99-32760. Revision to Promulgation of Federal Implementation Plan for ArizonaMaricopa Nonattainment Area; PM-10  

  • [Federal Register Volume 64, Number 244 (Tuesday, December 21, 1999)]
    [Rules and Regulations]
    [Pages 71304-71317]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 99-32760]
    
    
    =======================================================================
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    
    40 CFR Part 52
    
    [AZ 012-FIP; FRL-6511-3]
    RIN 2060-AI54
    
    
    Revision to Promulgation of Federal Implementation Plan for 
    Arizona--Maricopa Nonattainment Area; PM-10
    
    AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
    
    ACTION: Final rule.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: Under the authority of section 110(c)(1) of the Clean Air Act 
    (CAA or ``the Act''), EPA is finalizing proposed amendments to the 
    moderate area federal implementation plan (FIP) for the Phoenix PM-10 
    nonattainment area. These amendments modify the fugitive dust rule to 
    add or replace certain test methods and allow alternative control 
    measures (ACMs) to be implemented without prior EPA approval. For the 
    convenience of readers, the entire FIP rule is reprinted in this 
    publication.
    
    DATES: This action is effective on January 20, 2000.
    
    ADDRESSES: A copy of docket No. A-98-42 containing material relevant to 
    this final action, including EPA's responses to comments received on 
    the proposed amendments, is available for review at: EPA Region 9, Air 
    Division, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105. Interested 
    persons may make an appointment with Eleanor Kaplan (415) 744-1159 to 
    inspect the docket at EPA's San Francisco office on weekdays between 9 
    a.m. and 4 p.m.
        A copy of the docket No. A-98-42 is also available to review at the 
    Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, Library, 3033 N. Central 
    Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona 85012. (602) 207-2217.
        Electronic Availability: This document is also available as an 
    electronic file on EPA's Region 9 Air Web Page at http://www.epa.gov/
    region09/air.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen Irwin (415) 744-1903.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    
    Table of Contents
    
    I. Background
    II. Summary of Final Action on Proposed Revisions
        A. Test Methods
        1. Silt Content Test Method
        2. Visible Crust Test Method
        3. Standing Vegetation Test Method Density Procedure
        B. Alternative Control Measures
    III. Unpaved Roads
    IV. Agency Responses to Comments
    V. Text Corrections to the Final Rule
    VI. Administrative Requirements
        A. Executive Order 12866
        B. Executive Order 13045
        C. Executive Order 13084
        D. Executive Order 13132
        E. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
        F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
        G. Paperwork Reduction Act
        H. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
        I. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office
        J. Petitions for Judicial Review
    
    I. Background
    
        On August 3, 1998 (63 FR 41326), EPA finalized a FIP for the 
    Phoenix PM-10 nonattainment area (the ``final FIP''). Readers should 
    refer to 63 FR 41326 for details of the history and contents of the 
    final FIP.
        The final FIP includes a fugitive dust rule to control PM-10 
    emissions from vacant lots, unpaved parking lots and unpaved roads 
    codified at 40 CFR 52.128 (63 FR 41326, 41350), hereafter referred to 
    as ``the final FIP rule''.1 EPA subsequently proposed 
    specific revisions related to the test methods, ACMs, and unpaved road 
    requirements of the final FIP rule (64 FR 3263, January 21, 1999). EPA 
    accepted comments on the proposed amendments through March 8, 1999. EPA 
    is now finalizing action on all but one of the proposed amendments and 
    re-publishing the final FIP fugitive dust rule in its entirety.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \1\ EPA promulgated the final FIP rule as part of its court-
    ordered obligation to provide for the implementation of Reasonably 
    Available Control Measures (RACM) (required by section 189(a)(1)(C) 
    of the Clean Air Act) in the Phoenix PM-10 nonattainment area.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        A detailed discussion of the FIP rule revisions proposed by EPA can 
    be found in 64 FR 3263, January 1999. EPA proposed to add a silt 
    content test method for unpaved roads and unpaved parking lots, add a 
    new visible crust test method or replace the visible crust test method 
    for vacant lots, add a procedure for measuring the density of standing 
    vegetation to the standing vegetation test method, include coverage of 
    privately owned unpaved roads that are privately maintained or not 
    maintained,2 and allow ACMs to be implemented without prior 
    EPA approval.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \2\ Note: the FIP rule as finalized in August 1998 includes 
    coverage of privately owned unpaved roads that are publicly 
    maintained; EPA's proposal in January 1999 to include privately 
    owned roads that are privately maintained or not maintained has no 
    bearing on existing FIP rule coverage of privately owned, publicly 
    maintained unpaved roads.
    
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    [[Page 71305]]
    
    II. Summary of Final Action on Proposed Revisions
    
    A. Test Methods
    
    1. Silt Content Test Method
        The final FIP rule contains an opacity standard of twenty (20) 
    percent, or Ringlemann 1, for unpaved roads and unpaved parking lots. 
    Compliance with this standard is to be tested using visible emissions 
    test methods included in the final Phoenix FIP rule.3 EPA 
    proposed an additional, new test method for measuring silt 
    content.4
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \3\ Reference Method 9 (40 CFR part 60, appendix A) and Methods 
    203A and 203C. Appendix A.I. to Sec. 52.128 (63 FR 41326, 41353-
    41355).
        \4\ 64 FR 3263, 3267-3268.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        EPA solicited comments on this additional test method and whether 
    or not to retain the existing opacity test method in the final FIP 
    rule. EPA received no comments suggesting that the existing opacity 
    test method be eliminated from the FIP rule. In this final action, EPA 
    has added the silt content test method into the FIP rule and retained 
    the opacity test method. Therefore, sources subject to the FIP rule 
    will need to comply with both a silt content standard and an opacity 
    standard.
        Also, EPA received public comments suggesting that silt loading be 
    taken into account. In this final action, EPA has included a silt 
    loading value in the silt content test method, below which a source may 
    be deemed in compliance with the FIP rule. Text changes to accommodate 
    this addition occur in paragraph (b)(16) and in Appendix A, I.B of the 
    final amendments.
        Furthermore, EPA has clarified the following items from the 
    proposed test method text:
         Samples should be collected to a depth of approximately 1 
    centimeter or until a hard subsurface is reached, whichever occurs 
    first.
         If sieving is simplified by combining three samples, each 
    sample should weigh within one ounce of the other two samples. (EPA's 
    contractor clarified that samples must be of approximately the same 
    weight in order to ensure technical accuracy if they are combined.) 
    5
    
        \5\ Chatten Cowherd, MRI Research Institute in Kansas City, 
    Missouri, January 1999.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    EPA has corrected the following two items from the proposed test method 
    text:
         An incorrect reference to collector pan material as silt 
    fraction has been eliminated.
         A printing error in the AP-42 silt content test method 
    with respect to the method's equation to calculate percent silt 
    content.
    2. Visible Crust Test Method
        The final FIP rule's test method for measuring visible crust 
    thickness on vacant lots involved breaking off a piece of crust, 
    checking whether the crust crumbles easily and measuring its thickness 
    with a ruler.6 EPA proposed an alternative method to 
    determine the sufficiency of a visible crust.7 The 
    alternative test method involves dropping a small steel ball from a 
    height of one foot in select one square foot areas and checking to see 
    whether the ball penetrates the surface or causes loose grains to 
    appear. Public comments received support the alternative method. In 
    this final action, EPA has replaced the earlier visible crust thickness 
    test method with the alternative visible crust test method. This 
    required renumbering of the proposed text 8 for consistency 
    with the numbering of other vacant lot test methods. Also, EPA has 
    modified the text to allow the weight of the ball used in the test 
    method to range from 16 to 17 grams, as opposed to an exact weight of 
    16.33 grams.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \6\ 63 FR 41324, 41355.
        \7\ 64 FR 3263, 3268-3269.
        \8\ 63 FR 3263, 3268.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    3. Standing Vegetation Test Method Density Procedure
        The final FIP rule contains a test method for standing 
    vegetation.9 EPA proposed to add a vegetation density 
    procedure involving the use of a grid with one inch or half-inch 
    squares to help ensure that various vegetative structures can be 
    assessed accurately and consistently.10 Public comments 
    received support the inclusion of the vegetation density procedure in 
    the standing vegetation test method. In this final action, EPA has 
    added the density procedure into the final FIP rule. EPA also made two 
    minor text corrections to the proposed test method which are enumerated 
    in the Technical Support Document associated with this action, which 
    can be found in Docket No. A-98-42.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \9\ 63 FR 41326, 41356.
        \10\ 64 FR 3263, 3269-3271. The procedure was provided to EPA by 
    Larry Hagen, Agricultural Engineer, United States Department of 
    Agriculture, Wind Erosion Research Unit, 2004 Throckmortion Hall, 
    Kansas State University, Manhatten, Kansas 66506.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    B. Alternative Control Measures
    
        In the final FIP rule (August 1998), ACMs are allowed provided that 
    they are submitted to EPA and receive EPA approval.11 ACMs 
    are any RACM not specifically listed in the rule that can meet the 
    rule's stabilization standards for each source category.12 
    EPA proposed to amend the final FIP rule such that ACMs would not 
    require prior EPA approval.13 In today's action, EPA has 
    accordingly eliminated the final FIP rule requirement that ACMs receive 
    prior EPA approval.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \11\ 63 FR 41326, 41352.
        \12\  The ACM provisions of the rule do not otherwise authorize 
    any modification of the FIP rule's requirements.
        \13\ 64 FR 3263, 3267.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    III. Unpaved Roads
    
        The final FIP rule contains requirements to control fugitive dust 
    from unpaved roads that are publicly owned and/or operated (i.e., 
    maintained). This includes privately owned roads that are publicly 
    maintained. EPA proposed to include in the FIP rule unpaved privately 
    owned roads that are privately maintained or not maintained. EPA is not 
    taking final action at this time on the proposed amendments to the 
    unpaved road requirements of the final FIP rule. The Maricopa 
    Association of Governments (MAG) recently announced its intent to pave 
    or otherwise control all unpaved roads located in the PM-10 
    nonattainment area with traffic levels that meet or exceed 130 average 
    daily trips.14 EPA believes that the County's action may 
    supersede the need for EPA to control additional unpaved roads as 
    specified in the proposed FIP revision, and thus is not taking action 
    on the proposed revision at this time.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \14\ Memorandum from Lindy Bauer, MAG, to Members of the MAG Air 
    Quality Planning Team, November 30, 1999, summarizing the MAG 
    Transportation Review Committee's funding recommendations presented 
    on November 23, 1999.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    IV. Agency Responses to Comments
    
        A 45-day public comment period was provided in 64 FR 3263. EPA 
    received several comments on the proposed FIP rule revisions and 
    responds to the most significant below. EPA has responded to all 
    comments associated with this final action in the Technical Support 
    Document, which can be found in Docket No. A-98-42.
        Comment: Maricopa County Environmental Services Division (MCESD) 
    comments that by itself, the silt content of the surface material on an 
    unpaved road is a unidimensional parameter and does not indicate 
    whether or not the road is stabilized. It is the silt loading value 
    which provides an indicator of stabilization as it estimates the amount 
    of fine particulate per surface area which may become airborne. The 
    proposed test method should be modified to derive silt loading in place 
    of silt content.
    
    [[Page 71306]]
    
        Response: EPA has modified the test method to include a silt 
    loading parameter, such that surfaces with less than 0.33 oz/ft.\3\ 
    silt loading will be considered stable under the FIP rule. However, EPA 
    has retained the silt content standards of 6 percent for unpaved roads 
    and 8 percent for unpaved parking lots when silt loading is greater 
    than or equal to 0.33 oz/ft \2\
        Comment: MCESD, Maricopa County Department of Transportation 
    (MCDOT) and Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) comment 
    on the benefits associated with retaining the opacity test method in 
    the FIP rule while adding a silt content test method. With respect to 
    visible crust test methods, however, MCESD and ADEQ comment that EPA 
    should replace (i.e., not retain) the visible crust test currently 
    found in the FIP rule with the proposed ``drop ball'' visible crust 
    test. Arizona Center for Law in the Public Interest (ACLPI) comments 
    that they support the use of the most accurate test methods available, 
    however, test methods should not be replaced where the superiority of 
    the replacement tests has not been established; requiring both existing 
    and proposed tests, at least for a certain time period, would not be 
    unduly cumbersome or expensive to the regulated community, and this 
    would also allow EPA to compare the relative value and accuracy of the 
    two sets of tests.
        Response: EPA has retained the opacity standard in the FIP rule, 
    while adding a new test method for measuring silt content. Retaining 
    both the opacity and silt content standards and test methods in the 
    final FIP rule will provide greater flexibility for qualified persons 
    to conduct compliance testing of fugitive dust sources and will allow 
    opportunities to compare the relative value and accuracy of the two 
    tests.
        With respect to visible crust test methods, EPA has replaced the 
    former visible crust test with the proposed ``drop ball'' visible crust 
    test. EPA conducted field testing of both the visible crust test method 
    in the final FIP rule and the proposed ``drop ball'' visible crust test 
    method. Field testing showed that the proposed ``drop ball'' test 
    method is easier to conduct, more accurately repeatable by various 
    parties, and more indicative of whether a sufficiently stabilizing 
    crust exists. To ensure the use of a superior method, EPA is replacing 
    the test method in the final FIP rule with the ``drop ball'' test 
    method. (Interested parties should note that the test method for 
    threshold friction velocity promulgated in the final FIP rule can also 
    be used to determine source compliance where some visible crusting is 
    present.)
        Comment: ADEQ comments that adding the vegetative density procedure 
    to the current test method would clarify the method and produce more 
    accurate results when performed by different individuals.
        Response: EPA has added the vegetative density procedure to the 
    standing vegetation test method.
        Comment: ADEQ comments that they support eliminating the 
    requirement to submit ACMs to EPA because implementation costs will 
    decrease since parties will not need to commit time and resources to 
    submit ACMs to EPA and wait for approval before utilizing them. ACLIPI, 
    however, comments that they strongly object to the implementation of 
    ACMs without EPA approval because without such approval, ACMs will 
    inevitably become ``least effective control measures''.
        Response: EPA has eliminated the requirement to submit ACMs to EPA 
    for approval. Since the FIP rule contains standards and test methods 
    which indicate whether a surface is stabilized, owners/operators can be 
    allowed flexibility as to the type of control measure applied as long 
    as the control measure results in a stabilized surface. The elimination 
    of the requirement to submit ACMs for prior EPA approval does not 
    lessen the owners'/operators' responsibility to implement control 
    measures effectively on the sources subject to the rule. In fact, by 
    emphasizing the intended result, as opposed to the type of control, EPA 
    hopes to increase owners'/operators' understanding that their 
    responsibility under the FIP rule will remain until a source is 
    controlled, even if the owner/operator inadequately implements a 
    control measure or implements an ineffective control measure. If 
    applied, ACMs must meet the minimum standards established by the FIP 
    rule, therefore, requiring that ACMs be submitted to EPA for approval 
    would result in unnecessary administrative burden.
    
    V. Text Corrections to the Final Rule
    
        In addition to finalizing the proposed rule amendments, EPA is 
    incorporating a few minor corrections to final FIP rule text at 40 CFR 
    52.128. These are enumerated in the Technical Support Document 
    associated with this action, which can be found in Docket No. A-98-42.
    
    VI. Administrative Requirements
    
    A. Executive Order 12866
    
        Under Executive Order 12866, 58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993), the 
    Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' 
    and therefore subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review 
    and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Order defines 
    ``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a 
    rule that may:
    
        (1) have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more 
    or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the 
    economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
    health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments or 
    communities;
        (2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with 
    an action taken or planned by another agency;
        (3) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, 
    grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of 
    recipients thereof; or
        (4) raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal 
    mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in 
    the Executive Order.
    
        Due to potential novel policy issues this action is considered a 
    significant regulatory action and therefore must be reviewed by OMB. 
    Changes made in response to OMB suggestions or recommendations will be 
    documented in the public record.
    
    B. Executive Order 13045
    
        Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
    Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies to any rule that: (1) Is 
    determined to be ``economically significant'' as defined under 
    Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or 
    safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate 
    effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the 
    Agency must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the 
    planned rule on children, and explain why the planned regulation is 
    preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible 
    alternatives considered by the Agency.
        This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does 
    not involve decisions intended to mitigate environmental health or 
    safety risks.
    
    C. Executive Order 13084
    
        Under Executive Order 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is 
    not required by statute, that significantly affects or uniquely affects 
    the communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes 
    substantial direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the 
    Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct 
    compliance costs incurred by the tribal
    
    [[Page 71307]]
    
    governments. If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13084 
    requires EPA to provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a 
    separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a 
    description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with 
    representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature 
    of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the 
    regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop 
    an effective process permitting elected and other representatives of 
    Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in 
    the development of regulatory policies on matters that significantly or 
    uniquely affect their communities.''
        Today's rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the 
    communities of Indian tribal governments. This action does not involve 
    or impose any requirements that affect Indian Tribes. Accordingly, the 
    requirements of section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084 do not apply to 
    this rule.
    
    D. Executive Order 13132
    
        Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August 
    10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure 
    ``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the 
    development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' 
    ``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the 
    Executive Order to include regulations that 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.'' Under 
    Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a regulation that has 
    federalism implications, that imposes substantial direct compliance 
    costs, and that is not required by statute, unless the Federal 
    government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance 
    costs incurred by State and local governments, or EPA consults with 
    State and local officials early in the process of developing the 
    proposed regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation that has 
    federalism implications and that preempts State law unless the Agency 
    consults with State and local officials early in the process of 
    developing the proposed regulation.
        If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13132 requires EPA 
    to provide to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), in a 
    separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a federalism 
    summary impact statement (FSIS). The FSIS must include a description of 
    the extent of EPA's prior consultation with State and local officials, 
    a summary of the nature of their concerns and the agency's position 
    supporting the need to issue the regulation, and a statement of the 
    extent to which the concerns of State and local officials have been 
    met. Also, when EPA transmits a draft final rule with federalism 
    implications to OMB for review pursuant to Executive Order 12866, EPA 
    must include a certification from the agency's Federalism Official 
    stating that EPA has met the requirements of Executive Order 13132 in a 
    meaningful and timely manner.
        This final rule 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. 
    The revisions finalized in this rulemaking concern test methods and 
    flexibility for alternative compliance. Thus, the requirements of 
    section 6 of the Executive Order do not apply to this rule.
    
    E. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
    
    1. Regulatory Flexibility Act Requirements
        Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., 
    EPA must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact 
    of any proposed or final rule on small entities. Alternatively, EPA may 
    certify that the rule will not have a significant impact on a 
    substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small 
    businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and government entities 
    with jurisdiction over populations of less than 50,000.
        For the purposes of this inquiry, as it applies to the proposed 
    amendments to the federal fugitive dust rule (40 CFR Sec. 52.128), EPA 
    is assuming that the affected or potentially affected sources 
    constitute ``small entities'' as defined by the RFA.
        A detailed discussion of the RFA analysis for the final FIP is 
    found in section V.B. at 63 FR 41326. In general, the finalized 
    amendments to the final FIP fugitive dust rule are intended to provide 
    more flexibility in complying with the FIP rule and to improve the test 
    methods as they currently exist in the rule. Thus, EPA believes that 
    the amendments will not change the final FIP RFA analysis, except 
    possibly to have a lesser impact on small entities.
    2. RFA Analysis
    
    a. Finalized Amendments to Federal Rule for Unpaved Roads, Unpaved 
    Parking Lots and Vacant Lots
    
        EPA believes that the finalized test method amendments will provide 
    either more flexibility or an improved procedure for determining 
    compliance with the FIP fugitive dust rule. The silt content test 
    method will allow persons who are not certified in visible emissions 
    training to test the stability of an unpaved road or unpaved parking 
    lot by using an alternative method to the opacity test method. EPA 
    plans to ensure that the necessary sieve units are available for loan 
    by local entities to regulated sources. Also, the newly added visible 
    crust test method accomplishes the same objective as the previous 
    visible crust test method yet is more practical and can be accurately 
    repeated by various parties. The additional procedure to assist parties 
    in measuring frontal silhouette area of various vegetative structures 
    is merely intended to address circumstances that may arise in the field 
    which are not addressed in the final FIP rule. Finally, eliminating the 
    requirement for EPA approval of ACMs increases the rule's flexibility 
    for source owners/operators and reduces the paperwork burden of the 
    rule.
    
    b. Certification
    
        For reasons discussed above, EPA has determined that it is not 
    necessary to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis in connection 
    with the final rule amendments. After consideration of the economic 
    impacts of today's final rule amendments on small entities, I hereby 
    certify that the final rule will not have a significant economic impact 
    on a substantial number of small entities.
    
    F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
    
        Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
    (``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA 
    must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or 
    final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated 
    costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to 
    private sector, of $100 million or more. Under Section 205, EPA must 
    select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative that 
    achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with statutory 
    requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan for 
    informing and advising any small governments that
    
    [[Page 71308]]
    
    may be significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
        A detailed discussion of the UMRA requirements and how they are 
    addressed can be found in section V.C. of the final FIP rulemaking (63 
    FR 41326). As explained above, today's finalized amendments to the 
    final FIP fugitive dust rule are intended to provide more flexibility 
    in complying with the FIP rule and to improve the test methods 
    currently in the rule. Thus, EPA believes that the amendments will not 
    change the final FIP UMRA analysis, except possibly to have a lesser 
    impact on most regulated entities.
    
    G. Paperwork Reduction Act
    
        The finalized test method and ACM amendments do not impact the 
    information collection request analysis for the final FIP (EPA ICR 
    1855.02). The final FIP (63 FR 41326) provides more information on the 
    information collection request requirements.
    
    H. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
    
        Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
    Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law No. 104-113, Sec. 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 
    272 note) directs 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 EPA 
    to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides 
    not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
        In this action, EPA has incorporated voluntary consensus standards 
    where feasible [See language for Appendix A to Sec. 52.128, I.B(iv)]. 
    However, in most cases there are no applicable technical standards or 
    field procedures specifically designed for the source categories at 
    hand. OMB has reviewed and concurred on the applicable technical 
    standards finalized in this revision.
    
    I. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office
    
        The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
    Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
    provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
    the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
    to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
    United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other 
    required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
    Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
    to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This rule is not a 
    ``major'' rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
    
    J. Petitions for Judicial Review
    
        Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
    judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
    of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by February 22, 2000. Filing a 
    petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule 
    does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial 
    review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial 
    review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such 
    rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings 
    to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
    
    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
    
        Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental 
    relations, Particulate matter.
    
        Dated: December 13, 1999.
    Carol M. Browner,
    Administrator.
        For the reasons set forth in the preamble, part 52, chapter I, 
    title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
    
    PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
    
        1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
    
        Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
    
    Subpart D--Arizona
    
        2. Section 52.128 is revised as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 52.128  Rule for unpaved parking lots, unpaved roads and vacant 
    lots.
    
        (a) General. (1) Purpose. The purpose of this section is to limit 
    the emissions of particulate matter into the ambient air from human 
    activity on unpaved parking lots, unpaved roads and vacant lots.
        (2) Applicability. The provisions of this section shall apply to 
    owners/operators of unpaved roads, unpaved parking lots and vacant lots 
    and responsible parties for weed abatement on vacant lots in the 
    Phoenix PM-10 nonattainment area. This section does not apply to 
    unpaved roads, unpaved parking lots or vacant lots located on an 
    industrial facility, construction, or earth-moving site that has an 
    approved permit issued by Maricopa County Environmental Services 
    Division under Rule 200, Section 305, Rule 210 or Rule 220 containing a 
    Dust Control Plan approved under Rule 310 covering all unpaved parking 
    lots, unpaved roads and vacant lots. This section does not apply to the 
    two Indian Reservations (the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community 
    and the Fort McDowell Mojave-Apache Indian Community) and a portion of 
    a third reservation (the Gila River Indian Community) in the Phoenix 
    PM-10 nonattainment area. Nothing in this definition shall preclude 
    applicability of this section to vacant lots with disturbed surface 
    areas due to construction, earth-moving, weed abatement or other dust 
    generating operations which have been terminated for over eight months.
        (3) The test methods described in Appendix A of this section shall 
    be used when testing is necessary to determine whether a surface has 
    been stabilized as defined in paragraph (b)(16) of this section.
        (b) Definitions. (1) Average daily trips (ADT)--The average number 
    of vehicles that cross a given surface during a specified 24-hour time 
    period as determined by the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip 
    Generation Report (6th edition, 1997) or tube counts.
        (2) Chemical/organic stabilizer--Any non-toxic chemical or organic 
    dust suppressant other than water which meets any specifications, 
    criteria, or tests required by any federal, state, or local water 
    agency and is not prohibited for use by any applicable law, rule or 
    regulation.
        (3) Disturbed surface area--Any portion of the earth's surface, or 
    materials placed thereon, which has been physically moved, uncovered, 
    destabilized, or otherwise modified from its undisturbed natural 
    condition, thereby increasing the potential for emission of fugitive 
    dust.
        (4) Dust suppressants--Water, hygroscopic materials, solution of 
    water and chemical surfactant, foam, or non-toxic chemical/organic 
    stabilizers not prohibited for use by any applicable law, rule or 
    regulation, as a treatment material to reduce fugitive dust emissions.
        (5) EPA--United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 
    75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California 94105.
    
    [[Page 71309]]
    
        (6) Fugitive dust--The particulate matter entrained in the ambient 
    air which is caused from man-made and natural activities such as, but 
    not limited to, movement of soil, vehicles, equipment, blasting, and 
    wind. This excludes particulate matter emitted directly from the 
    exhaust of motor vehicles and other internal combustion engines, from 
    portable brazing, soldering, or welding equipment, and from 
    piledrivers.
        (7) Lot--A parcel of land identified on a final or parcel map 
    recorded in the office of the Maricopa County recorder with a separate 
    and distinct number or letter.
        (8) Low use unpaved parking lot--A lot on which vehicles are parked 
    no more than thirty-five (35) days a year, excluding days where the 
    exemption in paragraph (c)(2) of this section applies.
        (9) Motor vehicle--A self-propelled vehicle for use on the public 
    roads and highways of the State of Arizona and required to be 
    registered under the Arizona State Uniform Motor Vehicle Act, including 
    any non-motorized attachments, such as, but not limited to, trailers or 
    other conveyances which are connected to or propelled by the actual 
    motorized portion of the vehicle.
        (10) Off-road motor vehicle--any wheeled vehicle which is used off 
    paved roadways and includes but is not limited to the following:
        (i) Any motor cycle or motor-driven cycle;
        (ii) Any motor vehicle commonly referred to as a sand buggy, dune 
    buggy, or all terrain vehicle.
        (11) Owner/operator--any person who owns, leases, operates, 
    controls, maintains or supervises a fugitive dust source subject to the 
    requirements of this section.
        (12) Paving--Applying asphalt, recycled asphalt, concrete, or 
    asphaltic concrete to a roadway surface.
        (13) Phoenix PM-10 nonattainment area--such area as defined in 40 
    CFR 81.303, excluding Apache Junction.
        (14) PM-10--Particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less 
    than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometers as measured by reference or 
    equivalent methods that meet the requirements specified for PM-10 in 40 
    CFR part 50, Appendix J.
        (15) Reasonably available control measures (RACM)--Techniques used 
    to prevent the emission and/or airborne transport of fugitive dust and 
    dirt.
        (16) Stabilized surface--(i) Any unpaved road or unpaved parking 
    lot surface where:
        (A) Any fugitive dust plume emanating from vehicular movement does 
    not exceed 20 percent opacity as determined in section I.A of Appendix 
    A of this section; and
        (B) Silt loading (weight of silt per unit area) is less than 0.33 
    ounces per square foot as determined by the test method in section I.B 
    of Appendix A of this section OR where silt loading is greater than or 
    equal to 0.33 ounces per square foot and silt content does not exceed 
    six (6) percent for unpaved road surfaces or eight (8) percent for 
    unpaved parking lot surfaces as determined by the test method in 
    section I.B of Appendix A of this section.
        (ii) Any vacant lot surface with:
        (A) A visible crust which is sufficient as determined in section 
    II.1 of Appendix A of this section;
        (B) A threshold friction velocity (TFV), corrected for non-erodible 
    elements, of 100 cm/second or higher as determined in section II.2 of 
    Appendix A of this section;
        (C) Flat vegetation cover equal to at least 50 percent as 
    determined in section II.3 of Appendix A of this section;
        (D) Standing vegetation cover equal to or greater than 30 percent 
    as determined in section II.4 of Appendix A of this section; or
        (E) Standing vegetation cover equal to or greater than 10 percent 
    as determined in section II.4 of Appendix A of this section where 
    threshold friction velocity, corrected for non-erodible elements, as 
    determined in section II.2 of Appendix A of this section is equal to or 
    greater than 43 cm/second.
        (17) Unpaved parking lot--A privately or publicly owned or operated 
    area utilized for parking vehicles that is not paved and is not a Low 
    use unpaved parking lot.
        (18) Unpaved road--Any road, equipment path or driveway used by 
    motor vehicles or off-road motor vehicles that is not paved which is 
    open to public access and owned/operated by any federal, state, county, 
    municipal or other governmental or quasi-governmental agencies.
        (19) Urban or suburban open area--An unsubdivided or undeveloped 
    tract of land adjoining a residential, industrial or commercial area, 
    located on public or private property.
        (20) Vacant lot--A subdivided residential, industrial, 
    institutional, governmental or commercial lot which contains no 
    approved or permitted buildings or structures of a temporary or 
    permanent nature.
        (c) Exemptions. The following requirements in paragraph (d) of this 
    section do not apply:
        (1) In paragraphs (d)(1), (d)(2) and (d)(4)(iii) of this section: 
    Any unpaved parking lot or vacant lot 5,000 square feet or less.
        (2) In paragraphs (d)(1) and (d)(2) of this section: Any unpaved 
    parking lot on any day in which ten (10) or fewer vehicles enter.
        (3) In paragraphs (d)(4)(i) and (d)(4)(ii) of this section: Any 
    vacant lot with less than 0.50 acre (21,780 square feet) of disturbed 
    surface area(s).
        (4) In paragraph (d) of this section: Non-routine or emergency 
    maintenance of flood control channels and water retention basins.
        (5) In paragraph (d) of this section: Vehicle test and development 
    facilities and operations when dust is required to test and validate 
    design integrity, product quality and/or commercial acceptance. Such 
    facilities and operations shall be exempted from the provisions of this 
    section only if such testing is not feasible within enclosed 
    facilities.
        (6) In paragraph (d)(4)(i) of this section: Weed abatement 
    operations performed on any vacant lot or property under the order of a 
    governing agency for the control of a potential fire hazard or 
    otherwise unhealthy condition provided that mowing, cutting, or another 
    similar process is used to maintain weed stubble at least three (3) 
    inches above the soil surface. This includes the application of 
    herbicides provided that the clean-up of any debris does not disturb 
    the soil surface.
        (7) In paragraph (d)(4)(i) of this section: Weed abatement 
    operations that receive an approved Earth Moving permit under Maricopa 
    County Rule 200, Section 305 (adopted 11/15/93).
        (d) Requirements. (1) Unpaved parking lots. Any owners/operators of 
    an unpaved parking lot shall implement one of the following RACM on any 
    surface area(s) of the lot on which vehicles enter and park.
        (i) Pave; or
        (ii) Apply chemical/organic stabilizers in sufficient concentration 
    and frequency to maintain a stabilized surface; or
        (iii) Apply and maintain surface gravel uniformly such that the 
    surface is stabilized; or
        (iv) Apply and maintain an alternative control measure such that 
    the surface is stabilized, provided that the alternative measure is not 
    prohibited under paragraph (b)(2) or (b)(4) of this section.
        (2) Any owners/operators of a low use unpaved parking lot as 
    defined in paragraph (b)(8) of this section shall implement one of the 
    RACM under paragraph (d)(1) of this section on any day(s) in which over 
    100 vehicles enter the lot, such that the surface area(s) on which 
    vehicles enter and park is/are
    
    [[Page 71310]]
    
    stabilized throughout the duration of time that vehicles are parked.
        (3) Unpaved roads. Any owners/operators of existing unpaved roads 
    with ADT volumes of 250 vehicles or greater shall implement one of the 
    following RACM along the entire surface of the road or road segment 
    that is located within the Phoenix non-attainment area by June 10, 
    2000:
        (i) Pave; or
        (ii) Apply chemical/organic stabilizers in sufficient concentration 
    and frequency to maintain a stabilized surface; or
        (iii) Apply and maintain surface gravel uniformly such that the 
    surface is stabilized; or
        (iv) Apply and maintain an alternative control measure such that 
    the surface is stabilized, provided that the alternative measure is not 
    prohibited under paragraph (b)(2) or (b)(4) of this section.
        (4) Vacant lots. The following provisions shall be implemented as 
    applicable.
        (i) Weed abatement. No person shall remove vegetation from any 
    vacant lot by blading, disking, plowing under or any other means 
    without implementing all of the following RACM to prevent or minimize 
    fugitive dust.
        (A) Apply a dust suppressant(s) to the total surface area subject 
    to disturbance immediately prior to or during the weed abatement.
        (B) Prevent or eliminate material track-out onto paved surfaces and 
    access points adjoining paved surfaces.
        (C) Apply a dust suppressant(s), gravel, compaction or alternative 
    control measure immediately following weed abatement to the entire 
    disturbed surface area such that the surface is stabilized.
        (ii) Disturbed surfaces. Any owners/operators of an urban or 
    suburban open area or vacant lot of which any portion has a disturbed 
    surface area(s) that remain(s) unoccupied, unused, vacant or 
    undeveloped for more than fifteen (15) calendar days shall implement 
    one of the following RACM within sixty (60) calendar days following the 
    disturbance.
        (A) Establish ground cover vegetation on all disturbed surface 
    areas in sufficient quantity to maintain a stabilized surface; or
        (B) Apply a dust suppressant(s) to all disturbed surface areas in 
    sufficient quantity and frequency to maintain a stabilized surface; or
        (C) Restore to a natural state, i.e. as existing in or produced by 
    nature without cultivation or artificial influence, such that all 
    disturbed surface areas are stabilized; or
        (D) Apply and maintain surface gravel uniformly such that all 
    disturbed surface areas are stabilized; or
        (E) Apply and maintain an alternative control measure such that the 
    surface is stabilized, provided that the alternative measure is not 
    prohibited under paragraph (b)(2) or (b)(4) of this section.
        (iii) Motor vehicle disturbances. Any owners/operators of an urban 
    or suburban open area or vacant lot of which any portion has a 
    disturbed surface area due to motor vehicle or off-road motor vehicle 
    use or parking, notwithstanding weed abatement operations or use or 
    parking by the owner(s), shall implement one of the following RACM 
    within 60 calendar days following the initial determination of 
    disturbance.
        (A) Prevent motor vehicle and off-road motor vehicle trespass/ 
    parking by applying fencing, shrubs, trees, barriers or other effective 
    measures; or
        (B) Apply and maintain surface gravel or chemical/organic 
    stabilizer uniformly such that all disturbed surface areas are 
    stabilized.
        (5) Implementation date of RACM. All of the requirements in 
    paragraph (d) of this section shall be effective eight (8) months from 
    September 2, 1998. For requirements in paragraph (d)(4)(ii) and 
    (d)(4)(iii) of this section, RACM shall be implemented within eight (8) 
    months from September 2, 1998, or within 60 calendar days following the 
    disturbance, whichever is later.
        (e) Monitoring and records. (1) Any owners/operators that are 
    subject to the provisions of this section shall compile and retain 
    records that provide evidence of control measure application, 
    indicating the type of treatment or measure, extent of coverage and 
    date applied. For control measures involving chemical/organic 
    stabilization, records shall also indicate the type of product applied, 
    vendor name, label instructions for approved usage, and the method, 
    frequency, concentration and quantity of application.
        (2) Copies of control measure records and dust control plans along 
    with supporting documentation shall be retained for at least three 
    years.
        (3) Agency surveys. (i) EPA or other appropriate entity shall 
    conduct a survey of the number and size (or length) of unpaved roads, 
    unpaved parking lots, and vacant lots subject to the provisions of this 
    section located within the Phoenix PM-10 nonattainment area beginning 
    no later than 365 days from September 2, 1998.
        (ii) EPA or other appropriate entity shall conduct a survey at 
    least every three years within the Phoenix PM-10 nonattainment area 
    beginning no later than 365 days from September 2, 1998, which 
    includes:
        (A) An estimate of the percentage of unpaved roads, unpaved parking 
    lots, and vacant lots subject to this section to which RACM as required 
    in this section have been applied; and
        (B) A description of the most frequently applied RACM and estimates 
    of their control effectiveness.
    
    Appendix A to Sec. 52.128--Test Methods To Determine Whether A Surface 
    Is Stabilized
    
    I. Unpaved Roads and Unpaved Parking Lots
    
    A. Opacity Observations
    
        Conduct opacity observations in accordance with Reference Method 
    9 (40 CFR Part 60, appendix A) and Methods 203A and 203C of this 
    appendix, with opacity readings taken at five second observation 
    intervals and two consecutive readings per plume beginning with the 
    first reading at zero seconds, in accordance with Method 203C, 
    sections 2.3.2. and 2.4.2 of this appendix. Conduct visible opacity 
    tests only on dry unpaved surfaces (i.e. when the surface is not 
    damp to the touch) and on days when average wind speeds do not 
    exceed 15 miles per hour (mph).
    
    (i) Method 203A--Visual Determination of Opacity of Emissions From 
    Stationary Sources for Time-Arranged Regulations
    
        Method 203A is virtually identical to EPA's Method 9 (40 CFR 
    Part 60 Appendix A) except for the data-reduction procedures, which 
    provide for averaging times other than 6 minutes. That is, using 
    Method 203A with a 6-minute averaging time would be the same as 
    following EPA Method 9 (40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A). Additionally, 
    Method 203A provides procedures for fugitive dust applications. The 
    certification procedures provided in section 3 are virtually 
    identical to Method 9 (40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A) and are provided 
    here, in full, for clarity and convenience.
    
    1. Applicability and Principle
    
        1.1 Applicability. This method is applicable for the 
    determination of the opacity of emissions from sources of visible 
    emissions for time-averaged regulations. A time-averaged regulation 
    is any regulation that requires averaging visible emission data to 
    determine the opacity of visible emissions over a specific time 
    period.
        1.2 Principle. The opacity of emissions from sources of visible 
    emissions is determined visually by an observer qualified according 
    to the procedures of section 3.
    
    2. Procedures
    
        An observer qualified in accordance with section 3 of this 
    method shall use the following procedures for visually determining 
    the opacity of emissions.
        2.1 Procedures for Emissions from Stationary Sources. These 
    procedures are not applicable to this section.
        2.2 Procedures for Fugitive Process Dust Emissions. These 
    procedures are applicable for the determination of the opacity of 
    fugitive emissions by a qualified observer. The qualified field 
    observer should do the following:
    
    [[Page 71311]]
    
        2.2.1 Position. Stand at a position at least 5 meters from the 
    fugitive dust source in order to provide a clear view of the 
    emissions with the sun oriented in the 140-degree sector to the 
    back. Consistent as much as possible with maintaining the above 
    requirements, make opacity observations from a position such that 
    the line of vision is approximately perpendicular to the plume and 
    wind direction. As much as possible, if multiple plumes are 
    involved, do not include more than one plume in the line of sight at 
    one time.
        2.2.2 Field Records. Record the name of the plant or site, 
    fugitive source location, source type [pile, stack industrial 
    process unit, incinerator, open burning operation activity, material 
    handling (transfer, loading, sorting, etc.)], method of control 
    used, if any, observer's name, certification data and affiliation, 
    and a sketch of the observer's position relative to the fugitive 
    source. Also, record the time, estimated distance to the fugitive 
    source location, approximate wind direction, estimated wind speed, 
    description of the sky condition (presence and color of clouds), 
    observer's position relative to the fugitive source, and color of 
    the plume and type of background on the visible emission observation 
    form when opacity readings are initiated and completed.
        2.2.3 Observations. Make opacity observations, to the extent 
    possible, using a contrasting background that is perpendicular to 
    the line of vision. For roads, storage piles, and parking lots, make 
    opacity observations approximately 1 meter above the surface from 
    which the plume is generated. For other fugitive sources, make 
    opacity observations at the point of greatest opacity in that 
    portion of the plume where condensed water vapor is not present. For 
    intermittent sources, the initial observation should begin 
    immediately after a plume has been created above the surface 
    involved. Do not look continuously at the plume but, instead, 
    observe the plume momentarily at 15-second intervals.
        2.3 Recording Observations. Record the opacity observations to 
    the nearest 5 percent every 15 seconds on an observational record 
    sheet. Each momentary observation recorded represents the average 
    opacity of emissions for a 15-second period.
        2.4 Data Reduction for Time-Averaged Regulations. A set of 
    observations is composed of an appropriate number of consecutive 
    observations determined by the averaging time specified. Divide the 
    recorded observations into sets of appropriate time lengths for the 
    specified averaging time. Sets must consist of consecutive 
    observations; however, observations immediately preceding and 
    following interrupted observations shall be deemed consecutive. Sets 
    need not be consecutive in time and in no case shall two sets 
    overlap, resulting in multiple violations. For each set of 
    observations, calculate the appropriate average opacity.
    
    3. Qualification and Testing
    
        3.1 Certification Requirements. To receive certification as a 
    qualified observer, a candidate must be tested and demonstrate the 
    ability to assign opacity readings in 5 percent increments to 25 
    different black plumes and 25 different white plumes, with an error 
    not to exceed 15 percent opacity on any one reading and an average 
    error not to exceed 7.5 percent opacity in each category. Candidates 
    shall be tested according to the procedures described in paragraph 
    3.2. Any smoke generator used pursuant to paragraph 3.2 shall be 
    equipped with a smoke meter which meets the requirements of 
    paragraph 3.3. Certification tests that do not meet the requirements 
    of paragraphs 3.2 and 3.3 are not valid.
        The certification shall be valid for a period of 6 months, and 
    after each 6-month period, the qualification procedures must be 
    repeated by an observer in order to retain certification.
        3.2 Certification Procedure. The certification test consists of 
    showing the candidate a complete run of 50 plumes, 25 black plumes 
    and 25 white plumes, generated by a smoke generator. Plumes shall be 
    presented in random order within each set of 25 black and 25 white 
    plumes. The candidate assigns an opacity value to each plume and 
    records the observation on a suitable form. At the completion of 
    each run of 50 readings, the score of the candidate is determined. 
    If a candidate fails to qualify, the complete run of 50 readings 
    must be repeated in any retest. The smoke test may be administered 
    as part of a smoke school or training program, and may be preceded 
    by training or familiarization runs of the smoke generator during 
    which candidates are shown black and white plumes of known opacity.
        3.3 Smoke Generator Specifications. Any smoke generator used for 
    the purpose of paragraph 3.2 shall be equipped with a smoke meter 
    installed to measure opacity across the diameter of the smoke 
    generator stack. The smoke meter output shall display in-stack 
    opacity, based upon a path length equal to the stack exit diameter 
    on a full 0 to 100 percent chart recorder scale. The smoke meter 
    optical design and performance shall meet the specifications shown 
    in Table A. The smoke meter shall be calibrated as prescribed in 
    paragraph 3.3.1 prior to conducting each smoke reading test. At the 
    completion of each test, the zero and span drift, shall be checked, 
    and if the drift exceeds 1 percent opacity, the 
    condition shall be corrected prior to conducting any subsequent test 
    runs. The smoke meter shall be demonstrated at the time of 
    installation to meet the specifications listed in Table A. This 
    demonstration shall be repeated following any subsequent repair or 
    replacement of the photocell or associated electronic circuitry 
    including the chart recorder or output meter, or every 6 months, 
    whichever occurs first.
        3.3.1 Calibration. The smoke meter is calibrated after allowing 
    a minimum of 30 minutes warm-up by alternately producing simulated 
    opacity of 0 percent and 100 percent. When stable response at 0 
    percent or 100 percent is noted, the smoke meter is adjusted to 
    produce an output of 0 percent or 100 percent, as appropriate. This 
    calibration shall be repeated until stable 0 percent and 100 percent 
    readings are produced without adjustment. Simulated 0 percent and 
    100 percent opacity values may be produced by alternately switching 
    the power to the light source on and off while the smoke generator 
    is not producing smoke.
        3.3.2 Smoke Meter Evaluation. The smoke meter design and 
    performance are to be evaluated as follows:
        3.3.2.1 Light Source. Verify from manufacturer's data and from 
    voltage measurements made at the lamp, as installed, that the lamp 
    is operated within 5 percent of the nominal rated 
    voltage.
        3.3.2.2 Spectral Response of Photocell. Verify from 
    manufacturer's data that the photocell has a photopic response; 
    i.e., the spectral sensitivity of the cell shall closely approximate 
    the standard spectral-luminosity curve for photopic vision which is 
    referenced in (b) of Table A.
        3.3.2.3 Angle of View. Check construction geometry to ensure 
    that the total angle of view of the smoke plume, as seen by the 
    photocell, does not exceed 15 degrees. Calculate the total angle of 
    view as follows:
    
    v = 2 tan-1 d/2L
    
    Where:
    
    v = total angle of view;
    d = the photocell diameter + the diameter of the limiting aperture; 
    and
    L = distance from the photocell to the limiting aperture.
    
        The limiting aperture is the point in the path between the 
    photocell and the smoke plume where the angle of view is most 
    restricted. In smoke generator smoke meters, this is normally an 
    orifice plate.
        3.3.2.4 Angle of Projection. Check construction geometry to 
    ensure that the total angle of projection of the lamp on the smoke 
    plume does not exceed 15 degrees. Calculate the total angle of 
    projection as follows:
    
    p = 2 tan-1 d/2L
    
    Where:
    
    p = total angle of projection;
    d = the sum of the length of the lamp filament + the diameter of the 
    limiting aperture; and
    L = the distance from the lamp to the limiting aperture.
    
        3.3.2.5 Calibration Error. Using neutral-density filters of 
    known opacity, check the error between the actual response and the 
    theoretical linear response of the smoke meter. This check is 
    accomplished by first calibrating the smoke meter according to 3.3.1 
    and then inserting a series of three neutral-density filters of 
    nominal opacity of 20, 50, and 75 percent in the smoke meter path 
    length. Use filters calibrated within 2 percent. Care 
    should be taken when inserting the filters to prevent stray light 
    from affecting the meter. Make a total of five nonconsecutive 
    readings for each filter. The maximum opacity error on any one 
    reading shall be 3 percent.
        3.3.2.6 Zero and Span Drift. Determine the zero and span drift 
    by calibrating and operating the smoke generator in a normal manner 
    over a 1-hour period. The drift is measured by checking the zero and 
    span at the end of this period.
        3.3.2.7 Response Time. Determine the response time by producing 
    the series of five simulated 0 percent and 100 percent opacity 
    values and observing the time required to reach stable response. 
    Opacity values of 0 percent and 100 percent may be simulated by 
    alternately switching the power to the light
    
    [[Page 71312]]
    
    source off and on while the smoke generator is not operating.
    
    4. References
    
        1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Standards of 
    Performance for New Stationary Sources; appendix A; Method 9 for 
    Visual Determination of the Opacity of Emissions from Stationary 
    Sources. Final Rule. 39 FR 219. Washington, DC. U.S. Government 
    Printing Office. November 12, 1974.
        2. Office of Air and Radiation. ``Quality Assurance Guideline 
    for Visible Emission Training Programs.'' EPA-600/S4-83-011. Quality 
    Assurance Division. Research Triangle Park, N.C. May 1982.
        3. ``Method 9--Visible Determination of the Opacity of Emissions 
    from Stationary Sources.'' February 1984. Quality Assurance Handbook 
    for Air Pollution Measurement Systems. Volume III, section 3.1.2. 
    Stationary Source Specific Methods. EPA-600-4-77-027b. August 1977. 
    Office of Research and Development Publications, 26 West Clair 
    Street, Cincinnati, OH.
        4. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. ``Opacity Error 
    for Averaging and Nonaveraging Data Reduction and Reporting 
    Techniques.'' Final Report-SR-1-6-85. Emission Measurement Branch, 
    Research Triangle Park, N.C. June 1985.
        5. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Preparation, 
    Adoption, and Submittal of State Implementation Plans. Methods for 
    Measurement of PM10 Emissions from Stationary Sources. 
    Final Rule. Federal Register. Washington, DC. U.S. Government 
    Printing Office. Volumes 55. No. 74. pps. 14246-14279. April 17, 
    1990.
    
    (ii) Method 203C--Visual Determination of Opacity of Emissions From 
    Stationary Sources for Instantaneous Limitation Regulations
    
        Method 203C is virtually identical to EPA's Method 9 (40 CFR 
    Part 60, Appendix A), except for the data-reduction procedures which 
    have been modified for application to instantaneous limitation 
    regulations. Additionally, Method 203C provides procedures for 
    fugitive dust applications which were unavailable when Method 9 was 
    promulgated. The certification procedures in section 3 are identical 
    to Method 9. These certification procedures are provided in Method 
    203A as well, and, therefore, have not been repeated in this method.
    
    1. Applicability and Principle
    
        1.1 Applicability. This method is applicable for the 
    determination of the opacity of emissions from sources of visible 
    emissions for instantaneous limitations. An instantaneous limitation 
    regulation is an opacity limit which is never to be exceeded.
        1.2 Principle. The opacity of emissions from sources of visible 
    emissions is determined visually by a qualified observer.
    
    2. Procedures
    
        The observer qualified in accordance with section 3 of this 
    method shall use the following procedures for visually determining 
    the opacity of emissions.
        2.1 Procedures for Emissions From Stationary Sources. Same as 
    2.1, Method 203A.
        2.1.1 Position. Same as 2.1.1, Method 203A.
        2.1.2 Field Records. Same as 2.1.2, Method 203A.
        2.1.3 Observations. Make opacity observations at the point of 
    greatest opacity in that portion of the plume where condensed water 
    vapor is not present.
        Do not look continuously at the plume. Instead, observe the 
    plume momentarily at the interval specified in the subject 
    regulation. Unless otherwise specified, a 15-second observation 
    interval is assumed.
        2.1.3.1 Attached Steam Plumes. Same as 2.1.3.1, Method 203A.
        2.1.3.2 Detached Steam Plumes. Same as 2.1.3.2, Method 203A.
        2.2 Procedures for Fugitive Process Dust Emissions.
        2.2.1 Position. Same as section 2.2.1, Method 203A.
        2.2.2 Field Records. Same as section 2.2.2, Method 203A.
        2.2.3 Observations.
        2.2.3.1 Observations for a 15-second Observation Interval 
    Regulations. Same as section 2.2.3, Method 203A.
        2.2.3.2 Observations for a 5-second Observation Interval 
    Regulations. Same as section 2.2.3, Method 203A, except, observe the 
    plume momentarily at 5-second intervals.
        2.3 Recording Observations. Record opacity observations to the 
    nearest 5 percent at the prescribed interval on an observational 
    record sheet. Each momentary observation recorded represents the 
    average of emissions for the prescribed period. If a 5-second 
    observation period is not specified in the applicable regulation, a 
    15-second interval is assumed. The overall time for which recordings 
    are made shall be of a length appropriate to the regulation for 
    which opacity is being measured.
        2.3.1 Recording Observations for 15-second Observation Interval 
    Regulations. Record opacity observations to the nearest 5 percent at 
    15-second intervals on an observational record sheet. Each momentary 
    observation recorded represents the average of emissions for a 15-
    second period.
        2.3.2 Recording Observations for 5-second Observation Interval 
    Regulations. Record opacity observations to the nearest 5 percent at 
    5-second intervals on an observational record sheet. Each momentary 
    observation recorded represents the average of emissions for 5-
    second period.
        2.4 Data Reduction for Instantaneous Limitation Regulations. For 
    an instantaneous limitation regulation, a 1-minute averaging time 
    will be used. Divide the observations recorded on the record sheet 
    into sets of consecutive observations. A set is composed of the 
    consecutive observations made in 1 minute. Sets need not be 
    consecutive in time, and in no case shall two sets overlap. Reduce 
    opacity observations by dividing the sum of all observations 
    recorded in a set by the number of observations recorded in each 
    set.
        2.4.1 Data Reduction for 15-second Observation Intervals. Reduce 
    opacity observations by averaging four consecutive observations 
    recorded at 15-second intervals. Divide the observations recorded on 
    the record sheet into sets of four consecutive observations. For 
    each set of four observations, calculate the average by summing the 
    opacity of the four observations and dividing this sum by four.
        2.4.2 Data Reduction for 5-second Observation Intervals. Reduce 
    opacity observations by averaging 12 consecutive observations 
    recorded at 5-second intervals. Divide the observations recorded on 
    the record sheet into sets of 12 consecutive observations. For each 
    set of 12 observations, calculate the average by summing the opacity 
    of the 12 observations and dividing this sum by 12.
    
    3. Qualification and Test
    
        Same as section 3, Method 203A.
    
                               TABLE A.--Smoke Meter Design and Performance Specifications
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Parameter                                              Specification
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    a. Light Source........................  Incandescent lamp operated at nominal rated voltage.
    b. Spectral response of photocell......  Photopic (daylight spectral response of the human eye--Reference 4.1 of
                                              section 4.)
    c. Angle of view.......................  15 degrees maximum total angle
    d. Angle of projection.................  15 degrees maximum total angle.
    e. Calibration error...................  3 percent opacity, maximum.
    f. Zero and span drift.................  1 percent opacity, 30 minutes.
    g. Response time.......................  5 seconds.
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    B. Silt Content
    
        Conduct the following test method to determine the silt loading 
    and silt content of unpaved road and unpaved parking lot surfaces.
        (i) Collect a sample of loose surface material from an area 30 
    cm by 30 cm (1 foot by 1 foot) in size to a depth of approximately 1 
    cm or until a hard subsurface is reached, whichever occurs first. 
    Use a brush and dustpan or other similar device. Collect the sample 
    from a routinely-traveled portion of the surface which receives a 
    preponderance of vehicle traffic, i.e. as commonly evidenced by tire 
    tracks. Conduct sweeping slowly so
    
    [[Page 71313]]
    
    that fine surface material is not released into the air. Only 
    collect samples from surfaces that are not wet or damp due to 
    precipitation or dew.
        (ii) Obtain a shallow, lightweight container and a scale with 
    readings in half ounce increments or less. Place the scale on a 
    level surface and zero it with the weight of the empty container. 
    Transfer the entire sample collected to the container, minimizing 
    escape of particles into the air. Weigh the sample and record its 
    weight.
        (iii) Obtain and stack a set of sieves with the following 
    openings: 4 mm, 2 mm, 1 mm, 0.5 mm, and 0.25 mm. Place the sieves in 
    order according to size openings beginning with the largest size 
    opening at the top. Place a collector pan underneath the bottom 
    (0.25 mm) sieve. Pour the entire sample into the top sieve, 
    minimizing escape of particles into the air by positioning the 
    sieve/collector pan unit in an enclosed or wind barricaded area. 
    Cover the sieve/collector pan unit with a lid. Shake the covered 
    sieve/collector pan unit vigorously for a period of at least one (1) 
    minute in both the horizontal and vertical planes. Remove the lid 
    from the sieve/collector pan unit and disassemble each sieve 
    separately beginning with the largest sieve. As each sieve is 
    removed, examine it for a complete separation of material in order 
    to ensure that all material has been sifted to the finest sieve 
    through which it can pass. If not, reassemble and cover the sieve/
    collector pan unit and shake it for period of at least one (1) 
    minute. After disassembling the sieve/collector pan unit, transfer 
    the material which is captured in the collector pan into the 
    lightweight container originally used to collect and weigh the 
    sample. Minimize escape of particles into the air when transferring 
    the material into the container. Weigh the container with the 
    material from the collector pan and record its weight. Multiply the 
    resulting weight by 0.38 if the source is an unpaved road or by 0.55 
    if the source is an unpaved parking lot to estimate silt loading. 
    Divide by the total sample weight and multiply by 100 to arrive at 
    the percent silt content.
        (iv) As an alternative to conducting the procedure described 
    above in section I.B.(ii) and section I.B.(iii) of this appendix, 
    the sample (collected according to section I.B.(i) of this appendix) 
    may be taken to an independent testing laboratory or engineering 
    facility for silt loading (e.g. net weight < 200="" mesh)="" and="" silt="" content="" analysis="" according="" to="" the="" following="" test="" method="" from="" ``procedures="" for="" laboratory="" analysis="" of="" surface/bulk="" dust="" loading="" samples'',="" (fifth="" edition,="" volume="" i,="" appendix="" c.2.3="" ``silt="" analysis'',="" 1995),="" ap-42,="" office="" of="" air="" quality="" planning="" &="" standards,="" u.s.="" environmental="" protection="" agency,="" research="" triangle="" park,="" north="" carolina.="" 1.="" objective--several="" open="" dust="" emission="" factors="" have="" been="" found="" to="" be="" correlated="" with="" the="" silt="">< 200="" mesh)="" of="" the="" material="" being="" disturbed.="" the="" basic="" procedure="" for="" silt="" content="" determination="" is="" mechanical,="" dry="" sieving.="" for="" sources="" other="" than="" paved="" roads,="" the="" same="" sample="" which="" was="" oven-dried="" to="" determine="" moisture="" content="" is="" then="" mechanically="" sieved.="" 2.1="" procedure--select="" the="" appropriate="" 20-cm="" (8-in.)="" diameter,="" 5-="" cm="" (2-in.)="" deep="" sieve="" sizes.="" recommended="" u.="" s.="" standard="" series="" sizes="" are="" 3/8="" in.,="" no.="" 4,="" no.="" 40,="" no.="" 100,="" no.="" 140,="" no.="" 200,="" and="" a="" pan.="" comparable="" tyler="" series="" sizes="" can="" also="" be="" used.="" the="" no.="" 20="" and="" the="" no.="" 200="" are="" mandatory.="" the="" others="" can="" be="" varied="" if="" the="" recommended="" sieves="" are="" not="" available,="" or="" if="" buildup="" on="" 1="" particulate="" sieve="" during="" sieving="" indicates="" that="" an="" intermediate="" sieve="" should="" be="" inserted.="" 2.2="" obtain="" a="" mechanical="" sieving="" device,="" such="" as="" a="" vibratory="" shaker="" or="" a="" roto-tap=""> 1 without the tapping 
    function.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \1\ CFR part 60, App. A, Meth. 5, 2.1.2, footnote 2.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        2.3 Clean the sieves with compressed air and/or a soft brush. 
    Any material lodged in the sieve openings or adhering to the sides 
    of the sieve should be removed, without handling the screen roughly, 
    if possible.
        2.4 Obtain a scale (capacity of at least 1600 grams [g] or 3.5 
    lb) and record make, capacity, smallest division, date of last 
    calibration, and accuracy. (See Figure A)
        2.5 Weigh the sieves and pan to determine tare weights. Check 
    the zero before every weighing. Record the weights.
        2.6 After nesting the sieves in decreasing order of size, and 
    with pan at the bottom, dump dried laboratory sample (preferably 
    immediately after moisture analysis) into the top sieve. The sample 
    should weigh between  400 and 1600 g ( 0.9 
    and 3.5 lb). This amount will vary for finely textured materials, 
    and 100 to 300 g may be sufficient when 90% of the sample passes a 
    No. 8 (2.36 mm) sieve. Brush any fine material adhering to the sides 
    of the container into the top sieve and cover the top sieve with a 
    special lid normally purchased with the pan.
        2.7 Place nested sieves into the mechanical sieving device and 
    sieve for 10 minutes (min). Remove pan containing minus No. 200 and 
    weigh. Repeat the sieving at 10-min intervals until the difference 
    between 2 successive pan sample weighings (with the pan tare weight 
    subtracted) is less than 3.0%. Do not sieve longer than 40 min.
        2.8 Weigh each sieve and its contents and record the weight. 
    Check the zero before every weighing.
        2.9 Collect the laboratory sample. Place the sample in a 
    separate container if further analysis is expected.
        2.10 Calculate the percent of mass less than the 200 mesh screen 
    (75 micrometers [m]). This is the silt content.
        Figure A. Example silt analysis form.
    
    Silt Analysis
    
    Dated: __________
    By: ________________________
    Sample No: ________ Sample Weight (after drying)
    Material: ________
        Pan + Sample: ____________
        Pan: ____________
        Split Sample Balance: ____________
        Dry Sample: ______________
    Make ____________ Capacity: ____________
    Smallest Division ________
    Final Weight ____________
    % Silt = [Net Weight <200 mesh]=""> [Total Net Weight  x  100] 
    =____%
    
                                     Sieving
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Time: Start:                       Weight (Pan Only)
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Initial (Tare):
    10 min:
    20 min:
    30 min:
    40 min:
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Final weight (screen +
                 Screen               Tare weight (screen)           sample)           Net weight (sample)      %
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3/8\ in.......................
    4 mesh.........................
    10 mesh........................
    20 mesh........................
    40 mesh........................
    100 mesh.......................
    140 mesh.......................
    200 mesh.......................
    Pan............................
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        (v) The silt loading and percent silt content for any given 
    unpaved road surface or unpaved parking lot surface shall be based 
    on the average of at least three (3) samples that are representative 
    of routinely-traveled portions of the road or parking lot surface. 
    In order to simplify the sieve test procedures in section I.B.(ii) 
    and section I.B.(iii) of this appendix, the three samples may be 
    combined as long as all material is sifted to the finest sieve 
    through which it can pass, each sample weighs within 1 ounce of the 
    other two samples, and the combined weight of the samples and unit 
    area from which they were collected is calculated and recorded 
    accurately.
    
    [[Page 71314]]
    
    II. Vacant Lots
    
        The following test methods shall be used for determining whether 
    a vacant lot, or portion thereof, has a stabilized surface.
        Should a disturbed vacant lot contain more than one type of 
    disturbance, soil, vegetation or other characteristics which are 
    visibly distinguishable, test each representative surface for 
    stability separately in random areas according to the test methods 
    in section II. of this appendix and include or eliminate it from the 
    total size assessment of disturbed surface area(s) depending upon 
    test method results. A vacant lot surface shall be considered 
    stabilized if any of the test methods in section II. of this 
    appendix indicate that the surface is stabilized such that the 
    conditions defined in paragraph (b)(16)(ii) of this section are met:
    
    1. Visible Crust Determination
    
        (i) Where a visible crust exists, drop a steel ball with a 
    diameter of 15.9 millimeters (0.625 inches) and a mass ranging from 
    16 to 17 grams from a distance of 30 centimeters (one foot) directly 
    above (at a 90 degree angle perpendicular to) the soil surface. If 
    blowsand is present, clear the blowsand from the surfaces on which 
    the visible crust test method is conducted. Blowsand is defined as 
    thin deposits of loose uncombined grains covering less than 50 
    percent of a vacant lot which have not originated from the 
    representative vacant lot surface being tested. If material covers a 
    visible crust which is not blowsand, apply the test method in 
    section II.2 of this appendix to the loose material to determine 
    whether the surface is stabilized.
        (ii) A sufficient crust is defined under the following 
    conditions: once a ball has been dropped according to section 
    II.1.(i) of this appendix, the ball does not sink into the surface 
    so that it is partially or fully surrounded by loose grains and, 
    upon removing the ball, the surface upon which it fell has not been 
    pulverized so that loose grains are visible.
        (iii) Conduct three tests, dropping the ball once per test, 
    within a survey area the size of one foot by one foot. The survey 
    area shall be considered sufficiently crusted if at least two out of 
    three tests meet the definition in section II.1.(ii) of this 
    appendix. Select at least two other survey areas that represent the 
    disturbed surface area and repeat this procedure. Whether a 
    sufficient crust covers the disturbed surface area shall be based on 
    a determination that all of the survey areas tested are sufficiently 
    crusted.
        (iv) At any given site, the existence of a sufficient crust 
    covering one portion of a disturbed surface may not represent the 
    existence or protectiveness of a crust on another disturbed 
    surface(s). Repeat the visible crust test as often as necessary on 
    each representative disturbed surface area for an accurate 
    assessment of all disturbed surfaces at a given site.
    
    2. Determination of Threshold Friction Velocity (TFV)
    
        For disturbed surface areas that are not crusted or vegetated, 
    determine threshold friction velocity (TFV) according to the 
    following sieving field procedure (based on a 1952 laboratory 
    procedure published by W. S. Chepil).
        (i) Obtain and stack a set of sieves with the following 
    openings: 4 millimeters (mm), 2 mm, 1 mm, 0.5 mm, and 0.25 mm. Place 
    the sieves in order according to size openings beginning with the 
    largest size opening at the top. Place a collector pan underneath 
    the bottom (0.25 mm) sieve. Collect a sample of loose surface 
    material from an area at least 30 cm by 30 cm in size to a depth of 
    approximately 1 cm using a brush and dustpan or other similar 
    device. Only collect soil samples from dry surfaces (i.e. when the 
    surface is not damp to the touch). Remove any rocks larger than 1 cm 
    in diameter from the sample. Pour the sample into the top sieve (4 
    mm opening) and cover the sieve/collector pan unit with a lid. 
    Minimize escape of particles into the air when transferring surface 
    soil into the sieve/collector pan unit. Move the covered sieve/
    collector pan unit by hand using a broad, circular arm motion in the 
    horizontal plane. Complete twenty circular arm movements, ten 
    clockwise and ten counterclockwise, at a speed just necessary to 
    achieve some relative horizontal motion between the sieves and the 
    particles. Remove the lid from the sieve/collector pan unit and 
    disassemble each sieve separately beginning with the largest sieve. 
    As each sieve is removed, examine it for loose particles. If loose 
    particles have not been sifted to the finest sieve through which 
    they can pass, reassemble and cover the sieve/collector pan unit and 
    gently rotate it an additional ten times. After disassembling the 
    sieve/collector pan unit, slightly tilt and gently tap each sieve 
    and the collector pan so that material aligns along one side. In 
    doing so, minimize escape of particles into the air. Line up the 
    sieves and collector pan in a row and visibly inspect the relative 
    quantities of catch in order to determine which sieve (or whether 
    the collector pan) contains the greatest volume of material. If a 
    visual determination of relative volumes of catch among sieves is 
    difficult, use a graduated cylinder to measure the volume. Estimate 
    TFV for the sieve catch with the greatest volume using Table 1, 
    which provides a correlation between sieve opening size and TFV.
    
      Table 1 (Metric Units).--Determination of Threshold Friction Velocity
                                      (TFV)
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Opening   TFV (cm/
                      Tyler Sieve No.                       (mm)       s)
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    5..................................................       4         >100
    10.................................................       2          100
    18.................................................       1           76
    35.................................................       0.5         58
    60.................................................       0.25        43
    Collector Pan......................................  .........        30
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        Collect at least three (3) soil samples which are representative 
    of the disturbed surface area, repeat the above TFV test method for 
    each sample and average the resulting TFVs together to determine the 
    TFV uncorrected for non-erodible elements.
        (ii) Non-erodible elements are distinct elements on the 
    disturbed surface area that are larger than one (1) cm in diameter, 
    remain firmly in place during a wind episode and inhibit soil loss 
    by consuming part of the shear stress of the wind. Non-erodible 
    elements include stones and bulk surface material but do not include 
    flat or standing vegetation. For surfaces with non-erodible 
    elements, determine corrections to the TFV by identifying the 
    fraction of the survey area, as viewed from directly overhead, that 
    is occupied by non-erodible elements using the following procedure. 
    Select a survey area of one (1) meter by 1 meter. Where many non-
    erodible elements lie on the disturbed surface area, separate them 
    into groups according to size. For each group, calculate the 
    overhead area for the non-erodible elements according to the 
    following equations:
    
    (Average length)  x  (Average width) = Average Dimensions    Eq. 1 
    (Average Dimensions)  x  (Number of Elements) = Overhead Area    Eq. 
    2 
    Overhead Area of Group 1 + Overhead Area of Group 2 (etc.) = Total 
    Overhead Area    Eq. 3 
    Total Overhead Area/2 = Total Frontal Area    Eq. 4 
    (Total Frontal Area/Survey Area)  x  100 = Percent Cover of Non-
    erodible Elements    Eq. 5 
    (Ensure consistent units of measurement, e.g. square meters or 
    square inches when calculating percent cover.)
    
        Repeat this procedure on an additional two (2) distinct survey 
    areas representing a disturbed surface and average the results. Use 
    Table 2 to identify the correction factor for the percent cover of 
    non-erodible elements. Multiply the TFV by the corresponding 
    correction factor to calculate the TFV corrected for non-erodible 
    elements.
    
          Table 2.--Correction Factors for Threshold Friction Velocity
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Percent cover of non-erodible elements         Correction factor
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    10%.............................  5
    5% and < 10%....................="" 3="">< 5%="" and=""> 1%....................  2
    < 1%.......................................="" none.="" ------------------------------------------------------------------------="" 3.="" determination="" of="" flat="" vegetation="" cover="" flat="" vegetation="" includes="" attached="" (rooted)="" vegetation="" or="" unattached="" vegetative="" debris="" lying="" on="" the="" surface="" with="" a="" predominant="" horizontal="" orientation="" that="" is="" not="" subject="" to="" movement="" by="" wind.="" flat="" vegetation="" which="" is="" dead="" but="" firmly="" attached="" shall="" be="" considered="" equally="" protective="" as="" live="" vegetation.="" stones="" or="" other="" aggregate="" larger="" than="" one="" centimeter="" in="" diameter="" shall="" be="" considered="" protective="" cover="" in="" the="" course="" of="" conducting="" the="" line="" transect="" method.="" where="" flat="" vegetation="" exists,="" conduct="" the="" following="" line="" transect="" method.="" (i)="" stretch="" a="" one-hundred="" (100)="" foot="" measuring="" tape="" across="" a="" disturbed="" surface="" area.="" firmly="" anchor="" both="" ends="" of="" the="" measuring="" tape="" into="" the="" surface="" using="" a="" tool="" such="" as="" a="" screwdriver="" with="" the="" tape="" stretched="" taut="" and="" close="" to="" the="" soil="" surface.="" if="" vegetation="" exists="" in="" regular="" rows,="" place="" the="" tape="" diagonally="" (at="" approximately="" a="" 45="" degree="" angle)="" away="" from="" a="" parallel="" or="" perpendicular="" position="" to="" the="" vegetated="" rows.="" pinpoint="" an="" area="" the="" size="" of="" a="" \3/32\="" inch="" diameter="" brazing="" [[page="" 71315]]="" rod="" or="" wooden="" dowel="" centered="" above="" each="" one-foot="" interval="" mark="" along="" one="" edge="" of="" the="" tape.="" count="" the="" number="" of="" times="" that="" flat="" vegetation="" lies="" directly="" underneath="" the="" pinpointed="" area="" at="" one-foot="" intervals.="" consistently="" observe="" the="" underlying="" surface="" from="" a="" 90="" degree="" angle="" directly="" above="" each="" pinpoint="" on="" one="" side="" of="" the="" tape.="" do="" not="" count="" the="" underlying="" surface="" as="" vegetated="" if="" any="" portion="" of="" the="" pinpoint="" extends="" beyond="" the="" edge="" of="" the="" vegetation="" underneath="" in="" any="" direction.="" if="" clumps="" of="" vegetation="" or="" vegetative="" debris="" lie="" underneath="" the="" pinpointed="" area,="" count="" the="" surface="" as="" vegetated="" unless="" bare="" soil="" is="" visible="" directly="" below="" the="" pinpointed="" area.="" when="" 100="" observations="" have="" been="" made,="" add="" together="" the="" number="" of="" times="" a="" surface="" was="" counted="" as="" vegetated.="" this="" total="" represents="" the="" percent="" of="" flat="" vegetation="" cover="" (e.g.="" if="" 35="" positive="" counts="" were="" made,="" then="" vegetation="" cover="" is="" 35="" percent).="" if="" the="" disturbed="" surface="" area="" is="" too="" small="" for="" 100="" observations,="" make="" as="" many="" observations="" as="" possible.="" then="" multiply="" the="" count="" of="" vegetated="" surface="" areas="" by="" the="" appropriate="" conversion="" factor="" to="" obtain="" percent="" cover.="" for="" example,="" if="" vegetation="" was="" counted="" 20="" times="" within="" a="" total="" of="" 50="" observations,="" divide="" 20="" by="" 50="" and="" multiply="" by="" 100="" to="" obtain="" a="" flat="" vegetation="" cover="" of="" 40="" percent.="" (ii)="" conduct="" the="" above="" line="" transect="" test="" method="" an="" additional="" two="" (2)="" times="" on="" areas="" representative="" of="" the="" disturbed="" surface="" and="" average="" results.="" 4.="" determination="" of="" standing="" vegetation="" cover="" standing="" vegetation="" includes="" vegetation="" that="" is="" attached="" (rooted)="" with="" a="" predominant="" vertical="" orientation.="" standing="" vegetation="" which="" is="" dead="" but="" firmly="" rooted="" shall="" be="" considered="" equally="" protective="" as="" live="" vegetation.="" conduct="" the="" following="" standing="" vegetation="" test="" method="" to="" determine="" if="" 30="" percent="" cover="" or="" more="" exists.="" if="" the="" resulting="" percent="" cover="" is="" less="" than="" 30="" percent="" but="" equal="" to="" or="" greater="" than="" 10="" percent,="" then="" conduct="" the="" threshold="" friction="" velocity="" test="" in="" section="" ii.2="" of="" this="" appendix="" in="" order="" to="" determine="" whether="" the="" disturbed="" surface="" area="" is="" stabilized="" according="" to="" paragraph="" (b)(16)(ii)(e)="" of="" this="" section.="" (i)="" for="" standing="" vegetation="" that="" consists="" of="" large,="" separate="" vegetative="" structures="" (for="" example,="" shrubs="" and="" sagebrush),="" select="" a="" survey="" area="" representing="" the="" disturbed="" surface="" that="" is="" the="" shape="" of="" a="" square="" with="" sides="" equal="" to="" at="" least="" ten="" (10)="" times="" the="" average="" height="" of="" the="" vegetative="" structures.="" for="" smaller="" standing="" vegetation,="" select="" a="" survey="" area="" of="" three="" (3)="" feet="" by="" 3="" feet.="" (ii)="" count="" the="" number="" of="" standing="" vegetative="" structures="" within="" the="" survey="" area.="" count="" vegetation="" which="" grows="" in="" clumps="" as="" a="" single="" unit.="" where="" different="" types="" of="" vegetation="" exists="" and/or="" vegetation="" of="" different="" height="" and="" width="" exists,="" separate="" the="" vegetative="" structures="" with="" similar="" dimensions="" into="" groups.="" count="" the="" number="" of="" vegetative="" structures="" in="" each="" group="" within="" the="" survey="" area.="" select="" an="" individual="" structure="" within="" each="" group="" that="" represents="" the="" average="" height="" and="" width="" of="" the="" vegetation="" in="" the="" group.="" if="" the="" structure="" is="" dense="" (i.e.="" when="" looking="" at="" it="" vertically="" from="" base="" to="" top="" there="" is="" little="" or="" zero="" open="" air="" space="" within="" its="" perimeter),="" calculate="" and="" record="" its="" frontal="" silhouette="" area="" according="" to="" equation="" 6="" of="" this="" appendix.="" also="" use="" equation="" 6="" if="" the="" survey="" area="" is="" larger="" than="" nine="" square="" feet,="" estimating="" the="" average="" height="" and="" width="" of="" the="" vegetation.="" otherwise,="" use="" the="" procedure="" in="" section="" ii.4.(iii)="" of="" this="" appendix="" to="" calculate="" the="" frontal="" silhouette="" area.="" then="" calculate="" the="" percent="" cover="" of="" standing="" vegetation="" according="" to="" equations="" 7,="" 8="" and="" 9="" of="" this="" appendix.="" (ensure="" consistent="" units="" of="" measurement,="" e.g.="" square="" feet="" or="" square="" inches="" when="" calculating="" percent="" cover.)="" (iii)="" vegetative="" density="" factor.="" cut="" a="" single,="" representative="" piece="" of="" vegetation="" (or="" consolidated="" vegetative="" structure)="" to="" within="" 1="" cm="" of="" surface="" soil.="" using="" a="" white="" paper="" grid="" or="" transparent="" grid="" over="" white="" paper,="" lay="" the="" vegetation="" flat="" on="" top="" of="" the="" grid="" (but="" do="" not="" apply="" pressure="" to="" flatten="" the="" structure).="" grid="" boxes="" of="" one="" inch="" or="" one="" half="" inch="" squares="" are="" sufficient="" for="" most="" vegetation="" when="" conducting="" this="" procedure.="" using="" a="" marker="" or="" pencil,="" outline="" the="" shape="" of="" the="" vegetation="" along="" its="" outer="" perimeter="" according="" to="" figure="" b,="" c="" or="" d="" of="" this="" appendix,="" as="" appropriate.="" (note:="" figure="" c="" differs="" from="" figure="" d="" primarily="" in="" that="" the="" width="" of="" vegetation="" in="" figure="" c="" is="" narrow="" at="" its="" base="" and="" gradually="" broadens="" to="" its="" tallest="" height.="" in="" figure="" d,="" the="" width="" of="" the="" vegetation="" generally="" becomes="" narrower="" from="" its="" midpoint="" to="" its="" tallest="" height.)="" remove="" the="" vegetation="" and="" count="" and="" record="" the="" total="" number="" of="" gridline="" intersections="" within="" the="" outlined="" area,="" but="" do="" not="" count="" gridline="" intersections="" that="" connect="" with="" the="" outlined="" shape.="" there="" must="" be="" at="" least="" 10="" gridline="" intersections="" within="" the="" outlined="" area="" and="" preferably="" more="" than="" 20,="" otherwise,="" use="" smaller="" grid="" boxes.="" draw="" small="" circles="" (no="" greater="" than="" a="" \3/32\="" inch="" diameter)="" at="" each="" gridline="" intersection="" counted="" within="" the="" outlined="" area.="" replace="" the="" vegetation="" on="" the="" grid="" within="" its="" outlined="" shape.="" from="" a="" distance="" of="" approximately="" two="" feet="" directly="" above="" the="" grid,="" observe="" each="" circled="" gridline="" intersection.="" count="" and="" record="" the="" number="" of="" circled="" gridline="" intersections="" that="" are="" not="" covered="" by="" any="" piece="" of="" the="" vegetation.="" to="" calculate="" percent="" vegetative="" density,="" use="" equations="" 10="" and="" 11="" of="" this="" appendix.="" if="" percent="" vegetative="" density="" is="" equal="" to="" or="" greater="" than="" 30,="" use="" the="" equation="" (eq.="" 14,="" 15="" or="" 16)="" that="" matches="" the="" outline="" used="" to="" trace="" the="" vegetation="" (figure="" b,="" c="" or="" d)="" to="" calculate="" its="" frontal="" silhouette="" area.="" if="" percent="" vegetative="" density="" is="" less="" than="" 30,="" use="" equations="" 12="" and="" 13="" of="" this="" appendix="" to="" calculate="" the="" frontal="" silhouette="" area.="" (iv)="" within="" a="" disturbed="" surface="" area="" that="" contains="" multiple="" types="" of="" vegetation="" with="" each="" vegetation="" type="" uniformly="" distributed,="" results="" of="" the="" percent="" cover="" associated="" with="" the="" individual="" vegetation="" types="" may="" be="" added="" together.="" (v)="" repeat="" this="" procedure="" on="" an="" additional="" two="" (2)="" distinct="" survey="" areas="" representing="" the="" disturbed="" surface="" and="" average="" the="" results.="" height="" x="" width="Frontal" silhouette="" area="" eq.="" 6="" (frontal="" silhouette="" area="" of="" individual="" vegetative="" structure)="" x="" number="" of="" vegetation="" structures="" per="" group="Group" frontal="" silhouette="" area="" of="" group="" eq.="" 7="" frontal="" silhouette="" area="" of="" group="" 1="" +="" frontal="" silhouette="" area="" of="" group="" 2="" (etc.)="Total" frontal="" silhouette="" area="" eq.="" 8="" (total="" frontal="" silhouette="" area/survey="" area)="" x="" 100="Percent" cover="" of="" standing="" vegetation="" eq.="" 9="" [(number="" of="" circled="" gridlines="" within="" the="" outlined="" area="" counted="" that="" are="" not="" covered="" by="" vegetation="" total="" number="" of="" gridline="" intersections="" within="" the="" outlined="" area)="" x="" 100]="Percent" open="" space="" eq.="" 10="" 100="Percent" open="" space="Percent" vegetative="" density="" eq.="" 11="" percent="" vegetative="" density/100="Vegetative" density="" eq.="" 12="" billing="" code="" 6560-50-p="" [graphic]="" [tiff="" omitted]="" tr21de99.000="" [[page="" 71316]]="" [graphic]="" [tiff="" omitted]="" tr21de99.001="" [[page="" 71317]]="" billing="" code="" 6560-50-c="" iii.="" alternative="" test="" methods="" alternative="" test="" methods="" may="" be="" used="" upon="" obtaining="" the="" written="" approval="" of="" the="" epa.="" [fr="" doc.="" 99-32760="" filed="" 12-20-99;="" 8:45="" am]="" billing="" code="" 6560-50-p="">

Document Information

Effective Date:
1/20/2000
Published:
12/21/1999
Department:
Environmental Protection Agency
Entry Type:
Rule
Action:
Final rule.
Document Number:
99-32760
Dates:
This action is effective on January 20, 2000.
Pages:
71304-71317 (14 pages)
Docket Numbers:
AZ 012-FIP, FRL-6511-3
RINs:
2060-AI54: Revisions to Promulgation of Federal Implementation Plan for Arizona - Maricopa Nonattainment Area PM-10 Test Methods
RIN Links:
https://www.federalregister.gov/regulations/2060-AI54/revisions-to-promulgation-of-federal-implementation-plan-for-arizona-maricopa-nonattainment-area-pm-
PDF File:
99-32760.pdf
CFR: (1)
40 CFR 52.128