Document ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0071-0064
Agency: epa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Update of Continuous Instrumental Test Methods: Technical Amendments
Posted Date: 2007-09-07T04:00Z

[Federal Register: September 7, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 173)]
[Rules and Regulations]               
[Page 51365-51373]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr07se07-13]                         

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 60

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0071; FRL-8448-9]
RIN 2060-A009

 
Update of Continuous Instrumental Test Methods: Technical 
Amendments

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action on ``Update of Continuous 
Instrumental Test Methods: Technical Amendments'' to correct errors in 
a recent final rule that amended five instrumental test methods and was 
published on May 15, 2006. As published, the amendments contained 
inadvertent errors and provisions that need to be clarified. We are 
correcting errors and clarifying portions of the amendments to reflect 
the intent of the rule and to make them more understandable by affected 
parties.

DATES: This rule is effective on November 6, 2007 without further

[[Page 51366]]

notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by October 9, 2007. If EPA 
receives adverse comment, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal in the 
Federal Register informing the public that this rule will not take 
effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2002-0071, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov. 
     Fax: (202) 566-9744.
     Mail: Update of Continuous Instrumental Test Methods, 
Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania 
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460. Please include a total of two 
copies.
     Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center, 1301 Constitution 
Avenue, NW., EPA Headquarters Library, Room 3334, EPA West Building, 
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-
2002-0071. 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 http://www.regulations.gov, 

or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' 

system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact 
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you 
send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through 
http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail 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, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact 
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you 
submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties 
and cannot contact you for clarification, 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 
http://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 http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Update of Continuous 

Instrumental Test Methods, EPA/DC, EPA West Building, EPA Headquarters 
Library, 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 
Update of Continuous Instrumental Test Methods is (202) 566-1742.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Foston Curtis, Air Quality and 
Analysis Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (D143-
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. Why Is EPA Using a Direct Final Rule?
II. Does This Action Apply to Me?
III. Where Can I Obtain a Copy of This Action?
IV. Judicial Review
V. Background
VI. 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
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and 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 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. Why Is EPA Using a Direct Final Rule?

    EPA is publishing this rule without a prior proposed rule because 
we view this as a noncontroversial action and anticipate no adverse 
comment. The technical amendments we are making simply add clarity and 
correct errors in the prior rule. However, in the ``Proposed Rules'' 
section of today's Federal Register, we are publishing a separate 
document that will serve as the proposed rule to these technical 
amendments if adverse comments are received on this direct final rule. 
We will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any 
parties interested in commenting must do so at this time. For further 
information about commenting on this rule, see the ADDRESSES section of 
this document.
    If EPA receives adverse comment, we will publish a timely 
withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that this 
direct final rule will not take effect. We would address all public 
comments in any subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule.

II. Does This Action Apply to Me?

    This rule applies to sources that are subject to the New Source 
Performance Standards, Clean Air Markets requirements, and other 
regulations that require the use of Method 3A of Appendix A-1, Methods 
6C and 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 entities          SIC codes      NAICS codes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fossil Fuel Steam Generators............            3569          332410
Industrial, Commercial, Institutional               3569          332410
 Steam Generating Units.................
Electric Generating.....................            3569          332410
Stationary Gas Turbines.................            3511          333611

[[Page 51367]]

Petroleum Refineries....................            2911          324110
Municipal Waste Combustors..............            4953          562213
Kraft Pulp Mills........................            2621          322110
Sulfuric Acid Plants....................            2819          325188
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of 
this direct final 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 amendments 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.

IV. Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), judicial review 
of this direct final rule is available only by filing a petition for 
review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia 
Circuit by November 6, 2007. Under section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA, 
only an objection to this direct 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.

V. 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 amendments to simplify, harmonize, and update these test 
methods on May 15, 2006 (71 FR 28081). These amendments became 
effective August 14, 2006. As published, the amendments contained 
inadvertent errors and provisions that need to be clarified. We are 
correcting errors and clarifying portions of the amendments to reflect 
the intent of the rule and to make them more understandable by affected 
parties.

VI. This Action

    EPA is taking the following actions:

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

    1. We are clearly stating that precleaned 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. Section 3.16 is corrected 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.
    6. 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.
    7. 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 mode, as suggested in the current 
method, but the calibration gas manifold may simply supply an excess of 
calibration gas through the system.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. In Section 7.2, we are clearly stating that the appropriate 
test gases listed in Table 7E-3, or others not listed

[[Page 51368]]

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.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. In the sample traversing procedure in Section 8.4, we delete 
redundant language in paragraphs (1) and (2).
    16. In paragraph (1) of Section 8.5, we clarify the handling of 
failed post-run bias checks by removing unnecessary wording.
    17. 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.
    18. In Section 12.1, we are revising certain definitions to reflect 
the corrections being made to the calculations.
    19. In Section 12.4, we correct the system calibration error 
equation by adding a term for the dilution factor.
    20. In Section 12.6, we add a missing equation for calculating 
sample concentration when a zero gas is used as the low-level 
calibration gas.
    21. In Section 12.9 we replace the erroneous equation added in the 
updates rule with the one traditionally used by the method.
    22. In Section 12.11, we correct the equation for calculating the 
spike recovery.
    23. In Section 13.5, we are adding the 2 percent limit for the 
alternative converter efficiency test.
    24. 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.
    25. 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.
    26. 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.
    27. 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.

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. 
These amendments do not add information collection requirements beyond 
those currently required under the applicable regulation. The 
amendments being made to the test methods do not add information 
collection requirements but make needed corrections to existing testing 
methodology.
    Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources 
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or 
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time 
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize 
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and 
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and 
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to 
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; 
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; 
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; 
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required 
to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a 
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control number for EPA's 
regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

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 today's 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 today's direct 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 direct 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), Pub. 
L. 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,

[[Page 51369]]

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 direct 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 1 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, 
today's 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 direct 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 direct final 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 today's 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 direct 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

    Executive Order 13045: ``Protection of Children from Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies 
to any rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' 
as defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an 
environmental health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may 
have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action 
meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health 
or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the 
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and 
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency. EPA 
interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those regulatory 
actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that the 
analysis required under section 5-501 of the Order has the potential to 
influence the regulation. This rule is not subject to Executive Order 
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

    As noted in the proposed rule, Section 12(d) of the National 
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law 
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. The 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 (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 
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 direct 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 direct final rule

[[Page 51370]]

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 November 6, 2007.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60

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

    Dated: July 26, 2007.
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. * * * Precleaned 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 the third sentence in Section 3.12.
0
c. Revise the first sentence in Section 3.16.
0
d. Revise Section 6.2.2.
0
e. Revise the second sentence in Section 6.2.6.
0
f. Revise Section 6.2.8.2.
0
g. Add a sentence after the second sentence in Section 7.1.
0
h. Revise Section 7.1.4.
0
i. Revise Section 7.2.
0
j. Add two sentences to the beginning of Section 8.1.2.
0
k. Revise the second sentence in Section 8.2.1.
0
l. Revise the first sentence in Section 8.2.4.
0
m. Revise Section 8.2.4.1.
0
n. Revise the first and second sentences in paragraph (1) and the 
second sentence in paragraph (2) of Section 8.2.7.
0
o. Revise paragraphs (1) and (2) in Section 8.4.
0
p. Revise the introductory paragraph and paragraph (1) of Section 8.5.
0
q. In Section 9.0, the table entitled ``Summary Table of QA/QC'' is 
amended by revising the entry for ``M'' ``System Performance'' 
``NO2-NO conversion efficiency'' ``[gteqt]90% of certified 
test gas concentration'' ``before each test.''
0
r. Revise the last sentence in paragraph (1) of Section 10.0.
0
s. Add a definitions for ``Cnative,'' ``COA,'' 
and ``DF'' in alphabetical order to Section 12.1.
0
t. Remove the definition for ``NOfinal'' in Section 12.1.
0
u. Revise the definition of ``SBf'' in Section 12.1.
0
v. Revise Equation 7E-3 in Section 12.4.
0
w. Revise Sections 12.6 and 12.9.
0
x. Revise Equation 7E-12 in Section 12.11.
0
y. Revise Section 13.5.
0
z. Revise the third sentence in paragraph (1) of Section 16.2.2.
0
aa. Remove and reserve paragraph (2) and remove paragraph (3) of 
Section 16.2.2.
0
bb. Revise Section 16.3.
0
cc. Revise Table 7E-3.
0
dd. 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. * * *
* * * * *
    3.16 System Bias means the difference between a calibration gas 
measured in system calibration mode and the manufacturer certified 
concentration of the gas expressed as a percentage of the 
calibration span.
* * * * *
    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

[[Page 51371]]

(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 recommended concentration in the 
mid- to high-calibration gas range. Lower concentrations may be more 
appropriate where source emissions are low. 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. 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 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 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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Process or           QA/QC                                     Checking
             Status                   element         specification      Acceptance criteria       frequency
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

* * * * *
    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. * * *
    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. * * *

[[Page 51372]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07SE07.000

* * * * *
    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] TR07SE07.001

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07SE07.002

* * * * *
    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 requirement in 
Section 13.5 for the converter to be acceptable.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07SE07.003

* * * * *
    12.11 Calculated Spike Gas Concentration and Spike Recovery for 
the Example Alternative Dynamic Spiking Procedure in Section 16.1.3. 
* * *
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07SE07.004

* * * * *
    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

[[Page 51373]]

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. E7-17415 Filed 9-6-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P