Quality Assurance Requirements for Continuous Opacity Monitoring Systems at Stationary Sources, 8160-8166 [2012-3379]
Download as PDF
8160
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
§ 1029.500
General.
Loan or finance companies are subject
to the special information sharing
procedures to deter money laundering
and terrorist activity requirements set
forth and cross referenced in this
subpart. Loan or finance companies
should also refer to subpart E of part
1010 of this chapter for special
information sharing procedures to deter
money laundering and terrorist activity
contained in that subpart which apply
to loan or finance companies.
§ 1029.520 Special information sharing
procedures to deter money laundering and
terrorist activity for loan or finance
companies.
(a) Refer to § 1010.520 of this chapter.
(b) [Reserved]
§ 1029.530
[Reserved]
§ 1029.540 Voluntary information sharing
among financial institutions.
(a) Refer to § 1010.540 of this chapter.
(b) [Reserved]
Subpart F—Special Standards of
Diligence; Prohibitions, and Special
Measures for Loan or Finance
Companies
§ 1029.600
[Reserved]
§ 1029.610
[Reserved]
§ 1029.620
[Reserved]
§ 1029.630
[Reserved]
§ 1029.640
[Reserved]
§ 1029.670
[Reserved]
Dated: February 6, 2012.
James H. Freis, Jr.,
Director, Financial Crimes Enforcement
Network.
[FR Doc. 2012–3074 Filed 2–13–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4802–10–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 60
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0873; FRL–9630–7]
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
RIN 2060–AH23
Quality Assurance Requirements for
Continuous Opacity Monitoring
Systems at Stationary Sources
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:25 Feb 13, 2012
Jkt 226001
The EPA is taking direct final
action to establish quality assurance and
quality control (QA/QC) procedures for
continuous opacity monitoring systems
(COMS) used to demonstrate continuous
compliance with opacity standards in
federally enforceable regulations. This
action is necessary because we do not
currently have QA/QC procedures for
COMS. This action would require
COMS used to demonstrate continuous
compliance to meet these procedures
(referred to as Procedure 3).
DATES: This rule is effective on April 16,
2012 without further notice, unless the
EPA receives adverse comment by
March 15, 2012. If the EPA receives
adverse comment, we will publish a
timely withdrawal in the Federal
Register informing the public that the
rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2010–0873 by one of the following
methods:
• www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• Email: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov.
• Fax: (202) 566–9744.
• Mail: Attention Docket ID No. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2010–0873, Environmental
Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460.
• Hand Delivery: The EPA Docket
Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket’s normal
hours of operation, and special
arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–
0873. The EPA’s policy is that all
comments received will be included in
the public docket without change and
may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through www.regulations.gov
or email. The www.regulations.gov Web
site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system,
which means the EPA will not know
your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an email
comment directly to the EPA without
going through www.regulations.gov,
your email address will be
automatically captured and included as
SUMMARY:
Subpart E—Special Information
Sharing Procedures To Deter Money
Laundering and Terrorist Activity
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
part of the comment that is placed in the
public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, the 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 the EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
the 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 the EPA’s public
docket, visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at https://www.epa.gov/
epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the www.regulations.gov
index. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, will be publicly
available only in hard copy. Publicly
available docket materials are available
either electronically in
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Procedure 3—Quality Assurance
Requirements for Continuous Opacity
Monitoring Systems at Stationary
Sources Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave.
NW., Washington, DC. The Docket
Facility and Public Reading Room are
open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the
Air Docket is (202) 566–1742, and the
telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is (202) 566–1744.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Lula H. Melton, U.S. EPA, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, Air
Quality Assessment Division,
Measurement Technology Group (Mail
Code: E143–02), Research Triangle Park,
NC 27711; telephone number: (919)
541–2910; fax number: (919) 541–0516;
email address: melton.lula@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. General Information
A. Why is the EPA using a direct final rule?
B. Does this action apply to me?
C. Where can I obtain a copy of this action?
D. Judicial Review
II. This Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E:\FR\FM\14FER1.SGM
14FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
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
Concerning Regulations 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. General Information
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
A. Why is the EPA using a direct final
rule?
The EPA is publishing this rule
without a prior proposed rule because
we view this as a non-controversial
action and anticipate no adverse
comment. This action establishes QA/
QC procedures for continuous opacity
monitoring systems used to demonstrate
continuous compliance with opacity
standards in federally enforceable
regulations. We believe that these QA/
QC procedures are reasonable and that
they can be met by any well-maintained
and operated COMS. Furthermore, the
procedures were developed based on
input provided by the affected parties.
On May 8, 2003, we published a
proposed rule to codify QA/QC
procedures for COMS (i.e., Procedure 3).
Due to other priorities, we did not
finalize Procedure 3, but public
comments received on the proposal
have been considered in this action.
This rule also takes into account
changes in technology since 2003.
In the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ section of
this Federal Register, we are publishing
a separate document that will serve as
the proposed rule if relevant adverse
comments are received on this direct
final rule. We will not institute a second
comment period on this action. Any
parties interested in commenting, must
do so at this time. For further
information about commenting on this
rule, see the ADDRESSES section of this
document. If the EPA receives adverse
comment, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register
informing the public that this direct
final rule will not take effect. We would
address all public comments in any
subsequent final rule based on the
proposed rule.
B. Does this action apply to me?
Procedure 3 applies to COMS used to
demonstrate continuous compliance
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:25 Feb 13, 2012
Jkt 226001
with opacity standards in federally
enforceable regulations.
C. 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. A redline strikeout
document that compares this final rule
to the proposed rule has also been
added to the docket.
D. Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean
Air Act (CAA), judicial review of this
direct final rule is available by filing a
petition for review in the United States
Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit by April 16, 2012.
Under section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA,
only an objection to this direct final rule
that was raised with reasonable
specificity during the period for public
comment can be raised during judicial
review. Moreover, under section
307(b)(2) of the CAA, the requirements
that are the subject of this direct final
rule may not be challenged later in civil
or criminal proceedings brought by the
EPA to enforce these requirements.
II. This Action
This direct final rule codifies
Procedure 3 in 40 CFR part 60,
Appendix F. Procedure 3 establishes
quality assurance and quality control
procedures for continuous opacity
monitoring systems used to demonstrate
continuous compliance with opacity
standards in federally enforceable
regulations. More specifically,
Procedure 3 provides requirements for
daily instrument zero and upscale drift
checks, daily status indicator checks,
quarterly performance audits, annual
zero alignment audits, and corrective
action for malfunctioning COMS. On
May 8, 2003, we published a proposed
rule to codify Procedure 3. However,
due to other priorities, we did not
finalize Procedure 3 after the comment
period ended July 7, 2003. Public
comments received on the May 8, 2003,
proposal have been considered in this
action.
Most of the comments on the 2003
proposal required us to provide
clarifications and updates. For example,
several commenters were confused by
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
8161
the wording of the applicability
statement in the 2003 proposal. We
revised the applicability statement in
the direct final rule to remove the
ambiguity. The direct final rule
references the 1998, 2003, and 2007
versions of the American Society of
Testing and Materials’ Standard Practice
for Opacity Monitor Manufacturers to
Certify Conformance with Design and
Performance Specifications, whereas the
2003 proposal referenced the 1998
version only.
III. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory 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 Executive
Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011).
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
quality assurance procedures do not add
information collection requirements
beyond those currently required under
the applicable regulations.
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 accessing 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 rule on small entities, I
E:\FR\FM\14FER1.SGM
14FER1
8162
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
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. This
action establishes quality assurance
procedures for continuous opacity
monitoring systems used to demonstrate
continuous compliance with opacity
standards as specified in federally
enforceable regulations and does not
impose additional regulatory
requirements on sources.
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.
Rules establishing quality assurance
requirements impose no costs
independent from national emission
standards which require their use, and
such costs are fully reflected in the
regulatory impact assessment for those
emission standards. 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
action simply establishes quality
assurance procedures for continuous
opacity monitoring systems used to
demonstrate continuous compliance
with opacity standards as specified in
federally enforceable regulations.
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action 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. This action
establishes quality assurance procedures
for continuous opacity monitoring
systems used to demonstrate continuous
compliance with opacity standards as
specified in federally enforceable
regulations. Thus, Executive Order
13132 does not apply to this action.
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). This action establishes quality
assurance procedures for continuous
opacity monitoring systems used to
demonstrate continuous compliance
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:25 Feb 13, 2012
Jkt 226001
with opacity standards as specified in
federally enforceable regulations. It does
not add any emission limits and does
not affect pollutant emissions or air
quality. Thus, Executive Order 13175
does not apply to this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
The 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
104–113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs the 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 the
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, the EPA did not
consider the use of any voluntary
consensus standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR
7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes federal
executive policy on environmental
justice. Its main provision directs
federal agencies, to the greatest extent
practicable and permitted by law, to
make environmental justice part of their
mission by identifying and addressing,
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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.
The EPA has determined that this
direct final rule will not have
disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects
on minority or low-income populations
because it does not affect the level of
protection provided to human health or
the environment. This 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. The 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 April
16, 2012.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60
Air pollution control, Environmental
protection, Continuous opacity
monitoring.
Dated: February 6, 2012.
Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, title 40, chapter I of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
PART 60—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 60
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
2. Appendix F of part 60 is amended
by adding Procedure 3 to read as
follows:
■
Appendix F to Part 60—Quality
Assurance Procedures
*
E:\FR\FM\14FER1.SGM
*
*
14FER1
*
*
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
Procedure 3—Quality Assurance
Requirements for Continuous Opacity
Monitoring Systems at Stationary Sources
1.0 What are the purpose and applicability
of Procedure 3?
The purpose of Procedure 3 is to establish
quality assurance and quality control (QA/
QC) procedures for continuous opacity
monitoring systems (COMS). Procedure 3
applies to COMS used to demonstrate
continuous compliance with opacity
standards in federally enforceable
regulations.
1.1 What are the data quality objectives
of Procedure 3? The overall data quality
objective (DQO) of Procedure 3 is the
generation of valid and representative
opacity data. Procedure 3 specifies the
minimum requirements for controlling and
assessing the quality of COMS data submitted
to us or the delegated regulatory agency.
Procedure 3 requires you to perform periodic
evaluations of a COMS performance and to
develop and implement QA/QC programs to
ensure that COMS data quality is maintained.
1.2 What is the intent of the QA/QC
procedures specified in Procedure 3?
Procedure 3 is intended to establish the
minimum QA/QC requirements to verify and
maintain an acceptable level of quality of the
data produced by COMS. It is presented in
general terms to allow you to develop a
program that is most effective for your
circumstances.
1.3 When must I comply with Procedure
3? You must comply with Procedure 3 after
your COMS has been initially certified.
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
2.0 What are the basic functions of
Procedure 3?
The basic functions of Procedure 3 are
assessment of the quality of your COMS data
and control and improvement of the quality
of the data by implementing QC requirements
and corrective actions. Procedure 3 provides
requirements for:
(1) Daily instrument zero and upscale drift
checks, as well as, daily status indicators
checks;
(2) Quarterly performance audits which
include the following assessments:
(i) Optical alignment,
(ii) Calibration error,
(iii) Zero compensation; and
(3) Annual zero alignment.
Sources that consistently achieve quality
assured data may request a semi-annual audit
frequency by submitting the request in
writing to the Administrator.
3.0 What special definitions apply to
Procedure 3?
The definitions in Procedure 3 include
those provided in Performance Specification
1 (PS–1) of Appendix B and ASTM D 6216–
98, 03, 07 and the following additions.
3.1 Out-of-control periods. Out-of-control
periods mean that one or more COMS
parameters falls outside of the acceptable
limits established by this rule.
(1) Daily Assessments. Whenever the
calibration drift (CD) exceeds twice the
specification of PS–1, the COMS is out-ofcontrol. The beginning of the out-of-control
period is the time corresponding to the
completion of the daily calibration drift
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:25 Feb 13, 2012
Jkt 226001
8163
check. The end of the out-of-control period
is the time corresponding to the completion
of appropriate adjustment and subsequent
successful CD assessment.
(2) Quarterly and Annual Assessments.
Whenever an annual zero alignment or
quarterly performance audit indicates
noncompliance with the criteria established
in paragraphs (2) and (3) of section 10.4, the
COMS is out-of-control. The beginning of the
out-of-control period is the time
corresponding to the completion of the
performance audit indicating
noncompliance. The end of the out-of-control
period is the time corresponding to the
completion of appropriate corrective actions
and the subsequent successful audit (or, if
applicable, partial audit).
for inspection by us, the State, and/or local
enforcement agencies for the life of your
COMS or until you are no longer subject to
the requirements of this procedure.
9.2 What are the consequences of failing
QC audits? Your QC procedures are deemed
to be inadequate or your COMS incapable of
providing quality data if you fail two
consecutive annual audits, two consecutive
quarterly audits, or five consecutive daily
checks. If this occurs, you must either revise
your QC procedures or repair or replace the
COMS to correct the deficiencies causing the
audit failures. If you determine that your
COMS requires extensive repairs, you may
use a substitute COMS provided the
substitute meets the requirements in section
10.6.
4.0 What interferences must I avoid?
Opacity cannot be measured accurately in
the presence of water droplets. Thus, COMS
opacity compliance determinations cannot be
made when water droplets are present, such
as downstream of a wet scrubber without a
reheater or at other saturated flue gas
locations.
10.0 What calibration and standardization
procedures must I perform for my COMS?
(1) You must perform routine system
checks to ensure proper operation of system
electronics and optics, light and radiation
sources and detectors, electric or electromechanical systems, and general stability of
the system calibration.
(2) You must subject your COMS to a
performance audit to include checks of the
individual COMS components and factors
affecting the accuracy of the monitoring data
at least once per calendar quarter.
(3) At least annually, you must perform a
zero alignment by comparing the COMS
simulated zero to the actual clear path zero.
The simulated zero device produces a
simulated clear path condition or low-level
opacity condition, where the energy reaching
the detector is between 90 and 110 percent
of the energy reaching the detector under
actual clear path conditions.
10.1 What routine system checks must I
perform on my COMS? Necessary
components of the routine system checks
will depend on the design details of your
COMS. At a minimum, you must verify the
system operating parameters listed in
paragraphs (1) through (3) of this section on
a daily basis. Some COMS may perform one
or more of these functions automatically or
as an integral portion of unit operations;
other COMS may perform one or more of
these functions manually.
(1) You must check the zero drift to ensure
stability of your COMS response to the
simulated zero device. The simulated zero
device, an automated mechanism within the
transmissometer that produces a simulated
clear path condition or low-level opacity
condition, is used to check the zero drift. You
must, at a minimum, take corrective action
on your COMS whenever the daily zero drift
exceeds twice the applicable drift
specification in PS–1.
(2) You must check the upscale drift to
ensure stability of your COMS response to
the upscale drift value. The upscale
calibration device, an automated mechanism
(employing a filter or reduced reflectance
device) within the transmissometer that
produces an upscale opacity value is used to
check the upscale drift. You must, at a
minimum, take corrective action on your
COMS whenever the daily upscale drift
check exceeds twice the applicable drift
specification in PS–1.
5.0 What do I need to know to ensure the
safety of persons using Procedure 3?
People using Procedure 3 may be exposed
to hazardous materials, operations and
equipment. Procedure 3 does not purport to
address all of the safety issues associated
with its use. It is your responsibility to
establish appropriate health and safety
practices and determine the applicable
regulatory limitations before performing this
procedure. You should consult the COMS
user’s manual for specific precautions to
take.
6.0 What equipment and supplies do I
need?
The equipment and supplies that you need
are specified in PS–1.
7.0 What reagents and standards do I need?
The reagents and standards that you need
are specified in PS–1.
8.0 What sample collection, preservation,
storage, and transport are relevant to this
procedure ? [Reserved]
9.0 What quality control measures are
required by this procedure for my COMS?
You must develop and implement a QC
program for your COMS. Your QC program
must, at a minimum, include written
procedures which describe in detail complete
step-by-step procedures and operations for
the activities in paragraphs (1) through (4):
(1) Procedures for performing drift checks,
including both zero and upscale drift and the
status indicators check,
(2) Procedures for performing quarterly
performance audits,
(3) A means of checking the zero alignment
of the COMS, and
(4) A program of corrective action for a
malfunctioning COMS. The corrective action
must include, at a minimum, the
requirements specified in section 10.5.
9.1 What QA/QC documentation must I
have? You are required to keep the QA/QC
written procedures on record and available
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\14FER1.SGM
14FER1
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
8164
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
(3) You must, at a minimum, check the
status indicators, data acquisition system
error messages, and other system selfdiagnostic indicators. You must take
appropriate corrective action based on the
manufacturer’s recommendations when the
COMS is operating outside preset limits. All
COMS data recorded during periods in which
the fault status indicators are illuminated are
to be considered invalid.
10.2 What are the quarterly auditing
requirements for my COMS? At a minimum,
the parameters listed in paragraphs (1)
through (3) of this section must be included
in the quarterly performance audit.
(1) For units with automatic zero
compensation, you must determine the zero
compensation for the COMS. The value of the
zero compensation applied at the time of the
audit must be calculated as equivalent
opacity and corrected to stack exit conditions
according to the procedures specified by the
manufacturer. The compensation applied to
the effluent recorded by the monitor system
must be recorded.
(2) You must conduct a three-point
calibration error test of the COMS. For either
calibration error test method identified
below, three neutral density filters meeting
the requirements of PS–1 must be placed in
the COMS light beam path for at least three
nonconsecutive readings. All monitor
responses must then be independently
recorded from the COMS permanent data
recorder. Additional guidance for conducting
this test is included in section 8.1(3)(ii) of
PS–1. The low-, mid-, and high-range
calibration error results must be computed as
the mean difference and 95 percent
confidence interval for the difference
between the expected and actual responses of
the monitor as corrected to stack exit
conditions. The equations necessary to
perform the calculations are found in section
12.0 of PS–1. For the calibration error
method, you must use the external audit
device. You must confirm that the external
audit device produces a zero value within
one percent opacity.
(3) You must check the optical alignment
of the COMS. The optical alignment should
be checked when the stack temperature is
±50 percent of the typical operating
temperature in degrees Farenheit.
10.3 What are the annual auditing
requirements for my COMS?
(1) You must perform the primary zero
alignment method under clear path
conditions. The COMS may be removed from
its installation and setup under clear path
conditions or, if the process is not operating
and the monitor path is free of particulate
matter, the zero alignment may be conducted
at the installed site. Determining if the
monitor path is free of particulate matter can
be accomplished by, but is not limited to, the
following procedure: observe the
instantaneous or one-minute average opacity
for at least two hours prior to the clear path
adjustment; open the reflector or detector
housing and observe the projected light beam
and look for the presence of forward
scattered light (halo-effect); if the beam
observation reveals no perceptible
particulate, and the 2-hour readings do not
vary more than ±3 percent opacity, adjust the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:25 Feb 13, 2012
Jkt 226001
clear path zero based on the lowest opacity
reading recorded during the 2-hour period.
There must be no adjustments to the monitor
other than the establishment of the proper
monitor path length and correct optical
alignment of the COMS components. You
must record the COMS response to a clear
condition and to the COMS’s simulated zero
condition as percent opacity corrected to
stack exit conditions. For a COMS with
automatic zero compensation, you must
disconnect or disable the zero compensation
mechanism or record the amount of
correction applied to the COMS’s simulated
zero condition. The response difference in
percent opacity to the clear path and
simulated zero conditions must be recorded
as the zero alignment error. You must adjust
the COMS’s simulated zero device to provide
the same response as the clear path condition
as specified in paragraph (3) of section 10.0.
You must perform the zero alignment audits
with the COMS off the stack at least every
three years.
(2) As an alternative, monitors capable of
allowing the installation of an external zero
device (commonly referred to as zero-jig) may
use the device for the zero alignment
provided that: the zero-jig setting has been
established for the monitor path length and
recorded for the specific COMS by
comparison of the COMS responses to the
installed zero-jig and to the clear path
condition, and the zero-jig is demonstrated to
be capable of producing a consistent zero
response when it is repeatedly (i.e., three
consecutive installations and removals prior
to conducting the final zero alignment check)
installed on the COMS. This can be
demonstrated by either the MCOC or actual
on-site performance. The zero-jig setting
must be permanently set at the time of initial
zeroing to the clear path zero value and
protected when not in use to ensure that the
setting equivalent to zero opacity does not
change. The zero-jig response must be
checked and recorded prior to initiating the
zero alignment. If the zero-jig setting has
changed, you must remove the COMS from
the stack in order to reset the zero-jig. If you
employ a zero-jig, you must perform the zero
alignment audits with the COMS off the stack
at least every three years. If the zero-jig is
adjusted within the three-year period, you
must perform the zero alignment with the
COMS off the stack no later than three years
from the date of adjustment.
(3) The procedure in section 6.8 of ASTM
D 6216–98, 03, 07 is allowed.
(4) Other alternatives that verify that the
zero optical adjustment is ±3 percent opacity
are also allowed.
10.4 What are my limits for excessive
audit inaccuracy? Unless specified otherwise
in the applicable subpart, the criteria for
excessive inaccuracy are listed in paragraphs
(1) through (4) of this section.
(1) What is the criterion for excessive zero
or upscale drift? Your COMS is out-of-control
if either the zero drift check or upscale drift
check exceeds twice the applicable drift
specification in PS–1 for any one day.
(2) What is the criterion for excessive zero
alignment? Your COMS is out-of-control if
the zero alignment error exceeds 2 percent
opacity.
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(3) What is the criterion to pass the
quarterly performance audit? Your COMS is
out-of-control if the results of a quarterly
performance audit indicate noncompliance
with the following criteria:
(i) The optical alignment misalignment
error exceeds 3 percent opacity,
(ii) The zero compensation exceeds 4
percent opacity, or
(iii) The calibration error exceeds 3 percent
opacity.
(4) What is the criterion for data capture?
The data capture will be considered
insufficient if your COMS fails to obtain
valid opacity data for at least 95 percent of
your operating hours per calendar quarter,
considering COMS downtime for all causes
(e.g., monitor malfunctions, data system
failures, preventative maintenance, unknown
causes, etc.) except for downtime associated
with routine zero and upscale checks and
QA/QC activities required by this procedure.
Whenever less than 95 percent of the valid
data averages are obtained, you must either:
(i) Perform additional QA/QC activities as
deemed necessary to ensure acceptable data
capture, or
(ii) Determine if the COMS is functioning
properly. If your COMS is malfunctioning,
you may use a substitute COMS until repairs
are made, provided the substitute meets the
requirements in section 10.6.
10.5 What corrective action must I take if
my COMS is malfunctioning? You must have
a corrective action program in place to
address the repair and/or maintenance of
your COMS. There are four classes of
maintenance and repair procedures to be
considered as described in paragraphs (1)
through (4) of this section. They may be
performed at the manufacturer’s facility, a
service provider’s facility, the user’s
instrument laboratory, or at the stack/duct at
the discretion of the owner/operator and
within the recommendation of the
manufacturer. They must be performed by
persons either skilled and/or trained in the
operation and maintenance of the analyzer.
After the repair/maintenance of your COMS,
you must ensure that the COMS is still in
compliance with PS–1. Table 17–1 outlines
the tests required to maintain PS–1
certification.
(1) Routine/Preventative Maintenance.
Routine/preventative maintenance includes
the routine replacement of consumables,
cleaning of optical surfaces, and adjustment
of monitor operating parameters as needed to
maintain normal operation. Replacement of
consumables that have the possibility of
adversely affecting the performance of an
analyzer may cause the nature of the
maintenance procedure to fall within one of
the classifications described below.
(2) Measurement Non-Critical Repairs.
Measurement non-critical repairs include
repair and/or replacement of standard noncritical components, the unique
characteristics of which do not materially
affect the performance of the monitor. These
components include, but are not limited to,
resistors, capacitors, inductors, transformers,
semiconductors, such as discrete components
and integrated circuits, brackets and
machined parts (not associated with internal
optical components), cabling and connectors,
E:\FR\FM\14FER1.SGM
14FER1
8165
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
electro mechanical components, such as
relays, solenoids, motors, switches, blowers,
pressure/flow indicators, tubing, indicator
lights, software with the same version and/
or revision level, glass windows (uncoated or
anti-reflection coated, but with no curvature),
lenses with mounts where such mounts are
not adjustable as installed, circuit boards
where such boards are interchangeable and
without unique adjustments (except offset
and gain adjustments) for the specific
analyzer of the same model, with such
repairs to include the maintenance
procedures required to ensure that the
analyzer is appropriately setup.
(3) Primary Measurement Light Source.
Repair or replace the primary measurement
light source.
(4) Measurement Critical Repairs.
Measurement critical repairs include repair
and/or replacement of measurement sensitive
components, the unique characteristics of
which may materially affect the performance
of the monitor. These components include,
but are not limited to, optical detectors
associated with the opacity measurement/
reference beam(s), spectrally selective optical
filters, beam splitters, internal zero and/or
upscale reference reflective or transmissive
materials, electro optical light switches, retro
reflectors, adjustable apertures used on
external zero devices or reflectors, lenses
which have an adjustable mount, circuit
boards which are not completely
interchangeable and/or require unique
adjustments for the specific analyzer, with
such repairs to include the maintenance
procedures required to ensure that the
analyzer is appropriately setup.
(5) Rebuilt or Refurbished Analyzers.
Rebuilt or refurbished analyzers include
analyzers for which a major sub-assembly has
been replaced or multiple lesser subassemblies with different revision levels from
the original have been replaced and/or
modified. This also includes major changes
to the analyzer measurement detection and
processing hardware or software.
10.6 What requirements must I meet if I
use a substitute opacity monitor? In the event
that your certified opacity monitor has to be
removed for extended service, you may
install a temporary replacement monitor to
obtain required opacity emissions data
provided that:
(1) The temporary monitor has been
certified according to ASTM D 6216–98, 03,
07 for which a manufacturer’s certificate of
conformance (MCOC) has been provided;
(2) The use of the temporary monitor does
not exceed 720 hours (30 days) of operation
per year as a replacement for a fully certified
opacity monitor. After that time, the analyzer
must complete a full certification according
to PS–1 prior to further use as a temporary
replacement monitor. Once a temporary
replacement monitor has been installed and
required testing and adjustments have been
successfully completed, it cannot be replaced
by another temporary replacement monitor to
avoid the full PS–1 certification testing
required after 720 hours (30 days) of use;
(3) The temporary monitor has been
installed and successfully completed an
optical alignment assessment and status
indicator assessment;
(4) The temporary monitor has successfully
completed an off-stack clear path zero
assessment and zero calibration value
adjustment procedure;
(5) The temporary monitor has successfully
completed an abbreviated zero and upscale
drift check consisting of seven zero and
upscale calibration value drift checks which
may be conducted within a 24-hour period
with not more than one calibration drift
check every three hours and not less than one
calibration drift check every 25 hours.
Calculated zero and upscale drift
requirements are the same as specified for the
normal PS–1 certification;
(6) The temporary monitor has successfully
completed a three-point calibration error test;
(7) The upscale reference calibration check
value of the new monitor has been updated
in the associated data recording equipment;
(8) The overall calibration of the monitor
and data recording equipment has been
verified; and
(9) The user has documented all of the
above in the maintenance log or in other
appropriate permanently maintained records.
10.7 When do out-of-control periods begin
and end? The out-of-control periods are as
specified in section 3.1.
10.8 What are the limitations on the use of
my COMS data collected during out-ofcontrol periods? During the period your
COMS is out-of-control, you may not use
your COMS data to calculate emission
compliance or to meet minimum data capture
requirements in this procedure or the
applicable regulation.
10.9 What are the QA/QC reporting
requirements for my COMS? You must report
the accuracy results from section 10.0 for
your COMS at the interval specified in this
procedure or the applicable regulation. You
must report the drift and accuracy
information as a Data Assessment Report
(DAR), and include one copy of this DAR for
each quarterly audit with the report of
emissions required under the applicable
regulation. An example DAR is provided in
Procedure 1, Appendix F of this part.
10.10 What minimum information must I
include in my DAR? At a minimum, you
must include the information listed in
paragraphs (1) through (5) of this section in
the DAR.
(1) Your name and address,
(2) Identification and location of your
COMS(s),
(3) Manufacturer, model, and serial
number of your COMS(s),
(4) Assessment of COMS data accuracy/
acceptability and date of assessment as
determined by a performance audit described
in section 10.0. If the accuracy audit results
show your COMS to be out-of-control, you
must report both the audit results showing
your COMS to be out-of-control and the
results of the audit following corrective
action showing your COMS to be operating
within specifications, and
(5) Summary of all corrective actions you
took when you determined your COMS was
out-of-control.
10.11 Where and how long must I retain
the QA data that this procedure requires me
to record for my COMS? You must keep the
records required by this procedure for your
COMS onsite and available for inspection by
us, the State, and/or the local enforcement
agency for the period specified in the
regulations requiring the use of COMS.
11.0 What analytical procedures apply to this
procedure? [Reserved]
12.0 What calculations and data analysis
must I perform for my COMS?
The calculations required for the
performance audit are in section 12.0 of PS–
1.
13.0
Method Performance [Reserved]
14.0
Pollution Prevention [Reserved]
15.0
Waste Management [Reserved]
16.0
References
16.1 Performance Specification 1–
Specifications and Test Procedures for
Continuous Opacity Monitoring Systems in
Stationary Sources, 40 CFR part 60,
Appendix B.
16.2 ASTM D 6216–98, 03, 07–Standard
Practice for Opacity Monitor Manufacturers
to Certify Conformance with Design and
Performance Specifications, American
Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM).
17.0 What Tables, Diagrams, Flowcharts,
and Validation Data Are Relevant to This
Procedure?
17.1. TABLE 17–1—DIAGNOSTIC TESTS REQUIRED AFTER VARIOUS REPAIRS
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Description of event
(1) Replace or repair components described as
routine and/or preventative maintenance..
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Optical
alignment
Optical
alignment
indicator
assessment
(Note 1)
Zero calibration
check
Clear
path (offstack)
zero assessment
(Note 3)
Upscale
calibration
check
Calibration error
check
Fault status indicator
check
Averaging
period
calculation and
recording
7-Day
zero and
up-scale
drift
check
(Note 2)
Recertify
per
PS–1
New
MCOC
per
ASTM D
6216–98,
07
X
—
X
—
X
—
X
—
—
—
—
14:25 Feb 13, 2012
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\14FER1.SGM
14FER1
Comments
Includes replacement of
blower, cleaning optical
surfaces, resetting adjustable parameters to
maintain normal performance, etc.
8166
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 14, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
17.1. TABLE 17–1—DIAGNOSTIC TESTS REQUIRED AFTER VARIOUS REPAIRS—Continued
Description of event
Optical
alignment
Optical
alignment
indicator
assessment
(Note 1)
Zero calibration
check
Clear
path (offstack)
zero assessment
(Note 3)
Upscale
calibration
check
Calibration error
check
Fault status indicator
check
Averaging
period
calculation and
recording
7-Day
zero and
up-scale
drift
check
(Note 2)
Recertify
per
PS–1
New
MCOC
per
ASTM D
6216–98,
07
(2) Replace or repair primary measurement light..
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
—
—
—
—
(3) Replace or repair components which are
measurement noncritical..
(4) Replace or repair components which are
measurement critical..
(5) Replace or repair components which are
measurement critical but
do not involve optical or
electro-optical components..
(6) Rebuild or substantially
refurbish the analyzer..
(7) Change to, or addition
of, analyzer components
which may affect MCOCspecified performance
parameters..
X
—
X
—
X
................
X
—
—
—
—
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
—
X
—
—
See test description, section 10.5(3).
—
—
X
—
X
X
X
X
—
—
—
Includes changes of components involving data
acquisition and recording.
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
X
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
X
X
See text description, section 10.5(4).
Significant changes which
are not part of the
MCOC-designated configuration.
Comments
Light source uniformity and
position are key source
to many performance
parameters.
See text description, section 10.5(2).
Notes: (1) Optical alignment indicator assessment requires the operator to verify during an off the stack clear path zero assessment that the beam is centered on the reflector/retro reflector
when the alignment indicator indicates on-axis centered alignment. If not, the analyzer optical train must be adjusted until this condition is met.
(2) 7-Day zero and upscale drift assessment. Opacity measurement data recorded prior to completion of the 7-day drift test will be considered as valid provided that the first 7-day drift test is
successful, that it is completed within 14 days of completion of the repair, and that other QA requirements are met during this time period.
(3) Requires verification of the external zero-jig response, or recalibration of the same, after the off-stack clear path zero has been re-established.
4678, Email:
AIDARPartnerVetting@usaid.gov.
[FR Doc. 2012–3379 Filed 2–13–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL
DEVELOPMENT
48 CFR Parts 704, 713, 714, 715, 716,
744, and 752
RIN 0412–AA63
Partner Vetting in USAID Acquisitions
United States Agency for
International Development.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Agency for
International Development (USAID) is
implementing a pilot for a Partner
Vetting System for USAID assistance
and acquisition awards. The purpose of
the Partner Vetting System is to help
ensure that USAID funds and other
resources do not inadvertently benefit
individuals or entities that are terrorists,
supporters of terrorists or affiliated with
terrorists, while also minimizing the
impact on USAID programs and its
implementing partners. We are
amending the USAID Acquisition
Regulations (AIDAR) regulations in
order to apply the Partner Vetting
System to USAID acquisitions for the
pilot and any subsequent
implementation of PVS that is
determined appropriate.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
March 15, 2012.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael Gushue, Telephone: 202–567–
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:25 Feb 13, 2012
Jkt 226001
USAID’s final rule exempting portions
of the Partner Vetting System (PVS)
from provisions of the Privacy Act of
1974 went into effect on August 4, 2009
after several extensions, the most recent
of which was published on May 6, 2009
(74 FR 20871). Although USAID did not
further extend the effective date, the
agency did not implement PVS at that
time in order to allow additional input
from interested parties and to allow PVS
to be applied to both assistance and
acquisitions. Before the agency
determines whether to implement PVS
on a world-wide basis, USAID is
launching a PVS pilot program to
determine the costs and benefits of
implementing PVS more broadly. At the
conclusion of the pilot program, State
and USAID will determine whether it is
necessary to implement PVS more
broadly, and/or make changes to the
risk-based model it employs. In order to
apply PVS to USAID acquisitions,
USAID is amending 48 CFR Chapter 7,
which is USAID’s procurement
regulation. USAID published a Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in the
Federal Register on June 26, 2009 (74
FR 30494) with a public comment
period of 60 days, closing on August 25,
2009. During the 60-day comment
period, USAID received comments from
five separate respondents. All
respondents expressed concerns about
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
USAID’s intent to implement PVS and
reiterated objections raised during and
after the public comment period when
USAID established the PVS as a new
system of records (72 FR 39042) and
exempted portions of PVS from one or
more provisions of the Privacy Act (74
FR 9). However, since comments of this
nature are outside the scope of the
Proposed Rule, we are not addressing
them in this Final Rule. Only those
comments directly addressing the
proposed amendments to the AIDAR
and our responses are discussed below.
B. Summary of the Final Rule
USAID is issuing a final rule
amending 48 CFR Chapter 7, as
described in the proposed rule with
some modifications in response to the
public comments received. This final
rule implements the partner vetting
system for USAID acquisitions by
adding a new subpart 704.70 to (48 CFR)
AIDAR, with an associated solicitation
provision and contract clause in (48
CFR) AIDAR Part 752. Additionally, this
final rule amends (48 CFR) AIDAR Parts
713, 714, and 715, 716, and adds a new
Part 744 to include reference to the
requirements at (48 CFR) AIDAR
Subpart 704.70.
C. Discussion of Comments
USAID received comments and
suggestions from five organizations on
its proposed rule to amend 48 CFR
Chapter 7, which would enable USAID
to apply the Partner Vetting System to
USAID acquisitions. While some of the
comments and suggestions received did
E:\FR\FM\14FER1.SGM
14FER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 30 (Tuesday, February 14, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 8160-8166]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-3379]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 60
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0873; FRL-9630-7]
RIN 2060-AH23
Quality Assurance Requirements for Continuous Opacity Monitoring
Systems at Stationary Sources
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA is taking direct final action to establish quality
assurance and quality control (QA/QC) procedures for continuous opacity
monitoring systems (COMS) used to demonstrate continuous compliance
with opacity standards in federally enforceable regulations. This
action is necessary because we do not currently have QA/QC procedures
for COMS. This action would require COMS used to demonstrate continuous
compliance to meet these procedures (referred to as Procedure 3).
DATES: This rule is effective on April 16, 2012 without further notice,
unless the EPA receives adverse comment by March 15, 2012. If the EPA
receives adverse comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take
effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2010-0873 by one of the following methods:
www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
Email: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov.
Fax: (202) 566-9744.
Mail: Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0873,
Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460.
Hand Delivery: The EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460. Such deliveries are
only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2010-0873. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change and may be made available
online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov
or email. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access''
system, which means the EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an email comment directly to the EPA without going through
www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, the 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 the EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the 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 the EPA's public
docket, visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at https://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Procedure 3--Quality
Assurance Requirements for Continuous Opacity Monitoring Systems at
Stationary Sources Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The Docket Facility and Public
Reading Room are open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Air
Docket is (202) 566-1742, and the telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is (202) 566-1744.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Lula H. Melton, U.S. EPA, Office
of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Air Quality Assessment Division,
Measurement Technology Group (Mail Code: E143-02), Research Triangle
Park, NC 27711; telephone number: (919) 541-2910; fax number: (919)
541-0516; email address: melton.lula@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. General Information
A. Why is the EPA using a direct final rule?
B. Does this action apply to me?
C. Where can I obtain a copy of this action?
D. Judicial Review
II. This Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
[[Page 8161]]
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 Concerning Regulations 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. General Information
A. Why is the EPA using a direct final rule?
The EPA is publishing this rule without a prior proposed rule
because we view this as a non-controversial action and anticipate no
adverse comment. This action establishes QA/QC procedures for
continuous opacity monitoring systems used to demonstrate continuous
compliance with opacity standards in federally enforceable regulations.
We believe that these QA/QC procedures are reasonable and that they can
be met by any well-maintained and operated COMS. Furthermore, the
procedures were developed based on input provided by the affected
parties. On May 8, 2003, we published a proposed rule to codify QA/QC
procedures for COMS (i.e., Procedure 3). Due to other priorities, we
did not finalize Procedure 3, but public comments received on the
proposal have been considered in this action. This rule also takes into
account changes in technology since 2003.
In the ``Proposed Rules'' section of this Federal Register, we are
publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposed rule if
relevant adverse comments are received on this direct final rule. We
will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting, must do so at this time. For further
information about commenting on this rule, see the ADDRESSES section of
this document. If the EPA receives adverse comment, we will publish a
timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that
this direct final rule will not take effect. We would address all
public comments in any subsequent final rule based on the proposed
rule.
B. Does this action apply to me?
Procedure 3 applies to COMS used to demonstrate continuous
compliance with opacity standards in federally enforceable regulations.
C. 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. A redline strikeout
document that compares this final rule to the proposed rule has also
been added to the docket.
D. Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), judicial review
of this direct final rule is available by filing a petition for review
in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit by April 16, 2012. Under section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA, only
an objection to this direct final rule that was raised with reasonable
specificity during the period for public comment can be raised during
judicial review. Moreover, under section 307(b)(2) of the CAA, the
requirements that are the subject of this direct final rule may not be
challenged later in civil or criminal proceedings brought by the EPA to
enforce these requirements.
II. This Action
This direct final rule codifies Procedure 3 in 40 CFR part 60,
Appendix F. Procedure 3 establishes quality assurance and quality
control procedures for continuous opacity monitoring systems used to
demonstrate continuous compliance with opacity standards in federally
enforceable regulations. More specifically, Procedure 3 provides
requirements for daily instrument zero and upscale drift checks, daily
status indicator checks, quarterly performance audits, annual zero
alignment audits, and corrective action for malfunctioning COMS. On May
8, 2003, we published a proposed rule to codify Procedure 3. However,
due to other priorities, we did not finalize Procedure 3 after the
comment period ended July 7, 2003. Public comments received on the May
8, 2003, proposal have been considered in this action.
Most of the comments on the 2003 proposal required us to provide
clarifications and updates. For example, several commenters were
confused by the wording of the applicability statement in the 2003
proposal. We revised the applicability statement in the direct final
rule to remove the ambiguity. The direct final rule references the
1998, 2003, and 2007 versions of the American Society of Testing and
Materials' Standard Practice for Opacity Monitor Manufacturers to
Certify Conformance with Design and Performance Specifications, whereas
the 2003 proposal referenced the 1998 version only.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory 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 Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
(76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011).
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 quality assurance
procedures do not add information collection requirements beyond those
currently required under the applicable regulations.
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 accessing 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 rule on small
entities, I
[[Page 8162]]
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. This action establishes quality
assurance procedures for continuous opacity monitoring systems used to
demonstrate continuous compliance with opacity standards as specified
in federally enforceable regulations and does not impose additional
regulatory requirements on sources.
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.
Rules establishing quality assurance requirements impose no costs
independent from national emission standards which require their use,
and such costs are fully reflected in the regulatory impact assessment
for those emission standards. 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 action simply
establishes quality assurance procedures for continuous opacity
monitoring systems used to demonstrate continuous compliance with
opacity standards as specified in federally enforceable regulations.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action 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. This action establishes quality
assurance procedures for continuous opacity monitoring systems used to
demonstrate continuous compliance with opacity standards as specified
in federally enforceable regulations. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does
not apply to this action.
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). This action
establishes quality assurance procedures for continuous opacity
monitoring systems used to demonstrate continuous compliance with
opacity standards as specified in federally enforceable regulations. It
does not add any emission limits and does not affect pollutant
emissions or air quality. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to
this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
The 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 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs the 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 the 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, the
EPA did not consider the use of any voluntary consensus standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
The EPA has determined that this direct final rule will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not
affect the level of protection provided to human health or the
environment. This 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. The 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 April 16, 2012.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60
Air pollution control, Environmental protection, Continuous opacity
monitoring.
Dated: February 6, 2012.
Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the
Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 60--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 60 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
0
2. Appendix F of part 60 is amended by adding Procedure 3 to read as
follows:
Appendix F to Part 60--Quality Assurance Procedures
* * * * *
[[Page 8163]]
Procedure 3--Quality Assurance Requirements for Continuous Opacity
Monitoring Systems at Stationary Sources
1.0 What are the purpose and applicability of Procedure 3?
The purpose of Procedure 3 is to establish quality assurance and
quality control (QA/QC) procedures for continuous opacity monitoring
systems (COMS). Procedure 3 applies to COMS used to demonstrate
continuous compliance with opacity standards in federally
enforceable regulations.
1.1 What are the data quality objectives of Procedure 3? The
overall data quality objective (DQO) of Procedure 3 is the
generation of valid and representative opacity data. Procedure 3
specifies the minimum requirements for controlling and assessing the
quality of COMS data submitted to us or the delegated regulatory
agency. Procedure 3 requires you to perform periodic evaluations of
a COMS performance and to develop and implement QA/QC programs to
ensure that COMS data quality is maintained.
1.2 What is the intent of the QA/QC procedures specified in
Procedure 3? Procedure 3 is intended to establish the minimum QA/QC
requirements to verify and maintain an acceptable level of quality
of the data produced by COMS. It is presented in general terms to
allow you to develop a program that is most effective for your
circumstances.
1.3 When must I comply with Procedure 3? You must comply with
Procedure 3 after your COMS has been initially certified.
2.0 What are the basic functions of Procedure 3?
The basic functions of Procedure 3 are assessment of the quality
of your COMS data and control and improvement of the quality of the
data by implementing QC requirements and corrective actions.
Procedure 3 provides requirements for:
(1) Daily instrument zero and upscale drift checks, as well as,
daily status indicators checks;
(2) Quarterly performance audits which include the following
assessments:
(i) Optical alignment,
(ii) Calibration error,
(iii) Zero compensation; and
(3) Annual zero alignment.
Sources that consistently achieve quality assured data may
request a semi-annual audit frequency by submitting the request in
writing to the Administrator.
3.0 What special definitions apply to Procedure 3?
The definitions in Procedure 3 include those provided in
Performance Specification 1 (PS-1) of Appendix B and ASTM D 6216-98,
03, 07 and the following additions.
3.1 Out-of-control periods. Out-of-control periods mean that one
or more COMS parameters falls outside of the acceptable limits
established by this rule.
(1) Daily Assessments. Whenever the calibration drift (CD)
exceeds twice the specification of PS-1, the COMS is out-of-control.
The beginning of the out-of-control period is the time corresponding
to the completion of the daily calibration drift check. The end of
the out-of-control period is the time corresponding to the
completion of appropriate adjustment and subsequent successful CD
assessment.
(2) Quarterly and Annual Assessments. Whenever an annual zero
alignment or quarterly performance audit indicates noncompliance
with the criteria established in paragraphs (2) and (3) of section
10.4, the COMS is out-of-control. The beginning of the out-of-
control period is the time corresponding to the completion of the
performance audit indicating noncompliance. The end of the out-of-
control period is the time corresponding to the completion of
appropriate corrective actions and the subsequent successful audit
(or, if applicable, partial audit).
4.0 What interferences must I avoid?
Opacity cannot be measured accurately in the presence of water
droplets. Thus, COMS opacity compliance determinations cannot be
made when water droplets are present, such as downstream of a wet
scrubber without a reheater or at other saturated flue gas
locations.
5.0 What do I need to know to ensure the safety of persons using
Procedure 3?
People using Procedure 3 may be exposed to hazardous materials,
operations and equipment. Procedure 3 does not purport to address
all of the safety issues associated with its use. It is your
responsibility to establish appropriate health and safety practices
and determine the applicable regulatory limitations before
performing this procedure. You should consult the COMS user's manual
for specific precautions to take.
6.0 What equipment and supplies do I need?
The equipment and supplies that you need are specified in PS-1.
7.0 What reagents and standards do I need?
The reagents and standards that you need are specified in PS-1.
8.0 What sample collection, preservation, storage, and transport
are relevant to this procedure ? [Reserved]
9.0 What quality control measures are required by this procedure
for my COMS?
You must develop and implement a QC program for your COMS. Your
QC program must, at a minimum, include written procedures which
describe in detail complete step-by-step procedures and operations
for the activities in paragraphs (1) through (4):
(1) Procedures for performing drift checks, including both zero
and upscale drift and the status indicators check,
(2) Procedures for performing quarterly performance audits,
(3) A means of checking the zero alignment of the COMS, and
(4) A program of corrective action for a malfunctioning COMS.
The corrective action must include, at a minimum, the requirements
specified in section 10.5.
9.1 What QA/QC documentation must I have? You are required to
keep the QA/QC written procedures on record and available for
inspection by us, the State, and/or local enforcement agencies for
the life of your COMS or until you are no longer subject to the
requirements of this procedure.
9.2 What are the consequences of failing QC audits? Your QC
procedures are deemed to be inadequate or your COMS incapable of
providing quality data if you fail two consecutive annual audits,
two consecutive quarterly audits, or five consecutive daily checks.
If this occurs, you must either revise your QC procedures or repair
or replace the COMS to correct the deficiencies causing the audit
failures. If you determine that your COMS requires extensive
repairs, you may use a substitute COMS provided the substitute meets
the requirements in section 10.6.
10.0 What calibration and standardization procedures must I perform
for my COMS?
(1) You must perform routine system checks to ensure proper
operation of system electronics and optics, light and radiation
sources and detectors, electric or electro-mechanical systems, and
general stability of the system calibration.
(2) You must subject your COMS to a performance audit to include
checks of the individual COMS components and factors affecting the
accuracy of the monitoring data at least once per calendar quarter.
(3) At least annually, you must perform a zero alignment by
comparing the COMS simulated zero to the actual clear path zero. The
simulated zero device produces a simulated clear path condition or
low-level opacity condition, where the energy reaching the detector
is between 90 and 110 percent of the energy reaching the detector
under actual clear path conditions.
10.1 What routine system checks must I perform on my COMS?
Necessary components of the routine system checks will depend on the
design details of your COMS. At a minimum, you must verify the
system operating parameters listed in paragraphs (1) through (3) of
this section on a daily basis. Some COMS may perform one or more of
these functions automatically or as an integral portion of unit
operations; other COMS may perform one or more of these functions
manually.
(1) You must check the zero drift to ensure stability of your
COMS response to the simulated zero device. The simulated zero
device, an automated mechanism within the transmissometer that
produces a simulated clear path condition or low-level opacity
condition, is used to check the zero drift. You must, at a minimum,
take corrective action on your COMS whenever the daily zero drift
exceeds twice the applicable drift specification in PS-1.
(2) You must check the upscale drift to ensure stability of your
COMS response to the upscale drift value. The upscale calibration
device, an automated mechanism (employing a filter or reduced
reflectance device) within the transmissometer that produces an
upscale opacity value is used to check the upscale drift. You must,
at a minimum, take corrective action on your COMS whenever the daily
upscale drift check exceeds twice the applicable drift specification
in PS-1.
[[Page 8164]]
(3) You must, at a minimum, check the status indicators, data
acquisition system error messages, and other system self-diagnostic
indicators. You must take appropriate corrective action based on the
manufacturer's recommendations when the COMS is operating outside
preset limits. All COMS data recorded during periods in which the
fault status indicators are illuminated are to be considered
invalid.
10.2 What are the quarterly auditing requirements for my COMS?
At a minimum, the parameters listed in paragraphs (1) through (3) of
this section must be included in the quarterly performance audit.
(1) For units with automatic zero compensation, you must
determine the zero compensation for the COMS. The value of the zero
compensation applied at the time of the audit must be calculated as
equivalent opacity and corrected to stack exit conditions according
to the procedures specified by the manufacturer. The compensation
applied to the effluent recorded by the monitor system must be
recorded.
(2) You must conduct a three-point calibration error test of the
COMS. For either calibration error test method identified below,
three neutral density filters meeting the requirements of PS-1 must
be placed in the COMS light beam path for at least three
nonconsecutive readings. All monitor responses must then be
independently recorded from the COMS permanent data recorder.
Additional guidance for conducting this test is included in section
8.1(3)(ii) of PS-1. The low-, mid-, and high-range calibration error
results must be computed as the mean difference and 95 percent
confidence interval for the difference between the expected and
actual responses of the monitor as corrected to stack exit
conditions. The equations necessary to perform the calculations are
found in section 12.0 of PS-1. For the calibration error method, you
must use the external audit device. You must confirm that the
external audit device produces a zero value within one percent
opacity.
(3) You must check the optical alignment of the COMS. The
optical alignment should be checked when the stack temperature is
50 percent of the typical operating temperature in
degrees Farenheit.
10.3 What are the annual auditing requirements for my COMS?
(1) You must perform the primary zero alignment method under
clear path conditions. The COMS may be removed from its installation
and setup under clear path conditions or, if the process is not
operating and the monitor path is free of particulate matter, the
zero alignment may be conducted at the installed site. Determining
if the monitor path is free of particulate matter can be
accomplished by, but is not limited to, the following procedure:
observe the instantaneous or one-minute average opacity for at least
two hours prior to the clear path adjustment; open the reflector or
detector housing and observe the projected light beam and look for
the presence of forward scattered light (halo-effect); if the beam
observation reveals no perceptible particulate, and the 2-hour
readings do not vary more than 3 percent opacity, adjust
the clear path zero based on the lowest opacity reading recorded
during the 2-hour period. There must be no adjustments to the
monitor other than the establishment of the proper monitor path
length and correct optical alignment of the COMS components. You
must record the COMS response to a clear condition and to the COMS's
simulated zero condition as percent opacity corrected to stack exit
conditions. For a COMS with automatic zero compensation, you must
disconnect or disable the zero compensation mechanism or record the
amount of correction applied to the COMS's simulated zero condition.
The response difference in percent opacity to the clear path and
simulated zero conditions must be recorded as the zero alignment
error. You must adjust the COMS's simulated zero device to provide
the same response as the clear path condition as specified in
paragraph (3) of section 10.0. You must perform the zero alignment
audits with the COMS off the stack at least every three years.
(2) As an alternative, monitors capable of allowing the
installation of an external zero device (commonly referred to as
zero-jig) may use the device for the zero alignment provided that:
the zero-jig setting has been established for the monitor path
length and recorded for the specific COMS by comparison of the COMS
responses to the installed zero-jig and to the clear path condition,
and the zero-jig is demonstrated to be capable of producing a
consistent zero response when it is repeatedly (i.e., three
consecutive installations and removals prior to conducting the final
zero alignment check) installed on the COMS. This can be
demonstrated by either the MCOC or actual on-site performance. The
zero-jig setting must be permanently set at the time of initial
zeroing to the clear path zero value and protected when not in use
to ensure that the setting equivalent to zero opacity does not
change. The zero-jig response must be checked and recorded prior to
initiating the zero alignment. If the zero-jig setting has changed,
you must remove the COMS from the stack in order to reset the zero-
jig. If you employ a zero-jig, you must perform the zero alignment
audits with the COMS off the stack at least every three years. If
the zero-jig is adjusted within the three-year period, you must
perform the zero alignment with the COMS off the stack no later than
three years from the date of adjustment.
(3) The procedure in section 6.8 of ASTM D 6216-98, 03, 07 is
allowed.
(4) Other alternatives that verify that the zero optical
adjustment is 3 percent opacity are also allowed.
10.4 What are my limits for excessive audit inaccuracy? Unless
specified otherwise in the applicable subpart, the criteria for
excessive inaccuracy are listed in paragraphs (1) through (4) of
this section.
(1) What is the criterion for excessive zero or upscale drift?
Your COMS is out-of-control if either the zero drift check or
upscale drift check exceeds twice the applicable drift specification
in PS-1 for any one day.
(2) What is the criterion for excessive zero alignment? Your
COMS is out-of-control if the zero alignment error exceeds 2 percent
opacity.
(3) What is the criterion to pass the quarterly performance
audit? Your COMS is out-of-control if the results of a quarterly
performance audit indicate noncompliance with the following
criteria:
(i) The optical alignment misalignment error exceeds 3 percent
opacity,
(ii) The zero compensation exceeds 4 percent opacity, or
(iii) The calibration error exceeds 3 percent opacity.
(4) What is the criterion for data capture? The data capture
will be considered insufficient if your COMS fails to obtain valid
opacity data for at least 95 percent of your operating hours per
calendar quarter, considering COMS downtime for all causes (e.g.,
monitor malfunctions, data system failures, preventative
maintenance, unknown causes, etc.) except for downtime associated
with routine zero and upscale checks and QA/QC activities required
by this procedure. Whenever less than 95 percent of the valid data
averages are obtained, you must either:
(i) Perform additional QA/QC activities as deemed necessary to
ensure acceptable data capture, or
(ii) Determine if the COMS is functioning properly. If your COMS
is malfunctioning, you may use a substitute COMS until repairs are
made, provided the substitute meets the requirements in section
10.6.
10.5 What corrective action must I take if my COMS is
malfunctioning? You must have a corrective action program in place
to address the repair and/or maintenance of your COMS. There are
four classes of maintenance and repair procedures to be considered
as described in paragraphs (1) through (4) of this section. They may
be performed at the manufacturer's facility, a service provider's
facility, the user's instrument laboratory, or at the stack/duct at
the discretion of the owner/operator and within the recommendation
of the manufacturer. They must be performed by persons either
skilled and/or trained in the operation and maintenance of the
analyzer. After the repair/maintenance of your COMS, you must ensure
that the COMS is still in compliance with PS-1. Table 17-1 outlines
the tests required to maintain PS-1 certification.
(1) Routine/Preventative Maintenance. Routine/preventative
maintenance includes the routine replacement of consumables,
cleaning of optical surfaces, and adjustment of monitor operating
parameters as needed to maintain normal operation. Replacement of
consumables that have the possibility of adversely affecting the
performance of an analyzer may cause the nature of the maintenance
procedure to fall within one of the classifications described below.
(2) Measurement Non-Critical Repairs. Measurement non-critical
repairs include repair and/or replacement of standard non-critical
components, the unique characteristics of which do not materially
affect the performance of the monitor. These components include, but
are not limited to, resistors, capacitors, inductors, transformers,
semiconductors, such as discrete components and integrated circuits,
brackets and machined parts (not associated with internal optical
components), cabling and connectors,
[[Page 8165]]
electro mechanical components, such as relays, solenoids, motors,
switches, blowers, pressure/flow indicators, tubing, indicator
lights, software with the same version and/or revision level, glass
windows (uncoated or anti-reflection coated, but with no curvature),
lenses with mounts where such mounts are not adjustable as
installed, circuit boards where such boards are interchangeable and
without unique adjustments (except offset and gain adjustments) for
the specific analyzer of the same model, with such repairs to
include the maintenance procedures required to ensure that the
analyzer is appropriately setup.
(3) Primary Measurement Light Source. Repair or replace the
primary measurement light source.
(4) Measurement Critical Repairs. Measurement critical repairs
include repair and/or replacement of measurement sensitive
components, the unique characteristics of which may materially
affect the performance of the monitor. These components include, but
are not limited to, optical detectors associated with the opacity
measurement/reference beam(s), spectrally selective optical filters,
beam splitters, internal zero and/or upscale reference reflective or
transmissive materials, electro optical light switches, retro
reflectors, adjustable apertures used on external zero devices or
reflectors, lenses which have an adjustable mount, circuit boards
which are not completely interchangeable and/or require unique
adjustments for the specific analyzer, with such repairs to include
the maintenance procedures required to ensure that the analyzer is
appropriately setup.
(5) Rebuilt or Refurbished Analyzers. Rebuilt or refurbished
analyzers include analyzers for which a major sub-assembly has been
replaced or multiple lesser sub-assemblies with different revision
levels from the original have been replaced and/or modified. This
also includes major changes to the analyzer measurement detection
and processing hardware or software.
10.6 What requirements must I meet if I use a substitute opacity
monitor? In the event that your certified opacity monitor has to be
removed for extended service, you may install a temporary
replacement monitor to obtain required opacity emissions data
provided that:
(1) The temporary monitor has been certified according to ASTM D
6216-98, 03, 07 for which a manufacturer's certificate of
conformance (MCOC) has been provided;
(2) The use of the temporary monitor does not exceed 720 hours
(30 days) of operation per year as a replacement for a fully
certified opacity monitor. After that time, the analyzer must
complete a full certification according to PS-1 prior to further use
as a temporary replacement monitor. Once a temporary replacement
monitor has been installed and required testing and adjustments have
been successfully completed, it cannot be replaced by another
temporary replacement monitor to avoid the full PS-1 certification
testing required after 720 hours (30 days) of use;
(3) The temporary monitor has been installed and successfully
completed an optical alignment assessment and status indicator
assessment;
(4) The temporary monitor has successfully completed an off-
stack clear path zero assessment and zero calibration value
adjustment procedure;
(5) The temporary monitor has successfully completed an
abbreviated zero and upscale drift check consisting of seven zero
and upscale calibration value drift checks which may be conducted
within a 24-hour period with not more than one calibration drift
check every three hours and not less than one calibration drift
check every 25 hours. Calculated zero and upscale drift requirements
are the same as specified for the normal PS-1 certification;
(6) The temporary monitor has successfully completed a three-
point calibration error test;
(7) The upscale reference calibration check value of the new
monitor has been updated in the associated data recording equipment;
(8) The overall calibration of the monitor and data recording
equipment has been verified; and
(9) The user has documented all of the above in the maintenance
log or in other appropriate permanently maintained records.
10.7 When do out-of-control periods begin and end? The out-of-
control periods are as specified in section 3.1.
10.8 What are the limitations on the use of my COMS data
collected during out-of-control periods? During the period your COMS
is out-of-control, you may not use your COMS data to calculate
emission compliance or to meet minimum data capture requirements in
this procedure or the applicable regulation.
10.9 What are the QA/QC reporting requirements for my COMS? You
must report the accuracy results from section 10.0 for your COMS at
the interval specified in this procedure or the applicable
regulation. You must report the drift and accuracy information as a
Data Assessment Report (DAR), and include one copy of this DAR for
each quarterly audit with the report of emissions required under the
applicable regulation. An example DAR is provided in Procedure 1,
Appendix F of this part.
10.10 What minimum information must I include in my DAR? At a
minimum, you must include the information listed in paragraphs (1)
through (5) of this section in the DAR.
(1) Your name and address,
(2) Identification and location of your COMS(s),
(3) Manufacturer, model, and serial number of your COMS(s),
(4) Assessment of COMS data accuracy/acceptability and date of
assessment as determined by a performance audit described in section
10.0. If the accuracy audit results show your COMS to be out-of-
control, you must report both the audit results showing your COMS to
be out-of-control and the results of the audit following corrective
action showing your COMS to be operating within specifications, and
(5) Summary of all corrective actions you took when you
determined your COMS was out-of-control.
10.11 Where and how long must I retain the QA data that this
procedure requires me to record for my COMS? You must keep the
records required by this procedure for your COMS onsite and
available for inspection by us, the State, and/or the local
enforcement agency for the period specified in the regulations
requiring the use of COMS.
11.0 What analytical procedures apply to this procedure? [Reserved]
12.0 What calculations and data analysis must I perform for my
COMS?
The calculations required for the performance audit are in
section 12.0 of PS-1.
13.0 Method Performance [Reserved]
14.0 Pollution Prevention [Reserved]
15.0 Waste Management [Reserved]
16.0 References
16.1 Performance Specification 1-Specifications and Test
Procedures for Continuous Opacity Monitoring Systems in Stationary
Sources, 40 CFR part 60, Appendix B.
16.2 ASTM D 6216-98, 03, 07-Standard Practice for Opacity
Monitor Manufacturers to Certify Conformance with Design and
Performance Specifications, American Society for Testing and
Materials (ASTM).
17.0 What Tables, Diagrams, Flowcharts, and Validation Data Are
Relevant to This Procedure?
17.1. Table 17-1--Diagnostic Tests Required After Various Repairs
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clear path 7-Day zero
Optical (off- Fault Averaging and up- New MCOC
Optical alignment Zero stack) Upscale Calibration status period scale Recertify per ASTM D
Description of event align-ment indicator calibration zero calibration error check indicator calculation drift per PS-1 6216-98, Comments
assessment check assessment check check and check 07
(Note 1) (Note 3) recording (Note 2)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Replace or repair components X -- X -- X -- X -- -- -- -- Includes replacement
described as routine and/or of blower, cleaning
preventative maintenance.. optical surfaces,
resetting
adjustable
parameters to
maintain normal
performance, etc.
[[Page 8166]]
(2) Replace or repair primary X X X X X X X -- -- -- -- Light source
measurement light.. uniformity and
position are key
source to many
performance
parameters.
(3) Replace or repair components X -- X -- X ........... X -- -- -- -- See text
which are measurement description,
noncritical.. section 10.5(2).
(4) Replace or repair components X X X X X X X -- X -- -- See test
which are measurement critical.. description,
section 10.5(3).
(5) Replace or repair components -- -- X -- X X X X -- -- -- Includes changes of
which are measurement critical components
but do not involve optical or involving data
electro-optical components.. acquisition and
recording.
(6) Rebuild or substantially -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- X -- See text
refurbish the analyzer.. description,
section 10.5(4).
(7) Change to, or addition of, -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- X X Significant changes
analyzer components which may which are not part
affect MCOC-specified performance of the MCOC-
parameters.. designated
configuration.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: (1) Optical alignment indicator assessment requires the operator to verify during an off the stack clear path zero assessment that the beam is centered on the reflector/retro reflector
when the alignment indicator indicates on-axis centered alignment. If not, the analyzer optical train must be adjusted until this condition is met.
(2) 7-Day zero and upscale drift assessment. Opacity measurement data recorded prior to completion of the 7-day drift test will be considered as valid provided that the first 7-day drift test
is successful, that it is completed within 14 days of completion of the repair, and that other QA requirements are met during this time period.
(3) Requires verification of the external zero-jig response, or recalibration of the same, after the off-stack clear path zero has been re-established.
[FR Doc. 2012-3379 Filed 2-13-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P