03/31/88
Transmittal of OAQPS CEMS Policy and FY1988 Guidance
July 28, 1987
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Transmittal of OAQPS CEMS Policy and FY 1988 Guidance
FROM: Gerald A. Emison, Director
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
TO: Air and Waste Management Division Director
Region II
Air Management Division Directors
Region I, III and IX
Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division
Directors
Regions IV and VI
Air and Toxics Division Directors
Regions VII, VIII and X
Air and Radiation Division Director
Region V
Attached is the OAQPS policy statement and FY 1988 guidance on CEMS.
The Regional Offices commented on the draft document, which provided many
useful changes and additions to this policy statement. In particular, the
"Policy" section more precisely defines how priorities should be established
so that source categories of greatest environmental concern, including
NESHAPs, are addressed. This should help with allocation of resources to
ensure that the base CEMS program requirements are met. Other changes
include clarified references to related guidance documents and policy
statements and several editorial changes to make the statement "read" more
clearly.
Several comments were received which have not been included in this
document. These require longer term discussion and resolution among
Headquarters and the Regional Offices. One of these issues is whether the
inspection frequency guidance should be revised to allow greater
- 2 -
substitution of EER review for on-site inspections. A Compliance Monitoring
Strategy Workgroup has been established which will address possible
revisions to the guidance. For information, contact Howard Wright of SSCD
at FTS 475-7034.
Another long-term issue is the development of minimum national criteria
for determining follow-up action to be taken as a result of EER review.
This would add consistency to Regional enforcement activity and to
requirements which must be met by companies that operate similar sources in
different Regions. SSCD may, in the near future, develop a comprehensive
continuous compliance strategy that will address this and other similar
issues. Also, SSCD will be providing clarification as to how the mid-year
review of data in the CEM subset will be conducted.
Finally, it must be stressed that this is a generic policy and guidance
which is applicable to all source categories and for all pollutants where
CEMS can be used to monitor continuous compliance. If properly implemented,
it will result in more efficient utilization of compliance resources and
more effective enforcement of emission requirements.
Attachment
cc: Darryl Tyler, CPDD
Jack R. Farmer, ESED
Richard Rhoads, MDAD
John R. O'Connor, SASD
Don R. Clay, OAR
Bruce Armstrong, OAR
Joe Lees, OA
Paul M. Stolpman, OPAR
Michael S. Alushin, AED
Alan W. Eckert, OGC
CEMS Topic Coordinators
July 28, 1987
SUBJECT: CEMS Policy and FY 1988 Guidance
APPROVED: Gerald A. Emison, Director
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
DATE:
Purpose
This states the OAQPS policy, which is effective immediately, on the use
of Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems ( CEMS ) data and provides
specific guidance as to how that policy should be implemented. It also
provides instructions for meeting FY 1988 Strategic Planning and Management
System ( SPMS ) and Regional oversight requirements.
Definition
CEMS is one of several self-monitoring techniques used by regulatory
agencies to monitor continuous compliance of sources. Sampling and analysis
of sulfur in fuel to assess SO2 compliance of sources and recordkeeping for
assessment of compliance with volatile organic compound ( VOC ) emission
limitations are two other self-monitoring techniques.
Information
As the air compliance program resolves initial compliance problems and
sources install control equipment, efforts to assure continuous compliance
become increasingly important. Based on the review of State and Regional
programs that promote the use of CEMS, OAQPS has found that CEMS is a
valuable tool for assuring continuous compliance. Self-monitoring
techniques should be integrated into the air compliance program as a means
of assessing stationary source continuous compliance with air quality
regulations.
- 2 -
Some of the States which effectively use CEMS data in compliance
monitoring and in supplementing or supporting enforcement actions are
Washington ( with SO2 and total reduced sulfur data ) and Tennessee ( with
opacity monitoring data ). Ohio has a comprehensive program for requiring
CEMS in operating permits which has resulted in installation of CEMS on a
wide variety of source types. Pennsylvania and Indiana have highly
structured CEMS programs, including penalty programs based on reported
excess emissions.
Policy
OAQPS is committed to promoting, encouraging and utilizing CEMS data as
a compliance assessment measure. Our Office is also committed to the use of
CEMS in direct enforcement where CEMS is the compliance test method and for
supporting enforcement where CEMS is not the compliance test method. OAQPS
encourages the use of CEMS data by States in compliance monitoring and in
supplementing or supporting enforcement actions. If it is technically
feasible, CEMS requirements should be incorporated into NSR preconstruction
reviews, operating permits and resolutions of enforcement actions including
consent decrees and administrative orders.
CEMS should be used to assure continuous compliance of sources in both
attainment and nonattainment areas. Resources should be allocated to
monitor continuous compliance of sources in areas where the greatest
environmental benefit is likely to occur. Therefore, priority should be
given to NESHAPS sources in nonattainment areas ( for the pollutant for
which the area is in nonattainment ). Next, CEMS should be used to monitor
the continuous compliance of NSPS and PSD sources in attainment areas.
Sources with excessive emission limit excursions identified by CEMS data
should be targeted for follow-up action ( on-site inspection or Section 114
letter ). Where CEMS is the compliance test methods, CEMS data should be
used to identify significant violators. These sources will then be tracked
in accordance with the "Timely and Appropriate Enforcement Response
Guidance," issued by OAR on April 11, 1986.
There are two different types of CEMS data - direct compliance
monitoring data and excess emissions monitoring data. Where CEMS is the
compliance test methods, the status of the source is established and
documented by CEMS data. Compliance status determined by CEMS data should
be coded in the Compliance Data System ( CDS ). Violations identified by
- 3 -
direct compliance monitoring data require appropriate enforcement action
including the assessment of penalties. There are plans to modify the CEM
subset of CDS to allow for entry of direct compliance monitoring data. Use
of CEMS data for direct enforcement where CEMS is the compliance test method
is discussed in "Guidance: Enforcement Application of Continuous Emissions
Monitoring System Data," issued by OAQPS and OECM on April 22, 1986.
The second type of CEMS data is where CEMS is not the compliance method.
In these cases, CEMS data should be used to monitor the continuous
compliance of sources and to initiate follow-up action including on-site
inspections, requesting further information, and issuing a notice of
violation.
Future Action
They FY 1988 SPMS requires determination and reporting of the compliance
status of SO2 sources subject to CEMS requirements. Specifically, these
sources should be identified and their status determined with respect to
CEMS installation, certification, and report submission. While SO2 sources
are emphasized in SPMS, this measure should be carried out for all sources
with CEMS requirements.
An OAQPS Regional Oversight System will be implemented in FY 1988. This
system will be a broader management system than SPMS and will include
tracking all NESHAPs sources with CEMS requirements and all SIP and NSPS
sources with CEMS requirements in nonattainment areas. NSPS sources with
CEMS requirements in attainment areas will also be tracked. As part of the
overall compliance monitoring program, it is expected that the Regional
Offices will review Excess Emission Reports ( EERs ) and enter ERR summary
data into the CEM Subset. It is a minimum requirement that States with
delegated authority provide EPA with the information needed to permit entry
of summary EER data into the CEM Subset. Guidance on the minimum reporting
requirements to the CEM Subset was issued on July 8, 1987.
Headquarters will conduct a mid-year review in FY 1988 of the data in
the CEM Subset. The purpose of this review will be to assure that sources
with continuous compliance problems are identified, are receiving proper
follow-up attention, and if appropriate, have been placed on the significant
violators list. Our findings and recommendations will be reported to the
Regional Offices.
- 4 -
As part of our FY 1987 program, an electronic bulletin board has been
developed. In FY 1988, this bulletin board will include a summary of NSPS
and SIP source categories with CEMS requirements and a list of applicable
CEMS guidance available.
Conclusion
CEMS is an important technique for monitoring the continuous compliance
of stationary sources. It should be an expanding component of the air
compliance program. Evaluation of CEMS data has been shown to be effective
for identifying sources with continuous compliance problems and has allowed
agencies to utilize their compliance monitoring resources more effectively.
CEMS Policy Statement - Comments and Revisions to 6/26/87 DRAFT
Comment Proposed Revision
Region I:
1. - unclear how priorities for - revise "Policy" section,
monitoring sources should be 3rd Paragraph, p2 to
set clarify how priorities
should be set and resources
- enforcement actions should be allocated ( see R II,
prioritized according to VI, IX )
environmental benefit; discretion
to set priorities should be left
to RO's
2. - assume that Regional Oversight - no changes necessary to
System will be a pull from CDS policy statement; clarify
with no additional reports in transmittal memo
required from ROs
Regional II:
1. - priority to monitor sources - change "Policy" section,
should be to NESHAP sources first 3rd Paragraph, p2, to
reflect this ( see R I, VI,
- statement on adding CEMS to IX )
permits is good, but in wrong
place - move to "Policy" section,
2nd Paragraph p2
- should cite "timely & appropriate"
guidance precisely - make change to, 3rd
Paragraph, p2
2. - what will SSCD be looking for in
mid-year review? - discuss in transmittal memo
- how can bulletin board be - asked Mark Antell to call
accessed Ann Zownir
Region III:
- none - none necessary
- 2 -
Comments Proposed Revision
Region IV:
1. - review of EERs will take approx. - do not make changes to
400 hrs/qtr; to alleviate burden, guidance; send memo to
should stress that EER review Region IV reminding them
could serve as alternate to that they have been
on-site inspections ( see allocated 800 hrs/qtr.
Inspection Frequency Guidance ) for EER review; refer to
guidance on substitution of
- recommend exemption requirement EERS for on-site
should be modified so that EERs inspections and discuss
would not be required for all possible revisions to be
pollutants in certain cases made in future; also
mention as subject for
- SSCD should develop a list of further discussion in
NSPS subparts and SIP categories transmittal memo
that might qualify; use bulletin
board to transmit
- alleviate ERR review burden by
requiring sources to submit
ERR summaries
2. - not clear whether CEMS data - add reference to Enforcement
should be used to designate Guidance in 3rd Paragraph,
significant violators and to p2
assess penalties when it is
not the compliance method
3. - SSCD should set minimum - mention as subject for
criteria to trigger follow-up further discussion in
action after review of an ERR transmittal memo
4. - Regional Oversight System - add "NESHAPS" to 4th
should include NESHAP sources paragraph, p3 describing
oversight system
Region V:
1. - "good policy statement" - no changes necessary
2. - mention prospective modification - any changes to guidance will
to Inspection Frequency Guidance not be able to be made
to allow greater substitution of quickly and reference to
CEMS data review for on-site them in policy statement
inspections would delay and confuse its
implementation; mention in
transmittal memo as a
subject for further
discussion
- 3 -
Comment Proposed Revision
3. - 10 suggested editorial - incorporate 6 completely
changes and 3 in part
Regional VI:
1. - guidance would require that - revise "Policy" section, 3rd
most of 1500 NSPS, PSD and SIP Paragraph, p2, to clarify
sources be tracked; ROs should how priorities should be set
be given discretion to prioritize and resources allocated
sources to be tracked ( see RI, II, IX )
2. - guidance should specify minimum - mention in transmittal memo
criteria before enforcement as subject for further
action is initiated discussion
Region VII:
1. - no specific comments - no changes necessary
- discussed several points in
memo, e.g., mid-year review,
minimum reporting requirements
Region VIII:
1. - add specificity to discussion - add reference to Enforcement
on use of CEMS in direct Guidance in 1st Paragraph,
enforcement; give examples p3, ( the Enforcement
of source categories Guidance already discusses
use of CEMS data where it is
Region IX: the compliance method; this
policy statement is really
1. - disagree with priorities and more concerned with use of
mandatory actions on SO2; CEMS data for other source
SO2 not major concern, NOx is categories )
problem; SCAQMD refuses to accept
grant $ to provide minimum SO2 - revise "Policy" section, 3rd
ERR information Paragraph, p2, to clarify
how priorities should be
set; makes this more of a
"common sense" policy ( see
R I, II, VI )
- RO concentrations on NSPS - important to remember that
requirements and NOx emissions policy is generic and not
limited to SO2; mention this
in transmittal memo
- 4 -
Comments Proposed Revision
- NOx is acid deposition
precursor in Region; most
SO2 sources have been cleared
up already
Region X:
1. - think it is a weak policy - good comment, but not
statement; need to strengthen appropriate to this policy
to expand CEMS as compliance statement; may be resolved
method in more source categories by workgroup on CEMS as
compliance method
2. - "personal concern" that CSA is
incompatible with 24 hr and - no change to policy but
shorter standard should be discussed in
future
QAR:
- looks good, no comments - none necessary
Return to Enforcement Policies