Frequent Questions About Quality-Assurance Requirements During the COVID-19 National Emergency

Continuous Emission Monitoring; Quality-Assurance Requirements During the COVID-19 National Emergency (40 CFR § 75.68), interim final rule (IFR)

Contents

• Background
• General Q&A
  • Why did the EPA issue this rule?
  • What extensions does this rule create?
  • What types of facilities are affected by this rule?
  • What is the difference between this rule and the March 26, 2020 EPA memo COVID-19 Implications for EPA’s Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Program?
  • Must power plant and industrial unit operators continue to monitor and report emissions?
  • Can the power plants and industrial units emit more pollution because of this rule?
  • How will the public know if power plant or industrial unit operators delay quality assurance tests?
  • How can the public access the emissions data?
• Implementation Q&A
  • What quality assurance activities does this rule cover?
  • When do the extensions allowed under this rule begin and end?
  • When must power plant and industrial unit operators complete any delayed quality assurance tests?
  • What are the recordkeeping and reporting requirements?
  • How should power plant operators indicate that the hourly operating data are valid based on the extended validity of quality assurance tests?
  • Will the hourly measurements with MODC of 54 be included in lookback periods?
  • What actions should power plant operators take if they cannot complete the quality assurance tests before the rule expires?
• Example scenarios
  • Example 1: RATAs and linearity tests
  • Example 2: Certification and recertification testing
  • Example 3: Appendix E tests
  • Example 4: Fuel sample analysis
  • Example 5: MATS sorbent traps and quarterly emissions reporting

Background

On April 22, 2020 – EPA issued an interim final rule (IFR) to temporarily amend the Part 75 emission monitoring and reporting regulations for the Acid Rain Program, Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR), and the NO_X SIP Call. The temporary amendments allow power plant or industrial unit operators that cannot complete a required quality assurance activity due to travel, plant access, or other safety restrictions implemented to address the current COVID-19 national emergency to continue reporting valid, measured data. In the absence of these amendments, power plant or industrial unit operators would have to invalidate monitored data and report substitute data after a quality assurance deadline and any applicable grace period passed. The substitute data are generally biased high – at their maximum, substitute data are equal to maximum potential emissions.

The power plant or industrial unit operator must complete the delayed quality assurance activity as soon as the operator can safely and practicably complete the activity, but no later than the earlier of the end of the COVID-19 national emergency plus a 60 day grace period or the expiration of this rule 180 days from its publication in the Federal Register.

General Q&A

Why did the EPA issue this rule?

The EPA issued this rule to reduce the risk of exposure for power plant and industrial unit operators and other essential personnel to COVID-19.

The existing Part 75 regulations require power plants and industrial facilities to conduct regular quality assurance activities (e.g., stack tests), some of which may require outside contractors. If these quality assurance tests are not completed by the deadlines established in the regulations, the measured emissions data are generally considered invalid and the power plant or industrial unit operator must submit substitute data that, at its most stringent, is equal to maximum potential emissions. In normal times, these quality assurance and substitute data provisions create a strong incentive for power plant and industrial unit operators to conduct regular quality assurance activities. However, due to current travel, plant access, and other safety restrictions implemented to address the COVID-19 emergency, compliance with quality assurance testing requirements may be difficult or impossible for some power plants and industrial facilities.

EPA received reports from power companies and plant operators, state air agency staff, consultants, and others that restrictions implemented to address the COVID-19 national emergency would interfere with the ability of power plants and industrial facilities to conduct required quality assurance activities.  Many power plants have restricted access to outside contractors and/or sequestered key personnel on site. Some state air agencies are not able to approve testing protocols or observe on-site tests due to state or power plant restrictions. Some stack testing companies are no longer conducting stack tests and, when they do begin conducting tests, they will prioritize tests that were scheduled for the first and second quarter of 2020 but not completed. The testing backlog will make it difficult to schedule future stack tests. Finally, at least one laboratory that conducts fuel analyses has stopped accepting fuel samples. These restrictions and constraints make it difficult or impossible for power plant and industrial unit operators to conduct the necessary quality assurance activities by the regulatory deadlines.

EPA has decided that a temporary alternative is needed to the Part 75 data substitution requirements if a test is not completed in a timely manner because of travel, plant access, or other safety restrictions implemented to address the COVID-19 emergency. The temporary alternative will extend the deadline for quality assurance tests to reduce risks to facility operators and other essential personnel from exposure to COVID-19. This rule is consistent with social distancing recommendations while ensuring that mission-essential functions can be performed. [Added April 17, 2020]

What extensions does this rule create?

Under this temporary rule, power plants and industrial units that report under Part 75 that fail to complete a required quality assurance test may temporarily continue to report actual hourly monitoring data instead of substitute data, providing they meet certain criteria. Those criteria include (i) the data are otherwise valid; (ii) the failure to complete the tests is attributable to travel, plant access, or other safety restrictions implemented to address the COVID-10 national emergency; and (iii) the applicable recordkeeping and reporting requirements are met. [Added April 17, 2020]

What types of facilities are affected by this rule?

The Part 75 monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping requirements apply to most power plants that have boilers or turbines that burn fossil fuels and are connected to an electricity generator larger than 25 MW. The requirements also apply to some industrial boilers and turbines in the eastern U.S. under the NO_X SIP Call program. [Added April 17, 2020]

What is the difference between this rule and the March 26, 2020 EPA memo COVID-19 Implications for EPA’s Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Program?

This rule applies only to data validation for purposes of determining the hourly emissions data to be reported under Part 75 in circumstances where power plant and industrial unit operators may have difficulties conducting required quality assurance tests by the applicable deadlines because of COVID-19. [Added April 17, 2020]

Must power plant and industrial unit operators continue to monitor and report emissions?

Yes, power plant and industrial unit operators must still operate and maintain their monitoring equipment, measure hourly emissions, and report those emission data to the EPA at the end of each calendar quarter. [Added April 17, 2020]

Can the power plants and industrial units emit more pollution because of this rule?

No, this rule does not alter power plant operators’ obligation to comply with emissions limitations under any EPA rules. [Added April 17, 2020]

How will the public know if power plant or industrial unit operators delay quality assurance tests?

The designated representative of a power plant or industrial unit that delays a quality assurance test due to travel, plant access, or other safety restrictions implemented to address the COVID-19 emergency must notify the EPA within five days of when a test(s) is delayed and again within five days of when the test(s) is completed. The EPA will regularly post a list of facilities that have delayed a quality assurance test(s) and the dates when the delayed tests are completed. The list will be available on the EPA emission monitoring regulatory actions page. [Added April 17, 2020]

How can the public access the emissions data?

Power plants and industrial units regulated under Part 75 must continuously monitor and report emissions data for sulfur dioxide (SO₂), nitrogen oxides (NO_X), carbon dioxide (CO₂), and/or mercury to the EPA. The EPA publishes these data at different levels of aggregation, including combustion units, facilities, states, and the contiguous U.S. The CAMD Power Sector Emissions Data are available from 1995 through 2019.

The EPA also integrates the CAMD Power Sector Emissions Data with US Energy Information Administration (EIA) data to create the Emissions & Generation Resource Integrated Database (eGRID). eGRID provides facility-level emissions data for all grid-connected sources of electricity above 1 MW as well as regional emissions factors. [Added April 17, 2020]

Implementation Q&A

What quality assurance activities does this rule cover?

This rule covers the following certification, recertification and on-going quality assurance activities:

• Relative accuracy test audits (RATAs)
• Linearity checks
• Calibration error tests
• Seven-day calibration error drift tests
• Cycle time tests
• Fuel flowmeter initial and ongoing calibrations
• Sample gross-calorific value (GCV), sulfur, and density analysis
• Appendix E stack tests
• Low-mass emitter Appendix E stack tests

[Added April 17, 2020]

When do the extensions allowed under this rule begin and end?

This rule becomes effective on the date it is published in the Federal Register. The provisions in the rule apply to quality assurance tests due, including any applicable grace periods, after the declaration of the national emergency on March 13, 2020. The extensions expire the earlier of: 1) when it is practicable for the power plant operator to complete the delayed test(s), 2) the end of the national emergency plus a 60-day grace period, or 3) 180 days after the rule is published in the Federal Register.  [Added April 17, 2020]

When must power plant and industrial unit operators complete any delayed quality assurance tests?

This rule extends the deadline to conduct quality assurance tests that cannot be completed due to travel, plant access, or other safety related restrictions implemented to address the COVID-19 emergency until it is practicable for a plant operator to complete the required tests, but no longer than the earlier of 60 days after the end of the COVID-19 emergency or 180 days after this rule is published in the Federal Register. Generally, a plant operator should complete delayed quality assurance tests as soon as possible when travel, plant access, or other safety restrictions due to the COVID-19 emergency no longer restrict the plant operator’s ability to complete the tests. [Added April 17, 2020]

What are the recordkeeping and reporting requirements?

For each delayed quality assurance test, the power plant’s Designated Representative (DR), Alternative Designated Representative (ADR), or agent with the delegated authority to submit quality assurance test data must submit a delayed test notification to EPA. The notification must include information about the facility (e.g., plant ID (ORIS); plant name; unit/monitoring location ID(s); system ID(s), if applicable; quality assurance test(s) and applicable deadline(s) that are delayed; a detailed explanation of the reason the quality assurance test(s) could not be completed by the applicable deadline(s); and the certifications that the power plant unit(s) meets the criteria for using the extensions available under this rule (i.e., the certification statements in 40 CFR §72.21). When the delayed quality assurance tests are completed, the power plant’s DR, ADR, or agent with delegated authority to submit quality assurance data must submit a test completion notification to EPA. The test completion notification should include the same information as the delayed test notification, except that instead of reporting the applicable deadline(s) and the reasons for delay, the source should report the date the relevant restrictions no longer apply and the date the delayed quality assurance tests are completed. The DR must send the notifications to EPA via email no later than 5 business days after a test is missed or a missed test is completed. There is, however, an exception to the five-day requirement – 40 CFR § 75.68(a)(7)(vii)specifies that no notifications will be due before May 22 (30 days after the rule went into effect).

In the case of quality assurance tests that recur more often than quarterly, such as calibration error tests and certain appendix D fuel analyses, power plant DRs may treat a series of recurring tests as a single test for purposes of the required notifications.

EPA has provided templates that can be used to complete the notification. All notifications should be sent to EPA via email to [email protected].

In addition to the requirement to notify EPA when a test is delayed and subsequently completed, power plant operators must maintain onsite records that document the reasons for delaying any required test. [Added April 17, 2020; modified April 24, 2020]

How should power plant operators indicate that the hourly operating data are valid based on the extended validity of quality assurance tests?

While this rule is in effect, if a power plant operator is unable to complete a required quality assurance test(s) by the applicable deadline(s) and an hourly measurement would otherwise be valid, the plant operator should report a method of determination code (MODC) of “54” with each hourly measured value after the test(s) deadline(s), including any applicable grace periods.

If, however, the data would not otherwise be valid (e.g., a component of the measurement system malfunctioned), the plant operator should report the appropriate MODC for that hour indicating that substitute data procedures were applied. Nothing in this rule overrides the requirement in 40 CFR §72.21 that each submission must include a certification statement that states, “… I certify that the statements and information are to the best of knowledge and belief true, accurate, and complete…” and is digitally signed by the power plant’s DR, ADR, or agent. [Added April 17, 2020]

Will the hourly measurements with MODC of 54 be included in lookback periods?

Yes, all valid QA measured data, including those with MODC of 54 should be included in lookback periods. [Added April 17, 2020]

What actions should power plant operators take if they cannot complete the quality assurance tests before the rule expires?

If a test is not completed when the rule expires, or 60 days after the end of the national emergency, the power plant operator can exercise any applicable grace periods or, if none exist or the test isn’t completed before the end of the applicable grace period, the plant operator should apply the appropriate missing data substitutions from the first hour after the rule expires, 60 days after the national emergency ends, or applicable grace period.

State air agencies may have additional record keeping and reporting requirements. [Added April 17, 2020]

Example scenarios

Example 1: RATAs and linearity tests

I am unable to schedule my annual RATA test or linearity test due to lack of available stack test teams or COVID-19 exposure concerns for the facility.

Section 2.2.4 of Appendix B provides a 168 unit (or stack) operating hour grace period for a missed quarterly linearity check and Section 2.3.3 of Appendix B provides a 720 unit (or stack) operating hour grace period for a missed semiannual or annual RATA. The interim final rule grants a further extension of the RATA and linearity tests not to exceed the end of the national emergency plus 60 days or the expiration of the amendments 180 days after publication.

To extend the previous RATA/Linearity test beyond the 720/168 operating hour grace period, report quality assured data as MODC “01” until last hour of the hour grace period. For quality assured operating hours beyond the grace period specified in Appendix B report using an hourly MODC of “54”. Continue to report quality assured data operating hours using MODC “54” until the RATA or linearity test is successfully passed (but not longer than the maximum extension discussed above). RATA and linearity tests should not be reported as a grace period tests. In the event you are unable to successfully conduct and pass a RATA or linearity test within the relief period specified by the rule (end of the national emergency plus 60 days), data from the monitoring system become invalid beginning with the first operating hour after the relief period.

Example 2: Certification and recertification testing

I am unable to complete my initial certification or recertification testing due to lack of available stack test teams or COVID-19 exposure concerns for the facility.

§75.20 details required tests and conditional data validation timelines for initial and recertification events. The interim final rule grants a further extension of these conditional data validation periods not to exceed the end of the national emergency plus 60 days or the expiration of the amendments 180 days after publication. To extend the conditional data validation timeframe beyond those defined in §75.20, report an MODC of “54” for conditionally valid operating hours between the end 75.20 timeline and the successful completion of initial or recertification testing. The interim final rule does not grant relief from failed or incomplete tests as described under §75.20(b)(3)(viii), it only extends the conditional data validation period to a maximum of either the successful completion of required testing or end of the relief period defined in the interim final rule.

Example 3: Appendix E tests

I am unable to schedule my Appendix E tests due to lack of available stack test teams or COVID-19 exposure concerns for the facility.

Appendix E Section 2.2 requires retesting at least once every 20 calendar quarters. The interim final rule grants a further extension of this time period not to exceed to exceed the end of the national emergency plus 60 days or the expiration of the amendments 180 days after publication. For quality assured operating hours beyond the 20 calendar quarters report an hourly MODC of “54”. If a required retest is not completed by either the end of the 20th calendar quarter following the quarter of the last test or the end of the relief period defined in the interim rule, use the missing data substitution procedures in section 2.5 of Appendix E, beginning with the first unit operating hour after the end of the 20th calendar quarter or quarter subsequent to the end of the period defined in the interim reporting rule.

Example 4: Fuel sample analysis

I am unable to submit my fuel samples for sulfur and/or GCV testing due to testing laboratory closures.

The sampling and analysis may be done either by the owner or operator or by the fuel supplier. In the event you are unable to obtain fuel analysis results prior to the quarterly emissions submission deadline, maintain samples until resumption of normal business operations and a fuel analysis can be performed. Until such time, affected emissions data may be submitted using the previous quarterly values. Upon the end of the national emergency and completion of fuel analysis, resubmit the affected emissions data with corrected values. In the event fuel analysis is not performed within the relief period specified by the rule (end of the national emergency plus 60 days or the expiration of the amendments 180 days after publication), verify the DAHS substitutes the appropriate maximum potential sulfur content, SO₂ emission rate, GCV, or density for the fuel, from Table D-6 of Appendix D and resubmit the affected emissions data using these values.

Example 5: MATS sorbent traps and quarterly emissions reporting

I have not received the sorbent trap results needed to complete my hourly MATS Hg emissions data in time to submit my quarterly emissions file.

This rule does not affect MATS obligations. However, if you are unable to receive sorbent trap tests results prior to the Part 75 quarterly data submission deadline, affected hourly Hg concentration data should be reported as data unavailable using MODC “34”. Upon receiving the sorbent trap test data results, recalculate and resubmit the quarterly emissions file as normal.