MAY 06 2004 Dr. Demetra Vlachos Senior Manager, Regulatory Affairs Syngenta Seeds, Inc. P. O. Box 12257 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 2257 Dear Dr. Vlachos:

Subject: Your Application Dated April 29, 2003 to Test Event 3243M Corn and Confidential Statement of Formula Dated May 4, 2004 EPA Experimental Use Permit No. 67979 EUP 3 Effective Dates: The Date of this Letter Through August 15, 2005 and Associated Activities Such as Collection of Field Data; Harvesting & Processing of Seed After Last Planting; Etc. Quantity Authorized: 5,880 lbs Corn Seed ( 2.91 grams active ingredient)

On the basis of the information furnished by the applicant and the annexed program, this experimental use permit ( EUP) under § 5 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act is hereby issued to test Event 3243M corn; Bacillus thuringiensis Cry1Ab protein and the genetic material necessary for its production ( via elements of p2062) in corn. Shipment and/ or use under this Permit is subject to the provisions of 40 CFR Part 172. Tolerance exemptions under 40 CFR 180.1173 and to be issued under 180.1252 apply to the plant incorporated protectant and plant incorporated protectant inert ingredient in the corn to be tested under this permit.

Prior to shipment and/ or use of the subject corn, you must consult with the pesticide regulatory officials and, if applicable, the biotechnology regulatory officials of the State( s) in which your experimental program will be conducted, and obtain a State permit or license if such is required. ( Note Hawaii's reporting requirement for genetically modified organisms under section 321 11.6 of the Hawaii revised statutes.) Issuance of this Federal permit does not negate the need for permission from individual States. Prior to initiating this experimental program in any State, you are to notify the lead Agency of the State( s) in which your experimental program will be conducted of the specific testing program ( when, where, how much, etc.). Failure to do so may result in revocation or modification of this EUP. You must comply with all requirements of the USDA/ APHIS as they apply to the proposed testing.

You must provide notice to the State pesticide regulatory Agency at least 72 hours 2 before you begin to apply the experimental use product. You must also provide a copy of this authorization letter and approved label, as well as the experimental program section G ( as revised in item 2 below) to all cooperators, participants, and users prior to the initial pesticide application made in accordance with the EUP. The Agency is also notifying the relevant EPA Regions, by sending them copies of this EUP.

Based upon the submitted experimental program, the subject corn seed may be shipped for use under this permit to the following State( s) and be planted on the following acreage, provided that the States agree to the trials and all other requirements of the USDA/ APHIS have been met as they apply to the testing.

States Acres AR 2 AZ 2 CA 2 FL 2 HI 84 IA 39 IL 29 IN 10 KS 3 KY 4 LA 2 MI 5 MN 19 MO 7 MS 3 NC 2 NE 15 NM 2 OH 5 3 States Acres PR 37 SD 4 TX 2 WI 14 Total Acres 294 Conditions under which the EUP is being issued are as follows.

1. The total amount of corn seed to be used will not exceed the quantity authorized by the EUP and its planting acres.

2. While it is not anticipated that test plots would be within 1/ 4 mile of endangered or threatened Lepidoptera, your experimental program, section G, must be modified by indicating no plantings may be within 1/ 4 mile of endangered or threatened Lepidoptera habitats.

3. The permittee must immediately notify the Environmental Protection Agency of any findings from the experimental uses that have a bearing on safety ( i. e., reporting to the Agency of any adverse effects from the use of, or exposure to, the pesticide is required). The permittee will also keep records of production, distribution and performance, and, on request, make the records available to any authorized officer or employee of the Environmental Protection Agency.

4. You must provide a final report within180 days of the expiration of the permit. The final report must include all of the items set forth in 40 CFR § 172.8( b).

5. Per 40 CFR § 174.4( b)( v), you must provide the name and street address of all cooperators as soon as available and prior to planting.

6. The labeling submitted in connection with your application is acceptable and must be used for all shipments of seed subsequent to receiving this approval and be in possession of the user under this EUP. A stamped copy of the label which contains the correct EUP number, 67979 EUP 3, is enclosed for your records. 4 7. This experimental use permit is not a limited seed increase registration under § 3 of FIFRA and plantings solely for commercial seed increase are prohibited Copies of relevant reviews are enclosed for your information. Please note Carl Etsitty's April 21, 2004 review and the comments regarding the detection/ quantification limits. While this information is not necessary for the EUP, it should be submitted prior to or with an application for registration.

Sincerely,

/ s/

Janet L. Andersen, Ph. D., Director Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division ( 7511C) Enclosure


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 45 (Tuesday, March 8, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 12062-12064]
[FR Doc No: 2016-05151]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

49 CFR Parts 350, 365, 385, 386, 387, and 395

[Docket No. FMCSA-2015-0001]
RIN 2126-AB11

Carrier Safety Fitness Determination

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice; extension of comment period and technical correction.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA extends the public comment period for the Agency's
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that published on January 21,
2016. This NPRM concerns the proposals to the current methodology for
issuance of safety fitness determinations (SFD) for motor carriers. The
Agency extends the deadline for the submission of initial comments to
May 23, 2016. Reply comments will be due on or before June 23, 2016. In
addition, FMCSA corrects the title and date of an American
Transportation Research Institute (ATRI) study report that the NPRM
cited about the Agency's Safety Measurement System (SMS).

DATES: FMCSA is extending the initial comment period for the proposed
rulemaking published on January 21, 2016 (81 FR 3562). You must submit
comments by May 23, 2016, and reply comments on or before June 23,
2016.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments (initial and reply) identified by
the docket number FMCSA-2015-0001 using any of the following methods:
     Web site: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments on the Federal electronic docket
site.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
     Mail: Docket Services, U.S. Department of Transportation,
Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: Ground Floor, Room W12-140, DOT Building,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    To avoid duplication, please use only one of these four methods.
See the ``Public Participation and Request for Comments'' portion of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below for instructions on
submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. David Yessen,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA office hours are from 7:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. If you have questions
on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Docket Services,
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation and Request for Comments

    FMCSA encourages you to participate in this rulemaking by
submitting comments, reply comments, and related materials. All
comments received will be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any personal information you
provide.

A. Submitting Comments

    Initial comments may address any issue raised in the NPRM and the
background documents in the docket (e.g., Regulatory Evaluation,
studies). Initial comments will be made available promptly online on
http://www.regulations.gov and for public inspection in room W12-140,
DOT Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. In
order to allow sufficient opportunity for interested parties to prepare
and submit any reply comments, late-filed initial comments will not be
considered. Reply comments must address only matters raised in initial
comments and must not be used to present new arguments, contentions, or
factual material that is not responsive to the initial comments.
    If you submit a comment or a reply comment, please include the
docket number for this rulemaking (FMCSA-2015-0001), indicate the
specific section of this document to which each comment or reply
comment applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or
recommendation. You may submit your comments, reply comments and
material online or by fax, mail, or hand delivery, but please use only
one of these means. FMCSA recommends that you include your name and a
mailing address, an email address, or a phone number in the body of
your document so the Agency can contact you if it has questions
regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment or reply comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov and insert ``FMCSA-2015-0001'' in the ``Search''
box, and then click the ``Search'' button to the right of the white
box. Click on the top ``Comment Now'' box which appears next to the
document. Fill in your contact information, as desired and your comment
or reply comment, uploading documents if appropriate. If you submit
your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an unbound
format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying and
electronic filing. If you submit comments or reply comments by mail and
would like to know that they reached the facility, please enclose a
stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope.
    FMCSA will consider all comments, reply comments and material
received during the comment period and may change this proposed rule
based on your comments.

B. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as documents mentioned in this preamble
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov and
insert ``FMCSA-2015-0001'' in the ``Search'' box and then click on
``Search.'' Click on the ``Open Docket Folder'' link and all the
information for the document, and the list of comments will appear with
a link to each one. Click on the comment you would like to read. If you
do not have access to the Internet, you may view the docket online by
visiting the Docket Services in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the
Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

C. Privacy Act

    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the
public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these
comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system
of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.

II. Background

    On January 21, 2016 (81 FR 3562), FMCSA published an NPRM to amend
the current methodology for issuance of SFDs for motor carriers. From
February 3 to 5, 2016, the American Moving and Storage Association
(AMSA), Transportation Intermediaries Association (TIA), and the
Transportation & Logistics Council, Inc. (TL Council) petitioned the
Agency for a 60-day extension of the comment period. On February 16,
2016, the Owner Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA)
petitioned the Agency for a 90-day extension of the comment period. A
copy of the AMSA, TIA, TL Council, and OOIDA petitions are included in
the docket referenced at the beginning of this document. After
reviewing the requests, FMCSA has decided to grant a 60-day extension
(to May 23, 2016, for initial comments and to June 23, 2016 for reply
comments) to provide all interested parties adequate time to submit
comments on proposals in this rulemaking.
    In addition, Rebecca M. Brewster, President and Chief Operating
Officer of the American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI),
informed FMCSA that the NPRM incorrectly cited an ATRI study (81 FR
3562, at 3567, third column) on the Agency's Behavioral Analysis and
Safety Improvement Categories (BASICs) and their relationship to crash
risk. The study erroneously cited by FMCSA was a qualitative study of
motor carrier, driver, law enforcement and shipper survey data. The
ATRI study on the BASICs was released in October 2012 and is titled
``Compliance, Safety, Accountability: Analyzing the Relationship of
Scores to Crash Risk.'' It involved an analysis of carriers assessed by
BASICs. The results confirmed that FMCSA's Safety Measurement System
(SMS) is better at targeting carriers and identifying safety problems
than the current SafeStat, the Agency's previous intervention
prioritization system. In addition, the ATRI study indicated that the
number of ``alerts'' a carrier has is the best indicator of future
crashes.
    FMCSA has included the correct report in the docket for the
public's consideration of the Carrier Safety Fitness Determination
NPRM.

    Issued on: March 1, 2016.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2016-05151 Filed 3-7-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 160 (Thursday, August 18, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51463-51464]
[FR Doc No: 2011-21094]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket Number FRA-2010-0034]

Petition for Waiver of Compliance

    In accordance with part 211 of Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), this document provides the public notice that by a document
dated July 15, 2011, Port Authority Trans-Hudson Corporation (PATH) has
petitioned the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) for a waiver of
compliance from certain provisions of the Federal railroad safety
regulations contained at 49 CFR part 236. FRA has previously assigned
all PATH Positive Train Control (PTC)-related documentation Docket
Number FRA-2010-0034, and is adding this waiver request to that docket.
    PATH seeks a waiver from compliance with PTC system requirements
found at 49 CFR Section 236.1006, Equipping locomotives operating in
PTC territory. Specifically, this petition is made in connection with
the implementation of PATH's Automatic Train Control (ATC) project and
the plan to use unequipped PA-4 cars as maintenance-of-way (MOW) work
equipment. PATH is currently in the process of implementing an ATC
system using communications-based train control (CBTC) technology
throughout the PATH rail network, as described in the Positive Train
Control Implementation and Development Plans previously submitted for
FRA approval. As part of that program, PATH will be equipping all A-
cars (cab control cars) of the new PA-5 fleet with onboard ATC
equipment. By December 31, 2015, PATH's passenger carrying fleet will
consist of only multiple-unit train consists made of PA-5 cars, and as
such, PATH's operation will be in compliance with the new PTC rule. An
important element of the new ATC system implementation at PATH will be
the incorporation of a track-circuit-based Secondary Train Detection
System (STDS) incorporating wayside signals and automatic train stops
(trip stops). The STDS will provide for safe

operation of both PA-5 trains with failed ATC equipment, and MOW work
equipment that will not be fitted with onboard ATC equipment.
    It is PATH's intention to retire the existing PA-4 fleet from
passenger service, but to retain some of these PA-4 cars to function as
MOW work equipment. PATH will modify the interiors of some of these
vehicles so that they are configured to transport tools and equipment.
The PA-4 work vehicles would retain their trip cock equipment, and as
such, the STDS would provide enforced braking for these vehicles at
stop (red) signals. Further, since the PA-4 cars reliably shunt track
circuits, they will be continuously detected by both the STDS and the
CBTC system, thereby preventing train-to-train collisions.
    PATH's justification for relief is that the proposed use of non-
equipped PA-4 vehicles for MOW work equipment does not introduce any
new or different safety hazards to the existing operation, and provides
additional safety elements not available for other types of MOW
equipment. The installation of the ATC and/or CBTC systems and the STDS
by December 31, 2015, in conjunction with well-established operating
rules and procedures, will in fact provide enhanced safety for such
operations.
    A copy of the petition, as well as any written communications
concerning the petition, is available for review online at http://www.regulations.gov and in person at the U.S. Department of
Transportation's (DOT) Docket Operations Facility, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue, SE., W12-140, Washington, DC 20590. The Docket Operations
Facility is open from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested party
desires an opportunity for oral comment, they should notify FRA, in
writing, before the end of the comment period and specify the basis for
their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number and may be submitted by any of the following
methods:
     Web site: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
    Communications received by October 3, 2011 will be considered by
FRA before final action is taken. Comments received after that date
will be considered as far as practicable.
    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written
communications and comments received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment,
if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages
19477-78) or at http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 12, 2011.
Robert C. Lauby,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Regulatory and Legislative
Operations.
[FR Doc. 2011-21094 Filed 8-17-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 42 (Friday, March 2, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 12769-12770]
[FR Doc No: 2012-4995]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2011-0850-201154(b); FRL-9639-7]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Georgia;
Macon; Fine Particulate Matter 2002 Base Year Emissions Inventory

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve the fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) 2002 base year emissions inventory, portion of the
State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of
Georgia on August 17, 2009. The emissions inventory is part of the
Macon, Georgia PM2.5 attainment demonstration that was
submitted for the 1997 annual PM2.5 National Ambient Air
Quality Standards. This action is being taken pursuant to section 110
of the Clean Air Act. In the Rules Section of this Federal Register,
EPA is approving Georgia's SIP revision as a direct final rule without
prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial
submittal and anticipates no adverse comments.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before April 2, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2011-0850, by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    2. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: ``EPA-R04-OAR-2011-0850,'' Regulatory Development Section,
Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Lynorae Benjamin, Regulatory
Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61
Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such deliveries are
only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation.
The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding federal holidays.
    Please see the direct final rule which is located in the Rules
section of this Federal Register for detailed instructions on how to
submit comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Lakeman, Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth
Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is (404)
562-9043. Mr. Lakeman can be reached via electronic mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For additional information see the direct

final rule which is published in the Rules Section of this Federal
Register. A detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the
direct final rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to
this rule, no further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse
comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public
comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on
this proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on
this document. Any parties interested in commenting on this document
should do so at this time.

    Dated: February 16, 2012.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2012-4995 Filed 3-1-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 85 (Friday, May 2, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 25126]
[FR Doc No: 2014-10088]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP14-763-000
    Applicants: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company,
    Description: Annual Adjustment to Rate Schedule SS-2 Storage Gas
Balances 2014 to be effective 5/1/2014
    Filed Date: 4/22/14
    Accession Number: 20140422-5102
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/5/14

    Docket Numbers: RP14-764-000
    Applicants: Millennium Pipeline Company, LLC
    Description: Negotiated Rate Service Agreement--WPX to be effective
5/1/2014
    Filed Date: 4/23/14
    Accession Number: 20140423-5054
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/5/14

    Docket Numbers: RP14-765-000
    Applicants: Texas Gas Transmission, LLC
    Description: Non-conforming Agmt--Clarksdale 20393 to be effective
4/23/2014
    Filed Date: 4/23/14
    Accession Number: 20140423-5146
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 5/5/14

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: April 24, 2014.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-10088 Filed 5-1-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


time) that are used in NAAQS computations.

Design values are the metrics (i.e., statistics) that are compared to
the NAAQS levels to determine compliance, calculated as specified in
section 5 of this appendix.  The design value for the primary 1-hour
NAAQS is the 3-year average of annual 99th percentile daily maximum
1-hour values for a monitoring site (referred to as the “1-hour
primary standard design value”).

99th percentile daily maximum 1-hour value  is the value below which
nominally 99 percent of all daily maximum 1-hour concentration values
fall, using the ranking and selection method specified in section 5 of
this appendix.

Quarter refers to a calendar quarter.

Year refers to a calendar year.

2. Requirements for Data Used for Comparisons with the SO2 NAAQS and
Data

Reporting Considerations.

(a) All valid FRM/FEM SO2 hourly data required to be submitted to
EPA’s Air Quality System (AQS), or otherwise available to EPA, meeting
the requirements of part 58 of this chapter including appendices A, C,
and E shall be used in design value calculations.  Multi-hour average
concentration values collected by wet chemistry methods shall not be
used.

(b) When two or more SO2 monitors are operated at a site, the state may
in advance designate one of them as the primary monitor.  If the state
has not made this designation, the Administrator will make the
designation, either in advance or retrospectively.  Design values will
be developed using only the data from the primary monitor, if this
results in a valid design value.  If data from the primary monitor do
not allow the development of a valid design value, data solely from the
other monitor(s) will be used in turn to develop a valid design value,
if this results in a valid design value.  If there are three or more
monitors, the order for such comparison of the other monitors will be
determined by the Administrator.  The Administrator may combine data
from different monitors in different years for the purpose of developing
a valid 1-hour primary standard design value, if a valid design value
cannot be developed solely with the data from a single monitor.
However, data from two or more monitors in the same year at the same
site will not be combined in an attempt to meet data completeness
requirements, except if one monitor has physically replaced another
instrument permanently, in which case the two instruments will be
considered to be the same monitor, or if the state has switched the
designation of the primary monitor from one instrument to another during
the year.

(c) Hourly SO2 measurement data shall be reported to AQS in units of
parts per billion (ppb), to at most one place after the decimal, with
additional digits to the right being truncated with no further rounding.

3. Comparisons with the 1-hour Primary SO2 NAAQS.

 (a) The 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS is met at a site when the valid 1-hour
primary standard design value is less than or equal to [50-150] parts
per billion (ppb).

(b) An SO2 1-hour primary standard design value is valid if it
encompasses three consecutive calendar years of complete data.  A year
meets data completeness requirements when all 4 quarters are complete.
A quarter is complete when at least 75 percent of the sampling days for
each quarter have complete data. A sampling day has complete data if 75
percent of the hourly concentration values are reported.

 (c) In the case of one, two, or three years that do not meet the
completeness requirements of section 3(b) of this appendix and thus
would normally not be useable for the calculation of a valid 3-year
1-hour primary standard design value, the 3-year 1-hour primary standard
design value shall nevertheless be considered valid if one of the
following conditions is true.

(i) At least 75 percent of the days in each quarter of each of three
consecutive years have at least one reported hourly value, and the
design value calculated according to the procedures specified in section
5 is above the level of the primary 1-hour standard.

(ii) (A) A 1-hour primary standard design value that is below the level
of the NAAQS can be validated if the substitution test in section
3(c)(ii)(B) results in a “test design value” that is below the level
of the NAAQS.  The test substitutes actual ‘‘high’’ reported
daily maximum 1-hour values from the same site at about the same time of
the year (specifically, in the same calendar quarter) for unknown values
that were not successfully measured.  Note that the test is merely
diagnostic in nature, intended to confirm that there is a very high
likelihood that the original design value (the one with less than 75
percent data capture of hours by day and of days by quarter) reflects
the true under-NAAQS-level status for that 3-year period; the result of
this data substitution test (the ‘‘test design value”, as defined
in section 3(c)(ii)(B)) is not considered the actual design value. For
this test, substitution is permitted only if there are at least 200 days
across the three matching quarters of the three years under
consideration (which is about 75 percent of all possible daily values in
those three quarters) for which 75 percent of the hours in the day have
reported concentrations. However, maximum 1-hour values from days with
less than 75 percent of the hours reported shall also be considered in
identifying the high value to be used for substitution.

(B) The substitution test is as follows: Data substitution will be
performed in all quarter periods that have less than 75 percent data
capture but at least 50 percent data capture; if any quarter has less
than 50 percent data capture then this substitution test cannot be used.
 Identify for each quarter (e.g., January-March) the highest reported
daily maximum 1-hour value for that quarter, looking across those three
months of all three years under consideration.  All daily maximum 1-hour
values from all days in the quarter period shall be considered when
identifying this highest value, including days with less than 75 percent
data capture. If after substituting the highest reported daily maximum
1-hour value for a quarter for as much of the missing daily data in the
matching deficient quarter(s) as is needed to make them 100 percent
complete, the procedure in section 5 yields a recalculated 3-year 1-hour
standard “test design value” below the level of the standard, then
the 1-hour primary standard design value is deemed to have passed the
diagnostic test and is valid, and the level of the standard is deemed to
have been met in that 3-year period. As noted in section 3(c)(i), in
such a case, the 3-year design value based on the data actually
reported, not the ‘‘test design value’’, shall be used as the
valid design value.

(iii) (A) A 1-hour primary standard design value that is above the level
of the NAAQS can be validated if the substitution test in section
3(c)(iii)(B) results in a “test design value” that is above the
level of the NAAQS.  The test substitutes actual ‘‘low” reported
daily maximum 1-hour values from the same site at about the same time of
the year (specifically, in the same three months of the calendar) for
unknown hourly values that were not successfully measured.  Note that
the test is merely diagnostic in nature, intended to confirm that there
is a very high likelihood that the original design value (the one with
less than 75 percent data capture of hours by day and of days by
quarter) reflects the true above-NAAQS-level status for that 3-year
period; the result of this data substitution test (the ‘‘test design
value”, as defined in section 3(c)(iii)(B)) is not considered the
actual design value. For this test, substitution is permitted only if
there are a minimum number of available daily data points from which to
identify the low quarter-specific daily maximum 1-hour values,
specifically if there are at least 200 days across the three matching
quarters of the three years under consideration (which is about 75
percent of all possible daily values in those three quarters) for which
75 percent of the hours in the day have reported concentrations. Only
days with at least 75 percent of the hours reported shall be considered
in identifying the low value to be used for substitution.

(B) The substitution test is as follows: Data substitution will be
performed in all quarter periods that have less than 75 percent data
capture.  Identify for each quarter (e.g., January-March) the lowest
reported daily maximum 1-hour value for that quarter, looking across
those three months of all three years under consideration.  All daily
maximum 1-hour values from all days with at least 75 percent capture in
the quarter period shall be considered when identifying this lowest
value. If after substituting the lowest reported daily maximum 1-hour
value for a quarter for as much of the missing daily data in the
matching deficient quarter(s) as is needed to make them 75 percent
complete, the procedure in section 5 yields a recalculated 3-year 1-hour
standard “test design value” above the level of the standard, then
the 1-hour primary standard design value is deemed to have passed the
diagnostic test and is valid, and the level of the standard is deemed to
have been exceeded in that 3-year period. As noted in section 3(c)(i),
in such a case, the 3-year design value based on the data actually
reported, not the ‘‘test design value’’, shall be used as the
valid design value.

 (d) A 1-hour primary standard design value based on data that do not
meet the completeness criteria stated in 3(b) and also do not satisfy
section 3(c), may also be considered valid with the approval of, or at
the initiative of, the Administrator, who may consider factors such as
monitoring site closures/moves, monitoring diligence, the consistency
and levels of the valid concentration measurements that are available,
and nearby concentrations in determining whether to use such data.

(e) The procedures for calculating the 1-hour primary standard design
values are given in section 5 of this appendix.

4. Rounding Conventions for the 1-hour Primary SO2 NAAQS.

 (a) Hourly SO2 measurement data shall be reported to AQS in units of
parts per billion (ppb), to at most one place after the decimal, with
additional digits to the right being truncated with no further rounding.

(b) Daily maximum 1-hour values and therefore the annual 4th highest of
those daily values are not rounded.

 (c) The 1-hour primary standard design value is calculated pursuant to
section 5 and then  rounded to the nearest whole number or 1 ppb
(decimals 0.5 and greater are rounded up to the nearest whole number,
and any decimal lower than 0.5 is rounded down to the nearest whole
number).

5. Calculation Procedures for the 1-hour Primary SO2 NAAQS.

 (a) Procedure for identifying annual 99th percentile values. When the
data for a particular site and year meet the data completeness
requirements in section 3(b), or if one of the conditions of section
3(c) is met, or if the Administrator exercises the discretionary
authority in section 3(d), identification of annual 99th percentile
values will be based on the number of days with at least 75 percent of
the hourly values reported.

(i) For the year, from only the days with at least 75 percent of the
hourly values reported, select from each day the highest hourly value.

(ii) Sort all the valid daily values from a particular site and year by
descending value. (For example: (x[1], x[2], x[3],  *  *  *, x[n]).
In this case, x[1] is the largest number and x[n] is the smallest
value.) The 99th percentile is determined from this sorted series of
daily values which is ordered from the highest to the lowest number.
Using the left column of Table 1, determine the appropriate range (i.e.,
row) for the annual number of days with valid data for year y (cny). The
corresponding “n” value in the right column identifies the rank of
the annual 99th percentile value in the descending sorted list of daily
site values for year y. Thus, P0.99, y= the nth largest value.

Table 1

Annual number of days with valid data for year “y” (cny)	P0.99, y is
the nth maximum value of the year, where n is the listed number

1–100	1

101-200	2

201-300	3

301-366	4

(b) The 1-hour primary standard design value for a site is mean of the
three annual 99th percentile values, rounded according to the
conventions in section 4.

7.  EPA proposes to amend several sections and Table A-1 in Subpart A,
as follows:

8.  Section 53.2(a)(1) would be amended to read as follows:

(a) Manual methods—(1) Sulfur dioxide (SO2) and Lead.  For measuring
SO2 and lead, appendixes A-2 and G of part 50 of this chapter specify
unique manual FRM for measuring those pollutants.  After [insert
effective date of Appendix A-1], a new FRM for SO2 must be an automated
method that utilizes the measurement principle and calibration procedure
specified in appendix A-1 to part 50 of this chapter and must meet
applicable requirements of this part, as specified in §53.2(b).  Except
as provided in §53.16, other manual methods for lead will not be
considered for a reference method determination under this part.

9.  Section 53.2(b) would be amended to read as follows:

(b) Automated methods.  An automated FRM for measuring SO2, CO, O3, or
NO2 must utilize the measurement principle and calibration procedure
specified in the appropriate appendix to part 50 of this chapter
(appendix A-1 only for SO2 methods after [insert effective date of
appendix A-1]) and must have been shown in accordance with this part to
meet the requirements specified in this subpart A and subpart B of this
part.

10.  Section 53.8 would be amended to read as follows:

(c) The Administrator will maintain a current list of methods designated
as FRM or FEM in accordance with this part and will send a copy of the
list to any person or group upon request. A copy of the list will be
available via the Internet and may be available from other sources.

11.  Table A-1 would be amended to read as follows:

Table A–1 to Subpart A of Part 53 – Summary of Applicable
Requirements for Reference and Equivalent Methods for Air Monitoring of
Criteria Pollutants

Pollutant	Reference or

equivalent	Manual or automated	Applicable part 50 appendix	Applicable
subparts of part 53

A	B	C	D	E	F

SO2 	Reference	Manual	A-2

Automated	A-1	(	(

	Equivalent	Manual	A-1	(

(

	Automated	A-1	(	(	(

	CO	Reference	Automated	C	(	(

	Equivalent	Manual	C	(

(

	Automated	C	(	(	(

	O3	Reference	Automated	D	(	(

	Equivalent	Manual	D	(

(

	Automated	D	(	(	(

	NO2	Reference	Automated	F	(	(

	Equivalent	Manual	F	(

(

	Automated	F	(	(	(

	Pb	Reference	Manual	G

	Equivalent	Manual	G	(

(

	Automated	G	(

(

	PM10-Pb	Reference	Manual	Q

	Equivalent	Manual	Q	(

(

	Automated	Q	(

(

	PM10	Reference	Manual	J	(

	(

	Equivalent	Manual	J	(

(	(

Automated	J	(

(	(

PM2.5	Reference	Manual	L	(

(

Equivalent Class I	Manual	L	(

(

(

Equivalent Class II	Manual	L1	(

(2

(	(1, 2

	Equivalent Class III	Automated	L1	(

(

(	(1

PM10-2.5	Reference	Manual	L, O	(

(

Equivalent Class I	Manual	L, O	(

(

(

Equivalent Class II	Manual	L, O	(

(2

(	(1, 2

	Equivalent Class III	Automated	L1, O1	(

(

(	(1

1.  Some requirements may apply, based on the nature of each particular
candidate method, as determined by the Administrator.

2.  Alternative Class III requirements may be substituted.

II.  EPA proposes to amend several sections and tables in Subpart B, as
follows:

12.  Section 53.20(b) would be revised to read as follows:

(b)  For a candidate method having more than one selectable measurement
range, one range must be that specified in table B-1 (standard range for
SO2), and a test analyzer representative of the method must pass the
tests required by this subpart while operated in that range.  The tests
may be repeated for one or more broader ranges (i.e., ones extending to
higher concentrations) than the range specified in table B-1, provided
that the range does not extend to concentrations more than four times
the upper range limit specified in table B-1.  For broader ranges, only
the tests for range (calibration), noise at 80% of the upper range
limit, and lag, rise and fall time are required to be repeated.  The
tests may be repeated for one or more narrower ranges (ones extending to
lower concentrations) than that specified in table B-1.  For SO2
methods, table B-1 specifies special performance requirements for
narrower (lower) ranges.  For methods other than SO2, only the tests for
range (calibration), noise at 0 % of the measurement range, and lower
detectable limit are required to be repeated.

   If the tests are conducted or passed only for the specified range
(standard range for SO2), any FRM or FEM method determination with
respect to the method will be limited to that range.  If the tests are
passed for both the specified range and one or more broader ranges, any
such determination will include the additional range(s) as well as the
specified range, provided that the tests required by subpart C of this
part (if applicable) are met for the broader range(s).  If the tests are
passed for both the specified range and one or more narrower ranges, any
FRM or FEM method determination for the method will include the narrower
range(s) as well as the specified range.  Appropriate test data shall be
submitted for each range sought to be included in a FRM or FEM method
determination under this paragraph (b).

13.  Section 53.21(a) would be read as follows:

(a)  Set-up and start-up of the test analyzer shall be in strict
accordance with the operating instructions specified in the manual
referred to in §53.4(b)(3).  Allow adequate warm-up or stabilization
time as indicated in the operating instructions before beginning the
tests.  The test procedures assume that the test analyzer has an analog
measurement signal output that is connected to a suitable strip chart
recorder of the servo, null-balance type.  This recorder shall have a
chart width of a least 25 centimeters, chart speeds up to 10 cm per
hour, a response time of 1 second or less, a deadband of not more than
0.25 percent of full scale, and capability either of reading
measurements at least 5 percent below zero or of offsetting the zero by
at least 5 percent.  If the test analyzer does not have an analog signal
output, or if other types of measurement data output are used, an
alternative measurement data recording device (or devices) may be used
for the tests, provided it is reasonably suited to the nature and
purposes of the tests and an analog representation of the analyzer
measurements for each test can be plotted or otherwise generated that is
reasonably similar to the analog measurement recordings that would be
produced by a conventional chart recorder.

14.  Table B-1 would be revised to read as follows:

Table B-1—Performance Specifications for Automated Methods

Performance parameter	Units1	SO2 	O3	CO	NO2	Definitions and test
procedures

Std. range3	Lower range2,3

1. Range	ppm	0-0.5	<0.5	0-0.5	0-50	0-0.5	Sec. 53.23(a)

2. Noise	ppm	0.001	0.0005	0.005  	  50	0.005	Sec. 53.23(b)

3. Lower detectable limit	ppm	0.002	0.001	0.010	 1.0	0.010	Sec. 53.23(c)

4. Interference equivalent

      Each interferent

      Total, all interferents

ppm

ppm

±0.005

  0.020

±0.005

  0.020

±0.02

  0.06

±1.0

  1.5

±0.02

  0.04

Sec. 53.23(d)

Sec. 53.23(d)

5. Zero drift, 12 and 24 hour	ppm	±0.004	±0.002	±0.02	±1.0	±0.02
Sec. 53.23(e)

7. Span drift, 24 hour

     20 % of upper range limit

     80 % of upper range limit

Percent

Percent

 ---

±5.0

  ---

±5.0

±20.0

  ±5.0

±10.0

  ±2.5

±20.0

  ±5.0

Sec. 53.23(e)

Sec. 53.23(e)

8. Lag time	Minutes	2	2	20	10	20	Sec. 53.23(e)

9. Rise time	Minutes	2	2	15	5	15	Sec. 53.23(e)

10. Fall time	Minutes	2	2	15	5	15	Sec. 53.23(e)

11. Precision

     20 % of upper range limit

     80 % of upper range limit

ppm

Percent

ppm

Percent

 ---

2

 ---

2

 ---

2

 ---

2

0.010

0.010

 ---

0.5

0.5

 ---

0.020

0.030

 ---

Sec. 53.23(e)

Sec. 53.23(e)

Sec. 53.23(e)

Sec. 53.23(e)

1. To convert from parts per million (ppm) to μg/m3 at 25 °C and 760
mm Hg, multiply by M/0.02447, where M is the molecular weight of the
gas.  Percent means percent of the upper range limit.

2.  Tests for interference equivalent and lag time do not need to be
repeated for any lower SO2 range provided the test for the standard
range shows that the lower range specification is met for each of these
test parameters.

3.  For candidate analyzers having automatic or adaptive time constants
or smoothing filters, describe their functional nature, and describe and
conduct suitable tests to demonstrate their function aspects and verify
that performances for calibration, noise, lag, rise, fall times, and
precision are within specifications under all applicable conditions.
For candidate analyzers with operator-selectable time constants or
smoothing filters, conduct calibration, noise, lag, rise, fall times,
and precision tests at the highest and lowest settings that are to be
included in the FRM or FEM designation.

15.  Table B-2 would be revised to read as follows:

Table B-2—Test Atmospheres

Test gas	Generation	Verification

Ammonia	Permeation device. Similar to system described

in references 1 and 2	Indophenol method, reference 3.

Carbon dioxide

	Cylinder of zero air or nitrogen containing CO2 as required to obtain
the concentration specified in table B-3.	Use NIST-certified standards
whenever possible.  If NIST standards are not available, obtain 2
standards from independent sources which agree within 2 percent, or
obtain one standard and submit it to an independent laboratory for
analysis, which must agree within 2 percent of the supplier’s nominal
analysis.

Carbon monoxide	Cylinder of zero air or nitrogen containing CO as
required to obtain the concentration specified in table B-3.	Use a FRM
CO analyzer as described in reference 8.

Ethane

	Cylinder of zero air or nitrogen containing ethane as required to
obtain the concentration specified in table B-3.	Gas chromatography,
ASTM D2820, reference 10.  Use NIST-traceable gaseous methane or propane
standards for calibration.

Ethylene

	Cylinder of pre-purified nitrogen containing ethylene as required to
obtain the concentration specified in table B-3.	Do.

Hydrogen chloride

	Cylinder1 of pre-purified nitrogen containing approximately 100 ppm of
gaseous HCL. Dilute with zero air to concentration specified in table
B-3	Collect samples in bubbler containing distilled water and analyze by
the mercuric thiocyante method, ASTM (D612), p. 29, reference 4.

Hydrogen sulfide

	Permeation device system described in references 1 and 2.

	Tentative method of analysis for H2S content of the atmosphere, p. 426,
reference 5.

Methane

	Cylinder of zero air containing methane as required to obtain the
concentration specified in table B-3.

	Gas chromatography ASTM D2820, reference 10.  Use NIST-traceable
methane standards for calibration.

Nitric oxide

	Cylinder1 of pre-purified nitrogen containing approximately 100 ppm NO.
Dilute with zero air to required concentration.	Gas phase titration as
described in reference 6, section 7.1

Nitrogen dioxide

	1. Gas phase titration as described in reference 6.

2. Permeation device, similar to system described in reference 6.	1. Use
an FRM NO2 analyzer calibrated with a gravimetrically calibrated
permeation device.

2. Use an FRM NO2 analyzer calibrated by gas-phase titration as
described in reference 6.

Ozone

	Calibrated ozone generator as described in reference 9.	Use an FEM
ozone analyzer calibrated as described in reference 9.

Sulfur dioxide

	1. Permeation device as described in references 1 and 2.

2. Dynamic dilution of a cylinder containing approximately 100 ppm SO2
as described in Reference 7.

	Use an SO2 FRM or FEM analyzer as described in reference 7.

Table B-2—Test Atmospheres (Continued)

Test gas	Generation	Verification

Water

	Pass zero air through distilled water at a fixed known temperature
between 20° and 30° C such that the air stream becomes saturated.
Dilute with zero air to concentration specified in table B-3.	Measure
relative humidity by means of a dew-point indicator, calibrated
electrolytic or piezo electric hygrometer, or wet/dry bulb thermometer.

Xylene

	Cylinder of pre-purified nitrogen containing 100 ppm xylene.  Dilute
with zero air to concentration specified in table B-3.	Use
NIST-certified standards whenever possible.  If NIST standards are not
available, obtain 2 standards from independent sources which agree
within 2 percent, or obtain one standard and submit it to an independent
laboratory for analysis, which must agree within 2 percent of the
supplier’s nominal analysis.

Zero air	1. Ambient air purified by appropriate scrubbers or other
devices such that it is free of contaminants likely to cause a
detectable response on the analyzer.

2. Cylinder of compressed zero air certified by the supplier or an
independent laboratory to be free of contaminants likely to cause a
detectable response on the analyzer.

1 Use stainless steel pressure regulator dedicated to the pollutant
measured.

Reference 1. O'Keefe, A. E., and Ortaman, G. C. "Primary Standards for
Trace Gas Analysis," Anal. Chem. 38, 760 (1966).

Reference 2. Scaringelli, F. P., A. E. . Rosenberg, E*, and Bell, J. P.,
"Primary Standards for Trace Gas Analysis." Anal. Chem. 42, 871 (1970).

Reference 3. "Tentative Method of Analysis for Ammonia in the Atmosphere
(Indophenol Method)", Health Lab Sciences, vol. 10, No. 2, 115-118,
April 1973.

Reference 4. 1973 Annual Book of ASTM Standards, American Society for
Testing and Materials, 1916 Race St., Philadelphia, PA.

Reference 5. Methods for Air Sampling and Analysis, Intersociety
Committee, 1972, American Public Health Association, 1015.

Reference 6. 40 CFR 50 Appendix F, "Measurement Principle and
Calibration Principle for the Measurement of Nitrogen Dioxide in the
Atmosphere (Gas Phase Chemiluminescence)."

Reference 7. 40 CFR 50 Appendix A-1, "Measurement Principle and
Calibration Procedure for the Measurement of Sulfur Dioxide in the
Atmosphere (Ultraviolet FIuorscence)."

Reference 8. 40 CFR 50 Appendix C, "Measurement Principle and
Calibration Procedure for the Measurement of Carbon Monoxide in the
Atmosphere" (Non-Dispersive Infrared Photometry)".

Reference 9. 40 CFR 50 Appendix D, "Measurement Principle and
Calibration Procedure for the Measurement of Ozone in the Atmosphere".

Reference 10. "Standard Test Method for C, through C5 Hydrocarbons in
the Atmosphere by Gas Chromatography", D 2820, 1987 Annual Book of Aston
Standards, vol 11.03, American Society for Testing and Materials, 1916
Race St., Philadelphia, PA 19103.

16. Table B-3 would be revised to read as follows:

Table B-3—Interferent Test Concentration,1 Parts Per Million

Pollu-

tant

Analyzer Type	Hydro-

chloric

acid	Ammo-

nia	Hydro-

gen

sulfide	Sulfur

dioxide	Nitrogen

dioxide	Nitric

oxide	Carbon

dioxide	Ethy-

lene	Ozone	M-

xylene

	Water

vapor	Carbon

mon-oxide	Meth-

ane	Ethane	Naphthalene

SO2 	Ultraviolet fluorescence

	0.15	0.144	0.5	0.5

	0.5	0.2	20,000

0.056

SO2 	Flame photometric

	0.01	0.144

	750

20,0003	50

	SO2 	Gas chromatography

	0.1	0.144

	750

20,0003	50

	SO2 	Spectrophotometric-wet chemical (pararosanaline)	0.2	0.1	0.1	0.144
0.5

750

0.5

SO2 	Electrochemical	0.2	0.1	0.1	0.144	0.5	0.5

0.2	0.5

20,0003

SO2 	Conductivity	0.2	0.1

0.144	0.5

750

SO2 	Spectrophotometric-gas phase, including DOAS

0.144	0.5

0.5	0.2

	O3	Chemiluminescent

	0.13

750

0.084

20,0003

O3	Electrochemical

0.13

0.5	0.5

0.084

O3	Spectrophotometric-wet chemical (potassium iodide)

0.13

0.5	0.5	0.53

	0.084

O3	Spectrophotometric-gas phase, including ultraviolet absorption and
DOAS)

0.5	0.5	0.5

	0.084	0.02	20,000

CO	Infrared

	750

20,000	104

	CO	Gas chromatography with flame ionization detector

	20,000	104

0.5

	CO	Electrochemical

0.5

0.2

	20,000	104

	CO	Catalytic combustion-thermal detection

0.1

	750	0.2

	20,000	104	5.0	0.5

	CO	IR fluorescence

	750

20,000	104

0.5

	CO	Mercury replacement-UV photometric

0.2

104

0.5

	Table B-3—Interferant Test Concentration,1 Parts Per Million
(Continued)

Pollu-

tant	Analyzer Type	Hydro-

chloric

acid	Ammo-

nia	Hydro-

gen

sulfide	Sulfur

dioxide	Nitrogen

dioxide	Nitric

oxide	Carbon

dioxide	Ethy-

lene	Ozone	M-

xylene	Water

vapor	Carbon

mon-oxide	Meth-

ane	Ethane	Naphthalene

NO2	Chemiluminescent

0.13

0.5	0.14	0.5

	20,000

NO2	Spectrophotometric-wet chemical (azo-dye reaction)

0.5	0.14	0.5	750

0.5

NO2	Electrochemical	0.2	0.13

0.5	0.14	0.5	750

0.5

20,000	50

	NO2	Spectrophotometric-gas phase

0.13

0.5	0.14	0.5

	0.5

20,000	50

Concentrations of interferent listed must be prepared and controlled to
±10 percent of the stated value.

Analyzer types not listed will be considered by the Administrator as
special cases.

Do not mix with the pollutant.

Concentration of pollutant used for test.  These pollutant
concentrations must be prepared to ±10 percent of the stated value.

If candidate method utilizes an elevated-temperature scrubber for
removal of aromatic hydrocarbons, perform this interference test.

If naphthalene test concentration cannot be accurately quantified,
remove the scrubber, use a test concentration that causes a full scale
response, reattach the scrubber, and evaluate response for
interference.III. EPA proposes to revise section 53.32(e)(2) and table
C-1 in Subpart C to read as follows:

17.  Section 53.32(e)(2) would be amended to read as follows:

(2) For a candidate method having more than one selectable range, one
range must be that specified in table B–1 of subpart B of this part,
and a test analyzer representative of the method must pass the tests
required by this subpart while operated on that range.  The tests may be
repeated for one or more broader ranges (i.e., ones extending to higher
concentrations) than the one specified in table B–1 of subpart B of
this part, provided that such a range does not extend to concentrations
more than four times the upper range limit specified in table B–1 of
subpart B of this part and that the test analyzer has passed the tests
required by subpart B of this part (if applicable) for the broader
range.  If the tests required by this subpart are conducted or passed
only for the range specified in table B–1 of subpart B of this part,
any equivalent method determination with respect to the method will be
limited to that range. If the tests are passed for both the specified
range and a broader range (or ranges), any such determination will
include the broader range(s) as well as the specified range. Appropriate
test data shall be submitted for each range sought to be included in
such a determination.

18. Table C-1 is revised to read as follows:

Table C-1 to Subpart C of Part 53—Test Concentration Ranges, Number of
Measurements Required, and Maximum Discrepancy Specifications

Pollutant

Concentration range, parts per million (ppm)

Simultaneous measurements required	Maximum discrepancy specification,
parts per million

1-hour	24-hour

	First set	Second set	First set	Second set

Ozone

	Low  0.06 to 0.10

Med. 0.15 to 0.25

High 0.35 to 0.46	5

5

4	6

6

6	--

--

--	--

--

--	0.02

0.03

0.04

	Total….	14	18	--	--	--

Carbon monoxide	Low    7 to 11

Med. 20 to 30

High 25 to 45	5

5

4	6

6

6	--

--

--	--

--

--	1.5

2.0

3.0

	Total….	14	18	--	--	--

Sulfur dioxide	Low  0.02 to 0.05

Med. 0.10 to 0.15

High 0.30 to 0.50	5

5

4	6

6

6	3

2

2	3

3

2	0.02

0.03

0.04

	Total….	14	18	7	8	--

Nitrogen dioxide	Low  0.02 to 0.08

Med. 0.10 to 0.20

High 0.25 to 0.35	--

--

--	--

--

--	3

2

2	3

2

2	0.02

0.02

0.03

	Total….	--	--	7	8	--

19.

§50.4	National primary ambient air quality standards for sulfur oxides
(sulfur dioxide).

* * * * *

(e) The standards set forth in this section will remain applicable to
all areas notwithstanding the promulgation of SO2 national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQS) in §50.16.  The SO2 NAAQS set forth in this
section will no longer apply to an area one year after the effective
date of the designation of that area, pursuant to section 107 of the
Clean Air Act, for the SO2 NAAQS set forth in §50. 16;  except that for
areas designated nonattainment for the SO2 NAAQS set forth in this
section as of the effective date of §50. 16, and areas not meeting the
requirements of a SIP call with respect to requirements for the SO2
NAAQS set forth in this section, the SO2 NAAQS set forth in this section
will apply until that area submits, pursuant to section 191 of the Clean
Air Act, and EPA approves, an implementation plan providing for
attainment of the SO2 NAAQS set forth in §50.16.

For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the code
of Federal regulations is proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 58--AMBIENT AIR QUALITY SURVEILLANCE

The authority citation for part 58 continues to read as follows:

Authority:   42 U.S.C. 7403, 7410, 7601(a), 7611, and 7619.

Subpart B [AMENDED]

20. Section 58.10, is amended by adding paragraph (a)(6) to read as
follows:

§ 58.10   Annual monitoring network plan and periodic network
assessment.

* * * * *

	(a) * * *

(6)  A plan for establishing SO2 monitoring sites in accordance with the
requirements of appendix D to this part shall be submitted to the EPA
Regional Administrator by July 1, 2011.  The plan shall provide for all
required SO2 monitoring sites to be operational by January 1, 2013.

* * * * *

21. Section 58.12 is amended by adding paragraph (g) to read as follows:

§ 58.12   Operating Schedules

* * * * *

	(g) For continuous SO2 analyzers, the maximum 5-minute block-average
for each hour out of the twelve 5-minute blocks in the hour must be
collected except as noted in § 58.12 (a)(1) – (a)(3).

22. Section 58.13 is amended by adding paragraph (d) to read as follows:

§ 58.13 Monitoring network completion.

* * * * *

(d) The network of SO2 monitors must be physically established no later
than January 1, 2013, and at that time, must be operating under all of
the requirements of this part, including the requirements of appendices
A, C, D, E, and G to this part.

* * * * *

23. Section 58.16 is amended by adding paragraph (g) to read as follows:

§ 58.16   Data submittal and archiving requirements.

* * * * *

(g) Any State, or where applicable, local agency or tribal agency
operating an SO2 monitor shall report the maximum 5-minute block average
of SO2 of the twelve available 5-minute blocks for each hour in addition
to the hourly SO2 average.

* * * * *

24. Appendix A to Part 58 is amended as by adding paragraph <IP_ADDRESS> to
read as follows:

Appendix A to Part 58—Quality Assurance Requirements for SLAMS, SPMs
and PSD Air Monitoring

	<IP_ADDRESS> Measurement Uncertainty for SO2. The goal for acceptable
measurement uncertainty for precision is defined as an upper 90 percent
confidence limit for the coefficient of variation (CV) of 15 percent and
for bias as an upper 95 percent confidence limit for the absolute bias
of 15 percent.

* * * * *

25. Appendix C to Part 58 is amended as by adding paragraph 2.1.2 to
read as follows:

Appendix C to Part 58—Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Methodology

* * * * *

2.1.2 Any SO2 FRM or FEM used for making primary NAAQS decisions, as
prescribed in 40 CFR Part 50 Appendix A-1, must be capable of providing
hourly averaged and five minute averaged concentration data.

* * * * *

26. Appendix D to Part 58 is amended as by replacing paragraph 4.4 to
read as follows:

Appendix D to Part 58—Network Design Criteria for Ambient Air Quality
Monitoring

* * * * *

4.4 Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Design Criteria.

4.4.1 General Requirement s. (a) State and, where appropriate, local
agencies must operate a minimum number of required SO2 monitoring sites
as described below. Global comment; suggest replacing “given” with
“particular” or “each”

4.4.2 Requirement for Monitoring by the Population Weighted Emissions
Index. (a)  The population weighted emissions index (PWEI) shall be
calculated for each CBSA in the country. The PWEI shall be calculated by
multiplying the population of each CBSA, using the most current census
data, by the total amount of SO2, in tons per year, emitted within the
CBSA area, using an aggregate of the most recent county level emissions
data available in the National Emissions Inventory for each county in
each CBSA. The resulting product shall be divided by one million,
providing a PWEI value with the unit million persons-tons per year.  For
any CBSA with a calculated PWEI value equal to or greater than 1,000,000
million persons-tons per year, 3 SO2 monitors are required within that
CBSA. For any CBSA with a calculated PWEI value equal to or greater than
10,000, but less than 1,000,000 million persons-tons per year, 2 SO2
monitors are required within that CBSA.  For any CBSA with a calculated
PWEI value equal to or greater than 5,000, but less than 10,000 million
persons-tons per year, 1 SO2 monitor is required within that CBSA.

(1) The SO2 monitoring site required as a result of the PWEI in each
CBSA shall be sited by identifying locations within the boundaries of
that CBSA where SO2 source emissions that originate inside and/or
outside of a given CBSA result in or contribute to maximum hourly
concentrations within that CBSA. Where a state or local air monitoring
agency identifies multiple acceptable candidate sites where maximum
hourly SO2 concentrations are expected to occur, the monitoring agency
shall select the location with the greater population exposure. Where
one CBSA is required to have more than one SO2 monitor, the monitoring
sites shall not be oriented to measure maximum short-term concentrations
from the same SO2 source or group of sources, but shall monitor a
different source or group of sources. Any PWEI-triggered monitors shall
not count toward satisfying any required monitors resulting from the
state emissions triggered requirements described below.

4.4.3 Requirement for State Emission Triggered SO2 Monitoring. (a) Each
State shall operate a minimum number of monitors based on that state’s
contribution of SO2 emissions to the national, anthropogenic, non-fire
SO2 inventory as identified in the 2005 National Emissions Inventory.
Each state shall operate one monitor for each percent that it
contributes to the NEI.  The percent contribution shall be rounded to
the nearest whole integer value with a minimum value of 1 percent.  If a
state contributes to the anthropogenic, non-fire SO2 inventory, those
states shall be required to operate a minimum of one monitor.

(1) Each state emission triggered SO2 monitoring stations shall be sited
by identifying locations inside or outside of CBSAs, and also
considering tribal lands, where SO2 source emissions that originate
inside or outside the state result in or contribute to maximum
short-term concentrations within that state. Where a state or local air
monitoring agency identifies multiple acceptable candidate sites where
maximum short-term SO2 concentrations are expected to occur, the
monitoring agency shall select the location with the greater population
exposure. Where a state had CBSAs with population weighted emissions
index-triggered monitoring, the population weighted emissions
index-triggered monitors may not count toward the emission-triggered
monitors.  State emission triggered monitors shall not be sited to
measure maximum short-term concentrations from the same SO2 source or
group of sources as another SO2 monitor, but shall measure maximum
short-term concentrations resulting from a different source or group of
sources.

  4.4.4 Regional Administrator Required Monitoring. (a) The Regional
Administrator may use his/her discretion to require additional SO2
monitoring stations above the minimum number of monitors required above,
where the minimum monitoring requirements are not sufficient to meet
monitoring objectives.  The Regional Administrator may use this
discretion in situations where an area that is suspected of having
concentrations that may violate the NAAQS is not monitored as a result
of the minimum monitoring requirements described above.  The Regional
Administrator and the responsible State or local air monitoring agency
should work together to design and/or maintain the most appropriate SO2
network to provide sufficient data to protect public health.

 4.4.5 (a) Continued operation of an existing SO2 monitor is required if
data from an individual monitor exceeds the proposed NAAQS, has exceeded
80% of the proposed NAAQS over the prior 5 year period, or has greater
than 10% chance of exceeding 80% of the proposed NAAQS.

4.4.6 SO2 Monitoring Spatial Scales. (a) The appropriate spatial scales
for SO2 SLAMS monitors are the microscale, middle, neighborhood, and
possibly urban scales. Monitors sited at the microscale, middle, and
neighborhood scales are suitable for determining maximum hourly
concentrations for the
v牡敩祴漠体′潳牵散琠灹獥愠摮挠湡戠獵摥映牯
挠浯汰慩据捡楴湯⁳湡慭湩整慮据汰湡愠牧敥敭
瑮⹳†潍楮潴獲猠瑩摥愠⁴牵慢捳污獥愠敲甠敳畦
潦⁲摩湥楴祦湩体′牴湡灳牯ⱴ琠敲摮ⱳ愠摮晩猠
瑩摥甠睰湩景氠捯污猠畯捲獥慢正牧畯摮挠湯散瑮
慲楴湯⹳

!

#

'

6

8

r

s

~

…

¬

¹

º

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

ƒ

¤

gdw

&

gdw

&

gdw

&

ÿgdw

©s

.Î

mÎ

º

¼

½

ã

ô

÷

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

-¤

¾

Õ

é

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

`„`úgdw

&

ÿ^„Ð`„0ýgdw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

hw

h

hw

$

„@

„0ý^„@

„@

„0ý^„@

„@

„0ý^„@

„@

„0ý^„@

葞ː葠ﴰ摧Ὓð

葠ː摧浲

hì

hrm

 hrm

hrm

  hrm

hrm

hrm

葠ː摧ቛ

h

h+

h†S

h

h˜

h

h

h

h

hU

 hU

hU

  hU

hU

hU

hU

h

h

h‚b

h

*

_

(

)

*

+

.

O

Y

^

_

æ

^

i

q

‚

Œ

±

Ö

ñ

h

h

h

  h

h+

葠ː摧焗

h

摧泣q

hó

$

:

=

Y

0

1

C

D

æ

ç

ö

h

h

萑ː搒Ǡ葠ː摧ɠl	ԀĤ搒Ǡ摧⧒u

 hw4

"

 hw4

h

h

kd}

hSr

hSr

hSr

h

萑ː搒Ǡ葠ː摧ʫ

  h«

h«

 h«

h«

h«

 h«

  h«

h«

h«

 h«

h«

  h«

h«

  h«

h«

  h«

h«

 h«

h«

  hÅ

h-*

  hÅ

葠ː摧ʫ

摧䔢ä

h

h

H*

h%

 h#

h

h

^

2

6

8

:

L

^

7^

p

ú

"

B

D

Z

\

^

l

Ä

Þ

 h

s

 h

h‘

h

h

h

q

 hç:

  hç:

 hç:

 hç:

  hç:

u

w

x

ç

é

ê

 hç:

  hç:

  hç:

 hç:

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

혈F鐃᳿ꐋⰖ"蠆

蠆

蠆

摧攑¢

"̀Ĥ옍)

옍)

瑹໊à"̀Ĥ옍)

瑹໊à"̀Ĥ옍)

瑹໊à"̀Ĥ옍)

"̀Ĥ옍)

"̀Ĥ옍)

"̀Ĥ옍)

"̀Ĥ옍)

"̀Ĥ옍)

"̀Ĥ옍)

"̀Ĥ옍)

"̀Ĥ옍)

옍)

x

…

搒Ǡ摧㔜k

葠ː摧㔜kЀ6摧㔜k

葠ː摧㔜k

  h|

 h|

Ѐ 摧ᵍЀ6摧ᵍ

 hÛ

  hÛ

 hÛ

  hÛ

 hÛ

 hÛ

H* hÛ

h

h

h

 h

h

-

b

c

t

u

‰

Š

œ

³

´

Á

Ã

`

a

c

e

"̀Ĥ옍)

옍)

"̀Ĥ옍)

"̀Ĥ옍)

"̀Ĥ옍)

"̀Ĥ옍)

"̀Ĥ옍)

"̀Ĥ옍)

"̀Ĥ옍)

"̀Ĥ옍)

"̀Ĥ옍)

"̀Ĥ옍)

"̀Ĥ옍)

옍)

옍)

将

Ô

kd=

kdø

Ff

@

@

Ñ

ˆe

Úf

i

%k

«l

µl

m

Mm

Xm

Ym

Zm

0

1

Z

[

Ò

Ó

d

Dd

Fd

Gd

Hd

Nd

Wd

^d

e

e

$e

-e

.e

]f

©f

¯f

±f

²f

¸f

Ðf

Ùf

Úf

Ûf

Üf

Ýf

™g

h

h

,h

Ph

Qh

eh

gh

hh

ih

i

£j

¤j

0k

1k

Ck

Dk

Ók

Ôk

	l

l

.l

/l

 l

¡l

ªl

(1) Microscale —This scale would typify areas in close proximity to
SO2 point and area sources.  Emissions from stationary point and area
sources, and non-road sources may, under certain plume conditions,
result in high ground level concentrations at the microscale. The
microscale typically represents an area impacted by the plume with
dimensions extending up to approximately 100 meters.

(2) Middle scale —This scale generally represents air quality levels
in areas up to several city blocks in size with dimensions on the order
of approximately 100 meters to 500 meters. The middle scale may include
locations of expected maximum short-term concentrations due to proximity
to major SO2 point, area, and/or non-road sources.

 (3) Neighborhood scale —The neighborhood scale would characterize air
quality conditions throughout some relatively uniform land use areas
with dimensions in the 0.5 to 4.0 kilometer range. Emissions from
stationary point and area sources may, under certain plume conditions,
result in high SO2 concentrations at the neighborhood scale. Where a
neighborhood site is located away from immediate SO2 sources, the site
may be useful in representing typical air quality values for a larger
residential area, and therefore suitable for population exposure and
trends analyses.

(4) Urban scale – Measurements in this scale would be used to estimate
concentrations over large portions of an urban area with dimensions from
4 to 50 kilometers. Such measurements would be useful for assessing
trends in area-wide air quality, and hence, the effectiveness of large
scale air pollution control strategies.  Urban scale sites may also
support other monitoring objectives of the SO2 monitoring network such
as identifying trends, and when monitors are sited upwind of local
sources, background concentrations.

4.4.7 NCore Monitoring. (a) SO2 measurements are included within the
NCore multipollutant site requirements as described in paragraph (3)(b)
of this appendix.  NCore-based SO2 measurements are primarily used to
characterize SO2 trends and assist in understanding SO2 transport across
representative areas in urban or rural locations although they can also
be compared with the SO2 NAAQS.

* * * * *

Appendix G to Part 58 is amended as by revising Table 2 to read as
follows:

Appendix G to Part 58 - Uniform Air Quality Index (AQI) and Daily
Reporting

* * * * *

TABLE 2.—BREAKPOINTS FOR THE AQI

These breakpoints	Equal these AQI’s

O3 (ppm)

8-hour	O3 (ppm)

1-hour1	PM2.5

(µg/m3)	PM10

(µg/m3)	CO (ppm)	SO2 (ppm) 1-hour	NO2 (ppm)

1-hour	AQI	Category

0.000-0.059	..................	0.0-15.4	0-54	0.0-4.4	0 -  (0.025 –
0.050)	0 – (0.040 – 0.053)	0-50	Good.

0.060-0.075	..................	15.5-40.4	55-154	4.5-9.4	(0.026 –
0.051) – (0.050 – 0.100)	(0.041 – 0.054) – (0.080 – 0.100)
51-100	Moderate.

0.076-0.095	0.125-0.164	40.5-65.4	155-254	9.5-12.4	(0.051 – 0.101) –
(.175 - .200)	(0.081 – 0.101) – (0.360 –  0.370)	101-150	Unhealthy
for Sensitive Groups.

0.096-0.115	0.165-0.204	365.5-150.4	255-354	12.5-15.4	(0.176 – 0.201)
– (.304)	(0.361 – 0.371) – 0.64	151-200	Unhealthy.

0.116-0.374	0.205-0.404	3150.5-250.4	355-424	15.5-30.4	0.305 – 0.604
0.65 – 1.24	201-300	Very Unhealthy.

(2)...............	0.405-0.504	3250.5-350.4	425-504	30.5-40.4	0.605 –
0.804	1.25 – 1.64	301-400

	(2)...............	0.505-0.604	3350.5-500.4	505-604	40.5-50.4	0.805 –
1.004	1.65 – 2.04	401-500	Hazardous.

1 Areas are generally required to report the AQI based on 8-hour ozone
values.  However, there are a small number of areas where an AQI based
on 1-hour ozone values would be more precautionary.  In these cases, in
addition to calculating the 8-hour ozone index value, the 1-hour ozone
index value may be calculated, and the maximum of the two values
reported.

2 8-hour O3 values do not define higher AQI values (( 301).  AQI values
of 301 or greater are calculated with 1-hour O3 concentrations.

3 If a different SHL for PM2.5 is promulgated, these numbers will change
accordingly.

 The legislative history of section 109 indicates that a primary
standard is to be set at “the maximum permissible ambient air level .
. . which will protect the health of any [sensitive] group of the
population,” and that for this purpose “reference should be made to
a representative sample of persons comprising the sensitive group rather
than to a single person in such a group.” S. Rep. No. 91-1196, 91st
Cong., 2d Sess. 10 (1970)

 EPA is currently conducting a separate review of the secondary SO2
NAAQS jointly with a review of the secondary NO2 NAAQS (see   HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/no2so2sec/index.html"
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/no2so2sec/index.html  for more
information).

A small number of sites, 98 total from 1997 to 2007 of the approximately
500 SO2 monitors, and not the same sites in all years, voluntarily
reported 5-minute block average data to AQS (ISA, section 2.5.2).  Of
these, 16 reported all twelve 5-minute averages in each hour for at
least part of the time between 1997 and 2007.  The remainder reported
only the maximum 5-minute average in each hour.

 Studies utilizing a mouthpiece exposure system cannot be directly
compared to studies involving freely breathing subjects, as nasal
absorption of SO2 is bypassed during oral breathing, thus allowing a
greater fraction of inhaled SO2 to reach the tracheobronchial airways.
As a result, individuals exposed to SO2 through a mouthpiece are likely
to experience greater respiratory effects from a given SO2 exposure.

 FEV1 and sRaw are measures of bronchoconstriction.  Decreases in FEV1
or increases in sRaw can result in difficulty breathing.

 The ISA cites one chamber study with intermittent exercise where
healthy and asthmatic children were exposed to 100 ppb SO2 in a mixture
with ozone and sulfuric acid.  The ISA notes that compared to exposure
to filtered air, exposure to the pollutant mix did not result in
statistically significant changes in lung function or respiratory
symptoms (ISA section <IP_ADDRESS>)

 These transcripts can be found in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-ORD-2006-0260.
Available at www.regulations.gov.

 Very young children are not included in controlled human exposure
studies and this absence of data on what is likely to be a sensitive
life stage is a source of uncertainty for children’s susceptibility.

 Benchmark values derived from the controlled human exposure literature
were associated with a 5-minute averaging time. However, only 98 ambient
monitors located in 13 states from 1997-2007 reported measured 5-minute
SO2 concentrations since such monitoring is not required (see section
III).  In contrast, 809 monitors in 48 states, DC, Puerto Rico, and the
Virgin Islands reported 1-hour SO2 concentrations over a similar time
period.  Therefore, to broaden analyses to areas where measured 5-minute
SO2 concentrations were not available, the REA utilized a statistical
relationship to estimate the highest 5-minute level in an hour, given a
reported 1-hour average SO2 concentration (REA, section 6.4).   Then,
similar to measured 5-minute SO2 levels, statistically estimated
5-minute SO2 concentrations were compared to 5-minute potential health
effect benchmark values.

 EPA recently conducted a complete quality assurance review of all
individual subject data.

The results of this review did not substantively change any of the
entries in ISA, Table 3-1, and did not in anyway affect the conclusions
of the ISA (see Johns and Simmons, 2009).

 Very young children were not included in the controlled human exposure
data which served as the basis for the exposure-response relationships
used in the risk assessment.  This absence of data on what is likely to
be a sensitive life stage is an additional source of uncertainty in the
risk assessment.

 Section I.C above discusses potential standards considered but not
adopted in the last review, notably some type of standard to deal with
effects of 5 to 10 minute exposures.

 As noted in the REA, the controlling standard by definition would be
the standard that allows air quality to just meet either the annual
concentration level of 30.4 ppb (i.e., the annual standard is the
controlling standard) or the 2nd highest 24-hour concentration level of
144 ppb (i.e., the 24-hour standard is the controlling standard).  The
factor selected is derived from a single monitor within each county
(even if there is more than one monitor in the county) for a given year.
 A different (or the same) monitor in each county could be used to
derive the factor for other years; the only requirement for selection is
that it be the lowest factor, whether derived from the annual or 24-hour
standard level. "

 Air quality estimates presented in this section represent the mean
number of days per year when 5-minute daily maximum SO2 concentrations
exceed a particular benchmark level given 2001-2006 air quality adjusted
to just meet the current standards (see REA, Tables 7-11 to 7-14).

 Exposure and risk results presented in this notice are with respect to
asthmatic children, results for all asthmatics are presented in REA
Chapters, 8, 9, and 10.

  The risk results presented represent the median estimate of exposed
asthmatics expected to experience moderate or greater lung function
decrements.  Results are presented for both the probit and 2-parameter
logistic functional forms. The full range of estimates can be found in
Chapter 9 of the REA, and in all instances the smaller estimate is a
result of using the probit function to estimate the exposure-response
relationship.

 In this notice, risk results with respect to moderate or greater lung
function responses are presented in terms of sRaw (i.e., ≥ 100%
increases in sRaw).  Risk results with respect to decrements in lung
function defined in terms of FEV1 can be found in Chapter 9 of the REA.

 CASAC views with respect to the current 24-hour and annual standards,
as well as with respect to potential alternative standards are those
following their review of the second draft SO2 REA, which contained a
staff policy assessment chapter.  EPA did not solicit, nor did it
receive CASAC comments on the final policy assessment chapter contained
in the final REA.

 The analysis of peak to mean ratios was used as an initial screen to
evaluate which averaging times could be suited to control 5-minute peaks
of SO2.  The more sophisticated analysis for ultimately determining that
a one-hour averaging time at set an appropriate level could effectively
control these 5-minute peaks was the air quality, exposure, and risk
analyses discussed in section II.F.4.

 In 2005, given a 99th percentile 1-hour daily maximum standard at 50
ppb, Wayne County, West Virginia would have an estimated 99th percentile
24-hour average SO2 concentration >36 ppb (43 ppb; REA Appendix  Table
D-1)

 99th or 98th percentile 1-hour daily maximum concentrations were
determined for each monitor in a given county for the years complete
data were available from 2004-2006.  These concentrations were averaged,
and the monitor with the highest average in a given county was
determined.  Based on this highest average, all monitors in a given
county were adjusted to just meet the potential alternative standards
defined above, and for each of the years, the 99th percentile 24-hour
average SO2 concentration was identified.  Results for the years 2005
and 2006 are presented in the REA, Appendix D.

 In some cases, U.S. authors provided the AQS monitor IDs used in their
studies and the statistics from the highest reporting monitor were
calculated by EPA.  In cases where U.S. authors were unable to provide
the requested data (Schwartz 1995, Schwartz 1996, and Jaffe 2003), EPA
identified the maximum reporting monitor from all monitors located in
the study area and calculated the 98th and 99th percentile statistics
(see Thompson and Stewart 2009).   Results presented from study
locations for which effect estimates were reported.

 For example, evidence of a pattern of results from a group of studies
that find effect estimates similar in direction and magnitude would
warrant consideration of and reliance on such studies even if the
studies did not all report statistically significant associations in
single- or multi-pollutant models. The SO2 epidemiologic studies fit
this pattern, and are buttressed further by the results of the clinical
studies.  ISA, section 5.2.

 There were no U.S. hospitalization studies with 1-hour effect estimates
identified in Table 5-5 of the ISA

 Although not directly comparable to free-breathing chamber studies,
findings from these mouthpiece studies may be particularly relevant to
those asthmatics who breathe oronasally even at rest (EPA, 1994b).

  Air quality, exposure, and risk numbers reported in Chapter 10 of the
REA for  a 75 ppb standard were bound by the estimates from air quality
adjusted to just meet 99th percentile 1-hour daily maximum standards at
50 and 100 ppb.

 Table 3 reports that given a 99th percentile 1-hour daily maximum
standard in the range of 50 – 100 ppb, <1% of asthmatic children at
moderate or greater exertion would be estimated to experience an SO2
exposure ≥ 400 ppb, hence it can be stated that this range of levels
would protect > 99% of asthmatic children at moderate or greater
exertion from experiencing at least one SO2 exposure ≥ 400 ppb per
year.

 Spatial scales are defined in 40 CFR Part 58 Appendix D, Section 1.2,
where the scales of representativeness include:

1. Microscale – Defines the concentration in air volumes associated
with area dimensions ranging from several meters up to about 100 meters.

2. Middle scale – Defines the concentration typical of areas up to
several city blocks in size, with dimensions ranging from about 100
meters to 0.5 kilometers.

3. Neighborhood scale – Defines concentrations within some extended
area of the city that has relatively uniform land use with dimensions in
the 0.5 to 4.0 kilometers range.

4. Urban scale – Defines concentrations within an area of city-like
dimensions, on the order of 4 to 50 kilometers. Within a city, the
geographic placement of sources may result in there being no single site
that can be said to represent air quality on an urban scale. The
neighborhood and urban scales have the potential to overlap in
applications that concern secondarily formed or homogeneously
distributed air pollutants.

5. Regional scale – Defines usually a rural area of reasonably
homogeneous geography without large sources, and extends from tens to
hundreds of kilometers.

 There is inherent variability in where peak ground level concentrations
may occur in space and time from an individual source or group of
sources, due to multiple factors including tons emitted, stack height,
meteorology, among others. These factors are discussed further in the
Monitor Placement and Siting section of this chapter.

 CBSAs are defined by the U.S. Census Bureau, and are comprised of both
Metropolitan Statistical Areas and Micropolitan Statistical Areas (
HYPERLINK "http://www.census.gov"  http://www.census.gov ).

 Due to the variability in where maximum ground-level concentrations may
occur (discussed in the Monitor Siting and Placement section of this
chapter), the appropriate spatial scales within which an SO2 monitor
might be placed include the microscale, middle, and neighborhood scales,
which are defined in 40 CFR Part 58 Appendix D. [could also refer to the
fn above where these are described]

 Due to the variability in where maximum ground-level concentrations may
occur (discussed in the Monitor Siting and Placement section of this
chapter), the appropriate spatial scales within which an SO2 monitor
might be placed include the microscale, middle, and neighborhood scales,
which are defined in 40 CFR Part 58 Appendix D.

  Since EPA is proposing to take comments on retaining the current 24-hr
standards without revision if the 1-hr standard is set at 100-150 ppb,
the discussion in this section relates to implementation of the proposed
1-hour standard and the possible retention or revocation of the current
24-hr standard.

 See SO2 Guideline Document, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, EPA-452/R-94-008, February
1994.

  Two elements identified in section 110(a)(2) are not listed below
because, as EPA interprets the CAA, SIPs incorporating any necessary
local nonattainment area controls would not be due within 3 years, but
rather are due at the time the nonattainment area planning requirements
are due.  These elements are: (1) Emission limits and other control
measures, section 110(a)(2)(A), and (2) Provisions for meeting part D,
section 110(a)(2)(I), which requires areas designated as nonattainment
to meet the applicable nonattainment planning requirements of part D,
title I of the CAA.

 The terms “major” and “minor” define the size of a stationary
source, for applicability purposes, in terms of an annual emissions rate
(tons per year, tpy) for a pollutant.  Generally, a minor source is any
source that is not “major.”  “Major” is defined by the
applicable regulations—PSD or nonattainment NSR.

 In addition, the PSD program applies to non-criteria pollutants subject
to regulation under the Act, except those pollutants regulated under
section 112 and pollutants subject to regulation only under section
211(o).

 Criteria pollutants are those pollutants for which EPA has established
a NAAQS under section 109 of the CAA.

ªl

«l

m

m

Lm

Mm

Xm

^m

¦m

§m

¶m

·m

Äm

Åm

Èm

Ëm

Ñm

Òm

Öm

Øm

Þm

ßm

ìm

ím

ým

þm

n

On

Sn

cn

dn

gn

hn

wn

„n

¼n

Ýn

Þn

o

o

Eo

do

eo

ˆo

±o

Éo

Êo

ço

ÿo

p

p

+p

3浚

浛

浜

浝

浞

浿

涀

涒

涤

涥

涮

®m

µm

¾m

Æm

Ìm

Ôm

Ùm

ám

êm

ûm

n

n

n

n

n

&n

9n

Bn

Gn

On

dn

xn

}n

ƒn

„n

n

£n

£n

n

´n

¼n

Þn

o

	o

o

o

-o

*o

4o

<o

Eo

eo

ˆo

o

°o

±o

½o

Éo

Õo

Ýo

ço

p

p

p

p

*p

+p

7p

Cp

Pp

Xp

bp

pp

|p

„p

”p

•p

¨p

´p

Áp

Ép

Óp

áp

íp

õp

öp

÷p

q

q

#q

+p

Cp

Dp

bp

op

pp

|p

•p

–p

—p

´p

µp

Óp

àp

áp

íp

÷p

øp

ùp

q

q

5q

Bq

Cq

Oq

cq

dq

Ër

Ìr

Õr

Ör

ÿr

s

As

Bs

Ss

Ts

ns

qs

§s

¨s

©s

ªs

«s

'u

(u

^u

_u

¡u

0#q

+q

5q

Cq

Oq

Wq

bq

cq

Ër

Ss

©s

^u

v

x

y

1z

§{

|

â|

ã|

O€

摧ቛ

愀Ĥ摧ૼµ᐀¡u

¢u

Òu

Óu

ßu

àu

ìu

'v

)v

*v

+v

fv

gv

~v

v

€v

Ïv

Ðv

x

x

x

x

x

¤x

¥x

÷x

øx

Fy

Gy

¡y

¢y

¬y

y

®y

²y

³y

óy

ôy

1z

2z

«z

z

®z

§{

¨{

í{

|

 |

 |

 h†S

0 |

â|

ã|

ä|

æ|

;}

¢}

¿}

À}

Ù}

~

~

j~

l~

m~

—~

 ~

·~

Ü~

Ý~

‚

ƒ

‡

¹

Á

Ë

Í

Î

ø

ú

û

N€

O€

P€

‚

X‚

d‚

x‚

‘‚

”‚

•‚

–‚

Fƒ

Gƒ

Hƒ

1„

3„

†

†

†

W†

X†

x†

‚†

ˆ†

†

’†

“†

?O€

€

•‚

Fƒ

†

†

/‡

Ô‡

‰‰

<‹

šŽ

Ò‘

í“

©•

«•

¬•

–

é–

Ö—

èš

摧䱮Kᘀ“†

”†

£†

Ö†

ñ†

-‡

/‡

0‡

Ô‡

Õ‡

‰‰

Š‰

ìŠ

îŠ

<‹

>‹

VŒ

XŒ

YŒ

šŽ

›Ž

¯Ž

±Ž

B‘

D‘

b‘

c‘

Ò‘

Ó‘

V“

X“

_“

a“

í“

î“

ò“

ú“

)•

*•

¬•

•

–

–

–

–

é–

ê–

’—

”—

Ö—

×—

÷—

ù—

>™

B™

D™

¢š

¦š

¨š

èš

êš

ìš

Ðž

Ñž

tŸ

uŸ

e¡

f¡

ñ¡

ò¡

 ¢

¢

¢

,¢

-¢

1¢

2¢

4¢

û¢

ü¢

º£

»£

¼£

¾£

…¤

†¤

	¥

¥

/èš

Ø›

yœ

uŸ

e¡

1¢

»£

¥

:¦

Ë¦

©

Kª

Lª

'«

(«

—«

 Ì

Ì

Ì

-Î

.Î

0Î

¥

	¥

:¦

;¦

@¦

B¦

C¦

È¦

Ê¦

Ë¦

Ì¦

ì§

í§

©

©

©

 ©

 ©

Kª

Lª

Mª

Nª

(«

)«

*«

—«

˜«

™«

b

¼

ë

í

î

ï

õ

÷

Ì

 Ì

 Ì

Ì

Ì

gÌ

hÌ

iÌ

40 CFR 93.102(b)(1).

 The areas that are currently designated as nonattainment for the
pre-existing SO2 primary NAAQS are Hayden, AZ; Armstrong, PA; Laurel,
MT; Piti, GU; and Tanguisson, GU. The areas that are designated
nonattainment for both the primary and the secondary standards are East
Helena, MT, Salt Lake Co, MT, Toole Co, UT, and Warren Co, NJ. ( See
HYPERLINK "http://www.epa.gov/oar/oaqps/greenbk/lnc.html"
http://www.epa.gov/oar/oaqps/greenbk/lnc.html ).  The Billings/Laurel,
MT, area is the only area currently subject to a SIP call.

 PAGE

 PAGE   1

 PAGE

 PAGE   245