 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |
1. The Time Frame for Conducting Stack Tests
2. Stack Test Waivers
3. Stack Test Notifications
4. Observation of Stack Tests
5. Representative Testing Conditions
6. Stoppages
7. Postponements
8. Test Reports
2. Stack Test Waivers
3. Stack Test Notifications
4. Observation of Stack Tests
5. Representative Testing Conditions
6. Stoppages
7. Postponements
8. Test Reports
6. STOPPAGES
• The primary issue is whether it is appropriate to stop a stack test being conducted to determine
and demonstrate compliance once it has been started, and if so, under what circumstances.
• There are no regulatory provisions in the NSPS, NESHAP, or MACT programs that address
whether a facility is allowed to stop a stack test once it has been started.6 Depending on the
circumstances surrounding the stoppage, the facility may be found in violation of the
requirement to conduct a stack test, the underlying regulatory requirement, or both. For
example:
-If a facility stopped the stack test because it was exceeding applicable emission
standards and would have failed the test, it would be considered in violation of both the
requirement to conduct a stack test (if it does not complete a performance test by the
applicable deadline) and to comply with the underlying regulatory requirement or permit
condition. Consistent with 40 CFR §§ 60.11 and 61.12, any credible evidence may be
used to demonstrate non-compliance. For major sources, the test should be reported in
the Title V quarterly or semi-annual deviation reports, and taken into consideration as
part of the annual compliance certifications. In addition, the stoppage should be reported
as a failure in the national air data system, and an enforcement action should be initiated
and penalties assessed consistent with the HPV Policy and CAA Civil Penalty Policy.
-If a facility is forced to stop a test due to a Force Majeure Event, the facility shall
provide written notification to the Administrator in accordance with the applicable to stack tests required by 40 CFR
Parts 60, 61, and 63.
6 However, under 40 CFR § 63.7(e), the results of a test run may, upon approval from the
Administrator, be replaced with the results of an additional test run in the event that a test run is
discontinued because of forced shutdown or other circumstances discussed in the regulation.
Under 40 CFR § 60.8(f), if a sample is accidentally lost or conditions occur in which one of the
three runs must be discontinued for certain types of circumstances beyond the owner or
operator’s control, the results of two runs may be used with the Administrator’s approval.
Page 18
regulations. The performance test shall be conducted as soon as practicable after the
force majeure occurs. Whether to grant an extension to the performance test deadline is
solely within the discretion of the Administrator. Until an extension has been approved
by the Administrator, the facility remains strictly subject to the performance test
requirements of the applicable regulations. 40 CFR §§ 60.8(a)(1-4), 61.13(a)(3-6),
63.7(a)(4).
7. POSTPONEMENTS
• The primary issue is whether it is appropriate to postpone a stack test to determine and
demonstrate compliance once it has been scheduled, and if so, under what circumstances. See
also the discussion of delays in conducting the performance test in the Section, "Stack
Test Notifications."
• Postponements should be treated similar to stoppages. If a postponement results in the facility
failing to complete the test within the required time frame, the facility is in violation of the
requirement to test.
• Regardless of whether the postponement affects a facility’s ability to test in a timely manner,
the delegated agency should carefully scrutinize the circumstances surrounding the
postponement to determine whether the facility was in violation of the underlying emission
limitations, and therefore, postponed the test to avoid a documented violation. Consistent with
40 CFR §§ 60.11 and 61.12, any credible evidence may be used to demonstrate non-compliance
or compliance.
• The primary issue is whether it is appropriate to stop a stack test being conducted to determine
and demonstrate compliance once it has been started, and if so, under what circumstances.
• There are no regulatory provisions in the NSPS, NESHAP, or MACT programs that address
whether a facility is allowed to stop a stack test once it has been started.6 Depending on the
circumstances surrounding the stoppage, the facility may be found in violation of the
requirement to conduct a stack test, the underlying regulatory requirement, or both. For
example:
-If a facility stopped the stack test because it was exceeding applicable emission
standards and would have failed the test, it would be considered in violation of both the
requirement to conduct a stack test (if it does not complete a performance test by the
applicable deadline) and to comply with the underlying regulatory requirement or permit
condition. Consistent with 40 CFR §§ 60.11 and 61.12, any credible evidence may be
used to demonstrate non-compliance. For major sources, the test should be reported in
the Title V quarterly or semi-annual deviation reports, and taken into consideration as
part of the annual compliance certifications. In addition, the stoppage should be reported
as a failure in the national air data system, and an enforcement action should be initiated
and penalties assessed consistent with the HPV Policy and CAA Civil Penalty Policy.
-If a facility is forced to stop a test due to a Force Majeure Event, the facility shall
provide written notification to the Administrator in accordance with the applicable to stack tests required by 40 CFR
Parts 60, 61, and 63.
6 However, under 40 CFR § 63.7(e), the results of a test run may, upon approval from the
Administrator, be replaced with the results of an additional test run in the event that a test run is
discontinued because of forced shutdown or other circumstances discussed in the regulation.
Under 40 CFR § 60.8(f), if a sample is accidentally lost or conditions occur in which one of the
three runs must be discontinued for certain types of circumstances beyond the owner or
operator’s control, the results of two runs may be used with the Administrator’s approval.
Page 18
regulations. The performance test shall be conducted as soon as practicable after the
force majeure occurs. Whether to grant an extension to the performance test deadline is
solely within the discretion of the Administrator. Until an extension has been approved
by the Administrator, the facility remains strictly subject to the performance test
requirements of the applicable regulations. 40 CFR §§ 60.8(a)(1-4), 61.13(a)(3-6),
63.7(a)(4).
7. POSTPONEMENTS
• The primary issue is whether it is appropriate to postpone a stack test to determine and
demonstrate compliance once it has been scheduled, and if so, under what circumstances. See
also the discussion of delays in conducting the performance test in the Section, "Stack
Test Notifications."
• Postponements should be treated similar to stoppages. If a postponement results in the facility
failing to complete the test within the required time frame, the facility is in violation of the
requirement to test.
• Regardless of whether the postponement affects a facility’s ability to test in a timely manner,
the delegated agency should carefully scrutinize the circumstances surrounding the
postponement to determine whether the facility was in violation of the underlying emission
limitations, and therefore, postponed the test to avoid a documented violation. Consistent with
40 CFR §§ 60.11 and 61.12, any credible evidence may be used to demonstrate non-compliance
or compliance.
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
