P. 1



# OAR Box 1787 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 79 ) ll-C-3 7
Docket Number: 

# A-90-3 7

Printed 11/4/200810:22:19 AM

Sheet 79 of 147r

tot*
. P. 2

i £ * \ UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTION AGENC

Y P ^ ^ 1Sffi z ? o ,c e °1 £ l

. Qualit yPlan TM g an d Standard s - W S - r. n y***~f Researc h Triangl e Park, Nort h Carolin a 2771 1 -U ' L-3 I MA Y - 8 I99

0 %-^t f



### Mr . Ar tFraa s Informatio n an d Regulator y Affair s Offic e o f

Managemen

tan d Budge t Ne w Executiv e Offic e Buildin g Roo m 301 9 Washington , D.C . 2050 3 Dea r Mr . Fraas : Enclosed for you

r informatio

ni s a clarificatio n o f the Environmenta l Protectio nAgency' s (EPA's ) fina l approva l o f th e Kentuck y rule s fo

r the preventio

no f significan t deterioratio n (PSD) . Thi s actio

nclarifie s EPA' s inten t i n a n actio n taken in Septembe r 1989 . Specifically , i t explain s tha t EP A guidanc e document s an

d interpretation s do no t hav e bindin

g regulator

y effect s o

nStates . I t doe s no t involv e an y o f the issue s o r concern s addresse

d b y Mr . MacRae' s March5 , 199 0 letter regardin g the top-dow

n policy . I hav

e forwarde

d thi s packag e t o senio r EP A managemen t for signature an d publication . Nevertheless , given you r staff' s interes t i n action s relatin

g t o PSD , I a

m forwardin

g i t t o you for information . A s I a m sur e you wil l agree , thi s actio naddresse s a number o f concern s raise d b y Kentuck

y an d other s regardin

g th e rol e o f polic

y an d guidanc e an

d mor e accuratel y

describe s EPA' s lega l relationshi p wit ha Stat e upo n approva l o f a Stat e PS D rule . I f you hav

e an y question s o r concern s regardin g thi s package , pleas e cal l m e or Mik e Shapiro . However , EP A ha s been litigated o

nthi s rulemakin

g action . I norde r t o mee t ou r commitment s t o the court , I a m seekin g t o hav

e the packag e signe d b y Ma y 11 , 1990 . Sincerely ,

^Joh n Calcagn ^ Director / Ai r Quality(Managemen t Division Enclosur e
cc : M . ShapiroP. 3 04/24/9 0 16:0 3 U.S

. - E.P.ft

. AI R DIU

. 00 2

\-S52 /

UNITE O STATE S ENVIRONMENTA U PROTECTIO N AGENC Y **«'-w ^ REGIO N I V

» « „ .« —J4SCOUHTLAN O STRIC T AP R 1 6 189

0 ATLANTA , OKO*OI A IOI« | ACTIO N MEMORANDU

M SUBJECT : Preventio no f Significan t Deterioration an d Visibilit y New Sourc e Revie

w i nAttainmen t Area s for Kentuck y FROM : Gree r C . Tidwel l ^_. - ._i\ . ~ ? Regiona l Administrato r TO : Willia

m K . Reill y Administrato r
THRU : SI P Coordinatio nOffice , Offic e o f Ai r Qualit y Planning an d Standard s (MD-15 ) IDENTIFICATIO

N O F ACTION Th e attache d notic e clarifie s certai ninterpretiv e statement s containe d i nth e Federa l Registe r notic e approvin g revision s t o the Kentuck

y SI P fo r PS D an

d Visibility . The actionbeing take n i s a Notic e o f Clarificationfo r th e interpretiv e statement s an

d doe s no t have an effec t o n th e approve d PS D an

d Visibilit y regulations . SUMMAR YO F ACTION OnFebruary

20 , 1986 , the Commonwealt ho f Kentuck y submitte d regulation s fo r Preventio n o f Significan t Deteriorationan d Visibilit y

fo r approva l a s implementationplan revisions . EPA publishe d the fina l approva l o n Septembe r 1 , 198 9 (5 4 FR36307) . Th e Septembe r 1 , 1989 , notic e describe d EPA' s view o f the relationshi p betwee nBP A an d the state s unde r th e Clean Ai r Act , an d o f th e lega l effec t o f BPA' s approva l o f SI P measure s implementing variou s program s unde r the Act . O nNovembe r 17 , 1989 , Mr . Willia m C . Eddins , Director , Divisio no f Ai r Quality , Natura l Resource s an d Environmenta l Protectio nCommissio n (NREPC) , submitte d a lette r regarding th e preambl e languag e i nth e Septembe r 1 , 198 9 notice . NREP C state d tha t anagreemen t b y th e stat e t o compl y wit hfutur e guideline s an d policie s adopte d b y BPA woul d b e a delegation o f legislative powe r prohibite d b y th e stat e constitution , an d sough t t o clarif y certai npoint s regarding the Septembe r 1 , 1989 , notice . I n addition , NREP C state d tha t EPA shoul d refrai nfro m using policie s an

d guideline s t o implemen t substantiv e change s t o regulatory

and statutory

requirements .P. 4 0^/24/9 0 16:0 3 U.S . -E.P.A . AI RDIU . 80 3

-2 -
A compan y sough t judicia l revie w o f the interpretiv e languag e (Westvac o Corp . v . EPA , No . 89-397 5 (6t hCir.)) . I nit s brief , Westvac o assarted , inte r glia . tha t th e interpretiv

e languag e in questionconstitute d a n imprope r impositio no f binding regulator y requirement s withou t prope r rulemakin g procedures . i n respons e t o th e concern s expressed b y the stat e an

d Westvaco , thi s notic e clarifie s EPA intent . Specifically , i t clarifie s tha t guidanc e document s an d intrepretatlon s issue d b y EP A d o no t have binding regulator y effect s on th e state . I n Marc hthe cour t ordere d a deferra l o f th e briefin

g schedule . EPA' s brie f i s du e Ma y 18 , 1990 . Thi s notic e shoul d b e publishe d a t leas t 1 0 day s prio r t o tha t dat e t o allo w Westvac o tim

e t o withdra w the litigationo r alternatively , allo w EP A tim e t o seek anappropriat e revisio no f the briefin g schedule . COORDINATIO

N WIT H STAT E Thi s notic e shoul d resolve the concern s the stat e has . ISSUE S Th e mai nissu e i s EPA' s involvemen t i n overseeing th e stat e implementation o f a NS Rpermitting program . The purpos e o f thi s clarificationnotic e i s t o accuratel y describe the lega l relationshi p betwee nEP A an d th e Commonwealt ho f Kentuck y wit h respec t t o th e NS R program . PROCEDURA

L REVIE

W Thi s notic e clarifie s a fina l actio nclassifie d a s a Tabl e 1 SI P an d i a exemp t fro

m OMB review . I t shoul d b e reviewe d b y AWMD , OPA , OGC , an d SSCD . Pleas e sig nthi s notic e an

d forward i t t o the Offic e o f th e Federa l Registe r fo r publicatio ni nth e notice s sectio no £ th e Federa l Register . Question s on thi s packag e ma y

b e directe d t o Richard A . Schut t a t FT S 257-286 4 o r Denni s Crumple r a t FT S 629-0871 . Attachmen t_^____

_P. 5 04/24/9 0 16:04 ' " " U.S."

- E.P.A

. AI R DIU

. 00 4

ENVIRONMENTA

L PROTECTIO

N AGENC

Y 4 0 CF RPAR T 5 2 APPROVA L AN D PROMULGATIO

N O F IMPLEMENTATIO

N PLANS , KENTUCKY ; STAT E REGULATIO N FO R PREVENTIO

N O F SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATIO

N AN D VISIBILIT YNE

W SOURC E REVIE

W I N ATTAINMENT AREA S [K Y- 030 )

AGENCY : Environmenta l Protection Agenc y (EPA) .

ACTION : Notic e o f Clarification .

SUMMARY : I nthi s notice , EPA i s clarifyin

g certai ninterpretive statement s containe d i n th e Federa l Registe r notic e approving revision s t o th e Kentuck y Stat e Implementatio n Pla n(SIP ) unde r the Clea nAi r Act , 4 2 U.S.C.§$7401-7642 . Tha t action , publishe d
o nSeptembe r 1 , 198 9 (5 4 FR36307) , wa s a fina l rul e approving Kentucky' s regulatio nfo r prevention o f significan t deterioration (PSD) , a visibilit y monitoring strategy , an d regulation s fo r visibilit y

new sourc e revie

w (NSR ) i n attainmen t areas . Th e purpos e o f today' s notic e i s t o clarif y EPA' s inten t regarding certai ninterpretive languag e containe d i ntha t earlie r notice. . Today' s actiondoe s no t alte r EPA' s approva l o f the SI P revision s whic hwer e th e subjec t o f th e earlie r fina l actio nnotice , bu t i t doe s supersed e the interpretive statement s i ntha t notice .04/24/9 0 16:0 4 U.S

. - E.P.A

. AI RDIU

. f)0 5 P. 6

DATE : Thi s notic e i s effective immediately .

ADDRESSES : Copie s o f the document s relevan t t o thi s actio nare availabl e fo r publi c inspectiondurin g norma l busines s hour s at th e following location :

Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y RegionIV , Ai r Program s Branch , 34 5 Courtlan

d Stree t NE , Atlanta , Georgi a 3036 5

FO RFURTHE R INFORMATIO N CONTACT t Fo r informationregardin g thi s notic e o f clarlfication , contac t Denni s Crumpler , EPA , New Sourc e Revie

w section , Offic e
o f Ai r Qualit y

Planning an

d Standard s (MD-15) , Researc hTriangl e Park , Nort hCarolin a 27711 , telephone (919 ) 541-0871 , FT S 629-0871 . Fo r informationregardin g th e Septembe r 1 , 1989 , approva l o f Kentucky' s regulationfo r PSD , contac t Richar d A . Schut t a t th e above Region I V addres s or telephon e (404 ) 347-2864 , FT S 257-2864 .

-2 -P. 7 04/24/9 0 16:0

5 U.S . -E.P.A . AI R DIU . 006

SUPPLEMENTAR

YINFORMATION : Following a Decembe r 30 , 1985 , publi c hearin g i n conformit y wit h4 0 CF R51.10 2 (previousl y 4 0 CF R 51.4) , th e Commonwealt ho f Kentucky' s Natura l Resource s an d Environmenta l ProtectionCabine t (NREPC ) adopte d regulationchange s involvin g PS D an

d visibilit y
an d submitte d the

m t o EP A

onFebruary

20 , 1986 , fo

r approva l a s implementationpla nrevisions . EP A proposed t o approv e th e revision s o nMarc h17 , 198 7 (5 2 F R8311) . Th e fina l actio n notic e o f Septembe r 1 , 198 9 (5 4 F R36307 ) finalised tha t approval . Specifically , EPA foun d tha t Kentucky' s regulation s fo r PS D (includin

g stac k height s an d dispersiontechniques) , visibilit y

monitoring , an

d visibilit y

ne w sourc e revie

w i n attainmen t area s ar e adequat e t o mee t the requirement s containe d i n4 0 CF R51.166 , 51.305 , an d 51.307(a ) an

d (d) , respectively . Se e 5 4 FR36310-11 . Th e Diapute d Languag e i n EPA' s Approva l o f Kentucky' s SI P . Revisions . Th e Septembe r 1 , 1989 , notic e describe d EPA' 8 vie w o f th e relationshi p betwee nBP A an d th e state s unde r the Clea nAi r Act , an

d o f the lega l effec t o f EPA' s approva l o f SI P measure s Implementing variou s program s unde r th e Act . Se e 5 4 F

R 36307-06 . BPA pointe d ou t tha t i nadopting th e Clean Ai r Act , congres s designate d BP A

a s th e agenc y

primaril y

responsibl e for interpretin g th e Ac t an d overseeing it s implementation b y th e states . EPA

als o note d tha t i t mus t approv e stat e program s tha t
mee t th e requirement s o f 40 . CF RPar t 51 . However , the Agenc y


### -3

-P. 8 04/24/9 0 16:0

5 U.S . -E.P.A . AI RDIU . 00 7 , /

als o referre d t o the very complexan

d dynami c natur e o f the Act' s PS D requirement s (includin g stac k height s an d dispersion techniques) , an

d new sourc e revie

w an d visibilit y

programs . Consequently , EP A

noted , i t woul d be administrativel y impracticabl e an

d legall y

unnecessar

y t o include al l statutory interpretation s i nth e BP A regulation s an

d the SIP s o f th e variou s states , o r t o amen d the regulation s an d the SIP s everytim

e EP A interpret s the statut e o r regulation s o r issue s guidanc e regarding the prope r implementatio n o f th

e NS R program . Rather , BPA

maintaine d tha t federa l approva l o f thes e NSR-relate d regulation s an

d narrative a s par t o f th e Kentuck

y SI P require d the stat e t o follo w EPA' s curren t an

d futur e interpretation s o f th e Act' s provision s an d regulations , a s wel l a s EPA' s operating policie s an

d guidance , bu t onl y t o th e exten t tha t suc hpolicie s
ar e intende d t o guid e th e implementatio no f approved stat e NS R programs . I nmakin g thi s assertion , EP A wa s carefu l t o emphasiz e tha t a s a matte r o f course , an y fundamenta l change s i nth e administratio n o f NS Rwoul d have t o b e accomplishe d throug h amendment s t o th e regulation s i n4 0 CFRPar t 5 1 an d subsequen t SI P revisions . SP A the nexplaine d the consequence s o f lt a approva l o f thes e portion s o f Kentucky' s NS Rprograms i n ligh t o f th e Agency' s view s regardin g th e federal-stat e relationshi p unde r th e Act . BPA note d tha t i t wil l continu e t o overse e implementation o f thi s



### -4 -""037257-3 0 lb : 0 b =—U.b ; - t
. K
. W
. H1 W U1U
. 03 3 ~

importan t progra

m by reviewing an

d commentin

g upo npropose d permit s a s appropriate . Specifically , EP A stated , i t wil l
commen t upo npropose d permit s tha t do no t implemen t the lette r o f the law , a s wel l a s EPA' s statutor y an d regulator

y interpretation s an d applicabl e guidance . I f a fina l permi t i s issued whic hstil l doe s no t reflec t considerationo f the relevan t factors , EP

A state d tha t i t ma y vie w the permi t a s inadequat e fo r purpose s o f implementing th e requirement s o f the Ac t an d Kentucky' s SIP , an d ma y conside r enforcemen t actionunde r Section s 11 3 an

d 16 7 o f the Ac t t o addres s the permi t deficiency . Kentucky' s Lette r o f Novembe r 17 . 1989 . O n Novembe r 17 , 1989 , Mr . Willia

m C . Eddins , Director , Divisiono f Ai r Quality , NREPC , submitte d a lette r regarding the . preambl e languag e i nthe Septembe r 1 , 198 9 notic e discusse d above . NREP C stated tha t a n agreemen t b

y the stat e t o compl y wit hfutur e guideline s an d policie s adopte d b y EP A woul d b e a delegationo f legislative powe r prohibite d by the stat e constitution , an d sought t o clarif y certai npoint s regarding th e Septembe r 1 Federa l Registe r notice . I n addition , NREP C state d tha t EP A shoul d refrai nfro m using policie s an

d guideline s t o implemen t substantive change s t o regulatory

an d statutory

requirements . Litigatio n Reqardin- g th e S»ptemftt ^ 1 . 198 9 Notice . A compan y sough t judicia l revie w o f the interpretive languag e i n th e Septembe r 1 , 1989 , Federa l Registe r notice . Westvac o Corp .
v . EPA , No . 89-397 5 (6thCir.) . I nit s brief , Westvac o asserted ,
-5 -04/24/9 0 16:0 7 U.S

. -E.P.A

. AI R DIU

. 009, , P.1 0 i 4 '

inte r filial tha t th e interpretiv e languag e i nquestio n constitute d a n imprope r impositio n o f bindin

g regulator

y requirement s withou t prope r rulemakin g procedures . EPA Clarificatio n o f Interpretiv e languag e i nthe Septembe r 1 , 198 9 Notice . NREP C an d Westvac o apparentl y hav e misinterprete d bot hthe purpos e an d effec t o f the languag e i n question . I n respons e t o th e concern s expresse d b y NREP C an

d Westvaco , EPA

today clarifie s tha t i t di d no t Inten d t o sugges t tha t Kentuck

y i s require d to follo w EPA' s Interpretation s an d guidanc e issue d unde r th e Clean Ai r Ac t l nthe sens e tha t thos e pronouncement s have independen t statu s a s enforceabl e provision s
o f the Kentuck

y SIP , suc htha t mer e failur e t o follo w suc h pronouncements , standing alone , woul d constitut e a violatio no f the Clea nAi r Act . Rather , a s discussed below , EPA' s inten t wa s merel y t o plac e the stat e an d the publi c a t larg e o nnotic e o f EPA' s longstandin g view s tha t the Agency mus t continu e t o overse e
an d enforc e th e NS R provision s o f th e Ac t followin

g approva l o f a stat e program , an

d tha t EPA' s judgmen t a s t o wha t constitute s complianc e wit hth e la w i s at al l time s informed b y th e Agency' s interpretive ruling s an d policy

statements . A s such , strictl y speaking th e languag e i n questionwa s neithe r par t o f no r a conditio n o f EPA' s approva l o f Kentucky' s SIP , an d i t ha s n

o binding effect . Rathe r than creatin g ne w right s o r obligations , i t advise d th e publi c o f EPA' s views regardin g obligation s tha t alread y exis t by

operatio n p f the statutor y scheme .
-6 -p.1 1 04/24/9 0 16:0 7 U.S
. - E.P.A
. AI R DIU
. 01 0

Th e issuanc e o f NS Rpermit s an d othe r action s b

y th e stat e inth e administratio n o f th e federa l CleanAi r Ac t mus t confor m t o the requirement s o f the Ac t an d th e SlP i Se e section s 16 7 an d 113 , 4 2 U.S.C . S S 747 7 an d 7413 . I n making judgment s a s t o wha t constitute s complianc e wit hthe Ac t an d regulation s issued thereunder , EPA

look s t o (amon

g othe r sources ) it s polic y statement s an

d interpretive ruling s regardin g thos e binding statutor

y an d regulatory

requirements . I t follow s tha t stat e action s Implementin g the federa l Clean Ai r Ac t whic hd o no t confor m t o the Act , a s viewe d i nligh t o f EPA' s policie s an

d interpretations , may lea d t o potentia l enforcemen t actio nb y EPA . However , i n defending agains t sucha n enforcemen t action , a part y i s fre e t o asser t tha t EPA' s statement s i nfac t d o no t reasonabl y interpre t th e underlying statutory

and regulatory

provisions . EPA' s approva l o f a stat e NS Rprogra m o r som

e portio no f i t doe s no t dives t th e Agenc y o f th e duty

t o continu e a vigorou s oversigh t an

d enforcemen t rol e unde r section s 16 7 an d 113 . For example , sectio n 16 7 provide s tha t EP A shal l tak e whateve r enforcemen t actio nma y b e necessar

y t o preven t constructio no f a majo r stationary

sourc e tha t doe s no t "confor m t o the requirement s o f th e PS D program . Thus , a s t o PSD , the purpos e
o f th e preambl e languag e i nthe Septembe r 1 notic e wa s t o advis e Kentuck y an d th e publi c o f EPA' s vie w tha t approva l o f a state' s PS D progra

m doe s no t ba r EPA

fro m relyin g onit s ow

ninterstitia l interpretation s i ndeciding whethe r a state-issue d PS D permi t

-7 -04/24/9 0 16:0 8 U.S
. -E.P.A
. AI R DIU
. 011
.

conform s t o th e Act' s PS D requirements . Followin g SI P approval , then , EP A remain s a s th

e congressionall y

designate d agency wit hultimat e authorit y t o interpre t th e federa l la w unde r th

e Ac t an

d t o bas e it s enforcemen t action s onthos e interpretations . in addition , becaus e EPA' s interpretation s an d policie s ar e onl y interstitial , relatin g bac k t o the existing federa l statut e an d regulations , the y guid e EPA' s enforcemen t action s irrespectiv e o f whethe r the

y
ar e issue d befor e o r afte r approva l o f a SIP . EP A acknowledge s tha t state s hav e the primary

rol e i n administering an

d enforcing the variou s component s o f th e NS R program . Fo r the mos t part , the state s hav e bee nsuccessfu l i n thi s effort , an

d EPA' s involvemen t i ninterpretativ e an d enforcemen t issue s i s limited t o onl y a smal l numbe r o f cases . Consequently , EPA' s continuing oversigh t rol e unde r th e Clea n Ai r Ac t leave s Kentuck y an d othe r state s wit hconsiderabl e discretion t o implemen t th e NS Rprogra m a s the y se e fit . First , a s note d i n th e Septembe r 1 notice , EP A ma y no t institut e fundamenta l change s i nth e requirement s se t fort hi nit s ow n regulation s o r stat e implementatio nplan s throug hinterpretiv

e ruling s o r polic y statements . Th e creatio no f ne w right s o r obligation s ca nonl y b e accomplishe d b

y revision s t o th

e regulation s i n4 0 CF R Part s 5 1 an d 5 2 an

d b y SI P revisions , i naccordanc e wit happlicabl e rulemakin g procedures . Second , EPA' s interpretation s and policie s ofte nar e intende d i nwhol e o r i n par t t o guid e onl y EP A



### -8

-P.1 3 04/24/9 0 16:0 8 U.S
. - E.P.A
. AI R DIU
. 01 2

Regiona l Offices , an d i nsuchinstance s the y hav e n o Implication s whatsoeve r fo r a state' s administratio no f it s program . Third , ther e ar e many

aspect s o f the NS R progra m tha t EP

A ha s no t addresse d i nguidanc e o r interpretiv e rulings . I nthes e areas , state s remai nfre e t o follo w thei r ow

ncourse , provided tha t stat e action i s consisten t wit hthe lette r an d spiri t o f th e SIP , whe nrea d i nconjunction wit hthe Clean Ai r Ac t an d EPA' s regulations . I nsum , EPA

believe s tha t the language inquestio ni nthe Septembe r 1 , 1989 , notice , a s clarified here , accuratel y describe s th e lega l relationshi p betweenEPA an d th e Commonwealt h of . Kentuck

y wit hrespec t t o th e NS R program . Unde r 5 U.S.C . 5605(b) , I certif y tha t thi s notic e wil l no t have a significan t economi c impac t o na substantia l numbe r o f smal l entities . Th e Offic e o f Managemen t an d Budge t ha s exempted thi s rul e fro m the requirement s o f Section 3 o f Executive Orde r 12291 .

Lis t o f Subject s i n4 0 CF R Par t 52 : Ai r pollutioncontrol , intergovernmenta l relations .
Authority : 4 2 U.S.C . 7401-7642 .

Dated : Willia m K . Reilly , Administrator .
-9 -85/14/200 1 11:2 5 919484012 2 EC R 

### Jj2LS •••rt-
. 

# (Sz) UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENC Y Offic e o f Ai r Qualit y Plannin g an d Standard s Researc h Triangl e Park
. Nort h Carolin a 2771 1

HA Y - 8 192

0 Mr

- Ar t Fraa s Informatio n an dRegulator y Aff air s offic e o f

Managemen tan d Budge t Me w Executiv e offic e Buildin g Roo n 301 9 Washington , o.c . 2050 3 Dear Mr . Fraas : Enclosed fo r you r informatio n i s a clarification o f th e Environmenta l Protectio n Agency' s (EPA's ) fina l approva l o r th e Kentuck y rule s for th e preventio no f significan t deterioration (PSD) . Thi s actio

nclarifie s EPA' s intent i n n n actio n take ni n Septembe r 19S9 . Specifically , i t explain s tha t EPA guidanc e document s an

d Interpretation s do no t have binding regulator y effect s on states . I t doe e no t involv e an y o f the.issue s o r concern s addressed b y Kr . MacRae* s MarchS , 199 0 lette r regarding th e top-dow

n policy . I have forwarde d thi s packag e t o senio r EPA managemen t fo r signatur e an d publication . Heverthelass , give n your staff' s interes t i naction s relatin g t o PSD . I a

m forwarding i t t o yo u fo r information . A s I a m sur e yo u wil l agree , thi s actio naddresse s a numbe r o f concern s raised b y Kentuck

y an d other s regardin

g the rol e o f polic y an d guidanc e an

d mor e accuratel y

describe s EPA' s lega l relationshi p wit ha Stat e upon approva l o f a stat e PS D rule . I f yo u hav

e an y question s or concern * regarding thi s package , pleas e cal l me o r Hik w Shapiro . However , EP A ha s bee n litigated o nthi s rulemakin g action . I n orde r t o mee t our commitment s t o the court , I a m seekin g t o nav e th e packag e reigne d b y Ma y 11 , 1990 . Sincerely ,

roh n Calcagn Director ' Ai r Quality

(Managemen t Divis i

Enclosur e cc : M - Shapiro

&P.1 5

f-M»JL - **» W B5/14/200 1 11:2 5 913484812 2 &*

0 4<24/9 0 16=0 3 U.S

. - E.P.A

. fllRDIU

. 00 2 

# {mj ; UNITC O STATE S CNVIRONM5NTAI . PROTECTIO N AGENC Y S mei*'ecoio n i v l« S COUMTLAM P •THC T AP RI 6 I860 *TI»HT» . acosoi * »o m ACTIO N MEMORANDU

M SUBJECT » Preventio n o f

Significan tDeterioratio n an d Visibilit y Me w Sourc e Revie w l n Attainmen tArea s fo rKentuck y PROXi Gree r C . Tldwel l ^^, fV~ ? ^

_Jft.L ^ * Regiona l Administrato r * ' • " "p^ - TO i William

X . Reill y Administrato r THRO : SI P CoordinationOffice , Offle e o f Ai r Qualit y Plannin g an d Standard s (MD-15 ) IDENTIFICATIO

N O F ACTIO

N The attache d notic e clarifie s certai n Interpretive statement s contained i nth e Federa l Registe r notic e approving revision s t o che Kentuck

y SI P fo r PS D an

d Visibility . Th e actio n being take n i s a Notic e o f Clarification for th e interpretive statement s an d doe s no t have a neffec t o nth e approve d PS D an

d Visibilit y regulations . SUMMAR YO F ACTION O nFebruary

20 , 1986 , th

e Commonwealt ho f Kentuck y submitte d regulation s fo r Preventiono f Significan t Deterioratio nan d Visibilit y

fo r approva l a s implementation pla nrevisions . EPA published th e fina l approva l o nSeptembe r 1 , 198 9 (5 4 P R36307) . Th e Septembe r 1 , 1989 , notic e describe d EPA' s viaw o f th e relationshi p betwee n EPA an d the state s unde r th e Clea nAi r Act , an d o f th e lega l effec t o f BPA' a approva l o f SI P measure s implementin

g variou s program s unde r th e Act . O nNovembe r 17 , 1989 , Mr . Willia m C . Sddlns , Director , Divisiono f Ai r Quality , Natura l Resource s an d Environmenta l ProtectionCommission (NREPC) , submitte d a lette r regarding th e preambl e languag e i nth e Septembe r 1 , 198 9 notice . NREP C state d tha t anagreemen t b y the stat e t o compl y vlt hfutur e guideline s an d policie s adopte d b y EPA woul d b e a delegatio no f legislative powe r prohibite d by th e stat e constitution , an d sough t t o clarit y certai npoint s regarding the Septembe r 1 , 1989 , notice . I n addition , NREP C stated tha t EPA shoul d refrai nfro m usin g policie s an

d guideline s t o implemen t substantive change s t o regulator

y an d statutor

y requirements . 

# <§>P.1 6

. ' 05/14/200 1 11:2 5 913494012 2 « * — — 0<a^24/"3 0 XS:8 3 U.S . - E . P.p . ftlRDIU . 93 3

- 2 -
A compan y sough t judicia l revie w o f th e interpretiv e lanouaa e (Westvac o Corp . v . EPA , No . 89-397 5 (6t hCir.)) . I nit s brie f Westvac o asserted , An£s* : AUA / tha t the integrativ e languag e i n questionconstitute d a n imprope r impositio np f bindin g regulatory requirement s withou t prope r rulemaking procedures . i n respons e t o th

e concern s expresse d b y th e stat e and Westvaco , thi s notic e clarifie s EP A Intent . Specifically , i t clarifie s tha t guidanc e document s an d lntrepretatlona issue d b y BP A d e no t have binding regulatory affect s o n th e state . I n Marchth e cour t ordered a deferra l o f the briefing schedule EPA' s brie f l s du e May IB , 1990 . Thi s notic e ahoul d b e publishe d a t leas t 1 0 day s prio r t o tha t dat e t o allo w Westvac o time t o withdra w ch e litigation o r alternatively , allo w EP A tim e t o see k en appropriat e revisiono f the briefin g schedule . COORDINATIO

N WIT H STAT S Thi s notic e shoul d resolve the concern s the stat e has . ISSUE S , .•'•• ; The mai nissu e i s BPA' a involvemen t in overseeing th e stat e implementationo f a HS R permitting program , th e purpos e o f thi s clarificationnotie e l s t o accuratel y describe th e lega l relationshi p betwee nEPA an d th e Commonwealt ho f Kentucky -wit h respec t t o th e NS R program . PROCEDURA

L RKVIBt f Thi s notic e clarifie s a fina l actio nclassifie d a s a Tabl e 1 SI P an d i s exemp t fro

m OMB review. . I t shoul d b e reviewe d b y AWMD , OPA , OGC , an d SSCD . Pleas e sig nthi s notic e and forwar d i t t o th e Offic e o f the Federa l Registe r for publicatio ni n th e notice s sectiono f the Federa l Reqlg^er . Question s o nthi s packag e ma y

b e directe d t o Richard A . Schut t a t FT S 257-286 4 o r Denni s Crumple r a t PT S 629-0871 . Attachmen t



# (3P.1 7

05/14/5B0 1 11:2 5 giyqaatji: ^ CJ KrHa t 88/i b e^2«V9 0 16:0< * U.S

. - E.P.fl

. PI R DIU

. 0 0 4

ENVIRONMENTA

L PROTECTIO

N ACENC Y 4 0 CF R PAR T 5 2 APPHOVAL AND PROMULGATIO N O F IMPLEMENTATIO

N PLANS.. * KENTUCKY , STAT E REGULATIO N FO * PREVENTIO

N O F SIGNIFICAN T DETERIORATIO

N AN D VISIBILIT YNE W SOURC E RSVIE W I N ATTAINMEN T AREA S [X Y- 030 ] 

### AQKMcY i Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y (BPA) .
ACTZON tNotic e o f

Clarification . * 

### SUMMARY i I n thi s notice , BP A i s clarifyin g certai n lntaTrrprativ a statement s Containe d i n th e Federa l Registe rnotic e approvin g revision s t o th e Kentuck y Stat e Implementatio n Pla n (SIP ) unde r th e Clea n Ai rAct , 4 2 U.S. C £$7401-764 2 - Tha taction , publishe d
o n Septembe r1 , 198 9 (5 4 F R36307) , wa s afina l rul e approvin g Kentucky' s regulatio n fox - preventio n o f significan tdeterioratio n (PSD) , avisibilit y monitorin g strategy , an d regulation s fo r visibilit y ne* * sourc e revie w (NSR ) i n attainmen tareas . Th e purpos e o f

today' s notic e i s t o Clarif y EPA' s inten tregardin g certai n interpretiv e languag e containe d l n tha tearlie rnotice . Today' s actio n doe s no talte rSPA' aapprova l o f ch e SI Prevision s whic h wer e th e aubjoc to f th e earlie rfina l actio n notice , bu ti t doe s supersed e th o interpretiv e statement s i n tha tnotice .



# ©P.1 8

85/14/200 1 11:2 5 919dB4012 2 EC R 04^24/^ 0 16:0 4 U.S
. - E
. P
. P
. PI R DIU
. 08 5

DATE i Thi s notic e i s effective immediately .

ADDRESSE S i Copie s o f the document s relevan t t o thi s actio nar e availabl e fo r publi c inapectlon during norma l busines s hour s a t the following location i

Environmenta l Protractio n Agenc y Region IV , Ai r Programs Branch , 34 5 Courtlan

d Stree t NE , Atlanta , Georgi a 3036 5

FO RFURTHE RINFORMATIO N CONTACT I Fo r informatio n regarding thi s notic e o f clarification , contac t Denni s Crumpler , EPA * New Sourc e Revie

w Section , Offic e o f Ai r Qualit y

Plannin

g an d Standard s (MD~15) , Researc hTriangl e Park , Nort hCarolina 27711 , telephone (919 ) 541-0071 , FT S 629-0871 . Fo r information regardin g th e Septembe r I , 1989 , approva l o f Kentucky' s regulationfo r PSD , contac t Richar d A . Schut t a t th e above RegionIV addres a o r telephon e (404 ) 347-2864 , FT S 257-2864 .

-2 -



# ©P.1 9

05/14/200 1 11:2 5 919484012 2 EC R •"««
. A «,, i U 04'24/3 0 16 J 0 S U.S
. - E
. P
. P
. RI R DIU
. 00 6

SUPPLEMENTAR

YINFORMATIO

N i Followin g a Decembe r 30 , 1985 , publi c hearing i n conformit y wit h4 0 CF R51.10 2 (previousl y 4 0 CFR51,4) , th e Conwionweejrt ho f Kentucky' s Natura l Resource s an d Environmenta l Protectio nCabine t (HRSFC ) adopte d regulationchange s involving PS D an d visibilit y an d submitte d the

m t o EPA

ohFebruary

20 , 1986 , fo r approva l a s implementationpla nrevisions . BP A propose d t o approve th e revision s o nMarc h17 , 198 7 (5 2 TR8311) . Tho fina l actio n notic e o f Septembe r l , 198 9 (5 4 FR 36307 ) finalise d tha t approval . Specifically , EPA foun d tha t Kentucky' s regulation s fa r PS O (including stac k height s an d dispersio ntechniques) , visibilit y

monitoring , an

d visibilit y

ne w sourc e review

i n attainmen t area s ar e adequat e t o mea t th e requirement s containe d i n4 0 CF R51*166 , 51.305 , an d 51.307(a ) an

d (d) , respectively . See 5 4 F R36310-11 . Th e Diapufce ^ Lancniao . I n EPA' s Approva l o f Kentucky' s SI P . Revisions . Th a Septembe r 1 , 1989 , notic e describe d EPA' S Vie w o f ths relationshi p betwee nBPA an d th e state s unde r th e clea n Ai r Act , an

d o f th e lega l effec t o f SPA' S approva l o f SI P measure s implementin

g variou s programs unde r th e Act . Se e 5 4 F R36307-08 . SP A pointe d ou t tha t i nadoptin g th e Clea n Ai r Act , congres s designate d SP A

a s the agency

primaril y

responsibl e fo r interpreting tha Ac t en d overseeing it s implementatio nb y tha states . BP A

als o noted tha t i t mus t approve stat e program s tha t
mas t th e requirement s o f 40 . CFRPar t 51 . However , th e Agenc y
-3 - 

# ©P.2 0

05/14/200 1 ll 1

- 2 5 319484012 2 « * 04^2<i'S 0 16:0 S U.S . - E.P.P . fllf* DIU . 00 7 '

als o referre d t o th e ver y comple xan d dynami c natur e o f th e Act' s PS D requirement s (includin g stac k height s an d diapersIo n • techniques) , an d ne w sourc e revie w

an d visibilit y programs.* * Consequently , EP A noted , i t woul d b e administrativel y impracticabl e an d legall y unnecessar y

t o includ e al l statutor y Interpretation s i nth e BP A regulation s an d th e SIP s o t th e variou s states , o r t o amen d th e regulation s an d th e SIP s everytim e BP A

interpret s th e statut a o r regulatlon a o r issue s guldane * regardin g th a prope r implementatio no f th e NS R program . Rathar , BP A

maintaine d tha t federa l approva l o f thes e NSR-relate d regulation s an d narrativ e a a por t o f th e Ke n tu a k y SI P require d th e stat e t o follo w RPA' s curren t an d futur e interpretation s o f th a Act' s provision s an d regulations , a s wel l a a EP A " a operatin g policie s an d guidance , bu t onl y t o the . exten t tha t suc hpolicie s
ar e intende d t o guid e th e implementatio no f approve d stat e NS R programs . I nmakin g thi a assertion , BP A wa s carefu l t o emphasiz e tha t a s a matte r o f course . ati y fundamenta l change s i nth e administratio no f NS Rwoul d hav e t o b e accomplishe d throug h amendment s t o th e regulation s i n4 0 CF RPar t 5 1 an d subsequen t S I P revisions . EP A the nexplaine d th e consequence s o f it s approva l o f thes e portion s o f Kentucky' s NS R programs i n ligh t o f th e Agency' s vlaw s regardin g th e federal-stat e relationshi p unde r th e Act . BPA note d tha t i t wil l continue t o overse e implementatio n o f thi s

-4 - 

## CT3)P.2 1

05/14/200 1 U:2 5 9194B4012 2 EC R 04^24^ 0 16:0 6 U.S
. - E
. P
. R
. RI R DIU
. 00 Q

important progra

m b y reviewing en

d commentin

g upo npropose d permit s a s appropriate . Specifically , EPA stated , i t wil l ooimaan t uponpropoae d permit s tha t do no t implemen t th e lette r o f th e lav , a s wel l a a EPA' s statutory en d regulatory interpretation s an d applicabl e guidance . I f a fina l permi t i s Issue d whic hstil l doe s not-reflec t consideratio no f ch e relevan t factors , EPA

state d tha t I t may view the permi t a e inadequat e fo r purpose s o f implementing th e requirement s O f th e Ac t an d Kentucky' s SIP , an d ma y conside r enforcemen t actio nunde r Section s 11 3 and 16 7 o f th e Ac t t o addres s the permi t deficiency . Kentucky' s Let^e f o f Novembe r 17 . Igf9
. O nNovembe r 17 , 1989 , Kr . Willia

m c . Bddlns , Director , Divisio no f Ai r Quality , NREPC , submitte d a lette r regarding the. - preambl e languag e I n the Septembe r 1 , 199 9 notic e discusse d above . NREP C state d tha t an agreemen t b

y th e stat e t o compl y wit hfutur e guideline s and poli o le s adopte d b y EP A woul d b e a delegatio n O f legislativ e powa r prohibite d b y th o stat e constitution , an d sough t t o clarif y certai npoint s regarding th e Septembe r 1 Federa l yegiftt^ f notice . I n addition , NREP C state d tha t BP A shoul d refrai nfro m usin g policie s an

d guideline s t o Implemen t substantive change s t o regulator

y an d statutory

requirements . y^jgatlo w Baaagdlnt r th e Septembe r 1 . 198 9 Notice . A compan y sough t judlaie l ravie w o f th e interpretive languag e i n th e Septembe r 1 , 1989 , Federa l RgglBtf C notice . Keatvac o Corp . v . EPA , No . 89-397 5 (6thCi,r.) - i n It s brief , Vestvac o asserted .
-S 

# G )P.2 2

05/14/200 1 11:2 5 919484012 2 ECK

. fc 04^24/^ 0 16:0 7 U.S . - E.P.R . PI R DIU . 00 9

inte r aULA , tha t th e interpretiv e languag e i nquestio n constitute d a nImprope r impositio no f binding regulatory 4

- requirement s withou t prope r rulemakin g procedures . EP A Clarificatio no f Interpretiv e languag e l nth e Septembe r 1 , 19B 9 Notice . NREP C an d Westvac o apparentl y hav e misinterprete d bot hthe purpos e an d effec t o f th e languag e i n question . I n respons e t o the concern s expresse d b y NREP C an

d Waatvaoo , EP A

toda y clarifie s tha t i t di d no t Inten d t o sugges t tha t Kentuck

y i s require d t o follo w EPA' s interpretation s an d guidanc e Issue d unde r th e cleanAi r Ac t l nth e sens e tha t thos e pronouncement s hav e independen t statu s a s enforceabl e provision s
o f th e Kentucky

SIP , suc htha t mer e failur e t o follo w suc h pronouncements , standing alone , woul d constitut e a violatio no f the CleanAi r Act . Rather , a s discussed below , EPA' s inten t wa s merel y t o plac e the stat e an d the publi c a t larg a o n notic e o f EPA' s longstanding view s tha t th e Agenc y

mus t continu e t o overse e
an d enforc e th e N8 R provision s o f th e Ac t following approva l o f a stat e program , an

d tha t EPA' s judgmen t a s t o wha t constitute s complianc e wit hthe le w I s a t al l time s informe d b y th e Agency' s Interpretive ruling s an d policy

statements . A s auch , strictl y speakin g th e languag e i n question wa s neithe r par t o f no r a conditio no f BPA' * approva l o f Kentucky' s SIP , an d i t ha s no bindin g offeat . Rathe r than creatin g ne w right s o r obligations , i t advise d the publi c o f BPA' s views regarding obligation s tha t alread y exis t b

y operation o f th

e statutor

y scheme . -6 - 

# ®>P.2 3

05/14/200 1 11:2 5 919484012 2 EC RPAG E 1«V1 G 0^24x9 0 16:0 7 U.S . - E . P . fl. PI RDIU . 01 0

The issuanc e o f NS R permit s an d othe r action s b

y the stat a i nthe administratio no f th e federa l Clean Ai r Ac t mus t confor m t o th« requirement s o f the Ac t an d th o SIP ^ Se e section s 16 7 an d 113 . 4 2 U.S.C . S S 747 7 an d 7413 , m

making Judgment s a s t o wha t constitute s complianc e wit hth e Ac t an d regulation s issue d thereunder , EPA

look s t o (amon

g othe r Sources ) it s polic y statement s an

d interpretive ruling s regardin g thos e bindin g statutor

y an d regulatory

requirements . I t follows tha t stat e aotlona implementing th e federa l clea n Ai r Ao t whic hdo no t confor m t o th e Act , a s viewe d i n ligh t o f EPA' s policie s an

d interpretations , may lea d t o potentia l enforcemen t actionby EPA - However , i n defendin g agains t suc han enforcemen t action , a part y i s fre e t o asser t tha t EPA' s statement s i n faa t do no t reasonabl y interpre t th e underlyin g statutor

y and . regulator y

provision* . EPA' s approva l o f a stat e NS R progra m o r som

e portio no f i t doe s no t dives t the Agenc y o f th e dut y

t o continu e a vigorou s oversigh t and enforcemen t rol e unde r section s 16 7 and 113 . Fo r example , sectio n16 7 provide s tha t EPA shal l tak e whateve r enforcemen t action ma y b e necessary

t o preven t constructio no f a majo r stationary

sourc e tha t doe s no t "confor m t o th e requirement s of * th e PS D program . Thus , a s t o PSD , th e purpos e o f the preambl e languag e i n th a Septembe r 1 notic e wa s t o advis e Kentuak y an d th a publi a o f EPA' s vie w cha t approva l o f a state' s PS D progra

m doe s no t ba r EPA

fro m relyin g o nit s ow

n interstitia l interpretation s indeciding whethe r a state-Issue d PS D permi t
-7 -P.2 4

05/14/200 1 11:2 5 9194B4012 2

_EG R^

. 04^24^9 0 16:0 0 U.S . - £.P;fi. : RI RDIU . 0 1 :

conforms t o th e Act' s PS D requirements . Followin g SI P approval , then , BP A remain s a s the congressionall y

designate d agency wit hultimat e authorit y t d interpre t th e federa l la w unde r th

a Ac t an

d t o bas e lt a enforcemen t action s o n thos e interpretations . I n additio n , beaaue e EPA' s interpretation s an d policie s ar e onl y interstitial , relating bac k t o the existing federal ! statut e an d regulations * they guid e EPA' s enforcemen t action s Irrespective o f whethe r the y ar e issue d befor e o r afte r approva l o f a SIP . EP A acknowledge s tha t state s hav e the primary

rol e i n administerin g an

d enforcing th e variou s component s o f th e NII R program . Fo r the mos t part , th e state s have bee nsuccessfu l I n thi s effort , an

d EPA' s involvement : l ninterpretative and anforaemen t issue s i s limite d t o onl y a smal l numbe r o f cae^e . Consequently , EPA' s continuing oversigh t rol e unde r th e Clcn n Ai r Ac t leave s Kentuck y an d othe r states ! wit hconaiderabl e dlsc:ir«tlot i t o implemen t th e NSll progra m a s this

y se e fit . First , a s nctetf l i n i i the Septembe r 1 notice , EPA ma y no t institut e fundamenta l change s l nth e requirement s se t fort hi n its ' ow n regulation s o r »cit m implementatio n plan s throughinterpretiv e ruling s o r polic y statements . Th e creatio no f new right s o r obligation s ca n onl y b e accomplishe d b

y revision s t o the regulation s l n 4 0 CF R :?a.rt s s i an d 5 2 an

d b y S3 P revisions , i n accordanc e wit happlicabl e x-ulemakin

g procedures . Second , EPA' s interpretation s an d polioie s ofte nar e intende d i nwhol e or i n par t t o guid e mil y EP A

&P.2 5
,5/14/288 1 11:2 5 919484012 2 04/24>'g 0 IS" . 0 9 ECfc\ U.S ; - E.P J A

. AI RDIU . 01 ;

Regiona l Offices , an d i n suc h i^Stan|| | the y hav e n o Implication s whatsoeve rfo r. state' s administrat| | o f it . program . Third , ther . ar e man y aspect s o f th e kS Rpxf§|a m tha tEP A ha s no t* addr.— d i n guidanc e o rint-r^xj.ti^|||ullng . • I n thes e are , , , .tate s remai n fre e t o follo w thei r«<=ourse , provide d that : stat e actio n 1 . consen twit h th e f*t. ran d spiri to f th e SIP , whe n rea d i n conjunctio n wit h th e c||j|i-Ai rAc tan d EPA' s regulations . fpjfc: - i n sum , EP

A believe o tha * th e fjpP«3 - * " questio n i n l.h » Septembe r1 . 1969 , notice , .as-ftarij||a ' here , accuratel y
d .a~lb. s th alega l relationshi p beffffe n SP A an d th e Co^on , TMit h
o f Kentuck y wit h respec tt o the ! NSl|^6gr« a I f

. S:7'.-.y'r--. • „„« « S U.S.C . S t>3<b> , jic.ri| | «« t «hl.«*ie . -il l « * W . . .!**«« « .iconi c i^--- || « -ub.«n t l. l au»b. r -- smal l entities . IMiS • Th e Offic e o f Managemen t an d Ifige t ha - exempte d thi s rul e fro m th . requirement , o f Sectio n 31 | Executiv e Orde r 12291 . jjjjpjtjki

r pollutio ncontro l . • intergovemmanta l relations .

Autho r ity« 4 2 tl-S-C . 7401-76*2 .

Date d i . Willia m K . Reilly * Adminintrator .