Document ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0071-0068
Agency: epa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Update of Continuous Instrumental Test Methods: Technical Amendments
Posted Date: 2008-05-22T04:00Z

[Federal Register: May 22, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 100)]
[Rules and Regulations]               
[Page 29691-29698]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr22my08-8]                         

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 60

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0071; FRL-8568-7]
RIN 2060-AP13

 
Update of Continuous Instrumental Test Methods: Technical 
Amendments

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to correct errors in a final rule 
published May 15, 2006, that updated five continuous instrumental test 
methods. As published, the rule contained inadvertent errors and 
provisions that needed to be clarified. We published a direct final 
rule with a parallel proposed rule on September 7, 2007 to correct the 
errors and to add clarifying language. However, we received an adverse 
comment on the direct final rule, and it was subsequently withdrawn on 
November 5, 2007. This action finalizes the parallel proposal. In this 
final rule, EPA corrects errors, clarifies certain provisions, and 
responds to the adverse comment received on the direct final rule 
published on September 7, 2007.

DATES: This final rule is effective on May 22, 2008.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0071. All documents in the docket are listed on the 
www.regulations.gov Web site. 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, is not placed on the Internet and will be 
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket 
materials are available either electronically through 
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Update of Continuous 
Instrumental Test Methods Docket, Docket ID No. EPA-OAR-2002-0071, EPA 
Docket Center, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., 
NW., Washington, DC. This Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 
4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday excluding legal holidays. The Docket 
telephone number is (202) 566-1742. 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Foston Curtis, Air Quality 
Assessment Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards 
(E143-02), Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, 
North Carolina 27711; telephone number (919) 541-1063; fax number (919) 
541-0516; e-mail address: curtis.foston@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Does This Action Apply to Me?
II. Where Can I Obtain a Copy of This Action?
III. Background
IV. This Action
    A. Method 3A--40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A-1
    B. Method 6C--40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A-4
    C. Method 7E--40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A-4
    D. Method 20--40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A-7
V. Public Comments on the Proposed Rule
VI. Judicial Review
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

[[Page 29692]]

    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 Risks and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect 
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address 
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations
    K. Congressional Review Act

I. Does This Action Apply to Me?

    This rule applies to certain sources that are subject to New Source 
Performance Standards (40 CFR part 60), are required to conduct 
continuous emission monitoring pursuant to 40 CFR Part 75, or are 
subject to other regulations that require the use of Method 3A, of 
Appendix A-1, Methods 6C, 7E of Appendix A-4, and Method 20 of Appendix 
A-7 to 40 CFR Part 60.
    Regulated Entities. Categories and entities potentially affected 
include the following:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Examples of regulated
           Category                 NAICS \a\             entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry......................  332410...........  Fossil Fuel Steam
                                                    Generators.
Industry......................  332410...........  Industrial,
                                                    Commercial,
                                                    Institutional Steam
                                                    Generating Units.
Industry......................  332410...........  Electric Generating
                                                    Units.
Industry......................  333611...........  Stationary Gas
                                                    Turbines.
Industry......................  324110...........  Petroleum Refineries.
Industry......................  562213...........  Municipal Waste
                                                    Combustors.
Industry......................  322110...........  Kraft Pulp Mills.
Industry......................  325188...........  Sulfuric Acid Plants.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ North American Industry Classification System.

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather to provide 
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this 
action. This table lists examples of the types of entities EPA is now 
aware could potentially be affected by the final rule. Other types of 
entities not listed could also be affected. If you have any questions 
regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, 
consult the person listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT section.

II. Where Can I Obtain a Copy of This Action?

    In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of 
this rule will also be available on the Worldwide Web (www) through the 
Technology Transfer Network (TTN). Following the Administrator's 
signature, a copy of the final rule will be placed on the TTN's policy 
and guidance page for newly proposed or promulgated rules at  http://
www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN provides information and technology 
exchange in various areas of air pollution control.

III. Background

    Methods 3A, 6C, 7E, 10, and 20 measure oxygen, carbon dioxide, 
sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and carbon monoxide emissions from 
stationary sources. They are prescribed for use in determining 
compliance with a number of Federal, State, and local regulations. The 
EPA published updates to simplify, harmonize, and update these test 
methods on May 15, 2006 (71 FR 28081). The rule promulgating these 
updates became effective August 14, 2006. As published, the rule 
contained inadvertent errors and provisions that needed clarification.
    On September 7, 2007, EPA simultaneously published a proposed rule 
(72 FR 51392) and a direct final rule (72 FR 51365) to correct errors 
and clarify certain provisions in the May 15, 2006 rule. Because EPA 
received one adverse comment during the public comment period, EPA 
withdrew the direct final rule on November 5, 2007 (72 FR 62414). EPA 
is taking final action on the corrections and clarifications proposed 
for approval on September 7, 2007, and is responding to the adverse 
comment received in response to that proposal.

IV. This Action

    In this final rule, EPA corrects errors and clarifies portions of 
the May 15, 2006 rule to reflect the intent of the rule and to make it 
more understandable.
    Specifically, EPA is taking the following actions:

A. Method 3A--40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A-1

    1. We are clearly stating that pre-cleaned or scrubbed air may be 
used for the high-level calibration gas provided no interfering gases 
are present.
    2. An incorrect reference in Section 8.1 to Section 8.2 of Method 3 
for sampling to determine gas molecular weight is corrected to 
reference Section 8.2.1 of Method 3.

B. Method 6C--40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A-4

    In Section 6.2, a reference to Section 6.2.8.1 for dual-range 
analyzers is expanded to include Section 6.2.8.2 which also applies.

C. Method 7E--40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A-4

    1. Under the descriptions for calibration gases in Section 3.3, the 
quality of zero gas allowed for instrument calibration is clarified. 
The current requirement is that all calibration gases be of EPA 
traceability protocol quality. However, the traceability protocol does 
not have a specification for zero gas. Therefore, we are adopting the 
specification for ``zero air material'' in 40 CFR 72.2 for zero gas in 
place of the traceability protocol.
    2. In Section 3.4, we recommend the instrument calibration span be 
chosen such that emission concentrations are between 20 to 100 percent 
of the calibration span, ``to the extent practicable.'' We are adding a 
note, as an example, that meeting this 20 to 100 percent criterion may 
not be practicable when emissions are low relative to the emission 
limit and the purpose of the test is to show compliance with the 
emission limit.
    3. Section 3.9 is clarified to note that drift is the difference 
between the pre- and post-run system bias checks instead of the 
difference between the measurement system readings for the pre- and 
post-run bias checks.
    4. Section 3.12 is corrected to remove erroneous citations to 40 
CFR 53.55 and 53.56 which have nothing to do with the manufacturer's 
stability test (MST).
    5. In Section 6.2.2, we are specifically stating that the 
particulate media must be included in the system bias test only when 
using out-of-stack filters.
    6. In Section 6.2.6, the description of the calibration gas 
manifold is clarified to note that blocking the sample flow is not 
necessary when in direct calibration

[[Page 29693]]

mode, as suggested in the current method, but the calibration gas may 
simply supply an excess of calibration gas through the system.
    7. The method implies that all analyzers with calibration spans of 
20 ppmv or less are required to perform the MST. In Section 6.2.8.2, we 
are clarifying the MST requirement to note that it is only required for 
those analyzers that are routinely calibrated with a calibration span 
of 20 ppmv or less.
    8. The new converter efficiency check that was added in Section 
16.2.2 requires the nitrogen dioxide (NO2) test gas be of 
EPA traceability protocol quality. Subsequent discussions with the 
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) concerning the 
quality of the NIST NO2 standard revealed that this standard 
contains small but consistent amounts of nitric acid (HNO3). 
Some converters may not be able to completely convert this 
HNO3 to nitric oxide (NO) for analysis. There are also 
concerns about the cost and stability of certified NO2 gas 
over time. We are, therefore, dropping the new requirement that the 
converter efficiency gas be of EPA traceability protocol quality and 
reverting to the previous requirement that the gas be of a 
manufacturer-certified concentration. In addition, for this converter 
check procedure, the gas is required to be in the 40 to 60 ppmv range 
while the two alternative procedures require gas in the mid- to high-
calibration range. We are dropping the 40 to 60 ppmv requirement in 
favor of recommending the concentration be in the mid- to high-
calibration range in order to keep the three procedures consistent. 
Subsequent references to the 40 to 60 ppmv requirement have been 
deleted from the method.
    9. In Section 7.2, we are clearly stating that the appropriate test 
gases listed in Table 7E-3, or others not listed that can potentially 
interfere, as noted elsewhere, must be used for the test. We are also 
making it clear that the gases used should be manufacturer-certified 
but are not required to be prepared by the EPA traceability protocol.
    10. In Section 8.1.2, we are explicitly stating that the required 
stratification test is to be performed at each test site except for 
small stacks that are less than 4 inches in diameter.
    11. In Section 8.2.1, we are making it clear that testers must 
obtain a certificate from the gas manufacturer documenting the quality 
of the calibration gas.
    12. In Section 8.2.4, we are clearly stating that the converter 
efficiency test may be performed either before or after a test or after 
a series of tests.
    13. In Section 8.2.7, paragraph (1) is reworded to add clarity to 
the interference test, and paragraph (2) is corrected to note that the 
interference test is valid for the life of the instrument unless major 
components are replaced with different model parts.
    14. In the sample traversing procedure in Section 8.4, we delete 
redundant language in paragraphs (1) and (2).
    15. In paragraph (1) of Section 8.5, we clarify the handling of 
failed post-run bias checks by removing unnecessary wording.
    16. In Section 10.0, we clearly state that analyzers which measure 
NO and NO2 without using a converter must be calibrated with 
both NO and NO2. The current wording is not clear to some 
users.
    17. In Section 12.1, we are revising certain definitions to reflect 
the corrections being made to the calculations.
    18. In Section 12.4, we correct the system calibration error 
equation by adding a term for the dilution factor.
    19. In Section 12.6, we add a missing equation for calculating 
sample concentration when a non-zero gas is used as the low-level 
calibration gas.
    20. In Section 12.9 we replace the erroneous equation added in the 
updates rule with the one traditionally used by the method.
    21. In Section 12.11, we correct the equation for calculating the 
spike recovery.
    22. In Section 13.5, we are adding the 2 percent limit for the 
alternative converter efficiency test.
    23. In Section 16.2.2, we are deleting the procedures in paragraphs 
(2) and (3) because they are not needed for the test and are confusing.
    24. In Section 16.3, the erroneous references to 40 CFR 53.55 and 
53.56 are removed; only 53.53 is followed for the MST. A note is added 
to clarify that alternative procedures or documentation of instrument 
stability are acceptable.
    25. In Table 7E-3, the title is edited to note that the table 
contains example interference gases and concentrations. We are removing 
a table footnote instructing dilution extractive systems to use the hot 
wet concentrations because it may not be applicable in all cases. In 
its place, a footnote is added to remind the tester to use the highest 
gas concentration expected at test sites for the interference test.
    26. In Table 7E-5, we correct the typographical error listing the 
NOX concentration at ``.80% of calibration span'' to read 
``80% of calibration span.'' We have removed the note to evaluate each 
model by the MST at least quarterly or once per 50 production units 
because it is not necessary.

D. Method 20--40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A-7

    1. In Section 8.4, we are adding a minimum sample run time of 21 
minutes.

V. Public Comments on the Proposed Rule

    Two public comment letters were received on the direct final rule 
that was published on September 7, 2007. Because the comments was 
considered adverse, the direct final rule was withdrawn on November 5, 
2007 (72 FR 62414). One commenter identified an error in the definition 
of ``system bias.'' We inadvertently proposed to change the definition 
to note that system bias is calculated from the difference between the 
system calibration response and the manufacturer certified gas 
concentration and not from the difference between the system 
calibration response and the direct calibration responses. Therefore, 
we are not revising the definition of system bias as indicated in the 
September 7, 2007, notice.
    Another commenter asked that we amend the suggested gas 
concentrations that were proposed for the Method 7E converter check to 
make it clear that gases in the 40 to 60 ppm range were not the only 
ones allowed but that other concentrations were acceptable if they were 
more appropriate for the source conditions. We agree and have made this 
change in the final rule.
    Another error in the published equation for calculating system 
calibration error was pointed out. The dilution factor was not in the 
correct place in Equation 7E-3. This has been corrected.

VI. Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), judicial review 
of this final rule is available by filing a petition for review in the 
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit by July 21, 
2008. Under section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA, only an objection to this 
final rule that was raised with reasonable specificity during the 
period for public comment can be raised during judicial review. 
Moreover, under section 307(b)(2) of the CAA, the requirements 
established by this action may not be challenged separately in any 
civil or criminal proceedings brought by EPA to enforce these 
requirements.

[[Page 29694]]

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the 
terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is, 
therefore, not subject to review under the Executive Order.

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). These amendments do not add 
information collection requirements beyond those currently required 
under the applicable regulation. The amendments being made correct 
technical inaccuracies in the 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 whose parent 
company has fewer than 100 or 1,000 employees, or fewer than 4 billion 
kilowatt-hr per year of electricity usage, depending on the size 
definition for the affected North American Industry Classification 
System code; (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 final rule on small 
entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This final 
rule will not impose any requirements on small entities because it does 
not impose any additional regulatory requirements.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the 
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal 
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA 
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit 
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that 
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in 
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any 
1 year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement 
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify 
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt 
the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative 
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, 
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least 
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative if the 
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that 
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory 
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed, 
under section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan 
must provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, 
enabling officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and 
timely input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with 
significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, 
educating, and advising small governments on compliance with the 
regulatory requirements.
    EPA has determined that this final rule does not contain a Federal 
mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for 
State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private 
sector in any one year, nor does this rule significantly or uniquely 
impact small governments, because it contains no requirements that 
apply to such governments or impose obligations upon them. Thus, this 
rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the 
UMRA. EPA has determined that this rule contains no regulatory 
requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments because it contains no requirements that apply to such 
governments or impose obligations upon them. Thus, this rule is not 
subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    Executive Order 13132 entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August 
10, 1999) requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure 
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the 
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' 
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the 
Executive Order to include regulations that 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.''
    This final rule 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. The amendments in this rule will 
benefit State and local governments by clarifying and correcting 
provisions they currently implement. No added responsibilities or 
increase in implementation efforts or costs for State and local 
governments are being added in this action. Thus, Executive Order 13132 
does not apply to this rule.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    Executive Order 13175 entitled ``Consultation and Coordination with 
Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) requires 
EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely 
input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies 
that have tribal implications.'' This final rule does not have tribal 
implications as specified in Executive Order 13175. It will not have 
substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship 
between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175. 
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    EPA interprets EO 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as applying 
only to those regulatory actions that concern

[[Page 29695]]

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 That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions 
Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use'' (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 No. 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) directs 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 EPA to 
provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not 
to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    This action does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA 
did not consider the use of any voluntary consensus standards.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    Executive Order 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 
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, 
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income 
populations in the United States.
    EPA has determined that this final 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 final rule does not relax the control measures on 
sources regulated by the rule and, therefore, will not cause emissions 
increases from these sources.

K. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other 
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2). This rule will be effective May 22, 2008.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedures, 
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: May 15, 2008.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.

0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the 
Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 60--STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE FOR NEW STATIONARY SOURCES

0
1. The authority citation for part 60 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 23 U.S.C. 101; 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Appendix A-2--[Amended] /

0
2. Amend Method 3A as follows:
0
a. Add a sentence after the second sentence of Section 7.1.
0
b. Revise the second sentence in Section 8.1.

Method 3A--Determination of Oxygen and Carbon Dioxide Concentrations in 
Emissions From Stationary Sources (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure)

* * * * *
    7.1 Calibration Gas. * * * Pre-cleaned or scrubbed air may be 
used for the O2 high-calibration gas provided it does not contain 
other gases that interfere with the O2 measurement.
* * * * *
    8.1. Sampling Site and Sampling Points. * * * In that case, you 
may use single-point integrated sampling as described in Section 
8.2.1 of Method 3.
* * * * *

Appendix A-4--[Amended]

0
3. Amend Method 6C by revising the last sentence in Section 6.2 to read 
as follows:

Method 6C--Determination of Sulfur Dioxide Emissions From Stationary 
Sources (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure)

* * * * *
    6.2 * * * The low-range and dual-range analyzer provisions in 
Sections 6.2.8.1 and 6.2.8.2 of Method 7E apply.
* * * * *

0
4. Amend Method 7E as follows:
0
a. Revise Sections 3.3, 3.4, and 3.9.
0
b. Revise Section 3.12 by removing the third sentence and adding two 
new sentences.
0
c. Revise Section 6.2.2.
0
d. Revise the second sentence in Section 6.2.6.
0
e. Revise Section 6.2.8.2.
0
f. Add a sentence after the second sentence in Section 7.1.
0
g. Revise Section 7.1.4.
0
h. Revise Section 7.2.
0
i. Add three sentences to the beginning of Section 8.1.2.
0
j. Revise the second sentence in Section 8.2.1.
0
k. Revise the first sentence in Section 8.2.4.
0
l. Revise Section 8.2.4.1.
0
m. Revise the first and second sentences in paragraph (1) and the 
second sentence in paragraph (2) of Section 8.2.7.
0
n. Revise paragraphs (1) and (2) in Section 8.4.
0
o. Revise the introductory paragraph and paragraph (1) of Section 8.5.
0
p. In Section 9.0, revise the table entitled ``Summary Table of QA/QC'' 
by amending the entry for ``M'' ``System Performance'' ``NO2-NO 
conversion efficiency'' ``>= 90% of certified test gas concentration'' 
``before each test.''
0
q. Revise the last sentence in paragraph (1) of Section 10.0.
0
r. Add definitions for ``Cnative,'' ``COA,'' and ``DF'' in alphabetical 
order to Section 12.1.
0
s. Remove the definition for ``NOfinal'' in Section 12.1.
0
t. Revise the definitions of ``C0'' and ``SBf'' in Section 12.1.
0
u. Revise Section 12.4.
0
v. Revise Sections 12.6 and 12.9.
0
w. Revise Equation 7E-12 in Section 12.11.

[[Page 29696]]

0
x. Revise Section 13.5.
0
y. Revise the third sentence in paragraph (1) of Section 16.2.2.
0
z. Remove and reserve paragraph (2) and remove paragraph (3) of Section 
16.2.2.
0
aa. Revise Section 16.3.
0
bb. Revise Table 7E-3.
0
cc. Revise Table 7E-5.

Method 7E--Determination of Nitrogen Oxides Emissions From Stationary 
Sources (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure)

* * * * *
    3.3 Calibration Gas means the gas mixture containing NOX 
at a known concentration and produced and certified in accordance with 
``EPA Traceability Protocol for Assay and Certification of Gaseous 
Calibration Standards,'' September 1997, as amended August 25, 1999, 
EPA-600/R-97/121 or more recent updates. The tests for analyzer 
calibration error, drift, and system bias require the use of 
calibration gas prepared according to this protocol. If a zero gas is 
used for the low-level gas, it must meet the requirements under the 
definition for ``zero air material'' in 40 CFR 72.2 in place of being 
prepared by the traceability protocol.
* * * * *
    3.4 Calibration Span means the upper limit of the analyzer's 
calibration that is set by the choice of high-level calibration gas. No 
valid run average concentration may exceed the calibration span. To the 
extent practicable, the measured emissions should be between 20 to 100 
percent of the selected calibration span. This may not be practicable 
in some cases of low-concentration measurements or testing for 
compliance with an emission limit when emissions are substantially less 
than the limit. In such cases, calibration spans that are practicable 
to achieving the data quality objectives without being excessively high 
should be chosen.
* * * * *
    3.9 Drift means the difference between the pre- and post-run system 
bias (or system calibration error) checks at a specific calibration gas 
concentration level (i.e. low-, mid- or high-).
    3.12 * * * An MST subjects the analyzer to a range of line voltages 
and temperatures that reflect potential field conditions to demonstrate 
its stability following procedures similar to those provided in 40 CFR 
53.23. Ambient-level analyzers are exempt from the MST requirements of 
Section 16.3. * * *
* * * * *
    6.2.2 Particulate Filter. An in-stack or out-of-stack filter. The 
filter must be made of material that is non-reactive to the gas being 
sampled. The filter media for out-of-stack filters must be included in 
the system bias test. The particulate filter requirement may be waived 
in applications where no significant particulate matter is expected 
(e.g., for emission testing of a combustion turbine firing natural 
gas).
* * * * *
    6.2.6 Calibration Gas Manifold. * * * In system calibration mode, 
the system should be able to flood the sampling probe and vent excess 
gas. * * *
* * * * *
    6.2.8.2 Low Concentration Analyzer. When an analyzer is routinely 
calibrated with a calibration span of 20 ppmv or less, the 
manufacturer's stability test (MST) is required. See Table 7E-5 for 
test parameters.
* * * * *
    7.1 Calibration Gas. * * * If a zero gas is used for the low-level 
gas, it must meet the requirements under the definition for ``zero air 
material'' in 40 CFR 72.2.
    * * *
    7.1.4 Converter Efficiency Gas. What reagents do I need for the 
converter efficiency test? The converter efficiency gas is a 
manufacturer-certified gas with a concentration sufficient to show NO2 
conversion at the concentrations encountered in the source. A test gas 
concentration in the 40 to 60 ppm range is suggested, but other 
concentrations may be more appropriate to specific sources. For the 
test described in Section 8.2.4.1, NO2 is required. For the alternative 
converter efficiency tests in Section 16.2, NO is required.
* * * * *
    7.2 Interference Check. What reagents do I need for the 
interference check? Use the appropriate test gases listed in Table 7E-3 
or others not listed that can potentially interfere (as indicated by 
the test facility type, instrument manufacturer, etc.) to conduct the 
interference check. These gases should be manufacturer certified but do 
not have to be prepared by the EPA traceability protocol.
* * * * *
    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 * * *
* * * * *
    8.2.1 Calibration Gas Verification. * * * Obtain a certificate from 
the gas manufacturer documenting the quality of the gas. * * *
* * * * *
    8.2.4 NO2 to NO Conversion Efficiency. Before or after each field 
test, you must conduct an NO2 to NO conversion efficiency test if your 
system converts NO2 to NO before analyzing for NOX. You may 
risk testing multiple facilities before performing this test provided 
you pass this test at the conclusion of the final facility test. A 
failed final conversion efficiency test in this case will invalidate 
all tests performed subsequent to the test in which the converter 
efficiency test was passed. * * *
    8.2.4.1. Introduce NO2 converter efficiency gas to the 
analyzer in direct calibration mode and record the NOX 
concentration displayed by the analyzer. Calculate the converter 
efficiency using Equation 7E-7 in Section 12.7. The specification for 
converter efficiency in Section 13.5 must be met. The user is cautioned 
that state-of-the-art NO2 calibration gases may have limited shelf 
lives, and this could affect the ability to pass the 90-percent 
conversion efficiency requirement.
    8.2.7 Interference Check. * * *
    (1) You may introduce the appropriate interference test gases (that 
are potentially encountered during a test, see examples in Table 7E-3) 
into the analyzer separately or as mixtures. Test the analyzer with the 
interference gas alone at the highest concentration expected at a test 
source and again with the interference gas and NOX at a 
representative NOX test concentration. * * *
    (2) * * * This interference test is valid for the life of the 
instrument unless major analytical components (e.g., the detector) are 
replaced with different model parts. If major components are replaced 
with different model parts, the interference gas check must be repeated 
before returning the analyzer to service.
* * * * *
    8.4 Sample Collection.
    (1) Position the probe at the first sampling point. Purge the 
system for at least two times the response time before recording any 
data. Then, traverse all required sampling points, sampling at each 
point for an equal length of time and maintaining the appropriate 
sample flow rate or dilution ratio (as applicable). You must record at 
least

[[Page 29697]]

one valid data point per minute during the test run.
    (2) Each time the probe is removed from the stack and replaced, you 
must recondition the sampling system for at least two times the system 
response time prior to your next recording. If the average of any run 
exceeds the calibration span value, that run is invalid.
* * * * *
    8.5 Post-Run System Bias Check and Drift Assessment.
    How do I confirm that each sample I collect is valid? After each 
run, repeat the system bias check or 2-point system calibration error 
check (for dilution systems) to validate the run. Do not make 
adjustments to the measurement system (other than to maintain the 
target sampling rate or dilution ratio) between the end of the run and 
the completion of the post-run system bias or system calibration error 
check. Note that for all post-run system bias or 2-point system 
calibration error checks, you may inject the low-level gas first and 
the upscale gas last, or vice-versa. You may risk sampling for multiple 
runs before performing the post-run bias or system calibration error 
check provided you pass this test at the conclusion of the group of 
runs. A failed final test in this case will invalidate all runs 
subsequent to the last passed test.
    (1) If you do not pass the post-run system bias (or system 
calibration error) check, then the run is invalid. You must diagnose 
and fix the problem and pass another calibration error test (Section 
8.2.3) and system bias (or 2-point system calibration error) check 
(Section 8.2.5) before repeating the run. Record the system bias (or 
system calibration error) results on a form similar to Table 7E-2.
* * * * *
    9.0 Quality Control

                                             Summary Table of QA/QC

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Status         Process or element    QA/QC specification     Acceptance criteria      Checking frequency
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
M..................  System Performance..  NO2-NO conversion     >= 90% of certified test   Before or after each
                                            efficiency.           gas concentration.         test.

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    * * *
    10.0 Calibration and Standardization
    * * *
    (1) * * * Analyzers that measure NO and NO2 separately without 
using a converter must be calibrated with both NO and NO2.
* * * * *
    12.1 Nomenclature. * * *
    Cnative = NOX concentration in the stack gas as 
calculated in Section 12.6, ppmv.
    * * *
    CO = Average of the initial and final system calibration bias (or 
2-point system calibration error) check responses from the low-level 
(or zero) calibration gas, ppmv.
    COA = Actual concentration of the low-level calibration gas, ppmv.
    * * *
    DF = Dilution system dilution factor or spike gas dilution factor, 
dimensionless.
    * * *
    SBfinal = Post-run system bias, percent of calibration span.
* * * * *
    12.4 System Calibration Error. Use Equation 7E-3 to calculate the 
system calibration error for dilution systems. Equation 7E-3 applies to 
both the initial 3-point system calibration error test and the 
subsequent 2-point calibration error checks between test runs. In this 
equation, the term ``Cs'' refers to the diluted calibration gas 
concentration measured by the analyzer.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR22MY08.000

* * * * *
    12.6 Effluent Gas Concentration. For each test run, calculate Cavg, 
the arithmetic average of all valid NOX concentration values 
(e.g., 1-minute averages). Then adjust the value of Cavg for bias using 
Equation 7E-5a if you use a non-zero gas as your low-level calibration 
gas, or Equation 7E-5b if you use a zero gas as your low-level 
calibration gas.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR22MY08.001

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR22MY08.002

* * * * *
    12.9 Alternative NO2 Converter Efficiency. If the alternative 
procedure of Section 16.2.2 is used, determine the NOX 
concentration decrease from NOXPeak after the minimum 30-minute test 
interval using Equation 7E-9. This decrease from NOXPeak must meet the

[[Page 29698]]

requirement in Section 13.5 for the converter to be acceptable.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR22MY08.003

* * * * *
    12.11 Calculated Spike Gas Concentration and Spike Recovery for the 
Example Alternative Dynamic Spiking Procedure in Section 16.1.3. * * *
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR22MY08.004

* * * * *
    13.5 NO2 to NO Conversion Efficiency Test (as applicable). The NO2 
to NO conversion efficiency, calculated according to Equation 7E-7, 
must be greater than or equal to 90 percent. The alternative conversion 
efficiency check, described in Section 16.2.2 and calculated according 
to Equation 7E-9, must not result in a decrease from NOXPeak by more 
than 2.0 percent.
* * * * *
    16.2.2 Tedlar Bag Procedure. * * * Fill the remainder of the bag 
with mid- to high-level NO in nitrogen (or other appropriate 
concentration) calibration gas.
* * * * *
    16.3 Manufacturer's Stability Test. A manufacturer's stability test 
is required for all analyzers that routinely measure emissions below 20 
ppmv and is optional but recommended for other analyzers. This test 
evaluates each analyzer model by subjecting it to the tests listed in 
Table 7E-5 following procedures similar to those in 40 CFR 53.23 for 
thermal stability and insensitivity to supply voltage variations. If 
the analyzer will be used under temperature conditions that are outside 
the test conditions in Table B-4 of Part 53.23, alternative test 
temperatures that better reflect the analyzer field environment should 
be used. Alternative procedures or documentation that establish the 
analyzer's stability over the appropriate line voltages and 
temperatures are acceptable.
* * * * *

       Table 7E-3.--Example Interference Check Gas Concentrations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Concentrations\2\ sample conditioning
                                                    type
   Potential interferent gas\1\   --------------------------------------
                                         Hot wet             Dried
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CO2..............................  5 and 15%           5 and 15%
H2O..............................  25%                 1%
NO...............................  15 ppmv             15 ppmv
NO2..............................  15 ppmv             15 ppmv
N2O..............................  10 ppmv             10 ppmv
CO...............................  50 ppmv             50 ppmv
NH3..............................  10 ppmv             10 ppmv
CH4..............................  50 ppmv             50 ppmv
SO2..............................  20 ppmv             20 ppmv
H2...............................  50 ppmv             50 ppmv
HCl..............................  10 ppmv             10 ppmv
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\(1)\ Any applicable gas may be eliminated or tested at a reduced level
  if the manufacturer has provided reliable means for limiting or
  scrubbing that gas to a specified level.
\(2)\ As practicable, gas concentrations should be the highest expected
  at test sites.

* * * * *

                Table 7E-5.--Manufacturer Stability Test
------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Test description               Acceptance criteria (note 1)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thermal Stability............  Temperature range when drift does not
                                exceed 3.0% of analyzer range over a 12-
                                hour run when measured with NOX present
                                @ 80% of calibration span.
Fault Conditions.............  Identify conditions which, when they
                                occur, result in performance which is
                                not in compliance with the
                                Manufacturer's Stability Test criteria.
                                These are to be indicated visually or
                                electrically to alert the operator of
                                the problem.
Insensitivity to Supply         10.0% (or manufacturers
 Voltage Variations.            alternative) variation from nominal
                                voltage must produce a drift of <= 2.0%
                                of calibration span for either zero or
                                concentration >= 80% NOX present.
Analyzer Calibration Error...  For a low-, medium-, and high-calibration
                                gas, the difference between the
                                manufacturer certified value and the
                                analyzer response in direct calibration
                                mode, no more than 2.0% of calibration
                                span.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note 1: If the instrument is to be used as a Low Range analyzer, all
  tests must be performed at a calibration span of 20 ppm or less.

* * * * *

Appendix A-7--[Amended]

0
5. Amend Method 20 by adding a sentence to the end of Section 8.4 to 
read as follows:

Method 20--Determination of Oxygen and Carbon Dioxide Concentrations in 
Emissions From Stationary Sources (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure)

* * * * *
    8.4 Sample Collection. * * * A test run must have a duration of at 
least 21 minutes.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E8-11398 Filed 5-21-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P