[Code of Federal Regulations]
[Title 40, Volume 9]
[Revised as of July 1, 2006]
From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access
[CITE: 40CFR63.8]
[Page 41-48]
TITLE 40--PROTECTION OF ENVIRONMENT
CHAPTER I--ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (CONTINUED)
PART 63_NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS FOR
SOURCE CATEGORIES--Table of Contents
Subpart A_General Provisions
Sec. 63.8 Monitoring requirements.
(a) Applicability. (1) The applicability of this section is set out
in Sec. 63.1(a)(4).
(2) 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 for CMS as specified in the
relevant standard or otherwise by the Administrator.
(3) [Reserved]
(4) Additional monitoring requirements for control devices used to
comply with provisions in relevant standards of this part are specified
in Sec. 63.11.
(b) Conduct of monitoring. (1) Monitoring shall be conducted as set
forth in this section and the relevant standard(s) unless the
Administrator--
[[Page 42]]
(i) Specifies or approves the use of minor changes in methodology
for the specified monitoring requirements and procedures (see Sec.
63.90(a) for definition); or
(ii) Approves the use of an intermediate or major change or
alternative to any monitoring requirements or procedures (see Sec.
63.90(a) for definition).
(iii) Owners or operators with flares subject to Sec. 63.11(b) are
not subject to the requirements of this section unless otherwise
specified in the relevant standard.
(2)(i) When the emissions from two or more affected sources are
combined before being released to the atmosphere, the owner or operator
may install an applicable CMS for each emission stream or for the
combined emissions streams, provided the monitoring is sufficient to
demonstrate compliance with the relevant standard.
(ii) If the relevant standard is a mass emission standard and the
emissions from one affected source are released to the atmosphere
through more than one point, the owner or operator must install an
applicable CMS at each emission point unless the installation of fewer
systems is--
(A) Approved by the Administrator; or
(B) Provided for in a relevant standard (e.g., instead of requiring
that a CMS be installed at each emission point before the effluents from
those points are channeled to a common control device, the standard
specifies that only one CMS is required to be installed at the vent of
the control device).
(3) When more than one CMS is used to measure the emissions from one
affected source (e.g., multiple breechings, multiple outlets), the owner
or operator shall report the results as required for each CMS. However,
when one CMS is used as a backup to another CMS, the owner or operator
shall report the results from the CMS used to meet the monitoring
requirements of this part. If both such CMS are used during a particular
reporting period to meet the monitoring requirements of this part, then
the owner or operator shall report the results from each CMS for the
relevant compliance period.
(c) Operation and maintenance of continuous monitoring systems. (1)
The owner or operator of an affected source shall maintain and operate
each CMS as specified in this section, or in a relevant standard, and in
a manner consistent with good air pollution control practices. (i) The
owner or operator of an affected source must maintain and operate each
CMS as specified in Sec. 63.6(e)(1).
(ii) The owner or operator must keep the necessary parts for routine
repairs of the affected CMS equipment readily available.
(iii) The owner or operator of an affected source must develop a
written startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan for CMS as specified in
Sec. 63.6(e)(3).
(2)(i) All CMS must be installed such that representative measures
of emissions or process parameters from the affected source are
obtained. In addition, CEMS must be located according to procedures
contained in the applicable performance specification(s).
(ii) Unless the individual subpart states otherwise, the owner or
operator must ensure the read out (that portion of the CMS that provides
a visual display or record), or other indication of operation, from any
CMS required for compliance with the emission standard is readily
accessible on site for operational control or inspection by the operator
of the equipment.
(3) All CMS shall be installed, operational, and the data verified
as specified in the relevant standard either prior to or in conjunction
with conducting performance tests under Sec. 63.7. Verification of
operational status shall, at a minimum, include completion of the
manufacturer's written specifications or recommendations for
installation, operation, and calibration of the system.
(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 and CEMS,
shall be in continuous operation and shall meet minimum frequency of
operation requirements as follows:
(i) All COMS shall complete a minimum of one cycle of sampling and
analyzing for each successive 10-second
[[Page 43]]
period and one cycle of data recording for each successive 6-minute
period.
(ii) All CEMS for measuring emissions other than opacity shall
complete a minimum of one cycle of operation (sampling, analyzing, and
data recording) for each successive 15-minute period.
(5) Unless otherwise approved by the Administrator, minimum
procedures for COMS shall include a method for producing a simulated
zero opacity condition and an upscale (high-level) opacity condition
using a certified neutral density filter or other related technique to
produce a known obscuration of the light beam. Such procedures shall
provide a system check of all the analyzer's internal optical surfaces
and all electronic circuitry, including the lamp and photodetector
assembly normally used in the measurement of opacity.
(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), must 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 (ii) of this
section. The zero (low-level) and high-level calibration drifts must 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 shall
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 COMS, all optical and instrumental surfaces
exposed to the effluent gases must be cleaned prior to performing the
zero (low-level) and high-level drift adjustments; the optical surfaces
and instrumental surfaces must be cleaned when the cumulative automatic
zero compensation, if applicable, exceeds 4 percent opacity. The CPMS
must be calibrated prior to use for the purposes of complying with this
section. The CPMS must be checked daily for indication that the system
is responding. If the CPMS system includes an internal system check,
results must be recorded and checked daily for proper operation.
(7)(i) A CMS is out of control if--
(A) The 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 CMS 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.
(ii) When the CMS is out of control, the owner or operator of the
affected source shall take the necessary corrective action and shall
repeat all necessary tests which indicate that the system is out of
control. The owner or operator shall take corrective action and conduct
retesting until the performance requirements are below the applicable
limits. The beginning of the out-of-control period is the hour the owner
or operator conducts a performance check (e.g., calibration drift) that
indicates an exceedance of the performance requirements established
under this part. The end of the out-of-control period is the hour
following the completion of corrective action and successful
demonstration that the system is within the allowable limits. During the
period the CMS is out of control, recorded data shall not be used in
data averages and calculations, or to meet any data availability
requirement established under this part.
(8) The owner or operator of a CMS that is out of control as defined
in paragraph (c)(7) of this section shall submit all information
concerning out-of-control periods, including start and end dates and
hours and descriptions of corrective actions taken, in the excess
emissions and continuous monitoring system performance report required
in Sec. 63.10(e)(3).
(d) Quality control program. (1) The results of the quality control
program required in this paragraph will be considered by the
Administrator when he/she determines the validity of monitoring data.
(2) The owner or operator of an affected source that is required to
use a
[[Page 44]]
CMS and is subject to the monitoring requirements of this section and a
relevant standard shall develop and implement a CMS quality control
program. As part of the quality control program, the owner or operator
shall develop and submit to the Administrator for approval upon request
a site-specific performance evaluation test plan for the CMS performance
evaluation required in paragraph (e)(3)(i) of this section, according to
the procedures specified in paragraph (e). In addition, each quality
control program shall include, at a minimum, a written protocol that
describes procedures for each of the following operations:
(i) Initial and any subsequent calibration of the CMS;
(ii) Determination and adjustment of the calibration drift of the
CMS;
(iii) Preventive maintenance of the CMS, including spare parts
inventory;
(iv) Data recording, calculations, and reporting;
(v) Accuracy audit procedures, including sampling and analysis
methods; and
(vi) Program of corrective action for a malfunctioning CMS.
(3) The owner or operator shall keep these written procedures on
record for the life of the affected source or until the affected source
is no longer subject to the provisions of this part, to be made
available for inspection, upon request, by the Administrator. If the
performance evaluation plan is revised, the owner or operator shall keep
previous (i.e., superseded) versions of the performance evaluation plan
on record to be made available for inspection, upon request, by the
Administrator, for a period of 5 years after each revision to the plan.
Where relevant, e.g., program of corrective action for a malfunctioning
CMS, these written procedures may be incorporated as part of the
affected source's startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan to avoid
duplication of planning and recordkeeping efforts.
(e) Performance evaluation of continuous monitoring systems--(1)
General. When required by a relevant standard, and at any other time the
Administrator may require under section 114 of the Act, the owner or
operator of an affected source being monitored shall conduct a
performance evaluation of the CMS. Such performance evaluation shall be
conducted according to the applicable specifications and procedures
described in this section or in the relevant standard.
(2) Notification of performance evaluation. The owner or operator
shall notify the Administrator in writing of the date of the performance
evaluation 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 CMS 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.
(ii) The internal QA program shall include, at a minimum, the
activities planned by routine operators and analysts to provide an
assessment of CMS performance. The external QA program shall include, at
a minimum, systems audits that include the opportunity for on-site
evaluation by the Administrator of instrument calibration, data
validation, sample logging, and documentation of quality control data
and field maintenance activities.
(iii) The owner or operator of an affected source shall submit the
site-specific performance evaluation test plan to the Administrator (if
requested) at least 60 days before the performance test or performance
evaluation is scheduled to begin, or on a mutually agreed upon date, and
review and approval of the performance evaluation test plan by the
Administrator will occur with the review and approval of the site-
specific test plan (if review of the site-specific test plan is
requested).
[[Page 45]]
(iv) The Administrator may request additional relevant information
after the submittal of a site-specific performance evaluation test plan.
(v) In the event that the Administrator fails to approve or
disapprove the site-specific performance evaluation test plan within the
time period specified in Sec. 63.7(c)(3), the following conditions
shall apply:
(A) If the owner or operator intends to demonstrate compliance using
the monitoring method(s) specified in the relevant standard, the owner
or operator shall conduct the performance evaluation within the time
specified in this subpart using the specified method(s);
(B) If the owner or operator intends to demonstrate compliance by
using an alternative to a monitoring method specified in the relevant
standard, the owner or operator shall refrain from conducting the
performance evaluation until the Administrator approves the use of the
alternative method. If the Administrator does not approve the use of the
alternative method within 30 days before the performance evaluation is
scheduled to begin, the performance evaluation deadlines specified in
paragraph (e)(4) of this section may be extended such that the owner or
operator shall conduct the performance evaluation within 60 calendar
days after the Administrator approves the use of the alternative method.
Notwithstanding the requirements in the preceding two sentences, the
owner or operator may proceed to conduct the performance evaluation as
required in this section (without the Administrator's prior approval of
the site-specific performance evaluation test plan) if he/she
subsequently chooses to use the specified monitoring method(s) instead
of an alternative.
(vi) Neither the submission of a site-specific performance
evaluation test plan for approval, nor the Administrator's approval or
disapproval of a plan, nor the Administrator's failure to approve or
disapprove a plan in a timely manner shall--
(A) Relieve an owner or operator of legal responsibility for
compliance with any applicable provisions of this part or with any other
applicable Federal, State, or local requirement; or
(B) Prevent the Administrator from implementing or enforcing this
part or taking any other action under the Act.
(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 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.
(5) Reporting performance evaluation results. (i) The owner or
operator shall furnish the Administrator a copy of a written report of
the results of the performance evaluation simultaneously with the
results of the performance test required under Sec. 63.7 or within 60
days of completion of the performance evaluation if no test is required,
unless otherwise specified in a relevant standard. The Administrator may
request that the owner or operator submit the raw data from a
performance evaluation in the report of the performance evaluation
results.
(ii) The owner or operator of an affected source using a COMS to
determine opacity compliance during any performance test required under
Sec. 63.7 and described in Sec. 63.6(d)(6) shall furnish the
Administrator two or, upon request, three copies of a written report of
the results of the COMS performance evaluation under this paragraph. The
[[Page 46]]
copies shall be provided at least 15 calendar days before the
performance test required under Sec. 63.7 is conducted.
(f) Use of an alternative monitoring method.--(1) General. Until
permission to use an alternative monitoring procedure (minor,
intermediate, or major changes; see definition in Sec. 63.90(a)) has
been granted by the Administrator under this paragraph (f)(1), the owner
or operator of an affected source remains subject to the requirements of
this section and the relevant standard.
(2) After receipt and consideration of written application, the
Administrator may approve alternatives to any monitoring methods or
procedures of this part including, but not limited to, the following:
(i) Alternative monitoring requirements when installation of a CMS
specified by a relevant standard would not provide accurate measurements
due to liquid water or other interferences caused by substances within
the effluent gases;
(ii) Alternative monitoring requirements when the affected source is
infrequently operated;
(iii) Alternative monitoring requirements to accommodate CEMS that
require additional measurements to correct for stack moisture
conditions;
(iv) Alternative locations for installing CMS when the owner or
operator can demonstrate that installation at alternate locations will
enable accurate and representative measurements;
(v) Alternate methods for converting pollutant concentration
measurements to units of the relevant standard;
(vi) Alternate procedures for performing daily checks of zero (low-
level) and high-level drift that do not involve use of high-level gases
or test cells;
(vii) Alternatives to the American Society for Testing and Materials
(ASTM) test methods or sampling procedures specified by any relevant
standard;
(viii) Alternative CMS that do not meet the design or performance
requirements in this part, but adequately demonstrate a definite and
consistent relationship between their measurements and the measurements
of opacity by a system complying with the requirements as specified in
the relevant standard. The Administrator may require that such
demonstration be performed for each affected source; or
(ix) Alternative monitoring requirements when the effluent from a
single affected source or the combined effluent from two or more
affected sources is released to the atmosphere through more than one
point.
(3) If the Administrator finds reasonable grounds to dispute the
results obtained by an alternative monitoring method, requirement, or
procedure, the Administrator may require the use of a method,
requirement, or procedure specified in this section or in the relevant
standard. If the results of the specified and alternative method,
requirement, or procedure do not agree, the results obtained by the
specified method, requirement, or procedure shall prevail.
(4)(i) Request to use alternative monitoring procedure. An owner or
operator who wishes to use an alternative monitoring procedure must
submit an application to the Administrator as described in paragraph
(f)(4)(ii) of this section. The application may be submitted at any time
provided that the monitoring procedure is not the performance test
method used to demonstrate compliance with a relevant standard or other
requirement. If the alternative monitoring procedure will serve as the
performance test method that is to be used to demonstrate compliance
with a relevant standard, the application must be submitted at least 60
days before the performance evaluation is scheduled to begin and must
meet the requirements for an alternative test method under Sec.
63.7(f).
(ii) The application must contain a description of the proposed
alternative monitoring system which addresses the four elements
contained in the definition of monitoring in Sec. 63.2 and a
performance evaluation test plan, if required, as specified in paragraph
(e)(3) of this section. In addition, the application must include
information justifying the owner or operator's request for an
alternative monitoring method, such as the technical or economic
infeasibility, or the impracticality, of the affected source using the
required method.
(iii) The owner or operator may submit the information required in
this
[[Page 47]]
paragraph well in advance of the submittal dates specified in paragraph
(f)(4)(i) above to ensure a timely review by the Administrator in order
to meet the compliance demonstration date specified in this section or
the relevant standard.
(iv) Application for minor changes to monitoring procedures, as
specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, may be made in the site-
specific performance evaluation plan.
(5) Approval of request to use alternative monitoring procedure. (i)
The Administrator will notify the owner or operator of approval or
intention to deny approval of the request to use an alternative
monitoring method within 30 calendar days after receipt of the original
request and within 30 calendar days after receipt of any supplementary
information that is submitted. If a request for a minor change is made
in conjunction with site-specific performance evaluation plan, then
approval of the plan will constitute approval of the minor change.
Before disapproving any request to use an alternative monitoring method,
the Administrator will notify the applicant of the Administrator's
intention to disapprove the request together with--
(A) Notice of the information and findings on which the intended
disapproval is based; and
(B) Notice of opportunity for the owner or operator to present
additional information to the Administrator before final action on the
request. At the time the Administrator notifies the applicant of his or
her intention to disapprove the request, the Administrator will specify
how much time the owner or operator will have after being notified of
the intended disapproval to submit the additional information.
(ii) The Administrator may establish general procedures and criteria
in a relevant standard to accomplish the requirements of paragraph
(f)(5)(i) of this section.
(iii) If the Administrator approves the use of an alternative
monitoring method for an affected source under paragraph (f)(5)(i) of
this section, the owner or operator of such source shall continue to use
the alternative monitoring method until he or she receives approval from
the Administrator to use another monitoring method as allowed by Sec.
63.8(f).
(6) Alternative to the relative accuracy test. An alternative to the
relative accuracy test for CEMS specified in a relevant standard may be
requested as follows:
(i) Criteria for approval of alternative procedures. An alternative
to the test method for determining relative accuracy is available for
affected sources with emission rates demonstrated to be less than 50
percent of the relevant standard. The owner or operator of an affected
source may petition the Administrator under paragraph (f)(6)(ii) of this
section to substitute the relative accuracy test in section 7 of
Performance Specification 2 with the procedures in section 10 if the
results of a performance test conducted according to the requirements in
Sec. 63.7, or other tests performed following the criteria in Sec.
63.7, demonstrate that the emission rate of the pollutant of interest in
the units of the relevant standard is less than 50 percent of the
relevant standard. For affected sources subject to emission limitations
expressed as control efficiency levels, the owner or operator may
petition the Administrator to substitute the relative accuracy test with
the procedures in section 10 of Performance Specification 2 if the
control device exhaust emission rate is less than 50 percent of the
level needed to meet the control efficiency requirement. The alternative
procedures do not apply if the CEMS is used continuously to determine
compliance with the relevant standard.
(ii) Petition to use alternative to relative accuracy test. The
petition to use an alternative to the relative accuracy test shall
include a detailed description of the procedures to be applied, the
location and the procedure for conducting the alternative, the
concentration or response levels of the alternative relative accuracy
materials, and the other equipment checks included in the alternative
procedure(s). The Administrator will review the petition for
completeness and applicability. The Administrator's determination to
approve an alternative will depend on the intended use of the CEMS data
and
[[Page 48]]
may require specifications more stringent than in Performance
Specification 2.
(iii) Rescission of approval to use alternative to relative accuracy
test. The Administrator will review the permission to use an alternative
to the CEMS relative accuracy test and may rescind such permission if
the CEMS data from a successful completion of the alternative relative
accuracy procedure indicate that the affected source's emissions are
approaching the level of the relevant standard. The criterion for
reviewing the permission is that the collection of CEMS data shows that
emissions have exceeded 70 percent of the relevant standard for any
averaging period, as specified in the relevant standard. For affected
sources subject to emission limitations expressed as control efficiency
levels, the criterion for reviewing the permission is that the
collection of CEMS data shows that exhaust emissions have exceeded 70
percent of the level needed to meet the control efficiency requirement
for any averaging period, as specified in the relevant standard. The
owner or operator of the affected source shall maintain records and
determine the level of emissions relative to the criterion for
permission to use an alternative for relative accuracy testing. If this
criterion is exceeded, the owner or operator shall notify the
Administrator within 10 days of such occurrence and include a
description of the nature and cause of the increased emissions. The
Administrator will review the notification and may rescind permission to
use an alternative and require the owner or operator to conduct a
relative accuracy test of the CEMS as specified in section 7 of
Performance Specification 2.
(g) Reduction of monitoring data. (1) The owner or operator of each
CMS must reduce the monitoring data as specified in paragraphs (g)(1)
through (5) of this section.
(2) The owner or operator of each COMS shall reduce all data to 6-
minute averages calculated from 36 or more data points equally spaced
over each 6-minute period. Data from CEMS for measurement other than
opacity, unless otherwise specified in the relevant standard, shall be
reduced to 1-hour averages computed from four or more data points
equally spaced over each 1-hour period, except during periods when
calibration, quality assurance, or maintenance activities pursuant to
provisions of this part are being performed. During these periods, a
valid hourly average shall consist of at least two data points with each
representing a 15-minute period. Alternatively, an arithmetic or
integrated 1-hour average of CEMS data may be used. Time periods for
averaging are defined in Sec. 63.2.
(3) The data may be recorded in reduced or nonreduced form (e.g.,
ppm pollutant and percent O2 or ng/J of pollutant).
(4) All emission data shall be converted into units of the relevant
standard for reporting purposes using the conversion procedures
specified in that standard. After conversion into units of the relevant
standard, the data may be rounded to the same number of significant
digits as used in that standard to specify the emission limit (e.g.,
rounded to the nearest 1 percent opacity).
(5) Monitoring data recorded during periods of unavoidable CMS
breakdowns, out-of-control periods, repairs, maintenance periods,
calibration checks, and zero (low-level) and high-level adjustments must
not be included in any data average computed under this part. For the
owner or operator complying with the requirements of Sec.
63.10(b)(2)(vii)(A) or (B), data averages must include any data recorded
during periods of monitor breakdown or malfunction.
[59 FR 12430, Mar. 16, 1994, as amended at 64 FR 7468, Feb. 12, 1999; 67
FR 16603, Apr. 5, 2002; 71 FR 20455, Apr. 20, 2006]