Revisions to Procedure 2-Quality Assurance Requirements for Particulate Matter Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems at Stationary Sources, 83189-83190 [2016-27847]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 224 / Monday, November 21, 2016 / Proposed Rules D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local or tribal governments or the private sector. This action merely proposes to approve i-SIP provisions that are consistent with the CAA and disapprove i-SIP provisions that are inconsistent with the CAA; and therefore will have no impact on small governments. J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations The EPA believes the human health or environmental risk addressed by this action will not have potential disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income or indigenous populations. This action merely proposes to approve i-SIP provisions that are consistent with the CAA and disapprove i-SIP provisions that are inconsistent with the CAA. E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 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. Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Interstate transport of pollution, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides. F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments Dated: November 15, 2016. Ron Curry, Regional Administrator, Region 6. This action does not have tribal implications as specified in Executive Order 13175. This action does not apply on any Indian reservation land, any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction, or non-reservation areas of Indian country. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action. [FR Doc. 2016–27924 Filed 11–18–16; 8:45 am] G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect children, per the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory action’’ in section 2–202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it merely proposes to disapprove a SIP submission as not meeting the CAA. H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act This rulemaking does not involve technical standards. VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:51 Nov 18, 2016 Jkt 241001 Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 60 [EPA–HQ–OAR–2016–0382; FRL–9955–21– OAR] RIN 2060–AT15 Revisions to Procedure 2—Quality Assurance Requirements for Particulate Matter Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems at Stationary Sources Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing revisions to a procedure in the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS). The procedure provides the ongoing quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) procedures for assessing the acceptability of particulate matter (PM) continuous emissions monitoring systems (CEMS). The procedure explains the criteria for passing an annual response correlation audit (RCA) and the criteria for passing an annual relative response audit (RRA). The procedure currently contains a requirement that the annual QA/QC test results for affected facilities must fall SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 83189 within the same response range as was used to develop the existing PM CEMS correlation curve. As a result, some facilities are unable to meet the criteria for passing their annual QA/QC test simply because their emissions are now lower than the range previously set during correlation testing. We are proposing to modify the procedure to allow facilities to extend their PM CEMS correlation regression line to the lowest PM CEMS response obtained during the RCA or RRA, when these PM CEMS responses are less than the lowest response used to develop the existing correlation curve. We also propose to correct a typographical error in the procedure. DATES: Written comments must be received by December 21, 2016. Public Hearing. If anyone contacts the EPA by December 1, 2016 requesting to speak at a public hearing on this action, the EPA will consider holding a public hearing on December 21, 2016 at the EPA facility in Research Triangle Park. Please check the EPA’s Web page at https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/emc/ proposed.html on December 12, 2016 for the announcement of whether a hearing will be held. To request a public hearing and present oral testimony at the hearing, please contact on or before December 1, 2016, the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document. If a hearing is held, the hearing schedule, including the list of speakers, will be posted on the EPA’s Web page at https:// www3.epa.gov/ttn/emc/proposed.html. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– OAR–2016–0382, at https:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the Web, Cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on E:\FR\FM\21NOP1.SGM 21NOP1 83190 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 224 / Monday, November 21, 2016 / Proposed Rules making effective comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ commenting-epa-dockets. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Kimberly Garnett, U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Air Quality Assessment Division, Measurement Technology Group (E143– 02), Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone number: (919) 541–1158; fax number: (919) 541- 0516; email address: garnett.kim@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing revisions to a procedure in the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS). We also propose to correct a typographical error in the introduction to Paragraph (6) of section 10.4 of Procedure 2. Without this revision, paragraph (6)(iii) would remain unused in Procedure 2. This typographical correction is necessary to fulfill the intent of Procedure 2, section 10.4(6), when promulgated. See 69 FR 1786. asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS I. Why is the EPA issuing this proposed rule? The EPA proposes a revision to Procedure 2, sections 10.4(5)and (6), to allow facilities that have reduced their emissions since completing their PM CEMS correlation testing to extend their correlation regression line to the point corresponding to the lowest PM CEMS response obtained during the RCA or RRA. This extended correlation regression line will be used to determine if results of this RCA or RRA meet the criteria specified in Section 10.4, paragraphs (5) and (6) of Procedure 2, respectively. This change will ensure that facilities that have reduced their emissions since completing their correlation testing will no longer be penalized because their lower emissions fall outside their initial response range. This action also proposes to correct a typographical error in the introduction to section 10.4, paragraph (6) of Procedure 2. Paragraph (6), which originally read, ‘‘To pass an RRA, you must meet the criteria specified in paragraphs (6)(i) and (ii) . . .’’, is being corrected to read: ‘‘To pass an RRA, you must meet the criteria specified in paragraphs (6)(i) through (iii) . . .’’ Without this revision, paragraph (6)(iii) would remain unused in Procedure 2. This typographical correction is necessary to fulfill the intent of Procedure 2, section 10.4(6), when promulgated in 69 FR 1786. We have published a direct final rule approving the revisions to Procedure 2 in the ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ section of this Federal Register publication because we view this as a non-controversial action VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:51 Nov 18, 2016 Jkt 241001 and anticipate no adverse comment. We have explained our reasons for this action in the preamble of the direct final rule. If we receive no adverse comment, we will not take further action on this proposed rule. If the EPA receives adverse comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the direct final rule will not take effect. In that case, we would address all public comments in any subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule. We do not intend to 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, please see the information provided in the ADDRESSES section of this document. The regulatory text for the proposal is identical to that for the direct final rule published in the ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ section of this Federal Register publication. For further supplementary information, the detailed rationale for the proposal and the regulatory revisions, see the direct final rule published in a separate part of this Federal Register publication. II. Does this action apply to me? The entities potentially affected by this rule include any facility that is required to install and operate a PM CEMS under any provision of title 40 of the CFR. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60 Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control, Continuous emission monitoring systems, Particulate matter, Procedures. Dated: November 8, 2016. Gina McCarthy, Administrator. [FR Doc. 2016–27847 Filed 11–18–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration 49 CFR Part 172 [Docket No. PHMSA–2016–0079 (HM–213E)] RIN 2137–AF25 Hazardous Materials: PIPES Act Requirements for Identification Numbers on Cargo Tanks Containing Petroleum Based Fuel Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), DOT. ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM). AGENCY: PHMSA is publishing this advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) in response to the Protecting our Infrastructure of Pipelines and Enhancing Safety (PIPES) Act of 2016, which reauthorizes the pipeline safety program and requires a number of reports and mandates. The PIPES Act requires PHMSA to take regulatory actions to establish minimum safety standards for underground natural gas storage facilities; to update the minimum safety standards for permanent, small scale liquefied natural gas pipeline facilities; and to publish an ANPRM to address a petition for rulemaking proposing hazardous materials regulations related to the marking of identification numbers on cargo tanks. This ANPRM specifically addresses the PIPES Act requirement applicable to the petition for rulemaking related to the marking of identification numbers on cargo tanks. PHMSA will consider the comments, data, and information received in any future action related to the petition. DATES: Comments must be received by February 21, 2017. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by the Docket Number PHMSA–2016–0079 (HM–213E) through any of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. • Fax: 1–202–493–2251. • Mail: Docket Management System, U.S. Department of Transportation, Dockets Operations, M–30, Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. • Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M–30, Ground Floor, Room W12–140 in the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\21NOP1.SGM 21NOP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 224 (Monday, November 21, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 83189-83190]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-27847]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 60

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0382; FRL-9955-21-OAR]
RIN 2060-AT15


Revisions to Procedure 2--Quality Assurance Requirements for 
Particulate Matter Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems at Stationary 
Sources

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing 
revisions to a procedure in the New Source Performance Standards 
(NSPS). The procedure provides the ongoing quality assurance/quality 
control (QA/QC) procedures for assessing the acceptability of 
particulate matter (PM) continuous emissions monitoring systems (CEMS). 
The procedure explains the criteria for passing an annual response 
correlation audit (RCA) and the criteria for passing an annual relative 
response audit (RRA). The procedure currently contains a requirement 
that the annual QA/QC test results for affected facilities must fall 
within the same response range as was used to develop the existing PM 
CEMS correlation curve. As a result, some facilities are unable to meet 
the criteria for passing their annual QA/QC test simply because their 
emissions are now lower than the range previously set during 
correlation testing. We are proposing to modify the procedure to allow 
facilities to extend their PM CEMS correlation regression line to the 
lowest PM CEMS response obtained during the RCA or RRA, when these PM 
CEMS responses are less than the lowest response used to develop the 
existing correlation curve. We also propose to correct a typographical 
error in the procedure.

DATES: Written comments must be received by December 21, 2016.
    Public Hearing. If anyone contacts the EPA by December 1, 2016 
requesting to speak at a public hearing on this action, the EPA will 
consider holding a public hearing on December 21, 2016 at the EPA 
facility in Research Triangle Park. Please check the EPA's Web page at 
https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/emc/proposed.html on December 12, 2016 for the 
announcement of whether a hearing will be held. To request a public 
hearing and present oral testimony at the hearing, please contact on or 
before December 1, 2016, the person listed in the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document. If a hearing is held, the 
hearing schedule, including the list of speakers, will be posted on the 
EPA's Web page at https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/emc/proposed.html.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2016-0382, at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot 
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any 
comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any 
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) 
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a 
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment 
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA 
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located 
outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the Web, Cloud, or other 
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA 
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, 
and general guidance on

[[Page 83190]]

making effective comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Kimberly Garnett, U.S. EPA, Office 
of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Air Quality Assessment Division, 
Measurement Technology Group (E143-02), Research Triangle Park, NC 
27711; telephone number: (919) 541-1158; fax number: (919) 541- 0516; 
email address: garnett.kim@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is 
proposing revisions to a procedure in the New Source Performance 
Standards (NSPS). We also propose to correct a typographical error in 
the introduction to Paragraph (6) of section 10.4 of Procedure 2. 
Without this revision, paragraph (6)(iii) would remain unused in 
Procedure 2. This typographical correction is necessary to fulfill the 
intent of Procedure 2, section 10.4(6), when promulgated. See 69 FR 
1786.

I. Why is the EPA issuing this proposed rule?

    The EPA proposes a revision to Procedure 2, sections 10.4(5)and 
(6), to allow facilities that have reduced their emissions since 
completing their PM CEMS correlation testing to extend their 
correlation regression line to the point corresponding to the lowest PM 
CEMS response obtained during the RCA or RRA. This extended correlation 
regression line will be used to determine if results of this RCA or RRA 
meet the criteria specified in Section 10.4, paragraphs (5) and (6) of 
Procedure 2, respectively. This change will ensure that facilities that 
have reduced their emissions since completing their correlation testing 
will no longer be penalized because their lower emissions fall outside 
their initial response range. This action also proposes to correct a 
typographical error in the introduction to section 10.4, paragraph (6) 
of Procedure 2. Paragraph (6), which originally read, ``To pass an RRA, 
you must meet the criteria specified in paragraphs (6)(i) and (ii) . . 
.'', is being corrected to read: ``To pass an RRA, you must meet the 
criteria specified in paragraphs (6)(i) through (iii) . . .'' Without 
this revision, paragraph (6)(iii) would remain unused in Procedure 2. 
This typographical correction is necessary to fulfill the intent of 
Procedure 2, section 10.4(6), when promulgated in 69 FR 1786. We have 
published a direct final rule approving the revisions to Procedure 2 in 
the ``Rules and Regulations'' section of this Federal Register 
publication because we view this as a non-controversial action and 
anticipate no adverse comment. We have explained our reasons for this 
action in the preamble of the direct final rule.
    If we receive no adverse comment, we will not take further action 
on this proposed rule. If the EPA receives adverse comment, we will 
publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the 
public that the direct final rule will not take effect. In that case, 
we would address all public comments in any subsequent final rule based 
on this proposed rule.
    We do not intend to 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, please see the 
information provided in the ADDRESSES section of this document.
    The regulatory text for the proposal is identical to that for the 
direct final rule published in the ``Rules and Regulations'' section of 
this Federal Register publication. For further supplementary 
information, the detailed rationale for the proposal and the regulatory 
revisions, see the direct final rule published in a separate part of 
this Federal Register publication.

II. Does this action apply to me?

    The entities potentially affected by this rule include any facility 
that is required to install and operate a PM CEMS under any provision 
of title 40 of the CFR. If you have any questions regarding the 
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person 
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Air pollution control, Continuous emission monitoring systems, 
Particulate matter, Procedures.

    Dated: November 8, 2016.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2016-27847 Filed 11-18-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.