Office of Research and Development; Ambient Air Monitoring Reference and Equivalent Methods: Designation of a New Equivalent Method, 28241-28242 [E9-14022]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 113 / Monday, June 15, 2009 / Notices
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15 are
identified on the form and/or
instrument, if applicable.
Burden Statement: The annual public
reporting and recordkeeping burden for
this collection of information is
estimated to average 320 hours per
response. Burden means the total time,
effort, or financial resources expended
by persons to generate, maintain, retain,
or disclose and provide information
either to or for a Federal agency. This
includes the time needed to review
instructions, develop, acquire, install,
and utilize technology and systems for
the purposes of collecting, validating,
and verifying information, processing
and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information.
All existing ways will have to adjust to
comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements that have
subsequently changed; train personnel
to be able to respond to a collection of
information; search data sources;
complete and review the collection of
information; and transmit or otherwise
disclose the information.
Respondents/Affected Entities:
Owners and operators of hospital/
medical/infectious waste incinerators.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
72.
Frequency of Response: Initially,
occasionally, annually and
semiannually.
Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden:
69,067.
Estimated Total Annual Cost:
$5,705,702, which is comprised of
$5,575,702 in labor costs, $130,000 in
operation and maintenance (O&M)
costs, and no capital/startup costs.
Changes in the Estimates: There is no
change in the labor hours in this ICR
compared to the previous ICR. This is
due to two considerations. First, the
regulations have not changed over the
past three years and are not anticipated
to change over the next three years.
Secondly, the current growth rate for the
industry is very low, negative or
nonexistent, so there is no significant
change in the overall burden.
Dated: June 8, 2009.
John Moses,
Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. E9–14010 Filed 6–12–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[FRL–8919–2]
Office of Research and Development;
Ambient Air Monitoring Reference and
Equivalent Methods: Designation of a
New Equivalent Method
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Notice of the designation of a
new equivalent method for monitoring
ambient air quality.
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that
the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) has designated, in accordance
with 40 CFR Part 53, a new equivalent
method for measuring concentrations of
PM10–2.5 in the ambient air.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Surender Kaushik, Human Exposure
and Atmospheric Sciences Division
(MD–D205–03), National Exposure
Research Laboratory, U.S. EPA,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27711. Phone: (919) 541–5691, email:
Kaushik.Surender@epa.gov.
In
accordance with regulations at 40 CFR
Part 53, the EPA evaluates various
methods for monitoring the
concentrations of those ambient air
pollutants for which EPA has
established National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQSs) as set
forth in 40 CFR Part 50. Monitoring
methods that are determined to meet
specific requirements for adequacy are
designated by the EPA as either
reference methods or equivalent
methods (as applicable), thereby
permitting their use under 40 CFR Part
58 by States and other agencies for
determining compliance with the
NAAQSs.
The EPA hereby announces the
designation of a new equivalent method
for measuring concentrations of PM10–2.5
in the ambient air. This designation is
made under the provisions of 40 CFR
part 53, as amended on October 17,
2006 (71 FR 61271).
The new PM10–2.5 equivalent method
utilizes a pair of FEM samplers (EQPM–
0308–170), one configured to measure
PM2.5 and the other to measure PM10.
This automated monitoring method
utilizes a measurement principle based
on sample collection by filtration and
analysis by beta-ray attenuation. The
newly designated equivalent method is
identified as follows:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
EQPM–0709–185, ‘‘Met One Instruments
BAM–1020 PM10–2.5 Measurement System,’’
consisting of 2 BAM–1020 monitors, the first
of which (PM2.5 measurement) is configured
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:47 Jun 12, 2009
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
28241
as a PM2.5 FEM (EQPM–0308–170). The
second BAM–1020 monitor (PM10
measurement) is configurable as a PM2.5 FEM
(EQPM–0308–170), but set to monitor PM10.
The BAM–1020 monitors are collocated to
within 1–4 meters of one another. The BAM–
1020 performing the PM2.5 measurement is
equipped with Met One Instruments, Inc. P/
N BX–Coarse interface board and accessories;
the units are interconnected to provide
concurrent sampling and to report PM10–2.5
concentrations directly to the user. Both
units are operated in accordance with BAM–
1020 PM–Coarse Addendum Rev. 5–5 or later
and the BAM–1020 Operations Manual Rev.
D or later.
The application for equivalent
method determination for this candidate
method was received by the EPA on
January 22, 2009. The monitor is
commercially available from the
applicant, Met One Instruments, Inc.,
1600 Washington Blvd., Grants Pass, OR
97526.
Test analyzers representative of this
method have been tested in accordance
with the applicable test procedures
specified in 40 CFR part 53 (as amended
on October 17, 2006). After reviewing
the results of those tests and other
information submitted by the applicant
in the application, EPA has determined,
in accordance with part 53, that this
method should be designated as an
equivalent method. The information
submitted by the applicant will be kept
on file, either at EPA’s National
Exposure Research Laboratory, Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711 or
in an approved archive storage facility,
and will be available for inspection
(with advance notice) to the extent
consistent with 40 CFR Part 2 (EPA’s
regulations implementing the Freedom
of Information Act).
As a designated equivalent method,
this method is acceptable for use by
states and other air monitoring agencies
under the requirements of 40 CFR part
58, Ambient Air Quality Surveillance.
For such purposes, this method must be
used in strict accordance with the
operation or instruction manual
associated with the method and subject
to any specifications and limitations
(e.g., configuration or operational
settings) specified in the applicable
designated method description (see the
identification of the method above).
Use of the method should also be in
general accordance with the guidance
and recommendations of applicable
sections of the ‘‘Quality Assurance
Handbook for Air Pollution
Measurement Systems, Volume I,’’ EPA/
600/R–94/038a and ‘‘Quality Assurance
Handbook for Air Pollution
Measurement Systems, Volume II,
Ambient Air Quality Monitoring
Program’’ EPA–454/B–08–003,
E:\FR\FM\15JNN1.SGM
15JNN1
28242
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 113 / Monday, June 15, 2009 / Notices
December, 2008 (available at https://
www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/qabook.html).
Vendor modifications of a designated
equivalent method used for purposes of
Part 58 are permitted only with prior
approval of the EPA, as provided in part
53. Provisions concerning modification
of such methods by users are specified
under Section 2.8 (Modifications of
Methods by Users) of Appendix C to 40
CFR Part 58.
In general, a method designation
applies to any sampler or analyzer
which is identical to the sampler or
analyzer described in the application for
designation. In some cases, similar
samplers or analyzers manufactured
prior to the designation may be
upgraded or converted (e.g., by minor
modification or by substitution of the
approved operation or instruction
manual) so as to be identical to the
designated method and thus achieve
designated status. The manufacturer
should be consulted to determine the
feasibility of such upgrading or
conversion.
Part 53 requires that sellers of
designated reference or equivalent
method analyzers or samplers comply
with certain conditions. These
conditions are specified in 40 CFR 53.9.
Aside from occasional breakdowns or
malfunctions, consistent or repeated
noncompliance with any of these
conditions should be reported to:
Director, Human Exposure and
Atmospheric Sciences Division (MD–
E205–01), National Exposure Research
Laboratory, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina 27711.
Designation of this new equivalent
method is intended to assist the States
in establishing and operating their air
quality surveillance systems under 40
CFR part 58. Questions concerning the
commercial availability or technical
aspects of the method should be
directed to the applicant.
Jewel F. Morris,
Acting Director, National Exposure Research
Laboratory.
[FR Doc. E9–14022 Filed 6–12–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
[FRL–8918–6]
Clean Air Act Operating Permit
Program; Petition for Objection to
Federal Operating Permit for CITGO
Refining and Chemicals Company L.P.
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:47 Jun 12, 2009
Jkt 217001
ACTION:
Notice of final action.
SUMMARY: This document announces
that the EPA Administrator has
responded to a citizen petition asking
EPA to object to the CITGO Refining and
Chemicals Company L.P. (CITGO)
operating permit issued by the Texas
Commission on Environmental Quality.
Specifically, the Administrator has
partially granted and partially denied
the petition submitted by
Environmental Integrity Project, the
Refinery Reform Campaign, Citizens for
Environmental Justice, and Suzie
Canales (Petitioners), to object to the
title V operating permit for CITGO to
operate the West Plant at its refinery in
Corpus Christi, Texas.
Pursuant to section 505(b)(2) of the
Clean Air Act (Act), the petitioner may
seek judicial review of those portions of
the petition which EPA denied in the
United States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit. Any petition for
review shall be filed within 60 days
from the date this notice appears in the
Federal Register, pursuant to section
307 of the Act.
ADDRESSES: You may review copies of
the final order, the petition, and other
supporting information at EPA Region 6,
1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202–
2733. EPA requests that if at all
possible, you contact the individual
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section to view copies of the
final order, petition, and other
supporting information. If you wish to
examine these documents, you should
make an appointment at least 24 hours
before visiting day. The final order is
also available electronically at: https://
www.epa.gov/region07/programs/artd/
air/title5/petitiondb/petitions/citgo_
corpuschristi_west_response2007.pdf.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bonnie Braganza, Air Permits Section,
Multimedia Planning and Permitting
Division, EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross
Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733,
telephone (214) 665–7340, or e-mail at
braganza.bonnie@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Act
affords EPA a 45-day period to review,
and, as appropriate, object to operating
permits proposed by State permitting
authorities under Title V of the Act.
Section 505(b)(2) of the Act authorizes
any person to petition the EPA
Administrator within 60 days after the
expiration of this review period to
object to title V operating permits if EPA
has not done so. Petitions must be based
only on objections to the permit that
were raised with reasonable specificity
during the public comment period
provided by the State, unless the
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
petitioner demonstrates that it was
impracticable to raise these issues
during the comment period or the
grounds for the issues arose after this
period.
On March 30, 2007, EPA received a
petition from the Petitioners requesting
that EPA object to the issuance of the
title V operating permit to CITGO for the
operation of the West Plant at its
refinery in Corpus Christi, Texas. First,
the petitioners claim that the permit’s
monitoring requirements are not
adequate to ensure compliance with all
emission limitations and other
substantive Act requirements.
Second, the Petitioners claim that the
permit’s use of incorporation by
reference for emission limitations and
standards violates title V of the Act and
its implementing regulations at 40 CFR
part 70 and renders the permit
practically unenforceable. Further, the
Petitioners claim that (1) the permit
should include the emission rate tables
located in underlying permits; (2) the
Applicable Requirements Summary of
the permit must reference a State
administrative enforcement order, and
the permit should explicitly state the
provisions of the order as terms of the
permit; and (3) the permit must
explicitly incorporate a federal consent
decree, and the permit should
specifically state the emission
limitations and monitoring
requirements of the consent decree as
terms of the permit.
On May 28, 2009, the Administrator
issued an order partially granting and
partially denying the petition. The order
explains the reasons behind EPA’s
conclusion to partially grant and
partially deny the petition for objection.
Dated: June 5, 2009.
Lawrence E. Starfield,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. E9–14016 Filed 6–12–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[FRL–8918–7]
Clean Air Act Operating Permit
Program; Petition for Objection to
Federal Operating Permit for The
Premcor Refining Group, Inc.
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of final action.
SUMMARY: This document announces
that the EPA Administrator has
responded to a citizen petition asking
EPA to object to the Premcor Refining
E:\FR\FM\15JNN1.SGM
15JNN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 113 (Monday, June 15, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28241-28242]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-14022]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[FRL-8919-2]
Office of Research and Development; Ambient Air Monitoring
Reference and Equivalent Methods: Designation of a New Equivalent
Method
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Notice of the designation of a new equivalent method for
monitoring ambient air quality.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) has designated, in accordance with 40 CFR Part 53, a new
equivalent method for measuring concentrations of PM10-2.5
in the ambient air.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Surender Kaushik, Human Exposure and
Atmospheric Sciences Division (MD-D205-03), National Exposure Research
Laboratory, U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711.
Phone: (919) 541-5691, email: Kaushik.Surender@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with regulations at 40 CFR
Part 53, the EPA evaluates various methods for monitoring the
concentrations of those ambient air pollutants for which EPA has
established National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQSs) as set
forth in 40 CFR Part 50. Monitoring methods that are determined to meet
specific requirements for adequacy are designated by the EPA as either
reference methods or equivalent methods (as applicable), thereby
permitting their use under 40 CFR Part 58 by States and other agencies
for determining compliance with the NAAQSs.
The EPA hereby announces the designation of a new equivalent method
for measuring concentrations of PM10-2.5 in the ambient air.
This designation is made under the provisions of 40 CFR part 53, as
amended on October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61271).
The new PM10-2.5 equivalent method utilizes a pair of
FEM samplers (EQPM-0308-170), one configured to measure
PM2.5 and the other to measure PM10. This
automated monitoring method utilizes a measurement principle based on
sample collection by filtration and analysis by beta-ray attenuation.
The newly designated equivalent method is identified as follows:
EQPM-0709-185, ``Met One Instruments BAM-1020 PM10-2.5
Measurement System,'' consisting of 2 BAM-1020 monitors, the first
of which (PM2.5 measurement) is configured as a
PM2.5 FEM (EQPM-0308-170). The second BAM-1020 monitor
(PM10 measurement) is configurable as a PM2.5
FEM (EQPM-0308-170), but set to monitor PM10. The BAM-
1020 monitors are collocated to within 1-4 meters of one another.
The BAM-1020 performing the PM2.5 measurement is equipped
with Met One Instruments, Inc. P/N BX-Coarse interface board and
accessories; the units are interconnected to provide concurrent
sampling and to report PM10-2.5 concentrations directly
to the user. Both units are operated in accordance with BAM-1020 PM-
Coarse Addendum Rev. 5-5 or later and the BAM-1020 Operations Manual
Rev. D or later.
The application for equivalent method determination for this
candidate method was received by the EPA on January 22, 2009. The
monitor is commercially available from the applicant, Met One
Instruments, Inc., 1600 Washington Blvd., Grants Pass, OR 97526.
Test analyzers representative of this method have been tested in
accordance with the applicable test procedures specified in 40 CFR part
53 (as amended on October 17, 2006). After reviewing the results of
those tests and other information submitted by the applicant in the
application, EPA has determined, in accordance with part 53, that this
method should be designated as an equivalent method. The information
submitted by the applicant will be kept on file, either at EPA's
National Exposure Research Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina 27711 or in an approved archive storage facility, and will be
available for inspection (with advance notice) to the extent consistent
with 40 CFR Part 2 (EPA's regulations implementing the Freedom of
Information Act).
As a designated equivalent method, this method is acceptable for
use by states and other air monitoring agencies under the requirements
of 40 CFR part 58, Ambient Air Quality Surveillance. For such purposes,
this method must be used in strict accordance with the operation or
instruction manual associated with the method and subject to any
specifications and limitations (e.g., configuration or operational
settings) specified in the applicable designated method description
(see the identification of the method above).
Use of the method should also be in general accordance with the
guidance and recommendations of applicable sections of the ``Quality
Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement Systems, Volume I,''
EPA/600/R-94/038a and ``Quality Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution
Measurement Systems, Volume II, Ambient Air Quality Monitoring
Program'' EPA-454/B-08-003,
[[Page 28242]]
December, 2008 (available at https://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/qabook.html).
Vendor modifications of a designated equivalent method used for
purposes of Part 58 are permitted only with prior approval of the EPA,
as provided in part 53. Provisions concerning modification of such
methods by users are specified under Section 2.8 (Modifications of
Methods by Users) of Appendix C to 40 CFR Part 58.
In general, a method designation applies to any sampler or analyzer
which is identical to the sampler or analyzer described in the
application for designation. In some cases, similar samplers or
analyzers manufactured prior to the designation may be upgraded or
converted (e.g., by minor modification or by substitution of the
approved operation or instruction manual) so as to be identical to the
designated method and thus achieve designated status. The manufacturer
should be consulted to determine the feasibility of such upgrading or
conversion.
Part 53 requires that sellers of designated reference or equivalent
method analyzers or samplers comply with certain conditions. These
conditions are specified in 40 CFR 53.9.
Aside from occasional breakdowns or malfunctions, consistent or
repeated noncompliance with any of these conditions should be reported
to: Director, Human Exposure and Atmospheric Sciences Division (MD-
E205-01), National Exposure Research Laboratory, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711.
Designation of this new equivalent method is intended to assist the
States in establishing and operating their air quality surveillance
systems under 40 CFR part 58. Questions concerning the commercial
availability or technical aspects of the method should be directed to
the applicant.
Jewel F. Morris,
Acting Director, National Exposure Research Laboratory.
[FR Doc. E9-14022 Filed 6-12-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P