[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 151 (Monday, August 8, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 45608-45625]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-15330]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 60 and 63
OAR-2003-0074
[FRL-7947-5]
RIN 2060-AG21
Performance Specification 16 for Predictive Emission Monitoring
Systems and Amendments to Testing and Monitoring Provisions
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency is proposing performance
specifications (PS) that evaluate the acceptability of predictive
emission monitoring systems (PEMS) when used on stationary sources.
This PS is needed to provide sources and regulatory agencies with
performance criteria for evaluating this new technology. The intended
effect of this action is to establish standardized performance
requirements that will be used to evaluate candidate PEMS uniformly.
The affected industries and their Standard Industrial Classification
codes are listed under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. In addition, we are
proposing to make minor amendments to various testing provisions in the
New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) and National Emission Standards
for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Categories (MACT) to correct
inadvertent errors, make needed updates, and add flexibility.
DATES: Comments: Submit comments on or before October 7, 2005.
Public Hearing: If anyone contacts us requesting to speak at a
public hearing by August 23, 2005, we will hold a public hearing on
September 7, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Comments. Comments may be submitted electronically, by mail,
by facsimile, or through hand delivery/courier. Follow the detailed
instructions as provided in Unit IB of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section.
Public Hearing. If a public hearing is held, it will be held at 10
a.m. in the EPA Auditorium, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, or
at an alternate site nearby.
Docket. Docket No. OAR-2003-0074, contains information relevant to
this rule. You can read and copy it between 8:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, (except for Federal holidays), at the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room 108,
1301 Constitution Ave., Washington, DC 20004; telephone (202) 566-1742.
The docket office may charge a reasonable fee for copying.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Foston Curtis, Emission Measurement
Center, Mail Code D205-02, Emissions, Monitoring, and Analysis
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina 27711; telephone (919) 541-1063; facsimile number (919)
541-0516; electronic mail address [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
General Information
A. Affected Entities
Predictive emission monitoring systems are not currently required
in any Federal rule. However, they may be used under the NSPS to
predict nitrogen oxides emissions from small industrial, commercial,
and institutional steam generating units. In some cases, PEMS have been
approved as alternatives to CEMS for the initial 30-day compliance test
at these facilities. Various State and Local regulations are
incorporating PEMS as an emission monitoring tool. The major entities
that are potentially affected by Proposed Performance Specification 16
and amendments to the subparts are included in the following tables.
Table 1.--Major Entities Potentially Affected by This Action for
Proposed Performance Specification 16 and for Petroleum Refinery NSPS,
Kraft Pulp Mills NSPS, Municipal Solid Waste Landfill NSPS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of regulated entities SIC codes NAICS codes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industrial, Commercial, Institutional 3569 332410
Steam Generating Units.................
Stationary Gas Turbines................. 3511 333611
Petroleum Refineries.................... 2911 324110
Kraft Pulp Mills........................ 2621 322110
Municipal Solid Waste Landfills......... 4953 562213
Surface Coatings........................ 3479 336111, 336112
Coke Ovens.............................. 3312 33111111
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2.--Major Entities Potentially Affected by This Action for
Amendments to Performance Specification 11 and Procedure 2, Appendix F,
Part 60
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of regulated entities SIC codes NAICS codes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Portland Cement Manufacturing........... 3559 333298
[[Page 45609]]
Hazardous Waste Incinerators............ 4953 562211
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 3.--Major Entities Potentially Affected by This Action for
Amendments to Performance Specification 2, Appendix B, Part 60
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of regulated entities SIC codes NAICS codes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fossil Fuel Steam Generators............ 3569 332410
Electric Generating Units............... 3569 332410
Industrial/Commercial/Institutional 3569 332410
Steam Generating Units.................
Small Industrial/Commercial/ 3569 332410
Institutional Steam Generating Units...
Municipal Waste Combustors.............. 4953 562213
Nitric Acid Plants...................... 2873 525311
Sulfuric Acid Plants.................... 2819 325188
Petroleum Refineries.................... 2911 324110
Primary Copper Smelters................. 3331 331411
Primary Zinc Smelters................... 3339 331419
Primary Lead Smelters................... 3339 331419
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 4.--Major Entities Potentially Affected by This Action for
Amendments to Method 24, Appendix A, Part 60
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of regulated entities SIC codes NAICS codes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rubber Tire Manufacturing............... 3011 326211
Flexible Vinyl and Urethane Coating and 2754 323111
Printing...............................
Magnetic Tape Coating Facilities........ 3695 334613
Surface Coating of Plastic Parts for 3479 326199
Business Machines......................
Polymetric Coating of Supporting 2824 332812
Substrates Facilities..................
Surface Coating of Metal Furniture...... 2514 337124
Automobile and Light Duty Truck Surface 5012 336111
Coating................................
Graphic Arts Industry: Publication 2754 323111
Rotogravure Printing...................
Pressure Sensitive Tape and Label 2672 322222
Surface Coating Operations.............
Indusrial Surface Coating: Large 5064 421620
Appliances.............................
Metal Coil Surface Coating.............. 3479 335931
Beverage Can Surface Coating............ 3411 332812
Aerospace............................... 3721 33641
Boat and Ship Manufacturing and Repair 3731, 3732 ..............
Surface Coating........................
Fabric Printing, Coating and Dyeing..... 2759 ..............
Leather Finishing....................... 3111 ..............
Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing..... 3479 ..............
Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products.. 3479 ..............
Paper and other Web Surface Coating..... 2741
Plastic Parts Surface Coating........... 3479
Printing and Publishing Surface Coating. 2741 ..............
Wood Building Products.................. 2499 ..............
Wood Furniture.......................... 2511, 2521 ..............
------------------------------------------------------------------------
These tables are not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides
an example of entities that may be affected by this action. 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.
B. How Can I Get Copies of This Document and Other Related Information?
1. Docket. EPA has established an official public docket for this
action under Docket ID No. OAR-2003-0074. The official public docket
consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, any
public comments received, and other information related to this action.
Although a part of the official docket, the public docket does not
include Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Documents in the official
public docket are listed in the index list in EPA's electronic public
docket and comment system, EDOCKET. Documents may be available either
electronically or in hard copy. Electronic documents may be viewed
through EDOCKET. Hard copy documents may be viewed at Docket OAR-2003-
0074, EPA Docket Center, (EPA/DC) EPA West, Room B102, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone (202) 566-1742.
The docket facility 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.
2. Electronic Access. You may access this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet under the ``Federal Register''
listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/ or you can go to the federal
wide eRulemaking site at http://www.regulations.gov.
[[Page 45610]]
An electronic version of the public docket is available through
EDOCKET. You may use EPA Dockets at http://www.epa.gov/edocket/ to
submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the
contents of the official public docket, and to access those documents
in the public docket that are available electronically. Once in the
system, select ``search,'' then key in the appropriate docket
identification number.
Certain types of information will not be placed in the EPA Dockets.
Information claimed as CBI and other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute, which is not included in the official public
docket, will not be available for public viewing in EPA's electronic
public docket. The EPA's policy is that copyrighted material will not
be placed in EPA's electronic public docket but will be available only
in printed, paper form in the official public docket. To the extent
feasible, publicly available docket materials will be made available in
EPA's electronic public docket. When a document is selected from the
index list in EDOCKET, the system will identify whether the document is
available for viewing in EPA's electronic public docket. Publicly
available docket materials that are not available electronically may be
viewed at the docket facility identified in Unit I.B. The EPA intends
to work towards providing electronic access to all of the publicly
available docket materials through EPA's electronic public docket.
For public commenters, it is important to note that EPA's policy is
that public comments, whether submitted electronically or on paper,
will be made available for public viewing in EPA's electronic public
docket as EPA receives them and without change, unless the comment
contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. When EPA identifies a comment
containing copyrighted material, EPA will provide a reference to that
material in the version of the comment that is placed in EPA's
electronic public docket. The entire printed comment, including the
copyrighted material, will be available in the public docket.
Public comments submitted on computer disks that are mailed or
delivered to the docket will be transferred to EPA's electronic public
docket. Public comments that are mailed or delivered to the Docket will
be scanned and placed in EPA's electronic public docket. Where
practical, physical objects will be photographed, and the photograph
will be placed in EPA's electronic public docket along with a brief
description written by the docket staff.
For additional information about EPA's electronic public docket,
visit EDOCKET online or see 67 FR 38102, May 31, 2002.
C. How and to Whom Do I Submit Comments?
You may submit comments electronically, by mail, by facsimile, or
through hand delivery/courier. To ensure proper receipt by EPA,
identify the appropriate docket identification number in the subject
line on the first page of your comment. Please ensure that your
comments are submitted within the specified comment period. Comments
received after the close of the comment period will be marked ``late.''
The EPA is not required to consider these late comments. However, late
comments may be considered if time permits.
1. Electronically. If you submit an electronic comment as
prescribed below, EPA recommends that you include your name, mailing
address, and an e-mail address or other contact information in the body
of your comment. Also include this contact information on the outside
of any disk or CD ROM you submit and in any cover letter accompanying
the disk or CD ROM. This ensures that you can be identified as the
submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA
cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or needs further
information on the substance of your comment. The EPA's policy is that
EPA will not edit your comment, and any identifying or contact
information provided in the body of a comment will be included as part
of the comment that is placed in the official public docket and made
available in EPA's electronic public docket. 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.
i. EDOCKET. Your use of EPA's electronic public docket to submit
comments to EPA electronically is EPA's preferred method for receiving
comments. Go directly to EDOCKET at http://www.epa.gov/edocket, and
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. To access EPA's
electronic public docket from the EPA Internet Home Page, select
``Information Sources,'' ``Dockets,'' and ``EDOCKET.'' Once in the
system, select ``search,'' and then key in Docket ID No. OAR-2003-0074.
The system is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not
know your identity, e-mail address, or other contact information unless
you provide it in the body of your comment.
ii. http://www.regulations.gov. Electronic comments may also be
sent through the federal wide eRulemaking web site at http://www.regulations.gov.
iii. E-mail. Comments may be sent by electronic mail (e-mail) to [email protected], Attention: Docket ID No. OAR-2003-0074. In
contrast to EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's e-mail system is not
an ``anonymous access'' system. If you send an e-mail comment directly
to the Docket without going through EPA's electronic public docket,
EPA's e-mail system automatically captures your e-mail address. E-mail
addresses that are automatically captured by EPA's e-mail system are
included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public
docket and made available in EPA's electronic public docket.
iv. Disk or CD ROM. You may submit comments on a disk or CD ROM
that you mail to the mailing address identified in Unit I.C.2. These
electronic submissions will be accepted in WordPerfect or ASCII file
format. Avoid the use of special characters and any form of encryption.
2. By Mail. Send duplicate copies of your comments to:
``Performance Specification 16 for Predictive Emission Monitoring
Systems,'' Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code 6102T, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC, 20460, Attention Docket ID No.
OAR-2003-0074.
3. By Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: EPA
Docket Center, EPA West, Room 108, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460, Attention: Docket ID No. OAR-2003-0074. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation as identified in Unit I.B.1.
4. By Facsimile. Fax your comments to: 202-566-1741, Attention:
Docket ID. No. OAR-2003-0074.
D. How Should I Submit CBI to the Agency?
Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI
electronically through EPA's electronic public docket or by e-mail.
Send or deliver information identified as CBI only to the docket
address to the attention of Docket ID No. OAR-2003-0074. You may claim
information that you submit to EPA as CBI by marking any part or all of
that information as CBI (if you submit CBI on disk or CD ROM, mark the
outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then identify electronically
within the disk or CD ROM the specific information that is CBI).
Information so
[[Page 45611]]
marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set
forth in 40 CFR Part 2.
In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes
any information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not
contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion
in the public docket and EPA's electronic public docket. If you submit
the copy that does not contain CBI on disk or CD ROM, mark the outside
of the disk or CD ROM clearly that it does not contain CBI. Information
not marked as CBI will be included in the public docket and EPA's
electronic public docket without prior notice. If you have any
questions about CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI, please consult
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
E. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?
You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your
comments:
1. Explain your views as clearly as possible.
2. Describe any assumptions that you used.
3. Provide any technical information and/or data you used that
support your views.
4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you
arrived at your estimate.
5. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns.
6. Offer alternatives.
7. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline
identified.
8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate docket
identification number in the subject line on the first page of your
response. It would also be helpful if you provided the name, date, and
Federal Register citation related to your comments.
Outline. The information presented in this preamble is organized as
follows:
I. Background
II. Summary of Proposed Performance Specification 16
A. What Is the Purpose of PS-16?
B. Who Must Comply With PS-16?
C. What Are the Basic Requirements of PS-16?
D. What Is the Rationale for the Performance Criteria in PS-16?
III. Summary of Other Amendments
A. Petroleum Refinery (Subpart J) NSPS
B. Kraft Pulp Mill (Subpart BB) NSPS
C. Municipal Solid Waste Landfills (Subpart WWW) NSPS
D. Method 24 of Appendix A of Part 60
E. Performance Specification 2 of Appendix B of Part 60
F. Performance Specification 11 of Appendix B of Part 60
G. Method 303 of Appendix A of Part 63
IV. 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: Action Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
I. NTTAA: National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
I. Background
Today we are proposing Performance Specification 16 for Predictive
Emission Monitoring Systems to Appendix B, Part 60. Predictive emission
monitoring systems are a new and innovative tool for monitoring
pollutant emissions without the traditional hardware analyzers. The
PEMS predicts a unit's emissions indirectly using process parameters
that have a known relationship to pollutant concentration. Their
principle of operation can range from a relatively simple relationship
based on combustion principles to the more complex computer models that
are trained to predict emissions using neural networks technology. They
have been used for monitoring purposes at industrial, commercial, and
institutional steam-generating units, gas turbines, internal combustion
engines, and other combustion processes where process parameters have a
predictable relationship to emissions. We are also proposing to make
amendments to the testing and monitoring provisions of various NSPS and
MACT rules.
II. Summary of Proposed Performance Specification 16
A. What Is the Purpose of PS-16?
The purpose of PS-16 is to establish the initial installation and
performance procedures that candidate PEMS must meet to be acceptable
for use. The specification stipulates equipment design and
documentation, location, and addresses initial and periodic performance
tests of the PEMS.
B. Who Must Comply With PS-16?
If adopted as a final rule, all PEMS that will be used to comply
with 40 CFR Parts 60, 61, and 63 will be required to comply with PS-16.
In addition to new PEMS that are installed after the effective date of
PS-16, other PEMS may also be required to comply with PS-16 at the
discretion of the applicable regulatory agency or permit writer.
C. What Are the Basic Requirements of PS-16?
The PS-16 requires owners and operators of affected PEMS to: (1)
Select a PEMS that satisfies basic design criteria; (2) verify and
document their PEMS; (3) validate their PEMS against a reference method
using prescribed statistical procedures prior to placing it into
operation; and (4) periodically reassess their PEMS's performance. The
performance requirements for PS-16 follow the general performance
requirements for continuous emission monitoring systems (CEMS) in
Appendix B of Part 60. A relative accuracy (RA) test of the PEMS
against a reference method is the primary assessment of accuracy. The
number of runs prescribed for the RA test will depend upon the
underlying regulation.
D. What Is the Rationale for the Performance Criteria in PS-16?
The Agency is allowing, but not requiring, PEMS use in a number of
recently-promulgated rules, and a number of facilities regulated by
State and Local agencies are considering their use. Past EPA approvals
of PEMS were based on criteria provided in the draft performance
specifications on the Agency's Emission Measurement Center website. In
other cases, performance specifications developed by State or Local
Agencies were used to evaluate the PEMS. We are proposing PS-16 to
provide regulatory agencies a uniform procedure for assessing the
capabilities of this new monitoring tool.
III. Summary of Other Amendments
A. Petroleum Refinery (Subpart J) NSPS
In the petroleum refinery NSPS in Sec. 60.106(b)(3) the equation
for determining the coke burnoff rate is being corrected.
B. Kraft Pulp Mill (Subpart BB) NSPS
In the monitoring provisions of the kraft pulp mills NSPS in Sec.
60.284, a paragraph requiring continuous emission monitors be subject
to the quality assurance provisions of Appendix F that was added by
mistake in an October 17, 2000 amendment is being deleted.
C. Municipal Solid Waste Landfill (Subpart WWW) NSPS
Under the municipal solid waste landfill NSPS in Sec. 60.752, the
requirement to test open flares for heat content and flare exit
velocity using Methods 18 and ASTM D1946 is being
[[Page 45612]]
changed to require Method 3C. These open flares must comply with the
general flare provisions of 40 CFR 60.18, which require that flare gas
heat content and flare exit velocity be within prescribed limits. The
heat content of flare gas is determined from an analysis of its organic
compound and hydrogen content using Method 18 and ASTM D1946,
respectively. Methane is the only significant organic compound in
landfill gas and hydrogen is not likely to be present. Therefore,
Method 18 and ASTM D1946 are not practical methods for landfill
applications. Method 3C is less labor-intensive than Method 18 and has
the preferred measuring range for methane levels encountered at
landfills. In addition, Method 3C determines oxygen and nitrogen which
are currently determined by an additional method and are needed to
calculate the flare gas exit velocity. We are proposing that Method 3C
be required as the test method for methane in place of Method 18 and
ASTM D1946 for organics and hydrogen.
D. Method 24 of Appendix A of Part 60
Method 24, Part 60, Appendix A is used to determine the contents
and properties of surface coatings under NSPS applications. Method 24
currently references ASTM D2369 as the method for determining volatiles
content. The American Society for Testing and Materials has recommended
that ASTM D6419 be allowed as an alternative to D2369 in this case. We
are proposing to amend Method 24 to allow this option.
E. Performance Specification 2, Part 60, Appendix B
In Performance Specification 2, Part 60, Appendix B, an inadvertent
omission in an October 17, 2000 amendment removed an allowance for
relative accuracy relief for low-emitters. We are proposing to
reinstate the allowance.
F. Performance Specification 11 of Appendix of Appendix B of Part 60
The publication on January 12, 2004 of Performance Specification 11
for Appendix B and Procedure 2 for Part 60, Appendix F contained
technical and typographical errors and unclear instructions. We are
revising the definition of confidence interval half range to clarify
the language, replacing the word ``pairs'' with ``sets'' to avoid
possible confusion regarding the use of paired sampling trains,
correcting errors in Equations 11-22, 11-27, and 11-37, correcting the
procedures in paragraphs (4) and (5) of section 12.3 for determining
confidence and tolerance interval half ranges for the exponential and
power correlation models, and adding a note following paragraph (5)(v)
concerning the application of correlation equations to calculate PM
concentrations using the response data from an operating PM CEMS. We
are also renumbering some equations and references for clarification,
consistency, and accuracy.
G. Method 303 of Appendix A of Part 63
In Method 303 of Appendix A of Part 63, we are proposing to add a
statement on varying the time of day runs are taken that was deleted by
mistake in a recent amendment of the method.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735 October 4, 1993), we must
determine whether this regulatory action is ``significant'' and
therefore subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review and
the requirements of this Executive Order. The Order defines
``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a
rule that may: (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million
or more or adversely affects in a material way the economy, a sector of
the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, Local, or Tribal governments or
communities; (2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interferes
with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3) materially alter
the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan
programs, or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4)
raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the
President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive
Order.
We have determined that this rule is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under the terms of Executive Order 12866 and is therefore not
subject to OMB review. We have determined that this regulation would
result in none of the economic effects set forth in Section 1 of the
Order because it does not impose emission measurement requirements
beyond those specified in the current regulations, nor does it change
any emission standard.
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.
This actions provides performance criteria for a new monitoring tool
that may be used in some cases in place of current source monitoring
requirements. These criteria do not add information collection
requirements beyond those currently required under the applicable
regulation. The additional amendments being made to the testing
requirements in 40 CFR part 60 do no add information collection
requirements but make minor 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 numbers for EPA's
regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The 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 as defined
by the Small Business Administration's regulations at 13 CFR 121.201;
(2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city,
county, town, school district or special district with a population of
less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is any not-for-
profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field. Entities potentially affected by this action
[[Page 45613]]
include those listed in Table 1 of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
After considering the economic impacts of today's proposed rule on
small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. We are
allowing, but not requiring, PEMS use in a number of recently-
promulgated rules, and a number of facilities regulated by State and
Local agencies are considering their use. The intended effect of this
action is to facilitate the use of PEMS by establishing levels of
acceptability for candidate PEMS. In addition, we are proposing to make
minor amendments to various testing provisions in the New Source
Performance Standards (NSPS) and National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Categories (MACT) to correct
inadvertent errors, make needed updates, and add flexibility. We invite
comments on all aspects of the proposal and its impacts on small
entities.
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
one 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.
Today's rule contains no Federal mandates (under the regulatory
provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for State, Local, or Tribal
governments or the private sector. The rule imposes no enforceable duty
on any State, Local, or Tribal governments or the private sector. In
any event, EPA has determined that this 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. 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'' are 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 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. Thus, the requirements of Section 6
of the Executive Order do not apply to this rule.
In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with EPA
policy to promote communications between EPA and State and Local
governments, EPA specifically solicits comment on this proposed rule
from State and Local officials.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Tribal
Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 6, 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.'' ``Policies that have tribal
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations
that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal government and the Indian tribes,
or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the
Federal government and Indian tribes.''
This proposed rule does not have tribal implications. 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. In
this proposed rule, we are simply allowing an alternative emission
monitoring tool that applicable facilities may use. 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 applies to any rule that EPA determines (1)
is ``economically significant'' as defined under Executive Order 12866,
and (2) the environmental health or safety risk addressed by the rule
has 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.
The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to
regulatory actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that
the analysis required under section 5-501 of the Executive Order has
the potential to influence the regulation. This proposed rule is not
subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is not based on health or
safety risks.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions
Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is
[[Page 45614]]
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
I. NTTAA: National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113 (15 U.S.C. 272), directs us to
use voluntary consensus standards (VCSs) in our 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,
business practices, etc.) that are developed or adopted by VCS bodies.
The NTTAA requires us to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations
when we decide not to use available and applicable VCSs. We are not
proposing new test methods in this rulemaking but are adding
performance requirements for a new monitoring tool that can be used as
an alternative to what has already been mandated. Therefore, NTTAA does
not apply.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Parts 60 and 63
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, New sources, Test
methods and procedures, Performance specifications, and Continuous
emission monitors.
Dated: July 26, 2005.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Environmental
Protection Agency proposes to amend title 40, chapter I of the Code of
Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 60--STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE FOR NEW STATIONARY SOURCES
1. The authority citation for Part 60 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, 7411, 7413, 7414, 7416, 7601, and
7602.
Sec. 60.106 [Amended]
2. By revising the equation in Sec. 60.106(b)(3) to read as
follows:
Sec. 60.106 Test methods and procedures.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(3) * * *
RC = K1Qr (%CO2 + %CO) +
(K2Qa - K3Qr)((%CO / 2) +
(%CO2 + %O2))
* * * * *
Sec. 60.284 [Amended]
3. By revising Sec. 60.284(f) to read as follows:
Sec. 60.284 Monitoring of emissions and operations.
* * * * *
(f) The procedures under Sec. 60.13 shall be followed for
installation, evaluation, and operation of the continuous monitoring
systems required under this section. All continuous monitoring systems
shall be operated in accordance with the applicable procedures under
Performance Specifications 1, 3, and 5 of appendix B of this part.
* * * * *
Sec. 60.752 [Amended]
4. By revising Sec. 60.752(b)(2)(iii)(A) to read as follows:
Sec. 60.752 Standards for air emissions from municipal solid waste
landfills
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(iii) * * *
(A) An open flare designed and operated in accordance with Sec.
60.18, except that the net heating value of the combusted landfill gas
is calculated from the concentration of methane in the landfill gas as
measured by Method 3C. Other organic components, hydrogen, and carbon
monoxide are not measured;
* * * * *
Appendix A [Amended]
5. In Appendix A, by adding Section 6.7 to Method 24 to read as
follows:
Method 24--Determination of Volatile Matter Content, Water Content,
Density, Volume Solids, and Weight Solids of Surface Coatings
* * * * *
6.7 ASTM D 6419-00, Test Method for Volatile Content of Sheet-Fed
and Coldset Web Offset Printing Inks.
* * * * *
Appendix B [Amended]
6. In Appendix B, by adding a sentence to Section 13.2 of
Performance Specification 2 to read as follows:
Performance Specification 2--Specifications and Test Procedures for
SO2 and NOX Continuous Emission Monitoring
Systems in Stationary Sources
* * * * *
13.2 * * * For SO2 emission standards of 130 to and
including 86 ng/J (0.30 and 0.20 lb/million Btu), inclusive, use 15
percent of the applicable standard; below 86 ng/J (0.20 lb/million
Btu), use 20 percent of the emission standard.
* * * * *
7. In Appendix B, Performance Specification 11:
A. By revising Sections 3.4 and 8.6;
B. By revising paragraphs (1)(ii), (2), (4), and (5) of Section
12.3;
C. By revising paragraph (3)(ii) of Section 12.4;
D. By revising (2) and (3) of Section 13.2;
E. By adding references 16.8 and 16.9 to Section 16.0; and
F. By revising Table 1 in Section 17.0.
The revisions and addition read as follows:
Performance Specification 11--Specifications and Test Procedures for
Particulate Matter Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems at Stationary
Sources
* * * * *
3.4 ``Confidence Interval Half Range (CI)'' is a statistical term
and means one-half of the width of the 95 percent confidence interval
around the predicted mean PM concentration (y value) calculated at the
PM CEMS response value (x value) where the confidence interval is
narrowest. Procedures for calculating CI are specified in section 12.3.
The CI as a percent of the emission limit value (CI%) is calculated at
the appropriate PM CEMS response value and must satisfy the criteria
specified in Section 13.2 (2).
* * * * *
8.6 How do I conduct my PM CEMS correlation test? You must conduct
the correlation test according to the procedure given in paragraphs (1)
through (5) of this section. If you need multiple correlations, you
must conduct testing and collect at least 15 sets of reference method
and PM CEMS data for calculating each separate correlation.
* * * * *
12.3 How do I determine my PM CEMS correlation?
* * * * *
(1) How do I evaluate a linear correlation for my correlation test
data?
* * * * *
(ii) Calculate the half range of the 95 percent confidence interval
(CI) for the predicted PM concentration (y) at the mean value of x,
using Equation 11-8:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.045
Where:
CI = the half range of the 95 percent confidence interval for the
predicted PM concentration at the mean x value,
tdf,1-a/2 = the value for the t statistic provided in Table
1 for df = (n-2), and
[[Page 45615]]
SL = the scatter or deviation of y values about the
correlation curve, which is determined using Equation 11-9:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.046
Calculate the confidence interval half range for the predicted PM
concentration (y) at the mean x value as a percentage of the emission
limit (CI%) using Equation 11-10:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.047
Where:
CI = the half range of the 95 percent confidence interval for the
predicted PM concentration at the mean x value, and
EL = PM emission limit, as described in section 13.2.
(iii) Calculate the half range of the tolerance interval (TI) for
the predicted PM concentration (y) at the mean x value using Equation
11-11:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.048
Where:
TI = the half range of the tolerance interval for the predicted PM
concentration (y) at the mean x value,
kT = as calculated using Equation 11-12, and
SL = as calculated using Equation 11-9:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.049
Where:
n' = the number of test runs (n),
un, = the tolerance factor for 75 percent coverage at 95
percent confidence provided in Table 1 for df = (n-2), and
vdf = the value from Table 1 for df = (n--2).
Calculate the half range of the tolerance interval for the
predicted PM concentration (y) at the mean x value as a percentage of
the emission limit (TI%) using Equation 11-13:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.050
Where:
TI = the half range of the tolerance interval for the predicted PM
concentration (y) at the mean x value, and
EL = PM emission limit, as described in section 13.2.
* * * * *
(2) How do I evaluate a polynomial correlation for my correlation
test data? To evaluate a polynomial correlation, follow the procedures
described in paragraphs (2)(i) through (iv) of this section.
(i) Calculate the polynomial correlation equation, which is
indicated by Equation 11-16, using Equations 11-17 through 11-22:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.051
Where:
y = the PM CEMS concentration predicted by the polynomial correlation
equation, and
b0, b1, b2 = the coefficients
determined from the solution to the matrix equation Ab=B
Where:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.052
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.053
Where:
xi = the PM CEMS response for run i,
yi = the reference method PM concentration for run i, and
n = the number of test runs.
Calculate the polynomial correlation curve coefficients
(b0, b1, and b2 ) using Equations 11-
19 through 11-21, respectively:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.054
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.055
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.056
Where:
[[Page 45616]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.057
(ii) Calculate the 95 percent confidence interval half range (CI)
by first calculating the C coefficients (C0 to
C5) using Equations 11-23 and 11-24:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.058
Where:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.059
Calculate [Delta] using Equation 11-25 for each x value:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.060
Determine the x value that corresponds to the minimum value [Delta]
([Delta]min). Determine the scatter or deviation of y values
about the polynomial correlation curve (SP) using Equation
11-26:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.061
Calculate the half range of the 95 percent confidence interval (CI)
for the predicted PM concentration (y) at the x value that corresponds
to [Delta]min using Equation 11-27:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.062
Where:
df = (n - 3), and
tdf = as listed in Table 1 (see section 17).
Calculate the half range of the 95 percent confidence interval for
the predicted PM concentration at the x value that corresponds to
[Delta]min as a percentage of the emission limit (CI%) using
Equation 11-28:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.063
Where:
CI = the half range of the 95 percent confidence interval for the
predicted PM concentration at the x value that corresponds to
[Delta]min, and
EL = PM emission limit, as described in section 13.2.
(iii) Calculate the tolerance interval half range (TI) for the
predicted PM concentration at the x value that corresponds to
[Delta]min, as indicated in Equation 11-29 for the
polynomial correlation, using Equations 11-30 and 11-31:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.064
Where:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.065
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.066
un, = the value indicated in Table 1 for df = (n' - 3), and
vdf = the value indicated in Table 1 for df = (n' - 3).
Calculate the tolerance interval half range for the predicted PM
concentration at the x value that corresponds to [Delta]min
as a percentage of the emission limit (TI%) using Equation 11-32:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.067
Where:
TI = the tolerance interval half range for the predicted PM
concentration at the x value that corresponds to [Delta]min,
and
EL = PM emission limit, as described in section 13.2.
(iv) Calculate the polynomial correlation coefficient (r) using
Equation 11-33:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.068
Where:
SP = as calculated using Equation 11-26, and
Sy = as calculated using Equation 11-15.
* * * * *
(4) How do I evaluate an exponential correlation for my correlation
test data? To evaluate an exponential correlation, which has the form
indicated by Equation 11-37, follow the procedures described in
paragraphs (4)(i) through (v) of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.069
(i) Perform a logarithmic transformation of each PM concentration
measurement (y values) using Equation 11-38:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.070
Where:
y'i = is the transformed value of yi, and
Ln(yi) = the natural logarithm of the PM concentration
measurement for run i.
(ii) Using the values for y'i in place of the values for
yi, perform the same procedures used to develop the linear
correlation equation described in paragraph (1)(i) of this section. The
resulting equation will have the form indicated by Equation 11-39.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.071
Where:
[ycirc]' = the predicted log PM concentration value,
b'0 = the natural logarithm of b0, and the variables b0, b1,
and x are as defined in paragraph (1)(i) of this section.
[[Page 45617]]
(iii) Using the values for y'i in place of the values for yi,
calculate the half range of the 95 percent confidence interval (CI'),
as described in paragraph (1)(ii) of this section for CI. Note that CI'
is on the log scale. Next, calculate the upper and lower 95 percent
confidence limits for the mean value y' using Equations 11-40 and 11-
41:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.072
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.073
Where:
LCL' = the lower 95 percent confidence limit for the mean value y',
UCL = the upper 95 percent confidence limit for the mean value y',
y' = the mean value of the log-transformed PM concentrations, and
CI' = the half range of the 95 percent confidence interval for the
predicted PM concentration ([ycirc]'), as calculated in Equation 11-8.
Calculate the half range of the 95 percent confidence interval (CI)
on the original PM concentration scale using Equation 11-42:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.074
Where:
CI = the half range of the 95 percent confidence interval on the
original PM concentration scale, and UCL' and LCL' are as defined
previously.
Calculate the half range of the 95 percent confidence interval for
the predicted PM concentration corresponding to the mean value of x as
a percentage of the emission limit (CI%) using Equation 11-10.
(iv) Using the values for y'i in place of the values for
yi, calculate the half range tolerance interval (TI'), as
described in paragraph (1)(iii) of this section for TI. Note that TI'
is on the log scale. Next, calculate the half range tolerance limits
for the mean value y' using Equations 11-43 and 11-44:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.075
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.076
Where:
LTL' = the lower 95 percent tolerance limit for the mean value y',
UTL' = the upper 95 percent tolerance limit for the mean value y',
y' = the mean value of the log-transformed PM concentrations, and
TI' = the half range of the 95 percent tolerance interval for the
predicted PM concentration ([ycirc]'), as calculated in Equation 11-11.
Calculate the half range tolerance interval (TI) on the original PM
concentration scale using Equation 11-45:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.077
TI = the half range of the 95 percent tolerance interval on the
original PM scale, and UTL' and LTL' are as defined previously.
Calculate the tolerance interval half range for the predicted PM
concentration corresponding to the mean value of x as a percentage of
the emission limit (TI%) using Equation 11-13.
(v) Using the values for y'i in place of the values for yi,
calculate the correlation coefficient (r) using the procedure described
in paragraph (1)(iv) of this section.
(5) How do I evaluate a power correlation for my correlation test
data? To evaluate a power correlation, which has the form indicated by
Equation 11-46, follow the procedures described in paragraphs (5)(i)
through (v) of this section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.078
(i) Perform logarithmic transformations of each PM CEMS response (x
values) and each PM concentration measurement (y values) using
Equations 11-35 and 11-38, respectively.
(ii) Using the values for x'i in place of the values for xi, and
the values for y'i in place of the values for yi, perform the same
procedures used to develop the linear correlation equation described in
paragraph (1)(i) of this section. The resulting equation will have the
form indicated by Equation 11-47:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.079
Where:
[ycirc]' = the predicted log PM concentration value, and
x' = the natural logarithm of the PM CEMS response values,
b'0 = the natural logarithm of b0, and the variables b0, b1,
and x are as defined in paragraph (1)(i) of this section.
(iii) Using the same procedure described for exponential models in
paragraph (4)(iii) of this section, calculate the half range of the 95
percent confidence interval for the predicted PM concentration
corresponding to the mean value of x' as a percentage of the emission
limit.
(iv) Using the same procedure described for exponential models in
paragraph (4)(iv) of this section, calculate the tolerance interval
half range for the predicted PM concentration corresponding to the mean
value of x' as a percentage of the emission limit.
(v) Using the values for y'i in place of the values for yi,
calculate the correlation coefficient (r) using the procedure described
in paragraph (1)(iv) of this section.
Note: PS-11 does not address the application of correlation
equations to calculate PM emission concentrations using PM CEMS
response data during normal operations of a PM CEMS. However, we
will provide guidance on the use of specific correlation models
(i.e., logarithmic, exponential, and power models) to calculate PM
concentrations in an operating PM CEMS in situations when the PM
CEMS response values are equal to or less than zero, and the
correlation model is undefined.
* * * * *
12.4 What correlation model should I use?
* * * * *
(3) * * *
(ii) Calculate the minimum value using Equation 11-48.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.080
* * * * *
13.2 What performance criteria must my PM CEMS correlation satisfy?
* * * * *
(2) The confidence interval half range must satisfy the applicable
criterion specified in paragraph (2)(i), (ii), or (iii) of this
section, based on the type of correlation model.
(i) For linear or logarithmic correlations, the 95 percent
confidence interval half range at the mean PM CEMS response value from
the correlation test must be within 10
[[Page 45618]]
percent of the PM emission limit value specified in the applicable
regulation. Therefore, the CI% calculated using Equation 11-10 must be
less than or equal to 10 percent.
(ii) For polynomial correlations, the 95 percent confidence
interval half range at the PM CEMS response value from the correlation
test that corresponds to the minimum value for [Delta] must be within
10 percent of the PM emission limit value specified in the applicable
regulation. Therefore, the CI% calculated using Equation 11-28 must be
less than or equal to 10 percent.
(iii) For exponential or power correlations, the 95 percent
confidence interval half range at the mean of the logarithm of the PM
CEMS response values from the correlation test must be within 10
percent of the PM emission limit value specified in the applicable
regulation. Therefore, the CI% calculated using Equation 11-10 must be
less than or equal to 10 percent.
* * * * *
(3) The tolerance interval half range must satisfy the applicable
criterion specified in paragraph (3)(i), (ii), or (iii) of this
section, based on the type of correlation model.
(i) For linear or logarithmic correlations, the half range
tolerance interval with 95 percent confidence and 75 percent coverage
at the mean PM CEMS response value from the correlation test must be
within 25 percent of the PM emission limit value specified in the
applicable regulation. Therefore, the TI% calculated using Equation 11-
13 must be less than or equal to 25 percent.
(ii) For polynomial correlations, the half range tolerance interval
with 95 percent confidence and 75 percent coverage at the PM CEMS
response value from the correlation test that corresponds to the
minimum value for [Delta] must be within 25 percent of the PM emission
limit value specified in the applicable regulation. Therefore, the TI%
calculated using Equation 11-32 must be less than or equal to 25
percent.
(iii) For exponential or power correlations, the half range
tolerance interval with 95 percent confidence and 75 percent coverage
at the mean of the logarithm of the PM CEMS response values from the
correlation test must be within 25 percent of the PM emission limit
value specified in the applicable regulation. Therefore, the TI%
calculated using Equation 11-13 must be less than or equal to 25
percent.
* * * * *
16.0 Which references are relevant to this performance
specification?
* * * * *
16.8 Snedecor, George W. and Cochran, William G. (1989),
Statistical Methods, Eighth Edition, Iowa State University Press.
16.9 Wallis, W.A. (1951) ``Tolerance Intervals for Linear
Regression,'' in Second Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics
and Probability, ed. J. Neyman, Berkeley: University of California
Press, pp. 43-51.
17.0 What Reference Tables and Validation Data Are Relevant to PS-11?
* * * * *
Table 1.--Factors for Calculation of Confidence and Tolerance Interval Half Ranges
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tolerance interval with 75% coverage and 95%
Student's t, confidence level
df t df -----------------------------------------------
V df (95%) u n, (75%) kT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3............................................... 3.182 2.920 1.266 3.697
4............................................... 2.776 2.372 1.247 2.958
5............................................... 2.571 2.089 1.233 2.576
6............................................... 2.447 1.915 1.223 2.342
7............................................... 2.365 1.797 1.214 2.183
8............................................... 2.306 1.711 1.208 2.067
9............................................... 2.262 1.645 1.203 1.979
10.............................................. 2.228 1.593 1.198 1.909
11.............................................. 2.201 1.551 1.195 1.853
12.............................................. 2.179 1.515 1.192 1.806
13.............................................. 2.160 1.485 1.189 1.766
14.............................................. 2.145 1.460 1.186 1.732
15.............................................. 2.131 1.437 1.184 1.702
16.............................................. 2.120 1.418 1.182 1.676
17.............................................. 2.110 1.400 1.181 1.653
18.............................................. 2.101 1.384 1.179 1.633
19.............................................. 2.093 1.370 1.178 1.614
20.............................................. 2.086 1.358 1.177 1.597
21.............................................. 2.080 1.346 1.175 1.582
22.............................................. 2.074 1.335 1.174 1.568
23.............................................. 2.069 1.326 1.173 1.555
24.............................................. 2.064 1.316 1.172 1.544
25.............................................. 2.060 1.308 1.172 1.533
26.............................................. 2.056 1.300 1.171 1.522
27.............................................. 2.052 1.293 1.170 1.513
28.............................................. 2.048 1.286 1.170 1.504
29.............................................. 2.045 1.280 1.169 1.496
30.............................................. 2.042 1.274 1.168 1.488
31.............................................. 2.040 1.268 1.168 1.481
32.............................................. 2.037 1.263 1.167 1.474
33.............................................. 2.035 1.258 1.167 1.467
34.............................................. 2.032 1.253 1.166 1.461
35.............................................. 2.030 1.248 1.166 1.455
36.............................................. 2.028 1.244 1.165 1.450
37.............................................. 2.026 1.240 1.165 1.444
38.............................................. 2.024 1.236 1.165 1.439
39.............................................. 2.023 1.232 1.164 1.435
40.............................................. 2.021 1.228 1.164 1.430
[[Page 45619]]
41.............................................. 2.020 1.225 1.164 1.425
42.............................................. 2.018 1.222 1.163 1.421
43.............................................. 2.017 1.218 1.163 1.417
44.............................................. 2.015 1.215 1.163 1.413
45.............................................. 2.014 1.212 1.163 1.410
46.............................................. 2.013 1.210 1.162 1.406
47.............................................. 2.012 1.207 1.162 1.403
48.............................................. 2.011 1.204 1.162 1.399
49.............................................. 2.010 1.202 1.162 1.396
50.............................................. 2.009 1.199 1.161 1.393
51.............................................. 2.008 1.197 1.161 1.390
52.............................................. 2.007 1.195 1.161 1.387
53.............................................. 2.006 1.192 1.161 1.384
54.............................................. 2.005 1.190 1.161 1.381
55.............................................. 2.004 1.188 1.160 1.379
56.............................................. 2.003 1.186 1.160 1.376
57.............................................. 2.002 1.184 1.160 1.374
58.............................................. 2.002 1.182 1.160 1.371
59.............................................. 2.001 1.180 1.160 1.369
60.............................................. 2.000 1.179 1.160 1.367
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
References 16.8 (t values) and 16.9 (v df and u n, (values).
* * * * *
8. In Appendix B, by adding Performance Specification 16 to read as
follows:
Appendix B--Performance Specifications
* * * * *
Performance Specification 16--Specifications and Test Procedures for
Predictive Emission Monitoring Systems in Stationary Sources
1.0 Scope and Application
1.1 Does this performance specification apply to me? If you, the
source owner or operator, intend to use a predictive emission
monitoring system (PEMS) to show compliance with your emission
limitation(s), you must use the procedures in this performance
specification (PS) to determine whether your PEMS has acceptable
performance. Use these procedures to certify your PEMS after initial
installation and periodically thereafter to ensure the PEMS is
operating properly. Additional tests may be required by an applicable
regulation or by us, the reviewing authority. If your PEMS contains a
diluent (O2 or CO2) measuring component, this
must be tested as well.
1.1.1 How do I certify my PEMS after it is installed? We require
that a relative accuracy (RA) test and accompanying statistical tests
be passed in the initial certification test before your PEMS is
acceptable for use in demonstrating compliance with applicable
requirements. Ongoing quality assurance tests must be conducted to
ensure the PEMS is operating properly. An ongoing sensor evaluation
procedure must be in place before the PEMS certification is complete.
The amount of testing and data validation we require depends upon the
regulatory needs, i.e., whether precise quantification of emissions
will be needed or whether indication of exceedances of some regulatory
threshold will suffice. Performance criteria are more rigorous for
PEMSs that are used in market-based programs and for determining
continual compliance with an emission limit than those used to measure
excess emissions or indicate control device operation and maintenance
(O&M). You must perform the initial certification test on your PEMS
before reporting any PEMS data as quality-assured.
1.1.2 Is other testing required after certification? After you
initially certify your PEMS, you must pass additional periodic
performance checks to ensure the long-term quality of data. These
periodic checks are listed in the table in Section 9. You are always
responsible for maintaining and operating your PEMS properly.
2.0 Summary of Performance Specification
The following performance tests are required in addition to
equipment and measurement location requirements.
2.1 Initial PEMS Certification.
2.1.1 Operation and Maintenance PEMS. PEMS that are used for excess
emission reporting and as indicators of control device operation and
maintenance must perform a minimum 9-run, 3-level (3 runs at each
level) RA test (see Section 8.2).
2.1.2 Compliance and Market Trading PEMS. PEMS that are used for
continual compliance standards or in a market trading program must
perform a minimum 27-run, 3-level (9 runs at each level) comparison
test against the reference method (RM) (see Section 8.1.6). The data
are evaluated for bias and by F-test and correlation analysis.
2.2 Periodic Quality Assurance (QA) Assessments. All PEMSs are
required to conduct quarterly relative accuracy audits (RAA) and yearly
relative accuracy test audits (RATA) to assess ongoing PEMS operation.
3.0 Definitions
The following definitions apply:
3.1 Centroidal Area means that area in the center of the stack (or
duct) comprising no more than 1 percent of the stack cross-sectional
area and having the same geometric shape as the stack.
3.2 Data Recorder means the equipment that provides a permanent
record of the PEMS output. The data recorder may include automatic data
reduction capabilities and may include electronic data records, paper
records, or a combination of electronic data and paper records.
3.3 Defective sensor means a sensor that is responsible for PEMS
malfunction or that operates outside the approved operating envelope.
3.4 Diluent PEMS means the total equipment required to predict a
diluent gas concentration.
[[Page 45620]]
3.5 Operating envelope means the defined range of a parameter input
that is established during PEMS development. Emission data generated
from parameter inputs that are outside the operating envelope are not
considered quality assured and are therefore unacceptable.
3.6 PEMS means all of the equipment required to predict an emission
concentration or emission rate. The system may consist of any of the
following major subsystems: sensors and sensor interfaces, emission
model, algorithm, or equation that uses process data to generate an
output that is proportional to the emission concentration or emission
rate, diluent emission model, data recorder, and sensor evaluation
system. Simple relationships that use fewer than 3 variables may not be
acceptable as PEMS, and such systems must have the Administrator's
approval before use. A PEMS may or may not predict emissions data that
are corrected for diluent.
3.7 Reconciled Process Data means substitute data that are
generated by a sensor evaluation system to replace that of a failed
sensor.
3.8 Relative Accuracy means the accuracy of the PEMS when compared
to a RM at the source. The RA is the average difference between the
pollutant PEMS and RM data for a specified number of runs plus a 2.5
percent confidence coefficient, divided by the average of the RM tests
or the emission standard. For diluent PEMS, the RA may be expressed as
a percentage absolute difference between the PEMS and RM. Alternative
specifications may be given for low-emitting units.
3.9 Relative Accuracy Audit means a quarterly audit of the PEMS
against a portable analyzer meeting the requirements of ASTM D6522-00
or RM for a specified number of runs.
3.10 Relative Accuracy Test Audit means a RA test that is performed
at least once every four calendar quarters while the PEMS is operating
at the normal operating level. The RATA must not be conducted in
consecutive quarters.
3.11 Reference Value means a PEMS baseline value established by RM
testing under conditions when all sensors are functioning properly.
3.12 Sensor Evaluation System means the equipment or procedure used
to periodically assess the quality of sensor input data. This system
may be a sub-model that periodically cross-checks sensor inputs against
other inputs or any other procedure that checks sensor integrity at
least daily.
3.13 Sensors and Sensor Interface means the equipment that measures
the process input signals and transports them to the emission
prediction system.
4.0 Interferences [Reserved]
5.0 Safety [Reserved]
6.0 Equipment and Supplies
6.1 PEMS Design. You must define and make available details on the
design of your PEMS. You must also establish the following, as
applicable:
6.1.1 Number of Input Parameters. An acceptable PEMS will normally
use three or more input parameters. You must obtain our permission on a
case-by-case basis to use a PEMS having fewer than three input
parameters.
6.1.2 Parameter Operating Envelopes. Before you evaluate your PEMS
through the certification test, you must specify the input parameters
your PEMS uses, define their range of minimum and maximum values
(operating envelope), and demonstrate the integrity of the parameter
operating envelopes using graphs and data from the PEMS development
process. After the certification test, the PEMS must be operated within
these envelopes at all times for the system to be acceptable. If these
operating envelopes are not clearly defined, the PEMS operation will be
limited to the range of parameter inputs encountered during the
certification test until the PEMS has a new operating envelope
established.
6.1.3 Source-Specific Operating Conditions. Identify any source-
specific operating conditions, such as fuel type, that will affect the
output of your PEMS. You may only use your PEMS under the source-
specific operating conditions it was certified for.
6.1.4 Ambient Conditions. You must explain whether and how ambient
conditions and seasonal changes affect your PEMS. Some parameters such
as absolute ambient humidity cannot be manipulated during a test. The
effect of ambient conditions such as humidity on the pollutant
concentration must be determined and this effect extrapolated to
include future anticipated conditions. Seasonal changes and their
effects on the PEMS must be evaluated unless you can show that such
effects are negligible.
6.1.5 PEMS Principle of Operation. If your PEMS is developed on the
basis of known physical principles, you must identify the specific
physical assumptions or mathematical manipulations that support its
operation. If your PEMS is developed on the basis of linear or
nonlinear regression analysis, you must make available the paired data
(preferably in graphic form) used to develop or train the model.
6.1.6 Data Recorder Scale. If you are not using a digital recorder,
you must choose a recorder scale that accurately captures the desired
range of potential emissions. The lower limit of your data recorder's
range must be no greater than 20 percent of the applicable emission
standard (if subject to an emission standard). The upper limit of your
data recorder's range must be determined using the following table. If
you obtain approval first, you may use other lower and upper recorder
limits.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then your upper
If PEMS is measuring . . . And if . . . limit . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Uncontrolled emissions, such No regulation says Must be 1.25 to 2
as NOX at the stack of a otherwise. times the average
natural gas-fired boiler. potential emission
level.
Uncontrolled emissions, such A regulation says Must follow the
as NOX at the stack of a otherwise. other regulation.
natural gas-fired boiler.
Controlled emissions........ .................... Must be 1.5 to 2.0
times the
concentration of
the emission
standard that
applies to your
emission unit.
Continual compliance .................... Must be 1.1 to 1.5
emissions for an applicable times the
regulation. concentration of
the emission
standard that
applies to your
emission unit.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
6.1.7 Sensor Location and Repair. We recommend you install sensors
in an accessible location in order to perform repairs and replacements.
Permanently installed platforms or ladders may not be needed. If you
install sensors in an area which is not accessible, you may be required
to shut down the emissions unit to repair or replace a sensor. If
[[Page 45621]]
necessary after repairing or replacing a sensor, correct the process
data to match the data obtained from the originally tested sensor, or
conduct another RA test. All sensors must be calibrated as often as
needed but in no event less often than recommended by the manufacturers
be exceeded.
6.1.8 Sensor Evaluation System. Your PEMS must be designed to
perform automatic or manual determination of defective sensors on at
least a daily basis. This sensor evaluation system may consist of a
sensor validation sub-model, a comparison of redundant sensors, a spot
check of sensor input readings at a reference value, operation, or
emission level, or other procedure that detects faulty or failed
sensors. Some sensor evaluation systems generate substitute values
(reconciled data) that are used when a sensor is perceived to have
failed. You must have our prior approval before you use reconciled
data.
6.1.9 Parameter Envelope Exceedances. Your PEMS must include a plan
to detect and notify the operator of parameter envelope exceedances.
Emission data collected outside any of the operating ranges will not be
considered quality assured.
6.2 Recordkeeping. All valid data recorded by the PEMS must be used
to calculate the emission value. For a valid hourly average emission
value, each 15-minute quadrant of the hour in which the unit combusts
any fuel must contain at least one valid emission value.
7.0 Reagents and Standards [Reserved]
8.0 Sample Collection, Preservation, Storage, and Transport
8.1 Initial Certification. Use the following procedure to certify
your PEMS. Complete all PEMS training before the certification.
8.2 Relative Accuracy Test.
8.2.1 Reference Methods. Unless otherwise specified in the
applicable regulations, you must use the test methods in Appendix A of
this part for the RM test. Conduct the RM tests at three operating
levels of the key parameter that affects emissions, e.g., load level.
Conduct the specified number of RM tests at the low (minimum to 50
percent of maximum), normal, and high (80 percent to maximum) operating
levels as practicable.
8.2.2 Number of RM Tests for O&M PEMS. Conduct at least nine RM
tests at the following key parameter operating levels:
Three at a low level.
Three at the normal level.
Three at a high level.
You may choose to perform more than nine RM tests. If you perform
more than nine tests, you may reject a maximum of three tests as long
as the total number of test results used to determine the RA is greater
than or equal to nine and each operating level has at least three
tests. You must report all data, including the rejected data.
8.2.3 Number of RM Tests for Continual Compliance and Market-
Trading PEMS. Conduct at least 27 RM tests at the following key
parameter operating levels:
Nine at a low level.
Nine at the normal operating level.
Nine at a high level.
You may choose to perform more than 9 RM runs at each operating
level. If you perform more than 9 runs, you may reject a maximum of
three runs as long as the total number of runs used to determine the RA
at each operating level is greater than or equal to 9.
8.2.4 Reference Method Measurement Location. Select an accessible
measurement point for the RM that will ensure that you measure
emissions representatively. Ensure the location is at least two
equivalent stack diameters downstream and a half equivalent diameter
upstream from the nearest flow disturbance such as the control device,
point of pollutant generation, or other place where the pollutant
concentration or emission rate can change. You may use a half diameter
downstream instead of the two diameters if you meet both of the
following conditions:
Changes in the pollutant concentration are caused solely
by diluent leakage, such as leaks from air heaters.
You measure pollutants and diluents simultaneously at the
same location.
8.2.5 Traverse Points. Select traverse points that ensure you
obtain representative samples. Conduct all RM tests within 3 cm of each
selected traverse point but no closer than 3 cm to the stack or duct
wall. The minimum requirements for selecting traverse points are as
follows:
1. Establish a measurement line across the stack that passes
through the center and in the direction of any expected stratification.
2. Locate a minimum of three traverse points on the line at 16.7,
50.0, and 83.3 percent of the stack inside diameter.
3. If the stack inside diameter is greater than 2.4 meters, you may
locate the three traverse points on the line at 0.4, 1.2, and 2.0
meters from the stack or duct wall. You cannot use this option after
wet scrubbers or at points where two streams with different pollutant
concentrations are combined.
4. You may select a different traverse point if you demonstrate and
provide verification that it provides a representative sample.
If you desire to test at only one traverse point, use the following
procedure, or provide supporting information for alternative
procedures, to show that the single point yields representative
results.
1. Use Method 1 to establish the number and location of traverse
points that are normally used to sample the stack or duct.
2. Following the RM procedures, measure emissions at each traverse
point for a period of two minutes plus twice the response time of the
RM.
3. Determine the average of the emissions from all traverse points.
4. Choose the traverse point with emissions closest to the average
emissions from all points as the sampling location for the RM tests.
5. You may select a different traverse point if you can show that
it provides a representative sample.
8.2.6 Relative Accuracy Procedure. Perform the number of RA tests
at the levels required in Sections 8.2.2 and 8.2.3. For integrated
samples, e.g., Method 3A or 7E, make a sample traverse of at least 21
minutes, sampling for 7 minutes at each traverse point. For grab
samples, e.g., Method 3 or 7, take one sample at each traverse point,
scheduling the grab samples so that they are taken simultaneously
(within a 3-minute period) or at an equal interval of time apart over a
21-minute (or less) period. A test run for grab samples must be made up
of at least three separate measurements.
Where multiple fuels are used in the monitored unit and the fuel
type affects the predicted emissions, determine a RA for each fuel
unless the effects of the alternative fuel on predicted emissions or
diluent were addressed in the model training process. You may only use
fuels in your unit that have been evaluated this way.
8.2.4 Correlation of RM and PEMS Data. Mark the beginning and end
of each RM test run (including the exact time of day) on the permanent
record of PEMS output. Correlate the PEMS and the RM test data as to
the time and duration using the following steps:
A. Determine the integrated pollutant concentration for the PEMS
for each corresponding RM test period.
B. Consider system response time, if important, and confirm that
the pair of results are on a consistent moisture, temperature, and
diluent concentration basis.
[[Page 45622]]
C. Compare each average PEMS value to the corresponding average RM
value. Use the following guidelines to make these comparisons.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If . . . Then . . . And then . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The RM has an instrumental Directly compare RM
or integrated non- and PEMS results..
instrumental sampling
technique.
The RM has a grab sampling Average the results Compare this average
technique. from all grab RM result with the
samples taken PEMS result
during the test obtained during the
run. The test run run.
must include >= 3
separate grab
measurements.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
8.2.5 Relative Accuracy for O&M PEMS. Use the paired PEMS and RM
data and the equations in Section 12.2 to calculate the RA in the units
of the applicable emission standard. For this 3-level RA test,
calculate the RA at each operation level.
8.3 Statistical Tests for PEMS that are Used for Continual
Compliance or Market-Trading. In addition to the RA determination,
evaluate the paired RA and PEMS data using the following statistical
tests.
8.3.1 Bias Test. From the RA data taken at the normal operating
level, determine if a bias exists between the RM and PEMS. Use the
equations in Section 12.3.1.
8.3.2 F-test. Perform a separate F-test for the RA paired data from
each operating level to determine if the RM and PEMS variances differ
by more than might be expected from chance. Use the equations in
Section 12.3.2.
8.3.3 Correlation Analysis. Perform a correlation analysis on all
RA paired data from all operating levels, combined, to determine how
well the RM and PEMS correlate. Use the equations in Section 12.3.3.
If the process cannot be varied to produce a concentration change
sufficient for a successful correlation test because of its technical
design, the correlation analysis may be temporarily waived by the
Administrator if the emission concentration is less than 50 percent of
the applicable emission standard. Requests for waiver must be
accompanied by RM documentation of the emission concentration. The
waiver will be based on the measured value at the time of the waiver.
Should a subsequent RATA identify a change in the RM measured value by
more than 30 percent, the correlation analysis test must be repeated at
the next RATA.
8.3.4 Additional Statistical Tests. Consult the reviewing authority
with jurisdiction over your emissions unit for additional requirements.
8.4 Reporting. Summarize in tabular form the results of the RA and
statistical tests. Include all data sheets, calculations, and charts
(records of PEMS responses) necessary to verify your PEMS's meeting the
performance specifications. Include in the report the documentation
used to establish your PEMS parameter envelopes. Consult the EPA
regional office or permitting authority with jurisdiction over your
emissions unit for additional requirements.
8.5 Reevaluating Your PEMS After a Failed Test, Change in
Operations, or Change in Critical PEMS Parameter. After initial
certification, if a quarterly RAA or yearly RATA is failed due to a
problem with the PEMS, or if changes occur that result in a significant
change in the emission rate (e.g., turbine aging, process modification,
new process operating modes, or changes to emission controls), your
PEMS must be recertified using the tests and procedures in Section 8.1.
For example, if you initially operated the emissions unit at 80-100
percent of its range, you would have performed the initial test under
these conditions. Later, if you wanted to operate the emission unit at
50-100 percent of its range, you must conduct another RA test and
statistical tests, as applicable, under the new conditions of 50-100
percent of range. These tests must demonstrate that your PEMS provides
acceptable data when operating in the new range or with the new
critical PEMS parameter(s). The requirements of Section 8.1 must be
completed by the earlier of 60 unit operating days or 180 calendar days
after the failed RATA or after the change that caused a significant
change in emission rate.
9.0 Quality Control.
You must incorporate a QA plan beyond the initial PEMS
certification test to verify that your system is generating quality-
assured data. The QA plan must include the components of this section.
9.1 QA/QC Summary. Conduct the applicable ongoing tests listed
below.
Ongoing Quality Assurance Tests
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test PEMS Regulatory Purpose Acceptability Frequency
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sensor Evaluation Check.......... All...................... ........................ Daily.
RAA.............................. Compliance............... 3-test average <= 10% of Each quarter except
simultaneous PEMS quarter when RATA
average. performed.
RATA............................. All...................... Same as for RA in Sec. Yearly in quarter when
13.1. RAA not performed.
Bias Correction.................. All...................... If davg > [bond]cc[bond] Determine factor after
each RATA.
PEMS Training.................... All...................... If Fcritical >= F r >= After initial and
0.8. subsequent RATAs.
Sensor Evaluation Alert Test..... All...................... See Section 6.1.8....... After each PEMS
training.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9.2 Daily Sensor Evaluation Check. Your sensor evaluation system
must check the integrity of each PEMS input at least daily.
9.3 Quarterly Relative Accuracy Audit. Perform a RAA consisting of
at least three 30-minute portable analyzer determinations each quarter
a RATA is not performed.
9.4 Yearly Relative Accuracy Test Audit. Perform a minimum 9-run
RATA at the normal operating level on a yearly basis in the quarter
that the RAA is not preformed.
[[Page 45623]]
10.0 Calibration and Standardization [Reserved]
11.0 Analytical Procedure [Reserved]
12.0 Calculations and Data Analysis
12.1 Nomenclature.
B = PEMS bias adjustment factor.
cc = Confidence coefficient.
di = Difference between each RM and PEMS run.
d = Arithmetic mean of differences for all runs.
ei = Individual measurement provided by the PEMS or RM
at a particular level.
em = Mean of the PEMS or RM measurements at a particular
level.
ep = Individual measurement provided by the PEMS.
ev = Individual measurement provided by the RM.
F = Calculated F-value.
n = Number of RM runs.
PEMSi = Individual measurement provided by the PEMS.
PEMSiAdjusted = Individual measurement provided by the
PEMS adjusted for bias.
PEMS = Mean of the values provided by the PEMS at the normal
operating range during the bias test.
r = coefficient of correlation.
RA = Relative accuracy.
RM = Average RM value. In cases where the average emissions for the
test are less than 50 percent of the applicable standard, substitute
the emission standard value here in place of the average RM value.
Sd = Standard deviation of differences.
S2 = variance of your PEMS or RM.
t0.025 = t-value for a one-sided, 97.5 percent
confidence interval (see Table 16-1).
12.2 Relative Accuracy Calculations. Calculate the mean of the RM
values. Calculate the differences between the pairs of observations for
the RM and the PEMS output sets. Finally, calculate the mean of the
differences, standard deviation, confidence coefficient, and PEMS RA,
using Equations 16-1, 16-2, 16-3, and 16-4, respectively. For
compliance and market-trading PEMS, calculate the RA at each operating
level. The PEMS must pass the RA criterion at each operating level.
12.2.1 Arithmetic Mean. Calculate the arithmetic mean of the
differences between paired RM and PEMS observations using Equation 16-
1.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.081
12.2.2 Standard Deviation. Calculate the standard deviation of the
differences using Equation 16-2 (positive square root).
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.082
12.2.3 Confidence Coefficient. Calculate the confidence coefficient
using Equation 16-3 and Table 16-1.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.083
12.2.4 Relative Accuracy. Calculate the RA of your data using
Equation 16-4.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.084
12.3 Compliance and Market-Trading PEMS Statistical Tests. If your
PEMS will be used for continual compliance or market-trading purposes,
conduct the following tests using the information obtained during the
RA tests. For the pollutant measurements at any one test level, if the
mean value of the RM is less than either 10 ppm or 5 percent of the
emission standard, all statistical tests are waived at that specific
test level. For diluent measurements at any one test level, if the mean
value of the RM is less than 3 percent of span, all statistical tests
are waived for that specific test level.
12.3.1 Bias Test. Conduct a bias test to determine if your PEMS is
biased relative to the RM. Determine the PEMS bias by comparing the
confidence coefficient obtained from Equation 16-3 to the arithmetic
mean of the differences determined in Equation 16-1. If the arithmetic
mean of the differences d is greater than the absolute value of the
confidence coefficient (cc), your PEMS must incorporate a bias factor
to adjust future PEMS values as in Equation 16-5.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.085
Where:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.086
12.3.2 F-test. Conduct an F-test for each of the three RA data sets
collected at different parameter operating levels. Calculate the
variances of the PEMS and the RM using Equation 16-6.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.087
Determine if the variance of the PEMS data is significantly
different from that of the RM data at each level by calculating the F-
value using Equation 16-7.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.088
Compare the calculated F-value with the critical value of F at the
95 percent confidence level with n-1 degrees of freedom. The critical
value is obtained from Table 16-2 or a similar table for F-
distribution. If the calculated F-value is greater than the critical
value at any level, your proposed PEMS is unacceptable.
For pollutant PEMS measurements, if the standard deviation of the
RM is less than either 3 percent of the span or 5 ppm, use a RM
standard deviation of either 5 ppm or 3 percent of span. For diluent
PEMS measurements, if the standard deviation of the reference method is
less than 3 percent of span, use a RM standard deviation of 3 percent
of span.
12.3.3 Correlation Analysis. Calculate the correlation coefficient
either manually using Eq. 16-8, on a graph, or by computer using all of
the paired data points from all operating levels. Your PEMS correlation
must be 0.8 or greater to be acceptable.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.089
[[Page 45624]]
13.0 Method Performance.
13.1 PEMS Relative Accuracy. See the relevant regulation for the
applicable RA criterion. For PEMS installed to meet New Source
Performance Standards, the RA of your PEMS must be no greater than 10
percent when based upon the average RM data (which must be measured in
the units of your emission standard). For emissions below 25 percent of
the emission standard, 20 percent RA based upon the emission standard
may be used. For emissions below 10 percent of the emission standard,
average PEMS measurements within 2 ppm of the RM mean value constitutes
an acceptable RA test. For diluent PEMS, an alternative criterion of
1 percent absolute difference between the PEMS and RM may
be used if less stringent.
13.2 PEMS Bias. Your PEMS data is considered biased and must be
adjusted if the arithmetic mean (d) is greater than the absolute value
of the confidence coefficient (cc) in Equations 16.1 and 16.3. In such
cases, a bias factor must be used to correct your PEMS data.
13.3 PEMS Variance. Your calculated F-value must not be greater
than the critical F-value at the 95-percent confidence level for your
PEMS to be acceptable.
13.4 PEMS Correlation. Your calculated r-value must be greater than
or equal to 0.8 for your PEMS to be acceptable.
14.0 Pollution Prevention. [Reserved]
15.0 Waste Management. [Reserved]
16.0 References. [Reserved]
17.0 Tables, Diagrams, Flowcharts, and Validation Data
Table 16-1.--t-Values for One-sided, 97.5 Percent Confidence Intervals
for Selected Sample Sizes[dagger]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
n-1 t0.025
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.......................................................... 12.706
3.......................................................... 4.303
4.......................................................... 3.182
5.......................................................... 2.776
6.......................................................... 2.571
7.......................................................... 2.447
8.......................................................... 2.365
9.......................................................... 2.306
10......................................................... 2.262
11......................................................... 2.228
12......................................................... 2.201
13......................................................... 2.179
14......................................................... 2.160
15......................................................... 2.145
16......................................................... 2.131
17......................................................... 2.120
18......................................................... 2.110
19......................................................... 2.101
20......................................................... 2.093
21......................................................... 2.086
22......................................................... 2.080
23......................................................... 2.074
24......................................................... 2.069
25......................................................... 2.064
26......................................................... 2.060
27......................................................... 2.056
28......................................................... 2.052
>29........................................................ t-Table
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[dagger](Use n equal to the number of data points (n-1 equals the
degrees of freedom).
Table 16-2.--F-Values for Critical Value of F at the 95 Percent Confidence Level
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
d.f. for S\2\PEMS
d.f. for S\2\RM -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1....................................................... 161.4 199.5 215.7 224.6 230.2 234.0 236.8 238.9 240.5 241.8 243.0 243.9
2....................................................... 18.51 19.00 19.16 19.25 19.30 19.33 19.35 19.37 19.38 19.50 19.40 19.41
3....................................................... 10.13 9.552 9.277 9.117 9.014 8.941 8.887 8.845 8.812 8.786 8.763 8.745
4....................................................... 7.709 6.944 6.591 6.388 6.256 6.163 6.094 6.041 5.999 5.964 5.935 5.912
5....................................................... 6.608 5.786 5.410 5.192 5.050 4.950 4.876 4.818 4.773 4.735 4.703 4.678
6....................................................... 5.987 5.143 4.757 4.534 4.387 4.284 4.207 4.147 4.099 4.060 4.027 4.000
7....................................................... 5.591 4.734 4.347 4.120 3.971 3.866 3.787 3.726 3.677 3.637 3.603 3.575
8....................................................... 5.318 4.459 4.066 3.838 3.688 3.581 3.501 3.438 3.388 3.347 3.312 3.284
9....................................................... 5.117 4.257 3.863 3.633 3.482 3.374 3.293 3.230 3.197 3.137 3.102 3.073
10...................................................... 4.965 4.103 3.709 3.478 3.326 3.217 3.136 3.072 3.020 2.978 2.942 2.913
11...................................................... 4.844 3.982 3.587 3.357 3.204 3.095 3.012 2.948 2.896 2.854 2.817 2.788
12...................................................... 4.747 3.885 3.490 3.259 3.106 2.996 2.913 2.849 2.796 2.753 2.717 2.687
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Appendix F--[Amended]
9. In Procedure 1 of Appendix F, by revising paragraph (3) of
Section 5.1.2 and Section 8 as follows:
Procedure 1. Quality Assurance Requirements for Gas Continuous Emission
Monitoring Systems Used for Compliance Determination
* * * * *
5.1.2 Cylinder Gas Audit (CGA).
* * * * *
(3) Use Certified Reference Materials (CRM's) (See Citation 1)
audit gases that have been certified by comparison to National
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) or EPA Traceability
Protocol Materials (ETPM's) following the most recent edition of EPA's
Traceability Protocol No. 1 (See Citation 2). Procedures for
preparation of CRM's are described in Citation 1. Procedures for
preparation of ETPM's are described in Citation 2. As an alternative to
CRM's or ETPM gases, Method 205 (See Citation 3) may be used.
The difference between the actual concentration of the audit gas
and the concentration indicated by the monitor is used to assess the
accuracy of the CEMS.
* * * * *
8. Bibliography
1. ``A Procedure for Establishing Traceability of Gas Mixtures to
Certain National Bureau of Standards Standard Reference Materials.''
Joint publication by NBS and EPA-600/7-81-010, Revised 1989. Available
from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Quality Assurance
Division (MD-77). Research Triangle Park, NC 27711.
2. ``EPA Traceability Protocol For Assay And Certification Of
Gaseous Calibration Standards.'' EPA-600/R-97/121, September 1997.
Available from EPA's Emission Measurement Center at www.epa.gov/ttn/emc.
3. Method 205, ``Verification of Gas Dilution Systems for Field
Instrument Calibrations,'' 40 CFR 51, Appendix M.
* * * * *
10. In Procedure 2, by revising Section 10.1, paragraph (3) of
Section
[[Page 45625]]
10.4, paragraph (2) of Section 12.0 as follows:
Procedure 2--Quality Assurance Requirements for Particulate Matter
Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems at Stationary Sources
* * * * *
10.1 When should I use paired trains for reference method testing?
Although not required, we recommend that you should use paired-train
reference method testing to generate data used to develop your PM CEMS
correlation and for RCA testing. Guidance on the use of paired sampling
trains can be found in the PM CEMS Knowledge Document (see section 16.5
of PS-11).
* * * * *
10.4 What are my limits for excessive audit inaccuracy?
* * * * *
(3) What are the criteria for excessive ACA error? Your PM CEMS is
out of control if the results of any ACA exceed 10 percent
of the average audit value, as calculated using Equation 2-1a, or 7.5
percent of the applicable standard, as calculated using Equation 2-1b,
whichever is greater.
* * * * *
12.0 What calculations and data analysis must I perform for my PM
CEMS?
* * * * *
(2) How do I calculate ACA accuracy? You must use either Equation
2-1a or 2-1b to calculate ACA accuracy for each of the three audit
points. However, when calculating ACA accuracy for the first audit
point (0 to 20 percent of measurement range), you must use Equation 2-
1b to calculate ACA accuracy if the reference standard value
(Rv) equals zero.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.090
Where:
ACA Accuracy=The ACA accuracy at each audit point, in percent,
RCEM = Your PM CEMS response to the reference standard, and
RV = The reference standard value.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP08AU05.091
Where:
ACA Accuracy = The ACA accuracy at each audit point, in percent,
CCEM = The PM concentration that corresponds to your PM CEMS
response to the reference standard, as calculated using the correlation
equation for your PM CEMS,
CRV = The PM concentration that corresponds to the reference
standard value in units consistent with CCEM, and
Cs = The PM concentration that corresponds to the applicable
emission limit in units consistent with CCEM.
* * * * *
11. The authority citation for Part 63 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
PART 63--NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS
FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES
12. In Method 303 of Appendix A, by adding the following sentence
to Section 1.1:
Appendix A to Part 63--Test Methods
* * * * *
Method 303--Determination of Visible Emissions From By-Product Coke
Oven Batteries
* * * * *
1.0 Scope and Application
1.1 Applicability. * * * In order for the test method results to be
indicative of plant performance, the time of day of the run should
vary.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 05-15330 Filed 8-5-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P