Revisions to Procedure 2-Quality Assurance Requirements for Particulate Matter Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems at Stationary Sources, 83160-83163 [2016-27849]
Download as PDF
83160
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 224 / Monday, November 21, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
3. Section 52.1881 is amended by
adding paragraph (a)(16) to read as
follows:
has been approved as submitted on
August 11, 2015.
*
*
*
*
*
■
§ 52.1881 Control strategy: Sulfur oxides
(sulfur dioxide).
PART 81–-DESIGNATION OF AREAS
FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING
PURPOSES
(a) * * *
(16) Approval—The 2010 SO2
maintenance plan for the Ohio portion
of the Campbell-Clermont KY-OH
(Pierce Township, Clermont County),
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.
5. Section 81.336 is amended by
revising the entry for ‘‘CampbellClermont Counties, KY-OH’’ in the table
entitled ‘‘Ohio—2010 Sulfur Dioxide
NAAQS [Primary]’’ to read as follows:
■
§ 81.336
4. The authority citation for part 81
continues to read as follows:
■
*
*
Ohio.
*
*
*
OHIO—2010 SULFUR DIOXIDE NAAQS
[Primary]
Designation
Designated area
Date
Campbell-Clermont Counties, KY-OH 1 ................................................................................................................
Clermont County (part):
Pierce Township
*
1 Excludes
*
*
*
*
11/21/16
*
Attainment.
*
Indian country located in each area, if any, unless otherwise specified.
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2016–27852 Filed 11–18–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 60
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2016–0382; FRL–9955–20–
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: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:02 Nov 18, 2016
Jkt 241001
facilities are unable to meet the criteria
for passing their annual QA/QC test
because their emissions are now lower
than the range previously set during
their correlation testing. We are
modifying the procedure to allow
facilities to extend their PM CEMS
correlation regression line to the lowest
PM CEMS response obtained during the
annual RCA or RRA, when these PM
CEMS responses are less than the lowest
response used to develop the existing
correlation curve. 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 corrects a typographical
error in the procedure.
This rule is effective on February
21, 2017 without further notice, unless
the EPA receives adverse comment by
December 21, 2016. 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.
DATES:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is taking direct final
action to update 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 that was
used to develop the existing PM CEMS
correlation curve. As a result, some
SUMMARY:
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
*
Type
Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2016–0382, to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or withdrawn. 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.
ADDRESSES:
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 (e.g., 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
making effective comments, please visit
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Questions concerning this direct final
rule should be addressed to Ms.
Kimberly Garnett, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 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
information in this SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this preamble
is
organized as follows:
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 Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
E:\FR\FM\21NOR1.SGM
21NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 224 / Monday, November 21, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
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 (CRA)
L. Determination Under Section 307(d)
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
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 modifies
Procedure 2, sections 10.4(5) and (6), to
allow facilities that have reduced their
PM emissions since their PM CEMS
correlation curve was developed to
extend their correlation regression line
to the point corresponding to the lowest
PM CEMS response obtained during an
annual RCA or RRA. This extended
correlation regression line will then 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 corrects
a typographical error in the introduction
to section 10.4, paragraph (6) of
Procedure 2. In the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’
section of this Federal Register
publication, we are publishing a
separate proposed rule to modify
Procedure 2. If the EPA receives any
significant and relevant adverse
comments, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register
informing the public that this direct
final rule will not take effect. In that
case, we would address all public
comments in any subsequent final rule
based on the proposed rule. We will not
institute a second comment period on
the proposed rule. Any parties
interested in commenting must do so at
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:02 Nov 18, 2016
Jkt 241001
this time. For further information about
commenting on the proposed rule, see
the ADDRESSES section of this direct
final rule.
B. 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.
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 online at https://
www3.epa.gov/ttn/emc/new.html.
D. Judicial Review.
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean
Air Act (CAA), petitions for judicial
review of this action must be filed in the
United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit by January
20, 2017. Clean Air Act section
307(d)(7)(B) further provides that
‘‘[o]nly an objection to a rule or
procedure that was raised with
reasonable specificity during the period
for public comment (including any
public hearing) may be raised during
judicial review.’’ This section also
provides a mechanism for the EPA to
reconsider the rule ‘‘[i]f the person
raising an objection can demonstrate to
the Administrator that it was
impracticable to raise such objection
within [the period for public comment]
or if the grounds for such objection
arose after the period for public
comment (but within the time specified
for judicial review) and if such objection
is of central relevance to the outcome of
the rule.’’ Any person seeking to make
such a demonstration should submit a
Petition for Reconsideration to the
Office of the Administrator, U.S. EPA,
Room 3000, EPA WJC, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington,
DC 20460, with a copy to both the
person(s) listed in the preceding FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this direct final rule, and the Associate
General Counsel for the Air and
Radiation Law Office, Office of General
Counsel (Mail Code 2344A), U.S. EPA,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460. Filing a petition
for reconsideration by the Administrator
of this final action does not affect the
finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review, nor does it extend the
time within which a petition for judicial
review must be filed, and shall not
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
83161
postpone the effectiveness of this action.
This action may not be challenged later
in proceedings to enforce its
requirements (see section 307(b)(2) of
the CAA).
Rather than file an immediate petition
for judicial review of this direct final
rule, parties with objections are
encouraged to file comments in
response to the parallel notice of
proposed rulemaking published in the
‘‘Proposed Rules’’ section of today’s
Federal Register to allow the EPA to
withdraw this direct final rule and
address the comment(s) in the final
rulemaking.
II. This Final Action
On January 12, 2004, the EPA
promulgated Procedure 2—Quality
Assurance Requirements for Particulate
Matter Continuous Emission Monitoring
Systems at Stationary Sources (69 FR
1786). Procedure 2, sections 10.4(5) and
(6), contain the requirement that when
conducting the annual RCA or RRA QA/
QC test procedures, a specified amount
of the required number of PM CEMS
response values, or data points, must lie
within the PM CEMS response range
used to develop the PM CEMS
correlation curve. In other words, when
conducting the annual QA/QC tests, the
PM CEMS response values should not
be higher or lower than the values used
to develop the correlation curve for that
PM CEMS. Recently, as PM emission
limits have been reduced and facilities
have installed more robust PM emission
control devices, a number of facilities
have found that their PM emissions are
lower than their PM CEMS correlation
curve. As a result, the facilities are now
unable to meet the criteria for a passing
the annual Procedure 2 QA/QC tests.
In order to rectify this situation, we
are modifying Procedure 2, sections
10.4(5) and (6), to allow facilities to
extend their correlation regression line
to the lowest PM CEMS response
obtained during a RCA or RRA. When
a RCA or RRA is performed, if any of the
PM CEMS response values are lower
than the response range of the existing
correlation curve, the facility will take
the existing correlation regression line
and extend it to the lowest PM CEMS
response value found during the annual
RCA or RRA. The extension of the
existing regression line will be
accomplished by using the lowest PM
CEMS response value, or x-value, found
during the RCA or RRA, solving the
regression line equation for the
corresponding y-value and then
extending the regression line to this new
lowest point. This extended correlation
regression line will then be used to
determine if the RCA or RRA data meet
E:\FR\FM\21NOR1.SGM
21NOR1
83162
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 224 / Monday, November 21, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
the criteria specified for a RCA or a
RRA, in section 10.4(5) and (6),
respectively.
This action also corrects 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. See 69 FR 1786.
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 and was, therefore, not
submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose an
information collection burden under the
PRA. This action does not contain any
information collection activities.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the RFA. This action will not
impose any requirements on small
entities. There are no small entities in
the regulated industry for which
Procedure 2 applies.
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. This action imposes no
enforceable duty on any state, local or
tribal governments, or the private sector.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD 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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:02 Nov 18, 2016
Jkt 241001
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This action does not have tribal
implications, as specified in Executive
Order 13175. Procedure 2 is applicable
to facility owners and operators who are
responsible for one or more PM CEMS
used for monitoring emissions. 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 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 does not concern an
environmental health risk or safety risk.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions
Concerning Regulations 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.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
The EPA believes that this action is
not subject to Executive Order 12898 (59
FR 7629, February 16, 1994) because it
does not establish an environmental
health or safety standard. This
regulatory action is a procedural change
and does not have any impact on human
health or the environment.
K. Congressional Review Act
This action is subject to the CRA, and
the EPA will submit a rule report to
each House of Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United
States. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
L. Determination Under Section 307(d)
Pursuant to CAA section 307(d)(1)(V),
the Administrator determines that this
action is subject to provisions of section
307(d). Section 307(d) establishes
procedural requirements specific to
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
rulemaking under the CAA. Section
307(d)(1)(V) provides that the
provisions of section 307(d) apply to
‘‘such other actions as the Administrator
may determine.’’
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.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, title 40, chapter I of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
PART 60—STANDARDS OF
PERFORMANCE FOR NEW
STATIONARY SOURCES
1. The authority citation for Part 60
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
2. In Appendix F, Procedure 2, in
section 10.4, paragraphs (5) and (6) are
revised to read as follows:
■
Appendix F to Part 60—Quality
Assurance Procedures
*
*
*
*
*
Procedure 2—Quality Assurance
Requirements for Particulate Matter
Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems at
Stationary Sources
10.4 * * *
(5) What are the criteria for passing a RCA?
To pass a RCA, you must meet the criteria
specified in paragraphs (5)(i) through (iii) of
this section. If your PM CEMS fails to meet
these RCA criteria, it is out of control, with
the following exception: If any of the PM
CEMS response values resulting from your
RCA are lower than the lowest PM CEMS
response value of your existing correlation
curve, you may extend your correlation
regression line to the point corresponding to
the lowest PM CEMS response value
obtained during the RCA. This extended
correlation regression line must then be used
to determine if the RCA data meets the
criteria specified in paragraphs (5)(i) through
(iii) of this section.
(i) For all 12 data points, the PM CEMS
response value can be no greater than the
greatest PM CEMS response value used to
develop your correlation curve.
(ii) For 9 of the 12 data points, the PM
CEMS response value must lie within the PM
CEMS output range used to develop your
correlation curve.
(iii) At least 75 percent of a minimum
number of 12 sets of PM CEMS and reference
method measurements must fall within a
specified area on a graph of the correlation
regression line. The specified area on the
graph of the correlation regression line is
E:\FR\FM\21NOR1.SGM
21NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 224 / Monday, November 21, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
defined by two lines parallel to the
correlation regression line, offset at a
distance of ±25 percent of the numerical
emission limit value from the correlation
regression line.
(6) What are the criteria to pass a RRA? To
pass a RRA, you must meet the criteria
specified in paragraphs (6)(i) through (iii) of
this section. If your PM CEMS fails to meet
these RRA criteria, it is out of control, with
the following exception: If any of the PM
CEMS response values resulting from your
RRA are lower than the lowest PM CEMS
response value of your existing correlation
curve, you may extend your correlation
regression line to the point corresponding to
the lowest PM CEMS response value
obtained during the RRA; this extended
correlation regression line must then be used
to determine if the RRA data meets the
criteria specified in paragraphs (6)(i) through
(iii) of this section.
(i) For all three data points, the PM CEMS
response value can be no greater than the
greatest PM CEMS response value used to
develop your correlation curve.
(ii) For two of the three data points, the PM
CEMS response value must lie within the PM
CEMS output range used to develop your
correlation curve.
(iii) At least two of the three sets of PM
CEMS and reference method measurements
must fall within the same specified area on
a graph of the correlation regression line as
required for the RCA and described in
paragraph (5)(iii) of this section.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2016–27849 Filed 11–18–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0613; FRL–9953–97]
Endothall; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of endothall in or
on multiple commodities which are
identified and discussed later in this
document. United Phosphorus, Inc.
requested these tolerances under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
November 21, 2016. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before January 20, 2017 and must
be filed in accordance with the
instructions provided in 40 CFR part
178 (see also Unit I.C. of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).
ADDRESSES: The docket for this action,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0613, is
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:02 Nov 18, 2016
Jkt 241001
available at https://www.regulations.gov
or at the Office of Pesticide Programs
Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket)
in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William
Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460–0001. The Public Reading Room
is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the
Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744,
and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is (703) 305–5805. Please review
the visitor instructions and additional
information about the docket available
at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael Goodis, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; main telephone
number: (703) 305–7090; email address:
RDFRNotices@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you are an agricultural
producer, food manufacturer, or
pesticide manufacturer. The following
list of North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS) codes is
not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide to help readers
determine whether this document
applies to them. Potentially affected
entities may include:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS code
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532).
B. How can I get electronic access to
other related information?
You may access a frequently updated
electronic version of EPA’s tolerance
regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through
the Government Printing Office’s e-CFR
site at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/
40tab_02.tpl.
C. How can I file an objection or hearing
request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21
U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation
and may also request a hearing on those
objections. You must file your objection
or request a hearing on this regulation
in accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
83163
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2014–0613 in the subject line on
the first page of your submission. All
objections and requests for a hearing
must be in writing, and must be
received by the Hearing Clerk on or
before January 20, 2017. Addresses for
mail and hand delivery of objections
and hearing requests are provided in 40
CFR 178.25(b).
In addition to filing an objection or
hearing request with the Hearing Clerk
as described in 40 CFR part 178, please
submit a copy of the filing (excluding
any Confidential Business Information
(CBI)) for inclusion in the public docket.
Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be
disclosed publicly by EPA without prior
notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your
objection or hearing request, identified
by docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–
2014–0613, by one of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be CBI or
other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.
• Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental
Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/
DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001.
• Hand Delivery: To make special
arrangements for hand delivery or
delivery of boxed information, please
follow the instructions at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
Additional instructions on
commenting or visiting the docket,
along with more information about
dockets generally, is available at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets.
II. Summary of Petitioned-for Tolerance
In the Federal Register of December
17, 2014 (79 FR 75110) (FRL–9918–90),
EPA issued a document pursuant to
FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C.
346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a
pesticide petition (PP 4F8293) by
United Phosphorus, Inc., 630 Freedom
Business Center, Suite 402, King of
Prussia, PA 19406. The petition
requested that 40 CFR 180.293 be
amended by amending tolerances for
residues of the herbicide endothall, in
or on cattle, fat from 0.01 to 0.05 parts
per million (ppm); cattle, kidney from
0.20 to 0.06 ppm; cattle, liver from 0.10
to 0.05 ppm; cattle, meat from 0.03 to
0.05 ppm; goat, fat from 0.005 to 0.05
ppm; goat, kidney from 0.15 to 0.06
ppm; goat, meat from 0.015 to 0.05 ppm;
hog, fat from 0.005 to 0.05 ppm; hog,
kidney from 0.10 to 0.06 ppm; hog, meat
E:\FR\FM\21NOR1.SGM
21NOR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 224 (Monday, November 21, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 83160-83163]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-27849]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 60
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0382; FRL-9955-20-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: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct
final action to update 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 that 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 because their
emissions are now lower than the range previously set during their
correlation testing. We are modifying the procedure to allow facilities
to extend their PM CEMS correlation regression line to the lowest PM
CEMS response obtained during the annual RCA or RRA, when these PM CEMS
responses are less than the lowest response used to develop the
existing correlation curve. 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 corrects a
typographical error in the procedure.
DATES: This rule is effective on February 21, 2017 without further
notice, unless the EPA receives adverse comment by December 21, 2016.
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-2016-0382, to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or withdrawn. 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 (e.g., 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 making effective
comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Questions concerning this direct final
rule should be addressed to Ms. Kimberly Garnett, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 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 information in this SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this preamble is organized as follows:
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 Final Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive
[[Page 83161]]
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
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 (CRA)
L. Determination Under Section 307(d)
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 modifies Procedure 2, sections 10.4(5) and
(6), to allow facilities that have reduced their PM emissions since
their PM CEMS correlation curve was developed to extend their
correlation regression line to the point corresponding to the lowest PM
CEMS response obtained during an annual RCA or RRA. This extended
correlation regression line will then 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 corrects a typographical error in the
introduction to section 10.4, paragraph (6) of Procedure 2. In the
``Proposed Rules'' section of this Federal Register publication, we are
publishing a separate proposed rule to modify Procedure 2. If the EPA
receives any significant and relevant adverse comments, we will publish
a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that
this direct final rule will not take effect. In that case, we would
address all public comments in any subsequent final rule based on the
proposed rule. We will not institute a second comment period on the
proposed rule. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this
time. For further information about commenting on the proposed rule,
see the ADDRESSES section of this direct final rule.
B. 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.
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 online at https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/emc/new.html.
D. Judicial Review.
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit by January 20, 2017.
Clean Air Act section 307(d)(7)(B) further provides that ``[o]nly an
objection to a rule or procedure that was raised with reasonable
specificity during the period for public comment (including any public
hearing) may be raised during judicial review.'' This section also
provides a mechanism for the EPA to reconsider the rule ``[i]f the
person raising an objection can demonstrate to the Administrator that
it was impracticable to raise such objection within [the period for
public comment] or if the grounds for such objection arose after the
period for public comment (but within the time specified for judicial
review) and if such objection is of central relevance to the outcome of
the rule.'' Any person seeking to make such a demonstration should
submit a Petition for Reconsideration to the Office of the
Administrator, U.S. EPA, Room 3000, EPA WJC, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460, with a copy to both the person(s) listed in
the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this direct
final rule, and the Associate General Counsel for the Air and Radiation
Law Office, Office of General Counsel (Mail Code 2344A), U.S. EPA, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final action does not
affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review,
nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review
must be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of this action.
This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its
requirements (see section 307(b)(2) of the CAA).
Rather than file an immediate petition for judicial review of this
direct final rule, parties with objections are encouraged to file
comments in response to the parallel notice of proposed rulemaking
published in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's Federal Register
to allow the EPA to withdraw this direct final rule and address the
comment(s) in the final rulemaking.
II. This Final Action
On January 12, 2004, the EPA promulgated Procedure 2--Quality
Assurance Requirements for Particulate Matter Continuous Emission
Monitoring Systems at Stationary Sources (69 FR 1786). Procedure 2,
sections 10.4(5) and (6), contain the requirement that when conducting
the annual RCA or RRA QA/QC test procedures, a specified amount of the
required number of PM CEMS response values, or data points, must lie
within the PM CEMS response range used to develop the PM CEMS
correlation curve. In other words, when conducting the annual QA/QC
tests, the PM CEMS response values should not be higher or lower than
the values used to develop the correlation curve for that PM CEMS.
Recently, as PM emission limits have been reduced and facilities have
installed more robust PM emission control devices, a number of
facilities have found that their PM emissions are lower than their PM
CEMS correlation curve. As a result, the facilities are now unable to
meet the criteria for a passing the annual Procedure 2 QA/QC tests.
In order to rectify this situation, we are modifying Procedure 2,
sections 10.4(5) and (6), to allow facilities to extend their
correlation regression line to the lowest PM CEMS response obtained
during a RCA or RRA. When a RCA or RRA is performed, if any of the PM
CEMS response values are lower than the response range of the existing
correlation curve, the facility will take the existing correlation
regression line and extend it to the lowest PM CEMS response value
found during the annual RCA or RRA. The extension of the existing
regression line will be accomplished by using the lowest PM CEMS
response value, or x-value, found during the RCA or RRA, solving the
regression line equation for the corresponding y-value and then
extending the regression line to this new lowest point. This extended
correlation regression line will then be used to determine if the RCA
or RRA data meet
[[Page 83162]]
the criteria specified for a RCA or a RRA, in section 10.4(5) and (6),
respectively.
This action also corrects 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. See 69 FR 1786.
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 and was,
therefore, not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the PRA. This action does not contain any information collection
activities.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This
action will not impose any requirements on small entities. There are no
small entities in the regulated industry for which Procedure 2 applies.
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. This action imposes no enforceable duty on any
state, local or tribal governments, or the private sector.
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.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175. Procedure 2 is applicable to facility owners and
operators who are responsible for one or more PM CEMS used for
monitoring emissions. 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 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 does not concern an environmental
health risk or safety risk.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations 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.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
The EPA believes that this action is not subject to Executive Order
12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) because it does not establish an
environmental health or safety standard. This regulatory action is a
procedural change and does not have any impact on human health or the
environment.
K. Congressional Review Act
This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule
report to each House of Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).
L. Determination Under Section 307(d)
Pursuant to CAA section 307(d)(1)(V), the Administrator determines
that this action is subject to provisions of section 307(d). Section
307(d) establishes procedural requirements specific to rulemaking under
the CAA. Section 307(d)(1)(V) provides that the provisions of section
307(d) apply to ``such other actions as the Administrator may
determine.''
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.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the
Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 60--STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE FOR NEW STATIONARY SOURCES
0
1. The authority citation for Part 60 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
0
2. In Appendix F, Procedure 2, in section 10.4, paragraphs (5) and (6)
are revised to read as follows:
Appendix F to Part 60--Quality Assurance Procedures
* * * * *
Procedure 2--Quality Assurance Requirements for Particulate Matter
Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems at Stationary Sources
10.4 * * *
(5) What are the criteria for passing a RCA? To pass a RCA, you
must meet the criteria specified in paragraphs (5)(i) through (iii)
of this section. If your PM CEMS fails to meet these RCA criteria,
it is out of control, with the following exception: If any of the PM
CEMS response values resulting from your RCA are lower than the
lowest PM CEMS response value of your existing correlation curve,
you may extend your correlation regression line to the point
corresponding to the lowest PM CEMS response value obtained during
the RCA. This extended correlation regression line must then be used
to determine if the RCA data meets the criteria specified in
paragraphs (5)(i) through (iii) of this section.
(i) For all 12 data points, the PM CEMS response value can be no
greater than the greatest PM CEMS response value used to develop
your correlation curve.
(ii) For 9 of the 12 data points, the PM CEMS response value
must lie within the PM CEMS output range used to develop your
correlation curve.
(iii) At least 75 percent of a minimum number of 12 sets of PM
CEMS and reference method measurements must fall within a specified
area on a graph of the correlation regression line. The specified
area on the graph of the correlation regression line is
[[Page 83163]]
defined by two lines parallel to the correlation regression line,
offset at a distance of 25 percent of the numerical
emission limit value from the correlation regression line.
(6) What are the criteria to pass a RRA? To pass a RRA, you must
meet the criteria specified in paragraphs (6)(i) through (iii) of
this section. If your PM CEMS fails to meet these RRA criteria, it
is out of control, with the following exception: If any of the PM
CEMS response values resulting from your RRA are lower than the
lowest PM CEMS response value of your existing correlation curve,
you may extend your correlation regression line to the point
corresponding to the lowest PM CEMS response value obtained during
the RRA; this extended correlation regression line must then be used
to determine if the RRA data meets the criteria specified in
paragraphs (6)(i) through (iii) of this section.
(i) For all three data points, the PM CEMS response value can be
no greater than the greatest PM CEMS response value used to develop
your correlation curve.
(ii) For two of the three data points, the PM CEMS response
value must lie within the PM CEMS output range used to develop your
correlation curve.
(iii) At least two of the three sets of PM CEMS and reference
method measurements must fall within the same specified area on a
graph of the correlation regression line as required for the RCA and
described in paragraph (5)(iii) of this section.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-27849 Filed 11-18-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P