1130 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 51, 60, 61, and 63 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0114; FRL–9501–3] 

RIN 2060–AQ01 

Revisions to Test Methods and Testing 

Regulations 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: This action proposes editorial 

and technical corrections necessary for 

source testing of emissions and 

operations. The revisions include the 

addition of alternative equipment and 

methods as well as corrections to 

technical and typographical errors. We 

also solicit public comment on potential 

changes to the current procedures for 

determining emission stratification. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before March 9, 2012. 

Public Hearing. If anyone contacts the 

EPA by January 19, 2012 requesting to 

speak at a public hearing, a hearing will 

be held on February 8, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2010–0114, by one of the 

following methods: 

• www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (202) 566–9744. 

• Mail: Revisions to Test Methods 

and Testing Regulations, Docket No. 

EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0114, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460. 

Please include two copies. 

• Hand Delivery: Docket No. EPA– 

HQ–OAR–2010–0114, EPA Docket 

Center, Public Reading Room, EPA 

West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution 

Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2010– 

0114. The EPA’s policy is that all 

comments received will be included in 

the public docket without change and 

may be made available online at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means the EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to the EPA without 

going through www.regulations.gov, 

your email address will be 

automatically captured and included as 

part of the comment that is placed in the 

public docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, the EPA recommends that 

you include your name and other 

contact information in the body of your 

comment as well as with any disk or 

CD–ROM you submit. If the EPA cannot 

read your comment due to technical 

difficulties and cannot contact you for 

clarification, the EPA may not be able to 

consider your comment. Electronic files 

should avoid the use of special 

characters, any form of encryption, and 

be free of any defects or viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the www.regulations.gov 

index. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., CBI or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Revisions to Test Methods and 

Testing Regulations Docket, EPA/DC, 

EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 

Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 

20460. The Public Reading Room is 

open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The telephone number for the 

Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, 

and the telephone number for the 

Revisions to Test Methods and Testing 

Regulations Docket is (202) 566–1742. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Foston Curtis, Office of Air Quality 

Planning and Standards, Air Quality 

Assessment Division (E143–02), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; 

telephone number: (919) 541–1063; fax 

number: (919) 541–0516; email address: 

curtis.foston@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

The proposed amendments apply to a 

large number of industries that are 

already subject to the current provisions 

of Parts 51, 60, 61, and 63. Therefore, 

we have not listed specific affected 

industries or their North American 

Industry Classification System (NAICS) 

codes here. 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 should I consider as I prepare 

my comments for the EPA? 

1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this 

information to the EPA through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly 

mark any of the information that you 

claim to be CBI. For CBI information in 

a disk or CD–ROM that you mail to the 

EPA, mark the outside of the disk or 

CD–ROM as CBI and then identify 

electronically within the disk or CD– 

ROM the specific information that is 

claimed as CBI. In addition to one 

complete version of the comment that 

includes information claimed as CBI, a 

copy of the comment that does not 

contain the information claimed as CBI 

must be submitted for inclusion in the 

public docket. Information so marked 

will not be disclosed except in 

accordance with procedures set forth in 

40 CFR part 2. 

2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. 

When submitting comments, remember 

to: 

• Follow directions—The Agency 

may ask you to respond to specific 

questions or organize comments by 

referencing a Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) part or section 

number. 

• Explain why you agree or disagree, 

suggest alternatives, and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

• Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used. 

• If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

• Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns, and suggest 

alternatives. 

• Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

• Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified. 

C. Where can I get a copy of this 

document? 

In addition to being available in the 

docket, an electronic copy of this 

proposed rule will also be available on 

the Worldwide Web (WWW) through 

the Technology Transfer Network 

(TTN). Following signature, a copy of 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 1131 

this proposed rule will be posted on the 

TTN’s policy and guidance page for 

newly proposed or promulgated rules at 

the following address: http:// 

www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/. The TTN 

provides information and technology 

exchange in various areas of air 

pollution control. A redline/strikeout 

document comparing the proposed 

revisions to the appropriate sections of 

the current rules is located in the 

docket. 

D. How is this document organized? 

The supplementary information in 

this preamble is organized as follows: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

B. What should I consider as I prepare my 

comments for the EPA? 

C. Where can I get a copy of this 

document? 

D. How is this document organized? 

II. Background 

III. Summary of Amendments 

A. Appendix M of Part 51 

B. Method 201A of Appendix M of Part 51 

C. Method 202 of Appendix M of Part 51 

D. General Provisions (Subpart A) Part 60 

E. Industrial-Commercial-Institutional 

Steam Generating Units (Subpart Db) 

Part 60 

F. Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste 

Incinerators (Subpart Ec) Part 60 

G. Sulfuric Acid Plants (Subpart H) Part 60 

H. Sewage Treatments Plants (Subpart O) 

Part 60 

I. Kraft Pulp Mills (Subpart BB) Part 60 

J. Stationary Gas Turbines (Subpart GG) 

Part 60 

K. Lead-Acid Battery Manufacturing Plants 

(Subpart KK) Part 60 

L. Metallic Mineral Processing Plants 

(Subpart LL) Part 60 

M. Asphalt Processing and Asphalt Roofing 

Manufacture (Subpart UU) Part 60 

N. Volatile Organic Chemical (VOC) 

Emissions From Synthetic Organic 

Compound Manufacturing Industry 

(SOCMI) Distillation Operations (Subpart 

NNN) Part 60 

O. Stationary Compression Ignition 

Internal Combustion Engines (Subpart 

IIII) Part 60 

P. Stationary Spark Ignition Internal 

Combustion Engines (Subpart JJJJ) Part 

60 

Q. Method 1 of Appendix A–1 of Part 60 

R. Method 2 of Appendix A–1 of Part 60 

S. Method 2A of Appendix A–1 of Part 60 

T. Method 2B of Appendix A–1 of Part 60 

U. Method 2D of Appendix A–1 of Part 60 

V. Method 3A of Appendix A–2 of Part 60 

W. Method 4 of Appendix A–3 of Part 60 

X. Method 5 of Appendix A–3 of Part 60 

Y. Method 5A of Appendix A–3 of Part 60 

Z. Method 5E of Appendix A–3 of Part 60 

AA. Method 5H of Appendix A–3 of Part 

60 

BB. Method 6 of Appendix A–4 of Part 60 

CC. Method 6C of Appendix A–4 of Part 60 

DD. Method 7 of Appendix A–4 of Part 60 

EE. Method 7A of Appendix A–4 of Part 60 

FF. Method 7E of Appendix A–4 of Part 60 

GG. Method 8 of Appendix A–4 of Part 60 

HH. Method 10 of Appendix A–4 of Part 

60 

II. Methods 10A and 10B of Appendix A– 

4 of Part 60 

JJ. Method 11 of Appendix A–5 of Part 60 

KK. Method 12 of Appendix A–5 of Part 60 

LL. Method 14A of Appendix A–5 of Part 

60 

MM. Method 16A of Appendix A–6 of Part 

60 

NN. Method 18 of Appendix A–6 of Part 

60 

OO. Method 23 of Appendix A–7 of Part 

60 

PP. Method 24 of Appendix A–7 of Part 60 

QQ. Method 25 of Appendix A–7 of Part 

60 

RR. Method 25C of Appendix A–7 of Part 

60 

SS. Method 25D of Appendix A–7 of Part 

60 

TT. Method 26 of Appendix A–8 of Part 60 

UU. Method 29 of Appendix A–8 of Part 

60 

VV. Method 30B of Appendix A–8 of Part 

60 

WW. Performance Specification 1 of 

Appendix B of Part 60 

XX. Performance Specification 3 of 

Appendix B of Part 60 

YY. Performance Specification 4 of 

Appendix B of Part 60 

ZZ. Performance Specification 4B of 

Appendix B of Part 60 

AAA. Performance Specification 7 of 

Appendix B of Part 60 

BBB. Performance Specification 11 of 

Appendix B of Part 60 

CCC. Performance Specification 15 of 

Appendix B of Part 60 

DDD. Performance Specification 16 of 

Appendix B of Part 60 

EEE. Procedure 1 of Appendix F of Part 60 

FFF. Procedure 2 of Appendix F of Part 60 

GGG. Procedure 5 of Appendix F of Part 60 

HHH. General Provisions (Subpart A) Part 

61 

III. Beryllium (Subpart C) Part 61 

JJJ. Beryllium Rocket Motor Firing (Subpart 

D) Part 61 

KKK. Mercury (Subpart E) Part 61 

LLL. Inorganic Arsenic Emissions from 

Glass Manufacturing Plants (Subpart N) 

Part 61 

MMM. Method 101 of Appendix B of Part 

61 

NNN. Method 101A of Appendix B of Part 

61 

OOO. Method 102 of Appendix B of Part 

61 

PPP. Method 104 of Appendix B of Part 61 

QQQ. Methods 108 and 108A of Appendix 

B of Part 61 

RRR. General Provisions (Subpart A) Part 

63 

SSS. Synthetic Organic Chemical 

Manufacturing Industry (Subpart G) Part 

63 

TTT. Chromium Emissions From Hard and 

Decorative Chromium Electroplating and 

Chromium Anodizing Tanks (Subpart N) 

Part 63 

UUU. Ethylene Oxide Emissions Standards 

for Sterilization Facilities (Subpart O) 

Part 63 

VVV. Marine Tank Vessel Loading 

Operations (Subpart Y) Part 63 

WWW. Aerospace Manufacturing and 

Rework Facilities (Subpart GG) Part 63 

XXX. Pharmaceuticals Production (Subpart 

GGG) Part 63 

YYY. Secondary Aluminum Production 

(Subpart RRR) Part 63 

ZZZ. Manufacturing of Nutritional Yeast 

(Subpart CCCC) Part 63 

AAAA. Petroleum Refineries: Catalytic 

Cracking Units, Catalytic Reforming 

Units, and Sulfur Recovery Units 

(Subpart UUUU) Part 63 

BBBB. Stationary Reciprocating Internal 

Combustion Engines (Subpart ZZZZ) 

Part 63 

CCCC. Method 306 of Appendix A of Part 

63 

DDDD. Method 306A of Appendix A of 

Part 63 

EEEE. Methods 308, 315, and 316 of 

Appendix A of Part 63 

FFFF. Method 321 of Appendix A of Part 

63 

IV. Request for Comments 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulations and 

Regulatory Review 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

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 

and Safety Risks 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions 

To Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations 

II. Background 

The EPA catalogs revisions and 

updates that are needed for test 

methods, performance specifications, 

and associated regulations in 40 CFR 

parts 51, 60, 61, and 63, and proposes 

the revisions on a 5- to 10-year basis. 

The last methods update was published 

as a final rule on October 17, 2000 (65 

FR 61744). Many of these needed 

revisions were brought to our attention 

by affected parties and end-users. The 

revisions consist of allowable 

alternatives that were not previously 

available, changes that facilitate the use 

of mercury-free equipment, and updates 

needed to correct obsolete provisions or 

add flexibility. Corrections to 

typographical errors and technical 

errors in equations and diagrams are 

also proposed. It is important to note 

that although numerous technical 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
1132 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

corrections are being proposed to 

portions of the subparts in parts 51, 60, 

61, and 63, changes are not made to any 

compliance standard, reporting, or 

recordkeeping requirement. For this 

notice, the EPA is only proposing 

revisions to sections of the subpart 

pertaining to source testing or 

monitoring of emissions and operations. 

III. Summary of Amendments 

A. Appendix M of Part 51 

In the introduction of Appendix M of 

part 51, Methods 3A and 19 would be 

added to the list of methods not 

requiring the use of audit samples. 

Method 3A is a direct measurement 

instrumental method which the audit 

program does not evaluate, and Method 

19 deals with calculation procedures 

and not measurement procedures. 

B. Method 201A of Appendix M of Part 

51 

Revisions would be made to the 

Method 201A published on December 

21, 2010. Typographical errors in 

references to isokinetic sampling rate, 

source gas temperatures, stack blockage 

dimensions by the sampling heads, and 

PM10 in Sections 8.3.4(b), 8.3.4.1, 

8.7.2.2, and 8.7.5.5(a), respectively, 

would be corrected. An erroneous 

reference to Methods 4A and 5 in 

Section 10.1 when using a standard 

pitot tube would be corrected to refer to 

Methods 1 and 2. Section 10.5, which 

addresses Class A volumetric glassware, 

would be deleted because it is not 

needed in the method. For those filters 

whose weight cannot be weighed to a 

constant weight in Section 11.2.1, 

instruction would be added to flag and 

report the data as a minimum value. It 

would be noted that the nozzle, front 

half, and in-stack filter samples need to 

be speciated into organic and inorganic 

fractions to be similar to the practice in 

Method 17. The method would also note 

that neither Method 17 nor 201A require 

a separate analysis of the filter for 

inorganic and organic particulate 

matter. Method 201A is often used 

together with Method 202 which 

requires a separate analysis of inorganic 

and organic PM. This note would 

remind testers that a separate analysis is 

not required for Method 201A. An 

incorrect term in Equation 9 of Section 

12.5 would be corrected. In the 

nomenclature in Section 12.1, Vb, the 

volume of aliquot taken for ion 

chromatography (IC) analysis, would be 

deleted since no IC analysis is 

performed. 

C. Method 202 of Appendix M of Part 

51 

Revisions would be made to the 

Method 202 published on December 21, 

2010. In Section 8.5.3.1, the text 

referring to empty impingers would be 

deleted because empty impingers are 

not used. Figures 2 and 3 would be 

revised to correctly show the first 

impinger with an extended stem instead 

of a shortened one to be consistent with 

the method text, and the condensed 

moisture and sample portion of the 

sampling train would be labeled to 

make it easy to identify. Figures 4, 5, 

and 6 would be republished because 

they did not print clearly in the 

December 21, 2010, publication. 

D. General Provisions (Subpart A) Part 

60 

In the General Provisions of part 60, 

Methods 3A and 19 would be added to 

the list of methods not requiring the use 

of audit samples in § 60.8(gd). Method 

3A is a direct measurement 

instrumental method which the audit 

program does not evaluate, and Method 

19 deals with calculation procedures in 

lieu of measurement procedures. 

A new § 60.8(h) would be added to 

require that sampling sites be evaluated 

for cyclonic flow and stratification 

before testing. Cyclonic flow and gas 

stratification has not been adequately 

addressed in the past except for 

particulate measurement methods. Our 

experience has been that gaseous 

pollutant measurements may also be 

affected by these phenomena. 

Procedures currently used in Methods 1 

and 7E would be referenced for all tests 

to evaluate the suitability of test 

locations and give procedures for testing 

under conditions of gas stratification 

and cyclonic flow to preclude nonrepresentative sampling. 

A new § 60.8(i) would be added to 

allow the use of Method 205 of 40 CFR 

part 51, Appendix M, ‘‘Verification of 

Gas Dilution Systems for Field 

Instrument Calibrations,’’ as an 

alternative provision whenever the use 

of multiple calibration gases is required 

under Part 60. Method 205 has 

previously been allowed for different 

applications on a case-by-case basis. 

Method 205 reduces the number of 

cylinder gases needed for a test by 

allowing lower-concentration gases to 

be generated from a high-level gas. 

Section 60.13(d)(1) would be revised to 

remove the phrase ‘‘automatically, 

intrinsic to the opacity monitor’’ which 

was incorrectly inserted into the 

paragraph in a past revision. The title of 

an organization in a method that is 

incorporated by reference would be 

updated in § 60.17(e), and the edition of 

the method referred to in § 60.17(e)(1) 

would be updated to reflect the 

currently available version. 

E. Industrial-Commercial-Institutional 

Steam Generating Units (Subpart Db) 

Part 60 

In subpart Db, Method 320 would be 

added as an alternative to the methods 

for determining nitrogen oxides (NOX) 

concentration in § 60.46b(f)(1)(ii), (h)(1) 

and (2), and sulfur dioxide (SO2) 

concentration in § 60.47b(b)(2). The EPA 

has allowed the use of Method 320 in 

the past on a case-by-case basis and now 

believes it is appropriate for general use. 

F. Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste 

Incinerators (Subpart Ec) Part 60 

In subpart Ec, the definition of 

medical/infectious wastes in § 60.51c 

would be revised to correct the 

misspelling of ‘‘cremation.’’ 

G. Sulfuric Acid Plants (Subpart H) Part 

60 

In Subpart H, an equation for 

calculating the SO2 emission rate in 

§ 60.84(d) would be corrected. 

H. Sewage Treatment Plants (Subpart O) 

Part 60 

In subpart O, a reference to Method 

209F in § 60.154(b)(5) would be revised 

to reflect a newer available version of 

the method (i.e., 2540G). 

I. Kraft Pulp Mills (Subpart BB) Part 60 

In subpart BB, a typographical error in 

the equation in § 60.284(c)(3) would be 

corrected. 

J. Stationary Gas Turbines (Subpart GG) 

Part 60 

In subpart GG, the definitions of terms 

for the equation in § 60.335(b)(l) would 

be revised to allow the reference 

combustor inlet absolute pressure to be 

measured in millimeters of mercury 

(mm Hg). Using the site barometric 

pressure gives comparable results to the 

observed combustor inlet absolute 

pressure for calculating the mean NOX

emission concentration and would be 

allowed as an alternative. 

K. Lead-Acid Battery Manufacturing 

Plants (Subpart KK) Part 60 

In subpart KK, Method 29 would be 

added as an alternative to Method 12 in 

§ 60.374(b)(1)and (c)(2) for determining 

the lead concentration and flow rate of 

the effluent gas. Method 29 is an 

accepted method for determining lead 

under other rules and is appropriate for 

this subpart as well. Also, an error in 

the equation for calculating the lead 

emission concentration in 60.374(b)(2) 

would be corrected. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 1133 

L. Metallic Mineral Processing Plants 

(Subpart LL) Part 60 

In subpart LL, an error in the value of 

the particulate matter standard in 

§ 60.382(a)(1) would be corrected from 

0.02 g/dscm to 0.05 g/dscm. An 

alternative procedure, where a single 

visible emission observer may conduct 

visible emission observations for up to 

three fugitive, stack, or vent emission 

points within a 15-second interval, 

would be added to § 60.386. This 

alternative would allow the observer to 

take readings in a more cost-effective 

and timely manner than currently 

allowed. 

M. Asphalt Processing and Asphalt 

Roofing Manufacture (Subpart UU) Part 

60 

In subpart UU, an error in the value 

of the particulate matter standard for 

saturated felt or smooth-surfaced roll 

roofing in § 60.472(a)(1)(ii) would be 

corrected from 0.04 kg/Mg to 0.4 kg/Mg. 

N. Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) 

Emissions From Synthetic Organic 

Chemical Manufacturing Industry 

(SOCMI) Distillation Operations 

(Subpart NNN) Part 60 

In subpart NNN, several paragraphs 

were renumbered in a previous 

amendment, but conforming changes in 

sections that referenced these 

paragraphs were not made. In 

§ 60.660(c)(4) and § 60.665(h)(2) and (3), 

these references would be corrected. 

O. Stationary Compression Ignition 

Internal Combustion Engines (Subpart 

IIII) Part 60 

In Subpart IIII, the use of Method 1 or 

1A for sampling point selection would 

be dropped, and single-point sampling 

at the centroid of the exhaust would be 

added. The exhausts of most regulated 

engines are too small and not equipped 

with sampling ports. This makes it 

difficult to divide the exhaust into 

multiple sampling-point locations as 

required by Methods 1 and 1A. Table 7 

would be revised to delete the 

requirement to use Method 1 or 1A. 

P. Stationary Spark Ignition Internal 

Combustion Engines (Subpart JJJJ) Part 

60 

In Subpart JJJJ, the exhausts of most 

regulated engines do not contain 

sampling ports and are too small to be 

subdivided into multiple samplingpoint locations. Table 2 would be 

revised to delete the requirement to use 

Method 1 or 1A for determining 

sampling site and sampling-point 

location, and instruction would be 

added to sample at the centroid of the 

exhaust. 

Q. Method 1 of Appendix A–1 of Part 60 

In Method 1, Section 11.2.2 would be 

clarified to note that it specifically 

applies to gaseous measurements. The 

provisions in the section for 

determining exhaust gas stratification 

would be streamlined to make them 

consistent with the new stratification 

provisions in Method 7E. Figures 1–1 

and 1–2 would be clarified to note that 

the horizontal coordinates represent the 

duct diameters from the sampling point 

to the flow disturbance and not simply 

the duct diameters from the flow 

disturbance. Figure 1–2 would also be 

corrected to show the proper 

demarcation between the requirement 

for 12 and 16 sampling points. The test 

for the presence or absence of cyclonic 

flow would be required for all tests 

instead of recommended at sites 

suspected of having cyclonic flow. 

R. Method 2 of Appendix A–1 of Part 60 

In Method 2, a pressure stability 

specification that has been lacking for 

the pitot tube leak-check would be 

added to clearly note the desired 

stability. An erroneous reference to a 

Figure 2–6B would be corrected to 

reference Figure 2–7B. An error in a 

term in the denominator of Equation 2– 

7 would be corrected to the average of 

the square root of delta P rather than the 

square root of the average delta P. The 

velocity constant in English units used 

in Equation 2–7 would be corrected by 

changing m/sec to ft/sec. The term for 

absolute temperature in Equations 2–7 

and 2–8 would be corrected to represent 

the average of the absolute 

temperatures; an inadvertently omitted 

term would be added to Section 12.1 for 

the average absolute temperature; and 

calibrating a barometer against a NISTtraceable barometer would be added as 

an alternative to calibrating against a 

mercury barometer to facilitate the use 

of mercury-free products. 

S. Method 2A of Appendix A–1 of Part 

60 

In Method 2A, calibrating a barometer 

against a NIST-traceable barometer 

would be added as an alternative to 

calibrating against a mercury barometer 

to facilitate the use of mercury-free 

products. 

T. Method 2B of Appendix A–1 of Part 

60 

In Method 2B, nomenclature errors 

would be corrected and the assumed 

ambient carbon dioxide concentration 

used in the calculations would be 

changed from 300 to 380 ppm to closer 

approximate current ambient levels. 

U. Method 2D of Appendix A–1 of Part 

60 

In Method 2D, calibrating a barometer 

against a NIST-traceable barometer 

would be added as an alternative to 

calibrating against a mercury barometer 

to facilitate the use of mercury-free 

products. 

V. Method 3A of Appendix A–2 of Part 

60 

In Method 3A, a redundant sentence 

noting that pre-cleaned air may be used 

for the high-level calibration gas would 

be deleted. 

W. Method 4 of Appendix A–3 of Part 

60 

In Method 4, the English value for the 

leak rate exceedance in Section 9.1 

would be corrected from 0.20 cfm to 

0.020 cfm. Method 6A, Method 320, and 

a calculation using F-factors would be 

added as alternatives to Method 4 for 

the moisture determination. These are 

logical alternatives in cases where 

Methods 6A and 320 are already being 

used, and the F-factors approach can 

save both time and expenses in some 

cases. 

X. Method 5 of Appendix A–3 of Part 60 

In Method 5, a clarification would be 

added that the deionized water used in 

the analysis of material caught in the 

impingers must have ≤0.001 percent 

residue; the factor K would be corrected 

to K’ in Equation 5–13; calibrating a 

barometer against a NIST-traceable 

barometer would be added as an 

alternative to calibrating against a 

mercury barometer to facilitate the use 

of mercury-free products; calibrating a 

temperature sensor against a 

thermometer equivalent to a mercury-inglass thermometer would be added as an 

alternative to calibrating against a 

mercury-in-glass thermometer to 

facilitate the use of mercury-free 

products; rechecking temperature 

sensors for the filter holder and 

metering system after each test has been 

found to be sufficient and would replace 

having sensors calibrated within 3 °F; 

the option to check the probe heater 

calibration after a test at a single point 

using a reference thermometer would be 

added; the use of weather station 

barometric pressure corrected to testing 

point elevation would be added as an 

option to having an on-site barometer; 

mention of stopcock grease for air-tight 

impinger seals would be deleted since it 

is outdated and not often used; a smaller 

acetone cleanup blank is determined 

sufficient and a single blank per 

container would be allowed in place of 

a blank from each wash bottle; Section 

10.3.3 would be clarified as a post-test 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
1134 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

metering system calibration check rather 

than a metering system calibration, and 

an alternative metering check procedure 

would be added; the Isostack metering 

system would be noted as an acceptable 

system for determining sample flow 

rates; the use of a Teflon filter holder 

would be allowed without having to 

obtain the Administrator’s approval 

first; and Reference 13 for post-test 

calibration would be added to the 

method. 

Y. Method 5A of Appendix A–3 of Part 

60 

In Method 5A, mercury-free 

thermometers would be added as an 

alternative to mercury-in-glass 

thermometers to facilitate the use of 

mercury-free products. 

Z. Method 5E of Appendix A–3 of Part 

60 

In Method 5E, the use of the 

Rosemount Model 2100A total organic 

content analyzer would be replaced 

with the Tekmar-Dohrmann or 

equivalent analyzer, as neither the 

Rosemount analyzer nor any similar 

dual-injection analyzer is currently 

manufactured. Also, Section 12.5 

inadvertently labels the equation for 

total particulate concentration as Eq. 

5E–4, which would be corrected to Eq. 

5E–5. 

AA. Method 5H of Appendix A–3 of Part 

60 

In Method 5H, Section 12.1 would be 

revised to add missing terms Ci, Co, Qi, 

and Qo; and procedures for the 

determination of an alternative tracer 

gas flow rate would be added. 

BB. Method 6 of Appendix A–4 of Part 

60 

In Method 6, calibrating a temperature 

sensor against a thermometer equivalent 

to a mercury-in-glass thermometer 

would be added as an alternative to 

using a mercury-in-glass thermometer, 

and calibrating a barometer against a 

NIST-traceable barometer would be 

added as an alternative to calibrating 

against a mercury barometer. These 

revisions would facilitate the use of 

mercury-free products. 

CC. Method 6C of Appendix A–4 of Part 

60 

In Section 4.0 of Method 6C, an 

incorrect reference to Section 4.1 of 

Method 6 would be corrected to 

reference Section 4.0 of Method 7E. 

Provisions that were removed from the 

original method that addressed potential 

quenching effects in fluorescence 

analyzers would be added again. It was 

previously believed that current 

fluorescence analyzers are not affected 

by quenching effects; however, we were 

informed that the provisions are still 

needed in many cases. 

DD. Method 7 of Appendix A–4 of Part 

60 

In Method 7, procedures would be 

added to avoid biased results when 

sampling under conditions of high SO2

concentrations; calibrating a barometer 

against a NIST-traceable barometer 

would be added as an alternative to 

calibrating against a mercury barometer; 

and calibrating a temperature sensor 

against a thermometer equivalent to a 

mercury-in-glass thermometer would be 

added as an alternative to using a 

mercury-in-glass thermometer. These 

revisions would facilitate the use of 

mercury-free products. 

EE. Method 7A of Appendix A–4 of Part 

60 

In Method 7A, new procedures would 

be added to avoid biased results when 

sampling under conditions of high SO2

concentrations, and calibrating a 

temperature sensor against a 

thermometer equivalent to a mercury-inglass thermometer would be added as an 

alternative to using a mercury-in-glass 

thermometer to facilitate the use of 

mercury-free products. 

FF. Method 7E of Appendix A–4 of Part 

60 

In Method 7E, the instructions for 

choosing the high-level calibration gas 

would be clarified. Instructions would 

be added to minimize contact of the 

sample with any condensate to reduce 

the chance of sample loss, and an error 

in the traverse point locations used to 

determine stratification across large 

stacks would be corrected. A statement 

noting that the stratification test is not 

required at sources with temporally 

varying emissions or low-concentration 

emissions would be added since a 

stratification test under such conditions 

would be meaningless or difficult to 

pass. The basis of a stable response for 

measurements in the system response 

time determination would be revised in 

Section 8.2.5 to conform with Section 

8.2.6. The response time reading would 

be recorded after the concentration 

reading has reached 95 percent or 

within 0.5 ppm of a stable response for 

the gas instead of after reaching 95 

percent of the certified gas 

concentration. This change removes a 

potential conflict between the response 

time stable reading criterion and the 

bias or system calibration error test 

criterion. Alternative sampling bags 

made of materials other than Tedlar 

would be allowed if the materials are 

applicable for retaining the compounds 

of interest. Tedlar bags are no longer 

being produced. 

GG. Method 8 of Appendix A–4 of Part 

60 

In Method 8, corrections would be 

made to errors in the sample aliquot 

volumes required for containers 1 and 2 

and in the values for Va and Vsoln. Figure 

8–1 would be clarified to identify which 

impingers collect sulfuric acid/sulfur 

trioxide and which collect sulfur 

dioxide. 

HH. Method 10 of Appendix A–4 of Part 

60 

Method 10 would be revised to allow 

the use of sample tanks as an alternative 

to flexible bags for sample collection. 

Tanks are an acceptable collection 

medium, are currently allowed for 

carbon monoxide in other EPA methods, 

and are appropriate for Method 10 as 

well. 

II. Methods 10A and 10B of Appendix 

A–4 of Part 60 

In Methods 10A and 10B, sampling 

bags made of materials other than 

Tedlar would be allowed if the materials 

have the sample retaining qualities of 

Tedlar. Tedlar bags are no longer 

produced. 

JJ. Method 11 of Appendix A–5 of Part 

60 

Method 11 would be revised to 

address sample breakthrough at high 

concentrations. An additional collection 

impinger would be added to the train 

whenever the final impinger solution 

exhibits a yellow color. Calibrating a 

temperature sensor against a 

thermometer equivalent to a mercury-inglass thermometer would be added as an 

alternative to using a mercury-in-glass 

thermometer to facilitate the use of 

mercury-free products. 

KK. Method 12 of Appendix A–5 of Part 

60 

Method 12 would be revised to allow 

an analysis by inductively coupled 

plasma-atomic emission spectrometry 

(ICP–AES) or cold vapor atomic 

fluorescence spectrometry (CVAFS) as 

alternatives to atomic absorption (AA) 

analysis. The ICP–AES is currently an 

approved technique for lead analysis in 

Method 29, and CVAFS offers 

comparable sensitivity and precision to 

AA. 

LL. Method 14A of Appendix A–5 of 

Part 60 

In Section 10.1.1 of Method 14A, we 

inadvertently referenced Figure 5–6. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 1135 

This reference would be corrected to 

Figure 5–5. 

MM. Method 16A of Appendix A–6 of 

Part 60 

In Method 16A, the applicability 

section would note that method results 

may be biased low if used at sources 

other than kraft pulp mills where stack 

oxygen levels may be lower. 

NN. Method 18 of Appendix A–6 of Part 

60 

In Method 18, sampling bags made of 

materials other than Tedlar would be 

allowed if the materials are applicable 

for retaining the compounds of interest. 

Tedlar bags are no longer produced. 

OO. Method 23 of Appendix A–7 of Part 

60 

In Method 23, the requirement in 

Section 2.2.7 that silica gel be stored in 

metal containers is unnecessary and 

would be deleted. Section 4.2.7 would 

be clarified to note that the used silica 

gel should be transferred to its original 

container or other suitable vessel if 

moisture is being determined. If 

moisture is not being determined, the 

spent silica gel may be discarded. 

Mercury-free thermometers would be 

added as an alternative to using 

mercury-in-glass thermometers to 

facilitate the use of mercury-free 

products. 

PP. Method 24 of Appendix A–7 of Part 

60 

Method 24 would be revised to cite 

only ASTM Method D2369 and not the 

specific sections of the method, since 

the section numbers may change with 

periodic updates. 

QQ. Method 25 of Appendix A–7 of Part 

60 

In Method 25, more detailed 

information would be added to describe 

the filters used for sample collection. 

RR. Method 25C of Appendix A–7 of 

Part 60 

Method 25C would be revised to 

allow sampling lines made of Teflon. 

Probes that have closed points and are 

driven below surface in a single step 

and withdrawn at a distance to create a 

gas gap would be allowed as acceptable 

substitutes to using pilot probes and the 

auger procedure. An equation for 

correcting the sample nitrogen 

concentration for tank dilution would 

be added as a supplemental calculation 

option. 

SS. Method 25D of Appendix A–7 of 

Part 60 

In Method 25D, errors in crossreferences within the method would be 

corrected. 

TT. Method 26 of Appendix A–8 of Part 

60 

Method 26 would be revised to allow 

the use of heated Teflon probes in place 

of glass-lined probes. Conflicting 

temperature requirements for the 

sampling system would be clarified. The 

note to keep the probe and filter 

temperature at least 20 °C above the 

source temperature would be removed 

because the specification is not needed 

at higher temperature stacks. The 

location of the thermocouple that 

monitors the collected gas temperature 

would be clarified as being in the gas 

stream, not the filter box. Method 26A 

would be an acceptable alternative to 

Method 26 since the methods are 

fundamentally similar and give 

comparable results when determining 

non-particulate hydrogen halides. 

UU. Method 29 of Appendix A–8 of Part 

60 

Method 29 would be revised to allow 

samples to be analyzed by CVAFS as an 

alternative to AA analysis since CVAFS 

is as sensitive and precise as AA. 

VV. Method 30B of Appendix A–8 of 

Part 60 

In Method 30B, calibrating a 

barometer against a NIST-traceable 

barometer would be added as an 

alternative to calibrating against a 

mercury barometer to facilitate the use 

of mercury-free products. 

Table 9–1 and the method text would 

be revised to amend the quality 

assurance/quality control criteria for 

sorbent trap section 2 breakthrough and 

sample analysis. These revisions would 

address compliance testing and relative 

accuracy testing of mercury monitoring 

systems currently being conducted at 

much lower emission concentrations. 

For compliance/emissions testing, the 

specification in Table 9–1 for sample 

analysis would be revised to require 

analytical results be within the valid 

calibration range down to a 

concentration of 0.01 mg/dscm. This will 

ensure that measurements at the low 

levels being measured under recent 

rulemakings are of known, acceptable, 

and consistent quality. For relative 

accuracy testing of mercury monitoring 

systems, the sample analysis 

specification in Table 9–1 would remain 

the same, but the breakthrough criteria 

for second section in the sorbent traps 

would be revised to provide additional 

flexibility where mercury 

concentrations are less than 0.5 mg/ 

dscm. 

Finally, Method 30B would be revised 

to include the most up to date citation 

for determining the method detection 

limit or MDL. 

WW. Performance Specification 1 of 

Appendix B of Part 60 

In Performance Specification 1, the 

terms ‘‘full scale’’ and ‘‘span’’ would be 

noted as having the same meaning. 

XX. Performance Specification 3 of 

Appendix B of Part 60 

In Performance Specification 3, a 

statement that allows the relative 

accuracy to be within 20 percent of the 

reference method would be added to 

establish the original intent of the rule. 

This statement was inadvertently 

deleted in a previous amendment. 

YY. Performance Specification 4 of 

Appendix B of Part 60 

Performance Specification 4 would be 

revised to remove the required use of 

the interference trap specified in 

Method 10 when evaluating nondispersive infrared continuous emission 

monitoring systems against Method 10. 

This is an old requirement, and the trap 

is not needed with modern analyzers. 

ZZ. Performance Specification 4B of 

Appendix B of Part 60 

Performance Specification 4B would 

be clarified to note that Equation 1 in 

Section 7.1.1 for calculating calibration 

error only applies to the carbon 

monoxide monitor and not the oxygen 

monitor. It would be noted for the 

oxygen monitor that the calibration 

error should be expressed as the oxygen 

concentration difference between the 

mean monitor and reference value at 

three levels. 

AAA. Performance Specification 7 of 

Appendix B of Part 60 

Performance Specification 7 would be 

revised to allow Methods 15 and 16 as 

reference methods in addition to 

Method 11. Methods 15 and 16 are 

approved for determining hydrogen 

sulfide and are appropriate for this 

application. Methods 15 and 16 are 

approved EPA reference methods for a 

number of sources. A pertinent 

reference would also be added to the 

references section. 

BBB. Performance Specification 11 of 

Appendix B of Part 60 

In Performance Specification 11, 

errors in the denominators of Equations 

11–1 and 11–2 would be corrected. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
1136 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

CCC. Performance Specification 15 of 

Appendix B of Part 60 

In Performance Specification 15, the 

general references to 40 CFR part 60, 

Appendix B for the relative accuracy 

analysis procedure would specifically 

cite Performance Specification 2 of 40 

CFR part 60, Appendix B. 

DDD. Performance Specification 16 of 

Appendix B of Part 60 

Performance Specification 16 would 

be clarified to answer questions that 

have arisen since its publication. 

Retesting a predictive emission 

monitoring system (PEMS) after a sensor 

is replaced would be explained more 

clearly. Allowances would be made for 

relative accuracy testing at three load or 

production rate levels in cases where 

the key operating parameter could not 

be readily altered. Additional 

instruction would be added for 

performing the relative accuracy audit 

(RAA). An error in the RAA acceptance 

criterion would be corrected, and an 

alternative acceptance criterion for low 

concentration measurements would be 

added. The yearly relative accuracy test 

audit would clearly note that the 

statistical tests in Section 8.3 are not 

required. An incorrect reference to 

Equation 16–4 in Section 12.4 would be 

corrected. 

EEE. Procedure 1 of Appendix F of Part 

60 

In Procedure 1, the relevant 

performance specification would be 

cited for the RAA calculation instead of 

using the current Equation 1–1 which is 

not appropriate for all pollutants. 

FFF. Procedure 2 of Appendix F of Part 

60 

In Procedure 2, Equations 2–2 and 2– 

3 would be revised to have the full-scale 

value in the denominator, which is 

more appropriate than the up-scale 

check value. The denominator of 

equation 2–4 would be revised to 

include the volume of the reference 

device rather than the full-scale value. 

These revisions reflect the original 

intent of the rule. 

GGG. Procedure 5 of Appendix F of Part 

60 

In Procedure 5, the second section 

listed as Section 6.2.6 would be 

correctly numbered as Section 6.2.7. 

HHH. General Provisions (Subpart A) 

Part 61 

In the General Provisions of part 61, 

Methods 3A and 19 would be added to 

the list of methods not requiring the use 

of audit samples in § 61.13(e). These 

methods were inadvertently omitted in 

the original rule. 

III. Beryllium (Subpart C) Part 61 

In the beryllium National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

(NESHAP), Method 29 of part 60 would 

be added as an alternative to Method 

104 in § 61.33(a) for emissions testing 

since Method 29 is used to determine 

beryllium under other rules and is 

appropriate for this subpart as well. 

JJJ. Beryllium Rocket Motor Firing 

(Subpart D) Part 61 

In the beryllium rocket motor firing 

NESHAP, a conversion error in the 

emission standard in § 61.42(a) would 

be corrected. 

KKK. Mercury (Subpart E) Part 61 

In the mercury NESHAP, Method 29 

of part 60 would be added as an 

alternative to Method 101A in 

§ 61.53(d)(2) for emissions testing since 

Method 29 is used to determine mercury 

under other rules and is appropriate for 

this subpart as well. 

LLL. Inorganic Arsenic Emissions From 

Glass Manufacturing Plants (Subpart N) 

Part 61 

In the glass manufacturing plants 

NESHAP, Method 29 in Appendix A of 

part 60 would be added as an alternative 

to Method 108 in § 61.164(d)(2)(i) for 

determining the arsenic emissions rate 

and in § 61.164(e)(1)(i) and (e)(2) for 

determining the arsenic concentration 

in a gas stream. Method 29 is used to 

determine arsenic under other rules and 

is appropriate for this subpart as well. 

MMM. Method 101 of Appendix B of 

Part 61 

Method 101 would be revised to allow 

analysis by ICP–AES or CVAFS as 

alternatives to AA analysis. These 

techniques are allowed for determining 

mercury in other approved methods and 

are appropriate for Method 101 as well. 

They were not available when Method 

101 was promulgated. 

NNN. Method 101A of Appendix B of 

Part 61 

Method 101A would be revised to 

allow analysis by ICP–AES or CVAFS as 

alternatives to AA analysis. These 

techniques are allowed for determining 

mercury in other approved methods and 

are appropriate for Method 101A as 

well. They were not available when 

Method 101A was promulgated. 

OOO. Method 102 of Appendix B of Part 

61 

In Method 102, mercury-free 

thermometers would be allowed in 

place of mercury-in-glass thermometers 

to facilitate the use of mercury-free 

products. 

PPP. Method 104 of Appendix B of Part 

61 

Method 104 would be revised to allow 

analysis by ICP–AES as an alternative to 

AA analysis. This new technique is 

acceptable for measuring beryllium and 

was not available when Method 104 was 

promulgated. A new alternative 

procedures section would be added to 

address ICP–AES. 

QQQ. Methods 108 and 108A of 

Appendix B of Part 61 

Methods 108 and 108A would be 

revised to allow analysis by ICP–AES as 

an alternative to AA analysis. This new 

technique is acceptable for measuring 

arsenic and was not available when 

Methods 108 and 108A were 

promulgated. A new alternative 

procedures section would be added to 

address ICP–AES. 

RRR. General Provisions (Subpart A) 

Part 63 

In the General Provisions of part 63, 

Methods 3A and 19 would be added to 

the list of methods not requiring the use 

of audit samples in § 63.7(c). These were 

inadvertent omissions of the original 

rule. In § 63.8(f)(6)(iii), an incorrect 

reference to a section of Performance 

Specification 2 would be corrected. 

SSS. Synthetic Organic Chemical 

Manufacturing Industry (Subpart G) 

Part 63 

Subpart G would be revised to allow 

the use of Method 8260B in the SW–846 

Compendium of Methods or Method 

316 to determine hazardous air 

pollutant concentrations in wastewater 

streams in § 63.144(b)(5)(i). Both 

methods are appropriate for this 

application but were not considered 

during the original rule development. 

TTT. Chromium Emissions From Hard 

and Decorative Chromium 

Electroplating and Chromium 

Anodizing Tanks (Subpart N) Part 63 

South Coast Air Quality Management 

District Method 205.1 would be added 

as a testing option for measuring total 

chromium. Method 205.1 is appropriate 

for this application, but its application 

to this rule was not considered during 

the original rule development. 

UUU. Ethylene Oxide Emissions 

Standards for Sterilization Facilities 

(Subpart O) Part 63 

The ethylene oxide emissions 

standards for sterilization facilities 

NESHAP would be revised to allow 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 1137 

California Air Resources Board (CARB) 

Method 431 as an alternative to the 

procedures in § 63.365(b) for 

determining efficiency at the 

sterilization chamber vent. Method 431 

is appropriate for this application but 

was not considered during the original 

rule development. An error in a 

reference to a section in Performance 

Specification 8 would also be corrected. 

VVV. Marine Tank Vessel Loading 

Operations (Subpart Y) Part 63 

The marine tank vessel loading 

operations NESHAP would be revised to 

allow Method 25B as an alternative to 

Method 25A in § 63.565(d)(5) for 

determining the average volatile organic 

compound (VOC) concentration 

upstream and downstream of recovery 

devices. Method 25B would be allowed 

as an alternative to Methods 25 and 25A 

for determining the percent reduction in 

VOC in § 63.565(d)(8), and the 

requirement that Method 25B be 

validated according to Method 301 in 

§ 63.565(d)(10) would be added. Method 

25B would also be added as an 

alternative to Method 25A in 

determining the baseline outlet VOC 

concentration in § 63.565(g). Method 

25B uses a different detector than 

Method 25A but gives comparable 

results to Method 25A in these 

applications. 

WWW. Aerospace Manufacturing and 

Rework Facilities (Subpart GG) Part 63 

The aerospace manufacturing and 

rework facilities NESHAP would be 

revised to remove an incorrect reference 

to the location of Method 319 in 

§ 63.750(o). 

XXX. Pharmaceuticals Production 

(Subpart GGG) Part 63 

The pharmaceuticals production 

NESHAP would be revised to allow 

Method 320 as an alternative to Method 

18 for demonstrating that a vent is not 

a process vent. Method 320 is a broadly 

applicable method that is acceptable in 

this application because it is selfvalidating. 

YYY. Secondary Aluminum Production 

(Subpart RRR) Part 63 

The secondary aluminum production 

NESHAP would be revised to allow 

Method 26 as an alternative to Method 

26A in § 63.1511(c)(9) for determining 

hydrochloric acid (HCl) concentration. 

Method 26 is the non-isokinetic version 

of Method 26A and is being allowed in 

all cases where non-isokinetic sampling 

for HCl is performed. 

ZZZ. Manufacturing of Nutritional 

Yeast (Subpart CCCC) Part 63 

Table 2 in the manufacturing of 

nutritional yeast NESHAP would be 

revised to delete the requirements to use 

Methods 1, 2, 3, and 4 when measuring 

VOC by Method 25A. Methods 1, 2, 3, 

and 4 are required for particulate matter 

sampling and the VOC in this 

application is normally not particulate 

in nature. 

AAAA. Petroleum Refineries: Catalytic 

Cracking Units, Catalytic Reforming 

Units, and Sulfur Recovery Units 

(Subpart UUUU) Part 63 

Table 4 in the petroleum refineries: 

catalytic cracking units, catalytic 

reforming units, and sulfur recovery 

units NESHAP would be revised to 

allow Method 320 as an alternative to 

Method 18 for determining control 

device efficiency for organic 

compounds. Method 320 is a broadly 

applicable method that is acceptable in 

this application because it is selfvalidating. 

BBBB. Stationary Reciprocating Internal 

Combustion Engines (Subpart ZZZZ) 

Part 63 

Table 4 in the stationary reciprocating 

internal combustion engines NESHAP 

would be revised to clarify that a heated 

probe is not necessary when using 

ASTM D6522 to measure oxygen or 

carbon dioxide concentrations because 

condensed moisture is normally not an 

interferent to these compounds. The 

requirement to use Method 1 or 1A for 

sampling site and sampling point 

location would be deleted because the 

exhausts are small and have temporally 

varying emissions. Instruction would be 

added to sample at the centroid of the 

stack. 

CCCC. Method 306 of Appendix A of 

Part 63 

Method 306 would be revised to 

remove references to two figures that do 

not exist and to add clarifying 

information about the conditions under 

which ICP is appropriate for sample 

analysis. Alternative mercury-free 

thermometers also would be added as 

alternatives to mercury-in-glass 

thermometers to facilitate the use of 

mercury-free products. 

DDDD. Method 306A of Appendix A of 

Part 63 

In Method 306A, information would 

be added to clarify the conditions under 

which sample filtering is required. 

EEEE. Methods 308, 315, and 316 of 

Appendix A of Part 63 

In Methods 308, 315, and 316, 

calibrating a temperature sensor against 

a thermometer equivalent to a mercuryin-glass thermometer would be added as 

an alternative to mercury-in-glass 

thermometers to facilitate the use of 

non-mercury products. Alternative 

mercury-free thermometers would be 

added as an alternative to using a 

mercury-in-glass thermometers. 

FFFF. Method 321 of Appendix A of 

Part 63 

In Method 321, the term for dilution 

factor in the calculations would be 

clarified. 

IV. Request for Comments 

The agency is reviewing the adequacy 

of its current test methods in regard to 

sampling site selection and sampling 

point requirements. Emission gas flow 

patterns affect representative testing, 

and this is not addressed in many EPA 

test methods. Method 1 contains 

provisions for sampling point locations, 

traversing, and determination of 

cyclonic flow, and Method 7E was 

revised to contain procedures for 

determining gaseous stratification in 

2006. However, there are no 

requirements in most methods to follow 

the Method 1 or 7E procedures. 

Method 7E allows stratification to be 

assessed through either a 3- or 12-point 

traverse while measuring variations in 

either a pollutant or diluent 

concentration. The degree of 

stratification determines whether a 

single-point, 3-, or 12-point traverse is 

used for the test. There are no 

requirements to check for cyclonic flow 

in Method 7E. 

We have information that suggests 

deficiencies exist in the 3-point test in 

a number of cases and that at least a 5- 

point, dual axis test should be required. 

A summary of this information has been 

included in the regulatory docket. We 

are also reconsidering the 

appropriateness of a diluent gas for the 

test instead of the regulated pollutant. 

In this proposed rule, we would 

update the General Provisions of Parts 

60, 61, and 63 to include evaluations of 

gas stratification and cyclonic flow with 

all compliance tests. The agency solicits 

your comments and data to aid in 

establishing better procedures. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
1138 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

This action is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under the terms of 

Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993) and is therefore 

not subject to review under Executive 

Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011). 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This action does not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 

Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. Burden is 

defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). The 

amendments being proposed in this 

action to the test methods and testing 

regulations do not add information 

collection requirements but make 

needed corrections and updates to 

existing testing methodology. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

generally requires an agency to prepare 

a regulatory flexibility analysis of any 

rule subject to notice and comment 

rulemaking requirements under the 

Administrative Procedure Act or any 

other statute unless the agency certifies 

that the rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. Small entities 

include small businesses, small 

organizations, and small governmental 

jurisdictions. 

For purposes of assessing the impacts 

of this rule on small entities, small 

entity is defined as (1) A small business 

as defined by the Small Business 

Administration’s (SBA) regulations at 13 

CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental 

jurisdiction that is a government of a 

city, county, town, school district or 

special district with a population of less 

than 50,000; and (3) a small 

organization that is any not-for-profit 

enterprise which is independently 

owned and operated and is not 

dominant in its field. 

After considering the economic 

impacts of this rule on small entities, I 

certify that this action will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

This proposed rule will neither impose 

emission measurement requirements 

beyond those specified in the current 

regulations, nor will it change any 

emission standard. This proposed action 

will not impose any new requirements 

on small entities. We continue to be 

interested in the potential impacts of the 

proposed rule on small entities and 

welcome comments on issues related to 

such impacts. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

This action contains no Federal 

mandates under the provisions of Title 

II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 

Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 1531– 

1538 for State, local, or tribal 

governments or the private sector. The 

action imposes no enforceable duty on 

any State, local or tribal governments or 

the private sector. Therefore, this action 

is not subject to the requirements of 

sections 202 or 205 of the UMRA. This 

action is also not subject to the 

requirements of section 203 of UMRA 

because it contains no regulatory 

requirements that might significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments. This 

action corrects and updates current 

testing regulations and does not add any 

new requirements. 

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, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132. This action 

simply corrects minor errors and makes 

updates to current source testing 

methods to maintain their original 

intent. Thus, Executive Order 13132 

does not apply to this action. In the 

spirit of Executive Order 13132, and 

consistent with the EPA policy to 

promote communications between the 

EPA and State and local governments, 

the EPA specifically solicits comment 

on this proposed rule from State and 

local officials. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications, as specified in Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000). This proposed rule imposes no 

requirements on tribal governments. 

This action simply corrects and updates 

current testing regulations. Thus, 

Executive Order 13175 does not apply 

to this action. The EPA specifically 

solicits additional comment on this 

proposed action from tribal officials. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

The EPA interprets EO 13045 (62 FR 

19885, April 23, 1997) as applying only 

to those regulatory actions that concern 

health or safety risks, such that the 

analysis required under section 5–501 of 

the EO has the potential to influence the 

regulation. This action is not subject to 

EO 13045 because it does not establish 

an environmental standard intended to 

mitigate health or safety risks. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211 (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 

2001)), because it is not a significant 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law 

104–113 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs the 

EPA to use voluntary consensus 

standards in its regulatory activities 

unless to do so would be inconsistent 

with applicable law or otherwise 

impractical. Voluntary consensus 

standards are technical standards (e.g., 

materials specifications, test methods, 

sampling procedures, and business 

practices) that are developed or adopted 

by voluntary consensus standards 

bodies. NTTAA directs the EPA to 

provide Congress, through OMB, 

explanations when the Agency decides 

not to use available and applicable 

voluntary consensus standards. 

This proposed rulemaking involves 

technical standards. The EPA proposes 

to use ASTM D975–076, developed and 

adopted by the American Society for 

Testing and Materials (ASTM). This 

standard may be obtained from ASTM at 

100 Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, 

West Conshohocken, PA 19428–2959. 

ASTM D975–076 has been determined 

to be at least as stringent as currently 

required ASTM D396 for defining 

‘‘distillate oil.’’ ASTM D975–076 is 

required in some State permits for this 

purpose and end users have asked that 

it be allowed as an alternative to D396 

under 40 CFR 60.41c. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

Executive Order (EO) 12898 (59 FR 

7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes Federal 

executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs 

Federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their 

mission by identifying and addressing, 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 1139 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, 

policies, and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. 

The EPA has determined that this 

proposed rule will not have 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects 

on minority or low-income populations 

because it does not affect the level of 

protection provided to human health or 

the environment. This rule corrects and 

updates current testing regulations and 

does not cause emission increases from 

regulated sources. 

Revisions to Test Methods and Testing 

Regulations 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Parts 51, 60, 

61, and 63 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Test methods and 

procedures, and Performance 

specifications. 

Dated: November 29, 2011. 

Lisa P. Jackson, 

Administrator. 

For the reasons stated 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 Appendix M by revising 

section 4a. to read as follows: 

Appendix M to Part 51—Recommended 

Test Methods for State Implementation 

Plans 

* * * * * 

4. * * * 

a. The source owner, operator, or 

representative of the tested facility shall 

obtain an audit sample, if commercially 

available, from an AASP for each test method 

used for regulatory compliance purposes. No 

audit samples are required for the following 

test methods: Methods 3A and 3C of 

Appendix A–3 of Part 60, Methods 6C, 7E, 

9, and 10 of Appendix A–4 of Part 60, 

Methods 18 and 19 of Appendix A–6 of Part 

60, Methods 20, 22, and 25A of Appendix A– 

7 of Part 60, and Methods 303, 318, 320, and 

321 of Appendix A of Part 63. If multiple 

sources at a single facility are tested during 

a compliance test event, only one audit 

sample is required for each method used 

during a compliance test. The compliance 

authority responsible for the compliance test 

may waive the requirement to include an 

audit sample if they believe that an audit 

sample is not necessary. ‘‘Commercially 

available’’ means that two or more 

independent AASPs have blind audit 

samples available for purchase. If the source 

owner, operator, or representative cannot 

find an audit sample for a specific method, 

the owner, operator, or representative shall 

consult the EPA Web site at the following 

URL, http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc, to confirm 

whether there is a source that can supply an 

audit sample for that method. If the EPA Web 

site does not list an available audit sample 

at least 60 days prior to the beginning of the 

compliance test, the source owner, operator, 

or representative shall not be required to 

include an audit sample as part of the quality 

assurance program for the compliance test. 

When ordering an audit sample, the source 

owner, operator, or representative shall give 

the sample provider an estimate for the 

concentration of each pollutant that is 

emitted by the source or the estimated 

concentration of each pollutant based on the 

permitted level and the name, address, and 

phone number of the compliance authority. 

The source owner, operator, or representative 

shall report the results for the audit sample 

along with a summary of the emission test 

results for the audited pollutant to the 

compliance authority and shall report the 

results of the audit sample to the AASP. The 

source owner, operator, or representative 

shall make both reports at the same time and 

in the same manner or shall report to the 

compliance authority first and report to the 

AASP. If the method being audited is a 

method that allows the samples to be 

analyzed in the field and the tester plans to 

analyze the samples in the field, the tester 

may analyze the audit samples prior to 

collecting the emission samples provided a 

representative of the compliance authority is 

present at the testing site. The tester may 

request and the compliance authority may 

grant a waiver to the requirement that a 

representative of the compliance authority 

must be present at the testing site during the 

field analysis of an audit sample. The source 

owner, operator, or representative may report 

the results of the audit sample to the 

compliance authority and then report the 

results of the audit sample to the AASP prior 

to collecting any emission samples. The test 

protocol and final test report shall document 

whether an audit sample was ordered and 

utilized and the pass/fail results as 

applicable. 

* * * * * 

3. Amend Method 201A of Appendix 

M as follows: 

a. By revising sections 8.3.4(b) and 

8.3.4.1. 

b. By revising sections 8.7.2.2 and 

8.7.5.5(a). 

c. By revising the introductory text of 

section 10.1. 

d. By revising section 11.2.1. 

e. By revising Equation 9 in section 

12.5. 

f. By removing section 10.5. 

g. By removing the term ‘‘Vb’’ and its 

definition from section 12.1. 

Method 201A—Determination of PM10

and PM2.5 Emissions From Stationary 

Sources (Constant Sampling Rate 

Procedure) 

* * * * * 

8.3.4 * * * 

(b) The appropriate nozzle to maintain the 

required gas sampling rate for the velocity 

pressure range and isokinetic range. If the 

isokinetic range cannot be met (e.g., batch 

processes, extreme process flow or 

temperature variation), void the sample or 

use methods subject to the approval of the 

Administrator to correct the data. The 

acceptable variation from isokinetic sampling 

is 80 to 120 percent and no more than 100 

± 21 percent (2 out of 12 or 5 out of 24) 

sampling points outside of this criteria. 

* * * * * 

8.3.4.1 Preliminary traverse. You must 

use an S-type pitot tube with a conventional 

thermocouple to conduct the traverse. 

Conduct the preliminary traverse as close as 

possible to the anticipated testing time on 

sources that are subject to hour-by-hour gas 

flow rate variations of approximately ± 20 

percent and/or gas temperature variations of 

approximately ± 10 °C (± 18; °F). (Note: You 

should be aware that these variations can 

cause errors in the cyclone cut diameters and 

the isokinetic sampling velocities.) 

* * * * * 

8.7.2.2 Probe blockage factor. You must 

use Equation 26 to calculate an average probe 

blockage correction factor (bf) if the diameter 

of your stack or duct is between 25.7 and 

36.4 inches for the combined PM2.5/PM10

sampling head and pitot and between 18.8 

and 26.5 inches for the PM2.5 cyclone and 

pitot. A probe blockage factor is calculated 

because of the flow blockage caused by the 

relatively large cross-sectional area of the 

cyclone sampling head, as discussed in 

Section 8.3.2.2 and illustrated in Figures 8 

and 9 of Section 17. You must determine the 

cross-sectional area of the cyclone head you 

use and determine its stack blockage factor. 

(Note: Commercially-available sampling 

heads (including the PM10 cyclone, PM2.5

cyclone, pitot and filter holder) have a 

projected area of approximately 31.2 square 

inches when oriented into the gas stream. As 

the probe is moved from the outermost to the 

innermost point, the amount of blockage that 

actually occurs ranges from approximately 13 

square inches to the full 31.2 inches plus the 

blockage caused by the probe extension. The 

average cross-sectional area blocked is 22 

square inches. 

* * * * * 

8.7.5.5 * * * 

(a) Container #1, Less than or equal to 

PM2.5 micrometer filterable particulate. Use 

tweezers and/or clean disposable surgical 

gloves to remove the filter from the filter 

holder. Place the filter in the Petri dish that 

you labeled with the test identification and 

Container #1. Using a dry brush and/or a 

sharp-edged blade, carefully transfer any PM 

and/or filter fibers that adhere to the filter 

holder gasket or filter support screen to the 

Petri dish. Seal the container. This container 

holds particles less than or equal to 2.5 

micrometers that are caught on the in-stack 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
1140 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

filter. (Note: If the test is conducted for PM10

only, then Container #1 would be for less 

than or equal to PM10 micrometer filterable 

particulate.) 

* * * * * 

10.1 Gas Flow Velocities. You must use 

an S-type pitot tube that meets the required 

EPA specifications (EPA Publication 600/4– 

77–0217b) during these velocity 

measurements. (NOTE: If, as specified in 

Section 8.7.2.3, testing is performed in stacks 

less than 26.5 inches in diameter, testers may 

use a standard pitot tube according to the 

requirements in Method 1 or 2 of Appendix 

A–3 to Part 60.) You must also complete the 

following: 

* * * * * 

11.2.1 Container #1, Less than or Equal to 

PM2.5 Micrometer Filterable Particulate. 

Transfer the filter and any loose particulate 

from the sample container to a tared 

weighing dish or pan that is inert to solvent 

or mineral acids. Desiccate for 24 hours in a 

desiccator containing anhydrous calcium 

sulfate. Weigh to a constant weight and 

report the results to the nearest 0.1 mg. (See 

Section 3.0 for a definition of constant 

weight.) If constant weight requirements 

cannot be met, data should be reported and 

flagged as a minimum value. (Note: 

Regardless of the stack temperature, you are 

not required to speciate the Method 201A 

nozzle, front half or in-stack filter sample 

into organic and inorganic fractions. Neither 

Method 17 nor 201A require separate 

analysis of the filter for inorganic and organic 

PM. Since the in-stack filter samples 

collected at ≤30 °C (85 °F) may include both 

filterable insoluble particulate and 

condensable particulate, the filter should be 

weighed after desiccation but not extracted 

since insoluble particulate will not be 

recovered from the extraction.) 

* * * * * 

12.5 * * * 

For Nre greater than or equal to 3,162: 

* * * * * 

4. Amend Method 202 of Appendix M 

as follows: 

a. By revising the introductory text in 

section 8.5.3.1. 

b. By revising section 11.2.2. 

c. By revising Figures 2, 3, 4, 5, and 

6 in section 18.0. 

Method 202—Dry Impinger Method for 

Determining Condensable Particulate 

Emissions from Stationary Sources 

* * * * * 

8.5.3.1 If you choose to conduct a 

pressurized nitrogen purge on the complete 

CPM sampling train, you may quantitatively 

transfer the water collected in the condenser 

and the water dropout impinger to the 

backup impinger as an alternative to 

replacing the short stem impinger insert with 

a long stem insert prior to purging the 

sampling train. You must measure the water 

combined in the backup impinger and record 

the volume or weight as part of the moisture 

collected during sampling as specified in 

Section 8.5.3.4. 

* * * * * 

11.2.2 CPM Container #1, Aqueous 

Liquid Impinger Contents. Analyze the water 

soluble CPM in Container #1 as described in 

this section. Place the contents of Container 

#1 into a separatory funnel. Add 

approximately 30 ml of hexane to the funnel, 

mix well, and pour off the upper organic 

phase. Repeat this procedure twice with 30 

ml of hexane each time combining the 

organic phase from each extraction. Each 

time, leave a small amount of the organic/ 

hexane phase in the separatory funnel, 

ensuring that no water is collected in the 

organic phase. This extraction should yield 

about 90 ml of organic extract. Combine the 

organic extract from Container #1 with the 

organic train rinse in Container #2. 

* * * * * 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2EP09JA12.018</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 1141 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2EP09JA12.019</GPH>
1142 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2EP09JA12.020</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 1143 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2EP09JA12.021</GPH> EP09JA12.022</GPH>
1144 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

* * * * * 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–C 

PART 60—STANDARDS OF 

PERFORMANCE FOR NEW 

STATIONARY SOURCES 

5. The authority citation for part 60 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq. 

6. Amend § 60.8 by revising paragraph 

(g)(1) and adding new paragraphs (h) 

and (i) to read as follows: 

§ 60.8 Performance tests. 

* * * * * 

(g) * * * 

(1) The source owner, operator, or 

representative of the tested facility shall 

obtain an audit sample, if commercially 

available, from an AASP for each test 

method used for regulatory compliance 

purposes. No audit samples are required 

for the following test methods: Methods 

3A and 3C of Appendix A–3 of Part 60, 

Methods 6C, 7E, 9, and 10 of Appendix 

A–4 of Part 60, Methods 18 and 19 of 

Appendix A–6 of Part 60, Methods 20, 

22, and 25A of Appendix A–7 of Part 

60, and Methods 303, 318, 320, and 321 

of Appendix A of Part 63. If multiple 

sources at a single facility are tested 

during a compliance test event, only one 

audit sample is required for each 

method used during a compliance test. 

The compliance authority responsible 

for the compliance test may waive the 

requirement to include an audit sample 

if they believe that an audit sample is 

not necessary. ‘‘Commercially 

available’’ means that two or more 

independent AASPs have blind audit 

samples available for purchase. If the 

source owner, operator, or 

representative cannot find an audit 

sample for a specific method, the owner, 

operator, or representative shall consult 

the EPA Web site at the following URL, 

www.epa.gov/ttn/emc, to confirm 

whether there is a source that can 

supply an audit sample for that method. 

If the EPA Web site does not list an 

available audit sample at least 60 days 

prior to the beginning of the compliance 

test, the source owner, operator, or 

representative shall not be required to 

include an audit sample as part of the 

quality assurance program for the 

compliance test. When ordering an 

audit sample, the source owner, 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2EP09JA12.023</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 1145 

operator, or representative shall give the 

sample provider an estimate for the 

concentration of each pollutant that is 

emitted by the source or the estimated 

concentration of each pollutant based 

on the permitted level and the name, 

address, and phone number of the 

compliance authority. The source 

owner, operator, or representative shall 

report the results for the audit sample 

along with a summary of the emission 

test results for the audited pollutant to 

the compliance authority and shall 

report the results of the audit sample to 

the AASP. The source owner, operator, 

or representative shall make both 

reports at the same time and in the same 

manner or shall report to the 

compliance authority first and then 

report to the AASP. If the method being 

audited is a method that allows the 

samples to be analyzed in the field and 

the tester plans to analyze the samples 

in the field, the tester may analyze the 

audit samples prior to collecting the 

emission samples provided a 

representative of the compliance 

authority is present at the testing site. 

The tester may request, and the 

compliance authority may grant, a 

waiver to the requirement that a 

representative of the compliance 

authority must be present at the testing 

site during the field analysis of an audit 

sample. The source owner, operator, or 

representative may report the results of 

the audit sample to the compliance 

authority and report the results of the 

audit sample to the AASP prior to 

collecting any emission samples. The 

test protocol and final test report shall 

document whether an audit sample was 

ordered and utilized and the pass/fail 

results as applicable. 

* * * * * 

(h) Unless otherwise specified in the 

applicable subpart, each test location 

must be verified to be free of cyclonic 

flow and evaluated for the existence of 

emission gas stratification and the 

required number of sampling traverse 

points. If other procedures are not 

specified in the applicable subpart to 

the regulations, use the appropriate 

procedures in Method 1 to check for 

cyclonic flow and Method 7E to 

evaluate emission gas stratification and 

selection of sampling points. 

(i) Whenever the use of multiple 

calibration gases is required by a test 

method, performance specification, or 

quality assurance procedure in a Part 60 

standard or appendix, Method 205 of 40 

CFR part 51, Appendix M, ‘‘Verification 

of Gas Dilution Systems for Field 

Instrument Calibrations,’’ may be used. 

7. Amend § 60.13 by revising 

paragraph (d)(1) to read as follows: 

§ 60.13 Monitoring requirements. 

* * * * * 

(d)(1) Owners and operators of a 

CEMS installed in accordance with the 

provisions of this part, must check the 

zero (or low level value between 0 and 

20 percent of span value) and span (50 

to 100 percent of span value) calibration 

drifts at least once daily in accordance 

with a written procedure. The zero and 

span must, at a minimum, be adjusted 

whenever either the 24-hour zero drift 

or the 24-hour span drift exceeds two 

times the limit of the applicable 

performance specification in Appendix 

B of this part. The system must allow 

the amount of the excess zero and span 

drift to be recorded and quantified 

whenever specified. Owners and 

operators of a COMS installed in 

accordance with the provisions of this 

part must check the zero and upscale 

(span) calibration drifts at least once 

daily. For a particular COMS, the 

acceptable range of zero and upscale 

calibration materials is defined in the 

applicable version of PS–1 in Appendix 

B of this part. For a COMS, the optical 

surfaces, exposed to the effluent gases, 

must be cleaned before performing the 

zero and upscale drift adjustments, 

except for systems using automatic zero 

adjustments. The optical surfaces must 

be cleaned when the cumulative 

automatic zero compensation exceeds 4 

percent opacity. 

* * * * * 

8. Amend § 60.17 by revising 

paragraphs (e) and (e)(1) to read as 

follows: 

§ 60.17 Incorporations by reference. 

* * * * * 

(e) The following material is available 

for purchase from the Water 

Environment Federation, 2626 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, 

DC 20037. 

(1) Method 209A, Total Residue Dried 

at 103–105 °C, in Standard Methods for 

the Examination of Water and 

Wastewater, 20th Edition, 1999, IBR 

approved February 25, 1985, for 

§ 60.683(b). 

* * * * * 

9. Amend § 60.46b by revising 

paragraphs (f)(1)(ii) and (h)(1) and (2) to 

read as follows: 

§ 60.46b Compliance and performance test 

methods and procedures for particulate 

matter and nitrogen oxides. 

* * * * * 

(f) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(ii) Method 7E of Appendix A of this 

part or Method 320 of Appendix A of 

Part 63 shall be used to determine the 

NOX concentrations. Method 3A or 3B 

of Appendix A of this part shall be used 

to determine O2 concentration. 

* * * * * 

(h) * * * 

(1) Conduct an initial performance 

test as required under § 60.8 over a 

minimum of 24 consecutive steam 

generating unit operating hours at 

maximum heat input capacity to 

demonstrate compliance with the NOX

emission standards under § 60.44b using 

Method 7, 7A, or 7E of Appendix A of 

this part, Method 320 of Appendix A of 

Part 63, or other approved reference 

methods; and 

(2) Conduct subsequent performance 

tests once per calendar year or every 400 

hours of operation (whichever comes 

first) to demonstrate compliance with 

the NOX emission standards under 

§ 60.44b over a minimum of 3 

consecutive steam generating unit 

operating hours at maximum heat input 

capacity using Method 7, 7A, or 7E of 

Appendix A of this part, Method 320 of 

Appendix A of Part 63, or other 

approved reference methods. 

* * * * * 

10. Amend § 60.47b by revising 

paragraph (b)(2) to read as follows: 

§ 60.47b Emission monitoring for sulfur 

dioxide. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(2) Measuring SO2 according to 

Method 6B of Appendix A of this part 

at the inlet or outlet to the SO2 control 

system. An initial stratification test is 

required to verify the adequacy of the 

sampling location for Method 6B of 

Appendix A of this part. The 

stratification test shall consist of three 

paired runs of a suitable SO2 and CO2

measurement train operated at the 

candidate location and a second similar 

train operated according to the 

procedures in Section 3.2 and the 

applicable procedures in Section 7 of 

Performance Specification 2. Method 6B 

of Appendix A of this part, Method 6A 

of Appendix A of this part, or a 

combination of Methods 6 and 3 or 3B 

of Appendix A of this part or Methods 

6C or Method 320 of Appendix A of Part 

63 and 3A of Appendix A of this part 

are suitable measurement techniques. If 

Method 6B of Appendix A of this part 

is used for the second train, sampling 

time and timer operation may be 

adjusted for the stratification test as long 

as an adequate sample volume is 

collected; however, both sampling trains 

are to be operated similarly. For the 

location to be adequate for Method 6B 

of Appendix A of this part, 24-hour 

tests, the mean of the absolute 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
1146 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

difference between the three paired runs 

must be less than 10 percent. 

* * * * * 

11. Amend § 60.51c by revising the 

definition of ‘‘Medical/infectious waste’’ 

to read as follows: 

§ 60.51c Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Medical/infectious waste means any 

waste generated in the diagnosis, 

treatment, or immunization of human 

beings or animals, in research pertaining 

thereto, or in the production or testing 

of biologicals that are listed in 

paragraphs (1) through (7) of this 

definition. The definition of medical/ 

infectious waste does not include 

hazardous waste identified or listed 

under the regulations in part 261 of this 

chapter; household waste, as defined in 

§ 261.4(b)(1) of this chapter; ash from 

incineration of medical/infectious 

waste, once the incineration process has 

been completed; human corpses, 

remains, and anatomical parts that are 

intended for interment or cremation; 

and domestic sewage materials 

identified in § 261.4(a)(1) of this 

chapter. 

* * * * * 

12. Amend § 60.84 by revising the 

equation in paragraph (d) to read as 

follows: 

§ 60.84 Emission monitoring. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

Es = (Cs S)/[0.265 ¥ (0.0126 %O2) ¥ (A 

%CO2)] 

* * * * * 

13. Amend § 60.154 by revising 

paragraph (b)(5) to read as follows: 

§ 60.154 Test methods and procedures. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(5) Samples of the sludge charged to 

the incinerator shall be collected in 

nonporous jars at the beginning of each 

run and at approximately 1-hour 

intervals thereafter until the test ends; 

and ‘‘2540 G. Total, Fixed, and Volatile 

Solids in Solid and Semisolid Samples, 

in Standard Methods for the 

Examination of Water and Wastewater, 

20th Edition, 1998’’ (incorporated by 

reference—see § 60.17) shall be used to 

determine dry sludge content of each 

sample (total solids residue), except 

that: 

* * * * * 

14. Amend § 60.284 by revising the 

equation in paragraph (c)(3) to read as 

follows: 

§ 60.284 Monitoring of emissions and 

operations. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(3) * * * 

Ccorr = Cmeas × (21 ¥ X)/(21 ¥ Y) 

* * * * * 

15. Amend § 60.335 by revising two 

terms for the equation in paragraph 

(b)(1)to read as follows: 

§ 60.335 Test methods and procedures. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(1) * * * 

Pr = reference combustor inlet 

absolute pressure at 101.3 kilopascals 

ambient pressure. Alternatively, you 

may use 760 mm Hg (29.92 in Hg), 

Po = observed combustor inlet 

absolute pressure at test, mm Hg. 

Alternatively, you may use the 

barometric pressure for the date of the 

test, 

* * * * * 

16. Amend 60.374 by revising 

paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2), and (c)(2) to 

read as follows: 

§ 60.374 Test methods and procedures. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(1) Method 12 or Method 29 shall be 

used to determine the lead 

concentration (CPb) and, if applicable, 

the volumetric flow rate (Qsda) of the 

effluent gas. The sampling time and 

sample volume for each run shall be at 

least 60 minutes and 0.85 dscm (30 

dscf). 

(2) When different operations in a 

three-process operation facility are 

ducted to separate control devices, the 

lead emission concentration (C) from 

the facility shall be determined as 

follows: 

Where: 

C = Concentration of lead emissions for the 

entire facility, mg/dscm (gr/dscf). 

Ca = Concentration of lead emissions from 

facility ‘‘a’’, mg/dscm (gr/dscf). 

Qsda = Volumetric flow rate of effluent gas 

from facility ‘‘a’’, dscm/hr (dscf/hr). 

N = Total number of control devices to which 

separate operations in the facility are 

ducted. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(2) Method 12 or Method 29 shall be 

used to determine the lead 

concentration (CPb) and the volumetric 

flow rate (Qsd) of the effluent gas. The 

sampling time and sample volume for 

each run shall be at least 60 minutes 

and 0.85 dscm (30 dscf). 

* * * * * 

17. Amend § 60.382 by revising 

paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows: 

§ 60.382 Standard for particulate matter. 

* * * * * 

(a) * * * 

(1) Contain particulate matter in 

excess of 0.05 grams per dry standard 

cubic meter (0.05 g/dscm). 

* * * * * 

18. Amend § 60.386 by revising 

paragraph (b)(2) to read as follows: 

§ 60.386 Test methods and procedures. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(2) Method 9 and the procedures in 

§ 60.11 shall be used to determine 

opacity from stack emissions and 

process fugitive emissions. The observer 

shall read opacity only when emissions 

are clearly identified as emanating 

solely from the affected facility being 

observed. A single visible emission 

observer may conduct visible emission 

observations for up to three fugitive, 

stack, or vent emission points within a 

15-second interval. This option is 

subject to the following limitations: 

(i) No more than three emission 

points are read concurrently; 

(ii) All three emission points must be 

within a 70° viewing sector or angle in 

front of the observer such that the 

proper sun position can be maintained 

for all three points; and 

(iii) If an opacity reading for any one 

of the three emission points is within 5 

percent opacity of the application 

standard, then the observer must stop 

taking readings for the other two points 

and continue reading just that single 

point. 

* * * * * 

19. Amend § 60.472 by revising 

paragraph (a)(1)(ii) to read as follows: 

§ 60.472 Standards for particulate matter. 

* * * * * 

(a) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(ii) 0.4 kg/Mg (0.8 lb/ton) of saturated 

felt or smooth-surfaced roll roofing 

produced; 

* * * * * 

20. Amend § 60.660 by revising 

paragraph (c)(4) to read as follows: 

§ 60.660 Applicability and designation of 

affected facility. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(4) Each affected facility that has a 

total resource effectiveness (TRE) index 

value greater than 8.0 is exempt from all 

provisions of this subpart except for 

§§ 60.662; 60.664 (e), (f), and (g); and 

60.665 (h) and (l). 

* * * * * 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2EP09JA12.024</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 1147 

21. Amend § 60.665 by revising 

paragraphs (h)(2) and (3) to read as 

follows: 

§ 60.665 Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

* * * * * 

(h) * * * 

(2) Any recalculation of the TRE 

index value performed pursuant to 

§ 60.664(g); and 

(3) The results of any performance test 

performed pursuant to the methods and 

procedures required by § 60.664(e). 

* * * * * 

22. Amend Subpart IIII by revising 

Table 7 to read as follows: 

TABLE 7 TO SUBPART IIII OF PART 60—REQUIREMENTS FOR PERFORMANCE TESTS FOR STATIONARY CI ICE WITH A

DISPLACEMENT OF ≥ 30 LITERS PER CYLINDER

[As stated in § 60.4213, you must comply with the following requirements for performance tests for stationary CI ICE with a displacement of ≥ 30 

liters per cylinder] 

Each Complying with the 

requirement to You must Using According to the following requirements 

1. Stationary CI internal 

combustion engine with 

a displacement of ≥ 30 liters per cylinder.

a. Reduce NOX emissions 

by 90 percent or more.

i. Measure NOX at the 

centroid of the exhaust 

at the inlet and outlet of 

the control device; 

(1) Method 7E of 40 CFR 

part 60, Appendix A, 

Method 320 of 40 CFR 

part 63, Appendix A, or 

ASTM D 6348–03 (incorporated by reference, 

see § 60.17).

(a) NOX concentration 

must be at 15 percent 

O2, dry basis. Results of 

this test consist of the 

average of the three 1- 

hour or longer runs. 

ii. Measure O2 at the inlet 

and outlet of the control 

device; and, 

(2) Method 3, 3A, or 3B of 

40 CFR part 60, Appendix A.

(b) Measurements to determine O2 concentration 

must be made at the 

same time as the measurements for NOX concentration. 

iii. If necessary, measure 

moisture content at the 

inlet and outlet of the 

control device. 

(3) Method 4 of 40 CFR 

part 60, Appendix A, 

Method 320 of 40 CFR 

part 63, Appendix A, or 

ASTM D 6348–03 (incorporated by reference, 

see § 60.17).

(c) Measurements to determine moisture content 

must be made at the 

same time as the measurements for NOX concentration. 

b. Limit the concentration 

of NOX in the stationary 

CI internal combustion 

engine exhaust. 

i. Measure NOX at the 

centroid of the exhaust 

of the stationary internal 

combustion engine; 

(1) Method 7E of 40 CFR 

part 60, Appendix A, 

Method 320 of 40 CFR 

part 63, Appendix A, or 

ASTM D 6348–03 (incorporated by reference, 

see § 60.17).

(a) If using a control device, the sampling site 

must be located at the 

outlet of the control device. NOX concentration 

must be at 15 percent 

O2, dry basis. Results of 

this test consist of the 

average of the three 1- 

hour or longer runs. 

ii. Determine the O2 concentration of the stationary internal combustion engine exhaust at 

the sampling port location; and, 

(2) Method 3, 3A, or 3B of 

40 CFR part 60, Appendix A.

(b) Measurements to determine O2 concentration 

must be made at the 

same time as the measurement for NOX concentration. 

iii. If necessary, measure 

moisture content of the 

stationary internal combustion engine exhaust 

at the sampling port location. 

(3) Method 4 of 40 CFR 

part 60, Appendix A, 

Method 320 of 40 CFR 

part 63, Appendix A, or 

ASTM D 6348–03 (incorporated by reference, 

see § 60.17).

(c) Measurements to determine moisture content 

must be made at the 

same time as the measurement for NOX concentration. 

c. Reduce PM emissions 

by 60 percent or more.

i. Select the sampling port 

location and the number 

of traverse points; 

(1) Method 1 or 1A of 40 

CFR part 60, Appendix 

A.

(a) Sampling sites must be 

located at the inlet and 

outlet of the control device. 

ii. Measure O2 at the inlet 

and outlet of the control 

device; 

(2) Method 3, 3A, or 3B of 

40 CFR part 60, Appendix A.

(b) Measurements to determine O2 concentration 

must be made at the 

same time as the measurements for PM concentration. 

iii. If necessary, measure 

moisture content at the 

inlet and outlet of the 

control device; and 

(3) Method 4 of 40 CFR 

part 60, Appendix A.

(c) Measurements to determine and moisture 

content must be made 

at the same time as the 

measurements for PM 

concentration. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
1148 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 7 TO SUBPART IIII OF PART 60—REQUIREMENTS FOR PERFORMANCE TESTS FOR STATIONARY CI ICE WITH A

DISPLACEMENT OF ≥ 30 LITERS PER CYLINDER—Continued 

[As stated in § 60.4213, you must comply with the following requirements for performance tests for stationary CI ICE with a displacement of ≥ 30 

liters per cylinder] 

Each Complying with the 

requirement to You must Using According to the following requirements 

iv. Measure PM at the inlet 

and outlet of the control 

device.

(4) Method 5 of 40 CFR 

part 60, Appendix A.

(d) PM concentration must 

be at 15 percent O2, dry 

basis. Results of this 

test consist of the average of the three 1-hour 

or longer runs. 

d. Limit the concentration 

of PM in the stationary 

CI internal combustion 

engine exhaust.

i. Select the sampling port 

location and the number 

of traverse points; 

(1) Method 1 or 1A of 40 

CFR part 60, Appendix 

A.

(a) If using a control device, the sampling site 

must be located at the 

outlet of the control device. 

ii. Determine the O2 concentration of the stationary internal combustion engine exhaust at 

the sampling port location; and 

(2) Method 3, 3A, or 3B of 

40 CFR part 60, Appendix A.

(b) Measurements to determine O2 concentration 

must be made at the 

same time as the measurements for PM concentration. 

iii. If necessary, measure 

moisture content of the 

stationary internal combustion engine exhaust 

at the sampling port location; 

(3) Method 4 of 40 CFR 

part 60, Appendix A.

(c) Measurements to determine moisture content 

must be made at the 

same time as the measurements for PM concentration. 

iv. Measure PM at the exhaust of the stationary 

internal combustion engine. 

(4) Method 5 of 40 CFR 

part 60, Appendix A.

(d) PM concentration must 

be at 15 percent O2, dry 

basis. Results of this 

test consist of the average of the three 1-hour 

or longer runs. 

23. Amend Subpart JJJJ by revising 

Table 2 to read as follows: 

TABLE 2 TO SUBPART JJJJ OF PART 60—REQUIREMENTS FOR PERFORMANCE TESTS

[As stated in § 60.4244, you must comply with the following requirements for performance tests within 10 percent of 100 percent peak (or the 

highest achievable) load] 

For each Complying with the 

requirement to You must Using According to the following requirements 

1. Stationary SI internal 

combustion engine demonstrating compliance 

according to § 60.4244. 

a. limit the concentration of 

NOX in the stationary SI 

internal combustion engine exhaust. 

i. Measure NOX at the 

centroid of the exhaust 

of the stationary internal 

combustion engine; 

(1) Method 7E of 40 CFR 

part 60, Appendix A, 

Method D6522– 

00(2005),a Method 320 

of 40 CFR part 63, Appendix A, or ASTM 

D6348–03 (incorporated 

by reference, see 

§ 60.17). 

(a) If using a control device, the sampling site 

must be located at the 

outlet of the control device. Results of this test 

consist of the average of 

the three 1-hour or 

longer runs. 

ii. Determine the O2 concentration of the stationary internal combustion engine exhaust; (2) Method 3, 3A, or 3Bb

of 40 CFR part 60, Appendix A or ASTM Method D6522–00(2005).a

(b) Measurements to determine O2 concentration 

must be made at the 

same time as the measurements for NOX concentration. 

iii. Determine the exhaust 

flow rate of the stationary internal combustion engine exhaust; and 

(3) Method 2 or 19 of 40 

CFR part 60. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 1149 

TABLE 2 TO SUBPART JJJJ OF PART 60—REQUIREMENTS FOR PERFORMANCE TESTS—Continued 

[As stated in § 60.4244, you must comply with the following requirements for performance tests within 10 percent of 100 percent peak (or the 

highest achievable) load] 

For each Complying with the 

requirement to You must Using According to the following requirements 

iv. If necessary, measure 

moisture content of the 

stationary internal combustion engine exhaust 

at the sampling port location. 

(4) Method 4 of 40 CFR 

part 60, Appendix A, 

Method 320 of 40 CFR 

part 63, Appendix A, or 

ASTM D6348–03 (incorporated by reference, 

see § 60.17). 

(c) Measurements to determine moisture must 

be made at the same 

time as the measurement for NOX concentration. 

b. limit the concentration of 

CO in the stationary SI 

internal combustion engine exhaust. 

i. Sample for CO at the 

centroid of the stack of 

the stationary internal 

combustion engine; 

(1) Method 10 of 40 CFR 

part 60, Appendix A, 

ASTM Method D6522– 

00(2005),a Method 320 

of 40 CFR part 63, Appendix A, or ASTM D 

6348–03 (incorporated 

by reference, see 

§ 60.17). 

(a) If using a control device, the sampling site 

must be located at the 

outlet of the control device. Results of this test 

consist of the average of 

the three 1-hour or 

longer runs. 

ii. Determine the O2 concentration of the stationary internal combustion engine exhaust at 

the sampling port location; 

(2) Method 3, 3A, or 3Bb

of 40 CFR part 60, Appendix A or ASTM Method D6522–00(2005).a

(b) Measurements to determine O2 concentration 

must be made at the 

same time as the measurements for CO concentration. 

iii. Determine the exhaust 

flow rate of the stationary internal combustion engine exhaust; and 

(3) Method 2 or 19 of 40 

CFR part 60. 

iv. If necessary, measure 

moisture content of the 

stationary internal combustion engine exhaust 

at the sampling port location. 

(4) Method 4 of 40 CFR 

part 60, Appendix A, 

Method 320 of 40 CFR 

part 63, Appendix A, or 

ASTM D6348–03 (incorporated by reference, 

see § 60.17). 

(c) Measurements to determine moisture must 

be made at the same 

time as the measurement for CO concentration. 

c. limit the concentration of 

VOC in the stationary SI 

internal combustion engine exhaust. 

i. Measure VOC at the 

centroid of the exhaust 

of the stationary internal 

combustion engine; 

(1) Methods 25A and 18 of 

40 CFR part 60, Appendix A, Method 25A with 

the use of a methane 

cutter as described in 40 

CFR 1065.265, Method 

18 or 40 CFR part 60, 

Appendix A,c d Method 

320 of 40 CFR part 63, 

Appendix A, or ASTM 

D6348–03 (incorporated 

by reference, see 

§ 60.17). 

(a) If using a control device, the sampling site 

must be located at the 

outlet of the control device. Results of this test 

consist of the average of 

the three 1-hour or 

longer runs. 

ii. Determine the O2 concentration of the stationary internal combustion engine exhaust at 

the sampling port location; 

(2) Method 3, 3A, or 3Bb

of 40 CFR part 60, Appendix A or ASTM Method D6522–00(2005).a

(b) Measurements to determine O2 concentration 

must be made at the 

same time as the measurements for VOC concentration. 

iii. Determine the exhaust 

flow rate of the stationary internal combustion engine exhaust; and 

(3) Method 2 or 19 of 40 

CFR part 60. 

iv. If necessary, measure 

moisture content of the 

stationary internal combustion engine exhaust 

at the sampling port location. 

(4) Method 4 of 40 CFR 

part 60, Appendix A, 

Method 320 of 40 CFR 

part 63, Appendix A, or 

ASTM D6348–03 (incorporated by reference, 

see § 60.17). 

(c) Measurements to determine moisture must 

be made at the same 

time as the measurement for VOC concentration. 

aASTM D6522–00 is incorporated by reference; see 40 CFR 60.17. Also, you may petition the Administrator for approval to use alternative 

methods for portable analyzer. bYou may use ASME PTC 19.10–1981, Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses, for measuring the O2 content of the exhaust gas as an alternative to 

EPA Method 3B. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
1150 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

cYou may use EPA Method 18 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, provided that you conduct an adequate pre-survey test prior to the emissions 

test, such as the one described in OTM 11 on EPA’s Web site (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/prelim/otm11.pdf). dYou may use ASTM D6420–99 (2004), Test Method for Determination of Gaseous Organic Compounds by Direct Interface Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry as an alternative to EPA Method 18 for measuring total nonmethane organic. 

24. Amend Method 1 of Appendix A– 

1 to Part 60 by revising Sections 11.2.2, 

11.4.1, and Figures 1–1 and 1–2 to read 

as follows: 

Appendix A–1 to Part 60—Test 

Methods 1 Through 2F 

Method 1—Sample and Velocity Traverses 

From Stationary Sources 

* * * * * 

11.2.2 Velocity and Gaseous (NonParticulate) Traverses. Perform a 

stratification test to determine the 

appropriate number of sample traverse 

points. If testing for multiple pollutants or 

diluents at the same site, a stratification test 

using only one pollutant or diluent satisfies 

this requirement. A stratification test is not 

required for small stacks that are less than 4 

inches in diameter. When the 8- and 2- 

diameter criterion can be met, the minimum 

number of traverse points for the 

stratification test will be 12. Test for 

stratification using a probe of appropriate 

length to measure the gas concentration at 

the required traverse points located 

according to Table 1–2. Alternatively (if the 

8- and 2-diameter criterion is met), you may 

measure the gas concentration at three points 

on a line passing through the centroidal area. 

Space the three points at 16.7, 50.0, and 83.3 

percent of the measurement line. Sample for 

a minimum of twice the system response 

time at each traverse point. Calculate the 

individual point and mean concentrations. If 

the concentration at each traverse point 

differs from the mean concentration for all 

traverse points by no more than: (a) ± 5.0 

percent of the mean concentration; or (b) 

± 0.5 ppm (whichever is less restrictive), the 

gas stream is considered unstratified and you 

may collect samples from a single point that 

most closely matches the mean. If the 5.0 

percent or 0.5 ppm criterion is not met, but 

the concentration at each traverse point 

differs from the mean concentration for all 

traverse points by no more than: (a) ± 10.0 

percent of the mean; or (b) ± 1.0 ppm 

(whichever is less restrictive), the gas stream 

is considered to be minimally stratified, and 

you may take samples from three points. 

Space the three points at 16.7, 50.0, and 83.3 

percent of the measurement line. 

Alternatively, if a 12-point stratification test 

was performed and the emissions were 

shown to be minimally stratified (all points 

within ± 10.0 percent of their mean or within 

± 1.0 ppm), and if the stack diameter (or 

equivalent diameter, for a rectangular stack 

or duct) is greater than 2.4 meters (7.8 ft), 

then you may use 3-point sampling and 

locate the three points along the 

measurement line exhibiting the highest 

average concentration during the 

stratification test at 0.4, 1.0 and 2.0 meters 

from the stack or duct wall. If the gas stream 

is found to be stratified because the 10.0 

percent or 1.0 ppm criterion for a 3-point test 

is not met, locate 12 traverse points for the 

test in accordance with Table 1–2. 

* * * * * 

11.4.1 In most stationary sources, the 

direction of stack gas flow is essentially 

parallel to the stack walls. However, cyclonic 

flow may exist: (1) after such devices as 

cyclones and inertial demisters following 

venturi scrubbers, or (2) in stacks having 

tangential inlets or other duct configurations 

which tend to induce swirling. Determine the 

presence or absence of cyclonic flow at each 

sampling location. The following techniques 

are acceptable for this determination. 

* * * * * 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2EP09JA12.025</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 1151 

* * * * * 

25. Amend Method 2 of Appendix A– 

1 to Part 60 as follows: 

a. By revising Section 8.1. 

b. By revising the Note at the end of 

10.1.1 

c. By revising Section 10.4. 

d. By adding a term to Section 12.1. 

e. By revising Sections 12.6, and 12.7. 

Method 2—Determination of Stack Gas 

Velocity and Volumetric Flow Rate (Type S 

Pitot Tube) 

* * * * * 

8.1 Set up the apparatus as shown in 

Figure 2–1. Capillary tubing or surge tanks 

installed between the manometer and pitot 

tube may be used to dampen DP fluctuations. 

It is recommended, but not required, that a 

pretest leak-check be conducted as follows: 

(1) blow through the pitot impact opening 

until at least 7.6 cm (3.0 in.) H2O velocity 

head registers on the manometer; then, close 

off the impact opening. The pressure shall 

remain stable (± 2.5 mm H2O, ± 0.10 in. H2O) 

for at least 15 seconds; (2) do the same for 

the static pressure side, except using suction 

to obtain the minimum of 7.6 cm (3.0 in.) 

H2O. Other leak-check procedures, subject to 

the approval of the Administrator, may be 

used. 

* * * * * 

10.1.1 * * * 

Note: Do not use a Type S pitot tube 

assembly that is constructed such that the 

impact pressure opening plane of the pitot 

tube is below the entry plane of the nozzle 

(see Figure 2–7B). 

* * * * * 

10.4 Barometer. Calibrate the barometer 

used against a mercury barometer or NISTtraceable barometer prior to each field test. 

* * * * * 

12.1 Nomenclature 

* * * 

Ts(abavg)—Average absolute stack 

temperature, °K (°R). 

* * * * * 

12.6 Average Stack Gas Velocity. 

Where: 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2EP09JA12.026</GPH> EP09JA12.027</GPH> EP09JA12.028</GPH>
1152 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

12.7 Average Stack Gas Dry Volumetric 

Flow Rate. 

* * * * * 

26. Amend Method 2A of Appendix 

A–1 to Part 60 by revising Sections 10.3 

and 12.2 to read as follows: 

Method 2A—Direct Measurement of Gas 

Volume Through Pipes and Small Ducts 

* * * * * 

10.3 Barometer. Calibrate the barometer 

used against a mercury barometer or NISTtraceable barometer prior to the field test. 

* * * * * 

12.2 Test Meter Calibration Coefficient. 

* * * * * 

27. Amend Method 2B of Appendix 

A–1 to Part 60 by revising Section 12.1 

to read as follows: 

Method 2B—Determination of Exhaust Gas 

Volume Flow Rate from Gasoline Vapor 

Incinerators 

* * * * * 

12.1 Nomenclature. 

COe = Mean carbon monoxide concentration 

in system exhaust, ppm. 

(CO2)a = Ambient carbon dioxide 

concentration, ppm (if not measured 

during the test period, may be assumed 

to equal 380 ppm). 

(CO2)e = Mean carbon dioxide concentration 

in system exhaust, ppm. 

HCe = Mean organic concentration in system 

exhaust as defined by the calibration gas, 

ppm. 

Hci = Mean organic concentration in system 

inlet as defined by the calibration gas, 

ppm. 

Ke = Hydrocarbon calibration gas factor for 

the exhaust hydrocarbon analyzer, 

unitless [equal to the number of carbon 

atoms per molecule of the gas used to 

calibrate the analyzer (2 for ethane, 3 for 

propane, etc.)]. 

Ki = Hydrocarbon calibration gas factor for 

the inlet hydrocarbon analyzer, unitless. 

Ves = Exhaust gas volume, m3. 

Vis = Inlet gas volume, m3. 

Qes = Exhaust gas volume flow rate, m3/min. 

Qis = Inlet gas volume flow rate, m3/min. 

Q = Sample run time, min. 

S = Standard conditions: 20 °C, 760 mm Hg. 

* * * * * 

28. Amend Method 2D of Appendix 

A–1 to Part 60 by revising Section 10.4 

to read as follows: 

Method 2D—Measurement of Gas Volume 

Flow Rates in Small Pipes and Ducts 

* * * * * 

10.4 Barometer. Calibrate the barometer 

used against a mercury barometer or NISTtraceable barometer prior to the field test. 

* * * * * 

29. Amend Method 3A of Appendix 

A–2 to Part 60 by revising Section 7.1 

to read as follows: 

Appendix A–2 to Part 60—Test 

Methods 2G through 3C 

* * * * * 

Method 3A—Determination of Oxygen and 

Carbon Dioxide Concentrations in Emissions 

From Stationary Sources (Instrumental 

Analyzer Procedure) 

* * * * * 

7.1 Calibration Gas. What calibration 

gases do I need? Refer to Section 7.1 of 

Method 7E for the calibration gas 

requirements. Example calibration gas 

mixtures are listed below. Pre-cleaned or 

scrubbed air may be used for the O2 highcalibration gas provided it does not contain 

other gases that interfere with the O2

measurement. 

(a) CO2 in Nitrogen (N2). 

(b) CO2 in air. 

(c) CO2/SO2 gas mixture in N2. 

(d) O2/SO2 gas mixture in N2. 

(e) O2/CO2/SO2 gas mixture in N2. 

(f) CO2/NOX gas mixture in N2. 

(g) CO2/SO2/NOX gas mixture in N2. 

The tests for analyzer calibration error and 

system bias require high-, mid-, and lowlevel gases. 

* * * * * 

30. Amend Method 4 of Appendix A– 

3 to Part 60 by revising Sections 9.1 and 

16 to read as follows: 

Appendix A–3 to Part 60—Test 

Methods 4 Through 5I 

* * * * * 

Method 4—Determination of Moisture 

Content in Stack Gases 

* * * * * 

9.1 Miscellaneous Quality Control 

Measures. 

Section Quality control measure Effect 

Section 8.1.1.4 ..................... Leak rate of the sampling system cannot exceed four 

percent of the average sampling rate or 0.00057 m3/ 

min (0.020 cfm).

Ensures the accuracy of the volume of gas sampled. 

(Reference Method) 

Section 8.2.1 ........................ Leak rate of the sampling system cannot exceed two 

percent of the average sampling rate.

Ensures the accuracy of the volume of gas sampled. 

(Approximation Method) 

* * * * * 

16.0 Alternative Procedures 

16.1 The procedure described in Method 

5 for determining moisture content is an 

acceptable alternative to Method 4. 

16.2 The procedures in Method 6A for 

determining moisture is an acceptable 

alternative to Method 4. 

16.3 Method 320 is an acceptable 

alternative to Method 4 for determining 

moisture. 

16.4 Using F-factors to determine 

moisture is an acceptable alternative to 

Method 4. For a combustion stack not using 

a scrubber, the moisture content may be 

calculated as follows: 

Where: 

BA = Mole fraction of moisture in the ambient 

air. 

BF = Mole fraction of moisture from free 

water in the fuel. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2EP09JA12.029</GPH> EP09JA12.030</GPH> ep09ja12.031</GPH> ep09ja12.032</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 1153 

BH = Mole fraction of moisture from the 

hydrogen in the fuel. 

Bws = Mole fraction of moisture in the stack 

gas. 

Fd = Volume of dry combustion components 

per unit of heat content at 0 percent 

oxygen, dscf/106 Btu (scm/J). See Table 

19–2 in Method 19. 

FW = Volume of wet combustion components 

per unit of heat content at 0 percent 

oxygen, wet scf/106 Btu (scm/J). See 

Table 19–2 in Method 19. 

%RH = Percent relative humidity (calibrated 

hydrometer acceptable), percent. 

PBar = Barometric pressure, in. Hg (mm Hg). 

T = Ambient temperature, °F (°C). 

W = Percent free water by weight, percent. 

O2 = Percent oxygen in stack gas, dry basis, 

percent. 

* * * * * 

31. Amend Method 5 of Appendix A– 

3 to Part 60 as follows: 

a. By revising Sections 6.1.1.5, 6.1.1.7, 

and 6.1.1.9. 

b. By revising Section 7.1.3. 

c. By removing Section 7.1.5. 

d. By revising Sections 8.1, 8.3.4, 

8.7.3, and 8.7.5. 

e. By revising Sections 10.3.3, 10.4, 

10.5, and 10.6. 

f. By revising Equation 5–13 in 

Section 16.2.3.3. 

g. By adding Section 16.3. 

i. By adding reference 13 to Section 

17.0. 

Method 5—Determination of Particulate 

Matter Emissions From Stationary Sources 

* * * * * 

6.1.1.5 Filter Holder. Borosilicate glass, 

with a glass frit filter support and a silicone 

rubber gasket. Alternatively, Teflon filter 

holders may be used. Other materials of 

construction (e.g., stainless steel or Viton) 

may be used, subject to the approval of the 

Administrator. The holder design shall 

provide a positive seal against leakage from 

the outside or around the filter. The holder 

shall be attached immediately at the outlet of 

the probe (or cyclone, if used). 

* * * * * 

6.1.1.7 Temperature Sensor. A calibrated 

temperature sensor (rechecked at at least one 

point after each test) shall be installed so that 

the sensing tip of the temperature sensor is 

in direct contact with the sample gas, and the 

temperature around the filter holder can be 

regulated and monitored during sampling. 

* * * * * 

6.1.1.9 Metering System. Vacuum gauge, 

leak-free pump, calibrated temperature 

sensors (rechecked at at least one point after 

each test), dry gas meter (DGM) capable of 

measuring volume to within 2 percent, and 

related equipment, as shown in Figure 5–1. 

Alternatively, an Isostack metering system 

may be used if all Method 5 calibrations are 

performed, with the exception of those 

related to DH@ in Section 9.2.1, wherein the 

sample flow rate system shall be calibrated 

in lieu of DH@ and shall not deviate by more 

than 5 percent. Other metering systems 

capable of maintaining sampling rates within 

10 percent of isokinetic and of determining 

sample volumes to within 2 percent may be 

used, subject to the approval of the 

Administrator. When the metering system is 

used in conjunction with a pitot tube, the 

system shall allow periodic checks of 

isokinetic rates. 

* * * * * 

7.1.3 Water. When analysis of the 

material caught in the impingers is required, 

deionized distilled water (to conform to 

ASTM D 1193–77 or 91 Type 3 (incorporated 

by reference—see § 60.17)) with ≤ 0.001 

percent residue shall be used. Run blanks 

prior to field use to eliminate a high blank 

on test samples, and use only water with low 

blank values (≤ 0.001 percent). 

* * * * * 

8.1 Pretest Preparation. It is suggested 

that sampling equipment be maintained 

according to the procedures described in 

APTD–0576. Alternative mercury-free 

thermometers may be used if the 

thermometers are at a minimum equivalent 

in terms of performance or suitably effective 

for the specific temperature measurement 

application. 

* * * * * 

8.3.4 Set up the train as shown in Figure 

5–1 ensuring that the connections are leaktight. Subject to the approval of the 

Administrator, a glass cyclone may be used 

between the probe and filter holder when the 

total particulate catch is expected to exceed 

100 mg or when water droplets are present 

in the stack gas. 

* * * * * 

8.7.3 Before moving the sample train to 

the cleanup site, remove the probe from the 

sample train and cap the open outlet of the 

probe. Be careful not to lose any condensate 

that might be present. Cap the filter inlet 

where the probe was fastened. Remove the 

umbilical cord from the last impinger, and 

cap the impinger. If a flexible line is used 

between the first impinger or condenser and 

the filter holder, disconnect the line at the 

filter holder, and let any condensed water or 

liquid drain into the impingers or condenser. 

Cap off the filter holder outlet and impinger 

inlet. Either ground-glass stoppers, plastic 

caps, or serum caps may be used to close 

these openings. 

* * * * * 

8.7.5 Save a portion of the acetone used 

for cleanup as a blank. For each container of 

acetone used for cleanup, save 200 ml and 

place it in a glass sample container labeled 

‘‘acetone blank.’’ To minimize any 

particulate contamination, rinse the wash 

bottle prior to filling from the tested 

container. Take 200 ml of this acetone 

directly from the wash bottle being used, and 

place it in a glass sample container labeled 

‘‘acetone blank.’’ 

* * * * * 

10.3.3 Acceptable Variation in 

Calibration Check. If the DGM coefficient 

values obtained before and after a test series 

differ by more than 5 percent, the test series 

shall either be voided, or calculations for the 

test series shall be performed using 

whichever meter coefficient value (i.e., before 

or after) gives the lower value of total sample 

volume. 

* * * * * 

10.4 Probe Heater Calibration. Use a heat 

source to generate air heated to selected 

temperatures that approximate those 

expected to occur in the sources to be 

sampled. Pass this air through the probe at 

a typical sample flow rate while measuring 

the probe inlet and outlet temperatures at 

various probe heater settings. For each air 

temperature generated, construct a graph of 

probe heating system setting versus probe 

outlet temperature. The procedure outlined 

in APTD–0576 can also be used. Probes 

constructed according to APTD–0581 need 

not be calibrated if the calibration curves in 

APTD–0576 are used. Also, probes with 

outlet temperature monitoring capabilities do 

not require calibration. As an alternative, the 

following single-point calibration procedure 

may be used. After each test run series, check 

the accuracy (and, hence, the calibration) of 

each thermocouple system at ambient 

temperature, or any other temperature, 

within the range specified by the 

manufacturer, using a reference thermometer 

(either ASTM reference thermometer or a 

thermometer that has been calibrated against 

an ASTM reference thermometer). The 

temperatures of the thermocouple and 

reference thermometers shall agree to within 

±2 °F. Note: The probe heating system shall 

be calibrated before its initial use in the field. 

10.5 Temperature Sensors. Use the 

procedure in Section 10.3 of Method 2 to 

calibrate in-stack temperature sensors. Dial 

thermometers, such as are used for the DGM 

and condenser outlet, shall be calibrated 

against mercury-in-glass thermometers. An 

alternative mercury-free NIST-traceable 

thermometer may be used if the thermometer 

is, at a minimum, equivalent in terms of 

performance or suitably effective for the 

specific temperature measurement 

application. 

10.6 Barometer. Calibrate against a 

mercury barometer or NIST-traceable 

barometer prior to the field test. 

Alternatively, barometric pressure may be 

obtained from a weather report that has been 

adjusted for the test point (on the stack) 

elevation. 

* * * * * 

16.2.3.3 * * * 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2ep09ja12.033</GPH> ep09ja12.034</GPH>
1154 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

* * * * * 

16.3 Alternative Post-Test Metering 

System Calibration. The following procedure 

may be used as an alternative to the post-test 

calibration described in Section 10.3.2. This 

alternative procedure does not detect 

leakages between the inlet of the metering 

system and the dry gas meter. Therefore, two 

steps must be included to make it an 

equivalent alternative: (1) The metering 

system must pass the post-test leak-check 

from either the inlet of the sampling train or 

the inlet of the metering system. Therefore, 

if the train fails the former leak-check, 

another leak-check from the inlet of the 

metering system must be conducted; (2) The 

metering system must pass the leak-check of 

that portion of the train from the pump to the 

orifice meter as described in Section 10.3.1.1. 

16.3.1 After each test run, do the 

following: 

16.3.1.1 Ensure that the metering system 

has passed the post-test leak-check. If not, 

conduct a leak-check of the metering system 

from its inlet. 

16.3.1.2 Conduct the leak-check of that 

portion of the train from the pump to the 

orifice meter as described in Section 10.3.1.1. 

16.3.1.3 Calculate Yqa for each test run 

using the following equation: 

Where: 

Yqa = Dry gas meter calibration check value, 

dimensionless. 

0.0319 = (29.92/528)(0.75)2(in. Hg/°R) cfm2

.

DH@ = Orifice meter calibration coefficient, 

in. H2O. 

Md = Dry molecular weight of stack gas, lb/ 

lb-mole. 

29 = Dry molecular weight of air, lb/lb-mole. 

16.3.2 After each test run series, do the 

following: 

16.3.2.1 Average the three or more Yqa’s 

obtained from the test run series and 

compare this average Yqa with the dry gas 

meter calibration factor Y. The average Yqa

must be within 5 percent of Y. 

16.3.2.2 If the average Yqa does not meet 

the 5 percent criterion, recalibrate the meter 

over the full range of orifice settings as 

detailed in Section 10.3.1. Then follow the 

procedure in Section 10.3.3. 

* * * * * 

17.0 References 

* * * * * 

13. Shigehara, Roger T., P.G. Royals, and 

E.W. Steward. ‘‘Alternative Method 5 PostTest Calibration.’’ Entropy Incorporated, 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. 

* * * * * 

32. Amend Method 5A of Appendix 

A–3 to Part 60 by revising Section 8.1 

to read as follows: 

Method 5A—Determination of Particulate 

Matter Emissions From the Asphalt 

Processing and Asphalt Roofing Industry 

* * * * * 

8.1 Pretest Preparation. Unless otherwise 

specified, maintain and calibrate all 

components according to the procedure 

described in APTD–0576, ‘‘Maintenance, 

Calibration, and Operation of Isokinetic 

Source-Sampling Equipment’’ (Reference 3 in 

Method 5, Section 17.0). Alternative 

mercury-free thermometers may be used if 

the thermometers are, at a minimum, 

equivalent in terms of performance or 

suitably effective for the specific temperature 

measurement application. 

* * * * * 

33. Amend Method 5E of Appendix 

A–3 to Part 60 as follows: 

a. By redesignating Sections 16 and 17 

as Sections 17 and 18. 

b. By adding a new Section 16. 

Method 5E—Determination of Particulate 

Matter Emissions From the Wool Fiberglass 

Insulation Manufacturing Industry 

* * * * * 

16.0 Alternative Procedures 

16.1 Total Organic Carbon Analyzer. 

Tekmar-Dohrmann analyzers using the single 

injection technique may be used as an 

alternative to Rosemount Model 2100A 

analyzers. 

* * * * * 

34. Amend Method 5H of Appendix 

A–3 to Part 60 as follows: 

a. By revising Section 12.1. 

b. By adding Section 12.15. 

c. By redesignating Sections 16 and 17 

as Sections 17 and 18, respectively. 

d. By adding a new Section 16. 

Method 5H—Determination of Particulate 

Matter Emissions From Wood Heaters From 

a Stack Location 

* * * * * 

12.1 Nomenclature. 

A = Sample flow rate adjustment factor. 

BR = Dry wood burn rate, kg/hr (lb/hr), from 

Method 28, Section 8.3. 

Bws = Water vapor in the gas stream, 

proportion by volume. 

Ci = Tracer gas concentration at inlet, ppmv. 

Co = Tracer gas concentration at outlet, 

ppmv. 

Cs = Concentration of particulate matter in 

stack gas, dry basis, corrected to standard 

conditions, g/dscm (g/dscf). 

E = Particulate emission rate, g/hr (lb/hr). 

DH = Average pressure differential across the 

orifice meter (see Figure 5H–1), mm H2O 

(in. H2O). 

La = Maximum acceptable leakage rate for 

either a post-test leak-check or for a leakcheck following a component change; 

equal to 0.00057 cmm (0.020 cfm) or 4 

percent of the average sampling rate, 

whichever is less. 

L1 = Individual leakage rate observed during 

the leak-check conducted before a 

component change, cmm (cfm). 

Lp = Leakage rate observed during the posttest leak-check, cmm (cfm). 

mn = Total amount of particulate matter 

collected, mg. 

Ma = Mass of residue of solvent after 

evaporation, mg. 

NC = Grams of carbon/gram of dry fuel (lb/ 

lb), equal to 0.0425. 

NT = Total dry moles of exhaust gas/kg of dry 

wood burned, g-moles/kg (lb-moles/lb). 

PR = Percent of proportional sampling rate. 

Pbar = Barometric pressure at the sampling 

site, mm Hg (in.Hg). 

Pstd = Standard absolute pressure, 760 mm Hg 

(29.92 in.Hg). 

Qi = Gas volumetric flow rate at inlet, cfm (l/ 

min). 

Qo = Gas volumetric flow rate at outlet, cfm 

(l/min). 

* * * * * 

12.15 Alternative Tracer Gas Flow Rate 

Determination. 

Note: This gives Q for a single instance 

only. Repeated multiple determinations are 

needed to track temporal variations. Very 

small variations in Qi, Ci, or Co may give very 

large variations in Qo. 

* * * * * 

16.0 Alternative Procedures 

16.1 Alternative Stack Gas Volumetric 

Flow Rate Determination (Tracer Gas). 

16.1.1 Apparatus. 

16.1.1.1 Tracer Gas Injector System. This 

is to inject a known concentration of tracer 

gas into the stack. This system consists of a 

cylinder of tracer gas, a gas cylinder 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2ep09ja12.035</GPH> ep09ja12.036</GPH> EP09JA12.037</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 1155 

regulator, a stainless steel needle valve or a 

flow controller, a nonreactive (stainless steel 

or glass) rotameter, and an injection loop to 

disperse the tracer gas evenly in the stack. 

16.1.1.2 Tracer Gas Probe. A glass or 

stainless steel sampling probe. 

16.1.1.3 Gas Conditioning System. A gas 

conditioning is a system suitable for 

delivering a cleaned sample to the analyzer 

consisting of a filter to remove particulate 

and a condenser capable of lowering the dew 

point of the sample gas to less than 5 °C (40 

°F). A desiccant such as anhydrous calcium 

sulfate may be used to dry the sample gas. 

Desiccants which react or absorb tracer gas or 

stack gas may not be used, e.g. silica gel 

absorbs CO2.

16.1.1.4 Pump. An inert (i.e., stainless 

steel or Teflon head) pump to deliver more 

than the total sample required by the 

manufacturer’s specifications for the analyzer 

used to measure the downstream tracer gas 

concentration. 

16.1.1.5 Gas Analyzer. A gas analyzer is 

any analyzer capable of measuring the tracer 

gas concentration in the range necessary at 

least every 10 minutes. A means of 

controlling the analyzer flow rate and a 

device for determining proper sample flow 

rate shall be provided unless data is provided 

to show that the analyzer is insensitive to 

flow variations over the range encountered 

during the test. The gas analyzer needs to 

meet or exceed the flowing performance 

specifications: 

Linearity .................. ± 1 percent of full scale. 

Calibration Error ..... ≤ 2 percent of span. 

Response Time ...... ≤ 10 seconds. 

Zero Drift (24 hour) ≤ 2 percent of full scale. 

Span Drift (24 hour) ≤ 2 percent of full scale. 

Resolution ............... ≤ 0.5 percent of span. 

16.1.1.6 Recorder (optional). To provide a 

permanent record of the analyzer output. 

16.1.2 Reagents. 

16.1.2.1 Tracer Gas. The tracer gas is 

sulfur hexafluoride in an appropriate 

concentration for accurate analyzer 

measurement or pure sulfur dioxide. The gas 

used must be nonreactive with the stack 

effluent and give minimal (< 3 percent) 

interference to measurement by the gas 

analyzer. 

16.1.3 Procedure. Select upstream and 

downstream locations in the stack or duct for 

introducing the tracer gas and delivering the 

sampled gas to the analyzer. The inlet 

location should be 8 or more duct diameters 

beyond any upstream flow disturbance. The 

outlet should be 8 or more undisturbed duct 

diameters from the inlet and 2 or more duct 

diameters from the duct exit. After installing 

the apparatus, meter a known concentration 

of the tracer gas into the stack at the inlet 

location. Use the gas sample probe and 

analyzer to show that no stratification of the 

tracer gas is found in the stack at the 

measurement locations. Monitor the tracer 

gas concentration from the outlet location 

and record the concentration at 10-minute 

intervals or more often at the option of the 

tester. A minimum of three measured 

intervals is recommended to determine the 

stack gas volumetric flow rate. Other 

statistical procedures may be applied for 

complete flow characterization and 

additional QA/QC. 

* * * * * 

35. Amend Method 6 of Appendix A– 

4 to Part 60 by revising Sections 10.2 

and 10.4 to read as follows: 

Appendix A–4 to Part 60—Test 

Methods 6 through 10B 

* * * * * 

Method 6—Determination of Sulfur Dioxide 

Emissions From Stationary Sources 

* * * * * 

10.2 Temperature Sensors. Calibrate 

against mercury-in-glass thermometers. An 

alternative mercury-free thermometer may be 

used if the thermometer is, at a minimum, 

equivalent in terms of performance or 

suitably effective for the specific temperature 

measurement application. 

* * * * * 

10.4 Barometer. Calibrate against a 

mercury barometer or NIST-traceable 

barometer prior to the field test. 

* * * * * 

36. Amend Method 6C of Appendix 

A–4 to Part 60 by revising Sections 4.0 

and 8.3 to read as follows: 

Method 6C—Determination of Sulfur 

Dioxide Emissions From Stationary Sources 

(Instrumental Analyzer Procedure) 

* * * * * 

4.0 Interferences 

Refer to Section 4.0 of Method 7E. 

* * * * * 

8.3 Interference Check. You must follow 

the procedures of Section 8.2.7 of Method 7E 

to conduct an interference check, substituting 

SO2 for NOX as the method pollutant. For 

dilution-type measurement systems, you 

must use the alternative interference check 

procedure in Section 16 and a co-located, 

unmodified Method 6 sampling train. 

Quenching in fluorescence analyzers must be 

evaluated and remedied unless a dilution 

system and ambient-level analyzer is used. 

This may be done by preparing the 

calibration gas to contain within 1 percent of 

the absolute oxygen and carbon dioxide 

content of the measured gas, preparing the 

calibration gas in air and using vendor 

nomographs, or by other acceptable means. 

* * * * * 

37. Amend Method 7 of Appendix A– 

4 to Part 60 by revising Sections 4.0, 

10.2, and 10.3 to read as follows: 

Method 7—Determination of Nitrogen Oxide 

Emissions From Stationary Sources 

* * * * * 

4.0 Interferences 

Biased results have been observed when 

sampling under conditions of high sulfur 

dioxide concentrations. At or above 2100 

ppm SO2, use five times the H2O2

concentration of the Method 7 absorbing 

solution. Laboratory tests have shown that 

high concentrations of SO2 (about 2100 ppm) 

cause low results in Method 7 and 7A. 

Increasing the H2O2 concentration to five 

times the original concentration eliminates 

this bias. However, when no SO2 is present, 

increasing the concentration by five times 

results in a low bias. 

* * * * * 

10.2 Barometer. Calibrate against a 

mercury barometer or NIST-traceable 

barometer prior to the field test. 

10.3 Temperature Gauge. Calibrate dial 

thermometers against mercury-in-glass 

thermometers. An alternative mercury-free 

thermometer may be used if the thermometer 

is, at a minimum, equivalent in terms of 

performance or suitably effective for the 

specific temperature measurement 

application. 

* * * * * 

38. Amend Method 7A of Appendix 

A–4 to Part 60 by revising Sections 4.0 

and 10.4 to read as follows: 

Method 7A—Determination of Nitrogen 

Oxide Emissions From Stationary Sources 

(Ion Chromatographic Method) 

* * * * * 

4.0 Interferences 

Biased results have been observed when 

sampling under conditions of high sulfur 

dioxide concentrations. At or above 2100 

ppm SO2, use five times the H2O2

concentration of the Method 7 absorbing 

solution. Laboratory tests have shown that 

high concentrations of SO2 (about 2100 ppm) 

cause low results in Method 7 and 7A. 

Increasing the H2O2 concentration to five 

times the original concentration eliminates 

this bias. However, when no SO2 is present, 

increasing the concentration by five times 

results in a low bias. 

* * * * * 

10.4 Temperature Gauge. Calibrate dial 

thermometers against mercury-in-glass 

thermometers. An alternative mercury-free 

thermometer may be used if the thermometer 

is, at a minimum, equivalent in terms of 

performance or suitably effective for the 

specific temperature measurement 

application. 

* * * * * 

39. Amend Method 7E of Appendix 

A–4 to Part 60 as follows: 

a. By revising Section 6.1. 

b. By revising Section 7.1.1. 

c. By revising Sections 8.1.2 and 8.2.5. 

d. By revising Section 16.2.2. 

Method 7E—Determination of Nitrogen 

Oxides Emissions From Stationary Sources 

(Instrumental Analyzer Procedure) 

* * * * * 

6.1 What do I need for the measurement 

system? You may use any equipment and 

supplies meeting the following 

specifications: 

(1) Sampling system components that are 

not evaluated in the system bias or system 

calibration error test must be glass, Teflon, or 

stainless steel. Other materials are potentially 

acceptable, subject to approval by the 

Administrator. 

(2) The interference, calibration error, and 

system bias criteria must be met. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
1156 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

(3) Sample flow rate must be maintained 

within 10 percent of the flow rate at which 

the system response time was measured. 

(4) All system components (excluding 

sample conditioning components, if used) 

must maintain the sample temperature above 

the moisture dew point. Ensure minimal 

contact between any condensate and the 

sample gas. Section 6.2 provides example 

equipment specifications for a NOX

measurement system. Figure 7E–1 is a 

diagram of an example dry-basis 

measurement system that is likely to meet the 

method requirements and is provided as 

guidance. For wet-basis systems, you may 

use alternative equipment and supplies as 

needed (some of which are described in 

Section 6.2), provided that the measurement 

system meets the applicable performance 

specifications of this method. 

* * * * * 

7.1.1 High-Level Gas. This concentration 

is chosen to set the calibration span as 

defined in Section 3.4. Choose this high-level 

concentration so that emission measurements 

will be within 20 to 100 percent of this 

concentration. 

* * * * * 

8.1.2 Determination of Stratification. 

Perform a stratification test at each test site 

to determine the appropriate number of 

sample traverse points. If testing for multiple 

pollutants or diluents at the same site, a 

stratification test using only one pollutant or 

diluent satisfies this requirement. A 

stratification test is not required for small 

stacks that are less than 4 inches in diameter. 

To test for stratification, use a probe of 

appropriate length to measure the NOX (or 

pollutant of interest) concentration at 12 

traverse points located according to Table 1– 

1 or Table 1–2 of Method 1. Alternatively, 

you may measure at three points on a line 

passing through the centroidal area. Space 

the three points at 16.7, 50.0, and 83.3 

percent of the measurement line. Sample for 

a minimum of twice the system response 

time (see Section 8.2.6) at each traverse 

point. Calculate the individual point and 

mean NOX concentrations. If the 

concentration at each traverse point differs 

from the mean concentration for all traverse 

points by no more than: (a) ± 5.0 percent of 

the mean concentration; or (b) ± 0.5 ppm 

(whichever is less restrictive), the gas stream 

is considered unstratified and you may 

collect samples from a single point that most 

closely matches the mean. If the 5.0 percent 

or 0.5 ppm criterion is not met, but the 

concentration at each traverse point differs 

from the mean concentration for all traverse 

points by no more than: (a) ± 10.0 percent of 

the mean; or (b) ± 1.0 ppm (whichever is less 

restrictive), the gas stream is considered to be 

minimally stratified, and you may take 

samples from three points. Space the three 

points at 16.7, 50.0, and 83.3 percent of the 

measurement line. Alternatively, if a 12-point 

stratification test was performed and the 

emissions shown to be minimally stratified 

(all points within ± 10.0 percent of their 

mean or within ± 1.0 ppm), and if the stack 

diameter (or equivalent diameter for a 

rectangular stack or duct) is greater than 2.4 

meters (7.8 ft), then you may use 3-point 

sampling and locate the three points along 

the measurement line exhibiting the highest 

average concentration during the 

stratification test at 0.4, 1.2, and 2.0 meters 

from the stack or duct wall. If the gas stream 

is found to be stratified because the 10.0 

percent or 1.0 ppm criterion for a 3-point test 

is not met, locate 12 traverse points for the 

test in accordance with Table 1–1 or Table 

1–2 of Method 1. This stratification test may 

not be meaningful at sources with temporally 

varying emissions or where emission 

concentrations are low. In these cases, the 

stratification test is not required. 

* * * * * 

8.2.5 Initial System Bias and System 

Calibration Error Checks. Before sampling 

begins, determine whether the high-level or 

mid-level calibration gas best approximates 

the emissions and use it as the upscale gas. 

Introduce the upscale gas at the probe 

upstream of all sample conditioning 

components in system calibration mode. 

Record the time it takes for the measured 

concentration to increase to a value that is 

within 95 percent or 0.5 ppm (whichever is 

less restrictive) of a stable response for both 

the low-level and upscale gases. Continue to 

observe the gas concentration reading until it 

has reached a final, stable value. Record this 

value on a form similar to Table 7E–2. 

* * * * * 

16.2.2 Bag Procedure. Perform the 

analyzer calibration error test to document 

the calibration (both NO and NOX modes, as 

applicable). Fill a Tedlar or equivalent bag 

approximately half full with either ambient 

air, pure oxygen, or an oxygen standard gas 

with at least 19.5 percent by volume oxygen 

content. Fill the remainder of the bag with 

mid- to high-level NO in N2 (or other 

appropriate concentration) calibration gas. 

(Note that the concentration of the NO 

standard should be sufficiently high enough 

for the diluted concentration to be easily and 

accurately measured on the scale used. The 

size of the bag should be large enough to 

accommodate the procedure and time 

required. Contact the bag manufacturer for 

guidance on the applicability of Tedlar 

equivalent materials for NO.) 

* * * * * 

40. Amend Method 8 of Appendix A– 

4 to Part 60 as follows: 

a. By revising Sections 11.2.1 and 

11.2.2. 

b. By revising two definitions in 

Section 12.1. 

c. By revising Figure 8–1. 

Method 8—Determination of Sulfuric Acid 

Mist and Sulfur Dioxide Emissions From 

Stationary Sources 

* * * * * 

11.2.1 Container No. 1. Shake the 

container holding the isopropanol solution 

and the filter. If the filter breaks up, allow the 

fragments to settle for a few minutes before 

removing a sample aliquot. For 

determination of SO3/H2SO4 concentration, 

pipette a 10-ml aliquot of this solution into 

a 250-ml Erlenmeyer flask, add 2 to 4 drops 

of thorin indicator, and titrate to a pink 

endpoint using 0.0100 N barium standard 

solution. Repeat the titration with a second 

aliquot of sample, and average the titration 

values. Replicate titrations must agree within 

1 percent or 0.2 ml, whichever is greater. 

11.2.2 Container No. 2. Thoroughly mix 

the solution in the container holding the 

contents of the second and third impingers. 

For determination of SO2 concentration, 

pipette a 100-ml aliquot of sample into a 250- 

ml Erlenmeyer flask. Add 40 ml of 

isopropanol, 2 to 4 drops of thorin indicator, 

and titrate to a pink endpoint using 0.0100 

N barium standard solution. Repeat the 

titration with a second aliquot of sample, and 

average the titration values. Replicate 

titrations must agree within 1 percent or 0.2 

ml, whichever is greater. 

* * * * * 

12.1 * * * 

Va = Volume of sample aliquot titrated, 10 ml 

for H2SO4 and 100 ml for SO2. 

Vsoln = Total volume of solution in which the 

sample is contained, 1000 ml for the SO2

sample and 250 ml for the H2SO4

sample. 

* * * * * 

* * * * * 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 1157 

* * * * * 

41. Amend Method 10 of Appendix 

A–4 to Part 60 by revising Sections 6.2.5 

and 8.4.2 to read as follows: 

Method 10—Determination of Carbon 

Monoxide Emissions From Stationary 

Sources 

* * * * * 

6.2.5 Flexible Bag. Tedlar, or equivalent, 

with a capacity of 60 to 90 liters (2 to 3 ft 3). 

(Contact the bag manufacturer for guidance 

on the applicability of Tedlar equivalent 

materials for the compound of interest.) Leaktest the bag in the laboratory before using by 

evacuating with a pump followed by a dry 

gas meter. When the evacuation is complete, 

there should be no flow through the meter. 

Gas tanks may be used in place of bags if the 

samples are analyzed within one week. 

* * * * * 

8.4.2 Integrated Sampling. Evacuate the 

flexible bag. Set up the equipment as shown 

in Figure 10–1 with the bag disconnected. 

Place the probe in the stack and purge the 

sampling line. Connect the bag, making sure 

that all connections are leak-free. Sample at 

a rate proportional to the stack velocity. If 

needed, the CO2 content of the gas may be 

determined by using the Method 3 integrated 

sample procedures, or by weighing an 

ascarite CO2 removal tube used and 

computing CO2 concentration from the gas 

volume sampled and the weight gain of the 

tube. Data may be recorded on a form similar 

to Table 10–1. If a tank is used for sample 

collection, follow procedures similar to those 

in Sections 8.1.2, 8.2.3, 8.3, and 12.4 of 

Method 25 as appropriate to prepare the tank, 

conduct the sampling, and correct the 

measured sample concentration. 

* * * * * 

42. Amend Method 10A of Appendix 

A–4 to Part 60 as follows: 

a. By revising Section 2.0. 

b. By revising Sections 8.2.1 and 

8.2.3. 

c. By revising Sections 11.1 and 11.2. 

d. By revising the narrative in Section 

12.3. 

e. By revising Section 13.5. 

Method 10A—Determination of Carbon 

Monoxide Emissions in Certifying 

Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems at 

Petroleum Refineries 

* * * * * 

2.0 Summary of Method 

An integrated gas sample is extracted from 

the stack, passed through an alkaline 

permanganate solution to remove sulfur 

oxides and nitrogen oxides, and collected in 

a Tedlar or equivalent bag. (Contact the bag 

manufacturer for guidance on the 

applicability of Tedlar equivalent materials 

for the compound of interest.) The CO 

concentration in the sample is measured 

spectrophotometrically using the reaction of 

CO with p-sulfaminobenzoic acid. 

* * * * * 

8.2.1 Evacuate the bag completely using a 

vacuum pump. Assemble the apparatus as 

shown in Figure 10A–1. Loosely pack glass 

wool in the tip of the probe. Place 400 ml of 

alkaline permanganate solution in the first 

two impingers and 250 ml in the third. 

Connect the pump to the third impinger, and 

follow this with the surge tank, rate meter, 

and 3-way valve. Do not connect the bag to 

the system at this time. 

* * * * * 

8.2.3 Purge the system with sample gas 

by inserting the probe into the stack and 

drawing the sample gas through the system 

at 300 ml/min ±10 percent for 5 minutes. 

Connect the evacuated bag to the system, 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2EP09JA12.038</GPH>
1158 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

record the starting time, and sample at a rate 

of 300 ml/min for 30 minutes, or until the 

bag is nearly full. Record the sampling time, 

the barometric pressure, and the ambient 

temperature. Purge the system as described 

above immediately before each sample. 

* * * * * 

11.1 Assemble the system shown in 

Figure 10A–3, and record the information 

required in Table 10A–1 as it is obtained. 

Pipet 10.0 ml of the colorimetric reagent into 

each gas reaction bulb, and attach the bulbs 

to the system. Open the stopcocks to the 

reaction bulbs, but leave the valve to the bag 

closed. Turn on the pump, fully open the 

coarse-adjust flow valve, and slowly open the 

fine-adjust valve until the pressure is 

reduced to at least 40 mm Hg. Now close the 

coarse adjust valve, and observe the 

manometer to be certain that the system is 

leak-free. Wait a minimum of 2 minutes. If 

the pressure has increased less than 1 mm 

Hg, proceed as described below. If a leak is 

present, find and correct it before proceeding 

further. 

11.2 Record the vacuum pressure (Pv) to 

the nearest 1 mm Hg, and close the reaction 

bulb stopcocks. Open the bag valve, and 

allow the system to come to atmospheric 

pressure. Close the bag valve, open the pump 

coarse adjust valve, and evacuate the system 

again. Repeat this fill/evacuation procedure 

at least twice to flush the manifold 

completely. Close the pump coarse adjust 

valve, open the bag valve, and let the system 

fill to atmospheric pressure. Open the 

stopcocks to the reaction bulbs, and let the 

entire system come to atmospheric pressure. 

Close the bulb stopcocks, remove the bulbs, 

record the room temperature and barometric 

pressure (Pbar, to nearest mm Hg), and place 

the bulbs on the shaker table with their main 

axis either parallel to or perpendicular to the 

plane of the table top. Purge the bulb-filling 

system with ambient air for several minutes 

between samples. Shake the samples for 

exactly 2 hours. 

* * * * * 

12.3 CO Concentration in the Bag. 

Calculate Cb using Equations 10A–2 and 

10A–3. If condensate is visible in the bag, 

calculate Bw using Table 10A–2 and the 

temperature and barometric pressure in the 

analysis room. If condensate is not visible, 

calculate Bw using the temperature and 

barometric pressure at the sampling site. 

* * * 

* * * * * 

13.5 Stability. The individual 

components of the colorimetric reagent are 

stable for at least one month. The 

colorimetric reagent must be used within two 

days after preparation to avoid excessive 

blank correction. The samples in the bag 

should be stable for at least one week if the 

bags are leak-free. 

* * * * * 

43. Amend Method 10B of Appendix 

A–4 to Part 60 by revising Sections 2.1 

and 6.2.3, and by revising the narrative 

in Section 12.2 to read as follows: 

Method 10B—Determination of Carbon 

Monoxide Emissions From Stationary 

Sources 

* * * * * 

2.1 An integrated gas sample is extracted 

from the sampling point, passed through a 

conditioning system to remove interferences, 

and collected in a Tedlar or equivalent bag. 

(Contact the bag manufacturer for guidance 

on the applicability of Tedlar equivalent 

materials for the compound of interest.) The 

CO is separated from the sample by gas 

chromatography (GC) and catalytically 

reduced to methane (CH4) which is 

determined by flame ionization detection 

(FID). The analytical portion of this method 

is identical to applicable sections in Method 

25 detailing CO measurement. 

* * * * * 

6.2.3 Sample Injection System. Same as 

in Method 25, Section 6.3.1.4, equipped to 

accept a sample line from the bag. 

* * * * * 

12.2 CO Concentration in the Bag. 

Calculate Cb using Equations 10B–1 and 10B– 

2. If condensate is visible in the bag, 

calculate Bw using Table 10A–2 of Method 

10A and the temperature and barometric 

pressure in the analysis room. If condensate 

is not visible, calculate Bw using the 

temperature and barometric pressure at the 

sampling site. * * * 

* * * * * 

44. Amend Method 11 of Appendix 

A–5 to Part 60 by revising Sections 8.5 

and 10.1.2 to read as follows: 

Appendix A–5 to Part 60—Test 

Methods 11 Through 15A 

* * * * * 

Method 11—Determination of Hydrogen 

Sulfide Content of Fuel Gas Streams in 

Petroleum Refineries 

* * * * * 

8.5 Sample for at least 10 minutes. At the 

end of the sampling time, close the sampling 

valve, and record the final volume and 

temperature readings. Conduct a leak-check 

as described in Section 8.2. A yellow color 

in the final cadmium sulfate impinger 

indicates depletion of the absorbing solution. 

An additional cadmium sulfate impinger 

should be added for subsequent samples and 

the sample with yellow color in the final 

impinger should be voided. 

* * * * * 

10.1.2 Temperature Sensors. Calibrate 

against mercury-in-glass thermometers. An 

alternative mercury-free thermometer may be 

used if the thermometer is at a minimum 

equivalent in terms of performance or 

suitably effective for the specific temperature 

measurement application. 

* * * * * 

45. Amend Method 12 of Appendix 

A–5 to Part 60 by revising Section 16.1 

and adding Sections 16.4, 16.4.1, and 

16.4.2 to read as follows: 

Method 12—Determination of Inorganic 

Lead Emissions From Stationary Sources 

* * * * * 

16.1 Simultaneous Determination of 

Particulate Matter and Lead Emissions. 

Method 12 may be used to simultaneously 

determine Pb provided: (1) acetone is used to 

remove particulate from the probe and inside 

of the filter holder as specified by Method 5, 

(2) 0.1 N HNO3 is used in the impingers, (3) 

a glass fiber filter with a low Pb background 

is used, and (4) the entire train contents, 

including the impingers, are treated and 

analyzed for Pb as described in Sections 8.0 

and 11.0 of this method. 

* * * * * 

16.4 Alternative Analyzer. Inductively 

coupled plasma-atomic emission 

spectrometry (ICP–AES) may be used as an 

alternative to atomic absorption analysis 

provided the following conditions are met: 

16.4.1 Sample collection, sample 

preparation, and analytical preparation 

procedures are as defined in the method 

except as necessary for the ICP–AES 

application. 

16.4.2 The limit of quantitation for the 

ICP–AES must be demonstrated, and the 

sample concentrations reported should be no 

less than two times the limit of quantitation. 

The limit of quantitation is defined as ten 

times the standard deviation of the blank 

value. The standard deviation of the blank 

value is determined from the analysis of 

seven blanks. It has been reported that for 

mercury and those elements that form 

hydrides, a continuous-flow generator 

coupled to an ICP–AES offers detection 

limits comparable to cold vapor atomic 

absorption. 

* * * * * 

46. Amend Method 14A of Appendix 

A–5 to Part 60 by adding a sentence to 

the end of Section 10.1.1 to read as 

follows: 

Method 14A — Determination of Total 

Fluoride Emissions From Selected Sources at 

Primary Aluminum Production Facilities 

* * * * * 

10.1.1 Metering system. * * * Allowable 

tolerances for Y and DH@ are given in Figure 

5–5 of Method 5 of this appendix. 

* * * * * 

47. Amend Method 16A of Appendix 

A–6 to Part 60 by revising Section 1.2 

to read as follows: 

Appendix A–6 to Part 60—Test 

Methods 16 Through 18 

* * * * * 

Method 16A—Determination of Total 

Reduced Sulfur Emissions From Stationary 

Sources (Impinger Technique) 

* * * * * 

1.2 Applicability. This method is 

applicable for the determination of TRS 

emissions from recovery boilers, lime kilns, 

and smelt dissolving tanks at kraft pulp 

mills, reduced sulfur compounds (H2S, 

carbonyl sulfide, and carbon disulfide) from 

sulfur recovery units at onshore natural gas 

processing facilities, and from other sources 

when specified in an applicable subpart of 

the regulations. The flue gas must contain at 

least 1 percent oxygen for complete oxidation 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 1159 

of all TRS to SO2. Note: If sources other than 

kraft pulp mills experience low oxygen levels 

in the emissions, the method results may be 

biased low. 

* * * * * 

48. Amend Method 18 of Appendix 

A–6 to Part 60 as follows: 

a. By revising Sections 8.2.1.1.2, 

8.2.1.4, 8.2.1.4.2. 

b. By adding 8.2.1.5.2.2. 

c. By revising Sections 16.1.1.12, and 

16.1.3.2. 

d. By revising the titles to Figures 18– 

3 and 18–10. 

Method 18—Measurement of Gaseous 

Organic Compound Emissions by Gas 

Chromatography 

* * * * * 

8.2.1.1.2 Sampling Procedure. To obtain a 

sample, assemble the sample train as shown 

in Figure 18–9. Leak-check both the bag and 

the container. Connect the vacuum line from 

the needle valve to the Teflon sample line 

from the probe. Place the end of the probe 

at the centroid of the stack or at a point no 

closer to the walls than 1 m, and start the 

pump. Set the flow rate so that the final 

volume of the sample is approximately 80 

percent of the bag capacity. After allowing 

sufficient time to purge the line several 

times, connect the vacuum line to the bag, 

and evacuate until the rotameter indicates no 

flow. Then position the sample and vacuum 

lines for sampling, and begin the actual 

sampling, keeping the rate proportional to 

the stack velocity. As a precaution, direct the 

gas exiting the rotameter away from sampling 

personnel. At the end of the sample period, 

shut off the pump, disconnect the sample 

line from the bag, and disconnect the vacuum 

line from the bag container. Record the 

source temperature, barometric pressure, 

ambient temperature, sampling flow rate, and 

initial and final sampling time on the data 

sheet shown in Figure 18–10. Protect the bag 

and its container from sunlight. Record the 

time lapsed between sample collection and 

analysis, and then conduct the recovery 

procedure in Section 8.4.2. 

* * * * * 

8.2.1.4 Other Modified Bag Sampling 

Procedures. In the event that condensation is 

observed in the bag while collecting the 

sample and a direct interface system cannot 

be used, heat the bag during collection and 

maintain it at a suitably elevated temperature 

during all subsequent operations. (Note: Take 

care to leak-check the system prior to the 

dilutions so as not to create a potentially 

explosive atmosphere.) As an alternative, 

collect the sample gas, and simultaneously 

dilute it in the bag. 

* * * * * 

8.2.1.4.2 Second Alternative Procedure. 

Prefill the bag with a known quantity of inert 

gas. Meter the inert gas into the bag according 

to the procedure for the preparation of gas 

concentration standards of volatile liquid 

materials (Section 10.1.2.2), but eliminate the 

midget impinger section. Take the partly 

filled bag to the source, and meter the source 

gas into the bag through heated sampling 

lines and a heated flowmeter, or Teflon 

positive displacement pump. Verify the 

dilution factors before sampling each bag 

through dilution and analysis of gases of 

known concentration. 

* * * * * 

8.2.1.5.2.2 Analyze the two field audit 

samples as described in Section 9.2 by 

connecting each bag containing an audit gas 

mixture to the sampling valve. Calculate the 

results; record and report the data to the 

audit supervisor. 

* * * * * 

16.1.1.12 Flexible Bags. Tedlar or 

equivalent, 10- and 50-liter capacity, for 

preparation of standards. (Contact the bag 

manufacturer for guidance on the 

applicability of Tedlar equivalent materials 

for the compound of interest.) 

* * * * * 

16.1.3.2 Flexible Bag Procedure. Any 

leak-free plastic (e.g., Tedlar, Mylar, Teflon) 

or plastic-coated aluminum (e.g., aluminized 

Mylar) bag, or equivalent, can be used to 

obtain the pre-survey sample. Use new bags, 

and leak-check them before field use. In 

addition, check the bag before use for 

contamination by filling it with nitrogen or 

air and analyzing the gas by GC at high 

sensitivity. Experience indicates that it is 

desirable to allow the inert gas to remain in 

the bag about 24 hours or longer to check for 

desorption of organics from the bag. Follow 

the leak-check and sample collection 

procedures given in Section 8.2.1. 

* * * * * 

Figure 18–3. Preparation of Standards in 

Tedlar or Tedlar-Equlivalent Bags and 

Calibration Curve 

* * * * * 

Figure 18–10. Field Sample Data Sheet— 

Tedlar or Tedlar-Equivalent Bag Collection 

Method 

* * * * * 

49. Amend Method 23 of Appendix 

A–7 to Part 60 by revising Sections 

2.2.7, 4.1.1.3, and 4.2.7 to read as 

follows: 

Appendix A–7 to Part 60—Test 

Methods 19 Through 25E 

* * * * * 

Method 23—Determination of 

Polychlorinated Dibenzo-p-Dioxins and 

Polychlorinated Dibenzofurans From 

Stationary Sources 

* * * * * 

2.2.7 Storage Container. Air-tight 

container to store silica gel. 

* * * * * 

4.1.1.3 Sample Train. It is suggested that 

all components be maintained according to 

the procedure described in APTD–0576. 

Alternative mercury-free thermometers may 

be used if the thermometers are, at a 

minimum, equivalent in terms of 

performance or suitably effective for the 

specific temperature measurement 

application. 

* * * * * 

4.2.7 Silica Gel. Note the color of the 

indicating silica gel to determine if it has 

been completely spent and make a mention 

of its condition. Transfer the silica gel from 

the fifth impinger to its original container 

and seal. If a moisture determination is made, 

follow the applicable procedures in sections 

8.7.6.3 and 11.2.3 of Method 5 to handle and 

weigh the silica gel. If moisture is not 

measured, the silica gel may be disposed. 

* * * * * 

50. Amend Method 24 of Appendix 

A–7 to Part 60 by revising Section 11.2.2 

to read as follows: 

Method 24—Determination of Volatile 

Matter Content, Water Content, Density, 

Volume Solids, and Weight Solids of Surface 

Coatings 

* * * * * 

11.2.2 Volatile Content. To determine 

total volatile content, use the apparatus and 

reagents described in ASTM D2369 

(incorporated by reference; see § 60.17 for the 

approved versions of the standard), 

respectively, and use the following 

procedures: 

* * * * * 

51. Amend Method 25 of Appendix 

A–7 to Part 60 by revising Section 7.1.3 

to read as follows: 

Method 25—Determination of Total Gaseous 

Nonmethane Organic Emissions as Carbon 

* * * * * 

7.1.3 Filters. Glass fiber filters, without 

organic binder, exhibiting at least 99.95 

percent efficiency (< 0.05 percent 

penetration) on 0.3 micron dioctyl phthalate 

smoke particles. The filter efficiency test 

shall be conducted in accordance with ASTM 

Method D2986–71, 78, or 95a (incorporated 

by reference—see § 60.17). Test data from the 

supplier’s quality control program are 

sufficient for this purpose. 

* * * * * 

52. Amend Method 25C of Appendix 

A–7 to Part 60 as follows: 

a. By revising Sections 6.1. 

b. By adding a new Section 8.2.3. 

c. By revising Section 12.1. 

d. By redesignating Equation 25C–2 in 

Section 12.3 as Equation 25C–3. 

c. By redesignating Section 12.3 as 

Section 12.4. 

d. By adding new Section 12.3. 

Method 25C—Determination of Nonmethane 

Organic Compounds (NMOC) in MSW 

Landfill Gases 

* * * * * 

6.1 Sample Probe. Stainless steel, with 

the bottom third perforated. Teflon probe 

liners and sampling lines are also allowed. 

Non-perforated probes are allowed as long as 

they are withdrawn to create a gap equivalent 

to having the bottom third perforated. The 

sample probe must be capped at the bottom 

and must have a threaded cap with a 

sampling attachment at the top. The sample 

probe must be long enough to go through and 

extend no less than 0.9 m (3 ft) below the 

landfill cover. If the sample probe is to be 

driven into the landfill, the bottom cap 

should be designed to facilitate driving the 

probe into the landfill. 

* * * * * 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
1160 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

8.2.3 Driven Probes. Closed-point probes 

may be driven directly into the landfill in a 

single step. This method may not require 

backfilling if the probe is adequately sealed 

by its insertion. Unperforated probes that are 

inserted in this manner and withdrawn a 

distance from a detachable tip to create an 

open space are also acceptable. 

* * * * * 

12.1 Nomenclature. 

Bw = Moisture content in the sample, 

fraction. 

CN2 = Measured N2 concentration (by Method 

3C), fraction. 

CN2Corr = Measured N2 concentration 

corrected for dilution, fraction. 

Ct = Calculated NMOC concentration, ppmv 

C equivalent. 

Ctm = Measured NMOC concentration, ppmv 

C equivalent. 

Pb = Barometric pressure, mm Hg. 

Pt = Gas sample tank pressure after sampling, 

but before pressurizing, mm Hg absolute. 

Ptf = Final gas sample tank pressure after 

pressurizing, mm Hg absolute. 

Pti = Gas sample tank pressure after 

evacuation, mm Hg absolute. 

Pw = Vapor pressure of H2O (from Table 25C– 

1), mm Hg. 

r = Total number of analyzer injections of 

sample tank during analysis (where j = 

injection number, 1 * * * r). 

Tt = Sample tank temperature at completion 

of sampling, °K. 

Tti = Sample tank temperature before 

sampling, °K. 

Ttf = Sample tank temperature after 

pressurizing, °K. 

* * * * * 

12.3 Measured N2 Concentration 

Correction. Use the following equation to 

correct the measured concentration of N2 as 

determined by Method 3C for dilution. 

* * * * * 

53. Amend Method 25D of Appendix 

A–7 to Part 60 by revising the first 

sentence in Section 9.1 to read as 

follows: 

Method 25D—Determination of the Volatile 

Organic Concentration of Waste Samples 

* * * * * 

9.1 Quality Control Samples. If audit 

samples are not available, prepare and 

analyze the two types of quality control 

samples (QCS) listed in Sections 9.1.1 and 

9.1.2. * * * 

* * * * * 

54. Amend Method 26 of Appendix 

A–8 as follows: 

a. By revising Sections 6.1.1 and 8.1.2. 

b. By redesignating Sections 16 and 

17 as Sections 17 and 18, respectively. 

c. By adding a new Section 16. 

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 

* * * * * 

6.1.1 Probe. Borosilicate glass, 

approximately 3⁄8-in. (9-mm) I.D. with a 

heating system capable of maintaining a 

probe gas temperature during sampling of 

120 ± 14 °C (248 ± 25 °F) to prevent moisture 

condensation; or Teflon where stack probes 

are below 210 °C. If HF is a target analyte, 

then preconditioning of new teflon 

components by heating should be considered 

to prevent potential HF outgassing. A Teflonglass filter in a mat configuration should be 

installed in the gas stream, not the filter box, 

to remove particulate matter from the gas 

stream (see Section 6.1.6). 

* * * * * 

8.1.2 Adjust the probe temperature and 

the temperature of the filter and the stopcock 

(i.e., the heated area in Figure 26–1) to a 

temperature sufficient to prevent water 

condensation. This temperature should be 

greater than 120 °C (248 °F). The temperature 

should be monitored throughout a sampling 

run to ensure that the desired temperature is 

maintained. It is important to maintain a 

temperature around the probe and filter of 

greater than 120 °C (248 °F) since it is 

extremely difficult to purge acid gases off 

these components. (These components are 

not quantitatively recovered and, hence, any 

collection of acid gases on these components 

would result in potential underreporting of 

these emissions. The applicable subparts may 

specify alternative higher temperatures.) 

* * * * * 

16.0 Alternative Procedures 

Method 26A. Method 26A, which uses 

isokinetic sampling equipment, is an 

acceptable alternative to Method 26. 

* * * * * 

55. Amend Method 29 of Appendix 

A–8 as follows: 

a. By redesignating Sections 16 and 17 

as Sections 17 and 18, respectively. 

b. By adding a new Section 16. 

Method 29—Determination of Metals 

Emissions From Stationary Sources 

* * * * * 

16.0 Alternative Procedures 

16.1 Alternative Analyzer. Samples may 

also be analyzed by cold vapor atomic 

fluorescence spectrometry. 

* * * * * 

56. Amend Method 30B of Appendix 

A–8 to Part 60 as follows: 

a. By revising the first paragraph in 

Section 8.2.2.1. 

b. By revising Table 9–1 in Section 9. 

c. By revising Section 10.3. 

d. By revising the first paragraph in 

Section 11.3. 

Method 30B—Determination of Total Vapor 

Phase Mercury Emissions From Coal-Fired 

Combustion Sources Using Carbon Sorbent 

Traps 

* * * * * 

8.2.2.1 Determination of Minimum 

Calibration Concentration or Mass. Based on 

your instrument’s sensitivity and linearity, 

determine the calibration concentrations or 

masses that make up a representative low 

level calibration range. Verify that you are 

able to meet the multipoint calibration 

performance criteria in section 11.0 of this 

method. Select a calibration concentration or 

mass that is no less than 2 times the lowest 

concentration or mass in your calibration 

curve. The lowest point in your calibration 

curve must be at least 5, and preferably 10, 

times the Method Detection Limit (MDL), 

which is the minimum amount of the analyte 

that can be detected and reported. The MDL 

must be determined at least once for the 

analytical system using an MDL study such 

as that found in section 15.0 of the EPA 

Method 301 (76 FR 28673, 5/18/2011). * * * 

* * * * * 

9.0 Quality Assurance and Quality Control 

* * * * * 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2EP09JA12.039</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 1161 

TABLE 9–1—QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL CRITERIA FOR METHOD 30B 

QA/QC test or specification Acceptance criteria Frequency Consequences if not met 

Gas flow meter calibration (At 3 

settings or points).

Calibration factor (Yi) at each flow 

rate must be within ± 2% of the 

average value (Y).

Prior to initial use and when posttest check is not within ± 5% of 

Y.

Recalibrate at 3 points until the 

acceptance criteria are met. 

Gas flow meter post-test calibration check (Single-point).Calibration factor (Yi) must be 

within ± 5% of the Y value from 

the most recent 3-point calibration.

After each field test. For mass 

flow meters, must be done onsite, using stack gas.

Recalibrate gas flow meter at 3 

points to determine a new value 

of Y. For mass flow meters, 

must be done on-site, using 

stack gas. Apply the new Y 

value to the field test data. 

Temperature sensor calibration ..... Absolute temperature measures 

by sensor within ± 1.5% of a 

reference sensor.

Prior to initial use and before 

each test thereafter.

Recalibrate; sensor may not be 

used until specification is met. 

Barometer calibration ..................... Absolute pressure measured by 

instrument within ± 10 mm Hg 

of reading with a mercury barometer or NIST traceable barometer.

Prior to initial use and before 

each test thereafter.

Recalibrate; instrument may not 

be used until specification is 

met. 

Pre-test leak check ........................ ≤ 4% of target sampling rate ........ Prior to sampling .......................... Sampling shall not commence 

until the leak check is passed. 

Post-test leak check ...................... ≤ 4% of average sampling rate ..... After sampling ............................... Sample invalidated.* 

Analytical matrix interference test 

(wet chemical analysis, only).

Establish minimum dilution (if any) 

needed to eliminate sorbent 

matrix interferences.

Prior to analyzing any field samples; repeat for each type of 

sorbent used.

Field sample results not validated. 

Analytical bias test ......................... Average recovery between 90% 

and 110% for Hg0 and HgCl2 at 

each of the 2 spike concentration levels.

Prior to analyzing field samples 

and prior to use of new sorbent 

media.

Field samples shall not be analyzed until the percent recovery 

criteria has been met. 

Multipoint analyzer calibration ....... Each analyzer reading within 

± 10% of true value and r2≥ 

0.99.

On the day of analysis, before 

analyzing any samples.

Recalibrate until successful. 

Analysis of independent calibration 

standard.

Within ± 10% of true value ........... Following daily calibration, prior to 

analyzing field samples.

Recalibrate and repeat independent standard analysis until 

successful. 

Analysis of continuing calibration 

verification standard (CCVS).

Within ±10% of true value ............ Following daily calibration, after 

analyzing ≤ 10 field samples, 

and at end of each set of analyses.

Recalibrate and repeat independent standard analysis, reanalyze samples until successful, if possible; for destructive 

techniques, samples invalidated. 

Test run total sample volume ........ Within ± 20% of total volume sampled during field recovery test.Each individual sample ................. Sample invalidated. 

Sorbent trap section 2 breakthrough.For compliance/emissions testing: Every sample ................................ Sample invalidated.* 

≤ 10% of section 1 Hg mass for 

Hg concentrations > 1 μg/dscm; 

≤ 20% of section 1 Hg mass for 

Hg concentrations ≤ 1 μg/dscm 

For relative accuracy testing: 

≤ 10% of section 1 Hg mass for 

Hg concentrations > 1 μg/dscm; 

≤ 20% of section 1 Hg mass for 

Hg concentrations ≤ 1 μg/dscm 

and > 0.5 μg/dscm; 

≤ 50% of section 1 Hg mass for 

Hg concentrations ≤ 0.5 μg/ 

dscm > 0.1 μg/dscm; 

No criterion for Hg concentrations 

≤ 0.1 μg/dscm (must meet all 

other QA/QC specifications).

Paired sorbent trap agreement ...... ≤ 10% Relative Deviation (RD) 

mass for Hg concentrations > 1 

μg/dscm; 

Every run ...................................... Run invalidated.* 

≤ 20% RD or ≤ 0.2 μg/dscm absolute difference for Hg concentrations ≤ 1 μg/dscm.

Sample analysis ............................. Within valid calibration range 

(within calibration curve).

All Section 1 samples where 

stack Hg concentration is ≥ 0.5 

μg/dscm.

Reanalyze at more concentrated 

level if possible, samples invalidated if not within calibrated 

range. 

Sample analysis ............................. Within bounds of Hg0 and HgCl2

Analytical Bias Test.

All Section 1 samples where 

stack Hg concentration is ≥ 0.5 

μg/dscm.

Expand bounds of Hg0 and HgCl2

Analytical Bias Test; if not successful, samples invalidated. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
1162 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 9–1—QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL CRITERIA FOR METHOD 30B—Continued 

QA/QC test or specification Acceptance criteria Frequency Consequences if not met 

Field recovery test ......................... Average recovery between 85% 

and 115% for Hg0.

Once per field test ........................ Field sample runs not validated 

without successful field recovery test. 

* And data from the pair of sorbent traps are also invalidated. 

* * * * * 

10.3 Thermocouples and Other 

Temperature Sensors. Use the procedures 

and criteria in Section 10.3 of Method 2 in 

Appendix A–1 to this part to calibrate instack temperature sensors and 

thermocouples. Dial thermometers shall be 

calibrated against mercury-in-glass 

thermometers or equivalent. * * * 

* * * * * 

11.3 Field Sample Analyses. Analyze the 

sorbent trap samples following the same 

procedures that were used for conducting the 

Hg0 and HgCl2 analytical bias tests. The 

individual sections of the sorbent trap and 

their respective components must be 

analyzed separately (i.e., section 1 and its 

components, then section 2 and its 

components). All sorbent trap section 1 

sample analyses must be within the 

calibrated range of the analytical system as 

specified in Table 9–1. For wet analyses, the 

sample can simply be diluted to fall within 

the calibrated range. However, for the 

destructive thermal analyses, samples that 

are not within the calibrated range cannot be 

re-analyzed. As a result, the sample cannot 

be validated, and another sample must be 

collected. It is strongly suggested that the 

analytical system be calibrated over multiple 

ranges so that thermally analyzed samples do 

fall within the calibrated range. The total 

mass of Hg measured in each sorbent trap 

section 1 must also fall within the lower and 

upper mass limits established during the 

initial Hg0 and HgCl2 analytical bias test. If 

a sample is analyzed and found to fall 

outside of these limits, it is acceptable for an 

additional Hg0 and HgCl2 analytical bias test 

to be performed that now includes this level. 

However, some samples (e.g., the mass 

collected in trap section 2), may have Hg 

levels so low that it may not be possible to 

quantify them in the analytical system’s 

calibrated range. Because a reliable estimate 

of these low-level Hg measurements is 

necessary to fully validate the emissions 

data, the MDL (see section 8.2.2.1 of this 

method) is used to establish the minimum 

amount that can be detected and reported. If 

the measured mass or concentration is below 

the lowest point in the calibration curve and 

above the MDL, the analyst must do the 

following: Estimate the mass or concentration 

of the sample based on the analytical 

instrument response relative to an additional 

calibration standard at a concentration or 

mass between the MDL and the lowest point 

in the calibration curve. This is 

accomplished by establishing a response 

factor (e.g., area counts per Hg mass or 

concentration) and estimating the amount of 

Hg present in the sample based on the 

analytical response and this response factor. 

* * * 

* * * * * 

57. Amend Performance Specification 

1 of Appendix B to Part 60 by revising 

Section 3.5 to 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 

* * * * * 

3.5 Full Scale. The maximum data 

display output of the COMS. For purposes of 

recordkeeping and reporting, full scale will 

be greater than 80 percent opacity. 

Note: ‘‘Full scale’’ means ‘‘span.’’ 

* * * * * 

58. Amend Performance Specification 

3 of Appendix B to Part 60 by revising 

Section 13.2 to read as follows: 

Performance Specification 3—Specifications 

and Test Procedures for O2 and CO2

Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems in 

Stationary Sources 

* * * * * 

13.2 CEMS Relative Accuracy 

Performance Specification. The RA of the 

CEMS must be no greater than 20 percent of 

the mean value of the RM test data or 1.0 

percent O2 or CO2, whichever is greater. 

* * * * * 

59. Amend Performance Specification 

4 of Appendix B to Part 60 by revising 

Section 8.2 to read as follows: 

Performance Specification 4—Specifications 

and Test Procedures for Carbon Monoxide 

Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems in 

Stationary Sources 

* * * * * 

8.2 Reference Methods. Unless otherwise 

specified in an applicable subpart of the 

regulation, Method 10, 10A, 10B, or other 

approved alternative are the RM for this PS. 

* * * * * 

60. Amend Performance Specification 

4B of Appendix B to Part 60 by revising 

Section 7.1.1 to read as follows: 

Performance Specification 4B— 

Specifications and Test Procedures for 

Carbon Monoxide and Oxygen Continuous 

Monitoring Systems in Stationary Sources 

* * * * * 

7.1.1 Calculations. Summarize the results 

on a data sheet. 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: 

CE = | d/FS | × 100 (1) 

Where d is the mean difference between 

the CEMS response and the known reference 

concentration, and FS is the span value. The 

CE for the O2 monitor is the average percent 

O2 difference between the O2 monitor and the 

certified cylinder gas value for each gas. 

* * * * * 

61. Amend Performance Specification 

7 of Appendix B to Part 60 by revising 

Section 8.4 and adding a reference to 

the end of Section 16.0. to read as 

follows: 

Performance Specification 7—Specifications 

and Test Procedures for Hydrogen Sulfide 

Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems in 

Stationary Sources 

* * * * * 

8.4 Relative Accuracy Test Procedure. 

8.4.1 Sampling Strategy for RM Tests, 

Number of RM Tests, Correlation of RM and 

CEMS Data, and Calculations. These are the 

same as that in PS–2, Sections 8.4.3 (except 

as specified below), 8.4.4, 8.4.5, and 8.4.6, 

respectively. 

8.4.2 Reference Methods. Unless 

otherwise specified in an applicable subpart 

of the regulation, Methods 11, 15, and 16 

may be used for the RM for this PS. 

8.4.2.1 Sampling Time Per Run—Method 

11. A sampling run, when Method 11 

(integrated sampling) is used, shall consist of 

a single measurement for at least 10 minutes 

and 0.010 dscm (0.35 dscf). Each sample 

shall be taken at approximately 30-minute 

intervals. 

8.4.2.2 Sampling Time Per Run— 

Methods 15 and 16. The sampling run shall 

consist of two injections equally spaced over 

a 30-minute period following the procedures 

described in the particular method. 

Note: Caution! Heater or non-approved 

electrical probes should not be used around 

explosive or flammable sources. 

* * * * * 

16.0 References 

* * * * * 

5. Letter to RAMCON Environmental Corp. 

from Robert Kellam, December 27, 1992. 

* * * * * 

62. Amend Performance Specification 

11 of Appendix B to Part 60 by revising 

Sections 12.1(1) and (2) to read as 

follows: 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 1163 

Performance Specification 11— 

Specifications and Test Procedures for 

Particulate Matter Continuous Emission 

Monitoring Systems at Stationary Sources 

* * * * * 

12.1 * * * 

(1) Calculate the upscale drift (UD) using 

Equation 11–1: 

Where: 

UD = The upscale (high-level) drift of your 

PM CEMS in percent, 

RCEM= The measured PM CEMS response to 

the upscale reference standard, and 

RU= The pre-established numerical value of 

the upscale reference standard. 

FS = Full-scale value. 

(2) Calculate the zero drift (ZD) using 

Equation 11–2: 

Where: 

ZD = The zero (low-level) drift of your PM 

CEMS in percent, 

RCEM= The measured PM CEMS response to 

the zero reference standard, 

RL = The pre-established numerical value of 

the zero reference standard, and 

FS = Full-scale value. 

* * * * * 

63. Amend Performance Specification 

15 of Appendix B to Part 60 by revising 

Sections 11.1.1.4.2 and 11.1.1.4.3 to 

read as follows: 

Performance Specification 15—Performance 

Specification for Extractive FTIR Continuous 

Emission Monitoring Systems in Stationary 

Sources 

* * * * * 

11.1.1.4.2 RMs Using a Grab Sampling 

Technique. Synchronize the RM and FTIR 

CEM measurements as closely as possible. 

For a grab sampling RM, record the volume 

collected and the exact sampling period for 

each sample. Synchronize the FTIR CEM so 

that the FTIR measures a spectrum of a 

similar cell volume at the same time as the 

RM grab sample was collected. Measure at 

least five independent samples with both the 

FTIR CEM and the RM for each of the 

minimum nine runs. Compare the run 

concentration averages by using the relative 

accuracy analysis procedure in Performance 

Specification 2 of Appendix B of 40 CFR part 

60. 

11.1.1.4.3 Continuous Emission Monitors 

as RMs. If the RM is a CEM, synchronize the 

sampling flow rates of the RM and the FTIR 

CEM. Each run is at least 1 hour long and 

consists of at least 10 FTIR CEM 

measurements and the corresponding 10 RM 

measurements (or averages). For the 

statistical comparison, use the relative 

accuracy analysis procedure in Performance 

Specification 2 of Appendix B of 40 CFR part 

60. If the RM time constant is < 1⁄2 the FTIR 

CEM time constant, brief fluctuations in 

analyte concentrations that are not 

adequately measured with the slower FTIR 

CEM time constant can be excluded from the 

run average along with the corresponding RM 

measurements. However, the FTIR CEM run 

average must still include at least 10 

measurements over a 1-hour period. 

* * * * * 

64. Amend Performance Specification 

16 of Appendix B to Part 60 by revising 

Sections 6.1.7, 8.2.1, 9.1, 9.3, 9.4, 12.4, 

and 13.5 to read as follows: 

Performance Specification 16— 

Specifications and Test Procedures for 

Predictive Emission Monitoring Systems in 

Stationary Sources 

* * * * * 

6.1.7 Sensor Location and Repair. We 

recommend you install sensors in an 

accessible location in order to perform 

repairs and replacements. Permanentlyinstalled platforms or ladders may not be 

needed. If you install sensors in an area that 

is not accessible, you may be required to shut 

down the emissions unit to repair or replace 

a sensor. Conduct a new RATA after 

replacing a sensor that supplies a critical 

PEMS parameter if the new sensor provides 

a different output or scaling or changes the 

historical training dataset of the PEMS. 

Replacement of a non-critical sensor that 

does not cause an impact in the accuracy of 

the PEMS does not trigger a RATA. All 

sensors must be calibrated as often as needed 

but at least as often as recommended by the 

manufacturers. 

* * * * * 

8.2.1 Reference Methods. Unless 

otherwise specified in the applicable 

regulations, you must use the test methods in 

Appendix A of this part for the RM test. 

Conduct the RM tests at three operating 

levels. The RM tests shall be performed at a 

low-load (or production) level between the 

minimum safe, stable load and 50 percent of 

the maximum level load, at the mid-load 

level (an intermediary level between the low 

and high levels), and at a high-load level 

between 80 percent and the maximum load. 

Alternatively, if practicable, you may test at 

three levels of the key operating parameter 

(e.g. selected based on a covariance analysis 

between each parameter and the PEMS 

output) equally spaced within the normal 

range of the parameter. 

* * * * * 

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 ................................................ Compliance ................................... 3-test avg ≤ 10% of simultaneous 

analyzer or RM average.

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 davg ≤ |cc| ................................... Bias test passed (no correction 

factor needed). 

PEMS Training ............................... All .................................................. If Fcritical ≥ Fr ≥ 0.8 ........................ Optional after initial and subsequent RATAs. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2EP09JA12.040</GPH> EP09JA12.041</GPH>
1164 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

ONGOING QUALITY ASSURANCE TESTS—Continued 

Test PEMS regulatory purpose Acceptability Frequency 

Sensor Evaluation Alert Test (optional).All .................................................. See Section 6.1.8 ......................... After each PEMS training. 

* * * * * 

9.3 Quarterly Relative Accuracy Audits. 

In the first year of operation after the initial 

certification, perform a RAA consisting of at 

least three 30-minute portable analyzer or 

RM determinations each quarter a RATA is 

not performed. To conduct a RAA, follow the 

procedures in Section 8.2 for the relative 

accuracy test, except that only three sets of 

measurement data are required, and the 

statistical tests are not required. The average 

of the three or more portable analyzer or RM 

determinations must not exceed the limits 

given in Section 13.5. Report the data from 

all sets of measurement data. If a PEMS 

passes all quarterly RAAs in the first year 

and also passes the subsequent yearly RATA 

in the second year, you may elect to perform 

a single mid-year RAA in the second year in 

place of the quarterly RAAs. This option may 

be repeated, but only until the PEMS fails 

either a mid-year RAA or a yearly RATA. 

When such a failure occurs, you must resume 

quarterly RAAs in the quarter following the 

failure and continue conducting quarterly 

RAAs until the PEMS successfully passes 

both a year of quarterly RAAs and a 

subsequent RATA. 

9.4 Yearly Relative Accuracy Test. 

Perform a minimum 9-run RATA at the 

normal operating level on a yearly basis in 

the quarter that the RAA is not performed. 

The statistical tests in Section 8.3 are not 

required for the yearly RATA. 

* * * * * 

12.4 Relative Accuracy Audit. Calculate 

the quarterly RAA using Equation 16–9. 

* * * * * 

13.5 Relative Accuracy Audits. 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 20 

percent for concentrations between 100 and 

20 ppm, or the test is failed. For 

measurements at 20 ppm or less, this 

difference must not exceed 2 ppm for a 

pollutant PEMS and 1 percent absolute for a 

diluents PEMS. 

* * * * * 

65. Amend Procedure 1 of Appendix 

F to Part 60 by revising Section 6.2 to 

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 

* * * * * 

6.2 RAA Accuracy Calculation. Use the 

calculation procedure in the relevant 

performance specification to calculate the 

accuracy for the RAA. The RAA must be 

calculated in the units of the applicable 

emission standard. 

* * * * * 

66. Amend Procedure 2 of Appendix F to 

Part 60 by revising paragraphs (3) and (4) in 

Section 12.0 to read as follows: 

Procedure 2—Quality Assurance 

Requirements for Particulate Matter 

Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems at 

Stationary Sources 

* * * * * 

12.0 * * * 

(3) How do I calculate daily upscale and 

zero drift? You must calculate the upscale 

drift using Equation 2–2 and the zero drift 

using Equation 2–3: 

Where: 

UD = The upscale drift of your PM CEMS, 

in percent, 

RCEM = Your PM CEMS response to the 

upscale check value, and 

RU = The upscale check value. 

FS = Full-scale value. 

Where: 

ZD = The zero (low-level) drift of your PM 

CEMS, in percent, 

RCEM = Your PM CEMS response of the zero 

check value, 

RL = The zero check value, and 

(4) How do I calculate SVA accuracy? You 

must use Equation 2–4 to calculate the 

accuracy, in percent, for each of the three 

SVA tests or the daily sample volume check: 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2EP09JA12.042</GPH> EP09JA12.043</GPH> EP09JA12.044</GPH> EP09JA12.045</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 1165 

Where: 

VM = Sample gas volume determined/ 

reported by your PM CEMS (e.g., dscm), 

VR = Sample gas volume measured by the 

independent calibrated reference device 

(e.g., dscm) for the SVA or the reference 

value for the daily sample volume check. 

Note: Before calculating SVA accuracy, you 

must correct the sample gas volumes 

measured by your PM CEMS and the 

independent calibrated reference device to 

the same basis of temperature, pressure, and 

moisture content. You must document all 

data and calculations. 

* * * * * 

67. Amend Procedure 5 of Appendix 

F to Part 60 by redesignating the second 

listing of Section 6.2.6 as Section 6.2.7. 

PART 61—NATIONAL EMISSION 

STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR 

POLLUTANTS 

68. The authority citation for Part 61 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq. 

69. Amend § 61.13 by revising 

paragraph (e)(1)(i) to read as follows: 

§ 61.13 Emission tests and waiver of 

emission tests. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(i) The source owner, operator, or 

representative of the tested facility shall 

obtain an audit sample, if commercially 

available, from an AASP for each test 

method used for regulatory compliance 

purposes. No audit samples are required 

for the following test methods: Methods 

3A and 3C of Appendix A–3 of Part 60; 

Methods 6C, 7E, 9, and 10 of Appendix 

A–4 of Part 60; Method 18 and 19 of 

Appendix A–6 of Part 60; Methods 20, 

22, and 25A of Appendix A–7 of Part 

60; and Methods 303, 318, 320, and 321 

of Appendix A of Part 63. If multiple 

sources at a single facility are tested 

during a compliance test event, only one 

audit sample is required for each 

method used during a compliance test. 

The compliance authority responsible 

for the compliance test may waive the 

requirement to include an audit sample 

if they believe that an audit sample is 

not necessary. ‘‘Commercially 

available’’ means that two or more 

independent AASPs have blind audit 

samples available for purchase. If the 

source owner, operator, or 

representative cannot find an audit 

sample for a specific method, the owner, 

operator, or representative shall consult 

the EPA Web site at the following URL, 

www.epa.gov/ttn/emc, to confirm 

whether there is a source that can 

supply an audit sample for that method. 

If the EPA Web site does not list an 

available audit sample at least 60 days 

prior to the beginning of the compliance 

test, the source owner, operator, or 

representative shall not be required to 

include an audit sample as part of the 

quality assurance program for the 

compliance test. When ordering an 

audit sample, the source owner, 

operator, or representative shall give the 

sample provider an estimate for the 

concentration of each pollutant that is 

emitted by the source or the estimated 

concentration of each pollutant based 

on the permitted level and the name, 

address, and phone number of the 

compliance authority. The source 

owner, operator, or representative shall 

report the results for the audit sample 

along with a summary of the emission 

test results for the audited pollutant to 

the compliance authority and shall 

report the results of the audit sample to 

the AASP. The source owner, operator, 

or representative shall make both 

reports at the same time and in the same 

manner or shall report to the 

compliance authority first and report to 

the AASP. If the method being audited 

is a method that allows the samples to 

be analyzed in the field and the tester 

plans to analyze the samples in the 

field, the tester may analyze the audit 

samples prior to collecting the emission 

samples provided a representative of the 

compliance authority is present at the 

testing site. The tester may request, and 

the compliance authority may grant, a 

waiver to the requirement that a 

representative of the compliance 

authority must be present at the testing 

site during the field analysis of an audit 

sample. The source owner, operator, or 

representative may report the results of 

the audit sample to the compliance 

authority and then report the results of 

the audit sample to the AASP prior to 

collecting any emission samples. The 

test protocol and final test report shall 

document whether an audit sample was 

ordered and utilized and the pass/fail 

results as applicable. 

* * * * * 

70. Amend § 61.33 by revising 

paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

§ 61.33 Stack sampling. 

(a) Unless a waiver of emission testing 

is obtained under § 61.13, each owner or 

operator required to comply with 

§ 61.32(a) shall test emissions from the 

source according to Method 104 of 

Appendix B to this part or according to 

Method 29 of Appendix A to Part 60. 

Method 103 of Appendix B to this part 

is approved by the Administrator as an 

alternative method for sources subject to 

§ 61.32(a). The emission test shall be 

performed: 

(1) Within 90 days of the effective 

date in the case of an existing source or 

a new source which has an initial 

startup date preceding the effective date; 

or 

(2) Within 90 days of startup in the 

case of a new source which did not have 

an initial startup date preceding the 

effective date. 

* * * * * 

71. Amend § 61.42 by revising 

paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

§ 61.42 Emission standard. 

(a) Emissions to the atmosphere from 

rocket-motor test sites shall not cause 

time-weighted atmospheric 

concentrations of beryllium to exceed 

75 microgram minutes per cubic meter 

(mg-min/m 3) (4.68 × 10¥9 pound 

minutes per cubic foot (lb-min/ft 3)) of 

air within the limits of 10 to 60 minutes, 

accumulated during any 2 consecutive 

weeks, in any area in which an adverse 

effect to public health could occur. 

* * * * * 

72. Amend § 61.53 by revising 

paragraph (d)(2) to read as follows: 

§ 61.53 Stack sampling. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(2) Method 101A in Appendix B or 

Method 29 in Appendix A to part 60 

shall be used to test emissions as 

follows: 

* * * * * 

73. Amend § 61.164 by revising 

paragraphs (d)(2)(i), (e)(1)(i), and (e)(2) 

to read as follows: 

§ 61.164 Test methods and procedures. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(i) Use Method 108 in Appendix B to 

this part or Method 29 in Appendix A 

to part 60 for determining the arsenic 

emission rate, g/hr (lb/hr). The emission 

rate shall equal the arithmetic mean of 

the results of three 60-minute test runs. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(1) * * * 

(i) Use Method 108 in Appendix B to 

this part or Method 29 in Appendix A 

to part 60 to determine the 

concentration of arsenic in the gas 

streams entering and exiting the control 

device. Conduct three 60-minute test 

runs, each consisting of simultaneous 

testing of the inlet and outlet gas 

streams. The gas streams shall contain 

all the gas exhausted from the glass 

melting furnace. 

* * * * * 

(2) Calculate the percent emission 

reduction for each run as follows: 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
1166 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

Where: 

D = the percent emission reduction. 

Cb = the arsenic concentration of the stack 

gas entering the control device, as 

measured by Method 108 or Method 29. 

Ca = the arsenic concentration of the stack gas 

exiting the control device, as measured 

by Method 108 or Method 29. 

* * * * * 

74. Amend Method 101 of Appendix 

B to Part 61 by redesignating Sections 

16 and 17 as Sections 17 and 18, 

respectively; and by adding a new 

Section 16 to read as follows: 

Appendix B to Part 61—Test Methods 

* * * * * 

Method 101—Determination of Particulate 

and Gaseous Mercury Emissions From 

Chlor-Alkali Plants (Air Streams) 

* * * * * 

16.0 Alternative Procedures 

16.1 Alternative Analyzer. Samples may 

also be analyzed by cold vapor atomic 

fluorescence spectrometry. 

* * * * * 

75. Amend Method 101A of Appendix 

B to Part 61 by redesignating Sections 

16 and 17 as Sections 17 and 18, 

respectively; and by adding a new 

Section 16 to read as follows: 

Method 101A—Determination of Particulate 

and Gaseous Mercury Emissions From 

Sewage Sludge Incinerators 

* * * * * 

16.0 Alternative Procedures 

16.1 Alternative Analyzers. 

16.1.1 Inductively coupled plasmaatomic emission spectrometry (ICP–AES) 

may be used as an alternative to atomic 

absorption analysis provided the following 

conditions are met: 

16.1.1.1 Sample collection, sample 

preparation, and analytical preparation 

procedures are as defined in the method 

except as necessary for the ICP–AES 

application. 

16.1.1.2 The quality control procedures 

are conducted as prescribed. 

16.1.1.3 The limit of quantitation for the 

ICP–AES must be demonstrated and the 

sample concentrations reported should be no 

less than two times the limit of quantitation. 

The limit of quantitation is defined as ten 

times the standard deviation of the blank 

value. The standard deviation of the blank 

value is determined from the analysis of 

seven blanks. It has been reported that for 

mercury and those elements that form 

hydrides, a continuous-flow generator 

coupled to an ICP–AES offers detection 

limits comparable to cold vapor atomic 

absorption. 

6.1.2 Samples may also be analyzed by 

cold vapor atomic fluorescence spectrometry. 

* * * * * 

76. Amend Method 102 in Appendix 

B to Part 61 by revising Section 8.1.1.1 

to read as follows: 

Method 102—Determination of Particulate 

and Gaseous Mercury Emissions From 

Chlor-Alkali Plants (Hydrogen Streams) 

* * * * * 

8.1.1.1 Calibrate the meter box orifice. 

Use the techniques described in APTD–0576 

(see Reference 9 in Section 17.0 of Method 

5 of Appendix A to Part 60). Calibration of 

the orifice meter at flow conditions that 

simulate the conditions at the source is 

suggested. Calibration should either be done 

with hydrogen or with some other gas having 

a similar Reynolds Number so that there is 

similarity between the Reynolds Numbers 

during calibration and during sampling. 

Alternative mercury-free thermometers may 

be used if the thermometers are, at a 

minimum, equivalent in terms of 

performance or suitably effective for the 

specific temperature measurement 

application. 

* * * * * 

77. Amend Method 104 in Appendix 

B to Part 61 as follows: 

a. By revising Section 4.1. 

b. By revising Section 11.5.3. 

c. By redesignating Sections 16 and 17 

as Sections 17 and 18 respectively. 

d. By adding a new Section 16. 

Method 104—Determination of Beryllium 

Emissions From Stationary Sources 

* * * * * 

4.1 Matrix Effects. Analysis for Be by 

flame atomic absorption spectrophotometry 

is sensitive to the chemical composition and 

to the physical properties (e.g., viscosity, pH) 

of the sample. Aluminum and silicon, in 

particular, are known to interfere when 

present in appreciable quantities. The 

analytical procedure includes (optionally) 

the use of the Method of Standard Additions 

to check for these matrix effects, and sample 

analysis using the Method of Standard 

Additions if significant matrix effects are 

found to be present (see Reference 2 in 

Section 17.0). 

* * * * * 

11.5.3 Check for Matrix Effects (optional). 

Use the Method of Standard Additions (see 

Reference 2 in Section 17.0) to check at least 

one sample from each source for matrix 

effects on the Be results. If the results of the 

Method of Standard Additions procedure 

used on the single source sample do not 

agree to within 5 percent of the value 

obtained by the routine atomic absorption 

analysis, then reanalyze all samples from the 

source using the Method of Standard 

Additions procedure. 

* * * * * 

16.0 Alternative Procedures 

16.1 Alternative Analyzer. Inductively 

coupled plasma-atomic emission 

spectrometry (ICP–AES) may be used as an 

alternative to atomic absorption analysis 

provided the following conditions are met: 

16.1.1 Sample collection, sample 

preparation, and analytical preparation 

procedures are as defined in the method 

except as necessary for the ICP–AES 

application. 

16.1.2 Quality Assurance/Quality Control 

procedures, including audit material 

analysis, are conducted as prescribed in the 

method. The QA acceptance conditions must 

be met. 

16.1.3 The limit of quantitation for the 

ICP–AES must be demonstrated and the 

sample concentrations reported should be no 

less than two times the limit of quantitation. 

The limit of quantitation is defined as ten 

times the standard deviation of the blank 

value. The standard deviation of the blank 

value is determined from the analysis of 

seven blanks. It has been reported that for 

mercury and those elements that form 

hydrides, a continuous-flow generator 

coupled to an ICP–AES offers detection 

limits comparable to cold vapor atomic 

absorption. 

* * * * * 

78. Amend Method 108 of Appendix 

B to Part 61 by redesignating Sections 

16 and 17 as Sections 17 and 18 

respectively, and by adding a new 

Section 16 to read as follows: 

Method 108—Determination of Particulate 

and Gaseous Arsenic Emissions 

* * * * * 

16.0 Alternative Procedures 

16.1 Alternative Analyzer. Inductively 

coupled plasma-atomic emission 

spectrometry (ICP–AES) may be used as an 

alternative to atomic absorption analysis 

provided the following conditions are met: 

16.1.1 Sample collection, sample 

preparation, and analytical preparation 

procedures are as defined in the method 

except as necessary for the ICP–AES 

application. 

16.1.2 Quality Assurance/Quality Control 

procedures, including audit material 

analysis, are conducted as prescribed in the 

method. The QA acceptance conditions must 

be met. 

16.1.3 The limit of quantitation for the 

ICP–AES must be demonstrated and the 

sample concentrations reported should be no 

less than two times the limit of quantitation. 

The limit of quantitation is defined as ten 

times the standard deviation of the blank 

value. The standard deviation of the blank 

value is determined from the analysis of 

seven blanks. It has been reported that for 

mercury and those elements that form 

hydrides, a continuous-flow generator 

coupled to an ICP–AES offers detection 

limits comparable to cold vapor atomic 

absorption. 

* * * * * 

79. Amend Method 108A of Appendix 

B to Part 61 by redesignating Sections 

16 and 17 as Sections 17 and 18 

respectively, and by adding a new 

Section 16 to read as follows: 

Method 108A—Determination of Arsenic 

Content in Ore Samples From Nonferrous 

Smelters 

* * * * * 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2EP09JA12.046</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 1167 

16.0 Alternative Procedures 

16.1 Alternative Analyzer. Inductively 

coupled plasma-atomic emission 

spectrometry (ICP–AES) may be used as an 

alternative to atomic absorption analysis 

provided the following conditions are met: 

16.1.1 Sample collection, sample 

preparation, and analytical preparation 

procedures are as defined in the method 

except as necessary for the ICP–AES 

application. 

16.1.2 Quality Assurance/Quality Control 

procedures, including audit material 

analysis, are conducted as prescribed in the 

method. The QA acceptance conditions must 

be met. 

16.1.3 The limit of quantitation for the 

ICP–AES must be demonstrated and the 

sample concentrations reported should be no 

less than two times the limit of quantitation. 

The limit of quantitation is defined as ten 

times the standard deviation of the blank 

value. The standard deviation of the blank 

value is determined from the analysis of 

seven blanks. It has been reported that for 

mercury and those elements that form 

hydrides, a continuous-flow generator 

coupled to an ICP–AES offers detection 

limits comparable to cold vapor atomic 

absorption. 

* * * * * 

PART 63—NATIONAL EMISSION 

STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR 

POLLUTANTS FOR SOURCE 

CATEGORIES 

80. The authority citation for part 63 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

81. Amend § 63.7 by revising 

paragraph (c)(2)(iii)(A) to read as 

follows: 

§ 63.7 Performance testing requirements. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(iii) * * * 

(A) The source owner, operator, or 

representative of the tested facility shall 

obtain an audit sample, if commercially 

available, from an AASP for each test 

method used for regulatory compliance 

purposes. No audit samples are required 

for the following test methods: Methods 

3A and 3C of Appendix A–3 of Part 60; 

Methods 6C, 7E, 9, and 10 of Appendix 

A–4 of Part 60; Methods 18 and 19 of 

Appendix A–6 of Part 60; Methods 20, 

22, and 25A of Appendix A–7 of Part 

60; and Methods 303, 318, 320, and 321 

of Appendix A of Part 63. If multiple 

sources at a single facility are tested 

during a compliance test event, only one 

audit sample is required for each 

method used during a compliance test. 

The compliance authority responsible 

for the compliance test may waive the 

requirement to include an audit sample 

if they believe that an audit sample is 

not necessary. ‘‘Commercially 

available’’ means that two or more 

independent AASPs have blind audit 

samples available for purchase. If the 

source owner, operator, or 

representative cannot find an audit 

sample for a specific method, the owner, 

operator, or representative shall consult 

the EPA web site at the following URL, 

www.epa.gov/ttn/emc, to confirm 

whether there is a source that can 

supply an audit sample for that method. 

If the EPA web site does not list an 

available audit sample at least 60 days 

prior to the beginning of the compliance 

test, the source owner, operator, or 

representative shall not be required to 

include an audit sample as part of the 

quality assurance program for the 

compliance test. When ordering an 

audit sample, the source owner, 

operator, or representative shall give the 

sample provider an estimate for the 

concentration of each pollutant that is 

emitted by the source or the estimated 

concentration of each pollutant based 

on the permitted level and the name, 

address, and phone number of the 

compliance authority. The source 

owner, operator, or representative shall 

report the results for the audit sample 

along with a summary of the emission 

test results for the audited pollutant to 

the compliance authority and shall 

report the results of the audit sample to 

the AASP. The source owner, operator, 

or representative shall make both 

reports at the same time and in the same 

manner or shall report to the 

compliance authority first and report to 

the AASP. If the method being audited 

is a method that allows the samples to 

be analyzed in the field and the tester 

plans to analyze the samples in the 

field, the tester may analyze the audit 

samples prior to collecting the emission 

samples provided a representative of the 

compliance authority is present at the 

testing site. The tester may request, and 

the compliance authority may grant, a 

waiver to the requirement that a 

representative of the compliance 

authority must be present at the testing 

site during the field analysis of an audit 

sample. The source owner, operator, or 

representative may report the results of 

the audit sample to the compliance 

authority and then report the results of 

the audit sample to the AASP prior to 

collecting any emission samples. The 

test protocol and final test report shall 

document whether an audit sample was 

ordered and utilized and the pass/fail 

results as applicable. 

* * * * * 

82. Amend § 63.8 by adding a 

sentence to the end of paragraph 

(f)(6)(iii) to read as follows: 

§ 63.8 Monitoring requirements. 

* * * * * 

(f) * * * 

(6) * * * 

(iii) * * * The Administrator will 

review the notification and may rescind 

permission to use an alternative and 

require the owner or operator to conduct 

a relative accuracy test of the CEMS as 

specified in section 8.4 of Performance 

Specification 2. 

* * * * * 

83. Amend § 63.144 by adding 

paragraphs (b)(5)(i)(G) and (b)(5)(i)(H) to 

read as follows: 

§ 63.144 Process wastewater provisions— 

test methods and procedures for 

determining applicability and Group 1/ 

Group 2 determinations (determining which 

wastewater streams require control). 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(5) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(G) Method 8260B. Use procedures 

specified in Method 8260B in the SW– 

846 Compendium of Methods. 

(H) Method 316. Use Method 316 to 

determine formaldehyde concentration. 

* * * * * 

84. Amend § 63.344 by adding 

paragraph (c)(5) to read as follows: 

§ 63.344 Performance test requirements 

and test methods. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(5) The South Coast Air Quality 

Management District (SCAQMD) 

Method 205.1 (which is available by 

contacting the South Coast AQMD, 

21865 Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, CA 

91765) may be used to determine the 

total chromium concentration from hard 

and decorative chromium electroplating 

tanks and chromium anodizing tanks. 

* * * * * 

85. Amend § 63.364 by revising 

paragraph (e) to read as follows: 

§ 63.364 Monitoring requirements. 

* * * * * 

(e) Measure and record once per hour 

the ethylene oxide concentration at the 

outlet to the atmosphere after any 

control device according to the 

procedures specified in § 63.365(c)(1). 

The owner or operator shall compute 

and record a 24-hour average daily. The 

owner or operator will install, calibrate, 

operate, and maintain a monitor 

consistent with the requirements of 

performance specification (PS) 8 or 9 in 

40 CFR part 60, Appendix B, to measure 

ethylene oxide. The daily calibration 

requirements of section 7.2 of PS–9 or 

Section 13.1 of PS–8 are required only 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
1168 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

on days when ethylene oxide emissions 

are vented to the control device. 

* * * * * 

86. Amend § 63.365 by revising 

paragraph (b) introductory text to read 

as follows: 

§ 63.365 Test methods and procedures. 

* * * * * 

(b) Efficiency at the sterilization 

chamber vent. California Air Resources 

Board (CARB) Method 431 or the 

following procedures shall be used to 

determine the efficiency of all types of 

control devices used to comply with 

§ 63.362(c), sterilization chamber vent 

standard. 

* * * * * 

87. Amend § 63.565 by revising 

paragraphs (d)(5), (8), and (10) and (g) 

to read as follows: 

§ 63.565 Test methods and procedures. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(5) Recovery devices. The average 

VOC concentration in the vent upstream 

and downstream of the control device 

shall be determined using Method 25A 

or 25B of Appendix A to part 60 of this 

chapter for recovery devices. The 

average VOC concentration shall 

correspond to the volume measurement 

by taking into account the sampling 

system response time. 

* * * * * 

(8) Where Method 25, 25A, or 25B is 

used to measure the percent reduction 

in VOC, the percent reduction across the 

combustion or recovery device shall be 

calculated as follows: 

Where: 

R = control efficiency of control device, 

percent. 

Ei = mass flow rate of VOC at the inlet to the 

combustion or recovery device as 

calculated under paragraph (c)(7) of this 

section, kg/hr. 

Eo = mass flow rate of VOC at the outlet of 

the combustion or recovery device, as 

calculated under paragraph (c)(7) of this 

section, kg/hr. 

* * * * * 

(10) Use of methods other than 

Method 25, 25A, or 25B shall be 

validated pursuant to Method 301 of 

Appendix A to part 63 of this chapter. 

* * * * * 

(g) Baseline outlet VOC concentration. 

The procedures in this paragraph shall 

be used to determine the outlet VOC 

concentration required in § 63.563(b)(4), 

(6), (7), and (8) for combustion devices 

except flare, carbon adsorbers, 

condenser/refrigeration units, and 

absorbers, respectively, and to monitor 

the VOC concentration as required in 

§ 63.564(e), (g), (h), and (i). The owner 

or operator shall use the procedures 

outlined in Method 25A or 25B. For the 

baseline VOC concentration, the 

arithmetic average of the outlet VOC 

concentration from three test runs from 

paragraph (d) of this section shall be 

calculated for the control device. The 

VOC concentration shall be measured at 

least every 15 minutes. Compliance 

testing of VOC CEMS shall be performed 

using PS 8. 

* * * * * 

88. Amend § 63.750 by revising 

paragraph (o) to read as follows: 

§ 63.750 Test methods and procedures. 

* * * * * 

(o) Inorganic HAP emissions—dry 

particulate filter certification 

requirements. Dry particulate filters 

used to comply with § 63.745(g)(2) or 

§ 63.746(b)(4) must be certified by the 

filter manufacturer or distributor, paint/ 

depainting booth supplier, and/or the 

facility owner or operator using method 

319 in Appendix A of this part, to meet 

or exceed the efficiency data points 

found in Tables 1 and 2, or 3 and 4 of 

§ 63.745 for existing or new sources 

respectively. 

89. Amend § 63.1251 by revising the 

definition of ‘‘Process vent’’ to read as 

follows: 

§ 63.1251 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Process vent means a vent from a unit 

operation or vents from multiple unit 

operations within a process that are 

manifolded together into a common 

header, through which a HAPcontaining gas stream is, or has the 

potential to be, released to the 

atmosphere. Examples of process vents 

include, but are not limited to, vents on 

condensers used for product recovery, 

bottom receivers, surge control vessels, 

reactors, filters, centrifuges, and process 

tanks. Emission streams that are 

undiluted and uncontrolled containing 

less than 50 ppmv HAP, as determined 

through process knowledge that no HAP 

are present in the emission stream or 

using an engineering assessment as 

discussed in § 63.1257(d)(2)(ii); test data 

using Method 18 of 40 CFR part 60, 

Appendix A; Method 320 of 40 CFR part 

63; or any other test method that has 

been validated according to the 

procedures in Method 301 of Appendix 

A of this part, are not considered 

process vents. Process vents do not 

include vents on storage tanks regulated 

under § 63.1253, vents on wastewater 

emission sources regulated under 

§ 63.1256, or pieces of equipment 

regulated under § 63.1255. 

* * * * * 

90. Amend § 63.1511 by revising 

paragraph (c)(9) as to read follows: 

§ 63.1511 Performance test/compliance 

demonstration general requirements. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(9) Method 26A for the concentration 

of HCl. Where a lime-injected fabric 

filter is used as the control device to 

comply with the 90 percent reduction 

standard, the owner or operator must 

measure the fabric filter inlet 

concentration of HCl at a point before 

lime is introduced to the system. 

Method 26 may be used in place of 

Method 26A where it can be 

demonstrated that there are no water 

droplets in the emission stream. This 

can be demonstrated by showing that 

the vapor pressure of water in the 

emission stream that you are testing is 

less than the equilibrium vapor pressure 

of water at the emission stream 

temperature, and by certifying that the 

emission stream is not controlled by a 

wet scrubber. 

* * * * * 

Subpart CCCC—National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Air 

Pollutants: Manufacturing of 

Nutritional Yeast 

91. Subpart CCCC of Part 63 is 

amended by revising Table 2 to read as 

follows: 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2EP09JA12.047</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 1169 

TABLE 2 TO SUBPART CCCC OF PART 63—REQUIREMENTS FOR PERFORMANCE TESTS

[As stated in § 63.2161, if you demonstrate compliance by monitoring brew ethanol, you must comply with the requirements for performance tests 

in the following table (brew ethanol monitoring only)] 

For each fed-batch fermenter for which compliance is determined by monitoring brew ethanol 

concentration and calculating VOC concentration in the fermenter exhaust according to the 

procedures in § 63.2161, you must . . . 

Using . . . According to the following requirements . . . 

1. Measure VOC as propane ............................. Method 25A *, or an alternative validated by 

EPA Method 301 * and approved by the Administrator.

You must measure the VOC concentration in 

the fermenter exhaust at any point prior to 

the dilution of the exhaust stream. 

* EPA Test Methods found in Appendix A of 40 CFR part 60. 

Subpart UUUU—National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

for Cellulose Products Manufacturing 

92. Amend Subpart UUUU by revising 

Table 4 to read as follows: 

Table 4 to Subpart UUUU of Part 63— 

Requirements for Performance Tests 

As required in §§ 63.5530(b) and 

63.5535(a), (b), (g)(1), and (h)(1), you 

must conduct performance tests, other 

initial compliance demonstrations, and 

CEMS performance evaluations and 

establish operating limits according to 

the requirements in the following table: 

For . . . At . . . You must . . . Using . . . According to the following 

requirements . . . 

1. the sum of all process vents a. each existing or new affected source.i. select sampling port’s location and the number of traverse points; EPA Method 1 or 1A in Appendix A to 40 CFR 

§ 63.7(d)(1)(i); 

sampling sites must be located 

at the inlet and outlet to 

each control device; 

ii. determine velocity and volumetric flow rate; EPA Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 

2F, or 2G in Appendix A to 

part 60 of this chapter; 

you may use EPA Method 2A, 

2C, 2D, 2F, or 2G as an alternative to using EPA Method 2, as appropriate; 

iii. conduct gas analysis; and, (1) EPA Method 3, 3A, or 3B 

in Appendix A to part 60 of 

this chapter; or, 

you may use EPA Method 3A 

or 3B as an alternative to 

using EPA Method 3; or, 

(2) ASME PTC 19.101981— 

Part 10; and, 

you may use ASME PTC 

19.10–1981—Part 10 (available for purchase from 

Three Park Avenue, New 

York, NY 10016–5990) as 

an alternative to using EPA 

Method 3B. 

iv. measure moisture content 

of the stack gas. 

EPA Method 4 in Appendix A 

to part 60 of this chapter. 

2. the sum of all viscose process vents.a. each existing or new viscose process source.i. measure total sulfide emissions.(1) EPA Method 15 in Appendix A to part 60 of this chapter; or (a) you must conduct testing of 

emissions at the inlet and 

outlet of each control device; 

(b) you must conduct testing of 

emissions from continuous 

viscose process vents and 

combinations of batch and 

continuous viscose process 

vents at normal operating 

conditions, as specified in 

§§ 63.7(e)(1) and 63.5535; 

(c) you must conduct testing of 

emissions from batch viscose process vents as specified in § 63.490(c), except 

that the emission reductions 

required for process vents 

under this subpart supersede the emission reductions required for process 

vents under subpart U of this 

part; and 

(d) you must collect CPMS 

data during the period of the 

initial compliance demonstration and determine the 

CPMS operating limit during 

the period of the initial compliance demonstration; or 

(2) carbon disulfide and/or hydrogen sulfide CEMS, as applicable; (a) you must measure emissions at the inlet and outlet 

of each control device using 

CEMS; 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
1170 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

For . . . At . . . You must . . . Using . . . According to the following 

requirements . . . 

(b) you must install, operate, 

and maintain the CEMS according to the applicable 

performance specification 

(PS–7, PS–8, PS–9, or PS– 

15) of 40 CFR part 60, Appendix B; and 

(c) you must collect CEMS 

emissions data at the inlet 

and outlet of each control 

device during the period of 

the initial compliance demonstration and determine the 

CEMS operating limit during 

the period of the initial compliance demonstration. 

3. the sum of all solvent coating process vents.a. each existing or new cellophane operation.i. measure toluene emissions .. (1) EPA Method 18 in Appendix A to part 60 of this chapter, or Method 320 in appendix A to part 63, or (a) you must conduct testing of 

emissions at the inlet and 

outlet of each control device; 

(b) you may use EPA Method 

18 or 320 to determine the 

control efficiency of any control device for organic compounds; for a combustion 

device, you must use only 

HAP that are present in the 

inlet to the control device to 

characterize the percent reduction across the combustion device; 

(c) you must conduct testing of 

emissions from continuous 

solvent coating process 

vents and combinations of 

batch and continuous solvent coating process vents 

at normal operating conditions, as specified in 

§§ 63.7(e)(1) and 63.5535; 

(d) you must conduct testing of 

emissions from batch solvent 

coating process vents as 

specified in § 63.490(c), except that the emission reductions required for process 

vents under this subpart supersede the emission reductions required for process 

vents under subpart U of this 

part; and 

(e) you must collect CPMS 

data during the period of the 

initial compliance demonstration and determine the 

CPMS operating limit during 

the initial compliance demonstration; or 

(2) ASTM D6420–99 ................ (a) you must conduct testing of 

emissions at the inlet and 

outlet of each control device; 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 1171 

For . . . At . . . You must . . . Using . . . According to the following 

requirements . . . 

(b) you may use ASTM 

D6420–99 (available for purchase from at least one of 

the following addresses: 100 

Barr Harbor Drive, West 

Conshohocken, PA 19428– 

2959; or University Microfilms International, 300 North 

Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 

48106) as an alternative to 

EPA Method 18 only where: 

The target compound(s) are 

those listed in Section 1.1 of 

ASTM D6420–99; and the 

target concentration is between 150 parts per billion 

by volume (ppbv) and 100 

ppmv; for target compound(s) not listed in Section 1.1 of ASTM D6420–99, 

but potentially detected by 

mass spectrometry, the additional system continuing calibration check after each run, 

as detailed in Section 10.5.3 

of the ASTM method, must 

be followed, met, documented, and submitted with 

the data report even if there 

is no moisture condenser 

used or the compound is not 

considered water soluble; 

and for target compound(s) 

not listed in Section 1.1 of 

ASTM D6420–99 and not 

amenable to detection by 

mass spectrometry, ASTM 

D6420–99 does not apply; 

(c) you must conduct testing of 

emissions from continuous 

solvent coating process 

vents and combinations of 

batch and continuous solvent coating process vents 

at normal operating conditions, as specified in 

§§ 63.7(e)(1) and 63.5535; 

(d) you must conduct testing of 

emissions from batch solvent 

coating process vents as 

specified in § 63.490(c), except that the emission reductions required for process 

vents under this subpart supersede the emission reductions required for process 

vents under subpart U of this 

part; and, 

(e) you must collect CPMS 

data during the period of the 

initial compliance demonstration and determine the 

CPMS operating limit during 

the period of the initial compliance demonstration. 

4. the sum of all cellulose 

ether process vents.

a. each existing or new cellulose ether operation.i. measure total organic HAP 

emissions.

(1) EPA Method 18 in Appendix A to Part 60 of this chapter or Method 320 in Appendix A to Part 63, or (a) you must conduct testing of 

emissions at the inlet and 

outlet of each control device; 

(b) you may use EPA Method 

18 or 320 to determine the 

control efficiency of any control device for organic compounds; for a combustion 

device, you must use only 

HAP that are present in the 

inlet to the control device to 

characterize the percent reduction across the combustion device; 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
1172 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

For . . . At . . . You must . . . Using . . . According to the following 

requirements . . . 

(c) you must conduct testing of 

emissions from continuous 

cellulose ether process vents 

and combinations of batch 

and continuous cellulose 

ether process vents at normal operating conditions, as 

specified in §§ 63.7(e)(1) and 

63.5535; 

(d) you must conduct testing of 

emissions from batch cellulose ether process vents 

as specified in § 63.490(c), 

except that the emission reductions required for process 

vents under this subpart supersede the emission reductions required for process 

vents under subpart U of this 

part; and 

(e) you must collect CPMS 

data during the period of the 

initial performance test and 

determine the CPMS operating limit during the period 

of the initial performance 

test; 

(2) ASTM D6420–99 ................ (a) you must conduct testing of 

emissions at the inlet and 

outlet of each control device; 

(b) you may use ASTM 

D6420–99 (available for purchase from at least one of 

the following addresses: 100 

Barr Harbor Drive, West 

Conshohocken, PA 19428– 

2959; or University Microfilms International, 300 North 

Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 

48106) as an alternative to 

EPA Method 18 only where: 

The target compound(s) are 

those listed in Section 1.1 of 

ASTM D6420–99; and the 

target concentration is between 150 ppbv and 100 

ppmv; for target compound(s) not listed in Section 1.1 of ASTM D6420–99, 

but potentially detected by 

mass spectrometry, the additional system continuing calibration check after each run, 

as detailed in Section 10.5.3 

of the ASTM method, must 

be followed, met, documented, and submitted with 

the data report even if there 

is no moisture condenser 

used or the compound is not 

considered water soluble; 

and for target compound(s) 

not listed in Section 1.1 of 

ASTM D6420–99 and not 

amenable to detection by 

mass spectrometry, ASTM 

D6420–99 does not apply; 

target concentration is between 150 ppbv and 100 

ppmv for target compound(s). 

(c) you must conduct testing of 

emissions from continuous 

cellulose ether process vents 

and combinations of batch 

and continuous cellulose 

ether process vents at normal operating conditions, as 

specified in §§ 63.7(e)(1) and 

63.5535; 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 1173 

For . . . At . . . You must . . . Using . . . According to the following 

requirements . . . 

(d) you must conduct testing of 

emissions from batch cellulose ether process vents 

as specified in § 63.490(c), 

except that the emission reductions required for process 

vents under this subpart supersede the emission reductions required for process 

vents under subpart U of this 

part; and 

(e) you must collect CPMS 

data during the period of the 

initial performance test and 

determine the CPMS operating limit during the period 

of the initial performance 

test. 

(3) EPA Method 25 in Appendix A to Part 60 of this chapter; or (a) you must conduct testing of 

emissions at the inlet and 

outlet of each control device; 

(b) you may use EPA Method 

25 to determine the control 

efficiency of combustion devices for organic compounds; you may not use 

EPA Method 25 to determine 

the control efficiency of noncombustion control devices; 

(c) you must conduct testing of 

emissions from continuous 

cellulose ether process vents 

and combinations of batch 

and continuous cellulose 

ether process vents at normal operating conditions, as 

specified in §§ 63.7(e)(1) and 

63.5535; 

(d) you must conduct testing of 

emissions from batch cellulose ether process vents 

as specified in § 63.490(c), 

except that the emission reductions required for process 

vents under this subpart supersede the emission reductions required for process 

vents under subpart U of this 

part; and 

(e) you must collect CPMS 

data during the period of the 

initial performance test and 

determine the CPMS operating limit during the period 

of the initial performance 

test; or 

(4) EPA Method 25A in Appendix A to Part 60 of this chapter.(a) you must conduct testing of 

emissions at the inlet and 

outlet of each control device; 

(b) you may use EPA Method 

25A if: An exhaust gas volatile organic matter concentration of 50 ppmv or 

less is required in order to 

comply with the emission 

limit; the volatile organic 

matter concentration at the 

inlet to the control device 

and the required level of 

control are such as to result 

in exhaust volatile organic 

matter concentrations of 50 

ppmv or less; or because of 

the high control efficiency of 

the control device, the anticipated volatile organic matter 

concentration at the control 

device exhaust is 50 ppmv 

or less, regardless of the 

inlet concentration; 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
1174 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

For . . . At . . . You must . . . Using . . . According to the following 

requirements . . . 

(c) you must conduct testing of 

emissions from continuous 

cellulose ether process vents 

and combinations of batch 

and continuous cellulose 

ether process vents at normal operating conditions, as 

specified in §§ 63.7(e)(1) and 

63.5535; 

(d) you must conduct testing of 

emissions from batch cellulose ether process vents 

as specified in § 63.490(c), 

except that the emission reductions required for process 

vents under this subpart supersede the emission reductions required for process 

vents under subpart U of this 

part; and, 

(e) you must collect CPMS 

data during the period of the 

initial performance test and 

determine the CPMS operating limit during the period 

of the initial performance 

test. 

5. each toluene storage vessel a. each existing or new cellophane operation.i. measure toluene emissions .. (1) EPA Method 18 in Appendix A to Part 60 of this chapter or Method 320 in Appendix A to Part 63; or (a) if venting to a control device to reduce emissions, 

you must conduct testing of 

emissions at the inlet and 

outlet of each control device; 

(b) you may use EPA Method 

18 or 320 to determine the 

control efficiency of any control device for organic compounds; for a combustion 

device, you must use only 

HAP that are present in the 

inlet to the control device to 

characterize the percent reduction across the combustion device; 

(c) you must conduct testing of 

emissions from continuous 

storage vessel vents and 

combinations of batch and 

continuous storage vessel 

vents at normal operating 

conditions, as specified in 

§§ 63.7(e)(1) and 63.5535 

for continuous process 

vents; 

(d) you must conduct testing of 

emissions from batch storage vessel vents as specified in § 63.490(c) for batch 

process vents, except that 

the emission reductions required for process vents 

under this subpart supersede the emission reductions required for process 

vents under subpart U of this 

part; and, 

(e) you must collect CPMS 

data during the period of the 

initial compliance demonstration and determine the 

CPMS operating limit during 

the period of the initial compliance demonstration; or 

(2) ASTM D6420–99 ................ (a) if venting to a control device to reduce emissions, 

you must conduct testing of 

emissions at the inlet and 

outlet of each control device; 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 1175 

For . . . At . . . You must . . . Using . . . According to the following 

requirements . . . 

(b) you may use ASTM 

D6420–99 (available for purchase from at least one of 

the following addresses: 100 

Barr Harbor Drive, West 

Conshohocken, PA 19428– 

2959; or University Microfilms International, 300 North 

Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 

48106) as an alternative to 

EPA Method 18 only where: 

the target compound(s) are 

those listed in Section 1.1 of 

ASTM D6420–99, and the 

target concentration is between 150 ppbv and 100 

ppmv; for target compound(s) not listed in Section 1.1 of ASTM D6420–99, 

but potentially detected by 

mass spectrometry, the additional system continuing calibration check after each run, 

as detailed in Section 10.5.3 

of the ASTM method, must 

be followed, met, documented, and submitted with 

the data report even if there 

is no moisture condenser 

used or the compound is not 

considered water soluble; 

and for target compound(s) 

not listed in Section 1.1 of 

ASTM D6420–99 and not 

amenable to detection by 

mass spectrometry, ASTM 

D6420–99 does not apply; 

(c) you must conduct testing of 

emissions from continuous 

storage vessel vents and 

combinations of batch and 

continuous storage vessel 

vents at normal operating 

conditions, as specified in 

§§ 63.7(e)(1) and 63.5535 

for continuous process 

vents; 

(d) you must conduct testing of 

emissions from batch storage vessel vents as specified in § 63.490(c) for batch 

process vents, except that 

the emission reductions required for process vents 

under this subpart supersede the emission reductions required for process 

vents under subpart U of this 

part; and, 

(e) you must collect CPMS 

data during the period of the 

initial compliance demonstration and determine the 

CPMS operating limit during 

the period of the initial compliance demonstration. 

6. the sum of all process vents 

controlled using a flare.

a. each existing or new affected source.i. measure visible emissions .... (1) EPA Method 22 in Appendix A to Part 60 of this chapter.(a) you must conduct the flare 

visible emissions test according to § 63.11(b). 

7. equipment leaks .................. a. each existing or new cellulose ether operation.i. measure leak rate ................. (1) applicable equipment leak 

test methods in § 63.180; or 

(a) you must follow all requirements for the applicable 

equipment leak test methods 

in § 63.180; or 

(2) applicable equipment leak 

test methods in § 63.1023.

(a) you must follow all requirements for the applicable 

equipment leak test methods 

in § 63.1023. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
1176 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

For . . . At . . . You must . . . Using . . . According to the following 

requirements . . . 

8. all sources of wastewater 

emissions.

a. each existing or new cellulose ether operation.i. measure wastewater HAP 

emissions.

(1) applicable wastewater test 

methods and procedures in 

§§ 63.144 and 63.145; or 

(a) You must follow all requirements for the applicable 

wastewater test methods 

and procedures in §§ 63.144 

and 63.145; or 

(2) applicable wastewater test 

methods and procedures in 

§§ 63.144 and 63.145, using 

ASTM D5790–95 as an alternative to EPA Method 624 

in Appendix A to Part 163 of 

this chapter.

(a) you must follow all requirements for the applicable 

waste water test methods 

and procedures in §§ 63.144 

and 63.145, except that you 

may use ASTM D5790–95 

(available for purchase from 

at least one of the following 

addresses: 100 Barr Harbor 

Drive, West Conshohocken, 

PA 19428–2959; or University Microfilms International, 

300 North Zeeb Road, Ann 

Arbor, MI 48106) as an alternative to EPA Method 624, 

under the condition that this 

ASTM method be used with 

the sampling procedures of 

EPA Method 25D or an 

equivalent method. 

9. any emission point ............... a. each existing or new affected source using a CEMS 

to demonstrate compliance.

i. conduct a CEMS performance evaluation.(1) applicable requirements in 

§ 63.8 and applicable performance specification (PS– 

7, PS–8, PS–9, or PS–15) in 

Appendix B to part 60 of this 

chapter.

(a) you must conduct the 

CEMS performance evaluation during the period of the 

initial compliance demonstration according to the applicable requirements in § 63.8 

and the applicable performance specification (PS–7, 

PS–8, PS–9, or PS–15) of 

40 CFR part 60, Appendix B; 

(b) you must install, operate, 

and maintain the CEMS according to the applicable 

performance specification 

(PS–7, PS–8, PS–9, or PS– 

15) of 40 CFR part 60, Appendix B; and 

(c) you must collect CEMS 

emissions data at the inlet 

and outlet of each control 

device during the period of 

the initial compliance demonstration and determine the 

CEMS operating limit during 

the period of the initial compliance demonstration. 

Subpart ZZZZ—National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

for Stationary Reciprocating Internal 

Combustion Engines 

93. Amend Subpart ZZZZ by revising 

Table 4 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 . . . 

1. 2SLB, 4SLB, and 

CI stationary RICE.

a. Reduce CO emissions.i. Measure the O2 at 

the inlet and outlet 

of the control device; and 

(1) Portable CO and 

O2 analyzer.

(a) Using ASTM D6522–00 (2005) a (heated 

probe not necessary; single-point sampling) (incorporated by reference, see 

§ 63.14). Measurements to determine O2

must be made at the same time as the 

measurements for CO concentration. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 1177 

TABLE 4 TO SUBPART ZZZZ OF PART 63—REQUIREMENTS FOR PERFORMANCE TESTS—Continued 

[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 . . . 

ii. Measure the CO at 

the inlet and the 

outlet of the control 

device.

(1) Portable CO and 

O2 analyzer.

(a) Using ASTM D6522–00 (2005) a (heated 

probe not necessary; single-point sampling) (incorporated by reference, see 

§ 63.14) or Method 10 of 40 CFR part 60, 

Appendix A. The CO concentration must 

be at 15 percent O2, dry basis. 

2. 4SRB stationary 

RICE.

a. Reduce formaldehyde emissions.i. Sample at the centroid of the exhaust; .................................... (a) Sampling sites must be located at the 

inlet and outlet of the control device. 

ii. Measure O2 at the 

inlet and outlet of 

the control device.

(1) Method 3 or 3A or 

3B of 40 CFR part 

60, Appendix A, or 

ASTM Method 

D6522–00 (2005) 

(heated probe not 

necessary; singlepoint sampling).

(a) Measurements to determine O2 concentration must be made at the same time 

as the measurements for formaldehyde 

concentration. 

iii. Measure moisture 

content at the inlet 

and outlet of the 

control device; and 

(1) Method 4 of 40 

CFR part 60, Appendix A, or Test 

Method 320 of 40 

CFR part 63, Appendix A, or ASTM 

D 6348–03.

(a) Measurements to determine moisture 

content must be made at the same time 

and location as the measurements for 

formaldehyde concentration. 

iv. Measure formaldehyde at the inlet 

and the outlet of the 

control device.

(1) Method 320 or 323 

of 40 CFR part 63, 

Appendix A; or 

ASTM D6348–03,b

provided in ASTM 

D6348–03 Annex 

A5 (Analyte Spiking 

Technique), the percent R must be 

greater than or 

equal to 70 and less 

than or equal to 130.

(a) Formaldehyde concentration must be at 

15 percent O2, dry basis. Results of this 

test consist of the average of the three 1- 

hour or longer runs. 

3. Stationary RICE ..... a. Limit the concentration of formaldehyde 

in the stationary 

RICE exhaust.

i. Sample at the centroid of the exhaust; (a) If using a control device, the sampling 

site must be located at the outlet of the 

control device. 

ii. Determine the O2

concentration of the 

stationary RICE exhaust at the sampling port location; 

(1) Method 3 or 3A or 

3B of 40 CFR part 

60, Appendix A, or 

ASTM Method 

D6522–00 (2005) 

(heated probe not 

necessary; singlepoint sampling).

(a) Measurements to determine O2 concentration must be made at the same time 

and location as the measurements for 

formaldehyde concentration. 

iii. Measure moisture 

content of the stationary RICE exhaust at the sampling port location; 

and, 

(1) Method 4 of 40 

CFR part 60, Appendix A, or Test 

Method 320 of 40 

CFR part 63, Appendix A, or ASTM 

D 6348–03.

(a) Measurements to determine moisture 

content must be made at the same time 

and location as the measurements for 

formaldehyde concentration. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
1178 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 4 TO SUBPART ZZZZ OF PART 63—REQUIREMENTS FOR PERFORMANCE TESTS—Continued 

[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 . . . 

iv. Measure formaldehyde at the exhaust 

of the stationary 

RICE.

(1) Method 320 or 323 

of 40 CFR part 63, 

Appendix A; or 

ASTM D6348–03,b

provided in ASTM 

D6348–03 Annex 

A5 (Analyte Spiking 

Technique), the percent R must be 

greater than or 

equal to 70 and less 

than or equal to 130.

(a) Formaldehyde concentration must be at 

15 percent O2, 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). You may obtain a copy of ASTM–D6522–00 (2005) from at 

least one of the following addresses: American Society for Testing and Materials, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428–2959, 

or University Microfilms International, 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106. bYou may obtain a copy of ASTM–D6348–03 from at least one of the following addresses: American Society for Testing and Materials, 100 

Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428–2959, or University Microfilms International, 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106. 

94. Amend Method 306 of Appendix 

A to Part 63 by revising Sections 2.2.1, 

6.1.4, and 8.0 to read as follows: 

Appendix A to Part 63—Test Methods 

Pollutant Measurement Methods From 

Various Waste Media 

* * * * * 

Method 306—Determination of Chromium 

Emissions From Decorative and Hard 

Chromium Electroplating and Chromium 

Anodizing Operations—Isokinetic Method 

* * * * * 

2.2.1 Total chromium samples with high 

chromium concentrations (≥35 mg/L) may be 

analyzed using inductively coupled plasma 

emission spectrometry (ICP) at 267.72 nm. 

Note: The ICP analysis is applicable for this 

method only when the solution analyzed has 

a Cr concentration greater than or equal to 35 

mg/L or five times the method detection limit 

as determined according to Appendix B in 40 

CFR part 136. Similarly, inductively coupled 

plasma-mass spectroscopy (ICP–MS) may be 

used for total chromium analysis provided 

the procedures for ICP–MS analysis 

described in Method 6020 or 6020A (EPA 

Office of Solid Waste, publication SW–846) 

are followed. 

* * * * * 

6.1.4 Operating and maintenance 

procedures for the sampling train are 

described in APTD–0576 of Method 5. Users 

should read the APTD–0576 document and 

adopt the outlined procedures. Alternative 

mercury-free thermometers may be used if 

the thermometers are, at a minimum, 

equivalent in terms of performance or 

suitably effective for the specific temperature 

measurement application. 

* * * * * 

8.0 Sample Collection, Preservation, 

Holding Times, Storage, and Transport 

Note: Prior to sample collection, 

consideration should be given to the type of 

analysis (Cr +6 or total Cr) that will be 

performed. Which analysis option(s) will be 

performed will determine which sample 

recovery and storage procedures will be 

required to process the sample. 

* * * * * 

95. Amend Method 306A of Appendix 

A to Part 63 by revising Section 8.2 to 

read as follows: 

Method 306A—Determination of Chromium 

Emissions From Decorative and Hard 

Chromium Electroplating and Chromium 

Anodizing Operations 

* * * * * 

8.2 Sample Recovery. After the train has 

been transferred to the sample recovery area, 

disconnect the tubing that connects the jar/ 

impingers. The tester shall select either the 

total Cr or Cr +6 sample recovery option. 

Samples to be analyzed for both total Cr and 

Cr +6 shall be recovered using the Cr +6

sample option (Section 8.2.2). Note: Collect 

a reagent blank sample for each of the total 

Cr or the Cr +6 analytical options. If both 

analyses (Cr and Cr +6) are to be conducted 

on the samples, collect separate reagent 

blanks for each analysis. Also, since 

particulate matter is not usually present at 

chromium electroplating and/or chromium 

anodizing operations, it is not necessary to 

filter the Cr +6 samples unless there is 

observed sediment in the collected solutions. 

If it is necessary to filter the Cr +6 solutions, 

please refer to Method 0061, Determination 

of Hexavalent Chromium Emissions from 

Stationary Sources, Section 7.4, Sample 

Preparation in SW–846 (see Reference 1). 

* * * * * 

96. Amend Method 308 of Appendix 

A to Part 63 by revising Section 10.1.3 

to read as follows: 

Method 308—Procedure for Determination 

of Methanol Emission From Stationary 

Sources 

* * * * * 

10.1.3 Temperature Sensors. Calibrate 

against mercury-in-glass thermometers. An 

alternative mercury-free thermometer may be 

used if the thermometer is, at a minimum, 

equivalent in terms of performance or 

suitably effective for the specific temperature 

measurement application. 

* * * * * 

97. Amend Method 315 of Appendix 

A to Part 63 by revising Sections 6.1.1 

and 10.5 and by redesignating Section 

8.11 as 8.1 and revising newly 

designated section 8.1 to read as 

follows: 

Method 315—Determination of Particulate 

and Methylene Chloride Extractable Matter 

(MCEM) From Selected Sources at Primary 

Aluminum Production Facilities 

* * * * * 

6.1.1 Sampling train. A schematic of the 

sampling train used in this method is shown 

in Figure 5–1, Method 5, 40 CFR part 60, 

Appendix A. Complete construction details 

are given in APTD–0581 (Reference 2 in 

section 17.0 of this method); commercial 

models of this train are also available. For 

changes from APTD–0581 and for allowable 

modifications of the train shown in Figure 

5–1, Method 5, 40 CFR part 60, Appendix A, 

see the following subsections. Note: The 

operating and maintenance procedures for 

the sampling train are described in APTD– 

0576 (Reference 3 in section 17.0 of this 

method). Since correct usage is important in 

obtaining valid results, all users should read 

APTD–0576 and adopt the operating and 

maintenance procedures outlined in it, 

unless otherwise specified herein. 

Alternative mercury-free thermometers may 

be used if the thermometers are, at a 

minimum, equivalent in terms of 

performance or suitably effective for the 

specific temperature measurement 

application. The use of grease for sealing 

sampling train components is not 

recommended because many greases are 

soluble in methylene chloride. The sampling 

train consists of the following components: 

* * * * * 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2012 / Proposed Rules 1179 

8.1 Pretest preparation. It is suggested 

that sampling equipment be maintained 

according to the procedures described in 

APTD–0576. Alternative mercury-free 

thermometers may be used if the 

thermometers are at a minimum equivalent 

in terms of performance or suitably effective 

for the specific temperature measurement 

application. 

* * * * * 

10.5 Temperature sensors. Use the 

procedure in Section 10.3 of Method 2, 40 

CFR part 60, Appendix A to calibrate in-stack 

temperature sensors. Dial thermometers, such 

as are used for the DGM and condenser 

outlet, shall be calibrated against mercury-inglass thermometers. An alternative mercuryfree thermometer may be used if the 

thermometer is, at a minimum, equivalent in 

terms of performance or suitably effective for 

the specific temperature measurement 

application. 

* * * * * 

98. Amend Method 316 of Appendix 

A to Part 63 by revising Section 10.5 to 

read as follows: 

Method 316—Sampling and Analysis for 

Formaldehyde Emissions From Stationary 

Sources in the Mineral Wool and Wool 

Fiberglass Industries 

* * * * * 

10.5 Temperature gauges: Use the 

procedure in Section 4.3 of EPA Method 2 to 

calibrate in-stack temperature gauges. Dial 

thermometers, such as are used for the dry 

gas meter and condenser outlet, shall be 

calibrated against mercury-in-glass 

thermometers. An alternative mercury-free 

thermometer may be used if the thermometer 

is, at a minimum, equivalent in terms of 

performance or suitably effective for the 

specific temperature measurement 

application. 

* * * * * 

99. Amend Method 321 of Appendix 

A to Part 63 by revising the definition 

for the term ‘‘Df’’ after equation (2) in 

Section 9.3.1 to read as follows: 

Test Method 321—Measurement of Gaseous 

Hydrogen Chloride Emissions at Portland 

Cement Kilns by Fourier Transform Infrared 

(FTIR) Spectroscopy 

* * * * * 

9.3 * * * 

DF = Dilution Factor (Total flow/Spike flow). 

Total flow = spike flow plus effluent 

flow. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2011–31234 Filed 1–6–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2