WAIS Document Retrieval[Code of Federal Regulations]
[Title 40, Volume 2]
[Revised as of July 1, 2004]
From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access
[CITE: 40CFR51]
[Page 129-523]
TITLE 40--PROTECTION OF ENVIRONMENT
CHAPTER I--ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (CONTINUED)
PART 51_REQUIREMENTS FOR PREPARATION, ADOPTION, AND SUBMITTAL OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
Sec.
Subpart A_Emission Inventory Reporting Requirements
General Information for Inventory Preparers
51.1 Who is responsible for actions described in this subpart?
51.5 What tools are available to help prepare and report emissions data?
51.10 How does my State report emissions that are required by the
NOX SIP Call?
Specific Reporting Requirements
51.15 What data does my State need to report to EPA?
51.20 What are the emission thresholds that separate point and area
sources?
51.25 What geographic area must my State's inventory cover?
51.30 When does my State report the data to EPA?
51.35 How can my State equalize the effort for annual reporting?
51.40 In what form should my State report the data to EPA?
51.45 Where should my State report the data?
Appendix A to Subpart A of Part 51--Tables and Glossary
Appendix B to Subpart A of Part 51 [Reserved]
Subparts B-E [Reserved]
Subpart F_Procedural Requirements
51.100 Definitions.
51.101 Stipulations.
51.102 Public hearings.
51.103 Submission of plans, preliminary review of plans.
51.104 Revisions.
51.105 Approval of plans.
Subpart G_Control Strategy
51.110 Attainment and maintenance of national standards.
51.111 Description of control measures.
51.112 Demonstration of adequacy.
51.113 [Reserved]
51.114 Emissions data and projections.
51.115 Air quality data and projections.
51.116 Data availability.
51.117 Additional provisions for lead.
51.118 Stack height provisions.
51.119 Intermittent control systems.
51.120 Requirements for State Implementation Plan revisions relating to
new motor vehicles.
51.121 Findings and requirements for submission of State implementation
plan revisions relating to emissions of oxides of nitrogen.
51.122 Emissions reporting requirements for SIP revisions relating to
budgets for NOX emissions.
Subpart H_Prevention of Air Pollution Emergency Episodes
51.150 Classification of regions for episode plans.
51.151 Significant harm levels.
51.152 Contingency plans.
51.153 Reevaluation of episode plans.
Subpart I_Review of New Sources and Modifications
51.160 Legally enforceable procedures.
51.161 Public availability of information.
51.162 Identification of responsible agency.
51.163 Administrative procedures.
51.164 Stack height procedures.
51.165 Permit requirements.
51.166 Prevention of significant deterioration of air quality.
[[Page 130]]
Subpart J_Ambient Air Quality Surveillance
51.190 Ambient air quality monitoring requirements.
Subpart K_Source Survelliance
51.210 General.
51.211 Emission reports and recordkeeping.
51.212 Testing, inspection, enforcement, and complaints.
51.213 Transportation control measures.
51.214 Continuous emission monitoring.
Subpart L_Legal Authority
51.230 Requirements for all plans.
51.231 Identification of legal authority.
51.232 Assignment of legal authority to local agencies.
Subpart M_Intergovernmental Consultation
Agency Designation
51.240 General plan requirements.
51.241 Nonattainment areas for carbon monoxide and ozone.
51.242 [Reserved]
Subpart N_Compliance Schedules
51.260 Legally enforceable compliance schedules.
51.261 Final compliance schedules.
51.262 Extension beyond one year.
Subpart O_Miscellaneous Plan Content Requirements
51.280 Resources.
51.281 Copies of rules and regulations.
51.285 Public notification.
Subpart P_Protection of Visibility
51.300 Purpose and applicability.
51.301 Definitions.
51.302 Implementation control strategies for reasonably attributable
visibility impairment.
51.303 Exemptions from control.
51.304 Identification of integral vistas.
51.305 Monitoring for reasonably attributable visibility impairment.
51.306 Long-term strategy requirements for reasonably attributable
visibility impairment.
51.307 New source review.
51.308 Regional haze program requirements.
51.309 Requirements related to the Grand Canyon Visibility Transport
Commission.
Subpart Q_Reports
Air Quality Data Reporting
51.320 Annual air quality data report.
Source Emissions and State Action Reporting
51.321 Annual source emissions and State action report.
51.322 Sources subject to emissions reporting.
51.323 Reportable emissions data and information.
51.324 Progress in plan enforcement.
51.326 Reportable revisions.
51.327 Enforcement orders and other State actions.
51.328 [Reserved]
Subpart R_Extensions
51.341 Request for 18-month extension.
Subpart S_Inspection/Maintenance Program Requirements
51.350 Applicability.
51.351 Enhanced I/M performance standard.
51.352 Basic I/M performance standard.
51.353 Network type and program evaluation.
51.354 Adequate tools and resources.
51.355 Test frequency and convenience.
51.356 Vehicle coverage.
51.357 Test procedures and standards.
51.358 Test equipment.
51.359 Quality control.
51.360 Waivers and compliance via diagnostic inspection.
51.361 Motorist compliance enforcement.
51.362 Motorist compliance enforcement program oversight.
51.363 Quality assurance.
51.364 Enforcement against contractors, stations and inspectors.
51.365 Data collection.
51.366 Data analysis and reporting.
51.367 Inspector training and licensing or certification.
51.368 Public information and consumer protection.
51.369 Improving repair effectiveness.
51.370 Compliance with recall notices.
51.371 On-road testing.
51.372 State Implementation Plan submissions.
51.373 Implementation deadlines.
Appendix A to Subpart S--Calibrations, Adjustments and Quality Control
Appendix B to Subpart S--Test Procedures
Appendix C to Subpart S--Steady-State Short Test Standards
Appendix D to Subpart S--Steady-State Short Test Equipment
[[Page 131]]
Appendix E to Subpart S--Transient Test Driving Cycle
Subpart T_Conformity to State or Federal Implementation Plans of
Transportation Plans, Programs, and Projects Developed, Funded or
Approved Under Title 23 U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Laws
51.390 Implementation plan revision.
Subpart U_Economic Incentive Programs
51.490 Applicability.
51.491 Definitions.
51.492 State program election and submittal.
51.493 State program requirements.
51.494 Use of program revenues.
Subpart W_Determining Conformity of General Federal Actions to State or
Federal Implementation Plans
51.850 Prohibition.
51.851 State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision.
51.852 Definitions.
51.853 Applicability.
51.854 Conformity analysis.
51.855 Reporting requirements.
51.856 Public participation.
51.857 Frequency of conformity determinations.
51.858 Criteria for determining conformity of general Federal actions.
51.859 Procedures for conformity determinations of general Federal
actions.
51.860 Mitigation of air quality impacts.
Subpart X_Provisions for Implementation of 8-hour Ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standard
51.900 Definitions.
51.901 Applicability of part 51.
51.902 Which classification and area planning provisions of the CAA
shall apply to areas designated nonattainment for the 8-hour
NAAQS?
51.903 How do the classification and attainment date provisions in
section 181 of subpart 2 of the CAA apply to areas subject to
Sec. 51.902(a)?
51.904 How do the classification and attainment date provisions in
section 172(a) of subpart 1 of the CAA apply to areas subject
to Sec. 51.902(b)?
51.905 How do areas transition from the 1-hour NAAQS to the 8-hour NAAQS
and what are the anti-backsliding provisions?
51.906 [Reserved]
51.907 For an area that fails to attain the 8-hour NAAQS by its
attainment date, how does EPA interpret sections
172(a)(2)(C)(ii) and 181(a)(5)(B) of the CAA?
51.908 What is the required timeframe for obtaining emission reductions
to ensure attainment by the attainment date?
51.909--51.916 [Reserved]
Appendixes A-K to Part 51 [Reserved]
Appendix L to Part 51--Example Regulations for Prevention of Air
Pollution Emergency Episodes
Appendix M to Part 51--Recommended Test Methods for State Implementation
Plans
Appendixes N-O to Part 51 [Reserved]
Appendix P to Part 51--Minimum Emission Monitoring Requirements
Appendixes Q-R to Part 51 [Reserved]
Appendix S to Part 51--Emission Offset Interpretative Ruling
Appendixes T-U to Part 51 [Reserved]
Appendix V to Part 51--Criteria for Determining the Completeness of Plan
Submissions
Appendix W to Part 51--Guideline on Air Quality Models
Appendix X to Part 51--Examples of Economic Incentive Programs
Authority: 23 U.S.C. 101; 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Source: 36 FR 22398, Nov. 25, 1971, unless otherwise noted.
Subpart A_Emission Inventory Reporting Requirements
Source: 67 FR 39611, June 10, 2002, unless otherwise noted.
General Information for Inventory Preparers
Sec. 51.1 Who is responsible for actions described in this subpart?
State agencies whose geographic coverage include any point, area,
mobile, or biogenic sources must inventory these sources and report this
information to EPA.
Sec. 51.5 What tools are available to help prepare and report
emissions data?
We urge your State to use estimation procedures described in
documents from the Emission Inventory Improvement Program (EIIP). These
procedures are standardized and ranked according to relative uncertainty
for each emission estimating technique. Using this guidance will enable
others to use your State's data and evaluate its quality and consistency
with other data.
[[Page 132]]
Sec. 51.10 How does my State report emissions that are required by the
NOX SIP Call?
The States and the District of Columbia that are subject to the
NOX SIP Call (Sec. 51.121) should report their emissions
under the provisions of Sec. 51.122. To avoid confusion, these
requirements are not repeated here.
Specific Reporting Requirements
Sec. 51.15 What data does my State need to report to EPA?
(a) Pollutants. Report actual emissions of the following (see
Glossary to Appendix A to this subpart for precise definitions as
required):
(1) Required Pollutants:
(i) Sulfur oxides.
(ii) VOC.
(iii) Nitrogen oxides.
(iv) Carbon monoxide.
(v) Lead and lead compounds.
(vi) Primary PM2.5.
(vii) Primary PM10.
(viii) NH3.
(2) Optional Pollutant:
(i) Primary PM.
(ii) [Reserved]
(b) Sources. Emissions should be reported from the following
sources:
(1) Point.
(2) Area.
(3) Onroad mobile.
(4) Nonroad mobile.
(5) Biogenic.
(c) Supporting information. Report the data elements in Tables 2a
through 2d of Appendix A to this subpart. Depending on the format you
choose to report your State data, additional information not listed in
Tables 2a through 2d will be required. We may ask you for other data on
a voluntary basis to meet special purposes.
(d) Confidential data. We don't consider the data in Tables 2a
through 2d of Appendix A to this subpart confidential, but some States
limit release of this type of data. Any data that you submit to EPA
under this rule will be considered in the public domain and cannot be
treated as confidential. If Federal and State requirements are
inconsistent, consult your EPA Regional Office for a final
reconciliation.
Sec. 51.20 What are the emission thresholds that separate point and
area sources?
(a) All anthropogenic stationary sources must be included in your
inventory as either point or area sources.
(b) See Table 1 of Appendix A to this subpart for minimum reporting
thresholds on point sources.
(c) Your State has two alternatives to the point source reporting
thresholds in paragraph (b) of this section:
(1) You may choose to define point sources by the definition of a
major source used under CAA Title V, see 40 CFR 70.2.
(2) If your State has lower emission reporting thresholds for point
sources than paragraph (b) of this section, then you may use these in
reporting your emissions to EPA.
(d) All stationary sources that have actual emissions lower than the
thresholds specified in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, should
be reported as area sources.
Sec. 51.25 What geographic area must my State's inventory cover?
Because of the regional nature of these pollutants, your State's
inventory must be statewide, regardless of an area's attainment status.
Sec. 51.30 When does my State report the data to EPA?
Your State is required to report two basic types of emission
inventories to us: Annual Cycle Inventory; and Three-year Cycle
Inventory.
(a) Annual cycle. You are required to report annually data from Type
A (large) point sources. Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this
section, the first annual cycle inventory will be for the year 2001 and
must be submitted to us within 17 months, i.e., by June 1, 2003.
Subsequent annual cycle inventories will be due 17 months following the
end of the reporting year. See Table 2a of Appendix A to this subpart
for the specific data elements to report annually.
(b) Three-year cycle. You are required to report triennially, data
for Type B (all) point sources, area sources and mobile sources. Except
as provided in paragraph (e) of this section, the first three-year cycle
inventory will be for
[[Page 133]]
the year 2002 and must be submitted to us within 17 months, i.e., by
June 1, 2004. Subsequent three-year cycle inventories will be due 17
months following the end of the reporting year. See Tables 2a, 2b and 2c
of Appendix A to this subpart for the specific data elements that must
be reported triennially.
(c) NOX SIP call. There are specific annual and three-
year reporting requirements for States subject to the NOX SIP
call. See Sec. 51.122 for these requirements.
(d) Biogenic emissions. Biogenic emissions are part of your 3-year
cycle inventory. Your State must establish an initial baseline for
biogenic emissions that is due as specified under paragraph (b) of this
section. Your State need not submit more biogenic data unless land use
characteristics or the methods for estimating emissions change
substantially. If either of these changes, your State must report the
biogenic emission data elements shown in Table 2d of Appendix A to this
subpart. Report these data elements 17 months after the end of the
reporting year.
(e) Point Sources. States must commence reporting point source
emissions of PM2.5 and NH3 on June 1, 2004 unless
that date is less than 60 days after EPA publishes an approved
Information Collection Request (ICR) addressing this section of the
rule. If EPA fails to publish an approved ICR 60 days in advance of June
1, 2004, States must commence reporting point source emissions of
PM2.5 and NH3 on the next annual or triennial
reporting date (as appropriate) that is at least 60 days after EPA
publishes an approved ICR addressing this section.
Sec. 51.35 How can my State equalize the effort for annual reporting?
(a) Compiling a 3-year cycle inventory means much more effort every
three years. As an option, your State may ease this workload spike by
using the following approach:
(1) Annually collect and report data for all Type A (large) point
sources (This is required for all Type A point sources).
(2) Annually collect data for one-third of your smaller point
sources (Type B point sources minus Type A (large) point sources).
Collect data for a different third of these sources each year so that
data has been collected for all of the smaller point sources by the end
of each three-year cycle. You may report these data to EPA annually, or
as an option you may save three years of data and then report all of the
smaller point sources on the three-year cycle due date.
(3) Annually collect data for one-third of the area, nonroad mobile,
onroad mobile and, if required, biogenic sources. You may report these
data to EPA annually, or as an option you may save three years of data
and then report all of these data on the three-year cycle due date.
(b) For the sources described in paragraph (a) of this section, your
State will therefore have data from three successive years at any given
time, rather than from the single year in which it is compiled.
(c) If your State chooses the method of inventorying one-third of
your smaller point sources and 3-year cycle area, nonroad mobile, onroad
mobile sources each year, your State must compile each year of the
three-year period identically. For example, if a process hasn't changed
for a source category or individual plant, your State must use the same
emission factors to calculate emissions for each year of the three-year
period. If your State has revised emission factors during the three
years for a process that hasn't changed, resubmit previous year's data
using the revised factor. If your State uses models to estimate
emissions, you must make sure that the model is the same for all three
years.
(d) If your State chooses the method of inventorying one-third of
your smaller point sources and 3-year cycle area, nonroad mobile, onroad
mobile sources each year and reporting them on the 3-year cycle due
date, the first required date for you to report on all such sources will
be June 1, 2004 as specified in Sec. 51.25. You can satisfy the 2004
reporting requirement by either: Starting to inventory one third of your
sources in 2000; or doing a one-time complete 3-year cycle inventory for
2002, then changing to the option of
[[Page 134]]
inventorying one third of your sources for subsequent years.
(e) If your State needs a new reference year emission inventory for
a selected pollutant, your State can't use these optional reporting
frequencies for the new reference year.
(f) If your State is a NOX SIP call State, you can't use
these optional reporting frequencies for NOX SIP call
reporting.
Sec. 51.40 In what form should my State report the data to EPA?
You must report your emission inventory data to us in electronic
form. We support specific electronic data reporting formats and you are
required to report your data in a format consistent with these. Because
electronic reporting technology continually changes, contact the
Emission Factor and Inventory Group (EFIG) for the latest specific
formats. You can find information on the current formats at the
following Internet address: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief. You may also
call our Info CHIEF help desk at (919) 541-1000 or email to
info.chief@epa.gov.
Sec. 51.45 Where should my State report the data?
(a) Your State submits or reports data by providing it directly to
EPA.
(b) The latest information on data reporting procedures is available
at the following Internet address: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief.
You may also call our Info CHIEF help desk at (919)541-1000 or email
to info.chief@epa.gov.
Appendix A to Subpart A of Part 51--Tables and Glossary
Table 1--Minimum Point Source Reporting Thresholds by Pollutant(tpy \1\)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Three-year cycle
Pollutant Annual cycle --------------------------------------------------------
(type A sources) Type B sources \2\ NAA \3\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. SOX............................. =2500 =100 =100
2. VOC............................. =250 =100 03 (moderate)>=100
3. VOC............................. .................. .................. O3 (serious)>=50
4. VOC............................. .................. .................. O3 (severe)>=25
5. VOC............................. .................. .................. O3 (extreme)>=10
6. NOX............................. =2500 =100 =100
7. CO.............................. =2500 =1000 O3 (all areas)>=100
8. CO.............................. .................. .................. CO (all areas)=100
9. Pb.............................. .................. =5 =5
10. PM10........................... =250 =100 PM1010 (moderate)>=100
11. PM10........................... .................. .................. PM10 (serious)>=70
12. PM2.5.......................... =250 =100 =100
13. NH3............................ =250 =100 =100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ tpy = tons per year of actual emissions.
\2\ Type A sources are a subset of the Type B sources and are the larger emitting sources by pollutant.
\3\ NAA = Nonattainment Area. Special point source reporting thresholds apply for certain pollutants by type of
nonattainment area. The pollutants by nonattainment area are: Ozone: VOC, NOX, CO; CO: CO; PM10: PM10.
Table 2a--Data Elements That States Must Report for Point Sources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Every 3 years
Data elements Annual (Type A (Type B sources
sources) and NAAs)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Inventory year............... [bcheck] [bcheck]
2. Inventory start date......... [bcheck] [bcheck]
3. Inventory end date........... [bcheck] [bcheck]
4. Inventory type............... [bcheck] [bcheck]
5. State FIPS code.............. [bcheck] [bcheck]
6. County FIPS code............. [bcheck] [bcheck]
7. Facility ID code............. [bcheck] [bcheck]
8. Point ID code................ [bcheck] [bcheck]
9. Process ID code.............. [bcheck] [bcheck]
10. Stack ID code............... [bcheck] [bcheck]
11. Site name................... [bcheck] [bcheck]
12. Physical address............ [bcheck] [bcheck]
13. SCC or PCC.................. [bcheck] [bcheck]
14. Heat content (fuel) (annual [bcheck] [bcheck]
average).......................
15. Ash content (fuel) (annual [bcheck] [bcheck]
average).......................
[[Page 135]]
16. Sulfur content (fuel) [bcheck] [bcheck]
(annual average)...............
17. Pollutant code.............. [bcheck] [bcheck]
18. Activity/throughput (annual) [bcheck] [bcheck]
19. Activity/throughput (daily). [bcheck] [bcheck]
20. Work weekday emissions...... [bcheck] [bcheck]
21. Annual emissions............ [bcheck] [bcheck]
22. Emission factor............. [bcheck] [bcheck]
23. Winter throughput (%)....... [bcheck] [bcheck]
24. Spring throughput (%)....... [bcheck] [bcheck]
25. Summer throughput (%)....... [bcheck] [bcheck]
26. Fall throughput (%)......... [bcheck] [bcheck]
27. Hr/day in operation......... [bcheck] [bcheck]
28. Start time (hour)........... [bcheck] [bcheck]
29. Day/wk in operation......... [bcheck] [bcheck]
30. Wk/yr in operation.......... [bcheck] [bcheck]
31. X stack coordinate .................. [bcheck]
(latitude).....................
32. Y stack coordinate .................. [bcheck]
(longitude)....................
33. Stack Height................ .................. [bcheck]
34. Stack diameter.............. .................. [bcheck]
35. Exit gas temperature........ .................. [bcheck]
36. Exit gas velocity........... .................. [bcheck]
37. Exit gas flow rate.......... .................. [bcheck]
38. SIC/NAICS................... .................. [bcheck]
39. Design capacity............. .................. [bcheck]
40. Maximum namemplate capacity. .................. [bcheck]
41. Primary control eff (%)..... .................. [bcheck]
42. Secondary control eff (%)... .................. [bcheck]
43. Control device type......... .................. [bcheck]
44. Rule effectiveness (%)...... .................. [bcheck]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2b--Data Elements that States Must Report for Area and Nonroad
Mobile Sources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Every 3
Data elements years
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Inventory year......................................... [bcheck]
2. Inventory start date................................... [bcheck]
3. Inventory end date..................................... [bcheck]
4. Inventory type......................................... [bcheck]
5. State FIPS code........................................ [bcheck]
6. County FIPS code....................................... [bcheck]
7. SCC or PCC............................................. [bcheck]
8. Emission factor........................................ [bcheck]
9. Activity/throughput level (annual)..................... [bcheck]
10. Total capture/control efficiency (%).................. [bcheck]
11. Rule effectiveness (%)................................ [bcheck]
12. Rule penetration (%).................................. [bcheck]
13. Pollutant code........................................ [bcheck]
14. Summer/winter work weekday emissions.................. [bcheck]
15. Annual emissions...................................... [bcheck]
16. Winter throughput (%)................................. [bcheck]
17. Spring throughput (%)................................. [bcheck]
18. Summer throughput (%)................................. [bcheck]
19. Fall throughput (%)................................... [bcheck]
20. Hrs/day in operation.................................. [bcheck]
21. Days/wk in operation.................................. [bcheck]
22. Wks/yr in operation................................... [bcheck]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2c--Data Elements that States Must Report for Onroad Mobile
Sources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Every 3
Data elements years
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Inventory year......................................... [bcheck]
2. Inventory start date................................... [bcheck]
3. Inventory end date..................................... [bcheck]
4. Inventory type......................................... [bcheck]
5. State FIPS code........................................ [bcheck]
6. County FIPS code....................................... [bcheck]
7. SCC or PCC............................................. [bcheck]
8. Emission factor........................................ [bcheck]
9. Activity (VMT by Roadway Class)........................ [bcheck]
10. Pollutant code........................................ [bcheck]
11. Summer/winter work weekday emissions.................. [bcheck]
12. Annual emissions...................................... [bcheck]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2d--Data Elements that States Must Report for Biogenic Sources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Every 3
Data elements years
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Inventory year......................................... [bcheck]
2. Inventory start date................................... [bcheck]
3. Inventory end date..................................... [bcheck]
4. Inventory type......................................... [bcheck]
5. State FIPS code........................................ [bcheck]
6. County FIPS code....................................... [bcheck]
7. SCC or PCC............................................. [bcheck]
8. Pollutant code......................................... [bcheck]
9. Summer/winter work weekday emissions................... [bcheck]
10. Annual emissions...................................... [bcheck]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 136]]
Glossary
Activity rate/throughput (annual)--A measurable factor or parameter
that relates directly or indirectly to the emissions of an air pollution
source. Depending on the type of source category, activity information
may refer to the amount of fuel combusted, raw material processed,
product manufactured, or material handled or processed. It may also
refer to population, employment, number of units, or miles traveled.
Activity information is typically the value that is multiplied against
an emission factor to generate an emissions estimate.
Activity rate/throughput (daily)--The beginning and ending dates and
times that define the emissions period used to estimate the daily
activity rate/throughput.
Annual emissions--Actual emissions for a plant, point, or process--
measured or calculated that represent a calendar year.
Area sources--Area sources collectively represent individual sources
that have not been inventoried as specific point, mobile, or biogenic
sources. These individual sources treated collectively as area sources
are typically too small, numerous, or difficult to inventory using the
methods for the other classes of sources.
Ash content--Inert residual portion of a fuel.
Biogenic sources--Biogenic emissions are all pollutants emitted from
non-anthropogenic sources. Example sources include trees and vegetation,
oil and gas seeps, and microbial activity.
Control device type--The name of the type of control device (e.g.,
wet scrubber, flaring, or process change).
County FIPS Code--Federal Information Placement System (FIPS) is the
system of unique numeric codes the government developed to identify
States, counties and parishes for the entire United States, Puerto Rico,
and Guam.
Day/wk in operations--Days per week that the emitting process
operates--average over the inventory period.
Design capacity--A measure of the size of a point source, based on
the reported maximum continuous capacity of the unit.
Emission factor--Ratio relating emissions of a specific pollutant to
an activity or material throughput level.
Exit gas flow rate--Numeric value of stack gas's flow rate.
Exit gas temperature--Numeric value of an exit gas stream's
temperature.
Exit gas velocity--Numeric value of an exit gas stream's velocity.
Facility ID code--Unique code for a plant or facility, containing
one or more pollutant-emitting sources. This is the data element in
Appendix A, Table 2a, that is defined elsewhere in this glossary as a
``point source''.
Fall throughput(%)--Part of the throughput for the three Fall months
(September, October, November). This expresses part of the annual
activity information based on four seasons--typically spring, summer,
fall, and winter. It can be a percentage of the annual activity (e.g.,
production in summer is 40% of the year's production) or units of the
activity (e.g., out of 600 units produced, spring = 150 units, summer =
250 units, fall = 150 units, and winter = 50 units).
Heat content--The amount of thermal heat energy in a solid, liquid,
or gaseous fuel. Fuel heat content is typically expressed in units of
Btu/lb of fuel, Btu/gal of fuel, joules/kg of fuel, etc.
Hr/day in operations--Hours per day that the emitting process
operates--average over the inventory period.
Inventory end date--Last day of the inventory period.
Inventory start date--First day of the inventory period.
Inventory type--Type of inventory represented by data (i.e., point,
3-year cycle, daily).
Inventory year--The calendar year for which you calculated emissions
estimates.
Lead (Pb)--As defined in 40 CFR 50.12, lead should be reported as
elemental lead and its compounds.
Maximum nameplate capacity--A measure of a unit's size that the
manufacturer puts on the unit's nameplate.
Mobile source--A motor vehicle, nonroad engine or nonroad vehicle.
A ``motor vehicle'' is any self-propelled vehicle
used to carry people or property on a street or highway.
A ``nonroad engine'' is an internal combustion
engine (including fuel system) that is not used in a motor vehicle or
vehicle only used for competition, or that is not affected by sections
111 or 202 of the CAA.
A ``nonroad vehicle'' is a vehicle that is run by
a nonroad engine and that is not a motor vehicle or a vehicle only used
for competition.
PM (Particulate Matter)--Particulate matter is a criteria air
pollutant. For the purpose of this subpart, the following definitions
apply:
(1) Primary PM: Particles that enter the atmosphere as a direct
emission from a stack or an open source. It is comprised of two
components: Filterable PM and Condensible PM. (As specified in Sec.
51.15 (a)(2), these two PM components are the components measured by a
stack sampling train such as EPA Method 5 and have no upper particle
size limit.)
(2) Filterable PM: Particles that are directly emitted by a source
as a solid or liquid at stack or release conditions and captured on the
filter of a stack test train.
[[Page 137]]
(3) Condensible PM: Material that is vapor phase at stack
conditions, but which condenses and/or reacts upon cooling and dilution
in the ambient air to form solid or liquid PM immediately after
discharge from the stack.
(4) Secondary PM: Particles that form through chemical reactions in
the ambient air well after dilution and condensation have occurred.
Secondary PM is usually formed at some distance downwind from the
source. Secondary PM should NOT be reported in the emission inventory
and is NOT covered by this subpart.
(5) Primary PM2.5: Also PM2.5 (or Filterable
PM2.5 and Condensible PM individually. Note that all
Condensible PM is assumed to be in the PM2.5 size fraction)--
Particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter equal to or less than
2.5 micrometers.
(6) Primary PM10: Also PM10 (or Filterable
PM10 and Condensible PM individually)--Particulate matter
with an aerodynamic diameter equal to or less than 10 micrometers.
PCC--Process classification code. A process-level code that
describes the equipment or operation which is emitting pollutants. This
code is being considered as a replacement for the SCC.
Physical address--Street address of a facility. This is the address
of the location where the emissions occur; not, for example, the
corporate headquarters.
Point ID code--Unique code for the point of generation of emissions,
typically a physical piece of equipment.
Point source--Point sources are large, stationary (non-mobile),
identifiable sources of emissions that release pollutants into the
atmosphere. As used in this rule, a point source is defined as a
facility that annually emits more than a ``threshold'' value as defined
under Sec. 51.20.
Pollutant code--A unique code for each reported pollutant assigned
in the Emission Inventory Improvement Program (EIIP) Data Model. The
EIIP model was developed to promote consistency in organizations sharing
emissions data. The model uses character names for criteria pollutants
and Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) numbers for all other pollutants.
You may be using SAROAD codes for pollutants, but you should be able to
map them to the pollutant codes in the EIIP Data Model.
Process ID code--Unique code for the process generating the
emissions, typically a description of a process.
Roadway class--A classification system developed by the Federal
Highway Administration that defines all public roadways as to type.
Currently there are four roadway types: (1) Freeway, (2) freeway ramp,
(3) arterial/collector and (4) local.
Rule effectiveness (RE)--How well a regulatory program achieves all
possible emission reductions. This rating reflects the assumption that
controls typically aren't 100 percent effective because of equipment
downtime, upsets, decreases in control efficiencies, and other
deficiencies in emission estimates. RE adjusts the control efficiency.
Rule penetration--The percentage of an area source category covered
by an applicable regulation.
SCC--Source classification code. A process-level code that describes
the equipment and/or operation which is emitting pollutants.
Seasonal activity rate/throughput--A measurable factor or parameter
that relates directly or indirectly to the pollutant season emissions of
an air pollution source. Depending on the type of source category,
activity information may refer to the amount of fuel combusted, raw
material processed, product manufactured, or material handled or
processed. It may also refer to population, employment, number of units,
or miles traveled. Activity information is typically the value that is
multiplied against an emission factor to generate an emissions estimate.
Seasonal fuel heat content--The amount of thermal heat energy in a
solid, liquid, or gaseous fuel used during the pollutant season. Fuel
heat content is typically expressed in units of Btu/lb of fuel, Btu/gal
of fuel, joules/kg of fuel, etc.
Secondary control eff (%)--The emission reduction efficiency of a
secondary control device. Control efficiency is usually expressed as a
percentage or in tenths.
SIC/NAICS--Standard Industrial Classification code. NAICS (North
American Industry Classification System) codes will replace SIC codes.
U.S. Department of Commerce's code for businesses by products or
services.
Site name--The name of the facility.
Spring throughput (%)--Part of throughput or activity for the three
spring months (March, April, May). See the definition of Fall
Throughput.
Stack diameter--A stack's inner physical diameter.
Stack height--A stack's physical height above the surrounding
terrain.
Stack ID code--Unique code for the point where emissions from one or
more processes release into the atmosphere.
Start time (hour)--Start time (if available) that you used to
calculate the emissions estimates.
State FIPS Code--Federal Information Placement System (FIPS) is the
system of unique numeric codes the government developed to identify
States, counties and parishes for the entire United States, Puerto Rico,
and Guam.
Sulfur content--Sulfur content of a fuel, usually expressed as
percent by weight.
Summer throughput(%)--Part of throughput or activity for the three
summer months (June, July, August). See the definition of Fall
Throughput.
[[Page 138]]
Summer/winter work weekday emissions--Average day's emissions for a
typical day. Ozone daily emissions = summer work weekday; CO and PM
daily emissions = winter work weekday.
Total capture/control efficiency--The emission reduction efficiency
of a primary control device, which shows the amount controls or material
changes reduce a particular pollutant from a process' emissions. Control
efficiency is usually expressed as a percentage or in tenths.
Type A source--Large point sources with actual annual emissions
greater than or equal to any of the emission thresholds listed in Table
1 for Type A sources.
Type B source--Point sources with actual annual emissions during any
year of the three year cycle greater than or equal to any of the
emission thresholds listed in Table 1 for Type B sources. Type B sources
include all Type A sources.
VMT by Roadway Class--Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) expresses vehicle
activity and is used with emission factors. The emission factors are
usually expressed in terms of grams per mile of travel. Because VMT
doesn't correlate directly to emissions that occur while the vehicle
isn't moving, these nonmoving emissions are incorporated into the
emission factors in EPA's MOBILE Model.
VOC--Volatile Organic Compounds. The EPA's regulatory definition of
VOC is in 40 CFR 51.100.
Winter throughput (%)--Part of throughput or activity for the three
winter months (December, January, February, all from the same year,
e.g., Winter 2000 = January 2000 + February, 2000 + December 2000). See
the definition of Fall Throughput.
Wk/yr in operation--Weeks per year that the emitting process
operates.
Work Weekday--Any day of the week except Saturday or Sunday.
X stack coordinate (latitude)--An object's north-south geographical
coordinate. Y stack coordinate (longitude)--An object's east-west
geographical coordinate.
Appendix B to Subpart A of Part 51 [Reserved]
Subparts B-E [Reserved]
Subpart F_Procedural Requirements
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, 7411, 7412, 7413, 7414, 7470-7479, 7501-
7508, 7601, and 7602.
Sec. 51.100 Definitions.
As used in this part, all terms not defined herein will have the
meaning given them in the Act:
(a) Act means the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq., as amended
by Pub. L. 91-604, 84 Stat. 1676 Pub. L. 95-95, 91 Stat., 685 and Pub.
L. 95-190, 91 Stat., 1399.)
(b) Administrator means the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) or an authorized representative.
(c) Primary standard means a national primary ambient air quality
standard promulgated pursuant to section 109 of the Act.
(d) Secondary standard means a national secondary ambient air
quality standard promulgated pursuant to section 109 of the Act.
(e) National standard means either a primary or secondary standard.
(f) Owner or operator means any person who owns, leases, operates,
controls, or supervises a facility, building, structure, or installation
which directly or indirectly result or may result in emissions of any
air pollutant for which a national standard is in effect.
(g) Local agency means any local government agency other than the
State agency, which is charged with responsibility for carrying out a
portion of the plan.
(h) Regional Office means one of the ten (10) EPA Regional Offices.
(i) State agency means the air pollution control agency primarily
responsible for development and implementation of a plan under the Act.
(j) Plan means an implementation plan approved or promulgated under
section 110 of 172 of the Act.
(k) Point source means the following:
(1) For particulate matter, sulfur oxides, carbon monoxide, volatile
organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen dioxide--
(i) Any stationary source the actual emissions of which are in
excess of 90.7 metric tons (100 tons) per year of the pollutant in a
region containing an area whose 1980 urban place population, as defined
by the U.S. Bureau of the Census, was equal to or greater than 1
million.
[[Page 139]]
(ii) Any stationary source the actual emissions of which are in
excess of 22.7 metric tons (25 tons) per year of the pollutant in a
region containing an area whose 1980 urban place population, as defined
by the U.S. Bureau of the Census, was less than 1 million; or
(2) For lead or lead compounds measured as elemental lead, any
stationary source that actually emits a total of 4.5 metric tons (5
tons) per year or more.
(l) Area source means any small residential, governmental,
institutional, commercial, or industrial fuel combustion operations;
onsite solid waste disposal facility; motor vehicles, aircraft vessels,
or other transportation facilities or other miscellaneous sources
identified through inventory techniques similar to those described in
the ``AEROS Manual series, Vol. II AEROS User's Manual,'' EPA-450/2-76-
029 December 1976.
(m) Region means an area designated as an air quality control region
(AQCR) under section 107(c) of the Act.
(n) Control strategy means a combination of measures designated to
achieve the aggregate reduction of emissions necessary for attainment
and maintenance of national standards including, but not limited to,
measures such as:
(1) Emission limitations.
(2) Federal or State emission charges or taxes or other economic
incentives or disincentives.
(3) Closing or relocation of residential, commercial, or industrial
facilities.
(4) Changes in schedules or methods of operation of commercial or
industrial facilities or transportation systems, including, but not
limited to, short-term changes made in accordance with standby plans.
(5) Periodic inspection and testing of motor vehicle emission
control systems, at such time as the Administrator determines that such
programs are feasible and practicable.
(6) Emission control measures applicable to in-use motor vehicles,
including, but not limited to, measures such as mandatory maintenance,
installation of emission control devices, and conversion to gaseous
fuels.
(7) Any transportation control measure including those
transportation measures listed in section 108(f) of the Clean Air Act as
amended.
(8) Any variation of, or alternative to any measure delineated
herein.
(9) Control or prohibition of a fuel or fuel additive used in motor
vehicles, if such control or prohibition is necessary to achieve a
national primary or secondary air quality standard and is approved by
the Administrator under section 211(c)(4)(C) of the Act.
(o) Reasonably available control technology (RACT) means devices,
systems, process modifications, or other apparatus or techniques that
are reasonably available taking into account:
(1) The necessity of imposing such controls in order to attain and
maintain a national ambient air quality standard;
(2) The social, environmental, and economic impact of such controls;
and
(3) Alternative means of providing for attainment and maintenance of
such standard. (This provision defines RACT for the purposes of Sec.
51.341(b) only.)
(p) Compliance schedule means the date or dates by which a source or
category of sources is required to comply with specific emission
limitations contained in an implementation plan and with any increments
of progress toward such compliance.
(q) Increments of progress means steps toward compliance which will
be taken by a specific source, including:
(1) Date of submittal of the source's final control plan to the
appropriate air pollution control agency;
(2) Date by which contracts for emission control systems or process
modifications will be awarded; or date by which orders will be issued
for the purchase of component parts to accomplish emission control or
process modification;
(3) Date of initiation of on-site construction or installation of
emission control equipment or process change;
(4) Date by which on-site construction or installation of emission
control equipment or process modification is to be completed; and
(5) Date by which final compliance is to be achieved.
(r) Transportation control measure means any measure that is
directed toward reducing emissions of air pollutants from transportation
sources. Such
[[Page 140]]
measures include, but are not limited to, those listed in section 108(f)
of the Clean Air Act.
(s) Volatile organic compounds (VOC) means any compound of carbon,
excluding carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, carbonic acid, metallic
carbides or carbonates, and ammonium carbonate, which participates in
atmospheric photochemical reactions.
(1) This includes any such organic compound other than the
following, which have been determined to have negligible photochemical
reactivity: methane; ethane; methylene chloride (dichloromethane);
1,1,1-trichloroethane (methyl chloroform); 1,1,2-trichloro-1,2,2-
trifluoroethane (CFC-113); trichlorofluoromethane (CFC-11);
dichlorodifluoromethane (CFC-12); chlorodifluoromethane (HCFC-22);
trifluoromethane (HFC-23); 1,2-dichloro 1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane (CFC-
114); chloropentafluoroethane (CFC-115); 1,1,1-trifluoro 2,2-
dichloroethane (HCFC-123); 1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane (HFC-134a); 1,1-
dichloro 1-fluoroethane (HCFC-141b); 1-chloro 1,1-difluoroethane (HCFC-
142b); 2-chloro-1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane (HCFC-124); pentafluoroethane
(HFC-125); 1,1,2,2-tetrafluoroethane (HFC-134); 1,1,1-trifluoroethane
(HFC-143a); 1,1-difluoroethane (HFC-152a); parachlorobenzotrifluoride
(PCBTF); cyclic, branched, or linear completely methylated siloxanes;
acetone; perchloroethylene (tetrachloroethylene); 3,3-dichloro-
1,1,1,2,2-pentafluoropropane (HCFC-225ca); 1,3-dichloro-1,1,2,2,3-
pentafluoropropane (HCFC-225cb); 1,1,1,2,3,4,4,5,5,5-decafluoropentane
(HFC 43-10mee); difluoromethane (HFC-32); ethylfluoride (HFC-161);
1,1,1,3,3,3-hexafluoropropane (HFC-236fa); 1,1,2,2,3-pentafluoropropane
(HFC-245ca); 1,1,2,3,3-pentafluoropropane (HFC-245ea); 1,1,1,2,3-
pentafluoropropane (HFC-245eb); 1,1,1,3,3-pentafluoropropane (HFC-
245fa); 1,1,1,2,3,3-hexafluoropropane (HFC-236ea); 1,1,1,3,3-
pentafluorobutane (HFC-365mfc); chlorofluoromethane (HCFC-31); 1 chloro-
1-fluoroethane (HCFC-151a); 1,2-dichloro-1,1,2-trifluoroethane (HCFC-
123a); 1,1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4-nonafluoro-4-methoxy-butane
(C4F9OCH3); 2-(difluoromethoxymethyl)-
1,1,1,2,3,3,3-heptafluoropropane
((CF3)2CFCF2OCH3); 1-ethoxy-
1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4,4-nonafluorobutane
(C4F9OC2H5); 2-
(ethoxydifluoromethyl)-1,1,1,2,3,3,3-heptafluoropropane
((CF3)2CFCF2OC2H5)
; methyl acetate and perfluorocarbon compounds which fall into these
classes:
(i) Cyclic, branched, or linear, completely fluorinated alkanes;
(ii) Cyclic, branched, or linear, completely fluorinated ethers with
no unsaturations;
(iii) Cyclic, branched, or linear, completely fluorinated tertiary
amines with no unsaturations; and
(iv) Sulfur containing perfluorocarbons with no unsaturations and
with sulfur bonds only to carbon and fluorine.
(2) For purposes of determining compliance with emissions limits,
VOC will be measured by the test methods in the approved State
implementation plan (SIP) or 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, as applicable.
Where such a method also measures compounds with negligible
photochemical reactivity, these negligibility-reactive compounds may be
excluded as VOC if the amount of such compounds is accurately
quantified, and such exclusion is approved by the enforcement authority.
(3) As a precondition to excluding these compounds as VOC or at any
time thereafter, the enforcement authority may require an owner or
operator to provide monitoring or testing methods and results
demonstrating, to the satisfaction of the enforcement authority, the
amount of negligibly-reactive compounds in the source's emissions.
(4) For purposes of Federal enforcement for a specific source, the
EPA shall use the test methods specified in the applicable EPA-approved
SIP, in a permit issued pursuant to a program approved or promulgated
under title V of the Act, or under 40 CFR part 51, subpart I or appendix
S, or under 40 CFR parts 52 or 60. The EPA shall not be bound by any
State determination as to appropriate methods for testing or monitoring
negligibly-reactive compounds if such determination is not reflected in
any of the above provisions.
(t)-(w) [Reserved]
[[Page 141]]
(x) Time period means any period of time designated by hour, month,
season, calendar year, averaging time, or other suitable
characteristics, for which ambient air quality is estimated.
(y) Variance means the temporary deferral of a final compliance date
for an individual source subject to an approved regulation, or a
temporary change to an approved regulation as it applies to an
individual source.
(z) Emission limitation and emission standard mean a requirement
established by a State, local government, or the Administrator which
limits the quantity, rate, or concentration of emissions of air
pollutants on a continuous basis, including any requirements which limit
the level of opacity, prescribe equipment, set fuel specifications, or
prescribe operation or maintenance procedures for a source to assure
continuous emission reduction.
(aa) Capacity factor means the ratio of the average load on a
machine or equipment for the period of time considered to the capacity
rating of the machine or equipment.
(bb) Excess emissions means emissions of an air pollutant in excess
of an emission standard.
(cc) Nitric acid plant means any facility producing nitric acid 30
to 70 percent in strength by either the pressure or atmospheric pressure
process.
(dd) Sulfuric acid plant means any facility producing sulfuric acid
by the contact process by burning elemental sulfur, alkylation acid,
hydrogen sulfide, or acid sludge, but does not include facilities where
conversion to sulfuric acid is utilized primarily as a means of
preventing emissions to the atmosphere of sulfur dioxide or other sulfur
compounds.
(ee) Fossil fuel-fired steam generator means a furnance or bioler
used in the process of burning fossil fuel for the primary purpose of
producing steam by heat transfer.
(ff) Stack means any point in a source designed to emit solids,
liquids, or gases into the air, including a pipe or duct but not
including flares.
(gg) A stack in existence means that the owner or operator had (1)
begun, or caused to begin, a continuous program of physical on-site
construction of the stack or (2) entered into binding agreements or
contractual obligations, which could not be cancelled or modified
without substantial loss to the owner or operator, to undertake a
program of construction of the stack to be completed within a reasonable
time.
(hh)(1) Dispersion technique means any technique which attempts to
affect the concentration of a pollutant in the ambient air by:
(i) Using that portion of a stack which exceeds good engineering
practice stack height:
(ii) Varying the rate of emission of a pollutant according to
atmospheric conditions or ambient concentrations of that pollutant; or
(iii) Increasing final exhaust gas plume rise by manipulating source
process parameters, exhaust gas parameters, stack parameters, or
combining exhaust gases from several existing stacks into one stack; or
other selective handling of exhaust gas streams so as to increase the
exhaust gas plume rise.
(2) The preceding sentence does not include:
(i) The reheating of a gas stream, following use of a pollution
control system, for the purpose of returning the gas to the temperature
at which it was originally discharged from the facility generating the
gas stream;
(ii) The merging of exhaust gas streams where:
(A) The source owner or operator demonstrates that the facility was
originally designed and constructed with such merged gas streams;
(B) After July 8, 1985 such merging is part of a change in operation
at the facility that includes the installation of pollution controls and
is accompanied by a net reduction in the allowable emissions of a
pollutant. This exclusion from the definition of dispersion techniques
shall apply only to the emission limitation for the pollutant affected
by such change in operation; or
(C) Before July 8, 1985, such merging was part of a change in
operation at the facility that included the installation of emissions
control equipment or was carried out for sound economic or engineering
reasons. Where there was an increase in the emission limitation or, in
the event that no emission limitation was in existence prior to the
[[Page 142]]
merging, an increase in the quantity of pollutants actually emitted
prior to the merging, the reviewing agency shall presume that merging
was significantly motivated by an intent to gain emissions credit for
greater dispersion. Absent a demonstration by the source owner or
operator that merging was not significantly motivated by such intent,
the reviewing agency shall deny credit for the effects of such merging
in calculating the allowable emissions for the source;
(iii) Smoke management in agricultural or silvicultural prescribed
burning programs;
(iv) Episodic restrictions on residential woodburning and open
burning; or
(v) Techniques under Sec. 51.100(hh)(1)(iii) which increase final
exhaust gas plume rise where the resulting allowable emissions of sulfur
dioxide from the facility do not exceed 5,000 tons per year.
(ii) Good engineering practice (GEP) stack height means the greater
of:
(1) 65 meters, measured from the ground-level elevation at the base
of the stack:
(2)(i) For stacks in existence on January 12, 1979, and for which
the owner or operator had obtained all applicable permits or approvals
required under 40 CFR parts 51 and 52.
Hg = 2.5H,
provided the owner or operator produces evidence that this equation was
actually relied on in establishing an emission limitation:
(ii) For all other stacks,
Hg = H + 1.5L
where:
Hg = good engineering practice stack height, measured from
the ground-level elevation at the base of the stack,
H = height of nearby structure(s) measured from the ground-level
elevation at the base of the stack.
L = lesser dimension, height or projected width, of nearby structure(s)
provided that the EPA, State or local control agency may require the use
of a field study or fluid model to verify GEP stack height for the
source; or
(3) The height demonstrated by a fluid model or a field study
approved by the EPA State or local control agency, which ensures that
the emissions from a stack do not result in excessive concentrations of
any air pollutant as a result of atmospheric downwash, wakes, or eddy
effects created by the source itself, nearby structures or nearby
terrain features.
(jj) Nearby as used in Sec. 51.100(ii) of this part is defined for
a specific structure or terrain feature and
(1) For purposes of applying the formulae provided in Sec.
51.100(ii)(2) means that distance up to five times the lesser of the
height or the width dimension of a structure, but not greater than 0.8
km (\1/2\ mile), and
(2) For conducting demonstrations under Sec. 51.100(ii)(3) means
not greater than 0.8 km (\1/2\ mile), except that the portion of a
terrain feature may be considered to be nearby which falls within a
distance of up to 10 times the maximum height (Ht) of the
feature, not to exceed 2 miles if such feature achieves a height
(Ht) 0.8 km from the stack that is at least 40 percent of the
GEP stack height determined by the formulae provided in Sec.
51.100(ii)(2)(ii) of this part or 26 meters, whichever is greater, as
measured from the ground-level elevation at the base of the stack. The
height of the structure or terrain feature is measured from the ground-
level elevation at the base of the stack.
(kk) Excessive concentration is defined for the purpose of
determining good engineering practice stack height under Sec.
51.100(ii)(3) and means:
(1) For sources seeking credit for stack height exceeding that
established under Sec. 51.100(ii)(2) a maximum ground-level
concentration due to emissions from a stack due in whole or part to
downwash, wakes, and eddy effects produced by nearby structures or
nearby terrain features which individually is at least 40 percent in
excess of the maximum concentration experienced in the absence of such
downwash, wakes, or eddy effects and which contributes to a total
concentration due to emissions from all sources that is greater than an
ambient air quality standard. For sources subject to the prevention of
significant deterioration program (40 CFR 51.166 and 52.21), an
excessive concentration alternatively means a maximum ground-level
concentration due to emissions from a
[[Page 143]]
stack due in whole or part to downwash, wakes, or eddy effects produced
by nearby structures or nearby terrain features which individually is at
least 40 percent in excess of the maximum concentration experienced in
the absence of such downwash, wakes, or eddy effects and greater than a
prevention of significant deterioration increment. The allowable
emission rate to be used in making demonstrations under this part shall
be prescribed by the new source performance standard that is applicable
to the source category unless the owner or operator demonstrates that
this emission rate is infeasible. Where such demonstrations are approved
by the authority administering the State implementation plan, an
alternative emission rate shall be established in consultation with the
source owner or operator.
(2) For sources seeking credit after October 11, 1983, for increases
in existing stack heights up to the heights established under Sec.
51.100(ii)(2), either (i) a maximum ground-level concentration due in
whole or part to downwash, wakes or eddy effects as provided in
paragraph (kk)(1) of this section, except that the emission rate
specified by any applicable State implementation plan (or, in the
absence of such a limit, the actual emission rate) shall be used, or
(ii) the actual presence of a local nuisance caused by the existing
stack, as determined by the authority administering the State
implementation plan; and
(3) For sources seeking credit after January 12, 1979 for a stack
height determined under Sec. 51.100(ii)(2) where the authority
administering the State implementation plan requires the use of a field
study or fluid model to verify GEP stack height, for sources seeking
stack height credit after November 9, 1984 based on the aerodynamic
influence of cooling towers, and for sources seeking stack height credit
after December 31, 1970 based on the aerodynamic influence of structures
not adequately represented by the equations in Sec. 51.100(ii)(2), a
maximum ground-level concentration due in whole or part to downwash,
wakes or eddy effects that is at least 40 percent in excess of the
maximum concentration experienced in the absence of such downwash,
wakes, or eddy effects.
(ll)-(mm) [Reserved]
(nn) Intermittent control system (ICS) means a dispersion technique
which varies the rate at which pollutants are emitted to the atmosphere
according to meteorological conditions and/or ambient concentrations of
the pollutant, in order to prevent ground-level concentrations in excess
of applicable ambient air quality standards. Such a dispersion technique
is an ICS whether used alone, used with other dispersion techniques, or
used as a supplement to continuous emission controls (i.e., used as a
supplemental control system).
(oo) Particulate matter means any airborne finely divided solid or
liquid material with an aerodynamic diameter smaller than 100
micrometers.
(pp) Particulate matter emissions means all finely divided solid or
liquid material, other than uncombined water, emitted to the ambient air
as measured by applicable reference methods, or an equivalent or
alternative method, specified in this chapter, or by a test method
specified in an approved State implementation plan.
(qq) PM10 means particulate matter with an aerodynamic
diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometers as measured by a
reference method based on appendix J of part 50 of this chapter and
designated in accordance with part 53 of this chapter or by an
equivalent method designated in accordance with part 53 of this chapter.
(rr) PM10 emissions means finely divided solid or liquid
material, with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal
10 micrometers emitted to the ambient air as measured by an applicable
reference method, or an equivalent or alternative method, specified in
this chapter or by a test method specified in an approved State
implementation plan.
(ss) Total suspended particulate means particulate matter as
measured by the
[[Page 144]]
method described in appendix B of part 50 of this chapter.
[51 FR 40661, Nov. 7, 1986, as amended at 52 FR 24712, July 1, 1987; 57
FR 3945, Feb. 3, 1992; 61 FR 4590, Feb. 7, 1996; 61 FR 16060, Apr. 11,
1996; 61 FR 30162, June 14, 1996; 61 FR 52850, Oct. 8, 1996; 62 FR
44903, Aug. 25, 1997; 63 FR 9151, Feb. 24, 1998; 63 FR 17333, Apr. 9,
1998]
Sec. 51.101 Stipulations.
Nothing in this part will be construed in any manner:
(a) To encourage a State to prepare, adopt, or submit a plan which
does not provide for the protection and enhancement of air quality so as
to promote the public health and welfare and productive capacity.
(b) To encourage a State to adopt any particular control strategy
without taking into consideration the cost-effectiveness of such control
strategy in relation to that of alternative control strategies.
(c) To preclude a State from employing techniques other than those
specified in this part for purposes of estimating air quality or
demonstrating the adequacy of a control strategy, provided that such
other techniques are shown to be adequate and appropriate for such
purposes.
(d) To encourage a State to prepare, adopt, or submit a plan without
taking into consideration the social and economic impact of the control
strategy set forth in such plan, including, but not limited to, impact
on availability of fuels, energy, transportation, and employment.
(e) To preclude a State from preparing, adopting, or submitting a
plan which provides for attainment and maintenance of a national
standard through the application of a control strategy not specifically
identified or described in this part.
(f) To preclude a State or political subdivision thereof from
adopting or enforcing any emission limitations or other measures or
combinations thereof to attain and maintain air quality better than that
required by a national standard.
(g) To encourage a State to adopt a control strategy uniformly
applicable throughout a region unless there is no satisfactory
alternative way of providing for attainment and maintenance of a
national standard throughout such region.
[61 FR 30163, June 14, 1996]
Sec. 51.102 Public hearings.
(a) Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (c) of this section,
States must conduct one or more public hearings on the following prior
to adoption and submission to EPA of:
(1) Any plan or revision of it required by Sec. 51.104(a).
(2) Any individual compliance schedule under (Sec. 51.260).
(3) Any revision under Sec. 51.104(d).
(b) Separate hearings may be held for plans to implement primary and
secondary standards.
(c) No hearing will be required for any change to an increment of
progress in an approved individual compliance schedule unless such
change is likely to cause the source to be unable to comply with the
final compliance date in the schedule. The requirements of Sec. Sec.
51.104 and 51.105 will be applicable to such schedules, however.
(d) Any hearing required by paragraph (a) of this section will be
held only after reasonable notice, which will be considered to include,
at least 30 days prior to the date of such hearing(s):
(1) Notice given to the public by prominent advertisement in the
area affected announcing the date(s), time(s), and place(s) of such
hearing(s);
(2) Availability of each proposed plan or revision for public
inspection in at least one location in each region to which it will
apply, and the availability of each compliance schedule for public
inspection in at least one location in the region in which the affected
source is located;
(3) Notification to the Administrator (through the appropriate
Regional Office);
(4) Notification to each local air pollution control agency which
will be significantly impacted by such plan, schedule or revision;
(5) In the case of an interstate region, notification to any other
States included, in whole or in part, in the regions which are
significantly impacted by such plan or schedule or revision.
[[Page 145]]
(e) The State must prepare and retain, for inspection by the
Administrator upon request, a record of each hearing. The record must
contain, as a minimum, a list of witnesses together with the text of
each presentation.
(f) The State must submit with the plan, revision, or schedule a
certification that the hearing required by paragraph (a) of this section
was held in accordance with the notice required by paragraph (d) of this
section.
(g) Upon written application by a State agency (through the
appropriate Regional Office), the Administrator may approve State
procedures for public hearings. The following criteria apply:
(1) Procedures approved under this section shall be deemed to
satisfy the requirement of this part regarding public hearings.
(2) Procedures different from this part may be approved if they--
(i) Ensure public participation in matters for which hearings are
required; and
(ii) Provide adequate public notification of the opportunity to
participate.
(3) The Administrator may impose any conditions on approval he or
she deems necessary.
[36 FR 22938, Nov. 25, 1971, as amended at 65 FR 8657, Feb. 22, 2000]
Sec. 51.103 Submission of plans, preliminary review of plans.
(a) The State makes an official plan submission to EPA only when the
submission conforms to the requirements of appendix V to this part, and
the State delivers five copies of the plan to the appropriate Regional
Office, with a letter giving notice of such action.
(b) Upon request of a State, the Administrator will provide
preliminary review of a plan or portion thereof submitted in advance of
the date such plan is due. Such requests must be made in writing to the
appropriate Regional Office and must be accompanied by five copies of
the materials to be reviewed. Requests for preliminary review do not
relieve a State of the responsibility of adopting and submitting plans
in accordance with prescribed due dates.
[51 FR 40661, Nov. 7, 1986, as amended at 55 FR 5830, Feb. 16, 1990; 63
FR 9151, Feb. 24, 1998]
Sec. 51.104 Revisions.
(a) States may revise the plan from time to time consistent with the
requirements applicable to implementation plans under this part.
(b) The States must submit any revision of any regulation or any
compliance schedule under paragraph (c) of this section to the
Administrator no later than 60 days after its adoption.
(c) EPA will approve revisions only after applicable hearing
requirements of Sec. 51.102 have been satisfied.
(d) In order for a variance to be considered for approval as a
revision to the State implementation plan, the State must submit it in
accordance with the requirements of this section.
[51 FR 40661, Nov. 7, 1986, as amended at 61 FR 16060, Apr. 11, 1996]
Sec. 51.105 Approval of plans.
Revisions of a plan, or any portion thereof, will not be considered
part of an applicable plan until such revisions have been approved by
the Administrator in accordance with this part.
[51 FR 40661, Nov. 7, 1986, as amended at 60 FR 33922, June 29, 1995]
Subpart G_Control Strategy
Source: 51 FR 40665, Nov. 7, 1986, unless otherwise noted.
Sec. 51.110 Attainment and maintenance of national standards.
(a) Each plan providing for the attainment of a primary or secondary
standard must specify the projected attainment date.
(b)-(f) [Reserved]
(g) During developing of the plan, EPA encourages States to identify
alternative control strategies, as well as the costs and benefits of
each such alternative for attainment or maintenance of the national
standard.
[51 FR 40661 Nov. 7, 1986 as amended at 61 FR 16060, Apr. 11, 1996; 61
FR 30163, June 14, 1996]
Sec. 51.111 Description of control measures.
Each plan must set forth a control strategy which includes the
following:
(a) A description of enforcement methods including, but not limited
to:
[[Page 146]]
(1) Procedures for monitoring compliance with each of the selected
control measures,
(2) Procedures for handling violations, and
(3) A designation of agency responsibility for enforcement of
implementation.
(b) [Reserved]
[51 FR 40665, Nov. 7, 1986, as amended at 60 FR 33922, June 29, 1995]
Sec. 51.112 Demonstration of adequacy.
(a) Each plan must demonstrate that the measures, rules, and
regulations contained in it are adequate to provide for the timely
attainment and maintenance of the national standard that it implements.
(1) The adequacy of a control strategy shall be demonstrated by
means of applicable air quality models, data bases, and other
requirements specified in appendix W of this part (Guideline on Air
Quality Models).
(2) Where an air quality model specified in appendix W of this part
(Guideline on Air Quality Models) is inappropriate, the model may be
modified or another model substituted. Such a modification or
substitution of a model may be made on a case-by-case basis or, where
appropriate, on a generic basis for a specific State program. Written
approval of the Administrator must be obtained for any modification or
substitution. In addition, use of a modified or substituted model must
be subject to notice and opportunity for public comment under procedures
set forth in Sec. 51.102.
(b) The demonstration must include the following:
(1) A summary of the computations, assumptions, and judgments used
to determine the degree of reduction of emissions (or reductions in the
growth of emissions) that will result from the implementation of the
control strategy.
(2) A presentation of emission levels expected to result from
implementation of each measure of the control strategy.
(3) A presentation of the air quality levels expected to result from
implementation of the overall control strategy presented either in
tabular form or as an isopleth map showing expected maximum pollutant
concentrations.
(4) A description of the dispersion models used to project air
quality and to evaluate control strategies.
(5) For interstate regions, the analysis from each constituent State
must, where practicable, be based upon the same regional emission
inventory and air quality baseline.
[51 FR 40665, Nov. 7, 1986, as amended at 58 FR 38821, July 20, 1993; 60
FR 40468, Aug. 9, 1995; 61 FR 41840, Aug. 12, 1996]
Sec. 51.113 [Reserved]
Sec. 51.114 Emissions data and projections.
(a) Except for lead, each plan must contain a detailed inventory of
emissions from point and area sources. Lead requirements are specified
in Sec. 51.117. The inventory must be based upon measured emissions or,
where measured emissions are not available, documented emission factors.
(b) Each plan must contain a summary of emission levels projected to
result from application of the new control strategy.
(c) Each plan must identify the sources of the data used in the
projection of emissions.
Sec. 51.115 Air quality data and projections.
(a) Each plan must contain a summary of data showing existing air
quality.
(b) Each plan must:
(1) Contain a summary of air quality concentrations expected to
result from application of the control strategy, and
(2) Identify and describe the dispersion model, other air quality
model, or receptor model used.
(c) Actual measurements of air quality must be used where available
if made by methods specified in appendix C to part 58 of this chapter.
Estimated air quality using appropriate modeling techniques may be used
to supplement measurements.
(d) For purposes of developing a control strategy, background
concentration shall be taken into consideration with respect to
particulate matter. As
[[Page 147]]
used in this subpart, background concentration is that portion of the
measured ambient levels that cannot be reduced by controlling emissions
from man-made sources.
(e) In developing an ozone control strategy for a particular area,
background ozone concentrations and ozone transported into an area must
be considered. States may assume that the ozone standard will be
attained in upwind areas.
Sec. 51.116 Data availability.
(a) The State must retain all detailed data and calculations used in
the preparation of each plan or each plan revision, and make them
available for public inspection and submit them to the Administrator at
his request.
(b) The detailed data and calculations used in the preparation of
plan revisions are not considered a part of the plan.
(c) Each plan must provide for public availability of emission data
reported by source owners or operators or otherwise obtained by a State
or local agency. Such emission data must be correlated with applicable
emission limitations or other measures. As used in this paragraph,
correlated means presented in such a manner as to show the relationship
between measured or estimated amounts of emissions and the amounts of
such emissions allowable under the applicable emission limitations or
other measures.
Sec. 51.117 Additional provisions for lead.
In addition to other requirements in Sec. Sec. 51.100 through
51.116 the following requirements apply to lead. To the extent they
conflict, there requirements are controlling over those of the
proceeding sections.
(a) Control strategy demonstration. Each plan must contain a
demonstration showing that the plan will attain and maintain the
standard in the following areas:
(1) Areas in the vicinity of the following point sources of lead:
Primary lead smelters, Secondary lead smelters, Primary copper smelters,
Lead gasoline additive plants, Lead-acid storage battery manufacturing
plants that produce 2,000 or more batteries per day. Any other
stationary source that actually emits 25 or more tons per year of lead
or lead compounds measured as elemental lead.
(2) Any other area that has lead air concentrations in excess of the
national ambient air quality standard concentration for lead, measured
since January 1, 1974.
(b) Time period for demonstration of adequacy. The demonstration of
adequacy of the control strategy required under Sec. 51.112 may cover a
longer period if allowed by the appropriate EPA Regional Administrator.
(c) Special modeling provisions. (1) For urbanized areas with
measured lead concentrations in excess of 4.0 [mu]g/m\3\, quarterly mean
measured since January 1, 1974, the plan must employ the modified
rollback model for the demonstration of attainment as a minimum, but may
use an atmospheric dispersion model if desired, consistent with
requirements contained in Sec. 51.112(a). If a proportional model is
used, the air quality data should be the same year as the emissions
inventory required under the paragraph e.
(2) For each point source listed in Sec. 51.117(a), that plan must
employ an atmospheric dispersion model for demonstration of attainment,
consistent with requirements contained in Sec. 51.112(a).
(3) For each area in the vicinity of an air quality monitor that has
recorded lead concentrations in excess of the lead national standard
concentration, the plan must employ the modified rollback model as a
minimum, but may use an atmospheric dispersion model if desired for the
demonstration of attainment, consistent with requirements contained in
Sec. 51.112(a).
(d) Air quality data and projections. (1) Each State must submit to
the appropriate EPA Regional Office with the plan, but not part of the
plan, all lead air quality data measured since January 1, 1974. This
requirement does not apply if the data has already been submitted.
(2) The data must be submitted in accordance with the procedures and
data forms specified in Chapter 3.4.0 of the ``AEROS User's Manual''
concerning storage and retrieval of aerometric
[[Page 148]]
data (SAROAD) except where the Regional Administrator waives this
requirement.
(3) If additional lead air quality data are desired to determine
lead air concentrations in areas suspected of exceeding the lead
national ambient air quality standard, the plan may include data from
any previously collected filters from particulate matter high volume
samplers. In determining the lead content of the filters for control
strategy demonstration purposes, a State may use, in addition to the
reference method, X-ray fluorescence or any other method approved by the
Regional Administrator.
(e) Emissions data. (1) The point source inventory on which the
summary of the baseline lead emissions inventory is based must contain
all sources that emit five or more tons of lead per year.
(2) Each State must submit lead emissions data to the appropriate
EPA Regional Office with the original plan. The submission must be made
with the plan, but not as part of the plan, and must include emissions
data and information related to point and area source emissions. The
emission data and information should include the information identified
in the Hazard ous and Trace Emissions System (HATREMS) point source
coding forms for all point sources and the area source coding forms for
all sources that are not point sources, but need not necessarily be in
the format of those forms.
[41 FR 18388, May 3, 1976, as amended at 58 FR 38822, July 20, 1993]
Sec. 51.118 Stack height provisions.
(a) The plan must provide that the degree of emission limitation
required of any source for control of any air pollutant must not be
affected by so much of any source's stack height that exceeds good
engineering practice or by any other dispersion technique, except as
provided in Sec. 51.118(b). The plan must provide that before a State
submits to EPA a new or revised emission limitation that is based on a
good engineering practice stack height that exceeds the height allowed
by Sec. 51.100(ii) (1) or (2), the State must notify the public of the
availabilty of the demonstration study and must provide opportunity for
a public hearing on it. This section does not require the plan to
restrict, in any manner, the actual stack height of any source.
(b) The provisions of Sec. 51.118(a) shall not apply to (1) stack
heights in existence, or dispersion techniques implemented on or before
December 31, 1970, except where pollutants are being emitted from such
stacks or using such dispersion techniques by sources, as defined in
section 111(a)(3) of the Clean Air Act, which were constructed, or
reconstructed, or for which major modifications, as defined in
Sec. Sec. 51.165(a)(1)(v)(A), 51.166(b)(2)(i) and 52.21(b)(2)(i), were
carried out after December 31, 1970; or (2) coal-fired steam electric
generating units subject to the provisions of section 118 of the Clean
Air Act, which commenced operation before July 1, 1957, and whose stacks
were construced under a construction contract awarded before February 8,
1974.
Sec. 51.119 Intermittent control systems.
(a) The use of an intermittent control system (ICS) may be taken
into account in establishing an emission limitation for a pollutant
under a State implementation plan, provided:
(1) The ICS was implemented before December 31, 1970, according to
the criteria specified in Sec. 51.119(b).
(2) The extent to which the ICS is taken into account is limited to
reflect emission levels and associated ambient pollutant concentrations
that would result if the ICS was the same as it was before December 31,
1970, and was operated as specified by the operating system of the ICS
before December 31, 1970.
(3) The plan allows the ICS to compensate only for emissions from a
source for which the ICS was implemented before December 31, 1970, and,
in the event the source has been modified, only to the extent the
emissions correspond to the maximum capacity of the source before
December 31, 1970. For purposes of this paragraph, a source for which
the ICS was implemented is any particular structure or equipment the
emissions from which were subject to the ICS operating procedures.
[[Page 149]]
(4) The plan requires the continued operation of any constant
pollution control system which was in use before December 31, 1970, or
the equivalent of that system.
(5) The plan clearly defines the emission limits affected by the ICS
and the manner in which the ICS is taken into account in establishing
those limits.
(6) The plan contains requirements for the operation and maintenance
of the qualifying ICS which, together with the emission limitations and
any other necessary requirements, will assure that the national ambient
air quality standards and any applicable prevention of significant
deterioration increments will be attained and maintained. These
requirements shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, the
following:
(i) Requirements that a source owner or operator continuously
operate and maintain the components of the ICS specified at Sec.
51.119(b)(3) (ii)-(iv) in a manner which assures that the ICS is at
least as effective as it was before December 31, 1970. The air quality
monitors and meteorological instrumentation specified at Sec. 51.119(b)
may be operated by a local authority or other entity provided the source
has ready access to the data from the monitors and instrumentation.
(ii) Requirements which specify the circumstances under which, the
extent to which, and the procedures through which, emissions shall be
curtailed through the activation of ICS.
(iii) Requirements for recordkeeping which require the owner or
operator of the source to keep, for periods of at least 3 years, records
of measured ambient air quality data, meteorological information
acquired, and production data relating to those processes affected by
the ICS.
(iv) Requirements for reporting which require the owner or operator
of the source to notify the State and EPA within 30 days of a NAAQS
violation pertaining to the pollutant affected by the ICS.
(7) Nothing in this paragraph affects the applicability of any new
source review requirements or new source performance standards contained
in the Clean Air Act or 40 CFR subchapter C. Nothing in this paragraph
precludes a State from taking an ICS into account in establishing
emission limitations to any extent less than permitted by this
paragraph.
(b) An intermittent control system (ICS) may be considered
implemented for a pollutant before December 31, 1970, if the following
criteria are met:
(1) The ICS must have been established and operational with respect
to that pollutant prior to December 31, 1970, and reductions in
emissions of that pollutant must have occurred when warranted by
meteorological and ambient monitoring data.
(2) The ICS must have been designed and operated to meet an air
quality objective for that pollutant such as an air quality level or
standard.
(3) The ICS must, at a minimum, have included the following
components prior to December 31, 1970:
(i) Air quality monitors. An array of sampling stations whose
location and type were consistent with the air quality objective and
operation of the system.
(ii) Meteorological instrumentation. A meteorological data
acquisition network (may be limited to a single station) which provided
meteorological prediction capabilities sufficient to determine the need
for, and degree of, emission curtailments necessary to achieve the air
quality design objective.
(iii) Operating system. A system of established procedures for
determining the need for curtailments and for accomplishing such
curtailments. Documentation of this system, as required by paragraph
(n)(4), may consist of a compendium of memoranda or comparable material
which define the criteria and procedures for curtailments and which
identify the type and number of personnel authorized to initiate
curtailments.
(iv) Meteorologist. A person, schooled in meteorology, capable of
interpreting data obtained from the meteorological network and qualified
to forecast meteorological incidents and their effect on ambient air
quality. Sources may have obtained meteorological services through a
consultant. Services of such a consultant could include sufficient
training of source personnel for certain
[[Page 150]]
operational procedures, but not for design, of the ICS.
(4) Documentation sufficient to support the claim that the ICS met
the criteria listed in this paragraph must be provided. Such
documentation may include affidavits or other documentation.
Sec. 51.120 Requirements for State Implementation Plan revisions
relating to new motor vehicles.
(a) The EPA Administrator finds that the State Implementation Plans
(SIPs) for the States of Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland,
Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode
Island, and Vermont, the portion of Virginia included (as of November
15, 1990) within the Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area that
includes the District of Columbia, are substantially inadequate to
comply with the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D) of the Clean Air
Act, 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2)(D), and to mitigate adequately the interstate
pollutant transport described in section 184 of the Clean Air Act, 42
U.S.C. 7511C, to the extent that they do not provide for emission
reductions from new motor vehicles in the amount that would be achieved
by the Ozone Transport Commission low emission vehicle (OTC LEV) program
described in paragraph (c) of this section. This inadequacy will be
deemed cured for each of the aforementioned States (including the
District of Columbia) in the event that EPA determines through
rulemaking that a national LEV-equivalent new motor vehicle emission
control program is an acceptable alternative for OTC LEV and finds that
such program is in effect. In the event no such finding is made, each of
those States must adopt and submit to EPA by February 15, 1996 a SIP
revision meeting the requirements of paragraph (b) of this section in
order to cure the SIP inadequacy.
(b) If a SIP revision is required under paragraph (a) of this
section, it must contain the OTC LEV program described in paragraph (c)
of this section unless the State adopts and submits to EPA, as a SIP
revision, other emission-reduction measures sufficient to meet the
requirements of paragraph (d) of this section. If a State adopts and
submits to EPA, as a SIP revision, other emission-reduction measures
pursuant to paragraph (d) of this section, then for purposes of
determining whether such a SIP revision is complete within the meaning
of section 110(k)(1) (and hence is eligible at least for consideration
to be approved as satisfying paragraph (d) of this section), such a SIP
revision must contain other adopted emission-reduction measures that,
together with the identified potentially broadly practicable measures,
achieve at least the minimum level of emission reductions that could
potentially satisfy the requirements of paragraph (d) of this section.
All such measures must be fully adopted and enforceable.
(c) The OTC LEV program is a program adopted pursuant to section 177
of the Clean Air Act.
(1) The OTC LEV program shall contain the following elements:
(i) It shall apply to all new 1999 and later model year passenger
cars and light-duty trucks (0-5750 pounds loaded vehicle weight), as
defined in Title 13, California Code of Regulations, section 1900(b)(11)
and (b)(8), respectively, that are sold, imported, delivered, purchased,
leased, rented, acquired, received, or registered in any area of the
State that is in the Northeast Ozone Transport Region as of December 19,
1994.
(ii) All vehicles to which the OTC LEV program is applicable shall
be required to have a certificate from the California Air Resources
Board (CARB) affirming compliance with California standards.
(iii) All vehicles to which this LEV program is applicable shall be
required to meet the mass emission standards for Non-Methane Organic
Gases (NMOG), Carbon Monoxide (CO), Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX),
Formaldehyde (HCHO), and particulate matter (PM) as specified in Title
13, California Code of Regulations, section 1960.1(f)(2) (and
formaldehyde standards under section 1960.1(e)(2), as applicable) or as
specified by California for certification as a TLEV (Transitional Low-
Emission Vehicle), LEV (Low-Emission Vehicle), ULEV (Ultra-Low-Emission
Vehicle), or ZEV (Zero-Emission Vehicle) under section 1960.1(g)(1) (and
section
[[Page 151]]
1960.1(e)(3), for formaldehyde standards, as applicable).
(iv) All manufacturers of vehicles subject to the OTC LEV program
shall be required to meet the fleet average NMOG exhaust emission values
for production and delivery for sale of their passenger cars, light-duty
trucks 0-3750 pounds loaded vehicle weight, and light-duty trucks 3751-
5750 pounds loaded vehicle weight specified in Title 13, California Code
of Regulations, section 1960.1(g)(2) for each model year beginning in
1999. A State may determine not to implement the NMOG fleet average in
the first model year of the program if the State begins implementation
of the program late in a calendar year. However, all States must
implement the NMOG fleet average in any full model years of the LEV
program.
(v) All manufacturers shall be allowed to average, bank and trade
credits in the same manner as allowed under the program specified in
Title 13, California Code of Regulations, section 1960.1(g)(2) footnote
7 for each model year beginning in 1999. States may account for credits
banked by manufacturers in California or New York in years immediately
preceding model year 1999, in a manner consistent with California
banking and discounting procedures.
(vi) The provisions for small volume manufacturers and intermediate
volume manufacturers, as applied by Title 13, California Code of
Regulations to California's LEV program, shall apply. Those
manufacturers defined as small volume manufacturers and intermediate
volume manufacturers in California under California's regulations shall
be considered small volume manufacturers and intermediate volume
manufacturers under this program.
(vii) The provisions for hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs), as defined
in Title 13 California Code of Regulations, section 1960.1, shall apply
for purposes of calculating fleet average NMOG values.
(viii) The provisions for fuel-flexible vehicles and dual-fuel
vehicles specified in Title 13, California Code of Regulations, section
1960.1(g)(1) footnote 4 shall apply.
(ix) The provisions for reactivity adjustment factors, as defined by
Title 13, California Code of Regulations, shall apply.
(x) The aforementioned State OTC LEV standards shall be identical to
the aforementioned California standards as such standards exist on
December 19, 1994.
(xi) All States' OTC LEV programs must contain any other provisions
of California's LEV program specified in Title 13, California Code of
Regulations necessary to comply with section 177 of the Clean Air Act.
(2) States are not required to include the mandate for production of
ZEVs specified in Title 13, California Code of Regulations, section
1960.1(g)(2) footnote 9.
(3) Except as specified elsewhere in this section, States may
implement the OTC LEV program in any manner consistent with the Act that
does not decrease the emissions reductions or jeopardize the
effectiveness of the program.
(d) The SIP revision that paragraph (b) of this section describes as
an alternative to the OTC LEV program described in paragraph (c) of this
section must contain a set of State-adopted measures that provides at
least the following amount of emission reductions in time to bring
serious ozone nonattainment areas into attainment by their 1999
attainment date:
(1) Reductions at least equal to the difference between:
(i) The nitrogen oxides (NOX) emission reductions from
the 1990 statewide emissions inventory achievable through implementation
of all of the Clean Air Act-mandated and potentially broadly practicable
control measures throughout all portions of the State that are within
the Northeast Ozone Transport Region created under section 184(a) of the
Clean Air Act as of December 19, 1994; and
(ii) A reduction in NOX emissions from the 1990 statewide
inventory in such portions of the State of 50% or whatever greater
reduction is necessary to prevent significant contribution to
nonattainment in, or interference with maintenance by, any downwind
State.
(2) Reductions at least equal to the difference between:
[[Page 152]]
(i) The VOC emission reductions from the 1990 statewide emissions
inventory achievable through implementation of all of the Clean Air Act-
mandated and potentially broadly practicable control measures in all
portions of the State in, or near and upwind of, any of the serious or
severe ozone nonattainment areas lying in the series of such areas
running northeast from the Washington, DC, ozone nonattainment area to
and including the Portsmouth, New Hampshire ozone nonattainment area;
and
(ii) A reduction in VOC emissions from the 1990 emissions inventory
in all such areas of 50% or whatever greater reduction is necessary to
prevent significant contribution to nonattainment in, or interference
with maintenance by, any downwind State.
[60 FR 4736, Jan. 24, 1995]
Sec. 51.121 Findings and requirements for submission of State
implementation plan revisions relating to emissions of oxides
of nitrogen.
(a)(1) The Administrator finds that the State implementation plan
(SIP) for each jurisdiction listed in paragraph (c) of this section is
substantially inadequate to comply with the requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C.
7410(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), because the SIP does not include adequate
provisions to prohibit sources and other activities from emitting
nitrogen oxides (``NOX'') in amounts that will contribute
significantly to nonattainment in one or more other States with respect
to the 1-hour ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). Each
of the jurisdictions listed in paragraph (c) of this section must submit
to EPA a SIP revision that cures the inadequacy.
(2) Under section 110(a)(1) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(1), the
Administrator determines that each jurisdiction listed in paragraph (c)
of this section must submit a SIP revision to comply with the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), 42 U.S.C.
7410(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), through the adoption of adequate provisions
prohibiting sources and other activities from emitting NOX in
amounts that will contribute significantly to nonattainment in, or
interfere with maintenance by, one or more other States with respect to
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
(3)(i) For purposes of this section, the term ``Phase I SIP
Submission'' means those SIP revisions submitted by States on or before
October 30, 2000 in compliance with paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this
section. A State's Phase I SIP submission may include portions of the
NOX budget, under paragraph (e)(3) of this section, that a
State is required to include in a Phase II SIP submission.
(ii) For purposes of this section, the term ``Phase II SIP
Submission'' means those SIP revisions that must be submitted by a State
in compliance with paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this section and which
includes portions of the NOX budget under paragraph (e)(3) of
this section.
(b)(1) For each jurisdiction listed in paragraph (c) of this
section, the SIP revision required under paragraph (a) of this section
will contain adequate provisions, for purposes of complying with section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), only if
the SIP revision:
(i) Contains control measures adequate to prohibit emissions of
NOX that would otherwise be projected, in accordance with
paragraph (g) of this section, to cause the jurisdiction's overall
NOX emissions to be in excess of the budget for that
jurisdiction described in paragraph (e) of this section (except as
provided in paragraph (b)(2) of this section),
(ii) Requires full implementation of all such control measures by no
later than May 31, 2004 for the sources covered by a Phase I SIP
submission and May 1, 2007 for the sources covered by a Phase II SIP
submission.
(iii) Meets the other requirements of this section. The SIP
revision's compliance with the requirement of paragraph (b)(1)(i) of
this section shall be considered compliance with the jurisdiction's
budget for purposes of this section.
(2) The requirements of paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section shall be
deemed satisfied, for the portion of the budget covered by an interstate
trading program, if the SIP revision:
[[Page 153]]
(i) Contains provisions for an interstate trading program that EPA
determines will, in conjunction with interstate trading programs for one
or more other jurisdictions, prohibit NOX emissions in excess
of the sum of the portion of the budgets covered by the trading programs
for those jurisdictions; and
(ii) Conforms to the following criteria:
(A) Emissions reductions used to demonstrate compliance with the
revision must occur during the ozone season.
(B) Emissions reductions occurring prior to the first year in which
any sources covered by Phase I or Phase II SIP submission are subject to
control measures under paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section may be used
by a source to demonstrate compliance with the SIP revision for the
first and second ozone seasons in which any sources covered by a Phase I
or Phase II SIP submission are subject to such control measures,
provided the SIPs provisions regarding such use comply with the
requirements of paragraph (e)(4) of this section.
(C) Emissions reductions credits or emissions allowances held by a
source or other person following the first ozone season in which any
sources covered by a Phase I or Phase II SIP submission are subject to
control measures under paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section or any ozone
season thereafter that are not required to demonstrate compliance with
the SIP for the relevant ozone season may be banked and used to
demonstrate compliance with the SIP in a subsequent ozone season.
(D) Early reductions created according to the provisions in
paragraph (b)(2)(ii)(B) of this section and used in the first ozone
season in which any sources covered by Phase I or Phase II submissions
are subject to the control measures under paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this
section are not subject to the flow control provisions set forth in
paragraph (b)(2)(ii)(E) of this section.
(E) Starting with the second ozone season in which any sources
covered by a Phase I or Phase II SIP submission are subject to control
measures under paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section, the SIP shall
include provisions to limit the use of banked emissions reductions
credits or emissions allowances beyond a predetermined amount as
calculated by one of the following approaches:
(1) Following the determination of compliance after each ozone
season, if the total number of emissions reduction credits or banked
allowances held by sources or other persons subject to the trading
program exceeds 10 percent of the sum of the allowable ozone season
NOX emissions for all sources subject to the trading program,
then all banked allowances used for compliance for the following ozone
season shall be subject to the following:
(i) A ratio will be established according to the following formula:
(0.10) x (the sum of the allowable ozone season NOX emissions
for all sources subject to the trading program) / (the total number of
banked emissions reduction credits or emissions allowances held by all
sources or other persons subject to the trading program).
(ii) The ratio, determined using the formula specified in paragraph
(b)(2)(ii)(E)(1)(i) of this section, will be multiplied by the number of
banked emissions reduction credits or emissions allowances held in each
account at the time of compliance determination. The resulting product
is the number of banked emissions reduction credits or emissions
allowances in the account which can be used in the current year's ozone
season at a rate of 1 credit or allowance for every 1 ton of emissions.
The SIP shall specify that banked emissions reduction credits or
emissions allowances in excess of the resulting product either may not
be used for compliance, or may only be used for compliance at a rate no
less than 2 credits or allowances for every 1 ton of emissions.
(2) At the time of compliance determination for each ozone season,
if the total number of banked emissions reduction credits or emissions
allowances held by a source subject to the trading program exceeds 10
percent of the source's allowable ozone season NOX emissions,
all banked emissions reduction credits or emissions allowances used for
compliance in such ozone season by the source shall be subject to the
following:
[[Page 154]]
(i) The source may use an amount of banked emissions reduction
credits or emissions allowances not greater than 10 percent of the
source's allowable ozone season NOX emissions for compliance
at a rate of 1 credit or allowance for every 1 ton of emissions.
(ii) The SIP shall specify that banked emissions reduction credits
or emissions allowances in excess of 10 percent of the source's
allowable ozone season NOX emissions may not be used for
compliance, or may only be used for compliance at a rate no less than 2
credits or allowances for every 1 ton of emissions.
(c) The following jurisdictions (hereinafter referred to as
``States'') are subject to the requirement of this section:
(1) With respect to the 1-hour ozone NAAQS: Connecticut, Delaware,
Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New
York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina,
Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia, and the District of Columbia.
(2) With respect to the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, the portions of
Missouri, Michigan, Alabama, and Georgia within the fine grid of the
OTAG modeling domain. The fine grid is the area encompassed by a box
with the following geographic coordinates: Southwest Corner, 92 degrees
West longitude and 32 degrees North latitude; and Northeast Corner, 69.5
degrees West longitude and 44 degrees North latitude.
(d)(1) The SIP submissions required under paragraph (a) of this
section must be submitted to EPA by no later than October 30, 2000 for
Phase I SIP submissions and no later than April 1, 2005 for Phase II SIP
submissions.
(2) The State makes an official submission of its SIP revision to
EPA only when:
(i) The submission conforms to the requirements of appendix V to
this part; and
(ii) The State delivers five copies of the plan to the appropriate
Regional Office, with a letter giving notice of such action.
(e)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (e)(2)(ii) of this section,
the NOX budget for a State listed in paragraph (c) of this
section is defined as the total amount of NOX emissions from
all sources in that State, as indicated in paragraph (e)(2)(i) of this
section with respect to that State, which the State must demonstrate
that it will not exceed in the 2007 ozone season pursuant to paragraph
(g)(1) of this section.
(2)(i) The State-by-State amounts of the NOX budget,
expressed in tons, are as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Final budget Budget
------------------------------------------------------------------ --------
Alabama.......................................... 119,827
Connecticut...................................... 42,850
Delaware......................................... 22,862
District of Columbia............................. 6,657
Georgia.......................................... 150,656
Illinois......................................... 271,091
Indiana.......................................... 230,381
Kentucky......................................... 162,519
Maryland......................................... 81,947
Massachusetts.................................... 84,848
Michigan......................................... 190,908
Missouri......................................... 61,406
New Jersey....................................... 96,876
New York......................................... 240,322
North Carolina................................... 165,306
Ohio............................................. 249,541
Pennsylvania..................................... 257,928
Rhode Island..................................... 9,378
South Carolina................................... 123,496
Tennessee........................................ 198,286
Virginia......................................... 180,521
West Virginia.................................... 83,921
------------------
Total.......................................... $3,031,527
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(ii) (A) For purposes of paragraph (e)(2)(i) of this section, in the
case of each State listed in paragraphs (e)(2)(ii)(B) through (E) of
this section, the NOX budget is defined as the total amount
of NOX emissions from all sources in the specified counties
in that State, as indicated in paragraph (e)(2)(i) of this section with
respect to the State, which the State must demonstrate that it will not
exceed in the 2007 ozone season pursuant to paragraph (g)(1) of this
section.
(B) In the case of Alabama, the counties are: Autauga, Bibb, Blount,
Calhoun, Chambers, Cherokee, Chilton, Clay, Cleburne, Colbert, Coosa,
Cullman, Dallas, De Kalb, Elmore, Etowah, Fayette, Franklin, Greene,
Hale, Jackson, Jefferson, Lamar, Lauderdale, Lawrence, Lee, Limestone,
Macon, Madison, Marion, Marshall, Morgan, Perry, Pickens, Randolph,
Russell, St. Clair, Shelby, Sumter, Talladega, Tallapoosa, Tuscaloosa,
Walker, and Winston.
(C) In the case of Georgia, the counties are: Baldwin, Banks,
Barrow, Bartow, Bibb, Bleckley, Bulloch,
[[Page 155]]
Burke, Butts, Candler, Carroll, Catoosa, Chattahoochee, Chattooga,
Cherokee, Clarke, Clayton, Cobb, Columbia, Coweta, Crawford, Dade,
Dawson, De Kalb, Dooly, Douglas, Effingham, Elbert, Emanuel, Evans,
Fannin, Fayette, Floyd, Forsyth, Franklin, Fulton, Gilmer, Glascock,
Gordon, Greene, Gwinnett, Habersham, Hall, Hancock, Haralson, Harris,
Hart, Heard, Henry, Houston, Jackson, Jasper, Jefferson, Jenkins,
Johnson, Jones, Lamar, Laurens, Lincoln, Lumpkin, McDuffie, Macon,
Madison, Marion, Meriwether, Monroe, Morgan, Murray, Muscogee, Newton,
Oconee, Oglethorpe, Paulding, Peach, Pickens, Pike, Polk, Pulaski,
Putnam, Rabun, Richmond, Rockdale, Schley, Screven, Spalding, Stephens,
Talbot, Taliaferro, Taylor, Towns, Treutlen, Troup, Twiggs, Union,
Upson, Walker, Walton, Warren, Washington, White, Whitfield, Wilkes, and
Wilkinson.
(D) In the case of Michigan, the counties are: Allegan, Barry, Bay,
Berrien, Branch, Calhoun, Cass, Clinton, Eaton, Genesee, Gratiot,
Hillsdale, Ingham, Ionia, Isabella, Jackson, Kalamazoo, Kent, Lapeer,
Lenawee, Livingston, Macomb, Mecosta, Midland, Monroe, Montcalm,
Muskegon, Newaygo, Oakland, Oceana, Ottawa, Saginaw, St. Clair, St.
Joseph, Sanilac, Shiawassee, Tuscola, Van Buren, Washtenaw, and Wayne.
(E) In the case of Missouri, the counties are: Bollinger, Butler,
Cape Girardeau, Carter, Clark, Crawford, Dent, Dunklin, Franklin,
Gasconade, Iron, Jefferson, Lewis, Lincoln, Madison, Marion,
Mississippi, Montgomery, New Madrid, Oregon, Pemiscot, Perry, Pike,
Ralls, Reynolds, Ripley, St. Charles, St. Genevieve, St. Francois, St.
Louis, St. Louis City, Scott, Shannon, Stoddard, Warren, Washington, and
Wayne.
(3) The State-by-State amounts of the portion of the NOX
budget provided in paragraph (e)(1) of this section, expressed in tons,
that the States may include in a Phase II SIP submission are as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phase II
State incremental
budget
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama................................................ 4,968
Connecticut............................................ 41
Delaware............................................... 660
District of Columbia................................... 1
Illinois............................................... 7,055
Indiana................................................ 4,244
Kentucky............................................... 2,556
Maryland............................................... 780
Massachusetts.......................................... 1,023
Michigan............................................... 1,033
New Jersey............................................. -994
New York............................................... 1,659
North Carolina......................................... 6,026
Ohio................................................... 2,741
Pennsylvania........................................... 10,230
Rhode Island........................................... 192
South Carolina......................................... 4,260
Tennessee.............................................. 2,877
Virginia............................................... 6,168
West Virginia.......................................... 1,124
----------------
Total.............................................. 56,644
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(4)(i) Notwithstanding the State's obligation to comply with the
budgets set forth in paragraph (e)(2) of this section, a SIP revision
may allow sources required by the revision to implement NOX
emission control measures to demonstrate compliance in the first and
second ozone seasons in which any sources covered by a Phase I or Phase
II SIP submission are subject to control measures under paragraph
(b)(1)(i) of this section using credit issued from the State's
compliance supplement pool, as set forth in paragraph (e)(4)(iii) of
this section.
(ii) A source may not use credit from the compliance supplement pool
to demonstrate compliance after the second ozone season in which any
sources are covered by a Phase I or Phase II SIP submission.
(iii) The State-by-State amounts of the compliance supplement pool
are as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Compliance
State supplement pool
(tons of NOX)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama................................................ 8,962
Connecticut............................................ 569
Delaware............................................... 168
District of Columbia................................... 0
Georgia................................................ 10,728
Illinois............................................... 17,688
Indiana................................................ 19,915
Kentucky............................................... 13,520
Maryland............................................... 3,882
Massachusetts.......................................... 404
Michigan............................................... 9,907
Missouri............................................... 5,630
New Jersey............................................. 1,550
New York............................................... 2,764
North Carolina......................................... 10,737
Ohio................................................... 22,301
Pennsylvania........................................... 15,763
[[Page 156]]
Rhode Island........................................... 15
South Carolina......................................... 5,344
Tennessee.............................................. 10,565
Virginia............................................... 5,504
West Virginia.......................................... 16,709
----------------
Total................................................ 182,625
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iv) The SIP revision may provide for the distribution of the
compliance supplement pool to sources that are required to implement
control measures using one or both of the following two mechanisms:
(A) The State may issue some or all of the compliance supplement
pool to sources that implement emissions reductions during the ozone
season beyond all applicable requirements in the first ozone season in
which any sources covered by a Phase I or Phase II SIP submission are
subject to control measures under paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section.
(1) The State shall complete the issuance process by no later than
the commencement of the first ozone season in which any sources covered
by a Phase I or Phase II SIP submission are subject to control measures
under paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section.
(2) The emissions reduction may not be required by the State's SIP
or be otherwise required by the CAA.
(3) The emissions reductions must be verified by the source as
actually having occurred during an ozone season between September 30,
1999 and the commencement of the first ozone season in which any sources
covered by a Phase I or Phase II SIP submission are subject to control
measures under paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section.
(4) The emissions reduction must be quantified according to
procedures set forth in the SIP revision and approved by EPA. Emissions
reductions implemented by sources serving electric generators with a
nameplate capacity greater than 25 MWe, or boilers, combustion turbines
or combined cycle units with a maximum design heat input greater than
250 mmBtu/hr, must be quantified according to the requirements in
paragraph (i)(4) of this section.
(5) If the SIP revision contains approved provisions for an
emissions trading program, sources that receive credit according to the
requirements of this paragraph may trade the credit to other sources or
persons according to the provisions in the trading program.
(B) The State may issue some or all of the compliance supplement
pool to sources that demonstrate a need for an extension of the earliest
date on which any sources covered by a Phase I or Phase II SIP
submission are subject to control measures under paragraph (b)(1)(i) of
this section according to the following provisions:
(1) The State shall initiate the issuance process by the later date
of September 30 before the first ozone season in which any sources
covered by a Phase I or Phase II SIP submission are subject to control
measures under paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section or after the State
issues credit according to the procedures in paragraph (e)(4)(iv)(A) of
this section.
(2) The State shall complete the issuance process by no later than
the commencement of the first ozone season in which any sources covered
by a Phase I or Phase II SIP submission are subject to control measures
under paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section.
(3) The State shall issue credit to a source only if the source
demonstrates the following:
(i) For a source used to generate electricity, compliance with the
SIP revision's applicable control measures by the commencement of the
first ozone season in which any sources covered by a Phase I or Phase II
SIP submission are subject to control measures under paragraph (b)(1)(i)
of this section, would create undue risk for the reliability of the
electricity supply. This demonstration must include a showing that it
would not be feasible to import electricity from other electricity
generation systems during the installation of control technologies
necessary to comply with the SIP revision.
(ii) For a source not used to generate electricity, compliance with
the SIP revision's applicable control measures by the commencement of
the first
[[Page 157]]
ozone season in which any sources covered by a Phase I or Phase II SIP
submission are subject to control measures under paragraph (b)(1)(i) of
this section would create undue risk for the source or its associated
industry to a degree that is comparable to the risk described in
paragraph (e)(4)(iv)(B)(3)(i) of this section.
(iii) For a source subject to an approved SIP revision that allows
for early reduction credits in accordance with paragraph (e)(4)(iv)(A)
of this section, it was not possible for the source to comply with
applicable control measures by generating early reduction credits or
acquiring early reduction credits from other sources.
(iv) For a source subject to an approved emissions trading program,
it was not possible to comply with applicable control measures by
acquiring sufficient credit from other sources or persons subject to the
emissions trading program.
(4) The State shall ensure the public an opportunity, through a
public hearing process, to comment on the appropriateness of allocating
compliance supplement pool credits to a source under paragraph
(e)(3)(iv)(B) of this section.
(5) If, no later than February 22, 1999, any member of the public
requests revisions to the source-specific data and vehicle miles
traveled (VMT) and nonroad mobile growth rates, VMT distribution by
vehicle class, average speed by roadway type, inspection and maintenance
program parameters, and other input parameters used to establish the
State budgets set forth in paragraph (e)(2) of this section or the 2007
baseline sub-inventory information set forth in paragraph (g)(2)(ii) of
this section, then EPA will act on that request no later than April 23,
1999 provided:
(i) The request is submitted in electronic format;
(ii) Information is provided to corroborate and justify the need for
the requested modification;
(iii) The request includes the following data information regarding
any electricity-generating source at issue:
(A) Federal Information Placement System (FIPS) State Code;
(B) FIPS County Code;
(C) Plant name;
(D) Plant ID numbers (ORIS code preferred, State agency tracking
number also or otherwise);
(E) Unit ID numbers (a unit is a boiler or other combustion device);
(F) Unit type;
(G) Primary fuel on a heat input basis;
(H) Maximum rated heat input capacity of unit;
(I) Nameplate capacity of the largest generator the unit serves;
(J) Ozone season heat inputs for the years 1995 and 1996;
(K) 1996 (or most recent) average NOX rate for the ozone
season;
(L) Latitude and longitude coordinates;
(M) Stack parameter information ;
(N) Operating parameter information;
(O) Identification of specific change to the inventory; and
(P) Reason for the change;
(iv) The request includes the following data information regarding
any non-electricity generating point source at issue:
(A) FIPS State Code;
(B) FIPS County Code;
(C) Plant name;
(D) Facility primary standard industrial classification code (SIC);
(E) Plant ID numbers (NEDS, AIRS/AFS, and State agency tracking
number also or otherwise);
(F) Unit ID numbers (a unit is a boiler or other combustion device);
(G) Primary source classification code (SCC);
(H) Maximum rated heat input capacity of unit;
(I) 1995 ozone season or typical ozone season daily NOX
emissions;
(J) 1995 existing NOX control efficiency;
(K) Latitude and longitude coordinates;
(L) Stack parameter information;
(M) Operating parameter information;
(N) Identification of specific change to the inventory; and
(O) Reason for the change;
(v) The request includes the following data information regarding
any stationary area source or nonroad mobile source at issue:
[[Page 158]]
(A) FIPS State Code;
(B) FIPS County Code;
(C) Primary source classification code (SCC);
(D) 1995 ozone season or typical ozone season daily NOX
emissions;
(E) 1995 existing NOX control efficiency;
(F) Identification of specific change to the inventory; and
(G) Reason for the change;
(vi) The request includes the following data information regarding
any highway mobile source at issue:
(A) FIPS State Code;
(B) FIPS County Code;
(C) Primary source classification code (SCC) or vehicle type;
(D) 1995 ozone season or typical ozone season daily vehicle miles
traveled (VMT);
(E) 1995 existing NOX control programs;
(F) identification of specific change to the inventory; and
(G) reason for the change.
(f) Each SIP revision must set forth control measures to meet the
NOX budget in accordance with paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this
section, which include the following:
(1) A description of enforcement methods including, but not limited
to:
(i) Procedures for monitoring compliance with each of the selected
control measures;
(ii) Procedures for handling violations; and
(iii) A designation of agency responsibility for enforcement of
implementation.
(2) Should a State elect to impose control measures on fossil fuel-
fired NOX sources serving electric generators with a
nameplate capacity greater than 25 MWe or boilers, combustion turbines
or combined cycle units with a maximum design heat input greater than
250 mmBtu/hr as a means of meeting its NOX budget, then those
measures must:
(i)(A) Impose a NOX mass emissions cap on each source;
(B) Impose a NOX emissions rate limit on each source and
assume maximum operating capacity for every such source for purposes of
estimating mass NOX emissions; or
(C) Impose any other regulatory requirement which the State has
demonstrated to EPA provides equivalent or greater assurance than
options in paragraphs (f)(2)(i)(A) or (f)(2)(i)(B) of this section that
the State will comply with its NOX budget in the 2007 ozone
season; and
(ii) Impose enforceable mechanisms, in accordance with paragraphs
(b)(1) (i) and (ii) of this section, to assure that collectively all
such sources, including new or modified units, will not exceed in the
2007 ozone season the total NOX emissions projected for such
sources by the State pursuant to paragraph (g) of this section.
(3) For purposes of paragraph (f)(2) of this section, the term
``fossil fuel-fired'' means, with regard to a NOX source:
(i) The combustion of fossil fuel, alone or in combination with any
other fuel, where fossil fuel actually combusted comprises more than 50
percent of the annual heat input on a Btu basis during any year starting
in 1995 or, if a NOX source had no heat input starting in
1995, during the last year of operation of the NOX source
prior to 1995; or
(ii) The combustion of fossil fuel, alone or in combination with any
other fuel, where fossil fuel is projected to comprise more than 50
percent of the annual heat input on a Btu basis during any year;
provided that the NOX source shall be ``fossil fuel-fired''
as of the date, during such year, on which the NOX source
begins combusting fossil fuel.
(g)(1) Each SIP revision must demonstrate that the control measures
contained in it are adequate to provide for the timely compliance with
the State's NOX budget during the 2007 ozone season.
(2) The demonstration must include the following:
(i) Each revision must contain a detailed baseline inventory of
NOX mass emissions from the following sources in the year
2007, absent the control measures specified in the SIP submission:
electric generating units (EGU), non-electric generating units (non-
EGU), area, nonroad and highway sources. The State must use the same
baseline emissions inventory that EPA used in calculating the State's
NOX budget, as set forth for the State in paragraph
[[Page 159]]
(g)(2)(ii) of this section, except that EPA may direct the State to use
different baseline inventory information if the State fails to certify
that it has implemented all of the control measures assumed in
developing the baseline inventory.
(ii) The revised NOX emissions sub-inventories for each
State, expressed in tons per ozone season, are as follows:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State EGU Non-EGU Area Nonroad Highway Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama....................................... 29,022 43,415 28,762 20,146 51,274 172,619
Connecticut................................... 2,652 5,216 4,821 10,736 19,424 42,849
Delaware...................................... 5,250 2,473 1,129 5,651 8,358 22,861
District of Columbia.......................... 207 282 830 3,135 2,204 6,658
Georgia....................................... 30,402 29,716 13,212 26,467 88,775 188,572
Illinois...................................... 32,372 59,577 9,369 56,724 112,518 270,560
Indiana....................................... 47,731 47,363 29,070 26,494 79,307 229,965
Kentucky...................................... 36,503 25,669 31,807 15,025 53,268 162,272
Maryland...................................... 14,656 12,585 4,448 20,026 30,183 81,898
Massachusetts................................. 15,146 10,298 11,048 20,166 28,190 84,848
Michigan...................................... 32,228 60,055 31,721 26,935 78,763 229,702
Missouri...................................... 24,216 21,602 7,341 20,829 51,615 125,603
New Jersey.................................... 10,250 15,464 12,431 23,565 35,166 96,876
New York...................................... 31,036 25,477 17,423 42,091 124,261 240,288
North Carolina................................ 31,821 26,434 11,067 22,005 73,695 165,022
Ohio.......................................... 48,990 40,194 21,860 43,380 94,850 249,274
Pennsylvania.................................. 47,469 70,132 17,842 30,571 91,578 257,592
Rhode Island.................................. 997 1,635 448 2,455 3,843 9,378
South Carolina................................ 16,772 27,787 9,415 14,637 54,494 123,105
Tennessee..................................... 25,814 39,636 13,333 52,920 66,342 198,045
Virginia...................................... 17,187 35,216 27,738 27,859 72,195 180,195
West Virginia................................. 26,859 20,238 5,459 10,433 20,844 83,833
Wisconsin..................................... 17,381 19,853 11,253 17,965 69,319 135,771
-------------
Total..................................... 544,961 640,317 321,827 540,215 1,310,466 3,357,786
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note to paragraph (g)(2)(ii): Totals may not sum due to rounding.
(iii) Each revision must contain a summary of NOX mass
emissions in 2007 projected to result from implementation of each of the
control measures specified in the SIP submission and from all
NOX sources together following implementation of all such
control measures, compared to the baseline 2007 NOX emissions
inventory for the State described in paragraph (g)(2)(i) of this
section. The State must provide EPA with a summary of the computations,
assumptions, and judgments used to determine the degree of reduction in
projected 2007 NOX emissions that will be achieved from the
implementation of the new control measures compared to the baseline
emissions inventory.
(iv) Each revision must identify the sources of the data used in the
projection of emissions.
(h) Each revision must comply with Sec. 51.116 of this part
(regarding data availability).
(i) Each revision must provide for monitoring the status of
compliance with any control measures adopted to meet the NOX
budget. Specifically, the revision must meet the following requirements:
(1) The revision must provide for legally enforceable procedures for
requiring owners or operators of stationary sources to maintain records
of and periodically report to the State:
(i) Information on the amount of NOX emissions from the
stationary sources; and
(ii) Other information as may be necessary to enable the State to
determine whether the sources are in compliance with applicable portions
of the control measures;
(2) The revision must comply with Sec. 51.212 of this part
(regarding testing, inspection, enforcement, and complaints);
(3) If the revision contains any transportation control measures,
then the revision must comply with Sec. 51.213 of this part (regarding
transportation control measures);
(4) If the revision contains measures to control fossil fuel-fired
NOX sources serving electric generators with a
[[Page 160]]
nameplate capacity greater than 25 MWe or boilers, combustion turbines
or combined cycle units with a maximum design heat input greater than
250 mmBtu/hr, then the revision must require such sources to comply with
the monitoring provisions of part 75, subpart H.
(5) For purposes of paragraph (i)(4) of this section, the term
``fossil fuel-fired'' means, with regard to a NOX source:
(i) The combustion of fossil fuel, alone or in combination with any
other fuel, where fossil fuel actually combusted comprises more than 50
percent of the annual heat input on a Btu basis during any year starting
in 1995 or, if a NOX source had no heat input starting in
1995, during the last year of operation of the NOX source
prior to 1995; or
(ii) The combustion of fossil fuel, alone or in combination with any
other fuel, where fossil fuel is projected to comprise more than 50
percent of the annual heat input on a Btu basis during any year,
provided that the NOX source shall be ``fossil fuel-fired''
as of the date, during such year, on which the NOX source
begins combusting fossil fuel.
(j) Each revision must show that the State has legal authority to
carry out the revision, including authority to:
(1) Adopt emissions standards and limitations and any other measures
necessary for attainment and maintenance of the State's NOX
budget specified in paragraph (e) of this section;
(2) Enforce applicable laws, regulations, and standards, and seek
injunctive relief;
(3) Obtain information necessary to determine whether air pollution
sources are in compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and
standards, including authority to require recordkeeping and to make
inspections and conduct tests of air pollution sources;
(4) Require owners or operators of stationary sources to install,
maintain, and use emissions monitoring devices and to make periodic
reports to the State on the nature and amounts of emissions from such
stationary sources; also authority for the State to make such data
available to the public as reported and as correlated with any
applicable emissions standards or limitations.
(k)(1) The provisions of law or regulation which the State
determines provide the authorities required under this section must be
specifically identified, and copies of such laws or regulations must be
submitted with the SIP revision.
(2) Legal authority adequate to fulfill the requirements of
paragraphs (j)(3) and (4) of this section may be delegated to the State
under section 114 of the CAA.
(l)(1) A revision may assign legal authority to local agencies in
accordance with Sec. 51.232 of this part.
(2) Each revision must comply with Sec. 51.240 of this part
(regarding general plan requirements).
(m) Each revision must comply with Sec. 51.280 of this part
(regarding resources).
(n) For purposes of the SIP revisions required by this section, EPA
may make a finding as applicable under section 179(a)(1)-(4) of the CAA,
42 U.S.C. 7509(a)(1)-(4), starting the sanctions process set forth in
section 179(a) of the CAA. Any such finding will be deemed a finding
under Sec. 52.31(c) of this part and sanctions will be imposed in
accordance with the order of sanctions and the terms for such sanctions
established in Sec. 52.31 of this part.
(o) Each revision must provide for State compliance with the
reporting requirements set forth in Sec. 51.122 of this part.
(p)(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, if a
State adopts regulations substantively identical to 40 CFR part 96 (the
model NOX budget trading program for SIPs), incorporates such
part by reference into its regulations, or adopts regulations that
differ substantively from such part only as set forth in paragraph
(p)(2) of this section, then that portion of the State's SIP revision is
automatically approved as satisfying the same portion of the State's
NOX emission reduction obligations as the State projects such
regulations will satisfy, provided that:
(i) The State has the legal authority to take such action and to
implement its responsibilities under such regulations, and
(ii) The SIP revision accurately reflects the NOX
emissions reductions to
[[Page 161]]
be expected from the State's implementation of such regulations.
(2) If a State adopts an emissions trading program that differs
substantively from 40 CFR part 96 in only the following respects, then
such portion of the State's SIP revision is approved as set forth in
paragraph (p)(1) of this section:
(i) The State may expand the applicability provisions of the trading
program to include units (as defined in 40 CFR 96.2) that are smaller
than the size criteria thresholds set forth in 40 CFR 96.4(a);
(ii) The State may decline to adopt the exemption provisions set
forth in 40 CFR 96.4(b);
(iii) The State may decline to adopt the opt-in provisions set forth
in subpart I of 40 CFR part 96;
(iv) The State may decline to adopt the allocation provisions set
forth in subpart E of 40 CFR part 96 and may instead adopt any
methodology for allocating NOX allowances to individual
sources, provided that:
(A) The State's methodology does not allow the State to allocate
NOX allowances in excess of the total amount of
NOX emissions which the State has assigned to its trading
program; and
(B) The State's methodology conforms with the timing requirements
for submission of allocations to the Administrator set forth in 40 CFR
96.41; and
(v) The State may decline to adopt the early reduction credit
provisions set forth in 40 CFR 96.55(c) and may instead adopt any
methodology for issuing credit from the State's compliance supplement
pool that complies with paragraph (e)(3) of this section.
(3) If a State adopts an emissions trading program that differs
substantively from 40 CFR part 96 other than as set forth in paragraph
(p)(2) of this section, then such portion of the State's SIP revision is
not automatically approved as set forth in paragraph (p)(1) of this
section but will be reviewed by the Administrator for approvability in
accordance with the other provisions of this section.
(q) Stay of Findings of Significant Contribution with respect to the
8-hour standard. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this subpart,
the effectiveness of paragraph (a)(2) of this section is stayed.
[63 FR 57491, Oct. 27, 1998, as amended at 63 FR 71225, Dec. 24, 1998;
64 FR 26305, May 14, 1999; 65 FR 11230, Mar. 2, 2000; 65 FR 56251, Sept.
18, 2000; 69 FR 21642, Apr. 21, 2004]
Sec. 51.122 Emissions reporting requirements for SIP revisions
relating to budgets for NOX emissions.
(a) For its transport SIP revision under Sec. 51.121 of this part,
each State must submit to EPA NOX emissions data as described
in this section.
(b) Each revision must provide for periodic reporting by the State
of NOX emissions data to demonstrate whether the State's
emissions are consistent with the projections contained in its approved
SIP submission.
(1) Annual reporting. Each revision must provide for annual
reporting of NOX emissions data as follows:
(i) The State must report to EPA emissions data from all
NOX sources within the State for which the State specified
control measures in its SIP submission under Sec. 51.121(g) of this
part. This would include all sources for which the State has adopted
measures that differ from the measures incorporated into the baseline
inventory for the year 2007 that the State developed in accordance with
Sec. 51.121(g) of this part.
(ii) If sources report NOX emissions data to EPA annually
pursuant to a trading program approved under Sec. 51.121(p) of this
part or pursuant to the monitoring and reporting requirements of subpart
H of 40 CFR part 75, then the State need not provide annual reporting to
EPA for such sources.
(2) Triennial reporting. Each plan must provide for triennial (i.e.,
every third year) reporting of NOX emissions data from all
sources within the State.
(3) Year 2007 reporting. Each plan must provide for reporting of
year 2007 NOX emissions data from all sources within the
State.
(4) The data availability requirements in Sec. 51.116 of this part
must be followed for all data submitted to meet the requirements of
paragraphs (b)(1),(2) and (3) of this section.
(c) The data reported in paragraph (b) of this section for
stationary point
[[Page 162]]
sources must meet the following minimum criteria:
(1) For annual data reporting purposes the data must include the
following minimum elements:
(i) Inventory year.
(ii) State Federal Information Placement System code.
(iii) County Federal Information Placement System code.
(iv) Federal ID code (plant).
(v) Federal ID code (point).
(vi) Federal ID code (process).
(vii) Federal ID code (stack).
(vii) Site name.
(viii) Physical address.
(ix) SCC.
(x) Pollutant code.
(xi) Ozone season emissions.
(xii) Area designation.
(2) In addition, the annual data must include the following minimum
elements as applicable to the emissions estimation methodology.
(i) Fuel heat content (annual).
(ii) Fuel heat content (seasonal).
(iii) Source of fuel heat content data.
(iv) Activity throughput (annual).
(v) Activity throughput (seasonal).
(vi) Source of activity/throughput data.
(vii) Spring throughput (%).
(viii) Summer throughput (%).
(ix) Fall throughput (%).
(x) Work weekday emissions.
(xi) Emission factor.
(xii) Source of emission factor.
(xiii) Hour/day in operation.
(xiv) Operations Start time (hour).
(xv) Day/week in operation.
(xvi) Week/year in operation.
(3) The triennial and 2007 inventories must include the following
data elements:
(i) The data required in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this
section.
(ii) X coordinate (latitude).
(iii) Y coordinate (longitude).
(iv) Stack height.
(v) Stack diameter.
(vi) Exit gas temperature.
(vii) Exit gas velocity.
(viii) Exit gas flow rate.
(ix) SIC.
(x) Boiler/process throughput design capacity.
(xi) Maximum design rate.
(xii) Maximum capacity.
(xiii) Primary control efficiency.
(xiv) Secondary control efficiency.
(xv) Control device type.
(d) The data reported in paragraph (b) of this section for area
sources must include the following minimum elements:
(1) For annual inventories it must include:
(i) Inventory year.
(ii) State FIPS code.
(iii) County FIPS code.
(iv) SCC.
(v) Emission factor.
(vi) Source of emission factor.
(vii) Activity/throughput level (annual).
(viii) Activity throughput level (seasonal).
(ix) Source of activity/throughput data.
(x) Spring throughput (%).
(xi) Summer throughput (%).
(xii) Fall throughput (%).
(xiii) Control efficiency (%).
(xiv) Pollutant code.
(xv) Ozone season emissions.
(xvi) Source of emissions data.
(xvii) Hour/day in operation.
(xviii) Day/week in operation.
(xix) Week/year in operations.
(2) The triennial and 2007 inventories must contain, at a minimum,
all the data required in paragraph (d)(1) of this section.
(e) The data reported in paragraph (b) of this section for mobile
sources must meet the following minimum criteria:
(1) For the annual, triennial, and 2007 inventory purposes, the
following data must be reported:
(i) Inventory year.
(ii) State FIPS code.
(iii) County FIPS code.
(iv) SCC.
(v) Emission factor.
(vi) Source of emission factor.
(vii) Activity (this must be reported for both highway and nonroad
activity. Submit nonroad activity in the form of hours of activity at
standard load (either full load or average load) for each engine type,
application, and horsepower range. Submit highway activity in the form
of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) by vehicle class on each roadway type.
Report both highway and nonroad activity for a typical ozone season
weekday day, if the State uses EPA's default weekday/weekend activity
ratio. If the State uses a different
[[Page 163]]
weekday/weekend activity ratio, submit separate activity level
information for weekday days and weekend days).
(viii) Source of activity data.
(ix) Pollutant code.
(x) Summer work weekday emissions.
(xi) Ozone season emissions.
(xii) Source of emissions data.
(2) [Reserved]
(f) Approval of ozone season calculation by EPA. Each State must
submit for EPA approval an example of the calculation procedure used to
calculate ozone season emissions along with sufficient information for
EPA to verify the calculated value of ozone season emissions.
(g) Reporting schedules. (1) Data collection is to begin during the
ozone season 1 year prior to the State's NOX SIP Call
compliance date.
(2) Reports are to be submitted according to paragraph (b) of this
section and the schedule in Table 1. After 2008, trienniel reports are
to be submitted every third year and annual reports are to be submitted
each year that a trienniel report is not required.
Table 1.--Schedule for Submitting Reports
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Data collection year Type of report required
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002................................... Trienniel.
2003................................... Annual.
2004................................... Annual.
2005................................... Trienniel.
2006................................... Annual.
2007................................... Year 2007 Report.
2008................................... Trienniel.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) States must submit data for a required year no later than 12
months after the end of the calendar year for which the data are
collected.
(h) Data reporting procedures. When submitting a formal
NOX budget emissions report and associated data, States shall
notify the appropriate EPA Regional Office.
(1) States are required to report emissions data in an electronic
format to one of the locations listed in this paragraph (h). Several
options are available for data reporting. States can obtain information
on the current formats at the following Internet address: http://
www.epa.gov/ttn/chief, by calling the EPA Info CHIEF help desk at (919)
541-1000 or by sending an e-mail to info.chief@epa.gov. Because
electronic reporting technology continually changes, States are to
contact the Emission Factor and Inventory Group (EFIG) for the latest
specific formats.
(2) An agency may choose to continue reporting to the EPA Aerometric
Information Retrieval System (AIRS) system using the AIRS facility
subsystem (AFS) format for point sources. (This option will continue for
point sources for some period of time after AIRS is reengineered (before
2002), at which time this choice may be discontinued or modified.)
(3) An agency may convert its emissions data into the Emission
Inventory Improvement Program/Electronic Data Interchange (EIIP/EDI)
format. This file can then be made available to any requestor, either
using E-mail, floppy disk, or value added network (VAN), or can be
placed on a file transfer protocol (FTP) site.
(4) An agency may submit its emissions data in a proprietary format
based on the EIIP data model.
(5) For options in paragraphs (h)(3) and (4) of this section, the
terms submitting and reporting data are defined as either providing the
data in the EIIP/EDI format or the EIIP based data model proprietary
format to EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Emission
Factors and Inventory Group, directly or notifying this group that the
data are available in the specified format and at a specific electronic
location (e.g., FTP site).
(6) For annual reporting (not for triennial reports), a State may
have sources submit the data directly to EPA to the extent the sources
are subject to a trading program that qualifies for approval under Sec.
51.121(q) of this part, and the State has agreed to accept data in this
format. The EPA will make both the raw data submitted in this format and
summary data available to any State that chooses this option.
(i) Definitions. As used in this section, the following words and
terms shall have the meanings set forth below:
(1) Annual emissions. Actual emissions for a plant, point, or
process, either measured or calculated.
(2) Ash content. Inert residual portion of a fuel.
[[Page 164]]
(3) Area designation. The designation of the area in which the
reporting source is located with regard to the ozone NAAQS. This would
include attainment or nonattainment designations. For nonattainment
designations, the classification of the nonattainment area must be
specified, i.e., transitional, marginal, moderate, serious, severe, or
extreme.
(4) Boiler design capacity. A measure of the size of a boiler, based
on the reported maximum continuous steam flow. Capacity is calculated in
units of MMBtu/hr.
(5) Control device type. The name of the type of control device
(e.g., wet scrubber, flaring, or process change).
(6) Control efficiency. The emissions reduction efficiency of a
primary control device, which shows the amount of reductions of a
particular pollutant from a process' emissions due to controls or
material change. Control efficiency is usually expressed as a percentage
or in tenths.
(7) Day/week in operations. Days per week that the emitting process
operates.
(8) Emission factor. Ratio relating emissions of a specific
pollutant to an activity or material throughput level.
(9) Exit gas flow rate. Numeric value of stack gas flow rate.
(10) Exit gas temperature. Numeric value of an exit gas stream
temperature.
(11) Exit gas velocity. Numeric value of an exit gas stream
velocity.
(12) Fall throughput (%). Portion of throughput for the 3 fall
months (September, October, November). This represents the expression of
annual activity information on the basis of four seasons, typically
spring, summer, fall, and winter. It can be represented either as a
percentage of the annual activity (e.g., production in summer is 40
percent of the year's production), or in terms of the units of the
activity (e.g., out of 600 units produced, spring = 150 units, summer =
250 units, fall = 150 units, and winter = 50 units).
(13) Federal ID code (plant). Unique codes for a plant or facility,
containing one or more pollutant-emitting sources.
(14) Federal ID code (point). Unique codes for the point of
generation of emissions, typically a physical piece of equipment.
(15) Federal ID code (stack number). Unique codes for the point
where emissions from one or more processes are released into the
atmosphere.
(16) Federal Information Placement System (FIPS). The system of
unique numeric codes developed by the government to identify States,
counties, towns, and townships for the entire United States, Puerto
Rico, and Guam.
(17) Heat content. The thermal heat energy content of a solid,
liquid, or gaseous fuel. Fuel heat content is typically expressed in
units of Btu/lb of fuel, Btu/gal of fuel, joules/kg of fuel, etc.
(18) Hr/day in operations. Hours per day that the emitting process
operates.
(19) Maximum design rate. Maximum fuel use rate based on the
equipment's or process' physical size or operational capabilities.
(20) Maximum nameplate capacity. A measure of the size of a
generator which is put on the unit's nameplate by the manufacturer. The
data element is reported in megawatts (MW) or kilowatts (KW).
(21) Mobile source. A motor vehicle, nonroad engine or nonroad
vehicle, where:
(i) Motor vehicle means any self-propelled vehicle designed for
transporting persons or property on a street or highway;
(ii) Nonroad engine means an internal combustion engine (including
the fuel system) that is not used in a motor vehicle or a vehicle used
solely for competition, or that is not subject to standards promulgated
under section 111 or section 202 of the CAA;
(iii) Nonroad vehicle means a vehicle that is powered by a nonroad
engine and that is not a motor vehicle or a vehicle used solely for
competition.
(22) Ozone season. The period May 1 through September 30 of a year.
(23) Physical address. Street address of facility.
(24) Point source. A non-mobile source which emits 100 tons of
NOX or more per year unless the State designates as a point
source a non-mobile source emitting at a specified level lower than 100
tons of NOX per year. A non-mobile source which emits less
NOX per year
[[Page 165]]
than the point source threshold is an area source.
(25) Pollutant code. A unique code for each reported pollutant that
has been assigned in the EIIP Data Model. Character names are used for
criteria pollutants, while Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) numbers are
used for all other pollutants. Some States may be using storage and
retrieval of aerometric data (SAROAD) codes for pollutants, but these
should be able to be mapped to the EIIP Data Model pollutant codes.
(26) Process rate/throughput. A measurable factor or parameter that
is directly or indirectly related to the emissions of an air pollution
source. Depending on the type of source category, activity information
may refer to the amount of fuel combusted, the amount of a raw material
processed, the amount of a product that is manufactured, the amount of a
material that is handled or processed, population, employment, number of
units, or miles traveled. Activity information is typically the value
that is multiplied against an emission factor to generate an emissions
estimate.
(27) SCC. Source category code. A process-level code that describes
the equipment or operation emitting pollutants.
(28) Secondary control efficiency (%). The emissions reductions
efficiency of a secondary control device, which shows the amount of
reductions of a particular pollutant from a process' emissions due to
controls or material change. Control efficiency is usually expressed as
a percentage or in tenths.
(29) SIC. Standard Industrial Classification code. U.S. Department
of Commerce's categorization of businesses by their products or
services.
(30) Site name. The name of the facility.
(31) Spring throughput (%). Portion of throughput or activity for
the 3 spring months (March, April, May). See the definition of Fall
Throughput.
(32) Stack diameter. Stack physical diameter.
(33) Stack height. Stack physical height above the surrounding
terrain.
(34) Start date (inventory year). The calendar year that the
emissions estimates were calculated for and are applicable to.
(35) Start time (hour). Start time (if available) that was
applicable and used for calculations of emissions estimates.
(36) Summer throughput (%). Portion of throughput or activity for
the 3 summer months (June, July, August). See the definition of Fall
Throughput.
(37) Summer work weekday emissions. Average day's emissions for a
typical day.
(38) VMT by Roadway Class. This is an expression of vehicle activity
that is used with emission factors. The emission factors are usually
expressed in terms of grams per mile of travel. Since VMT does not
directly correlate to emissions that occur while the vehicle is not
moving, these non-moving emissions are incorporated into EPA's MOBILE
model emission factors.
(39) Week/year in operation. Weeks per year that the emitting
process operates.
(40) Work Weekday. Any day of the week except Saturday or Sunday.
(41) X coordinate (latitude). East-west geographic coordinate of an
object.
(42) Y coordinate (longitude). North-south geographic coordinate of
an object.
[63 FR 57496, Oct. 27, 1998, as amended at 69 FR 21644, Apr. 21, 2004]
Subpart H_Prevention of Air Pollution Emergency Episodes
Source: 51 FR 40668, Nov. 7, 1986, unless otherwise noted.
Sec. 51.150 Classification of regions for episode plans.
(a) This section continues the classification system for episode
plans. Each region is classified separately with respect to each of the
following pollutants: Sulfur oxides, particulate matter, carbon
monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, and ozone.
(b) Priority I Regions means any area with greater ambient
concentrations than the following:
(1) Sulfur dioxide--100 [mu]g/m\3\ (0.04 ppm) annual arithmetic
mean; 455 [mu]g/m\3\ (0.17 ppm) 24-hour maximum.
(2) Particulate matter--95 [mu]g/m\3\ annual geometric mean; 325
[mu]g/m\3\ 24-hour maximum.
[[Page 166]]
(3) Carbon monoxide--55 mg/m\3\ (48 ppm) 1-hour maximum; 14 mg/m\3\
(12 ppm) 8-hour maximum.
(4) Nitrogen dioxide--100 [mu]g/m\3\ (0.06 ppm) annual arithmetic
mean.
(5) Ozone--195 [mu]g/m\3\ (0.10 ppm) 1-hour maximum.
(c) Priority IA Region means any area which is Priority I primarily
because of emissions from a single point source.
(d) Priority II Region means any area which is not a Priority I
region and has ambient concentrations between the following:
(1) Sulfur Dioxides--60-100 [mu]g/m\3\ (0.02-0.04 ppm) annual
arithmetic mean; 260-445 [mu]g/m\3\ (0.10-0.17 ppm) 24-hour maximum; any
concentration above 1,300 [mu]g/m\3\ (0.50 ppm) three-hour average.
(2) Particulate matter--60-95 [mu]g/m\3\ annual geometric mean; 150-
325 [mu]g/m\3\ 24-hour maximum.
(e) In the absence of adequate monitoring data, appropriate models
must be used to classify an area under paragraph (b) of this section,
consistent with the requirements contained in Sec. 51.112(a).
(f) Areas which do not meet the above criteria are classified
Priority III.
[51 FR 40668, Nov. 7, 1986, as amended at 58 FR 38822, July 20, 1993]
Sec. 51.151 Significant harm levels.
Each plan for a Priority I region must include a contingency plan
which must, as a mimimum, provide for taking action necessary to prevent
ambient pollutant concentrations at any location in such region from
reaching the following levels:
Sulfur dioxide--2.620 [mu]g/m\3\ (1.0 ppm) 24-hour average.
PM10--600 micrograms/cubic meter; 24-hour average.
Carbon monoxide--57.5 mg/m\3\ (50 ppm) 8-hour average; 86.3 mg/m\3\ (75
ppm) 4-hour average; 144 mg/m\3\ (125 ppm) 1-hour average.
Ozone--1,200 ug/m\3\ (0.6 ppm) 2-hour average.
Nitrogen dioxide--3.750 ug/m\3\ (2.0 ppm) 1-hour average; 938 ug/m\3\
(0.5 ppm) 24-hour average.
[51 FR 40668, Nov. 7, 1986, as amended at 52 FR 24713, July 1, 1987]
Sec. 51.152 Contingency plans.
(a) Each contingency plan must--
(1) Specify two or more stages of episode criteria such as those set
forth in appendix L to this part, or their equivalent;
(2) Provide for public announcement whenever any episode stage has
been determined to exist; and
(3) Specify adequate emission control actions to be taken at each
episode stage. (Examples of emission control actions are set forth in
appendix L.)
(b) Each contingency plan for a Priority I region must provide for
the following:
(1) Prompt acquisition of forecasts of atmospheric stagnation
conditions and of updates of such forecasts as frequently as they are
issued by the National Weather Service.
(2) Inspection of sources to ascertain compliance with applicable
emission control action requirements.
(3) Communications procedures for transmitting status reports and
orders as to emission control actions to be taken during an episode
stage, including procedures for contact with public officials, major
emission sources, public health, safety, and emergency agencies and news
media.
(c) Each plan for a Priority IA and II region must include a
contingency plan that meets, as a minimum, the requirements of
paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of this section. Areas classified Priority
III do not need to develop episode plans.
(d) Notwithstanding the requirements of paragraphs (b) and (c) of
this section, the Administrator may, at his discretion--
(1) Exempt from the requirements of this section those portions of
Priority I, IA, or II regions which have been designated as attainment
or unclassifiable for national primary and secondary standards under
section 107 of the Act; or
(2) Limit the requirements pertaining to emission control actions in
Priority I regions to--
(i) Urbanized areas as identified in the most recent United States
Census, and
(ii) Major emitting facilities, as defined by section 169(1) of the
Act, outside the urbanized areas.
[[Page 167]]
Sec. 51.153 Reevaluation of episode plans.
(a) States should periodically reevaluate priority classifications
of all Regions or portion of Regions within their borders. The
reevaluation must consider the three most recent years of air quality
data. If the evaluation indicates a change to a higher priority
classification, appropriate changes in the episode plan must be made as
expeditiously as practicable.
(b) [Reserved]
Subpart I_Review of New Sources and Modifications
Source: 51 FR 40669, Nov. 7, 1986, unless otherwise noted.
Sec. 51.160 Legally enforceable procedures.
(a) Each plan must set forth legally enforceable procedures that
enable the State or local agency to determine whether the construction
or modification of a facility, building, structure or installation, or
combination of these will result in--
(1) A violation of applicable portions of the control strategy; or
(2) Interference with attainment or maintenance of a national
standard in the State in which the proposed source (or modification) is
located or in a neighboring State.
(b) Such procedures must include means by which the State or local
agency responsible for final decisionmaking on an application for
approval to construct or modify will prevent such construction or
modification if--
(1) It will result in a violation of applicable portions of the
control strategy; or
(2) It will interfere with the attainment or maintenance of a
national standard.
(c) The procedures must provide for the submission, by the owner or
operator of the building, facility, structure, or installation to be
constructed or modified, of such information on--
(1) The nature and amounts of emissions to be emitted by it or
emitted by associated mobile sources;
(2) The location, design, construction, and operation of such
facility, building, structure, or installation as may be necessary to
permit the State or local agency to make the determination referred to
in paragraph (a) of this section.
(d) The procedures must provide that approval of any construction or
modification must not affect the responsibility to the owner or operator
to comply with applicable portions of the control strategy.
(e) The procedures must identify types and sizes of facilities,
buildings, structures, or installations which will be subject to review
under this section. The plan must discuss the basis for determining
which facilities will be subject to review.
(f) The procedures must discuss the air quality data and the
dispersion or other air quality modeling used to meet the requirements
of this subpart.
(1) All applications of air quality modeling involved in this
subpart shall be based on the applicable models, data bases, and other
requirements specified in appendix W of this part (Guideline on Air
Quality Models).
(2) Where an air quality model specified in appendix W of this part
(Guideline on Air Quality Models) is inappropriate, the model may be
modified or another model substituted. Such a modification or
substitution of a model may be made on a case-by-case basis or, where
appropriate, on a generic basis for a specific State program. Written
approval of the Administrator must be obtained for any modification or
substitution. In addition, use of a modified or substituted model must
be subject to notice and opportunity for public comment under procedures
set forth in Sec. 51.102.
[51 FR 40669, Nov. 7, 1986, as amended at 58 FR 38822, July 20, 1993; 60
FR 40468, Aug. 9, 1995; 61 FR 41840, Aug. 12, 1996]
Sec. 51.161 Public availability of information.
(a) The legally enforceable procedures in Sec. 51.160 must also
require the State or local agency to provide opportunity for public
comment on information submitted by owners and operators. The public
information must include the agency's analysis of the effect of
construction or modification on ambient air quality, including the
[[Page 168]]
agency's proposed approval or disapproval.
(b) For purposes of paragraph (a) of this section, opportunity for
public comment shall include, as a minimum--
(1) Availability for public inspection in at least one location in
the area affected of the information submitted by the owner or operator
and of the State or local agency's analysis of the effect on air
quality;
(2) A 30-day period for submittal of public comment; and
(3) A notice by prominent advertisement in the area affected of the
location of the source information and analysis specified in paragraph
(b)(1) of this section.
(c) Where the 30-day comment period required in paragraph (b) of
this section would conflict with existing requirements for acting on
requests for permission to construct or modify, the State may submit for
approval a comment period which is consistent with such existing
requirements.
(d) A copy of the notice required by paragraph (b) of this section
must also be sent to the Administrator through the appropriate Regional
Office, and to all other State and local air pollution control agencies
having jurisdiction in the region in which such new or modified
installation will be located. The notice also must be sent to any other
agency in the region having responsibility for implementing the
procedures required under this subpart. For lead, a copy of the notice
is required for all point sources. The definition of point for lead is
given in Sec. 51.100(k)(2).
Sec. 51.162 Identification of responsible agency.
Each plan must identify the State or local agency which will be
responsible for meeting the requirements of this subpart in each area of
the State. Where such responsibility rests with an agency other than an
air pollution control agency, such agency will consult with the
appropriate State or local air pollution control agency in carrying out
the provisions of this subpart.
Sec. 51.163 Administrative procedures.
The plan must include the administrative procedures, which will be
followed in making the determination specified in paragraph (a) of Sec.
51.160.
Sec. 51.164 Stack height procedures.
Such procedures must provide that the degree of emission limitation
required of any source for control of any air pollutant must not be
affected by so much of any source's stack height that exceeds good
engineering practice or by any other dispersion technique, except as
provided in Sec. 51.118(b). Such procedures must provide that before a
State issues a permit to a source based on a good engineering practice
stack height that exceeds the height allowed by Sec. 51.100(ii) (1) or
(2), the State must notify the public of the availability of the
demonstration study and must provide opportunity for public hearing on
it. This section does not require such procedures to restrict in any
manner the actual stack height of any source.
Sec. 51.165 Permit requirements.
(a) State Implementation Plan and Tribal Implementation Plan
provisions satisfying sections 172(c)(5) and 173 of the Act shall meet
the following conditions:
(1) All such plans shall use the specific definitions. Deviations
from the following wording will be approved only if the State
specifically demonstrates that the submitted definition is more
stringent, or at least as stringent, in all respects as the
corresponding definition below:
(i) Stationary source means any building, structure, facility, or
installation which emits or may emit a regulated NSR pollutant.
(ii) Building, structure, facility, or installation means all of the
pollutant-emitting activities which belong to the same industrial
grouping, are located on one or more contiguous or adjacent properties,
and are under the control of the same person (or persons under common
control) except the activities of any vessel. Pollutant-emitting
activities shall be considered as part of the same industrial grouping
if they belong to the same Major Group (i.e., which have the same two-
digit code) as described in the Standard Industrial Classification
Manual, 1972, as amended by the 1977 Supplement (U.S. Government
[[Page 169]]
Printing Office stock numbers 4101-0065 and 003-005-00176-0,
respectively).
(iii) Potential to emit means the maximum capacity of a stationary
source to emit a pollutant under its physical and operational design.
Any physical or operational limitation on the capacity of the source to
emit a pollutant, including air pollution control equipment and
restrictions on hours of operation or on the type or amount of material
combusted, stored, or processed, shall be treated as part of its design
only if the limitation or the effect it would have on emissions is
federally enforceable. Secondary emissions do not count in determining
the potential to emit of a stationary source.
(iv)(A) Major stationary source means:
(1) Any stationary source of air pollutants which emits, or has the
potential to emit 100 tons per year or more of any regulated NSR
pollutant, or
(2) Any physical change that would occur at a stationary source not
qualifying under paragraph (a)(1)(iv)(A)(1) as a major stationary
source, if the change would constitute a major stationary source by
itself.
(B) A major stationary source that is major for volatile organic
compounds shall be considered major for ozone
(C) The fugitive emissions of a stationary source shall not be
included in determining for any of the purposes of this paragraph
whether it is a major stationary source, unless the source belongs to
one of the following categories of stationary sources:
(1) Coal cleaning plants (with thermal dryers);
(2) Kraft pulp mills;
(3) Portland cement plants;
(4) Primary zinc smelters;
(5) Iron and steel mills;
(6) Primary aluminum ore reduction plants;
(7) Primary copper smelters;
(8) Municipal incinerators capable of charging more than 250 tons of
refuse per day;
(9) Hydrofluoric, sulfuric, or nitric acid plants;
(10) Petroleum refineries;
(11) Lime plants;
(12) Phosphate rock processing plants;
(13) Coke oven batteries;
(14) Sulfur recovery plants;
(15) Carbon black plants (furnace process);
(16) Primary lead smelters;
(17) Fuel conversion plants;
(18) Sintering plants;
(19) Secondary metal production plants;
(20) Chemical process plants;
(21) Fossil-fuel boilers (or combination thereof) totaling more than
250 million British thermal units per hour heat input;
(22) Petroleum storage and transfer units with a total storage
capacity exceeding 300,000 barrels;
(23) Taconite ore processing plants;
(24) Glass fiber processing plants;
(25) Charcoal production plants;
(26) Fossil fuel-fired steam electric plants of more than 250
million British thermal units per hour heat input; and
(27) Any other stationary source category which, as of August 7,
1980, is being regulated under section 111 or 112 of the Act.
(v)(A) Major modification means any physical change in or change in
the method of operation of a major stationary source that would result
in:
(1) A significant emissions increase of a regulated NSR pollutant
(as defined in paragraph (a)(1)(xxxvii) of this section); and
(2) A significant net emissions increase of that pollutant from the
major stationary source.
(B) Any significant emissions increase (as defined in paragraph
(a)(1)(xxvii) of this section) from any emissions units or net emissions
increase (as defined in paragraph (a)(1)(vi) of this section) at a major
stationary source that is significant for volatile organic compounds
shall be considered significant for ozone.
(C) A physical change or change in the method of operation shall not
include:
(1) Routine maintenance, repair and replacement. Routine
maintenance, repair and replacement shall include, but not be limited
to, any activity(s) that meets the requirements of the equipment
replacement provisions contained in paragraph (h) of this section;
Note to paragraph (a)(1)(v)(C)(1): On December 24, 2003, the second
sentence of this paragraph (a)(1)(v)(C)(1) is stayed indefinitely by
court order. The stayed provisions will become effective immediately if
the
[[Page 170]]
court terminates the stay. At that time, EPA will publish a document in
the Federal Register advising the public of the termination of the stay.
(2) Use of an alternative fuel or raw material by reason of an order
under sections 2 (a) and (b) of the Energy Supply and Environmental
Coordination Act of 1974 (or any superseding legislation) or by reason
of a natural gas curtailment plan pursuant to the Federal Power Act;
(3) Use of an alternative fuel by reason of an order or rule section
125 of the Act;
(4) Use of an alternative fuel at a steam generating unit to the
extent that the fuel is generated from municipal solid waste;
(5) Use of an alternative fuel or raw material by a stationary
source which;
(i) The source was capable of accommodating before December 21,
1976, unless such change would be prohibited under any federally
enforceable permit condition which was established after December 12,
1976 pursuant to 40 CFR 52.21 or under regulations approved pursuant to
40 CFR subpart I or Sec. 51.166, or
(ii) The source is approved to use under any permit issued under
regulations approved pursuant to this section;
(6) An increase in the hours of operation or in the production rate,
unless such change is prohibited under any federally enforceable permit
condition which was established after December 21, 1976 pursuant to 40
CFR 52.21 or regulations approved pursuant to 40 CFR part 51 subpart I
or 40 CFR 51.166.
(7) Any change in ownership at a stationary source.
(8) The addition, replacement, or use of a PCP, as defined in
paragraph (a)(1)(xxv) of this section, at an existing emissions unit
meeting the requirements of paragraph (e) of this section. A replacement
control technology must provide more effective emissions control than
that of the replaced control technology to qualify for this exclusion.
(9) The installation, operation, cessation, or removal of a
temporary clean coal technology demonstration project, provided that the
project complies with:
(i) The State Implementation Plan for the State in which the project
is located, and
(ii) Other requirements necessary to attain and maintain the
national ambient air quality standard during the project and after it is
terminated.
(D) This definition shall not apply with respect to a particular
regulated NSR pollutant when the major stationary source is complying
with the requirements under paragraph (f) of this section for a PAL for
that pollutant. Instead, the definition at paragraph (f)(2)(viii) of
this section shall apply.
(vi)(A) Net emissions increase means, with respect to any regulated
NSR pollutant emitted by a major stationary source, the amount by which
the sum of the following exceeds zero:
(1) The increase in emissions from a particular physical change or
change in the method of operation at a stationary source as calculated
pursuant to paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of this section; and
(2) Any other increases and decreases in actual emissions at the
major stationary source that are contemporaneous with the particular
change and are otherwise creditable. Baseline actual emissions for
calculating increases and decreases under this paragraph
(a)(1)(vi)(A)(2) shall be determined as provided in paragraph
(a)(1)(xxxv) of this section, except that paragraphs (a)(1)(xxxv)(A)(3)
and (a)(1)(xxxv)(B)(4) of this section shall not apply.
(B) An increase or decrease in actual emissions is contemporaneous
with the increase from the particular change only if it occurs before
the date that the increase from the particular change occurs;
(C) An increase or decrease in actual emissions is creditable only
if:
(1) It occurs within a reasonable period to be specified by the
reviewing authority; and
(2) The reviewing authority has not relied on it in issuing a permit
for the source under regulations approved pursuant to this section,
which permit is in effect when the increase in actual emissions from the
particular change occurs; and
[[Page 171]]
(3) The increase or decrease in emissions did not occur at a Clean
Unit, except as provided in paragraphs (c)(8) and (d)(10) of this
section.
(D) An increase in actual emissions is creditable only to the extent
that the new level of actual emissions exceeds the old level.
(E) A decrease in actual emissions is creditable only to the extent
that:
(1) The old level of actual emission or the old level of allowable
emissions whichever is lower, exceeds the new level of actual emissions;
(2) It is enforceable as a practical matter at and after the time
that actual construction on the particular change begins; and
(3) The reviewing authority has not relied on it in issuing any
permit under regulations approved pursuant to 40 CFR part 51 subpart I
or the State has not relied on it in demonstrating attainment or
reasonable further progress;
(4) It has approximately the same qualitative significance for
public health and welfare as that attributed to the increase from the
particular change; and
(5) The decrease in actual emissions did not result from the
installation of add-on control technology or application of pollution
prevention practices that were relied on in designating an emissions
unit as a Clean Unit under 40 CFR 52.21(y) or under regulations approved
pursuant to paragraph (d) of this section or Sec. 51.166(u). That is,
once an emissions unit has been designated as a Clean Unit, the owner or
operator cannot later use the emissions reduction from the air pollution
control measures that the Clean Unit designation is based on in
calculating the net emissions increase for another emissions unit (i.e.,
must not use that reduction in a ``netting analysis'' for another
emissions unit). However, any new emissions reductions that were not
relied upon in a PCP excluded pursuant to paragraph (e) of this section
or for a Clean Unit designation are creditable to the extent they meet
the requirements in paragraphs (e)(6)(iv) of this section for the PCP
and paragraphs (c)(8) or (d)(10) of this section for a Clean Unit.
(F) An increase that results from a physical change at a source
occurs when the emissions unit on which construction occurred becomes
operational and begins to emit a particular pollutant. Any replacement
unit that requires shakedown becomes operational only after a reasonable
shakedown period, not to exceed 180 days.
(G) Paragraph (a)(1)(xii)(B) of this section shall not apply for
determining creditable increases and decreases or after a change.
(vii) Emissions unit means any part of a stationary source that
emits or would have the potential to emit any regulated NSR pollutant
and includes an electric steam generating unit as defined in paragraph
(a)(1)(xx) of this section. For purposes of this section, there are two
types of emissions units as described in paragraphs (a)(1)(vii)(A) and
(B) of this section.
(A) A new emissions unit is any emissions unit which is (or will be)
newly constructed and which has existed for less than 2 years from the
date such emissions unit first operated.
(B) An existing emissions unit is any emissions unit that does not
meet the requirements in paragraph (a)(1)(vii)(A) of this section. A
replacement unit, as defined in paragraph (a)(1)(xxi) of this section,
is an existing emissions unit.
(viii) Secondary emissons means emissions which would occur as a
result of the construction or operation of a major stationary source or
major modification, but do not come from the major stationary source or
major modification itself. For the purpose of this section, secondary
emissions must be specific, well defined, quantifiable, and impact the
same general area as the stationary source or modification which causes
the secondary emissions. Secondary emissions include emissions from any
offsite support facility which would not be constructed or increase its
emissions except as a result of the construction of operation of the
major stationary source of major modification. Secondary emissions do
not include any emissions which come directly from a mobile source such
as emissions from the tailpipe of a motor vehicle, from a train, or from
a vessel.
(ix) Fugitive emissions means those emissions which could not
reasonably
[[Page 172]]
pass through a stack, chimney, vent or other functionally equivalent
opening.
(x) Significant means, in reference to a net emissions increase pr
the potential of a source to emit any of the following pollutions, as
rate of emissions that would equal or exceed any of the following rates:
Pollutant Emission Rate
Carbon monoxide: 100 tons per year (tpy)
Nitrogen oxides: 40 tpy
Sulfur dioxide: 40 tpy
Ozone: 40 tpy of volatile organic compounds
Lead: 0.6 tpy
(xi) Allowable emissions means the emissions rate of a stationary
source calculated using the maximum rated capacity of the source (unless
the source is subject to federally enforceable limits which restrict the
operating rate, or hours of operation, or both) and the most stringent
of the following:
(A) The applicable standards set forth in 40 CFR part 60 or 61;
(B) Any applicable State Implementation Plan emissions limitation
including those with a future compliance date; or
(C) The emissions rate specified as a federally enforceable permit
condition, including those with a future compliance date.
(xii)(A) Actual emissions means the actual rate of emissions of a
regulated NSR pollutant from an emissions unit, as determined in
accordance with paragraphs (a)(1)(xii)(B) through (D) of this section,
except that this definition shall not apply for calculating whether a
significant emissions increase has occurred, or for establishing a PAL
under paragraph (f) of this section. Instead, paragraphs (a)(1)(xxviii)
and (xxxv) of this section shall apply for those purposes.
(B) In general, actual emissions as of a particular date shall equal
the average rate, in tons per year, at which the unit actually emitted
the pollutant during a consecutive 24-month period which precedes the
particular date and which is representative of normal source operation.
The reviewing authority shall allow the use of a different time period
upon a determination that it is more representative of normal source
operation. Actual emissions shall be calculated using the unit's actual
operating hours, production rates, and types of materials processed,
stored, or combusted during the selected time period.
(C) The reviewing authority may presume that source-specific
allowable emissions for the unit are equivalent to the actual emissions
of the unit.
(D) For any emissions unit that has not begun normal operations on
the particular date, actual emissions shall equal the potential to emit
of the unit on that date.
(xiii) Lowest achievable emission rate (LAER) means, for any source,
the more stringent rate of emissions based on the following:
(A) The most stringent emissions limitation which is contained in
the implementation plan of any State for such class or category of
stationary source, unless the owner or operator of the proposed
stationary source demonstrates that such limitations are not achievable;
or
(B) The most stringent emissions limitation which is achieved in
practice by such class or category of stationary sources. This
limitation, when applied to a modification, means the lowest achievable
emissions rate for the new or modified emissions units within or
stationary source. In no event shall the application of the term permit
a proposed new or modified stationary source to emit any pollutant in
excess of the amount allowable under an applicable new source standard
of performance.
(xiv) Federally enforceable means all limitations and conditions
which are enforceable by the Administrator, including those requirements
developed pursuant to 40 CFR parts 60 and 61, requirements within any
applicable State implementation plan, any permit requirements
established pursuant to 40 CFR 52.21 or under regulations approved
pursuant to 40 CFR part 51, subpart I, including operating permits
issued under an EPA-approved program that is incorporated into the State
implementation plan and expressly requires adherence to any permit
issued under such program.
(xv) Begin actual construction means in general, initiation of
physical on-
[[Page 173]]
site construction activities on an emissions unit which are of a
permanent nature. Such activities include, but are not limited to,
installation of building supports and foundations, laying of underground
pipework, and construction of permanent storage structures. With respect
to a change in method of operating this term refers to those on-site
activities other than preparatory activities which mark the initiation
of the change.
(xvi) Commence as applied to construction of a major stationary
source or major modification means that the owner or operator has all
necessary preconstruction approvals or permits and either has:
(A) Begun, or caused to begin, a continuous program of actual on-
site construction of the source, to be completed within a reasonable
time; or
(B) Entered into binding agreements or contractual obligations,
which cannot be canceled or modified without substantial loss to the
owner or operator, to undertake a program of actual construction of the
source to be completed within a reasonable time.
(xvii) Necessary preconstruction approvals or permits means those
Federal air quality control laws and regulations and those air quality
control laws and regulations which are part of the applicable State
Implementation Plan.
(xviii) Construction means any physical change or change in the
method of operation (including fabrication, erection, installation,
demolition, or modification of an emissions unit) that would result in a
change in emissions.
(xix)Volatile organic compounds (VOC) is as defined in Sec.
51.100(s) of this part.
(xx) Electric utility steam generating unit means any steam electric
generating unit that is constructed for the purpose of supplying more
than one-third of its potential electric output capacity and more than
25 MW electrical output to any utility power distribution system for
sale. Any steam supplied to a steam distribution system for the purpose
of providing steam to a steam-electric generator that would produce
electrical energy for sale is also considered in determining the
electrical energy output capacity of the affected facility.
(xxi) Replacement unit means an emissions unit for which all the
criteria listed in paragraphs (a)(1)(xxi)(A) through (D) of this section
are met. No creditable emission reductions shall be generated from
shutting down the existing emissions unit that is replaced.
(A) The emissions unit is a reconstructed unit within the meaning of
Sec. 60.15(b)(1) of this chapter, or the emissions unit completely
takes the place of an existing emissions unit.
(B) The emissions unit is identical to or functionally equivalent to
the replaced emissions unit.
(C) The replacement does not alter the basic design parameters (as
discussed in paragraph (h)(2) of this section) of the process unit.
(D) The replaced emissions unit is permanently removed from the
major stationary source, otherwise permanently disabled, or permanently
barred from operation by a permit that is enforceable as a practical
matter. If the replaced emissions unit is brought back into operation,
it shall constitute a new emissions unit.
(xxii) Temporary clean coal technology demonstration project means a
clean coal technology demonstration project that is operated for a
period of 5 years or less, and which complies with the State
Implementation Plan for the State in which the project is located and
other requirements necessary to attain and maintain the national ambient
air quality standards during the project and after it is terminated.
(xxiii) Clean coal technology means any technology, including
technologies applied at the precombustion, combustion, or post
combustion stage, at a new or existing facility which will achieve
significant reductions in air emissions of sulfur dioxide or oxides of
nitrogen associated with the utilization of coal in the generation of
electricity, or process steam which was not in widespread use as of
November 15, 1990.
(xxiv) Clean coal technology demonstration project means a project
using funds appropriated under the heading ``Department of Energy-Clean
Coal Technology,'' up to a total amount of $2,500,000,000 for commercial
demonstration of clean coal technology, or
[[Page 174]]
similar projects funded through appropriations for the Environmental
Protection Agency. The Federal contribution for a qualifying project
shall be at least 20 percent of the total cost of the demonstration
project.
(xxv) Pollution control project (PCP) means any activity, set of
work practices or project (including pollution prevention as defined
under paragraph (a)(1)(xxvi) of this section) undertaken at an existing
emissions unit that reduces emissions of air pollutants from such unit.
Such qualifying activities or projects can include the replacement or
upgrade of an existing emissions control technology with a more
effective unit. Other changes that may occur at the source are not
considered part of the PCP if they are not necessary to reduce emissions
through the PCP. Projects listed in paragraphs (a)(1)(xxv)(A) through
(F) of this section are presumed to be environmentally beneficial
pursuant to paragraph (e)(2)(i) of this section. Projects not listed in
these paragraphs may qualify for a case-specific PCP exclusion pursuant
to the requirements of paragraphs (e)(2) and (e)(5) of this section.
(A) Conventional or advanced flue gas desulfurization or sorbent
injection for control of SO2.
(B) Electrostatic precipitators, baghouses, high efficiency
multiclones, or scrubbers for control of particulate matter or other
pollutants.
(C) Flue gas recirculation, low-NOX burners or
combustors, selective non-catalytic reduction, selective catalytic
reduction, low emission combustion (for IC engines), and oxidation/
absorption catalyst for control of NOX.
(D) Regenerative thermal oxidizers, catalytic oxidizers, condensers,
thermal incinerators, hydrocarbon combustion flares, biofiltration,
absorbers and adsorbers, and floating roofs for storage vessels for
control of volatile organic compounds or hazardous air pollutants. For
the purpose of this section, ``hydrocarbon combustion flare'' means
either a flare used to comply with an applicable NSPS or MACT standard
(including uses of flares during startup, shutdown, or malfunction
permitted under such a standard), or a flare that serves to control
emissions of waste streams comprised predominately of hydrocarbons and
containing no more than 230 mg/dscm hydrogen sulfide.
(E) Activities or projects undertaken to accommodate switching (or
partially switching) to an inherently less polluting fuel, to be limited
to the following fuel switches:
(1) Switching from a heavier grade of fuel oil to a lighter fuel
oil, or any grade of oil to 0.05 percent sulfur diesel (i.e., from a
higher sulfur content 2 fuel or from 6 fuel, to CA
0.05 percent sulfur 2 diesel);
(2) Switching from coal, oil, or any solid fuel to natural gas,
propane, or gasified coal;
(3) Switching from coal to wood, excluding construction or
demolition waste, chemical or pesticide treated wood, and other forms of
``unclean'' wood;
(4) Switching from coal to 2 fuel oil (0.5 percent maximum
sulfur content); and
(5) Switching from high sulfur coal to low sulfur coal (maximum 1.2
percent sulfur content).
(F) Activities or projects undertaken to accommodate switching from
the use of one ozone depleting substance (ODS) to the use of a substance
with a lower or zero ozone depletion potential (ODP), including changes
to equipment needed to accommodate the activity or project, that meet
the requirements of paragraphs (a)(1)(xxv)(F)(1) and (2) of this
section.
(1) The productive capacity of the equipment is not increased as a
result of the activity or project.
(2) The projected usage of the new substance is lower, on an ODP-
weighted basis, than the baseline usage of the replaced ODS. To make
this determination, follow the procedure in paragraphs
(a)(1)(xxv)(F)(2)(i) through (iv) of this section.
(i) Determine the ODP of the substances by consulting 40 CFR part
82, subpart A, appendices A and B.
(ii) Calculate the replaced ODP-weighted amount by multiplying the
baseline actual usage (using the annualized average of any 24
consecutive months of usage within the past 10 years) by the ODP of the
replaced ODS.
[[Page 175]]
(iii) Calculate the projected ODP-weighted amount by multiplying the
projected future annual usage of the new substance by its ODP.
(iv) If the value calculated in paragraph (a)(1)(xxv)(F)(2)(ii) of
this section is more than the value calculated in paragraph
(a)(1)(xxv)(F)(2)(iii) of this section, then the projected use of the
new substance is lower, on an ODP-weighted basis, than the baseline
usage of the replaced ODS.
(xxvi) Pollution prevention means any activity that through process
changes, product reformulation or redesign, or substitution of less
polluting raw materials, eliminates or reduces the release of air
pollutants (including fugitive emissions) and other pollutants to the
environment prior to recycling, treatment, or disposal; it does not mean
recycling (other than certain ``in-process recycling'' practices),
energy recovery, treatment, or disposal.
(xxvii) Significant emissions increase means, for a regulated NSR
pollutant, an increase in emissions that is significant (as defined in
paragraph (a)(1)(x) of this section) for that pollutant.
(xxviii)(A) Projected actual emissions means, the maximum annual
rate, in tons per year, at which an existing emissions unit is projected
to emit a regulated NSR pollutant in any one of the 5 years (12-month
period) following the date the unit resumes regular operation after the
project, or in any one of the 10 years following that date, if the
project involves increasing the emissions unit's design capacity or its
potential to emit of that regulated NSR pollutant and full utilization
of the unit would result in a significant emissions increase or a
significant net emissions increase at the major stationary source.
(B) In determining the projected actual emissions under paragraph
(a)(1)(xxviii)(A) of this section before beginning actual construction,
the owner or operator of the major stationary source:
(1) Shall consider all relevant information, including but not
limited to, historical operational data, the company's own
representations, the company's expected business activity and the
company's highest projections of business activity, the company's
filings with the State or Federal regulatory authorities, and compliance
plans under the approved plan; and
(2) Shall include fugitive emissions to the extent quantifiable, and
emissions associated with startups, shutdowns, and malfunctions; and
(3) Shall exclude, in calculating any increase in emissions that
results from the particular project, that portion of the unit's
emissions following the project that an existing unit could have
accommodated during the consecutive 24-month period used to establish
the baseline actual emissions under paragraph (a)(1)(xxxv) of this
section and that are also unrelated to the particular project, including
any increased utilization due to product demand growth; or,
(4) In lieu of using the method set out in paragraphs
(a)(1)(xxviii)(B)(1) through (3) of this section, may elect to use the
emissions unit's potential to emit, in tons per year, as defined under
paragraph (a)(1)(iii) of this section.
(xxix) Clean Unit means any emissions unit that has been issued a
major NSR permit that requires compliance with BACT or LAER, that is
complying with such BACT/LAER requirements, and qualifies as a Clean
Unit pursuant to regulations approved by the Administrator in accordance
with paragraph (c) of this section; or any emissions unit that has been
designated by a reviewing authority as a Clean Unit, based on the
criteria in paragraphs (d)(3)(i) through (iv) of this section, using a
plan-approved permitting process; or any emissions unit that has been
designated as a Clean Unit by the Administrator in accordance with Sec.
52.21(y)(3)(i) through (iv) of this chapter.
(xxx) Nonattainment major new source review (NSR) program means a
major source preconstruction permit program that has been approved by
the Administrator and incorporated into the plan to implement the
requirements of this section, or a program that implements part 51,
appendix S, Sections I through VI of this chapter. Any permit issued
under such a program is a major NSR permit.
(xxxi) Continuous emissions monitoring system (CEMS) means all of
the equipment that may be required to meet the
[[Page 176]]
data acquisition and availability requirements of this section, to
sample, condition (if applicable), analyze, and provide a record of
emissions on a continuous basis.
(xxxii) Predictive emissions monitoring system (PEMS) means all of
the equipment necessary to monitor process and control device
operational parameters (for example, control device secondary voltages
and electric currents) and other information (for example, gas flow
rate, O2 or CO2 concentrations), and calculate and
record the mass emissions rate (for example, lb/hr) on a continuous
basis.
(xxxiii) Continuous parameter monitoring system (CPMS) means all of
the equipment necessary to meet the data acquisition and availability
requirements of this section, to monitor process and control device
operational parameters (for example, control device secondary voltages
and electric currents) and other information (for example, gas flow
rate, O2 or CO2 concentrations), and to record
average operational parameter value(s) on a continuous basis.
(xxxiv) Continuous emissions rate monitoring system (CERMS) means
the total equipment required for the determination and recording of the
pollutant mass emissions rate (in terms of mass per unit of time).
(xxxv) Baseline actual emissions means the rate of emissions, in
tons per year, of a regulated NSR pollutant, as determined in accordance
with paragraphs (a)(1)(xxxv)(A) through (D) of this section.
(A) For any existing electric utility steam generating unit,
baseline actual emissions means the average rate, in tons per year, at
which the unit actually emitted the pollutant during any consecutive 24-
month period selected by the owner or operator within the 5-year period
immediately preceding when the owner or operator begins actual
construction of the project. The reviewing authority shall allow the use
of a different time period upon a determination that it is more
representative of normal source operation.
(1) The average rate shall include fugitive emissions to the extent
quantifiable, and emissions associated with startups, shutdowns, and
malfunctions.
(2) The average rate shall be adjusted downward to exclude any non-
compliant emissions that occurred while the source was operating above
any emission limitation that was legally enforceable during the
consecutive 24-month period.
(3) For a regulated NSR pollutant, when a project involves multiple
emissions units, only one consecutive 24-month period must be used to
determine the baseline actual emissions for the emissions units being
changed. A different consecutive 24-month period can be used for each
regulated NSR pollutant.
(4) The average rate shall not be based on any consecutive 24-month
period for which there is inadequate information for determining annual
emissions, in tons per year, and for adjusting this amount if required
by paragraph (a)(1)(xxxv)(A)(2) of this section.
(B) For an existing emissions unit (other than an electric utility
steam generating unit), baseline actual emissions means the average
rate, in tons per year, at which the emissions unit actually emitted the
pollutant during any consecutive 24-month period selected by the owner
or operator within the 10-year period immediately preceding either the
date the owner or operator begins actual construction of the project, or
the date a complete permit application is received by the reviewing
authority for a permit required either under this section or under a
plan approved by the Administrator, whichever is earlier, except that
the 10-year period shall not include any period earlier than November
15, 1990.
(1) The average rate shall include fugitive emissions to the extent
quantifiable, and emissions associated with startups, shutdowns, and
malfunctions.
(2) The average rate shall be adjusted downward to exclude any non-
compliant emissions that occurred while the source was operating above
an emission limitation that was legally enforceable during the
consecutive 24-month period.
(3) The average rate shall be adjusted downward to exclude any
emissions that would have exceeded an emission limitation with which the
major stationary source must currently comply,
[[Page 177]]
had such major stationary source been required to comply with such
limitations during the consecutive 24-month period. However, if an
emission limitation is part of a maximum achievable control technology
standard that the Administrator proposed or promulgated under part 63 of
this chapter, the baseline actual emissions need only be adjusted if the
State has taken credit for such emissions reductions in an attainment
demonstration or maintenance plan consistent with the requirements of
paragraph (a)(3)(ii)(G) of this section.
(4) For a regulated NSR pollutant, when a project involves multiple
emissions units, only one consecutive 24-month period must be used to
determine the baseline actual emissions for the emissions units being
changed. A different consecutive 24-month period can be used For each
regulated NSR pollutant.
(5) The average rate shall not be based on any consecutive 24-month
period for which there is inadequate information for determining annual
emissions, in tons per year, and for adjusting this amount if required
by paragraphs (a)(1)(xxxv)(B)(2) and (3) of this section.
(C) For a new emissions unit, the baseline actual emissions for
purposes of determining the emissions increase that will result from the
initial construction and operation of such unit shall equal zero; and
thereafter, for all other purposes, shall equal the unit's potential to
emit.
(D) For a PAL for a major stationary source, the baseline actual
emissions shall be calculated for existing electric utility steam
generating units in accordance with the procedures contained in
paragraph (a)(1)(xxxv)(A) of this section, for other existing emissions
units in accordance with the procedures contained in paragraph
(a)(1)(xxxv)(B) of this section, and for a new emissions unit in
accordance with the procedures contained in paragraph (a)(1)(xxxv)(C) of
this section.
(xxxvi) [Reserved]
(xxxvii) Regulated NSR pollutant, for purposes of this section,
means the following:
(A) Nitrogen oxides or any volatile organic compounds;
(B) Any pollutant for which a national ambient air quality standard
has been promulgated; or
(C) Any pollutant that is a constituent or precursor of a general
pollutant listed under paragraphs (a)(1)(xxxvii)(A) or (B) of this
section, provided that a constituent or precursor pollutant may only be
regulated under NSR as part of regulation of the general pollutant.
(xxxviii) Reviewing authority means the State air pollution control
agency, local agency, other State agency, Indian tribe, or other agency
authorized by the Administrator to carry out a permit program under this
section and Sec. 51.166, or the Administrator in the case of EPA-
implemented permit programs under Sec. 52.21.
(xxxix) Project means a physical change in, or change in the method
of operation of, an existing major stationary source.
(xl) Best available control technology (BACT) means an emissions
limitation (including a visible emissions standard) based on the maximum
degree of reduction for each regulated NSR pollutant which would be
emitted from any proposed major stationary source or major modification
which the reviewing authority, on a case-by-case basis, taking into
account energy, environmental, and economic impacts and other costs,
determines is achievable for such source or modification through
application of production processes or available methods, systems, and
techniques, including fuel cleaning or treatment or innovative fuel
combustion techniques for control of such pollutant. In no event shall
application of best available control technology result in emissions of
any pollutant which would exceed the emissions allowed by any applicable
standard under 40 CFR part 60 or 61. If the reviewing authority
determines that technological or economic limitations on the application
of measurement methodology to a particular emissions unit would make the
imposition of an emissions standard infeasible, a design, equipment,
work practice, operational standard, or combination thereof, may be
prescribed instead to satisfy the requirement for the application of
BACT. Such standard shall, to the degree possible, set forth
[[Page 178]]
the emissions reduction achievable by implementation of such design,
equipment, work practice or operation, and shall provide for compliance
by means which achieve equivalent results.
(xli) Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permit means any
permit that is issued under a major source preconstruction permit
program that has been approved by the Administrator and incorporated
into the plan to implement the requirements of Sec. 51.166 of this
chapter, or under the program in Sec. 52.21 of this chapter.
(xlii) Federal Land Manager means, with respect to any lands in the
United States, the Secretary of the department with authority over such
lands.
(xliii)(A) In general, process unit means any collection of
structures and/or equipment that processes, assembles, applies, blends,
or otherwise uses material inputs to produce or store an intermediate or
a completed product. A single stationary source may contain more than
one process unit, and a process unit may contain more than one emissions
unit.
(B) Pollution control equipment is not part of the process unit,
unless it serves a dual function as both process and control equipment.
Administrative and warehousing facilities are not part of the process
unit.
(C) For replacement cost purposes, components shared between two or
more process units are proportionately allocated based on capacity.
(D) The following list identifies the process units at specific
categories of stationary sources.
(1) For a steam electric generating facility, the process unit
consists of those portions of the plant that contribute directly to the
production of electricity. For example, at a pulverized coal-fired
facility, the process unit would generally be the combination of those
systems from the coal receiving equipment through the emission stack
(excluding post-combustion pollution controls), including the coal
handling equipment, pulverizers or coal crushers, feedwater heaters, ash
handling, boiler, burners, turbine-generator set, condenser, cooling
tower, water treatment system, air preheaters, and operating control
systems. Each separate generating unit is a separate process unit.
(2) For a petroleum refinery, there are several categories of
process units: those that separate and/or distill petroleum feedstocks;
those that change molecular structures; petroleum treating processes;
auxiliary facilities, such as steam generators and hydrogen production
units; and those that load, unload, blend or store intermediate or
completed products.
(3) For an incinerator, the process unit would consist of components
from the feed pit or refuse pit to the stack, including conveyors,
combustion devices, heat exchangers and steam generators, quench tanks,
and fans.
Note to paragraph (a)(1)(xliii): By a court order on December 24,
2003, this paragraph (a)(1)(xliii) is stayed indefinitely. The stayed
provisions will become effective immediately if the court terminates the
stay. At that time, EPA will publish a document in the Federal Register
advising the public of the termination of the stay.
(xliv) Functionally equivalent component means a component that
serves the same purpose as the replaced component.
Note to paragraph (a)(1)(xliv): By a court order on December 24,
2003, this paragraph (a)(1)(xliv) is stayed indefinitely. The stayed
provisions will become effective immediately if the court terminates the
stay. At that time, EPA will publish a document in the Federal Register
advising the public of the termination of the stay.
(xlv) Fixed capital cost means the capital needed to provide all the
depreciable components. ``Depreciable components'' refers to all
components of fixed capital cost and is calculated by subtracting land
and working capital from the total capital investment, as defined in
paragraph (a)(1)(xlvi) of this section.
Note to paragraph (a)(1)(xlv): By a court order on December 24,
2003, this paragraph (a)(1)(xlv) is stayed indefinitely. The stayed
provisions will become effective immediately if the court terminates the
stay. At that time, EPA will publish a document in the Federal Register
advising the public of the termination of the stay.
(xlvi) Total capital investment means the sum of the following: All
costs required to purchase needed process equipment (purchased equipment
costs); the costs of labor and materials for installing that equipment
(direct installation costs); the costs of site
[[Page 179]]
preparation and buildings; other costs such as engineering, construction
and field expenses, fees to contractors, startup and performance tests,
and contingencies (indirect installation costs); land for the process
equipment; and working capital for the process equipment.
Note to paragraph (a)(1)(xlvi): By a court order on December 24,
2003, this paragraph (a)(1)(xlvi) is stayed indefinitely. The stayed
provisions will become effective immediately if the court terminates the
stay. At that time, EPA will publish a document in the Federal Register
advising the public of the termination of the stay.
(2) Applicability procedures. (i) Each plan shall adopt a
preconstruction review program to satisfy the requirements of sections
172(c)(5) and 173 of the Act for any area designated nonattainment for
any national ambient air quality standard under subpart C of 40 CFR part
81. Such a program shall apply to any new major stationary source or
major modification that is major for the pollutant for which the area is
designated nonattainment under section 107(d)(1)(A)(i) of the Act, if
the stationary source or modification would locate anywhere in the
designated nonattainment area.
(ii) Each plan shall use the specific provisions of paragraphs
(a)(2)(ii)(A) through (F) of this section. Deviations from these
provisions will be approved only if the State specifically demonstrates
that the submitted provisions are more stringent than or at least as
stringent in all respects as the corresponding provisions in paragraphs
(a)(2)(ii)(A) through (F) of this section.
(A) Except as otherwise provided in paragraphs (a)(2)(iii) and (iv)
of this section, and consistent with the definition of major
modification contained in paragraph (a)(1)(v)(A) of this section, a
project is a major modification for a regulated NSR pollutant if it
causes two types of emissions increases--a significant emissions
increase (as defined in paragraph (a)(1)(xxvii) of this section), and a
significant net emissions increase (as defined in paragraphs (a)(1)(vi)
and (x) of this section). The project is not a major modification if it
does not cause a significant emissions increase. If the project causes a
significant emissions increase, then the project is a major modification
only if it also results in a significant net emissions increase.
(B) The procedure for calculating (before beginning actual
construction) whether a significant emissions increase (i.e., the first
step of the process) will occur depends upon the type of emissions units
being modified, according to paragraphs (a)(2)(ii)(C) through (F) of
this section. The procedure for calculating (before beginning actual
construction) whether a significant net emissions increase will occur at
the major stationary source (i.e., the second step of the process) is
contained in the definition in paragraph (a)(1)(vi) of this section.
Regardless of any such preconstruction projections, a major modification
results if the project causes a significant emissions increase and a
significant net emissions increase.
(C) Actual-to-projected-actual applicability test for projects that
only involve existing emissions units. A significant emissions increase
of a regulated NSR pollutant is projected to occur if the sum of the
difference between the projected actual emissions (as defined in
paragraph (a)(1)(xxviii) of this section) and the baseline actual
emissions (as defined in paragraphs (a)(1)(xxxv)(A) and (B) of this
section, as applicable), for each existing emissions unit, equals or
exceeds the significant amount for that pollutant (as defined in
paragraph (a)(1)(x) of this section).
(D) Actual-to-potential test for projects that only involve
construction of a new emissions unit(s). A significant emissions
increase of a regulated NSR pollutant is projected to occur if the sum
of the difference between the potential to emit (as defined in paragraph
(a)(1)(iii) of this section) from each new emissions unit following
completion of the project and the baseline actual emissions (as defined
in paragraph (a)(1)(xxxv)(C) of this section) of these units before the
project equals or exceeds the significant amount for that pollutant (as
defined in paragraph (a)(1)(x) of this section).
(E) Emission test for projects that involve Clean Units. For a
project that will be constructed and operated at a
[[Page 180]]
Clean Unit without causing the emissions unit to lose its Clean Unit
designation, no emissions increase is deemed to occur.
(F) Hybrid test for projects that involve multiple types of
emissions units. A significant emissions increase of a regulated NSR
pollutant is projected to occur if the sum of the emissions increases
for each emissions unit, using the method specified in paragraphs
(a)(2)(ii)(C) through (E) of this section as applicable with respect to
each emissions unit, for each type of emissions unit equals or exceeds
the significant amount for that pollutant (as defined in paragraph
(a)(1)(x) of this section). For example, if a project involves both an
existing emissions unit and a Clean Unit, the projected increase is
determined by summing the values determined using the method specified
in paragraph (a)(2)(ii)(C) of this section for the existing unit and
using the method specified in paragraph (a)(2)(ii)(E) of this section
for the Clean Unit.
(iii) The plan shall require that for any major stationary source
for a PAL for a regulated NSR pollutant, the major stationary source
shall comply with requirements under paragraph (f) of this section.
(iv) The plan shall require that an owner or operator undertaking a
PCP (as defined in paragraph (a)(1)(xxv) of this section) shall comply
with the requirements under paragraph (e) of this section.
(3)(i) Each plan shall provide that for sources and modifications
subject to any preconstruction review program adopted pursuant to this
subsection the baseline for determining credit for emissions reductions
is the emissions limit under the applicable State Implementation Plan in
effect at the time the application to construct is filed, except that
the offset baseline shall be the actual emissions of the source from
which offset credit is obtained where;
(A) The demonstration of reasonable further progress and attainment
of ambient air quality standards is based upon the actual emissions of
sources located within a designated nonattainment area for which the pre
con struction review program was adopted; or
(B) The applicable State Implementation Plan does not contain an
emissions limitation for that source or source category.
(ii) The plan shall further provide that:
(A) Where the emissions limit under the applicable State
Implementation Plan allows greater emissions than the potential to emit
of the source, emissions offset credit will be allowed only for control
below this potential;
(B) For an existing fuel combustion source, credit shall be based on
the allowable emissions under the applicable State Implementation Plan
for the type of fuel being burned at the time the application to
construct is filed. If the existing source commits to switch to a
cleaner fuel at some future date, emissions offset credit based on the
allowable (or actual) emissions for the fuels involved is not
acceptable, unless the permit is conditioned to require the use of a
specified alternative control measure which would achieve the same
degree of emissions reduction should the source switch back to a dirtier
fuel at some later date. The reviewing authority should ensure that
adequate long-term supplies of the new fuel are available before
granting emissions offset credit for fuel switches,
(C)(1) Emissions reductions achieved by shutting down an existing
source or curtailing production or operating hours below baseline levels
may be generally credited if such reductions are permanent,
quantifiable, and federally enforceable, and if the area has an EPA-
approved attainment plan. In addition, the shutdown or curtailment is
creditable only if it occurred on or after the date specified for this
purpose in the plan, and if such date is on or after the date of the
most recent emissions inventory used in the plan's demonstration of
attainment. Where the plan does not specify a cutoff date for shutdown
credits, the date of the most recent emissions inventory or attainment
demonstration, as the case may be, shall apply. However, in no event may
credit be given for shutdowns which occurred prior to August 7, 1977.
For purposes of this paragraph, a permitting authority may choose to
consider a prior shutdown or curtailment to have occurred after the date
of its
[[Page 181]]
most recent emissions inventory, if the inventory explicitly includes as
current existing emissions the emissions from such previously shutdown
or curtailed sources.
(2) Such reductions may be credited in the absence of an approved
attainment demonstration only if the shutdown or curtailment occurred on
or after the date the new source permit application is filed, or, if the
applicant can establish that the proposed new source is a replacement
for the shutdown or curtailed source, and the cutoff date provisions of
Sec. 51.165(a)(3)(ii)(C)(1) are observed.
(D) No emissions credit may be allowed for replacing one hydrocarbon
compound with another of lesser reactivity, except for those compounds
listed in Table 1 of EPA's ``Recommended Policy on Control of Volatile
Organic Compounds'' (42 FR 35314, July 8, 1977; (This document is also
available from Mr. Ted Creekmore, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, (MD-15) Research Triangle Park, NC 27711.))
(E) All emission reductions claimed as offset credit shall be
federally enforceable;
(F) Procedures relating to the permissible location of offsetting
emissions shall be followed which are at least as stringent as those set
out in 40 CFR part 51 appendix S section IV.D.
(G) Credit for an emissions reduction can be claimed to the extent
that the reviewing authority has not relied on it in issuing any permit
under regulations approved pursuant to 40 CFR part 51 subpart I or the
State has not relied on it in demonstration attainment or reasonable
further progress.
(H) Decreases in actual emissions resulting from the installation of
add-on control technology or application of pollution prevention
measures that were relied upon in designating an emissions unit as a
Clean Unit or a project as a PCP cannot be used as offsets.
(I) Decreases in actual emissions occurring at a Clean Unit cannot
be used as offsets, except as provided in paragraphs (c)(8) and (d)(10)
of this section. Similarly, decreases in actual emissions occurring at a
PCP cannot be used as offsets, except as provided in paragraph
(e)(6)(iv) of this section.
(J) The total tonnage of increased emissions, in tons per year,
resulting from a major modification that must be offset in accordance
with section 173 of the Act shall be determined by summing the
difference between the allowable emissions after the modification (as
defined by paragraph (a)(1)(xi) of this section) and the actual
emissions before the modification (as defined in paragraph (a)(1)(xii)
of this section) for each emissions unit.
(4) Each plan may provide that the provisions of this paragraph do
not apply to a source or modification that would be a major stationary
source or major modification only if fugitive emission to the extent
quantifiable are considered in calculating the potential to emit of the
stationary source or modification and the source does not belong to any
of the following categories:
(i) Coal cleaning plants (with thermal dryers);
(ii) Kraft pulp mills;
(iii) Portland cement plants;
(iv) Primary zinc smelters;
(v) Iron and steel mills;
(vi) Primary aluminum ore reduction plants;
(vii) Primary copper smelters;
(viii) Municipal incinerators capable of charging more than 250 tons
of refuse per day;
(ix) Hydrofluoric, sulfuric, or citric acid plants;
(x) Petroleum refineries;
(xi) Lime plants;
(xii) Phosphate rock processing plants;
(xiii) Coke oven batteries;
(xiv) Sulfur recovery plants;
(xv) Carbon black plants (furnace process);
(xvi) Primary lead smelters;
(xvii) Fuel conversion plants;
(xviii) Sintering plants;
(xix) Secondary metal production plants;
(xx) Chemical process plants;
(xxi) Fossil-fuel boilers (or combination thereof) totaling more
than 250 million British thermal units per hour heat input;
(xxii) Petroleum storage and transfer units with a total storage
capacity exceeding 300,000 barrels;
[[Page 182]]
(xxiii) Taconite ore processing plants;
(xxiv) Glass fiber processing plants;
(xxv) Charcoal production plants;
(xxvi) Fossil fuel-fired steam electric plants of more than 250
million British thermal units per hour heat input;
(xxvii) Any other stationary source category which, as of August 7,
1980, is being regulated under section 111 or 112 of the Act.
(5) Each plan shall include enforceable procedures to provide that:
(i) Approval to construct shall not relieve any owner or operator of
the responsibility to comply fully with applicable provision of the plan
and any other requirements under local, State or Federal law.
(ii) At such time that a particular source or modification becomes a
major stationary source or major modification solely by virtue of a
relaxation in any enforcement limitation which was established after
August 7, 1980, on the capacity of the source or modification otherwise
to emit a pollutant, such as a restriction on hours of operation, then
the requirements of regulations approved pursuant to this section shall
apply to the source or modification as though construction had not yet
commenced on the source or modification;
(6) Each plan shall provide that the following specific provisions
apply to projects at existing emissions units at a major stationary
source (other than projects at a Clean Unit or at a source with a PAL)
in circumstances where there is a reasonable possibility that a project
that is not a part of a major modification may result in a significant
emissions increase and the owner or operator elects to use the method
specified in paragraphs (a)(1)(xxviii)(B)(1) through (3) of this section
for calculating projected actual emissions. Deviations from these
provisions will be approved only if the State specifically demonstrates
that the submitted provisions are more stringent than or at least as
stringent in all respects as the corresponding provisions in paragraphs
(a)(6)(i) through (v) of this section.
(i) Before beginning actual construction of the project, the owner
or operator shall document and maintain a record of the following
information:
(A) A description of the project;
(B) Identification of the emissions unit(s) whose emissions of a
regulated NSR pollutant could be affected by the project; and
(C) A description of the applicability test used to determine that
the project is not a major modification for any regulated NSR pollutant,
including the baseline actual emissions, the projected actual emissions,
the amount of emissions excluded under paragraph (a)(1)(xxviii)(B)(3) of
this section and an explanation for why such amount was excluded, and
any netting calculations, if applicable.
(ii) If the emissions unit is an existing electric utility steam
generating unit, before beginning actual construction, the owner or
operator shall provide a copy of the information set out in paragraph
(a)(6)(i) of this section to the reviewing authority. Nothing in this
paragraph (a)(6)(ii) shall be construed to require the owner or operator
of such a unit to obtain any determination from the reviewing authority
before beginning actual construction.
(iii) The owner or operator shall monitor the emissions of any
regulated NSR pollutant that could increase as a result of the project
and that is emitted by any emissions units identified in paragraph
(a)(6)(i)(B) of this section; and calculate and maintain a record of the
annual emissions, in tons per year on a calendar year basis, for a
period of 5 years following resumption of regular operations after the
change, or for a period of 10 years following resumption of regular
operations after the change if the project increases the design capacity
or potential to emit of that regulated NSR pollutant at such emissions
unit.
(iv) If the unit is an existing electric utility steam generating
unit, the owner or operator shall submit a report to the reviewing
authority within 60 days after the end of each year during which records
must be generated under paragraph (a)(6)(iii) of this section setting
out the unit's annual emissions during the year that preceded submission
of the report.
(v) If the unit is an existing unit other than an electric utility
steam
[[Page 183]]
generating unit, the owner or operator shall submit a report to the
reviewing authority if the annual emissions, in tons per year, from the
project identified in paragraph (a)(6)(i) of this section, exceed the
baseline actual emissions (as documented and maintained pursuant to
paragraph (a)(6)(i)(C) of this section, by a significant amount (as
defined in paragraph (a)(1)(x) of this section) for that regulated NSR
pollutant, and if such emissions differ from the preconstruction
projection as documented and maintained pursuant to paragraph
(a)(6)(i)(C) of this section. Such report shall be submitted to the
reviewing authority within 60 days after the end of such year. The
report shall contain the following:
(A) The name, address and telephone number of the major stationary
source;
(B) The annual emissions as calculated pursuant to paragraph
(a)(6)(iii) of this section; and
(C) Any other information that the owner or operator wishes to
include in the report (e.g., an explanation as to why the emissions
differ from the preconstruction projection).
(7) Each plan shall provide that the owner or operator of the source
shall make the information required to be documented and maintained
pursuant to paragraph (a)(6) of this section available for review upon a
request for inspection by the reviewing authority or the general public
pursuant to the requirements contained in Sec. 70.4(b)(3)(viii) of this
chapter.
(b)(1) Each plan shall include a preconstruction review permit
program or its equivalent to satisfy the requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the Act for any new major stationary source or major
modification as defined in paragraphs (a)(1) (iv) and (v) of this
section. Such a program shall apply to any such source or modification
that would locate in any area designated as attainment or unclassifiable
for any national ambient air quality standard pursuant to section 107 of
the Act, when it would cause or contribute to a violation of any
national ambient air quality standard.
(2) A major source or major modification will be considered to cause
or contribute to a violation of a national ambient air quality standard
when such source or modification would, at a minimum, exceed the
following significance levels at any locality that does not or would not
meet the applicable national standard:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Averaging time (hours)
Pollutant Annual --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
24 8 3 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2................................ 1.0 [mu]g/m\3\........ 5 [mu]g/m\3\.......... ..................... 25 [mu]g/m\3\........ .....................
PM10............................... 1.0 [mu]g/m\3\........ 5 [mu]g/m\3\.......... ..................... ..................... .....................
NO2................................ 1.0 [mu]g/m\3\........ ...................... ..................... ..................... .....................
CO................................. ...................... ...................... 0.5 mg/m\3\.......... ..................... 2 mg/m\3\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) Such a program may include a provision which allows a proposed
major source or major modification subject to paragraph (b) of this
section to reduce the impact of its emissions upon air quality by
obtaining sufficient emission reductions to, at a minimum, compensate
for its adverse ambient impact where the major source or major
modification would otherwise cause or contribute to a violation of any
national ambient air quality standard. The plan shall require that, in
the absence of such emission reductions, the State or local agency shall
deny the proposed construction.
(4) The requirements of paragraph (b) of this section shall not
apply to a major stationary source or major modification with respect to
a particular pollutant if the owner or operator demonstrates that, as to
that pollutant, the source or modification is located in an area
designated as nonattainment pursuant to section 107 of the Act.
(c) Clean Unit Test for emissions units that are subject to LAER.
The plan shall provide an owner or operator of a major stationary source
the option of using the Clean Unit Test to determine whether emissions
increases at a Clean Unit are part of a project that is a major
modification according to the provisions in paragraphs (c)(1) through
(9) of this section.
[[Page 184]]
(1) Applicability. The provisions of this paragraph (c) apply to any
emissions unit for which the reviewing authority has issued a major NSR
permit within the past 10 years.
(2) General provisions for Clean Units. The provisions in paragraphs
(c)(2)(i) through (v) of this section apply to a Clean Unit.
(i) Any project for which the owner or operator begins actual
construction after the effective date of the Clean Unit designation (as
determined in accordance with paragraph (c)(4) of this section) and
before the expiration date (as determined in accordance with paragraph
(c)(5) of this section) will be considered to have occurred while the
emissions unit was a Clean Unit.
(ii) If a project at a Clean Unit does not cause the need for a
change in the emission limitations or work practice requirements in the
permit for the unit that were adopted in conjunction with LAER and the
project would not alter any physical or operational characteristics that
formed the basis for the LAER determination as specified in paragraph
(c)(6)(iv) of this section, the emissions unit remains a Clean Unit.
(iii) If a project causes the need for a change in the emission
limitations or work practice requirements in the permit for the unit
that were adopted in conjunction with LAER or the project would alter
any physical or operational characteristics that formed the basis for
the LAER determination as specified in paragraph (c)(6)(iv) of this
section, then the emissions unit loses its designation as a Clean Unit
upon issuance of the necessary permit revisions (unless the unit
requalifies as a Clean Unit pursuant to paragraph (c)(3)(iii) of this
section). If the owner or operator begins actual construction on the
project without first applying to revise the emissions unit's permit,
the Clean Unit designation ends immediately prior to the time when
actual construction begins.
(iv) A project that causes an emissions unit to lose its designation
as a Clean Unit is subject to the applicability requirements of
paragraphs (a)(2)(ii)(A) through (D) and paragraph (a)(2)(ii)(F) of this
section as if the emissions unit is not a Clean Unit.
(v) Certain Emissions Units with PSD permits. For emissions units
that meet the requirements of paragraphs (c)(2)(v)(A) and (B) of this
section, the BACT level of emissions reductions and/or work practice
requirements shall satisfy the requirement for LAER in meeting the
requirements for Clean Units under paragraphs (c)(3) through (8) of this
section. For these emissions units, all requirements for the LAER
determination under paragraphs (c)(2)(ii) and (iii) of this section
shall also apply to the BACT permit terms and conditions. In addition,
the requirements of paragraph (c)(7)(i)(B) of this section do not apply
to emissions units that qualify for Clean Unit status under this
paragraph (c)(2)(v).
(A) The emissions unit must have received a PSD permit within the
last 10 years and such permit must require the emissions unit to comply
with BACT.
(B) The emissions unit must be located in an area that was
redesignated as nonattainment for the relevant pollutant(s) after
issuance of the PSD permit and before the effective date of the Clean
Unit Test provisions in the area.
(3) Qualifying or re-qualifying to use the Clean Unit applicability
test. An emissions unit automatically qualifies as a Clean Unit when the
unit meets the criteria in paragraphs (c)(3)(i) and (ii) of this
section. After the original Clean Unit designation expires in accordance
with paragraph (c)(5) of this section or is lost pursuant to paragraph
(c)(2)(iii) of this section, such emissions unit may re-qualify as a
Clean Unit under either paragraph (c)(3)(iii) of this section, or under
the Clean Unit provisions in paragraph (d) of this section. To re-
qualify as a Clean Unit under paragraph (c)(3)(iii) of this section, the
emissions unit must obtain a new major NSR permit issued through the
applicable nonattainment major NSR program and meet all the criteria in
paragraph (c)(3)(iii) of this section. Clean Unit designation applies
individually for each pollutant emitted by the emissions unit.
(i) Permitting requirement. The emissions unit must have received a
major NSR permit within the past 10 years. The owner or operator must
maintain and be able to provide information that
[[Page 185]]
would demonstrate that this permitting requirement is met.
(ii) Qualifying air pollution control technologies. Air pollutant
emissions from the emissions unit must be reduced through the use of an
air pollution control technology (which includes pollution prevention as
defined under paragraph (a)(1)(xxvi) of this section or work practices)
that meets both the following requirements in paragraphs (c)(3)(ii)(A)
and (B) of this section.
(A) The control technology achieves the LAER level of emissions
reductions as determined through issuance of a major NSR permit within
the past 10 years. However, the emissions unit is not eligible for Clean
Unit designation if the LAER determination resulted in no requirement to
reduce emissions below the level of a standard, uncontrolled, new
emissions unit of the same type.
(B) The owner or operator made an investment to install the control
technology. For the purpose of this determination, an investment
includes expenses to research the application of a pollution prevention
technique to the emissions unit or expenses to apply a pollution
prevention technique to an emissions unit.
(iii) Re-qualifying for the Clean Unit designation. The emissions
unit must obtain a new major NSR permit that requires compliance with
the current-day LAER, and the emissions unit must meet the requirements
in paragraphs (c)(3)(i) and (c)(3)(ii) of this section.
(4) Effective date of the Clean Unit designation. The effective date
of an emissions unit's Clean Unit designation (that is, the date on
which the owner or operator may begin to use the Clean Unit Test to
determine whether a project at the emissions unit is a major
modification) is determined according to the applicable paragraph
(c)(4)(i) or (c)(4)(ii) of this section.
(i) Original Clean Unit designation, and emissions units that re-
qualify as Clean Units by implementing a new control technology to meet
current-day LAER. The effective date is the date the emissions unit's
air pollution control technology is placed into service, or 3 years
after the issuance date of the major NSR permit, whichever is earlier,
but no sooner than the date that provisions for the Clean Unit
applicability test are approved by the Administrator for incorporation
into the plan and become effective for the State in which the unit is
located.
(ii) Emissions units that re-qualify for the Clean Unit designation
using an existing control technology. The effective date is the date the
new, major NSR permit is issued.
(5) Clean Unit expiration. An emissions unit's Clean Unit
designation expires (that is, the date on which the owner or operator
may no longer use the Clean Unit Test to determine whether a project
affecting the emissions unit is, or is part of, a major modification)
according to the applicable paragraph (c)(5)(i) or (ii) of this section.
(i) Original Clean Unit designation, and emissions units that re-
qualify by implementing new control technology to meet current-day LAER.
For any emissions unit that automatically qualifies as a Clean Unit
under paragraphs (c)(3)(i) and (ii) of this section, the Clean Unit
designation expires 10 years after the effective date, or the date the
equipment went into service, whichever is earlier; or, it expires at any
time the owner or operator fails to comply with the provisions for
maintaining Clean Unit designation in paragraph (c)(7) of this section.
(ii) Emissions units that re-qualify for the Clean Unit designation
using an existing control technology. For any emissions unit that re-
qualifies as a Clean Unit under paragraph (c)(3)(iii) of this section,
the Clean Unit designation expires 10 years after the effective date;
or, it expires any time the owner or operator fails to comply with the
provisions for maintaining the Clean Unit Designation in paragraph
(c)(7) of this section.
(6) Required title V permit content for a Clean Unit. After the
effective date of the Clean Unit designation, and in accordance with the
provisions of the applicable title V permit program under part 70 or
part 71 of this chapter, but no later than when the title V permit is
renewed, the title V permit for the major stationary source must include
the following terms and conditions in
[[Page 186]]
paragraphs (c)(6)(i) through (vi) of this section related to the Clean
Unit.
(i) A statement indicating that the emissions unit qualifies as a
Clean Unit and identifying the pollutant(s) for which this Clean Unit
designation applies.
(ii) The effective date of the Clean Unit designation. If this date
is not known when the Clean Unit designation is initially recorded in
the title V permit (e.g., because the air pollution control technology
is not yet in service), the permit must describe the event that will
determine the effective date (e.g., the date the control technology is
placed into service). Once the effective date is determined, the owner
or operator must notify the reviewing authority of the exact date. This
specific effective date must be added to the source's title V permit at
the first opportunity, such as a modification, revision, reopening, or
renewal of the title V permit for any reason, whichever comes first, but
in no case later than the next renewal.
(iii) The expiration date of the Clean Unit designation. If this
date is not known when the Clean Unit designation is initially recorded
into the title V permit (e.g., because the air pollution control
technology is not yet in service), then the permit must describe the
event that will determine the expiration date (e.g., the date the
control technology is placed into service). Once the expiration date is
determined, the owner or operator must notify the reviewing authority of
the exact date. The expiration date must be added to the source's title
V permit at the first opportunity, such as a modification, revision,
reopening, or renewal of the title V permit for any reason, whichever
comes first, but in no case later than the next renewal.
(iv) All emission limitations and work practice requirements adopted
in conjunction with the LAER, and any physical or operational
characteristics that formed the basis for the LAER determination (e.g.,
possibly the emissions unit's capacity or throughput).
(v) Monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements as
necessary to demonstrate that the emissions unit continues to meet the
criteria for maintaining the Clean Unit designation. (See paragraph
(c)(7) of this section.)
(vi) Terms reflecting the owner or operator's duties to maintain the
Clean Unit designation and the consequences of failing to do so, as
presented in paragraph (c)(7) of this section.
(7) Maintaining the Clean Unit designation. To maintain the Clean
Unit designation, the owner or operator must conform to all the
restrictions listed in paragraphs (c)(7)(i) through (iii) of this
section. This paragraph (c)(7) applies independently to each pollutant
for which the emissions unit has the Clean Unit designation. That is,
failing to conform to the restrictions for one pollutant affects Clean
Unit designation only for that pollutant.
(i) The Clean Unit must comply with the emission limitation(s) and/
or work practice requirements adopted in conjunction with the LAER that
is recorded in the major NSR permit, and subsequently reflected in the
title V permit.
(A) The owner or operator may not make a physical change in or
change in the method of operation of the Clean Unit that causes the
emissions unit to function in a manner that is inconsistent with the
physical or operational characteristics that formed the basis for the
LAER determination (e.g., possibly the emissions unit's capacity or
throughput).
(B) The Clean Unit may not emit above a level that has been offset.
(ii) The Clean Unit must comply with any terms and conditions in the
title V permit related to the unit's Clean Unit designation.
(iii) The Clean Unit must continue to control emissions using the
specific air pollution control technology that was the basis for its
Clean Unit designation. If the emissions unit or control technology is
replaced, then the Clean Unit designation ends.
(8) Offsets and netting at Clean Units. Emissions changes that occur
at a Clean Unit must not be included in calculating a significant net
emissions increase (that is, must not be used in a ``netting
analysis''), or be used for generating offsets unless such use occurs
before the effective date of the Clean Unit designation, or after the
Clean Unit designation expires; or, unless the
[[Page 187]]
emissions unit reduces emissions below the level that qualified the unit
as a Clean Unit. However, if the Clean Unit reduces emissions below the
level that qualified the unit as a Clean Unit, then, the owner or
operator may generate a credit for the difference between the level that
qualified the unit as a Clean Unit and the new emission limitation if
such reductions are surplus, quantifiable, and permanent. For purposes
of generating offsets, the reductions must also be federally
enforceable. For purposes of determining creditable net emissions
increases and decreases, the reductions must also be enforceable as a
practical matter.
(9) Effect of redesignation on the Clean Unit designation. The Clean
Unit designation of an emissions unit is not affected by redesignation
of the attainment status of the area in which it is located. That is, if
a Clean Unit is located in an attainment area and the area is
redesignated to nonattainment, its Clean Unit designation is not
affected. Similarly, redesignation from nonattainment to attainment does
not affect the Clean Unit designation. However, if an existing Clean
Unit designation expires, it must re-qualify under the requirements that
are currently applicable in the area.
(d) Clean Unit provisions for emissions units that achieve an
emission limitation comparable to LAER. The plan shall provide an owner
or operator of a major stationary source the option of using the Clean
Unit Test to determine whether emissions increases at a Clean Unit are
part of a project that is a major modification according to the
provisions in paragraphs (d)(1) through (11) of this section.
(1) Applicability. The provisions of this paragraph (d) apply to
emissions units which do not qualify as Clean Units under paragraph (c)
of this section, but which are achieving a level of emissions control
comparable to LAER, as determined by the reviewing authority in
accordance with this paragraph (d).
(2) General provisions for Clean Units. The provisions in paragraphs
(d)(2)(i) through (iv) of this section apply to a Clean Unit (designated
under this paragraph (d)).
(i) Any project for which the owner or operator begins actual
construction after the effective date of the Clean Unit designation (as
determined in accordance with paragraph (d)(5) of this section) and
before the expiration date (as determined in accordance with paragraph
(d)(6) of this section) will be considered to have occurred while the
emissions unit was a Clean Unit.
(ii) If a project at a Clean Unit does not cause the need for a
change in the emission limitations or work practice requirements in the
permit for the unit that have been determined (pursuant to paragraph
(d)(4) of this section) to be comparable to LAER, and the project would
not alter any physical or operational characteristics that formed the
basis for determining that the emissions unit's control technology
achieves a level of emissions control comparable to LAER as specified in
paragraph (d)(8)(iv) of this section, the emissions unit remains a Clean
Unit.
(iii) If a project causes the need for a change in the emission
limitations or work practice requirements in the permit for the unit
that have been determined (pursuant to paragraph (d)(4) of this section)
to be comparable to LAER, or the project would alter any physical or
operational characteristics that formed the basis for determining that
the emissions unit's control technology achieves a level of emissions
control comparable to LAER as specified in paragraph (d)(8)(iv) of this
section, then the emissions unit loses its designation as a Clean Unit
upon issuance of the necessary permit revisions (unless the unit re-
qualifies as a Clean Unit pursuant to paragraph (d)(3)(iv) of this
section). If the owner or operator begins actual construction on the
project without first applying to revise the emissions unit's permit,
the Clean Unit designation ends immediately prior to the time when
actual construction begins.
(iv) A project that causes an emissions unit to lose its designation
as a Clean Unit is subject to the applicability requirements of
paragraphs (a)(2)(ii)(A) through (D) and paragraph (a)(2)(ii)(F) of this
section as if the emissions unit were never a Clean Unit.
[[Page 188]]
(3) Qualifying or re-qualifying to use the Clean Unit applicability
test. An emissions unit qualifies as a Clean Unit when the unit meets
the criteria in paragraphs (d)(3)(i) through (iii) of this section.
After the original Clean Unit designation expires in accordance with
paragraph (d)(6) of this section or is lost pursuant to paragraph
(d)(2)(iii) of this section, such emissions unit may re-qualify as a
Clean Unit under either paragraph (d)(3)(iv) of this section, or under
the Clean Unit provisions in paragraph (c) of this section. To re-
qualify as a Clean Unit under paragraph (d)(3)(iv) of this section, the
emissions unit must obtain a new permit issued pursuant to the
requirements in paragraphs (d)(7) and (8) of this section and meet all
the criteria in paragraph (d)(3)(iv) of this section. The reviewing
authority will make a separate Clean Unit designation for each pollutant
emitted by the emissions unit for which the emissions unit qualifies as
a Clean Unit.
(i) Qualifying air pollution control technologies. Air pollutant
emissions from the emissions unit must be reduced through the use of air
pollution control technology (which includes pollution prevention as
defined under paragraph (a)(1)(xxvi) of this section or work practices)
that meets both the following requirements in paragraphs (d)(3)(i)(A)
and (B) of this section.
(A) The owner or operator has demonstrated that the emissions unit's
control technology is comparable to LAER according to the requirements
of paragraph (d)(4) of this section. However, the emissions unit is not
eligible for the Clean Unit designation if its emissions are not reduced
below the level of a standard, uncontrolled emissions unit of the same
type (e.g., if the LAER determinations to which it is compared have
resulted in a determination that no control measures are required).
(B) The owner or operator made an investment to install the control
technology. For the purpose of this determination, an investment
includes expenses to research the application of a pollution prevention
technique to the emissions unit or to retool the unit to apply a
pollution prevention technique.
(ii) Impact of emissions from the unit. The reviewing authority must
determine that the allowable emissions from the emissions unit will not
cause or contribute to a violation of any national ambient air quality
standard or PSD increment, or adversely impact an air quality related
value (such as visibility) that has been identified for a Federal Class
I area by a Federal Land Manager and for which information is available
to the general public.
(iii) Date of installation. An emissions unit may qualify as a Clean
Unit even if the control technology, on which the Clean Unit designation
is based, was installed before the effective date of plan requirements
to implement the requirements of this paragraph (d)(3)(iii). However,
for such emissions units, the owner or operator must apply for the Clean
Unit designation within 2 years after the plan requirements become
effective. For technologies installed after the plan requirements become
effective, the owner or operator must apply for the Clean Unit
designation at the time the control technology is installed.
(iv) Re-qualifying as a Clean Unit. The emissions unit must obtain a
new permit (pursuant to requirements in paragraphs (d)(7) and (8) of
this section) that demonstrates that the emissions unit's control
technology is achieving a level of emission control comparable to
current-day LAER, and the emissions unit must meet the requirements in
paragraphs (d)(3)(i)(A) and (d)(3)(ii) of this section.
(4) Demonstrating control effectiveness comparable to LAER. The
owner or operator may demonstrate that the emissions unit's control
technology is comparable to LAER for purposes of paragraph (d)(3)(i) of
this section according to either paragraph (d)(4)(i) or (ii) of this
section. Paragraph (d)(4)(iii) of this section specifies the time for
making this comparison.
(i) Comparison to previous LAER determinations. The administrator
maintains an on-line data base of previous determinations of RACT, BACT,
and LAER in the RACT/BACT/LAER Clearinghouse (RBLC). The emissions
unit's control technology is presumed to be comparable to LAER if it
achieves an emission limitation that is at least as
[[Page 189]]
stringent as any one of the five best-performing similar sources for
which a LAER determination has been made within the preceding 5 years,
and for which information has been entered into the RBLC. The reviewing
authority shall also compare this presumption to any additional LAER
determinations of which it is aware, and shall consider any information
on achieved-in-practice pollution control technologies provided during
the public comment period, to determine whether any presumptive
determination that the control technology is comparable to LAER is
correct.
(ii) The substantially-as-effective test. The owner or operator may
demonstrate that the emissions unit's control technology is
substantially as effective as LAER. In addition, any other person may
present evidence related to whether the control technology is
substantially as effective as LAER during the public participation
process required under paragraph (d)(7) of this section. The reviewing
authority shall consider such evidence on a case-by-case basis and
determine whether the emissions unit's air pollution control technology
is substantially as effective as LAER.
(iii) Time of comparison--(A) Emissions units with control
technologies that are installed before the effective date of plan
requirements implementing this paragraph. The owner or operator of an
emissions unit whose control technology is installed before the
effective date of plan requirements implementing this paragraph (d) may,
at its option, either demonstrate that the emission limitation achieved
by the emissions unit's control technology is comparable to the LAER
requirements that applied at the time the control technology was
installed, or demonstrate that the emission limitation achieved by the
emissions unit's control technology is comparable to current-day LAER
requirements. The expiration date of the Clean Unit designation will
depend on which option the owner or operator uses, as specified in
paragraph (d)(6) of this section.
(B) Emissions units with control technologies that are installed
after the effective date of plan requirements implementing this
paragraph. The owner or operator must demonstrate that the emission
limitation achieved by the emissions unit's control technology is
comparable to current-day LAER requirements.
(5) Effective date of the Clean Unit designation. The effective date
of an emissions unit's Clean Unit designation (that is, the date on
which the owner or operator may begin to use the Clean Unit Test to
determine whether a project involving the emissions unit is a major
modification) is the date that the permit required by paragraph (d)(7)
of this section is issued or the date that the emissions unit's air
pollution control technology is placed into service, whichever is later.
(6) Clean Unit expiration. If the owner or operator demonstrates
that the emission limitation achieved by the emissions unit's control
technology is comparable to the LAER requirements that applied at the
time the control technology was installed, then the Clean Unit
designation expires 10 years from the date that the control technology
was installed. For all other emissions units, the Clean Unit designation
expires 10 years from the effective date of the Clean Unit designation,
as determined according to paragraph (d)(5) of this section. In
addition, for all emissions units, the Clean Unit designation expires
any time the owner or operator fails to comply with the provisions for
maintaining the Clean Unit designation in paragraph (d)(9) of this
section.
(7) Procedures for designating emissions units as Clean Units. The
reviewing authority shall designate an emissions unit a Clean Unit only
by issuing a permit through a permitting program that has been approved
by the Administrator and that conforms with the requirements of
Sec. Sec. 51.160 through 51.164 of this chapter including requirements
for public notice of the proposed Clean Unit designation and opportunity
for public comment. Such permit must also meet the requirements in
paragraph (d)(8).
(8) Required permit content. The permit required by paragraph (d)(7)
of this section shall include the terms and conditions set forth in
paragraphs (d)(8)(i) through (vi) of this section.
[[Page 190]]
Such terms and conditions shall be incorporated into the major
stationary source's title V permit in accordance with the provisions of
the applicable title V permit program under part 70 or part 71 of this
chapter, but no later than when the title V permit is renewed.
(i) A statement indicating that the emissions unit qualifies as a
Clean Unit and identifying the pollutant(s) for which this designation
applies.
(ii) The effective date of the Clean Unit designation. If this date
is not known when the reviewing authority issues the permit (e.g.,
because the air pollution control technology is not yet in service),
then the permit must describe the event that will determine the
effective date (e.g., the date the control technology is placed into
service). Once the effective date is known, then the owner or operator
must notify the reviewing authority of the exact date. This specific
effective date must be added to the source's title V permit at the first
opportunity, such as a modification, revision, reopening, or renewal of
the title V permit for any reason, whichever comes first, but in no case
later than the next renewal.
(iii) The expiration date of the Clean Unit designation. If this
date is not known when the reviewing authority issues the permit (e.g.,
because the air pollution control technology is not yet in service),
then the permit must describe the event that will determine the
expiration date (e.g., the date the control technology is placed into
service). Once the expiration date is known, then the owner or operator
must notify the reviewing authority of the exact date. The expiration
date must be added to the source's title V permit at the first
opportunity, such as a modification, revision, reopening, or renewal of
the title V permit for any reason, whichever comes first, but in no case
later than the next renewal.
(iv) All emission limitations and work practice requirements adopted
in conjunction with emission limitations necessary to assure that the
control technology continues to achieve an emission limitation
comparable to LAER, and any physical or operational characteristics that
formed the basis for determining that the emissions unit's control
technology achieves a level of emissions control comparable to LAER
(e.g., possibly the emissions unit's capacity or throughput).
(v) Monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements as
necessary to demonstrate that the emissions unit continues to meet the
criteria for maintaining its Clean Unit designation. (See paragraph
(d)(9) of this section.)
(vi) Terms reflecting the owner or operator's duties to maintain the
Clean Unit designation and the consequences of failing to do so, as
presented in paragraph (d)(9) of this section.
(9) Maintaining Clean Unit designation. To maintain Clean Unit
designation, the owner or operator must conform to all the restrictions
listed in paragraphs (d)(9)(i) through (v) of this section. This
paragraph (d)(9) applies independently to each pollutant for which the
reviewing authority has designated the emissions unit a Clean Unit. That
is, failing to conform to the restrictions for one pollutant affects the
Clean Unit designation only for that pollutant.
(i) The Clean Unit must comply with the emission limitation(s) and/
or work practice requirements adopted to ensure that the control
technology continues to achieve emission control comparable to LAER.
(ii) The owner or operator may not make a physical change in or
change in the method of operation of the Clean Unit that causes the
emissions unit to function in a manner that is inconsistent with the
physical or operational characteristics that formed the basis for the
determination that the control technology is achieving a level of
emission control that is comparable to LAER (e.g., possibly the
emissions unit's capacity or throughput).
(iii) The Clean Unit may not emit above a level that has been
offset.
(iv) The Clean Unit must comply with any terms and conditions in the
title V permit related to the unit's Clean Unit designation.
(v) The Clean Unit must continue to control emissions using the
specific air pollution control technology that was the basis for its
Clean Unit designation. If the emissions unit or control technology is
replaced, then the Clean Unit designation ends.
[[Page 191]]
(10) Offsets and Netting at Clean Units. Emissions changes that
occur at a Clean Unit must not be included in calculating a significant
net emissions increase (that is, must not be used in a ``netting
analysis''), or be used for generating offsets unless such use occurs
before the effective date of plan requirements adopted to implement this
paragraph (d) or after the Clean Unit designation expires; or, unless
the emissions unit reduces emissions below the level that qualified the
unit as a Clean Unit. However, if the Clean Unit reduces emissions below
the level that qualified the unit as a Clean Unit, then the owner or
operator may generate a credit for the difference between the level that
qualified the unit as a Clean Unit and the emissions unit's new emission
limitation if such reductions are surplus, quantifiable, and permanent.
For purposes of generating offsets, the reductions must also be
federally enforceable. For purposes of determining creditable net
emissions increases and decreases, the reductions must also be
enforceable as a practical matter.
(11) Effect of redesignation on the Clean Unit designation. The
Clean Unit designation of an emissions unit is not affected by
redesignation of the attainment status of the area in which it is
located. That is, if a Clean Unit is located in an attainment area and
the area is redesignated to nonattainment, its Clean Unit designation is
not affected. Similarly, redesignation from nonattainment to attainment
does not affect the Clean Unit designation. However, if a Clean Unit's
designation expires or is lost pursuant to paragraphs (c)(2)(iii) and
(d)(2)(iii) of this section, it must re-qualify under the requirements
that are currently applicable.
(e) PCP exclusion procedural requirements. Each plan shall include
provisions for PCPs equivalent to those contained in paragraphs (e)(1)
through (6) of this section.
(1) Before an owner or operator begins actual construction of a PCP,
the owner or operator must either submit a notice to the reviewing
authority if the project is listed in paragraphs (a)(1)(xxv)(A) through
(F) of this section, or if the project is not listed in paragraphs
(a)(1)(xxv)(A) through (F) of this section, then the owner or operator
must submit a permit application and obtain approval to use the PCP
exclusion from the reviewing authority consistent with the requirements
in paragraph (e)(5) of this section. Regardless of whether the owner or
operator submits a notice or a permit application, the project must meet
the requirements in paragraph (e)(2) of this section, and the notice or
permit application must contain the information required in paragraph
(e)(3) of this section.
(2) Any project that relies on the PCP exclusion must meet the
requirements in paragraphs (e)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section.
(i) Environmentally beneficial analysis. The environmental benefit
from the emission reductions of pollutants regulated under the Act must
outweigh the environmental detriment of emissions increases in
pollutants regulated under the Act. A statement that a technology from
paragraphs (a)(1)(xxv)(A) through (F) of this section is being used
shall be presumed to satisfy this requirement.
(ii) Air quality analysis. The emissions increases from the project
will not cause or contribute to a violation of any national ambient air
quality standard or PSD increment, or adversely impact an air quality
related value (such as visibility) that has been identified for a
Federal Class I area by a Federal Land Manager and for which information
is available to the general public.
(3) Content of notice or permit application. In the notice or permit
application sent to the reviewing authority, the owner or operator must
include, at a minimum, the information listed in paragraphs (e)(3)(i)
through (v) of this section.
(i) A description of the project.
(ii) The potential emissions increases and decreases of any
pollutant regulated under the Act and the projected emissions increases
and decreases using the methodology in paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of this
section, that will result from the project, and a copy of the
environmentally beneficial analysis required by paragraph (e)(2)(i) of
this section.
(iii) A description of monitoring and recordkeeping, and all other
methods,
[[Page 192]]
to be used on an ongoing basis to demonstrate that the project is
environmentally beneficial. Methods should be sufficient to meet the
requirements in part 70 and part 71.
(iv) A certification that the project will be designed and operated
in a manner that is consistent with proper industry and engineering
practices, in a manner that is consistent with the environmentally
beneficial analysis and air quality analysis required by paragraphs
(e)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section, with information submitted in the
notice or permit application, and in such a way as to minimize, within
the physical configuration and operational standards usually associated
with the emissions control device or strategy, emissions of collateral
pollutants.
(v) Demonstration that the PCP will not have an adverse air quality
impact (e.g., modeling, screening level modeling results, or a statement
that the collateral emissions increase is included within the parameters
used in the most recent modeling exercise) as required by paragraph
(e)(2)(ii) of this section. An air quality impact analysis is not
required for any pollutant which will not experience a significant
emissions increase as a result of the project.
(4) Notice process for listed projects. For projects listed in
paragraphs (a)(1)(xxv)(A) through (F) of this section, the owner or
operator may begin actual construction of the project immediately after
notice is sent to the reviewing authority (unless otherwise prohibited
under requirements of the applicable plan). The owner or operator shall
respond to any requests by its reviewing authority for additional
information that the reviewing authority determines is necessary to
evaluate the suitability of the project for the PCP exclusion.
(5) Permit process for unlisted projects. Before an owner or
operator may begin actual construction of a PCP project that is not
listed in paragraphs (a)(1)(xxv)(A) through (F) of this section, the
project must be approved by the reviewing authority and recorded in a
plan-approved permit or title V permit using procedures that are
consistent with Sec. Sec. 51.160 and 51.161 of this chapter. This
includes the requirement that the reviewing authority provide the public
with notice of the proposed approval, with access to the environmentally
beneficial analysis and the air quality analysis, and provide at least a
30-day period for the public and the Administrator to submit comments.
The reviewing authority must address all material comments received by
the end of the comment period before taking final action on the permit.
(6) Operational requirements. Upon installation of the PCP, the
owner or operator must comply with the requirements of paragraphs
(e)(6)(i) through (iii) of this section.
(i) General duty. The owner or operator must operate the PCP in a
manner consistent with proper industry and engineering practices, in a
manner that is consistent with the environmentally beneficial analysis
and air quality analysis required by paragraphs (e)(2)(i) and (ii) of
this section, with information submitted in the notice or permit
application required by paragraph (e)(3) of this section, and in such a
way as to minimize, within the physical configuration and operational
standards usually associated with the emissions control device or
strategy, emissions of collateral pollutants.
(ii) Recordkeeping. The owner or operator must maintain copies on
site of the environmentally beneficial analysis, the air quality impacts
analysis, and monitoring and other emission records to prove that the
PCP operated consistent with the general duty requirements in paragraph
(e)(6)(i) of this section.
(iii) Permit requirements. The owner or operator must comply with
any provisions in the plan-approved permit or title V permit related to
use and approval of the PCP exclusion.
(iv) Generation of emission reduction credits. Emission reductions
created by a PCP shall not be included in calculating a significant net
emissions increase, or be used for generating offsets, unless the
emissions unit further reduces emissions after qualifying for the PCP
exclusion (e.g., taking an operational restriction on the hours of
operation). The owner or operator may generate a credit for the
difference between the level of reduction which was
[[Page 193]]
used to qualify for the PCP exclusion and the new emission limitation if
such reductions are surplus, quantifiable, and permanent. For purposes
of generating offsets, the reductions must also be federally
enforceable. For purposes of determining creditable net emissions
increases and decreases, the reductions must also be enforceable as a
practical matter.
(f) Actuals PALs. The plan shall provide for PALs according to the
provisions in paragraphs (f)(1) through (15) of this section.
(1) Applicability.
(i) The reviewing authority may approve the use of an actuals PAL
for any existing major stationary source (except as provided in
paragraph (f)(1)(ii) of this section) if the PAL meets the requirements
in paragraphs (f)(1) through (15) of this section. The term ``PAL''
shall mean ``actuals PAL'' throughout paragraph (f) of this section.
(ii) The reviewing authority shall not allow an actuals PAL for VOC
or NOX for any major stationary source located in an extreme
ozone nonattainment area.
(iii) Any physical change in or change in the method of operation of
a major stationary source that maintains its total source-wide emissions
below the PAL level, meets the requirements in paragraphs (f)(1) through
(15) of this section, and complies with the PAL permit:
(A) Is not a major modification for the PAL pollutant;
(B) Does not have to be approved through the plan's nonattainment
major NSR program; and
(C) Is not subject to the provisions in paragraph (a)(5)(ii) of this
section (restrictions on relaxing enforceable emission limitations that
the major stationary source used to avoid applicability of the
nonattainment major NSR program).
(iv) Except as provided under paragraph (f)(1)(iii)(C) of this
section, a major stationary source shall continue to comply with all
applicable Federal or State requirements, emission limitations, and work
practice requirements that were established prior to the effective date
of the PAL.
(2) Definitions. The plan shall use the definitions in paragraphs
(f)(2)(i) through (xi) of this section for the purpose of developing and
implementing regulations that authorize the use of actuals PALs
consistent with paragraphs (f)(1) through (15) of this section. When a
term is not defined in these paragraphs, it shall have the meaning given
in paragraph (a)(1) of this section or in the Act.
(i) Actuals PAL for a major stationary source means a PAL based on
the baseline actual emissions (as defined in paragraph (a)(1)(xxxv) of
this section) of all emissions units (as defined in paragraph
(a)(1)(vii) of this section) at the source, that emit or have the
potential to emit the PAL pollutant.
(ii) Allowable emissions means ``allowable emissions'' as defined in
paragraph (a)(1)(xi) of this section, except as this definition is
modified according to paragraphs (f)(2)(ii)(A) through (B) of this
section.
(A) The allowable emissions for any emissions unit shall be
calculated considering any emission limitations that are enforceable as
a practical matter on the emissions unit's potential to emit.
(B) An emissions unit's potential to emit shall be determined using
the definition in paragraph (a)(1)(iii) of this section, except that the
words ``or enforceable as a practical matter'' should be added after
``federally enforceable.''
(iii) Small emissions unit means an emissions unit that emits or has
the potential to emit the PAL pollutant in an amount less than the
significant level for that PAL pollutant, as defined in paragraph
(a)(1)(x) of this section or in the Act, whichever is lower.
(iv) Major emissions unit means:
(A) Any emissions unit that emits or has the potential to emit 100
tons per year or more of the PAL pollutant in an attainment area; or
(B) Any emissions unit that emits or has the potential to emit the
PAL pollutant in an amount that is equal to or greater than the major
source threshold for the PAL pollutant as defined by the Act for
nonattainment areas. For example, in accordance with the definition of
major stationary source in section 182(c) of the Act, an emissions unit
would be a major emissions unit for
[[Page 194]]
VOC if the emissions unit is located in a serious ozone nonattainment
area and it emits or has the potential to emit 50 or more tons of VOC
per year.
(v) Plantwide applicability limitation (PAL) means an emission
limitation expressed in tons per year, for a pollutant at a major
stationary source, that is enforceable as a practical matter and
established source-wide in accordance with paragraphs (f)(1) through
(f)(15) of this section.
(vi) PAL effective date generally means the date of issuance of the
PAL permit. However, the PAL effective date for an increased PAL is the
date any emissions unit which is part of the PAL major modification
becomes operational and begins to emit the PAL pollutant.
(vii) PAL effective period means the period beginning with the PAL
effective date and ending 10 years later.
(viii) PAL major modification means, notwithstanding paragraphs
(a)(1)(v) and (vi) of this section (the definitions for major
modification and net emissions increase), any physical change in or
change in the method of operation of the PAL source that causes it to
emit the PAL pollutant at a level equal to or greater than the PAL.
(ix) PAL permit means the major NSR permit, the minor NSR permit, or
the State operating permit under a program that is approved into the
plan, or the title V permit issued by the reviewing authority that
establishes a PAL for a major stationary source.
(x) PAL pollutant means the pollutant for which a PAL is established
at a major stationary source.
(xi) Significant emissions unit means an emissions unit that emits
or has the potential to emit a PAL pollutant in an amount that is equal
to or greater than the significant level (as defined in paragraph
(a)(1)(x) of this section or in the Act, whichever is lower) for that
PAL pollutant, but less than the amount that would qualify the unit as a
major emissions unit as defined in paragraph (f)(2)(iv) of this section.
(3) Permit application requirements. As part of a permit application
requesting a PAL, the owner or operator of a major stationary source
shall submit the following information to the reviewing authority for
approval:
(i) A list of all emissions units at the source designated as small,
significant or major based on their potential to emit. In addition, the
owner or operator of the source shall indicate which, if any, Federal or
State applicable requirements, emission limitations or work practices
apply to each unit.
(ii) Calculations of the baseline actual emissions (with supporting
documentation). Baseline actual emissions are to include emissions
associated not only with operation of the unit, but also emissions
associated with startup, shutdown and malfunction.
(iii) The calculation procedures that the major stationary source
owner or operator proposes to use to convert the monitoring system data
to monthly emissions and annual emissions based on a 12-month rolling
total for each month as required by paragraph (f)(13)(i) of this
section.
(4) General requirements for establishing PALs. (i) The plan allows
the reviewing authority to establish a PAL at a major stationary source,
provided that at a minimum, the requirements in paragraphs (f)(4)(i)(A)
through (G) of this section are met.
(A) The PAL shall impose an annual emission limitation in tons per
year, that is enforceable as a practical matter, for the entire major
stationary source. For each month during the PAL effective period after
the first 12 months of establishing a PAL, the major stationary source
owner or operator shall show that the sum of the monthly emissions from
each emissions unit under the PAL for the previous 12 consecutive months
is less than the PAL (a 12-month average, rolled monthly). For each
month during the first 11 months from the PAL effective date, the major
stationary source owner or operator shall show that the sum of the
preceding monthly emissions from the PAL effective date for each
emissions unit under the PAL is less than the PAL.
(B) The PAL shall be established in a PAL permit that meets the
public participation requirements in paragraph (f)(5) of this section.
(C) The PAL permit shall contain all the requirements of paragraph
(f)(7) of this section.
[[Page 195]]
(D) The PAL shall include fugitive emissions, to the extent
quantifiable, from all emissions units that emit or have the potential
to emit the PAL pollutant at the major stationary source.
(E) Each PAL shall regulate emissions of only one pollutant.
(F) Each PAL shall have a PAL effective period of 10 years.
(G) The owner or operator of the major stationary source with a PAL
shall comply with the monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements provided in paragraphs (f)(12) through (14) of this section
for each emissions unit under the PAL through the PAL effective period.
(ii) At no time (during or after the PAL effective period) are
emissions reductions of a PAL pollutant, which occur during the PAL
effective period, creditable as decreases for purposes of offsets under
paragraph (a)(3)(ii) of this section unless the level of the PAL is
reduced by the amount of such emissions reductions and such reductions
would be creditable in the absence of the PAL.
(5) Public participation requirement for PALs. PALs for existing
major stationary sources shall be established, renewed, or increased
through a procedure that is consistent with Sec. Sec. 51.160 and 51.161
of this chapter. This includes the requirement that the reviewing
authority provide the public with notice of the proposed approval of a
PAL permit and at least a 30-day period for submittal of public comment.
The reviewing authority must address all material comments before taking
final action on the permit.
(6) Setting the 10-year actuals PAL level. (i) Except as provided in
paragraph (f)(6)(ii) of this section, the plan shall provide that the
actuals PAL level for a major stationary source shall be established as
the sum of the baseline actual emissions (as defined in paragraph
(a)(1)(xxxv) of this section) of the PAL pollutant for each emissions
unit at the source; plus an amount equal to the applicable significant
level for the PAL pollutant under paragraph (a)(1)(x) of this section or
under the Act, whichever is lower. When establishing the actuals PAL
level, for a PAL pollutant, only one consecutive 24-month period must be
used to determine the baseline actual emissions for all existing
emissions units. However, a different consecutive 24-month period may be
used for each different PAL pollutant. Emissions associated with units
that were permanently shut down after this 24-month period must be
subtracted from the PAL level. The reviewing authority shall specify a
reduced PAL level(s) (in tons/yr) in the PAL permit to become effective
on the future compliance date(s) of any applicable Federal or State
regulatory requirement(s) that the reviewing authority is aware of prior
to issuance of the PAL permit. For instance, if the source owner or
operator will be required to reduce emissions from industrial boilers in
half from baseline emissions of 60 ppm NOX to a new rule
limit of 30 ppm, then the permit shall contain a future effective PAL
level that is equal to the current PAL level reduced by half of the
original baseline emissions of such unit(s).
(ii) For newly constructed units (which do not include modifications
to existing units) on which actual construction began after the 24-month
period, in lieu of adding the baseline actual emissions as specified in
paragraph (f)(6)(i) of this section, the emissions must be added to the
PAL level in an amount equal to the potential to emit of the units.
(7) Contents of the PAL permit. The plan shall require that the PAL
permit contain, at a minimum, the information in paragraphs (f)(7)(i)
through (x) of this section.
(i) The PAL pollutant and the applicable source-wide emission
limitation in tons per year.
(ii) The PAL permit effective date and the expiration date of the
PAL (PAL effective period).
(iii) Specification in the PAL permit that if a major stationary
source owner or operator applies to renew a PAL in accordance with
paragraph (f)(10) of this section before the end of the PAL effective
period, then the PAL shall not expire at the end of the PAL effective
period. It shall remain in effect until a revised PAL permit is issued
by the reviewing authority.
[[Page 196]]
(iv) A requirement that emission calculations for compliance
purposes include emissions from startups, shutdowns and malfunctions.
(v) A requirement that, once the PAL expires, the major stationary
source is subject to the requirements of paragraph (f)(9) of this
section.
(vi) The calculation procedures that the major stationary source
owner or operator shall use to convert the monitoring system data to
monthly emissions and annual emissions based on a 12-month rolling total
for each month as required by paragraph (f)(13)(i) of this section.
(vii) A requirement that the major stationary source owner or
operator monitor all emissions units in accordance with the provisions
under paragraph (f)(12) of this section.
(viii) A requirement to retain the records required under paragraph
(f)(13) of this section on site. Such records may be retained in an
electronic format.
(ix) A requirement to submit the reports required under paragraph
(f)(14) of this section by the required deadlines.
(x) Any other requirements that the reviewing authority deems
necessary to implement and enforce the PAL.
(8) PAL effective period and reopening of the PAL permit. The plan
shall require the information in paragraphs (f)(8)(i) and (ii) of this
section.
(i) PAL effective period. The reviewing authority shall specify a
PAL effective period of 10 years.
(ii) Reopening of the PAL permit. (A) During the PAL effective
period, the plan shall require the reviewing authority to reopen the PAL
permit to:
(1) Correct typographical/calculation errors made in setting the PAL
or reflect a more accurate determination of emissions used to establish
the PAL.
(2) Reduce the PAL if the owner or operator of the major stationary
source creates creditable emissions reductions for use as offsets under
paragraph (a)(3)(ii) of this section.
(3) Revise the PAL to reflect an increase in the PAL as provided
under paragraph (f)(11) of this section.
(B) The plan shall provide the reviewing authority discretion to
reopen the PAL permit for the following:
(1) Reduce the PAL to reflect newly applicable Federal requirements
(for example, NSPS) with compliance dates after the PAL effective date.
(2) Reduce the PAL consistent with any other requirement, that is
enforceable as a practical matter, and that the State may impose on the
major stationary source under the plan.
(3) Reduce the PAL if the reviewing authority determines that a
reduction is necessary to avoid causing or contributing to a NAAQS or
PSD increment violation, or to an adverse impact on an air quality
related value that has been identified for a Federal Class I area by a
Federal Land Manager and for which information is available to the
general public.
(C) Except for the permit reopening in paragraph (f)(8)(ii)(A)(1) of
this section for the correction of typographical/calculation errors that
do not increase the PAL level, all other reopenings shall be carried out
in accordance with the public participation requirements of paragraph
(f)(5) of this section.
(9) Expiration of a PAL. Any PAL which is not renewed in accordance
with the procedures in paragraph (f)(10) of this section shall expire at
the end of the PAL effective period, and the requirements in paragraphs
(f)(9)(i) through (v) of this section shall apply.
(i) Each emissions unit (or each group of emissions units) that
existed under the PAL shall comply with an allowable emission limitation
under a revised permit established according to the procedures in
paragraphs (f)(9)(i)(A) through (B) of this section.
(A) Within the time frame specified for PAL renewals in paragraph
(f)(10)(ii) of this section, the major stationary source shall submit a
proposed allowable emission limitation for each emissions unit (or each
group of emissions units, if such a distribution is more appropriate as
decided by the reviewing authority) by distributing the PAL allowable
emissions for the major stationary source among each of the emissions
units that existed under the PAL. If the PAL had not yet been adjusted
for an applicable requirement that became effective during the PAL
effective period, as required under paragraph (f)(10)(v) of this
section, such
[[Page 197]]
distribution shall be made as if the PAL had been adjusted.
(B) The reviewing authority shall decide whether and how the PAL
allowable emissions will be distributed and issue a revised permit
incorporating allowable limits for each emissions unit, or each group of
emissions units, as the reviewing authority determines is appropriate.
(ii) Each emissions unit(s) shall comply with the allowable emission
limitation on a 12-month rolling basis. The reviewing authority may
approve the use of monitoring systems (source testing, emission factors,
etc.) other than CEMS, CERMS, PEMS or CPMS to demonstrate compliance
with the allowable emission limitation.
(iii) Until the reviewing authority issues the revised permit
incorporating allowable limits for each emissions unit, or each group of
emissions units, as required under paragraph (f)(9)(i)(A) of this
section, the source shall continue to comply with a source-wide, multi-
unit emissions cap equivalent to the level of the PAL emission
limitation.
(iv) Any physical change or change in the method of operation at the
major stationary source will be subject to the nonattainment major NSR
requirements if such change meets the definition of major modification
in paragraph (a)(1)(v) of this section.
(v) The major stationary source owner or operator shall continue to
comply with any State or Federal applicable requirements (BACT, RACT,
NSPS, etc.) that may have applied either during the PAL effective period
or prior to the PAL effective period except for those emission
limitations that had been established pursuant to paragraph (a)(5)(ii)
of this section, but were eliminated by the PAL in accordance with the
provisions in paragraph (f)(1)(iii)(C) of this section.
(10) Renewal of a PAL. (i) The reviewing authority shall follow the
procedures specified in paragraph (f)(5) of this section in approving
any request to renew a PAL for a major stationary source, and shall
provide both the proposed PAL level and a written rationale for the
proposed PAL level to the public for review and comment. During such
public review, any person may propose a PAL level for the source for
consideration by the reviewing authority.
(ii) Application deadline. The plan shall require that a major
stationary source owner or operator shall submit a timely application to
the reviewing authority to request renewal of a PAL. A timely
application is one that is submitted at least 6 months prior to, but not
earlier than 18 months from, the date of permit expiration. This
deadline for application submittal is to ensure that the permit will not
expire before the permit is renewed. If the owner or operator of a major
stationary source submits a complete application to renew the PAL within
this time period, then the PAL shall continue to be effective until the
revised permit with the renewed PAL is issued.
(iii) Application requirements. The application to renew a PAL
permit shall contain the information required in paragraphs
(f)(10)(iii)(A) through (D) of this section.
(A) The information required in paragraphs (f)(3)(i) through (iii)
of this section.
(B) A proposed PAL level.
(C) The sum of the potential to emit of all emissions units under
the PAL (with supporting documentation).
(D) Any other information the owner or operator wishes the reviewing
authority to consider in determining the appropriate level for renewing
the PAL.
(iv) PAL adjustment. In determining whether and how to adjust the
PAL, the reviewing authority shall consider the options outlined in
paragraphs (f)(10)(iv)(A) and (B) of this section. However, in no case
may any such adjustment fail to comply with paragraph (f)(10)(iv)(C) of
this section.
(A) If the emissions level calculated in accordance with paragraph
(f)(6) of this section is equal to or greater than 80 percent of the PAL
level, the reviewing authority may renew the PAL at the same level
without considering the factors set forth in paragraph (f)(10)(iv)(B) of
this section; or
(B) The reviewing authority may set the PAL at a level that it
determines to be more representative of the source's baseline actual
emissions, or that it determines to be appropriate
[[Page 198]]
considering air quality needs, advances in control technology,
anticipated economic growth in the area, desire to reward or encourage
the source's voluntary emissions reductions, or other factors as
specifically identified by the reviewing authority in its written
rationale.
(C) Notwithstanding paragraphs (f)(10)(iv)(A) and (B) of this
section,
(1) If the potential to emit of the major stationary source is less
than the PAL, the reviewing authority shall adjust the PAL to a level no
greater than the potential to emit of the source; and
(2) The reviewing authority shall not approve a renewed PAL level
higher than the current PAL, unless the major stationary source has
complied with the provisions of paragraph (f)(11) of this section
(increasing a PAL).
(v) If the compliance date for a State or Federal requirement that
applies to the PAL source occurs during the PAL effective period, and if
the reviewing authority has not already adjusted for such requirement,
the PAL shall be adjusted at the time of PAL permit renewal or title V
permit renewal, whichever occurs first.
(11) Increasing a PAL during the PAL effective period. (i) The plan
shall require that the reviewing authority may increase a PAL emission
limitation only if the major stationary source complies with the
provisions in paragraphs (f)(11)(i)(A) through (D) of this section.
(A) The owner or operator of the major stationary source shall
submit a complete application to request an increase in the PAL limit
for a PAL major modification. Such application shall identify the
emissions unit(s) contributing to the increase in emissions so as to
cause the major stationary source's emissions to equal or exceed its
PAL.
(B) As part of this application, the major stationary source owner
or operator shall demonstrate that the sum of the baseline actual
emissions of the small emissions units, plus the sum of the baseline
actual emissions of the significant and major emissions units assuming
application of BACT equivalent controls, plus the sum of the allowable
emissions of the new or modified emissions unit(s) exceeds the PAL. The
level of control that would result from BACT equivalent controls on each
significant or major emissions unit shall be determined by conducting a
new BACT analysis at the time the application is submitted, unless the
emissions unit is currently required to comply with a BACT or LAER
requirement that was established within the preceding 10 years. In such
a case, the assumed control level for that emissions unit shall be equal
to the level of BACT or LAER with which that emissions unit must
currently comply.
(C) The owner or operator obtains a major NSR permit for all
emissions unit(s) identified in paragraph (f)(11)(i)(A) of this section,
regardless of the magnitude of the emissions increase resulting from
them (that is, no significant levels apply). These emissions unit(s)
shall comply with any emissions requirements resulting from the
nonattainment major NSR program process (for example, LAER), even though
they have also become subject to the PAL or continue to be subject to
the PAL.
(D) The PAL permit shall require that the increased PAL level shall
be effective on the day any emissions unit that is part of the PAL major
modification becomes operational and begins to emit the PAL pollutant.
(ii) The reviewing authority shall calculate the new PAL as the sum
of the allowable emissions for each modified or new emissions unit, plus
the sum of the baseline actual emissions of the significant and major
emissions units (assuming application of BACT equivalent controls as
determined in accordance with paragraph (f)(11)(i)(B)), plus the sum of
the baseline actual emissions of the small emissions units.
(iii) The PAL permit shall be revised to reflect the increased PAL
level pursuant to the public notice requirements of paragraph (f)(5) of
this section.
(12) Monitoring requirements for PALs--(i) General requirements.
(A) Each PAL permit must contain enforceable requirements for the
monitoring system that accurately determines plantwide emissions of the
PAL pollutant in terms of mass per unit of
[[Page 199]]
time. Any monitoring system authorized for use in the PAL permit must be
based on sound science and meet generally acceptable scientific
procedures for data quality and manipulation. Additionally, the
information generated by such system must meet minimum legal
requirements for admissibility in a judicial proceeding to enforce the
PAL permit.
(B) The PAL monitoring system must employ one or more of the four
general monitoring approaches meeting the minimum requirements set forth
in paragraphs (f)(12)(ii)(A) through (D) of this section and must be
approved by the reviewing authority.
(C) Notwithstanding paragraph (f)(12)(i)(B) of this section, you may
also employ an alternative monitoring approach that meets paragraph
(f)(12)(i)(A) of this section if approved by the reviewing authority.
(D) Failure to use a monitoring system that meets the requirements
of this section renders the PAL invalid.
(ii) Minimum Performance Requirements for Approved Monitoring
Approaches. The following are acceptable general monitoring approaches
when conducted in accordance with the minimum requirements in paragraphs
(f)(12)(iii) through (ix) of this section:
(A) Mass balance calculations for activities using coatings or
solvents;
(B) CEMS;
(C) CPMS or PEMS; and
(D) Emission Factors.
(iii) Mass Balance Calculations. An owner or operator using mass
balance calculations to monitor PAL pollutant emissions from activities
using coating or solvents shall meet the following requirements:
(A) Provide a demonstrated means of validating the published content
of the PAL pollutant that is contained in or created by all materials
used in or at the emissions unit;
(B) Assume that the emissions unit emits all of the PAL pollutant
that is contained in or created by any raw material or fuel used in or
at the emissions unit, if it cannot otherwise be accounted for in the
process; and
(C) Where the vendor of a material or fuel, which is used in or at
the emissions unit, publishes a range of pollutant content from such
material, the owner or operator must use the highest value of the range
to calculate the PAL pollutant emissions unless the reviewing authority
determines there is site-specific data or a site-specific monitoring
program to support another content within the range.
(iv) CEMS. An owner or operator using CEMS to monitor PAL pollutant
emissions shall meet the following requirements:
(A) CEMS must comply with applicable Performance Specifications
found in 40 CFR part 60, appendix B; and
(B) CEMS must sample, analyze and record data at least every 15
minutes while the emissions unit is operating.
(v) CPMS or PEMS. An owner or operator using CPMS or PEMS to monitor
PAL pollutant emissions shall meet the following requirements:
(A) The CPMS or the PEMS must be based on current site-specific data
demonstrating a correlation between the monitored parameter(s) and the
PAL pollutant emissions across the range of operation of the emissions
unit; and
(B) Each CPMS or PEMS must sample, analyze, and record data at least
every 15 minutes, or at another less frequent interval approved by the
reviewing authority, while the emissions unit is operating.
(vi) Emission factors. An owner or operator using emission factors
to monitor PAL pollutant emissions shall meet the following
requirements:
(A) All emission factors shall be adjusted, if appropriate, to
account for the degree of uncertainty or limitations in the factors'
development;
(B) The emissions unit shall operate within the designated range of
use for the emission factor, if applicable; and
(C) If technically practicable, the owner or operator of a
significant emissions unit that relies on an emission factor to
calculate PAL pollutant emissions shall conduct validation testing to
determine a site-specific emission factor within 6 months of PAL permit
issuance, unless the reviewing authority determines that testing is not
required.
(vii) A source owner or operator must record and report maximum
potential
[[Page 200]]
emissions without considering enforceable emission limitations or
operational restrictions for an emissions unit during any period of time
that there is no monitoring data, unless another method for determining
emissions during such periods is specified in the PAL permit.
(viii) Notwithstanding the requirements in paragraphs (f)(12)(iii)
through (vii) of this section, where an owner or operator of an
emissions unit cannot demonstrate a correlation between the monitored
parameter(s) and the PAL pollutant emissions rate at all operating
points of the emissions unit, the reviewing authority shall, at the time
of permit issuance:
(A) Establish default value(s) for determining compliance with the
PAL based on the highest potential emissions reasonably estimated at
such operating point(s); or
(B) Determine that operation of the emissions unit during operating
conditions when there is no correlation between monitored parameter(s)
and the PAL pollutant emissions is a violation of the PAL.
(ix) Re-validation. All data used to establish the PAL pollutant
must be re-validated through performance testing or other scientifically
valid means approved by the reviewing authority. Such testing must occur
at least once every 5 years after issuance of the PAL.
(13) Recordkeeping requirements. (i) The PAL permit shall require an
owner or operator to retain a copy of all records necessary to determine
compliance with any requirement of paragraph (f) of this section and of
the PAL, including a determination of each emissions unit's 12-month
rolling total emissions, for 5 years from the date of such record.
(ii) The PAL permit shall require an owner or operator to retain a
copy of the following records for the duration of the PAL effective
period plus 5 years:
(A) A copy of the PAL permit application and any applications for
revisions to the PAL; and
(B) Each annual certification of compliance pursuant to title V and
the data relied on in certifying the compliance.
(14) Reporting and notification requirements. The owner or operator
shall submit semi-annual monitoring reports and prompt deviation reports
to the reviewing authority in accordance with the applicable title V
operating permit program. The reports shall meet the requirements in
paragraphs (f)(14)(i) through (iii).
(i) Semi-Annual Report. The semi-annual report shall be submitted to
the reviewing authority within 30 days of the end of each reporting
period. This report shall contain the information required in paragraphs
(f)(14)(i)(A) through (G) of this section.
(A) The identification of owner and operator and the permit number.
(B) Total annual emissions (tons/year) based on a 12-month rolling
total for each month in the reporting period recorded pursuant to
paragraph (f)(13)(i) of this section.
(C) All data relied upon, including, but not limited to, any Quality
Assurance or Quality Control data, in calculating the monthly and annual
PAL pollutant emissions.
(D) A list of any emissions units modified or added to the major
stationary source during the preceding 6-month period.
(E) The number, duration, and cause of any deviations or monitoring
malfunctions (other than the time associated with zero and span
calibration checks), and any corrective action taken.
(F) A notification of a shutdown of any monitoring system, whether
the shutdown was permanent or temporary, the reason for the shutdown,
the anticipated date that the monitoring system will be fully
operational or replaced with another monitoring system, and whether the
emissions unit monitored by the monitoring system continued to operate,
and the calculation of the emissions of the pollutant or the number
determined by method included in the permit, as provided by paragraph
(f)(12)(vii) of this section.
(G) A signed statement by the responsible official (as defined by
the applicable title V operating permit program) certifying the truth,
accuracy, and completeness of the information provided in the report.
[[Page 201]]
(ii) Deviation report. The major stationary source owner or operator
shall promptly submit reports of any deviations or exceedance of the PAL
requirements, including periods where no monitoring is available. A
report submitted pursuant to Sec. 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(B) of this chapter
shall satisfy this reporting requirement. The deviation reports shall be
submitted within the time limits prescribed by the applicable program
implementing Sec. 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(B) of this chapter. The reports shall
contain the following information:
(A) The identification of owner and operator and the permit number;
(B) The PAL requirement that experienced the deviation or that was
exceeded;
(C) Emissions resulting from the deviation or the exceedance; and
(D) A signed statement by the responsible official (as defined by
the applicable title V operating permit program) certifying the truth,
accuracy, and completeness of the information provided in the report.
(iii) Re-validation results. The owner or operator shall submit to
the reviewing authority the results of any re-validation test or method
within 3 months after completion of such test or method.
(15) Transition requirements. (i) No reviewing authority may issue a
PAL that does not comply with the requirements in paragraphs (f)(1)
through (15) of this section after the Administrator has approved
regulations incorporating these requirements into a plan.
(ii) The reviewing authority may supersede any PAL which was
established prior to the date of approval of the plan by the
Administrator with a PAL that complies with the requirements of
paragraphs (f)(1) through (15) of this section.
(g) If any provision of this section, or the application of such
provision to any person or circumstance, is held invalid, the remainder
of this section, or the application of such provision to persons or
circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid, shall not
be affected thereby.
(h) Equipment replacement provision. Without regard to other
considerations, routine maintenance, repair and replacement includes,
but is not limited to, the replacement of any component of a process
unit with an identical or functionally equivalent component(s), and
maintenance and repair activities that are part of the replacement
activity, provided that all of the requirements in paragraphs (h)(1)
through (3) of this section are met.
(1) Capital Cost threshold for Equipment Replacement. (i) For an
electric utility steam generating unit, as defined in Sec.
51.165(a)(1)(xx), the fixed capital cost of the replacement component(s)
plus the cost of any associated maintenance and repair activities that
are part of the replacement shall not exceed 20 percent of the
replacement value of the process unit, at the time the equipment is
replaced. For a process unit that is not an electric utility steam
generating unit the fixed capital cost of the replacement component(s)
plus the cost of any associated maintenance and repair activities that
are part of the replacement shall not exceed 20 percent of the
replacement value of the process unit, at the time the equipment is
replaced.
(ii) In determining the replacement value of the process unit; and,
except as otherwise allowed under paragraph (h)(1)(iii) of this section,
the owner or operator shall determine the replacement value of the
process unit on an estimate of the fixed capital cost of constructing a
new process unit, or on the current appraised value of the process unit.
(iii) As an alternative to paragraph (h)(1)(ii) of this section for
determining the replacement value of a process unit, an owner or
operator may choose to use insurance value (where the insurance value
covers only complete replacement), investment value adjusted for
inflation, or another accounting procedure if such procedure is based on
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, provided that the owner or
operator sends a notice to the reviewing authority. The first time that
an owner or operator submits such a notice for a particular process
unit, the notice may be submitted at any time, but any subsequent notice
for that process unit may be submitted only at the beginning of the
process unit's fiscal year. Unless the owner or operator submits a
notice to the reviewing authority, then
[[Page 202]]
paragraph (h)(1)(ii) of this section will be used to establish the
replacement value of the process unit. Once the owner or operator
submits a notice to use an alternative accounting procedure, the owner
or operator must continue to use that procedure for the entire fiscal
year for that process unit. In subsequent fiscal years, the owner or
operator must continue to use this selected procedure unless and until
the owner or operator sends another notice to the reviewing authority
selecting another procedure consistent with this paragraph or paragraph
(h)(1)(ii) of this section at the beginning of such fiscal year.
(2) Basic design parameters. The replacement does not change the
basic design parameter(s) of the process unit to which the activity
pertains.
(i) Except as provided in paragraph (h)(2)(iii) of this section, for
a process unit at a steam electric generating facility, the owner or
operator may select as its basic design parameters either maximum hourly
heat input and maximum hourly fuel consumption rate or maximum hourly
electric output rate and maximum steam flow rate. When establishing fuel
consumption specifications in terms of weight or volume, the minimum
fuel quality based on British Thermal Units content shall be used for
determining the basic design parameter(s) for a coal-fired electric
utility steam generating unit.
(ii) Except as provided in paragraph (h)(2)(iii) of this section,
the basic design parameter(s) for any process unit that is not at a
steam electric generating facility are maximum rate of fuel or heat
input, maximum rate of material input, or maximum rate of product
output. Combustion process units will typically use maximum rate of fuel
input. For sources having multiple end products and raw materials, the
owner or operator should consider the primary product or primary raw
material when selecting a basic design parameter.
(iii) If the owner or operator believes the basic design
parameter(s) in paragraphs (h)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section is not
appropriate for a specific industry or type of process unit, the owner
or operator may propose to the reviewing authority an alternative basic
design parameter(s) for the source's process unit(s). If the reviewing
authority approves of the use of an alternative basic design
parameter(s), the reviewing authority shall issue a permit that is
legally enforceable that records such basic design parameter(s) and
requires the owner or operator to comply with such parameter(s).
(iv) The owner or operator shall use credible information, such as
results of historic maximum capability tests, design information from
the manufacturer, or engineering calculations, in establishing the
magnitude of the basic design parameter(s) specified in paragraphs
(h)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section.
(v) If design information is not available for a process unit, then
the owner or operator shall determine the process unit's basic design
parameter(s) using the maximum value achieved by the process unit in the
five-year period immediately preceding the planned activity.
(vi) Efficiency of a process unit is not a basic design parameter.
(3) The replacement activity shall not cause the process unit to
exceed any emission limitation, or operational limitation that has the
effect of constraining emissions, that applies to the process unit and
that is legally enforceable.
Note to paragraph (h): By a court order on December 24, 2003, this
paragraph (h) is stayed indefinitely. The stayed provisions will become
effective immediately if the court terminates the stay. At that time,
EPA will publish a document in the Federal Register advising the public
of the termination of the stay.
[51 FR 40669, Nov. 7, 1986, as amended at 52 FR 24713, July 1, 1987; 52
FR 29386, Aug 7, 1987; 54 FR 27285, 27299 June 28, 1989; 57 FR 3946,
Feb. 3, 1992; 57 FR 32334, July 21, 1992; 67 FR 80244, Dec. 31, 2002; 68
FR 61276, Oct. 27, 2003; 68 FR 63027, Nov. 7, 2003; 69 FR 40275, July 1,
2004]
Sec. 51.166 Prevention of significant deterioration of air quality.
(a)(1) Plan requirements. In accordance with the policy of section
101(b)(1) of the Act and the purposes of section 160 of the Act, each
applicable State Implementation Plan and each applicable
[[Page 203]]
Tribal Implementation Plan shall contain emission limitations and such
other measures as may be necessary to prevent significant deterioration
of air quality.
(2) Plan revisions. If a State Implementation Plan revision would
result in increased air quality deterioration over any baseline
concentration, the plan revision shall include a demonstration that it
will not cause or contribute to a violation of the applicable
increment(s). If a plan revision proposing less restrictive requirements
was submitted after August 7, 1977 but on or before any applicable
baseline date and was pending action by the Administrator on that date,
no such demonstration is necessary with respect to the area for which a
baseline date would be established before final action is taken on the
plan revision. Instead, the assessment described in paragraph (a)(4) of
this section, shall review the expected impact to the applicable
increment(s).
(3) Required plan revision. If the State or the Administrator
determines that a plan is substantially inadequate to prevent
significant deterioration or that an applicable increment is being
violated, the plan shall be revised to correct the inadequacy or the
violation. The plan shall be revised within 60 days of such a finding by
a State or within 60 days following notification by the Administrator,
or by such later date as prescribed by the Administrator after
consultation with the State.
(4) Plan assessment. The State shall review the adequacy of a plan
on a periodic basis and within 60 days of such time as information
becomes available that an applicable increment is being violated.
(5) Public participation. Any State action taken under this
paragraph shall be subject to the opportunity for public hearing in
accordance with procedures equivalent to those established in Sec.
51.102.
(6) Amendments. (i) Any State required to revise its implementation
plan by reason of an amendment to this section, including any amendment
adopted simultaneously with this paragraph (a)(6)(i), shall adopt and
submit such plan revision to the Administrator for approval no later
than three years after such amendment is published in the Federal
Register.
(ii) Any revision to an implementation plan that would amend the
provisions for the prevention of significant air quality deterioration
in the plan shall specify when and as to what sources and modifications
the revision is to take effect.
(iii) Any revision to an implementation plan that an amendment to
this section required shall take effect no later than the date of its
approval and may operate prospectively.
(7) Applicability. Each plan shall contain procedures that
incorporate the requirements in paragraphs (a)(7)(i) through (vi) of
this section.
(i) The requirements of this section apply to the construction of
any new major stationary source (as defined in paragraph (b)(1) of this
section) or any project at an existing major stationary source in an
area designated as attainment or unclassifiable under sections
107(d)(1)(A)(ii) or (iii) of the Act.
(ii) The requirements of paragraphs (j) through (r) of this section
apply to the construction of any new major stationary source or the
major modification of any existing major stationary source, except as
this section otherwise provides.
(iii) No new major stationary source or major modification to which
the requirements of paragraphs (j) through (r)(5) of this section apply
shall begin actual construction without a permit that states that the
major stationary source or major modification will meet those
requirements.
(iv) Each plan shall use the specific provisions of paragraphs
(a)(7)(iv)(a) through (f) of this section. Deviations from these
provisions will be approved only if the State specifically demonstrates
that the submitted provisions are more stringent than or at least as
stringent in all respects as the corresponding provisions in paragraphs
(a)(7)(iv)(a) through (f) of this section.
(a) Except as otherwise provided in paragraphs (a)(7)(v) and (vi) of
this section, and consistent with the definition of major modification
contained in paragraph (b)(2) of this section, a project is a major
modification for a regulated NSR pollutant if it causes
[[Page 204]]
two types of emissions increases--a significant emissions increase (as
defined in paragraph (b)(39) of this section), and a significant net
emissions increase (as defined in paragraphs (b)(3) and (b)(23) of this
section). The project is not a major modification if it does not cause a
significant emissions increase. If the project causes a significant
emissions increase, then the project is a major modification only if it
also results in a significant net emissions increase.
(b) The procedure for calculating (before beginning actual
construction) whether a significant emissions increase (i.e., the first
step of the process) will occur depends upon the type of emissions units
being modified, according to paragraphs (a)(7)(iv)(c) through (f) of
this section. The procedure for calculating (before beginning actual
construction) whether a significant net emissions increase will occur at
the major stationary source (i.e., the second step of the process) is
contained in the definition in paragraph (b)(3) of this section.
Regardless of any such preconstruction projections, a major modification
results if the project causes a significant emissions increase and a
significant net emissions increase.
(c) Actual-to-projected-actual applicability test for projects that
only involve existing emissions units. A significant emissions increase
of a regulated NSR pollutant is projected to occur if the sum of the
difference between the projected actual emissions (as defined in
paragraph (b)(40) of this section) and the baseline actual emissions (as
defined in paragraphs (b)(47)(i) and (ii) of this section) for each
existing emissions unit, equals or exceeds the significant amount for
that pollutant (as defined in paragraph (b)(23) of this section).
(d) Actual-to-potential test for projects that only involve
construction of a new emissions unit(s). A significant emissions
increase of a regulated NSR pollutant is projected to occur if the sum
of the difference between the potential to emit (as defined in paragraph
(b)(4) of this section) from each new emissions unit following
completion of the project and the baseline actual emissions (as defined
in paragraph (b)(47)(iii) of this section) of these units before the
project equals or exceeds the significant amount for that pollutant (as
defined in paragraph (b)(23) of this section).
(e) Emission test for projects that involve Clean Units. For a
project that will be constructed and operated at a Clean Unit without
causing the emissions unit to lose its Clean Unit designation, no
emissions increase is deemed to occur.
(f) Hybrid test for projects that involve multiple types of
emissions units. A significant emissions increase of a regulated NSR
pollutant is projected to occur if the sum of the emissions increases
for each emissions unit, using the method specified in paragraphs
(a)(7)(iv)(c) through (e) of this section as applicable with respect to
each emissions unit, for each type of emissions unit equals or exceeds
the significant amount for that pollutant (as defined in paragraph
(b)(23) of this section). For example, if a project involves both an
existing emissions unit and a Clean Unit, the projected increase is
determined by summing the values determined using the method specified
in paragraph (a)(7)(iv)(c) of this section for the existing unit and
determined using the method specified in paragraph (a)(7)(iv)(e) of this
section for the Clean Unit.
(v) The plan shall require that for any major stationary source for
a PAL for a regulated NSR pollutant, the major stationary source shall
comply with requirements under paragraph (w) of this section.
(vi) The plan shall require that an owner or operator undertaking a
PCP (as defined in paragraph (b)(31) of this section) shall comply with
the requirements under paragraph (v) of this section.
(b) Definitions. All State plans shall use the following definitions
for the purposes of this section. Deviations from the following wording
will be approved only if the State specifically demonstrates that the
submitted definition is more stringent, or at least as stringent, in all
respects as the corresponding definitions below:
(1)(i) Major stationary source means:
(a) Any of the following stationary sources of air pollutants which
emits,
[[Page 205]]
or has the potential to emit, 100 tons per year or more of any a
regulated NSR pollutant: Fossil fuel-fired steam electric plants of more
than 250 million British thermal units per hour heat input, coal
cleaning plants (with thermal dryers), kraft pulp mills, portland cement
plants, primary zinc smelters, iron and steel mill plants, primary
aluminum ore reduction plants, primary copper smelters, municipal
incinerators capable of charging more than 250 tons of refuse per day,
hydrofluoric, sulfuric, and nitric acid plants, petroleum refineries,
lime plants, phosphate rock processing plants, coke oven batteries,
sulfur recovery plants, carbon black plants (furnace process), primary
lead smelters, fuel conversion plants, sintering plants, secondary metal
production plants, chemical process plants, fossil fuel boilers (or
combinations thereof) totaling more than 250 million British thermal
units per hour heat input, petroleum storage and transfer units with a
total storage capacity exceeding 300,000 barrels, taconite ore
processing plants, glass fiber processing plants, and charcoal
production plants;
(b) Notwithstanding the stationary source size specified in
paragraph (b)(1)(i)(a) of this section, any stationary source which
emits, or has the potential to emit, 250 tons per year or more of a
regulated NSR pollutant; or
(c) Any physical change that would occur at a stationary source not
otherwise qualifying under paragraph (b)(1) of this section, as a major
stationary source if the change would constitute a major stationary
source by itself.
(ii) A major source that is major for volatile organic compounds
shall be considered major for ozone.
(iii) The fugitive emissions of a stationary source shall not be
included in determining for any of the purposes of this section whether
it is a major stationary source, unless the source belongs to one of the
following categories of stationary sources:
(a) Coal cleaning plants (with thermal dryers);
(b) Kraft pulp mills;
(c) Portland cement plants;
(d) Primary zinc smelters;
(e) Iron and steel mills;
(f) Primary aluminum ore reduction plants;
(g) Primary copper smelters;
(h) Municipal incinerators capable of charging more than 250 tons of
refuse per day;
(i) Hydrofluoric, sulfuric, or nitric acid plants;
(j) Petroleum refineries;
(k) Lime plants;
(l) Phosphate rock processing plants;
(m) Coke oven batteries;
(n) Sulfur recovery plants;
(o) Carbon black plants (furnace process);
(p) Primary lead smelters;
(q) Fuel conversion plants;
(r) Sintering plants;
(s) Secondary metal production plants;
(t) Chemical process plants;
(u) Fossil-fuel boilers (or combination thereof) totaling more than
250 million British thermal units per hour heat input;
(v) Petroleum storage and transfer units with a total storage
capacity exceeding 300,000 barrels;
(w) Taconite ore processing plants;
(x) Glass fiber processing plants;
(y) Charcoal production plants;
(z) Fossil fuel-fired steam electric plants of more that 250 million
British thermal units per hour heat input;
(aa) Any other stationary source category which, as of August 7,
1980, is being regulated under section 111 or 112 of the Act.
(2)(i) Major modification means any physical change in or change in
the method of operation of a major stationary source that would result
in: a significant emissions increase (as defined in paragraph (b)(39) of
this section) of a regulated NSR pollutant (as defined in paragraph
(b)(49) of this section); and a significant net emissions increase of
that pollutant from the major stationary source.
(ii) Any significant emissions increase (as defined at paragraph
(b)(39) of this section) from any emissions units or net emissions
increase (as defined at paragraph (b)(3) of this section) at a major
stationary source that is significant for volatile organic compounds
shall be considered significant for ozone.
[[Page 206]]
(iii) A physical change or change in the method of operation shall
not include:
(a) Routine maintenance, repair and replacement. Routine
maintenance, repair and replacement shall include, but not be limited
to, any activity(s) that meets the requirements of the equipment
replacement provisions contained in paragraph (y) of this section;
Note to paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(a): On December 24, 2003, the second
sentence of this paragraph (b)(2)(iii)(a) is stayed indefinitely by
court order. The stayed provisions will become effective immediately if
the court terminates the stay. At that time, EPA will publish a document
in the Federal Register advising the public of the termination of the
stay.
(b) Use of an alternative fuel or raw material by reason of any
order under section 2 (a) and (b) of the Energy Supply and Environmental
Coordination Act of 1974 (or any superseding legislation) or by reason
of a natural gas curtailment plan pursuant to the Federal Power Act;
(c) Use of an alternative fuel by reason of an order or rule under
section 125 of the Act;
(d) Use of an alternative fuel at a steam generating unit to the
extent that the fuel is generated from municipal solid waste;
(e) Use of an alternative fuel or raw material by a stationary
source which:
(1) The source was capable of accommodating before January 6, 1975,
unless such change would be prohibited under any federally enforceable
permit condition which was established after January 6, 1975 pursuant to
40 CFR 52.21 or under regulations approved pursuant to 40 CFR subpart I
or Sec. 51.166; or
(2) The source is approved to use under any permit issued under 40
CFR 52.21 or under regulations approved pursuant to 40 CFR 51.166;
(f) An increase in the hours of operation or in the production rate,
unless such change would be prohibited under any federally enforceable
permit condition which was established after January 6, 1975, pursuant
to 40 CFR 52.21 or under regulations approved pursuant to 40 CFR subpart
I or Sec. 51.166.
(g) Any change in ownership at a stationary source.
(h) The addition, replacement, or use of a PCP, as defined in
paragraph (b)(31) of this section, at an existing emissions unit meeting
the requirements of paragraph (v) of this section. A replacement control
technology must provide more effective emission control than that of the
replaced control technology to qualify for this exclusion.
(i) The installation, operation, cessation, or removal of a
temporary clean coal technology demonstration project, provided that the
project complies with:
(1) The State implementation plan for the State in which the project
is located; and
(2) Other requirements necessary to attain and maintain the national
ambient air quality standards during the project and after it is
terminated.
(j) The installation or operation of a permanent clean coal
technology demonstration project that constitutes repowering, provided
that the project does not result in an increase in the potential to emit
of any regulated pollutant emitted by the unit. This exemption shall
apply on a pollutant-by-pollutant basis.
(k) The reactivation of a very clean coal-fired electric utility
steam generating unit.
(iv) This definition shall not apply with respect to a particular
regulated NSR pollutant when the major stationary source is complying
with the requirements under paragraph (w) of this section for a PAL for
that pollutant. Instead, the definition at paragraph (w)(2)(viii) of
this section shall apply.
(3)(i) Net emissions increase means, with respect to any regulated
NSR pollutant emitted by a major stationary source, the amount by which
the sum of the following exceeds zero:
(a) The increase in emissions from a particular physical change or
change in the method of operation at a stationary source as calculated
pursuant to paragraph (a)(7)(iv) of this section; and
(b) Any other increases and decreases in actual emissions at the
major stationary source that are contemporaneous with the particular
change and
[[Page 207]]
are otherwise creditable. Baseline actual emissions for calculating
increases and decreases under this paragraph (b)(3)(i)(b) shall be
determined as provided in paragraph (b)(47), except that paragraphs
(b)(47)(i)(c) and (b)(47)(ii)(d) of this section shall not apply.
(ii) An increase or decrease in actual emissions is contemporaneous
with the increase from the particular change only if it occurs within a
reasonable period (to be specified by the State) before the date that
the increase from the particular change occurs.
(iii) An increase or decrease in actual emissions is creditable only
if:
(a) It occurs within a reasonable period (to be specified by the
reviewing authority); and
(b) The reviewing authority has not relied on it in issuing a permit
for the source under regulations approved pursuant to this section,
which permit is in effect when the increase in actual emissions from the
particular change occurs; and
(c) The increase or decrease in emissions did not occur at a Clean
Unit, except as provided in paragraphs (t)(8) and (u)(10) of this
section.
(iv) An increase or decrease in actual emissions of sulfur dioxide,
particulate matter, or nitrogen oxides that occurs before the applicable
minor source baseline date is creditable only if it is required to be
considered in calculating the amount of maximum allowable increases
remaining available.
(v) An increase in actual emissions is creditable only to the extent
that the new level of actual emissions exceeds the old level.
(vi) A decrease in actual emissions is creditable only to the extent
that:
(a) The old level of actual emissions or the old level of allowable
emissions, whichever is lower, exceeds the new level of actual
emissions;
(b) It is enforceable as a practical matter at and after the time
that actual construction on the particular change begins;
(c) It has approximately the same qualitative significance for
public health and welfare as that attributed to the increase from the
particular change; and
(d) The decrease in actual emissions did not result from the
installation of add-on control technology or application of pollution
prevention practices that were relied on in designating an emissions
unit as a Clean Unit under Sec. 52.21(y) or under regulations approved
pursuant to paragraph (u) of this section or Sec. 51.165(d). That is,
once an emissions unit has been designated as a Clean Unit, the owner or
operator cannot later use the emissions reduction from the air pollution
control measures that the Clean Unit designation is based on in
calculating the net emissions increase for another emissions unit (i.e.,
must not use that reduction in a ``netting analysis'' for another
emissions unit). However, any new emissions reductions that were not
relied upon in a PCP excluded pursuant to paragraph (v) of this section
or for the Clean Unit designation are creditable to the extent they meet
the requirements in paragraph (v)(6)(iv) of this section for the PCP and
paragraph (t)(8) or (u)(10) of this section for a Clean Unit.
(vii) An increase that results from a physical change at a source
occurs when the emissions unit on which construction occurred becomes
operational and begins to emit a particular pollutant. Any replacement
unit that requires shakedown becomes operational only after a reasonable
shakedown period, not to exceed 180 days.
(viii) Paragraph (b)(21)(ii) of this section shall not apply for
determining creditable increases and decreases.
(4) Potential to emit means the maximum capacity of a stationary
source to emit a pollutant under its physical and operational design.
Any physical or operational limitation on the capacity of the source to
emit a pollutant, including air pollution control equipment and
restrictions on hours of operation or on the type or amount of material
combusted, stored, or processed, shall be treated as part of its design
if the limitation or the effect it would have on emissions is federally
enforceable. Secondary emissions do not count in determining the
potential to emit of a stationary source.
(5) Stationary source means any building, structure, facility, or
installation
[[Page 208]]
which emits or may emit a regulated NSR pollutant.
(6) Building, structure, facility, or installation means all of the
pollutant-emitting activities which belong to the same industrial
grouping, are located on one or more contiguous or adjacent properties,
and are under the control of the same person (or persons under common
control) except the activities of any vessel. Pollutant-emitting
activities shall be considered as part of the same industrial grouping
if they belong to the same Major Group (i.e., which have the same two-
digit code) as described in the Standard Industrial Classification
Manual, 1972, as amended by the 1977 Supplement (U.S. Government
Printing Office stock numbers 4101-0066 and 003-005-00176-0,
respectively).
(7) Emissions unit means any part of a stationary source that emits
or would have the potential to emit any regulated NSR pollutant and
includes an electric utility steam generating unit as defined in
paragraph (b)(30) of this section. For purposes of this section, there
are two types of emissions units as described in paragraphs (b)(7)(i)
and (ii) of this section.
(i) A new emissions unit is any emissions unit that is (or will be)
newly constructed and that has existed for less than 2 years from the
date such emissions unit first operated.
(ii) An existing emissions unit is any emissions unit that does not
meet the requirements in paragraph (b)(7)(i) of this section. A
replacement unit, as defined in paragraph (b)(32) of this section, is an
existing emissions unit.
(8) Construction means any physical change or change in the method
of operation (including fabrication, erection, installation, demolition,
or modification of an emissions unit) that would result in a change in
emissions.
(9) Commence as applied to construction of a major stationary source
or major modification means that the owner or operator has all necessary
preconstruction approvals or permits and either has:
(i) Begun, or caused to begin, a continuous program of actual on-
site construction of the source, to be completed within a reasonable
time; or
(ii) Entered into binding agreements or contractual obligations,
which cannot be cancelled or modified without substantial loss to the
owner or operator, to undertake a program of actual construction of the
source to be completed within a reasonable time.
(10) Necessary preconstruction approvals or permits means those
permits or approvals required under Federal air quality control laws and
regulations and those air quality control laws and regulations which are
part of the applicable State Implementation Plan.
(11) Begin actual construction means, in general, initiation of
physical on-site construction activities on an emissions unit which are
of a permanent nature. Such activities include, but are not limited to,
installation of building supports and foundations, laying of underground
pipework, and construction of permanent storage structures. With respect
to a change in method of operation this term refers to those on-site
activities, other than preparatory activities, which mark the initiation
of the change.
(12) Best available control technology means an emissions limitation
(including a visible emissions standard) based on the maximum degree of
reduction for each a regulated NSR pollutant which would be emitted from
any proposed major stationary source or major modification which the
reviewing authority, on a case-by-case basis, taking into account
energy, environmental, and economic impacts and other costs, determines
is achievable for such source or modification through application of
production processes or available methods, systems, and techniques,
including fuel cleaning or treatment or innovative fuel combination
techniques for control of such pollutant. In no event shall application
of best available control technology result in emissions of any
pollutant which would exceed the emissions allowed by any applicable
standard under 40 CFR parts 60 and 61. If the reviewing authority
determines that technological or economic limitations on the application
of measurement methodology to a particular emissions unit would make the
imposition of an emissions standard infeasible, a design, equipment,
work practice, operational standard or combination thereof, may be
prescribed instead to satisfy the requirement for the
[[Page 209]]
application of best available control technology. Such standard shall,
to the degree possible, set forth the emissions reduction achievable by
implementation of such design, equipment, work practice or operation,
and shall provide for compliance by means which achieve equivalent
results.
(13)(i) Baseline concentration means that ambient concentration
level that exists in the baseline area at the time of the applicable
minor source baseline date. A baseline concentration is determined for
each pollutant for which a minor source baseline date is established and
shall include:
(a) The actual emissions, as defined in paragraph (b)(21) of this
section, representative of sources in existence on the applicable minor
source baseline date, except as provided in paragraph (b)(13)(ii) of
this section;
(b) The allowable emissions of major stationary sources that
commenced construction before the major source baseline date, but were
not in operation by the applicable minor source baseline date.
(ii) The following will not be included in the baseline
concentration and will affect the applicable maximum allowable
increase(s):
(a) Actual emissions, as defined in paragraph (b)(21) of this
section, from any major stationary source on which construction
commenced after the major source baseline date; and
(b) Actual emissions increases and decreases, as defined in
paragraph (b)(21) of this section, at any stationary source occurring
after the minor source baseline date.
(14)(i) Major source baseline date means:
(a) In the case of particulate matter and sulfur dioxide, January 6,
1975, and
(b) In the case of nitrogen dioxide, February 8, 1988.
(ii) Minor source baseline date means the earliest date after the
trigger date on which a major stationary source or a major modification
subject to 40 CFR 52.21 or to regulations approved pursuant to 40 CFR
51.166 submits a complete application under the relevant regulations.
The trigger date is:
(a) In the case of particulate matter and sulfur dioxide, August 7,
1977, and
(b) In the case of nitrogen dioxide, February 8, 1988.
(iii) The baseline date is established for each pollutant for which
increments or other equivalent measures have been established if:
(a) The area in which the proposed source or modification would
construct is designated as attainment or unclassifiable under section
107(d)(i) (D) or (E) of the Act for the pollutant on the date of its
complete application under 40 CFR 52.21 or under regulations approved
pursuant to 40 CFR 51.166; and
(b) In the case of a major stationary source, the pollutant would be
emitted in significant amounts, or, in the case of a major modification,
there would be a significant net emissions increase of the pollutant.
(iv) Any minor source baseline date established originally for the
TSP increments shall remain in effect and shall apply for purposes of
determining the amount of available PM-10 increments, except that the
reviewing authority may rescind any such minor source baseline date
where it can be shown, to the satisfaction of the reviewing authority,
that the emissions increase from the major stationary source, or the net
emissions increase from the major modification, responsible for
triggering that date did not result in a significant amount of PM-10
emissions.
(15)(i) Baseline area means any intrastate area (and every part
thereof) designated as attainment or unclassifiable under section
107(d)(1) (D) or (E) of the Act in which the major source or major
modification establishing the minor source baseline date would construct
or would have an air quality impact equal to or greater than 1 [mu]g/
m\3\ (annual average) of the pollutant for which the minor source
baseline date is established.
(ii) Area redesignations under section 107(d)(1) (D) or (E) of the
Act cannot intersect or be smaller than the area of impact of any major
stationary source or major modification which:
(a) Establishes a minor source baseline date; or
(b) Is subject to 40 CFR 52.21 or under regulations approved
pursuant to 40 CFR 51.166, and would be constructed in
[[Page 210]]
the same State as the State proposing the redesignation.
(iii) Any baseline area established originally for the TSP
increments shall remain in effect and shall apply for purposes of
determining the amount of available PM-10 increments, except that such
baseline area shall not remain in effect if the permit authority
rescinds the corresponding minor source baseline date in accordance with
paragraph (b)(14)(iv) of this section.
(16) Allowable emissions means the emissions rate of a stationary
source calculated using the maximum rated capacity of the source (unless
the source is subject to federally enforceable limits which restrict the
operating rate, or hours of operation, or both) and the most stringent
of the following:
(i) The applicable standards as set forth in 40 CFR parts 60 and 61;
(ii) The applicable State Implementation Plan emissions limitation,
including those with a future compliance date; or
(iii) The emissions rate specified as a federally enforceable permit
condition.
(17) Federally enforceable means all limitations and conditions
which are enforceable by the Administrator, including those requirements
developed pursuant to 40 CFR parts 60 and 61, requirements within any
applicable State implementation plan, any permit requirements
established pursuant to 40 CFR 52.21 or under regulations approved
pursuant to 40 CFR part 51, subpart I, including operating permits
issued under an EPA-approved program that is incorporated into the State
implementation plan and expressly requires adherence to any permit
issued under such program.
(18) Secondary emissions means emissions which occur as a result of
the construction or operation of a major stationary source or major
modification, but do not come from the major stationary source or major
modification itself. For the purposes of this section, secondary
emissions must be specific, well defined, quantifiable, and impact the
same general areas the stationary source modification which causes the
secondary emissions. Secondary emissions include emissions from any
offsite support facility which would not be constructed or increase its
emissions except as a result of the construction or operation of the
major stationary source or major modification. Secondary emissions do
not include any emissions which come directly from a mobile source, such
as emissions from the tailpipe of a motor vehicle, from a train, or from
a vessel.
(19) Innovative control technology means any system of air pollution
control that has not been adequately demonstrated in practice, but would
have a substantial likelihood of achieving greater continuous emissions
reduction than any control system in current practice or of achieving at
least comparable reductions at lower cost in terms of energy, economics,
or nonair quality environmental impacts.
(20) Fugitive emissions means those emissions which could not
reasonably pass through a stack, chimney, vent, or other functionally
equivalent opening.
(21)(i) Actual emissions means the actual rate of emissions of a
regulated NSR pollutant from an emissions unit, as determined in
accordance with paragraphs (b)(21)(ii) through (iv) of this section,
except that this definition shall not apply for calculating whether a
significant emissions increase has occurred, or for establishing a PAL
under paragraph (w) of this section. Instead, paragraphs (b)(40) and
(b)(47) of this section shall apply for those purposes.
(ii) In general, actual emissions as of a particular date shall
equal the average rate, in tons per year, at which the unit actually
emitted the pollutant during a consecutive 24-month period which
precedes the particular date and which is representative of normal
source operation. The reviewing authority shall allow the use of a
different time period upon a determination that it is more
representative of normal source operation. Actual emissions shall be
calculated using the unit's actual operating hours, production rates,
and types of materials processed, stored, or combusted during the
selected time period.
(iii) The reviewing authority may presume that source-specific
allowable emissions for the unit are equivalent to the actual emissions
of the unit.
(iv) For any emissions unit that has not begun normal operations on
the
[[Page 211]]
particular date, actual emissions shall equal the potential to emit of
the unit on that date.
(22) Complete means, in reference to an application for a permit,
that the application contains all the information necessary for
processing the application. Designating an application complete for
purposes of permit processing does not preclude the reviewing authority
from requesting or accepting any additional information.
(23)(i) Significant means, in reference to a net emissions increase
or the potential of a source to emit any of the following pollutants, a
rate of emissions that would equal or exceed any of the following rates:
Pollutant and Emissions Rate
Carbon monoxide: 100 tons per year (tpy)
Nitrogen oxides: 40 tpy
Sulfur dioxide: 40 tpy
Particulate matter: 25 tpy of particulate matter emissions. 15 tpy of
PM10 emissions.
Ozone: 40 tpy of volatile organic compounds
Lead: 0.6 tpy
Fluorides: 3 tpy
Sulfuric acid mist: 7 tpy
Hydrogen sulfide (H2 S): 10 tpy
Total reduced sulfur (including H2 S): 10 tpy
Reduced sulfur compounds (including H2 S): 10 tpy
Municipal waste combustor organics (measured as total tetra- through
octa-chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and dibenzofurans): 3.2 x
10-6 megagrams per year (3.5 x 10-6 tons per year)
Municipal waste combustor metals (measured as articulate matter): 14
megagrams per year (15 tons per year) Municipal waste combustor acid
gases (measured as sulfur dioxide and hydrogen chloride): 36 megagrams
per year (40 tons per year)
Municipal solid waste landfill emissions (measured as nonmethane organic
compounds): 45 megagrams per year (50 tons per year)
(ii) Significant means, in reference to a net emissions increase or
the potential of a source to emit a a regulated NSR pollutant that
paragraph (b)(23)(i) of this section, does not list, any emissions rate.
(iii) Notwithstanding paragraph (b)(23)(i) of this section,
significant means any emissions rate or any net emissions increase
associated with a major stationary source or major modification, which
would construct within 10 kilometers of a Class I area, and have an
impact on such area equal to or greater than 1 [mu]g/m\3\ (24-hour
average).
(24) Federal Land Manager means, with respect to any lands in the
United States, the Secretary of the department with authority over such
lands.
(25) High terrain means any area having an elevation 900 feet or
more above the base of the stack of a source.
(26) Low terrain means any area other than high terrain.
(27) Indian Reservation means any federally recognized reservation
established by Treaty, Agreement, Executive Order, or Act of Congress.
(28) Indian Governing Body means the governing body of any tribe,
band, or group of Indians subject to the jurisdiction of the United
States and recognized by the United States as possessing power of self-
government.
(29) Volatile organic compounds (VOC) is as defined in Sec.
51.100(s) of this part.
(30) Electric utility steam generating unit means any steam electric
generating unit that is constructed for the purpose of supplying more
than one-third of its potential electric output capacity and more than
25 MW electrical output to any utility power distribution system for
sale. Any steam supplied to a steam distribution system for the purpose
of providing steam to a steam-electric generator that would produce
electrical energy for sale is also considered in determining the
electrical energy output capacity of the affected facility.
(31) Pollution control project (PCP) means any activity, set of work
practices or project (including pollution prevention as defined under
paragraph (b)(38) of this section) undertaken at an existing emissions
unit that reduces emissions of air pollutants from such unit. Such
qualifying activities or projects can include the replacement or upgrade
of an existing emissions control technology with a more effective unit.
Other changes that may occur at the source are not considered part of
the PCP if they are not necessary to reduce emissions through the PCP.
Projects listed in paragraphs (b)(31)(i) through (vi) of this section
are presumed to be environmentally beneficial pursuant to paragraph
(v)(2)(i) of this section. Projects not listed in these paragraphs may
qualify for a
[[Page 212]]
case-specific PCP exclusion pursuant to the requirements of paragraphs
(v)(2) and (v)(5) of this section.
(i) Conventional or advanced flue gas desulfurization or sorbent
injection for control of SO2.
(ii) Electrostatic precipitators, baghouses, high efficiency
multiclones, or scrubbers for control of particulate matter or other
pollutants.
(iii) Flue gas recirculation, low-NOX burners or
combustors, selective non-catalytic reduction, selective catalytic
reduction, low emission combustion (for IC engines), and oxidation/
absorption catalyst for control of NOX.
(iv) Regenerative thermal oxidizers, catalytic oxidizers,
condensers, thermal incinerators, hydrocarbon combustion flares,
biofiltration, absorbers and adsorbers, and floating roofs for storage
vessels for control of volatile organic compounds or hazardous air
pollutants. For the purpose of this section, ``hydrocarbon combustion
flare'' means either a flare used to comply with an applicable NSPS or
MACT standard (including uses of flares during startup, shutdown, or
malfunction permitted under such a standard), or a flare that serves to
control emissions of waste streams comprised predominately of
hydrocarbons and containing no more than 230 mg/dscm hydrogen sulfide.
(v) Activities or projects undertaken to accommodate switching (or
partially switching) to an inherently less polluting fuel, to be limited
to the following fuel switches:
(a) Switching from a heavier grade of fuel oil to a lighter fuel
oil, or any grade of oil to 0.05 percent sulfur diesel (i.e., from a
higher sulfur content 2 fuel or from 6 fuel, to CA
0.05 percent sulfur 2 diesel);
(b) Switching from coal, oil, or any solid fuel to natural gas,
propane, or gasified coal;
(c) Switching from coal to wood, excluding construction or
demolition waste, chemical or pesticide treated wood, and other forms of
``unclean'' wood;
(d) Switching from coal to 2 fuel oil (0.5 percent maximum
sulfur content); and
(e) Switching from high sulfur coal to low sulfur coal (maximum 1.2
percent sulfur content).
(vi) Activities or projects undertaken to accommodate switching from
the use of one ozone depleting substance (ODS) to the use of a substance
with a lower or zero ozone depletion potential (ODP), including changes
to equipment needed to accommodate the activity or project, that meet
the requirements of paragraphs (b)(31)(vi)(a) and (b) of this section.
(a) The productive capacity of the equipment is not increased as a
result of the activity or project.
(b) The projected usage of the new substance is lower, on an ODP-
weighted basis, than the baseline usage of the replaced ODS. To make
this determination, follow the procedure in paragraphs (b)(31)(vi)(b)(1)
through (4) of this section.
(1) Determine the ODP of the substances by consulting 40 CFR part
82, subpart A, appendices A and B.
(2) Calculate the replaced ODP-weighted amount by multiplying the
baseline actual usage (using the annualized average of any 24
consecutive months of usage within the past 10 years) by the ODP of the
replaced ODS.
(3) Calculate the projected ODP-weighted amount by multiplying the
projected annual usage of the new substance by its ODP.
(4) If the value calculated in paragraph (b)(31)(vi)(b)(2) of this
section is more than the value calculated in paragraph (b)(31)(vi)(b)(3)
of this section, then the projected use of the new substance is lower,
on an ODP-weighted basis, than the baseline usage of the replaced ODS.
(32) Replacement unit means an emissions unit for which all the
criteria listed in paragraphs (b)(32)(i) through (iv) of this section
are met. No creditable emission reductions shall be generated from
shutting down the existing emissions unit that is replaced.
(i) The emissions unit is a reconstructed unit within the meaning of
Sec. 60.15(b)(1) of this chapter, or the emissions unit completely
takes the place of an existing emissions unit.
(ii) The emissions unit is identical to or functionally equivalent
to the replaced emissions unit.
[[Page 213]]
(iii) The replacement does not change the basic design parameter(s)
(as discussed in paragraph (y)(2) of this section) of the process unit.
(iv) The replaced emissions unit is permanently removed from the
major stationary source, otherwise permanently disabled, or permanently
barred from operation by a permit that is enforceable as a practical
matter. If the replaced emissions unit is brought back into operation,
it shall constitute a new emissions unit.
(33) Clean coal technology means any technology, including
technologies applied at the precombustion, combustion, or post
combustion stage, at a new or existing facility which will achieve
significant reductions in air emissions of sulfur dioxide or oxides of
nitrogen associated with the utilization of coal in the generation of
electricity, or process steam which was not in widespread use as of
November 15, 1990.
(34) Clean coal technology demonstration project means a project
using funds appropriated under the heading ``Department of Energy--Clean
Coal Technology'', up to a total amount of $2,500,000,000 for commercial
demonstration of clean coal technology, or similar projects funded
through appropriations for the Environmental Protection Agency. The
Federal contribution for a qualifying project shall be at least 20
percent of the total cost of the demonstration project.
(35) Temporary clean coal technology demonstration project means a
clean coal technology demonstration project that is operated for a
period of 5 years or less, and which complies with the State
implementation plan for the State in which the project is located and
other requirements necessary to attain and maintain the national ambient
air quality standards during and after the project is terminated.
(36)(i) Repowering means replacement of an existing coal-fired
boiler with one of the following clean coal technologies: atmospheric or
pressurized fluidized bed combustion, integrated gasification combined
cycle, magnetohydrodynamics, direct and indirect coal-fired turbines,
integrated gasification fuel cells, or as determined by the
Administrator, in consultation with the Secretary of Energy, a
derivative of one or more of these technologies, and any other
technology capable of controlling multiple combustion emissions
simultaneously with improved boiler or generation efficiency and with
significantly greater waste reduction relative to the performance of
technology in widespread commercial use as of November 15, 1990.
(ii) Repowering shall also include any oil and/or gas-fired unit
which has been awarded clean coal technology demonstration funding as of
January 1, 1991, by the Department of Energy.
(iii) The reviewing authority shall give expedited consideration to
permit applications for any source that satisfies the requirements of
this subsection and is granted an extension under section 409 of the
Clean Air Act.
(37) Reactivation of a very clean coal-fired electric utility steam
generating unit means any physical change or change in the method of
operation associated with the commencement of commercial operations by a
coal-fired utility unit after a period of discontinued operation where
the unit:
(i) Has not been in operation for the two-year period prior to the
enactment of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, and the emissions
from such unit continue to be carried in the permitting authority's
emissions inventory at the time of enactment;
(ii) Was equipped prior to shutdown with a continuous system of
emissions control that achieves a removal efficiency for sulfur dioxide
of no less than 85 percent and a removal efficiency for particulates of
no less than 98 percent;
(iii) Is equipped with low-NOX burners prior to the time
of commencement of operations following reactivation; and
(iv) Is otherwise in compliance with the requirements of the Clean
Air Act.
(38) Pollution prevention means any activity that through process
changes, product reformulation or redesign, or substitution of less
polluting raw materials, eliminates or reduces the release of air
pollutants (including fugitive emissions) and other pollutants to the
environment prior to recycling, treatment, or disposal; it does not mean
recycling (other than certain ``in-
[[Page 214]]
process recycling'' practices), energy recovery, treatment, or disposal.
(39) Significant emissions increase means, for a regulated NSR
pollutant, an increase in emissions that is significant (as defined in
paragraph (b)(23) of this section) for that pollutant.
(40)(i) Projected actual emissions means the maximum annual rate, in
tons per year, at which an existing emissions unit is projected to emit
a regulated NSR pollutant in any one of the 5 years (12-month period)
following the date the unit resumes regular operation after the project,
or in any one of the 10 years following that date, if the project
involves increasing the emissions unit's design capacity or its
potential to emit that regulated NSR pollutant, and full utilization of
the unit would result in a significant emissions increase, or a
significant net emissions increase at the major stationary source.
(ii) In determining the projected actual emissions under paragraph
(b)(40)(i) of this section (before beginning actual construction), the
owner or operator of the major stationary source:
(a) Shall consider all relevant information, including but not
limited to, historical operational data, the company's own
representations, the company's expected business activity and the
company's highest projections of business activity, the company's
filings with the State or Federal regulatory authorities, and compliance
plans under the approved plan; and
(b) Shall include fugitive emissions to the extent quantifiable and
emissions associated with startups, shutdowns, and malfunctions; and
(c) Shall exclude, in calculating any increase in emissions that
results from the particular project, that portion of the unit's
emissions following the project that an existing unit could have
accommodated during the consecutive 24-month period used to establish
the baseline actual emissions under paragraph (b)(47) of this section
and that are also unrelated to the particular project, including any
increased utilization due to product demand growth; or,
(d) In lieu of using the method set out in paragraphs (b)(40)(ii)(a)
through (c) of this section, may elect to use the emissions unit's
potential to emit, in tons per year, as defined under paragraph (b)(4)
of this section.
(41) Clean Unit means any emissions unit that has been issued a
major NSR permit that requires compliance with BACT or LAER, is
complying with such BACT/LAER requirements, and qualifies as a Clean
Unit pursuant to regulations approved by the Administrator in accordance
with paragraph (t) of this section; or any emissions unit that has been
designated by a reviewing authority as a Clean Unit, based on the
criteria in paragraphs (u)(3)(i) through (iv) of this section, using a
plan-approved permitting process; or any emissions unit that has been
designated as a Clean Unit by the Administrator in accordance with 52.21
(y)(3)(i) through (iv) of this chapter.
(42) Prevention of Significant Deterioration Program (PSD) program
means a major source preconstruction permit program that has been
approved by the Administrator and incorporated into the plan to
implement the requirements of this section, or the program in Sec.
52.21 of this chapter. Any permit issued under such a program is a major
NSR permit.
(43) Continuous emissions monitoring system (CEMS) means all of the
equipment that may be required to meet the data acquisition and
availability requirements of this section, to sample, condition (if
applicable), analyze, and provide a record of emissions on a continuous
basis.
(44) Predictive emissions monitoring system (PEMS) means all of the
equipment necessary to monitor process and control device operational
parameters (for example, control device secondary voltages and electric
currents) and other information (for example, gas flow rate, O\2\ or
CO\2\ concentrations), and calculate and record the mass emissions rate
(for example, lb/hr) on a continuous basis.
(45) Continuous parameter monitoring system (CPMS) means all of the
equipment necessary to meet the data acquisition and availability
requirements of this section, to monitor process and control device
operational parameters (for example, control device secondary voltages
and electric currents) and
[[Page 215]]
other information (for example, gas flow rate, O\2\ or CO\2\
concentrations), and to record average operational parameter value(s) on
a continuous basis.
(46) Continuous emissions rate monitoring system (CERMS) means the
total equipment required for the determination and recording of the
pollutant mass emissions rate (in terms of mass per unit of time).
(47) Baseline actual emissions means the rate of emissions, in tons
per year, of a regulated NSR pollutant, as determined in accordance with
paragraphs (b)(47)(i) through (iv) of this section.
(i) For any existing electric utility steam generating unit,
baseline actual emissions means the average rate, in tons per year, at
which the unit actually emitted the pollutant during any consecutive 24-
month period selected by the owner or operator within the 5-year period
immediately preceding when the owner or operator begins actual
construction of the project. The reviewing authority shall allow the use
of a different time period upon a determination that it is more
representative of normal source operation.
(a) The average rate shall include fugitive emissions to the extent
quantifiable, and emissions associated with startups, shutdowns, and
malfunctions.
(b) The average rate shall be adjusted downward to exclude any non-
compliant emissions that occurred while the source was operating above
an emission limitation that was legally enforceable during the
consecutive 24-month period.
(c) For a regulated NSR pollutant, when a project involves multiple
emissions units, only one consecutive 24-month period must be used to
determine the baseline actual emissions for the emissions units being
changed. A different consecutive 24-month period can be used For each
regulated NSR pollutant.
(d) The average rate shall not be based on any consecutive 24-month
period for which there is inadequate information for determining annual
emissions, in tons per year, and for adjusting this amount if required
by paragraph (b)(47)(i)(b) of this section.
(ii) For an existing emissions unit (other than an electric utility
steam generating unit), baseline actual emissions means the average
rate, in tons per year, at which the emissions unit actually emitted the
pollutant during any consecutive 24-month period selected by the owner
or operator within the 10-year period immediately preceding either the
date the owner or operator begins actual construction of the project, or
the date a complete permit application is received by the reviewing
authority for a permit required either under this section or under a
plan approved by the Administrator, whichever is earlier, except that
the 10-year period shall not include any period earlier than November
15, 1990.
(a) The average rate shall include fugitive emissions to the extent
quantifiable, and emissions associated with startups, shutdowns, and
malfunctions.
(b) The average rate shall be adjusted downward to exclude any non-
compliant emissions that occurred while the source was operating above
an emission limitation that was legally enforceable during the
consecutive 24-month period.
(c) The average rate shall be adjusted downward to exclude any
emissions that would have exceeded an emission limitation with which the
major stationary source must currently comply, had such major stationary
source been required to comply with such limitations during the
consecutive 24-month period. However, if an emission limitation is part
of a maximum achievable control technology standard that the
Administrator proposed or promulgated under part 63 of this chapter, the
baseline actual emissions need only be adjusted if the State has taken
credit for such emissions reductions in an attainment demonstration or
maintenance plan consistent with the requirements of Sec.
51.165(a)(3)(ii)(G).
(d) For a regulated NSR pollutant, when a project involves multiple
emissions units, only one consecutive 24-month period must be used to
determine the baseline actual emissions for the emissions units being
changed. A different consecutive 24-month period can be used For each
regulated NSR pollutant.
(e) The average rate shall not be based on any consecutive 24-month
period for which there is inadequate information for determining annual
[[Page 216]]
emissions, in tons per year, and for adjusting this amount if required
by paragraphs (b)(47)(ii)(b) and (c) of this section.
(iii) For a new emissions unit, the baseline actual emissions for
purposes of determining the emissions increase that will result from the
initial construction and operation of such unit shall equal zero; and
thereafter, for all other purposes, shall equal the unit's potential to
emit.
(iv) For a PAL for a stationary source, the baseline actual
emissions shall be calculated for existing electric utility steam
generating units in accordance with the procedures contained in
paragraph (b)(47)(i) of this section, for other existing emissions units
in accordance with the procedures contained in paragraph (b)(47)(ii) of
this section, and for a new emissions unit in accordance with the
procedures contained in paragraph (b)(47)(iii) of this section.
(48) [Reserved]
(49) Regulated NSR pollutant, for purposes of this section, means
the following:
(i) Any pollutant for which a national ambient air quality standard
has been promulgated and any constituents or precursors for such
pollutants identified by the Administrator (e.g., volatile organic
compounds are precursors for ozone);
(ii) Any pollutant that is subject to any standard promulgated under
section 111 of the Act;
(iii) Any Class I or II substance subject to a standard promulgated
under or established by title VI of the Act; or
(iv) Any pollutant that otherwise is subject to regulation under the
Act; except that any or all hazardous air pollutants either listed in
section 112 of the Act or added to the list pursuant to section
112(b)(2) of the Act, which have not been delisted pursuant to section
112(b)(3) of the Act, are not regulated NSR pollutants unless the listed
hazardous air pollutant is also regulated as a constituent or precursor
of a general pollutant listed under section 108 of the Act.
(50) Reviewing authority means the State air pollution control
agency, local agency, other State agency, Indian tribe, or other agency
authorized by the Administrator to carry out a permit program under
Sec. 51.165 and this section, or the Administrator in the case of EPA-
implemented permit programs under Sec. 52.21 of this chapter.
(51) Project means a physical change in, or change in method of
operation of, an existing major stationary source.
(52) Lowest achievable emission rate (LAER) is as defined in Sec.
51.165(a)(1)(xiii).
(53)(i) In general, process unit means any collection of structures
and/or equipment that processes, assembles, applies, blends, or
otherwise uses material inputs to produce or store an intermediate or a
completed product. A single stationary source may contain more than one
process unit, and a process unit may contain more than one emissions
unit.
(ii) Pollution control equipment is not part of the process unit,
unless it serves a dual function as both process and control equipment.
Administrative and warehousing facilities are not part of the process
unit.
(iii) For replacement cost purposes, components shared between two
or more process units are proportionately allocated based on capacity.
(iv) The following list identifies the process units at specific
categories of stationary sources.
(a) For a steam electric generating facility, the process unit
consists of those portions of the plant that contribute directly to the
production of electricity. For example, at a pulverized coal-fired
facility, the process unit would generally be the combination of those
systems from the coal receiving equipment through the emission stack
(excluding post-combustion pollution controls), including the coal
handling equipment, pulverizers or coal crushers, feedwater heaters, ash
handling, boiler, burners, turbine-generator set, condenser, cooling
tower, water treatment system, air preheaters, and operating control
systems. Each separate generating unit is a separate process unit.
(b) For a petroleum refinery, there are several categories of
process units: those that separate and/or distill petroleum feedstocks;
those that change molecular structures; petroleum treating processes;
auxiliary facilities, such as
[[Page 217]]
steam generators and hydrogen production units; and those that load,
unload, blend or store intermediate or completed products.
(c) For an incinerator, the process unit would consist of components
from the feed pit or refuse pit to the stack, including conveyors,
combustion devices, heat exchangers and steam generators, quench tanks,
and fans.
Note to paragraph (b)(53): By a court order on December 24, 2003,
this paragraph (b)(53) is stayed indefinitely. The stayed provisions
will become effective immediately if the court terminates the stay. At
that time, EPA will publish a document in the Federal Register advising
the public of the termination of the stay.
(54) Functionally equivalent component means a component that serves
the same purpose as the replaced component.
Note to paragraph (b)(54): By a court order on December 24, 2003,
this paragraph (b)(54) is stayed indefinitely. The stayed provisions
will become effective immediately if the court terminates the stay. At
that time, EPA will publish a document in the Federal Register advising
the public of the termination of the stay.
(55) Fixed capital cost means the capital needed to provide all the
depreciable components. ``Depreciable components'' refers to all
components of fixed capital cost and is calculated by subtracting land
and working capital from the total capital investment, as defined in
paragraph (b)(56) of this section.
Note to paragraph (b)(55): By a court order on December 24, 2003,
this paragraph (b)(55) is stayed indefinitely. The stayed provisions
will become effective immediately if the court terminates the stay. At
that time, EPA will publish a document in the Federal Register advising
the public of the termination of the stay.
(56) Total capital investment means the sum of the following: all
costs required to purchase needed process equipment (purchased equipment
costs); the costs of labor and materials for installing that equipment
(direct installation costs); the costs of site preparation and
buildings; other costs such as engineering, construction and field
expenses, fees to contractors, startup and performance tests, and
contingencies (indirect installation costs); land for the process
equipment; and working capital for the process equipment.
Note to paragraph (b)(56): By a court order on December 24, 2003,
this paragraph (b)(56) is stayed indefinitely. The stayed provisions
will become effective immediately if the court terminates the stay. At
that time, EPA will publish a document in the Federal Register advising
the public of the termination of the stay.
(c) Ambient air increments. The plan shall contain emission
limitations and such other measures as may be necessary to assure that
in areas designated as Class I, II, or III, increases in pollutant
concentration over the baseline concentration shall be limited to the
following:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum
allowable
increase
Pollutant (micrograms
per cubic
meter)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Class I
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Particulate matter:
PM-10, annual arithmetic mean.......................... 4
PM-10, 24-hr maximum................................... 8
Sulfur dioxide:
Annual arithmetic mean................................. 2
24-hr maximum.......................................... 5
3-hr maximum........................................... 25
Nitrogen dioxide: Annual arithmetic mean................... 2.5
------------------------------------------------------------
Class II
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Particulate matter:
PM-10, annual arithmetic mean.......................... 17
PM-10, 24-hr maximum................................... 30
Sulfur dioxide:
Annual arithmetic mean................................. 20
24-hr maximum.......................................... 91
3-hr maximum........................................... 512
Nitrogen dioxide:
Annual arithmetic mean................................. 25
------------------------------------------------------------
Class III
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Particulate matter:
PM-10, annual arithmetic mean.......................... 34
PM-10, 24-hr maximum................................... 60
Sulfur dioxide:
Annual arithmetic mean................................. 40
24-hr maximum.......................................... 182
3-hr maximum........................................... 700
Nitrogen dioxide: Annual arithmetic mean................... 50
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For any period other than an annual period, the applicable maximum
allowable increase may be exceeded during one such period per year at
any one location.
(d) Ambient air ceilings. The plan shall provide that no
concentration of a pollutant shall exceed:
(1) The concentration permitted under the national secondary ambient
air quality standard, or
[[Page 218]]
(2) The concentration permitted under the national primary ambient
air quality standard, whichever concentration is lowest for the
pollutant for a period of exposure.
(e) Restrictions on area classifications. The plan shall provide
that--
(1) All of the following areas which were in existence on August 7,
1977, shall be Class I areas and may not be redesignated:
(i) International parks,
(ii) National wilderness areas which exceed 5,000 acres in size,
(iii) National memorial parks which exceed 5,000 acres in size, and
(iv) National parks which exceed 6,000 acres in size.
(2) Areas which were redesignated as Class I under regulations
promulgated before August 7, 1977, shall remain Class I, but may be
redesignated as provided in this section.
(3) Any other area, unless otherwise specified in the legislation
creating such an area, is initially designated Class II, but may be
redesignated as provided in this section.
(4) The following areas may be redesignated only as Class I or II:
(i) An area which as of August 7, 1977, exceeded 10,000 acres in
size and was a national monument, a national primitive area, a national
preserve, a national recreational area, a national wild and scenic
river, a national wildlife refuge, a national lakeshore or seashore; and
(ii) A national park or national wilderness area established after
August 7, 1977, which exceeds 10,000 acres in size.
(f) Exclusions from increment consumption. (1) The plan may provide
that the following concentrations shall be excluded in determining
compliance with a maximum allowable increase:
(i) Concentrations attributable to the increase in emissions from
stationary sources which have converted from the use of petroleum
products, natural gas, or both by reason of an order in effect under
section 2 (a) and (b) of the Energy Supply and Environmental
Coordination Act of 1974 (or any superseding legislation) over the
emissions from such sources before the effective date of such an order;
(ii) Concentrations attributable to the increase in emissions from
sources which have converted from using natural gas by reason of natural
gas curtailment plan in effect pursuant to the Federal Power Act over
the emissions from such sources before the effective date of such plan;
(iii) Concentrations of particulate matter attributable to the
increase in emissions from construction or other temporary emission-
related activities of new or modified sources;
(iv) The increase in concentrations attributable to new sources
outside the United States over the concentrations attributable to
existing sources which are included in the baseline concentration; and
(v) Concentrations attributable to the temporary increase in
emissions of sulfur dioxide, particulate matter, or nitrogen oxides from
stationary sources which are affected by plan revisions approved by the
Administrator as meeting the criteria specified in paragraph (f)(4) of
this section.
(2) If the plan provides that the concentrations to which paragraph
(f)(1) (i) or (ii) of this section, refers shall be excluded, it shall
also provide that no exclusion of such concentrations shall apply more
than five years after the effective date of the order to which paragraph
(f)(1)(i) of this section, refers or the plan to which paragraph
(f)(1)(ii) of this section, refers, whichever is applicable. If both
such order and plan are applicable, no such exclusion shall apply more
than five years after the later of such effective dates.
(3) [Reserved]
(4) For purposes of excluding concentrations pursuant to paragraph
(f)(1)(v) of this section, the Administrator may approve a plan revision
that:
(i) Specifies the time over which the temporary emissions increase
of sulfur dioxide, particulate matter, or nitrogen oxides would occur.
Such time is not to exceed 2 years in duration unless a longer time is
approved by the Administrator.
(ii) Specifies that the time period for excluding certain
contributions in accordance with paragraph (f)(4)(i) of this section, is
not renewable;
(iii) Allows no emissions increase from a stationary source which
would:
[[Page 219]]
(a) Impact a Class I area or an area where an applicable increment
is known to be violated; or
(b) Cause or contribute to the violation of a national ambient air
quality standard;
(iv) Requires limitations to be in effect the end of the time period
specified in accordance with paragraph (f)(4)(i) of this section, which
would ensure that the emissions levels from stationary sources affected
by the plan revision would not exceed those levels occurring from such
sources before the plan revision was approved.
(g) Redesignation. (1) The plan shall provide that all areas of the
State (except as otherwise provided under paragraph (e) of this section)
shall be designated either Class I, Class II, or Class III. Any
designation other than Class II shall be subject to the redesignation
procedures of this paragraph. Redesignation (except as otherwise
precluded by paragraph (e) of this section) may be proposed by the
respective States or Indian Governing Bodies, as provided below, subject
to approval by the Administrator as a revision to the applicable State
implementation plan.
(2) The plan may provide that the State may submit to the
Administrator a proposal to redesignate areas of the State Class I or
Class II: Provided, That:
(i) At least one public hearing has been held in accordance with
procedures established in Sec. 51.102.
(ii) Other States, Indian Governing Bodies, and Federal Land
Managers whose lands may be affected by the proposed redesignation were
notified at least 30 days prior to the public hearing;
(iii) A discussion of the reasons for the proposed redesignation,
including a satisfactory description and analysis of the health,
environmental, economic, social, and energy effects of the proposed
redesignation, was prepared and made available for public inspection at
least 30 days prior to the hearing and the notice announcing the hearing
contained appropriate notification of the availability of such
discussion;
(iv) Prior to the issuance of notice respecting the redesignation of
an area that includes any Federal lands, the State has provided written
notice to the appropriate Federal Land Manager and afforded adequate
opportunity (not in excess of 60 days) to confer with the State
respecting the redesignation and to submit written comments and
recommendations. In redesignating any area with respect to which any
Federal Land Manager had submitted written comments and recommendations,
the State shall have published a list of any inconsistency between such
redesignation and such comments and recommendations (together with the
reasons for making such redesignation against the recommendation of the
Federal Land Manager); and
(v) The State has proposed the redesignation after consultation with
the elected leadership of local and other substate general purpose
governments in the area covered by the proposed redesignation.
(3) The plan may provide that any area other than an area to which
paragraph (e) of this section refers may be redesignated as Class III
if--
(i) The redesignation would meet the requirements of provisions
established in accordance with paragraph (g)(2) of this section;
(ii) The redesignation, except any established by an Indian
Governing Body, has been specifically approved by the Governor of the
State, after consultation with the appropriate committees of the
legislature, if it is in session, or with the leadership of the
legislature, if it is not in session (unless State law provides that
such redesignation must be specifically approved by State legislation)
and if general purpose units of local government representing a majority
of the residents of the area to be redesignated enact legislation
(including resolutions where appropriate) concurring in the
redesignation;
(iii) The redesignation would not cause, or contribute to, a
concentration of any air pollutant which would exceed any maximum
allowable increase permitted under the classification of any other area
or any national ambient air quality standard; and
(iv) Any permit application for any major stationary source or major
modification subject to provisions established in accordance with
paragraph (l) of this section which could receive a permit only if the
area in question
[[Page 220]]
were redesignated as Class III, and any material submitted as part of
that application, were available, insofar as was practicable, for public
inspection prior to any public hearing on redesignation of any area as
Class III.
(4) The plan shall provide that lands within the exterior boundaries
of Indian Reservations may be redesignated only by the appropriate
Indian Governing Body. The appropriate Indian Governing Body may submit
to the Administrator a proposal to redesignate areas Class I, Class II,
or Class III: Provided, That:
(i) The Indian Governing Body has followed procedures equivalent to
those required of a State under paragraphs (g) (2), (3)(iii), and
(3)(iv) of this section; and
(ii) Such redesignation is proposed after consultation with the
State(s) in which the Indian Reservation is located and which border the
Indian Reservation.
(5) The Administrator shall disapprove, within 90 days of
submission, a proposed redesignation of any area only if he finds, after
notice and opportunity for public hearing, that such redesignation does
not meet the procedural requirements of this section or is inconsistent
with paragraph (e) of this section. If any such disapproval occurs, the
classification of the area shall be that which was in effect prior to
the redesignation which was disapproved.
(6) If the Administrator disapproves any proposed area designation,
the State or Indian Governing Body, as appropriate, may resubmit the
proposal after correcting the deficiencies noted by the Administrator.
(h) Stack heights. The plan shall provide, as a minimum, that the
degree of emission limitation required for control of any air pollutant
under the plan shall not be affected in any manner by--
(1) So much of a stack height, not in existence before December 31,
1970, as exceeds good engineering practice, or
(2) Any other dispersion technique not implemented before then.
(i) Exemptions.
(1) The plan may provide that requirements equivalent to those
contained in paragraphs (j) through (r) of this section do not apply to
a particular major stationary source or major modification if:
(i) The major stationary source would be a nonprofit health or
nonprofit educational institution or a major modification that would
occur at such an institution; or
(ii) The source or modification would be a major stationary source
or major modification only if fugitive emissions, to the extent
quantifiable, are considered in calculating the potential to emit of the
stationary source or modification and such source does not belong to any
following categories:
(a) Coal cleaning plants (with thermal dryers);
(b) Kraft pulp mills;
(c) Portland cement plants;
(d) Primary zinc smelters;
(e) Iron and steel mills;
(f) Primary aluminum ore reduction plants;
(g) Primary copper smelters;
(h) Municipal incinerators capable of charging more than 250 tons of
refuse per day;
(i) Hydrofluoric, sulfuric, or nitric acid plants;
(j) Petroleum refineries;
(k) Lime plants;
(l) Phosphate rock processing plants;
(m) Coke oven batteries;
(n) Sulfur recovery plants;
(o) Carbon black plants (furnace process);
(p) Primary lead smelters;
(q) Fuel conversion plants;
(r) Sintering plants;
(s) Secondary metal production plants;
(t) Chemical process plants;
(u) Fossil-fuel boilers (or combination thereof) totaling more than
250 million British thermal units per hour heat input;
(v) Petroleum storage and transfer units with a total storage
capacity exceeding 300,000 barrels;
(w) Taconite ore processing plants;
(x) Glass fiber processing plants;
(y) Charcoal production plants;
(z) Fossil fuel-fired steam electric plants of more than 250 million
British thermal units per hour heat input;
(aa) Any other stationary source category which, as of August 7,
1980, is being regulated under section 111 or 112 of the Act; or
[[Page 221]]
(iii) The source or modification is a portable stationary source
which has previously received a permit under requirements equivalent to
those contained in paragraphs (j) through (r) of this section, if:
(a) The source proposes to relocate and emissions of the source at
the new location would be temporary; and
(b) The emissions from the source would not exceed its allowable
emissions; and
(c) The emissions from the source would impact no Class I area and
no area where an applicable increment is known to be violated; and
(d) Reasonable notice is given to the reviewing authority prior to
the relocation identifying the proposed new location and the probable
duration of operation at the new location. Such notice shall be given to
the reviewing authority not less than 10 days in advance of the proposed
relocation unless a different time duration is previously approved by
the reviewing authority.
(2) The plan may provide that requirements equivalent to those
contained in paragraphs (j) through (r) of this section do not apply to
a major stationary source or major modification with respect to a
particular pollutant if the owner or operator demonstrates that, as to
that pollutant, the source or modification is located in an area
designated as nonattainment under section 107 of the Act.
(3) The plan may provide that requirements equivalent to those
contained in paragraphs (k), (m), and (o) of this section do not apply
to a proposed major stationary source or major modification with respect
to a particular pollutant, if the allowable emissions of that pollutant
from a new source, or the net emissions increase of that pollutant from
a modification, would be temporary and impact no Class I area and no
area where an applicable increment is known to be violated.
(4) The plan may provide that requirements equivalent to those
contained in paragraphs (k), (m), and (o) of this section as they relate
to any maximum allowable increase for a Class II area do not apply to a
modification of a major stationary source that was in existence on March
1, 1978, if the net increase in allowable emissions of each a regulated
NSR pollutant from the modification after the application of best
available control technology would be less than 50 tons per year.
(5) The plan may provide that the reviewing authority may exempt a
proposed major stationary source or major modification from the
requirements of paragraph (m) of this section, with respect to
monitoring for a particular pollutant, if:
(i) The emissions increase of the pollutant from a new stationary
source or the net emissions increase of the pollutant from a
modification would cause, in any area, air quality impacts less than the
following amounts:
(a) Carbon monoxide--575 ug/m\3\, 8-hour average;
(b) Nitrogen dioxide--14 ug/m\3\, annual average;
(c) Particulate matter--10 [mu]g/m\3\ of PM-10, 24-hour average.
(d) Sulfur dioxide--13 ug/m\3\, 24-hour average;
(e) Ozone; \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ No de minimis air quality level is provided for ozone. However,
any net increase of 100 tons per year or more of volatile organic
compounds subject to PSD would be required to perform and ambient impact
analysis, including the gathering of ambient air quality data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(f) Lead--0.1 [mu]g/m\3\, 3-month average.
(g) Fluorides--0.25 [mu]g/m3, 24-hour average;
(h) Total reduced sulfur--10 [mu]g/m3, 1-hour average
(i) Hydrogen sulfide--0.2 [mu]g/m3, 1-hour average;
(j) Reduced sulfur compounds--10 [mu]g/m3, 1-hour
average; or
(ii) The concentrations of the pollutant in the area that the source
or modification would affect are less than the concentrations listed in
(i)(8)(i) of this section; or
(iii) The pollutants is not listed in paragraph (i)(8)(i) of this
section.
(6) If EPA approves a plan revision under 40 CFR 51.166 as in effect
before August 7, 1980, any subsequent revision which meets the
requirements of this section may contain transition provisions which
parallel the transition provisions of 40 CFR 52.21(i)(9), (i)(10) and
(m)(1)(v) as in effect on that date,
[[Page 222]]
which provisions relate to requirements for best available control
technology and air quality analyses. Any such subsequent revision may
not contain any transition provision which in the context of the
revision would operate any less stringently than would its counterpart
in 40 CFR 52.21.
(7) If EPA approves a plan revision under Sec. 51.166 as in effect
[before July 31, 1987], any subsequent revision which meets the
requirements of this section may contain transition provisions which
parallel the transition provisions of Sec. 52.21 (i)(11), and (m)(1)
(vii) and (viii) of this chapter as in effect on that date, these
provisions being related to monitoring requirements for particulate
matter. Any such subsequent revision may not contain any transition
provision which in the context of the revision would operate any less
stringently than would its counterpart in Sec. 52.21 of this chapter.
(8) The plan may provide that the permitting requirements equivalent
to those contained in paragraph (k)(2) of this section do not apply to a
stationary source or modification with respect to any maximum allowable
increase for nitrogen oxides if the owner or operator of the source or
modification submitted an application for a permit under the applicable
permit program approved or promulgated under the Act before the
provisions embodying the maximum allowable increase took effect as part
of the plan and the permitting authority subsequently determined that
the application as submitted before that date was complete.
(9) The plan may provide that the permitting requirements equivalent
to those contained in paragraph (k)(2) of this section shall not apply
to a stationary source or modification with respect to any maximum
allowable increase for PM-10 if (i) the owner or operator of the source
or modification submitted an application for a permit under the
applicable permit program approved under the Act before the provisions
embodying the maximum allowable increases for PM-10 took effect as part
of the plan, and (ii) the permitting authority subsequently determined
that the application as submitted before that date was complete.
Instead, the applicable requirements equivalent to paragraph (k)(2)
shall apply with respect to the maximum allowable increases for TSP as
in effect on the date the application was submitted.
(j) Control technology review. The plan shall provide that:
(1) A major stationary source or major modification shall meet each
applicable emissions limitation under the State Implementation Plan and
each applicable emission standards and standard of performance under 40
CFR parts 60 and 61.
(2) A new major stationary source shall apply best available control
technology for each a regulated NSR pollutant that it would have the
potential to emit in significant amounts.
(3) A major modification shall apply best available control
technology for each a regulated NSR pollutant for which it would be a
significant net emissions increase at the source. This requirement
applies to each proposed emissions unit at which a net emissions
increase in the pollutant would occur as a result of a physical change
or change in the method of operation in the unit.
(4) For phased construction projects, the determination of best
available control technology shall be reviewed and modified as
appropriate at the least reasonable time which occurs no later than 18
months prior to commencement of construction of each independent phase
of the project. At such time, the owner or operator of the applicable
stationary source may be required to demonstrate the adequacy of any
previous determination of best available control technology for the
source.
(k) Source impact analysis. The plan shall provide that the owner or
operator of the proposed source or modification shall demonstrate that
allowable emission increases from the proposed source or modification,
in conjunction with all other applicable emissions increases or
reduction (including secondary emissions) would not cause or contribute
to air pollution in violation of:
(1) Any national ambient air quality standard in any air quality
control region; or
[[Page 223]]
(2) Any applicable maximum allowable increase over the baseline
concentration in any area.
(l) Air quality models. The plan shall provide for procedures which
specify that--
(1) All applications of air quality modeling involved in this
subpart shall be based on the applicable models, data bases, and other
requirements specified in appendix W of this part (Guideline on Air
Quality Models).
(2) Where an air quality model specified in appendix W of this part
(Guideline on Air Quality Models) is inappropriate, the model may be
modified or another model substituted. Such a modification or
substitution of a model may be made on a case-by-case basis or, where
appropriate, on a generic basis for a specific State program. Written
approval of the Administrator must be obtained for any modification or
substitution. In addition, use of a modified or substituted model must
be subject to notice and opportunity for public comment under procedures
set forth in Sec. 51.102.
(m) Air quality analysis--(1) Pre application analysis. (i) The plan
shall provide that any application for a permit under regulations
approved pursuant to this section shall contain an analysis of ambient
air quality in the area that the major stationary source or major
modification would affect for each of the following pollutants:
(a) For the source, each pollutant that it would have the potential
to emit in a significant amount;
(b) For the modification, each pollutant for which it would result
in a significant net emissions increase.
(ii) The plan shall provide that, with respect to any such pollutant
for which no National Ambient Air Quality Standard exists, the analysis
shall contain such air quality monitoring data as the reviewing
authority determines is necessary to assess ambient air quality for that
pollutant in any area that the emissions of that pollutant would affect.
(iii) The plan shall provide that with respect to any such pollutant
(other than nonmethane hydrocarbons) for which such a standard does
exist, the analysis shall contain continuous air quality monitoring data
gathered for purposes of determining whether emissions of that pollutant
would cause or contribute to a violation of the standard or any maxiumum
allowable increase.
(iv) The plan shall provide that, in general, the continuous air
monitoring data that is required shall have been gathered over a period
of one year and shall represent the year preceding receipt of the
application, except that, if the reviewing authority determines that a
complete and adequate analysis can be accomplished with monitoring data
gathered over a period shorter than one year (but not to be less than
four months), the data that is required shall have been gathered over at
least that shorter period.
(v) The plan may provide that the owner or operator of a proposed
major stationary source or major modification of volatile organic
compounds who satisfies all conditions of 40 CFR part 51 appendix S,
section IV may provide postapproval monitoring data for ozone in lieu of
providing preconstruction data as required under paragraph (m)(1) of
this section.
(2) Post-construction monitoring. The plan shall provide that the
owner or operator of a major stationary source or major modification
shall, after construction of the stationary source or modification,
conduct such ambient monitoring as the reviewing authority determines is
necessary to determine the effect emissions from the stationary source
or modification may have, or are having, on air quality in any area.
(3) Operation of monitoring stations. The plan shall provide that
the owner or operator of a major stationary source or major modification
shall meet the requirements of appendix B to part 58 of this chapter
during the operation of monitoring stations for purposes of satisfying
paragraph (m) of this section.
(n) Source information. (1) The plan shall provide that the owner or
operator of a proposed source or modification shall submit all
information necessary to perform any analysis or make any determination
required under procedures established in accordance with this section.
[[Page 224]]
(2) The plan may provide that such information shall include:
(i) A description of the nature, location, design capacity, and
typical operating schedule of the source or modification, including
specifications and drawings showing its design and plant layout;
(ii) A detailed schedule for construction of the source or
modification;
(iii) A detailed description as to what system of continuous
emission reduction is planned by the source or modification, emission
estimates, and any other information as necessary to determine that best
available control technology as applicable would be applied;
(3) The plan shall provide that upon request of the State, the owner
or operator shall also provide information on:
(i) The air quality impact of the source or modification, including
meteorological and topographical data necessary to estimate such impact;
and
(ii) The air quality impacts and the nature and extent of any or all
general commercial, residential, industrial, and other growth which has
occurred since August 7, 1977, in the area the source or modification
would affect.
(o) Additional impact analyses. The plan shall provide that--
(1) The owner or operator shall provide an analysis of the
impairment to visibility, soils, and vegetation that would occur as a
result of the source or modification and general commercial,
residential, industrial, and other growth associated with the source or
modification. The owner or operator need not provide an analysis of the
impact on vegetation having no significant commercial or recreational
value.
(2) The owner or operator shall provide an analysis of the air
quality impact projected for the area as a result of general commercial,
residential, industrial, and other growth associated with the source or
modification.
(p) Sources impacting Federal Class I areas--additional
requirements--(1) Notice to EPA. The plan shall provide that the
reviewing authority shall transmit to the Administrator a copy of each
permit application relating to a major stationary source or major
modification and provide notice to the Administrator of every action
related to the consideration of such permit.
(2) Federal Land Manager. The Federal Land Manager and the Federal
official charged with direct responsibility for management of Class I
lands have an affirmative responsibility to protect the air quality
related values (including visibility) of any such lands and to consider,
in consultation with the Administrator, whether a proposed source or
modification would have an adverse impact on such values.
(3) Denial--impact on air quality related values. The plan shall
provide a mechanism whereby a Federal Land Manager of any such lands may
present to the State, after the reviewing authority's preliminary
determination required under procedures developed in accordance with
paragraph (r) of this section, a demonstration that the emissions from
the proposed source or modification would have an adverse impact on the
air quality-related values (including visibility) of any Federal
mandatory Class I lands, notwithstanding that the change in air quality
resulting from emissions from such source or modification would not
cause or contribute to concentrations which would exceed the maximum
allowable increases for a Class I area. If the State concurs with such
demonstration, the reviewing authority shall not issue the permit.
(4) Class I Variances. The plan may provide that the owner or
operator of a proposed source or modification may demonstrate to the
Federal Land Manager that the emissions from such source would have no
adverse impact on the air quality related values of such lands
(including visibility), notwithstanding that the change in air quality
resulting from emissions from such source or modification would cause or
contribute to concentrations which would exceed the maximum allowable
increases for a Class I area. If the Federal land manager concurs with
such demonstration and so certifies to the State, the reviewing
authority may: Provided, That applicable requirements are otherwise met,
issue the permit with such emission limitations as may be necessary to
assure that emissions of sulfur dioxide, particulate matter, and
nitrogen oxides would not
[[Page 225]]
exceed the following maximum allowable increases over minor source
baseline concentration for such pollutants:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum
allowable
increase
Pollutant (micrograms
per cubic
meter)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Particulate matter:
PM-10, annual arithmetic mean.......................... 17
PM-10, 24-hour maximum................................. 30
Sulfur dioxide:
Annual arithmetic mean................................. 20
24-hr maximum.......................................... 91
3-hr maximum........................................... 325
Nitrogen dioxide: Annual arithmetic mean................... 25
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(5) Sulfur dioxide variance by Governor with Federal Land Manager's
concurrence. The plan may provide that--
(i) The owner or operator of a proposed source or modification which
cannot be approved under procedures developed pursuant to paragraph
(q)(4) of this section may demonstrate to the Governor that the source
or modification cannot be constructed by reason of any maximum allowable
increase for sulfur dioxide for periods of twenty-four hours or less
applicable to any Class I area and, in the case of Federal mandatory
Class I areas, that a variance under this clause would not adversely
affect the air quality related values of the area (including
visibility);
(ii) The Governor, after consideration of the Federal Land Manager's
recommendation (if any) and subject to his concurrence, may grant, after
notice and an opportunity for a public hearing, a variance from such
maximum allowable increase; and
(iii) If such variance is granted, the reviewing authority may issue
a permit to such source or modification in accordance with provisions
developed pursuant to paragraph (q)(7) of this section: Provided, That
the applicable requirements of the plan are otherwise met.
(6) Variance by the Governor with the President's concurrence. The
plan may provide that--
(i) The recommendations of the Governor and the Federal Land Manager
shall be transferred to the President in any case where the Governor
recommends a variance in which the Federal Land Manager does not concur;
(ii) The President may approve the Governor's recommendation if he
finds that such variance is in the national interest; and
(iii) If such a variance is approved, the reviewing authority may
issue a permit in accordance with provisions developed pursuant to the
requirements of paragraph (q)(7) of this section: Provided, That the
applicable requirements of the plan are otherwise met.
(7) Emission limitations for Presidential or gubernatorial variance.
The plan shall provide that in the case of a permit issued under
procedures developed pursuant to paragraph (q) (5) or (6) of this
section, the source or modification shall comply with emission
limitations as may be necessary to assure that emissions of sulfur
dioxide from the source or modification would not (during any day on
which the otherwise applicable maximum allowable increases are exceeded)
cause or contribute to concentrations which would exceed the following
maximum allowable increases over the baseline concentration and to
assure that such emissions would not cause or contribute to
concentrations which exceed the otherwise applicable maximum allowable
increases for periods of exposure of 24 hours or less for more than 18
days, not necessarily consecutive, during any annual period:
Maximum Allowable Increase
[Micrograms per cubic meter]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Terrain areas
Period of exposure -----------------
Low High
------------------------------------------------------------------------
24-hr maximum......................................... 36 62
3-hr maximum.......................................... 130 221
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(q) Public participation. The plan shall provide that--
(1) The reviewing authority shall notify all applicants within a
specified time period as to the completeness of the application or any
deficiency in the application or information submitted. In the event of
such a deficiency, the date of receipt of the application shall be the
date on which the reviewing authority received all required information.
[[Page 226]]
(2) Within one year after receipt of a complete application, the
reviewing authority shall:
(i) Make a preliminary determination whether construction should be
approved, approved with conditions, or disapproved.
(ii) Make available in at least one location in each region in which
the proposed source would be constructed a copy of all materials the
applicant submitted, a copy of the preliminary determination, and a copy
or summary of other materials, if any, considered in making the
preliminary determination.
(iii) Notify the public, by advertisement in a newspaper of general
circulation in each region in which the proposed source would be
constructed, of the application, the preliminary determination, the
degree of increment consumption that is expected from the source or
modification, and of the opportunity for comment at a public hearing as
well as written public comment.
(iv) Send a copy of the notice of public comment to the applicant,
the Administrator and to officials and agencies having cognizance over
the location where the proposed construction would occur as follows: Any
other State or local air pollution control agencies, the chief
executives of the city and county where the source would be located; any
comprehensive regional land use planning agency, and any State, Federal
Land Manager, or Indian Governing body whose lands may be affected by
emissions from the source or modification.
(v) Provide opportunity for a public hearing for interested persons
to appear and submit written or oral comments on the air quality impact
of the source, alternatives to it, the control technology required, and
other appropriate considerations.
(vi) Consider all written comments submitted within a time specified
in the notice of public comment and all comments received at any public
hearing(s) in making a final decision on the approvability of the
application. The reviewing authority shall make all comments available
for public inspection in the same locations where the reviewing
authority made available preconstruction information relating to the
proposed source or modification.
(vii) Make a final determination whether construction should be
approved, approved with conditions, or disapproved.
(viii) Notify the applicant in writing of the final determination
and make such notification available for public inspection at the same
location where the reviewing authority made available preconstruction
information and public comments relating to the source.
(r) Source obligation. (1) The plan shall include enforceable
procedures to provide that approval to construct shall not relieve any
owner or operator of the responsibility to comply fully with applicable
provisions of the plan and any other requirements under local, State or
Federal law.
(2) The plan shall provide that at such time that a particular
source or modification becomes a major stationary source or major
modification solely by virtue of a relaxation in any enforceable
limitation which was established after August 7, 1980, on the capacity
of the source or modification otherwise to emit a pollutant, such as a
restriction on hours of operation, then the requirements of paragraphs
(j) through (s) of this section shall apply to the source or
modification as though construction had not yet commenced on the source
or modification.
(3)-(5) [Reserved]
(6) Each plan shall provide that the following specific provisions
apply to projects at existing emissions units at a major stationary
source (other than projects at a Clean Unit or at a source with a PAL)
in circumstances where there is a reasonable possibility that a project
that is not a part of a major modification may result in a significant
emissions increase and the owner or operator elects to use the method
specified in paragraphs (b)(40)(ii)(a) through (c) of this section for
calculating projected actual emissions. Deviations from these provisions
will be approved only if the State specifically demonstrates that the
submitted provisions are more stringent than or at least as stringent in
all respects as the corresponding provisions in paragraphs (r)(6)(i)
through (v) of this section.
[[Page 227]]
(i) Before beginning actual construction of the project, the owner
or operator shall document and maintain a record of the following
information:
(a) A description of the project;
(b) Identification of the emissions unit(s) whose emissions of a
regulated NSR pollutant could be affected by the project; and
(c) A description of the applicability test used to determine that
the project is not a major modification for any regulated NSR pollutant,
including the baseline actual emissions, the projected actual emissions,
the amount of emissions excluded under paragraph (b)(40)(ii)(c) of this
section and an explanation for why such amount was excluded, and any
netting calculations, if applicable.
(ii) If the emissions unit is an existing electric utility steam
generating unit, before beginning actual construction, the owner or
operator shall provide a copy of the information set out in paragraph
(r)(6)(i) of this section to the reviewing authority. Nothing in this
paragraph (r)(6)(ii) shall be construed to require the owner or operator
of such a unit to obtain any determination from the reviewing authority
before beginning actual construction.
(iii) The owner or operator shall monitor the emissions of any
regulated NSR pollutant that could increase as a result of the project
and that is emitted by any emissions unit identified in paragraph
(r)(6)(i)(b) of this section; and calculate and maintain a record of the
annual emissions, in tons per year on a calendar year basis, for a
period of 5 years following resumption of regular operations after the
change, or for a period of 10 years following resumption of regular
operations after the change if the project increases the design capacity
or potential to emit of that regulated NSR pollutant at such emissions
unit.
(iv) If the unit is an existing electric utility steam generating
unit, the owner or operator shall submit a report to the reviewing
authority within 60 days after the end of each year during which records
must be generated under paragraph (r)(6)(iii) of this section setting
out the unit's annual emissions during the calendar year that preceded
submission of the report.
(v) If the unit is an existing unit other than an electric utility
steam generating unit, the owner or operator shall submit a report to
the reviewing authority if the annual emissions, in tons per year, from
the project identified in paragraph (r)(6)(i) of this section, exceed
the baseline actual emissions (as documented and maintained pursuant to
paragraph (r)(6)(i)(c) of this section) by a significant amount (as
defined in paragraph (b)(23) of this section) for that regulated NSR
pollutant, and if such emissions differ from the preconstruction
projection as documented and maintained pursuant to paragraph
(r)(6)(i)(c) of this section. Such report shall be submitted to the
reviewing authority within 60 days after the end of such year. The
report shall contain the following:
(a) The name, address and telephone number of the major stationary
source;
(b) The annual emissions as calculated pursuant to paragraph
(r)(6)(iii) of this section; and
(c) Any other information that the owner or operator wishes to
include in the report (e.g., an explanation as to why the emissions
differ from the preconstruction projection).
(7) Each plan shall provide that the owner or operator of the source
shall make the information required to be documented and maintained
pursuant to paragraph (r)(6) of this section available for review upon
request for inspection by the reviewing authority or the general public
pursuant to the requirements contained in Sec. 70.4(b)(3)(viii) of this
chapter.
(s) Innovative control technology. (1) The plan may provide that an
owner or operator of a proposed major stationary source or major
modification may request the reviewing authority to approve a system of
innovative control technology.
(2) The plan may provide that the reviewing authority may, with the
consent of the Governor(s) of other affected State(s), determine that
the source or modification may employ a system of innovative control
technology, if:
[[Page 228]]
(i) The proposed control system would not cause or contribute to an
unreasonable risk to public health, welfare, or safety in its operation
or function;
(ii) The owner or operator agrees to achieve a level of continuous
emissions reduction equivalent to that which would have been required
under paragraph (j)(2) of this section, by a date specified by the
reviewing authority. Such date shall not be later than 4 years from the
time of startup or 7 years from permit issuance;
(iii) The source or modification would meet the requirements
equivalent to those in paragraphs (j) and (k) of this section, based on
the emissions rate that the stationary source employing the system of
innovative control technology would be required to meet on the date
specified by the reviewing authority;
(iv) The source or modification would not before the date specified
by the reviewing authority:
(a) Cause or contribute to any violation of an applicable national
ambient air quality standard; or
(b) Impact any area where an applicable increment is known to be
violated;
(v) All other applicable requirements including those for public
participation have been met.
(vi) The provisions of paragraph (p) of this section (relating to
Class I areas) have been satisfied with respect to all periods during
the life of the source or modification.
(3) The plan shall provide that the reviewing authority shall
withdraw any approval to employ a system of innovative control
technology made under this section, if:
(i) The proposed system fails by the specified date to achieve the
required continuous emissions reduction rate; or
(ii) The proposed system fails before the specified date so as to
contribute to an unreasonable risk to public health, welfare, or safety;
or
(iii) The reviewing authority decides at any time that the proposed
system is unlikely to achieve the required level of control or to
protect the public health, welfare, or safety.
(4) The plan may provide that if a source or modification fails to
meet the required level of continuous emissions reduction within the
specified time period, or if the approval is withdrawn in accordance
with paragraph (s)(3) of this section, the reviewing authority may allow
the source or modification up to an additional 3 years to meet the
requirement for the application of best available control technology
through use of a demonstrated system of control.
(t) Clean Unit Test for emissions units that are subject to BACT or
LAER. The plan shall provide an owner or operator of a major stationary
source the option of using the Clean Unit Test to determine whether
emissions increases at a Clean Unit are part of a project that is a
major modification according to the provisions in paragraphs (t)(1)
through (9) of this section.
(1) Applicability. The provisions of this paragraph (t) apply to any
emissions unit for which the reviewing authority has issued a major NSR
permit within the past 10 years.
(2) General provisions for Clean Units. The provisions in paragraphs
(t)(2)(i) through (iv) of this section apply to a Clean Unit.
(i) Any project for which the owner or operator begins actual
construction after the effective date of the Clean Unit designation (as
determined in accordance with paragraph (t)(4) of this section) and
before the expiration date (as determined in accordance with paragraph
(t)(5) of this section) will be considered to have occurred while the
emissions unit was a Clean Unit.
(ii) If a project at a Clean Unit does not cause the need for a
change in the emission limitations or work practice requirements in the
permit for the unit that were adopted in conjunction with BACT and the
project would not alter any physical or operational characteristics that
formed the basis for the BACT determination as specified in paragraph
(t)(6)(iv) of this section, the emissions unit remains a Clean Unit.
(iii) If a project causes the need for a change in the emission
limitations or work practice requirements in the permit for the unit
that were adopted in conjunction with BACT or the project would alter
any physical or operational characteristics that formed the basis
[[Page 229]]
for the BACT determination as specified in paragraph (t)(6)(iv) of this
section, then the emissions unit loses its designation as a Clean Unit
upon issuance of the necessary permit revisions (unless the unit re-
qualifies as a Clean Unit pursuant to paragraph (t)(3)(iii) of this
section). If the owner or operator begins actual construction on the
project without first applying to revise the emissions unit's permit,
the Clean Unit designation ends immediately prior to the time when
actual construction begins.
(iv) A project that causes an emissions unit to lose its designation
as a Clean Unit is subject to the applicability requirements of
paragraphs (a)(7)(iv)(a) through (d) and paragraph (a)(7)(iv)(f) of this
section as if the emissions unit is not a Clean Unit.
(3) Qualifying or re-qualifying to use the Clean Unit Applicability
Test. An emissions unit automatically qualifies as a Clean Unit when the
unit meets the criteria in paragraphs (t)(3)(i) and (ii) of this
section. After the original Clean Unit designation expires in accordance
with paragraph (t)(5) of this section or is lost pursuant to paragraph
(t)(2)(iii) of this section, such emissions unit may re-qualify as a
Clean Unit under either paragraph (t)(3)(iii) of this section, or under
the Clean Unit provisions in paragraph (u) of this section. To re-
qualify as a Clean Unit under paragraph (t)(3)(iii) of this section, the
emissions unit must obtain a new major NSR permit issued through the
applicable PSD program and meet all the criteria in paragraph
(t)(3)(iii) of this section. The Clean Unit designation applies
individually for each pollutant emitted by the emissions unit.
(i) Permitting requirement. The emissions unit must have received a
major NSR permit within the past 10 years. The owner or operator must
maintain and be able to provide information that would demonstrate that
this permitting requirement is met.
(ii) Qualifying air pollution control technologies. Air pollutant
emissions from the emissions unit must be reduced through the use of air
pollution control technology (which includes pollution prevention as
defined under paragraph (b)(38) of this section or work practices) that
meets both the following requirements in paragraphs (t)(3)(ii)(a) and
(b) of this section.
(a) The control technology achieves the BACT or LAER level of
emissions reductions as determined through issuance of a major NSR
permit within the past 10 years. However, the emissions unit is not
eligible for the Clean Unit designation if the BACT determination
resulted in no requirement to reduce emissions below the level of a
standard, uncontrolled, new emissions unit of the same type.
(b) The owner or operator made an investment to install the control
technology. For the purpose of this determination, an investment
includes expenses to research the application of a pollution prevention
technique to the emissions unit or expenses to apply a pollution
prevention technique to an emissions unit.
(iii) Re-qualifying for the Clean Unit designation. The emissions
unit must obtain a new major NSR permit that requires compliance with
the current-day BACT (or LAER), and the emissions unit must meet the
requirements in paragraphs (t)(3)(i) and (t)(3)(ii) of this section.
(4) Effective date of the Clean Unit designation. The effective date
of an emissions unit's Clean Unit designation (that is, the date on
which the owner or operator may begin to use the Clean Unit Test to
determine whether a project at the emissions unit is a major
modification) is determined according to the applicable paragraph
(t)(4)(i) or (t)(4)(ii) of this section.
(i) Original Clean Unit designation, and emissions units that re-
qualify as Clean Units by implementing a new control technology to meet
current-day BACT. The effective date is the date the emissions unit's
air pollution control technology is placed into service, or 3 years
after the issuance date of the major NSR permit, whichever is earlier,
but no sooner than the date that provisions for the Clean Unit
applicability test are approved by the Administrator for incorporation
into the plan and become effective for the State in which the unit is
located.
(ii) Emissions Units that re-qualify for the Clean Unit designation
using an existing control technology. The effective
[[Page 230]]
date is the date the new, major NSR permit is issued.
(5) Clean Unit expiration. An emissions unit's Clean Unit
designation expires (that is, the date on which the owner or operator
may no longer use the Clean Unit Test to determine whether a project
affecting the emissions unit is, or is part of, a major modification)
according to the applicable paragraph (t)(5)(i) or (ii) of this section.
(i) Original Clean Unit designation, and emissions units that re-
qualify by implementing new control technology to meet current-day BACT.
For any emissions unit that automatically qualifies as a Clean Unit
under paragraphs (t)(3)(i) and (ii) of this section or re-qualifies by
implementing new control technology to meet current-day BACT under
paragraph (t)(3)(iii) of this section, the Clean Unit designation
expires 10 years after the effective date, or the date the equipment
went into service, whichever is earlier; or, it expires at any time the
owner or operator fails to comply with the provisions for maintaining
the Clean Unit designation in paragraph (t)(7) of this section.
(ii) Emissions units that re-qualify for the Clean Unit designation
using an existing control technology. For any emissions unit that re-
qualifies as a Clean Unit under paragraph (t)(3)(iii) of this section
using an existing control technology, the Clean Unit designation expires
10 years after the effective date; or, it expires any time the owner or
operator fails to comply with the provisions for maintaining the Clean
Unit designation in paragraph (t)(7) of this section.
(6) Required title V permit content for a Clean Unit. After the
effective date of the Clean Unit designation, and in accordance with the
provisions of the applicable title V permit program under part 70 or
part 71 of this chapter, but no later than when the title V permit is
renewed, the title V permit for the major stationary source must include
the following terms and conditions related to the Clean Unit in
paragraphs (t)(6)(i) through (vi) of this section.
(i) A statement indicating that the emissions unit qualifies as a
Clean Unit and identifying the pollutant(s) for which this Clean Unit
designation applies.
(ii) The effective date of the Clean Unit designation. If this date
is not known when the Clean Unit designation is initially recorded in
the title V permit (e.g., because the air pollution control technology
is not yet in service), the permit must describe the event that will
determine the effective date (e.g., the date the control technology is
placed into service). Once the effective date is determined, the owner
or operator must notify the reviewing authority of the exact date. This
specific effective date must be added to the source's title V permit at
the first opportunity, such as a modification, revision, reopening, or
renewal of the title V permit for any reason, whichever comes first, but
in no case later than the next renewal.
(iii) The expiration date of the Clean Unit designation. If this
date is not known when the Clean Unit designation is initially recorded
into the title V permit (e.g., because the air pollution control
technology is not yet in service), then the permit must describe the
event that will determine the expiration date (e.g., the date the
control technology is placed into service). Once the expiration date is
determined, the owner or operator must notify the reviewing authority of
the exact date. The expiration date must be added to the source's title
V permit at the first opportunity, such as a modification, revision,
reopening, or renewal of the title V permit for any reason, whichever
comes first, but in no case later than the next renewal.
(iv) All emission limitations and work practice requirements adopted
in conjunction with BACT, and any physical or operational
characteristics that formed the basis for the BACT determination (e.g.,
possibly the emissions unit's capacity or throughput).
(v) Monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements as
necessary to demonstrate that the emissions unit continues to meet the
criteria for maintaining the Clean Unit designation. (See paragraph
(t)(7) of this section.)
(vi) Terms reflecting the owner or operator's duties to maintain the
Clean Unit designation and the consequences
[[Page 231]]
of failing to do so, as presented in paragraph (t)(7) of this section.
(7) Maintaining the Clean Unit designation. To maintain the Clean
Unit designation, the owner or operator must conform to all the
restrictions listed in paragraphs (t)(7)(i) through (iii) of this
section. This paragraph (t)(7) applies independently to each pollutant
for which the emissions unit has the Clean Unit designation. That is,
failing to conform to the restrictions for one pollutant affects the
Clean Unit designation only for that pollutant.
(i) The Clean Unit must comply with the emission limitation(s) and/
or work practice requirements adopted in conjunction with the BACT that
is recorded in the major NSR permit, and subsequently reflected in the
title V permit. The owner or operator may not make a physical change in
or change in the method of operation of the Clean Unit that causes the
emissions unit to function in a manner that is inconsistent with the
physical or operational characteristics that formed the basis for the
BACT determination (e.g., possibly the emissions unit's capacity or
throughput).
(ii) The Clean Unit must comply with any terms and conditions in the
title V permit related to the unit's Clean Unit designation.
(iii) The Clean Unit must continue to control emissions using the
specific air pollution control technology that was the basis for its
Clean Unit designation. If the emissions unit or control technology is
replaced, then the Clean Unit designation ends.
(8) Netting at Clean Units. Emissions changes that occur at a Clean
Unit must not be included in calculating a significant net emissions
increase (that is, must not be used in a ``netting analysis''), unless
such use occurs before the effective date of the Clean Unit designation,
or after the Clean Unit designation expires; or, unless the emissions
unit reduces emissions below the level that qualified the unit as a
Clean Unit. However, if the Clean Unit reduces emissions below the level
that qualified the unit as a Clean Unit, then the owner or operator may
generate a credit for the difference between the level that qualified
the unit as a Clean Unit and the new emission limitation if such
reductions are surplus, quantifiable, and permanent. For purposes of
generating offsets, the reductions must also be federally enforceable.
For purposes of determining creditable net emissions increases and
decreases, the reductions must also be enforceable as a practical
matter.
(9) Effect of redesignation on the Clean Unit designation. The Clean
Unit designation of an emissions unit is not affected by redesignation
of the attainment status of the area in which it is located. That is, if
a Clean Unit is located in an attainment area and the area is
redesignated to nonattainment, its Clean Unit designation is not
affected. Similarly, redesignation from nonattainment to attainment does
not affect the Clean Unit designation. However, if an existing Clean
Unit designation expires, it must re-qualify under the requirements that
are currently applicable in the area.
(u) Clean Unit provisions for emissions units that achieve an
emission limitation comparable to BACT. The plan shall provide an owner
or operator of a major stationary source the option of using the Clean
Unit Test to determine whether emissions increases at a Clean Unit are
part of a project that is a major modification according to the
provisions in paragraphs (u)(1) through (11) of this section.
(1) Applicability. The provisions of this paragraph (u) apply to
emissions units which do not qualify as Clean Units under paragraph (t)
of this section, but which are achieving a level of emissions control
comparable to BACT, as determined by the reviewing authority in
accordance with this paragraph (u).
(2) General provisions for Clean Units. The provisions in paragraphs
(u)(2)(i) through (iv) of this section apply to a Clean Unit.
(i) Any project for which the owner or operator begins actual
construction after the effective date of the Clean Unit designation (as
determined in accordance with paragraph (u)(5) of this section) and
before the expiration date (as determined in accordance with paragraph
(u)(6) of this section) will be considered to have occurred while the
emissions unit was a Clean Unit.
[[Page 232]]
(ii) If a project at a Clean Unit does not cause the need for a
change in the emission limitations or work practice requirements in the
permit for the unit that have been determined (pursuant to paragraph
(u)(4) of this section) to be comparable to BACT, and the project would
not alter any physical or operational characteristics that formed the
basis for determining that the emissions unit's control technology
achieves a level of emissions control comparable to BACT as specified in
paragraph (u)(8)(iv) of this section, the emissions unit remains a Clean
Unit.
(iii) If a project causes the need for a change in the emission
limitations or work practice requirements in the permit for the unit
that have been determined (pursuant to paragraph (u)(4) of this section)
to be comparable to BACT, or the project would alter any physical or
operational characteristics that formed the basis for determining that
the emissions unit's control technology achieves a level of emissions
control comparable to BACT as specified in paragraph (u)(8)(iv) of this
section, then the emissions unit loses its designation as a Clean Unit
upon issuance of the necessary permit revisions (unless the unit re-
qualifies as a Clean Unit pursuant to paragraph (u)(3)(iv) of this
section). If the owner or operator begins actual construction on the
project without first applying to revise the emissions unit's permit,
the Clean Unit designation ends immediately prior to the time when
actual construction begins.
(iv) A project that causes an emissions unit to lose its designation
as a Clean Unit is subject to the applicability requirements of
paragraphs (a)(7)(iv)(a) through (d) and paragraph (a)(7)(iv)(f) of this
section as if the emissions unit is not a Clean Unit.
(3) Qualifying or re-qualifying to use the Clean Unit applicability
test. An emissions unit qualifies as a Clean Unit when the unit meets
the criteria in paragraphs (u)(3)(i) through (iii) of this section.
After the original Clean Unit designation expires in accordance with
paragraph (u)(6) of this section or is lost pursuant to paragraph
(u)(2)(iii) of this section, such emissions unit may re-qualify as a
Clean Unit under either paragraph (u)(3)(iv) of this section, or under
the Clean Unit provisions in paragraph (t) of this section. To re-
qualify as a Clean Unit under paragraph (u)(3)(iv) of this section, the
emissions unit must obtain a new permit issued pursuant to the
requirements in paragraphs (u)(7) and (8) of this section and meet all
the criteria in paragraph (u)(3)(iv) of this section. The reviewing
authority will make a separate Clean Unit designation for each pollutant
emitted by the emissions unit for which the emissions unit qualifies as
a Clean Unit.
(i) Qualifying air pollution control technologies. Air pollutant
emissions from the emissions unit must be reduced through the use of air
pollution control technology (which includes pollution prevention as
defined under paragraph (b)(38) or work practices) that meets both the
following requirements in paragraphs (u)(3)(i)(a) and (b) of this
section.
(a) The owner or operator has demonstrated that the emissions unit's
control technology is comparable to BACT according to the requirements
of paragraph (u)(4) of this section. However, the emissions unit is not
eligible for the Clean Unit designation if its emissions are not reduced
below the level of a standard, uncontrolled emissions unit of the same
type (e.g., if the BACT determinations to which it is compared have
resulted in a determination that no control measures are required).
(b) The owner or operator made an investment to install the control
technology. For the purpose of this determination, an investment
includes expenses to research the application of a pollution prevention
technique to the emissions unit or to retool the unit to apply a
pollution prevention technique.
(ii) Impact of emissions from the unit. The reviewing authority must
determine that the allowable emissions from the emissions unit will not
cause or contribute to a violation of any national ambient air quality
standard or PSD increment, or adversely impact an air quality related
value (such as visibility) that has been identified for a Federal Class
I area by a Federal Land Manager and for which information is available
to the general public.
[[Page 233]]
(iii) Date of installation. An emissions unit may qualify as a Clean
Unit even if the control technology, on which the Clean Unit designation
is based, was installed before the effective date of plan requirements
to implement the requirements of this paragraph (u)(3)(iii). However,
for such emissions units, the owner or operator must apply for the Clean
Unit designation within 2 years after the plan requirements become
effective. For technologies installed after the plan requirements become
effective, the owner or operator must apply for the Clean Unit
designation at the time the control technology is installed.
(iv) Re-qualifying as a Clean Unit. The emissions unit must obtain a
new permit (pursuant to requirements in paragraphs (u)(7) and (8) of
this section) that demonstrates that the emissions unit's control
technology is achieving a level of emission control comparable to
current-day BACT, and the emissions unit must meet the requirements in
paragraphs (u)(3)(i)(a) and (u)(3)(ii) of this section.
(4) Demonstrating control effectiveness comparable to BACT. The
owner or operator may demonstrate that the emissions unit's control
technology is comparable to BACT for purposes of paragraph (u)(3)(i) of
this section according to either paragraph (u)(4)(i) or (ii) of this
section. Paragraph (u)(4)(iii) of this section specifies the time for
making this comparison.
(i) Comparison to previous BACT and LAER determinations. The
Administrator maintains an on-line data base of previous determinations
of RACT, BACT, and LAER in the RACT/BACT/LAER Clearinghouse (RBLC). The
emissions unit's control technology is presumed to be comparable to BACT
if it achieves an emission limitation that is equal to or better than
the average of the emission limitations achieved by all the sources for
which a BACT or LAER determination has been made within the preceding 5
years and entered into the RBLC, and for which it is technically
feasible to apply the BACT or LAER control technology to the emissions
unit. The reviewing authority shall also compare this presumption to any
additional BACT or LAER determinations of which it is aware, and shall
consider any information on achieved-in-practice pollution control
technologies provided during the public comment period, to determine
whether any presumptive determination that the control technology is
comparable to BACT is correct.
(ii) The substantially-as-effective test. The owner or operator may
demonstrate that the emissions unit's control technology is
substantially as effective as BACT. In addition, any other person may
present evidence related to whether the control technology is
substantially as effective as BACT during the public participation
process required under paragraph (u)(7) of this section. The reviewing
authority shall consider such evidence on a case-by-case basis and
determine whether the emissions unit's air pollution control technology
is substantially as effective as BACT.
(iii) Time of comparison--(a) Emissions units with control
technologies that are installed before the effective date of plan
requirements implementing this paragraph. The owner or operator of an
emissions unit whose control technology is installed before the
effective date of plan requirements implementing this paragraph (u) may,
at its option, either demonstrate that the emission limitation achieved
by the emissions unit's control technology is comparable to the BACT
requirements that applied at the time the control technology was
installed, or demonstrate that the emission limitation achieved by the
emissions unit's control technology is comparable to current-day BACT
requirements. The expiration date of the Clean Unit designation will
depend on which option the owner or operator uses, as specified in
paragraph (u)(6) of this section.
(b) Emissions units with control technologies that are installed
after the effective date of plan requirements implementing this
paragraph. The owner or operator must demonstrate that the emission
limitation achieved by the emissions unit's control technology is
comparable to current-day BACT requirements.
(5) Effective date of the Clean Unit designation. The effective date
of an emissions unit's Clean Unit designation (that is, the date on
which the owner or
[[Page 234]]
operator may begin to use the Clean Unit Test to determine whether a
project involving the emissions unit is a major modification) is the
date that the permit required by paragraph (u)(7) of this section is
issued or the date that the emissions unit's air pollution control
technology is placed into service, whichever is later.
(6) Clean Unit expiration. If the owner or operator demonstrates
that the emission limitation achieved by the emissions unit's control
technology is comparable to the BACT requirements that applied at the
time the control technology was installed, then the Clean Unit
designation expires 10 years from the date that the control technology
was installed. For all other emissions units, the Clean Unit designation
expires 10 years from the effective date of the Clean Unit designation,
as determined according to paragraph (u)(5) of this section. In
addition, for all emissions units, the Clean Unit designation expires
any time the owner or operator fails to comply with the provisions for
maintaining the Clean Unit designation in paragraph (u)(9) of this
section.
(7) Procedures for designating emissions units as Clean Units. The
reviewing authority shall designate an emissions unit a Clean Unit only
by issuing a permit through a permitting program that has been approved
by the Administrator and that conforms with the requirements of
Sec. Sec. 51.160 through 51.164 of this chapter, including requirements
for public notice of the proposed Clean Unit designation and opportunity
for public comment. Such permit must also meet the requirements in
paragraph (u)(8) of this section.
(8) Required permit content. The permit required by paragraph (u)(7)
of this section shall include the terms and conditions set forth in
paragraphs (u)(8)(i) through (vi). Such terms and conditions shall be
incorporated into the major stationary source's title V permit in
accordance with the provisions of the applicable title V permit program
under part 70 or part 71 of this chapter, but no later than when the
title V permit is renewed.
(i) A statement indicating that the emissions unit qualifies as a
Clean Unit and identifying the pollutant(s) for which the Clean Unit
designation applies.
(ii) The effective date of the Clean Unit designation. If this date
is not known when the reviewing authority issues the permit (e.g.,
because the air pollution control technology is not yet in service),
then the permit must describe the event that will determine the
effective date (e.g., the date the control technology is placed into
service). Once the effective date is known, then the owner or operator
must notify the reviewing authority of the exact date. This specific
effective date must be added to the source's title V permit at the first
opportunity, such as a modification, revision, reopening, or renewal of
the title V permit for any reason, whichever comes first, but in no case
later than the next renewal.
(iii) The expiration date of the Clean Unit designation. If this
date is not known when the reviewing authority issues the permit (e.g.,
because the air pollution control technology is not yet in service),
then the permit must describe the event that will determine the
expiration date (e.g., the date the control technology is placed into
service). Once the expiration date is known, then the owner or operator
must notify the reviewing authority of the exact date. The expiration
date must be added to the source's title V permit at the first
opportunity, such as a modification, revision, reopening, or renewal of
the title V permit for any reason, whichever comes first, but in no case
later than the next renewal.
(iv) All emission limitations and work practice requirements adopted
in conjunction with emission limitations necessary to assure that the
control technology continues to achieve an emission limitation
comparable to BACT, and any physical or operational characteristics that
formed the basis for determining that the emissions unit's control
technology achieves a level of emissions control comparable to BACT
(e.g., possibly the emissions unit's capacity or throughput).
(v) Monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements as
necessary to demonstrate that the emissions unit continues to meet the
criteria for
[[Page 235]]
maintaining its Clean Unit designation. (See paragraph (u)(9) of this
section.)
(vi) Terms reflecting the owner or operator's duties to maintain the
Clean Unit designation and the consequences of failing to do so, as
presented in paragraph (u)(9) of this section.
(9) Maintaining the Clean Unit designation. To maintain the Clean
Unit designation, the owner or operator must conform to all the
restrictions listed in paragraphs (u)(9)(i) through (v) of this section.
This paragraph (u)(9) applies independently to each pollutant for which
the reviewing authority has designated the emissions unit a Clean Unit.
That is, failing to conform to the restrictions for one pollutant
affects the Clean Unit designation only for that pollutant.
(i) The Clean Unit must comply with the emission limitation(s) and/
or work practice requirements adopted to ensure that the control
technology continues to achieve emission control comparable to BACT.
(ii) The owner or operator may not make a physical change in or
change in the method of operation of the Clean Unit that causes the
emissions unit to function in a manner that is inconsistent with the
physical or operational characteristics that formed the basis for the
determination that the control technology is achieving a level of
emission control that is comparable to BACT (e.g., possibly the
emissions unit's capacity or throughput).
(iii) [Reserved]
(iv) The Clean Unit must comply with any terms and conditions in the
title V permit related to the unit's Clean Unit designation.
(v) The Clean Unit must continue to control emissions using the
specific air pollution control technology that was the basis for its
Clean Unit designation. If the emissions unit or control technology is
replaced, then the Clean Unit designation ends.
(10) Netting at Clean Units. Emissions changes that occur at a Clean
Unit must not be included in calculating a significant net emissions
increase (that is, must not be used in a ``netting analysis'') unless
such use occurs before the effective date of plan requirements adopted
to implement this paragraph (u) or after the Clean Unit designation
expires; or, unless the emissions unit reduces emissions below the level
that qualified the unit as a Clean Unit. However, if the Clean Unit
reduces emissions below the level that qualified the unit as a Clean
Unit, then the owner or operator may generate a credit for the
difference between the level that qualified the unit as a Clean Unit and
the emissions unit's new emission limitation if such reductions are
surplus, quantifiable, and permanent. For purposes of generating
offsets, the reductions must also be federally enforceable. For purposes
of determining creditable net emissions increases and decreases, the
reductions must also be enforceable as a practical matter.
(11) Effect of redesignation on the Clean Unit designation. The
Clean Unit designation of an emissions unit is not affected by
redesignation of the attainment designation of the area in which it is
located. That is, if a Clean Unit is located in an attainment area and
the area is redesignated to nonattainment, its Clean Unit designation is
not affected. Similarly, redesignation from nonattainment to attainment
does not affect the Clean Unit designation. However, if a Clean Unit's
designation expires or is lost pursuant to paragraphs (t)(2)(iii) and
(u)(2)(iii) of this section, it must re-qualify under the requirements
that are currently applicable.
(v) PCP exclusion procedural requirements. Each plan shall include
provisions for PCPs equivalent to those contained in paragraphs (v)(1)
through (6) of this section.
(1) Before an owner or operator begins actual construction of a PCP,
the owner or operator must either submit a notice to the reviewing
authority if the project is listed in paragraphs (b)(31)(i) through (vi)
of this section, or if the project is not listed in paragraphs
(b)(31)(i) through (vi) of this section, then the owner or operator must
submit a permit application and obtain approval to use the PCP exclusion
from the reviewing authority consistent with the requirements in
paragraph (v)(5) of this section. Regardless of whether the owner or
operator submits a notice or a permit application, the project must meet
the requirements in paragraph (v)(2) of this section, and the
[[Page 236]]
notice or permit application must contain the information required in
paragraph (v)(3) of this section.
(2) Any project that relies on the PCP exclusion must meet the
requirements in paragraphs (v)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section.
(i) Environmentally beneficial analysis. The environmental benefit
from the emission reductions of pollutants regulated under the Act must
outweigh the environmental detriment of emissions increases in
pollutants regulated under the Act. A statement that a technology from
paragraphs (b)(31)(i) through (vi) of this section is being used shall
be presumed to satisfy this requirement.
(ii) Air quality analysis. The emissions increases from the project
will not cause or contribute to a violation of any national ambient air
quality standard or PSD increment, or adversely impact an air quality
related value (such as visibility) that has been identified for a
Federal Class I area by a Federal Land Manager and for which information
is available to the general public.
(3) Content of notice or permit application. In the notice or permit
application sent to the reviewing authority, the owner or operator must
include, at a minimum, the information listed in paragraphs (v)(3)(i)
through (v) of this section.
(i) A description of the project.
(ii) The potential emissions increases and decreases of any
pollutant regulated under the Act and the projected emissions increases
and decreases using the methodology in paragraph (a)(7)(vi) of this
section, that will result from the project, and a copy of the
environmentally beneficial analysis required by paragraph (v)(2)(i) of
this section.
(iii) A description of monitoring and recordkeeping, and all other
methods, to be used on an ongoing basis to demonstrate that the project
is environmentally beneficial. Methods should be sufficient to meet the
requirements in part 70 and part 71.
(iv) A certification that the project will be designed and operated
in a manner that is consistent with proper industry and engineering
practices, in a manner that is consistent with the environmentally
beneficial analysis and air quality analysis required by paragraphs
(v)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section, with information submitted in the
notice or permit application, and in such a way as to minimize, within
the physical configuration and operational standards usually associated
with the emissions control device or strategy, emissions of collateral
pollutants.
(v) Demonstration that the PCP will not have an adverse air quality
impact (e.g., modeling, screening level modeling results, or a statement
that the collateral emissions increase is included within the parameters
used in the most recent modeling exercise) as required by paragraph
(v)(2)(ii) of this section. An air quality impact analysis is not
required for any pollutant that will not experience a significant
emissions increase as a result of the project.
(4) Notice process for listed projects. For projects listed in
paragraphs (b)(31)(i) through (vi) of this section, the owner or
operator may begin actual construction of the project immediately after
notice is sent to the reviewing authority (unless otherwise prohibited
under requirements of the applicable plan). The owner or operator shall
respond to any requests by its reviewing authority for additional
information that the reviewing authority determines is necessary to
evaluate the suitability of the project for the PCP exclusion.
(5) Permit process for unlisted projects. Before an owner or
operator may begin actual construction of a PCP project that is not
listed in paragraphs (b)(31)(i) through (vi) of this section, the
project must be approved by the reviewing authority and recorded in a
plan-approved permit or title V permit using procedures that are
consistent with Sec. Sec. 51.160 and 51.161 of this chapter. This
includes the requirement that the reviewing authority provide the public
with notice of the proposed approval, with access to the environmentally
beneficial analysis and the air quality analysis, and provide at least a
30-day period for the public and the Administrator to submit comments.
The reviewing authority must address all material comments received by
the end of the comment period before taking final action on the permit.
[[Page 237]]
(6) Operational requirements. Upon installation of the PCP, the
owner or operator must comply with the requirements of paragraphs
(v)(6)(i) through (iv) of this section.
(i) General duty. The owner or operator must operate the PCP
consistent with proper industry and engineering practices, in a manner
that is consistent with the environmentally beneficial analysis and air
quality analysis required by paragraphs (v)(2)(i) and (ii) of this
section, with information submitted in the notice or permit application
required by paragraph (v)(3), and in such a way as to minimize, within
the physical configuration and operational standards usually associated
with the emissions control device or strategy, emissions of collateral
pollutants.
(ii) Recordkeeping. The owner or operator must maintain copies on
site of the environmentally beneficial analysis, the air quality impacts
analysis, and monitoring and other emission records to prove that the
PCP operated consistent with the general duty requirements in paragraph
(v)(6)(i) of this section.
(iii) Permit requirements. The owner or operator must comply with
any provisions in the plan-approved permit or title V permit related to
use and approval of the PCP exclusion.
(iv) Generation of Emission Reduction Credits. Emission reductions
created by a PCP shall not be included in calculating a significant net
emissions increase unless the emissions unit further reduces emissions
after qualifying for the PCP exclusion (e.g., taking an operational
restriction on the hours of operation.) The owner or operator may
generate a credit for the difference between the level of reduction
which was used to qualify for the PCP exclusion and the new emission
limitation if such reductions are surplus, quantifiable, and permanent.
For purposes of generating offsets, the reductions must also be
federally enforceable. For purposes of determining creditable net
emissions increases and decreases, the reductions must also be
enforceable as a practical matter.
(w) Actuals PALs. The plan shall provide for PALs according to the
provisions in paragraphs (w)(1) through (15) of this section.
(1) Applicability. (i) The reviewing authority may approve the use
of an actuals PAL for any existing major stationary source if the PAL
meets the requirements in paragraphs (w)(1) through (15) of this
section. The term ``PAL'' shall mean ``actuals PAL'' throughout
paragraph (w) of this section.
(ii) Any physical change in or change in the method of operation of
a major stationary source that maintains its total source-wide emissions
below the PAL level, meets the requirements in paragraphs (w)(1) through
(15) of this section, and complies with the PAL permit:
(a) Is not a major modification for the PAL pollutant;
(b) Does not have to be approved through the plan's major NSR
program; and
(c) Is not subject to the provisions in paragraph (r)(2) of this
section (restrictions on relaxing enforceable emission limitations that
the major stationary source used to avoid applicability of the major NSR
program).
(iii) Except as provided under paragraph (w)(1)(ii)(c) of this
section, a major stationary source shall continue to comply with all
applicable Federal or State requirements, emission limitations, and work
practice requirements that were established prior to the effective date
of the PAL.
(2) Definitions. The plan shall use the definitions in paragraphs
(w)(2)(i) through (xi) of this section for the purpose of developing and
implementing regulations that authorize the use of actuals PALs
consistent with paragraphs (w)(1) through (15) of this section. When a
term is not defined in these paragraphs, it shall have the meaning given
in paragraph (b) of this section or in the Act.
(i) Actuals PAL for a major stationary source means a PAL based on
the baseline actual emissions (as defined in paragraph (b)(47) of this
section) of all emissions units (as defined in paragraph (b)(7) of this
section) at the source, that emit or have the potential to emit the PAL
pollutant.
(ii) Allowable emissions means ``allowable emissions'' as defined in
paragraph
[[Page 238]]
(b)(16) of this section, except as this definition is modified according
to paragraphs (w)(2)(ii)(a) and (b) of this section.
(a) The allowable emissions for any emissions unit shall be
calculated considering any emission limitations that are enforceable as
a practical matter on the emissions unit's potential to emit.
(b) An emissions unit's potential to emit shall be determined using
the definition in paragraph (b)(4) of this section, except that the
words ``or enforceable as a practical matter'' should be added after
``federally enforceable.''
(iii) Small emissions unit means an emissions unit that emits or has
the potential to emit the PAL pollutant in an amount less than the
significant level for that PAL pollutant, as defined in paragraph
(b)(23) of this section or in the Act, whichever is lower.
(iv) Major emissions unit means:
(a) Any emissions unit that emits or has the potential to emit 100
tons per year or more of the PAL pollutant in an attainment area; or
(b) Any emissions unit that emits or has the potential to emit the
PAL pollutant in an amount that is equal to or greater than the major
source threshold for the PAL pollutant as defined by the Act for
nonattainment areas. For example, in accordance with the definition of
major stationary source in section 182(c) of the Act, an emissions unit
would be a major emissions unit for VOC if the emissions unit is located
in a serious ozone nonattainment area and it emits or has the potential
to emit 50 or more tons of VOC per year.
(v) Plantwide applicability limitation (PAL) means an emission
limitation expressed in tons per year, for a pollutant at a major
stationary source, that is enforceable as a practical matter and
established source-wide in accordance with paragraphs (w)(1) through
(15) of this section.
(vi) PAL effective date generally means the date of issuance of the
PAL permit. However, the PAL effective date for an increased PAL is the
date any emissions unit that is part of the PAL major modification
becomes operational and begins to emit the PAL pollutant.
(vii) PAL effective period means the period beginning with the PAL
effective date and ending 10 years later.
(viii) PAL major modification means, notwithstanding paragraphs
(b)(2) and (b)(3) of this section (the definitions for major
modification and net emissions increase), any physical change in or
change in the method of operation of the PAL source that causes it to
emit the PAL pollutant at a level equal to or greater than the PAL.
(ix) PAL permit means the major NSR permit, the minor NSR permit, or
the State operating permit under a program that is approved into the
plan, or the title V permit issued by the reviewing authority that
establishes a PAL for a major stationary source.
(x) PAL pollutant means the pollutant for which a PAL is established
at a major stationary source.
(xi) Significant emissions unit means an emissions unit that emits
or has the potential to emit a PAL pollutant in an amount that is equal
to or greater than the significant level (as defined in paragraph
(b)(23) of this section or in the Act, whichever is lower) for that PAL
pollutant, but less than the amount that would qualify the unit as a
major emissions unit as defined in paragraph (w)(2)(iv) of this section.
(3) Permit application requirements. As part of a permit application
requesting a PAL, the owner or operator of a major stationary source
shall submit the following information in paragraphs (w)(3)(i) through
(iii) of this section to the reviewing authority for approval.
(i) A list of all emissions units at the source designated as small,
significant or major based on their potential to emit. In addition, the
owner or operator of the source shall indicate which, if any, Federal or
State applicable requirements, emission limitations, or work practices
apply to each unit.
(ii) Calculations of the baseline actual emissions (with supporting
documentation). Baseline actual emissions are to include emissions
associated not only with operation of the unit, but also emissions
associated with startup, shutdown, and malfunction.
(iii) The calculation procedures that the major stationary source
owner or operator proposes to use to convert the
[[Page 239]]
monitoring system data to monthly emissions and annual emissions based
on a 12-month rolling total for each month as required by paragraph
(w)(13)(i) of this section.
(4) General requirements for establishing PALs. (i) The plan allows
the reviewing authority to establish a PAL at a major stationary source,
provided that at a minimum, the requirements in paragraphs (w)(4)(i)(a)
through (g) of this section are met.
(a) The PAL shall impose an annual emission limitation in tons per
year, that is enforceable as a practical matter, for the entire major
stationary source. For each month during the PAL effective period after
the first 12 months of establishing a PAL, the major stationary source
owner or operator shall show that the sum of the monthly emissions from
each emissions unit under the PAL for the previous 12 consecutive months
is less than the PAL (a 12-month average, rolled monthly). For each
month during the first 11 months from the PAL effective date, the major
stationary source owner or operator shall show that the sum of the
preceding monthly emissions from the PAL effective date for each
emissions unit under the PAL is less than the PAL.
(b) The PAL shall be established in a PAL permit that meets the
public participation requirements in paragraph (w)(5) of this section.
(c) The PAL permit shall contain all the requirements of paragraph
(w)(7) of this section.
(d) The PAL shall include fugitive emissions, to the extent
quantifiable, from all emissions units that emit or have the potential
to emit the PAL pollutant at the major stationary source.
(e) Each PAL shall regulate emissions of only one pollutant.
(f) Each PAL shall have a PAL effective period of 10 years.
(g) The owner or operator of the major stationary source with a PAL
shall comply with the monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements provided in paragraphs (w)(12) through (14) of this section
for each emissions unit under the PAL through the PAL effective period.
(ii) At no time (during or after the PAL effective period) are
emissions reductions of a PAL pollutant that occur during the PAL
effective period creditable as decreases for purposes of offsets under
Sec. 51.165(a)(3)(ii) of this chapter unless the level of the PAL is
reduced by the amount of such emissions reductions and such reductions
would be creditable in the absence of the PAL.
(5) Public participation requirements for PALs. PALs for existing
major stationary sources shall be established, renewed, or increased,
through a procedure that is consistent with Sec. Sec. 51.160 and 51.161
of this chapter. This includes the requirement that the reviewing
authority provide the public with notice of the proposed approval of a
PAL permit and at least a 30-day period for submittal of public comment.
The reviewing authority must address all material comments before taking
final action on the permit.
(6) Setting the 10-year actuals PAL level. (i) Except as provided in
paragraph (w)(6)(ii) of this section, the plan shall provide that the
actuals PAL level for a major stationary source shall be established as
the sum of the baseline actual emissions (as defined in paragraph
(b)(47) of this section) of the PAL pollutant for each emissions unit at
the source; plus an amount equal to the applicable significant level for
the PAL pollutant under paragraph (b)(23) of this section or under the
Act, whichever is lower. When establishing the actuals PAL level, for a
PAL pollutant, only one consecutive 24-month period must be used to
determine the baseline actual emissions for all existing emissions
units. However, a different consecutive 24-month period may be used for
each different PAL pollutant. Emissions associated with units that were
permanently shut down after this 24-month period must be subtracted from
the PAL level. The reviewing authority shall specify a reduced PAL
level(s) (in tons/yr) in the PAL permit to become effective on the
future compliance date(s) of any applicable Federal or State regulatory
requirement(s) that the reviewing authority is aware of prior to
issuance of the PAL permit.
[[Page 240]]
For instance, if the source owner or operator will be required to reduce
emissions from industrial boilers in half from baseline emissions of 60
ppm NOX to a new rule limit of 30 ppm, then the permit shall
contain a future effective PAL level that is equal to the current PAL
level reduced by half of the original baseline emissions of such
unit(s).
(ii) For newly constructed units (which do not include modifications
to existing units) on which actual construction began after the 24-month
period, in lieu of adding the baseline actual emissions as specified in
paragraph (w)(6)(i) of this section, the emissions must be added to the
PAL level in an amount equal to the potential to emit of the units.
(7) Contents of the PAL permit. The plan shall require that the PAL
permit contain, at a minimum, the information in paragraphs (w)(7)(i)
through (x) of this section.
(i) The PAL pollutant and the applicable source-wide emission
limitation in tons per year.
(ii) The PAL permit effective date and the expiration date of the
PAL (PAL effective period).
(iii) Specification in the PAL permit that if a major stationary
source owner or operator applies to renew a PAL in accordance with
paragraph (w)(10) of this section before the end of the PAL effective
period, then the PAL shall not expire at the end of the PAL effective
period. It shall remain in effect until a revised PAL permit is issued
by the reviewing authority.
(iv) A requirement that emission calculations for compliance
purposes include emissions from startups, shutdowns and malfunctions.
(v) A requirement that, once the PAL expires, the major stationary
source is subject to the requirements of paragraph (w)(9) of this
section.
(vi) The calculation procedures that the major stationary source
owner or operator shall use to convert the monitoring system data to
monthly emissions and annual emissions based on a 12-month rolling total
for each month as required by paragraph (w)(3)(i) of this section.
(vii) A requirement that the major stationary source owner or
operator monitor all emissions units in accordance with the provisions
under paragraph (w)(13) of this section.
(viii) A requirement to retain the records required under paragraph
(w)(13) of this section on site. Such records may be retained in an
electronic format.
(ix) A requirement to submit the reports required under paragraph
(w)(14) of this section by the required deadlines.
(x) Any other requirements that the reviewing authority deems
necessary to implement and enforce the PAL.
(8) PAL effective period and reopening of the PAL permit. The plan
shall require the information in paragraphs (w)(8)(i) and (ii) of this
section.
(i) PAL effective period. The reviewing authority shall specify a
PAL effective period of 10 years.
(ii) Reopening of the PAL permit.
(a) During the PAL effective period, the plan shall require the
reviewing authority to reopen the PAL permit to:
(1) Correct typographical/calculation errors made in setting the PAL
or reflect a more accurate determination of emissions used to establish
the PAL;
(2) Reduce the PAL if the owner or operator of the major stationary
source creates creditable emissions reductions for use as offsets under
Sec. 51.165(a)(3)(ii) of this chapter; and
(3) Revise the PAL to reflect an increase in the PAL as provided
under paragraph (w)(11) of this section.
(b) The plan shall provide the reviewing authority discretion to
reopen the PAL permit for the following:
(1) Reduce the PAL to reflect newly applicable Federal requirements
(for example, NSPS) with compliance dates after the PAL effective date;
(2) Reduce the PAL consistent with any other requirement, that is
enforceable as a practical matter, and that the State may impose on the
major stationary source under the plan; and
(3) Reduce the PAL if the reviewing authority determines that a
reduction is necessary to avoid causing or contributing to a NAAQS or
PSD increment violation, or to an adverse impact on an AQRV that has
been identified for a Federal Class I area by a Federal Land Manager and
for which information is available to the general public.
[[Page 241]]
(c) Except for the permit reopening in paragraph (w)(8)(ii)(a)(1) of
this section for the correction of typographical/calculation errors that
do not increase the PAL level, all reopenings shall be carried out in
accordance with the public participation requirements of paragraph
(w)(5) of this section.
(9) Expiration of a PAL. Any PAL that is not renewed in accordance
with the procedures in paragraph (w)(10) of this section shall expire at
the end of the PAL effective period, and the requirements in paragraphs
(w)(9)(i) through (v) of this section shall apply.
(i) Each emissions unit (or each group of emissions units) that
existed under the PAL shall comply with an allowable emission limitation
under a revised permit established according to the procedures in
paragraphs (w)(9)(i)(a) and (b) of this section.
(a) Within the time frame specified for PAL renewals in paragraph
(w)(10)(ii) of this section, the major stationary source shall submit a
proposed allowable emission limitation for each emissions unit (or each
group of emissions units, if such a distribution is more appropriate as
decided by the reviewing authority) by distributing the PAL allowable
emissions for the major stationary source among each of the emissions
units that existed under the PAL. If the PAL had not yet been adjusted
for an applicable requirement that became effective during the PAL
effective period, as required under paragraph (w)(10)(v) of this
section, such distribution shall be made as if the PAL had been
adjusted.
(b) The reviewing authority shall decide whether and how the PAL
allowable emissions will be distributed and issue a revised permit
incorporating allowable limits for each emissions unit, or each group of
emissions units, as the reviewing authority determines is appropriate.
(ii) Each emissions unit(s) shall comply with the allowable emission
limitation on a 12-month rolling basis. The reviewing authority may
approve the use of monitoring systems (source testing,emission factors,
etc.) other than CEMS, CERMS, PEMS or CPMS to demonstrate compliance
with the allowable emission limitation.
(iii) Until the reviewing authority issues the revised permit
incorporating allowable limits for each emissions unit, or each group of
emissions units, as required under paragraph (w)(9)(i)(b) of this
section, the source shall continue to comply with a source-wide, multi-
unit emissions cap equivalent to the level of the PAL emission
limitation.
(iv) Any physical change or change in the method of operation at the
major stationary source will be subject to major NSR requirements if
such change meets the definition of major modification in paragraph
(b)(2) of this section.
(v) The major stationary source owner or operator shall continue to
comply with any State or Federal applicable requirements (BACT, RACT,
NSPS, etc.) that may have applied either during the PAL effective period
or prior to the PAL effective period except for those emission
limitations that had been established pursuant to paragraph (r)(2) of
this section, but were eliminated by the PAL in accordance with the
provisions in paragraph (w)(1)(ii)(c) of this section.
(10) Renewal of a PAL. (i) The reviewing authority shall follow the
procedures specified in paragraph (w)(5) of this section in approving
any request to renew a PAL for a major stationary source, and shall
provide both the proposed PAL level and a written rationale for the
proposed PAL level to the public for review and comment. During such
public review, any person may propose a PAL level for the source for
consideration by the reviewing authority.
(ii) Application deadline. The plan shall require that a major
stationary source owner or operator shall submit a timely application to
the reviewing authority to request renewal of a PAL. A timely
application is one that is submitted at least 6 months prior to, but not
earlier than 18 months from, the date of permit expiration. This
deadline for application submittal is to ensure that the permit will not
expire before the permit is renewed. If the owner or operator of a major
stationary source submits a complete application to renew the PAL within
this time period, then the PAL shall continue to be
[[Page 242]]
effective until the revised permit with the renewed PAL is issued.
(iii) Application requirements. The application to renew a PAL
permit shall contain the information required in paragraphs (w)(10)(iii)
(a) through (d) of this section.
(a) The information required in paragraphs (w)(3)(i) through (iii)
of this section.
(b) A proposed PAL level.
(c) The sum of the potential to emit of all emissions units under
the PAL (with supporting documentation).
(d) Any other information the owner or operator wishes the reviewing
authority to consider in determining the appropriate level for renewing
the PAL.
(iv) PAL adjustment. In determining whether and how to adjust the
PAL, the reviewing authority shall consider the options outlined in
paragraphs (w)(10)(iv) (a) and (b) of this section. However, in no case
may any such adjustment fail to comply with paragraph (w)(10)(iv)(c) of
this section.
(a) If the emissions level calculated in accordance with paragraph
(w)(6) of this section is equal to or greater than 80 percent of the PAL
level, the reviewing authority may renew the PAL at the same level
without considering the factors set forth in paragraph (w)(10)(iv)(b) of
this section; or
(b) The reviewing authority may set the PAL at a level that it
determines to be more representative of the source's baseline actual
emissions, or that it determines to be appropriate considering air
quality needs, advances in control technology, anticipated economic
growth in the area, desire to reward or encourage the source's voluntary
emissions reductions, or other factors as specifically identified by the
reviewing authority in its written rationale.
(c) Notwithstanding paragraphs (w)(10)(iv) (a) and (b) of this
section:
(1) If the potential to emit of the major stationary source is less
than the PAL, the reviewing authority shall adjust the PAL to a level no
greater than the potential to emit of the source; and
(2) The reviewing authority shall not approve a renewed PAL level
higher than the current PAL, unless the major stationary source has
complied with the provisions of paragraph (w)(11) of this section
(increasing a PAL).
(v) If the compliance date for a State or Federal requirement that
applies to the PAL source occurs during the PAL effective period, and if
the reviewing authority has not already adjusted for such requirement,
the PAL shall be adjusted at the time of PAL permit renewal or title V
permit renewal, whichever occurs first.
(11) Increasing a PAL during the PAL effective period. (i) The plan
shall require that the reviewing authority may increase a PAL emission
limitation only if the major stationary source complies with the
provisions in paragraphs (w)(11)(i) (a) through (d) of this section.
(a) The owner or operator of the major stationary source shall
submit a complete application to request an increase in the PAL limit
for a PAL major modification. Such application shall identify the
emissions unit(s) contributing to the increase in emissions so as to
cause the major stationary source's emissions to equal or exceed its
PAL.
(b) As part of this application, the major stationary source owner
or operator shall demonstrate that the sum of the baseline actual
emissions of the small emissions units, plus the sum of the baseline
actual emissions of the significant and major emissions units assuming
application of BACT equivalent controls, plus the sum of the allowable
emissions of the new or modified emissions unit(s), exceeds the PAL. The
level of control that would result from BACT equivalent controls on each
significant or major emissions unit shall be determined by conducting a
new BACT analysis at the time the application is submitted, unless the
emissions unit is currently required to comply with a BACT or LAER
requirement that was established within the preceding 10 years. In such
a case, the assumed control level for that emissions unit shall be equal
to the level of BACT or LAER with which that emissions unit must
currently comply.
(c) The owner or operator obtains a major NSR permit for all
emissions unit(s) identified in paragraph (w)(11)(i)(a) of this section,
regardless
[[Page 243]]
of the magnitude of the emissions increase resulting from them (that is,
no significant levels apply). These emissions unit(s) shall comply with
any emissions requirements resulting from the major NSR process (for
example, BACT), even though they have also become subject to the PAL or
continue to be subject to the PAL.
(d) The PAL permit shall require that the increased PAL level shall
be effective on the day any emissions unit that is part of the PAL major
modification becomes operational and begins to emit the PAL pollutant.
(ii) The reviewing authority shall calculate the new PAL as the sum
of the allowable emissions for each modified or new emissions unit, plus
the sum of the baseline actual emissions of the significant and major
emissions units (assuming application of BACT equivalent controls as
determined in accordance with paragraph (w)(11)(i)(b) of this section),
plus the sum of the baseline actual emissions of the small emissions
units.
(iii) The PAL permit shall be revised to reflect the increased PAL
level pursuant to the public notice requirements of paragraph (w)(5) of
this section.
(12) Monitoring requirements for PALs--(i) General requirements. (a)
Each PAL permit must contain enforceable requirements for the monitoring
system that accurately determines plantwide emissions of the PAL
pollutant in terms of mass per unit of time. Any monitoring system
authorized for use in the PAL permit must be based on sound science and
meet generally acceptable scientific procedures for data quality and
manipulation. Additionally, the information generated by such system
must meet minimum legal requirements for admissibility in a judicial
proceeding to enforce the PAL permit.
(b) The PAL monitoring system must employ one or more of the four
general monitoring approaches meeting the minimum requirements set forth
in paragraphs (w)(12)(ii) (a) through (d) of this section and must be
approved by the reviewing authority.
(c) Notwithstanding paragraph (w)(12)(i)(b) of this section, you may
also employ an alternative monitoring approach that meets paragraph
(w)(12)(i)(a) of this section if approved by the reviewing authority.
(d) Failure to use a monitoring system that meets the requirements
of this section renders the PAL invalid.
(ii) Minimum performance requirements for approved monitoring
approaches. The following are acceptable general monitoring approaches
when conducted in accordance with the minimum requirements in paragraphs
(w)(12)(iii) through (ix) of this section:
(a) Mass balance calculations for activities using coatings or
solvents;
(b) CEMS;
(c) CPMS or PEMS; and
(d) Emission factors.
(iii) Mass balance calculations. An owner or operator using mass
balance calculations to monitor PAL pollutant emissions from activities
using coating or solvents shall meet the following requirements:
(a) Provide a demonstrated means of validating the published content
of the PAL pollutant that is contained in or created by all materials
used in or at the emissions unit;
(b) Assume that the emissions unit emits all of the PAL pollutant
that is contained in or created by any raw material or fuel used in or
at the emissions unit, if it cannot otherwise be accounted for in the
process; and
(c) Where the vendor of a material or fuel, which is used in or at
the emissions unit, publishes a range of pollutant content from such
material, the owner or operator must use the highest value of the range
to calculate the PAL pollutant emissions unless the reviewing authority
determines there is site-specific data or a site-specific monitoring
program to support another content within the range.
(iv) CEMS. An owner or operator using CEMS to monitor PAL pollutant
emissions shall meet the following requirements:
(a) CEMS must comply with applicable Performance Specifications
found in 40 CFR part 60, appendix B; and
(b) CEMS must sample, analyze, and record data at least every 15
minutes while the emissions unit is operating.
[[Page 244]]
(v) CPMS or PEMS. An owner or operator using CPMS or PEMS to monitor
PAL pollutant emissions shall meet the following requirements:
(a) The CPMS or the PEMS must be based on current site-specific data
demonstrating a correlation between the monitored parameter(s) and the
PAL pollutant emissions across the range of operation of the emissions
unit; and
(b) Each CPMS or PEMS must sample, analyze, and record data at least
every 15 minutes, or at another less frequent interval approved by the
reviewing authority, while the emissions unit is operating.
(vi) Emission factors. An owner or operator using emission factors
to monitor PAL pollutant emissions shall meet the following
requirements:
(a) All emission factors shall be adjusted, if appropriate, to
account for the degree of uncertainty or limitations in the factors'
development;
(b) The emissions unit shall operate within the designated range of
use for the emission factor, if applicable; and
(c) If technically practicable, the owner or operator of a
significant emissions unit that relies on an emission factor to
calculate PAL pollutant emissions shall conduct validation testing to
determine a site-specific emission factor within 6 months of PAL permit
issuance, unless the reviewing authority determines that testing is not
required.
(vii) A source owner or operator must record and report maximum
potential emissions without considering enforceable emission limitations
or operational restrictions for an emissions unit during any period of
time that there is no monitoring data, unless another method for
determining emissions during such periods is specified in the PAL
permit.
(viii) Notwithstanding the requirements in paragraphs (w)(12)(iii)
through (vii) of this section, where an owner or operator of an
emissions unit cannot demonstrate a correlation between the monitored
parameter(s) and the PAL pollutant emissions rate at all operating
points of the emissions unit, the reviewing authority shall, at the time
of permit issuance:
(a) Establish default value(s) for determining compliance with the
PAL based on the highest potential emissions reasonably estimated at
such operating point(s); or
(b) Determine that operation of the emissions unit during operating
conditions when there is no correlation between monitored parameter(s)
and the PAL pollutant emissions is a violation of the PAL.
(ix) Re-validation. All data used to establish the PAL pollutant
must be re-validated through performance testing or other scientifically
valid means approved by the reviewing authority. Such testing must occur
at least once every 5 years after issuance of the PAL.
(13) Recordkeeping requirements.
(i) The PAL permit shall require an owner or operator to retain a
copy of all records necessary to determine compliance with any
requirement of paragraph (w) of this section and of the PAL, including a
determination of each emissions unit's 12-month rolling total emissions,
for 5 years from the date of such record.
(ii) The PAL permit shall require an owner or operator to retain a
copy of the following records, for the duration of the PAL effective
period plus 5 years:
(a) A copy of the PAL permit application and any applications for
revisions to the PAL; and
(b) Each annual certification of compliance pursuant to title V and
the data relied on in certifying the compliance.
(14) Reporting and notification requirements. The owner or operator
shall submit semi-annual monitoring reports and prompt deviation reports
to the reviewing authority in accordance with the applicable title V
operating permit program. The reports shall meet the requirements in
paragraphs (w)(14)(i) through (iii) of this section.
(i) Semi-annual report. The semi-annual report shall be submitted to
the reviewing authority within 30 days of the end of each reporting
period. This report shall contain the information required in paragraphs
(w)(14)(i)(a) through (g) of this section.
(a) The identification of owner and operator and the permit number.
[[Page 245]]
(b) Total annual emissions (tons/year) based on a 12-month rolling
total for each month in the reporting period recorded pursuant to
paragraph (w)(13)(i) of this section.
(c) All data relied upon, including, but not limited to, any Quality
Assurance or Quality Control data, in calculating the monthly and annual
PAL pollutant emissions.
(d) A list of any emissions units modified or added to the major
stationary source during the preceding 6-month period.
(e) The number, duration, and cause of any deviations or monitoring
malfunctions (other than the time associated with zero and span
calibration checks), and any corrective action taken.
(f) A notification of a shutdown of any monitoring system, whether
the shutdown was permanent or temporary, the reason for the shutdown,
the anticipated date that the monitoring system will be fully
operational or replaced with another monitoring system, and whether the
emissions unit monitored by the monitoring system continued to operate,
and the calculation of the emissions of the pollutant or the number
determined by method included in the permit, as provided by paragraph
(w)(12)(vii) of this section.
(g) A signed statement by the responsible official (as defined by
the applicable title V operating permit program) certifying the truth,
accuracy, and completeness of the information provided in the report.
(ii) Deviation report. The major stationary source owner or operator
shall promptly submit reports of any deviations or exceedance of the PAL
requirements, including periods where no monitoring is available. A
report submitted pursuant to Sec. 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(B) of this chapter
shall satisfy this reporting requirement. The deviation reports shall be
submitted within the time limits prescribed by the applicable program
implementing Sec. 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(B) of this chapter. The reports shall
contain the following information:
(a) The identification of owner and operator and the permit number;
(b) The PAL requirement that experienced the deviation or that was
exceeded;
(c) Emissions resulting from the deviation or the exceedance; and
(d) A signed statement by the responsible official (as defined by
the applicable title V operating permit program) certifying the truth,
accuracy, and completeness of the information provided in the report.
(iii) Re-validation results. The owner or operator shall submit to
the reviewing authority the results of any re-validation test or method
within three months after completion of such test or method.
(15) Transition requirements. (i) No reviewing authority may issue a
PAL that does not comply with the requirements in paragraphs (w)(1)
through (15) of this section after the Administrator has approved
regulations incorporating these requirements into a plan.
(ii) The reviewing authority may supersede any PAL which was
established prior to the date of approval of the plan by the
Administrator with a PAL that complies with the requirements of
paragraphs (w)(1) through (15) of this section.
(x) If any provision of this section, or the application of such
provision to any person or circumstance, is held invalid, the remainder
of this section, or the application of such provision to persons or
circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid, shall not
be affected thereby.
(y) Equipment replacement provision. Without regard to other
considerations, routine maintenance, repair and replacement includes,
but is not limited to, the replacement of any component of a process
unit with an identical or functionally equivalent component(s), and
maintenance and repair activities that are part of the replacement
activity, provided that all of the requirements in paragraphs (y)(1)
through (3) of this section are met.
(1) Capital Cost threshold for Equipment Replacement. (i) For an
electric utility steam generating unit, as defined in Sec.
51.166(b)(30), the fixed capital cost of the replacement component(s)
plus the cost of any associated maintenance and repair activities that
are part of the replacement shall not exceed 20 percent
[[Page 246]]
of the replacement value of the process unit, at the time the equipment
is replaced. For a process unit that is not an electric utility steam
generating unit the fixed capital cost of the replacement component(s)
plus the cost of any associated maintenance and repair activities that
are part of the replacement shall not exceed 20 percent of the
replacement value of the process unit, at the time the equipment is
replaced.
(ii) In determining the replacement value of the process unit; and,
except as otherwise allowed under paragraph (y)(1)(iii) of this section,
the owner or operator shall determine the replacement value of the
process unit on an estimate of the fixed capital cost of constructing a
new process unit, or on the current appraised value of the process unit.
(iii) As an alternative to paragraph (y)(1)(ii) of this section for
determining the replacement value of a process unit, an owner or
operator may choose to use insurance value (where the insurance value
covers only complete replacement), investment value adjusted for
inflation, or another accounting procedure if such procedure is based on
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, provided that the owner or
operator sends a notice to the reviewing authority. The first time that
an owner or operator submits such a notice for a particular process
unit, the notice may be submitted at any time, but any subsequent notice
for that process unit may be submitted only at the beginning of the
process unit's fiscal year. Unless the owner or operator submits a
notice to the reviewing authority, then paragraph (y)(1)(ii) of this
section will be used to establish the replacement value of the process
unit. Once the owner or operator submits a notice to use an alternative
accounting procedure, the owner or operator must continue to use that
procedure for the entire fiscal year for that process unit. In
subsequent fiscal years, the owner or operator must continue to use this
selected procedure unless and until the owner or operator sends another
notice to the reviewing authority selecting another procedure consistent
with this paragraph or paragraph (y)(1)(ii) of this section at the
beginning of such fiscal year.
(2) Basic design parameters. The replacement does not change the
basic design parameter(s) of the process unit to which the activity
pertains.
(i) Except as provided in paragraph (y)(2)(iii) of this section, for
a process unit at a steam electric generating facility, the owner or
operator may select as its basic design parameters either maximum hourly
heat input and maximum hourly fuel consumption rate or maximum hourly
electric output rate and maximum steam flow rate. When establishing fuel
consumption specifications in terms of weight or volume, the minimum
fuel quality based on British Thermal Units content shall be used for
determining the basic design parameter(s) for a coal-fired electric
utility steam generating unit.
(ii) Except as provided in paragraph (y)(2)(iii) of this section,
the basic design parameter(s) for any process unit that is not at a
steam electric generating facility are maximum rate of fuel or heat
input, maximum rate of material input, or maximum rate of product
output. Combustion process units will typically use maximum rate of fuel
input. For sources having multiple end products and raw materials, the
owner or operator should consider the primary product or primary raw
material when selecting a basic design parameter.
(iii) If the owner or operator believes the basic design
parameter(s) in paragraphs (y)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section is not
appropriate for a specific industry or type of process unit, the owner
or operator may propose to the reviewing authority an alternative basic
design parameter(s) for the source's process unit(s). If the reviewing
authority approves of the use of an alternative basic design
parameter(s), the reviewing authority shall issue a permit that is
legally enforceable that records such basic design parameter(s) and
requires the owner or operator to comply with such parameter(s).
(iv) The owner or operator shall use credible information, such as
results of historic maximum capability tests, design information from
the manufacturer, or engineering calculations, in
[[Page 247]]
establishing the magnitude of the basic design parameter(s) specified in
paragraphs (y)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section.
(v) If design information is not available for a process unit, then
the owner or operator shall determine the process unit's basic design
parameter(s) using the maximum value achieved by the process unit in the
five-year period immediately preceding the planned activity.
(vi) Efficiency of a process unit is not a basic design parameter.
(3) The replacement activity shall not cause the process unit to
exceed any emission limitation, or operational limitation that has the
effect of constraining emissions, that applies to the process unit and
that is legally enforceable.
Note to paragraph (y): By a court order on December 24, 2003, this
paragraph (y) is stayed indefinitely. The stayed provisions will become
effective immediately if the court terminates the stay. At that time,
EPA will publish a document in the Federal Register advising the public
of the termination of the stay.
(Secs. 101(b)(1), 110, 160-169, 171-178, and 301(a), Clean Air Act, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 7401(b)(1), 7410, 7470-7479, 7501-7508, and 7601(a));
sec. 129(a), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977 (Pub. L. 95-95, 91 Stat.
685 (Aug. 7, 1977)))
[43 FR 26382, June 19, 1978]
Editorial Note: For Federal Register citations affecting Sec.
51.166, see the List of CFR Sections Affected, which appears in the
Finding Aids section of the printed volume and on GPO Access.
Subpart J_Ambient Air Quality Surveillance
Authority: Secs. 110, 301(a), 313, 319, Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C.
7410, 7601(a), 7613, 7619).
Sec. 51.190 Ambient air quality monitoring requirements.
The requirements for monitoring ambient air quality for purposes of
the plan are located in subpart C of part 58 of this chapter.
[44 FR 27569, May 10, 1979]
Subpart K_Source Survelliance
Source: 51 FR 40673, Nov. 7, 1986, unless otherwise noted.
Sec. 51.210 General.
Each plan must provide for monitoring the status of compliance with
any rules and regulations that set forth any portion of the control
strategy. Specifically, the plan must meet the requirements of this
subpart.
Sec. 51.211 Emission reports and recordkeeping.
The plan must provide for legally enforceable procedures for
requiring owners or operators of stationary sources to maintain records
of and periodically report to the State--
(a) Information on the nature and amount of emissions from the
stationary sources; and
(b) Other information as may be necessary to enable the State to
determine whether the sources are in compliance with applicable portions
of the control strategy.
Sec. 51.212 Testing, inspection, enforcement, and complaints.
The plan must provide for--
(a) Periodic testing and inspection of stationary sources; and
(b) Establishment of a system for detecting violations of any rules
and regulations through the enforcement of appropriate visible emission
limitations and for investigating complaints.
(c) Enforceable test methods for each emission limit specified in
the plan. For the purpose of submitting compliance certifications or
establishing whether or not a person has violated or is in violation of
any standard in this part, the plan must not preclude the use, including
the exclusive use, of any credible evidence or information, relevant to
whether a source would have been in compliance with applicable
requirements if the appropriate performance or compliance test or
procedure had been performed. As an enforceable method, States may use:
(1) Any of the appropriate methods in appendix M to this part,
Recommended Test Methods for State Implementation Plans; or
(2) An alternative method following review and approval of that
method by the Administrator; or
[[Page 248]]
(3) Any appropriate method in appendix A to 40 CFR part 60.
[51 FR 40673, Nov. 7, 1986, as amended at 55 FR 14249, Apr. 17, 1990; 62
FR 8328, Feb. 24, 1997]
Sec. 51.213 Transportation control measures.
(a) The plan must contain procedures for obtaining and maintaining
data on actual emissions reductions achieved as a result of implementing
transportation control measures.
(b) In the case of measures based on traffic flow changes or
reductions in vehicle use, the data must include observed changes in
vehicle miles traveled and average speeds.
(c) The data must be maintained in such a way as to facilitate
comparison of the planned and actual efficacy of the transportation
control measures.
[61 FR 30163, June 14, 1996]
Sec. 51.214 Continuous emission monitoring.
(a) The plan must contain legally enforceable procedures to--
(1) Require stationary sources subject to emission standards as part
of an applicable plan to install, calibrate, maintain, and operate
equipment for continuously monitoring and recording emissions; and
(2) Provide other information as specified in appendix P of this
part.
(b) The procedures must--
(1) Identify the types of sources, by source category and capacity,
that must install the equipment; and
(2) Identify for each source category the pollutants which must be
monitored.
(c) The procedures must, as a minimum, require the types of sources
set forth in appendix P of this part to meet the applicable requirements
set forth therein.
(d)(1) The procedures must contain provisions that require the owner
or operator of each source subject to continuous emission monitoring and
recording requirements to maintain a file of all pertinent information
for at least two years following the date of collection of that
information.
(2) The information must include emission measurements, continuous
monitoring system performance testing measurements, performance
evaluations, calibration checks, and adjustments and maintenance
performed on such monitoring systems and other reports and records
required by appendix P of this part.
(e) The procedures must require the source owner or operator to
submit information relating to emissions and operation of the emission
monitors to the State to the extent described in appendix P at least as
frequently as described therein.
(f)(1) The procedures must provide that sources subject to the
requirements of paragraph (c) of this section must have installed all
necessary equipment and shall have begun monitoring and recording within
18 months after either--
(i) The approval of a State plan requiring monitoring for that
source; or
(ii) Promulgation by the Agency of monitoring requirements for that
source.
(2) The State may grant reasonable extensions of this period to
sources that--
(i) Have made good faith efforts to purchases, install, and begin
the monitoring and recording of emission data; and
(ii) Have been unable to complete the installation within the
period.
Subpart L_Legal Authority
Source: 51 FR 40673, Nov. 7, 1986, unless otherwise noted.
Sec. 51.230 Requirements for all plans.
Each plan must show that the State has legal authority to carry out
the plan, including authority to:
(a) Adopt emission standards and limitations and any other measures
necessary for attainment and maintenance of national standards.
(b) Enforce applicable laws, regulations, and standards, and seek
injunctive relief.
(c) Abate pollutant emissions on an emergency basis to prevent
substantial endangerment to the health of persons, i.e., authority
comparable to that available to the Administrator under section 305 of
the Act.
[[Page 249]]
(d) Prevent construction, modification, or operation of a facility,
building, structure, or installation, or combination thereof, which
directly or indirectly results or may result in emissions of any air
pollutant at any location which will prevent the attainment or
maintenance of a national standard.
(e) Obtain information necessary to determine whether air pollution
sources are in compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and
standards, including authority to require recordkeeping and to make
inspections and conduct tests of air pollution sources.
(f) Require owners or operators of stationary sources to install,
maintain, and use emission monitoring devices and to make periodic
reports to the State on the nature and amounts of emissions from such
stationary sources; also authority for the State to make such data
available to the public as reported and as correlated with any
applicable emission standards or limitations.
Sec. 51.231 Identification of legal authority.
(a) The provisions of law or regulation which the State determines
provide the authorities required under this section must be specifically
identified, and copies of such laws or regulations be submitted with the
plan.
(b) The plan must show that the legal authorities specified in this
subpart are available to the State at the time of submission of the
plan.
(c) Legal authority adequate to fulfill the requirements of Sec.
51.230 (e) and (f) of this subpart may be delegated to the State under
section 114 of the Act.
Sec. 51.232 Assignment of legal authority to local agencies.
(a) A State government agency other than the State air pollution
control agency may be assigned responsibility for carrying out a portion
of a plan if the plan demonstrates to the Administrator's satisfaction
that the State governmental agency has the legal authority necessary to
carry out the portion of plan.
(b) The State may authorize a local agency to carry out a plan, or
portion thereof, within such local agency's jurisdiction if--
(1) The plan demonstrates to the Administrator's satisfaction that
the local agency has the legal authority necessary to implement the plan
or portion of it; and
(2) This authorization does not relieve the State of responsibility
under the Act for carrying out such plan, or portion thereof.
Subpart M_Intergovernmental Consultation
Authority: Secs. 110, 121, 174(a), 301(a), Clean Air Act, as amended
(42 U.S.C. 7410, 7421, 7504, and 7601(a)).
Source: 44 FR 35179, June 18, 1979, unless otherwise noted.
Agency Designation
Sec. 51.240 General plan requirements.
Each State implementation plan must identify organizations, by
official title, that will participate in developing, implementing, and
enforcing the plan and the responsibilities of such organizations. The
plan shall include any related agreements or memoranda of understanding
among the organizations.
Sec. 51.241 Nonattainment areas for carbon monoxide and ozone.
(a) For each AQCR or portion of an AQCR in which the national
primary standard for carbon monoxide or ozone will not be attained by
July 1, 1979, the Governor (or Governors for interstate areas) shall
certify, after consultation with local officials, the organization
responsible for developing the revised implementation plan or portions
thereof for such AQCR.
(b)-(f) [Reserved]
[44 FR 35179, June 18, 1979, as amended at 48 FR 29302, June 24, 1983;
60 FR 33922, June 29, 1995; 61 FR 16060, Apr. 11, 1996]
Sec. 51.242 [Reserved]
Subpart N_Compliance Schedules
Source: 51 FR 40673, Nov. 7, 1986, unless otherwise noted.
[[Page 250]]
Sec. 51.260 Legally enforceable compliance schedules.
(a) Each plan shall contain legally enforceable compliance schedules
setting forth the dates by which all stationary and mobile sources or
categories of such sources must be in compliance with any applicable
requirement of the plan.
(b) The compliance schedules must contain increments of progress
required by Sec. 51.262 of this subpart.
Sec. 51.261 Final compliance schedules.
(a) Unless EPA grants an extension under subpart R, compliance
schedules designed to provide for attainment of a primary standard
must--
(1) Provide for compliance with the applicable plan requirements as
soon as practicable; or
(2) Provide for compliance no later than the date specified for
attainment of the primary standard under;
(b) Unless EPA grants an extension under subpart R, compliance
schedules designed to provide for attainment of a secondary standard
must--
(1) Provide for compliance with the applicable plan requirements in
a reasonable time; or
(2) Provide for compliance no later than the date specified for the
attainment of the secondary standard under Sec. 51.110(c).
Sec. 51.262 Extension beyond one year.
(a) Any compliance schedule or revision of it extending over a
period of more than one year from the date of its adoption by the State
agency must provide for legally enforceable increments of progress
toward compliance by each affected source or category of sources. The
increments of progress must include--
(1) Each increment of progress specified in Sec. 51.100(q); and
(2) Additional increments of progress as may be necessary to permit
close and effective supervision of progress toward timely compliance.
(b) [Reserved]
Subpart O_Miscellaneous Plan Content Requirements
Authority: Secs. 110, 301(a), 313, 319, Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C.
7410, 7601(a), 7613, 7619).
Sec. 51.280 Resources.
Each plan must include a description of the resources available to
the State and local agencies at the date of submission of the plan and
of any additional resources needed to carry out the plan during the 5-
year period following its submission. The description must include
projections of the extent to which resources will be acquired at 1-, 3-,
and 5-year intervals.
[51 FR 40674, Nov. 7, 1986]
Sec. 51.281 Copies of rules and regulations.
Emission limitations and other measures necessary for attainment and
maintenance of any national standard, including any measures necessary
to implement the requirements of subpart L must be adopted as rules and
regulations enforceable by the State agency. Copies of all such rules
and regulations must be submitted with the plan. Submittal of a plan
setting forth proposed rules and regulations will not satisfy the
requirements of this section nor will it be considered a timely
submittal.
[51 FR 40674, Nov. 7, 1986]
Sec. 51.285 Public notification.
By March 1, 1980, the State shall submit a plan revision that
contains provisions for:
(a) Notifying the public on a regular basis of instances or areas in
which any primary standard was exceeded during any portion of the
preceeding calendar year,
(b) Advising the public of the health hazards associated with such
an exceedance of a primary standard, and
(c) Increasing public awareness of:
(1) Measures which can be taken to prevent a primary standard from
being exceeded, and
(2) Ways in which the public can participate in regulatory and other
efforts to improve air quality.
[44 FR 27569, May 10, 1979]
[[Page 251]]
Subpart P_Protection of Visibility
Authority: Secs. 110, 114, 121, 160-169, 169A, and 301 of the Clean
Air Act, (42 U.S.C. 7410, 7414, 7421, 7470-7479, and 7601).
Source: 45 FR 80089, Dec. 2, 1980, unless otherwise noted.
Sec. 51.300 Purpose and applicability.
(a) Purpose. The primary purposes of this subpart are to require
States to develop programs to assure reasonable progress toward meeting
the national goal of preventing any future, and remedying any existing,
impairment of visibility in mandatory Class I Federal areas which
impairment results from manmade air pollution; and to establish
necessary additional procedures for new source permit applicants, States
and Federal Land Managers to use in conducting the visibility impact
analysis required for new sources under Sec. 51.166. This subpart sets
forth requirements addressing visibility impairment in its two principal
forms: ``reasonably attributable'' impairment (i.e., impairment
attributable to a single source/small group of sources) and regional
haze (i.e., widespread haze from a multitude of sources which impairs
visibility in every direction over a large area).
(b) Applicability. (1) General Applicability. The provisions of this
subpart pertaining to implementation plan requirements for assuring
reasonable progress in preventing any future and remedying any existing
visibility impairment are applicable to:
(i) Each State which has a mandatory Class I Federal area identified
in part 81, subpart D, of this title, and (ii) each State in which there
is any source the emissions from which may reasonably be anticipated to
cause or contribute to any impairment of visibility in any such area.
(2) The provisions of this subpart pertaining to implementation
plans to address reasonably attributable visibility impairment are
applicable to the following States:
Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida,
Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan,
Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New
Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, South
Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia,
Virgin Islands, Washington, West Virginia, Wyoming.
(3) The provisions of this subpart pertaining to implementation
plans to address regional haze visibility impairment are applicable to
all States as defined in section 302(d) of the Clean Air Act (CAA)
except Guam, Puerto Rico, American Samoa, and the Northern Mariana
Islands.
[45 FR 80089, Dec. 2, 1980, as amended at 64 FR 35763, July 1, 1999]
Sec. 51.301 Definitions.
For purposes of this subpart:
Adverse impact on visibility means, for purposes of section 307,
visibility impairment which interferes with the management, protection,
preservation, or enjoyment of the visitor's visual experience of the
Federal Class I area. This determination must be made on a case-by-case
basis taking into account the geographic extent, intensity, duration,
frequency and time of visibility impairments, and how these factors
correlate with (1) times of visitor use of the Federal Class I area, and
(2) the frequency and timing of natural conditions that reduce
visibility. This term does not include effects on integral vistas.
Agency means the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
BART-eligible source means an existing stationary facility as
defined in this section.
Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) means an emission
limitation based on the degree of reduction achievable through the
application of the best system of continuous emission reduction for each
pollutant which is emitted by an existing stationary facility. The
emission limitation must be established, on a case-by-case basis, taking
into consideration the technology available, the costs of compliance,
the energy and nonair quality environmental impacts of compliance, any
pollution control equipment in use or in existence at the source, the
remaining useful life of the source, and
[[Page 252]]
the degree of improvement in visibility which may reasonably be
anticipated to result from the use of such technology.
Building, structure, or facility means all of the pollutant-emitting
activities which belong to the same industrial grouping, are located on
one or more contiguous or adjacent properties, and are under the control
of the same person (or persons under common control). Pollutant-emitting
activities must be considered as part of the same industrial grouping if
they belong to the same Major Group (i.e., which have the same two-digit
code) as described in the Standard Industrial Classification Manual,
1972 as amended by the 1977 Supplement (U.S. Government Printing Office
stock numbers 4101-0066 and 003-005-00176-0 respectively).
Deciview means a measurement of visibility impairment. A deciview is
a haze index derived from calculated light extinction, such that uniform
changes in haziness correspond to uniform incremental changes in
perception across the entire range of conditions, from pristine to
highly impaired. The deciview haze index is calculated based on the
following equation (for the purposes of calculating deciview, the
atmospheric light extinction coefficient must be calculated from aerosol
measurements):
Deciview haze index=10 lne (bext/10
Mm-1).
Where bext=the atmospheric light extinction coefficient,
expressed in inverse megameters (Mm-1).
Existing stationary facility means any of the following stationary
sources of air pollutants, including any reconstructed source, which was
not in operation prior to August 7, 1962, and was in existence on August
7, 1977, and has the potential to emit 250 tons per year or more of any
air pollutant. In determining potential to emit, fugitive emissions, to
the extent quantifiable, must be counted.
Fossil-fuel fired steam electric plants of more than 250 million
British thermal units per hour heat input,
Coal cleaning plants (thermal dryers),
Kraft pulp mills,
Portland cement plants,
Primary zinc smelters,
Iron and steel mill plants,
Primary aluminum ore reduction plants,
Primary copper smelters,
Municipal incinerators capable of charging more than 250 tons of
refuse per day,
Hydrofluoric, sulfuric, and nitric acid plants,
Petroleum refineries,
Lime plants,
Phosphate rock processing plants,
Coke oven batteries,
Sulfur recovery plants,
Carbon black plants (furnace process),
Primary lead smelters,
Fuel conversion plants,
Sintering plants,
Secondary metal production facilities,
Chemical process plants,
Fossil-fuel boilers of more than 250 million British thermal units
per hour heat input,
Petroleum storage and transfer facilities with a capacity exceeding
300,000 barrels,
Taconite ore processing facilities,
Glass fiber processing plants, and
Charcoal production facilities.
Federal Class I area means any Federal land that is classified or
reclassified Class I.
Federal Land Manager means the Secretary of the department with
authority over the Federal Class I area (or the Secretary's designee)
or, with respect to Roosevelt-Campobello International Park, the
Chairman of the Roosevelt-Campobello International Park Commission.
Federally enforceable means all limitations and conditions which are
enforceable by the Administrator under the Clean Air Act including those
requirements developed pursuant to parts 60 and 61 of this title,
requirements within any applicable State Implementation Plan, and any
permit requirements established pursuant to Sec. 52.21 of this chapter
or under regulations approved pursuant to part 51, 52, or 60 of this
title.
Fixed capital cost means the capital needed to provide all of the
depreciable components.
[[Page 253]]
Fugitive Emissions means those emissions which could not reasonably
pass through a stack, chimney, vent, or other functionally equivalent
opening.
Geographic enhancement for the purpose of Sec. 51.308 means a
method, procedure, or process to allow a broad regional strategy, such
as an emissions trading program designed to achieve greater reasonable
progress than BART for regional haze, to accommodate BART for reasonably
attributable impairment.
Implementation plan means, for the purposes of this part, any State
Implementation Plan, Federal Implementation Plan, or Tribal
Implementation Plan.
Indian tribe or tribe means any Indian tribe, band, nation, or other
organized group or community, including any Alaska Native village, which
is federally recognized as eligible for the special programs and
services provided by the United States to Indians because of their
status as Indians.
In existence means that the owner or operator has obtained all
necessary preconstruction approvals or permits required by Federal,
State, or local air pollution emissions and air quality laws or
regulations and either has (1) begun, or caused to begin, a continuous
program of physical on-site construction of the facility or (2) entered
into binding agreements or contractual obligations, which cannot be
cancelled or modified without substantial loss to the owner or operator,
to undertake a program of construction of the facility to be completed
in a reasonable time.
In operation means engaged in activity related to the primary design
function of the source.
Installation means an identifiable piece of process equipment.
Integral vista means a view perceived from within the mandatory
Class I Federal area of a specific landmark or panorama located outside
the boundary of the mandatory Class I Federal area.
Least impaired days means the average visibility impairment
(measured in deciviews) for the twenty percent of monitored days in a
calendar year with the lowest amount of visibility impairment.
Major stationary source and major modification mean major stationary
source and major modification, respectively, as defined in Sec. 51.166.
Mandatory Class I Federal Area means any area identified in part 81,
subpart D of this title.
Most impaired days means the average visibility impairment (measured
in deciviews) for the twenty percent of monitored days in a calendar
year with the highest amount of visibility impairment.
Natural conditions includes naturally occurring phenomena that
reduce visibility as measured in terms of light extinction, visual
range, contrast, or coloration.
Potential to emit means the maximum capacity of a stationary source
to emit a pollutant under its physical and operational design. Any
physical or operational limitation on the capacity of the source to emit
a pollutant including air pollution control equipment and restrictions
on hours of operation or on the type or amount of material combusted,
stored, or processed, shall be treated as part of its design if the
limitation or the effect it would have on emissions is federally
enforceable. Secondary emissions do not count in determining the
potential to emit of a stationary source.
Reasonably attributable means attributable by visual observation or
any other technique the State deems appropriate.
Reasonably attributable visibility impairment means visibility
impairment that is caused by the emission of air pollutants from one, or
a small number of sources.
Reconstruction will be presumed to have taken place where the fixed
capital cost of the new component exceeds 50 percent of the fixed
capital cost of a comparable entirely new source. Any final decision as
to whether reconstruction has occurred must be made in accordance with
the provisions of Sec. 60.15 (f) (1) through (3) of this title.
Regional haze means visibility impairment that is caused by the
emission of air pollutants from numerous sources located over a wide
geographic area. Such sources include, but are not limited to, major and
minor stationary sources, mobile sources, and area sources.
[[Page 254]]
Secondary emissions means emissions which occur as a result of the
construction or operation of an existing stationary facility but do not
come from the existing stationary facility. Secondary emissions may
include, but are not limited to, emissions from ships or trains coming
to or from the existing stationary facility.
Significant impairment means, for purposes of Sec. 51.303,
visibility impairment which, in the judgment of the Administrator,
interferes with the management, protection, preservation, or enjoyment
of the visitor's visual experience of the mandatory Class I Federal
area. This determination must be made on a case-by-case basis taking
into account the geographic extent, intensity, duration, frequency and
time of the visibility impairment, and how these factors correlate with
(1) times of visitor use of the mandatory Class I Federal area, and (2)
the frequency and timing of natural conditions that reduce visibility.
State means ``State'' as defined in section 302(d) of the CAA.
Stationary Source means any building, structure, facility, or
installation which emits or may emit any air pollutant.
Visibility impairment means any humanly perceptible change in
visibility (light extinction, visual range, contrast, coloration) from
that which would have existed under natural conditions.
Visibility in any mandatory Class I Federal area includes any
integral vista associated with that area.
[45 FR 80089, Dec. 2, 1980, as amended at 64 FR 35763, 35774, July 1,
1999]
Sec. 51.302 Implementation control strategies for reasonably
attributable visibility impairment.
(a) Plan Revision Procedures. (1) Each State identified in Sec.
51.300(b)(2) must have submitted, not later than September 2, 1981, an
implementation plan meeting the requirements of this subpart pertaining
to reasonably attributable visibility impairment.
(2)(i) The State, prior to adoption of any implementation plan to
address reasonably attributable visibility impairment required by this
subpart, must conduct one or more public hearings on such plan in
accordance with Sec. 51.102.
(ii) In addition to the requirements in Sec. 51.102, the State must
provide written notification of such hearings to each affected Federal
Land Manager, and other affected States, and must state where the public
can inspect a summary prepared by the Federal Land Managers of their
conclusions and recommendations, if any, on the proposed plan revision.
(3) Submission of plans as required by this subpart must be
conducted in accordance with the procedures in Sec. 51.103.
(b) State and Federal Land Manager Coordination. (1) The State must
identify to the Federal Land Managers, in writing and within 30 days of
the date of promulgation of these regulations, the title of the official
to which the Federal Land Manager of any mandatory Class I Federal area
can submit a recommendation on the implementation of this subpart
including, but not limited to:
(i) A list of integral vistas that are to be listed by the State for
the purpose of implementing section 304,
(ii) Identification of impairment of visibility in any mandatory
Class I Federal area(s), and
(iii) Identification of elements for inclusion in the visibility
monitoring strategy required by section 305.
(2) The State must provide opportunity for consultation, in person
and at least 60 days prior to holding any public hearing on the plan,
with the Federal Land Manager on the proposed SIP revision required by
this subpart. This consultation must include the opportunity for the
affected Federal Land Managers to discuss their:
(i) Assessment of impairment of visibility in any mandatory Class I
Federal area, and
(ii) Recommendations on the development of the long-term strategy.
(3) The plan must provide procedures for continuing consultation
between the State and Federal Land Manager on the implementation of the
visibility protection program required by this subpart.
(c) General plan requirements for reasonably attributable visibility
impairment. (1) The affected Federal Land Manager
[[Page 255]]
may certify to the State, at any time, that there exists reasonably
attributable impairment of visibility in any mandatory Class I Federal
area.
(2) The plan must contain the following to address reasonably
attributable impairment:
(i) A long-term (10-15 years) strategy, as specified in Sec. 51.305
and Sec. 51.306, including such emission limitations, schedules of
compliance, and such other measures including schedules for the
implementation of the elements of the long-term strategy as may be
necessary to make reasonable progress toward the national goal specified
in Sec. 51.300(a).
(ii) An assessment of visibility impairment and a discussion of how
each element of the plan relates to the preventing of future or
remedying of existing impairment of visibility in any mandatory Class I
Federal area within the State.
(iii) Emission limitations representing BART and schedules for
compliance with BART for each existing stationary facility identified
according to paragraph (c)(4) of this section.
(3) The plan must require each source to maintain control equipment
required by this subpart and establish procedures to ensure such control
equipment is properly operated and maintained.
(4) For any existing reasonably attributable visibility impairment
the Federal Land Manager certifies to the State under paragraph (c)(1)
of this section, at least 6 months prior to plan submission or revision:
(i) The State must identify and analyze for BART each existing
stationary facility which may reasonably be anticipated to cause or
contribute to impairment of visibility in any mandatory Class I Federal
area where the impairment in the mandatory Class I Federal area is
reasonably attributable to that existing stationary facility. The State
need not consider any integral vista the Federal Land Manager did not
identify pursuant to Sec. 51.304(b) at least 6 months before plan
submission.
(ii) If the State determines that technologicial or economic
limitations on the applicability of measurement methodology to a
particular existing stationary facility would make the imposition of an
emission standard infeasible it may instead prescribe a design,
equipment, work practice, or other operational standard, or combination
thereof, to require the application of BART. Such standard, to the
degree possible, is to set forth the emission reduction to be achieved
by implementation of such design, equipment, work practice or operation,
and must provide for compliance by means which achieve equivalent
results.
(iii) BART must be determined for fossil-fuel fired generating
plants having a total generating capacity in excess of 750 megawatts
pursuant to ``Guidelines for Determining Best Available Retrofit
Technology for Coal-fired Power Plants and Other Existing Stationary
Facilities'' (1980), which is incorporated by reference, exclusive of
appendix E, which was published in the Federal Register on February 6,
1980 (45 FR 8210). It is EPA publication No. 450/3-80-009b and is for
sale from the U.S. Department of Commerce, National Technical
Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
It is also available for inspection at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/
federal--register/code--of--federal--regulations/ibr--locations.html.
(iv) The plan must require that each existing stationary facility
required to install and operate BART do so as expeditiously as
practicable but in no case later than five years after plan approval.
(v) The plan must provide for a BART analysis of any existing
stationary facility that might cause or contribute to impairment of
visibility in any mandatory Class I Federal area identified under this
paragraph (c)(4) at such times, as determined by the Administrator, as
new technology for control of the pollutant becomes reasonably available
if:
(A) The pollutant is emitted by that existing stationary facility,
(B) Controls representing BART for the pollutant have not previously
been required under this subpart, and
[[Page 256]]
(C) The impairment of visibility in any mandatory Class I Federal
area is reasonably attributable to the emissions of that pollutant.
[45 FR 80089, Dec. 2, 1980, as amended at 57 FR 40042, Sept. 1, 1992; 64
FR 35764, 35774, July 1, 1999; 69 FR 18803, Apr. 9, 2004]
Sec. 51.303 Exemptions from control.
(a)(1) Any existing stationary facility subject to the requirement
under Sec. 51.302 to install, operate, and maintain BART may apply to
the Administrator for an exemption from that requirement.
(2) An application under this section must include all available
documentation relevant to the impact of the source's emissions on
visibility in any mandatory Class I Federal area and a demonstration by
the existing stationary facility that it does not or will not, by itself
or in combination with other sources, emit any air pollutant which may
be reasonably anticipated to cause or contribute to a significant
impairment of visibility in any mandatory Class I Federal area.
(b) Any fossil-fuel fired power plant with a total generating
capacity of 750 megawatts or more may receive an exemption from BART
only if the owner or operator of such power plant demonstrates to the
satisfaction of the Administrator that such power plant is located at
such a distance from all mandatory Class I Federal areas that such power
plant does not or will not, by itself or in combination with other
sources, emit any air pollutant which may reasonably be anticipated to
cause or contribute to significant impairment of visibility in any such
mandatory Class I Federal area.
(c) Application under this Sec. 51.303 must be accompanied by a
written concurrence from the State with regulatory authority over the
source.
(d) The existing stationary facility must give prior written notice
to all affected Federal Land Managers of any application for exemption
under this Sec. 51.303.
(e) The Federal Land Manager may provide an initial recommendation
or comment on the disposition of such application. Such recommendation,
where provided, must be part of the exemption application. This
recommendation is not to be construed as the concurrence required under
paragraph (h) of this section.
(f) The Administrator, within 90 days of receipt of an application
for exemption from control, will provide notice of receipt of an
exemption application and notice of opportunity for public hearing on
the application.
(g) After notice and opportunity for public hearing, the
Administrator may grant or deny the exemption. For purposes of judicial
review, final EPA action on an application for an exemption under this
Sec. 51.303 will not occur until EPA approves or disapproves the State
Implementation Plan revision.
(h) An exemption granted by the Administrator under this Sec.
51.303 will be effective only upon concurrence by all affected Federal
Land Managers with the Administrator's determination.
[45 FR 80089, Dec. 2, 1980, as amended by 64 FR 35774, July 1, 1999]
Sec. 51.304 Identification of integral vistas.
(a) On or before December 31, 1985 the Federal Land Manager may
identify any integral vista. The integral vista must be identified
according to criteria the Federal Land Manager develops. These criteria
must include, but are not limited to, whether the integral vista is
important to the visitor's visual experience of the mandatory Class I
Federal area. Adoption of criteria must be preceded by reasonable notice
and opportunity for public comment on the proposed criteria.
(b) The Federal Land Manager must notify the State of any integral
vistas identified under paragraph (a) of this section, and the reasons
therefor.
(c) The State must list in its implementation plan any integral
vista the Federal Land Manager identifies at least six months prior to
plan submission, and must list in its implementation plan at its
earliest opportunity, and in no case later than at the time of the
periodic review of the SIP required by Sec. 51.306(c), any integral
vista the Federal Land Manager identifies after that time.
(d) The State need not in its implementation plan list any integral
vista the indentification of which was not made in accordance with the
criteria in
[[Page 257]]
paragraph (a) of this section. In making this finding, the State must
carefully consider the expertise of the Federal Land Manager in making
the judgments called for by the criteria for identification. Where the
State and the Federal Land Manager disagree on the identification of any
integral vista, the State must give the Federal Land Manager an
opportunity to consult with the Governor of the State.
[45 FR 80089, Dec. 2, 1980, as amended by 64 FR 35774, July 1, 1999]
Sec. 51.305 Monitoring for reasonably attributable visibility
impairment.
(a) For the purposes of addressing reasonably attributable
visibility impairment, each State containing a mandatory Class I Federal
area must include in the plan a strategy for evaluating reasonably
attributable visibility impairment in any mandatory Class I Federal area
by visual observation or other appropriate monitoring techniques. Such
strategy must take into account current and anticipated visibility
monitoring research, the availability of appropriate monitoring
techniques, and such guidance as is provided by the Agency.
(b) The plan must provide for the consideration of available
visibility data and must provide a mechanism for its use in decisions
required by this subpart.
[45 FR 80089, Dec. 2, 1980, as amended at 64 FR 35764, July 1, 1999]
Sec. 51.306 Long-term strategy requirements for reasonably
attributable visibility impairment.
(a)(1) For the purposes of addressing reasonably attributable
visibility impairment, each plan must include a long-term (10-15 years)
strategy for making reasonable progress toward the national goal
specified in Sec. 51.300(a). This strategy must cover any existing
impairment the Federal Land Manager certifies to the State at least 6
months prior to plan submission, and any integral vista of which the
Federal Land Manager notifies the State at least 6 months prior to plan
submission.
(2) A long-term strategy must be developed for each mandatory Class
I Federal area located within the State and each mandatory Class I
Federal area located outside the State which may be affected by sources
within the State. This does not preclude the development of a single
comprehensive plan for all such areas.
(3) The plan must set forth with reasonable specificity why the
long-term strategy is adequate for making reasonable progress toward the
national visibility goal, including remedying existing and preventing
future impairment.
(b) The State must coordinate its long-term strategy for an area
with existing plans and goals, including those provided by the affected
Federal Land Managers, that may affect impairment of visibility in any
mandatory Class I Federal area.
(c) The plan must provide for periodic review and revision, as
appropriate, of the long-term strategy for addressing reasonably
attributable visibility impairment. The plan must provide for such
periodic review and revision not less frequently than every 3 years
until the date of submission of the State's first plan addressing
regional haze visibility impairment in accordance with Sec. 51.308(b)
and (c). On or before this date, the State must revise its plan to
provide for review and revision of a coordinated long-term strategy for
addressing reasonably attributable and regional haze visibility
impairment, and the State must submit the first such coordinated long-
term strategy. Future coordinated long-term strategies must be submitted
consistent with the schedule for periodic progress reports set forth in
Sec. 51.308(g). Until the State revises its plan to meet this
requirement, the State must continue to comply with existing
requirements for plan review and revision, and with all emission
management requirements in the plan to address reasonably attributable
impairment. This requirement does not affect any preexisting deadlines
for State submittal of a long-term strategy review (or element thereof)
between August 30, 1999, and the date required for submission of the
State's first regional haze plan. In addition, the plan must provide for
review of the long-term strategy as it applies to reasonably
attributable impairment, and revision as appropriate, within 3 years
[[Page 258]]
of State receipt of any certification of reasonably attributable
impairment from a Federal Land Manager. The review process must include
consultation with the appropriate Federal Land Managers, and the State
must provide a report to the public and the Administrator on progress
toward the national goal. This report must include an assessment of:
(1) The progress achieved in remedying existing impairment of
visibility in any mandatory Class I Federal area;
(2) The ability of the long-term strategy to prevent future
impairment of visibility in any mandatory Class I Federal area;
(3) Any change in visibility since the last such report, or, in the
case of the first report, since plan approval;
(4) Additional measures, including the need for SIP revisions, that
may be necessary to assure reasonable progress toward the national
visibility goal;
(5) The progress achieved in implementing BART and meeting other
schedules set forth in the long-term strategy;
(6) The impact of any exemption granted under Sec. 51.303;
(7) The need for BART to remedy existing visibility impairment of
any integral vista listed in the plan since the last such report, or, in
the case of the first report, since plan approval.
(d) The long-term strategy must provide for review of the impacts
from any new major stationary source or major modifications on
visibility in any mandatory Class I Federal area. This review of major
stationary sources or major modifications must be in accordance with
Sec. 51.307, Sec. 51.166, Sec. 51.160, and any other binding guidance
provided by the Agency insofar as these provisions pertain to protection
of visibility in any mandatory Class I Federal areas.
(e) The State must consider, at a minimum, the following factors
during the development of its long-term strategy:
(1) Emission reductions due to ongoing air pollution control
programs,
(2) Additional emission limitations and schedules for compliance,
(3) Measures to mitigate the impacts of construction activities,
(4) Source retirement and replacement schedules,
(5) Smoke management techniques for agricultural and forestry
management purposes including such plans as currently exist within the
State for these purposes, and
(6) Enforceability of emission limitations and control measures.
(f) The plan must discuss the reasons why the above and other
reasonable measures considered in the development of the long-term
strategy were or were not adopted as part of the long-term strategy.
(g) The State, in developing the long-term strategy, must take into
account the effect of new sources, and the costs of compliance, the time
necessary for compliance, the energy and nonair quality environmental
impacts of compliance, and the remaining useful life of any affected
existing source and equipment therein.
[45 FR 80089, Dec. 2, 1980, as amended at 64 FR 35764, 35774, July 1,
1999]
Sec. 51.307 New source review.
(a) For purposes of new source review of any new major stationary
source or major modification that would be constructed in an area that
is designated attainment or unclassified under section 107(d)(1)(D) or
(E) of the CAA, the State plan must, in any review under Sec. 51.166
with respect to visibility protection and analyses, provide for:
(1) Written notification of all affected Federal Land Managers of
any proposed new major stationary source or major modification that may
affect visibility in any Federal Class I area. Such notification must be
made in writing and include a copy of all information relevant to the
permit application within 30 days of receipt of and at least 60 days
prior to public hearing by the State on the application for permit to
construct. Such notification must include an analysis of the anticipated
impacts on visibility in any Federal Class I area,
(2) Where the State requires or receives advance notification (e.g.
early consultation with the source prior to submission of the
application or notification of intent to monitor under Sec. 51.166) of
a permit application of a source that may affect visibility the
[[Page 259]]
State must notify all affected Federal Land Managers within 30 days of
such advance notification, and
(3) Consideration of any analysis performed by the Federal Land
Manager, provided within 30 days of the notification and analysis
required by paragraph (a)(1) of this section, that such proposed new
major stationary source or major modification may have an adverse impact
on visibility in any Federal Class I area. Where the State finds that
such an analysis does not demonstrate to the satisfaction of the State
that an adverse impact will result in the Federal Class I area, the
State must, in the notice of public hearing, either explain its decision
or give notice as to where the explanation can be obtained.
(b) The plan shall also provide for the review of any new major
stationary source or major modification:
(1) That may have an impact on any integral vista of a mandatory
Class I Federal area, if it is identified in accordance with Sec.
51.304 by the Federal Land Manager at least 12 months before submission
of a complete permit application, except where the Federal Land Manager
has provided notice and opportunity for public comment on the integral
vista in which case the review must include impacts on any integral
vista identified at least 6 months prior to submission of a complete
permit application, unless the State determines under Sec. 51.304(d)
that the identification was not in accordance with the identification
criteria, or
(2) That proposes to locate in an area classified as nonattainment
under section 107(d)(1)(A), (B), or (C) of the Clean Air Act that may
have an impact on visibility in any mandatory Class I Federal area.
(c) Review of any major stationary source or major modification
under paragraph (b) of this section, shall be conducted in accordance
with paragraph (a) of this section, and Sec. 51.166(o), (p)(1) through
(2), and (q). In conducting such reviews the State must ensure that the
source's emissions will be consistent with making reasonable progress
toward the national visibility goal referred to in Sec. 51.300(a). The
State may take into account the costs of compliance, the time necessary
for compliance, the energy and nonair quality environmental impacts of
compliance, and the useful life of the source.
(d) The State may require monitoring of visibility in any Federal
Class I area near the proposed new stationary source or major
modification for such purposes and by such means as the State deems
necessary and appropriate.
[45 FR 80089, Dec. 2, 1980, as amended at 64 FR 35765, 35774, July 1,
1999]
Sec. 51.308 Regional haze program requirements.
(a) What is the purpose of this section? This section establishes
requirements for implementation plans, plan revisions, and periodic
progress reviews to address regional haze.
(b) When are the first implementation plans due under the regional
haze program? Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section and
Sec. 51.309(c), each State identified in Sec. 51.300(b)(3) must submit
an implementation plan for regional haze meeting the requirements of
paragraphs (d) and (e) of this section by the following dates:
(1) For any area designated as attainment or unclassifiable for the
national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for fine particulate
matter (PM2.5), the State must submit a regional haze
implementation plan to EPA within 12 months after the date of
designation.
(2) For any area designated as nonattainment for the
PM2.5 NAAQS, the State must submit a regional haze
implementation plan to EPA at the same time that the State's plan for
implementation of the PM2.5 NAAQS must be submitted under
section 172 of the CAA, that is, within 3 years after the area is
designated as nonattainment, but not later than December 31, 2008.
(c) Options for regional planning. If at the time the SIP for
regional haze would otherwise be due, a State is working with other
States to develop a coordinated approach to regional haze by
participating in a regional planning process, the State may choose to
defer addressing the core requirements for regional haze in paragraph
(d) of this section and the requirements for BART in paragraph (e) of
this section. If a
[[Page 260]]
State opts to do this, it must meet the following requirements:
(1) The State must submit an implementation plan by the earliest
date by which an implementation plan would be due for any area of the
State under paragraph (b) of this section. This implementation plan must
contain the following:
(i) A demonstration of ongoing participation in a regional planning
process to address regional haze, and an agreement by the State to
continue participating with one or more other States in such a process
for the development of this and future implementation plan revisions;
(ii) A showing, based on available inventory, monitoring, or
modeling information, that emissions from within the State contribute to
visibility impairment in a mandatory Class I Federal Area outside the
State, or that emissions from another State contribute to visibility
impairment in any mandatory Class I Federal area within the State.
(iii) A description of the regional planning process, including a
list of the States which have agreed to work together to address
regional haze in a region (i.e., the regional planning group), the
goals, objectives, management, and decisionmaking structure of the
regional planning group, deadlines for completing significant technical
analyses and developing emission management strategies, and a schedule
for State review and adoption of regulations implementing the
recommendations of the regional group;
(iv) A commitment by the State to submit an implementation plan
revision addressing the requirements in paragraphs (d) and (e) of this
section by the date specified in paragraph (c)(2) of this section. In
addition, the State must commit to develop its plan revision in
coordination with the other States participating in the regional
planning process, and to fully address the recommendations of the
regional planning group.
(v) A list of all BART-eligible sources within the State.
(2) The State must submit an implementation plan revision addressing
the requirements in paragraphs (d) and (e) of this section by the latest
date an area within the planning region would be required to submit an
implementation plan under paragraph (b) of this section, but in any
event, no later than December 31, 2008.
(d) What are the core requirements for the implementation plan for
regional haze? The State must address regional haze in each mandatory
Class I Federal area located within the State and in each mandatory
Class I Federal area located outside the State which may be affected by
emissions from within the State. To meet the core requirements for
regional haze for these areas, the State must submit an implementation
plan containing the following plan elements and supporting documentation
for all required analyses:
(1) Reasonable progress goals. For each mandatory Class I Federal
area located within the State, the State must establish goals (expressed
in deciviews) that provide for reasonable progress towards achieving
natural visibility conditions. The reasonable progress goals must
provide for an improvement in visibility for the most impaired days over
the period of the implementation plan and ensure no degradation in
visibility for the least impaired days over the same period.
(i) In establishing a reasonable progress goal for any mandatory
Class I Federal area within the State, the State must:
(A) Consider the costs of compliance, the time necessary for
compliance, the energy and non-air quality environmental impacts of
compliance, and the remaining useful life of any potentially affected
sources, and include a demonstration showing how these factors were
taken into consideration in selecting the goal.
(B) Analyze and determine the rate of progress needed to attain
natural visibility conditions by the year 2064. To calculate this rate
of progress, the State must compare baseline visibility conditions to
natural visibility conditions in the mandatory Federal Class I area and
determine the uniform rate of visibility improvement (measured in
deciviews) that would need to be maintained during each implementation
period in order to attain natural visibility conditions by 2064. In
establishing the reasonable progress goal,
[[Page 261]]
the State must consider the uniform rate of improvement in visibility
and the emission reduction measures needed to achieve it for the period
covered by the implementation plan.
(ii) For the period of the implementation plan, if the State
establishes a reasonable progress goal that provides for a slower rate
of improvement in visibility than the rate that would be needed to
attain natural conditions by 2064, the State must demonstrate, based on
the factors in paragraph (d)(1)(i)(A) of this section, that the rate of
progress for the implementation plan to attain natural conditions by
2064 is not reasonable; and that the progress goal adopted by the State
is reasonable. The State must provide to the public for review as part
of its implementation plan an assessment of the number of years it would
take to attain natural conditions if visibility improvement continues at
the rate of progress selected by the State as reasonable.
(iii) In determining whether the State's goal for visibility
improvement provides for reasonable progress towards natural visibility
conditions, the Administrator will evaluate the demonstrations developed
by the State pursuant to paragraphs (d)(1)(i) and (d)(1)(ii) of this
section.
(iv) In developing each reasonable progress goal, the State must
consult with those States which may reasonably be anticipated to cause
or contribute to visibility impairment in the mandatory Class I Federal
area. In any situation in which the State cannot agree with another such
State or group of States that a goal provides for reasonable progress,
the State must describe in its submittal the actions taken to resolve
the disagreement. In reviewing the State's implementation plan
submittal, the Administrator will take this information into account in
determining whether the State's goal for visibility improvement provides
for reasonable progress towards natural visibility conditions.
(v) The reasonable progress goals established by the State are not
directly enforceable but will be considered by the Administrator in
evaluating the adequacy of the measures in the implementation plan to
achieve the progress goal adopted by the State.
(vi) The State may not adopt a reasonable progress goal that
represents less visibility improvement than is expected to result from
implementation of other requirements of the CAA during the applicable
planning period.
(2) Calculations of baseline and natural visibility conditions. For
each mandatory Class I Federal area located within the State, the State
must determine the following visibility conditions (expressed in
deciviews):
(i) Baseline visibility conditions for the most impaired and least
impaired days. The period for establishing baseline visibility
conditions is 2000 to 2004. Baseline visibility conditions must be
calculated, using available monitoring data, by establishing the average
degree of visibility impairment for the most and least impaired days for
each calendar year from 2000 to 2004. The baseline visibility conditions
are the average of these annual values. For mandatory Class I Federal
areas without onsite monitoring data for 2000-2004, the State must
establish baseline values using the most representative available
monitoring data for 2000-2004, in consultation with the Administrator or
his or her designee;
(ii) For an implementation plan that is submitted by 2003, the
period for establishing baseline visibility conditions for the period of
the first long-term strategy is the most recent 5-year period for which
visibility monitoring data are available for the mandatory Class I
Federal areas addressed by the plan. For mandatory Class I Federal areas
without onsite monitoring data, the State must establish baseline values
using the most representative available monitoring data, in consultation
with the Administrator or his or her designee;
(iii) Natural visibility conditions for the most impaired and least
impaired days. Natural visibility conditions must be calculated by
estimating the degree of visibility impairment existing under natural
conditions for the most impaired and least impaired days, based on
available monitoring information and appropriate data analysis
techniques; and
[[Page 262]]
(iv)(A) For the first implementation plan addressing the
requirements of paragraphs (d) and (e) of this section, the number of
deciviews by which baseline conditions exceed natural visibility
conditions for the most impaired and least impaired days; or
(B) For all future implementation plan revisions, the number of
deciviews by which current conditions, as calculated under paragraph
(f)(1) of this section, exceed natural visibility conditions for the
most impaired and least impaired days.
(3) Long-term strategy for regional haze. Each State listed in Sec.
51.300(b)(3) must submit a long-term strategy that addresses regional
haze visibility impairment for each mandatory Class I Federal area
within the State and for each mandatory Class I Federal area located
outside the State which may be affected by emissions from the State. The
long-term strategy must include enforceable emissions limitations,
compliance schedules, and other measures as necessary to achieve the
reasonable progress goals established by States having mandatory Class I
Federal areas. In establishing its long-term strategy for regional haze,
the State must meet the following requirements:
(i) Where the State has emissions that are reasonably anticipated to
contribute to visibility impairment in any mandatory Class I Federal
area located in another State or States, the State must consult with the
other State(s) in order to develop coordinated emission management
strategies. The State must consult with any other State having emissions
that are reasonably anticipated to contribute to visibility impairment
in any mandatory Class I Federal area within the State.
(ii) Where other States cause or contribute to impairment in a
mandatory Class I Federal area, the State must demonstrate that it has
included in its implementation plan all measures necessary to obtain its
share of the emission reductions needed to meet the progress goal for
the area. If the State has participated in a regional planning process,
the State must ensure it has included all measures needed to achieve its
apportionment of emission reduction obligations agreed upon through that
process.
(iii) The State must document the technical basis, including
modeling, monitoring and emissions information, on which the State is
relying to determine its apportionment of emission reduction obligations
necessary for achieving reasonable progress in each mandatory Class I
Federal area it affects. The State may meet this requirement by relying
on technical analyses developed by the regional planning organization
and approved by all State participants. The State must identify the
baseline emissions inventory on which its strategies are based. The
baseline emissions inventory year is presumed to be the most recent year
of the consolidate periodic emissions inventory.
(iv) The State must identify all anthropogenic sources of visibility
impairment considered by the State in developing its long-term strategy.
The State should consider major and minor stationary sources, mobile
sources, and area sources.
(v) The State must consider, at a minimum, the following factors in
developing its long-term strategy:
(A) Emission reductions due to ongoing air pollution control
programs, including measures to address reasonably attributable
visibility impairment;
(B) Measures to mitigate the impacts of construction activities;
(C) Emissions limitations and schedules for compliance to achieve
the reasonable progress goal;
(D) Source retirement and replacement schedules;
(E) Smoke management techniques for agricultural and forestry
management purposes including plans as currently exist within the State
for these purposes;
(F) Enforceability of emissions limitations and control measures;
and
(G) The anticipated net effect on visibility due to projected
changes in point, area, and mobile source emissions over the period
addressed by the long-term strategy.
(4) Monitoring strategy and other implementation plan requirements.
The State must submit with the implementation plan a monitoring strategy
for measuring, characterizing, and reporting of
[[Page 263]]
regional haze visibility impairment that is representative of all
mandatory Class I Federal areas within the State. This monitoring
strategy must be coordinated with the monitoring strategy required in
Sec. 51.305 for reasonably attributable visibility impairment.
Compliance with this requirement may be met through participation in the
Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments network. The
implementation plan must also provide for the following:
(i) The establishment of any additional monitoring sites or
equipment needed to assess whether reasonable progress goals to address
regional haze for all mandatory Class I Federal areas within the State
are being achieved.
(ii) Procedures by which monitoring data and other information are
used in determining the contribution of emissions from within the State
to regional haze visibility impairment at mandatory Class I Federal
areas both within and outside the State.
(iii) For a State with no mandatory Class I Federal areas,
procedures by which monitoring data and other information are used in
determining the contribution of emissions from within the State to
regional haze visibility impairment at mandatory Class I Federal areas
in other States.
(iv) The implementation plan must provide for the reporting of all
visibility monitoring data to the Administrator at least annually for
each mandatory Class I Federal area in the State. To the extent
possible, the State should report visibility monitoring data
electronically.
(v) A statewide inventory of emissions of pollutants that are
reasonably anticipated to cause or contribute to visibility impairment
in any mandatory Class I Federal area. The inventory must include
emissions for a baseline year, emissions for the most recent year for
which data are available, and estimates of future projected emissions.
The State must also include a commitment to update the inventory
periodically.
(vi) Other elements, including reporting, recordkeeping, and other
measures, necessary to assess and report on visibility.
(e) Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) requirements for
regional haze visibility impairment. The State must submit an
implementation plan containing emission limitations representing BART
and schedules for compliance with BART for each BART-eligible source
that may reasonably be anticipated to cause or contribute to any
impairment of visibility in any mandatory Class I Federal area, unless
the State demonstrates that an emissions trading program or other
alternative will achieve greater reasonable progress toward natural
visibility conditions.
(1) To address the requirements for BART, the State must submit an
implementation plan containing the following plan elements and include
documentation for all required analyses:
(i) A list of all BART-eligible sources within the State.
(ii) A determination of BART for each BART-eligible source in the
State that emits any air pollutant which may reasonably be anticipated
to cause or contribute to any impairment of visibility in any mandatory
Class I Federal area. All such sources are subject to BART. This
determination must be based on the following analyses:
(A) An analysis of the best system of continuous emission control
technology available and associated emission reductions achievable for
each BART-eligible source within the State subject to BART. In this
analysis, the State must take into consideration the technology
available, the costs of compliance, the energy and nonair quality
environmental impacts of compliance, any pollution control equipment in
use at the source, and the remaining useful life of the source; and
(B) An analysis of the degree of visibility improvement that would
be achieved in each mandatory Class I Federal area as a result of the
emission reductions achievable from all sources subject to BART located
within the region that contributes to visibility impairment in the Class
I area, based on the analysis conducted under paragraph (e)(1)(ii)(A) of
this section.
(iii) If the State determines in establishing BART that
technological or economic limitations on the applicability of
measurement methodology to
[[Page 264]]
a particular source would make the imposition of an emission standard
infeasible, it may instead prescribe a design, equipment, work practice,
or other operational standard, or combination thereof, to require the
application of BART. Such standard, to the degree possible, is to set
forth the emission reduction to be achieved by implementation of such
design, equipment, work practice or operation, and must provide for
compliance by means which achieve equivalent results.
(iv) A requirement that each source subject to BART be required to
install and operate BART as expeditiously as practicable, but in no
event later than 5 years after approval of the implementation plan
revision.
(v) A requirement that each source subject to BART maintain the
control equipment required by this subpart and establish procedures to
ensure such equipment is properly operated and maintained.
(2) A State may opt to implement an emissions trading program or
other alternative measure rather than to require sources subject to BART
to install, operate, and maintain BART. To do so, the State must
demonstrate that this emissions trading program or other alternative
measure will achieve greater reasonable progress than would be achieved
through the installation and operation of BART. To make this
demonstration, the State must submit an implementation plan containing
the following plan elements and include documentation for all required
analyses:
(i) A demonstration that the emissions trading program or other
alternative measure will achieve greater reasonable progress than would
have resulted from the installation and operation of BART at all sources
subject to BART in the State. This demonstration must be based on the
following:
(A) A list of all BART-eligible sources within the State.
(B) An analysis of the best system of continuous emission control
technology available and associated emission reductions achievable for
each source within the State subject to BART. In this analysis, the
State must take into consideration the technology available, the costs
of compliance, the energy and nonair quality environmental impacts of
compliance, any pollution control equipment in use at the source, and
the remaining useful life of the source. The best system of continuous
emission control technology and the above factors may be determined on a
source category basis. The State may elect to consider both source-
specific and category-wide information, as appropriate, in conducting
its analysis.
(C) An analysis of the degree of visibility improvement that would
be achieved in each mandatory Class I Federal area as a result of the
emission reductions achievable from all such sources subject to BART
located within the region that contributes to visibility impairment in
the Class I area, based on the analysis conducted under paragraph
(e)(2)(i)(B) of this section.
(ii) A demonstration that the emissions trading program or
alternative measure will apply, at a minimum, to all BART-eligible
sources in the State. Those sources having a federally enforceable
emission limitation determined by the State and approved by EPA as
meeting BART in accordance with Sec. 51.302(c) or paragraph (e)(1) of
this section do not need to meet the requirements of the emissions
trading program or alternative measure, but may choose to participate if
they meet the requirements of the emissions trading program or
alternative measure.
(iii) A requirement that all necessary emission reductions take
place during the period of the first long-term strategy for regional
haze. To meet this requirement, the State must provide a detailed
description of the emissions trading program or other alternative
measure, including schedules for implementation, the emission reductions
required by the program, all necessary administrative and technical
procedures for implementing the program, rules for accounting and
monitoring emissions, and procedures for enforcement.
(iv) A demonstration that the emission reductions resulting from the
emissions trading program or other alternative measure will be surplus
to those reductions resulting from measures adopted to meet requirements
of the CAA as of the baseline date of the SIP.
[[Page 265]]
(v) At the State's option, a provision that the emissions trading
program or other alternative measure may include a geographic
enhancement to the program to address the requirement under Sec.
51.302(c) related to BART for reasonably attributable impairment from
the pollutants covered under the emissions trading program or other
alternative measure.
(3) After a State has met the requirements for BART or implemented
emissions trading program or other alternative measure that achieve more
reasonable progress than the installation and operation of BART, BART-
eligible sources will be subject to the requirements of paragraph (d) of
this section in the same manner as other sources.
(4) Any BART-eligible facility subject to the requirement under
paragraph (e) of this section to install, operate, and maintain BART may
apply to the Administrator for an exemption from that requirement. An
application for an exemption will be subject to the requirements of
Sec. 51.303 (a)(2) through (h).
(f) Requirements for comprehensive periodic revisions of
implementation plans for regional haze. Each State identified in Sec.
51.300(b)(3) must revise and submit its regional haze implementation
plan revision to EPA by July 31, 2018 and every ten years thereafter. In
each plan revision, the State must evaluate and reassess all of the
elements required in paragraph (d) of this section, taking into account
improvements in monitoring data collection and analysis techniques,
control technologies, and other relevant factors. In evaluating and
reassessing these elements, the State must address the following:
(1) Current visibility conditions for the most impaired and least
impaired days, and actual progress made towards natural conditions
during the previous implementation period. The period for calculating
current visibility conditions is the most recent five year period
preceding the required date of the implementation plan submittal for
which data are available. Current visibility conditions must be
calculated based on the annual average level of visibility impairment
for the most and least impaired days for each of these five years.
Current visibility conditions are the average of these annual values.
(2) The effectiveness of the long-term strategy for achieving
reasonable progress goals over the prior implementation period(s); and
(3) Affirmation of, or revision to, the reasonable progress goal in
accordance with the procedures set forth in paragraph (d)(1) of this
section. If the State established a reasonable progress goal for the
prior period which provided a slower rate of progress than that needed
to attain natural conditions by the year 2064, the State must evaluate
and determine the reasonableness, based on the factors in paragraph
(d)(1)(i)(A) of this section, of additional measures that could be
adopted to achieve the degree of visibility improvement projected by the
analysis contained in the first implementation plan described in
paragraph (d)(1)(i)(B) of this section.
(g) Requirements for periodic reports describing progress towards
the reasonable progress goals. Each State identified in Sec.
51.300(b)(3) must submit a report to the Administrator every 5 years
evaluating progress towards the reasonable progress goal for each
mandatory Class I Federal area located within the State and in each
mandatory Class I Federal area located outside the State which may be
affected by emissions from within the State. The first progress report
is due 5 years from submittal of the initial implementation plan
addressing paragraphs (d) and (e) of this section. The progress reports
must be in the form of implementation plan revisions that comply with
the procedural requirements of Sec. 51.102 and Sec. 51.103. Periodic
progress reports must contain at a minimum the following elements:
(1) A description of the status of implementation of all measures
included in the implementation plan for achieving reasonable progress
goals for mandatory Class I Federal areas both within and outside the
State.
(2) A summary of the emissions reductions achieved throughout the
State through implementation of the measures described in paragraph
(g)(1) of this section.
(3) For each mandatory Class I Federal area within the State, the
State must assess the following visibility
[[Page 266]]
conditions and changes, with values for most impaired and least impaired
days expressed in terms of 5-year averages of these annual values.
(i) The current visibility conditions for the most impaired and
least impaired days;
(ii) The difference between current visibility conditions for the
most impaired and least impaired days and baseline visibility
conditions;
(iii) The change in visibility impairment for the most impaired and
least impaired days over the past 5 years;
(4) An analysis tracking the change over the past 5 years in
emissions of pollutants contributing to visibility impairment from all
sources and activities within the State. Emissions changes should be
identified by type of source or activity. The analysis must be based on
the most recent updated emissions inventory, with estimates projected
forward as necessary and appropriate, to account for emissions changes
during the applicable 5-year period.
(5) An assessment of any significant changes in anthropogenic
emissions within or outside the State that have occurred over the past 5
years that have limited or impeded progress in reducing pollutant
emissions and improving visibility.
(6) An assessment of whether the current implementation plan
elements and strategies are sufficient to enable the State, or other
States with mandatory Federal Class I areas affected by emissions from
the State, to meet all established reasonable progress goals.
(7) A review of the State's visibility monitoring strategy and any
modifications to the strategy as necessary.
(h) Determination of the adequacy of existing implementation plan.
At the same time the State is required to submit any 5-year progress
report to EPA in accordance with paragraph (g) of this section, the
State must also take one of the following actions based upon the
information presented in the progress report:
(1) If the State determines that the existing implementation plan
requires no further substantive revision at this time in order to
achieve established goals for visibility improvement and emissions
reductions, the State must provide to the Administrator a negative
declaration that further revision of the existing implementation plan is
not needed at this time.
(2) If the State determines that the implementation plan is or may
be inadequate to ensure reasonable progress due to emissions from
sources in another State(s) which participated in a regional planning
process, the State must provide notification to the Administrator and to
the other State(s) which participated in the regional planning process
with the States. The State must also collaborate with the other State(s)
through the regional planning process for the purpose of developing
additional strategies to address the plan's deficiencies.
(3) Where the State determines that the implementation plan is or
may be inadequate to ensure reasonable progress due to emissions from
sources in another country, the State shall provide notification, along
with available information, to the Administrator.
(4) Where the State determines that the implementation plan is or
may be inadequate to ensure reasonable progress due to emissions from
sources within the State, the State shall revise its implementation plan
to address the plan's deficiencies within one year.
(i) What are the requirements for State and Federal Land Manager
coordination?
(1) By November 29, 1999, the State must identify in writing to the
Federal Land Managers the title of the official to which the Federal
Land Manager of any mandatory Class I Federal area can submit any
recommendations on the implementation of this subpart including, but not
limited to:
(i) Identification of impairment of visibility in any mandatory
Class I Federal area(s); and
(ii) Identification of elements for inclusion in the visibility
monitoring strategy required by Sec. 51.305 and this section.
(2) The State must provide the Federal Land Manager with an
opportunity for consultation, in person and at least 60 days prior to
holding any public hearing on an implementation plan (or plan revision)
for regional haze required by this subpart. This consultation must
include the opportunity
[[Page 267]]
for the affected Federal Land Managers to discuss their:
(i) Assessment of impairment of visibility in any mandatory Class I
Federal area; and
(ii) Recommendations on the development of the reasonable progress
goal and on the development and implementation of strategies to address
visibility impairment.
(3) In developing any implementation plan (or plan revision), the
State must include a description of how it addressed any comments
provided by the Federal Land Managers.
(4) The plan (or plan revision) must provide procedures for
continuing consultation between the State and Federal Land Manager on
the implementation of the visibility protection program required by this
subpart, including development and review of implementation plan
revisions and 5-year progress reports, and on the implementation of
other programs having the potential to contribute to impairment of
visibility in mandatory Class I Federal areas.
[64 FR 35765, July 1, 1999]
Sec. 51.309 Requirements related to the Grand Canyon Visibility
Transport Commission.
(a) What is the purpose of this section? This section establishes
the requirements for the first regional haze implementation plan to
address regional haze visibility impairment in the 16 Class I areas
covered by the Grand Canyon Visibility Transport Commission Report. For
the years 2003 to 2018, certain States (defined in paragraph (b) of this
section as Transport Region States) may choose to implement the
Commission's recommendations within the framework of the national
regional haze program and applicable requirements of the Act by
complying with the provisions of this section, as supplemented by an
approvable Annex to the Commission Report as required by paragraph (f)
of this section. If a transport region State submits an implementation
plan which is approved by EPA as meeting the requirements of this
section, it will be deemed to comply with the requirements for
reasonable progress for the period from approval of the plan to 2018.
(b) Definitions. For the purposes of this section:
(1) 16 Class I areas means the following mandatory Class I Federal
areas on the Colorado Plateau: Grand Canyon National Park, Sycamore
Canyon Wilderness, Petrified Forest National Park, Mount Baldy
Wilderness, San Pedro Parks Wilderness, Mesa Verde National Park,
Weminuche Wilderness, Black Canyon of the Gunnison Wilderness, West Elk
Wilderness, Maroon Bells Wilderness, Flat Tops Wilderness, Arches
National Park, Canyonlands National Park, Capital Reef National Park,
Bryce Canyon National Park, and Zion National Park.
(2) Transport Region State means one of the States that is included
within the Transport Region addressed by the Grand Canyon Visibility
Transport Commission (Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, New
Mexico, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming).
(3) Commission Report means the report of the Grand Canyon
Visibility Transport Commission entitled ``Recommendations for Improving
Western Vistas,'' dated June 10, 1996.
(4) Fire means wildfire, wildland fire (including prescribed natural
fire), prescribed fire, and agricultural burning conducted and occurring
on Federal, State, and private wildlands and farmlands.
(5) Milestone means the maximum level of annual regional sulfur
dioxide emissions for a given year, assessed annually consistent with
paragraph (h)(2) of this section beginning in the year 2003.
(6) Continuous decline in total mobile source emissions means that
the projected level of emissions from mobile sources of each listed
pollutant in 2008, 2013, and 2018, are less than the projected level of
emissions from mobile sources of each listed pollutant for the previous
period (i.e., 2008 less than 2003; 2013 less than 2008; and 2018 less
than 2013).
(7) Geographic enhancement means a method, procedure, or process to
allow a broad regional strategy, such as a milestone or backstop market
trading program designed to achieve greater reasonable progress than
BART for regional haze, to accommodate BART for reasonably attributable
impairment.
[[Page 268]]
(8) Base year means the year, generally a year between 1996 and
1998, for which data for a source included within the program were used
by the WRAP to calculate base year emissions as a starting point for
development of the Annex required by paragraph (f) of this section.
(9) Forecast means the process used by the WRAP to predict future
emissions for purposes of developing the milestones required by
paragraph (f) of this section.
(10) Reforecast means a corrected forecast, based upon reapplication
of the forecasting process after correction of base year emissions
estimates.
(11) BHP San Manuel means:
(i) The copper smelter located in San Manuel, Arizona which operated
during 1990, but whose operations were suspended during the year 2000,
(ii) The same smelter in the event of a change of name or ownership.
(12) Phelps Dodge Hidalgo means:
(i) The copper smelter located in Hidalgo, New Mexico which operated
during 1990, but whose operations were suspended during the year 2000,
(ii) The same smelter in the event of a change of name or ownership.
(13) Eligible renewable energy resource, for purposes of 40 CFR
51.309, means electricity generated by non-nuclear and non-fossil low or
no air emission technologies.
(c) Implementation Plan Schedule. Each Transport Region State may
meet the requirements of Sec. 51.308(b) through (e) by submitting an
implementation plan that complies with the requirements of this section.
Each Transport Region State must submit an implementation plan
addressing regional haze visibility impairment in the 16 Class I areas
no later than December 31, 2003. Indian Tribes may submit implementation
plans after the December 31, 2003 deadline. A Transport Region State
that does not submit an implementation plan that complies with the
requirements of this section (or whose plan does not comply with all of
the requirements of this section) is subject to the requirements of
Sec. 51.308 in the same manner and to the same extent as any State not
included within the Transport Region.
(d) Requirements of the first implementation plan for States
electing to adopt all of the recommendations of the Commission Report.
Except as provided for in paragraph (e) of this section, each Transport
Region State must submit an implementation plan that meets the following
requirements:
(1) Time period covered. The implementation plan must be effective
for the entire time period between December 31, 2003 and December 31,
2018.
(2) Projection of visibility improvement. For each of the 16
mandatory Class I areas located within the Transport Region State, the
plan must include a projection of the improvement in visibility
conditions (expressed in deciviews, and in any additional ambient
visibility metrics deemed appropriate by the State) expected through the
year 2018 for the most impaired and least impaired days, based on the
implementation of all measures as required in the Commission report and
the provisions in this section. The projection must be made in
consultation with other Transport Region States with sources which may
be reasonably anticipated to contribute to visibility impairment in the
relevant Class I area. The projection may be based on a satisfactory
regional analysis.
(3) Treatment of clean-air corridors. The plan must describe and
provide for implementation of comprehensive emission tracking strategies
for clean-air corridors to ensure that the visibility does not degrade
on the least-impaired days at any of the 16 Class I areas. The strategy
must include:
(i) An identification of clean-air corridors. The EPA will evaluate
the State's identification of such corridors based upon the reports of
the Commission's Meteorology Subcommittee and any future updates by a
successor organization;
(ii) Within areas that are clean-air corridors, an identification of
patterns of growth or specific sites of growth that could cause, or are
causing, significant emissions increases that could have, or are having,
visibility impairment at one or more of the 16 Class I areas.
(iii) In areas outside of clean-air corridors, an identification of
significant emissions growth that could begin, or
[[Page 269]]
is beginning, to impair the quality of air in the corridor and thereby
lead to visibility degradation for the least-impaired days in one or
more of the 16 Class I areas.
(iv) If impairment of air quality in clean air corridors is
identified pursuant to paragraphs (d)(3)(ii) and (iii) of this section,
an analysis of the effects of increased emissions, including provisions
for the identification of the need for additional emission reductions
measures, and implementation of the additional measures where necessary.
(v) A determination of whether other clean air corridors exist for
any of the 16 Class I areas. For any such clean air corridors, an
identification of the necessary measures to protect against future
degradation of air quality in any of the 16 Class I areas.
(4) Implementation of stationary source reductions. The first
implementation plan submission must include:
(i) Sulfur dioxide milestones consistent with paragraph (h)(1) of
this section.
(ii) Monitoring and reporting of sulfur dioxide emissions. The plan
submission must include provisions requiring the annual monitoring and
reporting of actual stationary source sulfur dioxide emissions within
the State. The monitoring and reporting data must be sufficient to
determine whether a 13 percent reduction in actual emissions has
occurred between the years 1990 and 2000, and for determining annually
whether the milestone for each year between 2003 and 2018 is exceeded,
consistent with paragraph (h) (2) of this section. The plan submission
must provide for reporting of these data by the State to the
Administrator and to the regional planning organization consistent with
paragraph (h)(2) of this section.
(iii) Criteria and Procedures for a Market Trading Program. The plan
must include the criteria and procedures for activating a market trading
program consistent with paragraphs (h)(3) and (h)(4) of this section.
The plan must also provide for implementation plan assessments of the
program in the years 2008, 2013, and 2018.
(iv) Provisions for market trading program compliance reporting
consistent with paragraph (h)(4) of this section.
(v) Provisions for stationary source NOX and PM. The plan
submission must include a report which assesses emissions control
strategies for stationary source NOX and PM, and the degree
of visibility improvement that would result from such strategies. In the
report, the State must evaluate and discuss the need to establish
emission milestones for NOX and PM to avoid any net increase
in these pollutants from stationary sources within the transport region,
and to support potential future development and implementation of a
multipollutant and possibly multisource market-based program. The plan
submission must provide for an implementation plan revision, containing
any necessary long-term strategies and BART requirements for stationary
source PM and NOX (including enforceable limitations,
compliance schedules, and other measures) by no later than December 31,
2008.
(5) Mobile sources. The plan submission must provide for:
(i) Statewide inventories of onroad and nonroad mobile source
emissions of VOC, NOX, SO2, PM2.5,
elemental carbon, and organic carbon for the years 2003, 2008, 2013, and
2018.
(A) The inventories must demonstrate a continuous decline in total
mobile source emissions (onroad plus nonroad; tailpipe and evaporative)
of VOC, NOX, PM2.5, elemental carbon, and organic
carbon, evaluated separately. If the inventories show a continuous
decline in total mobile source emissions of each of these pollutants
over the period 2003-2018, no further action is required as part of this
plan to address mobile source emissions of these pollutants. If the
inventories do not show a continuous decline in mobile source emissions
of one or more of these pollutants over the period 2003-2018, the plan
submission must provide for an implementation plan revision by no later
than December 31, 2008 containing any necessary long-term strategies to
achieve a continuous decline in total mobile source emissions of the
pollutant(s), to the extent practicable,
[[Page 270]]
considering economic and technological reasonableness and federal
preemption of vehicle standards and fuel standards under title II of the
CAA.
(B) The plan submission must also provide for an implementation plan
revision by no later than December 31, 2008 containing any long-term
strategies necessary to reduce emissions of SO2 from nonroad
mobile sources, consistent with the goal of reasonable progress. In
assessing the need for such long-term strategies, the State may consider
emissions reductions achieved or anticipated from any new Federal
standards for sulfur in nonroad diesel fuel.
(ii) Interim reports to EPA and the public in years 2003, 2008,
2013, and 2018 on the implementation status of the regional and local
strategies recommended by the Commission Report to address mobile source
emissions.
(6) Programs related to fire. The plan must provide for:
(i) Documentation that all Federal, State, and private prescribed
fire programs within the State evaluate and address the degree
visibility impairment from smoke in their planning and application. In
addition the plan must include smoke management programs that include
all necessary components including, but not limited to, actions to
minimize emissions, evaluation of smoke dispersion, alternatives to
fire, public notification, air quality monitoring, surveillance and
enforcement, and program evaluation.
(ii) A statewide inventory and emissions tracking system (spatial
and temporal) of VOC, NOX, elemental and organic carbon, and
fine particle emissions from fire. In reporting and tracking emissions
from fire from within the State, States may use information from
regional data-gathering and tracking initiatives.
(iii) Identification and removal wherever feasible of any
administrative barriers to the use of alternatives to burning in
Federal, State, and private prescribed fire programs within the State.
(iv) Enhanced smoke management programs for fire that consider
visibility effects, not only health and nuisance objectives, and that
are based on the criteria of efficiency, economics, law, emission
reduction opportunities, land management objectives, and reduction of
visibility impact.
(v) Establishment of annual emission goals for fire, excluding
wildfire, that will minimize emission increases from fire to the maximum
extent feasible and that are established in cooperation with States,
tribes, Federal land management agencies, and private entities.
(7) Area sources of dust emissions from paved and unpaved roads. The
plan must include an assessment of the impact of dust emissions from
paved and unpaved roads on visibility conditions in the 16 Class I
Areas. If such dust emissions are determined to be a significant
contributor to visibility impairment in the 16 Class I areas, the State
must implement emissions management strategies to address the impact as
necessary and appropriate.
(8) Pollution prevention. The plan must provide for:
(i) An initial summary of all pollution prevention programs
currently in place, an inventory of all renewable energy generation
capacity and production in use, or planned as of the year 2002
(expressed in megawatts and megawatt-hours), the total energy generation
capacity and production for the State, the percent of the total that is
renewable energy, and the State's anticipated contribution toward the
renewable energy goals for 2005 and 2015, as provided in paragraph
(d)(8)(vi) of this section.
(ii) Programs to provide incentives that reward efforts that go
beyond compliance and/or achieve early compliance with air-pollution
related requirements.
(iii) Programs to preserve and expand energy conservation efforts.
(iv) The identification of specific areas where renewable energy has
the potential to supply power where it is now lacking and where
renewable energy is most cost-effective.
(v) Projections of the short- and long-term emissions reductions,
visibility improvements, cost savings, and secondary benefits associated
with the renewable energy goals, energy efficiency and pollution
prevention activities.
(vi) A description of the programs relied on to achieve the State's
contribution toward the Commission's goal that renewable energy will
comprise 10
[[Page 271]]
percent of the regional power needs by 2005 and 20 percent by 2015, and
a demonstration of the progress toward achievement of the renewable
energy goals in the years 2003, 2008, 2013, and 2018. This description
must include documentation of the potential for renewable energy
resources, the percentage of renewable energy associated with new power
generation projects implemented or planned, and the renewable energy
generation capacity and production in use and planned in the State. To
the extent that it is not feasible for a State to meet its contribution
to the regional renewable energy goals, the State must identify in the
progress reports the measures implemented to achieve its contribution
and explain why meeting the State's contribution was not feasible.
(9) Implementation of additional recommendations. The plan must
provide for implementation of all other recommendations in the
Commission report that can be practicably included as enforceable
emission limits, schedules of compliance, or other enforceable measures
(including economic incentives) to make reasonable progress toward
remedying existing and preventing future regional haze in the 16 Class I
areas. The State must provide a report to EPA and the public in 2003,
2008, 2013, and 2018 on the progress toward developing and implementing
policy or strategy options recommended in the Commission Report.
(10) Periodic implementation plan revisions. Each Transport Region
State must submit to the Administrator periodic reports in the years
2008, 2013, and 2018. The progress reports must be in the form of
implementation plan revisions that comply with the procedural
requirements of Sec. 51.102 and Sec. 51.103.
(i) The report will assess the area for reasonable progress as
provided in this section for mandatory Class I Federal area(s) located
within the State and for mandatory Class I Federal area(s) located
outside the State which may be affected by emissions from within the
State. This demonstration may be based on assessments conducted by the
States and/or a regional planning body. The progress reports must
contain at a minimum the following elements:
(A) A description of the status of implementation of all measures
included in the implementation plan for achieving reasonable progress
goals for mandatory Class I Federal areas both within and outside the
State.
(B) A summary of the emissions reductions achieved throughout the
State through implementation of the measures described in paragraph
(d)(10)(i)(A) of this section.
(C) For each mandatory Class I Federal area within the State, an
assessment of the following: the current visibility conditions for the
most impaired and least impaired days; the difference between current
visibility conditions for the most impaired and least impaired days and
baseline visibility conditions; the change in visibility impairment for
the most impaired and least impaired days over the past 5 years.
(D) An analysis tracking the change over the past 5 years in
emissions of pollutants contributing to visibility impairment from all
sources and activities within the State. Emissions changes should be
identified by type of source or activity. The analysis must be based on
the most recent updated emissions inventory, with estimates projected
forward as necessary and appropriate, to account for emissions changes
during the applicable 5-year period.
(E) An assessment of any significant changes in anthropogenic
emissions within or outside the State that have occurred over the past 5
years that have limited or impeded progress in reducing pollutant
emissions and improving visibility.
(F) An assessment of whether the current implementation plan
elements and strategies are sufficient to enable the State, or other
States with mandatory Federal Class I areas affected by emissions from
the State, to meet all established reasonable progress goals.
(G) A review of the State's visibility monitoring strategy and any
modifications to the strategy as necessary.
(ii) At the same time the State is required to submit any 5-year
progress report to EPA in accordance with paragaph (d)(10)(i) of this
section, the State must also take one of the following actions based
upon the information presented in the progress report:
[[Page 272]]
(A) If the State determines that the existing implementation plan
requires no further substantive revision at this time in order to
achieve established goals for visibility improvement and emissions
reductions, the State must provide to the Administrator a negative
declaration that further revision of the existing implementation plan is
not needed at this time.
(B) If the State determines that the implementation plan is or may
be inadequate to ensure reasonable progress due to emissions from
sources in another State(s) which participated in a regional planning
process, the State must provide notification to the Administrator and to
the other State(s) which participated in the regional planning process
with the States. The State must also collaborate with the other State(s)
through the regional planning process for the purpose of developing
additional strategies to address the plan's deficiencies.
(C) Where the State determines that the implementation plan is or
may be inadequate to ensure reasonable progress due to emissions from
sources in another country, the State shall provide notification, along
with available information, to the Administrator.
(D) Where the State determines that the implementation plan is or
may be inadequate to ensure reasonable progress due to emissions from
within the State, the State shall develop additional strategies to
address the plan deficiencies and revise the implementation plan no
later than one year from the date that the progress report was due.
(11) State planning and interstate coordination. In complying with
the requirements of this section, States may include emission reductions
strategies that are based on coordinated implementation with other
States. Examples of these strategies include economic incentive programs
and transboundary emissions trading programs. The implementation plan
must include documentation of the technical and policy basis for the
individual State apportionment (or the procedures for apportionment
throughout the trans-boundary region), the contribution addressed by the
State's plan, how it coordinates with other State plans, and compliance
with any other appropriate implementation plan approvability criteria.
States may rely on the relevant technical, policy and other analyses
developed by a regional entity (such as the Western Regional Air
Partnership) in providing such documentation. Conversely, States may
elect to develop their own programs without relying on work products
from a regional entity.
(12) Tribal implementation. Consistent with 40 CFR Part 49, tribes
within the Transport Region may implement the required visibility
programs for the 16 Class I areas, in the same manner as States,
regardless of whether such tribes have participated as members of a
visibility transport commission.
(e) States electing not to implement the commission recommendations.
Any Transport Region State may elect not to implement the Commission
recommendations set forth in paragraph (d) of this section. Such States
are required to comply with the timelines and requirements of Sec.
51.308. Any Transport Region State electing not to implement the
Commission recommendations must advise the other States in the Transport
Region of the nature of the program and the effect of the program on
visibility-impairing emissions, so that other States can take this
information into account in developing programs under this section.
(f) Annex to the Commission Report. (1) A Transport Region State may
choose to comply with the provisions of this section and by doing so
shall satisfy the requirements of Sec. 51.308(b) through (e) only if
the Grand Canyon Visibility Transport Commission (or a regional planning
body formed to implement the Commission recommendations) submits a
satisfactory annex to the Commission Report no later than October 1,
2000. To be satisfactory, the Annex must contain the following elements:
(i) The annex must contain quantitative emissions milestones for
stationary source sulfur dioxide emissions for the reporting years 2003,
2008, 2013 and 2018. The milestones must provide for steady and
continuing emissions reductions for the 2003-2018 time period consistent
with the Commission's definition of reasonable progress, its goal
[[Page 273]]
of 50 to 70 percent reduction in sulfur dioxide emissions from 1990
actual emission levels by 2040, applicable requirements under the CAA,
and the timing of implementation plan assessments of progress and
identification of deficiencies which will be due in the years 2008,
2013, and 2018. The milestones must be shown to provide for greater
reasonable progress than would be achieved by application of best
available retrofit technology (BART) pursuant to Sec. 51.308(e)(2) and
would be approvable in lieu of BART.
(ii) The annex must contain documentation of the market trading
program or other programs to be implemented pursuant to paragraph (d)(4)
of this section if current programs and voluntary measures are not
sufficient to meet the required emission reduction milestones. This
documentation must include model rules, memoranda of understanding, and
other documentation describing in detail how emission reduction progress
will be monitored, what conditions will require the market trading
program to be activated, how allocations will be performed, and how the
program will operate.
(2) The Commission may elect, at the same time it submits the annex,
to make recommendations intended to demonstrate reasonable progress for
other mandatory Class I areas (beyond the original 16) within the
Transport Region States, including the technical and policy
justification for these additional mandatory Class I Federal areas in
accordance with the provisions of paragraph (g) of this section.
(3) The EPA will publish the annex upon receipt. If EPA finds that
the annex meets the requirements of paragraph (f)(1) of this section and
assures reasonable progress, then, after public notice and comment, EPA
will amend the requirements of this section to incorporate the
provisions of the annex. If EPA finds that the annex does not meet the
requirements of paragraph (f)(1) of this section, or does not assure
reasonable progress, or if EPA finds that the annex is not received,
then each Transport Region State must submit an implementation plan for
regional haze meeting all of the requirements of Sec. 51.308.
(4) In accordance with the provisions under paragraph (f)(1) of this
section, the annex may include a geographic enhancement to the program
provided for in paragraph (d)(4) of this section to address the
requirement under Sec. 51.302(c) related to Best Available Retrofit
Technology for reasonably attributable impairment from the pollutants
covered by the milestones or the backstop market trading program. The
geographic enhancement program may include an appropriate level of
reasonably attributable impairment which may require additional emission
reductions over and above those achieved under the milestones defines in
paragraph (f)(1)(i) of this section.
(g) Additional Class I areas. The following submittals must be made
by Transport Region States implementing the provisions of this section
as the basis for demonstrating reasonable progress for additional Class
I areas in the Transport Region States. If a Transport Region State
submits an implementation plan which is approved by EPA as meeting the
requirements of this section, it will be deemed to comply with the
requirements for reasonable progress for the period from approval of the
plan to 2018.
(1) In the plan submitted for the 16 Class I areas no later than
December 31, 2003, a declaration indicating whether other Class I areas
will be addressed under Sec. 51.308 or paragraphs (g)(2) and (3) of
this section.
(2) In a plan submitted no later than December 31, 2008, provide a
demonstration of expected visibility conditions for the most impaired
and least impaired days at the additional mandatory Class I Federal
area(s) based on emissions projections from the long-term strategies in
the implementation plan. This demonstration may be based on assessments
conducted by the States and/or a regional planning body.
(3) In a plan submitted no later than December 31, 2008, provide
revisions to the plan submitted under paragraph (c) of this section,
including provisions to establish reasonable progress goals and
implement any additional measures necessary to demonstrate reasonable
progress for the additional mandatory Federal Class I areas. These
revisions
[[Page 274]]
must comply with the provisions of Sec. 51.308(d)(1) through (4).
(4) The following provisions apply for Transport Region States
establishing reasonable progress goals and adopting any additional
measures for Class I areas other than the 16 Class I areas under
paragraphs (g)(2) and (3) of this section.
(i) In developing long-term strategies pursuant to Sec.
51.308(d)(3), the State may build upon the strategies implemented under
paragraph (d) of this section, and take full credit for the visibility
improvement achieved through these strategies.
(ii) The requirement under Sec. 51.308(e) related to Best Available
Retrofit Technology for regional haze is deemed to be satisfied for
pollutants addressed by the milestones and backstop trading program if,
in establishing the emission reductions milestones under paragraph (f)
of this section, it is shown that greater reasonable progress will be
achieved for these Class I areas than would be achieved through the
application of source-specific BART emission limitations under Sec.
51.308(e)(1).
(iii) The Transport Region State may consider whether any strategies
necessary to achieve the reasonable progress goals required by paragraph
(g)(3) of this section are incompatible with the strategies implemented
under paragraph (d) of this section to the extent the State adequately
demonstrates that the incompatibility is related to the costs of the
compliance, the time necessary for compliance, the energy and no air
quality environmental impacts of compliance, or the remaining useful
life of any existing source subject to such requirements.
(h) Emissions Reduction Program for Major Industrial Sources of
Sulfur Dioxide. The first implementation plan submission must include a
stationary source emissions reductions program for major industrial
sources of sulfur dioxide that meets the following requirements:
(1) Regional sulfur dioxide milestones. The plan must include the
milestones in Table 1, and provide for the adjustments in paragraphs
(h)(1)(i) through (iv) of this section. Table 1 follows:
Table 1--Sulfur Dioxide Emissions Milestones
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
. . . if neither . . . and the
. . . if BHP San BHP San Manuel emission
Manuel and nor Phelps Dodge inventories for
Phelps Dodge Hidalgo resumes these years will
For the year . . . Hidalgo resume operation, the determine
operation, the minimum regional whether
maximum regional sulfur dioxide emissions are
sulfur dioxide milestone is . . greater than or
milestone is . . . less than the
. milestone:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2003.............. 720,000 tons.... 682,000 tons.... 2003.
2004.............. 720,000 tons.... 682,000 tons.... Average of 2003
and 2004.
2005.............. 720,000 tons.... 682,000 tons.... Average of 2003,
2004 and 2005.
2006.............. 720,000 tons.... 682,000 tons.... Average of 2004,
2005 and 2006.
2007.............. 720,000 tons.... 682,000 tons.... Average of 2005,
2006 and 2007.
2008.............. 718,333 tons.... 680,333 tons.... Average of 2006,
2007 and 2008.
2009.............. 716,667 tons.... 678,667 tons.... Average of 2007,
2008 and 2009.
2010.............. 715,000 tons.... 677,000 tons.... Average of 2008,
2009 and 2010.
2011.............. 715,000 tons.... 677,000 tons.... Average of 2009,
2010 and 2011.
2012.............. 715,000 tons.... 677,000 tons.... Average of 2010,
2011 and 2012.
2013.............. 695,000 tons.... 659,667 tons.... Average of 2011,
2012 and 2013.
2014.............. 675,000 tons.... 642,333 tons.... Average of 2012,
2013 and 2014.
2015.............. 655,000 tons.... 625,000 tons.... Average of 2013,
2014 and 2015.
2016.............. 655,000 tons.... 625,000 tons.... Average of 2014,
2015 and 2016.
2017.............. 655,000 tons.... 625,000 tons.... Average of 2015,
2016 and 2017.
2018.............. 510,000 tons.... 480,000 tons.... Year 2018 only.
Each year after no more than no more than 3-year average
2018. 510,000 tons 480,000 tons of the year and
unless the unless the the two
milestones are milestones are previous years,
replaced with a replaced with a or any
different different alternative
program that program that provided in any
meets any BART meets any BART future plan
and reasonable and reasonable revisions under
progress progress Sec.
requirements requirements 51.308(f).
established in established in
Sec. 51.309. Sec. 51.309.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) Adjustment for States and Tribes Which Choose Not to Participate
in the Program, and for Tribes that opt into the program after the 2003
deadline. If a State or Tribe chooses not to submit
[[Page 275]]
an implementation plan under the option provided in Sec. 51.309, or if
EPA has not approved a State or Tribe's implementation plan by the date
of the draft determination required by Sec. 51.309(h)(3)(ii), the
amounts for that State or Tribe which are listed in Table 2 must be
subtracted from the milestones that are included in the implementation
plans for the remaining States and Tribes. For Tribes that opt into the
program after 2003, the amounts in Table 2 or 4 will be automatically
added to the milestones that are included in the implementation plans
for the participating States and Tribes, beginning with the first year
after the tribal implementation plan implementing Sec. 51.309 is
approved by the Administrator. The amounts listed in Table 2 are for
purposes of adjusting the milestones only, and they do not represent
amounts that must be allocated under any future trading program. Table 2
follows:
Table 2--Amounts Subtracted From the Milestones for States and Tribes Which Do Not Exercise the Option Provided by Sec. 51.309
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State or tribe 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Arizona...................................................... 117,372 117,372 117,372 117,372 117,372 117,941 118,511 119,080
2. California................................................... 37,343 37,343 37,343 37,784 37,343 36,363 35,382 34,402
3. Colorado..................................................... 98,897 98,897 98,897 98,897 98,897 98,443 97,991 97,537
4. Idaho........................................................ 18,016 18,016 18,016 18,016 18,016 17,482 16,948 16,414
5. Nevada....................................................... 20,187 20,187 20,187 20,187 20,187 20,282 20,379 20,474
6. New Mexico................................................... 84,624 84,624 84,624 84,624 84,624 84,143 83,663 83,182
7. Oregon....................................................... 26,268 26,268 26,268 26,268 26,268 26,284 26,300 26,316
8. Utah......................................................... 42,782 42,782 42,782 42,782 42,782 42,795 42,806 42,819
9. Wyoming...................................................... 155,858 155,858 155,858 155,858 155,858 155,851 155,843 155,836
10. Navajo Nation............................................... 53,147 53,147 53,147 53,147 53,147 53,240 53,334 53,427
11. Shoshone-Bannock Tribe of the Fort Hall Reservation......... 4,994 4,994 4,994 4,994 4,994 4,994 4,994 4,994
12. Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintahand Ouray Reservation......... 1,129 1,129 1,129 1,129 1,129 1,131 1,133 1,135
13. Wind River Reservation...................................... 1,384 1,384 1,384 1,384 1,384 1,384 1,384 1,384
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State or tribe 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Arizona...................................................... 119,080 119,080 116,053 113,025 109,998 109,998 109,998 82,302
2. California................................................... 34,402 34,402 33,265 32,128 30,991 30,991 30,991 27,491
3. Colorado..................................................... 97,537 97,537 94,456 91,375 88,294 88,294 88,294 57,675
4. Idaho........................................................ 16,414 16,414 15,805 15,197 14,588 14,588 14,588 13,227
5. Nevada....................................................... 20,474 20,474 20,466 20,457 20,449 20,449 20,449 20,232
6. New Mexico................................................... 83,182 83,182 81,682 80,182 78,682 78,682 78,682 70,000
7. Oregon....................................................... 26,316 26,316 24,796 23,277 21,757 21,757 21,757 8,281
8. Utah......................................................... 42,819 42,819 41,692 40,563 39,436 39,436 39,436 30,746
9. Wyoming...................................................... 155,836 155,836 151,232 146,629 142,025 142,025 142,025 97,758
10. Navajo Nation............................................... 53,427 53,427 52,707 51,986 51,266 51,266 51,266 44,772
11. Shoshone-Bannock Tribe of the Fort Hall Reservation......... 4,994 4,994 4,994 4,994 4,994 4,994 4,994 4,994
12. Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintahand Ouray Reservation......... 1,135 1,135 1,135 1,135 1,135 1,135 1,135 1,135
13. Northern Arapaho and Shoshone Tribes of the Wind River 1,384 1,384 1,384 1,384 1,384 1,384 1,384 1,384
Reservation....................................................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(ii) Adjustment for Future Operation of Copper Smelters.
(A) The plan must provide for adjustments to the milestones in the
event that Phelps Dodge Hidalgo and/or BHP San Manuel resume operations
or that other smelters increase their operations.
(B) The plan must provide for adjustments to the milestones
according to Tables 3a and 3b except that if either the Hidalgo or San
Manuel smelters resumes operation and is required to obtain a permit
under 40 CFR 52.21 or 40
[[Page 276]]
CFR 51.166, the adjustment to the milestone must be based upon the
levels allowed by the permit. In no instance may the adjustment to the
milestone be greater than 22,000 tons for the Phelps Dodge Hidalgo,
greater than 16,000 tons for BHP San Manuel, or more than 30,000 tons
for the combination of the Phelps Dodge Hidalgo and BHP San Manuel
smelters for the years 2013 through 2018. Tables 3a and 3b follow:
Table 3a--Adjustments to the Milestones for Future Operations of Copper
Smelters
------------------------------------------------------------------------
. . . then you
calculate the
milestone by
Scenario If this happens and this happens adding this
. . . . . . amount to the
value in column
3 of Table 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.................. Phelps Dodge Phelps Dodge A. Beginning
Hidalgo resumes Hidalgo resumes with the year
operation, but production that
BHP San Manuel consistent with production
does not. past operations resumes, and
and emissions. for each year
up to the year
2012, the
milestone
increases by:
(1) 22,000 tons
PLUS
(2) Any amounts
identified in
Table 3b.
B. For the
years 2013
through 2018,
the milestone
increases by
this amount or
by 30,000
tons,
whichever is
less.
2.................. Phelps Dodge Phelps Dodge A. Beginning
Hidalgo resumes Hidalgo resumes with the year
operation, but operation in a that
BHP San Manuel substantially production
does not. different resumes, and
manner such for each year
that emissions up to the year
will be less 2012, the
than for past milestone
operations (an increases by:
example would (1) Expected
be running only emissions for
one portion of Phelps Dodge
the plant to Hidalgo (not
produce sulfur to exceed
acid only). 22,000 tons),
PLUS
(2) Any amounts
identified in
Table 3b.
B. For the
years 2013
through 2018,
the milestone
increases by
this amount or
by 30,000
tons,
whichever is
less.
3.................. BHP San Manuel BHP San Manuel A. 16,000 tons
Manuel resumes resumes PLUS
operation, but production B. Any amounts
Phelps Dodge consistent with identified in
Hidalgo does past operations Table 3b.
not. and emissions.
4.................. BHP San Manuel BHP San Manuel A. Expected
resumes resumes emissions for
operation, but operations in a BHP (not to
Phelps Dodge substantially exceed 16,000
Hidalgo does different tons) PLUS
not. manner such B. Any amounts
that emissions identified in
will be less Table 3b.
than for past
operations (an
example would
be running only
one portion of
the plant to
produce sulfur
acid only).
5.................. Both Phelps Both smelters A. Beginning
Dodge Hidalgo resume with the year
and BHP San production that
Manuel resume consistent with production
operations. past operations resumes, and
and emissions. for each year
up to the year
2012, the
milestone
increase by
38,000 tons.
B. For the
years 2013
through 2018,
the milestone
increases by
30,000 tons.
6.................. Both Phelps Phelps Dodge A. For the year
Dodge Hidalgo Hidalgo resumes that
and BHP San production production
Manuel resume consistent with resumes, and
operations. past operations for each year
and emissions, up to the year
but BHP San 2012, the
Manuel resumes milestone
operations in a increases by:
substantially (1) 22,000 PLUS
different (2) Expected
manner such emissions for
that emissions San Manuel
will be less (not to exceed
than for past 16,000 tons).
operations (an B. For the
example would years 2013
be running only though 2018,
one portion of the milestone
the plant to increases by
produce sulfur this same
acid only). amount, or by
30,000 tons,
whichever is
less.
[[Page 277]]
7.................. Both Phelps BHP San Manuel A. For the year
Dodge Hidalgo resume that
and BHP San production production
Manuel resumes consistent with resumes, and
operations. the past for each year
operations and up to the year
emissions, but 2012,
Phelps Dodge milestone
Hidalgo resumes increases by:
operations in a (1) 16,000 PLUS
substantially (2) Expected
different Hidalgo
manner such emissions (not
that emissions to exceed
will be less 22,000 tons).
than for past B. For the
operations (an years 2013
example would though 2018,
be running only the milestone
one portion of increases by
the plant to this same
produce sulfur amount, or by
acid only). 30,000 tons,
whichever is
less.
8.................. Both Phelps ................ A. Any amounts
Dodge Hidalgo identified in
and BHP San Table 3b.
Manuel do not
resume
operations.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 3b--Adjustments for Certain Copper Smelters Which Operate Above
Baseline Levels
[In tons]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
. . . the
complies with milestone
existing increases by
permits but the difference
has actual between actual
Where it applies in table 3a, if the annual emissions and
following smelter . . . emissions that the baseline
exceed the level, or the
following following
baseline level amount,
. . . whichever is
less
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Asarco Hayden........................... 23,000 3,000
BHP San Manuel.......................... 16,000 1,500
Kennecott Salt Lake..................... 1,000 100
Phelps Dodge Chino...................... 16,000 3,000
Phelps Dodge Hidalgo.................... 22,000 4,000
Phelps Dodge Miami...................... 8,000 2,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) Adjustments for changes in emission monitoring or calculation
methods. The plan must provide for adjustments to the milestones to
reflect changes in sulfur dioxide emission monitoring or measurement
methods for a source that is included in the program, including changes
identified under paragraph (h)(2)(iii)(D) of this section. Any such
adjustment based upon changes to emissions monitoring or measurement
methods must be made in the form of an implementation plan revision that
complies with the procedural requirements of Sec. 51.102 and Sec.
51.103. The implementation plan revision must be submitted to the
Administrator no later than the first due date for a periodic report
under paragraph (d)(10) of this section following the change in emission
monitoring or measurement method.
(iv) Adjustments for changes in flow rate measurement methods for
affected sources under 40 CFR 72.1. For the years between 2003 and 2017,
the implementation plan must provide for adjustments to the milestones
for sources using the methods contained in 40 CFR part 60, appendix A,
Methods 2F, 2G, and 2H. For any year for which such an adjustment has
not yet been made to the milestone, the implementation plan must provide
for an adjustment to the emissions reporting to ensure consistency. The
implementation plan must provide for adjustments to the milestones by no
later than the date of the periodic plan revision required under Sec.
51.309(d)(10).
[[Page 278]]
(v) Adjustments due to enforcement actions arising from settlements.
The implementation plan must provide for adjustments to the milestones,
as specified in paragraph (h)(1)(vii) and (viii) of this section, if:
(A) An agreement to settle an action, arising from allegations of a
failure of an owner or operator of an emissions unit at a source in the
program to comply with applicable regulations which were in effect
during the base year, is reached between the parties to the action;
(B) The alleged failure to comply with applicable regulations
affects the assumptions that were used in calculating the source's base
year and forecasted sulfur dioxide emissions; and
(C) The settlement includes or recommends an adjustment to the
milestones.
(vi) Adjustments due to enforcement actions arising from
administrative or judicial orders. The implementation plan must also
provide for adjustments to the milestones as directed by any final
administrative or judicial order, as specified in paragraph (h)(1)(vii)
and (viii) of this section. Where the final administrative or judicial
order does not include a reforecast of the source's baseline, the State
or Tribe shall evaluate whether a reforecast of the source's baseline
emissions is appropriate.
(vii) Adjustments for enforcement actions. The plan must provide
that, based on paragraph (h)(1)(v) and (vi) of this section, the
milestone must be decreased by an appropriate amount based on a
reforecast of the source's decreased sulfur dioxide emissions. The
adjustments do not become effective until after the source has reduced
its sulfur dioxide emissions as required in the settlement agreement, or
administrative or judicial order. All adjustments based upon enforcement
actions must be made in the form of an implementation plan revision that
complies with the procedural requirements of Sec. Sec. 51.102 and
51.103.
(viii) Documentation of adjustments for enforcement actions. In the
periodic plan revision required under 51.309(d)(10), the State or Tribe
shall include the following documentation of any adjustment due to an
enforcement action:
(A) Identification of each source under the State or Tribe's
jurisdiction which has reduced sulfur dioxide emissions pursuant to a
settlement agreement, or an administrative or judicial order;
(B) For each source identified, a statement indicating whether the
milestones were adjusted in response to the enforcement action;
(C) Discussion of the rationale for the State or Tribe's decision to
adjust or not to adjust the milestones; and
(D) If extra SO2 emissions reductions (over and above
those reductions needed for compliance with the applicable regulations)
were part of an agreement to settle an action, a statement indicating
whether such reductions resulted in any adjustment to the milestones or
allowance allocations, and a discussion of the rationale for the State
or Tribe's decision on any such adjustment.
(ix) Adjustment based upon program audits. The plan must provide for
appropriate adjustments to the milestones based upon the results of
program audits. Any such adjustment based upon audits must be made in
the form of an implementation plan revision that complies with the
procedural requirements of Sec. Sec. 51.102 and 51.103. The
implementation plan revision must be submitted to the Administrator no
later than the first due date after the audit for a periodic report
under paragraph (d)(10) of this section.
(x) Adjustment for individual sources opting into the program. The
plan may provide for adjustments to the milestones for any source
choosing to participate in the program even though the source does not
meet the 100 tons per year criterion for inclusion. Any such adjustments
must be made in the form of an implementation plan revision that
complies with the procedural requirements of Sec. Sec. 51.102 and
51.103.
(2) Requirements for monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting of
actual annual emissions of sulfur dioxide--(i) Sources included in the
program. The implementation plan must provide for annual emission
monitoring and reporting, beginning with calendar year 2003, for all
sources with actual emissions of sulfur
[[Page 279]]
dioxide of 100 tons per year or more as of 2003, and all sources with
actual emissions of 100 tons or more per year in any subsequent year.
States and Tribes may include other sources in the program, if the
implementation plan provides for the same procedures and monitoring as
for other sources in a way that is federally enforceable.
(ii) Documentation of emissions calculation methods. The
implementation plan must provide documentation of the specific
methodology used to calculate emissions for each emitting unit included
in the program during the base year. The implementation plan must also
provide for documentation of any change to the specific methodology used
to calculate emissions at any emitting unit for any year after the base
year.
(iii) Recordkeeping. The implementation plan must provide for the
retention of records for at least 10 years from the establishment of the
record. If a record will be the basis for an adjustment to the milestone
as provided for in paragraph (h)(1) of this section, that record must be
retained for at least 10 years from the establishment of the record, or
5 years after the date of the implementation plan revision which
reflects the adjustment, whichever is longer.
(iv) Completion and submission of emissions reports. The
implementation plan must provide for the annual collection of emissions
data for sources included within the program, quality assurance of the
data, public review of the data, and submission of emissions reports to
the Administrator and to each State and Tribe which has submitted an
implementation plan under this section. The implementation plan must
provide for submission of the emission reports by no later than
September 30 of each year, beginning with reports due September 30, 2004
for emissions from calendar year 2003. For sources for which changes in
emission quantification methods require adjustments under paragraph
(h)(1)(iii) of this section, the emissions reports must reflect the
method in place before the change, for each year until the milestone has
been adjusted. If each of the States which have submitted an
implementation plan under this section have identified a regional
planning organization to coordinate the annual comparison of regional
SO2 emissions against the appropriate milestone, the
implementation plan must provide for reporting of this information to
the regional planning body.
(v) Exceptions reports. The emissions report submitted by each State
and Tribe under paragraph (h)(2)(ii) of this section must provide for
exceptions reports containing the following:
(A) Identification of any new or additional sulfur dioxide sources
greater than 100 tons per year that were not contained in the previous
year emissions report;
(B) Identification of sources shut down or removed from the previous
year emissions report;
(C) Explanation for emissions variations at any covered source that
exceed plus or minus 20 percent from the previous year's emissions
report;
(D) Identification and explanation of changed emissions monitoring
and reporting methods at any source. The use of any changed emission
monitoring or reporting methods requires an adjustment to the milestones
according to paragraph (h)(1)(iii) of this section.
(vi) Reporting of emissions for the Mohave Generating Station for
the years 2003 through 2006. For the years 2003, 2004, 2005, and for any
part of the year 2006 before installation and operation of sulfur
dioxide controls at the Mohave Generating Station, emissions from the
Mohave Generating Station will be calculated using a sulfur dioxide
emission factor of 0.15 pounds per million BTU.
(vii) Special provision for the year 2013. The implementation plan
must provide that in the emissions report for calendar year 2012, which
is due by September 30, 2013 under paragraph (h)(2)(iv) of this section,
each State has the option of including calendar year 2018 emission
projections for each source, in addition to the actual emissions for
each source for calendar year 2012.
(3) Annual comparison of emissions to the milestone--(i) The
implementation plan must provide for a comparison each year of annual
SO2 emissions for the region against the appropriate
milestone. In making this comparison,
[[Page 280]]
the State or Tribe must make the comparison, using its annual emissions
report and emissions reports from other States and Tribes reported under
paragraph (h)(2)(iv) of this section.
(ii) The implementation plan must provide for the State or Tribe to
make available to the public a draft report comparing annual emissions
to the milestone by December 31 of each year. The first draft report,
comparing annual emissions in 2003 to the year 2003 milestone will be
due December 31, 2004.
(iii) The implementation plan must provide for the State or Tribe to
submit to the Administrator a final determination of annual emissions by
March 31 of the following year. The final determination must state
whether or not the annual emissions for the year exceed the appropriate
milestone.
(iv) A State or Tribe may delegate its responsibilities to prepare
draft reports and reports supporting the final determinations under
paragraphs (h)(3)(i) through (iii) of this section to a regional
planning organization designated by each State or Tribe submitting an
approvable plan under this section.
(v) Special considerations for year 2012 report. If each State or
Tribe submitting an approvable plan under this section has included
calendar year 2018 emission projections under paragraph (h)(2)(vii) of
this section, then the report for the year 2012 milestone which is due
by December 31, 2013 under paragraph (h)(3)(ii) of this section may also
include a comparison of the regional year 2018 emissions projection with
the milestone for calendar year 2018. If the report indicates that the
year 2018 milestone will be exceeded, then the State or Tribe may choose
to implement the market trading program beginning in the year 2018, if
each State or Tribe submitting an approvable plan under this section
agrees.
(vi) Independent review. The implementation plan must provide for
reviews of the annual emissions reporting program by an independent
third party. This independent review is not required if a determination
has been made under paragraph (h)(3)(iii) of this section to implement
the market trading program. The independent review shall be completed by
the end of 2006, and every 5 years thereafter, and shall include an
analysis of:
(A) The uncertainty of the reported emissions data;
(B) Whether the uncertainty of the reported emissions data is likely
to have an adverse impact on the annual determination of emissions
relative to the milestone; and,
(C) Whether there are any necessary improvements for the annual
administrative process for collecting the emissions data, reporting the
data, and obtaining public review of the data.
(4) Market trading program. The implementation plan must provide for
implementation of a market trading program if the determination required
by paragraph (h)(3)(iii) of this section indicates that a milestone has
been exceeded. The implementation plan must provide for the option of
implementation of a market trading program if a report under paragraph
(h)(3)(v) of this section indicates that projected emissions for the
year 2018 will exceed the year 2018 milestone. The implementation plan
must provide for a market trading program whose provisions are
substantively the same for each State or Tribe submitting an approvable
plan under this section. The implementation plan must include the
following market trading program provisions:
(i) Allowances. For each source in the program, the implementation
plan must either identify the specific allocation of allowances, on a
tons per year basis, for each calendar year from 2009 to 2018 or the
formula or methodology that will be used to calculate the allowances if
the program is triggered. The implementation plan must provide that
eligible renewable energy resources that begin operation after October
1, 2000 will receive 2.5 tons of SO2 allowances per megawatt
of installed nameplate capacity per year. Allowance allocations for
renewable energy resources that begin operation prior to the program
trigger will be retroactive to the time of initial operation. The
implementation plan may provide for an upper limit on the number of
allowances provided for eligible renewable energy resources. The total
of the tons per year allowances across all participating States and
Tribes, including the
[[Page 281]]
renewable energy allowances, may not exceed the amounts in Table 4 of
this paragraph, less a 20,000 ton amount that must be set aside for use
by Tribes. The implementation plan may include procedures for
redistributing the allowances in future years, if as the amounts in
Table 4 of this paragraph, less a 20,000 ton amount, are not exceeded.
The implementation plan must provide that any adjustment for a calendar
year applied to the milestones under paragraphs (h)(1)(i) through (vii)
of this section must also be applied to the amounts in Table 4. Table 4
follows:
Table 4--Total Amount of Allowances by Year
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If the two If the two
smelters smelters do
resume not resume
operations, operations,
the total the total
number of number of
For this year: allowances allowances
issued by issued by
States and States and
Tribes may not Tribes may not
exceed this exceed this
amount: amount:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2009.................................... 715,000 677,000
2010.................................... 715,000 677,000
2011.................................... 715,000 677,000
2012.................................... 715,000 677,000
2013.................................... 655,000 625,000
2014.................................... 655,000 625,000
2015.................................... 655,000 625,000
2016.................................... 655,000 625,000
2017.................................... 655,000 625,000
2018.................................... 510,000 480,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(ii) Compliance with allowances. The implementation plan must
provide that, beginning with the compliance period 6 years following the
calendar year for which emissions exceeded the milestone and for each
compliance period thereafter, the owner or operator of each source in
the program must hold allowances for each ton of sulfur dioxide emitted
by the source.
(iii) Emissions quantification protocols. The implementation plan
must include specific emissions quantification protocols for each source
category included within the program, including the identification of
sources subject to part 75 of this chapter. For sources subject to part
75 of this chapter, the implementation plan may rely on the emissions
quantification protocol in part 75. For source categories with sources
in more than one State or tribal area submitting an implementation plan
under this section, each State or Tribe should use the same protocol to
quantify emissions for sources in the source category. The protocols
must provide for reliability (repeated application obtains results
equivalent to EPA-approved test methods), and replicability (different
users obtain the same or equivalent results that are independently
verifiable). The protocols must include procedures for addressing
missing data, which provide for conservative calculations of emissions
and provide sufficient incentives for sources to comply with the
monitoring provisions. If the protocols are not the same for sources
within a given source category, and where the protocols are not based
upon part 75 or equivalent methods, the State or Tribes must provide a
demonstration that each such protocol meets all of the criteria of this
paragraph.
(iv) Monitoring and Recordkeeping. The implementation plan must
include monitoring provisions which are consistent with the emissions
quantification protocol. Monitoring required by these provisions must be
timely and of sufficient frequency to ensure the enforceability of the
program. The implementation plan must also include requirements that the
owner or operator of each source in the program keep records consistent
with the emissions quantification protocols, and keep all records used
to determine compliance
[[Page 282]]
for at least 5 years. For source owners or operators which use banked
allowances, all records relating to the banked allowance must be kept
for at least 5 years after the banked allowances are used.
(v) Tracking system. The implementation plan must provide for
submitting data to a centralized system for the tracking of allowances
and emissions. The implementation plan must provide that all necessary
information regarding emissions, allowances, and transactions is
publicly available in a secure, centralized data base. In the system,
each allowance must be uniquely identified. The system must allow for
frequent updates and include enforceable procedures for recording data.
(vi) Authorized account representative. The implementation plan must
include provisions requiring the owner or operator of each source in the
program to identify an authorized account representative. The
implementation plan must provide that all matters pertaining to the
account, including, but not limited to, the deduction and transfer of
allowances in the account, and certifications of the completeness and
accuracy of emissions and allowances transactions required in the annual
report under paragraph (h)(4)(vii) of this section shall be undertaken
only by the authorized account representative.
(vii) Annual report. The implementation plan must include provisions
requiring the authorized account representative for each source in the
program to demonstrate and report within a specified time period
following the end of each calendar year that the source holds allowances
for each ton per year of SO2 emitted in that year. The
implementation plan must require the authorized account representative
to submit the report within 60 days after the end of each calendar year,
unless an alternative deadline is specified consistent with emission
monitoring and reporting procedures.
(viii) Allowance transfers. The implementation plan must include
provisions detailing the process for transferring allowances between
parties.
(ix) Emissions banking. The implementation plan may provide for the
banking of unused allowances. Any such provisions must state whether
unused allowances may be kept for use in future years and describe any
restrictions on the use of any such allowances. Allowances kept for use
in future years may be used in calendar year 2018 only if the
implementation plan ensures that such allowances would not interfere
with the achievement of the year 2018 amount in Table 4 in paragraph
(c)(4)(i) of this section.
(x) Penalties. The implementation plan must:
(A) Provide that if emissions from a source in the program exceed
the allowances held by the source, the source's allowances will be
reduced by an amount equal to two times the source's tons of excess
emissions,
(B) Provide for appropriate financial penalties for excess
emissions, either $5000 per ton (year 2000 dollars) or an alternative
amount that is the same for each participating State and Tribe and that
substantially exceeds the expected cost of allowances,
(C) Ensure that failure to comply with any program requirements
(including monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements) are
violations which are subject to civil and criminal remedies provided
under applicable State or tribal law and the Clean Air Act, that each
day of the control period is a separate violation, and that each ton of
excess emissions is a separate violation. Any allowance reduction or
penalty assessment required under paragraphs (h)(4)(x)(A) and (B) of
this section shall not affect the liability of the source for remedies
under this paragraph.
(xi) Provisions for periodic evaluation of the trading program. The
implementation plan must provide for an evaluation of the trading
program no later than 3 years following the first full year of the
trading program, and at least every 5 years thereafter. Any changes
warranted by the evaluation should be incorporated into the next
periodic implementation plan revision required under paragraph (d)(10)
of this section. The evaluation must be conducted by an independent
third party and must include an analysis of:
(A) Whether the total actual emissions could exceed the values in
[[Page 283]]
Sec. 51.309(h)(4)(i), even though sources comply with their allowances;
(B) Whether the program achieved the overall emission milestone it
was intended to reach;
(C) The effectiveness of the compliance, enforcement and penalty
provisions;
(D) A discussion of whether States and Tribes have enough resources
to implement the trading program;
(E) Whether the trading program resulted in any unexpected
beneficial effects, or any unintended detrimental effects;
(F) Whether the actions taken to reduce sulfur dioxide have led to
any unintended increases in other pollutants;
(G) Whether there are any changes needed in emissions monitoring and
reporting protocols, or in the administrative procedures for program
administration and tracking; and
(H) The effectiveness of the provisions for interstate trading, and
whether there are any procedural changes needed to make the interstate
nature of the program more effective.
(5) Other provisions--(i) Permitting of affected sources. The
implementation plan must provide that for sources subject to part 70 or
part 71 of this chapter, the implementation plan requirements for
emissions reporting and for the trading program under paragraph (h) of
this section must be incorporated into the part 70 or part 71 permit.
For sources not subject to part 70 or part 71 of this chapter, the
requirements must be incorporated into a permit that is enforceable as a
practical matter by the Administrator, and by citizens to the extent
permitted under the Clean Air Act.
(ii) Integration with other programs. The implementation plan must
provide that in addition to the requirements of paragraph (h) of this
section, any applicable restrictions of Federal, State, and tribal law
remain in place. No provision of paragraph (h) of this section should be
interpreted as exempting any source from compliance with any other
provision of Federal, State, tribal or local law, including an approved
implementation plan, a Federally enforceable permit, or any other
Federal regulations.
[64 FR 35769, July 1, 1999, as amended at 68 FR 33784, June 5, 2003; 68
FR 39846, July 3, 2003; 68 FR 61369, Oct. 28, 2003; 68 FR 71014, Dec.
22, 2003]
Subpart Q_Reports
Authority: Secs. 110, 301(a), 313, 319, Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C.
7410, 7601(a), 7613, 7619).
Source: 44 FR 27569, May 10, 1979, unless otherwise noted.
Air Quality Data Reporting
Sec. 51.320 Annual air quality data report.
The requirements for reporting air quality data collected for
purposes of the plan are located in subpart C of part 58 of this
chapter.
Source Emissions and State Action Reporting
Sec. 51.321 Annual source emissions and State action report.
The State agency shall report to the Administrator (through the
appropriate Regional Office) information as specified in Sec. Sec.
51.322 through 51.326.
[67 FR 39615, June 10, 2002]
Sec. 51.322 Sources subject to emissions reporting.
The requirements for reporting emissions data under the plan are in
subpart A of this part 51.
[67 FR 39615, June 10, 2002]
Sec. 51.323 Reportable emissions data and information.
The requirements for reportable emissions data and information under
the plan are in subpart A of this part 51.
[67 FR 39615, June 10, 2002]
Sec. 51.324 Progress in plan enforcement.
(a) For each point source, the State shall report any achievement
made during the reporting period of any increment of progress of
compliance schedules required by:
(1) The applicable plan, or
[[Page 284]]
(2) Any enforcement order or other State action required to be
submitted pursuant to Sec. 51.327.
(b) For each point source, the State shall report any enforcement
action taken during the reporting period and not submitted under Sec.
51.327 which results in civil or criminal penalties.
Sec. 51.326 Reportable revisions.
The State shall identify and describe all substantive plan revisions
during the reporting period of the applicable plan other than revisions
to rules and regulations or compliance schedules submitted in accordance
with Sec. 51.6(d). Substantive revisions shall include but are not
limited to changes in stack-test procedures for determining compliance
with applicable regulations, modifications in the projected total
manpower needs to carry out the approved plan, and all changes in
responsibilities given to local agencies to carry out various portions
of the plan.
Sec. 51.327 Enforcement orders and other State actions.
(a) Any State enforcement order, including any State court order,
must be submitted to the Administrator within 60 days of its issuance or
adoption by the State.
(b) A State enforcement order or other State action must be
submitted as a revision to the applicable implementation plan pursuant
to Sec. 51.104 and approved by the Administrator in order to be
considered a revision to such plan.
[36 FR 22398, Nov. 25, 1971, as amended at 51 FR 40675, Nov. 7, 1986]
Sec. 51.328 [Reserved]
Subpart R_Extensions
Sec. 51.341 Request for 18-month extension.
(a) Upon request of the State made in accordance with this section,
the Administrator may, whenever he determines necessary, extend, for a
period not to exceed 18 months, the deadline for submitting that portion
of a plan that implements a secondary standard.
(b) Any such request must show that attainment of the secondary
standards will require emission reductions exceeding those which can be
achieved through the application of reasonably available control
technology.
(c) Any such request for extension of the deadline with respect to
any State's portion of an interstate region must be submitted jointly
with requests for such extensions from all other States within the
region or must show that all such States have been notified of such
request.
(d) Any such request must be submitted sufficiently early to permit
development of a plan prior to the deadline in the event that such
request is denied.
[51 FR 40675, Nov. 7, 1986]
Subpart S_Inspection/Maintenance Program Requirements
Source: 57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, unless otherwise noted.
Sec. 51.350 Applicability.
Inspection/maintenance (I/M) programs are required in both ozone and
carbon monoxide (CO) nonattainment areas, depending upon population and
nonattainment classification or design value.
(a) Nonattainment area classification and population criteria. (1)
States or areas within an ozone transport region shall implement
enhanced I/M programs in any metropolitan statistical area (MSA), or
portion of an MSA, within the State or area with a 1990 population of
100,000 or more as defined by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
regardless of the area's attainment classification. In the case of a
multi-state MSA, enhanced I/M shall be implemented in all ozone
transport region portions if the sum of these portions has a population
of 100,000 or more, irrespective of the population of the portion in the
individual ozone transport region State or area.
(2) Apart from those areas described in paragraph (a)(1) of this
section, any area classified as serious or worse ozone nonattainment, or
as moderate or serious CO nonattainment with a design value greater than
12.7 ppm, and having a 1980 Bureau of Census-defined
[[Page 285]]
(Census-defined) urbanized area population of 200,000 or more, shall
implement enhanced I/M in the 1990 Census-defined urbanized area.
(3) Any area classified, as of November 5, 1992, as marginal ozone
nonattainment or moderate CO nonattainment with a design value of 12.7
ppm or less shall continue operating I/M programs that were part of an
approved State Implementation Plan (SIP) as of November 15, 1990, and
shall update those programs as necessary to meet the basic I/M program
requirements of this subpart. Any such area required by the Clean Air
Act, as in effect prior to November 15, 1990, as interpreted in EPA
guidance, to have an I/M program shall also implement a basic I/M
program. Serious, severe and extreme ozone areas and CO areas over 12.7
ppm shall also continue operating existing I/M programs and shall
upgrade such programs, as appropriate, pursuant to this subpart.
(4) Any area classified as moderate ozone nonattainment, and not
required to implement enhanced I/M under paragraph (a)(1) of this
section, shall implement basic I/M in any 1990 Census-defined urbanized
area with a population of 200,000 or more.
(5) [Reserved]
(6) If the boundaries of a moderate ozone nonattainment area are
changed pursuant to section 107(d)(4)(A)(i)-(ii) of the Clean Air Act,
such that the area includes additional urbanized areas with a population
of 200,000 or more, then a basic I/M program shall be implemented in
these additional urbanized areas.
(7) If the boundaries of a serious or worse ozone nonattainment area
or of a moderate or serious CO nonattainment area with a design value
greater than 12.7 ppm are changed any time after enactment pursuant to
section 107(d)(4)(A) such that the area includes additional urbanized
areas, then an enhanced I/M program shall be implemented in the newly
included 1990 Census-defined urbanized areas, if the 1980 Census-defined
urban area population is 200,000 or more.
(8) If a marginal ozone nonattainment area, not required to
implement enhanced I/M under paragraph (a)(1) of this section, is
reclassified to moderate, a basic I/M program shall be implemented in
the 1990 Census-defined urbanized area(s) with a population of 200,000
or more. If the area is reclassified to serious or worse, an enhanced I/
M program shall be implemented in the 1990 Census-defined urbanized
area, if the 1980 Census-defined urban area population is 200,000 or
more.
(9) If a moderate ozone or CO nonattainment area is reclassified to
serious or worse, an enhanced I/M program shall be implemented in the
1990 Census-defined urbanized area, if the 1980 Census-defined
population is 200,000 or more.
(b) Extent of area coverage. (1) In an ozone transport region, the
program shall cover all counties within subject MSAs or subject portions
of MSAs, as defined by OMB in 1990, except largely rural counties having
a population density of less than 200 persons per square mile based on
the 1990 Census and counties with less than 1% of the population in the
MSA may be excluded provided that at least 50% of the MSA population is
included in the program. This provision does not preclude the voluntary
inclusion of portions of an excluded county. Non-urbanized islands not
connected to the mainland by roads, bridges, or tunnels may be excluded
without regard to population.
(2) Outside of ozone transport regions, programs shall nominally
cover at least the entire urbanized area, based on the 1990 census.
Exclusion of some urban population is allowed as long as an equal number
of non-urban residents of the MSA containing the subject urbanized area
are included to compensate for the exclusion.
(3) Emission reduction benefits from expanding coverage beyond the
minimum required urban area boundaries can be applied toward the
reasonable further progress requirements or can be used for offsets,
provided the covered vehicles are operated in the nonattainment area,
but not toward the enhanced I/M performance standard requirement.
(4) In a multi-state urbanized area with a population of 200,000 or
more that is required under paragraph (a) of this section to implement
I/M, any State with a portion of the area having a 1990 Census-defined
population of
[[Page 286]]
50,000 or more shall implement an I/M program. The other coverage
requirements in paragraph (b) of this section shall apply in multi-state
areas as well.
(5) Notwithstanding the limitation in paragraph (b)(3) of this
section, in an ozone transport region, States which opt for a program
which meets the performance standard described in Sec. 51.351(h) and
claim in their SIP less emission reduction credit than the basic
performance standard for one or more pollutants, may apply a geographic
bubble covering areas in the State not otherwise subject to an I/M
requirement to achieve emission reductions from other measures equal to
or greater than what would have been achieved if the low enhanced
performance standard were met in the subject I/M areas. Emissions
reductions from non-I/M measures shall not be counted towards the OTR
low enhanced performance standard.
(c) Requirements after attainment. All I/M programs shall provide
that the program will remain effective, even if the area is redesignated
to attainment status or the standard is otherwise rendered no longer
applicable, until the State submits and EPA approves a SIP revision
which convincingly demonstrates that the area can maintain the relevant
standard(s) without benefit of the emission reductions attributable to
the I/M program. The State shall commit to fully implement and enforce
the program until such a demonstration can be made and approved by EPA.
At a minimum, for the purposes of SIP approval, legislation authorizing
the program shall not sunset prior to the attainment deadline for the
applicable National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).
(d) SIP requirements. The SIP shall describe the applicable areas in
detail and, consistent with Sec. 51.372 of this subpart, shall include
the legal authority or rules necessary to establish program boundaries.
[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 60 FR 48034, Sept. 18, 1995;
61 FR 39036, July 25, 1996; 65 FR 45532, July 24, 2000]
Sec. 51.351 Enhanced I/M performance standard.
(a) [Reserved]
(b) On-road testing. The performance standard shall include on-road
testing (including out-of-cycle repairs in the case of confirmed
failures) of at least 0.5% of the subject vehicle population, or 20,000
vehicles whichever is less, as a supplement to the periodic inspection
required in paragraphs (f), (g), and (h) of this section. Specific
requirements are listed in Sec. 51.371 of this subpart.
(c) On-board diagnostics (OBD). The performance standard shall
include inspection of all 1996 and later light-duty vehicles and light-
duty trucks equipped with certified on-board diagnostic systems, and
repair of malfunctions or system deterioration identified by or
affecting OBD systems as specified in Sec. 51.357. For States using
some version of MOBILE5 prior to mandated use of the MOBILE6 and
subsequent versions of EPA's mobile source emission factor model, the
OBD-I/M portion of the State's program as well as the applicable
enhanced I/M performance standard may be assumed to be equivalent to
performing the evaporative system purge test, the evaporative system
fill-neck pressure test, and the IM240 using grams-per-mile (gpm)
cutpoints of 0.60 gpm HC, 10.0 gpm CO, and 1.50 gpm NOX on MY
1996 and newer vehicles and assuming a start date of January 1, 2002 for
the OBD-I/M portion of the performance standard. This interim credit
assessment does not add to but rather replaces credit for any other
test(s) that may be performedon MY 1996 and newer vehicles, with the
exception of the gas-cap-only evaporative system test, which may be
added to the State's program to generate additional HC reduction credit.
This interim assumption shall apply even in the event that the State
opts to discontinue its current I/M tests on MY 1996 and newer vehicles
in favor of an OBD-I/M check on those same vehicles, with the exception
of the gas-cap evaporative system test. If a State currently claiming
the gas-cap test in its I/M SIP decides to discontinue that test on some
segment of its subject fleet previously covered, then the State will
need to revise its SIP and I/M modeling to quantify the resulting loss
in credit, per established modeling policy for the gas-cap pressure
test. Once MOBILE6 is released and its use required, the interim,
[[Page 287]]
MOBILE5-based modeling methodology described in this section will be
replaced by the OBD-I/M credit available from the MOBILE6 and subsequent
mobile source emission factor models.
(d) Modeling requirements. Equivalency of the emission levels which
will be achieved by the I/M program design in the SIP to those of the
model program described in this section shall be demonstrated using the
most current version of EPA's mobile source emission model, or an
alternative approved by the Administrator, using EPA guidance to aid in
the estimation of input parameters. States may adopt alternative
approaches that meet this performance standard. States may do so through
program design changes that affect normal I/M input parameters to the
mobile source emission factor model, or through program changes (such as
the accelerated retirement of high emitting vehicles) that reduce in-use
mobile source emissions. If the Administrator finds, under section
182(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Act pertaining to reasonable further progress
demonstrations or section 182(f)(1) of the Act pertaining to provisions
for major stationary sources, that NOX emission reductions
are not beneficial in a given ozone nonattainment area, then
NOX emission reductions are not required of the enhanced I/M
program, but the program shall be designed to offset NOX
increases resulting from the repair of HC and CO failures.
(e) [Reserved]
(f) High Enhanced Performance Standard. Enhanced I/M programs shall
be designed and implemented to meet or exceed a minimum performance
standard, which is expressed as emission levels in area-wide average
grams per mile (gpm), achieved from highway mobile sources as a result
of the program. The emission levels achieved by the State's program
design shall be calculated using the most current version, at the time
of submittal, of the EPA mobile source emission factor model or an
alternative model approved by the Administrator, and shall meet the
minimum performance standard both in operation and for SIP approval.
Areas shall meet the performance standard for the pollutants which cause
them to be subject to enhanced I/M requirements. In the case of ozone
nonattainment areas subject to enhanced I/M and subject areas in the
Ozone Transport Region, the performance standard must be met for both
oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs), except
as provided in paragraph (d) of this section. Except as provided in
paragraphs (g) and (h) of this section, the model program elements for
the enhanced I/M performance standard shall be as follows:
(1) Network type. Centralized testing.
(2) Start date. For areas with existing I/M programs, 1983. For
areas newly subject, 1995.
(3) Test frequency. Annual testing.
(4) Model year coverage. Testing of 1968 and later vehicles.
(5) Vehicle type coverage. Light duty vehicles, and light duty
trucks, rated up to 8,500 pounds Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR).
(6) Exhaust emission test type. Transient mass-emission testing on
1986 and later model year vehicles using the IM240 driving cycle, two-
speed testing (as described in appendix B of this subpart S) of 1981-
1985 vehicles, and idle testing (as described in appendix B of this
subpart S) of pre-1981 vehicles is assumed.
(7) Emission standards. (i) Emission standards for 1986 through 1993
model year light duty vehicles, and 1994 and 1995 light-duty vehicles
not meeting Tier 1 emission standards, of 0.80 gpm hydrocarbons (HC), 20
gpm CO, and 2.0 gpm NOX;
(ii) Emission standards for 1986 through 1993 light duty trucks less
than 6000 pounds gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR), and 1994 and 1995
trucks not meeting Tier 1 emission standards, of 1.2 gpm HC, 20 gpm CO,
and 3.5 gpm NOX;
(iii) Emission standards for 1986 through 1993 light duty trucks
greater than 6000 pounds GVWR, and 1994 and 1995 trucks not meeting the
Tier 1 emission standards, of 1.2 gpm HC, 20 gpm CO, and 3.5 gpm
NOX;
(iv) Emission standards for 1994 and later light duty vehicles
meeting Tier 1 emission standards of 0.70 gpm HC, 15 gpm CO, and 1.4 gpm
NOX;
(v) Emission standards for 1994 and later light duty trucks under
6000
[[Page 288]]
pounds GVWR and meeting Tier 1 emission standards of 0.70 gpm HC, 15 gpm
CO, and 2.0 gpm NOX;
(vi) Emission standards for 1994 and later light duty trucks greater
than 6000 pounds GVWR and meeting Tier 1 emission standards of 0.80 gpm
HC, 15 gpm CO and 2.5 gpm NOX;
(vii) Emission standards for 1981-1985 model year vehicles of 1.2%
CO, and 220 gpm HC for the idle, two-speed tests and loaded steady-state
tests (as described in appendix B of this subpart S); and
(viii) Maximum exhaust dilution measured as no less than 6% CO plus
carbon dioxide (CO2) on vehicles subject to a steady-state
test (as described in appendix B of this subpart S); and
(viii) Maximum exhaust dilution measured as no less than 6% CO plus
carbon dioxide (CO2) on vehicles subject to a steady-state
test (as described in appendix B of this subpart S).
(8) Emission control device inspections. (i) Visual inspection of
the catalyst and fuel inlet restrictor on all 1984 and later model year
vehicles.
(ii) Visual inspection of the positive crankcase ventilation valve
on 1968 through 1971 model years, inclusive, and of the exhaust gas
recirculation valve on 1972 through 1983 model year vehicles, inclusive.
(9) Evaporative system function checks. Evaporative system integrity
(pressure) test on 1983 and later model year vehicles and an evaporative
system transient purge test on 1986 and later model year vehicles.
(10) Stringency. A 20% emission test failure rate among pre-1981
model year vehicles.
(11) Waiver rate. A 3% waiver rate, as a percentage of failed
vehicles.
(12) Compliance rate. A 96% compliance rate.
(13) Evaluation date. Enhanced I/M program areas subject to the
provisions of this paragraph shall be shown to obtain the same or lower
emission levels as the model program described in this paragraph by
January 1, 2002 to within 0.02 gpm. Subject
programs shall demonstrate through modeling the ability to maintain this
level of emission reduction (or better) through their attainment
deadline for the applicable NAAQS standard(s).
(g) Alternate Low Enhanced I/M Performance Standard. An enhanced I/M
area which is either not subject to or has an approved State
Implementation Plan pursuant to the requirements of the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990 for Reasonable Further Progress in 1996, and does not
have a disapproved plan for Reasonable Further Progress for the period
after 1996 or a disapproved plan for attainment of the air quality
standards for ozone or CO, may select the alternate low enhanced I/M
performance standard described below in lieu of the standard described
in paragraph (f) of this section. The model program elements for this
alternate low enhanced I/M performance standard are:
(1) Network type. Centralized testing.
(2) Start date. For areas with existing I/M programs, 1983. For
areas newly subject, 1995.
(3) Test frequency. Annual testing.
(4) Model year coverage. Testing of 1968 and newer vehicles.
(5) Vehicle type coverage. Light duty vehicles, and light duty
trucks, rated up to 8,500 pounds GVWR.
(6) Exhaust emission test type. Idle testing of all covered vehicles
(as described in appendix B of subpart S).
(7) Emission standards. Those specified in 40 CFR part 85, subpart
W.
(8) Emission control device inspections. Visual inspection of the
positive crankcase ventilation valve on all 1968 through 1971 model year
vehicles, inclusive, and of the exhaust gas recirculation valve on all
1972 and newer model year vehicles.
(9) Evaporative system function checks. None.
(10) Stringency. A 20% emission test failure rate among pre-1981
model year vehicles.
(11) Waiver rate. A 3% waiver rate, as a percentage of failed
vehicles.
(12) Compliance rate. A 96% compliance rate.
(13) Evaluation date. Enhanced I/M program areas subject to the
provisions of this paragraph (g) shall be shown to obtain the same or
lower emission levels as the model program described in this paragraph
by January 1, 2002 to within 0.02 gpm. Subject
programs shall demonstrate through modeling the ability to maintain this
level of
[[Page 289]]
emission reduction (or better) through their attainment deadline for the
applicable NAAQS standard(s).
(h) Ozone Transport Region Low-Enhanced Performance Standard. An
attainment area, marginal ozone area, or moderate ozone area with a 1980
Census population of less than 200,000 in the urbanized area, in an
ozone transport region, that is required to implement enhanced I/M under
section 184(b)(1)(A) of the Clean Air Act, but was not previously
required to or did not in fact implement basic I/M under the Clean Air
Act as enacted prior to 1990 and is not subject to the requirements for
basic I/M programs in this subpart, may select the performance standard
described below in lieu of the standard described in paragraph (f) or
(g) of this section as long as the difference in emission reductions
between the program described in paragraph (g) and this paragraph are
made up with other measures, as provided in Sec. 51.350(b)(5).
Offsetting measures shall not include those otherwise required by the
Clean Air Act in the areas from which credit is bubbled. The program
elements for this alternate OTR enhanced I/M performance standard are:
(1) Network type. Centralized testing.
(2) Start date. January 1, 1999.
(3) Test frequency. Annual testing.
(4) Model year coverage. Testing of 1968 and newer vehicles.
(5) Vehicle type coverage. Light duty vehicles, and light duty
trucks, rated up to 8,500 pounds GVWR.
(6) Exhaust emission test type. Remote sensing measurements on 1968-
1995 vehicles; on-board diagnostic system checks on 1996 and newer
vehicles.
(7) Emission standards. For remote sensing measurements, a carbon
monoxide standard of 7.5% (with at least two separate readings above
this level to establish a failure).
(8) Emission control device inspections. Visual inspection of the
catalytic converter on 1975 and newer vehicles and visual inspection of
the positive crankcase ventilation valve on 1968-1974 vehicles.
(9) Waiver rate. A 3% waiver rate, as a percentage of failed
vehicles.
(10) Compliance rate. A 96% compliance rate.
(11) Evaluation date. Enhanced I/M program areas subject to the
provisions of this paragraph shall be shown to obtain the same or lower
VOC and NOx emission levels as the model program described in this
paragraph (h) by January 1, 2002 to within 0.02
gpm. Subject programs shall demonstrate through modeling the ability to
maintain this level of emission reduction (or better) through their
attainment deadline for the applicable NAAQS standard(s). Equality of
substituted emission reductions to the benefits of the low enhanced
performance standard must be demonstrated for the same evaluation date.
[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 58 FR 59367, Nov. 9, 1993; 59
FR 32343, June 23, 1994; 60 FR 48035, Sept. 18, 1995; 61 FR 39036, July
25, 1996; 61 FR 40945, Aug. 6, 1996; 63 FR 24433, May 4, 1998; 65 FR
45532, July 24, 2000; 66 FR 18176, Apr. 5, 2001]
Sec. 51.352 Basic I/M performance standard.
(a) Basic I/M programs shall be designed and implemented to meet or
exceed a minimum performance standard, which is expressed as emission
levels achieved from highway mobile sources as a result of the program.
The performance standard shall be established using the following model
I/M program inputs and local characteristics, such as vehicle mix and
local fuel controls. Similarly, the emission reduction benefits of the
State's program design shall be estimated using the most current version
of the EPA mobile source emission model, and shall meet the minimum
performance standard both in operation and for SIP approval.
(1) Network type. Centralized testing.
(2) Start date. For areas with existing I/M programs, 1983. For
areas newly subject, 1994.
(3) Test frequency. Annual testing.
(4) Model year coverage. Testing of 1968 and later model year
vehicles.
(5) Vehicle type coverage. Light duty vehicles.
(6) Exhaust emission test type. Idle test.
(7) Emission standards. No weaker than specified in 40 CFR part 85,
subpart W.
(8) Emission control device inspections. None.
[[Page 290]]
(9) Stringency. A 20% emission test failure rate among pre-1981
model year vehicles.
(10) Waiver rate. A 0% waiver rate.
(11) Compliance rate. A 100% compliance rate.
(12) Evaluation date. Basic I/M programs shall be shown to obtain
the same or lower emission levels as the model inputs by 1997 for ozone
nonattainment areas and 1996 for CO nonattainment areas; and, for
serious or worse ozone nonattainment areas, on each applicable milestone
and attainment deadline, thereafter.
(b) Oxides of nitrogen. Basic I/M testing in ozone nonattainment
areas shall be designed such that no increase in NOX
emissions occurs as a result of the program. If the Administrator finds,
under section 182(b)(1)(A)(i) of the Act pertaining to reasonable
further progress demonstrations or section 182(f)(1) of the Act
pertaining to provisions for major stationary sources, that
NOX emission reductions are not beneficial in a given ozone
nonattainment area, then the basic I/M NOX requirement may be
omitted. States shall implement any required NOX controls
within 12 months of implementation of the program deadlines required in
Sec. 51.373 of this subpart, except that newly implemented I/M programs
shall include NOX controls from the start.
(c) On-board diagnostics (OBD). The performance standard shall
include inspection of all 1996 and later light-duty vehicles equipped
with certified on-board diagnostic systems, and repair of malfunctions
or system deterioration identified by or affecting OBD systems as
specified in Sec. 51.357. For States using some version of MOBILE5
prior to mandated use of the MOBILE6 and subsequent versions of EPA's
mobile source emission factor model, the OBD-I/M portion of the State's
program as well as the applicable I/M performance standard may be
assumed to be equivalent to performing the evaporative system purge
test, the evaporative system fill-neck pressure test, and the IM240
using grams-per-mile (gpm) cutpoints of 0.60 gpm HC, 10.0 gpm CO, and
1.50 gpm NOX on MY 1996 and newer vehicles and assuming a
start date of January 1, 2002 for the OBD-I/M portion of the performance
standard. This interim credit assessment does not add to but rather
replaces credit for any other test(s) that may be performed on MY 1996
and newer vehicles, with theexception of the gas-cap-only evaporative
system test, which may be added to the State's program to generate
additional HC reduction credit. This interim assumption shall apply even
in the event that the State opts to discontinue its current I/M tests on
MY 1996 and newer vehicles in favor of an OBD-I/M check on those same
vehicles, with the exception of the gas-cap evaporative system test. If
a State currently claiming the gas-cap test in its I/M SIP decides to
discontinue that test on some segment of its subject fleet previously
covered, then the State will need to revise its SIP and I/M modeling to
quantify the resulting loss in credit, per established modeling policy
for the gas-cap pressure test. Once MOBILE6 is released and its use
required, the interim, MOBILE5-based modeling methodology described in
this section will be replaced by the OBD-I/M credit available from the
MOBILE6 and subsequent mobile source emission factor models.
(d) Modeling requirements. Equivalency of emission levels which will
be achieved by the I/M program design in the SIP to those of the model
program described in this section shall be demonstrated using the most
current version of EPA's mobile source emission model and EPA guidance
on the estimation of input parameters. Areas required to implement basic
I/M programs shall meet the performance standard for the pollutants
which cause them to be subject to basic requirements. Areas subject as a
result of ozone nonattainment shall meet the standard for VOCs and shall
demonstrate no NOX increase, as required in paragraph (b) of
this section.
[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 61 FR 40945, Aug. 6, 1996; 63
FR 24433, May 4, 1998; 66 FR 18177, Apr. 5, 2001]
Sec. 51.353 Network type and program evaluation.
Basic and enhanced I/M programs can be centralized, decentralized,
or a hybrid of the two at the State's discretion, but shall be
demonstrated to achieve the same (or better) level of
[[Page 291]]
emission reduction as the applicable performance standard described in
either Sec. 51.351 or 51.352 of this subpart. For decentralized
programs other than those meeting the design characteristics described
in paragraph (a) of this section, the State must demonstrate that the
program is achieving the level of effectiveness claimed in the plan
within 12 months of the plan's final conditional approval before EPA can
convert that approval to a final full approval. The adequacy of these
demonstrations will be judged by the Administrator on a case-by-case
basis through notice-and-comment rulemaking.
(a) Presumptive equivalency. A decentralized network consisting of
stations that only perform official I/M testing (which may include
safety-related inspections) and in which owners and employees of those
stations, or companies owning those stations, are contractually or
legally barred from engaging in motor vehicle repair or service, motor
vehicle parts sales, and motor vehicle sale and leasing, either directly
or indirectly, and are barred from referring vehicle owners to
particular providers of motor vehicle repair services (except as
provided in Sec. 51.369(b)(1) of this subpart) shall be considered
presumptively equivalent to a centralized, test-only system including
comparable test elements. States may allow such stations to engage in
the full range of sales not covered by the above prohibition, including
self-serve gasoline, pre-packaged oil, or other, non-automotive,
convenience store items. At the State's discretion, such stations may
also fulfill other functions typically carried out by the State such as
renewal of vehicle registration and driver's licenses, or tax and fee
collections.
(b) [Reserved]
(c) Program evaluation. Enhanced I/M programs shall include an
ongoing evaluation to quantify the emission reduction benefits of the
program, and to determine if the program is meeting the requirements of
the Clean Air Act and this subpart.
(1) The State shall report the results of the program evaluation on
a biennial basis, starting two years after the initial start date of
mandatory testing as required in Sec. 51.373 of this subpart.
(2) The evaluation shall be considered in establishing actual
emission reductions achieved from I/M for the purposes of satisfying the
requirements of sections 182(g)(1) and 182(g)(2) of the Clean Air Act,
relating to reductions in emissions and compliance demonstration.
(3) The evaluation program shall consist, at a minimum, of those
items described in paragraph (b)(1) of this section and program
evaluation data using a sound evaluation methodology, as approved by
EPA, and evaporative system checks, specified in Sec. 51.357(a) (9) and
(10) of this subpart, for model years subject to those evaporative
system test procedures. The test data shall be obtained from a
representative, random sample, taken at the time of initial inspection
(before repair) on a minimum of 0.1 percent of the vehicles subject to
inspection in a given year. Such vehicles shall receive a State
administered or monitored test, as specified in this paragraph (c)(3),
prior to the performance of I/M-triggered repairs during the inspection
cycle under consideration.
(4) The program evaluation test data shall be submitted to EPA and
shall be capable of providing accurate information about the overall
effectiveness of an I/M program, such evaluation to begin no later than
November 30, 1998.
(5) Areas that qualify for and choose to implement an OTR low
enhanced I/M program, as established in Sec. 51.351(h), and that claim
in their SIP less emission reduction credit than the basic performance
standard for one or more pollutants, are exempt from the requirements of
paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(4) of this section. The reports required
under Sec. 51.366 of this part shall be sufficient in these areas to
satisfy the requirements of Clean Air Act for program reporting.
(d) SIP requirements. (1) The SIP shall include a description of the
network to be employed, the required legal authority, and, in the case
of areas making claims under paragraph (b) of this section, the required
demonstration.
(2) The SIP shall include a description of the evaluation schedule
and protocol, the sampling methodology,
[[Page 292]]
the data collection and analysis system, the resources and personnel for
evaluation, and related details of the evaluation program, and the legal
authority enabling the evaluation program.
[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 58 FR 59367, Nov. 9, 1993; 61
FR 39037, July 25, 1996; 63 FR 1368, Jan. 9, 1998; 65 FR 45532, July 24,
2000]
Sec. 51.354 Adequate tools and resources.
(a) Administrative resources. The program shall maintain the
administrative resources necessary to perform all of the program
functions including quality assurance, data analysis and reporting, and
the holding of hearings and adjudication of cases. A portion of the test
fee or a separately assessed per vehicle fee shall be collected, placed
in a dedicated fund and retained, to be used to finance program
oversight, management, and capital expenditures. Alternatives to this
approach shall be acceptable if the State can demonstrate that adequate
funding of the program can be maintained in some other fashion (e.g.,
through contractual obligation along with demonstrated past
performance). Reliance on future uncommitted annual or biennial
appropriations from the State or local General Fund is not acceptable,
unless doing otherwise would be a violation of the State's constitution.
This section shall in no way require the establishment of a test fee if
the State chooses to fund the program in some other manner.
(b) Personnel. The program shall employ sufficient personnel to
effectively carry out the duties related to the program, including but
not limited to administrative audits, inspector audits, data analysis,
program oversight, program evaluation, public education and assistance,
and enforcement against stations and inspectors as well as against
motorists who are out of compliance with program regulations and
requirements.
(c) Equipment. The program shall possess equipment necessary to
achieve the objectives of the program and meet program requirements,
including but not limited to a steady supply of vehicles for covert
auditing, test equipment and facilities for program evaluation, and
computers capable of data processing, analysis, and reporting. Equipment
or equivalent services may be contractor supplied or owned by the State
or local authority.
(d) SIP requirements. The SIP shall include a description of the
resources that will be used for program operation, and discuss how the
performance standard will be met.
(1) The SIP shall include a detailed budget plan which describes the
source of funds for personnel, program administration, program
enforcement, purchase of necessary equipment (such as vehicles for
undercover audits), and any other requirements discussed throughout, for
the period prior to the next biennial self-evaluation required in Sec.
51.366 of this subpart.
(2) The SIP shall include a description of personnel resources. The
plan shall include the number of personnel dedicated to overt and covert
auditing, data analysis, program administration, enforcement, and other
necessary functions and the training attendant to each function.
Sec. 51.355 Test frequency and convenience.
(a) The performance standards for I/M programs assume an annual test
frequency; other schedules may be approved if the required emission
targets are achieved. The SIP shall describe the test schedule in
detail, including the test year selection scheme if testing is other
than annual. The SIP shall include the legal authority necessary to
implement and enforce the test frequency requirement and explain how the
test frequency will be integrated with the enforcement process.
(b) In enhanced I/M programs, test systems shall be designed in such
a way as to provide convenient service to motorists required to get
their vehicles tested. The SIP shall demonstrate that the network of
stations providing test services is sufficient to insure short waiting
times to get a test and short driving distances. Stations shall be
required to adhere to regular testing hours and to test any subject
vehicle presented for a test during its test period.
[[Page 293]]
Sec. 51.356 Vehicle coverage.
The performance standard for enhanced I/M programs assumes coverage
of all 1968 and later model year light duty vehicles and light duty
trucks up to 8,500 pounds GVWR, and includes vehicles operating on all
fuel types. The standard for basic I/M programs does not include light
duty trucks. Other levels of coverage may be approved if the necessary
emission reductions are achieved. Vehicles registered or required to be
registered within the I/M program area boundaries and fleets primarily
operated within the I/M program area boundaries and belonging to the
covered model years and vehicle classes comprise the subject vehicles.
(a) Subject vehicles. (1) All vehicles of a covered model year and
vehicle type shall be tested according to the applicable test schedule,
including leased vehicles whose registration or titling is in the name
of an equity owner other than the lessee or user.
(2) All subject fleet vehicles shall be inspected. Fleets may be
officially inspected outside of the normal I/M program test facilities,
if such alternatives are approved by the program administration, but
shall be subject to the same test requirements using the same quality
control standards as non-fleet vehicles. If all vehicles in a particular
fleet are tested during one part of the cycle, then the quality control
requirements shall be met during the time of testing only. Any vehicle
available for rent in the I/M area or for use in the I/M area shall be
subject. Fleet vehicles not being tested in normal I/M test facilities
in enhanced I/M programs, however, shall be inspected in independent,
test-only facilities, according to the requirements of Sec. 51.353(a)
of this subpart.
(3) Subject vehicles which are registered in the program area but
are primarily operated in another I/M area shall be tested, either in
the area of primary operation, or in the area of registration. Alternate
schedules may be established to permit convenient testing of these
vehicles (e.g., vehicles belonging to students away at college should be
rescheduled for testing during a visit home). I/M programs shall make
provisions for providing official testing to vehicles registered
elsewhere.
(4) Vehicles which are operated on Federal installations located
within an I/M program area shall be tested, regardless of whether the
vehicles are registered in the State or local I/M area. This requirement
applies to all employee-owned or leased vehicles (including vehicles
owned, leased, or operated by civilian and military personnel on Federal
installations) as well as agency-owned or operated vehicles, except
tactical military vehicles, operated on the installation. This
requirement shall not apply to visiting agency, employee, or military
personnel vehicles as long as such visits do not exceed 60 calendar days
per year. In areas without test fees collected in the lane, arrangements
shall be made by the installation with the I/M program for reimbursement
of the costs of tests provided for agency vehicles, at the discretion of
the I/M agency. The installation shall provide documentation of proof of
compliance to the I/M agency. The documentation shall include a list of
subject vehicles and shall be updated periodically, as determined by the
I/M program administrator, but no less frequently than each inspection
cycle. The installation shall use one of the following methods to
establish proof of compliance:
(i) Presentation of a valid certificate of compliance from the local
I/M program, from any other I/M program at least as stringent as the
local program, or from any program deemed acceptable by the I/M program
administrator.
(ii) Presentation of proof of vehicle registration within the
geographic area covered by the I/M program, except for any program whose
enforcement is not through registration denial.
(iii) Another method approved by the State or local I/M program
administrator.
(5) Special exemptions may be permitted for certain subject vehicles
provided a demonstration is made that the performance standard will be
met.
(6) States may also exempt MY 1996 and newer OBD-equipped vehicles
that receive an OBD-I/M inspection from the tailpipe, purge, and fill-
neck pressure tests (where applicable) without any loss of emission
reduction credit.
[[Page 294]]
(b) SIP requirements. (1) The SIP shall include a detailed
description of the number and types of vehicles to be covered by the
program, and a plan for how those vehicles are to be identified,
including vehicles that are routinely operated in the area but may not
be registered in the area.
(2) The SIP shall include a description of any special exemptions
which will be granted by the program, and an estimate of the percentage
and number of subject vehicles which will be impacted. Such exemptions
shall be accounted for in the emission reduction analysis.
(3) The SIP shall include the legal authority or rule necessary to
implement and enforce the vehicle coverage requirement.
[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 66 FR 18177, Apr. 5, 2001]
Sec. 51.357 Test procedures and standards.
Written test procedures and pass/fail standards shall be established
and followed for each model year and vehicle type included in the
program.
(a) Test procedure requirements. Emission tests and functional tests
shall be conducted according to good engineering practices to assure
test accuracy.
(1) Initial tests (i.e., those occurring for the first time in a
test cycle) shall be performed without repair or adjustment at the
inspection facility, prior to the test, except as provided in paragraph
(a)(10)(i) of this section.
(2) The vehicle owner or driver shall have access to the test area
such that observation of the entire official inspection process on the
vehicle is permitted. Such access may be limited but shall in no way
prevent full observation.
(3) An official test, once initiated, shall be performed in its
entirety regardless of intermediate outcomes except in the case of
invalid test condition, unsafe conditions, fast pass/fail algorithms,
or, in the case of the on-board diagnostic (OBD) system check, unset
readiness codes.
(4) Tests involving measurement shall be performed with program-
approved equipment that has been calibrated according to the quality
procedures contained in appendix A to this subpart.
(5) Vehicles shall be rejected from testing if the exhaust system is
missing or leaking, or if the vehicle is in an unsafe condition for
testing. Coincident with mandatory OBD-I/M testing and repair of
vehicles so equipped, MY 1996 and newer vehicles shall be rejected from
testing if a scan of the OBD system reveals a ``not ready'' code for any
component of the OBD system. At a state's option it may choose
alternatively to reject MY 1996-2000 vehicles only if three or more
``not ready'' codes are present and to reject MY 2001 and later model
years only if two or more ``not ready'' codes are present. This
provision does not release manufacturers from the obligations regarding
readiness status set forth in 40 CFR 86.094-17(e)(1): ``Control of Air
Pollution From New Motor Vehicles and New Motor Vehicle Engines:
Regulations RequiringOn-Board Diagnostic Systems on 1994 and Later Model
Year Light-Duty Vehicles and Light-Duty Trucks.'' Once the cause for
rejection has been corrected, the vehicle must return for testing to
continue the testing process. Failure to return for testing in a timely
manner after rejection shall be considered non-compliance with the
program, unless the motorist can prove that the vehicle has been sold,
scrapped, or is otherwise no longer in operation within the program
area.
(6) Vehicles shall be retested after repair for any portion of the
inspection that is failed on the previous test to determine if repairs
were effective. To the extent that repair to correct a previous failure
could lead to failure of another portion of the test, that portion shall
also be retested. Evaporative system repairs shall trigger an exhaust
emissions retest (in programs which conduct an exhaust emission test as
part of the initial inspection).
(7) Steady-state testing. Steady-state tests shall be performed in
accordance with the procedures contained in appendix B to this subpart.
(8) Emission control device inspection. Visual emission control
device checks shall be performed through direct observation or through
indirect observation using a mirror, video camera or
[[Page 295]]
other visual aid. These inspections shall include a determination as to
whether each subject device is present and appears to be properly
connected and appears to be the correct type for the certified vehicle
configuration.
(9) Evaporative system purge test procedure. The purge test
procedure shall consist of measuring the total purge flow (in standard
liters) occurring in the vehicle's evaporative system during the
transient dynamometer emission test specified in paragraph (a)(11) of
this section. The purge flow measurement system shall be connected to
the purge portion of the evaporative system in series between the
canister and the engine, preferably near the canister. The inspector
shall be responsible for ensuring that all items that are disconnected
in the conduct of the test procedure are properly re-connected at the
conclusion of the test procedure. Alternative procedures may be used if
they are shown to be equivalent or better to the satisfaction of the
Administrator. Except in the case of government-run test facilities
claiming sovereign immunity, any damage done to the evaporative emission
control system during this test shall be repaired at the expense of the
inspection facility.
(10) Evaporative system integrity test procedure. The test sequence
shall consist of the following steps:
(i) Test equipment shall be connected to the fuel tank canister hose
at the canister end. The gas cap shall be checked to ensure that it is
properly, but not excessively tightened, and shall be tightened if
necessary.
(ii) The system shall be pressurized to 140.5
inches of water without exceeding 26 inches of water system pressure.
(iii) Close off the pressure source, seal the evaporative system and
monitor pressure decay for up to two minutes.
(iv) Loosen the gas cap after a maximum of two minutes and monitor
for a sudden pressure drop, indicating that the fuel tank was
pressurized.
(v) The inspector shall be responsible for ensuring that all items
that are disconnected in the conduct of the test procedure are properly
re-connected at the conclusion of the test procedure.
(vi) Alternative procedures may be used if they are shown to be
equivalent or better to the satisfaction of the Administrator. Except in
the case of government-run test facilities claiming sovereign immunity,
any damage done to the evaporative emission control system during this
test shall be repaired at the expense of the inspection facility.
(11) Transient emission test. The transient emission test shall
consist of mass emission measurement using a constant volume sampler (or
an Administrator-approved alternative methodology for accounting for
exhaust volume) while the vehicle is driven through a computer-monitored
driving cycle on a dynamometer. The driving cycle shall include
acceleration, deceleration, and idle operating modes as specified in
appendix E to this subpart (or an approved alternative). The driving
cycle may be ended earlier using approved fast pass or fast fail
algorithms and multiple pass/fail algorithms may be used during the test
cycle to eliminate false failures. The transient test procedure,
including algorithms and other procedural details, shall be approved by
the Administrator prior to use in an I/M program.
(12) On-board diagnostic checks. Beginning January 1, 2002,
inspection of the on-board diagnostic (OBD) system on MY 1996 and newer
light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks shall be conducted according
to the procedure described in 40 CFR 85.2222, at a minimum. This
inspection may be used in lieu of tailpipe, purge, and fill-neck
pressure testing. Alternatively, states may elect to phase-in OBD-I/M
testing for one test cycle by using the OBD-I/M check to screen clean
vehicles from tailpipe testing and require repair and retest for only
those vehicles which proceed to fail the tailpipe test. An additional
alternative is also available to states with regard to the deadline for
mandatory testing, repair, and retesting of vehicles based upon the OBD-
I/M check. Under this third option, if a state can show good cause (and
the Administrator takes notice-and-comment action to approve this good
cause showing as a revision to the State's Implementation Plan), up to
an additional 12 months' extensionmay be
[[Page 296]]
granted, establishing an alternative start date for such states of no
later than January 1, 2003. States choosing to make this showing will
also have available to them the phase-in approach described in this
section, with the one-cycle time limit to begin coincident with the
alternative start date established by Administrator approval of the
showing, but no later than January 1, 2003. The showing of good cause
(and its approval or disapproval) will be addressed on a case-by-case
basis by the Administrator.
(13) Approval of alternative tests. Alternative test procedures may
be approved if the Administrator finds that such procedures show a
reasonable correlation with the Federal Test Procedure and are capable
of identifying comparable emission reductions from the I/M program as a
whole, in combination with other program elements, as would be
identified by the test(s) which they are intended to replace.
(b) Test standards--(1) Emissions standards. HC, CO, and
CO+CO2 (or CO2 alone) emission standards shall be
applicable to all vehicles subject to the program with the exception of
MY 1996 and newer OBD-equipped light-duty vehicles and light-duty
trucks, which will be held to the requirements of 40 CFR 85.2207, at a
minimum. Repairs shall be required for failure of any standard
regardless of the attainment status of the area. NOX emission
standards shall be applied to vehicles subject to a loaded mode test in
ozone nonattainment areas and in an ozone transport region, unless a
waiver of NOX controls is provided to the State under Sec.
51.351(d).
(i) Steady-state short tests. The steady-state short test emission
standards for 1981 and later model year light duty vehicles and light
duty trucks shall be at least as stringent as those in appendix C to
this subpart.
(ii) Transient test. Transient test emission standards shall be
established for HC, CO, CO2, and NOX for subject
vehicles based on model year and vehicle type.
(2) Visual equipment inspection standards. (i) Vehicles shall fail
visual inspections of subject emission control devices if such devices
are part of the original certified configuration and are found to be
missing, modified, disconnected, or improperly connected.
(ii) Vehicles shall fail visual inspections of subject emission
control devices if such devices are found to be incorrect for the
certified vehicle configuration under inspection. Aftermarket parts, as
well as original equipment manufacture parts, may be considered correct
if they are proper for the certified vehicle configuration. Where an EPA
aftermarket approval or self-certification program exists for a
particular class of subject parts, vehicles shall fail visual equipment
inspections if the part is neither original equipment manufacture nor
from an approved or self-certified aftermarket manufacturer.
(3) Functional test standards--(i) Evaporative system integrity
test. Vehicles shall fail the evaporative system pressure test if the
system cannot maintain a system pressure above eight inches of water for
up to two minutes after being pressurized to 140.5
inches of water or if no pressure drop is detected when the gas cap is
loosened as described in paragraph (a)(10)(iv) of this section.
Additionally, vehicles shall fail the evaporative test if the canister
is missing or obviously damaged, if hoses are missing or obviously
disconnected, or if the gas cap is missing.
(ii) Evaporative canister purge test. Vehicles with a total purge
system flow measuring less than one liter, over the course of the
transient test required in paragraph (a)(9) of this section, shall fail
the evaporative purge test.
(4) On-board diagnostic test standards. Vehicles shall fail the on-
board diagnostic test if they fail to meet the requirements of 40 CFR
85.2207, at a minimum. Failure of the on-board diagnostic test need not
result in failure of the vehicle inspection/maintenance test until
January 1, 2002. Alternatively, states may elect to phase-in OBD-I/M
testing for one test cycle by using the OBD- I/M check to screen clean
vehicles from tailpipe testing and require repair and retest for only
those vehicles which proceed to fail the tailpipe test. An additional
alternative is also available to states with regard to the deadline for
mandatory testing, repair, and retesting of vehicles based
[[Page 297]]
upon the OBD-I/M check. Under this third option, if a state can show
good cause (and the Administrator takes notice-and-comment action to
approve this good cause showing), up to an additional 12 months'
extension may be granted, establishing an alternative start date for
such states of no later than January 1, 2003. States choosingto make
this showing will also have available to them the phase-in approach
described in this section, with the one-cycle time limit to begin
coincident with the alternative start date established by Administrator
approval of the showing, but no later than January 1, 2003. The showing
of good cause (and its approval or disapproval) will be addressed on a
case-by-case basis.
(c) Fast test algorithms and standards. Special test algorithms and
pass/fail algorithms may be employed to reduce test time when the test
outcome is predictable with near certainty, if the Administrator
approves by letter the equivalency to full procedure testing.
(d) Applicability. In general, section 203(a)(3)(A) of the Clean Air
Act prohibits altering a vehicle's configuration such that it changes
from a certified to a non-certified configuration. In the inspection
process, vehicles that have been altered from their original certified
configuration are to be tested in the same manner as other subject
vehicles with the exception of MY 1996 and newer, OBD-equipped vehicles
on which the data link connector is missing, has been tampered with or
which has been altered in such a way as to make OBD system testing
impossible. Such vehicles shall be failed for the on-board diagnostics
portion of the test and are expected to be repaired so that the vehicle
is testable. Failure to return for retesting in a timely manner after
failure and repair shall be considered non-compliance with the program,
unless the motorist can prove that the vehicle has been sold, scrapped,
or is otherwise no longer in operation within the program area.
(1) Vehicles with engines other than the engine originally installed
by the manufacturer or an identical replacement of such engine shall be
subject to the test procedures and standards for the chassis type and
model year including visual equipment inspections for all parts that are
part of the original or now-applicable certified configuration and part
of the normal inspection. States may choose to require vehicles with
such engines to be subject to the test procedures and standards for the
engine model year if it is newer than the chassis model year.
(2) Vehicles that have been switched from an engine of one fuel type
to another fuel type that is subject to the program (e.g., from a diesel
engine to a gasoline engine) shall be subject to the test procedures and
standards for the current fuel type, and to the requirements of
paragraph (d)(1) of this section.
(3) Vehicles that are switched to a fuel type for which there is no
certified configuration shall be tested according to the most stringent
emission standards established for that vehicle type and model year.
Emission control device requirements may be waived if the program
determines that the alternatively fueled vehicle configuration would
meet the new vehicle standards for that model year without such devices.
(4) Mixing vehicle classes (e.g., light-duty with heavy-duty) and
certification types (e.g., California with Federal) within a single
vehicle configuration shall be considered tampering.
(e) SIP requirements. The SIP shall include a description of each
test procedure used. The SIP shall include the rule, ordinance or law
describing and establishing the test procedures.
[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 61 FR 40945, Aug. 6, 1996; 63
FR 24433, May 4, 1998; 65 FR 45533, July 24, 2000; 66 FR 18178, Apr. 5,
2001]
Sec. 51.358 Test equipment.
Computerized emission test systems are required for performing an
official emissions test on subject vehicles.
(a) Performance features of computerized emission test systems. The
emission test equipment shall be certified by the program, and newly
acquired emission test systems shall be subjected to acceptance test
procedures to ensure compliance with program specifications.
(1) Emission test equipment shall be capable of testing all subject
vehicles and shall be updated from time to time
[[Page 298]]
to accommodate new technology vehicles as well as changes to the
program. In the case of OBD-based testing, the equipment used to access
the onboard computer shall be capable of testing all MY 1996 and newer,
OBD-equipped light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks.
(2) At a minimum, emission test equipment:
(i) Shall make automatic pass/fail decisions;
(ii) Shall be secured from tampering and/or abuse;
(iii) Shall be based upon written specifications; and
(iv) Shall be capable of simultaneously sampling dual exhaust
vehicles in the case of tailpipe-based emission test equipment.
(3) The vehicle owner or driver shall be provided with a record of
test results, including all of the items listed in 40 CFR part 85,
subpart W as being required on the test record (as applicable). The test
report shall include:
(i) A vehicle description, including license plate number, vehicle
identification number, and odometer reading;
(ii) The date and time of test;
(iii) The name or identification number of the individual(s)
performing the tests and the location of the test station and lane;
(iv) The type(s) of test(s) performed;
(v) The applicable test standards;
(vi) The test results, by test, and, where applicable, by pollutant;
(vii) A statement indicating the availability of warranty coverage
as required in section 207 of the Clean Air Act;
(viii) Certification that tests were performed in accordance with
the regulations and, in the case of decentralized programs, the
signature of the individual who performed the test; and
(ix) For vehicles that fail the emission test, information on the
possible cause(s) of the failure.
(b) Functional characteristics of computerized emission test
systems. The test system is composed of motor vehicle test equipment
controlled by a computerized processor and shall make automatic pass/
fail decisions.
(1) [Reserved]
(2) Test systems in enhanced I/M programs shall include a real-time
data link to a host computer that prevents unauthorized multiple initial
tests on the same vehicle in a test cycle and to insure test record
accuracy. For areas which have demonstrated the ability to meet their
other, non-I/M Clean Air Act requirements without relying on emission
reductions from the I/M program (and which have also elected to employ
stand-alone test equipment as part of the I/M program), such areas may
adopt alternative methods for preventing multiple initial tests, subject
to approval by the Administrator.
(3) [Reserved]
(4) On-board diagnostic test equipment requirements. The test
equipment used to perform on-board diagnostic inspections shall function
as specified in 40 CFR 85.2231.
(c) SIP requirements. The SIP shall include written technical
specifications for all test equipment used in the program and shall
address each of the above requirements (as applicable). The
specifications shall describe the testing process, the necessary test
equipment, the required features, and written acceptance testing
criteria and procedures.
[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 61 FR 40945, Aug. 6, 1996; 65
FR 45533, July 24, 2000; 66 FR 18178, Apr. 5, 2001]
Sec. 51.359 Quality control.
Quality control measures shall insure that emission testing
equipment is calibrated and maintained properly, and that inspection,
calibration records, and control charts are accurately created, recorded
and maintained (where applicable).
(a) General requirements. (1) The practices described in this
section and in appendix A to this subpart shall be followed for those
tests (or portions of tests) which fall into the testing categories
identified. Alternatives or exceptions to these procedures or
frequencies may be approved by the Administrator based on a
demonstration of comparable performance.
(2) Preventive maintenance on all inspection equipment necessary to
insure accurate and repeatable operation shall be performed on a
periodic basis.
(3) [Reserved]
(b) Requirements for steady-state emissions testing equipment. (1)
Equipment
[[Page 299]]
shall be maintained according to demonstrated good engineering practices
to assure test accuracy. The calibration and adjustment requirements in
appendix A to this subpart shall apply to all steady-state test
equipment. States may adjust calibration schedules and other quality
control frequencies by using statistical process control to monitor
equipment performance on an ongoing basis.
(2) For analyzers that use ambient air as zero air, provision shall
be made to draw the air from outside the inspection bay or lane in which
the analyzer is situated.
(3) The analyzer housing shall be constructed to protect the
analyzer bench and electrical components from ambient temperature and
humidity fluctuations that exceed the range of the analyzer's design
specifications.
(4) Analyzers shall automatically purge the analytical system after
each test.
(c) Requirements for transient exhaust emission test equipment.
Equipment shall be maintained according to demonstrated good engineering
practices to assure test accuracy. Computer control of quality assurance
checks and quality control charts shall be used whenever possible.
Exceptions to the procedures and the frequency of the checks described
in appendix A of this subpart may be approved by the Administrator based
on a demonstration of comparable performance.
(d) Requirements for evaporative system functional test equipment.
Equipment shall be maintained according to demonstrated good engineering
practices to assure test accuracy. Computer control of quality assurance
checks and quality control charts shall be used whenever possible.
Exceptions to the procedures and the frequency of the checks described
in appendix A of this subpart may be approved by the Administrator based
on a demonstration of comparable performance.
(e) Document security. Measures shall be taken to maintain the
security of all documents by which compliance with the inspection
requirement is established including, but not limited to inspection
certificates, waiver certificates, license plates, license tabs, and
stickers. This section shall in no way require the use of paper
documents but shall apply if they are used by the program for these
purposes.
(1) Compliance documents shall be counterfeit resistant. Such
measures as the use of special fonts, water marks, ultra-violet inks,
encoded magnetic strips, unique bar-coded identifiers, and difficult to
acquire materials may be used to accomplish this requirement.
(2) All inspection certificates, waiver certificates, and stickers
shall be printed with a unique serial number and an official program
seal.
(3) Measures shall be taken to ensure that compliance documents
cannot be stolen or removed without being damaged.
(f) SIP requirements. The SIP shall include a description of quality
control and record keeping procedures. The SIP shall include the
procedure manual, rule, ordinance or law describing and establishing the
quality control procedures and requirements.
[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 58 FR 59367, Nov. 9, 1993; 65
FR 45533, July 24, 2000]
Sec. 51.360 Waivers and compliance via diagnostic inspection.
The program may allow the issuance of a waiver, which is a form of
compliance with the program requirements that allows a motorist to
comply without meeting the applicable test standards, as long as the
prescribed criteria described below are met.
(a) Waiver issuance criteria. The waiver criteria shall include the
following at a minimum.
(1) Waivers shall be issued only after a vehicle has failed a retest
performed after all qualifying repairs have been completed. Qualifying
repairs include repairs of the emission control components, listed in
paragraph (a)(5) of this section, performed within 60 days of the test
date.
(2) Any available warranty coverage shall be used to obtain needed
repairs before expenditures can be counted towards the cost limits in
paragraphs (a)(5) and (a)(6) of this section. The operator of a vehicle
within the statutory age and mileage coverage under section 207(b) of
the Clean Air Act shall present a written denial of warranty
[[Page 300]]
coverage from the manufacturer or authorized dealer for this provision
to be waived for approved tests applicable to the vehicle.
(3) Waivers shall not be issued to vehicles for tampering-related
repairs. The cost of tampering-related repairs shall not be applicable
to the minimum expenditure in paragraphs (a)(5) and (a)(6) of this
section. States may issue exemptions for tampering-related repairs if it
can be verified that the part in question or one similar to it is no
longer available for sale.
(4) Repairs shall be appropriate to the cause of the test failure,
and a visual check shall be made to determine if repairs were actually
made if, given the nature of the repair, it can be visually confirmed.
Receipts shall be submitted for review to further verify that qualifying
repairs were performed.
(5) General repairs shall be performed by a recognized repair
technician (i.e., one professionally engaged in vehicle repair, employed
by a going concern whose purpose is vehicle repair, or possessing
nationally recognized certification for emission-related diagnosis and
repair) in order to qualify for a waiver. I/M programs may allow the
cost of parts (not labor) utilized by non-technicians (e.g., owners) to
apply toward the waiver limit. The waiver would apply to the cost of
parts for the repair or replacement of the following list of emission
control components: oxygen sensor, catalytic converter, thermal reactor,
EGR valve, fuel filler cap, evaporative canister, PCV valve, air pump,
distributor, ignition wires, coil, and spark plugs. The cost of any
hoses, gaskets, belts, clamps, brackets or other accessories directly
associated with these components may also be applied to the waiver
limit.
(6) In basic programs, a minimum of $75 for pre-81 vehicles and $200
for 1981 and newer vehicles shall be spent in order to qualify for a
waiver. These model year cutoffs and the associated dollar limits shall
be in full effect no later than January 1, 1998. Prior to January 1,
1998, States may adopt any minimum expenditure commensurate with the
waiver rate committed to for the purposes of modeling compliance with
the basic I/M performance standard.
(7) Beginning on January 1, 1998, enhanced I/M programs shall
require the motorist to make an expenditure of at least $450 in repairs
to qualify for a waiver. The I/M program shall provide that the $450
minimum expenditure shall be adjusted in January of each year by the
percentage, if any, by which the Consumer Price Index for the preceding
calendar year differs from the Consumer Price Index of 1989. Prior to
January 1, 1998, States may adopt any minimum expenditure commensurate
with the waiver rate committed to for the purposes of modeling
compliance with the relevant enhanced I/M performance standard.
(i) The Consumer Price Index for any calendar year is the average of
the Consumer Price Index for all-urban consumers published by the
Department of Labor, as of the close of the 12-month period ending on
August 31 of each calendar year. A copy of the current Consumer Price
Index may be obtained from the Emission Planning and Strategies
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2565 Plymouth Road, Ann
Arbor, Michigan 48105.
(ii) The revision of the Consumer Price Index which is most
consistent with the Consumer Price Index for calendar year 1989 shall be
used.
(8) States may establish lower minimum expenditures if a program is
established to scrap vehicles that do not meet standards after the lower
expe nditure is made.
(9) A time extension, not to exceed the period of the inspection
frequency, may be granted to obtain needed repairs on a vehicle in the
case of economic hardship when waiver requirements have not been met.
After having received a time extension, a vehicle must fully pass the
applicable test standards before becoming eligible for another time
extension. The extension for a vehicle shall be tracked and reported by
the program.
(b) Compliance via diagnostic inspection. Vehicles subject to a
transient IM240 emission test at the cutpoints established in Sec. Sec.
51.351 (f)(7) and (g)(7) of this subpart may be issued a certificate of
compliance without meeting the prescribed emission cutpoints, if, after
[[Page 301]]
failing a retest on emissions, a complete, documented physical and
functional diagnosis and inspection performed by the I/M agency or a
contractor to the I/M agency show that no additional emission-related
repairs are needed. Any such exemption policy and procedures shall be
subject to approval by the Administrator.
(c) Quality control of waiver issuance. (1) Enhanced programs shall
control waiver issuance and processing by establishing a system of
agency-issued waivers. The State may delegate this authority to a single
contractor but inspectors in stations and lanes shall not issue waivers.
Basic programs may permit inspector-issued waivers as long as quality
assurance efforts include a comprehensive review of waiver issuance.
(2) The program shall include methods of informing vehicle owners or
lessors of potential warranty coverage, and ways to obtain warranty
repairs.
(3) The program shall insure that repair receipts are authentic and
cannot be revised or reused.
(4) The program shall insure that waivers are only valid for one
test cycle.
(5) The program shall track, manage, and account for time extensions
or exemptions so that owners or lessors cannot receive or retain a
waiver improperly.
(d) SIP requirements. (1) The SIP shall include a maximum waiver
rate expressed as a percentage of initially failed vehicles. This waiver
rate shall be used for estimating emission reduction benefits in the
modeling analysis.
(2) The State shall take corrective action if the waiver rate
exceeds that committed to in the SIP or revise the SIP and the emission
reductions claimed.
(3) The SIP shall describe the waiver criteria and procedures,
including cost limits, quality assurance methods and measures, and
administration.
(4) The SIP shall include the necessary legal authority, ordinance,
or rules to issue waivers, set and adjust cost limits as required in
paragraph (a)(5) of this section, and carry out any other functions
necessary to administer the waiver system, including enforcement of the
waiver provisions.
[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 58 FR 59367, Nov. 9, 1993; 60
FR 48036, Sept. 18, 1995]
Sec. 51.361 Motorist compliance enforcement.
Compliance shall be ensured through the denial of motor vehicle
registration in enhanced I/M programs unless an exception for use of an
existing alternative is approved. An enhanced I/M area may use an
existing alternative if it demonstrates that the alternative has been
more effective than registration denial. An enforcement mechanism may be
considered an ``existing alternative'' only in States that, for some
area in the State, had an I/M program with that mechanism in operation
prior to passage of the 1990 Amendments to the Act. A basic I/M area may
use an alternative enforcement mechanism if it demonstrates that the
alternative will be as effective as registration denial. Two other types
of enforcement programs may qualify for enhanced I/M programs if
demonstrated to have been more effective than enforcement of the
registration requirement in the past: Sticker-based enforcement programs
and computer-matching programs. States that did not adopt an I/M program
for any area of the State before November 15, 1990, may not use an
enforcement alternative in connection with an enhanced I/M program
required to be adopted after that date.
(a) Registration denial. Registration denial enforcement is defined
as rejecting an application for initial registration or reregistration
of a used vehicle (i.e., a vehicle being registered after the initial
retail sale and associated registration) unless the vehicle has complied
with the I/M requirement prior to granting the application. Pursuant to
section 207(g)(3) of the Act, nothing in this subpart shall be construed
to require that new vehicles shall receive emission testing prior to
initial retail sale. In designing its enforcement program, the State
shall:
[[Page 302]]
(1) Provide an external, readily visible means of determining
vehicle compliance with the registration requirement to facilitate
enforcement of the program;
(2) Adopt a schedule of testing (either annual or biennial) that
clearly determines when a vehicle shall comply prior to registration;
(3) Design a testing certification mechanism (either paper-based or
electronic) that shall be used for registration purposes and clearly
indicates whether the certification is valid for purposes of
registration, including:
(i) Expiration date of the certificate;
(ii) Unambiguous vehicle identification information; and
(iii) Whether the vehicle passed or received a waiver;
(4) Routinely issue citations to motorists with expired or missing
license plates, with either no registration or an expired registration,
and with no license plate decals or expired decals, and provide for
enforcement officials other than police to issue citations (e.g.,
parking meter attendants) to parked vehicles in noncompliance;
(5) Structure the penalty system to deter non-compliance with the
registration requirement through the use of mandatory minimum fines
(meaning civil, monetary penalties, in this subpart) constituting a
meaningful deterrent and through a requirement that compliance be
demonstrated before a case can be closed;
(6) Ensure that evidence of testing is available and checked for
validity at the time of a new registration of a used vehicle or
registration renewal;
(7) Prevent owners or lessors from avoiding testing through
manipulation of the title or registration system; title transfers may
re-start the clock on the inspection cycle only if proof of current
compliance is required at title transfer;
(8) Prevent the fraudulent initial classification or
reclassification of a vehicle from subject to non-subject or exempt by
requiring proof of address changes prior to registration record
modification, and documentation from the testing program (or delegate)
certifying based on a physical inspection that the vehicle is exempt;
(9) Limit and track the use of time extensions of the registration
requirement to prevent repeated extensions;
(10) Provide for meaningful penalties for cases of registration
fraud;
(11) Limit and track exemptions to prevent abuse of the exemption
policy for vehicles claimed to be out-of-state; and
(12) Encourage enforcement of vehicle registration transfer
requirements when vehicle owners move into the I/M area by coordinating
with local and State enforcement agencies and structuring other
activities (e.g., drivers license issuance) to effect registration
transfers.
(b) Alternative enforcement mechanisms--(1) General requirements.
The program shall demonstrate that a non-registration-based enforcement
program is currently more effective than registration-denial enforcement
in enhanced I/M programs or, prospectively, as effective as registration
denial in basic programs. The following general requirements shall
apply:
(i) For enhanced I/M programs, the area in question shall have had
an operating I/M program using the alternative mechanism prior to
enactment of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. While modifications
to improve compliance may be made to the program that was in effect at
the time of enactment, the expected change in effectiveness cannot be
considered in determining acceptability;
(ii) The State shall assess the alternative program's effectiveness,
as well as the current effectiveness of the registration system,
including the following:
(A) Determine the number and percentage of vehicles subject to the
I/M program that were in compliance with the program over the course of
at least one test cycle; and
(B) Determine the number and fraction of the same group of vehicles
as in paragraph (b)(1)(ii)(A) of this section that were in compliance
with the registration requirement over the same period. Late
registration shall not be considered non-compliance for the purposes of
this determination. The precise definition of late registration versus a
non-complying vehicle shall be explained and justified in the SIP;
[[Page 303]]
(iii) An alternative mechanism shall be considered more effective if
the fraction of vehicles complying with the existing program, as
determined according to the requirements of this section, is greater
than the fraction of vehicles complying with the registration
requirement. An alternative mechanism is as effective if the fraction
complying with the program is at least equal to the fraction complying
with the registration requirement.
(2) Sticker-based enforcement. In addition to the general
requirements, a sticker-based enforcement program shall demonstrate that
the enforcement mechanism will swiftly and effectively prevent operation
of subject vehicles that fail to comply. Such demonstration shall
include the following:
(i) An assessment of the current extent of the following forms of
non-compliance and demonstration that mechanisms exist to keep such non-
compliance within acceptable limits:
(A) Use of stolen, counterfeit, or fraudulently obtained stickers;
(B) In States with safety inspections, the use of ``Safety
Inspection Only'' stickers on vehicles that should be subject to the I/M
requirement as well; and
(C) Operation of vehicles with expired stickers, including a
stratification of non-compliance by length of noncompliance and model
year.
(ii) The program as currently implemented or as proposed to be
improved shall also:
(A) Require an easily observed external identifier such as the
county name on the license plate, an obviously unique license plate tab,
or other means that shows whether or not a vehicle is subject to the I/M
requirement;
(B) Require an easily observed external identifier, such as a
windshield sticker or license plate tab that shows whether a subject
vehicle is in compliance with the inspection requirement;
(C) Impose monetary fines at least as great as the estimated cost of
compliance with I/M requirements (e.g., test fee plus minimum waiver
expenditure) for the absence of such identifiers;
(D) Require that such identifiers be of a quality that makes them
difficult to counterfeit, difficult to remove without destroying once
installed, and durable enough to last until the next inspection without
fading, peeling, or other deterioration;
(E) Perform surveys in a variety of locations and at different times
for the presence of the required identifiers such that at least 10% of
the vehicles or 10,000 vehicles (whichever is less) in the subject
vehicle population are sampled each year;
(F) Track missing identifiers for all inspections performed at each
station, with stations being held accountable for all such identifiers
they are issued; and
(G) Assess and collect significant fines for each identifier that is
unaccounted for by a station.
(3) Computer matching. In addition to the general requirements,
computer-matching programs shall demonstrate that the enforcement
mechanism will swiftly and effectively prevent operation of subject
vehicles that fail to comply. Such demonstration shall:
(i) Require an expeditious system that results in at least 90% of
the subject vehicles in compliance within 4 months of the compliance
deadline;
(ii) Require that subject vehicles be given compliance deadlines
based on the regularly scheduled test date, not the date of previous
compliance;
(iii) Require that motorists pay monetary fines at least as great as
the estimated cost of compliance with I/M requirements (e.g., test fee
plus minimum waiver expenditure) for the continued operation of a
noncomplying vehicle beyond 4 months of the deadline;
(iv) Require that continued non-compliance will eventually result in
preventing operation of the non-complying vehicle (no later than the
date of the next test cycle) through, at a minimum, suspension of
vehicle registration and subsequent denial of reregistration;
(v) Demonstrate that the computer system currently in use is
adequate to store and manipulate the I/M vehicle database, generate
computerized notices, and provide regular backup to said system while
maintaining auxiliary storage devices to insure ongoing operation of the
system and prevent data losses;
(vi) Track each vehicle through the steps taken to ensure
compliance, including:
[[Page 304]]
(A) The compliance deadline;
(B) The date of initial notification;
(C) The dates warning letters are sent to non-complying vehicle
owners;
(D) The dates notices of violation or other penalty notices are
sent; and
(E) The dates and outcomes of other steps in the process, including
the final compliance date;
(vii) Compile and report monthly summaries including statistics on
the percentage of vehicles at each stage in the enforcement process; and
(viii) Track the number and percentage of vehicles initially
identified as requiring testing but which are never tested as a result
of being junked, sold to a motorist in a non-I/M program area, or for
some other reason.
(c) SIP requirements. (1) The SIP shall provide information
concerning the enforcement process, including:
(i) A description of the existing compliance mechanism if it is to
be used in the future and the demonstration that it is as effective or
more effective than registration-denial enforcement;
(ii) An identification of the agencies responsible for performing
each of the applicable activities in this section;
(iii) A description of and accounting for all classes of exempt
vehicles; and
(iv) A description of the plan for testing fleet vehicles, rental
car fleets, leased vehicles, and any other subject vehicles, e.g., those
operated in (but not necessarily registered in) the program area.
(2) The SIP shall include a determination of the current compliance
rate based on a study of the system that includes an estimate of
compliance losses due to loopholes, counterfeiting, and unregistered
vehicles. Estimates of the effect of closing such loopholes and
otherwise improving the enforcement mechanism shall be supported with
detailed analyses.
(3) The SIP shall include the legal authority to implement and
enforce the program.
(4) The SIP shall include a commitment to an enforcement level to be
used for modeling purposes and to be maintained, at a minimum, in
practice.
[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 61 FR 49682, Sept. 23, 1996]
Sec. 51.362 Motorist compliance enforcement program oversight.
The enforcement program shall be audited regularly and shall follow
effective program management practices, including adjustments to improve
operation when necessary.
(a) Quality assurance and quality control. A quality assurance
program shall be implemented to insure effective overall performance of
the enforcement system. Quality control procedures are required to
instruct individuals in the enforcement process regarding how to
properly conduct their activities. At a minimum, the quality control and
quality assurance program shall include:
(1) Verification of exempt vehicle status by inspecting and
confirming such vehicles by the program or its delegate;
(2) Facilitation of accurate critical test data and vehicle
identifier collection through the use of automatic data capture systems
such as bar-code scanners or optical character readers, or through
redundant data entry (where applicable);
(3) Maintenance of an audit trail to allow for the assessment of
enforcement effectiveness;
(4) Establishment of written procedures for personnel directly
engaged in I/M enforcement activities;
(5) Establishment of written procedures for personnel engaged in I/M
document handling and processing, such as registration clerks or
personnel involved in sticker dispensing and waiver processing, as well
as written procedures for the auditing of their performance;
(6) Follow-up validity checks on out-of-area or exemption-triggering
registration changes;
(7) Analysis of registration-change applications to target potential
violators;
(8) A determination of enforcement program effectiveness through
periodic audits of test records and program compliance documentation;
(9) Enforcement procedures for disciplining, retraining, or removing
enforcement personnel who deviate from established requirements, or in
the case of non-government entities that process registrations, for
[[Page 305]]
defranchising, revoking or otherwise discontinuing the activity of the
entity issuing registrations; and
(10) The prevention of fraudulent procurement or use of inspection
documents by controlling and tracking document distribution and
handling, and making stations financially liable for missing or
unaccounted for documents by assessing monetary fines reflecting the
``street value'' of these documents (i.e., the test fee plus the minimum
waiver expenditure).
(b) Information management. In establishing an information base to
be used in characterizing, evaluating, and enforcing the program, the
State shall:
(1) Determine the subject vehicle population;
(2) Permit EPA audits of the enforcement process;
(3) Assure the accuracy of registration and other program document
files;
(4) Maintain and ensure the accuracy of the testing database through
periodic internal and/or third-party review;
(5) Compare the testing database to the registration database to
determine program effectiveness, establish compliance rates, and to
trigger potential enforcement action against non-complying motorists;
and
(6) Sample the fleet as a determination of compliance through
parking lot surveys, road-side pull-overs, or other in-use vehicle
measurements.
(c) SIP requirements. The SIP shall include a description of
enforcement program oversight and information management activities.
[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 65 FR 45534, July 24, 2000]
Sec. 51.363 Quality assurance.
An ongoing quality assurance program shall be implemented to
discover, correct and prevent fraud, waste, and abuse and to determine
whether procedures are being followed, are adequate, whether equipment
is measuring accurately, and whether other problems might exist which
would impede program performance. The quality assurance and quality
control procedures shall be periodically evaluated to assess their
effectiveness and relevance in achieving program goals.
(a) Performance audits. Performance audits shall be conducted on a
regular basis to determine whether inspectors are correctly performing
all tests and other required functions. Performance audits shall be of
two types: overt and covert, and shall include:
(1) Performance audits based upon written procedures and results
shall be reported using either electronic or written forms to be
retained in the inspector and station history files, with sufficient
detail to support either an administrative or civil hearing;
(2) Performance audits in addition to regularly programmed audits
for stations employing inspectors suspected of violating regulations as
a result of audits, data analysis, or consumer complaints;
(3) Overt performance audits shall be performed at least twice per
year for each lane or test bay and shall include:
(i) A check for the observance of appropriate document security;
(ii) A check to see that required record keeping practices are being
followed;
(iii) A check for licenses or certificates and other required
display information; and
(iv) Observation and written evaluation of each inspector's ability
to properly perform an inspection;
(4) Covert performance audits shall include:
(i) Remote visual observation of inspector performance, which may
include the use of aids such as binoculars or video cameras, at least
once per year per inspector in high-volume stations (i.e., those
performing more than 4000 tests per year);
(ii) Site visits at least once per year per number of inspectors
using covert vehicles set to fail (this requirement sets a minimum level
of activity, not a requirement that each inspector be involved in a
covert audit);
(iii) For stations that conduct both testing and repairs, at least
one covert vehicle visit per station per year including the purchase of
repairs and subsequent retesting if the vehicle is initially failed for
tailpipe emissions (this activity may be accomplished in conjunction
with paragraph (a)(4)(ii) of this section but must involve each station
at least once per year);
[[Page 306]]
(iv) Documentation of the audit, including vehicle condition and
preparation, sufficient for building a legal case and establishing a
performance record;
(v) Covert vehicles covering the range of vehicle technology groups
(e.g., carbureted and fuel-injected vehicles) included in the program,
including a full range of introduced malfunctions covering the emission
test, the evaporative system tests, and emission control component
checks (as applicable);
(vi) Sufficient numbers of covert vehicles and auditors to allow for
frequent rotation of both to prevent detection by station personnel; and
(vii) Where applicable, access to on-line inspection databases by
State personnel to permit the creation and maintenance of covert vehicle
records.
(b) Record audits. Station and inspector records shall be reviewed
or screened at least monthly to assess station performance and identify
problems that may indicate potential fraud or incompetence. Such review
shall include:
(1) Automated record analysis to identify statistical
inconsistencies, unusual patterns, and other discrepancies;
(2) Visits to inspection stations to review records not already
covered in the electronic analysis (if any); and
(3) Comprehensive accounting for all official forms that can be used
to demonstrate compliance with the program.
(c) Equipment audits. During overt site visits, auditors shall
conduct quality control evaluations of the required test equipment,
including (where applicable):
(1) A gas audit using gases of known concentrations at least as
accurate as those required for regular equipment quality control and
comparing these concentrations to actual readings;
(2) A check for tampering, worn instrumentation, blocked filters,
and other conditions that would impede accurate sampling;
(3) A check for critical flow in critical flow CVS units;
(4) A check of the Constant Volume Sampler flow calibration;
(5) A check for the optimization of the Flame Ionization Detection
fuel-air ratio using methane;
(6) A leak check;
(7) A check to determine that station gas bottles used for
calibration purposes are properly labelled and within the relevant
tolerances;
(8) Functional dynamometer checks addressing coast-down, roll speed
and roll distance, inertia weight selection, and power absorption;
(9) A check of the system's ability to accurately detect background
pollutant concentrations;
(10) A check of the pressure monitoring devices used to perform the
evaporative canister pressure test(s); and
(11) A check of the purge flow metering system.
(d) Auditor training and proficiency. (1) Auditors shall be formally
trained and knowledgeable in:
(i) The use of test equipment and/or procedures;
(ii) Program rules and regulations;
(iii) The basics of air pollution control;
(iv) Basic principles of motor vehicle engine repair, related to
emission performance;
(v) Emission control systems;
(vi) Evidence gathering;
(vii) State administrative procedures laws;
(viii) Quality assurance practices; and
(ix) Covert audit procedures.
(2) Auditors shall themselves be audited at least once annually.
(3) The training and knowledge requirements in paragraph (d)(1) of
this section may be waived for temporary auditors engaged solely for the
purpose of conducting covert vehicle runs.
(e) SIP requirements. The SIP shall include a description of the
quality assurance program, and written procedures manuals covering both
overt and covert performance audits, record audits, and equipment
audits. This requirement does not include materials or discussion of
details of enforcement strategies that would ultimately hamper the
enforcement process.
[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 65 FR 45534, July 24, 2000]
[[Page 307]]
Sec. 51.364 Enforcement against contractors, stations and inspectors.
Enforcement against licensed stations or contractors, and inspectors
shall include swift, sure, effective, and consistent penalties for
violation of program requirements.
(a) Imposition of penalties. A penalty schedule shall be developed
that establishes minimum penalties for violations of program rules and
procedures.
(1) The schedule shall categorize and list violations and the
minimum penalties to be imposed for first, second, and subsequent
violations and for multiple violation of different requirements. In the
case of contracted systems, the State may use compensation retainage in
lieu of penalties.
(2) Substantial penalties or retainage shall be imposed on the first
offense for violations that directly affect emission reduction benefits.
At a minimum, in test-and-repair programs inspector and station license
suspension shall be imposed for at least 6 months whenever a vehicle is
intentionally improperly passed for any required portion of the test. In
test-only programs, inspectors shall be removed from inspector duty for
at least 6 months (or a retainage penalty equivalent to the inspector's
salary for that period shall be imposed).
(3) All findings of serious violations of rules or procedural
requirements shall result in mandatory fines or retainage. In the case
of gross neglect, a first offense shall result in a fine or retainage of
no less than $100 or 5 times the inspection fee, whichever is greater,
for the contractor or the licensed station, and the inspector if
involved.
(4) Any finding of inspector incompetence shall result in mandatory
training before inspection privileges are restored.
(5) License or certificate suspension or revocation shall mean the
individual is barred from direct or indirect involvement in any
inspection operation during the term of the suspension or revocation.
(b) Legal authority. (1) The quality assurance officer shall have
the authority to temporarily suspend station and inspector licenses or
certificates (after approval of a superior) immediately upon finding a
violation or equipment failure that directly affects emission reduction
benefits, pending a hearing when requested. In the case of immediate
suspension, a hearing shall be held within fourteen calendar days of a
written request by the station licensee or the inspector. Failure to
hold a hearing within 14 days when requested shall cause the suspension
to lapse. In the event that a State's constitution precludes such a
temporary license suspension, the enforcement system shall be designed
with adequate resources and mechanisms to hold a hearing to suspend or
revoke the station or inspector license within three station business
days of the finding.
(2) The oversight agency shall have the authority to impose
penalties against the licensed station or contractor, as well as the
inspector, even if the licensee or contractor had no direct knowledge of
the violation but was found to be careless in oversight of inspectors or
has a history of violations. Contractors and licensees shall be held
fully responsible for inspector performance in the course of duty.
(c) Recordkeeping. The oversight agency shall maintain records of
all warnings, civil fines, suspensions, revocations, and violations and
shall compile statistics on violations and penalties on an annual basis.
(d) SIP requirements. (1) The SIP shall include the penalty schedule
and the legal authority for establishing and imposing penalties, civil
fines, license suspension, and revocations.
(2) In the case of State constitutional impediments to immediate
suspension authority, the State Attorney General shall furnish an
official opinion for the SIP explaining the constitutional impediment as
well as relevant case law.
(3) The SIP shall describe the administrative and judicial
procedures and responsibilities relevant to the enforcement process,
including which agencies, courts, and jurisdictions are involved; who
will prosecute and adjudicate cases; and other aspects of the
enforcement of the program requirements, the resources to be allocated
to this function, and the source of those funds. In States without
immediate suspension authority, the SIP shall demonstrate that
sufficient resources, personnel, and systems are in place to
[[Page 308]]
meet the three day case management requirement for violations that
directly affect emission reductions.
(e) Alternative quality assurance procedures or frequencies that
achieve equivalent or better results may be approved by the
Administrator. Statistical process control shall be used whenever
possible to demonstrate the efficacy of alternatives.
(f) Areas that qualify for and choose to implement an OTR low
enhanced I/M program, as established in Sec. 51.351(h), and that claim
in their SIP less emission reduction credit than the basic performance
standard for one or more pollutants, are not required to meet the
oversight specifications of this section.
[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 61 FR 39037, July 25, 1996]
Sec. 51.365 Data collection.
Accurate data collection is essential to the management, evaluation,
and enforcement of an I/M program. The program shall gather test data on
individual vehicles, as well as quality control data on test equipment
(with the exception of test procedures for which either no testing
equipment is required or those test procedures relying upon a vehicle's
OBD system).
(a) Test data. The goal of gathering test data is to unambiguously
link specific test results to a specific vehicle, I/M program
registrant, test site, and inspector, and to determine whether or not
the correct testing parameters were observed for the specific vehicle in
question. In turn, these data can be used to distinguish complying and
noncomplying vehicles as a result of analyzing the data collected and
comparing it to the registration database, to screen inspection stations
and inspectors for investigation as to possible irregularities, and to
help establish the overall effectiveness of the program. At a minimum,
the program shall collect the following with respect to each test
conducted:
(1) Test record number;
(2) Inspection station and inspector numbers;
(3) Test system number (where applicable);
(4) Date of the test;
(5) Emission test start time and the time final emission scores are
determined;
(6) Vehicle Identification Number;
(7) License plate number;
(8) Test certificate number;
(9) Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR);
(10) Vehicle model year, make, and type;
(11) Number of cylinders or engine displacement;
(12) Transmission type;
(13) Odometer reading;
(14) Category of test performed (i.e., initial test, first retest,
or subsequent retest);
(15) Fuel type of the vehicle (i.e., gas, diesel, or other fuel);
(16) Type of vehicle preconditioning performed (if any);
(17) Emission test sequence(s) used;
(18) Hydrocarbon emission scores and standards for each applicable
test mode;
(19) Carbon monoxide emission scores and standards for each
applicable test mode;
(20) Carbon dioxide emission scores (CO+CO2) and
standards for each applicable test mode;
(21) Nitrogen oxides emission scores and standards for each
applicable test mode;
(22) Results (Pass/Fail/Not Applicable) of the applicable visual
inspections for the catalytic converter, air system, gas cap,
evaporative system, positive crankcase ventilation (PCV) valve, fuel
inlet restrictor, and any other visual inspection for which emission
reduction credit is claimed;
(23) Results of the evaporative system pressure test(s) expressed as
a pass or fail;
(24) Results of the evaporative system purge test expressed as a
pass or fail along with the total purge flow in liters achieved during
the test (where applicable); and
(25) Results of the on-board diagnostic check expressed as a pass or
fail along with the diagnostic trouble codes revealed (where
applicable).
(b) Quality control data. At a minimum, the program shall gather and
report the results of the quality control checks required under Sec.
51.359 of this
[[Page 309]]
subpart, identifying each check by station number, system number, date,
and start time. The data report shall also contain the concentration
values of the calibration gases used to perform the gas characterization
portion of the quality control checks (where applicable).
[ 57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 61 FR 40945, Aug. 6, 1996; 65
FR 45534, July 24, 2000]
Sec. 51.366 Data analysis and reporting.
Data analysis and reporting are required to allow for monitoring and
evaluation of the program by program management and EPA, and shall
provide information regarding the types of program activities performed
and their final outcomes, including summary statistics and effectiveness
evaluations of the enforcement mechanism, the quality assurance system,
the quality control program, and the testing element. Initial submission
of the following annual reports shall commence within 18 months of
initial implementation of the program as required by Sec. 51.373 of
this subpart. The biennial report shall commence within 30 months of
initial implementation of the program as required by Sec. 51.373 of
this subpart.
(a) Test data report. The program shall submit to EPA by July of
each year a report providing basic statistics on the testing program for
January through December of the previous year, including:
(1) The number of vehicles tested by model year and vehicle type;
(2) By model year and vehicle type, the number and percentage of
vehicles:
(i) Failing initially, per test type;
(ii) Failing the first retest per test type;
(iii) Passing the first retest per test type;
(iv) Initially failed vehicles passing the second or subsequent
retest per test type;
(v) Initially failed vehicles receiving a waiver; and
(vi) Vehicles with no known final outcome (regardless of reason).
(vii)-(x) [Reserved]
(xi) Passing the on-board diagnostic check;
(xii) Failing the on-board diagnostic check;
(xiii) Failing the on-board diagnostic check and passing the
tailpipe test (if applicable);
(xiv) Failing the on-board diagnostic check and failing the tailpipe
test (if applicable);
(xv) Passing the on-board diagnostic check and failing the I/M gas
cap evaporative system test (if applicable);
(xvi) Failing the on-board diagnostic check and passing the I/M gas
cap evaporative system test (if applicable);
(xvii) Passing both the on-board diagnostic check and I/M gas cap
evaporative system test (if applicable);
(xviii) Failing both the on-board diagnostic check and I/M gas cap
evaporative system test (if applicable);
(xix) MIL is commanded on and no codes are stored;
(xx) MIL is not commanded on and codes are stored;
(xxi) MIL is commanded on and codes are stored;
(xxii) MIL is not commanded on and codes are not stored;
(xxiii) Readiness status indicates that the evaluation is not
complete for any module supported by on-board diagnostic systems;
(3) The initial test volume by model year and test station;
(4) The initial test failure rate by model year and test station;
and
(5) The average increase or decrease in tailpipe emission levels for
HC, CO, and NOX (if applicable) after repairs by model year
and vehicle type for vehicles receiving a mass emissions test.
(b) Quality assurance report. The program shall submit to EPA by
July of each year a report providing basic statistics on the quality
assurance program for January through December of the previous year,
including:
(1) The number of inspection stations and lanes:
(i) Operating throughout the year; and
(ii) Operating for only part of the year;
(2) The number of inspection stations and lanes operating throughout
the year:
(i) Receiving overt performance audits in the year;
[[Page 310]]
(ii) Not receiving overt performance audits in the year;
(iii) Receiving covert performance audits in the year;
(iv) Not receiving covert performance audits in the year; and
(v) That have been shut down as a result of overt performance
audits;
(3) The number of covert audits:
(i) Conducted with the vehicle set to fail per test type;
(ii) Conducted with the vehicle set to fail any combination of two
or more test types;
(iii) Resulting in a false pass per test type;
(iv) Resulting in a false pass for any combination of two or more
test types;
(v)-(viii) [Reserved]
(4) The number of inspectors and stations:
(i) That were suspended, fired, or otherwise prohibited from testing
as a result of covert audits;
(ii) That were suspended, fired, or otherwise prohibited from
testing for other causes; and
(iii) That received fines;
(5) The number of inspectors licensed or certified to conduct
testing;
(6) The number of hearings:
(i) Held to consider adverse actions against inspectors and
stations; and
(ii) Resulting in adverse actions against inspectors and stations;
(7) The total amount collected in fines from inspectors and stations
by type of violation;
(8) The total number of covert vehicles available for undercover
audits over the year; and
(9) The number of covert auditors available for undercover audits.
(c) Quality control report. The program shall submit to EPA by July
of each year a report providing basic statistics on the quality control
program for January through December of the previous year, including:
(1) The number of emission testing sites and lanes in use in the
program;
(2) The number of equipment audits by station and lane;
(3) The number and percentage of stations that have failed equipment
audits; and
(4) Number and percentage of stations and lanes shut down as a
result of equipment audits.
(d) Enforcement report. (1) All varieties of enforcement programs
shall, at a minimum, submit to EPA by July of each year a report
providing basic statistics on the enforcement program for January
through December of the previous year, including:
(i) An estimate of the number of vehicles subject to the inspection
program, including the results of an analysis of the registration data
base;
(ii) The percentage of motorist compliance based upon a comparison
of the number of valid final tests with the number of subject vehicles;
(iii) The total number of compliance documents issued to inspection
stations;
(iv) The number of missing compliance documents;
(v) The number of time extensions and other exemptions granted to
motorists; and
(vi) The number of compliance surveys conducted, number of vehicles
surveyed in each, and the compliance rates found.
(2) Registration denial based enforcement programs shall provide the
following additional information:
(i) A report of the program's efforts and actions to prevent
motorists from falsely registering vehicles out of the program area or
falsely changing fuel type or weight class on the vehicle registration,
and the results of special studies to investigate the frequency of such
activity; and
(ii) The number of registration file audits, number of registrations
reviewed, and compliance rates found in such audits.
(3) Computer-matching based enforcement programs shall provide the
following additional information:
(i) The number and percentage of subject vehicles that were tested
by the initial deadline, and by other milestones in the cycle;
(ii) A report on the program's efforts to detect and enforce against
motorists falsely changing vehicle classifications to circumvent program
requirements, and the frequency of this type of activity; and
(iii) The number of enforcement system audits, and the error rate
found during those audits.
[[Page 311]]
(4) Sticker-based enforcement systems shall provide the following
additional information:
(i) A report on the program's efforts to prevent, detect, and
enforce against sticker theft and counterfeiting, and the frequency of
this type of activity;
(ii) A report on the program's efforts to detect and enforce against
motorists falsely changing vehicle classifications to circumvent program
requirements, and the frequency of this type of activity; and
(iii) The number of parking lot sticker audits conducted, the number
of vehicles surveyed in each, and the noncompliance rate found during
those audits.
(e) Additional reporting requirements. In addition to the annual
reports in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section, programs shall
submit to EPA by July of every other year, biennial reports addressing:
(1) Any changes made in program design, funding, personnel levels,
procedures, regulations, and legal authority, with detailed discussion
and evaluation of the impact on the program of all such changes; and
(2) Any weaknesses or problems identified in the program within the
two-year reporting period, what steps have already been taken to correct
those problems, the results of those steps, and any future efforts
planned.
(f) SIP requirements. The SIP shall describe the types of data to be
collected.
[ 57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 61 FR 40945, Aug. 6, 1996; 65
FR 45534, July 24, 2000; 66 FR 18178, Apr. 5, 2001]
Sec. 51.367 Inspector training and licensing or certification.
All inspectors shall receive formal training and be licensed or
certified to perform inspections.
(a) Training. (1) Inspector training shall impart knowledge of the
following:
(i) The air pollution problem, its causes and effects;
(ii) The purpose, function, and goal of the inspection program;
(iii) Inspection regulations and procedures;
(iv) Technical details of the test procedures and the rationale for
their design;
(v) Emission control device function, configuration, and inspection;
(vi) Test equipment operation, calibration, and maintenance (with
the exception of test procedures which either do not require the use of
special equipment or which rely upon a vehicle's OBD system);
(vii) Quality control procedures and their purpose;
(viii) Public relations; and
(ix) Safety and health issues related to the inspection process.
(2) If inspector training is not administered by the program, the
responsible State agency shall monitor and evaluate the training program
delivery.
(3) In order to complete the training requirement, a trainee shall
pass (i.e., a minimum of 80% of correct responses or lower if an
occupational analysis justifies it) a written test covering all aspects
of the training. In addition, a hands-on test shall be administered in
which the trainee demonstrates without assistance the ability to conduct
a proper inspection and to follow other required procedures. Inability
to properly conduct all test procedures shall constitute failure of the
test. The program shall take appropriate steps to insure the security
and integrity of the testing process.
(b) Licensing and certification. (1) All inspectors shall be either
licensed by the program (in the case of test-and-repair systems that do
not use contracts with stations) or certified by an organization other
than the employer (in test-only programs and test-and-repair programs
that require station owners to enter into contracts with the State) in
order to perform official inspections.
(2) Completion of inspector training and passing required tests
shall be a condition of licensing or certification.
(3) Inspector licenses and certificates shall be valid for no more
than 2 years, at which point refresher training and testing shall be
required prior to renewal. Alternative approaches based on more
comprehensive skill examination and determination of inspector
competency may be used.
(4) Licenses or certificates shall not be considered a legal right
but rather a privilege bestowed by the program conditional upon
adherence to program requirements.
[[Page 312]]
(c) SIP requirements. The SIP shall include a description of the
training program, the written and hands-on tests, and the licensing or
certification process.
[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 65 FR 45534, July 24, 2000]
Sec. 51.368 Public information and consumer protection.
(a) Public awareness. The SIP shall include a plan for informing the
public on an ongoing basis throughout the life of the I/M program of the
air quality problem, the requirements of Federal and State law, the role
of motor vehicles in the air quality problem, the need for and benefits
of an inspection program, how to maintain a vehicle in a low-emission
condition, how to find a qualified repair technician, and the
requirements of the I/M program. Motorists that fail the I/M test in
enhanced I/M areas shall be offered a list of repair facilities in the
area and information on the results of repairs performed by repair
facilities in the area, as described in Sec. 51.369(b)(1) of this
subpart. Motorists that fail the I/M test shall also be provided with
information concerning the possible cause(s) for failing the particular
portions of the test that were failed.
(b) Consumer protection. The oversight agency shall institute
procedures and mechanisms to protect the public from fraud and abuse by
inspectors, mechanics, and others involved in the I/M program. This
shall include a challenge mechanism by which a vehicle owner can contest
the results of an inspection. It shall include mechanisms for protecting
whistle blowers and following up on complaints by the public or others
involved in the process. It shall include a program to assist owners in
obtaining warranty covered repairs for eligible vehicles that fail a
test. The SIP shall include a detailed consumer protection plan.
[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 65 FR 45534, July 24, 2000]
Sec. 51.369 Improving repair effectiveness.
Effective repairs are the key to achieving program goals and the
State shall take steps to ensure the capability exists in the repair
industry to repair vehicles that fail I/M tests.
(a) Technical assistance. The oversight agency shall provide the
repair industry with information and assistance related to vehicle
inspection diagnosis and repair.
(1) The agency shall regularly inform repair facilities of changes
in the inspection program, training course schedules, common problems
being found with particular engine families, diagnostic tips and the
like.
(2) The agency shall provide a hot line service to assist repair
technicians with specific repair problems, answer technical questions
that arise in the repair process, and answer questions related to the
legal requirements of State and Federal law with regard to emission
control device tampering, engine switching, or similar issues.
(b) Performance monitoring. (1) In enhanced I/M program areas, the
oversight agency shall monitor the performance of individual motor
vehicle repair facilities, and provide to the public at the time of
initial failure, a summary of the performance of local repair facilities
that have repaired vehicles for retest. Performance monitoring shall
include statistics on the number of vehicles submitted for a retest
after repair by the repair facility, the percentage passing on first
retest, the percentage requiring more than one repair/retest trip before
passing, and the percentage receiving a waiver. Programs may provide
motorists with alternative statistics that convey similar information on
the relative ability of repair facilities in providing effective and
convenient repair, in light of the age and other characteristics of
vehicles presented for repair at each facility.
(2) Programs shall provide feedback, including statistical and
qualitative information to individual repair facilities on a regular
basis (at least annually) regarding their success in repairing failed
vehicles.
(3) A prerequisite for a retest shall be a completed repair form
that indicates which repairs were performed, as well as any technician
recommended repairs that were not performed, and identification of the
facility that performed the repairs.
[[Page 313]]
(c) Repair technician training. The State shall assess the
availability of adequate repair technician training in the I/M area and,
if the types of training described in paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of
this section are not currently available, shall insure that training is
made available to all interested individuals in the community either
through private or public facilities. This may involve working with
local community colleges or vocational schools to add curricula to
existing programs or start new programs or it might involve attracting
private training providers to offer classes in the area. The training
available shall include:
(1) Diagnosis and repair of malfunctions in computer controlled,
close-loop vehicles;
(2) The application of emission control theory and diagnostic data
to the diagnosis and repair of failures on the transient emission test
and the evaporative system functional checks (where applicable);
(3) Utilization of diagnostic information on systematic or repeated
failures observed in the transient emission test and the evaporative
system functional checks (where applicable); and
(4) General training on the various subsystems related to engine
emission control.
(d) SIP requirements. The SIP shall include a description of the
technical assistance program to be implemented, a description of the
procedures and criteria to be used in meeting the performance monitoring
requirements of this section, and a description of the repair technician
training resources available in the community.
[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 65 FR 45535, July 24, 2000]
Sec. 51.370 Compliance with recall notices.
States shall establish methods to ensure that vehicles subject to
enhanced I/M and that are included in either a ``Voluntary Emissions
Recall'' as defined at 40 CFR 85.1902(d), or in a remedial plan
determination made pursuant to section 207(c) of the Act, receive the
required repairs. States shall require that owners of recalled vehicles
have the necessary recall repairs completed, either in order to complete
an annual or biennial inspection process or to obtain vehicle
registration renewal. All recalls for which owner notification occurs
after January 1, 1995 shall be included in the enhanced I/M recall
requirement.
(a) General requirements. (1) The State shall have an electronic
means to identify recalled vehicles based on lists of VINs with
unresolved recalls made available by EPA, the vehicle manufacturers, or
a third party supplier approved by the Administrator. The State shall
update its list of unresolved recalls on a quarterly basis at a minimum.
(2) The State shall require owners or lessees of vehicles with
unresolved recalls to show proof of compliance with recall notices in
order to complete either the inspection or registration cycle.
(3) Compliance shall be required on the next registration or
inspection date, allowing a reasonable period to comply, after
notification of recall was received by the State.
(b) Enforcement. (1) A vehicle shall either fail inspection or be
denied vehicle registration if the required recall repairs have not been
completed.
(2) In the case of vehicles obtaining recall repairs but remaining
on the updated list provided in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, the
State shall have a means of verifying completion of the required
repairs; electronic records or paper receipts provided by the authorized
repair facility shall be required. The vehicle inspection or
registration record shall be modified to include (or be supplemented
with other VIN-linked records which include) the recall campaign
number(s) and the date(s) repairs were performed. Documentation
verifying required repairs shall include the following:
(i) The VIN, make, and model year of the vehicle; and
(ii) The recall campaign number and the date repairs were completed.
(c) Reporting requirements. The State shall submit to EPA, by July
of each year for the previous calendar year, an annual report providing
the following information:
[[Page 314]]
(1) The number of vehicles in the I/M area initially listed as
having unresolved recalls, segregated by recall campaign number;
(2) The number of recalled vehicles brought into compliance by
owners;
(3) The number of listed vehicles with unresolved recalls that, as
of the end of the calendar year, were not yet due for inspection or
registration;
(4) The number of recalled vehicles still in non-compliance that
have either failed inspection or been denied registration on the basis
of non-compliance with recall; and
(5) The number of recalled vehicles that are otherwise not in
compliance.
(d) SIP submittals. The SIP shall describe the procedures used to
incorporate the vehicle lists provided in paragraph (a)(1) of this
section into the inspection or registration database, the quality
control methods used to insure that recall repairs are properly
documented and tracked, and the method (inspection failure or
registration denial) used to enforce the recall requirements.
Sec. 51.371 On-road testing.
On-road testing is defined as testing of vehicles for conditions
impacting the emission of HC, CO, NOX and/or CO2 emissions on
any road or roadside in the nonattainment area or the I/M program area.
On-road testing is required in enhanced I/M areas and is an option for
basic I/M areas.
(a) General requirements. (1) On-road testing is to be part of the
emission testing system, but is to be a complement to testing otherwise
required.
(2) On-road testing is not required in every season or on every
vehicle but shall evaluate the emission performance of 0.5% of the
subject fleet statewide or 20,000 vehicles, whichever is less, per
inspection cycle.
(3) The on-road testing program shall provide information about the
performance of in-use vehicles, by measuring on-road emissions through
the use of remote sensing devices or by assessing vehicle emission
performance through roadside pullovers including tailpipe or evaporative
emission testing or a check of the onboard diagnostic (OBD) system for
vehicles so equipped. The program shall collect, analyze and report on-
road testing data.
(4) Owners of vehicles that have previously been through the normal
periodic inspection and passed the final retest and found to be high
emitters shall be notified that the vehicles are required to pass an
out-of-cycle follow-up inspection; notification may be by mailing in the
case of remote sensing on-road testing or through immediate notification
if roadside pullovers are used.
(b) SIP requirements. (1) The SIP shall include a detailed
description of the on-road testing program, including the types of
testing, test limits and criteria, the number of vehicles (the
percentage of the fleet) to be tested, the number of employees to be
dedicated to the on-road testing effort, the methods for collecting,
analyzing, utilizing, and reporting the results of on-road testing and,
the portion of the program budget to be dedicated to on-road testing.
(2) The SIP shall include the legal authority necessary to implement
the on-road testing program, including the authority to enforce off-
cycle inspection and repair requirements (where applicable).
(3) Emission reduction credit for on-road testing programs shall be
granted for a program designed to obtain measurable emission reductions
over and above those already predicted to be achieved by other aspects
of the I/M program. Emission reduction credit will only be granted to
those programs which require out-of-cycle repairs for confirmed high-
emitting vehicles identified under the on-road testing program. The SIP
shall include technical support for the claimed additional emission
reductions.
[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 65 FR 45535, July 24, 2000]
Sec. 51.372 State Implementation Plan submissions.
(a) SIP submittals. The SIP shall address each of the elements
covered in this subpart, including, but not limited to:
(1) A schedule of implementation of the program including interim
milestones leading to mandatory testing. The milestones shall include,
at a minimum:
[[Page 315]]
(i) Passage of enabling statutory or other legal authority;
(ii) Proposal of draft regulations and promulgation of final
regulations;
(iii) Issuance of final specifications and procedures;
(iv) Issuance of final Request for Proposals (if applicable);
(v) Licensing or certifications of stations and inspectors;
(vi) The date mandatory testing will begin for each model year to be
covered by the program;
(vii) The date full-stringency cutpoints will take effect;
(viii) All other relevant dates;
(2) An analysis of emission level targets for the program using the
most current EPA mobile source emission model or an alternative approved
by the Administrator showing that the program meets the performance
standard described in Sec. 51.351 or Sec. 51.352 of this subpart, as
applicable;
(3) A description of the geographic coverage of the program,
including ZIP codes if the program is not county-wide;
(4) A detailed discussion of each of the required design elements,
including provisions for Federal facility compliance;
(5) Legal authority requiring or allowing implementation of the I/M
program and providing either broad or specific authority to perform all
required elements of the program;
(6) Legal authority for I/M program operation until such time as it
is no longer necessary (i.e., until a Section 175 maintenance plan
without an I/M program is approved by EPA);
(7) Implementing regulations, interagency agreements, and memoranda
of understanding; and
(8) Evidence of adequate funding and resources to implement all
aspects of the program.
(b) Submittal schedule. The SIP shall be submitted to EPA according
to the following schedule--
(1) States shall submit a SIP revision by November 15, 1992 which
includes the schedule required in paragraph (a)(1) of this section and a
formal commitment from the Governor to the adoption and implementation
of an I/M program meeting all requirements of this subpart.
(2) A SIP revision, including all necessary legal authority and the
items specified in (a)(1) through (a)(8) of this section, shall be
submitted no later than November 15, 1993.
(3) States shall revise SIPS as EPA develops further regulations.
Revisions to incorporate on-board diagnostic checks in the I/M program
shall be submitted by August 6, 1998.
(c) Redesignation requests. Any nonattainment area that EPA
determines would otherwise qualify for redesignation from nonattainment
to attainment shall receive full approval of a State Implementation Plan
(SIP) submittal under Sections 182(a)(2)(B) or 182(b)(4) if the
submittal contains the following elements:
(1) Legal authority to implement a basic I/M program (or enhanced if
the State chooses to opt up) as required by this subpart. The
legislative authority for an I/M program shall allow the adoption of
implementing regulations without requiring further legislation.
(2) A request to place the I/M plan (if no I/M program is currently
in place or if an I/M program has been terminated,) or the I/M upgrade
(if the existing I/M program is to continue without being upgraded) into
the contingency measures portion of the maintenance plan upon
redesignation.
(3) A contingency measure consisting of a commitment by the Governor
or the Governor's designee to adopt or consider adopting regulations to
implement an I/M program to correct a violation of the ozone or CO
standard or other air quality problem, in accordance with the provisions
of the maintenance plan.
(4) A contingency commitment that includes an enforceable schedule
for adoption and implementation of the I/M program, and appropriate
milestones. The schedule shall include the date for submission of a SIP
meeting all of the requirements of this subpart. Schedule milestones
shall be listed in months from the date EPA notifies the State that it
is in violation of the ozone or CO standard or any earlier date
specified in the State plan. Unless the State, in accordance with the
provisions of the maintenance plan, chooses not to implement I/M, it
must submit a SIP revision containing an I/M
[[Page 316]]
program no more than 18 months after notification by EPA.
(d) Basic areas continuing operation of I/M programs as part of
their maintenance plan without implemented upgrades shall be assumed to
be 80% as effective as an implemented, upgraded version of the same I/M
program design, unless a State can demonstrate using operating
information that the I/M program is more effective than the 80% level.
(e) SIP submittals to correct violations. SIP submissions required
pursuant to a violation of the ambient ozone or CO standard (as
discussed in paragraph (c) of this section) shall address all of the
requirements of this subpart. The SIP shall demonstrate that performance
standards in either Sec. 51.351 or Sec. 51.352 shall be met using an
evaluation date (rounded to the nearest January for carbon monoxide and
July for hydrocarbons) seven years after the date EPA notifies the State
that it is in violation of the ozone or CO standard or any earlier date
specified in the State plan. Emission standards for vehicles subject to
an IM240 test may be phased in during the program but full standards
must be in effect for at least one complete test cycle before the end of
the 5-year period. All other requirements shall take effect within 24
months of the date EPA notifies the State that it is in violation of the
ozone or CO standard or any earlier date specified in the State plan.
The phase-in allowances of Sec. 51.373(c) of this subpart shall not
apply.
[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 60 FR 1738, Jan. 5, 1995; 60
FR 48036, Sept. 18, 1995; 61 FR 40946, Aug. 6, 1996; 61 FR 44119, Aug.
27, 1996]
Sec. 51.373 Implementation deadlines.
I/M programs shall be implemented as expeditiously as practicable.
(a) Decentralized basic programs shall be fully implemented by
January 1, 1994, and centralized basic programs shall be fully
implemented by July 1, 1994. More implementation time may be approved by
the Administrator if an enhanced I/M program is implemented.
(b) For areas newly required to implement basic I/M after
promulgation of this subpart (as a result of failure to attain,
reclassification, or redesignation) decentralized programs shall be
fully implemented within one year of obtaining legal authority.
Centralized programs shall be fully implemented within two years of
obtaining legal authority. More implementation time may be approved by
the Administrator if an enhanced I/M program is implemented.
(c) All requirements related to enhanced I/M programs shall be
implemented by January 1, 1995, with the following exceptions.
(1) Areas switching from an existing test-and-repair network to a
test-only network may phase in the change between January of 1995 and
January of 1996. Starting in January of 1995 at least 30% of the subject
vehicles shall participate in the test-only system (in States with
multiple I/M areas, implementation is not required in every area by
January 1995 as long as statewide, 30% of the subject vehicles are
involved in testing) and shall be subject to the new test procedures
(including the evaporative system checks, visual inspections, and
tailpipe emission tests). By January 1, 1996, all applicable vehicle
model years and types shall be included in the test-only system. During
the phase-in period, all requirements of this subpart shall be applied
to the test-only portion of the program; existing requirements may
continue to apply for the test-and-repair portion of the program until
it is phased out by January 1, 1996.
(2) Areas starting new test-only programs and those with existing
test-only programs may also phase in the new test procedures between
January 1, 1995 and January 1, 1996. Other program requirements shall be
fully implemented by January 1, 1995.
(d) In the case of areas newly required to implement enhanced I/M
after promulgation of this subpart (as a result of failure to attain,
reclassification, or nonattainment designation) enhanced I/M shall be
implemented within 24 months of obtaining legal authority.
(e) Legal authority for the implementing agency or agencies to
implement and enforce an I/M program consistent with this subpart shall
be obtained from the State legislature or
[[Page 317]]
local governing body in the first legislative session after November 5,
1992, or after being newly required to implement or upgrade an I/M
program as in paragraph (b) or (c) of this section, including sessions
already in progress if at least 21 days remain before the final bill
submittal deadline.
(f) Areas that choose to implement an enhanced I/M program only
meeting the requirements of Sec. 51.351(h) shall fully implement the
program no later than July 1, 1999. The availability and use of this
late start date does not relieve the area of the obligation to meet the
requirements of Sec. 51.351(h)(11) by the end of 1999.
(g) On-Board Diagnostic checks shall be implemented in all basic,
low enhanced and high enhanced areas as part of the I/M program by
January 1, 2002. Alternatively, states may elect to phase-in OBD-I/M
testing for one test cycle by using the OBD-I/M check to screen clean
vehicles from tailpipe testing and require repair and retest for only
those vehicles which proceed to fail the tailpipe test. An additional
alternative is also available to states with regard to the deadline for
mandatory testing, repair, and retesting of vehicles based upon the OBD-
I/M check. Under this third option, if a state can show good cause (and
the Administrator takes notice-and-comment action to approve this good
cause showing), up to an additional 12 months' extension may be granted,
establishing an alternative startdate for such states of no later than
January 1, 2003. States choosing to make this showing will also have
available to them the phase-in approach described in this section, with
the one-cycle time limit to begin coincident with the alternative start
date established by Administrator approval of the showing, but no later
than January 1, 2003. The showing of good cause (and its approval or
disapproval) will be addressed on a case-by-case basis.
[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 58 FR 59367, Nov. 9, 1993; 61
FR 39037, July 25, 1996; 61 FR 40946, Aug. 6, 1996; 63 FR 24433, May 4,
1998; 66 FR 18178, Apr. 5, 2001]
Appendix A to Subpart S of Part 51--Calibrations, Adjustments and
Quality Control
(I) Steady-State Test Equipment
States may opt to use transient emission test equipment for steady-
state tests and follow the quality control requirements in paragraph
(II) of this appendix instead of the following requirements.
(a) Equipment shall be calibrated in accordance with the
manufacturers' instructions.
(b) Prior to each test. (1) Hydrocarbon hang-up check. Immediately
prior to each test the analyzer shall automatically perform a
hydrocarbon hang-up check. If the HC reading, when the probe is sampling
ambient air, exceeds 20 ppm, the system shall be purged with clean air
or zero gas. The analyzer shall be inhibited from continuing the test
until HC levels drop below 20 ppm.
(2) Automatic zero and span. The analyzer shall conduct an automatic
zero and span check prior to each test. The span check shall include the
HC, CO, and CO2 channels, and the NO and O2 channels, if
present. If zero and/or span drift cause the signal levels to move
beyond the adjustment range of the analyzer, it shall lock out from
testing.
(3) Low flow. The system shall lock out from testing if sample flow
is below the acceptable level as defined in paragraph (I)(b)(6) of
appendix D to this subpart.
(c) Leak check. A system leak check shall be performed within
twenty-four hours before the test in low volume stations (those
performing less than the 4,000 inspections per year) and within four
hours in high-volume stations (4,000 or more inspections per year) and
may be performed in conjunction with the gas calibration described in
paragraph (I)(d)(1) of this appendix. If a leak check is not performed
within the preceding twenty-four hours in low volume stations and within
four hours in high-volume stations or if the analyzer fails the leak
check, the analyzer shall lock out from testing. The leak check shall be
a procedure demonstrated to effectively check the sample hose and probe
for leaks and shall be performed in accordance with good engineering
practices. An error of more than 2% of the reading
using low range span gas shall cause the analyzer to lock out from
testing and shall require repair of leaks.
(d) Gas calibration. (1) On each operating day in high-volume
stations, analyzers shall automatically require and successfully pass a
two-point gas calibration for HC, CO, and CO2 and shall continually
compensate for changes in barometric pressure. Calibration shall be
checked within four hours before the test and the analyzer adjusted if
the reading is more than 2% different from the span gas value. In low-
volume stations, analyzers
[[Page 318]]
shall undergo a two-point calibration within seventy-two hours before
each test, unless changes in barometric pressure are compensated for
automatically and statistical process control demonstrates equal or
better quality control using different frequencies. Gas calibration
shall be accomplished by introducing span gas that meets the
requirements of paragraph (I)(d)(3) of this appendix into the analyzer
through the calibration port. If the analyzer reads the span gas within
the allowable tolerance range (i.e., the square root of sum of the
squares of the span gas tolerance described in paragraph (I)(d)(3) of
this appendix and the calibration tolerance, which shall be equal to
2%), no adjustment of the analyzer is necessary. The gas calibration
procedure shall correct readings that exceed the allowable tolerance
range to the center of the allowable tolerance range. The pressure in
the sample cell shall be the same with the calibration gas flowing
during calibration as with the sample gas flowing during sampling. If
the system is not calibrated, or the system fails the calibration check,
the analyzer shall lock out from testing.
(2) Span points. A two point gas calibration procedure shall be
followed. The span shall be accomplished at one of the following pairs
of span points:
(A) 300--ppm propane (HC)
1.0--% carbon monoxide (CO)
6.0--% carbon dioxide (CO2)
1000--ppm nitric oxide (if equipped with NO)
1200--ppm propane (HC)
4.0--% carbon monoxide (CO)
12.0--% carbon dioxide (CO2)
3000--ppm nitric oxide (if equipped with NO)
(B) --ppm propane
0.0--% carbon monoxide
0.0--% carbon dioxide
0--ppm nitric oxide (if equipped with NO)
600--ppm propane (HC)
1.6--% carbon monoxide (CO)
11.0--% carbon dioxide (CO2)
1200--ppm nitric oxide (if equipped with NO)
(3) Span gases. The span gases used for the gas calibration shall be
traceable to National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
standards 2%, and shall be within two percent of
the span points specified in paragraph (d)(2) of this appendix. Zero
gases shall conform to the specifications given in Sec. 86.114-79(a)(5)
of this chapter.
(e) Dynamometer checks--(1) Monthly check. Within one month
preceding each loaded test, the accuracy of the roll speed indicator
shall be verified and the dynamometer shall be checked for proper power
absorber settings.
(2) Semi-annual check. Within six months preceding each loaded test,
the road-load response of the variable-curve dynamometer or the
frictional power absorption of the dynamometer shall be checked by a
coast down procedure similar to that described in Sec. 86.118-78 of
this chapter. The check shall be done at 30 mph, and a power absorption
load setting to generate a total horsepower (hp) of 4.1 hp. The actual
coast down time from 45 mph to 15 mph shall be within 1 second of the time calculated by the following
equation:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.014
where W is the total inertia weight as represented by the weight of the
rollers (excluding free rollers), and any inertia flywheels used,
measured in pounds. If the coast down time is not within the specified
tolerance the dynamometer shall be taken out of service and corrective
action shall be taken.
(f) Other checks. In addition to the above periodic checks, these
shall also be used to verify system performance under the following
special circumstances.
(1) Gas Calibration. (A) Each time the analyzer electronic or
optical systems are repaired or replaced, a gas calibration shall be
performed prior to returning the unit to service.
(B) In high-volume stations, monthly multi-point calibrations shall
be performed. Low-volume stations shall perform multi-point calibrations
every six months. The calibration curve shall be checked at 20%, 40%,
60%, and 80% of full scale and adjusted or repaired if the
specifications in appendix D(I)(b)(1) to this subpart are not met.
(2) Leak checks. Each time the sample line integrity is broken, a
leak check shall be performed prior to testing.
(II) Transient Test Equipment
(a) Dynamometer. Once per week, the calibration of each dynamometer
and each fly wheel shall be checked by a dynamometer coast-down
procedure comparable to that in Sec. 86.118-78 of this chapter between
the speeds of 55 to 45 mph, and between 30 to 20 mph. All rotating
dynamometer components shall be included in the coast-down check for the
inertia weight selected. For dynamometers with uncoupled rolls, the
uncoupled rollers may undergo a separate coast-down check. If a vehicle
is used to motor the dynamometer to the beginning coast-down speed, the
vehicle shall be lifted off the dynamometer rolls before the coast-down
test begins. If the difference between the measured coast-down time and
the theoretical coast-down time is greater than +1 second, the system
shall lock out, until corrective action brings the dynamometer into
calibration.
(b) Constant volume sampler. (1) The constant volume sampler (CVS)
flow calibration shall be checked daily by a procedure that identifies
deviations in flow from the true
[[Page 319]]
value. Deviations greater than 4% shall be
corrected.
(2) The sample probe shall be cleaned and checked at least once per
month. The main CVS venturi shall be cleaned and checked at least once
per year.
(3) Verification that flow through the sample probe is adequate for
the design shall be done daily. Deviations greater than the design
tolerances shall be corrected.
(c) Analyzer system--(1) Calibration checks. (A) Upon initial
operation, calibration curves shall be generated for each analyzer. The
calibration curve shall consider the entire range of the analyzer as one
curve. At least 6 calibration points plus zero shall be used in the
lower portion of the range corresponding to an average concentration of
approximately 2 gpm for HC, 30 gpm for CO, 3 gpm for NOX, and
400 gpm for CO2. For the case where a low and a high range
analyzer is used, the high range analyzer shall use at least 6
calibration points plus zero in the lower portion of the high range
scale corresponding to approximately 100% of the full-scale value of the
low range analyzer. For all analyzers, at least 6 calibration points
shall also be used to define the calibration curve in the region above
the 6 lower calibration points. Gas dividers may be used to obtain the
intermediate points for the general range classifications specified. The
calibration curves generated shall be a polynomial of no greater order
than 4th order, and shall fit the date within 0.5% at each calibration
point.
(B) For all calibration curves, curve checks, span adjustments, and
span checks, the zero gas shall be considered a down-scale reference
gas, and the analyzer zero shall be set at the trace concentration value
of the specific zero gas used.
(2) The basic curve shall be checked monthly by the same procedure
used to generate the curve, and to the same tolerances.
(3) On a daily basis prior to vehicle testing--
(A) The curve for each analyzer shall be checked by adjusting the
analyzer to correctly read a zero gas and an up-scale span gas, and then
by correctly reading a mid-scale span gas within 2% of point. If the
analyzer does not read the mid-scale span point within 2% of point, the
system shall lock out. The up-scale span gas concentration for each
analyzer shall correspond to approximately 80 percent of full scale, and
the mid-point concentration shall correspond to approximately 15 percent
of full scale; and
(B) After the up-scale span check, each analyzer in a given facility
shall analyze a sample of a random concentration corresponding to
approximately 0.5 to 3 times the cut point (in gpm) for the constituent.
The value of the random sample may be determined by a gas blender. The
deviation in analysis from the sample concentration for each analyzer
shall be recorded and compared to the historical mean and standard
deviation for the analyzers at the facility and at all facilities. Any
reading exceeding 3 sigma shall cause the analyzer to lock out.
(4) Flame ionization detector check. Upon initial operation, and
after maintenance to the detector, each Flame Ionization Detector (FID)
shall be checked, and adjusted if necessary, for proper peaking and
characterization. Procedures described in SAE Paper No. 770141 are
recommended for this purpose. A copy of this paper may be obtained from
the Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc. (SAE), 400 Commonwealth Drive,
Warrendale, Pennsylvania, 15096-0001. Additionally, every month the
response of each FID to a methane concentration of approximately 50 ppm
CH4 shall be checked. If the response is outside of the range
of 1.10 to 1.20, corrective action shall be taken to bring the FID
response within this range. The response shall be computed by the
following formula:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.015
(5) Spanning frequency. The zero and up-scale span point shall be
checked, and adjusted if necessary, at 2 hour intervals following the
daily mid-scale curve check. If the zero or the up-scale span point
drifts by more than 2% for the previous check (except for the first
check of the day), the system shall lock out, and corrective action
shall be taken to bring the system into compliance.
(6) Spanning limit checks. The tolerance on the adjustment of the
up-scale span point is 0.4% of point. A software algorithm to perform
the span adjustment and subsequent calibration curve adjustment shall be
used. However, software up-scale span adjustments greater than 10% shall cause the system to lock out, requiring system
maintenance.
(7) Integrator checks. Upon initial operation, and every three
months thereafter, emissions from a randomly selected vehicle with
official test value greater than 60% of the standard (determined
retrospectively)
[[Page 320]]
shall be simultaneously sampled by the normal integration method and by
the bag method in each lane. The data from each method shall be put into
a historical data base for determining normal and deviant performance
for each test lane, facility, and all facilities combined. Specific
deviations exceeding 5% shall require corrective
action.
(8) Interference. CO and CO2 analyzers shall be checked
prior to initial service, and on a yearly basis thereafter, for water
interference. The specifications and procedures used shall generally
comply with either Sec. 86.122-78 or Sec. 86.321-79 of this chapter.
(9) NOX converter check. The converter efficiency of the
NO2 to NO converter shall be checked on a weekly basis. The
check shall generally conform to Sec. 86.123-78 of this chapter, or EPA
MVEL Form 305-01. Equivalent methods may be approved by the
Administrator.
(10) NO/NOX flow balance. The flow balance between the NO
and NOX test modes shall be checked weekly. The check may be
combined with the NOX convertor check as illustrated in EPA
MVEL Form 305-01.
(11) Additional checks. Additional checks shall be performed on the
HC, CO, CO2, and NOX analyzers according to best
engineering practices for the measurement technology used to ensure that
measurements meet specified accuracy requirements.
(12) System artifacts (hang-up). Prior to each test a comparison
shall be made between the background HC reading, the HC reading measured
through the sample probe (if different), and the zero gas. Deviations
from the zero gas greater than 10 parts per million carbon (ppmC) shall
cause the analyzer to lock out.
(13) Ambient background. The average of the pre-test and post-test
ambient background levels shall be compared to the permissible levels of
10 ppmC HC, 20 ppm CO, and 1 ppm NOX. If the permissible
levels are exceeded, the test shall be voided and corrective action
taken to lower the ambient background concentrations.
(14) Analytical gases. Zero gases shall meet the requirements of
Sec. 86.114-79(a)(5) of this chapter. NOX calibration gas
shall be a single blend using nitrogen as the diluent. Calibration gas
for the flame ionization detector shall be a single blend of propane
with a diluent of air. Calibration gases for CO and CO2 shall
be single blends using nitrogen or air as a diluent. Multiple blends of
HC, CO, and CO2 in air may be used if shown to be stable and
accurate.
(III) Purge Analysis System
On a daily basis each purge flow meter shall be checked with a
simulated purge flow against a reference flow measuring device with
performance specifications equal to or better than those specified for
the purge meter. The check shall include a mid-scale rate check, and a
total flow check between 10 and 20 liters. Deviations greater than
5% shall be corrected. On a monthly basis, the
calibration of purge meters shall be checked for proper rate and total
flow with three equally spaced points across the flow rate and the
totalized flow range. Deviations exceeding the specified accuracy shall
be corrected. The dynamometer quality assurance checks required under
paragraph (II) of this appendix shall also apply to the dynamometer used
for purge tests.
(IV) Evaporative System Integrity Test Equipment
(a) On a weekly basis pressure measurement devices shall be checked
against a reference device with performance specifications equal to or
better than those specified for the measurement device. Deviations
exceeding the performance specifications shall be corrected. Flow
measurement devices, if any, shall be checked according to paragraph III
of this appendix.
(b) Systems that monitor evaporative system leaks shall be checked
for integrity on a daily basis by sealing and pressurizing.
[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 58 FR 59367, Nov. 9, 1993]
Appendix B to Subpart S of Part 51--Test Procedures
(I) Idle test
(a) General requirements--(1) Exhaust gas sampling algorithm. The
analysis of exhaust gas concentrations shall begin 10 seconds after the
applicable test mode begins. Exhaust gas concentrations shall be
analyzed at a minimum rate of two times per second. The measured value
for pass/fail determinations shall be a simple running average of the
measurements taken over five seconds.
(2) Pass/fail determination. A pass or fail determination shall be
made for each applicable test mode based on a comparison of the short
test standards contained in appendix C to this subpart, and the measured
value for HC and CO as described in paragraph (I)(a)(1) of this
appendix. A vehicle shall pass the test mode if any pair of simultaneous
measured values for HC and CO are below or equal to the applicable short
test standards. A vehicle shall fail the test mode if the values for
either HC or CO, or both, in all simultaneous pairs of values are above
the applicable standards.
(3) Void test conditions. The test shall immediately end and any
exhaust gas measurements shall be voided if the measured concentration
of CO plus CO2 falls below six percent or the vehicle's
engine stalls at any time during the test sequence.
(4) Multiple exhaust pipes. Exhaust gas concentrations from vehicle
engines equipped
[[Page 321]]
with multiple exhaust pipes shall be sampled simultaneously.
(5) This test shall be immediately terminated upon reaching the
overall maximum test time.
(b) Test sequence. (1) The test sequence shall consist of a first-
chance test and a second-chance test as follows:
(i) The first-chance test, as described under paragraph (c) of this
section, shall consist of an idle mode.
(ii) The second-chance test as described under paragraph (I)(d) of
this appendix shall be performed only if the vehicle fails the first-
chance test.
(2) The test sequence shall begin only after the following
requirements are met:
(i) The vehicle shall be tested in as-received condition with the
transmission in neutral or park and all accessories turned off. The
engine shall be at normal operating temperature (as indicated by a
temperature gauge, temperature lamp, touch test on the radiator hose, or
other visual observation for overheating).
(ii) For all pre-1996 model year vehicles, a tachometer shall be
attached to the vehicle in accordance with the analyzer manufacturer's
instructions. For 1996 and newer model year vehicles the OBD data link
connector will be used to monitor RPM. In the event that an OBD data
link connector is not available or that an RPM signal is not available
over the data link connector, a tachometer shall be used instead.
(iii) The sample probe shall be inserted into the vehicle's tailpipe
to a minimum depth of 10 inches. If the vehicle's exhaust system
prevents insertion to this depth, a tailpipe extension shall be used.
(iv) The measured concentration of CO plus CO2 shall be
greater than or equal to six percent.
(c) First-chance test. The test timer shall start (tt=0) when the
conditions specified in paragraph (I)(b)(2) of this appendix are met.
The first-chance test shall have an overall maximum test time of 145
seconds (tt=145). The first-chance test shall consist of an idle mode
only.
(1) The mode timer shall start (mt=0) when the vehicle engine speed
is between 350 and 1100 rpm. If engine speed exceeds 1100 rpm or falls
below 350 rpm, the mode timer shall reset zero and resume timing. The
minimum mode length shall be determined as described under paragraph
(I)(c)(2) of this appendix. The maximum mode length shall be 90 seconds
elapsed time (mt=90).
(2) The pass/fail analysis shall begin after an elapsed time of 10
seconds (mt=10). A pass or fail determination shall be made for the
vehicle and the mode shall be terminated as follows:
(i) The vehicle shall pass the idle mode and the test shall be
immediately terminated if, prior to an elapsed time of 30 seconds
(mt=30), measured values are less than or equal to 100 ppm HC and 0.5
percent CO.
(ii) The vehicle shall pass the idle mode and the test shall be
terminated at the end of an elapsed time of 30 seconds (mt=30), if prior
to that time the criteria of paragraph (I)(c)(2)(i) of this appendix are
not satisfied and the measured values are less than or equal to the
applicable short test standards as described in paragraph (I)(a)(2) of
this appendix.
(iii) The vehicle shall pass the idle mode and the test shall be
immediately terminated if, at any point between an elapsed time of 30
seconds (mt=30) and 90 seconds (mt=90), the measured values are less
than or equal to the applicable short test standards as described in
paragraph (I)(a)(2) of this appendix.
(iv) The vehicle shall fail the idle mode and the test shall be
terminated if none of the provisions of paragraphs (I)(c)(2)(i), (ii)
and (iii) of this appendix is satisfied by an elapsed time of 90 seconds
(mt=90). Alternatively, the vehicle may be failed if the provisions of
paragraphs (I)(c)(2)(i) and (ii) of this appendix are not met within an
elapsed time of 30 seconds.
(v) Optional. The vehicle may fail the first-chance test and the
second-chance test shall be omitted if no exhaust gas concentration
lower than 1800 ppm HC is found by an elapsed time of 30 seconds
(mt=30).
(d) Second-chance test. If the vehicle fails the first-chance test,
the test timer shall reset to zero (tt=0) and a second-chance test shall
be performed. The second-chance test shall have an overall maximum test
time of 425 seconds (tt=425). The test shall consist of a
preconditioning mode followed immediately by an idle mode.
(1) Preconditioning mode. The mode timer shall start (mt=0) when the
engine speed is between 2200 and 2800 rpm. The mode shall continue for
an elapsed time of 180 seconds (mt=180). If engine speed falls below
2200 rpm or exceeds 2800 rmp for more than five seconds in any one
excursion, or 15 seconds over all excursions, the mode timer shall reset
to zero and resume timing.
(2) Idle mode--(i) Ford Motor Company and Honda vehicles. The
engines of 1981-1987 Ford Motor Company vehicles and 1984-1985 Honda
Preludes shall be shut off for not more than 10 seconds and restarted.
This procedure may also be used for 1988-1989 Ford Motor Company
vehicles but should not be used for other vehicles. The probe may be
removed from the tailpipe or the sample pump turned off if necessary to
reduce analyzer fouling during the restart procedure.
(ii) The mode timer shall start (mt=0) when the vehicle engine speed
is between 350 and 1100 rpm. If engine speed exceeds 1100 rpm or falls
below 350 rpm, the mode timer shall reset to zero and resume timing. The
[[Page 322]]
minimum idle mode length shall be determined as described in paragraph
(I)(d)(2)(iii) of this appendix. The maximum idle mode length shall be
90 seconds elapsed time (mt=90).
(iii) The pass/fail analysis shall begin after an elapsed time of 10
seconds (mt=10). A pass or fail determination shall be made for the
vehicle and the idle mode shall be terminated as follows:
(A) The vehicle shall pass the idle mode and the test shall be
immediately terminated if, prior to an elapsed time of 30 seconds
(mt=30), measured values are less than or equal to 100 ppm HC and 0.5
percent CO.
(B) The vehicle shall pass the idle mode and the test shall be
terminated at the end of an elapsed time of 30 seconds (mt=30), if prior
to that time the criteria of paragraph (I)(d)(2)(iii)(A) of this
appendix are not satisfied and the measured values are less than or
equal to the applicable short test standards as described in paragraph
(I)(a)(2) of this appendix.
(C) The vehicle shall pass the idle mode and the test shall be
immediately terminated if, at any point between an elapsed time of 30
seconds (mt=30) and 90 seconds (mt=90), measured values are less than or
equal to the applicable short test standards described in paragraph
(I)(a)(2) of this appendix.
(D) The vehicle shall fail the idle mode and the test shall be
terminated if none of the provisions of paragraphs (I)(d)(2)(iii)(A),
(d)(2)(iii)(B), and (d)(2)(iii)(C) of this appendix are satisfied by an
elapsed time of 90 seconds (mt=90).
(II) Two Speed Idle Test
(a) General requirements--(1) Exhaust gas sampling algorithm. The
analysis of exhaust gas concentrations shall begin 10 seconds after the
applicable test mode begins. Exhaust gas concentrations shall be
analyzed at a rate of two times per second. The measured value for pass/
fail determinations shall be a simple running average of the
measurements taken over five seconds.
(2) Pass/fail determination. A pass or fail determination shall be
made for each applicable test mode based on a comparison of the short
test standards contained in appendix C to this subpart, and the measured
value for HC and CO as described in paragraph (II)(a)(1) of this
appendix. A vehicle shall pass the test mode if any pair of simultaneous
values for HC and CO are below or equal to the applicable short test
standards. A vehicle shall fail the test mode if the values for either
HC or CO, or both, in all simultaneous pairs of values are above the
applicable standards.
(3) Void test conditions. The test shall immediately end and any
exhaust gas measurements shall be voided if the measured concentration
of CO plus CO2 falls below six percent or the vehicle's
engine stalls at any time during the test sequence.
(4) Multiple exhaust pipes. Exhaust gas concentrations from vehicle
engines equipped with multiple exhaust pipes shall be sampled
simultaneously.
(5) The test shall be immediately terminated upon reaching the
overall maximum test time.
(b) Test sequence. (1) The test sequence shall consist of a first-
chance test and a second-chance test as follows:
(i) The first-chance test, as described under paragraph (II)(c) of
this appendix, shall consist of an idle mode followed by a high-speed
mode.
(ii) The second-chance high-speed mode, as described under paragraph
(II)(c) of this appendix, shall immediately follow the first-chance
high-speed mode. It shall be performed only if the vehicle fails the
first-chance test. The second-chance idle mode, as described under
paragraph (II)(d) of this appendix, shall follow the second-chance high-
speed mode and be performed only if the vehicle fails the idle mode of
the first-chance test.
(2) The test sequence shall begin only after the following
requirements are met:
(i) The vehicle shall be tested in as-received condition with the
transmission in neutral or park and all accessories turned off. The
engine shall be at normal operating temperature (as indicated by a
temperature gauge, temperature lamp, touch test on the radiator hose, or
other visual observation for overheating).
(ii) For all pre-1996 model year vehicles, a tachometer shall be
attached to the vehicle in accordance with the analyzer manufacturer's
instructions. For 1996 and newer model year vehicles the OBD data link
connector will be used to monitor RPM. In the event that an OBD data
link connector is not available or that an RPM signal is not available
over the data link connector, a tachometer shall be used instead.
(iii) The sample probe shall be inserted into the vehicle's tailpipe
to a minimum depth of 10 inches. If the vehicle's exhaust system
prevents insertion to this depth, a tailpipe extension shall be used.
(iv) The measured concentration of CO plus CO2 shall be
greater than or equal to six percent.
(c) First-chance test and second-chance high-speed mode. The test
timer shall start (tt=0) when the conditions specified in paragraph
(b)(2) of this section are met. The first-chance test and second-chance
high-speed mode shall have an overall maximum test time of 425 seconds
(tt=425). The first-chance test shall consist of an idle mode followed
immediately by a high-speed mode. This is followed immediately by an
additional second-chance high-speed mode, if necessary.
[[Page 323]]
(1) First-chance idle mode. (i) The mode timer shall start (mt=0)
when the vehicle engine speed is between 350 and 1100 rpm. If engine
speed exceeds 1100 rpm or falls below 350 rpm, the mode timer shall
reset to zero and resume timing. The minimum idle mode length shall be
determined as described in paragraph (II)(c)(1)(ii) of this appendix.
The maximum idle mode length shall be 90 seconds elapsed time (mt=90).
(ii) The pass/fail analysis shall begin after an elapsed time of 10
seconds (mt=10). A pass or fail determination shall be made for the
vehicle and the mode terminated as follows:
(A) The vehicle shall pass the idle mode and the mode shall be
immediately terminated if, prior to an elapsed time of 30 seconds
(mt=30), measured values are less than or equal to 100 ppm HC and 0.5
percent CO.
(B) The vehicle shall pass the idle mode and the mode shall be
terminated at the end of an elapsed time of 30 seconds (mt=30) if, prior
to that time, the criteria of paragraph (II)(c)(1)(ii)(A) of this
appendix are not satisfied, and the measured values are less than or
equal to the applicable short test standards as described in paragraph
(II)(a)(2) of this appendix.
(C) The vehicle shall pass the idle mode and the mode shall be
immediately terminated if, at any point between an elapsed time of 30
seconds (mt=30) and 90 seconds (mt=90), the measured values are less
than or equal to the applicable short test standards as described in
paragraph (II)(a)(2) of this appendix.
(D) The vehicle shall fail the idle mode and the mode shall be
terminated if none of the provisions of paragraphs (II)(c)(1)(ii)(A),
(B), and (C) of this appendix is satisfied by an elapsed time of 90
seconds (mt=90). Alternatively, the vehicle may be failed if the
provisions of paragraphs (II)(c)(2)(i) and (ii) of this appendix are not
met within an elapsed time of 30 seconds.
(E) Optional. The vehicle may fail the first-chance test and the
second-chance test shall be omitted if no exhaust gas concentration less
than 1800 ppm HC is found by an elapsed time of 30 seconds (mt=30).
(2) First-chance and second-chance high-speed modes. This mode
includes both the first-chance and second-chance high-speed modes, and
follows immediately upon termination of the first-chance idle mode.
(i) The mode timer shall reset (mt=0) when the vehicle engine speed
is between 2200 and 2800 rpm. If engine speed falls below 2200 rpm or
exceeds 2800 rpm for more than two seconds in one excursion, or more
than six seconds over all excursions within 30 seconds of the final
measured value used in the pass/fail determination, the measured value
shall be invalidated and the mode continued. If any excursion lasts for
more than ten seconds, the mode timer shall reset to zero (mt=0) and
timing resumed. The minimum high-speed mode length shall be determined
as described under paragraphs (II)(c)(2)(ii) and (iii) of this appendix.
The maximum high-speed mode length shall be 180 seconds elapsed time
(mt=180).
(ii) Ford Motor Company and Honda vehicles. For 1981-1987 model year
Ford Motor Company vehicles and 1984-1985 model year Honda Preludes, the
pass/fail analysis shall begin after an elapsed time of 10 seconds
(mt=10) using the following procedure. This procedure may also be used
for 1988-1989 Ford Motor Company vehicles but should not be used for
other vehicles.
(A) A pass or fail determination, as described below, shall be used,
for vehicles that passed the idle mode, to determine whether the high-
speed test should be terminated prior to or at the end of an elapsed
time of 180 seconds (mt=180).
(1) The vehicle shall pass the high-speed mode and the test shall be
immediately terminated if, prior to an elapsed time of 30 seconds
(mt=30), the measured values are less than or equal to 100 ppm HC and
0.5 percent CO.
(2) The vehicle shall pass the high-speed mode and the test shall be
terminated at the end of an elapsed time of 30 seconds (mt=30) if, prior
to that time, the criteria of paragraph (II)(c)(2)(ii)(A)(1) of this
appendix are not satisfied, and the measured values are less than or
equal to the applicable short test standards as described in paragraph
(II)(a)(2) of this appendix.
(3) The vehicle shall pass the high-speed mode and the test shall be
immediately terminated if, at any point between an elapsed time of 30
seconds (mt=30) and 180 seconds (mt=180), the measured values are less
than or equal to the applicable short test standards as described in
paragraph (II)(a)(2) of this appendix.
(4) Restart. If at an elapsed time of 90 seconds (mt=90) the
measured values are greater than the applicable short test standards as
described in paragraph (II)(a)(2) of this appendix, the vehicle's engine
shall be shut off for not more than 10 seconds after returning to idle
and then shall be restarted. The probe may be removed from the tailpipe
or the sample pump turned off if necessary to reduce analyzer fouling
during the restart procedure. The mode timer will stop upon engine shut
off (mt=90) and resume upon engine restart. The pass/fail determination
shall resume as follows after 100 seconds have elapsed (mt=100).
(i) The vehicle shall pass the high-speed mode and the test shall be
immediately terminated if, at any point between an elapsed time of 100
seconds (mt=100) and 180 seconds (mt=180), the measured values are less
than or equal to the applicable short test standards described in
paragraph (II)(a)(2) of this appendix.
[[Page 324]]
(ii) The vehicle shall fail the high-speed mode and the test shall
be terminated if paragraph (II)(c)(2)(ii)(A)(4)(i) of this appendix is
not satisfied by an elapsed time of 180 seconds (mt=180).
(B) A pass or fail determination shall be made for vehicles that
failed the idle mode and the high-speed mode terminated at the end of an
elapsed time of 180 seconds (mt=180) as follows:
(1) The vehicle shall pass the high-speed mode and the mode shall be
terminated at an elapsed time of 180 seconds (mt=180) if any measured
values of HC and CO exhaust gas concentrations during the high-speed
mode are less than or equal to the applicable short test standards as
described in paragraph (II)(a)(2) of this appendix.
(2) Restart. If at an elapsed time of 90 seconds (mt=90) the
measured values of HC and CO exhaust gas concentrations during the high-
speed mode are greater than the applicable short test standards as
described in paragraph (II)(a)(2) of this appendix, the vehicle's engine
shall be shut off for not more than 10 seconds after returning to idle
and then shall be restarted. The probe may be removed from the tailpipe
or the sample pump turned off if necessary to reduce analyzer fouling
during the restart procedure. The mode timer will stop upon engine shut
off (mt=90) and resume upon engine restart. The pass/fail determination
shall resume as follows after 100 seconds have elapsed (mt=100).
(i) The vehicle shall pass the high-speed mode and the mode shall be
terminated at an elapsed time of 180 seconds (mt=180) if any measured
values of HC and CO exhaust gas concentrations during the high-speed
mode are less than or equal to the applicable short test standards as
described in paragraph (II)(a)(2) of this appendix.
(ii) The vehicle shall fail the high-speed mode and the test shall
be terminated if paragraph (II)(c)(2)(ii)(B)(2)(i) of this appendix is
not satisfied by an elapsed time of 180 seconds (mt=180).
(iii) All other light-duty motor vehicles. The pass/fail analysis
for vehicles not specified in paragraph (II)(c)(2)(ii) of this appendix
shall begin after an elapsed time of 10 seconds (mt=10) using the
following procedure.
(A) A pass or fail determination, as described below, shall be used
for vehicles that passed the idle mode, to determine whether the high-
speed mode should be terminated prior to or at the end of an elapsed
time of 180 seconds (mt=180).
(1) The vehicle shall pass the high-speed mode and the test shall be
immediately terminated if, prior to an elapsed time of 30 seconds
(mt=30), any measured values are less than or equal to 100 ppm HC and
0.5 percent CO.
(2) The vehicle shall pass the high-speed mode and the test shall be
terminated at the end of an elapsed time of 30 seconds (mt=30) if, prior
to that time, the criteria of paragraph (II)(c)(2)(iii)(A)(1) of this
appendix are not satisfied, and the measured values are less than or
equal to the applicable short test standards as described in paragraph
(II)(a)(2) of this appendix.
(3) The vehicle shall pass the high-speed mode and the test shall be
immediately terminated if, at any point between an elapsed time of 30
seconds (mt=30) and 180 seconds (mt=180), the measured values are less
than or equal to the applicable short test standards as described in
paragraph (II)(a)(2) of this appendix.
(4) The vehicle shall fail the high-speed mode and the test shall be
terminated if none of the provisions of paragraphs
(II)(c)(2)(iii)(A)(1), (2), and (3) of this appendix is satisfied by an
elapsed time of 180 seconds (mt=180).
(B) A pass or fail determination shall be made for vehicles that
failed the idle mode and the high-speed mode terminated at the end of an
elapsed time of 180 seconds (mt=180) as follows:
(1) The vehicle shall pass the high-speed mode and the mode shall be
terminated at an elapsed time of 180 seconds (mt=180) if any measured
values are less than or equal to the applicable short test standards as
described in paragraph (II)(a)(2) of this appendix.
(2) The vehicle shall fail the high-speed mode and the test shall be
terminated if paragraph (II)(c)(2)(iii)(B)(1) of this appendix is not
satisfied by an elapsed time of 180 seconds (mt=180).
(d) Second-chance idle mode. If the vehicle fails the first-chance
idle mode and passes the high-speed mode, the test timer shall reset to
zero (tt=0) and a second-chance idle mode shall commence. The second-
chance idle mode shall have an overall maximum test time of 145 seconds
(tt=145). The test shall consist of an idle mode only.
(1) The engines of 1981-1987 Ford Motor Company vehicles and 1984-
1985 Honda Preludes shall be shut off for not more than 10 seconds and
restarted. The probe may be removed from the tailpipe or the sample pump
turned off if necessary to reduce analyzer fouling during the restart
procedure. This procedure may also be used for 1988-1989 Ford Motor
Company vehicles but should not be used for other vehicles.
(2) The mode timer shall start (mt=0) when the vehicle engine speed
is between 350 and 1100 rpm. If the engine speed exceeds 1100 rpm or
falls below 350 rpm the mode timer shall reset to zero and resume
timing. The minimum second-chance idle mode length shall be determined
as described in paragraph (II)(d)(3) of this appendix. The maximum
second-chance idle mode length shall be 90 seconds elapsed time (mt=90).
(3) The pass/fail analysis shall begin after an elapsed time of 10
seconds (mt=10). A pass or fail determination shall be made for the
[[Page 325]]
vehicle and the second-chance idle mode shall be terminated as follows:
(i) The vehicle shall pass the second-chance idle mode and the test
shall be immediately terminated if, prior to an elapsed time of 30
seconds (mt=30), any measured values are less than or equal to 100 ppm
HC and 0.5 percent CO.
(ii) The vehicle shall pass the second-chance idle mode and the test
shall be terminated at the end of an elapsed time of 30 seconds (mt=30)
if, prior to that time, the criteria of paragraph (II)(d)(3)(i) of this
appendix are not satisfied, and the measured values are less than or
equal to the applicable short test standards as described in paragraph
(II)(a)(2) of this appendix.
(iii) The vehicle shall pass the second-chance idle mode and the
test shall be immediately terminated if, at any point between an elapsed
time of 30 seconds (mt=30) and 90 seconds (mt=90), the measured values
are less than or equal to the applicable short test standards as
described in paragraph (II)(a)(2) of this appendix.
(iv) The vehicle shall fail the second-chance idle mode and the test
shall be terminated if none of the provisions of paragraph
(II)(d)(3)(i), (ii), and (iii) of this appendix is satisfied by an
elapsed time of 90 seconds (mt=90).
(III) Loaded Test
(a) General requirements--(1) Exhaust gas sampling algorithm. The
analysis of exhaust gas concentrations shall begin 10 seconds after the
applicable test mode begins. Exhaust gas concentrations shall be
analyzed at a minimum rate of two times per second. The measured value
for pass/fail determinations shall be a simple running average of the
measurements taken over five seconds.
(2) Pass/fail determination. A pass or fail determination shall be
made for each applicable test mode based on a comparison of the short
test standards contained in appendix C to this subpart and the measured
value for HC and CO as described in paragraph (III)(a)(1) of this
appendix. A vehicle shall pass the test mode if any pair of simultaneous
values for HC and CO are below or equal to the applicable short test
standards. A vehicle shall fail the test mode if the values for either
HC or CO, or both, in all simultaneous pairs of values are above the
applicable standards.
(3) Void test conditions. The test shall immediately end and any
exhaust gas measurements shall be voided if the measured concentration
of CO plus CO2 falls below six percent or the vehicle's
engine stalls at any time during the test sequence.
(4) Multiple exhaust pipes. Exhaust gas concentrations from vehicle
engines equipped with multiple exhaust pipes shall be sampled
simultaneously.
(5) The test shall be immediately terminated upon reaching the
overall maximum test time.
(b) Test sequence. (1) The test sequence shall consist of a loaded
mode using a chassis dynamometer followed immediately by an idle mode as
described under paragraphs (III)(c)(1) and (2) of this appendix.
(2) The test sequence shall begin only after the following
requirements are met:
(i) The dynamometer shall be warmed up, in stabilized operating
condition, adjusted, and calibrated in accordance with the procedures of
appendix A to this subpart. Prior to each test, variable-curve
dynamometers shall be checked for proper setting of the road-load
indicator or road-load controller.
(ii) The vehicle shall be tested in as-received condition with all
accessories turned off. The engine shall be at normal operating
temperature (as indicated by a temperature gauge, temperature lamp,
touch test on the radiator hose, or other visual observation for
overheating).
(iii) The vehicle shall be operated during each mode of the test
with the gear selector in the following position:
(A) In drive for automatic transmissions and in second (or third if
more appropriate) for manual transmissions for the loaded mode;
(B) In park or neutral for the idle mode.
(iv) For all pre-1996 model year vehicles, a tachometer shall be
attached to the vehicle in accordance with the analyzer manufacturer's
instructions. For 1996 and newer model year vehicles the OBD data link
connector will be used to monitor RPM. In the event that an OBD data
link connector is not available or that an RPM signal is not available
over the data link connector, a tachometer shall be used instead.
(v) The sample probe shall be inserted into the vehicle's tailpipe
to a minimum depth of 10 inches. If the vehicle's exhaust system
prevents insertion to this depth, a tailpipe extension shall be used.
(vi) The measured concentration of CO plus CO2 shall be
greater than or equal to six percent.
(c) Overall test procedure. The test timer shall start (tt=0) when
the conditions specified in paragraph (III)(b)(2) of this appendix are
met and the mode timer initiates as specified in paragraph (III)(c)(1)
of this appendix. The test sequence shall have an overall maximum test
time of 240 seconds (tt=240). The test shall be immediately terminated
upon reaching the overall maximum test time.
(1) Loaded mode--(i) Ford Motor Company and Honda vehicles.
(Optional) The engines of 1981-1987 Ford Motor Company vehicles and
1984-1985 Honda Preludes shall be shut off for not more than 10 seconds
and restarted. This procedure may also be used for 1988-1989 Ford Motor
Company vehicles but should not be
[[Page 326]]
used for other vehicles. The probe may be removed from the tailpipe or
the sample pump turned off if necessary to reduce analyzer fouling
during the restart procedure.
(ii) The mode timer shall start (mt=0) when the dynamometer speed is
within the limits specified for the vehicle engine size according to the
following schedule. If the dynamometer speed falls outside the limits
for more than five seconds in one excursion, or 15 seconds over all
excursions, the mode timer shall reset to zero and resume timing. The
minimum mode length shall be determined as described in paragraph
(III)(c)(1)(iii)(A) of this appendix. The maximum mode length shall be
90 seconds elapsed time (mt=90).
Dynamometer Test Schedule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Normal
Roll speed loading
Gasoline engine size (cylinders) (mph) (brake
horsepower)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 or less..................................... 22-25 2.8-4.1
5-6........................................... 29-32 6.8-8.4
7 or more..................................... 32-35 8.4-10.8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) The pass/fail analysis shall begin after an elapsed time of 10
seconds (mt=10). A pass or fail determination shall be made for the
vehicle and the mode shall be terminated as follows:
(A) The vehicle shall pass the loaded mode and the mode shall be
immediately terminated if, at any point between an elapsed time of 30
seconds (mt=30) and 90 seconds (mt=90), measured values are less than or
equal to the applicable short test standards described in paragraph
(a)(2) of this section.
(B) The vehicle shall fail the loaded mode and the mode shall be
terminated if paragraph (III)(c)(1)(iii)(A) of this appendix is not
satisfied by an elapsed time of 90 seconds (mt=90).
(C) Optional. The vehicle may fail the loaded mode and any
subsequent idle mode shall be omitted if no exhaust gas concentration
less than 1800 ppm HC is found by an elapsed time of 30 seconds (mt=30).
(2) Idle mode--(i) Ford Motor Company and Honda vehicles. (Optional)
The engines of 1981-1987 Ford Motor Company vehicles and 1984-1985 Honda
Preludes shall be shut off for not more than 10 seconds and restarted.
This procedure may also be used for 1988-1989 Ford Motor Company
vehicles but should not be used for other vehicles. The probe may be
removed from the tailpipe or the sample pump turned off if necessary to
reduce analyzer fouling during the restart procedure.
(ii) The mode timer shall start (mt=0) when the dynamometer speed is
zero and the vehicle engine speed is between 350 and 1100 rpm. If engine
speed exceeds 1100 rpm or falls below 350 rpm, the mode timer shall
reset to zero and resume timing. The minimum idle mode length shall be
determined as described in paragraph (II)(c)(2)(ii) of this appendix.
The maximum idle mode length shall be 90 seconds elapsed time (mt=90).
(iii) The pass/fail analysis shall begin after an elapsed time of 10
seconds (mt=10). A pass or fail determination shall be made for the
vehicle and the mode shall be terminated as follows:
(A) The vehicle shall pass the idle mode and the test shall be
immediately terminated if, prior to an elapsed time of 30 seconds
(mt=30), measured values are less than or equal to 100 ppm HC and 0.5
percent CO.
(B) The vehicle shall pass the idle mode and the test shall be
terminated at the end of an elapsed time of 30 seconds (mt=30) if, prior
to that time, the criteria of paragraph (III)(c)(2)(iii)(A) of this
appendix are not satisfied, and the measured values are less than or
equal to the applicable short test standards as described in paragraph
(III)(a)(2) of this appendix.
(C) The vehicle shall pass the idle mode and the test shall be
immediately terminated if, at any point between an elapsed time of 30
seconds (mt=30) and 90 seconds (mt=90), measured values are less than or
equal to the applicable short test standards described in paragraph
(III)(a)(2) of this appendix.
(D) The vehicle shall fail the idle mode and the test shall be
terminated if none of the provisions of paragraphs (III)(c)(2)(iii)(A),
(c)(2)(iii)(B), and (c)(2)(iii)(C) of this appendix is satisfied by an
elapsed time of 90 seconds (mt=90).
(IV) Preconditioned IDLE TEST
(a) General requirements--(1) Exhaust gas sampling algorithm. The
analysis of exhaust gas concentrations shall begin 10 seconds after the
applicable test mode begins. Exhaust gas concentrations shall be
analyzed at a minimum rate of two times per second. The measured value
for pass/fail determinations shall be a simple running average of the
measurements taken over five seconds.
(2) Pass/fail determination. A pass or fail determination shall be
made for each applicable test mode based on a comparison of the short
test standards contained in appendix C to this subpart, and the measured
value for HC and CO as described in paragraph (IV)(a)(1) of this
appendix. A vehicle shall pass the test mode if any pair of simultaneous
values for HC and CO are below or equal to the applicable short test
standards. A vehicle shall fail the test mode if the values for either
HC or CO, or both, in all simultaneous pairs of values are above the
applicable standards.
(3) Void test conditions. The test shall immediately end and any
exhaust gas measurements shall be voided if the measured concentration
of CO plus CO2 falls below six percent or the vehicle's
engine stalls at any time during the test sequence.
[[Page 327]]
(4) Multiple exhaust pipes. Exhaust gas concentrations from vehicle
engines equipped with multiple exhaust pipes shall be sampled
simultaneously.
(5) The test shall be immediately terminated upon reaching the
overall maximum test time.
(b) Test sequence. (1) The test sequence shall consist of a first-
chance test and a second-chance test as follows:
(i) The first-chance test, as described under paragraph (IV)(c) of
this appendix, shall consist of a preconditioning mode followed by an
idle mode.
(ii) The second-chance test, as described under paragraph (IV)(d) of
this appendix, shall be performed only if the vehicle fails the first-
chance test.
(2) The test sequence shall begin only after the following
requirements are met:
(i) The vehicle shall be tested in as-received condition with the
transmission in neutral or park and all accessories turned off. The
engine shall be at normal operating temperature (as indicated by a
temperature gauge, temperature lamp, touch test on the radiator hose, or
other visual observation for overheating).
(ii) For all pre-1996 model year vehicles, a tachometer shall be
attached to the vehicle in accordance with the analyzer manufacturer's
instructions. For 1996 and newer model year vehicles the OBD data link
connector will be used to monitor RPM. In the event that an OBD data
link connector is not available or that an RPM signal is not available
over the data link connector, a tachometer shall be used instead.
(iii) The sample probe shall be inserted into the vehicle's tailpipe
to a minimum depth of 10 inches. If the vehicle's exhaust system
prevents insertion to this depth, a tailpipe extension shall be used.
(iv) The measured concentration of CO plus CO2 shall be greater than
or equal to six percent.
(c) First-chance test. The test timer shall start (tt=0) when the
conditions specified in paragraph (IV)(b)(2) of this appendix are met.
The test shall have an overall maximum test time of 200 seconds
(tt=200). The first-chance test shall consist of a preconditioning mode
followed immediately by an idle mode.
(1) Preconditioning mode. The mode timer shall start (mt=0) when the
engine speed is between 2200 and 2800 rpm. The mode shall continue for
an elapsed time of 30 seconds (mt=30). If engine speed falls below 2200
rpm or exceeds 2800 rpm for more than five seconds in any one excursion,
or 15 seconds over all excursions, the mode timer shall reset to zero
and resume timing.
(2) Idle mode. (i) The mode timer shall start (mt=0) when the
vehicle engine speed is between 350 and 1100 rpm. If engine speed
exceeds 1100 rpm or falls below 350 rpm, the mode timer shall reset to
zero and resume timing. The minimum idle mode length shall be determined
as described in paragraph (IV)(c)(2)(ii) of this appendix. The maximum
idle mode length shall be 90 seconds elapsed time (mt=90).
(ii) The pass/fail analysis shall begin after an elapsed time of 10
seconds (mt=10). A pass or fail determination shall be made for the
vehicle and the mode shall be terminated as follows:
(A) The vehicle shall pass the idle mode and the test shall be
immediately terminated if, prior to an elapsed time of 30 seconds
(mt=30), measured values are less than or equal to 100 ppm HC and 0.5
percent CO.
(B) The vehicle shall pass the idle mode and the test shall be
terminated at the end of an elapsed time of 30 seconds (mt=30) if, prior
to that time, the criteria of paragraph (IV)(c)(2)(ii)(A) of this
appendix are not satisfied, and the measured values are less than or
equal to the applicable short test standards as described in paragraph
(IV)(a)(2) of this appendix.
(C) The vehicle shall pass the idle mode and the test shall be
immediately terminated if, at any point between an elapsed time of 30
seconds (mt=30) and 90 seconds (mt=90), measured values are less than or
equal to the applicable short test standards as described in paragraph
(IV)(a)(2) of this section.
(D) The vehicle shall fail the idle mode and the test shall be
terminated if none of the provisions of paragraphs (IV)(c)(2)(ii)(A),
(B), and (C) of this appendix is satisfied by an elapsed time of 90
seconds (mt=90). Alternatively, the vehicle may be failed if the
provisions of paragraphs (IV)(c)(2) (i) and (ii) of this appendix are
not met within an elapsed time of 30 seconds.
(E) Optional. The vehicle may fail the first-chance test and the
second-chance test shall be omitted if no exhaust gas concentration less
than 1800 ppm HC is found at an elapsed time of 30 seconds (mt=30).
(d) Second-chance test. If the vehicle fails the first-chance test,
the test timer shall reset to zero and a second-chance test shall be
performed. The second-chance test shall have an overall maximum test
time of 425 seconds. The test shall consist of a preconditioning mode
followed immediately by an idle mode.
(1) Preconditioning mode. The mode timer shall start (mt=0) when
engine speed is between 2200 and 2800 rpm. The mode shall continue for
an elapsed time of 180 seconds (mt=180). If the engine speed falls below
2200 rpm or exceeds 2800 rpm for more than five seconds in any one
excursion, or 15 seconds over all excursions, the mode timer shall reset
to zero and resume timing.
(2) Idle mode--(i) Ford Motor Company and Honda vehicles. The
engines of 1981-1987 Ford Motor Company vehicles and 1984-1985 Honda
Preludes shall be shut off for not more than
[[Page 328]]
10 seconds and then shall be restarted. The probe may be removed from
the tailpipe or the sample pump turned off if necessary to reduce
analyzer fouling during the restart procedure. This procedure may also
be used for 1988-1989 Ford Motor Company vehicles but should not be used
for other vehicles.
(ii) The mode timer shall start (mt=0) when the vehicle engine speed
is between 350 and 1100 rpm. If the engine speed exceeds 1100 rpm or
falls below 350 rpm, the mode timer shall reset to zero and resume
timing. The minimum idle mode length shall be determined as described in
paragraph (IV)(d)(2)(iii) of this appendix. The maximum idle mode length
shall be 90 seconds elapsed time (mt=90).
(iii) The pass/fail analysis shall begin after an elapsed time of 10
seconds (mt=10). A pass or fail determination shall be made for the
vehicle and the mode shall be terminated as follows:
(A) The vehicle shall pass the idle mode and the test shall be
immediately terminated if, prior to an elapsed time of 30 seconds
(mt=30), measured values are less than or equal to 100 ppm HC and 0.5
percent CO.
(B) The vehicle shall pass the idle mode and the test shall be
terminated at the end of an elapsed time of 30 seconds (mt=30) if, prior
to that time, the criteria of paragraph (IV)(d)(2)(iii)(A) of this
appendix are not satisfied, and the measured values are less than or
equal to the applicable short test standards as described in paragraph
(IV)(a)(2) of this appendix.
(C) The vehicle shall pass the idle mode and the test shall be
immediately terminated if, at any point between an elapsed time of 30
seconds (mt=30) and 90 seconds (mt=90), measured values are less than or
equal to the applicable short test standards described in paragraph
(IV)(a)(2) of this appendix.
(D) The vehicle shall fail the idle mode and the test shall be
terminated if none of the provisions of paragraphs (IV)(d)(2)(iii) (A),
(B), and (C) of this appendix is satisfied by an elapsed time of 90
seconds (mt=90).
(V) Idle Test With Loaded Preconditioning
(a) General requirements--(1) Exhaust gas sampling algorithm. The
analysis of exhaust gas concentrations shall begin 10 seconds after the
applicable test mode begins. Exhaust gas concentrations shall be
analyzed at a minimum rate of two times per second. The measured value
for pass/fail determinations shall be a simple running average of the
measurements taken over five seconds.
(2) Pass/fail determination. A pass or fail determination shall be
made for each applicable test mode based on a comparison of the short
test standards contained in appendix C to this subpart, and the measured
value for HC and CO as described in paragraph (V)(a)(1) of this
appendix. A vehicle shall pass the test mode if any pair of simultaneous
values for HC and CO are below or equal to the applicable short test
standards. A vehicle shall fail the test mode if the values for either
HC or CO, or both, in all simultaneous pairs of values are above the
applicable standards.
(3) Void test conditions. The test shall immediately end and any
exhaust gas measurements shall be voided if the measured concentration
of CO plus CO2 falls below six percent or the vehicle's
engine stalls at any time during the test sequence.
(4) Multiple exhaust pipes. Exhaust gas concentrations from vehicle
engines equipped with multiple exhaust pipes shall be sampled
simultaneously.
(5) The test shall be immediately terminated upon reaching the
overall maximum test time.
(b) Test sequence. (1) The test sequence shall consist of a first-
chance test and a second-chance test as follows:
(i) The first-chance test, as described under paragraph (V)(c) of
this appendix, shall consist of an idle mode.
(ii) The second-chance test as described under paragraph (V)(d) of
this appendix shall be performed only if the vehicle fails the first-
chance test.
(2) The test sequence shall begin only after the following
requirements are met:
(i) The dynamometer shall be warmed up, in stabilized operating
condition, adjusted, and calibrated in accordance with the procedures of
appendix A to this subpart. Prior to each test, variable-curve
dynamometers shall be checked for proper setting of the road-load
indicator or road-load controller.
(ii) The vehicle shall be tested in as-received condition with all
accessories turned off. The engine shall be at normal operating
temperature (as indicated by a temperature gauge, temperature lamp,
touch test on the radiator hose, or other visual observation for
overheating).
(iii) The vehicle shall be operated during each mode of the test
with the gear selector in the following position:
(A) In drive for automatic transmissions and in second (or third if
more appropriate) for manual transmissions for the loaded
preconditioning mode;
(B) In park or neutral for the idle mode.
(iv) For all pre-1996 model year vehicles, a tachometer shall be
attached to the vehicle in accordance with the analyzer manufacturer's
instructions. For 1996 and newer model year vehicles the OBD data link
connector will be used to monitor RPM. In the event that an OBD data
link connector is not available or that an RPM signal is not available
over the data link connector, a tachometer shall be used instead.
(v) The sample probe shall be inserted into the vehicle's tailpipe
to a minimum depth of 10 inches. If the vehicle's exhaust system
[[Page 329]]
prevents insertion to this depth, a tailpipe extension shall be used.
(vi) The measured concentration of CO plus CO2 shall be
greater than or equal to six percent.
(c) First-chance test. The test timer shall start (tt=0) when the
conditions specified in paragraph (V)(b)(2) of this appendix are met.
The test shall have an overall maximum test time of 155 seconds
(tt=155). The first-chance test shall consist of an idle mode only.
(1) The mode timer shall start (mt=0) when the vehicle engine speed
is between 350 and 1100 rpm. If the engine speed exceeds 1100 rpm or
falls below 350 rpm, the mode timer shall reset to zero and resume
timing. The minimum mode length shall be determined as described in
paragraph (V)(c)(2) of this appendix. The maximum mode length shall be
90 seconds elapsed time (mt=90).
(2) The pass/fail analysis shall begin after an elapsed time of 10
seconds (mt=10). A pass or fail determination shall be made for the
vehicle and the mode shall be terminated as follows:
(i) The vehicle shall pass the idle mode and the test shall be
immediately terminated if, prior to an elapsed time of 30 seconds
(mt=30), measured values are less than or equal to 100 ppm HC and 0.5
percent CO.
(ii) The vehicle shall pass the idle mode and the test shall be
terminated at the end of an elapsed time of 30 seconds (mt=30) if, prior
to that time, the criteria of paragraph (V)(c)(2)(i) of this appendix
are not satisfied, and the measured values are less than or equal to the
applicable short test standards as described in paragraph (V)(a)(2) of
this appendix.
(iii) The vehicle shall pass the idle mode and the test shall be
immediately terminated if, at any point between an elapsed time of 30
seconds (mt=30) and 90 seconds (mt=90), the measured values are less
than or equal to the applicable short test standards as described in
paragraph (V)(a)(2) of this appendix.
(iv) The vehicle shall fail the idle mode and the test shall be
terminated if none of the provisions of paragraphs (V)(c)(2)(i), (ii),
and (iii) of this appendix is satisfied by an elapsed time of 90 seconds
(mt=90). Alternatively, the vehicle may be failed if the provisions of
paragraphs (V)(c)(2) (i) and (ii) of this appendix are not met within an
elapsed time of 30 seconds.
(v) Optional. The vehicle may fail the first-chance test and the
second-chance test shall be omitted if no exhaust gas concentration less
than 1800 ppm HC is found at an elapsed time of 30 seconds (mt=30).
(d) Second-chance test. If the vehicle fails the first-chance test,
the test timer shall reset to zero (tt=0) and a second-chance test shall
be performed. The second-chance test shall have an overall maximum test
time of 200 seconds (tt=200). The test shall consist of a
preconditioning mode using a chassis dynamometer, followed immediately
by an idle mode.
(1) Preconditioning mode. The mode timer shall start (mt=0) when the
dynamometer speed is within the limits specified for the vehicle engine
size in accordance with the following schedule. The mode shall continue
for a minimum elapsed time of 30 seconds (mt=30). If the dynamometer
speed falls outside the limits for more than five seconds in one
excursion, or 15 seconds over all excursions, the mode timer shall reset
to zero and resume timing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dynamometer test
schedule
---------------------
Gasoline engine size (cylinders) Normal
Roll loading
speed (brake
(mph) horsepower)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 or less......................................... 22-25 2.8-4.1
5-6............................................... 29-32 6.8-8.4
7 or more......................................... 32-35 8.4-10.8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Idle mode. (i) Ford Motor Company and Honda vehicles. (Optional)
The engines of 1981-1987 Ford Motor Company vehicles and 1984-1985 Honda
Preludes shall be shut off for not more than 10 seconds and restarted.
This procedure may also be used for 1988-1989 Ford Motor Company
vehicles but should not be used for other vehicles. The probe may be
removed from the tailpipe or the sample pump turned off if necessary to
reduce analyzer fouling during the restart procedure.
(ii) The mode timer shall start (mt=0) when the dynamometer speed is
zero and the vehicle engine speed is between 350 and 1100 rpm. If the
engine speed exceeds 1100 rpm or falls below 350 rpm, the mode timer
shall reset to zero and resume timing. The minimum idle mode length
shall be determined as described in paragraph (V)(d)(2)(ii) of this
appendix. The maximum idle mode length shall be 90 seconds elapsed time
(mt=90).
(iii) The pass/fail analysis shall begin after an elapsed time of 10
seconds (mt=10). A pass or fail determination shall be made for the
vehicle and the mode shall be terminated as follows:
(A) The vehicle shall pass the idle mode and the test shall be
immediately terminated if, prior to an elapsed time of 30 seconds
(mt=30), measured values are less than or equal to 100 ppm HC and 0.5
percent CO.
(B) The vehicle shall pass the idle mode and the test shall be
terminated at the end of an elapsed time of 30 seconds (mt=30) if, prior
to that time, the criteria of paragraph (V)(d)(2)(ii)(A) of this
appendix are not satisfied, and the measured values are less than or
equal to the applicable short test standards as described in paragraph
(V)(a)(2) of this appendix.
[[Page 330]]
(C) The vehicle shall pass the idle mode and the test shall be
immediately terminated if, at any point between an elapsed time of 30
seconds (mt=30) and 90 seconds (mt=90), the measured values are less
than or equal to the applicable short test standards as described in
paragraph (V)(a)(2) of this appendix.
(D) The vehicle shall fail the idle mode and the test shall be
terminated if none of the provisions of paragraphs (V)(d)(2)(ii)(A),
(B), and (C) of this appendix is satisfied by an elapsed time of 90
seconds (mt=90).
(VI) Preconditioned Two Speed Idle Test
(a) General requirements--(1) Exhaust gas sampling algorithm. The
analysis of exhaust gas concentrations shall begin 10 seconds after the
applicable test mode begins. Exhaust gas concentrations shall be
analyzed at a minimum rate of two times per second. The measured value
for pass/fail determinations shall be a simple running average of the
measurements taken over five seconds.
(2) Pass/fail determination. A pass or fail determination shall be
made for each applicable test mode based on a comparison of the short
test standards contained in appendix C to this subpart, and the measured
value for HC and CO as described in paragraph (VI)(a)(1) of this
appendix. A vehicle shall pass the test mode if any pair of simultaneous
values for HC and CO are below or equal to the applicable short test
standards. A vehicle shall fail the test mode if the values for either
HC or CO, or both, in all simultaneous pairs of values are above the
applicable standards.
(3) Void test conditions. The test shall immediately end and any
exhaust gas measurements shall be voided if the measured concentration
of CO plus CO2 falls below six percent or the vehicle's
engine stalls at any time during the test sequence.
(4) Multiple exhaust pipes. Exhaust gas concentrations from vehicle
engines equipped with multiple exhaust pipes shall be sampled
simultaneously.
(5) The test shall be immediately terminated upon reaching the
overall maximum test time.
(b) Test sequence. (1) The test sequence shall consist of a first-
chance test and a second-chance test as follows:
(i) The first-chance test, as described under paragraph (VI)(c) of
this appendix, shall consist of a first-chance high-speed mode followed
immediately by a first-chance idle mode.
(ii) The second-chance test as described under paragraph (VI)(d) of
this appendix shall be performed only if the vehicle fails the first-
chance test.
(2) The test sequence shall begin only after the following
requirements are met:
(i) The vehicle shall be tested in as-received condition with the
transmission in neutral or park and all accessories turned off. The
engine shall be at normal operating temperature (as indicated by a
temperature gauge, temperature lamp, touch test on the radiator hose, or
other visual observation for overheating).
(ii) For all pre-1996 model year vehicles, a tachometer shall be
attached to the vehicle in accordance with the analyzer manufacturer's
instructions. For 1996 and newer model year vehicles the OBD data link
connector will be used to monitor rpm. In the event that an OBD data
link connector is not available or that an rpm signal is not available
over the data link connector, a tachometer shall be used instead.
(iii) The sample probe shall be inserted into the vehicle's tailpipe
to a minimum depth of 10 inches. If the vehicle's exhaust system
prevents insertion to this depth, a tailpipe extension shall be used.
(iv) The measured concentration of CO plus CO2 shall be
greater than or equal to six percent.
(c) First-chance test. The test timer shall start (tt=0) when the
conditions specified in paragraph (VI)(b)(2) of this appendix are met.
The test shall have an overall maximum test time of 290 seconds
(tt=290). The first-chance test shall consist of a high-speed mode
followed immediately by an idle mode.
(1) First-chance high-speed mode. (i) The mode timer shall reset
(mt=0) when the vehicle engine speed is between 2200 and 2800 rpm. If
the engine speed falls below 2200 rpm or exceeds 2800 rpm for more than
two seconds in one excursion, or more than six seconds over all
excursions within 30 seconds of the final measured value used in the
pass/fail determination, the measured value shall be invalidated and the
mode continued. If any excursion lasts for more than ten seconds, the
mode timer shall reset to zero (mt=0) and timing resumed. The high-speed
mode length shall be 90 seconds elapsed time (mt=90).
(ii) The pass/fail analysis shall begin after an elapsed time of 10
seconds (mt=10). A pass or fail determination shall be made for the
vehicle and the mode shall be terminated as follows:
(A) The vehicle shall pass the high-speed mode and the mode shall be
terminated at an elapsed time of 90 seconds (mt=90) if any measured
values are less than or equal to the applicable short test standards as
described in paragraph (VI)(a)(2) of this appendix.
(B) The vehicle shall fail the high-speed mode and the mode shall be
terminated if the requirements of paragraph (VI)(c)(1)(ii)(A) of this
appendix are not satisfied by an elapsed time of 90 seconds (mt=90).
(C) Optional. The vehicle shall fail the first-chance test and any
subsequent test shall be omitted if no exhaust gas concentration lower
than 1800 ppm HC is found at an elapsed time of 30 seconds (mt=30).
[[Page 331]]
(2) First-chance idle mode. (i) The mode timer shall start (mt=0)
when the vehicle engine speed is between 350 and 1100 rpm. If the engine
speed exceeds 1100 rpm or falls below 350 rpm, the mode timer shall
reset to zero and resume timing. The minimum first-chance idle mode
length shall be determined as described in paragraph (VI)(c)(2)(ii) of
this appendix. The maximum first-chance idle mode length shall be 90
seconds elapsed time (mt=90).
(ii) The pass/fail analysis shall begin after an elapsed time of 10
seconds (mt=10). A pass or fail determination shall be made for the
vehicle and the mode shall be terminated as follows:
(A) The vehicle shall pass the idle mode and the test shall be
immediately terminated if, prior to an elapsed time of 30 seconds
(mt=30), measured values are less than or equal to 100 ppm HC and 0.5
percent CO.
(B) The vehicle shall pass the idle mode and the test shall be
terminated at the end of an elapsed time of 30 seconds (mt=30) if, prior
to that time, the criteria of paragraph (VI)(c)(2)(ii)(A) of this
appendix are not satisfied, and the measured values are less than or
equal to the applicable short test standards as described in paragraph
(VI)(a)(2) of this appendix.
(C) The vehicle shall pass the idle mode and the test shall be
immediately terminated if, at any point between an elapsed time of 30
seconds (mt=30) and 90 seconds (mt=90), the measured values are less
than or equal to the applicable short test standards as described in
paragraph (VI)(a)(2) of this appendix.
(D) The vehicle shall fail the idle mode and the test shall be
terminated if none of the provisions of paragraphs (VI)(c)(2)(ii) (A),
(B), and (C) of this appendix is satisfied by an elapsed time of 90
seconds (mt=90). Alternatively, the vehicle may be failed if the
provisions of paragraphs (VI)(c)(2)(i) and (ii) of this appendix are not
met within the elapsed time of 30 seconds.
(d) Second-chance test. (1) If the vehicle fails either mode of the
first-chance test, the test timer shall reset to zero (tt=0) and a
second-chance test shall commence. The second-chance test shall be
performed based on the first-chance test failure mode or modes as
follows:
(A) If the vehicle failed only the first-chance high-speed mode, the
second-chance test shall consist of a second-chance high-speed mode as
described in paragraph (VI)(d)(2) of this appendix. The overall maximum
test time shall be 280 seconds (tt=280).
(B) If the vehicle failed only the first-chance idle mode, the
second-chance test shall consist of a second-chance pre-conditioning
mode followed immediately by a second-chance idle mode as described in
paragraphs (VI)(d) (3) and (4) of this appendix. The overall maximum
test time shall be 425 seconds (tt=425).
(C) If both the first-chance high-speed mode and first-chance idle
mode were failed, the second-chance test shall consist of the second-
chance high-speed mode followed immediately by the second-chance idle
mode as described in paragraphs (VI)(d) (2) and (4) of this appendix.
However, if during this second-chance procedure the vehicle fails the
second-chance high-speed mode, then the second-chance idle mode may be
eliminated. The overall maximum test time shall be 425 seconds (tt=425).
(2) Second-chance high-speed mode--(i) Ford Motor Company and Honda
vehicles. The engines of 1981-1987 Ford Motor Company vehicles and 1984-
1985 Honda Preludes shall be shut off for not more than 10 seconds and
then shall be restarted. The probe may be removed from the tailpipe or
the sample pump turned off if necessary to reduce analyzer fouling
during the restart procedure. This procedure may also be used for 1988-
1989 Ford Motor Company vehicles but should not be used for other
vehicles.
(ii) The mode timer shall reset (mt=0) when the vehicle engine speed
is between 2200 and 2800 rpm. If the engine speed falls below 2200 rpm
or exceeds 2800 rpm for more than two seconds in one excursion, or more
than six seconds over all excursions within 30 seconds of the final
measured value used in the pass/fail determination, the measured value
shall be invalidated and the mode continued. The minimum second-chance
high-speed mode length shall be determined as described in paragraphs
(VI)(d)(2) (iii) and (iv) of this appendix. If any excursion lasts for
more than ten seconds, the mode timer shall reset to zero (mt=0) and
timing resumed. The maximum second-chance high-speed mode length shall
be 180 seconds elapsed time (mt=180).
(iii) In the case where the second-chance high-speed mode is not
followed by the second-chance idle mode, the pass/fail analysis shall
begin after an elapsed time of 10 seconds (mt=10). A pass or fail
determination shall be made for the vehicle and the mode shall be
terminated as follows:
(A) The vehicle shall pass the high-speed mode and the test shall be
immediately terminated if, prior to an elapsed time of 30 seconds
(mt=30), measured values are less than or equal to 100 ppm HC and 0.5
percent CO.
(B) The vehicle shall pass the high-speed mode and the test shall be
terminated if at the end of an elapsed time of 30 seconds (mt=30) if,
prior to that time, the criteria of paragraph (VI)(d)(2)(iii)(A) of this
appendix are not satisfied, and the measured values are less than or
equal to the applicable short test standards as described in paragraph
(VI)(a)(2) of this appendix.
[[Page 332]]
(C) The vehicle shall pass the high-speed mode and the test shall be
immediately terminated if, at any point between an elapsed time for 30
seconds (mt=30) and 180 seconds (mt=180), the measured values are less
than or equal to the applicable short test standards as described in
paragraph (VI)(a)(2) of this appendix.
(D) The vehicle shall fail the high-speed mode and the test shall be
terminated if none of the provisions of paragraphs (VI)(d)(2)(iii) (A),
(B), and (C) of this appendix is satisfied by an elapsed time of 180
seconds (mt=180).
(iv) In the case where the second-chance high-speed mode is followed
by the second-chance idle mode, the pass/fail analysis shall begin after
an elapsed time of 10 seconds (mt=10). A pass or fail determination
shall be made for the vehicle and the mode shall be terminated as
follows:
(A) The vehicle shall pass the high-speed mode and the mode shall be
terminated at the end of an elapsed time of 180 seconds (mt=180) if any
measured values are less than or equal to the applicable short test
standards as described in paragraph (VI)(a)(2) of this appendix.
(B) The vehicle shall fail the high-speed mode and the mode shall be
terminated if paragraph (VI)(d)(2)(iv)(A) of this appendix is not
satisfied by an elapsed time of 180 seconds (mt=180).
(3) Second-chance preconditioning mode. The mode timer shall start
(mt=0) when engine speed is between 2200 and 2800 rpm. The mode shall
continue for an elapsed time of 180 seconds (mt=180). If the engine
speed falls below 2200 rpm or exceeds 2800 rpm for more than five
seconds in any one excursion, or 15 seconds over all excursions, the
mode timer shall reset to zero and resume timing.
(4) Second-chance idle mode--(i) Ford Motor Company and Honda
vehicles. The engines of 1981-1987 Ford Motor Company vehicles and 1984-
1985 Honda Preludes shall be shut off for not more than 10 seconds and
then shall be restarted. The probe may be removed from the tailpipe or
the sample pump turned off if necessary to reduce analyzer fouling
during the restart procedure. This procedure may also be used for 1988-
1989 Ford Motor Company vehicles but should not be used for other
vehicles.
(ii) The mode timer shall start (mt=0) when the vehicle engine speed
is between 350 and 1100 rpm. If the engine exceeds 1100 rpm or falls
below 350 rpm the mode timer shall reset to zero and resume timing. The
minimum second-chance idle mode length shall be determined as described
in paragraph (VI)(d)(4)(iii) of this appendix. The maximum second-chance
idle mode length shall be 90 seconds elapsed time (mt=90).
(iii) The pass/fail analysis shall begin after an elapsed time of 10
seconds (mt=10). A pass or fail determination shall be made for the
vehicle and the mode shall be terminated as follows:
(A) The vehicle shall pass the second-chance idle mode and the test
shall be immediately terminated if, prior to an elapsed time of 30
seconds (mt=30), measured values are less than or equal to 100 ppm HC
and 0.5 percent CO.
(B) The vehicle shall pass the second-chance idle mode and the test
shall be terminated at the end of an elapsed time of 30 seconds (mt=30)
if, prior to that time, the criteria of paragraph (VI)(d)(4)(iii)(A) of
this appendix are not satisfied, and the measured values are less than
or equal to the applicable short test standards as described in
paragraph (VI)(a)(2) of this appendix.
(C) The vehicle shall pass the second-chance idle mode and the test
shall be immediately terminated if, at any point between an elapsed time
of 30 seconds (mt=30) and 90 seconds (mt=90), measured values are less
than or equal to the applicable short test standards described in
paragraph (VI)(a)(2) of this appendix.
(D) The vehicle shall fail the second-chance idle mode and the test
shall be terminated if none of the provisions of paragraphs
(VI)(d)(4)(iii) (A), (B), and (C) of this appendix is satisfied by an
elapsed time of 90 seconds (mt=90).
[ 57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 61 FR 40946, Aug. 6, 1996]
Appendix C to Subpart S of Part 51--Steady-State Short Test Standards
(I) Short Test Standards for 1981 and Later Model Year Light-Duty
Vehicles
For 1981 and later model year light-duty vehicles for which any of
the test procedures described in appendix B to this subpart are utilized
to establish Emissions Performance Warranty eligibility (i.e., 1981 and
later model year light-duty vehicles at low altitude and 1982 and later
model year vehicles at high altitude to which high altitude
certification standards of 1.5 gpm HC and 15 gpm CO or less apply),
short test emissions for all tests and test modes shall not exceed:
(a) Hydrocarbons: 220 ppm as hexane.
(b) Carbon monoxide: 1.2%.
(II) Short Test Standards for 1981 and Later Model Year Light-Duty
Trucks
For 1981 and later model year light-duty trucks for which any of the
test procedures described in appendix B to this subpart are utilized to
establish Emissions Performance Warranty eligibility (i.e., 1981 and
later model year light-duty trucks at low altitude and 1982 and later
model year trucks at high altitude to which high altitude certification
standards of 2.0 gpm HC and 26 gpm CO or less apply), short test
emissions for all tests and test modes shall not exceed:
[[Page 333]]
(a) Hydrocarbons: 220 ppm as hexane.
(b) Carbon monoxide: 1.2%.
Appendix D to Subpart S of Part 51--Steady-State Short Test Equipment
(I) Steady-State Test Exhaust Analysis System
(a) Sampling system--(1) General requirements. The sampling system
for steady-state short tests shall, at a minimum, consist of a tailpipe
probe, a flexible sample line, a water removal system, particulate trap,
sample pump, flow control components, tachometer or dynamometer,
analyzers for HC, CO, and CO2, and digital displays for
exhaust concentrations of HC, CO, and CO2, and engine rpm.
Materials that are in contact with the gases sampled shall not
contaminate or change the character of the gases to be analyzed,
including gases from alcohol fueled vehicles. The probe shall be capable
of being inserted to a depth of at least ten inches into the tailpipe of
the vehicle being tested, or into an extension boot if one is used. A
digital display for dynamometer speed and load shall be included if the
test procedures described in appendix B to this subpart, paragraphs
(III) and (V), are conducted. Minimum specifications for optional NO
analyzers are also described in this appendix. The analyzer system shall
be able to test, as specified in at least one section in appendix B to
this subpart, all model vehicles in service at the time of sale of the
analyzer.
(2) Temperature operating range. The sampling system and all
associated hardware shall be of a design certified to operate within the
performance specifications described in paragraph (I)(b) of this
appendix in ambient air temperatures ranging from 41 to 110 degrees
Fahrenheit. The analyzer system shall, where necessary, include features
to keep the sampling system within the specified range.
(3) Humidity operating range. The sampling system and all associated
hardware shall be of a design certified to operate within the
performance specifications described in paragraph (I)(b) of this
appendix at a minimum of 80 percent relative humidity throughout the
required temperature range.
(4) Barometric pressure compensation. Barometric pressure
compensation shall be provided. Compensation shall be made for
elevations up to 6,000 feet (above mean sea level). At any given
altitude and ambient conditions specified in paragraph (I)(b) of this
appendix, errors due to barometric pressure changes of 2 inches of mercury shall not exceed the accuracy limits
specified in paragraph (I)(b) of this appendix.
(5) Dual sample probe requirements. When testing a vehicle with dual
exhaust pipes, a dual sample probe of a design certified by the analyzer
manufacturer to provide equal flow in each leg shall be used. The equal
flow requirement is considered to be met if the flow rate in each leg of
the probe has been measured under two sample pump flow rates (the normal
rate and a rate equal to the onset of low flow), and if the flow rates
in each of the legs are found to be equal to each other (within 15% of
the flow rate in the leg having lower flow).
(6) System lockout during warm-up. Functional operation of the gas
sampling unit shall remain disabled through a system lockout until the
instrument meets stability and warm-up requirements. The instrument
shall be considered ``warmed up'' when the zero and span readings for
HC, CO, and CO2 have stabilized, within 3% of the full range of low scale, for five minutes
without adjustment.
(7) Electromagnetic isolation and interference. Electromagnetic
signals found in an automotive service environment shall not cause
malfunctions or changes in the accuracy in the electronics of the
analyzer system. The instrument design shall ensure that readings do not
vary as a result of electromagnetic radiation and induction devices
normally found in the automotive service environment, including high
energy vehicle ignition systems, radio frequency transmission radiation
sources, and building electrical systems.
(8) Vibration and shock protection. System operation shall be
unaffected by the vibration and shock encountered under the normal
operating conditions encountered in an automotive service environment.
(9) Propane equivalency factor. The propane equivalency factor shall
be displayed in a manner that enables it to be viewed conveniently,
while permitting it to be altered only by personnel specifically
authorized to do so.
(b) Analyzers--(1) Accuracy. The analyzers shall be of a design
certified to meet the following accuracy requirements when calibrated to
the span points specified in appendix A to this subpart:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Repeat
Channel Range Accuracy Noise ability
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HC, ppm........................... 0-400 2 analyzers shall not exceed eight seconds
to 90% of a step change in input. For NO analyzers, the response time
shall not exceed twelve seconds to 90% of a step change in input.
(4) Display refresh rate. Dynamic information being displayed shall
be refreshed at a minimum rate of twice per second.
(5) Interference effects. The interference effects for non-interest
gases shall not exceed 10 ppm for hydrocarbons,
0.05 percent for carbon monoxide, 0.20 percent for carbon dioxide, and 20 ppm for oxides of nitrogen.
(6) Low flow indication. The analyzer shall provide an indication
when the sample flow is below the acceptable level. The sampling system
shall be equipped with a flow meter (or equivalent) that shall indicate
sample flow degradation when meter error exceeds three percent of full
scale, or causes system response time to exceed 13 seconds to 90 percent
of a step change in input, whichever is less.
(7) Engine speed detection. The analyzer shall utilize a tachometer
capable of detecting engine speed in revolutions per minute (rpm) with a
0.5 second response time and an accuracy of 3% of
the true rpm.
(8) Test and mode timers. The analyzer shall be capable of
simultaneously determining the amount of time elapsed in a test, and in
a mode within that test.
(9) Sample rate. The analyzer shall be capable of measuring exhaust
concentrations of gases specified in this section at a minimum rate of
twice per second.
(c) Demonstration of conformity. The analyzer shall be demonstrated
to the satisfaction of the inspection program manager, through
acceptance testing procedures, to meet the requirements of this section
and that it is capable of being maintained as required in appendix A to
this subpart.
(II) Steady-State Test Dynamometer
(a) The chassis dynamometer for steady-state short tests shall
provide the following capabilities:
(1) Power absorption. The dynamometer shall be capable of applying a
load to the vehicle's driving tire surfaces at the horsepower and speed
levels specified in paragraph (II)(b) of this appendix.
(2) Short-term stability. Power absorption at constant speed shall
not drift more than 0.5 horsepower (hp) during any
single test mode.
(3) Roll weight capacity. The dynamometer shall be capable of
supporting a driving axle weight up to four thousand (4,000) pounds or
greater.
(4) Between roll wheel lifts. These shall be controllable and
capable of lifting a minimum of four thousand (4,000) pounds.
(5) Roll brakes. Both rolls shall be locked when the wheel lift is
up.
(6) Speed indications. The dynamometer speed display shall have a
range of 0-60 mph, and a resolution and accuracy of at least 1 mph.
(7) Safety interlock. A roll speed sensor and safety interlock
circuit shall be provided which prevents the application of the roll
brakes and upward lift movement at any roll speed above 0.5 mph.
(b) The dynamometer shall produce the load speed relationships
specified in paragraphs (III) and (V) of appendix B to this subpart.
(III) Transient Emission Test Equipment [Reserved]
(IV) Evaporative System Purge Test Equipment [Reserved]
(V) Evaporative System Integrity Test Equipment [Reserved]
[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 58 FR 59367, Nov. 9, 1993]
Appendix E to Subpart S of Part 51--Transient Test Driving Cycle
(I) Driver's trace. All excursions in the transient driving cycle
shall be evaluated by the procedures defined in Sec. 86.115-78(b)(1)
and Sec. 86.115(c) of this chapter. Excursions exceeding these limits
shall cause a test to be void. In addition, provisions shall be
available to utilize cycle validation criteria, as described in Sec.
86.1341-90 of this chapter, for trace speed versus actual speed as a
means to determine a valid test.
(II) Driving cycle. The following table shows the time speed
relationship for the transient IM240 test procedure.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second MPH
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0.............................................................. 0
1.............................................................. 0
2.............................................................. 0
3.............................................................. 0
4.............................................................. 0
5.............................................................. 3
6.............................................................. 5.9
7.............................................................. 8.6
8.............................................................. 11.5
9.............................................................. 14.3
10............................................................. 16.9
11............................................................. 17.3
12............................................................. 18.1
13............................................................. 20.7
14............................................................. 21.7
15............................................................. 22.4
16............................................................. 22.5
17............................................................. 22.1
18............................................................. 21.5
19............................................................. 20.9
20............................................................. 20.4
21............................................................. 19.8
22............................................................. 17
23............................................................. 14.9
24............................................................. 14.9
25............................................................. 15.2
[[Page 335]]
26............................................................. 15.5
27............................................................. 16
28............................................................. 17.1
29............................................................. 19.1
30............................................................. 21.1
31............................................................. 22.7
32............................................................. 22.9
33............................................................. 22.7
34............................................................. 22.6
35............................................................. 21.3
36............................................................. 19
37............................................................. 17.1
38............................................................. 15.8
39............................................................. 15.8
40............................................................. 17.7
41............................................................. 19.8
42............................................................. 21.6
43............................................................. 23.2
44............................................................. 24.2
45............................................................. 24.6
46............................................................. 24.9
47............................................................. 25
48............................................................. 25.7
49............................................................. 26.1
50............................................................. 26.7
51............................................................. 27.5
52............................................................. 28.6
53............................................................. 29.3
54............................................................. 29.8
55............................................................. 30.1
56............................................................. 30.4
57............................................................. 30.7
58............................................................. 30.7
59............................................................. 30.5
60............................................................. 30.4
61............................................................. 30.3
62............................................................. 30.4
63............................................................. 30.8
64............................................................. 30.4
65............................................................. 29.9
66............................................................. 29.5
67............................................................. 29.8
68............................................................. 30.3
69............................................................. 30.7
70............................................................. 30.9
71............................................................. 31
72............................................................. 30.9
73............................................................. 30.4
74............................................................. 29.8
75............................................................. 29.9
76............................................................. 30.2
77............................................................. 30.7
78............................................................. 31.2
79............................................................. 31.8
80............................................................. 32.2
81............................................................. 32.4
82............................................................. 32.2
83............................................................. 31.7
84............................................................. 28.6
85............................................................. 25.1
86............................................................. 21.6
87............................................................. 18.1
88............................................................. 14.6
89............................................................. 11.1
90............................................................. 7.6
91............................................................. 4.1
92............................................................. 0.6
93............................................................. 0
94............................................................. 0
95............................................................. 0
96............................................................. 0
97............................................................. 0
98............................................................. 3.3
99............................................................. 6.6
100............................................................ 9.9
101............................................................ 13.2
102............................................................ 16.5
103............................................................ 19.8
104............................................................ 22.2
105............................................................ 24.3
106............................................................ 25.8
107............................................................ 26.4
108............................................................ 25.7
109............................................................ 25.1
110............................................................ 24.7
111............................................................ 25.2
112............................................................ 25.4
113............................................................ 27.2
114............................................................ 26.5
115............................................................ 24
116............................................................ 22.7
117............................................................ 19.4
118............................................................ 17.7
119............................................................ 17.2
120............................................................ 18.1
121............................................................ 18.6
122............................................................ 20
123............................................................ 20.7
124............................................................ 21.7
125............................................................ 22.4
126............................................................ 22.5
127............................................................ 22.1
128............................................................ 21.5
129............................................................ 20.9
130............................................................ 20.4
131............................................................ 19.8
132............................................................ 17
133............................................................ 17.1
134............................................................ 15.8
135............................................................ 15.8
136............................................................ 17.7
137............................................................ 19.8
138............................................................ 21.6
139............................................................ 22.2
140............................................................ 24.5
141............................................................ 24.7
142............................................................ 24.8
143............................................................ 24.7
144............................................................ 24.6
145............................................................ 24.6
146............................................................ 25.1
147............................................................ 25.6
148............................................................ 25.7
149............................................................ 25.4
150............................................................ 24.9
151............................................................ 25
152............................................................ 25.4
153............................................................ 26
154............................................................ 26
155............................................................ 25.7
156............................................................ 26.1
157............................................................ 26.7
158............................................................ 27.3
159............................................................ 30.5
160............................................................ 33.5
161............................................................ 36.2
162............................................................ 37.3
163............................................................ 39.3
164............................................................ 40.5
165............................................................ 42.1
166............................................................ 43.5
167............................................................ 45.1
168............................................................ 46
169............................................................ 46.8
170............................................................ 47.5
171............................................................ 47.5
172............................................................ 47.3
173............................................................ 47.2
[[Page 336]]
174............................................................ 47.2
175............................................................ 47.4
176............................................................ 47.9
177............................................................ 48.5
178............................................................ 49.1
179............................................................ 49.5
180............................................................ 50
181............................................................ 50.6
182............................................................ 51
183............................................................ 51.5
184............................................................ 52.2
185............................................................ 53.2
186............................................................ 54.1
187............................................................ 54.6
188............................................................ 54.9
189............................................................ 55
190............................................................ 54.9
191............................................................ 54.6
192............................................................ 54.6
193............................................................ 54.8
194............................................................ 55.1
195............................................................ 55.5
196............................................................ 55.7
197............................................................ 56.1
198............................................................ 56.3
199............................................................ 56.6
200............................................................ 56.7
201............................................................ 56.7
202............................................................ 56.3
203............................................................ 56
204............................................................ 55
205............................................................ 53.4
206............................................................ 51.6
207............................................................ 51.8
208............................................................ 52.1
209............................................................ 52.5
210............................................................ 53
211............................................................ 53.5
212............................................................ 54
213............................................................ 54.9
214............................................................ 55.4
215............................................................ 55.6
216............................................................ 56
217............................................................ 56
218............................................................ 55.8
219............................................................ 55.2
220............................................................ 54.5
221............................................................ 53.6
222............................................................ 52.5
223............................................................ 51.5
224............................................................ 50.5
225............................................................ 48
226............................................................ 44.5
227............................................................ 41
228............................................................ 37.5
229............................................................ 34
230............................................................ 30.5
231............................................................ 27
232............................................................ 23.5
233............................................................ 20
234............................................................ 16.5
235............................................................ 13
236............................................................ 9.5
237............................................................ 6
238............................................................ 2.5
239............................................................ 0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[57 FR 52987, Nov. 5, 1992, as amended at 58 FR 59367, Nov. 9, 1993]
Subpart T_Conformity to State or Federal Implementation Plans of
Transportation Plans, Programs, and Projects Developed, Funded or
Approved Under Title 23 U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Laws
Sec. 51.390 Implementation plan revision.
(a) States with areas subject to this subpart and part 93, subpart
A, of this chapter must submit to the EPA and DOT a revision to their
implementation plan which contains criteria and procedures for DOT, MPOs
and other State or local agencies to assess the conformity of
transportation plans, programs, and projects, consistent with this
subpart and part 93, subpart A, of this chapter. This revision is to be
submitted by November 25, 1994 (or within 12 months of an area's
redesignation from attainment to nonattainment, if the State has not
previously submitted such a revision). Further revisions to the
implementation plan required by amendments to part 93, subpart A, of
this chapter must be submitted within 12 months of the date of
publication of such final amendments. EPA will provide DOT with a 30-day
comment period before taking action to approve or disapprove the
submission. A State's conformity provisions may contain criteria and
procedures more stringent than the requirements described in this
subpart and part 93, subpart A, of this chapter only if the State's
conformity provisions apply equally to non-federal as well as Federal
entities.
(b) The Federal conformity rules under part 93, subpart A, of this
chapter, in addition to any existing applicable State requirements,
establish the conformity criteria and procedures necessary to meet the
requirements of Clean Air Act section 176(c) until such time as EPA
approves the conformity implementation plan revision required by this
subpart. Following EPA approval of the State conformity provisions (or a
portion thereof) in a revision to the applicable implementation plan,
conformity determinations would be governed by the approved (or approved
portion of the) State criteria and procedures. The Federal conformity
regulations contained in part
[[Page 337]]
93, subpart A, of this chapter would apply only for the portion, if any,
of the State's conformity provisions that is not approved by EPA. In
addition, any previously applicable implementation plan conformity
requirements remain enforceable until the State submits a revision to
its applicable implementation plan to specifically remove them and that
revision is approved by EPA.
(c) The implementation plan revision required by this section must
meet all of the requirements of part 93, subpart A, of this chapter.
(d) In order for EPA to approve the implementation plan revision
submitted to EPA and DOT under this subpart, the plan must address all
requirements of part 93, subpart A, of this chapter in a manner which
gives them full legal effect. In particular, the revision shall
incorporate the provisions of the following sections of part 93, subpart
A, of this chapter in verbatim form, except insofar as needed to clarify
or to give effect to a stated intent in the revision to establish
criteria and procedures more stringent than the requirements stated in
the following sections of this chapter: Sec. Sec. 93.101, 93.102,
93.103, 93.104, 93.106, 93.109, 93.110, 93.111, 93.112, 93.113, 93.114,
93.115, 93.116, 93.117, 93.118, 93.119, 93.120, 93.121, 93.126, and
93.127.
[62 FR 43801, Aug. 15, 1997]
Subpart U_Economic Incentive Programs
Source: 59 FR 16710, Apr. 7, 1994, unless otherwise noted.
Sec. 51.490 Applicability.
(a) The rules in this subpart apply to any statutory economic
incentive program (EIP) submitted to the EPA as an implementation plan
revision to comply with sections 182(g)(3), 182(g)(5), 187(d)(3), or
187(g) of the Act. Such programs may be submitted by any authorized
governmental organization, including States, local governments, and
Indian governing bodies.
(b) The provisions contained in these rules, except as explicitly
exempted, shall also serve as the EPA's policy guidance on discretionary
EIP's submitted as implementation plan revisions for any purpose other
than to comply with the statutory requirements specified in paragraph
(a) of this section.
Sec. 51.491 Definitions.
Act means the Clean Air Act as amended November 15, 1990.
Actual emissions means the emissions of a pollutant from an affected
source determined by taking into account actual emission rates
associated with normal source operation and actual or representative
production rates (i.e., capacity utilization and hours of operation).
Affected source means any stationary, area, or mobile source of a
criteria pollutant(s) to which an EIP applies. This term applies to
sources explicitly included at the start of a program, as well as
sources that voluntarily enter (i.e., opt into) the program.
Allowable emissions means the emissions of a pollutant from an
affected source determined by taking into account the most stringent of
all applicable SIP emissions limits and the level of emissions
consistent with source compliance with all Federal requirements related
to attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS and the production rate
associated with the maximum rated capacity and hours of operation
(unless the source is subject to federally enforceable limits which
restrict the operating rate, or hours of operation, or both).
Area sources means stationary and nonroad sources that are too small
and/or too numerous to be individually included in a stationary source
emissions inventory.
Attainment area means any area of the country designated or
redesignated by the EPA at 40 CFR part 81 in accordance with section
107(d) as having attained the relevant NAAQS for a given criteria
pollutant. An area can be an attainment area for some pollutants and a
nonattainment area for other pollutants.
Attainment demonstration means the requirement in section
182(b)(1)(A) of the Act to demonstrate that the specific annual
emissions reductions included in a SIP are sufficient to attain
[[Page 338]]
the primary NAAQS by the date applicable to the area.
Directionally-sound strategies are strategies for which adequate
procedures to quantify emissions reductions or specify a program
baseline are not defined as part of the EIP.
Discretionary economic incentive program means any EIP submitted to
the EPA as an implementation plan revision for purposes other than to
comply with the statutory requirements of sections 182(g)(3), 182(g)(5),
187(d)(3), or 187(g) of the Act.
Economic incentive program (EIP) means a program which may include
State established emission fees or a system of marketable permits, or a
system of State fees on sale or manufacture of products the use of which
contributes to O3 formation, or any combination of the
foregoing or other similar measures, as well as incentives and
requirements to reduce vehicle emissions and vehicle miles traveled in
the area, including any of the transportation control measures
identified in section 108(f). Such programs may be directed toward
stationary, area, and/or mobile sources, to achieve emissions reductions
milestones, to attain and maintain ambient air quality standards, and/or
to provide more flexible, lower-cost approaches to meeting environmental
goals. Such programs are categorized into the following three
categories: Emission-limiting, market-response, and directionally-sound
strategies.
Emission-limiting strategies are strategies that directly specify
limits on total mass emissions, emission-related parameters (e.g.,
emission rates per unit of production, product content limits), or
levels of emissions reductions relative to a program baseline that are
required to be met by affected sources, while providing flexibility to
sources to reduce the cost of meeting program requirements.
Indian governing body means the governing body of any tribe, band,
or group of Indians subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. and
recognized by the U.S. as possessing power of self-government.
Maintenance plan means an implementation plan for an area for which
the State is currently seeking designation or has previously sought
redesignation to attainment, under section 107(d) of the Act, which
provides for the continued attainment of the NAAQS.
Market-response strategies are strategies that create one or more
incentives for affected sources to reduce emissions, without directly
specifying limits on emissions or emission-related parameters that
individual sources or even all sources in the aggregate are required to
meet.
Milestones means the reductions in emissions required to be achieved
pursuant to section 182(b)(1) and the corresponding requirements in
section 182(c)(2) (B) and (C), 182(d), and 182(e) of the Act for
O3 nonattainment areas, as well as the reduction in emissions
of CO equivalent to the total of the specified annual emissions
reductions required by December 31, 1995, pursuant to section 187(d)(1).
Mobile sources means on-road (highway) vehicles (e.g., automobiles,
trucks and motorcycles) and nonroad vehicles (e.g., trains, airplanes,
agricultural equipment, industrial equipment, construction vehicles,
off-road motorcycles, and marine vessels).
National ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) means a standard set
by the EPA at 40 CFR part 50 under section 109 of the Act.
Nonattainment area means any area of the country designated by the
EPA at 40 CFR part 81 in accordance with section 107(d) of the Act as
nonattainment for one or more criteria pollutants. An area could be a
nonattainment area for some pollutants and an attainment area for other
pollutants.
Nondiscriminatory means that a program in one State does not result
in discriminatory effects on other States or sources outside the State
with regard to interstate commerce.
Program baseline means the level of emissions, or emission-related
parameter(s), for each affected source or group of affected sources,
from which program results (e.g., quantifiable emissions reductions)
shall be determined.
Program uncertainty factor means a factor applied to discount the
amount of emissions reductions credited in an implementation plan
demonstration to
[[Page 339]]
account for any strategy-specific uncertainties in an EIP.
Reasonable further progress (RFP) plan means any incremental
emissions reductions required by the CAA (e.g., section 182(b)) and
approved by the EPA as meeting these requirements.
Replicable refers to methods which are sufficiently unambiguous such
that the same or equivalent results would be obtained by the application
of the methods by different users.
RFP baseline means the total of actual volatile organic compounds or
nitrogen oxides emissions from all anthropogenic sources in an
O3 nonattainment area during the calendar year 1990 (net of
growth and adjusted pursuant to section 182(b)(1)(B) of the Act),
expressed as typical O3 season, weekday emissions.
Rule compliance factor means a factor applied to discount the amount
of emissions reductions credited in an implementation plan demonstration
to account for less-than-complete compliance by the affected sources in
an EIP.
Shortfall means the difference between the amount of emissions
reductions credited in an implementation plan for a particular EIP and
those that are actually achieved by that EIP, as determined through an
approved reconciliation process.
State means State, local government, or Indian-governing body.
State implementation plan (SIP) means a plan developed by an
authorized governing body, including States, local governments, and
Indian-governing bodies, in a nonattainment area, as required under
titles I & II of the Clean Air Act, and approved by the EPA as meeting
these same requirements.
Stationary source means any building, structure, facility or
installation, other than an area or mobile source, which emits or may
emit any criteria air pollutant or precursor subject to regulation under
the Act.
Statutory economic incentive program means any EIP submitted to the
EPA as an implementation plan revision to comply with sections
182(g)(3), 182(g)(5), 187(d)(3), or 187(g) of the Act.
Surplus means, at a minimum, emissions reductions in excess of an
established program baseline which are not required by SIP requirements
or State regulations, relied upon in any applicable attainment plan or
demonstration, or credited in any RFP or milestone demonstration, so as
to prevent the double-counting of emissions reductions.
Transportation control measure (TCM) is any measure of the types
listed in section 108(F) of the Act, or any measure in an applicable
implementation plan directed toward reducing emissions of air pollutants
from transportation sources by a reduction in vehicle use or changes in
traffic conditions.
Sec. 51.492 State program election and submittal.
(a) Extreme O3 nonattainment areas. (1) A State or
authorized governing body for any extreme O3 nonattainment
area shall submit a plan revision to implement an EIP, in accordance
with the requirements of this part, pursuant to section 182(g)(5) of the
Act, if:
(i) A required milestone compliance demonstration is not submitted
within the required period.
(ii) The Administrator determines that the area has not met any
applicable milestone.
(2) The plan revision in paragraph (a)(1) of this section shall be
submitted within 9 months after such failure or determination, and shall
be sufficient, in combination with other elements of the SIP, to achieve
the next milestone.
(b) Serious CO nonattainment areas. (1) A State or authorized
governing body for any serious CO nonattainment area shall submit a plan
revision to implement an EIP, in accordance with the requirements of
this part, if:
(i) A milestone demonstration is not submitted within the required
period, pursuant to section 187(d) of the Act.
(ii) The Administrator notifies the State, pursuant to section
187(d) of the Act, that a milestone has not been met.
(iii) The Administrator determines, pursuant to section 186(b)(2) of
the Act that the NAAQS for CO has not been attained by the applicable
date for that area. Such revision shall be submitted within 9 months
after such failure or determination.
(2) Submittals made pursuant to paragraphs (b)(1) (i) and (ii) of
this section shall be sufficient, together with a
[[Page 340]]
transportation control program, to achieve the specific annual
reductions in CO emissions set forth in the implementation plan by the
attainment date. Submittals made pursuant to paragraph (b)(1)(iii) of
this section shall be adequate, in combination with other elements of
the revised plan, to reduce the total tonnage of emissions of CO in the
area by at least 5 percent per year in each year after approval of the
plan revision and before attainment of the NAAQS for CO.
(c) Serious and severe O3 nonattainment areas. If a
State, for any serious or severe O3 nonattainment area,
elects to implement an EIP in the circumstances set out in section
182(g)(3) of the Act, the State shall submit a plan revision to
implement the program in accordance with the requirements of this part.
If the option to implement an EIP is elected, a plan revision shall be
submitted within 12 months after the date required for election, and
shall be sufficient, in combination with other elements of the SIP, to
achieve the next milestone.
(d) Any nonattainment or attainment area. Any State may at any time
submit a plan or plan revision to implement a discretionary EIP, in
accordance with the requirements of this part, pursuant to sections
110(a)(2)(A) and 172(c)(6) and other applicable provisions of the Act
concerning SIP submittals. The plan revision shall not interfere with
any applicable requirement concerning attainment and RFP, or any other
applicable requirements of the Act.
Sec. 51.493 State program requirements.
Economic incentive programs shall be State and federally
enforceable, nondiscriminatory, and consistent with the timely
attainment of NAAQS, all applicable RFP and visibility requirements,
applicable PSD increments, and all other applicable requirements of the
Act. Programs in nonattainment areas for which credit is taken in
attainment and RFP demonstrations shall be designed to ensure that the
effects of the program are quantifiable and permanent over the entire
duration of the program, and that the credit taken is limited to that
which is surplus. Statutory programs shall be designed to result in
quantifiable, significant reductions in actual emissions. The EIP's
shall include the following elements, as applicable:
(a) Statement of goals and rationale. This element shall include a
clear statement as to the environmental problem being addressed, the
intended environmental and economic goals of the program, and the
rationale relating the incentive-based strategy to the program goals.
(1) The statement of goals must include the goal that the program
will benefit both the environment and the regulated entities. The
program shall be designed so as to meaningfully meet this goal either
directly, through increased or more rapid emissions reductions beyond
those that would be achieved through a traditional regulatory program,
or, alternatively, through other approaches that will result in real
environmental benefits. Such alternative approaches include, but are not
limited to, improved administrative mechanisms, reduced administrative
burdens on regulatory agencies, improved emissions inventories, and the
adoption of emission caps which over time constrain or reduce growth-
related emissions beyond traditional regulatory approaches.
(2) The incentive-based strategy shall be described in terms of one
of the following three strategies:
(i) Emission-limiting strategies, which directly specify limits on
total mass emissions, emission-related parameters (e.g., emission rates
per unit of production, product content limits), or levels of emissions
reductions relative to a program baseline that affected sources are
required to meet, while providing flexibility to sources to reduce the
cost of meeting program requirements.
(ii) Market-response strategies, which create one or more incentives
for affected sources to reduce emissions, without directly specifying
limits on emissions or emission-related parameters that individual
sources or even all sources in the aggregate are required to meet.
(iii) Directionally-sound strategies, for which adequate procedures
to quantify emissions reductions are not defined.
[[Page 341]]
(b) Program scope. (1) This element shall contain a clear definition
of the sources affected by the program. This definition shall address:
(i) The extent to which the program is mandatory or voluntary for
the affected sources.
(ii) Provisions, if any, by which sources that are not required to
be in the program may voluntarily enter the program.
(iii) Provisions, if any, by which sources covered by the program
may voluntarily leave the program.
(2) Any opt-in or opt-out provisions in paragraph (b)(1) of this
section shall be designed to provide mechanisms by which such program
changes are reflected in an area's attainment and RFP demonstrations,
thus ensuring that there will not be an increase in the emissions
inventory for the area caused by voluntary entry or exit from the
program.
(3) The program scope shall be defined so as not to interfere with
any other Federal requirements which apply to the affected sources.
(c) Program baseline. A program baseline shall be defined as a basis
for projecting program results and, if applicable, for initializing the
incentive mechanism (e.g., for marketable permits programs). The program
baseline shall be consistent with, and adequately reflected in, the
assumptions and inputs used to develop an area's RFP plans and
attainment and maintenance demonstrations, as applicable. The State
shall provide sufficient supporting information from the areawide
emissions inventory and other sources to justify the baseline used in
the EIP.
(1) For EIP's submitted in conjunction with, or subsequent to, the
submission of any areawide progress plan due at the time of EIP
submission (e.g., the 15 percent RFP plan and/or subsequent 3 percent
plans) or an attainment demonstration, a State may exercise flexibility
in setting a program baseline provided the program baseline is
consistent with and reflected in all relevant progress plans or
attainment demonstration. A flexible program baseline may be based on
the lower of actual, allowable, or some other intermediate or lower
level of emissions. For any EIP submitted prior to the submittal of an
attainment demonstration, the State shall include the following with its
EIP submittal:
(i) A commitment that its subsequent attainment demonstration and
all future progress plans, if applicable, will be consistent with the
EIP baseline.
(ii) A discussion of how the baseline will be integrated into the
subsequent attainment demonstration, taking into account the potential
that credit issued prior to the attainment demonstration may no longer
be surplus relative to the attainment demonstration.
(2) Except as provided for in paragraph (c)(4) of this section, for
EIP's submitted during a time period when any progress plans are
required but not yet submitted (e.g., the 15 percent RFP plan and/or the
subsequent 3 percent plans), the program baseline shall be based on the
lower-of-actual-or-allowable emissions. In such cases, actual emissions
shall be taken from the most appropriate inventory, such as the 1990
actual emission inventory (due for submission in November 1992), and
allowable emissions are the lower of SIP-allowable emissions or the
level of emissions consistent with source compliance with all Federal
requirements related to attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS.
(3) For EIP's that are designed to implement new and/or previously
existing RACT requirements through emissions trading and are submitted
in conjunction with, or subsequent to, the submission of an associated
RACT rule, a State may exercise flexibility in setting a program
baseline provided the program baseline is consistent with and reflected
in the associated RACT rule, and any applicable progress plans and
attainment demonstrations.
(4) For EIP's that are designed to implement new and/or previously
existing RACT requirements through emissions trading and are submitted
prior to the submission of a required RFP plan or attainment
demonstration, States also have flexibility in determining the program
baseline, provided the following conditions are met.
(i) For EIP's that implement new RACT requirements for previously
unregulated source categories through
[[Page 342]]
emissions trading, the new RACT requirements must reflect, to the extent
practicable, increased emissions reductions beyond those that would be
achieved through a traditional RACT program.
(ii) For EIP's that impose new RACT requirements on previously
unregulated sources in a previously regulated source category (e.g.,
RACT ``catch-up'' programs), the new incentive-based RACT rule shall, in
the aggregate, yield reductions in actual emissions at least equivalent
to that which would result from source-by-source compliance with the
existing RACT limit for that source category.
(5) A program baseline for individual sources shall, as appropriate,
be contained or incorporated by reference in federally-enforceable
operating permits or a federally-enforceable SIP.
(6) An initial baseline for TCM's shall be calculated by
establishing the preexisting conditions in the areas of interest. This
may include establishing to what extent TCM's have already been
implemented, what average vehicle occupancy (AVO) levels have been
achieved during peak and off-peak periods, what types of trips occur in
the region, and what mode choices have been made in making these trips.
In addition, the extent to which travel options are currently available
within the region of interest shall be determined. These travel options
may include, but are not limited to, the degree of dispersion of transit
services, the current ridership rates, and the availability and usage of
parking facilities.
(7) Information used in setting a program baseline shall be of
sufficient quality to provide for at least as high a degree of
accountability as currently exists for traditional control requirements
for the categories of sources affected by the program.
(d) Replicable emission quantification methods. This program
element, for programs other than those which are categorized as
directionally-sound, shall include credible, workable, and replicable
methods for projecting program results from affected sources and, where
necessary, for quantifying emissions from individual sources subject to
the EIP. Such methods, if used to determine credit taken in attainment,
RFP, and maintenance demonstrations, as applicable, shall yield results
which can be shown to have a level of certainty comparable to that for
source-specific standards and traditional methods of control strategy
development. Such methods include, as applicable, the following
elements:
(1) Specification of quantification methods. This element shall
specify the approach or the combination or range of approaches that are
acceptable for each source category affected by the program. Acceptable
approaches may include, but are not limited to:
(i) Test methods for the direct measurement of emissions, either
continuously or periodically.
(ii) Calculation equations which are a function of process or
control system parameters, ambient conditions, activity levels, and/or
throughput or production rates.
(iii) Mass balance calculations which are a function of inventory,
usage, and/or disposal records.
(iv) EPA-approved emission factors, where appropriate and adequate.
(v) Any combination of these approaches.
(2) Specification of averaging times.
(i) The averaging time for any specified mass emissions caps or
emission rate limits shall be consistent with: attaining and maintaining
all applicable NAAQS, meeting RFP requirements, and ensuring equivalency
with all applicable RACT requirements.
(ii) If the averaging time for any specified VOC or NOX
mass emissions caps or emission rate limits for stationary sources (and
for other sources, as appropriate) is longer than 24 hours, the State
shall provide, in support of the SIP submittal, a statistical showing
that the specified averaging time is consistent with attaining the
O3 NAAQS and satisfying RFP requirements, as applicable, on
the basis of typical summer day emissions; and, if applicable, a
statistical showing that the longer averaging time will produce
emissions reductions that are equivalent on a daily basis to source-
specific RACT requirements.
(3) Accounting for shutdowns and production curtailments. This
accounting shall include provisions which ensure that:
[[Page 343]]
(i) Emissions reductions associated with shutdowns and production
curtailments are not double-counted in attainment or RFP demonstrations.
(ii) Any resultant ``shifting demand'' which increases emissions
from other sources is accounted for in such demonstrations.
(4) Accounting for batch, seasonal, and cyclical operations. This
accounting shall include provisions which ensure that the approaches
used to account for such variable operations are consistent with
attainment and RFP plans.
(5) Accounting for travel mode choice options, as appropriate, for
TCM's. This accounting shall consider the factors or attributes of the
different forms of travel modes (e.g., bus, ridesharing) which determine
which type of travel an individual will choose. Such factors include,
but are not limited to, time, cost, reliability, and convenience of the
mode.
(e) Source requirements. This program element shall include all
source-specific requirements that constitute compliance with the
program. Such requirements shall be appropriate, readily ascertainable,
and State and federally enforceable, including, as applicable:
(1) Emission limits.
(i) For programs that impose limits on total mass emissions,
emission rates, or other emission-related parameter(s), there must be an
appropriate tracking system so that a facility's limits are readily
ascertainable at all times.
(ii) For emission-limiting EIP's that authorize RACT sources to meet
their RACT requirements through RACT/non-RACT trading, such trading
shall result in an exceptional environmental benefit. Demonstration of
an exceptional environmental benefit shall require either the use of the
statutory offset ratios for nonattainment areas as the determinant of
the amount of emissions reductions that would be required from non-RACT
sources generating credits for RACT sources or, alternatively, a trading
ratio of 1.1 to 1, at a minimum, may be authorized, provided exceptional
environmental benefits are otherwise demonstrated.
(2) Monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements.
(i) An EIP (or the SIP as a whole) must contain test methods and,
where necessary, emission quantification methodologies, appropriate to
the emission limits established in the SIP. EIP sources must be subject
to clearly specified MRR requirements appropriate to the test methods
and any applicable quantification methodologies, and consistent with the
EPA's title V rules, where applicable. Such MRR requirements shall
provide sufficiently reliable and timely information to determine
compliance with emission limits and other applicable strategy-specific
requirements, and to provide for State and Federal enforceability of
such limits and requirements. Methods for MRR may include, but are not
limited to:
(A) The continuous monitoring of mass emissions, emission rates, or
process or control parameters.
(B) In situ or portable measurement devices to verify control system
operating conditions.
(C) Periodic measurement of mass emissions or emission rates using
reference test methods.
(D) Operation and maintenance procedures and/or other work practices
designed to prevent, identify, or remedy noncomplying conditions.
(E) Manual or automated recordkeeping of material usage,
inventories, throughput, production, or levels of required activities.
(F) Any combination of these methods. EIP's shall require that
responsible parties at each facility in the EIP program certify reported
information.
(ii) Procedures for determining required data, including the
emissions contribution from affected sources, for periods for which
required data monitoring is not performed, data are otherwise missing,
or data have been demonstrated to have been inaccurately determined.
(3) Any other applicable strategy-specific requirements.
(f) Projected results and audit/reconciliation procedures. (1) The
SIP submittal shall include projections of the emissions reductions
associated with the implementation of the program. These projected
results shall be related to
[[Page 344]]
and consistent with the assumptions used to develop the area's
attainment demonstration and maintenance plan, as applicable. For
programs designed to produce emissions reductions creditable towards RFP
milestones, projected emissions reductions shall be related to the RFP
baseline and consistent with the area's RFP compliance demonstration.
The State shall provide sufficient supporting information that shows how
affected sources are or will be addressed in the emissions inventory,
RFP plan, and attainment demonstration or maintenance plan, as
applicable.
(i) For emission-limiting programs, the projected results shall be
consistent with the reductions in mass emissions or emissions-related
parameters specified in the program design.
(ii) For market-response programs, the projected results shall be
based on market analyses relating levels of targeted emissions and/or
emission-related activities to program design parameters.
(iii) For directionally-sound programs, the projected results may be
descriptive and shall be consistent with the area's attainment
demonstration or maintenance plan.
(2) Quantitative projected results shall be adjusted through the use
of two uncertainty factors, as appropriate, to reflect uncertainties
inherent in both the extent to which sources will comply with program
requirements and the overall program design.
(i) Uncertainty resulting from incomplete compliance shall be
addressed through the use of a rule compliance factor.
(ii) Programmatic uncertainty shall be addressed through the use of
a program uncertainty factor. Any presumptive norms set by the EPA shall
be used unless an adequate justification for an alternative factor is
included in supporting information to be supplied with the SIP
submittal. In the absence of any EPA-specified presumptive norms, the
State shall provide an adequate justification for the selected factors
as part of the supporting information to be supplied with the SIP
submittal.
(3) Unless otherwise provided in program-specific guidance issued by
the EPA, EIP's for which SIP credit is taken shall include audit
procedures to evaluate program implementation and track program results
in terms of both actual emissions reductions, and, to the extent
practicable, cost savings relative to traditional regulatory program
requirements realized during program implementation. Such audits shall
be conducted at specified time intervals, not to exceed three years. The
State shall provide timely post-audit reports to the EPA.
(i) For emission-limiting EIP's, the State shall commit to ensure
the timely implementation of programmatic revisions or other measures
which the State, in response to the audit, deems necessary for the
successful operation of the program in the context of overall RFP and
attainment requirements.
(ii) For market-response EIP's, reconciliation procedures that
identify a range of appropriate actions or revisions to program
requirements that will make up for any shortfall between credited
results (i.e., projected results, as adjusted by the two uncertainty
factors described above) and actual results obtained during program
implementation shall be submitted together with the program audit
provisions. Such measures must be federally enforceable, as appropriate,
and automatically executing to the extent necessary to make up the
shortfall within a specified period of time, consistent with relevant
RFP and attainment requirements.
(g) Implementation schedule. The program shall contain a schedule
for the adoption and implementation of all State commitments and source
requirements included in the program design.
(h) Administrative procedures. The program shall contain a
description of State commitments which are integral to the
implementation of the program, and the administrative system to be used
to implement the program, addressing the adequacy of the personnel,
funding, and legislative authority.
(1) States shall furnish adequate documentation of existing legal
authority and demonstrated administrative capacity to implement and
enforce the provisions of the EIP.
[[Page 345]]
(2) For programs which require private and/or public entities to
establish emission-related economic incentives (e.g., programs requiring
employers to exempt carpoolers/multiple occupancy vehicles from paying
for parking), States shall furnish adequate documentation of State
authority and administrative capacity to implement and enforce the
underlying program.
(i) Enforcement mechanisms. The program shall contain a compliance
instrument(s) for all program requirements, which is legally binding and
State and federally enforceable. This program element shall also include
a State enforcement program which defines violations, and specifies
auditing and inspections plans and provisions for enforcement actions.
The program shall contain effective penalties for noncompliance which
preserve the level of deterrence in traditional programs. For all such
programs, the manner of collection of penalties must be specified.
(1) Emission limit violations. (i) Programs imposing limits on mass
emissions or emission rates that provide for extended averaging times
and/or compliance on a multisource basis shall include procedures for
determining the number of violations, the number of days of violation,
and sources in violation, for statutory maximum penalty purposes, when
the limits are exceeded. The State shall demonstrate that such
procedures shall not lessen the incentive for source compliance as
compared to a program applied on a source-by-source, daily basis.
(ii) Programs shall require plans for remedying noncompliance at any
facility that exceeds a multisource emissions limit for a given
averaging period. These plans shall be enforceable both federally and by
the State.
(2) Violations of MRR requirements. The MRR requirements shall apply
on a daily basis, as appropriate, and violations thereof shall be
subject to State enforcement sanctions and to the Federal penalty of up
to $25,000 for each day a violation occurs or continues. In addition,
where the requisite scienter conditions are met, violations of such
requirements shall be subject to the Act's criminal penalty sanctions of
section 113(c)(2), which provides for fines and imprisonment of up to 2
years.
Sec. 51.494 Use of program revenues.
Any revenues generated from statutory EIP's shall be used by the
State for any of the following:
(a) Providing incentives for achieving emissions reductions.
(b) Providing assistance for the development of innovative
technologies for the control of O3 air pollution and for the
development of lower-polluting solvents and surface coatings. Such
assistance shall not provide for the payment of more than 75 percent of
either the costs of any project to develop such a technology or the
costs of development of a lower-polluting solvent or surface coating.
(c) Funding the administrative costs of State programs under this
Act. Not more than 50 percent of such revenues may be used for this
purpose. The use of any revenues generated from discretionary EIP's
shall not be constrained by the provisions of this part.
Subpart W_Determining Conformity of General Federal Actions to State or
Federal Implementation Plans
Source: 58 FR 63247, Nov. 30, 1993, unless otherwise noted.
Sec. 51.850 Prohibition.
(a) No department, agency or instrumentality of the Federal
Government shall engage in, support in any way or provide financial
assistance for, license or permit, or approve any activity which does
not conform to an applicable implementation plan.
(b) A Federal agency must make a determination that a Federal action
conforms to the applicable implementation plan in accordance with the
requirements of this subpart before the action is taken.
(c) Paragraph (b) of this section does not include Federal actions
where either:
(1) A National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analysis was
completed as evidenced by a final environmental assessment (EA),
environmental impact
[[Page 346]]
statement (EIS), or finding of no significant impact (FONSI) that was
prepared prior to January 31, 1994;
(2)(i) Prior to January 31, 1994, an EA was commenced or a contract
was awarded to develop the specific environmental analysis;
(ii) Sufficient environmental analysis is completed by March 15,
1994 so that the Federal agency may determine that the Federal action is
in conformity with the specific requirements and the purposes of the
applicable SIP pursuant to the agency's affirmative obligation under
section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act (Act); and
(iii) A written determination of conformity under section 176(c) of
the Act has been made by the Federal agency responsible for the Federal
action by March 15, 1994.
(d) Notwithstanding any provision of this subpart, a determination
that an action is in conformance with the applicable implementation plan
does not exempt the action from any other requirements of the applicable
implementation plan, the NEPA, or the Act.
Sec. 51.851 State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision.
(a) Each State must submit to the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) a revision to its applicable implementation plan which contains
criteria and procedures for assessing the conformity of Federal actions
to the applicable implementation plan, consistent with this subpart. The
State must submit the conformity provisions within 12 months after
November 30, 1993 or within 12 months of an area's designation to
nonattainment, whichever date is later.
(b) The Federal conformity rules under this subpart and 40 CFR part
93, in addition to any existing applicable State requirements, establish
the conformity criteria and procedures necessary to meet the Act
requirements until such time as the required conformity SIP revision is
approved by EPA. A State's conformity provisions must contain criteria
and procedures that are no less stringent than the requirements
described in this subpart. A State may establish more stringent
conformity criteria and procedures only if they apply equally to non-
Federal as well as Federal entities. Following EPA approval of the State
conformity provisions (or a portion thereof) in a revision to the
applicable SIP, the approved (or approved portion of the) State criteria
and procedures would govern conformity determinations and the Federal
conformity regulations contained in 40 CFR part 93 would apply only for
the portion, if any, of the State's conformity provisions that is not
approved by EPA. In addition, any previously applicable SIP requirements
relating to conformity remain enforceable until the State revises its
SIP to specifically remove them from the SIP and that revision is
approved by EPA.
Sec. 51.852 Definitions.
Terms used but not defined in this part shall have the meaning given
them by the Act and EPA's regulations, (40 CFR chapter I), in that order
of priority.
Affected Federal land manager means the Federal agency or the
Federal official charged with direct responsibility for management of an
area designated as Class I under the Act (42 U.S.C. 7472) that is
located within 100 km of the proposed Federal action.
Applicable implementation plan or applicable SIP means the portion
(or portions) of the SIP or most recent revision thereof, which has been
approved under section 110 of the Act, or promulgated under section
110(c) of the Act (Federal implementation plan), or promulgated or
approved pursuant to regulations promulgated under section 301(d) of the
Act and which implements the relevant requirements of the Act.
Areawide air quality modeling analysis means an assessment on a
scale that includes the entire nonattainment or maintenance area which
uses an air quality dispersion model to determine the effects of
emissions on air quality.
Cause or contribute to a new violation means a Federal action that:
(1) Causes a new violation of a national ambient air quality
standard (NAAQS) at a location in a nonattainment or maintenance area
which would otherwise not be in violation of the standard during the
future period in question if the Federal action were not taken; or
[[Page 347]]
(2) Contributes, in conjunction with other reasonably foreseeable
actions, to a new violation of a NAAQS at a location in a nonattainment
or maintenance area in a manner that would increase the frequency or
severity of the new violation.
Caused by, as used in the terms ``direct emissions'' and ``indirect
emissions,'' means emissions that would not otherwise occur in the
absence of the Federal action.
Criteria pollutant or standard means any pollutant for which there
is established a NAAQS at 40 CFR part 50.
Direct emissions means those emissions of a criteria pollutant or
its precursors that are caused or initiated by the Federal action and
occur at the same time and place as the action.
Emergency means a situation where extremely quick action on the part
of the Federal agencies involved is needed and where the timing of such
Federal activities makes it impractical to meet the requirements of this
subpart, such as natural disasters like hurricanes or earthquakes, civil
disturbances such as terrorist acts, and military mobilizations.
Emissions budgets are those portions of the applicable SIP's
projected emissions inventories that describe the levels of emissions
(mobile, stationary, area, etc.) that provide for meeting reasonable
further progress milestones, attainment, and/or maintenance for any
criteria pollutant or its precursors.
Emissions offsets, for purposes of Sec. 51.858, are emissions
reductions which are quantifiable, consistent with the applicable SIP
attainment and reasonable further progress demonstrations, surplus to
reductions required by, and credited to, other applicable SIP
provisions, enforceable at both the State and Federal levels, and
permanent within the timeframe specified by the program.
Emissions that a Federal agency has a continuing program
responsibility for means emissions that are specifically caused by an
agency carrying out its authorities, and does not include emissions that
occur due to subsequent activities, unless such activities are required
by the Federal agency. Where an agency, in performing its normal program
responsibilities, takes actions itself or imposes conditions that result
in air pollutant emissions by a non-Federal entity taking subsequent
actions, such emissions are covered by the meaning of a continuing
program responsibility.
EPA means the Environmental Protection Agency.
Federal action means any activity engaged in by a department,
agency, or instrumentality of the Federal Government, or any activity
that a department, agency or instrumentality of the Federal Government
supports in any way, provides financial assistance for, licenses,
permits, or approves, other than activities related to transportation
plans, programs, and projects developed, funded, or approved under title
23 U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Act (49 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.). Where the
Federal action is a permit, license, or other approval for some aspect
of a non-Federal undertaking, the relevant activity is the part,
portion, or phase or the non-Federal undertaking that requires the
Federal permit, license, or approval.
Federal agency means, for purposes of this subpart, a Federal
department, agency, or instrumentality of the Federal Government.
Increase the frequency or severity of any existing violation of any
standard in any area means to cause a nonattainment area to exceed a
standard more often or to cause a violation at a greater concentration
than previously existed and/or would otherwise exist during the future
period in question, if the project were not implemented.
Indirect emissions means those emissions of a criteria pollutant or
its precursors that:
(1) Are caused by the Federal action, but may occur later in time
and/or may be farther removed in distance from the action itself but are
still reasonably foreseeable; and
(2) The Federal agency can practicably control and will maintain
control over due to a continuing program responsibility of the Federal
agency.
Local air quality modeling analysis means an assessment of localized
impacts on a scale smaller than the entire nonattainment or maintenance
area, including, for example, congested roadway intersections and
highways or
[[Page 348]]
transit terminals, which uses an air quality dispersion model to
determine the effects of emissions on air quality.
Maintenance area means an area with a maintenance plan approved
under section 175A of the Act.
Maintenance plan means a revision to the applicable SIP, meeting the
requirements of section 175A of the Act.
Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) is that organization
designated as being responsible, together with the State, for conducting
the continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive planning process under 23
U.S.C. 134 and 49 U.S.C. 1607.
Milestone has the meaning given in sections 182(g)(1) and 189(c)(1)
of the Act.
National ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) are those standards
established pursuant to section 109 of the Act and include standards for
carbon monoxide (CO), lead (Pb), nitrogen dioxide (NO2),
ozone, particulate matter (PM-10), and sulfur dioxide (SO2).
NEPA is the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended
(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).
Nonattainment Area (NAA) means an area designated as nonattainment
under section 107 of the Act and described in 40 CFR part 81.
Precursors of a criteria pollutant are:
(1) For ozone, nitrogen oxides (NOX), unless an area is
exempted from NOX requirements under section 182(f) of the
Act, and volatile organic compounds (VOC); and
(2) For PM-10, those pollutants described in the PM-10 nonattainment
area applicable SIP as significant contributors to the PM-10 levels.
Reasonably foreseeable emissions are projected future indirect
emissions that are identified at the time the conformity determination
is made; the location of such emissions is known and the emissions are
quantifiable, as described and documented by the Federal agency based on
its own information and after reviewing any information presented to the
Federal agency.
Regional water and/or wastewater projects include construction,
operation, and maintenance of water or wastewater conveyances, water or
wastewater treatment facilities, and water storage reservoirs which
affect a large portion of a nonattainment or maintenance area.
Regionally significant action means a Federal action for which the
direct and indirect emissions of any pollutant represent 10 percent or
more of a nonattainment or maintenance area's emissions inventory for
that pollutant.
Total of direct and indirect emissions means the sum of direct and
indirect emissions increases and decreases caused by the Federal action;
i.e., the ``net'' emissions considering all direct and indirect
emissions. The portion of emissions which are exempt or presumed to
conform under Sec. 51.853, (c), (d), (e), or (f) are not included in
the ``total of direct and indirect emissions.'' The ``total of direct
and indirect emissions'' includes emissions of criteria pollutants and
emissions of precursors of criteria pollutants.
Sec. 51.853 Applicability.
(a) Conformity determinations for Federal actions related to
transportation plans, programs, and projects developed, funded, or
approved under title 23 U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Act (49 U.S.C.
1601 et seq.) must meet the procedures and criteria of 40 CFR part 51,
subpart T, in lieu of the procedures set forth in this subpart.
(b) For Federal actions not covered by paragraph (a) of this
section, a conformity determination is required for each pollutant where
the total of direct and indirect emissions in a nonattainment or
maintenance area caused by a Federal action would equal or exceed any of
the rates in paragraphs (b)(1) or (2) of this section.
(1) For purposes of paragraph (b) of this section, the following
rates apply in nonattainment areas (NAAs):
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tons/
year
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ozone (VOC's or NOX):
Serious NAA's................................................ 50
Severe NAA's................................................. 25
Extreme NAA's................................................ 10
Other ozone NAA's outside an ozone transport region.......... 100
Marginal and moderate NAA's inside an ozone transport region:
VOC........................................................ 50
NOX........................................................ 100
Carbon monoxide: All NAA's..................................... 100
SO2 or NO2: All NAA's.......................................... 100
PM-10:
Moderate NAA's............................................... 100
Serious NAA's................................................ 70
[[Page 349]]
Pb: All NAA's.................................................. 25
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) For purposes of paragraph (b) of this section, the following
rates apply in maintenance areas:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tons/
year
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ozone (NOX), SO2 or NO2: All maintenance areas................. 100
Ozone (VOC's):
Maintenance areas inside an ozone transport region........... 50
Maintenance areas outside an ozone transport region.......... 100
Carbon monoxide: All maintenance areas......................... 100
PM-10: All maintenance areas................................... 100
Pb: All maintenance areas...................................... 25
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(c) The requirements of this subpart shall not apply to:
(1) Actions where the total of direct and indirect emissions are
below the emissions levels specified in paragraph (b) of this section.
(2) The following actions which would result in no emissions
increase or an increase in emissions that is clearly de minimis:
(i) Judicial and legislative proceedings.
(ii) Continuing and recurring activities such as permit renewals
where activities conducted will be similar in scope and operation to
activities currently being conducted.
(iii) Rulemaking and policy development and issuance.
(iv) Routine maintenance and repair activities, including repair and
maintenance of administrative sites, roads, trails, and facilities.
(v) Civil and criminal enforcement activities, such as
investigations, audits, inspections, examinations, prosecutions, and the
training of law enforcement personnel.
(vi) Administrative actions such as personnel actions,
organizational changes, debt management or collection, cash management,
internal agency audits, program budget proposals, and matters relating
to the administration and collection of taxes, duties and fees.
(vii) The routine, recurring transportation of materiel and
personnel.
(viii) Routine movement of mobile assets, such as ships and
aircraft, in home port reassignments and stations (when no new support
facilities or personnel are required) to perform as operational groups
and/or for repair or overhaul.
(ix) Maintenance dredging and debris disposal where no new depths
are required, applicable permits are secured, and disposal will be at an
approved disposal site.
(x) Actions, such as the following, with respect to existing
structures, properties, facilities and lands where future activities
conducted will be similar in scope and operation to activities currently
being conducted at the existing structures, properties, facilities, and
lands; for example, relocation of personnel, disposition of federally-
owned existing structures, properties, facilities, and lands, rent
subsidies, operation and maintenance cost subsidies, the exercise of
receivership or conservatorship authority, assistance in purchasing
structures, and the production of coins and currency.
(xi) The granting of leases, licenses such as for exports and trade,
permits, and easements where activities conducted will be similar in
scope and operation to activities currently being conducted.
(xii) Planning, studies, and provision of technical assistance.
(xiii) Routine operation of facilities, mobile assets and equipment.
(xiv) Transfers of ownership, interests, and titles in land,
facilities, and real and personal properties, regardless of the form or
method of the transfer.
(xv) The designation of empowerment zones, enterprise communities,
or viticultural areas.
(xvi) Actions by any of the Federal banking agencies or the Federal
Reserve Banks, including actions regarding charters, applications,
notices, licenses, the supervision or examination of depository
institutions or depository institution holding companies, access to the
discount window, or the provision of financial services to banking
organizations or to any department, agency or instrumentality of the
United States.
(xvii) Actions by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
System or any Federal Reserve Bank to effect monetary or exchange rate
policy.
[[Page 350]]
(xviii) Actions that implement a foreign affairs function of the
United States.
(xix) Actions (or portions thereof) associated with transfers of
land, facilities, title, and real properties through an enforceable
contract or lease agreement where the delivery of the deed is required
to occur promptly after a specific, reasonable condition is met, such as
promptly after the land is certified as meeting the requirements of the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA), and where the Federal agency does not retain continuing
authority to control emissions associated with the lands, facilities,
title, or real properties.
(xx) Transfers of real property, including land, facilities, and
related personal property from a Federal entity to another Federal
entity and assignments of real property, including land, facilities, and
related personal property from a Federal entity to another Federal
entity for subsequent deeding to eligible applicants.
(xxi) Actions by the Department of the Treasury to effect fiscal
policy and to exercise the borrowing authority of the United States.
(3) The following actions where the emissions are not reasonably
foreseeable:
(i) Initial Outer Continental Shelf lease sales which are made on a
broad scale and are followed by exploration and development plans on a
project level.
(ii) Electric power marketing activities that involve the
acquisition, sale and transmission of electric energy.
(4) Actions which implement a decision to conduct or carry out a
conforming program such as prescribed burning actions which are
consistent with a conforming land management plan.
(d) Notwithstanding the other requirements of this subpart, a
conformity determination is not required for the following Federal
actions (or portion thereof):
(1) The portion of an action that includes major new or modified
stationary sources that require a permit under the new source review
(NSR) program (section 173 of the Act) or the prevention of significant
deterioration (PSD) program (title I, part C of the Act).
(2) Actions in response to emergencies or natural disasters such as
hurricanes, earthquakes, etc., which are commenced on the order of hours
or days after the emergency or disaster and, if applicable, which meet
the requirements of paragraph (e) of this section.
(3) Research, investigations, studies, demonstrations, or training
(other than those exempted under paragraph (c)(2) of this section),
where no environmental detriment is incurred and/or, the particular
action furthers air quality research, as determined by the State agency
primarily responsible for the applicable SIP.
(4) Alteration and additions of existing structures as specifically
required by new or existing applicable environmental legislation or
environmental regulations (e.g., hush houses for aircraft engines and
scrubbers for air emissions).
(5) Direct emissions from remedial and removal actions carried out
under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and
Liability Act (CERCLA) and associated regulations to the extent such
emissions either comply with the substantive requirements of the PSD/NSR
permitting program or are exempted from other environmental regulation
under the provisions of CERCLA and applicable regulations issued under
CERCLA.
(e) Federal actions which are part of a continuing response to an
emergency or disaster under paragraph (d)(2) of this section and which
are to be taken more than 6 months after the commencement of the
response to the emergency or disaster under paragraph (d)(2) of this
section are exempt from the requirements of this subpart only if:
(1) The Federal agency taking the actions makes a written
determination that, for a specified period not to exceed an additional 6
months, it is impractical to prepare the conformity analyses which would
otherwise be required and the actions cannot be delayed due to
overriding concerns for
[[Page 351]]
public health and welfare, national security interests and foreign
policy commitments; or
(2) For actions which are to be taken after those actions covered by
paragraph (e)(1) of this section, the Federal agency makes a new
determination as provided in paragraph (e)(1) of this section.
(f) Notwithstanding other requirements of this subpart, actions
specified by individual Federal agencies that have met the criteria set
forth in either paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this section and the
procedures set forth in paragraph (h) of this section are presumed to
conform, except as provided in paragraph (j) of this section.
(g) The Federal agency must meet the criteria for establishing
activities that are presumed to conform by fulfilling the requirements
set forth in either paragraph (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this section:
(1) The Federal agency must clearly demonstrate using methods
consistent with this subpart that the total of direct and indirect
emissions from the type of activities which would be presumed to conform
would not:
(i) Cause or contribute to any new violation of any standard in any
area;
(ii) Interfere with provisions in the applicable SIP for maintenance
of any standard;
(iii) Increase the frequency or severity of any existing violation
of any standard in any area; or
(iv) Delay timely attainment of any standard or any required interim
emission reductions or other milestones in any area including, where
applicable, emission levels specified in the applicable SIP for purposes
of:
(A) A demonstration of reasonable further progress;
(B) A demonstration of attainment; or
(C) A maintenance plan; or
(2) The Federal agency must provide documentation that the total of
direct and indirect emissions from such future actions would be below
the emission rates for a conformity determination that are established
in paragraph (b) of this section, based, for example, on similar actions
taken over recent years.
(h) In addition to meeting the criteria for establishing exemptions
set forth in paragraphs (g)(1) or (g)(2) of this section, the following
procedures must also be complied with to presume that activities will
conform:
(1) The Federal agency must identify through publication in the
Federal Register its list of proposed activities that are presumed to
conform and the basis for the presumptions;
(2) The Federal agency must notify the appropriate EPA Regional
Office(s), State and local air quality agencies and, where applicable,
the agency designated under section 174 of the Act and the MPO and
provide at least 30 days for the public to comment on the list of
proposed activities presumed to conform;
(3) The Federal agency must document its response to all the
comments received and make the comments, response, and final list of
activities available to the public upon request; and
(4) The Federal agency must publish the final list of such
activities in the Federal Register.
(i) Notwithstanding the other requirements of this subpart, when the
total of direct and indirect emissions of any pollutant from a Federal
action does not equal or exceed the rates specified in paragraph (b) of
this section, but represents 10 percent or more of a nonattainment or
maintenance area's total emissions of that pollutant, the action is
defined as a regionally significant action and the requirements of Sec.
51.850 and Sec. Sec. 51.855 through 51.860 shall apply for the Federal
action.
(j) Where an action otherwise presumed to conform under paragraph
(f) of this section is a regionally significant action or does not in
fact meet one of the criteria in paragraph (g)(1) of this section, that
action shall not be presumed to conform and the requirements of Sec.
51.850 and Sec. Sec. 51.855 through 51.860 shall apply for the Federal
action.
(k) The provisions of this subpart shall apply in all nonattainment
and maintenance areas.
[[Page 352]]
Sec. 51.854 Conformity analysis.
Any Federal department, agency, or instrumentality of the Federal
Government taking an action subject to this subpart must make its own
conformity determination consistent with the requirements of this
subpart. In making its conformity determination, a Federal agency must
consider comments from any interested parties. Where multiple Federal
agencies have jurisdiction for various aspects of a project, a Federal
agency may choose to adopt the analysis of another Federal agency or
develop its own analysis in order to make its conformity determination.
Sec. 51.855 Reporting requirements.
(a) A Federal agency making a conformity determination under Sec.
51.858 must provide to the appropriate EPA Regional Office(s), State and
local air quality agencies and, where applicable, affected Federal land
managers, the agency designated under section 174 of the Act and the MPO
a 30 day notice which describes the proposed action and the Federal
agency's draft conformity determination on the action.
(b) A Federal agency must notify the appropriate EPA Regional
Office(s), State and local air quality agencies and, where applicable,
affected Federal land managers, the agency designated under section 174
of the Clean Air Act and the MPO within 30 days after making a final
conformity determination under Sec. 51.858.
Sec. 51.856 Public participation.
(a) Upon request by any person regarding a specific Federal action,
a Federal agency must make available for review its draft conformity
determination under Sec. 51.858 with supporting materials which
describe the analytical methods and conclusions relied upon in making
the applicability analysis and draft conformity determination.
(b) A Federal agency must make public its draft conformity
determination under Sec. 51.858 by placing a notice by prominent
advertisement in a daily newspaper of general circulation in the area
affected by the action and by providing 30 days for written public
comment prior to taking any formal action on the draft determination.
This comment period may be concurrent with any other public involvement,
such as occurs in the NEPA process.
(c) A Federal agency must document its response to all the comments
received on its draft conformity determination under Sec. 51.858 and
make the comments and responses available, upon request by any person
regarding a specific Federal action, within 30 days of the final
conformity determination.
(d) A Federal agency must make public its final conformity
determination under Sec. 51.858 for a Federal action by placing a
notice by prominent advertisement in a daily newspaper of general
circulation in the area affected by the action within 30 days of the
final conformity determination.
Sec. 51.857 Frequency of conformity determinations.
(a) The conformity status of a Federal action automatically lapses 5
years from the date a final conformity determination is reported under
Sec. 51.855, unless the Federal action has been completed or a
continuous program has been commenced to implement that Federal action
within a reasonable time.
(b) Ongoing Federal activities at a given site showing continuous
progress are not new actions and do not require periodic
redeterminations so long as such activities are within the scope of the
final conformity determination reported under Sec. 51.855.
(c) If, after the conformity determination is made, the Federal
action is changed so that there is an increase in the total of direct
and indirect emissions above the levels in Sec. 51.853(b), a new
conformity determination is required.
Sec. 51.858 Criteria for determining conformity of general Federal
actions.
(a) An action required under Sec. 51.853 to have a conformity
determination for a specific pollutant, will be determined to conform to
the applicable SIP if, for each pollutant that exceeds the rates in
Sec. 51.853(b), or otherwise requires a conformity determination due to
the total of direct and indirect emissions from the action, the action
meets the requirements of paragraph (c) of this
[[Page 353]]
section, and meets any of the following requirements:
(1) For any criteria pollutant, the total of direct and indirect
emissions from the action are specifically identified and accounted for
in the applicable SIP's attainment or maintenance demonstration;
(2) For ozone or nitrogen dioxide, the total of direct and indirect
emissions from the action are fully offset within the same nonattainment
or maintenance area through a revision to the applicable SIP or a
similarly enforceable measure that effects emission reductions so that
there is no net increase in emissions of that pollutant;
(3) For any criteria pollutant, except ozone and nitrogen dioxide,
the total of direct and indirect emissions from the action meet the
requirements:
(i) Specified in paragraph (b) of this section, based on areawide
air quality modeling analysis and local air quality modeling analysis;
or
(ii) Meet the requirements of paragraph (a)(5) of this section and,
for local air quality modeling analysis, the requirement of paragraph
(b) of this section;
(4) For CO or PM-10--
(i) Where the State agency primarily responsible for the applicable
SIP determines that an areawide air quality modeling analysis is not
needed, the total of direct and indirect emissions from the action meet
the requirements specified in paragraph (b) of this section, based on
local air quality modeling analysis; or
(ii) Where the State agency primarily responsible for the applicable
SIP determines that an areawide air quality modeling analysis is
appropriate and that a local air quality modeling analysis is not
needed, the total of direct and indirect emissions from the action meet
the requirements specified in paragraph (b) of this section, based on
areawide modeling, or meet the requirements of paragraph (a)(5) of this
section; or
(5) For ozone or nitrogen dioxide, and for purposes of paragraphs
(a)(3)(ii) and (a)(4)(ii) of this section, each portion of the action or
the action as a whole meets any of the following requirements:
(i) Where EPA has approved a revision to an area's attainment or
maintenance demonstration after 1990 and the State makes a determination
as provided in paragraph (a)(5)(i)(A) of this section or where the State
makes a commitment as provided in paragraph (a)(5)(i)(B) of this
section:
(A) The total of direct and indirect emissions from the action (or
portion thereof) is determined and documented by the State agency
primarily responsible for the applicable SIP to result in a level of
emissions which, together with all other emissions in the nonattainment
(or maintenance) area, would not exceed the emissions budgets specified
in the applicable SIP;
(B) The total of direct and indirect emissions from the action (or
portion thereof) is determined by the State agency responsible for the
applicable SIP to result in a level of emissions which, together with
all other emissions in the nonattainment (or maintenance) area, would
exceed an emissions budget specified in the applicable SIP and the State
Governor or the Governor's designee for SIP actions makes a written
commitment to EPA which includes the following:
(1) A specific schedule for adoption and submittal of a revision to
the SIP which would achieve the needed emission reductions prior to the
time emissions from the Federal action would occur;
(2) Identification of specific measures for incorporation into the
SIP which would result in a level of emissions which, together with all
other emissions in the nonattainment or maintenance area, would not
exceed any emissions budget specified in the applicable SIP;
(3) A demonstration that all existing applicable SIP requirements
are being implemented in the area for the pollutants affected by the
Federal action, and that local authority to implement additional
requirements has been fully pursued;
(4) A determination that the responsible Federal agencies have
required all reasonable mitigation measures associated with their
action; and
(5) Written documentation including all air quality analyses
supporting the conformity determination;
[[Page 354]]
(C) Where a Federal agency made a conformity determination based on
a State commitment under paragraph (a)(5)(i)(B) of this section, such a
State commitment is automatically deemed a call for a SIP revision by
EPA under section 110(k)(5) of the Act, effective on the date of the
Federal conformity determination and requiring response within 18 months
or any shorter time within which the State commits to revise the
applicable SIP;
(ii) The action (or portion thereof), as determined by the MPO, is
specifically included in a current transportation plan and
transportation improvement program which have been found to conform to
the applicable SIP under 40 CFR part 51, subpart T, or 40 CFR part 93,
subpart A;
(iii) The action (or portion thereof) fully offsets its emissions
within the same nonattainment or maintenance area through a revision to
the applicable SIP or an equally enforceable measure that effects
emission reductions equal to or greater than the total of direct and
indirect emissions from the action so that there is no net increase in
emissions of that pollutant;
(iv) Where EPA has not approved a revision to the relevant SIP
attainment or maintenance demonstration since 1990, the total of direct
and indirect emissions from the action for the future years (described
in Sec. 51.859(d)) do not increase emissions with respect to the
baseline emissions:
(A) The baseline emissions reflect the historical activity levels
that occurred in the geographic area affected by the proposed Federal
action during:
(1) Calendar year 1990;
(2) The calendar year that is the basis for the classification (or,
where the classification is based on multiple years, the most
representative year), if a classification is promulgated in 40 CFR part
81; or
(3) The year of the baseline inventory in the PM-10 applicable SIP;
(B) The baseline emissions are the total of direct and indirect
emissions calculated for the future years (described in Sec. 51.859(d))
using the historic activity levels (described in paragraph (a)(5)(iv)(A)
of this section) and appropriate emission factors for the future years;
or
(v) Where the action involves regional water and/or wastewater
projects, such projects are sized to meet only the needs of population
projections that are in the applicable SIP.
(b) The areawide and/or local air quality modeling analyses must:
(1) Meet the requirements in Sec. 51.859; and
(2) Show that the action does not:
(i) Cause or contribute to any new violation of any standard in any
area; or
(ii) Increase the frequency or severity of any existing violation of
any standard in any area.
(c) Notwithstanding any other requirements of this section, an
action subject to this subpart may not be determined to conform to the
applicable SIP unless the total of direct and indirect emissions from
the action is in compliance or consistent with all relevant requirements
and milestones contained in the applicable SIP, such as elements
identified as part of the reasonable further progress schedules,
assumptions specified in the attainment or maintenance demonstration,
prohibitions, numerical emission limits, and work practice requirements.
(d) Any analyses required under this section must be completed, and
any mitigation requirements necessary for a finding of conformity must
be identified before the determination of conformity is made.
Sec. 51.859 Procedures for conformity determinations of general
Federal actions.
(a) The analyses required under this subpart must be based on the
latest planning assumptions.
(1) All planning assumptions must be derived from the estimates of
population, employment, travel, and congestion most recently approved by
the MPO, or other agency authorized to make such estimates, where
available.
(2) Any revisions to these estimates used as part of the conformity
determination, including projected shifts in geographic location or
level of population, employment, travel, and congestion, must be
approved by the MPO or other agency authorized to make such estimates
for the urban area.
[[Page 355]]
(b) The analyses required under this subpart must be based on the
latest and most accurate emission estimation techniques available as
described below, unless such techniques are inappropriate. If such
techniques are inappropriate and written approval of the EPA Regional
Administrator is obtained for any modification or substitution, they may
be modified or another technique substituted on a case-by-case basis or,
where appropriate, on a generic basis for a specific Federal agency
program.
(1) For motor vehicle emissions, the most current version of the
motor vehicle emissions model specified by EPA and available for use in
the preparation or revision of SIPs in that State must be used for the
conformity analysis as specified in paragraphs (b)(1) (i) and (ii) of
this section:
(i) The EPA must publish in the Federal Register a notice of
availability of any new motor vehicle emissions model; and
(ii) A grace period of three months shall apply during which the
motor vehicle emissions model previously specified by EPA as the most
current version may be used. Conformity analyses for which the analysis
was begun during the grace period or no more than 3 years before the
Federal Register notice of availability of the latest emission model may
continue to use the previous version of the model specified by EPA.
(2) For non-motor vehicle sources, including stationary and area
source emissions, the latest emission factors specified by EPA in the
``Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors (AP-42)''\1\ must be
used for the conformity analysis unless more accurate emission data are
available, such as actual stack test data from stationary sources which
are part of the conformity analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Copies may be obtained from the Technical Support Division of
OAQPS, EPA, MD-14, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(c) The air quality modeling analyses required under this subpart
must be based on the applicable air quality models, data bases, and
other requirements specified in the most recent version of the
``Guideline on Air Quality Models (Revised)'' (1986), including
supplements (EPA publication no. 450/2-78-027R) \2\, unless:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See footnote 1 at Sec. 51.859(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) The guideline techniques are inappropriate, in which case the
model may be modified or another model substituted on a case-by-case
basis or, where appropriate, on a generic basis for a specific Federal
agency program; and
(2) Written approval of the EPA Regional Administrator is obtained
for any modification or substitution.
(d) The analyses required under this subpart, except Sec.
51.858(a)(1), must be based on the total of direct and indirect
emissions from the action and must reflect emission scenarios that are
expected to occur under each of the following cases:
(1) The Act mandated attainment year or, if applicable, the farthest
year for which emissions are projected in the maintenance plan;
(2) The year during which the total of direct and indirect emissions
from the action is expected to be the greatest on an annual basis; and
(3) any year for which the applicable SIP specifies an emissions
budget.
Sec. 51.860 Mitigation of air quality impacts.
(a) Any measures that are intended to mitigate air quality impacts
must be identified and the process for implementation and enforcement of
such measures must be described, including an implementation schedule
containing explicit timelines for implementation.
(b) Prior to determining that a Federal action is in conformity, the
Federal agency making the conformity determination must obtain written
commitments from the appropriate persons or agencies to implement any
mitigation measures which are identified as conditions for making
conformity determinations.
(c) Persons or agencies voluntarily committing to mitigation
measures to facilitate positive conformity determinations must comply
with the obligations of such commitments.
[[Page 356]]
(d) In instances where the Federal agency is licensing, permitting
or otherwise approving the action of another governmental or private
entity, approval by the Federal agency must be conditioned on the other
entity meeting the mitigation measures set forth in the conformity
determination.
(e) When necessary because of changed circumstances, mitigation
measures may be modified so long as the new mitigation measures continue
to support the conformity determination. Any proposed change in the
mitigation measures is subject to the reporting requirements of Sec.
51.856 and the public participation requirements of Sec. 51.857.
(f) The implementation plan revision required in Sec. 51.851 shall
provide that written commitments to mitigation measures must be obtained
prior to a positive conformity determination and that such commitments
must be fulfilled.
(g) After a State revises its SIP to adopt its general conformity
rules and EPA approves that SIP revision, any agreements, including
mitigation measures, necessary for a conformity determination will be
both State and federally enforceable. Enforceability through the
applicable SIP will apply to all persons who agree to mitigate direct
and indirect emissions associated with a Federal action for a conformity
determination.
Subpart X_Provisions for Implementation of 8-hour Ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standard
Source: 69 FR 23996, Apr. 30, 2004, unless otherwise noted.
Sec. 51.900 Definitions.
The following definitions apply for purposes of this subpart. Any
term not defined herein shall have the meaning as defined in 40 CFR
51.100.
(a) 1-hour NAAQS means the 1-hour ozone national ambient air quality
standards codified at 40 CFR 50.9.
(b) 8-hour NAAQS means the 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality
standards codified at 40 CFR 50.10.
(c) 1-hour ozone design value is the 1-hour ozone concentration
calculated according to 40 CFR part 50, Appendix H and the
interpretation methodology issued by the Administrator most recently
before the date of the enactment of the CAA Amendments of 1990.
(d) 8-Hour ozone design value is the 8-hour ozone concentration
calculated according to 40 CFR part 50, appendix I.
(e) CAA means the Clean Air Act as codified at 42 U.S.C. 7401--7671q
(2003).
(f) Applicable requirements means for an area the following
requirements to the extent such requirements apply or applied to the
area for the area's classification under section 181(a)(1) of the CAA
for the 1-hour NAAQS at the time the Administrator signs a final rule
designating the area for the 8-hour standard as nonattainment,
attainment or unclassifiable:
(1) Reasonably available control technology (RACT).
(2) Inspection and maintenance programs (I/M).
(3) Major source applicability cut-offs for purposes of RACT.
(4) Rate of Progress (ROP) reductions.
(5) Stage II vapor recovery.
(6) Clean fuels fleet program under section 183(c)(4) of the CAA.
(7) Clean fuels for boilers under section 182(e)(3) of the CAA.
(8) Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) during heavy traffic
hours as provided under section 182(e)(4) of the CAA.
(9) Enhanced (ambient) monitoring under section 182(c)(1) of the
CAA.
(10) Transportation controls under section 182(c)(5) of the CAA.
(11) Vehicle miles traveled provisions of section 182(d)(1) of the
CAA.
(12) NOX requirements under section 182(f) of the CAA.
(g) Attainment year ozone season shall mean the ozone season
immediately preceding a nonattainment area's attainment date.
(h) Designation for the 8-hour NAAQS shall mean the effective date
of the 8-hour designation for an area.
(i) Higher classification/lower classification. For purposes of
determining whether a classification is higher or lower, classifications
are ranked from
[[Page 357]]
lowest to highest as follows: classification under subpart 1 of the CAA;
marginal; moderate; serious; severe-15; severe-17; and extreme.
(j) Initially designated means the first designation that becomes
effective for an area for the 8-hour NAAQS and does not include a
redesignation to attainment or nonattainment for that standard.
(k) Maintenance area for the 1-hour NAAQS means an area that was
designated nonattainment for the 1-hour NAAQS on or after November 15,
1990 and was redesignated to attainment for the 1-hour NAAQS subject to
a maintenance plan as required by section 175A of the CAA.
(l) Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) means the sum of nitric oxide
and nitrogen dioxide in the flue gas or emission point, collectively
expressed as nitrogen dioxide.
(m) NOX SIP Call means the rules codified at 40 CFR
51.121 and 51.122.
(n) Ozone season means for each State, the ozone monitoring season
as defined in 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix D, section 2.5 for that State.
(o) Ozone transport region means the area established by section
184(a) of the CAA or any other area established by the Administrator
pursuant to section 176A of the CAA for purposes of ozone.
(p) Reasonable further progress (RFP) means for the purposes of the
8-hour NAAQS, the progress reductions required under section 172(c)(2)
and section 182(b)(1) and (c)(2)(B) and (c)(2)(C) of the CAA.
(q) Rate of progress (ROP) means for purposes of the 1-hour NAAQS,
the progress reductions required under section 172(c)(2) and section
182(b)(1) and (c)(2)(B) and (c)(2)(C) of the CAA.
(r) Revocation of the 1-hour NAAQS means the time at which the 1-
hour NAAQS no longer apply to an area pursuant to 40 CFR 50.9(b).
(s) Subpart 1 (CAA) means subpart 1 of part D of title I of the CAA.
(t) Subpart 2 (CAA) means subpart 2 of part D of title I of the CAA.
(u) Attainment Area means, unless otherwise indicated, an area
designated as either attainment, unclassifiable, or attainment/
unclassifiable.
Sec. 51.901 Applicability of part 51.
The provisions in subparts A through W of part 51 apply to areas for
purposes of the 8-hour NAAQS to the extent they are not inconsistent
with the provisions of this subpart.
Sec. 51.902 Which classification and nonattainment area planning
provisions of the CAA shall apply to areas designated
nonattainment for the 8-hour NAAQS?
(a) Classification under subpart 2 (CAA). An area designated
nonattainment for the 8-hour NAAQS with a 1-hour ozone design value
equal to or greater than 0.121 ppm at the time the Administrator signs a
final rule designating or redesignating the area as nonattainment for
the 8-hour NAAQS will be classified in accordance with section 181 of
the CAA, as interpreted in Sec. 51.903(a), for purposes of the 8-hour
NAAQS, and will be subject to the requirements of subpart 2 that apply
for that classification.
(b) Covered under subpart 1 (CAA). An area designated nonattainment
for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS with a 1-hour design value less than 0.121
ppm at the time the Administrator signs a final rule designating or
redesignating the area as nonattainment for the 8-hour NAAQS will be
covered under section 172(a)(1) of the CAA and will be subject to the
requirements of subpart 1.
Sec. 51.903 How do the classification and attainment date provisions
in section 181 of subpart 2 of the CAA apply to areas subject
to Sec. 51.902(a)?
(a) In accordance with section 181(a)(1) of the CAA, each area
subject to Sec. 51.902(a) shall be classified by operation of law at
the time of designation. However, the classification shall be based on
the 8-hour design value for the area, in accordance with Table 1 below,
or such higher or lower classification as the State may request as
provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section. The 8-hour design
value for the area shall be calculated using the three most recent years
of air quality data. For each area classified under this section, the
primary NAAQS attainment date for the 8-hour NAAQS shall be as
expeditious as practicable
[[Page 358]]
but not later than the date provided in the following Table 1.
Table 1.--Classification for 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS for Areas Subject to Sec. 51.902(a)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum period for
attainment dates in
8-hour design state plans (years
Area class value (ppm after effective date of
ozone) nonattainment
designation for 8-hour
NAAQS)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marginal................................. from........................ 0.085 3
up to \1\................... 0.092
Moderate................................. from........................ 0.092 6
up to \1\................... 0.107
Serious.................................. from........................ 0.107 9
up to \1\................... 0.120
Severe-15................................ from........................ 0.120 15
up to \1\................... 0.127
Severe-17................................ from........................ 0.127 17
up to \1\................... 0.187
Extreme.................................. equal to.................... 0.187 20
or above....................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ but not including.
(b) A State may request a higher classification for any reason in
accordance with section 181(b)(3) of the CAA.
(c) A State may request a lower classification in accordance with
section 181(a)(4) of the CAA.
Sec. 51.904 How do the classification and attainment date provisions
in section 172(a) of subpart 1 of the CAA apply to areas
subject to Sec. 51.902(b)?
(a) Classification. The Administrator may classify an area subject
to Sec. 51.902(b) as an overwhelming transport area if:
(1) The area meets the criteria as specified for rural transport
areas under section 182(h) of the CAA;
(2) Transport of ozone and/or precursors into the area is so
overwhelming that the contribution of local emissions to observed 8-hour
ozone concentration above the level of the NAAQS is relatively minor;
and
(3) The Administrator finds that sources of VOC (and, where the
Administrator determines relevant, NOX) emissions within the
area do not make a significant contribution to the ozone concentrations
measured in other areas.
(b) Attainment dates. For an area subject to Sec. 51.902(b), the
Administrator will approve an attainment date consistent with the
attainment date timing provision of section 172(a)(2)(A) of the CAA at
the time the Administrator approves an attainment demonstration for the
area.
Sec. 51.905 How do areas transition from the 1-hour NAAQS to the 8-
hour NAAQS and what are the anti-backsliding provisions?
(a) What requirements that applied in an area for the 1-hour NAAQS
continue to apply after revocation of the 1-hour NAAQS for that area?
(1) 8-Hour NAAQS Nonattainment/1-Hour NAAQS Nonattainment. The following
requirements apply to an area designated nonattainment for the 8-hour
NAAQS and designated nonattainment for the 1-hour NAAQS at the time of
designation for the 8-hour NAAQS for that area.
(i) The area remains subject to the obligation to adopt and
implement the applicable requirements as defined in Sec. 51.900(f),
except as provided in paragraph (a)(1)(iii) of this section, and except
as provided in paragraph (b) of this section.
(ii) If the area has not met its obligation to have a fully-approved
attainment demonstration SIP for the 1-hour NAAQS, the State must comply
with one of the following:
(A) Submit a 1-hour attainment demonstration no later than 1 year
after designation;
(B) Submit a RFP plan for the 8-hour NAAQS no later than 1-year
following designations for the 8-hour NAAQS providing a 5 percent
increment of emissions reduction from the area's
[[Page 359]]
2002 emissions baseline, which must be in addition to measures (or
enforceable commitments to measures) in the SIP at the time of the
effective date of designation and in addition to national or regional
measures and must be achieved no later than 2 years after the required
date for submission (3 years after designation).
(C) Submit an 8-hour ozone attainment demonstration no later than 1
year following designations that demonstrates attainment of the 8-hour
NAAQS by the area's attainment date; provides for 8-hour RFP for the
area out to the attainment date; and for the initial period of RFP for
the area (between 2003-2008), achieve the emission reductions by
December 31, 2007.
(iii) If the area has an outstanding obligation for an approved 1-
hour ROP SIP, it must develop and submit to EPA all outstanding 1-hour
ROP plans; where a 1-hour obligation overlaps with an 8-hour RFP
requirement, the State's 8-hour RFP plan can be used to satisfy the 1-
hour ROP obligation if the 8-hour RFP plan has an emission target at
least as stringent as the 1-hour ROP emission target in each of the 1-
hour ROP target years for which the 1-hour ROP obligation exists.
(2) 8-Hour NAAQS Nonattainment/1-Hour NAAQS Maintenance. An area
designated nonattainment for the 8-hour NAAQS that is a maintenance area
for the 1-hour NAAQS at the time of designation for the 8-hour NAAQS for
that area remains subject to the obligation to implement the applicable
requirements as defined in Sec. 51.900 (f) to the extent such
obligations are required by the approved SIP, except as provided in
paragraph (b) of this section. Applicable measures in the SIP must
continue to be implemented; however, if these measures were shifted to
contingency measures prior to designation for the 8-hour NAAQS for the
area, they may remain as contingency measures, unless the measures are
required to be implemented by the CAA by virtue of the area's
requirements under the 8-hour NAAQS. The State may not remove such
measures from the SIP.
(3) 8-Hour NAAQS Attainment/1-Hour NAAQS Nonattainment--(i)
Obligations in an approved SIP. For an area that is 8-hour NAAQS
attainment/1-hour NAAQS nonattainment, the State may request that
obligations under the applicable requirements of Sec. 51.900(f) be
shifted to contingency measures, consistent with sections 110(l) and 193
of the CAA, after revocation of the 1-hour NAAQS; however, the State
cannot remove the obligations from the SIP. For such areas, the State
may request that the nonattainment NSR provisions be removed from the
SIP on or after the date of revocation of the 1-hour NAAQS and need not
be shifted to contingency measures subject to paragraph (e)(4) of this
section.
(ii) Attainment demonstration and ROP plans. (A) To the extent an 8-
hour NAAQS attainment/1-hour NAAQS nonattainment area does not have an
approved attainment demonstration or ROP plan that was required for the
1-hour NAAQS under the CAA, the obligation to submit such an attainment
demonstration or ROP plan
(1) Is deferred for so long as the area continues to maintain the 8-
hour NAAQS; and
(2) No longer applies once the area has an approved maintenance plan
pursuant to paragraph (a)(3)(iii) of this section.
(B) For an 8-hour NAAQS attainment/1-hour NAAQS nonattainment area
that violates the 8-hour NAAQS, prior to having an approved maintenance
plan for the 8-hour NAAQS as provided under paragraph (a)(3)(iii) of
this section, paragraphs (a)(3)(ii)(B)(1), (2), and (3) of this section
shall apply.
(1) In lieu of any outstanding obligation to submit an attainment
demonstration, within 1 year after the date on which EPA publishes a
determination that a violation of the 8-hour NAAQS has occurred, the
State must submit (or revise a submitted) maintenance plan for the 8-
hour NAAQS, as provided under paragraph (a)(3)(iii) of this section,
to--
(i) Address the violation by relying on modeling that meets EPA
guidance for purposes of demonstrating maintenance of the NAAQS; or
(ii) Submit a SIP providing for a 3 percent increment of emissions
reductions from the area's 2002 emissions baseline; these reductions
must be in addition to measures (or enforceable commitments to measures)
in the SIP
[[Page 360]]
at the time of the effective date of designation and in addition to
national or regional measures.
(2) The plan required under paragraph (a)(3)(ii)(B)(1) of this
section must provide for the emission reductions required within 3 years
after the date on which EPA publishes a determination that a violation
of the 8-hour NAAQS has occurred.
(3) The State shall submit an ROP plan to achieve any outstanding
ROP reductions that were required for the area for the 1-hour NAAQS, and
the 3-year period or periods for achieving the ROP reductions will begin
January 1 of the year following the 3-year period on which EPA bases its
determination that a violation of the 8-hour NAAQS occurred.
(iii) Maintenance plans for the 8-hour NAAQS. For areas initially
designated attainment for the 8-hour NAAQS, and designated nonattainment
for the 1-hour NAAQS at the time of designation for the 8-hour NAAQS,
the State shall submit no later than 3 years after the area's
designation for the 8-hour NAAQS, a maintenance plan for the 8-hour
NAAQS in accordance with section 110(a)(1) of the CAA. The maintenance
plan must provide for continued maintenance of the 8-hour NAAQS for 10
years following designation and must include contingency measures. This
provision does not apply to areas redesignated from nonattainment to
attainment for the 8-hour NAAQS pursuant to CAA section 107(d)(3); such
areas are subject to the maintenance plan requirement in section 175A of
the CAA.
(4) 8-Hour NAAQS Attainment/1-Hour NAAQS Maintenance--(i)
Obligations in an approved SIP. For an 8-hour NAAQS attainment/1-hour
NAAQS maintenance area, the State may request that obligations under the
applicable requirements of Sec. 51.900(f) be shifted to contingency
measures, consistent with sections 110(l) and 193 of the CAA, after
revocation of the 1-hour NAAQS; however, the State cannot remove the
obligations from the SIP.
(ii) Maintenance Plans for the 8-hour NAAQS. For areas initially
designated attainment for the 8-hour NAAQS and subject to the
maintenance plan for the 1-hour NAAQS at the time of designation for the
8-hour NAAQS, the State shall submit no later than 3 years after the
area's designation for the 8-hour NAAQS, a maintenance plan for the 8-
hour NAAQS in accordance with section 110(a)(1) of the CAA. The
maintenance plan must provide for continued maintenance of the 8-hour
NAAQS for 10 years following designation and must include contingency
measures. This provision does not apply to areas redesignated from
nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour NAAQS pursuant to section
107(d)(3); such areas are subject to the maintenance plan requirement in
section 175A of the CAA.
(b) Does attainment of the ozone NAAQS affect the obligations under
paragraph (a) of this section? A State remains subject to the
obligations under paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and (a)(2) of this section until
the area attains the 8-hour NAAQS. After the area attains the 8-hour
NAAQS, the State may request such obligations be shifted to contingency
measures, consistent with sections 110(l) and 193 of the CAA; however,
the State cannot remove the obligations from the SIP.
(c) Which portions of an area designated for the 8-hour NAAQS remain
subject to the obligations identified in paragraph (a) of this section?
(1) Except as provided in paragraph (c)(2) of this section, only the
portion of the designated area for the 8-hour NAAQS that was required to
adopt the applicable requirements in Sec. 51.900(f) for purposes of the
1-hour NAAQS is subject to the obligations identified in paragraph (a)
of this section, including the requirement to submit a maintenance plan
for purposes of paragraph (a)(3)(iii) of this section. 40 CFR Part 81,
Subpart E identifies the boundaries of areas and the area designations
and classifications for the 1-hour NAAQS at the time the 1-hour NAAQS no
longer applied to each area.
(2) For purposes of paragraph (a)(1)(ii)(B) and (C) of this section,
the requirement to achieve emission reductions applies to the entire
area designated nonattainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
(d) [Reserved]
(e) What obligations that applied for the 1-hour NAAQS will no
longer apply after revocation of the 1-hour NAAQS for
[[Page 361]]
an area?--(1) Maintenance plans. Upon revocation of the 1-hour NAAQS, an
area with an approved 1-hour maintenance plan under section 175A of the
CAA may modify the maintenance plan: To remove the obligation to submit
a maintenance plan for the 1-hour NAAQS 8 years after approval of the
initial 1-hour maintenance plan; and to remove the obligation to
implement contingency measures upon a violation of the 1-hour NAAQS.
However, such requirements will remain enforceable as part of the
approved SIP until such time as EPA approves a SIP revision removing
such obligations. The EPA shall not approve a SIP revision requesting
these modifications until the State submits and EPA approves an
attainment demonstration for the 8-hour NAAQS for an area initially
designated nonattainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS or a maintenance SIP
for the 8-hour NAAQS for an area initially designated attainment for the
8-hour NAAQS. Any revision to such SIP must meet the requirements of
section 110(l) and 193 of the CAA.
(2) Findings of failure to attain the 1-hour NAAQS. (i) Upon
revocation of the 1-hour NAAQS for an area, EPA is no longer obligated--
(A) To determine pursuant to section 181(b)(2) or section 179(c) of
the CAA whether an area attained the 1-hour NAAQS by that area's
attainment date for the 1-hour NAAQS; or
(B) To reclassify an area to a higher classification for the 1-hour
NAAQS based upon a determination that the area failed to attain the 1-
hour NAAQS by the area's attainment date for the 1-hour NAAQS.
(ii) In addition, the State is no longer required to impose under
CAA sections 181(b)(4) and 185 fees on emissions sources in areas
classified as severe or extreme for failure to meet the 1-hour
attainment date.
(3) Conformity determinations for the 1-hour NAAQS. Upon revocation
of the 1-hour NAAQS for an area, conformity determinations pursuant to
section 176(c) of the CAA are no longer required for the 1-hour NAAQS.
At that time, any provisions of applicable SIPs that require conformity
determinations in such areas for the 1-hour NAAQS will no longer be
enforceable pursuant to section 176(c)(5) of the CAA.
(4) Nonattainment area new source review under the 1-hour NAAQS. (i)
Upon revocation of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, for any area that was
designated nonattainment for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, the area's
implementation plan provisions satisfying sections 172(c)(5) and 173 of
the CAA (including provisions satisfying section 182) based on the
area's previous 1-hour ozone NAAQS classification are no longer required
elements of an approvable implementation plan. Instead, the area's
implementation plan must meet the requirements contained in paragraphs
(e)(4)(ii) through (e)(4)(iv) of this section.
(ii) If the area is designated nonattainment for the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, the implementation plan must include requirements to implement
the provisions of sections 172(c)(5) and 173 of the CAA based on the
area's 8-hour ozone NAAQS classification under part 81 of this chapter,
and the provisions of Sec. 51.165.
(iii) If the area is designated attainment or unclassifiable for the
8-hour ozone NAAQS, the area's implementation plan must include
provisions to implement the provisions of section 165 of the CAA, and
the provisions of Sec. 51.166 of this part, unless the provisions of
Sec. 52.21 of this chapter apply in such area.
(iv) If the area is designated attainment or unclassifiable but is
located in an Ozone Transport Region, the area's implementation plan
must include provisions to implement, consistent with the requirements
in section 184 of the CAA, the requirements of sections 172(c) and 173
of the CAA as if the area is classified as moderate nonattainment for
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
(f) What is the continued applicability of the NOX SIP
Call after revocation of the 1-hour NAAQS? The NOX SIP Call
shall continue to apply after revocation of the 1-hour NAAQS. Control
obligations approved into the SIP pursuant to 40 CFR 51.121 and 51.122
may be modified by the State only if the requirements of Sec. Sec.
51.121 and 51.122, including the statewide NOX emission
budgets, continue to be met and the
[[Page 362]]
State makes a showing consistent with section 110(l) of the CAA.
Sec. 51.906 [Reserved]
Sec. 51.907 For an area that fails to attain the 8-hour NAAQS by its
attainment date, how does EPA interpret sections
172(a)(2)(C)(ii) and 181(a)(5)(B) of the CAA?
For purposes of applying sections 172(a)(2)(C) and 181(a)(5) of the
CAA, an area will meet the requirement of section 172(a)(2)(C)(ii) or
181(a)(5)(B) of the CAA pertaining to 1-year extensions of the
attainment date if:
(a) For the first 1-year extension, the area's 4th highest daily 8-
hour average in the attainment year is 0.084 ppm or less.
(b) For the second 1-year extension, the area's 4th highest daily 8-
hour value, averaged over both the original attainment year and the
first extension year, is 0.084 ppm or less.
(c) For purposes of paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section, the
area's 4th highest daily 8-hour average shall be from the monitor with
the highest 4th highest daily 8-hour average of all the monitors that
represent that area.
Sec. 51.908 What is the required timeframe for obtaining emission
reductions to ensure attainment by the attainment date?
For each nonattainment area, the State must provide for
implementation of all control measures needed for attainment no later
than the beginning of the attainment year ozone season.
Sec. Sec. 51.909-51.916 [Reserved]
Appendixes A-K to Part 51 [Reserved]
Appendix L to Part 51--Example Regulations for Prevention of Air
Pollution Emergency Episodes
The example regulations presented herein reflect generally
recognized ways of preventing air pollution from reaching levels that
would cause imminent and substantial endangerment to the health of
persons. States are required under subpart H to have emergency episodes
plans but they are not required to adopt the regulations presented
herein.
1.0 Air pollution emergency. This regulation is designed to prevent
the excessive buildup of air pollutants during air pollution episodes,
thereby preventing the occurrence of an emergency due to the effects of
these pollutants on the health of persons.
1.1 Episode criteria. Conditions justifying the proclamation of an
air pollution alert, air pollution warning, or air pollution emergency
shall be deemed to exist whenever the Director determines that the
accumulation of air pollutants in any place is attaining or has attained
levels which could, if such levels are sustained or exceeded, lead to a
substantial threat to the health of persons. In making this
determination, the Director will be guided by the following criteria:
(a) Air Pollution Forecast: An internal watch by the Department of
Air Pollution Control shall be actuated by a National Weather Service
advisory that Atmospheric Stagnation Advisory is in effect or the
equivalent local forecast of stagnant atmospheric condition.
(b) Alert: The Alert level is that concentration of pollutants at
which first stage control actions is to begin. An Alert will be declared
when any one of the following levels is reached at any monitoring site:
SO2--800 [mu]g/m 3 (0.3 p.p.m.), 24-hour average.
PM10--350 [mu]g/m\3\, 24-hour average.
CO--17 mg/m 3 (15 p.p.m.), 8-hour average.
Ozone (O2)=400 [mu]g/m 3 (0.2 ppm)-hour average.
NO2-1130 [mu]g/m 3 (0.6 p.p.m.), 1-hour average,
282 [mu]g/m 3 (0.15 p.p.m.), 24-hour average.
In addition to the levels listed for the above pollutants,
meterological conditions are such that pollutant concentrations can be
expected to remain at the above levels for twelve (12) or more hours or
increase, or in the case of ozone, the situation is likely to reoccur
within the next 24-hours unless control actions are taken.
(c) Warning: The warning level indicates that air quality is
continuing to degrade and that additional control actions are necessary.
A warning will be declared when any one of the following levels is
reached at any monitoring site:
SO2--1,600 [mu]g/m 3 (0.6 p.p.m.), 24-hour
average.
PM10--420 [mu]g/m\3\, 24-hour average.
CO--34 mg/m 3 (30 p.p.m.), 8-hour average.
Ozone (O3)--800 [mu]g/m 3 (0.4 p.p.m.), 1-hour
average.
NO2--2,260 [mu]g/m 3 (1.2 ppm)--1-hour average;
565[mu]g/m 3 (0.3 ppm), 24-hour average.
In addition to the levels listed for the above pollutants,
meterological conditions are such that pollutant concentrations can be
expected to remain at the above levels for twelve (12) or more hours or
increase, or in the case of ozone, the situation is likely to reoccur
within the next 24-hours unless control actions are taken.
(d) Emergency: The emergency level indicates that air quality is
continuing to degrade toward a level of significant harm to the health
of persons and that the most
[[Page 363]]
stringent control actions are necessary. An emergency will be declared
when any one of the following levels is reached at any monitoring site:
SO2--2,100 [mu]g/m 3 (0.8 p.p.m.), 24-hour
average.
PM10--500 [mu]g/m\3\, 24-hour average.
CO--46 mg/m 3 (40 p.p.m.), 8-hour average.
Ozone (O3)--1,000 [mu]g/m 3 (0.5 p.p.m.), 1-hour
average.
NO2-3,000 [mu]g/m 3 (1.6 ppm), 1-hour average; 750
[mu]g/m 3 (0.4 ppm), 24-hour average.
In addition to the levels listed for the above pollutants,
meterological conditions are such that pollutant concentrations can be
expected to remain at the above levels for twelve (12) or more hours or
increase, or in the case of ozone, the situation is likely to reoccur
within the next 24-hours unless control actions are taken.
(e) Termination: Once declared, any status reached by application of
these criteria will remain in effect until the criteria for that level
are no longer met. At such time, the next lower status will be assumed.
1.2 Emission reduction plans. (a) Air Pollution Alert--When the
Director declares an Air Pollution Alert, any person responsible for the
operation of a source of air pollutants as set forth in Table I shall
take all Air Pollution Alert actions as required for such source of air
pollutants and shall put into effect the preplanned abatement strategy
for an Air Pollution Alert.
(b) Air Pollution Warning--When the Director declares an Air
Pollution Warning, any person responsible for the operation of a source
of air pollutants as set forth in Table II shall take all Air Pollution
Warning actions as required for such source of air pollutants and shall
put into effect the preplanned abatement strategy for an Air Pollution
Warning.
(c) Air Pollution Emergency--When the Director declares an Air
Pollution Emergency, any person responsible for the operation of a
source of air pollutants as described in Table III shall take all Air
Pollution Emergency actions as required for such source of air
pollutants and shall put into effect the preplanned abatement strategy
for an Air Pollution Emergency.
(d) When the Director determines that a specified criteria level has
been reached at one or more monitoring sites solely because of emissions
from a limited number of sources, he shall notify such source(s) that
the preplanned abatement strategies of Tables I, II, and III or the
standby plans are required, insofar as it applies to such source(s), and
shall be put into effect until the criteria of the specified level are
no longer met.
1.3 Preplanned abatement strategies, (a) Any person responsible for
the operation of a source of air pollutants as set forth in Tables I-III
shall prepare standby plans for reducing the emission of air pollutants
during periods of an Air Pollution Alert, Air Pollution Warning, and Air
Pollution Emergency. Standby plans shall be designed to reduce or
eliminate emissions of air pollutants in accordance with the objectives
set forth in Tables I-III which are made a part of this section.
(b) Any person responsible for the operation of a source of air
pollutants not set forth under section 1.3(a) shall, when requested by
the Director in writing, prepare standby plans for reducing the emission
of air pollutants during periods of an Air Pollution Alert, Air
Pollution Warning, and Air Pollution Emergency. Standby plans shall be
designed to reduce or eliminate emissions of air pollutants in
accordance with the objectives set forth in Tables I-III.
(c) Standby plans as required under section 1.3(a) and (b) shall be
in writing and identify the sources of air pollutants, the approximate
amount of reduction of pollutants and a brief description of the manner
in which the reduction will be achieved during an Air Pollution Alert,
Air Pollution Warning, and Air Pollution Emergency.
(d) During a condition of Air Pollution Alert, Air Pollution
Warning, and Air Pollution Emergency, standby plans as required by this
section shall be made available on the premises to any person authorized
to enforce the provisions of applicable rules and regulations.
(e) Standby plans as required by this section shall be submitted to
the Director upon request within thirty (30) days of the receipt of such
request; such standby plans shall be subject to review and approval by
the Director. If, in the opinion of the Director, a standby plan does
not effectively carry out the objectives as set forth in Table I-III,
the Director may disapprove it, state his reason for disapproval and
order the preparation of an amended standby plan within the time period
specified in the order.
Table I--Abatement Strategies Emission Reduction Plans alert level
Part A. General
1. There shall be no open burning by any persons of tree waste,
vegetation, refuse, or debris in any form.
2. The use of incinerators for the disposal of any form of solid
waste shall be limited to the hours between 12 noon and 4 p.m.
3. Persons operating fuel-burning equipment which required boiler
lancing or soot blowing shall perform such operations only between the
hours of 12 noon and 4 p.m.
4. Persons operating motor vehicles should eliminate all unnecessary
operations.
Part B. Source curtailment
Any person responsible for the operation of a source of air
pollutants listed below shall
[[Page 364]]
take all required control actions for this Alert Level.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source of air pollution Control action
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Coal or oil-fired electric a. Substantial reduction by
power generating facilities. utilization of fuels having low ash
and sulfur content.
b. Maximum utilization of mid-day
(12 noon to 4 p.m.) atmospheric
turbulence for boiler lancing and
soot blowing.
c. Substantial reduction by
diverting electric power generation
to facilities outside of Alert
Area.
2. Coal and oil-fired process a. Substantial reduction by
steam generating facilities. utilization of fuels having low ash
and sulfur content.
b. Maximum utilization of mid-day
(12 noon to 4 p.m.) atmospheric
turbulence for boiler lancing and
soot blowing.
c. Substantial reduction of steam
load demands consistent with
continuing plant operations.
3. Manufacturing industries of the a. Substantial reduction of air
following classifications: pollutants from manufacturing
Primary Metals Industry. operations by curtailing,
Petroleum Refining Operations. postponing, or deferring production
Chemical Industries. and all operations.
Mineral Processing Industries. b. Maximum reduction by deferring
Paper and Allied Products. trade waste disposal operations
Grain Industry. which emit solid particles, gas
vapors or malodorous substances.
c. Maximum reduction of heat load
demands for processing.
d. Maximum utilization of mid-day
(12 noon to 4 p.m.) atmospheric
turbulence for boiler lancing and
soot blowing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table II--Emission Reduction Plans
warning level
Part A. General
1. There shall be no open burning by any persons of tree waste,
vegetation, refuse, or debris in any form.
2. The use of incinerators for the disposal of any form of solid
waste or liquid waste shall be prohibited.
3. Persons operating fuel-burning equipment which requires boiler
lancing or soot blowing shall perform such operations only between the
hours of 12 noon and 4 p.m.
4. Persons operating motor vehicles must reduce operations by the
use of car pools and increased use of public transportation and
elimination of unnecessary operation.
Part B. Source curtailment
Any person responsible for the operation of a source of air
pollutants listed below shall take all required control actions for this
Warning Level.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source of air pollution Control action
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Coal or oil-fired process steam a. Maximum reduction by utilization
generating facilities. of fuels having lowest ash and
sulfur content.
b. Maximum utilization of mid-day
(12 noon to 4 p.m.) atmospheric
turbulence for boiler lancing and
soot blowing.
c. Maximum reduction by diverting
electric power generation to
facilities outside of Warning Area.
2. Oil and oil-fired process steam a. Maximum reduction by utilization
generating facilities. of fuels having the lowest
available ash and sulfur content.
b. Maximum utilization of mid-day
(12 noon to 4 p.m.) atmospheric
turbulence for boiler lancing and
soot blowing.
c. Making ready for use a plan of
action to be taken if an emergency
develops.
[[Page 365]]
3. Manufacturing industries which a. Maximum reduction of air
require considerable lead time contaminants from manufacturing
for shut-down including the operations by, if necessary,
following classifications: assuming reasonable economic
Petroleum Refining. hardships by postponing production
Chemical Industries. and allied operation.
Primary Metals Industries. b. Maximum reduction by deferring
Glass Industries. trade waste disposal operations
Paper and Allied Products. which emit solid particles, gases,
vapors or malodorous substances.
c. Maximum reduction of heat load
demands for processing.
d. Maximum utilization of mid-day
(12 noon to 4 p.m.) atmospheric
turbulence for boiler lancing or
soot blowing.
4. Manufacturing industries a. Elimination of air pollutants
require relatively short lead from manufacturing operations by
times for shut-down including the ceasing, curtailing, postponing or
following classifications: deferring production and allied
Primary Metals Industries. operations to the extent possible
Chemical Industries. without causing injury to persons
Mineral Processing Industries. or damage to equipment.
Grain Industry. b. Elimination of air pollutants
from trade waste disposal processes
which emit solid particles, gases,
vapors or malodorous substances.
c. Maximum reduction of heat load
demands for processing.
d. Maximum utilization of mid-day
(12 noon to 4 p.m.) atmospheric
turbulence for boiler lancing or
soot blowing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table III--Emission Reduction Plans
emergency level
Part A. General
1. There shall be no open burning by any persons of tree waste,
vegetation, refuse, or debris in any form.
2. The use of incinerators for the disposal of any form of solid or
liquid waste shall be prohibited.
3. All places of employment described below shall immediately cease
operations.
a. Mining and quarrying of nonmetallic minerals.
b. All construction work except that which must proceed to avoid
emergent physical harm.
c. All manufacturing establishments except those required to have in
force an air pollution emergency plan.
d. All wholesale trade establishments; i.e., places of business
primarily engaged in selling merchandise to retailers, or industrial,
commercial, institutional or professional users, or to other
wholesalers, or acting as agents in buying merchandise for or selling
merchandise to such persons or companies, except those engaged in the
distribution of drugs, surgical supplies and food.
e. All offices of local, county and State government including
authorities, joint meetings, and other public bodies excepting such
agencies which are determined by the chief administrative officer of
local, county, or State government, authorities, joint meetings and
other public bodies to be vital for public safety and welfare and the
enforcement of the provisions of this order.
f. All retail trade establishments except pharmacies, surgical
supply distributors, and stores primarily engaged in the sale of food.
g. Banks, credit agencies other than banks, securities and
commodities brokers, dealers, exchanges and services; offices of
insurance carriers, agents and brokers, real estate offices.
h. Wholesale and retail laundries, laundry services and cleaning and
dyeing establishments; photographic studios; beauty shops, barber shops,
shoe repair shops.
i. Advertising offices; consumer credit reporting, adjustment and
collection agencies; duplicating, addressing, blueprinting;
photocopying, mailing, mailing list and stenographic services; equipment
rental services, commercial testing laboratories.
j. Automobile repair, automobile services, garages.
k. Establishments rendering amusement and recreational services
including motion picture theaters.
l. Elementary and secondary schools, colleges, universities,
professional schools, junior colleges, vocational schools, and public
and private libraries.
4. All commercial and manufacturing establishments not included in
this order will institute such actions as will result in maximum
reduction of air pollutants from their operation by ceasing, curtailing,
or postponing operations which emit air pollutants to the extent
possible without causing injury to persons or damage to equipment.
5. The use of motor vehicles is prohibited except in emergencies
with the approval of local or State police.
Part B. Source curtailment
Any person responsible for the operation of a source of air
pollutants listed below shall take all required control actions for this
Emergency Level.
[[Page 366]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source of air pollution Control action
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Coal or oil-fired electric a. Maximum reduction by utilization
power generating facilities. of fuels having lowest ash and
sulfur content.
b. Maximum utilization of mid-day
(12 noon to 4 p.m.) atmospheric
turbulence for boiler lancing or
soot blowing.
c. Maximum reduction by diverting
electric power generation to
facilities outside of Emergency
Area.
2. Coal and oil-fired process a. Maximum reduction by reducing
steam generating facilities. heat and steam demands to absolute
necessities consistent with
preventing equipment damage.
b. Maximum utilization of mid-day
(12 noon to 4 p.m.) atmospheric
turbulence for boiler lancing and
soot blowing.
c. Taking the action called for in
the emergency plan.
3. Manufacturing industries of the a. Elimination of air pollutants
following classifications: from manufacturing operations by
Primary Metals Industries. ceasing, curtailing, postponing or
Petroleum Refining. deferring production and allied
Chemical Industries. operations to the extent possible
Mineral Processing Industries. without causing injury to persons
Grain Industry. or damage to equipment.
Paper and Allied Products. b. Elimination of air pollutants
from trade waste disposal processes
which emit solid particles, gases,
vapors or malodorous substances.
c. Maximum reduction of heat load
demands for processing.
d. Maximum utilization of mid-day
(12 noon to 4 p.m.) atmospheric
turbulence for boiler lancing or
soot blowing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Secs. 110, 301(a), 313, 319, Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7410, 7601(a),
7613, 7619))
[36 FR 22398, Nov. 25, 1971; 36 FR 24002, Dec. 17, 1971, as amended at
37 FR 26312, Dec. 9, 1972; 40 FR 36333, Aug. 20, 1975; 41 FR 35676, Aug.
24, 1976; 44 FR 27570, May 10, 1979; 51 FR 40675, Nov. 7, 1986; 52 FR
24714, July 1, 1987]
Appendix M to Part 51--Recommended Test Methods for State Implementation
Plans
Method 201--Determination of PM10 Emissions (Exhaust Gas
Recycle Procedure).
Method 201A--Determination of PM10 Emissions (Constant
Sampling Rate Procedure).
Method 202--Determination of Condensible Particulate Emissions From
Stationary Sources
Method 204--Criteria for and Verification of a Permanent or Temporary
Total Enclosure.
Method 204A--Volatile Organic Compounds Content in Liquid Input Stream.
Method 204B--Volatile Organic Compounds Emissions in Captured Stream.
Method 204C--Volatile Organic Compounds Emissions in Captured Stream
(Dilution Technique).
Method 204D--Volatile Organic Compounds Emissions in Uncaptured Stream
from Temporary Total Enclosure.
Method 204E--Volatile Organic Compounds Emissions in Uncaptured Stream
from Building Enclosure.
Method 204F--Volatile Organic Compounds Content in Liquid Input Stream
(Distillation Approach).
Method 205--Verification of Gas Dilution Systems for Field Instrument
Calibrations
Presented herein are recommended test methods for measuring air
pollu tant emana ting from an emission source. They are provided for
States to use in their plans to meet the requirements of subpart K--
Source Surveillance.
The State may also choose to adopt other methods to meet the
requirements of subpart K of this part, subject to the normal plan
review process.
The State may also meet the requirements of subpart K of this part
by adopting, again subject to the normal plan review process, any of the
relevant methods in appendix A to 40 CFR part 60.
Method 201--Determination of PM10 Emissions
(exhaust gas recycle procedure)
1. Applicability and Principle
1.1 Applicability. This method applies to the in-stack measurement
of particulate matter (PM) emissions equal to or less than an
aerodynamic diameter of nominally 10 [mu]m (PM10) from
stationary sources. The EPA recognizes that condensible emissions not
collected by an in-stack method are also PM10, and that
emissions that contribute to ambient PM10 levels are the sum
of condensible emissions and emissions measured by an in-stack
PM10 method, such as this method or Method 201A. Therefore,
for establishing source contributions to ambient levels of
PM10, such as for emission inventory purposes, EPA suggests
that source PM10 measurement include both in-stack
PM10 and condensible emissions. Condensible missions may be
measured by an impinger analysis in combination with this method.
[[Page 367]]
1.2 Principle. A gas sample is isokinetically extracted from the
source. An in-stack cyclone is used to separate PM greater than
PM10, and an in-stack glass fiber filter is used to collect
the PM10. To maintain isokinetic flow rate conditions at the
tip of the probe and a constant flow rate through the cyclone, a clean,
dried portion of the sample gas at stack temperature is recycled into
the nozzle. The particulate mass is determined gravimetrically after
removal of uncombined water.
2. Apparatus
Note: Method 5 as cited in this method refers to the method in 40
CFR part 60, appendix A.
2.1 Sampling Train. A schematic of the exhaust of the exhaust gas
recycle (EGR) train is shown in Figure 1 of this method.
2.1.1 Nozzle with Recycle Attachment. Stainless steel (316 or
equivalent) with a sharp tapered leading edge, and recycle attachment
welded directly on the side of the nozzle (see schematic in Figure 2 of
this method). The angle of the taper shall be on the outside. Use only
straight sampling nozzles. ``Gooseneck'' or other nozzle extensions
designed to turn the sample gas flow 90[deg], as in Method 5 are not
acceptable. Locate a thermocouple in the recycle attachment to measure
the temperature of the recycle gas as shown in Figure 3 of this method.
The recycle attachment shall be made of stainless steel and shall be
connected to the probe and nozzle with stainless steel fittings. Two
nozzle sizes, e.g., 0.125 and 0.160 in., should be available to allow
isokinetic sampling to be conducted over a range of flow rates.
Calibrate each nozzle as described in Method 5, Section 5.1.
2.1.2 PM10 Sizer. Cyclone, meeting the specifications in
Section 5.7 of this method.
2.1.3 Filter Holder. 63mm, stainless steel. An Andersen filter, part
number SE274, has been found to be acceptable for the in-stack filter.
Note: Mention of trade names or specific products does not
constitute endorsement by the Environmental Protection Agency.
2.1.4 Pitot Tube. Same as in Method 5, Section 2.1.3. Attach the
pitot to the pitot lines with stainless steel fittings and to the
cyclone in a configuration similar to that shown in Figure 3 of this
method. The pitot lines shall be made of heat resistant material and
attached to the probe with stainless steel fittings.
2.1.5 EGR Probe. Stainless steel, 15.9-mm (\5/8\-in.) ID tubing with
a probe liner, stainless steel 9.53-mm (\3/8\-in.) ID stainless steel
recycle tubing, two 6.35-mm (\1/4\-in.) ID stainless steel tubing for
the pitot tube extensions, three thermocouple leads, and one power lead,
all contained by stainless steel tubing with a diameter of approximately
51 mm (2.0 in.). Design considerations should include minimum weight
construction materials sufficient for probe structural strength. Wrap
the sample and recycle tubes with a heating tape to heat the sample and
recycle gases to stack temperature.
2.1.6 Condenser. Same as in Method 5, Section 2.1.7.
2.1.7 Umbilical Connector. Flexible tubing with thermocouple and
power leads of sufficient length to connect probe to meter and flow
control console.
2.1.8 Vacuum Pump. Leak-tight, oil-less, noncontaminating, with an
absolute filter, ``HEPA'' type, at the pump exit. A Gast Model 0522-V103
G18DX pump has been found to be satisfactory.
2.1.9 Meter and Flow Control Console. System consisting of a dry gas
meter and calibrated orifice for measuring sample flow rate and capable
of measuring volume to 2 percent, calibrated
laminar flow elements (LFE's) or equivalent for measuring total and
sample flow rates, probe heater control, and manometers and magnehelic
gauges (as shown in Figures 4 and 5 of this method), or equivalent.
Temperatures needed for calculations include stack, recycle, probe, dry
gas meter, filter, and total flow. Flow measurements include velocity
head ([Delta]p), orifice differential pressure ([Delta]H), total flow,
recycle flow, and total back-pressure through the system.
2.1.10 Barometer. Same as in Method 5, Section 2.1.9.
2.1.11 Rubber Tubing. 6.35-mm (\1/4\-in.) ID flexible rubber tubing.
2.2 Sample Recovery.
2.2.1 Nozzle, Cyclone, and Filter Holder Brushes. Nylon bristle
brushes property sized and shaped for cleaning the nozzle, cyclone,
filter holder, and probe or probe liner, with stainless steel wire
shafts and handles.
2.2.2 Wash Bottles, Glass Sample Storage Containers, Petri Dishes,
Graduated Cylinder and Balance, Plastic Storage Containers, and Funnels.
Same as Method 5, Sections 2.2.2 through 2.2.6 and 2.2.8, respectively.
2.3 Analysis. Same as in Method 5, Section 2.3.
3. Reagents
The reagents used in sampling, sample recovery, and analysis are the
same as that specified in Method 5, Sections 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3,
respectively.
4. Procedure
4.1 Sampling. The complexity of this method is such that, in order
to obtain reliable results, testers should be trained and experienced
with the test procedures.
4.1.1 Pretest Preparation. Same as in Method 5, Section 4.1.1.
4.1.2 Preliminary Determinations. Same as Method 5, Section 4.1.2,
except use the directions on nozzle size selection in this section.
[[Page 368]]
Use of the EGR method may require a minimum sampling port diameter of
0.2 m (6 in.). Also, the required maximum number of sample traverse
points at any location shall be 12.
4.1.2.1 The cyclone and filter holder must be in-stack or at stack
temperature during sampling. The blockage effects of the EGR sampling
assembly will be minimal if the cross-sectional area of the sampling
assembly is 3 percent or less of the cross-sectional area of the duct
and a pitot coefficient of 0.84 may be assigned to the pitot. If the
cross-sectional area of the assembly is greater than 3 percent of the
cross-sectional area of the duct, then either determine the pitot
coefficient at sampling conditions or use a standard pitot with a known
coefficient in a configuration with the EGR sampling assembly such that
flow disturbances are minimized.
4.1.2.2 Construct a setup of pressure drops for various [Delta]p's
and temperatures. A computer is useful for these calculations. An
example of the output of the EGR setup program is shown in Figure 6 of
this method, and directions on its use are in section 4.1.5.2 of this
method. Computer programs, written in IBM BASIC computer language, to do
these types of setup and reduction calculations for the EGR procedure,
are available through the National Technical Information Services
(NTIS), Accession number PB90-500000, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield,
VA 22161.
4.1.2.3 The EGR setup program allows the tester to select the nozzle
size based on anticipated average stack conditions and prints a setup
sheet for field use. The amount of recycle through the nozzle should be
between 10 and 80 percent. Inputs for the EGR setup program are stack
temperature (minimum, maximum, and average), stack velocity (minimum,
maximum, and average), atmospheric pressure, stack static pressure,
meter box temperature, stack moisture, percent 02, and
percent CO2 in the stack gas, pitot coefficient
(Cp), orifice [Delta] H@, flow rate measurement
calibration values [slope (m) and y-intercept (b) of the calibration
curve], and the number of nozzles available and their diameters.
4.1.2.4 A less rigorous calculation for the setup sheet can be done
manually using the equations on the example worksheets in Figures 7, 8,
and 9 of this method, or by a Hewlett-Packard HP41 calculator using the
program provided in appendix D of the EGR operators manual, entitled
Applications Guide for Source PM10 Exhaust Gas Recycle
Sampling System. This calculation uses an approximation of the total
flow rate and agrees within 1 percent of the exact solution for pressure
drops at stack temperatures from 38 to 260 [deg]C (100 to 500 [deg]F)
and stack moisture up to 50 percent. Also, the example worksheets use a
constant stack temperature in the calculation, ingoring the complicated
temperature dependence from all three pressure drop equations. Errors
for this at stack temperatures 28 [deg]C (50 [deg]F) of the temperature used in the setup
calculations are within 5 percent for flow rate and within 5 percent for
cyclone cut size.
4.1.2.5 The pressure upstream of the LFE's is assumed to be constant
at 0.6 in. Hg in the EGR setup calculations.
4.1.2.6 The setup sheet constructed using this procedure shall be
similar to Figure 6 of this method. Inputs needed for the calculation
are the same as for the setup computer except that stack velocities are
not needed.
4.1.3 Preparation of Collection Train. Same as in Method 5, Section
4.1.3, except use the following directions to set up the train.
4.1.3.1 Assemble the EGR sampling device, and attach it to probe as
shown in Figure 3 of this method. If stack temperatures exceed 260
[deg]C (500 [deg]F), then assemble the EGR cyclone without the O-ring
and reduce the vacuum requirement to 130 mm Hg (5.0 in. Hg) in the leak-
check procedure in Section 4.1.4.3.2 of this method.
4.1.3.2 Connect the proble directly to the filter holder and
condenser as in Method 5. Connect the condenser and probe to the meter
and flow control console with the umbilical connector. Plug in the pump
and attach pump lines to the meter and flow control console.
4.1.4 Leak-Check Procedure. The leak-check for the EGR Method
consists of two parts: the sample-side and the recycle-side. The sample-
side leak-check is required at the beginning of the run with the cyclone
attached, and after the run with the cyclone removed. The cyclone is
removed before the post-test leak-check to prevent any disturbance of
the collected sample prior to analysis. The recycle-side leak-check
tests the leak tight integrity of the recycle components and is required
prior to the first test run and after each shipment.
4.1.4.1 Pretest Leak-Check. A pretest leak-check of the entire
sample-side, including the cyclone and nozzle, is required. Use the
leak-check procedure in Section 4.1.4.3 of this method to conduct a
pretest leak-check.
4.1.4.2 Leak-Checks During Sample Run. Same as in Method 5, Section
4.1.4.1.
4.1.4.3 Post-Test Leak-Check. A leak-check is required at the
conclusion of each sampling run. Remove the cyclone before the leak-
check to prevent the vacuum created by the cooling of the probe from
disturbing the collected sample and use the following procedure to
conduct a post-test leak-check.
4.1.4.3.1 The sample-side leak-check is performed as follows: After
removing the cyclone, seal the probe with a leak-tight stopper. Before
starting pump, close the coarse total valve and both recycle valves, and
open completely the sample back pressure valve and the fine total valve.
After turning the
[[Page 369]]
pump on, partially open the coarse total valve slowly to prevent a surge
in the manometer. Adjust the vacuum to at least 381 mm Hg (15.0 in. Hg)
with the fine total valve. If the desired vacuum is exceeded, either
leak-check at this higher vacuum or end the leak-check as shown below
and start over.
Caution: Do not decrease the vacuum with any of the valves. This may
cause a rupture of the filter.
Note: A lower vacuum may be used, provided that it is not exceeded
during the test.
4.1.4.3.2 Leak rates in excess of 0.00057 m\3\/min (0.020 ft\3\/min)
are unacceptable. If the leak rate is too high, void the sampling run.
4.1.4.3.3 To complete the leak-check, slowly remove the stopper from
the nozzle until the vacuum is near zero, then immediately turn off the
pump. This procedure sequence prevents a pressure surge in the manometer
fluid and rupture of the filter.
4.1.4.3.4 The recycle-side leak-check is performed as follows: Close
the coarse and fine total valves and sample back pressure valve. Plug
the sample inlet at the meter box. Turn on the power and the pump, close
the recycle valves, and open the total flow valves. Adjust the total
flow fine adjust valve until a vacuum of 25 inches of mercury is
achieved. If the desired vacuum is exceeded, either leak-check at this
higher vacuum, or end the leak-check and start over. Minimum acceptable
leak rates are the same as for the sample-side. If the leak rate is too
high, void the sampling run.
4.1.5 EGR Train Operation. Same as in Method 5, Section 4.1.5,
except omit references to nomographs and recommendations about changing
the filter assembly during a run.
4.1.5.1 Record the data required on a data sheet such as the one
shown in Figure 10 of this method. Make periodic checks of the manometer
level and zero to ensure correct [Delta]H and [Delta]p values. An
acceptable procedure for checking the zero is to equalize the pressure
at both ends of the manometer by pulling off the tubing, allowing the
fluid to equilibrate and, if necessary, to re-zero. Maintain the probe
temperature to within 11 [deg]C (20 [deg]F) of stack temperature.
4.1.5.2 The procedure for using the example EGR setup sheet is as
follows: Obtain a stack velocity reading from the pitot manometer
([Delta]p), and find this value on the ordinate axis of the setup sheet.
Find the stack temperature on the abscissa. Where these two values
intersect are the differential pressures necessary to achieve
isokineticity and 10 [mu]m cut size (interpolation may be necessary).
4.1.5.3 The top three numbers are differential pressures (in.
H2 O), and the bottom number is the percent recycle at these
flow settings. Adjust the total flow rate valves, coarse and fine, to
the sample value ([Delta]H) on the setup sheet, and the recycle flow
rate valves, coarse and fine, to the recycle flow on the setup sheet.
4.1.5.4 For startup of the EGR sample train, the following procedure
is recommended. Preheat the cyclone in the stack for 30 minutes. Close
both the sample and recycle coarse valves. Open the fine total, fine
recycle, and sample back pressure valves halfway. Ensure that the nozzle
is properly aligned with the sample stream. After noting the [Delta]p
and stack temperature, select the appropriate [Delta]H and recycle from
the EGR setup sheet. Start the pump and timing device simultaneously.
Immediately open both the coarse total and the coarse recycle valves
slowly to obtain the approximate desired values. Adjust both the fine
total and the fine recycle valves to achieve more precisely the desired
values. In the EGR flow system, adjustment of either valve will result
in a change in both total and recycle flow rates, and a slight iteration
between the total and recycle valves may be necessary. Because the
sample back pressure valve controls the total flow rate through the
system, it may be necessary to adjust this valve in order to obtain the
correct flow rate.
Note: Isokinetic sampling and proper operation of the cyclone are
not achieved unless the correct [Delta]H and recycle flow rates are
maintained.
4.1.5.5 During the test run, monitor the probe and filter
temperatures periodically, and make adjustments as necessary to maintain
the desired temperatures. If the sample loading is high, the filter may
begin to blind or the cyclone may clog. The filter or the cyclone may be
replaced during the sample run. Before changing the filter or cyclone,
conduct a leak-check (Section 4.1.4.2 of this method). The total
particulate mass shall be the sum of all cyclone and the filter catch
during the run. Monitor stack temperature and [Delta]p periodically, and
make the necessary adjustments in sampling and recycle flow rates to
maintain isokinetic sampling and the proper flow rate through the
cyclone. At the end of the run, turn off the pump, close the coarse
total valve, and record the final dry gas meter reading. Remove the
probe from the stack, and conduct a post-test leak-check as outlined in
Section 4.1.4.3 of this method.
4.2 Sample Recovery. Allow the probe to cool. When the probe can be
safely handled, wipe off all external PM adhering to the outside of the
nozzle, cyclone, and nozzle attachment, and place a cap over the nozzle
to prevent losing or gaining PM. Do not cap the nozzle tip tightly while
the sampling train is cooling, as this action would create a vacuum in
the filter holder. Disconnect the probe from the umbilical connector,
and take the probe to the cleanup site. Sample recovery should be
conducted in a dry indoor area or, if outside, in an area protected from
wind
[[Page 370]]
and free of dust. Cap the ends of the impingers and carry them to the
cleanup site. Inspect the components of the train prior to and during
disassembly to note any abnormal conditions. Disconnect the pitot from
the cyclone. Remove the cyclone from the probe. Recover the sample as
follows:
4.2.1 Container Number 1 (Filter). The recovery shall be the same as
that for Container Number 1 in Method 5, Section 4.2.
4.2.2 Container Number 2 (Cyclone or Large PM Catch). The cyclone
must be disassembled and the nozzle removed in order to recover the
large PM catch. Quantitatively recover the PM from the interior surfaces
of the nozzle and the cyclone, excluding the ``turn around'' cup and the
interior surfaces of the exit tube. The recovery shall be the same as
that for Container Number 2 in Method 5, Section 4.2.
4.2.3 Container Number 3 (PM10). Quantitatively recover
the PM from all of the surfaces from cyclone exit to the front half of
the in-stack filter holder, including the ``turn around'' cup and the
interior of the exit tube. The recovery shall be the same as that for
Container Number 2 in Method 5, Section 4.2.
4.2.4 Container Number 4 (Silica Gel). Same as that for Container
Number 3 in Method 5, Section 4.2.
4.2.5 Impinger Water. Same as in Method 5, Section 4.2, under
``Impinger Water.''
4.3 Analysis. Same as in Method 5, Section 4.3, except handle EGR
Container Numbers 1 and 2 like Container Number 1 in Method 5, EGR
Container Numbers 3, 4, and 5 like Container Number 3 in Method 5, and
EGR Container Number 6 like Container Number 3 in Method 5. Use Figure
11 of this method to record the weights of PM collected.
4.4 Quality Control Procedures. Same as in Method 5, Section 4.4.
4.5 PM10 Emission Calculation and Acceptability of
Results. Use the EGR reduction program or the procedures in section 6 of
this method to calculate PM10 emissions and the criteria in
section 6.7 of this method to determine the acceptability of the
results.
5. Calibration
Maintain an accurate laboratory log of all calibrations.
5.1 Probe Nozzle. Same as in Method 5, Section 5.1.
5.2 Pitot Tube. Same as in Method 5, Section 5.2.
5.3 Meter and Flow Control Console.
5.3.1 Dry Gas Meter. Same as in Method 5, Section 5.3.
5.3.2 LFE Gauges. Calibrate the recycle, total, and inlet total LFE
gauges with a manometer. Read and record flow rates at 10, 50, and 90
percent of full scale on the total and recycle pressure gauges. Read and
record flow rates at 10, 20, and 30 percent of full scale on the inlet
total LFE pressure gauge. Record the total and recycle readings to the
nearest 0.3 mm (0.01 in.). Record the inlet total LFE readings to the
nearest 3 mm (0.1 in.). Make three separate measurements at each setting
and calculate the average. The maximum difference between the average
pressure reading and the average manometer reading shall not exceed 1 mm
(0.05 in.). If the differences exceed the limit specified, adjust or
replace the pressure gauge. After each field use, check the calibration
of the pressure gauges.
5.3.3 Total LFE. Same as the metering system in Method 5, Section
5.3.
5.3.4 Recycle LFE. Same as the metering system in Method 5, Section
5.3, except completely close both the coarse and fine recycle valves.
5.4 Probe Heater. Connect the probe to the meter and flow control
console with the umbilical connector. Insert a thermocouple into the
probe sample line approximately half the length of the probe sample
line. Calibrate the probe heater at 66 [deg]C (150 [deg]F), 121 [deg]C
(250 [deg]F), and 177 [deg]C (350 [deg]F). Turn on the power, and set
the probe heater to the specified temperature. Allow the heater to
equilibrate, and record the thermocouple temperature and the meter and
flow control console temperature to the nearest 0.5 [deg]C (1 [deg]F).
The two temperatures should agree within 5.5 [deg]C (10 [deg]F). If this
agreement is not met, adjust or replace the probe heater controller.
5.5 Temperature Gauges. Connect all thermocouples, and let the meter
and flow control console equilibrate to ambient temperature. All
thermocouples shall agree to within 1.1 [deg]C (2.0 [deg]F) with a
standard mercury-in-glass thermometer. Replace defective thermocouples.
5.6 Barometer. Calibrate against a standard mercury-in-glass
barometer.
5.7 Probe Cyclone and Nozzle Combinations. The probe cyclone and
nozzle combinations need not be calibrated if the cyclone meets the
design specifications in Figure 12 of this method and the nozzle meets
the design specifications in appendix B of the Application Guide for the
Source PM 10 Exhaust Gas Recycle Sampling System, EPA/600/3-
88-058. This document may be obtained from Roy Huntley at (919) 541-
1060. If the nozzles do not meet the design specifications, then test
the cyclone and nozzle combination for conformity with the performance
specifications (PS's) in Table 1 of this method. The purpose of the PS
tests is to determine if the cyclone's sharpness of cut meets minimum
performance criteria. If the cyclone does not meet design
specifications, then, in addition to the cyclone and nozzle combination
conforming to the PS's, calibrate the cyclone and determine the
relationship between flow rate, gas viscosity, and gas density. Use the
procedures in Section 5.7.5 of this method to conduct PS tests and the
procedures in Section 5.8 of this method to calibrate the cyclone.
Conduct the PS tests in a wind tunnel
[[Page 371]]
described in Section 5.7.1 of this method and using a particle
generation system described in Section 5.7.2 of this method. Use five
particle sizes and three wind velocities as listed in Table 2 of this
method. Perform a minimum of three replicate measurements of collection
efficiency for each of the 15 conditions listed, for a minimum of 45
measurements.
5.7.1 Wind Tunnel. Perform calibration and PS tests in a wind tunnel
(or equivalent test apparatus) capable of establishing and maintaining
the required gas stream velocities within 10 percent.
5.7.2 Particle Generation System. The particle generation system
shall be capable of producing solid monodispersed dye particles with the
mass median aerodynamic diameters specified in Table 2 of this method.
The particle size distribution verification should be performed on an
integrated sample obtained during the sampling period of each test. An
acceptable alternative is to verify the size distribution of samples
obtained before and after each test, with both samples required to meet
the diameter and monodispersity requirements for an acceptable test run.
5.7.2.1 Establish the size of the solid dye particles delivered to
the test section of the wind tunnel using the operating parameters of
the particle generation system, and verify the size during the tests by
microscopic examination of samples of the particles collected on a
membrane filter. The particle size, as established by the operating
parameters of the generation system, shall be within the tolerance
specified in Table 2 of this method. The precision of the particle size
verification technique shall be at least 0.5
[mu]m, and the particle size determined by the verification technique
shall not differ by more than 10 percent from that established by the
operating parameters of the particle generation system.
5.7.2.2 Certify the monodispersity of the particles for each test
either by microscopic inspection of collected particles on filters or by
other suitable monitoring techniques such as an optical particle counter
followed by a multichannel pulse height analyzer. If the proportion of
multiplets and satellites in an aerosol exceeds 10 percent by mass, the
particle generation system is unacceptable for purposes of this test.
Multiplets are particles that are agglomerated, and satellites are
particles that are smaller than the specified size range.
5.7.3 Schematic Drawings. Schematic drawings of the wind tunnel and
blower system and other information showing complete procedural details
of the test atmosphere generation, verification, and delivery techniques
shall be furnished with calibration data to the reviewing agency.
5.7.4 Flow Rate Measurement. Determine the cyclone flow rates with a
dry gas meter and a stopwatch, or a calibrated orifice system capable of
measuring flow rates to within 2 percent.
5.7.5 Performance Specification Procedure. Establish the test
particle generator operation and verify the particle size
microscopically. If mondispersity is to be verified by measurements at
the beginning and the end of the run rather than by an integrated
sample, these measurements may be made at this time.
5.7.5.1 The cyclone cut size (D50) is defined as the
aerodynamic diameter of a particle having a 50 percent probability of
penetration. Determine the required cyclone flow rate at which
D50 is 10 [mu]m. A suggested procedure is to vary the cyclone
flow rate while keeping a constant particle size of 10 [mu]m. Measure
the PM collected in the cyclone (mc), exit tube
(mt), and filter (mf). Compute the cyclone
efficiency (Ec) as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.016
5.7.5.2 Perform three replicates and calculate the average cyclone
efficiency as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.017
where E1, E2, and E3 are replicate
measurements of Ec.
5.7.5.3 Calculate the standard deviation ([sigma]) for the replicate
measurements of Ec as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.018
[[Page 372]]
if [sigma] exceeds 0.10, repeat the replicate runs.
5.7.5.4 Using the cyclone flow rate that produces D50 for
10 [mu]m, measure the overall efficiency of the cyclone and nozzle,
Eo, at the particle sizes and nominal gas velocities in Table
2 of this method using this following procedure.
5.7.5.5 Set the air velocity in the wind tunnel to one of the
nominal gas velocities from Table 2 of this method. Establish isokinetic
sampling conditions and the correct flow rate through the sampler
(cyclone and nozzle) using recycle capacity so that the D50
is 10 [mu]m. Sample long enough to obtain 5
percent precision on the total collected mass as determined by the
precision and the sensitivity of the measuring technique. Determine
separately the nozzle catch (mn), cyclone catch
(mc), cyclone exit tube catch (mt), and collection
filter catch (mf).
5.7.5.6 Calculate the overall efficiency (Eo) as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.019
5.7.5.7 Do three replicates for each combination of gas velocities
and particle sizes in Table 2 of this method. Calculate Eo
for each particle size following the procedures described in this
section for determining efficiency. Calculate the standard deviation
([sigma]) for the replicate measurements. If [sigma] exceeds 0.10,
repeat the replicate runs.
5.7.6 Criteria for Acceptance. For each of the three gas stream
velocities, plot the average Eo as a function of particle
size on Figure 13 of this method. Draw a smooth curve for each velocity
through all particle sizes. The curve shall be within the banded region
for all sizes, and the average Ec for a D50 for 10
[mu]m shall be 50 0.5 percent.
5.8 Cyclone Calibration Procedure. The purpose of this section is to
develop the relationship between flow rate, gas viscosity, gas density,
and D50. This procedure only needs to be done on those
cyclones that do not meet the design specifications in Figure 12 of this
method.
5.8.1 Calculate cyclone flow rate. Determine the flow rates and
D50's for three different particle sizes between 5 [mu]m and
15 [mu]m, one of which shall be 10 [mu]m. All sizes must be within 0.5
[mu]m. For each size, use a different temperature within 60 [deg]C (108
[deg]F) of the temperature at which the cyclone is to be used and
conduct triplicate runs. A suggested procedure is to keep the particle
size constant and vary the flow rate. Some of the values obtained in the
PS tests in Section 5.7.5 may be used.
5.8.1.1 On log-log graph paper, plot the Reynolds number (Re) on the
abscissa, and the square root of the Stokes 50 number
[(STK50)1/2] on the ordinate for each temperature.
Use the following equations:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.021
where:
Qcyc = Cyclone flow rate cm\3\/sec.
[rho] = Gas density, g/cm\3\.
dcyc = Diameter of cyclone inlet, cm.
[mu]cyc = Viscosity of gas through the cyclone, poise.
D50 = Cyclone cut size, cm.
5.8.1.2 Use a linear regression analysis to determine the slope (m),
and the y-intercept (b). Use the following formula to determine Q, the
cyclone flow rate required for a cut size of 10 [mu]m.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.069
where:
Q = Cyclone flow rate for a cut size of 10 [mu]m, cm\3\/sec.
Ts = Stack gas temperature, [deg]K,
d = Diameter of nozzle, cm.
K1 = 4.077x10-3.
5.8.2. Directions for Using Q. Refer to Section 5 of the EGR
operators manual for directions in using this expression for Q in the
setup calculations.
6. Calculations
6.1 The EGR data reduction calculations are performed by the EGR
reduction computer program, which is written in IBM BASIC computer
language and is available through NTIS, Accession number PB90-500000,
5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22161. Examples of program
inputs and outputs are shown in Figure 14 of this method.
[[Page 373]]
6.1.1 Calculations can also be done manually, as specified in Method
5, Sections 6.3 through 6.7, and 6.9 through 6.12, with the addition of
the following:
6.1.2 Nomenclature.
Bc = Moisture fraction of mixed cyclone gas, by volume,
dimensionless.
C1 = Viscosity constant, 51.12 micropoise for [deg]K (51.05
micropoise for [deg] R).
C2 = Viscosity constant, 0.372 micropoise/[deg]K (0.207
micropoise/[deg] R).
C3 = Viscosity constant, 1.05x10-4 micropoise/
[deg]K\2\ (3.24x10-5 micropoise/[deg] R\2\).
C4 = Viscosity constant, 53.147 micropoise/fraction
O2.
C5 = Viscosity constant, 74.143 micropoise/fraction
H2 O.
D50 = Diameter of particles having a 50 percent probability
of penetration, [mu]m.
f02 = Stack gas fraction O2 by volume, dry basis.
K1 = 0.3858 [deg]K/mm Hg (17.64 [deg] R/in. Hg).
Mc = Wet molecular weight of mixed gas through the
PM10 cyclone, g/g-mole (lb/lb-mole).
Md = Dry molecular weight of stack gas, g/g-mole (lb/lb-
mole).
Pbar = Barometer pressure at sampling site, mm Hg (in. Hg).
Pin1 = Gauge pressure at inlet to total LFE, mm H2
O (in. H2 O).
P3 = Absolute stack pressure, mm Hg (in. Hg).
Q2 = Total cyclone flow rate at wet cyclone conditions, m\3\/
min (ft\3\/min).
Qs[lpar]std[rpar] = Total cyclone flow rate at standard
conditons, dscm/min (dscf/min).
Tm = Average temperature of dry gas meter, [deg]K ([deg]R).
Ts = Average stack gas temperature, [deg]K ([deg]R).
Vw[lpar]std[rpar] = Volume of water vapor in gas sample
(standard conditions), scm (scf).
XT = Total LFE linear calibration constant, m\3\/[(min)(mm
H2 O]) { ft\3\/[(min)(in. H2 O)]{time} .
YT = Total LFE linear calibration constant, dscm/min (dscf/
min).
[Delta] PT = Pressure differential across total LFE, mm
H2 O, (in. H2 O).
[thetas] = Total sampling time, min.
[mu]cyc = Viscosity of mixed cyclone gas, micropoise.
[mu]LFE = Viscosity of gas laminar flow elements, micropoise.
[mu]std = Viscosity of standard air, 180.1 micropoise.
6.2 PM10 Particulate Weight. Determine the weight of
PM10 by summing the weights obtained from Container Numbers 1
and 3, less the acetone blank.
6.3 Total Particulate Weight. Determine the particulate catch for PM
greater than PM10 from the weight obtained from Container
Number 2 less the acetone blank, and add it to the PM10
particulate weight.
6.4 PM10 Fraction. Determine the PM10 fraction
of the total particulate weight by dividing the PM10
particulate weight by the total particulate weight.
6.5 Total Cyclone Flow Rate. The average flow rate at standard
conditions is determined from the average pressure drop across the total
LFE and is calculated as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.022
The flow rate, at actual cyclone conditions, is calculated as
follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.023
The flow rate, at actual cyclone conditions, is calculated as
follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.024
6.6 Aerodynamic Cut Size. Use the following procedure to determine
the aerodynamic cut size (D50).
6.6.1 Determine the water fraction of the mixed gas through the
cyclone by using the equation below.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.025
6.6.2 Calculate the cyclone gas viscosity as follows:
[mu]cyc = C1 + C2 Ts +
C3 Ts2 + C4 f02 -
C5 Bc
6.6.3 Calculate the molecular weight on a wet basis of the cyclone
gas as follows:
Mc = Md(1 - Bc) + 18.0(Bc)
6.6.4 If the cyclone meets the design specification in Figure 12 of
this method, calculate the actual D50 of the cyclone for the
run as follows:
[[Page 374]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.026
where [beta]1 = 0.1562.
6.6.5 If the cyclone does not meet the design specifications in
Figure 12 of this method, then use the following equation to calculate
D50.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.027
where:
m = Slope of the calibration curve obtained in Section 5.8.2.
b = y-intercept of the calibration curve obtained in Section 5.8.2.
6.7 Acceptable Results. Acceptability of anisokinetic variation is
the same as Method 5, Section 6.12.
6.7.1 If 9.0 [mu]m <= D50 <=11 [mu]m and 90 <= I <= 110,
the results are acceptable. If D50 is greater than 11 [mu]m,
the Administrator may accept the results. If D50 is less than
9.0 [mu]m, reject the results and repeat the test.
7. Bibliography
1. Same as Bibliography in Method 5.
2. McCain, J.D., J.W. Ragland, and A.D. Williamson. Recommended
Methodology for the Determination of Particles Size Distributions in
Ducted Sources, Final Report. Prepared for the California Air Resources
Board by Southern Research Institute. May 1986.
3. Farthing, W.E., S.S. Dawes, A.D. Williamson, J.D. McCain, R.S.
Martin, and J.W. Ragland. Development of Sampling Methods for Source PM-
10 Emissions. Southern Research Institute for the Environmental
Protection Agency. April 1989.
4. Application Guide for the Source PM10 Exhaust Gas
Recycle Sampling System, EPA/600/3-88-058.
[[Page 375]]
[[Page 376]]
[[Page 377]]
[[Page 378]]
[[Page 379]]
EXAMPLE EMISSION GAS RECYCLE SETUP SHEET
VERSION 3.1 MAY 1986
TEST I.D.: SAMPLE SETUP
RUN DATE: 11/24/86
LOCATION: SOURCE SIM
OPERATOR(S): RH JB
NOZZLE DIAMETER (IN): .25
STACK CONDITIONS:
AVERAGE TEMPERATURE (F): 200.0
AVERAGE VELOCITY (FT/SEC): 15.0
AMBIENT PRESSURE (IN HG): 29.92
STACK PRESSURE (IN H20): .10
GAS COMPOSITION:
H20=10.0%...........................................MD=28.84
O2=20.9%............................................MW=27.75
CO2=.0%.........................................(LB/LB MOLE)
TARGET PRESSURE DROPS
TEMPERATURE (F)
DP(PTO)............ 150 161 172 183 194 206 217 228
0.026.............. SAMPLE .49 .49 .48 .47 .46 .45 .45
[[Page 380]]
TOTAL 1.90 1.90 1.91 1.92 1.92 1.92 1.93
RECYCLE 2.89 2.92 2.94 2.97 3.00 3.02 3.05
% RCL 61% 61% 62% 62% 63% 63% 63%
.031............... .58 .56 .55 .55 .55 .54 .53 .52
1.88 1.89 1.89 1.90 1.91 1.91 1.91 1.92
2.71 2.74 2.77 2.80 2.82 2.85 2.88 2.90
57% 57% 58% 58% 59% 59% 60% 60%
.035............... .67 .65 .64 .63 .62 .61 .670 .59
1.88 1.88 1.89 1.89 1.90 1.90 1.91 1.91
2.57 2.60 2.63 2.66 2.69 2.72 2.74 2.74
54% 55% 55% 56% 56% 57% 57% 57%
.039............... .75 .74 .72 .71 .70 .69 .67 .66
1.87 1.88 1.88 1.89 1.89 1.90 1.90 1.91
2.44 2.47 2.50 2.53 2.56 2.59 2.62 2.65
51% 52% 52% 53% 53% 54% 54% 55%
Figure 6. Example EGR setup sheet.
Barometric pressure, Pbar, in. Hg... = ------
Stack static pressure, Pg, in. H2 O. = ------
Average stack temperature, ts, = ------
[deg]F.
Meter temperature, tm, [deg]F....... = ------
Gas analysis:
%CO2.............................. = ------
%O2............................... = ------
%N2+%CO........................... = ------
Fraction moisture content, Bws.... = ------
Calibration data:
Nozzle diameter, Dn in............ = ------
Pitot coefficient, Cp............. = ------
[Delta]H@, in. H2O................ = ------
Molecular weight of stack gas, dry
basis:
Md=0.44
(%CO2)+0.32 = lb/lb
mole
(%O2)+0.28
(%N2+%CO)
Molecular weight of stack gas, wet
basis:
Mw=Md (1-Bws)+18Bws............... = ------ lb/lb mole
Absolute stack pressure:
Ps=Pbar+(Pg/13.6) = ------ in. Hg
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.071
Desired meter orifice pressure ([Delta]H) for velocity head of stack gas
([Delta]p):
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.072
Figure 7. Example worksheet 1, meter orifice pressure head
calculation.
Barometric pressure, Pbar, in. Hg...... = ------
Absolute stack pressure, Ps, in. Hg.... = ------
Average stack temperature, Ts, [deg]R.. = ------
Meter temperature, Tm, [deg]R.......... = ------
Molecular weight of stack gas, wet = ------
basis, Md lb/lb mole.
Pressure upstream of LFE, in. Hg....... = 0.6
Gas analysis:
%O2.................................. = ------
Fraction moisture content, Bws....... = ------
Calibration data:
Nozzle diameter, Dn, in.............. = ------
Pitot coefficient, Cp................ = ------
Total LFE calibration constant, Xt... = ------
Total LFE calibration constant, Tt... = ------
Absolute pressure upstream of LFE:
PLFE=Pbar+0.6........................ = ------ in. Hg
[[Page 381]]
Viscosity of gas in total LFE:
[mu]LFE=152.418+0.2552 Tm+3.2355x10-5 = ------
Tm2+0.53147 (%O2).
Viscosity of dry stack gas:
[mu]d=152.418+0.2552 Ts+3.2355x10-5 = ------
Ts2+0.53147 (%O2).
Constants:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.028
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.029
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.030
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.031
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.032
Total LFE pressure head:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.033
Figure 8. Example worksheet 1, meter orifice pressure head
calculation.
Barometric pressure, Pbar, in. Hg...... = ------
Absolute stack pressure, Ps, in. Hg.... = ------
Average stack temperature, Ts, [deg]R.. = ------
Meter temperature, Tm, [deg]R.......... = ------
Molecular weight of stack gas, dry = ------
basis, Md lb/lb mole.
Viscosity of LFE gas[mu]LFE,poise...... = ------
Absolute pressure upstream of LFE, = ------
PPLEin. Hg.
Calibration data:......................
Nozzle diameter, Dn, in.............. = ------
Pitot coefficient, Cp................ = ------
Recycle LFE calibration constant, Xt = ------
Recycle LFE calibration constant, Yt = ------
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.034
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.035
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.036
[[Page 382]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.038
Pressure head for recycle LFE:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.039
Figure 9. Example worksheet 3, recycle LFE pressure head.
Plant___________________________________________________________________
Date____________________________________________________________________
Run no._________________________________________________________________
Filter no.______________________________________________________________
Amount liquid lost during transport_____________________________________
Acetone blank volume, ml________________________________________________
Acetone wash volume, ml (2)------(3)____________________________________
Acetone blank conc., mg/mg (Equation 5-4, Method 5)_____________________
[[Page 383]]
Acetone wash blank, mg (Equation 5-5, Method 5)_________________________
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weight of particulate
matter, mg
Container number --------------------------
Final Tare Weight
weight weight gain
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1............................................ ....... ....... .......
3............................................ ....... ....... .......
Total...................................... ....... ....... .......
--------
Less acetone blank......................... ....... ....... .......
--------
Weight of PM10............................. ....... ....... .......
2............................................ ....... ....... .......
--------
Less acetone blank......................... ....... ....... .......
--------
Total particulate weight................... ....... ....... .......
--------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Figure 11. EGR method analysis sheet.
[[Page 384]]
Table 1--Performance Specifications for Source PM10 Cyclones and Nozzle
Combinations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parameter Units Specification
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Collection efficiency........ Percent........... Such that
collection
efficiency falls
within envelope
specified by
Section 5.7.6 and
Figure 13.
2. Cyclone cut size (D50)....... [mu]m............. 101 [mu]m
aerodynamic
diameter.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 385]]
Table 2--Particle Sizes and Nominal Gas Velocities for Efficiency
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target gas velocities (m/sec)
--------------------------------------------------------------
Particle size ([mu]m)a 71.0 thn-eq>1.5 thn-eq>2.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
50.5....................... ................... ................... ...................
70.5....................... ................... ................... ...................
100.5...................... ................... ................... ...................
141.0...................... ................... ................... ...................
201.0...................... ................... ................... ...................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Mass median aerodynamic diameter.
Emission Gas Recycle, Data Reduction, Version 3.4 MAY 1986
Test ID. Code: Chapel Hill 2.
Test Location: Baghouse Outlet.
Test Site: Chapel Hill.
Test Date: 10/20/86.
Operators(s): JB RH MH.
Entered Run Data
Temperatures:
T(STK).............................. 251.0 F
T(RCL).............................. 259.0 F
T(LFE).............................. 81.0 F
T(DGM).............................. 76.0 F
System Pressures:
DH(ORI)............................. 1.18 INWG
DP(TOT)............................. 1.91 INWG
P(INL).............................. 12.15 INWG
DP(RCL)............................. 2.21 INWG
DP(PTO)............................. 0.06 INWG
Miscellanea:
P(BAR).............................. 29.99 INWG
DP(STK)............................. 0.10 INWG
V(DGM).............................. 13.744 FT3
TIME................................ 60.00 MIN
% CO2............................... 8.00
% O2................................ 20.00
NOZ (IN)............................ 0.2500
[[Page 386]]
Water Content:
Estimate............................ 0.0%
or
Condenser........................... 7.0 ML
Column.............................. 0.0 GM
Raw Masses:
Cyclone 1........................... 21.7 MG
Filter.............................. 11.7 MG
Impinger Residue.................... 0.0 MG
Blank Values:
CYC Rinse........................... 0.0 MG
Filter Holder Rinse................. 0.0 MG
Filter Blank........................ 0.0 MG
Impinger Rinse...................... 0.0 MG
Calibration Values:
CP(PITOT)................................................ 0.840
DH@(ORI)................................................. 10.980
M(TOT LFE)............................................... 0.2298
B(TOT LFE)............................................... -.0058
M(RCL LFE)............................................... 0.0948
B(RCL LFE)............................................... -.0007
DGM GAMMA................................................ 0.9940
Reduced Data
Stack Velocity (FT/SEC)........................................ 15.95
Stack Gas Moisture (%)......................................... 2.4
Sample Flow Rate (ACFM)........................................ 0.3104
Total Flow Rate (ACFM)......................................... 0.5819
Recycle Flow Rate (ACFM)....................................... 0.2760
Percent Recycle................................................ 46.7
Isokinetic Ratio (%)........................................... 95.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Particulate)
------------------ (MG/DNCM) (GR/ACF) (GR/DCF) (LB/DSCF) (X
(UM) (% <) 1E6)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cyclone 1............................. 10.15 35.8 56.6 0.01794 0.02470 3.53701
Backup Filter......................... ....... ....... 30.5 0.00968 0.01332 1.907
Particulate Total..................... ....... ....... 87.2 0.02762 0.03802 5.444
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Figure 14. Example inputs and outputs of the EGR reduction program.
Method 201A--Determination of PM10 Emissions (Constant
Sampling Rate Procedure)
1. Applicability and Principle
1.1 Applicability. This method applies to the in-stack measurement
of particulate matter (PM) emissions equal to or less than an
aerodynamic diameter of nominally 10 (PM10) from stationary
sources. The EPA recognizes that condensible emissions not collected by
an in-stack method are also PM10, and that emissions that
contribute to ambient, PM10 levels are the sum of condensible
emissions and emissions measured by an in-stack PM10 method,
such as this method or Method 201. Therefore, for establishing source
contributions to ambient levels of PM10, such as for emission
inventory purposes, EPA suggests that source PM10 measurement
include both in-stack PM10 and condensible emissions.
Condensible emissions may be measured by an impinger analysis in
combination with this method.
1.2 Principle. A gas sample is extracted at a constant flow rate
through an in-stack sizing device, which separates PM greater than
PM10. Variations from isokinetic sampling conditions are
maintained within well-defined limits. The particulate mass is
determined gravimetrically after removal of uncombined water.
2. Apparatus
Note: Methods cited in this method are part of 40 CFR part 60,
appendix A.
2.1 Sampling Train. A schematic of the Method 201A sampling train is
shown in Figure 1 of this method. With the exception of the
PM10 sizing device and in-stack filter, this train is the
same as an EPA Method 17 train.
2.1.1 Nozzle. Stainless steel (316 or equivalent) with a sharp
tapered leading edge. Eleven nozzles that meet the design specification
in Figure 2 of this method are recommended. A larger number of nozzles
with small nozzle increments increase the likelihood that a single
nozzle can be used for the entire traverse. If the nozzles do not meet
the design specifications in Figure 2 of this method, then the nozzles
must meet the criteria in Section 5.2 of this method.
2.1.2 PM10 Sizer. Stainless steel (316 or equivalent),
capable of determining the PM10 fraction. The sizing device
shall be either a cyclone that meets the specifications in Section 5.2
of this method or a cascade impactor that has been calibrated using the
procedure in Section 5.4 of this method.
2.1.3 Filter Holder. 63-mm, stainless steel. An Andersen filter,
part number SE274, has been found to be acceptable for the in-stack
filter. Note: Mention of trade names or specific products does not
constitute endorsement by the Environmental Protection Agency.
2.1.4 Pitot Tube. Same as in Method 5, Section 2.1.3. The pitot
lines shall be made of heat resistant tubing and attached to the probe
with stainless steel fittings.
2.1.5 Probe Liner. Optional, same as in Method 5, Section 2.1.2.
2.1.6 Differential Pressure Gauge, Condenser, Metering System,
Barometer, and Gas Density Determination Equipment. Same as in Method 5,
Sections 2.1.4, and 2.1.7 through 2.1.10, respectively.
2.2 Sample Recovery.
[[Page 387]]
2.2.1 Nozzle, Sizing Device, Probe, and Filter Holder Brushes. Nylon
bristle brushes with stainless steel wire shafts and handles, properly
sized and shaped for cleaning the nozzle, sizing device, probe or probe
liner, and filter holders.
2.2.2 Wash Bottles, Glass Sample Storage Containers, Petri Dishes,
Graduated Cylinder and Balance, Plastic Storage Containers, Funnel and
Rubber Policeman, and Funnel. Same as in Method 5, Sections 2.2.2
through 2.2.8, respectively.
2.3 Analysis. Same as in Method 5, Section 2.3.
3. Reagents
The reagents for sampling, sample recovery, and analysis are the
same as that specified in Method 5, Sections 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3,
respectively.
4. Procedure
4.1 Sampling. The complexity of this method is such that, in order
to obtain reliable results, testers should be trained and experienced
with the test procedures.
4.1.1 Pretest Preparation. Same as in Method 5, Section 4.1.1.
4.1.2 Preliminary Determinations. Same as in Method 5, Section
4.1.2, except use the directions on nozzle size selection and sampling
time in this method. Use of any nozzle greater than 0.16 in. in diameter
requires a sampling port diameter of 6 inches. Also, the required
maximum number of traverse points at any location shall be 12.
4.1.2.1 The sizing device must be in-stack or maintained at stack
temperature during sampling. The blockage effect of the CSR sampling
assembly will be minimal if the cross-sectional area of the sampling
assembly is 3 percent or less of the cross-sectional area of the duct.
If the cross-sectional area of the assembly is greater than 3 percent of
the cross-sectional area of the duct, then either determine the pitot
coefficient at sampling conditions or use a standard pitot with a known
coefficient in a configuration with the CSR sampling assembly such that
flow disturbances are minimized.
4.1.2.2 The setup calculations can be performed by using the
following procedures.
4.1.2.2.1 In order to maintain a cut size of 10 [mu]m in the sizing
device, the flow rate through the sizing device must be maintained at a
constant, discrete value during the run. If the sizing device is a
cyclone that meets the design specifications in Figure 3 of this method,
use the equations in Figure 4 of this method to calculate three orifice
heads ([Delta]H): one at the average stack temperature, and the other
two at temperatures 28 [deg]C (50 [deg]F) of the average stack temperature. Use
[Delta]H calculated at the average stack temperature as the pressure
head for the sample flow rate as long as the stack temperature during
the run is within 28 [deg]C (50 [deg]F) of the average stack
temperature. If the stack temperature varies by more than 28 [deg]C (50
[deg]F), then use the appropriate [Delta]H.
4.1.2.2.2 If the sizing device is a cyclone that does not meet the
design specifications in Figure 3 of this method, use the equations in
Figure 4 of this method, except use the procedures in Section 5.3 of
this method to determine Qs, the correct cyclone flow rate
for a 10 [mu]m size.
4.1.2.2.3 To select a nozzle, use the equations in Figure 5 of this
method to calculate [Delta]pmin and [Delta]pmax
for each nozzle at all three temperatures. If the sizing device is a
cyclone that does not meet the design specifications in Figure 3 of this
method, the example worksheets can be used.
4.1.2.2.4 Correct the Method 2 pitot readings to Method 201A pitot
readings by multiplying the Method 2 pitot readings by the square of a
ratio of the Method 201A pitot coefficient to the Method 2 pitot
coefficient. Select the nozzle for which [Delta]pmin and
[Delta]pmax bracket all of the corrected Method 2 pitot
readings. If more than one nozzle meets this requirement, select the
nozzle giving the greatest symmetry. Note that if the expected pitot
reading for one or more points is near a limit for a chosen nozzle, it
may be outside the limits at the time of the run.
4.1.2.2.5 Vary the dwell time, or sampling time, at each traverse
point proportionately with the point velocity. Use the equations in
Figure 6 of this method to calculate the dwell time at the first point
and at each subsequent point. It is recommended that the number of
minutes sampled at each point be rounded to the nearest 15 seconds.
4.1.3 Preparation of Collection Train. Same as in Method 5, Section
4.1.3, except omit directions about a glass cyclone.
4.1.4 Leak-Check Procedure. The sizing device is removed before the
post-test leak-check to prevent any disturbance of the collected sample
prior to analysis.
4.1.4.1 Pretest Leak-Check. A pretest leak-check of the entire
sampling train, including the sizing device, is required. Use the leak-
check procedure in Method 5, Section 4.1.4.1 to conduct a pretest leak-
check.
4.1.4.2 Leak-Checks During Sample Run. Same as in Method 5, Section
4.1.4.1.
4.1.4.3 Post-Test Leak-Check. A leak-check is required at the
conclusion of each sampling run. Remove the cyclone before the leak-
check to prevent the vacuum created by the cooling of the probe from
disturbing the collected sample and use the procedure in Method 5,
Section 4.1.4.3 to conduct a post-test leak-check.
4.1.5 Method 201A Train Operation. Same as in Method 5, Section
4.1.5, except use the procedures in this section for isokinetic sampling
and flow rate adjustment. Maintain the flow rate calculated in Section
4.1.2.2.1 of this method throughout the run provided the
[[Page 388]]
stack temperature is within 28 [deg]C (50 [deg]F) of the temperature
used to calculate [Delta]H. If stack temperatures vary by more than 28
[deg]C (50 [deg]F), use the appropriate [Delta]H value calculated in
Section 4.1.2.2.1 of this method. Calculate the dwell time at each
traverse point as in Figure 6 of this method.
4.2 Sample Recovery. If a cascade impactor is used, use the
manufacturer's recommended procedures for sample recovery. If a cyclone
is used, use the same sample recovery as that in Method 5, Section 4.2,
except an increased number of sample recovery containers is required.
4.2.1 Container Number 1 (In-Stack Filter). The recovery shall be
the same as that for Container Number 1 in Method 5, Section 4.2.
4.2.3 Container Number 2 (Cyclone or Large PM Catch). This step is
optional. The anisokinetic error for the cyclone PM is theoretically
larger than the error for the PM10 catch. Therefore, adding
all the fractions to get a total PM catch is not as accurate as Method 5
or Method 201. Disassemble the cyclone and remove the nozzle to recover
the large PM catch. Quantitatively recover the PM from the interior
surfaces of the nozzle and cyclone, excluding the ``turn around'' cup
and the interior surfaces of the exit tube. The recovery shall be the
same as that for Container Number 2 in Method 5, Section 4.2.
4.2.4 Container Number 3 (PM10). Quantitatively recover
the PM from all of the surfaces from the cyclone exit to the front half
of the in-stack filter holder, including the ``turn around'' cup inside
the cyclone and the interior surfaces of the exit tube. The recovery
shall be the same as that for Container Number 2 in Method 5, Section
4.2.
4.2.6 Container Number 4 (Silica Gel). The recovery shall be the
same as that for Container Number 3 in Method 5, Section 4.2.
4.2.7 Impinger Water. Same as in Method 5, Section 4.2, under
``Impinger Water.''
4.3 Analysis. Same as in Method 5, Section 4.3, except handle Method
201A Container Number 1 like Container Number 1, Method 201A Container
Numbers 2 and 3 like Container Number 2, and Method 201A Container
Number 4 like Container Number 3. Use Figure 7 of this method to record
the weights of PM collected. Use Figure 5-3 in Method 5, Section 4.3, to
record the volume of water collected.
4.4 Quality Control Procedures. Same as in Method 5, Section 4.4.
4.5 PM10 Emission Calculation and Acceptability of
Results. Use the procedures in section 6 to calculate PM10
emissions and the criteria in section 6.3.5 to determine the
acceptability of the results.
5. Calibration
Maintain an accurate laboratory log of all calibrations.
5.1 Probe Nozzle, Pitot Tube, Metering System, Probe Heater
Calibration, Temperature Gauges, Leak-check of Metering System, and
Barometer. Same as in Method 5, Section 5.1 through 5.7, respectively.
5.2 Probe Cyclone and Nozzle Combinations. The probe cyclone and
nozzle combinations need not be calibrated if both meet design
specifications in Figures 2 and 3 of this method. If the nozzles do not
meet design specifications, then test the cyclone and nozzle
combinations for conformity with performance specifications (PS's) in
Table 1 of this method. If the cyclone does not meet design
specifications, then the cylcone and nozzle combination shall conform to
the PS's and calibrate the cyclone to determine the relationship between
flow rate, gas viscosity, and gas density. Use the procedures in Section
5.2 of this method to conduct PS tests and the procedures in Section 5.3
of this method to calibrate the cyclone. The purpose of the PS tests are
to conform that the cyclone and nozzle combination has the desired
sharpness of cut. Conduct the PS tests in a wind tunnel described in
Section 5.2.1 of this method and particle generation system described in
Section 5.2.2 of this method. Use five particle sizes and three wind
velocities as listed in Table 2 of this method. A minimum of three
replicate measurements of collection efficiency shall be performed for
each of the 15 conditions listed, for a minimum of 45 measurements.
5.2.1 Wind Tunnel. Perform the calibration and PS tests in a wind
tunnel (or equivalent test apparatus) capable of establishing and
maintaining the required gas stream velocities within 10 percent.
5.2.2 Particle Generation System. The particle generation system
shall be capable of producing solid monodispersed dye particles with the
mass median aerodynamic diameters specified in Table 2 of this method.
Perform the particle size distribution verification on an integrated
sample obtained during the sampling period of each test. An acceptable
alternative is to verify the size distribution of samples obtained
before and after each test, with both samples required to meet the
diameter and monodispersity requirements for an acceptable test run.
5.2.2.1 Establish the size of the solid dye particles delivered to
the test section of the wind tunnel by using the operating parameters of
the particle generation system, and verify them during the tests by
microscopic examination of samples of the particles collected on a
membrane filter. The particle size, as established by the operating
parameters of the generation system, shall be within the tolerance
specified in Table 2 of this method. The precision of the particle size
verification technique shall be at least 0.5,
[mu]m, and particle size determined by the verification technique shall
not differ by
[[Page 389]]
more than 10 percent from that established by the operating parameters
of the particle generation system.
5.2.2.2 Certify the monodispersity of the particles for each test
either by microscopic inspection of collected particles on filters or by
other suitable monitoring techniques such as an optical particle counter
followed by a multichannel pulse height analyzer. If the proportion of
multiplets and satellites in an aerosol exceeds 10 percent by mass, the
particle generation system is unacceptable for the purpose of this test.
Multiplets are particles that are agglomerated, and satellites are
particles that are smaller than the specified size range.
5.2.3 Schematic Drawings. Schematic drawings of the wind tunnel and
blower system and other information showing complete procedural details
of the test atmosphere generation, verification, and delivery techniques
shall be furnished with calibration data to the reviewing agency.
5.2.4 Flow Measurements. Measure the cyclone air flow rates with a
dry gas meter and a stopwatch, or a calibrated orifice system capable of
measuring flow rates to within 2 percent.
5.2.5 Performance Specification Procedure. Establish test particle
generator operation and verify particle size microscopically. If
monodisperity is to be verified by measurements at the beginning and the
end of the run rather than by an integrated sample, these measurements
may be made at this time.
5.2.5.1 The cyclone cut size, or D50, of a cyclone is
defined here as the particle size having a 50 percent probability of
penetration. Determine the cyclone flow rate at which D50 is
10 [mu]m. A suggested procedure is to vary the cyclone flow rate while
keeping a constant particle size of 10 [mu]m. Measure the PM collected
in the cyclone (mc), the exit tube (mt), and the
filter (mf). Calculate cyclone efficiency (Ec) for
each flow rate as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.040
5.2.5.2. Do three replicates and calculate the average cyclone
efficiency [Ec[lpar]avg[rpar]] as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.041
Where E1, E2, and E3 are replicate
measurements of Ec.
5.2.5.3 Calculate the standard deviation ([sigma]) for the replicate
measurements of Ec as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.042
If [sigma] exceeds 0.10, repeat the replicated runs.
5.2.5.4 Measure the overall efficiency of the cyclone and nozzle,
Eo, at the particle sizes and nominal gas velocities in Table
2 of this method using the following procedure.
5.2.5.5 Set the air velocity and particle size from one of the
conditions in Table 2 of this method. Establish isokinetic sampling
conditions and the correct flow rate in the cyclone (obtained by
procedures in this section) such that the D50 is 10 [mu]m.
Sample long enough to obtain 5 percent precision
on total collected mass as determined by the precision and the
sensitivity of measuring technique. Determine separately the nozzle
catch (mn), cyclone catch (mc), cyclone exit tube
(Mt), and collection filter catch (mf) for each
particle size and nominal gas velocity in Table 2 of this method.
Calculate overall efficiency (Eo) as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.043
5.2.5.6 Do three replicates for each combination of gas velocity and
particle size in Table 2 of this method. Use the equation below to
calculate the average overall efficiency [Eo[lpar]avg[rpar]]
for each combination following the procedures described in this section
for determining efficiency.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.044
Where E1, E2, and E3 are replicate
measurements of Eo.
5.2.5.7 Use the formula in Section 5.2.5.3 to calculate [sigma] for
the replicate measurements. If [sigma] exceeds 0.10 or if the particle
sizes and nominal gas velocities are not within the
[[Page 390]]
limits specified in Table 2 of this method, repeat the replicate runs.
5.2.6 Criteria for Acceptance. For each of the three gas stream
velocities, plot the Eo[lpar]avg[rpar] as a function of
particle size on Figure 8 of this method. Draw smooth curves through all
particle sizes. Eo[lpar]avg[rpar] shall be within the banded
region for all sizes, and the Ec[lpar]avg[rpar] shall be
500.5 percent at 10 [mu]m.
5.3 Cyclone Calibration Procedure. The purpose of this procedure is
to develop the relationship between flow rate, gas viscosity, gas
density, and D50.
5.3.1 Calculate Cyclone Flow Rate. Determine flow rates and
D50's for three different particle sizes between 5 [mu]m and
15 [mu]m, one of which shall be 10 [mu]m. All sizes must be determined
within 0.5 [mu]m. For each size, use a different temperature within 60
[deg]C (108 [deg]F) of the temperature at which the cyclone is to be
used and conduct triplicate runs. A suggested procedure is to keep the
particle size constant and vary the flow rate.
5.3.1.1 On log-log graph paper, plot the Reynolds number (Re) on the
abscissa, and the square root of the Stokes 50 number
[(Stk50)12] on the ordinate for each temperature.
Use the following equations to compute both values:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.045
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.046
where:
Qcyc = Cyclone flow rate, cm\3\/sec.
[rho] = Gas density, g/cm\3\.
dcyc = Diameter of cyclone inlet, cm.
[mu]s = Viscosity of stack gas, micropoise.
D50 = Aerodynamic diameter of a particle having a 50 percent
probability of penetration, cm.
5.3.1.2 Use a linear regression analysis to determine the slope (m)
and the Y-intercept (b). Use the following formula to determine Q, the
cyclone flow rate required for a cut size of 10 [mu]m.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.047
where:
m = Slope of the calibration line.
b = y-intercept of the calibration line.
Qs = Cyclone flow rate for a cut size of 10 [mu]m, cm\3\/sec.
d = Diameter of nozzle, cm.
Ts = Stack gas temperature, [middot] R.
Ps = Absolute stack pressure, in. Hg.
Mw = Wet molecular weight of the stack gas, lb/1b-mole.
K1 = 4.077x10-3.
5.3.1.3 Refer to the Method 201A operators manual, entitled
Application Guide for Source PM10 Measurement with Constant
Sampling Rate, for directions in the use of this equation for Q in the
setup calculations.
5.4 Cascade Impactor. The purpose of calibrating a cascade impactor
is to determine the empirical constant (STK50), which is
specific to the impactor and which permits the accurate determination of
the cut size of the impactor stages at field conditions. It is not
necessary to calibrate each individual impactor. Once an impactor has
been calibrated, the calibration data can be applied to other impactors
of identical design.
5.4.1 Wind Tunnel. Same as in Section 5.2.1 of this method.
5.4.2 Particle Generation System. Same as in Section 5.2.2 of this
method.
5.4.3 Hardware Configuration for Calibrations. An impaction stage
constrains an aerosol to form circular or rectangular jets, which are
directed toward a suitable substrate where the larger aerosol particles
are collected. For calibration purposes, three stages of the cascade
impactor shall be discussed and designated calibration stages 1, 2, and
3. The first calibration stage consists of the collection substrate of
an impaction stage and all upstream surfaces up to and including the
nozzle. This may include other preceding impactor stages. The second and
third calibration stages consist of each respective collection substrate
and all upstream surfaces up to but excluding the collection substrate
of the preceding calibration stage. This may include intervening
impactor stages which are not designated as calibration stages. The cut
size, or D50, of the adjacent calibration stages shall differ
by a factor of not less than 1.5 and not more than 2.0. For example, if
the first calibration stage has a D50 of 12 [mu]m, then the
D50 of the downstream stage shall be between 6 and 8 [mu]m.
5.4.3.1 It is expected, but not necessary, that the complete
hardware assembly will be used in each of the sampling runs of the
calibration and performance determinations.
[[Page 391]]
Only the first calibration stage must be tested under isokinetic
sampling conditions. The second and third calibration stages must be
calibrated with the collection substrate of the preceding calibration
stage in place, so that gas flow patterns existing in field operation
will be simulated.
5.4.3.2 Each of the PM10 stages should be calibrated with
the type of collection substrate, viscid material (such as grease) or
glass fiber, used in PM10 measurements. Note that most
materials used as substrates at elevated temperatures are not viscid at
normal laboratory conditions. The substrate material used for
calibrations should minimize particle bounce, yet be viscous enough to
withstand erosion or deformation by the impactor jets and not interfere
with the procedure for measuring the collected PM.
5.4.4 Calibration Procedure. Establish test particle generator
operation and verify particle size microscopically. If monodispersity is
to be verified by measurements at the beginning and the end of the run
rather than by an integrated sample, these measurements shall be made at
this time. Measure in triplicate the PM collected by the calibration
stage (m) and the PM on all surfaces downstream of the respective
calibration stage (m') for all of the flow rates and particle size
combinations shown in Table 2 of this method. Techniques of mass
measurement may include the use of a dye and spectrophotometer.
Particles on the upstream side of a jet plate shall be included with the
substrate downstream, except agglomerates of particles, which shall be
included with the preceding or upstream substrate. Use the following
formula to calculate the collection efficiency (E) for each stage.
5.4.4.1 Use the formula in Section 5.2.5.3 of this method to
calculate the standard deviation ([sigma]) for the replicate
measurements. If [sigma] exceeds 0.10, repeat the replicate runs.
5.4.4.2 Use the following formula to calculate the average
collection efficiency (Eavg) for each set of replicate
measurements.
Eavg=(E1+E2+E3)/3
where E1, E2, and E3 are replicate
measurements of E.
5.4.4.3 Use the following formula to calculate Stk for each
Eavg.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.048
where:
D = Aerodynamic diameter of the test particle, cm (g/
cm\3\)1/2.
Q = Gas flow rate through the calibration stage at inlet conditions,
cm\3\/sec.
[mu] = Gas viscosity, micropoise.
A = Total cross-sectional area of the jets of the calibration stage,
cm2.
dj = Diameter of one jet of the calibration stage, cm.
5.4.4.4 Determine Stk50 for each calibration stage by
plotting Eavg versus Stk on log-log paper. Stk50
is the Stk number at 50 percent efficiency. Note that particle bounce
can cause efficiency to decrease at high values of Stk. Thus, 50 percent
efficiency can occur at multiple values of Stk. The calibration data
should clearly indicate the value of Stk50 for minimum
particle bounce. Impactor efficiency versus Stk with minimal particle
bounce is characterized by a monotonically increasing function with
constant or increasing slope with increasing Stk.
5.4.4.5 The Stk50 of the first calibration stage can
potentially decrease with decreasing nozzle size. Therefore,
calibrations should be performed with enough nozzle sizes to provide a
measured value within 25 percent of any nozzle size used in
PM10 measurements.
5.4.5 Criteria For Acceptance. Plot Eavg for the first
calibration stage versus the square root of the ratio of Stk to
Stk50 on Figure 9 of this method. Draw a smooth curve through
all of the points. The curve shall be within the banded region.
6. Calculations
Calculations are as specified in Method 5, sections 6.3 through 6.7, and
6.9 through 6.11, with the addition of the following:
6.1 Nomenclature.
Bws=Moisture fraction of stack, by volume, dimensionless.
C1=Viscosity constant, 51.12 micropoise for [deg]K (51.05
micropoise for [deg]R).
C2=Viscosity constant, 0.372 micropoise/ [deg]K (0.207
micropoise/[deg]R).
C3=Viscosity constant, 1.05x10-4 micropoise/
[deg]K2 (3.24x10-5 micropoise/[deg]R2).
C4=Viscosity constant, 53.147 micropoise/fraction
O2.
C5=Viscosity constant, 74.143 micropoise/fraction
H2O.
D50=Diameter of particles having a 50 percent probability of
penetration, [mu]m.
fo=Stack gas fraction O2, by volume, dry basis.
K1=0.3858 [deg]K/mm Hg (17.64 [deg]R/in. Hg).
Mw=Wet molecular weight of stack gas, g/g-mole (lb/lb-mole).
Md=Dry molecular weight of stack gas, g/g-mole (1b/1b-mole).
Pbar=Barometric pressure at sampling site, mm Hg (in. Hg).
Ps=Absolute stack pressure, mm Hg (in. Hg).
Qs=Total cyclone flow rate at wet cyclone conditions, m\3\/
min (ft\3\/min).
Qs[lpar]std[rpar]=Total cyclone flow rate at standard
conditions, dscm/min (dscf/min).
Tm=Average absolute temperature of dry meter, [deg]K
([deg]R).
Ts=Average absolute stack gas temperature, [deg]K ([deg]R).
[[Page 392]]
Vw[lpar]std[rpar]=Volume of water vapor in gas sample
(standard conditions), scm (scf).
[thetas]=Total sampling time, min.
[mu]s=Viscosity of stack gas, micropoise.
6.2 Analysis of Cascade Impactor Data. Use the manufacturer's
recommended procedures to analyze data from cascade impactors.
6.3 Analysis of Cyclone Data. Use the following procedures to
analyze data from a single stage cyclone.
6.3.1 PM10 Weight. Determine the PM catch in the
PM10 range from the sum of the weights obtained from
Container Numbers 1 and 3 less the acetone blank.
6.3.2 Total PM Weight (optional). Determine the PM catch for greater
than PM10 from the weight obtained from Container Number 2
less the acetone blank, and add it to the PM10 weight.
6.3.3 PM10 Fraction. Determine the PM10
fraction of the total particulate weight by dividing the PM10
particulate weight by the total particulate weight.
6.3.4 Aerodynamic Cut Size. Calculate the stack gas viscosity as
follows:
[mu]s=C1+C2Ts+C3Ts
2+C4f02-C5Bws
6.3.4.1 The PM10 flow rate, at actual cyclone conditions,
is calculated as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.049
6.3.4.2 Calculate the molecular weight on a wet basis of the stack
gas as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.050
6.3.4.3 Calculate the actual D50 of the cyclone for the
given conditions as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.051
where [beta]1=0.027754 for metric units (0.15625 for English units).
6.3.5 Acceptable Results. The results are acceptable if two
conditions are met. The first is that 9.0 [mu]m <= D50 <=
11.0 [mu]m. The second is that no sampling points are outside
[Delta]pmin and [Delta]pmax, or that 80 percent <=
I <= 120 percent and no more than one sampling point is outside
[Delta]pmin and [Delta]pmax. If D50 is
less than 9.0 [mu]m, reject the results and repeat the test.
7. Bibliography
1. Same as Bibliography in Method 5.
2. McCain, J.D., J.W. Ragland, and A.D. Williamson. Recommended
Methodology for the Determination of Particle Size Distributions in
Ducted Sources, Final Report. Prepared for the California Air Resources
Board by Southern Research Institute. May 1986.
3. Farthing, W.E., S.S. Dawes, A.D. Williamson, J.D. McCain, R.S.
Martin, and J.W. Ragland. Development of Sampling Methods for Source
PM10 Emissions. Southern Research Institute for the
Environmental Protection Agency. April 1989. NTIS PB 89 190375, EPA/600/
3-88-056.
4. Application Guide for Source PM10 Measurement with
Constant Sampling Rate, EPA/600/3-88-057.
[[Page 393]]
[[Page 394]]
[[Page 395]]
Barometric pressure,
Pbar, in. Hg= ------
Stack static pressure,
Pg, in. H2 O= ------
Average stack temperature,
ts, [deg]F= ------
Meter temperature, tm, [deg]F= ------
Orifice [Delta]H@, in. H2 O= ------
Gas analysis:
%CO2= ------
%O2= ------
%N2+%CO= ------
Fraction moisture content,
Bws= ------
Molecular weight of stack gas, dry basis:
Md=0.44 (%CO2)+0.32 (%O2)+0.28
(%N2+%CO)= ------ lb/lb mole
Molecular weight of stack gas, wet basis:
Mw=Md (1-Bws)+18 (Bws)= ----
-- lb/lb mole
Absolute stack pressure:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.073
Viscosity of stack gas:
[mu]s=152.418+0.2552 ts+3.2355x10-5
ts2+0.53147 (%02)-74.143 Bws= ------
micropoise
Cyclone flow rate:
[[Page 396]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.052
Figure 4. Example worksheet 1, cyclone flow rate and [Delta]H.
Orifice pressure head ([Delta]H) needed for cyclone flow rate:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.053
Calculate [Delta] H for three temperatures:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ts, [deg]F
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Delta]H, in. H2O
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stack viscosity, [mu]s,
micropoise = ------
Absolute stack pressure,
Ps, in. Hg = ------
Average stack temperature,
ts, [deg]F = ------
Meter temperature, tm, [deg]F = ------
Method 201A pitot coefficient,
Cp = ------
Cyclone flow rate, ft\3\/min,
Qs = ------
Method 2 pitot coefficient,
Cp' = ------
Molecular weight of stack gas, wet basis,
Mw = ------
Nozzle diameter, Dn, in. = ------
Nozzle velocity:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.054
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.055
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.056
Maximum and minimum velocities:
Calculate Rmin
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.057
If Rmin is less than 0.5, or if an imaginary number
occurs when calculating Rmin, use Equation 1 to calculate
vmin. Otherwise, use Equation 2.
Eq. 1 vmin = vn (0.5) = ---- ft/sec
[[Page 397]]
Eq. 2 vmin =vn Rmin = ---- ft/sec
Calculate Rmax.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.058
If Rmax is greater than 1.5, use Equation 3 to calculate
vmax. Otherwise, use Equation 4.
Eq. 3 vmax = vn (1.5) = ---- ft/sec
Eq. 4 vmax =vn Rmax = ---- ft/sec
Figure 5. Example worksheet 2, nozzle selection.
Maximum and minimum velocity head values:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.059
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.060
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nozzle No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dn, in.............................................. ... ... ... ...
vn, ft/sec.......................................... ... ... ... ...
vmin, ft/sec........................................ ... ... ... ...
vmax, ft/sec........................................ ... ... ... ...
[Delta]pmin, in. H2O................................ ... ... ... ...
[Delta]pmax, in. H2O................................ ... ... ... ...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Velocity traverse data:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.061
Total run time, minutes = ------
Number of traverse points =
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.062
where:
t1 = dwell time at first traverse point, minutes.
[Delta]p'1 = the velocity head at the first traverse point
(from a previous traverse), in. H20.
[Delta]p'avg = the square of the average square root of the
[Delta]p's (from a previous velocity traverse), in. H20.
At subsequent traverse points, measure the velocity [Delta]p and
calculate the dwell time by using the following equation:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.063
[[Page 398]]
where:
tn = dwell time at traverse point n, minutes.
[Delta]pn = measured velocity head at point n, in.
H20.
[Delta]p1 = measured velocity head at point 1 in.
H20.
Figure 6. Example worksheet 3, dwell time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Port
Point No. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Delta]p t [Delta]p t [Delta]p t [Delta]p t
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 ............ ......... ........... ......... ........... ......... ........... .........
2 ............ ......... ........... ......... ........... ......... ........... .........
3 ............ ......... ........... ......... ........... ......... ........... .........
4 ............ ......... ........... ......... ........... ......... ........... .........
5 ............ ......... ........... ......... ........... ......... ........... .........
6 ............ ......... ........... ......... ........... ......... ........... .........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Plant ------
Date ------
Run no. ------
Filter no. ------
Amount of liquid lost during
transport ------
Acetone blank volume, ml ------
Acetone wash volume, ml (4) ------
(5) ------
Acetone blank conc., mg/mg (Equation 5-4,
Method 5) ------
Acetone wash blank, mg (Equation 5-5,
Method 5) ------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weight of PM10 (mg)
-----------------------------
Container No. Final Tare Weight
weight weight gain
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1......................................... ........ ........ ........
3......................................... ........ ........ ........
---------
Total................................. ........ ........ ........
---------
Less acetone blank.................... ........ ........ ........
---------
Weight of PM10........................ ........ ........ ........
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Figure 7. Method 201A analysis sheet.
Table 1--Performance Specifications for Source PM10 Cyclones and Nozzle
Combinations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parameter Units Specifications
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Collection efficiency......... Percent......... Such that
collection
efficiency falls
within envelope
specified by
Section 5.2.6 and
Figure 8.
2. Cyclone cut size (D50)........ [mu]m........... 101 [mu]m
aerodynamic
diameter.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2--Particle Sizes and Nominal Gas Velocities for Efficiency
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target gas velocities (m/sec)
--------------------------------------------------------------
Particle size ([mu]m)a 71.0 thn-eq>1.5 thn-eq>2.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
50.5....................... ................... ................... ...................
70.5....................... ................... ................... ...................
100.5...................... ................... ................... ...................
141.0...................... ................... ................... ...................
201.0...................... ................... ................... ...................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Mass median aerodynamic diameter.
[[Page 399]]
[[Page 400]]
Method 202--Determination of Condensible Particulate Emissions From
Stationary Sources
1. Applicability and Principle
1.1 Applicability.
1.1.1 This method applies to the determination of condensible
particulate matter (CPM) emissions from stationary sources. It is
intended to represent condensible matter as material that condenses
after passing through a filter and as measured by this method (Note: The
filter catch can be analyzed according to the appropriate method).
1.1.2 This method may be used in conjunction with Method 201 or 201A
if the probes are glass-lined. Using Method 202 in conjunction with
Method 201 or 201A, only the impinger train configuration and analysis
is addressed by this method. The sample train operation and front end
recovery and analysis shall be conducted according to Method 201 or
201A.
1.1.3 This method may also be modified to measure material that
condenses at other temperatures by specifying the filter and probe
temperature. A heated Method 5 out-of-stack filter may be used instead
of the in-stack filter to determine condensible emissions at wet
sources.
1.2 Principle.
1.2.1 The CPM is collected in the impinger portion of a Method 17
(appendix A, 40 CFR part 60) type sampling train. The impinger contents
are immediately purged after the run with nitrogen (N2) to
remove dissolved sulfur dioxide (SO2) gases from the impinger
contents. The impinger solution is then extracted with methylene
chloride (MeCl2). The organic and aqueous fractions are then
taken to dryness and the residues weighed. The total of both fractions
represents the CPM.
1.2.2 The potential for low collection efficiency exist at oil-fired
boilers. To improve the collection efficiency at these type of sources,
an additional filter placed between the second and third impinger is
recommended.
[[Page 401]]
2. Precision and Interference
2.1 Precision. The precision based on method development tests at an
oil-fired boiler and a catalytic cracker were 11.7 and 4.8 percent,
respectively.
2.2 Interference. Ammonia. In sources that use ammonia injection as
a control technique for hydrogen chloride (HC1), the ammonia interferes
by reacting with HC1 in the gas stream to form ammonium chloride
(NH4 C1) which would be measured as CPM. The sample may be
analyzed for chloride and the equivalent amount of NH4 C1 can
be subtracted from the CPM weight. However, if NH4 C1 is to
be counted as CPM, the inorganic fraction should be taken to near
dryness (less than 1 ml liquid) in the oven and then allowed to air dry
at ambient temperature to prevent any NH4 C1 from vaporizing.
3. Apparatus
3.1 Sampling Train. Same as in Method 17, section 2.1, with the
following exceptions noted below (see Figure 202-1). Note: Mention of
trade names or specific products does not constitute endorsement by EPA.
3.1.1 The probe extension shall be glass-lined or Teflon.
3.1.2 Both the first and second impingers shall be of the Greenburg-
Smith design with the standard tip.
3.1.3 All sampling train glassware shall be cleaned prior to the
test with soap and tap water, water, and rinsed using tap water, water,
acetone, and finally, MeCl2. It is important to completely
remove all silicone grease from areas that will be exposed to the
MeCl2 during sample recovery.
3.2 Sample Recovery. Same as in Method 17, section 2.2, with the
following additions:
3.2.1 N2 Purge Line. Inert tubing and fittings capable of
delivering 0 to 28 liters/min of N2 gas to the impinger train
from a standard gas cylinder (see Figure 202-2). Standard 0.95 cm (\3/
8\-inch) plastic tubing and compression fittings in conjunction with an
adjustable pressure regulator and needle valve may be used.
3.2.2 Rotameter. Capable of measuring gas flow at 20 liters/min.
3.3 Analysis. The following equipment is necessary in addition to
that listed in Method 17, section 2.3:
3.3.1 Separatory Funnel. Glass, 1-liter.
3.3.2 Weighing Tins. 350-ml.
3.3.3 Dry Equipment. Hot plate and oven with temperature control.
3.3.4 Pipets. 5-ml.
3.3.5 Ion Chromatograph. Same as in Method 5F, Section 2.1.6.
4. Reagents
Unless otherwise indicated, all reagents must conform to the
specifications established by the Committee on Analytical Reagents of
the American Chemical Society. Where such specifications are not
available, use the best available grade.
4.1 Sampling. Same as in Method 17, section 3.1, with the addition
of deionized distilled water to conform to the American Society for
Testing and Materials Specification D 1193-74, Type II and the omittance
of section 3.1.4.
4.2 Sample Recovery. Same as in Method 17, section 3.2, with the
following additions:
4.2.1 N2 Gas. Zero N2 gas at delivery
pressures high enough to provide a flow of 20 liters/min for 1 hour
through the sampling train.
4.2.2 Methylene Chloride, ACS grade. Blanks shall be run prior to
use and only methylene chloride with low blank values (0.001 percent)
shall be used.
4.2.3 Water. Same as in section 4.1.
4.3 Analysis. Same as in Method 17, section 3.3, with the following
additions:
4.3.1 Methylene Chloride. Same as section 4.2.2.
4.3.2 Ammonium Hydroxide. Concentrated (14.8 M) NH4 OH.
4.3.3 Water. Same as in section 4.1.
4.3.4 Phenolphthalein. The pH indicator solution, 0.05 percent in 50
percent alcohol.
5. Procedure
5.1 Sampling. Same as in Method 17, section 4.1, with the following
exceptions:
5.1.1 Place 100 ml of water in the first three impingers.
5.1.2 The use of silicone grease in train assembly is not
recommended because it is very soluble in MeCl2 which may
result in sample contamination. Teflon tape or similar means may be used
to provide leak-free connections between glassware.
5.2 Sample Recovery. Same as in Method 17, section 4.2 with the
addition of a post-test N2 purge and specific changes in
handling of individual samples as described below.
5.2.1 Post-test N2 Purge for Sources Emitting
SO2. (Note: This step is recommended, but is optional. With
little or no SO2 is present in the gas stream, i.e., the pH
of the impinger solution is greater than 4.5, purging has been found to
be unnecessary.) As soon as possible after the post-test leak check,
detach the probe and filter from the impinger train. Leave the ice in
the impinger box to prevent removal of moisture during the purge. If
necessary, add more ice during the purge to maintain the gas temperature
below 20 [deg]C. With no flow of gas through the clean purge line and
fittings, attach it to the input of the impinger train (see Figure 202-
2). To avoid over- or under-pressurizing the impinger array, slowly
commence the N2 gas flow through the line while
simultaneously opening the meter box pump valve(s). When using the gas
cylinder pressure to push the purge gas through the sample train, adjust
the flow rate to 20 liters/min through the rotameter. When pulling the
[[Page 402]]
purge gas through the sample train using the meter box vacuum pump, set
the orifice pressure differential to [Delta]H@ and maintain
an overflow rate through the rotameter of less than 2 liters/min. This
will guarantee that the N2 delivery system is operating at
greater than ambient pressure and prevents the possibility of passing
ambient air (rather than N2) through the impingers. Continue
the purge under these conditions for 1 hour, checking the rotameter and
[Delta]H value(s) periodically. After 1 hour, simultaneously turn off
the delivery and pumping systems.
5.2.2 Sample Handling.
5.2.2.1 Container Nos. 1, 2, and 3. If filter catch is to be
determined, as detailed in Method 17, section 4.2.
5.2.2.2 Container No. 4 (Impinger Contents). Measure the liquid in
the first three impingers to within 1 ml using a clean graduated
cylinder or by weighing it to within 0.5 g using a balance. Record the
volume or weight of liquid present to be used to calculate the moisture
content of the effluent gas. Quantitatively transfer this liquid into a
clean sample bottle (glass or plastic); rinse each impinger and the
connecting glassware, including probe extension, twice with water,
recover the rinse water, and add it to the same sample bottle. Mark the
liquid level on the bottle.
5.2.2.3 Container No. 5 (MeCl2 Rinse). Follow the water
rinses of each impinger and the connecting glassware, including the
probe extension with two rinses of MeCl2; save the rinse
products in a clean, glass sample jar. Mark the liquid level on the jar.
5.2.2.4 Container No. 6 (Water Blank). Once during each field test,
place 500 ml of water in a separate sample container.
5.2.2.5 Container No. 7 (MeCl2 Blank). Once during each
field test, place in a separate glass sample jar a volume of
MeCl2 approximately equivalent to the volume used to conduct
the MeCl2 rinse of the impingers.
5.3 Analysis. Record the data required on a sheet such as the one
shown in Figure 202-3. Handle each sample container as follows:
5.3.1 Container Nos. 1, 2, and 3. If filter catch is analyzed, as
detailed in Method 17, section 4.3.
5.3.2 Container Nos. 4 and 5. Note the level of liquid in the
containers and confirm on the analytical data sheet whether leakage
occurred during transport. If a noticeable amount of leakage has
occurred, either void the sample or use methods, subject to the approval
of the Administrator, to correct the final results. Measure the liquid
in Container No. 4 either volumetrically to 1 ml
or gravimetrically to 0.5 g. Remove a 5-ml aliquot
and set aside for later ion chromatographic (IC) analysis of sulfates.
(Note: Do not use this aliquot to determine chlorides since the HCl will
be evaporated during the first drying step; Section 8.2 details a
procedure for this analysis.)
5.3.2.1 Extraction. Separate the organic fraction of the sample by
adding the contents of Container No. 4 (MeCl2) to the
contents of Container No. 4 in a 1000-ml separatory funnel. After
mixing, allow the aqueous and organic phases to fully separate, and
drain off most of the organic/MeCl2 phase. Then add 75 ml of
MeCl2 to the funnel, mix well, and drain off the lower
organic phase. Repeat with another 75 ml of MeCl2. This
extraction should yield about 250 ml of organic extract. Each time,
leave a small amount of the organic/MeCl2 phase in the
separatory funnel ensuring that no water is collected in the organic
phase. Place the organic extract in a tared 350-ml weighing tin.
5.3.2.2 Organic Fraction Weight Determination (Organic Phase from
Container Nos. 4 and 5). Evaporate the organic extract at room
temperature and pressure in a laboratory hood. Following evaporation,
desiccate the organic fraction for 24 hours in a desiccator containing
anhydrous calcium sulfate. Weigh to a constant weight and report the
results to the nearest 0.1 mg.
5.3.2.3 Inorganic Fraction Weight Determination. (Note: If
NH4 Cl is to be counted as CPM, the inorganic fraction should
be taken to near dryness (less than 1 ml liquid) in the oven and then
allow to air dry at ambient temperature. If multiple acid emissions are
suspected, the ammonia titration procedure in section 8.1 may be
preferred.) Using a hot plate, or equivalent, evaporate the aqueous
phase to approximately 50 ml; then, evaporate to dryness in a 105 [deg]C
oven. Redissovle the residue in 100 ml of water. Add five drops of
phenolphthalein to this solution; then, add concentrated (14.8 M)
NH4 OH until the sample turns pink. Any excess NH2
OH will be evaporated during the drying step. Evaporate the sample to
dryness in a 105 [deg]C oven, desiccate the sample for 24 hours, weigh
to a constant weight, and record the results to the nearest 0.1 mg.
(Note: The addition of NH4 OH is recommended, but is optional
when little or no SO2 is present in the gas stream, i.e.,
when the pH of the impinger solution is greater than 4.5, the addition
of NH4 OH is not necessary.)
5.3.2.4 Analysis of Sulfate by IC to Determine Ammonium Ion
(NH4+) Retained in the Sample. (Note: If NH4 OH is
not added, omit this step.) Determine the amount of sulfate in the
aliquot taken from Container No. 4 earlier as described in Method 5F
(appendix A, 40 CFR part 60). Based on the IC SO4-2 analysis
of the aliquot, calculate the correction factor to subtract the
NH4+ retained in the sample and to add the combined water
removed by the acid-base reaction (see section 7.2).
5.3.3 Analysis of Water and MeCl2 Blanks (Container Nos.
6 and 7). Analyze these sample blanks as described above in sections
5.3.2.3 and 5.3.2.2, respectively.
[[Page 403]]
5.3.4 Analysis of Acetone Blank (Container No. 8). Same as in Method
17, section 4.3.
6. Calibration
Same as in Method 17, section 5, except for the following:
6.1 IC Calibration. Same as Method 5F, section 5.
6.2 Audit Procedure. Concurrently, analyze the audit sample and a
set of compliance samples in the same manner to evaluate the technique
of the analyst and the standards preparation. The same analyst,
analytical reagents, and analytical system shall be used both for
compliance samples and the EPA audit sample. If this condition is met,
auditing of subsequent compliance analyses for the same enforcement
agency within 30 days is not required. An audit sample set may not be
used to validate different sets of compliance samples under the
jurisdiction of different enforcement agencies, unless prior
arrangements are made with both enforcement agencies.
6.3 Audit Samples. Audit Sample Availability. Audit samples will be
supplied only to enforcement agencies for compliance tests. The
availability of audit samples may be obtained by writing:
Source Test Audit Coordinator (MD-77B), Quality Assurance Division,
Atmospheric Research and Exposure Assessment Laboratory, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle, Park, NC 27711
or by calling the Source Test Audit Coordinator (STAC) at (919) 541-
7834. The request for the audit sample must be made at least 30 days
prior to the scheduled compliance sample analysis.
6.4 Audit Results. Calculate the audit sample concentration
according to the calculation procedure described in the audit
instructions included with the audit sample. Fill in the audit sample
concentration and the analyst's name on the audit response form included
with the audit instructions. Send one copy to the EPA Regional Office or
the appropriate enforcement agency and a second copy to the STAC. The
EPA Regional Office or the appropriate enforcement agency will report
the results of the audit to the laboratory being audited. Include this
response with the results of the compliance samples in relevant reports
to the EPA Regional Office or the appropriate enforcement agency.
7. Calculations
Same as in Method 17, section 6, with the following additions:
7.1 Nomenclature. Same as in Method 17, section 6.1 with the
following additions.
Ccpm=Concentration of the CPM in the stack gas, dry basis,
corrected to standard conditions, g/dscm (g/dscf).
CSO4=Concentration of SO4-2 in the sample, mg/ml.
mb=Sum of the mass of the water and MeCl2 blanks,
mg.
mc=Mass of the NH4+ added to sample to form
ammonium sulfate, mg.
mi=Mass of inorganic CPM matter, mg.
mo=Mass of organic CPM, mg.
mr=Mass of dried sample from inorganic fraction, mg.
Vb=Volume of aliquot taken for IC analysis, ml.
Vic=Volume of impinger contents sample, ml.
7.2 Correction for NH4+ and H2O. Calculate the
correction factor to subtract the NH4+ retained in the sample
based on the IC SO4-2 and if desired, add the combined water
removed by the acid-base reaction.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.064
=0.1840, when only correcting for NH4+.
7.3 Mass of Inorganic CPM.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.065
7.4
Concentration of CPM.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.066
8. Alternative Procedures
8.1 Determination of NH4+ Retained in Sample by
Titration.
8.1.1 An alternative procedure to determine the amount of
NH4+ added to the inorganic fraction by titration may be
used. After dissolving the inorganic residue in 100 ml of water, titrate
the solution with 0.1 N NH4 OH to a pH of 7.0, as indicated
by a pH meter. The 0.1 N NH4 OH is made as follows: Add 7 ml
of concentrated (14.8 M) NH4 OH to 1 liter of water.
Standardize against standardized 0.1 N H2 SO4 and
calculate the exact normality using a procedure parallel to that
described in section 5.5 of Method 6 (appendix A, 40 CFR part 60).
Alternatively, purchase 0.1 N NH4 OH that has been
standardized against a National Institute of Standards and Technology
reference material.
8.1.2 Calculate the concentration of SO4-2 in the sample
using the following equation.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.067
where
N = Normality of the NH4OH, mg/ml.
Vt = Volume of NH4 OH titrant, ml.
48.03 = mg/meq.
100 = Volume of solution, ml.
[[Page 404]]
8.3.1 Calculate the CPM as described in section 7.
8.2 Analysis of Chlorides by IC. At the conclusion of the final
weighing as described in section 5.3.2.3, redissolve the inorganic
fraction in 100 ml of water. Analyze an aliquot of the redissolved
sample for chlorides by IC using techniques similar to those described
in Method 5F for sulfates. Previous drying of the sample should have
removed all HCl. Therefore, the remaining chlorides measured by IC can
be assumed to be NH4 Cl, and this weight can be subtracted
from the weight determined for CPM.
8.3 Air Purge to Remove SO2 from Impinger Contents. As an
alternative to the post-test N2 purge described in section
5.2.1, the tester may opt to conduct the post-test purge with air at 20
liter/min. Note: The use of an air purge is not as effective as a
N2 purge.
8.4 Chloroform-ether Extraction. As an alternative to the methylene
chloride extraction described in section 5.3.2.1, the tester may opt to
conduct a chloroform-ether extraction. Note: The Chloroform-ether was
not as effective as the MeCl2 in removing the organics, but
it was found to be an acceptable organic extractant. Chloroform and
diethylether of ACS grade, with low blank values (0.001 percent), shall
be used. Analysis of the chloroform and diethylether blanks shall be
conducted according to Section 5.3.3 for MeCl2.
8.4.1 Add the contents of Container No. 4 to a 1000-ml separatory
funnel. Then add 75 ml of chloroform to the funnel, mix well, and drain
off the lower organic phase. Repeat two more times with 75 ml of
chloroform. Then perform three extractions with 75 ml of diethylether.
This extraction should yield approximately 450 ml of organic extraction.
Each time, leave a small amount of the organic/MeCl2 phase in
the separatory funnel ensuring that no water is collected in the organic
phase.
8.4.2 Add the contents of Container No. 5 to the organic extraction.
Place approximately 300 ml of the organic extract in a tared 350-ml
weighing tin while storing the remaining organic extract in a sample
container. As the organic extract evaporates, add the remaining extract
to the weighing tin.
8.4.3 Determine the weight of the organic phase as described in
Section 5.3.2.2.
8.5 Improving Collection Efficiency. If low impinger collection
efficiency is suspected, the following procedure may be used.
8.5.1 Place an out-of-stock filter as described in Method 8 between
the second and third impingers.
8.5.2 Recover and analyze the filter according to Method 17, Section
4.2. Include the filter holder as part of the connecting glassware and
handle as described in sections 5.2.2.2 and 5.2.2.3.
8.5.3 Calculate the Concentration of CPM as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TC08NO91.068
where:
mf = amount of CPM collected on out-of-stack filter, mg.
8.6 Wet Source Testing. When testing at a wet source, use a heated
out-of-stack filter as described in Method 5.
9. Bibliography
1. DeWees, W.D., S.C. Steinsberger, G.M. Plummer, L.T. Lay, G.D.
McAlister, and R.T. Shigehara. ``Laboratory and Field Evaluation of the
EPA Method 5 Impinger Catch for Measuring Condensible Matter from
Stationary Sources.'' Paper presented at the 1989 EPA/AWMA International
Symposium on Measurement of Toxic and Related Air Pollutants. Raleigh,
North Carolina. May 1-5, 1989.
2. DeWees, W.D. and K.C. Steinsberger. ``Method Development and
Evaluation of Draft Protocol for Measurement of Condensible Particulate
Emissions.'' Draft Report. November 17, 1989.
3. Texas Air Control Board, Laboratory Division. ``Determination of
Particulate in Stack Gases Containing Sulfuric Acid and/or Sulfur
Dioxide.'' Laboratory Methods for Determination of Air Pollutants.
Modified December 3, 1976.
4. Nothstein, Greg. Masters Thesis. University of Washington.
Department of Environmental Health. Seattle, Washington.
5. ``Particulate Source Test Procedures Adopted by Puget Sound Air
Pollution Control Agency Board of Directors.'' Puget Sound Air Pollution
Control Agency, Engineering Division. Seattle, Washington. August 11,
1983.
6. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Environmental
Resources. Chapter 139, Sampling and Testing (Title 25, Rules and
Regulations, Part I, Department of Environmental Resources, Subpart C,
Protection of Natural Resources, Article III, Air Resources). January 8,
1960.
7. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. Air Management
Operations Handbook, Revision 3. January 11, 1988.
[[Page 405]]
[[Page 406]]
Moisture Determination
Volume or weight of liquid in impingers: ------ ml or g
Weight of moisture in silica gel: ------ g
Sample Preparation (Container No. 4)
Amount of liquid lost during transport: ------ ml
Final volume: ------ ml
pH of sample prior to analysis: ------
[[Page 407]]
Addition of NH4 OH required: ------
Sample extracted 2X with 75 ml MeCl2?: ------
For Titration of Sulfate
Normality of NH2 OH: ------ N
Volume of sample titrated: ------ ml
Volume of titrant: ------ ml
Sample Analysis
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weight of condensible
particulate, mg
Container number --------------------------
Final Tare Weight
weight weight gain
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4 (Inorganic)................................ ....... ....... .......
4 & 5 (Organic).............................. ....... ....... .......
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total: ------
Less Blank: ------
Weight of Consensible Particulate:
Figure 202-3. Analytical data sheet.
Method 204--Criteria for and Verification of a Permanent or Temporary
Total Enclosure
1. Scope and Application
This procedure is used to determine whether a permanent or temporary
enclosure meets the criteria for a total enclosure. An existing building
may be used as a temporary or permanent enclosure as long as it meets
the appropriate criteria described in this method.
2. Summary of Method
An enclosure is evaluated against a set of criteria. If the criteria
are met and if all the exhaust gases from the enclosure are ducted to a
control device, then the volatile organic compounds (VOC) capture
efficiency (CE) is assumed to be 100 percent, and CE need not be
measured. However, if part of the exhaust gas stream is not ducted to a
control device, CE must be determined.
3. Definitions
3.1 Natural Draft Opening (NDO). Any permanent opening in the
enclosure that remains open during operation of the facility and is not
connected to a duct in which a fan is installed.
3.2 Permanent Total Enclosure (PE). A permanently installed
enclosure that completely surrounds a source of emissions such that all
VOC emissions are captured and contained for discharge to a control
device.
3.3 Temporary Total Enclosure (TTE). A temporarily installed
enclosure that completely surrounds a source of emissions such that all
VOC emissions that are not directed through the control device (i.e.
uncaptured) are captured by the enclosure and contained for discharge
through ducts that allow for the accurate measurement of the uncaptured
VOC emissions.
3.4 Building Enclosure (BE). An existing building that is used as a
TTE.
4. Safety
An evaluation of the proposed building materials and the design for
the enclosure is recommended to minimize any potential hazards.
5. Criteria for Temporary Total Enclosure
5.1 Any NDO shall be at least four equivalent opening diameters from
each VOC emitting point unless otherwise specified by the Administrator.
5.2 Any exhaust point from the enclosure shall be at least four
equivalent duct or hood diameters from each NDO.
5.3 The total area of all NDO's shall not exceed 5 percent of the
surface area of the enclosure's four walls, floor, and ceiling.
5.4 The average facial velocity (FV) of air through all NDO's shall
be at least 3,600 m/hr (200 fpm). The direction of air flow through all
NDO's shall be into the enclosure.
5.5 All access doors and windows whose areas are not included in
section 5.3 and are not included in the calculation in section 5.4 shall
be closed during routine operation of the process.
6. Criteria for a Permanent Total Enclosure
6.1 Same as sections 5.1 and 5.3 through 5.5.
6.2 All VOC emissions must be captured and contained for discharge
through a control device.
7. Quality Control
7.1 The success of this method lies in designing the TTE to simulate
the conditions that exist without the TTE (i.e., the effect of the TTE
on the normal flow patterns around the affected facility or the amount
of uncaptured VOC emissions should be minimal). The TTE must enclose the
application stations, coating reservoirs, and all areas from the
application station to the oven. The oven does not have to be enclosed
if it is under negative pressure. The NDO's of the temporary enclosure
and an exhaust fan must be properly sized and placed.
7.2 Estimate the ventilation rate of the TTE that best simulates the
conditions that exist without the TTE (i.e., the effect of the TTE on
the normal flow patterns around the affected facility or the amount of
uncaptured VOC emissions should be minimal). Figure 204-1 or the
following equation may be used as an aid.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.000
[[Page 408]]
Measure the concentration (CG) and flow rate (QG)
of the captured gas stream, specify a safe concentration (CF)
for the uncaptured gas stream, estimate the CE, and then use the plot in
Figure 204-1 or Equation 204-1 to determine the volumetric flow rate of
the uncaptured gas stream (QF). An exhaust fan that has a variable flow
control is desirable.
7.3 Monitor the VOC concentration of the captured gas steam in the
duct before the capture device without the TTE. To minimize the effect
of temporal variation on the captured emissions, the baseline
measurement should be made over as long a time period as practical.
However, the process conditions must be the same for the measurement in
section 7.5 as they are for this baseline measurement. This may require
short measuring times for this quality control check before and after
the construction of the TTE.
7.4 After the TTE is constructed, monitor the VOC concentration
inside the TTE. This concentration should not continue to increase, and
must not exceed the safe level according to Occupational Safety and
Health Administration requirements for permissible exposure limits. An
increase in VOC concentration indicates poor TTE design.
7.5 Monitor the VOC concentration of the captured gas stream in the
duct before the capture device with the TTE. To limit the effect of the
TTE on the process, the VOC concentration with and without the TTE must
be within 10 percent. If the measurements do not agree, adjust the
ventilation rate from the TTE until they agree within 10 percent.
8. Procedure
8.1 Determine the equivalent diameters of the NDO's and determine
the distances from each VOC emitting point to all NDO's. Determine the
equivalent diameter of each exhaust duct or hood and its distance to all
NDO's. Calculate the distances in terms of equivalent diameters. The
number of equivalent diameters shall be at least four.
8.2 Measure the total surface area (AT) of the enclosure
and the total area (AN) of all NDO's in the enclosure.
Calculate the NDO to enclosure area ratio (NEAR) as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.001
The NEAR must be <=10.05.
8.3 Measure the volumetric flow rate, corrected to standard
conditions, of each gas stream exiting the enclosure through an exhaust
duct or hood using EPA Method 2. In some cases (e.g., when the building
is the enclosure), it may be necessary to measure the volumetric flow
rate, corrected to standard conditions, of each gas stream entering the
enclosure through a forced makeup air duct using Method 2. Calculate FV
using the following equation:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.002
where:
QO = the sum of the volumetric flow from all gas streams
exiting the enclosure through an exhaust duct or hood.
QI = the sum of the volumetric flow from all gas streams into
the enclosure through a forced makeup air duct; zero, if there is no
forced makeup air into the enclosure.
AN = total area of all NDO's in enclosure.
The FV shall be at least 3,600 m/hr (200 fpm). Alternatively,
measure the pressure differential across the enclosure. A pressure drop
of 0.013 mm Hg (0.007 in. H2O) corresponds to an FV of 3,600
m/hr (200 fpm).
8.4 Verify that the direction of air flow through all NDO's is
inward. If FV is less than 9,000 m/hr (500 fpm), the continuous inward
flow of air shall be verified using streamers, smoke tubes, or tracer
gases. Monitor the direction of air flow for at least 1 hour, with
checks made no more than 10 minutes apart. If FV is greater than 9,000
m/hr (500 fpm), the direction of air flow through the NDOs shall be
presumed to be inward at all times without verification.
9. Diagrams
[[Page 409]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.026
Method 204A--Volatile Organic Compounds Content in Liquid Input Stream
1. Scope and Application
1.1 Applicability. This procedure is applicable for determining the
input of volatile organic compounds (VOC). It is intended to be used in
the development of liquid/gas protocols for determining VOC capture
efficiency (CE) for surface coating and printing operations.
1.2 Principle. The amount of VOC introduced to the process (L) is
the sum of the products of the weight (W) of each VOC containing liquid
(ink, paint, solvent, etc.) used and its VOC content (V).
[[Page 410]]
1.3 Sampling Requirements. A CE test shall consist of at least three
sampling runs. Each run shall cover at least one complete production
cycle, but shall be at least 3 hours long. The sampling time for each
run need not exceed 8 hours, even if the production cycle has not been
completed. Alternative sampling times may be used with the approval of
the Administrator.
2. Summary of Method
The amount of VOC containing liquid introduced to the process is
determined as the weight difference of the feed material before and
after each sampling run. The VOC content of the liquid input material is
determined by volatilizing a small aliquot of the material and analyzing
the volatile material using a flame ionization analyzer (FIA). A sample
of each VOC containing liquid is analyzed with an FIA to determine V.
3. Safety
Because this procedure is often applied in highly explosive areas,
caution and care should be exercised in choosing, installing, and using
the appropriate equipment.
4. Equipment and Supplies
Mention of trade names or company products does not constitute
endorsement. All gas concentrations (percent, ppm) are by volume, unless
otherwise noted.
4.1 Liquid Weight.
4.1.1 Balances/Digital Scales. To weigh drums of VOC containing
liquids to within 0.2 lb or 1.0 percent of the total weight of VOC
liquid used.
4.1.2 Volume Measurement Apparatus (Alternative). Volume meters,
flow meters, density measurement equipment, etc., as needed to achieve
the same accuracy as direct weight measurements.
4.2 VOC Content (FIA Technique). The liquid sample analysis system
is shown in Figures 204A-1 and 204A-2. The following equipment is
required:
4.2.1 Sample Collection Can. An appropriately-sized metal can to be
used to collect VOC containing materials. The can must be constructed in
such a way that it can be grounded to the coating container.
4.2.2 Needle Valves. To control gas flow.
4.2.3 Regulators. For carrier gas and calibration gas cylinders.
4.2.4 Tubing. Teflon or stainless steel tubing with diameters and
lengths determined by connection requirements of equipment. The tubing
between the sample oven outlet and the FIA shall be heated to maintain a
temperature of 1205 [deg]C.
4.2.5 Atmospheric Vent. A tee and 0- to 0.5-liter/min rotameter
placed in the sampling line between the carrier gas cylinder and the VOC
sample vessel to release the excess carrier gas. A toggle valve placed
between the tee and the rotameter facilitates leak tests of the analysis
system.
4.2.6 Thermometer. Capable of measuring the temperature of the hot
water bath to within 1 [deg]C.
4.2.7 Sample Oven. Heated enclosure, containing calibration gas coil
heaters, critical orifice, aspirator, and other liquid sample analysis
components, capable of maintaining a temperature of 1205 [deg]C.
4.2.8 Gas Coil Heaters. Sufficient lengths of stainless steel or
Teflon tubing to allow zero and calibration gases to be heated to the
sample oven temperature before entering the critical orifice or
aspirator.
4.2.9 Water Bath. Capable of heating and maintaining a sample vessel
temperature of 1005 [deg]C.
4.2.10 Analytical Balance. To measure 0.001 g.
4.2.11 Disposable Syringes. 2-cc or 5-cc.
4.2.12 Sample Vessel. Glass, 40-ml septum vial. A separate vessel is
needed for each sample.
4.2.13 Rubber Stopper. Two-hole stopper to accommodate 3.2-mm (\1/
8\-in.) Teflon tubing, appropriately sized to fit the opening of the
sample vessel. The rubber stopper should be wrapped in Teflon tape to
provide a tighter seal and to prevent any reaction of the sample with
the rubber stopper. Alternatively, any leak-free closure fabricated of
nonreactive materials and accommodating the necessary tubing fittings
may be used.
4.2.14 Critical Orifices. Calibrated critical orifices capable of
providing constant flow rates from 50 to 250 ml/min at known pressure
drops. Sapphire orifice assemblies (available from O'Keefe Controls
Company) and glass capillary tubing have been found to be adequate for
this application.
4.2.15 Vacuum Gauge. Zero to 760-mm (0- to 30-in.) Hg U-Tube
manometer or vacuum gauge.
4.2.16 Pressure Gauge. Bourdon gauge capable of measuring the
maximum air pressure at the aspirator inlet (e.g., 100 psig).
4.2.17 Aspirator. A device capable of generating sufficient vacuum
at the sample vessel to create critical flow through the calibrated
orifice when sufficient air pressure is present at the aspirator inlet.
The aspirator must also provide sufficient sample pressure to operate
the FIA. The sample is also mixed with the dilution gas within the
aspirator.
4.2.18 Soap Bubble Meter. Of an appropriate size to calibrate the
critical orifices in the system.
4.2.19 Organic Concentration Analyzer. An FIA with a span value of
1.5 times the expected concentration as propane; however, other span
values may be used if it can be demonstrated that they would provide
more accurate measurements. The FIA instrument should be the same
instrument used in the gaseous analyses adjusted with the same
[[Page 411]]
fuel, combustion air, and sample back-pressure (flow rate) settings. The
system shall be capable of meeting or exceeding the following
specifications:
4.2.19.1 Zero Drift. Less than 3.0 percent of
the span value.
4.2.19.2 Calibration Drift. Less than 3.0
percent of the span value.
4.2.19.3 Calibration Error. Less than 5.0
percent of the calibration gas value.
4.2.20 Integrator/Data Acquisition System. An analog or digital
device or computerized data acquisition system used to integrate the FIA
response or compute the average response and record measurement data.
The minimum data sampling frequency for computing average or integrated
values is one measurement value every 5 seconds. The device shall be
capable of recording average values at least once per minute.
4.2.21 Chart Recorder (Optional). A chart recorder or similar device
is recommended to provide a continuous analog display of the measurement
results during the liquid sample analysis.
5. Reagents and Standards
5.1 Calibration and Other Gases. Gases used for calibration, fuel,
and combustion air (if required) are contained in compressed gas
cylinders. All calibration gases shall be traceable to National
Institute of Standards and Technology standards and shall be certified
by the manufacturer to 1 percent of the tag value.
Additionally, the manufacturer of the cylinder should provide a
recommended shelf life for each calibration gas cylinder over which the
concentration does not change more than 2 percent
from the certified value. For calibration gas values not generally
available, dilution systems calibrated using Method 205 may be used.
Alternative methods for preparing calibration gas mixtures may be used
with the approval of the Administrator.
5.1.1 Fuel. The FIA manufacturer's recommended fuel should be used.
A 40 percent H2/60 percent He or 40 percent H2/60 percent
N2 gas mixture is recommended to avoid an oxygen synergism
effect that reportedly occurs when oxygen concentration varies
significantly from a mean value. Other mixtures may be used provided the
tester can demonstrate to the Administrator that there is no oxygen
synergism effect.
5.1.2 Carrier Gas. High purity air with less than 1 ppm of organic
material (as propane) or less than 0.1 percent of the span value,
whichever is greater.
5.1.3 FIA Linearity Calibration Gases. Low-, mid-, and high-range
gas mixture standards with nominal propane concentrations of 20-30, 45-
55, and 70-80 percent of the span value in air, respectively. Other
calibration values and other span values may be used if it can be shown
to the Administrator's satisfaction that equally accurate measurements
would be achieved.
5.1.4 System Calibration Gas. Gas mixture standard containing
propane in air, approximating the undiluted VOC concentration expected
for the liquid samples.
6. Sample Collection, Preservation and Storage
6.1 Samples must be collected in a manner that prevents or minimizes
loss of volatile components and that does not contaminate the coating
reservoir.
6.2 Collect a 100-ml or larger sample of the VOC containing liquid
mixture at each application location at the beginning and end of each
test run. A separate sample should be taken of each VOC containing
liquid added to the application mixture during the test run. If a fresh
drum is needed during the sampling run, then obtain a sample from the
fresh drum.
6.3 When collecting the sample, ground the sample container to the
coating drum. Fill the sample container as close to the rim as possible
to minimize the amount of headspace.
6.4 After the sample is collected, seal the container so the sample
cannot leak out or evaporate.
6.5 Label the container to clearly identify the contents.
7. Quality Control
7.1 Required instrument quality control parameters are found in the
following sections:
7.1.1 The FIA system must be calibrated as specified in section 8.1.
7.1.2 The system drift check must be performed as specified in
section 8.2.
7.2 Audits.
7.2.1 Audit Procedure. Concurrently, analyze the audit sample and a
set of compliance samples in the same manner to evaluate the technique
of the analyst and the standards preparation. The same analyst,
analytical reagents, and analytical system shall be used both for
compliance samples and the EPA audit sample. If this condition is met,
auditing of subsequent compliance analyses for the same enforcement
agency within 30 days is not required. An audit sample set may not be
used to validate different sets of compliance samples under the
jurisdiction of different enforcement agencies, unless prior
arrangements are made with both enforcement agencies.
7.2.2 Audit Samples and Audit Sample Availability. Audit samples
will be supplied only to enforcement agencies for compliance tests. The
availability of audit samples may be obtained by writing: Source Test
Audit Coordinator (STAC) (MD-77B), Quality Assurance Division,
Atmospheric Research and
[[Page 412]]
Exposure Assessment Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 or by calling the STAC at (919) 541-
7834. The request for the audit sample must be made at least 30 days
prior to the scheduled compliance sample analysis.
7.2.3 Audit Results. Calculate the audit sample concentration
according to the calculation procedure described in the audit
instructions included with the audit sample. Fill in the audit sample
concentration and the analyst's name on the audit response form included
with the audit instructions. Send one copy to the EPA Regional Office or
the appropriate enforcement agency, and a second copy to the STAC. The
EPA Regional Office or the appropriate enforcement agency will report
the results of the audit to the laboratory being audited. Include this
response with the results of the compliance samples in relevant reports
to the EPA Regional Office or the appropriate enforcement agency.
8. Calibration and Standardization
8.1 FIA Calibration and Linearity Check. Make necessary adjustments
to the air and fuel supplies for the FIA and ignite the burner. Allow
the FIA to warm up for the period recommended by the manufacturer.
Inject a calibration gas into the measurement system and adjust the
back-pressure regulator to the value required to achieve the flow rates
specified by the manufacturer. Inject the zero- and the high-range
calibration gases and adjust the analyzer calibration to provide the
proper responses. Inject the low- and mid-range gases and record the
responses of the measurement system. The calibration and linearity of
the system are acceptable if the responses for all four gases are within
5 percent of the respective gas values. If the performance of the system
is not acceptable, repair or adjust the system and repeat the linearity
check. Conduct a calibration and linearity check after assembling the
analysis system and after a major change is made to the system.
8.2 Systems Drift Checks. After each sample, repeat the system
calibration checks in section 9.2.7 before any adjustments to the FIA or
measurement system are made. If the zero or calibration drift exceeds
3 percent of the span value, discard the result
and repeat the analysis.
Alternatively, recalibrate the FIA as in section 8.1 and report the
results using both sets of calibration data (i.e., data determined prior
to the test period and data determined following the test period). The
data that results in the lowest CE value shall be reported as the
results for the test run.
8.3 Critical Orifice Calibration.
8.3.1 Each critical orifice must be calibrated at the specific
operating conditions under which it will be used. Therefore, assemble
all components of the liquid sample analysis system as shown in Figure
204A-3. A stopwatch is also required.
8.3.2 Turn on the sample oven, sample line, and water bath heaters,
and allow the system to reach the proper operating temperature. Adjust
the aspirator to a vacuum of 380 mm (15 in.) Hg vacuum. Measure the time
required for one soap bubble to move a known distance and record
barometric pressure.
8.3.3 Repeat the calibration procedure at a vacuum of 406 mm (16
in.) Hg and at 25-mm (1-in.) Hg intervals until three consecutive
determinations provide the same flow rate. Calculate the critical flow
rate for the orifice in ml/min at standard conditions. Record the vacuum
necessary to achieve critical flow.
9. Procedure
9.1 Determination of Liquid Input Weight.
9.1.1 Weight Difference. Determine the amount of material introduced
to the process as the weight difference of the feed material before and
after each sampling run. In determining the total VOC containing liquid
usage, account for:
(a) The initial (beginning) VOC containing liquid mixture.
(b) Any solvent added during the test run.
(c) Any coating added during the test run.
(d) Any residual VOC containing liquid mixture remaining at the end
of the sample run.
9.1.1.1 Identify all points where VOC containing liquids are
introduced to the process. To obtain an accurate measurement of VOC
containing liquids, start with an empty fountain (if applicable). After
completing the run, drain the liquid in the fountain back into the
liquid drum (if possible) and weigh the drum again. Weigh the VOC
containing liquids to 0.5 percent of the total
weight (full) or 1.0 percent of the total weight
of VOC containing liquid used during the sample run, whichever is less.
If the residual liquid cannot be returned to the drum, drain the
fountain into a preweighed empty drum to determine the final weight of
the liquid.
9.1.1.2 If it is not possible to measure a single representative
mixture, then weigh the various components separately (e.g., if solvent
is added during the sampling run, weigh the solvent before it is added
to the mixture). If a fresh drum of VOC containing liquid is needed
during the run, then weigh both the empty drum and fresh drum.
9.1.2 Volume Measurement (Alternative). If direct weight
measurements are not feasible, the tester may use volume meters or flow
rate meters and density measurements to determine the weight of liquids
used if it can be demonstrated that the technique produces results
equivalent to the direct weight measurements. If a single representative
[[Page 413]]
mixture cannot be measured, measure the components separately.
9.2 Determination of VOC Content in Input Liquids
9.2.1 Assemble the liquid VOC content analysis system as shown in
Figure 204A-1.
9.2.2 Permanently identify all of the critical orifices that may be
used. Calibrate each critical orifice under the expected operating
conditions (i.e., sample vacuum and temperature) against a volume meter
as described in section 8.3.
9.2.3 Label and tare the sample vessels (including the stoppers and
caps) and the syringes.
9.2.4 Install an empty sample vessel and perform a leak test of the
system. Close the carrier gas valve and atmospheric vent and evacuate
the sample vessel to 250 mm (10 in.) Hg absolute or less using the
aspirator. Close the toggle valve at the inlet to the aspirator and
observe the vacuum for at least 1 minute. If there is any change in the
sample pressure, release the vacuum, adjust or repair the apparatus as
necessary, and repeat the leak test.
9.2.5 Perform the analyzer calibration and linearity checks
according to the procedure in section 5.1. Record the responses to each
of the calibration gases and the back-pressure setting of the FIA.
9.2.6 Establish the appropriate dilution ratio by adjusting the
aspirator air supply or substituting critical orifices. Operate the
aspirator at a vacuum of at least 25 mm (1 in.) Hg greater than the
vacuum necessary to achieve critical flow. Select the dilution ratio so
that the maximum response of the FIA to the sample does not exceed the
high-range calibration gas.
9.2.7 Perform system calibration checks at two levels by introducing
compressed gases at the inlet to the sample vessel while the aspirator
and dilution devices are operating. Perform these checks using the
carrier gas (zero concentration) and the system calibration gas. If the
response to the carrier gas exceeds 0.5 percent of
span, clean or repair the apparatus and repeat the check. Adjust the
dilution ratio as necessary to achieve the correct response to the
upscale check, but do not adjust the analyzer calibration. Record the
identification of the orifice, aspirator air supply pressure, FIA back-
pressure, and the responses of the FIA to the carrier and system
calibration gases.
9.2.8 After completing the above checks, inject the system
calibration gas for approximately 10 minutes. Time the exact duration of
the gas injection using a stopwatch. Determine the area under the FIA
response curve and calculate the system response factor based on the
sample gas flow rate, gas concentration, and the duration of the
injection as compared to the integrated response using Equations 204A-2
and 204A-3.
9.2.9 Verify that the sample oven and sample line temperatures are
120 5 [deg]C and that the water bath temperature
is 100 5 [deg]C.
9.2.10 Fill a tared syringe with approximately 1 g of the VOC
containing liquid and weigh it. Transfer the liquid to a tared sample
vessel. Plug the sample vessel to minimize sample loss. Weigh the sample
vessel containing the liquid to determine the amount of sample actually
received. Also, as a quality control check, weigh the empty syringe to
determine the amount of material delivered. The two coating sample
weights should agree within 0.02 g. If not, repeat the procedure until
an acceptable sample is obtained.
9.2.11 Connect the vessel to the analysis system. Adjust the
aspirator supply pressure to the correct value. Open the valve on the
carrier gas supply to the sample vessel and adjust it to provide a
slight excess flow to the atmospheric vent. As soon as the initial
response of the FIA begins to decrease, immerse the sample vessel in the
water bath. (Applying heat to the sample vessel too soon may cause the
FIA response to exceed the calibrated range of the instrument and, thus,
invalidate the analysis.)
9.2.12 Continuously measure and record the response of the FIA until
all of the volatile material has been evaporated from the sample and the
instrument response has returned to the baseline (i.e., response less
than 0.5 percent of the span value). Observe the aspirator supply
pressure, FIA back-pressure, atmospheric vent, and other system
operating parameters during the run; repeat the analysis procedure if
any of these parameters deviate from the values established during the
system calibration checks in section 9.2.7. After each sample, perform
the drift check described in section 8.2. If the drift check results are
acceptable, calculate the VOC content of the sample using the equations
in section 11.2. Alternatively, recalibrate the FIA as in section 8.1
and report the results using both sets of calibration data (i.e., data
determined prior to the test period and data determined following the
test period). The data that results in the lowest CE value shall be
reported as the results for the test run. Integrate the area under the
FIA response curve, or determine the average concentration response and
the duration of sample analysis.
10. Data Analysis and Calculations
10.1 Nomenclature.
AL=area under the response curve of the liquid sample, area
count.
AS=area under the response curve of the calibration gas, area
count.
CS=actual concentration of system calibration gas, ppm
propane.
K=1.830 x 10-9 g/(ml-ppm).
L=total VOC content of liquid input, kg.
[[Page 414]]
ML=mass of liquid sample delivered to the sample vessel, g.
q = flow rate through critical orifice, ml/min.
RF=liquid analysis system response factor, g/area count.
[thetas]S=total gas injection time for system calibration gas
during integrator calibration, min.
VFj=final VOC fraction of VOC containing liquid j.
VIj=initial VOC fraction of VOC containing liquid j.
VAj=VOC fraction of VOC containing liquid j added during the
run.
V=VOC fraction of liquid sample.
WFj=weight of VOC containing liquid j remaining at end of the
run, kg.
WIj=weight of VOC containing liquid j at beginning of the
run, kg.
WAj=weight of VOC containing liquid j added during the run,
kg.
10.2 Calculations
10.2.1 Total VOC Content of the Input VOC Containing Liquid.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.003
10.2.2 Liquid Sample Analysis System Response Factor for Systems
Using Integrators, Grams/Area Count.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.004
10.2.3 VOC Content of the Liquid Sample.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.005
11. Method Performance
The measurement uncertainties are estimated for each VOC containing
liquid as follows: W = 2.0 percent and V = 4.0 percent. Based on these numbers, the probable
uncertainty for L is estimated at about 4.5
percent for each VOC containing liquid.
12. Diagrams
[[Page 415]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.036
[[Page 416]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.037
[[Page 417]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.038
[[Page 418]]
Method 204B--Volatile Organic Compounds Emissions in Captured Stream
1. Scope and Application
1.1 Applicability. This procedure is applicable for determining the
volatile organic compounds (VOC) content of captured gas streams. It is
intended to be used in the development of a gas/gas protocol for
determining VOC capture efficiency (CE) for surface coating and printing
operations. The procedure may not be acceptable in certain site-specific
situations [e.g., when: (1) direct-fired heaters or other circumstances
affect the quantity of VOC at the control device inlet; and (2)
particulate organic aerosols are formed in the process and are present
in the captured emissions].
1.2 Principle. The amount of VOC captured (G) is calculated as the
sum of the products of the VOC content (CGj), the flow rate
(QGj), and the sample time ([Theta]C) from each
captured emissions point.
1.3 Sampling Requirements. A CE test shall consist of at least three
sampling runs. Each run shall cover at least one complete production
cycle, but shall be at least 3 hours long. The sampling time for each
run need not exceed 8 hours, even if the production cycle has not been
completed. Alternative sampling times may be used with the approval of
the Administrator.
2. Summary of Method
A gas sample is extracted from the source though a heated sample
line and, if necessary, a glass fiber filter to a flame ionization
analyzer (FIA).
3. Safety
Because this procedure is often applied in highly explosive areas,
caution and care should be exercised in choosing, installing, and using
the appropriate equipment.
4. Equipment and Supplies
Mention of trade names or company products does not constitute
endorsement. All gas concentrations (percent, ppm) are by volume, unless
otherwise noted.
4.1 Gas VOC Concentration. A schematic of the measurement system is
shown in Figure 204B-1. The main components are as follows:
4.1.1 Sample Probe. Stainless steel or equivalent. The probe shall
be heated to prevent VOC condensation.
4.1.2 Calibration Valve Assembly. Three-way valve assembly at the
outlet of the sample probe to direct the zero and calibration gases to
the analyzer. Other methods, such as quick-connect lines, to route
calibration gases to the outlet of the sample probe are acceptable.
4.1.3 Sample Line. Stainless steel or Teflon tubing to transport the
sample gas to the analyzer. The sample line must be heated to prevent
condensation.
4.1.4 Sample Pump. A leak-free pump, to pull the sample gas through
the system at a flow rate sufficient to minimize the response time of
the measurement system. The components of the pump that contact the gas
stream shall be constructed of stainless steel or Teflon. The sample
pump must be heated to prevent condensation.
4.1.5 Sample Flow Rate Control. A sample flow rate control valve and
rotameter, or equivalent, to maintain a constant sampling rate within 10
percent. The flow rate control valve and rotameter must be heated to
prevent condensation. A control valve may also be located on the sample
pump bypass loop to assist in controlling the sample pressure and flow
rate.
4.1.6 Organic Concentration Analyzer. An FIA with a span value of
1.5 times the expected concentration as propane; however, other span
values may be used if it can be demonstrated to the Administrator's
satisfaction that they would provide equally accurate measurements. The
system shall be capable of meeting or exceeding the following
specifications:
4.1.6.1 Zero Drift. Less than 3.0 percent of
the span value.
4.1.6.2 Calibration Drift. Less than 3.0
percent of the span value.
4.1.6.3 Calibration Error. Less than 5.0
percent of the calibration gas value.
4.1.6.4 Response Time. Less than 30 seconds.
4.1.7 Integrator/Data Acquisition System. An analog or digital
device, or computerized data acquisition system used to integrate the
FIA response or compute the average response and record measurement
data. The minimum data sampling frequency for computing average or
integrated values is one measurement value every 5 seconds. The device
shall be capable of recording average values at least once per minute.
4.2 Captured Emissions Volumetric Flow Rate.
4.2.1 Method 2 or 2A Apparatus. For determining volumetric flow
rate.
4.2.2 Method 3 Apparatus and Reagents. For determining molecular
weight of the gas stream. An estimate of the molecular weight of the gas
stream may be used if approved by the Administrator.
4.2.3 Method 4 Apparatus and Reagents. For determining moisture
content, if necessary.
5. Reagents and Standards
5.1 Calibration and Other Gases. Gases used for calibration, fuel,
and combustion air (if required) are contained in compressed gas
cylinders. All calibration gases shall be traceable to National
Institute of Standards and Technology standards and shall be certified
by the manufacturer to 1 percent of
[[Page 419]]
the tag value. Additionally, the manufacturer of the cylinder should
provide a recommended shelf life for each calibration gas cylinder over
which the concentration does not change more than 2 percent from the certified value. For calibration gas
values not generally available, dilution systems calibrated using Method
205 may be used. Alternative methods for preparing calibration gas
mixtures may be used with the approval of the Administrator.
5.1.1 Fuel. The FIA manufacturer's recommended fuel should be used.
A 40 percent H2/60 percent He or 40 percent H2/60
percent N2 gas mixture is recommended to avoid an oxygen
synergism effect that reportedly occurs when oxygen concentration varies
significantly from a mean value. Other mixtures may be used provided the
tester can demonstrate to the Administrator that there is no oxygen
synergism effect.
5.1.2 Carrier Gas. High purity air with less than 1 ppm of organic
material (as propane or carbon equivalent) or less than 0.1 percent of
the span value, whichever is greater.
5.1.3 FIA Linearity Calibration Gases. Low-, mid-, and high-range
gas mixture standards with nominal propane concentrations of 20-30, 45-
55, and 70-80 percent of the span value in air, respectively. Other
calibration values and other span values may be used if it can be shown
to the Administrator's satisfaction that equally accurate measurements
would be achieved.
5.2 Particulate Filter. An in-stack or an out-of-stack glass fiber
filter is recommended if exhaust gas particulate loading is significant.
An out-of-stack filter must be heated to prevent any condensation unless
it can be demonstrated that no condensation occurs.
6. Quality Control
6.1 Required instrument quality control parameters are found in the
following sections:
6.1.1 The FIA system must be calibrated as specified in section 7.1.
6.1.2 The system drift check must be performed as specified in
section 7.2.
6.1.3 The system check must be conducted as specified in section
7.3.
6.2 Audits.
6.2.1 Analysis Audit Procedure. Immediately before each test,
analyze an audit cylinder as described in section 7.2. The analysis
audit must agree with the audit cylinder concentration within 10
percent.
6.2.2 Audit Samples and Audit Sample Availability. Audit samples
will be supplied only to enforcement agencies for compliance tests. The
availability of audit samples may be obtained by writing: Source Test
Audit Coordinator (STAC) (MD-77B), Quality Assurance Division,
Atmospheric Research and Exposure Assessment Labortory, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 or by
calling the STAC at (919) 541-7834. The request for the audit sample
must be made at least 30 days prior to the scheduled compliance sample
analysis.
6.2.3 Audit Results. Calculate the audit sample concentration
according to the calculation procedure described in the audit
instructions included with the audit sample. Fill in the audit sample
concentration and the analyst's name on the audit response form included
with the audit instructions. Send one copy to the EPA Regional Office or
the appropriate enforcement agency, and a second copy to the STAC. The
EPA Regional Office or the appropriate enforcement agency will report
the results of the audit to the laboratory being audited. Include this
response with the results of the compliance samples in relevant reports
to the EPA Regional Office or the appropriate enforcement agency.
7. Calibration and Standardization
7.1 FIA Calibration and Linearity Check. Make necessary adjustments
to the air and fuel supplies for the FIA and ignite the burner. Allow
the FIA to warm up for the period recommended by the manufacturer.
Inject a calibration gas into the measurement system and adjust the
back-pressure regulator to the value required to achieve the flow rates
specified by the manufacturer. Inject the zero-and the high-range
calibration gases and adjust the analyzer calibration to provide the
proper responses. Inject the low- and mid-range gases and record the
responses of the measurement system. The calibration and linearity of
the system are acceptable if the responses for all four gases are within
5 percent of the respective gas values. If the performance of the system
is not acceptable, repair or adjust the system and repeat the linearity
check. Conduct a calibration and linearity check after assembling the
analysis system and after a major change is made to the system.
7.2 Systems Drift Checks. Select the calibration gas that most
closely approximates the concentration of the captured emissions for
conducting the drift checks. Introduce the zero and calibration gases at
the calibration valve assembly and verify that the appropriate gas flow
rate and pressure are present at the FIA. Record the measurement system
responses to the zero and calibration gases. The performance of the
system is acceptable if the difference between the drift check
measurement and the value obtained in section 7.1 is less than 3 percent
of the span value. Alternatively, recalibrate the FIA as in section 7.1
and report the results using both sets of calibration data (i.e., data
determined prior to the test period and data determined following the
test period). The data that results in the lowest CE value
[[Page 420]]
shall be reported as the results for the test run. Conduct the system
drift checks at the end of each run.
7.3 System Check. Inject the high-range calibration gas at the inlet
of the sampling probe and record the response. The performance of the
system is acceptable if the measurement system response is within 5
percent of the value obtained in section 7.1 for the high-range
calibration gas. Conduct a system check before and after each test run.
8. Procedure
8.1. Determination of Volumetric Flow Rate of Captured Emissions.
8.1.1 Locate all points where emissions are captured from the
affected facility. Using Method 1, determine the sampling points. Be
sure to check each site for cyclonic or swirling flow.
8.1.2 Measure the velocity at each sampling site at least once every
hour during each sampling run using Method 2 or 2A.
8.2 Determination of VOC Content of Captured Emissions.
8.2.1 Analysis Duration. Measure the VOC responses at each captured
emissions point during the entire test run or, if applicable, while the
process is operating. If there are multiple captured emission locations,
design a sampling system to allow a single FIA to be used to determine
the VOC responses at all sampling locations.
8.2.2 Gas VOC Concentration.
8.2.2.1 Assemble the sample train as shown in Figure 204B-1.
Calibrate the FIA according to the procedure in section 7.1.
8.2.2.2 Conduct a system check according to the procedure in section
7.3.
8.2.2.3 Install the sample probe so that the probe is centrally
located in the stack, pipe, or duct, and is sealed tightly at the stack
port connection.
8.2.2.4 Inject zero gas at the calibration valve assembly. Allow the
measurement system response to reach zero. Measure the system response
time as the time required for the system to reach the effluent
concentration after the calibration valve has been returned to the
effluent sampling position.
8.2.2.5 Conduct a system check before, and a system drift check
after, each sampling run according to the procedures in sections 7.2 and
7.3. If the drift check following a run indicates unacceptable
performance (see section 7.3), the run is not valid. Alternatively,
recalibrate the FIA as in section 7.1 and report the results using both
sets of calibration data (i.e., data determined prior to the test period
and data determined following the test period). The data that results in
the lowest CE value shall be reported as the results for the test run.
The tester may elect to perform system drift checks during the run not
to exceed one drift check per hour.
8.2.2.6 Verify that the sample lines, filter, and pump temperatures
are 1205 [deg]C.
8.2.2.7 Begin sampling at the start of the test period and continue
to sample during the entire run. Record the starting and ending times
and any required process information as appropriate. If multiple
captured emission locations are sampled using a single FIA, sample at
each location for the same amount of time (e.g., 2 minutes) and continue
to switch from one location to another for the entire test run. Be sure
that total sampling time at each location is the same at the end of the
test run. Collect at least four separate measurements from each sample
point during each hour of testing. Disregard the measurements at each
sampling location until two times the response time of the measurement
system has elapsed. Continue sampling for at least 1 minute and record
the concentration measurements.
8.2.3 Background Concentration.
Note: Not applicable when the building is used as the temporary
total enclosure (TTE).
8.2.3.1 Locate all natural draft openings (NDO's) of the TTE. A
sampling point shall be at the center of each NDO, unless otherwise
specified by the Administrator. If there are more than six NDO's, choose
six sampling points evenly spaced among the NDO's.
8.2.3.2 Assemble the sample train as shown in Figure 204B-2.
Calibrate the FIA and conduct a system check according to the procedures
in sections 7.1 and 7.3.
Note: This sample train shall be separate from the sample train used
to measure the captured emissions.
8.2.3.3 Position the probe at the sampling location.
8.2.3.4 Determine the response time, conduct the system check, and
sample according to the procedures described in sections 8.2.2.4 through
8.2.2.7.
8.2.4 Alternative Procedure. The direct interface sampling and
analysis procedure described in section 7.2 of Method 18 may be used to
determine the gas VOC concentration. The system must be designed to
collect and analyze at least one sample every 10 minutes. If the
alternative procedure is used to determine the VOC concentration of the
captured emissions, it must also be used to determine the VOC
concentration of the uncaptured emissions.
9. Data Analysis and Calculations
9.1 Nomenclature.
Ai=area of NDO i, ft\2\.
AN=total area of all NDO's in the enclosure, ft\2\.
CBi=corrected average VOC concentration of background
emissions at point i, ppm propane.
CB=average background concentration, ppm propane.
[[Page 421]]
CGj=corrected average VOC concentration of captured emissions
at point j, ppm propane.
CDH=average measured concentration for the drift check
calibration gas, ppm propane.
CDO=average system drift check concentration for zero
concentration gas, ppm propane.
CH=actual concentration of the drift check calibration gas,
ppm propane.
Ci=uncorrected average background VOC concentration measured
at point i, ppm propane.
Cj=uncorrected average VOC concentration measured at point j,
ppm propane.
G=total VOC content of captured emissions, kg.
K1=1.830x10-6 kg/(m\3\-ppm).
n=number of measurement points.
QGj=average effluent volumetric flow rate corrected to
standard conditions at captured emissions point j, m\3\/min.
[Theta]C=total duration of captured emissions.
9.2 Calculations.
9.2.1 Total VOC Captured Emissions.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.006
9.2.2 VOC Concentration of the Captured Emissions at Point j.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.007
9.2.3 Background VOC Concentration at Point i.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.008
9.2.4 Average Background Concentration.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.009
Note: If the concentration at each point is within 20 percent of the
average concentration of all points, then use the arithmetic average.
10. Method Performance
The measurement uncertainties are estimated for each captured or
uncaptured emissions point as follows: QGj=5.5 percent and CGj=5.0
percent. Based on these numbers, the probable uncertainty for G is
estimated at about 7.4 percent.
11. Diagrams
[[Page 422]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.027
[[Page 423]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.028
[[Page 424]]
Method 204C--Volatile Organic Compounds Emissions in Captured Stream
(Dilution Technique)
1. Scope and Application
1.1 Applicability. This procedure is applicable for determining the
volatile organic compounds (VOC) content of captured gas streams. It is
intended to be used in the development of a gas/gas protocol in which
uncaptured emissions are also measured for determining VOC capture
efficiency (CE) for surface coating and printing operations. A dilution
system is used to reduce the VOC concentration of the captured emissions
to about the same concentration as the uncaptured emissions. The
procedure may not be acceptable in certain site-specific situations
[e.g., when: (1) direct-fired heaters or other circumstances affect the
quantity of VOC at the control device inlet; and (2) particulate organic
aerosols are formed in the process and are present in the captured
emissions].
1.2 Principle. The amount of VOC captured (G) is calculated as the
sum of the products of the VOC content (CGj), the flow rate
(QGj), and the sampling time ([Theta]C) from each
captured emissions point.
1.3 Sampling Requirements. A CE test shall consist of at least three
sampling runs. Each run shall cover at least one complete production
cycle, but shall be at least 3 hours long. The sampling time for each
run need not exceed 8 hours, even if the production cycle has not been
completed. Alternative sampling times may be used with the approval of
the Administrator.
2. Summary of Method
A gas sample is extracted from the source using an in-stack dilution
probe through a heated sample line and, if necessary, a glass fiber
filter to a flame ionization analyzer (FIA). The sample train contains a
sample gas manifold which allows multiple points to be sampled using a
single FIA.
3. Safety
Because this procedure is often applied in highly explosive areas,
caution and care should be exercised in choosing, installing, and using
the appropriate equipment.
4. Equipment and Supplies
Mention of trade names or company products does not constitute
endorsement. All gas concentrations (percent, ppm) are by volume, unless
otherwise noted.
4.1 Gas VOC Concentration. A schematic of the measurement system is
shown in Figure 204C-1. The main components are as follows:
4.1.1 Dilution System. A Kipp in-stack dilution probe and controller
or similar device may be used. The dilution rate may be changed by
substituting different critical orifices or adjustments of the aspirator
supply pressure. The dilution system shall be heated to prevent VOC
condensation. Note: An out-of-stack dilution device may be used.
4.1.2 Calibration Valve Assembly. Three-way valve assembly at the
outlet of the sample probe to direct the zero and calibration gases to
the analyzer. Other methods, such as quick-connect lines, to route
calibration gases to the outlet of the sample probe are acceptable.
4.1.3 Sample Line. Stainless steel or Teflon tubing to transport the
sample gas to the analyzer. The sample line must be heated to prevent
condensation.
4.1.4 Sample Pump. A leak-free pump, to pull the sample gas through
the system at a flow rate sufficient to minimize the response time of
the measurement system. The components of the pump that contact the gas
stream shall be constructed of stainless steel or Teflon. The sample
pump must be heated to prevent condensation.
4.1.5 Sample Flow Rate Control. A sample flow rate control valve and
rotameter, or equivalent, to maintain a constant sampling rate within 10
percent. The flow control valve and rotameter must be heated to prevent
condensation. A control valve may also be located on the sample pump
bypass loop to assist in controlling the sample pressure and flow rate.
4.1.6 Sample Gas Manifold. Capable of diverting a portion of the
sample gas stream to the FIA, and the remainder to the bypass discharge
vent. The manifold components shall be constructed of stainless steel or
Teflon. If captured or uncaptured emissions are to be measured at
multiple locations, the measurement system shall be designed to use
separate sampling probes, lines, and pumps for each measurement location
and a common sample gas manifold and FIA. The sample gas manifold and
connecting lines to the FIA must be heated to prevent condensation.
Note: Depending on the number of sampling points and their location,
it may not be possible to use only one FIA. However to reduce the effect
of calibration error, the number of FIA's used during a test should be
keep as small as possible.
4.1.7 Organic Concentration Analyzer. An FIA with a span value of
1.5 times the expected concentration as propane; however, other span
values may be used if it can be demonstrated to the Administrator's
satisfaction that they would provide equally accurate measurements. The
system shall be capable of meeting or exceeding the following
specifications:
4.1.7.1 Zero Drift. Less than 3.0 percent of
the span value.
4.1.7.2 Calibration Drift. Less than 3.0
percent of the span value.
[[Page 425]]
4.1.7.3 Calibration Error. Less than 5.0
percent of the calibration gas value.
4.1.7.4 Response Time. Less than 30 seconds.
4.1.8 Integrator/Data Acquisition System. An analog or digital
device or computerized data acquisition system used to integrate the FIA
response or compute the average response and record measurement data.
The minimum data sampling frequency for computing average or integrated
values is one measurement value every 5 seconds. The device shall be
capable of recording average values at least once per minute.
4.2 Captured Emissions Volumetric Flow Rate.
4.2.1 Method 2 or 2A Apparatus. For determining volumetric flow
rate.
4.2.2 Method 3 Apparatus and Reagents. For determining molecular
weight of the gas stream. An estimate of the molecular weight of the gas
stream may be used if approved by the Administrator.
4.2.3 Method 4 Apparatus and Reagents. For determining moisture
content, if necessary.
5. Reagents and Standards
5.1 Calibration and Other Gases. Gases used for calibration, fuel,
and combustion air (if required) are contained in compressed gas
cylinders. All calibration gases shall be traceable to National
Institute of Standards and Technology standards and shall be certified
by the manufacturer to 1 percent of the tag value.
Additionally, the manufacturer of the cylinder should provide a
recommended shelf life for each calibration gas cylinder over which the
concentration does not change more than 2 percent
from the certified value. For calibration gas values not generally
available, dilution systems calibrated using Method 205 may be used.
Alternative methods for preparing calibration gas mixtures may be used
with the approval of the Administrator.
5.1.1 Fuel. The FIA manufacturer's recommended fuel should be used.
A 40 percent H2/60 percent He or 40 percent H2/60
percent N2 gas mixture is recommended to avoid an oxygen
synergism effect that reportedly occurs when oxygen concentration varies
significantly from a mean value. Other mixtures may be used provided the
tester can demonstrate to the Administrator that there is no oxygen
synergism effect
5.1.2 Carrier Gas and Dilution Air Supply. High purity air with less
than 1 ppm of organic material (as propane or carbon equivalent), or
less than 0.1 percent of the span value, whichever is greater.
5.1.3 FIA Linearity Calibration Gases. Low-, mid-, and high-range
gas mixture standards with nominal propane concentrations of 20-30, 45-
55, and 70-80 percent of the span value in air, respectively. Other
calibration values and other span values may be used if it can be shown
to the Administrator's satisfaction that equally accurate measurements
would be achieved.
5.1.4 Dilution Check Gas. Gas mixture standard containing propane in
air, approximately half the span value after dilution.
5.2 Particulate Filter. An in-stack or an out-of-stack glass fiber
filter is recommended if exhaust gas particulate loading is significant.
An out-of-stack filter must be heated to prevent any condensation unless
it can be demonstrated that no condensation occurs.
6. Quality Control
6.1 Required instrument quality control parameters are found in the
following sections:
6.1.1 The FIA system must be calibrated as specified in section 7.1.
6.1.2 The system drift check must be performed as specified in
section 7.2.
6.1.3 The dilution factor must be determined as specified in section
7.3.
6.1.4 The system check must be conducted as specified in section
7.4.
6.2 Audits.
6.2.1 Analysis Audit Procedure. Immediately before each test,
analyze an audit cylinder as described in section 7.2. The analysis
audit must agree with the audit cylinder concentration within 10
percent.
6.2.2 Audit Samples and Audit Sample Availability. Audit samples
will be supplied only to enforcement agencies for compliance tests. The
availability of audit samples may be obtained by writing: Source Test
Audit Coordinator (STAC) (MD-77B), Quality Assurance Division,
Atmospheric Research and Exposure Assessment Laboratory, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 or by
calling the STAC at (919) 541-7834. The request for the audit sample
must be made at least 30 days prior to the scheduled compliance sample
analysis.
6.2.3 Audit Results. Calculate the audit sample concentration
according to the calculation procedure described in the audit
instructions included with the audit sample. Fill in the audit sample
concentration and the analyst's name on the audit response form included
with the audit instructions. Send one copy to the EPA Regional Office or
the appropriate enforcement agency, and a second copy to the STAC. The
EPA Regional Office or the appropriate enforcement agency will report
the results of the audit to the laboratory being audited. Include this
response with the results of the compliance samples in relevant reports
to the EPA Regional Office or the appropriate enforcement agency.
[[Page 426]]
7. Calibration and Standardization
7.1 FIA Calibration and Linearity Check. Make necessary adjustments
to the air and fuel supplies for the FIA and ignite the burner. Allow
the FIA to warm up for the period recommended by the manufacturer.
Inject a calibration gas into the measurement system after the dilution
system and adjust the back-pressure regulator to the value required to
achieve the flow rates specified by the manufacturer. Inject the zero-
and the high-range calibration gases and adjust the analyzer calibration
to provide the proper responses. Inject the low-and mid-range gases and
record the responses of the measurement system. The calibration and
linearity of the system are acceptable if the responses for all four
gases are within 5 percent of the respective gas values. If the
performance of the system is not acceptable, repair or adjust the system
and repeat the linearity check. Conduct a calibration and linearity
check after assembling the analysis system and after a major change is
made to the system.
7.2 Systems Drift Checks. Select the calibration gas that most
closely approximates the concentration of the diluted captured emissions
for conducting the drift checks. Introduce the zero and calibration
gases at the calibration valve assembly, and verify that the appropriate
gas flow rate and pressure are present at the FIA. Record the
measurement system responses to the zero and calibration gases. The
performance of the system is acceptable if the difference between the
drift check measurement and the value obtained in section 7.1 is less
than 3 percent of the span value. Alternatively, recalibrate the FIA as
in section 7.1 and report the results using both sets of calibration
data (i.e., data determined prior to the test period and data determined
following the test period). The data that results in the lowest CE value
shall be reported as the results for the test run. Conduct the system
drift check at the end of each run.
7.3 Determination of Dilution Factor. Inject the dilution check gas
into the measurement system before the dilution system and record the
response. Calculate the dilution factor using Equation 204C-3.
7.4 System Check. Inject the high-range calibration gas at the inlet
to the sampling probe while the dilution air is turned off. Record the
response. The performance of the system is acceptable if the measurement
system response is within 5 percent of the value obtained in section 7.1
for the high-range calibration gas. Conduct a system check before and
after each test run.
8. Procedure
8.1 Determination of Volumetric Flow Rate of Captured Emissions
8.1.1 Locate all points where emissions are captured from the
affected facility. Using Method 1, determine the sampling points. Be
sure to check each site for cyclonic or swirling flow.
8.2.2 Measure the velocity at each sampling site at least once every
hour during each sampling run using Method 2 or 2A.
8.2 Determination of VOC Content of Captured Emissions
8.2.1 Analysis Duration. Measure the VOC responses at each captured
emissions point during the entire test run or, if applicable, while the
process is operating. If there are multiple captured emissions
locations, design a sampling system to allow a single FIA to be used to
determine the VOC responses at all sampling locations.
8.2.2 Gas VOC Concentration.
8.2.2.1 Assemble the sample train as shown in Figure 204C-1.
Calibrate the FIA according to the procedure in section 7.1.
8.2.2.2 Set the dilution ratio and determine the dilution factor
according to the procedure in section 7.3.
8.2.2.3 Conduct a system check according to the procedure in section
7.4.
8.2.2.4 Install the sample probe so that the probe is centrally
located in the stack, pipe, or duct, and is sealed tightly at the stack
port connection.
8.2.2.5 Inject zero gas at the calibration valve assembly. Measure
the system response time as the time required for the system to reach
the effluent concentration after the calibration valve has been returned
to the effluent sampling position.
8.2.2.6 Conduct a system check before, and a system drift check
after, each sampling run according to the procedures in sections 7.2 and
7.4. If the drift check following a run indicates unacceptable
performance (see section 7.4), the run is not valid. Alternatively,
recalibrate the FIA as in section 7.1 and report the results using both
sets of calibration data (i.e., data determined prior to the test period
and data determined following the test period). The data that results in
the lowest CE value shall be reported as the results for the test run.
The tester may elect to perform system drift checks during the run not
to exceed one drift check per hour.
8.2.2.7 Verify that the sample lines, filter, and pump temperatures
are 120 5 [deg]C.
8.2.2.8 Begin sampling at the start of the test period and continue
to sample during the entire run. Record the starting and ending times
and any required process information as appropriate. If multiple
captured emission locations are sampled using a single FIA, sample at
each location for the same amount of time (e.g., 2 min.) and continue to
switch from one location to another for the entire test run. Be sure
that total sampling time at each location is the same at the end of the
test run. Collect at least four separate measurements from each sample
point during each hour of testing. Disregard the measurements at each
sampling
[[Page 427]]
location until two times the response time of the measurement system has
elapsed. Continue sampling for at least 1 minute and record the
concentration measurements.
8.2.3 Background Concentration.
Note: Not applicable when the building is used as the temporary
total enclosure (TTE).
8.2.3.1 Locate all natural draft openings (NDO's) of the TTE. A
sampling point shall be at the center of each NDO, unless otherwise
approved by the Administrator. If there are more than six NDO's, choose
six sampling points evenly spaced among the NDO's.
8.2.3.2 Assemble the sample train as shown in Figure 204C-2.
Calibrate the FIA and conduct a system check according to the procedures
in sections 7.1 and 7.4.
8.2.3.3 Position the probe at the sampling location.
8.2.3.4 Determine the response time, conduct the system check, and
sample according to the procedures described in sections 8.2.2.4 through
8.2.2.8.
8.2.4 Alternative Procedure. The direct interface sampling and
analysis procedure described in section 7.2 of Method 18 may be used to
determine the gas VOC concentration. The system must be designed to
collect and analyze at least one sample every 10 minutes. If the
alternative procedure is used to determine the VOC concentration of the
captured emissions, it must also be used to determine the VOC
concentration of the uncaptured emissions.
9. Data Analysis and Calculations
9.1 Nomenclature.
Ai=area of NDO i, ft2.
AN=total area of all NDO's in the enclosure, ft2.
CA = actual concentration of the dilution check gas, ppm
propane.
CBi=corrected average VOC concentration of background
emissions at point i, ppm propane.
CB=average background concentration, ppm propane.
CDH=average measured concentration for the drift check
calibration gas, ppm propane.
CD0=average system drift check concentration for zero
concentration gas, ppm propane.
CH=actual concentration of the drift check calibration gas,
ppm propane.
Ci=uncorrected average background VOC concentration measured
at point i, ppm propane.
Cj=uncorrected average VOC concentration measured at point j,
ppm propane.
CM=measured concentration of the dilution check gas, ppm
propane.
DF=dilution factor.
G=total VOC content of captured emissions, kg.
K1=1.830x10-6 kg/(m\3\-ppm).
n=number of measurement points.
QGj=average effluent volumetric flow rate corrected to
standard conditions at captured emissions point j, m\3\/min.
[Theta]C=total duration of CE sampling run, min.
9.2 Calculations.
9.2.1 Total VOC Captured Emissions.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.010
9.2.2 VOC Concentration of the Captured Emissions at Point j.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.011
9.2.3 Dilution Factor.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.012
9.2.4 Background VOC Concentration at Point i.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.013
9.2.5 Average Background Concentration.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.014
Note: If the concentration at each point is within 20 percent of the
average concentration of all points, then use the arithmetic average.
10. Method Performance
The measurement uncertainties are estimated for each captured or
uncaptured emissions point as follows: QGj=5.5 percent and CGj= 5
percent. Based on these numbers, the probable uncertainty for G is
estimated at about 7.4 percent.
11. Diagrams
[[Page 428]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.029
[[Page 429]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.030
Method 204D--Volatile Organic Compounds Emissions in Uncaptured Stream
From Temporary Total Enclosure
1. Scope and Application
1.1 Applicability. This procedure is applicable for determining the
uncaptured volatile organic compounds (VOC) emissions from a temporary
total enclosure (TTE). It is intended to be used as a segment in the
development of liquid/gas or gas/gas protocols for determining VOC
capture efficiency (CE) for surface coating and printing operations.
[[Page 430]]
1.2 Principle. The amount of uncaptured VOC emissions (F) from the
TTE is calculated as the sum of the products of the VOC content
(CFj), the flow rate (QFj) from each uncaptured
emissions point, and the sampling time ([Theta]F).
1.3 Sampling Requirements. A CE test shall consist of at least three
sampling runs. Each run shall cover at least one complete production
cycle, but shall be at least 3 hours long. The sampling time for each
run need not exceed 8 hours, even if the production cycle has not been
completed. Alternative sampling times may be used with the approval of
the Administrator.
2. Summary of Method
A gas sample is extracted from the uncaptured exhaust duct of a TTE
through a heated sample line and, if necessary, a glass fiber filter to
a flame ionization analyzer (FIA).
3. Safety
Because this procedure is often applied in highly explosive areas,
caution and care should be exercised in choosing, installing, and using
the appropriate equipment.
4. Equipment and Supplies
Mention of trade names or company products does not constitute
endorsement. All gas concentrations (percent, ppm) are by volume, unless
otherwise noted.
4.1 Gas VOC Concentration. A schematic of the measurement system is
shown in Figure 204D-1. The main components are as follows:
4.1.1 Sample Probe. Stainless steel or equivalent. The probe shall
be heated to prevent VOC condensation.
4.1.2 Calibration Valve Assembly. Three-way valve assembly at the
outlet of the sample probe to direct the zero and calibration gases to
the analyzer. Other methods, such as quick-connect lines, to route
calibration gases to the outlet of the sample probe are acceptable.
4.1.3 Sample Line. Stainless steel or Teflon tubing to transport the
sample gas to the analyzer. The sample line must be heated to prevent
condensation.
4.1.4 Sample Pump. A leak-free pump, to pull the sample gas through
the system at a flow rate sufficient to minimize the response time of
the measurement system. The components of the pump that contact the gas
stream shall be constructed of stainless steel or Teflon. The sample
pump must be heated to prevent condensation.
4.1.5 Sample Flow Rate Control. A sample flow rate control valve and
rotameter, or equivalent, to maintain a constant sampling rate within 10
percent. The flow control valve and rotameter must be heated to prevent
condensation. A control valve may also be located on the sample pump
bypass loop to assist in controlling the sample pressure and flow rate.
4.1.6 Sample Gas Manifold. Capable of diverting a portion of the
sample gas stream to the FIA, and the remainder to the bypass discharge
vent. The manifold components shall be constructed of stainless steel or
Teflon. If emissions are to be measured at multiple locations, the
measurement system shall be designed to use separate sampling probes,
lines, and pumps for each measurement location and a common sample gas
manifold and FIA. The sample gas manifold and connecting lines to the
FIA must be heated to prevent condensation.
4.1.7 Organic Concentration Analyzer. An FIA with a span value of
1.5 times the expected concentration as propane; however, other span
values may be used if it can be demonstrated to the Administrator's
satisfaction that they would provide more accurate measurements. The
system shall be capable of meeting or exceeding the following
specifications:
4.1.7.1 Zero Drift. Less than 3.0 percent of
the span value.
4.1.7.2 Calibration Drift. Less than 3.0
percent of the span value.
4.1.7.3 Calibration Error. Less than 5.0
percent of the calibration gas value.
4.1.7.4 Response Time. Less than 30 seconds.
4.1.8 Integrator/Data Acquisition System. An analog or digital
device or computerized data acquisition system used to integrate the FIA
response or compute the average response and record measurement data.
The minimum data sampling frequency for computing average or integrated
values is one measurement value every 5 seconds. The device shall be
capable of recording average values at least once per minute.
4.2 Uncaptured Emissions Volumetric Flow Rate.
4.2.1 Method 2 or 2A Apparatus. For determining volumetric flow
rate.
4.2.2 Method 3 Apparatus and Reagents. For determining molecular
weight of the gas stream. An estimate of the molecular weight of the gas
stream may be used if approved by the Administrator.
4.2.3 Method 4 Apparatus and Reagents. For determining moisture
content, if necessary.
4.3 Temporary Total Enclosure. The criteria for designing an
acceptable TTE are specified in Method 204.
5. Reagents and Standards
5.1 Calibration and Other Gases. Gases used for calibration, fuel,
and combustion air (if required) are contained in compressed gas
cylinders. All calibration gases shall be traceable to National
Institute of Standards and Technology standards and shall be certified
by the manufacturer to 1 percent of
[[Page 431]]
the tag value. Additionally, the manufacturer of the cylinder should
provide a recommended shelf life for each calibration gas cylinder over
which the concentration does not change more than 2 percent from the certified value. For calibration gas
values not generally available, dilution systems calibrated using Method
205 may be used. Alternative methods for preparing calibration gas
mixtures may be used with the approval of the Administrator.
5.1.1 Fuel. The FIA manufacturer's recommended fuel should be used.
A 40 percent H2/60 percent He or 40 percent H2/60
percent N2 gas mixture is recommended to avoid an oxygen
synergism effect that reportedly occurs when oxygen concentration varies
significantly from a mean value. Other mixtures may be used provided the
tester can demonstrate to the Administrator that there is no oxygen
synergism effect.
5.1.2 Carrier Gas. High purity air with less than 1 ppm of organic
material (as propane or carbon equivalent) or less than 0.1 percent of
the span value, whichever is greater.
5.1.3 FIA Linearity Calibration Gases. Low-, mid-, and high-range
gas mixture standards with nominal propane concentrations of 20-30, 45-
55, and 70-80 percent of the span value in air, respectively. Other
calibration values and other span values may be used if it can be shown
to the Administrator's satisfaction that equally accurate measurements
would be achieved.
5.2 Particulate Filter. An in-stack or an out-of-stack glass fiber
filter is recommended if exhaust gas particulate loading is significant.
An out-of-stack filter must be heated to prevent any condensation unless
it can be demonstrated that no condensation occurs.
6. Quality Control
6.1 Required instrument quality control parameters are found in the
following sections:
6.1.1 The FIA system must be calibrated as specified in section 7.1.
6.1.2 The system drift check must be performed as specified in
section 7.2.
6.1.3 The system check must be conducted as specified in section
7.3.
6.2 Audits.
6.2.1 Analysis Audit Procedure. Immediately before each test,
analyze an audit cylinder as described in section 7.2. The analysis
audit must agree with the audit cylinder concentration within 10
percent.
6.2.2 Audit Samples and Audit Sample Availability. Audit samples
will be supplied only to enforcement agencies for compliance tests. The
availability of audit samples may be obtained by writing: Source Test
Audit Coordinator (STAC) (MD-77B) Quality Assurance Division,
Atmospheric Research and Exposure Assessment Laboratory, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 or by
calling the STAC at (919) 541-7834. The request for the audit sample
must be made at least 30 days prior to the scheduled compliance sample
analysis.
6.2.3 Audit Results. Calculate the audit sample concentration
according to the calculation procedure described in the audit
instructions included with the audit sample. Fill in the audit sample
concentration and the analyst's name on the audit response form included
with the audit instructions. Send one copy to the EPA Regional Office or
the appropriate enforcement agency, and a second copy to the STAC. The
EPA Regional Office or the appropriate enforcement agency will report
the results of the audit to the laboratory being audited. Include this
response with the results of the compliance samples in relevant reports
to the EPA Regional Office or the appropriate enforcement agency.
7. Calibration and Standardization
7.1 FIA Calibration and Linearity Check. Make necessary adjustments
to the air and fuel supplies for the FIA and ignite the burner. Allow
the FIA to warm up for the period recommended by the manufacturer.
Inject a calibration gas into the measurement system and adjust the
back-pressure regulator to the value required to achieve the flow rates
specified by the manufacturer. Inject the zero-and the high-range
calibration gases and adjust the analyzer calibration to provide the
proper responses. Inject the low-and mid-range gases and record the
responses of the measurement system. The calibration and linearity of
the system are acceptable if the responses for all four gases are within
5 percent of the respective gas values. If the performance of the system
is not acceptable, repair or adjust the system and repeat the linearity
check. Conduct a calibration and linearity check after assembling the
analysis system and after a major change is made to the system.
7.2 Systems Drift Checks. Select the calibration gas concentration
that most closely approximates that of the uncaptured gas emissions
concentration to conduct the drift checks. Introduce the zero and
calibration gases at the calibration valve assembly and verify that the
appropriate gas flow rate and pressure are present at the FIA. Record
the measurement system responses to the zero and calibration gases. The
performance of the system is acceptable if the difference between the
drift check measurement and the value obtained in section 7.1 is less
than 3 percent of the span value. Alternatively, recalibrate the FIA as
in section 7.1 and report the results using both sets of calibration
data (i.e., data determined prior to the test period and data determined
following the test period). The data that results in the
[[Page 432]]
lowest CE value shall be reported as the results for the test run.
Conduct a system drift check at the end of each run.
7.3 System Check. Inject the high-range calibration gas at the inlet
of the sampling probe and record the response. The performance of the
system is acceptable if the measurement system response is within 5
percent of the value obtained in section 7.1 for the high-range
calibration gas. Conduct a system check before each test run.
8. Procedure
8.1 Determination of Volumetric Flow Rate of Uncaptured Emissions
8.1.1 Locate all points where uncaptured emissions are exhausted
from the TTE. Using Method 1, determine the sampling points. Be sure to
check each site for cyclonic or swirling flow.
8.1.2 Measure the velocity at each sampling site at least once every
hour during each sampling run using Method 2 or 2A.
8.2 Determination of VOC Content of Uncaptured Emissions.
8.2.1 Analysis Duration. Measure the VOC responses at each
uncaptured emission point during the entire test run or, if applicable,
while the process is operating. If there are multiple emission
locations, design a sampling system to allow a single FIA to be used to
determine the VOC responses at all sampling locations.
8.2.2 Gas VOC Concentration.
8.2.2.1 Assemble the sample train as shown in Figure 204D-1.
Calibrate the FIA and conduct a system check according to the procedures
in sections 7.1 and 7.3, respectively.
8.2.2.2 Install the sample probe so that the probe is centrally
located in the stack, pipe, or duct, and is sealed tightly at the stack
port connection.
8.2.2.3 Inject zero gas at the calibration valve assembly. Allow the
measurement system response to reach zero. Measure the system response
time as the time required for the system to reach the effluent
concentration after the calibration valve has been returned to the
effluent sampling position.
8.2.2.4 Conduct a system check before, and a system drift check
after, each sampling run according to the procedures in sections 7.2 and
7.3. If the drift check following a run indicates unacceptable
performance (see section 7.3), the run is not valid. Alternatively,
recalibrate the FIA as in section 7.1 and report the results using both
sets of calibration data (i.e., data determined prior to the test period
and data determined following the test period). The data that results in
the lowest CE value shall be reported as the results for the test run.
The tester may elect to perform system drift checks during the run not
to exceed one drift check per hour.
8.2.2.5 Verify that the sample lines, filter, and pump temperatures
are 1205 [deg]C.
8.2.2.6 Begin sampling at the start of the test period and continue
to sample during the entire run. Record the starting and ending times
and any required process information, as appropriate. If multiple
emission locations are sampled using a single FIA, sample at each
location for the same amount of time (e.g., 2 min.) and continue to
switch from one location to another for the entire test run. Be sure
that total sampling time at each location is the same at the end of the
test run. Collect at least four separate measurements from each sample
point during each hour of testing. Disregard the response measurements
at each sampling location until 2 times the response time of the
measurement system has elapsed. Continue sampling for at least 1 minute
and record the concentration measurements.
8.2.3 Background Concentration.
8.2.3.1 Locate all natural draft openings (NDO's) of the TTE. A
sampling point shall be at the center of each NDO, unless otherwise
approved by the Administrator. If there are more than six NDO's, choose
six sampling points evenly spaced among the NDO's.
8.2.3.2 Assemble the sample train as shown in Figure 204D-2.
Calibrate the FIA and conduct a system check according to the procedures
in sections 7.1 and 7.3.
8.2.3.3 Position the probe at the sampling location.
8.2.3.4 Determine the response time, conduct the system check, and
sample according to the procedures described in sections 8.2.2.3 through
8.2.2.6.
8.2.4 Alternative Procedure. The direct interface sampling and
analysis procedure described in section 7.2 of Method 18 may be used to
determine the gas VOC concentration. The system must be designed to
collect and analyze at least one sample every 10 minutes. If the
alternative procedure is used to determine the VOC concentration of the
uncaptured emissions in a gas/gas protocol, it must also be used to
determine the VOC concentration of the captured emissions. If a tester
wishes to conduct a liquid/gas protocol using a gas chromatograph, the
tester must use Method 204F for the liquid steam. A gas chromatograph is
not an acceptable alternative to the FIA in Method 204A.
9. Data Analysis and Calculations
9.1 Nomenclature.
Ai=area of NDO i, ft\2\.
AN=total area of all NDO's in the enclosure, ft\2\.
CBi=corrected average VOC concentration of background
emissions at point i, ppm propane.
CB=average background concentration, ppm propane.
CDH=average measured concentration for the drift check
calibration gas, ppm propane.
[[Page 433]]
CD0=average system drift check concentration for zero
concentration gas, ppm propane.
CFj=corrected average VOC concentration of uncaptured
emissions at point j, ppm propane.
CH=actual concentration of the drift check calibration gas,
ppm propane.
Ci=uncorrected average background VOC concentration at point
i, ppm propane.
Cj=uncorrected average VOC concentration measured at point j,
ppm propane.
F=total VOC content of uncaptured emissions, kg.
K1=1.830x10-6 kg/(m\3\-ppm).
n=number of measurement points.
QFj=average effluent volumetric flow rate corrected to
standard conditions at uncaptured emissions point j, m\3\/min.
[Theta]F=total duration of uncaptured emissions sampling run,
min.
9.2 Calculations.
9.2.1 Total Uncaptured VOC Emissions.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.015
9.2.2 VOC Concentration of the Uncaptured Emissions at Point j.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.016
9.2.3 Background VOC Concentration at Point i.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.017
9.2.4 Average Background Concentration.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.018
Note: If the concentration at each point is within 20 percent of the
average concentration of all points, use the arithmetic average.
10. Method Performance
The measurement uncertainties are estimated for each uncaptured
emission point as follows: QFj=5.5
percent and CFj=5.0 percent. Based on
these numbers, the probable uncertainty for F is estimated at about
7.4 percent.
11. Diagrams
[[Page 434]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.031
[[Page 435]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.032
[[Page 436]]
Method 204E--Volatile Organic Compounds Emissions in Uncaptured Stream
From Building Enclosure
1. Scope and Application
1.1 Applicability. This procedure is applicable for determining the
uncaptured volatile organic compounds (VOC) emissions from a building
enclosure (BE). It is intended to be used in the development of liquid/
gas or gas/gas protocols for determining VOC capture efficiency (CE) for
surface coating and printing operations.
1.2 Principle. The total amount of uncaptured VOC emissions
(FB) from the BE is calculated as the sum of the products of
the VOC content (CFj) of each uncaptured emissions point, the
flow rate (QFj) at each uncaptured emissions point, and time
([Theta]F).
1.3 Sampling Requirements. A CE test shall consist of at least three
sampling runs. Each run shall cover at least one complete production
cycle, but shall be at least 3 hours long. The sampling time for each
run need not exceed 8 hours, even if the production cycle has not been
completed. Alternative sampling times may be used with the approval of
the Administrator.
2. Summary of Method
A gas sample is extracted from the uncaptured exhaust duct of a BE
through a heated sample line and, if necessary, a glass fiber filter to
a flame ionization analyzer (FIA).
3. Safety
Because this procedure is often applied in highly explosive areas,
caution and care should be exercised in choosing, installing, and using
the appropriate equipment.
4. Equipment and Supplies
Mention of trade names or company products does not constitute
endorsement. All gas concentrations (percent, ppm) are by volume, unless
otherwise noted.
4.1 Gas VOC Concentration. A schematic of the measurement system is
shown in Figure 204E-1. The main components are as follows:
4.1.1 Sample Probe. Stainless steel or equivalent. The probe shall
be heated to prevent VOC condensation.
4.1.2 Calibration Valve Assembly. Three-way valve assembly at the
outlet of the sample probe to direct the zero and calibration gases to
the analyzer. Other methods, such as quick-connect lines, to route
calibration gases to the outlet of the sample probe are acceptable.
4.1.3 Sample Line. Stainless steel or Teflon tubing to transport the
sample gas to the analyzer. The sample line must be heated to prevent
condensation.
4.1.4 Sample Pump. A leak-free pump, to pull the sample gas through
the system at a flow rate sufficient to minimize the response time of
the measurement system. The components of the pump that contact the gas
stream shall be constructed of stainless steel or Teflon. The sample
pump must be heated to prevent condensation.
4.1.5 Sample Flow Rate Control. A sample flow rate control valve and
rotameter, or equivalent, to maintain a constant sampling rate within 10
percent. The flow rate control valve and rotameter must be heated to
prevent condensation. A control valve may also be located on the sample
pump bypass loop to assist in controlling the sample pressure and flow
rate.
4.1.6 Sample Gas Manifold. Capable of diverting a portion of the
sample gas stream to the FIA, and the remainder to the bypass discharge
vent. The manifold components shall be constructed of stainless steel or
Teflon. If emissions are to be measured at multiple locations, the
measurement system shall be designed to use separate sampling probes,
lines, and pumps for each measurement location, and a common sample gas
manifold and FIA. The sample gas manifold must be heated to prevent
condensation.
4.1.7 Organic Concentration Analyzer. An FIA with a span value of
1.5 times the expected concentration as propane; however, other span
values may be used if it can be demonstrated to the Administrator's
satisfaction that they would provide equally accurate measurements. The
system shall be capable of meeting or exceeding the following
specifications:
4.1.7.1 Zero Drift. Less than 3.0 percent of
the span value.
4.1.7.2 Calibration Drift. Less than 3.0
percent of the span value.
4.1.7.3 Calibration Error. Less than 5.0
percent of the calibration gas value.
4.1.7.4 Response Time. Less than 30 seconds.
4.1.8 Integrator/Data Acquisition System. An analog or digital
device or computerized data acquisition system used to integrate the FIA
response or compute the average response and record measurement data.
The minimum data sampling frequency for computing average or integrated
values is one measurement value every 5 seconds. The device shall be
capable of recording average values at least once per minute.
4.2 Uncaptured Emissions Volumetric Flow Rate.
4.2.1 Flow Direction Indicators. Any means of indicating inward or
outward flow, such as light plastic film or paper streamers, smoke
tubes, filaments, and sensory perception.
4.2.2 Method 2 or 2A Apparatus. For determining volumetric flow
rate. Anemometers or similar devices calibrated according to the
manufacturer's instructions may be used
[[Page 437]]
when low velocities are present. Vane anemometers (Young-maximum
response propeller), specialized pitots with electronic manometers
(e.g., Shortridge Instruments Inc., Airdata Multimeter 860) are
commercially available with measurement thresholds of 15 and 8 mpm (50
and 25 fpm), respectively.
4.2.3 Method 3 Apparatus and Reagents. For determining molecular
weight of the gas stream. An estimate of the molecular weight of the gas
stream may be used if approved by the Administrator.
4.2.4 Method 4 Apparatus and Reagents. For determining moisture
content, if necessary.
4.3 Building Enclosure. The criteria for an acceptable BE are
specified in Method 204.
5. Reagents and Standards
5.1 Calibration and Other Gases. Gases used for calibration, fuel,
and combustion air (if required) are contained in compressed gas
cylinders. All calibration gases shall be traceable to National
Institute of Standards and Technology standards and shall be certified
by the manufacturer to 1 percent of the tag value.
Additionally, the manufacturer of the cylinder should provide a
recommended shelf life for each calibration gas cylinder over which the
concentration does not change more than 2 percent
from the certified value. For calibration gas values not generally
available, dilution systems calibrated using Method 205 may be used.
Alternative methods for preparing calibration gas mixtures may be used
with the approval of the Administrator.
5.1.1 Fuel. The FIA manufacturer's recommended fuel should be used.
A 40 percent H2/60 percent He or 40 percent H2/60
percent N2 gas mixture is recommended to avoid an oxygen
synergism effect that reportedly occurs when oxygen concentration varies
significantly from a mean value. Other mixtures may be used provided the
tester can demonstrate to the Administrator that there is no oxygen
synergism effect.
5.1.2 Carrier Gas. High purity air with less than 1 ppm of organic
material (propane or carbon equivalent) or less than 0.1 percent of the
span value, whichever is greater.
5.1.3 FIA Linearity Calibration Gases. Low-, mid-, and high-range
gas mixture standards with nominal propane concentrations of 20-30, 45-
55, and 70-80 percent of the span value in air, respectively. Other
calibration values and other span values may be used if it can be shown
to the Administrator's satisfaction that equally accurate measurements
would be achieved.
5.2 Particulate Filter. An in-stack or an out-of-stack glass fiber
filter is recommended if exhaust gas particulate loading is significant.
An out-of-stack filter must be heated to prevent any condensation unless
it can be demonstrated that no condensation occurs.
6. Quality Control
6.1 Required instrument quality control parameters are found in the
following sections:
6.1.1 The FIA system must be calibrated as specified in section 7.1.
6.1.2 The system drift check must be performed as specified in
section 7.2.
6.1.3 The system check must be conducted as specified in section
7.3.
6.2 Audits.
6.2.1 Analysis Audit Procedure. Immediately before each test,
analyze an audit cylinder as described in section 7.2. The analysis
audit must agree with the audit cylinder concentration within 10
percent.
6.2.2 Audit Samples and Audit Sample Availability. Audit samples
will be supplied only to enforcement agencies for compliance tests. The
availability of audit samples may be obtained by writing: Source Test
Audit Coordinator (STAC) (MD-77B), Quality Assurance Division,
Atmospheric Research and Exposure Assessment Laboratory, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 or by
calling the STAC at (919) 541-7834. The request for the audit sample
must be made at least 30 days prior to the scheduled compliance sample
analysis.
6.2.3 Audit Results. Calculate the audit sample concentration
according to the calculation procedure described in the audit
instructions included with the audit sample. Fill in the audit sample
concentration and the analyst's name on the audit response form included
with the audit instructions. Send one copy to the EPA Regional Office or
the appropriate enforcement agency, and a second copy to the STAC. The
EPA Regional Office or the appropriate enforcement agency will report
the results of the audit to the laboratory being audited. Include this
response with the results of the compliance samples in relevant reports
to the EPA Regional Office or the appropriate enforcement agency.
7. Calibration and Standardization
7.1 FIA Calibration and Linearity Check. Make necessary adjustments
to the air and fuel supplies for the FIA and ignite the burner. Allow
the FIA to warm up for the period recommended by the manufacturer.
Inject a calibration gas into the measurement system and adjust the
back-pressure regulator to the value required to achieve the flow rates
specified by the manufacturer. Inject the zero-and the high-range
calibration gases, and adjust the analyzer calibration to provide the
proper responses. Inject the low-and mid-range gases and record the
responses of the measurement system. The
[[Page 438]]
calibration and linearity of the system are acceptable if the responses
for all four gases are within 5 percent of the respective gas values. If
the performance of the system is not acceptable, repair or adjust the
system and repeat the linearity check. Conduct a calibration and
linearity check after assembling the analysis system and after a major
change is made to the system.
7.2 Systems Drift Checks. Select the calibration gas that most
closely approximates the concentration of the captured emissions for
conducting the drift checks. Introduce the zero and calibration gases at
the calibration valve assembly and verify that the appropriate gas flow
rate and pressure are present at the FIA. Record the measurement system
responses to the zero and calibration gases. The performance of the
system is acceptable if the difference between the drift check
measurement and the value obtained in section 7.1 is less than 3 percent
of the span value. Alternatively, recalibrate the FIA as in section 7.1
and report the results using both sets of calibration data (i.e., data
determined prior to the test period and data determined following the
test period). The data that results in the lowest CE value shall be
reported as the results for the test run. Conduct a system drift check
at the end of each run.
7.3 System Check. Inject the high-range calibration gas at the inlet
of the sampling probe and record the response. The performance of the
system is acceptable if the measurement system response is within 5
percent of the value obtained in section 7.1 for the high-range
calibration gas. Conduct a system check before each test run.
8. Procedure
8.1 Preliminary Determinations. The following points are considered
exhaust points and should be measured for volumetric flow rates and VOC
concentrations:
8.1.1 Forced Draft Openings. Any opening in the facility with an
exhaust fan. Determine the volumetric flow rate according to Method 2.
8.1.2 Roof Openings. Any openings in the roof of a facility which
does not contain fans are considered to be exhaust points. Determine
volumetric flow rate from these openings. Use the appropriate velocity
measurement devices (e.g., propeller anemometers).
8.2 Determination of Flow Rates.
8.2.1 Measure the volumetric flow rate at all locations identified
as exhaust points in section 8.1. Divide each exhaust opening into nine
equal areas for rectangular openings and into eight equal areas for
circular openings.
8.2.2 Measure the velocity at each site at least once every hour
during each sampling run using Method 2 or 2A, if applicable, or using
the low velocity instruments in section 4.2.2.
8.3 Determination of VOC Content of Uncaptured Emissions.
8.3.1 Analysis Duration. Measure the VOC responses at each
uncaptured emissions point during the entire test run or, if applicable,
while the process is operating. If there are multiple emissions
locations, design a sampling system to allow a single FIA to be used to
determine the VOC responses at all sampling locations.
8.3.2 Gas VOC Concentration.
8.3.2.1 Assemble the sample train as shown in Figure 204E-1.
Calibrate the FIA and conduct a system check according to the procedures
in sections 7.1 and 7.3, respectively.
8.3.2.2 Install the sample probe so that the probe is centrally
located in the stack, pipe, or duct, and is sealed tightly at the stack
port connection.
8.3.2.3 Inject zero gas at the calibration valve assembly. Allow the
measurement system response to reach zero. Measure the system response
time as the time required for the system to reach the effluent
concentration after the calibration valve has been returned to the
effluent sampling position.
8.3.2.4 Conduct a system check before, and a system drift check
after, each sampling run according to the procedures in sections 7.2 and
7.3. If the drift check following a run indicates unacceptable
performance (see section 7.3), the run is not valid. Alternatively,
recalibrate the FIA as in section 7.1 and report the results using both
sets of calibration data (i.e., data determined prior to the test period
and data determined following the test period). The data that results in
the lowest CE value shall be reported as the results for the test run.
The tester may elect to perform drift checks during the run, not to
exceed one drift check per hour.
8.3.2.5 Verify that the sample lines, filter, and pump temperatures
are 120 5 [deg]C.
8.3.2.6 Begin sampling at the start of the test period and continue
to sample during the entire run. Record the starting and ending times,
and any required process information, as appropriate. If multiple
emission locations are sampled using a single FIA, sample at each
location for the same amount of time (e.g., 2 minutes) and continue to
switch from one location to another for the entire test run. Be sure
that total sampling time at each location is the same at the end of the
test run. Collect at least four separate measurements from each sample
point during each hour of testing. Disregard the response measurements
at each sampling location until 2 times the response time of the
measurement system has elapsed. Continue sampling for at least 1 minute,
and record the concentration measurements.
8.4 Alternative Procedure. The direct interface sampling and
analysis procedure described in section 7.2 of Method 18 may be
[[Page 439]]
used to determine the gas VOC concentration. The system must be designed
to collect and analyze at least one sample every 10 minutes. If the
alternative procedure is used to determine the VOC concentration of the
uncaptured emissions in a gas/gas protocol, it must also be used to
determine the VOC concentration of the captured emissions. If a tester
wishes to conduct a liquid/gas protocol using a gas chromatograph, the
tester must use Method 204F for the liquid steam. A gas chromatograph is
not an acceptable alternative to the FIA in Method 204A.
9. Data Analysis and Calculations
9.1 Nomenclature.
CDH=average measured concentration for the drift check
calibration gas, ppm propane.
CD0=average system drift check concentration for zero
concentration gas, ppm propane.
CFj=corrected average VOC concentration of uncaptured
emissions at point j, ppm propane.
CH=actual concentration of the drift check calibration gas,
ppm propane.
Cj=uncorrected average VOC concentration measured at point j,
ppm propane.
FB=total VOC content of uncaptured emissions from the
building, kg.
K1=1.830 x 10-6 kg/(m \3\-ppm).
n=number of measurement points.
QFj=average effluent volumetric flow rate corrected to
standard conditions at uncaptured emissions point j, m \3\/min.
[Theta]F=total duration of CE sampling run, min.
9.2 Calculations
9.2.1 Total VOC Uncaptured Emissions from the Building.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.019
9.2.2 VOC Concentration of the Uncaptured Emissions at Point j.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.020
10. Method Performance
The measurement uncertainties are estimated for each uncaptured
emissions point as follows: QFj=10.0
percent and CFj= 5.0 percent. Based on
these numbers, the probable uncertainty for FB is estimated
at about 11.2 percent.
11. Diagrams
[[Page 440]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.033
Method 204F--Volatile Organic Compounds Content in Liquid Input Stream
(Distillation Approach)
1. Introduction
1.1 Applicability. This procedure is applicable for determining the
input of volatile organic compounds (VOC). It is intended to be used as
a segment in the development of liquid/gas protocols for determining VOC
capture efficiency (CE) for surface coating and printing operations.
1.2 Principle. The amount of VOC introduced to the process (L) is
the sum of the products of the weight (W) of each VOC containing liquid
(ink, paint, solvent, etc.) used,
[[Page 441]]
and its VOC content (V), corrected for a response factor (RF).
1.3 Sampling Requirements. A CE test shall consist of at least three
sampling runs. Each run shall cover at least one complete production
cycle, but shall be at least 3 hours long. The sampling time for each
run need not exceed 8 hours, even if the production cycle has not been
completed. Alternative sampling times may be used with the approval of
the Administrator.
2. Summary of Method
A sample of each coating used is distilled to separate the VOC
fraction. The distillate is used to prepare a known standard for
analysis by an flame ionization analyzer (FIA), calibrated against
propane, to determine its RF.
3. Safety
Because this procedure is often applied in highly explosive areas,
caution and care should be exercised in choosing, installing, and using
the appropriate equipment.
4. Equipment and Supplies
Mention of trade names or company products does not constitute
endorsement. All gas concentrations (percent, ppm) are by volume, unless
otherwise noted.
4.1 Liquid Weight.
4.1.1 Balances/Digital Scales. To weigh drums of VOC containing
liquids to within 0.2 lb or 1.0 percent of the total weight of VOC
liquid used.
4.1.2 Volume Measurement Apparatus (Alternative). Volume meters,
flow meters, density measurement equipment, etc., as needed to achieve
the same accuracy as direct weight measurements.
4.2 Response Factor Determination (FIA Technique). The VOC
distillation system and Tedlar gas bag generation system apparatuses are
shown in Figures 204F-1 and 204F-2, respectively. The following
equipment is required:
4.2.1 Sample Collection Can. An appropriately-sized metal can to be
used to collect VOC containing materials. The can must be constructed in
such a way that it can be grounded to the coating container.
4.2.2 Needle Valves. To control gas flow.
4.2.3 Regulators. For calibration, dilution, and sweep gas
cylinders.
4.2.4 Tubing and Fittings. Teflon and stainless steel tubing and
fittings with diameters, lengths, and sizes determined by the connection
requirements of the equipment.
4.2.5 Thermometer. Capable of measuring the temperature of the hot
water and oil baths to within 1 [deg]C.
4.2.6 Analytical Balance. To measure 0.01 mg.
4.2.7 Microliter Syringe. 10-[mu]l size.
4.2.8 Vacuum Gauge or Manometer. 0- to 760-mm (0- to 30-in.) Hg U-
Tube manometer or vacuum gauge.
4.2.9 Hot Oil Bath, With Stirring Hot Plate. Capable of heating and
maintaining a distillation vessel at 110 3
[deg]C.
4.2.10 Ice Water Bath. To cool the distillation flask.
4.2.11 Vacuum/Water Aspirator. A device capable of drawing a vacuum
to within 20 mm Hg from absolute.
4.2.12 Rotary Evaporator System. Complete with folded inner coil,
vertical style condenser, rotary speed control, and Teflon sweep gas
delivery tube with valved inlet. Buchi Rotavapor or equivalent.
4.2.13 Ethylene Glycol Cooling/Circulating Bath. Capable of
maintaining the condenser coil fluid at -10 [deg]C.
4.2.14 Dry Gas Meter (DGM). Capable of measuring the dilution gas
volume within 2 percent, calibrated with a spirometer or bubble meter,
and equipped with a temperature gauge capable of measuring temperature
within 3 [deg]C.
4.2.15 Activated Charcoal/Mole Sieve Trap. To remove any trace level
of organics picked up from the DGM.
4.2.16 Gas Coil Heater. Sufficient length of 0.125-inch stainless
steel tubing to allow heating of the dilution gas to near the water bath
temperature before entering the volatilization vessel.
4.2.17 Water Bath, With Stirring Hot Plate. Capable of heating and
maintaining a volatilization vessel and coil heater at a temperature of
100 5 [deg]C.
4.2.18 Volatilization Vessel. 50-ml midget impinger fitted with a
septum top and loosely filled with glass wool to increase the
volatilization surface.
4.2.19 Tedlar Gas Bag. Capable of holding 30 liters of gas, flushed
clean with zero air, leak tested, and evacuated.
4.2.20 Organic Concentration Analyzer. An FIA with a span value of
1.5 times the expected concentration as propane; however, other span
values may be used if it can be demonstrated that they would provide
equally accurate measurements. The FIA instrument should be the same
instrument used in the gaseous analyses adjusted with the same fuel,
combustion air, and sample back-pressure (flow rate) settings. The
system shall be capable of meeting or exceeding the following
specifications:
4.2.20.1 Zero Drift. Less than 3.0 percent of
the span value.
4.2.20.2 Calibration Drift. Less than 3.0
percent of the span value.
4.2.20.3 Calibration Error. Less than 3.0
percent of the calibration gas value.
4.2.21 Integrator/Data Acquisition System. An analog or digital
device or computerized data acquisition system used to integrate the FIA
response or compute the average response and record measurement data.
[[Page 442]]
The minimum data sampling frequency for computing average or integrated
value is one measurement value every 5 seconds. The device shall be
capable of recording average values at least once per minute.
4.2.22 Chart Recorder (Optional). A chart recorder or similar device
is recommended to provide a continuous analog display of the measurement
results during the liquid sample analysis.
5. Reagents and Standards
5.1 Zero Air. High purity air with less than 1 ppm of organic
material (as propane) or less than 0.1 percent of the span value,
whichever is greater. Used to supply dilution air for making the Tedlar
bag gas samples.
5.2 THC Free N2. High purity N2 with less than
1 ppm THC. Used as sweep gas in the rotary evaporator system.
5.3 Calibration and Other Gases. Gases used for calibration, fuel,
and combustion air (if required) are contained in compressed gas
cylinders. All calibration gases shall be traceable to National
Institute of Standards and Technology standards and shall be certified
by the manufacturer to 1 percent of the tag value.
Additionally, the manufacturer of the cylinder should provide a
recommended shelf life for each calibration gas cylinder over which the
concentration does not change more than 2 percent
from the certified value. For calibration gas values not generally
available, dilution systems calibrated using Method 205 may be used.
Alternative methods for preparing calibration gas mixtures may be used
with the approval of the Administrator.
5.3.1 Fuel. The FIA manufacturer's recommended fuel should be used.
A 40 percent H2/60 percent He, or 40 percent H2/60
percent N2 mixture is recommended to avoid fuels with oxygen
to avoid an oxygen synergism effect that reportedly occurs when oxygen
concentration varies significantly from a mean value. Other mixtures may
be used provided the tester can demonstrate to the Administrator that
there is no oxygen synergism effect.
5.3.2 Combustion Air. High purity air with less than 1 ppm of
organic material (as propane) or less than 0.1 percent of the span
value, whichever is greater.
5.3.3 FIA Linearity Calibration Gases. Low-, mid-, and high-range
gas mixture standards with nominal propane concentration of 20-30, 45-
55, and 70-80 percent of the span value in air, respectively. Other
calibration values and other span values may be used if it can be shown
that equally accurate measurements would be achieved.
5.3.4 System Calibration Gas. Gas mixture standard containing
propane in air, approximating the VOC concentration expected for the
Tedlar gas bag samples.
6. Quality Control
6.1 Required instrument quality control parameters are found in the
following sections:
6.1.1 The FIA system must be calibrated as specified in section 7.1.
6.1.2 The system drift check must be performed as specified in
section 7.2.
6.2 Precision Control. A minimum of one sample in each batch must be
distilled and analyzed in duplicate as a precision control. If the
results of the two analyses differ by more than 10
percent of the mean, then the system must be reevaluated and the entire
batch must be redistilled and analyzed.
6.3 Audits.
6.3.1 Audit Procedure. Concurrently, analyze the audit sample and a
set of compliance samples in the same manner to evaluate the technique
of the analyst and the standards preparation. The same analyst,
analytical reagents, and analytical system shall be used both for
compliance samples and the EPA audit sample. If this condition is met,
auditing of subsequent compliance analyses for the same enforcement
agency within 30 days is not required. An audit sample set may not be
used to validate different sets of compliance samples under the
jurisdiction of different enforcement agencies, unless prior
arrangements are made with both enforcement agencies.
6.3.2 Audit Samples. Audit Sample Availability. Audit samples will
be supplied only to enforcement agencies for compliance tests. The
availability of audit samples may be obtained by writing: Source Test
Audit Coordinator (STAC) (MD-77B), Quality Assurance Division,
Atmospheric Research and Exposure Assessment Laboratory, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 or by
calling the STAC at (919) 541-7834. The request for the audit sample
must be made at least 30 days prior to the scheduled compliance sample
analysis.
6.3.3 Audit Results. Calculate the audit sample concentration
according to the calculation procedure described in the audit
instructions included with the audit sample. Fill in the audit sample
concentration and the analyst's name on the audit response form included
with the audit instructions. Send one copy to the EPA Regional Office or
the appropriate enforcement agency, and a second copy to the STAC. The
EPA Regional Office or the appropriate enforcement agency will report
the results of the audit to the laboratory being audited. Include this
response with the results of the compliance samples in relevant reports
to the EPA Regional Office or the appropriate enforcement agency.
[[Page 443]]
7. Calibration and Standardization
7.1 FIA Calibration and Linearity Check. Make necessary adjustments
to the air and fuel supplies for the FIA and ignite the burner. Allow
the FIA to warm up for the period recommended by the manufacturer.
Inject a calibration gas into the measurement system and adjust the
back-pressure regulator to the value required to achieve the flow rates
specified by the manufacturer. Inject the zero-and the high-range
calibration gases and adjust the analyzer calibration to provide the
proper responses. Inject the low-and mid-range gases and record the
responses of the measurement system. The calibration and linearity of
the system are acceptable if the responses for all four gases are within
5 percent of the respective gas values. If the performance of the system
is not acceptable, repair or adjust the system and repeat the linearity
check. Conduct a calibration and linearity check after assembling the
analysis system and after a major change is made to the system. A
calibration curve consisting of zero gas and two calibration levels must
be performed at the beginning and end of each batch of samples.
7.2 Systems Drift Checks. After each sample, repeat the system
calibration checks in section 7.1 before any adjustments to the FIA or
measurement system are made. If the zero or calibration drift exceeds
3 percent of the span value, discard the result
and repeat the analysis. Alternatively, recalibrate the FIA as in
section 7.1 and report the results using both sets of calibration data
(i.e., data determined prior to the test period and data determined
following the test period). The data that results in the lowest CE value
shall be reported as the results for the test run.
8. Procedures
8.1 Determination of Liquid Input Weight
8.1.1 Weight Difference. Determine the amount of material introduced
to the process as the weight difference of the feed material before and
after each sampling run. In determining the total VOC containing liquid
usage, account for: (a) The initial (beginning) VOC containing liquid
mixture; (b) any solvent added during the test run; (c) any coating
added during the test run; and (d) any residual VOC containing liquid
mixture remaining at the end of the sample run.
8.1.1.1 Identify all points where VOC containing liquids are
introduced to the process. To obtain an accurate measurement of VOC
containing liquids, start with an empty fountain (if applicable). After
completing the run, drain the liquid in the fountain back into the
liquid drum (if possible), and weigh the drum again. Weigh the VOC
containing liquids to 0.5 percent of the total
weight (full) or 1.0 percent of the total weight
of VOC containing liquid used during the sample run, whichever is less.
If the residual liquid cannot be returned to the drum, drain the
fountain into a preweighed empty drum to determine the final weight of
the liquid.
8.1.1.2 If it is not possible to measure a single representative
mixture, then weigh the various components separately (e.g., if solvent
is added during the sampling run, weigh the solvent before it is added
to the mixture). If a fresh drum of VOC containing liquid is needed
during the run, then weigh both the empty drum and fresh drum.
8.1.2 Volume Measurement (Alternative). If direct weight
measurements are not feasible, the tester may use volume meters and flow
rate meters (and density measurements) to determine the weight of
liquids used if it can be demonstrated that the technique produces
results equivalent to the direct weight measurements. If a single
representative mixture cannot be measured, measure the components
separately.
8.2 Determination of VOC Content in Input Liquids
8.2.1 Collection of Liquid Samples.
8.2.1.1 Collect a 1-pint or larger sample of the VOC containing
liquid mixture at each application location at the beginning and end of
each test run. A separate sample should be taken of each VOC containing
liquid added to the application mixture during the test run. If a fresh
drum is needed during the sampling run, then obtain a sample from the
fresh drum.
8.2.1.2 When collecting the sample, ground the sample container to
the coating drum. Fill the sample container as close to the rim as
possible to minimize the amount of headspace.
8.2.1.3 After the sample is collected, seal the container so the
sample cannot leak out or evaporate.
8.2.1.4 Label the container to identify clearly the contents.
8.2.2 Distillation of VOC.
8.2.2.1 Assemble the rotary evaporator as shown in Figure 204F-1.
8.2.2.2 Leak check the rotary evaporation system by aspirating a
vacuum of approximately 20 mm Hg from absolute. Close up the system and
monitor the vacuum for approximately 1 minute. If the vacuum falls more
than 25 mm Hg in 1 minute, repair leaks and repeat. Turn off the
aspirator and vent vacuum.
8.2.2.3 Deposit approximately 20 ml of sample (inks, paints, etc.)
into the rotary evaporation distillation flask.
8.2.2.4 Install the distillation flask on the rotary evaporator.
8.2.2.5 Immerse the distillate collection flask into the ice water
bath.
8.2.2.6 Start rotating the distillation flask at a speed of
approximately 30 rpm.
8.2.2.7 Begin heating the vessel at a rate of 2 to 3 [deg]C per
minute.
[[Page 444]]
8.2.2.8 After the hot oil bath has reached a temperature of 50
[deg]C or pressure is evident on the mercury manometer, turn on the
aspirator and gradually apply a vacuum to the evaporator to within 20 mm
Hg of absolute. Care should be taken to prevent material burping from
the distillation flask.
8.2.2.9 Continue heating until a temperature of 110 [deg]C is
achieved and maintain this temperature for at least 2 minutes, or until
the sample has dried in the distillation flask.
8.2.2.10 Slowly introduce the N2 sweep gas through the
purge tube and into the distillation flask, taking care to maintain a
vacuum of approximately 400-mm Hg from absolute.
8.2.2.11 Continue sweeping the remaining solvent VOC from the
distillation flask and condenser assembly for 2 minutes, or until all
traces of condensed solvent are gone from the vessel. Some distillate
may remain in the still head. This will not affect solvent recovery
ratios.
8.2.2.12 Release the vacuum, disassemble the apparatus and transfer
the distillate to a labeled, sealed vial.
8.2.3 Preparation of VOC standard bag sample.
8.2.3.1 Assemble the bag sample generation system as shown in Figure
204F-2 and bring the water bath up to near boiling temperature.
8.2.3.2 Inflate the Tedlar bag and perform a leak check on the bag.
8.2.3.3 Evacuate the bag and close the bag inlet valve.
8.2.3.4 Record the current barometric pressure.
8.2.3.5 Record the starting reading on the dry gas meter, open the
bag inlet valve, and start the dilution zero air flowing into the Tedlar
bag at approximately 2 liters per minute.
8.2.3.6 The bag sample VOC concentration should be similar to the
gaseous VOC concentration measured in the gas streams. The amount of
liquid VOC required can be approximated using equations in section 9.2.
Using Equation 204F-4, calculate CVOC by assuming RF is 1.0
and selecting the desired gas concentration in terms of propane,
CC3. Assuming BV is 20 liters, ML, the
approximate amount of liquid to be used to prepare the bag gas sample,
can be calculated using Equation 204F-2.
8.2.3.7 Quickly withdraw an aliquot of the approximate amount
calculated in section 8.2.3.6 from the distillate vial with the
microliter syringe and record its weight from the analytical balance to
the nearest 0.01 mg.
8.2.3.8 Inject the contents of the syringe through the septum of the
volatilization vessel into the glass wool inside the vessel.
8.2.3.9 Reweigh and record the tare weight of the now empty syringe.
8.2.3.10 Record the pressure and temperature of the dilution gas as
it is passed through the dry gas meter.
8.2.3.11 After approximately 20 liters of dilution gas have passed
into the Tedlar bag, close the valve to the dilution air source and
record the exact final reading on the dry gas meter.
8.2.3.12 The gas bag is then analyzed by FIA within 1 hour of bag
preparation in accordance with the procedure in section 8.2.4.
8.2.4 Determination of VOC response factor.
8.2.4.1 Start up the FIA instrument using the same settings as used
for the gaseous VOC measurements.
8.2.4.2 Perform the FIA analyzer calibration and linearity checks
according to the procedure in section 7.1. Record the responses to each
of the calibration gases and the back-pressure setting of the FIA.
8.2.4.3 Connect the Tedlar bag sample to the FIA sample inlet and
record the bag concentration in terms of propane. Continue the analyses
until a steady reading is obtained for at least 30 seconds. Record the
final reading and calculate the RF.
8.2.5 Determination of coating VOC content as VOC (VIJ).
8.2.5.1 Determine the VOC content of the coatings used in the
process using EPA Method 24 or 24A as applicable.
9. Data Analysis and Calculations
9.1. Nomenclature.
BV=Volume of bag sample volume, liters.
CC3=Concentration of bag sample as propane, mg/liter.
CVOC=Concentration of bag sample as VOC, mg/liter.
K=0.00183 mg propane/(liter-ppm propane)
L=Total VOC content of liquid input, kg propane.
ML=Mass of VOC liquid injected into the bag, mg.
MV=Volume of gas measured by DGM, liters.
PM=Absolute DGM gas pressure, mm Hg.
PSTD=Standard absolute pressure, 760 mm Hg.
RC3=FIA reading for bag gas sample, ppm propane.
RF=Response factor for VOC in liquid, weight VOC/weight propane.
RFJ=Response factor for VOC in liquid J, weight VOC/weight
propane.
TM=DGM temperature, [deg]K.
TSTD=Standard absolute temperature, 293 [deg]K.
VIJ=Initial VOC weight fraction of VOC liquid J.
VFJ=Final VOC weight fraction of VOC liquid J.
VAJ=VOC weight fraction of VOC liquid J added during the run.
WIJ=Weight of VOC containing liquid J at beginning of run,
kg.
WFJ=Weight of VOC containing liquid J at end of run, kg.
[[Page 445]]
WAJ=Weight of VOC containing liquid J added during the run,
kg.
9.2 Calculations.
9.2.1 Bag sample volume.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.021
9.2.2 Bag sample VOC concentration.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.022
9.2.3 Bag sample VOC concentration as propane.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.023
9.2.4 Response Factor.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.024
9.2.5 Total VOC Content of the Input VOC Containing Liquid.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.025
10. Diagrams
[[Page 446]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.034
[[Page 447]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR16JN97.035
[[Page 448]]
Method 205--Verification of Gas Dilution Systems for Field Instrument
Calibrations
1. Introduction
1.1 Applicability. A gas dilution system can provide known values of
calibration gases through controlled dilution of high-level calibration
gases with an appropriate dilution gas. The instrumental test methods in
40 CFR part 60--e.g., Methods 3A, 6C, 7E, 10, 15, 16, 20, 25A and 25B--
require on-site, multi-point calibration using gases of known
concentrations. A gas dilution system that produces known low-level
calibration gases from high-level calibration gases, with a degree of
confidence similar to that for Protocol \1\ gases, may be used for
compliance tests in lieu of multiple calibration gases when the gas
dilution system is demonstrated to meet the requirements of this method.
The Administrator may also use a gas dilution system in order to produce
a wide range of Cylinder Gas Audit concentrations when conducting
performance specifications according to appendix F, 40 CFR part 60. As
long as the acceptance criteria of this method are met, this method is
applicable to gas dilution systems using any type of dilution
technology, not solely the ones mentioned in this method.
1.2 Principle. The gas dilution system shall be evaluated on one
analyzer once during each field test. A precalibrated analyzer is
chosen, at the discretion of the source owner or operator, to
demonstrate that the gas dilution system produces predictable gas
concentrations spanning a range of concentrations. After meeting the
requirements of this method, the remaining analyzers may be calibrated
with the dilution system in accordance to the requirements of the
applicable method for the duration of the field test. In Methods 15 and
16, 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, reactive compounds may be lost in the
gas dilution system. Also, in Methods 25A and 25B, 40 CFR part 60,
appendix A, calibration with target compounds other than propane is
allowed. In these cases, a laboratory evaluation is required once per
year in order to assure the Administrator that the system will dilute
these reactive gases without significant loss.
Note: The laboratory evaluation is required only if the source owner
or operator plans to utilize the dilution system to prepare gases
mentioned above as being reactive.
2. Specifications
2.1 Gas Dilution System. The gas dilution system shall produce
calibration gases whose measured values are within 2 percent of the predicted values. The predicted values
are calculated based on the certified concentration of the supply gas
(Protocol gases, when available, are recommended for their accuracy) and
the gas flow rates (or dilution ratios) through the gas dilution system.
2.1.1 The gas dilution system shall be recalibrated once per
calendar year using NIST-traceable primary flow standards with an
uncertainty <=0.25 percent. A label shall be affixed at all times to the
gas dilution system listing the date of the most recent calibration, the
due date for the next calibration, and the person or manufacturer who
carried out the calibration. Follow the manufacturer's instructions for
the operation and use of the gas dilution system. A copy of the
manufacturer's instructions for the operation of the instrument, as well
as the most recent recalibration documentation shall be made available
for the Administrator's inspection upon request.
2.1.2 Some manufacturers of mass flow controllers recommend that
flow rates below 10 percent of flow controller capacity be avoided;
check for this recommendation and follow the manufacturer's
instructions. One study has indicated that silicone oil from a positive
displacement pump produces an interference in SO2 analyzers
utilizing ultraviolet fluorescence; follow laboratory procedures similar
to those outlined in Section 3.1 in order to demonstrate the
significance of any resulting effect on instrument performance.
2.2 High-Level Supply Gas. An EPA Protocol calibration gas is
recommended, due to its accuracy, as the high-level supply gas.
2.3 Mid-Level Supply Gas. An EPA Protocol gas shall be used as an
independent check of the dilution system. The concentration of the mid-
level supply gas shall be within 10 percent of one of the dilution
levels tested in Section 3.2.
3. Performance Tests
3.1 Laboratory Evaluation (Optional). If the gas dilution system is
to be used to formulate calibration gases with reactive compounds (Test
Methods 15, 16, and 25A/25B (only if using a calibration gas other than
propane during the field test) in 40 CFR part 60, appendix A), a
laboratory certification must be conducted once per calendar year for
each reactive compound to be diluted. In the laboratory, carry out the
procedures in Section 3.2 on the analyzer required in each respective
test method to be laboratory certified (15, 16, or 25A and 25B for
compounds other than propane). For each compound in which the gas
dilution system meets the requirements in Section 3.2, the source must
provide the laboratory certification data for the field test and in the
test report.
3.2 Field Evaluation (Required). The gas dilution system shall be
evaluated at the test site with an analyzer or monitor chosen by the
source owner or operator. It is recommended that the source owner or
operator choose a precalibrated instrument with a
[[Page 449]]
high level of precision and accuracy for the purposes of this test. This
method is not meant to replace the calibration requirements of test
methods. In addition to the requirements in this method, all the
calibration requirements of the applicable test method must also be met.
3.2.1 Prepare the gas dilution system according to the
manufacturer's instructions. Using the high-level supply gas, prepare,
at a minimum, two dilutions within the range of each dilution device
utilized in the dilution system (unless, as in critical orifice systems,
each dilution device is used to make only one dilution; in that case,
prepare one dilution for each dilution device). Dilution device in this
method refers to each mass flow controller, critical orifice, capillary
tube, positive displacement pump, or any other device which is used to
achieve gas dilution.
3.2.2 Calculate the predicted concentration for each of the
dilutions based on the flow rates through the gas dilution system (or
the dilution ratios) and the certified concentration of the high-level
supply gas.
3.2.3 Introduce each of the dilutions from Section 3.2.1 into the
analyzer or monitor one at a time and determine the instrument response
for each of the dilutions.
3.2.4 Repeat the procedure in Section 3.2.3 two times, i.e., until
three injections are made at each dilution level. Calculate the average
instrument response for each triplicate injection at each dilution
level. No single injection shall differ by more than 2 percent from the average instrument response for that
dilution.
3.2.5 For each level of dilution, calculate the difference between
the average concentration output recorded by the analyzer and the
predicted concentration calculated in Section 3.2.2. The average
concentration output from the analyzer shall be within 2 percent of the predicted value.
3.2.6 Introduce the mid-level supply gas directly into the analyzer,
bypassing the gas dilution system. Repeat the procedure twice more, for
a total of three mid-level supply gas injections. Calculate the average
analyzer output concentration for the mid-level supply gas. The
difference between the certified concentration of the mid-level supply
gas and the average instrument response shall be within 2 percent.
3.3 If the gas dilution system meets the criteria listed in Section
3.2, the gas dilution system may be used throughout that field test. If
the gas dilution system fails any of the criteria listed in Section 3.2,
and the tester corrects the problem with the gas dilution system, the
procedure in Section 3.2 must be repeated in its entirety and all the
criteria in Section 3.2 must be met in order for the gas dilution system
to be utilized in the test.
4. References
1. ``EPA Traceability Protocol for Assay and Certification of
Gaseous Calibration Standards,'' EPA-600/R93/224, Revised September
1993.
[55 FR 14249, Apr. 17, 1990; 55 FR 24687, June 18, 1990, as amended at
55 FR 37606, Sept. 12, 1990; 56 FR 6278, Feb. 15, 1991; 56 FR 65435,
Dec. 17, 1991; 60 FR 28054, May 30, 1995; 62 FR 32502, June 16, 1997]
Appendixes N-O to Part 51 [Reserved]
Appendix P to Part 51--Minimum Emission Monitoring Requirements
1.0 Purpose. This appendix P sets forth the minimum requirements for
continuous emission monitoring and recording that each State
Implementation Plan must include in order to be approved under the
provisions of 40 CFR 51.165(b). These requirements include the source
categories to be affected; emission monitoring, recording, and reporting
requirements for those sources; performance specifications for accuracy,
reliability, and durability of acceptable monitoring systems; and
techniques to convert emission data to units of the applicable State
emission standard. Such data must be reported to the State as an
indication of whether proper maintenance and operating procedures are
being utilized by source operators to maintain emission levels at or
below emission standards. Such data may be used directly or indirectly
for compliance determination or any other purpose deemed appropriate by
the State. Though the monitoring requirements are specified in detail,
States are given some flexibility to resolve difficulties that may arise
during the implementation of these regulations.
1.1 Applicability. The State plan shall require the owner or
operator of an emission source in a category listed in this appendix to:
(1) Install, calibrate, operate, and maintain all monitoring equipment
necessary for continuously monitoring the pollutants specified in this
appendix for the applicable source category; and (2) complete the
installation and performance tests of such equipment and begin
monitoring and recording within 18 months of plan approval or
promulgation. The source categories and the respective monitoring
requirements are listed below.
1.1.1 Fossil fuel-fired steam generators, as specified in paragraph
2.1 of this appendix, shall be monitored for opacity, nitrogen oxides
emissions, sulfur dioxide emissions, and oxygen or carbon dioxide.
1.1.2 Fluid bed catalytic cracking unit catalyst regenerators, as
specified in paragraph 2.4 of this appendix, shall be monitored for
opacity.
[[Page 450]]
1.1.3 Sulfuric acid plants, as specified in paragraph 2.3 of this
appendix, shall be monitored for sulfur dioxide emissions.
1.1.4 Nitric acid plants, as specified in paragraph 2.2 of this
appendix, shall be monitored for nitrogen oxides emissions.
1.2 Exemptions. The States may include provisions within their
regulations to grant exemptions from the monitoring requirements of
paragraph 1.1 of this appendix for any source which is:
1.2.1 Subject to a new source performance standard promulgated in 40
CFR part 60 pursuant to section 111 of the Clean Air Act; or
1.2.2 not subject to an applicable emission standard of an approved
plan; or
1.2.3 scheduled for retirement within 5 years after inclusion of
monitoring requirements for the source in appendix P, provided that
adequate evidence and guarantees are provided that clearly show that the
source will cease operations prior to such date.
1.3 Extensions. States may allow reasonable extensions of the time
provided for installation of monitors for facilities unable to meet the
prescribed timeframe (i.e., 18 months from plan approval or
promulgation) provided the owner or operator of such facility
demonstrates that good faith efforts have been made to obtain and
install such devices within such prescribed timeframe.
1.4 Monitoring System Malfunction. The State plan may provide a
temporary exemption from the monitoring and reporting requirements of
this appendix during any period of monitoring system malfunction,
provided that the source owner or operator shows, to the satisfaction of
the State, that the malfunction was unavoidable and is being repaired as
expeditiously as practicable.
2.0 Minimum Monitoring Requirement. States must, as a minimum,
require the sources listed in paragraph 1.1 of this appendix to meet the
following basic requirements.
2.1 Fossil fuel-fired steam generators. Each fossil fuel-fired steam
generator, except as provided in the following subparagraphs, with an
annual average capacity factor of greater than 30 percent, as reported
to the Federal Power Commission for calendar year 1974, or as otherwise
demonstrated to the State by the owner or operator, shall conform with
the following monitoring requirements when such facility is subject to
an emission standard of an applicable plan for the pollutant in
question.
2.1.1 A continuous monitoring system for the measurement of opacity
which meets the performance specifications of paragraph 3.1.1 of this
appendix shall be installed, calibrated, maintained, and operated in
accordance with the procedures of this appendix by the owner or operator
of any such steam generator of greater than 250 million BTU per hour
heat input except where:
2.1.1.1 gaseous fuel is the only fuel burned, or
2.1.1.2 oil or a mixture of gas and oil are the only fuels burned
and the source is able to comply with the applicable particulate matter
and opacity regulations without utilization of particulate matter
collection equipment, and where the source has never been found, through
any administrative or judicial proceedings, to be in violation of any
visible emission standard of the applicable plan.
2.1.2 A continuous monitoring system for the measurement of sulfur
dioxide which meets the performance specifications of paragraph 3.1.3 of
this appendix shall be installed, calibrated, maintained, and operated
on any fossil fuel-fired steam generator of greater than 250 million BTU
per hour heat input which has installed sulfur dioxide pollutant control
equipment.
2.1.3 A continuous monitoring system for the measurement of nitrogen
oxides which meets the performance specification of paragraph 3.1.2 of
this appendix shall be installed, calibrated, maintained, and operated
on fossil fuel-fired steam generators of greater than 1000 million BTU
per hour heat input when such facility is located in an Air Quality
Control Region where the Administrator has specifically determined that
a control strategy for nitrogen dioxide is necessary to attain the
national standards, unless the source owner or operator demonstrates
during source compliance tests as required by the State that such a
source emits nitrogen oxides at levels 30 percent or more below the
emission standard within the applicable plan.
2.1.4 A continuous monitoring system for the measurement of the
percent oxygen or carbon dioxide which meets the performance
specifications of paragraphs 3.1.4 or 3.1.5 of this appendix shall be
installed, calibrated, operated, and maintained on fossil fuel-fired
steam generators where measurements of oxygen or carbon dioxide in the
flue gas are required to convert either sulfur dioxide or nitrogen
oxides continuous emission monitoring data, or both, to units of the
emission standard within the applicable plan.
2.2 Nitric acid plants. Each nitric acid plant of greater than 300
tons per day production capacity, the production capacity being
expressed as 100 percent acid, located in an Air Quality Control Region
where the Administrator has specifically determined that a control
strategy for nitrogen dioxide is necessary to attain the national
standard shall install, calibrate, maintain, and operate a continuous
monitoring system for the measurement of nitrogen oxides which meets the
performance specifications of paragraph 3.1.2 for each nitric acid
producing facility within such plant.
[[Page 451]]
2.3 Sulfuric acid plants. Each Sulfuric acid plant of greater than
300 tons per day production capacity, the production being expressed as
100 percent acid, shall install, calibrate, maintain and operate a
continuous monitoring system for the measurement of sulfur dioxide which
meets the performance specifications of paragraph 3.1.3 for each
sulfuric acid producing facility within such plant.
2.4 Fluid bed catalytic cracking unit catalyst regenerators at
petroleum refineries. Each catalyst regenerator for fluid bed catalytic
cracking units of greater than 20,000 barrels per day fresh feed
capacity shall install, calibrate, maintain, and operate a continuous
monitoring system for the measurement of opacity which meets the
performance specifications of paragraph 3.1.1.
3.0 Minimum specifications. All State plans shall require owners or
operators of monitoring equipment installed to comply with this
appendix, except as provided in paragraph 3.2, to demonstrate compliance
with the following performance specifications.
3.1 Performance specifications. The performance specifications set
forth in appendix B of part 60 are incorporated herein by reference, and
shall be used by States to determine acceptability of monitoring
equipment installed pursuant to this appendix except that (1) where
reference is made to the ``Administrator'' in appendix B, part 60, the
term State should be inserted for the purpose of this appendix (e.g., in
Performance Specification 1, 1.2, `` * * * monitoring systems subject to
approval by the Administrator,'' should be interpreted as, ``* * *
monitoring systems subject to approval by the State''), and (2) where
reference is made to the ``Reference Method'' in appendix B, part 60,
the State may allow the use of either the State approved reference
method or the Federally approved reference method as published in part
60 of this chapter. The Performance Specifications to be used with each
type of monitoring system are listed below.
3.1.1 Continuous monitoring systems for measuring opacity shall
comply with Performance Specification 1.
3.1.2 Continuous monitoring systems for measuring nitrogen oxides
shall comply with Performance Specification 2.
3.1.3 Continuous monitoring systems for measuring sulfur dioxide
shall comply with Performance Specification 2.
3.1.4 Continuous monitoring systems for measuring oxygen shall
comply with Performance Specification 3.
3.1.5 Continuous monitoring systems for measuring carbon dioxide
shall comply with Performance Specification 3.
3.2 Exemptions. Any source which has purchased an emission
monitoring system(s) prior to September 11, 1974, may be exempt from
meeting such test procedures prescribed in appendix B of part 60 for a
period not to exceed five years from plan approval or promulgation.
3.3 Calibration Gases. For nitrogen oxides monitoring systems
installed on fossil fuel-fired steam generators the pollutant gas used
to prepare calibration gas mixtures (Section 2.1, Performance
Specification 2, appendix B, part 60) shall be nitric oxide (NO). For
nitrogen oxides monitoring systems, installed on nitric acid plants the
pollutant gas used to prepare calibration gas mixtures (Section 2.1,
Performance Specification 2, appendix B, part 60 of this chapter) shall
be nitrogen dioxide (NO2). These gases shall also be used for
daily checks under paragraph 3.7 of this appendix as applicable. For
sulfur dioxide monitoring systems installed on fossil fuel-fired steam
generators or sulfuric acid plants the pollutant gas used to prepare
calibration gas mixtures (Section 2.1, Performance Specification 2,
appendix B, part 60 of this chapter) shall be sulfur dioxide
(SO2). Span and zero gases should be traceable to National
Bureau of Standards reference gases whenever these reference gases are
available. Every six months from date of manufacture, span and zero
gases shall be reanalyzed by conducting triplicate analyses using the
reference methods in appendix A, part 60 of this chapter as follows: for
sulfur dioxide, use Reference Method 6; for nitrogen oxides, use
Reference Method 7; and for carbon dioxide or oxygen, use Reference
Method 3. The gases may be analyzed at less frequent intervals if longer
shelf lives are guaranteed by the manufacturer.
3.4 Cycling times. Cycling times include the total time a monitoring
system requires to sample, analyze and record an emission measurement.
3.4.1 Continuous monitoring systems for measuring opacity shall
complete a minimum of one cycle of operation (sampling, analyzing, and
data recording) for each successive 10-second period.
3.4.2 Continuous monitoring systems for measuring oxides of
nitrogen, carbon dioxide, oxygen, or sulfur dioxide shall complete a
minimum of one cycle of operation (sampling, analyzing, and data
recording) for each successive 15-minute period.
3.5 Monitor location. State plans shall require all continuous
monitoring systems or monitoring devices to be installed such that
representative measurements of emissions or process parameters (i.e.,
oxygen, or carbon dioxide) from the affected facility are obtained.
Additional guidance for location of continuous monitoring systems to
obtain representative samples are contained in the applicable
Performance Specifications of appendix B of part 60 of this chapter.
3.6 Combined effluents. When the effluents from two or more affected
facilities of similar design and operating characteristics are combined
before being released to the atmosphere, the State plan may allow
monitoring
[[Page 452]]
systems to be installed on the combined effluent. When the affected
facilities are not of similar design and operating characteristics, or
when the effluent from one affected facility is released to the
atmosphere through more than one point, the State should establish
alternate procedures to implement the intent of these requirements.
3.7 Zero and drift. State plans shall require owners or operators of
all continuous monitoring systems installed in accordance with the
requirements of this appendix to record the zero and span drift in
accordance with the method prescribed by the manufacturer of such
instruments; to subject the instruments to the manufacturer's
recommended zero and span check at least once daily unless the
manufacturer has recommended adjustments at shorter intervals, in which
case such recommendations shall be followed; to adjust the zero and span
whenever the 24-hour zero drift or 24-hour calibration drift limits of
the applicable performance specifications in appendix B of part 60 are
exceeded; and to adjust continuous monitoring systems referenced by
paragraph 3.2 of this appendix whenever the 24-hour zero drift or 24-
hour calibration drift exceed 10 percent of the emission standard.
3.8 Span. Instrument span should be approximately 200 per cent of
the expected instrument data display output corresponding to the
emission standard for the source.
3.9 Alternative procedures and requirements. In cases where States
wish to utilize different, but equivalent, procedures and requirements
for continuous monitoring systems, the State plan must provide a
description of such alternative procedures for approval by the
Administrator. Some examples of situations that may require alternatives
follow:
3.9.1 Alternative monitoring requirements to accommodate continuous
monitoring systems that require corrections for stack moisture
conditions (e.g., an instrument measuring steam generator SO2
emissions on a wet basis could be used with an instrument measuring
oxygen concentration on a dry basis if acceptable methods of measuring
stack moisture conditions are used to allow accurate adjustments of the
measured SO2 concentration to dry basis.)
3.9.2 Alternative locations for installing continuous monitoring
systems or monitoring devices when the owner or operator can demonstrate
that installation at alternative locations will enable accurate and
representative measurements.
3.9.3 Alternative procedures for performing calibration checks
(e.g., some instruments may demonstrate superior drift characteristics
that require checking at less frequent intervals).
3.9.4 Alternative monitoring requirements when the effluent from one
affected facility or the combined effluent from two or more identical
affected facilities is released to the atmosphere through more than one
point (e.g., an extractive, gaseous monitoring system used at several
points may be approved if the procedures recommended are suitable for
generating accurate emission averages).
3.9.5 Alternative continuous monitoring systems that do not meet the
spectral response requirements in Performance Specification 1, appendix
B of part 60, but adequately demonstrate a definite and consistent
relationship between their measurements and the opacity measurements of
a system complying with the requirements in Performance Specification 1.
The State may require that such demonstration be performed for each
affected facility.
4.0 Minimum data requirements. The following paragraphs set forth
the minimum data reporting requirements necessary to comply with Sec.
51.214(d) and (e).
4.1 The State plan shall require owners or operators of facilities
required to install continuous monitoring systems to submit a written
report of excess emissions for each calendar quarter and the nature and
cause of the excess emissions, if known. The averaging period used for
data reporting should be established by the State to correspond to the
averaging period specified in the emission test method used to determine
compliance with an emission standard for the pollutant/source category
in question. The required report shall include, as a minimum, the data
stipulated in this appendix.
4.2 For opacity measurements, the summary shall consist of the
magnitude in actual percent opacity of all one-minute (or such other
time period deemed appropriate by the State) averages of opacity greater
than the opacity standard in the applicable plan for each hour of
operation of the facility. Average values may be obtained by integration
over the averaging period or by arithmetically averaging a minimum of
four equally spaced, instantaneous opacity meas ure ments per minute.
Any time period exempted shall be considered before determining the
excess averages of opacity (e.g., whenever a regulation allows two
minutes of opacity measurements in excess of the standard, the State
shall require the source to report all opacity averages, in any one
hour, in excess of the standard, minus the two-minute exemption). If
more than one opacity standard applies, excess emissions data must be
submitted in relation to all such standards.
4.3 For gaseous measurements the summary shall consist of emission
averages, in the units of the applicable standard, for each averaging
period during which the applicable standard was exceeded.
4.4 The date and time identifying each period during which the
continuous monitoring system was inoperative, except for zero and
[[Page 453]]
span checks, and the nature of system repairs or adjustments shall be
reported. The State may require proof of continuous monitoring system
performance whenever system repairs or adjustments have been made.
4.5 When no excess emissions have occurred and the continuous
monitoring system(s) have not been inoperative, repaired, or adjusted,
such information shall be included in the report.
4.6 The State plan shall require owners or operators of affected
facilities to maintain a file of all information reported in the
quarterly summaries, and all other data collected either by the
continuous monitoring system or as necessary to convert monitoring data
to the units of the applicable standard for a minimum of two years from
the date of collection of such data or submission of such summaries.
5.0 Data Reduction. The State plan shall require owners or operators
of affected facilities to use the following procedures for converting
monitoring data to units of the standard where necessary.
5.1 For fossil fuel-fired steam generators the following procedures
shall be used to convert gaseous emission monitoring data in parts per
million to g/million cal (lb/million BTU) where necessary:
5.1.1 When the owner or operator of a fossil fuel-fired steam
generator elects under paragraph 2.1.4 of this appendix to measure
oxygen in the flue gases, the measurements of the pollutant
concentration and oxygen concentration shall each be on a dry basis and
the following conversion procedure used:
E = CF [20.9/20.9 - %O2]
5.1.2 When the owner or operator elects under paragraph 2.1.4 of
this appendix to measure carbon dioxide in the flue gases, the
measurement of the pollutant concentration and the carbon dioxide
concentration shall each be on a consistent basis (wet or dry) and the
following conversion procedure used:
E = CFc (100 / %CO2)
5.1.3 The values used in the equations under paragraph 5.1 are
derived as follows:
E = pollutant emission, g/million cal (lb/million BTU),
C = pollutant concentration, g/dscm (lb/dscf), determined by multiplying
the average concentration (ppm) for each hourly period by
4.16x10-5 M g/dscm per ppm (2.64x10-9 M lb/dscf
per ppm) where M = pollutant molecular weight, g/g-mole (lb/lb-mole). M
= 64 for sulfur dioxide and 46 for oxides of nitrogen.
%O2, %CO2 = Oxygen or carbon dioxide volume
(expressed as percent) determined with equipment specified under
paragraph 4.1.4 of this appendix,
F, Fc = a factor representing a ratio of the volume of dry
flue gases generated to the calorific value of the fuel combusted (F),
and a factor representing a ratio of the volume of carbon dioxide
generated to the calorific value of the fuel combusted (Fc)
respectively. Values of F and Fc are given in Sec. 60.45(f)
of part 60, as applicable.
5.2 For sulfuric acid plants the owner or operator shall:
5.2.1 establish a conversion factor three times daily according to
the procedures to Sec. 60.84(b) of this chapter;
5.2.2 multiply the conversion factor by the average sulfur dioxide
concentration in the flue gases to obtain average sulfur dioxide
emissions in Kg/metric ton (lb/short ton); and
5.2.3 report the average sulfur dioxide emission for each averaging
period in excess of the applicable emission standard in the quarterly
summary.
5.3 For nitric acid plants the owner or operator shall:
5.3.1 establish a conversion factor according to the procedures of
Sec. 60.73(b) of this chapter;
5.3.2 multiply the conversion factor by the average nitrogen oxides
concentration in the flue gases to obtain the nitrogen oxides emissions
in the units of the applicable standard;
5.3.3 report the average nitrogen oxides emission for each averaging
period in excess of the applicable emission standard, in the quarterly
summary.
5.4 Any State may allow data reporting or reduction procedures
varying from those set forth in this appendix if the owner or operator
of a source shows to the satisfaction of the State that his procedures
are at least as accurate as those in this appendix. Such procedures may
include but are not limited to, the following:
5.4.1 Alternative procedures for computing emission averages that do
not require integration of data (e.g., some facilities may demonstrate
that the variability of their emissions is sufficiently small to allow
accurate reduction of data based upon computing averages from equally
spaced data points over the averaging period).
5.4.2 Alternative methods of converting pollutant concentration
measurements to the units of the emission standards.
6.0 Special Consideration. The State plan may provide for approval,
on a case-by-case basis, of alternative monitoring requirements
different from the provisions of parts 1 through 5 of this appendix if
the provisions of this appendix (i.e., the installation of a continuous
emission monitoring system) cannot be implemented by a source due to
physical plant limitations or extreme economic reasons. To make use of
this provision, States must include in their plan specific criteria for
determining those physical limitations or extreme economic situations
[[Page 454]]
to be considered by the State. In such cases, when the State exempts any
source subject to this appendix by use of this provision from installing
continuous emission monitoring systems, the State shall set forth
alternative emission monitoring and reporting requirements (e.g.,
periodic manual stack tests) to satisfy the intent of these regulations.
Examples of such special cases include, but are not limited to, the
following:
6.1 Alternative monitoring requirements may be prescribed when
installation of a continuous monitoring system or monitoring device
specified by this appendix would not provide accurate determinations of
emissions (e.g., condensed, uncombined water vapor may prevent an
accurate determination of opacity using commercially available
continuous monitoring systems).
6.2 Alternative monitoring requirements may be prescribed when the
affected facility is infrequently operated (e.g., some affected
facilities may operate less than one month per year).
6.3 Alternative monitoring requirements may be prescribed when the
State determines that the requirements of this appendix would impose an
extreme economic burden on the source owner or operator.
6.4 Alternative monitoring requirements may be prescribed when the
State determines that monitoring systems prescribed by this appendix
cannot be installed due to physical limitations at the facility.
[40 FR 46247, Oct. 6, 1975, as amended at 51 FR 40675, Nov. 7, 1986]
Appendixes Q-R to Part 51 [Reserved]
Appendix S to Part 51--Emission Offset Interpretative Ruling
I. Introduction
This appendix sets forth EPA's Interpretative Ruling on the
preconstruction review requirements for stationary sources of air
pollution (not including indirect sources) under 40 CFR subpart I and
section 129 of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977, Public Law 95-95,
(note under 42 U.S.C. 7502). A major new source or major modification
which would locate in an area designated in 40 CFR 81.300 et seq., as
nonattainment for a pollutant for which the source or modification would
be major may be allowed to construct only if the stringent conditions
set forth below are met. These conditions are designed to insure that
the new source's emissions will be controlled to the greatest degree
possible; that more than equivalent offsetting emission reductions
(emission offsets) will be obtained from existing sources; and that
there will be progress toward achievement of the NAAQS.
For each area designated as exceeding an NAAQS (nonattainment area)
under 40 CFR 81.300 et seq., this Interpretative Ruling will be
superseded after June 30, 1979--(a) by preconstruction review provisions
of the revised SIP, if the SIP meets the requirements of Part D, Title
1, of the Act; or (b) by a prohibition on construction under the
applicable SIP and section 110(a)(2)(I) of the Act, if the SIP does not
meet the requirements of Part D. The Ruling will remain in effect to the
extent not superseded under the Act. This prohibition on major new
source construction does not apply to a source whose permit to construct
was applied for during a period when the SIP was in compliance with Part
D, or before the deadline for having a revised SIP in effect that
satisfies Part D.
The requirement of this Ruling shall not apply to any major
stationary source or major modification that was not subject to the
Ruling as in effect on January 16, 1979, if the owner or operator:
A. Obtained all final Federal, State, and local preconstruction
approvals or permits necessary under the applicable State Implementation
Plan before August 7, 1980;
B. Commenced construction within 18 months from August 7, 1980, or
any earlier time required under the applicable State Implementation
Plan; and
C. Did not discontinue construction for a period of 18 months or
more and completed construction within a reasonable time.
II. Initial Screening Analyses and Determination of Applicable
Requirements
A. Definitions-- For the purposes of this Ruling:
1. Stationary source means any building, structure, facility, or
installation which emits or may emit any air pollutant subject to
regulation under the Act.
2. Building, structure, facility or installation means all of the
pollutant-emitting activities which belong to the same industrial
grouping, are located on one or more contiguous or adjacent properties,
and are under the control of the same person (or persons under common
control) except the activities of any vessel. Pollutant-emitting
activities shall be considered as part of the same industrial grouping
if they belong to the same ``Major Group'' (i.e., which have the same
two digit code) as described in the Standard Industrial Classification
Manual, 1972, as amended by the 1977 Supplement (U.S. Government
Printing Office stock numbers 4101-0066 and 003-005-00176-0,
respectively).
3. Potential to emit means the maximum capacity of a stationary
source to emit a pollutant under its physical and operational design.
Any physical or operational limitation on the capacity of the source to
emit a pollutant, including air pollution control equipment and
restrictions on hours of operation or on the type or amount of material
combusted, stored, or processed, shall be treated as part of its design
only if the limitation or
[[Page 455]]
the effect it would have on emissions is federally enforceable.
Secondary emissions do not count in determining the potential to emit of
a stationary source.
4. (i) Major stationary source means:
(a) Any stationary source of air pollutants which emits, or has the
potential to emit, 100 tons per year or more of any pollutant subject to
regulation under the Act; or
(b) Any physical change that would occur at a stationary source not
qualifying under paragraph 5.(i)(a) of section II of this appendix as a
major stationary source, if the change would constitute a major
stationary source by itself.
(ii) A major stationary source that is major for volatile organic
compounds shall be considered major for ozone.
(iii) The fugitive emissions of a stationary source shall not be
included in determining for any of the purposes of this ruling whether
it is a major stationary source, unless the source belongs to one of the
following categories of stationary sources:
(a) Coal cleaning plants (with thermal dryers);
(b) Kraft pulp mills;
(c) Portland cement plants;
(d) Primary zinc smelters;
(e) Iron and steel mills;
(f) Primary aluminum ore reduction plants;
(g) Primary copper smelters;
(h) Municipal incinerators capable of charging more than 250 tons of
refuse per day;
(i) Hydrofluoric, sulfuric, or nitric acid plants;
(j) Petroleum refineries;
(k) Lime plants;
(l) Phosphate rock processing plants;
(m) Coke oven batteries;
(n) Sulfur recovery plants;
(o) Carbon black plants (furnace process);
(p) Primary lead smelters;
(q) Fuel conversion plants;
(r) Sintering plants;
(s) Secondary metal production plants;
(t) Chemical process plants;
(u) Fossil-fuel boilers (or combination thereof) totaling more than
250 million British thermal units per hour heat input;
(v) Petroleum storage and transfer units with a total storage
capacity exceeding 300,000 barrels;
(w) Taconite ore processing plants;
(x) Glass fiber processing plants;
(y) Charcoal production plants;
(z) Fossil fuel-fired steam electric plants of more than 250 million
British thermal units per hour heat input;
(aa) Any other stationary source category which, as of August 7,
1980, is being regulated under section 111 or 112 of the Act.
5. (i) Major modification means any physical change in or change in
the method of operation of a major stationary source that would result
in a significant net emissions increase of any pollutant subject to
regulation under the Act.
(ii) Any net emissions increase that is considered significant for
volatile organic compounds shall be considered significant for ozone.
(iii) A physical change or change in the method of operation shall
not include:
(a) Routine maintenance, repair, and replacement;
(b) Use of an alternative fuel or raw material by reason of an order
under section 2 (a) and (b) of the Energy Supply and Environmental
Coordination Act of 1974 (or any superseding legislation) or by reason
of a natural gas curtailment plan pursuant to the Federal Power Act;
(c) Use of an alternative fuel by reason of an order or rule under
section 125 of the Act;
(d) Use of an alternative fuel at a steam generating unit to the
extent that the fuel is generated from municipal solid waste;
(e) Use of an alternative fuel or raw material by a stationary
source which:
(1) The source was capable of accommodating before December 21,
1976, unless such change would be prohibited under any federally
enforceable permit condition which was established after December 21,
1976, pursuant to 40 CFR 52.21 or under regulations approved pursuant to
40 CFR subpart I or Sec. 51.166; or
(2) The source is approved to use under any permit issued under this
ruling;
(f) An increase in the hours of operation or in the production rate,
unless such change is prohibited under any federally enforceable permit
condition which was established after December 21, 1976 pursuant to 40
CFR 52.21 or under regulations approved pursuant to 40 CFR subpart I or
Sec. 51.166;
(g) Any change in ownership at a stationary source.
6. (i) Net emissions increase means the amount by which the sum of
the following exceeds zero:
(a) Any increase in actual emissions from a particular physical
change or change in the method of operation at a stationary source; and
(b) Any other increases and decreases in actual emissions at the
source that are contemporaneous with the particular change and are
otherwise creditable.
(ii) An increase or decrease in actual emissions is contemporaneous
with the increase from the particular change only if it occurs between:
(a) The date five years before construction on the particular change
commences and
(b) The date that the increase from the particular change occurs.
(iii) An increase or decrease in actual emissions is creditable only
if the Administrator has not relied on it in issuing a permit
[[Page 456]]
for the source under this Ruling which permit is in effect when the
increase in actual emissions from the particular change occurs.
(iv) An increase in actual emissions is creditable only to the
extent that the new level of actual emissions exceeds the old level.
(v) A decrease in actual emissions is creditable only to the extent
that:
(a) The old level of actual emissions or the old level of allowable
emissions, whichever is lower, exceeds the new level of actual
emissions;
(b) It is federally enforceable at and after the time that actual
construction on the particular change begins;
(c) The reviewing authority has not relied on it in issuing any
permit under regulations approved pursuant to 40 CFR 51.18; and
(d) It has approximately the same qualitative significance for
public health and welfare as that attributed to the increase from the
particular change.
(vi) An increase that results from a physical change at a source
occurs when the emissions unit on which construction occurred becomes
operational and begins to emit a particular pollutant. Any replacement
unit that requires shakedown becomes operational only after a reasonable
shakedown period, not to exceed 180 days.
7. Emissions unit means any part of a stationary source which emits
or would have the potential to emit any pollutant subject to regulation
under the Act.
8. Secondary emissions means emissions which would occur as a result
of the construction or operation of a major stationary source or major
modification, but do not come from the major stationary source or major
modification itself. For the purpose of this Ruling, secondary emissions
must be specific, well defined, quantifiable, and impact the same
general area as the stationary source or modification which causes the
secondary emissions. Secondary emissions include emissions from any
offsite support facility which would not be constructed or increase its
emissions except as a result of the construction or operation of the
major stationary source or major modification. Secondary emissions do
not include any emissions which come directly from a mobile source, such
as emissions from the tailpipe of a motor vehicle, from a train, or from
a vessel.
9. Fugitive emissions means those emissions which could not
reasonably pass through a stack, chimney, vent, or other functionally
equivalent opening.
10. (i) Significant means, in reference to a net emissions increase
or the potential of a source to emit any of the following pollutants, a
rate of emissions that would equal or exceed any of the following rates:
Pollutant and Emissions Rate
Carbon monoxide: 100 tons per year (tpy)
Nitrogen oxides: 40 tpy
Sulfur dioxide: 40 tpy
Particulate matter: 25 tpy of particulate matter emissions
Ozone: 40 tpy of volatile organic compounds
Lead: 0.6 tpy
11. Allowable emissions means the emissions rate calculated using
the maximum rated capacity of the source (unless the source is subject
to federally enforceable limits which restrict the operating rate, or
hours of operation, or both) and the most stringent of the following:
(i) Applicable standards as set forth in 40 CFR parts 60 and 61;
(ii) Any applicable State Implementation Plan emissions limitation,
including those with a future compliance date; or
(iii) The emissions rate specified as a federally enforceable permit
condition, including those with a future compliance date.
12. Federally enforceable means all limitations and conditions which
are enforceable by the Administrator, including those requirements
developed pursuant to 40 CFR parts 60 and 61, requirements within any
applicable State implementation plan, any permit requirements
established pursuant to 40 CFR 52.21 or under regulations approved
pursuant to 40 CFR part 51, subpart I, including operating permits
issued under an EPA-approved program that is incorporated into the State
implementation plan and expressly requires adherence to any permit
issued under such program.
13. (i) Actual emissions means the actual rate of emissions of a
pollutant from an emissions unit as determined in accordance with
paragraphs 16. (ii) through (iv) of Section II.A. of this appendix.
(ii) In general, actual emissions as of a particular date shall
equal the average rate, in tons per year, at which the unit actually
emitted the pollutant during a two-year period which precedes the
particular date and which is representative of normal source operation.
The reviewing authority shall allow the use of a different time period
upon a determination that it is more representative of normal source
operation. Actual emissions shall be calculated using the unit's actual
operating hours, production rates, and types of materials processed,
stored or combusted during the selected time period.
(iii) The reviewing authority may presume that source-specific
allowable emissions for the unit are equivalent to the actual emissions
of the unit.
(iv) For any emissions unit which has not begun normal operations on
the particular date, actual emissions shall equal the potential to emit
of the unit on that date.
[[Page 457]]
14. Construction means any physical change or change in the method
of operation (including fabrication, erection, installation, demolition,
or modification of an emissions unit) which would result in a change in
actual emissions.
15. Commence as applied to construction of a major stationary source
or major modification means that the owner or operator has all necessary
preconstruction approvals or permits and either has:
(i) Begun, or caused to begin, a continuous program of actual on-
site construction of the source, to be completed within a reasonable
time; or
(ii) Entered into binding agreements or contractual obligations,
which cannot be cancelled or modified without substantial loss to the
owner or operator, to undertake a program of actual construction of the
source to be completed within a reasonable time.
16. Necessary preconstruction approvals or permits means those
permits or approvals required under Federal air quality control laws and
regulations and those air quality control laws and regulations which are
part of the applicable State Implementation Plan.
17. Begin actual construction means, in general, initiation of
physical on-site construction activities on an emissions unit which are
of a permanent nature. Such activities include, but are not limited to,
installation of building supports and foundations, laying of underground
pipework, and construction of permanent storage structures. With respect
to a change in method of operating this term refers to those on-site
activities other than preparatory activities which mark the initiation
of the change.
18. Lowest achievable emission rate means, for any source, the more
stringent rate of emissions based on the following:
(i) The most stringent emissions limitation which is contained in
the implementation plan of any State for such class or category of
stationary source, unless the owner or operator of the proposed
stationary source demonstrates that such limitations are not achievable;
or
(ii) The most stringent emissions limitation which is achieved in
practice by such class or category of stationary source. This
limitation, when applied to a modification, means the lowest achievable
emissions rate for the new or modified emissions units within the
stationary source. In no event shall the application of this term permit
a proposed new or modified stationary source to emit any pollutant in
excess of the amount allowable under applicable new source standards of
performance.
19. Resource recovery facility means any facility at which solid
waste is processed for the purpose of extracting, converting to energy,
or otherwise separating and preparing solid waste for reuse. Energy
conversion facilities must utilize solid waste to provide more than 50
percent of the heat input to be considered a resource recovery facility
under this Ruling.
20. Volatile organic compounds (VOC) is as defined in Sec.
51.100(s) of this part.
B. Review of all sources for emission limitation compliance. The
reviewing authority must examine each proposed major new source and
proposed major modification \1\ to determine if such a source will meet
all applicable emission requirements in the SIP, any applicable new
source performance standard in 40 CFR part 60, or any national emission
standard for hazardous air pollutants in 40 CFR part 61. If the
reviewing authority determines that the proposed major new source cannot
meet the applicable emission requirements, the permit to construct must
be denied.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Hereafter the term source will be used to denote both any source
and any modification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Review of specified sources for air quality impact. In addition,
the reviewing authority must determine whether the major stationary
source or major modification would be constructed in an area designated
in 40 CFR 81.300 et seq. as nonattainment for a pollutant for which the
stationary source or modification is major.
D.-E. [Reserved]
F. Fugitive emissions sources. Section IV. A. of this Ruling shall
not apply to a source or modification that would be a major stationary
source or major modification only if fugitive emissions, to the extent
quantifiable, are considered in calculating the potential to emit of the
stationary source or modification and the source does not belong to any
of the following categories:
(1) Coal cleaning plants (with thermal dryers);
(2) Kraft pulp mills;
(3) Portland cement plants;
(4) Primary zinc smelters;
(5) Iron and steel mills;
(6) Primary aluminum ore reduction plants;
(7) Primary copper smelters;
(8) Municipal incinerators capable of charging more than 250 tons of
refuse per day;
(9) Hydrofluoric, sulfuric, or nitric acid plants;
(10) Petroleum refineries;
(11) Lime plants;
(12) Phosphate rock processing plants;
(13) Coke oven batteries;
(14) Sulfur recovery plants;
(15) Carbon black plants (furnace process);
(16) Primary lead smelters;
(17) Fuel conversion plants;
(18) Sintering plants;
(19) Secondary metal production plants;
(20) Chemical process plants;
[[Page 458]]
(21) Fossil-fuel boilers (or combination thereof) totaling more than
250 million British thermal units per hour heat input;
(22) Petroleum storage and transfer units with a total storage
capacity exceeding 300,000 barrels;
(23) Taconite ore processing plants;
(24) Glass fiber processing plants;
(25) Charcoal production plants;
(26) Fossil fuel-fired steam electric plants of more than 250
million British thermal units per hour heat input;
(27) Any other stationary source category which, as of August 7,
1980, is being regulated under section 111 or 112 of the Act.
G. Secondary emissions. Secondary emissions need not be considered
in determining whether the emission rates in Section II.C. above would
be exceeded. However, if a source is subject to this Ruling on the basis
of the direct emissions from the source, the applicable conditions of
this Ruling must also be met for secondary emissions. However, secondary
emissions may be exempt from Conditions 1 and 2 of Section IV. Also,
since EPA's authority to perform or require indirect source review
relating to mobile sources regulated under Title II of the Act (motor
vehicles and aircraft) has been restricted by statute, consideration of
the indirect impacts of motor vehicles and aircraft traffic is not
required under this Ruling.
III. Sources Locating in Designated Clean or Unclassifiable Areas Which
Would Cause or Contribute to a Violation of a National Ambient Air
Quality Standard
A. This section applies only to major sources or major modifications
which would locate in an area designated in 40 CFR 81.300 et seq. as
attainment or unclassifiable in a State where EPA has not yet approved
the State preconstruction review program required by 40 CFR 51.165(b),
if the source or modification would exceed the following significance
levels at any locality that does not meet the NAAQS:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Averaging time (hours)
Pollutant Annual --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
24 8 3 1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2................................ 1.0 [mu]g/m\3\........ 5 [mu]g/m\3\.......... ..................... 25 [mu]g/m\3\........ .....................
TSP................................ 1.0 [mu]g/m\3\........ 5 [mu]g/m\3\.......... ..................... ..................... .....................
NO2................................ 1.0 [mu]g/m\3\........ ...................... ..................... ..................... .....................
CO................................. ...................... ...................... 0.5 mg/m\3\.......... ..................... 2 mg/m\3\.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Sources to which this section applies must meet Conditions 1, 2,
and 4 of Section IV.A. of this ruling.\2\ However, such sources may be
exempt from Condition 3 of Section IV.A. of this ruling.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The discussion in this paragraph is a proposal, but represents
EPA's interim policy until final rulemaking is completed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Review of specified sources for air quality impact. For stable
air pollutants (i.e. SO2, particulate matter and CO), the
determination of whether a source will cause or contribute to a
violation of an NAAQS generally should be made on a case-by-case basis
as of the proposed new source's start-up date using the source's
allowable emissions in an atmospheric simulation model (unless a source
will clearly impact on a receptor which exceeds an NAAQS).
For sources of nitrogen oxides, the initial determination of whether
a source would cause or contribute to a violation of the NAAQS for
NO2 should be made using an atmospheric simulation model
assuming all the nitric oxide emitted is oxidized to NO2 by
the time the plume reaches ground level. The initial concentration
estimates may be adjusted if adequate data are available to account for
the expected oxidation rate.
For ozone, sources of volatile organic compounds, locating outside a
designated ozone nonattainment area, will be presumed to have no
significant impact on the designated nonattainment area. If ambient
monitoring indicates that the area of source location is in fact
nonattainment, then the source may be permitted under the provisions of
any State plan adopted pursuant to section 110(a)(2)(D) of the Act until
the area is designated nonattainment and a State Implementation Plan
revision is approved. If no State plan pursuant to section 110(a)(2)(D)
has been adopted and approved, then this Ruling shall apply.
As noted above, the determination as to whether a source would cause
or contribute to a violation of an NAAQS should be made as of the new
source's start-up date. Therefore, if a designated nonattainment area is
projected to be an attainment area as part of an approved SIP control
strategy by the new source start-up date, offsets would not be required
if the new source would not cause a new violation.
D. Sources locating in clean areas, but would cause a new violating
of an NAAQS. If the reviewing authority finds that the emissions from a
proposed source would cause a new violation of an NAAQS, but would not
contribute to an existing violation, approval
[[Page 459]]
may be granted only if both of the following conditions are met:
Condition 1. The new source is required to meet a more stringent
emission limitation \3\ and/or the control of existing sources below
allowable levels is required so that the source will not cause a
violation of any NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ If the reviewing authority determines that technological or
economic limitations on the application of measurement methodology to a
particular class of sources would make the imposition of an enforceable
numerical emission standard infeasible, the authority may instead
prescribe a design, operational or equipment standard. In such cases,
the reviewing authority shall make its best estimate as to the emission
rate that will be achieved and must specify that rate in the required
submission to EPA (see Part V). Any permits issued without an
enforceable numerical emission standard must contain enforceable
conditions which assure that the design characteristics or equipment
will be properly maintained (or that the operational conditions will be
properly performed) so as to continuously achieve the assumed degree of
control. Such conditions shall be enforceable as emission limitations by
private parties under section 304. Hereafter, the term emission
limitation shall also include such design, operational, or equipment
standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Condition 2. The new emission limitations for the new source as well
as any existing sources affected must be enforceable in accordance with
the mechanisms set forth in Section V of this appendix.
IV. Sources That Would Locate in a Designated Nonattainment Area
A. Conditions for approval. If the reviewing authority finds that
the major stationary source or major modification would be constructed
in an area designated in 40 CFR 81.300 et seq as nonattainment for a
pollutant for which the stationary source or modification is major,
approval may be granted only if the following conditions are met:
Condition 1. The new source is required to meet an emission
Limitation \4\ which specifies the lowest achievable emission rate for
such source.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ If the reviewing authority determines that technological or
economic limitations on the application of measurement methodology to a
particular class of sources would make the imposition of an enforceable
numerical emission standard infeasible, the authority may instead
prescribe a design, operational or equipment standard. In such cases,
the reviewing authority shall make its best estimate as to the emission
rate that will be achieved and must specify that rate in the required
submission to EPA (see Part V). Any permits issued without an
enforceable numerical emission standard must contain enforceable
conditions which assure that the design characteristics or equipment
will be properly maintained (or that the operational conditions will be
properly performed) so as to continuously achieve the assumed degree of
control. Such conditions shall be enforceable as emission limitations by
private parties under section 304. Hereafter, the term emission
limitation shall also include such design, operational, or equipment
standards.
\5\ Required only for those pollutants for which the increased
allowable emissions exceed 50 tons per year, 1000 pounds per day, or 100
pounds per hour, although the reviewing authority may address other
pollutants if deemed appropriate. The preceding hourly and daily rates
shall apply only with respect to a pollutant for which a national
ambient air quality standard, for a period less than 24 hours or for a
24-hour period, as appropriate, has been established.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Condition 2. The applicant must certify that all existing major
sources owned or operated by the applicant (or any entity controlling,
controlled by, or under common control with the appplicant) in the same
State as the proposed source are in compliance with all applicable
emission limitations and standards under the Act (or are in compliance
with an expeditious schedule which is Federally enforceable or contained
in a court decree).
Condition 3. Emission reductions (offsets) from existing sources \6\
in the area of the proposed source (whether or not under the same
ownership) are required such that there will be reasonable progress
toward attainment of the applicable NAAQs.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Subject to the provisions of section IV.C. below.
\7\ The discussion in this paragraph is a proposal, but represents
EPA's interim policy until final rulemaking is completed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Only intrapollutant emission offsets will be acceptable (e.g.,
hydrocarbon increases may not be offset against SO2
reductions).
Condition 4. The emission offsets will provide a positive net air
quality benefit in the affected area (see Section IV.D. below).\8\
Atmospheric simulation modeling is not necessary for volatile organic
compounds and
[[Page 460]]
NOX. Fulfillment of Condition 3 and Section IV.D. will be
considered adequate to meet this condition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Required only for those pollutants for which the increased
allowable emissions exceed 50 tons per year, 1000 pounds per day, or 100
pounds per hour, although the reviewing authority may address other
pollutants if deemed appropriate. The preceding hourly and daily rates
shall apply only with respect to a pollutant for which a national
ambient air quality standard, for a period less than 24 hours or for a
24-hour period, as appropriate, has been established.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Exemptions from certain conditions. The reviewing authority may
exempt the following sources from Condition 1 under Section III or
Conditions 3 and 4. Section IV.A.:
(i) Resource recovery facilities burning municipal solid waste, and
(ii) sources which must switch fuels due to lack of adequate fuel
supplies or where a source is required to be modified as a result of EPA
regulations (e.g., lead-in-fuel requirements) and no exemption from such
regulation is available to the source. Such an exemption may be granted
only if:
1. The applicant demonstrates that it made its best efforts to
obtain sufficient emission offsets to comply with Condition 1 under
Section III or Conditions 3 and 4 under Section IV.A. and that such
efforts were unsuccessful;
2. The applicant has secured all available emission offsets; and
3. The applicant will continue to seek the necessary emission
offsets and apply them when they become available.
Such an exemption may result in the need to revise the SIP to
provide additional control of existing sources.
Temporary emission sources, such as pilot plants, portable
facilities which will be relocated outside of the nonattainment area
after a short period of time, and emissions resulting from the
construction phase of a new source, are exempt from Conditions 3 and 4
of this section.
C. Baseline for determining credit for emission and air quality
offsets. The baseline for determining credit for emission and air
quality offsets will be the SIP emission limitations in effect at the
time the application to construct or modify a source is filed. Thus,
credit for emission offset purposes may be allowable for existing
control that goes beyond that required by the SIP. Emission offsets
generally should be made on a pounds per hour basis when all facilities
involved in the emission offset calculations are operating at their
maximum expected or allowed production rate. The reviewing agency should
specify other averaging periods (e.g., tons per year) in addition to the
pounds per hour basis if necessary to carry out the intent of this
Ruling. When offsets are calculated on a tons per year basis, the
baseline emissions for existing sources providing the offsets should be
calculated using the actual annual operating hours for the previous one
or two year period (or other appropriate period if warranted by cyclical
business conditions). Where the SIP requires certain hardware controls
in lieu of an emission limitation (e.g., floating roof tanks for
petroleum storage), baseline allowable emissions should be based on
actual operating conditions for the previous one or two year period
(i.e., actual throughput and vapor pressures) in conjunction with the
required hardware controls.
1. No meaningful or applicable SIP requirement. Where the applicable
SIP does not contain an emission limitation for a source or source
category, the emission offset baseline involving such sources shall be
the actual emissions determined in accordance with the discussion above
regarding operating conditions.
Where the SIP emission limit allows greater emissions than the
uncontrolled emission rate of the source (as when a State has a single
particulate emission limit for all fuels), emission offset credit will
be allowed only for control below the uncontrolled emission rate.
2. Combustion of fuels. Generally, the emissions for determining
emission offset credit involving an existing fuel combustion source will
be the allowable emissions under the SIP for the type of fuel being
burned at the time the new source application is filed (i.e., if the
existing source has switched to a different type of fuel at some earlier
date, any resulting emission reduction [either actual or allowable]
shall not be used for emission offset credit). If the existing source
commits to switch to a cleaner fuel at some future date, emission offset
credit based on the allowable emissions for the fuels involved is not
acceptable unless the permit is conditioned to require the use of a
specified alternative control measure which would achieve the same
degree of emission reduction should the source switch back to a dirtier
fuel at some later date. The reviewing authority should ensure that
adequate long-term supplies of the new fuel are available before
granting emission offset credit for fuel switches.
3. (i) Operating hours and source shutdown.
A source may generally be credited with emissions reductions
achieved by shutting down an existing source or permanently curtailing
production or operating hours below baseline levels (see initial
discussion in this Section IV.C), if such reductions are permanent,
quantifiable, and federally enforceable, and if the area has an EPA-
approved attainment plan. In addition, the shutdown or curtailment is
creditable only if it occurred on or after the date specified for this
purpose in the plan, and if such date is on or after the date of the
most recent emissions inventory used in the plan's demonstration of
attainment. Where the plan does not specify a cutoff date for shutdown
credits, the date of the most recent emissions inventory or attainment
demonstration, as the case may be, shall apply. However, in no event may
credit be given for shutdowns which occurred prior
[[Page 461]]
to August 7, 1977. For purposes of this paragraph, a permitting
authority may choose to consider a prior shutdown or curtailment to have
occurred after the date of its most recent emissions inventory, if the
inventory explicitly includes as current ``existing'' emissions the
emissions from such previously shutdown or curtailed sources.
(ii) Such reductions may be credited in the absence of an approved
attainment demonstration only if the shutdown or curtailment occurred on
or after the date the new source application is filed, or, if the
applicant can establish that the proposed new source is a replacement
for the shutdown or curtailed source and the cutoff date provisions of
section IV.C.3.(i) are observed.
4. Credit for VOC substitution. As set forth in the Agency's
``Recommended Policy on Control of Volatile Organic Compounds'' (42 FR
35314, July 8, 1977), EPA has found that almost all non-methane VOCs are
photochemically reactive and that low reactivity VOCs eventually form as
much ozone as the highly reactive VOCs. Therefore, no emission offset
credit may be allowed for replacing one VOC compound with another of
lesser reactivity, except for those compounds listed in Table 1 of the
above policy statement.
5. ``Banking'' of emission offset credit. For new sources obtaining
permits by applying offsets after January 16, 1979, the reviewing
authority may allow offsets that exceed the requirements of reasonable
progress toward attainment (Condition 3) to be ``banked'' (i.e., saved
to provide offsets for a source seeking a permit in the future) for use
under this Ruling. Likewise, the reviewing authority may allow the owner
of an existing source that reduces its own emissions to bank any
resulting reductions beyond those required by the SIP for use under this
Ruling, even if none of the offsets are applied immediately to a new
source permit. A reviewing authority may allow these banked offsets to
be used under the preconstruction review program required by Part D, as
long as these banked emissions are identified and accounted for in the
SIP control strategy. A reviewing authority may not approve the
construction of a source using banked offsets if the new source would
interfere with the SIP control strategy or if such use would violate any
other condition set forth for use of offsets. To preserve banked
offsets, the reviewing authority should identify them in either a SIP
revision or a permit, and establish rules as to how and when they may be
used.
6. Offset credit for meeting NSPS or NESHAPS. Where a source is
subject to an emission limitation established in a New Source
Performance Standard (NSPS) or a National Emission Standard for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPS), (i.e., requirements under sections
111 and 112, respectively, of the Act), and a different SIP limitation,
the more stringent limitation shall be used as the baseline for
determining credit for emission and air quality offsets. The difference
in emissions between the SIP and the NSPS or NESHAPS, for such source
may not be used as offset credit. However, if a source were not subject
to an NSPS or NESHAPS, for example if its construction had commenced
prior to the proposal of an NSPS or NESHAPS for that source category,
offset credit can be permitted for tightening the SIP to the NSPS or
NESHAPS level for such source.
D. Location of offsetting emissions. In the case of emission offsets
involving volatile organic compounds (VOC), the offsets may be obtained
from sources located anywhere in the broad vicinity of the proposed new
source. Generally, offsets will be acceptable if obtained from within
the same AQCR as the new source or from other areas which may be
contributing to the ozone problem at the proposed new source location.
As with other pollutants, it is desirable to obtain offsets from sources
located as close to the proposed new source site as possible. If the
proposed offsets would be from sources located at greater distances from
the new source, the reviewing authority should increase the ratio of the
required offsets and require a showing that nearby offsets were
investigated and reasonable alternatives were not available.9
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ The discussion in this paragraph is a proposal, but represents
EPA's interim policy until final rulemaking is completed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offsets for NOX sources may also be obtained within the
broad vicinity of the proposed new source. This is because areawide
ozone and NO2 levels are generally not as dependent on
specific VOC or NOX source location as they are on overall
area emissions. Since the air quality impact of SO2,
particulate and carbon monoxide sources is site dependent, simple
areawide mass emission offsets are not appropriate. For these
pollutants, the reviewing authority should consider atmospheric
simulation modeling to ensure that the emission offsets provide a
positive net air quality benefit. However, to avoid unnecessary
consumption of limited, costly and time consuming modeling resources, in
most cases it can be assumed that if the emission offsets are obtained
from an existing source on the same premises or in the immediate
vicinity of the new source, and the pollutants disperse from
substantially the same effective stack height, the air quality test
under Condition 4 of Section IV.A. of this appendix will be met. Thus,
when stack emissions are offset against a ground level source at the
same site, modeling would be required. The reviewing authority may
perform this analysis or require
[[Page 462]]
the applicant to submit appropriate modeling results.
E. Reasonable progress towards attainment. As long as the emission
offset is greater than one-for-one, and the other criteria set forth
above are met, EPA does not intend to question a reviewing authority's
judgment as to what constitutes reasonable progress towards attainment
as required under Condition 3 in Section IV.A. of this appendix. This
does not apply to ``reasonable further progress'' as required by Section
173.
F. Source obligation. At such time that a particular source or
modification becomes a major stationary source or major modification
solely by virtue of a relaxation in any enforceable limitation which was
established after August 7, 1980, on the capacity of the source or
modification otherwise to emit a pollutant, such as a restriction on
hours of operation, then the requirements of this Ruling shall apply to
the source or modification as though construction had not yet commenced
on the source or modification.
V. Administrative Procedures
The necessary emission offsets may be proposed either by the owner
of the proposed source or by the local community or the State. The
emission reduction committed to must be enforceable by authorized State
and/or local agencies and under the Clean Air Act, and must be
accomplished by the new source's start-up date. If emission reductions
are to be obtained in a State that neighbors the State in which the new
source is to be located, the emission reductions committed to must be
enforceable by the neighboring State and/or local agencies and under the
Clean Air Act. Where the new facility is a replacement for a facility
that is being shut down in order to provide the necessary offsets, the
reviewing authority may allow up to 180 days for shakedown of the new
facility before the existing facility is required to cease operation.
A. Source initiated emission offsets. A source may propose emission
offsets which involve:
(1) Reductions from sources controlled by the source owner (internal
emission offsets); and/or (2) reductions from neighboring sources
(external emission offsets). The source does not have to investigate all
possible emission offsets. As long as the emission offsets obtained
represent reasonable progress toward attainment, they will be
acceptable. It is the reviewing authority's responsibility to assure
that the emission offsets will be as effective as proposed by the
source. An internal emission offset will be considered enforceable if it
is made a SIP requirement by inclusion as a condition of the new source
permit and the permit is forwarded to the appropriate EPA Regional
Office.10 An external emission offset will not be enforceable
unless the affected source(s) providing the emission reductions is
subject to a new SIP requirement to ensure that its emissions will be
reduced by a specified amount in a specified time. Thus, if the
source(s) providing the emission reductions does not obtain the
necessary reduction, it will be in violation of a SIP requirement and
subject to enforcement action by EPA, the State and/or private parties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ The emission offset will, therefore, be enforceable by EPA
under section 113 as an applicable SIP requirement and will be
enforceable by private parties under section 304 as an emission
limitation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The form of the SIP revision may be a State or local regulation,
operating permit condition, consent or enforcement order, or any other
mechanism available to the State that is enforceable under the Clean Air
Act. If a SIP revision is required, the public hearing on the revision
may be substituted for the normal public comment procedure required for
all major sources under 40 CFR 51.18. The formal publication of the SIP
revision approval in the Federal Register need not appear before the
source may proceed with construction. To minimize uncertainty that may
be caused by these procedures, EPA will, if requested by the State,
propose a SIP revision for public comment in the Federal Register
concurrently with the State public hearing process. Of course, any major
change in the final permit/SIP revision submitted by the State may
require a reproposal by EPA.
B. State or community initiated emission offsets. A State or
community which desires that a source locate in its area may commit to
reducing emissions from existing sources (including mobile sources) to
sufficiently outweigh the impact of the new source and thus open the way
for the new source. As with source-initiated emission offsets, the
commitment must be something more than one-for-one. This commitment must
be submitted as a SIP revision by the State.
VI. Policy Where Attainment Dates have not Passed
In some cases, the dates for attainment of primary standards
specified in the SIP under section 110 have not yet passed due to a
delay in the promulgation of a plan under this section of the Act. In
addition the Act provides more flexibility with respect to the dates for
attainment of secondary NAAQS than for primary standards. Rather than
setting specific deadlines, section 110 requires secondary NAAQS to be
achieved within a ``reasonable time''. Therefore, in some cases, the
date for attainment of secondary standards specified in the SIP under
section 110 may also not yet have passed. In such cases,
[[Page 463]]
a new source locating in an area designated in 40 CFR 81.3000 et seq. as
nonattainment (or, where Section III of this Ruling is applicable, a new
source which would cause or contribute to an NAAQS violation) may be
exempt from the Conditions of Section IV. A. so long as the new source
meets the applicable SIP emissions limitations and will not interfere
with the attainment date specified in the SIP under section 110 of the
Act.
(Secs. 101(b)(1), 110, 160-169, 171-178, and 301(a), Clean Air Act, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 7401(b)(1), 7410, 7470-7479, 7501-7508, and 7601(a));
sec. 129(a), Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977 (Pub. L. 95-95, 91 Stat.
685 (Aug., 7, 1977)))
[44 FR 3282, Jan. 16, 1979, as amended at 45 FR 31311, May 13, 1980; 45
FR 52741, Aug. 7, 1980; 45 FR 59879, Sept. 11, 1980; 46 FR 50771, Oct.
14, 1981; 47 FR 27561, June 25, 1982; 49 FR 43210, Oct. 26, 1984; 51 FR
40661, 40675, Nov. 7, 1986; 52 FR 24714, July 1, 1987; 52 FR 29386, Aug
7, 1987; 54 FR 27285, 27299, June 28, 1989; 57 FR 3946, Feb. 3, 1992]
Appendixes T-U to Part 51 [Reserved]
Appendix V to Part 51--Criteria for Determining the Completeness of Plan
Submissions
1.0. Purpose
This appendix V sets forth the minimum criteria for determining
whether a State implementation plan submitted for consideration by EPA
is an official submission for purposes of review under Sec. 51.103.
1.1 The EPA shall return to the submitting official any plan or
revision thereof which fails to meet the criteria set forth in this
appendix V, and request corrective action, identifying the component(s)
absent or insufficient to perform a review of the submitted plan.
1.2 The EPA shall inform the submitting official whether or not a
plan submission meets the requirements of this appendix V within 60 days
of EPA's receipt of the submittal, but no later than 6 months after the
date by which the State was required to submit the plan or revision. If
a completeness determination is not made by 6 months from receipt of a
submittal, the submittal shall be deemed complete by operation of law on
the date 6 months from receipt. A determination of completeness under
this paragraph means that the submission is an official submission for
purposes of Sec. 51.103.
2.0. Criteria
The following shall be included in plan submissions for review by
EPA:
2.1. Administrative Materials
(a) A formal letter of submittal from the Governor or his designee,
requesting EPA approval of the plan or revision thereof (hereafter ``the
plan'').
(b) Evidence that the State has adopted the plan in the State code
or body of regulations; or issued the permit, order, consent agreement
(hereafter ``document'') in final form. That evidence shall include the
date of adoption or final issuance as well as the effective date of the
plan, if different from the adoption/issuance date.
(c) Evidence that the State has the necessary legal authority under
State law to adopt and implement the plan.
(d) A copy of the actual regulation, or document submitted for
approval and incorporation by reference into the plan, including
indication of the changes made to the existing approved plan, where
applicable. The submittal shall be a copy of the official State
regulation /document signed, stamped, dated by the appropriate State
official indicating that it is fully enforceable by the State. The
effective date of the regulation/document shall, whenever possible, be
indicated in the document itself.
(e) Evidence that the State followed all of the procedural
requirements of the State's laws and constitution in conducting and
completing the adoption/issuance of the plan.
(f) Evidence that public notice was given of the proposed change
consistent with procedures approved by EPA, including the date of
publication of such notice.
(g) Certification that public hearings(s) were held in accordance
with the information provided in the public notice and the State's laws
and constitution, if applicable.
(h) Compilation of public comments and the State's response thereto.
2.2. Technical Support
(a) Identification of all regulated pollutants affected by the plan.
(b) Identification of the locations of affected sources including
the EPA attainment/nonattainment designation of the locations and the
status of the attainment plan for the affected areas(s).
(c) Quantification of the changes in plan allowable emissions from
the affected sources; estimates of changes in current actual emissions
from affected sources or, where appropriate, quantification of changes
in actual emissions from affected sources through calculations of the
differences between certain baseline levels and allowable emissions
anticipated as a result of the revision.
(d) The State's demonstration that the national ambient air quality
standards, prevention of significant deterioration increments,
reasonable further progress demonstration, and visibility, as
applicable, are protected if the plan is approved and implemented. For
[[Page 464]]
all requests to redesignate an area to attainment for a national primary
ambient air quality standard, under section 107 of the Act, a revision
must be submitted to provide for the maintenance of the national primary
ambient air quality standards for at least 10 years as required by
section 175A of the Act.
(e) Modeling information required to support the proposed revision,
including input data, output data, models used, justification of model
selections, ambient monitoring data used, meteorological data used,
justification for use of offsite data (where used), modes of models
used, assumptions, and other information relevant to the determination
of adequacy of the modeling analysis.
(f) Evidence, where necessary, that emission limitations are based
on continuous emission reduction technology.
(g) Evidence that the plan contains emission limitations, work
practice standards and recordkeeping/reporting requirements, where
necessary, to ensure emission levels.
(h) Compliance/enforcement strategies, including how compliance will
be determined in practice.
(i) Special economic and technological justifications required by
any applicable EPA policies, or an explanation of why such
justifications are not necessary.
2.3. Exceptions
2.3.1. The EPA, for the purposes of expediting the review of the
plan, has adopted a procedure referred to as ``parallel processing.''
Parallel processing allows a State to submit the plan prior to actual
adoption by the State and provides an opportunity for the State to
consider EPA comments prior to submission of a final plan for final
review and action. Under these circumstances, the plan submitted will
not be able to meet all of the requirements of paragraph 2.1 (all
requirements of paragraph 2.2 will apply). As a result, the following
exceptions apply to plans submitted explicitly for parallel processing:
(a) The letter required by paragraph 2.1(a) shall request that EPA
propose approval of the proposed plan by parallel processing.
(b) In lieu of paragraph 2.1(b) the State shall submit a schedule
for final adoption or issuance of the plan.
(c) In lieu of paragraph 2.1(d) the plan shall include a copy of the
proposed/draft regulation or document, including indication of the
proposed changes to be made to the existing approved plan, where
applicable.
(d) The requirements of paragraphs 2.1(e)-2.1(h) shall not apply to
plans submitted for parallel processing.
2.3.2. The exceptions granted in paragraph 2.3.1 shall apply only to
EPA's determination of proposed action and all requirements of paragraph
2.1 shall be met prior to publication of EPA's final determination of
plan approvability.
[55 FR 5830, Feb. 16, 1990, as amended at 56 FR 42219, Aug. 26, 1991; 56
FR 57288, Nov. 8, 1991]
Appendix W to Part 51--Guideline on Air Quality Models
Preface
a. Industry and control agencies have long expressed a need for
consistency in the application of air quality models for regulatory
purposes. In the 1977 Clean Air Act, Congress mandated such consistency
and encouraged the standardization of model applications. The Guideline
on Air Quality Models (hereafter, Guideline) was first published in
April 1978 to satisfy these requirements by specifying models and
providing guidance for their use. The Guideline provides a common basis
for estimating the air quality concentrations of criteria pollutants
used in assessing control strategies and developing emission limits.
b. The continuing development of new air quality models in response
to regulatory requirements and the expanded requirements for models to
cover even more complex problems have emphasized the need for periodic
review and update of guidance on these techniques. Three primary on-
going activities provide direct input to revisions of the Guideline. The
first is a series of annual EPA workshops conducted for the purpose of
ensuring consistency and providing clarification in the application of
models. The second activity is the solicitation and review of new models
from the technical and user community. In the March 27, 1980 Federal
Register, a procedure was outlined for the submittal to EPA of privately
developed models. After extensive evaluation and scientific review,
these models, as well as those made available by EPA, are considered for
recognition in the Guideline. The third activity is the extensive on-
going research efforts by EPA and others in air quality and
meteorological modeling.
c. Based primarily on these three activities, new sections and
topics are included as needed. EPA does not make changes to the guidance
on a predetermined schedule, but rather on an as needed basis. EPA
believes that revisions of the Guideline should be timely and responsive
to user needs and should involve public participation to the greatest
possible extent. All future changes to the guidance will be proposed and
finalized in the Federal Register. Information on the current status of
modeling guidance can always be obtained from EPA's Regional Offices.
[[Page 465]]
Table of Contents
List of Tables
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Overview of Model Use
2.1 Suitability of Models
2.2 Levels of Sophistication of Models
2.3 Availability of Models
3.0 Recommended Air Quality Models
3.1 Preferred Modeling Techniques
3.1.1 Discussion
3.1.2 Recommendations
3.2 Use of Alternative Models
3.2.1 Discussion
3.2.2 Recommendations
3.3 Availability of Supplementary Modeling Guidance
4.0 Traditional Stationary-Source Models
4.1 Discussion
4.2 Recommendations
4.2.1 Screening Techniques
4.2.1.1 Simple Terrain
4.2.1.2 Complex Terrain
4.2.2 Refined Analytical Techniques
5.0 Model Use in Complex Terrain
5.1 Discussion
5.2 Recommendations
5.2.1 Screening Techniques
5.2.2 Refined Analytical Techniques
6.0 Models for Ozone, Particulate Matter, Carbon Monoxide, Nitrogen
Dioxide, and Lead
6.1 Discussion
6.2 Recommendations
6.2.1 Models for Ozone
6.2.1 Models for Particulate Matter
6.2.2.1 PM-2.5
6.2.2.2 PM-10
6.2.3 Models for Carbon Monoxide
6.2.4 Models for Nitrogen Dioxide (Annual Average)
6.2.5 Models for Lead
7.0 Other Model Requirements
7.1 Discussion
7.2 Recommendations
7.2.1 Visibility
7.2.2 Good Engineering Practice Stack Height
7.2.3 Long Range Transport (i.e., beyond 50km)
7.2.4 Modeling Guidance for Other Governmental Programs
8.0 General Modeling Considerations
8.1 Discussion
8.2 Recommendations
8.2.1 Design Concentrations
8.2.2 Critical Receptor Sites
8.2.3 Dispersion Coefficients
8.2.4 Stability Categories
8.2.5 Plume Rise
8.2.6 Chemical Transformation
8.2.7 Gravitational Settling and Deposition
8.2.8 Complex Winds
8.2.9 Calibration of Models
9.0 Model Input Data
9.1 Source Data
9.1.1 Discussion
9.1.2 Recommendations
9.2 Background Concentrations
9.2.1 Discussion
9.2.2 Recommendations (Isolated Single Source)
9.2.3 Recommendations (Multi-Source Areas)
9.3 Meteorological Input Data
9.3.1 Length of Record of Meteorological Data
9.3.2 National Weather Service Data
9.3.3 Site Specific Data
9.3.4 Treatment of Calms
10.0 Accuracy and Uncertainty of Models
10.1 Discussion
10.1.1 Overview of Model Uncertainty
10.1.2 Studies of Model Accuracy
10.1.3 Use of Uncertainty in Decision-Making
10.1.4 Evaluation of Models
10.2 Recommendations
11.0 Regulatory Application of Models
11.1 Discussion
11.2 Recommendations
11.2.1 Analysis Requirements
11.2.2 Use of Measured Data in Lieu of Model Estimates
11.2.3 Emission Limits
12.0 Bibliography
13.0 References
Appendix A to Appendix W of 40 CFR Part 51--Summaries of Preferred Air
Quality Models
List of Tables
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table
No. Title
------------------------------------------------------------------------
5-1 Neutral/Stable Meteorological Matrix for CTSCREEN.
5-1 Unstable/Convective Meteorological Matrix for CTSCREEN.
9-1 Model Emission Input Data for Point Sources.
9-2 Point Source Model Input Data (Emissions) for PSD NAAQS
Compliance Demonstrations.
9-3 Averaging Times for Site Specific Wind and Turbulence
Measurements.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.0 Introduction
a. The Guideline recommends air quality modeling techniques that
should be applied to State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions for
existing sources and to new source reviews (NSR), including prevention
of significant deterioration (PSD). (See Ref. 1, 2, 3). Applicable only
to criteria air pollutants, it is intended for use by EPA Regional
Offices in judging the adequacy of modeling analyses performed by EPA,
State and local agencies and by industry. The guidance is appropriate
for use by other Federal agencies and by State agencies with air quality
and land management responsibilities. The Guideline serves to identify,
for all interested parties, those techniques and data bases EPA
[[Page 466]]
considers acceptable. The Guideline is not intended to be a compendium
of modeling techniques. Rather, it should serve as a common measure of
acceptable technical analysis when supported by sound scientific
judgement.
b. Due to limitations in the spatial and temporal coverage of air
quality measurements, monitoring data normally are not sufficient as the
sole basis for demonstrating the adequacy of emission limits for
existing sources. Also, the impacts of new sources that do not yet exist
can only be determined through modeling. Thus, models, while uniquely
filling one program need, have become a primary analytical tool in most
air quality assessments. Air quality measurements can be used in a
complementary manner to dispersion models, with due regard for the
strengths and weaknesses of both analysis techniques. Measurements are
particularly useful in assessing the accuracy of model estimates. The
use of air quality measurements alone however could be preferable, as
detailed in a later section of this document, when models are found to
be unacceptable and monitoring data with sufficient spatial and temporal
coverage are available.
c. It would be advantageous to categorize the various regulatory
programs and to apply a designated model to each proposed source needing
analysis under a given program. However, the diversity of the nation's
topography and climate, and variations in source configurations and
operating characteristics dictate against a strict modeling
``cookbook''. There is no one model capable of properly addressing all
conceivable situations even within a broad category such as point
sources. Meteorological phenomena associated with threats to air quality
standards are rarely amenable to a single mathematical treatment; thus,
case-by-case analysis and judgement are frequently required. As modeling
efforts become more complex, it is increasingly important that they be
directed by highly competent individuals with a broad range of
experience and knowledge in air quality meteorology. Further, they
should be coordinated closely with specialists in emissions
characteristics, air monitoring and data processing. The judgement of
experienced meteorologists and analysts is essential.
d. The model that most accurately estimates concentrations in the
area of interest is always sought. However, it is clear from the needs
expressed by the States and EPA Regional Offices, by many industries and
trade associations, and also by the deliberations of Congress, that
consistency in the selection and application of models and data bases
should also be sought, even in case-by-case analyses. Consistency
ensures that air quality control agencies and the general public have a
common basis for estimating pollutant concentrations, assessing control
strategies and specifying emission limits. Such consistency is not,
however, promoted at the expense of model and data base accuracy. The
Guideline provides a consistent basis for selection of the most accurate
models and data bases for use in air quality assessments.
e. Recommendations are made in the Guideline concerning air quality
models, data bases, requirements for concentration estimates, the use of
measured data in lieu of model estimates, and model evaluation
procedures. Models are identified for some specific applications. The
guidance provided here should be followed in air quality analyses
relative to State Implementation Plans and in supporting analyses
required by EPA, State and local agency air programs. EPA may approve
the use of another technique that can be demonstrated to be more
appropriate than those recommended in this guide. This is discussed at
greater length in Section 3. In all cases, the model applied to a given
situation should be the one that provides the most accurate
representation of atmospheric transport, dispersion, and chemical
transformations in the area of interest. However, to ensure consistency,
deviations from this guide should be carefully documented and fully
supported.
f. From time to time situations arise requiring clarification of the
intent of the guidance on a specific topic. Periodic workshops are held
with the headquarters, Regional Office, State, and local agency modeling
representatives to ensure consistency in modeling guidance and to
promote the use of more accurate air quality models and data bases. The
workshops serve to provide further explanations of Guideline
requirements to the Regional Offices and workshop reports are issued
with this clarifying information. In addition, findings from on-going
research programs, new model submittals, or results from model
evaluations and applications are continuously evaluated. Based on this
information changes in the guidance may be indicated.
g. All changes to the Guideline must follow rulemaking requirements
since the Guideline is codified in Appendix W of Part 51. EPA will
promulgate proposed and final rules in the Federal Register to amend
this Appendix. Ample opportunity for public comment will be provided for
each proposed change and public hearings scheduled if requested.
h. A wide range of topics on modeling and data bases are discussed
in the Guideline. Section 2 gives an overview of models and their
appropriate use. Section 3 provides specific guidance on the use of
``preferred'' air quality models and on the selection of alternative
techniques. Sections 4 through 7 provide recommendations on modeling
techniques for application to simple-terrain stationary source problems,
complex terrain
[[Page 467]]
problems, and mobile source problems. Specific modeling requirements for
selected regulatory issues are also addressed. Section 8 discusses
issues common to many modeling analyses, including acceptable model
components. Section 9 makes recommendations for data inputs to models
including source, meteorological and background air quality data.
Section 10 covers the uncertainty in model estimates and how that
information can be useful to the regulatory decision-maker. The last
chapter summarizes how estimates and measurements of air quality are
used in assessing source impact and in evaluating control strategies.
i. Appendix W to 40 CFR Part 51 itself contains an appendix:
Appendix A. Thus, when reference is made to ``Appendix A'' in this
document, it refers to Appendix A to Appendix W to 40 CFR Part 51.
Appendix A contains summaries of refined air quality models that are
``preferred'' for specific applications; both EPA models and models
developed by others are included.
2.0 Overview of Model Use
a. Before attempting to implement the guidance contained in this
document, the reader should be aware of certain general information
concerning air quality models and their use. Such information is
provided in this section.
2.1 Suitability of Models
a. The extent to which a specific air quality model is suitable for
the evaluation of source impact depends upon several factors. These
include: (1) The meteorological and topographic complexities of the
area; (2) the level of detail and accuracy needed for the analysis; (3)
the technical competence of those undertaking such simulation modeling;
(4) the resources available; and (5) the detail and accuracy of the data
base, i.e., emissions inventory, meteorological data, and air quality
data. Appropriate data should be available before any attempt is made to
apply a model. A model that requires detailed, precise, input data
should not be used when such data are unavailable. However, assuming the
data are adequate, the greater the detail with which a model considers
the spatial and temporal variations in emissions and meteorological
conditions, the greater the ability to evaluate the source impact and to
distinguish the effects of various control strategies.
b. Air quality models have been applied with the most accuracy, or
the least degree of uncertainty, to simulations of long term averages in
areas with relatively simple topography. Areas subject to major
topographic influences experience meteorological complexities that are
extremely difficult to simulate. Although models are available for such
circumstances, they are frequently site specific and resource intensive.
In the absence of a model capable of simulating such complexities, only
a preliminary approximation may be feasible until such time as better
models and data bases become available.
c. Models are highly specialized tools. Competent and experienced
personnel are an essential prerequisite to the successful application of
simulation models. The need for specialists is critical when the more
sophisticated models are used or the area being investigated has
complicated meteorological or topographic features. A model applied
improperly, or with inappropriate data, can lead to serious
misjudgements regarding the source impact or the effectiveness of a
control strategy.
d. The resource demands generated by use of air quality models vary
widely depending on the specific application. The resources required
depend on the nature of the model and its complexity, the detail of the
data base, the difficulty of the application, and the amount and level
of expertise required. The costs of manpower and computational
facilities may also be important factors in the selection and use of a
model for a specific analysis. However, it should be recognized that
under some sets of physical circumstances and accuracy requirements, no
present model may be appropriate. Thus, consideration of these factors
should lead to selection of an appropriate model.
2.2 Levels of Sophistication of Models
a. There are two levels of sophistication of models. The first level
consists of relatively simple estimation techniques that generally use
preset, worst-case meteorological conditions to provide conservative
estimates of the air quality impact of a specific source, or source
category. These are called screening techniques or screening models. The
purpose of such techniques is to eliminate the need of more detailed
modeling for those sources that clearly will not cause or contribute to
ambient concentrations in excess of either the National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS)\4\ or the allowable prevention of significant
deterioration (PSD) concentration increments.2,3 If a
screening technique indicates that the concentration contributed by the
source exceeds the PSD increment or the increment remaining to just meet
the NAAQS, then the second level of more sophisticated models should be
applied.
b. The second level consists of those analytical techniques that
provide more detailed treatment of physical and chemical atmospheric
processes, require more detailed and precise input data, and provide
more specialized concentration estimates. As a result they provide a
more refined and, at least theoretically, a more accurate estimate of
source impact and the effectiveness of control strategies. These are
referred to as refined models.
[[Page 468]]
c. The use of screening techniques followed, as appropriate, by a
more refined analysis is always desirable, however there are situations
where the screening techniques are practically and technically the only
viable option for estimating source impact. In such cases, an attempt
should be made to acquire or improve the necessary data bases and to
develop appropriate analytical techniques.
2.3 Availability of Models
a. For most of the screening and refined models discussed in the
Guideline, codes, associated documentation and other useful information
are available for download from EPA's Support Center for Regulatory Air
Modeling (SCRAM) Internet Web site at http://www.epa.gov/scram001. A
list of alternate models that can be used with case-by-case
justification (subsection 3.2) and an example air quality analysis
checklist are also posted on this Web site. This is a site with which
modelers should become familiar.
3.0 Recommended Air Quality Models
a. This section recommends the approach to be taken in determining
refined modeling techniques for use in regulatory air quality programs.
The status of models developed by EPA, as well as those submitted to EPA
for review and possible inclusion in this guidance, is discussed. The
section also addresses the selection of models for individual cases and
provides recommendations for situations where the preferred models are
not applicable. Two additional sources of modeling guidance are the
Model Clearinghouse and periodic Regional/State/Local Modelers
workshops.
b. In this guidance, when approval is required for a particular
modeling technique or analytical procedure, we often refer to the
``appropriate reviewing authority''. In some EPA regions, authority for
NSR and PSD permitting and related activities has been delegated to
State and even local agencies. In these cases, such agencies are
``representatives'' of the respective regions. Even in these
circumstances, the Regional Office retains the ultimate authority in
decisions and approvals. Therefore, as discussed above and depending on
the circumstances, the appropriate reviewing authority may be the
Regional Office, Federal Land Manager(s), State agency(ies), or perhaps
local agency(ies). In cases where review and approval comes solely from
the Regional Office (sometimes stated as ``Regional Administrator''),
this will be stipulated. If there is any question as to the appropriate
reviewing authority, you should contact the Regional modeling contact
(http://www.epa.gov/scram001/tt28.htm#regionalmodelingcontacts) in the
appropriate EPA Regional Office, whose jurisdiction generally includes
the physical location of the source in question and its expected
impacts.
c. In all regulatory analyses, especially if other than preferred
models are selected for use, early discussions among Regional Office
staff, State and local control agencies, industry representatives, and
where appropriate, the Federal Land Manager, are invaluable and are
encouraged. Agreement on the data base(s) to be used, modeling
techniques to be applied and the overall technical approach, prior to
the actual analyses, helps avoid misunderstandings concerning the final
results and may reduce the later need for additional analyses. The use
of an air quality analysis checklist, such as is posted on EPA's
Internet SCRAM Web site (subsection 2.3), and the preparation of a
written protocol help to keep misunderstandings at a minimum.
d. It should not be construed that the preferred models identified
here are to be permanently used to the exclusion of all others or that
they are the only models available for relating emissions to air
quality. The model that most accurately estimates concentrations in the
area of interest is always sought. However, designation of specific
models is needed to promote consistency in model selection and
application.
e. The 1980 solicitation of new or different models from the
technical community and the program whereby these models were evaluated,
established a means by which new models are identified, reviewed and
made available in the Guideline. There is a pressing need for the
development of models for a wide range of regulatory applications.
Refined models that more realistically simulate the physical and
chemical process in the atmosphere and that more reliably estimate
pollutant concentrations are needed. Thus, the solicitation of models is
considered to be continuous.
3.1 Preferred Modeling Techniques
3.1.1 Discussion
a. EPA has developed models suitable for regulatory application.
Other models have been submitted by private developers for possible
inclusion in the Guideline. These refined models have undergone
evaluation exercises 7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15 that include
statistical measures of model performance in comparison with measured
air quality data as suggested by the American Meteorological Society
\16\ and, where possible, peer scientific reviews. \17,18,19,20,21\
b. When a single model is found to perform better than others, it is
recommended for application as a preferred model and listed in Appendix
A. If no one model is found to clearly perform better through the
evaluation exercise, then the preferred model listed in Appendix A is
selected on the basis of
[[Page 469]]
other factors such as past use, public familiarity, cost or resource
requirements, and availability. No further evaluation of a preferred
model is required for a particular application if the EPA
recommendations for regulatory use specified for the model in the
Guideline are followed. Alternative models to those listed in Appendix A
should generally be compared with measured air quality data when they
are used for regulatory applications consistent with recommendations in
subsection 3.2.
c. The solicitation of new refined models which are based on sounder
scientific principles and which more reliably estimate pollutant
concentrations is considered by EPA to be continuous. Models that are
submitted in accordance with the established provisions will be
evaluated as submitted. These requirements are:
i. The model must be computerized and functioning in a common
computer code suitable for use on a variety of computer systems.
ii. The model must be documented in a user's guide which identifies
the mathematics of the model, data requirements and program operating
characteristics at a level of detail comparable to that available for
currently recommended models.
iii. The model must be accompanied by a complete test data set
including input parameters and output results. The test data must be
included in the user's guide as well as provided in computer-readable
form.
iv. The model must be useful to typical users, e.g., State air
pollution control agencies, for specific air quality control problems.
Such users should be able to operate the computer program(s) from
available documentation.
v. The model documentation must include a comparison with air
quality data (and/or tracer measurements) or with other well-established
analytical techniques.
vi. The developer must be willing to make the model available to
users at reasonable cost or make it available for public access through
the Internet or National Technical Information Service: the model cannot
be proprietary.
d. The evaluation process will include a determination of technical
merit, in accordance with the above six items including the practicality
of the model for use in ongoing regulatory programs. Each model will
also be subjected to a performance evaluation for an appropriate data
base and to a peer scientific review. Models for wide use (not just an
isolated case) that are found to perform better will be proposed for
inclusion as preferred models in future Guideline revisions.
3.1.2 Recommendations
a. Appendix A identifies refined models that are preferred for use
in regulatory applications. If a model is required for a particular
application, the user should select a model from that appendix. These
models may be used without a formal demonstration of applicability as
long as they are used as indicated in each model summary of Appendix A.
Further recommendations for the application of these models to specific
source problems are found in subsequent sections of the Guideline.
b. If changes are made to a preferred model without affecting the
concentration estimates, the preferred status of the model is unchanged.
Examples of modifications that do not affect concentrations are those
made to enable use of a different computer or those that affect only the
format or averaging time of the model results. However, when any changes
are made, the Regional Administrator should require a test case example
to demonstrate that the concentration estimates are not affected.
c. A preferred model should be operated with the options listed in
Appendix A as ``Recommendations for Regulatory Use.'' If other options
are exercised, the model is no longer ``preferred.'' Any other
modification to a preferred model that would result in a change in the
concentration estimates likewise alters its status as a preferred model.
Use of the model must then be justified on a case-by-case basis.
3.2 Use of Alternative Models
3.2.1 Discussion
a. Selection of the best techniques for each individual air quality
analysis is always encouraged, but the selection should be done in a
consistent manner. A simple listing of models in this guide cannot alone
achieve that consistency nor can it necessarily provide the best model
for all possible situations. EPA reports 22,23 are available
to assist in developing a consistent approach when justifying the use of
other than the preferred modeling techniques recommended in the
Guideline. An ASTM reference 24 provides a general philosophy
for developing and implementing advanced statistical evaluations of
atmospheric dispersion models, and provides an example statistical
technique to illustrate the application of this philosophy. An EPA
reference 25 provides a statistical technique for evaluating
model performance for predicting peak concentration values, as might be
observed at individual monitoring locations. In many cases, this
protocol should be considered preferentially to the material in Chapter
3 of reference 22. The procedures in these documents provide a general
framework for objective decision-making on the acceptability of an
alternative model for a given regulatory application. The documents
contain procedures for conducting both the technical evaluation of the
model and the field test or performance evaluation.
[[Page 470]]
b. This section discusses the use of alternate modeling techniques
and defines three situations when alternative models may be used.
3.2.2 Recommendations
a. Determination of acceptability of a model is a Regional Office
responsibility. Where the Regional Administrator finds that an
alternative model is more appropriate than a preferred model, that model
may be used subject to the recommendations of this subsection. This
finding will normally result from a determination that (1) a preferred
air quality model is not appropriate for the particular application; or
(2) a more appropriate model or analytical procedure is available and
applicable.
b. An alternative model should be evaluated from both a theoretical
and a performance perspective before it is selected for use. There are
three separate conditions under which such a model may normally be
approved for use: (1) If a demonstration can be made that the model
produces concentration estimates equivalent to the estimates obtained
using a preferred model; (2) if a statistical performance evaluation has
been conducted using measured air quality data and the results of that
evaluation indicate the alternative model performs better for the given
application than a comparable model in Appendix A; or (3) if the
preferred model is less appropriate for the specific application, or
there is no preferred model. Any one of these three separate conditions
may make use of an alternative model acceptable. Some known alternative
models that are applicable for selected situations are listed on EPA's
SCRAM Internet Web site (subsection 2.3). However, inclusion there does
not confer any unique status relative to other alternative models that
are being or will be developed in the future.
c. Equivalency, condition (1) in paragraph (b) of this subsection,
is established by demonstrating that the maximum or highest, second
highest concentrations are within 2 percent of the estimates obtained
from the preferred model. The option to show equivalency is intended as
a simple demonstration of acceptability for an alternative model that is
so nearly identical (or contains options that can make it identical) to
a preferred model that it can be treated for practical purposes as the
preferred model. Two percent was selected as the basis for equivalency
since it is a rough approximation of the fraction that PSD Class I
increments are of the NAAQS for SO\2\, i.e., the difference in
concentrations that is judged to be significant. However,
notwithstanding this demonstration, models that are not equivalent may
be used when one of the two other conditions described in paragraphs (d)
and (e) of this subsection are satisfied.
d. For condition (2) in paragraph (b) of this subsection, the
procedures and techniques for determining the acceptability of a model
for an individual case based on superior performance are contained in
references 22-25 should be followed, as appropriate. Preparation and
implementation of an evaluation protocol which is acceptable to both
control agencies and regulated industry is an important element in such
an evaluation.
e. Finally, for condition (3) in paragraph (b) of this subsection,
an alternative refined model may be used provided that:
i. The model has received a scientific peer review;
ii. The model can be demonstrated to be applicable to the problem on
a theoretical basis;
iii. The data bases which are necessary to perform the analysis are
available and adequate;
iv. Appropriate performance evaluations of the model have shown that
the model is not biased toward underestimates; and
v. A protocol on methods and procedures to be followed has been
established.
3.3 Availability of Supplementary Modeling Guidance
a. The Regional Administrator has the authority to select models
that are appropriate for use in a given situation. However, there is a
need for assistance and guidance in the selection process so that
fairness and consistency in modeling decisions is fostered among the
various Regional Offices and the States. To satisfy that need, EPA
established the Model Clearinghouse \5\ and also holds periodic
workshops with headquarters, Regional Office, State, and local agency
modeling representatives.
b. The Regional Office should always be consulted for information
and guidance concerning modeling methods and interpretations of modeling
guidance, and to ensure that the air quality model user has available
the latest most up-to-date policy and procedures. As appropriate, the
Regional Office may request assistance from the Model Clearinghouse
after an initial evaluation and decision has been reached concerning the
application of a model, analytical technique or data base in a
particular regulatory action.
4.0 Simple-Terrain Stationary Source Models
4.1 Discussion
a. Simple terrain, as used here, is considered to be an area where
terrain features are all lower in elevation than the top of the stack of
the source(s) in question. The models recommended in this section are
generally used in the air quality impact analysis
[[Page 471]]
of stationary sources for most criteria pollutants. The averaging time
of the concentration estimates produced by these models ranges from 1
hour to an annual average.
b. In the early 1980s, model evaluation exercises were conducted to
determine the ``best, most appropriate point source model'' for use in
simple terrain.8,17 No one model was found to be clearly
superior and, based on past use, public familiarity, and availability,
ISC (predecessor to ISC3 \26\) became the recommended model for a wide
range of regulatory applications. Other refined models which also
employed the basic Gaussian kernel, i.e., BLP, CALINE3, OCD, and EDMS,
were developed for specialized applications (Appendix A). Performance
evaluations were also made for these models, which are identified in
Appendix A.
4.2 Recommendations
4.2.1 Screening Techniques
a. Where a preliminary or conservative estimate is desired, point
source screening techniques are an acceptable approach to air quality
analyses. EPA has published guidance for screening procedures,\27\ and a
computerized version of the recommended screening technique, SCREEN3, is
available.\28\
b. All screening procedures should be adjusted to the site and
problem at hand. Close attention should be paid to whether the area
should be classified urban or rural in accordance with subsection 8.2.3.
The climatology of the area should be studied to help define the worst-
case meteorological conditions. Agreement should be reached between the
model user and the appropriate reviewing authority (paragraph 3.0(b)) on
the choice of the screening model for each analysis, and on the input
data as well as the ultimate use of the results.
4.2.2 Refined Analytical Techniques
a. A brief description of preferred models for refined applications
is found in Appendix A. Also listed in that appendix are the model input
requirements, the standard options that should be selected when running
the program, and output options.
b. When modeling for compliance with short term NAAQS and PSD
increments is of primary concern, a short term model may be used to
provide long term concentration estimates. The conversion from long term
to short term concentration averages by any transformation technique is
not acceptable in regulatory applications.
c. The state-of-the-science for modeling atmospheric deposition is
evolving and the best techniques are currently being assessed and their
results are being compared with observations. Consequently, the approach
taken for any purpose should be coordinated with the appropriate
reviewing authority (paragraph 3.0(b)).
5.0 Model Use in Complex Terrain
5.1 Discussion
a. For the purpose of the Guideline, complex terrain is defined as
terrain exceeding the height of the stack being modeled. Complex terrain
dispersion models are normally applied to stationary sources of
pollutants such as SO2 and particulates.
b. A major outcome from the EPA Complex Terrain Model Development
project has been the publication of a refined dispersion model (CTDM)
suitable for regulatory application to plume impaction assessments in
complex terrain.\29\ Although CTDM as originally produced was only
applicable to those hours characterized as neutral or stable, a computer
code for all stability conditions--CTDMPLUS--together with a user's
guide,\30\ and site specific meteorological and terrain data processors
\31,32\ is available. Moreover, CTSCREEN,\33\ a version of CTDMPLUS that
does not require site specific meteorological data inputs, is also
available as a screening technique.
c. The methods discussed in this section should be considered in two
categories: (1) Screening techniques, and (2) the refined dispersion
model, CTDMPLUS, discussed in this subsection and listed in Appendix A.
d. Continued improvements in ability to accurately model plume
dispersion in complex terrain situations can be expected, e.g., from
research on lee side effects due to terrain obstacles. New approaches to
improve the ability of models to realistically simulate atmospheric
physics, e.g., hybrid models which incorporate an accurate wind field
analysis, will ultimately provide more appropriate tools for analyses.
Such hybrid modeling techniques are also acceptable for regulatory
applications after the appropriate demonstration and evaluation.\22\
5.2 Recommendations
a. Recommendations in this section apply primarily to those
situations where the impaction of plumes on terrain at elevations equal
to or greater than the plume centerline during stable atmospheric
conditions are determined to be the problem. If a violation of any NAAQS
or the controlling increment is indicated by using any of the preferred
screening techniques, then a refined complex terrain model may be used.
Phenomena such as fumigation, wind direction shear, lee-side effects,
building wake- or terrain-induced downwash, deposition, chemical
transformation, variable plume trajectories, and long range transport
are not addressed by the recommendations in this section.
b. Where site specific data are used for either screening or refined
complex terrain models, a data base of at least 1 full-year of
[[Page 472]]
meteorological data is preferred. If more data are available, they
should be used. Meteorological data used in the analysis should be
reviewed for both spatial and temporal representativeness.
c. Placement of receptors requires very careful attention when
modeling in complex terrain. Often the highest concentrations are
predicted to occur under very stable conditions, when the plume is near,
or impinges on, the terrain. The plume under such conditions may be
quite narrow in the vertical, so that even relatively small changes in a
receptor's location may substantially affect the predicted
concentration. Receptors within about a kilometer of the source may be
even more sensitive to location. Thus, a dense array of receptors may be
required in some cases. In order to avoid excessively large computer
runs due to such a large array of receptors, it is often desirable to
model the area twice. The first model run would use a moderate number of
receptors carefully located over the area of interest. The second model
run would use a more dense array of receptors in areas showing potential
for high concentrations, as indicated by the results of the first model
run.
d. When CTSCREEN or CTDMPLUS is used, digitized contour data must be
first processed by the CTDM Terrain Processor \32\ to provide hill shape
parameters in a format suitable for direct input to CTDMPLUS. Then the
user supplies receptors either through an interactive program that is
part of the model or directly, by using a text editor; using both
methods to select receptors will generally be necessary to assure that
the maximum concentrations are estimated by either model. In cases where
a terrain feature may ``appear to the plume'' as smaller, multiple
hills, it may be necessary to model the terrain both as a single feature
and as multiple hills to determine design concentrations.
e. The user is encouraged to confer with the Regional Office if any
unresolvable problems are encountered with any screening or refined
analytical procedures, e.g., meteorological data, receptor siting, or
terrain contour processing issues.
5.2.1 Screening Techniques
a. CTSCREEN \33\ can be used to obtain conservative, yet realistic,
worst-case estimates for receptors located on terrain above stack
height. CTSCREEN accounts for the three-dimensional nature of plume and
terrain interaction and requires detailed terrain data representative of
the modeling domain. The model description and user's instructions are
contained in the user's guide.\33\ The terrain data must be digitized in
the same manner as for CTDMPLUS and a terrain processor is
available.\32\ A discussion of the model's performance characteristics
is provided in a technical paper.\34\ CTSCREEN is designed to execute a
fixed matrix of meteorological values for wind speed (u), standard
deviation of horizontal and vertical wind speeds ([sigma]v,
[sigma]w), vertical potential temperature gradient
(d[thetas]/dz), friction velocity (u*), Monin-Obukhov length
(L), mixing height (zi) as a function of terrain height, and
wind directions for both neutral/stable conditions and unstable
convective conditions. Table 5-1 contains the matrix of meteorological
variables that is used for each CTSCREEN analysis. There are 96
combinations, including exceptions, for each wind direction for the
neutral/stable case, and 108 combinations for the unstable case. The
specification of wind direction, however, is handled internally, based
on the source and terrain geometry. Although CTSCREEN is designed to
address a single source scenario, there are a number of options that can
be selected on a case-by-case basis to address multi-source situations.
However, the appropriate reviewing authority (paragraph 3.0(b)) should
be consulted, and concurrence obtained, on the protocol for modeling
multiple sources with CTSCREEN to ensure that the worst case is
identified and assessed. The maximum concentration output from CTSCREEN
represents a worst-case 1-hour concentration. Time-scaling factors of
0.7 for 3-hour, 0.15 for 24-hour and 0.03 for annual concentration
averages are applied internally by CTSCREEN to the highest 1-hour
concentration calculated by the model.
b. Placement of receptors requires very careful attention when
modeling in complex terrain. Often the highest concentrations are
predicted to occur under very stable conditions, when the plume is near,
or impinges on, the terrain. The plume under such conditions may be
quite narrow in the vertical, so that even relatively small changes in a
receptor's location may substantially affect the predicted
concentration. Receptors within about a kilometer of the source may be
even more sensitive to location. Thus, a dense array of receptors may be
required in some cases. In order to avoid excessively large computer
runs due to such a large array of receptors, it is often desirable to
model the area twice. The first model run would use a moderate number of
receptors carefully located over the area of interest. The second model
run would use a more dense array of receptors in areas showing potential
for high concentrations, as indicated by the results of the first model
run.
c. As mentioned above, digitized contour data must be preprocessed
\32\ to provide hill shape parameters in suitable input format. The user
then supplies receptors either through an interactive program that is
part of the model or directly, by using a text editor; using both
methods to select receptors will generally be necessary to assure that
the maximum concentrations are estimated
[[Page 473]]
by either model. In cases where a terrain feature may ``appear to the
plume'' as smaller, multiple hills, it may be necessary to model the
terrain both as a single feature and as multiple hills to determine
design concentrations.
d. Other screening techniques, e.g., Valley (as implemented in
SCREEN3 \28\), COMPLEX I (as implemented in ISC3 \26\), SHORTZ/LONGZ
\35\, and RTDM \36\ may be acceptable for complex terrain cases where
established procedures are used. The user is encouraged to confer with
the appropriate reviewing authority (paragraph 3.0(b)) if any
unresolvable problems are encountered, e.g., applicability,
meteorological data, receptor siting, or terrain contour processing
issues.
5.2.2 Refined Analytical Techniques
a. When the results of the screening analysis demonstrate a possible
violation of NAAQS or the controlling PSD increments, a more refined
analysis may need to be conducted.
b. The Complex Terrain Dispersion Model PLus Algorithms for Unstable
Situations (CTDMPLUS) is a refined air quality model that is preferred
for use in all stability conditions for complex terrain applications.
CTDMPLUS is a sequential model that requires five input files: (1)
General program specifications; (2) a terrain data file; (3) a receptor
file; (4) a surface meteorological data file; and (5) a user created
meteorological profile data file. Two optional input files consist of
hourly emissions parameters and a file containing upper air data from
rawinsonde data files, e.g., a National Climatic Data Center TD-6201
file, unless there are no hours categorized as unstable in the record.
The model description and user instructions are contained in Volume 1 of
the User's Guide.\30\ Separate publications 32,31 describe
the terrain preprocessor system and the meteorological preprocessor
program. In Part I of a technical article \37\ is a discussion of the
model and its preprocessors; the model's performance characteristics are
discussed in Part II of the same article.\38\ The size of the CTDMPLUS
executable file on a personal computer is approximately 360K bytes. The
model produces hourly average concentrations of stable pollutants, i.e.,
chemical transformation or decay of species and settling/deposition are
not simulated. To obtain concentration averages corresponding to the
NAAQS, e.g., 3- or 24-hour, or annual averages, the user must execute a
postprocessor program such as CHAVG. CTDMPLUS is applicable to all
receptors on terrain elevations above stack top. However, the model
contains no algorithms for simulating building downwash or the mixing or
recirculation found in cavity zones in the lee of a hill. The path taken
by a plume through an array of hills cannot be simulated. CTDMPLUS does
not explicitly simulate calm meteorological periods, and for those
situations the user should follow the guidance in subsection 9.3.4. The
user should follow the recommendations in the User's Guide under General
Program Specifications for: (1) Selecting mixed layer heights, (2)
setting minimum scalar wind speed to 1 m/s, and (3) scaling wind
direction with height. Close coordination with the Regional Office is
essential to insure a consistent, technically sound application of this
model.
c. The performance of CTDMPLUS is greatly improved by the use of
meteorological data from several levels up to plume height. However, due
to the vast range of source-plume-hill geometries possible in complex
terrain, detailed requirements for meteorological monitoring in support
of refined analyses using CTDMPLUS should be determined on a case-by-
case basis. The following general guidance should be considered in the
development of a meteorological monitoring protocol for regulatory
applications of CTDMPLUS and reviewed in detail by the Regional Office
before initiating any monitoring. As appropriate, EPA guidance (see
reference 100) should be consulted for specific guidance on siting
requirements for meteorological towers, selection and exposure of
sensors, etc. As more experience is gained with the model in a variety
of circumstances, more specific guidance may be developed.
d. Site specific meteorological data are critical to dispersion
modeling in complex terrain and, consequently, the meteorological
requirements are more demanding than for simple terrain. Generally,
three different meteorological files (referred to as surface, profile,
and rawin files) are needed to run CTDMPLUS in a regulatory mode.
e. The surface file is created by the meteorological preprocessor
(METPRO) \31\ based on site specific measurements or estimates of solar
and/or net radiation, cloud cover and ceiling, and the mixed layer
height. These data are used in METPRO to calculate the various surface
layer scaling parameters (roughness length, friction velocity, and
Monin-Obukhov length) which are needed to run the model. All of the user
inputs required for the surface file are based either on surface
observations or on measurements at or below 10m.
f. The profile data file is prepared by the user with site specific
measurements (from at least three levels) of wind speed, wind direction,
turbulence, and potential temperature. These measurements should be
obtained up to the representative plume height(s) of interest (i.e., the
plume height(s) under those conditions important to the determination of
the design concentration). The representative plume height(s) of
interest should be determined using an appropriate complex terrain
screening procedure
[[Page 474]]
(e.g., CTSCREEN) and should be documented in the monitoring/modeling
protocol. The necessary meteorological measurements should be obtained
from an appropriately sited meteorological tower augmented by SODAR if
the representative plume height(s) of interest exceed 100m. The
meteorological tower need not exceed the lesser of the representative
plume height of interest (the highest plume height if there is more than
one plume height of interest) or 100m.
g. Locating towers on nearby terrain to obtain stack height or plume
height measurements for use in profiles by CTDMPLUS should be avoided
unless it can clearly be demonstrated that such measurements would be
representative of conditions affecting the plume.
h. The rawin file is created by a second meteorological preprocessor
(READ62) \31\ based on NWS (National Weather Service) upper air data.
The rawin file is used in CTDMPLUS to calculate vertical potential
temperature gradients for use in estimating plume penetration in
unstable conditions. The representativeness of the off-site NWS upper
air data should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.
i. In the absence of an appropriate refined model, screening results
may need to be used to determine air quality impact and/or emission
limits.
Table 5-1a--Neutral/Stable Meteorological Matrix for CTSCREEN
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Variable Specific values
--------------------------------------------
U (m/s).................................... 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
[sigma]v (m/s)............................. 0.3 0.75 ............ ............ ...........
[sigma]w (m/s)............................. 0.08 0.15 0.30 0.75 ...........
[Delta][thetas]/[Delta]z (K/m)............. 0.01 0.02 0.035 ............ ...........
WD......................................... (Wind direction optimized internally for each meteorological
combination)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exceptions:
(1) If U <= 2 m/s and [sigma]v <= 0.3 m/s, then include [sigma]w = 0.04 m/s.
(2) If [sigma]w = 0.75 m/s and U >= 3.0 m/s, then [Delta][thetas]/[Delta]z is limited to <= 0.01 K/m.
(3) If U = 4 m/s, then [sigma]w = 0.15 m/s.
(4) [sigma]w <= [sigma]v
Table 5-1b--Unstable/Convective Meteorological Matrix for CTSCREEN
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Variable Specific values
-------------------------------------------
U (m/s)................................... 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
u* (m/s).................................. 0.1 0.3 0.5 ........... ...........
L (m)..................................... -10 -50 -90 ........... ...........
[Delta][sigma]/[Delta]z (K/m)............. 0.030 (potential temperature gradient above zi)
zi (m).................................... 0.5h 1.0h 1.5h ........... ...........
(where h = terrain height)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6.0 Models for Ozone, Particulate Matter, Carbon Monoxide, Nitrogen
Dioxide, and Lead
6.1 Discussion
a. This section identifies modeling approaches or models appropriate
for addressing ozone (O3) \1\, carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen
dioxide (NO2), particulates (PM-2.5 \a\ and PM-10), and lead.
These pollutants are often associated with emissions from numerous
sources. Generally, mobile sources contribute significantly to emissions
of these pollutants or their precursors. For cases where it is of
interest to estimate concentrations of CO or NO2 near a
single or small group of stationary sources, refer to Section 4.
(Modeling approaches for SO2 are discussed in Section 4.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Modeling for attainment demonstrations for O3 and PM-
2.5 should be conducted in time to meet required SIP submission dates as
provided for in the respective implementation rules. Information on
implementation of the 8-hr O3 and PM-2.5 standards is
available at: /ttn/naaqs/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Several of the pollutants mentioned in the preceding paragraph
are closely related to each other in that they share common sources of
emissions and/or are subject to chemical transformations of similar
precursors.\39, 40\ For example, strategies designed to reduce ozone
could have an effect on the secondary component of PM-2.5 and vice
versa. Thus, it makes sense to use models which take into account the
chemical coupling between O3 and PM-2.5, when feasible. This
should promote consistency among methods used to evaluate strategies for
reducing different pollutants as well as consistency among the
strategies themselves. Regulatory requirements for the different
pollutants are likely to be due at different times. Thus, the following
paragraphs identify appropriate modeling approaches for pollutants
individually.
[[Page 475]]
c. The NAAQS for ozone was revised on July 18, 1997 and is now based
on an 8-hour averaging period. Models for ozone are needed primarily to
guide choice of strategies to correct an observed ozone problem in an
area not attaining the NAAQS for ozone. Use of photochemical grid models
is the recommended means for identifying strategies needed to correct
high ozone concentrations in such areas. Such models need to consider
emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOC), nitrogen oxides
(NOX) and carbon monoxide (CO), as well as means for
generating meteorological data governing transport and dispersion of
ozone and its precursors. Other approaches, such as Lagrangian or
observational models may be used to guide choice of appropriate
strategies to consider with a photochemical grid model. These other
approaches may be sufficient to address ozone in an area where observed
concentrations are near the NAAQS or only slightly above it. Such a
decision needs to be made on a case-by-case basis in concert with the
Regional Office.
d. A control agency with jurisdiction over one or more areas with
significant ozone problems should review available ambient air quality
data to assess whether the problem is likely to be significantly
impacted by regional transport.\41\ Choice of a modeling approach
depends on the outcome of this review. In cases where transport is
considered significant, use of a nested regional model may be the
preferred approach. If the observed problem is believed to be primarily
of local origin, use of a model with a single horizontal grid resolution
and geographical coverage that is less than that of a regional model may
suffice.
e. The fine particulate matter NAAQS, promulgated on July 18, 1997,
includes particles with an aerodynamic diameter nominally less than or
equal to 2.5 micrometers (PM-2.5). Models for PM-2.5 are needed to
assess adequacy of a proposed strategy for meeting annual and/or 24-hour
NAAQS for PM-2.5. PM-2.5 is a mixture consisting of several diverse
components. Because chemical/physical properties and origins of each
component differ, it may be appropriate to use either a single model
capable of addressing several of the important components or to model
primary and secondary components using different models. Effects of a
control strategy on PM-2.5 is estimated from the sum of the effects on
the components composing PM-2.5. Model users may refer to guidance \42\
for further details concerning appropriate modeling approaches.
f. A control agency with jurisdiction over one or more areas with
PM-2.5 problems should review available ambient air quality data to
assess which components of PM-2.5 are likely to be major contributors to
the problem. If it is determined that regional transport of secondary
particulates, such as sulfates or nitrates, is likely to contribute
significantly to the problem, use of a regional model may be the
preferred approach. Otherwise, coverage may be limited to a domain that
is urban scale or less. Special care should be taken to select
appropriate geographical coverage for a modeling application.\42\
g. The NAAQS for PM-10 was promulgated in July 1987. A SIP
development guide \43\ is available to assist in PM-10 analyses and
control strategy development. EPA promulgated regulations for PSD
increments measured as PM-10 in a notice published on June 3, 1993. As
an aid to assessing the impact on ambient air quality of particulate
matter generated from prescribed burning activities, a reference\44\ is
available.
h. Models for assessing the impacts of particulate matter may
involve dispersion models or receptor models, or a combination
(depending on the circumstances). Receptor models focus on the behavior
of the ambient environment at the point of impact as opposed to source-
oriented dispersion models, which focus on the transport, diffusion, and
transformation that begin at the source and continue to the receptor
site. Receptor models attempt to identify and apportion sources by
relating known sample compositions at receptors to measured or inferred
compositions of source emissions. When complete and accurate emission
inventories or meteorological characterization are unavailable, or
unknown pollutant sources exist, receptor modeling may be necessary.
i. Models for assessing the impact of CO emissions are needed for a
number of different purposes. Examples include evaluating effects of
point sources, congested intersections and highways, as well as the
cumulative effect of numerous sources of CO in an urban area.
j. Models for assessing the impact of sources on ambient
NO2 concentrations are primarily needed to meet new source
review requirements, such as addressing the effect of a proposed source
on PSD increments for annual concentrations of NO2. Impact of
an individual source on ambient NO2 depends, in part, on the
chemical environment into which the source's plume is to be emitted.
There are several approaches for estimating effects of an individual
source on ambient NO2. One approach is through use of a
plume-in-grid algorithm imbedded within a photochemical grid model.
However, because of the rigor and complexity involved, and because this
approach may not be capable of defining sub-grid concentration
gradients, the plume-in-grid approach may be impractical for estimating
effects on an annual PSD increment. A second approach is to develop site
specific conversion factors based on measurements. If it is not possible
to develop site specific conversion factors and use of the plume-in-grid
algorithm is also not
[[Page 476]]
feasible, other screening procedures may be considered.
k. In January 1999 (40 CFR part 58, Appendix D), EPA gave notice
that concern about ambient lead impacts was being shifted away from
roadways and toward a focus on stationary point sources. EPA has also
issued guidance on siting ambient monitors in the vicinity of such
sources.\45\ For lead, the SIP should contain an air quality analysis to
determine the maximum quarterly lead concentration resulting from major
lead point sources, such as smelters, gasoline additive plants, etc.
General guidance for lead SIP development is also available.\46\
6.2 Recommendations
6.2.1 Models for Ozone
a. Choice of Models for Multi-source Applications. Simulation of
ozone formation and transport is a highly complex and resource intensive
exercise. Control agencies with jurisdiction over areas with ozone
problems are encouraged to use photochemical grid models, such as the
Models-3/Community Multi-scale Air Quality (CMAQ) modeling system \47\,
to evaluate the relationship between precursor species and ozone.
Judgement on the suitability of a model for a given application should
consider factors that include use of the model in an attainment test,
development of emissions and meteorological inputs to the model and
choice of episodes to model.\41\ Similar models for the 8-hour NAAQS and
for the 1-hour NAAQS are appropriate.
b. Choice of Models to Complement Photochemical Grid Models. As
previously noted, observational models, Lagrangian models, or the
Empirical Kinetics Modeling Approach (EKMA) \48, 49\ may be used to help
guide choice of strategies to simulate with a photochemical grid model
and to corroborate results obtained with a grid model. Receptor models
have also been used to apportion sources of ozone precursors (e.g., VOC)
in urban domains. EPA has issued guidance \41\ in selecting appropriate
techniques.
c. Estimating the Impact of Individual Sources. Choice of methods
used to assess the impact of an individual source depends on the nature
of the source and its emissions. Thus, model users should consult with
the Regional Office to determine the most suitable approach on a case-
by-case basis (subsection 3.2.2).
6.2.2 Models for Particulate Matter
6.2.2.1 PM-2.5
a. Choice of Models for Multi-source Applications. Simulation of
phenomena resulting in high ambient PM-2.5 can be a multi-faceted and
complex problem resulting from PM-2.5's existence as an aerosol mixture.
Treating secondary components of PM-2.5, such as sulfates and nitrates,
can be a highly complex and resource-intensive exercise. Control
agencies with jurisdiction over areas with secondary PM-2.5 problems are
encouraged to use models which integrate chemical and physical processes
important in the formation, decay and transport of these species (e.g.,
Models-3/CMAQ \47\ or REMSAD \50\). Primary components can be simulated
using less resource-intensive techniques. Suitability of a modeling
approach or mix of modeling approaches for a given application requires
technical judgement \42\, as well as professional experience in choice
of models, use of the model(s) in an attainment test, development of
emissions and meteorological inputs to the model and selection of days
to model.
b. Choice of Analysis Techniques to Complement Air Quality
Simulation Models. Receptor models may be used to corroborate
predictions obtained with one or more air quality simulation models.
They may also be potentially useful in helping to define specific source
categories contributing to major components of PM-2.5.\42\
c. Estimating the Impact of Individual Sources. Choice of methods
used to assess the impact of an individual source depends on the nature
of the source and its emissions. Thus, model users should consult with
the Regional Office to determine the most suitable approach on a case-
by-case basis (subsection 3.2.2).
6.2.2.2 PM-10
a. Screening techniques like those identified in subsection 4.2.1
are applicable to PM-10. Conservative assumptions which do not allow
removal or transformation are suggested for screening. Thus, it is
recommended that subjectively determined values for ``half-life'' or
pollutant decay not be used as a surrogate for particle removal.
Proportional models (rollback/forward) may not be applied for screening
analysis, unless such techniques are used in conjunction with receptor
modeling.\43\
b. Refined models such as those discussed in subsection 4.2.2 are
recommended for PM-10. However, where possible, particle size, gas-to-
particle formation, and their effect on ambient concentrations may be
considered. For point sources of small particles and for source-specific
analyses of complicated sources, use the appropriate recommended steady-
state plume dispersion model (subsection 4.2.2). For guidance on
determination of design concentrations, see paragraph 8.2.1.1(e).
c. Receptor models have proven useful for helping validate emission
inventories and for corroborating source-specific impacts estimated by
dispersion models. The Chemical Mass Balance (CMB) model is useful for
apportioning impacts from localized sources.\51,52,53\ Other receptor
models, e.g., the
[[Page 477]]
Positive Matrix Factorization (PMF) model \54\ and Unmix \55\, which
don't share some of CMB's constraints, have also been applied. In
regulatory applications, dispersion models have been used in conjunction
with receptor models to attribute source (or source category)
contributions. Guidance is available for PM-10 sampling and analysis
applicable to receptor modeling.\56\
d. Under certain conditions, recommended dispersion models may not
be reliable. In such circumstances, the modeling approach should be
approved by the Regional Office on a case-by-case basis. Analyses
involving model calculations for stagnation conditions should also be
justified on a case-by-case basis (subsection 8.2.8).
e. Fugitive dust usually refers to dust put into the atmosphere by
the wind blowing over plowed fields, dirt roads or desert or sandy areas
with little or no vegetation. Reentrained dust is that which is put into
the air by reason of vehicles driving over dirt roads (or dirty roads)
and dusty areas. Such sources can be characterized as line, area or
volume sources. Emission rates may be based on site specific data or
values from the general literature. Fugitive emissions include the
emissions resulting from the industrial process that are not captured
and vented through a stack but may be released from various locations
within the complex. In some unique cases a model developed specifically
for the situation may be needed. Due to the difficult nature of
characterizing and modeling fugitive dust and fugitive emissions, it is
recommended that the proposed procedure be cleared by the Regional
Office for each specific situation before the modeling exercise is
begun.
6.2.3 Models for Carbon Monoxide
a. Guidance is available for analyzing CO impacts at roadway
intersections.\57\ The recommended screening model for such analyses is
CAL3QHC.\58,59\ This model combines CALINE3 (listed in Appendix A) with
a traffic model to calculate delays and queues that occur at signalized
intersections. The screening approach is described in reference 57; a
refined approach may be considered on a case-by-case basis with
CAL3QHCR.\60\ The latest version of the MOBILE (mobile source emission
factor) model should be used for emissions input to intersection models.
b. For analyses of highways characterized by uninterrupted traffic
flows, CALINE3 is recommended, with emissions input from the latest
version of the MOBILE model.
c. For urban area wide analyses of CO, an Eulerian grid model should
be used. Information on SIP development and requirements for using such
models can be found in several references.57,61,62,63
d. Where point sources of CO are of concern, they should be treated
using the screening and refined techniques described in Section 4.
6.2.4 Models for Nitrogen Dioxide (Annual Average)
a. A tiered screening approach is recommended to obtain annual
average estimates of NO2 from point sources for New Source
Review analysis, including PSD, and for SIP planning purposes. This
multi-tiered approach is conceptually shown in Figure 6-1 and described
in paragraphs b through d of this subsection:
[[Page 478]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR15AP03.072
b. For Tier 1 (the initial screen), use an appropriate model in
subsection 4.2.2 to estimate the maximum annual average concentration
and assume a total conversion of NO to NO2. If the
concentration exceeds the NAAQS and/or PSD increments for
NO2, proceed to the 2nd level screen.
c. For Tier 2 (2nd level) screening analysis, multiply the Tier 1
estimate(s) by an empirically derived NO2/NOX
value of 0.75 (annual national default).\64\ The reviewing agency may
establish an alternative default NO2/NOX ratio
based on ambient annual average NO2 and annual average
NOX data representative of area wide quasi-equilibrium
conditions. Alternative default NO2/NOX ratios
should be based on data satisfying quality assurance procedures that
ensure data accuracy for both NO2 and NOX within
the typical range of measured values. In areas with relatively low
NOX concentrations, the quality assurance procedures used to
determine compliance with the NO2 national ambient air
quality standard may not be adequate. In addition, default
NO2/NOX ratios, including the 0.75 national
default value, can underestimate long range NO2 impacts and
should be used with caution in long range transport scenarios.
d. For Tier 3 (3rd level) analysis, a detailed screening method may
be selected on a case-by-case basis. For point source modeling, other
refined screening methods, such as the ozone limiting method,\65\ may
also be considered. Also, a site specific NO2/NOX
ratio may be used as a detailed screening method if it meets the same
restrictions as described for alternative default NO2/
NOX ratios. Ambient NOX monitors used to develop a
site specific ratio should be sited to obtain the NO2 and
NOX concentrations under quasi-equilibrium conditions. Data
obtained from monitors sited at the maximum NOX impact site,
as may be required in a PSD pre-construction monitoring program, likely
reflect transitional NOX conditions. Therefore,
NOX data from maximum impact sites may not be suitable for
determining a site specific NO2/NOX ratio that is
applicable for the entire modeling analysis. A site specific ratio
derived from maximum impact data can only be used to estimate
NO2 impacts at receptors located within the same distance of
the source as the source-to-monitor distance.
e. In urban areas (subsection 8.2.3), a proportional model may be
used as a preliminary assessment to evaluate control strategies to meet
the NAAQS for multiple minor sources, i.e., minor point, area and mobile
sources of NOX; concentrations resulting from major point
sources should be estimated separately as discussed above, then added to
the impact of the minor sources. An acceptable screening technique for
urban complexes is to assume that all NOX is emitted in the
form of NO2 and to use a model from Appendix A for
nonreactive pollutants to estimate NO2 concentrations. A more
accurate estimate can be obtained by: (1) Calculating the annual average
concentrations
[[Page 479]]
of NOX with an urban model, and (2) converting these
estimates to NO2 concentrations using an empirically derived
annual NO2/NOX ratio. A value of 0.75 is
recommended for this ratio. However, a spatially averaged alternative
default annual NO2/NOX ratio may be determined
from an existing air quality monitoring network and used in lieu of the
0.75 value if it is determined to be representative of prevailing ratios
in the urban area by the reviewing agency. To ensure use of appropriate
locally derived annual average NO2 / NOX ratios,
monitoring data under consideration should be limited to those collected
at monitors meeting siting criteria defined in 40 CFR Part 58, Appendix
D as representative of ``neighborhood'', ``urban'', or ``regional''
scales. Furthermore, the highest annual spatially averaged
NO2/NOX ratio from the most recent 3 years of
complete data should be used to foster conservatism in estimated
impacts.
f. To demonstrate compliance with NO2 PSD increments in
urban areas, emissions from major and minor sources should be included
in the modeling analysis. Point and area source emissions should be
modeled as discussed above. If mobile source emissions do not contribute
to localized areas of high ambient NO2 concentrations, they
should be modeled as area sources. When modeled as area sources, mobile
source emissions should be assumed uniform over the entire highway link
and allocated to each area source grid square based on the portion of
highway link within each grid square. If localized areas of high
concentrations are likely, then mobile sources should be modeled as line
sources using an appropriate steady-state plume dispersion model (e.g.,
CAL3QHCR; subsection 6.2.3).
g. More refined techniques to handle special circumstances may be
considered on a case-by-case basis and agreement with the appropriate
reviewing authority (paragraph 3.0(b)) should be obtained. Such
techniques should consider individual quantities of NO and
NO2 emissions, atmospheric transport and dispersion, and
atmospheric transformation of NO to NO2. Where they are
available, site specific data on the conversion of NO to NO2
may be used. Photochemical dispersion models, if used for other
pollutants in the area, may also be applied to the NOX
problem.
6.2.5 Models for Lead
a. For major lead point sources, such as smelters, which contribute
fugitive emissions and for which deposition is important, professional
judgement should be used, and there should be coordination with the
appropriate reviewing authority (paragraph 3.0(b)). To model an entire
major urban area or to model areas without significant sources of lead
emissions, as a minimum a proportional (rollback) model may be used for
air quality analysis. The rollback philosophy assumes that measured
pollutant concentrations are proportional to emissions. However, urban
or other dispersion models are encouraged in these circumstances where
the use of such models is feasible.
b. In modeling the effect of traditional line sources (such as a
specific roadway or highway) on lead air quality, dispersion models
applied for other pollutants can be used. Dispersion models such as
CALINE3 and CAL3QHCR have been used for modeling carbon monoxide
emissions from highways and intersections (subsection 6.2.3). Where
there is a point source in the middle of a substantial road network, the
lead concentrations that result from the road network should be treated
as background (subsection 9.2); the point source and any nearby major
roadways should be modeled separately using the appropriate recommended
steady-state plume dispersion model (subsection 4.2.2).
7.0 Other Model Requirements
7.1 Discussion
a. This section covers those cases where specific techniques have
been developed for special regulatory programs. Most of the programs
have, or will have when fully developed, separate guidance documents
that cover the program and a discussion of the tools that are needed.
The following paragraphs reference those guidance documents, when they
are available. No attempt has been made to provide a comprehensive
discussion of each topic since the reference documents were designed to
do that. This section will undergo periodic revision as new programs are
added and new techniques are developed.
b. Other Federal agencies have also developed specific modeling
approaches for their own regulatory or other requirements.66
Although such regulatory requirements and manuals may have come about
because of EPA rules or standards, the implementation of such
regulations and the use of the modeling techniques is under the
jurisdiction of the agency issuing the manual or directive.
c. The need to estimate impacts at distances greater than 50km (the
nominal distance to which EPA considers most steady-state Gaussian plume
models are applicable) is an important one especially when considering
the effects from secondary pollutants. Unfortunately, models originally
available to EPA had not undergone sufficient field evaluation to be
recommended for general use. Data bases from field studies at mesoscale
and long range transport distances were limited in detail. This
limitation was a result of the expense to perform the field studies
required to verify and improve mesoscale and long range transport
models. Meteorological data adequate for
[[Page 480]]
generating three-dimensional wind fields were particularly sparse.
Application of models to complicated terrain compounds the difficulty of
making good assessments of long range transport impacts. EPA completed
limited evaluation of several long range transport (LRT) models against
two sets of field data and evaluated results.\13\ Based on the results,
EPA concluded that long range and mesoscale transport models were
limited for regulatory use to a case-by-case basis. However a more
recent series of comparisons has been completed for a new model, CALPUFF
(Section A.3). Several of these field studies involved three-to-four
hour releases of tracer gas sampled along arcs of receptors at distances
greater than 50km downwind. In some cases, short-term concentration
sampling was available, such that the transport of the tracer puff as it
passed the arc could be monitored. Differences on the order of 10 to 20
degrees were found between the location of the simulated and observed
center of mass of the tracer puff. Most of the simulated centerline
concentration maxima along each arc were within a factor of two of those
observed. It was concluded from these case studies that the CALPUFF
dispersion model had performed in a reasonable manner, and had no
apparent bias toward over or under prediction, so long as the transport
distance was limited to less than 300km.67
7.2 Recommendations
7.2.1 Visibility
a. Visibility in important natural areas (e.g., Federal Class I
areas) is protected under a number of provisions of the Clean Air Act,
including Sections 169A and 169B (addressing impacts primarily from
existing sources) and Section 165 (new source review). Visibility
impairment is caused by light scattering and light absorption associated
with particles and gases in the atmosphere. In most areas of the
country, light scattering by PM-2.5 is the most significant component of
visibility impairment. The key components of PM-2.5 contributing to
visibility impairment include sulfates, nitrates, organic carbon,
elemental carbon, and crustal material.
b. The visibility regulations as promulgated in December 1980 (40
CFR 51.300-307) require States to mitigate visibility impairment, in any
of the 156 mandatory Federal Class I areas, that is found to be
``reasonably attributable'' to a single source or a small group of
sources. In 1985, EPA promulgated Federal Implementation Plans (FIPs)
for several States without approved visibility provisions in their SIPs.
The IMPROVE (Interagency Monitoring for Protected Visual Environments)
monitoring network, a cooperative effort between EPA, the States, and
Federal land management agencies, was established to implement the
monitoring requirements in these FIPs. Data has been collected by the
IMPROVE network since 1988.
c. In 1999, EPA issued revisions to the 1980 regulations to address
visibility impairment in the form of regional haze, which is caused by
numerous, diverse sources (e.g., stationary, mobile, and area sources)
located across a broad region (40 CFR 51.308-309). The state of relevant
scientific knowledge has expanded significantly since the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1977. A number of studies and reports 68, 69
have concluded that long range transport (e.g., up to hundreds of
kilometers) of fine particulate matter plays a significant role in
visibility impairment across the country. Section 169A of the Act
requires states to develop SIPs containing long-term strategies for
remedying existing and preventing future visibility impairment in 156
mandatory Class I federal areas. In order to develop long-term
strategies to address regional haze, many States will need to conduct
regional-scale modeling of fine particulate concentrations and
associated visibility impairment (e.g., light extinction and deciview
metrics).
d. To calculate the potential impact of a plume of specified
emissions for specific transport and dispersion conditions (``plume
blight''), a screening model, VISCREEN, and guidance are
available.70 If a more comprehensive analysis is required, a
refined model should be selected . The model selection (VISCREEN vs.
PLUVUE II or some other refined model), procedures, and analyses should
be determined in consultation with the appropriate reviewing authority
(paragraph 3.0(b)) and the affected Federal Land Manager (FLM). FLMs are
responsible for determining whether there is an adverse effect by a
plume on a Class I area.
e. CALPUFF (Section A.3) may be applied when assessment is needed of
reasonably attributable haze impairment or atmospheric deposition due to
one or a small group of sources. This situation may involve more sources
and larger modeling domains than that to which VISCREEN ideally may be
applied. The procedures and analyses should be determined in
consultation with the appropriate reviewing authority (paragraph 3.0(b))
and the affected FLM(s).
f. Regional scale models are used by EPA to develop and evaluate
national policy and assist State and local control agencies. Two such
models which can be used to assess visibility impacts from source
emissions are Models-3/CMAQ 47 and REMSAD.50 Model
users should consult with the appropriate reviewing authority (paragraph
3.0(b)), which in this instance would include FLMs.
7.2.2 Good Engineering Practice Stack Height
a. The use of stack height credit in excess of Good Engineering
Practice (GEP) stack
[[Page 481]]
height or credit resulting from any other dispersion technique is
prohibited in the development of emission limitations by 40 CFR 51.118
and 40 CFR 51.164. The definitions of GEP stack height and dispersion
technique are contained in 40 CFR 51.100. Methods and procedures for
making the appropriate stack height calculations, determining stack
height credits and an example of applying those techniques are found in
several references 71, 72, 73, 74, which provide a great deal
of additional information for evaluating and describing building cavity
and wake effects.
b. If stacks for new or existing major sources are found to be less
than the height defined by EPA's refined formula for determining GEP
height, then air quality impacts associated with cavity or wake effects
due to the nearby building structures should be determined. The EPA
refined formula height is defined as H + 1.5L (see reference 73).
Detailed downwash screening procedures 27 for both the cavity
and wake regions should be followed. If more refined concentration
estimates are required, the recommended steady-state plume dispersion
model in subsection 4.2.2 contains algorithms for building wake
calculations and should be used.
7.2.3 Long Range Transport (LRT) (i.e., Beyond 50km)
a. Section 165(d) of the Clean Air Act requires that suspected
adverse impacts on PSD Class I areas be determined. However, 50km is the
useful distance to which most steady-state Gaussian plume models are
considered accurate for setting emission limits. Since in many cases PSD
analyses show that Class I areas may be threatened at distances greater
than 50km from new sources, some procedure is needed to (1) determine if
an adverse impact will occur, and (2) identify the model to be used in
setting an emission limit if the Class I increments are threatened. In
addition to the situations just described, there are certain
applications containing a mixture of both long range and short range
source-receptor relationships in a large modeled domain (e.g., several
industrialized areas located along a river or valley). Historically,
these applications have presented considerable difficulty to an analyst
if impacts from sources having transport distances greater than 50km
significantly contributed to the design concentrations. To properly
analyze applications of this type, a modeling approach is needed which
has the capability of combining, in a consistent manner, impacts
involving both short and long range transport. The CALPUFF modeling
system, listed in Appendix A, has been designed to accommodate both the
Class I area LRT situation and the large modeling domain situation.
Given the judgement and refinement involved, conducting a LRT modeling
assessment will require significant consultation with the appropriate
reviewing authority (paragraph 3.0(b)) and the affected FLM(s). The FLM
has an affirmative responsibility to protect air quality related values
(AQRVs) that may be affected, and to provide the appropriate procedures
and analysis techniques. Where there is no increment violation, the
ultimate decision on whether a Class I area is adversely affected is the
responsibility of the appropriate reviewing authority (Section
165(d)(2)(C)(ii) of the Clean Air Act), taking into consideration any
information on the impacts on AQRVs provided by the FLM. According to
Section 165(d)(2)(C)(iii) of the Clean Air Act, if there is a Class I
increment violation, the source must demonstrate to the satisfaction of
the FLM that the emissions from the source will have no adverse impact
on the AQRVs.
b. If LRT is determined to be important, then refined estimates
utilizing the CALPUFF modeling system should be obtained. A screening
approach 67, 75 is also available for use on a case-by-case
basis that generally provides concentrations that are higher than those
obtained using refined characterizations of the meteorological
conditions. The meteorological input data requirements for developing
the time and space varying three-dimensional winds and dispersion
meteorology for refined analyses are discussed in paragraph 9.3.1.2(d).
Additional information on applying this model is contained in Appendix
A. To facilitate use of complex air quality and meteorological modeling
systems, a written protocol approved by the appropriate reviewing
authority (paragraph 3.0(b)) and the affected FLM(s) may be considered
for developing consensus in the methods and procedures to be followed.
7.2.4 Modeling Guidance for Other Governmental Programs
a. When using the models recommended or discussed in the Guideline
in support of programmatic requirements not specifically covered by EPA
regulations, the model user should consult the appropriate Federal or
State agency to ensure the proper application and use of the models. For
modeling associated with PSD permit applications that involve a Class I
area, the appropriate Federal Land Manager should be consulted on all
modeling questions.
b. The Offshore and Coastal Dispersion (OCD) model, described in
Appendix A, was developed by the Minerals Management Service and is
recommended for estimating air quality impact from offshore sources on
onshore, flat terrain areas. The OCD model is not recommended for use in
air quality impact assessments for onshore sources. Sources located on
or just inland of a shoreline where fumigation is expected should be
treated in accordance with subsection 8.2.8.
[[Page 482]]
c. The Emissions and Dispersion Modeling System (EDMS), described in
Appendix A, was developed by the Federal Aviation Administration and the
United States Air Force and is recommended for air quality assessment of
primary pollutant impacts at airports or air bases. Regulatory
application of EDMS is intended for estimating the cumulative effect of
changes in aircraft operations, point source, and mobile source
emissions on pollutant concentrations. It is not intended for PSD, SIP,
or other regulatory air quality analyses of point or mobile sources at
or peripheral to airport property that are independent of changes in
aircraft operations. If changes in other than aircraft operations are
associated with analyses, a model recommended in Chapter 4 or 5 should
be used.
8.0 General Modeling Considerations
8.1 Discussion
a. This section contains recommendations concerning a number of
different issues not explicitly covered in other sections of this guide.
The topics covered here are not specific to any one program or modeling
area but are common to nearly all modeling analyses for criteria
pollutants.
8.2 Recommendations
8.2.1 Design Concentrations (see also subsection 11.2.3.1)
8.2.1.1 Design Concentrations for SO2, PM-10, CO, Pb, and
NO2
a. An air quality analysis for SO2, PM-10, CO, Pb, and
NO2 is required to determine if the source will (1) cause a
violation of the NAAQS, or (2) cause or contribute to air quality
deterioration greater than the specified allowable PSD increment. For
the former, background concentration (subsection 9.2) should be added to
the estimated impact of the source to determine the design
concentration. For the latter, the design concentration includes impact
from all increment consuming sources.
b. If the air quality analyses are conducted using the period of
meteorological input data recommended in subsection 9.3.1.2 (e.g., 5
years of National Weather Service (NWS) data or at least 1 year of site
specific data; subsection 9.3.3), then the design concentration based on
the highest, second-highest short term concentration or the highest long
term average, whichever is controlling, should be used to determine
emission limitations to assess compliance with the NAAQS and PSD
increments.
c. When sufficient and representative data exist for less than a 5-
year period from a nearby NWS site, or when site specific data have been
collected for less than a full continuous year, or when it has been
determined that the site specific data may not be temporally
representative (subsection 9.3.3), then the highest concentration
estimate should be considered the design value. This is because the
length of the data record may be too short to assure that the conditions
producing worst-case estimates have been adequately sampled. The highest
value is then a surrogate for the concentration that is not to be
exceeded more than once per year (the wording of the deterministic
standards). Also, the highest concentration should be used whenever
selected worst-case conditions are input to a screening technique, as
described in EPA guidance.27
d. If the controlling concentration is an annual average value and
multiple years of data (site specific or NWS) are used, then the design
value is the highest of the annual averages calculated for the
individual years. If the controlling concentration is a quarterly
average and multiple years are used, then the highest individual
quarterly average should be considered the design value.
e. As long a period of record as possible should be used in making
estimates to determine design values and PSD increments. If more than 1
year of site specific data is available, it should be used.
8.2.1.2 Design Concentrations for O3 and PM-2.5
a. Guidance and specific instructions for the determination of the
1-hr and 8-hr design concentrations for ozone are provided in Appendix H
and I (respectively) of reference 4. Appendix H explains how to
determine when the expected number of days per calendar year with
maximum hourly concentrations above the NAAQS is equal to or less than
1. Appendix I explains the data handling conventions and computations
necessary for determining whether the 8-hour primary and secondary NAAQS
are met at an ambient monitoring site. For PM-2.5, Appendix N of
reference 4, and supplementary guidance 76, explain the data
handling conventions and computations necessary for determining when the
annual and 24-hour primary and secondary NAAQS are met. For all SIP
revisions the user should check with the Regional Office to obtain the
most recent guidance documents and policy memoranda concerning the
pollutant in question. There are currently no PSD increments for
O3 and PM-2.5.
8.2.2 Critical Receptor Sites
a. Receptor sites for refined modeling should be utilized in
sufficient detail to estimate the highest concentrations and possible
violations of a NAAQS or a PSD increment. In designing a receptor
network, the emphasis should be placed on receptor resolution and
location, not total number of receptors. The selection of receptor sites
should be a
[[Page 483]]
case-by-case determination taking into consideration the topography, the
climatology, monitor sites, and the results of the initial screening
procedure. For large sources (those equivalent to a 500MW power plant)
and where violations of the NAAQS or PSD increment are likely, 360
receptors for a polar coordinate grid system and 400 receptors for a
rectangular grid system, where the distance from the source to the
farthest receptor is 10km, are usually adequate to identify areas of
high concentration. Additional receptors may be needed in the high
concentration location if greater resolution is indicated by terrain or
source factors.
8.2.3 Dispersion Coefficients
a. Steady-state Gaussian plume models used in most applications
should employ dispersion coefficients consistent with those contained in
the preferred models in Appendix A. Factors such as averaging time,
urban/rural surroundings (see paragraphs (b)-(f) of this subsection),
and type of source (point vs. line) may dictate the selection of
specific coefficients. Coefficients used in some Appendix A models are
identical to, or at least based on, Pasquill-Gifford coefficients \77\
in rural areas and McElroy-Pooler \78\ coefficients in urban areas.\79\
b. The selection of either rural or urban dispersion coefficients in
a specific application should follow one of the procedures suggested by
Irwin \80\ and briefly described in paragraphs (c)-(f) of this
subsection. These include a land use classification procedure or a
population based procedure to determine whether the character of an area
is primarily urban or rural.
c. Land Use Procedure: (1) Classify the land use within the total
area, Ao, circumscribed by a 3km radius circle about the
source using the meteorological land use typing scheme proposed by Auer
\81\; (2) if land use types I1, I2, C1, R2, and R3 account for 50
percent or more of Ao, use urban dispersion coefficients;
otherwise, use appropriate rural dispersion coefficients.
d. Population Density Procedure: (1) Compute the average population
density, p per square kilometer with Ao as defined above; (2)
If p is greater than 750 people/km2, use urban dispersion
coefficients; otherwise use appropriate rural dispersion coefficients.
e. Of the two methods, the land use procedure is considered more
definitive. Population density should be used with caution and should
not be applied to highly industrialized areas where the population
density may be low and thus a rural classification would be indicated,
but the area is sufficiently built-up so that the urban land use
criteria would be satisfied. In this case, the classification should
already be ``urban'' and urban dispersion parameters should be used.
f. Sources located in an area defined as urban should be modeled
using urban dispersion parameters. Sources located in areas defined as
rural should be modeled using the rural dispersion parameters. For
analyses of whole urban complexes, the entire area should be modeled as
an urban region if most of the sources are located in areas classified
as urban.
g. Buoyancy-induced dispersion (BID), as identified by Pasquill
\82\, is included in the preferred models and should be used where
buoyant sources, e.g., those involving fuel combustion, are involved.
8.2.4 Stability Categories
a. The Pasquill approach to classifying stability is commonly used
in preferred models (Appendix A). The Pasquill method, as modified by
Turner \83\, was developed for use with commonly observed meteorological
data from the National Weather Service and is based on cloud cover,
insolation and wind speed.
b. Procedures to determine Pasquill stability categories from other
than NWS data are found in subsection 9.3. Any other method to determine
Pasquill stability categories must be justified on a case-by-case basis.
c. For a given model application where stability categories are the
basis for selecting dispersion coefficients, both [sigma]y
and [sigma]z should be determined from the same stability
category. ``Split sigmas'' in that instance are not recommended. Sector
averaging, which eliminates the [sigma]y term, is commonly
acceptable in complex terrain screening methods.
8.2.5 Plume Rise
a. The plume rise methods of Briggs 84, 85 are
incorporated in many of the preferred models and are recommended for use
in many modeling applications. In the convective boundary layer, plume
rise is superposed on the displacements by random convective
velocities.\86\ No explicit provisions in these models are made for
multistack plume rise enhancement or the handling of such special plumes
as flares; these problems should be considered on a case-by-case basis.
b. Gradual plume rise is generally recommended where its use is
appropriate: (1) In complex terrain screening procedures to determine
close-in impacts and (2) when calculating the effects of building wakes.
If the building wake is calculated to affect the plume for any hour,
gradual plume rise is also used in downwind dispersion calculations to
the distance of final plume rise, after which final plume rise is used.
Plumes captured by the near wake are re-emitted to the far wake as a
ground-level volume source.
c. Stack tip downwash generally occurs with poorly constructed
stacks and when the ratio of the stack exit velocity to wind speed is
small. An algorithm developed by Briggs \85\
[[Page 484]]
is the recommended technique for this situation and is found in the
point source preferred models.
8.2.6 Chemical Transformation
a. The chemical transformation of SO2 emitted from point
sources or single industrial plants in rural areas is generally assumed
to be relatively unimportant to the estimation of maximum concentrations
when travel time is limited to a few hours. However, in urban areas,
where synergistic effects among pollutants are of considerable
consequence, chemical transformation rates may be of concern. In urban
area applications, a half-life of 4 hours \83\ may be applied to the
analysis of SO2 emissions. Calculations of transformation
coefficients from site specific studies can be used to define a ``half-
life'' to be used in a steady-state Gaussian plume model with any travel
time, or in any application, if appropriate documentation is provided.
Such conversion factors for pollutant half-life should not be used with
screening analyses.
b. Use of models incorporating complex chemical mechanisms should be
considered only on a case-by-case basis with proper demonstration of
applicability. These are generally regional models not designed for the
evaluation of individual sources but used primarily for region-wide
evaluations. Visibility models also incorporate chemical transformation
mechanisms which are an integral part of the visibility model itself and
should be used in visibility assessments.
8.2.7 Gravitational Settling and Deposition
a. An ``infinite half-life'' should be used for estimates of
particle concentrations when steady-state Gaussian plume models
containing only exponential decay terms for treating settling and
deposition are used.
b. Gravitational settling and deposition may be directly included in
a model if either is a significant factor. When particulate matter
sources can be quantified and settling and dry deposition are problems,
professional judgement should be used, and there should be coordination
with the appropriate reviewing authority (paragraph 3.0(b)).
8.2.8 Complex Winds
a. Inhomogeneous Local Winds. In many parts of the United States,
the ground is neither flat nor is the ground cover (or land use)
uniform. These geographical variations can generate local winds and
circulations, and modify the prevailing ambient winds and circulations.
Geographic effects are most apparent when the ambient winds are light or
calm.\87\ In general these geographically induced wind circulation
effects are named after the source location of the winds, e.g., lake and
sea breezes, and mountain and valley winds. In very rugged hilly or
mountainous terrain, along coastlines, or near large land use
variations, the characterization of the winds is a balance of various
forces, such that the assumptions of steady-state straight-line
transport both in time and space are inappropriate. In the special cases
described, the CALPUFF modeling system (described in Appendix A) may be
applied on a case-by-case basis for air quality estimates in such
complex non-steady-state meteorological conditions. The purpose of
choosing a modeling system like CALPUFF is to fully treat the time and
space variations of meteorology effects on transport and dispersion. The
setup and application of the model should be determined in consultation
with the appropriate reviewing authority (paragraph 3.0(b)) consistent
with limitations of paragraph 3.2.2(e). The meteorological input data
requirements for developing the time and space varying three-dimensional
winds and dispersion meteorology for these situations are discussed in
paragraph 9.3.1.2(d). Examples of inhomogeneous winds include, but
aren't limited to, situations described in the following paragraphs (i)-
(iii):
i. Inversion Breakup Fumigation. Inversion breakup fumigation occurs
when a plume (or multiple plumes) is emitted into a stable layer of air
and that layer is subsequently mixed to the ground through convective
transfer of heat from the surface or because of advection to less stable
surroundings. Fumigation may cause excessively high concentrations but
is usually rather short-lived at a given receptor. There are no
recommended refined techniques to model this phenomenon. There are,
however, screening procedures \27\ that may be used to approximate the
concentrations. Considerable care should be exercised in using the
results obtained from the screening techniques.
ii. Shoreline Fumigation. Fumigation can be an important phenomenon
on and near the shoreline of bodies of water. This can affect both
individual plumes and area-wide emissions. When fumigation conditions
are expected to occur from a source or sources with tall stacks located
on or just inland of a shoreline, this should be addressed in the air
quality modeling analysis. The Shoreline Dispersion Model (SDM) listed
on EPA's Internet SCRAM Web site (subsection 2.3) may be applied on a
case-by-case basis when air quality estimates under shoreline fumigation
conditions are needed.\88\ Information on the results of EPA's
evaluation of this model together with other coastal fumigation models
is available.\89\ Selection of the appropriate model for applications
where shoreline fumigation is of concern should be determined in
consultation with the appropriate reviewing authority (paragraph
3.0(b)).
iii. Stagnation. Stagnation conditions are characterized by calm or
very low wind speeds, and variable wind directions. These
[[Page 485]]
stagnant meteorological conditions may persist for several hours to
several days. During stagnation conditions, the dispersion of air
pollutants, especially those from low-level emissions sources, tends to
be minimized, potentially leading to relatively high ground-level
concentrations. If point sources are of interest, users should note the
guidance provided for CALPUFF in paragraph (a) of this subsection.
Selection of the appropriate model for applications where stagnation is
of concern should be determined in consultation with the appropriate
reviewing authority (paragraph 3.0(b)).
8.2.9 Calibration of Models
a. Calibration of models is not common practice and is subject to
much error and misunderstanding. There have been attempts by some to
compare model estimates and measurements on an event-by-event basis and
then to calibrate a model with results of that comparison. This approach
is severely limited by uncertainties in both source and meteorological
data and therefore it is difficult to precisely estimate the
concentration at an exact location for a specific increment of time.
Such uncertainties make calibration of models of questionable benefit.
Therefore, model calibration is unacceptable.
9.0 Model Input Data
a. Data bases and related procedures for estimating input parameters
are an integral part of the modeling procedure. The most appropriate
data available should always be selected for use in modeling analyses.
Concentrations can vary widely depending on the source data or
meteorological data used. Input data are a major source of uncertainties
in any modeling analysis. This section attempts to minimize the
uncertainty associated with data base selection and use by identifying
requirements for data used in modeling. A checklist of input data
requirements for modeling analyses is posted on EPA's Internet SCRAM Web
site (subsection 2.3). More specific data requirements and the format
required for the individual models are described in detail in the users'
guide for each model.
9.1 Source Data
9.1.1 Discussion
a. Sources of pollutants can be classified as point, line and area/
volume sources. Point sources are defined in terms of size and may vary
between regulatory programs. The line sources most frequently considered
are roadways and streets along which there are well-defined movements of
motor vehicles, but they may be lines of roof vents or stacks such as in
aluminum refineries. Area and volume sources are often collections of a
multitude of minor sources with individually small emissions that are
impractical to consider as separate point or line sources. Large area
sources are typically treated as a grid network of square areas, with
pollutant emissions distributed uniformly within each grid square.
b. Emission factors are compiled in an EPA publication commonly
known as AP-42 \90\; an indication of the quality and amount of data on
which many of the factors are based is also provided. Other information
concerning emissions is available in EPA publications relating to
specific source categories. The appropriate reviewing authority
(paragraph 3.0(b)) should be consulted to determine appropriate source
definitions and for guidance concerning the determination of emissions
from and techniques for modeling the various source types.
9.1.2 Recommendations
a. For point source applications the load or operating condition
that causes maximum ground-level concentrations should be established.
As a minimum, the source should be modeled using the design capacity
(100 percent load). If a source operates at greater than design capacity
for periods that could result in violations of the standards or PSD
increments, this load \2\ should be modeled. Where the source operates
at substantially less than design capacity, and the changes in the stack
parameters associated with the operating conditions could lead to higher
ground level concentrations, loads such as 50 percent and 75 percent of
capacity should also be modeled. A range of operating conditions should
be considered in screening analyses; the load causing the highest
concentration, in addition to the design load, should be included in
refined modeling. For a steam power plant, the following (b-h) is
typical of the kind of data on source characteristics and operating
conditions that may be needed. Generally, input data requirements for
air quality models necessitate the use of metric units; where English
units are common for engineering usage, a conversion to metric is
required.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Malfunctions which may result in excess emissions are not
considered to be a normal operating condition. They generally should not
be considered in determining allowable emissions. However, if the excess
emissions are the result of poor maintenance, careless operation, or
other preventable conditions, it may be necessary to consider them in
determining source impact.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Plant layout. The connection scheme between boilers and stacks,
and the distance and direction between stacks, building parameters
(length, width, height, location and orientation relative to stacks) for
plant structures which house boilers, control
[[Page 486]]
equipment, and surrounding buildings within a distance of approximately
five stack heights.
c. Stack parameters. For all stacks, the stack height and inside
diameter (meters), and the temperature (K) and volume flow rate (actual
cubic meters per second) or exit gas velocity (meters per second) for
operation at 100 percent, 75 percent and 50 percent load.
d. Boiler size. For all boilers, the associated megawatts,
106 BTU/hr, and pounds of steam per hour, and the design and/
or actual fuel consumption rate for 100 percent load for coal (tons/
hour), oil (barrels/hour), and natural gas (thousand cubic feet/hour).
e. Boiler parameters. For all boilers, the percent excess air used,
the boiler type (e.g., wet bottom, cyclone, etc.), and the type of
firing (e.g., pulverized coal, front firing, etc.).
f. Operating conditions. For all boilers, the type, amount and
pollutant contents of fuel, the total hours of boiler operation and the
boiler capacity factor during the year, and the percent load for peak
conditions.
g. Pollution control equipment parameters. For each boiler served
and each pollutant affected, the type of emission control equipment, the
year of its installation, its design efficiency and mass emission rate,
the date of the last test and the tested efficiency, the number of hours
of operation during the latest year, and the best engineering estimate
of its projected efficiency if used in conjunction with coal combustion;
data for any anticipated modifications or additions.
h. Data for new boilers or stacks. For all new boilers and stacks
under construction and for all planned modifications to existing boilers
or stacks, the scheduled date of completion, and the data or best
estimates available for items (b) through (g) of this subsection
following completion of construction or modification.
i. In stationary point source applications for compliance with short
term ambient standards, SIP control strategies should be tested using
the emission input shown on Table 9-1. When using a refined model,
sources should be modeled sequentially with these loads for every hour
of the year. To evaluate SIPs for compliance with quarterly and annual
standards, emission input data shown in Table 9-1 should again be used.
Emissions from area sources should generally be based on annual average
conditions. The source input information in each model user's guide
should be carefully consulted and the checklist (paragraph 9.0(a))
should also be consulted for other possible emission data that could be
helpful. PSD and NAAQS compliance demonstrations should follow the
emission input data shown in Table 9-2. For purposes of emissions
trading, new source review and demonstrations, refer to current EPA
policy and guidance to establish input data.
j. Line source modeling of streets and highways requires data on the
width of the roadway and the median strip, the types and amounts of
pollutant emissions, the number of lanes, the emissions from each lane
and the height of emissions. The location of the ends of the straight
roadway segments should be specified by appropriate grid coordinates.
Detailed information and data requirements for modeling mobile sources
of pollution are provided in the user's manuals for each of the models
applicable to mobile sources.
k. The impact of growth on emissions should be considered in all
modeling analyses covering existing sources. Increases in emissions due
to planned expansion or planned fuel switches should be identified.
Increases in emissions at individual sources that may be associated with
a general industrial/commercial/residential expansion in multi-source
urban areas should also be treated. For new sources the impact of growth
on emissions should generally be considered for the period prior to the
start-up date for the source. Such changes in emissions should treat
increased area source emissions, changes in existing point source
emissions which were not subject to preconstruction review, and
emissions due to sources with permits to construct that have not yet
started operation.
Table 9-1--Model Emission Input Data for Point Sources \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emission limit Operating level Operating factor
Averaging time (/MMBtu) \2\ x (MMBtu/hr) \2\ x (e.g., hr/yr, hr/day)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary Point Source(s) Subject to SIP Emission Limit(s) Evaluation for Compliance With Ambient Standards
(Including Areawide Demonstrations)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual & quarterly............ Maximum allowable ... Actual or design ... Actual operating
emission limit or capacity (whichever factor averaged over
federally enforceable is greater), or most recent 2
permit limit.. federally enforceable years.\3\
permit condition..
Short term.................... Maximum allowable ... Actual or design ... Continuous operation,
emission limit or capacity (whichever i.e., all hours of
federally enforceable is greater), or each time period
permit limit.. federally enforceable under consideration
permit condition.\4\. (for all hours of the
meteorological data
base).\5\
-------------------------------
[[Page 487]]
Nearby Source(s) 6, 7
Same input requirements as for stationary point source(s) above.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Sources \7\
If modeled (subsection 9.2.3), input data requirements are defined below.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual & quarterly............ Maximum allowable ... Annual level when ... Actual operating
emission limit or actually operating, factor averaged over
federally enforceable averaged over the the most recent 2
permit limit.\6\. most recent 2 years.\3\
years.\3\.
Short term.................... Maximum allowable ... Annual level when ... Continuous operation,
emission limit or actually operating, i.e., all hours of
federally enforceable averaged over the each time period
permit limit.\6\. most recent 2 under consideration
years.\3\. (for all hours of the
meteorological data
base).\5\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The model input data requirements shown on this table apply to stationary source control strategies for
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLANS. For purposes of emissions trading, new source review, or prevention of significant
deterioration, other model input criteria may apply. Refer to the policy and guidance for these programs to
establish the input data.
\2\ Terminology applicable to fuel burning sources; analogous terminology (e.g., /throughput) may be
used for other types of sources.
\3\ Unless it is determined that this period is not representative.
\4\ Operating levels such as 50 percent and 75 percent of capacity should also be modeled to determine the load
causing the highest concentration.
\5\ If operation does not occur for all hours of the time period of consideration (e.g., 3 or 24 hours) and the
source operation is constrained by a federally enforceable permit condition, an appropriate adjustment to the
modeled emission rate may be made (e.g., if operation is only 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. each day, only these hours will
be modeled with emissions from the source. Modeled emissions should not be averaged across non-operating time
periods.)
\6\ See paragraph 9.2.3(c).
\7\ See paragraph 9.2.3(d).
Table 9-2--Point Source Model Input Data (Emissions) for PSD NAAQS Compliance Demonstrations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emission limit Operating level (MMBtu/ Operating factor
Averaging time (/MMBtu) \1\ x hr) \1\ x (e.g., hr/yr,hr/day)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Major New or Modified Source
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual & quarterly............ Maximum allowable ... Design capacity or ... Continuous operation
emission limit or federally enforceable (i.e., 8760
federally enforceable permit condition.. hours).\2\
permit limit..
Short term (<= 24 hours)...... Maximum allowable ... Design capacity or ... Continuous operation
emission limit or federally enforceable (i.e., all hours of
federally enforceable permit condition.\3\. each time period
permit limit.. under consideration)
(for all hours of the
meteorological data
base).\2\
-------------------------------
Nearby Source(s) 4,6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual & quarterly............ Maximum allowable ... Actual or design ... Actual operating
emission limit or capacity (whichever factor averaged over
federally enforceable is greater), or the most recent 2
permit limit.\5\. federally enforceable years.7,8
permit condition..
Short term (<= 24 hours)...... Maximum allowable ... Actual or design ... Continuous operation
emission limit or capacity (whichever (i.e., all hours of
federally enforceable is greater), or each time period
permit limit.\5\. federally enforceable under consideration)
permit condition.\3\. (for all hours of the
meteorological data
base).\2\
-------------------------------
Other Source(s) 6,9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual & quarterly............ Maximum allowable ... Annual level when ... Actual operating
emission limit or actually operating, factor averaged over
federally enforceable averaged over the the most recent 2
permit limit.\5\. most recent 2 years.7,8
years.\7\.
Short term (<= 24 hours)...... Maximum allowable ... Annual level when ... Continuous operation
emission limit or actually operating, (i.e., all hours of
federally enforceable averaged over the each time period
permit limit.\5\. most recent 2 under consideration)
years.\7\. (for all hours of the
meteorological data
base).\2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Terminology applicable to fuel burning sources; analogous terminology (e.g., /throughput) may be
used for other types of sources.
[[Page 488]]
\2\ If operation does not occur for all hours of the time period of consideration (e.g., 3 or 24 hours) and the
source operation is constrained by a federally enforceable permit condition, an appropriate adjustment to the
modeled emission rate may be made (e.g., if operation is only 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. each day, only these hours will
be modeled with emissions from the source. Modeled emissions should not be averaged across non-operating time
periods.
\3\ Operating levels such as 50 percent and 75 percent of capacity should also be modeled to determine the load
causing the highest concentration.
\4\ Includes existing facility to which modification is proposed if the emissions from the existing facility
will not be affected by the modification. Otherwise use the same parameters as for major modification.
\5\ See paragraph 9.2.3(c).
\6\ See paragraph 9.2.3(d).
\7\ Unless it is determined that this period is not representative.
\8\ For those permitted sources not in operation or that have not established an appropriate factor, continuous
operation (i.e., 8760) should be used.
\9\ Generally, the ambient impacts from non-nearby (background) sources can be represented by air quality data
unless adequate data do not exist.
9.2 Background Concentrations
9.2.1 Discussion
a. Background concentrations are an essential part of the total air
quality concentration to be considered in determining source impacts.
Background air quality includes pollutant concentrations due to: (1)
Natural sources; (2) nearby sources other than the one(s) currently
under consideration; and (3) unidentified sources.
b. Typically, air quality data should be used to establish
background concentrations in the vicinity of the source(s) under
consideration. The monitoring network used for background determinations
should conform to the same quality assurance and other requirements as
those networks established for PSD purposes.\91\ An appropriate data
validation procedure should be applied to the data prior to use.
c. If the source is not isolated, it may be necessary to use a
multi-source model to establish the impact of nearby sources. Since
sources don't typically operate at their maximum allowable capacity
(which may include the use of ``dirtier'' fuels), modeling is necessary
to express the potential contribution of background sources, and this
impact would not be captured via monitoring. Background concentrations
should be determined for each critical (concentration) averaging time.
9.2.2 Recommendations (Isolated Single Source)
a. Two options (paragraph (b) or (c) of this section) are available
to determine the background concentration near isolated sources.
b. Use air quality data collected in the vicinity of the source to
determine the background concentration for the averaging times of
concern. Determine the mean background concentration at each monitor by
excluding values when the source in question is impacting the monitor.
The mean annual background is the average of the annual concentrations
so determined at each monitor. For shorter averaging periods, the
meteorological conditions accompanying the concentrations of concern
should be identified. Concentrations for meteorological conditions of
concern, at monitors not impacted by the source in question, should be
averaged for each separate averaging time to determine the average
background value. Monitoring sites inside a 90[deg] sector downwind of
the source may be used to determine the area of impact. One hour
concentrations may be added and averaged to determine longer averaging
periods.
c. If there are no monitors located in the vicinity of the source, a
``regional site'' may be used to determine background. A ``regional
site'' is one that is located away from the area of interest but is
impacted by similar natural and distant man-made sources.
9.2.3 Recommendations (Multi-Source Areas)
a. In multi-source areas, two components of background should be
determined: Contributions from nearby sources and contributions from
other sources.
b. Nearby Sources: All sources expected to cause a significant
concentration gradient in the vicinity of the source or sources under
consideration for emission limit(s) should be explicitly modeled. The
number of such sources is expected to be small except in unusual
situations. Owing to both the uniqueness of each modeling situation and
the large number of variables involved in identifying nearby sources, no
attempt is made here to comprehensively define this term. Rather,
identification of nearby sources calls for the exercise of professional
judgement by the appropriate reviewing authority (paragraph 3.0(b)).
This guidance is not intended to alter the exercise of that judgement or
to comprehensively define which sources are nearby sources.
c. For compliance with the short-term and annual ambient standards,
the nearby sources as well as the primary source(s) should be evaluated
using an appropriate Appendix A model with the emission input data shown
in Table 9-1 or 9-2. When modeling a nearby source that does not have a
permit and the emission limit contained in the SIP for a particular
source category is greater than the emissions possible given the
source's maximum physical capacity to emit, the ``maximum allowable
emission limit'' for such a nearby source may be calculated as the
emission rate representative
[[Page 489]]
of the nearby source's maximum physical capacity to emit, considering
its design specifications and allowable fuels and process materials.
However, the burden is on the permit applicant to sufficiently document
what the maximum physical capacity to emit is for such a nearby source.
d. It is appropriate to model nearby sources only during those times
when they, by their nature, operate at the same time as the primary
source(s) being modeled. Where a primary source believes that a nearby
source does not, by its nature, operate at the same time as the primary
source being modeled, the burden is on the primary source to demonstrate
to the satisfaction of the appropriate reviewing authority (paragraph
3.0(b)) that this is, in fact, the case. Whether or not the primary
source has adequately demonstrated that fact is a matter of professional
judgement left to the discretion of the appropriate reviewing authority.
The following examples illustrate two cases in which a nearby source may
be shown not to operate at the same time as the primary source(s) being
modeled. Some sources are only used during certain seasons of the year.
Those sources would not be modeled as nearby sources during times in
which they do not operate. Similarly, emergency backup generators that
never operate simultaneously with the sources that they back up would
not be modeled as nearby sources. To reiterate, in these examples and
other appropriate cases, the burden is on the primary source being
modeled to make the appropriate demonstration to the satisfaction of the
appropriate reviewing authority.
e. The impact of the nearby sources should be examined at locations
where interactions between the plume of the point source under
consideration and those of nearby sources (plus natural background) can
occur. Significant locations include: (1) The area of maximum impact of
the point source; (2) the area of maximum impact of nearby sources; and
(3) the area where all sources combine to cause maximum impact. These
locations may be identified through trial and error analyses.
f. Other Sources: That portion of the background attributable to all
other sources (e.g., natural sources, minor sources and distant major
sources) should be determined by the procedures found in subsection
9.2.2 or by application of a model using Table 9-1 or 9-2.
9.3 Meteorological Input Data
a. The meteorological data used as input to a dispersion model
should be selected on the basis of spatial and climatological (temporal)
representativeness as well as the ability of the individual parameters
selected to characterize the transport and dispersion conditions in the
area of concern. The representativeness of the data is dependent on: (1)
The proximity of the meteorological monitoring site to the area under
consideration; (2) the complexity of the terrain; (3) the exposure of
the meteorological monitoring site; and (4) the period of time during
which data are collected. The spatial representativeness of the data can
be adversely affected by large distances between the source and
receptors of interest and the complex topographic characteristics of the
area. Temporal representativeness is a function of the year-to-year
variations in weather conditions. Where appropriate, data
representativeness should be viewed in terms of the appropriateness of
the data for constructing realistic boundary layer profiles and three
dimensional meteorological fields, as described in paragraphs (c) and
(d) below.
b. Model input data are normally obtained either from the National
Weather Service or as part of a site specific measurement program. Local
universities, Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), military stations,
industry and pollution control agencies may also be sources of such
data. Some recommendations for the use of each type of data are included
in this subsection.
c. For long range transport modeling assessments (subsection 7.2.3)
or for assessments where the transport winds are complex and the
application involves a non-steady-state dispersion model (subsection
8.2.8), use of output from prognostic mesoscale meteorological models is
encouraged.92, 93, 94 Some diagnostic meteorological
processors are designed to appropriately blend available NWS comparable
meteorological observations, local site specific meteorological
observations, and prognostic mesoscale meteorological data, using
empirical relationships, to diagnostically adjust the wind field for
mesoscale and local-scale effects. These diagnostic adjustments can
sometimes be improved through the use of strategically placed site
specific meteorological observations. The placement of these special
meteorological observations (often more than one location is needed)
involves expert judgement, and is specific to the terrain and land use
of the modeling domain. Acceptance for use of output from prognostic
mesoscale meteorological models is contingent on concurrence by the
appropriate reviewing authorities (paragraph 3.0(b)) that the data are
of acceptable quality, which can be demonstrated through statistical
comparisons with observations of winds aloft and at the surface at
several appropriate locations.
9.3.1 Length of Record of Meteorological Data
9.3.1.1 Discussion
a. The model user should acquire enough meteorological data to
ensure that worst-case meteorological conditions are adequately
represented in the model results.
[[Page 490]]
The trend toward statistically based standards suggests a need for all
meteorological conditions to be adequately represented in the data set
selected for model input. The number of years of record needed to obtain
a stable distribution of conditions depends on the variable being
measured and has been estimated by Landsberg and Jacobs \95\ for various
parameters. Although that study indicates in excess of 10 years may be
required to achieve stability in the frequency distributions of some
meteorological variables, such long periods are not reasonable for model
input data. This is due in part to the fact that hourly data in model
input format are frequently not available for such periods and that
hourly calculations of concentration for long periods may be
prohibitively expensive. Another study \96\ compared various periods
from a 17-year data set to determine the minimum number of years of data
needed to approximate the concentrations modeled with a 17-year period
of meteorological data from one station. This study indicated that the
variability of model estimates due to the meteorological data input was
adequately reduced if a 5-year period of record of meteorological input
was used.
9.3.1.2 Recommendations
a. Five years of representative meteorological data should be used
when estimating concentrations with an air quality model. Consecutive
years from the most recent, readily available 5-year period are
preferred. The meteorological data should be adequately representative,
and may be site specific or from a nearby NWS station. Where
professional judgment indicates NWS-collected ASOS (automated surface
observing stations) data are inadequate {for cloud cover observations,
the most recent 5 years of NWS data that are observer-based may be
considered for use.
b. The use of 5 years of NWS meteorological data or at least l year
of site specific data is required. If one year or more (including
partial years), up to five years, of site specific data is available,
these data are preferred for use in air quality analyses. Such data
should have been subjected to quality assurance procedures as described
in subsection 9.3.3.2.
c. For permitted sources whose emission limitations are based on a
specific year of meteorological data, that year should be added to any
longer period being used (e.g., 5 years of NWS data) when modeling the
facility at a later time.
d. For LRT situations (subsection 7.2.3) and for complex wind
situations (paragraph 8.2.8(a)), if only NWS or comparable standard
meteorological observations are employed, five years of meteorological
data (within and near the modeling domain) should be used. Consecutive
years from the most recent, readily available 5-year period are
preferred. Less than five, but at least three, years of meteorological
data (need not be consecutive) may be used if mesoscale meteorological
fields are available, as discussed in paragraph 9.3(c). These mesoscale
meteorological fields should be used in conjunction with available
standard NWS or comparable meteorological observations within and near
the modeling domain. If site specific meteorological data are available,
these data may be especially helpful for local-scale complex wind
situations, when appropriately blended together with standard NWS or
comparable observations and mesoscale meteorological fields.
9.3.2 National Weather Service Data
9.3.2.1 Discussion
a. The NWS meteorological data are routinely available and familiar
to most model users. Although the NWS does not provide direct
measurements of all the needed dispersion model input variables, methods
have been developed and successfully used to translate the basic NWS
data to the needed model input. Site specific measurements of model
input parameters have been made for many modeling studies, and those
methods and techniques are becoming more widely applied, especially in
situations such as complex terrain applications, where available NWS
data are not adequately representative. However, there are many model
applications where NWS data are adequately representative, and the
applications still rely heavily on the NWS data.
b. Many models use the standard hourly weather observations
available from the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC). These
observations are then preprocessed before they can be used in the
models.
9.3.2.2 Recommendations
a. The preferred models listed in Appendix A all accept as input the
NWS meteorological data preprocessed into model compatible form. If NWS
data are judged to be adequately representative for a particular
modeling application, they may be used. NCDC makes available surface
\97,98\ and upper air \99\ meteorological data in CD-ROM format.
b. Although most NWS measurements are made at a standard height of
10 meters, the actual anemometer height should be used as input to the
preferred model.
c. Wind directions observed by the National Weather Service are
reported to the nearest 10 degrees. A specific set of randomly generated
numbers has been developed for use with the preferred EPA models and
should be used with NWS data to ensure a lack of bias in wind direction
assignments within the models.
d. Data from universities, FAA, military stations, industry and
pollution control
[[Page 491]]
agencies may be used if such data are equivalent in accuracy and detail
to the NWS data, and they are judged to be adequately representative for
the particular application.
9.3.3 Site Specific Data
9.3.3.1 Discussion
a. Spatial or geographical representativeness is best achieved by
collection of all of the needed model input data in close proximity to
the actual site of the source(s). Site specific measured data are
therefore preferred as model input, provided that appropriate
instrumentation and quality assurance procedures are followed and that
the data collected are adequately representative (free from
inappropriate local or microscale influences) and compatible with the
input requirements of the model to be used. It should be noted that,
while site specific measurements are frequently made ``on-property''
(i.e., on the source's premises), acquisition of adequately
representative site specific data does not preclude collection of data
from a location off property. Conversely, collection of meteorological
data on a source's property does not of itself guarantee adequate
representativeness. For help in determining representativeness of site
specific measurements, technical guidance \100\ is available. Site
specific data should always be reviewed for representativeness and
consistency by a qualified meteorologist.
9.3.3.2 Recommendations
a. EPA guidance\100\ provides recommendations on the collection and
use of site specific meteorological data. Recommendations on
characteristics, siting, and exposure of meteorological instruments and
on data recording, processing, completeness requirements, reporting, and
archiving are also included. This publication should be used as a
supplement to other limited guidance on these subjects.\91,101,102\
Detailed information on quality assurance is also available.\103\ As a
minimum, site specific measurements of ambient air temperature,
transport wind speed and direction, and the variables necessary to
estimate atmospheric dispersion should be available in meteorological
data sets to be used in modeling. Care should be taken to ensure that
meteorological instruments are located to provide representative
characterization of pollutant transport between sources and receptors of
interest. The appropriate reviewing authority (paragraph 3.0(b)) is
available to help determine the appropriateness of the measurement
locations.
b. All site specific data should be reduced to hourly averages.
Table 9-3 lists the wind related parameters and the averaging time
requirements.
c. Missing Data Substitution. After valid data retrieval
requirements have been met \100\, hours in the record having missing
data should be treated according to an established data substitution
protocol provided that data from an adequately representative
alternative site are available. Such protocols are usually part of the
approved monitoring program plan. Data substitution guidance is provided
in Section 5.3 of reference 100. If no representative alternative data
are available for substitution, the absent data should be coded as
missing using missing data codes appropriate to the applicable
meteorological pre-processor. Appropriate model options for treating
missing data, if available in the model, should be employed.
d. Solar Radiation Measurements. Total solar radiation or net
radiation should be measured with a reliable pyranometer or net
radiometer, sited and operated in accordance with established site
specific meteorological guidance.\100,103\
e. Temperature Measurements. Temperature measurements should be made
at standard shelter height (2m) in accordance with established site
specific meteorological guidance.\100\
f. Temperature Difference Measurements. Temperature difference
([delta]T) measurements should be obtained using matched thermometers or
a reliable thermocouple system to achieve adequate accuracy. Siting,
probe placement, and operation of [delta]T systems should be based on
guidance found in Chapter 3 of reference 100, and such guidance should
be followed when obtaining vertical temperature gradient data.
g. Winds Aloft. For simulation of plume rise and dispersion of a
plume emitted from a stack, characterization of the wind profile up
through the layer in which the plume disperses is required. This is
especially important in complex terrain and/or complex wind situations
where wind measurements at heights up to hundreds of meters above stack
base may be required in some circumstances. For tall stacks when site
specific data are needed, these winds have been obtained traditionally
using meteorological sensors mounted on tall towers. A feasible
alternative to tall towers is the use of meteorological remote sensing
instruments (e.g., acoustic sounders or radar wind profilers) to provide
winds aloft, coupled with 10-meter towers to provide the near-surface
winds. (For specific requirements for CTDMPLUS, see Appendix A.)
Specifications for wind measuring instruments and systems are contained
in reference 100.
h. Turbulence. There are several dispersion models that are capable
of using direct measurements of turbulence (wind fluctuations) in the
characterization of the vertical and lateral dispersion (e.g., CTDMPLUS
and CALPUFF). For specific requirements for CTDMPLUS and CALPUFF, see
Appendix A. For technical guidance on measurement and processing of
turbulence parameters, see reference 100. When turbulence data are used
in
[[Page 492]]
this manner to directly characterize the vertical and lateral
dispersion, the averaging time for the turbulence measurements should be
one hour (Table 9-3). There are other dispersion models (e.g., BLP, and
CALINE3) that employ P-G stability categories for the characterization
of the vertical and lateral dispersion. Methods for using site specific
turbulence data for the characterization of P-G stability categories are
discussed in reference 100. When turbulence data are used in this manner
to determine the P-G stability category, the averaging time for the
turbulence measurements should be 15 minutes.
i. Stability Categories. For dispersion models that employ P-G
stability categories for the characterization of the vertical and
lateral dispersion (e.g., ISC3), the P-G stability categories, as
originally defined, couple near-surface measurements of wind speed with
subjectively determined insolation assessments based on hourly cloud
cover and ceiling height observations. The wind speed measurements are
made at or near 10m. The insolation rate is typically assessed using
observations of cloud cover and ceiling height based on criteria
outlined by Turner.\77\ It is recommended that the P-G stability
category be estimated using the Turner method with site specific wind
speed measured at or near 10m and representative cloud cover and ceiling
height. Implementation of the Turner method, as well as considerations
in determining representativeness of cloud cover and ceiling height in
cases for which site specific cloud observations are unavailable, may be
found in Section 6 of reference 100. In the absence of requisite data to
implement the Turner method, the SRDT method or wind fluctuation
statistics (i.e., the [sigma]E and [sigma]A
methods) may be used.
j. The SRDT method, described in Section 6.4.4.2 of reference 100,
is modified slightly from that published from earlier work \104\ and has
been evaluated with three site specific data bases.105 The
two methods of stability classification which use wind fluctuation
statistics, the [sigma]E and [sigma]A methods, are
also described in detail in Section 6.4.4 of reference 100 (note
applicable tables in Section 6). For additional information on the wind
fluctuation methods, several references are
available.\106,\\107,\\108,\\109,\
k. Meteorological Data Preprocessors. The following meteorological
preprocessors are recommended by EPA: PCRAMMET,\110\ MPRM,\111\
METPRO,\112\ and CALMET.\113\ PCRAMMET is the recommended meteorological
preprocessor for use in applications employing hourly NWS data. MPRM is
a general purpose meteorological data preprocessor which supports
regulatory models requiring PCRAMMET formatted (NWS) data. MPRM is
available for use in applications employing site specific meteorological
data. The latest version (MPRM 1.3) has been configured to implement the
SRDT method for estimating P-G stability categories. METPRO is the
required meteorological data preprocessor for use with CTDMPLUS. CALMET
is available for use with applications of CALPUFF. All of the above
mentioned data preprocessors are available for downloading from EPA's
Internet SCRAM Web site (subsection 2.3).
Table 9-3--Averaging Times for Site Specific Wind and Turbulence
Measurements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parameter Averaging time (in hours)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Surface wind speed (for use in stability 1
determinations).
Transport direction....................... 1
Dilution wind speed....................... 1
Turbulence measurements ([sigma]E and \1\ 1
[sigma]A) for use in stability
determinations.
Turbulence Measurements for direct input 1
to dispersion models.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ To minimize meander effects in [sigma]A when wind conditions are
light and/or variable, determine the hourly average [sigma] value from
four sequential 15-minute [sigma]'s according to the following
formula:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR15AP03.073
9.3.4 Treatment of Near-calms and Calms
9.3.4.1 Discussion
a. Treatment of calm or light and variable wind poses a special
problem in model applications since steady-state Gaussian plume models
assume that concentration is inversely proportional to wind speed.
Furthermore, concentrations may become unrealistically large when wind
speeds less than l m/s are input to the model. Procedures have been
developed to prevent the occurrence of overly conservative concentration
estimates during periods of calms. These procedures acknowledge that a
steady-state Gaussian plume model does not apply during calm conditions,
and that our knowledge of wind patterns and plume behavior during these
conditions does not, at present, permit the development of a better
technique. Therefore, the procedures disregard hours which are
identified as calm. The hour is treated as missing and a convention for
handling missing hours is recommended.
9.3.4.2 Recommendations
a. Hourly concentrations calculated with steady-state Gaussian plume
models using calms should not be considered valid; the wind and
concentration estimates for these hours should be disregarded and
considered to be missing. Critical concentrations for 3-, 8-, and 24-
hour averages should be calculated by dividing the sum of the hourly
[[Page 493]]
concentrations for the period by the number of valid or non-missing
hours. If the total number of valid hours is less than 18 for 24-hour
averages, less than 6 for 8-hour averages or less than 3 for 3-hour
averages, the total concentration should be divided by 18 for the 24-
hour average, 6 for the 8-hour average and 3 for the 3-hour average. For
annual averages, the sum of all valid hourly concentrations is divided
by the number of non-calm hours during the year. For models listed in
Appendix A, a post-processor computer program, CALMPRO \114\ has been
prepared, is available on the SCRAM Internet Web site (subsection 2.3),
and should be used.
b. Stagnant conditions that include extended periods of calms often
produce high concentrations over wide areas for relatively long
averaging periods. The standard steady-state Gaussian plume models are
often not applicable to such situations. When stagnation conditions are
of concern, other modeling techniques should be considered on a case-by-
case basis (see also subsection 8.2.8).
c. When used in steady-state Gaussian plume models, measured site
specific wind speeds of less than l m/s but higher than the response
threshold of the instrument should be input as l m/s; the corresponding
wind direction should also be input. Wind observations below the
response threshold of the instrument should be set to zero, with the
input file in ASCII format. In all cases involving steady-state Gaussian
plume models, calm hours should be treated as missing, and
concentrations should be calculated as in paragraph (a) of this
subsection.
10.0 Accuracy and Uncertainty of Models
10.1 Discussion
a. Increasing reliance has been placed on concentration estimates
from models as the primary basis for regulatory decisions concerning
source permits and emission control requirements. In many situations,
such as review of a proposed source, no practical alternative exists.
Therefore, there is an obvious need to know how accurate models really
are and how any uncertainty in the estimates affects regulatory
decisions. During the 1980's, attempts were made to encourage
development of standardized evaluation methods.\16\,\115\ EPA recognized
the need for incorporating such information and has sponsored workshops
\116\ on model accuracy, the possible ways to quantify accuracy, and on
considerations in the incorporation of model accuracy and uncertainty in
the regulatory process. The Second (EPA) Conference on Air Quality
Modeling, August 1982,\117\ was devoted to that subject.
b. To better deduce the statistical significance of differences seen
in model performance in the face of unaccounted for uncertainties and
variations, investigators have more recently explored the use of
bootstrap techniques.118, 119 Work is underway to develop a
new generation of evaluation metrics \24\ that takes into account the
statistical differences (in error distributions) between model
predictions and observations.\120\ Even though the procedures and
measures are still evolving to describe performance of models that
characterize atmospheric fate, transport and diffusion
121, 122, 123 there has been general acceptance of a need to
address the uncertainties inherent in atmospheric processes.
10.1.1 Overview of Model Uncertainty
a. Dispersion models generally attempt to estimate concentrations at
specific sites that really represent an ensemble average of numerous
repetitions of the same event.\24\ The event is characterized by
measured or ``known'' conditions that are input to the models, e.g.,
wind speed, mixed layer height, surface heat flux, emission
characteristics, etc. However, in addition to the known conditions,
there are unmeasured or unknown variations in the conditions of this
event, e.g., unresolved details of the atmospheric flow such as the
turbulent velocity field. These unknown conditions, may vary among
repetitions of the event. As a result, deviations in observed
concentrations from their ensemble average, and from the concentrations
estimated by the model, are likely to occur even though the known
conditions are fixed. Even with a perfect model that predicts the
correct ensemble average, there are likely to be deviations from the
observed concentrations in individual repetitions of the event, due to
variations in the unknown conditions. The statistics of these
concentration residuals are termed ``inherent'' uncertainty. Available
evidence suggests that this source of uncertainty alone may be
responsible for a typical range of variation in concentrations of as
much as 50 percent.\124\
b. Moreover, there is ``reducible'' uncertainty \115\ associated
with the model and its input conditions; neither models nor data bases
are perfect. Reducible uncertainties are caused by: (1) Uncertainties in
the input values of the known conditions (i.e., emission characteristics
and meteorological data); (2) errors in the measured concentrations
which are used to compute the concentration residuals; and (3)
inadequate model physics and formulation. The ``reducible''
uncertainties can be minimized through better (more accurate and more
representative) measurements and better model physics.
c. To use the terminology correctly, reference to model accuracy
should be limited to that portion of reducible uncertainty which deals
with the physics and the formulation of the model. The accuracy of the
model is normally determined by an evaluation procedure which involves
the comparison of model concentration estimates with
[[Page 494]]
measured air quality data.\125\ The statement of accuracy is based on
statistical tests or performance measures such as bias, noise,
correlation, etc.\16\ However, information that allows a distinction
between contributions of the various elements of inherent and reducible
uncertainty is only now beginning to emerge.\24\ As a result most
discussions of the accuracy of models make no quantitative distinction
between (1) limitations of the model versus (2) limitations of the data
base and of knowledge concerning atmospheric variability. The reader
should be aware that statements on model accuracy and uncertainty may
imply the need for improvements in model performance that even the
``perfect'' model could not satisfy.
10.1.2 Studies of Model Accuracy
a. A number of studies\126,127\ have been conducted to examine model
accuracy, particularly with respect to the reliability of short-term
concentrations required for ambient standard and increment evaluations.
The results of these studies are not surprising. Basically, they confirm
what expert atmospheric scientists have said for some time: (1) Models
are more reliable for estimating longer time-averaged concentrations
than for estimating short-term concentrations at specific locations; and
(2) the models are reasonably reliable in estimating the magnitude of
highest concentrations occurring sometime, somewhere within an area. For
example, errors in highest estimated concentrations of 10 to 40 percent are found to be typical \128,129\,
i.e., certainly well within the often quoted factor-of-two accuracy that
has long been recognized for these models. However, estimates of
concentrations that occur at a specific time and site, are poorly
correlated with actually observed concentrations and are much less
reliable.
b. As noted above, poor correlations between paired concentrations
at fixed stations may be due to ``reducible'' uncertainties in knowledge
of the precise plume location and to unquantified inherent
uncertainties. For example, Pasquill \130\ estimates that, apart from
data input errors, maximum ground-level concentrations at a given hour
for a point source in flat terrain could be in error by 50 percent due
to these uncertainties. Uncertainty of five to 10 degrees in the
measured wind direction, which transports the plume, can result in
concentration errors of 20 to 70 percent for a particular time and
location, depending on stability and station location. Such
uncertainties do not indicate that an estimated concentration does not
occur, only that the precise time and locations are in doubt.
10.1.3 Use of Uncertainty in Decision-Making
a. The accuracy of model estimates varies with the model used, the
type of application, and site specific characteristics. Thus, it is
desirable to quantify the accuracy or uncertainty associated with
concentration estimates used in decision-making. Communications between
modelers and decision-makers must be fostered and further developed.
Communications concerning concentration estimates currently exist in
most cases, but the communications dealing with the accuracy of models
and its meaning to the decision-maker are limited by the lack of a
technical basis for quantifying and directly including uncertainty in
decisions. Procedures for quantifying and interpreting uncertainty in
the practical application of such concepts are only beginning to evolve;
much study is still required.115,116,117,131,132
b. In all applications of models an effort is encouraged to identify
the reliability of the model estimates for that particular area and to
determine the magnitude and sources of error associated with the use of
the model. The analyst is responsible for recognizing and quantifying
limitations in the accuracy, precision and sensitivity of the procedure.
Information that might be useful to the decision-maker in recognizing
the seriousness of potential air quality violations includes such model
accuracy estimates as accuracy of peak predictions, bias, noise,
correlation, frequency distribution, spatial extent of high
concentration, etc. Both space/time pairing of estimates and
measurements and unpaired comparisons are recommended. Emphasis should
be on the highest concentrations and the averaging times of the
standards or increments of concern. Where possible, confidence intervals
about the statistical values should be provided. However, while such
information can be provided by the modeler to the decision-maker, it is
unclear how this information should be used to make an air pollution
control decision. Given a range of possible outcomes, it is easiest and
tends to ensure consistency if the decision-maker confines his judgement
to use of the ``best estimate'' provided by the modeler (i.e., the
design concentration estimated by a model recommended in the Guideline
or an alternate model of known accuracy). This is an indication of the
practical limitations imposed by current abilities of the technical
community.
c. To improve the basis for decision-making, EPA has developed and
is continuing to study procedures for determining the accuracy of
models, quantifying the uncertainty, and expressing confidence levels in
decisions that are made concerning emissions controls.\133,134\ However,
work in this area involves ``breaking new ground'' with slow and
sporadic progress likely. As a result, it may
[[Page 495]]
be necessary to continue using the ``best estimate'' until sufficient
technical progress has been made to meaningfully implement such concepts
dealing with uncertainty.
10.1.4 Evaluation of Models
a. A number of actions have been taken to ensure that the best model
is used correctly for each regulatory application and that a model is
not arbitrarily imposed. First, the Guideline clearly recommends the
most appropriate model be used in each case. Preferred models, based on
a number of factors, are identified for many uses. General guidance on
using alternatives to the preferred models is also provided. Second, the
models have been subjected to a systematic performance evaluation and a
peer scientific review. Statistical performance measures, including
measures of difference (or residuals) such as bias, variance of
difference and gross variability of the difference, and measures of
correlation such as time, space, and time and space combined as
recommended by the AMS Woods Hole Workshop \16\, were generally
followed. Third, more specific information has been provided for
justifying the site specific use of alternative models in previously
cited EPA guidance \22,25\, and new models are under consideration and
review.\24\ Together these documents provide methods that allow a
judgement to be made as to what models are most appropriate for a
specific application. For the present, performance and the theoretical
evaluation of models are being used as an indirect means to quantify one
element of uncertainty in air pollution regulatory decisions.
b. EPA has participated in a series of conferences entitled,
``Harmonisation within Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling for Regulatory
Purposes.'' \135\ for the purpose of promoting the development of
improved methods for the characterization of model performance. There is
a consensus developing on what should be considered in the evaluation of
air quality models \136\, namely quality assurance planning,
documentation and scrutiny should be consistent with the intended use,
and should include:
Scientific peer review;
Supportive analyses (diagnostic evaluations, code
verification, sensitivity and uncertainty analyses);
Diagnostic and performance evaluations with data
obtained in trial locations, and
Statistical performance evaluations in the
circumstances of the intended applications.
Performance evaluations and diagnostic evaluations assess different
qualities of how well a model is performing, and both are needed to
establish credibility within the client and scientific community.
Performance evaluations allow us to decide how well the model simulates
the average temporal and spatial patterns seen in the observations, and
employ large spatial/temporal scale data sets (e.g., national data
sets). Performance evaluations also allow determination of relative
performance of a model in comparison with alternative modeling systems.
Diagnostic evaluations allow determination of a model capability to
simulate individual processes that affect the results, and usually
employ smaller spatial/temporal scale date sets (e.g., field studies).
Diagnostic evaluations allow us to decide if we get the right answer for
the right reason. The objective comparison of modeled concentrations
with observed field data provides only a partial means for assessing
model performance. Due to the limited supply of evaluation data sets,
there are severe practical limits in assessing model performance. For
this reason, the conclusions reached in the science peer reviews and the
supportive analyses have particular relevance in deciding whether a
model will be useful for its intended purposes.
c. To extend information from diagnostic and performance
evaluations, sensitivity and uncertainty analyses are encouraged since
they can provide additional information on the effect of inaccuracies in
the data bases and on the uncertainty in model estimates. Sensitivity
analyses can aid in determining the effect of inaccuracies of variations
or uncertainties in the data bases on the range of likely
concentrations. Uncertainty analyses can aid in determining the range of
likely concentration values, resulting from uncertainties in the model
inputs, the model formulations, and parameterizations. Such information
may be used to determine source impact and to evaluate control
strategies. Where possible, information from such sensitivity analyses
should be made available to the decision-maker with an appropriate
interpretation of the effect on the critical concentrations.
10.2 Recommendations
a. No specific guidance on the quantification of model uncertainty
for use in decision-making is being given at this time. As procedures
for considering uncertainty develop and become implementable, this
guidance will be changed and expanded. For the present, continued use of
the ``best estimate'' is acceptable; however, in specific circumstances
for O3, PM-2.5 and regional haze, additional information and/
or procedures may be appropriate.\41, 42\
11.0 Regulatory Application of Models
11.1 Discussion
a. Procedures with respect to the review and analysis of air quality
modeling and data analyses in support of SIP revisions, PSD permitting
or other regulatory requirements need a certain amount of
standardization to ensure consistency in the depth and
[[Page 496]]
comprehensiveness of both the review and the analysis itself. This
section recommends procedures that permit some degree of standardization
while at the same time allowing the flexibility needed to assure the
technically best analysis for each regulatory application.
b. Dispersion model estimates, especially with the support of
measured air quality data, are the preferred basis for air quality
demonstrations. Nevertheless, there are instances where the performance
of recommended dispersion modeling techniques, by comparison with
observed air quality data, may be shown to be less than acceptable.
Also, there may be no recommended modeling procedure suitable for the
situation. In these instances, emission limitations may be established
solely on the basis of observed air quality data as would be applied to
a modeling analysis. The same care should be given to the analyses of
the air quality data as would be applied to a modeling analysis.
c. The current NAAQS for SO2 and CO are both stated in
terms of a concentration not to be exceeded more than once a year. There
is only an annual standard for NO2 and a quarterly standard
for Pb. Standards for fine particulate matter (PM-2.5) are expressed in
terms of both long-term (annual) and short-term (daily) averages. The
long-term standard is calculated using the three year average of the
annual averages while the short-term standard is calculated using the
three year average of the 98th percentile of the daily average
concentration. For PM-10, the convention is to compare the arithmetic
mean, averaged over 3 consecutive years, with the concentration
specified in the NAAQS (50 [mu]g/m\3\). The 24-hour NAAQS (150 [mu]g/
m\3\) is met if, over a 3-year period, there is (on average) no more
than one exceedance per year. For ozone the short term 1-hour standard
is expressed in terms of an expected exceedance limit while the short
term 8-hour standard is expressed in terms of a three year average of
the annual fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour value. The NAAQS are
subjected to extensive review and possible revision every 5 years.
d. This section discusses general requirements for concentration
estimates and identifies the relationship to emission limits. The
following recommendations apply to: (1) Revisions of State
Implementation Plans and (2) the review of new sources and the
prevention of significant deterioration (PSD).
11.2 Recommendations
11.2.1 Analysis Requirements
a. Every effort should be made by the Regional Office to meet with
all parties involved in either a SIP revision or a PSD permit
application prior to the start of any work on such a project. During
this meeting, a protocol should be established between the preparing and
reviewing parties to define the procedures to be followed, the data to
be collected, the model to be used, and the analysis of the source and
concentration data. An example of requirements for such an effort is
contained in the Air Quality Analysis Checklist posted on EPA's Internet
SCRAM Web site (subsection 2.3). This checklist suggests the level of
detail required to assess the air quality resulting from the proposed
action. Special cases may require additional data collection or analysis
and this should be determined and agreed upon at this preapplication
meeting. The protocol should be written and agreed upon by the parties
concerned, although a formal legal document is not intended. Changes in
such a protocol are often required as the data collection and analysis
progresses. However, the protocol establishes a common understanding of
the requirements.
b. An air quality analysis should begin with a screening model to
determine the potential of the proposed source or control strategy to
violate the PSD increment or NAAQS. For traditional stationary sources,
EPA guidance \27\ should be followed. Guidance is also available for
mobile sources.\57\
c. If the concentration estimates from screening techniques indicate
that the PSD increment or NAAQS may be approached or exceeded, then a
more refined modeling analysis is appropriate and the model user should
select a model according to recommendations in Sections 4-8. In some
instances, no refined technique may be specified in this guide for the
situation. The model user is then encouraged to submit a model developed
specifically for the case at hand. If that is not possible, a screening
technique may supply the needed results.
d. Regional Offices should require permit applicants to incorporate
the pollutant contributions of all sources into their analysis. Where
necessary this may include emissions associated with growth in the area
of impact of the new or modified source. PSD air quality assessments
should consider the amount of the allowable air quality increment that
has already been consumed by other sources. Therefore, the most recent
source applicant should model the existing or permitted sources in
addition to the one currently under consideration. This would permit the
use of newly acquired data or improved modeling techniques if such have
become available since the last source was permitted. When remodeling,
the worst case used in the previous modeling analysis should be one set
of conditions modeled in the new analysis. All sources should be modeled
for each set of meteorological conditions selected.
[[Page 497]]
11.2.2 Use of Measured Data in Lieu of Model Estimates
a. Modeling is the preferred method for determining emission
limitations for both new and existing sources. When a preferred model is
available, model results alone (including background) are sufficient.
Monitoring will normally not be accepted as the sole basis for emission
limitation. In some instances when the modeling technique available is
only a screening technique, the addition of air quality data to the
analysis may lend credence to model results.
b. There are circumstances where there is no applicable model, and
measured data may need to be used. However, only in the case of an
existing source should monitoring data alone be a basis for emission
limits. In addition, the following items (i-vi) should be considered
prior to the acceptance of the measured data:
i. Does a monitoring network exist for the pollutants and averaging
times of concern?
ii. Has the monitoring network been designed to locate points of
maximum concentration?
iii. Do the monitoring network and the data reduction and storage
procedures meet EPA monitoring and quality assurance requirements?
iv. Do the data set and the analysis allow impact of the most
important individual sources to be identified if more than one source or
emission point is involved?
v. Is at least one full year of valid ambient data available?
vi. Can it be demonstrated through the comparison of monitored data
with model results that available models are not applicable?
c. The number of monitors required is a function of the problem
being considered. The source configuration, terrain configuration, and
meteorological variations all have an impact on number and placement of
monitors. Decisions can only be made on a case-by-case basis. Guidance
is available for establishing criteria for demonstrating that a model is
not applicable.\22\
d. Sources should obtain approval from the appropriate reviewing
authority (paragraph 3.0(b)) for the monitoring network prior to the
start of monitoring. A monitoring protocol agreed to by all concerned
parties is highly desirable. The design of the network, the number, type
and location of the monitors, the sampling period, averaging time as
well as the need for meteorological monitoring or the use of mobile
sampling or plume tracking techniques, should all be specified in the
protocol and agreed upon prior to start-up of the network.
11.2.3 Emission Limits
11.2.3.1 Design Concentrations
a. Emission limits should be based on concentration estimates for
the averaging time that results in the most stringent control
requirements. The concentration used in specifying emission limits is
called the design value or design concentration and is a sum of the
concentration contributed by the source and the background
concentration.
b. To determine the averaging time for the design value, the most
restrictive NAAQS should be identified by calculating, for each
averaging time, the ratio of the difference between the applicable NAAQS
(S) and the background concentration (B) to the (model) predicted
concentration (P) (i.e., (S-B)/P). The averaging time with the lowest
ratio identifies the most restrictive standard. If the annual average is
the most restrictive, the highest estimated annual average concentration
from one or a number of years of data is the design value. When short
term standards are most restrictive, it may be necessary to consider a
broader range of concentrations than the highest value. For example, for
pollutants such as SO2, the highest, second-highest
concentration is the design value. For pollutants with statistically
based NAAQS, the design value is found by determining the more
restrictive of: (1) The short-term concentration over the period
specified in the standard, or (2) the long-term concentration that is
not expected to exceed the long-term NAAQS. Determination of design
values for PM-10 is presented in more detail in EPA guidance.\43\
11.2.3.2 NAAQS Analyses for New or Modified Sources
a. For new or modified sources predicted to have a significant
ambient impact \91\ and to be located in areas designated attainment or
unclassifiable for the SO2, Pb, NO2, or CO NAAQS,
the demonstration as to whether the source will cause or contribute to
an air quality violation should be based on: (1) The highest estimated
annual average concentration determined from annual averages of
individual years; or (2) the highest, second-highest estimated
concentration for averaging times of 24-hours or less; and (3) the
significance of the spatial and temporal contribution to any modeled
violation. For Pb, the highest estimated concentration based on an
individual calendar quarter averaging period should be used. Background
concentrations should be added to the estimated impact of the source.
The most restrictive standard should be used in all cases to assess the
threat of an air quality violation. For new or modified sources
predicted to have a significant ambient impact \91\ in areas designated
attainment or unclassifiable for the
[[Page 498]]
PM-10 NAAQS, the demonstration of whether or not the source will cause
or contribute to an air quality violation should be based on sufficient
data to show whether: (1) The projected 24-hour average concentrations
will exceed the 24-hour NAAQS more than 1 percent of the time, on
average ; (2) the expected (i.e., average) annual mean concentration
will exceed the annual NAAQS; and (3) the source contributes
significantly, in a temporal and spatial sense, to any modeled
violation.
11.2.3.3 PSD Air Quality Increments and Impacts
a. The allowable PSD increments for criteria pollutants are
established by regulation and cited in 40 CFR 51.166. These maximum
allowable increases in pollutant concentrations may be exceeded once per
year at each site, except for the annual increment that may not be
exceeded. The highest, second-highest increase in estimated
concentrations for the short term averages as determined by a model
should be less than or equal to the permitted increment. The modeled
annual averages should not exceed the increment.
b. Screening techniques defined in subsection 4.1 can sometimes be
used to estimate short term incremental concentrations for the first new
source that triggers the baseline in a given area. However, when
multiple increment-consuming sources are involved in the calculation,
the use of a refined model with at least 1 year of site specific or 5
years of (off-site) NWS data is normally required (subsection 9.3.1.2).
In such cases, sequential modeling must demonstrate that the allowable
increments are not exceeded temporally and spatially, i.e., for all
receptors for each time period throughout the year(s) (time period means
the appropriate PSD averaging time, e.g., 3-hour, 24-hour, etc.).
c. The PSD regulations require an estimation of the SO2,
particulate matter (PM-10), and NO2 impact on any Class I
area. Normally, steady-state Gaussian plume models should not be applied
at distances greater than can be accommodated by the steady state
assumptions inherent in such models. The maximum distance for refined
steady-state Gaussian plume model application for regulatory purposes is
generally considered to be 50km. Beyond the 50km range, screening
techniques may be used to determine if more refined modeling is needed.
If refined models are needed, long range transport models should be
considered in accordance with subsection 7.2.3. As previously noted in
Sections 3 and 7, the need to involve the Federal Land Manager in
decisions on potential air quality impacts, particularly in relation to
PSD Class I areas, cannot be overemphasized.
12.0 Bibliography \c\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\c\ The documents listed here are major sources of supplemental
infomation on the theory and application of mathematical air quality
models.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
American Meteorological Society. Symposia on Turbulence, Diffusion,
and Air Pollution (1st-10th); 1971-1992. Symposia on Boundary Layers &
Turb. 11th-12th; 1995-1997. Boston, MA.
American Meteorological Society, 1977-1998. Joint Conferences on
Applications of Air Pollution Meteorology (1st-10th). Sponsored by the
American Meteorological Society and the Air & Waste Management
Association. Boston, MA.
American Meteorological Society, 1978. Accuracy of Dispersion
Models. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 59(8): 1025-
1026.
American Meteorological Society, 1981. Air Quality Modeling and the
Clean Air Act: Recommendations to EPA on Dispersion Modeling for
Regulatory Applications. Boston, MA.
Briggs, G.A., 1969. Plume Rise. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission
Critical Review Series, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN.
Drake, R.L. and S.M. Barrager, 1979. Mathematical Models for
Atmospheric Pollutants. EPRI EA-1131. Electric Power Research Institute,
Palo Alto, CA.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1978. Workbook for Comparison of
Air Quality Models. EPA Publication No. EPA-450/2-78-028a and b. Office
of Air Quality Planning & Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC.
Erisman J.W., Van Pul A. and Wyers P. (1994) Parameterization of
surface resistance for the quantification of atmospheric deposition of
acidifying pollutants and ozone. Atmos. Environ., 28: 2595-2607.
Fox, D.G., and J.E. Fairobent, 1981. NCAQ Panel Examines Uses and
Limitations of Air Quality Models. Bulletin of the American
Meteorological Society, 62(2): 218-221.
Gifford, F.A., 1976. Turbulent Diffusion Typing Schemes: A Review.
Nuclear Safety, 17(1): 68-86.
Gudiksen, P.H., and M.H. Dickerson, Eds., Executive Summary:
Atmospheric Studies in Complex Terrain Technical Progress Report FY-1979
Through FY-1983. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA.
(Docket Reference No. II-I-103).
Hanna, S.R., G.A. Briggs, J. Deardorff, B.A. Egan, G.A. Gifford and
F. Pasquill, 1977. AMS Workshop on Stability Classification Schemes And
Sigma Curves--Summary of Recommendations. Bulletin of the American
Meteorological Society, 58(12): 1305-1309.
[[Page 499]]
Hanna, S.R., G.A. Briggs and R.P. Hosker, Jr., 1982. Handbook on
Atmospheric Diffusion. Technical Information Center, U.S. Department of
Energy, Washington, DC.
Haugen, D.A., Workshop Coordinator, 1975. Lectures on Air Pollution
and Environmental Impact Analyses. Sponsored by the American
Meteorological Society, Boston, MA.
Hoffnagle, G.F., M.E. Smith, T.V. Crawford and T.J. Lockhart, 1981.
On-site Meteorological Instrumentation Requirements to Characterize
Diffusion from Point Sources--A Workshop, 15-17 January 1980, Raleigh,
NC. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 62(2): 255-261.
Hunt, J.C.R., R.G. Holroyd, D.J. Carruthers, A.G. Robins, D.D.
Apsley, F.B. Smith and D.J. Thompson, 1990. Developments in Modeling Air
Pollution for Regulatory Uses. In Proceedings of the 18th NATO/CCMS
International Technical Meeting on Air Pollution Modeling and its
Application, Vancouver, Canada. Also In Air Pollution Modeling and its
Application VIII (1991). H. van Dop and D.G. Steyn, eds. Plenum Press,
New York, NY. pp. 17-59
Pasquill, F. and F.B. Smith, 1983. Atmospheric Diffusion, 3rd
Edition. Ellis Horwood Limited, Chichester, West Sussex, England, 438pp.
Randerson, D., Ed., 1984. Atmospheric Science and Power Production.
DOE/TIC 2760l. Office of Scientific and Technical Information, U.S.
Department of Energy, Oak Ridge, TN.
Scire, J.S. and L.L. Schulman, 1980: Modeling plume rise from low-
level buoyant line and point sources. AMS/APCA Second Joint Conference
on Applications of Air Pollution Meteorology, March 24-27, New Orleans,
LA.
Smith, M.E., Ed., 1973. Recommended Guide for the Prediction of the
Dispersion of Airborne Effluents. The American Society of Mechanical
Engineers, New York, NY.
Stern, A.C., Ed., 1976. Air Pollution, Third Edition, Volume I: Air
Pollutants, Their Transformation and Transport. Academic Press, New
York, NY.
Turner, D.B., 1979. Atmospheric Dispersion Modeling: A Critical
Review. Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association, 29(5): 502-
519.
Venkatram, A. and J.C. Wyngaard, Editors, 1988. Lectures on Air
Pollution Modeling. American Meteorological Society, Boston, MA. 390pp.
13.0 References
1. Code of Federal Regulations; Title 40 (Protection of
Environment). Sections 51.112, 51.117, 51.150, 51.160.
2. Environmental Protection Agency, 1990. New Source Review Workshop
Manual: Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Nonattainment Area
Permitting (Draft). Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards, Research
Triangle Park, NC. (Available @: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/nsr/)
3. Code of Federal Regulations; Title 40 (Protection of
Environment). Sections 51.166 and 52.21.
4. Code of Federal Regulations (Title 40, Part 50): Protection of
the Environment; National Primary and Secondary Ambient Air Quality
Standards.
5. Environmental Protection Agency, 1988. Model Clearinghouse:
Operational Plan (Revised). Staff Report. Office of Air Quality Planning
& Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. (Docket No. A-88-04, II-J-1)
6. Environmental Protection Agency, 1980. Guidelines on Air Quality
Models. Federal Register, 45(61):20157-20158.
7. Scire, J.S. and L.L. Schulman, 1981. Evaluation of the BLP and
ISC Models with SF6 Tracer Data and SO2
Measurements at Aluminum Reduction Plants. APCA Specialty Conference on
Dispersion Modeling for Complex Sources, St. Louis, MO.
8. Londergan, R.J., D.H. Minott, D.J. Wackter, T. Kincaid and D.
Bonitata, 1982. Evaluation of Rural Air Quality Simulation Models. EPA
Publication No. EPA-450/4-82-020. Office of Air Quality Planning &
Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 83-182758)
9. Seigneur C., A.B. Hudischewskyj and R.W. Bergstrom, 1982.
Evaluation of the EPA PLUVUE Model and the ERT Visibility Model Based on
the 1979 VISTTA Data Base. EPA Publication No. EPA-450/4-82-008. Office
of Air Quality Planning & Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS
No. PB 83-164723)
10. Londergan, R.J., D.H. Minott, D.J. Wackter and R.R. Fizz, 1983.
Evaluation of Urban Air Quality Simulation Models. EPA Publication No.
EPA-450/4-83-020. Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards, Research
Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 84-241173)
11. Londergan, R.J. and D.J. Wackter, 1984. Evaluation of Complex
Terrain Air Quality Simulation Models. EPA Publication No. EPA-450/4-84-
017. Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards, Research Triangle Park,
NC. (NTIS No. PB 85-119485)
12. Environmental Protection Agency, 1986. Evaluation of Mobile
Source Air Quality Simulation Models. EPA Publication No. EPA-450/4-86-
002. Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards, Research Triangle Park,
NC. (NTIS No. PB 86-167293)
13. Environmental Protection Agency, 1986. Evaluation of Short-Term
Long-Range Transport Models, Volumes I and II. EPA Publication Nos. EPA-
450/4-86-016a and b. Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards,
Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS Nos. PB 87-142337 and PB 87-142345)
14. Paine, R.J. and F. Lew, 1997. Results of the Independent
Evaluation of ISCST3 and ISC-PRIME. Prepared for the Electric Power
Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA. ENSR
[[Page 500]]
Document Number 2460-026-440. (NTIS No. PB 98-156524)
15. Strimaitis, D.G., J.S. Scire and J.C. Chang. 1998. Evaluation of
the CALPUFF Dispersion Model with Two Power Plant Data Sets. Tenth Joint
Conference on the Application of Air Pollution Meteorology, Phoenix,
Arizona. American Meteorological Society, Boston, MA. January 11-16,
1998.
16. Fox, D.G., 1981. Judging Air Quality Model Performance. Bulletin
of the American Meteorological Society, 62(5): 599-609.
17. American Meteorological Society, 1983. Synthesis of the Rural
Model Reviews. EPA Publication No. EPA-600/3-83-108. Office of Research
& Development, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 84-121037)
18. American Meteorological Society, 1984. Review of the Attributes
and Performance of Six Urban Diffusion Models. EPA Publication No. EPA-
600/S3-84-089. Office of Research & Development, Research Triangle Park,
NC. (NTIS No. PB 84-236850)
19. White, F.D.(Ed.), J.K.S. Ching, R.L. Dennis and W.H. Snyder,
1985. Summary of Complex Terrain Model Evaluation. EPA Publication No.
EPA-600/3-85-060. Office of Research & Development, Research Triangle
Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 85-236891)
20. Shannon, J.D., 1987. Mobile Source Modeling Review. A report
prepared under a cooperative agreement with the Environmental Protection
Agency. 5pp. (Docket No. A-88-04, II-J-2)
21. Allwine, K.J., W.F. Dabberdt and L.L. Simmons. 1998. Peer Review
of the CALMET/CALPUFF Modeling System. Prepared by the KEVRIC Company,
Inc. under EPA Contract No. 68-D-98-092 for Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC. (Docket No. A-99-05, II-A-8)
22. Environmental Protection Agency, 1984. Interim Procedures for
Evaluating Air Quality Models (Revised). EPA Publication No. EPA-450/4-
84-023. Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards, Research Triangle
Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 85-106060)
23. Environmental Protection Agency, 1985. Interim Procedures for
Evaluating Air Quality Models: Experience with Implementation. EPA
Publication No. EPA-450/4-85-006. Office of Air Quality Planning &
Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 85-242477)
24. ASTM D6589: Standard Guide for Statistical Evaluation of
Atmospheric Dispersion Model Performance. (2000)
25. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992. Protocol for Determining
the Best Performing Model. EPA Publication No. EPA-454/R-92-025. Office
of Air Quality Planning & Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS
No. PB 93-226082)
26. Environmental Protection Agency, 1995. User's Guide for the
Industrial Source Complex (ISC3) Dispersion Models, Volumes 1 and 2. EPA
Publication Nos. EPA-454/B-95-003a & b. Office of Air Quality Planning &
Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS Nos. PB 95-222741 and PB
95-222758, respectively)
27. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992. Screening Procedures for
Estimating the Air Quality Impact of Stationary Sources, Revised. EPA
Publication No. EPA-454/R-92-019. Office of Air Quality Planning &
Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 93-219095)
28. Environmental Protection Agency, 1995. SCREEN3 User's Guide. EPA
Publication No. EPA-454/B-95-004. Office of Air Quality Planning &
Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 95-222766)
29. Environmental Protection Agency, 1987. EPA Complex Terrain Model
Development: Final Report. EPA Publication No. EPA-600/3-88-006. Office
of Research & Development, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 88-
162110)
30. Perry, S.G., D.J. Burns, L.H. Adams, R.J. Paine, M.G. Dennis,
M.T. Mills, D.J. Strimaitis, R.J. Yamartino and E.M. Insley, 1989.
User's Guide to the Complex Terrain Dispersion Model Plus Algorithms for
Unstable Situations (CTDMPLUS) Volume 1; Model Description and User
Instructions. EPA Publication No. EPA-600/8-89-041. Office of Research &
Development, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 89-181424)
31. Paine, R.J., 1987. User's Guide to the CTDM Meteorological
Preprocessor Program. EPA Publication No. EPA-600/8-88-004. Office of
Research & Development, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 88-
162102)
32. Mills, M.T., R.J. Paine, E.A. Insley and B.A. Egan, 1987. The
Complex Terrain Dispersion Model Terrain Preprocessor System--User's
Guide and Program Description. EPA Publication No. EPA-600/8-88-003.
Office of Research & Development, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No.
PB 88-162094)
33. Perry, S.G., D.J. Burns and A.J. Cimorelli, 1990. User's Guide
to CTDMPLUS: Volume 2. The Screening Mode (CTSCREEN). EPA Publication
No. EPA-600/8-90-087. Office of Research & Development, Research
Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 91-136564)
34. Burns, D.J., S.G. Perry and A.J. Cimorelli, 1991. An Advanced
Screening Model for Complex Terrain Applications. Paper presented at the
7th Joint Conference on Applications of Air Pollution Meteorology
(cosponsored by the American Meteorological Society and the Air & Waste
Management Association), January 13-18, 1991, New Orleans, LA.
35. Bjorklund, J.R. and J.F. Bowers, 1982. User's Instructions for
the SHORTZ and LONGZ Computer Programs, Volumes I and II. EPA
Publication No. EPA-903/9-82-004a and b. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Region III, Philadelphia, PA. (NTIS Nos. PB 83-146092 and PB 83-
146100)
[[Page 501]]
36. Environmental Research and Technology, 1987. User's Guide to the
Rough Terrain Diffusion Model (RTDM), Rev. 3.20. ERT Document No. P-
D535-585. Environmental Research and Technology, Inc., Concord, MA.
(NTIS No. PB 88-171467)
37. Perry, S.G., 1992. CTDMPLUS: A Dispersion Model for Sources near
Complex Topography. Part I: Technical Formulations. Journal of Applied
Meteorology, 31(7): 633-645.
38. Paumier, J.O., S.G. Perry and D.J. Burns, 1992. CTDMPLUS: A
Dispersion Model for Sources near Complex Topography. Part II:
Performance Characteristics. Journal of Applied Meteorology, 31(7): 646-
660.
39. Meng, Z.D. Dabdub and J.H. Seinfeld, 1997. Chemical Coupling
between Atmospheric Ozone and Particulate Matter. Science, 277: 116-119.
40. Hidy, G.M, P.M. Roth, J.M. Hales and R.D. Scheffe, 1998. Fine
Particles and Oxidant Pollution: Developing an Agenda for Cooperative
Research. JAWMA, 50: 613-632.
41. Environmental Protection Agency, 1998. Use of Models and Other
Analyses in Attainment Demonstrations for the 8-hr Ozone NAAQS (Draft).
Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC.
(Docket No. A-99-05, II-A-14) (Available on SCRAM Web site as
draft8hr.pdf; see subsection 2.3)
42. Environmental Protection Agency, 1999. Guidance for
Demonstrating Attainment of PM-2.5 NAAQS and for Demonstrating
Reasonable Progress in Reducing Regional Haze (Draft). Office of Air
Quality Planning & Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. (Available on
SCRAM Web site as draft-pm.pdf; see subsection 2.3)
43. Environmental Protection Agency, 1987. PM-10 SIP Development
Guideline. EPA Publication No. EPA-450/2-86-001. Office of Air Quality
Planning & Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 87-
206488)
44. U.S. Forest Service, 1996. User Assessment of Smoke-Dispersion
Models for Wildland Biomass Burning. USDA, Pacific Northwest Research
Station, Portland, OR. General Technical Report PNW-GTR-379. 30pp. (NTIS
No. PB 97-163380)
45. Environmental Protection Agency, 1997. Guidance for Siting
Ambient Air Monitors around Stationary Lead Sources. EPA Publication No.
EPA-454/R-92-009R. Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards, Research
Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 97-208094)
46. Environmental Protection Agency, 1993. Lead Guideline Document.
EPA Publication No. EPA-452/R-93-009. Office of Air Quality Planning &
Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 94-111846)
47. Environmental Protection Agency, 1998. EPA Third-Generation Air
Quality Modeling System. Models-3, Volume 9b: User Manual. EPA
Publication No. EPA-600/R-98/069(b). Office of Research and Development,
Washington, D.C.
48. Environmental Protection Agency, 1989. Procedures for Applying
City-Specific EKMA (Empirical Kinetic Modeling Approach). EPA
Publication No. EPA-450/4-89-012. Office of Air Quality Planning &
Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 90-256777)
49. Meyer, Jr., E.L. and K.A. Baugues, 1987. Consideration of
Transported Ozone and Precursors and Their Use in EKMA. EPA Publication
No. EPA-450/4-89-010. Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards,
Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 90-255415)
50. Environmental Protection Agency, 2002. User's Guide to the
Regulatory Modeling System for Aerosols and Deposition (REMSAD) Version
7. Prepared for Environmental Protection Agency under Contract No. GS-
10F-0124J by ICF Consulting, July 2002; available @ http://www.epa.gov/
scram001/)
51. Environmental Protection Agency, 2003. {This reference is
reserved for the User's Manual for the latest version of CMB. Until
final publication, see http://www.epa.gov/scram001/)
52. Environmental Protection Agency, 2003. Protocol for Applying and
Validating the CMB Model for PM2.5 and VOC. EPA Publication No. EPA-454/
R-YY-nnn. Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards, Research Triangle
Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB YY-nnnnnn)
53. Environmental Protection Agency, 1988. Chemical Mass Balance
Model Diagnostics. EPA Publication No. EPA-450/4-88-005. Office of Air
Quality Planning & Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB
88-208319)
54. Paatero, P. and U. Tapper, 1994. Positive Matrix Factorization:
A Non-negative Factor Model with Optimal Utilization of Error Estimates
of Data Values. Environmetrics, 5: 111-126. (Other documents related to
PMF may be accessed via FTP @ ftp://rock.helsinki.fi/pub/misc/pmf.)
55. Lewis, C.W., G.A. Norris, R.C. Henry and T.L. Conner, 2003.
Source Apportionment of Phoenix PM-2.5 Aerosol with the Unmix Receptor
Model. Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association, 53(3): 325--
338.
56. Environmental Protection Agency, 1994. Guidelines for PM10
Sampling and Analysis Applicable to Receptor Modeling. EPA Publication
No. EPA-452/R-94-009. Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards,
Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 94-177441)
57. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992. Guideline for Modeling
Carbon Monoxide from Roadway Intersections. EPA Publication No. EPA-454/
R-92-005. Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards, Research Triangle
Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 93-210391)
58. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992. User's Guide for CAL3QHC
Version 2: A Modeling Methodology for Predicting Pollutant
Concentrations near Roadway Intersections. EPA Publication No. EPA-454/
R-92-006. Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards,
[[Page 502]]
Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 93-210250)
59. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992. Evaluation of CO
Intersection Modeling techniques Using a New York City Database. EPA
Publication No. EPA-454/R-92-004. Office of Air Quality Planning &
Standards, RTP, NC 27711. (NTIS No. PB 93-105559)
60. Environmental Protection Agency, 1995. Addendum to the User's
Guide to CAL3QHC Version 2.0. Staff Report. Office of Air Quality
Planning & Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. (Available from EPA's
Internet SCRAM Web site at http://www.epa.gov/scram001/)
61. Environmental Protection Agency, 1991. Emission Inventory
Requirements for Carbon Monoxide State Implementation Plans. EPA
Publication No. EPA-450/4-91-011. Office of Air Quality Planning &
Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 92-112150)
62. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992. Guideline for Regulatory
Application of the Urban Airshed Model for Areawide Carbon Monoxide. EPA
Publication No. EPA-450/4-92-011a and b. Office of Air Quality Planning
& Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS Nos. PB 92-213222 and PB
92-213230)
63. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992. Technical Support
Document to Aid States with the Development of Carbon Monoxide State
Implementation Plans. EPA Publication No. EPA-452/R-92-003. Office of
Air Quality Planning & Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No.
PB 92-233055)
64. Chu, S.H. and E.L. Meyer, 1991. Use of Ambient Ratios to
Estimate Impact of NOX Sources on Annual NO2
Concentrations. Proceedings, 84th Annual Meeting & Exhibition of the Air
& Waste Management Association, Vancouver, B.C.; 16-21 June 1991.
(16pp.) (Docket No. A-92-65, II-A-9)
65. Cole, H.S. and J.E. Summerhays, 1979. A Review of Techniques
Available for Estimation of Short-Term NO2 Concentrations.
Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association, 29(8): 812-817.
66. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 1980. Air
Quality Considerations in Residential Planning. U.S. Superintendent of
Documents, Washington, DC. (GPO Order Nos. 023-000-00577-8, 023-000-
00576-0, 023-000-00575-1)
67. Environmental Protection Agency, 1998. Interagency Workgroup on
Air Quality Modeling (IWAQM) Phase 2 Summary Report and Recommendations
for Modeling Long-Range Transport Impacts. EPA Publication No. EPA-454/
R-98-019. Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards, Research Triangle
Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 99-121089)
68. National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP), 1991.
Acid Deposition: State of Science and Technology. Volume III
Terrestrial, Materials, Health and Visibility Effects. Report 24,
Visibility: Existing and Historical Conditions--Causes and Effects
Edited by Patricia M. Irving. Washington, D.C. 129pp.
69. National Research Council, 1993. Protecting Visibility in
National Parks and Wilderness Areas. National Academy Press, Washington,
D.C. 446pp.
70. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992. Workbook for Plume Visual
Impact Screening and Analysis (Revised). EPA Publication No. EPA-454/R-
92-023. Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards, Research Triangle
Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 93-223592)
71. Environmental Protection Agency, 1981. Guideline for Use of
Fluid Modeling to Determine Good Engineering Practice (GEP) Stack
Height. EPA Publication No. EPA-450/4-81-003. Office of Air Quality
Planning & Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 82-
145327)
72. Lawson, Jr., R.E. and W.H. Snyder, 1983. Determination of Good
Engineering Practice Stack Height: A Demonstration Study for a Power
Plant. EPA Publication No. EPA-600/3-83-024. Office of Research &
Development, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 83-207407)
73. Environmental Protection Agency, 1985. Guideline for
Determination of Good Engineering Practice Stack Height (Technical
Support Document for the Stack Height Regulations), Revised. EPA
Publication No. EPA-450/4-80-023R. Office of Air Quality Planning &
Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 85-225241)
74. Snyder, W.H. and R.E. Lawson, Jr., 1985. Fluid Modeling
Demonstration of Good Engineering-Practice Stack Height in Complex
Terrain. EPA Publication No. EPA-600/3-85-022. Office of Research &
Development, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 85-203107)
75. Bennett, M.J., M.E. Yansura, I.G. Hornyik, J.M. Nall, D.G.
Caniparoli and C.G. Ashmore, 2002. Evaluation of the CALPUFF Long-range
Transport Screening Technique by Comparison to Refined CALPUFF Results
for Several Power Plants in Both the Eastern and Western United States.
Proceedings of the Air & Waste Management Association's 95th Annual
Conference, June 23-27, 2002; Baltimore, MD. Paper 43454.
76. Environmental Protection Agency, 1999. Guideline of Data
Handling Conventions for the PM NAAQS. EPA Publication No. EPA-454/R-99-
008. Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards, Research Triangle Park.
(NTIS PB 99-149023)
77. Turner, D.B., 1969. Workbook of Atmospheric Dispersion
Estimates. PHS Publication No. 999-AP-26. U.S. Department of Health,
Education and Welfare, Public Health Service, Cincinnati, OH. (NTIS No.
PB-191482)
78. McElroy, J.L. and F. Pooler, Jr., 1968. St. Louis Dispersion
Study, Volume II--
[[Page 503]]
Analysis. National Air Pollution Control Administration Publication No.
AP-53, U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Public Health
Service, Arlington, VA. (NTIS No. PB-190255)
79. Irwin, J.S., 1983. Estimating Plume Dispersion--A Comparison of
Several Sigma Schemes. Journal of Climate and Applied Meteorology, 22:
92-114.
80. Irwin, J.S., 1978. Proposed Criteria for Selection of Urban
Versus Rural Dispersion Coefficients. (Draft Staff Report). Meteorology
and Assessment Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, NC. (Docket No. A-80-46, II-B-8)
81. Auer, Jr., A.H., 1978. Correlation of Land Use and Cover with
Meteorological Anomalies. Journal of Applied Meteorology, 17(5): 636-
643.
82. Pasquill, F., 1976. Atmospheric Dispersion Parameters in
Gaussian Plume Modeling, Part II. Possible Requirements for Change in
the Turner Workbook Values. EPA Publication No. EPA-600/4-76-030b.
Office of Research & Development, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No.
PB-258036/3BA)
83. Turner, D.B., 1964. A Diffusion Model for an Urban Area. Journal
of Applied Meteorology, 3(1): 83-91.
84. Briggs, G.A., 1975. Plume Rise Predictions. Chapter 3 in
Lectures on Air Pollution and Environmental Impact Analyses. American
Meteorological Society, Boston, MA; pp. 59-111.
85. Hanna, S.R., G.A. Briggs and R.P. Hosker, Jr., 1982. Plume Rise.
Chapter 2 in Handbook on Atmospheric Diffusion. Technical Information
Center, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC; pp. 11-24. DOE/TIC-
11223 (DE 82002045)
86. Weil, J.C., L.A. Corio and R.P. Brower, 1997. A PDF dispersion
model for buoyant plumes in the convective boundary layer. Journal of
Applied Meteorology, 36: 982-1003.
87. Stull, R.B., 1988. An Introduction to Boundary Layer
Meteorology. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA. 666pp.
88. Environmental Protection Agency, 1988. User's Guide to SDM--A
Shoreline Dispersion Model. EPA Publication No. EPA-450/4-88-017. Office
of Air Quality Planning & Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS
No. PB 89-164305)
89. Environmental Protection Agency, 1987. Analysis and Evaluation
of Statistical Coastal Fumigation Models. EPA Publication No. EPA-450/4-
87-002. Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards, Research Triangle
Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 87-175519)
90. Environmental Protection Agency, 1995. Compilation of Air
Pollutant Emission Factors, Volume I: Stationary Point and Area Sources
(Fifth Edition, AP-42: GPO Stock No. 055-000-00500-1), and Supplements
A-D; Volume II: Mobile Sources (Fifth Edition). Office of Air Quality
Planning & Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. Volume I can be
downloaded from EPA's Internet Web site at www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/
ap42.html; Volume II can be downloaded from www.epa.gov/omswww/ap42.htm.
91. Environmental Protection Agency, 1987. Ambient Air Monitoring
Guidelines for Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD). EPA
Publication No. EPA-450/4-87-007. Office of Air Quality Planning &
Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 90-168030)
92. Stauffer, D.R. and Seaman, N.L., 1990. Use of four-dimensional
data assimilation in a limited-area mesoscale model. Part I: Experiments
with synoptic-scale data. Monthly Weather Review, 118: 1250-1277.
93. Stauffer, D.R., N.L. Seaman and F.S. Binkowski, 1991. Use of
four-dimensional data assimilation in a limited-area mesoscale model.
Part II: Effect of data assimilation within the planetary boundary
layer. Monthly Weather Review, 119: 734-754.
94. Grell, G.A., J. Dudhia, and D.R. Stauffer, 1994. A Description
of the Fifth-Generation Penn State/NCAR Mesoscale Model (MM5). NCAR
Technical Note, NCAR/TN-398+STR, National Center for Atmospheric
Research, Boulder, CO; 138pp. http://www.mmm.ucar.edu/mm5/mm5-home.html.
95. Landsberg, H.E. and W.C. Jacobs, 1951. Compendium of
Meteorology. American Meteorological Society, Boston, MA; pp. 976-992.
96. Burton, C.S., T.E. Stoeckenius and J.P. Nordin, 1983. The
Temporal Representativeness of Short-Term Meteorological Data Sets:
Implications for Air Quality Impact Assessments. Systems Applications,
Inc., San Rafael, CA. (Docket No. A-80-46, II-G-11)
97. Solar and Meteorological Surface Observation Network, 1961-1990;
3-volume CD-ROM. Version 1.0, September 1993. Produced jointly by
National Climatic Data Center and National Renewable Energy Laboratory.
Can be ordered from NOAA National Data Center's Internet Web site @
http://www.nndc.noaa.gov/.
98. Hourly United States Weather Observations, 1990-1995 (CD-ROM).
October 1997. Produced jointly by National Climatic Data Center and
Environmental Protection Agency. Can be ordered from NOAA National Data
Center's Internet Web site @ http://lwf.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/ncdc.html.
99. Radiosonde Data of North America, 1946-1996; 4-volume CD-ROM.
August 1996. Produced jointly by Forecast Systems laboratory and
National Climatic Data Center. Can be ordered from NOAA National Data
Center's Internet Web site @ http://lwf.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/ncdc.html.
100. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000. Meteorological
Monitoring Guidance for Regulatory Modeling Applications. EPA
Publication No. EPA-454/R-99-005. Office of Air Quality Planning &
Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. (PB 2001-103606) (http://
www.epa.gov/scram001/)
[[Page 504]]
101. ASTM D5527: Standard Practice for Measuring Surface Winds and
Temperature by Acoustic Means. (1994)
102. ASTM D5741: Standard Practice for Characterizing Surface Wind
Using Wind Vane and Rotating Anemometer. (1996)
103. Environmental Protection Agency, 1995. Quality Assurance for
Air Pollution Measurement Systems, Volume IV--Meteorological
Measurements. EPA Publication No. EPA600/R-94/038d. Office of Air
Quality Planning & Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. Note: for
copies of this handbook, you may make inquiry to ORD Publications, 26
West Martin Luther King Dr., Cincinatti, OH 45268. Phone (513) 569-7562
or (800) 490-9198 (automated request line)
104. Bowen, B.M., J.M. Dewart and A.I. Chen, 1983. Stability Class
Determination: A Comparison for One Site. Proceedings, Sixth Symposium
on Turbulence and Diffusion. American Meteorological Society, Boston,
MA; pp. 211-214. (Docket No. A-92-65, II-A-7)
105. Environmental Protection Agency, 1993. An Evaluation of a Solar
Radiation/Delta-T (SRDT) Method for Estimating Pasquill-Gifford (P-G)
Stability Categories. EPA Publication No. EPA-454/R-93-055. Office of
Air Quality Planning & Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No.
PB 94-113958)
106. Irwin, J.S., 1980. Dispersion Estimate Suggestion 8:
Estimation of Pasquill Stability Categories. Office of Air Quality
Planning & Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC (Docket No. A-80-46,
II-B-10)
107. Mitchell, Jr., A.E. and K.O. Timbre, 1979. Atmospheric
Stability Class from Horizontal Wind Fluctuation. Presented at 72nd
Annual Meeting of Air Pollution Control Association, Cincinnati, OH;
June 24-29, 1979. (Docket No. A-80-46, II-P-9)
108. Smedman--Hogstrom, A. and V. Hogstrom, 1978. A Practical Method
for Determining Wind Frequency Distributions for the Lowest 200m from
Routine Meteorological Data. J. of Applied Meteorology, 17(7): 942-954.
109. Smith, T.B. and S.M. Howard, 1972. Methodology for Treating
Diffusivity. MRI 72 FR-1030. Meteorology Research, Inc., Altadena, CA.
(Docket No. A-80-46, II-P-8)
110. Environmental Protection Agency, 1993. PCRAMMET User's Guide.
EPA Publication No. EPA-454/R-96-001. Office of Air Quality Planning &
Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 97-147912)
111. Environmental Protection Agency, 1996. Meteorological Processor
for Regulatory Models (MPRM) User's Guide. EPA Publication No. EPA-454/
B-96-002. Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards, Research Triangle
Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 96-180518)
112. Paine, R.J., 1987. User's Guide to the CTDM Meteorological
Preprocessor Program. EPA Publication No. EPA-600/8-88-004. Office of
Research & Development, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 88-
162102)
113. Scire, J.S., F.R. Francoise, M.E. Fernau and R.J. Yamartino,
1998. A User's Guide for the CALMET Meteorological Model (Version 5.0).
Earth Tech, Inc., Concord, MA. (http://www.src.com/calpuff/calpuff1.htm)
114. Environmental Protection Agency, 1984. Calms Processor
(CALMPRO) User's Guide. EPA Publication No. EPA-901/9-84-001. Office of
Air Quality Planning & Standards, Region I, Boston, MA. (NTIS No. PB 84-
229467)
115. Fox, D.G., 1984. Uncertainty in air quality modeling. Bulletin
of the American Meteorological Society, 65(1): 27-36.
116. Burton, C.S., 1981. The Role of Atmospheric Models in
Regulatory Decision-Making: Summary Report. Systems Applications, Inc.,
San Rafael, CA. Prepared under contract No. 68-01-5845 for U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC. (Docket No.
A-80-46, II-M-6)
117. Environmental Protection Agency, 1981. Proceedings of the
Second Conference on Air Quality Modeling, Washington, DC. Office of Air
Quality Planning & Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. (Docket No. A-
80-46, II-M-16)
118. Hanna, S.R., 1989. Confidence limits for air quality model
evaluations, as estimated by bootstrap and jackknife resampling methods.
Atmospheric Environment, 23(6): 1385-1398.
119. Cox, W.M. and J.A. Tikvart, 1990. A statistical procedure for
determining the best performing air quality simulation model. Atmos.
Environ., 24A(9): 2387-2395.
120. Oreskes, N.K., K. Shrader-Frechette and K. Beliz, 1994.
Verification, validation and confirmation of numerical models in the
earth sciences. Science, 263: 641-646.
121. Dekker, C.M., A. Groenendijk, C.J. Sliggers and G.K. Verboom,
1990. Quality Criteria for Models to Calculate Air Pollution. Lucht
(Air) 90, Ministry of Housing, Physical Planning and Environment,
Postbus 450, 2260 MB Leidschendam, The Netherlands; 52pp.
122. Weil, J.C., R.I. Sykes and A. Venkatram, 1992. Evaluating air-
quality models: review and outlook. Journal of Applied Meteorology, 31:
1121-1145.
123. Cole, S.T. and P.J. Wicks, Editors (1995): Model Evaluation
Group: Report of the Second Open Meeting. EUR 15990 EN, European
Commission, Directorate-General XII, Environmental Research Programme,
L-2920 Luxembourg; 77pp.
124. Hanna, S.R., 1982. Natural Variability of Observed Hourly
SO2 and CO Concentrations in St. Louis. Atmospheric
Environment, 16(6): 1435-1440.
125. Bowne, N.E., 1981. Validation and Performance Criteria for Air
Quality Models. Appendix F in Air Quality Modeling and the Clean Air
Act: Recommendations to EPA on
[[Page 505]]
Dispersion Modeling for Regulatory Applications. American Meteorological
Society, Boston, MA; pp. 159-171. (Docket No. A-80-46, II-A-106)
126. Bowne, N.E. and R.J. Londergan, 1983. Overview, Results, and
Conclusions for the EPRI Plume Model Validation and Development Project:
Plains Site. EPRI EA-3074. Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto,
CA.
127. Moore, G.E., T.E. Stoeckenius and D.A. Stewart, 1982. A Survey
of Statistical Measures of Model Performance and Accuracy for Several
Air Quality Models. EPA Publication No. EPA-450/4-83-001. Office of Air
Quality Planning & Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB
83-260810)
128. Rhoads, R.G., 1981. Accuracy of Air Quality Models. Staff
Report. Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards, Research Triangle
Park, NC. (Docket No. A-80-46, II-G-6)
129. Hanna, S.R., 1993. Uncertainties in air quality model
predictions. Boundary-Layer Meteorology, 62: 3-20.
130. Pasquill, F., 1974. Atmospheric Diffusion, 2nd Edition. John
Wiley and Sons, New York, NY; 479pp.
131. Morgan, M.G. and M. Henrion, 1990. Uncertainty, A Guide to
Dealing With Uncertainty in Quantitative Risk and Policy Analysis.
Cambridge University Press. New York, NY; 332pp.
132. Irwin, J.S., K. Steinberg, C. Hakkarinen and H. Feldman, 2001.
Uncertainty in Air Quality Modeling for Risk Calculations. (CD-ROM)
Proceedings of Guideline on Air Quality Models: A New Beginning. April
4-6, 2001, Newport, RI, Air & Waste Management Association. Pittsburgh,
PA; 17pp.
133. Austin, B.S., T.E. Stoeckenius, M.C. Dudik and T.S. Stocking,
1988. User's Guide to the Expected Exceedances System. Systems
Applications, Inc., San Rafael, CA. Prepared under Contract No. 68-02-
4352 Option I for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, NC. (Docket No. A-88-04, II-I-3)
134. Thrall, A.D., T.E. Stoeckenius and C.S. Burton, 1985. A Method
for Calculating Dispersion Modeling Uncertainty Applied to the
Regulation of an Emission Source. Systems Applications, Inc., San
Rafael, CA. Prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, NC. (Docket No. A-80-46, IV-G-1)
135. ``Ten years of Harmonisation activities: Past, present and
future'' at http://www.dmu.dk/AtmosphericEnvironment/Harmoni/
Conferences/Belgirate/BelgiratePapers.asp
136. ``A platform for model evaluation'' at http://www.dmu.dk/
AtmosphericEnvironment/Harmoni/Conferences/Belgirate/BelgiratePapers.asp
Appendix A to Appendix W of Part 51--Summaries of Preferred Air Quality
Models
Table of Contents
A.0 Introduction and Availability
A.1 Buoyant Line and Point Source Dispersion Model (BLP)
A.2 Caline3
A.3 Calpuff
A.4 Complex Terrain Dispersion Model Plus Algorithms for Unstable
Situations (CTDMPLUS)
A.5 Emissions and Dispersion Modeling System (EDMS) 3.1
A.6 Industrial Source Complex Model (ISC3)
A.7 Offshore and Coastal Dispersion (OCD)
A. Ref References
A.0 Introduction and Availability
(1) This appendix summarizes key features of refined air quality
models preferred for specific regulatory applications. For each model,
information is provided on availability, approximate cost (where
applicable), regulatory use, data input, output format and options,
simulation of atmospheric physics, and accuracy. These models may be
used without a formal demonstration of applicability provided they
satisfy the recommendations for regulatory use; not all options in the
models are necessarily recommended for regulatory use.
(2) Many of these models have been subjected to a performance
evaluation using comparisons with observed air quality data. Where
possible, several of the models contained herein have been subjected to
evaluation exercises, including (1) statistical performance tests
recommended by the American Meteorological Society and (2) peer
scientific reviews. The models in this appendix have been selected on
the basis of the results of the model evaluations, experience with
previous use, familiarity of the model to various air quality programs,
and the costs and resource requirements for use.
(3) With the exception of EDMS, codes and documentation for all
models listed in this appendix are available from EPA's Support Center
for Regulatory Air Models (SCRAM) Web site at http://www.epa.gov/
scram001. Documentation is also available from the National Technical
Information Service (NTIS), http://www.ntis.gov or U.S. Department of
Commerce, Springfield, VA 22161; phone: (800) 553-6847. Where possible,
accession numbers are provided.
A.1 Buoyant Line and Point Source Dispersion Model (BLP)
Reference
Schulman, Lloyd L. and Joseph S. Scire, 1980. Buoyant Line and Point
Source (BLP) Dispersion Model User's Guide. Document P-
[[Page 506]]
7304B. Environmental Research and Technology, Inc., Concord, MA. (NTIS
No. PB 81-164642)
Availability
The computer code is available on EPA's Internet SCRAM website and
also on diskette (as PB 2002-500051) from the National Technical
Information Service (see Section A.0).
Abstract
BLP is a Gaussian plume dispersion model designed to handle unique
modeling problems associated with aluminum reduction plants, and other
industrial sources where plume rise and downwash effects from stationary
line sources are important.
a. Recommendations for Regulatory Use
(1) The BLP model is appropriate for the following applications:
Aluminum reduction plants which contain buoyant,
elevated line sources;
Rural areas;
Transport distances less than 50 kilometers;
Simple terrain; and
One hour to one year averaging times.
(2) The following options should be selected for regulatory
applications:
(i) Rural (IRU=1) mixing height option;
(ii) Default (no selection) for plume rise wind shear (LSHEAR),
transitional point source plume rise (LTRANS), vertical potential
temperature gradient (DTHTA), vertical wind speed power law profile
exponents (PEXP), maximum variation in number of stability classes per
hour (IDELS), pollutant decay (DECFAC), the constant in Briggs' stable
plume rise equation (CONST2), constant in Briggs' neutral plume rise
equation (CONST3), convergence criterion for the line source
calculations (CRIT), and maximum iterations allowed for line source
calculations (MAXIT); and
(iii) Terrain option (TERAN) set equal to 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0, 0.0,
0.0
(3) For other applications, BLP can be used if it can be
demonstrated to give the same estimates as a recommended model for the
same application, and will subsequently be executed in that mode.
(4) BLP can be used on a case-by-case basis with specific options
not available in a recommended model if it can be demonstrated, using
the criteria in Section 3.2, that the model is more appropriate for a
specific application.
b. Input Requirements
(1) Source data: point sources require stack location, elevation of
stack base, physical stack height, stack inside diameter, stack gas exit
velocity, stack gas exit temperature, and pollutant emission rate. Line
sources require coordinates of the end points of the line, release
height, emission rate, average line source width, average building
width, average spacing between buildings, and average line source
buoyancy parameter.
(2) Meteorological data: Hourly surface weather data from punched
cards or from the preprocessor program PCRAMMET which provides hourly
stability class, wind direction, wind speed, temperature, and mixing
height.
(3) Receptor data: Locations and elevations of receptors, or
location and size of receptor grid or request automatically generated
receptor grid.
c. Output
(1) Printed output (from a separate post-processor program)
includes:
(2) Total concentration or, optionally, source contribution
analysis; monthly and annual frequency distributions for 1-, 3-, and 24-
hour average concentrations; tables of 1-, 3-, and 24-hour average
concentrations at each receptor; table of the annual (or length of run)
average concentrations at each receptor;
(3) Five highest 1-, 3-, and 24-hour average concentrations at each
receptor; and
(4) Fifty highest 1-, 3-, and 24-hour concentrations over the
receptor field.
d. Type of Model
BLP is a gaussian plume model.
e. Pollutant Types
BLP may be used to model primary pollutants. This model does not
treat settling and deposition.
f. Source-Receptor Relationship
(1) BLP treats up to 50 point sources, 10 parallel line sources, and
100 receptors arbitrarily located.
(2) User-input topographic elevation is applied for each stack and
each receptor.
g. Plume Behavior
(1) BLP uses plume rise formulas of Schulman and Scire (1980).
(2) Vertical potential temperature gradients of 0.02 Kelvin per
meter for E stability and 0.035 Kelvin per meter are used for stable
plume rise calculations. An option for user input values is included.
(3) Transitional rise is used for line sources.
(4) Option to suppress the use of transitional plume rise for point
sources is included.
(5) The building downwash algorithm of Schulman and Scire (1980) is
used.
[[Page 507]]
h. Horizontal Winds
(1) Constant, uniform (steady-state) wind is assumed for an hour.
Straight line plume transport is assumed to all downwind distances.
(2) Wind speeds profile exponents of 0.10, 0.15, 0.20, 0.25, 0.30,
and 0.30 are used for stability classes A through F, respectively. An
option for user--defined values and an option to suppress the use of the
wind speed profile feature are included.
i. Vertical Wind Speed
Vertical wind speed is assumed equal to zero.
j. Horizontal Dispersion
(1) Rural dispersion coefficients are from Turner (1969), with no
adjustment made for variations in surface roughness or averaging time.
(2) Six stability classes are used.
k. Vertical Dispersion
(1) Rural dispersion coefficients are from Turner (1969), with no
adjustment made for variations in surface roughness.
(2) Six stability classes are used.
(3) Mixing height is accounted for with multiple reflections until
the vertical plume standard deviation equals 1.6 times the mixing
height; uniform mixing is assumed beyond that point.
(4) Perfect reflection at the ground is assumed.
l. Chemical Transformation
Chemical transformations are treated using linear decay. Decay rate
is input by the user.
m. Physical Removal
Physical removal is not explicitly treated.
n. Evaluation Studies
Schulman, L.L. and J.S. Scire, 1980. Buoyant Line and Point Source
(BLP) Dispersion Model User's Guide, P-7304B. Environmental Research and
Technology, Inc., Concord, MA.
Scire, J.S. and L.L. Schulman, 1981. Evaluation of the BLP and ISC
Models with SF6 Tracer Data and SO2 Measurements
at Aluminum Reduction Plants. APCA Specialty Conference on Dispersion
Modeling for Complex Sources, St. Louis, MO.
A.2 CALINE3
Reference
Benson, Paul E, 1979. CALINE3--A Versatile Dispersion Model for
Predicting Air Pollutant Levels Near Highways and Arterial Streets.
Interim Report, Report Number FHWA/CA/TL-79/23. Federal Highway
Administration, Washington, DC. (NTIS No. PB 80-220841)
Availability
The CALINE3 model is available on diskette (as PB 95-502712) from
NTIS. The source code and user's guide are also available on EPA's
Internet SCRAM Web site ( Section A.0).
Abstract
CALINE3 can be used to estimate the concentrations of nonreactive
pollutants from highway traffic. This steady-state Gaussian model can be
applied to determine air pollution concentrations at receptor locations
downwind of ``at-grade,'' ``fill,'' ``bridge,'' and ``cut section''
highways located in relatively uncomplicated terrain. The model is
applicable for any wind direction, highway orientation, and receptor
location. The model has adjustments for averaging time and surface
roughness, and can handle up to 20 links and 20 receptors. It also
contains an algorithm for deposition and settling velocity so that
particulate concentrations can be predicted.
a. Recommendations for Regulatory Use
CALINE-3 is appropriate for the following applications:
Highway (line) sources;
Urban or rural areas;
Simple terrain;
Transport distances less than 50 kilometers; and
One-hour to 24-hour averaging times.
b. Input Requirements
(1) Source data: Up to 20 highway links classed as ``at-grade,''
``fill'' ``bridge,'' or ``depressed''; coordinates of link end points;
traffic volume; emission factor; source height; and mixing zone width.
(2) Meteorological data: Wind speed, wind angle (measured in degrees
clockwise from the Y axis), stability class, mixing height, ambient
(background to the highway) concentration of pollutant.
(3) Receptor data: Coordinates and height above ground for each
receptor.
c. Output
Printed output includes concentration at each receptor for the
specified meteorological condition.
d. Type of Model
CALINE-3 is a Gaussian plume model.
e. Pollutant Types
CALINE-3 may be used to model primary pollutants.
f. Source-Receptor Relationship
(1) Up to 20 highway links are treated.
[[Page 508]]
(2) CALINE-3 applies user input location and emission rate for each
link. User-input receptor locations are applied.
g. Plume Behavior
Plume rise is not treated.
h. Horizontal Winds
(1) User-input hourly wind speed and direction are applied.
(2) Constant, uniform (steady-state) wind is assumed for an hour.
i. Vertical Wind Speed
Vertical wind speed is assumed equal to zero.
j. Horizontal Dispersion
(1) Six stability classes are used.
(2) Rural dispersion coefficients from Turner (1969) are used, with
adjustment for roughness length and averaging time.
(3) Initial traffic-induced dispersion is handled implicitly by
plume size parameters.
k. Vertical Dispersion
(1) Six stability classes are used.
(2) Empirical dispersion coefficients from Benson (1979) are used
including an adjustment for roughness length.
(3) Initial traffic-induced dispersion is handled implicitly by
plume size parameters.
(4) Adjustment for averaging time is included.
l. Chemical Transformation
Not treated.
m. Physical Removal
Optional deposition calculations are included.
n. Evaluation Studies
Bemis, G.R. et al., 1977. Air Pollution and Roadway Location,
Design, and Operation--Project Overview. FHWA-CA-TL-7080-77-25, Federal
Highway Administration, Washington, D.C.
Cadle, S.H. et al., 1976. Results of the General Motors Sulfate
Dispersion Experiment, GMR-2107. General Motors Research Laboratories,
Warren, MI.
Dabberdt, W.F., 1975. Studies of Air Quality on and Near Highways,
Project 2761. Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA.
A.3 CALPUFF
References
Scire, J.S., D.G. Strimaitis and R.J. Yamartino, 2000. A User's
Guide for the CALPUFF Dispersion Model (Version 5.0). Earth Tech, Inc.,
Concord, MA.
Scire J.S., F.R. Robe, M.E. Fernau and R.J. Yamartino, 2000. A
User's Guide for the CALMET Meteorological Model (Version 5.0). Earth
Tech, Inc., Concord, MA.
Availability
The model code and its documentation are available at no cost for
download from the model developers' Internet Web site: http://
www.src.com/calpuff/calpuff1.htm. You may also contact Joseph Scire,
Earth Tech, Inc., 196 Baker Avenue, Concord, MA 01742; Telephone: (978)
371-4200, Fax: (978) 371-2468, e-mail: jss@src.com.
Abstract
CALPUFF is a multi-layer, multi-species non-steady-state puff
dispersion modeling system that simulates the effects of time- and
space-varying meteorological conditions on pollutant transport,
transformation, and removal. CALPUFF is intended for use on scales from
tens of meters from a source to hundreds of kilometers. It includes
algorithms for near-field effects such as building downwash,
transitional buoyant and momentum plume rise, partial plume penetration,
subgrid scale terrain and coastal interactions effects, and terrain
impingement as well as longer range effects such as pollutant removal
due to wet scavenging and dry deposition, chemical transformation,
vertical wind shear, overwater transport, plume fumigation, and
visibility effects of particulate matter concentrations.
a. Recommendations for Regulatory Use
(1) CALPUFF is appropriate for long range transport (source-receptor
distances of 50 to several hundred kilometers) of emissions from point,
volume, area, and line sources. The meteorological input data should be
fully characterized with time-and-space-varying three dimensional wind
and meteorological conditions using CALMET, as discussed in paragraphs
9.3(c) and 9.3.1.2(d) of Appendix W.
(2) CALPUFF may also be used on a case-by-case basis if it can be
demonstrated using the criteria in Section 3.2 that the model is more
appropriate for the specific application. The purpose of choosing a
modeling system like CALPUFF is to fully treat stagnation, wind
reversals, and time and space variations of meteorology effects on
transport and dispersion, as discussed in paragraph 8.2.8(a).
(3) For regulatory applications of CALMET and CALPUFF, the
regulatory default option should be used. Inevitably, some of the model
control options will have to be set specific for the application using
expert judgement and in consultation with the relevant reviewing
authorities.
[[Page 509]]
b. Input Requirements
Source Data:
1. Point sources: Source location, stack height, diameter, exit
velocity, exit temperature, base elevation, wind direction specific
building dimensions (for building downwash calculations), and emission
rates for each pollutant. Particle size distributions may be entered for
particulate matter. Temporal emission factors (diurnal cycle, monthly
cycle, hour/season, wind speed/stability class, or temperature-dependent
emission factors) may also be entered. Arbitrarily-varying point source
parameters may be entered from an external file.
2. Area sources: Source location and shape, release height, base
elevation, initial vertical distribution ([sigma]z) and
emission rates for each pollutant. Particle size distributions may be
entered for particulate matter. Temporal emission factors (diurnal
cycle, monthly cycle, hour/season, wind speed/stability class, or
temperature-dependent emission factors) may also be entered.
Arbitrarily-varying area source parameters may be entered from an
external file. Area sources specified in the external file are allowed
to be buoyant and their location, size, shape, and other source
characteristics are allowed to change in time.
3. Volume sources: Source location, release height, base elevation,
initial horizontal and vertical distributions ([sigma]y,
[sigma]z) and emission rates for each pollutant. Particle
size distributions may be entered for particulate matter. Temporal
emission factors (diurnal cycle, monthly cycle, hour/season, wind speed/
stability class, or temperature-dependent emission factors) may also be
entered. Arbitrarily-varying volume source parameters may be entered
from an external file. Volume sources with buoyancy can be simulated by
treating the source as a point source and entering initial plume size
parameters--initial ([sigma]y, [sigma]z)--to
define the initial size of the volume source.
4. Line sources: Source location, release height, base elevation,
average buoyancy parameter, and emission rates for each pollutant.
Building data may be entered for line source emissions experiencing
building downwash effects. Particle size distributions may be entered
for particulate matter. Temporal emission factors (diurnal cycle,
monthly cycle, hour/season, wind speed/stability class, or temperature-
dependent emission factors) may also be entered. Arbitrarily-varying
line source parameters may be entered from an external file.
Meteorological Data (different forms of meteorological input can be
used by CALPUFF):
1. Time-dependent three-dimensional meteorological fields generated
by CALMET. This is the preferred mode for running CALPUFF. Inputs into
CALMET include surface observations of wind speed, wind direction,
temperature, cloud cover, ceiling height, relative humidity, surface
pressure, and precipitation (type and amount), and upper air sounding
data (wind speed, wind direction, temperature, and height). Optional
large-scale model output (e.g., from MM5) can be used by CALMET as well
(paragraph 9.3.1.2(d)).
2. Single station surface and upper air meteorological data in
CTDMPLUS data file formats (SURFACE.DAT and PROFILE.DAT files). This
allows a vertical variation in the meteorological parameters but no
spatial variability.
3. Single station meteorological data in ISCST3 data file format.
This option does not account for variability of the meteorological
parameters in the horizontal or vertical, except as provided for by the
use of stability-dependent wind shear exponents and average temperature
lapse rates.
Gridded terrain and land use data are required as input into CALMET
when Option 1 is used. Geophysical processor programs are provided that
interface the modeling system to standard terrain and land use data
bases provided by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS).
Receptor Data:
CALPUFF includes options for gridded and non-gridded (discrete)
receptors. Special subgrid-scale receptors are used with the subgrid-
scale complex terrain option. An option is provided for discrete
receptors to be placed at ground-level or above the local ground level
(i.e., flagpole receptors). Gridded and subgrid-scale receptors are
placed at the local ground level only.
Other Input:
CALPUFF accepts hourly observations of ozone concentrations for use
in its chemical transformation algorithm. Subgrid-scale coastlines can
be specified in its coastal boundary file. Optional, user-specified
deposition velocities and chemical transformation rates can also be
entered. CALPUFF accepts the CTDMPLUS terrain and receptor files for use
in its subgrid-scale terrain algorithm. Inflow boundary conditions of
modeled pollutants can be specified in a boundary condition file.
c. Output
CALPUFF produces files of hourly concentrations of ambient
concentrations for each modeled species, wet deposition fluxes, dry
deposition fluxes, and for visibility applications, extinction
coefficients. Postprocessing programs (PRTMET and CALPOST) provide
options for analysis and display of the modeling results.
d. Type of Model
(1) CALPUFF is a non-steady-state time- and space-dependent Gaussian
puff model.
[[Page 510]]
CALPUFF includes parameterized gas phase chemical transformation of
SO2, SO4=, NO, NO2,
HNO3, NO3-, and organic aerosols.
CALPUFF can treat primary pollutants such as PM-10, toxic pollutants,
ammonia, and other passive pollutants. The model includes a resistance-
based dry deposition model for both gaseous pollutants and particulate
matter. Wet deposition is treated using a scavenging coefficient
approach. The model has detailed parameterizations of complex terrain
effects, including terrain impingement, side-wall scrapping, and steep-
walled terrain influences on lateral plume growth. A subgrid-scale
complex terrain module based on a dividing streamline concept divides
the flow into a lift component traveling over the obstacle and a wrap
component deflected around the obstacle.
(2) The meteorological fields used by CALPUFF are produced by the
CALMET meteorological model. CALMET includes a diagnostic wind field
model containing objective analysis and parameterized treatments of
slope flows, valley flows, terrain blocking effects, and kinematic
terrain effects, lake and sea breeze circulations, and a divergence
minimization procedure. An energy-balance scheme is used to compute
sensible and latent heat fluxes and turbulence parameters over land
surfaces. A profile method is used over water. CALMET contains
interfaces to prognostic meteorological models such as the Penn State/
NCAR Mesoscale Model (e.g., MM5; Section 13.0, ref. 94), as well as the
RAMS and Eta models.
e. Pollutant Types
CALPUFF may be used to model gaseous pollutants or particulate
matter that are inert or undergo linear chemical reactions, such as
SO2, SO4=, NO, NO2,
HNO3, NO3-, NH3, PM-10, and
toxic pollutants. For regional haze analyses, sulfate and nitrate
particulate components are explicitly treated.
f. Source-Receptor Relationships
CALPUFF contains no fundamental limitations on the number of sources
or receptors. Parameter files are provided that allow the user to
specify the maximum number of sources, receptors, puffs, species, grid
cells, vertical layers, and other model parameters. Its algorithms are
designed to be suitable for source-receptor distances from tens of
meters to hundreds of kilometers.
g. Plume Behavior
Momentum and buoyant plume rise is treated according to the plume
rise equations of Briggs (1974, 1975) for non-downwashing point sources,
Schulman and Scire (1980) for line sources and point sources subject to
building downwash effects, and Zhang (1993) for buoyant area sources.
Stack tip downwash effects and partial plume penetration into elevated
temperature inversions are included.
h. Horizontal Winds
A three-dimensional wind field is computed by the CALMET
meteorological model. CALMET combines an objective analysis procedure
using wind observations with parameterized treatments of slope flows,
valley flows, terrain kinematic effects, terrain blocking effects, and
sea/lake breeze circulations. CALPUFF may optionally use single station
(horizontally-constant) wind fields in the CTDMPLUS data format.
i. Vertical Wind Speed
Vertical wind speeds are not used explicitly by CALPUFF. Vertical
winds are used in the development of the horizontal wind components by
CALMET.
j. Horizontal Dispersion
Turbulence-based dispersion coefficients provide estimates of
horizontal plume dispersion based on measured or computed values of
[sigma]v. The effects of building downwash and buoyancy-
induced dispersion are included. The effects of vertical wind shear are
included through the puff splitting algorithm. Options are provided to
use Pasquill-Gifford (rural) and McElroy-Pooler (urban) dispersion
coefficients. Initial plume size from area or volume sources is allowed.
k. Vertical Dispersion
Turbulence-based dispersion coefficients provide estimates of
vertical plume dispersion based on measured or computed values of
[sigma]w. The effects of building downwash and buoyancy-
induced dispersion are included. Vertical dispersion during convective
conditions is simulated with a probability density function (pdf) model
based on Weil et al. (1997). Options are provided to use Pasquill-
Gifford (rural) and McElroy-Pooler (urban) dispersion coefficients.
Initial plume size from area or volume sources is allowed.
l. Chemical Transformation
Gas phase chemical transformations are treated using parameterized
models of SO2 conversion to SO4= and NO
conversion to NO2, HNO3, and
SO4=. Organic aerosol formation is treated.
m. Physical Removal
Dry deposition of gaseous pollutants and particulate matter is
parameterized in terms of a resistance-based deposition model.
Gravitational settling, inertial impaction, and Brownian motion effects
on deposition of particulate matter is included. Wet deposition of gases
and particulate matter is parameterized in terms of a scavenging
coefficient approach.
[[Page 511]]
n. Evaluation Studies
Berman, S., J.Y. Ku, J. Zhang and S.T. Rao, 1977: Uncertainties in
estimating the mixing depth--Comparing three mixing depth models with
profiler measurements, Atmospheric Environment, 31: 3023-3039.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1998. Interagency Workgroup on Air
Quality Modeling (IWAQM) Phase 2 Summary Report and Recommendations for
Modeling Long-Range Transport Impacts. EPA Publication No. EPA-454/R-98-
019. Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards, Research Triangle Park,
NC.
Irwin, J.S. 1997. A Comparison of CALPUFF Modeling Results with 1997
INEL Field Data Results. In Air Pollution Modeling and its Application,
XII. Edited by S.E. Gyrning and N. Chaumerliac. Plenum Press, New York,
NY.
Irwin, J.S., J.S. Scire and D.G. Strimaitis, 1996. A Comparison of
CALPUFF Modeling Results with CAPTEX Field Data Results. In Air
Pollution Modeling and its Application, XI. Edited by S.E. Gyrning and
F.A. Schiermeier. Plenum Press, New York, NY.
Strimaitis, D.G., J.S. Scire and J.C. Chang. 1998. Evaluation of the
CALPUFF Dispersion Model with Two Power Plant Data Sets. Tenth Joint
Conference on the Application of Air Pollution Meteorology, Phoenix,
Arizona. American Meteorological Society, Boston, MA. January 11-16,
1998.
A.4 Complex Terrain Dispersion Model Plus Algorithms for Unstable
Situations (CTDMPLUS)
Reference
Perry, S.G., D.J. Burns, L.H. Adams, R.J. Paine, M.G. Dennis, M.T.
Mills, D.G. Strimaitis, R.J. Yamartino and E.M. Insley, 1989. User's
Guide to the Complex Terrain Dispersion Model Plus Algorithms for
Unstable Situations (CTDMPLUS). Volume 1: Model Descriptions and User
Instructions. EPA Publication No. EPA-600/8-89-041. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 89-181424)
Perry, S.G., 1992. CTDMPLUS: A Dispersion Model for Sources near
Complex Topography. Part I: Technical Formulations. Journal of Applied
Meteorology, 31(7): 633-645.
Availability
This model code is available on EPA's Internet SCRAM Web site and
also on diskette (as PB 90-504119) from the National Technical
Information Service (Section A.0).
Abstract
CTDMPLUS is a refined point source Gaussian air quality model for
use in all stability conditions for complex terrain applications. The
model contains, in its entirety, the technology of CTDM for stable and
neutral conditions. However, CTDMPLUS can also simulate daytime,
unstable conditions, and has a number of additional capabilities for
improved user friendliness. Its use of meteorological data and terrain
information is different from other EPA models; considerable detail for
both types of input data is required and is supplied by preprocessors
specifically designed for CTDMPLUS. CTDMPLUS requires the
parameterization of individual hill shapes using the terrain
preprocessor and the association of each model receptor with a
particular hill.
a. Recommendation for Regulatory Use
CTDMPLUS is appropriate for the following applications:
Elevated point sources;
Terrain elevations above stack top;
Rural or urban areas;
Transport distances less than 50 kilometers; and
One hour to annual averaging times when used with
a post-processor program such as CHAVG.
b. Input Requirements
(1) Source data: For each source, user supplies source location,
height, stack diameter, stack exit velocity, stack exit temperature, and
emission rate; if variable emissions are appropriate, the user supplies
hourly values for emission rate, stack exit velocity, and stack exit
temperature.
(2) Meteorological data: For applications of CTDMPLUS, multiple
level (typically three or more) measurements of wind speed and
direction, temperature and turbulence (wind fluctuation statistics) are
required to create the basic meteorological data file (``PROFILE'').
Such measurements should be obtained up to the representative plume
height(s) of interest (i.e., the plume height(s) under those conditions
important to the determination of the design concentration). The
representative plume height(s) of interest should be determined using an
appropriate complex terrain screening procedure (e.g., CTSCREEN) and
should be documented in the monitoring/modeling protocol. The necessary
meteorological measurements should be obtained from an appropriately
sited meteorological tower augmented by SODAR and/or RASS if the
representative plume height(s) of interest is above the levels
represented by the tower measurements. Meteorological preprocessors then
create a SURFACE data file (hourly values of mixed layer heights,
surface friction velocity, Monin-Obukhov length and surface roughness
length) and a RAWINsonde data file (upper air measurements of pressure,
temperature, wind direction, and wind speed).
(3) Receptor data: Receptor names (up to 400) and coordinates, and
hill number (each receptor must have a hill number assigned).
[[Page 512]]
(4) Terrain data: User inputs digitized contour information to the
terrain preprocessor which creates the TERRAIN data file (for up to 25
hills).
c. Output
(1) When CTDMPLUS is run, it produces a concentration file, in
either binary or text format (user's choice), and a list file containing
a verification of model inputs, i.e.,
Input meteorological data from ``SURFACE'' and
``PROFILE''
Stack data for each source
Terrain information
Receptor information
Source-receptor location (line printer map).
(2) In addition, if the case-study option is selected, the listing
includes:
Meteorological variables at plume height
Geometrical relationships between the source and
the hill
Plume characteristics at each receptor, i.e.,
--Distance in along-flow and cross flow direction
--Effective plume-receptor height difference
--Effective [sigma]y [sigma]z values, both flat
terrain and hill induced (the difference shows the effect of the hill)
--Concentration components due to WRAP, LIFT and FLAT.
(3) If the user selects the TOPN option, a summary table of the top
4 concentrations at each receptor is given. If the ISOR option is
selected, a source contribution table for every hour will be printed.
(4) A separate disk file of predicted (1-hour only) concentrations
(``CONC'') is written if the user chooses this option. Three forms of
output are possible:
(i) A binary file of concentrations, one value for each receptor in
the hourly sequence as run;
(ii) A text file of concentrations, one value for each receptor in
the hourly sequence as run; or
(iii) A text file as described above, but with a listing of receptor
information (names, positions, hill number) at the beginning of the
file.
(3) Hourly information provided to these files besides the
concentrations themselves includes the year, month, day, and hour
information as well as the receptor number with the highest
concentration.
d. Type of Model
CTDMPLUS is a refined steady-state, point source plume model for use
in all stability conditions for complex terrain applications.
e. Pollutant Types
CTDMPLUS may be used to model non-reactive, primary pollutants.
f. Source-Receptor Relationship
Up to 40 point sources, 400 receptors and 25 hills may be used.
Receptors and sources are allowed at any location. Hill slopes are
assumed not to exceed 15[deg], so that the linearized equation of motion
for Boussinesq flow are applicable. Receptors upwind of the impingement
point, or those associated with any of the hills in the modeling domain,
require separate treatment.
g. Plume Behavior
(1) As in CTDM, the basic plume rise algorithms are based on Briggs'
(1975) recommendations.
(2) A central feature of CTDMPLUS for neutral/stable conditions is
its use of a critical dividing-streamline height (Hc) to
separate the flow in the vicinity of a hill into two separate layers.
The plume component in the upper layer has sufficient kinetic energy to
pass over the top of the hill while streamlines in the lower portion are
constrained to flow in a horizontal plane around the hill. Two separate
components of CTDMPLUS compute ground-level concentrations resulting
from plume material in each of these flows.
(3) The model calculates on an hourly (or appropriate steady
averaging period) basis how the plume trajectory (and, in stable/neutral
conditions, the shape) is deformed by each hill. Hourly profiles of wind
and temperature measurements are used by CTDMPLUS to compute plume rise,
plume penetration (a formulation is included to handle penetration into
elevated stable layers, based on Briggs (1984)), convective scaling
parameters, the value of Hc, and the Froude number above
Hc.
h. Horizontal Winds
CTDMPLUS does not simulate calm meteorological conditions. Both
scalar and vector wind speed observations can be read by the model. If
vector wind speed is unavailable, it is calculated from the scalar wind
speed. The assignment of wind speed (either vector or scalar) at plume
height is done by either:
Interpolating between observations above and
below the plume height, or
Extrapolating (within the surface layer) from the
nearest measurement height to the plume height.
i. Vertical Wind Speed
Vertical flow is treated for the plume component above the critical
dividing streamline height (Hc); see ``Plume Behavior''.
j. Horizontal Dispersion
Horizontal dispersion for stable/neutral conditions is related to
the turbulence velocity scale for lateral fluctuations,
[sigma]v, for which a minimum value of 0.2 m/s is used.
[[Page 513]]
Convective scaling formulations are used to estimate horizontal
dispersion for unstable conditions.
k. Vertical Dispersion
Direct estimates of vertical dispersion for stable/neutral
conditions are based on observed vertical turbulence intensity, e.g.,
[sigma]w (standard deviation of the vertical velocity
fluctuation). In simulating unstable (convective) conditions, CTDMPLUS
relies on a skewed, bi-Gaussian probability density function (pdf)
description of the vertical velocities to estimate the vertical
distribution of pollutant concentration.
l. Chemical Transformation
Chemical transformation is not treated by CTDMPLUS.
m. Physical Removal
Physical removal is not treated by CTDMPLUS (complete reflection at
the ground/hill surface is assumed).
n. Evaluation Studies
Burns, D.J., L.H. Adams and S.G. Perry, 1990. Testing and Evaluation
of the CTDMPLUS Dispersion Model: Daytime Convective Conditions.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC.
Paumier, J.O., S.G. Perry and D.J. Burns, 1990. An Analysis of
CTDMPLUS Model Predictions with the Lovett Power Plant Data Base.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC.
Paumier, J.O., S.G. Perry and D.J. Burns, 1992. CTDMPLUS: A
Dispersion Model for Sources near Complex Topography. Part II:
Performance Characteristics. Journal of Applied Meteorology, 31(7): 646-
660.
A.6 Emissions and Dispersion Modeling System (EDMS) 3.1
Reference
Benson, Paul E., 1979. CALINE3--A Versatile Dispersion Model for
Predicting Air Pollutant Levels Near Highways and Arterial Streets.
Interim Report, Report Number FHWA/CA/TL-79/23. Federal Highway
Administration, Washington, DC. (NTIS No. PB 80-220841)
Federal Aviation Administration, 1997. Emissions and Dispersion
Modeling System (EDMS) Reference Manual. FAA Report No. FAA-AEE-97-01,
USAF Report No. AL/EQ-TR-1997-0010, Federal Aviation Administration,
Washington, DC 20591. SEE Availability below. (Note: this manual
includes supplements that are available on the EDMS Internet Web site:
http://www.aee.faa.gov/aee-100/aee-120/edms/banner.htm)
Petersen, W.B. and E.D. Rumsey, 1987. User's Guide for PAL 2.0--A
Gaussian-Plume Algorithm for Point, Area, and Line Sources. EPA
Publication No. EPA-600/8-87-009. Office of Research and Development,
Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 87-168 787/AS)
Availability
EDMS is available for $45 ($55 for users outside of the United
States). The order form is available from: http://www.aee.faa.gov. Click
the EDMS button on the left side of the page, and then click on the
``EDMS Order Form'' link. The $45 cost covers the distribution of the
EDMS package: A CD ROM containing the executable installation file, the
user manual, and the model changes document. This EDMS package does not
include the source code, which is available only through special request
and FAA approval. Upon installation the user will have on their computer
an executable file for the model and supporting data and program files.
Official contact at Federal Aviation Administration: Ms. Julie Draper,
AEE, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591, Phone: (202)
267-3494.
Abstract
EDMS is a combined emissions/dispersion model for assessing
pollution at civilian airports and military air bases. This model, which
was jointly developed by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and
the United States Air Force (USAF), produces an emission inventory of
all airport sources and calculates concentrations produced by these
sources at specified receptors. The system stores emission factors for
fixed sources such as fuel storage tanks and incinerators and also for
mobile sources such as aircraft or automobiles. The EDMS emissions
inventory module incorporates methodologies described in AP-42 for
calculating aircraft emissions, on-road and off-road vehicle emissions,
and stationary source emissions. The dispersion modeling module
incorporates PAL2 and CALINE3 (Section A.3) for the various emission
source types. Both of these components interact with the database to
retrieve and store data. The dispersion module, which processes point,
area, and line sources, also incorporates a special meteorological
preprocessor for processing up to one year of National Climatic Data
Center (NCDC) hourly data.
a. Recommendations for Regulatory Use
EDMS is appropriate for the following applications:
Cumulative effect of changes in aircraft
operations, point source and mobile source emissions at airports or air
bases;
Simple terrain;
Non-reactive pollutants;
Transport distances less than 50 kilometers; and
1-hour to annual averaging times.
[[Page 514]]
b. Input Requirements
(1) All data are entered through the EDMS graphical user interface.
Typical entry items are annual and hourly source activity, source and
receptor coordinates, etc. Some point sources, such as heating plants,
require stack height, stack diameter, and effluent temperature inputs.
(2) Wind speed, wind direction, hourly temperature, and Pasquill-
Gifford stability category (P-G) are the meteorological inputs. They can
be entered manually through the EDMS data entry screens or automatically
through the processing of previously loaded NCDC hourly data.
c. Output
Printed outputs consist of:
A summary emission inventory report with
pollutant totals by source category and detailed emission inventory
reports for each source category; and
A concentration summary report for up to 8760
hours (one year) of meteorological data that lists the number of
sources, receptors, and the five highest concentrations for applicable
averaging periods for the respective primary NAAQS.
d. Type of Model
For its emissions inventory calculations, EDMS uses algorithms
consistent with the EPA Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors,
AP-42 (Section 11.0, ref. 96). For its dispersion calculations, EDMS
uses the Point Area & Line (PAL2) model and the CALifornia LINE source
(CALINE3) model, both of which use Gaussian algorithms.
e. Pollutant Types
EDMS includes emission factors for carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides,
sulfur oxides, hydrocarbons, and suspended particles and calculates the
dispersion for all except hydrocarbons.
f. Source-Receptor Relationship
(1) Within hardware and memory constraints, there is no upper limit
to the number of sources and receptors that can be modeled
simultaneously.
(2) The Gaussian point source equation estimates concentrations from
point sources after determining the effective height of emission and the
upwind and crosswind distance of the source from the receptor. Numerical
integration of the Gaussian point source equation is used to determine
concentrations from line sources (runways). Integration over area
sources (parking lots), which includes edge effects from the source
region, is done by considering finite line sources perpendicular to the
wind at intervals upwind from the receptor. The crosswind integration is
done analytically; integration upwind is done numerically by successive
approximations. Terrain elevation differences between sources and
receptors are neglected.
(3) A reasonable height above ground level may be specified for each
receptor.
g. Plume Behavior
(1) Briggs final plume rise equations are used. If plume height
exceeds mixing height, concentrations are assumed equal to zero. Surface
concentrations are set to zero when the plume centerline exceeds mixing
height.
(2) For roadways, plume rise is not treated.
(3) Building and stack tip downwash effects are not treated.
h. Horizontal Winds
(1) Steady state winds are assumed for each hour. Winds are assumed
to be constant with altitude.
(2) Winds are entered manually by the user or automatically by
reading previously loaded NCDC annual data files.
i. Vertical Wind Speed
Vertical wind speed is assumed to be zero.
j. Horizontal Dispersion
(1) Six stability classes are used (P-G classes A through F).
(2) Aircraft runways, vehicle parking lots, stationary sources, and
training fires are modeled using PAL2. Either rural (Pasquill-Gifford)
or urban (Briggs) dispersion settings may be specified globally for
these sources.
(3) Vehicle roadways, aircraft taxiways, and aircraft queues are
modeled using CALINE3. CALINE3 assumes urban dispersion curves. The user
specifies terrain roughness.
k. Vertical Dispersion
(1) Six stability classes are used (P-G classes A through F).
(2) Aircraft runways, vehicle parking lots, stationary sources, and
training fires are modeled using PAL2. Either rural (Pasquill-Gifford)
or urban (Briggs) dispersion settings may be specified globally for
these sources.
(3) Vehicle roadways, aircraft taxiways, and aircraft queues are
modeled using CALINE3. CALINE3 assumes urban dispersion curves. The user
specifies terrain roughness.
l. Chemical Transformation
Chemical transformations are not accounted for.
m. Physical Removal
Deposition is not treated.
n. Evaluation Studies
None cited.
[[Page 515]]
A.5 Industrial Source Complex Model (ISC3)
Reference
Environmental Protection Agency, 1995. User's Guide for the
Industrial Source Complex (ISC3) Dispersion Models, Volumes 1 and 2. EPA
Publication Nos. EPA-454/B-95-003a & b. Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS Nos. PB 95-222741 and PB 95-222758,
respectively)
Availability
The model code is available on the EPA's Internet SCRAM website.
ISCST3 (as PB 2002-500055) is also available on diskette from the
National Technical Information Service (see Section A.0).
Abstract
The ISC3 model is a steady-state Gaussian plume model which can be
used to assess pollutant concentrations from a wide variety of sources
associated with an industrial source complex. This model can account for
the following: Settling and dry deposition of particles; downwash; area,
line and volume sources; plume rise as a function of downwind distance;
separation of point sources; and limited terrain adjustment. ISC3
operates in both long-term and short-term modes.
a. Recommendations for Regulatory Use
ISC3 is appropriate for the following applications:
Industrial source complexes;
Rural or urban areas;
Flat or rolling terrain;
Transport distances less than 50 kilometers;
1-hour to annual averaging times; and
Continuous toxic air emissions.
The following options should be selected for regulatory
applications: For short term or long term modeling, set the regulatory
``default option''; i.e., use the keyword DFAULT, which automatically
selects stack tip downwash, final plume rise, buoyancy induced
dispersion (BID), the vertical potential temperature gradient, a
treatment for calms, the appropriate wind profile exponents, the
appropriate value for pollutant half-life, and a revised building wake
effects algorithm; set the ``rural option'' (use the keyword RURAL) or
``urban option'' (use the keyword URBAN); and set the ``concentration
option'' (use the keyword CONC).
b. Input Requirements
Source data: Location, emission rate, physical stack height, stack
gas exit velocity, stack inside diameter, and stack gas temperature.
Optional inputs include source elevation, building dimensions, particle
size distribution with corresponding settling velocities, and surface
reflection coefficients.
Meteorological data: ISCST3 requires hourly surface weather data
from the preprocessor program RAMMET, which provides hourly stability
class, wind direction, wind speed, temperature, and mixing height. For
ISCLT3, input includes stability wind rose (STAR deck), average
afternoon mixing height, average morning mixing height, and average air
temperature.
Receptor data: Coordinates and optional ground elevation for each
receptor.
c. Output
Printed output options include:
Program control parameters, source data, and
receptor data;
Tables of hourly meteorological data for each
specified day;
``N''-day average concentration or total
deposition calculated at each receptor for any desired source
combinations;
Concentration or deposition values calculated for
any desired source combinations at all receptors for any specified day
or time period within the day;
Tables of highest and second highest
concentration or deposition values calculated at each receptor for each
specified time period during a(n) ``N''-day period for any desired
source combinations, and tables of the maximum 50 concentration or
deposition values calculated for any desired source combinations for
each specified time period.
d. Type of Model
ISC3 is a Gaussian plume model. It has been revised to perform a
double integration of the Gaussian plume kernel for area sources.
e. Pollutant Types
ISC3 may be used to model primary pollutants and continuous releases
of toxic and hazardous waste pollutants. Settling and deposition are
treated.
f. Source-Receptor Relationships
ISC3 applies user-specified locations for point, line, area and
volume sources, and user-specified receptor locations or receptor rings.
User input topographic evaluation for each receptor is used.
Elevations above stack top are reduced to the stack top elevation, i.e.,
``terrain chopping''.
User input height above ground level may be used when necessary to
simulate impact at elevated or ``flag pole'' receptors, e.g., on
buildings.
Actual separation between each source-receptor pair is used.
[[Page 516]]
g. Plume Behavior
ISC3 uses Briggs (1969, 1971, 1975) plume rise equations for final
rise.
Stack tip downwash equation from Briggs (1974) is used.
Revised building wake effects algorithm is used. For stacks higher
than building height plus one-half the lesser of the building height or
building width, the building wake algorithm of Huber and Snyder (1976)
is used. For lower stacks, the building wake algorithm of Schulman and
Scire (Schulman and Hanna, 1986) is used, but stack tip downwash and BID
are not used.
For rolling terrain (terrain not above stack height), plume
centerline is horizontal at height of final rise above source.
Fumigation is not treated.
h. Horizontal Winds
Constant, uniform (steady-state) wind is assumed for each hour.
Straight line plume transport is assumed to all downwind distances.
Separate wind speed profile exponents (Irwin, 1979; EPA, 1980) for
both rural and urban cases are used.
An optional treatment for calm winds is included for short term
modeling.
i. Vertical Wind Speed
Vertical wind speed is assumed equal to zero.
j. Horizontal Dispersion
Rural dispersion coefficients from Turner (1969) are used, with no
adjustments for surface roughness or averaging time.
Urban dispersion coefficients from Briggs (Gifford, 1976) are used.
Buoyancy induced dispersion (Pasquill, 1976) is included.
Six stability classes are used.
k. Vertical Dispersion
Rural dispersion coefficients from Turner (1969) are used, with no
adjustments for surface roughness.
Urban dispersion coefficients from Briggs (Gifford, 1976) are used.
Buoyancy induced dispersion (Pasquill, 1976) is included.
Six stability classes are used.
Mixing height is accounted for with multiple reflections until the
vertical plume standard deviation equals 1.6 times the mixing height;
uniform vertical mixing is assumed beyond that point.
Perfect reflection is assumed at the ground.
l. Chemical Transformation
Chemical transformations are treated using exponential decay. Time
constant is input by the user.
m. Physical Removal
Dry deposition effects for particles are treated using a resistance
formulation in which the deposition velocity is the sum of the
resistances to pollutant transfer within the surface layer of the
atmosphere, plus a gravitational settling term (EPA, 1994), based on the
modified surface depletion scheme of Horst (1983).
n. Evaluation Studies
Bowers, J.F. and A.J. Anderson, 1981. An Evaluation Study for the
Industrial Source Complex (ISC) Dispersion Model, EPA Publication No.
EPA-450/4-81-002. Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards, Research
Triangle Park, NC.
Bowers, J.F., A.J. Anderson and W.R. Hargraves, 1982. Tests of the
Industrial Source Complex (ISC) Dispersion Model at the Armco
Middletown, Ohio Steel Mill. EPA Publication No. EPA-450/4-82-006.
Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1992. Comparison of a Revised Area
Source Algorithm for the Industrial Source Complex Short Term Model and
Wind Tunnel Data. EPA Publication No. EPA-454/R-92-014. Office of Air
Quality Planning & Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB
93-226751)
Environmental Protection Agency, 1992. Sensitivity Analysis of a
Revised Area Source Algorithm for the Industrial Source Complex Short
Term Model. EPA Publication No. EPA-454/R-92-015. Office of Air Quality
Planning & Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 93-
226769)
Environmental Protection Agency, 1992. Development and Evaluation of
a Revised Area Source Algorithm for the Industrial Source Complex Long
Term Model. EPA Publication No. EPA-454/R-92-016. Office of Air Quality
Planning & Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS No. PB 93-
226777)
Environmental Protection Agency, 1994. Development and Testing of a
Dry Deposition Algorithm (Revised). EPA Publication No. EPA-454/R-94-
015. Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards, Research Triangle Park,
NC. (NTIS No. PB 94-183100)
Scire, J.S. and L.L. Schulman, 1981. Evaluation of the BLP and ISC
Models with SF6 Tracer Data and SO2 Measurements
at Aluminum Reduction Plants. Air Pollution Control Association
Specialty Conference on Dispersion Modeling for Complex Sources, St.
Louis, MO.
Schulman, L.L. and S.R. Hanna, 1986. Evaluation of Downwash
Modification to the Industrial Source Complex Model. Journal of the Air
Pollution Control Association, 36: 258-264.
[[Page 517]]
A.7 Offshore and Coastal Dispersion Model (OCD)
Reference
DiCristofaro, D.C. and S.R. Hanna, 1989. OCD: The Offshore and
Coastal Dispersion Model, Version 4. Volume I: User's Guide, and Volume
II: Appendices. Sigma Research Corporation, Westford, MA. (NTIS Nos. PB
93-144384 and PB 93-144392)
Availability
This model code is available on the EPA's Internet SCRAM Web site
and also on diskette (as PB 91-505230) from the National Technical
Information Service (see Section A.0). Official contact at Minerals
Management Service: Mr. Dirk Herkhof, Parkway Atrium Building, 381 Elden
Street, Herndon, VA 20170, Phone: (703) 787-1735.
Abstract
(1) OCD is a straight-line Gaussian model developed to determine the
impact of offshore emissions from point, area or line sources on the air
quality of coastal regions. OCD incorporates overwater plume transport
and dispersion as well as changes that occur as the plume crosses the
shoreline. Hourly meteorological data are needed from both offshore and
onshore locations. These include water surface temperature, overwater
air temperature, mixing height, and relative humidity.
(2) Some of the key features include platform building downwash,
partial plume penetration into elevated inversions, direct use of
turbulence intensities for plume dispersion, interaction with the
overland internal boundary layer, and continuous shoreline fumigation.
a. Recommendations for Regulatory Use
OCD has been recommended for use by the Minerals Management Service
for emissions located on the Outer Continental Shelf. OCD is applicable
for overwater sources where onshore receptors are below the lowest
source height. Where onshore receptors are above the lowest source
height, offshore plume transport and dispersion may be modeled on a
case-by-case basis in consultation with the appropriate reviewing
authority (paragraph 3.0(b)).
b. Input Requirements
(1) Source data: Point, area or line source location, pollutant
emission rate, building height, stack height, stack gas temperature,
stack inside diameter, stack gas exit velocity, stack angle from
vertical, elevation of stack base above water surface and gridded
specification of the land/water surfaces. As an option, emission rate,
stack gas exit velocity and temperature can be varied hourly.
(2) Meteorological data (over water): Wind direction, wind speed,
mixing height, relative humidity, air temperature, water surface
temperature, vertical wind direction shear (optional), vertical
temperature gradient (optional), turbulence intensities (optional).
(3) Meteorological data (over land): Wind direction, wind speed,
temperature, stability class, mixing height.
(4) Receptor data: Location, height above local ground-level,
ground-level elevation above the water surface.
c. Output
(1) All input options, specification of sources, receptors and land/
water map including locations of sources and receptors.
(2) Summary tables of five highest concentrations at each receptor
for each averaging period, and average concentration for entire run
period at each receptor.
(3) Optional case study printout with hourly plume and receptor
characteristics. Optional table of annual impact assessment from non-
permanent activities.
(4) Concentration files written to disk or tape can be used by
ANALYSIS postprocessor to produce the highest concentrations for each
receptor, the cumulative frequency distributions for each receptor, the
tabulation of all concentrations exceeding a given threshold, and the
manipulation of hourly concentration files.
d. Type of Model
OCD is a Gaussian plume model constructed on the framework of the
MPTER model.
e. Pollutant Types
OCD may be used to model primary pollutants. Settling and deposition
are not treated.
f. Source-Receptor Relationship
(1) Up to 250 point sources, 5 area sources, or 1 line source and
180 receptors may be used.
(2) Receptors and sources are allowed at any location.
(3) The coastal configuration is determined by a grid of up to 3600
rectangles. Each element of the grid is designated as either land or
water to identify the coastline.
g. Plume Behavior
(1) As in ISC, the basic plume rise algorithms are based on Briggs'
recommendations.
(2) Momentum rise includes consideration of the stack angle from the
vertical.
(3) The effect of drilling platforms, ships, or any overwater
obstructions near the source are used to decrease plume rise using a
revised platform downwash algorithm based on laboratory experiments.
[[Page 518]]
(4) Partial plume penetration of elevated inversions is included
using the suggestions of Briggs (1975) and Weil and Brower (1984).
(5) Continuous shoreline fumigation is parameterized using the
Turner method where complete vertical mixing through the thermal
internal boundary layer (TIBL) occurs as soon as the plume intercepts
the TIBL.
h. Horizontal Winds
(1) Constant, uniform wind is assumed for each hour.
(2) Overwater wind speed can be estimated from overland wind speed
using relationship of Hsu (1981).
(3) Wind speed profiles are estimated using similarity theory
(Businger, 1973). Surface layer fluxes for these formulas are calculated
from bulk aerodynamic methods.
i. Vertical Wind Speed
Vertical wind speed is assumed equal to zero.
j. Horizontal Dispersion
(1) Lateral turbulence intensity is recommended as a direct estimate
of horizontal dispersion. If lateral turbulence intensity is not
available, it is estimated from boundary layer theory. For wind speeds
less than 8 m/s, lateral turbulence intensity is assumed inversely
proportional to wind speed.
(2) Horizontal dispersion may be enhanced because of obstructions
near the source. A virtual source technique is used to simulate the
initial plume dilution due to downwash.
(3) Formulas recommended by Pasquill (1976) are used to calculate
buoyant plume enhancement and wind direction shear enhancement.
(4) At the water/land interface, the change to overland dispersion
rates is modeled using a virtual source. The overland dispersion rates
can be calculated from either lateral turbulence intensity or Pasquill-
Gifford curves. The change is implemented where the plume intercepts the
rising internal boundary layer.
k. Vertical Dispersion
(1) Observed vertical turbulence intensity is not recommended as a
direct estimate of vertical dispersion. Turbulence intensity should be
estimated from boundary layer theory as default in the model. For very
stable conditions, vertical dispersion is also a function of lapse rate.
(2) Vertical dispersion may be enhanced because of obstructions near
the source. A virtual source technique is used to simulate the initial
plume dilution due to downwash.
(3) Formulas recommended by Pasquill (1976) are used to calculate
buoyant plume enhancement.
(4) At the water/land interface, the change to overland dispersion
rates is modeled using a virtual source. The overland dispersion rates
can be calculated from either vertical turbulence intensity or the
Pasquill-Gifford coefficients. The change is implemented where the plume
intercepts the rising internal boundary layer.
l. Chemical Transformation
Chemical transformations are treated using exponential decay.
Different rates can be specified by month and by day or night.
m. Physical Removal
Physical removal is also treated using exponential decay.
n. Evaluation Studies
DiCristofaro, D.C. and S.R. Hanna, 1989. OCD: The Offshore and
Coastal Dispersion Model. Volume I: User's Guide. Sigma Research
Corporation, Westford, MA.
Hanna, S.R., L.L. Schulman, R.J. Paine and J.E. Pleim, 1984. The
Offshore and Coastal Dispersion (OCD) Model User's Guide, Revised. OCS
Study, MMS 84-0069. Environmental Research & Technology, Inc., Concord,
MA. (NTIS No. PB 86-159803)
Hanna, S.R., L.L. Schulman, R.J. Paine, J.E. Pleim and M. Baer,
1985. Development and Evaluation of the Offshore and Coastal Dispersion
(OCD) Model. Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association, 35: 1039-
1047.
Hanna, S.R. and D.C. DiCristofaro, 1988. Development and Evaluation
of the OCD/API Model. Final Report, API Pub. 4461, American Petroleum
Institute, Washington, DC.
A.REF References
Benson, P.E., 1979. CALINE3--A Versatile Dispersion Model for
Predicting Air Pollution Levels Near Highways and Arterial Streets.
Interim Report, Report Number FHWA/CA/TL-79/23. Federal Highway
Administration, Washington, DC.
Briggs, G.A., 1969. Plume Rise. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission
Critical Review Series, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN.
(NTIS No. TID-25075)
Briggs, G.A., 1971. Some Recent Analyses of Plume Rise Observations.
Proceedings of the Second International Clean Air Congress, edited by
H.M. Englund and W.T. Berry. Academic Press, New York, NY.
Briggs, G.A., 1974. Diffusion Estimation for Small Emissions. USAEC
Report ATDL-106. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Oak Ridge, TN.
Briggs, G.A., 1975. Plume Rise Predictions. Lectures on Air
Pollution and Environmental Impact Analyses. American Meteorological
Society, Boston, MA, pp. 59-111.
[[Page 519]]
Briggs, G.A., 1984. Analytical Parameterizations of Diffusion: The
Convective Boundary Layer. Journal of Climate and Applied Meteorology,
24(11): 1167-1186
Environmental Protection Agency, 1980. Recommendations on Modeling
(October 1980 Meetings). Appendix G to: Summary of Comments and
Responses on the October 1980 Proposed Revisions to the Guideline on Air
Quality Models. Meteorology and Assessment Division, Office of Research
and Development, Research Triangle Park, NC.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1998. Interagency Workgroup on Air
Quality Modeling (IWAQM) Phase 2 Summary Report and Recommendations for
Modeling Long-Range Transport Impacts. EPA Publication No. EPA-454/R-98-
019. (NTIS No. PB 99-121089)
Gifford, F.A., Jr. 1976. Turbulent Diffusion Typing Schemes--A
Review. Nuclear Safety, 17: 68-86.
Horst, T.W., 1983. A Correction to the Gaussian Source-depletion
Model. In Precipitation Scavenging, Dry Deposition and Resuspension.
H.R. Pruppacher, R.G. Semonin and W.G.N. Slinn, eds., Elsevier, NY.
Hsu, S.A., 1981. Models for Estimating Offshore Winds from Onshore
Meteorological Measurements. Boundary Layer Meteorology, 20: 341-352.
Huber, A.H. and W.H. Snyder, 1976. Building Wake Effects on Short
Stack Effluents. Third Symposium on Atmospheric Turbulence, Diffusion
and Air Quality, American Meteorological Society, Boston, MA.
Irwin, J.S., 1979. A Theoretical Variation of the Wind Profile
Power-Law Exponent as a Function of Surface Roughness and Stability.
Atmospheric Environment, 13: 191-194.
Liu, M.K. et al., 1976. The Chemistry, Dispersion, and Transport of
Air Pollutants Emitted from Fossil Fuel Power Plants in California: Data
Analysis and Emission Impact Model. Systems Applications, Inc., San
Rafael, CA.
Pasquill, F., 1976. Atmospheric Dispersion Parameters in Gaussian
Plume Modeling Part II. Possible Requirements for Change in the Turner
Workbook Values. EPA Publication No. EPA-600/4-76-030b. Office of Air
Quality Planning & Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC.
Petersen, W.B., 1980. User's Guide for HIWAY-2 A Highway Air
Pollution Model. EPA Publication No. EPA-600/8-80-018. Office of
Research & Development, Research Triangle Park, NC. (NTIS PB 80-227556)
Rao, T.R. and M.T. Keenan, 1980. Suggestions for Improvement of the
EPA-HIWAY Model. Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association, 30:
247-256 (and reprinted as Appendix C in Petersen, 1980).
Schulman, L.L. and S.R. Hanna, 1986. Evaluation of Downwash
Modification to the Industrial Source Complex Model. Journal of the Air
Pollution Control Association, 36: 258-264.
Segal, H.M., 1983. Microcomputer Graphics in Atmospheric Dispersion
Modeling. Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association, 23: 598-600.
Snyder, W. H., R.S. Thompson, R. E. Eskridge, R. E. Lawson, I. P.
Castro, J. T. Lee, J. C. R. Hunt, and Y. Ogawa, 1985. The structure of
the strongly stratified flow over hills: Dividing streamline concept.
Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 152: 249-288.
Turner, D.B., 1969. Workbook of Atmospheric Dispersion Estimates.
PHS Publication No. 999-26. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle, Park, NC.
Weil, J.C. and R.P. Brower, 1984. An Updated Gaussian Plume Model
for Tall Stacks. Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association, 34:
818-827.
Weil, J.C., 1996. A new dispersion algorithm for stack sources in
building wakes, Paper 6.6. Ninth Joint Conference on Applications of Air
Pollution Meteorology with A&WMA, January 28--February 2, 1996. Atlanta,
GA.
Weil, J.C., L.A. Corio, and R.P. Brower, 1997. A PDF dispersion
model for buoyant plumes in the convective boundary layer. Journal of
Applied Meteorology, 36: 982-1003.
Zhang, X., 1993. A computational analysis of the rise, dispersion,
and deposition of buoyant plumes. Ph.D. Thesis, Massachusetts Institute
of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
Zhang, X. and A.F. Ghoniem, 1993. A computational model for the rise
and dispersion of wind-blown, buoyancy-driven plumes--I. Neutrally
stratified atmosphere. Atmospheric Environment, 15: 2295--2311.
[68 FR 18448, Apr. 15, 2003]
Appendix X to Part 51--Examples of Economic Incentive Programs
I. Introduction and Purpose
This appendix contains examples of EIP's which are covered by the
EIP rules. Program descriptions identify key provisions which
distinguish the different model program types. The examples provide
additional information and guidance on various types of regulatory
programs collectively referred to as EIP's. The examples include
programs involving stationary, area, and mobile sources. The definition
section at 40 CFR 51.491 defines an EIP as a program which may include
State established emission fees or a system of marketable permits, or a
system of State fees on sale or manufacture of products the use of which
contributes to O3 formation, or any combination of the
foregoing or other similar measures, as well as incentives and
requirements to reduce vehicle emissions and vehicle miles traveled in
the area, including any of the transportation control measures
identified in section 108(f). Such programs span a wide spectrum of
program designs.
[[Page 520]]
The EIP's are comprised of several elements that, in combination
with each other, must insure that the fundamental principles of any
regulatory program (including accountability, enforceability and
noninterference with other requirements of the Act) are met. There are
many possible combinations of program elements that would be acceptable.
Also, it is important to emphasize that the effectiveness of an EIP is
dependent upon the particular area in which it is implemented. No two
areas face the same air quality circumstances and, therefore, effective
strategies and programs will differ among areas.
Because of these considerations, the EPA is not specifying one
particular design or type of strategy as acceptable for any given EIP.
Such specific guidance would potentially discourage States (or other
entities with delegated authority to administer parts of an
implementation plan) from utilizing other equally viable program designs
that may be more appropriate for their situation. Thus, the examples
given in this Appendix are general in nature so as to avoid limiting
innovation on the part of the States in developing programs tailored to
individual State needs.
Another important consideration in designing effective EIP's is the
extent to which different strategies, or programs targeted at different
types of sources, can complement one another when implemented together
as an EIP ``package.'' The EPA encourages States to consider packaging
different measures together when such a strategy is likely to increase
the overall benefits from the program as a whole. Furthermore, some
activities, such as information distribution or public awareness
programs, while not EIP's in and of themselves, are often critical to
the success of other measures and, therefore, would be appropriate
complementary components of a program package. All SIP emissions
reductions credits should reflect a consideration of the effectiveness
of the entire package.
II. Examples of Stationary and Mobile Source Economic Incentive
Strategies
There is a wide variety of programs that fall under the general
heading of EIP's. Further, within each general type of program are
several different basic program designs. This section describes common
types of EIP's that have been implemented, designed, or discussed in the
literature for stationary and mobile sources. The program types
discussed below do not include all of the possible types of EIP's.
Innovative approaches incorporating new ideas in existing programs,
different combinations of existing program elements, or wholly new
incentive systems provide additional opportunities for States to find
ways to meet environmental goals at lower total cost.
A. Emissions Trading Markets
One prominent class of EIP's is based upon the creation of a market
in which trading of source-specific emissions requirements may occur.
Such programs may include traditional rate-based emissions limits
(generally referred to as emissions averaging) or overall limits on a
source's total mass emissions per unit of time (generally referred to as
an emissions cap). The emissions limits, which may be placed on
individual emitting units or on facilities as a whole, may decline over
time. The common feature of such programs is that sources have an
ongoing incentive to reduce pollution and increased flexibility in
meeting their regulatory requirements. A source may meet its own
requirements either by directly preventing or controlling emissions or
by trading or averaging with another source. Trading or averaging may
occur within the same facility, within the same firm, or between
different firms. Sources with lower cost abatement alternatives may
provide the necessary emissions reductions to sources facing more
expensive alternatives. These programs can lower the overall cost of
meeting a given total level of abatement. All sources eligible to trade
in an emissions market are faced with continuing incentives to find
better ways of reducing emissions at the lowest possible cost, even if
they are already meeting their own emissions requirements.
Stationary, area, and mobile sources could be allowed to participate
in a common emissions trading market. Programs involving emissions
trading markets are particularly effective at reducing overall costs
when individual affected sources face significantly different emissions
control costs. A wider range in control costs among affected sources
creates greater opportunities for cost-reducing trades. Thus, for
example, areas which face relatively high stationary source control
costs relative to mobile source control costs benefit most by including
both stationary and mobile sources in a single emissions trading market.
Programs involving emissions trading markets have generally been
designated as either emission allowance or emission reduction credit
(ERC) trading programs. The Federal Acid Rain Program is an example of
an emission allowance trading program, while ``bubbles'' and ``generic
bubbles'' created under the EPA's 1986 Emission Trading Policy Statement
are examples of ERC trading. Allowance trading programs can establish
emission allocations to be effective at the start of a program, at some
specific time in the future, or at varying levels over time. An ERC
trading program requires ERC's to be measured against a pre-established
emission
[[Page 521]]
baseline. Allowance allocations or emission baselines can be established
either directly by the EIP rules or by reference to traditional
regulations (e.g., RACT requirements). In either type of program,
sources can either meet their EIP requirements by maintaining their own
emissions within the limits established by the program, or by buying
surplus allowances or ERC's from other sources. In any case, the State
will need to establish adequate enforceable procedures for certifying
and tracking trades, and for monitoring and enforcing compliance with
the EIP.
The definition of the commodity to be traded and the design of the
administrative procedures the buyer and seller must follow to complete a
trade are obvious elements that must be carefully selected to help
ensure a successful trading market that achieves the desired
environmental goal at the lowest cost. An emissions market is defined as
efficient if it achieves the environmental goal at the lowest possible
total cost. Any feature of a program that unnecessarily increases the
total cost without helping achieve the environmental goals causes market
inefficiency. Thus, the design of an emission trading program should be
evaluated not only in terms of the likelihood that the program design
will ensure that the environmental goals of the program will be met, but
also in terms of the costs that the design imposes upon market
transactions and the impact of those costs on market efficiency.
Transaction costs are the investment in time and resources to
acquire information about the price and availability of allowances or
ERC's, to negotiate a trade, and to assure the trade is properly
recorded and legally enforceable. All trading markets impose some level
of transaction costs. The level of transaction costs in an emissions
trading market are affected by various aspects of the design of the
market, such as the nature of the procedures for reviewing, approving,
and recording trades, the timing of such procedures (i.e., before or
after the trade is made), uncertainties in the value of the allowance or
credit being traded, the legitimacy of the allowance or credit being
offered for sale, and the long-term integrity of the market itself.
Emissions trading programs in which every transaction is different, such
as programs requiring significant consideration of the differences in
the chemical properties or geographic location of the emissions, can
result in higher transaction costs than programs with a standardized
trading commodity and well-defined rules for acceptable trades.
Transaction costs are also affected by the relative ease with which
information can be obtained about the availability and price of
allowances or credits.
While the market considerations discussed above are clearly
important in designing an efficient market to minimize the transaction
costs of such a program, other considerations, such as regulatory
certainty, enforcement issues, and public acceptance, also clearly need
to be factored into the design of any emissions trading program.
B. Fee Programs
A fee on each unit of emissions is a strategy that can provide a
direct incentive for sources to reduce emissions. Ideally, fees should
be set so as to result in emissions being reduced to the socially
optimal level considering the costs of control and the benefits of the
emissions reductions. In order to motivate a change in emissions, the
fees must be high enough that sources will actively seek to reduce
emissions. It is important to note that not all emission fee programs
are designed to motivate sources to lower emissions. Fee programs using
small fees are designed primarily to generate revenue, often to cover
some of the administrative costs of a regulatory program.
There can be significant variations in emission fee programs. For
example, potential emissions could be targeted by placing a fee on an
input (e.g., a fee on the quantity and BTU content of fuel used in an
industrial boiler) rather than on actual emissions. Sources paying a fee
on potential emissions could be eligible for a fee waiver or rebate by
demonstrating that potential emissions are not actually emitted, such as
through a carbon absorber system on a coating operation.
Some fee program variations are designed to mitigate the potentially
large amount of revenue that a fee program could generate. Although more
complex than a simple fee program, programs that reduce or eliminate the
total revenues may be more readily adopted in a SIP than a simple
emission fee. Some programs lower the amount of total revenues generated
by waiving the fee on some emissions. These programs reduce the total
amount of revenue generated, while providing an incentive to decrease
emissions. Alternatively, a program may impose higher per-unit fees on a
portion of the emissions stream, providing a more powerful but targeted
incentive at the same revenue levels. For example, fees could be
collected on all emissions in excess of some fixed level. The level
could be set as a percentage of a baseline (e.g., fees on emissions
above some percentage of historical emissions), or as the lowest
emissions possible (e.g., fees on emissions in excess of the lowest
demonstrated emissions from the source category).
Other fee programs are ``revenue neutral,'' meaning that the
pollution control agency does not receive any net revenues. One way to
design a revenue-neutral program is to have both a fee provision and a
rebate provision. Rebates must be carefully designed to avoid lessening
the incentive provided by the emission fee. For example, a rebate based
on
[[Page 522]]
comparing a source's actual emissions and the average emissions for the
source category can be designed to be revenue neutral and not diminish
the incentive.
Other types of fee programs collect a fee in relation to particular
activities or types of products to encourage the use of alternatives.
While these fees are not necessarily directly linked to the total amount
of emissions from the activity or product, the relative simplicity of a
usage fee may make such programs an effective way to lower emissions. An
area source example is a construction permit fee for wood stoves. Such a
permit fee is directly related to the potential to emit inherent in a
wood stove, and not to the actual emissions from each wood stove in use.
Fees on raw materials to a manufacturing process can encourage product
reformulation (e.g., fees on solvent sold to makers of architectural
coatings) or changes in work practices (e.g., fees on specialty solvents
and degreasing compounds used in manufacturing).
Road pricing mechanisms are fee programs that are available to
curtail low occupancy vehicle use, fund transportation system
improvements and control measures, spatially and temporally shift
driving patterns, and attempt to effect land usage changes. Primary
examples include increased peak period roadway, bridge, or tunnel tolls
(this could also be accomplished with automated vehicle identification
systems as well), and toll discounts for pooling arrangements and zero-
emitting/low-emitting vehicles.
C. Tax Code and Zoning Provisions
Modifications to existing State or local tax codes, zoning
provisions, and land use planning can provide effective economic
incentives. Possible modifications to encourage emissions reductions
cover a broad span of programs, such as accelerated depreciation of
capital equipment used for emissions reductions, corporate income tax
deductions or credits for emission abatement costs, property tax waivers
based on decreasing emissions, exempting low-emitting products from
sales tax, and limitations on parking spaces for office facilities.
Mobile source strategies include waiving or lowering any of the
following for zero- or low-emitting vehicles: vehicle registration fees,
vehicle property tax, sales tax, taxicab license fees, and parking
taxes.
D. Subsidies
A State may create incentives for reducing emissions by offering
direct subsidies, grants or low-interest loans to encourage the purchase
of lower-emitting capital equipment, or a switch to less polluting
operating practices. Examples of such programs include clean vehicle
conversions, starting shuttle bus or van pool programs, and mass transit
fare subsidies. Subsidy programs often suffer from a variety of ``free
rider'' problems. For instance, subsidies for people or firms who were
going to switch to the cleaner alternative anyway lower the
effectiveness of the subsidy program, or drive up the cost of achieving
a targeted level of emissions reductions.
E. Transportation Control Measures
The following measures are the TCM's listed in section 108(f):
(i) Programs for improved public transit;
(ii) Restriction of certain roads or lanes to, or construction of
such roads or lanes for use by, passenger buses or high occupancy
vehicles;
(iii) Employer-based transportation management plans, including
incentives;
(iv) Trip-reduction ordinances;
(v) Traffic flow improvement programs that achieve emission
reductions;
(vi) Fringe and transportation corridor parking facilities serving
multiple-occupancy vehicle programs or transit service;
(vii) Programs to limit or restrict vehicle use in downtown areas or
other areas of emission concentration particularly during periods of
peak use;
(viii) Programs for the provision of all forms of high-occupancy,
shared-ride services;
(ix) Programs to limit portions of road surfaces or certain sections
of the metropolitan area to the use of non-motorized vehicles or
pedestrian use, both as to time and place;
(x) Programs for secure bicycle storage facilities and other
facilities, including bicycle lanes, for the convenience and protection
of bicyclists, in both public and private areas;
(xi) Programs to control extended idling of vehicles;
(xii) Programs to reduce motor vehicle emissions, consistent with
title II, which are caused by extreme cold start conditions;
(xiii) Employer-sponsored programs to permit flexible work
schedules;
(xiv) Programs and ordinances to facilitate non-automobile travel,
provision and utilization of mass transit, and to generally reduce the
need for single-occupant vehicle travel, as part of transportation
planning and development efforts of a locality, including programs and
ordinances applicable to new shopping centers, special events, and other
centers of vehicle activity;
(xv) Programs for new construction and major reconstruction of
paths, tracks or areas solely for the use by pedestrian or other non-
motorized means of transportation when economically feasible and in the
public interest. For purposes of this clause, the Administrator shall
also consult with the Secretary of the Interior; and
(xvi) Programs to encourage the voluntary removal from use and the
marketplace of
[[Page 523]]
pre-1980 model year light-duty vehicles and pre-1980 model light-duty
trucks.
[59 FR 16715, Apr. 7, 1994]