# Presentation: 667248

## Compliance Assurance and Title V Monitoring

- A Summary of the Rules and Applications
- Peter Westlin, EPA, OAQPS

## Title V monitoring principles
Part 64/CAM rule summary
Other Title V Monitoring 
Part 70/Title V permit responsibilities
Compliance certification

***Title V monitoring principles***
***Part 64/CAM rule summary***
***Other Title V Monitoring ***
***Part 70/Title V permit responsibilities***
***Compliance certification***

## 1990 - CAAA requires EPA to publish monitoring rules for major sources
1992 - EPA proposes Enhanced Monitoring rules
CEMS based
All major sources subject
1995 - EPA changes direction
Reasonable Assurance of Compliance
Focus on add-on control devices

- 1990 - CAAA requires EPA to publish monitoring rules for major sources
- 1992 - EPA proposes Enhanced Monitoring rules
- CEMS based
- All major sources subject
- 1995 - EPA changes direction
- Reasonable Assurance of Compliance
- Focus on add-on control devices

## Monitoring sufficient to provide a reasonable assurance of compliance with the applicable requirements (e.g., emissions limits) and to ensure operators pay the same level of attention to pollution control measures as to production activities.

*Monitoring sufficient to provide a reasonable assurance of compliance with the applicable requirements (e.g., emissions limits) and to ensure operators pay the same level of attention to pollution control measures as to production activities.*

## 40 CFR Part 64 - Compliance Assurance Monitoring
Implements the monitoring design principle for a reasonable assurance of compliance
Targets facilities with add-on control devices
Requires source owners to design monitoring to fit site and incorporate into permits

- 40 CFR Part 64 - Compliance Assurance Monitoring
***Implements the monitoring design principle for a reasonable assurance of compliance***
***Targets facilities with add-on control devices***
***Requires source owners to design monitoring to fit site and incorporate into permits***

## Build on current requirements and practices:
Select representative control device operational parameters (e.g., temperature, flow, pressure drop, electrical voltages, component concentration);
Establish indicator ranges for reasonable assurance of compliance
Accounting for site-specific factors such as margin of compliance, emissions control variability, correlation with emissions,
Relying on design information, historical data, similar sources, test data; and
Establish data collection method and averaging time.

**Build on current requirements and practices**:
***Select representative control device operational parameters (e.g., temperature, flow, pressure drop, electrical voltages, component concentration);***
***Establish indicator ranges for reasonable assurance of compliance***
***Accounting for site-specific factors such as margin of compliance, emissions control variability, correlation with emissions,***
***Relying on design information, historical data, similar sources, test data; and***
***Establish data collection method and averaging time.***

## Rule applies to each pollutant-specific emissions unit (PSEU) that:
Is located at major source subject to Title V operational permits program, and
Is subject to emission limitation and has a control device to meet that limit (e.g., ESPs, scrubbers, fabric filters), and
Has precontrol emissions >major source size threshold (e.g., >100 tons/year uncontrolled emissions).

- Rule applies to each pollutant-specific emissions unit (PSEU) that:
***Is located at major source subject to Title V operational permits program, and***
***Is subject to emission limitation and has a control device to meet that limit (e.g., ESPs, scrubbers, fabric filters), and***
***Has precontrol emissions >major source size threshold (e.g., >100 tons/year uncontrolled emissions).***

## Exemptions are by rule type, not facility type:
Acid rain rules,
Post-1990 EPA rules,
Rules with continuous compliance determination methods (e.g., Da facilities for SO2).
One exemption exception: Municipally-owned peaking units.

- Exemptions are by rule type, not facility type:
***Acid rain rules,***
***Post-1990 EPA rules,***
***Rules with continuous compliance determination methods (e.g., Da facilities for SO2).***
- One exemption exception: Municipally-owned peaking units.

## Apply CAM to PSEUs in new (including renewal) Title V applications after April 22, 1998:
Large units (post-control emissions greater than major source threshold) at initial permit and significant permit revisions,
All PSEUs meeting three criteria at permit renewal.
Other monitoring sufficient to assure compliance applies in interim.

- Apply CAM to PSEUs in new (including renewal) Title V applications after April 22, 1998:
***Large units (post-control emissions greater than major source threshold) at initial permit and significant permit revisions,***
***All PSEUs meeting three criteria at permit renewal.***
- Other monitoring sufficient to assure compliance applies in interim.

## Monitoring requirements from applicable rules including part 64
Monitoring to fill gaps
If applicable rule has no monitoring, no frequency, initial testing only
Gap-filling monitoring to provide reliable data from relevant time period representative of compliance (70.6(a)(3))

- Monitoring requirements from applicable rules including part 64
- Monitoring to fill gaps
- If applicable rule has no monitoring, no frequency, initial testing only
- Gap-filling monitoring to provide reliable data from relevant time period representative of compliance (70.6(a)(3))

## Develop and propose monitoring in permit application that at a minimum:
Satisfies part 64, as applicable, and
Includes applicable monitoring requirements.
May also propose monitoring to fill gaps including applying or improving existing monitoring.

- Develop and propose monitoring in permit application that at a minimum:
***Satisfies part 64, as applicable, and***
***Includes applicable monitoring requirements.***
- May also propose monitoring to fill gaps including applying or improving existing monitoring.

## Review and approve or disapprove proposed monitoring:
Is gap-filling monitoring with justification included? 
Is required monitoring (e.g., part 64, rule-specific) included?
If proposal indicates no monitoring is needed, is justification adequate?

- Review and approve or disapprove proposed monitoring:
*Is gap-filling monitoring with justification included? *
*Is required monitoring (e.g., part 64, rule-specific) included?*
*If proposal indicates no monitoring is needed, is justification adequate?*

## Specify gap-filling or, under own authority, improvements to proposed or existing monitoring as needed to assure compliance;
Define monitoring in permit, specify all elements and conditions for clarity and future inspections.

***Specify gap-filling or, under own authority, improvements to proposed or existing monitoring as needed to assure compliance;***
***Define monitoring in permit, specify all elements and conditions for clarity and future inspections.***

## Permit elements (EPA’s part 64 guidance has example format):
Description of monitoring (what is measured, how, frequency, averaging time),
What defines excursions and consequences (e.g., excursion triggers corrective action and reporting obligation), excess emissions, deviations.
QA/QC schedules and procedures.

- Permit elements (EPA’s part 64 guidance has example format):
***Description of monitoring (what is measured, how, frequency, averaging time),***
***What defines excursions and consequences (e.g., excursion triggers corrective action and reporting obligation), excess emissions, deviations.***
***QA/QC schedules and procedures.***

## Use the data to assure and assess compliance with applicable requirements by:
Operating control device(s) within designated CAM or other indicator ranges, and
Responding to excursions, excess emissions, deviations with appropriate corrective action; and
Operating other control measures in accordance with applicable conditions.

- Use the data to assure and assess compliance with applicable requirements by:
***Operating control device(s) within designated CAM or other indicator ranges, and***
***Responding to excursions, excess emissions, deviations with appropriate corrective action; and***
***Operating other control measures in accordance with applicable conditions.***

## Exceedance – condition detected by monitoring (in units of pollutant emissions) that emissions are beyond limit
Excursion – departure from indicator range established in accordance with part 64

***Exceedance – condition detected by monitoring (in units of pollutant emissions) that emissions are beyond limit***
***Excursion – departure from indicator range established in accordance with part 64***

## Potential problem in the operation and maintenance of the control device,
Possible exception to compliance with applicable requirements,
Owner or operator to take appropriate corrective action, but
Not necessarily a failure to comply with the underlying emissions limitation or standard.

***Potential problem in the operation and maintenance of the control device,***
***Possible exception to compliance with applicable requirements,***
***Owner or operator to take appropriate corrective action, but***
***Not necessarily a failure to comply with the underlying emissions limitation or standard.***

## Reporting requirements already established in existing requirements, in many cases,
May have to specify an appropriate time period for averaging data to report exceedances,
Exceptions to compliance.

***Reporting requirements already established in existing requirements, in many cases,***
***May have to specify an appropriate time period for averaging data to report exceedances,***
***Exceptions to compliance.***

## Certification of intermittent compliance is not necessarily a certification of noncompliance
Periods for which one does not really know (e.g., excursions from operating conditions),
Excused periods (e.g., SS&M),
Monitoring errors offset by other information indicating compliance.

- Certification of intermittent compliance is not necessarily a certification of noncompliance
***Periods for which one does not really know (e.g., excursions from operating conditions),***
***Excused periods (e.g., SS&M),***
***Monitoring errors offset by other information indicating compliance.***

## 40 CFR 70.6(c)(5) - annual or more frequent certification requires the source owner (responsible official) to:
Certify as to status of compliance for each permit term or condition, and
Indicate whether compliance is continuous or intermittent.

- 40 CFR 70.6(c)(5) - annual or more frequent certification requires the source owner (responsible official) to:
***Certify as to status of compliance for each permit term or condition, and***
***Indicate whether compliance is continuous or intermittent.***

## From preamble to part 70 revisions (06/27/03):
Any failure to meet permit terms or conditions (e.g., deviations or possible exceptions to compliance as per part 64 excursions) will result in intermittent compliance certification;
From other EPA documents (e.g., 1997, 2001 FR notices): Certification of intermittent compliance is not necessarily a certification of noncompliance:
Periods for which one does not really know (e.g., excursions from CAM indicator ranges),
Monitoring errors offset by other information indicating compliance.

**From preamble to part 70 revisions (06/27/03):**
**Any failure to meet permit terms or conditions (e.g., deviations or possible exceptions to compliance as per part 64 excursions) will result in intermittent compliance certification;**
**From other EPA documents (e.g., 1997, 2001 FR notices): Certification of intermittent compliance is not necessarily a certification of noncompliance:**
**Periods for which one does not really know (e.g., excursions from CAM indicator ranges),**
**Monitoring errors offset by other information indicating compliance*****.***

## Two related acronyms

- From Great Britain
***From regulatory language:  BATNEEC – Best available technology not entailing excessive costs***
***From industry paper:  CATNIP – Cheapest available technology not incurring prosecution***

## Questions?  Break?