Update of Continuous Instrumental Test Methods: Technical Amendments, 51365-51373 [E7-17415]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 173 / Friday, September 7, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR
part 522 continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 360b.
I
2. Add § 522.870 to read as follows:
§ 522.870
Etodolac.
(a) Specifications. Each milliliter
contains 100 milligrams (mg) etodolac.
(b) Sponsor. See No. 000856 in
§ 510.600 of this chapter.
(c) Conditions of use in dogs—(1)
Amount. Administer 4.5 to 6.8 mg/
pound (10 to 15 mg/kilogram) body
weight as a single, dorsoscapular
subcutaneous injection. If needed, the
daily dose of etodolac tablets as in
§ 520.870 of this chapter may be given
24 hours after the injection.
(2) Indications for use. For the control
of pain and inflammation associated
with osteoarthritis.
(3) Limitations. Federal law restricts
this drug to use by or on the order of
a licensed veterinarian.
Dated: August 28, 2007.
Bernadette Dunham,
Deputy Director, Center for Veterinary
Medicine.
[FR Doc. E7–17645 Filed 9–6–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160–01–S
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 522
Implantation or Injectable Dosage
Form New Animal Drugs;
Dexmedetomidine
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
ACTION:
Final rule.
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) is amending the
animal drug regulations to reflect
approval of a supplemental new animal
drug application (NADA) filed by Orion
Corp. The supplemental NADA
provides for veterinary prescription use
of dexmedetomidine hydrochloride
injectable solution as a sedative and
analgesic in cats.
DATES: This rule is effective September
7, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Melanie R. Berson, Center for Veterinary
Medicine (HFV–110), Food and Drug
Administration, 7500 Standish Pl.,
Rockville, MD 20855, 301–827–7540, email: melanie.berson@fda.hhs.gov.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:45 Sep 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
Orion
Corp., Orionintie 1, 02200 Espoo,
Finland, filed a supplement to NADA
141–267 for DEXDOMITOR
(dexmedetomidine hydrochloride). The
supplemental NADA provides for
veterinary prescription use of
dexmedetomidine hydrochloride
injectable solution as a sedative and
analgesic in cats. The supplemental
application is approved as of August 15,
2007, and the regulations in 21 CFR
522.558 are amended to reflect the
approval.
In accordance with the freedom of
information provisions of 21 CFR part
20 and 21 CFR 514.11(e)(2)(ii),
summaries of the safety and
effectiveness data and information
submitted to support approval of these
applications may be seen in the Division
of Dockets Management (HFA–305),
Food and Drug Administration, 5630
Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD
20852, between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday.
The agency has determined under 21
CFR 25.33(d)(1) that this action is of a
type that does not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on
the human environment. Therefore,
neither an environmental assessment
nor an environmental impact statement
is required.
Under section 512(c)(2)(F)(iii) of the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(the act) (21 U.S.C. 360b(c)(2)(F)(iii)),
this approval qualifies for 3 years of
marketing exclusivity beginning on the
date of approval.
This rule does not meet the definition
of ‘‘rule’’ in 5 U.S.C. 804(3)(A) because
it is a rule of ‘‘particular applicability.’’
Therefore, it is not subject to the
congressional review requirements in 5
U.S.C. 801–808.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PART 522—IMPLANTATION OR
INJECTABLE DOSAGE FORM NEW
ANIMAL DRUGS
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 522
Animal drugs.
Therefore, under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner
of Food and Drugs and redelegated to
the Center for Veterinary Medicine, 21
CFR part 522 is amended as follows:
I
PART 522—IMPLANTATION OR
INJECTABLE DOSAGE FORM NEW
ANIMAL DRUGS
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR
part 522 continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 360b.
2. In § 522.558, revise paragraph (c) to
read as follows:
I
§ 522.558
Dexmedetomidine.
*
*
PO 00000
*
Frm 00013
*
Fmt 4700
*
Sfmt 4700
51365
(c) Conditions of use—(1) Dogs—(i)
Indications for use and amount. (A) For
use as a sedative and analgesic to
facilitate clinical examinations, clinical
procedures, minor surgical procedures,
and minor dental procedures,
administer 375 micrograms (µg) per
square meter (/m2) of body surface area
by intravenous injection or 500 µg/m2 of
body surface area by intramuscular
injection.
(B) For use as a preanesthetic to
general anesthesia, administer 125
µg/m2 of body surface area or 375 µg/m2
of body surface area by intramuscular
injection.
(ii) Limitations. Federal law restricts
this drug to use by or on the order of
a licensed veterinarian.
(2) Cats—(i) Amount. 40 µg/killogram
by intramuscular injection.
(ii) Indications for use. For use as a
sedative and analgesic to facilitate
clinical examinations, clinical
procedures, minor surgical procedures,
and minor dental procedures.
(iii) Limitations. Federal law restricts
this drug to use by or on the order of
a licensed veterinarian.
Dated: August 28, 2007.
Bernadette Dunham,
Deputy Director, Center for Veterinary
Medicine.
[FR Doc. E7–17696 Filed 9–6–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160–01–S
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 60
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–0071; FRL–8448–9]
RIN 2060–A009
Update of Continuous Instrumental
Test Methods: Technical Amendments
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final
action on ‘‘Update of Continuous
Instrumental Test Methods: Technical
Amendments’’ to correct errors in a
recent final rule that amended five
instrumental test methods and was
published on May 15, 2006. As
published, the amendments contained
inadvertent errors and provisions that
need to be clarified. We are correcting
errors and clarifying portions of the
amendments to reflect the intent of the
rule and to make them more
understandable by affected parties.
DATES: This rule is effective on
November 6, 2007 without further
E:\FR\FM\07SER1.SGM
07SER1
51366
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 173 / Friday, September 7, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
notice, unless EPA receives adverse
comment by October 9, 2007. If EPA
receives adverse comment, EPA will
publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register informing the public
that this rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2002–0071, by one of the
following methods:
• https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• E-mail: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov.
• Fax: (202) 566–9744.
• Mail: Update of Continuous
Instrumental Test Methods,
Environmental Protection Agency,
Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460.
Please include a total of two copies.
• Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center,
1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., EPA
Headquarters Library, Room 3334, EPA
West Building, Washington, DC 20460.
Such deliveries are only accepted
during the Docket’s normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–
0071. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through www.regulations.gov,
or e-mail. The www.regulations.gov Web
site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system,
which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless
you provide it in the body of your
comment. If you send an e-mail
comment directly to EPA without going
through www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically
captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public
docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact
information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD–ROM
you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
EPA may not be able to consider your
comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form
of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the 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 Update of Continuous Instrumental
Test Methods, EPA/DC, EPA West
Building, EPA Headquarters Library,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave.,
NW., Washington, DC 20460. 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 Update of Continuous
Instrumental Test Methods is (202) 566–
1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Foston Curtis, Air Quality and Analysis
Division, Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards (D143–02),
Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27711; telephone number (919) 541–
1063; fax number (919) 541–0516; email address curtis.foston@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Why Is EPA Using a Direct Final Rule?
II. Does This Action Apply to Me?
III. Where Can I Obtain a Copy of This
Action?
IV. Judicial Review
V. Background
VI. This Action
A. Method 3A—40 CFR Part 60, Appendix
A–1
B. Method 6C—40 CFR Part 60, Appendix
A–4
C. Method 7E—40 CFR Part 60, Appendix
A–4
D. Method 20—40 CFR Part 60, Appendix
A–7
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
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. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions
To Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
K. Congressional Review Act
I. Why Is EPA Using a Direct Final
Rule?
EPA is publishing this rule without a
prior proposed rule because we view
this as a noncontroversial action and
anticipate no adverse comment. The
technical amendments we are making
simply add clarity and correct errors in
the prior rule. However, in the
‘‘Proposed Rules’’ section of today’s
Federal Register, we are publishing a
separate document that will serve as the
proposed rule to these technical
amendments if adverse comments are
received on this direct final rule. 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 adverse comment, we
will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register informing the public
that this direct final rule will not take
effect. We would address all public
comments in any subsequent final rule
based on the proposed rule.
II. Does This Action Apply to Me?
This rule applies to sources that are
subject to the New Source Performance
Standards, Clean Air Markets
requirements, and other regulations that
require the use of Method 3A of
Appendix A–1, Methods 6C and 7E of
Appendix A–4, and Method 20 of
Appendix A–7 to 40 CFR part 60.
Regulated Entities. Categories and
entities potentially affected include the
following:
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
Examples of regulated entities
SIC codes
Fossil Fuel Steam Generators .................................................................................................................................
Industrial, Commercial, Institutional Steam Generating Units .................................................................................
Electric Generating ..................................................................................................................................................
Stationary Gas Turbines ..........................................................................................................................................
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:44 Sep 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\07SER1.SGM
07SER1
3569
3569
3569
3511
NAICS codes
332410
332410
332410
333611
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 173 / Friday, September 7, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
Examples of regulated entities
SIC codes
Petroleum Refineries ...............................................................................................................................................
Municipal Waste Combustors ..................................................................................................................................
Kraft Pulp Mills .........................................................................................................................................................
Sulfuric Acid Plants ..................................................................................................................................................
III. Where Can I Obtain a Copy of This
Action?
In addition to being available in the
docket, an electronic copy of this direct
final rule will also be available on the
Worldwide Web (WWW) through the
Technology Transfer Network (TTN).
Following the Administrator’s signature,
a copy of the final amendments will be
placed on the TTN’s policy and
guidance page for newly proposed or
promulgated rules at https://
www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN
provides information and technology
exchange in various areas of air
pollution control.
IV. Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean
Air Act (CAA), judicial review of this
direct final rule is available only by
filing a petition for review in the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit by November 6, 2007.
Under section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA,
only an objection to this direct final rule
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 this action may not be
challenged separately in any civil or
criminal proceedings brought by EPA to
enforce these requirements.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
V. Background
Methods 3A, 6C, 7E, 10, and 20
measure oxygen, carbon dioxide, sulfur
dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and carbon
monoxide emissions from stationary
sources. They are prescribed for use in
determining compliance with a number
of Federal, State, and Local regulations.
The EPA published amendments to
simplify, harmonize, and update these
test methods on May 15, 2006 (71 FR
28081). These amendments became
effective August 14, 2006. As published,
the amendments contained inadvertent
errors and provisions that need to be
clarified. We are correcting errors and
clarifying portions of the amendments
to reflect the intent of the rule and to
make them more understandable by
affected parties.
VI. This Action
EPA is taking the following actions:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:45 Sep 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
A. Method 3A—40 CFR Part 60,
Appendix A–1
1. We are clearly stating that
precleaned or scrubbed air may be used
for the high-level calibration gas
provided no interfering gases are
present.
2. An incorrect reference in Section
8.1 to Section 8.2 of Method 3 for
sampling to determine gas molecular
weight is corrected to reference Section
8.2.1 of Method 3.
B. Method 6C—40 CFR Part 60,
Appendix A–4
In Section 6.2, a reference to Section
6.2.8.1 for dual-range analyzers is
expanded to include Section 6.2.8.2
which also applies.
C. Method 7E—40 CFR Part 60,
Appendix A–4
1. Under the descriptions for
calibration gases in Section 3.3, the
quality of zero gas allowed for
instrument calibration is clarified. The
current requirement is that all
calibration gases be of EPA traceability
protocol quality. However, the
traceability protocol does not have a
specification for zero gas. Therefore, we
are adopting the specification for ‘‘zero
air material’’ in 40 CFR 72.2 for zero gas
in place of the traceability protocol.
2. In Section 3.4, we recommend the
instrument calibration span be chosen
such that emission concentrations are
between 20 to 100 percent of the
calibration span, ‘‘to the extent
practicable.’’ We are adding a note, as
an example, that meeting this 20 to 100
percent criterion may not be practicable
when emissions are low relative to the
emission limit and the purpose of the
test is to show compliance with the
emission limit.
3. Section 3.9 is clarified to note that
drift is the difference between the preand post-run system bias checks instead
of the difference between the
measurement system readings for the
pre- and post-run bias checks.
4. Section 3.12 is corrected to remove
erroneous citations to 40 CFR 53.55 and
53.56 which have nothing to do with the
manufacturer’s stability test (MST).
5. Section 3.16 is corrected to note
that system bias is calculated from the
difference between the system
calibration response and the
manufacturer certified gas concentration
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
2911
4953
2621
2819
51367
NAICS codes
324110
562213
322110
325188
and not from the difference between the
system calibration response and the
direct calibration responses.
6. In Section 6.2.2, we are specifically
stating that the particulate media must
be included in the system bias test only
when using out-of-stack filters.
7. In Section 6.2.6, the description of
the calibration gas manifold is clarified
to note that blocking the sample flow is
not necessary when in direct calibration
mode, as suggested in the current
method, but the calibration gas manifold
may simply supply an excess of
calibration gas through the system.
8. The method implies that all
analyzers with calibration spans of 20
ppmv or less are required to perform the
MST. In Section 6.2.8.2, we are
clarifying the MST requirement to note
that it is only required for those
analyzers that are routinely calibrated
with a calibration span of 20 ppmv or
less.
9. The new converter efficiency check
that was added in Section 16.2.2
requires the nitrogen dioxide (NO2) test
gas be of EPA traceability protocol
quality. Subsequent discussions with
the National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NIST) concerning the
quality of the NIST NO2 standard
revealed that this standard contains
small but consistent amounts of nitric
acid (HNO3). Some converters may not
be able to completely convert this HNO3
to nitric oxide (NO) for analysis. There
are also concerns about the cost and
stability of certified NO2 gas over time.
We are therefore dropping the new
requirement that the converter
efficiency gas be of EPA traceability
protocol quality and reverting to the
previous requirement that the gas be of
a manufacturer-certified concentration.
In addition, for this converter check
procedure, the gas is required to be in
the 40 to 60 ppmv range while the two
alternative procedures require gas in the
mid- to high-calibration range. We are
dropping the 40 to 60 ppmv
requirement in favor of recommending
the concentration be in the mid- to highcalibration range in order to keep the
three procedures consistent. Subsequent
references to the 40 to 60 ppmv
requirement have been deleted from the
method.
10. In Section 7.2, we are clearly
stating that the appropriate test gases
listed in Table 7E–3, or others not listed
E:\FR\FM\07SER1.SGM
07SER1
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
51368
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 173 / Friday, September 7, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
that can potentially interfere, as noted
elsewhere, must be used for the test. We
are also making it clear that the gases
used should be manufacturer-certified
but are not required to be prepared by
the EPA traceability protocol.
11. In Section 8.1.2, we are explicitly
stating that the required stratification
test is to be performed at each test site
except for small stacks that are less than
4 inches in diameter.
12. In Section 8.2.1, we are making it
clear that testers must obtain a
certificate from the gas manufacturer
documenting the quality of the
calibration gas.
13. In Section 8.2.4, we are clearly
stating that the converter efficiency test
may be performed either before or after
a test or after a series of tests.
14. In Section 8.2.7, paragraph (1) is
reworded to add clarity to the
interference test, and paragraph (2) is
corrected to note that the interference
test is valid for the life of the instrument
unless major components are replaced
with different model parts.
15. In the sample traversing procedure
in Section 8.4, we delete redundant
language in paragraphs (1) and (2).
16. In paragraph (1) of Section 8.5, we
clarify the handling of failed post-run
bias checks by removing unnecessary
wording.
17. In Section 10.0, we clearly state
that analyzers which measure NO and
NO2 without using a converter must be
calibrated with both NO and NO2. The
current wording is not clear to some
users.
18. In Section 12.1, we are revising
certain definitions to reflect the
corrections being made to the
calculations.
19. In Section 12.4, we correct the
system calibration error equation by
adding a term for the dilution factor.
20. In Section 12.6, we add a missing
equation for calculating sample
concentration when a zero gas is used
as the low-level calibration gas.
21. In Section 12.9 we replace the
erroneous equation added in the
updates rule with the one traditionally
used by the method.
22. In Section 12.11, we correct the
equation for calculating the spike
recovery.
23. In Section 13.5, we are adding the
2 percent limit for the alternative
converter efficiency test.
24. In Section 16.2.2, we are deleting
the procedures in paragraphs (2) and (3)
because they are not needed for the test
and are confusing.
25. In Section 16.3, the erroneous
references to 40 CFR 53.55 and 53.56 are
removed; only 53.53 is followed for the
MST. A note is added to clarify that
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:45 Sep 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
alternative procedures or
documentation of instrument stability
are acceptable.
26. In Table 7E–3, the title is edited
to note that the table contains example
interference gases and concentrations.
We are removing a table footnote
instructing dilution extractive systems
to use the hot wet concentrations
because it may not be applicable in all
cases. In its place, a footnote is added
to remind the tester to use the highest
gas concentration expected at test sites
for the interference test.
27. In Table 7E–5, we correct the
typographical error listing the NOX
concentration at ‘‘.80% of calibration
span’’ to read ‘‘80% of calibration
span.’’ We have removed the note to
evaluate each model by the MST at least
quarterly or once per 50 production
units because it is not necessary.
D. Method 20—40 CFR Part 60,
Appendix A–7
1. In Section 8.4, we are adding a
minimum sample run time of 21
minutes.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review
This action is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under the terms of
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and is therefore not
subject to review under the Executive
Order.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose an
information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. These
amendments do not add information
collection requirements beyond those
currently required under the applicable
regulation. The amendments being
made to the test methods do not add
information collection requirements but
make needed corrections to existing
testing methodology.
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
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
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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
number 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
whose parent company has fewer than
100 or 1,000 employees, or fewer than
4 billion kilowatt-hr per year of
electricity usage, depending on the size
definition for the affected North
American Industry Classification
System code; (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 direct 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 direct final rule will not
impose any requirements on small
entities because it does not impose any
additional regulatory requirements.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Pub. L.
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,
E:\FR\FM\07SER1.SGM
07SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 173 / Friday, September 7, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
or to the private sector, of $100 million
or more in any 1 year. Before
promulgating an EPA rule for which a
written statement is needed, section 205
of the UMRA generally requires EPA to
identify and consider a reasonable
number of regulatory alternatives and
adopt the least costly, most costeffective or least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule.
The provisions of section 205 do not
apply when they are inconsistent with
applicable law. Moreover, section 205
allows EPA to adopt an alternative other
than the least costly, most cost-effective,
or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final
rule an explanation why that alternative
was not adopted. Before EPA establishes
any regulatory requirements that may
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including tribal
governments, it must have developed,
under section 203 of the UMRA a small
government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially
affected small governments, enabling
officials of affected small governments
to have meaningful and timely input in
the development of EPA regulatory
proposals with significant Federal
intergovernmental mandates, and
informing, educating, and advising
small governments on compliance with
the regulatory requirements.
EPA has determined that this direct
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 1 year, nor
does this rule significantly or uniquely
impact small governments, because it
contains no requirements that apply to
such governments or impose obligations
upon them. Thus, today’s rule is not
subject to the requirements of sections
202 and 205 of the UMRA.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132 entitled
‘‘Federalism’’ (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 direct final rule does not have
federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the States,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:45 Sep 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132. The
amendments in this direct final rule will
benefit State and Local governments by
clarifying and correcting provisions they
currently implement. No added
responsibilities or increase in
implementation efforts or costs for State
and Local governments are being added
in today’s action. Thus, Executive Order
13132 does not apply to this 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 direct final rule does not have
tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. It will not have
substantial direct effects on tribal
governments, on the relationship
between the Federal government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal government and Indian tribes,
as specified in Executive Order 13175.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this rule.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045: ‘‘Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that:
(1) Is determined to be ‘‘economically
significant’’ as defined under Executive
Order 12866, and (2) concerns an
environmental health or safety risk that
EPA has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If
the regulatory action meets both criteria,
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 Executive Order 13045 as
applying only to those regulatory
actions that are based on health or safety
risks, such that the analysis required
under section 5–501 of the Order has
the potential to influence the regulation.
This rule is not subject to Executive
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
51369
Order 13045 because it does not
establish an environmental standard
intended to mitigate health or safety
risks.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This rule is not subject to Executive
Order 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning
Regulations that Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66
FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is
not a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
As noted in the proposed rule,
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law
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. Therefore, EPA did not
consider the use of any voluntary
consensus standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR
7629 (Feb. 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 direct
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. This direct final rule
E:\FR\FM\07SER1.SGM
07SER1
51370
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 173 / Friday, September 7, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
does not relax the control measures on
sources regulated by the rule and
therefore will not cause emissions
increases from these sources.
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 the
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 a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This rule
will be effective November 6, 2007.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedures,
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: July 26, 2007.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, title 40, chapter I of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
I
PART 60—STANDARDS OF
PERFORMANCE FOR NEW
STATIONARY SOURCES
1. The authority citation for part 60
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 23 U.S.C. 101; 42 U.S.C. 7401–
7671q.
Appendix A–2—[Amended]
2. Amend Method 3A as follows:
a. Add a sentence after the second
sentence of Section 7.1.
I b. Revise the second sentence in
Section 8.1.
I
I
Method 3A—Determination of Oxygen and
Carbon Dioxide Concentrations in Emissions
From Stationary Sources (Instrumental
Analyzer Procedure)
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
7.1 Calibration Gas. * * * Precleaned or
scrubbed air may be used for the O2 highcalibration gas provided it does not contain
other gases that interfere with the O2
measurement.
*
*
*
VerDate Aug<31>2005
*
*
17:45 Sep 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
8.1 Sampling Site and Sampling Points.
* * * In that case, you may use single-point
integrated sampling as described in Section
8.2.1 of Method 3.
*
*
*
*
*
Appendix A–4—[Amended]
3. Amend Method 6C by revising the
last sentence in Section 6.2 to read as
follows:
I
Method 6C—Determination of Sulfur
Dioxide Emissions From Stationary Sources
(Instrumental Analyzer Procedure)
*
*
*
*
*
6.2 * * * The low-range and dual-range
analyzer provisions in Sections 6.2.8.1 and
6.2.8.2 of Method 7E apply.
*
*
*
*
*
4. Amend Method 7E as follows:
a. Revise Sections 3.3, 3.4, and 3.9.
b. Revise the third sentence in Section
3.12.
I c. Revise the first sentence in Section
3.16.
I d. Revise Section 6.2.2.
I e. Revise the second sentence in
Section 6.2.6.
I f. Revise Section 6.2.8.2.
I g. Add a sentence after the second
sentence in Section 7.1.
I h. Revise Section 7.1.4.
I i. Revise Section 7.2.
I j. Add two sentences to the beginning
of Section 8.1.2.
I k. Revise the second sentence in
Section 8.2.1.
I l. Revise the first sentence in Section
8.2.4.
I m. Revise Section 8.2.4.1.
I n. Revise the first and second
sentences in paragraph (1) and the
second sentence in paragraph (2) of
Section 8.2.7.
I o. Revise paragraphs (1) and (2) in
Section 8.4.
I p. Revise the introductory paragraph
and paragraph (1) of Section 8.5.
I q. In Section 9.0, the table entitled
‘‘Summary Table of QA/QC’’ is
amended by revising the entry for ‘‘M’’
‘‘System Performance’’ ‘‘NO2–NO
conversion efficiency’’ ‘‘≥90% of
certified test gas concentration’’ ‘‘before
each test.’’
I r. Revise the last sentence in
paragraph (1) of Section 10.0.
I s. Add a definitions for ‘‘Cnative,’’
‘‘COA,’’ and ‘‘DF’’ in alphabetical order
to Section 12.1.
I t. Remove the definition for ‘‘NOfinal’’
in Section 12.1.
I u. Revise the definition of ‘‘SBf’’ in
Section 12.1.
I v. Revise Equation 7E–3 in Section
12.4.
I w. Revise Sections 12.6 and 12.9.
I x. Revise Equation 7E–12 in Section
12.11.
I
I
I
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
y. Revise Section 13.5.
z. Revise the third sentence in
paragraph (1) of Section 16.2.2.
I aa. Remove and reserve paragraph (2)
and remove paragraph (3) of Section
16.2.2.
I bb. Revise Section 16.3.
I cc. Revise Table 7E–3.
I dd. Revise Table 7E–5.
I
I
Method 7E—Determination of Nitrogen
Oxides Emissions From Stationary Sources
(Instrumental Analyzer Procedure)
*
*
*
*
*
3.3 Calibration Gas means the gas
mixture containing NOX at a known
concentration and produced and certified in
accordance with ‘‘EPA Traceability Protocol
for Assay and Certification of Gaseous
Calibration Standards,’’ September 1997, as
amended August 25, 1999, EPA–600/R–97/
121 or more recent updates. The tests for
analyzer calibration error, drift, and system
bias require the use of calibration gas
prepared according to this protocol. If a zero
gas is used for the low-level gas, it must meet
the requirements under the definition for
‘‘zero air material’’ in 40 CFR 72.2 in place
of being prepared by the traceability protocol.
*
*
*
*
*
3.4 Calibration Span means the upper
limit of the analyzer’s calibration that is set
by the choice of high-level calibration gas. No
valid run average concentration may exceed
the calibration span. To the extent
practicable, the measured emissions should
be between 20 to 100 percent of the selected
calibration span. This may not be practicable
in some cases of low-concentration
measurements or testing for compliance with
an emission limit when emissions are
substantially less than the limit. In such
cases, calibration spans that are practicable to
achieving the data quality objectives without
being excessively high should be chosen.
*
*
*
*
*
3.9 Drift means the difference between
the pre- and post-run system bias (or system
calibration error) checks at a specific
calibration gas concentration level (i.e.
low-, mid- or high-).
3.12 * * * An MST subjects the analyzer
to a range of line voltages and temperatures
that reflect potential field conditions to
demonstrate its stability following
procedures similar to those provided in 40
CFR 53.23. Ambient-level analyzers are
exempt from the MST requirements of
Section 16.3. * * *
*
*
*
*
*
3.16 System Bias means the difference
between a calibration gas measured in system
calibration mode and the manufacturer
certified concentration of the gas expressed
as a percentage of the calibration span.
*
*
*
*
*
6.2.2 Particulate Filter. An in-stack or
out-of-stack filter. The filter must be made of
material that is non-reactive to the gas being
sampled. The filter media for out-of-stack
filters must be included in the system bias
test. The particulate filter requirement may
be waived in applications where no
significant particulate matter is expected
E:\FR\FM\07SER1.SGM
07SER1
51371
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 173 / Friday, September 7, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
(e.g., for emission testing of a combustion
turbine firing natural gas).
manufacturer documenting the quality of gas.
* * *
*
*
*
*
*
*
6.2.6 Calibration Gas Manifold. * * * In
system calibration mode, the system should
be able to flood the sampling probe and vent
excess gas. * * *
*
*
*
*
*
6.2.8.2 Low Concentration Analyzer.
When an analyzer is routinely calibrated
with a calibration span of 20 ppmv or less,
the manufacturer’s stability test (MST) is
required. See Table 7E–5 for test parameters.
*
*
*
*
*
7.1 Calibration Gas. * * * If a zero gas is
used for the low-level gas, it must meet the
requirements under the definition for ‘‘zero
air material’’ in 40 CFR 72.2.
* * *
7.1.4 Converter Efficiency Gas. What
reagents do I need for the converter efficiency
test? The converter efficiency gas is a
manufacturer-certified gas with a
recommended concentration in the mid- to
high-calibration gas range. Lower
concentrations may be more appropriate
where source emissions are low. For the test
described in Section 8.2.4.1, NO2 is required.
For the alternative converter efficiency tests
in Section 16.2, NO is required.
*
*
*
*
*
7.2 Interference Check. What reagents do
I need for the interference check? Use the
appropriate test gases listed in Table 7E–3 or
others not listed that can potentially interfere
(as indicated by the test facility type,
instrument manufacturer, etc.) to conduct the
interference check. These gases should be
manufacturer certified but do not have to be
prepared by the EPA traceability protocol.
*
*
*
*
*
8.1.2 Determination of Stratification.
Perform a stratification test at each test site
to determine the appropriate number of
sample traverse points. A stratification test is
not required for small stacks that are less
than 4 inches in diameter. * * *
*
*
*
*
*
8.2.1 Calibration Gas Verification. * * *
Obtain a certificate from the gas
*
*
*
*
8.2.4 NO2 to NO Conversion Efficiency.
Before or after each field test, you must
conduct an NO2 to NO conversion efficiency
test if your system converts NO2 to NO before
analyzing for NOX. You may risk testing
multiple facilities before performing this test
provided you pass this test at the conclusion
of the final facility test. A failed final
conversion efficiency test in this case will
invalidate all tests performed subsequent to
the test in which the converter efficiency test
was passed. * * *
8.2.4.1 Introduce NO2 converter
efficiency gas to the analyzer in direct
calibration mode and record the NOX
concentration displayed by the analyzer.
Calculate the converter efficiency using
Equation 7E–7 in Section 12.7. The
specification for converter efficiency in
Section 13.5 must be met. The user is
cautioned that state-of-the-art NO2 calibration
gases may have limited shelf lives, and this
could affect the ability to pass the 90 percent
conversion efficiency requirement.
8.2.7 Interference Check. * * *
(1) You may introduce the appropriate
interference test gases (that are potentially
encountered during a test, see examples in
Table 7E–3) into the analyzer separately or as
mixtures. Test the analyzer with the
interference gas alone at the highest
concentration expected at a test source and
again with the interference gas and NOX at
a representative NOX test concentration.
* * *
(2) * * * This interference test is valid for
the life of the instrument unless major
analytical components (e.g., the detector) are
replaced with different model parts. If major
components are replaced with different
model parts, the interference gas check must
be repeated before returning the analyzer to
service.
*
*
*
*
*
8.4 Sample Collection.
(1) Position the probe at the first sampling
point. Purge the system for at least two times
the response time before recording any data.
Then, traverse all required sampling points,
sampling at each point for an equal length of
time and maintaining the appropriate sample
flow rate or dilution ratio (as applicable).
You must record at least one valid data point
per minute during the test run.
(2) Each time the probe is removed from
the stack and replaced, you must recondition
the sampling system for at least two times the
system response time prior to your next
recording. If the average of any run exceeds
the calibration span value, that run is invalid.
*
*
*
*
*
8.5 Post-Run System Bias Check and Drift
Assessment.
How do I confirm that each sample I
collect is valid? After each run, repeat the
system bias check or 2-point system
calibration error check (for dilution systems)
to validate the run. Do not make adjustments
to the measurement system (other than to
maintain the target sampling rate or dilution
ratio) between the end of the run and the
completion of the post-run system bias or
system calibration error check. Note that for
all post-run system bias or 2-point system
calibration error checks, you may inject the
low-level gas first and the upscale gas last,
or vice-versa. You may risk sampling for
multiple runs before performing the post-run
bias or system calibration error check
provided you pass this test at the conclusion
of the group of runs. A failed final test in this
case will invalidate all runs subsequent to
the last passed test.
(1) If you do not pass the post-run system
bias (or system calibration error) check, then
the run is invalid. You must diagnose and fix
the problem and pass another calibration
error test (Section 8.2.3) and system bias (or
2-point system calibration error) check
(Section 8.2.5) before repeating the run.
Record the system bias (or system calibration
error) results on a form similar to Table
7E–2.
*
*
9.0
*
*
*
Quality Control
SUMMARY TABLE OF QA/QC
Status
Process or element
QA/QC specification
Acceptance criteria
*
M .................
*
System Performance ....
*
NO2–NO conversion efficiency.
*
*
*
≥90% of certified test gas concentration ..............
*
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
10.0 Calibration and Standardization
* * *
(1) * * * Analyzers that measure NO and
NO2 separately without using a converter
must be calibrated with both NO and NO2.
*
*
*
VerDate Aug<31>2005
*
*
*
12.1 Nomenclature. * * *
Cnative = NOX concentration in the stack gas
as calculated in Section 12.6, ppmv. * * *
COA = Actual concentration of the lowlevel calibration gas, ppmv. * * *
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
*
DF = Dilution system dilution factor or
spike gas dilution factor, dimensionless.
* * *
SBfinal = Post-run system bias, percent of
calibration span.
*
12.4
Jkt 211001
*
Before or after each
test.
*
*
*
17:45 Sep 06, 2007
Checking frequency
E:\FR\FM\07SER1.SGM
*
*
*
System Calibration Error. * * *
07SER1
51372
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 173 / Friday, September 7, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
*
of all valid NOX concentration values (e.g., 1minute averages). Then adjust the value of
Cavg for bias using Equation 7E–5a if you use
CGas = (CAvg − CM )
CMA − C0 A
+ CMA
C M − C0
CGas = (CAvg − C0 )
*
*
*
*
% Decrease =
*
*
*
*
Eq. 7E-5a
CMA
C M − C0
Eq. 7E-5b
Section 16.2.2 is used, determine the NOX
concentration decrease from NOXPeak after the
minimum 30-minute test interval using
*
12.9 Alternative NO2 Converter
Efficiency. If the alternative procedure of
NO XPeak − NO XFinal
× 100
NO XPeak
R=
DF (CSS − Cnative ) + Cnative
× 100
Cspike
supply voltage variations. If the analyzer will
be used under temperature conditions that
are outside the test conditions in Table B–4
of Part 53.23, alternative test temperatures
that better reflect the analyzer field
environment should be used. Alternative
procedures or documentation that establish
the analyzer’s stability over the appropriate
line voltages and temperatures are
acceptable.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
16.2.2 Tedlar Bag Procedure. * * * Fill
the remainder of the bag with mid- to highlevel NO in nitrogen (or other appropriate
concentration) calibration gas.
*
*
*
*
*
16.3 Manufacturer’s Stability Test. A
manufacturer’s stability test is required for all
analyzers that routinely measure emissions
below 20 ppmv and is optional but
recommended for other analyzers. This test
evaluates each analyzer model by subjecting
it to the tests listed in Table 7E–5 following
procedures similar to those in 40 CFR 53.23
for thermal stability and insensitivity to
*
*
*
*
TABLE 7E–3.—EXAMPLE INTERFERENCE CHECK GAS CONCENTRATIONS
Potential
interferent
gas1
Concentrations 2
Sample
conditioning type
Hot wet
CO2 ...........
H2O ...........
NO .............
5 and 15% .....
25% ...............
15 ppmv ........
Alternative Dynamic Spiking Procedure in
Section 16.1.3. * * *
Eq. 7E-12
13.5 NO2 to NO Conversion Efficiency
Test (as applicable). The NO2 to NO
conversion efficiency, calculated according
to Equation 7E–7, must be greater than or
equal to 90 percent. The alternative
conversion efficiency check, described in
Section 16.2.2 and calculated according to
Equation 7E–9, must not result in a decrease
from NOXPeak by more than 2.0 percent.
*
Equation 7E–9. This decrease from NOXPeak
must meet the requirement in Section 13.5
for the converter to be acceptable.
Eq. 7E-9
12.11 Calculated Spike Gas Concentration
and Spike Recovery for the Example
*
a non-zero gas as your low-level calibration
gas, or Equation 7E–5b if you use a zero gas
as your low-level calibration gas.
Dried
5 and 15%.
1%.
15 ppmv.
TABLE 7E–3.—EXAMPLE INTERFERENCE CHECK GAS CONCENTRATIONS—Continued
Concentrations 2
Sample
conditioning type
Potential
interferent
gas1
Hot wet
NO2 ...........
N2O ...........
CO .............
NH3 ............
CH4 ............
SO2 ............
H2 ..............
HCl ............
15
10
50
10
50
20
50
10
ppmv
ppmv
ppmv
ppmv
ppmv
ppmv
ppmv
ppmv
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
........
Dried
15
10
50
10
50
20
50
10
ppmv.
ppmv.
ppmv.
ppmv.
ppmv.
ppmv.
ppmv.
ppmv.
1 Any applicable gas may be eliminated or
tested at a reduced level if the manufacturer
has provided reliable means for limiting or
scrubbing that gas to a specified level.
2 As Practicable, gas concentrations should
be the highest expected at test sites.
*
*
*
*
*
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
TABLE 7E–5.—MANUFACTURER STABILITY TEST
Test description
Acceptance criteria
(note 1)
Thermal Stability ..................
Temperature range when drift does not exceed 3.0% of analyzer range over a 12-hour run when measured with
NOX present @ 80% of calibration span.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:55 Sep 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\07SER1.SGM
07SER1
ER07SE07.004
*
ER07SE07.003
*
ER07SE07.002
*
12.6 Effluent Gas Concentration. For each
test run, calculate Cavg, the arithmetic average
Eq. 7E-3
ER07SE07.001
*
(CS − CV ) × DF
× 100
CS
ER07SE07.000
SCE =
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 173 / Friday, September 7, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
51373
TABLE 7E–5.—MANUFACTURER STABILITY TEST—Continued
Test description
Acceptance criteria
(note 1)
Fault Conditions ...................
Identify conditions which, when they occur, result in performance which is not in compliance with the Manufacturer’s Stability Test criteria. These are to be indicated visually or electrically to alert the operator of the problem.
±10.0% (or manufacturers alternative) variation from nominal voltage must produce a drift of ≤ 2.0% of calibration
span for either zero or concentration ≥ 80% NOX present.
For a low-, medium-, and high-calibration gas, the difference between the manufacturer certified value and the
analyzer response in direct calibration mode, no more than 2.0% of calibration span.
Insensitivity to Supply Voltage Variations.
Analyzer Calibration Error ....
Note 1: If the instrument is to be used as a Low Range analyzer, all tests must be performed at a calibration span of 20 ppm or less.
*
*
*
*
*
Appendix A–7—[Amended]
I 5. Amend Method 20 by adding a
sentence to the end of Section 8.4 to
read as follows:
Method 20—Determination of Oxygen and
Carbon Dioxide Concentrations in Emissions
From Stationary Sources (Instrumental
Analyzer Procedure)
*
*
*
*
*
8.4 Sample Collection. * * * A test run
must have a duration of at least 21 minutes.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. E7–17415 Filed 9–6–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
41 CFR Part 300–80
[FTR Amendment 2007-04; FTR Case 2007–
303; Docket 2007–0002, Sequence 3]
RIN 3090–AI36
Federal Travel Regulation; FTR Case
2007–303, Relocation Expenses Test
Programs
Office of Governmentwide
Policy, General Services Administration
(GSA).
ACTION: Final rule.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with RULES
SUMMARY: The Travel and
Transportation Reform Act of 1998 (Pub.
L. 105–264, October 19, 1998),
authorized Federal agencies to conduct
travel and relocation expenses test
programs when determined by the
Administrator of General Services to be
in the interest of the Government. The
provisions of the Act were implemented
by a Federal Travel Regulation (FTR)
amendment, and published in the
Federal Register at 64 FR 28880, May
27, 1999. They permit agencies to test
new and innovative methods of
reimbursing travel and relocation
expenses without seeking a waiver of
current rules or authorizing legislation.
However, the test authority for the travel
and relocation programs expired in
October 2005.
17:45 Sep 06, 2007
Jkt 211001
83, dated May 7, 1999, and published in
the Federal Register on May 27, 1999
(64 FR 28880). The provisions of the Act
terminated October 2005. Public Law
(Pub. L.) 109–325, October 11, 2006,
extends the provisions relating to
relocation test programs for an
additional four years. This final rule
implements the provisions of Pub. L.
109–325 by authorizing the continuance
of the relocation expense test programs.
This final rule also requires agencies
having an approved test program to
submit annual reports on the progress of
the test to the General Services
Administration, Office of
Governmentwide Policy, Office of
Travel, Transportation and Asset
Management. Failure to submit a report
may cause termination of the test
program approval. In addition, this final
rule removes the provisions of the FTR
relating to travel test programs as there
is no longer any statutory authority for
conducting such tests.
For
clarification of content, contact Jim
Harte, Program Analyst, Travel and
Transportation Management Policy
Division (MTT), telephone (202) 501–
0483, email james.harte@gsa.gov. For
information pertaining to status or
publication schedules, contact the
Regulatory Secretariat (VIR), Room
4035, GS Building, Washington, DC
20405, (202) 501–4755. Please cite FTR
Amendment 2007-04; FTR case 2007–
303.
This regulation is excepted from the
definition of ‘‘regulation’’ or ‘‘rule’’
under Section 3(d)(3) of Executive Order
12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
dated September 30, 1993, and therefore
was not subject to review under Section
6(b) of that executive order.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
AGENCY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Pub. L. 109–325, October 11, 2006,
amends 5 U.S.C. 5739 by extending the
authority for the General Services
Administration (GSA) to approve
relocation expenses test programs for an
additional four years. In addition, the
law removes the 24-month period in
which an agency had to complete an
approved relocation expense test
program. The amendments provided by
Pub. L. No. 109–325 are effective as
though enacted as part of the Travel and
Transportation Reform Act of 1998.
This final rule incorporates Pub. L.
109–325 by removing the required
period of time to complete a relocation
test program and extends the authority
to conduct relocation tests for an
additional four years. The authority to
conduct a travel test expense program
was not renewed; accordingly, this final
rule also deletes those provisions. The
FTR and any corresponding documents
may be accessed at GSA’s website at
https://www.gsa.gov/ftr.
DATES: Effective Date: September 7,
2007.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
On October 19, 1998, the President
signed into law the Travel and
Transportation Reform Act of 1998 (the
Act) (Pub. L. 105–264). In applicable
part, the Act authorized travel and
relocation expenses test programs
designed to enhance cost savings or
other efficiencies that may accrue to the
Government. The provisions of the Act
were implemented by Federal Travel
Regulation (FTR) Amendment Number
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
B. Executive Order 12866
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
This final rule is not required to be
published in the Federal Register for
notice and comment as per the
exemption specified in 5 U.S.C.
553(a)(2); therefore, the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq.,
does not apply.
D. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act does
not apply because the final rule does not
impose recordkeeping or information
collection requirements, or the
collection of information from offerors,
contractors, or members of the public
which require the approval of the Office
of Management and Budget under 44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
E:\FR\FM\07SER1.SGM
07SER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 173 (Friday, September 7, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 51365-51373]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-17415]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 60
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0071; FRL-8448-9]
RIN 2060-A009
Update of Continuous Instrumental Test Methods: Technical
Amendments
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action on ``Update of Continuous
Instrumental Test Methods: Technical Amendments'' to correct errors in
a recent final rule that amended five instrumental test methods and was
published on May 15, 2006. As published, the amendments contained
inadvertent errors and provisions that need to be clarified. We are
correcting errors and clarifying portions of the amendments to reflect
the intent of the rule and to make them more understandable by affected
parties.
DATES: This rule is effective on November 6, 2007 without further
[[Page 51366]]
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by October 9, 2007. If EPA
receives adverse comment, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register informing the public that this rule will not take
effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2002-0071, by one of the following methods:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
E-mail: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov.
Fax: (202) 566-9744.
Mail: Update of Continuous Instrumental Test Methods,
Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460. Please include a total of two
copies.
Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center, 1301 Constitution
Avenue, NW., EPA Headquarters Library, Room 3334, EPA West Building,
Washington, DC 20460. Such deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be
made for deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2002-0071. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov,
or e-mail. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access''
system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through
www.regulations.gov, your 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 Update of Continuous
Instrumental Test Methods, EPA/DC, EPA West Building, EPA Headquarters
Library, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.
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
Update of Continuous Instrumental Test Methods is (202) 566-1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Foston Curtis, Air Quality and
Analysis Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (D143-
02), Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina 27711; telephone number (919) 541-1063; fax number (919) 541-
0516; e-mail address curtis.foston@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Why Is EPA Using a Direct Final Rule?
II. Does This Action Apply to Me?
III. Where Can I Obtain a Copy of This Action?
IV. Judicial Review
V. Background
VI. This Action
A. Method 3A--40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A-1
B. Method 6C--40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A-4
C. Method 7E--40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A-4
D. Method 20--40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A-7
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 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. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
K. Congressional Review Act
I. Why Is EPA Using a Direct Final Rule?
EPA is publishing this rule without a prior proposed rule because
we view this as a noncontroversial action and anticipate no adverse
comment. The technical amendments we are making simply add clarity and
correct errors in the prior rule. However, in the ``Proposed Rules''
section of today's Federal Register, we are publishing a separate
document that will serve as the proposed rule to these technical
amendments if adverse comments are received on this direct final rule.
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 adverse comment, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that this
direct final rule will not take effect. We would address all public
comments in any subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule.
II. Does This Action Apply to Me?
This rule applies to sources that are subject to the New Source
Performance Standards, Clean Air Markets requirements, and other
regulations that require the use of Method 3A of Appendix A-1, Methods
6C and 7E of Appendix A-4, and Method 20 of Appendix A-7 to 40 CFR part
60.
Regulated Entities. Categories and entities potentially affected
include the following:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of regulated entities SIC codes NAICS codes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fossil Fuel Steam Generators............ 3569 332410
Industrial, Commercial, Institutional 3569 332410
Steam Generating Units.................
Electric Generating..................... 3569 332410
Stationary Gas Turbines................. 3511 333611
[[Page 51367]]
Petroleum Refineries.................... 2911 324110
Municipal Waste Combustors.............. 4953 562213
Kraft Pulp Mills........................ 2621 322110
Sulfuric Acid Plants.................... 2819 325188
------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Where Can I Obtain a Copy of This Action?
In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of
this direct final rule will also be available on the Worldwide Web
(WWW) through the Technology Transfer Network (TTN). Following the
Administrator's signature, a copy of the final amendments will be
placed on the TTN's policy and guidance page for newly proposed or
promulgated rules at https://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN provides
information and technology exchange in various areas of air pollution
control.
IV. Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), judicial review
of this direct final rule is available only by filing a petition for
review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit by November 6, 2007. Under section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA,
only an objection to this direct final rule 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 this action may not be challenged
separately in any civil or criminal proceedings brought by EPA to
enforce these requirements.
V. Background
Methods 3A, 6C, 7E, 10, and 20 measure oxygen, carbon dioxide,
sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and carbon monoxide emissions from
stationary sources. They are prescribed for use in determining
compliance with a number of Federal, State, and Local regulations. The
EPA published amendments to simplify, harmonize, and update these test
methods on May 15, 2006 (71 FR 28081). These amendments became
effective August 14, 2006. As published, the amendments contained
inadvertent errors and provisions that need to be clarified. We are
correcting errors and clarifying portions of the amendments to reflect
the intent of the rule and to make them more understandable by affected
parties.
VI. This Action
EPA is taking the following actions:
A. Method 3A--40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A-1
1. We are clearly stating that precleaned or scrubbed air may be
used for the high-level calibration gas provided no interfering gases
are present.
2. An incorrect reference in Section 8.1 to Section 8.2 of Method 3
for sampling to determine gas molecular weight is corrected to
reference Section 8.2.1 of Method 3.
B. Method 6C--40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A-4
In Section 6.2, a reference to Section 6.2.8.1 for dual-range
analyzers is expanded to include Section 6.2.8.2 which also applies.
C. Method 7E--40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A-4
1. Under the descriptions for calibration gases in Section 3.3, the
quality of zero gas allowed for instrument calibration is clarified.
The current requirement is that all calibration gases be of EPA
traceability protocol quality. However, the traceability protocol does
not have a specification for zero gas. Therefore, we are adopting the
specification for ``zero air material'' in 40 CFR 72.2 for zero gas in
place of the traceability protocol.
2. In Section 3.4, we recommend the instrument calibration span be
chosen such that emission concentrations are between 20 to 100 percent
of the calibration span, ``to the extent practicable.'' We are adding a
note, as an example, that meeting this 20 to 100 percent criterion may
not be practicable when emissions are low relative to the emission
limit and the purpose of the test is to show compliance with the
emission limit.
3. Section 3.9 is clarified to note that drift is the difference
between the pre- and post-run system bias checks instead of the
difference between the measurement system readings for the pre- and
post-run bias checks.
4. Section 3.12 is corrected to remove erroneous citations to 40
CFR 53.55 and 53.56 which have nothing to do with the manufacturer's
stability test (MST).
5. Section 3.16 is corrected to note that system bias is calculated
from the difference between the system calibration response and the
manufacturer certified gas concentration and not from the difference
between the system calibration response and the direct calibration
responses.
6. In Section 6.2.2, we are specifically stating that the
particulate media must be included in the system bias test only when
using out-of-stack filters.
7. In Section 6.2.6, the description of the calibration gas
manifold is clarified to note that blocking the sample flow is not
necessary when in direct calibration mode, as suggested in the current
method, but the calibration gas manifold may simply supply an excess of
calibration gas through the system.
8. The method implies that all analyzers with calibration spans of
20 ppmv or less are required to perform the MST. In Section 6.2.8.2, we
are clarifying the MST requirement to note that it is only required for
those analyzers that are routinely calibrated with a calibration span
of 20 ppmv or less.
9. The new converter efficiency check that was added in Section
16.2.2 requires the nitrogen dioxide (NO2) test gas be of
EPA traceability protocol quality. Subsequent discussions with the
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) concerning the
quality of the NIST NO2 standard revealed that this standard
contains small but consistent amounts of nitric acid (HNO3).
Some converters may not be able to completely convert this
HNO3 to nitric oxide (NO) for analysis. There are also
concerns about the cost and stability of certified NO2 gas
over time. We are therefore dropping the new requirement that the
converter efficiency gas be of EPA traceability protocol quality and
reverting to the previous requirement that the gas be of a
manufacturer-certified concentration. In addition, for this converter
check procedure, the gas is required to be in the 40 to 60 ppmv range
while the two alternative procedures require gas in the mid- to high-
calibration range. We are dropping the 40 to 60 ppmv requirement in
favor of recommending the concentration be in the mid- to high-
calibration range in order to keep the three procedures consistent.
Subsequent references to the 40 to 60 ppmv requirement have been
deleted from the method.
10. In Section 7.2, we are clearly stating that the appropriate
test gases listed in Table 7E-3, or others not listed
[[Page 51368]]
that can potentially interfere, as noted elsewhere, must be used for
the test. We are also making it clear that the gases used should be
manufacturer-certified but are not required to be prepared by the EPA
traceability protocol.
11. In Section 8.1.2, we are explicitly stating that the required
stratification test is to be performed at each test site except for
small stacks that are less than 4 inches in diameter.
12. In Section 8.2.1, we are making it clear that testers must
obtain a certificate from the gas manufacturer documenting the quality
of the calibration gas.
13. In Section 8.2.4, we are clearly stating that the converter
efficiency test may be performed either before or after a test or after
a series of tests.
14. In Section 8.2.7, paragraph (1) is reworded to add clarity to
the interference test, and paragraph (2) is corrected to note that the
interference test is valid for the life of the instrument unless major
components are replaced with different model parts.
15. In the sample traversing procedure in Section 8.4, we delete
redundant language in paragraphs (1) and (2).
16. In paragraph (1) of Section 8.5, we clarify the handling of
failed post-run bias checks by removing unnecessary wording.
17. In Section 10.0, we clearly state that analyzers which measure
NO and NO2 without using a converter must be calibrated with
both NO and NO2. The current wording is not clear to some
users.
18. In Section 12.1, we are revising certain definitions to reflect
the corrections being made to the calculations.
19. In Section 12.4, we correct the system calibration error
equation by adding a term for the dilution factor.
20. In Section 12.6, we add a missing equation for calculating
sample concentration when a zero gas is used as the low-level
calibration gas.
21. In Section 12.9 we replace the erroneous equation added in the
updates rule with the one traditionally used by the method.
22. In Section 12.11, we correct the equation for calculating the
spike recovery.
23. In Section 13.5, we are adding the 2 percent limit for the
alternative converter efficiency test.
24. In Section 16.2.2, we are deleting the procedures in paragraphs
(2) and (3) because they are not needed for the test and are confusing.
25. In Section 16.3, the erroneous references to 40 CFR 53.55 and
53.56 are removed; only 53.53 is followed for the MST. A note is added
to clarify that alternative procedures or documentation of instrument
stability are acceptable.
26. In Table 7E-3, the title is edited to note that the table
contains example interference gases and concentrations. We are removing
a table footnote instructing dilution extractive systems to use the hot
wet concentrations because it may not be applicable in all cases. In
its place, a footnote is added to remind the tester to use the highest
gas concentration expected at test sites for the interference test.
27. In Table 7E-5, we correct the typographical error listing the
NOX concentration at ``.80% of calibration span'' to read
``80% of calibration span.'' We have removed the note to evaluate each
model by the MST at least quarterly or once per 50 production units
because it is not necessary.
D. Method 20--40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A-7
1. In Section 8.4, we are adding a minimum sample run time of 21
minutes.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is
therefore not subject to review under the Executive Order.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
These amendments do not add information collection requirements beyond
those currently required under the applicable regulation. The
amendments being made to the test methods do not add information
collection requirements but make needed corrections to existing testing
methodology.
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 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 number 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 whose parent
company has fewer than 100 or 1,000 employees, or fewer than 4 billion
kilowatt-hr per year of electricity usage, depending on the size
definition for the affected North American Industry Classification
System code; (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 direct 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 direct final rule will not impose any requirements on small
entities because it does not impose any additional regulatory
requirements.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Pub.
L. 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,
[[Page 51369]]
or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any 1 year. Before
promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement is needed,
section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify and consider
a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative that
achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do
not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed,
under section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan
must provide for notifying potentially affected small governments,
enabling officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and
timely input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with
significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing,
educating, and advising small governments on compliance with the
regulatory requirements.
EPA has determined that this direct 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 1 year, nor does this rule significantly or
uniquely impact small governments, because it contains no requirements
that apply to such governments or impose obligations upon them. Thus,
today's rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205
of the UMRA.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132 entitled ``Federalism'' (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 direct final rule does not have federalism implications. It
will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government, as specified in Executive Order 13132. The amendments in
this direct final rule will benefit State and Local governments by
clarifying and correcting provisions they currently implement. No added
responsibilities or increase in implementation efforts or costs for
State and Local governments are being added in today's action. Thus,
Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this 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 direct final rule does not have tribal implications as
specified in Executive Order 13175. It will not have substantial direct
effects on tribal governments, on the relationship between the Federal
government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal government and Indian tribes, as
specified in Executive Order 13175. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does
not apply to this rule.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045: ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies
to any rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant''
as defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an
environmental health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may
have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action
meets both criteria, 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 Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those regulatory
actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that the
analysis required under section 5-501 of the Order has the potential to
influence the regulation. This rule is not subject to Executive Order
13045 because it does not establish an environmental standard intended
to mitigate health or safety risks.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions
Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
As noted in the proposed rule, Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law
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. Therefore, EPA
did not consider the use of any voluntary consensus standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 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 direct 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. This direct final rule
[[Page 51370]]
does not relax the control measures on sources regulated by the rule
and therefore will not cause emissions increases from these sources.
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 the 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 a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2). This rule will be effective November 6, 2007.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedures,
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: July 26, 2007.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the
Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 60--STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE FOR NEW STATIONARY SOURCES
0
1. The authority citation for part 60 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 23 U.S.C. 101; 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Appendix A-2--[Amended]
0
2. Amend Method 3A as follows:
0
a. Add a sentence after the second sentence of Section 7.1.
0
b. Revise the second sentence in Section 8.1.
Method 3A--Determination of Oxygen and Carbon Dioxide Concentrations in
Emissions From Stationary Sources (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure)
* * * * *
7.1 Calibration Gas. * * * Precleaned or scrubbed air may be
used for the O2 high-calibration gas provided it does not
contain other gases that interfere with the O2
measurement.
* * * * *
8.1 Sampling Site and Sampling Points. * * * In that case, you
may use single-point integrated sampling as described in Section
8.2.1 of Method 3.
* * * * *
Appendix A-4--[Amended]
0
3. Amend Method 6C by revising the last sentence in Section 6.2 to read
as follows:
Method 6C--Determination of Sulfur Dioxide Emissions From Stationary
Sources (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure)
* * * * *
6.2 * * * The low-range and dual-range analyzer provisions in
Sections 6.2.8.1 and 6.2.8.2 of Method 7E apply.
* * * * *
0
4. Amend Method 7E as follows:
0
a. Revise Sections 3.3, 3.4, and 3.9.
0
b. Revise the third sentence in Section 3.12.
0
c. Revise the first sentence in Section 3.16.
0
d. Revise Section 6.2.2.
0
e. Revise the second sentence in Section 6.2.6.
0
f. Revise Section 6.2.8.2.
0
g. Add a sentence after the second sentence in Section 7.1.
0
h. Revise Section 7.1.4.
0
i. Revise Section 7.2.
0
j. Add two sentences to the beginning of Section 8.1.2.
0
k. Revise the second sentence in Section 8.2.1.
0
l. Revise the first sentence in Section 8.2.4.
0
m. Revise Section 8.2.4.1.
0
n. Revise the first and second sentences in paragraph (1) and the
second sentence in paragraph (2) of Section 8.2.7.
0
o. Revise paragraphs (1) and (2) in Section 8.4.
0
p. Revise the introductory paragraph and paragraph (1) of Section 8.5.
0
q. In Section 9.0, the table entitled ``Summary Table of QA/QC'' is
amended by revising the entry for ``M'' ``System Performance''
``NO2-NO conversion efficiency'' ``[gteqt]90% of certified
test gas concentration'' ``before each test.''
0
r. Revise the last sentence in paragraph (1) of Section 10.0.
0
s. Add a definitions for ``Cnative,'' ``COA,''
and ``DF'' in alphabetical order to Section 12.1.
0
t. Remove the definition for ``NOfinal'' in Section 12.1.
0
u. Revise the definition of ``SBf'' in Section 12.1.
0
v. Revise Equation 7E-3 in Section 12.4.
0
w. Revise Sections 12.6 and 12.9.
0
x. Revise Equation 7E-12 in Section 12.11.
0
y. Revise Section 13.5.
0
z. Revise the third sentence in paragraph (1) of Section 16.2.2.
0
aa. Remove and reserve paragraph (2) and remove paragraph (3) of
Section 16.2.2.
0
bb. Revise Section 16.3.
0
cc. Revise Table 7E-3.
0
dd. Revise Table 7E-5.
Method 7E--Determination of Nitrogen Oxides Emissions From Stationary
Sources (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure)
* * * * *
3.3 Calibration Gas means the gas mixture containing
NOX at a known concentration and produced and certified
in accordance with ``EPA Traceability Protocol for Assay and
Certification of Gaseous Calibration Standards,'' September 1997, as
amended August 25, 1999, EPA-600/R-97/121 or more recent updates.
The tests for analyzer calibration error, drift, and system bias
require the use of calibration gas prepared according to this
protocol. If a zero gas is used for the low-level gas, it must meet
the requirements under the definition for ``zero air material'' in
40 CFR 72.2 in place of being prepared by the traceability protocol.
* * * * *
3.4 Calibration Span means the upper limit of the analyzer's
calibration that is set by the choice of high-level calibration gas.
No valid run average concentration may exceed the calibration span.
To the extent practicable, the measured emissions should be between
20 to 100 percent of the selected calibration span. This may not be
practicable in some cases of low-concentration measurements or
testing for compliance with an emission limit when emissions are
substantially less than the limit. In such cases, calibration spans
that are practicable to achieving the data quality objectives
without being excessively high should be chosen.
* * * * *
3.9 Drift means the difference between the pre- and post-run
system bias (or system calibration error) checks at a specific
calibration gas concentration level (i.e. low-, mid- or high-).
3.12 * * * An MST subjects the analyzer to a range of line
voltages and temperatures that reflect potential field conditions to
demonstrate its stability following procedures similar to those
provided in 40 CFR 53.23. Ambient-level analyzers are exempt from
the MST requirements of Section 16.3. * * *
* * * * *
3.16 System Bias means the difference between a calibration gas
measured in system calibration mode and the manufacturer certified
concentration of the gas expressed as a percentage of the
calibration span.
* * * * *
6.2.2 Particulate Filter. An in-stack or out-of-stack filter.
The filter must be made of material that is non-reactive to the gas
being sampled. The filter media for out-of-stack filters must be
included in the system bias test. The particulate filter requirement
may be waived in applications where no significant particulate
matter is expected
[[Page 51371]]
(e.g., for emission testing of a combustion turbine firing natural
gas).
* * * * *
6.2.6 Calibration Gas Manifold. * * * In system calibration
mode, the system should be able to flood the sampling probe and vent
excess gas. * * *
* * * * *
6.2.8.2 Low Concentration Analyzer. When an analyzer is
routinely calibrated with a calibration span of 20 ppmv or less, the
manufacturer's stability test (MST) is required. See Table 7E-5 for
test parameters.
* * * * *
7.1 Calibration Gas. * * * If a zero gas is used for the low-
level gas, it must meet the requirements under the definition for
``zero air material'' in 40 CFR 72.2.
* * *
7.1.4 Converter Efficiency Gas. What reagents do I need for the
converter efficiency test? The converter efficiency gas is a
manufacturer-certified gas with a recommended concentration in the
mid- to high-calibration gas range. Lower concentrations may be more
appropriate where source emissions are low. For the test described
in Section 8.2.4.1, NO2 is required. For the alternative
converter efficiency tests in Section 16.2, NO is required.
* * * * *
7.2 Interference Check. What reagents do I need for the
interference check? Use the appropriate test gases listed in Table
7E-3 or others not listed that can potentially interfere (as
indicated by the test facility type, instrument manufacturer, etc.)
to conduct the interference check. These gases should be
manufacturer certified but do not have to be prepared by the EPA
traceability protocol.
* * * * *
8.1.2 Determination of Stratification. Perform a stratification
test at each test site to determine the appropriate number of sample
traverse points. A stratification test is not required for small
stacks that are less than 4 inches in diameter. * * *
* * * * *
8.2.1 Calibration Gas Verification. * * * Obtain a certificate
from the gas manufacturer documenting the quality of gas. * * *
* * * * *
8.2.4 NO2 to NO Conversion Efficiency. Before or
after each field test, you must conduct an NO2 to NO
conversion efficiency test if your system converts NO2 to
NO before analyzing for NOX. You may risk testing
multiple facilities before performing this test provided you pass
this test at the conclusion of the final facility test. A failed
final conversion efficiency test in this case will invalidate all
tests performed subsequent to the test in which the converter
efficiency test was passed. * * *
8.2.4.1 Introduce NO2 converter efficiency gas to the
analyzer in direct calibration mode and record the NOX
concentration displayed by the analyzer. Calculate the converter
efficiency using Equation 7E-7 in Section 12.7. The specification
for converter efficiency in Section 13.5 must be met. The user is
cautioned that state-of-the-art NO2 calibration gases may
have limited shelf lives, and this could affect the ability to pass
the 90 percent conversion efficiency requirement.
8.2.7 Interference Check. * * *
(1) You may introduce the appropriate interference test gases
(that are potentially encountered during a test, see examples in
Table 7E-3) into the analyzer separately or as mixtures. Test the
analyzer with the interference gas alone at the highest
concentration expected at a test source and again with the
interference gas and NOX at a representative
NOX test concentration. * * *
(2) * * * This interference test is valid for the life of the
instrument unless major analytical components (e.g., the detector)
are replaced with different model parts. If major components are
replaced with different model parts, the interference gas check must
be repeated before returning the analyzer to service.
* * * * *
8.4 Sample Collection.
(1) Position the probe at the first sampling point. Purge the
system for at least two times the response time before recording any
data. Then, traverse all required sampling points, sampling at each
point for an equal length of time and maintaining the appropriate
sample flow rate or dilution ratio (as applicable). You must record
at least one valid data point per minute during the test run.
(2) Each time the probe is removed from the stack and replaced,
you must recondition the sampling system for at least two times the
system response time prior to your next recording. If the average of
any run exceeds the calibration span value, that run is invalid.
* * * * *
8.5 Post-Run System Bias Check and Drift Assessment.
How do I confirm that each sample I collect is valid? After each
run, repeat the system bias check or 2-point system calibration
error check (for dilution systems) to validate the run. Do not make
adjustments to the measurement system (other than to maintain the
target sampling rate or dilution ratio) between the end of the run
and the completion of the post-run system bias or system calibration
error check. Note that for all post-run system bias or 2-point
system calibration error checks, you may inject the low-level gas
first and the upscale gas last, or vice-versa. You may risk sampling
for multiple runs before performing the post-run bias or system
calibration error check provided you pass this test at the
conclusion of the group of runs. A failed final test in this case
will invalidate all runs subsequent to the last passed test.
(1) If you do not pass the post-run system bias (or system
calibration error) check, then the run is invalid. You must diagnose
and fix the problem and pass another calibration error test (Section
8.2.3) and system bias (or 2-point system calibration error) check
(Section 8.2.5) before repeating the run. Record the system bias (or
system calibration error) results on a form similar to Table 7E-2.
* * * * *
9.0 Quality Control
Summary Table of QA/QC
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Process or QA/QC Checking
Status element specification Acceptance criteria frequency
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
M.............................. System NO2-NO conversion [gteqt]90% of Before or after
Performance. efficiency. certified test gas each test.
concentration.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
10.0 Calibration and Standardization * * *
(1) * * * Analyzers that measure NO and NO2
separately without using a converter must be calibrated with both NO
and NO2.
* * * * *
12.1 Nomenclature. * * *
Cnative = NOX concentration in the stack
gas as calculated in Section 12.6, ppmv. * * *
COA = Actual concentration of the low-level
calibration gas, ppmv. * * *
DF = Dilution system dilution factor or spike gas dilution
factor, dimensionless. * * *
SBfinal = Post-run system bias, percent of
calibration span.
* * * * *
12.4 System Calibration Error. * * *
[[Page 51372]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07SE07.000
* * * * *
12.6 Effluent Gas Concentration. For each test run, calculate
Cavg, the arithmetic average of all valid NOX
concentration values (e.g., 1-minute averages). Then adjust the
value of Cavg for bias using Equation 7E-5a if you use a
non-zero gas as your low-level calibration gas, or Equation 7E-5b if
you use a zero gas as your low-level calibration gas.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07SE07.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07SE07.002
* * * * *
12.9 Alternative NO2 Converter Efficiency. If the
alternative procedure of Section 16.2.2 is used, determine the
NOX concentration decrease from NOXPeak after
the minimum 30-minute test interval using Equation 7E-9. This
decrease from NOXPeak must meet the requirement in
Section 13.5 for the converter to be acceptable.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07SE07.003
* * * * *
12.11 Calculated Spike Gas Concentration and Spike Recovery for
the Example Alternative Dynamic Spiking Procedure in Section 16.1.3.
* * *
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07SE07.004
* * * * *
13.5 NO2 to NO Conversion Efficiency Test (as
applicable). The NO2 to NO conversion efficiency,
calculated according to Equation 7E-7, must be greater than or equal
to 90 percent. The alternative conversion efficiency check,
described in Section 16.2.2 and calculated according to Equation 7E-
9, must not result in a decrease from NOXPeak by more
than 2.0 percent.
* * * * *
16.2.2 Tedlar Bag Procedure. * * * Fill the remainder of the bag
with mid- to high-level NO in nitrogen (or other appropriate
concentration) calibration gas.
* * * * *
16.3 Manufacturer's Stability Test. A manufacturer's stability
test is required for all analyzers that routinely measure emissions
below 20 ppmv and is optional but recommended for other analyzers.
This test evaluates each analyzer model by subjecting it to the
tests listed in Table 7E-5 following procedures similar to those in
40 CFR 53.23 for thermal stability and insensitivity to supply
voltage variations. If the analyzer will be used under temperature
conditions that are outside the test conditions in Table B-4 of Part
53.23, alternative test temperatures that better reflect the
analyzer field environment should be used. Alternative procedures or
documentation that establish the analyzer's stability over the
appropriate line voltages and temperatures are acceptable.
* * * * *
Table 7E-3.--Example Interference Check Gas Concentrations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Concentrations \2\ Sample
conditioning type
Potential interferent gas\1\ ---------------------------------------
Hot wet Dried
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CO2............................. 5 and 15%......... 5 and 15%.
H2O............................. 25%............... 1%.
NO.............................. 15 ppmv........... 15 ppmv.
NO2............................. 15 ppmv........... 15 ppmv.
N2O............................. 10 ppmv........... 10 ppmv.
CO.............................. 50 ppmv........... 50 ppmv.
NH3............................. 10 ppmv........... 10 ppmv.
CH4............................. 50 ppmv........... 50 ppmv.
SO2............................. 20 ppmv........... 20 ppmv.
H2.............................. 50 ppmv........... 50 ppmv.
HCl............................. 10 ppmv........... 10 ppmv.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Any applicable gas may be eliminated or tested at a reduced level if
the manufacturer has provided reliable means for limiting or scrubbing
that gas to a specified level.
\2\ As Practicable, gas concentrations should be the highest expected at
test sites.
* * * * *
Table 7E-5.--Manufacturer Stability Test
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test description Acceptance criteria (note 1)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thermal Stability............ Temperature range when drift does not
exceed 3.0% of analyzer range over a 12-
hour run when measured with NOX present
@ 80% of calibration span.
[[Page 51373]]
Fault Conditions............. Identify conditions which, when they
occur, result in performance which is
not in compliance with the
Manufacturer's Stability Test criteria.
These are to be indicated visually or
electrically to alert the operator of
the problem.
Insensitivity to Supply 10.0% (or manufacturers
Voltage Variations. alternative) variation from nominal
voltage must produce a drift of <= 2.0%
of calibration span for either zero or
concentration >= 80% NOX present.
Analyzer Calibration Error... For a low-, medium-, and high-calibration
gas, the difference between the
manufacturer certified value and the
analyzer response in direct calibration
mode, no more than 2.0% of calibration
span.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note 1: If the instrument is to be used as a Low Range analyzer, all
tests must be performed at a calibration span of 20 ppm or less.
* * * * *
Appendix A-7--[Amended]
0
5. Amend Method 20 by adding a sentence to the end of Section 8.4 to
read as follows:
Method 20--Determination of Oxygen and Carbon Dioxide Concentrations in
Emissions From Stationary Sources (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure)
* * * * *
8.4 Sample Collection. * * * A test run must have a duration of
at least 21 minutes.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E7-17415 Filed 9-6-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P