the siting criteria may be necessary. In any such case, the reasons
must be thoroughly documented in a written request for a waiver that
describes how and why the proposed siting deviates from the
criteria. This documentation should help to avoid later questions
about the validity of the resulting monitoring data. Conditions
under which the EPA would consider an application for waiver from
these siting criteria are discussed in section 4 of this appendix.
    (c) The pollutant-specific probe and monitoring path siting
criteria generally apply to all spatial scales except where noted
otherwise. Specific siting criteria that are phrased with a ``must''
are defined as requirements and exceptions must be approved through
the waiver provisions. However, siting criteria that are phrased
with a ``should'' are defined as goals to meet for consistency but
are not requirements.

2. Monitors and Samplers With Probe Inlets

2.1 Horizontal and Vertical Placement

    The probe must be located greater than or equal to 2.0 and less
than or equal to 15. meters above ground level for all O3
and SO2 monitoring, and for neighborhood or larger
spatial scale Pb, PM10, PM10-2.5,
PM2.5, NO2, and CO sites. Middle scale CO and
NO2 monitors must also have sampler inlets greater than
or equal to 2.0 and less than or equal to 15 meters above ground
level. Middle scale PM10-2.5 sites are required to have
sampler inlets greater than or equal to 2.0 and less than or equal
to 7.0 meters above ground level. Microscale Pb, PM10,
PM10-2.5, and PM2.5 sites are required to have
sampler inlets greater than or equal to 2.0 and less than or equal
to 7.0 meters above ground level. Microscale near-road
NO2 monitoring sites are required to have sampler inlets
greater than or equal to 2.0 and less than or equal to 7.0 meters
above ground level. The probe inlets for microscale carbon monoxide
monitors that are being used to measure concentrations near roadways
must be greater than or equal to 2.0 and less than or equal to 7.0
meters above ground level. Those probe inlets for microscale carbon
monoxide monitors measuring concentrations near roadways in downtown
areas or urban street canyons must be greater than or equal to 2.5
and less than or equal to 3.5 meters above ground level. The probe
must be at least 1.0 meter vertically or horizontally away from any
supporting structure, walls, parapets, penthouses, etc., and away
from dusty or dirty areas. If the probe is located near the side of
a building or wall, then it should be located on the windward side
of the building relative to the prevailing wind direction during the
season of highest concentration potential for the pollutant being
measured.

2.2 Spacing From Minor Sources

    (a) It is important to understand the monitoring objective for a
particular location in order to interpret this particular
requirement. Local minor sources of a primary pollutant, such as
SO2, lead, or particles, can cause high concentrations of
that particular pollutant at a monitoring site. If the objective for
that monitoring site is to investigate these local primary pollutant
emissions, then the site is likely to be properly located nearby.
This type of monitoring site would in all likelihood be a microscale
type of monitoring site. If a monitoring site is to be used to
determine air quality over a much larger area, such as a
neighborhood or city, a monitoring agency should avoid placing a
monitor probe inlet near local, minor sources. The plume from the
local minor sources should not be allowed to inappropriately impact
the air quality data collected at a site. Particulate matter sites
should not be located in an unpaved area unless there is vegetative
ground cover year-round, so that the impact of windblown dusts will
be kept to a minimum.
    (b) Similarly, local sources of nitric oxide (NO) and ozone-
reactive hydrocarbons can have a scavenging effect causing
unrepresentatively low concentrations of O3 in the
vicinity of probes for O3. To minimize these potential
interferences the probe inlet should be away from furnace or
incineration flues or other minor sources of SO2 or NO.
The separation distance should take into account the heights of the
flues, type of waste or fuel burned, and the sulfur content of the
fuel.

2.3 Spacing From Obstructions

    (a) Buildings and other obstacles may possibly scavenge
SO2, O3, or NO2, and can act to
restrict airflow for any pollutant. To avoid this interference, the
probe inlet must have unrestricted airflow pursuant to paragraph (b)
of this section and should be located away from obstacles. The
horizontal distance from the obstacle to the probe inlet must be at
least twice the height that the obstacle protrudes above the probe
inlet. An obstacle that does not meet the minimum distance
requirement is considered an obstruction that restricts airflow to
the probe inlet.
    (b) A probe inlet located near or along a vertical wall is
undesirable because air moving along the wall may be subject to
possible removal mechanisms. A probe inlet must have unrestricted
airflow with no obstructions (as defined in paragraph (a) of this
section) in a continuous arc of at least 270 degrees. An
unobstructed continuous arc of 180 degrees is allowable when network
design criteria regulations specified in appendix D to this part
require monitoring in street canyons and the probe is located on the
side of a building. This arc must include the predominant wind
direction for the season of greatest pollutant concentration
potential. For particle sampling, a minimum of 2.0 meters of
horizontal separation from walls, parapets, and structures is
required for rooftop site placement.
    (c) A sampling station having a probe inlet located closer to an
obstacle than this criterion allows should be classified as middle
scale or microscale rather than neighborhood or urban scale, since
the measurements from such a station would more closely represent
these smaller scales.
    (d) For near-road monitoring stations, the monitor probe shall
have an unobstructed air flow, where no obstacles exist at or above
the height of the monitor probe, between the monitor probe and the
outside nearest edge of the traffic lanes of the target road
segment.

2.4 Spacing From Trees

    (a) Trees can provide surfaces for SO2,
O3, or NO2 adsorption or reactions, and
surfaces for particle deposition. Trees can also act as obstructions
in cases where they are located between the air pollutant sources or
source areas and the monitoring site, and where the trees are of a
sufficient height and leaf canopy density to interfere with the
normal airflow around the probe inlet. To reduce this possible
interference/obstruction, the probe inlet should be 20 meters or
more from the drip line of trees and must be at least 10 meters from
the drip line of trees. If a tree or trees is an obstacle, the probe
inlet must meet the distance requirements of section 2.3 of this
appendix.
    (b) The scavenging effect of trees is greater for O3
than for other criteria pollutants. Monitoring agencies must take
steps to consider the impact of trees on ozone monitoring sites and
take steps to avoid this problem.
    (c) Beginning January 1, 2024, microscale sites of any air
pollutant, shall have no trees or shrubs located at or above the
line-of-sight fetch between the probe and the source under
investigation, such as a roadway or a stationary source.

2.5 Spacing From Roadways

 Table E-1 to Appendix E to Part 58--Minimum Separation Distance Between
  Roadways and Probes for Monitoring Neighborhood and Urban Scale Ozone
             (O3) and Oxides of Nitrogen (NO, NO2, NOX, NOy)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Minimum
 Roadway average daily traffic, vehicles      Minimum      distance \1\
                 per day                   distance \1\       \2\ \3\
                                           \3\ (meters)      (meters)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
<=1,000.................................              10              10
10,000..................................              10              20
15,000..................................              20              30
20,000..................................              30              40
40,000..................................              50              60
70,000..................................             100             100
>=110,000...............................             250             250
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Distance from the edge of the nearest traffic lane. The distance for
  intermediate traffic counts should be interpolated from the table
  values based on the actual traffic count.
\2\ Applicable for ozone monitors whose placement has not already been
  approved as of December 18, 2006.
\3\ All distances listed are expressed as having 2 significant figures.
  When rounding is performed to assess compliance with these siting
  requirements, the distance measurements will be rounded such as to
  retain at least two significant figures.

2.5.1 Spacing for Ozone Probes

    In siting an O3 monitor, it is important to minimize
destructive interferences from sources of NO, since NO readily
reacts with

O3. Table E-1 to this appendix provides the required
minimum separation distances between a roadway and a probe inlet for
various ranges of daily roadway traffic. A sampling site having a
monitor probe located closer to a roadway than allowed by the table
E-1 requirements should be classified as middle scale or microscale,
rather than neighborhood or urban scale, since the measurements from
such a site would more closely represent these smaller scales.

2.5.2 Spacing for Carbon Monoxide Probes

    (a) Near-road microscale CO monitoring sites, including those
located in downtown areas, urban street canyons, and other near-road
locations such as those adjacent to highly trafficked roads, are
intended to provide a measurement of the influence of the immediate
source on the pollution exposure on the adjacent area.
    (b) Microscale CO monitor probe inlets in downtown areas or
urban street canyon locations shall be located a minimum distance of
2.0 meters and a maximum distance of 10 meters from the edge of the
nearest traffic lane.
    (c) Microscale CO monitor probe inlets in downtown areas or
urban street canyon locations shall be located at least 10 meters
from an intersection and preferably at a midblock location. Midblock
locations are preferable to intersection locations because
intersections represent a much smaller portion of downtown space
than do the streets between them. Pedestrian exposure is probably
also greater in street canyon/corridors than at intersections.

 Table E-2 to Appendix E to Part 58--Minimum Separation Distance Between
  Roadways and Probes for Monitoring Neighborhood Scale Carbon Monoxide
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Minimum
     Roadway average daily traffic, vehicles per day       distance \1\
                                                           \2\ (meters)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
<=10,000................................................              10
15,000..................................................              25
20,000..................................................              45
30,000..................................................              80
40,000..................................................             115
50,000..................................................             135
>=60,000................................................             150
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Distance from the edge of the nearest traffic lane. The distance for
  intermediate traffic counts should be interpolated from the table
  values based on the actual traffic count.
\2\ All distances listed are expressed as having 2 significant figures.
  When rounding is performed to assess compliance with these siting
  requirements, the distance measurements will be rounded such as to
  retain at least two significant figures.

2.5.3 Spacing for Particulate Matter (PM2.5, PM2.5-10, PM10, Pb) Inlets

    (a) Since emissions associated with the operation of motor
vehicles contribute to urban area particulate matter ambient levels,
spacing from roadway criteria are necessary for ensuring national
consistency in PM sampler siting.
    (b) The intent is to locate localized hot-spot sites in areas of
highest concentrations whether it be from mobile or multiple
stationary sources. If the area is primarily affected by mobile
sources and the maximum concentration area(s) is judged to be a
traffic corridor or street canyon location, then the monitors should
be located near roadways with the highest traffic volume and at
separation distances most likely to produce the highest
concentrations. For the microscale traffic corridor site, the
location must be greater than or equal 5.0 and less than or equal to
15 meters from the major roadway. For the microscale street canyon
site, the location must be greater than or equal 2.0 and less than
or equal to 10 meters from the roadway. For the middle scale site, a
range of acceptable distances from the roadway is shown in figure E-
1 to this appendix. Figure E-1 also includes separation distances
between a roadway and neighborhood or larger scale sites by default.
Any PM probe inlet at a site, 2.0 to 15 meters high, and further
back than the middle scale requirements will generally be
neighborhood, urban or regional scale. For example, according to
figure E-1, if a PM sampler is primarily influenced by roadway
emissions and that sampler is set back 10 meters from a 30,000 ADT
(average daily traffic) road, the site should be classified as
microscale, if the sampler's inlet height is between 2.0 and 7.0
meters. If the sampler's inlet height is between 7.0 and 15 meters,
the site should be classified as middle scale. If the sampler is 20
meters from the same road, it will be classified as middle scale; if
40 meters, neighborhood scale; and if 110 meters, an urban scale.

2.5.4 Spacing for Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) Probes

    (a) In siting near-road NO2 monitors as required in
section 4.3.2 of appendix D to this part, the monitor probe shall be
as near as practicable to the outside nearest edge of the traffic
lanes of the target road segment; but shall not be located at a
distance greater than 50 meters, in the horizontal, from the outside
nearest edge of the traffic lanes of the target road segment. Where
possible, the near-road NO2 monitor probe should be
within 20 meters of the target road segment.
    (b) In siting NO2 monitors for neighborhood and
larger scale monitoring, it is important to minimize near-road
influences. Table E-1 to this appendix provides the required minimum
separation distances between a roadway and a probe inlet for various
ranges of daily roadway traffic. A sampling site having a monitor
probe located closer to a roadway than allowed by the table E-1
requirements should be classified as microscale or middle scale
rather than neighborhood or urban scale.

Figure E-1 to Appendix E to Part 58

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JA23.017

2.6 Probe Material and Pollutant Sampler Residence Time

    (a) For the reactive gases (SO2, NO2, and
O3), special probe material must be used for monitors.
Studies have been conducted to determine the suitability of
materials such as polypropylene, polyethylene, polyvinyl chloride,
Tygon[supreg], aluminum, brass, stainless steel, copper,
borosilicate glass, polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF),
polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), perfluoroalkoxy (PFA), and
fluorinated ethylene propylene (FEP) for use as intake sampling
lines. Of the materials in the preceding sentence, only borosilicate
glass, PVDF, PTFE, PFA, and FEP have been found to be acceptable for
use as intake sampling lines for all the reactive gaseous
pollutants. Furthermore, the EPA has specified borosilicate glass or
FEP Teflon[supreg] as the only acceptable probe materials for
delivering test atmospheres in the determination of reference or
equivalent methods. Therefore, borosilicate glass, PVDF, PTFE, PFA,
FEP, or their equivalent must be the only material in the sampling
train (from probe inlet to the back of the monitor) that can be in
contact with the ambient air sample for reactive gas monitors.
Nafion\TM\ is composed primarily of PTFE and can be considered
equivalent to PTFE. It has been shown in tests to exhibit virtually
no loss of ozone at 20 second residence times.
    (b) For volatile organic compound (VOC) monitoring at PAMS, FEP
Teflon[supreg] is unacceptable as the probe material because of VOC
adsorption and desorption reactions on the FEP Teflon[supreg].
Borosilicate glass, stainless steel, or its equivalent are the
acceptable probe materials for VOC and carbonyl sampling. Care must
be taken to ensure that the sample residence time is kept to 20
seconds or less.
    (c) No matter how nonreactive the sampling probe material is
initially, after a period of use reactive particulate matter is
deposited on the probe walls. Therefore, the time it takes the gas
to transfer from the probe inlet to the sampling device is also
critical. Ozone in the presence of nitrogen oxide (NO) will show
significant losses even in the most inert probe material when the
residence time exceeds 20 seconds. Other studies indicate that a 10
second or less residence time is easily achievable. Therefore,
sampling probes for reactive gas monitors (i.e., SO2,
NO2, and O3) must have a sample residence time
less than 20 seconds.

2.7 Summary

    Table E-3 to this appendix presents a summary of the general
requirements for probe siting criteria with respect to distances and
heights. It is apparent from table E-3 that different elevation
distances above the ground are shown for the various pollutants. The
discussion in this appendix for each of the pollutants describes
reasons for elevating the monitor or probe inlet. The differences in
the specified range of heights are based on the vertical
concentration gradients. For source oriented and near-road monitors,
the gradients in the vertical direction are very large for the
microscale, so a small range of heights are used. The upper limit of
15 meters is specified for the consistency between pollutants and to
allow the use of a single manifold for monitoring more than one
pollutant.

                                          Table E-3 to Appendix E to Part 58--Summary of Probe Siting Criteria
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Horizontal or
                                                                                vertical distance
                                                          Height from ground      from supporting      Distance from drip line of       Distance from
            Pollutant                      Scale             to probe \8\       structures \2\ \8\    trees to probe \8\ (meters)     roadways to probe
                                                               (meters)           to probe inlet                                        \8\ (meters)
                                                                                (meters)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2 \2\ \3\ \4\ \5\..............  Middle (300 m)        2.0-15..............  >=1.0...............  >=10.........................  N/A.
                                    Neighborhood Urban,
                                    and Regional (1 km).
CO \3\ \4\ \6\...................  Micro [downtown or    2.5-3.5; 2.0-7.0;     >=1.0...............  >=10.........................  2.0-10 for downtown
                                    street canyon         2.0-15.                                                                    areas or street
                                    sites], micro [near-                                                                             canyon microscale;
                                    road sites], middle                                                                              <=50 for near-road
                                    (300 m) and                                                                                microscale; see
                                    Neighborhood (1 km).                                                                             Table E-2 to this
                                                                                appendix for middle
                                                                                and neighborhood
                                                                                scales.
O3 \2\ \3\ \4\...................  Middle (300 m)        2.0-15..............  >=1.0...............  >=10.........................  See Table E-1 to
                                    Neighborhood,                                                                                this appendix for
                                    Urban, and Regional                                                                              all scales.
                                    (1 km).
NO2 \2\ \3\ \4\..................  Micro (Near-road [50- 2.0-7.0 (micro).....  >=1.0...............  >=10.........................  <=50 for near-road
                                    300 m]).                                                                                micro-scale.
                                   Middle (300 m)......  2.0-15..............  >=1.0...............  >=10.........................
                                   Neighborhood, Urban,  2.0-15 (all other     >=1.0...............  >=10.........................  See Table E-1 to
                                    and Regional (1 km).  scales).                                                                   this appendix for
                                                                                all other scales.
Ozone precursors (for PAMS) \2\    Neighborhood and      2.0-15..............  >=1.0...............  >=10.........................  See Table E-1 to
 \3\ \4\.                           Urban (1 km).                                                                                this appendix for
                                                                                all scales.

PM, Pb \2\ \3\ \4\ \7\...........  Micro, Middle,        2.0-7.0 (micro); 2.0- >=2.0 (all scales,    >=10 (all scales)............  2.0-10 (micro); see
                                    Neighborhood, Urban   7.0 (middle PM10-     horizontal distance                                  Figure E-1 to this
                                    and Regional.         2.5); 2.0-7.0 for     only).                                               appendix for all
                                                          near-road; 2.0-15                                                          other scales. <=50
                                                          (all other scales).                                                        for near-road.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
N/A--Not applicable.
\1\ When probe is located on a rooftop, this separation distance is in reference to walls, parapets, or penthouses located on roof.
\2\ Should be greater than 20 meters from the dripline of tree(s) and must be 10 meters from the dripline.
\3\ Distance from sampler or probe inlet to obstacle, such as a building, must be at least twice the height the obstacle protrudes above the sampler or
  probe inlet. Sites not meeting this criterion may be classified as microscale or middle scale (see text).
\4\ Must have unrestricted airflow in a continuous arc of at least 270 degrees around the probe or sampler; 180 degrees if the probe is on the side of a
  building or a wall for street canyon monitoring.
\5\ The probe or sampler should be away from minor sources, such as furnace or incineration flues. The separation distance is dependent on the height of
  the minor source's emission point (such as a flue), the type of fuel or waste burned, and the quality of the fuel (sulfur, ash, or lead content). This
  criterion is designed to avoid undue influences from minor sources.
\6\ For microscale CO monitoring sites, the probe must be >=10 meters from a street intersection and preferably at a midblock location.
\7\ Collocated monitor inlets must be within 4.0 meters of each other and at least 2.0 meters apart for flow rates greater than 200 liters/min or at
  least 1.0 meter apart for samplers having flow rates less than 200 liters/min to preclude airflow interference, unless a waiver is in place as
  approved by the Regional Administrator pursuant to section 3 of appendix A to this part. For PM2.5, collocated monitor inlet heights should be within
  1 meter of each other vertically.
\8\ All distances listed are expressed as having 2 significant figures. When rounding is performed to assess compliance with these siting requirements,
  the distance measurements will be rounded such as to retain at least two significant figures.

3. Open Path Analyzers

3.1 Horizontal and Vertical Placement

    At least 80 percent of the monitoring path, must be located
greater than or equal 2.0 and less than or equal to 15 meters above
ground level for all O3 and SO2 monitoring
sites, and for neighborhood or larger spatial scale NO2,
and CO sites. Middle scale CO and NO2 sites must also
have monitoring paths greater than or equal 2.0 and less than or
equal to 15 meters above ground level. Microscale near-road
monitoring sites are required to have monitoring paths greater than
or equal 2.0 and less than or equal to 7.0 meters above ground
level. The monitoring path for microscale carbon monoxide monitors
that are being used to measure concentrations near roadways must be
greater than or equal 2.0 and less than or equal to 7.0 meters above
ground level. Those monitoring paths for microscale carbon monoxide
monitors measuring concentrations near roadways in downtown areas or
urban street canyons must be greater than or equal 2.5 and less than
or equal to 3.5 meters above ground level. At least 90 percent of
the monitoring path must be at least 1.0 meter vertically or
horizontally away from any supporting structure, walls, parapets,
penthouses, etc., and away from dusty or dirty areas. If a
significant portion of the monitoring path is located near the side
of a building or wall, then it should be located on the windward
side of the building relative to the prevailing wind direction
during the season of highest concentration potential for the
pollutant being measured.

3.2 Spacing From Minor Sources

    (a) It is important to understand the monitoring objective for a
particular location in order to interpret this particular
requirement. Local minor sources of a primary pollutant, such as
SO2 can cause high concentrations of that particular
pollutant at a monitoring site. If the objective for that monitoring
site is to investigate these local primary pollutant emissions, then
the site is likely to be properly located nearby. This type of
monitoring site would in all likelihood be a microscale type of
monitoring site. If a monitoring site is to be used to determine air
quality over a much larger area, such as a neighborhood or city, a
monitoring agency should avoid placing a monitoring path near local,
minor sources. The plume from the local minor sources should not be
allowed to inappropriately impact the air quality data collected at
a site.
    (b) Similarly, local sources of nitric oxide (NO) and ozone-
reactive hydrocarbons can have a scavenging effect causing
unrepresentatively low concentrations of O3 in the
vicinity of monitoring paths for O3. To minimize these
potential interferences, at least 90 percent of the monitoring path
must be away from furnace or incineration flues or other minor
sources of SO2 or NO. The separation distance should take
into account the heights of the flues, type of waste or fuel burned,
and the sulfur content of the fuel.

3.3 Spacing From Obstructions

    (a) Buildings and other obstacles may possibly scavenge
SO2, O3, or NO2, and can act to
restrict airflow for any pollutant. To avoid this interference, at
least 90 percent of the monitoring path must have unrestricted
airflow and should be located away from obstacles. The horizontal
distance from the obstacle to the monitoring path must be at least
twice the height that the obstacle protrudes above the monitoring
path. An obstacle that does not meet the minimum distance
requirement is considered an obstruction that restricts airflow to
the monitoring path.
    (b) A monitoring path located near or along a vertical wall is
undesirable because air moving along the wall may be subject to
possible removal mechanisms. At least 90 percent of the monitoring
path for open path analyzers must have unrestricted airflow with no
obstructions (as defined in paragraph (a) of this section) in a
continuous arc of at least 270 degrees. An unobstructed continuous
arc of 180 degrees is allowable when network design criteria
regulations specified in appendix D to this part require monitoring
in street canyons and the monitoring path is located on the side of
a building. This arc must include the predominant wind direction for
the season of greatest pollutant concentration potential.
    (c) Special consideration must be given to the use of open path
analyzers due to their inherent potential sensitivity to certain
types of interferences, or optical obstructions. A monitoring path
must be clear of all trees, brush, buildings, plumes, dust, or other
optical obstructions, including potential obstructions that may move
due to wind, human activity, growth of vegetation, etc. Temporary
optical obstructions, such as rain, particles, fog, or snow, should
be considered when siting an open path analyzer. Any of these
temporary obstructions that are of sufficient density to obscure the
light beam will affect the ability of the open path analyzer to
continuously measure pollutant concentrations. Transient, but
significant obscuration of especially longer measurement paths could
occur as a result of certain meteorological conditions (e.g., heavy
fog, rain, snow) and/or aerosol levels that are of a sufficient
density to prevent the open path analyzer's light transmission. If
certain compensating measures are not otherwise implemented at the
onset of monitoring (e.g., shorter path lengths, higher light source
intensity), data recovery during periods of greatest primary
pollutant potential could be compromised. For instance, if heavy fog
or high particulate levels are coincident with periods of projected
NAAQS-threatening pollutant potential, the representativeness of the
resulting data record in reflecting maximum pollutant concentrations
may be substantially impaired despite the fact that the site may
otherwise exhibit an acceptable, even exceedingly high overall valid
data capture rate.
    (d) A sampling station having a monitoring path located closer
to an obstacle than this criterion allows should be classified as
middle scale or microscale rather than neighborhood or urban scale,
since the measurements from such a station would more closely
represent these smaller scales.

    (e) For near-road monitoring stations, the monitoring path shall
have an unobstructed air flow, where no obstacles exist at or above
the height of the monitoring path, between the monitoring path and
the outside nearest edge of the traffic lanes of the target road
segment.

3.4 Spacing From Trees

    (a) Trees can provide surfaces for SO2,
O3, or NO2 adsorption or reactions. Trees can
also act as obstructions in cases where they are located between the
air pollutant sources or source areas and the monitoring site, and
where the trees are of a sufficient height and leaf canopy density
to interfere with the normal airflow around the monitoring path. To
reduce this possible interference/obstruction, at least 90 percent
of the monitoring path should be 20 meters or more from the drip
line of trees and must be at least 10 meters from the drip line of
trees. If a tree or trees could be considered an obstacle, the
monitoring path must meet the distance requirements of section 3.3
of this appendix.
    (b) The scavenging effect of trees is greater for O3
than for other criteria pollutants. Monitoring agencies must take
steps to consider the impact of trees on ozone monitoring sites and
take steps to avoid this problem.
    (c) Beginning January 1, 2024, microscale sites of any air
pollutant shall have no trees or shrubs located at or above the
line-of-sight fetch between the monitoring path and the source under
investigation, such as a roadway or a stationary source.

3.5 Spacing From Roadways

    Table E-4 to Appendix E to Part 58--Minimum Separation Distance Between Roadways and Monitoring Paths for
          Monitoring Neighborhood and Urban Scale Ozone (O3) and Oxides of Nitrogen (NO, NO2, NOX, NOy)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Minimum distance
               Roadway average daily traffic, vehicles per day                Minimum distance     \1\ \2\ \3\
                                                                              \1\ \3\ (meters)      (meters)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<=1,000.....................................................................                10                10
10,000......................................................................                10                20
15,000......................................................................                20                30
20,000......................................................................                30                40
40,000......................................................................                50                60
70,000......................................................................               100               100
>=110,000...................................................................               250               250
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Distance from the edge of the nearest traffic lane. The distance for intermediate traffic counts should be
  interpolated from the table values based on the actual traffic count.
\2\ Applicable for ozone open path monitors whose placement has not already been approved as of December 18,
  2006.
\3\ All distances listed are expressed as having 2 significant figures. When rounding is performed to assess
  compliance with these siting requirements, the distance measurements will be rounded such as to retain at
  least two significant figures.

3.5.1 Spacing for Ozone Monitoring Paths

    In siting an O3 open path analyzer, it is important
to minimize destructive interferences form sources of NO, since NO
readily reacts with O3. Table E-4 to this appendix
provides the required minimum separation distances between a roadway
and at least 90 percent of a monitoring path for various ranges of
daily roadway traffic. A monitoring site having a monitoring path
located closer to a roadway than allowed by the table E-4
requirements should be classified as microscale or middle scale,
rather than neighborhood or urban scale, since the measurements from
such a site would more closely represent these smaller scales. The
monitoring path(s) must not cross over a roadway with an average
daily traffic count of 10,000 vehicles per day or more. For those
situations where a monitoring path crosses a roadway with fewer than
10,000 vehicles per day, monitoring agencies must consider the
entire segment of the monitoring path in the area of potential
atmospheric interference from automobile emissions. Therefore, this
calculation must include the length of the monitoring path over the
roadway plus any segments of the monitoring path that lie in the
area between the roadway and minimum separation distance, as
determined from table E-4. The sum of these distances must not be
greater than 10 percent of the total monitoring path length.

3.5.2 Spacing for Carbon Monoxide Monitoring Paths

    (a) Near-road microscale CO monitoring sites, including those
located in downtown areas, urban street canyons, and other near-road
locations such as those adjacent to highly trafficked roads, are
intended to provide a measurement of the influence of the immediate
source on the pollution exposure on the adjacent area.
    (b) Microscale CO monitoring paths in downtown areas or urban
street canyon locations shall be located a minimum distance of 2.0
meters and a maximum distance of 10 meters from the edge of the
nearest traffic lane.
    (c) Microscale CO monitoring paths in downtown areas or urban
street canyon locations shall be located at least 10 meters from an
intersection and preferably at a midblock location. Midblock
locations are preferable to intersection locations because
intersections represent a much smaller portion of downtown space
than do the streets between them. Pedestrian exposure is probably
also greater in street canyon/corridors than at intersections.

 Table E-5 to Appendix E to Part 58--Minimum Separation Distance Between
 Roadways and Monitoring Paths for Monitoring Neighborhood Scale Carbon
                                Monoxide
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Minimum distance \1\
Roadway average daily traffic, vehicles per day        \2\ (meters)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
<=10,000.......................................                       10
15,000.........................................                       25
20,000.........................................                       45
30,000.........................................                       80
40,000.........................................                      115
50,000.........................................                      135
>=60,000.......................................                      150
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Distance from the edge of the nearest traffic lane. The distance for
  intermediate traffic counts should be interpolated from the table
  values based on the actual traffic count.

\2\ All distances listed are expressed as having 2 significant figures.
  When rounding is performed to assess compliance with these siting
  requirements, the distance measurements will be rounded such as to
  retain at least two significant figures.

3.5.3 Spacing for Nitrogen Dioxide (NO[bdi2]) Monitoring Paths

    (a) In siting near-road NO2 monitors as required in
section 4.3.2 of appendix D to this part, the monitoring path shall
be as near as practicable to the outside nearest edge of the traffic
lanes of the target road segment; but shall not be located at a
distance greater than 50 meters, in the horizontal, from the outside
nearest edge of the traffic lanes of the target road segment.
    (b) In siting NO2 open path monitors for neighborhood
and larger scale monitoring, it is important to minimize near-road
influences. Table E-5 to this appendix provides the required minimum
separation distances between a roadway and at least 90 percent of a
monitoring path for various ranges of daily roadway traffic. An open
path analyzer having a monitoring path located closer to a roadway
than allowed by the requirements in table E-4 to this appendix
should be classified as microscale or middle scale rather than
neighborhood or urban scale. The monitoring path(s) must not cross
over a roadway with an average daily traffic count of 10,000
vehicles per day or more. For those situations where a monitoring
path crosses a roadway with fewer than 10,000 vehicles per day,
monitoring agencies must consider the entire segment of the
monitoring path in the area of potential atmospheric interference
form automobile emissions. Therefore, this calculation must include
the length of the monitoring path over the roadway plus any segments
of the monitoring path that lie in the area between the roadway and
minimum separation distance, as determined form table E-5. The sum
of these distances must not be greater than 10 percent of the total
monitoring path length.

3.6 Cumulative Interferences on a Monitoring Path

    The cumulative length or portion of a monitoring path that is
affected by minor sources, trees, or roadways must not exceed 10
percent of the total monitoring path length.

3.7 Maximum Monitoring Path Length

    The monitoring path length must not exceed 1 kilometer for open
path analyzers in neighborhood, urban, or regional scale. For middle
scale monitoring sites, the monitoring path length must not exceed
300 meters. In areas subject to frequent periods of dust, fog, rain,
or snow, consideration should be given to a shortened monitoring
path length to minimize loss of monitoring data due to these
temporary optical obstructions. For certain ambient air monitoring
scenarios using open path analyzers, shorter path lengths may be
needed in order to ensure that the monitoring site meets the
objectives and spatial scales defined in appendix D to this part.
The Regional Administrator may require shorter path lengths, as
needed on an individual basis, to ensure that the SLAMS sites meet
the appendix D requirements. Likewise, the Administrator may specify
the maximum path length used at NCore monitoring sites.

3.8 Summary

    Table E-6 to this appendix presents a summary of the general
requirements for monitoring path siting criteria with respect to
distances and heights. It is apparent from table E-6 that different
elevation distances above the ground are shown for the various
pollutants. The discussion in this appendix for each of the
pollutants describes reasons for elevating the monitoring path. The
differences in the specified range of heights are based on the
vertical concentration gradients. For source oriented and near-road
monitors, the gradients in the vertical direction are very large for
the microscale, so a small range of heights are used. The upper
limit of 15 meters is specified for the consistency between
pollutants and to allow the use of a monitoring path for monitoring
more than one pollutant.

                 Table E-6 to Appendix E to Part 58--Summary of Monitoring Path Siting Criteria
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Horizontal or
                                                                    vertical
                                                  Height from     distance from   Distance from   Distance from
                                   Maximum       ground to 80%     supporting     trees to 90%     roadways to
          Pollutant            monitoring path   of monitoring   structures \2\   of monitoring  monitoring path
                                    length        path \1\ \8\      to 90% of     path \1\ \8\       \1\ \8\
                                                    (meters)       monitoring       (meters)         (meters)
                                                                  path \1\ \8\
                                                                    (meters)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2 \3\ \4\ \5\ \6\..........  Middle (300 m)   2.0-15.........           >=1.0            >=10  N/A.
                                Neighborhood
                                Urban, and
                                Regional (1
                                km).
CO \4\ \5\ \7\...............  Micro [downtown  2.5-3.5; 2.0-             >=1.0            >=10  2.0-10 for
                                or street        7.0; 2.0-15.                                     downtown areas
                                canyon sites],                                                    or street
                                micro [near-                                                      canyon
                                road sites],                                                      microscale;
                                middle (300.                                                      <=50. for near-
                                m) and                                                            road
                                Neighborhood                                                      microscale;
                                (1.0 km).                                                         see Table E-5
                                                                                to this
                                                                                appendix for
                                                                                middle and
                                                                                neighborhood
                                                                                scales.
O3 \3\ \4\ \5\...............  Middle (300. m)  2.0-15.........           >=1.0            >=10  See Table E-4
                                Neighborhood,                                                     to this
                                Urban, and                                                        appendix for
                                Regional (1.0                                                     all scales.
                                km).
NO2 \3\ \4\ \5\..............  Micro (Near-     2.0-7.0                   >=1.0            >=10  <=50. for near-
                                road [50-300     (micro);.                                        road micro-
                                m]).                                                              scale.
                               Middle (300 m).  2.0-15.........           >=1.0            >=10
                               Neighborhood,    2.0-15 (all               >=1.0            >=10  See Table E-4
                                Urban, and       other scales).                                   to this
                                Regional (1                                                       appendix for
                                km).                                                              all other
                                                                                scales.
Ozone precursors (for PAMS)    Neighborhood     2.0-15.........           >=1.0            >=10  See Table E-4
 \3\ \4\ \5\.                   and Urban (1                                                      to this
                                km).                                                              appendix for
                                                                                all scales.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
N/A--Not applicable.
\1\ Monitoring path for open path analyzers is applicable only to middle or neighborhood scale CO monitoring,
  middle, neighborhood, urban, and regional scale NO2 monitoring, and all applicable scales for monitoring SO2,
  O3, and O3 precursors.
\2\ When the monitoring path is located on a rooftop, this separation distance is in reference to walls,
  parapets, or penthouses located on roof.
\3\ At least 90 percent of the monitoring path should be greater than 20 meters from the dripline of tree(s) and
  must be 10 meters from the dripline when the tree(s).
\4\ Distance from 90 percent of monitoring path to obstacle, such as a building, must be at least twice the
  height the obstacle protrudes above the monitoring path. Sites not meeting this criterion may be classified as
  microscale or middle scale (see text).
\5\ Must have unrestricted airflow 270 degrees around at least 90 percent of the monitoring path; 180 degrees if
  the monitoring path is adjacent to the side of a building or a wall for street canyon monitoring.
\6\ The monitoring path should be away from minor sources, such as furnace or incineration flues. The separation
  distance is dependent on the height of the minor source's emission point (such as a flue), the type of fuel or
  waste burned, and the quality of the fuel (sulfur, ash, or lead content). This criterion is designed to avoid
  undue influences from minor sources.
\7\ For microscale CO monitoring sites, the monitoring path must be >=10. meters from a street intersection and
  preferably at a midblock location.
\8\ All distances listed are expressed as having 2 significant figures. When rounding is performed to assess
  compliance with these siting requirements, the distance measurements will be rounded such as to retain at
  least two significant figures.

4. Waiver Provisions

    Most sampling probes or monitors can be located so that they
meet the requirements of this appendix. New sites with rare
exceptions, can be located within the limits of this appendix.
However, some existing sites may not meet these requirements and
still produce useful data for some purposes. The EPA will consider a
written request from

the State, or where applicable local, agency to waive one or more
siting criteria for some monitoring sites providing that the State
or their designee can adequately demonstrate the need (purpose) for
monitoring or establishing a monitoring site at that location.
    4.1 For establishing a new site, a waiver may be granted only if
both of the following criteria are met:
    4.1.1 The site can be demonstrated to be as representative of
the monitoring area as it would be if the siting criteria were being
met.
    4.1.2 The monitor or probe cannot reasonably be located so as to
meet the siting criteria because of physical constraints (e.g.,
inability to locate the required type of site the necessary distance
from roadways or obstructions).
    4.2 However, for an existing site, a waiver may be granted if
either of the criteria in sections 4.1.1 and 4.1.2 of this appendix
are met.
    4.3 Cost benefits, historical trends, and other factors may be
used to add support to the criteria in sections 4.1.1 and 4.1.2 of
this appendix, however, they in themselves, will not be acceptable
reasons for granting a waiver. Written requests for waivers must be
submitted to the Regional Administrator. Approved waivers must be
renewed minimally every 5 years and ideally as part of the annual
monitoring network plan accompanying the network assessment as
defined in Sec.  58.10(d). The approval date of the waiver must be
documented in the annual monitoring network plan to support the
requirements of Sec.  58.10(a)(1) and (b)(10).

5. References

1. Bryan, R.J., R.J. Gordon, and H. Menck. Comparison of High Volume
Air Filter Samples at Varying Distances from Los Angeles Freeway.
University of Southern California, School of Medicine, Los Angeles,
CA. (Presented at 66th Annual Meeting of Air Pollution Control
Association. Chicago, IL. June 24-28, 1973. APCA 73-158.)
2. Teer, E.H. Atmospheric Lead Concentration Above an Urban Street.
Master of Science Thesis, Washington University, St. Louis, MO.
January 1971.
3. Bradway, R.M., F.A. Record, and W.E. Belanger. Monitoring and
Modeling of Resuspended Roadway Dust Near Urban Arterials. GCA
Technology Division, Bedford, MA. (Presented at 1978 Annual Meeting
of Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC. January 1978.)
4. Pace, T.G., W.P. Freas, and E.M. Afify. Quantification of
Relationship Between Monitor Height and Measured Particulate Levels
in Seven U.S. Urban Areas. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, NC. (Presented at 70th Annual Meeting of Air
Pollution Control Association, Toronto, Canada. June 20-24, 1977.
APCA 77-13.4.)
5. Harrison, P.R. Considerations for Siting Air Quality Monitors in
Urban Areas. City of Chicago, Department of Environmental Control,
Chicago, IL. (Presented at 66th Annual Meeting of Air Pollution
Control Association, Chicago, IL. June 24-28, 1973. APCA 73-161.)
6. Study of Suspended Particulate Measurements at Varying Heights
Above Ground. Texas State Department of Health, Air Control Section,
Austin, TX. 1970. p.7.
7. Rodes, C.E. and G.F. Evans. Summary of LACS Integrated Pollutant
Data. In: Los Angeles Catalyst Study Symposium. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC. EPA Publication No.
EPA-600/4-77-034. June 1977.
8. Lynn, D.A. et al. National Assessment of the Urban Particulate
Problem: Volume 1, National Assessment. GCA Technology Division,
Bedford, MA. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, NC. EPA Publication No. EPA-450/3-75-024. June 1976.
9. Pace, T.G. Impact of Vehicle-Related Particulates on TSP
Concentrations and Rationale for Siting Hi-Vols in the Vicinity of
Roadways. OAQPS, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, NC. April 1978.
10. Ludwig, F.L., J.H. Kealoha, and E. Shelar. Selecting Sites for
Monitoring Total Suspended Particulates. Stanford Research
Institute, Menlo Park, CA. Prepared for U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC. EPA Publication No.
EPA-450/3-77-018. June 1977, revised December 1977.
11. Ball, R.J. and G.E. Anderson. Optimum Site Exposure Criteria for
SO2 Monitoring. The Center for the Environment and Man,
Inc., Hartford, CT. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC. EPA Publication No. EPA-450/3-
77-013. April 1977.
12. Ludwig, F.L. and J.H.S. Kealoha. Selecting Sites for Carbon
Monoxide Monitoring. Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, CA.
Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, NC. EPA Publication No. EPA-450/3-75-077. September 1975.
13. Ludwig, F.L. and E. Shelar. Site Selection for the Monitoring of
Photochemical Air Pollutants. Stanford Research Institute, Menlo
Park, CA. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, NC. EPA Publication No. EPA-450/3-78-013.
April 1978.
14. Lead Analysis for Kansas City and Cincinnati, PEDCo
Environmental, Inc., Cincinnati, OH. Prepared for U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC. EPA Contract No. 66-
02-2515, June 1977.
15. Barltrap, D. and C.D. Strelow. Westway Nursery Testing Project.
Report to the Greater London Council. August 1976.
16. Daines, R.H., H. Moto, and D.M. Chilko. Atmospheric Lead: Its
Relationship to Traffic Volume and Proximity to Highways. Environ.
Sci. and Technol., 4:318, 1970.
17. Johnson, D.E., et al. Epidemiologic Study of the Effects of
Automobile Traffic on Blood Lead Levels, Southwest Research
Institute, Houston, TX. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC. EPA-600/1-78-055, August 1978.
18. Air Quality Criteria for Lead. Office of Research and
Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC
EPA-600/8-83-028 aF-dF, 1986, and supplements EPA-600/8-89/049F,
August 1990. (NTIS document numbers PB87-142378 and PB91-138420).
19. Lyman, D.R. The Atmospheric Diffusion of Carbon Monoxide and
Lead from an Expressway, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of
Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH. 1972.
20. Wechter, S.G. Preparation of Stable Pollutant Gas Standards
Using Treated Aluminum Cylinders. ASTM STP. 598:40-54, 1976.
21. Wohlers, H.C., H. Newstein and D. Daunis. Carbon Monoxide and
Sulfur Dioxide Adsorption On and Description From Glass, Plastic and
Metal Tubings. J. Air Poll. Con. Assoc. 17:753, 1976.
22. Elfers, L.A. Field Operating Guide for Automated Air Monitoring
Equipment. U.S. NTIS. p. 202, 249, 1971.
23. Hughes, E.E. Development of Standard Reference Material for Air
Quality Measurement. ISA Transactions, 14:281-291, 1975.
24. Altshuller, A.D. and A.G. Wartburg. The Interaction of Ozone
with Plastic and Metallic Materials in a Dynamic Flow System.
Intern. Jour. Air and Water Poll., 4:70-78, 1961.
25. Code of Federal Regulations. 40 CFR 53.22, July 1976.
26. Butcher, S.S. and R.E. Ruff. Effect of Inlet Residence Time on
Analysis of Atmospheric Nitrogen Oxides and Ozone, Anal. Chem.,
43:1890, 1971.
27. Slowik, A.A. and E.B. Sansone. Diffusion Losses of Sulfur
Dioxide in Sampling Manifolds. J. Air. Poll. Con. Assoc., 24:245,
1974.
28. Yamada, V.M. and R.J. Charlson. Proper Sizing of the Sampling
Inlet Line for a Continuous Air Monitoring Station. Environ. Sci.
and Technol., 3:483, 1969.
29. Koch, R.C. and H.E. Rector. Optimum Network Design and Site
Exposure Criteria for Particulate Matter, GEOMET Technologies, Inc.,
Rockville, MD. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, NC. EPA Contract No. 68-02-3584. EPA 450/4-
87-009. May 1987.
30. Burton, R.M. and J.C. Suggs. Philadelphia Roadway Study.
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, N.C. EPA-600/4-84-070
September 1984.
31. Technical Assistance Document For Sampling and Analysis of Ozone
Precursors. Atmospheric Research and Exposure Assessment Laboratory,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC
27711. EPA 600/8-91-215. October 1991.
32. Quality Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement
Systems: Volume IV. Meteorological Measurements.

Atmospheric Research and Exposure Assessment Laboratory, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711.
EPA 600/4-90-0003. August 1989.
33. On-Site Meteorological Program Guidance for Regulatory Modeling
Applications. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711.
EPA 450/4-87-013. June 1987F.
0
31. Revise appendix G to part 58 to read as follows:

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

1. General Information
2. Reporting Requirements
3. Data Handling

1. General Information

    1.1 AQI Overview. The AQI is a tool that simplifies reporting
air quality to the general public in a nationally uniform and easy
to understand manner. The AQI converts concentrations of pollutants
for which the EPA has established national ambient air quality
standard (NAAQS), into a uniform scale from 0-500. These pollutants
are ozone (O3), particulate matter (PM2.5,
PM10), carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur dioxide
(SO2), and nitrogen dioxide (NO2). The scale
of the index is divided into general categories that are associated
with health messages.

2. Reporting Requirements

    2.1 Applicability. The AQI must be reported daily for a
metropolitan statistical area (MSA) with a population over 350,000.
When it is useful and possible, it is recommended, but not required
for an area to report a sub-daily AQI as well.
    2.2 Contents of AQI Report.
    2.2.1 Content of AQI Report Requirements. An AQI report must
contain the following:
    a. The reporting area(s) (the MSA or subdivision of the MSA).
    b. The reporting period (the day for which the AQI is reported).
    c. The main pollutant (the pollutant with the highest index
value).
    d. The AQI (the highest index value).
    e. The category descriptor and index value associated with the
AQI and, if choosing to report in a color format, the associated
color. Use only the following descriptors and colors for the six AQI
categories:

            Table 1 to Appendix G to Part 58--AQI Categories
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         And this color
         For this AQI             Use this descriptor          \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0 to 50.......................  ``Good''..............  Green.
51 to 100.....................  ``Moderate''..........  Yellow.
101 to 150....................  ``Unhealthy for         Orange.
                                 Sensitive Groups''.
151 to 200....................  ``Unhealthy''.........  Red.
201 to 300....................  ``Very Unhealthy''....  Purple.
301 and above.................  ``Hazardous''.........  Maroon.\1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Specific color definitions can be found in the most recent reporting
  guidance (Technical Assistance Document for the Reporting of Daily Air
  Quality), which can be found at https://www.airnow.gov/publications/air-quality-index/technical-assistance-document-for-reporting-the-daily-aqi/.

    f. The pollutant specific sensitive groups for any reported
index value greater than 100. The sensitive groups for each
pollutant are identified as part of the periodic review of the air
quality criteria and the NAAQS. For convenience, EPA lists the
relevant groups for each pollutant in the most recent reporting
guidance (Technical Assistance Document for the Reporting of Daily
Air Quality), which can be found at https://www.airnow.gov/publications/air-quality-index/technical-assistance-document-for-reporting-the-daily-aqi/.
    2.2.2 Contents of AQI Report When Applicable. When appropriate,
the AQI report may also contain the following, but such information
is not required:
    a. Appropriate health and cautionary statements.
    b. The name and index value for other pollutants, particularly
those with an index value greater than 100.
    c. The index values for sub-areas of your MSA.
    d. Causes for unusually high AQI values.
    e. Pollutant concentrations.
    f. Generally, the AQI report applies to an area's MSA only.
However, if a significant air quality problem exists (AQI greater
than 100) in areas significantly impacted by the MSA but not in it
(for example, O3 concentrations are often highest
downwind and outside an urban area), the report should identify
these areas and report the AQI for these areas as well.
    2.3 Communication, Timing, and Frequency of AQI Report. The
daily AQI must be reported 7 days per week and made available via
website or other means of public access. The daily AQI report
represents the air quality for the previous day. Exceptions to this
requirement are in section 2.4 of this appendix.
    Reporting the AQI sub-daily is recommended, but not required, to
provide more timely air quality information to the public for making
health-protective decisions.
    Submitting hourly data in real-time to the EPA's AirNow (or
future analogous) system is recommended, but not required, and
assists the EPA in providing timely air quality information to the
public for making health-protective decisions.
    Submitting hourly data for appropriate monitors (referenced in
section 3.2 of this appendix) satisfies the daily AQI reporting
requirement because the AirNow system makes daily and sub-daily AQI
reports widely available through its website and other communication
tools.
    Forecasting the daily AQI provides timely air quality
information to the public and is recommended but not required. Sub-
daily forecasts are also recommended, especially when air quality is
expected to vary substantially throughout the day, like during
wildfires. Long-term (multi-day) forecasts can also be made
available when useful.
    2.4 Exceptions to Reporting Requirements.
    i. If the index value for a particular pollutant remains below
50 for a season or year, then it may be excluded from the
calculation of the AQI in section 3 of this appendix.
    ii. If all index values remain below 50 for a year, then the AQI
may be reported at the discretion of the reporting agency. In
subsequent years, if pollutant levels rise to where the AQI would be
above 50, then the AQI must be reported as required in section 2 of
this appendix.
    iii. As previously mentioned in section 2.3 of this appendix,
submitting hourly data in real-time from appropriate monitors
(referenced in section 3.2 of this appendix) to the EPA's AirNow (or
future analogous) system satisfies the daily AQI reporting
requirement.

3. Data Handling

    3.1 Relationship of AQI and pollutant concentrations. For each
pollutant, the AQI transforms ambient concentrations to a scale from
0 to 500. As appropriate, the AQI is associated with the NAAQS for
each pollutant. In most cases, the index value of 100 is associated
with the numerical level of the short-term standard (i.e., averaging
time of 24-hours or less) for each pollutant. The index value of 50
is associated with the numerical level of the annual standard for a
pollutant, if there is one, at one-half the level of the short-term
standard for the pollutant, or at the level at which it is
appropriate to begin to provide guidance on cautionary language.
Higher categories of the index are based on the potential for
increasingly serious health effects to occur following exposure and
increasing proportions of the population that are likely to be
affected. The reported AQI corresponds to the pollutant with the
highest calculated AQI. For the purposes of reporting the AQI, the
sub-indexes for PM10 and PM2.5 are to be
considered separately. The pollutant responsible for the highest
index value (the reported AQI) is called the ``main'' pollutant for
that day.

    3.2 Monitors Used for AQI Reporting. Concentration data from
State/Local Air Monitoring Station (SLAMS) or parts of the SLAMS
required by 40 CFR 58.10 must be used for each pollutant except PM.
For PM, calculate and report the AQI on days for which air quality
data has been measured (e.g., from continuous PM2.5
monitors required in appendix D to this part). PM measurements may
be used from monitors that are not reference or equivalent methods
(for example, continuous PM10 or PM2.5
monitors). Detailed guidance for relating non-approved measurements
to approved methods by statistical linear regression is referenced
here:
    Reference for relating non-approved PM measurements to approved
methods (Eberly, S., T. Fitz-Simons, T. Hanley, L. Weinstock., T.
Tamanini, G. Denniston, B. Lambeth, E. Michel, S. Bortnick. Data
Quality Objectives (DQOs) For Relating Federal Reference Method
(FRM) and Continuous PM2.5 Measurements to Report an Air
Quality Index (AQI). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, NC. EPA-454/B-02-002, November 2002).
    3.3 AQI Forecast. The AQI can be forecasted at least 24-hours in
advance using the most accurate and reasonable procedures
considering meteorology, topography, availability of data, and
forecasting expertise. The guidance document, ``Guidelines for
Developing an Air Quality (Ozone and PM2.5) Forecasting
Program,'' can be found at https://www.airnow.gov/publications/weathercasters/guidelines-developing-air-quality-forecasting-program/.
    3.4 Calculation and Equations.
    i. The AQI is the highest value calculated for each pollutant as
follows:
    a. Identify the highest concentration among all of the monitors
within each reporting area and truncate as follows:
    (1) Ozone--truncate to 3 decimal places

PM2.5--truncate to 1 decimal place
PM10--truncate to integer
CO--truncate to 1 decimal place
SO2--truncate to integer
NO2--truncate to integer

    (2) [Reserved]
    b. Using table 2 to this appendix, find the two breakpoints that
contain the concentration.
    c. Using equation 1 to this appendix, calculate the index.
    d. Round the index to the nearest integer.

                                                Table 2 to Appendix G to Part 58--Breakpoints for the AQI
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        These breakpoints                                                            Equal these AQI's
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      PM10
  O3 (ppm) 8-     O3 (ppm) 1-   PM2.5  ([mu]g/m3)  ([mu]g/m3)   CO (ppm)    SO2 (ppb)   NO2 (ppb)
     hour          hour \1\           24-hour        24-hour     8-hour      1-hour      1-hour       AQI                      Category

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   0.000-0.054  ..............     0.0-(9.0-10.0)        0-54     0.0-4.4        0-35        0-53      0-50  Good.
   0.055-0.070  ..............    (9.1-10.1)-35.4      55-154     4.5-9.4       36-75      54-100    51-100  Moderate.
   0.071-0.085     0.125-0.164          35.5-55.4     155-254    9.5-12.4      76-185     101-360   101-150  Unhealthy for Sensitive Groups.
   0.086-0.105     0.165-0.204         55.5-125.4     255-354   12.5-15.4    \3\ 186-     361-649   151-200  Unhealthy.
                                                                                304
   0.106-0.200     0.205-0.404        125.5-225.4     355-424   15.5-30.4    \3\<PHONE_NUMBER>   201-300  Very Unhealthy.
                                                                                604
   0.201-(\2\)          0.405+             225.5+        425+       30.5+    \3\ 605+       1250+      301+  Hazardous.\4\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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 concentrations do not define higher AQI values (>301). AQI values >301 are calculated with 1-hour O3 concentrations.
\3\ 1-hr SO2 concentrations do not define higher AQI values (>=200). AQI values of 200 or greater are calculated with 24-hour SO2 concentration.
\4\ AQI values between breakpoints are calculated using equation 1 to this appendix. For AQI values in the hazardous category, AQI values greater than
  500 should be calculated using equation 1 and the concentration specified for the AQI value of 500. The AQI value of 500 are as follows: O3 1-hour--
  0.604 ppm; PM2.5 24-hour--325.4 [mu]g/m\3\; PM10 24-hour--604 [mu]g/m\3\; CO ppm--50.4 ppm; SO2 1-hour--1004 ppb; and NO2 1-hour--2049 ppb.

    ii. If the concentration is equal to a breakpoint, then the
index is equal to the corresponding index value in table 2 to this
appendix. However, equation 1 to this appendix can still be used.
The results will be equal. If the concentration is between two
breakpoints, then calculate the index of that pollutant with
equation 1. It should also be noted that in some areas, the AQI
based on 1-hour O3 will be more precautionary than using
8-hour values (see footnote 1 to table 2). In these cases, the 1-
hour values as well as 8-hour values may be used to calculate index
values and then use the maximum index value as the AQI for
O3.

Equation 1 to Appendix G to Part 58
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JA23.018

Where:

Ip = the index value for pollutantp.
Cp = the truncated concentration of
pollutantp.
BPHi = the breakpoint that is greater than or equal to
Cp.
BPLo = the breakpoint that is less than or equal to
Cp.
IHi = the AQI value corresponding to BPHi.
Ilo = the AQI value corresponding to BPLo.

    iii. If the concentration is larger than the highest breakpoint
in table 2 to this appendix then the last two breakpoints in table 2
may be used when equation 1 to this appendix is applied.

Example

    iv. Using table 2 and equation 1 to this appendix, calculate the
index value for each of the pollutants measured and select the one
that produces the highest index value for the AQI. For example, if a
PM10 value of 210 [micro]g/m\3\ is observed, a 1-hour
O3 value of 0.156 ppm, and an 8-hour O3 value
of 0.130 ppm, then do this:
    a. Find the breakpoints for PM10 at 210 [micro]g/m\3\
as 155 [micro]g/m\3\ and 254 [micro]g/m\3\, corresponding to index
values 101 and 150;
    b. Find the breakpoints for 1-hour O3 at 0.156 ppm as
0.125 ppm and 0.164 ppm, corresponding to index values 101 and 150;
    c. Find the breakpoints for 8-hour O3 at 0.130 ppm as
0.116 ppm and 0.374 ppm, corresponding to index values 201 and 300;
    d. Apply equation 1 to this appendix for 210 [micro]g/m\3\,
PM10:

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JA23.019

    e. Apply equation 1 to this appendix for 0.156 ppm, 1-hour
O3:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JA23.020

    f. Apply equation 1 to this appendix for 0.130 ppm, 8-hour
O3:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP27JA23.021

    g. Find the maximum, 206. This is the AQI. A minimal AQI report
could read: ``Today, the AQI for my city is 206, which is Very
Unhealthy, due to ozone.'' It would then reference the associated
sensitive groups.

[FR Doc. 2023-00269 Filed 1-26-23; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 127 (Tuesday, July 2, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31598-31600]
[FR Doc No: 2019-14060]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2019-D-1615]

Instructions for Use--Patient Labeling for Human Prescription
Drug and Biological Products and Drug-Device and Biologic-Device
Combination Products--Content and Format; Draft Guidance for Industry;
Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) is announcing
the availability of a draft guidance for industry entitled
``Instructions for Use--Patient Labeling for Human Prescription Drug
and Biological Products and Drug-Device and Biologic-Device Combination
Products--Content and Format.'' This draft guidance provides
recommendations for developing the content and format of an
Instructions for Use (IFU) document for human prescription drugs and
biological products and drug-device or biologic-device combination
products submitted under a new drug application (NDA) or a biologics
license application (BLA). The IFU is developed by applicants for
patients who use drug products that have complicated or detailed
patient-use instructions. The recommendations in this draft guidance
are intended to help develop consistent content and format across IFUs
and to help ensure that patients receive clear, concise information
that is easily understood for the safe and effective use of
prescription drug products.

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on the draft
guidance by September 3, 2019 to ensure that the Agency considers your
comment on this draft guidance before it begins work on the final
version of the guidance.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on any guidance at any time as
follows:

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically,

including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov will be posted to
the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be made public, you are
solely responsible for ensuring that your comment does not include any
confidential information that you or a third party may not wish to be
posted, such as medical information, your or anyone else's Social
Security number, or confidential business information, such as a
manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your name,
contact information, or other information that identifies you in the
body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2019-D-1615 for ``Instructions for Use--Patient Labeling for Human
Prescription Drug and Biological Products and Drug-Device and Biologic-
Device Combination Products--Content and Format.'' Received comments
will be placed in the docket and, except for those submitted as
``Confidential Submissions,'' publicly viewable at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff between 9 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish
your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you
can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of
your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other
applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of
comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or
access the information at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
    You may submit comments on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)).
    Submit written requests for single copies of the draft guidance to
the Division of Drug Information, Center for Drug Evaluation and
Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10001 New Hampshire Ave.,
Hillandale Building, 4th Floor, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002, or the
Office of Communication, Outreach and Development, Center for Biologics
Evaluation and Research (CBER), Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 3128, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send
one self-addressed adhesive label to assist that office in processing
your requests. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic
access to the draft guidance document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chris Wheeler, Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 3330,
Silver Spring, MD 20993,<PHONE_NUMBER>; or Stephen Ripley, Center for
Biologics Evaluation and Research, Food and Drug Administration, 10903
New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 7301, Silver Spring, MD 20993, 240-
402-7911.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    FDA is announcing the availability of a draft guidance for industry
entitled ``Instructions for Use--Patient Labeling for Human
Prescription Drug and Biological Products and Drug-Device and Biologic-
Device Combination Products--Content and Format.'' The recommendations
in this guidance are intended to help develop consistent content and
format across IFUs and to help ensure that patients receive clear,
concise information that is easily understood for the safe and
effective use of such prescription drug products.
    The IFU is a form of prescription drug labeling submitted under a
new drug application (NDA), biologics license application (BLA), or
abbreviated new drug application (ANDA). The IFU is developed by
applicants for patients who use drug products that have complicated or
detailed patient-use instructions. For example, an IFU may be
appropriate for a drug product with one set of dosing instructions for
adult patients and another set for pediatric patients. The IFU is
developed by the applicant, reviewed and approved by FDA, and provided
to patients when the drug product is dispensed.
    This draft guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good
guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance, when
finalized, will represent the current thinking of FDA on ``Instructions
for Use--Patient Labeling for Human Prescription Drug and Biological
Products and Drug-Device and Biologic-Device Combination Products--
Content and Format.'' It does not establish any rights for any person
and is not binding on FDA or the public. You can use an alternative
approach if it satisfies the requirements of the applicable statutes
and regulations. This guidance is not subject to Executive Order 12866.

II. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This draft guidance refers to previously approved collections of
information found in FDA regulations. These collections of information
are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). The
collections of information in 21 CFR part 201 have been approved under
OMB control number 0910-0572; the collections of information in 21 CFR
part 314 have been approved under OMB control number 0910-0001; and the
collections of information in 21 CFR part 601 have been approved under
OMB control number 0910-0338.

III. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the internet may obtain the draft guidance
at https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm; https://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm; https://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/default.htm; or https://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: June 26, 2019.
Lowell J. Schiller,
Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2019-14060 Filed 7-1-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 10 (Friday, January 14, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 2572-2573]
[FR Doc No: 2011-867]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0808; Airspace Docket No. 10-AWP-14]
RIN 2120-AA66

Amendment of Class E Airspace; Kwajalein Island, Marshall
Islands, RMI

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: This action corrects a final rule; technical amendment
published in the Federal Register. In that rule, errors were made in
the airspace description. This action corrects those errors.

DATES: Effective date 0901 UTC, January 13, 2011. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and
publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ken McElroy, Airspace Regulation and
ATC Procedures Group, Office of Mission Support Services, Federal
Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC
20591; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On October 7, 2010, a final rule; technical amendment was published
in the Federal Register, FAA Docket No. FAA-2010-0808, Airspace Docket
No. 10-AWP-14 that amended Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations part 71
by amending Class E airspace; Kwajalein Island, Marshall Islands, RMI
(75 FR 61993). Specifically, the Kwajalein Tactical Air Navigation
System reference was removed from the legal descriptions. However, the
airspace descriptions contained several data points that were in error.
This action corrects those errors. The correct full legal description
is provided below.

Correction to Final Rule

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the legal
description for the Class E airspace area for Kwajalein Island,
Marshall Islands, RMI, as published in the Federal

Register on October 7, 2010, FR Doc. 2010-25220, (75 FR 61933) on page
61994, column 1, is corrected as follows:

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

Paragraph 6004-Class E airspace areas designated as an extension to
a class D or class E surface area

* * * * *

AWP RM E4 Kwajalein Island, Marshall Islands, RMI [Amended]

Kwajalein Island, Bucholz AAF, RMI
    (Lat. 08[deg]43'12'' N., long. 167[deg]43'54'' E.)
Kwajalein RBN
    (Lat. 08[deg]43'15'' N., long. 167[deg]43'40'' E.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within 2.2 miles
each side of the Bucholz AAF 249[deg] bearing, extending from the
4.3-mile radius of Bucholz AAF to 5.2 miles west of the Bucholz AAF,
and within 3 miles each side of the 077[deg] bearing from the
Kwajalein RBN, extending from the 4.3-mile radius to 9.6 miles east
of the RBN. This Class E airspace area is effective during the
specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to
Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously
published in the Pacific Chart Supplement.
* * * * *

Paragraph 6005 Class E airspace areas extending upward From 700
feet or more above the surface of the earth

* * * * *

AWP RM E5 Kwajalein Island, Marshall Islands, RMI [Amended]

Kwajalein Island, Bucholz AAF, RMI
    (Lat. 08[deg]43'12'' N., long. 167[deg]43'54'' E.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 12-mile radius of Bucholz AAF. That airspace extending
upward from 1,200 feet above the surface within a 100-mile radius of
Bucholz AAF.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on January 12, 2011.
Edith V. Parish,
Manager, Airspace, Regulation and ATC Procedures Group.
[FR Doc. 2011-867 Filed 1-12-11; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 146 (Thursday, July 30, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 45531-45532]
[FR Doc No: 2015-18720]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9931-44-Region 6]

Draft National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
General Permit for Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems in New
Mexico (NMR040000)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed permit reissuance and notice of public
meetings.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 6 Water
Quality Protection Division, today is proposing for public comment the
reissuance of a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
general permit for storm water discharges from small municipal separate
storm sewer systems (MS4s) located within the State of New Mexico
except MS4s located in Indian lands, Los Alamos County, the Middle Rio
Grande Sub-Watersheds described in Appendix A of the NPDES permit No
NMR04A000, or within the area of another MS4 permit. This proposed
permit offers discharge authorization to regulated small MS4s within
the boundaries of the Bureau of the Census-designated 2000 and 2010
Farmington, Santa Fe, Los Lunas, Las Cruces and El Paso Urbanized Areas
and any other small MS4s in the State of New Mexico designated by the
Director as needing a MS4 permit, other than those primarily located in
Los Alamos. This permit is intended to replace the expired general
permit NMR040000. The Director is also providing notice of public
meetings to be held regarding today's proposed general permit
reissuance.
    The Region is also providing notice that general permits NMR04000I
and OKR04000I (MS4s on Indian Country lands in New Mexico and Oklahoma,
respectively) are not being reissued and are considered terminated by
expiration.

DATES: Comments must be submitted in writing to EPA on or before
October 28, 2015.
    Proposed Documents: The proposed general permit and fact sheet
which sets forth principal facts and the significant factual, legal,
and policy questions considered in the development of the proposed
general permit, may be obtained via the Internet at http://epa.gov/region6/water/npdes/sw/sms4/index.htm. To obtain hard copies of these
documents or any other information in the administrative record, please
contact Ms. Evelyn Rosborough using the contact information provided
below.

How do I comment on this proposal?

    Comment Submittals: Submit your comments, by one of the following
methods:
     Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Mail: Ms. Evelyn Rosborough, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.
    Administrative Record: The proposed general permit and other
related documents in the administrative record are on file and may be
inspected any time between 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays, at the addresses listed for
submission of comments. It is recommended that you write or call to the
contact above for an appointment, so the record(s) will be available at
your convenience.
    Public Meetings and Public Hearing: EPA will be holding five
informal public meetings in the Santa Fe, Farmington, Los Lunas, Las
Cruces and El Paso urbanized areas. The public meetings will include a
presentation on the proposed general permit and a question and answer
session. Written, but not oral, comments for the official permit record
will be accepted at the public meetings. Public notice of these
meetings will be provided in The Sun News, Albuquerque Journal, The
Santa Fe New Mexican, and The Farmington Daily Times.

El Paso Urbanized Area Meeting

    Date and Time: Monday September 14, 2015 from 1:00 p.m.-2:30 p.m.
MST.
    Location: New Mexico State University, Dona Ana Community College-
Sunland Park Campus, Room 102--Auditorium, 3365 McNutt Rd., Sunland
Park, NM 88063.

Las Cruces Urbanized Area Meeting

    Date and Time: Monday September 14, 2015 from 6:00 p.m.-7:30 p.m.
MST
    Location: New Mexico State University, Dona Ana Community College-
East Mesa Campus, Student Resource Building, 2800 N. Sonoma Ranch
Blvd., Las Cruces, NM 88003.

Los Lunas Urbanized Area Meeting

    Date and Time: Tuesday September 15, 2015 from 6:00 p.m.-7:30 p.m.
MST
    Location: Holiday Inn Express Belen, 2110 Camino del Llano, Belen,
NM 87002.

Farmington Urbanized Area Meeting

    Date and Time: Wednesday September 16, 2015 at 6:00 p.m.-7:30 p.m.
MST
    Location: Courtyard by Marriott Farmington, 560 Scott Ave.,
Farmington, NM 87401.

Santa Fe Urbanized Area Meeting

    Date and Time: Thursday September 17, 2015 from 6:00 p.m.-7:30 p.m.
MST.
    Location: The Lodge at Santa Fe, 750 N. St. Francis Dr., Santa Fe,
NM 87501.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Evelyn Rosborough, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas,
Texas 75202-2733. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>. Email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. General Information

    This permit authorizes stormwater discharges to waters of the
United States from small MS4s within the State of New Mexico except
MS4s located in Indian lands, Los Alamos County, the Middle Rio Grande
Sub-Watersheds described in Appendix A of the NPDES permit No
NMR04A000, or within the

area of another MS4 permit provided the MS4 is located fully or
partially within an urbanized area as determined by the 2000 and 2010
Decennial Census; is designated as a regulated MS4 pursuant to 40 CFR
122.32; or this permit may also authorize an operator of a MS4 covered
by this permit for discharges from areas of a regulated small MS4
located outside an Urbanized Areas or areas designated by the Director
provided the permittee complies with all permit conditions in all areas
covered under the permit. Maps of 2010 Census urbanized areas are
available online at: http://water.epa.gov/polwaste/npdes/stormwater/Urbanized-Area-Maps-for-NPDES-MS4-Phase-II-Stormwater-Permits.cfm.
    At the time the general permit NMR040000 was issued, permit
coverage was actually provided by three legally separate and distinctly
numbered permits (NMR040000, NMR04000I, OKR04000I). NMR04000I was
issued for MS4s on Indian Country in New Mexico, general permit
OKR04000I was issued for MS4s on Indian Country lands in Oklahoma. MS4
General Permit OKR04000I expired June 30, 2012, without any MS4s
submitting a Notice of Intent to be covered. Since no MS4 operators
took advantage of the authorization offered by that permit during its
five year term and there are no administratively continued permittees
covered by the permit, EPA Region 6 considers the permit terminated as
of the expiration date and is not proposing to reissue MS4 General
Permit OKR04000I at this time. Any MS4 operators on Indian Country
lands in Oklahoma requiring permit coverage should contact EPA Region 6
for information on how to obtain permit coverage.

B. Statutory and Regulatory History

    The overall intent of the permit conditions is to support the
statutory goals of Section 101 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) to restore
and maintain the chemical, physical and biological integrity for the
Nation's waters. The 1987 Water Quality Act (WQA) amended the CWA by
adding section 402(p) which requires that NPDES permits be issued for
various categories of storm water discharges. Section 402(p)(2)
requires permits for five categories of storm water discharges,
commonly referred to as Phase I of the NPDES Storm Water Program.
Included in Phase I are discharges from large municipal separate storm
sewer systems (MS4s) (systems serving a population of 250,000 or more).
Phase I regulations published November 16, 1990 (55 FR 47990) addressed
discharges from large MS4s.
    Section 402(p)(6) of the CWA requires permitting for certain
additional storm water discharges (Phase II of the storm water program)
to protect water quality. EPA promulgated final Phase II storm water
regulations on December 8, 1999 (64 FR 68722). These regulations set
forth the additional categories of discharges to be permitted and the
requirements of the program. The additional discharges to be permitted
included small MS4s located in Urbanized Areas designated by the Bureau
of the Census and those designated by the Director on a case-by-case
basis to protect water quality. This proposed permit offers coverage to
Phase II regulated MS4s in the Farmington, Santa Fe, Los Lunas, Las
Cruces, and El Paso UAs into a single general permit.
    The discharge control conditions established by this permit are
based on Section 402(p)(3)(B) of the Act which mandates that a permit
for discharges from Phase II MS4s must effectively prohibit the
discharge of non-stormwater to the MS4 and require controls to reduce
pollutants in discharges from the MS4 to the maximum extent practicable
(MEP) including management practices, control techniques and system
design and engineering methods, and such other provisions as the
Administrator deems appropriate for the control of pollutants. MS4
permits requiring implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs)
addressing the Six Minimum Control Measures at 40 CFR 122.34(b) are
generally deemed to be an appropriate means of meeting the MEP
standard. Protection of water quality and compliance with Total Maximum
Daily Loads (TMDLs) are addressed through the CWA 402(p)(3)(B)(iii)
authority for ``other such provisions as the Administrator deems
appropriate for the control of pollutants.''

Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection required by this permit will reduce
paperwork significantly by implementation of electronic reporting
requirements. EPA is working on an electronic notice of intent (eNOI)
system so applicants will file their NOIs online. EPA estimates that it
takes 10 to 15 minutes to fill up all information required by eNOI for
each lease block. And it takes much less time to add, delete, or modify
eNOI. EPA will also incorporate an electronic discharge monitoring
report (NetDMR) requirement in the permit. The time for NetDMR
preparation will be much less than that for paper DMR. The electronic
filing systems will also significantly reduce the mailing cost.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., requires that
EPA prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis for regulations that have
a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. As
indicated below, the permit reissuance proposed today is not a ``rule''
subject to the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

    Dated: July 20, 2015.
William K. Honker,
Director, Water Quality Protection Division, EPA Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2015-18720 Filed 7-29-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P