Update of Continuous Instrumental Test Methods

[Federal Register: May 15, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 93)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 28081-28104]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr15my06-10]
[[Page 28082]]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 60
[EPA-OAR-2002-0071; FRL-8165-1]
RIN 2060-AK61

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: On October 10, 2003, the EPA proposed amendments to update
five instrumental test methods that are used to measure air pollutant
emissions from stationary sources. These amendments are finalized in
this document and reflect changes to the proposal to accommodate the
public comments. This action is made to improve the methods by
simplifying, harmonizing, and updating their procedures. A large number
of industries are already subject to provisions that require the use of
these methods. Some of the affected industries and their North American
Industrial Classification System (NAICS) are listed under SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION.

DATES: This final rule is effective on August 14, 2006.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. OAR-2002-0071. All documents in the docket are listed on the http://
www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically through http://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air and Radiation Docket,
Docket ID No. OAR-2003-0071, EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room
B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading
Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading
Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air and
Radiation Docket is (202) 566-1742.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Foston Curtis, Measurement Technology
Group (E143-02), Air Quality Assessment Division, EPA, Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone (919) 541-1063; fax
number (919) 541-0516; electronic mail address: curtis.foston@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Affected Entities. Categories and entities potentially regulated
by the final rule include the following:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of regulated entities SIC codes NAICS codes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fossil Fuel Steam Generators............ 3569 332410
Industrial, Commercial, Institutional 3569 332410
Steam Generating Units.................
Electric Generating..................... 3569 332410
Stationary Gas Turbines................. 3511 333611
Petroleum Refineries.................... 2911 324110
Municipal Waste Combustors.............. 4953 562213
Kraft Pulp Mills........................ 2621 322110
Sulfuric Acid Plants.................... 2819 325188
------------------------------------------------------------------------

This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. This table lists examples of the types of entities EPA is now
aware could potentially be affected by the final rule. Other types of
entities not listed could also be affected. If you have any questions
regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity,
consult the person listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section.
B. Worldwide Web. In addition to being available in the docket, an
electronic copy of today's final rule amendments will also be available
on the Worldwide Web (WWW) through the Technology Transfer Network
(TTN). Following the Administrator's signature, a copy of the final
rule will be placed on the TTN's policy and guidance page for newly
proposed or promulgated rules at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN
provides information and technology exchange in various areas of air
pollution control.
C. Judicial Review. Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act
(CAA), judicial review of the final rule is available only by filing a
petition for review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit by July 14, 2006. Under section 307(d)(7)(B) of the
CAA, only an objection to the final rule that was raised with
reasonable specificity during the period for public comment can be raised
during judicial review. Under CAA section 307(b)(2), the requirements
established by the final rule may not be challenged later in civil or
criminal proceedings brought by EPA to enforce these requirements.
D. Outline. The information presented in this preamble is organized
as follows:

I. Background
II. Summary of Major Comments and Revisions Since Proposal
A. Uncertainty Calculation
B. Sampling System Bias
C. Calibration Drift Test
D. Analyzer Calibration Error Test
E. Interference Test
F. Alternative Dynamic Spike Procedure
G. Sampling Traverse Points
H. Sampling Dilution Systems
I. Equipment Heating Specifications
J. Technology-Specific Analyzers
K. Calibration Gases
L. Method 7E Converter Test
III. Summary of Environmental, Energy, and Economic Impacts
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Action Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
I. NTTAA: National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
J. Congressional Review Act

I. Background

Methods 3A, 6C, 7E, 10, and 20 are instrumental procedures used to
measure oxygen, carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and
carbon monoxide emissions in stationary sources. They are prescribed
for determining compliance with a number of Federal, State, and Local
regulations. Amendments to update these methods were originally
proposed on August 27,

[[Page 28083]]

1997 (62 FR 45369) as part of an action to update the test methods in
40 CFR parts 60, 61, and 63. Eight comment letters were received from
this proposal with comments pertinent to Methods 3A, 6C, 7E, 10, and
20. Some commenters thought insufficient notification was given in the
preamble for the changes being proposed and asked that the instrumental
method revisions be reproposed as a separate action. This separate
proposal was published on October 10, 2003 (68 FR 58838) and contained
additional revisions not included in the first proposal. Sixty one
comment letters were received from this second proposal. These comments
along with the comments received from the first proposal were used to
make the appropriate changes to the proposed revisions.

II. Summary of Major Comments and Revisions Since Proposal

A. Uncertainty Calculation. Numerous commenters disliked the
proposed requirement to calculate data uncertainty in the method
results and thought it inappropriate and confusing. It was noted that
existing emission limitations were developed using emission data
derived principally from these same test methods with no consideration
of uncertainty. Further, the purpose of the Federal test methods is to
provide a means of demonstrating compliance with the applicable
requirements on the basis of the test method results. Most commenters
objected to allowing regulatory agencies (or data end users) the
discretion of accepting data close to an emission limit if the
uncertainty determination is questionable, especially since no criteria
for acceptable uncertainty were identified. The commenters thought that
measurement uncertainty and data quality objectives present a number of
very serious issues that are too easy for those without a thorough
understanding of statistics to misapply. The resulting gray areas would
incite many frivolous lawsuits by those who would use the perception of
uncertainty to continuously challenge any decision made related to
compliance. The commenters noted that the proposed revisions failed to
provide a definition for uncertainty and the proposed uncertainty
calculation reflected only two factors (sampling system bias and
converter efficiency) that contribute to uncertainty, rather than all
potential measurement factors. They preferred the tester and facility
have a reasonable assurance that they have met the test requirements
based on a properly quality assured test, not on an untenable
uncertainty calculation.
A number of commenters recommended retaining the bias-corrected
data calculation currently in Method 6C in place of the proposed data
uncertainty calculation.
We agree with the commenters and have dropped the proposed
requirement to calculate measurement uncertainty. The methods will
retain a bias-correction for the sample concentration similar to what
is current in Method 6C.
B. Sampling System Bias. Several commenters found the proposed
sampling system bias calculation that is based on the emission standard
problematic because some units have no emission limit, others have more
than one limit, and still others have limits in units other than
concentration (e.g., lbs/hr, lb/mm BTU, or lb/ton feed). Most believed
analyzer performance and accuracy are best evaluated as a function of
analyzer span. One commenter wondered why the proposed bias test was
based on the emission standard, while the other performance tests were not.
In the proposal, the conversion table for sources that have
standards in units other than concentration and the note in section
1.3.3 advising the test to be designed around the most stringent
standard in cases of multiple standards were attempts to alleviate the
problems the commenters noted. We proposed using the emission limit in
place of the span in the bias calculation to relieve what was thought
to be an increased burden of passing the test when lower spans are
chosen. The intent was to have testers use a consistent value in the
denominator of the bias equation and emphasize the greatest accuracy in
the range of the emission standard. This approach appears to have added
more complication than it was intended to relieve.
In the final rule, the proposed change to calculate the bias
relative to the emission standard has been dropped. The bias
determination as a percentage of the span is retained. However,
``span'' has been changed to ``calibration span'' which is equivalent
to the concentration of the high calibration gas as in the proposal. In
the current methods, the span is any number that doesn't result in the
emission standard being less than 30 percent of the span. The high
calibration gas chosen for this span must then be 80-100 percent of the
span. This allows a concentration interval between the high calibration
gas and the span that is not quality assured. This interval has been
eliminated.
The traditional ``span'' was often mistaken for and used
interchangeably with ``analyzer range.'' With the ``calibration span,''
only the calibrated portion of the analyzer range is of concern, and
any value that exceeds the calibration span is considered invalid.
This approach offers several additional advantages. First, it gives
the tester flexibility to set the calibration range at a convenient
number that is not excessive. Second, it alleviates concern about the
quality of data points that are currently allowed between the high
calibration concentration and the span. Third, if it is properly chosen
with the majority of measurements in the 20-to-100 percent range, it
would prevent a tester from choosing an inordinately high calibration
range which reduces measurement accuracy.
C. Calibration Drift Test. Commenters generally thought that the
between-run calibration drift requirement should not be eliminated as
in the proposal. We have taken this recommendation and retained the
between-run drift determination.
D. Analyzer Calibration Error Test. Two commenters thought the
proposed limit for calibration error of 2 percent of the certified gas
concentration was unnecessarily restrictive when compared to the
existing 2 percent of span specification. They noted that EPA gave no
technical basis for such increased restriction and recommended the
proposed change be dropped. Others wondered why the same gases were
required for the analyzer setup and the calibration error test? This
seemed redundant.
The proposed requirement that the analyzer calibration error be
within 2 percent of the tag value has been changed to 2 percent of the
calibration span. The proposed requirement to calibrate the instrument
with the same gases used in the calibration error test has been dropped.
E. Interference Test. Commenters in general objected to EPA's
proposed requirement to conduct the interference test on an annual
basis. They noted that little evidence was provided to show that annual
interference testing was necessary. They believed the test should only
be repeated after major instrument modifications. Annual interference
testing was thought to put a major burden on the testing companies.
The commenters raised valid concerns. The proposed requirement to
conduct the interference test on an annual basis has been dropped. The
interference test will remain a one-time test except for major
instrument modifications, as is the current requirement. The current
interference test in Method 6C, where the analyzer is compared to
modified Method 6

[[Page 28084]]

samples in the field, is now listed as the alternative interference
test procedure since this approach was considered archaic by some
commenters. An interference test where the analyzer is challenged by
potential interferent gases is now the primary procedure.
F. Alternative Dynamic Spike Procedure. Commenters thought the
dynamic spiking procedure was confusing and lacked sufficient detail to
perform. Some commenters thought adding the procedure was a good idea;
others strenuously objected to even allowing it as an option.
We have retained the allowance to use dynamic spiking as an
alternative to the interference and bias tests, except for part 75
applications, where Administrative approval is required to use the
procedure. We purposely made the procedure general and performance-
based instead of making it prescriptive because different procedures
may be followed to perform it successfully. We believe that dynamic
spiking is a valuable tool for evaluating a method and should be
retained as an alternative for testers able to perform it. Clarity has
been added to the procedure details where possible to remove confusion.
G. Sampling Traverse Points. Comments were mixed on the proposed
requirement to use Method 1 unless a stratification test showed fewer
sampling point are justified. The majority did not think a Method 1
determination was justified for gaseous sampling in all cases and that
this made the methods burdensome and significantly more costly to use.
Others proposed reducing the number of points to three, as are allowed
in relative accuracy testing of continuous emission monitoring systems.
Two commenters recommended dropping the proposed requirement to correct
the pollutant concentration for diluent in the stratification test.
In the final rule, the tester may either sample at twelve Method 1
points or a stratification test (3-point or 12-point) may be performed.
If the stratification test is done and results in a concentration
deviation of any point from the mean concentration by more than 10
percent, then a minimum of twelve traverse points located according to
Method 1 must be sampled. If the concentrations of all stratification
test points are less than 10 percent from the mean, the testing may
resume using 3 traverse points. If the concentrations at all
stratification test points are less than 5 percent from the mean, then
single-point testing may be performed. Note that these traverse point
layout rules are not intended to apply to relative accuracy test audits
(RATA) of continuous emission monitoring systems (CEMS) where
applicable CEMS quality assurance requirements specify specific
traverse point selection requirements for RATA.
H. Sampling Dilution Systems. Commenters recommended that EPA
specifically state that dilution-based sampling technology is an
acceptable technique. These systems have been approved by the Emission
Measurement Center (EMC) as alternative method ALT-007 (Use of Dilution
Probes with Instrumental Methods). Guidance Document 18 from EMC also
indicates that dilution sampling systems are acceptable for use with
Methods 6C, 7E, 20, and 10, and the special requirements of dilution-
based sampling are addressed. This information, or the discussions
found in Chapter 21 of the Part 75 Emissions Monitoring Policy Manual
were recommended for addition to the methods.
The instrumental methods have been modified to clearly note that
dilution systems are acceptable. We have included discussions of
calibration gas needs relative to the sample gas molecular weight,
calibration drift test variations, and other instructions pertinent to
dilutions systems that were a part of EMC Guidance Document GD-18.
I. Equipment Heating Specifications. Several commenters criticized
the numerous references to equipment heating that were thought to
preclude the use of other techniques of preventing sample loss. We were
urged to require that the sample be maintained at a temperature above
the dew point of the sample gas rather than specifying minimum
equipment temperatures to provide a technology-neutral approach.
The language has been changed to allow the tester to choose which
procedure or technology to use for preventing condensation. The final
rule requires the sample gas be maintained above the dew point of the
stack gas (including all gas components, e.g. acid gas constituents) so
that no loss of sample results. This may be done by heating, diluting,
drying, desiccating, a combination thereof, or by other means.
J. Technology-Specific Analyzers. Various references to specific
technologies throughout the methods were noted. Most commenters wanted
us to remove these references. One commenter implicated electrochemical
cells for providing completely unreliable results when not operated in
diffusion limiting conditions even though such analyzers could meet the
performance criteria of the proposal while operating outside of
diffusion-limiting conditions. The commenter recommended this technology
be subject to special procedures such as those included in ASTM D6522-00.
We have removed the references to specific technologies in the
methods to make them flexible and performance-based, not technology-
based. It may be difficult to set performance requirements that
appropriately evaluate all analytical techniques 100 percent of the
time. However, we believe the interference, calibration error, and bias
tests provide adequate assessments of performance for the majority of
the time. The electrochemical analyzer has been shown capable of
producing reliable results in an Environmental Technology Verification
study, and we do not believe special restrictions should be placed on
this technology.
K. Calibration Gases. Commenters asked that we list all of the
allowable calibration gas blends in the methods. They wanted the
wording changed to allow the flexibility of blending standards with
other gases that can be shown not to interfere. One commenter thought
the proposed mid-level calibration gas range of 20 to 70 percent of the
span-level gas was an improvement over the existing 40 to 60 percent
range. Another commenter thought this would allow for poor selection of
mid-level gases. Other commenters wondered if it was acceptable to
prepare calibration gases from a single high-concentration EPA
Traceability Protocol gas using Method 205.
Blended calibration gases are allowed in the final rule provided
they are made from Traceability Protocol gases and any additional gas
components are shown not to interfere with the analysis. After
considering the comments, the EPA has decided to retain the current 40-
to 60-percent of span requirement for the mid-level gas. We believe
this ensures a better evaluation of the analyzer's linear response, as
noted by one of the commenters. In the final rule, Method 205 is
allowed to prepare calibration gases from high-concentration gases of
EPA Traceability Protocol quality, except for part 75 applications,
which require administrative approval to use this technique.
L. Method 7E Converter Test. Several commenters noted that the
nitrogen dioxide (NO₂) calibration gas used in the converter
efficiency test is not available as an EPA Traceability Protocol
Standard as required. This prevents one from performing the test.
Because NO₂ has unusual storage problems, it is difficult to
maintain the gas at its certified concentration. A search of vendors
has shown that gas of

[[Page 28085]]

traceability protocol quality is available commercially, but in limited
concentrations and from limited sources. We also concur with the long-
term stability problems noted with NO₂ cylinder gas. Because
of these concerns, we have retained the original procedures cited in
Method 20 for determining converter efficiency and have listed the
proposed procedure for direct evaluation with NO₂ as an
allowable alternative. Numerous commenters pointed out the error in the
converter efficiency correction in the uncertainty calculation. This
error has been corrected through a new equation.
Commenters generally thought that requiring the converter
efficiency gas be in the concentration range of the source emissions
was too restrictive and would require numerous gas cylinders be
transported into the field. We understand the difficulty in preparing
test gases to match anticipated emission levels. Therefore, we have
dropped the proposed requirement to match the stack NO₂
concentration within 50 percent and instead require gas in the 40 to 60
ppm range for all cases.

IV. Summary of Environmental, Energy, and Economic Impacts

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Reviews

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735 October 4, 1993), the EPA
must determine whether this regulatory action is ``significant'' and
therefore subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Order defines
``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a
rule that may: (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million
or more or adversely affects in a material way the economy, a sector of
the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, Local, or Tribal governments or
communities; (2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interferes
with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3) materially alter
the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan
programs, or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4)
raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the
President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order.
We have determined that this rule is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under the terms of Executive Order 12866 and is therefore not
subject to OMB review. We have determined that this regulation would
result in none of the economic effects set forth in Section 1 of the
Order because it does not impose emission measurement requirements
beyond those specified in the current regulations, nor does it change
any emission standard.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
These criteria do not add information collection requirements beyond
those currently required under the applicable regulation. The amendments
being made to the test methods do not add information collection
requirements but make needed updates to existing testing methodology.
Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information;
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

EPA has determined that it is not necessary to prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis in connection with this final rule.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's rule on small
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as defined
by the Small Business Administrations' regulations at 13 CFR 121.201;
(2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city,
county, town, school district or special district with a population of
less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is any not-for-
profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not
dominant in its field. Entities potentially affected by this action
include those listed in Table 1 of SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
After considering the economic impacts of today's final rule on
small entities, I have concluded that this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
This rule reflects changes to the proposal to accommodate the public
comments and is made to improve the test methods by simplifying,
harmonizing, and updating their procedures. A large number of the
regulated industries are already subject to the provisions that require
the use of these methods and this rule does not impose any new emission
measurement requirements beyond those specified in the current
regulations, nor does it change any emission standard but makes needed
updates to existing testing methodology. This rule would also add some
flexibility by giving testers more choice in selecting their test equipment
which could translate into reduced costs for the regulated industries.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, Local, and Tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, Local, and Tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt
the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover,
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must
provide for notifying potentially

[[Page 28086]]

affected small governments, enabling officials of affected small
governments to have meaningful and timely input in the development of
EPA regulatory proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental
mandates, and informing, educating, and advising small governments on
compliance with the regulatory requirements.
Today's rule contains no Federal mandates (under the regulatory
provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for State, Local, or Tribal
governments or the private sector. The rule imposes no enforceable duty
on any State, Local, or Tribal governments or the private sector. In
any event, EPA has determined that this rule does not contain a Federal
mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for
State, Local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private
sector in any one year. Thus, today's rule is not subject to the
requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and Local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' are defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
This rule does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132. Thus, the requirements of section 6
of the Executive Order do not apply to this rule.

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

Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (59 FR 22951, November 6, 2000),
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have tribal implications.'' ``Policies that have tribal
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations
that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal government and the Indian tribes,
or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the
Federal government and Indian tribes.''
This final rule does not have tribal implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship
between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175. In
this final rule, we are simply updating existing pollutant test
methods. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.

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

Executive Order 13045 applies to any rule that EPA determines (1)
is ``economically significant'' as defined under Executive Order 12866,
and (2) the environmental health or safety risk addressed by the rule
has a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action
meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health
or safety effects of the planned rule on children and explain why the
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to
regulatory actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that
the analysis required under section 5-501 of the Executive Order has
the potential to influence the regulation. This final rule is not
subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is not based on health or
safety risks.

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

This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions
Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. NTTAA: National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113 (15 U.S.C. 272), directs us to
use voluntary consensus standards (VCS) in our regulatory activities
unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards
(e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedures,
business practices, etc.) that are developed or adopted by VCS bodies.
The NTTAA requires us to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations
when we decide not to use available and applicable VCS. We are requiring
new test methods in this rulemaking. Therefore, NTTAA does not apply.

J. Congressional Review Act

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing the final rule
amendments and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S.
House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the final rule amendments in the Federal
Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after its
publication in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major
rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). The final rule amendments will be
effective on July 14, 2006.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, New sources, Test
methods and procedures, Performance specifications, and Continuous
emission monitors.

Dated: April 28, 2006.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.

? For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 60 of
the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 60--[AMENDED]

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

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

? 2. Appendix A-2 is amended by revising Method 3A to read as follows:

Appendix A-2 to Part 60--Test Methods 2G Through 3C

* * * * *

[[Page 28087]]

Method 3A--Determination of Oxygen and Carbon Dioxide Concentrations in
Emissions From Stationary Sources (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure)

1.0 Scope and Application

What is Method 3A?

Method 3A is a procedure for measuring oxygen (O₂)
and carbon dioxide (CO₂) in stationary source emissions
using a continuous instrumental analyzer. Quality assurance and
quality control requirements are included to assure that you, the
tester, collect data of known quality. You must document your
adherence to these specific requirements for equipment, supplies,
sample collection and analysis, calculations, and data analysis.
This method does not completely describe all equipment,
supplies, and sampling and analytical procedures you will need but
refers to other methods for some of the details. Therefore, to
obtain reliable results, you should also have a thorough knowledge of these
additional test methods which are found in appendix A to this part:
(a) Method 1--Sample and Velocity Traverses for Stationary Sources.
(b) Method 3--Gas Analysis for the Determination of Molecular Weight.
(c) Method 4--Determination of Moisture Content in Stack Gases.
(d) Method 7E--Determination of Nitrogen Oxides Emissions from
Stationary Sources (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure).
1.1 Analytes. What does this method determine? This method
measures the concentration of oxygen and carbon dioxide.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analyte CAS No. Sensitivity
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oxygen (O2).................... 7782-44-7 Typically < 2% of
Calibration Span.
Carbon dioxide (CO2)........... 124-38-9 Typically < 2% of
Calibration Span.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

1.2 Applicability. When is this method required? The use of
Method 3A may be required by specific New Source Performance
Standards, Clean Air Marketing rules, State Implementation Plans and
permits, where measurements of O₂ and CO₂
concentrations in stationary source emissions must be made, either
to determine compliance with an applicable emission standard or to
conduct performance testing of a continuous emission monitoring
system (CEMS). Other regulations may also require the use of Method 3A.
1.3 Data Quality Objectives. How good must my collected data be?
Refer to Section 1.3 of Method 7E.

2.0 Summary of Method

In this method, you continuously or intermittently sample the
effluent gas and convey the sample to an analyzer that measures the
concentration of O₂ or CO₂. You must meet the
performance requirements of this method to validate your data.

3.0 Definitions

Refer to Section 3.0 of Method 7E for the applicable definitions.

4.0 Interferences [Reserved]

5.0 Safety

Refer to Section 5.0 of Method 7E.

6.0 Equipment and Supplies

Figure 7E-1 in Method 7E is a schematic diagram of an acceptable
measurement system.
6.1 What do I need for the measurement system? The components of
the measurement system are described (as applicable) in Sections 6.1
and 6.2 of Method 7E, except that the analyzer described in Section
6.2 of this method must be used instead of the analyzer described in
Method 7E. You must follow the noted specifications in Section 6.1
of Method 7E except that the requirements to use stainless steel,
Teflon, or non-reactive glass filters do not apply. Also, a heated
sample line is not required to transport dry gases or for systems
that measure the O₂ or CO₂ concentration on a
dry basis, provided that the system is not also being used to
concurrently measure SO₂ and/or NO_X.
6.2 What analyzer must I use? You must use an analyzer that
continuously measures O₂ or CO₂ in the gas
stream and meets the specifications in Section 13.0.

7.0 Reagents and Standards

7.1 Calibration Gas. What calibration gases do I need? Refer to
Section 7.1 of Method 7E for the calibration gas requirements.
Example calibration gas mixtures are listed below.
(a) CO₂ in nitrogen (N₂).
(b) CO₂ in air.
(c) CO₂/SO₂ gas mixture in N₂.
(d) O₂/SO₂ gas mixture in N₂.
(e) O₂/CO₂/SO₂ gas mixture in N₂.
(f) CO₂/NO_X gas mixture in N₂.
(g) CO₂/SO₂/NO_X gas mixture in N₂.
The tests for analyzer calibration error and system bias require
high-, mid-, and low-level gases.
7.2 Interference Check. What reagents do I need for the
interference check? Potential interferences may vary among available
analyzers. Table 7E-3 of Method 7E lists a number of gases that
should be considered in conducting the interference test.

8.0 Sample Collection, Preservation, Storage, and Transport

8.1 Sampling Site and Sampling Points. You must follow the
procedures of Section 8.1 of Method 7E to determine the appropriate
sampling points, unless you are using Method 3A only to determine
the stack gas molecular weight and for no other purpose. In that
case, you may use single-point integrated sampling as described in
Section 8.2 of Method 3. If the stratification test provisions in
Section 8.1.2 of Method 7E are used to reduce the number of required
sampling points, the alternative acceptance criterion for 3-point
sampling will be ± 0.5 percent CO₂ or
O₂, and the alternative acceptance criterion for single-
point sampling will be ± 0.3 percent CO₂ or O₂.
8.2 Initial Measurement System Performance Tests. You must
follow the procedures in Section 8.2 of Method 7E. If a dilution-
type measurement system is used, the special considerations in
Section 8.3 of Method 7E apply.
8.3 Interference Check. The O₂ or CO₂
analyzer must be documented to show that interference effects to not
exceed 2.5 percent of the calibration span. The interference test in
Section 8.2.7 of Method 7E is a procedure that may be used to show
this. The effects of all potential interferences at the
concentrations encountered during testing must be addressed and
documented. This testing and documentation may be done by the
instrument manufacturer.
8.4 Sample Collection. You must follow the procedures in Section
8.4 of Method 7E.
8.5 Post-Run System Bias Check and Drift Assessment. You must
follow the procedures in Section 8.5 of Method 7E.

9.0 Quality Control

Follow quality control procedures in Section 9.0 of Method 7E.

10.0 Calibration and Standardization

Follow the procedures for calibration and standardization in
Section 10.0 of Method 7E.

11.0 Analytical Procedures

Because sample collection and analysis are performed together
(see Section 8), additional discussion of the analytical procedure
is not necessary.

12.0 Calculations and Data Analysis

You must follow the applicable procedures for calculations and data
analysis in Section 12.0 of Method 7E, substituting percent O₂ and
percent CO₂ for ppmv of NO_X as appropriate.

13.0 Method Performance

The specifications for the applicable performance checks are the
same as in Section 13.0 of Method 7E except for the alternative
specifications for system bias, drift, and calibration error. In these
alternative specifications, replace the term ``0.5 ppmv'' with the term
``0.5 percent O₂'' or ``0.5 percent CO₂'' (as applicable).

14.0 Pollution Prevention [Reserved]

15.0 Waste Management [Reserved]

16.0 Alternative Procedures [Reserved]

17.0 References

1. ``EPA Traceability Protocol for Assay and Certification of
Gaseous Calibration Standards'' September 1997 as amended, EPA-600/
R-97/121.

18.0 Tables, Diagrams, Flowcharts, and Validation Data

Refer to Section 18.0 of Method 7E.
* * * * *

[[Page 28088]]

? 3. Appendix A-4 is amended by revising Methods 6C, 7E, and 10 to read
as follows:

Appendix A-4 to Part 60--Test Methods 6 Through 10B

* * * * *

Method 6C--Determination of Sulfur Dioxide Emissions From Stationary
Sources (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure)

1.0 Scope and Application

What is Method 6C?

Method 6C is a procedure for measuring sulfur dioxide
(SO₂) in stationary source emissions using a continuous
instrumental analyzer. Quality assurance and quality control
requirements are included to assure that you, the tester, collect
data of known quality. You must document your adherence to these
specific requirements for equipment, supplies, sample collection and
analysis, calculations, and data analysis.
This method does not completely describe all equipment,
supplies, and sampling and analytical procedures you will need but
refers to other methods for some of the details. Therefore, to obtain
reliable results, you should also have a thorough knowledge of these
additional test methods which are found in appendix A to this part:
(a) Method 1--Sample and Velocity Traverses for Stationary Sources.
(b) Method 4--Determination of Moisture Content in Stack Gases.
(c) Method 6--Determination of Sulfur Dioxide Emissions from
Stationary Sources.
(d) Method 7E--Determination of Nitrogen Oxides Emissions from
Stationary Sources (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure).
1.1 Analytes. What does this method determine? This method
measures the concentration of sulfur dioxide.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analyte CAS No. Sensitivity
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2............................ 7446-09-5 Typically < 2% of
Calibration Span.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

1.2 Applicability. When is this method required? The use of
Method 6C may be required by specific New Source Performance
Standards, Clean Air Marketing rules, State Implementation Plans,
and permits where SO₂ concentrations in stationary source
emissions must be measured, either to determine compliance with an
applicable emission standard or to conduct performance testing of a
continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS). Other regulations may
also require the use of Method 6C.
1.3 Data Quality Objectives. How good must my collected data be?
Refer to Section 1.3 of Method 7E.

2.0 Summary of Method

In this method, you continuously sample the effluent gas and
convey the sample to an analyzer that measures the concentration of
SO₂. You must meet the performance requirements of this
method to validate your data.

3.0 Definitions

Refer to Section 3.0 of Method 7E for the applicable definitions.

4.0 Interferences

Refer to Section 4.1 of Method 6.

5.0 Safety

Refer to Section 5.0 of Method 7E.

6.0 Equipment and Supplies

Figure 7E-1 of Method 7E is a schematic diagram of an acceptable
measurement system.
6.1 What do I need for the measurement system? The essential
components of the measurement system are the same as those in
Sections 6.1 and 6.2 of Method 7E, except that the SO₂
analyzer described in Section 6.2 of this method must be used
instead of the analyzer described in Section 6.2 of Method 7E. You
must follow the noted specifications in Section 6.1 of Method 7E.
6.2 What analyzer must I use? You may use an instrument that
uses an ultraviolet, non-dispersive infrared, fluorescence, or other
detection principle to continuously measure SO₂ in the
gas stream and meets the performance specifications in Section 13.0.
The low-range and dual-range analyzer provisions in Section 6.2.8.1
of Method 7E apply.

7.0 Reagents and Standards

7.1 Calibration Gas. What calibration gases do I need? Refer to
Section 7.1 of Method 7E for the calibration gas requirements.
Example calibration gas mixtures are listed below.
(a) SO₂ in nitrogen (N₂).
(b) SO₂ in air.
(c) SO₂ and CO₂ in N₂.
(d) SO₂ andO₂ in N₂.
(e) SO₂/CO₂/O₂ gas mixture in N₂.
(f) CO₂/NO_X gas mixture in N₂.
(g) CO₂/SO₂/NO_X gas mixture in N₂.
7.2 Interference Check. What additional reagents do I need for the
interference check? The test gases for the interference check are listed
in Table 7E-3 of Method 7E. For the alternative interference check, you
must use the reagents described in Section 7.0 of Method 6.

8.0 Sample Collection, Preservation, Storage, and Transport

8.1 Sampling Site and Sampling Points. You must follow the
procedures of Section 8.1 of Method 7E.
8.2 Initial Measurement System Performance Tests. You must
follow the procedures in Section 8.2 of Method 7E. If a dilution-
type measurement system is used, the special considerations in
Section 8.3 of Method 7E also apply.
8.3 Interference Check. You must follow the procedures of
Section 8.2.7 of Method 7E to conduct an interference check,
substituting SO₂ for NO_X as the method
pollutant. For dilution-type measurement systems, you must use the
alternative interference check procedure in Section 16 and a co-
located, unmodified Method 6 sampling train.
8.4 Sample Collection. You must follow the procedures of Section
8.4 of Method 7E.
8.5 Post-Run System Bias Check and Drift Assessment. You must
follow the procedures of Section 8.5 of Method 7E.

9.0 Quality Control

Follow quality control procedures in Section 9.0 of Method 7E.

10.0 Calibration and Standardization

Follow the procedures for calibration and standardization in
Section 10.0 of Method 7E.

11.0 Analytical Procedures

Because sample collection and analysis are performed together
(see Section 8), additional discussion of the analytical procedure
is not necessary.

12.0 Calculations and Data Analysis

You must follow the applicable procedures for calculations and
data analysis in Section 12.0 of Method 7E as applicable,
substituting SO₂ for NO_X as appropriate.

13.0 Method Performance

13.1 The specifications for the applicable performance checks
are the same as in Section 13.0 of Method 7E.
13.2 Alternative Interference Check. The results are acceptable
if the difference between the Method 6C result and the modified
Method 6 result is less than 7.0 percent of the Method 6 result for
each of the three test runs. For the purposes of comparison, the
Method 6 and 6C results must be expressed in the same units of measure.

14.0 Pollution Prevention [Reserved]

15.0 Waste Management [Reserved]

16.0 Alternative Procedures

16.1 Alternative Interference Check. You may perform an
alternative interference check consisting of at least three
comparison runs between Method 6C and Method 6. This check validates
the Method 6C results at each particular facility of known potential
interferences. When testing under conditions of low concentrations
(< 15 ppm), this alternative interference check is not allowed.

Note: The procedure described below applies to non-dilution
sampling systems only. If this alternative interference check is
used for a dilution sampling system, use a standard Method 6
sampling train and extract the sample directly from the exhaust
stream at points collocated with the Method 6C sample probe.

[[Page 28089]]

(1) Build the modified Method 6 sampling train (flow control
valve, two midget impingers containing 3 percent hydrogen peroxide,
and dry gas meter) shown in Figure 6C-1. Connect the sampling train
to the sample bypass discharge vent. Record the dry gas meter
reading before you begin sampling. Simultaneously collect modified
Method 6 and Method 6C samples. Open the flow control valve in the
modified Method 6 train as you begin to sample with Method 6C.
Adjust the Method 6 sampling rate to 1 liter per minute (.10
percent). The sampling time per run must be the same as for Method 6
plus twice the average measurement system response time. If your
modified Method 6 train does not include a pump, you risk biasing
the results high if you over-pressurize the midget impingers and
cause a leak. You can reduce this risk by cautiously increasing the
flow rate as sampling begins.
(2) After completing a run, record the final dry gas meter
reading, meter temperature, and barometric pressure. Recover and
analyze the contents of the midget impingers using the procedures in
Method 6. You must analyze performance audit samples as described in
Method 6 with this interference check. Determine the average gas
concentration reported by Method 6C for the run.

17.0 References

1. ``EPA Traceability Protocol for Assay and Certification of
Gaseous Calibration Standards'' September 1997 as amended, EPA-600/R-97/121

18.0 Tables, Diagrams, Flowcharts, and Validation Data
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TR15MY06.000

* * * * *

Method 7E--Determination of Nitrogen Oxides Emissions From Stationary
Sources (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure)

1.0 Scope and Application

What is Method 7E?

Method 7E is a procedure for measuring nitrogen oxides
(NO_X) in stationary source emissions using a continuous
instrumental analyzer. Quality assurance and quality control
requirements are included to assure that you, the tester, collect
data of known quality. You must document your adherence to these
specific requirements for equipment, supplies, sample collection and
analysis, calculations, and data analysis. This method does not
completely describe all equipment, supplies, and sampling and
analytical procedures you will need but refers to other methods for
some of the details. Therefore, to obtain reliable results, you
should also have a thorough knowledge of these additional test
methods which are found in appendix A to this part:
(a) Method 1--Sample and Velocity Traverses for Stationary Sources.
(b) Method 4--Determination of Moisture Content in Stack Gases.
1.1 Analytes. What does this method determine? This method
measures the concentration of nitrogen oxides as NO₂.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analyte CAS No. Sensitivity
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nitric oxide (NO).............. 10102-43-9 Typically < 2% of
Nitrogen dioxide (NO2)......... 10102-44-0 Calibration Span.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

1.2 Applicability. When is this method required? The use of
Method 7E may be required by specific New Source Performance
Standards, Clean Air Marketing rules, State Implementation Plans,
and permits where measurement of NO_X concentrations in
stationary source emissions is required, either to determine
compliance with an applicable emissions standard or to conduct
performance testing of a continuous monitoring system (CEMS). Other
regulations may also require the use of Method 7E.
1.3 Data Quality Objectives (DQO). How good must my collected
data be? Method 7E is designed to provide high-quality data for
determining compliance with Federal and State emission standards and
for relative accuracy testing of CEMS. In these and other
applications, the principal objective is to ensure the accuracy of
the data at the actual emission levels encountered. To meet this
objective, the use of EPA traceability protocol calibration gases
and measurement system performance tests are required.
1.4 Data Quality Assessment for Low Emitters. Is performance
relief granted when testing low-emission units? Yes. For low-
emitting sources, there are alternative performance specifications
for analyzer calibration error, system bias, drift, and

[[Page 28090]]

response time. Also, the alternative dynamic spiking procedure in
Section 16 may provide performance relief for certain low-emitting units.

2.0 Summary of Method

In this method, a sample of the effluent gas is continuously
sampled and conveyed to the analyzer for measuring the concentration
of NO_X. You may measure NO and NO₂ separately
or simultaneously together but, for the purposes of this method,
NO_X is the sum of NO and NO₂. You must meet
the performance requirements of this method to validate your data.

3.0 Definitions

3.1 Analyzer Calibration Error, for non-dilution systems, means
the difference between the manufacturer certified concentration of a
calibration gas and the measured concentration of the same gas when
it is introduced into the analyzer in direct calibration mode.
3.2 Calibration Curve means the relationship between an
analyzer's response to the injection of a series of calibration
gases and the actual concentrations of those gases.
3.3 Calibration Gas means the gas mixture containing
NO_X at a known concentration and produced and certified
in accordance with ``EPA Traceability Protocol for Assay and
Certification of Gaseous Calibration Standards,'' September 1997, as
amended August 25, 1999, EPA-600/R-97/121 or more recent updates.
The tests for analyzer calibration error, drift, and system bias
require the use of calibration gas prepared according to this protocol.
3.3.1 Low-Level Gas means a calibration gas with a concentration
that is less than 20 percent of the calibration span and may be a zero gas.
3.3.2 Mid-Level Gas means a calibration gas with a concentration
that is 40 to 60 percent of the calibration span.
3.3.3 High-Level Gas means a calibration gas with a
concentration that is equal to the calibration span.
3.4 Calibration Span means the upper limit of valid instrument
response during sampling. To the extent practicable, the measured
emissions should be between 20 to 100 percent of the selected
calibration span
3.5 Centroidal Area means the central area of the stack or duct
that is no greater than 1 percent of the stack or duct cross
section. This area has the same geometric shape as the stack or duct.
3.6 Converter Efficiency Gas means a calibration gas with a known NO
or NO₂ concentration and of Traceability Protocol quality.
3.7 Data Recorder means the equipment that permanently records
the concentrations reported by the analyzer.
3.8 Direct Calibration Mode means introducing the calibration
gases directly into the analyzer (or into the assembled measurement
system at a point downstream of all sample conditioning equipment)
according to manufacturer's recommended calibration procedure. This
mode of calibration applies to non-dilution-type measurement systems.
3.9 Drift means the difference between the measurement system
readings obtained in the pre-run and post-run system bias (or system
calibration error) checks at a specific calibration gas
concentration level (i.e. low-, mid-, or high-).
3.10 Gas Analyzer means the equipment that senses the gas being
measured and generates an output proportional to its concentration.
3.11 Interference Check means the test to detect analyzer
responses to compounds other than the compound of interest, usually
a gas present in the measured gas stream, that is not adequately
accounted for in the calibration procedure and may cause measurement bias.
3.12 Low-Concentration Analyzer means any analyzer that operates
with a calibration span of 20 ppm NO_X or lower. Each
analyzer model used routinely to measure low NO_X
concentrations must pass a Manufacturer's Stability Test (MST). A
MST subjects the analyzer to a range of potential effects to
demonstrate its stability following the procedures provided in 40
CFR 53.23, 53.55, and 53.56 and provides the information in a
summary format. A copy of this information must be included in each
test report. Table 7E-5 lists the criteria to be met.
3.13 Measurement System means all of the equipment used to
determine the NO_X concentration. The measurement system
comprises six major subsystems: Sample acquisition, sample
transport, sample conditioning, calibration gas manifold, gas
analyzer, and data recorder.
3.14 Response Time means the time it takes the measurement
system to respond to a change in gas concentration occurring at the
sampling point when the system is operating normally at its target
sample flow rate or dilution ratio.
3.15 Run means a series of gas samples taken successively from
the stack or duct. A test normally consists of a specific number of runs.
3.16 System Bias means the difference between a calibration gas
measured in direct calibration mode and in system calibration mode.
System bias is determined before and after each run at the low- and
mid- or high-concentration levels. For dilution-type systems, pre-
and post-run system calibration error is measured, rather than system bias.
3.17 System Calibration Error applies to dilution-type systems
and means the difference between the measured concentration of low-,
mid-, or high-level calibration gas and the certified concentration
for each gas when introduced in system calibration mode. For
dilution-type systems, a 3-point system calibration error test is
conducted in lieu of the analyzer calibration error test, and 2-point
system calibration error tests are conducted in lieu of system bias tests.
3.18 System Calibration Mode means introducing the calibration
gases into the measurement system at the probe, upstream of the
filter and all sample conditioning components.
3.19 Test refers to the series of runs required by the
applicable regulation.

4.0 Interferences

Note that interferences may vary among instruments and that
instrument-specific interferences must be evaluated through the
interference test.

5.0 Safety

What safety measures should I consider when using this method?
This method may require you to work with hazardous materials and in
hazardous conditions. We encourage you to establish safety
procedures before using the method. Among other precautions, you
should become familiar with the safety recommendations in the gas
analyzer user's manual. Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) regulations concerning cylinder and noxious
gases may apply. Nitric oxide and NO₂ are toxic and
dangerous gases. Nitric oxide is immediately converted to
NO₂ upon reaction with air. Nitrogen dioxide is a highly
poisonous and insidious gas. Inflammation of the lungs from exposure
may cause only slight pain or pass unnoticed, but the resulting
edema several days later may cause death. A concentration of 100 ppm
is dangerous for even a short exposure, and 200 ppm may be fatal.
Calibration gases must be handled with utmost care and with adequate
ventilation. Emission-level exposure to these gases should be avoided.

6.0 Equipment and Supplies

The performance criteria in this method will be met or exceeded
if you are properly using equipment designed for this application.
6.1 What do I need for the measurement system? You may use any
equipment and supplies meeting the following specifications.
(1) Sampling system components that are not evaluated in the
system bias or system calibration error test must be glass, Teflon,
or stainless steel. Other materials are potentially acceptable,
subject to approval by the Administrator.
(2) The interference, calibration error, and system bias
criteria must be met.
(3) Sample flow rate must be maintained within 10 percent of the
flow rate at which the system response time was measured.
(4) All system components (excluding sample conditioning
components, if used) must maintain the sample temperature above the
moisture dew point.
Section 6.2 provides example equipment specifications for a
NO_X measurement system. Figure 7E-1 is a diagram of an
example dry basis measurement system that is likely to meet the
method requirements and is provided as guidance. For wet-basis
systems, you may use alternative equipment and supplies as needed
(some of which are described in Section 6.2), provided that the
measurement system meets the applicable performance specifications
of this method.
6.2 Measurement System Components
6.2.1 Sample Probe. Glass, stainless steel, or other approved
material, of sufficient length to traverse the sample points.
6.2.2 Particulate Filter. An in-stack or out-of-stack filter.
The filter media must be included in the system bias test and made
of material that is non-reactive to the gas being sampled. This
particulate filter requirement may be waived in applications where
no significant particulate matter is expected

[[Page 28091]]

(e.g., for emission testing of a combustion turbine firing natural gas).
6.2.3 Sample Line. The sample line from the probe to the
conditioning system/sample pump should be made of Teflon or other
material that does not absorb or otherwise alter the sample gas. For
a dry-basis measurement system (as shown in Figure 7E-1), the
temperature of the sample line must be maintained at a sufficiently
high level to prevent condensation before the sample conditioning
components. For wet-basis measurement systems, the temperature of
the sample line must be maintained at a sufficiently high level to
prevent condensation before the analyzer.
6.2.4 Conditioning Equipment. For dry basis measurements, a
condenser, dryer or other suitable device is required to remove
moisture continuously from the sample gas. Any equipment needed to
heat the probe or sample line to avoid condensation prior to the
sample conditioning component is also required.
For wet basis systems, you must keep the sample above its dew
point either by: (1) Heating the sample line and all sample
transport components up to the inlet of the analyzer (and, for hot-
wet extractive systems, also heating the analyzer) or (2) by
diluting the sample prior to analysis using a dilution probe system.
The components required to do either of the above are considered to
be conditioning equipment.
6.2.5 Sampling Pump. For systems similar to the one shown in
Figure 7E-1, a leak-free pump is needed to pull the sample gas
through the system at a flow rate sufficient to minimize the
response time of the measurement system. The pump may be constructed
of any material that is non-reactive to the gas being sampled. For
dilution-type measurement systems, an ejector pump (eductor) is used
to create a vacuum that draws the sample through a critical orifice
at a constant rate.
6.2.6 Calibration Gas Manifold. Prepare a system to allow the
introduction of calibration gases either directly to the gas
analyzer in direct calibration mode or into the measurement system,
at the probe, in system calibration mode, or both, depending upon
the type of system used. In system calibration mode, the system
should be able to block the sample gas flow and flood the sampling
probe. Alternatively, calibration gases may be introduced at the
calibration valve following the probe. Maintain a constant pressure
in the gas manifold. For in-stack dilution-type systems, a gas
dilution subsystem is required to transport large volumes of
purified air to the sample probe and a probe controller is needed to
maintain the proper dilution ratio.
6.2.7 Sample Gas Manifold. For the type of system shown in
Figure 7E-1, the sample gas manifold diverts a portion of the sample
to the analyzer, delivering the remainder to the by-pass discharge
vent. The manifold should also be able to introduce calibration
gases directly to the analyzer (except for dilution-type systems).
The manifold must be made of material that is non-reactive to the
gas sampled or the calibration gas and be configured to safely
discharge the bypass gas.
6.2.8 NOX Analyzer. An instrument that continuously measures
NO_X in the gas stream and meets the applicable
specifications in Section 13.0. An analyzer that operates on the
principle of chemiluminescence with an NO₂ to NO
converter is one example of an analyzer that has been used
successfully in the past. Analyzers operating on other principles
may also be used provided the performance criteria in Section 13.0 are met.
6.2.8.1 Dual Range Analyzers. For certain applications, a wide
range of gas concentrations may be encountered, necessitating the
use of two measurement ranges. Dual-range analyzers are readily
available for these applications. These analyzers are often equipped
with automated range-switching capability, so that when readings
exceed the full-scale of the low measurement range, they are
recorded on the high range. As an alternative to using a dual-range
analyzer, you may use two segments of a single, large measurement
scale to serve as the low and high ranges. In all cases, when two
ranges are used, you must quality-assure both ranges using the
proper sets of calibration gases. You must also meet the
interference, calibration error, system bias, and drift checks.
However, we caution that when you use two segments of a large
measurement scale for dual range purposes, it may be difficult to
meet the performance specifications on the low range due to signal-
to-noise ratio considerations.
6.2.8.2 Low Concentration Analyzer. When the calibration span is
less than or equal to 20 ppmv, the manufacturer's stability test
(MST) is required. See Table 7E-5.
6.2.9 Data Recording. A strip chart recorder, computerized data
acquisition system, digital recorder, or data logger for recording
measurement data may be used.

7.0 Reagents and Standards

7.1 Calibration Gas. What calibration gases do I need? Your
calibration gas must be NO in nitrogen and certified (or
recertified) within an uncertainty of 2.0 percent in accordance with
``EPA Traceability Protocol for Assay and Certification of Gaseous
Calibration Standards'' September 1997, as amended August 25, 1999,
EPA-600/R-97/121. Blended gases meeting the Traceability Protocol
are allowed if the additional gas components are shown not to
interfere with the analysis. The calibration gas must not be used
after its expiration date.
Except for applications under part 75 of this chapter, it is
acceptable to prepare calibration gas mixtures from EPA Traceability
Protocol gases in accordance with Method 205 in M to part 51 of this
chapter. For part 75 applications, the use of Method 205 is subject
to the approval of the Administrator. The goal and recommendation
for selecting calibration gases is to bracket the sample concentrations.
The following calibration gas concentrations are required:
7.1.1 High-Level Gas. This concentration sets the calibration
span and results in measurements being 20 to 100 percent of the
calibration span.
7.1.2 Mid-Level Gas. 40 to 60 percent of the calibration span.
7.1.3 Low-Level Gas. Less than 20 percent of the calibration span.
7.1.4 Converter Efficiency Gas.What reagents do I need for the
converter efficiency test? The converter efficiency gas for the test
described in Section 8.2.4.1 must have a concentration of NO₂ that
is between 40 and 60 ppmv. For the alternative converter efficiency tests
in Section 16.2, NO is required. In either case, the test gas must be
prepared according to the EPA Traceability Protocol.
7.2 Interference Check. What reagents do I need for the
interference check? Use the appropriate test gases listed in Table
7E-3 (i.e., the potential interferents for the test facility, as identified
by the instrument manufacturer) to conduct the interference check.

8.0 Sample Collection, Preservation, Storage, and Transport

Emission Test Procedure

Since you are allowed to choose different options to comply with
some of the performance criteria, it is your responsibility to
identify the specific options you have chosen, to document that the
performance criteria for that option have been met, and to identify
any deviations from the method.
8.1 What sampling site and sampling points do I select?
8.1.1 Unless otherwise specified in an applicable regulation or
by the Administrator, when this method is used to determine
compliance with an emission standard, conduct a stratification test
as described in Section 8.1.2 to determine the sampling traverse
points to be used. For performance testing of continuous emission
monitoring systems, follow the sampling site selection and traverse
point layout procedures described in the appropriate performance
specification or applicable regulation (e.g., Performance
Specification 2 in appendix B to this part).
8.1.2 Determination of Stratification. To test for
stratification, use a probe of appropriate length to measure the
NO_X (or pollutant of interest) concentration at twelve
traverse points located according to Table 1-1 or Table 1-2 of
Method 1. Alternatively, you may measure at three points on a line
passing through the centroidal area. Space the three points at 16.7,
50.0, and 83.3 percent of the measurement line. Sample for a minimum
of twice the system response time (see Section 8.2.6) at each
traverse point. Calculate the individual point and mean
NO_X concentrations. If the concentration at each traverse
point differs from the mean concentration for all traverse points by
no more than: (a) ± 5.0 percent of the mean
concentration; or (b) ± 0.5 ppm (whichever is less
restrictive), the gas stream is considered unstratified and you may
collect samples from a single point that most closely matches the
mean. If the 5.0 percent or 0.5 ppm criterion is not met, but the
concentration at each traverse point differs from the mean
concentration for all traverse points by no more than: (a) < plus-
minus> 10.0 percent of the mean; or (b) ± 1.0 ppm
(whichever is less restrictive), the gas stream is considered to be
minimally stratified, and you may take samples from three points.
Space the three points at 16.7, 50.0, and 83.3 percent of the
measurement line. Alternatively, if a twelve

[[Page 28092]]

point stratification test was performed and the emissions shown to
be minimally stratified (all points within ± 10.0 percent
of their mean or within ± 1.0 ppm), and if the stack
diameter (or equivalent diameter, for a rectangular stack or duct)
is greater than 2.4 meters (7.8 ft), then you may use 3-point
sampling and locate the three points along the measurement line
exhibiting the highest average concentration during the
stratification test, at 0.4, 1.0 and 2.0 meters from the stack or
duct wall. If the gas stream is found to be stratified because the
10.0 percent or 1.0 ppm criterion for a 3-point test is not met,
locate twelve traverse points for the test in accordance with Table
1-1 or Table 1-2 of Method 1.
8.2 Initial Measurement System Performance Tests. What initial
performance criteria must my system meet before I begin collecting
samples? Before measuring emissions, perform the following procedures:
(a) Calibration gas verification,
(b) Measurement system preparation,
(c) Calibration error test,
(d) NO₂ to NO conversion efficiency test, if applicable,
(e) System bias check,
(f) System response time test, and
(g) Interference check
8.2.1 Calibration Gas Verification. How must I verify the
concentrations of my calibration gases? Obtain a certificate from
the gas manufacturer and confirm that the documentation includes all
information required by the Traceability Protocol. Confirm that the
manufacturer certification is complete and current. Ensure that your
calibration gases certifications have not expired. This
documentation should be available on-site for inspection. To the
extent practicable, select a high-level gas concentration that will
result in the measured emissions being between 20 and 100 percent of
the calibration span.
8.2.2 Measurement System Preparation. How do I prepare my
measurement system? Assemble, prepare, and precondition the
measurement system according to your standard operating procedure.
Adjust the system to achieve the correct sampling rate or dilution
ratio (as applicable).
8.2.3 Calibration Error Test. How do I confirm my analyzer
calibration is correct? After you have assembled, prepared and
calibrated your sampling system and analyzer, you must conduct a 3-
point analyzer calibration error test (or a 3-point system
calibration error test for dilution systems) before the first run
and again after any failed system bias test (or 2-point system
calibration error test for dilution systems) or failed drift test.
Introduce the low-, mid-, and high-level calibration gases
sequentially. For non-dilution-type measurement systems, introduce
the gases in direct calibration mode. For dilution-type measurement
systems, introduce the gases in system calibration mode.
(1) For non-dilution systems, you may adjust the system to
maintain the correct flow rate at the analyzer during the test, but
you may not make adjustments for any other purpose. For dilution
systems, you must operate the measurement system at the appropriate
dilution ratio during all system calibration error checks, and may
make only the adjustments necessary to maintain the proper ratio.
(2) Record the analyzer's response to each calibration gas on a
form similar to Table 7E-1. For each calibration gas, calculate the
analyzer calibration error using Equation 7E-1 in Section 12.2 or
the system calibration error using Equation 7E-3 in Section 12.4 (as
applicable). The calibration error specification in Section 13.1
must be met for the low-, mid-, and high-level gases. If the
calibration error specification is not met, take corrective action
and repeat the test until an acceptable 3-point calibration is achieved.
8.2.4 NO₂ to NO Conversion Efficiency Test. Before
each field test, you must conduct an NO₂ to NO conversion
efficiency test if your system converts NO₂ to NO before
analyzing for NO_X. Follow the procedures in Section
8.2.4.1, or 8.2.4.2. If desired, the converter efficiency factor
derived from this test may be used to correct the test results for
converter efficiency if the NO₂ fraction in the measured
test gas is known. Use Equation 7E-8 in Section 12.8 for this correction.
8.2.4.1 Introduce a concentration of 40 to 60 ppmv
NO₂ to the analyzer in direct calibration mode and record
the NO_X concentration displayed by the analyzer. If a
dilution-system is used, introduce the NO₂ calibration
gas at a point before the dilution takes place. Calculate the
converter efficiency using Equation 7E-7 in Section 12.7. The
specification for converter efficiency in Section 13.5 must be met.
The user is cautioned that state-of-the-art NO₂
calibration gases may not be sufficiently stable and thus make it
more difficult to pass the 90 percent conversion efficiency
requirement. The NO₂ must be prepared according to the
EPA Traceability Protocol and have an accuracy within 2.0 percent.
8.2.4.2 Alternatively, either of the procedures for determining
conversion efficiency using NO in Section 16.2 may be used.
8.2.5 Initial System Bias and System Calibration Error Checks.
Before sampling begins, determine whether the high-level or mid-
level calibration gas best approximates the emissions and use it as
the upscale gas. Introduce the upscale gas at the probe upstream of
all sample conditioning components in system calibration mode.
Record the time it takes for the measured concentration to increase
to a value that is within 95 percent or 0.5 ppm (whichever is less
restrictive) of the certified gas concentration. Continue to observe
the gas concentration reading until it has reached a final, stable
value. Record this value on a form similar to Table 7E-2.
(1) Next, introduce the low-level gas in system calibration mode
and record the time required for the concentration response to
decrease to a value that is within 5.0 percent or 0.5 ppm (whichever
is less restrictive) of the certified low-range gas concentration.
If the low-level gas is a zero gas, use the procedures described
above and observe the change in concentration until the response is
0.5 ppm or 5.0 percent of the upscale gas concentration (whichever
is less restrictive).
(2) Continue to observe the low-level gas reading until it has
reached a final, stable value and record the result on a form
similar to Table 7E-2. Operate the measurement system at the normal
sampling rate during all system bias checks. Make only the
adjustments necessary to achieve proper calibration gas flow rates
at the analyzer.
(3) From these data, calculate the measurement system response
time (see Section 8.2.6) and then calculate the initial system bias
using Equation 7E-2 in Section 12.3. For dilution systems, calculate
the system calibration error in lieu of system bias using equation
7E-3 in Section 12.4. See Section 13.2 for acceptable performance
criteria for system bias and system calibration error. If the
initial system bias (or system calibration error) specification is
not met, take corrective action. Then, you must repeat the
applicable calibration error test from Section 8.2.3 and the initial
system bias (or 2-point system calibration error) check until
acceptable results are achieved, after which you may begin sampling.

(Note: For dilution-type systems, data from the 3-point system
calibration error test described in Section 8.2.3 may be used to
meet the initial 2-point system calibration error test requirement
of this section, if the calibration gases were injected as described
in this section, and if response time data were recorded).

8.2.6 Measurement System Response Time. As described in section
8.2.5, you must determine the measurement system response time
during the initial system bias (or 2-point system calibration error)
check. Observe the times required to achieve 95 percent of a stable
response for both the low-level and upscale gases. The longer
interval is the response time.
8.2.7 Interference Check. Conduct an interference response test
of the gas analyzer prior to its initial use in the field. If you
have multiple analyzers of the same make and model, you need only
perform this alternative interference check on one analyzer. You may
also meet the interference check requirement if the instrument
manufacturer performs this or similar check on the same make and
model of analyzer that you use and provides you with documented results.
(1) You may introduce the appropriate interference test gases
(that are potentially encountered during a test, see examples in
Table 7E-3) into the analyzer (or measurement system for dilution-
type systems) separately or as mixtures. This test must be performed
both with and without NO_X (NO and NO₂) (the
applicable pollutant gas). For analyzers measuring NO_X
greater than 20 ppm, use a calibration gas with an NO_X
concentration of 80 to 100 ppm and set this concentration equal to
the calibration span. For analyzers measuring less than 20 ppm
NO_X, select an NO concentration for the calibration span
that reflects the emission levels at the sources to be tested, and
perform the interference check at that level. Measure the total
interference response of the analyzer to these gases in ppmv. Record
the responses and determine the interference using Table 7E-4. The
specification in Section 13.4 must be met.
(2) A copy of this data, including the date completed and signed
certification, must be

[[Page 28093]]

available for inspection at the test site and included with each
test report. This interference test is valid for the life of the
instrument unless major analytical components (e.g., the detector)
are replaced. If major components are replaced, the interference gas
check must be repeated before returning the analyzer to service. The
tester must ensure that any specific technology, equipment, or
procedures that are intended to remove interference effects are
operating properly during testing.
8.3 Dilution-Type Systems--Special Considerations. When a
dilution-type measurement system is used, there are three important
considerations that must be taken into account to ensure the quality
of the emissions data. First, the critical orifice size and dilution
ratio must be selected properly so that the sample dew point will be
below the sample line and analyzer temperatures. Second, a high-
quality, accurate probe controller must be used to maintain the
dilution ratio during the test. The probe controller should be
capable of monitoring the dilution air pressure, eductor vacuum, and
sample flow rates. Third, differences between the molecular weight
of calibration gas mixtures and the stack gas molecular weight must
be addressed because these can affect the dilution ratio and
introduce measurement bias.
8.4 Sample Collection. (1) Position the probe at the first
sampling point. Purge the system for at least two times the response
time before recording any data. Then, traverse all required sampling
points and sample at each point for an equal length of time,
maintaining the appropriate sample flow rate or dilution ratio (as
applicable). You must record at least one valid data point per
minute during the test run. The minimum time you must sample at each
point is two times the system response time. Usually the test is
designed for sampling longer than this to better characterize the
source's temporal variation.
(2) After recording data for the appropriate period of time at
the first traverse point, you may move to the next point and
continue recording, omitting the requirement to wait for two times
the system response time before recording data at the subsequent
traverse points. For example, if you use a sampling system with a
two-minute system response time, initially purge the system for at
least four minutes, then record a minimum of four one-minute
averages at each sample point. However, if you remove the probe from
the stack, you must recondition the sampling system for at least two
times the system response time prior to your next recording. If the
average of any run exceeds the calibration span value, the run is
invalidated.
(3) You may satisfy the multipoint traverse requirement by
sampling sequentially using a single-hole probe or a multi-hole
probe designed to sample at the prescribed points with a flow within
10 percent of mean flow rate. Notwithstanding, for applications
under part 75 of this chapter, the use of multi-hole probes is
subject to the approval of the Administrator.
8.5 Post-Run System Bias Check and Drift Assessment. How do I
confirm that each sample I collect is valid? After each run, repeat
the system bias check or 2-point system calibration error check (for
dilution systems) to validate the run. Do not make adjustments to
the measurement system (other than to maintain the target sampling
rate or dilution ratio) between the end of the run and the
completion of the post-run system bias or system calibration error
check. Note that for all post-run system bias or 2-point system
calibration error checks, you may inject the low-level gas first and
the upscale gas last, or vice-versa.
(1) If you do not pass the post-run system bias (or system
calibration error) check, then the run is invalid. You must diagnose
and fix the problem and pass another initial 3-point calibration
error test (see Section 8.2.3) and another system bias (or 2-point
system calibration error) check (see Section 8.2.5) before repeating
the run. In these additional bias and calibration error tests, the
gases may be injected in any order. Record the system bias (or
system calibration error) check results on a form similar to Table 7E-2.
(2) After each run, calculate the low-level and upscale drift,
using Equation 7E-4 in Section 12.5. If the post-run low- and
upscale bias (or 2-point system calibration error) checks are
passed, but the low-or upscale drift exceeds the specification in
Section 13.3, the run data are valid, but a 3-point calibration
error test and a system bias (or 2-point system calibration error)
check must be performed and passed before any more test runs are done.
(3) For dilution systems, data from a 3-point system calibration
error test may be used to met the pre-run 2-point system calibration
error requirement for the first run in a test sequence. Also, the
post-run bias (or 2-point calibration error) check data may be used
as the pre-run data for the next run in the test sequence at the
discretion of the tester.
8.6 Alternative Interference and System Bias Checks (Dynamic
Spike Procedure). If I want to use the dynamic spike procedure to
validate my data, what procedure should I follow? Except for
applications under part 75 of this chapter, you may use the dynamic
spiking procedure and requirements provided in Section 16.1 during
each test as an alternative to the interference check and the pre-
and post-run system bias checks. The calibration error test is still
required under this option. Use of the dynamic spiking procedure for
Part 75 applications is subject to the approval of the Administrator.
8.7 Moisture correction. You must determine the moisture content
of the flue gas and correct the measured gas concentrations to a dry
basis using Method 4 or other appropriate methods, subject to the
approval of the Administrator, when the moisture basis (wet or dry)
of the measurements made with this method is different from the
moisture basis of either: (1) The applicable emissions limit; or (2)
the CEMS being evaluated for relative accuracy. Moisture correction
is also required if the applicable limit is in lb/mmBtu and the
moisture basis of the Method 7E NO_X analyzer is different
from the moisture basis of the Method 3A diluent gas (CO₂
or O₂) analyzer.

9.0 Quality Control

What quality control measures must I take?

The following table is a summary of the mandatory, suggested,
and alternative quality assurance and quality control measures and
the associated frequency and acceptance criteria. All of the QC
data, along with the sample run data, must be documented and
included in the test report.

Summary Table of QA/QC
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status Process or element QA/QC specification Acceptance criteria Checking frequency
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
S................ Identify Data User... ..................... Regulatory Agency or Before designing
other primary end user test.
of data.
S................ Analyzer Design...... Analyzer resolution < 2.0% of full-scale range Manufacturer design.
or sensitivity.
M................ ..................... Interference gas Sum of responses < =2.5% ....................
check. of calibration span.
Alternatively, sum of
responses:.
< =0.5 ppmv for
calibration spans of 5
to 10 ppmv..
< =0.2 ppmv for
calibration spans < 5
ppmv..
See Table 7E-3...........
M................ Calibration on Gases. Traceability protocol Valid certificate
(G1, G2). required. Uncertainty
< =2.0% of tag value.
M................ ..................... High-level gas....... Equal to the calibration Each test.
span.
M................ ..................... Mid-level gas........ 40 to 60% of calibration Each test.
span.
M................ ..................... Low-level gas........ < 20% of calibration span. Each test.
S................ Data Recorder Design. Data resolution...... < =0.5% of full-scale Manufacturer design.
range.
S................ Sample Extraction.... Probe material....... SS or quartz if stack Each test.
>500 [deg]F.

[[Page 28094]]

M................ Sample Extraction.... Probe, filter and For dry-basis analyzers, Each run.
sample line keep sample above the
temperature. dew point by heating,
prior to sample
conditioning.
For wet-basis analyzers,
keep sample above dew
point at all times, by
heating or dilution..
S................ Sample Extraction.... Calibration valve SS....................... Each test.
material.
S................ Sample Extraction.... Sample pump material. Inert to sample Each test.
constituents.
S................ Sample Extraction.... Manifolding material. Inert to sample Each test.
constituents.
S................ Moisture Removal..... Equipment efficiency. < 5% target compound Verified through
removal. system bias check.
S................ Particulate Removal.. Filter inertness..... Pass system bias check... Each bias check.
M................ Analyzer & Analyzer calibration Within ±2.0% Before initial run
Calibration Gas error (or 3-point of the calibration span and after a failed
Performance. system calibration of the analyzer for the system bias test or
error for dilution low-, mid-, and high- dilution drift
systems). level calibration gases. test.
Alternative
specification: 0.5 ppmv
absolute difference..
M................ System Performance... System bias (or pre- Within ±5.0% Before and after
and post-run 2-point of the analyzer each run.
system calibration calibration span for low-
error for dilution scale and upscale
systems). calibration gases.
Alternative
specification: 0.5 ppmv
absolute difference..
M................ System Performance... System response time. Determines minimum During initial
sampling time per point. sampling system
bias test.
M................ System Performance... Drift................ 3.0% of calibration span After each test run.
for low-level and mid-
or high-level gases.
Alternative
specification: 0.5 ppmv
absolute difference..
M................ System Performance... NO2-NO conversion >=90% of certified test Before each test.
efficiency. gas concentration.
M................ System Performance... Purge time........... >=2 times system response Before starting the
time. first run and when
probe is removed
from and re-
inserted into the
stack.
M................ System Performance... Minimum sample time Two times the system Each sample point.
at each point. response time.
M................ System Performance... Stable sample flow Within 10% of flow rate Each run.
rate (surrogate for established during
maintaining system system response time
response time). check.
M................ Sample Point Stratification test.. All points within: Prior to first run.
Selection. ±5% of mean
for 1-point sampling..
±10% of mean
for 3-point..
Alternatively, all points
within:.
±0.5 ppm of
mean for 1-point
sampling..
±1.0 ppm of
mean for 3-point
sampling..
A................ Multiple sample No. of openings in Multi-hole probe with Each run.
points probe. verifiable constant flow
simultaneously. through all holes within
10% of mean flow rate
(requires Administrative
approval for Part 75).
M................ Data Recording....... Frequency............ 1 minute average......... During run.
S................ Data Parameters...... Sample concentration All 1-minute averages Each run.
range. within calibration span.
M................ Data Parameters...... Average concentration Run average < =calibration Each run.
for the run. span.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
S = Suggested.
M = Mandatory.
A = Alternative.

10.0 Calibration and Standardization

What measurement system calibrations are required?

(1) The initial 3-point calibration error test as described in
Section 8.2.3 and the system bias (or system calibration error)
checks described in Section 8.2.5 are required and must meet the
specifications in Section 13 before you start the test. Make all
necessary adjustments to calibrate the gas analyzer and data
recorder. Then, after the test commences, the system bias or system
calibration error checks described in Section 8.5 are required
before and after each run. Your analyzer must be calibrated for all
species of NO_X that it detects. If your analyzer measures
NO and NO₂ separately, then you must use both NO and
NO₂ calibration gases.
(2) You must include a copy of the manufacturer's certification
of the calibration gases used in the testing as part of the test
report. This certification must include the 13 documentation
requirements in the EPA Traceability Protocol For Assay and
Certification of Gaseous Calibration Standards, September 1997, as
amended August 25, 1999. When Method 205 is used to produce diluted
calibration gases, you must document that the specifications for the
gas dilution system are met for the test. You must also include the
date of the most recent dilution system calibration against flow
standards and the name of the person or manufacturer who carried out
the calibration in the test report.

[[Page 28095]]

11.0 Analytical Procedures

Because sample collection and analysis are performed together
(see Section 8), additional discussion of the analytical procedure
is not necessary.

12.0 Calculations and Data Analysis

You must follow the procedures for calculations and data
analysis listed in this section.
12.1 Nomenclature. The terms used in the equations are defined
as follows:

ACE = Analyzer calibration error, percent of calibration span.
B_WS = Moisture content of sample gas as measured by
Method 4 or other approved method, percent/100.
C_Avg = Average unadjusted gas concentration indicated by
data recorder for the test run, ppmv.
C_D = Pollutant concentration adjusted to dry conditions, ppmv.
C_Dir = Measured concentration of a calibration gas (low,
mid, or high) when introduced in direct calibration mode, ppmv.
C_Gas = Average effluent gas concentration adjusted for bias, ppmv.
C_M = Average of initial and final system calibration bias
(or 2-point system calibration error) check responses for the
upscale calibration gas, ppmv.
C_MA = Actual concentration of the upscale calibration gas, ppmv.
C_O = Average of the initial and final system calibration
bias (or 2-point system calibration error) check responses from the
low-level (or zero) calibration gas, ppmv.
C_S = Measured concentration of a calibration gas (low,
mid, or high) when introduced in system calibration mode, ppmv.
C_SS = Concentration of NO_X measured in the
spiked sample, ppmv.
C_Spike = Concentration of NO_X in the undiluted
spike gas, ppmv.
C_Calc = Calculated concentration of NO_X in the
spike gas diluted in the sample, ppmv.
C_V = Manufacturer certified concentration of a
calibration gas (low, mid, or high), ppmv.
C_W = Pollutant concentration measured under moist sample
conditions, wet basis, ppmv.
CS = Calibration span, ppmv.
D = Drift assessment, percent of calibration span.
Eff_NO2 = NO₂ to NO converter efficiency, percent.
NO_Final = The average NO concentration observed with the
analyzer in the NO mode during the converter efficiency test in
Section 16.2.2, ppmv.
NO_XCorr = The NO_X concentration corrected for
the converter efficiency, ppmv.
NOX_Final = The final NO_X concentration
observed during the converter efficiency test in Section 16.2.2, ppmv.
NO_XPeak = The highest NO_X concentration
observed during the converter efficiency test in Section 16.2.2, ppmv.
Q_Spike = Flow rate of spike gas introduced in system
calibration mode, L/min.
Q_Total = Total sample flow rate during the spike test, L/min.
R = Spike recovery, percent.
SB = System bias, percent of calibration span.
SB_i = Pre-run system bias, percent of calibration span.
SB_f = Post-run system bias, percent of calibration span.
SCE = System calibration error, percent of calibration span.
SCE_i = Pre-run system calibration error, percent of calibration span.
SCE_final = Post-run system calibration error, percent of
calibration span.
12.2 Analyzer Calibration Error. For non-dilution systems, use
Equation 7E-1 to calculate the analyzer calibration error for the
low-, mid-, and high-level calibration gases.
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TR15MY06.001

12.3 System Bias. For non-dilution systems, use Equation 7E-2 to
calculate the system bias separately for the low-level and upscale
calibration gases.
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TR15MY06.002

12.4 System Calibration Error. Use Equation 7E-3 to calculate
the system calibration error for dilution systems. Equation 7E-3
applies to both the initial 3-point system calibration error test
and the subsequent 2-point between run tests.
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TR15MY06.003

12.5 Drift Assessment. Use Equation 7E-4 to separately calculate
the low-level and upscale drift over each test run. For dilution
systems, replace ``SB_final'' and ``SB_i'' with
``SCE_final'' and ``SCE_i'', respectively, to
calculate and evaluate drift.
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TR15MY06.004

12.6 Effluent Gas Concentration. For each test run, calculate
C_avg, the arithmetic average of all valid NO_X
concentration values (e.g., 1-minute averages). Then adjust the
value of C_avg for bias, using Equation 7E-5.
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TR15MY06.005

12.7 NO₂--NO Conversion Efficiency. If the
NO_X converter efficiency test described in Section
8.2.4.1 is performed, calculate the efficiency using Equation 7E-7.
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TR15MY06.006

12.8 NO₂--NO Conversion Efficiency Correction. If
desired, calculate the total NO_X concentration with a
correction for converter efficiency using Equations 7E-8.
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TR15MY06.007

12.9 Alternative NO₂ Converter Efficiency. If the
alternative procedure of Section 16.2.2 is used, calculate the
converter efficiency using Equation 7E-9.
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TR15MY06.008

12.10 Moisture Correction. Use Equation 7E-10 if your
measurements need to be corrected to a dry basis.
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TR15MY06.009

12.11 Calculated Spike Gas Concentration and Spike Recovery for
the Example Alternative Dynamic Spiking Procedure in Section 16.1.3.
Use Equation 7E-11 to determine the calculated spike gas
concentration. Use Equation 7E-12 to calculate the spike recovery.
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TR15MY06.010

[[Page 28096]]

13.0 Method Performance

13.1 Calibration Error. This specification is applicable to both
the analyzer calibration error and the 3-point system calibration
error tests described in Section 8.2.3. At each calibration gas
level (low, mid, and high) the calibration error must either be
within ± 2.0 percent of the calibration span.
Alternatively, the results are acceptable if [bond]C_dir -
C_v[bond]
or [bond]C_s-C_v[bond]
(as
applicable) is < =0.5 ppmv.
13.2 System Bias. This specification is applicable to both the
system bias and 2-point system calibration error tests described in
Section 8.2.5 and 8.5. The pre- and post-run system bias (or system
calibration error) must be within ± 5.0 percent of the
calibration span for the low-level and upscale calibration gases.
Alternatively, the results are acceptable if [bond]
C_s -
C_dir [bond]
is <= 0.5 ppmv or if [bond]
C_s-
C_v [bond]
is <= 0.5 ppmv (as applicable).
13.3 Drift. For each run, the low-level and upscale drift must
be less than or equal to 3.0 percent of the calibration span. The
drift is also acceptable if the pre- and post-run bias (or the pre-
and post-run system calibration error) responses do not differ by
more than 0.5 ppmv at each gas concentration (i.e. [bond]
C_{s post-run}- C_{s pre-run} [bond]
<= 0.5 ppmv).
13.4 Interference Check. The total interference response (i.e.,
the sum of the interference responses of all tested gaseous
components) must not be greater than 2.50 percent of the calibration
span for the analyzer tested. In summing the interferences, use the
larger of the absolute values obtained for the interferent tested
with and without the pollutant present. The results are also acceptable if
the sum of the responses does not exceed 0.5 ppmv for a calibration span
of 5 to 10 ppmv, or 0.2 ppmv for a calibration span < 5 ppmv.
13.5 NO₂ to NO Conversion Efficiency Test (as
applicable). The NO₂ to NO conversion efficiency,
calculated according to Equation 7E-7 or Equation 7E-9, must be
greater than or equal to 90 percent.
13.6 Alternative Dynamic Spike Procedure. Recoveries of both
pre-test spikes and post-test spikes must be within 100 ±
10 percent. If the absolute difference between the calculated spike
value and measured spike value is equal to or less than 0.20 ppmv,
then the requirements of the ADSC are met.

14.0 Pollution Prevention [Reserved]

15.0 Waste Management [Reserved]

16.0 Alternative Procedures

16.1 Dynamic Spike Procedure. Except for applications under part
75 of this chapter, you may use a dynamic spiking procedure to
validate your test data for a specific test matrix in place of the
interference check and pre- and post-run system bias checks. For
part 75 applications, use of this procedure is subject to the
approval of the Administrator. Best results are obtained for this
procedure when source emissions are steady and not varying.
Fluctuating emissions may render this alternative procedure
difficult to pass. To use this alternative, you must meet the
following requirements.
16.1.1 Procedure Documentation. You must detail the procedure
you followed in the test report, including how the spike was
measured, added, verified during the run, and calculated after the test.
16.1.2 Spiking Procedure Requirements. The spikes must be
prepared from EPA Traceability Protocol gases. Your procedure must
be designed to spike field samples at two target levels both before
and after the test. Your target spike levels should bracket the
average sample NO_X concentrations. The higher target
concentration must be less than the calibration span. You must
collect at least 5 data points for each target concentration. The
spiking procedure must be performed before the first run and
repeated after the last run of the test program.
16.1.3 Example Spiking Procedure. Determine the NO concentration
needed to generate concentrations that are 50 and 150 percent of the
anticipated NO_X concentration in the stack at the total
sampling flow rate while keeping the spike flow rate at or below 10
percent of this total. Use a mass flow meter (accurate within 2.0
percent) to generate these NO spike gas concentrations at a constant
flow rate. Use Equation 7E-11 in Section 12.11 to determine the
calculated spike concentration in the collected sample.
(1) Prepare the measurement system and conduct the analyzer
calibration error test as described in Sections 8.2.2 and 8.2.3.
Following the sampling procedures in Section 8.1, determine the
stack NO_X concentration and use this concentration as the
average stack concentration (C_avg) for the first spike
level, or if desired, for both pre-test spike levels. Introduce the
first level spike gas into the system in system calibration mode and
begin sample collection. Wait for at least two times the system
response time before measuring the spiked sample concentration. Then
record at least five successive 1-minute averages of the spiked
sample gas. Monitor the spike gas flow rate and maintain at the
determined addition rate. Average the five 1-minute averages and
determine the spike recovery using Equation 7E-12. Repeat this
procedure for the other pre-test spike level. The recovery at each
level must be within the limits in Section 13.6 before proceeding
with the test.
(2) Conduct the number of runs required for the test. Then
repeat the above procedure for the post-test spike evaluation. The
last run of the test may serve as the average stack concentration
for the post-test spike test calculations. The results of the post-
test spikes must meet the limits in Section 13.6.
16.2 Alternative NO₂ to NO Conversion Efficiency
Procedures. You may use either of the following procedures to determine
converter efficiency in place of the procedure in Section 8.2.4.1.
16.2.1 The procedure for determining conversion efficiency using
NO in 40 CFR 86.123-78.
16.2.2 Tedlar Bag Procedure. Perform the analyzer calibration
error test to document the calibration (both NO and NO_X
modes, as applicable). Fill a Tedlar bag approximately half full
with either ambient air, pure oxygen, or an oxygen standard gas with
at least 19.5 percent by volume oxygen content. Fill the remainder
of the bag with mid-level NO in nitrogen calibration gas. (Note that
the concentration of the NO standard should be sufficiently high
that the diluted concentration will be easily and accurately
measured on the scale used. The size of the bag should be large
enough to accommodate the procedure and time required).
(1) Immediately attach the bag to the inlet of the
NO_X analyzer (or external converter if used). In the case
of a dilution-system, introduce the gas at a point upstream of the
dilution assembly. Measure the NO_X concentration for a
period of 30 minutes. If the NO_X concentration drops more
than 2 percent absolute from the peak value observed, then the
NO₂ converter has failed to meet the criteria of this
test. Take corrective action. The highest NO_X value
observed is considered to be NO_XPeak. The final
NO_X value observed is considered to be NO_Xfinal.
(2) If the NO_X converter has met the criterion of
this test, then switch the analyzer to the NO mode (note that this
may not be required for analyzers with auto-switching). Document the
average NO concentration for a period of 30 seconds to one minute.
This average value is NO_final. Switch the analyzer back
to the NO_X mode and document that the analyzer still
meets the criteria of not dropping more than 2 percent from the peak value.
(3) In sequence, inject the zero and the upscale calibration gas
that most closely matches the NO_X concentration observed
during the converter efficiency test. Repeat this procedure in both
the NO and NO_X modes. If the gases are not within 1
percent of scale of the actual values, reject the converter
efficiency test and take corrective action. If the gases are within
this criterion, use Equation 7E-9 to determine the converter efficiency.
The converter efficiency must meet the specification in Section 13.5.
16.3 Manufacturer's Stability Test. A manufacturer's stability
test is required for all analyzers that routinely measure emissions
below 20 ppm and is optional but recommended for other analyzers.
This test evaluates each analyzer model by subjecting it to the
tests listed in Table 7E-5 following the procedures in 40 CFR 53.23,
53.55, and 53.56 to demonstrate its stability. A copy of this
information in summary format must be included in each test report.

17.0 References

1. ``ERA Traceability Protocol for Assay and Certification of
Gaseous Calibration Standards'' September 1997 as amended, ERA-600/
R-97/121.

18.0 Tables, Diagrams, Flowcharts, and Validation Data

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

[[Page 28097]]
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TR15MY06.012
[[Page 28098]]
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TR15MY06.013
[[Page 28099]]
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TR15MY06.014
[[Page 28100]]
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TR15MY06.015

BILLING CODE 6560-50-C

Table 7E-3.--Interference Check Gas Concentrations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sample conditioning type \2\
Potential interferent --------------------------------------
Hot wet Dried
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CO2.............................. 5 and 15% 5 and 15%
H2O.............................. 25% 1.%
NO............................... 15 ppmv 15 ppmv
NO2.............................. 15 ppmv 15 ppmv
N2O.............................. 10 ppmv 10 ppmv
CO............................... 50 ppmv 50 ppmv
NH3.............................. 10 ppmv 10 ppmv
CH4.............................. 50 ppmv 50 ppmv
SO2.............................. 20 ppmv 20 ppmv
H2............................... 50 ppmv 50 ppmv
HCl.............................. 10 ppmv 10 ppmv
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Any of the above specific gases can be eliminated or tested at a
lower level if the manufacturer has provided reliable means for
limiting or scrubbing that gas to a specified level.
(2) For dilution extractive systems, use the Hot Wet concentrations
divided by the minimum targeted dilution ratio to be used during the
test.

Table 7E-4.--Interference Response

Date of Test:---------------------------------------------------------
Analyzer Type:--------------------------------------------------------
Model No.:------------------------------------------------------------
Serial No:------------------------------------------------------------
Calibration Span:-----------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test gas type Concentration (ppm) Analyzer response
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sum of Responses .....................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
% of Calibration Span .....................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table 7E-5.--Manufacturer Stability Test
[Each model must be tested quarterly or once per 50 production units]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test description Acceptance criteria (note 1)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thermal Stability............ Temperature range when drift does not
exceed 3.0% of analyzer range over a 12-
hour run when measured with NOX present
Fault Conditions............. Identify conditions which, when they
occur, result in performance which is
not in compliance with the
Manufacturer's Stability Test criteria.
These are to be indicated visually or
electrically to alert the operator of
the problem.
Insensitivity to Supply ±10.0% (or manufacturers
Voltage Variations. alternative) variation from nominal
voltage must produce a drift of < = 2.0%
of calibration span for either zero or
concentration >= 80% NOX present.

[[Page 28101]]

Analyzer Calibration Error... For a low-, medium-, and high-calibration
gas, the difference between the
manufacturer certified value and the
analyzer response in direct calibration
mode, no more than 2.0% of calibration
span.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note 1: If the instrument is to be used as a Low Range analyzer, all
tests must be performed at a calibration span of 20 ppm or less.

* * * * *

Method 10--Determination of Carbon Monoxide Emissions From Stationary
Sources (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure)

1.0 Scope and Application

What is Method 10?

Method 10 is a procedure for measuring carbon monoxide (CO) in
stationary source emissions using a continuous instrumental
analyzer. Quality assurance and quality control requirements are
included to assure that you, the tester, collect data of known
quality. You must document your adherence to these specific
requirements for equipment, supplies, sample collection and
analysis, calculations, and data analysis. This method does not
completely describe all equipment, supplies, and sampling and
analytical procedures you will need but refers to other methods for
some of the details. Therefore, to obtain reliable results, you
should also have a thorough knowledge of these additional test
methods which are found in appendix A to this part:
(a) Method 1--Sample and Velocity Traverses for Stationary Sources.
(b) Method 4--Determination of Moisture Content in Stack Gases.
(c) Method 7E--Determination of Nitrogen Oxides Emissions from
Stationary Sources (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure).
1.1 Analytes. What does this method determine? This method
measures the concentration of carbon monoxide.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analyte CAS No. Sensitivity
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CO............................. 630-08-0 Typically < 2% of
Calibration Span.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

1.2 Applicability. When is this method required? The use of
Method 10 may be required by specific New Source Performance
Standards, State Implementation Plans, and permits where CO
concentrations in stationary source emissions must be measured,
either to determine compliance with an applicable emission standard
or to conduct performance testing of a continuous emission monitoring
system (CEMS). Other regulations may also require the use of Method 10.
1.3 Data Quality Objectives. Refer to Section 1.3 of Method 7E.

2.0 Summary of Method

In this method, you continuously or intermittently sample the
effluent gas and convey the sample to an analyzer that measures the
concentration of CO. You must meet the performance requirements of
this method to validate your data.

3.0 Definitions

Refer to Section 3.0 of Method 7E for the applicable definitions.

4.0 Interferences

Substances having a strong absorption of infrared energy may
interfere to some extent in some analyzers. Instrumental correction
may be used to compensate for the interference. You may also use
silica gel and ascarite traps to eliminate the interferences. If
this option is used, correct the measured gas volume for the carbon
dioxide (CO₂) removed in the trap.

5.0 Safety

Refer to Section 5.0 of Method 7E.

6.0 Equipment and Supplies

What do I need for the measurement system?

6.1 Continuous Sampling. Figure 7E-1 of Method 7E is a schematic
diagram of an acceptable measurement system. The components are the
same as those in Sections 6.1 and 6.2 of Method 7E, except that the
CO analyzer described in Section 6.2 of this method must be used
instead of the analyzer described in Section 6.2 of Method 7E. You
must follow the noted specifications in Section 6.1 of Method 7E
except that the requirements to use stainless steel, Teflon, or non-
reactive glass filters do not apply. Also, a heated sample line is
not required to transport dry gases or for systems that measure the
CO concentration on a dry basis.
6.2 Integrated Sampling.
6.2.1 Air-Cooled Condenser or Equivalent. To remove any excess moisture.
6.2.2 Valve. Needle valve, or equivalent, to adjust flow rate.
6.2.3 Pump. Leak-free diaphragm type, or equivalent, to transport gas.
6.2.4 Rate Meter. Rotameter, or equivalent, to measure a flow
range from 0 to 1.0 liter per minute (0.035 cfm).
6.2.5 Flexible Bag. Tedlar, or equivalent, with a capacity of 60
to 90 liters (2 to 3 ft3). Leak-test the bag in the
laboratory before using by evacuating with a pump followed by a dry
gas meter. When the evacuation is complete, there should be no flow
through the meter.
6.3 What analyzer must I use? You must use an instrument that
continuously measures CO in the gas stream and meets the
specifications in Section 13.0. The dual-range analyzer provisions
in Section 6.2.8.1 of Method 7E apply.

7.0 Reagents and Standards

7.1 Calibration Gas. What calibration gases do I need? Refer to
Section 7.1 of Method 7E for the calibration gas requirements.
7.2 Interference Check. What additional reagents do I need for
the interference check? Use the appropriate test gases listed in
Table 7E-3 of Method 7E (i.e., potential interferents, as identified
by the instrument manufacturer) to conduct the interference check.

8.0 Sample Collection, Preservation, Storage, and Transport

Emission Test Procedure

8.1 Sampling Site and Sampling Points. You must follow Section
8.1 of Method 7E.
8.2 Initial Measurement System Performance Tests. You must
follow the procedures in Section 8.2 of Method 7E. If a dilution-
type measurement system is used, the special considerations in
Section 8.3 of Method 7E also apply.
8.3 Interference Check. You must follow the procedures of
Section 8.2.7 of Method 7E.
8.4 Sample Collection.
8.4.1 Continuous Sampling. You must follow the procedures of
Section 8.4 of Method 7E.
8.4.2 Integrated Sampling. Evacuate the flexible bag. Set up the
equipment as shown in Figure 10-1 with the bag disconnected. Place
the probe in the stack and purge the sampling line. Connect the bag,
making sure that all connections are leak-free. Sample at a rate
proportional to the stack velocity. If needed, the CO₂
content of the gas may be determined by using the Method 3
integrated sample procedures, or by weighing an ascarite
CO₂ removal tube used and computing CO₂
concentration from the gas volume sampled and the weight gain of the
tube. Data may be recorded on a form similar to Table 10-1.
8.5 Post-Run System Bias Check, Drift Assessment, and
Alternative Dynamic Spike Procedure. You must follow the procedures
in Sections 8.5 and 8.6 of Method 7E.

[[Page 28102]]

9.0 Quality Control

Follow the quality control procedures in Section 9.0 of Method 7E.

10.0 Calibration and Standardization

Follow the procedures for calibration and standardization in
Section 10.0 of Method 7E.

11.0 Analytical Procedures

Because sample collection and analysis are performed together
(see Section 8), additional discussion of the analytical procedure
is not necessary.

12.0 Calculations and Data Analysis

You must follow the procedures for calculations and data
analysis in Section 12.0 of Method 7E, as applicable, substituting
CO for NO_X as applicable.
12.1 Concentration Correction for CO₂ Removal.
Correct the CO concentration for CO₂ removal (if
applicable) using Eq. 10-1.
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TR15MY06.011

Where:

C_Avg = Average gas concentration for the test run, ppm.
C_{CO stack} = Average unadjusted stack gas CO concentration
indicated by the data recorder for the test run, ppmv.
F_CO2 = Volume fraction of CO₂ in the sample,
i.e., percent CO₂ from Orsat analysis divided by 100.

13.0 Method Performance

The specifications for analyzer calibration error, system bias,
drift, interference check, and alternative dynamic spike procedure
are the same as in Section 13.0 of Method 7E.

14.0 Pollution Prevention [Reserved]

15.0 Waste Management [Reserved]

16.0 Alternative Procedures

The dynamic spike procedure and the manufacturer stability test
are the same as in Sections 16.1 and 16.3 of Method 7E

17.0 References

1. ``EPA Traceability Protocol for Assay and Certification of
Gaseous Calibration Standards-- September 1997 as amended, EPA-600/R-97/121

18.0 Tables, Diagrams, Flowcharts, and Validation Data

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TR15MY06.016

BILLING CODE 6560-60-C

[[Page 28103]]

Table 10-1.--Field Data
[Integrated sampling]
------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location: Date:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test: Operator:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clock Time Rotameter Reading Comments
liters/min (cfm)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

* * * * *

? 4. Appendix A-7 is amended by revising Method 20 to read as follows:

Appendix A-7 to Part 60--Test Methods 19 Through 25E

* * * * *

Method 20--Determination of Nitrogen Oxides, Sulfur Dioxide, and
Diluent Emissions From Stationary Gas Turbines

1.0 Scope and Application

What is Method 20?

Method 20 contains the details you must follow when using an
instrumental analyzer to determine concentrations of nitrogen
oxides, oxygen, carbon dioxide, and sulfur dioxide in the emissions
from stationary gas turbines. This method follows the specific
instructions for equipment and performance requirements, supplies,
sample collection and analysis, calculations, and data analysis in
the methods listed in Section 2.0.
1.1 Analytes. What does this method determine?

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analyte CAS No. Sensitivity
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nitrogen oxides (NOX) as 10102-43-9 Typically < 2% of
nitrogen dioxide: Calibration Span.
Nitric oxide (NO).......... 10102-44-0
Nitrogen dioxide NO2.......
Diluent oxygen (O2) or carbon .............. Typically < 2% of
dioxide (CO2). Calibration Span.
Sulfur dioxide (SOX)........... 7446-09-5 Typically < 2% of
Calibration Span.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

1.2 Applicability. When is this method required? The use of
Method 20 may be required by specific New Source Performance
Standards, Clean Air Marketing rules, and State Implementation Plans
and permits where measuring SO₂, NO_X, CO₂, and/or
O₂ concentrations in stationary gas turbines emissions are
required. Other regulations may also require its use.
1.3 Data Quality Objectives. How good must my collected data be?
Refer to Section 1.3 of Method 7E.

2.0 Summary of Method

In this method, NO_X, O₂ (or
CO₂), and SO_X are measured using the following
methods found in appendix A to this part:
(a) Method 1--Sample and Velocity Traverses for Stationary Sources.
(b) Method 3A--Determination of Oxygen and Carbon Dioxide
Emissions From Stationary Sources (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure).
(c) Method 6C--Determination of Sulfur Dioxide Emissions From
Stationary Sources (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure).
(d) Method 7E--Determination of Nitrogen Oxides Emissions From
Stationary Sources (Instrumental Analyzer Procedure).
(e) Method 19--Determination of Sulfur Dioxide Removal Efficiency and
Particulate Matter, Sulfur Dioxide, and Nitrogen Oxide Emission Rates.

3.0 Definitions

Refer to Section 3.0 of Method 7E for the applicable definitions.

4.0 Interferences

Refer to Section 4.0 of Methods 3A, 6C, and 7E as applicable.

5.0 Safety

Refer to Section 5.0 of Method 7E.

6.0 Equipment and Supplies

The measurement system design is shown in Figure 7E-1 of Method
7E. Refer to the appropriate methods listed in Section 2.0 for
equipment and supplies.

7.0 Reagents and Standards

Refer to the appropriate methods listed in Section 2.0 for
reagents and standards.

8.0 Sample Collection, Preservation, Storage, and Transport

8.1 Sampling Site and Sampling Points. Follow the procedures of
Section 8.1 of Method 7E. For the stratification test in Section
8.1.2, determine the diluent-corrected pollutant concentration at
each traverse point.
8.2 Initial Measurement System Performance Tests. You must refer
to the appropriate methods listed in Section 2.0 for the measurement
system performance tests as applicable.
8.3 Interference Check. You must follow the procedures in Section 8.3
of Method 3A or 6C, or Section 8.2.7 of Method 7E (as appropriate).
8.4 Sample Collection. You must follow the procedures of Section
8.4 of the appropriate methods listed in Section 2.0.
8.5 Post-Run System Bias Check, Drift Assessment, and
Alternative Dynamic Spike Procedure. You must follow the procedures
of Sections 8.5 and 8.6 of the appropriate methods listed in Section 2.0.

9.0 Quality Control

Follow quality control procedures in Section 9.0 of Method 7E.

10.0 Calibration and Standardization

Follow the procedures for calibration and standardization in
Section 10.0 of Method 7E.

11.0 Analytical Procedures

Because sample collection and analysis are performed together
(see Section 8), additional discussion of the analytical procedure
is not necessary.

12.0 Calculations and Data Analysis

You must follow the procedures for calculations and data
analysis in Section 12.0 of the appropriate method listed in Section
2.0. Follow the procedures in Section 12.0 of Method 19 for
calculating fuel-specific F factors, diluent-corrected pollutant
concentrations, and emission rates.

13.0 Method Performance

The specifications for the applicable performance checks are the
same as in Section 13.0 of Method 7E.

14.0 Pollution Prevention [Reserved]

15.0 Waste Management [Reserved]

16.0 Alternative Procedures

Refer to Section 16.0 of the appropriate method listed in
Section 2.0 for alternative procedures.

[[Page 28104]]

17.0 References

Refer to Section 17.0 of the appropriate method listed in
Section 2.0 for references.

18.0 Tables, Diagrams, Flowcharts, and Validation Data

Refer to Section 18.0 of the appropriate method listed in
Section 2.0 for tables, diagrams, flowcharts, and validation data.
* * * * *

[FR Doc. 06-4196 Filed 5-12-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

Notices For
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994

Update of Continuous Instrumental Test Methods

Local Navigation