24488 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 26, 2022 / Proposed Rules 
associated implementing instructions, 
and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have made a preliminary determination that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This proposed rule involves a safety zone lasting 12 hours spread over the course of 3 days that would prohibit entry within .4 miles of the Korean Veterans Bridge. Normally such actions are categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L60(a) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023–01– 001–01, Rev. 1. A preliminary Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket. For instructions on locating the docket, see the 
ADDRESSES section of this preamble. We 
seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this proposed rule. 
G. Protest Activities 
The Coast Guard respects the First 
Amendment rights of protesters. 
Protesters are asked to call or email the person listed in the 
FOR FURTHER  
INFORMATION CONTACT section to 
coordinate protest activities so that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or security of people, places, or vessels. 
V. Public Participation and Request for 
Comments 
We view public participation as 
essential to effective rulemaking, and will consider all comments and material received during the comment period. Your comment can help shape the outcome of this rulemaking. If you submit a comment, please include the docket number for this rulemaking, indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. 
Submitting comments. We encourage 
you to submit comments through the Federal Decision Making Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. To do so, 
go to https://www.regulations.gov, type 
USCG–2022–0275 in the search box and click ‘‘Search.’’ Next, look for this document in the Search Results column, and click on it. Then click on the Comment option. If you cannot submit your material by using https://www.regulations.gov, call or email the 
person in the 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION  CONTACT section of this proposed rule 
for alternate instructions. 
Viewing material in docket. To view 
documents mentioned in this proposed rule as being available in the docket, find the docket as described in the previous paragraph, and then select ‘‘Supporting & Related Material’’ in the Document Type column. Public comments will also be placed in our online docket and can be viewed by following instructions on the https://www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked 
Questions web page. We review all comments received, but we will only post comments that address the topic of the proposed rule. We may choose not to post off-topic, inappropriate, or duplicate comments that we receive. 
Personal information. We accept 
anonymous comments. Comments we post to https://www.regulations.gov will 
include any personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and submissions to the docket in response to this document, see DHS’s eRulemaking System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, March 11, 2020). 
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation 
(water), Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Security measures, Waterways. 
For the reasons discussed in the 
preamble, the Coast Guard is proposing to amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows: 
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 
■1. The authority citation for part 165 
continues to read as follows: 
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 
1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; 
Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 00170.1, Revision No. 01.2. 
■2. Add § 165.T08–0275 to read as 
follows: 
§ 165.T08–0275 Safety Zone; Cumberland River, Nashville, TN. 
(a) Location. The following area is a 
safety zone: All navigable waters of the 
Cumberland River from mile marker 191.1 to mile marker 191.5. 
(b) Definitions: As used in this 
section, designated representative 
means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast Guard vessel and a Federal, State, and local officer designated by or assisting the Captain of the Port Sector Ohio Valley (COTP) in the enforcement of the safety zone. 
(c) Regulations. (1) Under the general 
safety zone regulations in subpart C of this part, you may not enter the safety zone described in paragraph (a) of this section unless authorized by the COTP or the COTP’s designated representative. 
(2) To seek permission to enter, 
contact the COTP or the COTP’s representative by VHF–FM radio channel 16 or phone at 1–800–253– 7465. Those in the safety zone must comply with all lawful orders or directions given to them by the COTP or the COTP’s designated representative. 
(d) Enforcement periods. This section 
will be enforced from 2 p.m. until 6:30 p.m. on August 5, 2022, from 11 a.m. until 5 p.m. on August 6, 2021, and from 2 p.m. until 4:30 p.m. on August 7, 2022. 
Dated: April 20, 2022. 
A.M. Beach, 
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 
Port Sector Ohio Valley. 
[FR Doc. 2022–08882 Filed 4–25–22; 8:45 am] 
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 
AGENCY 
40 CFR Parts 51, 60, and 63 
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2020–0556; FRL–8335–03– 
OAR] 
RIN 2060–AV35 
Testing Provisions for Air Emission 
Sources 
AGENCY : Environmental Protection 
Agency (EPA). 
ACTION : Proposed rule. 
SUMMARY : This action proposes 
corrections and updates to regulations for source testing of emissions under various rules. This proposed rule includes corrections to inaccurate testing provisions, updates to outdated procedures, and approved alternative procedures that provide testers enhanced flexibility. The revisions will improve the quality of data but will not impose new substantive requirements on source owners or operators. 
DATES : Comments must be received on 
or before June 27, 2022. 
ADDRESSES : You may send comments, 
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– OAR–2020–0556 by any of the following methods: 
•Federal eRulemaking Portal: 
https://www.regulations.gov (our 
preferred method). Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. 
•Email: a-and-r docket@epa.gov. 
Include docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR– 2020–0556 in the subject line of the message. 
•Fax: (202) 566–9744. 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:09 Apr 25, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26APP1.SGM 26APP1jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS124489 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 26, 2022 / Proposed Rules 
•Mail: U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center, 
Office of Air and Radiation Docket, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460. 
•Hand Delivery or Courier (by 
scheduled appointment only): EPA Docket Center, WJC West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004. The Docket Center’s hours of operations are 8:30 a.m.–4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday (except Federal Holidays). 
Instructions: All submissions received 
must include the Docket ID No. for this rulemaking. Comments received may be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov/, including any 
personal information provided. For detailed instructions on sending comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the ‘‘Public Participation’’ heading of the 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 
this document. Out of an abundance of caution for members of the public and our staff, the EPA Docket Center and Reading Room are closed to the public, with limited exceptions, to reduce the risk of transmitting COVID–19. Our Docket Center staff will continue to provide remote customer service via email, phone, and webform. We encourage the public to submit comments via https://www.regulations.gov/ or email, as there 
may be a delay in processing mail and faxes. Hand deliveries and couriers may be received by scheduled appointment only. For further information on EPA Docket Center services and the current status, please visit us online at https:// 
www.epa.gov/dockets. 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT : Mrs. 
Lula H. Melton, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Air Quality Assessment Division (E143–02), Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone number: (919) 541–2910; fax number: (919) 541–0516; email address: melton.lula@epa.gov. 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : The 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION in this 
preamble is organized as follows: 
I. Public Participation and Written Comments II. General Information 
A. Does this action apply to me? B. What action is the Agency taking? 
III. Background IV. Incorporation by Reference V. Summary of Proposed Amendments 
A. Method 201A of Appendix M of Part 51 B. General Provisions (Subpart A) of Part 
60 
C. Standards of Performance for New 
Residential Wood Heaters (Subpart AAA) of Part 60 
D. Standards of Performance for New 
Residential Wood Heaters, New Residential Hydronic Heaters, and 
Forced-Air Furnaces (Subpart QQQQ) of Part 60 
E. Method 1 of Appendix A–1 of Part 60 F. Method 4 of Appendix A–3 of Part 60 G. Method 7 of Appendix A–4 of Part 60 H. Method 19 of Appendix A–7 of Part 60 I. Method 25 of Appendix A–7 of Part 60 J. Method 25C of Appendix A–7 of Part 60 K. Method 26 of Appendix A–8 of Part 60 L. Performance Specification 1 of 
Appendix B of Part 60 
M. Performance Specification 2 of 
Appendix B of Part 60 
N. Performance Specification 4B of 
Appendix B of Part 60 
O. Performance Specification 6 of 
Appendix B of Part 60 
P. Performance Specification 12A of 
Appendix B of Part 60 
Q. Performance Specification 16 of 
Appendix B of Part 60 
R. Procedure 1 of Appendix F of Part 60 
S. Procedure 5 of Appendix F of Part 60 T. General Provisions (Subpart A) of Part 
63 
U. National Emission Standards for 
Hazardous Air Pollutants From the Pulp and Paper Industry (Subpart S) of Part 63 
V. National Emission Standards for 
Hazardous Air Pollutants From Hazardous Waste Combustors (Subpart EEE) of Part 63 
W. National Emission Standards for 
Hazardous Air Pollutants: Paper and Other Web Coating (Subpart JJJJ) of Part 63 
X. National Emission Standards for 
Hazardous Air Pollutants for Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (Subpart ZZZZ) of Part 63 
Y. National Emission Standards for 
Hazardous Air Pollutants: Engine Test Cells/Stands Residual Risk and Technology Review (Subpart PPPPP) of Part 63 
Z. National Emission Standards for 
Hazardous Air Pollutants: Coal- and Oil- Fired Electric Utility Steam Generating Units (Subpart UUUUU) of Part 63 
AA. Method 315 of Appendix A of Part 63 BB. Method 323 of Appendix A of Part 63 
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 
Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review 
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (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 and 1 CFR part 51 
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions 
To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations 
I. Public Participation and Written Comments 
Submit your comments identified by 
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2020– 0556 at https://www.regulations.gov (our preferred method) or the other methods identified in the 
ADDRESSES  
section. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from the docket. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit to EPA’s docket at https://www.regulations.gov/ any 
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or 
other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ commenting-epa-dockets. 
Public visitors are allowed in the EPA 
Docket Center and Reading Room by making an appointment in advance. Our Docket Center staff will continue to provide remote customer service via email, phone, and webform. We encourage the public to submit comments via https://www.regulations.gov/ as there may be a 
delay in processing mail and faxes. Hand deliveries or couriers will be received by scheduled appointment only. For further information and updates on EPA Docket Center services, please visit us online at https://www.epa.gov/dockets. The EPA 
continues to carefully and continuously monitor information from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), local area health departments, and our Federal partners so that we can respond rapidly as conditions change regarding COVID–19. 
II. General Information A. Does this action apply to me? 
The proposed amendments apply to 
industries that are subject to the current 
provisions of 40 CFR parts 51, 60, and 63. We did not list all of the specific affected industries or their North 
American Industry Classification 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:09 Apr 25, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26APP1.SGM 26APP1jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS124490 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 26, 2022 / Proposed Rules 
System (NAICS) codes herein since 
there are many affected sources in numerous NAICS categories. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult either the air permitting authority for the entity or your EPA Regional representative as listed in 40 CFR 63.13. 
B. What action is the Agency taking? 
This action proposes corrections and 
revisions to source test methods, 
performance specifications (PS), and associated regulations. The corrections and revisions consist primarily of typographical errors, updates to testing procedures, and the addition of alternative equipment and methods the Agency has deemed acceptable to use. 
III. Background 
The EPA catalogs errors and 
corrections, as well as necessary 
revisions to test methods, performance specifications, and associated regulations in 40 CFR parts 51, 60, and 
63 and periodically updates and revises these provisions. The most recent updates and revisions were promulgated on October 7, 2020 (85 FR 63394). This proposed rule addresses necessary corrections and revisions identified after that final action, many of which were brought to our attention by regulated sources and end-users, such as environmental consultants and compliance professionals. These revisions will improve the quality of data obtained and give source testers the flexibility to use newly approved alternative procedures. 
IV. Incorporation by Reference 
The EPA proposes to incorporate by 
reference two ASTM standards. 
Specifically, the EPA proposes to incorporate ASTM D6216–20, which covers the procedure for certifying continuous opacity monitors and includes design and performance specifications, test procedures, and QA requirements to ensure that continuous opacity monitors meet minimum design and calibration requirements necessary for accurate opacity monitoring measurements in regulatory environmental opacity monitoring applications subject to 10 percent or higher opacity standards. The EPA also proposes to update the incorporation by reference for ASTM D6784, a test method for elemental, oxidized, particle-bound, and total mercury in emissions from stationary sources, from the 2002 version to the 2016 version; this update would apply to incorporations by reference in 40 CFR part 60, appendix B, Performance Specification 12A for continuous monitoring of mercury emissions. Likewise, EPA proposes to update the incorporations by reference in 40 CFR part 63 for use of ASTM D6784 under table 5 and appendix A of Subpart UUUUU, for mercury emissions measurement and monitoring. Both the ASTM D6216–20 and ASTM D6784–16 standards were developed and adopted by ASTM. The ASTM standards may be obtained from www.astm.org or from the 
ASTM at 100 Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428–2959. 
The EPA also proposes to incorporate 
by reference the American Public Health Association (APHA) Method 5210 Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) from ‘‘Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater.’’ This standard is acceptable as an alternative to Method 405.1 and is available from APHA at www.standardmethods.org or by 
telephone at (844) 232–3707. 
The EPA is also proposing specific 
modifications to requirements in an existing incorporation by reference, the ASTM E2515–11 test method. The proposed stipulations would modify the post-test leak check procedures as well as add procedures for performing leak checks during a sampling run. 
V. Summary of Proposed Amendments 
The following amendments are being 
proposed. A. Method 201A of Appendix M of Part 
51 
In Method 201A, the erroneous 
equation 25 in section 12.5 would be corrected. 
B. General Provisions (Subpart A) of 
Part 60 
In the General Provisions of part 60, 
§ 60.17(h) would be revised to add American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) D6216–20 and D6784–16 to the list of incorporations by reference and to re-number the remaining consensus standards that are incorporated by reference in alpha- numeric order. 
C. Standards of Performance for New 
Residential Wood Heaters (Subpart AAA) of Part 60 
Subpart AAA would be amended to 
add stipulations for use of the ASTM E2515–11 test method. The stipulations would modify the post-test leak check procedures as well as add procedures for performing leak checks during a sampling run. The stipulations to ASTM E2515–11 are necessary as we have learned that the quality assurance/ quality control (QA/QC) requirements for leak tests required by ASTM E2515– 11, section 9.6.5.1 are not sufficient to provide assurance of the sampling system integrity. Additionally, the language of ASTM E2515–11, section 9.6.5.1 currently allows for averaging the PM results from a non-leaking sampling system with those from a leaking sampling system, which effectively reduces reported PM emissions by as much as half, rendering the test method inappropriate for compliance determination. 
We would revise the language in 
§ 60.534(c) and are proposing new language to replace ASTM E2515–11, section 9.6.5.1 by adding § 60.534(c)(1), which specifies appropriate post-test leak check procedures and in § 60.534(c)(2) by adding procedures for performing leak checks during a sampling run. We are proposing these modifications to bring appropriate QA/ QC requirements to PM measurements required by the rule and to eliminate opportunity for emissions test results to be considered valid when a leaking sampling system allows dilution of the PM sample(s). 
We are also proposing in § 60.534(d) 
that the first hour PM emissions measurements be conducted using a separate ASTM E2515–11 sampling train operated concurrently with the paired ASTM E2515–11 sampling trains used in compliance PM sampling. In this manner, the first hour PM emissions would be collected appropriately, and the compliance test measurements would not be impacted by a sampling pause for filter replacement at the 1-hour mark. 
The regulatory language in 
§ 60.539b(b) would be revised to include General Provisions that were added to § 60.8(f)(2) (81 FR 59801, August 30, 2016) and were inadvertently exempted from inclusion in subpart AAA as that rule, as promulgated in 2015, exempted § 60.8(f) in its entirety. The exemption promulgated in subpart AAA at § 60.539b(b) was intended to exempt those affected sources from § 60.8(f), which, at the time, consisted of what is now currently § 60.8(f)(1) and is specific to compliance testing results consisting of the arithmetic mean of three replicate tests. We are proposing these modifications to ensure that emissions test reporting includes all data necessary to assess and assure the quality of the reported emissions data and appropriately describes and identifies the specific unit covered by the emissions test report. Since compliance tests in this category consist of a single test, the original regulatory 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:09 Apr 25, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26APP1.SGM 26APP1jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS124491 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 26, 2022 / Proposed Rules 
exemption to the General Provisions of 
§ 60.8(f)(1) is retained. 
D. Standards of Performance for New 
Residential Wood Heaters, New Residential Hydronic Heaters, and Forced-Air Furnaces (Subpart QQQQ) of Part 60 
The erroneous PM emission limits in 
g/MJ in §§ 60.5474(b)(2), (b)(3) and (b)(6) would be corrected. 
In addition, subpart QQQQ would be 
amended to add stipulations for use of the ASTM E2515–11 test method. The stipulations would modify the post-test leak check procedures as well as add procedures for performing leak checks during a sampling run. The stipulations to ASTM E2515–11 are necessary as we have learned that the QA/QC requirements for leak tests required by ASTM E2515–11, section 9.6.5.1 are not sufficient to provide assurance of the sampling system integrity. Additionally, the language of ASTM E2515–11, section 9.6.5.1 currently allows for averaging the PM results from a non- leaking sampling system with those from a leaking sampling system, which effectively reduces reported PM emissions by as much as half, rendering the test method inappropriate for compliance determination. The language in § 60.5476(c)(5) and § 60.5476(c)(6) would be replaced with the word ‘‘reserved.’’ 
We would revise language in 
§ 60.5476(f) and are proposing new language to replace ASTM E2515–11, section 9.6.5.1 by adding § 60.5476(f)(1), which specifies appropriate post-test leak check procedures and in 
§ 60.5476(f)(2) adding procedures for performing leak checks during a sampling run. We are proposing these modifications to bring appropriate QA/ QC requirements to PM measurements required by the rule and eliminate opportunity for emissions test results to be considered valid when a leaking sampling system allows dilution of the PM sample(s). 
We are also proposing in § 60.5476(f) 
that first hour PM emissions measurements should be conducted using a separate ASTM E2515–11 sampling train operated concurrently with the paired ASTM E2515–11 sampling trains used in compliance PM sampling. In this manner, the first hour PM emissions will be collected appropriately, and the compliance test measurements would not be impacted by a sampling pause for filter replacement at the one-hour mark. In § 60.5476(f), we would incorporate language about filter type and size acceptance currently in § 60.5476(c)(5). Additionally, we would remove text relating to EN 303–5 currently found in § 60.5476(f). 
The regulatory language in 
§ 60.5483(b) would be revised to include General Provisions that were added to § 60.8(f)(2) (81 FR 59801, August 30, 2016) and were inadvertently exempted from subpart QQQQ as that rule, as promulgated in 2015, exempted § 60.8(f) in its entirety. The exemption promulgated in subpart QQQQ at § 60.5483(b) was intended for those affected sources subject to § 60.8(f), which, at the time, consisted of what is currently § 60.8(f)(1) and is specific to compliance testing results consisting of the arithmetic mean of three replicate tests. We are proposing these modifications to ensure that emissions test reporting includes all data necessary to assess and assure the quality of the reported emissions data and appropriately describes and identifies the specific unit covered by the emissions test report. Since compliance tests in this category consist of a single test, the original regulatory exemption to the General Provisions of § 60.8(f)(1) is retained. 
In subpart QQQQ, in Method 28WHH, 
in section 13.8, the erroneous CO calculation instructions for equation 23 would be corrected to include the summation of CO emissions over four instead of three test categories. 
E. Method 1 of Appendix A–1 of Part 60 
In Method 1, the heading in section 
11.5.1 would be moved to 11.5, and the 
word ‘‘procedure’’ would be moved to the first sentence in section 11.5.1 for clarity. Section 11.5.2 would be revised to clearly specify the number of traverse points that must be used for sampling and velocity measurements once a directional flow-sensing probe procedure has been used to demonstrate that an alternative measurement site is acceptable. The last sentence of section 11.5.2, which appears unclear as to what ‘‘same traverse point number and locations’’ it is referring, would be revised to instead specify the ‘‘same minimum of 40 traverse points for circular ducts and 42 points for rectangular ducts’’ that are used in the alternative measurement procedure of section 11.5.3. 
Also, Table 1–2 would be revised to 
correct the erroneous requirement that calls for 99.9 percent of stack diameter from the inside wall to the traverse point to 98.9 percent. 
F. Method 4 of Appendix A–3 of Part 60 
In Method 4, Table 4–3 would be 
formatted correctly. G. Method 7 of Appendix A–4 of Part 60 
In Method 7, section 10.1.3 would be 
revised to change the word ‘‘should’’ to 
‘‘shall’’ in the last sentence because the difference between the calculated concentration values and the actual concentrations are required to be less than 7 percent for all standards. 
H. Method 19 of Appendix A–7 of Part 
60 
In Method 19, the erroneous equation 
19–5 would be corrected. 
I. Method 25 of Appendix A–7 of Part 
60 
In Method 25, a record and report 
section (section 12.9) would be added to confirm that the quality control (QC) was successfully performed. Also, the erroneous Figure 25–6 would be corrected. 
J. Method 25C of Appendix A–7 of Part 
60 
In Method 25C, the nomenclature in 
section 12.1 for C
N2and C mN2would be 
revised to provide clarity. 
K. Method 26 of Appendix A–8 of Part 
60 
In Method 26, erroneous equations 
26–4 and 26–5 in sections 12.4 and 12.5, respectively, would be revised to be consistent with the nomenclature in section 12.1. 
L. Performance Specification 1 of 
Appendix B of Part 60 
In Performance Specification 1, 
references to ASTM D6216–12 (in sections 2.1, 3.1, 6.1, 8.1(1), 8.1(2)(iii), 8.1(3)(ii), 8.2(1), 8.2(2), 8.2(3), 9.0, 12.1, 13.1, 13.2, and 16.0 reference 8) would be replaced with ASTM D6216–20. Note: If the initial certification of the continuous opacity monitoring system (COMS) has already occurred using D6216–98, D6216–03, D6216–07, or D6216–12, it will not be necessary to recertify using D6216–20. 
Also, in Performance Specification 1, 
section 8.1(2)(iii) would be revised by removing the next to the last sentence, which reads, ‘‘The opacities of the two locations or paths may be measured at different times but must represent the same process operating conditions,’’ because the statement is confusing and unclear; furthermore, it is unlikely that one would achieve the same conditions at two different times. 
M. Performance Specification 2 of 
Appendix B of Part 60 
In Performance Specification 2, in 
section 8.3.3, a sentence would be added to clarify that during a calibration, the reference gas is to be 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:09 Apr 25, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26APP1.SGM 26APP1jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS124492 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 26, 2022 / Proposed Rules 
introduced into the sampling system 
prior to any sample conditioning or filtration equipment and must pass through as much of the probe as is practical. In section 12.5, minor revisions would be made to clarify that relative accuracy (RA) test results are expressed as a percent of emission rate or concentration (units of the applicable standard) and the definition of the average reference method (RM) value for Equation 2–6. 
N. Performance Specification 4B of 
Appendix B of Part 60 
The entire Performance Specification 
4B would be updated to the 
Environmental Monitoring Management Council (EMMC) methods format used for all other performance specifications. 
O. Performance Specification 6 of 
Appendix B of Part 60 
In Performance Specification 6, 
section 13.2 would be revised to specifically state the relative accuracy criteria including significant figures. On October 7, 2020 (85 FR 63394), we revised section 13.2 of Performance Specification 6 to make the relative accuracy calculations and criteria consistent with Performance Specification 2 and offer an alternate calculation and criterion for low emission concentration/rate situations; however, we neglected to specifically cite the alternate relative accuracy criterion from Performance Specification 2 for low emission sources and to ensure consistency with Performance Specification 2 with regard to significant figures in the relative accuracy criteria. 
P. Performance Specification 12A of 
Appendix B of Part 60 
We are proposing to revise the 
references (in sections 8.4.2, 8.4.4, 8.4.5, 8.4.6.1, and 17.5 and the footnote to Figure 12A–3) to ASTM D6784, Standard Test Method for Elemental, Oxidized, Particle-Bound and Total Mercury in Flue Gas Generated from Coal-Fired Stationary Sources (Ontario Hydro Method), to update them from the 2002 version to the latest version, which was authorized in 2016. 
The capabilities of mercury CEMS 
have been improving since initially being deployed to support regulations over a decade ago. Therefore, we are proposing to revise section 13.3 to modify the alternative relative accuracy criterion such that: (1) It would apply only at mercury concentrations less than 2.5 mg/scm and (2) the difference 
between the average reference method and CEMS values added to the confidence coefficient would now be 0.5 mg/scm. This revised criterion is 
consistent with revisions that we made to the mercury monitoring requirements in 40 CFR 63, subpart UUUUU (81 FR 20172, April 6, 2016). 
Q. Performance Specification 16 of 
Appendix B of Part 60 
In Performance Specification 16, 
several corrections and modifications would be made to clarify the intent of the requirements. In section 1.1, we would correct the language to make it clear that if a PEMS (predictive emission monitoring system) contains a diluent component, then the diluent component must be tested as well. Also, in section 1.1, the language referring to PS–17 would be removed since PS–17 was never promulgated. In sections 3.11 and 3.12, language would be added to define commonly used acronyms, and in section 3.12, the language would be corrected to indicate that the relative accuracy test audit (RATA) is to be conducted as specified in section 8.2. In section 9.1, the QA/QC Summary chart would be corrected to reflect the language found in section 2.2, which indicates that the relative accuracy audit (RAA) is required on all PEMS and not just those classified as compliance PEMS. The QA/QC Summary Chart is also modified to align the criteria for a RAA with that found in section 13.5. In section 9.4, the language stating a RATA is to be conducted at the normal operating level would be corrected to indicate the RATA is to be conducted as specified in section 8.2 and to remove the statement that the statistical tests in section 8.3 are not required for the yearly RATA. In section 12.3.2, the alternative criteria language would be 
removed because it does not apply to F- factor determinations. In sections 13.1 and 13.5, the language would be modified to add the corresponding alternative criteria in units of lb/mmBtu. 
R. Procedure 1 of Appendix F of Part 60 
In Procedure 1, in section 4.1, a 
sentence would be added to clarify that 
during a calibration, the reference gas is to be introduced into the sampling system prior to any sample conditioning or filtration equipment and must pass through as much of the probe as is practical. Section 5.2.3 (2) would be modified to refine the alternative cylinder gas audit (CGA) criteria in response to the use of analyzers with lower span values. In section 6.2, in order to provide clarity and clear up any confusion, we would remove the language referring to the relevant performance specification and insert the language referring to the use of Equation 1–1. S. Procedure 5 of Appendix F of Part 60 
Regulated entities have pointed out 
that we did not include criteria for the 
system integrity check required in Procedure 5. In section 2.5, we would clarify that ongoing daily calibration of the Hg CEMS must be conducted using elemental mercury reference gas. This is consistent with revisions that we made to the Hg monitoring requirements in 40 CFR 63, subpart UUUUU (81 FR 20172, April 6, 2016). We would revise the title of section 4.0 and add section 4.4 to explain more explicitly the procedure for conducting the system integrity check as well as to provide the criteria for passing the check. In section 5.1.3, to add clarity we would insert language referring to Equation 1–1 of Procedure 1 for calculating relative accuracy. 
T. General Provisions (Subpart A) of 
Part 63 
In the General Provisions of part 63, 
§ 63.14 would be revised to: (1) Add ASTM D6784–16 to redesignated paragraph (i) and (2) add ‘‘Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater’’ Method 5210B to new paragraph (d). 
U. National Emission Standards for 
Hazardous Air Pollutants From the Pulp and Paper Industry (Subpart S) of Part 63 
In subpart S, the existing reference in 
40 CFR 63.457(c)(4) to Method 405.1 of part 136 of chapter 40 for the measurement of biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) is no longer valid, as 
Method 405.1 was withdrawn in 2007. It was replaced with Biochemical Oxygen Demand Standard Methods 5210 B (72 FR 11199, March 12, 2007), which has been previously approved in test plans for measuring BOD to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of subpart S. In § 63.457(c)(4), Method 405.1 would be updated to reference Method 5210B. This method would also be incorporated by reference in 40 CFR 63.14. 
V. Standards of Performance for 
Hazardous Air Pollutants From Hazardous Waste Combustors (Subpart EEE) of Part 63 
In the appendix to subpart EEE, we 
would remove the erroneous language regarding an Interference Response Test in the introductory paragraph of section 5 and section 5.3 in its entirety. 
W. National Emission Standards for 
Hazardous Air Pollutants: Paper and Other Web Coating (Subpart JJJJ) of Part 63 
In 2009, revisions were made to 
§ 63.3360(e)(1)(viii) to clarify that the 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:09 Apr 25, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26APP1.SGM 26APP1jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS124493 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 26, 2022 / Proposed Rules 
results of Method 25 or Method 25A 
were being used to determine ‘‘total organic volatile matter’’ (85 FR 41276). At the time, the use of the terminology ‘‘total gaseous non-methane organic volatile organic matter’’ in § 63.3360(e)(1)(vi) was overlooked. We are proposing to revise § 63.3360(e)(1)(vi) by removing the term ‘‘non-methane’’ to be consistent with § 63.3360(e)(1)(viii). 
X. National Emission Standards for 
Hazardous Air Pollutants for Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (Subpart ZZZZ) of Part 63 
We have received multiple inquiries 
regarding the requirements in Table 4 of Subpart ZZZZ to measure the exhaust gas moisture when measuring the concentration of carbon monoxide (CO), formaldehyde, or THC to demonstrate compliance with the rule. It was first pointed out that it is not always 
necessary to measure that exhaust gas moisture when measuring CO. We would add language to all three sections of Table 4 stating that that the moisture measurement is only necessary when needed to correct the CO, formaldehyde, THC and/or O
2measurements to a dry 
basis. 
Y. National Emission Standards for 
Hazardous Air Pollutants: Engine Test Cells/Stands Residual Risk and Technology Review (Subpart PPPPP) of Part 63 
In subpart PPPPP, the existing 
erroneous statement in § 63.9306(d)(2)(iv) would be corrected to read, ‘‘Using a pressure sensor with measurement sensitivity of 0.002 inches water, check gauge calibration quarterly and transducer calibration monthly.’’ Also, in subpart PPPPP, the existing erroneous statement in § 63.9322(a)(1) would be corrected to read, ‘‘The capture system meets the criteria in Method 204 of appendix M to 40 CFR part 51 for a permanent total enclosure (PE) and directs all the exhaust gases from the enclosure to an add-on control device.’’ 
Z. National Emission Standards for 
Hazardous Air Pollutants: Coal- and Oil-Fired Electric Utility Steam Generating Units (Subpart UUUUU) of Part 63 
We are proposing to revise the 
references in sections 4.1.1.5 and 4.1.1.5.1 in subpart UUUUU, appendix A to ASTM Method D6784, Standard Test Method for Elemental, Oxidized, Particle-Bound and Total Mercury in Flue Gas Generated from Coal-Fired Stationary Sources (Ontario Hydro Method), to update them from the 2002 version to the latest version, which was 
authorized in 2016. In table 5, we are proposing to add ASTM Method D6784– 16 as a mercury testing option as it was inadvertently left out previously. 
AA. Method 315 of Appendix A of Part 
63 
Section 16.2 is mislabeled as section 
6.2 and would be corrected. 
BB. Method 323 of Appendix A of Part 
63 
In Method 323, sections 10.1 and 10.3 
would be revised to require best laboratory practices. The nomenclature in section 12.1 would be revised to include ‘‘b,’’ which is the intercept of the calibration curve at zero concentration and revise K
c; these 
additions are necessary because equation 323–5 in section 12.6 would be revised to reflect changes in calibration procedures for calculating the mass of formaldehyde. 
VI. Statutory and Executive Order 
Reviews 
Additional information about these 
statutes and Executive Orders can be found at https://www2.epa.gov/laws- regulations/laws-and-executive-orders. 
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. The amendments being proposed in this action to the test methods, performance specifications, and testing regulations only make corrections and minor updates to existing testing methodology. In addition, the proposed amendments clarify performance testing requirements. 
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. This proposed rule will not impose emission measurement requirements beyond those specified in the current regulations, nor does it change any emission standard. 
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 
(UMRA) 
This action does not contain any 
unfunded mandate as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local or tribal governments or the private sector. 
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. This action would correct and update existing testing regulations. 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 and 1 CFR Part 51 
This action involves technical 
standards. The EPA proposes to use ASTM D6216–20 for continuous opacity monitors in Performance Specification 1. The ASTM D6216–20 standard covers the procedure for certifying continuous opacity monitors and includes design and performance specifications, test procedures, and QA requirements to ensure that continuous opacity monitors meet minimum design and calibration requirements, necessary in part, for accurate opacity monitoring measurements in regulatory environmental opacity monitoring applications subject to 10 percent or 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:09 Apr 25, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26APP1.SGM 26APP1jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS124494 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 26, 2022 / Proposed Rules 
higher opacity standards. The EPA also 
proposes to update the version of ASTM D6784, a test method for elemental, oxidized, particle-bound, and total mercury in emissions from stationary sources, from the 2002 to 2016 version in the references contained in 40 CFR part 60, appendix B, Performance Specification 12A for continuous monitoring of mercury emissions. Likewise, EPA proposes to update the version of ASTM D6784 referenced in table 5 and appendix A of Subpart UUUUU in 40 CFR part 63, for mercury emissions measurement and monitoring. The ASTM D6216–20 and D6784–16 standards were developed and adopted by the American Society for Testing and Materials. The standards may be obtained from http://www.astm.org or 
from the ASTM at 100 Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428–2959. 
The EPA also proposes to use the 
APHA Method 5210 Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) from ‘‘Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater.’’ This standard is 
acceptable as an alternative to Method 405.1 and is available from APHA at www.standardmethods.org or by 
telephone at (844) 232–3707. 
Additionally, the EPA proposes 
language intended to correct a portion of the ASTM E2515–11 test method. The stipulations would modify the post-test leak check procedures as well as add procedures for performing leak checks during a sampling run. The stipulations to ASTM E2515–11 are necessary as we have learned that the quality assurance/ quality control (QA/QC) requirements for leak tests required by ASTM E2515– 11, section 9.6.5.1 are not sufficient to provide assurance of the sampling system integrity. Additionally, the language of ASTM E2515–11, section 9.6.5.1 currently allows for averaging the PM results from a non-leaking sampling system with those from a leaking sampling system which effectively reduces reported PM emissions by as much as half, rendering the test method inappropriate for compliance determination. 
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 action would correct and update existing testing regulations. List of Subjects 
40 CFR Part 51 
Environmental protection, Air 
pollution control, Performance 
specifications, Test methods and procedures. 
40 CFR Part 60 
Environmental protection, Air 
pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Performance specifications, Test methods and procedures. 
40 CFR Part 63 
Environmental protection, Air 
pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Performance specifications, Test methods and procedures. 
Michael S. Regan, 
Administrator. 
For the reasons set forth in the 
preamble, the Environmental Protection 
Agency proposes to amend title 40, chapter I of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows: 
PART 51—REQUIREMENTS FOR 
PREPARATION, ADOPTION, AND SUBMITTAL OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 
■1. The authority citation for part 51 
continues to read as follows: 
Authority: 23 U.S.C. 101; 42 U.S.C. 7401– 
7671q. 
■2. Amend section 12.5 in Method 
201A of appendix M to part 51 by revising Eq. 25 to read as follows: 
Appendix M to Part 51—Recommended 
Test Methods for State Implementation Plans 
* * * * * 
Method 201A—Determination of PM 10and 
PM 2.5Emissions From Stationary Sources 
(Constant Sampling Rate Procedure) 
* * * * * 
12.5 Equations. Use the following 
equations to complete the calculations 
required in this test method. 
* * * * * 
* * * * * 
PART 60—STANDARDS OF 
PERFORMANCE FOR NEW STATIONARY SOURCES 
■3. The authority citation of part 60 is 
revised to read as follows: 
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 
■4. In § 60.17: 
■a. Revise paragraphs (a) and (h)(179) 
and (191); ■b. Redesignate paragraphs (h)(193) 
through (h)(212) as (h)(194) through 
(h)(213) respectively; and 
■c. Add new paragraph (h)(193). 
The additions and revisions read as 
follows: 
§ 60.17 Incorporations by reference. 
(a) Certain material is incorporated by 
reference into this part with the 
approval of the Director of the Federal Register under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. To enforce any edition other than that specified in this section, the EPA must publish a document in the Federal Register and the material must be available to the public. All approved material is available for inspection at the EPA and the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). Contact EPA at: The EPA Docket Center, Public Reading Room, EPA WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC, phone (202) 566–1744. For information on the availability of this material at NARA, email fr.inspection@nara.gov, or go to 
www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ ibr-locations.html. The material may be 
obtained from the source(s) in the following paragraph(s) of this section. 
* * * * * 
(h) * * * 
(179) ASTM D6216–20, Standard 
Practice for Opacity Monitor 
Manufacturers to Certify Conformance with Design and Performance Specifications, 2020; IBR approved for appendix B: Performance Specification 1. 
* * * * * 
(191) ASTM 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); IBR approved for § 60.56c(b). 
* * * * * 
(193) ASTM D6784–16, Standard Test 
Method for Elemental, Oxidized, 
Particle-Bound and Total Mercury in Flue Gas Generated from Coal-Fired Stationary Sources (Ontario Hydro Method), 2016; IBR approved for appendix B: Performance Specification 12A. 
* * * * * 
■5. Amend § 60.534 by revising 
paragraphs (c) and (d) to read as follows: 
§ 60.534 What test methods and 
procedures must I use to determine compliance with the standards and requirements for certification? 
* * * * * 
(c) For affected wood heaters subject 
to the 2015 and 2020 particulate matter 
emission standards specified in § 60.532(a), (b) and (c), particulate 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:09 Apr 25, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26APP1.SGM 26APP1
EP26AP22.077</GPH>jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS124495 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 26, 2022 / Proposed Rules 
matter emission concentrations must be 
measured with ASTM E2515–11 (IBR, see § 60.17) with the following exceptions: Eliminate section 9.6.5.1 of ASTM E2515–11 and perform the post- test leak checks as described in paragraph (c)(1) of this section. Additionally, if a component change of either sampling train is needed during sampling, then perform the leak check specified in paragraph (c)(2) of this section. Four-inch filters and Teflon membrane filters or Teflon-coated glass fiber filters may be used in ASTM E2515–11. 
(1) Post-Test Leak Check: A leak 
check of each sampling train is mandatory at the conclusion of each sampling run before sample recovery. The leak check must be performed in accordance with the procedures of ASTM E2515–11, section 9.6.4.1 (IBR, see § 60.17), except that it must be conducted at a vacuum equal to or greater than the maximum value reached during the sampling run. If the leakage rate is found to be no greater than 0.0003 m
3/min (0.01 cfm) or 4% of 
the average sampling rate (whichever is less), the leak check results are acceptable. If a higher leakage rate is obtained, the sampling run is invalid. 
(2) Leak Checks During Sample Run: 
If, during a sampling run, a component (e.g., filter assembly) change becomes 
necessary, a leak check must be conducted immediately before the change is made. The leak check must be done according to the procedure outlined in ASTM E2515–11, section 9.6.4.1 (IBR, see § 60.17), except that it must be done at a vacuum equal to or greater than the maximum value recorded up to that point in the sampling run. If the leakage rate is found to be no greater than 0.0003 m
3/ 
min (0.01 cfm) or 4% of the average sampling rate (whichever is less), the leak check results are acceptable. If a higher leakage rate is obtained, the sampling run is invalid. 
Note 1 to paragraph (c)(2): Immediately 
after component changes, leak checks are 
optional but highly recommended. If such leak checks are done, the procedure in paragraph (c)(1) of this section should be used. 
(d) For all tests conducted using 
ASTM E2515–11 (IBR, see § 60.17), with 
the exceptions described in § paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section, and pursuant to this section, the manufacturer and approved test laboratory must also measure the first hour of particulate matter emissions for each test run by sampling with a third, identical and independent sampling train operated concurrently for the first hour of PM paired train compliance testing according to paragraph (c) of this section. The manufacturer and approved test laboratory must report the test results from this third train separately as the first hour emissions. 
* * * * * 
■6. Amend § 60.539b by revising 
paragraph (b) to read as follows: 
§ 60.539b What parts of the General 
Provisions do not apply to me? 
* * * * * 
(b) Section 60.8(a), (c), (d), (e), (f) (1), 
and (g); 
* * * * * 
■7. Amend § 60.5474 by revising 
paragraph (b)(2), (3) and (6) to read as 
follows: 
§ 60.5474 What standards and 
requirements must I meet and by when? 
* * * * * 
(b) * * * 
(2) 2020 residential hydronic heater 
particulate matter emission limit: 0.10 
lb/mmBtu (0.043 g/MJ) heat output per individual burn rate as determined by the crib wood test methods and procedures in § 60.5476 or an alternative crib wood test method approved by the Administrator. 
(3) 2020 residential hydronic heater 
cord wood alternative compliance option for particulate matter emission limit: 0.15 lb/mmBtu (0.064 g/MJ) heat output per individual burn rate as determined by the cord wood test methods and procedures in § 60.5476 or an alternative cord wood test method approved by the Administrator. 
* * * * * 
(6) 2020 forced-air furnace particulate 
matter emission limit: 0.15 lb/mmBtu 
(0.064 g/MJ) heat output per individual burn rate as determined by the cord wood test methods and procedures in § 60.5476 or cord wood test methods approved by the Administrator. 
* * * * * 
■9. Amend § 60.5476 by removing 
paragraph (c)(5) and (6) and revising 
paragraph (f). 
The revision reads as follows: 
§ 60.5476 What test methods and 
procedures must I use to determine compliance with the standards and requirements for certification? 
* * * * * 
(f) For affected wood heaters subject 
to the particulate matter emission 
standards, particulate matter emission concentrations must be measured with ASTM E2515–11 (IBR, see § 60.17) with the following exceptions, eliminate section 9.6.5.1 of ASTM E2515–11 and perform the post-test leak checks as described in paragraph (f)(1) of this section. Additionally, if a component change of either sampling train is needed during sampling, then perform the leak check specified in paragraph (f)(2 of this section). Four-inch filters and Teflon membrane filters or Teflon- coated glass fiber filters may be used in ASTM E2515–11. For all tests conducted using ASTM 2515–11, with the exceptions described in paragraphs (f)(1) and (2) of this section, the manufacturer and approved test laboratory must also measure the first hour of particulate matter emissions for each test run by sampling with a third, identical and independent sampling train operated concurrently with the first hour of PM paired train compliance testing. The manufacturer and approved test laboratory must report the test results for this third train separately as the first hour emissions. 
(1) Post-Test Leak Check: A leak 
check of each sampling train is mandatory at the conclusion of each sampling run before sample recovery. The leak check must be performed in accordance with the procedures of ASTM E2515–11, section 9.6.4.1 (IBR, see § 60.17), except that it must be conducted at a vacuum equal to or greater than the maximum value reached during the sampling run. If the leakage rate is found to be no greater than 0.0003 m
3/min (0.01 cfm) or 4% of 
the average sampling rate (whichever is less), the leak check results are acceptable. If a higher leakage rate is obtained, the sampling run is invalid. 
(2) Leak Checks During Sample Run: 
If, during a sampling run, a component (e.g., filter assembly) change becomes 
necessary, a leak check must be conducted immediately before the change is made. The leak check must be done according to the procedure outlined in ASTM E2515–11, section 9.6.4.1 (IBR, see § 60.17), except that it must be done at a vacuum equal to or greater than the maximum value recorded up to that point in the sampling run. If the leakage rate is found to be no greater than 0.0003 m
3/ 
min (0.01 cfm) or 4% of the average sampling rate (whichever is less), the leak check results are acceptable. If a higher leakage rate is obtained, the sampling run is invalid. 
Note 1 to paragraph (f)(2): Immediately 
after component changes, leak checks are 
optional but highly recommended. If such leak checks are done, the procedure in paragraph (f)(1) of this section should be used. 
* * * * * 
■10. Amend § 60.5483 by revising 
paragraph (b) to read as follows: 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:09 Apr 25, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26APP1.SGM 26APP1jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS124496 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 26, 2022 / Proposed Rules 
§ 60.5483 What parts of the General 
Provisions do not apply to me? 
* * * * * 
(b) Section 60.8(a), (c), (d), (e), (f) (1), 
and (g); 
* * * * * 
■11. Amend Appendix A–1 to part 60 
by revising sections 11.5, 11.5.1, and 
11.5.2, and Table 1–2 in Method 1 to read as follows: 
Appendix A–1 to Part 60—Test 
Methods 1 Through 2F 
* * * * * 
Method 1—Sample and Velocity Traverses 
For Stationary Sources 
* * * * * 
11.5 Alternative Measurement Site 
Selection Procedure. The alternative site 
selection procedure may be used to determine the rotation angles in lieu of the 
procedure outlined in section 11.4. 
11.5.1 This alternative procedure applies 
to sources where measurement locations are less than 2 equivalent or duct diameters 
downstream or less than one-half duct diameter upstream from a flow disturbance. The alternative should be limited to ducts larger than 24 inches in diameter where blockage and wall effects are minimal. A directional flow-sensing probe is used to measure pitch and yaw angles of the gas flow at 40 or more traverse points; the resultant angle is calculated and compared with acceptable criteria for mean and standard deviation. 
Note: Both the pitch and yaw angles are 
measured from a line passing through the traverse point and parallel to the stack axis. The pitch angle is the angle of the gas flow component in the plane that INCLUDES the traverse line and is parallel to the stack axis. The yaw angle is the angle of the gas flow 
component in the plane PERPENDICULAR to the traverse line at the traverse point and is measured from the line passing through the traverse point and parallel to the stack axis. 
11.5.2 Traverse Points. Use a minimum of 
40 traverse points for circular ducts and 42 points for rectangular ducts for the gas flow angle determinations. Follow the procedure outlined in section 11.3 and Table 1–1 or 1– 2 of this method for the location and layout of the traverse points. If the alternative measurement location is determined to be acceptable according to the criteria in this alternative procedure, use the same minimum of 40 traverse points for circular ducts and 42 points for rectangular ducts that 
were used in the alternative measurement procedure for future sampling and velocity measurements. 
* * * * * 
TABLE 1–2—L OCATION OF TRAVERSE POINTS IN CIRCULAR STACKS  
[Percent of stack diameter from inside wall to traverse point] 
Traverse point number 
on a diameter Number of traverse points on a diameter 
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 
1 ....................................... 14.6 6.7 4.4 3.2 2.6 2.1 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.3 1.1 1.1 
2 ....................................... 85.4 25.0 14.6 10.5 8.2 6.7 5.7 4.9 4.4 3.9 3.5 3.2 
3 ....................................... ............ 75.0 29.6 19.4 14.6 11.8 9.9 8.5 7.5 6.7 6.0 5.5 
4 ....................................... ............ 93.3 70.4 32.3 22.6 17.7 14.6 12.5 10.9 9.7 8.7 7.9 
5 ....................................... ............ ............ 85.4 67.7 34.2 25.0 20.1 16.9 14.6 12.9 11.6 10.5 
6 ....................................... ............ ............ 95.6 80.6 65.8 35.6 26.9 22.0 18.8 16.5 14.6 13.2 
7 ....................................... ............ ............ ............ 89.5 77.4 64.4 36.6 28.3 23.6 20.4 18.0 16.1 
8 ....................................... ............ ............ ............ 96.8 85.4 75.0 63.4 37.5 29.6 25.0 21.8 19.4 
9 ....................................... ............ ............ ............ ............ 91.8 82.3 73.1 62.5 38.2 30.6 26.2 23.0 
10 ..................................... ............ ............ ............ ............ 97.4 88.2 79.9 71.7 61.8 38.8 31.5 27.2 
11 ..................................... ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ 93.3 85.4 78.0 70.4 61.2 39.3 32.3 
12 ..................................... ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ 97.9 90.1 83.1 76.4 69.4 60.7 39.8 
13 ..................................... ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ 94.3 87.5 81.2 75.0 68.5 60.2 
14 ..................................... ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ 98.2 91.5 85.4 79.6 73.8 67.7 
15 ..................................... ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ 95.1 89.1 83.5 78.2 72.8 
16 ..................................... ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ 98.4 92.5 87.1 82.0 77.0 
17 ..................................... ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ 95.6 90.3 85.4 80.6 
18 ..................................... ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ 98.6 93.3 88.4 83.9 
19 ..................................... ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ 96.1 91.3 86.8 
20 ..................................... ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ 98.7 94.0 89.5 
21 ..................................... ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ 96.5 92.1 
22 ..................................... ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ 98.9 94.5 
23 ..................................... ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ 96.8 
24 ..................................... ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ ............ 98.9 
* * * * * 
■12. Amend Method 4 in Appendix A– 
3 to part 60 by revising Figure 4–3 to 
read as follows: Appendix A–3 to Part 60—Test 
Methods 4 Through 5I 
* * * * * Method 4—Determination of Moisture 
Content in Stack Gases 
* * * * * 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:09 Apr 25, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26APP1.SGM 26APP1jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS124497 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 26, 2022 / Proposed Rules 
* * * * * 
■13. Amend Appendix A–4 to part 60 
by revising section 10.1.3 in Method 7 
of to read as follows: 
Appendix A–4 to Part 60—Test 
Methods 6 Through 10B 
* * * * * 
Method 7—Determination of Nitrogen Oxide 
Emissions From Stationary Sources 
* * * * * 
10.1.3 Spectrophotometer Calibration 
Quality Control. Multiply the absorbance 
value obtained for each standard by the K c 
factor (reciprocal of the least squares slope) to determine the distance each calibration 
point lies from the theoretical calibration line. The difference between the calculated concentration values and the actual concentrations (i.e., 100, 200, 300, and 400 mg 
NO
2) shall be less than 7 percent for all 
standards. 
* * * * * 
■16. Amend Appendix A–7 to part 60 
by: 
■a. In Method 19, revising Equation 19– 
5; 
■b. In Method 25, adding sections 12.9 
and 12.9.1 through 12.9.16, and revising 
Figure 25–6; and ■c. In Method 25C, revising section 
12.1. 
The revisions and additions read as 
follows: 
Appendix A–7 to Part 60—Test 
Methods 19 Through 25E 
* * * * * 
Method 19—Determination of Sulfur Dioxide 
Removal Efficiency and Particulate Matter, Sulfur Dioxide, and Nitrogen Oxide Emission Rates 
* * * * * 
* * * * * 
Method 25—Determination of Total Gaseous 
Nonmethane Organic Emissions As Carbon 
* * * * * 
12.9 Record and Report Initial Method 
Checks as follows: 
12.9.1 Calibration and Linearity Check Gas 
Certifications (Section 7.2 and 7.4) 
12.9.2 Condensate Trap Blank Check 
(Section 8.1.1) 
12.9.3 Pretest Leak-Check (Section 8.1.4) 12.9.4 Condensate Recovery Apparatus 
(Section 10.1.1) 
12.9.5 Carrier Gas and Auxiliary O 2Blank 
Check (Section 10.1.1.1) 
12.9.6 Oxidation Catalyst Efficiency Check. 
(Section 10.1.1.2) 
12.9.7 System Performance Check. 
(Section10.1.1.3) 
12.9.8 Oxidation Catalyst Efficiency Check. 
(Section 10.1.2.1) 
12.9.9 Reduction Catalyst Efficiency Check 
(Section 10.1.2.2) 12.9.10 NMO Analyzer Linearity Check 
Calibration. (Section 10.1.2.3) 
12.9.11 NMO Analyzer Daily Calibration. 
(Section 10.2) 
12.9.12 Condensate Recovery. (Section 
11.1) 
12.9.13 Daily Performance Checks. (Section 
11.1.1) 
12.9.14 Leak-Check. (Section 11.1.1.1) 
12.9.15 System Background Test. (Section 
11.1.1.2) 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:09 Apr 25, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26APP1.SGM 26APP1
EP26AP22.078</GPH> EP26AP22.079</GPH>jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS124498 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 26, 2022 / Proposed Rules 
12.9.16 Oxidation Catalyst Efficiency 
Check. (Section 11.1.1.3) 
* * * * * 
* * * * * 
Method 25C—Determination of Nonmethane 
Organic Compounds (NMOC) in Landfill Gases 
* * * * * 
12.1 Nomenclature. 
* * * * * 
CN2= N 2concentration in the landfill gas 
sample CmN2= Measured N 2concentration, diluted 
landfill gas sample 
* * * * * 
■17. In Appendix A–8 to part 60: 
■a. Revise sections 12.4 and 12.5 in 
Method 26. 
■b. Revise section 13.8 in Test Method 
28WHH. 
The revisions read as follows: Appendix A–8 to Part 60—Test 
Methods 26 Through 30B 
* * * * * 
Method 26—Determination of Hydrogen 
Halide and Halogen Emissions From Stationary Sources Non-Isokinetic Method 
* * * * * 
12.4 Total ug HCl, HBr, or HF Per 
Sample. 
12.5 Total ug Cl 2or Br 2Per Sample. 
* * * * * Test Method 28WHH for Measurement of 
Particulate Emissions and Heating Efficiency of Wood-Fired Hydronic Heating Appliances 
* * * * * 13.8 Carbon Monoxide Emissions. 
For each minute of the test period, the 
carbon monoxide emissions rate (g/min) shall be calculated as: 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:09 Apr 25, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26APP1.SGM 26APP1
EP26AP22.080</GPH> EP26AP22.081</GPH> EP26AP22.082</GPH>jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS124499 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 26, 2022 / Proposed Rules 
Total CO emissions for each of the four test 
periods (CO_ 1, CO_ 2, CO_ 3, CO_ 4) shall be 
calculated as the sum of the emissions rates 
for each of the 1-minute intervals. 
Total CO emissions for the test run, CO T, 
shall be calculated as the sum of CO_ 1, CO_ 2, 
CO_ 3and CO_ 4. 
* * * * * 
■18. Amend Appendix B to part 60 by: 
■a. In Performance Specification 1, 
revising sections 2.1, 3.1, 6.1, 8.1(1), 
8.1(2)(iii), 8.1(3)(ii), 8.2(1), 8.2(2), 8.2(3), 9.0, 12.1, 13.1, 13.2, and 16.0 reference 8; 
■b. In Performance Specification 2, 
revising sections 8.3.3 and 12.5; 
■c. Revising Performance Specification 
4B; 
■d. In Performance Specification 6, 
revising section 13.2; 
■e. In Performance Specification 12A, 
revising sections 8.4.2, 8.4.4, 8.4.5, 8.4.6.1, 13.3, 17.5, and footnote to Figure 12A–3; 
■f. In Performance Specification 16, 
revising sections 1.1, 3.11, 3.12, 9.1, 9.4, 12.3.2, 13.1, and 13.5. 
The revisions read as follows: 
Appendix B to Part 60—Performance Specifications 
* * * * * 
Performance Specification 1—Specifications 
and Test Procedures for Continuous Opacity Monitoring Systems in Stationary Sources 
* * * * * 
2.1 ASTM D6216 (IBR, see § 60.17) is the 
reference for design specifications, manufacturer’s performance specifications, and test procedures. The opacity monitor manufacturer must periodically select and test an opacity monitor, that is representative of a group of monitors produced during a specified period or lot, for conformance with the design specifications in ASTM D6216. The opacity monitor manufacturer must test each opacity monitor for conformance with the manufacturer’s performance specifications in ASTM D6216. Note: If the initial certification of the opacity monitor occurred before [the effective date of the final rule] using ASTM D6216–98, D6216–03, D6216–07, or D6216–12, it is not necessary to recertify using ASTM D6216–20. 
* * * * * 
3.1 All definitions and discussions from 
section 3 of ASTM D6216 are applicable to PS–1. 
* * * * * 
6.1 Continuous Opacity Monitoring 
System. You, as owner or operator, are 
responsible for purchasing an opacity monitor that meets the specifications of ASTM D6216, including a suitable data recorder or automated data acquisition handling system. Example data recorders include an analog strip chart recorder or more appropriately an electronic data acquisition and reporting system with an 
input signal range compatible with the analyzer output. 
* * * * * 
8.1 * * * (1) You must purchase an opacity monitor 
that complies with ASTM D6216 and obtain a certificate of conformance from the opacity monitor manufacturer. 
(2) * * * (iii) Alternative Locations and Light Beam 
Paths. You may select locations and light beam paths, other than those cited above, if you demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the Administrator or delegated agent, that the average opacity measured at the alternative location or path is equivalent to the opacity as measured at a location meeting the criteria of sections 8.1(2)(i) and 8.1(2)(ii). The opacity at the alternative location is considered equivalent if {1} the average opacity value 
measured at the alternative location is within ±10 percent of the average opacity value measured at the location meeting the installation criteria, and {2} the difference 
between any two average opacity values is less than 2 percent opacity (absolute). You use the following procedure to conduct this demonstration: Simultaneously measure the opacities at the two locations or paths for a minimum period of time (e.g., 180-minutes) 
covering the range of normal operating conditions and compare the results. You may use alternative procedures for determining acceptable locations if those procedures are approved by the Administrator. 
(3) * * * (ii) Calibration Error Check. Conduct a 
three-point calibration error test using three calibration attenuators that produce outlet pathlength corrected, single-pass opacity 
values shown in ASTM D6216, section 7.5. If your applicable limit is less than 10 percent opacity, use attenuators as described in ASTM D6216, section 7.5 for applicable standards of 10 to 19 percent opacity. Confirm the external audit device produces the proper zero value on the COMS data recorder. Separately, insert each calibration attenuators (low, mid, and high-level) into the external audit device. While inserting each attenuator, {1} ensure that the entire 
light beam passes through the attenuator, {2} minimize interference from reflected light, and {3} leave the attenuator in place for at 
least two times the shortest recording interval on the COMS data recorder. Make a total of five nonconsecutive readings for each attenuator. At the end of the test, correlate each attenuator insertion to the corresponding value from the data recorder. Subtract the single-pass calibration attenuator values corrected to the stack exit conditions from the COMS responses. Calculate the arithmetic mean difference, standard deviation, and confidence coefficient of the five measurements value using equations 1–3, 1–4, and 1–5. Calculate the calibration error as the sum of the absolute value of the mean difference and the 95 percent confidence coefficient for each of the three test attenuators using equation 1– 6. Report the calibration error test results for 
each of the three attenuators. 
* * * * * 
8.2 * * * (1) Conduct the verification procedures for 
design specifications in section 6 of ASTM D6216. 
(2) Conduct the verification procedures for 
performance specifications in section 7 of ASTM D6216. 
(3) Provide to the owner or operator, a 
report of the opacity monitor’s conformance to the design and performance specifications required in sections 6 and 7 of ASTM D6216 in accordance with the reporting requirements of section 9 in ASTM D6216. 
9.0 What quality control measures are 
required by PS–1? 
Opacity monitor manufacturers must 
initiate a quality program following the requirements of ASTM D6216, section 8. The quality program must include: 
(1) A quality system and (2) A corrective action program. 
* * * * * 
12.1 Desired Attenuator Values. Calculate 
the desired attenuator value corrected to the emission outlet pathlength as follows: 
Where: 
OP 1= Nominal opacity value of required 
low-, mid-, or high-range calibration 
attenuators. 
OP 2= Desired attenuator opacity value from 
ASTM D6216, section 7.5 at the opacity limit required by the applicable subpart. 
L
1= Monitoring pathlength. 
L2= Emission outlet pathlength. 
* * * * * 
13.1 Design Specifications. The opacity 
monitoring equipment must comply with the design specifications of ASTM D6216. 
13.2 Manufacturer’s Performance 
Specifications. The opacity monitor must comply with the manufacturer’s performance specifications of ASTM D6216. 
* * * * * 
16.0 * * * 8. ASTM D6216–20: Standard Practice for 
Opacity Monitor Manufacturers to Certify Conformance with Design and Performance Specifications. ASTM. September 2020. 
* * * * * 
Performance Specification 2—Specifications and Test Procedures for SO
2and NO X 
Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems in Stationary Sources 
* * * * * 
8.3.3 Conduct the CD test at the two 
points specified in section 6.1.2. Introduce to the CEMS the reference gases, gas cells, or optical filters (these need not be certified). When using reference gases, introduce the reference gas prior to any sample conditioning or filtration equipment and ensure that it passes through all filters, 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:09 Apr 25, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26APP1.SGM 26APP1
EP26AP22.083</GPH> EP26AP22.084</GPH>jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS124500 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 26, 2022 / Proposed Rules 
scrubbers, conditioners, and other monitor 
components used during normal sampling. The reference gas should pass through as much of the sampling probe as practical. Record the CEMS response and subtract this 
value from the reference value (see example 
data sheet in Figure 2–1). 
* * * * * 12.5 Relative Accuracy. Calculate the RA, 
expressed as a percentage, of a set of data as 
follows: 
Where: 
|d| = Absolute value of the mean differences 
(from Equation 2–3). 
|CC| = Absolute value of the confidence 
coefficient (from Equation 2–3). 
RM= Average RM value. In cases where the 
average emissions for the test are less 
than 50 percent of the applicable emission standard, substitute the applicable emission standard value in the denominator of Eq. 2–6 in place of the average RM value. In all other cases, use 
RM. 
* * * * * 
Performance Specification 4B— 
Specifications and Test Procedures for Carbon Monoxide and Oxygen Continuous Monitoring Systems in Stationary Sources 
1.0 Scope and Application 
Analytes 
Analyte CAS No. 
Carbon Monoxide (CO) ........ 630–08–0 
Oxygen (O 2) ......................... 7782–44–7 
Applicability 
This specification is to be used for 
evaluating the acceptability of carbon 
monoxide (CO) and oxygen (O 2) continuous 
emission monitoring systems (CEMS) at the time of or soon after installation and whenever specified in the regulations. The CEMS may include, for certain stationary sources, (a) flow monitoring equipment to allow measurement of the dry volume of stack effluent sampled, and (b) an automatic sampling system. 
This specification is not designed to 
evaluate the installed CEMS’ performance over an extended period of time, nor does it identify specific calibration techniques and auxiliary procedures to assess the CEMS’ performance. The source owner or operator, however, is responsible to properly calibrate, maintain, and operate the CEMS. To evaluate the CEMS’ performance, the Administrator may require, under section 114 of the Act, the operator to conduct CEMS performance evaluations at times other than the initial test. 
The definitions, installation and 
measurement location specifications, test procedures, data reduction procedures, reporting requirements, and bibliography are the same as in PS 3 (for O
2) and PS 4A (for 
CO) except as otherwise noted below. 
Summary of Performance Specification 
Installation and measurement location 
specifications, performance specifications, 
test procedures, and data reduction procedures are included in this specification. Reference method tests, calibration error 
tests, calibration drift tests, and interferant tests are conducted to determine conformance of the CEMS with the specification. 
Definitions 
The definitions are the same as in section 
3.0 of PS2 with the following definitions 
added: 
Continuous Emission Monitoring System 
(CEMS). This definition is the same as PS 2 
section 3.0 with the following addition. A continuous monitor is one in which the sample to be analyzed passes the measurement section of the analyzer without interruption. 
Response Time (RT). The time interval 
between the start of a step change in the system input and when the pollutant analyzer output reaches 95 percent of the 
final value. 
Calibration Error (CE). The difference 
between the concentration indicated by the CEMS and the known concentration generated by a calibration source when the entire CEMS, including the sampling interface is challenged. A CE test procedure is performed to document the accuracy and linearity of the CEMS over the entire measurement range. 
Interferences [Reserved] Safety 
This performance specification may 
involve hazardous materials, operations, and 
equipment. This performance specification may not address all of the safety problems associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicable regulatory limitations prior to performing this performance specification. The CEMS user’s manual should be consulted for specific precautions to be taken with regard to the analytical procedures. 
Equipment and Supplies 
Same as section 6.0 of PS 2, except for the 
following: 
Data Recorder Scale. For O
2, same as 
specified in PS 3, except that the span must 
be 25 percent. The span of the O 2may be 
higher if the O 2concentration at the sampling 
point can be greater than 25 percent. For CO, same as specified in PS 4A, except that the low-range span must be 200 ppm and the high range span must be 3000 ppm. In addition, the scale for both CEMS must record all readings within a measurement range with a resolution of 0.5 percent. Reagents and Standards 
Sample Collection, Preservation, Storage, 
and Transport 
Installation and Measurement Location 
Specifications 
The CEMS Installation. This specification 
is the same as PS 2 section 8.1.1 with the 
following additions. Both the CO and O
2 
monitors should be installed at the same 
general location. If this is not possible, they may be installed at different locations if the effluent gases at both sample locations are not stratified and there is no in-leakage of air between sampling locations. 
Measurement Location. Same as PS 2 
section 8.1.2. 
Point CEMS. The measurement point 
should be within or centrally located over the centroidal area of the stack or duct cross section. 
Path CEMS. The effective measurement 
path should: (1) Have at least 70 percent of the path within the inner 50 percent of the stack or duct cross sectional area, or (2) be centrally located over any part of the centroidal area. 
Reference Method (RM) Measurement 
Location and Traverse Points 
This specification is the same as PS 2 
section 8.1.3 with the following additions. 
When pollutant concentration changes are due solely to diluent leakage and CO and O
2 
are simultaneously measured at the same location, one half diameter may be used in place of two equivalent diameters. 
Pretest Preparation. Install the CEMS, 
prepare the RM test site according to the specifications in section 8.1, and prepare the CEMS for operation according to the manufacturer’s written instructions. 
Stratification Test Procedure. Stratification 
is defined as the difference in excess of 10 percent between the average concentration in the duct or stack and the concentration at any point more than 1.0 meter from the duct or stack wall. To determine whether effluent stratification exists, a dual probe system should be used to determine the average effluent concentration while measurements at each traverse point are being made. One probe, located at the stack or duct centroid, is used as a stationary reference point to indicate change in the effluent concentration over time. The second probe is used for sampling at the traverse points specified in Method 1 (40 CFR part 60 appendix A). The monitoring system samples sequentially at the reference and traverse points throughout the testing period for five minutes at each point. 
Calibration Drift Test Procedure. Same as 
section 8.3 in PS 2. 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:09 Apr 25, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26APP1.SGM 26APP1
EP26AP22.085</GPH>jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS124501 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 26, 2022 / Proposed Rules 
Note: The CE and RT tests must be 
conducted during the CD test period. 
Calibration Error Test Procedure. Challenge 
each monitor (both low and high range CO 
and O 2) with zero gas and EPA Protocol 1 
cylinder gases at three measurement points within the ranges specified in Table 4B–1 (in section 18.0). 
Operate each monitor in its normal 
sampling mode as nearly as possible. The calibration gas must be injected into the sample system as close to the sampling probe outlet as practical and should pass through all CEMS components used during normal sampling. Challenge the CEMS three non- consecutive times at each measurement point and record the responses. The duration of each gas injection should be sufficient to ensure that the CEMS surfaces are conditioned. 
Response Time Test Procedure. Same as 
section 8.3 in PS 4A and must be carried out for both the CO and O
2monitors. 
Relative Accuracy Test Procedure. 
Sampling Strategy for Reference Method (RM) Tests, Number of RM Tests, and Correlation of RM and CEMS Data are the same as PS 2, sections 8.4.3, 8.4.4, and 8.4.5, respectively. 
Quality Control [Reserved] Calibration and Standardization [Reserved] Analytical Procedure 
Sample collection and analysis are 
concurrent for this Performance Specification 
(see section 8.0). Refer to the RM for specific analytical procedures. 
Calculation and Data Analysis 
Summarize the results on a data sheet as 
shown in Figure 4B–1 (in section 18.0). Calibration Error (CE) is the average the 
differences between the instrument response 
and the certified cylinder gas value for each gas. Calculate the CE results for the CO monitor according to: 
Where: 
d = mean difference between the CEMS 
response and the known reference 
concentration, and 
FS = span value. 
The CE for the O 2monitor is the average 
percent O 2difference between the O 2monitor 
and the certified cylinder gas value for each gas. 
Method Performance 
Calibration Drift Performance 
Specification. For O
2, same as specified in PS 
3. For CO, the same as specified in PS 4A 
except that the CEMS calibration must not drift from the reference value of the calibration standard by more than 3 percent of the span value on either the high or low range. 
Calibration Error (CE) Performance 
Specification. The mean difference between the CEMS and reference values at all three test points (see Table 4B–1) must be no greater than 5 percent of span value for CO monitors and 0.5 percent for O
2monitors. 
Response Time Performance Specification. 
The response time for the CO or O 2monitor 
must not exceed 240 seconds. 
Relative Accuracy (RA) Performance 
Specification. For O 2, same as specified in PS 
3. For CO, the same as specified in PS 4A. Pollution Prevention [Reserved] 
Waste Management [Reserved] Alternative Procedure 
Alternative RA Procedure. Under some 
operating conditions, it may not be possible 
to obtain meaningful results using the RA test procedure. This includes conditions where consistent, very low CO emission or low CO emissions interrupted periodically by short duration, high level spikes are observed. It may be appropriate in these circumstances to waive the RA test and substitute the following procedure. 
Conduct a complete CEMS status check 
following the manufacturer’s written instructions. The check should include operation of the light source, signal receiver, timing mechanism functions, data acquisition and data reduction functions, data recorders, mechanically operated functions, sample filters, sample line heaters, moisture traps, and other related functions of the CEMS, as applicable. All parts of the CEMS must be functioning properly before the RA requirement can be waived. The instrument must also successfully pass the CE and CD specifications. Substitution of the alternate procedure requires approval of the Regional Administrator. 
Reference 
40 CFR part 266, Appendix IX, section 2, 
‘‘Performance Specifications for Continuous 
Emission Monitoring Systems.’’ 
Tables, Diagrams, Flowcharts, and 
Validation Data 
TABLE 4B–1—C ALIBRATION ERROR CONCENTRATION RANGE  
Measurement point CO Low range 
(ppm) CO High range 
(ppm) O2 
(%) 
1 .............................................................................................................................. ......... 0–40 0–600 0–2 
2 .............................................................................................................................. ......... 60–80 900–1,200 8–10 
3 .............................................................................................................................. ......... 140–160 2,100–2,400 14–16 
FIGURE 4B–1—C ALIBRATION ERROR DATASHEET  
Run No. Calibration 
value Monitor 
response Difference 
Zero Mid High 
1-Zero.
2-Mid.
3-High.
4-Mid.
5-Zero.
6-High.
7-Zero.
8-Mid.
9-High.
Mean Difference = 
Calibration Error = % % % 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:09 Apr 25, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26APP1.SGM 26APP1
EP26AP22.086</GPH>jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS124502 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 26, 2022 / Proposed Rules 
* * * * * 
Performance Specification 6—Specifications 
and Test Procedures for Continuous Emission Rate Monitoring Systems in Stationary Sources 
* * * * * 
13.2 CERMS Relative Accuracy. Calculate 
the CERMS Relative Accuracy (RA) 
expressed as a percentage using Eq. 2–6 of section 12 of Performance Specification 2. The RA of the CERMS shall be no greater than 20.0 percent in terms of the units of the emission standard. If the average emissions for the test are less than 50 percent of the applicable emission standard, substitute the 
applicable emission standard value in the denominator of Eq. 2–6 in place of the average RM value; in this case, the RA of the CERMS shall be no greater than 10.0 percent consistent with section 13.2 of Performance Specification 2. 
* * * * * 
Performance Specification 12A— 
Specifications and Test Procedures for Total Vapor Phase Mercury Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems in Stationary Sources 
* * * * * 
8.4.2 Reference Methods (RM). Unless 
otherwise specified in an applicable subpart 
of the regulations, use Method 29, Method 30A, or Method 30B in appendix A–8 to this part or ASTM D6784 (IBR, see § 60.17) as the RM for Hg concentration. For Method 29 and ASTM D6784 only, the filterable portion of the sample need not be included when making comparisons to the CEMS results. When Method 29, Method 30B, or ASTM 
D6784–16 is used, conduct the RM test runs with paired or duplicate sampling systems and use the average of the vapor phase Hg concentrations measured by the two trains. When Method 30A is used, paired sampling systems are not required. If the RM and CEMS measure on a different moisture basis, data derived with Method 4 in appendix A– 3 to this part must also be obtained during the RA test. 
* * * * * 
8.4.4 Number and Length of RM Test 
Runs. Conduct a minimum of nine RM test 
runs. When Method 29, Method 30B, or ASTM D6784 is used, only test runs for which the paired RM trains meet the relative deviation criteria (RD) of this PS must be used in the RA calculations. In addition, for Method 29 and ASTM D6784, use a minimum sample time of 2 hours and for Methods 30A and 30B use a minimum sample time of 30 minutes. 
* * * * * 
8.4.5 Correlation of RM and CEMS Data. 
Correlate the CEMS and the RM test data as to the time and duration by first determining from the CEMS final output (the one used for reporting) the integrated average pollutant concentration for each RM test period. Consider system response time, if important, and confirm that the results are on a consistent moisture basis with the RM test. Then, compare each integrated CEMS value against the corresponding RM value. When Method 29, Method 30B, or ASTM D6784 is used, compare each CEMS value against the corresponding average of the paired RM 
values. 
* * * * * 
8.4.6.1 When Method 29, Method 30B, or 
ASTM D6784 is used, outliers are identified through the determination of relative 
deviation (RD) of the paired RM tests. Data that do not meet the RD criteria must be flagged as a data quality problem and may not be used in the calculation of RA. The primary reason for performing paired RM sampling is to ensure the quality of the RM data. The percent RD of paired data is the parameter used to quantify data quality. Determine RD for paired data points as follows: Where: Ca and Cb are the Hg concentration values determined from the paired samples. 
* * * * * 
13.3 Relative Accuracy (RA). The RA of 
the CEMS must be no greater than 20 percent of the mean value of the RM test data in terms of units of mg/scm. Alternatively, if the mean RM is less than 2.5 mg/scm, the results are acceptable if the absolute value of the difference between the mean RM and CEMS values added to the absolute value of the confidence coefficient from Equation 12A–7 does not exceed 0.5 mg/scm. 
* * * * * 
17.5 ASTM D6784–16, ‘‘Standard Test 
Method for Elemental, Oxidized, Particle- Bound and Total Mercury in Flue Gas Generated from Coal-Fired Stationary Sources (Ontario Hydro Method).’’ 
* * * * * 
FIGURE 12A–3—R ELATIVE ACCURACY TESTDATA 
Run 
No. Date Begin time End time RM value 
(μg/m3) CEMS value 
(μg/m3) Difference 
(μg/m3) Run used? 
(yes/no) RD1 
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Average Values 
Arithmetic Mean Difference: 
Standard Deviation: 
Confidence Coefficient: T-Value: % Relative Accuracy: (RM)
avg¥(CEMS) avg: 
1Calculate the RD only if paired samples are taken using RM 30B, RM 29, or ASTM D6784. Express RD as a percentage or, for very low RM 
concentrations (≤1.0 μg/m3), as the absolute difference between C aand C b. 
* * * * * Performance Specification 16— 
Specifications and Test Procedures for Predictive Emission Monitoring Systems in Stationary Sources 
* * * * * 1.1 Does this performance specification 
apply to me? If you, the source owner or 
operator, intend to use (with any necessary approvals) a predictive emission monitoring system (PEMS) to show compliance with 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:09 Apr 25, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26APP1.SGM 26APP1jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS124503 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 26, 2022 / Proposed Rules 
your emission limitation under 40 CFR parts 
60, 61, or 63, you must use the procedures in this performance specification (PS) to determine whether your PEMS is acceptable for use in demonstrating compliance with 
applicable requirements. Use these procedures to certify your PEMS after initial installation and periodically thereafter to ensure the PEMS is operating properly. If your PEMS contains a diluent (O
2or CO 2) 
measuring component, the diluent component must be tested as well. These 
specifications apply to PEMS that are 
installed under 40 CFR parts 60, 61, and 63 after the effective date of this performance specification. 
* * * * * 
3.11 Relative Accuracy Audit (RAA) 
means a quarterly audit of the PEMS against a portable analyzer meeting the requirements of ASTM D6522–00 or a RM for a specified number of runs. A RM may be used in place 
of the portable analyzer for the RAA. 
3.12 Relative Accuracy Test Audit 
(RATA) means a RA test that is performed at 
least once every four calendar quarters after the initial certification test. The RATA shall be conducted as described in section 8.2. 
* * * * * 
9.1 QA/QC Summary. Conduct the 
applicable ongoing tests listed below. 
ONGOING QUALITY ASSURANCE TESTS  
Test PEMS 
regulatory 
purpose Acceptability Frequency 
Sensor Evaluation ........................... All ................... ........................................................ Daily . 
RAA ................................................. All ................... Same as for RA in Sec. 13.5 ........ Each quarter except quarter when RATA performed. 
RATA ............................................... All ................... Same as for RA in Sec. 13.1 ........ Yearly in quarter when RAA not performed. 
Bias Correction ............................... All ................... If d avg≤ |cc| .................................... Bias test passed (no correction factor needed). 
PEMS Training ................................ All ................... If F critical ≥F, r ≥0.8 ........................ Optional after initial and subsequent RATAs. 
Sensor Evaluation Alert Test (op-
tional).All ................... See Section 6.1.8 .......................... After each PEMS training. 
* * * * * 
9.4 Yearly Relative Accuracy Test Audit. 
Perform a minimum 9-run RATA as specified by section 8.2 on a yearly basis in the quarter that the RAA is not performed. 
* * * * * 
12.3.2 F-test. Conduct an F-test for each 
of the three RA data sets collected at different test levels. Calculate the variances of the PEMS and the RM using Equation 16–6. 
Determine if the variance of the PEMS data 
is significantly different from that of the RM data at each level by calculating the F-value using Equation 16–7. 
Compare the calculated F-value with the 
critical value of F at the 95 percent confidence level with n–1 degrees of freedom. The critical value is obtained from Table 16–2 or a similar table for F- distribution. If the calculated F-value is greater than the critical value at any level, your proposed PEMS is unacceptable. 
* * * * * 
13.1 PEMS Relative Accuracy. The RA, 
calculated in units of the emission standard, must not exceed 10 percent if the PEMS measurements are greater than 100 ppm or 0.2 lbs/mm Btu. The RA must not exceed 20 percent if the PEMS measurements are 
between 100 ppm (or 0.2 lb/mm Btu) and 10 ppm (or 0.02 lb/mm Btu). For measurements below 10 ppm (or 0.02 lb/mm Btu), the absolute mean difference between the PEMS measurements and the RM measurements must not exceed 2 ppm (or 0.01 lb/mm Btu). For diluent only PEMS, an alternative criterion of ±1 percent absolute difference between the PEMS and RM may be used if 
less stringent. 
* * * * * 
13.5 Relative Accuracy Audits (RAA). 
The average of the three portable analyzer or RM determinations must not differ from the simultaneous PEMS average value by more than 10 percent of the analyzer or RM for concentrations greater than 100 ppm (or 0.2 lb/mm Btu) or 20 percent for concentrations between 100 ppm (or 0.2 lb/mm Btu) and 20 ppm (or 0.04 lb/mm Btu), or the test is failed. For measurements at 20 ppm (or 0.04 lb/mm Btu) or less, this difference must not exceed 2 ppm (or 0.01 lb/mm Btu) for a pollutant PEMS. For diluent PEMS, the difference must not exceed 1 percent. 
* * * * * 
■19. Amend Appendix F to part 60 by: 
■a. In Procedure 1, by revising sections 
4.1, 5.2.3, and 6.2; and 
■b. In Procedure 5, by revising sections 
2.5, 4.0, adding section 4.4, and revising 
section 5.1.3. 
The revisions and addition read as 
follows: 
Appendix F to Part 60—Quality 
Assurance Procedures 
Procedure 1—Quality Assurance 
Requirements for Gas Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems Used for Compliance Determination 
* * * * * 
4.1 CD Requirement. As described in 40 
CFR 60.13(d), source owners and operators of 
CEMS must check, record, and quantify the CD at two concentration values at least once daily (approximately 24 hours) in accordance with the method prescribed by the 
manufacturer. When using reference gases, introduce the reference gas prior to any sample conditioning or filtration equipment and ensure that it passes through all filters, scrubbers, conditioners, and other monitor components used during normal sampling. The reference gas must pass through as much of the sampling probe as practical. The CEMS 
calibration must, as minimum, be adjusted whenever the daily zero (or low-level) CD or the daily high-level CD exceeds two times the limits of the applicable PS’s in appendix B of this regulation. 
* * * * * 
5.2.3 * * * (1) * * * (2) For the CGA, for pollutant monitors, the 
audit inaccuracy must be ±15 percent of the average audit value as calculated using Equation 1–1 or the difference between the average CEMS response and the average audit value must be less than one of the following: 
Analyzer span Alternative CGA 
criteria 
(ppm) 
≥50 ppm ........................................ ±5 
>20 ppm, but ≤50 ppm .................. ±3 
≤20 ppm ........................................ +2 
For diluent monitors, ±15 percent of the 
average audit value. 
(3) For the RAA, ±15 percent of the three- 
run average or ±7.5 percent of the applicable 
standard, whichever is greater. 
* * * * * 
6.2 RAA Accuracy Calculation. Use 
Equation 1–1 to calculate the accuracy for the RAA. The RAA must be calculated in the units of the applicable emission standard. 
* * * * * 
Procedure 5—Quality Assurance Requirements for Vapor Phase Mercury Continuous Emissions Monitoring Systems and Sorbent Trap Monitoring Systems Used for Compliance Determination at Stationary Sources 
* * * * * 
2.5 Calibration Drift (CD) means the 
absolute value of the difference between the CEMS output response and either the upscale elemental Hg reference gas or the zero-level elemental Hg reference gas, expressed as a percentage of the span value, when the entire 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:09 Apr 25, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26APP1.SGM 26APP1
EP26AP22.087</GPH> EP26AP22.088</GPH>jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS124504 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 26, 2022 / Proposed Rules 
CEMS, including the sampling interface, is 
challenged after a stated period of operation during which no unscheduled maintenance, repair, or adjustment took place. 
* * * * * 
4.0 Calibration Drift (CD) Assessment and Weekly System Integrity Check 
* * * * * 
4.4 Weekly System Integrity Check. At 
least once every 7 calendar days, using the procedure described in section 8.3.3 of Performance Specification 12A in appendix B to this part, source owners and operators of Hg CEMS must use a single mid- or high- level oxidized Hg (mercuric chloride, HgCl
2) 
reference gas to assess transport and measurement of oxidized mercury. The absolute value of the difference between the Hg CEMS output response and the reference gas value, as a percentage of span, must not be greater than 10.0 percent. 
* * * * * 
5.1.3 Relative Accuracy Audit (RAA). As 
an alternative to the QGA, a RAA may be conducted in three of four calendar quarters, but in no more than three quarters in succession. To conduct a RAA, follow the RATA test procedures in section 8.5 of PS 12A in appendix B to this part, except that only three test runs are required. Calculate the relative accuracy according to Equation 1–1 of Procedure 1 of this appendix. 
* * * * * 
PART 63—NATIONAL EMISSION 
STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES 
■20. The authority citation for part 63 
continues to read as follows: 
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 
■21. In § 63.14: 
■a. Revise paragraph (a); 
■b. Redesignate paragraphs (d) through 
(t) as paragraphs (e) through (u); 
■c. Add new paragraph (d); 
■d. Revise newly redesignated 
paragraph (i)(102); 
■e. Redesignate newly redesignated 
paragraphs (i)(103) through (116) as paragraphs (i)(104) through (117); and 
■f. Add new paragraph (i)(103). 
The revisions and addition read as 
follows: 
§ 63.14 Incorporation by reference. 
(a) The materials listed in this section 
are incorporated by reference into this part with the approval of the Director of the Federal Register under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. To enforce any edition other than that specified in this section, EPA must publish a document in the Federal Register and the material must be available to the public. All approved materials are available for inspection at the EPA and the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). Contact EPA at: Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center (Air Docket) in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC) at Rm. 3334, EPA West Bldg., 1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room hours of operation are 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number of the EPA/DC Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, and the telephone number for the Air Docket is (202) 566– 1742. For information on the availability of this material at NARA, email fr.inspection@nara.gov or go to 
www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ ibr-locations.html. The material may be 
obtained from the source(s) in the following paragraph(s) of this section. 
* * * * * 
(d) American Public Health 
Association, 1015 15th Street NW, 
Washington, DC 20005; phone: (844) 232–3707; email: standardmethods@subscritpionoffice.com; website: www.standardmethods.org. Standard 
Methods (Online) For the Examination of Water and Wastewater: 
(1) 5210B (Method 5210B); 
Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD), 2019; IBR approved for § 63.457(c). 
(2) [Reserved] 
* * * * * 
(i) * * * 
(102) ASTM D6784–02 (Reapproved 
2008), Standard Test Method for 
Elemental, Oxidized, Particle-Bound and Total Mercury in Flue Gas Generated from Coal-Fired Stationary Sources (Ontario Hydro Method), Approved April 1, 2008; IBR approved for §§ 63.2465(d); 63.11646(a); 63.11647(a) and (d); tables 1, 2, 5, 11, 12t, and 13 to subpart DDDDD; tables 4 and 5 to subpart JJJJJ; tables 4 and 6 to subpart KKKKK; table 4 to subpart JJJJJJ. 
(103) ASTM D6784–16, Standard Test 
Method for Elemental, Oxidized, Particle-Bound and Total Mercury in Flue Gas Generated from Coal-Fired Stationary Sources (Ontario Hydro Method), 2016; IBR approved for table 5 to subpart UUUUU appendix A to subpart UUUUU. 
* * * * * 
Subpart S—National Emission 
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants from the Pulp and Paper Industry 
■22. In § 63.457, revise paragraph (c)(4) 
to read as follows: 
§ 63.457 Test methods and procedures. 
* * * * * 
(c) * * * 
(4) To determine soluble BOD 5in the 
effluent stream from an open biological 
treatment unit used to comply with §§ 63.446(e)(2) and 63.453(j), the owner or operator shall use Method 5210B (IBR, see § 63.14) with the following modifications: 
(i) Filter the sample through the filter 
paper, into an Erlenmeyer flask by applying a vacuum to the flask sidearm. Minimize the time for which vacuum is applied to prevent stripping of volatile organics from the sample. Replace filter paper as often as needed in order to maintain filter times of less than approximately 30 seconds per filter paper. No rinsing of sample container or filter bowl into the Erlenmeyer flask is allowed. 
(ii) Perform Method 5210B on the 
filtrate obtained in paragraph (c)(4) of this section. Dilution water shall be seeded with 1 milliliter of final effluent per liter of dilution water. Dilution ratios may require adjustment to reflect the lower oxygen demand of the filtered sample in comparison to the total BOD
5. 
Three BOD bottles and different dilutions shall be used for each sample. 
* * * * * 
Subpart EEE—National Emission 
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants From Hazardous Waste Combustors 
■23. In Appendix to Subpart EEE of 
part 63 revise section 5, remove section 5.3 and redesignate section 5.4 as new section 5.3. to read as follows: 
Appendix to Subpart EEE of Part 63— 
Quality Assurance Procedures for Continuous Emissions Monitors Used for Hazardous Waste Combustors 
* * * * * 
5. Performance Evaluation for CO, O 2, and 
HC CEMS 
Carbon Monoxide (CO), Oxygen (O 2), and 
Hydrocarbon (HC) CEMS. An Absolute 
Calibration Audit (ACA) must be conducted quarterly, and a Relative Accuracy Test Audit (RATA) (if applicable, see sections 5.1 and 5.2) must be conducted yearly. When a performance test is also required under § 63.1207 to document compliance with emission standards, the RATA must coincide with the performance test. The audits must be conducted as follows. 
5.1 Relative Accuracy Test Audit (RATA). 
This requirement applies to O
2and CO 
CEMS. The RATA must be conducted at least yearly. Conduct the RATA as described in the RA test procedure (or alternate procedures section) described in the applicable Performance Specifications. In addition, analyze the appropriate performance audit samples received from the EPA as described in the applicable sampling methods. 
5.2 Absolute Calibration Audit (ACA). 
The ACA must be conducted at least quarterly except in a quarter when a RATA (if applicable, see section 5.1) is conducted instead. Conduct an ACA as described in the 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:09 Apr 25, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26APP1.SGM 26APP1jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS124505 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 26, 2022 / Proposed Rules 
calibration error (CE) test procedure 
described in the applicable Performance Specifications. 
5.3 Excessive Audit Inaccuracy. If the RA 
from the RATA or the CE from the ACA exceeds the criteria in the applicable Performance Specifications, hazardous waste burning must cease immediately. Hazardous waste burning cannot resume until the owner or operator takes corrective measures and audit the CEMS with a RATA to document that the CEMS is operating within the specifications. 
* * * * * 
Subpart JJJJ—National Emission 
Standards for Hazardous Air 
Pollutants: Paper and Other Web Coating 
■24. In § 63.3360, revise paragraph 
(e)(1)(vi) introductory text to read as follows: § 63.3360 What performance tests must I 
conduct? 
* * * * * 
(e) * * * 
(1) * * * (vi) Method 25 or 25A of appendix A– 
7 to 40 CFR part 60 must be used to 
determine total gaseous organic matter concentration. Use the same test method for both the inlet and outlet measurements which must be conducted simultaneously. You must submit notice of the intended test method to the Administrator for approval along with notification of the performance test required under § 63.7(b). You must use Method 25A if any of the conditions described in paragraphs (e)(1)(vi)(A) through (D) of this section apply to the control device. 
* * * * * Subpart ZZZZ—National Emissions 
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines 
■25. Revise Table 4 to subpart ZZZZ of 
part 63 to read as follows: 
Table 4 to Subpart ZZZZ of Part 63— 
Requirements for Performance Tests 
As stated in §§ 63.6610, 63.6611, 
63.6620, and 63.6640, you must comply 
with the following requirements for performance tests for stationary RICE: 
For each . . . Complying with the 
requirement to . . . You must . . . Using . . . According to the following requirements . . . 
2SLB, 4SLB, and CI 
stationary RICE.Reduce CO emissions Select the sampling port location 
and the number/location of tra-
verse points at the inlet and outlet of the control device; and....................................................... For CO, O
2, and moisture measurement, 
ducts ≤6 inches in diameter may be sam-
pled at a single point located at the duct centroid and ducts >6 and ≤12 inches in diameter may be sampled at 3 traverse points located at 16.7, 50.0, and 83.3% of the measurement line (‘3-point long line’). If the duct is >12 inches in diameter and the sampling port location meets the two and half-diameter criterion of section 11.1.1 of Method 1 of 40 CFR part 60, ap-pendix A–1, the duct may be sampled at ‘3-point long line’; otherwise, conduct the stratification testing and select sampling points according to section 8.1.2 of Meth-od 7E of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A–4. 
Measure the O 2at the inlet and 
outlet of the control device; and.Method 3 or 3A or 3B of 40 CFR 
part 60, appendix A–2, or ASTM D6522–00 (Reapproved 2005)
abc(heated probe not 
necessary).Measurements to determine O 2must be 
made at the same time as the measure-ments for CO concentration. 
Measure the CO at the inlet and 
the outlet of the control device; and.ASTM D6522–00 (Reapproved 
2005)
abc(heated probe not 
necessary) or Method 10 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A–4.The CO concentration must be at 15 per-
cent O
2, dry basis. 
Measure moisture content at the 
inlet and outlet of the control device as needed to determine CO and O
2concentrations on 
a dry basis.Method 4 of 40 CFR part 60, ap-
pendix A–3, or Method 320 of 40 CFR part 63, appendix A, or ASTM D 6348–03
b.Measurements to determine moisture con-
tent must be made at the same time and location as the measurements for CO concentration. 
4SRB stationary RICE Reduce formaldehyde 
or THC emissions.Select the sampling port location 
and the number/location of tra-verse points at the inlet and outlet of the control device; and....................................................... For formaldehyde, THC, O
2, and moisture 
measurement, ducts ≤6 inches in diame-ter may be sampled at a single point lo-cated at the duct centroid and ducts >6 and ≤12 inches in diameter may be sam-
pled at 3 traverse points located at 16.7, 50.0, and 83.3% of the measurement line (‘3-point long line’). If the duct is >12 inches in diameter and the sampling port 
location meets the two and half-diameter criterion of section 11.1.1 of Method 1 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, the duct may be sampled at ‘3-point long line’; oth-erwise, conduct the stratification testing and select sampling points according to section 8.1.2 of Method 7E of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A. 
Measure O 2at the inlet and out-
let of the control device; and.Method 3 or 3A or 3B of 40 CFR 
part 60, appendix A–2, or ASTM Method D6522–00 (Re-approved 2005)
ab(heated 
probe not necessary).Measurements to determine O 2concentra-
tion must be made at the same time as the measurements for formaldehyde or THC concentration. 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:09 Apr 25, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26APP1.SGM 26APP1jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS124506 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 26, 2022 / Proposed Rules 
For each . . . Complying with the 
requirement to . . . You must . . . Using . . . According to the following requirements . . . 
Measure moisture content at the 
inlet and outlet of the control 
device as needed to determine formaldehyde or THC and O
2 
concentrations on a dry basis; and.Method 4 of 40 CFR part 60, ap-
pendix A–3, or Method 320 of 
40 CFR part 63, appendix A, or ASTM D 6348–03
b.Measurements to determine moisture con-
tent must be made at the same time and 
location as the measurements for form-aldehyde or THC concentration. 
If demonstrating compliance with 
the formaldehyde percent re-duction requirement, measure formaldehyde at the inlet and the outlet of the control device.Method 320 or 323 of 40 CFR 
part 63, appendix A; or ASTM D6348–03,
bprovided in ASTM 
D6348–03 Annex A5 (Analyte Spiking Technique), the per-cent R must be greater than or equal to 70 and less than or equal to 130.Formaldehyde concentration must be at 15 
percent O
2, dry basis. Results of this test 
consist of the average of the three 1-hour or longer runs. 
If demonstrating compliance with 
the THC percent reduction re-quirement, measure THC at the inlet and the outlet of the control device.(1) Method 25A, reported as pro-
pane, of 40 CFR part 60, ap-pendix A–7.THC concentration must be at 15 percent 
O
2, dry basis. Results of this test consist 
of the average of the three 1-hour or longer runs. 
Stationary RICE ......... Limit the concentra-
tion of formalde-hyde or CO in the stationary RICE ex-haust.Select the sampling port location 
and the number/location of tra-verse points at the exhaust of the stationary RICE; and....................................................... For formaldehyde, CO, O
2, and moisture 
measurement, ducts ≤6 inches in diame-
ter may be sampled at a single point lo-cated at the duct centroid and ducts >6 and ≤12 inches in diameter may be sam-
pled at 3 traverse points located at 16.7, 
50.0, and 83.3% of the measurement line (‘3-point long line’). If the duct is >12 inches in diameter and the sampling port 
location meets the two and half-diameter criterion of section 11.1.1 of Method 1 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, the duct may be sampled at ‘3-point long line’; oth-erwise, conduct the stratification testing and select sampling points according to section 8.1.2 of Method 7E of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A. If using a control de-vice, the sampling site must be located at the outlet of the control device. 
Determine the O 2concentration 
of the stationary RICE exhaust at the sampling port location; and.Method 3 or 3A or 3B of 40 CFR 
part 60, appendix A–2, or ASTM Method D6522–00 (Re-approved 2005)
ab(heated 
probe not necessary).Measurements to determine O 2concentra-
tion must be made at the same time and location as the measurements for form-aldehyde or CO concentration. 
Measure moisture content of the 
stationary RICE exhaust at the sampling port location as needed to determine formalde-hyde or CO and O
2concentra-
tions on a dry basis; and.Method 4 of 40 CFR part 60, ap-
pendix A–3, or Method 320 of 40 CFR part 63, appendix A, or ASTM D 6348–03
b.Measurements to determine moisture con-
tent must be made at the same time and location as the measurements for form-aldehyde or CO concentration. 
Measure formaldehyde at the ex-
haust of the stationary RICE; or.Method 320 or 323 of 40 CFR 
part 63, appendix A; or ASTM D6348–03,
bprovided in ASTM 
D6348–03 Annex A5 (Analyte Spiking Technique), the per-cent R must be greater than or equal to 70 and less than or equal to 130.Formaldehyde concentration must be at 15 
percent O
2, dry basis. Results of this test 
consist of the average of the three 1-hour or longer runs. 
Measure CO at the exhaust of 
the stationary RICE.Method 10 of 40 CFR part 60, 
appendix A–4, ASTM Method D6522–00 (2005),
abMethod 
320 of 40 CFR part 63, appen-dix A, or ASTM D6348–03
b.CO concentration must be at 15 percent O 2, 
dry basis. Results of this test consist of the average of the three 1-hour or longer runs. 
aYou may also use Methods 3A and 10 as options to ASTM–D6522–00 (2005). 
bYou may obtain a copy of the standard from at least one of the following addresses: ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428– 
2959, or University Microfilms International, 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106. 
Subpart PPPPP—National Emission 
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Engine Test Cells/Stands 
■26. In § 63.9306, revise paragraph 
(d)(2)(iv) to read as follows: 
§ 63.9306 What are my continuous 
parameter monitoring system (CPMS) installation, operation, and maintenance requirements? 
* * * * * (d) * * * 
(2) * * * (iv) Using a pressure sensor with 
measurement sensitivity of 0.002 inch 
water, check gauge calibration quarterly and transducer calibration monthly. 
* * * * * 
■27. In § 63.9322, revise paragraph 
(a)(1) to read as follows: § 63.9322 How do I determine the emission 
capture system efficiency? 
* * * * * 
(a) * * * 
(1) The capture system meets the 
criteria in Method 204 of appendix M to 
40 CFR part 51 for a permanent total enclosure (PE) and directs all the exhaust gases from the enclosure to an add-on control device. 
* * * * * 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:09 Apr 25, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26APP1.SGM 26APP1jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS124507 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 26, 2022 / Proposed Rules 
Subpart UUUUU—National Emission 
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Coal- and Oil-Fired Electric Utility Steam Generating Units 
■28. Revise table 5 to subpart UUUUU 
of part 63 to read as follows: Table 5 to Subpart UUUUU of Part 63— Performance Testing Requirements 
As stated in § 63.10007, you must 
comply with the following requirements for performance testing for existing, new or reconstructed affected sources: Note: Regarding emissions data collected 
during periods of startup or shutdown, see 
§§ 63.10020(b) and (c) and 63.10021(h). 
To conduct a performance 
test for the following pollutant ...  Using . . . You must perform the following activities, as applicable to your input- or output- based emission limit . . . Using . . .
1 
1. Filterable Particulate mat-
ter (PM).Emissions Testing ............... a. Select sampling ports location and the 
number of traverse points.Method 1 at appendix A–1 to part 60 of this chapter. 
b. Determine velocity and volumetric flow- 
rate of the stack gas.Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2F, 2G or 2H at appendix A–1 or A–2 
to part 60 of this chapter. 
c. Determine oxygen and carbon dioxide 
concentrations of the stack gas.Method 3A or 3B at appendix A–2 to part 60 of this 
chapter, or ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10.2 
d. Measure the moisture content of the 
stack gas.Method 4 at appendix A–3 to part 60 of this chapter. 
e. Measure the filterable PM concentration Methods 5 and 5I at appendix A–3 to part 60 of this 
chapter. For positive pressure fabric filters, Method 5D 
at appendix A–3 to part 60 of this chapter for filterable PM emissions. Note that the Method 5 or 5I front half temperature shall be 160° ±14 °C (320° ±25 °F). 
f. Convert emissions concentration to lb/ 
MMBtu or lb/MWh emissions rates.Method 19 F-factor methodology at appendix A–7 to part 
60 of this chapter or calculate using mass emissions rate and gross output data (see § 63.10007(e)). 
OR OR 
PM CEMS ............................ a. Install, certify, operate, and maintain the 
PM CEMS.Performance Specification 11 at appendix B to part 60 of 
this chapter and Procedure 2 at appendix F to part 60 of this chapter. 
b. Install, certify, operate, and maintain the 
diluent gas, flow rate, and/or moisture monitoring systems.Part 75 of this chapter and § 63.10010(a), (b), (c), and 
(d). 
c. Convert hourly emissions concentrations 
to 30 boiler operating day rolling aver-age lb/MMBtu or lb/MWh emissions rates.Method 19 F-factor methodology at appendix A–7 to part 
60 of this chapter or calculate using mass emissions rate and gross output data (see § 63.10007(e)). 
2. Total or individual non-Hg 
HAP metals.Emissions Testing ............... a. Select sampling ports location and the 
number of traverse points.Method 1 at appendix A–1 to part 60 of this chapter. 
b. Determine velocity and volumetric flow- 
rate of the stack gas.Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2F, 2G or 2H at appendix A–1 or A–2 
to part 60 of this chapter. 
c. Determine oxygen and carbon dioxide 
concentrations of the stack gas.Method 3A or 3B at appendix A–2 to part 60 of this 
chapter, or ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10.2 
d. Measure the moisture content of the 
stack gas.Method 4 at appendix A–3 to part 60 of this chapter. 
e. Measure the HAP metals emissions 
concentrations and determine each indi-vidual HAP metals emissions concentra-tion, as well as the total filterable HAP metals emissions concentration and total HAP metals emissions concentration.Method 29 at appendix A–8 to part 60 of this chapter. 
For liquid oil-fired units, Hg is included in HAP metals and you may use Method 29, Method 30B at appendix A–8 to part 60 of this chapter or ASTM D6784;
2for 
Method 29 or ASTM D 6784, you must report the front half and back half results separately. When using Method 29, report metals matrix spike and recovery levels. 
f. Convert emissions concentrations (indi-
vidual HAP metals, total filterable HAP metals, and total HAP metals) to lb/ MMBtu or lb/MWh emissions rates.Method 19 F-factor methodology at appendix A–7 to part 
60 of this chapter or calculate using mass emissions rate and gross output data (see § 63.10007(e)). 
3. Hydrogen chloride (HCl) 
and hydrogen fluoride (HF).Emissions Testing ............... a. Select sampling ports location and the 
number of traverse points.Method 1 at appendix A–1 to part 60 of this chapter. 
b. Determine velocity and volumetric flow- 
rate of the stack gas.Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2F, 2G or 2H at appendix A–1 or A–2 
to part 60 of this chapter. 
c. Determine oxygen and carbon dioxide 
concentrations of the stack gas.Method 3A or 3B at appendix A–2 to part 60 of this 
chapter, or ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10.2 
d. Measure the moisture content of the 
stack gas.Method 4 at appendix A–3 to part 60 of this chapter. 
e. Measure the HCl and HF emissions 
concentrations.Method 26 or Method 26A at appendix A–8 to part 60 of 
this chapter or Method 320 at appendix A to this part or ASTM D6348–03
2with 
(1) the following conditions when using ASTM D6348–03: 
(A) The test plan preparation and implementation in the 
Annexes to ASTM D6348–03, sections A1 through A8 are mandatory; 
(B) For ASTM D6348–03 Annex A5 (Analyte Spiking 
Technique), the percent (%) R must be determined for each target analyte (see Equation A5.5); 
(C) For the ASTM D6348–03 test data to be acceptable 
for a target analyte, %R must be 70% ≥R ≤130%; and 
(D) The %R value for each compound must be reported 
in the test report and all field measurements corrected with the calculated %R value for that compound using the following equation: 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:09 Apr 25, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26APP1.SGM 26APP1jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS124508 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 26, 2022 / Proposed Rules 
To conduct a performance 
test for the following pollutant ...  (cont’d) Using . . . (cont’d) You must perform the following activities, as applicable to your input- or output- based emission limit . . . (cont’d) Using . . .
1 
(cont’d) 
(2) spiking levels nominally no greater than two times the 
level corresponding to the applicable emission limit. 
Method 26A must be used if there are entrained water 
droplets in the exhaust stream. 
f. Convert emissions concentration to lb/ 
MMBtu or lb/MWh emissions rates.Method 19 F-factor methodology at appendix A–7 to part 
60 of this chapter or calculate using mass emissions 
rate and gross output data (see § 63.10007(e)). 
OR OR 
HCl and/or HF CEMS .......... a. Install, certify, operate, and maintain the 
HCl or HF CEMS.Appendix B to this subpart. 
b. Install, certify, operate, and maintain the 
diluent gas, flow rate, and/or moisture 
monitoring systems.Part 75 of this chapter and § 63.10010(a), (b), (c), and 
(d). 
c. Convert hourly emissions concentrations 
to 30 boiler operating day rolling aver-
age lb/MMBtu or lb/MWh emissions rates.Method 19 F-factor methodology at appendix A–7 to part 
60 of this chapter or calculate using mass emissions rate and gross output data (see § 63.10007(e)). 
4. Mercury (Hg) ..................... Emissions Testing ............... a. Select sampling ports location and the 
number of traverse points.Method 1 at appendix A–1 to part 60 of this chapter or 
Method 30B at Appendix A–8 for Method 30B point se-lection. 
b. Determine velocity and volumetric flow- 
rate of the stack gas.Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2F, 2G or 2H at appendix A–1 or A–2 
to part 60 of this chapter. 
c. Determine oxygen and carbon dioxide 
concentrations of the stack gas.Method 3A or 3B at appendix A–1 to part 60 of this 
chapter, or ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10–1981.2 
d. Measure the moisture content of the 
stack gas.Method 4 at appendix A–3 to part 60 of this chapter. 
e. Measure the Hg emission concentration Method 30B at appendix A–8 to part 60 of this chapter, 
ASTM D6784,2or Method 29 at appendix A–8 to part 
60 of this chapter; for Method 29 or ASTM D 6784, you must report the front half and back half results separately. 
f. Convert emissions concentration to lb/ 
TBtu or lb/GWh emission rates.Method 19 F-factor methodology at appendix A–7 to part 
60 of this chapter or calculate using mass emissions rate and gross output data (see § 63.10007(e)). 
OR OR 
Hg CEMS ............................. a. Install, certify, operate, and maintain the 
CEMS.Sections 3.2.1 and 5.1 of appendix A to this subpart. 
b. Install, certify, operate, and maintain the 
diluent gas, flow rate, and/or moisture monitoring systems.Part 75 of this chapter and § 63.10010(a), (b), (c), and 
(d). 
c. Convert hourly emissions concentrations 
to 30 boiler operating day rolling aver-age lb/TBtu or lb/GWh emissions rates.Section 6 of appendix A to this subpart. 
OR OR 
Sorbent trap monitoring sys-
tem.a. Install, certify, operate, and maintain the 
sorbent trap monitoring system.Sections 3.2.2 and 5.2 of appendix A to this subpart. 
b. Install, operate, and maintain the diluent 
gas, flow rate, and/or moisture moni-toring systems.Part 75 of this chapter and § 63.10010(a), (b), (c), and 
(d). 
c. Convert emissions concentrations to 30 
boiler operating day rolling average lb/ TBtu or lb/GWh emissions rates.Section 6 of appendix A to this subpart. 
OR OR 
LEE testing .......................... a. Select sampling ports location and the 
number of traverse points.Single point located at the 10% centroidal area of the 
duct at a port location per Method 1 at appendix A–1 to part 60 of this chapter or Method 30B at Appendix A–8 for Method 30B point selection. 
b. Determine velocity and volumetric flow- 
rate of the stack gas.Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2F, 2G, or 2H at appendix A–1 or A–2 
to part 60 of this chapter or flow monitoring system certified per appendix A to this subpart. 
c. Determine oxygen and carbon dioxide 
concentrations of the stack gas.Method 3A or 3B at appendix A–1 to part 60 of this 
chapter, or ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10–1981,2or diluent 
gas monitoring systems certified according to part 75 of this chapter. 
d. Measure the moisture content of the 
stack gas.Method 4 at appendix A–3 to part 60 of this chapter, or 
moisture monitoring systems certified according to part 75 of this chapter. 
e. Measure the Hg emission concentration Method 30B at appendix A–8 to part 60 of this chapter; 
perform a 30 operating day test, with a maximum of 10 operating days per run (i.e., per pair of sorbent traps) 
or sorbent trap monitoring system or Hg CEMS cer-tified per appendix A of this subpart. 
f. Convert emissions concentrations from 
the LEE test to lb/TBtu or lb/GWh emis-sions rates.Method 19 F-factor methodology at appendix A–7 to part 
60 of this chapter or calculate using mass emissions rate and gross output data (see § 63.10007(e)). 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:09 Apr 25, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26APP1.SGM 26APP1
EP26AP22.089</GPH>jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS124509 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 26, 2022 / Proposed Rules 
To conduct a performance 
test for the following pollutant ...  (cont’d) Using . . . (cont’d) You must perform the following activities, as applicable to your input- or output- based emission limit . . . (cont’d) Using . . .
1 
(cont’d) 
g. Convert average lb/TBtu or lb/GWh Hg 
emission rate to lb/year, if you are at-
tempting to meet the 29.0 lb/year thresh-old.Potential maximum annual heat input in TBtu or potential 
maximum electricity generated in GWh. 
5. Sulfur dioxide (SO 2) .......... SO 2CEMS .......................... a. Install, certify, operate, and maintain the 
CEMS.Part 75 of this chapter and § 63.10010(a) and (f). 
b. Install, operate, and maintain the diluent 
gas, flow rate, and/or moisture moni-toring systems.Part 75 of this chapter and § 63.10010(a), (b), (c), and 
(d). 
c. Convert hourly emissions concentrations 
to 30 boiler operating day rolling aver-age lb/MMBtu or lb/MWh emissions rates.Method 19 F-factor methodology at appendix A–7 to part 
60 of this chapter or calculate using mass emissions rate and gross output data (see § 63.10007(e)). 
1See tables 1 and 2 to this subpart for required sample volumes and/or sampling run times. 
2IBR, see § 63.14. 
* * * * * 
■29. Amend sections 4.1.1.5 and 
4.1.1.5.1 under ‘‘4. Certification and 
Recertification Requirements’’ in Appendix A to subpart UUUUU of part 63 to read as follows: 
Appendix A to Subpart UUUUU—Hg 
Monitoring Provision 
* * * * * 
4.1.1.5 Relative Accuracy Test Audit 
(RATA). Perform the RATA of the Hg CEMS 
at normal load. Acceptable Hg reference 
methods for the RATA include ASTM D6784 (IBR, see § 63.14) and Methods 29, 30A, and 30B in appendix A–8 to part 60 of this chapter. When Method 29 or ASTM D6784 is used, paired sampling trains are required, and the filterable portion of the sample need not be included when making comparisons to 
the Hg CEMS results for purposes of a RATA. To validate a Method 29 or ASTM D6784 test run, calculate the relative deviation (RD) using Equation A–1 of this section, and assess the results as follows to validate the run. The RD must not exceed 10 percent, when the average Hg concentration is greater than 1.0 mg/dscm. If the RD specification is met, the results of the two samples shall be averaged arithmetically. 
Where: 
RD = Relative Deviation between the Hg 
concentrations of samples ‘‘a’’ and ‘‘b’’ 
(percent), 
Ca= Hg concentration of Hg sample ‘‘a’’ (mg/ 
dscm), and 
Cb= Hg concentration of Hg sample ‘‘b’’ (mg/ 
dscm). 
4.1.1.5.1 Special Considerations. A 
minimum of nine valid test runs must be performed, directly comparing the CEMS measurements to the reference method. More than nine test runs may be performed. If this option is chosen, the results from a maximum of three test runs may be rejected so long as the total number of test results used to determine the relative accuracy is greater than or equal to nine; however, all data must be reported including the rejected data. The minimum time per run is 21 minutes if Method 30A is used. If Method 29, Method 30B, or ASTM D6784 (IBR, see § 63.14) is used, the time per run must be long enough to collect a sufficient mass of Hg to analyze. Complete the RATA within 168 unit operating hours, except when Method 29 or ASTM D6784 is used, in which case; up to 336 operating hours may be taken to finish the test. 
* * * * * 
■30. Amend Appendix A to part 63 by: 
■a. In Method 315 by redesignating 
section 6.2 as section 16.2, placing it in 
numerical order and revising the introductory paragraph. 
■b. In Method 323, by revising sections 
10.1, and 10.3; in section 12.1 adding entry ‘‘b’’ in alphabetical order, revising the entry ‘‘K
c’’; and revising section 
12.6. 
The revisions and addition read as 
follows: 
Appendix A to Part 63—Test Methods 
* * * * * 
Method 315—Determination of Particulate 
and Methylene Chloride Extractable Matter (MCEM) From Selected Sources at Primary Aluminum Production Facilities 
* * * * * 
16.2 Critical orifices as calibration 
standards. Critical orifices may be used as calibration standards in place of the wet test meter specified in section 10.3 of this method, provided that they are selected, calibrated, and used as follows: 
* * * * * 
Method 323—Measurement of Formaldehyde Emissions From Natural Gas- Fired Stationary Sources—Acetyl Acetone Derivatization Method 
* * * * * 10.1 Spectrophotometer Calibration. 
Prepare a stock solution of 10 mg/mL 
formaldehyde. Prepare a series of calibration standards from the stock solution corresponding to 0.0, 0.5, 1.5, 3.5, 5.0, and 7.5 mg/mL formaldehyde. Mix 2.0 ml of each 
calibration standard with 2.0 mL of acetyl acetone reagent in screw cap vials, thoroughly mix the solution, and place the vials in a water bath (or heating block) at 60°C for 10 minutes. Remove the vials and 
allow to cool to room temperature. Transfer 
each solution to a cuvette and measure the absorbance at 412 nm using the spectrophotometer. Develop a calibration curve (response vs. concentration) from the analytical results of these standards. The acceptance criteria for the spectrophotometer calibration is a correlation coefficient of 0.99 or higher. If this criterion is not met, the calibration procedures should be repeated. 
* * * * * 
10.3 Calibration Checks. Calibration 
checks consisting of analyzing a mid-range standard separate prepared with each batch of samples. The calibration check standard must be prepared independent of the calibration stock solution. The result of the check standard must be within 10 percent of the theoretical value to be acceptable. If the acceptance criteria are not met, the standard must be reanalyzed. If still unacceptable, a new calibration curve must be prepared using freshly prepared standards. 
* * * * * 
12.1 Nomenclature. 
* * * * * 
b = the intercept of the calibration curve at 
zero concentration 
* * * * * 
Kc= spectrophotometer calibration factor, 
slope of the least square regression line, absorbance/(mg/mL) (Note: Most spreadsheets are capable of calculating a least squares line, including slope, intercept, and correlation coefficient). 
* * * * * 
12.6 Mass of Formaldehyde in Liquid 
Sample. 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:09 Apr 25, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26APP1.SGM 26APP1
EP26AP22.090</GPH>jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS124510 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 80 / Tuesday, April 26, 2022 / Proposed Rules 
1A Board Order issued by the Board is a 
regulatory instrument which specifies air pollution 
control limits or requirements for a specific source or company. See 66 FR 53665, 53671 (October 23, 
2001) (Response 2I). 
2The Louisville Area was subsequently 
redesignated to attainment for the 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS. See 66 FR 53665 (October 23, 2001). More recently, the Louisville Area was designated as Marginal nonattainment for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. See 83 FR 25776 (June 4, 2018). 
3EPA incorporated Regulation 6.42 into the 
Jefferson County portion of the Kentucky SIP on October 23, 2001. See 66 FR 53658. 
* * * * * 
[FR Doc. 2022–07891 Filed 4–25–22; 8:45 am] 
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 
AGENCY 
40 CFR Part 52 
[EPA–R04–OAR–2021–0188; FRL–9775–01– 
R4] 
Air Plan Approval; Kentucky; Source 
Specific Changes for Jefferson County 
AGENCY : Environmental Protection 
Agency (EPA). 
ACTION : Proposed rule. 
SUMMARY : The Environmental Protection 
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve changes to the Kentucky State Implementation Plan (SIP), submitted by the Commonwealth of Kentucky, through the Energy and Environment Cabinet (Cabinet), on March 4, 2020, and supplemented on January 28, 2022. The proposed changes were submitted on behalf of the Louisville Metro Air Pollution Control District (District), which has jurisdiction over Jefferson County, Kentucky, and make changes to a Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) determination for a specific major source of nitrogen oxides (NO
X) and volatile organic compound 
(VOC) emissions. EPA is proposing to approve these changes as they are consistent with the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act). 
DATES : Comments must be received on 
or before May 26, 2022. 
ADDRESSES : Submit your comments, 
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– OAR–2021–0188 at www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 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. EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For 
additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting- epa-dockets. 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT : Joel 
Huey, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air and Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Mr. Huey can be reached by telephone at (404) 562–9104 or via electronic mail at huey.joel@
epa.gov. 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION : 
I. EPA’s Proposed Action 
EPA is proposing to approve changes 
to the Kentucky SIP that were received by EPA on March 4, 2020 and supplemented on January 28, 2022. Approval of this submission would incorporate Board Order—Amendment 2, issued by the Air Pollution Control Board of Jefferson County (Board) for American Synthetic Rubber Company (ASRC), into the SIP. This amended Board Order
1would replace in the SIP 
the existing Board Order issued by the Board for ASRC. The amended Board Order and EPA’s rationale for proposing to approve it into the SIP are described in detail below. 
II. Background and EPA’s Analysis of 
the Proposed Revisions 
Three counties in the Louisville area 
(Jefferson County in Kentucky and Clark and Floyd Counties in Indiana) were designated as nonattainment for ozone in March 1978 (43 FR 8962). On November 6, 1991 (56 FR 56694), after the CAA Amendments of 1990 were enacted, Jefferson County and portions of Bullitt and Oldham Counties in Kentucky and the Indiana Counties of Clark and Floyd were designated as the Louisville Moderate ozone nonattainment area (Louisville Area) under section 107(d)(4)(A) as a result of monitored violations of the 1979 1-hour ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) during 1987–1989.
2 Section 182(b)(2) of the CAA requires 
states to adopt RACT for all major 
stationary sources of VOC in Moderate and above ozone nonattainment areas. Section 182(f) of the CAA requires that the same provisions for major stationary sources of VOC shall also apply to major stationary sources of NO
X. Therefore, 
pursuant to section 182(f), RACT is a requirement, with certain exceptions described therein, for major sources of NO
Xin ozone nonattainment areas 
where VOC RACT applies. 
To comply with the NOx RACT 
requirement, which was a result of the Moderate nonattainment area designation for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, the District submitted Jefferson County Air Quality Regulation 6.42, Reasonably Available Control Technology Requirements for Major Volatile Organic Compound- and Nitrogen Oxides-Emitting Facilities, to EPA approval.
3Regulation 6.42 requires 
the establishment and implementation of RACT, including the determination and demonstration of compliance with RACT, for certain emission units located at a major stationary source of NO
Xor 
VOC emissions and requires that each determination of RACT approved by the District be submitted to EPA as a source- specific revision to the Kentucky SIP. RACT is defined at paragraph 1.66 of District Regulation 1.02 as meaning ‘‘devices, systems, process modifications, or other apparatus or techniques, including pollution prevention approaches, that are reasonably available taking into account the necessity of imposing those controls 
in order to attain and maintain a national ambient air quality standard and the social, environmental, and economic impact of those controls.’’ 
As discussed in EPA’s June 22, 2001 
(66 FR 33505), proposal to redesignate the Louisville Area to attainment for the 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS, Regulation 6.42 has been implemented in part by means of Board Orders adopted by the Air Pollution Control Board of Jefferson County. Such Board Orders contain NO
XRACT and VOC RACT plans, 
which set forth RACT requirements for the source, including monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements, as attachments. 
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:09 Apr 25, 2022 Jkt 256001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\26APP1.SGM 26APP1
EP26AP22.091</GPH>jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1