Update of Continuous Instrumental Test Methods: Technical Amendments, 29691-29698 [E8-11398]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 100 / Thursday, May 22, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
high water and 33 feet at mean low
water. The existing drawbridge
operation regulations are listed at 33
CFR 117.224.
The waterway has seasonal
recreational vessels, fishing vessels, and
U.S. Navy vessels of various sizes. The
U.S. Navy and other marine facilities
were notified regarding this deviation
and no objections were received.
The owner of the bridge, National
Railroad Passenger Corporation
(Amtrak), requested a temporary
deviation to facilitate rehabilitation
construction at the bridge.
Under this temporary deviation the
Amtrak Bridge, mile 3.0, across the
Thames River at New London may
remain in the closed position from June
1, 2008, through June 13, 2008, and
from June 18, 2008, through June 20,
2008.
From June 21, 2008, through June 30,
2008, the draw may remain in the
closed position; except that, the draw
shall open for the passage of vessel
traffic during the following time
periods:
Monday through Friday from: 5 a.m.
to 5:40 a.m.; 11:20 a.m. to 11:55 a.m.;
3:35 p.m. to 4:15 p.m.; and 8:30 p.m. to
8:55 p.m.
Saturday from: 8:30 a.m. to 9:10 a.m.;
12:35 p.m. to 1:05 p.m.; 3:40 p.m. to
4:10 p.m.; 5:35 p.m. to 6:05 p.m.; and
7:35 p.m. to 8:40 p.m.
Sunday from: 8:30 a.m. to 9:20 a.m.;
11:35 a.m. to 12:15 p.m.; 1:30 p.m. to
1:55 p.m.; 6:30 p.m. to 7:10 p.m.; and
8:30 p.m. to 9:15 p.m.
The draw shall open on signal at any
time for U.S. Navy submarines and their
associated escort vessels.
Vessels that can pass under the bridge
without a bridge opening may do so at
all times.
In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e),
the bridge must return to its regular
operating schedule immediately at the
end of the designated time period. This
deviation from the operating regulations
is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
Dated: May 9, 2008.
Gary Kassof,
Bridge Program Manager, First Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. E8–11437 Filed 5–21–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:18 May 21, 2008
Jkt 214001
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 51
Requirements for Preparation,
Adoption, and Submittal of
Implementation Plans
CFR Correction
In title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, parts 50 to 51, revised as of
July 1, 2007, on page 296, in § 51.357,
remove paragraphs (b)(1)(i) and
(b)(1)(ii).
[FR Doc. E8–11525 Filed 5–21–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1505–01–D
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; Mississippi
CFR Correction
In title 40 of the Code of Regulations,
part 52.1019 to End, revised as of July
1, 2007, on page 222, in section 52.1270,
in the table in paragraph (c), under APCS-2, the entry for Section VI, is corrected
in the column titled ‘‘EPA approval
date’’, is corrected to read ‘‘7/10/2006,
71 FR 38775’’.
[FR Doc. E8–11526 Filed 5–21–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1505–01–D
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 60
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–0071; FRL–8568–7]
RIN 2060–AP13
Update of Continuous Instrumental
Test Methods: Technical Amendments
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to
correct errors in a final rule published
May 15, 2006, that updated five
continuous instrumental test methods.
As published, the rule contained
inadvertent errors and provisions that
needed to be clarified. We published a
direct final rule with a parallel proposed
rule on September 7, 2007 to correct the
errors and to add clarifying language.
However, we received an adverse
comment on the direct final rule, and it
was subsequently withdrawn on
November 5, 2007. This action finalizes
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
29691
the parallel proposal. In this final rule,
EPA corrects errors, clarifies certain
provisions, and responds to the adverse
comment received on the direct final
rule published on September 7, 2007.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
May 22, 2008.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–0071. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov Web site.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
e.g., CBI or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Update of Continuous Instrumental
Test Methods Docket, Docket ID No.
EPA–OAR–2002–0071, EPA Docket
Center, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC. This Docket Facility is
open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
Monday through Friday excluding legal
holidays. The Docket telephone number
is (202) 566–1742. 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Foston Curtis, Air Quality Assessment
Division, Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards (E143–02),
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. Does This Action Apply to Me?
II. Where Can I Obtain a Copy of This
Action?
III. Background
IV. 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
V. Public Comments on the Proposed Rule
VI. Judicial Review
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
E:\FR\FM\22MYR1.SGM
22MYR1
29692
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 100 / Thursday, May 22, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
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. Does This Action Apply to Me?
This rule applies to certain sources
that are subject to New Source
Performance Standards (40 CFR part
NAICS a
Category
Industry
Industry
Industry
Industry
Industry
Industry
Industry
Industry
............................................
............................................
............................................
............................................
............................................
............................................
............................................
............................................
a North
332410
332410
332410
333611
324110
562213
322110
325188
Examples of regulated entities
...........................................
...........................................
...........................................
...........................................
...........................................
...........................................
...........................................
...........................................
Fossil Fuel Steam Generators.
Industrial, Commercial, Institutional Steam Generating Units.
Electric Generating Units.
Stationary Gas Turbines.
Petroleum Refineries.
Municipal Waste Combustors.
Kraft Pulp Mills.
Sulfuric Acid Plants.
American Industry Classification System.
This table is not intended to be
exhaustive, but rather to provide a guide
for readers regarding entities likely to be
affected by this action. This table lists
examples of the types of entities EPA is
now aware could potentially be affected
by the final rule. Other types of entities
not listed could also be affected. If you
have any questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a
particular entity, consult the person
listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.
II. Where Can I Obtain a Copy of This
Action?
In addition to being available in the
docket, an electronic copy of this 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 rule 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.
III. Background
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
60), are required to conduct continuous
emission monitoring pursuant to 40 CFR
Part 75, or are subject to other
regulations that require the use of
Method 3A, of Appendix A–1, Methods
6C, 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:
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 updates to simplify,
harmonize, and update these test
methods on May 15, 2006 (71 FR
28081). The rule promulgating these
updates became effective August 14,
2006. As published, the rule contained
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:18 May 21, 2008
Jkt 214001
inadvertent errors and provisions that
needed clarification.
On September 7, 2007, EPA
simultaneously published a proposed
rule (72 FR 51392) and a direct final
rule (72 FR 51365) to correct errors and
clarify certain provisions in the May 15,
2006 rule. Because EPA received one
adverse comment during the public
comment period, EPA withdrew the
direct final rule on November 5, 2007
(72 FR 62414). EPA is taking final action
on the corrections and clarifications
proposed for approval on September 7,
2007, and is responding to the adverse
comment received in response to that
proposal.
IV. This Action
In this final rule, EPA corrects errors
and clarifies portions of the May 15,
2006 rule to reflect the intent of the rule
and to make it more understandable.
Specifically, 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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. 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.
6. 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
E:\FR\FM\22MYR1.SGM
22MYR1
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 100 / Thursday, May 22, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
mode, as suggested in the current
method, but the calibration gas may
simply supply an excess of calibration
gas through the system.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. In Section 7.2, we are clearly
stating that the appropriate test gases
listed in Table 7E–3, or others not listed
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.
10. 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.
11. 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.
12. In Section 8.2.4, we are clearly
stating that the converter efficiency test
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:18 May 21, 2008
Jkt 214001
may be performed either before or after
a test or after a series of tests.
13. 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.
14. In the sample traversing procedure
in Section 8.4, we delete redundant
language in paragraphs (1) and (2).
15. In paragraph (1) of Section 8.5, we
clarify the handling of failed post-run
bias checks by removing unnecessary
wording.
16. 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.
17. In Section 12.1, we are revising
certain definitions to reflect the
corrections being made to the
calculations.
18. In Section 12.4, we correct the
system calibration error equation by
adding a term for the dilution factor.
19. In Section 12.6, we add a missing
equation for calculating sample
concentration when a non-zero gas is
used as the low-level calibration gas.
20. In Section 12.9 we replace the
erroneous equation added in the
updates rule with the one traditionally
used by the method.
21. In Section 12.11, we correct the
equation for calculating the spike
recovery.
22. In Section 13.5, we are adding the
2 percent limit for the alternative
converter efficiency test.
23. 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.
24. 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.
25. 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.
26. In Table 7E–5, we correct the
typographical error listing the NOX
concentration at ‘‘.80% of calibration
span’’ to read ‘‘80% of calibration
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
29693
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.
V. Public Comments on the Proposed
Rule
Two public comment letters were
received on the direct final rule that was
published on September 7, 2007.
Because the comments was considered
adverse, the direct final rule was
withdrawn on November 5, 2007 (72 FR
62414). One commenter identified an
error in the definition of ‘‘system bias.’’
We inadvertently proposed to change
the definition 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. Therefore,
we are not revising the definition of
system bias as indicated in the
September 7, 2007, notice.
Another commenter asked that we
amend the suggested gas concentrations
that were proposed for the Method 7E
converter check to make it clear that
gases in the 40 to 60 ppm range were
not the only ones allowed but that other
concentrations were acceptable if they
were more appropriate for the source
conditions. We agree and have made
this change in the final rule.
Another error in the published
equation for calculating system
calibration error was pointed out. The
dilution factor was not in the correct
place in Equation 7E–3. This has been
corrected.
VI. Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean
Air Act (CAA), judicial review of this
final rule is available by filing a petition
for review in the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the District of Columbia Circuit by
July 21, 2008. Under section
307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA, only an
objection to this 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.
E:\FR\FM\22MYR1.SGM
22MYR1
29694
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 100 / Thursday, May 22, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
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. Burden is
defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). These
amendments do not add information
collection requirements beyond those
currently required under the applicable
regulation. The amendments being
made correct technical inaccuracies in
the existing testing methodology.
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
generally requires an agency to prepare
a regulatory flexibility analysis of any
rule subject to notice and comment
rulemaking requirements under the
Administrative Procedure Act or any
other statute unless the agency certifies
that the rule 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 this 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 this final rule on small
entities, I certify that this action will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
This final rule will not impose any
requirements on small entities because
it does not impose any additional
regulatory requirements.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:18 May 21, 2008
Jkt 214001
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104–4, establishes requirements for
Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their regulatory actions on State, local,
and tribal governments and the private
sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA,
EPA generally must prepare a written
statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules
with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may
result in expenditures to State, local,
and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or to the private sector, of $100 million
or more in any 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 final
rule does not contain a Federal mandate
that may result in expenditures of $100
million or more for State, local, and
tribal governments, in the aggregate, or
the private sector in any one year, 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, this rule is not subject
to the requirements of sections 202 and
205 of the UMRA. EPA has determined
that this rule contains no regulatory
requirements that might significantly or
uniquely affect small governments
because it contains no requirements that
apply to such governments or impose
obligations upon them. Thus, this rule
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 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 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 this 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 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
EPA interprets EO 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997) as applying only
to those regulatory actions that concern
E:\FR\FM\22MYR1.SGM
22MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 100 / Thursday, May 22, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
health or safety risks, such that the
analysis required under section 5–501 of
the EO has the potential to influence the
regulation. This action is not subject to
EO 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.
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law No.
104–113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus
standards in its regulatory activities
unless to do so would be inconsistent
with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. Voluntary consensus
standards are technical standards (e.g.,
materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, and business
practices) that are developed or adopted
by voluntary consensus standards
bodies. 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 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 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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:18 May 21, 2008
Jkt 214001
provided to human health or the
environment. This final rule does not
relax the control measures on sources
regulated by the rule and, therefore, will
not cause emissions increases from
these sources.
other gases that interfere with the O2
measurement.
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 May 22, 2008.
29695
Appendix A–4—[Amended]
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedures,
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: May 15, 2008.
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)
*
*
*
*
*
7.1 Calibration Gas. * * * Pre-cleaned or
scrubbed air may be used for the O2 highcalibration gas provided it does not contain
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
*
*
*
*
*
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.
*
*
*
*
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 Section 3.12 by removing
the third sentence and adding two new
sentences.
I c. Revise Section 6.2.2.
I d. Revise the second sentence in
Section 6.2.6.
I e. Revise Section 6.2.8.2.
I f. Add a sentence after the second
sentence in Section 7.1.
I g. Revise Section 7.1.4.
I h. Revise Section 7.2.
I i. Add three sentences to the
beginning of Section 8.1.2.
I j. Revise the second sentence in
Section 8.2.1.
I k. Revise the first sentence in Section
8.2.4.
I l. Revise Section 8.2.4.1.
I m. Revise the first and second
sentences in paragraph (1) and the
second sentence in paragraph (2) of
Section 8.2.7.
I n. Revise paragraphs (1) and (2) in
Section 8.4.
I o. Revise the introductory paragraph
and paragraph (1) of Section 8.5.
I p. In Section 9.0, revise the table
entitled ‘‘Summary Table of QA/QC’’ by
amending the entry for ‘‘M’’ ‘‘System
Performance’’ ‘‘NO2–NO conversion
efficiency’’ ‘‘≥ 90% of certified test gas
concentration’’ ‘‘before each test.’’
I q. Revise the last sentence in
paragraph (1) of Section 10.0.
I r. Add definitions for ‘‘Cnative,’’ ‘‘COA,’’
and ‘‘DF’’ in alphabetical order to
Section 12.1.
I s. Remove the definition for ‘‘NOfinal’’
in Section 12.1.
I t. Revise the definitions of ‘‘C0’’ and
‘‘SBf’’ in Section 12.1.
I u. Revise Section 12.4.
I v. Revise Sections 12.6 and 12.9.
I w. Revise Equation 7E–12 in Section
12.11.
I
I
I
E:\FR\FM\22MYR1.SGM
22MYR1
29696
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 100 / Thursday, May 22, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
x. Revise Section 13.5.
y. Revise the third sentence in
paragraph (1) of Section 16.2.2.
I z. Remove and reserve paragraph (2)
and remove paragraph (3) of Section
16.2.2.
I aa. Revise Section 16.3.
I bb. Revise Table 7E–3.
I cc. Revise Table 7E–5.
I
I
Method 7E—Determination of Nitrogen
Oxides Emissions From Stationary
Sources (Instrumental Analyzer
Procedure)
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
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 lowconcentration 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. Ambientlevel analyzers are exempt from the
MST requirements of Section 16.3.
* * *
*
*
*
*
*
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:18 May 21, 2008
Jkt 214001
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.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 concentration sufficient to show NO2
conversion at the concentrations
encountered in the source. A test gas
concentration in the 40 to 60 ppm range
is suggested, but other concentrations
may be more appropriate to specific
sources. 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. If
testing for multiple pollutants or
diluents at the same site, a stratification
test using only one pollutant or diluent
satisfies this requirement. A
stratification test is not required for
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 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
E:\FR\FM\22MYR1.SGM
22MYR1
29697
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 100 / Thursday, May 22, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
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 .............
* * *
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.
*
* * *
CO = Average of the initial and final
system calibration bias (or 2-point
system calibration error) check
responses from the low-level (or zero)
calibration gas, ppmv.
COA = Actual concentration of the
low-level calibration gas, ppmv.
* * *
DF = Dilution system dilution factor
or spike gas dilution factor,
dimensionless.
* * *
SCE =
*
*
*
*
*
12.6 Effluent Gas Concentration. For
each test run, calculate Cavg, the
arithmetic average of all valid NOX
( CS
DF ) − CV
CS
CMA − COA
+ CMA
CM − CO
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
CGas = ( C Avg − CO )
*
*
*
*
12.9 Alternative NO2 Converter
Efficiency. If the alternative procedure
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:18 May 21, 2008
Jkt 214001
× 100
CMA
CM − CO
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
*
SBfinal = Post-run system bias, percent
of calibration span.
*
*
*
*
*
12.4 System Calibration Error. Use
Equation 7E–3 to calculate the system
calibration error for dilution systems.
Equation 7E–3 applies to both the initial
3-point system calibration error test and
the subsequent 2-point calibration error
checks between test runs. In this
equation, the term ‘‘Cs’’ refers to the
diluted calibration gas concentration
measured by the analyzer.
calibration gas, or Equation 7E–5b if you
use a zero gas as your low-level
calibration gas.
Eq. 7E -5a
Eq. 7E -5b
of Section 16.2.2 is used, determine the
NOX concentration decrease from
NOXPeak after the minimum 30-minute
PO 00000
*
Eq. 7E -3
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
CGas = ( C Avg − CM )
*
*
ER22MY08.002
*
test interval using Equation 7E–9. This
decrease from NOXPeak must meet the
E:\FR\FM\22MYR1.SGM
22MYR1
ER22MY08.001
*
*
Before or after each
test.
ER22MY08.000
*
Checking frequency
29698
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 100 / Thursday, May 22, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
requirement in Section 13.5 for the
converter to be acceptable.
% Decrease =
*
*
*
*
*
12.11 Calculated Spike Gas
Concentration and Spike Recovery for
NOXPeak − NOXFinal
× 100
NOXPeak
Eq. 7E -9
the Example Alternative Dynamic
R=
*
*
*
*
*
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 midto 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
DF ( CSS − Cnative ) + Cnative
Cspike
100
Spiking Procedure in Section 16.1.3.
* * *
Eq. 7E -12
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
Potential interferent
gas1
Concentrations2 sample conditioning type
Hot wet
CO2 .......................
H2O .......................
NO ........................
NO2 .......................
N2O .......................
CO ........................
NH3 .......................
CH4 .......................
SO2 .......................
H2 ..........................
HCl ........................
Dried
5 and 15%
25%
15 ppmv
15 ppmv
10 ppmv
50 ppmv
10 ppmv
50 ppmv
20 ppmv
50 ppmv
10 ppmv
5 and 15%
1%
15 ppmv
15 ppmv
10 ppmv
50 ppmv
10 ppmv
50 ppmv
20 ppmv
50 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.
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.
Fault Conditions ..................................................
Insensitivity to Supply Voltage Variations ..........
Analyzer Calibration Error ..................................
*
*
*
*
Appendix A–7—[Amended]
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. E8–11398 Filed 5–21–08; 8:45 am]
I
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:18 May 21, 2008
Jkt 214001
*
*
*
*
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\22MYR1.SGM
22MYR1
ER22MY08.003
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
*
ER22MY08.004
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.
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 100 (Thursday, May 22, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 29691-29698]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-11398]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 60
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0071; FRL-8568-7]
RIN 2060-AP13
Update of Continuous Instrumental Test Methods: Technical
Amendments
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to correct errors in a final rule
published May 15, 2006, that updated five continuous instrumental test
methods. As published, the rule contained inadvertent errors and
provisions that needed to be clarified. We published a direct final
rule with a parallel proposed rule on September 7, 2007 to correct the
errors and to add clarifying language. However, we received an adverse
comment on the direct final rule, and it was subsequently withdrawn on
November 5, 2007. This action finalizes the parallel proposal. In this
final rule, EPA corrects errors, clarifies certain provisions, and
responds to the adverse comment received on the direct final rule
published on September 7, 2007.
DATES: This final rule is effective on May 22, 2008.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0071. All documents in the docket are listed on the
www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Update of Continuous
Instrumental Test Methods Docket, Docket ID No. EPA-OAR-2002-0071, EPA
Docket Center, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave.,
NW., Washington, DC. This Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday excluding legal holidays. The Docket
telephone number is (202) 566-1742. 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Foston Curtis, Air Quality
Assessment Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
(E143-02), 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. Does This Action Apply to Me?
II. Where Can I Obtain a Copy of This Action?
III. Background
IV. 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
V. Public Comments on the Proposed Rule
VI. Judicial Review
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
[[Page 29692]]
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. Does This Action Apply to Me?
This rule applies to certain sources that are subject to New Source
Performance Standards (40 CFR part 60), are required to conduct
continuous emission monitoring pursuant to 40 CFR Part 75, or are
subject to other regulations that require the use of Method 3A, of
Appendix A-1, Methods 6C, 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
Category NAICS \a\ entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry...................... 332410........... Fossil Fuel Steam
Generators.
Industry...................... 332410........... Industrial,
Commercial,
Institutional Steam
Generating Units.
Industry...................... 332410........... Electric Generating
Units.
Industry...................... 333611........... Stationary Gas
Turbines.
Industry...................... 324110........... Petroleum Refineries.
Industry...................... 562213........... Municipal Waste
Combustors.
Industry...................... 322110........... Kraft Pulp Mills.
Industry...................... 325188........... Sulfuric Acid Plants.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ North American Industry Classification System.
This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather to provide
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. This table lists examples of the types of entities EPA is now
aware could potentially be affected by the final rule. Other types of
entities not listed could also be affected. If you have any questions
regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity,
consult the person listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section.
II. Where Can I Obtain a Copy of This Action?
In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of
this 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 rule 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.
III. 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 updates to simplify, harmonize, and update these test
methods on May 15, 2006 (71 FR 28081). The rule promulgating these
updates became effective August 14, 2006. As published, the rule
contained inadvertent errors and provisions that needed clarification.
On September 7, 2007, EPA simultaneously published a proposed rule
(72 FR 51392) and a direct final rule (72 FR 51365) to correct errors
and clarify certain provisions in the May 15, 2006 rule. Because EPA
received one adverse comment during the public comment period, EPA
withdrew the direct final rule on November 5, 2007 (72 FR 62414). EPA
is taking final action on the corrections and clarifications proposed
for approval on September 7, 2007, and is responding to the adverse
comment received in response to that proposal.
IV. This Action
In this final rule, EPA corrects errors and clarifies portions of
the May 15, 2006 rule to reflect the intent of the rule and to make it
more understandable.
Specifically, EPA is taking the following actions:
A. Method 3A--40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A-1
1. We are clearly stating that pre-cleaned 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. 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.
6. 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
[[Page 29693]]
mode, as suggested in the current method, but the calibration gas may
simply supply an excess of calibration gas through the system.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. In Section 7.2, we are clearly stating that the appropriate test
gases listed in Table 7E-3, or others not listed 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.
10. 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.
11. 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.
12. 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.
13. 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.
14. In the sample traversing procedure in Section 8.4, we delete
redundant language in paragraphs (1) and (2).
15. In paragraph (1) of Section 8.5, we clarify the handling of
failed post-run bias checks by removing unnecessary wording.
16. 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.
17. In Section 12.1, we are revising certain definitions to reflect
the corrections being made to the calculations.
18. In Section 12.4, we correct the system calibration error
equation by adding a term for the dilution factor.
19. In Section 12.6, we add a missing equation for calculating
sample concentration when a non-zero gas is used as the low-level
calibration gas.
20. In Section 12.9 we replace the erroneous equation added in the
updates rule with the one traditionally used by the method.
21. In Section 12.11, we correct the equation for calculating the
spike recovery.
22. In Section 13.5, we are adding the 2 percent limit for the
alternative converter efficiency test.
23. 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.
24. 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.
25. 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.
26. 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.
V. Public Comments on the Proposed Rule
Two public comment letters were received on the direct final rule
that was published on September 7, 2007. Because the comments was
considered adverse, the direct final rule was withdrawn on November 5,
2007 (72 FR 62414). One commenter identified an error in the definition
of ``system bias.'' We inadvertently proposed to change the definition
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. Therefore,
we are not revising the definition of system bias as indicated in the
September 7, 2007, notice.
Another commenter asked that we amend the suggested gas
concentrations that were proposed for the Method 7E converter check to
make it clear that gases in the 40 to 60 ppm range were not the only
ones allowed but that other concentrations were acceptable if they were
more appropriate for the source conditions. We agree and have made this
change in the final rule.
Another error in the published equation for calculating system
calibration error was pointed out. The dilution factor was not in the
correct place in Equation 7E-3. This has been corrected.
VI. Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), judicial review
of this final rule is available by filing a petition for review in the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit by July 21,
2008. Under section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA, only an objection to this
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.
[[Page 29694]]
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.
Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). These amendments do not add
information collection requirements beyond those currently required
under the applicable regulation. The amendments being made correct
technical inaccuracies in the existing testing methodology.
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 this 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 this final rule on small
entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This final
rule will not impose any requirements on small entities 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), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
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 final rule does not contain a Federal
mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for
State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private
sector in any one year, 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, this
rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the
UMRA. EPA has determined that this rule contains no regulatory
requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small
governments because it contains no requirements that apply to such
governments or impose obligations upon them. Thus, this 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 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 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 this 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 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
EPA interprets EO 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as applying
only to those regulatory actions that concern
[[Page 29695]]
health or safety risks, such that the analysis required under section
5-501 of the EO has the potential to influence the regulation. This
action is not subject to EO 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
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law No. 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272
note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards
are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. 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 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 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 final rule 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 May 22, 2008.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedures,
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: May 15, 2008.
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. * * * Pre-cleaned 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 Section 3.12 by removing the third sentence and adding two
new sentences.
0
c. Revise Section 6.2.2.
0
d. Revise the second sentence in Section 6.2.6.
0
e. Revise Section 6.2.8.2.
0
f. Add a sentence after the second sentence in Section 7.1.
0
g. Revise Section 7.1.4.
0
h. Revise Section 7.2.
0
i. Add three sentences to the beginning of Section 8.1.2.
0
j. Revise the second sentence in Section 8.2.1.
0
k. Revise the first sentence in Section 8.2.4.
0
l. Revise Section 8.2.4.1.
0
m. Revise the first and second sentences in paragraph (1) and the
second sentence in paragraph (2) of Section 8.2.7.
0
n. Revise paragraphs (1) and (2) in Section 8.4.
0
o. Revise the introductory paragraph and paragraph (1) of Section 8.5.
0
p. In Section 9.0, revise the table entitled ``Summary Table of QA/QC''
by amending the entry for ``M'' ``System Performance'' ``NO2-NO
conversion efficiency'' ``>= 90% of certified test gas concentration''
``before each test.''
0
q. Revise the last sentence in paragraph (1) of Section 10.0.
0
r. Add definitions for ``Cnative,'' ``COA,'' and ``DF'' in alphabetical
order to Section 12.1.
0
s. Remove the definition for ``NOfinal'' in Section 12.1.
0
t. Revise the definitions of ``C0'' and ``SBf'' in Section 12.1.
0
u. Revise Section 12.4.
0
v. Revise Sections 12.6 and 12.9.
0
w. Revise Equation 7E-12 in Section 12.11.
[[Page 29696]]
0
x. Revise Section 13.5.
0
y. Revise the third sentence in paragraph (1) of Section 16.2.2.
0
z. Remove and reserve paragraph (2) and remove paragraph (3) of Section
16.2.2.
0
aa. Revise Section 16.3.
0
bb. Revise Table 7E-3.
0
cc. 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. * * *
* * * * *
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.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 concentration sufficient to show NO2
conversion at the concentrations encountered in the source. A test gas
concentration in the 40 to 60 ppm range is suggested, but other
concentrations may be more appropriate to specific sources. 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. If testing for multiple pollutants or diluents at the
same site, a stratification test using only one pollutant or diluent
satisfies this requirement. 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 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
[[Page 29697]]
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 Checking frequency
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
M.................. System Performance.. NO2-NO conversion >= 90% of certified test Before or after each
efficiency. gas concentration. test.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * *
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.
* * *
CO = Average of the initial and final system calibration bias (or
2-point system calibration error) check responses from the low-level
(or zero) calibration gas, 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. Use Equation 7E-3 to calculate the
system calibration error for dilution systems. Equation 7E-3 applies to
both the initial 3-point system calibration error test and the
subsequent 2-point calibration error checks between test runs. In this
equation, the term ``Cs'' refers to the diluted calibration gas
concentration measured by the analyzer.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR22MY08.000
* * * * *
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] TR22MY08.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR22MY08.002
* * * * *
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
[[Page 29698]]
requirement in Section 13.5 for the converter to be acceptable.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR22MY08.003
* * * * *
12.11 Calculated Spike Gas Concentration and Spike Recovery for the
Example Alternative Dynamic Spiking Procedure in Section 16.1.3. * * *
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR22MY08.004
* * * * *
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.
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. E8-11398 Filed 5-21-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P