The EPA proposes to allow the PSD reviewing authority to waive the
PM2.5 3 [mu]g/m\3\ concentration validity threshold for
implementation of the PM2.5-PEP in the last quarter of PSD
monitoring. The PM2.5-PEP (current appendix A section 3.2.7)
requires five valid PM2.5-PEP audits per year for
PM2.5 monitoring networks with less than or equal to five
sites and eight valid PM2.5-PEP audits per year with
PM2.5 monitoring networks greater than five sites. Any PEP
sample collected with a concentration less than 3 [mu]g/m\3\ are not
considered valid, since they cannot be used for bias estimates, and re-
sampling is required at a later date. With NAAQS related monitoring,
which aggregates the PM2.5-PEP data over a 3-year period,
re-sampling is easily accomplished. Due to the relatively short-term
nature of most PSD monitoring, the likelihood of measuring low
concentrations in many areas attaining the PM2.5 standard
and the time required to weigh filters collected in performance
evaluations, a PSD monitoring organization's QAPP may contain a
provision to waive the 3 [mu]g/m\3\ threshold for validity of
performance evaluations conducted in the last quarter of monitoring,
subject to approval by the PSD reviewing authority.
5. Calculations for Data Quality Assessment
    In order to allow reasonable estimates of data quality, the EPA
uses data above an established threshold concentration usually related
to the detection limits of the measurement method. Measurement pairs
are selected for use in the precision and bias calculations only when
both measurements are above a threshold concentration.
    For many years, the threshold concentration for Pb precision and
bias data has been 0.02 ug/m\3\. The EPA promulgated a new Pb FRM
utilizing the ICP-MS analysis technique in 2013 as a revision to
appendix G of 40 CFR part 50.\34\ This new FRM demonstrated MDLs \35\
below 0.0002 [mu]g/m\3\ which is well below the EPA requirement of five
percent of the current Pb NAAQS level of 0.15 [mu]g/m\3\ or 0.0075
[mu]g/m\3\. As a result of the increased sensitivity inherent in this
new FRM, the EPA proposes to lower the acceptable Pb concentration
(current section 4) from the current value of 0.02 ug/m\3\ to 0.002
[mu]g/m\3\ for measurements obtained using the new Pb FRM and other
more recently approved equivalent methods that have the requisite
increased sensitivity.\36\ The current 0.02 ug/m\3\ value will be
retained for the previous Pb FRM that has subsequently been
redesignated as Federal Equivalent Method EQLA-0813-803 as well as
older equivalent methods that were approved prior to the more recent
work on developing more sensitive methods. Since ambient Pb
concentrations are lower and methods more sensitive, lowering the
threshold concentration will allow much more collocated information to
be evaluated, which will provide more representative estimates of
precision and bias.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See 78 FR 40000, July 3, 2013.
    \35\ MDL is described as the minimum concentration of a
substance that can be measured and reported with 99 percent
confidence that the analyte concentration is greater than zero.
    \36\ FEMs approved on or after March 4, 2010, have the required
sensitivity to utilize the 0.002 [mu]g/m\3\ reporting limit with the
exception of manual equivalent method EQLA-0813-803, the previous
FRM based on flame atomic absorption spectroscopy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA also proposes to remove the TSP threshold concentration
since TSP is no longer an ambient indicator of PM NAAQS required
pollutant and the EPA no longer applies QC requirements for it.
    The EPA proposes to remove the statistical check currently
described in section 4.1.5 of appendix A. The check was developed to
perform a comparison of the one-point QC checks and the annual
performance evaluation data performed by the same PQAO. The section
suggests that 95 percent of all the bias estimates of the annual
performance evaluations (reported as a percent difference) should fall
within the 95 percent probability interval developed using the one-
point QC checks. The problem with this check is that PQAOs with very
good repeatability on the one-point QC check data had a hard time
meeting this requirement since the probability interval became very
tight, making it more difficult for better performing PQAOs to meet the
requirement. Separate statistics to

evaluate the one-point QC checks and the performance evaluations are
already promulgated, so the removal of this check does not affect data
quality assessments.
    Similar to the statistical comparison of performance evaluation
data, the EPA proposes to remove the statistical check (current
appendix A, section 4.2.4) to compare the flow rate audit data and flow
rate verification data. The existing language suggests that 95 percent
of all the flow rate audit data (reported as percent difference) should
fall within the 95 percent probability interval developed from the flow
rate verification data for the PQAO. The problem, as with the one-point
QC check, was that monitoring organizations with very good
repeatability on the flow rate verifications had a hard time meeting
this requirement since the probability interval became very tight,
making it difficult for better performing PQAOs to meet the
requirement. Separate statistics to evaluate the flow rate
verifications and flow rate audits are already promulgated so the
removal of this check does not affect data quality assessments.
    The EPA proposes to remove the reporting requirements that are
currently in section 5 of appendix A because they do not pertain to PSD
monitoring (current sections 5.1, 5.1.1 and <IP_ADDRESS>). Since PSD
organizations are not required to certify their data to the EPA nor
report to AQS, the EPA will remove language related to these
requirements and language that required the EPA to calculate and report
the measurement uncertainty for the entire calendar year. The EPA will
retain the quarterly PSD reporting requirements (current section 5.2 in
appendix A) and require that those requirements be consistent with Part
58.16 as it pertains to PSD ambient air quality data and QC data, as
described in appendix B.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is
therefore not subject to review under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
(76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011).

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). While the EPA believes that the
net effect of the proposed changes to requirements is a net decrease in
burden, the current information collection request calculation tools
are not sufficiently detailed to show a material change in burden
compared with the existing requirements.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of this rule on small
entities, small entity is defined as (1) a small business as defined by
the Small Business Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13 CFR
121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of
a city, county, town, school district or special district with a
population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is
any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated
and is not dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of this rule on small
entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This
proposed rule will neither impose emission measurement requirements
beyond those specified in the current regulations, nor will it change
any emission standard. As such, it will not present a significant
economic impact on small entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This action contains no federal mandates under the provisions of
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C.
1531-1538 for state, local, or tribal governments or the private
sector. This action imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local or
tribal governments or the private sector. Therefore, this action is not
subject to the requirements of sections 202 or 205 of the UMRA. This
action is also not subject to the requirements of section 203 of UMRA
because it contains no regulatory requirements that might significantly
or uniquely affect small governments.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132. This action proposes minor changes
to existing monitoring requirements and will not materially impact the
time required to operate monitoring networks. Thus, Executive Order
13132 does not apply to this action. In the spirit of Executive Order
13132, and consistent with the EPA policy to promote communications
between the EPA and state and local governments, the EPA specifically
solicits comment on this proposed rule from state and local officials.

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

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This proposed
rule imposes no requirements on tribal governments. This action
proposes minor changes to existing monitoring requirements and will not
materially impact the time required to operate monitoring networks.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action. In the
spirit of Executive order 13175, the EPA specifically solicits
additional comment on this proposed action from tribal officials.

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

    The EPA interprets E.O. 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as
applying only to those regulatory actions that concern health or safety
risks, such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of the E.O.
has the potential to influence the regulation. This action is not
subject to E.O. 13045 because it does not establish an environmental
standard intended to mitigate health or safety risks.

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

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' as defined in
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)), because it is not
likely to have a significant adverse effect on the

supply, distribution, or use of energy. This action proposes minor
changes to existing monitoring requirements.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law No. 104-113 (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs the EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory
activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs the EPA to
provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the agency decides not
to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. This
proposed rulemaking does not involve technical standards. Therefore
this action is not subject to the NTTAA.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    Executive Order (E.O.) 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994))
establishes federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main
provision directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable
and permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their
mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate,
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority
populations and low-income populations in the United States.
    The EPA has determined that this proposed rule will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not
affect the level of protection provided to human health or the
environment.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 58

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations.

    Dated: August 13, 2014.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Environmental
Protection Agency proposes to amend title 40, chapter 1 of the Code of
Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 58--AMBIENT AIR QUALITY SURVEILLANCE

0
1. The authority citation for part 58 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7403, 7405, 7410, 7414, 7601, 7611, 7614,
and 7619.

0
2. Revise Sec.  58.1 to read as follows:

Sec.  58.1  Definitions.

    As used in this part, all terms not defined herein have the meaning
given them in the Clean Air Act.
    AADT means the annual average daily traffic.
    Act means the Clean Air Act as amended (42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.)
    Additive and multiplicative bias means the linear regression
intercept and slope of a linear plot fitted to corresponding candidate
and reference method mean measurement data pairs.
    Administrator means the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) or his or her authorized representative.
    Air Quality System (AQS) means the EPA's computerized system for
storing and reporting of information relating to ambient air quality
data.
    Approved regional method (ARM) means a continuous PM2.5
method that has been approved specifically within a state or local air
monitoring network for purposes of comparison to the NAAQS and to meet
other monitoring objectives.
    AQCR means air quality control region.
    Area-wide means all monitors sited at neighborhood, urban, and
regional scales, as well as those monitors sited at either micro- or
middle-scale that are representative of many such locations in the same
CBSA.
    Certifying agency means a state, local, or tribal agency
responsible for meeting the data certification requirements in
accordance with Sec.  58.15 of this part for a unique set of monitors.
    Chemical Speciation Network (CSN) includes Speciation Trends
Network stations (STN) as specified in paragraph 4.7.4 of appendix D of
this part and supplemental speciation stations that provide chemical
species data of fine particulate.
    CO means carbon monoxide.
    Combined statistical area (CSA) is defined by the U.S. Office of
Management and Budget as a geographical area consisting of two or more
adjacent Core Based Statistical Areas (CBSA) with employment
interchange of at least 15 percent. Combination is automatic if the
employment interchange is 25 percent and determined by local opinion if
more than 15 but less than 25 percent.
    Core-based statistical area (CBSA) is defined by the U.S. Office of
Management and Budget, as a statistical geographic entity consisting of
the county or counties associated with at least one urbanized area/
urban cluster of at least 10,000 population, plus adjacent counties
having a high degree of social and economic integration. Metropolitan
Statistical Areas (MSAs) and micropolitan statistical areas are the two
categories of CBSA (metropolitan areas have populations greater than
50,000; and micropolitan areas have populations between 10,000 and
50,000). In the case of very large cities where two or more CBSAs are
combined, these larger areas are referred to as combined statistical
areas (CSAs)
    Corrected concentration pertains to the result of an accuracy or
precision assessment test of an open path analyzer in which a high-
concentration test or audit standard gas contained in a short test cell
is inserted into the optical measurement beam of the instrument. When
the pollutant concentration measured by the analyzer in such a test
includes both the pollutant concentration in the test cell and the
concentration in the atmosphere, the atmospheric pollutant
concentration must be subtracted from the test measurement to obtain
the corrected concentration test result. The corrected concentration is
equal to the measured concentration minus the average of the
atmospheric pollutant concentrations measured (without the test cell)
immediately before and immediately after the test.
    Design value means the calculated concentration according to the
applicable appendix of part 50 of this chapter for the highest site in
an attainment or nonattainment area.
    EDO means environmental data operations.
    Effective concentration pertains to testing an open path analyzer
with a high-concentration calibration or audit standard gas contained
in a short test cell inserted into the optical measurement beam of the
instrument. Effective concentration is the equivalent ambient-level
concentration that would produce the same spectral absorbance over the
actual atmospheric monitoring path length as produced by the high-
concentration gas in the short test cell. Quantitatively, effective
concentration is equal to the actual concentration of the gas standard
in the test cell multiplied by the ratio of the path length of the test
cell to the actual atmospheric monitoring path length.

    Federal equivalent method (FEM) means a method for measuring the
concentration of an air pollutant in the ambient air that has been
designated as an equivalent method in accordance with part 53; it does
not include a method for which an equivalent method designation has
been canceled in accordance with Sec.  53.11 or Sec.  53.16.
    Federal reference method (FRM) means a method of sampling and
analyzing the ambient air for an air pollutant that is specified as a
reference method in an appendix to part 50 of this chapter, or a method
that has been designated as a reference method in accordance with this
part; it does not include a method for which a reference method
designation has been canceled in accordance with Sec.  53.11 or Sec.
5316.
    HNO3 means nitric acid.
    Implementation Plan means an implementation plan approved or
promulgated by the EPA pursuant to section 110 of the Act.
    Local agency means any local government agency, other than the
state agency, which is charged by a state with the responsibility for
carrying out a portion of the annual monitoring network plan required
by Sec.  58.10.
    Meteorological measurements means measurements of wind speed, wind
direction, barometric pressure, temperature, relative humidity, solar
radiation, ultraviolet radiation, and/or precipitation that occur at
stations including NCore and PAMS.
    Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) means a CBSA associated with at
least one urbanized area of 50,000 population or greater. The central
county, plus adjacent counties with a high degree of integration,
comprise the area.
    Monitor means an instrument, sampler, analyzer, or other device
that measures or assists in the measurement of atmospheric air
pollutants and which is acceptable for use in ambient air surveillance
under the applicable provisions of appendix C to this part.
    Monitoring agency means a state, local or Tribal agency responsible
for meeting the requirements of this part.
    Monitoring organization means a monitoring agency or other
monitoring organization responsible for operating a monitoring site for
which the quality assurance regulations apply.
    Monitoring path for an open path analyzer means the actual path in
space between two geographical locations over which the pollutant
concentration is measured and averaged.
    Monitoring path length of an open path analyzer means the length of
the monitoring path in the atmosphere over which the average pollutant
concentration measurement (path-averaged concentration) is determined.
See also, optical measurement path length.
    Monitoring planning area (MPA) means a contiguous geographic area
with established, well-defined boundaries, such as a CBSA, county or
state, having a common area that is used for planning monitoring
locations for PM2.5. A MPA may cross state boundaries, such
as the Philadelphia PA-NJ MSA, and be further subdivided into community
monitoring zones. The MPAs are generally oriented toward CBSAs or CSAs
with populations greater than 200,000, but for convenience, those
portions of a state that are not associated with CBSAs can be
considered as a single MPA.
    NATTS means the national air toxics trends stations. This network
provides hazardous air pollution ambient data.
    NCore means the National Core multipollutant monitoring stations.
Monitors at these sites are required to measure particles
(PM2.5, speciated PM2.5, PM10-2.5),
O3, SO2, CO, nitrogen oxides (NO/NOy),
and meteorology (wind speed, wind direction, temperature, relative
humidity).
    Near-road monitor means any approved monitor meeting the applicable
specifications described in 40 CFR part 58, appendix D (sections 4.2.1,
4.3.2, 4.7.1(b)(2)) and appendix E (section 6.4(a), Table E-4) for
near-road measurement of PM2.5, CO, or NO2.
    Network means all stations of a given type or types.
    Network Plan means the Annual Monitoring Network Plan described in
Sec.  58.10 of this part.
    NH3 means ammonia.
    NO2 means nitrogen dioxide.
    NO means nitrogen oxide.
    NOX means the sum of the concentrations of NO2 and NO.
    NOy means the sum of all total reactive nitrogen oxides, including
NO, NO2, and other nitrogen oxides referred to as
NOZ.
    O3 means ozone.
    Open path analyzer means an automated analytical method that
measures the average atmospheric pollutant concentration in situ along
one or more monitoring paths having a monitoring path length of 5
meters or more and that has been designated as a reference or
equivalent method under the provisions of part 53 of this chapter.
    Optical measurement path length means the actual length of the
optical beam over which measurement of the pollutant is determined. The
path-integrated pollutant concentration measured by the analyzer is
divided by the optical measurement path length to determine the path-
averaged concentration. Generally, the optical measurement path length
is:
    (1) Equal to the monitoring path length for a (bistatic) system
having a transmitter and a receiver at opposite ends of the monitoring
path;
    (2) Equal to twice the monitoring path length for a (monostatic)
system having a transmitter and receiver at one end of the monitoring
path and a mirror or retroreflector at the other end; or
    (3) Equal to some multiple of the monitoring path length for more
complex systems having multiple passes of the measurement beam through
the monitoring path.
    PAMS means photochemical assessment monitoring stations.
    Pb means lead.
    PM means particulate matter, including but not limited to
PM10, PM10C, PM2.5, and
PM10-2.5.
    PM2.5 means particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less
than or equal to a nominal 2.5 micrometers as measured by a reference
method based on appendix L of part 50 and designated in accordance with
part 53, by an equivalent method designated in accordance with part 53,
or by an approved regional method designated in accordance with
appendix C to this part.
    PM10 means particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less
than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometers as measured by a reference
method based on appendix J of part 50 and designated in accordance with
part 53 or by an equivalent method designated in accordance with part
53.
    PM10C means particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less
than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometers as measured by a reference
method based on appendix O of part 50 and designated in accordance with
part 53 or by an equivalent method designated in accordance with part
53.
    PM10-2.5 means particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less
than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometers and greater than a nominal
2.5 micrometers as measured by a reference method based on appendix O
to part 50 and designated in accordance with part 53 or by an
equivalent method designated in accordance with part 53.
    Point analyzer means an automated analytical method that measures
pollutant concentration in an ambient air sample extracted from the
atmosphere at a specific inlet probe point, and that has been
designated as a reference or equivalent method in accordance with part
53 of this chapter.
    Primary Monitor means the monitor identified by the monitoring
organization that provides concentration data used for comparison to
the

NAAQS. For any specific site, only one monitor for each pollutant can
be designated in AQS as primary monitor for a given period of time. The
primary monitor identifies the default data source for creating a
combined site record for purposes of NAAQS comparisons.
    Primary quality assurance organization (PQAO) means a monitoring
organization, a group of monitoring organizations or other organization
that is responsible for a set of stations that monitor the same
pollutant and for which data quality assessments can be pooled. Each
criteria pollutant sampler/monitor at a monitoring station in the SLAMS
and SPM networks must be associated with only one PQAO.
    Probe means the actual inlet where an air sample is extracted from
the atmosphere for delivery to a sampler or point analyzer for
pollutant analysis.
    PSD monitoring network means a set of stations that provide
concentration information for a specific PSD permit.
    PSD monitoring organization means a source owner/operator, a
government agency, or a contractor of the source or agency that
operates an ambient air pollution monitoring network for PSD purposes.
    PSD reviewing authority means the state air pollution control
agency, local agency, other state agency, tribe, or other agency
authorized by the Administrator to carry out a permit program under
Sec.  51.165 and Sec.  51.166, or the Administrator in the case of EPA-
implemented permit programs under Sec.  52.21.
    PSD station means any station operated for the purpose of
establishing the effect on air quality of the emissions from a proposed
source for purposes of prevention of significant deterioration as
required by Sec.  51.24(n).
    Regional Administrator means the Administrator of one of the ten
EPA regional offices or his or her authorized representative.
    Reporting organization means an entity, such as a state, local, or
tribal monitoring agency, that reports air quality data to the EPA.
    Site means a geographic location. One or more stations may be at
the same site.
    SLAMS means state or local air monitoring stations. The SLAMS
include the ambient air quality monitoring sites and monitors that are
required by appendix D of this part and are needed for the monitoring
objectives of appendix D, including NAAQS comparisons, but may serve
other data purposes. The SLAMS includes NCore, PAMS, CSN, and all other
state or locally operated criteria pollutant monitors operated in
accordance to this part, that have not been designated and approved by
the Regional Administrator as SPM stations in an annual monitoring
network plan.
    SO2 means sulfur dioxide.
    Special purpose monitor (SPM) station means a monitor included in
an agency's monitoring network that the agency has designated as a
special purpose monitor station in its annual monitoring network plan
and in the AQS, and which the agency does not count when showing
compliance with the minimum requirements of this subpart for the number
and siting of monitors of various types. Any SPM operated by an air
monitoring agency must be included in the periodic assessments and
annual monitoring network plan required by Sec.  58.10 and approved by
the Regional Administrator.
    State agency means the air pollution control agency primarily
responsible for development and implementation of a State
Implementation Plan under the Act.
    Station means a single monitor, or a group of monitors, located at
a particular site.
    STN station means a PM2.5 chemical speciation station
designated to be part of the speciation trends network. This network
provides chemical species data of fine particulate.
    Supplemental speciation station means a PM2.5 chemical
speciation station that is operated for monitoring agency needs and not
part of the STN.
    Traceable means that a local standard has been compared and
certified, either directly or via not more than one intermediate
standard, to a National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)-
certified primary standard such as a NIST-traceable Reference Material
(NTRM) or a NIST-certified Gas Manufacturer's Internal Standard (GMIS).
    TSP (total suspended particulates) means particulate matter as
measured by the method described in appendix B of part 50.
    Urbanized area means an area with a minimum residential population
of at least 50,000 people and which generally includes core census
block groups or blocks that have a population density of at least 1,000
people per square mile and surrounding census blocks that have an
overall density of at least 500 people per square mile. The Census
Bureau notes that under certain conditions, less densely settled
territory may be part of each Urbanized Area.
    VOCs means volatile organic compounds.
0
3. In Sec.  58.10:
0
a. Revise paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2).
0
b. Add paragraph (a)(9).
0
c. Add paragraph (b)(14).
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Sec.  58.10  Annual monitoring network plan and periodic network
assessment.

    (a)(1) Beginning July 1, 2007, the state, or where applicable
local, agency shall submit to the Regional Administrator an annual
monitoring network plan which shall provide for the documentation of
the establishment and maintenance of an air quality surveillance system
that consists of a network of SLAMS monitoring stations that can
include FRM, FEM, and ARM monitors that are part of SLAMS, NCore, CSN,
PAMS, and SPM stations. The plan shall include a purpose statement for
each monitor along with a statement of whether the operation of each
monitor meets the requirements of appendices A, B, C, D, and E of this
part, where applicable. The Regional Administrator may require the
submission of additional information as needed to evaluate compliance
with applicable requirements of part 58 and its appendices. The annual
monitoring network plan must be made available for public inspection
and comment for at least 30 days prior to submission to the EPA and the
submitted plan shall reference and address any such received comments.
    (2) Any annual monitoring network plan that proposes SLAMS network
modifications (including new or discontinued monitoring sites, new
determinations that data are not of sufficient quality to be compared
to the NAAQS, and changes in identification of monitors as suitable or
not suitable for comparison against the annual PM2.5 NAAQS)
is subject to the approval of the EPA Regional Administrator, who shall
approve or disapprove the plan within 120 days of submission of a
complete plan to the EPA.
* * * * *
    (9) A detailed description of the PAMS network being operated in
accordance with the requirements of appendix D to this part shall be
submitted as part of the annual monitoring network plan for review by
the EPA Administrator. The PAMS Network Description described in
section 5 of appendix D may be used to meet this requirement.
    (b) * * *
    (14) The identification of any SPMs operating for a longer period
than 24 months that utilize FRM, FEM, and/or ARM monitors accompanied
by a discussion of the rationale for retention

as an SPM rather than a reclassification to SLAMS.
* * * * *
0
4. In Sec.  58.11, revise paragraph (a)(3) to read as follows:

Sec.  58.11  Network technical requirements.

    (a) * * *
    (3) The owner or operator of an existing or a proposed source shall
follow the quality assurance criteria in appendix B to this part that
apply to PSD monitoring when operating a PSD site.
* * * * *
0
5. In Sec.  58.12:
0
a. Revise paragraph (d)(1).
0
b. Revise paragraph (d)(3).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  58.12  Operating schedules.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1)(i) Manual PM2.5 samplers at required SLAMS stations
without a collocated continuously operating PM2.5 monitor
must operate on at least a 1-in-3 day schedule unless a waiver for an
alternative schedule has been approved per paragraph (d)(1)(ii) of this
section.
    (ii) For SLAMS PM2.5 sites with both manual and
continuous PM2.5 monitors operating, the monitoring agency
may request approval for a reduction to 1-in-6 day PM2.5
sampling or for seasonal sampling from the EPA Regional Administrator.
Other requests for a reduction to 1-in-6 day PM2.5 sampling
or for seasonal sampling may be approved on a case-by-case basis. The
EPA Regional Administrator may grant sampling frequency reductions
after consideration of factors (including but not limited to the
historical PM2.5 data quality assessments, the location of
current PM2.5 design value sites, and their regulatory data
needs) if the Regional Administrator determines that the reduction in
sampling frequency will not compromise data needed for implementation
of the NAAQS. Required SLAMS stations whose measurements determine the
design value for their area and that are within plus or minus 10
percent of the annual NAAQS, and all required sites where one or more
24-hour values have exceeded the 24-hour NAAQS each year for a
consecutive period of at least 3 years are required to maintain at
least a 1-in-3 day sampling frequency until the design value no longer
meets these criteria for 3 consecutive years. A continuously operating
FEM or ARM PM2.5 monitor satisfies this requirement unless
it is identified in the monitoring agency's annual monitoring network
plan as not appropriate for comparison to the NAAQS and the EPA
Regional Administrator has approved that the data from that monitor may
be excluded from comparison to the NAAQS.
    (iii) Required SLAMS stations whose measurements determine the 24-
hour design value for their area and whose data are within plus or
minus 5 percent of the level of the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS must
have an FRM or FEM operate on a daily schedule if that area's design
value for the annual NAAQS is less than the level of the annual
PM2.5 standard. A continuously operating FEM or ARM
PM2.5 monitor satisfies this requirement unless it is
identified in the monitoring agency's annual monitoring network plan as
not appropriate for comparison to the NAAQS and the EPA Regional
Administrator has approved that the data from that monitor may be
excluded from comparison to the NAAQS. The daily schedule must be
maintained until the referenced design values no longer meets these
criteria for 3 consecutive years.
    (iv) Changes in sampling frequency attributable to changes in
design values shall be implemented no later than January 1 of the
calendar year following the certification of such data as described in
Sec.  58.15.
* * * * *
    (3) Manual PM2.5 speciation samplers at STN stations
must operate on at least a 1-in-3 day sampling frequency unless a
reduction in sampling frequency has been approved by the EPA
Administrator based on factors such as area's design value, the role of
the particular site in national health studies, the correlation of the
site's species data with nearby sites, and presence of other leveraged
measurements.
* * * * *
0
6. In Sec.  58.14, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows:

Sec.  58.14  System modification.

    (a) The state, or where appropriate local, agency shall develop and
implement a network modification plan and schedule to modify the
ambient air quality monitoring network that implements the findings of
the network assessment required every 5 years by Sec.  58.10(d). The
network modification plan shall be submitted as part of the Annual
Monitoring Network Plan that is due no later than the year after
submittal of the network assessment.
* * * * *
0
7. Revise Sec.  58.15 to read as follows:

Sec.  58.15  Annual air monitoring data certification.

    (a) The state, or where appropriate local, agency shall submit to
the EPA Regional Administrator an annual air monitoring data
certification letter to certify data collected by FRM, FEM, and ARM
monitors at SLAMS and SPM sites that meet criteria in appendix A to
this part from January 1 to December 31 of the previous year. The head
official in each monitoring agency, or his or her designee, shall
certify that the previous year of ambient concentration and quality
assurance data are completely submitted to AQS and that the ambient
concentration data are accurate to the best of her or his knowledge,
taking into consideration the quality assurance findings. The annual
data certification letter is due by May 1 of each year.
    (b) Along with each certification letter, the state shall submit to
the Regional Administrator an annual summary report of all the ambient
air quality data collected by FRM, FEM, and ARM monitors at SLAMS and
SPM sites. The annual report(s) shall be submitted for data collected
from January 1 to December 31 of the previous year. The annual summary
serves as the record of the specific data that is the object of the
certification letter.
    (c) Along with each certification letter, the state shall submit to
the Regional Administrator a summary of the precision and accuracy data
for all ambient air quality data collected by FRM, FEM, and ARM
monitors at SLAMS and SPM sites. The summary of precision and accuracy
shall be submitted for data collected from January 1 to December 31 of
the previous year.
0
8. In Sec.  58.16, revise paragraphs (a), (c), and (d) to read as
follows:

Sec.  58.16  Data submittal and archiving requirements.

    (a) The state, or where appropriate, local agency, shall report to
the Administrator, via AQS all ambient air quality data and associated
quality assurance data for SO2; CO; O3;
NO2; NO; NOy; NOX; Pb-TSP mass
concentration; Pb-PM10 mass concentration; PM10
mass concentration; PM2.5 mass concentration; for filter-
based PM2.5 FRM/FEM, the field blank mass; chemically
speciated PM2.5 mass concentration data; PM10-2.5
mass concentration; meteorological data from NCore and PAMS sites; and
metadata records and information specified by the AQS Data Coding
Manual (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/airs/airsaqs/manuals/manuals.htm). Air
quality data and information must be submitted directly to the AQS via
electronic transmission on the specified schedule described in
paragraphs (b) and (d) of this section.
* * * * *
    (c) Air quality data submitted for each reporting period must be
edited,

validated, and entered into the AQS (within the time limits specified
in paragraphs (b) and (d) of this section) pursuant to appropriate AQS
procedures. The procedures for editing and validating data are
described in the AQS Data Coding Manual and in each monitoring agency's
quality assurance project plan.
    (d) The state shall report VOC and if collected, carbonyl,
NH3, and HNO3 data from PAMS sites, and
chemically speciated PM2.5 mass concentration data to AQS
within 6 months following the end of each quarterly reporting period
listed in paragraph (b) of this section.
* * * * *
0
9. Revise Appendix A to part 58 to read as follows:

Appendix A to Part 58--Quality Assurance Requirements for Monitors Used
in Evaluations of National Ambient Air Quality Standards

1. General Information
2. Quality System Requirements
3. Measurement Quality Check Requirements
4. Calculations for Data Quality Assessments
5. Reporting Requirements
6. References

1. General Information

    1.1 Applicability. (a) This appendix specifies the minimum
quality system requirements applicable to SLAMS and other monitor
types whose data are intended to be used to determine compliance
with the NAAQS (e.g., SPMs, tribal, CASTNET, industrial, etc),
unless the EPA Regional Administrator has reviewed and approved the
monitor for exclusion from NAAQS use and these quality assurance
requirements.
    (b) Primary quality assurance organizations are encouraged to
develop and maintain quality systems more extensive than the
required minimums. Additional guidance for the requirements
reflected in this appendix can be found in the ``Quality Assurance
Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement Systems,'' Volume II (see
reference 10 of this appendix) and at a national level in references
1, 2, and 3 of this appendix.
    1.2 Primary Quality Assurance Organization (PQAO). A PQAO is
defined as a monitoring organization or a coordinated aggregation of
such organizations that is responsible for a set of stations that
monitors the same pollutant and for which data quality assessments
will be pooled. Each criteria pollutant/monitor must be associated
with only one PQAO. In some cases, data quality is assessed at the
PQAO level.
    1.2.1 Each PQAO shall be defined such that measurement
uncertainty among all stations in the organization can be expected
to be reasonably homogeneous as a result of common factors. Common
factors that should be considered in defining PQAOs include:
    (a) Operation by a common team of field operators according to a
common set of procedures;
    (b) Use of a common quality assurance project plan (QAPP) or
standard operating procedures;
    (c) Common calibration facilities and standards;
    (d) Oversight by a common quality assurance organization; and
    (e) Support by a common management organization (i.e., state
agency) or laboratory.
    Since data quality assessments are made and data certified at
the PQAO level, the monitoring organization identified as the PQAO
will be responsible for the oversight of the quality of data of all
monitoring organizations within the PQAO.
    1.2.2 Monitoring organizations having difficulty describing its
PQAO or in assigning specific monitors to primary quality assurance
organizations should consult with the appropriate EPA regional
office. Any consolidation of monitoring organizations to PQAOs shall
be subject to final approval by the appropriate EPA regional office.
    1.2.3 Each PQAO is required to implement a quality system that
provides sufficient information to assess the quality of the
monitoring data. The quality system must, at a minimum, include the
specific requirements described in this appendix. Failure to conduct
or pass a required check or procedure, or a series of required
checks or procedures, does not by itself invalidate data for
regulatory decision making. Rather, PQAOs and the EPA shall use the
checks and procedures required in this appendix in combination with
other data quality information, reports, and similar documentation
that demonstrate overall compliance with part 58. Accordingly, the
EPA and PQAOs shall use a ``weight of evidence'' approach when
determining the suitability of data for regulatory decisions. The
EPA reserves the authority to use or not use monitoring data
submitted by a monitoring organization when making regulatory
decisions based on the EPA's assessment of the quality of the data.
Consensus built validation templates or validation criteria already
approved in Quality Assurance Project Plans (QAPPs) should be used
as the basis for the weight of evidence approach.
    1.3 Definitions.
    (a) Measurement Uncertainty. A term used to describe deviations
from a true concentration or estimate that are related to the
measurement process and not to spatial or temporal population
attributes of the air being measured.
    (b) Precision. A measurement of mutual agreement among
individual measurements of the same property usually under
prescribed similar conditions, expressed generally in terms of the
standard deviation.
    (c) Bias. The systematic or persistent distortion of a
measurement process which causes errors in one direction.
    (d) Accuracy. The degree of agreement between an observed value
and an accepted reference value. Accuracy includes a combination of
random error (imprecision) and systematic error (bias) components
which are due to sampling and analytical operations.
    (e) Completeness. A measure of the amount of valid data obtained
from a measurement system compared to the amount that was expected
to be obtained under correct, normal conditions.
    (f) Detection Limit. The lowest concentration or amount of
target analyte that can be determined to be different from zero by a
single measurement at a stated level of probability.
    1.4 Measurement Quality Checks. The measurement quality checks
described in sections 3 of this appendix shall be reported to AQS
and are included in the data required for certification.
    1.5 Assessments and Reports. Periodic assessments and
documentation of data quality are required to be reported to the
EPA. To provide national uniformity in this assessment and reporting
of data quality for all networks, specific assessment and reporting
procedures are prescribed in detail in sections 3, 4, and 5 of this
appendix. On the other hand, the selection and extent of the quality
assurance and quality control activities used by a monitoring
organization depend on a number of local factors such as field and
laboratory conditions, the objectives for monitoring, the level of
data quality needed, the expertise of assigned personnel, the cost
of control procedures, pollutant concentration levels, etc.
Therefore, quality system requirements in section 2 of this appendix
are specified in general terms to allow each monitoring organization
to develop a quality system that is most efficient and effective for
its own circumstances while achieving the data quality objectives
described in this appendix.

2. Quality System Requirements

    A quality system (reference 1 of this appendix) is the means by
which an organization manages the quality of the monitoring
information it produces in a systematic, organized manner. It
provides a framework for planning, implementing, assessing and
reporting work performed by an organization and for carrying out
required quality assurance and quality control activities.
    2.1 Quality Management Plans and Quality Assurance Project
Plans. All PQAOs must develop a quality system that is described and
approved in quality management plans (QMP) and QAPPs to ensure that
the monitoring results:
    (a) Meet a well-defined need, use, or purpose (reference 5 of
this appendix);
    (b) Provide data of adequate quality for the intended monitoring
objectives;
    (c) Satisfy stakeholder expectations;
    (d) Comply with applicable standards specifications;
    (e) Comply with statutory (and other legal) requirements; and
    (f) Reflect consideration of cost and economics.
    2.1.1 The QMP describes the quality system in terms of the
organizational structure, functional responsibilities of management
and staff, lines of authority, and required interfaces for those
planning, implementing, assessing and reporting activities involving
environmental data operations (EDO). The QMP must be suitably
documented in accordance with EPA requirements (reference 2 of this
appendix), and approved by the appropriate Regional Administrator,
or his or her representative. The quality system described in the
QMP

will be reviewed during the systems audits described in section 2.5
of this appendix. Organizations that implement long-term monitoring
programs with EPA funds should have a separate QMP document. Smaller
organizations, organizations that do infrequent work with the EPA or
have monitoring programs of limited size or scope may combine the
QMP with the QAPP if approved by, and subject to any conditions of
the EPA. Additional guidance on this process can be found in
reference 10 of this appendix. Approval of the recipient's QMP by
the appropriate Regional Administrator or his or her representative
may allow delegation of authority to review and approve
environmental data collection activities adequately described and
covered under the scope of the QMP and documented in appropriate
planning documents (QAPP) to the PQAOs independent quality assurance
function. Where a PQAO or monitoring organization has been delegated
authority to review and approve their QAPP, an electronic copy must
be submitted to the EPA region at the time it is submitted to the
PQAO/monitoring organizations QAPP approving authority. The QAPP
will be reviewed by the EPA during systems audits or circumstances
related to data quality. The QMP submission and approval dates for
PQAOs/monitoring organizations must be reported to AQS.
    2.1.2 The QAPP is a formal document describing, in sufficient
detail, the quality system that must be implemented to ensure that
the results of work performed will satisfy the stated objectives.
PQAOs must develop QAPPs that describe how the organization intends
to control measurement uncertainty to an appropriate level in order
to achieve the data quality objectives for the EDO. The quality
assurance policy of the EPA requires every EDO to have a written and
approved QAPP prior to the start of the EDO. It is the
responsibility of the PQAO/monitoring organization to adhere to this
policy. The QAPP must be suitably documented in accordance with EPA
requirements (reference 3 of this appendix) which include standard
operating procedures for all EDOs either within the document or by
appropriate reference. The QAPP must identify each PQAO operating
monitors under the QAPP as well as generally identify the sites and
monitors to which it is applicable. The QAPP submission and approval
dates must be reported to AQS.
    2.1.3 'The PQAO/monitoring organization's quality system must
have adequate resources both in personnel and funding to plan,
implement, assess and report on the achievement of the requirements
of this appendix and its approved QAPP.
    2.2 Independence of Quality Assurance. The PQAO must provide for
a quality assurance management function; that aspect of the overall
management system of the organization that determines and implements
the quality policy defined in a PQAO's QMP. Quality management
includes strategic planning, allocation of resources and other
systematic planning activities (e.g., planning, implementation,
assessing and reporting) pertaining to the quality system. The
quality assurance management function must have sufficient technical
expertise and management authority to conduct independent oversight
and assure the implementation of the organization's quality system
relative to the ambient air quality monitoring program and should be
organizationally independent of environmental data generation
activities.
    2.3. Data Quality Performance Requirements.
    2.3.1 Data Quality Objectives. The DQOs, or the results of other
systematic planning processes, are statements that define the
appropriate type of data to collect and specify the tolerable levels
of potential decision errors that will be used as a basis for
establishing the quality and quantity of data needed to support the
monitoring objectives (reference 5 of this appendix). The DQOs will
be developed by the EPA to support the primary regulatory objectives
for each criteria pollutant. As they are developed, they will be
added to the regulation. The quality of the conclusions derived from
data interpretation can be affected by population uncertainty
(spatial or temporal uncertainty) and measurement uncertainty
(uncertainty associated with collecting, analyzing, reducing and
reporting concentration data). This appendix focuses on assessing
and controlling measurement uncertainty.
    <IP_ADDRESS> Measurement Uncertainty for Automated and Manual PM2.5
Methods. The goal for acceptable measurement uncertainty is defined
for precision as an upper 90 percent confidence limit for the
coefficient of variation (CV) of 10 percent and plus or minus 10
percent for total bias.
    <IP_ADDRESS> Measurement Uncertainty for Automated O3 Methods. The
goal for acceptable measurement uncertainty is defined for precision
as an upper 90 percent confidence limit for the CV of 7 percent and
for bias as an upper 95 percent confidence limit for the absolute
bias of 7 percent.
    <IP_ADDRESS> Measurement Uncertainty for Pb Methods. The goal for
acceptable measurement uncertainty is defined for precision as an
upper 90 percent confidence limit for the CV of 20 percent and for
bias as an upper 95 percent confidence limit for the absolute bias
of 15 percent.
    <IP_ADDRESS> Measurement Uncertainty for NO2. The goal for acceptable
measurement uncertainty is defined for precision as an upper 90
percent confidence limit for the CV of 15 percent and for bias as an
upper 95 percent confidence limit for the absolute bias of 15
percent.
    <IP_ADDRESS> Measurement Uncertainty for SO2. The goal for acceptable
measurement uncertainty for precision is defined as an upper 90
percent confidence limit for the CV of 10 percent and for bias as an
upper 95 percent confidence limit for the absolute bias of 10
percent.
    2.4 National Performance Evaluation Programs. The PQAO shall
provide for the implementation of a program of independent and
adequate audits of all monitors providing data for NAAQS compliance
purposes including the provision of adequate resources for such
audit programs. A monitoring plan (or QAPP) which provides for PQAO
participation in the EPA's National Performance Audit Program
(NPAP), the PM2.5 Performance Evaluation Program
(PM2.5-PEP) program and the Pb Performance Evaluation
Program (Pb-PEP) and indicates the consent of the PQAO for the EPA
to apply an appropriate portion of the grant funds, which the EPA
would otherwise award to the PQAO for these QA activities, will be
deemed by the EPA to meet this requirement. For clarification and to
participate, PQAOs should contact either the appropriate EPA
regional quality assurance (QA) coordinator at the appropriate EPA
regional office location, or the NPAP coordinator at the EPA Air
Quality Assessment Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. The PQAOs that
plan to implement these programs (self-implement) rather than use
the federal programs must meet the adequacy requirements found in
the appropriate sections that follow, as well as meet the definition
of independent assessment that follows.
    2.4.1 Independent assessment. An assessment performed by a
qualified individual, group, or organization that is not part of the
organization directly performing and accountable for the work being
assessed. This auditing organization must not be involved with the
generation of the ambient air monitoring data. An organization can
conduct the performance evaluation (PE) if it can meet this
definition and has a management structure that, at a minimum, will
allow for the separation of its routine sampling personnel from its
auditing personnel by two levels of management. In addition, the
sample analysis of audit filters must be performed by a laboratory
facility and laboratory equipment separate from the facilities used
for routine sample analysis. Field and laboratory personnel will be
required to meet PE field and laboratory training and certification
requirements to establish comparability to federally implemented
programs.
    2.5 Technical Systems Audit Program. Technical systems audits of
each PQAO shall be conducted at least every 3 years by the
appropriate EPA regional office and reported to the AQS. If a PQAO
is made up of more than one monitoring organization, all monitoring
organizations in the PQAO should be audited within 6 years (two TSA
cycles of the PQAO). As an example, if a state has five local
monitoring organizations that are consolidated under one PQAO, all
five local monitoring organizations will receive a technical systems
audit within a 6-year period. Systems audit programs are described
in reference 10 of this appendix. For further instructions, PQAOs
should contact the appropriate EPA regional QA coordinator.
    2.6 Gaseous and Flow Rate Audit Standards.
    2.6.1 Gaseous pollutant concentration standards (permeation
devices or cylinders of compressed gas) used to obtain test
concentrations for carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur dioxide
(SO2), nitrogen oxide (NO), and nitrogen dioxide
(NO2) must be traceable to either a National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST) Traceable Reference Material (NTRM)
or a NIST-certified Gas

Manufacturer's Internal Standard (GMIS), certified in accordance
with one of the procedures given in reference 4 of this appendix.
Vendors advertising certification with the procedures provided in
reference 4 of this appendix and distributing gases as ``EPA
Protocol Gas'' for ambient air monitoring purposes must participate
in the EPA Ambient Air Protocol Gas Verification Program or not use
``EPA'' in any form of advertising. Monitoring organizations must
provide information to the EPA on the gas producers they use on an
annual basis and those PQAOs purchasing standards will be obligated,
at the request of the EPA, to participate in the program at least
once every 5 years by sending a new unused standard to a designated
verification laboratory.
    2.6.2 Test concentrations for ozone (O3) must be
obtained in accordance with the ultraviolet photometric calibration
procedure specified in appendix D to part 50 of this chapter and by
means of a certified NIST-traceable O3 transfer standard.
Consult references 7 and 8 of this appendix for guidance on transfer
standards for O3.
    2.6.3 Flow rate measurements must be made by a flow measuring
instrument that is NIST-traceable to an authoritative volume or
other applicable standard. Guidance for certifying some types of
flowmeters is provided in reference 10 of this appendix.
    2.7 Primary Requirements and Guidance. Requirements and guidance
documents for developing the quality system are contained in
references 1 through 11 of this appendix, which also contain many
suggested procedures, checks, and control specifications. Reference
10 describes specific guidance for the development of a quality
system for data collected for comparison to the NAAQS. Many specific
quality control checks and specifications for methods are included
in the respective reference methods described in part 50 of this
chapter or in the respective equivalent method descriptions
available from the EPA (reference 6 of this appendix). Similarly,
quality control procedures related to specifically designated
reference and equivalent method monitors are contained in the
respective operation or instruction manuals associated with those
monitors.

3. Measurement Quality Check Requirements

    This section provides the requirements for PQAOs to perform the
measurement quality checks that can be used to assess data quality.
Data from these checks are required to be submitted to the AQS
within the same time frame as routinely-collected ambient
concentration data as described in 40 CFR 58.16. Table A-1 of this
appendix provides a summary of the types and frequency of the
measurement quality checks that will be described in this section.
    3.1. Gaseous Monitors of SO2, NO2,
O3, and CO.
    3.1.1 One-Point Quality Control (QC) Check for SO2,
NO2, O3, and CO. (a) A one-point QC check must
be performed at least once every 2 weeks on each automated monitor
used to measure SO2, NO2, O3 and
CO. With the advent of automated calibration systems, more frequent
checking is strongly encouraged. See Reference 10 of this appendix
for guidance on the review procedure. The QC check is made by
challenging the monitor with a QC check gas of known concentration
(effective concentration for open path monitors) between the
prescribed range of 0.005 and 0.08 parts per million (ppm) for
SO2, NO2, and O3, and between the
prescribed range of 0.5 and 5 ppm for CO monitors. The QC check gas
concentration selected within the prescribed range must be related
to the mean or median of the ambient air concentrations normally
measured at sites within the monitoring network in order to
appropriately reflect the precision and bias at these ambient air
concentration ranges. If the mean or median concentrations at the
sites are below or above the prescribed range for the relevant
pollutant, select the lowest or highest concentration in the range.
An additional QC check point is encouraged for those organizations
that may have occasional high values or would like to confirm the
monitors' linearity at the higher end of the operational range or
around NAAQS concentrations.
    (b) Point analyzers must operate in their normal sampling mode
during the QC check and the test atmosphere must pass through all
filters, scrubbers, conditioners and other components used during
normal ambient sampling and as much of the ambient air inlet system
as is practicable. The QC check must be conducted before any
calibration or adjustment to the monitor.
    (c) Open path monitors are tested by inserting a test cell
containing a QC check gas concentration into the optical measurement
beam of the instrument. If possible, the normally used transmitter,
receiver, and as appropriate, reflecting devices should be used
during the test, and the normal monitoring configuration of the
instrument should be altered as little as possible to accommodate
the test cell for the test. However, if permitted by the associated
operation or instruction manual, an alternate local light source or
an alternate optical path that does not include the normal
atmospheric monitoring path may be used. The actual concentration of
the QC check gas in the test cell must be selected to produce an
effective concentration in the range specified earlier in this
section. Generally, the QC test concentration measurement will be
the sum of the atmospheric pollutant concentration and the QC test
concentration. As such, the result must be corrected to remove the
atmospheric concentration contribution. The corrected concentration
is obtained by subtracting the average of the atmospheric
concentrations measured by the open path instrument under test
immediately before and immediately after the QC test from the QC
check gas concentration measurement. If the difference between these
before and after measurements is greater than 20 percent of the
effective concentration of the test gas, discard the test result and
repeat the test. If possible, open path monitors should be tested
during periods when the atmospheric pollutant concentrations are
relatively low and steady.
    (d) Report the audit concentration of the QC gas and the
corresponding measured concentration indicated by the monitor to
AQS. The percent differences between these concentrations are used
to assess the precision and bias of the monitoring data as described
in sections 4.1.2 (precision) and 4.1.3 (bias) of this appendix.
    3.1.2 Annual performance evaluation for SO2, NO2, O3, or CO. A
performance evaluation must be conducted on each primary monitor
once a year. This can be accomplished by evaluating 25 percent of
the primary monitors each quarter. The evaluation should be
conducted by a trained experienced technician other than the routine
site operator.
    <IP_ADDRESS> The evaluation is made by challenging the monitor with
audit gas standards of known concentration from at least three audit
levels. Two of the audit levels selected will represent a range of
10-80 percent of the typical ambient air concentrations either
measured by the monitor or in the PQAOs network of monitors. The
third point should be at the NAAQS level or above the highest 3-year
ambient air hourly concentration, whichever is greater. An
additional 4th level is encouraged for those agencies that would
like to confirm the monitors' linearity at the higher end of the
operational range. In rare circumstances, there may be sites
measuring concentrations above audit level 10. Notify the
appropriate EPA region and the AQS program in order to make
accommodations for auditing at levels above level 10.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Concentration range, ppm
             Audit level             ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              O3                SO2                NO2                 CO
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1...................................       0.004-0.0059      0.0003-0.0029      0.0003-0.0029        0.020-0.059
2...................................        0.006-0.019      0.0030-0.0049      0.0030-0.0049        0.060-0.199
3...................................        0.020-0.039      0.0050-0.0079      0.0050-0.0079        0.200-0.899
4...................................        0.040-0.069      0.0080-0.0199      0.0080-0.0199        0.900-2.999
5...................................        0.070-0.089      0.0200-0.0499      0.0200-0.0499        3.000-7.999
6...................................        0.090-0.119      0.0500-0.0999      0.0500-0.0999       8.000-15.999
7...................................        0.120-0.139      0.1000-0.1499      0.1000-0.2999      16.000-30.999
8...................................        0.140-0.169      0.1500-0.2599      0.3000-0.4999      31.000-39.999

9...................................        0.170-0.189      0.2600-0.7999      0.5000-0.7999      40.000-49.999
10..................................        0.190-0.259       0.8000-1.000       0.8000-1.000      50.000-60.000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    <IP_ADDRESS> The NO2 audit techniques may vary depending
on the ambient monitoring method. For chemiluminescence-type
NO2 analyzers, gas phase titration (GPT) techniques
should be based on EPA guidance documents and monitoring agency
experience. The NO2 gas standards may be more appropriate
than GPT for direct NO2 methods that do not employ
converters. Care should be taken to ensure the stability of such gas
standards prior to use.
    <IP_ADDRESS> The standards from which audit gas test concentrations
are obtained must meet the specifications of section 2.6.1 of this
appendix. The gas standards and equipment used for the performance
evaluation must not be the same as the standards and equipment used
for one-point QC, calibrations, span evaluations or NPAP.
    <IP_ADDRESS> For point analyzers, the evaluation shall be carried out
by allowing the monitor to analyze the audit gas test atmosphere in
its normal sampling mode such that the test atmosphere passes
through all filters, scrubbers, conditioners, and other sample inlet
components used during normal ambient sampling and as much of the
ambient air inlet system as is practicable.
    <IP_ADDRESS> Open path monitors are evaluated by inserting a test
cell containing the various audit gas concentrations into the
optical measurement beam of the instrument. If possible, the
normally used transmitter, receiver, and, as appropriate, reflecting
devices should be used during the evaluation, and the normal
monitoring configuration of the instrument should be modified as
little as possible to accommodate the test cell for the evaluation.
However, if permitted by the associated operation or instruction
manual, an alternate local light source or an alternate optical path
that does not include the normal atmospheric monitoring path may be
used. The actual concentrations of the audit gas in the test cell
must be selected to produce effective concentrations in the
evaluation level ranges specified in this section of this appendix.
Generally, each evaluation concentration measurement result will be
the sum of the atmospheric pollutant concentration and the
evaluation test concentration. As such, the result must be corrected
to remove the atmospheric concentration contribution. The corrected
concentration is obtained by subtracting the average of the
atmospheric concentrations measured by the open path instrument
under test immediately before and immediately after the evaluation
test (or preferably before and after each evaluation concentration
level) from the evaluation concentration measurement. If the
difference between the before and after measurements is greater than
20 percent of the effective concentration of the test gas standard,
discard the test result for that concentration level and repeat the
test for that level. If possible, open path monitors should be
evaluated during periods when the atmospheric pollutant
concentrations are relatively low and steady. Also, if the open path
instrument is not installed in a permanent manner, the monitoring
path length must be reverified to be within plus or minus 3 percent
to validate the evaluation since the monitoring path length is
critical to the determination of the effective concentration.
    <IP_ADDRESS> Report both the evaluation concentrations (effective
concentrations for open path monitors) of the audit gases and the
corresponding measured concentration (corrected concentrations, if
applicable, for open path monitors) indicated or produced by the
monitor being tested to AQS. The percent differences between these
concentrations are used to assess the quality of the monitoring data
as described in section 4.1.1 of this appendix.
    3.1.3 National Performance Audit Program (NPAP).
    The NPAP is a performance evaluation which is a type of audit
where quantitative data are collected independently in order to
evaluate the proficiency of an analyst, monitoring instrument or
laboratory. Details of the program can be found in reference 11 of
this appendix. The program requirements include:
    <IP_ADDRESS> Performing audits of the primary monitors at 20 percent
of monitoring sites per year, and 100 percent of the sites in 6
years. High-priority sites may be visited more often. Since not all
gaseous criteria pollutants are monitored at every site within a
PQAO, it is not required that 20 percent of the primary monitors for
each pollutant receive an NPAP audit each year only that 20 percent
of the PQAOs monitoring sites receive an NPAP audit. It is expected
that over the 6-year period all primary monitors for all gaseous
pollutants will receive an NPAP audit.
    <IP_ADDRESS> Developing a delivery system that will allow for the
audit concentration gasses to be introduced to the probe inlet where
logistically feasible.
    <IP_ADDRESS> Using audit gases that are verified against the NIST
standard reference methods or special review procedures and
validated annually for CO, SO2 and NO2, and at
the beginning of each quarter of audits for O3.
    <IP_ADDRESS> As described in section 2.4 of this appendix, the PQAO
may elect, on an annual basis, to utilize the federally implemented
NPAP program. If the PQAO plans to self-implement NPAP, the EPA will
establish training and other technical requirements for PQAOs to
establish comparability to federally implemented programs. In
addition to meeting the requirements in sections <IP_ADDRESS> through
<IP_ADDRESS> of this appendix, the PQAO must:
    (a) Utilize an audit system equivalent to the federally
implemented NPAP audit system and is separate from equipment used in
annual performance evaluations.
    (b) Perform a whole system check by having the NPAP system
tested against an independent and qualified EPA lab, or equivalent.
    (c) Evaluate the system with the EPA NPAP program through
collocated auditing at an acceptable number of sites each year (at
least one for an agency network of five or less sites; at least two
for a network with more than five sites).
    (d) Incorporate the NPAP in the PQAO's quality assurance project
plan.
    (e) Be subject to review by independent, EPA-trained personnel.
    (f) Participate in initial and update training/certification
sessions.
    3.2 PM2.5.
    3.2.1 Flow Rate Verification for PM2.5. A one-point flow rate
verification check must be performed at least once every month (each
verification minimally separated by 14 days) on each monitor used to
measure PM2.5. The verification is made by checking the
operational flow rate of the monitor. If the verification is made in
conjunction with a flow rate adjustment, it must be made prior to
such flow rate adjustment. For the standard procedure, use a flow
rate transfer standard certified in accordance with section 2.6 of
this appendix to check the monitor's normal flow rate. Care should
be used in selecting and using the flow rate measurement device such
that it does not alter the normal operating flow rate of the
monitor. Report the flow rate of the transfer standard and the
corresponding flow rate measured by the monitor to AQS. The percent
differences between the audit and measured flow rates are used to
assess the bias of the monitoring data as described in section 4.2.2
of this appendix (using flow rates in lieu of concentrations).
    3.2.2 Semi-Annual Flow Rate Audit for PM2.5. Audit the flow rate
of the particulate monitor twice a year. The two audits should
ideally be spaced between 5 and 7 months apart. The EPA strongly
encourages more frequent auditing. The audit should (preferably) be
conducted by a trained experienced technician other than the routine
site operator. The audit is made by measuring the monitor's normal
operating flow rate(s) using a flow rate transfer standard certified
in accordance with section 2.6 of this appendix. The flow rate
standard used for auditing must not be the same flow rate standard
used for verifications or to calibrate the monitor. However, both
the calibration standard and the audit standard may be referenced to
the same primary flow rate or volume standard. Care must be taken in
auditing the flow rate to be certain that the flow measurement
device does not alter the normal operating flow rate of the monitor.
Report the audit flow rate of the transfer standard and the
corresponding flow rate measured by the monitor to AQS. The

percent differences between these flow rates are used to evaluate
monitor performance.
    3.2.3 Collocated Quality Control Sampling Procedures for PM2.5.
For each pair of collocated monitors, designate one sampler as the
primary monitor whose concentrations will be used to report air
quality for the site, and designate the other as the quality control
monitor. There can be only one primary monitor at a monitoring site
for a given time period.
    <IP_ADDRESS> For each distinct monitoring method designation (FRM or
FEM) that a PQAO is using for a primary monitor, the PQAO must:
    (a) Have 15 percent of the primary monitors of each method
designation collocated (values of 0.5 and greater round up); and
    (b) Have at least one collocated quality control monitor (if the
total number of monitors is less than three). The first collocated
monitor must be a designated FRM monitor.
    <IP_ADDRESS> In addition, monitors selected for collocation must also
meet the following requirements:
    (a) A primary monitor designated as an EPA FRM shall be
collocated with a quality control monitor having the same EPA FRM
method designation.
    (b) For each primary monitor designated as an EPA FEM used by
the PQAO, 50 percent of the monitors designated for collocation, or
the first if only one collocation is necessary, shall be collocated
with a FRM quality control monitor and 50 percent of the monitors
shall be collocated with a monitor having the same method
designation as the FEM primary monitor. If an odd number of
collocated monitors is required, the additional monitor shall be a
FRM quality control monitor. An example of the distribution of
collocated monitors for each unique FEM is provided below. Table A-2
of this appendix demonstrates the procedure with a PQAO having an
FRM and multiple FEMs.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Collocated
     Primary FEMS of a unique method      Collocated  Collocated    with same method
                   designation                                              with an FRM          designation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
``1-9''..........................................                  1                    1                    0
``10-16''........................................                  2                    1                    1
``17-23''........................................                  3                    2                    1
``24-29''........................................                  4                    2                    2
``30-36''........................................                  5                    3                    2
``37-43''........................................                  6                    3                    3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    <IP_ADDRESS> Since the collocation requirements are used to assess
precision of the primary monitors and there can only be one primary
monitor at a monitoring site, a site can only count for the
collocation of the method designation of the primary monitor at that
site.
    <IP_ADDRESS> The collocated monitors should be deployed according to
the following protocol:
    (a) Fifty percent of the collocated quality control monitors
should be deployed at sites with annual average or daily
concentrations estimated to be within 20 percent of
either the annual or 24-hour NAAQS and the remainder at the PQAOs
discretion;
    (b) If an organization has no sites with annual average or daily
concentrations within 20 percent of the annual NAAQS or
24-hour NAAQS, 50 percent of the collocated quality control monitors
should be deployed at those sites with the annual mean
concentrations or 24-hour concentrations among the highest for all
sites in the network and the remainder at the PQAOs discretion.
    (c) The two collocated monitors must be within 4 meters (inlet
to inlet) of each other and at least 2 meters apart for flow rates
greater than 200 liters/min or at least 1 meter apart for samplers
having flow rates less than 200 liters/min to preclude airflow
interference. A waiver allowing up to 10 meters horizontal distance
and up to 3 meters vertical distance (inlet to inlet) between a
primary and collocated sampler may be approved by the Regional
Administrator for sites at a neighborhood or larger scale of
representation during the annual network plan approval process.
Calibration, sampling, and analysis must be the same for both
primary and collocated quality control samplers and the same as for
all other samplers in the network.
    (d) Sample the collocated quality control monitor on a 1-in-12
day schedule. Report the measurements from both primary and
collocated quality control monitors at each collocated sampling site
to AQS. The calculations for evaluating precision between the two
collocated monitors are described in section 4.2.1 of this appendix.
    3.2.4 PM2.5 Performance Evaluation Program (PEP) Procedures. The
PEP is an independent assessment used to estimate total measurement
system bias. These evaluations will be performed under the NPEP as
described in section 2.4 of this appendix or a comparable program.
Performance evaluations will be performed annually within each PQAO.
For PQAOs with less than or equal to five monitoring sites, five
valid performance evaluation audits must be collected and reported
each year. For PQAOs with greater than five monitoring sites, eight
valid performance evaluation audits must be collected and reported
each year. A valid performance evaluation audit means that both the
primary monitor and PEP audit concentrations are valid and above 3
[mu]g/m\3\. Siting of the PEP monitor should be consistent with
section <IP_ADDRESS>. However, any horizontal distance greater than 4
meters and any vertical distance greater than one meter must be
reported to the EPA regional PEP coordinator. Additionally for every
monitor designated as a primary monitor, a primary quality assurance
organization must:
    <IP_ADDRESS> Have each method designation evaluated each year; and,
    <IP_ADDRESS> Have all FRM, FEM or ARM samplers subject to a PEP audit
at least once every six years; which equates to approximately 15
percent of the monitoring sites audited each year.
    <IP_ADDRESS> Additional information concerning the PEP is contained
in reference 10 of this appendix. The calculations for evaluating
bias between the primary monitor and the performance evaluation
monitor for PM2.5 are described in section 4.2.5 of this
appendix.
    3.3 PM10.
    3.3.1 Flow Rate Verification for PM10 Low Volume Samplers (less
than 200 liter/minute). A one-point flow rate verification check
must be performed at least once every month (each verification
minimally separated by 14 days) on each monitor used to measure
PM10. The verification is made by checking the
operational flow rate of the monitor. If the verification is made in
conjunction with a flow rate adjustment, it must be made prior to
such flow rate adjustment. For the standard procedure, use a flow
rate transfer standard certified in accordance with section 2.6 of
this appendix to check the monitor's normal flow rate. Care should
be taken in selecting and using the flow rate measurement device
such that it does not alter the normal operating flow rate of the
monitor. The percent differences between the audit and measured flow
rates are reported to AQS and used to assess the bias of the
monitoring data as described in section 4.2.2 of this appendix
(using flow rates in lieu of concentrations).
    3.3.2 Flow Rate Verification for PM10 High Volume Samplers
(greater than 200 liters/minute). For PM10 high volume samplers, the
verification frequency is one verification every 90 days (quarter)
with 4 in a year. Other than verification frequency, follow the same
technical procedure as described in section 3.3.1 of this appendix.
    3.3.3 Semi-Annual Flow Rate Audit for PM10. Audit the flow rate
of the particulate monitor twice a year. The two audits should
ideally be spaced between 5 and 7 months apart. The EPA strongly
encourages more frequent auditing. The audit should (preferably) be
conducted by a trained experienced technician other than the routine
site operator. The audit is made by measuring the monitor's normal
operating

flow rate using a flow rate transfer standard certified in
accordance with section 2.6 of this appendix. The flow rate standard
used for auditing must not be the same flow rate standard used for
verifications or to calibrate the monitor. However, both the
calibration standard and the audit standard may be referenced to the
same primary flow rate or volume standard. Care must be taken in
auditing the flow rate to be certain that the flow measurement
device does not alter the normal operating flow rate of the monitor.
Report the audit flow rate of the transfer standard and the
corresponding flow rate measured by the monitor to AQS. The percent
differences between these flow rates are used to evaluate monitor
performance.
    3.3.4 Collocated Quality Control Sampling Procedures for Manual
PM10. Collocated sampling for PM10 is only required for
manual samplers. For each pair of collocated monitors, designate one
sampler as the primary monitor whose concentrations will be used to
report air quality for the site and designate the other as the
quality control monitor.
    <IP_ADDRESS> For manual PM10 samplers, a PQAO must:
    (a) Have 15 percent of the primary monitors collocated (values
of 0.5 and greater round up); and
    (b) Have at least one collocated quality control monitor (if the
total number of monitors is less than three).
    <IP_ADDRESS> The collocated quality control monitors should be
deployed according to the following protocol:
    (a) Fifty percent of the collocated quality control monitors
should be deployed at sites with daily concentrations estimated to
be within 20 percent of the applicable NAAQS and the
remainder at the PQAOs discretion;
    (b) If an organization has no sites with daily concentrations
within 20 percent of the NAAQS, 50 percent of the
collocated quality control monitors should be deployed at those
sites with the daily mean concentrations among the highest for all
sites in the network and the remainder at the PQAOs discretion.
    (c) The two collocated monitors must be within 4 meters (inlet
to inlet) of each other and at least 2 meters apart for flow rates
greater than 200 liters/min or at least 1 meter apart for samplers
having flow rates less than 200 liters/min to preclude airflow
interference. A waiver allowing up to 10 meters horizontal distance
and up to 3 meters vertical distance (inlet to inlet) between a
primary and collocated sampler may be approved by the Regional
Administrator for sites at a neighborhood or larger scale of
representation. This waiver may be approved during the annual
network plan approval process. Calibration, sampling, and analysis
must be the same for both collocated samplers and the same as for
all other samplers in the network.
    (d) Sample the collocated quality control monitor on a 1-in-12
day schedule. Report the measurements from both primary and
collocated quality control monitors at each collocated sampling site
to AQS. The calculations for evaluating precision between the two
collocated monitors are described in section 4.2.1 of this appendix.
    (e) In determining the number of collocated quality control
sites required for PM10, monitoring networks for lead
(Pb-PM10) should be treated independently from networks
for particulate matter (PM), even though the separate networks may
share one or more common samplers. However, a single quality control
monitor that meets the collocation requirements for Pb-
PM10 and PM10 may serve as a collocated
quality control monitor for both networks. Extreme care must be
taken when using the filter from a quality control monitor for both
PM10 and Pb analysis. A PM10 filter weighing
should occur prior to any Pb analysis.
    3.4 Pb.
    3.4.1 Flow Rate Verification for Pb-PM10 Low Volume Samplers
(less than 200 liter/minute). A one-point flow rate verification
check must be performed at least once every month (each verification
minimally separated by 14 days) on each monitor used to measure Pb.
The verification is made by checking the operational flow rate of
the monitor. If the verification is made in conjunction with a flow
rate adjustment, it must be made prior to such flow rate adjustment.
For the standard procedure, use a flow rate transfer standard
certified in accordance with section 2.6 of this appendix to check
the monitor's normal flow rate. Care should be taken in selecting
and using the flow rate measurement device such that it does not
alter the normal operating flow rate of the monitor. The percent
differences between the audit and measured flow rates are reported
to AQS and used to assess the bias of the monitoring data as
described in section 4.2.2 of this appendix (using flow rates in
lieu of concentrations).
    3.4.2 Flow Rate Verification for Pb High Volume Samplers
(greater than 200 liters/minute). For high volume samplers, the
verification frequency is one verification every 90 days (quarter)
with four in a year. Other than verification frequency, follow the
same technical procedure as described in section 3.4.1 of this
appendix.
    3.4.3 Semi-Annual Flow Rate Audit for Pb. Audit the flow rate of
the particulate monitor twice a year. The two audits should ideally
be spaced between 5 and 7 months apart. The EPA strongly encourages
more frequent auditing. The audit should (preferably) be conducted
by a trained experienced technician other than the routine site
operator. The audit is made by measuring the monitor's normal
operating flow rate using a flow rate transfer standard certified in
accordance with section 2.6 of this appendix. The flow rate standard
used for auditing must not be the same flow rate standard used for
verifications or to calibrate the monitor. However, both the
calibration standard and the audit standard may be referenced to the
same primary flow rate or volume standard. Care must be taken in
auditing the flow rate to be certain that the flow measurement
device does not alter the normal operating flow rate of the monitor.
Report the audit flow rate of the transfer standard and the
corresponding flow rate measured by the monitor to AQS. The percent
differences between these flow rates are used to evaluate monitor
performance.
    3.4.4 Collocated Quality Control Sampling for TSP Pb for
monitoring sites other than non-source NCore. For each pair of
collocated monitors for manual TSP Pb samplers, designate one
sampler as the primary monitor whose concentrations will be used to
report air quality for the site, and designate the other as the
quality control monitor.
    <IP_ADDRESS> A PQAO must:
    (a) Have 15 percent of the primary monitors (not counting non-
source NCore sites in PQAO) collocated. Values of 0.5 and greater
round up; and
    (b) Have at least one collocated quality control monitor (if the
total number of monitors is less than three).
    <IP_ADDRESS> The collocated quality control monitors should be
deployed according to the following protocol:
    (a) The first collocated Pb site selected must be the site
measuring the highest Pb concentrations in the network. If the site
is impractical, alternative sites, approved by the EPA Regional
Administrator, may be selected. If additional collocated sites are
necessary, collocated sites may be chosen that reflect average
ambient air Pb concentrations in the network.
    (b) The two collocated monitors must be within 4 meters (inlet
to inlet) of each other and at least 2 meters apart for flow rates
greater than 200 liters/min or at least 1 meter apart for samplers
having flow rates less than 200 liters/min to preclude airflow
interference.
    (c) Sample the collocated quality control monitor on a 1-in-12
day schedule. Report the measurements from both primary and
collocated quality control monitors at each collocated sampling site
to AQS. The calculations for evaluating precision between the two
collocated monitors are described in section 4.2.1 of this appendix.
    3.4.5 Collocated Quality Control Sampling for Pb-PM10 at
monitoring sites other than non-source NCore. If a PQAO is
monitoring for Pb-PM10 at sites other than at a non-
source oriented NCore site then the PQAO must:
    <IP_ADDRESS> Have 15 percent of the primary monitors (not counting
non-source NCore sites in PQAO) collocated. Values of 0.5 and
greater round up; and
    <IP_ADDRESS> Have at least one collocated quality control monitor (if
the total number of monitors is less than three).
    <IP_ADDRESS> The collocated monitors should be deployed according to
the following protocol:
    (a) Fifty percent of the collocated quality control monitors
should be deployed at sites with the highest 3-month average
concentrations and the remainder at the PQAOs discretion.
    (b) The two collocated monitors must be within 4 meters (inlet
to inlet) of each other and at least 2 meters apart for flow rates
greater than 200 liters/min or at least 1 meter apart for samplers
having flow rates less than 200 liters/min to preclude airflow
interference. A waiver allowing up to 10 meters horizontal distance
and up to 3 meters vertical distance (inlet to inlet) between a
primary and collocated sampler may be approved by the Regional
Administrator for sites at a neighborhood or larger scale of
representation. This waiver may be approved during the annual
network plan approval

process. Calibration, sampling, and analysis must be the same for
both collocated samplers and the same as for all other samplers in
the network.
    (c) Sample the collocated quality control monitor on a 1-in-12
day schedule. Report the measurements from both primary and
collocated quality control monitors at each collocated sampling site
to AQS. The calculations for evaluating precision between the two
collocated monitors are described in section 4.2.1 of this appendix.
    (d) In determining the number of collocated quality control
sites required for Pb-PM10, monitoring networks for
PM10 should be treated independently from networks for
Pb-PM10, even though the separate networks may share one
or more common samplers. However, a single quality control monitor
that meets the collocation requirements for Pb-PM10 and
PM10 may serve as a collocated quality control monitor
for both networks. Extreme care must be taken when using a using the
filter from a quality control monitor for both PM10 and
Pb analysis. A PM10 filter weighing should occur prior to
any Pb analysis.
    3.4.6 Pb Analysis Audits. Each calendar quarter, audit the Pb
reference or equivalent method analytical procedure using filters
containing a known quantity of Pb. These audit filters are prepared
by depositing a Pb standard on unexposed filters and allowing them
to dry thoroughly. The audit samples must be prepared using batches
of reagents different from those used to calibrate the Pb analytical
equipment being audited. Prepare audit samples in the following
concentration ranges:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Equivalent ambient Pb
                Range                      concentration, [mu]g/m\3\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1...................................  30-100% of Pb NAAQS.
2...................................  200-300% of Pb NAAQS.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (a) Extract the audit samples using the same extraction
procedure used for exposed filters.
    (b) Analyze three audit samples in each of the two ranges each
quarter samples are analyzed. The audit sample analyses shall be
distributed as much as possible over the entire calendar quarter.
    (c) Report the audit concentrations (in [mu]g Pb/filter or
strip) and the corresponding measured concentrations (in [mu]g Pb/
filter or strip) to AQS using AQS unit code 077. The percent
differences between the concentrations are used to calculate
analytical accuracy as described in section 4.2.6 of this appendix.
    3.4.7 Pb PEP Procedures for monitoring sites other than non-
source NCore. The PEP is an independent assessment used to estimate
total measurement system bias. These evaluations will be performed
under the NPEP described in section 2.4 of this appendix or a
comparable program. Each year, one performance evaluation audit must
be performed at one Pb site in each primary quality assurance
organization that has less than or equal to five sites and two
audits at PQAOs with greater than five sites. Non-source oriented
NCore sites are not counted. In addition, each year, four collocated
samples from PQAOs with less than or equal to five sites and six
collocated samples at PQAOs with greater than five sites must be
sent to an independent laboratory, the same laboratory as the
performance evaluation audit, for analysis. Siting of this PEP
monitor should be consistent with section <IP_ADDRESS>. However, any
horizontal distance greater than 4 meters and any vertical distance
greater than 1 meter must be reported to the EPA regional PEP
coordinator. The calculations for evaluating bias between the
primary monitor and the performance evaluation monitor for Pb are
described in section 4.2.4 of this appendix.

4. Calculations for Data Quality Assessment

    (a) Calculations of measurement uncertainty are carried out by
the EPA according to the following procedures. The PQAOs must report
the data to AQS for all measurement quality checks as specified in
this appendix even though they may elect to perform some or all of
the calculations in this section on their own.
    (b) The EPA will provide annual assessments of data quality
aggregated by site and PQAO for SO2, NO2,
O3 and CO and by PQAO for PM10,
PM2.5, and Pb.
    (c) At low concentrations, agreement between the measurements of
collocated quality control samplers, expressed as relative percent
difference or percent difference, may be relatively poor. For this
reason, collocated measurement pairs are selected for use in the
precision and bias calculations only when both measurements are
equal to or above the following limits:
    (1) Pb: 0.002 [mu]g/m\3\ (Methods approved after 3/04/2010, with
exception of manual equivalent method EQLA-0813-803).
    (2) Pb: 0.02 [mu]g/m\3\ (Methods approved before 3/04/2010, and
manual equivalent method EQLA-0813-803).
    (3) PM10(Hi-Vol): 15 [mu]g/m\3\.
    (4) PM10(Lo-Vol): 3 [mu]g/m\3\.
    (5) PM2.5: 3 [mu]g/m\3\.
    4.1 Statistics for the Assessment of QC Checks for SO2, NO2, O3
and CO.
    4.1.1 Percent Difference. Many of the measurement quality checks
start with a comparison of an audit concentration or value (flow
rate) to the concentration/value measured by the monitor and use
percent difference as the comparison statistic as described in
equation 1 of this section. For each single point check, calculate
the percent difference, di, as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP11SE14.000

where, meas is the concentration indicated by the PQAO's instrument
and audit is the audit concentration of the standard used in the QC
check being measured.
    4.1.2 Precision Estimate. The precision estimate is used to
assess the one-point QC checks for SO2, NO2,
O3, or CO described in section 3.1.1 of this appendix.
The precision estimator is the coefficient of variation upper bound
and is calculated using equation 2 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP11SE14.001

where, n is the number of single point checks being aggregated; X
\2\ 0.1,n-1 is the 10th percentile of a chi-squared
distribution with n-1 degrees of freedom.

    4.1.3 Bias Estimate. The bias estimate is calculated using the
one-point QC checks for SO2, NO2,
O3, or CO described in section 3.1.1 of this appendix.
The bias estimator is an upper bound on the mean absolute value of
the percent differences as described in equation 3 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP11SE14.002

where, n is the number of single point checks being aggregated;
t0.95,-1 is the 95th quantile of a t-distribution with n-
1 degrees of freedom; the quantity AB is the mean of the absolute
values of the di's and is calculated using equation 4 of
this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP11SE14.003

and the quantity AS is the standard deviation of the absolute value
of the di's and is calculated using equation 5 of this
section:

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP11SE14.004

    <IP_ADDRESS> Assigning a sign (positive/negative) to the bias
estimate. Since the bias statistic as calculated in equation 3 of
this appendix uses absolute values, it does not have a tendency
(negative or positive bias) associated with it. A sign will be
designated by rank ordering the percent differences of the QC check
samples from a given site for a particular assessment interval.
    <IP_ADDRESS> Calculate the 25th and 75th percentiles of the percent
differences for each site. The absolute bias upper bound should be
flagged as positive if both percentiles are positive and negative if
both percentiles are negative. The absolute bias upper bound would
not be flagged if the 25th and 75th percentiles are of different
signs.
    4.2 Statistics for the Assessment of PM10, PM2.5, and Pb.
    4.2.1 Collocated Quality Control Sampler Precision Estimate for
PM10, PM2.5 and Pb. Precision is estimated via duplicate
measurements from collocated samplers. It is recommended that the
precision be aggregated at the PQAO level quarterly, annually, and
at the 3-year level. The data pair would only be considered valid if
both concentrations are greater than or equal to the minimum values
specified in section 4(c) of this appendix. For each collocated data
pair, calculate the relative percent difference, di,
using equation 6 of this appendix:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP11SE14.005

where, Xi is the concentration from the primary sampler
and Yi is the concentration value from the audit sampler.
The coefficient of variation upper bound is calculated using
equation 7 of this appendix:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP11SE14.006

where, n is the number of valid data pairs being aggregated, and X
\2\ 0.1,n-1 is the 10th percentile of a chi-squared
distribution with n-1 degrees of freedom. The factor of 2 in the
denominator adjusts for the fact that each di is
calculated from two values with error.
    4.2.2 One-Point Flow Rate Verification Bias Estimate for PM10,
PM2.5 and Pb. For each one-point flow rate verification, calculate
the percent difference in volume using equation 1 of this appendix
where meas is the value indicated by the sampler's volume
measurement and audit is the actual volume indicated by the auditing
flow meter. The absolute volume bias upper bound is then calculated
using equation 3, where n is the number of flow rate audits being
aggregated; t0.95,n-1is the 95th quantile of a t-
distribution with n-1 degrees of freedom, the quantity AB is the
mean of the absolute values of the di's and is
calculated using equation 4 of this appendix, and the quantity AS in
equation 3 of this appendix is the standard deviation of the
absolute values if the di's and is calculated
using equation 5 of this appendix.
    4.2.3 Semi-Annual Flow Rate Audit Bias Estimate for PM10, PM2.5
and Pb. Use the same procedure described in section 4.2.2 for the
evaluation of flow rate audits.
    4.2.4 Performance Evaluation Programs Bias Estimate for Pb. The
Pb bias estimate is calculated using the paired routine and the PEP
monitor as described in section 3.4.7. Use the same procedures as
described in section 4.1.3 of this appendix.
    4.2.5 Performance Evaluation Programs Bias Estimate for PM2.5.
The bias estimate is calculated using the PEP audits described in
section 4.1.3 of this appendix. The bias estimator is based on the
mean percent differences (Equation 1). The mean percent difference,
D, is calculated by Equation 8 below.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP11SE14.007

where, nj is the number of pairs and d1,
d2,...dnj are the biases for each pair to be
averaged.
    4.2.6 Pb Analysis Audit Bias Estimate. The bias estimate is
calculated using the analysis audit data described in section 3.4.6.
Use the same bias estimate procedure as described in section 4.1.3
of this appendix.

5. Reporting Requirements

    5.1 Reporting Requirements. For each pollutant, prepare a list
of all monitoring sites and their AQS site identification codes in
each PQAO and submit the list to the appropriate EPA regional
office, with a copy to AQS. Whenever there is a change in this list
of monitoring sites in a PQAO, report this change to the EPA
regional office and to AQS.
    5.1.1 Quarterly Reports. For each quarter, each PQAO shall
report to AQS directly (or via the appropriate EPA regional office
for organizations not direct users of AQS) the results of all valid
measurement quality checks it has carried out during the quarter.
The quarterly reports must be submitted consistent with the data
reporting requirements specified for air quality data as set forth
in 40 CFR 58.16. The EPA strongly encourages early submission of the
quality assurance data in order to assist the PQAOs ability to
control and evaluate the quality of the ambient air data.
    5.1.2 Annual Reports.
    <IP_ADDRESS> When the PQAO has certified relevant data for the
calendar year, the EPA will calculate and report the measurement
uncertainty for the entire calendar year.

6.0 References

(1) American National Standard--Specifications and Guidelines for
Quality Systems for Environmental Data Collection and Environmental
Technology Programs. ANSI/ASQC E4-2004. February 2004. Available
from American Society for Quality Control, 611 East Wisconsin
Avenue, Milwaukee, WI 53202.
(2) EPA Requirements for Quality Management Plans. EPA QA/R-2. EPA/
240/B-01/002. March 2001, Reissue May 2006. Office of Environmental
Information, Washington DC 20460. http://www.epa.gov/quality/qs-docs/r2-final.pdf.
(3) EPA Requirements for Quality Assurance Project Plans for
Environmental Data Operations. EPA QA/R-5. EPA/240/B-01/003. March
2001, Reissue May 2006. Office of Environmental Information,
Washington DC 20460. http://www.epa.gov/quality/qs-docs/r5-final.pdf.
(4) EPA Traceability Protocol for Assay and Certification of Gaseous
Calibration Standards. EPA-600/R-12/531. May, 2012. Available from
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Risk Management
Research Laboratory, Research Triangle Park NC 27711. http://www.epa.gov/nrmrl/appcd/mmd/db-traceability-protocol.html.
(5) Guidance for the Data Quality Objectives Process. EPA QA/G-4.
EPA/240/B-06/001. February, 2006. Office of Environmental
Information, Washington DC 20460. http://www.epa.gov/quality/qs-docs/g4-final.pdf.
(6) List of Designated Reference and Equivalent Methods. Available
from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Exposure
Research Laboratory,

Human Exposure and Atmospheric Sciences Division, MD-D205-03,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/criteria.html.
(7) Transfer Standards for the Calibration of Ambient Air Monitoring
Analyzers for Ozone. EPA-454/B-13-004 U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, October, 2013. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/qapollutant.html.
(8) Paur, R.J. and F.F. McElroy. Technical Assistance Document for
the Calibration of Ambient Ozone Monitors. EPA-600/4-79-057. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711,
September, 1979. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/cpreldoc.html.
(9) Quality Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement
Systems, Volume 1-A Field Guide to Environmental Quality Assurance.
EPA-600/R-94/038a. April 1994. Available from U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, ORD Publications Office, Center for Environmental
Research Information (CERI), 26 W. Martin Luther King Drive,
Cincinnati, OH 45268. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/qabook.html.
(10) Quality Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement
Systems, Volume II: Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Program Quality
System Development. EPA-454/B-13-003. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/qabook.html.
(11) National Performance Evaluation Program Standard Operating
Procedures. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/amtic/npapsop.html.

                 Table A-1 of Appendix A to Part 58--Minimum Data Assessment Requirements for NAAQS Related Criteria Pollutant Monitors
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Method                   Assessment method           Coverage           Minimum frequency     Parameters reported    AQS assessment type
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Gaseous Methods (CO, NO2, SO2, O3)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-Point QC for SO2, NO2, O3, CO....  Response check at       Each analyzer.........  Once per 2 weeks.....  Audit concentration    1-Point QC.
                                      concentration 0.005-                                                   \1\ and measured
                                      0.08 ppm SO2, NO2,                                                     concentration \2\.
                                      O3, and 0.5 and 5 ppm
                                      CO.
Annual performance evaluation for    See section 3.1.2 of    Each analyzer.........  Once per year........  Audit concentration    Annual PE.
 SO2, NO2, O3, CO.                    this appendix.                                                         \1\ and measured
                                                                                concentration \2\
                                                                                for each level.
NPAP for SO2, NO2, O3, CO..........  Independent Audit.....  20% of sites each year  Once per year........  Audit concentration    NPAP.
                                                                                \1\ and measured
                                                                                concentration \2\
                                                                                for each level.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Particulate Methods
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Continuous \4\ method-collocated     Collocated samplers...  15%...................  1-in-12 days.........  Primary sampler        No Transaction
 quality control sampling PM2.5.                                                                             concentration and      reported as raw
                                                                                duplicate sampler      data.
                                                                                concentration.\3\
Manual method-collocated quality     Collocated samplers...  15%...................  1-in-12 days.........  Primary sampler        No Transaction
 control sampling PM10, PM2.5, Pb-                                                                           concentration and      reported as raw
 TSP, Pb-PM10.                                                                                duplicate sampler      data.
                                                                                concentration.\3\
Flow rate verification PM10 (low     Check of sampler flow   Each sampler..........  Once every month.....  Audit flow rate and    Flow Rate
 Vol) PM2.5, Pb-PM10.                 rate.                                                                  measured flow rate     Verification.
                                                                                indicated by the
                                                                                sampler.
Flow rate verification PM10 (High-   Check of sampler flow   Each sampler..........  Once every quarter...  Audit flow rate and    Flow Rate
 Vol), Pb-TSP.                        rate.                                                                  measured flow rate     Verification.
                                                                                indicated by the
                                                                                sampler.
Semi-annual flow rate audit PM10,    Check of sampler flow   Each sampler..........  Once every 6 months..  Audit flow rate and    Semi Annual Flow Rate
 TSP, PM10-2.5, PM2.5, Pb-TSP, Pb-    rate using                                                             measured flow rate     Audit.
 PM10..                               independent standard.                                                  indicated by the
                                                                                sampler.
Pb analysis audits Pb-TSP, Pb-PM10.  Check of analytical     Analytical............  Once each quarter....  Measured value and     Pb Analysis Audits.
                                      system with Pb audit                                                   audit value ([mu]g
                                      strips/filters.                                                        Pb/filter) using AQS
                                                                                unit code 077.
Performance Evaluation Program       Collocated samplers...  (1) 5 valid audits for  Distributed over all   Primary sampler        PEP.
 PM2.5.                                                       primary QA orgs, with   4 quarters.            concentration and
                                                              <=5 sites. (2) 8                               performance
                                                              valid audits for                               evaluation sampler
                                                              primary QA orgs, with                          concentration.
                                                              >5 sites. (3) All
                                                              samplers in 6 years.
Performance Evaluation Program Pb-   Collocated samplers...  (1) 1 valid audit and   Distributed over all   Primary sampler        PEP.
 TSP, Pb-PM10.                                                4 collocated samples    4 quarters.            concentration and
                                                              for primary QA orgs,                           performance
                                                              with <=5 sites. (2) 2                          evaluation sampler
                                                              valid audits and 6                             concentration.
                                                              collocated samples                             Primary sampler
                                                              for primary QA orgs                            concentration and
                                                              with >5 sites.                                 duplicate sampler
                                                                                concentration.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Effective concentration for open path analyzers.
\2\ Corrected concentration, if applicable for open path analyzers.
\3\ Both primary and collocated sampler values are reported as raw data.
\4\ PM2.5 is the only particulate criteria pollutant requiring collocation of continuous and manual primary monitors.

      Table A-2 of Appendix A to Part 58--Summary of PM2.5 Number and Type of Collocation (15% Collocation
    Requirement) Required Using an Example of a PQAO That Has 54 Primary Monitors (54 Sites) With One Federal
                  Reference Method Type and Three Types of Approved Federal Equivalent Methods
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of
                                                                                Number of       collocated with
 Primary sampler method designation    Total number of    Total number of    collocated with      same method
                                           monitors          collocated            FRM           designation as
                                                                                primary
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FRM.................................                 20                  3                  3                  3
FEM (A).............................                 20                  3                  2                  1
FEM (B).............................                  2                  1                  1                  0
FEM (C).............................                 12                  2                  1                  1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

0
10. Add Appendix B to part 58 to read as follows:

Appendix B to Part 58--Quality Assurance Requirements for Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) Air Monitoring

    1. General Information
    2. Quality System Requirements
    3. Measurement Quality Check Requirements
    4. Calculations for Data Quality Assessments
    5. Reporting Requirements
    6. References

1. General Information

    1.1 Applicability.
    (a) This appendix specifies the minimum quality assurance
requirements for the control and assessment of the quality of the
ambient air monitoring data submitted to a PSD reviewing authority
or the EPA by an organization operating an air monitoring station,
or network of stations, operated in order to comply with Part 51 New
Source Review--Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD). Such
organizations are encouraged to develop and maintain quality
assurance programs more extensive than the required minimum.
Additional guidance for the requirements reflected in this appendix
can be found in the ``Quality Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution
Measurement Systems,'' Volume II (Ambient Air) and ``Quality
Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement Systems,'' Volume
IV (Meteorological Measurements) and at a national level in
references 1, 2, and 3 of this appendix.
    (b) It is not assumed that data generated for PSD under this
appendix will be used in making NAAQS decisions. However, if all the
requirements in this appendix are followed (including the NPEP
programs) and reported to AQS, with review and concurrence from the
EPA region, data may be used for NAAQS decisions. With the exception
of the NPEP programs (NPAP, PM2.5 PEP, Pb-PEP) for which
implementation is at the discretion of the PSD reviewing authority,
all other quality assurance and quality control requirements found
in the appendix must be met.
    1.2 PSD Primary Quality Assurance Organization (PQAO). A PSD
PQAO is defined as a monitoring organization or a coordinated
aggregation of such organizations that is responsible for a set of
stations within one reviewing authority that monitors the same
pollutant and for which data quality assessments will be pooled.
Each criteria pollutant/monitor must be associated with only one PSD
PQAO.
    1.2.1 Each PSD PQAO shall be defined such that measurement
uncertainty among all stations in the organization can be expected
to be reasonably homogeneous, as a result of common factors. A PSD
PQAO must be associated with only one PSD reviewing authority.
Common factors that should be considered in defining PSD PQAOs
include:
    (a) Operation by a common team of field operators according to a
common set of procedures;
    (b) Use of a common QAPP and/or standard operating procedures;
    (c) Common calibration facilities and standards;
    (d) Oversight by a common quality assurance organization; and
    (e) Support by a common management organization or laboratory.
    1.2.2 PSD monitoring organizations having difficulty describing
its PQAO or in assigning specific monitors to a PSD PQAO should
consult with the reviewing authority. Any consolidation of PSD PQAOs
shall be subject to final approval by the PSD reviewing authority.
    1.2.3 Each PSD PQAO is required to implement a quality system
that provides sufficient information to assess the quality of the
monitoring data. The quality system must, at a minimum, include the
specific requirements described in this appendix. Failure to conduct
or pass a required check or procedure, or a series of required
checks or procedures, does not by itself invalidate data for
regulatory decision making. Rather, PSD PQAOs and the PSD reviewing
authority shall use the checks and procedures required in this
appendix in combination with other data quality information,
reports, and similar documentation that demonstrate overall
compliance with parts 51, 52 and 58 of this chapter. Accordingly,
the PSD reviewing authority shall use a ``weight of evidence''
approach when determining the suitability of data for regulatory
decisions. The PSD reviewing authority reserves the authority to use
or not use monitoring data submitted by a PSD monitoring
organization when making regulatory decisions based on the PSD
reviewing authority's assessment of the quality of the data.
Generally, consensus built validation templates or validation
criteria already approved in quality assurance project plans (QAPPs)
should be used as the basis for the weight of evidence approach.
    1.3 Definitions.
    (a) Measurement Uncertainty. A term used to describe deviations
from a true concentration or estimate that are related to the
measurement process and not to spatial or temporal population
attributes of the air being measured.
    (b) Precision. A measurement of mutual agreement among
individual measurements of the same property usually under
prescribed similar conditions, expressed generally in terms of the
standard deviation.
    (c) Bias. The systematic or persistent distortion of a
measurement process which causes errors in one direction.
    (d) Accuracy. The degree of agreement between an observed value
and an accepted reference value. Accuracy includes a combination of
random error (imprecision) and systematic error (bias) components
which are due to sampling and analytical operations.
    (e) Completeness. A measure of the amount of valid data obtained
from a measurement system compared to the amount that was expected
to be obtained under correct, normal conditions.
    (f) Detectability. The low critical range value of a
characteristic that a method specific procedure can reliably
discern.
    1.4 Measurement Quality Check Reporting. The measurement quality
checks described in section 3 of this appendix, are required to be
submitted to the PSD reviewing authority within the same time frame
as routinely-collected ambient concentration data as described in 40
CFR 58.16. The PSD reviewing authority may as well require that the
measurement quality check data be reported to AQS.
    1.5 Assessments and Reports. Periodic assessments and
documentation of data quality are required to be reported to the PSD
reviewing authority. To provide national uniformity in this
assessment and reporting of data quality for all networks, specific
assessment and reporting procedures are prescribed in detail in
sections 3, 4, and 5 of this appendix.

2. Quality System Requirements

    A quality system (reference 1 of this appendix) is the means by
which an organization manages the quality of the monitoring
information it produces in a

systematic, organized manner. It provides a framework for planning,
implementing, assessing and reporting work performed by an
organization and for carrying out required quality assurance and
quality control activities.
    2.1 Quality Assurance Project Plans. All PSD PQAOs must develop
a quality system that is described and approved in quality assurance
project plans (QAPP) to ensure that the monitoring results:
    (a) Meet a well-defined need, use, or purpose (reference 5 of
this appendix);
    (b) Provide data of adequate quality for the intended monitoring
objectives;
    (c) Satisfy stakeholder expectations;
    (d) Comply with applicable standards specifications;
    (e) Comply with statutory (and other legal) requirements; and
    (f) Assure quality assurance and quality control adequacy and
independence.
    2.1.1 The QAPP is a formal document that describes these
activities in sufficient detail and is supported by standard
operating procedures. The QAPP must describe how the organization
intends to control measurement uncertainty to an appropriate level
in order to achieve the objectives for which the data are collected.
The QAPP must be documented in accordance with EPA requirements
(reference 3 of this appendix).
    2.1.2 The PSD PQAO's quality system must have adequate resources
both in personnel and funding to plan, implement, assess and report
on the achievement of the requirements of this appendix and it's
approved QAPP.
    2.1.3 Incorporation of quality management plan (QMP) elements
into the QAPP. The QMP describes the quality system in terms of the
organizational structure, functional responsibilities of management