SLAMS stations
without a collocated continuously
operating PM2.5 monitor must operate
on at least a 1-in-3 day schedule.’’ In
this rule text, ‘‘required SLAMS
stations’’ refers to minimum monitoring
requirements as specified in 40 CFR part
58, appendix D, section 4.7. It does not
include SPMs; therefore SPMs are not
required to sample on a 1-in-3 day
schedule.
After stating the 1-in-3 day sampling
requirement, the rule text at 40 CFR
58.12(d)(1)(ii) goes on to allow the
Regional Administrator to grant a
reduction of this schedule to 1-in-6 day
for SLAMS PM2.5 sites with both manual
and continuous PM2.5 monitors
operating. In this context, the rule text
contains a duplicated reference to
SLAMS PM2.5 sites; the second
reference, ‘‘at SLAMS stations,’’ is
removed in the corrected rule language
since the opening part of the sentence
already states the applicability of the
provision to SLAMS PM2.5 sites. The
text goes on to describe two situations
in which a manual PM2.5 sampler at a
required SLAMS station could not be
granted sampling frequency relief by the
Regional Administrator from the
minimum 1-in-3 day sampling schedule.
In the first situation, the phrase: ‘‘Sites
that have design values that are within
plus or minus 10 percent of the
NAAQS’’ could be construed as
applying to all sites within a particular
area that have design values that are
within plus or minus 10 percent of the
NAAQS, when the intention was to
apply the provision only to the site with
the highest value in a particular area
calculated in accordance with 40 CFR
part 50, appendix N (Interpretation of
the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards for PM2.5).2 In the second
2 EPA notes that the term ‘‘design value’’ as
defined in the final rule (40 CFR part 58.1, 71 FR
61296) is the calculated concentration of a pollutant
according to the applicable appendix of part 50 for
E:\FR\FM\12JNR1.SGM
12JNR1
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC67 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
situation, the phrase: ‘‘and sites where
the 24-hour values exceed the NAAQS
for a period of 3 years are required to
maintain at least a 1-in-3 day sampling
frequency’’ created ambiguity about
whether the provision was applicable in
situations where a single 24-hour value
exceeded the NAAQS at a particular site
during only 1 or 2 years of a 3-year
period. The EPA’s intention was that at
least one 24-hour value had to exceed
the NAAQS in each of the years
comprising the 3-year period situation
for the provision to apply.
Also, the regulatory text could be
construed as requiring 1-in-3 day
manual PM2.5 sampling at all sites
within a particular area that have design
values within the plus or minus 10
percent criteria, regardless of whether
the site is required and regardless of the
potential availability of continuous
PM2.5 FEM or ARM monitors which
inherently would provide every-day
data eligible for comparison to the
NAAQS. The EPA anticipates the
increasing availability of approved FEM
and ARM methods over the next few
years, and expects that many such
approved continuous monitors will be
deployed at sites formerly dedicated to
manual filter-based FRM or FEM PM2.5
samplers, including design value sites
subject to the plus or minus 10 percent
criteria when compared with the 24hour PM2.5 NAAQS. The EPA supports
the deployment of approved FEM or
ARM continuous PM2.5 methods to meet
appropriate monitoring objectives as
such monitors become available, and
thus we did not intend to require 1-in3 day sampling utilizing manual PM2.5
methods at design value sites, or any
other sites, where monitoring agencies
have deployed an approved continuous
FEM or ARM.
The clarified language of the
restriction related to being within plus
or minus 10 percent of the NAAQS now
reads: ‘‘Required SLAMS stations whose
measurements determine the design
value for their area and that are within
plus or minus 10 percent of the NAAQS,
and all required sites where one or more
24-hour values have exceeded the
NAAQS each year for a consecutive
period of at least 3 years, are required
to maintain at least a 1-in-3 day
sampling frequency. A continuously
operating FEM or ARM PM2.5 monitor
satisfies this requirement.’’
At the end of 40 CFR 58.12(d)(1), EPA
specified that manual PM2.5 samplers at
sites that have a design value within
the highest monitoring site in an attainment or
nonattainment area, and that EPA’s usage of
‘‘design value’’ in the rule text was consistent with
this definition.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
11:36 Jun 11, 2007
Jkt 211001
plus or minus 5 percent of the daily
PM2.5 NAAQS must have an FRM or
FEM operate on a daily schedule. As
with the previously discussed phrasing
in the context of the 1-in-3 day sampling
requirement, this text could be
construed as applying to all sites within
a particular area that have design values
that are within plus or minus 5 percent
of the NAAQS, when the intention was
to apply the provision only to the
required SLAMS site with the highest
value in a particular area. Also, the
above described concern regarding the
acceptability of continuous PM2.5
analyzers applies in the case of this plus
or minus 5 percent criterion, and a
similar clarification to the rule text is
appropriate.
Therefore, EPA is clarifying 40 CFR
58.12(d)(1) and for purposes of clarity is
adding subparagraph (iii). It will read:
‘‘Required SLAMS sites whose
measurements determine the design
value for their area and that are within
plus or minus 5 percent of the daily
PM2.5 NAAQS must have an FRM or
FEM operate on a daily schedule. A
continuously operating FEM or ARM
PM2.5 monitor satisfies this
requirement.’’
The EPA notes that only populationoriented monitors are subject to the
previously described percent-dependent
sampling frequency requirements. In 40
CFR 58.30 (Special Considerations for
Data Comparisons to the NAAQS), sites
must be population-oriented to be
comparable to either the annual or daily
PM2.5 NAAQS. By implication, design
value sites must be NAAQS comparable,
therefore non-population oriented sites
would not be affected by the plus or
minus 10 percent or plus or minus 5
percent provisions.
As previously mentioned, EPA is
aware that the length of 40 CFR
58.12(d)(1) creates the potential for
ambiguity in the applicability of
individual provisions related to
sampling frequency requirements. To
clarify the applicability of such
provisions, EPA has restructured 40
CFR 58.12(d)(1) to create distinct
paragraphs encompassing the
previously described amended language
applicable to SLAMS sites without
continuously operating PM2.5 monitors
(now numbered 40 CFR 58.12(d)(1)(i)),
SLAMS sites with both manual and
continuous PM2.5 monitors (now
numbered 40 CFR 58.12(d)(1)(ii)), and
design value sites within plus or minus
5 percent of the daily PM2.5 NAAQS
(now numbered 40 CFR 58.12(d)(1)(iii)).
In 40 CFR 58.12(d)(3), manual PM2.5
speciation samplers at required
Speciation Trends Network (STN)
stations are required to operate on a
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
32197
1-in-3 day sampling frequency. The EPA
intended the 1-in-3 day sampling
frequency to be a minimum sampling
frequency and not to imply a
prohibition against a more frequent
sampling frequency, such as a daily
sampling frequency, if such a frequency
is appropriate for specific monitoring
objectives. Consistent with the
phraseology of sampling frequency
requirements elsewhere in the
regulatory text, EPA is correcting the
aforementioned phrase to read: ‘‘Manual
PM2.5 speciation samplers at STN
stations must operate on at least a
1-in-3 day sampling frequency.’’
D. Standard versus Daylight Savings
Time Reference
40 CFR 58.12(e) requires that the
operating schedule for PM10 samplers
must be a 24-hour sampling period
taken from midnight to midnight (local
time) to ensure national consistency. In
a 1999 EPA memorandum,3 the use of
standard time versus daylight savings
time is discussed in the context of
sample collection for particulate matter
monitors, concluding with the
recommendation that monitoring
agencies operate their particulate matter
sampler clocks on standard time to
avoid the semi-annual time-shift issues
associated with conversion between
standard time and daylight savings time.
Monitoring agencies have generally
adopted the practice of keeping their
particulate matter sampler clocks on
standard time since the issuance of the
1999 memorandum. It was EPA’s
intention to codify the practice of
keeping particulate matter clocks on
standard time in the October 17, 2006,
Revisions to the Ambient Monitoring
Regulations; however, the codifying rule
text was inadvertently omitted for
PM10.4 If the aforementioned 40 CFR
58.12(e) reference to PM10 operating
schedule is left uncorrected, this could
create inconsistent interpretation of the
standard versus daylight savings time
issue among monitoring agencies
causing unnecessary confusion in the
interpretation of the air quality data.
Therefore, EPA is correcting the
reference to PM10 operating schedules in
3 ‘‘Use of PM Reference Methods and Daylight
Savings Time,’’ J. David Mobley; Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, June 11, 1999.
https://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/files/ambient/pm25/
stdtime.pdf.
4 The intention to base sampling on local
standard time was correctly reflected in rule text
applicable to PM2.5. 40 CFR part 50, appendix N
(Interpretation of the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards for PM2.5) reads: ‘‘Daily values for PM2.5
refers to the 24-hour average concentrations of
PM2.5 calculated (averaged from hourly
measurements) or measured from midnight to
midnight (local standard time) that are used in
NAAQS computations.’’
E:\FR\FM\12JNR1.SGM
12JNR1
32198
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC67 with RULES
40 CFR 58.12(e) to read as follows: ‘‘For
PM10 samplers, a 24-hour sample must
be taken from midnight to midnight
(local standard time) to ensure national
consistency.’’
E. Corrections to Regulatory Text on
Particulate Matter (PM10) Network
Design Criteria
In the preamble to the final
monitoring rule (71 FR 61240), EPA
stated an intention to retain the preexisting minimum monitoring network
design requirements for PM10, which are
based on the population of an MSA and
its historical PM10 air quality. The EPA’s
intention in finalizing the regulatory
text in section 4.6, Particulate Matter
(PM10) Design Criteria, of 40 CFR part
58, appendix D (Network Design Criteria
for Ambient Air Quality Monitoring) (71
FR 61320) was to retain all PM10relevant portions of the pre-existing
regulatory text beginning with section
3.7, Particulate Matter Design Criteria
for NAMS (see 62 FR 38820, July 18,
1997), with only minor changes
necessary to maintain consistency of
monitor type terminology (e.g., to
eliminate obsolete references to
National Air Monitoring Stations
(NAMS)). The EPA inadvertently
omitted several passages from the preexisting regulatory text in section 3.7
referencing PM10 network design
criteria. If left uncorrected, these
omissions could lead to
misinterpretation of PM10 monitoring
network design requirements. Three
specific textual corrections are detailed
below.
First, in Table D–4, PM10 Minimum
Monitoring Requirements (Number of
Stations per MSA), the word
‘‘Approximate’’ which had appeared in
the title of the pre-existing Table 4 was
omitted. Therefore, in order to retain the
earlier language EPA is revising the title
of Table D–4 to read: ‘‘PM10 Minimum
Monitoring Requirements (Approximate
Number of Stations Per MSA).’’
Second, the first footnote contains
some words (‘‘within the ranges shown
in this table’’) that were not part of the
corresponding footnote to the preexisting Table 4. Therefore, the first
footnote is revised to read: ‘‘Selection of
urban areas and actual numbers of
stations per area will be jointly
determined by EPA and the State
Agency.’’
Third, in paragraph (a) of section 4.6,
the regulatory text notes that State, and
where applicable local, agencies must
operate the minimum number of
required PM10 SLAMS sites listed in
Table D–4 of appendix D. In the October
17, 2006, rulemaking, EPA intended to
retain all of the pre-existing regulatory
VerDate Aug<31>2005
11:36 Jun 11, 2007
Jkt 211001
text in the pre-existing paragraph 3.7.1
(as last promulgated on July 18, 1997, at
62 FR 38850) in new paragraph (a) of
new section 4.6, to explain in words the
flexibility in minimum PM10 monitoring
requirements as provided in the preexisting Table 4 which had listed ranges
of required numbers (rather than a
single number) of monitors for each of
the categories of MSA population and
historical PM10 range. This regulatory
text was inadvertently omitted.
Therefore, EPA is restoring the omitted
text and correcting paragraph (a) of
section 4.6 to read: ‘‘Table D–4 indicates
the approximate number of permanent
stations required in MSAs to
characterize national and regional PM10
air quality trends and geographical
patterns. The number of PM10 stations
in areas where MSA populations exceed
1,000,000 must be in the range from 2
to 10 stations, while in low population
urban areas, no more than 2 stations are
required. A range of monitoring stations
is specified in Table D–4 because
sources of pollutants and local control
efforts can vary from one part of the
country to another and, therefore, some
flexibility is allowed in selecting the
actual number of stations in any one
locale.’’
F. Additional Regional Administrator
Flexibility in Applying PM10 Minimum
Monitoring Requirements
We are amending the monitoring rule
to allow EPA Regional Administrators to
approve departures from the minimum
number of PM10 monitors otherwise
specified in the rule.
In the January 17, 2006, proposed
monitoring rule (71 FR 2802), EPA
proposed minimum network design
monitoring requirements for PM10–2.5. In
paragraph (b) of section 4.8.1 of 40 CFR
part 58, appendix D, (Network Design
Criteria for Ambient Air Quality
Monitoring), EPA proposed that
modifications from the PM10–2.5
monitoring requirements must be
approved by the Regional
Administrator. The proposed regulatory
language providing the Regional
Administrator flexibility to modify the
PM10–2.5 monitoring requirements was
consistent with similar language
proposed for PM2.5 that read:
‘‘Deviations from these PM2.5
monitoring requirements must be
approved by the EPA Regional
Administrator’’ (71 FR 2801, paragraph
(b) of section 4.7.1). Similar regulatory
language was proposed for ozone
monitoring requirements (71 FR 2798,
paragraph (b) of section 4.1):
‘‘Deviations from the above O3
requirements are allowed if approved by
the EPA Regional Administrator.’’ The
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
EPA finalized the Regional
Administrator authority to modify the
PM2.5 and ozone monitoring
requirements in the October 17, 2006,
rule following a public comment period
in which no adverse comments were
received about the specific provisions
concerning Regional Administrator
flexibility in applying these regulations.
The EPA did not adopt the proposed
PM10–2.5 minimum monitoring network
design including the Regional
Administrator flexibility language. The
EPA notes, however, that no adverse
comments were received specifically
addressing the proposed Regional
Administrator authority to modify
PM10–2.5 monitoring network
requirements although voluminous
comment was received on other
proposed provisions of the PM10–2.5
monitoring network design and
accompanying suitability test.
The EPA also proposed and adopted
requirements for ‘‘NCore’’
multipollutant monitoring sites,
including a provision allowing the
Administrator to approve modifications
from these requirements. Again, no
adverse comment was received on this
modification provision. Finally, specific
requirements in the rule for
photochemical assessment monitoring
stations (PAMS) have always been
modifiable by the Administrator.
Thus, EPA notes that under the
current 40 CFR part 58, appendix D
network design requirements, PM10 is
the only pollutant with minimum
monitoring requirements not subject to
modification based on either
Administrator or Regional
Administrator evaluation and approval.
Such flexibility, already finalized for
ozone and PM2.5, can prove useful in
particular cases where a State
demonstrates that meeting the minimum
monitoring requirements, for an
individual MSA for example, may be
impractical or contrary to the optimum
use of monitoring resources.
The EPA believes it is appropriate to
allow the Regional Administrator to
modify PM10 monitoring requirements,
for the same reasons such authority was
finalized for PM2.5 and ozone
monitoring requirements. Such
authority allows for specific local
factors and information can be
considered in order to make the PM10
monitoring network more economical
while still meeting program data needs.
In light of the absence of any comments
of concern regarding very similar
Administrator or Regional
Administrator authority for other
pollutants, we do not expect any
adverse comment on this action.
Therefore, EPA is amending paragraph
E:\FR\FM\12JNR1.SGM
12JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
(a) of section 4.6 quoted in the section
above and adding the following
sentence so it now reads:
‘‘Modifications from these PM10
monitoring requirements must be
approved by the Regional
Administrator.’’ See also section VI.E of
this preamble for a clarifying
amendment which also affects section
4.6 of appendix D to part 58 by restoring
inadvertently omitted text.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC67 with RULES
G. Correction to Division Name and
Address Reference
The October 17, 2006, final rule
provided an address reference in
paragraph 2.4 of 40 CFR part 58
appendix A, to assist with
communications regarding the National
Performance Evaluation Programs.
Monitoring agencies were advised to
contact either the appropriate EPA
Regional Quality Assurance (QA)
Coordinator at the appropriate EPA
Regional Office location, or the NPAP
Coordinator, Emissions Monitoring and
Analysis Division (D205–02), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711. Due
to a reorganization within the Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards and
subsequent physical relocation within
the North Carolina facility, the provided
address mail code (D205–02) is no
longer correct for quality assurance
related communications. Additionally,
the Emissions Monitoring and Analysis
Division has been renamed to the Air
Quality Assessment Division, as part of
the same reorganization. Due to the
possibility of future address changes,
EPA believes a more general reference to
quality assurance contact information is
appropriate for inclusion in regulatory
language. Updated contact information
for all air monitoring program leads is
maintained on the Ambient Monitoring
Technology Information Center
(AMTIC) Web site https://www.epa.gov/
ttn/amtic/contacts.html. This website is
well publicized and frequently accessed
by all monitoring agencies; therefore,
specific address entries in the rule are
unnecessary and potentially misleading.
Accordingly, EPA is amending the
regulatory text in paragraph 2.4 to read:
‘‘For clarification and to participate,
monitoring organizations should contact
either the appropriate EPA Regional
Quality Assurance (QA) Coordinator at
the appropriate EPA Regional Office
location, or the NPAP Coordinator at the
Air Quality Assessment Division, Office
of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
in Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina.’’
VerDate Aug<31>2005
11:36 Jun 11, 2007
Jkt 211001
H. Clarification to Conditions for
Waiving Regional Administrator
Comment Period on Submitted Annual
Monitoring Network Plans
The regulatory text in 40 CFR
58.10(a)(2) (71 FR 61298) describes the
approval process for State-submitted
annual monitoring network plans that
propose SLAMS network modifications.
Such plans are subject to the approval
of the Regional Administrator, including
a new requirement for the Regional
Administrator to provide opportunity
for public comment during the 120-day
period allowed for approval or
disapproval. The rule permits the
Regional Administrator to waive the
separate public comment opportunity if
the State or local agency has already
provided a public comment opportunity
on its plan and has made no changes to
the plan subsequent to that comment
opportunity.
Implied but not explicitly stated in
the regulatory language is that the
Regional Administrator may forgo
public comment only if the State or
local agency submitted the full text of
public comments received on its annual
monitoring network plan to the Regional
Administrator, because only the
availability of such detailed comments
would make a separate comment period
by the Regional Administrator
redundant.
The EPA believes that the
aforementioned regulatory language
should be clarified to avoid ambiguity
about what situations would require the
Regional Administrator to provide a
public comment opportunity on
submitted annual monitoring network
plans that contain SLAMS network
modifications. The EPA notes that the
clarification does not modify the
minimum requirements for State and
local agencies to make their plans
available for public inspection for at
least 30 days prior to submission to
EPA.
Accordingly, the clarified regulatory
text in the second sentence of 40 CFR
58.10(a)(2) reads: ‘‘If the State or local
agency has already provided a public
comment opportunity on its plan and
has made no changes subsequent to that
comment opportunity, and has
submitted the received comments
together with the plan, the Regional
Administrator is not required to provide
a separate opportunity for comment.’’
Such comments could be transmitted
to the Regional Administrator in hardcopy or electronic format, and at a
minimum, would include all relevant
information supplied to the State or
local agency by the commenters.
Monitoring agencies would not be
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
32199
expected to provide comment
summaries or comment responses,
although those submissions could
optionally be provided to the Regional
Administrator in addition to the actual
text of the received comments.
I. Typographical Corrections
The Federal Register printing of the
October 17, 2006, final rule contained
typographical errors in equations,
tables, and figures. These errors, as
explained below and listed by Federal
Register page reference and CFR section
number, are corrected in this
rulemaking.
• 71 FR 61284. Subpart C of Part 53—
§ 53.35(d)(4), Calculation of mean
concentrations. Equation 12: The ‘‘n’’
over the summation symbol is replaced
with ‘‘m.’’
• 71 FR 61284. Subpart C of Part 53—
§ 53.35(e) and § 53.35(f), Tests for
reference method and candidate method
precision. Equations 13 and 15: 100% is
moved to be outside the square root
symbol.
• 71 FR 61284. Subpart C of Part 53—
§ 53.35(g), Test for additive and
multiplicative bias (comparative slope
and intercept). Equation 17: Left part of
¯
¯
equation is changed to be R not Rj.
• 71 FR 61284. Subpart C of Part 53—
§ 53.35(h), Tests for comparison
correlation. Equation 21: Radical sign in
the denominator is extended to cover
both summation signs.
• 71 FR 61285. Table C–1 to Subpart
C of Part 53, Test Concentration Ranges,
Number of Measurements Required, and
Maximum Discrepancy Specification.
The four occurrences of ‘‘Total’’ in the
first column are moved to the second
column.
• 71 FR 61285. Table C–1 to Subpart
C of Part 53, Test Concentration Ranges,
Number of Measurements Required, and
Maximum Discrepancy Specification.
Two entries of ‘‘18’’ are moved 3
columns left to appear in the ‘‘Second
Set’’ column rather than as shown in the
right-most column.
• 71 FR 61285. Table C–4 to Subpart
C of Part 53—Test Specifications for
PM10, PM2.5 and PM10–2.5 Candidate
Equivalent Methods. An erroneous ‘‘R’’
character in the table title is removed so
that the title reads—Test Specifications
for PM10, PM2.5 and PM10–2.5 Candidate
Equivalent Methods.
• 71 FR 61286. Table C–4 to Subpart
C of Part 53—Test Specifications for
PM10, PM2.5 and PM10–2.5 Candidate
Equivalent Methods. In the column
header for the last 2 columns, the
‘‘PM10–2.5’’ is corrected to be ‘‘PM10–2.5’’.
• 71 FR 61286. Table C–4 to Subpart
C of Part 53—Test Specifications for
PM10, PM2.5 and PM10–2.5 Candidate
E:\FR\FM\12JNR1.SGM
12JNR1
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC67 with RULES
32200
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
Equivalent Methods. The horizontal line
under ‘‘Rj > 60 µg/m3’’ in the table is
removed.
• 71 FR 61286. Table C–4 to Subpart
C of Part 53—Test Specifications for
PM10, PM2.5 and PM10–2.5 Candidate
Equivalent Methods. In the first column,
in the ‘‘Precision of replicate reference
method measurements * * *’’ entry, the
‘‘prime’’ symbols are removed from
‘‘RPRj’’ and ‘‘PM10–2.5’’.
• 71 FR 61286. Table C–4 to Subpart
C of Part 53—Test Specifications for
PM10, PM2.5 and PM10–2.5 Candidate
Equivalent Methods. An unintended
period is removed at the end of the
entry in the last column, Intercept row,
and at the end of the second footnote.
• 71 FR 61286. Table C–4 to Subpart
C of Part 53—Test Specifications for
PM10, PM2.5 and PM10–2.5 Candidate
Equivalent Methods. Values for
correlation of reference method and
candidate method measurements for
PM2.5 Class II and III, and PM10–2.5 Class
II and III are added to all four columns:
• ≥0.93 for CCV≤0.4;
• ≥0.85 + 0.2×CCV for 0.4≤CCV≤0.5;
• ≥0.95 for CCV≥0.5.
• 71 FR 61287. Figure C–1 to Subpart
C of Part 53—Suggested Format for
Reporting Test Results for Methods for
SO2, CO, O3, NO2. Title and the first
lines of content are repositioned from
being section text to being proper parts
of Figure C–1.
• 71 FR 61287. Figures C–2 and C–3
to Subpart C of Part 53—Illustration of
the Slope and Intercept Limits for Class
II and Class III PM2.5 Candidate
Equivalent Methods and Illustration of
the Slope and Intercept Limits for Class
II and Class III PM10–2.5 Candidate
Equivalent Methods. ‘‘PM2.5’’ is changed
to ‘‘PM2.5,’’ ‘‘PM10–2.5’’ is changed to
‘‘PM10–2.5,’’ ‘‘µg/m3’’ is changed to ‘‘µg/
m3.’’ Also, the ‘‘Class II’’ and ‘‘Class III’’
labels are related by arrows to the
outline of the hexagons rather than the
area inside, to be consistent with the
title, which indicates ‘‘Acceptance
Limits.’’
• 71 FR 61289. Figure C–4 to Subpart
C of Part 53—Illustration of the
Minimum Limits for Correlation
Coefficient for PM2.5 and PM10–2.5 Class
II and III methods. In the axes labels, the
commas are deleted and the ‘‘r’’ and the
‘‘CCV’’ are placed within parentheses.
• 71 FR 61293. Subpart E of Part 53—
§ 53.58(g), Operational field precision
and blank test. Equation 26: the symbol
‘‘C1,j’’ is corrected to ‘‘Ci,j.’’
• 71 FR 61294. Table E–1 to Subpart
E of Part 53—Summary of Test
Requirements for Reference and Class I
Equivalent Methods for PM2.5 and
PM10–2.5. In the 3rd column, row
VerDate Aug<31>2005
11:36 Jun 11, 2007
Jkt 211001
identified as ‘‘§ 53.56* * *,’’ a comma
is added after ‘‘16.67 ± 5%’’ and before
‘‘L/min.’’
• 71 FR 61294. Table E–1 to Subpart
E of Part 53—Summary of Test
Requirements for Reference and Class I
Equivalent Methods for PM2.5 and
PM10–2.5. In the 3rd column, row
identified as ‘‘§ 53.57* * *,’’ one of the
two periods at the end of item 3 is
removed.
• 71 FR 61294. Table E–1 to Subpart
E of Part 53—Summary of Test
Requirements for Reference and Class I
Equivalent Methods for PM2.5 and
PM10–2.5. In the fourth column, row
identified as ‘‘§ 53.57* * *,’’ item (c) is
changed to read ‘‘Solar flux of 1000 ± 50
W/m2’’ not ‘‘Solar flux of 1000 ? 50 W/
m2.’’
• 71 FR 61294. Table E–1 to Subpart
E of Part 53—Summary of Test
Requirements for Reference and Class I
Equivalent Methods for PM2.5 and
PM10–2.5. Spurious ‘‘?’’ characters
throughout the table are removed.
• 71 FR 61294. Table E–1 to Subpart
E of Part 53—Summary of Test
Requirements for Reference and Class I
Equivalent Methods for PM2.5 and
PM10–2.5. § 53.56 cell reference,
Barometric pressure effect test, Sample
flow rate performance specification,
value is changed to be 16.67 (versus
16.6).
• 71 FR 61296. Table F–1 to Subpart
F of Part 53—Performance
Specifications for PM2.5 Class II
Equivalent Samplers. In the last column,
row identified as ‘‘§ 53.64,’’ ‘‘Dp50 = 2.5
µm ? 0.2 µm’’ is changed to be ‘‘Dp50 =
2.5 µm ± 0.2 µm.’’
• 71 FR 61296. Table F–1 to Subpart
F of Part 53—Performance
Specifications for PM2.5 Class II
Equivalent Samplers. In the last column,
last row, a comma is added after
‘‘0.15mg’’ and before ‘‘r ≥0.97.’’
• 71 FR 61296. Table F–1 to Subpart
F of Part 53—Performance
Specifications for PM2.5 Class II
Equivalent Samplers. Spurious ‘‘?’’
characters throughout the table are
removed.
• 71 FR 61300. Figure 1 to Subpart B
of Part 58—Ratio to Standard for PM10
Operating Schedule. A missing value
(1.4) is added on the X axis.
• 71 FR 61309. Appendix A of Part
58—Quality Assurance Requirements
for SLAMS, SPMs, and PSD Air
Monitoring. Equation 7: A missing ‘‘•’’
character is added so that the equation
reads: Lower Probability Limit = m–1.96
• S.
• 71 FR 61309. Appendix A of Part
58—Quality Assurance Requirements
for SLAMS, SPMs, and PSD Air
Monitoring. A missing minus sign is
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
added in caption below Equation 11 so
that it reads: a chi-squared distribution
with n–1 degrees of freedom.
• 71 FR 61310. Appendix A of Part
58—Quality Assurance Requirements
for SLAMS, SPMs, and PSD Air
Monitoring. Equation 12: missing
ellipsis is added in caption so that it
reads: where, nj is the number of pairs
and d1, d2, * * * dnj are the biases for
each of the pairs to be averaged.
• ‘‘PM10C’’, where it appears in Part
53 without a subscripted ‘‘C’’, is
replaced with ‘‘PM10c.’’
VII. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), this action is a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ because
it may raise novel legal policy issues
arising out of legal mandates, the
President’s priorities, or the principles
set forth in the Executive Order.
Accordingly, EPA submitted this action
to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review under Executive
Order 12866 and any changes made in
response to OMB recommendations
have been documented in the docket for
this action.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose any new
information collection, as it only
corrects printing errors, provides
clarifications, and provides new
flexibility for PM10 monitoring on a
case-by-case basis. However, the OMB
has previously approved the
information collection requirements
contained in the existing regulations for
40 CFR part 53 and 40 CFR part 58
under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.,
and has assigned OMB control number
2060–0084, EPA ICR number 0940.20. A
copy of the OMB approved Information
Collection Request (ICR) may be
obtained from Susan Auby, Collection
Strategies Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (2822T), 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
DC 20460 or by calling (202) 566–1672.
This action does not impose any new
information collection burden beyond
the already-approved ICR.
Burden means the total time, effort, or
financial resources expended by persons
to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose
or provide information to or for a
Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop,
acquire, install, and utilize technology
and systems for the purposes of
collecting, validating, and verifying
E:\FR\FM\12JNR1.SGM
12JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC67 with RULES
information, processing and
maintaining information, and disclosing
and providing information; adjust the
existing ways to comply with any
previously applicable instructions and
requirements; train personnel to be able
to respond to a collection of
information; search data sources;
complete and review the collection of
information; and transmit or otherwise
disclose the information. An agency
may not conduct or sponsor, and a
person is not required to respond to a
collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control
number. The OMB control numbers for
EPA’s regulations in 40 CFR are listed
in 40 CFR part 9.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
generally requires an agency to prepare
a regulatory flexibility analysis of any
rule subject to notice and comment
rulemaking requirements under the
Administrative Procedure Act or any
other statute unless the agency certifies
that the rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities
include small businesses, small
organizations, and small governmental
jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impacts
of today’s rule on small entities, small
entity is defined as: (1) A small business
defined by the Small Business
Administration’s (SBA) regulations at 13
CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental
jurisdiction that is a government of a
city, county, town, school district or
special district with a population of less
than 50,000; and (3) a small
organization that is any not-for-profit
enterprise which is independently
owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field.
After considering the economic
impacts of today’s final rule on small
entities, I certify that this action will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
This final rule will not impose any
requirements on small entities. None of
the corrections and clarifications creates
additional regulatory requirements on
affected entities compared to those that
were promulgated in the final rule that
was published in the Federal Register
on October 17, 2006. The rule changes
being made only correct printing errors,
provide clarifications, and provides new
flexibility for PM10 monitoring on a
case-by-case basis.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104–4, establishes requirements for
VerDate Aug<31>2005
11:36 Jun 11, 2007
Jkt 211001
Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their regulatory actions on State, local,
and tribal governments and the private
sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA,
EPA generally must prepare a written
statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules
with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may
result in expenditures to State, local,
and Tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or to the private sector, of
$100 million or more in any one year.
Before promulgating an EPA rule for
which a written statement is needed,
section 205 of the UMRA generally
requires EPA to identify and consider a
reasonable number of regulatory
alternatives and adopt the least costly,
most cost-effective or least burdensome
alternative that achieves the objectives
of the rule. The provisions of section
205 do not apply when they are
inconsistent with applicable law.
Moreover, section 205 allows EPA to
adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective or least
burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final
rule an explanation why that alternative
was not adopted. Before EPA establishes
any regulatory requirements that may
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including Tribal
governments, it must have developed
under section 203 of the UMRA a small
government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially
affected small governments, enabling
officials of affected small governments
to have meaningful and timely input in
the development of EPA regulatory
proposals with significant Federal
intergovernmental mandates, and
informing, educating, and advising
small governments on compliance with
the regulatory requirements.
The EPA has determined that this
final rule does not contain a Federal
mandate that may result in expenditures
of $100 million or more for State, local,
and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or the private sector in any one year,
because the changes being made are
merely clarifications and corrections.
Thus, today’s rule is not subject to the
requirements of sections 202 and 205 of
the UMRA.
The EPA has determined that this
final rule contains no regulatory
requirements that might significantly or
uniquely affect small governments.
None of the changes creates additional
regulatory requirements on affected
entities compared to those that were
promulgated in the final rule that was
published in the Federal Register on
October 17, 2006. The rule changes
being made only correct printing errors,
provide clarifications, and provide some
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
32201
new flexibility for PM10 monitoring on
a case-by-case basis. Therefore, this final
rule is not subject to the requirements
of section 203 of the UMRA.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999), requires EPA to
develop an accountable process to
ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by
State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that
have federalism implications.’’ ‘‘Policies
that have federalism implications’’ is
defined in the Executive Order to
include regulations that have
‘‘substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.’’
This final rule does not have
federalism implications because it will
not have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the
national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132. This is because
the changes being made only correct
printing errors, provide clarifications,
and provides some new flexibility for
PM10 monitoring on a case-by-case
basis. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does
not apply to this final rule.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled
‘‘Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR
67249, November 9, 2000), requires EPA
to develop an accountable process to
ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by
tribal officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have tribal
implications.’’ This final rule does not
have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175. The EPA
consulted with tribal officials early in
the process of developing the October
17, 2006, rule to permit them to have
meaningful and timely input into its
development. Although tribal
governments may elect to conduct
ambient air monitoring, none of the
changes in today’s rule apply directly to
tribal governments. Thus, Executive
Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045 ‘‘Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,
E:\FR\FM\12JNR1.SGM
12JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that:
(1) Is determined to be ‘‘economically
significant’’ as defined under EO 12866,
and (2) concerns an environmental
health or safety risk that EPA has reason
to believe may have a disproportionate
effect on children. If the regulatory
action meets both criteria, the Agency
must evaluate the environmental health
or safety effects of the planned rule on
children, and explain why the planned
regulation is preferable to other
potentially effective and reasonably
feasible alternatives considered by the
Agency.
EPA interprets EO 13045 as applying
only to those regulatory actions that
concern health or safety risks, such that
the analysis required under section 5–
501 of the EO has the potential to
influence the regulation. This final rule
is not subject to EO 13045 because it
does not establish an environmental
standard intended to mitigate health or
safety risks.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC67 with RULES
H. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994) establishes federal
executive policy on environmental
justice. Its main provision directs
Federal agencies, to the greatest extent
practicable and permitted by law, to
make environmental justice part of their
mission by identifying and addressing,
as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or
environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority
populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
EPA has determined that this final
rule will not have disproportionately
high and adverse human health or
environmental effects on minority or
low-income populations because it does
not affect the level of protection
provided to human health or the
environment. The rule merely amends
the October 17, 2006, final monitoring
rule (71 FR 61236) by correcting
printing errors, providing clarifications,
and providing some new flexibility for
PM10 monitoring on a case-by-case
basis.
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This rule is not a ‘‘significant energy
action’’ as defined in Executive Order
13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001) because it is not likely to have
a significant adverse effect on the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
11:36 Jun 11, 2007
Jkt 211001
supply, distribution, or use of energy.
No significant change in the use of
energy is expected because the total
number of monitors for ambient air
quality measurements will not increase
above present levels. Further, we have
concluded that this rule is not likely to
have any adverse energy effects.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Parts 53 and
58
J. National Technology Transfer
Advancement Act
Dated: April 30, 2007.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law No.
104–113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus
standards in its regulatory activities
unless to do so would be inconsistent
with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. Voluntary consensus
standards are technical standards (e.g.,
materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, and business
practices) that are developed or adopted
by voluntary consensus standards
bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to
provide Congress, through OMB,
explanations when the Agency decides
not to use available and applicable
voluntary consensus standards.
This action does not involve technical
standards, other than to make
corrections and clarifications. Therefore,
EPA did not consider the use of any
voluntary consensus standards.
K. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801, et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This final
rule will not have an annual effect on
the economy of $100 million or more,
will not result in a major increase in
costs or prices for State or local
agencies, and will not affect competition
with foreign-based enterprises in
domestic and export markets. The final
amendments will be effective on
September 10, 2007.
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
For the reasons stated in the preamble,
title 40, chapter I, parts 53 and 58 of the
Code of Federal Regulations are
amended as follows:
I
PART 53—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 53
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: Section 301(a) of the Clean Air
Act (42 U.S.C. sec. 1857g(a)), as amended by
sec. 15(c)(2) of Pub. L. 91–604, 84 Stat. 1713,
unless otherwise noted.
Subpart C—[Amended]
2. Section 53.35 is amended by:
a. Revising Equation 12 of paragraph
(d)(4),
I b. Revising Equation 13 of paragraph
(e)(1),
I c. Revising Equation 15 of paragraph
(f)(1),
I d. Revising Equation 17 of paragraph
(g)(1), and
I e. Revising Equation 21 of paragraph
(h)(1) to read as follows:
I
I
§ 53.35 Test procedure for Class II and
Class III methods for PM 2.5 and PM10–2.5.
*
*
*
(d) * * *
(4) * * *
*
*
Equation 12
Cj =
1 m
∑ Ci , j
m i =1
Where:
Cj = The mean concentration measured by
the candidate method for the
measurement set;
Ci,j = The measurement of the candidate
method sampler or analyzer i on test day
j; and
m = The number of valid candidate method
measurements in the measurement set
(normally 3).
(e) * * *
(1) * * *
E:\FR\FM\12JNR1.SGM
12JNR1
ER41AD07.000
32202
32203
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
Equation 15
Equation 13
2
1 n
∑ R i2, j − n ∑ R i, j
i =1
× 100%
i =1
n −1
n
RPj =
*
1
Rj
*
*
(f) * * *
(1) * * *
*
(h) * * *
(1) * * *
CPj =
*
*
∑ Ci2, j −
1
Equation 21
2
1 m
∑ Ci , j
m i =1
× 100%
m −1
m
i =1
Cj
*
*
(g) * * *
(1) * * *
*
J
r=
*
*
R=
*
j
*
*
)(
− R Cj − C
j=1
∑(R
j
*
*
J
−R
j=1
Equation 17
*
∑(R
)
) ∑ (C − C)
2 J
2
j
j=1
*
3. Table C–1 to subpart C is revised to
read as follows:
I
1 J
∑Rj
J j=1
*
*
TABLE C–1 TO SUBPART C OF PART 53—TEST CONCENTRATION RANGES, NUMBER OF MEASUREMENTS REQUIRED, AND
MAXIMUM DISCREPANCY SPECIFICATION
Simultaneous measurements required
Concentration range, parts per
million
Pollutant
1-hr
Second
set
First set
First set
Second
set
................
................
................
0.02
.03
.04
14
18
................
................
........................
Low 7 to 11 ........................................
Med 20 to 30 ......................................
High 35 to 45 ......................................
5
5
4
6
6
6
................
................
................
................
................
................
1.5
2.0
3.0
14
18
................
................
........................
Low 0.02 to 0.05 ................................
Med 0.10 to 0.15 ................................
High 0.30 to 0.50 ................................
................
................
7
................
................
8
3
2
2
3
3
2
0.02
.03
.04
7
8
7
8
........................
Low 0.02 to 0.08 ................................
Med 0.10 to 0.20 ................................
High 0.25 to 0.35 ................................
................
................
................
................
................
................
3
2
2
3
3
2
0.02
.03
.03
Total ....................................................
................
................
7
8
........................
TABLE C–4 TO SUBPART C OF PART 53.—TEST SPECIFICATIONS FOR PM10, PM2.5 AND PM10–2.5 CANDIDATE EQUIVALENT
METHODS
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC67 with RULES
PM2.5
Specification
Class I
Acceptable concentration range
(Rj), µg/m3.
Minimum number of test sites ....
VerDate Aug<31>2005
11:36 Jun 11, 2007
PM10–2.5
PM10
Class II
Class III
Class II
Class III
15–300 .............
3–200 ...............
3–200
3–200
3–200
3–200
2 .......................
1 .......................
2
4
2
4
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\12JNR1.SGM
12JNR1
ER41AD07.002
4. Table C–4 to subpart C is revised to
read as follows:
I
ER41AD07.003
ER41AD07.004
................
................
................
Total ....................................................
Nitrogen dioxide ..................................
6
6
6
Total ....................................................
Sulfur dioxide ......................................
5
5
4
Total ....................................................
Carbon monoxide ...............................
Low 0.06 to 0.10 ................................
Med 0.15 to 0.25 ................................
High 0.35 to 0.45 ................................
ER41AD07.001
Ozone .................................................
Maximum
discrepancy
specification,
parts per million
24-hr
32204
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE C–4 TO SUBPART C OF PART 53.—TEST SPECIFICATIONS FOR PM10, PM2.5 AND PM10–2.5 CANDIDATE EQUIVALENT
METHODS—Continued
PM2.5
Specification
PM10–2.5
PM10
Class I
Class II
Class III
Class II
Class III
Minimum number of candidate
method samplers or analyzers
per site.
Number of reference method
samplers per site.
Minimum number of acceptable
sample sets per site for PM10
methods:
Rj < 60 µg/m3 ......................
Rj > 60 µg/m3 ......................
Total .....................................
Minimum number of acceptable
sample sets per site for PM2.5
and PM10–2.5 candidate equivalent methods:
Rj < 30 µg/m3 for 24-hr or
Rj < 20 µg/m3 for 48-hr
samples.
Rj > 30 µg/m3 for 24-hr or
Rj > 20 µg/m3 for 48-hr
samples.
Each season ........................
Total, each site ....................
3 .......................
3 .......................
31
31
31
31
3 .......................
3 .......................
31
31
31
31
23
23
10% 2
23
23 (46 for twoseason sites)
10% 2
3
3
10
...........................
3
...........................
3
...........................
...........................
10 .....................
10 .....................
23
23
Precision of replicate reference
method measurements, PRj or
RPRj, respectively; RP for
Class II or III PM2.5 or PM10–
2.5, maximum.
Precision of PM2.5 or PM10–2.5
candidate method, CP, each
site.
Slope of regression relationship.
Intercept of regression relationship, µg/m3.
5 µg/m3 or 7% ..
2 µg/m3 or 5%
10% 2
23
23 (46 for twoseason sites)
10% 2
...........................
..........................
10% 2
15% 2
15% 2
15% 2
1 ± 0.10 ............
0 ± 5 .................
1 ± 0.05 ...........
0 ± 1 ................
1 ± 0.10
Between: 13.55
¥ (15.05 ×
slope), but
not less than
¥1.5; and
16.56 ¥
(15.05 ×
slope), but
not more than
+1.5
1 ± 0.10
Between: 15.05
¥ (17.32 ×
slope), but
not less than
¥2.0; and
15.05 ¥
(13.20 ×
slope), but
not more than
+2.0
1 ± 0.10
Between: 62.05
¥ (70.5 ×
slope), but
not less than
¥3.5; and
78.95 ¥
(70.5 ×
slope), but
not more than
+3.5
1 ± 0.12
Between: 70.50
¥ (82.93 ×
slope), but
not less than
¥7.0; and
70.50 ¥
(61.16 ×
slope), but
not more than
+7.0
Correlation of reference method
and candidate method measurements.
≥ 0.97 ...............
≥ 0.97 ..............
1 Some
≥ 0.93—for CCV ≤ 0.4;
≥ 0.85 + 0.2 × CCV—for 0.4 ≤ CCV ≤ 0.5;
≥ 0.95—for CCV ≥ 0.5
missing daily measurement values may be permitted; see test procedure.
as the root mean square over all measurement sets.
2 Calculated
5. Figures C–1 through C–4 to subpart
C are revised to read as follows:
I
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC67 with RULES
Figure C–1 to Subpart C of Part 53—Suggested Format for Reporting Test Results for Methods for SO 2, CO, O 3,
NO 2
Candidate Method llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll
Reference Method llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll
Applicant llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll
b First Set
VerDate Aug<31>2005
b Second Set
11:36 Jun 11, 2007
b Type
Jkt 211001
b 1 Hour
PO 00000
b 24 Hour
Frm 00040
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4706
E:\FR\FM\12JNR1.SGM
12JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
Concentration, ppm
Concentration
range
Low
Date
Time
Difference
Candidate
Reference
Table C–1
spec.
1
llll ppm
2
to llll ppm
3
4
5
6
Medium
1
llll ppm
2
to llll ppm
3
4
5
6
High
1
llll ppm
2
to llll ppm
3
4
5
6
7
8
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC67 with RULES
Total Failures:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
11:36 Jun 11, 2007
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\12JNR1.SGM
12JNR1
32205
Pass or fail
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
11:36 Jun 11, 2007
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\12JNR1.SGM
12JNR1
ER41AD07.009
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC67 with RULES
32206
VerDate Aug<31>2005
11:36 Jun 11, 2007
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\12JNR1.SGM
12JNR1
32207
ER41AD07.010
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC67 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
32208
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
7. Table E–1 to subpart E is revised to
read as follows:
I
Subpart E—[Amended]
Equation 26
6. Section 53.58 is amended by
revising Equation 26 of paragraph
(g)(2)(i) to read as follows:
I
1 3
Cave, j = × ∑ Ci , j
3 i =1
§ 53.58 Operational field precision and
blank test.
*
*
*
(g) * * *
(2)(i) * * *
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
TABLE E–1 TO SUBPART E OF PART 53.—SUMMARY OF TEST REQUIREMENTS FOR REFERENCE AND CLASS I EQUIVALENT
METHODS FOR PM2.5 AND PM10–2.5
Performance test
§ 53.52 Sample leak check
test.
Sampler leak check facility
External leakage: 80 mL/
min, max.
Internal leakage: 80 mL/
min, max.
§ 53.53 Base flow rate test
Performance specification
Sample flow rate ...............
1. Mean .............................
2. Regulation .....................
3. Meas accuracy ..............
4. CV accuracy .................
5. Cut-off ...........................
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Part 50, appendix L
reference
Controlled leak flow rate of
80 mL/ min.
Sec. 7.4.6.
(a) 6-hour normal operational test plus flow
rate cut-off test.
(b) Normal conditions ........
(c) Additional 55 mm Hg
pressure drop to simulate loaded filter.
(d) Variable flow restriction
used for cut-off test.
Sec.
Sec.
Sec.
Sec.
Sec.
7.4.1.
7.4.2.
7.4.3.
7.4.4.
7.4.5.
ER41AD07.005
16.67 ± 5%, L/ min ........
2%, max ........................
2%, max ........................
0.3% max ......................
Flow rate cut-off if flow
rate deviates more than
10% from design flow
rate for >60 ± 30 seconds.
Test conditions
VerDate Aug<31>2005
11:36 Jun 11, 2007
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\12JNR1.SGM
12JNR1
ER41AD07.011
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC67 with RULES
Subpart E procedure
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
32209
TABLE E–1 TO SUBPART E OF PART 53.—SUMMARY OF TEST REQUIREMENTS FOR REFERENCE AND CLASS I EQUIVALENT
METHODS FOR PM2.5 AND PM10–2.5—Continued
Performance specification
Test conditions
Part 50, appendix L
reference
Subpart E procedure
Performance test
§ 53.54 Power interruption
test.
Sample flow rate ...............
1. Mean .............................
2. Regulation .....................
3. Meas. accuracy .............
4. CV accuracy .................
5. Occurrence time of
power interruptions.
6. Elapsed sample time ....
7. Sample volume .............
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
16.67 ± 5%, L/ min ........
2%, max ........................
2%, max ........................
0.3% max ......................
± 2 min if >60 seconds.
± 20 seconds ................
± 2%, max .....................
(a) 6-hour normal operational test.
(b) Nominal conditions ......
(c) Additional 55 mm Hg
pressure drop to simulate loaded filter.
(d) 6 power interruptions of
various durations.
Sec.
Sec.
Sec.
Sec.
Sec.
Sec.
Sec.
Sec.
7.4.1.
7.4.2.
7.4.3.
7.4.5.
7.4.12.
7.4.13.
7.4.15.4.
7.4.15.5.
§ 53.55 Temperature and
line voltage test.
Sample flow rate ...............
1. Mean .............................
2. Regulation .....................
3. Meas. accuracy .............
4. CV accuracy .................
5. Temperature meas. accuracy.
6. Proper operation.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
16.67 ± 5%, L/ min ........
2%, max ........................
2%, max ........................
0.3% max ......................
2 °C ...............................
(a) 6-hour normal operational test.
(b) Normal conditions ........
(c) Additional 55 mm Hg
pressure drop to simulate loaded filter.
(d) Ambient temperature at
¥20 and +40 °C.
(e) Line voltage: 105 Vac
to 125 Vac.
Sec.
Sec.
Sec.
Sec.
Sec.
Sec.
7.4.1.
7.4.2.
7.4.3.
7.4.5.
7.4.8.
7.4.15.1.
§ 53.56 Barometric pressure effect test.
Sample flow rate ...............
1. Mean .............................
2. Regulation .....................
3. Meas. accuracy .............
4. CV accuracy .................
5. Pressure meas. accuracy.
6. Proper operation.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
16.67 ± 5%, L/ min ........
2%, max ........................
2%, max ........................
0.3% max ......................
10 mm Hg .....................
(a) 6-hour normal operational test.
(b) Normal conditions ........
(c) Additional 55 mm Hg
pressure drop to simulate loaded filter.
(d) Barometric pressure at
600 and 800 mm Hg.
Sec.
Sec.
Sec.
Sec.
Sec.
7.4.1.
7.4.2.
7.4.3.
7.4.5.
7.4.9.
§ 53.57 Filter temperature
control test.
1. Filter temp. meas. accuracy.
2. Ambient temp. meas.
accuracy.
3. Filter temp. control accuracy, sampling and
non-sampling.
1. 2 °C ...............................
2. 2 °C ...............................
3. Not more than 5 °C
above ambient temp. for
more than 30 min.
(a) 4-hour simulated solar
radiation, sampling.
(b) 4-hour simulated solar
radiation, non-sampling.
(c) Solar flux of 1000 ± 50
W/m 2.
Sec. 7.4.8.
Sec. 7.4.10.
Sec. 7.4.11.
§ 53.58 Field precision test
1. Measurement precision
2. Storage deposition test
for sequential samplers.
1. Pj < 2 µg/m3 or RPj <
5%.
2. 50 µg max. average
weight gain/blank filter.
(a) 3 collocated samplers
at 1 site for at least 10
days.
(b) PM2.5 conc. > 3 µg/m3
(c) 24- or 48-hour samples
(d) 5- or 10-day storage
period for inactive stored
filters.
Sec.
Sec.
Sec.
Sec.
Sec.
The Following Requirement Is Applicable to Class I Candidate Equivalent Methods Only
§ 53.59 Aerosol transport
test.
Aerosol transport ...............
97%, min. for all channels.
Determine aerosol transport through any new or
modified components
with respect to the reference method sampler
before the filter for each
channel.
Subpart F—[Amended]
8. Table F–1 to subpart F is revised to
read as follows:
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC67 with RULES
I
VerDate Aug<31>2005
11:36 Jun 11, 2007
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\12JNR1.SGM
12JNR1
5.1.
7.3.5.
8.
9.
10.
32210
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE F–1 TO SUBPART F OF PART 53.—PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATIONS FOR PM2.5 CLASS II EQUIVALENT SAMPLERS
Performance test
Specifications
Acceptance criteria
§ 53.62 Full Wind Tunnel Evaluation .................
Solid VOAG produced aerosol at 2 km/hr and
24 km/hr.
Liquid VOAG produced aerosol at 2 km/hr
and 24 km/hr.
Evaluation of the fractionator under static conditions.
Loading of the clean candidate under laboratory conditions.
Dp50 = 2.5 µm ± 0.2 µm Numerical Analysis
Results: 95% ≤ Rc ≤ 105%.
Relative Aspiration: 95% ≤ A ≤ 105%.
§ 53.63 Wind Tunnel Inlet Aspiration Test .........
§ 53.64 Static Fractionator Test .........................
§ 53.65 Loading Test ..........................................
§ 53.66 Volatility Test .........................................
Polydisperse liquid aerosol produced by air
nebulization of A.C.S. reagent grade glycerol, 99.5% minimum purity.
§ 58.12
PART 58—[AMENDED]
Operating schedules.
*
9. The authority citation for part 58
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7403, 7410, 7601(a),
7611, and 7619.
Subpart B—[Amended]
10. Section 58.10 is amended by
revising the second sentence in
paragraph (a)(2) to read as follow:
I
§ 58.10 Annual monitoring network plan
and periodic network assessment.
(a)(1) * * *
(2) * * * If the State or local agency
has already provided a public comment
opportunity on its plan and has made
no changes subsequent to that comment
opportunity, and has submitted the
received comments together with the
plan, the Regional Administrator is not
required to provide a separate
opportunity for comment.
*
*
*
*
*
11. Section 58.12 is amended by
revising paragraph (d)(1), paragraph
(d)(3), and the first sentence of
paragraph (e) to read as follows:
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC67 with RULES
I
VerDate Aug<31>2005
11:36 Jun 11, 2007
Jkt 211001
*
*
*
*
(d) * * *
(1)(i) Manual PM2.5 samplers at
required SLAMS stations without a
collocated continuously operating PM2.5
monitor must operate on at least a 1-in3 day schedule.
(ii) For SLAMS PM2.5 sites with both
manual and continuous PM2.5 monitors
operating, the monitoring agency may
request approval for a reduction to 1-in6 day PM2.5 sampling or for seasonal
sampling from the EPA Regional
Administrator. The EPA Regional
Administrator may grant sampling
frequency reductions after consideration
of factors, including but not limited to
the historical PM2.5 data quality
assessments, the location of current
PM2.5 design value sites, and their
regulatory data needs. Required SLAMS
stations whose measurements determine
the design value for their area and that
are within plus or minus 10 percent of
the NAAQS; and all required sites
where one or more 24-hour values have
exceeded the NAAQS each year for a
consecutive period of at least 3 years are
required to maintain at least a 1-in-3 day
sampling frequency. A continuously
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Dp50 = 2.5 µm ± 0.2 µm Numerical Analysis
Results: 95% ≤ Rc ≤ 105%.
Acceptance criteria as specified in the postloading evaluation test (§ 53.62, § 53.63, or
§ 53.64).
Regression Parameters Slope = 1 ± 0.1, Intercept = 0 ± 0.15 mg, r ≥ 0.97.
operating FEM or ARM PM2.5 monitor
satisfies this requirement.
(iii) Required SLAMS stations whose
measurements determine the design
value for their area and that are within
plus or minus 5 percent of the daily
PM2.5 NAAQS must have an FRM or
FEM operate on a daily schedule. A
continuously operating FEM or ARM
PM2.5 monitor satisfies this requirement.
*
*
*
*
*
(3) Manual PM2.5 speciation samplers
at STN stations must operate on at least
a 1-in-3 day sampling frequency.
(e) For PM10 samplers, a 24-hour
sample must be taken from midnight to
midnight (local standard time) to ensure
national consistency. * * *
§ 58.12
[Amended]
12. Figure 1 of paragraph (e) of § 58.12
is revised to read as follows:
I
Subpart C—[Amended]
13. Section 58.20(c) is revised to read
as follows:
I
§ 58.20
*
E:\FR\FM\12JNR1.SGM
*
Special purpose monitors (SPM).
*
12JNR1
*
*
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC67 with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
2.4 * * * For clarification and to
participate, monitoring organizations should
contact either the appropriate EPA Regional
Quality Assurance (QA) Coordinator at the
appropriate EPA Regional Office location, or
the NPAP Coordinator at the Air Quality
Assessment Division, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency in Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina.
*
*
*
*
*
4. Calculations for Data Quality Assessments
*
*
4.1.4
*
*
11:36 Jun 11, 2007
Jkt 211001
*
4.2.1
*
*
*
*
* * *
Equation 11
where, n is the number of valid data pairs
being aggregated, and X2 0.1, n–1 is the
10th percentile of a chi-squared
distribution with n–1 degrees of
freedom. The factor of 2 in the
denominator adjusts for the fact that
each di is calculated from two values
with error.
4.2.2 * * * The absolute volume bias
upper bound is then calculated using
equation 3 of this appendix, where n is the
number of flow rate audits being aggregated;
t0.95, n–1 is the 95th quantile of a t-distribution
with n–1 degrees of freedom, the quantity AB
is the mean of the absolute values of the di’s
and is calculated using equation 4 of this
appendix, and the quantity AS in equation 3
of this appendix is the standard deviation of
the absolute values of the di’s and is
calculated using equation 5 of this appendix.
4.3.2.1 * * *
Equation 12
where, nj is the number of pairs and d1, d2,
* * *, dnj are the biases for each of the pairs
to be averaged.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
4.6 Particulate Matter (PM10) Design
Criteria.
(a) Table D–4 indicates the approximate
number of permanent stations required in
MSAs to characterize national and regional
PM10 air quality trends and geographical
patterns. The number of PM10 stations in
areas where MSA populations exceed
1,000,000 must be in the range from 2 to 10
stations, while in low population urban
areas, no more than two stations are required.
A range of monitoring stations is specified in
Table D–4 because sources of pollutants and
local control efforts can vary from one part
of the country to another and therefore, some
flexibility is allowed in selecting the actual
number of stations in any one locale.
Modifications from these PM10 monitoring
requirements must be approved by the
Regional Administrator.
Table D–4 of Appendix D to Part 58. PM10
Minimum Monitoring Requirements
(Approximate Number of Stations Per
MSA) 1
*
*
*
*
*
4.7.2 Requirement for Continuous PM2.5
Monitoring. The State, or where appropriate,
local agencies must operate continuous PM2.5
analyzers equal to at least one-half (round
up) the minimum required sites listed in
Table D–5 of this appendix. At least one
required continuous analyzer in each MSA
must be collocated with one of the required
FRM/FEM/ARM monitors, unless at least one
of the required FRM/FEM/ARM monitors is
itself a continuous FEM or ARM monitor in
Appendix D to Part 58—[Amended]
I
I
*
* * *
VerDate Aug<31>2005
*
4. Pollutant-Specific Design Criteria for
SLAMS Sites
15. Appendix D is amended by:
a. Revising section 4.6(a);
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
1 Selection of urban areas and actual numbers of
stations per area will be jointly determined by EPA
and the State agency.
E:\FR\FM\12JNR1.SGM
12JNR1
ER41AD07.008
2. General Monitoring Requirements
Lower Probability Limit = m − 1.96 ⋅ S
ER41AD07.007
14. Appendix A is amended by:
a. Revising the third (last) sentence of
section 2.4;
I b. Revising Equation 7 of section
4.1.4;
I c. Revising the definition of the
symbol ‘‘n’’ for Equation 11 of section
4.2.1,
I d. Revising the last sentence in section
4.2.2.2, and
I e. Revising the definition of the
symbol ‘‘nj’’ for Equation 12 of section
4.3.2.1 to read as follows:
I
I
Equation 7
ER41AD07.006
Appendix A to Part 58—[Amended]
b. Revising the title of Table D–4 and
Footnote 1 to Table D–4; and
I c. Revising section 4.7.2 to read as
follows:
I
ER41AD07.012
(c) All data from an SPM using an
FRM, FEM, or ARM which has operated
for more than 24 months is eligible for
comparison to the relevant NAAQS,
subject to the conditions of § 58.30,
unless the air monitoring agency
demonstrates that the data came from a
particular period during which the
requirements of appendix A, appendix
C, or appendix E to this part were not
met in practice.
*
*
*
*
*
32211
32212
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
which case no collocation requirement
applies. State and local air monitoring
agencies must use methodologies and quality
assurance/quality control (QA/QC)
procedures approved by the EPA Regional
Administrator for these required continuous
analyzers.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 07–2201 Filed 6–11–07; 8:45 am]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 82
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2006–0159; FRL–8325–5]
RIN 2060–AN81
Protection of Stratospheric Ozone:
Allocation of Essential Use Allowances
for Calendar Year 2007
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC67 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: With this action, EPA is
allocating essential use allowances for
import and production of Class I
stratospheric ozone-depleting
substances (ODSs) for calendar year
2007. Essential use allowances enable a
person to obtain controlled Class I ODSs
as part of an exemption to the regulatory
ban on the production and import of
these chemicals, which became effective
as of January 1, 1996. EPA allocates
essential use allowances for exempted
production or import of a specific
quantity of Class I ODSs solely for the
designated essential purpose. The
allocations in this action total 167.0
metric tons (MT) of chlorofluorocarbons
(CFCs) for use in metered dose inhalers
(MDIs) for 2007.
DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is
effective June 12, 2007.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2006–0159. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov Web site.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
e.g., CBI or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Air Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave.,
NW., Washington, DC. This Docket
Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:39 Jun 11, 2007
Jkt 211001
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The Public Reading
Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The telephone number
for the Public Reading Room is (202)
566–1744, and the telephone number for
the Air Docket is (202) 566–1742.
Kirsten Cappel, by regular mail: U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Stratospheric Protection Division
(6205J), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460; by courier
service or overnight express: 1310 L
Street, NW., Room 1047C, Washington,
DC 20005; by telephone: (202) 343–
9556; by fax: (202) 343–2338; or by, email: cappel.kirsten@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Basis for Allocating Essential Use
Allowances
A. What are essential use allowances?
B. Under what authority does EPA allocate
essential use allowances?
C. What is the process for allocating
essential use allowances?
D. What quantity of essential use
allowances is EPA allocating?
II. Response to Comments
A. Proposed Level of Allocations
B. Consideration of Stocks of CFCs in the
Allocation of Essential Use Allowances
C. Number of Months of Safety Stockpile
D. Rulemaking Process and Timing
E. The transition to Non-CFC MDIs
III. Allocation of Essential Use Allowances
for Calendar Year 2007
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
J. Congressional Review Act
V. Judicial Review
VI. Effective Date of This Final Rule
I. Basis for Allocating Essential Use
Allowances
A. What are essential use allowances?
Essential use allowances are
allowances to produce or import certain
ODSs in the U.S. for purposes that have
been deemed ‘‘essential’’ by the U.S.
Government and by the Parties to the
Montreal Protocol on Substances that
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Deplete the Ozone Layer (Montreal
Protocol).
The Montreal Protocol is an
international agreement aimed at
reducing and eliminating the
production and consumption1 of ODSs.
The elimination of production and
consumption of Class I ODSs is
accomplished through adherence to
phase-out schedules for specific Class I
ODSs,2 which include CFCs, halons,
carbon tetrachloride, and methyl
chloroform. As of January 1, 1996,
production and import of most Class I
ODSs were phased out in developed
countries, including the United States.
However, the Montreal Protocol and
the Clean Air Act (the Act) provide
exemptions that allow for the continued
import and/or production of Class I
ODSs for specific uses. Under the
Montreal Protocol, exemptions may be
granted for uses that are determined by
the Parties to be ‘‘essential.’’ Decision
IV/25, taken by the Parties to the
Protocol in 1992, established criteria for
determining whether a specific use
should be approved as essential, and set
forth the international process for
making determinations of essentiality.
The criteria for an essential use, as set
forth in paragraph 1 of Decision IV/25,
are the following:
‘‘(a) That a use of a controlled
substance should qualify as ‘essential’
only if:
(i) It is necessary for the health, safety
or is critical for the functioning of
society (encompassing cultural and
intellectual aspects); and
(ii) There are no available technically
and economically feasible alternatives
or substitutes that are acceptable from
the standpoint of environment and
health;
(b) That production and consumption,
if any, of a controlled substance for
essential uses should be permitted only
if:
(i) All economically feasible steps
have been taken to minimize the
essential use and any associated
emission of the controlled substance;
and
(ii) The controlled substance is not
available in sufficient quantity and
quality from existing stocks of banked or
recycled controlled substances, also
bearing in mind the developing
countries’ need for controlled
substances.’’
1 ‘‘Consumption’’ is defined as the amount of a
substance produced in the United States, plus the
amount imported into the United States, minus the
amount exported to Parties to the Montreal Protocol
(see Section 601(6) of the Clean Air Act).
2 Class I ozone depleting substances are listed at
40 CFR Part 82 subpart A, appendix A.
E:\FR\FM\12JNR1.SGM
12JNR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 112 (Tuesday, June 12, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 32193-32212]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-2201]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 53 and 58
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0018; FRL-8308-7]
RIN 2060-AO06
Ambient Air Monitoring Regulations: Correcting and Other
Amendments
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA is taking direct final action on ``Ambient Air
Monitoring Regulations: Correcting and Other Amendments'' to correct
and clarify parts of a recent final rule published on October 17, 2006,
that amended the ambient air monitoring requirements for criteria
pollutants. These errors included several instances where the wording
in the preamble and regulatory text were not completely consistent,
several regulatory text passages that contained some imprecise
language, two instances of regulatory text omission, an outdated
address reference, and numerous publication errors in tables and
equations. EPA is also amending the monitoring rule to allow EPA
Regional Administrators to approve departures from the minimum number
of PM10 monitors otherwise specified in the rule.
The October 17, 2006, final rule revised requirements for reference
and equivalent method determinations, modified requirements for general
monitoring network design, and modified other requirements pertaining
to quality assurance, annual network plans and assessments, data
reporting, monitoring methodology, and probe and monitor siting
criteria. All other preamble and regulatory text printed in the October
17, 2006, final rule is correct.
DATES: This rule is effective on September 10, 2007, without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by July 12, 2007. If we
receive adverse comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register informing the public that some or all of the
amendments in this rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2004-0018 by one of the following methods:
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
E-mail: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov.
Fax: (202) 566-1741.
Mail: Ambient Air Monitoring Regulations: Correcting and
Other Amendments, Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 6102T,
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460. Please include a
total of 2 copies.
Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center, 1301 Constitution
Avenue, NW., Room 3334, Washington, DC. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and special
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2004-0018. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change and may be made available
online at: www.regulations.gov including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov
or e-mail. The www.regulations.gov website is an ``anonymous access''
system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through
www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you
submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to
consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special
characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Revisions to the Ambient
Air Monitoring Regulations Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334,
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202)
566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air Docket is (202) 566-
1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Lewis Weinstock, Air Quality
Assessment Division (C304-06), Office
[[Page 32194]]
of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone number:
(919) 541-3661; fax number: (919) 541-1903; e-mail address:
weinstock.lewis@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Why Is EPA Using a Direct Final Rule?
II. Does This Action Apply to Me?
III. Judicial Review
IV. Authority
V. Overview of the October 17, 2006 Rule Changes
VI. This Action
A. Correction to Special Purpose Monitors
B. Clarification to Requirement for Collocating Required
Continuous Fine Particle (PM2.5) Monitors
C. Clarification to Operating Schedule Requirements for Filter-
Based Manual PM2.5 Samplers
D. Standard versus Daylight Savings Time Reference
E. Corrections to Regulatory Text on Particulate Matter
(PM10) Network Design Criteria
F. Additional Regional Administrator Flexibility in Applying
PM10 Minimum Monitoring Requirements
G. Correction to Division Name and Address Reference
H. Clarification to Conditions for Waiving Regional
Administrator Comment Period on Submitted Annual Monitoring Network
Plans
I. Typographical Corrections
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
J. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
K. Congressional Review Act
I. Why Is EPA Using a Direct Final Rule?
The EPA is publishing this rule without a prior proposed rule
because we view this as a non-controversial action and anticipate no
adverse comment. None of the proposed changes creates additional
regulatory requirements on affected entities compared to those that
were promulgated in the final rule that was published in the Federal
Register on October 17, 2006. However, in the ``Proposed Rules''
section of this Federal Register, we are publishing a separate document
that will serve as the proposed rule to make corrections to the Ambient
Air Monitoring Regulations if relevant adverse comments are received on
one or more of the amendments in this direct final rule as described in
sections VI.A. through VI.I of this preamble. We will not institute a
second comment period on this action. Any parties interested in
commenting must do so at this time. For further information about
commenting on this rule, see the ADDRESSES section of this document. If
EPA receives relevant adverse comment on one or more of the amendments
included in this rulemaking, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register indicating which amendment or amendments we are
withdrawing. The provisions that are not withdrawn will become
effective on the date set out above, notwithstanding any relevant
adverse comment on any other provision.
II. Does This Action Apply to Me?
Categories and entities potentially regulated by this action
include:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category NAICS code \1\ Examples of regulated entities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry...................................... 334513 Manufacturer, supplier, distributor, or vendor
541380 of ambient air monitoring instruments;
analytical laboratories or other monitoring
organizations that elect to submit an
application for a reference or equivalent
method determination under 40 CFR part 53.
Federal Government............................ 924110 Federal agencies (that conduct ambient air
monitoring similar to that conducted by States
under 40 CFR part 58 and that wish EPA to use
their monitoring data in the same manner as
State data) or that elect to submit an
application for a reference or equivalent
method determination under 40 CFR part 53.
State/territorial/local/tribal government..... 924110 State, territorial, and local air quality
management programs that are responsible for
ambient air monitoring under 40 CFR part 58 or
that elect to submit an application for a
reference or equivalent method determination
under 40 CFR part 53 or for an approved
regional method approved under 40 CFR part 58
appendix C. The proposal also may affect Tribes
that conduct ambient air monitoring similar to
that conducted by States and that wish EPA to
use their monitoring data in the same manner as
State monitoring data.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ North American Industry Classification System.
This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this
action. This table lists the types of entities that EPA is now aware
could potentially be regulated by this action. Other types of entities
not listed in the table could also be regulated. To determine whether
your facility or Federal, State, local, tribal, or territorial agency
is regulated by this action, you should carefully examine the
requirements for reference or equivalent method determinations in 40
CFR part 53, subpart A (General Provisions) and the applicability
criteria in 40 CFR 51.1 of EPA's requirements for State Implementation
Plans (SIPs). If you have questions regarding the applicability of this
action to a particular entity, consult the person listed in the
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
III. Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), judicial review
of the direct final rule amendments is available only by filing a
petition for review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia by August 13, 2007. Under section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA,
only an objection to the direct final rule amendments that was raised
with reasonable specificity during the period for public comment can be
raised during judicial review. Moreover, under section 307(b)(2) of the
CAA, the requirements established by the direct final rule amendments
may not be challenged separately in any civil or criminal proceedings
brought by EPA to enforce these requirements.
IV. Authority
The EPA rules for ambient air monitoring are authorized under
sections 110, 301(a), and 319 of the CAA. Section 110(a)(2)(B) of the
CAA requires that each SIP provide for the establishment and operation
of devices,
[[Page 32195]]
methods, systems, and procedures needed to monitor, compile, and
analyze data on ambient air quality and for the reporting of air
quality data to EPA. Section 103 authorizes, among others, research and
investigations relating to the causes, effects, extent, prevention and
control of air pollution. Section 301(a) of the CAA authorizes EPA to
develop regulations needed to carry out EPA's mission and establishes
rulemaking requirements. Uniform criteria to be followed when measuring
air quality and provisions for daily air pollution index reporting are
required by CAA section 319.
V. Overview of the October 17, 2006 Rule Changes
On October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61236), EPA amended the rules for
ambient air monitoring of criteria pollutants. The rule amendments
established limited ambient air monitoring requirements for particles
between 2.5 and 10 micrometers ([mu]m) in diameter
(PM10-2.5) to support continued research into
these particles' distribution, sources, and health effects. The rule
amendments required each State to operate one to three ``NCore''
monitoring stations that will take an integrated, multipollutant
approach to ambient air monitoring. In addition, the rule amendments
modified the general monitoring network design requirements for minimum
numbers of ambient air monitors to focus on populated areas with air
quality problems and to reduce significantly the requirements for
criteria pollutant monitors that have measured ambient air
concentrations well below the applicable National Ambient Air Quality
Standards. The rule amendments also revised certain provisions
regarding monitoring network descriptions and periodic assessments,
quality assurance, and data certifications. A number of the amendments
related specifically to monitoring of fine particles (referring to
particles less than or equal to 2.5 [mu]m in diameter,
PM2.5), revising the requirements for reference and
equivalent method determinations (including specifications and test
procedures) for fine particle monitors.
VI. This Action
EPA is taking the following actions:
Correcting a statement in the regulatory text pertaining
to the potential comparability of data collected from Special Purpose
Monitors (SPM) with approved alternative quality assurance plans to the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).
Correcting a statement in the preamble with regard to the
requirement for collocating required continuous PM2.5
monitors and clarifying associated regulatory text.
Clarifying several ambiguous regulatory text passages
pertaining to operating schedules for manual PM2.5 samplers.
Correcting a reference regarding standard versus daylight
savings time.
Restoring two instances of regulatory text that were
inadvertently omitted from the network design for monitoring particles
less than or equal to 10 [mu]m in diameter (PM10).
Adding authority for the Regional Administrator,
consistent with the authority that already exists for PM2.5
and ozone, to allow monitoring agencies to deviate from PM10
monitoring requirements.
Updating an organizational address reference within
regulatory text pertaining to quality assurance requirements.
Clarifying the conditions when the EPA Regional
Administrator is not required to offer a public comment opportunity
prior to approving a State's annual monitoring network plan.
Correcting numerous typographical errors in tables and
equations.
A. Correction to Special Purpose Monitors
The intent of 40 CFR 58.20(c) (published at 71 FR 61302) was to
describe the conditions when data from an SPM using a Federal reference
method (FRM), Federal equivalent method (FEM), or Approved Regional
Method (ARM) which has operated for more than 24 months is eligible for
comparison to the relevant NAAQS. The rule text states that all data
from an SPM is eligible for comparison to the relevant NAAQS unless the
data from the particular monitor came from a period when the
requirements of appendix A to part 58 (Quality Assurance Requirements
for SLAMS, SPMs, and PSD Air Monitoring) or an approved alternative,
appendix C to part 58 (Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Methodology), or
appendix E to part 58 (Probe and Monitoring Path Siting Criteria for
Ambient Air Monitoring) were not met in practice. This text does not
reflect EPA's actual intention. Instead, as discussed in the preamble
(71 FR 61253), the intention of the October 17, 2006, final rule was
that if the Regional Administrator approved an alternative quality
assurance plan in place of the requirements of appendix A to part 58,
the data from the affected SPM would not be eligible for comparison to
the relevant NAAQS. The unintentional inclusion in the rule text of the
phrase ``or an approved alternative'' implied that data from SPMs
operating during a period when approved alternative quality assurance
requirements were in effect, rather than appendix A requirements, would
still be eligible for comparison to the relevant NAAQS.
The EPA provided the Regional Administrator with the authority to
approve an alternative to the requirements of appendix A to part 58
with respect to SPM sites when meeting those requirements would be
physically and/or financially impractical due to physical conditions at
the monitoring site and the requirements were not essential to
achieving the intended data objectives of the SPM site.
Therefore, EPA is clarifying the regulatory text by deleting the
aforementioned words referencing alternative quality assurance plans.
The corrected rule text 40 CFR 58.20(c) reads: ``All data from an SPM
using an FRM, FEM, or ARM which has operated for more than 24 months is
eligible for comparison to the relevant NAAQS, subject to the
conditions of Sec. 58.30, unless the air monitoring agency
demonstrates that the data came from a particular period during which
the requirements of appendix A, appendix C, or appendix E to this part
were not met in practice.''
B. Clarification to Requirement for Collocating Required Continuous
Fine Particle (PM2.5) Monitors
The regulatory text in 40 CFR part 58, appendix D (Network Design
Criteria for Ambient Air Quality Monitoring), section 4.7.2 (71 FR
61322) describes the minimum requirements for operating continuous
PM2.5 analyzers.\1\ The text requires States to operate a
minimum number of continuous PM2.5 analyzers equal to at
least one-half (round up) the minimum required FRM/FEM/ARM
PM2.5 sites listed in Table D-5 of appendix D to part 58. At
least one required FRM/FEM/ARM PM2.5 monitor in each MSA
must be collocated with a continuous analyzer. For example, if a MSA
had three required FRM/FEM/ARM PM2.5 monitors, then two
continuous monitors are required, and at least one of those continuous
monitors must be collocated (placed at the same site) with one of the
FRM/FEM/ARM PM2.5 monitors. The second
[[Page 32196]]
required continuous monitor could be collocated with one of the
remaining two required FRM/FEM/ARM PM2.5 monitors at another
site, or be located at a separate site based on monitoring objectives.
The EPA did not intend that the continuous analyzers required under
section 4.7.2 be required to be collocated with each other.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In 40 CFR part 58 and in this preamble, the terms monitor,
analyzer, and sampler are sometimes used interchangeably. Monitor is
the more general term. Most often, analyzer means a self-contained
monitor which can produce concentration data on-site. Sampler means
a device that collects a sample (e.g., a filter) which must be
further processed at an outside laboratory to obtain the
concentration value.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The October 17, 2006, rule text matches our intended meaning.
However, when referencing this rule requirement in the preamble (71 FR
61263), EPA incorrectly stated that the collocation requirement was
adopted to address concerns about whether required continuous monitors
needed to be collocated with a matching second continuous monitor, and
that the final rule only required one of all the required
PM2.5 continuous monitors in each MSA to have ``such a
collocated match.'' This unintentional statement could be construed as
a requirement for collocating two continuous monitors with each other,
in addition to the requirement for collocation with at least one
required FRM/FEM/ARM monitor, leading to the conclusion that EPA was
requiring three PM2.5 monitors (two continuous, one filter-
based) at the first required site, subject to the requirements of
section 4.7.2. Moreover, it was not our intention to require a second
continuous monitor be sited with an FEM or ARM that itself provides
continuous data.
Therefore, EPA is clarifying the regulatory text to make clear the
intentions described above. The EPA is also clarifying that an
associated reference to quality assurance/quality control procedures
refers to the continuous monitoring requirement by adding the words
``for these required continuous analyzers.'' The corrected provision of
40 CFR part 58, appendix D, section 4.7.2 now reads: ``Requirement for
Continuous PM2.5 Monitoring. The State, or where
appropriate, local agencies must operate continuous PM2.5
analyzers equal to at least one-half (round up) the minimum required
sites listed in Table D-5 of this appendix. At least one required
continuous analyzer in each MSA must be collocated with one of the
required FRM/FEM/ARM monitors, unless at least one of the required FRM/
FEM/ARM monitors is itself a continuous FEM or ARM monitor, in which
case no collocation requirement applies. State and local air monitoring
agencies must use methodologies and quality assurance/quality control
(QA/QC) procedures approved by the EPA Regional Administrator for these
required continuous analyzers.''
C. Clarification to Operating Schedule Requirements for Filter-Based
Manual PM2.5 Samplers
The regulatory text in 40 CFR 58.12(d) (71 FR 61299) describes the
required sampling frequency for manual filter-based PM2.5
samplers. Manual PM2.5 samplers at SLAMS stations must
operate on at least a 1-in-3 day schedule at sites which do not also
have a collocated continuously operating PM2.5 monitor. For
SLAMS PM2.5 sites with both manual and continuous
PM2.5 monitors operating, other than NCore stations,
monitoring agencies may request approval from the EPA Regional
Administrator for a reduction to 1-in-6 day PM2.5 sampling
or for seasonal sampling. The EPA Regional Administrator may grant
sampling frequency reductions after consideration of factors including,
but not limited to, the historical PM2.5 data quality
assessments, the location of current PM2.5 design value
sites, and the regulatory data needs of States and EPA. The regulatory
text provides specific criteria under which a manual PM2.5
sampler at a SLAMS station cannot be exempted by the Regional
Administrator from at least 1-in-3 day sampling, and also includes a
separate provision describing when a daily sampling schedule is
required. The textual length of 40 CFR 58.12(d)(1) as well as the
specific wording of certain statements could create difficulty in
understanding the intended operating schedule requirements for manual
PM2.5 samplers. Therefore, EPA is clarifying 40 CFR
58.12(d)(1) as described below.
The first sentence of 40 CFR 58.12(d)(1) stated that: ``Manual
PM2.5 samplers at SLAMS stations other than NCore stations
must operate on at least a 1-in-3 day schedule at sites without a
collocated continuously operating PM2.5 monitor.'' This
statement could be construed as meaning that manual PM2.5
samplers at NCore stations were not required to maintain at least a 1-
in-3 day schedule. The rule in fact does require manual
PM2.5 samplers at NCore stations to maintain at least a 1-
in-3 day sampling schedule, as later noted in 40 CFR 58.12(d)(2), and
these samplers are not eligible for sampling frequency relief.
Therefore, EPA is clarifying the rule text by deleting the phrase
``other than NCore stations'' from first sentence of 40 CFR
58.12(d)(1).
Another potential ambiguity regarding the 1-in-3 day sampling
frequency provision of 40 CFR 58.12(d)(1) is its geographic
applicability. Since the regulatory language did not specify that the
1-in-3 day sampling frequency requirement be applied only in areas in
which PM2.5 monitoring is required, this requirement could
be interpreted as applying to any manual PM2.5 sampler
within a State that recorded the highest design value ``in an area''
whether or not any PM2.5 monitors were even required in that
area according to 40 CFR part 58, appendix D. The EPA is concerned that
such an interpretation would create a disincentive to monitoring by
potentially requiring States that operated discretionary SLAMS monitors
to sample on a 1-in-3 day frequency even though the monitor was in
excess of minimum monitoring requirements. Therefore, the first
sentence of 40 CFR 58.12(d)(1)(i) is amended to read: ``Manual
PM2.5 samplers at required SLAMS stations without a
collocated continuously operating PM2.5 monitor must operate
on at least a 1-in-3 day schedule.'' In this rule text, ``required
SLAMS stations'' refers to minimum monitoring requirements as specified
in 40 CFR part 58, appendix D, section 4.7. It does not include SPMs;
therefore SPMs are not required to sample on a 1-in-3 day schedule.
After stating the 1-in-3 day sampling requirement, the rule text at
40 CFR 58.12(d)(1)(ii) goes on to allow the Regional Administrator to
grant a reduction of this schedule to 1-in-6 day for SLAMS
PM2.5 sites with both manual and continuous PM2.5
monitors operating. In this context, the rule text contains a
duplicated reference to SLAMS PM2.5 sites; the second
reference, ``at SLAMS stations,'' is removed in the corrected rule
language since the opening part of the sentence already states the
applicability of the provision to SLAMS PM2.5 sites. The
text goes on to describe two situations in which a manual
PM2.5 sampler at a required SLAMS station could not be
granted sampling frequency relief by the Regional Administrator from
the minimum 1-in-3 day sampling schedule. In the first situation, the
phrase: ``Sites that have design values that are within plus or minus
10 percent of the NAAQS'' could be construed as applying to all sites
within a particular area that have design values that are within plus
or minus 10 percent of the NAAQS, when the intention was to apply the
provision only to the site with the highest value in a particular area
calculated in accordance with 40 CFR part 50, appendix N
(Interpretation of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for
PM2.5).\2\ In the second
[[Page 32197]]
situation, the phrase: ``and sites where the 24-hour values exceed the
NAAQS for a period of 3 years are required to maintain at least a 1-in-
3 day sampling frequency'' created ambiguity about whether the
provision was applicable in situations where a single 24-hour value
exceeded the NAAQS at a particular site during only 1 or 2 years of a
3-year period. The EPA's intention was that at least one 24-hour value
had to exceed the NAAQS in each of the years comprising the 3-year
period situation for the provision to apply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ EPA notes that the term ``design value'' as defined in the
final rule (40 CFR part 58.1, 71 FR 61296) is the calculated
concentration of a pollutant according to the applicable appendix of
part 50 for the highest monitoring site in an attainment or
nonattainment area, and that EPA's usage of ``design value'' in the
rule text was consistent with this definition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also, the regulatory text could be construed as requiring 1-in-3
day manual PM2.5 sampling at all sites within a particular
area that have design values within the plus or minus 10 percent
criteria, regardless of whether the site is required and regardless of
the potential availability of continuous PM2.5 FEM or ARM
monitors which inherently would provide every-day data eligible for
comparison to the NAAQS. The EPA anticipates the increasing
availability of approved FEM and ARM methods over the next few years,
and expects that many such approved continuous monitors will be
deployed at sites formerly dedicated to manual filter-based FRM or FEM
PM2.5 samplers, including design value sites subject to the
plus or minus 10 percent criteria when compared with the 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. The EPA supports the deployment of approved FEM
or ARM continuous PM2.5 methods to meet appropriate
monitoring objectives as such monitors become available, and thus we
did not intend to require 1-in-3 day sampling utilizing manual
PM2.5 methods at design value sites, or any other sites,
where monitoring agencies have deployed an approved continuous FEM or
ARM.
The clarified language of the restriction related to being within
plus or minus 10 percent of the NAAQS now reads: ``Required SLAMS
stations whose measurements determine the design value for their area
and that are within plus or minus 10 percent of the NAAQS, and all
required sites where one or more 24-hour values have exceeded the NAAQS
each year for a consecutive period of at least 3 years, are required to
maintain at least a 1-in-3 day sampling frequency. A continuously
operating FEM or ARM PM2.5 monitor satisfies this
requirement.''
At the end of 40 CFR 58.12(d)(1), EPA specified that manual
PM2.5 samplers at sites that have a design value within plus
or minus 5 percent of the daily PM2.5 NAAQS must have an FRM
or FEM operate on a daily schedule. As with the previously discussed
phrasing in the context of the 1-in-3 day sampling requirement, this
text could be construed as applying to all sites within a particular
area that have design values that are within plus or minus 5 percent of
the NAAQS, when the intention was to apply the provision only to the
required SLAMS site with the highest value in a particular area. Also,
the above described concern regarding the acceptability of continuous
PM2.5 analyzers applies in the case of this plus or minus 5
percent criterion, and a similar clarification to the rule text is
appropriate.
Therefore, EPA is clarifying 40 CFR 58.12(d)(1) and for purposes of
clarity is adding subparagraph (iii). It will read: ``Required SLAMS
sites whose measurements determine the design value for their area and
that are within plus or minus 5 percent of the daily PM2.5
NAAQS must have an FRM or FEM operate on a daily schedule. A
continuously operating FEM or ARM PM2.5 monitor satisfies
this requirement.''
The EPA notes that only population-oriented monitors are subject to
the previously described percent-dependent sampling frequency
requirements. In 40 CFR 58.30 (Special Considerations for Data
Comparisons to the NAAQS), sites must be population-oriented to be
comparable to either the annual or daily PM2.5 NAAQS. By
implication, design value sites must be NAAQS comparable, therefore
non-population oriented sites would not be affected by the plus or
minus 10 percent or plus or minus 5 percent provisions.
As previously mentioned, EPA is aware that the length of 40 CFR
58.12(d)(1) creates the potential for ambiguity in the applicability of
individual provisions related to sampling frequency requirements. To
clarify the applicability of such provisions, EPA has restructured 40
CFR 58.12(d)(1) to create distinct paragraphs encompassing the
previously described amended language applicable to SLAMS sites without
continuously operating PM2.5 monitors (now numbered 40 CFR
58.12(d)(1)(i)), SLAMS sites with both manual and continuous
PM2.5 monitors (now numbered 40 CFR 58.12(d)(1)(ii)), and
design value sites within plus or minus 5 percent of the daily
PM2.5 NAAQS (now numbered 40 CFR 58.12(d)(1)(iii)).
In 40 CFR 58.12(d)(3), manual PM2.5 speciation samplers
at required Speciation Trends Network (STN) stations are required to
operate on a 1-in-3 day sampling frequency. The EPA intended the 1-in-3
day sampling frequency to be a minimum sampling frequency and not to
imply a prohibition against a more frequent sampling frequency, such as
a daily sampling frequency, if such a frequency is appropriate for
specific monitoring objectives. Consistent with the phraseology of
sampling frequency requirements elsewhere in the regulatory text, EPA
is correcting the aforementioned phrase to read: ``Manual
PM2.5 speciation samplers at STN stations must operate on at
least a 1-in-3 day sampling frequency.''
D. Standard versus Daylight Savings Time Reference
40 CFR 58.12(e) requires that the operating schedule for
PM10 samplers must be a 24-hour sampling period taken from
midnight to midnight (local time) to ensure national consistency. In a
1999 EPA memorandum,\3\ the use of standard time versus daylight
savings time is discussed in the context of sample collection for
particulate matter monitors, concluding with the recommendation that
monitoring agencies operate their particulate matter sampler clocks on
standard time to avoid the semi-annual time-shift issues associated
with conversion between standard time and daylight savings time.
Monitoring agencies have generally adopted the practice of keeping
their particulate matter sampler clocks on standard time since the
issuance of the 1999 memorandum. It was EPA's intention to codify the
practice of keeping particulate matter clocks on standard time in the
October 17, 2006, Revisions to the Ambient Monitoring Regulations;
however, the codifying rule text was inadvertently omitted for
PM10.\4\ If the aforementioned 40 CFR 58.12(e) reference to
PM10 operating schedule is left uncorrected, this could
create inconsistent interpretation of the standard versus daylight
savings time issue among monitoring agencies causing unnecessary
confusion in the interpretation of the air quality data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ ``Use of PM Reference Methods and Daylight Savings Time,''
J. David Mobley; Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, June
11, 1999. https://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/files/ambient/pm25/
stdtime.pdf.
\4\ The intention to base sampling on local standard time was
correctly reflected in rule text applicable to PM2.5. 40
CFR part 50, appendix N (Interpretation of the National Ambient Air
Quality Standards for PM2.5) reads: ``Daily values for
PM2.5 refers to the 24-hour average concentrations of
PM2.5 calculated (averaged from hourly measurements) or
measured from midnight to midnight (local standard time) that are
used in NAAQS computations.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, EPA is correcting the reference to PM10
operating schedules in
[[Page 32198]]
40 CFR 58.12(e) to read as follows: ``For PM10 samplers, a
24-hour sample must be taken from midnight to midnight (local standard
time) to ensure national consistency.''
E. Corrections to Regulatory Text on Particulate Matter
(PM10) Network Design Criteria
In the preamble to the final monitoring rule (71 FR 61240), EPA
stated an intention to retain the pre-existing minimum monitoring
network design requirements for PM10, which are based on the
population of an MSA and its historical PM10 air quality.
The EPA's intention in finalizing the regulatory text in section 4.6,
Particulate Matter (PM10) Design Criteria, of 40 CFR part
58, appendix D (Network Design Criteria for Ambient Air Quality
Monitoring) (71 FR 61320) was to retain all PM10-relevant
portions of the pre-existing regulatory text beginning with section
3.7, Particulate Matter Design Criteria for NAMS (see 62 FR 38820, July
18, 1997), with only minor changes necessary to maintain consistency of
monitor type terminology (e.g., to eliminate obsolete references to
National Air Monitoring Stations (NAMS)). The EPA inadvertently omitted
several passages from the pre-existing regulatory text in section 3.7
referencing PM10 network design criteria. If left
uncorrected, these omissions could lead to misinterpretation of
PM10 monitoring network design requirements. Three specific
textual corrections are detailed below.
First, in Table D-4, PM10 Minimum Monitoring
Requirements (Number of Stations per MSA), the word ``Approximate''
which had appeared in the title of the pre-existing Table 4 was
omitted. Therefore, in order to retain the earlier language EPA is
revising the title of Table D-4 to read: ``PM10 Minimum
Monitoring Requirements (Approximate Number of Stations Per MSA).''
Second, the first footnote contains some words (``within the ranges
shown in this table'') that were not part of the corresponding footnote
to the pre-existing Table 4. Therefore, the first footnote is revised
to read: ``Selection of urban areas and actual numbers of stations per
area will be jointly determined by EPA and the State Agency.''
Third, in paragraph (a) of section 4.6, the regulatory text notes
that State, and where applicable local, agencies must operate the
minimum number of required PM10 SLAMS sites listed in Table
D-4 of appendix D. In the October 17, 2006, rulemaking, EPA intended to
retain all of the pre-existing regulatory text in the pre-existing
paragraph 3.7.1 (as last promulgated on July 18, 1997, at 62 FR 38850)
in new paragraph (a) of new section 4.6, to explain in words the
flexibility in minimum PM10 monitoring requirements as
provided in the pre-existing Table 4 which had listed ranges of
required numbers (rather than a single number) of monitors for each of
the categories of MSA population and historical PM10 range.
This regulatory text was inadvertently omitted. Therefore, EPA is
restoring the omitted text and correcting paragraph (a) of section 4.6
to read: ``Table D-4 indicates the approximate number of permanent
stations required in MSAs to characterize national and regional
PM10 air quality trends and geographical patterns. The
number of PM10 stations in areas where MSA populations
exceed 1,000,000 must be in the range from 2 to 10 stations, while in
low population urban areas, no more than 2 stations are required. A
range of monitoring stations is specified in Table D-4 because sources
of pollutants and local control efforts can vary from one part of the
country to another and, therefore, some flexibility is allowed in
selecting the actual number of stations in any one locale.''
F. Additional Regional Administrator Flexibility in Applying
PM10 Minimum Monitoring Requirements
We are amending the monitoring rule to allow EPA Regional
Administrators to approve departures from the minimum number of
PM10 monitors otherwise specified in the rule.
In the January 17, 2006, proposed monitoring rule (71 FR 2802), EPA
proposed minimum network design monitoring requirements for
PM10-2.5. In paragraph (b) of section 4.8.1 of 40 CFR part
58, appendix D, (Network Design Criteria for Ambient Air Quality
Monitoring), EPA proposed that modifications from the
PM10-2.5 monitoring requirements must be approved by the
Regional Administrator. The proposed regulatory language providing the
Regional Administrator flexibility to modify the PM10-2.5
monitoring requirements was consistent with similar language proposed
for PM2.5 that read: ``Deviations from these
PM2.5 monitoring requirements must be approved by the EPA
Regional Administrator'' (71 FR 2801, paragraph (b) of section 4.7.1).
Similar regulatory language was proposed for ozone monitoring
requirements (71 FR 2798, paragraph (b) of section 4.1): ``Deviations
from the above O3 requirements are allowed if approved by
the EPA Regional Administrator.'' The EPA finalized the Regional
Administrator authority to modify the PM2.5 and ozone
monitoring requirements in the October 17, 2006, rule following a
public comment period in which no adverse comments were received about
the specific provisions concerning Regional Administrator flexibility
in applying these regulations.
The EPA did not adopt the proposed PM10-2.5 minimum
monitoring network design including the Regional Administrator
flexibility language. The EPA notes, however, that no adverse comments
were received specifically addressing the proposed Regional
Administrator authority to modify PM10-2.5 monitoring
network requirements although voluminous comment was received on other
proposed provisions of the PM10-2.5 monitoring network
design and accompanying suitability test.
The EPA also proposed and adopted requirements for ``NCore''
multipollutant monitoring sites, including a provision allowing the
Administrator to approve modifications from these requirements. Again,
no adverse comment was received on this modification provision.
Finally, specific requirements in the rule for photochemical assessment
monitoring stations (PAMS) have always been modifiable by the
Administrator.
Thus, EPA notes that under the current 40 CFR part 58, appendix D
network design requirements, PM10 is the only pollutant with
minimum monitoring requirements not subject to modification based on
either Administrator or Regional Administrator evaluation and approval.
Such flexibility, already finalized for ozone and PM2.5, can
prove useful in particular cases where a State demonstrates that
meeting the minimum monitoring requirements, for an individual MSA for
example, may be impractical or contrary to the optimum use of
monitoring resources.
The EPA believes it is appropriate to allow the Regional
Administrator to modify PM10 monitoring requirements, for
the same reasons such authority was finalized for PM2.5 and
ozone monitoring requirements. Such authority allows for specific local
factors and information can be considered in order to make the
PM10 monitoring network more economical while still meeting
program data needs. In light of the absence of any comments of concern
regarding very similar Administrator or Regional Administrator
authority for other pollutants, we do not expect any adverse comment on
this action. Therefore, EPA is amending paragraph
[[Page 32199]]
(a) of section 4.6 quoted in the section above and adding the following
sentence so it now reads: ``Modifications from these PM10
monitoring requirements must be approved by the Regional
Administrator.'' See also section VI.E of this preamble for a
clarifying amendment which also affects section 4.6 of appendix D to
part 58 by restoring inadvertently omitted text.
G. Correction to Division Name and Address Reference
The October 17, 2006, final rule provided an address reference in
paragraph 2.4 of 40 CFR part 58 appendix A, to assist with
communications regarding the National Performance Evaluation Programs.
Monitoring agencies were advised to contact either the appropriate EPA
Regional Quality Assurance (QA) Coordinator at the appropriate EPA
Regional Office location, or the NPAP Coordinator, Emissions Monitoring
and Analysis Division (D205-02), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711. Due to a reorganization within the
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards and subsequent physical
relocation within the North Carolina facility, the provided address
mail code (D205-02) is no longer correct for quality assurance related
communications. Additionally, the Emissions Monitoring and Analysis
Division has been renamed to the Air Quality Assessment Division, as
part of the same reorganization. Due to the possibility of future
address changes, EPA believes a more general reference to quality
assurance contact information is appropriate for inclusion in
regulatory language. Updated contact information for all air monitoring
program leads is maintained on the Ambient Monitoring Technology
Information Center (AMTIC) Web site https://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/
contacts.html. This website is well publicized and frequently accessed
by all monitoring agencies; therefore, specific address entries in the
rule are unnecessary and potentially misleading. Accordingly, EPA is
amending the regulatory text in paragraph 2.4 to read: ``For
clarification and to participate, monitoring organizations should
contact either the appropriate EPA Regional Quality Assurance (QA)
Coordinator at the appropriate EPA Regional Office location, or the
NPAP Coordinator at the Air Quality Assessment Division, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.''
H. Clarification to Conditions for Waiving Regional Administrator
Comment Period on Submitted Annual Monitoring Network Plans
The regulatory text in 40 CFR 58.10(a)(2) (71 FR 61298) describes
the approval process for State-submitted annual monitoring network
plans that propose SLAMS network modifications. Such plans are subject
to the approval of the Regional Administrator, including a new
requirement for the Regional Administrator to provide opportunity for
public comment during the 120-day period allowed for approval or
disapproval. The rule permits the Regional Administrator to waive the
separate public comment opportunity if the State or local agency has
already provided a public comment opportunity on its plan and has made
no changes to the plan subsequent to that comment opportunity.
Implied but not explicitly stated in the regulatory language is
that the Regional Administrator may forgo public comment only if the
State or local agency submitted the full text of public comments
received on its annual monitoring network plan to the Regional
Administrator, because only the availability of such detailed comments
would make a separate comment period by the Regional Administrator
redundant.
The EPA believes that the aforementioned regulatory language should
be clarified to avoid ambiguity about what situations would require the
Regional Administrator to provide a public comment opportunity on
submitted annual monitoring network plans that contain SLAMS network
modifications. The EPA notes that the clarification does not modify the
minimum requirements for State and local agencies to make their plans
available for public inspection for at least 30 days prior to
submission to EPA.
Accordingly, the clarified regulatory text in the second sentence
of 40 CFR 58.10(a)(2) reads: ``If the State or local agency has already
provided a public comment opportunity on its plan and has made no
changes subsequent to that comment opportunity, and has submitted the
received comments together with the plan, the Regional Administrator is
not required to provide a separate opportunity for comment.''
Such comments could be transmitted to the Regional Administrator in
hard-copy or electronic format, and at a minimum, would include all
relevant information supplied to the State or local agency by the
commenters. Monitoring agencies would not be expected to provide
comment summaries or comment responses, although those submissions
could optionally be provided to the Regional Administrator in addition
to the actual text of the received comments.
I. Typographical Corrections
The Federal Register printing of the October 17, 2006, final rule
contained typographical errors in equations, tables, and figures. These
errors, as explained below and listed by Federal Register page
reference and CFR section number, are corrected in this rulemaking.
71 FR 61284. Subpart C of Part 53--Sec. 53.35(d)(4),
Calculation of mean concentrations. Equation 12: The ``n'' over the
summation symbol is replaced with ``m.''
71 FR 61284. Subpart C of Part 53--Sec. 53.35(e) and
Sec. 53.35(f), Tests for reference method and candidate method
precision. Equations 13 and 15: 100% is moved to be outside the square
root symbol.
71 FR 61284. Subpart C of Part 53--Sec. 53.35(g), Test
for additive and multiplicative bias (comparative slope and intercept).
Equation 17: Left part of equation is changed to be R not
Rj.
71 FR 61284. Subpart C of Part 53--Sec. 53.35(h), Tests
for comparison correlation. Equation 21: Radical sign in the
denominator is extended to cover both summation signs.
71 FR 61285. Table C-1 to Subpart C of Part 53, Test
Concentration Ranges, Number of Measurements Required, and Maximum
Discrepancy Specification. The four occurrences of ``Total'' in the
first column are moved to the second column.
71 FR 61285. Table C-1 to Subpart C of Part 53, Test
Concentration Ranges, Number of Measurements Required, and Maximum
Discrepancy Specification. Two entries of ``18'' are moved 3 columns
left to appear in the ``Second Set'' column rather than as shown in the
right-most column.
71 FR 61285. Table C-4 to Subpart C of Part 53--Test
Specifications for PM10, PM2.5 and
PM10-2.5 Candidate Equivalent Methods. An erroneous ``R''
character in the table title is removed so that the title reads--Test
Specifications for PM10, PM2.5 and
PM10-2.5 Candidate Equivalent Methods.
71 FR 61286. Table C-4 to Subpart C of Part 53--Test
Specifications for PM10, PM2.5 and
PM10-2.5 Candidate Equivalent Methods. In the column header
for the last 2 columns, the ``PM10-2.5'' is corrected to be
``PM10-2.5''.
71 FR 61286. Table C-4 to Subpart C of Part 53--Test
Specifications for PM10, PM2.5 and
PM10-2.5 Candidate
[[Page 32200]]
Equivalent Methods. The horizontal line under ``Rj > 60
[mu]g/m3'' in the table is removed.
71 FR 61286. Table C-4 to Subpart C of Part 53--Test
Specifications for PM10, PM2.5 and
PM10-2.5 Candidate Equivalent Methods. In the first column,
in the ``Precision of replicate reference method measurements * * *''
entry, the ``prime'' symbols are removed from ``RPRj'' and
``PM10-2.5''.
71 FR 61286. Table C-4 to Subpart C of Part 53--Test
Specifications for PM10, PM2.5 and
PM10-2.5 Candidate Equivalent Methods. An unintended period
is removed at the end of the entry in the last column, Intercept row,
and at the end of the second footnote.
71 FR 61286. Table C-4 to Subpart C of Part 53--Test
Specifications for PM10, PM2.5 and
PM10-2.5 Candidate Equivalent Methods. Values for
correlation of reference method and candidate method measurements for
PM2.5 Class II and III, and PM10-2.5 Class II and
III are added to all four columns:
>=0.93 for CCV<=0.4;
>=0.85 + 0.2xCCV for 0.4<=CCV<=0.5;
>=0.95 for CCV>=0.5.
71 FR 61287. Figure C-1 to Subpart C of Part 53--Suggested
Format for Reporting Test Results for Methods for SO2, CO,
O3, NO2. Title and the first lines of content are
repositioned from being section text to being proper parts of Figure C-
1.
71 FR 61287. Figures C-2 and C-3 to Subpart C of Part 53--
Illustration of the Slope and Intercept Limits for Class II and Class
III PM2.5 Candidate Equivalent Methods and Illustration of
the Slope and Intercept Limits for Class II and Class III
PM10-2.5 Candidate Equivalent Methods. ``PM2.5''
is changed to ``PM2.5,'' ``PM10-2.5'' is changed
to ``PM10-2.5,'' ``[mu]g/m3'' is changed to ``[mu]g/m\3\.''
Also, the ``Class II'' and ``Class III'' labels are related by arrows
to the outline of the hexagons rather than the area inside, to be
consistent with the title, which indicates ``Acceptance Limits.''
71 FR 61289. Figure C-4 to Subpart C of Part 53--
Illustration of the Minimum Limits for Correlation Coefficient for
PM2.5 and PM10-2.5 Class II and III methods. In
the axes labels, the commas are deleted and the ``r'' and the ``CCV''
are placed within parentheses.
71 FR 61293. Subpart E of Part 53--Sec. 53.58(g),
Operational field precision and blank test. Equation 26: the symbol
``C1,j'' is corrected to ``Ci,j.''
71 FR 61294. Table E-1 to Subpart E of Part 53--Summary of
Test Requirements for Reference and Class I Equivalent Methods for
PM2.5 and PM10-2.5. In the 3rd column, row
identified as ``Sec. 53.56* * *,'' a comma is added after ``16.67
5%'' and before ``L/min.''
71 FR 61294. Table E-1 to Subpart E of Part 53--Summary of
Test Requirements for Reference and Class I Equivalent Methods for
PM2.5 and PM10-2.5. In the 3rd column, row
identified as ``Sec. 53.57* * *,'' one of the two periods at the end
of item 3 is removed.
71 FR 61294. Table E-1 to Subpart E of Part 53--Summary of
Test Requirements for Reference and Class I Equivalent Methods for
PM2.5 and PM10-2.5. In the fourth column, row
identified as ``Sec. 53.57* * *,'' item (c) is changed to read ``Solar
flux of 1000 50 W/m\2\'' not ``Solar flux of 1000 ? 50 W/
m\2\.''
71 FR 61294. Table E-1 to Subpart E of Part 53--Summary of
Test Requirements for Reference and Class I Equivalent Methods for
PM2.5 and PM10-2.5. Spurious ``?'' characters
throughout the table are removed.
71 FR 61294. Table E-1 to Subpart E of Part 53--Summary of
Test Requirements for Reference and Class I Equivalent Methods for
PM2.5 and PM10-2.5. Sec. 53.56 cell reference,
Barometric pressure effect test, Sample flow rate performance
specification, value is changed to be 16.67 (versus 16.6).
71 FR 61296. Table F-1 to Subpart F of Part 53--
Performance Specifications for PM2.5 Class II Equivalent
Samplers. In the last column, row identified as ``Sec. 53.64,''
``Dp50 = 2.5 [mu]m ? 0.2 [mu]m'' is changed to be
``Dp50 = 2.5 [mu]m 0.2 [mu]m.''
71 FR 61296. Table F-1 to Subpart F of Part 53--
Performance Specifications for PM2.5 Class II Equivalent
Samplers. In the last column, last row, a comma is added after
``0.15mg'' and before ``r >=0.97.''
71 FR 61296. Table F-1 to Subpart F of Part 53--
Performance Specifications for PM2.5 Class II Equivalent
Samplers. Spurious ``?'' characters throughout the table are removed.
71 FR 61300. Figure 1 to Subpart B of Part 58--Ratio to
Standard for PM10 Operating Schedule. A missing value (1.4)
is added on the X axis.
71 FR 61309. Appendix A of Part 58--Quality Assurance
Requirements for SLAMS, SPMs, and PSD Air Monitoring. Equation 7: A
missing ``'' character is added so that the equation reads:
Lower Probability Limit = m-1.96 S.
71 FR 61309. Appendix A of Part 58--Quality Assurance
Requirements for SLAMS, SPMs, and PSD Air Monitoring. A missing minus
sign is added in caption below Equation 11 so that it reads: a chi-
squared distribution with n-1 degrees of freedom.
71 FR 61310. Appendix A of Part 58--Quality Assurance
Requirements for SLAMS, SPMs, and PSD Air Monitoring. Equation 12:
missing ellipsis is added in caption so that it reads: where,
nj is the number of pairs and d1, d2,
* * * dnj are the biases for each of the pairs to be
averaged.
``PM10C'', where it appears in Part 53 without
a subscripted ``C'', is replaced with ``PM10c.''
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is a ``significant regulatory action'' because it may raise
novel legal policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the
President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive
Order. Accordingly, EPA submitted this action to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for review under Executive Order 12866 and
any changes made in response to OMB recommendations have been
documented in the docket for this action.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose any new information collection, as it
only corrects printing errors, provides clarifications, and provides
new flexibility for PM10 monitoring on a case-by-case basis.
However, the OMB has previously approved the information collection
requirements contained in the existing regulations for 40 CFR part 53
and 40 CFR part 58 under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act,
44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., and has assigned OMB control number 2060-0084,
EPA ICR number 0940.20. A copy of the OMB approved Information
Collection Request (ICR) may be obtained from Susan Auby, Collection
Strategies Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2822T), 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460 or by calling (202) 566-
1672. This action does not impose any new information collection burden
beyond the already-approved ICR.
Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying
[[Page 32201]]
information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and
providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any
previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to
be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources;
complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or
otherwise disclose the information. An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of
information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in
40 CFR part 9.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's rule on small
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business defined by
the Small Business Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13 CFR
121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of
a city, county, town, school district or special district with a
population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is
any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated
and is not dominant in its field.
After considering the economic impacts of today's final rule on
small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
This final rule will not impose any requirements on small entities.
None of the corrections and clarifications creates additional
regulatory requirements on affected entities compared to those that
were promulgated in the final rule that was published in the Federal
Register on October 17, 2006. The rule changes being made only correct
printing errors, provide clarifications, and provides new flexibility
for PM10 monitoring on a case-by-case basis.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, local, and Tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt
the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-eff