
[Federal Register: October 9, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 197)]
[Proposed Rules]               
[Page 59955-60005]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr09oc08-44]                         


[[Page 59955]]

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

Part III





Environmental Protection Agency





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



40 CFR Parts 60, 61, and 63



Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources; National Emission 
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants; and National Emission Standards 
for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Categories; Proposed Rule


[[Page 59956]]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 60, 61, and 63

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0640; FRL-8721-4]
RIN 2060-AJ86

 
Performance Specification and Quality Assurance Requirements for 
Continuous Parameter Monitoring Systems and Amendments to Standards of 
Performance for New Stationary Sources; National Emission Standards for 
Hazardous Air Pollutants; and National Emission Standards for Hazardous 
Air Pollutants for Source Categories

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes Performance Specification 17, 
``Specifications and Test Procedures for Continuous Parameter 
Monitoring Systems at Stationary Sources'' and Procedure 4, ``Quality 
Assurance Requirements for Continuous Parameter Monitoring Systems at 
Stationary Sources.'' The proposed performance specification and 
quality assurance requirements establish procedures and other 
requirements to ensure that the systems are properly selected, 
installed, and placed into operation. This action also proposes minor 
amendments to Procedure 1 of the ``Quality Assurance Requirements for 
Gas Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems Used for Compliance 
Determinations'' to address continuous emissions monitoring systems 
that are used for monitoring multiple pollutants. Minor changes to the 
General Provisions for the Standards of Performance for New Stationary 
Sources, the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, 
and the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for 
Source Categories are also proposed to ensure consistency between the 
proposed Performance Specification 17, Procedure 4, and the General 
Provisions and to clarify that Performance Specification 17 and 
Procedure 4 apply instead of requirements that pertain specifically to 
continuous parameter monitoring systems. Finally, this action proposes 
amendments to the current national emission standards for closed vent 
systems, control devices and recovery systems to ensure consistency 
with Performance Specification 17 and Procedure 4. These actions are 
needed to establish consistent requirements for ensuring and assessing 
the quality of data measured by continuous parameter monitoring systems 
and to provide quality assurance procedures for continuous emission 
monitoring systems used to monitor multiple pollutants.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 8, 2008. Under 
the Paperwork Reduction Act, comments on the information collection 
provisions must be received by the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) on or before November 10, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2006-0640, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line 
instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail: a-and-r-Docket@epa.gov.
     Fax: (202) 566-9744.
     Mail: Performance Specification 17 and Procedure 4 for 
Continuous Parameter Monitoring Systems Docket, Docket No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2006-0640, Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center, 
Mailcode: 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. 
Please include a total of two copies. In addition, please mail a copy 
of your comments on the information collection provisions to the Office 
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB), Attn: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th St., NW., Washington, DC 
20503.
     Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center, Public Reading Room, EPA 
West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460. 
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of 
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of 
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2006-0640. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information 
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you 
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site 
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your 
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of 
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without 
going through http://www.regulations.gov your e-mail address will be 
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is 
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you 
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name 
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any 
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to 
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA 
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid 
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of 
any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. 
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically 
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Air Docket, 
EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, 
DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday 
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the 
Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the 
Air Docket is (202) 566-1742.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Barrett Parker, Sector Policies 
and Programs Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards 
(D243-05), Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, 
North Carolina 27711, telephone number: (919) 541-5635; e-mail address: 
parker.barrett@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Outline. The information presented in this preamble is organized as 
follows:

I. General Information
    A. Does this action apply to you?
    B. What should you consider as you prepare your comments to EPA?
    C. Where can you get a copy of this document and other related 
information?
    D. Will there be a public hearing?
II. Background
    A. What is the regulatory history of the proposed PS-17 and 
Procedure 4?
    B. What is the regulatory history of the proposed amendments to 
Procedure 1?
    C. What is the regulatory history of the proposed amendments to 
the General Provisions to parts 60, 61, and 63?
    D. What is the regulatory history of the proposed amendments to 
40 CFR part 63, subpart SS?

[[Page 59957]]

III. Summary of Proposed Performance Specification 17
    A. What is the purpose of PS-17?
    B. Who must comply with PS-17?
    C. When must owners or operators of affected CPMS comply with 
PS-17?
    D. What are the basic requirements of PS-17?
    E. What initial performance criteria must be demonstrated to 
comply with PS-17?
    F. What are the reporting and recordkeeping requirements for PS-
17?
IV. Summary of Proposed Procedure 4
    A. What is the purpose of Procedure 4?
    B. Who must comply with Procedure 4?
    C. When must owners or operators of affected CPMS comply with 
Procedure 4?
    D. What are the basic requirements of Procedure 4?
    E. How often must accuracy audits and other QA/QC procedures be 
performed?
    F. What are the reporting and recordkeeping requirements for 
Procedure 4?
V. Summary of Proposed Amendments to Procedure 1
    A. What is the purpose of the amendments?
    B. To whom do the amendments apply?
    C. How do the amendments address CEMS that are subject to PS-9?
    D. How do the amendments address CEMS that are subject to PS-15?
VI. Summary of Proposed Amendments to the General Provisions to 
Parts 60, 61, and 63
    A. What is the purpose of the amendments to the General 
Provisions to parts 60, 61, and 63?
    B. What specific changes are we proposing to the General 
Provisions to parts 60, 61, and 63?
VII. Summary of the Proposed Amendments to 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart 
SS
    A. What is the purpose of the amendments to subpart SS?
    B. What specific changes are we proposing to subpart SS?
VIII. Rationale for Selecting the Proposed Requirements of 
Performance Specification 17
    A. What information did we use to develop PS-17?
    B. How did we select the applicability criteria for PS-17?
    C. How did we select the parameters that are addressed by PS-17?
    D. Why did we include requirements for flow CPMS in PS-17 if PS-
6 already specifies requirements for flow sensors?
    E. How did we select the equipment requirements?
    F. How did we select the installation and location requirements?
    G. How did we select the initial QA measures?
    H. How did we select the methods for performing the initial 
validation check?
    I. How did we select the performance criteria for the initial 
validation check?
    J. How did we select the recordkeeping requirements?
IX. Rationale for Selecting the Proposed Requirements of Procedure 4
    A. What information did we use to develop Procedure 4?
    B. Why did we decide to apply Procedure 4 to all CPMS that are 
subject to PS-17?
    C. How did we select the accuracy audit procedures?
    D. How did we select the accuracy audit frequencies?
    E. How did we select the performance criteria for accuracy 
audits?
    F. How did we select the recordkeeping requirements?
X. Rationale for Selecting the Proposed Amendments to Procedure 1
    A. How did we select the amendments to Procedure 1 that apply to 
PS-9?
    B. How did we select the amendments to Procedure 1 that apply to 
PS-15?
XI. Rationale for Selecting the Proposed Amendments to the General 
Provisions to Parts 60, 61, and 63
    A. How did we select the amendments to the General Provisions to 
parts 60, 61, and 63?
XII. Rationale for Selecting the Proposed Amendments to 40 CFR Part 
63, Subpart SS
    A. How did we select the amendments to subpart SS?
XIII. Summary of Environmental, Energy, and Economic Impacts
    A. What are the impacts of PS-17 and Procedure 4?
    B. What are the impacts of the amendments to Procedure 1?
    C. What are the impacts of the amendments to the General 
Provisions to parts 60, 61, and 63?
    D. What are the impacts of the amendments to subpart SS?
XIV. Solicitation of Comments and Public Participation
XV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With 
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children From 
Environmental Health Risks & Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect 
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address 
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to you?

    The proposed Performance Specification 17 (PS-17) and Procedure 4 
would apply to any facility that is required to install a new 
continuous parameter monitoring system (CPMS), relocate an existing 
CPMS, or replace an existing CPMS under any applicable subpart of 40 
CFR parts 60, 61, or 63, with certain exceptions. Moreover, the 
proposed PS-17 and Procedure 4 would become effective upon permit 
renewal (or within 5 years for area sources that are exempt from title 
V permitting) for any affected facility subject to an applicable 
subpart of 40 CFR parts 60, 61, or 63, with certain exceptions. Table 1 
of this preamble lists the applicable rules by subpart and the 
corresponding source categories to which the proposed PS-17 and 
Procedure 4 would apply.

                    Table 1--Source Categories That Would Be Subject to PS-17 and Procedure 4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Subpart(s)                                             Source category
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 40 CFR part 63
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
O...................................  Commercial Ethylene Oxide Sterilization/Fumigation Facilities.
R...................................  Gasoline Distribution Facilities (Bulk Gasoline Terminals and Pipeline
                                       Breakout Stations).
S...................................  Pulp and Paper--Process Operations.
X...................................  Secondary Lead Smelters.
EE..................................  Magnetic Tape Manufacturing Operations.
GG..................................  Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework.
HH..................................  Oil and Natural Gas Production Facilities.
JJ..................................  Wood Furniture Manufacturing Operations.
KK..................................  Printing and Publishing.
MM..................................  Combustion Sources at Kraft, Soda & Sulfite Pulp & Paper Mills.

[[Page 59958]]


YY..................................  Spandex.
YY..................................  Cyanide Chemical Manufacture.
YY..................................  Carbon Black Production.
CCC.................................  Steel Pickling--HCl Process Facilities and Hydrochloric Acid Regeneration
                                       Plants.
EEE.................................  Hazardous Waste Combustors.
GGG.................................  Pharmaceuticals Production.
HHH.................................  Natural Gas Transmission and Storage Facilities.
MMM.................................  Pesticide Active Ingredient Production.
NNN.................................  Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing.
RRR.................................  Secondary Aluminum Production.
UUU.................................  Petroleum Refineries: Catalytic Cracking Units, Catalytic Reforming Units,
                                       and Sulfur Recovery Units.
DDDD................................  Plywood & Composite Wood Products.
EEEE................................  Organic Liquids Distribution (non-gasoline).
FFFF................................  Miscellaneous Organic Chemical Manufacturing.
HHHH................................  Wet-Formed Fiberglass Mat Production.
IIII................................  Surface Coating of Automobiles and Light Duty Trucks.
JJJJ................................  Paper & Other Web (surface coating).
KKKK................................  Surface Coating of Metal Cans.
PPPP................................  Surface Coating of Plastic Parts & Products.
QQQQ................................  Surface Coating of Wood Building Products.
RRRR................................  Surface Coating of Metal Furniture.
SSSS................................  Surface Coating of Metal Coil.
UUUU................................  Cellulose Products Manufacturing.
VVVV................................  Boat Manufacturing.
WWWW................................  Reinforced Plastics Composites Production.
XXXX................................  Rubber Tire Manufacturing.
YYYY................................  Stationary Combustion Turbines.
ZZZZ................................  Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines.
CCCCC...............................  Coke Ovens: Pushing, Quenching, & Battery Stacks.
DDDDD...............................  Industrial/Commercial/Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters.
EEEEE...............................  Iron and Steel Foundries.
FFFFF...............................  Integrated Iron and Steel Manufacturing Facilities.
GGGGG...............................  Site Remediation.
HHHHH...............................  Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing.
MMMMM...............................  Flexible Polyurethane Foam Fabrication Operations.
NNNNN...............................  Hydrochloric Acid Production.
PPPPP...............................  Engine Test Cells/Stands.
QQQQQ...............................  Friction Materials.
RRRRR...............................  Taconite Iron Ore Processing.
TTTTT...............................  Primary Magnesium Refining.
ZZZZZ...............................  Iron and Steel Foundries Area Sources.
LLLLLL..............................  Acrylic and Modacrylic Fibers Production Area Sources.
OOOOOO..............................  Flexible Polyurethane Foam Production and Fabrication Area Sources.
PPPPPP..............................  Lead Acid Battery Manufacturing Area Sources.
SSSSSS..............................  Glass Manufacturing Area Sources.
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
                                                 40 CFR part 60
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
Ea..................................  Municipal Waste Combustors after December 20, 1989 and on or before
                                       September 20, 1994.
Ec..................................  Hospital, Medical, and Infectious Waste Incinerators.
J...................................  Petroleum Refineries.
O...................................  Sewage Treatment Plants.
T, U, V, W, X.......................  Phosphate Fertilizer Industry.
Y...................................  Coal Preparation Plants (>200 tons per day).
Z...................................  Ferroalloy Production Facilities.
AA..................................  Steel Plants: EAF's and Oxygen Decarburization Vessels after October 21,
                                       1974 and on or before August 17, 1983.
BB..................................  Kraft Pulp Mills.
HH..................................  Lime Manufacturing Plants.
LL..................................  Metallic Mineral Processing Plants.
NN..................................  Phosphate rock plants (with prod. capacity >4 ton/hr).
PP..................................  Ammonium Sulfate Manufacture.
RR..................................  Pressure Sensitive Tape and Label Surface Coating Operations.
FFF.................................  Flexible Vinyl and Urethane Coating and Printing.
LLL.................................  Onshore Natural Gas Processing: SO2 Emissions.

[[Page 59959]]


UUU.................................  Calciners and Dryers in Mineral Industries.
VVV.................................  Polymeric Coating of Supporting Substrates Facilities.
AAAA................................  Small Municipal Waste Combustion Units Constructed after August 30, 1999.
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
                                                 40 CFR part 61
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
K...................................  Radionuclide Emissions from Elemental Phosphorus Plants.
L...................................  Benzene from Coke By-Product Recovery Plants.
BB..................................  Benzene Emissions from Benzene Transfer Operations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The requirements of the proposed PS-17 and Procedure 4 may also 
apply to stationary sources located in a State, District, Reservation, 
or Territory that adopts PS-17 or Procedure 4 in its implementation 
plan. The exceptions to the applicability criteria for PS-17 and 
Procedure 4 are those source categories that are subject to part 63 
rules that specify that Sec.  63.8(a)(2) of the General Provisions for 
the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) 
for Source Categories in 40 CFR part 63, subpart A does not apply to 
the source category. Section 63.8(a)(2) specifies that rules 
promulgated under part 63 are subject to the monitoring provisions of 
Sec.  63.8 upon promulgation of performance specifications (i.e., the 
proposed PS-17). Consequently, rules which specify that Sec.  
63.8(a)(2) does not apply, are not subject to PS-17 or Procedure 4. 
Table 2 of this preamble lists the part 63 rules that require CPMS but 
would not be subject to PS-17 or Procedure 4 for this reason.

                           Table 2--Part 63 Rules Not Subject to PS-17 or Procedure 4
                                       [Sec.   63.8(a)(2) does not apply]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Subpart(s)                                            Source category
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
F, G, H, I.....................................  Hazardous Organic NESHAP.
U..............................................  Polymers and Resins (Group I).
AA.............................................  Phosphoric Acid Plants.
BB.............................................  Phosphate Fertilizer Production.
CC.............................................  Petroleum Refineries.
DD.............................................  Offsite Waste and Recovery Operations.
DDD............................................  Mineral Wool.
III............................................  Flexible Polyurethane Foam Production.
JJJ............................................  Polymers and Resins (Group IV).
LLL............................................  Portland Cement Manufacturing.
OOO............................................  Amino/Phenolic Resins Production.
PPP............................................  Polyether Polyols Production.
AAAA...........................................  Municipal Solid Waste Landfills.
TTTT...........................................  Leather Tanning and Finishing Operations.
IIIII..........................................  Mercury Cell Chlor-Alkali Plants.
LLLLL..........................................  Asphalt Roofing and Processing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The standard industrial classification (SIC) codes and North 
American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes that correspond 
to potentially regulated entities are listed in Tables 3 and 4 of this 
preamble, respectively. To determine the specific types of industry 
referenced by the SIC or NAICS codes, go to http://www.osha.gov/pls/
imis/sic_manual.html or http://www.osha.gov/oshstats/naics-
manual.html, respectively.

[[Page 59960]]



          Table 3--SIC Codes for Potentially Regulated Entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                SIC code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
12, 42, 44, 47, 109, 279, 281, 282, 283, 284, 285, 286, 287, 289, 386,
 1011, 1021, 1031, 1041, 1044, 1051, 1061, 1099, 1311, 1321, 1411, 1422,
 1423, 1429, 1442, 1445, 1446, 1454, 1455, 1459, 1474, 1475, 1479, 1492,
 1496, 1499, 2034, 2035, 2046, 2099, 2211, 2241, 2295, 2296, 2392, 2394,
 2396, 2399, 2421, 2426, 2429, 2431, 2435, 2436, 2439, 2441, 2448, 2449,
 2451, 2452, 2491, 2493, 2499, 2514, 2522, 2531, 2542, 2599, 2611, 2621,
 2631, 2652, 2653, 2655, 2656, 2657, 2671, 2672, 2673, 2674, 2675, 2676,
 2677, 2678, 2679, 2711, 2721, 2741, 2754, 2759, 2761, 2771, 2812, 2813,
 2816, 2819, 2821, 2822, 2823, 2824, 2832, 2833, 2834, 2835, 2836, 2841,
 2842, 2843, 2844, 2851, 2861, 2865, 2869, 2873, 2874, 2875, 2879, 2891,
 2892, 2893, 2895, 2899, 2911, 2951, 2952, 2992, 2999, 3011, 3021, 3052,
 3053, 3061, 3069, 3074, 3079, 3081, 3082, 3083, 3084, 3085, 3086, 3087,
 3088, 3089, 3111, 3131, 3142, 3143, 3144, 3149, 3161, 3171, 3172, 3199,
 3211, 3221, 3229, 3274, 3281, 3291, 3292, 3295, 3296, 3299, 3312, 3313,
 3315, 3316, 3317, 3321, 3322, 3324, 3325, 3329, 3331, 3334, 3339, 3341,
 3351, 3353, 3354, 3355, 3356, 3357, 3363, 3364, 3365, 3366, 3369, 3398,
 3399, 3411, 3412, 3421, 3423, 3425, 3429, 3431, 3432, 3441, 3442, 3443,
 3444, 3446, 3448, 3449, 3451, 3452, 3462, 3463, 3465, 3466, 3469, 3471,
 3479, 3482, 3483, 3484, 3489, 3491, 3492, 3493, 3494, 3495, 3497, 3499,
 3511, 3519, 3523, 3524, 3531, 3537, 3543, 3545, 3559, 3562, 3566, 3568,
 3569, 3579, 3585, 3592, 3599, 3621, 3634, 3639, 3644, 3645, 3646, 3647,
 3663, 3677, 3691, 3693, 3694, 3695, 3711, 3713, 3714, 3715, 3716, 3720,
 3721, 3724, 3726, 3728, 3731, 3732, 3743, 3751, 3760, 3761, 3764, 3765,
 3769, 3792, 3795, 3799, 3821, 3829, 3841, 3842, 3843, 3851, 3861, 3911,
 3914, 3915, 3931, 3942, 3944, 3949, 3951, 3952, 3953, 3955, 3961, 3965,
 3991, 3993, 3995, 3996, 3999, 4225, 4226, 4512, 4581, 4612, 4911, 4922,
 4923, 4924, 4925, 4931, 4932, 4939, 4941, 4952, 4953, 4961, 4971, 5086,
 5122, 5149, 5169, 5171, 5172, 5541, 5995, 7218, 7231, 7241, 7391, 7397,
 7399, 7534, 7538, 7539, 7641, 7699, 7911, 7999, 8062, 8063, 8069, 8071,
 8072, 8091, 8211, 8221, 8222, 8231, 8243, 8244, 8249, 8299, 8411, 8711,
 8731, 8734, 8741, 8748, 8922, 9511, 9661, 9711
------------------------------------------------------------------------


         Table 4--NAICS Codes for Potentially Regulated Entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               NAICS code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
211, 221, 316, 321, 322, 324, 325, 326, 331, 332, 336, 339, 611, 622,
 2123, 2211, 3231, 3241, 3251, 3252, 3253, 3254, 3255, 3256, 3259, 3271,
 3273, 3274, 3279, 3327, 3328, 3329, 3332, 3335, 3339, 3341, 3342, 3343,
 3344, 3361, 3362, 3363, 4227, 5622, 5629, 21221, 22121, 22132, 31332,
 32211, 32222, 32411, 32613, 32614, 32615, 32791, 33422, 33634, 33992,
 33995, 42269, 42271, 45431, 48611, 48621, 49311, 49319, 51113, 51114,
 51223, 54171, 56220, 56221, 56292, 81142, 92411, 92711, 92811, 111998,
 112519, 112910, 112990, 211111, 211112, 212111, 212112, 212113, 212210,
 212221, 212222, 212231, 212234, 212299, 212319, 212322, 212324, 212325,
 212393, 212399, 213113, 221112, 221320, 238910, 311211, 311212, 311221,
 311225, 311340, 311421, 311423, 311823, 311830, 311911, 311920, 311941,
 311942, 311991, 311999, 313210, 313320, 314911, 314992, 315299, 315999,
 321211, 321212, 321213, 321214, 321219, 321911, 321918, 321999, 322110,
 322121, 322122, 322130, 322211, 322212, 322213, 322215, 322221, 322222,
 322223, 322224, 322225, 322226, 322231, 322291, 322299, 323111, 323112,
 323116, 323119, 324121, 324199, 325131, 325181, 325182, 325188, 325192,
 325199, 325211, 325221, 325222, 325311, 325312, 325320, 325411, 325412,
 325991, 326111, 326113, 326121, 326122, 326150, 326191, 326192, 326199,
 326211, 326212, 326299, 327211, 327212, 327213, 327410, 327991, 327992,
 327993, 327999, 331111, 331112, 331210, 331221, 331222, 331312, 331315,
 331316, 331319, 331419, 331492, 331511, 331512, 331513, 331521, 331524,
 332115, 332116, 332212, 332431, 332612, 332618, 332812, 332912, 332951,
 332999, 333111, 333112, 333120, 333313, 333319, 333611, 333612, 333613,
 333618, 334613, 335121, 335122, 335312, 335911, 336111, 336112, 336120,
 336211, 336213, 336214, 336312, 336350, 336399, 336411, 336412, 336413,
 336414, 336415, 336419, 336612, 336992, 336999, 337124, 337127, 337214,
 337215, 339111, 339112, 339114, 339911, 339912, 339914, 339999, 424690,
 424720, 425110, 425120, 481111, 483111, 483112, 483113, 483114, 483211,
 483212, 484110, 484121, 484122, 484210, 484220, 484230, 487210, 488111,
 488119, 488190, 488310, 488320, 488330, 488390, 488490, 492110, 492210,
 493110, 493120, 493130, 493190, 511199, 531130, 532411, 541380, 541710,
 541990, 561720, 562111, 562112, 562119, 562213, 562219, 611310, 611692,
 622110, 622310, 713930, 811111, 811118, 811310, 811411, 811420, 924110,
 928110
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed amendments to Procedure 1 (40 CFR part 60, appendix F) 
would apply to any facility that operates a continuous emission 
monitoring system (CEMS) that is subject to PS-9 or PS-15 (40 CFR part 
60, appendix B) and also must comply with 40 CFR part 60, appendix F. 
The proposed amendments to the General Provisions to 40 CFR parts 60, 
61, and 63 would apply to the same facilities that the proposed PS-17 
and Procedure 4 would apply. The proposed amendments to 40 CFR part 63, 
subpart SS, would apply to producers and coproducers of hydrogen 
cyanide; sodium cyanide; carbon black by thermal-oxidative 
decomposition in a closed system, thermal decomposition in a cyclic 
process, or thermal decomposition in a continuous process; ethylene 
from refined petroleum or liquid hydrocarbons; and spandex by reaction 
spinning.
    To determine whether your facility would be regulated by this 
action, you should examine the applicability criteria in section 1.2 of 
proposed PS-17 and the applicability criteria in the part 60, 61, or 63 
standard to which your facility is subject. If you have any questions 
regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, 
consult either the air permit authority for the entity or your EPA 
regional representative as listed in Sec.  63.13 of the General 
Provisions to part 63 (40 CFR part 63, subpart A).

B. What should you consider as you prepare your comments for EPA?

    Do not submit information containing CBI to EPA through http://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Send or deliver information identified 
as CBI only to the following address: Roberto Morales, OAQPS Document 
Control Officer (C404-02), U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and 
Standards, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, Attention 
Docket ID EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0640. Clearly mark the part or all of the 
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or 
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as 
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the 
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one 
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as 
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information 
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. 
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with 
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.

[[Page 59961]]

C. Where can you get a copy of this document and other related 
information?

    In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of 
these proposed actions will also be available on the Worldwide Web 
(WWW) through the Technology Transfer Network (TTN). A copy of this 
proposed action will be posted on the TTN's policy and guidance page 
for newly proposed or promulgated rules at the following address: 
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/. The TTN provides information and 
technology exchange in various areas of air pollution control.

D. Will there be a public hearing?

    The EPA will hold a public hearing on this proposed rule only if 
requested by November 10, 2008. The request for a public hearing should 
be made in writing and addressed to Mr. Barrett Parker, Sector Policies 
and Programs Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards 
(D243-05), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle 
Park, North Carolina 27711. The hearing, if requested, will be held on 
a date and at a place published in a separate Federal Register notice.

II. Background

A. What is the regulatory history of the proposed PS-17 and Procedure 
4?

    Monitoring of emissions, control device operating parameters, and 
process operations has been a requirement of many of the emission 
standards that we have promulgated under the authority of the Clean Air 
Act (CAA). Recognizing the need for good quality data, we initially 
developed performance specifications for CEMS. These performance 
specifications stipulate CEMS equipment design, location, and 
installation requirements and focus on the initial performance of CEMS. 
To address the ongoing performance of CEMS, we developed quality 
assurance (QA) procedures.
    The basis for performance specifications for CPMS was initially 
established by the General Provisions for Standards of Performance for 
New Stationary Sources in 40 CFR part 60, subpart A. Section 60.13(a), 
which addresses monitoring requirements, states that ``* * * all 
continuous monitoring systems required under applicable subparts shall 
be subject to the provisions of this section upon promulgation of 
performance specifications for continuous monitoring systems under 
appendix B to this part * * *'' As defined in Sec.  60.2, these 
``continuous monitoring systems'' include those systems that are used 
to measure and record process parameters. Section 60.13 specifies basic 
requirements for the installation, validation, and operation of 
continuous monitoring systems, including CPMS. General recordkeeping 
requirements for CPMS required under part 60 are specified in Sec.  
60.7(f).
    Section 61.14 of the NESHAP General Provisions in 40 CFR part 61, 
subpart A also addresses CPMS, although in less detail than does Sec.  
60.13. Included in the requirements for CPMS under part 61 are 
provisions for the general operation and maintenance of continuous 
monitoring systems, monitoring system performance evaluations, and 
recordkeeping.
    With the enactment of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (1990 
Amendments), we have placed increased emphasis on the collection and 
use of monitoring data as a means of ensuring continuous compliance 
with emission standards. In response to the mandates of the 1990 
Amendments, we incorporated into the General Provisions to part 63, 
basic requirements for all continuous monitoring systems (CMS). Section 
63.2 broadly defines CMS to include CPMS, as well as CEMS and other 
forms of monitoring that are used to demonstrate compliance with 
applicable regulations. In Sec.  63.8(a)(2), the General Provisions 
specify that, ``* * * all CMS required under relevant standards shall 
be subject to the provisions of this section upon promulgation of 
performance specifications for CMS as specified in the relevant 
standard or otherwise by the Administrator.'' As is the case for part 
60, the General Provisions to part 63 establish the need for 
performance specifications for CPMS.
    Rules promulgated under parts 60, 61, and 63 generally require 
owners or operators of affected sources to use CPMS to monitor the 
performance of emission control devices associated with those sources. 
Although many of these standards specify general design, installation, 
and calibration requirements for CPMS, these rules do not include 
specific performance requirements for CPMS. In addition, neither the 
General Provisions nor the subparts to parts 60, 61, and 63 fully 
specify procedures and criteria for ensuring that CPMS provide good 
quality data initially and on an ongoing basis. By proposing a new 
performance specification and QA procedure specifically for CPMS, we 
would be establishing standards for the design, installation, 
operation, and maintenance of CPMS that will help to ensure the 
generation of good quality data on a consistent basis.
    The proposed requirements for CPMS also reflect EPA's commitment to 
improving the quality of data collected and disseminated by the Agency. 
Although we have always recognized its importance, there has been 
increased emphasis on ensuring data quality in response to section 515 
of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal 
Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106-554), which directs the OMB to issue guidelines 
that ``provide policy and procedural guidance to Federal agencies for 
ensuring and maximizing the quality, objectivity, utility, and 
integrity of information * * * disseminated by Federal agencies.'' On 
September 28, 2001, OMB issued final Guidelines for Ensuring and 
Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, Utility, and Integrity of 
Information Disseminated by Federal Agencies (66 FR 49718). These 
guidelines require Federal agencies to adopt ``* * * a basic standard 
of quality (including objectivity, utility, and integrity) as a 
performance goal and should take appropriate steps to incorporate 
information quality criteria into agency dissemination practices.'' The 
guidelines also require agencies to ``* * * develop a process for 
reviewing the quality (including objectivity, utility, and integrity) 
of information before it is disseminated * * *'' and that the process 
must ``* * * enable the agency to substantiate the quality of the 
information it has disseminated through documentation or other means 
appropriate to the information.''
    In response to the OMB guidelines, we developed ``Guidelines for 
Ensuring and Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, Utility, and 
Integrity of Information Disseminated by the Environmental Protection 
Agency'' (EPA/260R-02-008, October 2002). As noted in these guidelines, 
we are committed to ensuring the quality control of information 
collected through regulatory requirements, such as this proposed rule, 
by specifying analytical procedures for data collection and sample 
analysis that will produce good quality data. We believe the procedures 
specified in the proposed PS-17 and Procedure 4 will help to ensure the 
quality of data measured and recorded by affected CPMS, which may 
subsequently be collected and disseminated by EPA.
    This proposed rule also represents an important part of our efforts 
to implement the recommendations developed by the Air Quality 
Management Work Group in response to the National Research Council 
(NRC) report on Air Quality Management in the United States. 
Specifically, the

[[Page 59962]]

recommendations developed by the Work Group call for improving 
emissions factors and other emissions estimation methods and reducing 
the uncertainty in emissions inventories and air quality modeling 
applications. When emissions factors and other methods are used to 
estimate emissions from controlled sources, the assumption is that the 
control device is operating properly. The improved monitoring of air 
pollution control device parameters that would be achieved by the 
proposed PS-17 and Procedure 4 would help to ensure that affected 
control devices are operated properly, and, when problems arise, 
corrective action is taken in a timely manner. Furthermore, the 
improved monitoring will help to reduce the uncertainty and improve the 
reliability of emission estimates that typically are based on the 
assumptions that emission controls are being operated properly and are 
performing as designed.

B. What is the regulatory history of the proposed amendments to 
Procedure 1?

    Quality Assurance Procedure 1 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix F, 
specifies QA procedures for CEMS. At the time that Procedure 1 was 
promulgated, affected CEMS were designed to monitor a single gaseous 
pollutant. Since that time, emission standards have been promulgated 
under parts 60, 61, and 63 that require the installation and operation 
of CEMS that monitor multiple pollutants. Although most of the 
provisions of Procedure 1 can be applied directly to multiple pollutant 
CEMS, there are differences in how multiple pollutant CEMS operate and 
how their performance should be assessed. We are proposing amendments 
to Procedure 1 to address those differences.

C. What is the regulatory history of the proposed amendments to the 
General Provisions to parts 60, 61, and 63?

    The only purpose of these proposed amendments to the General 
Provisions to parts 60 and 61 is to ensure consistency between those 
provisions, the applicable subparts to parts 60 and 61 that require the 
use of CPMS, and the requirements of the proposed PS-17 and Procedure 
4. As this is the initial proposal of PS-17 and Procedure 4, there is 
no regulatory history to these proposed amendments to the General 
Provisions to parts 60 and 61.
    We proposed amendments to the monitoring requirements of the 
General Provisions to part 63 on March 23, 2001 (66 FR 16318) and 
promulgated those amendments on April 5, 2002 (67 FR 16582). At the 
time we proposed those amendments, we had not yet developed PS-17 or 
Procedure 4. As a result, the amendments to the General Provisions, 
which were incorporated into Sec.  63.8, are not consistent with the 
requirements of PS-17 and Procedure 4 that we are now proposing. With 
this proposal of PS-17 and Procedure 4, we decided that additional 
amendments to the General Provisions to part 63 were needed to ensure 
consistency between subpart A of part 63, PS-17, Procedure 4, and the 
applicable subparts to part 63 that require CPMS.

D. What is the regulatory history of the proposed amendments to 40 CFR 
part 63, subpart SS?

    On June 29, 1999, we promulgated the consolidated rulemaking 
proposal for the ``generic MACT standards'' program (64 FR 34866). The 
generic MACT program established an alternative methodology for making 
maximum achievable control technology (MACT) determinations for 
appropriate small categories by referring to previous MACT standards 
that have been promulgated for similar sources in other categories. 
Initially, the generic MACT standards applied to four source 
categories: Acetal Resins Production, Acrylic and Modacrylic Fibers 
Production, Hydrogen Fluoride Production, and Polycarbonate Production. 
We included in the consolidated rulemaking package general control 
requirements for certain types of hazardous air pollutant (HAP) 
emissions from storage vessels containing organic materials, process 
vents emitting organic vapors, and leaks from equipment components. We 
also established a separate subpart SS, which specifies requirements 
for closed vent systems, control devices, recovery devices and routing 
emissions to fuel gas systems or a process. We included in Sec.  63.996 
of subpart SS general monitoring requirements for control and recovery 
devices. On December 6, 2000, we proposed revisions to the monitoring 
requirements of subpart SS (65 FR 76444). Those proposed revisions 
specified in greater detail the requirements for CPMS that are used to 
monitor temperature, pressure, or pH. At the time these revisions to 
subpart SS were proposed, we were in the early stages of developing PS-
17 and Procedure 4 and had not yet refined many of the requirements for 
CPMS that we are proposing today. However, with this proposal of PS-17 
and Procedure 4, we concluded that it would be appropriate to propose 
further amendments to subpart SS to ensure consistency with PS-17 and 
Procedure 4.

III. Summary of Proposed Performance Specification 17

A. What is the purpose of PS-17?

    The purpose of PS-17 is to establish the initial installation and 
performance procedures that are required for evaluating the 
acceptability of a CPMS that is used to monitor specific process or 
control device parameters. The specific parameters that would be 
addressed by the proposed PS-17 are temperature, pressure, liquid flow 
rate, gas flow rate, mass flow rate, pH, and conductivity. Mass flow 
rate includes the mass flow of liquids as well as solids, such as the 
flow of powders or dry solid material into a processing unit. As 
proposed, the requirements for the selection, installation, and 
validation of CPMS specified in PS-17 would apply instead of the 
corresponding requirements in an applicable subpart to parts 60, 61, or 
63 that requires the use of CPMS for monitoring temperature, pressure, 
flow rate, pH, or conductivity.

B. Who must comply with PS-17?

    The proposed PS-17 would apply to CPMS that are used to monitor 
temperature, pressure, liquid flow rate, gas flow rate, mass flow rate, 
pH, or conductivity as indicators of good control device performance or 
emission source operation. If adopted as a final rule, owners and 
operators of emission sources that would be required to install and 
operate any such CPMS under any subpart of parts 60, 61, or 63 (listed 
in Table 1 of this preamble) would be required to comply with PS-17, 
with the exception of facilities that are subject to the part 63 rules 
that are listed in Table 2 of this preamble. In addition to new CPMS 
that are installed after the proposed effective date of PS-17, existing 
CPMS that are required under parts 60, 61, or 63 also would be required 
to comply with PS-17.

C. When must owners or operators of affected CPMS comply with PS-17?

    Owners and operators of affected existing CPMS that were installed 
prior to the effective date of this rule and are located at facilities 
that are required to obtain a title V operating permit would be 
required to comply with PS-17 when they renew their title V permit, or 
when they replace any key components of an affected CPMS. The key 
components of a CPMS are the sensors, data recorders, and any other 
parts of the CPMS that affect overall system accuracy, measurement 
range, or measurement resolution. Owners and operators of affected 
existing CPMS that were installed prior to the effective date of this 
rulemaking and are located at area

[[Page 59963]]

source facilities that are exempt from obtaining a title V operating 
permit would be required to comply with PS-17 within 5 years of the 
effective date of this rule, or when they replace any key components of 
an affected CPMS. Owners and operators of new affected CPMS would have 
to comply with the proposed PS-17 when they install and place into 
operation the affected CPMS.

D. What are the basic requirements of PS-17?

    The proposed PS-17 would require owners and operators of affected 
CPMS to: (1) Select a CPMS that satisfies basic equipment design 
criteria; (2) install their CPMS according to standard procedures; (3) 
validate their CPMS prior to placing it into operation; and (4) record 
and maintain information on their CPMS and its operation. The technical 
rationales for proposed criteria, specifications, and other related 
requirements of PS-17 are described in section VIII of this document.
1. Equipment Selection
    Two types of equipment would be needed for complying with PS-17: 
(1) the components that comprise the CPMS, and (2) the equipment that 
is used to validate the CPMS. For CPMS components, PS-17 would require 
the selection of equipment that can satisfy basic criteria for 
measurement range, resolution, and overall system accuracy.
    For CPMS components, PS-17 does not specify sensor design criteria, 
allowing affected owners and operators to select any equipment, 
provided the CPMS meets the accuracy requirements for the initial 
validation. However, PS-17 would identify voluntary consensus standards 
that can be used as guidelines for selecting specific types of sensors.
    For a temperature CPMS, PS-17 would require a sensor that is 
consistent with one of the following standards: (1) ASTM E235-06, 
``Specification for Thermocouples, Sheathed, Type K, for Nuclear or 
Other High-Reliability Applications''; (2) ASTM E585/E585M-04, 
``Specification for Compacted Mineral-Insulated, Metal-Sheathed Base 
Metal Thermocouple Cables''; (3) ASTM E608/E608M-06, ``Specification 
for Mineral-Insulated, Metal-Sheathed Base Metal Thermocouples''; (4) 
ASTM E696-07, ``Specification for Tungsten-Rhenium Alloy Thermocouple 
Wire''; (5) ASTM E1129/E1129M-98 (2002), ``Standard Specification for 
Thermocouple Connectors''; (6) ASTM E 1159-98 (2003), ``Specification 
for Thermocouple Materials, Platinum-Rhodium Alloys, and Platinum''; 
(7) ISA-MC96.1-1982, ``Temperature Measurement Thermocouples''; or (8) 
ASTM E 1137/E 1137M-04, ``Standard Specification for Industrial 
Platinum Resistance Thermometers'' (incorporated by reference-see Sec.  
60.17)
    For a pressure CPMS that uses a pressure gauge as the sensor, PS-17 
would require a gauge that conforms to the design requirements of ASME 
B40.100-2005, ``Pressure Gauges and Gauge Attachments'' (incorporated 
by reference-see Sec.  60.17).
2. Range
    With respect to measurement range, this proposed rule would require 
that temperature, pressure, flow rate, and conductivity CPMS be capable 
of measuring the appropriate parameter over a range that extends at 
least 20 percent beyond the normal expected operating range of values 
for that parameter. For example, if the pressure drop measurement 
across a scrubber typically ranges from 5.0 to 7.5 kilopascals (kPa) 
(20 to 30 inches of water column (in. wc)), the range of the data 
recorder for a CPMS that monitors that pressure drop would have to 
extend from at least 4.0 to 9.0 kPa (16 to 36 in. wc). For pH CPMS, the 
proposed PS-17 would require that the CPMS data recorder range covers 
the entire pH scale from 0 to 14.
3. Resolution
    The data recording system associated with affected CPMS would 
require a resolution that is equal to or better than one-half of the 
required system accuracy. For example, if a temperature CPMS is 
required to have an accuracy of 1 [deg]C, the required resolution for 
the CPMS would be 0.5 [deg]C, or better.
4. Accuracy
    The accuracy criteria for CPMS, which are a function of the 
parameter that is measured by the CPMS, are described in detail in 
section II.E of this document.
    For devices or instruments that are used to validate or check the 
initial accuracy of a temperature, pressure, or flow CPMS, PS-17 
generally would require an accuracy hierarchy of three. In other words, 
the ratio of the required accuracy of the CPMS to the accuracy of the 
calibrated validation device would have to be at least three. For 
example, if the required accuracy of a temperature CPMS is 1.0 percent, to satisfy the accuracy hierarchy of three 
criterion, the calibrated validation device would need an accuracy of 
0.33 percent or better (1.0 / 0.33 = 3). A CPMS with an 
accuracy of 0.25 percent would satisfy the accuracy hierarchy 
criterion, but a CPMS with an accuracy of 0.5 percent would not satisfy 
the accuracy hierarchy criterion in this example. The accuracy of the 
equipment used to validate the CPMS also would have to be traceable to 
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) standards. We 
have incorporated into the proposed PS-17 two exceptions to the 
accuracy requirements for instruments that are used to validate CPMS. 
First, a mercury-in-glass or water-in-glass U-tube manometer could be 
used instead of a calibrated pressure measurement device with NIST-
traceable accuracy when validating a pressure CPMS or a flow CPMS that 
uses a differential pressure flow meter. Secondly, for instruments and 
reagents that are used to validate a pH CPMS, the performance 
specification would require NIST-traceable accuracy of 0.02 pH units or 
better, rather than an accuracy hierarchy of three.
5. Installation
    The PS-17 would require each CPMS sensor to be located so as to 
provide representative measurements of the appropriate parameter. The 
proposed PS-17 also lists voluntary consensus standards that could 
serve as guidelines for installing specific types of sensors. Voluntary 
consensus standards are technical standards that are developed or 
adopted by one or more voluntary consensus standards bodies, such as 
the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) or the American 
Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME).
    If required to install a flow CPMS and the sensor of the flow CPMS 
is a differential pressure device, turbine flow meter, rotameter, 
vortex formation flow meter or Coriolis mass flow meter, PS-17 would 
allow one of the following standards to be used as guidance: (1) ASME 
MFC-3M-2004, ``Measurement of Fluid Flow in Pipes Using Orifice, 
Nozzle, and Venturi''; (2) ANSI/ASME MFC-7M-1987 (R2001), ``Measurement 
of Gas Flow by Means of Critical Flow Venturi Nozzles''; (3) ANSI/ISA 
RP 31.1-1977, ``Recommended Practice: Specification, Installation, and 
Calibration of Turbine Flowmeters''; (4) ANSI/ASME MFC 4M-1986 (R2003), 
``Measurement of Gas Flow by Turbine Meters'' (if used for gas flow 
measurement); (5) ISA RP 16.5-1961, ``Installation, Operation, and 
Maintenance Instructions for Glass Tube Variable Area Meters 
(Rotameters)''; (6) ISO 10790:1999(E), ``Measurement of Fluid Flow in 
Closed Conduits-Guidance to the Selection, Installation and Use of 
Coriolis Meters (Mass Flow, Density and Volume Flow Measurements); or 
(7) ANSI/ASME MFC-6M-1998 (R2005) ``Measurement

[[Page 59964]]

of Fluid Flow in Pipes Using Vortex Flow Meters'' (incorporated by 
reference--see Sec.  60.17).
    There are also several voluntary consensus standards that can be 
used as alternative methods for checking the accuracy of specific types 
of CPMS sensors. Prior to validating the performance of a CPMS, owners 
and operators would be required to install work platforms, test ports, 
taps, valves, or any other equipment needed to perform the initial 
validation check.
6. CPMS Validation
    Under this proposed rule, we would require owners and operators of 
affected CPMS to demonstrate that affected CPMS meet a minimum overall 
system accuracy. Several methods are specified for checking CPMS 
accuracy, and owners and operators of affected CPMS could choose among 
the methods specified for each type of CPMS. These validation methods 
generally would involve either: (1) Comparing measurements made by the 
affected CPMS to measurements made by a calibrated measurement device, 
or (2) simulating the signal generated by the CPMS sensor using a 
calibrated simulation device. Table 5 of this preamble lists the CPMS 
validation methods specified in the proposed PS-17 and their 
applicability. As part of specific validation methods, the proposed PS-
17 specifies several voluntary consensus standards as alternative 
methods for checking sensor accuracy.

                Table 5--CPMS Initial Validation Methods
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                You can validate      If the sensor of
 If your CPMS measures . . .   your CPMS by . . .    your CPMS is . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Temperature..............  a. Comparison to a    Thermocouple, RTD,
                               calibrated            or any other type
                               temperature           of temperature
                               measurement device.   sensor.
                              b. Temperature        Thermocouple, RTD,
                               simulation.           or any other type
                                                     of sensor that
                                                     generates an
                                                     electronic signal
                                                     that can be related
                                                     to temperature
                                                     magnitude.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Pressure.................  a. Comparison to a    Pressure transducer,
                               calibrated pressure   pressure gauge, or
                               measurement device.   any other type of
                                                     pressure sensor.
                              b. Pressure           Pressure transducer,
                               simulation            pressure gauge, or
                               procedure using a     any other type of
                               calibrated pressure   pressure sensor.
                               source.
                              c. Pressure           Pressure transducer,
                               simulation using a    pressure gauge, or
                               pressure source and   any other type of
                               a calibrated          pressure sensor.
                               pressure
                               measurement device.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Liquid flow rate.........  a. Volumetric method  Any type of liquid
                                                     flow meter.
                              b. Gravimetric        Any type of liquid
                               method.               flow meter.
                              c. Differential       Orifice plate, flow
                               pressure              nozzle, or other
                               measurement method.   type of
                                                     differential
                                                     pressure liquid
                                                     flow meter.
                              d. Pressure source    Orifice plate, flow
                               flow simulation       nozzle, or other
                               method.               type of
                                                     differential
                                                     pressure liquid
                                                     flow meter.
                              e. Electronic signal  Turbine flow meter,
                               simulation method.    vortex shedding
                                                     flow meter, or any
                                                     other type of
                                                     liquid flow meter
                                                     that generates an
                                                     electronic signal
                                                     that can be related
                                                     to flow rate
                                                     magnitude.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Gas flow rate............  a. Differential       Orifice plate, flow
                               pressure              nozzle, or any
                               measurement method.   other type of
                                                     differential
                                                     pressure gas flow
                                                     meter other than a
                                                     differential
                                                     pressure tube.
                              b. Pressure source    Orifice plate, flow
                               flow simulation       nozzle, or any
                               method.               other type of
                                                     differential
                                                     pressure gas flow
                                                     meter other than a
                                                     differential
                                                     pressure tube.
                              c. Electronic signal  Any type of gas flow
                               simulation method.    meter that
                                                     generates an
                                                     electronic signal
                                                     that can be related
                                                     to flow rate
                                                     magnitude.
                              d. Relative accuracy  Any type of gas flow
                               test.                 meter.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Liquid mass flow rate....  Gravimetric method..  Any type of liquid
                                                     flow meter.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. Solid mass flow rate.....  a. Gravimetric        Any type of solid
                               method.               mass flow meter.
                              b. Material weight    Belt conveyor with
                               comparison method.    weigh scale,
                                                     equipped with a
                                                     totalizer.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. pH.......................  a. Comparison to      Any type of pH
                               calibrated pH meter.  meter.
                              b. Single point       Any type of pH
                               calibration.          meter.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. Conductivity.............  a. Comparison to      Any type of
                               calibrated            conductivity meter.
                               conductivity meter.
                              b. Single point       Any type of
                               calibration.          conductivity meter.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

7. Temperature CPMS Validation
    Under this proposed rule, the performance of a temperature CPMS 
could be validated by comparing measured values to a calibrated 
temperature measurement device or by simulating a typical operating 
temperature using a calibrated temperature simulation device. When the 
calibrated temperature measurement device method is used, the sensor of 
the calibrated device would have to be located adjacent to the CPMS 
sensor and must be subjected to the same

[[Page 59965]]

environmental conditions as the CPMS sensor. In addition, the 
measurements made using the CPMS and calibrated temperature measurement 
device would have to be concurrent. The method is based on ASTM E 220-
07e1, ``Standard Test Methods for Calibration of Thermocouples by 
Comparison Techniques'' (incorporated by reference--see Sec.  60.17).
    An alternative method for thermocouples is ASTM E 452-02 (2007), 
``Standard Test Method for Calibration of Refractory Metal 
Thermocouples Using an Optical Pyrometer'' and an alternative method 
for resistance temperature detectors is ASTM E 644-06, ``Standard Test 
Methods for Testing Industrial Resistance Thermometers'' (incorporated 
by reference--see Sec.  60.17).
8. Pressure CPMS Validation
    To validate the performance of a pressure CPMS, owners and 
operators could choose from one of three methods: (1) Comparison to a 
calibrated pressure measurement device, (2) pressure simulation using a 
calibrated pressure source, or (3) pressure simulation using a pressure 
source and calibrated pressure measurement device. Prior to performing 
the initial validation check of a pressure CPMS, PS-17 would require a 
leak test on all connections between the process line that is 
monitored, the CPMS, and the calibrated device that is used as the 
basis for comparison. If the calibrated pressure measurement device 
comparison were used, the measurements by the CPMS and calibrated 
device would have to be concurrent.
    As an alternative to the initial validation check, PS-17 would 
allow the user to check the accuracy of the pressure sensor associated 
with the pressure CPMS using one of the following methods: (1) ASME 
B40.100-2005, ``Pressure Gauges and Gauge Attachments'' or (2) ASTM E 
251-92 (2003), ``Standard Test Methods for Performance Characteristics 
of Metallic Bonded Resistance Strain Gages'' (incorporated by 
reference--see Sec.  60.17). Users would also be required to check the 
accuracy of the overall CPMS.
9. Flow CPMS Validation
    Under the proposed PS-17, the performance of a flow CPMS could be 
validated using one of seven methods. However, none of the methods 
could be applied universally to all types of flow CPMS; there would be 
limitations on the use of each specific method. The volumetric method, 
which could be used to validate any liquid flow rate measurement 
device, would entail collecting a volume of liquid for a timed period, 
then calculating the flow rate based on the volume collected and the 
length of the time period over which the liquid was collected. The 
gravimetric method is similar to the volumetric method except that the 
material collected would be weighed. The gravimetric method could be 
used to validate any liquid flow CPMS, liquid mass flow CPMS, and solid 
mass flow CPMS. Liquid mass flow rates and solid mass flow rates would 
be calculated based on the weight of the liquid or solid and the length 
of the time period over which the liquid or solid was collected. Liquid 
flow rate would be calculated based on the weight and density of the 
liquid and the length of the time period over which the liquid was 
collected.
    The volumetric and gravimetric methods are based on voluntary 
consensus standards and could be used to validate liquid flow CPMS. 
Both methods are described in the following standards: (1) ISA RP 16.6-
1961, ``Methods and Equipment for Calibration of Variable Area Meters 
(Rotameters)''; (2) ISA RP 31.1-1977, ``Specification, Installation, 
and Calibration of Turbine Flow Meters''; and (3) ISO 8316:1987, 
``Measurement of Liquid Flow in Closed Conduits-Method by Collection of 
Liquid in a Volumetric Tank'' (incorporated by reference-see Sec.  
60.17). The gravimetric method also is described in the following 
standards: (1) ANSI/ASME MFC-9M-1988, ``Measurement of Liquid Flow in 
Closed Conduits by Weighing Method''; and (2) ASHRAE 41.8-1989, 
``Standard Methods of Measurement of Flow of Liquids in Pipes Using 
Orifice Flow Meters'' (incorporated by reference-see Sec.  60.17). The 
gravimetric method also could be used to validate liquid mass flow or 
solid mass flow CPMS.
    The differential pressure measurement method and the pressure 
source flow simulation method could be used to validate any flow CPMS 
that uses a differential pressure measurement flow device, such as an 
orifice plate, flow nozzle, or venturi tube. Both methods would entail 
measuring the differential pressure across a flow constriction, then 
calculating the corresponding flow rate based on the measured 
differential pressure using the manufacturer's literature or the 
procedures specified in ASME MFC-3M-2004, ``Measurement of Fluid Flow 
in Pipes Using Orifice, Nozzle, and Venturi'' (incorporated by 
reference--see Sec.  60.17), the characteristics of the liquid, and the 
dimensions and design of the flow constriction. For CPMS that use an 
orifice flow meter, the flow rate can be calculated using procedures 
specified in ASHRAE 41.8-1989, ``Standard Methods of Measurement of 
Flow of Liquids in Pipes Using Orifice Flowmeters'' (incorporated by 
reference--see Sec.  60.17).
    In addition, prior to the validation check, both methods would 
require a leak test on all connections associated with the process 
line, CPMS, and pressure connections. Neither the differential pressure 
measurement method nor the pressure source flow simulation method could 
be used to validate a gas flow CPMS that uses one or more differential 
pressure tubes as the flow sensor. A differential pressure tube is 
defined as a device, such as a pitot tube, that consists of one or more 
pairs of tubes that are oriented to measure the velocity pressure and 
static pressure at one of more fixed points within a duct for the 
purpose of determining gas velocity.
    The electronic signal simulation method could be used to validate 
any flow CPMS that operates with a sensor that generates an electronic 
signal, provided the electronic signal can be simulated and is related 
to the magnitude of the flow rate. Examples of this type of flow sensor 
are turbine meters and vortex shedding flow meters. The electronic 
signal simulation method would entail simulating an electronic signal 
using a calibrated signal simulator, then calculating the flow rate 
that corresponds to the value of the simulated signal.
    Owners or operators of flow CPMS that are used for monitoring gas 
flow rate could validate their CPMS by performing a relative accuracy 
(RA) test using Reference Methods 2, 2A, 2B, 2C, 2D, or 2F (40 CFR part 
60, appendix A-1), or 2G (40 CFR part 60, appendix A-2). The RA test is 
the only method specified in the proposed PS-17 for validating a gas 
flow CPMS that incorporates a differential pressure tube.
    Finally, the material weight comparison method could be used to 
validate a solid mass flow CPMS that uses a combination belt conveyor 
and weigh scale equipped with a totalizer. The method is based on the 
Belt-Conveyor Scale Systems Method, which is described in NIST Handbook 
44--2002 Edition, ``Specifications, Tolerances, And Other Technical 
Requirements for Weighing and Measuring Devices'' (incorporated by 
reference--see Sec.  60.17) as adopted by the 86th National Conference 
on Weights and Measures in 2001.

[[Page 59966]]

10. pH CPMS Validation
    To validate the performance of a pH CPMS, two methods are specified 
in the proposed PS-17. In the first method, the pH measured by the CPMS 
would be compared to the pH measured by a calibrated pH meter. In the 
second method, the single point calibration method, the value measured 
by the CPMS would be compared to the pH measurement of a certified 
buffer solution. If the CPMS did not satisfy the accuracy requirement, 
a two-point calibration method, based on ASTM D 1293-99 (2005), 
``Standard Test Methods for pH of Water'' (incorporated by reference--
see Sec.  60.17), would be suggested.
11. Conductivity CPMS Validation
    The proposed PS-17 would specify two methods for validating 
conductivity CPMS. The two methods parallel the methods for validating 
pH CPMS: comparison to a calibrated conductivity meter and the single 
point calibration method using a standard conductivity solution.
    If the conductivity CPMS did not satisfy the accuracy requirement, 
calibration based on the procedures specified in the manufacturer's 
owner's manual would be suggested. If the manufacturer's owner's manual 
does not specify a calibration procedure, calibration should be 
performed based on one of the following standards: (1) ASTM D 1125-95 
(2005), ``Standard Test Methods for Electrical Conductivity and 
Resistivity of Water''; or (2) ASTM D 5391-99 (2005), ``Standard Test 
Method for Electrical conductivity and Resistivity of a Flowing High 
Purity Water Sample'' (incorporated by reference--see Sec.  60.17).
12. Alternative Methods of CPMS Validation
    Owners and operators of affected CPMS could have the option of 
using alternative methods for validating their CPMS, provided the 
alternative method has been approved by us or by a delegated authority. 
In all cases, owners and operators of affected CPMS would be required 
to take corrective action if the initial validation check indicates 
that the CPMS does not satisfy the accuracy requirement. Alternative 
monitoring methods are addressed under the General Provisions to parts 
60, 61, and 63 in Sec. Sec.  60.13(i), 61.14(g), and 63.8(f), 
respectively. Alternative monitoring methods also are addressed in the 
applicable subparts for each rule.

E. What initial performance criteria must be demonstrated to comply 
with PS-17?

    Owners or operators of affected CPMS would be required to 
demonstrate that their CPMS meet a minimum system accuracy. Table 6 of 
this preamble summarizes the required accuracies. These minimum 
accuracies would pertain to the overall CPMS and not simply the sensor.

         Table 6--Accuracy Criteria for Initial Validation Check
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 The accuracy criteria for the initial
  If the CPMS measures . . .           validation check are . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Temperature (in a non-      System accuracy of 1.0
 cryogenic environment).        percent of the temperature or 2.8 [deg]C
                                (5 [deg]F), whichever is greater.
2. Temperature (in a           System accuracy of 2.5
 cryogenic environment).        percent of the temperature or 2.8 [deg]C
                                (5 [deg]F), whichever is greater.
3. Pressure..................  System accuracy of 5 percent
                                or 0.12 kPa (0.5 in. wc), whichever is
                                greater.
4. Liquid flow rate..........  System accuracy of 5 percent
                                or 1.9 L/min (0.5 gal/min), whichever is
                                greater.
5. Gas flow rate.............  a. Relative accuracy of 20
                                percent, if the relative accuracy test
                                is used to demonstrate compliance, OR.
                               b. System accuracy of 10
                                percent, if the CPMS measures steam flow
                                rate, OR.
                               c. System accuracy of 5
                                percent or 280 L/min (10 ft\3\/min),
                                whichever is greater, for all other
                                gases and validation test methods.
6. Mass flow rate............  System accuracy of 5 percent.
7. pH........................  System accuracy of 0.2 pH units.
8. Conductivity..............  System accuracy percentage of 5 percent.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In most cases, the required accuracies are expressed both as 
accuracy percentages and as accuracy values; for a specific parameter 
value, the accuracy criterion that results in the greater value would 
apply (i.e., the less stringent criterion would apply). For example, 
for liquid flow rate, the accuracy percentage would be 5 
percent, and the accuracy value would be 1.9 liters per minute (L/min) 
(0.5 gallons per minute (gal/min)). If the actual flow rate were 30 L/
min (7.9 gal/min), the accuracy percentage criterion would result in a 
value of 1.5 L/min (0.4 gal/min). Therefore, the accuracy value 
criterion of 1.9 L/min (0.5 gal/min) would apply because 1.9 L/min is 
greater than 1.5 L/min.
    For temperature CPMS, the proposed PS-17 would make a distinction 
between cryogenic and non-cryogenic environments; cryogenic 
environments are those characterized by a temperature less than 0 
[deg]C (32 [deg]F), and non-cryogenic environments are those with a 
temperature of at least 0 [deg]C (32 [deg]F). The minimum accuracy for 
a temperature CPMS used in a non-cryogenic application would be the 
greater of 1.0 percent of the temperature measured on the 
Celsius scale ([deg]C) and 2.8 [deg]C (5 [deg]F). For 
example, for a temperature CPMS that is used to monitor a thermal 
oxidizer operating at 760 [deg]C (1400 [deg]F), the 1 percent accuracy 
criterion would require the CPMS to be accurate to within 7.6 [deg]C (14 [deg]F). Because 7.6 [deg]C (14 [deg]F) is greater than 2.8 [deg]C (5 [deg]F), the 1 percent 
accuracy criterion would apply. The minimum accuracy of a temperature 
CPMS used in a cryogenic application would be 2.8 [deg]C (5 
[deg]F) or 2.5 percent of the temperature measured on the 
Celsius scale, whichever is greater. For a temperature CPMS that is 
used to monitor a condenser operating with an outlet temperature of -12 
[deg]C (10 [deg]F), the temperature value criterion would apply; the 
CPMS would have to be accurate to 2.8 [deg]C (5 
[deg]F) because 2.8 [deg]C (5 [deg]F) is greater than 2.5 percent of -
12 [deg]C (10 [deg]F), which is 0.3 [deg]C (0.5 
[deg]F). These criteria translate to the accuracies listed in Table 7 
of this preamble.

[[Page 59967]]



       Table 7--Summary of Temperature CPMS Accuracy Requirements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 For temperatures that are . .   The required temperature CPMS accuracy
               .                                is . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Greater than 280 [deg]C       1 percent of temperature.
 (540 [deg]F).
2. Between -112 and 280 [deg]C  2.8 [deg]C (5 [deg]F).
 (-170 and 540 [deg]F).
3. Less than -112 [deg]C (-170  2.5 percent of temperature.
 [deg]F).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed PS-17 would require pressure CPMS to be accurate to 
within 5 percent or 0.12 kPa (0.5 in. wc), whichever is 
greater. For example, a CPMS that is used to monitor a venturi scrubber 
with a pressure drop of 7.5 kPa (30 in. wc) would have to be accurate 
to 0.37 kPa (1.5 in. wc) or better, based on the 5 percent 
criterion because 0.37 kPa (1.5 in. wc) is greater than 0.12 kPa (0.5 
in. wc). On the other hand, the required accuracy for a CPMS that 
monitored a pressure drop of 1.0 kPa (4 in. wc) across a fabric filter 
would be 0.12 kPa (0.5 in. wc), or better, because the 5 
percent criterion would result in an accuracy of 0.05 kPa (0.2 in. wc).
    The required accuracy for flow CPMS would depend on the material 
that is being monitored. For liquid flow rate CPMS, the minimum 
accuracy would be 1.9 L/min (0.5 gal/min) or 5 percent, 
whichever is greater. For example, to monitor a scrubber liquid flow 
rate of 300 L/min (80 gal/min), the required CPMS accuracy would be 15 
L/min (4 gal/min) or better. For gas flow rate CPMS, PS-17 would 
require a minimum accuracy of 280 L/min (10 cubic feet per minute 
(ft\3\/min)) or 5 percent, whichever is greater. Therefore, 
a fuel flow meter on a natural gas-fired 8 MMBtu/hr incinerator with a 
gas flow rate of 3,700 L/min (130 ft\3\/min) would have to be accurate 
to 280 L/min (10 ft\3\/min) or better. An exception to these accuracy 
requirements for flow meters would apply if an RA test is used to 
validate a gas flow CPMS. In such cases, the required RA would be 20 
percent of the mean value of the reference method test data, or better. 
An exception to the gas flow CPMS accuracy requirements would also 
apply for steam flow rate CPMS. The proposed PS-17 stipulates the 
minimum accuracy for a CPMS that is used for monitoring steam flow rate 
would have to be 10 percent or better. The minimum accuracy 
specified in the proposed PS-17 for mass flow CPMS would be 5 percent. We would require pH CPMS to be accurate to within 
0.2 pH units. Finally, conductivity CPMS would have to be 
accurate to 5 percent.

F. What are the reporting and recordkeeping requirements for PS-17?

    The proposed PS-17 does not specify reporting requirements but 
would require owners and operators of affected CPMS to record and 
maintain information that identifies the CPMS, including the location 
of the CPMS, identification number assigned by the owner or operator, 
the manufacturer's name and model number, and the typical operating 
range for each parameter that is monitored. In addition, owners and 
operators of affected CPMS would be required to document performance 
demonstrations.

IV. Summary of Proposed Procedure 4

A. What is the purpose of Procedure 4?

    The proposed Procedure 4 would have two primary purposes. First, 
the procedure would be used for evaluating the quality of data produced 
by CPMS on an ongoing basis. Second, the procedure would help evaluate 
the effectiveness of the QA and quality control (QC) programs that 
owners and operators develop for CPMS. As proposed, Procedure 4 would 
apply instead of the requirements for evaluating the operation and 
quality of the data produced by CPMS specified in an applicable subpart 
to parts 60, 61, or 63 that requires the use of CPMS for monitoring 
temperature, pressure, flow rate, pH, or conductivity.

B. Who must comply with Procedure 4?

    This procedure would apply to any CPMS that is subject to PS-17. 
That is, any owner or operator who would be required under an 
applicable subpart to parts 60, 61, or 63 to install and operate a CPMS 
that is used to monitor temperature, pressure, flow rate, pH, or 
conductivity would be subject to both PS-17 and Procedure 4.

C. When must owners or operators of affected CPMS comply with Procedure 
4?

    Owners and operators of affected CPMS would have to comply with 
Procedure 4 when they install and place into operation a CPMS that is 
subject to PS-17 or when an existing CPMS becomes subject to PS-17.

D. What are the basic requirements of Procedure 4?

    The proposed Procedure 4 would require owners or operators to 
perform periodic accuracy audits, perform visual inspections and other 
operational checks, and develop and implement a QA/QC program for each 
affected CPMS. The technical rationales for specific proposed 
requirements of Procedure 4 are described in section IX of this 
document.
1. Accuracy Audits
    The requirements for periodic accuracy audits would consist of 
equipment requirements and procedural requirements. As is the case for 
equipment used to perform initial validations under the proposed PS-17, 
the specific equipment required to perform an accuracy audit would 
depend on the type of CPMS and the method selected for evaluating the 
accuracy of the CPMS. However, all such equipment would have to be 
calibrated and would have to meet the same two general requirements for 
accuracy: (1) An accuracy hierarchy of at least three, and (2) an 
accuracy that is NIST-traceable.
    We have incorporated into the proposed Procedure 4 three exceptions 
to the accuracy requirements for instruments that are used to audit the 
accuracy of CPMS: (1) When performing an accuracy audit using a 
redundant sensor, the redundant sensor would have to have an accuracy 
equal to or better than the accuracy of your primary sensor; (2) a 
mercury-in-glass or water-in-glass U-tube manometer could be used 
instead of a calibrated pressure measurement device with NIST-traceable 
accuracy when auditing the accuracy of a pressure CPMS or a flow CPMS 
that uses a differential pressure flow meter; and (3) when performing 
an accuracy audit of a flow CPMS using the volumetric or gravimetric 
methods, the container that is used to collect the liquid or solid 
material would not be required to have NIST-traceable accuracy.
    The procedural requirements for performing accuracy audits of a 
CPMS would depend on the type of CPMS. Owners or operators of affected 
CPMS generally could choose among several methods for performing CPMS 
accuracy audits. Many of these methods are identical to the methods for 
performing the initial validation check of CPMS, as specified in the 
proposed PS-17 and

[[Page 59968]]

described in section III.D of this document. However, one significant 
difference between the initial validation methods specified in the 
proposed PS-17 and the accuracy audit methods specified in the proposed 
Procedure 4 is that the accuracy audit methods would require you to 
check the accuracy of each primary sensor, either separately or as part 
of the overall system accuracy audit. For PS-17, we assumed that newly 
installed sensors are calibrated, and a separate check of sensor 
accuracy would be unnecessary. However, for assessing ongoing QA, 
affected owners and operators would be required to perform accuracy 
audits on CPMS that have been in service, and the audit procedure would 
have to verify that the entire system, including the sensor, meets the 
accuracy criteria. Table 8 of this document lists the CPMS accuracy 
audit methods specified in the proposed Procedure 4 and the associated 
applicability.

                     Table 8--Accuracy Audit Methods
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               You can perform the
 If your CPMS measures . . .    accuracy audit of     If the sensor of
                               your CPMS by . . .    your CPMS is . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Temperature..............  a. Comparison to      Any type of
                               redundant             temperature sensor.
                               temperature CPMS.
                              b. Comparison to      Thermocouple, RTD,
                               calibrated            or any other type
                               temperature           of temperature
                               measurement device.   sensor.
                              c. Separate sensor    Thermocouple or RTD.
                               check and system
                               check by
                               temperature
                               simulation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Pressure.................  a. Comparison to      Any type of pressure
                               redundant pressure    sensor.
                               sensor..
                              b. Comparison to      Pressure transducer,
                               calibrated pressure   pressure gauge, or
                               measurement device.   any other type of
                                                     pressure sensor.
                              c. Separate sensor    Pressure gauge or
                               check and system      metallic-bonded
                               check by pressure     resistance strain
                               simulation using a    gauge.
                               calibrated pressure
                               source.
                              d. Separate sensor    Pressure gauge or
                               check and system      metallic-bonded
                               check by pressure     resistance strain
                               simulation using a    gauge.
                               pressure source and
                               a calibrated
                               pressure
                               measurement device.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Liquid flow rate.........  a. Comparison to      Any type of liquid
                               redundant flow        flow meter.
                               sensor.
                              b. Volumetric method  Any type of liquid
                                                     flow meter.
                              c. Gravimetric        Any type of liquid
                               method.               flow meter.
                              d. Separate sensor    Orifice plate, flow
                               check and system      nozzle, or other
                               check by              type of
                               differential          differential
                               pressure              pressure liquid
                               measurement method.   flow meter.
                              e. Separate sensor    Orifice plate, flow
                               check and system      nozzle, or other
                               check by pressure     type of
                               source flow           differential
                               simulation method.    pressure liquid
                                                     flow meter.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Gas flow rate............  a. Comparison to      Any type of gas flow
                               redundant flow        meter.
                               sensor.
                              b. Separate sensor    Orifice plate, flow
                               check and system      nozzle, or any
                               check by              other type of
                               differential          differential
                               pressure              pressure gas flow
                               measurement method.   meter other than a
                                                     differential
                                                     pressure tube.
                              c. Separate sensor    Orifice plate, flow
                               check and system      nozzle, or any
                               check by pressure     other type of
                               source flow           differential
                               simulation method.    pressure gas flow
                                                     meter.
                              d. Relative accuracy  Any type of gas flow
                               test.                 meter.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Liquid mass flow rate....  a. Comparison to      Any type of liquid
                               redundant flow        mass flow meter.
                               sensor.
                              b. Gravimetric        Any type of liquid
                               method.               mass flow meter.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. Solid mass flow rate.....  a. Comparison to      Any type of liquid
                               redundant flow        mass flow meter.
                               sensor.
                              b. Gravimetric        Any type of solid
                               method.               mass flow meter.
                              c. Material weight    Combination belt
                               comparison method.    conveyor, weigh
                                                     scale, and
                                                     totalizer.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. pH.......................  a. Comparison to      Any type of pH
                               redundant pH meter.   meter.
                              b. Comparison to      Any type of pH
                               calibrated pH meter.  meter.
                              c. Single point       Any type of pH
                               calibration.          meter.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. Conductivity.............  a. Comparison to      Any type of
                               redundant             conductivity meter.
                               conductivity meter.
                              b. Comparison to      Any type of
                               calibrated            conductivity meter.
                               conductivity meter.
                              c. Single point       Any type of
                               calibration.          conductivity meter.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Temperature CPMS Accuracy Audit Methods
    To perform an accuracy audit of a temperature CPMS, owners and 
operators of affected CPMS could choose from three methods. The first 
method would apply to CPMS with redundant temperature sensors and would 
entail comparing the temperature measured by the primary sensor of your 
CPMS to that of the redundant temperature sensor. The second method 
would consist of comparing the temperature measured by the CPMS to

[[Page 59969]]

a separate calibrated temperature measurement device. The third method 
would require checking the temperature sensor independent of the other 
components of the CPMS. The temperature sensor could be checked using 
methods specified in any of the following voluntary consensus 
standards: (1) ASTM E 220-07e1, ``Standard Test Methods for Calibration 
of Thermocouples by Comparison Techniques'' (for thermocouples); (2) 
ASTM E 452-02 (2007), ``Standard Test Method for Calibration of 
Refractory Metal Thermocouples Using an Optical Pyrometer'' (for 
thermocouples); or (3) ASTM E 644-06, ``Standard Test Methods for 
Testing Industrial Resistance Thermometers'' (for resistance 
temperature detectors) (incorporated by reference--see Sec.  60.17). 
The other components of the CPMS could be checked by simulating a 
temperature, then comparing the temperature recorded by the CPMS to the 
simulated temperature. Because the voluntary consensus standards 
specified in the proposed Procedure 4 would apply only to thermocouples 
and resistance temperature detectors (RTDs), this accuracy audit method 
would apply only to CPMS that use those types of temperature sensors.
3. Pressure CPMS Accuracy Audit Methods
    For an accuracy audit of a pressure CPMS, the proposed Procedure 4 
would specify four methods. The first method would apply to CPMS with 
redundant pressure sensors and would entail comparing the pressure 
measured by the primary pressure sensor of your CPMS to the pressure 
measured by the redundant pressure sensor. The second method would 
consist of comparing the pressure measured by your CPMS to the pressure 
measured by a separate calibrated pressure measurement device. The 
other two methods would involve checking the accuracies of the pressure 
sensor independent of the other components of the CPMS. For checking 
sensor accuracy, the proposed Procedure 4 would reference voluntary 
consensus standards. Because we were able to identify voluntary 
consensus standards only for pressure gauges (ASME B40.100-2005, 
``Pressure Gauges and Gauge Attachments'') and metallic-bonded 
resistance strain gauges (ASTM E 251-92 (2003), ``Standard Test Methods 
for Performance Characteristics of Metallic Bonded Resistance Strain 
Gages'') (incorporated by reference--see Sec.  60.17), these other two 
pressure CPMS accuracy audit methods would apply only to CPMS that use 
pressure gauge or metallic-bonded resistance strain gauge sensors.
    After checking sensor accuracy, the accuracy of the other 
components of the CPMS could be checked by either: (1) Pressure 
simulation using a calibrated pressure source, or (2) pressure 
simulation using a pressure source and a calibrated pressure 
measurement device. In either method, a simulated pressure would be 
compared to a calibrated pressure to determine accuracy.
4. Liquid Flow CPMS Accuracy Audit Methods
    To perform an accuracy audit of a liquid flow CPMS, five methods 
are specified in the proposed Procedure 4. As is the case with other 
types of CPMS, owners and operators of affected CPMS could choose among 
the methods specified. The first method would apply to CPMS with 
redundant flow sensors and would entail comparing the flow rate 
measured by the primary flow sensor of your CPMS to the flow rate 
measured by the redundant flow sensor. The next two methods--the 
volumetric and gravimetric methods--are the same methods as specified 
for the initial CPMS validation in the proposed PS-17 and described in 
section III.D of this document. The volumetric and gravimetric methods 
are based on voluntary consensus standards and could be used to 
validate liquid flow CPMS. Both methods are described in the following 
standards: (1) ISA RP 16.6-1961, ``Methods and Equipment for 
Calibration of Variable Area Meters (Rotameters)''; (2) ISA RP 31.1-
1977, ``Specification, Installation, and Calibration of Turbine Flow 
Meters''; (3) ISO 10790:1999, ``Measurement of Fluid Flow in Closed 
Conduits--Guidance to the Selection, Installation and Use of Coriolis 
Meters (Mass Flow, Density and Volume Flow Measurements)''; and (4) ISO 
8316:1987, ``Measurement of Liquid Flow in Closed Conduits--Method by 
Collection of Liquid in a Volumetric Tank'' (incorporated by 
reference--see Sec.  60.17). The gravimetric method also is described 
in the following standards: (1) ANSI/ASME MFC-9M-1988, ``Measurement of 
Liquid Flow in Closed Conduits by Weighing Method''; and (2) ASHRAE 
41.8-1989, ``Standard Methods of Measurement of Flow of Liquids in 
Pipes Using Orifice Flowmeters'' (incorporated by reference--see Sec.  
60.17). The gravimetric method also could be used to validate liquid 
mass flow or solid mass flow CPMS.
    For liquid flow CPMS that use a differential pressure meter, such 
as an orifice plate, venturi tube, or flow nozzle, two accuracy audit 
methods are specified in the proposed Procedure 4. Both of these 
methods would require a separate visual inspection of the flow 
constriction and a check of the accuracy of the other components of the 
system. The accuracy of the other components would have to be checked 
by pressure simulation, using either a calibrated differential pressure 
source or a differential pressure source in combination with a 
calibrated differential pressure measurement device. The required 
pressure drop that corresponds to the normal operating flow rate 
expected for the flow CPMS can be calculated using ASME MFC-3M-2004, 
``Measurement of Fluid Flow in Pipes Using Orifice, Nozzle, and 
Venturi'' (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  60.17). For CPMS that 
use an orifice flow meter, the pressure drop can be calculated using 
ASHRAE 41.8-1989, ``Standard Methods of Measurement of Flow of Liquids 
in Pipes Using Orifice Flowmeters'' (incorporated by reference--see 
Sec.  60.17).
5. Gas Flow CPMS Accuracy Audit Methods
    The proposed Procedure 4 specifies four methods for checking the 
accuracy of a gas flow CPMS. One method would entail comparison to a 
redundant flow sensor and could be used with any gas flow CPMS. Two 
methods would apply only to gas flow CPMS that incorporate differential 
pressure meters. These are the same two methods that would apply to 
differential pressure liquid flow meter systems described in the 
previous paragraph. The final method specified in the proposed 
Procedure 4 for checking the accuracy of a gas flow CPMS is the RA test 
using Reference Methods 2, 2A, 2B, 2C, 2D, or 2F (40 CFR part 60, 
appendix A-1), or 2G (40 CFR part 60, appendix A-2). This is the only 
method specified in Procedure 4 that could be used to check the 
accuracy of gas flow CPMS that use differential flow tubes.
6. Mass Flow CPMS Accuracy Audit Methods
    The accuracy of CPMS that measure either liquid mass flow or solid 
mass flow could be checked using the redundant sensor method and the 
gravimetric method, both of which are described in the previous section 
for liquid flow CPMS. The same two methods could be used for checking 
the accuracy of solid mass flow CPMS. The accuracy of solid mass flow 
CPMS also could be evaluated using the material weight comparison 
method, which is based on the Belt-Conveyor Scale Systems Method, 
described in NIST

[[Page 59970]]

Handbook 44--2002 Edition, ``Specifications, Tolerances, and Other 
Technical Requirements for Weighing and Measuring Devices'' 
(incorporated by reference--see Sec.  60.17), as adopted by the 86th 
National Conference on Weights and Measures in 2001.
7. pH CPMS Accuracy Audit Methods
    To check the accuracy of pH CPMS, owners and operators of affected 
CPMS could choose between three methods: (1) Comparison to a redundant 
pH sensor, (2) comparison to a calibrated pH meter calibrated according 
to ASTM D1293-99 (2005), ``Standard Test Methods for pH of Water'' 
(incorporated by reference--see Sec.  60.17), and (3) single point 
calibration. The redundant sensor method would require you to compare 
the pH measured by the primary pH sensor of your pH CPMS to that of a 
redundant pH sensor. The other two methods are the same as specified in 
the proposed PS-17 for the initial validation check.
8. Conductivity CPMS Accuracy Audit Methods
    The proposed Procedure 4 specifies three methods for checking the 
accuracy of a conductivity CPMS. These methods (comparison to redundant 
conductivity sensor, comparison to calibrated conductivity meter, and 
single point calibration) are based on the same principles as the 
methods specified for pH CPMS accuracy audits in this proposed rule.
    Calibration of the conductivity CPMS should be performed according 
to the manufacturer's owner's manual. If not specified, calibration 
must be performed based on one of the following standards: (1) ASTM D 
1125-95 (2005), ``Standard Test Methods for Electrical Conductivity and 
Resistivity of Water''; or (2) ASTM D 5391-99 (2005), ``Standard Test 
Method for Electrical Conductivity and Resistivity of a Flowing High 
Purity Water Sample'' (incorporated by reference--see Sec.  60.17).
9. Other Operational Checks
    In addition to accuracy audits, owners or operators of affected 
CPMS that do not use redundant sensors would be required to perform 
visual inspections and other checks of the operation of each affected 
CPMS. These checks would include such activities as inspecting the 
physical appearance of the CPMS for damage or wear and checking the 
electrical components for corrosion.
10. QA/QC Program
    The Procedure 4 would require CPMS owners or operators to develop 
QA/QC programs for each affected CPMS. The QA/QC programs would have to 
address procedures for accuracy audits, system calibration, preventive 
maintenance, recordkeeping, and corrective action.

E. How often must accuracy audits and other QA/QC procedures be 
performed?

    Table 9 of this document summarizes the required frequencies for 
accuracy audits and other QA/QC procedures that would be required under 
the proposed Procedure 4.

      Table 9--Frequency of Accuracy Audits and Other QC Procedures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              You must perform . .
 If your CPMS measures . . .            .              At least . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. Temperature.............   a. Accuracy audits.   i. Quarterly; AND
                                                    ii. Following any
                                                     period of more than
                                                     24 hours throughout
                                                     which the
                                                     temperature
                                                     exceeded the
                                                     maximum rated
                                                     temperature of the
                                                     sensor, or the data
                                                     recorder was off
                                                     scale.
                               b. Visual             Quarterly, unless
                               inspections and       the CPMS has a
                               checks of CPMS        redundant
                               operation.            temperature sensor.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. Pressure................   a. Accuracy audits.   i. Quarterly; AND
                                                    ii. Following any
                                                     period of more than
                                                     24 hours throughout
                                                     which the pressure
                                                     exceeded the
                                                     maximum rated
                                                     pressure of the
                                                     sensor, or the data
                                                     recorder was off
                                                     scale.
                               b. Checks of all      Monthly.
                               mechanical
                               connections for
                               leakage.
                               c. Visual             Quarterly, unless
                               inspections and       the CPMS has a
                               checks of CPMS        redundant pressure
                               operation.            sensor.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. Flow rate (liquid, gas,    a. Accuracy audits.   i. Quarterly; AND
 mass).                                             ii. Following any
                                                     period of more than
                                                     24 hours throughout
                                                     which the flow rate
                                                     exceeded the
                                                     maximum rated flow
                                                     rate of the sensor,
                                                     or the data
                                                     recorder was off
                                                     scale.
                               b. Checks of all      Monthly.
                               mechanical
                               connections for
                               leakage.
                               c. Visual             Quarterly, unless
                               inspections and       the CPMS has a
                               checks of CPMS        redundant flow
                               operation.            sensor.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. pH......................   a. Accuracy audits.   Weekly.
                               b. Visual             Monthly, unless the
                               inspections and       CPMS has a
                               checks of CPMS        redundant pH
                               operation.            sensor.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. Conductivity............   a. Accuracy audits.   Quarterly.
                               b. Visual             Quarterly, unless
                               inspections and       the CPMS has a
                               checks of CPMS        redundant
                               operation.            conductivity
                                                     sensor.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 59971]]

    For affected CPMS that are used to monitor temperature, pressure, 
or flow rate, owners and operators would be required to perform 
accuracy audits on a quarterly basis. For pH CPMS, accuracy audits 
would have to be performed weekly, and, for conductivity CPMS, monthly 
accuracy audits would be required. In addition, for temperature, 
pressure, and flow CPMS, an accuracy audit would be required following 
any periods of 24 hours or more, throughout which either: (1) The 
measured value exceeded the operating limit for the sensor, based on 
the manufacturer's recommendations, or (2) the parameter value remained 
off the scale of the CPMS data recorder. As an example of the first 
condition, consider a Type J thermocouple with a rated operating 
temperature limit of 760 [deg]C (1400 [deg]F). If a temperature CPMS 
that uses a Type J thermocouple records a temperature in excess of 760 
[deg]C (1400 [deg]F) for more than 24 hours, an accuracy audit of the 
CPMS would have to be performed within 48 hours.
    Visual inspections and other operational checks of temperature, 
pressure, and flow CPMS would be required quarterly, unless the CPMS is 
equipped with a redundant sensor. In addition, mechanical connections 
associated with pressure or flow CPMS would have to be checked monthly 
for leakage. For pH and conductivity CPMS that are not equipped with 
redundant sensors, owners or operators of affected units would have to 
visually inspect and perform operational checks of the affected CPMS on 
a monthly basis.

F. What are the reporting and recordkeeping requirements for Procedure 
4?

    The proposed Procedure 4 does not specify reporting requirements 
but would require owners and operators of affected CPMS to maintain 
records of all accuracy audits and corrective actions taken to return 
the CPMS to normal operation. These records would have to be maintained 
for a period of at least 5 years. For the first 2 years, the records 
would have to be kept onsite.

V. Summary of Proposed Amendments to Procedure 1

A. What is the purpose of the amendments?

    The purpose of the amendments to Procedure 1 of 40 CFR part 60, 
appendix F is to revise the procedure to address CEMS that must comply 
with PS-9 or PS-15 (40 CFR part 60, appendix B). Procedure 1 was 
developed for CEMS that are used to monitor a single pollutant or 
diluent. As a result, there may be some questions on how to apply 
Procedure 1 to CEMS subject to PS-9 or PS-15 that measure more than one 
pollutant. In addition, both PS-9 and PS-15 partially specify ongoing 
QA procedures. By amending the QA procedure, we are clarifying what 
owners or operators of CEMS subject to PS-9 or PS-15 must do to comply 
with Procedure 1 to ensure the quality of the data produced by these 
CEMS. The technical rationale for proposed changes to Procedure 1 is 
discussed further in section X of this document.

B. To whom do the amendments apply?

    The amendments to Procedure 1 (40 CFR part 60, appendix F) would 
apply to owners or operators of CEMS that are subject to PS-9 or PS-15 
(40 CFR part 60, appendix B) and are used to demonstrate compliance on 
a continuous basis. Several subparts to parts 60, 61, and 63 require 
that owners and operators of affected sources demonstrate that those 
sources are in continuous compliance with the applicable emission 
standard. Any such standard that requires the use of gas 
chromatographic CEMS subject to PS-9 or extractive Fourier Transfer 
Infrared (FTIR) CEMS subject to PS-15 would also require compliance 
with Procedure 1, and these proposed amendments to Procedure 1 would 
apply specifically to such sources.

C. How do the amendments address CEMS that are subject to PS-9?

    These proposed amendments would address CEMS that are subject to 
PS-9 (40 CFR part 60, appendix B) by clarifying that the procedure can 
be used for multiple-pollutant CEMS and by modifying the requirements 
for daily calibration drift (CD) and data accuracy assessments so that 
the procedure can be applied specifically to CEMS that are subject to 
PS-9. The proposed amendments to section 4.1.1 of Procedure 1 specify 
that the daily CD can be performed using any of the target pollutants 
that are monitored by the CEMS. For example, if a CEMS is subject to 
PS-9 and is used to monitor benzene and toluene, the CD check could be 
performed using either benzene or toluene.
    The PS-9 requires neither relative accuracy test audits (RATA's) 
nor relative accuracy assessments (RAA's). Instead, PS-9 requires 
cylinder gas audits (CGA's) every calendar quarter. To address data 
accuracy assessments for CEMS subject to PS-9, the amendments would add 
section 5.1.5 to Procedure 1. The new section would specify that the 
requirements for RATA's and RAA's do not apply to CEMS subject to PS-9. 
Instead, quarterly CGA's of each target pollutant would be required. 
The amendments further would specify that the quarterly CGA's are to be 
performed according to the procedure described in PS-9, except that the 
CGA's would have to be performed at two points rather than the single 
point requirement of PS-9. Finally, the amendments would clarify that 
the CGA's performed under the revised Procedure 1 satisfy the quarterly 
performance audit requirement of PS-9.

D. How do the amendments address CEMS that are subject to PS-15?

    These proposed amendments would address extractive FTIR CEMS that 
are subject to PS-15 (40 CFR part 60, appendix B) by modifying the 
requirements for checking daily CD, data recording, and data accuracy 
assessments so that the procedure could be applied specifically to CEMS 
that are subject to PS-15. The amendments also would clarify what 
constitutes excessive CD for CEMS subject to PS-15 and the criteria for 
determining when the CEMS is ``out of control.'' These modifications 
would be addressed in the amendments by adding sections 4.1.2, 4.3.3, 
4.4.1, and 5.1.6 to Procedure 1. Proposed section 4.1.2 of Procedure 1 
would specify that the daily CD requirement must be satisfied by 
performing a daily Calibration Transfer Standards (CTS) Check, Analyte 
Spike Check, and Background Deviation Check. For the specific 
procedures to be followed, the amendments would reference the 
appropriate sections of PS-15, which describe how to perform these 
system assessments.
    Proposed section 4.3.3 of Procedure 1 would specify the criteria 
for determining when a CEMS subject to PS-15 is out of control. The 
CEMS would be out of control under either of two conditions. The first 
condition would occur when the CTS Check, Analyte Spike Check, or 
Background Deviation Check exceeds twice the drift specification of 
5 percent for five consecutive daily periods. The second 
condition would occur when the CTS Check, Analyte Spike Check, or 
Background Deviation Check exceeds four times the drift specification 
of 5 percent during any daily check.
    Proposed section 4.4.1 of Procedure 1 would specify data storage 
criteria for CEMS subject to PS-15. In addition to the recordkeeping 
requirements specified in section 4.4 of Procedure 1, the proposed 
amended procedure would require owners or operators of affected CEMS to 
satisfy the data storage requirements of section 6.3 of PS-15. That is, 
the data storage system would

[[Page 59972]]

have to have capacity sufficient to store all data collected over the 
course of one week. The data would have to be stored on either a write-
protected medium or to a password-protected remote storage location.
    Proposed section 5.1.6 of Procedure 1 would specify the criteria 
for data accuracy assessments of CEMS subject to PS-15. Instead of 
requiring data accuracy assessments by RATA's, CGA's, or RAA's, as 
required for other types of CEMS, the amended Procedure 1 would require 
quarterly data accuracy assessments according to the three audit 
procedures specified in section 9 of PS-15. The Audit Sample Check, 
which is specified in section 9.1 of PS-15, would be required at least 
once every four calendar quarters. The Audit Spectra Check, which is 
specified in section 9.2 of PS-15, could be used to satisfy the data 
accuracy assessment requirement no more than once every four calendar 
quarters. The Submit Audit for Independent Analysis, which is specified 
in section 9.3 of PS-15, could be used to satisfy the data accuracy 
assessment in no more than three of every four consecutive calendar 
quarters. Proposed section 5.1.6(3) of Procedure 1 also would stipulate 
that the data accuracy audits performed under the QA procedure satisfy 
the PS-15 requirement for quarterly or semiannual QA/QC checks on the 
operation of the CEMS.

VI. Summary of Proposed Amendments to the General Provisions to Parts 
60, 61, and 63

A. What is the purpose of the amendments to the General Provisions to 
parts 60, 61, and 63?

    The purpose of the proposed amendments to the General Provisions to 
parts 60, 61, and 63 is to ensure that the monitoring requirements 
specified in the General Provisions that apply to CPMS are consistent 
with the requirements in the proposed PS-17 and Procedure 4 and the 
requirements specified in the applicable subparts that require the use 
of the CPMS that are affected by this proposed rule.

B. What specific changes are we proposing to the General Provisions to 
parts 60, 61, and 63?

    These proposed amendments to the General Provisions to part 60 
would redesignate Sec.  60.13(a) as Sec.  60.13(a)(1) and would add 
Sec.  60.13(a)(2). The new paragraph would state that performance 
specifications and QA procedures for CPMS, promulgated under part 60, 
appendices B and F, respectively, apply instead of requirements for 
CPMS specified in applicable subparts to part 60.
    These proposed amendments to the General Provisions to part 61 
would redesignate Sec.  61.14(a) as Sec.  61.14(a)(1) and would add 
Sec.  61.14(a)(2). The new paragraph would state that performance 
specifications and QA procedures for CPMS, promulgated under part 60, 
appendices B and F, respectively, apply instead of requirements for 
CPMS specified in applicable subparts to part 61.
    These proposed amendments to the General Provisions to part 63 
would make several changes to Sec.  63.8(c). Section 63.8(a)(2) would 
be revised to include new paragraph Sec.  63.8(a)(2)(ii). The new 
paragraph would state that performance specifications and QA procedures 
for CPMS, promulgated under part 60, appendices B and F, respectively, 
apply instead of the requirements for CPMS specified in applicable 
subparts to part 63.
    Under these proposed amendments, the installation requirements of 
Sec.  63.8(c)(2) would apply to all CMS, including CPMS.
    Section 63.8(c)(4) addresses continuous operation and cycle time 
for CEMS and COMS. These proposed amendments would expand the 
requirement of Sec.  63.8(c)(4) to require that all CPMS also must be 
in continuous operation. These proposed amendments also would add 
paragraph Sec.  63.8(c)(4)(iii) to require that all CPMS complete one 
cycle of operation within the time period specified in the applicable 
rule.
    Section 63.8(c)(6) addresses daily drift checks. In this proposal, 
we would delete the last three sentences of paragraph (c)(6) that apply 
specifically to CPMS because the proposed PS-17 and Procedure 4 would 
specify the applicable criteria.
    Section 63.8(c)(7) defines when a CMS is out of control. The 
proposed amendments would clarify in Sec.  63.8(c)(7)(i)(A) that the 
term ``out of control'', when defined in terms of excessive calibration 
drift, applies to CEMS and COMS and not to CPMS. We also would revise 
Sec.  63.8(c)(7)(i)(B), which relates out of control to failed 
performance test audits, relative accuracy audits, relative accuracy 
test audits, and linearity test audits. In these proposed amendments, 
Sec.  63.8(c)(7)(i)(A) and (B) would apply only to CEMS and COMS. These 
proposed amendments would add Sec.  63.8(c)(7)(i)(D) to clarify that a 
CPMS is out of control when the system fails an accuracy audit.
    Quality control programs for CMS are addressed in Sec.  63.8(d). We 
are proposing to revise Sec.  63.8(d)(2)(ii) to clarify that written 
protocols for calibration drift determinations and adjustments would 
not necessarily apply to CPMS.
    Finally, we are proposing changes to Sec.  63.8(e), which address 
CMS performance evaluations. We are proposing to amend Sec.  63.8(e)(2) 
and (3)(i) to clarify that prior written notice of performance 
evaluations and performance evaluation test plans are required for CEMS 
or COMS only. In addition, we are proposing to revise Sec.  63.8(e)(4) 
to clarify that CPMS performance evaluations must be performed in 
accordance with the applicable QA procedure (i.e., Procedure 4).

VII. Summary of the Proposed Amendments to 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart SS.

A. What is the purpose of the amendments to subpart SS?

    We are proposing to amend subpart SS to ensure that the monitoring 
requirements for CPMS specified in subpart SS are consistent with the 
proposed PS-17 and Procedure 4.

B. What specific changes are we proposing to subpart SS?

    We are proposing several changes to the general monitoring 
requirements for control and recovery devices specified in Sec.  
63.996. The purpose of these changes is to clarify CPMS monitoring 
requirements and ensure that the requirements of subpart SS are 
consistent with the proposed PS-17 and Procedure 4.
    Under Sec.  63.996(c)(7), we are proposing to require that you 
satisfy the requirements of applicable performance specifications and 
QA procedures established under 40 CFR part 60. In addition, the 
amended subpart SS would require a CPMS cycle time of no longer than 15 
minutes and at least four equally-spaced measurements for each valid 
hour of data for all CPMS. Any device that is used to perform an 
initial validation or an accuracy audit of a CPMS would have to have 
NIST-traceable accuracy and an accuracy hierarchy of at least three.
    Section 63.996(c)(8), (9), and (10) of the amended subpart SS would 
specify requirements for temperature, pressure, and pH CPMS, 
respectively. Specific requirements would include the same minimum 
accuracies and data recording system resolution specified in the 
proposed PS-17 for the same type of CPMS. The proposed amendments to 
subpart SS would require owners or operators of affected CPMS to 
perform initial calibrations and initial validations of each CPMS. The 
initial

[[Page 59973]]

validation of a temperature or pressure CPMS could be performed by 
comparison to a calibrated measurement device or by any other method 
specified in applicable performance specifications for CPMS established 
under 40 CFR part 60, appendix B. The initial validation of a pH CPMS 
could be performed using a single point calibration or by any other 
method specified in applicable performance specifications for CPMS 
established under 40 CFR part 60, appendix B.
    The proposed amendments to subpart SS also would require accuracy 
audits at the same frequencies that would be required by proposed 
Procedure 4: quarterly for temperature and pressure CPMS, and weekly 
for pH CPMS. Accuracy audits also would be required for temperature and 
pressure CPMS following any period of 24 hours throughout which the 
measured value (temperature or pressure) exceeded the manufacturer's 
recommended maximum operating value. Owners or operators of affected 
temperature or pressure CPMS could perform accuracy audits by the 
redundant sensor method, by comparison to a calibrated measurement 
device, or by any other accuracy audit method specified in applicable 
QA procedures established under 40 CFR part 60, appendix F. For pH 
CPMS, owners or operators could perform accuracy audits by the 
redundant sensor method, single point calibration method, or by any 
other accuracy audit method specified in applicable QA procedures 
established under 40 CFR part 60, appendix F. In addition, quarterly 
visual inspections would be required for any temperature or pressure 
CPMS not equipped with a redundant sensor; for pH CPMS not equipped 
with a redundant sensor, monthly visual inspections would be required.

VIII. Rationale for Selecting the Proposed Requirements of Performance 
Specification 17

A. What information did we use to develop PS-17?

    To develop proposed PS-17, we considered the requirements of 
emission standards promulgated under 40 CFR parts 60, 61, and 63; State 
agency requirements for CPMS; manufacturer and vendor recommendations; 
and current operational and design practices in industry. To the extent 
possible, we also considered voluntary consensus standards for CPMS 
specifications and requirements, and this proposed rule lists several 
voluntary consensus standards that can be used as alternative methods 
for checking instrument sensor accuracies. Our review of voluntary 
consensus standards that apply to parameter monitoring devices is 
summarized in section XV.I of this document.
    To obtain information on current practices and recommendations 
regarding CPMS design, installation and operation, we developed three 
separate surveys (hereafter referred to as the CPMS surveys). We sent 
one survey to nine State agencies, one survey to nine CPMS 
manufacturers and vendors, and the third survey to nine companies with 
facilities that currently are subject to emission standards. Although 
the responses to the CPMS survey were far from complete, the surveys 
did provide useful information on equipment accuracies, operation and 
maintenance procedures, and calibration frequencies. To the extent 
possible, we used the information presented in the CPMS survey 
responses in the selection of the requirements for PS-17.

B. How did we select the applicability criteria for PS-17?

    To select the applicability criteria for PS-17, we considered the 
current parameter monitoring requirements that are now in effect under 
40 CFR parts 60, 61, and 63. The General Provisions to parts 60 and 63 
clearly establish the need for performance specifications for CPMS. 
Although the monitoring provisions of the part 61 General Provisions 
are not as detailed as the General Provisions requirements of parts 60 
and 63, we believe that the need for performance specifications for 
part 61 is also warranted. The need for CPMS performance specifications 
is most evident for part 63 in that standards promulgated under part 63 
establish enforceable operating limits for parameter monitoring 
systems. As stated in Sec.  63.6(e)(iii), operation and maintenance 
requirements, which include parameter monitor operating limits, ``* * * 
are enforceable independent of emissions limitations or other 
requirements in relevant standards.'' As a result, there is a need for 
additional QA and QC for part 63 rules to ensure that the equipment 
used to comply with those operating limits is properly designed, 
installed, operated, and maintained.
    We recognize that parameter monitoring data for sources subject to 
part 60 and 61 rules are not in themselves the basis for compliance 
determinations with the applicable rules, as is the case for sources 
subject to part 63 rules. Despite that, we believe that there still is 
a strong need for performance specifications to help ensure the quality 
of those monitoring system data. In addition, many of the sources 
regulated under parts 60 and 61 are also regulated under part 63. For 
these reasons, and to achieve consistency among the requirements for 
all of our emission standards, we have decided to require PS-17 to 
apply uniformly to all sources for which CPMS are required under parts 
60, 61, or 63. It should be noted that the proposed requirements for 
CPMS would not be retroactive, but would apply only to the operation, 
use, and maintenance of CPMS following promulgation of the final PS-17 
and Procedure 4 for CPMS.

C. How did we select the parameters that are addressed by PS-17?

    The parameters that currently are addressed by proposed PS-17 
(temperature, pressure, flow rate, pH, and conductivity) were selected 
primarily for two reasons: (1) These parameters are generally accepted 
as reliable indicators of the performance of many types of emission 
control devices, and (2) most part 60, 61, and 63 emission standards 
require continuous monitoring of one or more of these parameters. 
Temperature often is monitored as an indicator of the performance of 
incineration devices, such as thermal oxidizers, catalytic oxidizers, 
boilers, and process heaters used for the control of organic emissions. 
In addition, several part 60, 61, and 63 standards require the 
monitoring of condenser outlet temperature or carbon adsorber bed 
regeneration temperature. Monitoring of the temperature of scrubber 
liquid also is required by some part 60, 61, and 63 standards. Several 
existing standards require monitoring of pressure drop across control 
devices, such as wet scrubbers, mist eliminators, and baghouses. 
Several rules also require CPMS for monitoring scrubber liquid supply 
pressure. A number of part 60, 61, and 63 standards require monitoring 
of gas or liquid flow rates. Gas flow rate generally is an indicator of 
residence time in control devices. The gas and liquid flow rates 
through a wet scrubber are used to determine the liquid-to-gas ratio, 
and several promulgated rules require wet scrubber liquid flow rate 
monitoring. Many standards require mass flow CPMS for monitoring 
process feed or production rates. In addition, some existing standards 
require monitoring of carbon adsorber regeneration steam flow rate. 
Scrubber liquid pH is an important indicator of the performance of acid 
gas control. Finally, monitoring wet scrubber liquid conductivity 
provides a good indication of the solids content of the scrubber liquid 
and the need for blowdown. We recognize that other parameters also are

[[Page 59974]]

used to indicate control device performance or to monitor process 
operations, but we believed it less critical to address those other 
parameters at this time. However, we intend to address additional 
parameters in PS-17 as the need arises and resources permit.

D. Why did we include requirements for flow CPMS in PS-17 if PS-6 
already specifies requirements for flow sensors?

    The requirements of PS-6 (40 CFR part 60, appendix B) apply 
specifically to continuous emission rate monitoring systems (CERMS), 
which generally include one or more sensors to measure exhaust gas flow 
rate in addition to the sensor for measuring the concentration of the 
target pollutant. The proposed PS-17 would have much broader 
application, such as natural gas flow, steam flow through a carbon bed 
adsorber, and exhaust gas flow through an emission control device. The 
proposed PS-17 also would apply to liquid flow and mass flow rate 
monitoring. In addition to applicability, there are other significant 
differences in the requirements for flow rate sensors under PS-6 and 
flow CPMS under the proposed PS-17. The PS-6 specifies CD and RA test 
requirements for the flow sensor component of CERMS and generally 
references PS-2 for other requirements. Specifying CD requirements for 
CERMS in PS-6 is appropriate because PS-6 is meant to apply to 
monitoring systems that are used for calculating emission rates for 
determining compliance with emission limits or caps. The proposed PS-17 
would have no provisions for checking CD because it is intended 
primarily for monitoring indicators of control device performance and 
process parameters rather than emission rates. Consequently, we believe 
that less rigorous performance assessments are appropriate for CPMS 
that would be subject to PS-17. Finally, unlike PS-6, PS-17 was 
developed specifically for CPMS. As a result, we were able to 
incorporate into the proposed PS-17 more specific design, installation, 
and evaluation criteria than are provided in PS-6.

E. How did we select the equipment requirements?

    In selecting the equipment requirements for PS-17, our intent was 
to specify criteria that would allow flexibility in the equipment that 
owners and operators of affected CPMS choose, without compromising the 
quality of data produced by that equipment. The proposed PS-17 would 
specify two types of equipment: (1) The components that comprise a 
CPMS, and (2) the equipment needed to validate that CPMS.
1. CPMS Equipment Requirements
    For CPMS components, we selected equipment criteria for overall 
system accuracy and compatibility. The equipment requirements also 
would address the measurement range and resolution of the data 
recording system. The criterion for accuracy would simply be that the 
equipment must have a demonstrable capability of satisfying the 
accuracy requirement for the initial validation. We considered, but 
decided against, specifying sensor design criteria. By not specifying 
design criteria, we incorporated a considerable amount of flexibility 
into proposed PS-17 by allowing affected owners and operators to select 
any equipment, provided they can demonstrate that the CPMS meets the 
accuracy requirements for the initial validation. However, we do 
identify voluntary consensus standards that can be used as guidelines 
for selecting specific types of sensors.
    The proposed PS-17 would require a resolution of one-half the 
accuracy requirement or better to ensure that the accuracy of the CPMS 
can be calculated to at least the minimum number of significant figures 
for the data accuracy assessment to be meaningful. For example, if the 
data recorder of a pressure CPMS had a resolution of 0.24 kPa (1.0 in. 
wc), it would not be possible to determine that the CPMS is satisfying 
the required accuracy of 0.12 kPa (0.5 in. wc). Selecting a resolution 
of one-half the required accuracy ensures that measurements made during 
validation checks can be readily compared to the accuracy requirement. 
Furthermore, based on our review of equipment vendor catalogues, most 
CPMS on the market easily satisfy this minimum resolution. The 
requirements for measurement range were selected to ensure that the 
CPMS can detect and record measurements beyond the normal operating 
range. We believe that requiring a range of at least 20 
percent beyond the normal operating range is reasonable and the minimum 
measurement range needed to encompass most excursions. Owners and 
operators may want to select equipment with even wider ranges if it is 
likely that measurements beyond 20 percent of the normal 
operating range will occur. We made an exception to the measurement 
range requirement for pH CPMS by requiring the range of pH CPMS data 
recorders to cover the entire pH scale of 0 to 14 pH units. Our review 
of vendor literature indicates that, with few exceptions, pH CPMS are 
designed to record over the entire pH scale.
    Finally, the proposed PS-17 would require the electronic components 
of any CPMS to be internally compatible. We believe that internal 
compatibility is essential for ensuring the accuracy and durability of 
a CPMS.
2. CPMS Validation Equipment Requirements
    Two types of equipment would be needed to perform the initial 
validation check of a CPMS: (1) A device that is used to directly check 
the accuracy of the CPMS, and (2) work platforms, test ports, fittings, 
valves, and other equipment that are needed to conduct the initial 
validation. For the devices used to check CPMS accuracy, we would 
require NIST-traceable accuracy and an accuracy hierarchy of at least 
three. We would require that the accuracy of the device be NIST-
traceable as a way of ensuring the accuracy of the test device. We 
incorporated into PS-17 two exceptions to the NIST-traceability 
requirement. First, a mercury-in-glass or water-in-glass U-tube 
manometer could be used instead of a calibrated pressure measurement 
device with NIST-traceable accuracy when validating a pressure CPMS or 
a flow CPMS that uses a differential pressure flow meter. The reason 
for making this exception is that the accuracy of such manometers can 
be confirmed onsite by a simple measurement of the manometer scale. We 
also included an exception to the NIST-traceable accuracy and accuracy 
hierarchy for containers used to validate flow CPMS by either the 
volumetric or gravimetric methods. In such cases, the volume of the 
container could be determined onsite with sufficient accuracy to 
provide a reliable assessment of flow CPMS accuracy.
    In selecting the accuracy hierarchy for validation devices, we 
reviewed the requirements for existing standards and manufacturers' 
recommendations. Several voluntary consensus standards, such as ISA-
S37.3-1982 (R1995) and ISA-S37.6-1982 (R1995), which apply to pressure 
transducers, require that the testing or calibration device have an 
accuracy at least five times that of the device that is to be tested 
(i.e., an accuracy hierarchy of five). Other standards developed by the 
American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) and Military 
Specifications (MIL-SPEC) require an accuracy of four times that of the 
equipment being tested, which establishes an accuracy hierarchy of 
four. At least one equipment owner's manual specifies that testing 
devices have an accuracy of at least three times that of the

[[Page 59975]]

equipment being tested. We believe that requiring an accuracy hierarchy 
of three is adequate for the purposes of PS-17. Furthermore, a review 
of manufacturers' literature indicates that calibration devices with 
accuracies that would satisfy the accuracy hierarchy of the proposed 
PS-17 are readily available at reasonable cost.
    We decided to require owners and operators of affected CPMS to 
install work platforms, test ports, and other equipment needed for the 
initial validation check to ensure that the validation check and 
ongoing accuracy audits can be conducted properly. It is not necessary 
that a permanent work platform be installed.

F. How did we select the installation and location requirements?

    In the proposed PS-17, we would require owners and operators of 
affected CPMS to locate CPMS sensors where they will provide 
measurements representative of the parameter that is being monitored. 
The objective of this requirement is to help ensure that affected CPMS 
produce quality data. The location and installation requirements 
specified in the proposed PS-17 are generally consistent with the 
requirements of rules promulgated under parts 60, 61, and 63.

G. How did we select the initial QA measures?

    The initial QA measures specified in the proposed PS-17 include an 
electronic calibration and an initial validation check. The initial 
calibration generally is included as part of the manufacturer's 
recommended procedures for the installation and startup of CPMS; we 
would require these initial calibrations as a means of further ensuring 
that the CPMS is placed into operation correctly. We consider the 
initial validation necessary for demonstrating that the CPMS is 
providing quality data from the outset.

H. How did we select the methods for performing the initial validation 
check?

    In selecting the methods for validating CPMS, we considered 
existing voluntary consensus standards, State agency requirements, 
manufacturers' and vendors' recommendations, and practices used by 
industry. We tried to identify all methods that would provide a 
reliable measure of CPMS accuracy to allow owners and operators of 
affected CPMS as much flexibility as possible in choosing how to comply 
with PS-17. In general, the validation methods specified in the 
proposed PS-17 involve comparison of measurements made by the subject 
CPMS to measurements made using a calibrated device that measures or 
simulates the same parameter that is measured by the subject CPMS. A 
primary objective in selecting these methods is to identify procedures 
that assess the overall accuracy of the CPMS while assuring the quality 
of data that are used to assess compliance. The initial validation 
methods that rely on simulating sensor output actually measure how well 
the rest of the system responds to a simulated sensor signal and do not 
check the accuracy of the sensor itself. However, we believe that these 
methods are reliable because the sensors used in new CPMS are factory-
calibrated and, therefore, should be accurate.
    Two general consensus standards were located, but they were 
rejected for use with the proposed PS-17 because they are general 
references for safe practices while working with electronics. The two 
standards are: (1) ANSI/ISA S82.02.01-1999, ``Electric and Electronic 
Test, Measuring, Controlling, and Related Equipment: General 
Requirements''; and (2) ANSI/ISA S82.03-1988, ``Safety Standard for 
Electrical and Electronic Test, Measuring, Controlling, and Related 
Equipment (Electrical and Electronic Process Measurement and Control 
Equipment).''
1. Temperature CPMS Validation Methods
    For validating temperature CPMS, the proposed PS-17 would specify 
two methods: (1) Comparison to a calibrated temperature measurement 
device, and (2) temperature simulation using a calibrated simulation 
device. The first method is based on ASTM E 220-07e1, ``Standard Test 
Methods for Calibration of Thermocouples by Comparison Techniques'' 
(incorporated by reference--see Sec.  60.17). Although the ASTM E220-
07e1 was developed for thermocouples, it should be applicable to other 
types of temperature measurement devices. Handheld and otherwise 
portable temperature measurement devices with NIST-traceable accuracy 
are available from many equipment manufacturers and suppliers.
    The second validation method for temperature CPMS would involve the 
use of calibrated temperature simulators. Although this simulation 
method is not based on an existing standard method, calibrated 
simulators with NIST-traceable accuracy are readily available and often 
are used to check the accuracy of thermocouples and RTD's. Therefore, 
we believe this method is appropriate for the initial validation of 
thermocouple-based or RTD-based temperature CPMS, as well as for any 
other type of CPMS for which the sensor response can be simulated.
    Two other consensus standards relating to temperature measurement 
were located, but they were both rejected for use with the proposed PS-
17. The first standard, ASTM E839-05, ``Standard Test Methods for 
Sheathed Thermocouples and Sheathed Thermocouple Material'' specifies 
tests that pertain to material quality and instrument assembly rather 
than direct indicators of instrument performance; many of the tests 
specified are either destructive or impractical to perform at the 
installation site. The second standard, ASTM E1350-07, ``Standard Guide 
for Testing Sheathed Thermocouples, Thermocouple assemblies, and 
Connecting Wires Prior to, and After Installation or Service'' 
specifies tests to determine if specific components of thermocouple 
assembly were damaged during storage, shipment, or installation, but 
the tests specified do not provide a measure of accuracy.
2. Pressure CPMS Validation Methods
    For validating pressure CPMS, the proposed PS-17 would specify 
three methods for performing the initial validation check. The first 
method would involve comparison to a calibrated pressure measurement 
device. This method is based on the same principle as is the 
temperature CPMS comparison method. Handheld and portable pressure 
measurement devices with NIST-traceable accuracy are available from 
many equipment suppliers. Therefore, we believe this method is 
appropriate for validating pressure CPMS. The other two pressure CPMS 
validation methods in the proposed PS-17 are similar to the simulation 
method for validating temperature CPMS and are based on the same 
principle. The difference between the temperature simulation method and 
the two pressure simulation methods is that the latter generate 
pressures instead of electronic signals. One pressure simulation method 
uses a calibrated pressure source with NIST-traceable accuracy. These 
devices can simulate a range of pressures to high degrees of accuracy. 
The other pressure simulation method allows the use of any pressure 
source. The pressure applied by the pressure source is measured 
concurrently by the subject CPMS and a separate calibrated pressure 
measurement device. We believe these methods also can provide reliable 
assessments of pressure CPMS accuracy.
    Two other voluntary consensus standards relating to pressure

[[Page 59976]]

measurement were located, but they were both rejected for use with the 
proposed PS-17. Both standards (ISA-S37.6-1982 (R1995), 
``Specifications and Tests for Potentiometric Pressure Transducers'' 
and ISA-S37.3-1982 (R1995), ``Specifications and Tests for Strain Gage 
Pressure Transducers'') provide general calibration procedures, but 
neither specifies criteria for evaluating performance.
3. Flow CPMS Validation Methods
    For validating flow CPMS, the proposed PS-17 would specify seven 
methods. The volumetric and gravimetric methods are based on voluntary 
consensus standards and could be used to validate liquid flow CPMS. 
Both methods are described in ISA RP 16.6-1961, ``Methods and Equipment 
for Calibration of Variable Area Meters (Rotameters),'' and ISA RP 
31.1-1977, ``Specification, Installation, and Calibration of Turbine 
Flow Meters'' (incorporated by reference--see Sec.  60.17). The 
gravimetric method also is described in ANSI/ASME MFC-9M-1988, 
``Measurement of Liquid Flow in Closed Conduits by Weighing Method,'' 
and ASHRAE 41.8-1989, ``Standard Methods of Measurement of Flow of 
Liquids in Pipes Using Orifice Flow Meters'' (incorporated by 
reference--see Sec.  60.17). These methods are relatively simple to 
perform provided that the process flow that is monitored can be 
diverted easily to a suitable container for measurement. The 
gravimetric method also could be used to validate liquid mass flow or 
solid mass flow CPMS.
    The differential pressure measurement and pressure flow source 
simulation methods for validating liquid or gas flow CPMS would apply 
to flow CPMS that use differential pressure meters. These methods would 
require accurate pressure measurements and are based on the same 
principles as are the methods used for validating pressure CPMS. The 
primary difference between the pressure CPMS methods and these flow 
CPMS methods is that the flow CPMS would require the calculation of 
flow rates based on the pressure differentials measured. The flow 
calculation methods are described in ASME MFC-3M-2004, ``Measurement of 
Fluid Flow in Pipes Using Orifice, Nozzle, and Venturi'' (incorporated 
by reference--see Sec.  60.17). The calibrated pressure measurement 
devices and calibrated pressure sources with NIST-traceable accuracy 
needed for these validation methods are readily available. Therefore, 
we believe these methods are appropriate for validating flow CPMS 
accuracy.
    The electronic simulation method is identical to the simulation 
methods described in this section for temperature and pressure CPMS. 
This method would apply only to flow CPMS that use flow sensors that 
generate electronic signals, which can be simulated. Examples of flow 
CPMS that can be validated using this method are CPMS that use turbine 
meters or vortex shedding flow meters.
    To validate flow CPMS that measure gas flow, PS-17 also would 
specify the RA test using Reference Method 2, 2A, 2B, 2C, 2D, or 2F (40 
CFR part 60, appendix A-1), or 2G (40 CFR part 60, appendix A-2), as 
appropriate. The RA test for flow CPMS is similar to the RA test 
procedures specified in other performance specifications. We selected 
this method because it may be the method of choice for facilities that 
perform their own emissions testing, have the emissions test equipment, 
and are familiar with the procedures of the reference methods for 
determining stack gas velocity and volumetric flow rate.
    Finally, the proposed PS-17 would specify the material weight 
comparison method for validating solid mass flow CPMS. This method 
would apply only to CPMS that incorporate a belt conveyor, weigh scale, 
and totalizer. The method is based on the Belt-Conveyor Scale Systems 
Method, which is described in NIST Handbook 44--2002 Edition: 
Specifications, Tolerances, And Other Technical Requirements for 
Weighing and Measuring Devices (incorporated by reference--see Sec.  
60.17), as adopted by the 86th National Conference on Weights and 
Measures 2001. We selected this method because it is relatively simple 
and is the only method we could identify that applies specifically to 
belt conveyors systems, which are often used to monitor process raw 
material feed rates and/or production rates.
    Five other voluntary consensus standards relating to flow 
measurement were located, but they were rejected for use with the 
proposed PS-17. The first standard, ASTM D 3195-90 (2004), ``Standard 
Practice for Rotameter Calibration,'' specifies calibration procedures 
for rotameters used to determine air sample volumes, but applies only 
to air at ambient temperature and pressure. The second standard, ANSI/
ASME MFC-8M-2001, ``Fluid Flow in Closed Conduits--Connections for 
Pressure Signal Transmissions between Primary and Secondary Devices,'' 
only applies to installations where very high accuracy is required. The 
third standard, ASTM D 3464-96 (2007), ``Standard Test Method for 
Average Velocity in a Duct Using a Thermal Anemometer,'' refers to 
another ASTM standard for calibration procedures. The fourth standard, 
ASTM D5540-94a (2003), ``Standard Practice for Flow Control and 
Temperature Control for On-Line Water Sampling and Analysis,'' details 
the sampling of the stream, but provides no information on the 
calibration of the flow. The fifth standard, ``Process Monitors in the 
Portland Cement Industry'' (published by the EPA) notes that nuclear 
weigh belts have 0.5 percent operational accuracy, while gravimetric 
and impaction plate weigh belts have 1 percent accuracy; these 
accuracies may not hold true for all industries or applications.
4. pH CPMS Validation Methods
    For validating pH CPMS, the proposed PS-17 would specify two 
methods. The first method would entail comparison to a calibrated pH 
meter and is similar to the comparison methods specified for 
temperature and pressure CPMS. The second method would be a single 
point calibration method using a standard buffer solution. We selected 
these methods because they are relatively simple and are in common use 
by many facilities to calibrate pH meters.
5. Conductivity CPMS Validation Methods
    The proposed PS-17 would specify two methods for validation 
conductivity CPMS: Comparison to a calibrated conductivity meter and 
single point calibration. These methods are essentially the same as 
those used for validating pH CPMS, the only differences being the types 
of calibrated instrument and standard solutions used. We selected these 
methods because both are reliable, yet relatively simple to perform.
    Four other voluntary consensus standards relating to conductivity 
measurement were located, but they were rejected for use with the 
proposed PS-17. The first and second standards, ASTM E1511-93 (2005), 
``Standard Practice for Testing Conductivity Detectors Used in Liquid 
and Ion Chromatography,'' and ASTM D3370-95a (2003)e1, ``Standard 
Practices for Sampling Water from Closed Conduits,'' detail the mixing 
of conductivity standards, so they are good calibration methods, but 
far more time-consuming than using readily available pre-mixed 
conductivity standards as specified in PS-17. The third standard, ASTM 
D6504-07, ``Standard Practice for On-Line Determination of Cation 
Conductivity in High Purity Water,'' references other standards for

[[Page 59977]]

calibration procedures. The fourth standard, ASTM D3864-06, ``Standard 
Guide for Continual On-Line Monitoring Systems for Water Analysis,'' 
contains statistical methods that are more rigorous than needed.

I. How did we select the performance criteria for the initial 
validation check?

    In selecting the performance criteria for the initial validation 
checks of CPMS, we considered the accuracies required by existing rules 
and the capabilities of off-the-shelf equipment available from the 
manufacturers and vendors of CPMS components. Based on our review of 
CPMS manufacturer and vendor literature, equipment that satisfies the 
accuracy requirements specified in this proposed rule is readily 
available.
    Existing rules that require the use of CPMS specify a range of 
instrument or system accuracies. For some of the affected source 
categories, the proposed PS-17 would specify a higher minimum accuracy 
than is specified in the applicable subpart. However, this proposed 
rule would not increase the stringency of the underlying emission 
standards in such cases. Instead, the proposed PS-17 would improve the 
accuracy and reliability of, and reduce the uncertainty in, data used 
to demonstrate compliance with those emission standards.
1. Temperature CPMS Accuracy
    Several rules promulgated under parts 60, 61, and 63 specify an 
accuracy requirement for temperature CPMS. Most of these rules specify 
temperature accuracy in units of temperature ([deg]C) and as a 
percentage of the measured temperature. For example, 40 CFR part 60, 
subpart EE, requires thermal incinerator temperature CPMS to have an 
accuracy of 2.5 [deg]C or 0.75 percent. Although there is a wide range 
of accuracies specified in these rules, the accuracy required for 
temperature CPMS associated with high temperature applications, such as 
thermal oxidizers or boilers, generally range from 0.75 to 1.0 percent 
or from 0.5 [deg]C to 2.5 [deg]C (0.9 [deg]F to 4.5 [deg]F). For lower 
temperature applications, such as wet scrubbers, the specified percent 
accuracies often are not as stringent; that is, accuracies are 
specified as a higher percentage of the measured temperature. This 
distinction between low and high temperature applications is consistent 
with ANSI specifications for thermocouples. The minimum standard 
accuracies for ANSI Type J and K thermocouples in non-cryogenic 
applications are [deg]0.75 percent or 2.2 [deg]C (4 [deg]F), whichever is greater; for cryogenic applications, the 
minimum standard accuracies are 2.0 percent or 2.2 [deg]C (4 [deg]F), whichever is greater. The 
reason for specifying a higher percentage accuracy for lower 
temperature ranges is to offset the fact that the accuracy percentage 
applies to a lower value. In selecting the temperature accuracy 
requirements for the proposed PS-17, we decided to incorporate a 
similar distinction between higher temperatures (non-cryogenic 
applications) and lower temperatures (cryogenic applications). Our 
selection of temperature accuracies of 2.8 [deg]C (5 [deg]F) or [deg]1 
percent for non-cryogenic applications, and 2.8 [deg]C (5 [deg]F) or 
2.5 percent for cryogenic applications is consistent with 
the required accuracies for most standards, and we believe that the 
accuracies specified in proposed PS-17 are adequate for ensuring good 
quality data. In addition, our review of vendor literature indicates 
that temperature CPMS that satisfy these accuracy requirements are 
readily available at reasonable costs.
2. Pressure CPMS Accuracy
    Among the part 60, 61, and 63 rules that require pressure 
monitoring and also specify a minimum accuracy, the accuracy specified 
generally is either 0.25 to 0.5 kPa (1 to 2 in. wc) or 5 percent for 
pressure drop, and 5 to 15 percent for liquid supply pressure. These 
accuracies are easily achievable because most pressure transducers are 
accurate to 0.25 to 1.0 percent, and all but the lowest grade (Grade D) 
of ANSI-rated pressure gauges have accuracies better than 5 percent. 
For the proposed PS-17, we selected an accuracy requirement of 0.12 kPa 
(0.5 in. wc) or 5 percent, whichever is greater. The 0.12 
kPa criterion would apply only in low pressure applications. Some 
existing rules require pressure CPMS to have accuracies of 0.24 kPa 
(1.0 in. wc) or better. However, those accuracies generally do not 
apply to pressure CPMS in low pressure applications, where the 0.12 kPa 
accuracy would apply. We believe this level of accuracy specified for 
pressure CPMS is appropriate, considering that some control devices 
operate with pressure drops of less than 1.2 kPa (5 in. wc). For 
applications with pressures in excess of 2.5 kPa (10 in. wc), the 5 
percent accuracy criterion would apply. This criterion is consistent 
with most rules that specify pressure device accuracies, and CPMS that 
are capable of achieving this accuracy are readily available.
3. Flow CPMS Accuracy
    Rules promulgated under parts 60, 61, and 63 that require flow rate 
monitoring all specify flow rate accuracy in terms of percent. For 
liquid flow rate measurement, these rules generally require accuracies 
of 5 percent, and rules that require steam flow rate 
monitoring generally require an accuracy of 10 percent or 
better. We believe that these accuracies are reasonable, and we have 
incorporated them into the proposed PS-17. According to our review of 
vendor literature, flow CPMS that can achieve these accuracies are 
readily available.
    Unlike rules that address temperature and pressure monitoring, most 
existing rules that require continuous flow rate monitoring do not 
specify flow rate monitoring device accuracies in units of flow rate. 
However, there is an advantage to specifying accuracy in units of 
measurement as well as a percent; in low flow rate applications, an 
accuracy criterion based solely on percent can result in an 
unreasonably stringent accuracy requirement. For that reason, we have 
incorporated into the proposed PS-17 accuracy criteria as a percent of 
flow rate and in units of flow rate. The exceptions are the accuracy 
criteria for liquid mass flow rate and solid mass flow rate, both of 
which would be specified only as a percentage (i.e., 5 
percent). We concluded that it would not be reasonable to specify 
accuracy criteria for mass flow in units of mass flow because of the 
wide range of flow rates that could be monitored (e.g., carbon 
injection rate vs. rotary kiln raw material feed rate). We based the 5 
percent accuracy criterion primarily on vendor literature.
    Recognizing the differences in the relative magnitudes and the 
commonly used units of flow rate measurement for liquids and gases, we 
have specified in the proposed PS-17 separate accuracy criteria for 
liquid and gas flow rates. For liquid flow rate CPMS, which typically 
are associated with wet scrubber operation, the minimum accuracy would 
be 1.9 L/min (0.5 gal/min) or 5 percent, whichever is 
greater. For gas flow rate CPMS, which often are used to monitor stack 
gas flow rate or natural gas fuel flow rate, PS-17 would require a 
minimum accuracy of 280 L/min (10 ft\3\/min) or 5 percent, 
whichever is greater.
    The proposed PS-17 also would specify a relative accuracy criterion 
for owners or operators who choose to validate a gas flow rate CPMS 
using the RA test, which is specified in section 8.6(6) of PS-17. In 
such cases, owners or operators would have to demonstrate that the 
affected CPMS achieves a relative accuracy of 20 percent or better. The 
relative accuracy criterion of 20 percent was selected because that 
value

[[Page 59978]]

is consistent with the relative accuracy required by most performance 
specifications promulgated under 40 CFR part 60.
4. pH CPMS Accuracy
    Although several subparts of 40 CFR parts 60, 61, and 63 require pH 
monitoring, the only rule to specify an accuracy requirement for pH 
CPMS is 40 CFR part 61, subpart E; the accuracy required by that rule 
for pH measurement devices is 10 percent. Our review of 
manufacturer and vendor literature indicates that pH CPMS generally 
have accuracies of 0.01 to 0.15 pH units. Based 
largely on the vendor literature, we decided to require pH CPMS to have 
accuracies of 0.2 pH units or better. An accuracy of 0.2 pH 
units should allow most facilities that currently monitor pH to 
continue using their pH CPMS, provided the CPMS satisfies the other 
equipment criteria specified in PS-17.
5. Conductivity CPMS Accuracy
    Because none of the part 60, 61, or 63 rules specify accuracy 
requirements for conductivity CPMS, we reviewed manufacturer and vendor 
literature, which indicates that conductivity CPMS generally have 
accuracies of 1 to 2 percent. Conductivity 
measurements range from 0.1 to 200,000 micromhos per centimeter 
([mu]mhos/cm) (0.1 to 200,000 microsiemens per centimeter ([mu]S/cm)) 
at 25 [deg]C (77 [deg]F). To account for this large range and the 
accuracies that can be met by most available instruments, we decided to 
require conductivity CPMS to have accuracies of 5 percent. 
An accuracy requirement of 5 percent should allow most 
facilities that currently monitor conductivity to continue using their 
conductivity CPMS, provided their CPMS satisfies the other equipment 
criteria specified in PS-17.

J. How did we select the recordkeeping requirements?

    The proposed PS-17 would require owners or operators of affected 
CPMS to maintain records that identify their CPMS and document 
performance evaluations, and to retain those records for a period of at 
least 5 years. These requirements are consistent with the recordkeeping 
requirements specified in Sec.  63.10 of the General Provisions to part 
63.

IX. Rationale for Selecting the Proposed Requirements of Procedure 4

A. What information did we use to develop Procedure 4?

    The information used to develop Procedure 4 is essentially the same 
information used to develop PS-17 and includes information from 
existing standards, manufacturer and vendor recommendations, and 
current practices in industry. Section VIII.A of this document provides 
additional details on how this information was obtained.

B. Why did we decide to apply Procedure 4 to all CPMS that are subject 
to PS-17?

    Rules promulgated under part 63 establish enforceable operating 
limits for parameter monitoring systems. As is the case for CEMS that 
are used to demonstrate continuous compliance and are subject to 
Procedure 1 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix F, there is a need for ongoing 
QA requirements to ensure that the data generated by CPMS are reliable 
and accurate. Although the data generated by CPMS that are required 
under parts 60 and 61 are not used directly to demonstrate compliance, 
we believe there still is a need to ensure the quality of those data is 
maintained. For that reason, we believe it is warranted to require that 
all part 60, 61, and 63 sources that are required to install and 
operate CPMS be subject to PS-17 and Procedure 4.

C. How did we select the accuracy audit procedures?

    With the exception of audit procedures for CPMS with redundant 
sensors, the accuracy audit procedures specified in the proposed 
Procedure 4 would essentially be the same procedures that could be used 
to perform the initial validation checks that would be required by PS-
17. For CPMS with redundant sensors, we selected the accuracy audit 
procedure of comparing the values of the parameter measured by the two 
sensors because that method currently is used by many industrial 
facilities to ensure the accuracy of their parameter monitoring 
systems. The most significant distinction between the audit procedures 
specified in the proposed Procedure 4 and the initial validation 
procedures specified in the proposed PS-17 is that the accuracy audit 
procedures address sensor accuracy, whereas some of the initial 
validation procedures do not address sensor accuracy. When CPMS are 
first installed, we assume sensors to have been manufactured and 
factory-calibrated under stringent QC requirements. Consequently, the 
proposed PS-17 does not require the initial validation check procedures 
to include sensor accuracy assessments. However, after a CPMS has been 
placed into operation, and the sensor is subjected to process 
environments, loss of calibration can occur quickly. Recognizing that 
possibility, we have incorporated a check of sensor accuracy into the 
accuracy audit procedures of the proposed Procedure 4. Some audit 
procedures assess the accuracy of the overall CPMS, including the 
sensor. For those procedures, a separate accuracy assessment of the 
sensor would not be necessary. For those audit procedures that do not 
assess the accuracy of the entire CPMS, we have incorporated into the 
proposed Procedure 4 a separate accuracy check of the CPMS sensor. 
These sensor accuracy assessments are based on voluntary consensus 
standards.

D. How did we select the accuracy audit frequencies?

    To determine the appropriate audit frequencies, we reviewed the 
requirements of existing rules, the procedures practiced by industry, 
and vendor recommendations. Most of the rules promulgated under 40 CFR 
parts 60, 61, and 63 do not specify calibration or audit frequencies. 
Those rules that do specify accuracy audit frequencies usually require 
annual calibrations; a few rules require semi-annual or quarterly 
calibrations of CPMS. The information provided by industry in its 
responses to the CPMS survey indicated that the typical calibration 
frequency for most CPMS is once per year. Two facilities perform 
calibrations on thermocouples semiannually. One of those facilities 
also checks pressure meter calibration semiannually. Another facility 
reported that it checks and calibrates its pH CPMS on a weekly basis. 
With the exception of pH CPMS, Procedure 4 would require quarterly 
accuracy audits. This frequency is comparable to the audit frequencies 
required for CEMS specified in many part 60, 61, and 63 standards, and 
we believe that quarterly accuracy assessments are warranted for CPMS 
to ensure that monitoring data are accurate. The available information 
indicates that pH sensors require more frequent calibration than do 
other types of sensors, and weekly calibration of pH CPMS is common. 
Therefore, we believe that weekly accuracy audits are warranted for pH 
CPMS.

E. How did we select the performance criteria for accuracy audits?

    The performance criteria for the accuracy audits specified in 
Procedure 4 are identical to those specified for the initial validation 
check required by PS-17. The rationale for the validation check 
accuracy requirements is described in section VIII.H of this document.

[[Page 59979]]

F. How did we select the recordkeeping requirements?

    The proposed Procedure 4 would require owners or operators of 
affected CPMS to maintain records of all accuracy audits and corrective 
actions taken to return the CPMS to normal operation and to retain 
those records for a period of at least 5 years. These requirements are 
consistent with the recordkeeping requirements specified in Sec.  63.10 
of the General Provisions to part 63.

X. Rationale for Selecting the Proposed Amendments to Procedure 1

A. How did we select the amendments to Procedure 1 that apply to PS-9?

    Before drafting the proposed amendments to Procedure 1 (40 CFR part 
60, appendix F), we reviewed the procedure and PS-9 (40 CFR part 60, 
appendix B) to identify those sections of Procedure 1 that did not 
address, or were inconsistent with, the specific requirements of PS-9. 
We identified three such sections of Procedure 1: section 1, 
Applicability and Principle; section 4, CD Assessment; and section 5, 
Data Accuracy Assessment. The applicability section of Procedure 1 
applies to CEMS that are used for monitoring a single pollutant or 
diluent. The section does not address CEMS that can be used for 
monitoring more than one pollutant, such as those that are subject to 
PS-9. Therefore, it is necessary to amend section 1 to clarify that 
Procedure 1 would apply to single and multiple pollutant CEMS.
    Section 4.1 of Procedure 1 requires owners or operators of affected 
CEMS to check the daily CD at two concentration values. In the case of 
a single pollutant CEMS, there is no ambiguity in this requirement. 
However, for multiple pollutant CEMS, Procedure 1 is unclear as to 
which pollutant can or must be used for the daily CD check. We are 
proposing to amend Procedure 1 to allow owners and operators of 
affected CEMS to perform the CD check using any of the target 
pollutants specified in the applicable subpart.
    Section 5 of Procedure 1, which addresses data accuracy audits, is 
inconsistent with the requirements of PS-9. Procedure 1 requires RATA's 
at least once every four calendar quarters; the accuracy audit 
requirement for the other three calendar quarters can be satisfied by 
performing either RATA's, CGA's, or RAA's. However, PS-9 requires 
quarterly CGA's and does not address RATA's or RAA's. To resolve this 
inconsistency in Procedure 1, these proposed amendments would add 
section 5.1.5, which would clarify that owners and operators of CEMS 
subject to PS-9 are not required to perform RATA's; the accuracy audit 
requirement would have to be satisfied by performing quarterly CGA's. 
The CGA's would have to be conducted at two points for each target 
pollutant specified in the applicable subpart. Finally, the proposed 
new section would clarify that these quarterly CGA's satisfy the 
quarterly CGA requirement of PS-9.

B. How did we select the amendments to Procedure 1 that apply to PS-15?

    After reviewing Procedure 1, we identified three sections that 
either were inconsistent with the requirements of PS-15 (40 CFR part 
60, appendix B) or did not address the unique characteristics of CEMS 
that are subject to PS-15. The sections identified were section 1, 
Applicability and Principle; section 4, CD Assessment; and section 5, 
Data Accuracy Assessment. As explained in the section X.A of this 
document, these proposed amendments to section 1 of Procedure 1 would 
clarify that the procedure also applies to CEMS that are used for 
monitoring more than one pollutant or diluent. To address the CD 
assessment of CEMS subject to PS-15, we are proposing to add three 
paragraphs to section 4 of Procedure 1. Unlike other types of CEMS, 
extractive FTIR CEMS are not generally checked for CD. Instead, PS-15 
specifies other procedures for checking these instruments on a daily 
basis. In these proposed amendments we are adding section 4.1.2 to 
Procedure 1 to specify the proper procedures for checking FTIR CEMS 
performance that are comparable to the CD checks of other types of 
CEMS. These daily assessments serve the same purpose as do the daily CD 
check requirements for other types of CEMS. We also recognize that the 
term ``excessive CD,'' as defined in section 4.3 of Procedure 1, needs 
to be clarified for CEMS subject to PS-15. To address this need, we are 
proposed to add section 4.3.3 to Procedure 1. Section 4.3.3 would 
clarify how excessive CD is defined for CEMS subject to PS-15 and also 
would specify when such CEMS are out of control.
    Section 4.4 of Procedure 1 addresses CEMS data reporting and 
recordkeeping. Because of the unique data storage requirements for PS-
15, we believe adding another paragraph to section 4.4 of Procedure 1 
is warranted. The new paragraph in section 4.4 essentially would 
reference the data storage requirements specified in PS-15.
    The Procedure 1 specifies three methods for assessing data 
accuracy: RATA's, CGA's, and RAA's. On the other hand, PS-15 specifies 
a different set of accuracy audit procedures: audit sample checks, 
audit spectra checks, and an independent accuracy assessment performed 
by us. Consequently, there is an obvious need to amend Procedure 1 if 
we were to extend the applicability of Procedure 1 to include CEMS 
subject to PS-15. To resolve this inconsistency, we would add section 
5.1.6 to Procedure 1. We modeled section 5.1.6 after the accuracy audit 
requirements that were already incorporated in Procedure 1. The most 
rigorous of the accuracy assessment methods specified in PS-15 is the 
audit sample check. In this respect, the audit sample check is 
analogous to the RATA. For consistency with the requirements for other 
types of CEMS, we would require audit sample checks for CEMS subject to 
PS-15 to be performed at least once every four calendar quarters, as is 
the case for RATA's for other types of CEMS. For the other three 
calendar quarters, we would allow owners and operators of CEMS subject 
to PS-15 to perform any of the three audit procedures specified in PS-
15 (audit sample check, audit spectra check, and submitting spectra for 
independent analysis), with one exception. The audit spectra check 
assesses the accuracy of the analytical measurement but not the 
sampling system measurement. Therefore, we would allow owners and 
operators of CEMS subject to PS-15 to use the audit spectra check only 
once every four quarters to satisfy the accuracy audit requirement of 
Procedure 1. Finally, proposed section 5.1.6 of Procedure 1 would 
clarify that the quarterly accuracy assessments required by Procedure 1 
satisfy the quarterly or semiannual QA/QC checks required by PS-15.

XI. Rationale for Selecting the Proposed Amendments to the General 
Provisions to Parts 60, 61, and 63

A. How did we select the amendments to the General Provisions to parts 
60, 61, and 63?

    The proposed PS-17 and Procedure 4 would specify CPMS accuracies, 
audit frequencies, and other requirements that differ from some of the 
requirements for CPMS specified in applicable subparts to parts 60, 61, 
and 63. Eliminating the resulting discrepancies would require either 
amending each of the applicable subparts or amending the General 
Provisions to those parts. We concluded that amending the General 
Provisions would be the preferred approach for avoiding such conflicts 
or discrepancies.
    After reviewing the General Provisions to parts 60 and 61 that 
apply

[[Page 59980]]

specifically to monitoring (i.e., Sec. Sec.  60.13 and 61.14), we 
decided to amend only the applicability sections of those parts. By 
stating that, upon promulgation, performance specifications and QA 
procedures for CPMS (i.e., the proposed PS-17 and Procedure 4) apply to 
CPMS instead of requirements in the applicable subparts to parts 60 and 
61, we believe we can eliminate any discrepancies between the 
applicable subparts and the proposed PS-17 and Procedure 4. We 
concluded that this proposed rule would not conflict with the 
monitoring requirements specified in subsequent sections of the General 
Provisions to parts 60 and 61, and further amendments to those General 
Provisions were unnecessary.
    With respect to the General Provisions to part 63, we identified 
several inconsistencies between the requirements specified in Sec.  
63.8 and the requirements in the proposed PS-17 and Procedure 4. In 
this action, we are proposing several changes to Sec.  63.8 to 
eliminate those inconsistencies.
    We believe that the installation requirement of Sec.  63.8(c)(2) 
should apply to all CMS, and not simply CEMS; we are proposing to amend 
Sec.  63.8(c)(2) accordingly. We believe that the requirement for 
continuous operation specified in Sec.  63.8(c)(4) should apply to all 
CMS, and not just CEMS and COMS as now specified in the General 
Provisions.
    Section 63.8(c)(4) addresses cycle time for CEMS and COMS, but not 
for CPMS. We believe it is necessary to address CPMS cycle time also. 
Consequently, we are proposing to add Sec.  63.8(c)(4)(iii) for that 
purpose.
    The last three sentences of Sec.  63.8(c)(6) address calibration 
and daily checks of CPMS. We are proposing to delete these provisions 
because the proposed PS-17 and Procedure 4 would address CPMS operation 
and maintenance more thoroughly.
    Section 63.8(c)(7) of the General Provisions defines CMS that are 
out of control in terms of excessive calibration drift checks and 
periodic audits that apply to CEMS and COMS, but not to CPMS. 
Consequently, we are proposing to amend Sec.  63.8(c)(7) to clarify 
that, for CPMS, out of control is defined in terms of failed accuracy 
audits only. The proposed amendments would clarify in Sec.  
63.8(c)(7)(i)(A) that out of control, when defined in terms of 
excessive calibration drift, applies to CEMS and COMS and not CPMS. We 
also would revise Sec.  63.8(c)(7)(i)(B), which relates out of control 
to failed performance test audits, relative accuracy audits, relative 
accuracy test audits, and linearity test audits that apply to CEMS and 
COMS, but not to CPMS. We propose adding Sec.  63.8(c)(7)(i)(D) to 
clarify that a CPMS is out of control when it fails an accuracy audit.
    Quality control programs for CMS are addressed in Sec.  63.8(d). We 
are proposing to revise Sec.  63.8(d)(2)(ii) to clarify that the 
requirement for written protocols for calibration drift determinations 
and adjustments would apply only to applicable CMS; that is, the 
requirement would apply to CEMS and COMS, but not to CPMS because 
calibration drift is not relevant to many CPMS.
    Finally, we are proposing changes to Sec.  63.8(e), which address 
CMS performance evaluations. We are proposing to amend Sec.  63.8(e)(2) 
and (3)(i) to clarify that prior written notice of performance 
evaluations and performance evaluation test plans are required for CEMS 
or COMS only. Under the proposed PS-17 and Procedure 4, CPMS initial 
validations and/or accuracy audits would be required at least quarterly 
using procedures that are much simpler than those required for CEMS or 
COMS performance tests. Consequently, we believe that requiring written 
notifications and test plans is unnecessary for CPMS performance 
evaluations. We also are proposing to revise Sec.  63.8(e)(4), which 
addresses conducting CMS performance evaluations during any required 
performance test. Currently, Sec.  63.8(e)(4) states that CMS 
performance evaluations must be conducted in accordance to the 
applicable performance specification. We are proposing to clarify 
paragraph (e)(4) to state that such evaluations of CMS performance 
should be conducted in accordance with the applicable performance 
specification or QA procedure because procedures for performing CPMS 
accuracy audits would be specified in the proposed Procedure 4.

XII. Rationale for Selecting the Proposed Amendments to 40 CFR Part 63, 
Subpart SS

    Our proposed amendments to subpart SS (65 FR 76444, December 6, 
2000) included revisions to the general monitoring requirements 
specified in Sec.  63.996. At that time, we had not completed our 
development of performance specifications and QA procedures for CPMS, 
which we are now proposing as PS-17 and Procedure 4, respectively. 
After reviewing the public comments on the December 6, 2000 proposal 
and comparing the requirements of PS-17 and Procedure 4 to the proposed 
changes to Sec.  63.996, we decided that further revisions to Sec.  
63.996 are warranted to ensure consistency between the monitoring 
requirements of subpart SS, PS-17, and Procedure 4. We identified the 
requirements of the proposed PS-17 and Procedure 4 that were most 
relevant to the generic MACT source categories and incorporated those 
requirements into the amendments that we are proposing for subpart SS. 
We believe that these proposed amendments would ensure consistency with 
PS-17, Procedure 4, and subpart SS.

XIII. Summary of Environmental, Energy, and Economic Impacts

A. What are the impacts of PS-17 and Procedure 4?

    The proposed PS-17 and Procedure 4 would apply only to CPMS that 
are required under an applicable subpart to 40 CFR parts 60, 61, or 63; 
that is, this proposed rulemaking would not require the installation or 
operation of CPMS, other than those already required by rule. The cost 
and economic impact analyses that are completed as part of the 
rulemaking process for any part 60, 61, or 63 rule account for the 
costs associated with any required CPMS that would be subject to PS-17 
and Procedure 4. Those costs, which are not attributable to this 
proposed rulemaking, include the capital costs for equipment, 
installation costs, the costs for operating and maintaining the CPMS, 
and the costs for maintaining records and reporting CPMS data. However, 
in some cases, the proposed PS-17 and Procedure 4 would require more 
accurate sensors and more frequent accuracy audits and inspections than 
would be required otherwise for some source categories. Therefore, the 
incremental costs associated with replacing those sensors and 
conducting additional audits and inspections can be attributed to the 
proposed PS-17 and Procedure 4. Because the applicability of the 
proposed PS-17 and Procedure 4 will be phased in over a 5-year period, 
we estimated the costs for each of those initial 5 years. Based on 
those estimates, the nationwide additional annualized costs to 
implement the proposed PS-17 and Procedure 4 amount to $17.7 million 
for the first year, $26.4 million for the second, $35.0 million for the 
third year, $43.7 million for the fourth year, and $52.3 million for 
the fifth year of this proposed rule. The average annualized cost per 
source is estimated to be $320, $470, $610, $740, and $870 for the 
first through fifth years, respectively. These costs are based on the 
assumption that affected facilities would not choose to use redundant

[[Page 59981]]

sensors. If facilities elected to use redundant sensors, the estimated 
compliance costs for the proposed PS-17 and Procedure 4 would be 
reduced.
    The proposed PS-17 and Procedure 4 would improve the quality of the 
data measured and recorded by CPMS and thereby would also reduce the 
uncertainty in those data. However, this proposed rulemaking would not 
require the installation or operation of additional CPMS. Therefore, 
with respect to other potential impacts associated with this proposed 
rulemaking, we have concluded that PS-17 and Procedure 4, as proposed, 
would have no energy or environmental impacts beyond those that have 
already been attributed by to the various part 60, 61, and 63 rules 
that require the use of CPMS.

B. What are the impacts of the amendments to Procedure 1?

    The proposed amendments to Procedure 1 clarify how owners and 
operators of CEMS subject to PS-9 or PS-15 must satisfy the 
requirements already established by Procedure 1. Therefore, we have 
determined that there are no additional impacts that should be 
attributed to these proposed amendments to Procedure 1.

C. What are the impacts of the amendments to the General Provisions to 
parts 60, 61, and 63?

    The proposed amendments to 40 CFR 60.13 and 40 CFR 61.14 would 
eliminate any discrepancies between the requirements for CPMS specified 
in an applicable subpart to parts 60 or 61 and requirements for CPMS 
specified in the proposed PS-17 and Procedure 4. The amendments to 40 
CFR 63.8 that we are proposing clarify how the monitoring requirements 
of the General Provisions to part 63 apply to CPMS. These proposed 
amendments do not add any additional requirements to what is already 
required by the General Provisions to parts 60, 61, and 63. 
Consequently, we have concluded that the proposed amendments do not 
have any significant environmental, energy, or economic impacts on the 
affected source categories.

D. What are the impacts of the amendments to subpart SS?

    The proposed amendments to 40 CFR part 63, subpart SS clarify the 
monitoring requirements for CPMS that are required under subpart SS and 
the General Provisions to part 63. Furthermore, these proposed 
amendments provide consistency between those monitoring requirements 
and the proposed requirements of PS-17 and Procedure 4. For these 
reasons, we have concluded that there are no significant environmental, 
energy, or economic impacts associated with the proposed amendments.

XIV. Solicitation of Comments and Public Participation

    We want to have full public participation in arriving at our final 
decisions, and we encourage comment on all aspects of this proposal 
from all interested parties. Interested parties should submit 
supporting data and detailed analyses with their comments so we can 
make maximum use of them. Information on where and when to submit 
comments is listed in ``Comments'' under the DATES and ADDRESSES 
sections.

XV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the 
terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is 
therefore not subject to review under the Executive Order.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection requirements in this proposed rule have 
been submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The 
Information Collection Request (ICR) document prepared by EPA has been 
assigned EPA ICR number 2269.01.
    The information collection requirements for the proposed PS-17 and 
Procedure 4 are based on the requirements in the General Provisions to 
parts 60, 61, and 63, which are mandatory for all operators subject to 
NSPS or NESHAP. These recordkeeping and reporting requirements are 
specifically authorized by section 114 of the CAA (42 U.S.C. 7414). All 
information submitted to EPA pursuant to the recordkeeping and 
reporting requirements for which a claim of confidentiality is made is 
safeguarded according to EPA's policies set forth in 40 CFR 2, subpart 
B.
    This proposed rule would not require any notifications or reports 
beyond those required by the General Provisions to parts 60, 61, and 
63. The recordkeeping requirements require only the specific 
information needed to determine compliance.
    The annual monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping burden for this 
collection of information (averaged over the first 3 years after the 
effective date of the rule) is estimated to be 318,662 labor hours per 
year at a total annual cost of $23.3 million. This burden estimate 
includes time for the maintenance and evaluation of monitoring system 
operation. Total capital costs associated with the monitoring 
requirements over the 3-year period of the ICR are estimated at $18.2 
million. Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required 
to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a 
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's 
regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
    To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy 
of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for 
minimizing respondent burden, EPA has established a public docket for 
this rule, which includes this ICR, under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2006-0640. Submit any comments related to the ICR to EPA and OMB. See 
ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this notice for where to submit 
comments to EPA. Send comments to OMB at the Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, 
NW., Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Office for EPA. Since OMB is 
required to make a decision concerning the ICR between 30 and 60 days 
after October 9, 2008, a comment to OMB is best assured of having its 
full effect if OMB receives it by November 10, 2008. The final rule 
will respond to any OMB or public comments on the information 
collection requirements contained in this proposal.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency 
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative 
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the 
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, 
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of this proposed rule on 
small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) a small business as 
defined by the Small Business Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13 
CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government 
of a city, county, town, school district or special district with a 
population of less than 50,000; and (3)

[[Page 59982]]

a small organization that is any not-for-profit enterprise which is 
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of this proposed rule on 
small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Because of 
the number of different source categories involved and the small cost 
per facility, a case study approach was used to assess the likelihood 
of significant impact on small entities. A subset of source categories 
that most likely would be the most impacted was chosen by two criteria. 
The first criterion was whether or not the underlying regulation was 
expected to have adverse small business impacts at the time of 
promulgation. The second criterion was the relative magnitude of the 
estimated costs for complying with the CPMS Rule on a per-plant basis. 
In none of the case studies were costs likely to approach 1 percent of 
sales because the average per facility costs were always less than 3 
percent of the compliance costs of underlying regulation.
    We continue to be interested in the potential impacts of this 
proposed rule on small entities and welcome comments on issues related 
to such impacts.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Pub. 
L. 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the 
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal 
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, we 
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit 
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that 
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in 
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any 
one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement 
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires us to identify 
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt 
the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative 
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, 
section 205 allows us to adopt an alternative other than the least 
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the 
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that 
alternative was not adopted. Before we establish any regulatory 
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under 
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must 
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling 
officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely 
input in the development of our regulatory proposals with significant 
Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and 
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory 
requirements.
    EPA has determined that this proposed rule does not contain a 
Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more 
for State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the 
private sector in any one year. The nationwide additional annualized 
costs to implement the proposed rule are estimated to be $52.3 million 
in the fifth year of this proposed rule. Thus, this proposed rule is 
not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
    EPA has determined that this proposed rule contains no regulatory 
requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments. The requirements of PS-17 and Procedure 4 have already 
been addressed under the General Provisions to parts 60, 61, and 63, 
and in the applicable subparts that require the installation and 
operation of CPMS. Furthermore, the amendments to Procedure 1 merely 
clarify the applicability and requirements of the procedure. Finally, 
these proposed amendments to the monitoring requirements in the General 
Provisions to parts 60, 61, and 63, as well as to subpart SS are made 
to ensure consistency with PS-17 and Procedure 4.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August 
10, 1999), requires us to develop an accountable process to ensure 
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the 
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' 
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the 
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct 
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
    This proposed rule does not have federalism implications. It will 
not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship 
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution 
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, 
as specified in Executive Order 13132. The requirements of PS-17 and 
Procedure 4 have already been addressed under the General Provisions to 
parts 60, 61, and 63, and in the applicable subparts that require the 
installation and operation of CPMS. Furthermore, these proposed 
amendments to Procedure 1 merely clarify the applicability and 
requirements of the procedure. Finally, these proposed amendments to 
the monitoring requirements specified in the General Provisions to 
parts 60, 61, and 63, as well as to subpart SS are made to ensure 
consistency with PS-17 and Procedure 4. Thus, Executive Order 13132 
does not apply to this rule.
    In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with our 
policy to promote communications between us and State and local 
governments, we specifically solicit comment on this proposed rule from 
State and local officials.

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

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination 
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), 
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful 
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory 
policies that have tribal implications.'' This proposed rule does not 
have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. The 
requirements of PS-17 and Procedure 4 have already been addressed under 
the General Provisions to parts 60, 61, and 63, and in the applicable 
subparts that require the installation and operation of CPMS. 
Furthermore, these proposed amendments to Procedure 1 merely clarify 
the applicability and requirements of the procedure. Finally, these 
proposed amendments to the monitoring requirements specified in the 
General Provisions to parts 60, 61, and 63, as well as to subpart SS 
are made to ensure consistency with PS-17 and Procedure 4. Thus, 
Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this proposed rule. EPA 
specifically solicits additional comment on this proposed rule from 
tribal officials.

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

    Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of Children from Environmental 
Health

[[Page 59983]]

Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any 
rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as 
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental 
health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a 
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets 
both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or 
safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the 
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and 
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
    EPA interprets EO 13045 as applying only to those regulatory 
actions that concern health or safety risks, such that the analysis 
required under section 5-501 of the Order has the potential to 
influence the regulation. This proposed rule is not subject to 
Executive Order 13045 because it does not establish an environmental 
standard intended to mitigate health or safety risks.

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

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

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Pub. L. No. 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its 
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with 
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards 
are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, 
sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or 
adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to 
provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not 
to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards (VCS).
    This proposed rulemaking involves technical standards. EPA proposes 
to use the following VCS: American Society for Testing and Materials 
(ASTM) E220-07e1, ASTM D1293-99 (2005), ASTM D1125-95 (2005), ASTM 
D5391-99 (2005), ASTM E251-92 (2003), ASTM E452-02 (2007), ASTM E585/E 
585M-04, ASTM E644-06, ASTM E235-06, ASTM E608/E 608M-06, ASTM E696-07, 
ASTM E1129/E1129M-98 (2002), ASTM E1137/E1137M-04, and ASTM E1159-98 
(2003); International Organization for Standardization (ISO) MC96.1-
1982 and ISO 10790:1999; American Society of Mechanical Engineers 
(ASME) B40.100-2005 and ASME MFC-3M-2004; American Society of Heating, 
Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) 41.8-1989; 
American National Standards Institute (ANSI)/ASME MFC-4M-1986 (R2003), 
ANSI/ASME MFC-6M-1998 (R2005), ANSI/ASME MFC-7M-1987 (R2001), ANSI/ASME 
MFC-9M-1988; ANSI/Instrumentation, Systems, and Automation Society 
(ISA) RP 31.1-1977, ISA RP 16.6-1961, ISA RP 16.5-1961, and ISA 
8316:1987; and National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) 
Handbook 44--2002 Edition (incorporated by reference--see 40 CFR 
60.17). The Agency conducted a search to identify potentially 
applicable voluntary consensus standards. While the Agency identified 
15 VCS as being potentially applicable to PS-17 and Procedure 4, we do 
not propose to use these standards in this proposed rulemaking. The use 
of these VCS would be impractical for the purposes of this proposed 
rule. See the docket for this proposed rule for the reasons for these 
determinations for the standards.
    EPA welcomes comments on this aspect of this proposed rulemaking 
and, specifically, invites the public to identify potentially-
applicable voluntary consensus standards and to explain why such 
standards should be used in this regulation.
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) establishes 
Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision 
directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and 
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission 
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high 
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, 
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income 
populations in the United States.
    EPA has determined that this proposed rule will not have 
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental 
effects on minority or low-income populations because it increases the 
level of environmental protection for all affected populations without 
having any disproportionately high and adverse human health or 
environmental effects on any population, including any minority or low-
income population. The proposed rule will help to ensure that emission 
control devices are operated properly and maintained as needed, thereby 
helping to ensure compliance with emission standards, which benefit all 
affected populations.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 60

    Environmental protection, Administrative Practice and Procedure, 
Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 61

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hazardous 
substances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 63

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hazardous 
substances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: September 22, 2008.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
    For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the 
Code of the Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 60--[AMENDED]

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

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

Subpart A--[Amended]

    2. Section 60.13 is amended by redesignating paragraph (a) as 
paragraph (a)(1) and adding paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows:


Sec.  60.13  Monitoring requirements.

    (a)(1) * * *
    (2) Performance specifications for continuous parameter monitoring 
systems (CPMS) promulgated under 40 CFR part 60, appendix B and quality 
assurance procedures for CPMS promulgated under 40 CFR part 60, 
appendix F apply instead of the requirements for CPMS specified in an 
applicable subpart upon promulgation of the performance specifications 
and quality assurance procedures for CPMS.
* * * * *
    3. Section 60.17 is amended by:
    a. Adding paragraphs (a)(93) through (a)(106);

[[Page 59984]]

    b. Adding paragraphs (h)(5) through (h)(10); and
    c. Adding paragraphs (o), (p) and (q) to read as follows:


Sec.  60.17  Incorporations by reference.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (93) ASTM E220-07e1, ``Standard Test Methods for Calibration of 
Thermocouples by Comparison Techniques,'' IBR approved for Table 6 to 
Performance Standard 17 of appendix B to this part and Table 2 to 
Procedure 4 of appendix F to this part.
    (94) ASTM E452-02 (2007), ``Standard Test Method for Calibration of 
Refractory Metal Thermocouples Using an Optical Pyrometer,'' IBR 
approved for Table 6 to Performance Standard 17 of appendix B to this 
part and Table 2 to Procedure 4 to appendix F of this part.
    (95) ASTM E585/E 585M-04, ``Specification for Compacted Mineral-
Insulated, Metal-Sheathed, Base Metal Thermocouple Cables,'' IBR 
approved for Table 2 to Performance Standard 17 of appendix B to this 
part.
    (96) ASTM E644-06, ``Standard Test Methods for Testing Industrial 
Resistance Thermometers,'' IBR approved for Table 6 to Performance 
Standard 17 of appendix B to this part and Table 2 to Procedure 4 of 
appendix F to this part.
    (97) ASTM E235-06, ``Specification for Thermocouples, Sheathed, 
Type K, for Nuclear or for Other High-Reliability Applications,'' IBR 
approved for Table 2 to Performance Standard 17 of appendix B to this 
part.
    (98) ASTM E608/E 608M-06, ``Specification for Mineral-Insulated, 
Metal-Sheathed Base Metal Thermocouples,'' IBR approved for Table 2 to 
Performance Standard 17 of appendix B to this part.
    (99) ASTM E696-07, ``Specification for Tungsten-Rhenium Alloy 
Thermocouple Wire,'' IBR approved for Table 2 to Performance Standard 
17 of appendix B to this part.
    (100) ASTM E1129/E 1129M-98 (2002), ``Standard Specification for 
Thermocouple Connectors,'' IBR approved for Table 2 to Performance 
Standard 17 of appendix B to this part.
    (101) ASTM E1137/E 1137M-04, ``Standard Specification for 
Industrial Platinum Resistance Thermometers,'' IBR approved for Table 2 
to Performance Standard 17 of appendix B to this part.
    (102) ASTM E1159-98 (2003), ``Specification for Thermocouple 
Materials, Platinum-Rhodium Alloys, and Platinum,'' IBR approved for 
Table 2 to Performance Standard 17 of appendix B to this part.
    (103) ASTM E251-92 (2003), ``Standard Test Methods for Performance 
Characteristics of Metallic Bonded Resistance Strain Gages,'' IBR 
approved for Table 7 to Performance Standard 17 of appendix B to this 
part and Table 3 to Procedure 4 of appendix F to this part.
    (104) ASTM D1293-99 (2005), ``Standard Test Methods for pH of 
Water,'' IBR approved for section 8.7 of Performance Standard 17 of 
appendix B to this part and section 8.4 of Procedure 4 of appendix F to 
this part.
    (105) ASTM D1125-95 (2005), ``Standard Test Methods for Electrical 
Conductivity and Resistivity of Water,'' IBR approved for section 8.8 
of Performance Standard 17 of appendix B to this part and section 8.5 
of Procedure 4 of appendix F to this part.
    (106) ASTM D5391-99 (2005), ``Standard Test Method for Electrical 
Conductivity and Resistivity of a Flowing High Purity Water Sample,'' 
IBR approved for section 8.8 of Performance Standard 17 of appendix B 
to this part and section 8.5 of Procedure 4 of appendix F to this part.
* * * * *
    (h) * * *
    (5) ASME B 40.100-2005, ``Pressure Gauges and Gauge Attachments,'' 
IBR approved for section 6.3 and Table 7 to Performance Standard 17 of 
appendix B to this part and Table 3 to Procedure 4 of appendix F to 
this part.
    (6) ASME MFC-3M-2004, ``Measurement of Fluid Flow in Pipes Using 
Orifice, Nozzle, and Venturi,'' IBR approved for Table 3 to Performance 
Standard 17 of appendix B to this part and section 8.3 of Procedure 4 
to appendix F of this part.
    (7) ANSI/ASME MFC-4M-1986 (R2003), ``Measurement of Gas Flow by 
Turbine Meters,'' IBR approved for Table 3 to Performance Standard 17 
of appendix B to this part.
    (8) ANSI/ASME MFC-6M-1998 (R2005), ``Measurement of Fluid Flow in 
Pipes Using Vortex Flow Meters,'' IBR approved for Table 3 to 
Performance Standard 17 of appendix B to this part.
    (9) ANSI/ASME MFC-7M-1987 (R2001), ``Measurement of Gas Flow by 
Means of Critical Flow Venturi Nozzles,'' IBR approved for Table 3 to 
Performance Standard 17 of appendix B to this part.
    (10) ANSI/ASME MFC-9M-1988, ``Measurement of Liquid Flow in Closed 
Conduits by Weighing Method,'' IBR approved for Table 5 to Performance 
Standard 17 of appendix B to this part and Table 5 to Procedure 4 of 
appendix F to this part.
* * * * *
    (o) The following material is available for purchase from the 
American National Standards Institute (ANSI), 25 West 43rd Street, 4th 
Floor, New York, NY, 10036.
    (1) ISA-MC96.1-1982, ``Temperature Measurement Thermocouples,'' IBR 
approved for Table 2 to Performance Standard 17 of appendix B to this 
part and Table 5 to Procedure 4 of appendix F to this part.
    (2) ASHRAE 41.8-1989, ``Standard Methods of Measurement of Flow of 
Liquids in Pipes Using Orifice Flowmeters,'' IBR approved for Table 5 
to Performance Standard 17 of appendix B to this part and Table 5 to 
Procedure 4 of appendix F to this part.
    (3) ANSI/ISA RP 31.1-1977, ``Recommended Practice: Specification, 
Installation, and Calibration of Turbine Flow Meters,'' IBR approved 
for Table 3 to Performance Standard 17 of appendix B to this part and 
Table 5 to Procedure 4 of appendix F to this part.
    (p) The following material is available for purchase from the 
Instrumentation, Systems, and Automation Society (ISA), 67 Alexander 
Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709.
    (1) ISA RP 16.6-1961, ``Methods and Equipment for Calibration of 
Variable Area Meters (Rotameters),'' IBR approved for Tables 4 and 5 to 
Performance Standard 17 of appendix B to this part and Tables 4 and 5 
to Procedure 4 of appendix F to this part.
    (2) ISA RP 16.5-1961, ``Installation, Operation, and Maintenance 
Instructions for Glass Tube Variable Area Meters (Rotameters),'' IBR 
approved for Table 3 to Performance Standard 17 of appendix B to this 
part.
    (q) The following material is available for purchase from the 
International Organization for Standardization (ISO), 1, ch. de la 
Voie-Creuse, CH-1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland.
    (1) ISO 8316:1987, ``Measurement of Liquid Flow in Closed 
Conduits--Method by Collection of Liquid in a Volumetric Tank,'' IBR 
approved for Table 4 to Performance Standard 17 of appendix B to this 
part and Table 4 to Procedure 4 of appendix F to this part.
    (2) ISO 10790:1999, ``Measurement of Fluid Flow in Closed 
Conduits--Guidance to the Selection, Installation, and Use of Coriolis 
Meters (Mass Flow, Density and Volume Flow Measurements),'' IBR 
approved for Table 3 to Performance Standard 17 of appendix B to this 
part and Table 4 to Procedure 4 of appendix F to this part.

[[Page 59985]]

    4. Appendix B to part 60 is amended by adding Performance 
Specification 17 in numerical order to read as follows:

Appendix B to Part 60--Performance Specifications

* * * * *

Performance Specification 17--Specifications and Test Procedures 
for Continuous Parameter Monitoring Systems at Stationary Sources

1.0 What is the purpose of Performance Specification 17?

    The purpose of Performance Specification 17 (PS-17) is to 
establish the initial installation and performance procedures that 
are required for evaluating the acceptability of a continuous 
parameter monitoring system (CPMS). This performance specification 
applies instead of the requirements for applicable CPMS specified in 
any applicable subpart to 40 CFR part 60, 61, or 63, unless 
otherwise specified in the applicable subpart. This performance 
specification does not establish procedures or criteria for 
evaluating the ongoing performance of an installed CPMS over an 
extended period of time. Procedures for evaluating the ongoing 
performance of a CPMS are described in Procedure 4 of appendix F to 
40 CFR part 40, Quality Assurance Procedures.
    1.1 Under what circumstances does PS-17 apply to my CPMS? This 
performance specification applies to your CPMS if your CPMS meets 
the conditions specified in section 1.2 of this specification and 
you meet either conditions (1) or (2) of this section:
    (1) You are required by any applicable subpart of 40 CFR parts 
60 or 61 to install and operate the CPMS, or
    (2) You are required by any applicable subpart of 40 CFR part 63 
to install and operate the CPMS, and Sec.  63.8(a)(2) of the General 
Provisions applies to the applicable subpart.
    1.2 To what types of devices does PS-17 apply? This performance 
specification applies if your total equipment meets the conditions 
of (1) and (2) of this section:
    (1) You are required by an applicable subpart to install and 
operate the total equipment on a continuous basis, and
    (2) You, as owner or operator, use the total equipment to 
monitor the parameters (currently temperature, pressure, liquid flow 
rate, gas flow rate, mass flow rate, pH, and conductivity) 
associated with the operation of an emission control device or 
process unit.
    1.3 When must I comply with PS-17? You must comply with PS-17 
when any of conditions (1) through (5) of this section occur:
    (1) At the time you install and place into operation a CPMS that 
is required by the applicable subpart after 90 days following the 
date of publication of the final rule in the Federal Register, or
    (2) At the time you replace or relocate the sensor of an 
affected CPMS after 90 days following the date of publication of the 
final rule in the Federal Register, or
    (3) At the time you replace the electronic signal modifier or 
conditioner, transmitter, external power supply, data acquisition 
system, data recording system, or any other mechanical or electrical 
component of your CPMS that affects the accuracy, range, or 
resolution of your CPMS after 90 days following the date of 
publication of the final rule in the Federal Register, or
    (4) For CPMS located at facilities that are required to obtain a 
title V permit, at the time of your title V permit renewal.
    (i) Prior to submitting your title V permit renewal, you must 
comply with the basic requirements of this performance 
specification.
    (5) For CPMS located at area source facilities that are exempt 
from obtaining a title V permit, 5 years after the date of 
publication of the final rule in the Federal Register.

2.0 What are the basic requirements of PS-17?

    This performance specification requires you, as an owner or 
operator of an applicable CPMS, to perform and record initial 
installation and calibration procedures to confirm the acceptability 
of the CPMS when it is installed and placed into operation.
    2.1 How does PS-17 address the installation and equipment 
requirements for my CPMS? This specification stipulates basic 
installation, location, and equipment requirements for CPMS and 
identifies applicable voluntary consensus standards that provide 
additional guidance on the selection and installation of specific 
types of sensors associated with CPMS. This specification also 
identifies the types of equipment needed to check the accuracy of 
your CPMS. General equipment requirements are identified in section 
6 of this specification. Location and installation requirements are 
addressed in sections 8.1 and 8.2 of this specification.
    2.2 What types of procedures must I perform to demonstrate 
compliance with PS-17? This specification requires you, as owner or 
operator of a CPMS, to demonstrate that your CPMS satisfies minimum 
requirements for accuracy. For each of the monitoring parameters 
addressed (currently temperature, pressure, liquid flow rate, gas 
flow rate, mass flow rate, pH, and conductivity), this specification 
offers you the choice of two or more methods that you can use to 
demonstrate that your CPMS meets the specified accuracy 
requirements. For accuracy demonstrations that involve measurement 
of gas or liquid pressures, this specification also requires you to 
perform a leak test on any pressure connections. Accuracy 
demonstration methods are described in sections 8.4 through 8.8 of 
this specification; section 8.9 addresses alternative procedures for 
demonstrating compliance with this specification; and leak test 
procedures are described in section 8.10 of this specification.
    2.3 What does PS-17 require me to do if my CPMS does not meet 
the specified accuracy requirements? If your CPMS does not meet the 
accuracy requirements, section 8 of this specification requires you 
to take corrective action until you can demonstrate that your CPMS 
meets the accuracy requirement.
    2.4 What types of recordkeeping and reporting activities does 
PS-17 require? This specification does not have any reporting 
requirements but does require you to record and maintain data that 
identify your CPMS and show the results of any performance 
demonstrations of your CPMS. Recordkeeping requirements are 
described in section 14 of this specification.

3.0 What special definitions apply to PS-17?

    3.1 Accuracy. A measure of the closeness of a measurement to the 
true or actual value.
    3.2 Accuracy hierarchy. The ratio of the accuracy of a 
measurement instrument to the accuracy of a calibrated instrument or 
standard that is used to measure the accuracy of the measurement 
instrument. For example, if the accuracy of a calibrated temperature 
measurement device is 0.2 percent, and the accuracy of a 
thermocouple is 1.0 percent, the accuracy hierarchy is 5.0 (1.0 / 
0.2 = 5.0).
    3.3 Conductivity CPMS. The total equipment that is used to 
measure and record the conductivity of a liquid on a continuous 
basis.
    3.4 Continuous Parameter Monitoring System (CPMS). The total 
equipment that is used to measure and record a parameter (currently 
temperature, pressure, liquid flow rate, gas flow rate, mass flow 
rate, pH, and conductivity) on a continuous basis in one or more 
locations.
    3.5 Cryogenic Application. An application of a temperature CPMS 
in which the sensor is subjected to a temperature of zero degrees 
Celsius (32 degrees Fahrenheit) or less.
    3.6 Differential pressure tube. A device, such as a pitot tube, 
that consists of one or more pairs of tubes that are oriented to 
measure the velocity pressure and static pressure at one or more 
fixed points within a duct for the purpose of determining gas 
velocity.
    3.7 Electronic Components. The electronic signal modifier or 
conditioner, transmitter, and power supply associated with a CPMS.
    3.8 Flow CPMS. The total equipment that is used to measure and 
record liquid flow rate, gas flow rate, or mass flow rate on a 
continuous basis.
    3.9 Integrator. The equipment that is used to calculate the 
material feed rate using two inputs: weight of the load on the 
material transfer system (e.g. belt conveyor) and the speed of the 
system.
    3.10 Mass flow rate. The measurement of solid, liquid, or gas 
flow in units of mass per time, such as kilograms per minute or tons 
per hour.
    3.11 Mechanical Component. Any component of a CPMS that consists 
of or includes moving parts or that is used to apply or transfer 
force to another component or part of the CPMS.
    3.12 pH CPMS. The total equipment that is used to measure and 
record the pH of a liquid on a continuous basis.
    3.13 Pressure CPMS. The total equipment that is used to measure 
and record the pressure of a liquid or gas at any location, or the 
differential pressure of a liquid or gas between any two locations, 
on a continuous basis.
    3.14 Resolution. The smallest detectable or legible increment of 
measurement.

[[Page 59986]]

    3.15 Sensor. The component or set of components of a CPMS that 
reacts to changes in the magnitude of the parameter that is measured 
by the CPMS (currently temperature, pressure, liquid flow rate, gas 
flow rate, mass flow rate, pH, or conductivity) and generates an 
output signal. Table 1 identifies the sensor components of some 
commonly used CPMS.
    3.16 Solid mass flow rate. The measurement of the rate at which 
a solid material is processed or transferred (in units of mass per 
time). Examples of solid mass flow rate are the rate at which ore is 
fed to a material dryer or the rate at which powdered lime is 
injected into an exhaust duct.
    3.17 Temperature CPMS. The total equipment that is used to 
measure and record the temperature of a liquid or gas at any 
location, or the differential temperature of a liquid or gas between 
any two locations, on a continuous basis.
    3.18 Total Equipment. The sensor, mechanical components, 
electronic components, data acquisition system, data recording 
system, electrical wiring, and other components of a CPMS.

4.0 Interferences [Reserved]

5.0 What do I need to know to ensure the safety of persons who perform 
the procedures specified in PS-17?

    The procedures required under this specification may involve 
hazardous materials, operations, site conditions, and equipment. 
This performance specification does not purport to address all of 
the safety issues associated with these procedures. It is the 
responsibility of the user to establish appropriate safety and 
health practices and determine the applicable regulatory limitations 
prior to performing these procedures.

6.0 What equipment and supplies do I need?

    The types of equipment that you need to comply with this 
specification depend upon the parameter that is measured by your 
CPMS and upon site-specific conditions. You must select the 
appropriate equipment based on manufacturer's recommendations, your 
site-specific conditions, the parameter that your CPMS measures, and 
the method that you choose for demonstrating compliance with this 
specification. For most CPMS, you will need the two types of 
equipment described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of this section.
    (1) The total equipment that is used to monitor and record the 
appropriate parameter, as defined in section 3.17 of this 
specification, and
    (2) The equipment needed to perform the initial validation check 
of your CPMS, as specified in sections 8.4 through 8.8 of this 
specification.
    6.1 What design criteria must my CPMS satisfy? You must select a 
CPMS that meets the design specifications in paragraphs (1) through 
(5) of this section.
    (1) Your CPMS must satisfy the accuracy requirements of Table 8 
of this specification.
    (2) Your CPMS must be capable of measuring the appropriate 
parameter (currently temperature, pressure, liquid flow rate, gas 
flow rate, mass flow rate, pH, or conductivity) over a range that 
extends from a value that is at least 20 percent less than the 
lowest value that you expect your CPMS to measure, to a value that 
is at least 20 percent greater than the highest value that you 
expect your CPMS to measure.
    (3) The signal conditioner, wiring, power supply, and data 
acquisition and recording system of your CPMS must be compatible 
with the output signal of the sensors used in your CPMS.
    (4) The data acquisition and recording system of your CPMS must 
be able to record values over the entire range specified in 
paragraph (2) of this section.
    (5) The data recording system associated with your CPMS must 
have a resolution of one-half of the required overall accuracy of 
your CPMS, as specified in Table 8 of this specification, or better.
    6.2 Are there any exceptions to the range requirements specified 
in section 6.1 of PS-17? A pH CPMS must be capable of measuring pH 
over the entire range of pH values from 0 to 14.
    6.3 What additional guidelines should I use for selecting the 
sensor of my CPMS? Additional guidelines for selecting temperature 
and pressure sensors are listed in paragraphs (1) and (2) of this 
section.
    (1) For a temperature CPMS, you should select a sensor that is 
consistent with the standards listed in Table 2 of this 
specification.
    (2) If your pressure CPMS uses a pressure gauge as the sensor, 
you should select a gauge that conforms to the design requirements 
of ASME B40.100-2005, ``Pressure Gauges and Gauge Attachments'' 
(incorporated by reference--see Sec.  60.17).
    6.4 What types of equipment do I need for checking the accuracy 
of my CPMS? The specific types of equipment that you need for 
checking the accuracy of your CPMS depend on the type of CPMS and 
the method that you choose for conducting the initial validation 
check of your CPMS, as specified in sections 8.4 through 8.8 of this 
specification. In most cases, you will need the equipment specified 
in paragraphs (1) and (2) of this section.
    (1) A separate device that either measures the same parameter as 
your CPMS, or that simulates the same electronic signal or response 
that your CPMS generates, and
    (2) Any work platform, test ports, pressure taps, valves, 
fittings, or other equipment required to perform the specific 
procedures of the validation check method that you choose, as 
specified in sections 8.4 through 8.8 of this specification.
    6.5 What are the accuracy requirements for the equipment that I 
use for checking the accuracy of my CPMS? Any measurement instrument 
or device that is used to conduct the initial validation check of 
your CPMS must have an accuracy that is traceable to National 
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) standards and must have 
an accuracy hierarchy of at least three. To determine if a 
measurement instrument or device satisfies this accuracy hierarchy 
requirement, follow the procedure described in section 12.1 of this 
specification.
    6.6 Are there any exceptions to the accuracy requirement of 
section 6.5 of PS-17? There are two exceptions to the NIST-traceable 
accuracy requirement specified in section 6.5 of this specification, 
as described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of this section.
    (1) As an alternative for a calibrated pressure measurement 
device with NIST-traceable accuracy specified in paragraphs (1) and 
(3) of section 8.5 and in paragraph (3) of section 8.6 of this 
specification, you can use a mercury-in-glass or water-in-glass U-
tube manometer to validate your pressure CPMS.
    (2) When validating a flow rate CPMS using the methods specified 
in paragraphs (1), (2), or (7) of section 8.6 of this specification, 
the container used to collect or weigh the liquid or solid is not 
required to have NIST-traceable accuracy.

7.0 What reagents or standards do I need to comply with PS-17?

    The specific reagents and standards needed to demonstrate 
compliance with this specification depend upon the parameter that 
your CPMS measures and the method that you choose to check the 
accuracy of your CPMS. Section 8.3 of this specification identifies 
the specific reagents and standards needed for each initial 
validation check of CPMS accuracy.

8.0 What performance demonstrations must I conduct?

    You must satisfy the installation requirements, perform an 
initial calibration, and perform an initial validation check of your 
CPMS using the procedures specified in sections 8.1 through 8.8 of 
this specification.
    8.1 How must I install my CPMS? The installation of your CPMS 
must satisfy the requirements specified in paragraphs (1) and (2) of 
this section.
    (1) You must install each sensor of your CPMS in a location that 
provides representative measurement of the applicable parameter over 
all operating conditions, taking into account the manufacturer's 
guidelines and any location specified in the applicable requirement.
    (2) You must also install any work platforms, test ports, 
pressure taps, valves, fittings, or other equipment needed to 
perform the initial validation check, as specified in sections 8.4 
through 8.8 of this specification.
    8.2 What additional guidelines can I use for installing my CPMS? 
If you are required to install a flow CPMS and the sensor of your 
flow CPMS is a differential pressure device, turbine flow meter, 
rotameter, vortex formation flow meter or Coriolis mass flow meter, 
you can use the standards listed in Table 3 of this specification as 
guidelines for installation.
    8.3 What initial quality assurance measures are required by PS-
17 for my CPMS? You must perform an initial calibration of your CPMS 
based on the procedures specified in the manufacturer's owner's 
manual. You also must perform an initial validation check of the 
operation of your CPMS using the methods described in sections 8.4 
through 8.8 of this specification.
    8.4 How do I perform the initial validation check of my 
temperature CPMS? To perform the initial validation check of a 
temperature CPMS, you can choose one of

[[Page 59987]]

the methods described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of this section.
    (1) Comparison to Calibrated Temperature Measurement Device. 
Place the sensor of a calibrated temperature measurement device 
adjacent to the sensor of your temperature CPMS so that the sensor 
of the calibrated test device is subjected to the same environment 
as the sensor of your temperature CPMS. The calibrated temperature 
measurement device must satisfy the accuracy requirements specified 
in section 6.5 of this specification. The calibrated temperature 
measurement device must also have a range equal to or greater than 
the range of your temperature CPMS. Allow sufficient time for the 
response of the calibrated temperature measurement device to reach 
equilibrium. With the process or control device that is monitored by 
your CPMS operating under normal conditions, concurrently record the 
temperatures measured by your temperature CPMS and the calibrated 
temperature measurement device. Using the temperature measured by 
the calibrated measurement device as the value for Vc, 
follow the procedure specified in section 12.2 to determine if your 
CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 8 of this 
specification. If you determine that your CPMS satisfies the 
accuracy requirement of Table 8, the validation check is complete. 
If your CPMS does not satisfy the accuracy requirement of Table 8 of 
this specification, check all system components and take any 
corrective action that is necessary to achieve the required minimum 
accuracy. Repeat this validation check procedure until the accuracy 
requirement of Table 8 of this specification is satisfied. If you 
are required to measure and record temperatures at multiple 
locations, repeat this procedure for each location.
    (2) Temperature Simulation Procedure. Disconnect the sensor from 
your temperature CPMS and connect to your CPMS a calibrated 
simulation device that is designed to simulate the same type of 
response as the sensor of your CPMS. The calibrated simulation 
device must satisfy the accuracy requirements specified in section 
6.5 of this specification. Simulate a typical temperature that is 
measured by your temperature CPMS under normal operating conditions. 
Allow sufficient time for the response of the calibrated simulation 
device to reach equilibrium. Record the temperature that is 
indicated by your temperature CPMS. Using the temperature simulated 
by the calibrated simulation device as the value for Vc, 
follow the procedure specified in section 12.2 of this specification 
to determine if your CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of 
Table 8 of this specification. If you determine that your CPMS 
satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 8, the validation check 
is complete. If the calculated accuracy does not meet the accuracy 
requirement of Table 8 of this specification, check all system 
components and take any corrective action that is necessary to 
achieve the required minimum accuracy. Repeat this validation check 
procedure until the accuracy requirement of Table 8 of this 
specification is satisfied. If you are required to measure and 
record temperatures at multiple locations, repeat this procedure for 
each location.
    8.5 How do I perform an initial validation check of my pressure 
CPMS? To perform the initial validation check of your pressure CPMS, 
you can choose one of the methods described in paragraphs (1) 
through (3) of this section.
    (1) Comparison to Calibrated Pressure Measurement Device. 
Connect a mercury-in-glass U-tube manometer, a water-in-glass U-tube 
manometer, or calibrated pressure measurement device to operate in 
parallel with your pressure CPMS so that the manometer or sensor of 
the calibrated pressure measurement device is subjected to the same 
pressure as the sensor of your pressure CPMS. If a calibrated 
pressure measurement device is used, the device must satisfy the 
accuracy requirements of section 6.5 of this specification. The 
calibrated pressure measurement device also must have a range equal 
to or greater than the range of your pressure CPMS. Perform a leak 
test on all manometer or calibrated pressure measurement device 
connections using the procedure specified in section 8.10 of this 
specification. Allow sufficient time for the response of the 
manometer or calibrated pressure measurement device to reach 
equilibrium. With the process or control device that is monitored by 
your pressure CPMS operating under normal conditions, concurrently 
record the pressures that are measured by your pressure CPMS and by 
the calibrated pressure measurement device. Using the pressure 
measured by the calibrated pressure measurement device as the value 
for Vc, follow the procedure specified in section 12.2 of 
this specification to determine if your CPMS satisfies the accuracy 
requirement of Table 8 of this specification. If you determine that 
your CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 8 of this 
specification, the validation check is complete. If your CPMS does 
not meet the accuracy requirement of Table 8 of this specification, 
check all system components and take any corrective action that is 
necessary to achieve the required minimum accuracy. Repeat this 
validation check procedure until the accuracy requirement of Table 8 
of this specification is satisfied. If you are required to measure 
and record pressure at multiple locations, repeat this procedure for 
each location.
    (2) Pressure Simulation Procedure Using a Calibrated Pressure 
Source. Disconnect or close off the process line or lines to your 
pressure CPMS. Connect an adjustable calibrated pressure source to 
your CPMS so that the pressure source applies a pressure to the 
sensor of your pressure CPMS. The calibrated pressure source must 
satisfy the accuracy requirements of section 6.5 of this 
specification. The calibrated pressure source also must be 
adjustable, either continuously or incrementally over the pressure 
range of your pressure CPMS. Perform a leak test on all calibrated 
pressure source connections using the procedure specified in section 
8.10 of this specification. Using the calibrated pressure source, 
apply a pressure that is within 10 percent of the normal 
operating pressure of your pressure CPMS. Allow sufficient time for 
the response of the calibrated pressure source to reach equilibrium. 
Record the pressure applied by the calibrated pressure source and 
the pressure measured by your pressure CPMS. Using the pressure 
applied by the calibrated pressure source as the value for 
Vc, follow the procedure specified in section 12.2 of 
this specification to determine if your CPMS satisfies the accuracy 
requirement of Table 8 of this specification. If you determine that 
your CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 8 of this 
specification, the validation check is complete. If your CPMS does 
not meet the accuracy requirement of Table 8 of this specification, 
check all system components and take any corrective action that is 
necessary to achieve the required minimum accuracy. Repeat this 
validation check procedure until the accuracy requirement of Table 8 
of this specification is satisfied. If you are required to measure 
and record pressure at multiple locations, repeat this procedure for 
each location.
    (3) Pressure Simulation Procedure Using a Pressure Source and 
Calibrated Pressure Measurement Device. Disconnect or close off the 
process line or lines to your pressure CPMS. Attach a mercury-in-
glass U-tube manometer, a water-in-glass U-tube manometer, or a 
calibrated pressure measurement device (the reference pressure 
measurement device) in parallel to your pressure CPMS. If a 
calibrated pressure measurement device is used, the device must 
satisfy the accuracy requirements of section 6.5 of this 
specification. Connect a pressure source to your pressure CPMS and 
the parallel reference pressure measurement device. Perform a leak 
test on all pressure source and parallel reference pressure 
measurement device connections using the procedure specified in 
section 8.10 of this specification. Apply pressure to your CPMS and 
the parallel reference pressure measurement device. Allow sufficient 
time for the response of your CPMS and the parallel reference 
pressure measurement device to reach equilibrium. Record the 
pressure measured by your pressure CPMS and the reference pressure 
measurement device. Using the pressure measured by the parallel 
reference pressure measurement device as the value for 
Vc, follow the procedure specified in section 12.2 of 
this specification to determine if your CPMS satisfies the accuracy 
requirement of Table 8 of this specification. If you determine that 
your CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 8 of this 
specification, the validation check is complete. If your CPMS does 
not meet the accuracy requirement of Table 8 of this specification, 
check all system components and take any corrective action that is 
necessary to achieve the required minimum accuracy. Repeat this 
validation check procedure until the accuracy requirement of Table 8 
of this specification is satisfied. If you are required to measure 
and record pressure at multiple locations, repeat this procedure for 
each location.
    8.6 How do I perform an initial validation check of my flow 
CPMS? To perform the initial validation check of your flow CPMS, you 
can choose any one of the methods described in paragraphs (1) 
through (7) of this section that is applicable to the type of

[[Page 59988]]

material measured by your flow CPMS and the type of sensor used in 
your flow CPMS.
    (1) Volumetric Method. This method applies to any CPMS that is 
designed to measure liquid flow rate. With the process or control 
device that is monitored by your flow CPMS operating under normal 
conditions, record the flow rate measured by your flow CPMS for the 
subject process line. At the same time, collect the liquid that is 
flowing through the same process line for a measured length of time 
using the Volumetric Method specified in one of the standards listed 
in Table 4 of this specification. Using the flow rate measured by 
the Volumetric Method as the value for Vc, follow the 
procedure specified in section 12.2 of this specification to 
determine if your CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 8 
of this specification. If you determine that your CPMS satisfies the 
accuracy requirement of Table 8 of this specification, the 
validation check is complete. If your CPMS does not satisfy the 
accuracy requirement of Table 8 of this specification, check all 
system components and take any corrective action that is necessary 
to achieve the required minimum accuracy. Repeat this validation 
check until the accuracy requirement of Table 8 of this 
specification is satisfied. If you are required to measure and 
record flow rate at multiple locations, repeat this procedure for 
each location.
    (2) Gravimetric Method. This method applies to any CPMS that is 
designed to measure liquid flow rate, liquid mass flow rate, or 
solid mass flow rate. With the process or control device that is 
monitored by your flow CPMS operating under normal conditions, 
record the flow rate measured by your flow CPMS for the subject 
process line. At the same time, collect the material (liquid or 
solid) that is flowing or being transferred through the same process 
line for a measured length of time using the Weighing, Weigh Tank, 
or Gravimetric Methods specified in the standards listed in Table 5. 
Using the flow rate measured by the Weighing, Weigh Tank, or 
Gravimetric Methods as the value for Vc, follow the 
procedure specified in section 12.2 of this specification to 
determine if your CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 8 
of this specification. If you determine that your CPMS satisfies the 
accuracy requirement of Table 8 of this specification, the 
validation check is complete. If your CPMS does not satisfy the 
accuracy requirement of Table 8 of this specification, check all 
system components and take any corrective action that is necessary 
to achieve the required minimum accuracy. Repeat this validation 
check until the accuracy requirement of Table 8 of this 
specification is satisfied. If you are required to measure and 
record flow rate at multiple locations, repeat this procedure for 
each location.
    (3) Differential Pressure Measurement Method. This method 
applies only to flow CPMS that use a differential pressure 
measurement flow device, such as an orifice plate, flow nozzle, or 
venturi tube. This method may not be used to validate a flow CPMS 
that measures gas flow by means of one or more differential pressure 
tubes. With the process or control device that is monitored by your 
CPMS operating under normal conditions, record the flow rate 
measured by your flow CPMS. Under the same operating conditions, 
disconnect the pressure taps from your flow CPMS and connect the 
pressure taps to a mercury-in-glass U-tube manometer, a water-in-
glass U-tube manometer, or calibrated differential pressure 
measurement device. If a calibrated pressure measurement device is 
used, the device must satisfy the accuracy requirements of section 
6.5 of this specification. Perform a leak test on all manometer or 
calibrated differential pressure measurement device connections 
using the procedure specified in section 8.10 of this specification. 
Allow sufficient time for the response of the calibrated 
differential pressure measurement device to reach equilibrium. 
Within 30 minutes of measuring and recording the flow rate using 
your CPMS, record the pressure drop measured by the calibrated 
differential pressure measurement device. Using the manufacturer's 
literature or the procedures specified in ASME MFC-3M-2004 
(incorporated by reference--see Sec.  60.17), calculate the flow 
rate that corresponds to the differential pressure measured by the 
calibrated differential pressure measurement device. For CPMS that 
use an orifice flow meter, the procedures specified in ASHRAE 41.8-
1989 (incorporated by reference--see Sec.  60.17) also can be used 
to calculate the flow rate. Using the calculated flow rate as the 
value for Vc, follow the procedure specified in section 
12.2 of this specification to determine if your CPMS satisfies the 
accuracy requirement of Table 8 of this specification. If you 
determine that your CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 
8 of this specification, the validation check is complete. If your 
CPMS does not satisfy the accuracy requirement of Table 8 of this 
specification, check all system components and take any corrective 
action that is necessary to achieve the required minimum accuracy. 
Repeat this procedure until the accuracy requirement of Table 8 of 
this specification is satisfied. If you are required to measure and 
record flow rate at multiple locations, repeat this procedure for 
each location.
    (4) Pressure Source Flow Simulation Method. This method applies 
only to flow CPMS that use a differential pressure measurement flow 
device, such as an orifice plate, flow nozzle, or venturi tube. This 
method may not be used to validate a flow CPMS that measures gas 
flow by means of one or more differential pressure tubes. Disconnect 
your flow CPMS from the pressure taps. Connect separate pressure 
sources to the upstream and downstream sides of your pressure CPMS, 
where the pressure taps are normally connected. The pressure sources 
must satisfy the accuracy requirements of section 6.5 of this 
specification. The pressure sources also must be adjustable, either 
continuously or incrementally over the pressure range that 
corresponds to the range of your flow CPMS. Perform a leak test on 
all connections between the calibrated pressure sources and your 
flow CPMS using the procedure specified in section 8.10 of this 
specification. Using the manufacturer's literature or the procedures 
specified in ASME MFC-3M-2004 (incorporated by reference--see Sec.  
60.17), calculate the required pressure drop that corresponds to the 
normal operating flow rate expected for your flow CPMS. For CPMS 
that use an orifice flow meter, the procedures specified in ASHRAE 
41.8-1989 (incorporated by reference--see Sec.  60.17) also can be 
used to calculate the pressure drop. Use the calibrated pressure 
sources to apply the calculated pressure drop to your flow CPMS. 
Allow sufficient time for the responses of the calibrated pressure 
sources to reach equilibrium. Record the flow rate measured by your 
flow CPMS. Using the flow rate measured by your CPMS when the 
calculated pressure drop was applied as the value for Vc, 
follow the procedure specified in section 12.2 of this specification 
to determine if your CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of 
Table 8 of this specification. If you determine that your CPMS 
satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 8 of this specification, 
the validation check is complete. If your CPMS does not satisfy the 
accuracy requirement of Table 8 of this specification, check all 
system components and take any corrective action that is necessary 
to achieve the required minimum accuracy. Repeat this procedure 
until the accuracy requirement of Table 8 of this specification is 
satisfied. If you are required to measure and record flow rate at 
multiple locations, repeat this procedure for each location.
    (5) Electronic Signal Simulation Method. This method applies to 
any flow CPMS that uses a flow sensor that generates an electronic 
signal. Disconnect the sensor from your flow CPMS and connect to 
your CPMS a calibrated simulation device that is designed to 
simulate the same type of electrical response as the sensor of your 
CPMS. The calibrated simulation device must satisfy the accuracy 
requirements of section 6.5 of this specification. Perform a leak 
test on all connections between the calibrated simulation device and 
your flow CPMS using the procedure specified in section 8.10 of this 
specification. Simulate a typical flow rate that is monitored by 
your flow CPMS under normal operating conditions. Allow sufficient 
time for the response of the calibrated simulation device to reach 
equilibrium. Record the flow rate measured by your flow CPMS. Using 
the flow rate simulated by the calibrated simulation device as the 
value for Vc, follow the procedure specified in section 
12.2 of this specification to determine if your CPMS satisfies the 
accuracy requirement of Table 8 of this specification. If you 
determine that your CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 
8 of this specification, the validation check is complete. If the 
calculated accuracy does not meet the accuracy requirement of Table 
8 of this specification, check all system components and take any 
corrective action that is necessary to achieve the required minimum 
accuracy. Repeat this validation check until the accuracy 
requirement of Table 8 of this specification is satisfied. If you 
are required to measure and record flow rate at multiple locations, 
repeat this procedure for each location.

[[Page 59989]]

    (6) Relative Accuracy (RA) Test. This method applies to any flow 
CPMS that measures gas flow rate. If your flow CPMS uses a 
differential flow tube as the flow sensor, you must use this method 
to validate your flow CPMS. The reference methods (RM's) applicable 
to this test are Methods 2, 2A, 2B, 2C, 2D, 2F of 40 CFR part 60, 
appendix A-1 and Method 2G of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-2. Conduct 
three sets of RM tests. Mark the beginning and end of each RM test 
period on the flow CPMS chart recordings or other permanent record 
of output. Determine the integrated flow rate for each RM test 
period. Perform the same calculations specified by section 7.5 in 
PS-2 of this appendix. If the RA is no greater than 20 percent of 
the mean value of the RM test data, the RA test is complete. If the 
RA is greater than 20 percent of the mean value of the RM test data, 
check all system components and take any corrective action that is 
necessary to achieve the required RA. Repeat this RA test until the 
RA requirement of this section is satisfied. If you are required to 
measure and record flow rate at multiple locations, repeat this 
procedure for each location.
    (7) Material Weight Comparison Method. This method applies to 
any solid mass flow CPMS that uses a combination of a belt conveyor 
and scale and is equipped with a totalizer. To conduct this test, 
pass a quantity of pre-weighed material over the belt conveyor in a 
manner consistent with actual loading conditions. To weigh the test 
quantity of material that is to be used during the initial 
validation, you must use a scale that satisfies the accuracy 
requirements of section 6.5 of this specification. The test quantity 
must be sufficient to challenge the conveyor belt-scale system for 
at least three revolutions of the belt. Record the length of the 
test. Calculate the mass flow rate using the measured weight and the 
recorded time. Using this mass flow rate as the value for 
Vc, follow the procedure specified in section 12.2 of 
this specification to determine if your CPMS satisfies the accuracy 
requirement of Table 8 of this specification. If you determine that 
your CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 8 of this 
specification, the validation check is complete. If your CPMS does 
not satisfy the accuracy requirement of Table 8 of this 
specification, check all system components and take any corrective 
action that is necessary to achieve the required minimum accuracy. 
Repeat this validation check until the accuracy requirement of Table 
8 of this specification is satisfied. If you are required to measure 
and record flow rate at multiple locations, repeat this procedure 
for each location. In addition, you must perform an initial 
validation check on the integrator used by your material feed CPMS 
according to the manufacturer's specifications.
    8.7 How do I perform an initial validation check of my pH CPMS? 
You must perform an initial validation check of your pH CPMS using 
either of the methods described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of this 
section.
    (1) Comparison to Calibrated pH Measurement Device. Place a 
calibrated pH measurement device adjacent to your pH CPMS so that 
the calibrated test device is subjected to the same environment as 
your pH CPMS. The calibrated pH measurement device must satisfy the 
accuracy requirements specified in section 6.5 of this 
specification. Allow sufficient time for the response of the 
calibrated pH measurement device to reach equilibrium. With the 
process or control device that is monitored by your CPMS operating 
under normal conditions, concurrently record the pH measured by your 
pH CPMS and the calibrated pH measurement device. If concurrent 
readings are not possible, extract a sufficiently large sample from 
the process stream and perform measurements using a portion of the 
sample for each meter. Using the pH measured by the calibrated pH 
measurement device as the value for Vc, follow the 
procedure specified in section 12.2 of this specification to 
determine if your CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 8 
of this specification. If you determine that your CPMS satisfies the 
accuracy requirement of Table 8 of this specification, the 
validation check is complete. If your CPMS does not satisfy the 
accuracy requirement of Table 8 of this specification, check all 
system components and take any corrective action that is necessary 
to achieve the required minimum accuracy. Repeat this validation 
check procedure until the accuracy requirement of Table 8 of this 
specification is satisfied. If you are required to measure and 
record pH at multiple locations, repeat this procedure for each 
location.
    (2) Single Point Calibration. This method requires the use of a 
certified buffer solution. All buffer solutions used must be 
certified by NIST and accurate to 0.02 pH units at 25 
[deg]C (77 [deg]F). Set the temperature on your pH meter to the 
temperature of the buffer solution, typically room temperature or 25 
[deg]C (77 [deg]F). If your pH meter is equipped with automatic 
temperature compensation, activate this feature before calibrating. 
Set your pH meter to measurement mode. Place the clean electrodes 
into the container of fresh buffer solution. If the expected pH of 
the process fluid lies in the acidic range (less than 7 pH), use a 
buffer solution with a pH value of 4.00. If the expected pH of the 
process fluid lies in the basic range (greater than 7 pH), use a 
buffer solution with a pH value of 10.00. Allow sufficient time for 
the response of your pH CPMS to reach equilibrium. Record the pH 
measured by your CPMS. Using the buffer solution pH as the value for 
Vc, follow the procedure specified in section 12.2 of 
this specification to determine if your CPMS satisfies the accuracy 
requirement of Table 8 of this specification. If you determine that 
your CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 8 of this 
specification, the validation check is complete. If your CPMS does 
not satisfy the accuracy requirement of Table 8 of this procedure, 
calibrate your pH CPMS using the procedures specified in the 
manufacturer's owner's manual. If the manufacturer's owner's manual 
does not specify a two-point calibration procedure, you must perform 
a two-point calibration procedure based on ASTM D1293-99 (2005) 
(incorporated by reference--see Sec.  60.17). If you are required to 
measure and record pH at multiple locations, repeat this procedure 
for each location.
    8.8 How do I perform an initial validation check of my 
conductivity CPMS? You must perform an initial validation check of 
your conductivity CPMS using either of the methods described in 
paragraphs (1) and (2) of this section.
    (1) Comparison to Calibrated Conductivity Measurement Device. 
Place a calibrated conductivity measurement device adjacent to your 
conductivity CPMS so that the calibrated measurement device is 
subjected to the same environment as your conductivity CPMS. The 
calibrated conductivity measurement device must satisfy the accuracy 
requirements specified in section 6.5 of this specification. Allow 
sufficient time for the response of the calibrated conductivity 
measurement device to reach equilibrium. With the process or control 
device that is monitored by your CPMS operating under normal 
conditions, concurrently record the conductivity measured by your 
conductivity CPMS and the calibrated conductivity measurement 
device. If concurrent readings are not possible, extract a 
sufficiently large sample from the process stream and perform 
measurements using a portion of the sample for each meter. Using the 
conductivity measured by the calibrated conductivity measurement 
device as the value for Vc, follow the procedure 
specified in section 12.2 of this specification to determine if your 
CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 8 of this 
specification. If you determine that your CPMS satisfies the 
accuracy requirement of Table 8 of this specification, the 
validation check is complete. If your CPMS does not satisfy the 
accuracy requirement of Table 8 of this specification, check all 
system components and take any corrective action that is necessary 
to achieve the required minimum accuracy. Repeat this validation 
check procedure until the accuracy requirement of Table 8 of this 
specification is satisfied. If you are required to measure and 
record conductivity at multiple locations, repeat this procedure for 
each location.
    (2) Single Point Calibration. This method requires the use of a 
certified conductivity standard solution. All solutions used must be 
certified by NIST and accurate to 2 percent micromhos 
per centimeter ([mu]mhos/cm) (2 percent microsiemens per 
centimeter ([mu]S/cm)) at 25 [deg]C (77 [deg]F). Choose a 
conductivity standard solution that is close to the measuring range 
for best results. Since conductivity is dependent on temperature, 
the conductivity tester should have an integral temperature sensor 
that adjusts the reading to a standard temperature, usually 25 
[deg]C (77 [deg]F). If the conductivity meter allows for manual 
temperature compensation, set this value to 25 [deg]C (77 [deg]F). 
Place the clean electrodes into the container of fresh conductivity 
standard solution. Allow sufficient time for the response of your 
CPMS to reach equilibrium. Record the conductivity measured by your 
CPMS. Using the conductivity standard solution as the value for 
Vc, follow the procedure specified in section 12.2 of 
this specification to determine if your CPMS satisfies the accuracy 
requirement of Table 8 of this specification. If you determine that 
your CPMS satisfies the

[[Page 59990]]

accuracy requirement of Table 8, the validation check is complete. 
If your CPMS does not satisfy the accuracy requirement of Table 8 of 
this procedure, calibrate your conductivity CPMS using the 
procedures specified in the manufacturer's owner's manual. If the 
manufacturer's owner's manual does not specify a calibration 
procedure, you must perform a calibration procedure based on ASTM D 
1125-95 (2005) or ASTM D 5391-99 (2005) (incorporated by reference--
see Sec.  60.17). If you are required to measure and record 
conductivity at multiple locations, repeat this procedure for each 
location.
    8.9 Are there any acceptable alternative procedures for 
installing and verifying my CPMS? You may use alternative procedures 
for installing and verifying the operation of your CPMS if the 
alternative procedures are approved by the Administrator. In 
addition, for temperature and pressure CPMS, you can use the methods 
specified in paragraphs (1) and (2) of this section, respectively, 
to satisfy the initial validation check.
    (1) Alternative Temperature CPMS Validation Check. As an 
alternative to the procedures for the temperature CPMS initial 
validation check in this specification, you may use the methods 
listed in Table 6 of this specification to determine the accuracy of 
thermocouples or resistance temperature detectors. However, you also 
must check the accuracy of the overall CPMS system using the methods 
specified in section 8.4 of this specification or an alternative 
method that has been approved by the Administrator.
    (2) Alternative Pressure CPMS Validation Check. As an 
alternative to the procedure for the pressure CPMS initial 
validation check in this specification, you may use the methods 
listed in Table 7 of this specification to check the accuracy of the 
pressure sensor associated with your pressure CPMS. However, you 
also must check the accuracy of the overall CPMS using the methods 
in section 8.5 of this specification or an alternative method that 
has been approved by the Administrator.
    8.10 How do I perform a leak test on pressure connections, as 
required by this specification? You can satisfy the leak test 
requirements of sections 8.5 and 8.6 of this specification by 
following the procedures described in paragraphs (1) through (3) of 
this section.
    (1) For each pressure connection, apply a pressure that is equal 
to the highest pressure the connection is likely to be subjected to 
or 0.24 kilopascals (1.0 inch of water column), whichever is 
greater.
    (2) Close off the connection between the applied pressure source 
and the connection that is being leak-tested.
    (3) If the applied pressure remains stable for at least 15 
seconds, the connection is considered to be leak tight. If the 
applied pressure does not remain stable for at least 15 seconds, 
take any corrective action necessary to make the connection leak 
tight and repeat this leak test procedure.

9.0 What ongoing quality control measures are required?

    Ongoing quality control procedures for CPMS are specified in 
Procedure 4 of appendix F of this part.

10.0 Calibration and Standardization [Reserved]

11.0 Analytical Procedure [Reserved]

12.0 What calculations are needed?

    The calculations needed to comply with this performance 
specification are described in sections 12.1 and 12.2 of this 
specification.
    12.1 How do I determine if a calibrated measurement device 
satisfies the accuracy hierarchy specified in section 6.5 of this 
specification. To determine if a calibrated measurement device 
satisfies the accuracy hierarchy requirement, follow the procedure 
described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of this section.
    (1) Calculate the accuracy hierarchy (Ah) using 
Equation 17-1.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP09OC08.010

Where:

Ah = Accuracy hierarchy, dimensionless.
Ar = Required accuracy (Ap or Av) 
specified in Table 8 of this specification, percent or units of 
parameter value (e.g., degrees Celsius, kilopascals, liters per 
minute).
Ac= Accuracy of calibrated measurement device, same units 
as Ar.

    (2) If the accuracy hierarchy (Ah) is equal to or 
greater than 3.0, the calibrated measurement device satisfies the 
accuracy hierarchy of Section 6.5 of this specification.
    12.2 How do I determine if my CPMS satisfies the accuracy 
requirement of PS-17? To determine if your CPMS satisfies the 
accuracy requirement of PS-17, follow the procedure described in 
paragraphs (1) through (4) of this section.
    (1) If your CPMS measures temperature, pressure, or flow rate, 
calculate the accuracy percent value (Apv) using Equation 
17-2. If your CPMS measures pH, proceed to paragraph (2) of this 
section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP09OC08.011

Where:

Apv = Accuracy percent value, units of parameter measured 
(e.g., degrees Celsius, kilopascals, liters per minute).
Vc = Parameter value measured by the calibrated 
measurement device or measured by your CPMS when a calibrated signal 
simulator is applied to your CPMS during the initial validation 
check, units of parameter measured (e.g., degrees Celsius, 
kilopascals, liters per minute).
Ap = Accuracy percentage specified in Table 8 of this 
specification that corresponds to your CPMS, percent.

    (2) If your CPMS measures temperature, pressure, or flow rate 
other than mass flow rate or steam flow rate, compare the accuracy 
percent value (Apv) to the accuracy value (Av) 
in Table 8 of this specification and select the greater of the two 
values. Use this greater value as the allowable deviation 
(da) in paragraph (4) of this section. If your CPMS 
measures pH, use the accuracy value (Av) specified in 
Table 8 of this specification as the allowable deviation 
(da). If your CPMS measures steam flow rate, mass flow 
rate, or conductivity, use the accuracy percent value 
(Apv) calculated using Equation 17-2 as the allowable 
deviation (da).
    (3) Using Equation 17-3, calculate the measured deviation 
(dm), which is the absolute value of the difference 
between the parameter value measured by the calibrated device 
(Vc) and the value measured by your CPMS (Vm).
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP09OC08.012

Where:

dm = Measured deviation, units of the parameter measured 
(e.g., degrees Celsius, kilopascals, liters per minute).
Vc = Parameter value measured by the calibrated 
measurement device or measured by your CPMS when a calibrated signal 
simulator is applied to your CPMS during the initial validation 
check, units of parameter measured (e.g., degrees Celsius, 
kilopascals, liters per minute).
Vm = Parameter value measured by your CPMS during the 
initial validation check, units of parameter measured (e.g., degrees 
Celsius, kilopascals, liters per minute).

    (4) Compare the measured deviation (dm) to the 
allowable deviation (da). If the measured deviation is 
less than or equal to the allowable deviation, your CPMS satisfies 
the accuracy requirement of this specification.

13.0 What initial performance criteria must I demonstrate for my CPMS 
to comply with PS-17?

    You must demonstrate that your CPMS meets the accuracy 
requirements specified in Table 8 of this specification.

14.0 What are the recordkeeping requirements for PS-17?

    You must satisfy the recordkeeping requirements specified in 
Sections 14.1 and 14.2 of this specification.
    14.1 What data does PS-17 require me to record for my CPMS? For 
each affected CPMS that you operate, you must record the information 
listed in paragraphs (1) through (6) of this section.
    (1) Identification and location of the CPMS;
    (2) Manufacturer's name and model number of the CPMS;
    (3) Range of parameter values you expect your CPMS to measure 
and record;
    (4) Date of the initial calibration and system validation check;
    (5) Results of the initial calibration and system validation 
check; and
    (6) Name of the person(s) who performed the initial calibration 
and system validation check.
    14.2 For how long must I maintain the data that PS-17 requires 
me to record for my CPMS? You are required to keep the records 
required by this specification for your CPMS for a period of 5 
years. At a minimum, you must maintain the most recent 2 years of 
data onsite and available for inspection by the enforcement agency.

[[Page 59991]]

15.0 Pollution Prevention [Reserved]

16.0 Waste Management [Reserved]

17.0 Which references are relevant to PS-17?

    1. Technical Guidance Document: Compliance Assurance Monitoring. 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning 
and Standards Emission Measurement Center. August 1998. (http://
www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/cam.html).
    2. NEMA Standard Publication 250. ``Enclosures for Electrical 
Equipment (1000 Volts Maximum)''. National Electrical Manufacturers 
Association. 1997.
    3. ASTM E-220-86 (1996): Standard Test Methods for Calibration 
of Thermocouples by Comparison Techniques. American Society for 
Testing and Materials. May 1986.
    4. MC96-1-1982: Temperature Measurement Thermocouples. American 
National Standards Institute. August 1982.
    5. The pH and Conductivity Handbook. Omega Engineering, Inc. 
1995.
    6. ASTM E-452-89: ``Standard Test Method for Calibration of 
Refractory Metal Thermocouples Using an Optical Pyrometer''. 
American Society of Testing and Materials. April 1989.
    7. ASTM E 644-06: ``Standard Test Methods for Testing Industrial 
Resistance Thermometers''. American Society of Testing and 
Materials. 2006.
    8. ASME B 40.100-2005: ``Pressure Gauges and Gauge 
Attachments''. American Society of Mechanical Engineers. 2005.
    9. ASTM E 251-92 (2003): ``Standard Test Methods for Performance 
Characteristics of Metallic Bonded Resistance Strain Gages''. 
American Society for Testing and Materials. 2003.
    10. ASHRAE 41.8-1989: ``Standard Methods of Measurement of Flow 
of Liquids in Pipes Using Orifice Flow Meters''. American Society of 
Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. 1989.
    11. ISA RP 16.6-1961: ``Methods and Equipment for Calibration of 
Variable Area Meters (Rotameters)''. Instrumentation, Systems, and 
Automation Society. 1961.
    12. ANSI/ISA-RP31.1-1977: ``Specification, Installation, and 
Calibration of Turbine Flow Meters''. Instrumentation, Systems, and 
Automation Society. 1977.
    13. ASTM E 1-95: ``Standard Specifications for ASTM 
Thermometers''. American Society for Testing and Materials. 1995.
    14. ANSI/ASHRAE 41.1-1986: ``Standard Method for Temperature 
Measurement'' American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-
Conditioning Engineers, Inc. February 1987.
    15. ANSI/ASHRAE 41.3-1989: ``Standard Method for Pressure 
Measurement''. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-
Conditioning Engineers, Inc. 1989.
    16. ISA RP 16.5-1961: ``Installation, Operation, and Maintenance 
Instructions for Glass Tube Variable Area Meters (Rotameters)''. 
Instrumentation, Systems, and Automation Society. 1961.
    17. ASME MFC-3M-2004: ``Measurement of Fluid Flow in Pipes Using 
Orifice, Nozzle, and Venturi''. American Society of Mechanical 
Engineers. 1989.
    18. ASTM E-1137-97: ``Standard Specification for Industrial 
Platinum Resistance Thermometers''. American Society for Testing and 
Materials. 1997.
    19. The Temperature Handbook. Omega Engineering, Inc. 2000.
    20. The Pressure, Strain and Force Handbook. Omega Engineering, 
Inc. 1999.
    21. The Flow and Level Handbook. Omega Engineering, Inc. 2000.
    22. ASTM D-5464-93 (1997): ``Standard Test Methods for pH 
Measurement of Water of Low Conductivity''. American Society for 
Testing and Materials. 1993.
    23. ASTM D-1293-99: ``Standard Test Methods for pH of Water''. 
American Society for Testing and Materials. 1999.
    24. ANSI/ASME MFC-4M-1986 (R2003): ``Measurement of Gas Flow by 
Turbine Meters''. American Society of Mechanical Engineers. 2003.
    25. ASME/ANSI MFC-6M-1987: ``Measurement of Fluid Flow in Pipes 
Using Vortex Flow Meters''. American Society of Mechanical 
Engineers. 1987.
    26. ASME/ANSI MFC-7M-1987: ``Measurement of Gas Flow by Means of 
Critical Flow Venturi Nozzles''. American Society of Mechanical 
Engineers. 1987.
    27. ASME/ANSI MFC-9M-1988: ``Measurement of Liquid Flow in 
Closed Conduits by Weighing Method''. American Society of Mechanical 
Engineers. 1989.
    28. ASME/ANSI MFC-10M-1994: ``Measurement of Liquid Flow in 
Closed Conduits by Volumetric Method''. American Society of 
Mechanical Engineers. 1994.
    29. ISO 8316:1987: ``Measurement of Liquid Flow in Closed 
Conduits-Method by Collection of Liquid in a Volumetric Tank''. 
International Organization for Standardization. 1987.
    30. NIST Handbook 44--2002 Edition: ``Specifications, 
Tolerances, And Other Technical Requirements for Weighing and 
Measuring Devices, as adopted by the 86th National Conference on 
Weights and Measures 2001'', Section 2.21: ``Belt-Conveyor Scale 
Systems''.
    31. ISO 10790:1999: ``Measurement of Fluid Flow in Closed 
Conduits-Guidance to the Selection, Installation, and Use of 
Coriolis Meters (Mass Flow, Density and Volume Flow Measurements''. 
International Organization for Standardization. 1999.
    32. ASTM D 1125-95 (2005): ``Standard Test Methods for 
Electrical Conductivity and Resistivity of Water''. American Society 
for Testing and Materials. 2005.
    33. ASTM D 5391-99 (2005): ``Standard Test Method for Electrical 
Conductivity and Resistivity of a Flowing High Purity Water 
Sample''. American Society for Testing and Materials. 2005.

18.0 What tables are relevant to PS-17?

            Table 1--Sensor Components of Commonly Used CPMS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    The sensor component
For a CPMS that measures . .      Using a . . .      consists of the . .
              .                                               .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Temperature..............  a. Thermocouple.....  Thermocouple.
                              b. Resistance         RTD.
                               temperature
                               detector (RTD).
                              c. Optical pyrometer  Optical assembly and
                                                     detector.
                              d. Thermistor.......  Thermistor.
                              e. Temperature        Integrated circuit
                               transducer.           sensor?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Pressure.................  a. Pressure gauge...  Gauge assembly,
                                                     including bourdon
                                                     element, bellows
                                                     element, or
                                                     diaphragm.
                              b. Pressure           Strain gauge
                               transducer.           assembly,
                                                     capacitance
                                                     assembly, linear
                                                     variable
                                                     differential
                                                     transformer, force
                                                     balance assembly,
                                                     potentiometer,
                                                     variable reluctance
                                                     assembly,
                                                     piezoelectric
                                                     assembly, or
                                                     piezoresistive
                                                     assembly.
                              c. Manometer........  U-tube or
                                                     differential
                                                     manometer.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Flow rate................  a. Differential       Flow constricting
                               pressure device.      element (nozzle,
                                                     Venturi, or orifice
                                                     plate) and
                                                     differential
                                                     pressure sensor.
                              b. Differential       Pitot tube, or other
                               pressure tube.        array of tubes that
                                                     measure velocity
                                                     pressure and static
                                                     pressure, and
                                                     differential
                                                     pressure sensor.
                              c. Magnetic flow      Magnetic coil
                               meter.                assembly.

[[Page 59992]]


                              d. Positive           Piston, blade, vane,
                               displacement flow     propeller, disk, or
                               meter.                gear assembly.
                              e. Turbine flow       Rotor or turbine
                               meter.                assembly.
                              f. Vortex formation   Vortex generating
                               flow meter.           and sensing
                                                     elements.
                              g. Fluidic            Feedback passage,
                               oscillating flow      side wall, control
                               meter.                port, and thermal
                                                     sensor.
                              h. Ultrasonic flow    Sonic transducers,
                               meter.                receivers, timer,
                                                     and temperature
                                                     sensor.
                              i. Thermal flow       Thermal element and
                               meter.                temperature
                                                     sensors.
                              j. Coriolis mass      U-tube and magnetic
                               flow meter.           sensing elements.
                              k. Rotameter........  Float assembly.
                              l. Solids flow meter  Sensing plate.
                              m. Belt conveyor....  Scale.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. pH.......................  pH meter............  Electrode.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Conductivity.............  Conductivity meter..  Electrode.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


            Table 2--Design Standards for Temperature Sensors
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    You can use the following design
   If the sensor is a . . .       standards as guidance in selecting a
                                       sensor for your CPMS . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Thermocouple..............  a. ASTM E235-88 (1996), ``Specification
                                for Thermocouples, Sheathed, Type K, for
                                Nuclear or Other High-Reliability
                                Applications.''
                               b. ASTM E585/E 585M-04, ``Specification
                                for Compacted Mineral-Insulated, Metal-
                                Sheathed, Base Metal Thermocouple
                                Cables.''
                               c. ASTM E608/E 608M-06, ``Specification
                                for Mineral-Insulated, Metal-Sheathed
                                Base Metal Thermocouples.''
                               d. ASTM E696-07, ``Specification for
                                Tungsten-Rhenium Alloy Thermocouple
                                Wire.''
                               e. ASTM E1129/E 1129M-98 (2002),
                                ``Standard Specification for
                                Thermocouple Connectors.''
                               f. ASTM E1159-98 (2003), ``Specification
                                for Thermocouple Materials, Platinum-
                                Rhodium Alloys, and Platinum.''
                               g. ISA-MC96.1-1982, ``Temperature
                                Measurement Ther mo couples.''
2. Resistance temperature      ASTM E1137/E1137M-04, ``Standard
 detector.                      Specification for Industrial Platinum
                                Resistance Thermometers.''
------------------------------------------------------------------------


         Table 3--Standards for the Installation of Flow Sensors
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If the sensor of your flow CPMS is   You should install the flow sensor
              a . . .                        according to . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Differential pressure device...  ASME MFC-3M-2004, ``Measurement of
                                     Fluid Flow in Pipes Using Orifice,
                                     Nozzle, and Venturi''.
2. Critical flow venturi flow       ASME/ANSI MFC-7M-1987 (R2001),
 meter used to measure gas flow      ``Measurement of Gas Flow by Means
 rate.                               of Critical Flow Venturi Nozzles''.
3. Turbine flow meter.............  ANSI/ISA RP 31.1-1977, ``Recommended
                                     Practice: Specification,
                                     Installation, and Calibration of
                                     Turbine Flowmeters'', or, if used
                                     for gas flow measurement, ANSI/ASME
                                     MFC-4M-1986 (R2003), ``Measurement
                                     of Gas Flow by Turbine Meters''.
4. Rotameter......................  ISA RP 16.5-1961, ``Installation,
                                     Operation, and Maintenance
                                     Instructions for Glass Tube
                                     Variable Area Meters
                                     (Rotameters)''.
5. Coriolis mass flow meter.......  ISO 10790:1999, ``Measurement of
                                     fluid flow in closed conduits--
                                     Guidance to the selection,
                                     installation and use of Coriolis
                                     meters (mass flow, density and
                                     volume flow measurements).
6. Vortex formation flow meter....  ASME/ANSI MFC-6M-1998 (R2005),
                                     ``Measurement of Fluid Flow in
                                     Pipes Using Vortex Flow Meters''.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


 Table 4--Volumetric Methods for Initial Validation Check of Flow Meters
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Designation                             Title
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. ISA RP 16.6-1961...............  ``Methods and Equipment for
                                     Calibration of Variable Area Meters
                                     (Rotameters)''.
2. ANSI/ISA RP 31.1-1977..........  ``Specification, Installation, and
                                     Calibration of Turbine Flow
                                     Meters''.
3. ISO 8316:1987..................  ``Measurement of Liquid Flow in
                                     Closed Conduits--Method by
                                     Collection of Liquid in a
                                     Volumetric Tank''.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


  Table 5--Weighing Methods for Initial Validation Check of Flow Meters
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Designation                             Title
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. ASHRAE 41.8-1989...............  ``Standard Methods of Measurement of
                                     Flow of Liquids in Pipes Using
                                     Orifice Flow Meters''.
2. ISA RP 16.6-1961...............  ``Methods and Equipment for
                                     Calibration of Variable Area Meters
                                     (Rotameters)''.
3. ANSI/ISA RP 31.1-1977..........  ``Specification, Installation, and
                                     Calibration of Turbine Flow
                                     Meters''.

[[Page 59993]]


4. ANSI/ASME MFC-9M-1988..........  ``Measurement of Liquid Flow in
                                     Closed Conduits by Weighing
                                     Method''.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


 Table 6--Alternate Methods for Initial Validation Check of Temperature
                                 Sensors
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        You can perform
                                                          the initial
  If the temperature sensor in    And is used in . .   validation check
      your CPMS is a . . .                 .             of the sensor
                                                          using . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Thermocouple.................  Any application...  ASTM E220-07e1.
2. Thermocouple.................  A reducing          ASTM E452-02
                                   environment.        (2007).
3. Resistance temperature         Any application...  ASTM E644-06.
 detector.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


   Table 7--Alternate Methods for Initial Validation Check of Pressure
                                 Sensors
------------------------------------------------------------------------
  If the pressure sensor in      You can perform the initial validation
     your CPMS is a . . .           check of the sensor using . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Pressure gauge............  ASME B40.100-2005.
2. Metallic bonded resistance  ASTM E251-92 (2003).
 strain gauge.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


                   Table 8--CPMS Accuracy Requirements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     You must demonstrate that your CPMS
    If your CPMS measures . . .             operates within . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Temperature, in a non-cryogenic  An accuracy percentage (Ap) of 1.0 percent of the
                                     temperature measured in degrees
                                     Celsius or within an accuracy value
                                     (Av) of 2.8 degrees Celsius (5
                                     degrees Fahrenheit), whichever is
                                     greater.
2. Temperature, in a cryogenic      An accuracy percentage (Ap) of 2.5 percent of the
                                     temperature measured in degrees
                                     Celsius or within an accuracy value
                                     (Av) of 2.8 degrees Celsius (5
                                     degrees Fahrenheit), whichever is
                                     greater.
3. Pressure.......................  An accuracy percentage (Ap) of 5 percent or an accuracy
                                     value (Av) of 0.12 kilopascals (0.5
                                     inches of water column), whichever
                                     is greater.
4. Liquid flow rate...............  An accuracy percentage (Ap) of 5 percent or an accuracy
                                     value (Av) of 1.9 liters per minute
                                     (0.5 gallons per minute), whichever
                                     is greater.
5. Gas flow rate..................  a. A relative accuracy of 20 percent, if you
                                     demonstrate compliance using the
                                     relative accuracy test, or
                                    b. An accuracy percentage (Ap) of
                                     10 percent, if your
                                     CPMS measures steam flow rate, or
                                    c. An accuracy percentage (Ap) of
                                     5 percent or an
                                     accuracy value (Av) of 280 liters
                                     per minute (10 cubic feet per
                                     minute), whichever is greater, for
                                     all other gases and accuracy audit
                                     methods.
6. Mass flow rate.................  An accuracy percentage (Ap) of 5 percent.
7. pH.............................  An accuracy value (Av) of 0.2 pH units.
8. Conductivity...................  An accuracy percentage (Ap) of 5 percent.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. Appendix F to part 60 is amended as follows:
    a. In Procedure 1, by:
    i. Revising the second (last) sentence in the first paragraph of 
section 1.1; and
    ii. Adding sections 4.1.1, 4.1.2, 4.3.3, 4.4.1, 5.5.5, and 5.1.7.
    b. Adding Procedure 4 in numerical order to read as follows:

Appendix F to Part 60--Quality Assurance Procedures

Procedure 1. Quality Assurance Requirements for Gas Continuous 
Emission Monitoring Systems Used for Compliance Determination

1. Applicability and Principle

    1.1 * * * The CEMS may include systems that monitor one 
pollutant (e.g., SO2 or NOX), a combination of 
pollutants (e.g., benzene and hexane), or diluents (e.g., 
O2 or CO2).
* * * * *

4. CD Assessment

* * * * *
    4.1.1 Multiple Organic Pollutant CEMS. Source owners and 
operators of gas chromatographic CEMS that are subject to PS 9 and 
are used to monitor multiple organic pollutants must perform the 
daily CD requirement specified in section 4.1 of this procedure 
using any one of the target pollutants specified in the applicable 
regulation.
    4.1.2 CEMS Subject to PS 15. To satisfy the daily CD requirement 
of this procedure, source owners and operators of extractive Fourier 
Transfer Infrared (FTIR) CEMS that are subject to PS 15 must perform 
at least once daily the calibration transfer standards check, 
analyte spike check, and background deviation check specified in PS-
15 (40 CFR part 60, appendix B), sections 10.1, 10.4, and 10.6, 
respectively. The analyte spike check can be performed using any of 
the target analytes.
* * * * *
    4.3.3 Out-of-Control Definition for CEMS Subject to PS 15. If 
the calibration transfer standards check, analyte spike check, or 
background deviation check exceeds twice the accuracy criterion of 
5 percent for five, consecutive daily periods, the CEMS 
is out of control. If the calibration transfer standards check, 
analyte spike check, or background deviation check exceeds four 
times the accuracy criterion of 5 percent during any 
daily calibration check, the CEMS is out of control. If the CEMS is 
out of control, take necessary corrective action. Following 
corrective action, repeat the calibration checks specified in this 
section.
* * * * *
    4.4.1 Data Storage Requirements for CEMS Subject to PS 15. In 
addition to the requirements of section 4.4 of this procedure, 
source owners and operators of CEMS subject to PS-15 (40 CFR part 
60, appendix B) must satisfy the data storage requirements of 
section 6.3 of PS-15.
* * * * *

5. Data Accuracy Assessment

* * * * *
    5.1.5 Audits for CEMS Subject to PS 9. For CEMS that are subject 
to PS 9, the requirements of section 5.1 of this procedure apply, 
with the following exceptions:

[[Page 59994]]

    (1) The RATA specified in sections 5.1.1 and 5.1.4 of this 
procedure does not apply.
    (2) The CGA must be conducted every calendar quarter.
    (3) The CGA must be conducted according to the procedures 
specified in section 5.3 of PS-9 (40 CFR part 60, appendix B), 
except that the audit must be performed at two points as specified 
in section 5.1.2 of this procedure.
    (4) The CGA must be conducted for each target pollutant 
specified in the applicable regulation.
    (5) The RAA specified in section 5.1.3 of this procedure does 
not apply.
    (6) Audits conducted under this procedure fulfill the 
requirement of section 5.3 of PS-9 (40 CFR part 60, appendix B) for 
quarterly performance audits.
    5.1.6 Audits for CEMS Subject to PS-15. For CEMS that are 
subject to PS-15 (40 CFR part 60, appendix B), the requirements of 
section 5.1 of this procedure apply, with the following exceptions:
    (1) The RATA specified in sections 5.1.1 and 5.1.4, the CGA 
specified in section 5.1.2, and the RAA specified in section 5.1.3 
of this procedure do not apply.
    (2) To satisfy the quarterly accuracy audit requirement of this 
procedure, one of the accuracy checks specified in PS-15 (40 CFR 
part 60, appendix B), sections 9.1 (Audit Sample), 9.2 (Audit 
Spectra), and 9.3 (Submit Spectra for Independent Analysis) must be 
performed at least once each calendar quarter, consistent with the 
following additional criteria:
    (i) The audit sample check, specified in section 9.1 of PS-15 
(40 CFR part 60, appendix B), must be conducted at least once every 
four calendar quarters.
    (ii) The audit spectra check, specified in section 9.2 of PS-15 
(40 CFR part 60, appendix B), can be used to satisfy the quarterly 
accuracy audit requirement only once every four calendar quarters.
    (3) Audits conducted under this procedure fulfill the 
requirement of section 9 of PS-15 (40 CFR part 60, appendix B) for 
quarterly or semiannual QA/QC checks on the operation of extractive 
FTIR CEMS.
* * * * *

Procedure 4. Quality Assurance Requirements for Continuous 
Parameter Monitoring Systems at Stationary Sources

1.0 What is the purpose of this procedure?

    The purpose of this procedure is to establish the minimum 
requirements for evaluating on an ongoing basis the quality of data 
produced by your continuous parameter monitoring system (CPMS), and 
the effectiveness of quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) 
procedures that you have developed for your CPMS. This procedure 
applies instead of the QA and QC requirements for applicable CPMS 
specified in any applicable subpart to parts 60, 61, or 63, unless 
otherwise specified in the applicable subpart. This procedure 
presents requirements in general terms to allow you to develop a QC 
program that is most effective for your circumstances. This 
procedure does not restrict your current QA/QC procedures to ensure 
compliance with applicable regulations. Instead, you are encouraged 
to develop and implement a more extensive QA/QC program or to 
continue such programs where they already exist.
    1.1 To what types of devices does Procedure 4 apply? This 
procedure applies to any CPMS that is subject to Performance 
Specification 17 (PS-17).
    1.2 When must I comply with Procedure 4? You must comply with 
this procedure when conditions (1) or (2) of this section occur.
    (1) At the time you install and place into operation a CPMS that 
is subject to PS-17.
    (2) At the time any of your existing CPMS become subject to PS-
17.
    1.3 How does Procedure 4 affect me if I am also subject to QA 
procedures under another applicable subpart? This procedure does not 
apply if any more stringent QA requirements apply to you under an 
applicable requirement. You are required to comply with the more 
stringent of the applicable QA requirements.

2.0 What are the basic requirements of Procedure 4?

    This procedure requires all owners and operators of a CPMS to 
perform periodic QA evaluations of CPMS performance and to develop 
and implement QC programs to ensure that CPMS data quality is 
maintained.
    2.1 What types of procedures are required for me to demonstrate 
compliance? This procedure requires you to meet the requirements of 
paragraphs (1) and (2) of this section.
    (1) Perform periodic accuracy audits of your CPMS; and
    (2) Take corrective action when your CPMS fails to meet the 
accuracy requirements of this procedure.
    2.2 What types of recordkeeping and reporting activities are 
required by Procedure 4? This procedure does not have any reporting 
requirements but does require you to record and maintain data that 
identify your CPMS and show the results of any performance 
demonstrations of your CPMS. Recordkeeping requirements are 
specified in section 14 of this procedure.

3.0 What special definitions apply to Procedure 4?

    3.1 Accuracy. A measure of the closeness of a measurement to the 
true or actual value.
    3.2 Accuracy hierarchy. The ratio of the accuracy of a 
measurement instrument to the accuracy of a calibrated instrument or 
standard that is used to measure the accuracy of the measurement 
instrument. For example, if the accuracy of a calibrated temperature 
measurement device is 0.2 percent, and the accuracy of a 
thermocouple is 1.0 percent, the accuracy hierarchy is 5.0 (1.0 / 
0.2 = 5.0).
    3.3 Calibration drift. The difference between a reference value 
and the output value of a CPMS after a period of operation during 
which no unscheduled maintenance, repair, or adjustment took place.
    3.4 Conductivity CPMS. The total equipment that is used to 
measure and record liquid conductivity on a continuous basis.
    3.5 Continuous parameter monitoring system (CPMS). The total 
equipment that is used to measure and record parameters, such as 
temperature, pressure, liquid flow rate, gas flow rate, mass flow 
rate, pH or conductivity, in one or more locations on a continuous 
basis.
    3.6 Differential pressure tube. A device, such as a pitot tube, 
that consists of one or more pairs of tubes that are oriented to 
measure the velocity pressure and static pressure at one of more 
fixed points within a duct for the purpose of determining gas 
velocity.
    3.7 Electronic components. The electronic signal modifier or 
conditioner, transmitter, and power supply associated with a CPMS.
    3.8 Flow CPMS. The total equipment that is used to measure 
liquid flow rate, gas flow rate, or mass flow rate on a continuous 
basis.
    3.9 Mass flow rate. The measurement of solid, liquid, or gas 
flow in units of mass per time, such as kilograms per minute or tons 
per hour.
    3.10 Mechanical component. Any component of a CPMS that consists 
of or includes moving parts or that is used to apply or transfer 
force to another component or part of a CPMS.
    3.11 pH CPMS. The total equipment that is used to measure and 
record liquid pH on a continuous basis.
    3.12 Pressure CPMS. The total equipment that is used to measure 
and record the pressure of a liquid or gas at any location or the 
differential pressure of a gas or liquid at any two locations on a 
continuous basis.
    3.13 Resolution. The smallest detectable or legible increment of 
measurement.
    3.14 Sensor. The component of a CPMS that senses the parameter 
being measured (currently temperature, pressure, liquid flow rate, 
gas flow rate, mass flow rate, pH, or conductivity) and generates an 
output signal. Table 1 identifies the sensor components of some 
commonly used CPMS.
    3.15 Solid mass flow rate. The measurement in units of mass per 
time of the rate at which a solid material is processed or 
transferred. Examples of solid mass flow rate are the rate at which 
ore is fed to a material dryer or the rate at which powdered lime is 
injected into an exhaust duct.
    3.16 Temperature CPMS. The total equipment that is used to 
measure and record the temperature of a liquid or gas at any 
location or the differential temperature of a gas or liquid at any 
two locations on a continuous basis.
    3.17 Total equipment. The sensor, mechanical components, 
electronic components, data recording, electrical wiring, and other 
components of a CPMS.

4.0 Interferences [Reserved]

5.0 What do I need to know to ensure the safety of persons who perform 
the accuracy audits specified in Procedure 4?

    The accuracy audits required under Procedure 4 may involve 
hazardous materials, operations, site conditions, and equipment. 
This QA procedure does not purport to address all of the safety 
issues associated with these audits. It is the responsibility of the 
user to establish appropriate safety and health practices and 
determine the applicable regulatory limitations prior to performing 
these audits.

[[Page 59995]]

6.0 What are the equipment requirements for Procedure 4?

    6.1 What types of equipment do I need for performing the 
accuracy audit of my CPMS? The specific types of equipment that you 
need for your CPMS accuracy audit depend on the type of CPMS, site-
specific conditions, and the method that you choose for conducting 
the accuracy audit, as specified in sections 8.1 through 8.5 of this 
procedure. In most cases, you will need the equipment described in 
paragraphs (1) and (2) of this section.
    (1) A separate device that either measures the same parameter 
that your CPMS measures, or that simulates the same electronic 
signal or response that your CPMS generates, and
    (2) Any test ports, pressure taps, valves, fittings, or other 
equipment required to perform the specific procedures of the 
accuracy audit method that you choose, as specified in section 8.1 
of this procedure.
    6.2 What are the accuracy requirements for the equipment that I 
use to audit the accuracy of my CPMS? Unless you meet one of the 
exceptions listed in section 6.3 of this procedure, any measurement 
instrument or device that you use to conduct an accuracy audit of 
your CPMS must have an accuracy that is traceable to National 
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) standards and must have 
an accuracy hierarchy of at least three. To determine if a 
measurement instrument or device satisfies this accuracy hierarchy 
requirement, follow the procedure described in section 12.1 of this 
procedure.
    6.3 Are there any exceptions to the accuracy requirement of 
section 6.2 of this procedure? There are three exceptions to the 
NIST-traceable accuracy requirement specified in section 6.2, as 
described in paragraphs (1) through (3) of this section.
    (1) If you perform an accuracy audit of your CPMS by comparison 
to a redundant CPMS, you need not meet the NIST-traceability 
requirement of section 6.2; however, the redundant CPMS must have an 
accuracy equal to or better than the corresponding minimum required 
accuracy specified in Table 6 of this procedure for that specific 
type of CPMS.
    (2) As an alternative for the calibrated pressure measurement 
device with NIST-traceable accuracy that is required in paragraphs 
(2) and (4) of section 8.2 and in paragraph (4) of section 8.3 of 
this specification, you can use a mercury-in-glass or water-in-glass 
U-tube manometer to check the accuracy of your pressure CPMS.
    (3) When validating a flow rate CPMS using the methods specified 
in paragraphs (2), (3), or (7) of section 8.3 of this specification, 
the container used to collect or weigh the liquid or solid is not 
required to have NIST-traceable accuracy.

7.0 What reagents or standards do I need to comply with Procedure 4?

    The specific reagents and standards needed to demonstrate 
compliance with this procedure depend upon the parameter that your 
CPMS measures and the method that you choose to check the accuracy 
of your CPMS. Sections 8.1 through 8.5 of this procedure identify 
the specific reagents and standards that you will need to conduct 
accuracy audits of your CPMS.

8.0 What quality assurance and quality control measures are required by 
Procedure 4 for my CPMS?

    You must perform accuracy audits, meet the accuracy requirements 
of this procedure, and perform any additional checks of the CPMS as 
specified in sections 8.1 through 8.9 of this procedure.
    8.1 How do I perform an accuracy audit for my temperature CPMS? 
To perform the accuracy audit, you can choose one of the methods 
described in paragraphs (1) through (3) of this section.
    (1) Comparison to Redundant Temperature Sensor. This method 
requires your CPMS to have a primary temperature sensor and a 
redundant temperature sensor. The redundant temperature sensor must 
be installed adjacent to the primary temperature sensor and must be 
subject to the same environment as the primary temperature sensor. 
To perform the accuracy audit, record three pairs of concurrent 
temperature measurements within a 24-hour period. Each pair of 
concurrent measurements must consist of a temperature measurement by 
each of the two temperature sensors. The minimum time interval 
between any two such pairs of consecutive temperature measurements 
is one hour. You must take these readings during periods when the 
process or control device that is being monitored by the CPMS is 
operating normally. Calculate the mean of the three values for each 
temperature sensor. The mean values must agree within the minimum 
required accuracy specified in Table 6 of this procedure. If your 
CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 6, the accuracy 
audit is complete. If your CPMS does not satisfy the accuracy 
requirement of Table 6 of this procedure, check all system 
components and take any corrective action that is necessary to 
achieve the required minimum accuracy. Repeat this accuracy audit 
procedure until the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this 
procedure is satisfied. If you replace any electrical or mechanical 
components of your temperature CPMS, you must perform the procedures 
outlined in PS-17. If you are required to measure and record 
temperatures at multiple locations, repeat this procedure for each 
location.
    (2) Comparison to Calibrated Temperature Measurement Device. 
Place the sensor of a calibrated temperature measurement device 
adjacent to the sensor of your temperature CPMS in a location that 
is subject to the same environment as the sensor of your temperature 
CPMS. The calibrated temperature measurement device must satisfy the 
accuracy requirements specified in section 6.2 of this procedure. 
Allow sufficient time for the response of the calibrated temperature 
measurement device to reach equilibrium. With the process or control 
device that is monitored by your CPMS operating under normal 
conditions, record concurrently the temperatures measured by your 
temperature CPMS and the calibrated temperature measurement device. 
Using the temperature measured by the calibrated measurement device 
as the value for Vc, follow the procedure specified in 
section 12.2 of this procedure to determine if your CPMS satisfies 
the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this procedure. If you 
determine that your CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 
6 of this procedure, the accuracy audit is complete. If your CPMS 
does not satisfy the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this 
procedure, check all system components and take any corrective 
action that is necessary to achieve the required minimum accuracy. 
Repeat this procedure until the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of 
this procedure is satisfied. If you replace any electrical or 
mechanical components of the primary CPMS, you must perform the 
procedures outlined in PS-17 (40 CFR part 60, appendix B). If you 
are required to measure and record temperatures at multiple 
locations, repeat this procedure for each location.
    (3) Separate Sensor Check and System Check by Temperature 
Simulation. This method applies to temperature CPMS that use either 
a thermocouple or a resistance temperature detector as the 
temperature sensor. First, perform the temperature sensor check 
using the appropriate ASTM standard listed in Table 2 of this 
procedure. To perform the system check, record the temperature using 
your temperature CPMS with the process or control device that is 
monitored by your temperature CPMS operating under normal 
conditions. Under the same operating conditions, disconnect the 
sensor from the CPMS system and connect a calibrated simulation 
device that is designed to simulate the same type of response as the 
CPMS sensor. The simulation device must satisfy the accuracy 
requirements specified in section 6.2 of this procedure. Within 15 
minutes of measuring and recording the temperature using your 
temperature CPMS, simulate the same temperature recorded for the 
temperature CPMS. Allow sufficient time for the response of the 
simulation device to reach equilibrium. Using the temperature 
simulated by the calibrated simulation device as the value for 
Vc, follow the procedure specified in section 12.2 of 
this procedure to determine if your CPMS satisfies the accuracy 
requirement of Table 6 of this procedure. If you determine that your 
CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this 
procedure, the accuracy audit is complete. If the calculated 
accuracy does not meet the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this 
procedure, check all system components and take any corrective 
action that is necessary to achieve the required minimum accuracy. 
Repeat this procedure until the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of 
this procedure is satisfied. If you replace any electrical or 
mechanical components of your temperature CPMS, you must perform the 
procedures outlined in PS-17. If you are required to measure and 
record temperatures at multiple locations, repeat this procedure for 
each location.
    8.2 How do I perform an accuracy audit for my pressure CPMS? To 
perform the accuracy audit, you can choose one of the methods 
described in paragraphs (1) through (4) of this section.
    (1) Comparison to redundant pressure sensor. This method 
requires your CPMS to

[[Page 59996]]

have a primary pressure sensor and a redundant pressure sensor. The 
redundant pressure sensor must be installed adjacent to the primary 
pressure sensor and must be subject to the same environment as the 
primary pressure sensor. To perform the accuracy audit, record three 
pairs of concurrent pressure measurements within a 24-hour period. 
Each pair of concurrent measurements must consist of a pressure 
measurement by each of the two pressure sensors. The minimum time 
interval between any two such pairs of consecutive pressure 
measurements is one hour. You must take these readings during 
periods when the process or control device that is being monitored 
by the CPMS is operating normally. Calculate the mean of the three 
values for each pressure sensor. The mean values must agree within 
the minimum required accuracy specified in Table 6 of this 
procedure. If your CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 
6 of this procedure, the accuracy audit is complete. If your CPMS 
does not satisfy the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this 
procedure, check all system components and take any corrective 
action that is necessary to achieve the required minimum accuracy. 
Repeat this accuracy audit procedure until the accuracy requirement 
of Table 6 of this procedure is satisfied. If you replace any 
electrical or mechanical components of your pressure CPMS, you must 
perform the procedures outlined in PS-17 (40 CFR part 60, appendix 
B). If you are required to measure and record pressure at multiple 
locations, repeat this procedure for each location.
    (2) Comparison to Calibrated Pressure Measurement Device. With 
the process or control device that is monitored by your pressure 
CPMS operating under normal conditions, record the pressure at each 
location that is monitored by your pressure CPMS. For each pressure 
monitoring location, connect the process lines from the process or 
emission control device that is monitored by your pressure CPMS to a 
mercury-in-glass U-tube manometer, a water-in-glass U-tube 
manometer, or calibrated pressure measurement device. If a 
calibrated pressure measurement device is used, the device must 
satisfy the accuracy requirements of section 6.2 of this procedure. 
The calibrated pressure measurement device must also have a range 
equal to or greater than the range of your pressure CPMS. Perform a 
leak test on all manometer or calibrated pressure measurement device 
connections using the method specified in section 8.9 of this 
procedure. Allow sufficient time for the response of the calibrated 
pressure measurement device to reach equilibrium. Within 30 minutes 
of measuring and recording the corresponding pressure using your 
CPMS, record the pressure measured by the calibrated pressure 
measurement device at each location. Using the pressure measured by 
the calibrated pressure measurement device as the value for 
Vc, follow the procedure specified in section 12.2 of 
this procedure to determine if your CPMS satisfies the accuracy 
requirement of Table 6 of this procedure. If you determine that your 
CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this 
procedure, the accuracy audit is complete. If the calculated 
accuracy does not meet the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this 
procedure, check all system components and take any corrective 
action that is necessary to achieve the accuracy requirements. 
Repeat this procedure until the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of 
this procedure is satisfied. If you replace any electrical or 
mechanical components of your pressure CPMS, you must perform the 
procedures outlined in PS-17 (40 CFR part 60, appendix B). If you 
are required to measure and record pressures at multiple locations, 
repeat this procedure for each location.
    (3) Separate Sensor Check and System Check by Pressure 
Simulation Using a Calibrated Pressure Source. Perform the pressure 
sensor check using the appropriate ASTM standard listed in Table 3 
of this procedure. These sensor check methods apply only to pressure 
CPMS that use either a pressure gauge or a metallic-bonded 
resistance strain gauge as the pressure sensor. To perform the 
system check, begin by disconnecting or closing off the process line 
or lines to your pressure CPMS. For each location that is monitored 
by your pressure CPMS, connect a pressure source to your CPMS. The 
pressure source must be calibrated and must satisfy the accuracy 
requirements of section 6.2 of this procedure. The pressure source 
also must be adjustable, either continuously or incrementally over 
the pressure range of your pressure CPMS. Perform a leak test on the 
calibrated pressure source using the method specified in section 8.9 
of this procedure. Using the calibrated pressure source, apply to 
each location that is monitored by your CPMS a pressure that is 
within 10 percent of the normal operating pressure of 
your pressure CPMS. Allow sufficient time for the response of the 
calibrated pressure source to reach equilibrium. Using the pressure 
applied by the calibrated pressure source as the value for 
Vc, follow the procedure specified in section 12.2 of 
this procedure to determine if your CPMS satisfies the accuracy 
requirement of Table 6 of this procedure. If you determine that your 
CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this 
procedure, the accuracy audit is complete. If your CPMS does not 
meet the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this procedure, check 
all system components and take any other corrective action that is 
necessary to achieve the required minimum accuracy. Repeat this 
procedure until the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this 
procedure is satisfied. If you replace any electrical or mechanical 
components of your pressure CPMS, you must perform the procedures 
outlined in PS-17 (40 CFR part 60, appendix B). If you are required 
to measure and record pressure at multiple locations, repeat this 
procedure for each location.
    (4) Separate Sensor and System Check by Pressure Simulation 
Procedure Using a Pressure Source and a Calibrated Pressure 
Measurement Device. Perform the pressure sensor check using the 
appropriate ASTM standard listed in Table 3 of this procedure. These 
sensor check methods apply only to pressure CPMS that use either a 
pressure gauge or a metallic-bonded resistance strain gauge as the 
pressure sensor. To perform the system check, begin by disconnecting 
or closing off the process line or lines to your pressure CPMS. 
Attach a mercury-in-glass U-tube manometer, a water-in-glass U-tube 
manometer, or a calibrated pressure measurement device (the 
reference pressure measurement device) in parallel to your pressure 
CPMS. If a calibrated pressure measurement device is used, the 
device must satisfy the accuracy requirements of section 6.2 of this 
procedure. Connect a pressure source to your pressure CPMS and the 
parallel reference pressure measurement device. Perform a leak test 
on all connections for the pressure source and calibrated pressure 
measurement device using the method as specified in section 8.9 of 
this procedure. Apply pressure to your CPMS and the parallel 
reference pressure measurement device. Allow sufficient time for the 
responses of your CPMS and the parallel reference pressure 
measurement device to reach equilibrium. Record the pressure 
measured by your pressure CPMS and the reference pressure 
measurement device. Using the pressure measured by the parallel 
reference pressure measurement device as the value for 
Vc, follow the procedure specified in section 12.2 of 
this procedure to determine if your CPMS satisfies the accuracy 
requirement of Table 6 of this procedure. If you determine that your 
CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this 
procedure, the accuracy audit is complete. If your CPMS does not 
meet the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this procedure, check 
all system components and take any corrective action that is 
necessary to achieve the required minimum accuracy. Repeat this 
accuracy audit until the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this 
procedure is satisfied. If you replace any electrical or mechanical 
components of your pressure CPMS, you must perform the procedures 
outlined in PS-17 (40 CFR part 60, appendix B). If you are required 
to measure and record pressure at multiple locations, repeat this 
procedure for each location.
    8.3 How do I perform an accuracy audit for my flow CPMS? To 
perform the accuracy audit on your flow CPMS, you can choose one of 
the methods described in paragraphs (1) through (7) of this section 
that is applicable to the type of material measured by your flow 
CPMS and the type of sensor used in your flow CPMS.
    (1) Comparison to redundant flow sensor. This method requires 
your CPMS to have a primary flow sensor and a redundant flow sensor. 
The redundant flow sensor must be installed adjacent to the primary 
flow sensor and must be subject to the same environment as the 
primary flow sensor. If using two Coriolis mass flow meters, care 
should be taken to avoid cross-talk, which is interference between 
the two meters due to mechanical coupling. Consult the manufacturer 
for specifics. To perform the accuracy audit, record three pairs of 
concurrent flow measurements within a 24-hour period. Each pair of 
concurrent measurements must consist of a flow measurement by each 
of the two flow sensors. The minimum time interval between any two 
such pairs of consecutive flow

[[Page 59997]]

measurements is one hour. You must take these readings during 
periods when the process or control device that is being monitored 
by the CPMS is operating normally. Calculate the mean of the three 
values for each flow sensor. The mean values must agree within the 
minimum required accuracy specified in Table 6 of this procedure. If 
your CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this 
procedure, the accuracy audit is complete. If your CPMS does not 
satisfy the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this procedure, check 
all system components and take any corrective action that is 
necessary to achieve the required minimum accuracy. Repeat this 
accuracy audit procedure until the accuracy requirement of Table 6 
of this procedure is satisfied. If you replace any electrical or 
mechanical components of your flow CPMS, you must perform the 
procedures outlined in PS-17 (40 CFR part 60, appendix B). If you 
are required to measure and record flow at multiple locations, 
repeat this procedure for each location.
    (2) Volumetric Method. This method applies to any CPMS that is 
designed to measure liquid flow rate. With the process or control 
device that is monitored by your flow CPMS operating under normal 
conditions, record the flow rate measured by your flow CPMS for the 
subject process line. Collect concurrently the liquid that is 
flowing through the same process line for a measured length of time 
using the Volumetric Method specified in one of the standards listed 
in Table 4 of this procedure. Using the flow rate measured by the 
Volumetric Method as the value for Vc, follow the 
procedure specified in section 12.2 of this procedure to determine 
if your CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this 
procedure. If you determine that your CPMS satisfies the accuracy 
requirement of Table 6 of this procedure, the accuracy audit is 
complete. If your CPMS does not satisfy the accuracy requirement of 
Table 6 of this procedure, check all system components and take any 
corrective action that is necessary to achieve the required minimum 
accuracy. Repeat this procedure until the accuracy requirement of 
Table 6 of this procedure is satisfied. If you replace any 
electrical or mechanical components of your flow CPMS, you must 
perform the procedures outlined in PS-17 (40 CFR part 60, appendix 
B). If you are required to measure and record flows at multiple 
locations, repeat this procedure for each location.
    (3) Gravimetric Method. This method applies to any CPMS that is 
designed to measure liquid flow rate, liquid mass flow rate, or 
solid mass flow rate. With the process or control device that is 
monitored by your flow CPMS operating under normal conditions, 
record the flow rate measured by your flow CPMS for the subject 
process line. At the same time, collect the material (liquid or 
solid) that is flowing or being transferred through the same process 
line for a measured length of time using the Weighing, Weigh Tank, 
or Gravimetric Methods specified in the standards listed in Table 5 
of this procedure. Using the flow rate measured by the Weighing, 
Weigh Tank, or Gravimetric Methods as the value for Vc, 
follow the procedure specified in section 12.2 of this procedure to 
determine if your CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 6 
of this procedure. If you determine that your CPMS satisfies the 
accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this procedure, the accuracy 
audit is complete. If your CPMS does not satisfy the accuracy 
requirement of Table 6 of this procedure, check all system 
components and take any corrective action that is necessary to 
achieve the required minimum accuracy. Repeat this procedure until 
the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this procedure is satisfied. 
If you replace any electrical or mechanical components of your flow 
CPMS, you must perform the procedures outlined in PS-17 (40 CFR part 
60, appendix B). If you are required to measure and record flows at 
multiple locations, repeat this procedure for each location.
    (4) Separate Sensor Check and System Check by Differential 
Pressure Measurement Method. This method applies only to flow CPMS 
that use a differential pressure measurement flow device, such as an 
orifice plate, flow nozzle, or venturi tube. This method may not be 
used to validate a flow CPMS that measures gas flow by means of one 
or more differential pressure tubes. To perform the sensor check, 
remove the flow constricting device and perform a visual inspection 
for wear or other deformities based on manufacturer's 
recommendations. Take any corrective action that is necessary to 
ensure its proper operation. To perform the system check, record the 
flow rate measured by your flow CPMS while the process or control 
device that is monitored by your CPMS operating under normal 
conditions. Under the same operating conditions, disconnect the 
pressure taps from your flow CPMS and connect the pressure taps to a 
mercury-in-glass U-tube manometer, a water-in-glass U-tube 
manometer, or calibrated differential pressure measurement device. 
If a calibrated pressure measurement device is used, the device must 
satisfy the accuracy requirements of section 6.2 of this procedure. 
Perform a leak test on all manometer or calibrated differential 
pressure measurement device connections using the method specified 
in section 8.9 of this procedure. Allow sufficient time for the 
response of the calibrated differential pressure measurement device 
to reach equilibrium. Within 30 minutes of measuring and recording 
the flow rate using your CPMS, record the pressure drop measured by 
the calibrated differential pressure measurement device. Using the 
manufacturer's literature or the procedures specified in ASME MFC-
3M-2004 (incorporated by reference--see Sec.  60.17), calculate the 
flow rate that corresponds to the differential pressure measured by 
the calibrated differential pressure measurement device. For CPMS 
that use an orifice flow meter, the procedures specified in ASHRAE 
41.8-1989 (incorporated by reference--see Sec.  60.17) also can be 
used to calculate the flow rate. Using the calculated flow rate as 
the value for Vc, follow the procedure specified in 
section 12.2 of this procedure to determine if your CPMS satisfies 
the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this procedure. If you 
determine that your CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 
6 of this procedure, the accuracy audit is complete. If your CPMS 
does not satisfy the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this 
procedure, check all system components and take any corrective 
action that is necessary to achieve the required minimum accuracy. 
Repeat this procedure until the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of 
this procedure is satisfied. If you replace any electrical or 
mechanical components of your flow CPMS, you must perform the 
procedures outlined in PS-17 (40 CFR part 60, appendix B). If you 
are required to measure and record flows at multiple locations, 
repeat this procedure for each location.
    (5) Separate Sensor Check and System Check by Pressure Source 
Flow Simulation Method. This method applies only to flow CPMS that 
use a differential pressure measurement flow device, such as an 
orifice plate, flow nozzle, or venturi tube. This method may not be 
used to validate a flow CPMS that measures gas flow by means of one 
or more differential pressure tubes. To perform the sensor check, 
remove the flow constricting device and perform a visual inspection 
for wear or other deformities based on manufacturer's 
recommendations. Take any corrective action that is necessary to 
ensure its proper operation. To perform the system check, connect 
separate pressure sources to the upstream and downstream sides of 
your pressure CPMS, where the pressure taps are normally connected. 
The pressure sources must be calibrated and must satisfy the 
accuracy requirements of section 6.2 of this procedure. The pressure 
sources also must be adjustable, either continuously or 
incrementally over the pressure range that corresponds to the range 
of your flow CPMS. Perform a leak test on all connections between 
the calibrated pressure sources and your flow CPMS using the method 
specified in section 8.9 of this procedure. Using the manufacturer's 
literature or the procedures specified in ASME MFC-3M-2004 
(incorporated by reference-see Sec.  60.17), calculate the required 
pressure drop that corresponds to the normal operating flow rate 
expected for your flow CPMS. For CPMS that use an orifice flow 
meter, the procedures specified in ASHRAE 41.8-1989 (incorporated by 
reference-see Sec.  60.17) also can be used to calculate the 
pressure drop. Use the calibrated pressure sources to apply the 
calculated pressure drop to your flow CPMS. Allow sufficient time 
for the responses of the calibrated pressure sources to reach 
equilibrium. Record the flow rate measured by your flow CPMS. Using 
the flow rate measured by your CPMS when the calculated pressure 
drop was applied as the value for Vc, follow the procedure specified 
in section 12.2 of this procedure to determine if your CPMS 
satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this procedure. If 
you determine that your CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of 
Table 6 of this procedure, the accuracy audit is complete. If your 
CPMS does not satisfy the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this 
procedure, check all system components and take any corrective 
action that is necessary to achieve the required minimum accuracy. 
Repeat this accuracy audit until the accuracy

[[Page 59998]]

requirement of Table 6 of this procedure is satisfied. If you 
replace any electrical or mechanical components of your flow CPMS, 
you must perform the procedures outlined in PS-17 (40 CFR part 60, 
appendix B). If you are required to measure and record flows at 
multiple locations, repeat this procedure for each location.
    (6) Relative Accuracy (RA) Test. This method applies to any flow 
CPMS that measures gas flow rate. If your flow CPMS uses a 
differential pressure tube as the flow sensor and does not include 
redundant sensors, you must use this method to validate your flow 
CPMS. The reference methods (RM's) applicable to this test are 
Methods 2, 2A, 2B, 2C, 2D, and 2F in 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-1, 
and Method 2G in 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-2. Conduct three sets of 
RM tests. Mark the beginning and end of each RM test period on the 
flow CPMS chart recordings or other permanent record of output. 
Determine the integrated flow rate for each RM test period. Perform 
the same calculations specified by PS-2 (40 CFR part 60, appendix 
B), section 7.5. If the RA is no greater than 20 percent of the mean 
value of the RM test data, the RA test is complete. If the RA is 
greater than 20 percent of the mean value of the RM test data, check 
all system components and take any corrective action that is 
necessary to achieve the required RA. Repeat this RA test until the 
RA requirement of this section is satisfied.
    (7) Material Weight Comparison Method. This method applies to 
any solid mass flow CPMS that uses a combination of a belt conveyor 
and scale and includes a totalizer. To conduct this test, pass a 
quantity of pre-weighed material over the belt conveyor in a manner 
consistent with actual loading conditions. To weigh the test 
quantity of material that is to be used during the accuracy audit, 
you must use a scale that satisfies the accuracy requirements of 
section 6.2 of this procedure. The test quantity must be sufficient 
to challenge the conveyor belt-scale system for at least three 
revolutions of the belt. Record the length of the test. Calculate 
the mass flow rate using the measured weight and the recorded time. 
Using this mass flow rate as the value for Vc, follow the procedure 
specified in section 12.2 of this procedure to determine if your 
CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this 
procedure. If your CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 
6 of this procedure, the accuracy audit is complete. If your CPMS 
does not satisfy the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this 
procedure, check all system components and take any corrective 
action that is necessary to achieve the required minimum accuracy. 
Repeat this accuracy audit procedure until the accuracy requirement 
of Table 6 of this procedure is satisfied. If you replace any 
electrical or mechanical components of your flow CPMS, you must 
perform the procedures outlined in PS-17 (40 CFR part 60, appendix 
B). If you are required to measure and record flow at multiple 
locations, repeat this procedure for each location.
    8.4 How do I perform an accuracy audit for my pH CPMS? To 
perform the accuracy audit, you can choose one of the methods 
described in paragraphs (1) through (3) of this section.
    (1) Comparison to redundant pH sensor. This method requires your 
CPMS to have a primary pH sensor and a redundant pH sensor. The 
redundant pH sensor must be installed adjacent to the primary pH 
sensor and must be subject to the same environment as the primary pH 
sensor. To perform the accuracy audit, concurrently record the pH 
measured by the two pH sensors. You must take these readings during 
periods when the process or control device that is being monitored 
by the CPMS is operating normally. The two pH values must agree 
within the minimum required accuracy specified in Table 6 of this 
procedure. If your CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 
6 of this procedure, the accuracy audit is complete. If your CPMS 
does not satisfy the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this 
procedure, check all system components and take any corrective 
action that is necessary to achieve the required minimum accuracy. 
Repeat this accuracy audit procedure until the accuracy requirement 
of Table 6 of this procedure is satisfied. If you replace any 
electrical or mechanical components of your pH CPMS, you must 
perform the procedures outlined in PS-17 (40 CFR part 60, appendix 
B). If you are required to measure and record pH at multiple 
locations, repeat this procedure for each location.
    (2) Comparison to Calibrated pH Meter. Place a calibrated pH 
measurement device adjacent to your pH CPMS so that the calibrated 
test device is subjected to the same environment as your pH CPMS. 
The calibrated pH measurement device must satisfy the accuracy 
requirements specified in section 6.2 of this procedure. Allow 
sufficient time for the response of the calibrated pH measurement 
device to reach equilibrium. With the process or control device that 
is monitored by your CPMS operating under normal conditions, record 
concurrently the pH measured by your pH CPMS and the calibrated pH 
measurement device. If concurrent pH readings are not possible, 
extract a sufficiently large sample from the process stream and 
perform measurements using a portion of the sample for each meter. 
Using the pH measured by the calibrated pH measurement device as the 
value for Vc, follow the procedure specified in section 12.2 of this 
procedure to determine if your CPMS satisfies the accuracy 
requirement of Table 6 of this procedure. If you determine that your 
CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 6, the accuracy 
audit is complete. If your CPMS does not satisfy the accuracy 
requirement of Table 6 of this procedure, check all system 
components and take any corrective action that is necessary to 
achieve the required minimum accuracy. Repeat this procedure until 
the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this procedure is satisfied. 
If you replace any electrical or mechanical components of the 
primary CPMS, you must perform the procedures outlined in PS-17 (40 
CFR part 60, appendix B). If you are required to measure and record 
pH at multiple locations, repeat this procedure for each location.
    (3) Single Point Calibration. This method requires the use of a 
certified buffer solution. All buffer solutions used must be 
certified by NIST and accurate to 0.02 pH units at 25 
[deg]C (77 [deg]F). Set the temperature on your pH meter to the 
temperature of the buffer solution, typically room temperature or 25 
[deg]C (77 [deg]F). If your pH meter is equipped with automatic 
temperature compensation, activate this feature before calibrating. 
Set your pH meter to measurement mode. Place the clean electrodes 
into the container of fresh buffer solution. If the expected pH of 
the process fluid lies in the acidic range (less than 7 pH), use a 
buffer solution with a pH value of 4.00. If the expected pH of the 
process fluid lies in the basic range (greater than 7 pH), use a 
buffer solution with a pH value of 10.00. Allow sufficient time for 
the response of your CPMS to reach equilibrium. Record the pH 
measured by your CPMS. Using the buffer solution pH as the value for 
Vc, follow the procedure specified in section 12.2 of 
this procedure to determine if your CPMS satisfies the accuracy 
requirement of Table 6 of this procedure. If you determine that your 
CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this 
procedure, the accuracy audit is complete. If your CPMS does not 
satisfy the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this procedure, 
calibrate your pH CPMS using the procedures specified in the 
manufacturer's owner's manual. If the manufacturer's owner's manual 
does not specify a two-point calibration procedure, you must perform 
a two-point calibration procedure based on ASTM D 1293-99 (2005) 
(incorporated by reference--see Sec.  60.17). If you replace any 
electrical or mechanical components of your pH CPMS, you must 
perform the procedures outlined in PS-17 (40 CFR part 60, appendix 
B). If you are required to measure and record pH at multiple 
locations, repeat this procedure for each location. If you are 
required to measure and record pH at multiple locations, repeat this 
procedure for each location.
    8.5 How do I perform an accuracy audit for my conductivity CPMS? 
To perform the accuracy audit, you can choose one of the methods 
described in paragraphs (1) through (3) of this section.
    (1) Comparison to Redundant Conductivity Sensor. This method 
requires your CPMS to have a primary conductivity sensor and a 
redundant conductivity sensor. The redundant conductivity sensor 
must be installed adjacent to the primary conductivity sensor and 
must be subject to the same environment as the primary conductivity 
sensor. To perform the accuracy audit, concurrently record the 
conductivity measured by the two conductivity sensors. You must take 
these readings during periods when the process or control device 
that is being monitored by the CPMS is operating normally. The two 
conductivity values must agree within the minimum required accuracy 
specified in Table 6 of this procedure. If your CPMS satisfies the 
accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this procedure, the accuracy 
audit is complete. If your CPMS does not satisfy the accuracy 
requirement of Table 6 of this procedure, check all system 
components and take any corrective action that is necessary to 
achieve the required minimum accuracy. Repeat this accuracy audit 
procedure until the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this

[[Page 59999]]

procedure is satisfied. If you replace any electrical or mechanical 
components of your conductivity CPMS, you must perform the 
procedures outlined in PS-17 (40 CFR part 60, appendix B). If you 
are required to measure and record conductivity at multiple 
locations, repeat this procedure for each location.
    (2) Comparison to Calibrated Conductivity Meter. Place a 
calibrated conductivity measurement device adjacent to your 
conductivity CPMS so that the calibrated test device is subjected to 
the same environment as your conductivity CPMS. The calibrated 
conductivity measurement device must satisfy the accuracy 
requirements specified in section 6.2 of this procedure. Allow 
sufficient time for the response of the calibrated conductivity 
measurement device to reach equilibrium. With the process or control 
device that is monitored by your CPMS operating under normal 
conditions, record concurrently the conductivity measured by your 
conductivity CPMS and the calibrated conductivity measurement 
device. If concurrent conductivity readings are not possible, 
extract a sufficiently large sample from the process stream and 
perform measurements using a portion of the sample for each meter. 
Using the conductivity measured by the calibrated conductivity 
measurement device as the value for Vc, follow the 
procedure specified in section 12.2 of this procedure to determine 
if your CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this 
procedure. If you determine that your CPMS satisfies the accuracy 
requirement of Table 6 of this procedure, the accuracy audit is 
complete. If your CPMS does not satisfy the accuracy requirement of 
Table 6 of this procedure, check all system components and take any 
corrective action that is necessary to achieve the required minimum 
accuracy. Repeat this procedure until the accuracy requirement of 
Table 6 of this procedure is satisfied. If you replace any 
electrical or mechanical components of the primary CPMS, you must 
perform the procedures outlined in PS-17 (40 CFR part 60, appendix 
B). If you are required to measure and record conductivity at 
multiple locations, repeat this procedure for each location.
    (3) Single Point Calibration. This method requires the use of a 
certified conductivity standard solution. All conductivity standard 
solutions used must be certified by NIST and accurate within 2 percent micromhos per centimeter ([mu]mhos/cm) (2 percent microsiemens per centimeter [mu]S/cm)) at 25 [deg]C 
(77 [deg]F). Choose a conductivity standard solution that is close 
to the measuring range for best results. Since conductivity is 
dependent on temperature, the conductivity tester should have an 
integral temperature sensor that adjusts the reading to a standard 
temperature, usually 25 [deg]C (77 [deg]F). If the conductivity 
meter allows for manual temperature compensation, set this value to 
25 [deg]C (77 [deg]F). Place the clean electrodes into the container 
of fresh conductivity standard solution. Allow sufficient time for 
the response of your CPMS to reach equilibrium. Record the 
conductivity measured by your CPMS. Using the conductivity standard 
solution as the value for VC, follow the procedure 
specified in section 12.2 of this procedure to determine if your 
CPMS satisfies the accuracy requirement of Table 6 of this 
procedure. If you determine that your CPMS satisfies the accuracy 
requirement of Table 6 of this procedure, the accuracy audit is 
complete. If your CPMS does not satisfy the accuracy requirement of 
Table 6 of this procedure, calibrate your conductivity CPMS using 
the procedures specified in the manufacturer's owner's manual. If 
the manufacturer's owner's manual does not specify a calibration 
procedure, you must perform a calibration procedure based on ASTM D 
1125-95 (2005) or ASTM D 5391-99 (2005) (incorporated by reference--
see Sec.  60.17). If you replace any electrical or mechanical 
components of your conductivity CPMS, you must perform the 
procedures outlined in PS-17 (40 CFR part 60, appendix B). If you 
are required to measure and record conductivity at multiple 
locations, repeat this procedure for each location.
    8.6 Are there any acceptable alternative procedures for 
evaluating my CPMS? You may use alternative procedures for 
evaluating the operation of your CPMS if the alternative procedures 
are approved by the Administrator.
    8.7 How often must I perform an accuracy audit of my CPMS? 
Depending on the parameter measured (temperature, pressure, flow, 
pH, or conductivity), you must perform the accuracy audits according 
to the frequencies specified in paragraphs (1) and (2) of this 
section.
    (1) Temperature, Pressure, Flow, and Conductivity. If your CPMS 
measures temperature, pressure, flow rate, or conductivity, you must 
perform an accuracy audit of your CPMS at least quarterly using the 
procedures specified in sections 8.1 through 8.3 and 8.5, 
respectively, of this procedure. You also must perform within 48 
hours an accuracy audit of your CPMS following any periods of at 
least 24 hours in duration throughout which:
    (i) The value of the measured parameter exceeded the maximum 
rated operating limit of the sensor, as specified in the 
manufacturer's owner's manual, or
    (ii) The value of the measured parameter remained off the scale 
of the CPMS data recording system.
    (2) pH. If your CPMS measures pH, you must perform an accuracy 
audit of your pH CPMS at least weekly using the procedures specified 
in section 8.4 of this procedure.
    8.8 What other checks must I do on my CPMS? According to the 
parameter being measured (temperature, pressure, flow, pH, or 
conductivity), you must perform the additional checks specified in 
paragraphs (1) through (4) of this section.
    (1) Temperature. If your temperature CPMS is not equipped with a 
redundant temperature sensor, at least quarterly, perform a visual 
inspection of all components of your temperature CPMS for physical 
and operational integrity and all electrical connections for 
oxidation and galvanic corrosion. You must take necessary corrective 
action to replace or repair any damaged components as soon as 
possible.
    (2) Pressure. At least monthly, check all mechanical connections 
for leakage. If your pressure CPMS is not equipped with a redundant 
pressure sensor, at least quarterly, perform a visual inspection of 
all components of the pressure CPMS for physical and operational 
integrity and all electrical connections for oxidation and galvanic 
corrosion. You must take necessary corrective action to replace or 
repair any damaged components as soon as possible.
    (3) Flow Rate. At least monthly, check all mechanical 
connections for leakage. If your flow CPMS is not equipped with a 
redundant flow sensor, at least quarterly, perform a visual 
inspection of all components of the flow CPMS for physical and 
operational integrity and all electrical connections for oxidation 
and galvanic corrosion. You must take necessary corrective action to 
replace or repair any damaged components as soon as possible.
    (4) pH. If your pH CPMS is not equipped with a redundant sensor, 
at least monthly, perform a visual inspection of all components of 
the pH CPMS for physical and operational integrity and all 
electrical connections for oxidation and galvanic corrosion. You 
must take necessary corrective action to replace or repair any 
damaged components as soon as possible.
    (5) Conductivity. If your conductivity CPMS is not equipped with 
a redundant sensor, at least quarterly, perform a visual inspection 
of all components of the conductivity CPMS for physical and 
operational integrity and all electrical connections for oxidation 
and galvanic corrosion. You must take necessary corrective action to 
replace or repair any damaged components as soon as possible.
    8.9 How do I perform a leak test on pressure connections, as 
required by this procedure? You can satisfy the leak test 
requirements of sections 8.2 and 8.3 of this procedure by following 
the procedures specified in paragraphs (1) through (3) of this 
section.
    (1) For each pressure connection, apply a pressure that is equal 
to the highest pressure the connection is likely to be subjected to 
or 0.24 kilopascals (1.0 inch of water column), whichever is 
greater.
    (2) Close off the connection between the applied pressure source 
and the connection that is being leak-tested.
    (3) If the applied pressure remains stable for at least 15 
seconds, the connection is considered to be leak tight. If the 
applied pressure does not remain stable for at least 15 seconds, 
take any corrective action necessary to make the connection leak 
tight and repeat this leak test procedure.

9.0 What quality control measures are required by this procedure for my 
CPMS?

    You must develop and implement a QA/QC program for your CPMS 
according to section 9.1 of this procedure. You must also maintain 
written QA/QC procedures for your CPMS.
    9.1 What elements must be covered by my QA/QC program? Your QA/
QC program must address, at a minimum, the elements listed in 
paragraphs (1) through (5) of this section.
    (1) Accuracy audit procedures for the CPMS sensor;

[[Page 60000]]

    (2) Calibration procedures, including procedures for assessing 
and adjusting the calibration drift (CD) of the CPMS;
    (3) Preventive maintenance of the CPMS (including a spare parts 
inventory);
    (4) Data recording, calculations, and reporting; and
    (5) Corrective action for a malfunctioning CPMS.
    9.1 How long must I maintain written QA/QC procedures for my 
CPMS? You are required to keep written QA/QC procedures on record 
and available for inspection by the enforcement agency for the life 
of your CPMS or until you are no longer subject to the requirements 
of this procedure.

10.0 Calibration and Standardization [Reserved]

11.0 Analytical Procedure [Reserved]

12.0 What calculations are needed?

    The calculations needed to comply with this procedure are 
described in sections 12.1 and 12.2 of this procedure.
    12.1 How do I determine if a calibrated measurement device 
satisfies the accuracy hierarchy specified in section 6.2 of this 
procedure? To determine if a calibrated measurement device satisfies 
the accuracy hierarchy requirement, follow the procedure described 
in paragraphs (1) and (2) of this section.
    (1) Calculate the accuracy hierarchy (Ah) using 
Equation 4-1.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP09OC08.013

Where:

Ah = Accuracy hierarchy, dimensionless.
Ar = Required accuracy (Ap or Av) 
specified in Table 6 of this procedure, percent or units of 
parameter value (e.g., degrees Celsius, kilopascals, liters per 
minute, pH units).
Ac = Accuracy of calibrated measurement device, same 
units as Ar.

    (2) If the accuracy hierarchy (Ah) is equal to or 
greater than 3.0, the calibrated measurement device satisfies the 
accuracy hierarchy of section 6.2 of this procedure.
    12.2 How do I determine if my CPMS satisfies the accuracy 
requirement of Procedure 4? To determine if your CPMS satisfies the 
accuracy requirement of this procedure, follow the procedure 
described in paragraphs (1) through (4) of this section.
    (1) If your CPMS measures temperature, pressure, or flow rate, 
calculate the accuracy percent value (Apv) using Equation 
4-2. If your CPMS measures pH, proceed to paragraph (2) of this 
section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP09OC08.014

Where:

Apv = Accuracy percent value, units of parameter measured 
(e.g., degrees Celsius, kilopascals, liters per minute).
Vc = Parameter value measured by the calibrated 
measurement device or measured by your CPMS when a calibrated signal 
simulator is applied to your CPMS during the initial validation 
check, units of parameter measured (e.g., degrees Celsius, 
kilopascals, liters per minute).
Ap = Accuracy percentage specified in Table 6 that 
corresponds to your CPMS, percent.

    (2) If your CPMS measures temperature, pressure, conductivity, 
or flow rate other than mass flow rate or steam flow rate, compare 
the accuracy percent value (Apv) to the accuracy value 
(Av) specified in Table 6 of this procedure and select 
the greater of the two values. Use this greater value as the 
allowable deviation (da) in paragraph (4) of this 
section.
    (3) If your CPMS measures pH, use the accuracy value 
(Av) specified in Table 6 of this procedure as the 
allowable deviation (da).
    (4) If your CPMS measures steam flow rate, mass flow rate, or 
conductivity, use the accuracy percent value (Apv) 
calculated using Equation 2 as the allowable deviation 
(da).
    (5) Using Equation 4-3, calculate the measured deviation 
(dm), which is the absolute value of the difference 
between the parameter value measured by the calibrated device 
(Vc) and the value measured by your CPMS (Vm).
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP09OC08.015

Where:

dm = Measured deviation, units of the parameter measured 
(e.g., degrees Celsius, kilopascals, liters per minute).
Vc = Parameter value measured by the calibrated 
measurement device or measured by your CPMS when a calibrated signal 
simulator is applied to your CPMS during the initial validation 
check, units of parameter measured (e.g., degrees Celsius, 
kilopascals, liters per minute).
Vm = Parameter value measured by your CPMS during the 
initial validation check, units of parameter measured (e.g., degrees 
Celsius, kilopascals, liters per minute).

    (6) Compare the measured deviation (dm) to the 
allowable deviation (da). If the measured deviation is 
less than or equal to the allowable deviation, your CPMS satisfies 
the accuracy requirement of this procedure.

13.0 What performance criteria must I demonstrate for my CPMS to comply 
with this quality assurance procedure?

    You must demonstrate that your CPMS meets the applicable 
accuracy requirements specified in Table 6 of this procedure.

14.0 What are the recordkeeping requirements for Procedure 4?

    You must satisfy the recordkeeping requirements specified in 
sections 14.1 and 14.2 of this procedure.
    14.1 What data does this procedure require me to record for my 
CPMS? You must record the results of all CPMS accuracy audits and a 
summary of all corrective actions taken to return your CPMS to 
normal operation.
    14.2 For how long must I maintain the QA data that this 
procedure requires me to record for my CPMS? You are required to 
keep the records required by this procedure for your CPMS for a 
period of 5 years. At a minimum, you must maintain the most recent 2 
years of data onsite and available for inspection by the enforcement 
agency.

15.0 Pollution Prevention [Reserved]

16.0 Waste Management [Reserved]

17.0 Which references are relevant to Procedure 4?

    1. Technical Guidance Document: Compliance Assurance Monitoring. 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning 
and Standards, Emission Measurement Center. August 1998. (http://
www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/cam.html).
    2. NEMA Standard Publication 250. ``Enclosures for Electrical 
Equipment, 1000 Volts Maximum''.
    3. ASTM E-220-07e1: ``Standard Test Methods for Calibration of 
Thermocouples by Comparison Techniques''. American Society for 
Testing and Materials. 2007.
    4. ISA-MC96-1-1982: ``Temperature Measurement Thermocouples''. 
American National Standards Institute. August 1982.
    5. The pH and Conductivity Handbook. Omega Engineering, Inc. 
1995.
    6. ASTM E-452-02 (2007): ``Standard Test Method for Calibration 
of Refractory Metal Thermocouples Using an Optical Pyrometer''. 
American Society for Testing and Materials. 2002.
    7. ASTM E 644-06: ``Standard Test Methods for Testing Industrial 
Resistance Thermometers''. American Society for Testing and 
Materials. 2006.
    8. ASME B 40.100-2005: ``Pressure Gauges and Gauge 
Attachments''. American Society of Mechanical Engineers. February 
2005.
    9. ASTM E 251-92 (2003): ``Standard Test Methods for Performance 
Characteristics of Metallic Bonded Resistance Strain Gages''. 
American Society for Testing and Materials. 2003.
    10. ANSI/ASME MFC-3M-2004: ``Measurement of Fluid Flow in Pipes 
Using Orifice, Nozzle, and Venturi''. American Society of Mechanical 
Engineers. 1989 (Reaffirmed 1995).
    11. ANSI/ASME MFC-9M-1988: ``Measurement of Liquid Flow in 
Closed Conduits by Weighing Method''. American Society of Mechanical 
Engineers. 1989.
    12. ASHRAE 41.8-1989: ``Standard Methods of Measurement of Flow 
of Liquids in Pipes Using Orifice Flow Meters''. American Society of 
Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. 1989.
    13. ISA RP 16.6-1961: ``Methods and Equipment for Calibration of 
Variable Area Meters (Rotameters)''. Instrumentation, Systems, and 
Automation Society. 1961.
    14. ANSI/ISA-RP31.1-1977: ``Specification, Installation, and 
Calibration of Turbine Flow Meters''. Instrumentation, Systems, and 
Automation Society. 1977.
    15. ISO 8316:1987: ``Measurement of Liquid Flow in Closed 
Conduits--Method by Collection of Liquid in a Volumetric Tank''. 
International Organization for Standardization. 1987.
    16. NIST Handbook 44--2002 Edition: ``Specifications, 
Tolerances, And Other

[[Page 60001]]

Technical Requirements for Weighing and Measuring Devices, as 
adopted by the 86th National Conference on Weights and Measures 
2001'', Section 2.21: ``Belt-Conveyor Scale Systems''.
    17. ISO 10790:1999: ``Measurement of Fluid Flow in Closed 
Conduits--Guidance to the Selection, Installation, and Use of 
Coriolis Meters (Mass Flow, Density and Volume Flow Measurements''. 
International Organization for Standardization. 1999.
    18. ASTM D 1125-95 (2005): ``Standard Test Methods for 
Electrical Conductivity and Resistivity of Water''. American Society 
for Testing and Materials. 2005.
    19. ASTM D 5391-99 (2005): ``Standard Test Method for Electrical 
Conductivity and Resistivity of a Flowing High Purity Water 
Sample''. American Society for Testing and Materials. 2005.

18.0 What tables are relevant to Procedure 4?

            Table 1--Sensor Components of Commonly Used CPMS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For a CPMS that measures . . .                      The sensor component
                                  Using a . . .    consists of the . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Temperature................  a. Thermocouple..  Thermocouple.
                                b. Resistance      (RTD).
                                 temperature
                                 detector.
                                c. Optical         Optical assembly and
                                 pyrometer.         detector.
                                d. Thermistor....  Thermistor.
                                e. Temperature     Integrated circuit
                                 transducer.        sensor?
2. Pressure...................  a. Pressure gauge  Gauge assembly,
                                                    including bourdon
                                                    element, bellows
                                                    element, or
                                                    diaphragm.
                                b. Pressure        Strain gauge
                                 transducer.        assembly,
                                                    capacitance
                                                    assembly, linear
                                                    variable
                                                    differential
                                                    transformer, force
                                                    balance assembly,
                                                    potentiometer,
                                                    variable reluctance
                                                    assembly,
                                                    piezoelectric
                                                    assembly, or
                                                    piezoresistive
                                                    assembly.
                                c. Manometer.....  U-tube or
                                                    differential
                                                    manometer.
3. Flow rate..................  a. Differential    Flow constricting
                                 pressure device.   element (nozzle,
                                                    Venturi, or orifice
                                                    plate) and
                                                    differential
                                                    pressure sensor.
                                b. Differential    Pitot tube, or other
                                 pressure tube.     array of tubes that
                                                    measure velocity
                                                    pressure and static
                                                    pressure, and
                                                    differential
                                                    pressure sensor.
                                c. Magnetic flow   Magnetic coil
                                 meter.             assembly.
                                d. Positive        Piston, blade, vane,
                                 displacement       propeller, disk, or
                                 flow meter.        gear assembly.
                                e. Turbine flow    Rotor or turbine
                                 meter.             assembly.
                                f. Vortex          Vortex generating and
                                 formation flow     sensing elements.
                                 meter.
                                g. Fluidic         Feedback passage,
                                 oscillating flow   side wall, control
                                 meter.             port, and thermal
                                                    sensor.
                                h. Ultrasonic      Sonic transducers,
                                 flow meter.        receivers, timer,
                                                    and temperature
                                                    sensor.
                                i. Thermal flow    Thermal element and
                                 meter.             temperature sensors.
                                j. Coriolis mass   U-tube and magnetic
                                 flow meter.        sensing elements.
                                k. Rotameter.....  Float assembly.
                                l. Solids flow     Sensing plate.
                                 meter.
                                m. Belt conveyor.  Scale.
4. pH.........................  pH meter.........  Electrode.
5. Conductivity...............  Conductivity       Electrode.
                                 meter.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                  Table 2--Methods for Temperature Sensor Check
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  If the temperature sensor in your                             You can perform the accuracy audit of the sensor
           CPMS is a . . .               And is used in . . .                      using . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Thermocouple......................  Any application........  ASTM E220-07e1.
2. Thermocouple......................  A reducing environment.  ASTM E452-02 (2007).
3. Resistance temperature detector...  Any application........  ASTM E644-06.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


               Table 3--Methods for Pressure Sensor Check
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 If the pressure sensor in your CPMS is    You can perform the accuracy
                a . . .                  audit of the sensor using . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Pressure gauge......................  ASME B40.100-2005.
2. Metallic bonded resistance strain     ASTM E251-92 (2003).
 gauge.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


       Table 4--Volumetric Methods for Flow Meter Accuracy Audits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Designation                             Title
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. ISA RP 16.6-1961...............  Methods and Equipment for
                                     Calibration of Variable Area Meters
                                     (Rotameters).
2. ANSI/ISA RP 31.1-1977..........  Specification, Installation, and
                                     Calibration of Turbine Flow Meters.
3. ISO 10790:1999.................  Measurement of Fluid Flow in Closed
                                     Conduits-Guidance to the Selection,
                                     Installation and Use of Coriolis
                                     Meters (Mass Flow, Density and
                                     Volume Flow Measurements).
4. ISO 8316:1987..................  Measurement of Liquid Flow in Closed
                                     Conduits-Method by Collection of
                                     Liquid in a Volumetric Tank.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


        Table 5--Weighing Methods for Flow Meter Accuracy Audits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Designation                             Title
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. ASHRAE 41.8-1989...............  Standard Methods of Measurement of
                                     Flow of Liquids in Pipes Using
                                     Orifice Flow Meters.

[[Page 60002]]


2. ISA RP 16.6-1961...............  Methods and Equipment for
                                     Calibration of Variable Area Meters
                                     (Rotameters).
3. ANSI/ISA RP 31.1-1977..........  Specification, Installation, and
                                     Calibration of Turbine Flow Meters.
4. NIST Handbook 44-2002 Edition,   Specifications, Tolerances, And
 Section 2.21.                       Other Technical Requirements for
                                     Weighing and Measuring Devices, as
                                     adopted by the 86th National
                                     Conference on Weights and Measures
                                     2001: Belt-Conveyor Scale Systems.
5. ANSI/ASME MFC-9M-1988..........  Measurement of Liquid Flow in Closed
                                     Conduits by Weighing Method.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


                   Table 6--CPMS Accuracy Requirements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     You must demonstrate that your CPMS
    If your CPMS measures . . .             operates within . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Temperature, in a non-cryogenic  An accuracy percentage (Ap) of 1.0 percent of the
                                     temperature measured in degrees
                                     Celsius or within an accuracy value
                                     (Av) of 2.8 degrees Celsius (5
                                     degrees Fahrenheit), whichever is
                                     greater.
2. Temperature, in a cryogenic      An accuracy percentage (Ap) of 2.5 percent of the
                                     temperature measured in degrees
                                     Celsius or within an accuracy value
                                     (Av) of 2.8 degrees Celsius (5
                                     degrees Fahrenheit), whichever is
                                     greater.
3. Pressure.......................  An accuracy percentage (Ap) of 5 percent or an accuracy
                                     value (Av) of 0.12 kilopascals (0.5
                                     inches of water column), whichever
                                     is greater.
4. Liquid flow rate...............  An accuracy percentage (Ap) of 5 percent or an accuracy
                                     value (Av) of 1.9 liters per minute
                                     (0.5 gallons per minute), whichever
                                     is greater.
5. Gas flow rate..................  a. A relative accuracy of 20 percent, if you
                                     demonstrate compliance using the
                                     relative accuracy test, or
                                    b. An accuracy percentage (Ap) of
                                     10 percent, if your
                                     CPMS measures steam flow rate, or
                                    c. An accuracy percentage (Ap) of
                                     5 percent or an
                                     accuracy value (Av) of 280 liters
                                     per minute (10 cubic feet per
                                     minute), whichever is greater, for
                                     all other gases and accuracy audit
                                     methods.
6. Mass flow rate.................  An accuracy percentage (Ap) of 5 percent.
7. pH.............................  An accuracy value (Av) of 0.2 pH units.
8. Conductivity...................  An accuracy percentage (Ap) of 5 percent.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

PART 61--[AMENDED]

    6. The authority citation for part 61 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart A--[Amended]

    7. Section 61.14 is amended by redesignating paragraph (a) as 
paragraph (a)(1) and adding paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows:


Sec.  61.14  Monitoring requirements.

    (a)(1) * * *
    (2) Performance specifications for continuous parameter 
monitoring systems (CPMS) promulgated under 40 CFR part 60, appendix 
B and quality assurance procedures for CPMS promulgated under 40 CFR 
part 60, appendix F apply instead of the requirements for CPMS 
specified in an applicable subpart upon promulgation of the 
performance specifications and quality assurance procedures for 
CPMS.
* * * * *

PART 63--[AMENDED]

    8. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as 
follows:

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

Subpart A--[Amended]

    9. Section 63.8 is amended by:
    a. Revising paragraph (a)(2);
    b. Revising paragraph (c)(2)(i);
    c. Revising paragraph (c)(4) introductory text and adding 
paragraph (c)(4)(iii);
    d. Revising paragraphs (c)(6) and (c)(7)(i);
    e. Revising paragraph (d)(2)(ii); and
    f. Revising paragraphs (e)(2), (e)(3)(i), and (e)(4).
    The revisions and additions read as follows:


Sec.  63.8  Monitoring requirements.

    (a) * * *
    (2)(i) For the purposes of this part, all CMS required under 
relevant standards shall be subject to the provisions of this section 
upon promulgation of performance specifications and quality assurance 
procedures for CMS as specified in the relevant standard or otherwise 
by the Administrator.
    (ii) Performance specifications for CPMS promulgated under 40 CFR 
part 60, appendix B and quality assurance procedures for CPMS 
promulgated under 40 CFR part 60, appendix F apply instead of the 
requirements for CPMS specified in the relevant standard upon 
promulgation of the performance specifications and quality assurance 
procedures for CPMS.
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2)(i) All CMS must be installed such that representative 
measurements of emissions or process parameters from the affected 
source are obtained. In addition, CMS shall be located according to 
procedures contained in the applicable performance specification(s).
* * * * *
    (4) Except for system breakdowns, out-of-control periods, repairs, 
maintenance periods, calibration checks, and zero (low-level) and high-
level calibration drift adjustments, all CMS, including COMS, CEMS, and 
CPMS, shall be in continuous operation and shall meet minimum frequency 
of operation requirements as follows:
* * * * *
    (iii) All CPMS shall complete a minimum of one cycle of operation 
(sampling, analyzing, and data recording) for each successive time 
period specified in the relevant standard.
* * * * *
    (6) The owner or operator of a CMS that is not a CPMS, which is 
installed in accordance with the provisions of this part and the 
applicable CMS performance specification(s) shall check the zero (low-
level) and high-level calibration drifts at least once daily in 
accordance with the written procedure specified in the performance 
evaluation plan developed under paragraphs (e)(3)(i) and (e)(3)(ii) of 
this section. The zero (low-level) and high-level calibration drifts 
shall be adjusted, at a minimum, whenever the 24-hour zero (low-level) 
drift exceeds two times the limits of the applicable performance 
specification(s) specified in the relevant standard. The system must 
allow the amount of excess zero (low-level) and high-level drift 
measured at the 24-hour interval checks to be recorded and quantified, 
whenever specified. For

[[Page 60003]]

COMS, all optical and instrumental surfaces exposed to the effluent 
gases shall be cleaned prior to performing the zero (low-level) and 
high-level drift adjustments; the optical surfaces and instrumental 
surfaces shall be cleaned when the cumulative automatic zero 
compensation, if applicable, exceeds 4 percent opacity.
* * * * *
    (7)(i) A CMS is out of control if--
    (A) The COMS or CEMS zero (low-level), mid-level (if applicable), 
or high-level calibration drift (CD) exceeds two times the applicable 
CD specification in the applicable performance specification or in the 
relevant standard; or
    (B) The COMS or CEMS fails a performance test audit (e.g., cylinder 
gas audit), relative accuracy audit, relative accuracy test audit, or 
linearity test audit; or
    (C) The COMS CD exceeds two times the limit in the applicable 
performance specification in the relevant standard; or
    (D) The CPMS fails an accuracy audit.
* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (ii) Determination and adjustment of the calibration drift of the 
CMS, where applicable;
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (2) Notification of performance evaluation. The owner or operator 
shall notify the Administrator in writing of the date of the 
performance evaluation of a COMS or CEMS simultaneously with the 
notification of the performance test date required under Sec.  63.7(b) 
or at least 60 days prior to the date the performance evaluation is 
scheduled to begin if no performance test is required.
    (3)(i) Submission of site-specific performance evaluation test 
plan. Before conducting a required COMS or CEMS performance evaluation, 
the owner or operator of an affected source shall develop and submit a 
site-specific performance evaluation test plan to the Administrator for 
approval upon request. The performance evaluation test plan shall 
include the evaluation program objectives, an evaluation program 
summary, the performance evaluation schedule, data quality objectives, 
and both an internal and external QA program. Data quality objectives 
are the pre-evaluation expectations of precision, accuracy, and 
completeness of data.
* * * * *
    (4) Conduct of performance evaluation and performance evaluation 
dates. The owner or operator of an affected source shall conduct a 
performance evaluation of a required CMS during any performance test 
required under Sec.  63.7 in accordance with the applicable performance 
specification or QA procedure as specified in the relevant standard. 
Notwithstanding the requirement in the previous sentence, if the owner 
or operator of an affected source elects to submit COMS data for 
compliance with a relevant opacity emission standard as provided under 
Sec.  63.6(h)(7), he/she shall conduct a performance evaluation of the 
COMS as specified in the relevant standard, before the performance test 
required under Sec.  63.7 is conducted in time to submit the results of 
the performance evaluation as specified in paragraph (e)(5)(ii) of this 
section. If a performance test is not required, or the requirement for 
a performance test has been waived under Sec.  63.7(h), the owner or 
operator of an affected source shall conduct the performance evaluation 
not later than 180 days after the appropriate compliance date for the 
affected source, as specified in Sec.  63.7(a), or as otherwise 
specified in the relevant standard.
* * * * *

Subpart SS--[Amended]

    10. Section 63.996 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(7) through 
(c)(10) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.996  General monitoring requirements for control and recovery 
devices.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (7) For each CPMS, the owner or operator must meet the requirements 
in paragraphs (c)(7)(i) through (vi) of this section.
    (i) Satisfy all requirements of applicable performance 
specifications for CPMS established under 40 CFR part 60, appendix B.
    (ii) Satisfy all requirements of quality assurance (QA) procedures 
for CPMS established under 40 CFR part 60, appendix F.
    (iii) The CPMS must complete a minimum of one cycle of operation 
for each successive 15-minute period.
    (iv) To calculate a valid hourly average, there must be at least 
four equally spaced values for that hour, excluding data collected 
during the periods described in paragraph (c)(5) of this section.
    (v) Calculate a daily average using all of the valid hourly 
averages for each day.
    (vi) Except for redundant sensors, any device that is used to 
conduct an initial validation or accuracy audit of a CPMS must meet the 
accuracy requirements specified in paragraphs (c)(7)(vi)(A) and (B) of 
this section.
    (A) The device must have an accuracy that is traceable to National 
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) standards.
    (B) The device must be at least three times as accurate as the 
required accuracy for the CPMS.
    (8) For each temperature CPMS, the owner or operator must meet the 
requirements in paragraphs (c)(8)(i) through (ix) of this section.
    (i) Install each sensor of the temperature CPMS in a location that 
provides representative temperature measurements over all operating 
conditions, taking into account the manufacturer's guidelines.
    (ii) For a noncryogenic temperature range, use a temperature CPMS 
with a minimum tolerance of 2.8 deg. C or 1.0 percent of the 
temperature value, whichever is larger.
    (iii) For a cryogenic temperature range, use a temperature CPMS 
with a minimum tolerance of 2.8 deg. C or 2.5 percent of the 
temperature value, whichever is larger.
    (iv) The data recording system associated with the CPMS must have a 
resolution of one-half of the applicable required overall accuracy of 
the CPMS, as specified in paragraph (c)(8)(ii) or (iii) of this 
section, or better.
    (v) Perform an initial calibration of the CPMS according to the 
procedures in the manufacturer's owner's manual.
    (vi) Perform an initial validation of the CPMS according to the 
requirements in paragraph (c)(8)(vi)(A) or (B) of this section.
    (A) Place the sensor of a calibrated temperature measurement device 
adjacent to the sensor of the temperature CPMS in a location that is 
subject to the same environment as the sensor of the temperature CPMS. 
The calibrated temperature measurement device must satisfy the accuracy 
requirements of (c)(7)(vi) of this section. Allow sufficient time for 
the response of the calibrated temperature measurement device to reach 
equilibrium. With the process and control device that is monitored by 
the CPMS operating normally, record concurrently and compare the 
temperatures measured by the temperature CPMS and the calibrated 
temperature measurement device. Using the calibrated temperature 
measurement device as the reference, the temperature measured by the 
temperature CPMS must be within the accuracy specified in paragraph 
(c)(8)(ii) or (iii) of this section, whichever applies.
    (B) Perform any of the initial validation methods for temperature 
CPMS specified in applicable performance specifications established 
under 40 CFR part 60, appendix B.

[[Page 60004]]

    (vii) Perform an accuracy audit of the temperature CPMS at least 
quarterly, according to the requirements in paragraph (c)(8)(vii)(A), 
(B), or (C) of this section.
    (A) If the temperature CPMS includes a redundant temperature 
sensor, record three pairs of concurrent temperature measurements 
within a 24-hour period. Each pair of concurrent measurements must 
consist of a temperature measurement by each of the two temperature 
sensors. The minimum time interval between any two such pairs of 
consecutive temperature measurements is one hour. The readings must be 
taken during periods when the process and control device that is 
monitored by the CPMS is operating normally. Calculate the mean of the 
three values for each temperature sensor. The mean values must agree 
within the required overall accuracy of the CPMS, as specified in 
paragraph (c)(8)(ii) or (iii) of this section, whichever applies.
    (B) If the temperature CPMS does not include a redundant 
temperature sensor, place the sensor of a calibrated temperature 
measurement device adjacent to the sensor of the temperature CPMS in a 
location that is subject to the same environment as the sensor of the 
temperature CPMS. The calibrated temperature measurement device must 
satisfy the accuracy requirements of paragraph (c)(7)(vi) of this 
section. Allow sufficient time for the response of the calibrated 
temperature measurement device to reach equilibrium. With the process 
and control device that is monitored by the CPMS operating normally, 
record concurrently and compare the temperatures measured by the 
temperature CPMS and the calibrated temperature measurement device. 
Using the calibrated temperature measurement device as the reference, 
the temperature measured by the temperature CPMS must be within the 
accuracy specified in paragraph (c)(8)(ii) or (iii) of this section, 
whichever applies.
    (C) Perform any of the accuracy audit methods for temperature CPMS 
specified in applicable QA procedures established under 40 CFR part 60, 
appendix F.
    (viii) Conduct an accuracy audit following any 24-hour period 
throughout which the temperature measured by the CPMS exceeds the 
manufacturer's specified maximum operating temperature range, or 
install a new temperature sensor.
    (ix) If the CPMS is not equipped with a redundant temperature 
sensor, at least quarterly, perform a visual inspection of all 
components for integrity, oxidation, and galvanic corrosion.
    (9) For each pressure CPMS, the owner or operator must meet the 
requirements in paragraph (c)(9)(i) through (ix) of this section.
    (i) Install each sensor of the pressure CPMS in a location that 
provides representative pressure measurements over all operating 
conditions, taking into account the manufacturer's guidelines.
    (ii) Use a pressure CPMS with a minimum tolerance of 5 
percent or 0.12 kilopascals (0.5 inches of water column), whichever is 
greater.
    (iii) The data recording system associated with the pressure CPMS 
must have a resolution of one-half of the required overall accuracy of 
the CPMS, as specified in paragraph (c)(9)(ii) of this section.
    (iv) Perform an initial calibration of the CPMS according to the 
procedures in the manufacturer's owner's manual.
    (v) Perform an initial validation of the CPMS according to the 
requirements in paragraph (c)(9)(v)(A) or (B) of this section.
    (A) Place the sensor of a calibrated pressure measurement device 
adjacent to the sensor of the pressure CPMS in a location that is 
subject to the same environment as the sensor of the pressure CPMS. The 
calibrated pressure measurement device must satisfy the accuracy 
requirements of paragraph (c)(7)(vi) of this section. Allow sufficient 
time for the response of the calibrated pressure measurement device to 
reach equilibrium. With the process and control device that is 
monitored by the CPMS operating normally, record concurrently and 
compare the pressure measured by the pressure CPMS and the calibrated 
pressure measurement device. Using the calibrated pressure measurement 
device as the reference, the pressure measured by the pressure CPMS 
must be within the accuracy specified in paragraph (c)(9)(ii) of this 
section.
    (B) Perform any of the initial validation methods for pressure CPMS 
specified in applicable performance specifications established under 40 
CFR part 60, appendix B.
    (vi) Perform an accuracy audit of the pressure CPMS at least 
quarterly, according to the requirements in paragraph (c)(9)(vi)(A), 
(B), or (C) of this section.
    (A) If the pressure CPMS includes a redundant pressure sensor, 
record three pairs of concurrent pressure measurements within a 24-hour 
period. Each pair of concurrent measurements must consist of a pressure 
measurement by each of the two pressure sensors. The minimum time 
interval between any two such pairs of consecutive pressure 
measurements is 1 hour. The readings must be taken during periods when 
the process and control device that is monitored by the CPMS is 
operating normally. Calculate the mean of the three pressure 
measurement values for each pressure sensor. The mean values must agree 
within the required overall accuracy of the CPMS, as specified in 
paragraph (c)(9)(ii) of this section.
    (B) If the pressure CPMS does not include a redundant pressure 
sensor, place the sensor of a calibrated pressure measurement device 
adjacent to the sensor of the pressure CPMS in a location that is 
subject to the same environment as the sensor of the pressure CPMS. The 
calibrated pressure measurement device must satisfy the accuracy 
requirements of paragraph (c)(7)(vi) of this section. Allow sufficient 
time for the response of the calibrated pressure measurement device to 
reach equilibrium. With the process and control device that is 
monitored by the CPMS operating normally, record concurrently and 
compare the pressure measured by the pressure CPMS and the calibrated 
pressure measurement device. Using the calibrated pressure measurement 
device as the reference, the pressure measured by the pressure CPMS 
must be within the accuracy specified in paragraph (c)(9)(ii) of this 
section.
    (C) Perform any of the accuracy audit methods for pressure CPMS 
specified in applicable QA procedures established under 40 CFR part 60, 
appendix F.
    (vii) Conduct an accuracy audit following any 24-hour period 
throughout which the pressure measured by the CPMS exceeds the 
manufacturer's specified maximum operating pressure range, or install a 
new pressure sensor.
    (viii) At least monthly, check all mechanical connections for 
leakage.
    (ix) If the CPMS is not equipped with a redundant pressure sensor, 
at least quarterly, perform a visual inspection of all components for 
integrity, oxidation, and galvanic corrosion.
    (10) For each pH CPMS, the owner or operator must meet the 
requirements in paragraph (c)(10)(i) through (vii) of this section.
    (i) Install the pH sensor in a location that provides 
representative measurement of pH over all operating conditions, taking 
into account the manufacturer's guidelines.
    (ii) Use a pH CPMS with a minimum tolerance of 0.2 pH units.
    (iii) The data recording system associated with the CPMS must have 
a resolution of 0.1 pH units or better and

[[Page 60005]]

must be capable of measuring pH over the entire range of pH values from 
0 to 14.
    (iv) Perform an initial calibration of the CPMS according to the 
procedures in the manufacturer's owner's manual.
    (v) Perform an initial validation of the CPMS according to the 
requirements in paragraph (c)(10)(v)(A) or (B) of this section.
    (A) Perform a single point calibration using an NIST-certified 
buffer solution that is accurate to within 0.02 pH units at 
25 [deg]C (77 [deg]F). If the expected pH of the fluid that is 
monitored lies in the acidic range (less than 7 pH), use a buffer 
solution with a pH value of 4.00. If the expected pH of the fluid that 
is monitored lies in the basic range (greater than 7 pH), use a buffer 
solution with a pH value of 10.00. Place the electrode of the pH CPMS 
in the container of buffer solution. Record the pH measured by the 
CPMS. Using the certified buffer solution as the reference, the pH 
measured by the pH CPMS must be within the accuracy specified in 
paragraph (c)(10)(ii) of this section.
    (B) Perform any of the initial validation methods for pH CPMS 
specified in applicable performance specifications established under 40 
CFR part 60, appendix B.
    (vi) Perform an accuracy audit of the pH CPMS at least weekly, 
according to the requirements in paragraph (c)(10)(vi)(A), (B), or (C) 
of this section.
    (A) If the pH CPMS includes a redundant pH sensor, record the pH 
measured by each of the two pH sensors. The readings must be taken 
during periods when the process and control device that is monitored by 
the CPMS are operating normally. The two pH values must agree within 
the required overall accuracy of the CPMS, as specified in paragraph 
(c)(10)(ii) of this section.
    (B) If the pH CPMS does not include a redundant pH sensor, perform 
a single point calibration using an NIST-certified buffer solution that 
is accurate to within 0.02 pH units at 25 [deg]C (77 
[deg]F). If the expected pH of the fluid that is monitored lies in the 
acidic range (less than 7 pH), use a buffer solution with a pH value of 
4.00. If the expected pH of the fluid that is monitored lies in the 
basic range (greater than 7 pH), use a buffer solution with a pH value 
of 10.00. Place the electrode of the pH CPMS in the container of buffer 
solution. Record the pH measured by the CPMS. Using the certified 
buffer solution as the reference, the pH measured by the pH CPMS must 
be within the accuracy specified in paragraph (c)(10)(ii) of this 
section.
    (C) Perform any of the accuracy audit methods for pH CPMS specified 
in applicable QA procedures established under 40 CFR part 60, appendix 
F.
    (vii) If the CPMS is not equipped with a redundant pH sensor, at 
least monthly, perform a visual inspection of all components for 
integrity, oxidation, and galvanic corrosion.
* * * * *
 [FR Doc. E8-22674 Filed 10-8-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
