[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 152 (Tuesday, August 8, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 40295-40297]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-19527]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 75
[FRL-5274-5]
Acid Rain Program: Continuous Emission Monitoring
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of removal of provisions of direct final rule and
extended public comment period.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On May 17, 1995, EPA published direct final amendments to the
Continuous Emission Monitoring (CEM) rule in the Acid Rain Program for
the purpose of making implementation of the program simpler,
streamlined, and more efficient. The amendments to the original January
11, 1993 rule became final and effective on July 17, 1995. During the
public comment period on the direct final rule and its companion
proposed rule, EPA received significant, adverse comments on those
amended provisions that related to alternative monitoring systems and
opacity monitoring for a bypass stack. EPA is removing those amended
provisions in the direct final rule and republishing the corresponding
provisions from the original January 11, 1993 rule. EPA will address
the removed, amended provisions in a future final rule. EPA is also
extending the public comment period on the removed, amended provisions
for 15 days to allow the public to respond to the significant, adverse
comments. All other provisions of the direct final rule remain final.
DATES: Comment date: Comments in response to the significant, adverse
comments on the direct final rule must be received on or before August
23, 1995.
Effective date: The effective date of the republished provisions
from the original January 11, 1993 rule is September 7, 1995.
ADDRESSES: Any written comments in response to the significant, adverse
comments on the direct final rule must be identified as being in
response to such comments in Docket No. A-94-16 and must be submitted
in duplicate to: EPA Air Docket (6102), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 401 M Street SW., Washington, DC 20460. The docket is available
for public inspection and copying between 8:30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, at the above address. A reasonable fee may be
charged for copying.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Margaret Sheppard, Acid Rain Division
(6204J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20460, (202) 233-9180.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA received significant, adverse comments
on certain provisions of the direct final rule amending part 75 from
Pavilion Technologies, Inc. The comments are found in Docket No. A-94-
16, item V-D-03. Pavilion Technologies, Inc. made significant, adverse
comments on the following amended provisions: 75.20(f); 75.41(a)(1),
(b)(1)(i), (b)(2)(iv)(A) and (C), (c)(1)(i) and (ii), and (c)(2)(ii);
75.47; and 75.48(a) introductory text, (a)(1), (b), and (c). Therefore,
those amended provisions in the direct final rule are being removed and
the corresponding provisions in the original January 11, 1993 rule will
be effective until EPA addresses the comments in a future final rule.
The Agency notes that, although the commenter requested withdrawal
of all direct final amendments pertaining to alternative monitoring
systems, the commenter also indicated that it supported the amendment
of Sec. 72.20(f)(2) providing for provisional certification of an
alternative monitoring system after the system has been approved by the
Administrator. However, the commenter objected to the public notice and
comment procedure that the direct final rule requires prior to such
approval. The direct final rule allows for provisional certification
because the alternative monitoring system has already undergone public
notice and comment and EPA review. See Docket No. A-94-16, item II-F-2.
Consequently, EPA is removing all of the interrelated direct final
provisions.
EPA also received one significant, adverse comment on the direct
final rule provision, Sec. 75.18(b)(3), from Monitor Labs, Inc. The
comment is found in Docket No. A-94-16, item V-D-18 (comment 4).
Monitor Labs, Inc. objected to the provision allowing the use of a
noncontinuous monitoring method (i.e., Method 9 of appendix A of part
60), in lieu of a continuous opacity monitoring system, for bypass
stacks. EPA is therefore removing the direct final provision at
Sec. 75.18(b)(3). The
[[Page 40296]]
remaining provisions in the direct final Sec. 75.18(b) remain in
effect.
No other significant, adverse comments were received by EPA on the
direct final rule. Thus, all other provisions of the direct final rule
became final on July 17, 1995 and remain in effect.
EPA is merely reinstating a few provisions of the original January
11, 1993 rule pending response to adverse comments on proposed
amendments of those provisions. The requirements of Executive Orders
12866 and 12875, the Regulatory Flexibility Act, the Unfunded Mandates
Act, and the Paperwork Reduction Act are therefore not applicable to
this notice. All applicable administrative requirements will be met
when the proposed amendments are addressed in a future final rule.
For additional information, see the direct final rule. 60 FR 26510
(May 17, 1995).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 75
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon dioxide,
Continuous emission monitors, Electric utilities, Incorporation by
reference, Nitrogen oxides, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Sulfur dioxide.
Dated: August 2, 1995.
Brian J. McLean,
Director, Acid Rain Division.
1. The authority citation for part 75 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7601 and 7651, et seq.
2. Section 75.18 is amended by removing paragraph (b)(3) and by
revising paragraph (b)(2) to read as follows:
Sec. 75.18 Specific provisions for monitoring emissions from common
and by-pass stacks for opacity.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) A continuous opacity monitoring system is already installed and
certified at the inlet of the add-on emissions controls.
3. Section 75.20 is amended by revising paragraph (f) to read as
follows:
Sec. 75.20 Certification and recertification procedures.
* * * * *
(f) Certification/recertification procedures for alternative
monitoring systems. The designated representative representing the
owner or operator of each alternative monitoring system approved by the
Administrator as equivalent to or better than a continuous emission
monitoring system according to the criteria in subpart E of this part
shall apply for certification to the Administrator prior to use of the
system under the Acid Rain Program, and shall apply for recertification
to the Administrator following a replacement, modification, or change
according to the procedures in paragraph (c) of this section. The owner
or operator of an alternative monitoring system shall comply with the
notification and application requirements for certification or
recertification according to the procedures specified in paragraphs (a)
and (b) of this section.
(1) The Administrator will publish each request for initial
certification of an alternative monitoring system in the Federal
Register and, following a public comment period of 60 days, will issue
a notice of approval or disapproval.
(2) No alternative monitoring system shall be authorized by the
Administrator in a permit issued pursuant to part 72 of this chapter
unless approved by the Administrator in accordance with this part.
4. Section 75.41 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1),
(b)(1)(i), (b)(2)(iv)(A), (b)(2)(iv)(C), (c)(1)(i), (c)(1)(ii), and
(c)(2)(ii) to read as follows:
Sec. 75.41 Precision criteria.
(a) * * *
(1) Data from the alternative monitoring system and the continuous
emission monitoring system shall be collected and paired in a manner
that ensures each pair of values applies to hourly average emissions
during the same hour.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) Apply the log transformation to each measured value of either
the certified continuous emissions monitoring system or certified flow
monitor, using the following equation:
lv=ln ev
(Eq. 11)
where,
ev=Hourly value generated by the certified continuous emissions
monitoring system or certified flow monitoring system
lv=Hourly lognormalized data values for the certified monitoring
system
and to each measured value, ep, of the proposed alternative
monitoring system, using the following equation to obtain the
lognormalized data values, lp:
lp=ln ep
(Eq. 12)
where,
ep=Hourly value generated by the proposed alternative monitoring
system.
lp=Hourly lognormalized data values for the proposed alternative
monitoring system.
* * * * *
(2) * * *
(iv) * * *
(A) The set of measured hourly values, ev, generated by the
certified continuous emissions monitoring system or certified flow
monitoring system.
* * * * *
(C) The set of hourly differences, ev-ep, between the
hourly values, ev, generated by the certified continuous emissions
monitoring system or certified flow monitoring system and the hourly
values, ep, generated by the proposed alternative monitoring
system.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) Calculate the variance of the certified continuous emission
monitoring system or certified flow monitor as applicable,
Sv2, and the proposed method, Sp2, using the
following equation.
[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TR08AU95.064
(Eq. 23)
where,
ei=Measured values of either the certified continuous emission
monitoring system or certified flow monitor, as applicable, or proposed
method.
em=Mean of either the certified continuous emission monitoring
system or certified flow monitor, as applicable, or proposed method
values.
n=Total number of paired samples.
(ii) Determine if the variance of the proposed method is
significantly different from that of the certified continuous emission
monitoring system or certified flow monitor, as applicable, by
calculating the F-value using the following equation.
[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TR08AU95.065
(Eq. 24)
Compare the experimental 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 a table for F-distribution. If the calculated F-
value is greater than the critical value, the proposed method is
unacceptable.
(2) * * *
[[Page 40297]]
(ii) Use the following equation to calculate the coefficient of
correlation, r, between the emissions data from the alternative
monitoring system and the continuous emission monitoring system using
all hourly data for which paired values were available from both
monitoring systems.
[GRAPHIC][TIFF OMITTED]TR08AU95.066
(Eq. 27)
* * * * *
5. Section 75.47 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 75.47 Criteria for a class of affected units.
(a) The owner or operator of an affected unit may represent a class
of affected units for the purpose of applying to the Administrator for
a class-approved alternative monitoring system.
(b) The owner or operator of an affected unit representing a class
of affected units shall provide the following information:
(1) A description of the affected unit and how it appropriately
represents the class of affected units;
(2) A description of the class of affected units, including data
describing all the affected units which will comprise the class; and
(3) A demonstration that the magnitude of emissions of all units
which will comprise the class of affected units are de minimis.
(c) If the Administrator determines that the emissions from all
affected units which will comprise the class of units are de minimis,
then the Administrator shall publish notice in the Federal Register,
providing a 30-day period for public comment, prior to granting a
class-approved alternative monitoring system.
6. Section 75.48 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 75.48 Petition for an alternative monitoring system.
(a) The designated representative shall submit the following
information in the application for certification or recertification of
an alternative monitoring system.
(1) Source identification information.
(2) A description of the alternative monitoring system.
(3) Data, calculations, and results of the statistical tests,
specified in Sec. 75.41(c) of this part, including:
(i) Date and hour.
(ii) Hourly test data for the alternative monitoring system at each
required operating level and fuel type.
(iii) Hourly test data for the continuous emissions monitoring
system at each required operating level and fuel type.
(iv) Arithmetic mean of the alternative monitoring system
measurement values, as specified in Equation 24 in Sec. 75.41(c) of
this part, of the continuous emission monitoring system values, as
specified on Equation 25 in Sec. 75.41(c) of this part, and of their
differences.
(v) Standard deviation of the difference, as specified in Equation
A-8 in appendix A of this part.
(vi) Confidence coefficient, as specified in Equation A-9 in
appendix A of this part.
(vii) The bias test results as specified in Sec. 7.6.4 in appendix
A of this part.
(viii) Variance of the measured values for the alternative
monitoring system and of the measured values for the continuous
emissions monitoring system, as specified in Equation 22 in
Sec. 75.41(c) of this part.
(ix) F-statistic, as specified in Equation 23 in Sec. 75.41(c) of
this part.
(x) Critical value of F at the 95-percent confidence level with n-1
degrees of freedom.
(xi) Coefficient of correlation, r, as specified in Equation 26 in
Sec. 75.41(c) of this part.
(4) Data plots, specified in Secs. 75.41(a)(9) and 75.41(c)(2)(i)
of this part.
(5) Results of monitor reliability analysis.
(6) Results of monitor accessibility analysis.
(7) Results of monitor timeliness analysis.
(8) A detailed description of the process used to collect data,
including location and method of ensuring an accurate assessment of
operating hourly conditions on a real-time basis.
(9) A detailed description of the operation, maintenance, and
quality assurance procedures for the alternative monitoring system as
required in appendix B of this part.
(10) A description of methods used to calculate heat input or
diluent gas concentration, if applicable.
(11) Results of tests and measurements (including the results of
all reference method field test sheets, charts, laboratory analyses,
example calculations, or other data as appropriate) necessary to
substantiate that the alternative monitoring system is equivalent in
performance to an appropriate, certified operating continuous emission
monitoring system.
[FR Doc. 95-19527 Filed 8-7-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P