Restructuring of the Stationary Source Audit Program, 28451-28466 [E9-13726]

Agencies

• ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 114 (Tuesday, June 16, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 28451-28466]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-13726]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 51, 60, 61 and 63

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0531; FRL-8917-3]
RIN 2060-AP23


Restructuring of the Stationary Source Audit Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The action proposes amendments to the General Provisions to 
allow accredited providers to supply stationary source audit samples 
and to require sources to obtain and use these samples from the 
accredited providers instead of from EPA, as is the current practice. 
In addition, this proposed rule incorporates by reference Volume 3, 
``General Requirements for Environmental Proficiency Test Providers'' 
adopted December 22, 2007, as an example of an acceptable accredited 
proficiency test sample provider (APTSP) technical criteria document. 
This document outlines the criteria an accredited provider program must 
meet for the samples to be acceptable.
    Requirements pertaining to the audit samples have all been moved to 
the General Provisions and have been removed from the test methods 
because the current language in the test methods regarding audit 
samples is inconsistent from method to method. Therefore, deleting all 
references to audit samples in the test methods eliminates any possible 
confusion and inconsistencies. Under this proposed amendment, the 
requirement to use an audit sample during a compliance test will apply 
to all test methods for which a commercially available audit exists.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 16, 2009. Under the 
Paperwork Reduction Act, comments on the information collection 
provisions are best assured of having full effect if the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) receives a copy of your comments on or 
before July 16, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OAR-2008-0531, by one of the following methods:
     https://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line 
instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail: Comments may be sent by electronic mail (e-mail) 
to a-and-r-docket@epa.gov, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-
0531.
     Fax: Fax your comments to: 202-566-9744, Attention Docket 
ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0531.
     Mail: Send your comments to: Air and Radiation Docket and 
Information Center, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 2822T, 
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. Attention Docket ID 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0531. In addition, please mail a copy of your 
comments on the information collection provisions to the Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB), Attn: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th St., NW., Washington, DC 
20503.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver your comments to: EPA 
Docket Center, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Room 3334, Washington, DC. 
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of 
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of 
boxed information.

    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2008-0531. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information 
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you 
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through https://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The https://www.regulations.gov Web site 
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your 
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of 
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without 
going through https://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be 
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is 
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you 
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name 
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any 
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to 
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA 
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid 
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of 
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public 
docket, visit the EPA

[[Page 28452]]

Docket Center homepage at https://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the https://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. 
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically 
in https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Restructuring of 
the Stationary Source Audit Program Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West Building, 
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. This Docket 
Facility Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number 
for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number 
for the Air Docket Center is (202) 566-1742.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions concerning today's 
proposed rule, contact Ms. Candace Sorrell, U.S. EPA, Office of Air 
Quality Planning and Standards, Air Quality Assessment Division, 
Measurement Technology Group (E143-02), Research Triangle Park, NC 
27711; telephone number: (919) 541-1064; fax number: (919) 541-0516; e-
mail address: sorrell.candace@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information

A. Does This Action Apply to Me?

    This action would apply to you if you operate a stationary source 
that is subject to applicable requirements to conduct compliance 
testing under 40 CFR parts 60, 61, and 63.
    In addition, this action would apply to you if Federal, State, or 
local agencies take certain additional actions. For example, this 
action would apply if State or local agencies implement regulations 
using any of the stationary source compliance test methods in Appendix 
M of Part 51 by adopting these methods in rules or permits (either by 
incorporation by reference or by duplicating the method in its 
entirety).
    The source categories and entities potentially affected include, 
but are not limited to, the following:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Category                     NAICS \a\                                 Examples of regulated entities
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry.......................................     336111  Surface Coating.
                                                    336112
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  Pulp and Paper Mills.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ North American Industry Classification System.

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through 
https://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Send or deliver information 
identified as CBI only to the following address: Roberto Morales, OAQPS 
Document Control Officer (C404-02), U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality 
Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, Attention 
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0531. Clearly mark the part or all of the 
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or 
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as 
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the 
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one 
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as 
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information 
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. 
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with 
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments, 
remember to:
     Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other 
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and 
page number).
     Follow directions--The agency may ask you to respond to 
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of 
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
     Explain why you agree or disagree, suggest alternatives, 
and substitute language for your requested changes.
     Describe any assumptions and provide any technical 
information and/or data that you used.
     If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how 
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be 
reproduced.
     Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and 
suggest alternatives.
     Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the 
use of profanity or personal threats.
     Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period 
deadline identified.

C. Where Can I Obtain a Copy of This Action and Other Related 
Information?

    In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of 
these proposed amendments is also available on the Worldwide Web 
(https://www.epa.gov/ttn) through the Technology Transfer Network (TTN). 
Following the Administrator's signature, a copy of the proposed 
amendment will be posted 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.

D. How Is This Document Organized?

    The information in this preamble is organized as follows:

I. General Information
    A. Does This Action Apply to Me?
    B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?
    C. Where Can I Obtain a Copy of This Document and Other Related 
Information?
    D. How Is This Document Organized?
II. Background
III. This Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

[[Page 28453]]

    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With 
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From 
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address 
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations

II. Background

    Quality assurance is an important part of evaluating the validity 
of compliance test data. One way of checking the quality of the data 
obtained during compliance tests is to use audit samples. Audit samples 
are samples whose true value is known to the supplier but not to the 
user and are analyzed alongside the samples collected in the field 
during the compliance test to evaluate the quality of the data. In the 
past, there were no private entities who supplied stationary source 
audit samples, so EPA provided them free of charge to regulatory 
agencies. Over the past few years with the emergence of field sampling 
and laboratory accreditation programs, there has been an increasing 
need for such samples and a number of private providers have emerged. 
EPA believes it is no longer necessary for it to supply audit samples 
and, therefore, has decided to restructure the audit program to allow 
private accredited suppliers to provide audit samples to industries for 
use in compliance testing at stationary source facilities.

III. This Action

    This action proposes to revise the General Provisions of Parts 51, 
60, 61, and 63 to allow accredited audit sample providers to supply 
stationary source audit samples and to require sources to obtain and 
use these samples from the accredited providers instead of from EPA, as 
is the current practice. It also revises test methods 5I, 6, 6A-C, 7, 
7A-D, 8, 15A, 16A, 18, 23, 25, 25C, 25D, 26, 26A, 104, 106, 108, 108A-
C, 204A-F, 306, 306A, and 308 to delete any language pertaining to 
audit samples. By adding language to the General Provisions of Parts 
51, 60, 61 and 63, the requirement to obtain and use audits for 
stationary source compliance test using EPA stationary source test 
methods is expanded and clarified. The current General Provisions and 
EPA test methods are not consistent in their language concerning the 
use or availability of audit samples. This action will potentially 
increase the number of test methods required to use audit samples and 
will clarify how the samples are to be obtained and used. By clarifying 
the requirement for audit samples and expanding their availability 
through multiple providers, EPA believes more audits will be used 
during compliance tests and the overall quality of the data used for 
determining compliance will improve.
    This action proposes minimum requirements for the audit samples, 
the accredited audit sample providers (AASP), and the audit sample 
provider acceditor (ASPA). The AASP is the company that prepares and 
distributes the audit samples and the ASPA is a third-party 
organization that will accredit and monitor the performance of the 
AASPs. Both the AASP and the ASPA must work with a voluntary consensus 
standard body using the consensus process to develop criteria documents 
that describe how they will function. The Federal Office of Management 
and Budget Circular A-119 defines a voluntary consensus standards body 
(VCSB) as one having the following attributes: (i) Openness; (ii) 
balance of interest; (iii) due process; (iv) an appeals process; and 
(v) consensus, which is general agreement, but not necessarily 
unanimity, and includes a process for attempting to resolve objections 
by interested parties. As long as all comments have been fairly 
considered, each objector is advised of the disposition of his or her 
objection(s) and the reason(s) why, and the consensus body members are 
given an opportunity to change their votes after reviewing the 
comments.
    AASPs must be accredited by an ASPA according to a technical 
criteria document developed by a VCSB. There may be many AASPs and more 
than one ASPA and VCSB. We predict that initially there will only be 
one VCSB. An example of an acceptable accredited proficiency test 
sample provider (APTSP) technical criteria document is Volume 3, 
``General Requirements for Environmental Proficiency Test Providers'' 
adopted December 22, 2007, (incorporated by reference--see Sec.  
60.17). This document specifies the requirements for providers who 
supply proficiency test (PT) samples for accrediting laboratories to 
perform analysis of water and solid waste samples and is an example of 
the type of technical criteria document that would be needed for 
providers of stationary source audits.
    This action proposes language that outlines the responsibilities of 
the regulated source owner or operator to acquire and use an audit 
sample for all testing conducted to determine compliance with an air 
emission limit. The requirement would apply only if there is a 
commercially available audit for the test method used during the 
compliance testing. The source owner, operator or representative shall 
report the results for the audit sample along with a summary of the 
emission test results for the audited pollutant to the appropriate 
compliance authority.
    This action proposes if there are no audit samples available from 
the AASPs, PT samples supplied by an accredited proficiency test sample 
provider (APTSP) may be used as an alternative provided that they are 
distributed as blind audit samples.
    From a scientific standpoint, PT samples and audit samples are 
identical. Physically and chemically, the samples are the same. 
However, the purpose of the samples is slightly different. The PT 
samples are designed to establish the proficiency of a laboratory for 
performing a specific method or procedure as in a lab accreditation 
program. The PT samples are typically analyzed on a recurring schedule 
at some specified time interval that is not connected to any particular 
event. They are only designed to demonstrate that the laboratory has 
the capability to properly analyze a particular kind of sample by a 
particular method. Audit samples by contrast are event driven. They are 
designed to demonstrate that during a particular test event, the tester 
produced acceptable results for the method or procedure that was used 
during that test event. They are not analyzed on a regular schedule, 
but they are analyzed only during the particular event (a compliance 
test for example) that is being ``audited''. They must be analyzed by 
the same analyst, using the same equipment and materials that are used 
to analyze the samples for which the audit is being conducted.
    In addition to allowing private AASPs to provide audit samples for 
the stationary source audit program, this action shifts the burden of 
obtaining an audit sample from the compliance authority to the source. 
In the past, the EPA provided the samples to the compliance authorities 
at no cost, but this action proposes to require the source to purchase 
the samples from an accredited provider. The samples will vary in cost 
depending on the type of audit sample required; however, the cost will 
be a very small portion of the cost of a compliance test (approximately 
one percent). Based on historical data, EPA estimates that the total 
cost to industry to purchase audit samples will be between $100,00 to 
$150,000 per year at the current usage rate.

[[Page 28454]]

IV. 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 (EO) 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 
is, therefore, not subject to review under the EO.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection requirements in this proposed rule have 
been submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The 
Information Collection Request (ICR) document prepared by EPA has been 
assigned EPA ICR number 2355.01.
    A regulated emission source conducting a compliance test would 
purchase an audit sample from an AASP. The AASP would report the true 
value of the audit sample to the compliance authority (State, local or 
EPA Regional Office). This is a new reporting requirement. The AASP 
would in most cases make the report by electronic mail. A report would 
be made for each audit sample that the AASP sold to a regulated 
emission source that was conducting an emissions test to determine 
compliance with an emission limit.
    Based on historic data, EPA estimates that there will be about 1000 
audit samples sold each year generating the need for about 1000 reports 
which corresponds to 80 hours burden or 0.08 hour per response for 
reporting and recordkeeping. The estimated cost burden is $5.05 per 
response or an annual burden of $5,050. Burden means the total time, 
effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, 
maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a 
federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; 
develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the 
purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, 
processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing 
information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously 
applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to 
respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete 
and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise 
disclose the information.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required 
to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a 
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's 
regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
    To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy 
of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for 
minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection 
techniques, EPA has established a public docket for this rule, which 
include this ICR, under Docket ID number EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0531. Submit 
any comments related to the ICR for this proposed rule to EPA and OMB. 
See ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this notice for where to 
submit comments to EPA. Send comments to OMB at the Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 
725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Office for 
EPA. Since OMB is required to make a decision concerning the ICR 
between 30 and 60 days after June 16, 2009, a comment to OMB is best 
assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it by July 16, 2009. 
The final rule will respond to any OMB or public comments on the 
information collection requirements contained in this proposal.

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 as defined 
by the Small Business Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13 CFR 
121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of 
a city, county, town, school district, or special district with a 
population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is 
any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated 
and is not dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of this proposed rule on 
small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. We do not 
anticipate that the proposed restructuring of the audit program will 
result in a significant economic impact on small entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This 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. 
The incremental costs associated with purchasing the audit samples 
(expected to be less than $1,000 per test) do not impose a significant 
burden on sources. Thus, this rule is not subject to the requirements 
of sections 202 or 205 of UMRA.
    This rule is also not subject to the requirements of section 203 of 
UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that might 
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This rule actually 
removes the responsibility of acquiring the audit samples from the 
government agencies to the regulated facility.

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 proposed 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 proposed amendments would 
add language to the general provisions to allow accredited providers to 
supply stationary source audit samples and to require sources to obtain 
and use these samples from the accredited providers instead of from 
EPA, as is the current practice. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not 
apply to this rule.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in 
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) The proposed 
amendments would

[[Page 28455]]

add language to the general provisions to allow accredited providers to 
supply stationary source audit samples and to require sources to obtain 
and use these samples from the accredited providers instead of from 
EPA, as is the current practice. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not 
apply to this action.

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 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 Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (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 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) 
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS) 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 proposed rulemaking involves technical standards. EPA proposes 
to incorporate by reference two consensus standards from The NELAC 
Institute (TNI). The first standard is TNI Standard Volume 3 entitled 
General Requirements for Environmental Proficiency Providers which was 
adopted by TNI on December 22, 2007. The second standard is TNI 
Standard Volume 4 entitled General Standard for an Accreditor of 
Environmental Proficiency Test Providers. The two documents can be 
obtained by downloading them from the TNI Web site (https://www.nelac-institute.org).
    EPA welcomes comments on this aspect of the proposed rulemaking 
and, specifically, invites the public to identify potentially-
applicable VCS and explain why such standards should be used in this 
regulation.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) 
establishes federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main 
provision directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable 
and permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their 
mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, 
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental 
effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority 
populations and low-income populations in the United States.
    EPA has determined that this proposed rule will not have 
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental 
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not 
affect the level of protection provided to human health or the 
environment. The proposed amendments would add language to the general 
provisions to allow accredited providers to supply stationary source 
audit samples and to require sources to obtain and use these samples 
from the accredited providers instead of from EPA, as is the current 
practice.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 51

    Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control, 
Carbon monoxide, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental 
relations, Lead, Nitrogen oxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting 
and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur compounds, Volatile organic 
compounds.

40 CFR Part 60

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Air pollution control, continuous emission monitors, Incorporation by 
reference.

40 CFR Part 61

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference.

40 CFR Part 63

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and Procedure, 
Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental 
relations, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

    Dated: June 5, 2009.
Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the 
Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 51--REQUIREMENTS FOR PREPARATION, ADOPTION, AND SUBMITTAL OF 
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

    1. The authority citation for part 51 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  23 U.S.C. 101; 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

    2. Amend Appendix M to part 51 as follows:
    a. Designate the three introductory paragraphs as 1.0 through 3.0.
    b. Add new introductory paragraph 4.0.
    c. In Method 204A by removing Sections 7.2, 7.2.1, 7.2.2, and 
7.2.3.
    d. In Method 204B by removing Sections 6.2, 6.2.1, 6.2.2, and 
6.2.3.
    e. In Method 204C by removing Sections 6.2, 6.2.1, 6.2.2, and 
6.2.3.
    f. In Method 204D by removing Sections 6.2, 6.2.1, 6.2.2, and 
6.2.3.
    g. In Method 204E by removing Sections 6.2, 6.2.1, 6.2.2, and 
6.2.3.
    h. In Method 204F by removing Sections 6.3, 6.3.1, 6.3.2, 6.3.3.

Appendix M To Part 51--Recommended Test Methods for State 
Implementation Plans

* * * * *
    4.0 Quality Assurance Procedures. The performance test shall 
include an external QA program which shall include, at a minimum, a 
test method performance audit (PA) during the performance test. The 
PAs consist of blind audit samples supplied by an accredited audit 
sample provider and analyzed during the performance test in order to 
provide a measure of test data bias. The audit sample must be 
analyzed by the same analyst using the same analytical reagents and 
analytical system as the compliance samples. Retests are required 
when there is a failure to produce acceptable results for an audit 
sample. However, if the audit results do not affect the compliance 
or noncompliance status of the affected facility, the compliance 
authority may waive the reanalysis requirement, further audits, or 
retests and accept the results of the compliance test. The 
compliance authority may also use the audit sample failure and the 
compliance test results as evidence to

[[Page 28456]]

determine the compliance or noncompliance status of the affected 
facility. A blind audit sample is a sample whose value is known only 
to the sample provider and is not revealed to the tested facility 
until after they report the measured value of the audit sample. For 
pollutants that exist in the gas phase at ambient temperature, the 
audit sample shall consist of an appropriate concentration of the 
pollutant in air or nitrogen that can be introduced into the 
sampling system of the test method at the same entry point as a 
sample from the emission source. If no gas phase audit samples are 
available, an acceptable alternative is a sample of the pollutant in 
the same matrix that would be produced when the sample is recovered 
from the sampling system as required by the test method. For samples 
that exist only in a liquid or solid form at ambient temperature, 
the audit sample shall consist of an appropriate concentration of 
the pollutant in the same matrix that would be produced when the 
sample is recovered from the sampling system as required by the test 
method. An accredited audit sample provider (AASP) is an 
organization that has been accredited to prepare audit samples by an 
independent, third party accrediting body. If there are no audit 
samples available from an accredited audit sample provider, 
proficiency test (PT) samples supplied by an accredited PT sample 
provider (APTSP) may be used as an alternative provided that they 
are distributed as blind audit samples as defined in this paragraph. 
A proficiency test sample is a sample whose composition is unknown 
to the laboratory and is provided to test whether the laboratory can 
produce results within the specified acceptance range. The external 
QA program may also include systems audits that include the 
opportunity for on-site evaluation by the Administrator of 
instrument calibration, data validation, sample logging, and 
documentation of quality control data and field maintenance 
activities.
    a. The source owner, operator, or representative of the tested 
facility shall obtain an audit sample, if available, from an AASP or 
APTSP for each test method used for regulatory compliance purposes. 
If the source owner, operator, or representative cannot find an 
audit sample for a specific method, the owner, operator, or 
representative shall consult the EPA Web site at the following URL, 
www.epa.gov/ttn/emc, to confirm whether there is a source that can 
supply an audit sample for that method. If the EPA Web site does not 
list an available audit sample at least 60 days prior to the 
beginning of the compliance test, the source owner, operator, or 
representative shall not be required to include an audit sample as 
part of the quality assurance program for the compliance test. When 
ordering an audit sample, the source owner, operator, or 
representative shall give the sample provider an estimate for the 
concentration of each pollutant that is emitted by the source and 
the name, address, and phone number of the compliance authority. The 
source owner, operator, or representative shall report the results 
for the audit sample along with a summary of the emission test 
results for the audited pollutant to the compliance authority and 
shall report the results of the audit sample to the AASP or the 
APTSP. The source owner, operator, or representative shall make both 
reports at the same time and in the same manner or shall report to 
the compliance authority first and report to the AASP or APTSP. If 
the method being audited is a method that allows the samples to be 
analyzed in the field and the tester plans to analyze the samples in 
the field, the tester may analyze the audit samples prior to 
collecting the emission samples provided a representative of the 
compliance authority is present at the testing site. The source 
owner, operator, or representative may report the results of the 
audit sample to the compliance authority and then report the results 
of the audit sample to the AASP or the APTSP prior to collecting any 
emission samples. The test protocol and final test report shall 
document whether an audit sample was ordered and utilized and the 
pass/fail results as applicable.
    b. An AASP or APTSP shall have and shall prepare, analyze, and 
report the true value of audit samples in accordance with a written 
technical criteria document that describes how audit samples or PT 
samples will be prepared and distributed in a manner that will 
insure the integrity of the audit sample program. One acceptable 
APTSP technical criteria document is Volume 3, ``General 
Requirements for Environmental Proficiency Test Providers'' 
(incorporated by reference--see Sec.  60.17). An acceptable 
technical criteria document shall contain standard operating 
procedures for all of the following operations:
    1. Preparing the sample;
    2. Confirming the true concentration of the sample;
    3. Distributing the sample to the user in a manner that 
guarantees that the true value of the sample is unknown to the user;
    4. Recording the measured concentration reported by the user and 
determining if the measured value is within acceptable limits;
    5. The AASP or APTSP shall report the results from each audit 
sample to the compliance authority and to the source owner, 
operator, or representative. The AASP or APTSP shall make both 
reports at the same time and in the same manner or shall report to 
the compliance authority first and then report to the source owner, 
operator, or representative. The results shall include the name of 
the facility tested, the date on which the compliance test was 
conducted, the name of the company performing the sample collection, 
the name of the company that analyzed the compliance samples 
including the audit sample, the measured result for the audit 
sample, the true value of the audit sample, the acceptance range for 
the measured value, and whether the testing company passed or failed 
the audit.
    6. Evaluating the acceptance limits of samples at least once 
every two years to determine in consultation with the voluntary 
consensus standard body if they should be changed;
    7. Maintaining a database, accessible to the compliance 
authorities, of results from the audit that shall include the name 
of the facility tested, the date on which the compliance test was 
conducted, the name of the company performing the sample collection, 
the name of the company that analyzed the compliance samples 
including the audit sample, the measured result for the audit 
sample, the true value of the audit sample, the acceptance range for 
the measured value, and whether the testing company passed or failed 
the audit.
    c. The accrediting body shall have a written technical criteria 
document that describes how it will insure that the AASP or APTSP is 
operating in accordance with the AASP or APTSP technical criteria 
document that describes how audit or PT samples are to be prepared 
and distributed. This document shall contain standard operating 
procedures for all of the following operations:
    1. Checking audit samples to confirm their true value as 
reported by the AASP;
    2. Performing technical systems audits of the AASP's facilities 
and operating procedures at least once every two years.
    3. Providing standards for use by the voluntary consensus 
standard body to approve the accrediting body that will accredit the 
audit sample providers.
    d. The technical criteria documents for the accredited sample 
providers and the accrediting body shall be developed through a 
public process guided by a voluntary consensus standards body 
(VCSB). The VCSB shall operate in accordance with the procedures and 
requirements in the Office of Management and Budget Circular A-119. 
The VCSB shall approve all accrediting bodies. The Administrator 
will review all technical criteria documents. If the technical 
criteria documents do not meet the minimum technical requirements in 
this Appendix M, paragraph b. through d. of this paragraph 4.0, the 
technical criteria documents are not acceptable and the proposed 
audit sample program is not capable of producing audit samples of 
sufficient quality to be used in a compliance test. All acceptable 
technical criteria documents are incorporated by reference in 40 CFR 
60.17.
* * * * *

PART 60--STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE FOR NEW STATIONARY SOURCES

    3. The authority citation for Part 60 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7410, 7414, 7421, 7470-7479, 7491, 7492, 
7601 and 7602.

    4. Section 60.8 is amended by adding paragraph (g) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  60.8  Performance tests.

* * * * *
    (g) The performance test shall include an external QA program which 
shall include, at a minimum, a test method performance audit (PA) 
during the performance test. The PAs consist of blind audit samples 
supplied by an accredited audit sample provider and analyzed during the 
performance test in order to provide a measure of test data bias. The 
audit sample must be analyzed

[[Page 28457]]

by the same analyst using the same analytical reagents and analytical 
system as the compliance samples. Retests are required when there is a 
failure to produce acceptable results for an audit sample. However, if 
the audit results do not affect the compliance or noncompliance status 
of the affected facility, the compliance authority may waive the 
reanalysis requirement, further audits, or retests and accept the 
results of the compliance test. The compliance authority may also use 
the audit sample failure and the compliance test results as evidence to 
determine the compliance or noncompliance status of the affected 
facility. A blind audit sample is a sample whose value is known only to 
the sample provider and is not revealed to the tested facility until 
after they report the measured value of the audit sample. For 
pollutants that exist in the gas phase at ambient temperature, the 
audit sample shall consist of an appropriate concentration of the 
pollutant in air or nitrogen that can be introduced into the sampling 
system of the test method at the same entry point as a sample from the 
emission source. If no gas phase audit samples are available, an 
acceptable alternative is a sample of the pollutant in the same matrix 
that would be produced when the sample is recovered from the sampling 
system as required by the test method. For samples that exist only in a 
liquid or solid form at ambient temperature, the audit sample shall 
consist of an appropriate concentration of the pollutant in the same 
matrix that would be produced when the sample is recovered from the 
sampling system as required by the test method. An accredited audit 
sample provider (AASP) is an organization that has been accredited to 
prepare audit samples by an independent, third party accrediting body. 
If there are no audit samples available from an accredited audit sample 
provider, proficiency test (PT) samples supplied by an accredited PT 
sample provider (APTSP) may be used as an alternative provided that 
they are distributed as blind audit samples as defined in this 
paragraph. A PT sample is a sample whose composition is unknown to the 
laboratory and is provided to test whether the laboratory can produce 
results within the specified acceptance range. The external QA program 
may also include systems audits that include the opportunity for on-
site evaluation by the Administrator of instrument calibration, data 
validation, sample logging, and documentation of quality control data 
and field maintenance activities.
    (1) The source owner, operator, or representative of the tested 
facility shall obtain an audit sample, if available, from an AASP or 
APTSP for each test method used for regulatory compliance purposes. If 
the source owner, operator, or representative cannot find an audit 
sample for a specific method, the owner, operator, or representative 
shall consult the EPA Web site at the following URL, www.epa.gov/ttn/emc, to confirm whether there is a source that can supply an audit 
sample for that method. If the EPA Web site does not list an available 
audit sample at least 60 days prior to the beginning of the compliance 
test, the source owner, operator, or representative shall not be 
required to include an audit sample as part of the quality assurance 
program for the compliance test. When ordering an audit sample, the 
source, operator, or representative shall give the sample provider an 
estimate for the concentration of each pollutant that is emitted by the 
source and the name, address, and phone number of the compliance 
authority. The source owner, operator, or representative shall report 
the results for the audit sample along with a summary of the emission 
test results for the audited pollutant to the compliance authority and 
shall report the results of the audit sample to the AASP or the APTSP. 
The source owner, operator, or representative shall make both reports 
at the same time and in the same manner or shall report to the 
compliance authority first and then report to the AASP or APTSP. If the 
method being audited is a method that allows the samples to be analyzed 
in the field and the tester plans to analyze the samples in the field, 
the tester may analyze the audit samples prior to collecting the 
emission samples provided a representative of the compliance authority 
is present at the testing site. The source owner, operator, or 
representative may report the results of the audit sample to the 
compliance authority and report the results of the audit sample to the 
AASP or the APTSP prior to collecting any emission samples. The test 
protocol and final test report shall document whether an audit sample 
was ordered and utilized and the pass/fail results as applicable.
    (2) An AASP or APTSP shall have and shall prepare, analyze, and 
report the true value of audit samples in accordance with a written 
technical criteria document that describes how audit samples or PT 
samples will be prepared and distributed in a manner that will insure 
the integrity of the audit sample program. One acceptable APTSP 
technical criteria document is Volume 3, ``General Requirements for 
Environmental Proficiency Test Providers'' (incorporated by reference--
see Sec.  60.17.) An acceptable technical criteria document shall 
contain standard operating procedures for all of the following 
operations:
    (i) Preparing the sample;
    (ii) Confirming the true concentration of the sample;
    (iii) Distributing the sample to the user in a manner that 
guarantees that the true value of the sample is unknown to the user;
    (iv) Recording the measured concentration reported by the user and 
determining if the measured value is within acceptable limits;
    (v) The AASP or APTSP shall report the results from each audit 
sample to the compliance authority and then to the source owner, 
operator, or representative. The AASP or APTSP shall make both reports 
at the same time and in the same manner or shall report to the 
compliance authority first and then report to the source owner, 
operator, or representative. The results shall include the name of the 
facility tested, the date on which the compliance test was conducted, 
the name of the company performing the sample collection, the name of 
the company that analyzed the compliance samples including the audit 
sample, the measured result for the audit sample, the true value of the 
audit sample, the acceptance range for the measured value, and whether 
the testing company passed or failed the audit.
    (vi) Evaluating the acceptance limits of samples at least once 
every two years to determine in cooperation with the voluntary 
consensus standard body if they should be changed;
    (vii) Maintaining a database, accessible to the compliance 
authorities, of results from the audit that shall include the name of 
the facility tested, the date on which the compliance test was 
conducted, the name of the company performing the sample collection, 
the name of the company that analyzed the compliance samples including 
the audit sample, the measured result for the audit sample, the true 
value of the audit sample, the acceptance range for the measured value, 
and whether the testing company passed or failed the audit.
    (3) The accrediting body shall have a written technical criteria 
document that describes how it will insure that the AASP or APTSP is 
operating in accordance with the AASP or APTSP technical criteria 
document that describes how audit or PT samples are to be prepared and 
distributed. This document shall contain standard

[[Page 28458]]

operating procedures for all of the following operations:
    (i) Checking audit samples to confirm their true value as reported 
by the AASP;
    (ii) Performing technical systems audits of the AASP's facilities 
and operating procedures at least once every two years;
    (iii) Providing standards for use by the voluntary consensus 
standard body to approve the accrediting body that will accredit the 
audit sample providers.
    (4) The technical criteria documents for the accredited sample 
providers and the accrediting body shall be developed through a public 
process guided by a voluntary consensus standards body (VCSB). The VCSB 
shall operate in accordance with the procedures and requirements in the 
Office of Management and Budget Circular A-119. The VCSB shall approve 
all accrediting bodies. The Administrator will review all technical 
criteria documents. If the technical criteria documents do not meet the 
minimum technical requirements in paragraphs (g)(2) through (4) of this 
section, the technical criteria documents are not acceptable and the 
proposed audit sample program is not capable of producing audit samples 
of sufficient quality to be used in a compliance test. All acceptable 
technical criteria documents are incorporated by reference in 40 CFR 
60.17.
    5. In Appendix A-3 to part 60 amend Method 5I by revising Section 
7.2 to read as follows:

Appendix A-3 to Part 60--Test Methods 4 through 5I

* * * * *

Method 5I--Determination of Low Level Particulate Matter Emissions from 
Stationary Sources

* * * * *
    7.2 Standards. There are no applicable standards commercially 
available for Method 5I analyses.
* * * * *
    6. Amend Appendix A-4 to part 60 as follows:
    a. In Method 6 as follows:
    i. Remove Section 7.3.6.
    ii. Revise Section 9.0.
    iii. Remove Sections 11.3, 11.3.1 through 11.3.3, 11.4, 11.4.1 
through 11.4.4, and 12.4.
    iv. Revise Section 12.1.
    b. In Method 6A as follows:
    i. Remove Section 11.2
    ii. Revise Section 16.5.
    c. In Method 6B by removing Section 11.2.
    d. In Method 6C by revising Section 16.1.
    e. In Method 7 as follows:
    i. Remove Section 7.3.10.
    ii. Revise Section 9.0.
    iii. Remove Sections 11.4, 11.4.1 through 11.4.3, 11.5, 11.5.1 
through 11.5.4, and 12.6.
    iv. Revise Section 12.1.
    f. In Method 7A as follows:
    i. Revise Section 6.3.
    ii. Remove Section 7.3.5.
    iii. Revise Section 9.0.
    iv. Remove Section 11.3.
    g. In Method 7B as follows:
    i. Revise Section 9.0.
    ii. Remove Section 11.4.
    h. In Method 7C as follows:
    i. Remove Section 7.2.15.
    ii. Revise Section 9.0.
    iii. Remove Section 11.6.
    i. In Method 7D as follows:
    i. Remove Sections 7.2.6 and 11.3.
    ii. Revise Section 9.0.
    j. In Method 8 as follows:
    i. Remove Section 7.3.1.
    ii. Revise Section 9.1.
    iii. Remove Sections 11.3, 11.3.1, 11.3.2, 11.3.3, 11.4, 11.4.1, 
11.4.2, 11.4.3, 11.4.4, and 12.9.
    iv. Revise Section 12.1.

Appendix A-4 to Part 60--Test Methods 6 through 10B

* * * * *

Method 6--Determination of Sulfur Dioxide Emissions from Stationary 
Sources

* * * * *
    9.0 Quality Control.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Section                     Quality control measure                      Effect
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7.1.2.................................  Isopropanol check.............  Ensure acceptable level of peroxide
                                                                         impurities in isopropanol.
8.2, 10.1-10.4........................  Sampling equipment leak-check   Ensure accurate measurement of stack gas
                                         and calibration.                flow rate, sample volume.
10.5..................................  Barium standard solution        Ensure precision of normality
                                         standardization.                determination.
11.2.3................................  Replicate titrations..........  Ensure precision of titration
                                                                         determinations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
    12.1 Nomenclature.

CSO2 = Concentration of SO2, dry basis, 
corrected to standard conditions, mg/dscm (lb/dscf).
N = Normality of barium standard titrant, meq/ml.
Pbar = Barometric pressure, mm Hg (in. Hg).
Pstd = Standard absolute pressure, 760 mm Hg (29.92 in. 
Hg).
Tm = Average DGM absolute temperature, [deg]K ([deg]R).
Tstd = Standard absolute temperature, 293 [deg]K (528 
[deg]R).
Va = Volume of sample aliquot titrated, ml.
Vm = Dry gas volume as measured by the DGM, dcm (dcf).
Vm(std) = Dry gas volume measured by the DGM, corrected 
to standard conditions, dscm (dscf).
Vsoln = Total volume of solution in which the 
SO2 sample is contained, 100 ml.
Vt = Volume of barium standard titrant used for the 
sample (average of replicate titration), ml.
Vtb = Volume of barium standard titrant used for the 
blank, ml.
Y = DGM calibration factor.
* * * * *

Method 6A--Determination of Sulfur Dioxide, Moisture and Carbon Dioxide 
Emissions from Fossil Fuel Combustion Sources

* * * * *
    16.5 Sample Analysis. Analysis of the peroxide solution is the 
same as that described in Section 11.1.
* * * * *

Method 6C--Determination of Sulfur Dioxide Emissions from Stationary 
Sources (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure)

* * * * *
    16.1 Alternative Interference Check. You may perform an 
alternative interference check consisting of at least three 
comparison runs between Method 6C and Method 6. This check validates 
the Method 6C results at each particular source category (type of 
facility) where the check is performed. When testing under 
conditions of low concentrations (<15 ppm), this alternative 
interference check is not allowed.

    Note:  The procedure described below applies to non-dilution 
sampling systems only. If this alternative interference check is 
used for a dilution sampling system, use a standard Method 6 
sampling train and extract the sample directly from the exhaust 
stream at points collocated with the Method 6C sample probe.

    (1) Build the modified Method 6 sampling train (flow control 
valve, two midget impingers containing 3 percent hydrogen peroxide, 
and dry gas meter) shown in Figure 6C-1. Connect the sampling train 
to the sample bypass discharge vent. Record the dry gas meter 
reading before you begin sampling. Simultaneously collect modified 
Method 6 and Method 6C samples. Open the flow control valve in the 
modified Method 6 train as you begin to sample with Method 6C. 
Adjust the Method 6 sampling rate to 1 liter per minute (.10 
percent). The sampling time per run must be the same as for Method 6 
plus twice the average measurement system response time. If your 
modified Method 6 train does not include a pump, you risk biasing 
the results high if you over-pressurize the midget impingers and 
cause a leak. You

[[Page 28459]]

can reduce this risk by cautiously increasing the flow rate as 
sampling begins.
    (2) After completing a run, record the final dry gas meter 
reading, meter temperature, and barometric pressure. Recover and 
analyze the contents of the midget impingers using the procedures in 
Method 6. Determine the average gas concentration reported by Method 
6C for the run.
* * * * *

Method 7--Determination of Nitrogen Oxide Emissions from Stationary 
Sources

* * * * *
    9.0 Quality Control.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Section                     Quality control measure                      Effect
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10.1..................................  Spectrophotometer calibration.  Ensure linearity of spectrophotometer
                                                                         response to standards.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
    12.1 Nomenclature.

A = Absorbance of sample.
A1 = Absorbance of the 100-[mu]g NO2 standard.
A2 = Absorbance of the 200-[mu]g NO2 standard.
A3 = Absorbance of the 300-[mu]g NO2 standard.
A4 = Absorbance of the 400-[mu]g NO2 standard.
C = Concentration of NOX as NO2, dry basis, 
corrected to standard conditions, mg/dsm\3\ (lb/dscf).
F = Dilution factor (i.e., 25/5, 25/10, etc., required only if 
sample dilution was needed to reduce the absorbance into the range 
of the calibration).
Kc = Spectrophotometer calibration factor.
m = Mass of NOX as NO2 in gas sample, [mu]g.
Pf = Final absolute pressure of flask, mm Hg (in. Hg).
Pi = Initial absolute pressure of flask, mm Hg (in. Hg).
Pstd = Standard absolute pressure, 760 mm Hg (29.92 in. 
Hg).
Tf = Final absolute temperature of flask, [deg]K 
([deg]R).
Ti = Initial absolute temperature of flask, [deg]K 
([deg]R).
Tstd = Standard absolute temperature, 293 [deg]K (528 
[deg]R).
Vsc = Sample volume at standard conditions (dry basis), 
ml.
Vf = Volume of flask and valve, ml.
Va = Volume of absorbing solution, 25 ml.
* * * * *

Method 7A--Determination of Nitrogen Oxide Emissions from Stationary 
Sources (Ion Chromatographic Method)

* * * * *
    6.3 Analysis. For the analysis, the following equipment and 
supplies are required. Alternative instrumentation and procedures 
will be allowed provided the calibration precision requirement in 
Section 10.1.2 can be met.
* * * * *
    9.0 Quality Control.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Section                     Quality control measure                      Effect
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10.1..................................  Ion chromatograph calibration.  Ensure linearity of ion chromatograph
                                                                         response to standards.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

Method 7B--Determination of Nitrogen Oxide Emissions from Stationary 
Sources (Ultraviolet Spectrophotometric Method)

* * * * *
    9.0 Quality Control.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Section                     Quality control measure                      Effect
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10.1..................................  Spectrophotometer calibration.  Ensures linearity of spectrophotometer
                                                                         response to standards.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

Method 7C--Determination of Nitrogen Oxide Emissions from Stationary 
Sources (Alkaline Permanganate/Colorimetric Method)

* * * * *
    9.0 Quality Control.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Section                     Quality control measure                      Effect
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8.2, 10.1-10.3........................  Sampling equipment leak-check   Ensure accurate measurement of sample
                                         and calibration.                volume.
10.4..................................  Spectrophotometer calibration.  Ensure linearity of spectrophotometer
                                                                         response to standards.
11.3..................................  Spiked sample analysis........  Ensure reduction efficiency of column.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

Method 7D--Determination of Nitrogen Oxide Emissions from Stationary 
Sources--Alkaline-Permanganate/Ion Chromatographic Method

* * * * *
    9.0 Quality Control.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Section                     Quality control measure                      Effect
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8.2, 10.1-10.3........................  Sampling equipment leak-check   Ensure accurate measurement of sample
                                         and calibration.                volume.
10.4..................................  Spectrophotometer calibration.  Ensure linearity of spectrophotometer
                                                                         response to standards.
11.3..................................  Spiked sample analysis........  Ensure reduction efficiency of column.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 28460]]

* * * * *

Method 8--Determination of Sulfuric Acid and Sulfur Dioxide Emissions 
from Stationary Sources

* * * * *
    9.1 Miscellaneous Quality Control Measures.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Section                     Quality control measure                      Effect
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7.