81 FR 83189 - Revisions to Procedure 2-Quality Assurance Requirements for Particulate Matter Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems at Stationary Sources

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 224 (November 21, 2016)

Page Range		83189-83190
FR Document		2016-27847

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing revisions to a procedure in the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS). The procedure provides the ongoing quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) procedures for assessing the acceptability of particulate matter (PM) continuous emissions monitoring systems (CEMS). The procedure explains the criteria for passing an annual response correlation audit (RCA) and the criteria for passing an annual relative response audit (RRA). The procedure currently contains a requirement that the annual QA/QC test results for affected facilities must fall within the same response range as was used to develop the existing PM CEMS correlation curve. As a result, some facilities are unable to meet the criteria for passing their annual QA/QC test simply because their emissions are now lower than the range previously set during correlation testing. We are proposing to modify the procedure to allow facilities to extend their PM CEMS correlation regression line to the lowest PM CEMS response obtained during the RCA or RRA, when these PM CEMS responses are less than the lowest response used to develop the existing correlation curve. We also propose to correct a typographical error in the procedure.

Federal Register, Volume 81 Issue 224 (Monday, November 21, 2016)

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 224 (Monday, November 21, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 83189-83190]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2016-27847]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 60

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0382; FRL-9955-21-OAR]
RIN 2060-AT15


Revisions to Procedure 2--Quality Assurance Requirements for 
Particulate Matter Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems at Stationary 
Sources

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing 
revisions to a procedure in the New Source Performance Standards 
(NSPS). The procedure provides the ongoing quality assurance/quality 
control (QA/QC) procedures for assessing the acceptability of 
particulate matter (PM) continuous emissions monitoring systems (CEMS). 
The procedure explains the criteria for passing an annual response 
correlation audit (RCA) and the criteria for passing an annual relative 
response audit (RRA). The procedure currently contains a requirement 
that the annual QA/QC test results for affected facilities must fall 
within the same response range as was used to develop the existing PM 
CEMS correlation curve. As a result, some facilities are unable to meet 
the criteria for passing their annual QA/QC test simply because their 
emissions are now lower than the range previously set during 
correlation testing. We are proposing to modify the procedure to allow 
facilities to extend their PM CEMS correlation regression line to the 
lowest PM CEMS response obtained during the RCA or RRA, when these PM 
CEMS responses are less than the lowest response used to develop the 
existing correlation curve. We also propose to correct a typographical 
error in the procedure.

DATES: Written comments must be received by December 21, 2016.
    Public Hearing. If anyone contacts the EPA by December 1, 2016 
requesting to speak at a public hearing on this action, the EPA will 
consider holding a public hearing on December 21, 2016 at the EPA 
facility in Research Triangle Park. Please check the EPA's Web page at 
https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/emc/proposed.html on December 12, 2016 for the 
announcement of whether a hearing will be held. To request a public 
hearing and present oral testimony at the hearing, please contact on or 
before December 1, 2016, the person listed in the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document. If a hearing is held, the 
hearing schedule, including the list of speakers, will be posted on the 
EPA's Web page at https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/emc/proposed.html.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2016-0382, at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot 
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any 
comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any 
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) 
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a 
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment 
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA 
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located 
outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the Web, Cloud, or other 
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA 
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, 
and general guidance on

[[Page 83190]]

making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Kimberly Garnett, U.S. EPA, Office 
of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Air Quality Assessment Division, 
Measurement Technology Group (E143-02), Research Triangle Park, NC 
27711; telephone number: (919) 541-1158; fax number: (919) 541- 0516; 
email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is 
proposing revisions to a procedure in the New Source Performance 
Standards (NSPS). We also propose to correct a typographical error in 
the introduction to Paragraph (6) of section 10.4 of Procedure 2. 
Without this revision, paragraph (6)(iii) would remain unused in 
Procedure 2. This typographical correction is necessary to fulfill the 
intent of Procedure 2, section 10.4(6), when promulgated. See 69 FR 
1786.

I. Why is the EPA issuing this proposed rule?

    The EPA proposes a revision to Procedure 2, sections 10.4(5)and 
(6), to allow facilities that have reduced their emissions since 
completing their PM CEMS correlation testing to extend their 
correlation regression line to the point corresponding to the lowest PM 
CEMS response obtained during the RCA or RRA. This extended correlation 
regression line will be used to determine if results of this RCA or RRA 
meet the criteria specified in Section 10.4, paragraphs (5) and (6) of 
Procedure 2, respectively. This change will ensure that facilities that 
have reduced their emissions since completing their correlation testing 
will no longer be penalized because their lower emissions fall outside 
their initial response range. This action also proposes to correct a 
typographical error in the introduction to section 10.4, paragraph (6) 
of Procedure 2. Paragraph (6), which originally read, ``To pass an RRA, 
you must meet the criteria specified in paragraphs (6)(i) and (ii) . . 
.'', is being corrected to read: ``To pass an RRA, you must meet the 
criteria specified in paragraphs (6)(i) through (iii) . . .'' Without 
this revision, paragraph (6)(iii) would remain unused in Procedure 2. 
This typographical correction is necessary to fulfill the intent of 
Procedure 2, section 10.4(6), when promulgated in 69 FR 1786. We have 
published a direct final rule approving the revisions to Procedure 2 in 
the ``Rules and Regulations'' section of this Federal Register 
publication because we view this as a non-controversial action and 
anticipate no adverse comment. We have explained our reasons for this 
action in the preamble of the direct final rule.
    If we receive no adverse comment, we will not take further action 
on this proposed rule. If the EPA receives adverse comment, we will 
publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the 
public that the direct final rule will not take effect. In that case, 
we would address all public comments in any subsequent final rule based 
on this proposed rule.
    We do not intend to institute a second comment period on this 
action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time. 
For further information about commenting on this rule, please see the 
information provided in the ADDRESSES section of this document.
    The regulatory text for the proposal is identical to that for the 
direct final rule published in the ``Rules and Regulations'' section of 
this Federal Register publication. For further supplementary 
information, the detailed rationale for the proposal and the regulatory 
revisions, see the direct final rule published in a separate part of 
this Federal Register publication.

II. Does this action apply to me?

    The entities potentially affected by this rule include any facility 
that is required to install and operate a PM CEMS under any provision 
of title 40 of the CFR. If you have any questions regarding the 
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person 
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Air pollution control, Continuous emission monitoring systems, 
Particulate matter, Procedures.

    Dated: November 8, 2016.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2016-27847 Filed 11-18-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 224 / Monday, November 21, 2016 / Proposed Rules 83189

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act J. Executive Order 12898: Federal within the same response range as was
(UMRA) Actions To Address Environmental used to develop the existing PM CEMS
Justice in Minority Populations and correlation curve. As a result, some
This action does not contain any
Low-Income Populations facilities are unable to meet the criteria
unfunded mandate as described in
The EPA believes the human health or for passing their annual QA/QC test
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does
environmental risk addressed by this simply because their emissions are now
not significantly or uniquely affect small
lower than the range previously set
governments. The action imposes no action will not have potential
during correlation testing. We are
enforceable duty on any state, local or disproportionately high and adverse
proposing to modify the procedure to
tribal governments or the private sector. human health or environmental effects
allow facilities to extend their PM
This action merely proposes to approve on minority, low-income or indigenous
CEMS correlation regression line to the
i-SIP provisions that are consistent with populations. This action merely
lowest PM CEMS response obtained
the CAA and disapprove i-SIP proposes to approve i-SIP provisions
during the RCA or RRA, when these PM
provisions that are inconsistent with the that are consistent with the CAA and
CEMS responses are less than the lowest
CAA; and therefore will have no impact disapprove i-SIP provisions that are
response used to develop the existing
on small governments. inconsistent with the CAA.
correlation curve. We also propose to
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 correct a typographical error in the
procedure.
This action does not have federalism Environmental protection, Air
implications. It will not have substantial pollution control, Incorporation by DATES: Written comments must be
direct effects on the states, on the reference, Intergovernmental relations, received by December 21, 2016.
relationship between the national Interstate transport of pollution, Public Hearing. If anyone contacts the
government and the states, or on the Particulate matter, Reporting and EPA by December 1, 2016 requesting to
distribution of power and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur speak at a public hearing on this action,
responsibilities among the various oxides. the EPA will consider holding a public
levels of government. hearing on December 21, 2016 at the
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
EPA facility in Research Triangle Park.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation Dated: November 15, 2016. Please check the EPA’s Web page at
and Coordination With Indian Tribal Ron Curry, https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/emc/
Governments Regional Administrator, Region 6. proposed.html on December 12, 2016
This action does not have tribal [FR Doc. 2016–27924 Filed 11–18–16; 8:45 am] for the announcement of whether a
implications as specified in Executive BILLING CODE 6560–50–P hearing will be held. To request a public
Order 13175. This action does not apply hearing and present oral testimony at
on any Indian reservation land, any the hearing, please contact on or before
other area where EPA or an Indian tribe ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION December 1, 2016, the person listed in
has demonstrated that a tribe has AGENCY the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
jurisdiction, or non-reservation areas of section of this document. If a hearing is
Indian country. Thus, Executive Order 40 CFR Part 60 held, the hearing schedule, including
13175 does not apply to this action. [EPA–HQ–OAR–2016–0382; FRL–9955–21– the list of speakers, will be posted on
OAR] the EPA’s Web page at https://
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of www3.epa.gov/ttn/emc/proposed.html.
Children From Environmental Health RIN 2060–AT15 ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
Risks and Safety Risks identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
Revisions to Procedure 2—Quality
EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 OAR–2016–0382, at http://
Assurance Requirements for
as applying only to those regulatory www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
Particulate Matter Continuous
actions that concern environmental instructions for submitting comments.
Emission Monitoring Systems at
health or safety risks that the EPA has Once submitted, comments cannot be
Stationary Sources
reason to believe may edited or removed from Regulations.gov.
disproportionately affect children, per AGENCY: Environmental Protection The EPA may publish any comment
the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory Agency (EPA). received to its public docket. Do not
action’’ in section 2–202 of the ACTION: Proposed rule. submit electronically any information
Executive Order. This action is not you consider to be Confidential
subject to Executive Order 13045 SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Business Information (CBI) or other
because it merely proposes to Agency (EPA) is proposing revisions to information whose disclosure is
disapprove a SIP submission as not a procedure in the New Source restricted by statute. Multimedia
meeting the CAA. Performance Standards (NSPS). The submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
procedure provides the ongoing quality accompanied by a written comment.
H. Executive Order 13211, Actions That assurance/quality control (QA/QC) The written comment is considered the
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, procedures for assessing the official comment and should include
Distribution or Use acceptability of particulate matter (PM) discussion of all points you wish to
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

This action is not subject to Executive continuous emissions monitoring make. The EPA will generally not
Order 13211, because it is not a systems (CEMS). The procedure consider comments or comment
significant regulatory action under explains the criteria for passing an contents located outside of the primary
Executive Order 12866. annual response correlation audit (RCA) submission (i.e., on the Web, Cloud, or
and the criteria for passing an annual other file sharing system). For
I. National Technology Transfer and
relative response audit (RRA). The additional submission methods, the full
Advancement Act
procedure currently contains a EPA public comment policy,
This rulemaking does not involve requirement that the annual QA/QC test information about CBI or multimedia
technical standards. results for affected facilities must fall submissions, and general guidance on

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:51 Nov 18, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21NOP1.SGM 21NOP1

83190 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 224 / Monday, November 21, 2016 / Proposed Rules

making effective comments, please visit and anticipate no adverse comment. We DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ have explained our reasons for this
commenting-epa-dockets. action in the preamble of the direct final Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. rule. Safety Administration
Kimberly Garnett, U.S. EPA, Office of If we receive no adverse comment, we
Air Quality Planning and Standards, Air 49 CFR Part 172
will not take further action on this
Quality Assessment Division, proposed rule. If the EPA receives [Docket No. PHMSA–2016–0079 (HM–213E)]
Measurement Technology Group (E143– adverse comment, we will publish a
02), Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; RIN 2137–AF25
timely withdrawal in the Federal
telephone number: (919) 541–1158; fax Hazardous Materials: PIPES Act
Register informing the public that the
number: (919) 541- 0516; email address: Requirements for Identification
direct final rule will not take effect. In
garnett.kim@epa.gov. Numbers on Cargo Tanks Containing
that case, we would address all public
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Petroleum Based Fuel
comments in any subsequent final rule
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
based on this proposed rule. AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous
is proposing revisions to a procedure in
the New Source Performance Standards We do not intend to institute a second Materials Safety Administration
(NSPS). We also propose to correct a comment period on this action. Any (PHMSA), DOT.
typographical error in the introduction parties interested in commenting must ACTION: Advance notice of proposed
to Paragraph (6) of section 10.4 of do so at this time. For further rulemaking (ANPRM).
Procedure 2. Without this revision, information about commenting on this
paragraph (6)(iii) would remain unused rule, please see the information SUMMARY: PHMSA is publishing this
in Procedure 2. This typographical provided in the ADDRESSES section of advance notice of proposed rulemaking
correction is necessary to fulfill the this document. (ANPRM) in response to the Protecting
intent of Procedure 2, section 10.4(6), our Infrastructure of Pipelines and
The regulatory text for the proposal is Enhancing Safety (PIPES) Act of 2016,
when promulgated. See 69 FR 1786. identical to that for the direct final rule which reauthorizes the pipeline safety
I. Why is the EPA issuing this proposed published in the ‘‘Rules and program and requires a number of
rule? Regulations’’ section of this Federal reports and mandates. The PIPES Act
The EPA proposes a revision to Register publication. For further requires PHMSA to take regulatory
Procedure 2, sections 10.4(5)and (6), to supplementary information, the detailed actions to establish minimum safety
allow facilities that have reduced their rationale for the proposal and the standards for underground natural gas
emissions since completing their PM regulatory revisions, see the direct final storage facilities; to update the
CEMS correlation testing to extend their rule published in a separate part of this minimum safety standards for
correlation regression line to the point Federal Register publication. permanent, small scale liquefied natural
corresponding to the lowest PM CEMS gas pipeline facilities; and to publish an
II. Does this action apply to me? ANPRM to address a petition for
response obtained during the RCA or
RRA. This extended correlation The entities potentially affected by rulemaking proposing hazardous
regression line will be used to this rule include any facility that is materials regulations related to the
determine if results of this RCA or RRA marking of identification numbers on
required to install and operate a PM
meet the criteria specified in Section cargo tanks. This ANPRM specifically
CEMS under any provision of title 40 of
10.4, paragraphs (5) and (6) of Procedure addresses the PIPES Act requirement
the CFR. If you have any questions applicable to the petition for rulemaking
2, respectively. This change will ensure regarding the applicability of this action
that facilities that have reduced their related to the marking of identification
to a particular entity, consult the person numbers on cargo tanks. PHMSA will
emissions since completing their
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION consider the comments, data, and
correlation testing will no longer be
CONTACT section of this document. information received in any future
penalized because their lower emissions
fall outside their initial response range. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60 action related to the petition.
This action also proposes to correct a DATES: Comments must be received by
typographical error in the introduction Environmental protection, February 21, 2017.
to section 10.4, paragraph (6) of Administrative practice and procedure, ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
Procedure 2. Paragraph (6), which Air pollution control, Continuous identified by the Docket Number
originally read, ‘‘To pass an RRA, you emission monitoring systems, PHMSA–2016–0079 (HM–213E) through
must meet the criteria specified in Particulate matter, Procedures. any of the following methods:
paragraphs (6)(i) and (ii) . . .’’, is being Dated: November 8, 2016. • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
corrected to read: ‘‘To pass an RRA, you http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
Gina McCarthy,
must meet the criteria specified in online instructions for submitting
paragraphs (6)(i) through (iii) . . .’’ Administrator. comments.
Without this revision, paragraph (6)(iii) [FR Doc. 2016–27847 Filed 11–18–16; 8:45 am] • Fax: 1–202–493–2251.
would remain unused in Procedure 2. BILLING CODE 6560–50–P • Mail: Docket Management System,
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

This typographical correction is U.S. Department of Transportation,
necessary to fulfill the intent of Dockets Operations, M–30, Ground
Procedure 2, section 10.4(6), when Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey
promulgated in 69 FR 1786. We have Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
published a direct final rule approving • Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of
the revisions to Procedure 2 in the Transportation, Docket Operations,
‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ section of this M–30, Ground Floor, Room W12–140 in
Federal Register publication because we the West Building, 1200 New Jersey
view this as a non-controversial action Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:51 Nov 18, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\21NOP1.SGM 21NOP1

Document Created: 2018-02-14 08:34:26
Document Modified: 2018-02-14 08:34:26

Category		Regulatory Information
Collection		Federal Register
sudoc Class		AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106:
Publisher		Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
Section		Proposed Rules
Action		Proposed rule.
Dates		Written comments must be received by December 21, 2016.
Contact		Ms. Kimberly Garnett, U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Air Quality Assessment Division, Measurement Technology Group (E143-02), Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone number: (919) 541-1158; fax number: (919) 541- 0516;
FR Citation		81 FR 83189
RIN Number		2060-AT15
CFR Associated		Environmental Protection; Administrative Practice and Procedure; Air Pollution Control; Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems; Particulate Matter and Procedures