Section NR 460.07 - Monitoring requirements(1) APPLICABILITY. (a)1. Unless otherwise specified in a relevant standard, this section applies to the owner or operator of an affected source required to do monitoring under that standard.2. Relevant standards established under 40 CFR part 63 or chs. NR 460 to 469 will specify monitoring systems, methods or procedures, monitoring frequency and other pertinent requirements for sources regulated by those standards. This section specifies general monitoring requirements such as those governing the conduct of monitoring and requests to use alternative monitoring methods. In addition, this section specifies detailed requirements that apply to affected sources required to use CMS under a relevant standard.(b) For the purposes of 40 CFR part 63 and in chs. NR 460 to 469, all continuous monitoring systems required under relevant standards shall be subject to the provisions of this section upon federal promulgation of performance specifications for continuous monitoring systems as specified in the relevant standard or otherwise by the department.(c) Additional monitoring requirements for control devices used to comply with provisions in relevant standards of 40 CFR part 63 are specified in s. NR 460.10.(2) CONDUCT OF MONITORING. (a) Except as provided in par. (am), monitoring shall be conducted as set forth in this section and the relevant standards unless the department or the administrator does any of the following: 1. Specifies or approves the use of minor changes in methodology for the specified monitoring requirements and procedures.2. Approves the use of an intermediate or major change or alternative to any monitoring requirements or procedures. (am) Owners or operators with flares subject to s. NR 460.10(2) are not subject to the requirements of this section unless otherwise specified in the relevant standard.(b)1. When the emissions from 2 or more affected sources, are combined before being released to the atmosphere, the owner or operator may install an applicable continuous monitoring system for each emission stream or for the combined emissions streams, provided the monitoring is sufficient to demonstrate compliance with the relevant standard.2. If the relevant standard is a mass emission standard and the emissions from one affected source are released to the atmosphere through more than one point, the owner or operator shall install an applicable continuous monitoring system at each emission point unless the installation of fewer systems is any of the following: a. Approved by the department.b. Provided for in a relevant standard. Note: For example, instead of requiring that a CMS be installed at each emission point before the emissions from those points are channeled to a common control device, the standard specifies that only one CMS is required to be installed at the vent of the control device.
(c) When more than one continuous monitoring system is used to measure the emissions from one affected source, the owner or operator shall report the results as required for each continuous monitoring system. However, when one continuous monitoring system is used as a backup to another continuous monitoring system, the owner or operator shall report the results from the continuous monitoring system used to meet the monitoring requirements of 40 CFR part 63. If both continuous monitoring systems are used during a particular reporting period to meet the monitoring requirements of 40 CFR part 63, then the owner or operator shall report the results from each continuous monitoring system for the relevant compliance period.(3) OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF CONTINUOUS MONITORING SYSTEMS. (a) The owner or operator of an affected source shall maintain and operate each CMS as specified in this section, or in a relevant standard, and in a manner consistent with good air pollution control practices.1. The owner or operator of an affected source shall maintain and operate each CMS as specified in s. NR 460.05(4) (a).2. The owner or operator shall keep the necessary parts for routine repairs of the affected CMS equipment readily available.3. The owner or operator of an affected source shall develop a written startup, shutdown and malfunction plan for CMS as specified in s. NR 460.05(4) (c).(b)1. All CMS shall be installed such that representative measurements of emissions or process parameters from the affected source are obtained. In addition, CEMS shall be located according to procedures contained in the applicable performance specifications.2. Unless the individual standard states otherwise, the owner or operator shall ensure the read out, which is the portion of the CMS that provides a visual display or record, or other indication of operation, from any CMS required for compliance with the emission standard is readily accessible on site for operational control or inspection by the operator of the equipment.(c) All CMS shall be installed, operational and the data verified as specified in the relevant standard either prior to or in conjunction with the conduct of performance tests under s. NR 460.06. Verification of operational status shall, at a minimum, include completion of the manufacturer's written specifications or recommendations for installation, operation and calibration of the system.(d) Except for system breakdowns, out-of-control periods, repairs, maintenance periods, calibration checks, and zero (low-level) and high-level calibration drift adjustments, all CMS, including COMS and CEMS, shall be in continuous operation and shall meet minimum frequency of operation requirements as follows: 1. All COMS shall complete a minimum of one cycle of sampling and analyzing for each successive 10-second period and one cycle of data recording for each successive 6-minute period.2. All CEMS for measuring emissions other than opacity shall complete a minimum of one cycle of operation, which includes sampling, analyzing and data recording, for each successive 15-minute period.(e) Unless otherwise approved by the department, minimum procedures for COMS shall include a method for producing a simulated zero opacity condition and an upscale (high-level) opacity condition using a certified neutral density filter or other related technique to produce a known obscuration of the light beam. Procedures shall provide a system check of all the analyzer's internal optical surfaces and all electronic circuitry, including the lamp and photodetector assembly normally used in the measurement of opacity.(f) The owner or operator of a CMS that is not a CPMS, which is installed in accordance with the provisions of 40 CFR part 63 and the applicable CMS performance specifications, shall check the zero (low-level) and high-level calibration drifts at least once daily in accordance with the written procedure specified in the performance evaluation plan developed under sub. (5) (c) 1. and 2. The zero (low-level) and high-level calibration drifts shall be adjusted, at a minimum, whenever the 24-hour zero (low-level) drift exceeds 2 times the limits of the applicable performance specifications in the relevant standard. The system shall allow the amount of excess zero (low-level) and high-level drift measured at the 24-hour interval checks to be recorded and quantified, whenever specified. For COMS, all optical and instrumental surfaces exposed to the effluent gases shall be cleaned prior to performing the zero (low-level) and high-level drift adjustments; the optical surfaces and instrumental surfaces shall be cleaned when the cumulative automatic zero compensation, if applicable, exceeds 4% opacity. The CPMS shall be calibrated prior to use for the purposes of complying with this section. The CPMS shall be checked daily for indication that the system is responding. If the CPMS system includes an internal system check, results shall be recorded and checked daily for proper operation.(g)1. A CMS is out of control if any of the following occurs: a. The zero (low-level), mid-level, if applicable, or high-level calibration drift exceeds 2 times the applicable calibration drift specification in the applicable performance specification or in the relevant standard.b. The CMS fails a performance test audit, including a cylinder gas audit, relative accuracy audit, relative accuracy test audit or linearity test audit.c. The COMS calibration drift exceeds 2 times the limit in the applicable performance specification in the relevant standard.2. When the CMS is out of control, the owner or operator of the affected source shall take the necessary corrective action and shall repeat all necessary tests which indicate that the system is out of control. The owner or operator shall take corrective action and conduct retesting until the performance requirements are below the applicable limits. The beginning of the out-of-control period is the hour the owner or operator conducts a performance check, such as calibration drift, that indicates an exceedance of the performance requirements established under 40 CFR part 63. The end of the out-of-control period is the hour following the completion of corrective action and successful demonstration that the system is within the allowable limits. During the period the CMS is out of control, recorded data may not be used in data averages and calculations or to meet any data availability requirement established under 40 CFR part 63 and in chs. NR 460 to 469.(h) The owner or operator of a CMS that is out of control as defined in par. (g) shall submit all information concerning out-of-control periods, including start and end dates and hours and descriptions of corrective actions taken, in the excess emissions and continuous monitoring system performance report required in s. NR 460.09(5) (c).(4) QUALITY CONTROL PROGRAM. (a) The results of the quality control program required in this subsection shall be considered by the department when it determines the validity of monitoring data.(b) The owner or operator of an affected source that is required to use a CMS and is subject to the monitoring requirements of this section and a relevant standard shall develop and implement a CMS quality control program. As part of the quality control program, the owner or operator shall develop and submit to the department for approval upon request a site-specific performance evaluation test plan for the CMS performance evaluation required in sub. (5) (c) 1., according to the procedures specified in sub. (5). In addition, each quality control program shall include, at a minimum, a written protocol that describes procedures for each of the following operations: 1. Initial and any subsequent calibration of the CMS.2. Determination and adjustment of the calibration drift of the CMS.3. Preventive maintenance of the CMS, including spare parts inventory.4. Data recording, calculations, and reporting.5. Accuracy audit procedures, including sampling and analysis methods.6. Program of corrective action for a malfunctioning CMS.(c) The owner or operator shall keep the written procedures required by par. (b) on record for the life of the affected source or until the affected source is no longer subject to the provisions of 40 CFR part 63 or chs. NR 460 to 469, to be made available for inspection, upon request, by the department. If the performance evaluation plan is revised, the owner or operator shall keep previous versions of the performance evaluation plan on record to be made available for inspection, upon request, by the department, for a period of 5 years after each revision to the plan. Where relevant, these written procedures may be incorporated as part of the affected source's startup, shutdown and malfunction plan to avoid duplication of planning and recordkeeping efforts.(5) PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF CONTINUOUS MONITORING SYSTEMS. (a) General. When required by a relevant standard, and at any other time as may be required under section 114 of the act (42 USC 7414), the owner or operator of an affected source being monitored shall conduct a performance evaluation of the CMS. The performance evaluation shall be conducted according to the applicable specifications and procedures described in this section or in the relevant standard.(b) Notification of performance evaluation. The owner or operator shall notify the department in writing of the date of the performance evaluation simultaneously with the notification of the performance test date required under s. NR 460.06(2) or at least 30 days prior to the date the performance evaluation is scheduled to begin if no performance test is required.(c) Submission of site-specific performance evaluation test plan. 1. Before conducting a required CMS performance evaluation, the owner or operator of an affected source shall develop and submit a site-specific performance evaluation test plan to the department for approval upon request. The performance evaluation test plan shall include the evaluation program objectives, an evaluation program summary, the performance evaluation schedule, data quality objectives, and both an internal and external quality assurance program. Data quality objectives are the pre-evaluation expectations of precision, accuracy, and completeness of data.2. The internal quality assurance program shall include, at a minimum, the activities planned by routine operators and analysts to provide an assessment of CMS performance. The external quality assurance program shall include, at a minimum, systems audits that include the opportunity for on-site evaluation by the department of instrument calibration, data validation, sample logging and documentation of quality control data and field maintenance activities.3. The owner or operator of an affected source shall submit the site-specific performance evaluation test plan to the department at least 30 days before the performance test or performance evaluation is scheduled to begin, or on a mutually agreed upon date, and review and approval of the performance evaluation test plan by the department shall occur with the review and approval of the site-specific test plan under s. NR 460.06(2).4. The department may request additional relevant information after the submittal of a site-specific performance evaluation test plan.5. In the event that the department fails to approve or disapprove the site-specific performance evaluation test plan within the time period specified under s. NR 460.06(2), the following conditions shall apply:a. If the owner or operator intends to demonstrate compliance using the monitoring methods specified in the relevant standard, the owner or operator shall conduct the performance evaluation within the time specified in this chapter using the specified methods.b. If the owner or operator intends to demonstrate compliance by using an alternative to a monitoring method specified in the relevant standard, the owner or operator shall refrain from conducting the performance evaluation until the department approves the use of the alternative method. If the department does not approve the use of the alternative method within 5 days before the performance evaluation is scheduled to begin, the performance evaluation deadlines specified in par. (d) may be extended such that the owner or operator shall conduct the performance evaluation within 60 calendar days after the department approves the use of the alternative method.c. Notwithstanding the requirements in subd. 5. b., the owner or operator may proceed to conduct the performance evaluation as required in this section, without the department's prior approval of the site-specific performance evaluation test plan, if the specified monitoring methods is subsequently chosen instead of an alternative.6. Neither the submission of a site-specific performance evaluation test plan for approval, nor the department's approval or disapproval of a plan, nor the department's failure to approve or disapprove a plan in a timely manner shall cause any of the following: a. Relieve an owner or operator of legal responsibility for compliance with any applicable provisions of 40 CFR part 63, chs. NR 460 to 469 or with any other applicable federal, state or local requirement.b. Prevent the department from implementing or enforcing 40 CFR part 63, chs. NR 460 to 469 or taking any other action under the act.(d) Conduct of performance evaluation and performance evaluation dates. The owner or operator of an affected source shall conduct a performance evaluation of a required CMS during any performance test required under s. NR 460.06 in accordance with the applicable performance specification as specified in the relevant standard. If the owner or operator of an affected source elects to submit COMS data for compliance with a relevant opacity emission standard as provided under s. NR 460.05(6) (f), a performance evaluation shall be conducted of the COMS as specified in the relevant standard, before the performance test required under s. NR 460.06 is conducted, in time to submit the results of the performance evaluation as specified in par. (e) 2. If a performance test is not required, or the requirement for a performance test has been waived under s. NR 460.06(7), the owner or operator of an affected source shall conduct the performance evaluation not later than 180 days after the appropriate compliance date for the affected source, as specified in s. NR 460.06(1), or as otherwise specified in the relevant standard.(e) Reporting performance evaluation results. 1. The owner or operator shall furnish the department a copy of a written report of the results of the performance evaluation simultaneously with the results of the performance test required under s. NR 460.06, or within 60 days of completion of the performance evaluation if no test is required, unless otherwise specified in a relevant standard. The department may request that the owner or operator submit the raw data from a performance evaluation in the report of the performance evaluation results.2. The owner or operator of an affected source using a COMS to determine opacity compliance during any performance test required under s. NR 460.06 shall furnish the department 2 or, upon request, 3 copies of a written report of the results of the COMS performance evaluation under this subsection. The copies shall be provided at least 15 calendar days before the performance test required under s. NR 460.06 is conducted.(6) USE OF AN ALTERNATIVE MONITORING METHOD. (a) Alternatives. After receipt and consideration of written application, the department may approve minor and intermediate alternative monitoring methods or procedures of 40 CFR part 63 or chs. NR 460 to 469 including, but not limited to, any of the following: Note: Under 40 CFR 63.91(g) only EPA can approve major alternatives to monitoring methods.
1. Alternative monitoring requirements when installation of a CMS specified by a relevant standard would not provide accurate measurements due to liquid water or other interferences caused by substances within the effluent gases.2. Alternative monitoring requirements when the affected source is infrequently operated.3. Alternative monitoring requirements to accommodate CEMS that require additional measurements to correct for stack moisture conditions.4. Alternative locations for installing CMS when the owner or operator can demonstrate that installation at alternate locations will enable accurate and representative measurements.5. Alternate methods for converting pollutant concentration measurements to units of the relevant standard.6. Alternate procedures for performing daily checks of zero (low-level) and high-level drift that do not involve use of high-level gases or test cells.7. Alternatives to the american society for testing and materials test methods or sampling procedures specified by any relevant standard.8. Alternative CMS that do not meet the design or performance requirements in 40 CFR part 63 or chs. NR 460 to 469, but adequately demonstrate a definite and consistent relationship between their measurements and the measurements of opacity by a system complying with the requirements as specified in the relevant standard. The department may require that the demonstration be performed for each affected source.9. Alternative monitoring requirements when the effluent from a single affected source or the combined effluent from 2 or more affected sources is released to the atmosphere through more than one point.(b) Disputed results. If the department finds reasonable grounds to dispute the results obtained by an alternative monitoring method, requirement or procedure, the department may require the use of a method, requirement or procedure specified in this section or in the relevant standard. If the results of the specified and alternative method, requirement or procedure do not agree, the results obtained by the specified method, requirement or procedure shall prevail.(c) Request to use alternative monitoring procedure.1. An owner or operator who wishes to use an alternative monitoring procedure shall submit an application to the department as described in subd. 2. The application may be submitted at any time provided that the monitoring procedure is not the performance test method used to demonstrate compliance with a relevant standard or other requirement. If the alternative monitoring procedure will serve as the performance test method that is to be used to demonstrate compliance with a relevant standard, the application shall be submitted at least 60 days before the performance evaluation is scheduled to begin and shall meet the requirements for an alternative test method under s. NR 460.06(5).2. The application shall contain a description of the proposed alternative monitoring system which addresses the 4 elements contained in the definition of monitoring in s. NR 460.02(24w) and a performance evaluation test plan, if required, as specified in sub. (5) (c). In addition, the application shall include information justifying the owner or operator's request for an alternative monitoring procedure, such as the technical or economic infeasibility, or the impracticality, of the affected source using the required method.3. The owner or operator may submit the information required in this subsection well in advance of the submittal dates specified in subd. 1. to ensure a timely review by the department in order to meet the compliance demonstration date specified in this section or the relevant standard. 4. Application for minor changes to monitoring procedures, as specified in sub. (2) (a), may be made in the site-specific performance evaluation plan.(d) Approval of request to use alternative monitoring procedure.1. The department shall notify the owner or operator of approval or intention to deny approval of the request to use an alternative monitoring procedure within 30 calendar days after receipt of the original request and within 30 calendar days after receipt of any supplementary information that is submitted. If a request for a minor change is made in conjunction with the site-specific performance evaluation plan, approval of the plan shall constitute approval of the minor change. Before disapproving any request to use an alternative monitoring method, the department shall notify the applicant of the department's intention to disapprove the request together with all of the following: a. Notice of the information and findings on which the intended disapproval is based.b. Notice of opportunity for the owner or operator to present additional information to the department before final action on the request. At the time the department notifies the applicant of its intention to disapprove the request, the department shall specify how much time the owner or operator will have after being notified of the intended disapproval to submit the additional information.2. The department may establish general procedures and criteria in a relevant standard to accomplish the requirements of subd. 1.3. If the department approves the use of an alternative monitoring method for an affected source under subd. 1., the owner or operator of the source shall continue to use the alternative monitoring method until he or she receives approval from the department to use another monitoring method as allowed under this subsection.(e) Alternative to the relative accuracy test. An alternative to the relative accuracy test for CEMS specified in a relevant standard may be requested as follows:1. An alternative to the test method for determining relative accuracy is available for affected sources with emission rates demonstrated to be less than 50% of the relevant standard. The owner or operator of an affected source may petition the department under subd. 2. to substitute the relative accuracy test in section 7 of Performance Specification 2 in Appendix B of 40 CFR part 60, incorporated by reference in s. NR 484.04(21), with the procedures in section 10 if the results of a performance test conducted according to the requirements in s. NR 460.06, or other tests performed following the criteria in s. NR 460.06, demonstrate that the emission rate of the pollutant of interest in the units of the relevant standard is less than 50% of the relevant standard. For affected sources subject to emission limitations expressed as control efficiency levels, the owner or operator may petition the department to substitute the relative accuracy test with the procedures in section 10 of Performance Specification 2 if the control device exhaust emission rate is less than 50% of the level needed to meet the control efficiency requirement. The alternative procedures do not apply if the CEMS is used continuously to determine compliance with the relevant standard.2. The petition to use an alternative to the relative accuracy test shall include a detailed description of the procedures to be applied, the location and the procedure for conducting the alternative, the concentration or response levels of the alternative relative accuracy materials, and the other equipment checks included in the alternative procedures. The department shall review the petition for completeness and applicability. The department's determination to approve an alternative shall depend on the intended use of the CEMS data and may require specifications more stringent than in Performance Specification 2.3. The department shall review the permission to use an alternative to the CEMS relative accuracy test and may rescind the permission if the CEMS data from a successful completion of the alternative relative accuracy procedure indicate that the affected source's emissions are approaching the level of the relevant standard. The criterion for reviewing the permission is that the collection of CEMS data shows that emissions have exceeded 70% of the relevant standard for any averaging period, as specified in the relevant standard. For affected sources subject to emission limitations expressed as control efficiency levels, the criterion for reviewing the permission is that the collection of CEMS data shows that exhaust emissions have exceeded 70% of the level needed to meet the control efficiency requirement for any averaging period, as specified in the relevant standard. The owner or operator of the affected source shall maintain records and determine the level of emissions relative to the criterion for permission to use an alternative for relative accuracy testing. If this criterion is exceeded, the owner or operator shall notify the department within 10 days of the occurrence and include a description of the nature and cause of the increased emissions. The department shall review the notification and may rescind permission to use an alternative and require the owner or operator to conduct a relative accuracy test of the CEMS as specified in section 7 of Performance Specification 2 in Appendix B of 40 CFR part 60, incorporated by reference in s. NR 484.04(21).(7) REDUCTION OF MONITORING DATA. (a) The owner or operator of each CMS shall reduce the monitoring data as specified in this subsection.(b) The owner or operator of each COMS shall reduce all data to 6-minute averages calculated from 36 or more data points equally spaced over each 6-minute period. Data from CEMS for measurement other than opacity, unless otherwise specified in the relevant standard, shall be reduced to 1-hour averages computed from 4 or more data points equally spaced over each 1-hour period, except during periods when calibration, quality assurance or maintenance activities pursuant to provisions of 40 CFR part 63 or chs. NR 460 to 469 are being performed. During these periods, a valid hourly average shall consist of at least 2 data points with each representing a 15-minute period. Alternatively, an arithmetic or integrated 1-hour average of CEMS data may be used. Time periods for averaging are defined in s. NR 460.02.(c) The data may be recorded in reduced or nonreduced form.(d) All emission data shall be converted into units of the relevant standard for reporting purposes using the conversion procedures specified in that standard. After conversion into units of the relevant standard, the data may be rounded to the same number of significant digits as used in that standard to specify the emission limit.(e) Monitoring data recorded during periods of unavoidable CMS breakdowns, out-of-control periods, repairs, maintenance periods, calibration checks and zero (low-level) and high-level adjustments may not be included in any data average computed under 40 CFR part 63 or under chs. NR 460 to 469. For owners or operators complying with the requirements of s. NR 460.09(2) (b) 7., data averages shall include any data recorded during periods of monitor breakdown or malfunction.Wis. Admin. Code Department of Natural Resources NR 460.07
Cr. Register, March, 1997, No. 495, eff. 4-1-97; CR 00-175: am. (6) (a) (intro.), (c) 1., and (7) (e) Register March 2002 No. 555, eff. 4-1-02; corrections in (6) (e) 1. and 3. made under s. 13.93(2m) (b) 7, Stats., Register March 2002 No. 555; CR 05-039: am. (2) (a) (intro.), 2., (b) 1., 2. (intro.), (3) (a) 1., (f), (6) (c) 1., 2., (d) 1. (intro.), and (7) (a), r. and recr. (3) (a) 2. and 3., renum. (3) (b) to be (3) (b) 1., cr. (3) (b) 2. and (6) (c) 4., Register February 2006 No. 602, eff. 3-1-06; CR 07-105: am. (3) (a) 3. Register December 2008 No. 636, eff. 1-1-09.