82 FR 37822 - Revisions to Procedure 2-Quality Assurance Requirements for Particulate Matter Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems at Stationary Sources

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 155 (August 14, 2017)

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing revisions to Procedure 2 that were proposed in the Federal Register on November 21, 2016. Procedure 2 includes quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) procedures for particulate matter (PM) continuous emission monitoring systems (CEMS) used for compliance determination at stationary sources. The QA procedures specify the minimum requirements necessary for the control and assessment of the quality of PM CEMS data submitted to the EPA and other regulatory authorities. This action establishes consistent requirements for ensuring and assessing the quality of PM data measured by CEMS that meet initial acceptance requirements in Performance Specification (PS) 11 of appendix B to part 60.

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 155 (Monday, August 14, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37822-37824]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2017-17123]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 60

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0382; FRL-9966-25-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: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing 
revisions to Procedure 2 that were proposed in the Federal Register on 
November 21, 2016. Procedure 2 includes quality assurance/quality 
control (QA/QC) procedures for particulate matter (PM) continuous 
emission monitoring systems (CEMS) used for compliance determination at 
stationary sources. The QA procedures specify the minimum requirements 
necessary for the control and assessment of the quality of PM CEMS data 
submitted to the EPA and other regulatory authorities. This action 
establishes consistent requirements for ensuring and assessing the 
quality of PM data measured by CEMS that meet initial acceptance 
requirements in Performance Specification (PS) 11 of appendix B to part 
60.

DATES: This final rule is effective on September 13, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Docket: The EPA has established a docket for this rulemaking 
under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0382. All documents in the docket 
are listed at https://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the 
index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential 
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is 
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted 
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available 
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are 
available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard 
copy at the EPA Docket Center, Room 3334, EPA WJC West Building, 1301 
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004. The Public Reading Room 
is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding 
legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is 
(202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the EPA Docket Center is 
(202) 566-1742.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Kimberly Garnett, Office of Air 
Quality Planning and Standards, Air Quality Assessment Division, 
Measurement Technology Group (Mail Code: E143-02), U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709; telephone number: 
(919) 541-1158; fax number: (919) 541-0516; email address: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    The information in this document is organized as follows:

I. General Information
    A. Does this action apply to me?
    B. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related 
information?
    C. Judicial Review
II. Background
III. Final Revisions to Procedure 2
IV. Summary of Major Comments and Responses
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and 
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With 
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From 
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address 
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations
    K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

I. General Information

A. 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 Code of Federal Regulations. 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.

B. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related 
information?

    In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of 
this action is available on the Internet through the EPA's Technology 
Transfer Network (TTN) Web site, a forum for information and technology 
exchange in various areas of air quality management, measurement 
standards and implementation, etc. Following publication in the Federal 
Register, the EPA will post the Federal Register version of the 
promulgation and key technical documents on the TTN at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/promulgated.html.

C. Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), judicial review 
of this final rule is available only by filing a petition for review in 
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit by 
October 13, 2017. Under

[[Page 37823]]

section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA, only an objection to this final rule 
that was raised with reasonable specificity during the period for 
public comment can be raised during judicial review. Moreover, under 
section 307(b)(2) of the CAA, the requirements established by this 
final rule may not be challenged separately in any civil or criminal 
proceedings brought by the EPA to enforce these requirements. Section 
307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA further provides that ``[o]nly an objection to 
a rule or procedure which was raised with reasonable specificity during 
the period for public comment (including any public hearing) may be 
raised during judicial review.'' This section also provides a mechanism 
for the EPA to convene a proceeding for reconsideration, ``[i]f the 
person raising an objection can demonstrate to the EPA that it was 
impracticable to raise such objection within [the period for public 
comment] or if the grounds for such objection arose after the period 
for public comment (but within the time specified for judicial review) 
and if such objection is of central relevance to the outcome of the 
rule.'' Any person seeking to make such a demonstration to us should 
submit a Petition for Reconsideration to the Office of the 
Administrator, U.S. EPA, Room 3000, William Jefferson Clinton Building, 
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460, with a copy to both 
the person(s) listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section, and the Associate General Counsel for the Air and Radiation 
Law Office, Office of General Counsel (Mail Code 2344A), U.S. EPA, 1200 
Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460. Filing a petition for 
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final action does not 
affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review, 
nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review 
must be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of this action.

II. Background

    On January 12, 2004, the EPA promulgated Procedure 2--Quality 
Assurance Requirements for Particulate Matter Continuous Emission 
Monitoring Systems at Stationary Sources (69 FR 1786). Procedure 2, 
sections 10.4 (5) and (6), contain a requirement for conducting the 
annual Relative Correlation Audit (RCA) or Relative Response Audit 
(RRA) QA/QC test procedures, in which a specified amount of the 
required number of PM CEMS response values, or data points, must lie 
within the PM CEMS response range used to develop the PM CEMS 
correlation curve. In other words, when conducting the annual QA/QC 
tests, the PM CEMS response values should not be higher or lower than 
the values used to develop the correlation curve for that PM CEMS. 
Recently, as PM emission limits have been reduced and facilities have 
installed more robust PM emission control devices, a number of 
facilities have found that their PM emissions are lower than their PM 
CEMS correlation curve and, as a result, the facilities are now unable 
to meet the criteria needed to pass the annual Procedure 2 QA/QC tests. 
The EPA proposed to modify this language in Procedure 2 through a 
direct final rule (81 FR 83160; November 21, 2016) and a parallel 
proposed rule (81 FR 83189; November 21, 2016). In the direct final 
rule, the EPA stated that if the agency received any significant and 
relevant adverse comments to the direct final rule, it would withdraw 
the direct final rule and address all public comments in a subsequent 
final rule based on the proposed rule. The EPA stated it would not 
institute a second comment period on the proposed rule (81 FR 83161, 
November 21, 2016). The EPA received one significant and relevant 
adverse comment and, therefore, published a withdrawal of the direct 
final rule (81 FR 10711; February 15, 2017). With this action, the EPA 
is responding to the adverse comment and finalizing revisions to 
Procedure 2.

III. Final Revisions to Procedure 2

    This action finalizes the changes to Procedure 2 that were proposed 
on November 21, 2016 (81 FR 83189), and responds to the adverse comment 
received in response to that proposal by addressing conflicting 
language in sections 10.4(5) and 10.4(6).

IV. Summary of Major Comments and Responses

    A commenter stated that the revisions to Procedure 2, as proposed 
by the EPA on November 21, 2016, do not achieve the intended result. As 
the commenter points out, sections 10.4(5) and 10.4(6) still contain 
language which requires that a portion of the data points from the RRA 
and RCA ``must lie within the PM CEMS output range used to develop your 
correlation curve.'' The commenter suggested that language in sections 
10.4(5)(ii) and 10.4(6)(ii) be removed. The EPA agrees with the 
commenter and removed the language in sections 10.4(5)(ii) and 
10.4(6)(ii). In addition, the language allowing the extension of the 
correlation curve to accommodate points that are lower than the 
original curve has been moved to make it clear that it is needed only 
when determining if the RRA and RCA meet the  25 percent 
criteria originally contained in sections 10.4(5)(iii) and 
10.4(6)(iii).

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive 
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a significant regulatory action and was, 
therefore, not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
for review.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under 
the PRA. This action provides performance criteria and QA/QC test 
procedures for assessing the acceptability of PM CEMS performance and 
data quality. These criteria and QA/QC test procedures do not add 
information collection requirements beyond those currently required 
under the applicable regulation.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This 
action will not impose any requirements on small entities. There are no 
small entities in the regulated industry for which Procedure 2 applies.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in 
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect 
small governments. This action imposes no enforceable duty on any 
state, local or tribal governments or the private sector.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action 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.

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

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in 
Executive Order 13175. Procedure 2 is applicable to facility owners and 
operators who are responsible for one or more PM CEMS used for 
monitoring emissions. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to 
this action.

[[Page 37824]]

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

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those 
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks 
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect 
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in 
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to 
Executive Order 13045 because it does not concern an environmental 
health risk or safety risk.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is 
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

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

    The EPA believes that this action will not have disproportionately 
high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority or 
low-income populations because it does not affect the level of 
protection provided to human health or the environment. This action 
will help to ensure that emission control devices are operated properly 
and maintained as needed, thereby helping to ensure compliance with 
emission standards, which would benefit all affected populations.

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

    This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule 
report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of 
the United States. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 
U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Air pollution control, Continuous emission monitoring systems, 
Particulate matter, Performance specifications, Test methods and 
procedures.

    Dated: August 7, 2017.
E. Scott Pruitt,
Administrator.

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

PART 60--STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE FOR NEW STATIONARY SOURCES

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

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.


0
2. In Appendix F, Procedure 2, in section 10.4, paragraphs (5) and (6) 
are revised to read as follows:

Appendix F to Part 60--Quality Assurance Procedures

* * * * *

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

* * * * *
    10.4 * * *
    (5) What are the criteria for passing a RCA? To pass a RCA, you 
must meet the criteria specified in paragraphs (5)(i) and (ii) of 
this section. If your PM CEMS fails to meet these RCA criteria, it 
is out of control.
    (i) For all 12 data points, the PM CEMS response value can be no 
greater than the greatest PM CEMS response value used to develop 
your correlation curve.
    (ii) At least 75 percent of a minimum number of 12 sets of PM 
CEMS and reference method measurements must fall within a specified 
area on a graph of the correlation regression line. The specified 
area on the graph of the correlation regression line is defined by 
two lines parallel to the correlation regression line, offset at a 
distance of 25 percent of the numerical emission limit 
value from the correlation regression line. If any of the PM CEMS 
response values resulting from your RCA are lower than the lowest PM 
CEMS response value of your existing correlation curve, you may 
extend your correlation regression line to the point corresponding 
to the lowest PM CEMS response value obtained during the RCA. This 
extended correlation regression line must then be used to determine 
if the RCA data meets this criterion.
    (6) What are the criteria to pass a RRA? To pass a RRA, you must 
meet the criteria specified in paragraphs (6)(i) and (ii) of this 
section. If your PM CEMS fails to meet these RRA criteria, it is out 
of control.
    (i) For all three data points, the PM CEMS response value can be 
no greater than the greatest PM CEMS response value used to develop 
your correlation curve.
    (ii) At least two of the three sets of PM CEMS and reference 
method measurements must fall within the same specified area on a 
graph of the correlation regression line as required for the RCA and 
described in paragraph (5)(ii) of this section.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2017-17123 Filed 8-11-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P