March 5, 2006

**Highlights of the Emissions Measurement Center=s Activities for
2005/2006**

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

Air Quality Assessment Division

Measurement Technology Group

([www.epa.gov/ttn/emc]{.underline})

Below are highlight items involving emission test method development,
evaluation, validation, publication and other **Emissions Measurement
Center (EMC)** activities during the past twelve months. The information
is generally organized by publication category and other activities.

A.  New and Revised 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A, Test Methods

-   **Instrumental Test Methods Revisions** - Methods 3A, 6C, 7E, 10,
    and 20 of 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A are instrumental test methods
    that have been revised to harmonize their equipment and performance
    criteria. Inconsistent acceptance criteria for performance test data
    and calibration gas quality have been made uniform. Other
    improvements address low-concentration measurements and alternative
    performance evaluating techniques. Revisions to these methods were
    proposed on October 10, 2003 (68 FR 58838) and a significant number
    of comments were received. The comments have been considered and
    addressed and the final rule package is presently awaiting the EPA
    Administrator's signature. We expect promulgation by April 2006.
    **(Foston Curtis 919/541-1063)**

-   **Method 18 Revisions** - Method 18 utilizes gas chromatography
    coupled with various sampling procedures to measure gaseous organic
    emissions from stationary sources. In January of 2004, we met with
    interested stakeholders to discuss their concerns with real-life
    application of Method 18 and to hear other suggestions for
    improvements in the method. In March of 2004, we presented our
    technical perspective on the stakeholder recommendations to
    Stationary Source Sampling and Analysis of Air Pollutants Conference
    participants. Resources are not yet available for work on a
    regulatory package to propose revisions to Method 18. **(Rima Howell
    919/541-0443 and Gary McAlister 919/541-1062)**

-   **Method 23 Revisions** -- EPA's Office of Solid Waste (OSW) is in
    the process of revising their procedure, SW-846 Method 8290, for
    analyzing samples for dioxins and furans. As a part of this process
    we are planning to revise Method 23. The revised Method 23 will only
    describe the sampling procedures for collecting the dioxin/furan
    sample. It will rely on the revised SW-846 Method 8290 for the
    appropriate analytical procedures. In addition, OSW plans to remove
    Method 0023A from their SW-846 manual and will use the revised
    Method 23 as their sampling procedure. (**Gary McAlister
    919/541-1062)**

-   **Method 24 Revisions** - Method 24 describes procedures for
    determining the volatile matter content, water content, density,
    volume solids, and weight solids of surface coatings, typically
    referencing ASTM procedures for conducting these analyses. In an
    EPA-sponsored study, we completed a round-robin sampling and
    analysis evaluation of a new procedure for determining the volatile
    organic content of water-based coatings and drafted a method
    revision based on the results. We are now working with the Adhesive
    Council which conducted a round-robin evaluation of a headspace
    procedure for water-based coatings. The Council drafted a method and
    is working to get it accepted by ASTM. Their draft did not pass the
    ASTM balloting process and is being revised based on new lab
    results. Following successful balloting, we plan to propose it as an
    addition to Method 24 in 2007. **(Candace Sorrell 919/541-1064)**

B.  New and Revised 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix B, Performance
    Specifications for Continuous Opacity and Gaseous Monitoring Systems

-   **Performance Specification 11** - Specifications and Test
    Procedures for Particulate Matter Continuous Emission Monitoring
    Systems at Stationary Sources (PS-11) - These requirements for
    particulate matter (PM) continuous emissions monitoring systems
    (CEMS) were promulgated on Monday, January 12, 2004 (69 FR 1786).
    PS-11 is used for evaluating the acceptability of a PM CEMS at the
    time of or soon after installation, and whenever specified in a
    source=s applicable regulation(s). This performance specification
    requires site-specific correlation of the PM CEMS response against
    manual gravimetric Reference Method measurements (e.g., Methods 5,
    5B, 5i, or 17, 40 CFR 60, Appendix A). PS-11 outlines the procedures
    and acceptance criteria for installation, operation, calculations,
    and reporting of data generated during a PM CEMS correlation.
    Currently, development of a guidance document for PM CEMS is
    underway; it should be available in the summer of 2006. **(Dan
    Bivins 919/541-5244)**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Performance Specification 12A** - Specifications and Test
    Procedures for Total Vapor Phase Mercury Continuous Emission
    Monitoring Systems in Stationary Sources (PS-12A) - The EMC recently
    completed a long-term field test program to investigate the
    performance and reliability of six commercially available mercury
    CEMS at a coal-fired utility boiler controlled by selective
    catalytic reduction technology, an electrostatic precipitator, and a
    wet scrubber. Results and experience from this test program were
    used to finalize PS-12A as well as mercury monitoring requirements
    in 40 CFR Part 75; PS-12A and the Part 75 requirements were
    promulgated in conjunction with mercury standards for coal-fired
    boilers in the Clean Air Mercury Rule on May 18, 2005 (70 FR 28606).
    **(Bill Grimley 919/541-1065 and Robin Segall 919/541-0893)**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Performance Specification for Predictive Emissions Monitoring
    Systems (PEMS) (PS-16)** - Performance Specification 16 provides
    performance criteria for evaluating and accepting PEMS. PEMS are
    typically used to predict emissions from combustion processes (e.g.,
    NO~x~ from gas boilers, turbines, and internal combustion engines)
    through the monitoring of process parameters. Predictive systems
    have been allowed for a number of years on the State level and the
    EPA has allowed their use in recently-promulgated rules. We proposed
    PS-16 on August 8, 2005 (70 FR 45608) and expect to promulgate it in
    August of 2006. **(Foston Curtis 919/541-1063)**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Draft Performance Specifications and QA/QC for Continuous
    Parameter Monitoring Systems (PS-17)** -- See Emissions Factors and
    Policy Applications Center Highlights

C.  New and Revised 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix F, Quality Assurance
    Procedures (for Continuous Monitoring Systems)

-   **Procedure 3 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Continuous
    Opacity Monitoring Systems at Stationary Sources** - As a result of
    the comments received after re-opening the comment period for the
    rulemaking formerly known as AMethod 203,@ which includes
    requirements for ongoing quality assurance and quality control
    evaluations of COMS used as continuous compliance monitoring
    systems, we decided to form a stakeholders= group to undertake the
    task of re-writing this rule package. The stakeholders= group was
    comprised of opacity monitor manufacturers, State/local agencies,
    EPA Regional personnel, as well as representatives from
    owners/operators. Method 203 has been rewritten as Procedure 3, and
    was re-proposed as an addition to 40 CFR part 60, appendix F in the
    [Federal Register]{.underline} on May 8, 2003 (68 FR 24692). ASTM
    Committee D-22 is now considering adding these QA/QC requirements to
    the ASTM standard referenced in Performance Specification 1 (40 CFR
    60, Appendix B). **(Tom Logan 919/541-2580)**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Procedure 2 - Quality Assurance Requirements for Particulate
    Matter Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems at Stationary
    Sources** - As an accompaniment to PS-11 for PM CEMS we promulgated
    ongoing quality assurance and quality control requirements for using
    PM CEMS as continuous compliance monitoring systems (69 FR 1786,
    1/12/04). The guidance being developed for PM CEMS will also address
    Procedure 2 and should be available in the summer of 2006. **(Dan
    Bivins 919/541-5244)**

D.  New and Revised 40 CFR Part 63, Appendix A, Test Methods

-   **Method 301 Revisions** - Method 301 is the field data validation
    protocol promulgated on December 29, 1992. The method provides a
    framework and performance criteria for validating emissions test
    data (and methods) when no EPA method is available or when proposing
    an alternative to an existing test method. Comments and questions
    from the user community have prompted preparation of technical
    revisions and clarification to the method. The proposed amendments
    to Method 301 appeared in the Federal register on December 22, 2004.
    We received comments from about fifteen parties and several of the
    comment letters were extensive. We expect to promulgate the
    amendments sometime in the Fall of 2006. **(Gary McAlister
    919/541-1062)**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Method 324-Determination of Vapor Phase Mercury Emissions from
    Stationary Sources Using Dry Sorbent Trap Sampling (Now Appendix K
    to 40 CFR Part 75)** - Method 324 was proposed along with PS-12A on
    January 30, 2004 (68 FR 4652) as part of the Clean Air Mercury Rule.
    During the field testing programs to demonstrate commercially
    available mercury CEMS at coal-fired utility boilers, EMC also
    evaluated procedures for long-term integrated mercury monitoring
    method using sorbent trap sampling. Results of this testing along
    with comments received on proposed Method 324 were used to finalize
    procedures for sorbent trap mercury monitoring which were published
    as Appendix K to 40 CFR Part 75 along with the Clean Air Mercury
    Rule on May 18, 2005 (70 FR 28606). **(Bill Grimley 919/541-1065 and
    Robin Segall 919/541-0893)**

E.  New and Revised 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix M, Test Methods

-   **Methods 203A, B, and C - Visual Determination of Opacity of
    Emissions from Stationary Sources for Time-Averaged, Time-Exception,
    and Instantaneous Limitation Regulations -**These methods are
    intended to provide State and Local agencies with an expanded array
    of data reduction procedures to determine compliance with various
    types of State Implementation Plan (SIP) opacity regulations. The
    data reduction procedures in Methods 203A, 203B, and 203C of
    Appendix M of Part 51 (Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of
    Implementation Plans) constitute the primary difference between
    these methods and Method 9 of Appendix A of 40 CFR, Part 60. These
    methods were proposed in 1994 and are expected to be promulgated by
    April of 2006. **(Robin Segall 919/541-0893)**

-   **Method 207 -- Method for Measuring Isocyanates in Stationary
    Source -**This method is applicable to the collection and analysis
    of 2,4-Toluene Diisocyanate, 1,6-Hexamethylene Diisocyanate,
    Methylene Diphenyl Diisocyanate, and Methyl Isocyanate in emissions
    from manufacturing processes. The gaseous and/or aerosol isocyanates
    are withdrawn from an emissions source at an isokinetic sampling
    rate and collected in a multi-impinger sampling train with
    derivatizing reagent in toluene and charcoal. The impinger contents
    are concentrated to dryness under vacuum, brought to volume in
    acetonitrile and analyzed by high pressure liquid chromatography.
    This method was proposed on December 8, 1997 and will be promulgated
    sometime in 2006. **(Gary McAlister 919/541-1062)**

F.  Other Test Methods - These methods, which are published on the EPA
    website at
    [www.epa.gov/ttn/emc](http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc)[/tmethods.html]{.underline},
    are methods which have not yet been subject to the Federal
    rulemaking process. Each of these methods, as well as the available
    technical documentation supporting them, have been reviewed by the
    Emission Measurement Center staff and have been found to be
    potentially useful to the emission measurement community. The types
    of technical information reviewed include field and laboratory
    validation studies; results of collaborative testing; articles from
    peer-reviewed journals; peer-review comments; and quality assurance
    (QA) and quality control (QC) procedures in the method itself. These
    methods may be considered for use in Federally enforceable State and
    local programs (e.g., Title V permits, State Implementation Plans
    (SIP)) provided they are subject to an EPA Regional SIP approval
    process or permit veto opportunity and public notice with the
    opportunity for comment. The methods may also be considered as
    candidates to be alternative methods to meet Federal requirements
    under 40 CFR Parts 60, 61, and 63; however, they must be approved as
    alternatives under 60.8, 61.13, or 63.7(f) before a source may use
    them for this purpose. The methods are available for application
    without EPA oversight for other non-EPA program uses including state
    permitting programs and scientific and engineering applications. The
    EPA strongly encourages the submission of additional supporting
    field and laboratory data as well as comments in regard to these
    methods.

-   **CTM-039 Measurement of PM2.5 and PM10 Emissions by Dilution
    Sampling (Constant Sampling Rate Procedures) -** This method uses
    the same in stack cyclone separation described in CTM-040, however,
    procedures for characterizing the condensable particulate matter are
    improved and expanded with the removal of the in-stack 47‑mm filter,
    the addition of a system to dilute and cool the sample gas, and the
    addition of a 142-mm filter to collect the filterable PM2.5 and the
    particulate matter condensed through the dilution and cooling of the
    sample gas. Because the sample gas is cooled and diluted to near
    ambient conditions, aliquots of the diluted sample gas can be
    extracted prior to the 142-mm filter for collection and analysis by
    ambient air methodologies. These procedures have been evaluated at
    coal fired utilities. **(Tom Logan 919/541-2580)**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **CTM-040 - Method for Determination of PM10 and PM2.5 Emissions
    (Constant Sampling Rate)** - This method combines Method 201A (40
    CFR 51, Appendix M) with the PM2.5 cyclone from a conventional
    five-stage cascade cyclone train that includes five cyclones of
    different diameters in series. The PM2.5 cyclone is inserted between
    the PM10 cyclone and the filter of the Method 201A train. Stack gas
    is sampled at a predetermined constant flowrate through the in-stack
    cyclones and filter. Once the sample is obtained, the uncombined
    water is removed and gravimetric analysis is used to determine the
    mass of particulate for each size fraction. This method was
    originally posted as PRE-004 on the EMC web site. **(Tom Logan
    919/541-2580)**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **CTM-041 - Determination of Volumetric Gas Flow in Rectangular Duct
    or Stacks Taking Into Account Velocity Decay Near the Stack or Duct
    Walls** - An effort is in progress harmonize flow decay measurements
    of CTM-041 for rectangular ducts with those of **Method 2H** for
    circular ducts. The utility industry has provided high quality data
    showing how flow decay at the walls of rectangular ducts can be
    determined and these procedures are consistent with the Method 2H
    requirements. **(Tom Logan 919/541-2580)**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **PRE-008 - Determination of Visible Emission Opacity from
    Stationary Sources Using Computer-Based Photographic Analysis
    Systems** - This preliminary method describes an approach for
    determining the opacity of visible emissions through the use of
    digital photographs taken of the emission source plume. The
    photographs are processed using computer software that determines
    percent opacity using information available from the digital or
    digitized images. The positioning of the camera is similar to the
    observer requirements of Method 9 (40 CFR 60, Appendix A) as are the
    reporting requirements. This method is still in a development phase
    and comments are sought as to how these procedures could be
    improved. **(Tom Logan 919/541-2580)**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **PRE-009 - Conceptual Method for Determination of Total Vapor Phase
    Mercury Emissions from Coal-Fired Combustion Sources (Instrumental
    Analyzer Procedure)** - EPA has recently promulgated the Clean Air
    Mercury Rule (May 18, 2005, 70 FR 28606) which establishes standards
    for mercury emissions from coal-fired electric utility boilers. The
    rule relies on monitoring of mercury which in turn requires
    certification of the mercury monitors using a reference method. The
    promulgated reference method, known as the Ontario Hydro (OH)
    method, which utilizes a wet chemical approach typically requires
    several weeks until the results are available. To provide a more
    practical and timely alternative to the OH method, EPA has drafted a
    conceptual instrument-based method for mercury and published it on
    our website at [www.epa.gov/ttn/emc](http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc) to
    solicit collection of data to evaluate its procedures and
    performance in preparation for revision and proposal as a reference
    method. **(Robin Segall 919/541-0893, Bill Grimley 919/541-1065 and
    Jeff Ryan 919/541-1437)**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Optical Remote Sensing Method to Determine Emission Flux from
    Fugitive Emission Sources (Radial Plume Mapping Protocol)** - No
    standard protocol exists for making measurements of air emission
    flux from fugitive or nonpoint sources. Current estimation
    techniques based on emission factors are imprecise and may
    overestimate, while earlier point measurement or remote sensing
    approaches relying on reverse dispersion modeling are prone to
    modeling errors. Starting in 2002, EMC participated in a project to
    validate a path-integrated optical remote sensing (PI-ORS) based
    approach to locate and quantify fugitive emissions. The approach
    evaluated utilizes multiple beam paths and optimizing algorithms to
    yield a time-averaged, mass-equivalent concentration field across a
    contaminant plume from which, using wind data, the emission rate can
    be determined. In 2004 a successful field validation testing program
    of the approach using open path FTIR and controlled releases of
    various gases was completed. The project was funded by DoD=s
    Environmental Security Technology Certification Program to the Air
    Force and carried out by its contractor, ARCADIS; EMC provided
    regulatory advice and is about to publish the peer-reviewed protocol
    for conducting these measurements on our website at:
    [www.epa.gov/ttn/emc](http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc). **(Robin Segall
    919/541-0893)**

G.  Other Emissions Measurement Projects

-   **Smart Leak Detection and Repair** Number range CHAPTER - The
    current work practice standard for assessing process equipment leaks
    under 40 CFR Parts 60, 61, and 63 requires the use of an instrument
    meeting the performance specifications of EPA Method 21. This work
    practice standard is based on 25-year-old techniques. Innovative
    technology is being developed which we believe can provide at least
    equal, if not better, environmental protection than that which is
    being provided by the current work practice. API has provided field
    tests and laboratory data to assist in demonstrating the performance
    of infra-red camera technology to image leaks from valves, flanges,
    compressors, and other similar equipment. EPA is working on a
    regulatory proposal which will take comment on a voluntary
    alternative work practice for finding leaking equipment using
    optical imaging. **(Tom Logan 919/541-2580 and Bill Grimley
    919-541-2580)**

-   **CEMS Cost Model** -- This model provides initial costs and annual
    operating and QA/QC costs for continuous emissions monitoring
    systems (CEMS). The last update of the model was done in 1995. This
    latest update will add mercury CEMS and bag leak detection
    monitoring system costs as well as updated cost values to other
    inputs to the model. The model will also be converted to a new
    format utilizing an MS Excel spreadsheet. The new model should be
    available on the EMC website by May 2006. **(Dan Bivins
    919/541-5244)**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Stationary Source Audit Program** **(SSAP) Database** - EMC has
    implemented an electronic database for use by Federal, State, Local,
    and Tribal Agency personnel to electronically order and receive
    pass/fail notice on audit samples. The database compiles the audit
    results in several report formats that allow the QA Team and Agency
    staff to review the results for particular types of audit samples.
    Currently, there are audit materials for Methods 6, 7, 8, 12, 13A
    and 13B, 18, 23, 24 (inks and solvents), 25, 26, 26A, 29, 101A,
    and 315. Registration requests can be submitted to Candace Sorrell
    at the e-mail address or telephone number below. The EMC QA team
    also conducts teleconference calls on the first Tuesday in every
    month from 1:30‑3:30 pm (EST) to discuss audit and other emission
    testing issues. Agendas and minutes for these conference calls can
    be obtained by contacting Candace. **(Candace Sorrell
    919/541-1064)**

-   **ASTM Activity** - EMC contacts participate as committee members on
    ASTM Subcommittees (e.g., D22-03 and E56-04) primarily to encourage
    development of new stack test methods where we anticipate a future
    need that is not met by a current EPA method. D6831‑02 Standard Test
    Method for Sampling and Determining Particulate Matter in Stack
    Gases Using an In‑Stack, Inertial Microbalance and D6784‑02 Standard
    Test Method for Elemental, Oxidized, Particle‑Bound and Total
    Mercury in Flue Gas Generated from Coal‑Fired Stationary Sources
    (Ontario Hydro Method) are successful examples falling into this
    category. In addition, EPA considers all available voluntary
    consensus methods in the process of rulemaking and offers
    appropriate methods as regulatory alternatives. A new effort of the
    E56-04 Subcommittee is focusing on development of draft standards
    for particulate matter from masonry and outdoor wood heaters and
    metal fireplaces. Final standards are expected in 2007/2008. **(Dan
    Bivins 919/541-5244, Tom Logan 919/541-2580 and Mike Toney
    919/541-5247)**

March 5, 2006

**Emissions Factors and Policy Applications Center Highlights for
2005/2006**

Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

Sector Policies and Programs Division

Measurement Policy Group

([www.epa.gov/chief/efpac]{.underline})

Below are highlight items and other **Emissions Factors and Policy
Applications Center (EFPAC)** activities involving emission monitoring
and other quantification protocols occurring during the past twelve
months.

-   **Electronic Reporting Tool (ERT)** - A Microsoft Access desktop
    application that is an electronic alternative for paper reports
    documenting EPA\'s emissions measurement Methods 1 through 5 and
    Method 202 for stationary sources. The ERT replaces the
    time-intensive manual preparation and transcription of stationary
    source emissions test plans and reports currently performed by
    contractors for emissions sources and the time-intensive manual
    quality assurance evaluations and documentation performed by State
    agencies. The ERT provides a format that 1) highlights the need to
    document the key information and procedures required by the existing
    EPA Federal Test Methods; 2) facilitates coordination among the
    source, the test contractor, and the regulatory agency in planning
    and preparing for the emissions test; 3) provides for consistent
    criteria to quantitatively characterize the quality of the data
    collected during the emissions test; 4) standardizes the reports;
    and 5) provides for future capabilities to electronically exchange
    information in the reports with facility, State or Federal data
    systems. In addition to improving the content and quality of source
    emissions test reports, the ERT should reduce the workload
    associated with manual transcription of information and data
    contained in the report, the resources required to store and access
    the reports; and redundant efforts in using the data for multiple
    purposes. Future versions of the ERT will provide for electronic
    preparation and data transfer from other EPA and State test methods.
    The current version of the ERT is available for review and comment
    at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ert/ert_tool.html. Contact: Ron
    Myers at [[myers.ron@epa.gov]{.underline}](mailto:myers.ron@epa.gov)
    or (919) 541-5407.

-   **WEB-FIRE** - The Internet version of the emissions Factor
    Information Retrieval System (FIRE) is now available for review and
    comment at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/efpac/index.html. The FIRE
    application web site provides fast and user-friendly access to the
    Agency's air emissions factors information. In time FIRE will
    replace the software application, FIRE version 6.25, and the
    Microsoft Access version of the database. An Internet version of
    FIRE will allow more frequent updates and easier access. The
    Internet site includes a list of frequently asked questions and
    describes in more detail the functions of the FIRE program and how
    the emissions factors are derived. The WEB-FIRE also includes more
    thorough and directed guidance on the uncertainties associated with
    applying emissions factors and the alternatives to emissions
    factors, specifically direct emissions measurements and monitoring.
    Contact Michael Ciolek, <ciolek.michael@epa.gov>, 919-541-4921

-   **Revisions to Part 64, Compliance Assurance Monitoring,** - We have
    drafted rulemaking entitled "Proposal of Revisions to Part 64 -
    Compliance Assurance Monitoring Rule," which revises Part 64 that
    would govern how states implement monitoring in the title V
    operating permit program. The revised rules would affect nearly
    every pollutant-specific emissions unit at title V sources. The rule
    would define more specifically when monitoring may be needed on a
    pollutant-specific emissions unit basis and set forth a process by
    which sources and permitting authorities would assess existing
    monitoring and create periodic monitoring, as needed, to provide a
    reasonable assurance of compliance with applicable requirements.
    This proposal is part of the Agency's four-step approach to
    addressing monitoring in title V permits as explained in final rule
    addressing §§ 70.6(c)(1) and 71.6(c)(1) of 40 CFR parts 70 and 71
    (referred to as the Umbrella Monitoring Rules in the January 22,
    2004 [Federal Register]{.underline} notice (69 FR 3202). Contact:
    Peter Westlin, <westlin.peter@epa.gov>, 919-541-1058

-   **Monitoring Knowledge Base** - EPA\'s Monitoring Knowledge Base
    web-site provides a user-friendly compilation of information about
    air pollution control technologies and the monitoring techniques
    applicable for establishing the ongoing compliance operations of a
    range of air pollution control measures. The MKB presents the
    monitoring information is by industry type and by control technique.
    The initial version of the MKB focuses on the printing and
    publishing industry and addresses the technologies and monitoring of
    activated carbon adsorbers, capture systems, catalytic oxidizers,
    compliant inks and coatings, condensers, cyclones, electrified
    filter beds, electrostatic precipitators, fabric filters, thermal
    oxidizers, and wet scrubbers of r particulate and gaseous control.
    Contact: Barrett Parker, <parker.barrett@epa.gov>, 919-541-5635

-   **TANKS** - TANKS is a Windows-based computer software program
    collaborative effort with API that estimates volatile organic
    compound (VOC) and hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions from
    fixed- and floating-roof storage tanks. We have made available an
    updated version of TANKS (Version 4.09d) at
    [http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/software/tanks/index.html.](../%20http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/software/tanks/index.html.)
    The program is now compatible with all versions of MS Access. The
    program installation has been streamlined and the program files are
    smaller. TANKS displays and prints reports with an Internet browser.
    The report formats have not changed. Improvements include 1)
    updating the chemical data with missing CAS numbers; 2) addition of
    new compounds; 3) correcting Antoine's coefficients for several
    compounds; 4) addition of a new partial speciation profile for
    gasoline oxygenated with ethanol; and correcting meteorological
    data. TANKS is based on the emission estimation procedures from
    [Chapter 7](http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/ch07/index.html) of
    EPA\'s [Compilation Of Air Pollutant Emission Factors
    (AP-42)](http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/index.html). In the
    future, EPA does not expect to provide updated versions of TANKS
    beyond Version 4.09d nor support the current version of TANKS in the
    future once it becomes outdated. Therefore, EPA anticipates that the
    private sector may want to develop new/improved software versions
    for use by anyone currently using the TANKS program. Our group
    intends to develop and implement an EPA approval protocol/process
    for endorsing new EFs including any software developed proposed to
    estimate the organic vapor emissions from storage tanks from outside
    entities. We have not developed specific assessment protocols for
    software such as TANKS but envision that verifying the protocols
    will entail simulations testing and results verification, at a
    minimum. We fully expect that in providing EPA-approval to such
    third-party developed products, we will alleviate acceptance issues
    that state/local/federal entities might have with vendor-developed
    EFs and other tools. Contact: Michael Ciolek,
    <ciolek.michael@epa.gov>, 919-541-4921

-   **Inadequate Monitoring (advanced notice of proposed rulemaking)** -
    On February 16, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 31)\], we published and ANPR
    asking for public comment to help us identify monitoring in
    applicable requirements under the Clean Air Act (Act) that is
    potentially inadequate with respect to the statutory monitoring
    requirements for operating permits issued under title V of the Act.
    The ANPR also requested public comment on ways to improve such
    monitoring. The goal is to provide for improvements to existing
    inadequate monitoring through rulemakings to revise the applicable
    requirements themselves or through other programmatic approaches
    will be more effective, more equitable, and more efficient, where
    necessary, than by addressing inadequate monitoring on a
    case-by-case basis in the issuance and renewal of title V operating
    permits. To inform EPA's consideration of improvements to existing
    monitoring, today's ANPR seeks stakeholder input to identify
    inadequate monitoring in certain Federal standards and State
    implementation plan (SIP) rules and to suggest specific ways to
    improve such monitoring. We are reviewing and preparing responses to
    comments received in response to the ANPR. Contact: Barrett Parker,
    <parker.barrett@epa.gov>, 919-541-5635

-   **Emissions Factors and Emissions Measurement Uncertainty
    Assessment** - We are investigating ways to assess and reduce the
    uncertainty associated with using emissions factors, such as those
    contained in AP-42 particularly those that are based on emissions
    testing data. We have applied statistical processes to assess the
    uncertainty associated with emissions factors for several well
    documented chapters of AP-42. The results from the statistical
    analysis indicate the potential for uncertainty bounds of several
    orders of magnitude for the 75th percentile and the 90th percentile
    adjustments on emissions factors for gaseous criteria pollutants,
    hazardous air pollutants (HAP), and particulate matter (PM). We have
    begun to develop possible approaches emissions factors can be
    adjusted based on sample size, pollutant, and presence/absence of
    add-on control devices. Contact: Barrett Parker,
    <parker.barrett@epa.gov>, 919-541-5635

-   **Open Path Fugitive Leak Detection** -- We have been working with
    various groups within OAQPS and externally to conduct assessments of
    emissions from gasoline dispensing facilities (GDF). EPA plans to
    develop rules, policy and guidance to assist with the reduction of
    contamination from underground storage tanks and to reduce vapor
    leaks from vent pipes and gasoline pump refilling activities. We
    developed two documents that will assist in developing policy and
    guidance; the first is an options paper that will establish a
    schedule for removing Stage II vapor recovery systems (VRS) from
    GDFs and the second is guidance for automobile manufacturers who are
    interested in obtaining waivers to remove Stage II VRS. We conducted
    testing at GDF using open path monitoring equipment and will provide
    a summary report of the monitoring protocol and its efficacy. Stage
    II Vapor Recovery Systems -- Options Paper, Guidance for Waiving
    Stage II Vapor Recovery Systems for Automobile Manufacturers,
    Conduct Stage II Monitoring & Prepare Final Report, Guidance
    Document for Reducing VOC and HAP Emissions from Gas Stations on
    Tribal Lands, Develop open path monitoring protocol for gas stations
    Contact**:** Annabelle Allison, <allison.annabelle@epa.gov>,
    919-541-0708. For Stage I Monitoring to Support Area Source Rule,
    contact Steve Shedd, <shedd.steve@epa.gov>, 919-541-5397

-   **Interpretive Rule for Parts 70/71 Monitoring** - We are preparing
    to publish "Interpretive Rulemaking to Clarify the Scope of Certain
    Monitoring Requirements for State and Federal Operating Permits
    Programs." This action will request comments on a proposed
    interpretation of certain existing regulatory language relative to
    the need to address the sufficiency of existing monitoring
    requirements included in State and federal operating permits
    programs developed under title V of the Clean Air Act (Act).
    Specifically, our proposed interpretation is that §§ 70.6(c)(1) and
    71.6(c)(1) of 40 CFR parts 70 and 71 (previously referred to as the
    Umbrella Monitoring Rule) do not provide a basis for assessing the
    adequacy of or adding monitoring requirements to operating permits,
    independent of such monitoring required under existing federal air
    pollution control rules and State implementation plan (SIP) rules
    (i.e., monitoring required under applicable requirements), including
    monitoring required under part 64 (the compliance assurance
    monitoring, or CAM, rule) where it applies, and such monitoring as
    may be required to fill gaps under the separate periodic monitoring
    requirements of the operating permits rules. We will also formally
    withdraw a September 17, 2002 proposal to revise these paragraphs in
    parts 70 and 71. Contact: Peter Westlin, <westlin.peter@epa.gov>,
    919-541-1058

-   **Draft Performance Specifications for Continuous Parameter
    Monitoring Systems (PS-17) and QA/QC (Procedure 4 of Appendix F)** -
    Our newer emissions standards (e.g., MACT and NSPS) frequently
    include requirements for monitoring of process or control device
    operational parameters and for having the operator to stay within
    site-specific or rule-specific operating ranges. We recognized the
    need for performance specifications for installing, operating and
    maintaining these parametric monitoring systems (e.g. temperature,
    pressure, pH, liquid flow, conductivity) and have begun work on
    drafting performance specifications and quality assurance
    requirements. We expect to have documents ready for proposal and
    public review in the summer of 2006. Contact: Barrett Parker
    <parker.barrett@epa.gov>, 919-541-5635

-   **Continuous Monitoring of Primary PM~2.5~ -** We have underway a
    project to review the technologies available for monitoring
    continuously primary particulate matter from stationary sources
    including both filterable and condensable materials. Included in the
    review are continuous dilution sample collection systems used in
    combination with continuous mass measurements. We expect a report on
    the study with recommendations for future work in early 2006.
    Contact: Ron Myers, <myers.ron@epa.gov>, 919-541-5407

-   **Implementing Testing Methods Appropriate for Measuring PM~2.5~** -
    On Tuesday, November 1, 2005 (Vol. 70, No. 210), we published the
    Proposed Rule to Implement the Fine Particle National Ambient Air
    Quality Standards. In that rulemaking, we discuss the applicability
    of emissions testing methods to demonstrating compliance with local
    control measures for primary particulate matter in nonattainment
    areas and the need to revise which stationary source test methods
    would apply. Information available indicates that the majority of
    existing SIPs specify the use of stationary source test methods that
    quantify only filterable particulate matter. In implementing the
    NAAQS, we recommended that the use of EPA Method 202 (with
    appropriate options) combined with EPA Method 5 or EPA Method 17 or
    Method 201 or 201A provides a reasonable indication of total
    particulate matter emissions for the majority of stationary emission
    sources. We also noted the availability and applicability of
    Conditional Test Method 039 - Measurement of PM 2.5 and PM 10
    Emissions by Dilution Sampling (Constant Sampling Rate Procedures).
    We intend to develop detailed guidance on the selection and
    application of methods appropriate for implementing the NAAQS once
    we review the comments and develop the final rule. Contacts: Ron
    Myers and Barrett Parker, <myers.ron@epa.gov>,
    <parker.barrett@epa.gov>, 919-541-5407 or 5635