Rule: Air Programs: Ambient Air Quality Standards, National&#8212 Particulate Matter Correction

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No.
112 / Tuesday, June 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 32193
OHIO—OZONE
[8-Hour Standard]
Designation a Classification
Designated area
Date 1 Type Date 1 Type
* * * * * * *
Youngstown-Warren-Sharon, PA-OH: June 12, 2007.
Columbiana County ................... ............................................. Attainment
Mahoning County ...................... ............................................. Attainment
Trumbull County ........................ ............................................. Attainment
* * * * * * *
a Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified.
1 This date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted.
[FR Doc. E7–11229 Filed 6–11–07; 8:45 am] the October 17, 2006, final rule is website is an ‘‘anonymous access’’
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P correct. system, which means EPA will not
DATES: This rule is effective on know your identity or contact
September 10, 2007, without further information unless you provide it in the
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION body of your comment. If you send an
notice, unless EPA receives adverse
AGENCY e-mail comment directly to EPA without
comment by July 12, 2007. If we receive
adverse comment, we will publish a going through www.regulations.gov,
40 CFR Parts 53 and 58 your e-mail address will be
timely withdrawal in the Federal
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2004–0018; FRL–8308–7] Register informing the public that some automatically captured and included as
or all of the amendments in this rule part of the comment that is placed in the
RIN 2060–AO06
will not take effect. public docket and made available on the
Ambient Air Monitoring Regulations: internet. If you submit an electronic
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
Correcting and Other Amendments comment, EPA recommends that you
identified under Docket ID No. EPA–
include your name and other contact
AGENCY: Environmental Protection HQ–OAR–2004–0018 by one of the
information in the body of your
Agency (EPA). following methods:
comment and with any disk or CD–ROM
ACTION: Direct final rule.
• www.regulations.gov. Follow the
you submit. If EPA cannot read your
on-line instructions for submitting
comment due to technical difficulties
SUMMARY: The EPA is taking direct final comments.
and cannot contact you for clarification,
action on ‘‘Ambient Air Monitoring • E-mail: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov.
EPA may not be able to consider your
Regulations: Correcting and Other • Fax: (202) 566–1741.
• Mail: Ambient Air Monitoring comment. Electronic files should avoid
Amendments’’ to correct and clarify
Regulations: Correcting and Other the use of special characters, any form
parts of a recent final rule published on
Amendments, Environmental Protection of encryption, and be free of any defects
October 17, 2006, that amended the
Agency, Mailcode: 6102T, 1200 or viruses.
ambient air monitoring requirements for
criteria pollutants. These errors Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Docket: All documents in the docket
included several instances where the Washington, DC 20460. Please include a are listed in the www.regulations.gov
wording in the preamble and regulatory total of 2 copies. index. Although listed in the index,
text were not completely consistent, • Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center, some information is not publicly
several regulatory text passages that 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room available, e.g., CBI or other information
contained some imprecise language, two 3334, Washington, DC. Such deliveries whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
instances of regulatory text omission, an are only accepted during the Docket’s Certain other material, such as
outdated address reference, and normal hours of operation, and special copyrighted material, will be publicly
numerous publication errors in tables arrangements should be made for available only in hard copy. Publicly
and equations. EPA is also amending deliveries of boxed information. available docket materials are available
the monitoring rule to allow EPA Instructions: Direct your comments to either electronically in
Regional Administrators to approve Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2004– www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
departures from the minimum number 0018. The EPA’s policy is that all the Revisions to the Ambient Air
of PM10 monitors otherwise specified in comments received will be included in Monitoring Regulations Docket, EPA/
the rule. the public docket without change and DC, EPA West, Room 3334, Constitution
The October 17, 2006, final rule may be made available online at: Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public
revised requirements for reference and www.regulations.gov including any Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
equivalent method determinations, personal information provided, unless 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
modified requirements for general the comment includes information excluding legal holidays. The telephone
monitoring network design, and claimed to be Confidential Business number for the Public Reading Room is
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC67 with RULES
modified other requirements pertaining Information (CBI) or other information (202) 566–1744, and the telephone
to quality assurance, annual network whose disclosure is restricted by statute. number for the Air Docket is (202) 566–
plans and assessments, data reporting, Do not submit information that you 1742.
monitoring methodology, and probe and consider to be CBI or otherwise FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
monitor siting criteria. All other protected through www.regulations.gov Lewis Weinstock, Air Quality
preamble and regulatory text printed in or e-mail. The www.regulations.gov Assessment Division (C304–06), Office
VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:39 Jun 11, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\12JNR1.SGM 12JNR1
32194 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
of Air Quality Planning and Standards, I. Typographical Corrections published in the Federal Register on
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews October 17, 2006. However, in the
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ section of this
27711; telephone number: (919) 541– Planning and Review
Federal Register, we are publishing a
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
3661; fax number: (919) 541–1903; e- C. Regulatory Flexibility Act separate document that will serve as the
mail address: weinstock.lewis@epa.gov. D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act proposed rule to make corrections to the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism Ambient Air Monitoring Regulations if
Table of Contents
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation relevant adverse comments are received
and Coordination With Indian Tribal on one or more of the amendments in
I. Why Is EPA Using a Direct Final Rule? Governments this direct final rule as described in
II. Does This Action Apply to Me? G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
III. Judicial Review sections VI.A. through VI.I of this
Children From Environmental Health
IV. Authority preamble. We will not institute a second
and Safety Risks
V. Overview of the October 17, 2006 Rule H. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions comment period on this action. Any
Changes To Address Environmental Justice in parties interested in commenting must
VI. This Action Minority Populations and Low-Income do so at this time. For further
A. Correction to Special Purpose Monitors Populations information about commenting on this
B. Clarification to Requirement for
Collocating Required Continuous Fine
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That rule, see the ADDRESSES section of this
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, document. If EPA receives relevant
Particle (PM2.5) Monitors
Distribution, or Use adverse comment on one or more of the
C. Clarification to Operating Schedule
J. National Technology Transfer amendments included in this
Requirements for Filter-Based Manual
Advancement Act
PM2.5 Samplers rulemaking, we will publish a timely
K. Congressional Review Act
D. Standard versus Daylight Savings Time withdrawal in the Federal Register
Reference I. Why Is EPA Using a Direct Final indicating which amendment or
E. Corrections to Regulatory Text on Rule?
Particulate Matter (PM10) Network
amendments we are withdrawing. The
Design Criteria The EPA is publishing this rule provisions that are not withdrawn will
F. Additional Regional Administrator without a prior proposed rule because become effective on the date set out
Flexibility in Applying PM10 Minimum we view this as a non-controversial above, notwithstanding any relevant
Monitoring Requirements action and anticipate no adverse adverse comment on any other
G. Correction to Division Name and provision.
Address Reference
comment. None of the proposed changes
H. Clarification to Conditions for Waiving creates additional regulatory II. Does This Action Apply to Me?
Regional Administrator Comment Period requirements on affected entities
on Submitted Annual Monitoring compared to those that were Categories and entities potentially
Network Plans promulgated in the final rule that was regulated by this action include:
Category NAICS code 1 Examples of regulated entities
Industry ..................................... 334513 Manufacturer, supplier, distributor, or vendor of ambient air monitoring instruments; analytical
541380 laboratories or other monitoring organizations that elect to submit an application for a ref-
erence or equivalent method determination under 40 CFR part 53.
Federal Government ................. 924110 Federal agencies (that conduct ambient air monitoring similar to that conducted by States
under 40 CFR part 58 and that wish EPA to use their monitoring data in the same manner
as State data) or that elect to submit an application for a reference or equivalent method
determination under 40 CFR part 53.
State/territorial/local/tribal gov- 924110 State, territorial, and local air quality management programs that are responsible for ambient
ernment. air monitoring under 40 CFR part 58 or that elect to submit an application for a reference
or equivalent method determination under 40 CFR part 53 or for an approved regional
method approved under 40 CFR part 58 appendix C. The proposal also may affect Tribes
that conduct ambient air monitoring similar to that conducted by States and that wish EPA
to use their monitoring data in the same manner as State monitoring data.
1 North American Industry Classification System.
This table is not intended to be for State Implementation Plans (SIPs). If with reasonable specificity during the
exhaustive, but rather provides a guide you have questions regarding the period for public comment can be raised
for readers regarding entities likely to be applicability of this action to a during judicial review. Moreover, under
regulated by this action. This table lists particular entity, consult the person section 307(b)(2) of the CAA, the
the types of entities that EPA is now listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER requirements established by the direct
aware could potentially be regulated by INFORMATION CONTACT section. final rule amendments may not be
this action. Other types of entities not challenged separately in any civil or
III. Judicial Review
listed in the table could also be criminal proceedings brought by EPA to
regulated. To determine whether your Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean enforce these requirements.
facility or Federal, State, local, tribal, or Air Act (CAA), judicial review of the
IV. Authority
territorial agency is regulated by this direct final rule amendments is
action, you should carefully examine available only by filing a petition for The EPA rules for ambient air
the requirements for reference or review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for monitoring are authorized under
equivalent method determinations in 40 the District of Columbia by August 13, sections 110, 301(a), and 319 of the
CFR part 53, subpart A (General 2007. Under section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA. Section 110(a)(2)(B) of the CAA
Provisions) and the applicability criteria CAA, only an objection to the direct requires that each SIP provide for the
in 40 CFR 51.1 of EPA’s requirements final rule amendments that was raised establishment and operation of devices,
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 112 / Tuesday, June 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 32195
methods, systems, and procedures for collocating required continuous alternative’’ implied that data from
needed to monitor, compile, and PM2.5 monitors and clarifying associated SPMs operating during a period when
analyze data on ambient air quality and regulatory text. approved alternative quality assurance
for the reporting of air quality data to • Clarifying several ambiguous requirements were in effect, rather than
EPA. Section 103 authorizes, among regulatory text passages pertaining to appendix A requirements, would still be
others, research and investigations operating schedules for manual PM2.5 eligible for comparison to the relevant
relating to the causes, effects, extent, samplers. NAAQS.
prevention and control of air pollution. • Correcting a reference regarding The EPA provided the Regional
Section 301(a) of the CAA authorizes standard versus daylight savings time. Administrator with the authority to
EPA to develop regulations needed to • Restoring two instances of approve an alternative to the
carry out EPA’s mission and establishes regulatory text that were inadvertently requirements of appendix A to part 58
rulemaking requirements. Uniform omitted from the network design for with respect to SPM sites when meeting
criteria to be followed when measuring monitoring particles less than or equal those requirements would be physically
air quality and provisions for daily air to 10 µm in diameter (PM10). and/or financially impractical due to
pollution index reporting are required • Adding authority for the Regional physical conditions at the monitoring
by CAA section 319. Administrator, consistent with the site and the requirements were not
authority that already exists for PM2.5 essential to achieving the intended data
V. Overview of the October 17, 2006 and ozone, to allow monitoring agencies
Rule Changes objectives of the SPM site.
to deviate from PM10 monitoring Therefore, EPA is clarifying the
On October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61236), requirements. regulatory text by deleting the
EPA amended the rules for ambient air • Updating an organizational address aforementioned words referencing
monitoring of criteria pollutants. The reference within regulatory text alternative quality assurance plans. The
rule amendments established limited pertaining to quality assurance corrected rule text 40 CFR 58.20(c)
ambient air monitoring requirements for requirements. reads: ‘‘All data from an SPM using an
particles between 2.5 and 10 • Clarifying the conditions when the
FRM, FEM, or ARM which has operated
micrometers (µm) in diameter (PM10–2.5) EPA Regional Administrator is not
for more than 24 months is eligible for
to support continued research into these required to offer a public comment
comparison to the relevant NAAQS,
particles’ distribution, sources, and opportunity prior to approving a State’s
subject to the conditions of § 58.30,
health effects. The rule amendments annual monitoring network plan.
• Correcting numerous typographical unless the air monitoring agency
required each State to operate one to demonstrates that the data came from a
three ‘‘NCore’’ monitoring stations that errors in tables and equations.
particular period during which the
will take an integrated, multipollutant A. Correction to Special Purpose requirements of appendix A, appendix
approach to ambient air monitoring. In Monitors C, or appendix E to this part were not
addition, the rule amendments modified met in practice.’’
the general monitoring network design The intent of 40 CFR 58.20(c)
requirements for minimum numbers of (published at 71 FR 61302) was to B. Clarification to Requirement for
ambient air monitors to focus on describe the conditions when data from Collocating Required Continuous Fine
populated areas with air quality an SPM using a Federal reference Particle (PM2.5) Monitors
problems and to reduce significantly the method (FRM), Federal equivalent
method (FEM), or Approved Regional The regulatory text in 40 CFR part 58,
requirements for criteria pollutant appendix D (Network Design Criteria for
monitors that have measured ambient Method (ARM) which has operated for
more than 24 months is eligible for Ambient Air Quality Monitoring),
air concentrations well below the section 4.7.2 (71 FR 61322) describes
applicable National Ambient Air comparison to the relevant NAAQS. The
rule text states that all data from an SPM the minimum requirements for
Quality Standards. The rule operating continuous PM2.5 analyzers.1
amendments also revised certain is eligible for comparison to the relevant
NAAQS unless the data from the The text requires States to operate a
provisions regarding monitoring minimum number of continuous PM2.5
network descriptions and periodic particular monitor came from a period
when the requirements of appendix A to analyzers equal to at least one-half
assessments, quality assurance, and data (round up) the minimum required FRM/
certifications. A number of the part 58 (Quality Assurance
Requirements for SLAMS, SPMs, and FEM/ARM PM2.5 sites listed in Table D–
amendments related specifically to 5 of appendix D to part 58. At least one
monitoring of fine particles (referring to PSD Air Monitoring) or an approved
alternative, appendix C to part 58 required FRM/FEM/ARM PM2.5 monitor
particles less than or equal to 2.5 µm in in each MSA must be collocated with a
diameter, PM2.5), revising the (Ambient Air Quality Monitoring
Methodology), or appendix E to part 58 continuous analyzer. For example, if a
requirements for reference and MSA had three required FRM/FEM/
equivalent method determinations (Probe and Monitoring Path Siting
Criteria for Ambient Air Monitoring) ARM PM2.5 monitors, then two
(including specifications and test continuous monitors are required, and
procedures) for fine particle monitors. were not met in practice. This text does
not reflect EPA’s actual intention. at least one of those continuous
VI. This Action Instead, as discussed in the preamble monitors must be collocated (placed at
(71 FR 61253), the intention of the the same site) with one of the FRM/
EPA is taking the following actions:
• Correcting a statement in the October 17, 2006, final rule was that if FEM/ARM PM2.5 monitors. The second
regulatory text pertaining to the the Regional Administrator approved an 1 In 40 CFR part 58 and in this preamble, the
potential comparability of data collected alternative quality assurance plan in terms monitor, analyzer, and sampler are sometimes
from Special Purpose Monitors (SPM) place of the requirements of appendix A used interchangeably. Monitor is the more general
with approved alternative quality to part 58, the data from the affected term. Most often, analyzer means a self-contained
assurance plans to the National Ambient SPM would not be eligible for monitor which can produce concentration data on-
site. Sampler means a device that collects a sample
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). comparison to the relevant NAAQS. The (e.g., a filter) which must be further processed at an
• Correcting a statement in the unintentional inclusion in the rule text outside laboratory to obtain the concentration
preamble with regard to the requirement of the phrase ‘‘or an approved value.
required continuous monitor could be C. Clarification to Operating Schedule which PM2.5 monitoring is required, this
collocated with one of the remaining Requirements for Filter-Based Manual requirement could be interpreted as
two required FRM/FEM/ARM PM2.5 PM2.5 Samplers applying to any manual PM2.5 sampler
monitors at another site, or be located at The regulatory text in 40 CFR 58.12(d) within a State that recorded the highest
a separate site based on monitoring (71 FR 61299) describes the required design value ‘‘in an area’’ whether or
objectives. The EPA did not intend that sampling frequency for manual filter- not any PM2.5 monitors were even
the continuous analyzers required under based PM2.5 samplers. Manual PM2.5 required in that area according to 40
section 4.7.2 be required to be samplers at SLAMS stations must CFR part 58, appendix D. The EPA is
collocated with each other. operate on at least a 1-in-3 day schedule concerned that such an interpretation
The October 17, 2006, rule text at sites which do not also have a would create a disincentive to
matches our intended meaning. collocated continuously operating PM2.5 monitoring by potentially requiring
However, when referencing this rule monitor. For SLAMS PM2.5 sites with States that operated discretionary
requirement in the preamble (71 FR both manual and continuous PM2.5 SLAMS monitors to sample on a 1-in-3
61263), EPA incorrectly stated that the monitors operating, other than NCore day frequency even though the monitor
collocation requirement was adopted to stations, monitoring agencies may was in excess of minimum monitoring
address concerns about whether request approval from the EPA Regional requirements. Therefore, the first
required continuous monitors needed to Administrator for a reduction to 1-in-6 sentence of 40 CFR 58.12(d)(1)(i) is
be collocated with a matching second day PM2.5 sampling or for seasonal amended to read: ‘‘Manual PM2.5
continuous monitor, and that the final sampling. The EPA Regional samplers at required SLAMS stations
rule only required one of all the Administrator may grant sampling without a collocated continuously
required PM2.5 continuous monitors in frequency reductions after consideration operating PM2.5 monitor must operate
each MSA to have ‘‘such a collocated of factors including, but not limited to, on at least a 1-in-3 day schedule.’’ In
match.’’ This unintentional statement the historical PM2.5 data quality this rule text, ‘‘required SLAMS
could be construed as a requirement for assessments, the location of current stations’’ refers to minimum monitoring
collocating two continuous monitors PM2.5 design value sites, and the requirements as specified in 40 CFR part
with each other, in addition to the regulatory data needs of States and EPA. 58, appendix D, section 4.7. It does not
requirement for collocation with at least The regulatory text provides specific include SPMs; therefore SPMs are not
one required FRM/FEM/ARM monitor, criteria under which a manual PM2.5 required to sample on a 1-in-3 day
leading to the conclusion that EPA was sampler at a SLAMS station cannot be schedule.
requiring three PM2.5 monitors (two exempted by the Regional Administrator After stating the 1-in-3 day sampling
continuous, one filter-based) at the first from at least 1-in-3 day sampling, and requirement, the rule text at 40 CFR
required site, subject to the also includes a separate provision 58.12(d)(1)(ii) goes on to allow the
requirements of section 4.7.2. Moreover, describing when a daily sampling Regional Administrator to grant a
it was not our intention to require a schedule is required. The textual length reduction of this schedule to 1-in-6 day
second continuous monitor be sited of 40 CFR 58.12(d)(1) as well as the for SLAMS PM2.5 sites with both manual
with an FEM or ARM that itself specific wording of certain statements and continuous PM2.5 monitors
provides continuous data. could create difficulty in understanding operating. In this context, the rule text
Therefore, EPA is clarifying the the intended operating schedule contains a duplicated reference to
regulatory text to make clear the requirements for manual PM2.5 SLAMS PM2.5 sites; the second
intentions described above. The EPA is samplers. Therefore, EPA is clarifying reference, ‘‘at SLAMS stations,’’ is
also clarifying that an associated 40 CFR 58.12(d)(1) as described below. removed in the corrected rule language
reference to quality assurance/quality The first sentence of 40 CFR since the opening part of the sentence
control procedures refers to the 58.12(d)(1) stated that: ‘‘Manual PM2.5 already states the applicability of the
continuous monitoring requirement by samplers at SLAMS stations other than provision to SLAMS PM2.5 sites. The
adding the words ‘‘for these required NCore stations must operate on at least text goes on to describe two situations
continuous analyzers.’’ The corrected a 1-in-3 day schedule at sites without a in which a manual PM2.5 sampler at a
provision of 40 CFR part 58, appendix collocated continuously operating PM2.5 required SLAMS station could not be
D, section 4.7.2 now reads: monitor.’’ This statement could be granted sampling frequency relief by the
‘‘Requirement for Continuous PM2.5 construed as meaning that manual PM2.5 Regional Administrator from the
Monitoring. The State, or where samplers at NCore stations were not minimum 1-in-3 day sampling schedule.
appropriate, local agencies must operate required to maintain at least a 1-in-3 day In the first situation, the phrase: ‘‘Sites
continuous PM2.5 analyzers equal to at schedule. The rule in fact does require that have design values that are within
least one-half (round up) the minimum manual PM2.5 samplers at NCore plus or minus 10 percent of the
required sites listed in Table D–5 of this stations to maintain at least a 1-in-3 day NAAQS’’ could be construed as
appendix. At least one required sampling schedule, as later noted in 40 applying to all sites within a particular
continuous analyzer in each MSA must CFR 58.12(d)(2), and these samplers are area that have design values that are
be collocated with one of the required not eligible for sampling frequency within plus or minus 10 percent of the
FRM/FEM/ARM monitors, unless at relief. Therefore, EPA is clarifying the NAAQS, when the intention was to
least one of the required FRM/FEM/ rule text by deleting the phrase ‘‘other apply the provision only to the site with
ARM monitors is itself a continuous than NCore stations’’ from first sentence the highest value in a particular area
FEM or ARM monitor, in which case no of 40 CFR 58.12(d)(1). calculated in accordance with 40 CFR
collocation requirement applies. State Another potential ambiguity regarding part 50, appendix N (Interpretation of
and local air monitoring agencies must the 1-in-3 day sampling frequency the National Ambient Air Quality
use methodologies and quality provision of 40 CFR 58.12(d)(1) is its Standards for PM2.5).2 In the second
assurance/quality control (QA/QC) geographic applicability. Since the 2 EPA notes that the term ‘‘design value’’ as
procedures approved by the EPA regulatory language did not specify that defined in the final rule (40 CFR part 58.1, 71 FR
Regional Administrator for these the 1-in-3 day sampling frequency 61296) is the calculated concentration of a pollutant
required continuous analyzers.’’ requirement be applied only in areas in according to the applicable appendix of part 50 for
situation, the phrase: ‘‘and sites where plus or minus 5 percent of the daily 1-in-3 day sampling frequency. The EPA
the 24-hour values exceed the NAAQS PM2.5 NAAQS must have an FRM or intended the 1-in-3 day sampling
for a period of 3 years are required to FEM operate on a daily schedule. As frequency to be a minimum sampling
maintain at least a 1-in-3 day sampling with the previously discussed phrasing frequency and not to imply a
frequency’’ created ambiguity about in the context of the 1-in-3 day sampling prohibition against a more frequent
whether the provision was applicable in requirement, this text could be sampling frequency, such as a daily
situations where a single 24-hour value construed as applying to all sites within sampling frequency, if such a frequency
exceeded the NAAQS at a particular site a particular area that have design values is appropriate for specific monitoring
during only 1 or 2 years of a 3-year that are within plus or minus 5 percent objectives. Consistent with the
period. The EPA’s intention was that at of the NAAQS, when the intention was phraseology of sampling frequency
least one 24-hour value had to exceed to apply the provision only to the requirements elsewhere in the
the NAAQS in each of the years required SLAMS site with the highest regulatory text, EPA is correcting the
comprising the 3-year period situation value in a particular area. Also, the aforementioned phrase to read: ‘‘Manual
for the provision to apply. above described concern regarding the PM2.5 speciation samplers at STN
Also, the regulatory text could be acceptability of continuous PM2.5 stations must operate on at least a
construed as requiring 1-in-3 day analyzers applies in the case of this plus 1-in-3 day sampling frequency.’’
manual PM2.5 sampling at all sites or minus 5 percent criterion, and a
D. Standard versus Daylight Savings
within a particular area that have design similar clarification to the rule text is
Time Reference
values within the plus or minus 10 appropriate.
percent criteria, regardless of whether Therefore, EPA is clarifying 40 CFR 40 CFR 58.12(e) requires that the
the site is required and regardless of the 58.12(d)(1) and for purposes of clarity is operating schedule for PM10 samplers
potential availability of continuous adding subparagraph (iii). It will read: must be a 24-hour sampling period
PM2.5 FEM or ARM monitors which ‘‘Required SLAMS sites whose taken from midnight to midnight (local
inherently would provide every-day measurements determine the design time) to ensure national consistency. In
data eligible for comparison to the value for their area and that are within a 1999 EPA memorandum,3 the use of
NAAQS. The EPA anticipates the plus or minus 5 percent of the daily standard time versus daylight savings
increasing availability of approved FEM PM2.5 NAAQS must have an FRM or time is discussed in the context of
and ARM methods over the next few FEM operate on a daily schedule. A sample collection for particulate matter
years, and expects that many such continuously operating FEM or ARM monitors, concluding with the
approved continuous monitors will be PM2.5 monitor satisfies this recommendation that monitoring
deployed at sites formerly dedicated to requirement.’’ agencies operate their particulate matter
manual filter-based FRM or FEM PM2.5 The EPA notes that only population- sampler clocks on standard time to
samplers, including design value sites oriented monitors are subject to the avoid the semi-annual time-shift issues
subject to the plus or minus 10 percent previously described percent-dependent associated with conversion between
sampling frequency requirements. In 40 standard time and daylight savings time.
criteria when compared with the 24-
CFR 58.30 (Special Considerations for Monitoring agencies have generally
hour PM2.5 NAAQS. The EPA supports
Data Comparisons to the NAAQS), sites adopted the practice of keeping their
the deployment of approved FEM or
must be population-oriented to be particulate matter sampler clocks on
ARM continuous PM2.5 methods to meet
comparable to either the annual or daily standard time since the issuance of the
appropriate monitoring objectives as
PM2.5 NAAQS. By implication, design 1999 memorandum. It was EPA’s
such monitors become available, and
value sites must be NAAQS comparable, intention to codify the practice of
thus we did not intend to require 1-in-
therefore non-population oriented sites keeping particulate matter clocks on
3 day sampling utilizing manual PM2.5
would not be affected by the plus or standard time in the October 17, 2006,
methods at design value sites, or any
minus 10 percent or plus or minus 5 Revisions to the Ambient Monitoring
other sites, where monitoring agencies Regulations; however, the codifying rule
percent provisions.
have deployed an approved continuous As previously mentioned, EPA is text was inadvertently omitted for
FEM or ARM. aware that the length of 40 CFR PM10.4 If the aforementioned 40 CFR
The clarified language of the 58.12(d)(1) creates the potential for 58.12(e) reference to PM10 operating
restriction related to being within plus ambiguity in the applicability of schedule is left uncorrected, this could
or minus 10 percent of the NAAQS now individual provisions related to create inconsistent interpretation of the
reads: ‘‘Required SLAMS stations whose sampling frequency requirements. To standard versus daylight savings time
measurements determine the design clarify the applicability of such issue among monitoring agencies
value for their area and that are within provisions, EPA has restructured 40 causing unnecessary confusion in the
plus or minus 10 percent of the NAAQS, CFR 58.12(d)(1) to create distinct interpretation of the air quality data.
and all required sites where one or more paragraphs encompassing the Therefore, EPA is correcting the
24-hour values have exceeded the previously described amended language reference to PM10 operating schedules in
NAAQS each year for a consecutive applicable to SLAMS sites without
period of at least 3 years, are required continuously operating PM2.5 monitors 3 ‘‘Use of PM Reference Methods and Daylight
to maintain at least a 1-in-3 day (now numbered 40 CFR 58.12(d)(1)(i)), Savings Time,’’ J. David Mobley; Office of Air
sampling frequency. A continuously Quality Planning and Standards, June 11, 1999.
SLAMS sites with both manual and http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/files/ambient/pm25/
operating FEM or ARM PM2.5 monitor continuous PM2.5 monitors (now stdtime.pdf.
satisfies this requirement.’’ numbered 40 CFR 58.12(d)(1)(ii)), and 4 The intention to base sampling on local
At the end of 40 CFR 58.12(d)(1), EPA design value sites within plus or minus standard time was correctly reflected in rule text
specified that manual PM2.5 samplers at 5 percent of the daily PM2.5 NAAQS
applicable to PM2.5. 40 CFR part 50, appendix N
(Interpretation of the National Ambient Air Quality
sites that have a design value within (now numbered 40 CFR 58.12(d)(1)(iii)). Standards for PM2.5) reads: ‘‘Daily values for PM2.5
In 40 CFR 58.12(d)(3), manual PM2.5 refers to the 24-hour average concentrations of
the highest monitoring site in an attainment or PM2.5 calculated (averaged from hourly
nonattainment area, and that EPA’s usage of
speciation samplers at required measurements) or measured from midnight to
‘‘design value’’ in the rule text was consistent with Speciation Trends Network (STN) midnight (local standard time) that are used in
this definition. stations are required to operate on a NAAQS computations.’’
40 CFR 58.12(e) to read as follows: ‘‘For text in the pre-existing paragraph 3.7.1 EPA finalized the Regional
PM10 samplers, a 24-hour sample must (as last promulgated on July 18, 1997, at Administrator authority to modify the
be taken from midnight to midnight 62 FR 38850) in new paragraph (a) of PM2.5 and ozone monitoring
(local standard time) to ensure national new section 4.6, to explain in words the requirements in the October 17, 2006,
consistency.’’ flexibility in minimum PM10 monitoring rule following a public comment period
requirements as provided in the pre- in which no adverse comments were
E. Corrections to Regulatory Text on
existing Table 4 which had listed ranges received about the specific provisions
Particulate Matter (PM10) Network
of required numbers (rather than a concerning Regional Administrator
Design Criteria
single number) of monitors for each of flexibility in applying these regulations.
In the preamble to the final the categories of MSA population and The EPA did not adopt the proposed
monitoring rule (71 FR 61240), EPA historical PM10 range. This regulatory PM10–2.5 minimum monitoring network
stated an intention to retain the pre- text was inadvertently omitted. design including the Regional
existing minimum monitoring network Therefore, EPA is restoring the omitted Administrator flexibility language. The
design requirements for PM10, which are text and correcting paragraph (a) of EPA notes, however, that no adverse
based on the population of an MSA and section 4.6 to read: ‘‘Table D–4 indicates comments were received specifically
its historical PM10 air quality. The EPA’s the approximate number of permanent addressing the proposed Regional
intention in finalizing the regulatory stations required in MSAs to Administrator authority to modify
text in section 4.6, Particulate Matter characterize national and regional PM10 PM10–2.5 monitoring network
(PM10) Design Criteria, of 40 CFR part air quality trends and geographical requirements although voluminous
58, appendix D (Network Design Criteria patterns. The number of PM10 stations comment was received on other
for Ambient Air Quality Monitoring) (71 in areas where MSA populations exceed proposed provisions of the PM10–2.5
FR 61320) was to retain all PM10- 1,000,000 must be in the range from 2 monitoring network design and
relevant portions of the pre-existing to 10 stations, while in low population accompanying suitability test.
regulatory text beginning with section urban areas, no more than 2 stations are The EPA also proposed and adopted
3.7, Particulate Matter Design Criteria required. A range of monitoring stations requirements for ‘‘NCore’’
for NAMS (see 62 FR 38820, July 18, is specified in Table D–4 because multipollutant monitoring sites,
1997), with only minor changes sources of pollutants and local control including a provision allowing the
necessary to maintain consistency of efforts can vary from one part of the Administrator to approve modifications
monitor type terminology (e.g., to country to another and, therefore, some from these requirements. Again, no
eliminate obsolete references to flexibility is allowed in selecting the adverse comment was received on this
National Air Monitoring Stations actual number of stations in any one modification provision. Finally, specific
(NAMS)). The EPA inadvertently locale.’’ requirements in the rule for
omitted several passages from the pre- photochemical assessment monitoring
existing regulatory text in section 3.7 F. Additional Regional Administrator stations (PAMS) have always been
referencing PM10 network design Flexibility in Applying PM10 Minimum modifiable by the Administrator.
criteria. If left uncorrected, these Monitoring Requirements Thus, EPA notes that under the
omissions could lead to We are amending the monitoring rule current 40 CFR part 58, appendix D
misinterpretation of PM10 monitoring to allow EPA Regional Administrators to network design requirements, PM10 is
network design requirements. Three approve departures from the minimum the only pollutant with minimum
specific textual corrections are detailed number of PM10 monitors otherwise monitoring requirements not subject to
below. specified in the rule. modification based on either
First, in Table D–4, PM10 Minimum In the January 17, 2006, proposed Administrator or Regional
Monitoring Requirements (Number of monitoring rule (71 FR 2802), EPA Administrator evaluation and approval.
Stations per MSA), the word proposed minimum network design Such flexibility, already finalized for
‘‘Approximate’’ which had appeared in monitoring requirements for PM10–2.5. In ozone and PM2.5, can prove useful in
the title of the pre-existing Table 4 was paragraph (b) of section 4.8.1 of 40 CFR particular cases where a State
omitted. Therefore, in order to retain the part 58, appendix D, (Network Design demonstrates that meeting the minimum
earlier language EPA is revising the title Criteria for Ambient Air Quality monitoring requirements, for an
of Table D–4 to read: ‘‘PM10 Minimum Monitoring), EPA proposed that individual MSA for example, may be
Monitoring Requirements (Approximate modifications from the PM10–2.5 impractical or contrary to the optimum
Number of Stations Per MSA).’’ monitoring requirements must be use of monitoring resources.
Second, the first footnote contains approved by the Regional The EPA believes it is appropriate to
some words (‘‘within the ranges shown Administrator. The proposed regulatory allow the Regional Administrator to
in this table’’) that were not part of the language providing the Regional modify PM10 monitoring requirements,
corresponding footnote to the pre- Administrator flexibility to modify the for the same reasons such authority was
existing Table 4. Therefore, the first PM10–2.5 monitoring requirements was finalized for PM2.5 and ozone
footnote is revised to read: ‘‘Selection of consistent with similar language monitoring requirements. Such
urban areas and actual numbers of proposed for PM2.5 that read: authority allows for specific local
stations per area will be jointly ‘‘Deviations from these PM2.5 factors and information can be
determined by EPA and the State monitoring requirements must be considered in order to make the PM10
Agency.’’ approved by the EPA Regional monitoring network more economical
Third, in paragraph (a) of section 4.6, Administrator’’ (71 FR 2801, paragraph while still meeting program data needs.
the regulatory text notes that State, and (b) of section 4.7.1). Similar regulatory In light of the absence of any comments
where applicable local, agencies must language was proposed for ozone of concern regarding very similar
operate the minimum number of monitoring requirements (71 FR 2798, Administrator or Regional
required PM10 SLAMS sites listed in paragraph (b) of section 4.1): Administrator authority for other
Table D–4 of appendix D. In the October ‘‘Deviations from the above O3 pollutants, we do not expect any
17, 2006, rulemaking, EPA intended to requirements are allowed if approved by adverse comment on this action.
retain all of the pre-existing regulatory the EPA Regional Administrator.’’ The Therefore, EPA is amending paragraph
(a) of section 4.6 quoted in the section H. Clarification to Conditions for expected to provide comment
above and adding the following Waiving Regional Administrator summaries or comment responses,
sentence so it now reads: Comment Period on Submitted Annual although those submissions could
‘‘Modifications from these PM10 Monitoring Network Plans optionally be provided to the Regional
monitoring requirements must be The regulatory text in 40 CFR Administrator in addition to the actual
approved by the Regional 58.10(a)(2) (71 FR 61298) describes the text of the received comments.
Administrator.’’ See also section VI.E of approval process for State-submitted I. Typographical Corrections
this preamble for a clarifying annual monitoring network plans that
amendment which also affects section The Federal Register printing of the
propose SLAMS network modifications.
4.6 of appendix D to part 58 by restoring October 17, 2006, final rule contained
Such plans are subject to the approval
inadvertently omitted text. typographical errors in equations,
of the Regional Administrator, including
tables, and figures. These errors, as
G. Correction to Division Name and a new requirement for the Regional
explained below and listed by Federal
Address Reference Administrator to provide opportunity
Register page reference and CFR section
for public comment during the 120-day
number, are corrected in this
The October 17, 2006, final rule period allowed for approval or
rulemaking.
provided an address reference in disapproval. The rule permits the • 71 FR 61284. Subpart C of Part 53—
paragraph 2.4 of 40 CFR part 58 Regional Administrator to waive the § 53.35(d)(4), Calculation of mean
appendix A, to assist with separate public comment opportunity if concentrations. Equation 12: The ‘‘n’’
communications regarding the National the State or local agency has already over the summation symbol is replaced
Performance Evaluation Programs. provided a public comment opportunity with ‘‘m.’’
Monitoring agencies were advised to on its plan and has made no changes to • 71 FR 61284. Subpart C of Part 53—
contact either the appropriate EPA the plan subsequent to that comment § 53.35(e) and § 53.35(f), Tests for
Regional Quality Assurance (QA) opportunity. reference method and candidate method
Coordinator at the appropriate EPA Implied but not explicitly stated in precision. Equations 13 and 15: 100% is
Regional Office location, or the NPAP the regulatory language is that the moved to be outside the square root
Coordinator, Emissions Monitoring and Regional Administrator may forgo symbol.
Analysis Division (D205–02), U.S. public comment only if the State or • 71 FR 61284. Subpart C of Part 53—
local agency submitted the full text of § 53.35(g), Test for additive and
Environmental Protection Agency,
public comments received on its annual multiplicative bias (comparative slope
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711. Due
monitoring network plan to the Regional and intercept). Equation 17: Left part of
to a reorganization within the Office of
Administrator, because only the equation is changed to be R̄ not R̄j.
Air Quality Planning and Standards and
availability of such detailed comments • 71 FR 61284. Subpart C of Part 53—
subsequent physical relocation within
would make a separate comment period § 53.35(h), Tests for comparison
the North Carolina facility, the provided
by the Regional Administrator correlation. Equation 21: Radical sign in
address mail code (D205–02) is no redundant.
longer correct for quality assurance the denominator is extended to cover
The EPA believes that the both summation signs.
related communications. Additionally, aforementioned regulatory language
the Emissions Monitoring and Analysis • 71 FR 61285. Table C–1 to Subpart
should be clarified to avoid ambiguity C of Part 53, Test Concentration Ranges,
Division has been renamed to the Air about what situations would require the
Quality Assessment Division, as part of Number of Measurements Required, and
Regional Administrator to provide a Maximum Discrepancy Specification.
the same reorganization. Due to the public comment opportunity on The four occurrences of ‘‘Total’’ in the
possibility of future address changes, submitted annual monitoring network first column are moved to the second
EPA believes a more general reference to plans that contain SLAMS network column.
quality assurance contact information is modifications. The EPA notes that the • 71 FR 61285. Table C–1 to Subpart
appropriate for inclusion in regulatory clarification does not modify the C of Part 53, Test Concentration Ranges,
language. Updated contact information minimum requirements for State and Number of Measurements Required, and
for all air monitoring program leads is local agencies to make their plans Maximum Discrepancy Specification.
maintained on the Ambient Monitoring available for public inspection for at Two entries of ‘‘18’’ are moved 3
Technology Information Center least 30 days prior to submission to columns left to appear in the ‘‘Second
(AMTIC) Web site http://www.epa.gov/ EPA. Set’’ column rather than as shown in the
ttn/amtic/contacts.html. This website is Accordingly, the clarified regulatory right-most column.
well publicized and frequently accessed text in the second sentence of 40 CFR • 71 FR 61285. Table C–4 to Subpart
by all monitoring agencies; therefore, 58.10(a)(2) reads: ‘‘If the State or local C of Part 53—Test Specifications for
specific address entries in the rule are agency has already provided a public PM10, PM2.5 and PM10–2.5 Candidate
unnecessary and potentially misleading. comment opportunity on its plan and Equivalent Methods. An erroneous ‘‘R’’
Accordingly, EPA is amending the has made no changes subsequent to that character in the table title is removed so
regulatory text in paragraph 2.4 to read: comment opportunity, and has that the title reads—Test Specifications
‘‘For clarification and to participate, submitted the received comments for PM10, PM2.5 and PM10–2.5 Candidate
monitoring organizations should contact together with the plan, the Regional Equivalent Methods.
either the appropriate EPA Regional Administrator is not required to provide • 71 FR 61286. Table C–4 to Subpart
Quality Assurance (QA) Coordinator at a separate opportunity for comment.’’ C of Part 53—Test Specifications for
the appropriate EPA Regional Office Such comments could be transmitted PM10, PM2.5 and PM10–2.5 Candidate
location, or the NPAP Coordinator at the to the Regional Administrator in hard- Equivalent Methods. In the column
Air Quality Assessment Division, Office copy or electronic format, and at a header for the last 2 columns, the
of Air Quality Planning and Standards, minimum, would include all relevant ‘‘PM10–2.5’’ is corrected to be ‘‘PM10–2.5’’.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency information supplied to the State or • 71 FR 61286. Table C–4 to Subpart
in Research Triangle Park, North local agency by the commenters. C of Part 53—Test Specifications for
Carolina.’’ Monitoring agencies would not be PM10, PM2.5 and PM10–2.5 Candidate
Equivalent Methods. The horizontal line identified as ‘‘§ 53.56* * *,’’ a comma added in caption below Equation 11 so
under ‘‘Rj > 60 µg/m3’’ in the table is is added after ‘‘16.67 ± 5%’’ and before that it reads: a chi-squared distribution
removed. ‘‘L/min.’’ with n–1 degrees of freedom.
• 71 FR 61286. Table C–4 to Subpart • 71 FR 61294. Table E–1 to Subpart • 71 FR 61310. Appendix A of Part
C of Part 53—Test Specifications for E of Part 53—Summary of Test 58—Quality Assurance Requirements
PM10, PM2.5 and PM10–2.5 Candidate Requirements for Reference and Class I for SLAMS, SPMs, and PSD Air
Equivalent Methods. In the first column, Equivalent Methods for PM2.5 and Monitoring. Equation 12: missing
in the ‘‘Precision of replicate reference PM10–2.5. In the 3rd column, row ellipsis is added in caption so that it
method measurements * * *’’ entry, the identified as ‘‘§ 53.57* * *,’’ one of the reads: where, nj is the number of pairs
‘‘prime’’ symbols are removed from two periods at the end of item 3 is and d1, d2, * * * dnj are the biases for
‘‘RPRj’’ and ‘‘PM10–2.5’’. removed. each of the pairs to be averaged.
• 71 FR 61286. Table C–4 to Subpart • 71 FR 61294. Table E–1 to Subpart • ‘‘PM10C’’, where it appears in Part
C of Part 53—Test Specifications for E of Part 53—Summary of Test 53 without a subscripted ‘‘C’’, is
PM10, PM2.5 and PM10–2.5 Candidate Requirements for Reference and Class I replaced with ‘‘PM10c.’’
Equivalent Methods. An unintended Equivalent Methods for PM2.5 and
PM10–2.5. In the fourth column, row VII. Statutory and Executive Order
period is removed at the end of the
identified as ‘‘§ 53.57* * *,’’ item (c) is Reviews
entry in the last column, Intercept row,
and at the end of the second footnote. changed to read ‘‘Solar flux of 1000 ± 50 A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
• 71 FR 61286. Table C–4 to Subpart W/m2’’ not ‘‘Solar flux of 1000 ? 50 W/ Planning and Review
C of Part 53—Test Specifications for m2.’’
• 71 FR 61294. Table E–1 to Subpart Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
PM10, PM2.5 and PM10–2.5 Candidate 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is a
Equivalent Methods. Values for E of Part 53—Summary of Test
Requirements for Reference and Class I ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ because
correlation of reference method and it may raise novel legal policy issues
candidate method measurements for Equivalent Methods for PM2.5 and
PM10–2.5. Spurious ‘‘?’’ characters arising out of legal mandates, the
PM2.5 Class II and III, and PM10–2.5 Class President’s priorities, or the principles
II and III are added to all four columns: throughout the table are removed.
• 71 FR 61294. Table E–1 to Subpart set forth in the Executive Order.
• ≥0.93 for CCV≤0.4; Accordingly, EPA submitted this action
• ≥0.85 + 0.2×CCV for 0.4≤CCV≤0.5; E of Part 53—Summary of Test
Requirements for Reference and Class I to the Office of Management and Budget
• ≥0.95 for CCV≥0.5. (OMB) for review under Executive
Equivalent Methods for PM2.5 and
• 71 FR 61287. Figure C–1 to Subpart PM10–2.5. § 53.56 cell reference, Order 12866 and any changes made in
C of Part 53—Suggested Format for Barometric pressure effect test, Sample response to OMB recommendations
Reporting Test Results for Methods for flow rate performance specification, have been documented in the docket for
SO2, CO, O3, NO2. Title and the first value is changed to be 16.67 (versus this action.
lines of content are repositioned from 16.6).
being section text to being proper parts B. Paperwork Reduction Act
• 71 FR 61296. Table F–1 to Subpart
of Figure C–1. F of Part 53—Performance This action does not impose any new
• 71 FR 61287. Figures C–2 and C–3 Specifications for PM2.5 Class II information collection, as it only
to Subpart C of Part 53—Illustration of Equivalent Samplers. In the last column, corrects printing errors, provides
the Slope and Intercept Limits for Class row identified as ‘‘§ 53.64,’’ ‘‘Dp50 = 2.5 clarifications, and provides new
II and Class III PM2.5 Candidate µm ? 0.2 µm’’ is changed to be ‘‘Dp50 = flexibility for PM10 monitoring on a
Equivalent Methods and Illustration of 2.5 µm ± 0.2 µm.’’ case-by-case basis. However, the OMB
the Slope and Intercept Limits for Class • 71 FR 61296. Table F–1 to Subpart has previously approved the
II and Class III PM10–2.5 Candidate F of Part 53—Performance information collection requirements
Equivalent Methods. ‘‘PM2.5’’ is changed Specifications for PM2.5 Class II contained in the existing regulations for
to ‘‘PM2.5,’’ ‘‘PM10–2.5’’ is changed to Equivalent Samplers. In the last column, 40 CFR part 53 and 40 CFR part 58
‘‘PM10–2.5,’’ ‘‘µg/m3’’ is changed to ‘‘µg/ last row, a comma is added after under the provisions of the Paperwork
m3.’’ Also, the ‘‘Class II’’ and ‘‘Class III’’ ‘‘0.15mg’’ and before ‘‘r ≥0.97.’’ Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.,
labels are related by arrows to the • 71 FR 61296. Table F–1 to Subpart and has assigned OMB control number
outline of the hexagons rather than the F of Part 53—Performance 2060–0084, EPA ICR number 0940.20. A
area inside, to be consistent with the Specifications for PM2.5 Class II copy of the OMB approved Information
title, which indicates ‘‘Acceptance Equivalent Samplers. Spurious ‘‘?’’ Collection Request (ICR) may be
Limits.’’ characters throughout the table are obtained from Susan Auby, Collection
• 71 FR 61289. Figure C–4 to Subpart removed. Strategies Division, U.S. Environmental
C of Part 53—Illustration of the • 71 FR 61300. Figure 1 to Subpart B Protection Agency (2822T), 1200
Minimum Limits for Correlation of Part 58—Ratio to Standard for PM10 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
Coefficient for PM2.5 and PM10–2.5 Class Operating Schedule. A missing value DC 20460 or by calling (202) 566–1672.
II and III methods. In the axes labels, the (1.4) is added on the X axis. This action does not impose any new
commas are deleted and the ‘‘r’’ and the • 71 FR 61309. Appendix A of Part information collection burden beyond
‘‘CCV’’ are placed within parentheses. 58—Quality Assurance Requirements the already-approved ICR.
• 71 FR 61293. Subpart E of Part 53— for SLAMS, SPMs, and PSD Air Burden means the total time, effort, or
§ 53.58(g), Operational field precision Monitoring. Equation 7: A missing ‘‘•’’ financial resources expended by persons
and blank test. Equation 26: the symbol character is added so that the equation to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose
‘‘C1,j’’ is corrected to ‘‘Ci,j.’’ reads: Lower Probability Limit = m–1.96 or provide information to or for a
• 71 FR 61294. Table E–1 to Subpart • S. Federal agency. This includes the time
E of Part 53—Summary of Test • 71 FR 61309. Appendix A of Part needed to review instructions; develop,
Requirements for Reference and Class I 58—Quality Assurance Requirements acquire, install, and utilize technology
Equivalent Methods for PM2.5 and for SLAMS, SPMs, and PSD Air and systems for the purposes of
PM10–2.5. In the 3rd column, row Monitoring. A missing minus sign is collecting, validating, and verifying
information, processing and Federal agencies to assess the effects of new flexibility for PM10 monitoring on
maintaining information, and disclosing their regulatory actions on State, local, a case-by-case basis. Therefore, this final
and providing information; adjust the and tribal governments and the private rule is not subject to the requirements
existing ways to comply with any sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, of section 203 of the UMRA.
previously applicable instructions and EPA generally must prepare a written
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
requirements; train personnel to be able statement, including a cost-benefit
to respond to a collection of analysis, for proposed and final rules Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,
information; search data sources; with ‘‘Federal mandates’’ that may August 10, 1999), requires EPA to
complete and review the collection of result in expenditures to State, local, develop an accountable process to
information; and transmit or otherwise and Tribal governments, in the ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by
disclose the information. An agency aggregate, or to the private sector, of State and local officials in the
may not conduct or sponsor, and a $100 million or more in any one year. development of regulatory policies that
person is not required to respond to a Before promulgating an EPA rule for have federalism implications.’’ ‘‘Policies
collection of information unless it which a written statement is needed, that have federalism implications’’ is
displays a currently valid OMB control section 205 of the UMRA generally defined in the Executive Order to
number. The OMB control numbers for requires EPA to identify and consider a include regulations that have
EPA’s regulations in 40 CFR are listed reasonable number of regulatory ‘‘substantial direct effects on the States,
in 40 CFR part 9. alternatives and adopt the least costly, on the relationship between the national
most cost-effective or least burdensome government and the States, or on the
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act distribution of power and
alternative that achieves the objectives
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) of the rule. The provisions of section responsibilities among the various
generally requires an agency to prepare 205 do not apply when they are levels of government.’’
a regulatory flexibility analysis of any inconsistent with applicable law. This final rule does not have
rule subject to notice and comment Moreover, section 205 allows EPA to federalism implications because it will
rulemaking requirements under the adopt an alternative other than the least not have substantial direct effects on the
Administrative Procedure Act or any costly, most cost-effective or least States, on the relationship between the
other statute unless the agency certifies burdensome alternative if the national government and the States, or
that the rule will not have a significant Administrator publishes with the final on the distribution of power and
economic impact on a substantial rule an explanation why that alternative responsibilities among the various
number of small entities. Small entities was not adopted. Before EPA establishes levels of government, as specified in
include small businesses, small any regulatory requirements that may Executive Order 13132. This is because
organizations, and small governmental significantly or uniquely affect small the changes being made only correct
jurisdictions. governments, including Tribal printing errors, provide clarifications,
For purposes of assessing the impacts governments, it must have developed and provides some new flexibility for
of today’s rule on small entities, small under section 203 of the UMRA a small PM10 monitoring on a case-by-case
entity is defined as: (1) A small business government agency plan. The plan must basis. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does
defined by the Small Business provide for notifying potentially not apply to this final rule.
Administration’s (SBA) regulations at 13 affected small governments, enabling F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental officials of affected small governments
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
jurisdiction that is a government of a to have meaningful and timely input in
Governments
city, county, town, school district or the development of EPA regulatory
special district with a population of less proposals with significant Federal Executive Order 13175, entitled
than 50,000; and (3) a small intergovernmental mandates, and ‘‘Consultation and Coordination with
organization that is any not-for-profit informing, educating, and advising Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR
enterprise which is independently small governments on compliance with 67249, November 9, 2000), requires EPA
owned and operated and is not the regulatory requirements. to develop an accountable process to
dominant in its field. The EPA has determined that this ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by
After considering the economic final rule does not contain a Federal tribal officials in the development of
impacts of today’s final rule on small mandate that may result in expenditures regulatory policies that have tribal
entities, I certify that this action will not of $100 million or more for State, local, implications.’’ This final rule does not
have a significant economic impact on and tribal governments, in the aggregate, have tribal implications, as specified in
a substantial number of small entities. or the private sector in any one year, Executive Order 13175. The EPA
This final rule will not impose any because the changes being made are consulted with tribal officials early in
requirements on small entities. None of merely clarifications and corrections. the process of developing the October
the corrections and clarifications creates Thus, today’s rule is not subject to the 17, 2006, rule to permit them to have
additional regulatory requirements on requirements of sections 202 and 205 of meaningful and timely input into its
affected entities compared to those that the UMRA. development. Although tribal
were promulgated in the final rule that The EPA has determined that this governments may elect to conduct
was published in the Federal Register final rule contains no regulatory ambient air monitoring, none of the
on October 17, 2006. The rule changes requirements that might significantly or changes in today’s rule apply directly to
being made only correct printing errors, uniquely affect small governments. tribal governments. Thus, Executive
provide clarifications, and provides new None of the changes creates additional Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.
flexibility for PM10 monitoring on a regulatory requirements on affected
entities compared to those that were G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of

case-by-case basis.
promulgated in the final rule that was Children From Environmental Health
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act published in the Federal Register on and Safety Risks
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates October 17, 2006. The rule changes Executive Order 13045 ‘‘Protection of
Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public being made only correct printing errors, Children from Environmental Health
Law 104–4, establishes requirements for provide clarifications, and provide some Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that: supply, distribution, or use of energy. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Parts 53 and
(1) Is determined to be ‘‘economically No significant change in the use of 58
significant’’ as defined under EO 12866, energy is expected because the total
and (2) concerns an environmental number of monitors for ambient air Environmental protection,
health or safety risk that EPA has reason quality measurements will not increase Administrative practice and procedure,
to believe may have a disproportionate above present levels. Further, we have Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
effect on children. If the regulatory concluded that this rule is not likely to relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
action meets both criteria, the Agency have any adverse energy effects. requirements.
must evaluate the environmental health Dated: April 30, 2007.
or safety effects of the planned rule on J. National Technology Transfer
Advancement Act Stephen L. Johnson,
children, and explain why the planned
regulation is preferable to other Administrator.
potentially effective and reasonably Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement ■ For the reasons stated in the preamble,
feasible alternatives considered by the
Act of 1995 (‘‘NTTAA’’), Public Law No. title 40, chapter I, parts 53 and 58 of the
Agency.
EPA interprets EO 13045 as applying 104–113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) Code of Federal Regulations are
only to those regulatory actions that directs EPA to use voluntary consensus amended as follows:
concern health or safety risks, such that standards in its regulatory activities
unless to do so would be inconsistent PART 53—[AMENDED]
the analysis required under section 5–
501 of the EO has the potential to with applicable law or otherwise
■ 1. The authority citation for part 53
influence the regulation. This final rule impractical. Voluntary consensus
continues to read as follows:
is not subject to EO 13045 because it standards are technical standards (e.g.,
does not establish an environmental materials specifications, test methods, Authority: Section 301(a) of the Clean Air
standard intended to mitigate health or sampling procedures, and business Act (42 U.S.C. sec. 1857g(a)), as amended by
safety risks. practices) that are developed or adopted sec. 15(c)(2) of Pub. L. 91–604, 84 Stat. 1713,
by voluntary consensus standards unless otherwise noted.
H. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to
provide Congress, through OMB, Subpart C—[Amended]
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations explanations when the Agency decides
not to use available and applicable ■ 2. Section 53.35 is amended by:
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, ■ a. Revising Equation 12 of paragraph
voluntary consensus standards.
February 16, 1994) establishes federal (d)(4),
executive policy on environmental This action does not involve technical
justice. Its main provision directs standards, other than to make ■ b. Revising Equation 13 of paragraph
Federal agencies, to the greatest extent corrections and clarifications. Therefore, (e)(1),
practicable and permitted by law, to EPA did not consider the use of any ■ c. Revising Equation 15 of paragraph
make environmental justice part of their voluntary consensus standards. (f)(1),
mission by identifying and addressing, K. Congressional Review Act ■ d. Revising Equation 17 of paragraph
as appropriate, disproportionately high
(g)(1), and
and adverse human health or The Congressional Review Act, 5
environmental effects of their programs, U.S.C. 801, et seq., as added by the ■ e. Revising Equation 21 of paragraph
policies, and activities on minority Small Business Regulatory Enforcement (h)(1) to read as follows:
populations and low-income Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides § 53.35 Test procedure for Class II and
populations in the United States. that before a rule may take effect, the Class III methods for PM 2.5 and PM10–2.5.
EPA has determined that this final agency promulgating the rule must
rule will not have disproportionately * * * * *
submit a rule report, which includes a
high and adverse human health or copy of the rule, to each House of (d) * * *
environmental effects on minority or Congress and to the Comptroller General (4) * * *
low-income populations because it does of the United States. EPA will submit a
not affect the level of protection report containing this rule and other Equation 12
provided to human health or the
required information to the U.S. Senate,
environment. The rule merely amends
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the October 17, 2006, final monitoring
the Comptroller General of the United 1 m
rule (71 FR 61236) by correcting
printing errors, providing clarifications,
States prior to publication of the rule in Cj = ∑ Ci , j
m i =1
the Federal Register. A major rule
and providing some new flexibility for Where:
PM10 monitoring on a case-by-case cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register. Cj = The mean concentration measured by
basis. the candidate method for the
This action is not ‘‘major rule’’ as
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This final measurement set;
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, rule will not have an annual effect on Ci,j = The measurement of the candidate
Distribution, or Use the economy of $100 million or more, method sampler or analyzer i on test day
will not result in a major increase in j; and
This rule is not a ‘‘significant energy
m = The number of valid candidate method
action’’ as defined in Executive Order costs or prices for State or local

agencies, and will not affect competition measurements in the measurement set
13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations
(normally 3).
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, with foreign-based enterprises in
Distribution or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May domestic and export markets. The final (e) * * *
22, 2001) because it is not likely to have amendments will be effective on
(1) * * *
ER41AD07.000</MATH>
a significant adverse effect on the September 10, 2007.
(h) * * *
Equation 13 Equation 15 (1) * * *
2 2 Equation 21
n
1 n  m
1 m 
1
∑
i =1
R i2, j −  ∑ R i , j 
n  i =1  × 100% 1
∑ Ci2, j −
i =1
∑ Ci, j 
m  i =1
RPj = CPj = × 100%
∑(R )( )
J
Rj n −1 Cj m −1 j − R Cj − C
j=1
* * * * * * * * * * r=
∑(R ) ∑ (C − C)
J 2 J 2
(g) * * * −R
(f) * * * (1) * * * j j
j=1 j=1
(1) * * *
* * * * *
Equation 17 ■ 3. Table C–1 to subpart C is revised to
read as follows:
1 J
R= ∑Rj
J j=1
* * * * *
TABLE C–1 TO SUBPART C OF PART 53—TEST CONCENTRATION RANGES, NUMBER OF MEASUREMENTS REQUIRED, AND
MAXIMUM DISCREPANCY SPECIFICATION
Simultaneous measurements required Maximum
discrepancy
Concentration range, parts per 1-hr 24-hr
Pollutant specification,
million parts per mil-
Second Second
First set First set lion
set set
Ozone ................................................. Low 0.06 to 0.10 ................................ 5 6 ................ ................ 0.02

Med 0.15 to 0.25 ................................ 5 6 ................ ................ .03
High 0.35 to 0.45 ................................ 4 6 ................ ................ .04
Total .................................................... 14 18 ................ ................ ........................
Carbon monoxide ............................... Low 7 to 11 ........................................ 5 6 ................ ................ 1.5

Med 20 to 30 ...................................... 5 6 ................ ................ 2.0
High 35 to 45 ...................................... 4 6 ................ ................ 3.0
Total .................................................... 14 18 ................ ................ ........................
Sulfur dioxide ...................................... Low 0.02 to 0.05 ................................ ................ ................ 3 3 0.02
Med 0.10 to 0.15 ................................ ................ ................ 2 3 .03
High 0.30 to 0.50 ................................ 7 8 2 2 .04
Total .................................................... 7 8 7 8 ........................
Nitrogen dioxide .................................. Low 0.02 to 0.08 ................................ ................ ................ 3 3 0.02
Med 0.10 to 0.20 ................................ ................ ................ 2 3 .03
High 0.25 to 0.35 ................................ ................ ................ 2 2 .03
Total .................................................... ................ ................ 7 8 ........................

ER41AD07.004</MATH>
■ 4. Table C–4 to subpart C is revised to

read as follows:
ER41AD07.003</MATH>
TABLE C–4 TO SUBPART C OF PART 53.—TEST SPECIFICATIONS FOR PM10, PM2.5 AND PM10–2.5 CANDIDATE EQUIVALENT
METHODS
PM2.5 PM10–2.5
Specification PM10
ER41AD07.002</MATH>
Class I Class II Class III Class II Class III
Acceptable concentration range 15–300 ............. 3–200 ............... 3–200 3–200 3–200 3–200
(Rj), µg/m3.
Minimum number of test sites .... 2 ....................... 1 ....................... 2 4 2 4
ER41AD07.001</MATH>
TABLE C–4 TO SUBPART C OF PART 53.—TEST SPECIFICATIONS FOR PM10, PM2.5 AND PM10–2.5 CANDIDATE EQUIVALENT
METHODS—Continued
PM2.5 PM10–2.5
Specification PM10
Class I Class II Class III Class II Class III
Minimum number of candidate 3 ....................... 3 ....................... 31 31 31 31

method samplers or analyzers
per site.
Number of reference method 3 ....................... 3 ....................... 31 31 31 31
samplers per site.
Minimum number of acceptable
sample sets per site for PM10
methods:
Rj < 60 µg/m3 ...................... 3
Rj > 60 µg/m3 ...................... 3
Total ..................................... 10
Minimum number of acceptable
sample sets per site for PM2.5
and PM10–2.5 candidate equiv-
alent methods:
Rj < 30 µg/m3 for 24-hr or ........................... 3
Rj < 20 µg/m3 for 48-hr
samples.
Rj > 30 µg/m3 for 24-hr or ........................... 3
Rj > 20 µg/m3 for 48-hr
samples.
Each season ........................ ........................... 10 ..................... 23 23 23 23
Total, each site .................... ........................... 10 ..................... 23 23 (46 for two- 23 23 (46 for two-
season sites) season sites)
Precision of replicate reference 5 µg/m3 or 7% .. 2 µg/m3 or 5% 10% 2 10% 2 10% 2 10% 2
method measurements, PRj or
RPRj, respectively; RP for
Class II or III PM2.5 or PM10–
2.5, maximum.
Precision of PM2.5 or PM10–2.5 ........................... .......................... 10% 2 15% 2 15% 2 15% 2
candidate method, CP, each
site.
Slope of regression relationship. 1 ± 0.10 ............ 1 ± 0.05 ........... 1 ± 0.10 1 ± 0.10 1 ± 0.10 1 ± 0.12
Intercept of regression relation- 0 ± 5 ................. 0 ± 1 ................ Between: 13.55 Between: 15.05 Between: 62.05 Between: 70.50
ship, µg/m3. ¥ (15.05 × ¥ (17.32 × ¥ (70.5 × ¥ (82.93 ×
slope), but slope), but slope), but slope), but
not less than not less than not less than not less than
¥1.5; and ¥2.0; and ¥3.5; and ¥7.0; and
16.56 ¥ 15.05 ¥ 78.95 ¥ 70.50 ¥
(15.05 × (13.20 × (70.5 × (61.16 ×
slope), but slope), but slope), but slope), but
not more than not more than not more than not more than
+1.5 +2.0 +3.5 +7.0
Correlation of reference method ≥ 0.97 ............... ≥ 0.97 .............. ≥ 0.93—for CCV ≤ 0.4;
and candidate method meas- ≥ 0.85 + 0.2 × CCV—for 0.4 ≤ CCV ≤ 0.5;
urements. ≥ 0.95—for CCV ≥ 0.5
1 Some missing daily measurement values may be permitted; see test procedure.
2 Calculated as the root mean square over all measurement sets.
■ 5. Figures C–1 through C–4 to subpart

C are revised to read as follows:
Figure C–1 to Subpart C of Part 53—Suggested Format for Reporting Test Results for Methods for SO 2, CO, O 3,
NO 2
Candidate Method llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll

Reference Method llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll
Applicant llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll
b First Set b Second Set b Type b 1 Hour b 24 Hour
Concentration, ppm
Concentration Table C–1
Date Time Difference Pass or fail
range spec.
Candidate Reference
Low 1
llll ppm 2
to llll ppm 3
Medium 1
llll ppm 2
to llll ppm 3
High 1
llll ppm 2
to llll ppm 3
Total Failures:
ER41AD07.009</GPH>
ER41AD07.010</GPH>
Subpart E—[Amended] ■ 7. Table E–1 to subpart E is revised to

read as follows:
■ 6. Section 53.58 is amended by Equation 26
revising Equation 26 of paragraph
(g)(2)(i) to read as follows:
1 3
§ 53.58 Operational field precision and Cave, j = × ∑ Ci , j
blank test. 3 i =1
* * * * * * * * * *
(g) * * *
(2)(i) * * *
TABLE E–1 TO SUBPART E OF PART 53.—SUMMARY OF TEST REQUIREMENTS FOR REFERENCE AND CLASS I EQUIVALENT
METHODS FOR PM2.5 AND PM10–2.5
Part 50, appendix L
Subpart E procedure Performance test Performance specification Test conditions reference
§ 53.52 Sample leak check Sampler leak check facility External leakage: 80 mL/ Controlled leak flow rate of Sec. 7.4.6.
test. min, max. 80 mL/ min.
Internal leakage: 80 mL/
min, max.
§ 53.53 Base flow rate test Sample flow rate ............... 1. 16.67 ± 5%, L/ min ........ (a) 6-hour normal oper- Sec. 7.4.1.
1. Mean ............................. 2. 2%, max ........................ ational test plus flow Sec. 7.4.2.
2. Regulation ..................... 3. 2%, max ........................ rate cut-off test. Sec. 7.4.3.
3. Meas accuracy .............. 4. 0.3% max ...................... (b) Normal conditions ........ Sec. 7.4.4.
4. CV accuracy ................. 5. Flow rate cut-off if flow (c) Additional 55 mm Hg Sec. 7.4.5.
5. Cut-off ........................... rate deviates more than pressure drop to simu-
10% from design flow late loaded filter.
rate for >60 ± 30 sec- (d) Variable flow restriction
onds. used for cut-off test.
ER41AD07.005</GPH>
ER41AD07.011</GPH>
TABLE E–1 TO SUBPART E OF PART 53.—SUMMARY OF TEST REQUIREMENTS FOR REFERENCE AND CLASS I EQUIVALENT
METHODS FOR PM2.5 AND PM10–2.5—Continued
Part 50, appendix L
Subpart E procedure Performance test Performance specification Test conditions reference
§ 53.54 Power interruption Sample flow rate ............... 1. 16.67 ± 5%, L/ min ........ (a) 6-hour normal oper- Sec. 7.4.1.
test. 1. Mean ............................. 2. 2%, max ........................ ational test. Sec. 7.4.2.
2. Regulation ..................... 3. 2%, max ........................ (b) Nominal conditions ...... Sec. 7.4.3.
3. Meas. accuracy ............. 4. 0.3% max ...................... (c) Additional 55 mm Hg Sec. 7.4.5.
4. CV accuracy ................. 5. ± 2 min if >60 seconds. pressure drop to simu- Sec. 7.4.12.
5. Occurrence time of 6. ± 20 seconds ................ late loaded filter. Sec. 7.4.13.
power interruptions. 7. ± 2%, max ..................... (d) 6 power interruptions of Sec. 7.4.15.4.
6. Elapsed sample time .... various durations. Sec. 7.4.15.5.
7. Sample volume .............
§ 53.55 Temperature and Sample flow rate ............... 1. 16.67 ± 5%, L/ min ........ (a) 6-hour normal oper- Sec. 7.4.1.
line voltage test. 1. Mean ............................. 2. 2%, max ........................ ational test. Sec. 7.4.2.
2. Regulation ..................... 3. 2%, max ........................ (b) Normal conditions ........ Sec. 7.4.3.
4. CV accuracy ................. 5. 2 °C ............................... pressure drop to simu- Sec. 7.4.8.
5. Temperature meas. ac- late loaded filter. Sec. 7.4.15.1.
curacy. (d) Ambient temperature at
6. Proper operation. ¥20 and +40 °C.
(e) Line voltage: 105 Vac
to 125 Vac.
§ 53.56 Barometric pres- Sample flow rate ............... 1. 16.67 ± 5%, L/ min ........ (a) 6-hour normal oper- Sec. 7.4.1.
sure effect test. 1. Mean ............................. 2. 2%, max ........................ ational test. Sec. 7.4.2.
2. Regulation ..................... 3. 2%, max ........................ (b) Normal conditions ........ Sec. 7.4.3.
4. CV accuracy ................. 5. 10 mm Hg ..................... pressure drop to simu- Sec. 7.4.9.
5. Pressure meas. accu- late loaded filter.
racy. (d) Barometric pressure at
6. Proper operation. 600 and 800 mm Hg.
§ 53.57 Filter temperature 1. Filter temp. meas. accu- 1. 2 °C ............................... (a) 4-hour simulated solar Sec. 7.4.8.
control test. racy. 2. 2 °C ............................... radiation, sampling. Sec. 7.4.10.
2. Ambient temp. meas. 3. Not more than 5 °C (b) 4-hour simulated solar Sec. 7.4.11.
accuracy. above ambient temp. for radiation, non-sampling.
3. Filter temp. control ac- more than 30 min. (c) Solar flux of 1000 ± 50
curacy, sampling and W/m 2.
non-sampling.
§ 53.58 Field precision test 1. Measurement precision 1. Pj < 2 µg/m3 or RPj < (a) 3 collocated samplers Sec. 5.1.
2. Storage deposition test 5%. at 1 site for at least 10 Sec. 7.3.5.
for sequential samplers. 2. 50 µg max. average days. Sec. 8.
weight gain/blank filter. (b) PM2.5 conc. > 3 µg/m3 Sec. 9.
(c) 24- or 48-hour samples Sec. 10.
(d) 5- or 10-day storage
period for inactive stored
filters.
The Following Requirement Is Applicable to Class I Candidate Equivalent Methods Only
§ 53.59 Aerosol transport Aerosol transport ............... 97%, min. for all channels. Determine aerosol trans-
test. port through any new or
modified components
with respect to the ref-
erence method sampler
before the filter for each
channel.
Subpart F—[Amended]
■ 8. Table F–1 to subpart F is revised to
read as follows:
TABLE F–1 TO SUBPART F OF PART 53.—PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATIONS FOR PM2.5 CLASS II EQUIVALENT SAMPLERS
Performance test Specifications Acceptance criteria
§ 53.62 Full Wind Tunnel Evaluation ................. Solid VOAG produced aerosol at 2 km/hr and Dp50 = 2.5 µm ± 0.2 µm Numerical Analysis
24 km/hr. Results: 95% ≤ Rc ≤ 105%.
§ 53.63 Wind Tunnel Inlet Aspiration Test ......... Liquid VOAG produced aerosol at 2 km/hr Relative Aspiration: 95% ≤ A ≤ 105%.
and 24 km/hr.
§ 53.64 Static Fractionator Test ......................... Evaluation of the fractionator under static con- Dp50 = 2.5 µm ± 0.2 µm Numerical Analysis
ditions. Results: 95% ≤ Rc ≤ 105%.
§ 53.65 Loading Test .......................................... Loading of the clean candidate under labora- Acceptance criteria as specified in the post-
tory conditions. loading evaluation test (§ 53.62, § 53.63, or
§ 53.64).
§ 53.66 Volatility Test ......................................... Polydisperse liquid aerosol produced by air Regression Parameters Slope = 1 ± 0.1, Inter-
nebulization of A.C.S. reagent grade glyc- cept = 0 ± 0.15 mg, r ≥ 0.97.
erol, 99.5% minimum purity.
PART 58—[AMENDED] § 58.12 Operating schedules. operating FEM or ARM PM2.5 monitor
* * * * * satisfies this requirement.
■ 9. The authority citation for part 58 (d) * * * (iii) Required SLAMS stations whose
continues to read as follows: (1)(i) Manual PM2.5 samplers at measurements determine the design
required SLAMS stations without a value for their area and that are within
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7403, 7410, 7601(a),
7611, and 7619. collocated continuously operating PM2.5 plus or minus 5 percent of the daily
monitor must operate on at least a 1-in- PM2.5 NAAQS must have an FRM or
Subpart B—[Amended] 3 day schedule. FEM operate on a daily schedule. A
(ii) For SLAMS PM2.5 sites with both continuously operating FEM or ARM
■ 10. Section 58.10 is amended by manual and continuous PM2.5 monitors PM2.5 monitor satisfies this requirement.
revising the second sentence in operating, the monitoring agency may
request approval for a reduction to 1-in- * * * * *
paragraph (a)(2) to read as follow:
6 day PM2.5 sampling or for seasonal (3) Manual PM2.5 speciation samplers
§ 58.10 Annual monitoring network plan sampling from the EPA Regional at STN stations must operate on at least
and periodic network assessment. Administrator. The EPA Regional a 1-in-3 day sampling frequency.
(a)(1) * * * Administrator may grant sampling (e) For PM10 samplers, a 24-hour
(2) * * * If the State or local agency frequency reductions after consideration sample must be taken from midnight to
has already provided a public comment of factors, including but not limited to midnight (local standard time) to ensure
opportunity on its plan and has made the historical PM2.5 data quality national consistency. * * *
no changes subsequent to that comment assessments, the location of current
PM2.5 design value sites, and their § 58.12 [Amended]
opportunity, and has submitted the
received comments together with the regulatory data needs. Required SLAMS ■ 12. Figure 1 of paragraph (e) of § 58.12
plan, the Regional Administrator is not stations whose measurements determine is revised to read as follows:
required to provide a separate the design value for their area and that
opportunity for comment. are within plus or minus 10 percent of Subpart C—[Amended]
the NAAQS; and all required sites
* * * * * where one or more 24-hour values have ■ 13. Section 58.20(c) is revised to read
■ 11. Section 58.12 is amended by exceeded the NAAQS each year for a as follows:
revising paragraph (d)(1), paragraph consecutive period of at least 3 years are
(d)(3), and the first sentence of required to maintain at least a 1-in-3 day § 58.20 Special purpose monitors (SPM).
paragraph (e) to read as follows: sampling frequency. A continuously * * * * *
(c) All data from an SPM using an ■ b. Revising the title of Table D–4 and
FRM, FEM, or ARM which has operated Footnote 1 to Table D–4; and
for more than 24 months is eligible for Equation 7 ■ c. Revising section 4.7.2 to read as
comparison to the relevant NAAQS, follows:
subject to the conditions of § 58.30, 4. Pollutant-Specific Design Criteria for
unless the air monitoring agency Lower Probability Limit = m − 1.96 ⋅ S
SLAMS Sites
demonstrates that the data came from a * * * * * * * * * *
particular period during which the 4.2.1 * * * 4.6 Particulate Matter (PM10) Design
requirements of appendix A, appendix Criteria.
C, or appendix E to this part were not (a) Table D–4 indicates the approximate
met in practice. number of permanent stations required in
Equation 11 MSAs to characterize national and regional
* * * * *
PM10 air quality trends and geographical
Appendix A to Part 58—[Amended] where, n is the number of valid data pairs patterns. The number of PM10 stations in
being aggregated, and X2 0.1, n–1 is the areas where MSA populations exceed
■ 14. Appendix A is amended by: 10th percentile of a chi-squared 1,000,000 must be in the range from 2 to 10
■ a. Revising the third (last) sentence of distribution with n–1 degrees of stations, while in low population urban
section 2.4; freedom. The factor of 2 in the areas, no more than two stations are required.
denominator adjusts for the fact that A range of monitoring stations is specified in
■ b. Revising Equation 7 of section
each di is calculated from two values Table D–4 because sources of pollutants and
4.1.4; with error. local control efforts can vary from one part
■ c. Revising the definition of the of the country to another and therefore, some
4.2.2 * * * The absolute volume bias
symbol ‘‘n’’ for Equation 11 of section upper bound is then calculated using flexibility is allowed in selecting the actual
4.2.1, equation 3 of this appendix, where n is the number of stations in any one locale.
■ d. Revising the last sentence in section number of flow rate audits being aggregated; Modifications from these PM10 monitoring
4.2.2.2, and t0.95, n–1 is the 95th quantile of a t-distribution requirements must be approved by the
■ e. Revising the definition of the with n–1 degrees of freedom, the quantity AB Regional Administrator.
symbol ‘‘nj’’ for Equation 12 of section is the mean of the absolute values of the di’s Table D–4 of Appendix D to Part 58. PM10
4.3.2.1 to read as follows: and is calculated using equation 4 of this Minimum Monitoring Requirements
appendix, and the quantity AS in equation 3 (Approximate Number of Stations Per
2. General Monitoring Requirements of this appendix is the standard deviation of MSA) 1 ER41AD07.008</MATH>
* * * * * the absolute values of the di’s and is

calculated using equation 5 of this appendix. * * * * *
2.4 * * * For clarification and to 4.7.2 Requirement for Continuous PM2.5
participate, monitoring organizations should 4.3.2.1 * * *
Monitoring. The State, or where appropriate,
contact either the appropriate EPA Regional local agencies must operate continuous PM2.5
Quality Assurance (QA) Coordinator at the analyzers equal to at least one-half (round
ER41AD07.007</GPH>
appropriate EPA Regional Office location, or up) the minimum required sites listed in
the NPAP Coordinator at the Air Quality
Equation 12
Table D–5 of this appendix. At least one
Assessment Division, Office of Air Quality required continuous analyzer in each MSA
where, nj is the number of pairs and d1, d2,
Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental must be collocated with one of the required
* * *, dnj are the biases for each of the pairs
Protection Agency in Research Triangle Park,
to be averaged. FRM/FEM/ARM monitors, unless at least one

ER41AD07.006</GPH>
North Carolina. of the required FRM/FEM/ARM monitors is

* * * * *
* * * * * itself a continuous FEM or ARM monitor in
4. Calculations for Data Quality Assessments Appendix D to Part 58—[Amended]
1 Selection of urban areas and actual numbers of
* * * * * ■ 15. Appendix D is amended by: stations per area will be jointly determined by EPA
ER41AD07.012</GPH>
4.1.4 * * * ■ a. Revising section 4.6(a); and the State agency.
which case no collocation requirement p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Deplete the Ozone Layer (Montreal
applies. State and local air monitoring legal holidays. The Public Reading Protocol).
agencies must use methodologies and quality Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 The Montreal Protocol is an
assurance/quality control (QA/QC) p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding international agreement aimed at
procedures approved by the EPA Regional
Administrator for these required continuous
legal holidays. The telephone number reducing and eliminating the
analyzers. for the Public Reading Room is (202) production and consumption1 of ODSs.
566–1744, and the telephone number for The elimination of production and
* * * * *
the Air Docket is (202) 566–1742. consumption of Class I ODSs is
[FR Doc. 07–2201 Filed 6–11–07; 8:45 am]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: accomplished through adherence to
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
Kirsten Cappel, by regular mail: U.S. phase-out schedules for specific Class I
Environmental Protection Agency, ODSs,2 which include CFCs, halons,
Stratospheric Protection Division carbon tetrachloride, and methyl
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
(6205J), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., chloroform. As of January 1, 1996,
AGENCY
Washington, DC 20460; by courier production and import of most Class I
40 CFR Part 82 service or overnight express: 1310 L ODSs were phased out in developed
Street, NW., Room 1047C, Washington, countries, including the United States.
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2006–0159; FRL–8325–5] However, the Montreal Protocol and
DC 20005; by telephone: (202) 343–
RIN 2060–AN81 9556; by fax: (202) 343–2338; or by, e- the Clean Air Act (the Act) provide
mail: cappel.kirsten@epa.gov. exemptions that allow for the continued
Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: import and/or production of Class I
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ODSs for specific uses. Under the
Allocation of Essential Use Allowances
for Calendar Year 2007 Table of Contents Montreal Protocol, exemptions may be
I. Basis for Allocating Essential Use granted for uses that are determined by
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Allowances the Parties to be ‘‘essential.’’ Decision
Agency (EPA). A. What are essential use allowances? IV/25, taken by the Parties to the
ACTION: Final rule. B. Under what authority does EPA allocate Protocol in 1992, established criteria for
essential use allowances? determining whether a specific use
SUMMARY: With this action, EPA is C. What is the process for allocating should be approved as essential, and set
allocating essential use allowances for essential use allowances? forth the international process for
import and production of Class I D. What quantity of essential use making determinations of essentiality.
stratospheric ozone-depleting allowances is EPA allocating?
II. Response to Comments
The criteria for an essential use, as set
substances (ODSs) for calendar year forth in paragraph 1 of Decision IV/25,
2007. Essential use allowances enable a A. Proposed Level of Allocations
B. Consideration of Stocks of CFCs in the are the following:
person to obtain controlled Class I ODSs Allocation of Essential Use Allowances ‘‘(a) That a use of a controlled
as part of an exemption to the regulatory C. Number of Months of Safety Stockpile substance should qualify as ‘essential’
ban on the production and import of D. Rulemaking Process and Timing only if:
these chemicals, which became effective E. The transition to Non-CFC MDIs (i) It is necessary for the health, safety
as of January 1, 1996. EPA allocates III. Allocation of Essential Use Allowances or is critical for the functioning of
essential use allowances for exempted for Calendar Year 2007
society (encompassing cultural and
production or import of a specific IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory intellectual aspects); and
quantity of Class I ODSs solely for the (ii) There are no available technically
designated essential purpose. The Planning and Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act and economically feasible alternatives
allocations in this action total 167.0 C. Regulatory Flexibility or substitutes that are acceptable from
metric tons (MT) of chlorofluorocarbons D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act the standpoint of environment and
(CFCs) for use in metered dose inhalers E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism health;
(MDIs) for 2007. F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation (b) That production and consumption,
DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is and Coordination With Indian Tribal if any, of a controlled substance for
effective June 12, 2007. Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
essential uses should be permitted only
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a Children From Environmental Health if:
docket for this action under Docket ID Risks and Safety Risks (i) All economically feasible steps
No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2006–0159. All H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That have been taken to minimize the
documents in the docket are listed on Significantly Affect Energy Supply, essential use and any associated
the www.regulations.gov Web site. Distribution, or Use emission of the controlled substance;
Although listed in the index, some I. National Technology Transfer and and
information is not publicly available, Advancement Act (ii) The controlled substance is not
e.g., CBI or other information whose J. Congressional Review Act available in sufficient quantity and
V. Judicial Review
disclosure is restricted by statute. VI. Effective Date of This Final Rule
quality from existing stocks of banked or
Certain other material, such as recycled controlled substances, also
copyrighted material, is not placed on I. Basis for Allocating Essential Use bearing in mind the developing
the Internet and will be publicly Allowances countries’ need for controlled
available only in hard copy form. A. What are essential use allowances? substances.’’
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through Essential use allowances are 1 ‘‘Consumption’’ is defined as the amount of a
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at allowances to produce or import certain substance produced in the United States, plus the
the Air Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, ODSs in the U.S. for purposes that have amount imported into the United States, minus the
amount exported to Parties to the Montreal Protocol
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., been deemed ‘‘essential’’ by the U.S. (see Section 601(6) of the Clean Air Act).
NW., Washington, DC. This Docket Government and by the Parties to the 2 Class I ozone depleting substances are listed at
Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 Montreal Protocol on Substances that 40 CFR Part 82 subpart A, appendix A.

Rule: Air Programs: Ambient Air Quality Standards, National&#8212 Particulate Matter Correction

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Rule: Air Programs: Ambient Air Quality Standards, National&#8212 Particulate Matter Correction

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No.

112 / Tuesday, June 12, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 32193

Category NAICS code 1 Examples of regulated entities

entities compared to those that were G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of

action’’ as defined in Executive Order costs or prices for State or local

a significant adverse effect on the September 10, 2007.

Ozone ................................................. Low 0.06 to 0.10 ................................ 5 6 ................ ................ 0.02

Total .................................................... 14 18 ................ ................ ........................

Carbon monoxide ............................... Low 7 to 11 ........................................ 5 6 ................ ................ 1.5

Total .................................................... 14 18 ................ ................ ........................

Total .................................................... 7 8 7 8 ........................

Total .................................................... ................ ................ 7 8 ........................

■ 4. Table C–4 to subpart C is revised to

Class I Class II Class III Class II Class III

Minimum number of candidate 3 ....................... 3 ....................... 31 31 31 31

■ 5. Figures C–1 through C–4 to subpart

Candidate Method llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll

b First Set b Second Set b Type b 1 Hour b 24 Hour

Subpart E—[Amended] ■ 7. Table E–1 to subpart E is revised to

The Following Requirement Is Applicable to Class I Candidate Equivalent Methods Only

* * * * * the absolute values of the di’s and is

to be averaged. FRM/FEM/ARM monitors, unless at least one

North Carolina. of the required FRM/FEM/ARM monitors is

4.1.4 * * * ■ a. Revising section 4.6(a); and the State agency.

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi