TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT & CONSERVATION

DIVISION OF AIR POLLUTION CONTROL

MEMORANDUM

DATE: July 16, 2015

TO: USEPA Region 4

FROM: Jeryl Stewart - TAPCD

 

SUBJECT: Update of Responses to Comments by USEPA Concerning Submitted SIP Revisions

Request to remove 1200-03-20-.04(2) from the Tennessee SIP

The only USEPA comment concerning the proposed removal of Division Rule 1200-03-20-.04(2) from the 

current SIP was that Tennessee must address the applicability of Section 110(l), Section 193 of the Clean Air 

Act (CAA), which requires that an analysis to demonstrate compliance with Section 193 of the CAA will be 

necessary. A response was submitted as a part of the SIP package. To expand upon this the Division 

submits as follows:

The rationale behind the proposed rule revision is the fact that Division Rule 1200-03-20-.04(2) is very old 

and requires the submittal of a quarterly report of startups, shutdowns, and malfunctions for affected sources. 

The rule was adopted in 1979 when the only pollutants of concern were total suspended particulates and 

sulfur dioxide and ambient air quality issues for those pollutants were generally attributable to excess source 

emissions. At that time there were no other periodic reporting requirements except for very large sources 

that were required to have continuous in-stack monitoring systems. In the first sentence of the rule there is 

the requirement that all sources located in non-attainment areas submit these reports. In the 1970’s the 

regulatory exemptions from the requirement to obtain a permit from this Division were much broader than at 

present. Changing conditions since 1979 have made the rule obsolete for the following reasons:

1. Subsequent to 1979 new regulations have been implemented that require the reporting of emissions and 

compliance requirements. Currently the Tennessee Title V program set forth in Division Rule 1200-03-9-

.02(11) specifies both the semi-annual reporting requirement and the annual compliance certification 

requirement for affected sources. The same rule requires the reporting of emissions from sources taking 

restrictions to remain below the applicability thresholds for Title V applicability. These are reported on an 

annual basis. In addition, the reporting requirements of 40 CFR 63.10, which are applicable to all the source 

categories subject to the national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants, utilize a semi-annual 

reporting time period as the default value. Therefore, the quarterly reporting time frame required by 

Division Rule 1200-03-20-.04(2) is not consistent with current time frames for the submittal of emissions 

reports.

2. The first sentence of the rule states that all sources located in non-attainment areas submit these reports. 

When this rule was written no consideration was given to the possibility of the many additional source 

categories that are currently regulated. In 1979, gasoline dispensing facilities, dry cleaners, and internal 

combustion engines in emergency service were unregulated. Today existing reporting requirements as set 

forth in item 1 above will address any facility whose emissions could have any conceivable impact upon 

recognized ambient air quality standards. To require reporting from all minor sources, whose emissions 
would have a negligible impact upon overall ambient air quality represents an unreasonable burden upon the 

sources and upon the Division to address the submitted data. 

 

3. Subsequent to 1979 new regulations have been implemented that render the reporting requirements of that 

Division Rule 1200-03-20-.04(2) obsolete and redundant. The federal Emergency Planning and Community 

Right-to-Know Act of 1986 (EPCRA) contains requirements for (1) emergency notification in the event of 

an unplanned release exceeding the reportable quantity of any designated chemical, (2) the submittal of 

hazardous chemical inventory information for facilities holding hazardous chemicals at an amount beyond 

specified thresholds, and (3) the requirement that manufacturing facilities that have specified chemicals 

beyond specified thresholds submit an annual toxic chemical release inventory. It should also be noted that 

the federal act addresses a significant number of sources whose normal air emissions are negligible and are 

not required to obtain an air emissions permit. 

There are two additional issues that support the removal of Rule 1200-03-20-.04(2). They are as follows:

First, the USEPA has recognized the obsolete nature of quarterly reporting in the Recordkeeping and 

Reporting Burden Reduction regulations promulgated in the Federal Register on February 12, 1999. That 

regulation allowed for the reporting of data from sources required to operate continuous in-stack monitoring 

systems on a semi-annual basis in lieu of the previously required quarterly basis so as to allow for 

consolidated reporting consistent with the reports discussed in Item 1 above. Without the deletion of Rule 

1200-03-20-.04(2) affected sources in Tennessee would not be able to avail themselves of this consolidated 

reporting requirement.

In addressing the requirements of Section 110(l) of the Clean Air Act, The Tennessee Division of Air 

Pollution Control declares that this proposed SIP revision will have no effect on any applicable requirement 

concerning attainment and reasonable further progress. . . or any other applicable requirement as it simply 

involves removing an obsolete and redundant reporting requirement from the SIP to avoid burdening sources 

with submitting duplicitous reports. In addressing the requirements of Section 193 of the Clean Air Act, The 

Tennessee Division of Air Pollution Control declares that this proposed SIP revision is not a control 

requirement. While the original rule was in effect prior to November 15, 1990, the original rule only 

addresses the reporting of emissions and does not address any emissions reduction or emissions control 

requirements. Given that the original regulation has been superseded by newer, federally mandated, 

reporting requirements, deleting the original regulation will have no effect on the emissions of any air 

pollutant. 

In response to an information request from the USEPA Region 4 SIP group that acknowledged that while the

newer regulations required periodic reports from both facilities subject to the Title V program and those 

facilities taking restrictions to remain below the applicability thresholds for Title V applicability,. The issue 

presented was the fact that removing this regulation from the Tennessee SIP would remove the requirement

for “minor” sources could have an adverse impact upon ambient air quality. 

For operating permit purposes the Tennessee definition of “potential to emit” is identical to that found in 40 

CFR 70. Facilities that restrain their “potential to emit” below the applicability thresholds for Title V 

applicability through the use of emissions control, hours restrictions, or other means are defined as 

“conditional major” facilities [synthetic minor] and have reporting requirements. In Tennessee “true minor” 

facilities for purposes of operating permit permitting are defined as facilities whose potential emissions with 

no credit given for emission controls and assuming unlimited hours of operation are below the applicability 

thresholds for Title V applicability. Tennessee scrutinizes very closely all permit applicants claiming true 

minor status but with potential to emit levels very close to the Part 70 applicability thresholds. Here it 
should be noted that for purposes of Part 70 rule applicability the threshold amounts of any substance 

designated as a “hazardous air pollutant” is ten tons for any single substance and twenty-five tons for any 

combination of substances. For this reason facilities whose total emissions on the basis of annual tonnage 

are quite small may be classified as either a “major” source or a “conditional major” source.

While Tennessee regulations do not generally require the submittal of periodic reports from “true minor” 

facilities, certain of these facilities are subject to federal regulations which do require such reporting. In 

addition, the provisions of 1200-03-18-.02(7), which addresses facilities located in the ozone additional 

control areas, requires the submittal of annual reports of volatile organic compounds and/or nitrogen oxides 

from any facility located in the designated counties that have annual emissions of either pollutant of twenty 

five tons or more. More generally the provisions of 1200-03-10-.02(1)(a) clearly state that “the Technical 

Secretary may require the owner or operator of any air contaminant source discharging air contaminants, at 

the expense of the owner or operator, to install, calibrate, operate, and maintain such monitoring equipment 

as the Technical Secretary shall prescribe; sample such emissions in accordance with methods as the

Technical Secretary shall prescribe; establish and maintain such records; and make periodic emission reports. 

While later sections of this regulation specifically address continuous in-stack monitoring systems, the 

general language cited above allows the Division to require the reporting of any emissions from a regulated 

facility. Thus, the Division has the ability to require reporting from any “true minor” facility whose 

emissions the Division considers could have any conceivable impact upon recognized ambient air quality 

standards. In making this statement the Division must note that the requirement to keep records, contained in 

1200-03-20-.04(1) remains unchanged and Division inspectors have the right to review those records 

anytime that an issue is suspected. The Division would like to note that this action is consistent with a 

number of federal regulations addressing small (minor) facilities and set forth in 40 CFR 63 in that while the 

requirement exists to keep records, there is no requirement to report. 

Request to revise 1200-03-10-.02 in the Tennessee SIP

The proposed revision to Division Rule 1200-03-10-.02 is simply to allow facilities subject to the provisions 

of Title V (hence the reference to Division Rule 1200-03-9-.02(11) which contains the Tennessee Title V 

regulations) to report data from continuous in-stack monitoring systems with the Title V semi-annual reports 

rather than quarterly as the current regulation requires. The rationale for this request is that the quarterly 

timeframe was established in federal rules promulgated in the mid-1970’s, well before any Title V reporting 

requirements existed. The underlying federal rule upon which Division Rule 1200-03-10-.02 is based in 40 

CFR 51, Appendix P, Section 4.1, which established the quarterly reporting time frame. This rule was last 

updated in 1986. The quarterly time frame for reporting excess emissions from continuous emission 

monitors required by the New Source Performance Standards (40 CFR 60) was set forth in the original 40 

CFR 60.7(c) promulgated in the 1970’s. In the 1990’s 40 CFR 60.7(c) was updated to allow for the 

reporting of this data on a semi-annual basis to match the semi-annual reporting requirements of Title V. 

Note that Division Rule 1200-03-10-.02 does not apply to situations where a facility is required to conduct 

monitoring by federal regulations set forth in 40 CFR 60 or 40 CFR 63. It only applies to monitoring 

required by 40 CFR 51, Appendix P and other monitoring required by the state.

The USEPA has recognized the obsolete nature of quarterly reporting in the Recordkeeping and Reporting 

Burden Reduction regulations promulgated in the Federal Register on February 12, 1999. That regulation 

allowed for the reporting of data from sources required to operate continuous in-stack monitoring systems on 

a semi-annual basis in lieu of the previously required quarterly basis so as to allow for consolidated reporting 
consistent with the reports discussed in Item 1 above. Without the revision to Rule 1200-03-10-.02, affected 

sources in Tennessee would not be able to avail themselves of this consolidated reporting requirement.

In addressing the requirements of Section 110(l) of the Clean Air Act, The Tennessee Division of Air 

Pollution Control declares that this proposed SIP revision will have no affect on any applicable requirement 

concerning attainment and reasonable further progress. . . or any other applicable requirement as it simply 

involves a revision of the time frame over which data is reported to the Division. In addressing the 

requirements of Section 193 of the Clean Air Act, The Tennessee Division of Air Pollution Control declares 

that this proposed SIP revision is not a control requirement. While the original rule was in effect prior to 

November 15, 1990, the original rule only addresses the reporting of emissions and does not address any 

emissions reduction or emissions control requirements. Therefore, amending the original regulation will 

have no affect on the emissions of any air pollutant.