P. 1


# OAR Box 1875 Prepped byOllie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 79 ) ll-F-2 6 Docket Number: 

# A-90-1 9

Printed 12/1/200811:12:49AM

Sheet 79of 86P. 2 

## A-90-1 9 ll-F-2 6

Note s (attached ) fro m10/20/9 2 conversatio nbetwee nA . Eckert , EPA:OGC an

d D . Rivkin , Offic e o f th e Vic e President , Counci l on Economi c Competitiveness . AlanEckert' s note s fro m the telephon e conversatio n wer e mad e o n a cop yo f th e marku

p forwarde d t o D . Rivki n o n 10/20/9 2 (Ite mNo . II-F-25) . Subject : Marku p o f draf t languag e fo r complementarylega l theory .

!99e EP AAI R DOCKE TP.3 _

Octobe r 20 , 199 2 Davi d Rivkin : iHere' s a markup o f you r length ypreambl e insert , whic hdoe s tw o things : first , i t conform s i t t o th e agreemen t yo u reache d wit hiRa

y( a copyo f whic hi s attached) . Second , i t incorporate s change s OAQP S develope d t o mak e i t technicall yaccurate . Pleas e le t m © kno wi f yo u hav e an yproblemwit hthes e revisions . Ala n Ecker t

OPTIONH, FOR M 9 9 (7-90 ) F A XTRANSMITTA L "IDooic/ KtV/ci n Oept/Aflvncy 

### * " V5Z-&Z3 / tr o fpage s • * j- *" " $/& n £-c/<e^f - 

### ""•^-^ z Pax* HSU 7540-0 1 -317.736 8 GENERA L senvice s ADMINISTRATIO N



## s S C : S T66/fO/T T 900 ®P. 4
Sciic'ij)

•4 tf/A 

# fy* "ijC<^m*ricyt/'o n

EPA' s propose d Brul e allow s a n averagin g approac hfo r HO N- fcbverled portion s o f l a plant , ge e pp . - EP Ai s alsoApaa^p&aio g a broade r averaging^pgepsGal , a s se t fort hbelow . Significantly , thi s Latte r averagin g schem e i s no t bein g propose d a s a n alternativ e t o th e averagin g approach , describe d above . Rather , th e tv o approache s ar e entirel ycomplementary . However , becaus e th e lega l issue s pose d b yth e broader*averagin g schem e diffe r appreciabl yfro mthos e implicate d b yth e mor e narro waveragin g proposal , EP Abelieve s tha t a separat e discussio n o f th e forme r i s warranted, . oMSHo')aMii^.m> Oy, ^ rh e broa d averagin g proposa l relie s upo n the * lega l theary<£s* ^ dovel-ppdid ' \J$LlAUl , whic hwoul d permi t complianc e wit hth e HO NMAC T standar d (or , fo r tha t matter , with-an yothe r MAC T standar d t o b e develope d b yEPA ) b yaveragin g emission s fro mpoint s locate d anywher e withi n a n entir e contiguou s facility , whic hcontain s HON-civere d processin g unit6 . Er A'-believe s tha t thi s apfeHFoach—ier- ' legally-pormiaoibl c unde r sectio n 11 3 o f th e Clea n Ai r Act . frm^ niijianr

n r f IIP P un l i111T 1 nVt r n'Tnl l I n ii i lirnfrl-wpnljr y enccs- . i/n/3 . atf&Air.a.'h-fcs*wXkJ <Xn0frn:*d*iJ*-* imvln g ,carefull yanalyse d Captio n 11 2 an d it s legislativ e hlctoiY / EFA ' conclude d tha t thai o li s a irtifference
- betwee n th e ter m'sourc e i n a categor yo r subcategory, " use d i n Sectio n 11 2 2,n d th e ter m"source, " use d i n Sectio n 11 2 (i ) . n? o bagi p with7^|^|^Ct^^^J3Tjt;ha t th o us e o f differont
- word s b ycongres s -An -

^tve—su-bse^Llon s wa" bno L accidenta l an d refloate d a well


# fy:

- J 

## *s* g thought?-otrf e Congressiona l intent , ^ffieolff f cite . Specifically , fo r purpose s o f establishin g emissions'standard s unde r subsectio n 11 2 (d) , Congres s expecte d EP At o identif yspecifi c productio n lines , piece d o f equipment , etc. , locate d withi n majo r stationar y source s o r are a sources , an d t o trea t the ma s source s onl yfo r th e pdrpose s o f subsection s 11 2 (d)(3)(A ) an d (B) , i.e T . fo r th e purpose s o f determinin g wha t ar e th e averag e emissio n limitation s achieve d b yth e bes t performin g twelv e percen t o f existin g A source bo r averag e emissio n limitation s achieve d b yth e fiv e bes t performin g sources , sinc e th e ter msourc e wa s use d i n th e subsectio n 11 2 (d ) fo r a distinc t an d uniqu e purpose , th e relevan t statutor ylanguag e contain s a qualifyin g se t o f word s - "i n a categor yo r subcategory " - appende d t o th e wor d "source. " significantly , i n subsectio n 11 2 (i) , th e relevan t statutor y languag e contain s th e ter m"source " —a fac t that,^Etfft~=few*a<ies£&& T clearl yreflected—th e congressional—inton t frhat> fo r purpose s o f /?JJ

caning^whic hencompasse s a n entir e plant . At . wi,i] d <3^fe« , jy e lmlbfu l C u lia t ueveig l g^UlaLluii D HIMTP-BP Adefine d thf > i-nm . /->.< ? ISL-L&JL& aourco l t o includ e a n entir e facility- . Thi s readin g i s supporte d b yth e I fac t tha t th e definition s o f statutor yterms , se t fort hi n subsectio n 11 2 (a ) , contai n th e traditiona l definition s o f suc h term s a s "majo r source" , "stationar ysource" , etc . Unde r t**e
- ffas ErA't * •'llatutoir ^ construction , th e statutor ylanguag e "an y emission s standard , limitation , o r regulatio n promulgate d unde r 

## ihJ- .Scw^w^l'nvJ-^^ t oorriftUnc ^ / s (x

### .
100 ® •"^-^r- vsczKi.<-cc © SC:S TZe/frO/T TP. 5

Ch> Vi-o n thi s [112 ] sectio n and applicabl e t o a^s^urce " describe s al l o f th e existin g MAC T standards , establishe d unde r subsectio n11 2 (d) , and applicabl e t o a source , whic hcontain s withi ni t "source s i n a categoryo r subcategory " fj.e T . productio nlines , piece s o f equipment , ejfcc.. ) covere d b ysuc hMAC T standards . -£P Aa3n9o note s that^—lul u "ttari yroductions " rulfr;—i^
- adopt-^d -

a planL-widt e definitio n u f suuxcu . (June ! 13-,—t9^3r)—*-o n early-indicatio n tha t th u agenc ybelieve d ge e SC—F R37, , 34 2 tha^-a n en t i ge-cottfcigue ; consider ^ t o b e jagt^^p j L2JH. EPAalso , i s mindfu l o f th e fac t tha t i t ha s traditionall yenjoye d wid e latitud e i ncoming up wit hdivers e definition s o f th e ter m"source, " depending o n wha t regulatory objective s wer e implicated . Thi s ebngreo n ip wel l awar e o f thi e £*et^-jan

d EPA' s considerabl e discretio n l nthi s are a ha s bee n artirme a o yth e courts7 ^ noceh?_cito<% . m Lii e pieuen t inotanoo , EPAbrili-sve

o tha t -th

e -statutor

yanalysi s do-scribe d ahnvp , ca n sustaine d -unde r th e Sirs t xnim u o£ Lhb t Chevro n analysis * Alternatively,
- thi s lega i theor ycan ba supporte d b ythe
woight i o f chevro n discrotioni—availabl o t e EPAunde r Soo t ioniia f

, , tfndeivirfes r broado-averagin

g approach , EP Awoul d mak e n o '<***• change s iT . th e wayi t ha s identified categorie s and subcategorie s o f soiirce s i n th e HO Nan d devise d appropriat e emissio n standard s fo r them , no r i n th e wayi t woul d prescrib e futur e emissio n standairds fo r othe r emissio ncategorie s o r subcategories . Fo r complianc e purposes , however , i f a n owne r o r operato r doe s not . wis hti o contro l a particula r HON^covere d emissio n poin t t o th e leve l tha t woul d resul t i n the complianc e wit hth e relevan t HO N emissio n standard , th e extr a emission s fro m tha t poin t coul d b e offset ! byemission s reduction s greate r tha nwha t i s require d by an ystiandar

d the n i n effec t unde r Sectio n11 2 a t on e o r mor e othe r iemission point s withi nth e entir e stationarysource , i n additijon , emission s averaging woul d b e allowe d acros s al l th e emissibn point s withi n th e entir e plant , including th e SOCM I source i categor ya s wel l a s point s no t ye t covere d byan yHAC T standalrd . Ak such , emission s fro mproces s vents , wastewate r operation , storag e vessel s and transfe r operation s coul d b e average d amon g themselve s o r wit hothe r emission s point s withi nth e entir e stationar ysource , i n orde r t o provid e a s muc hflexibilit ya s possible . However , distinctio n woul d b e mad e betwee nemissio n points i physicall ysimila r t o emissionpoint s covere d unde r th e HO Nor ! anyothe r MAC T an d al l othe r emissio npoints . Fo r th e former * t o participat e i n the averaging scheme , theymus t compl y wit hwhateve r complianc e routine s hav e bee nestablishe d unde r th e SOCM I HONo r othe r relevan t MACT . Fo r th e latter , t o participat e i n averaging , th e sourc e mus t petitio n EPAt o establis ha n appropriat e complianc e routine . T o b e sure , onc e EPAestablishe s suc ha i complianc e routin e fo r an ynewtyp e o f a n emissio n point ,

800 0 Sr 9C:S T Z6/P0/T TP. 6

/ VZ"-i

insAji " i i al l sjimila

r emission s point s locate d withi nan ysource s car

i participat e i n th e averaging , s o lon g a s theyus e th e EPA approjve d complianc e routine . EPAsolicit s commen t als o o nho wi t would ! verif yth e baselin e fo r unregulate d emissio npoints , and ho wij t woul d structur e th e averaging complianc e proces s t o assur e th e standar d a s a whol e remain s enforceable . On e possibilit yt o consiae r woul d b e t o us e th e averag e emission s fro msuc hemissio n

. point bove r som e representativ e time perio d a 6 thei r baselines . 6»w»n/ , i7 ^ Spe<<J/iLc<JOL(taqj^aiid onIs^-cJ

cXuXiujnikifi?*-, o,nd

paUc--r .*i.p4M*£zn-.stp; \>nciv<Ur-d n&>%-' &s&toJZiJ7wijy$oit-t-e^, ; wtfX sartw, a^^ft , explaine d abcw^o , whil e equipmen t le*k s ar e include d int o soc$K j sources , the ycaijno ? a t thi s time b e inoJ^ude d i nemission s averagV . Unde r thi s a iterative , EPAwoul d cxpe&itioucl ydevelo p method s r o assig n allowabl e emissio n level s t o parfci^ular lea k point s o r group s o f lea k points^^^-and. , eve n.withou t awaiting fo r an yindividualsjietitions , woul d sim'i-iarl ydevelop method&xfo r calculatin g emission s fro mtype s o f enii^sio

n point s no t regelate d b yHON . er ~

rna o



# r irnde

r th e broad/-^averagin g approach , emissio nreduction s from emission s point s no t covere d b yth e HONvoul d b e usabl e t o generat e credits , subjec t t o th e previousl ydiscusse d limitation s and anylimitation s adde d i nan yothe r MAC T standar d applicabl e t o th e relevan t emissio n points . Credit s coul d b e generate d a t an ytim e fromnon-HONemissio n point s unti l the ybecom e subjec t t o a !^C T standard . Whe ntheybecome subjec t t o a MAC T standard , th e fiiture valu e o f reduction s a t thos e emissio npoint s woul d b e goverrted byth e emissio n standard s require d b yth e ne wMACT , State d differently , th e offset s availabl e fro m suc hpoint s woul d hav e t o b e recompute d using th e newbaselin e establishe d fo r them . ; Eac hfutur e MAC T standard mus t contai na floo r calculation . T o th e exten t tha t point s covere d bythes e late r standard s haveCbeer P alre"adyAcontrolled fo r th e purpose s o f participatin g i n a n averaging scheme , tha t relate s t o th e complianc e wit ha n earlie r standard , th e floo r fo r th e late r 'standaircTXb

xb e mor e stringent . A s futur e MAC T standard s ar e adopted , EP Awoul d attemp t t o maximiz e averaging opportunitie s and therefor e minimiz e complianc e delay s an d costs . IJP Abelieve s tha t th e broad averaging scheme , describe d above, ! provide s significan t policybenefits . T o begi nwith , i t woul d jenabl e source s t o achiev e th e same environmenta l gains , a s unde r jthemor e narro waveraging proposal , bu t a t significantl y "~reaucejd costs , second,A-b yinducing oourco a to'.mak c coct- - gffeetjiv

e reduc t lon e throughou t onti-r o faci l it.ii.es~,—EP

Awoul d -be

ire— a betto r positio n t o establis hsub&equon t MACTg t I n fact-?—ifl
- -al- 1 cajcoo , whe n suchMACT B ar e establishe d -unde r sub«ocfejktfuJJL2---
- ^ fd^- r th e MAC T " floor"^wou^sr^r~ttgIit:er than otherwis e woul d 'hav e ^ /^ , tighte r thanotherwis e wouId~hav e ^ y - bee n tih

e cas e i f th e emissio n point s outsid e o f th e alread y coverej d MAC T categorie s woul d have staye d uncontrolled . .Last , bu t no t least , EPAbelieve s tha t the utilizatio n o f th e broa d averagin g schem e mayresul t i nthe discoveryo f emissio npoint s within ! facilitie s tha t otherwis e migh t hav e bee n overlooke d b y EP Aanl a stateregulators . /Th4s
- last—peint
- io
—supnQrted__i2y-JClie — < • > 0OQ S i t iV o ca^rlimc ewith^Ttte~ J 5rT5^ ^

CWZML-X •airui 600(g ) © AC:S T SB/frO/I TP. 7



### ~ -7
Inser t A Whil e equipmen t leaks/ar e include d i n SOCM I sources , the y canno t a t thi s tim e b e include d i n emission s averages . Equipmen t leaks;ar e no t include d because : (l ) th e negotiate d standar d doe s no t requir e an

yfixe d performanc e level ; an d (2 ) n o practica l metho d currentl yexists^t o verif yperformance . Unde r thi s alternative , EPAwouldy(develo p method s t o assignallowabl e emissio n level s t o particula r leak point s o r group s o f leak points , and woul d similarl ydevelop method s fo r calculating emission s fromemissio n point s no t regulate d b yth e HON . Th e Administrato r seek s commen t o n mean s t o verif yand documen t th e emissio n performanc e level s achieve d fo r situation s wher e equipmen t leak s ar e include d i nan average . Commenter s shoul d includ e a descriptio n o f th e complianc e verificatio nprocedur e tha t woul d b e use d and wha t dat a need s t o b e supplie d t o suppor t th e suggeste d system . Comment s ar e als o requeste d o ntype s o f non-scjCMi emissio n point s tha t migh t b e include d i nbroade r averagjes .

®8 C = S T 06/fO/T

T OTO © 

# JP. 8

& xtfsga . 1, a f .omftafc-- ^ :*ay , se t fort hbelo wi s th e appropriat e languag e fo r th e las t Substantiv e languag e insert . I t i s a s follows : regardin g unde r relate d j ' (ii ) Informatio n reasonabl ysimila r t o informatio n emission s averaging require d b yan ystandar d propose d sectio n 112 . Th e Administrato r mayreques t an yreasonabl y supplementa l informatio nwithi n3 0 day s afte r submission. " 

## in^^h

TTO ® ©8C = ST 56/fO/T TP. 9

''inser t B 

### j$JL*$- Severa l factor s mus t b e considere d i n implementing thi s ilterniativ

e approach . First , th e averaging approac hallow s Lnclusjio

n o f point s tha t wil l b e regulate d b ysubsequen t MAC T standards . I n calculating residua l ris k unde r sectio n 112(f) , should j al l point s i n th e initia l averag e b e include d i non e ris k fcalculjation eve n thoughsome o f thos e point s wil l no t b e subjec t t o the j standard s unde r 112(d ) unti l a late r date ? Sjecond , i t woul d requir e a determinatio no nth e permisjsibilityo f interpollutan t trades . Thi s concer n i s alread y being evaluate d fo r VQCHAP s i n th e SOCM I sourc e category . Th e alternativ e approac hwSStge T furthe r complicat e thi s issu e b y adding ! dissimila r categorie s (e.g. , industria l cooling towers ) emitting dissimila r pollutant s (e.g. , chromium) . sinc e th e HO N currentl yaddresse s onl yorgani c HAP s significan t change s woul d b e necfessar

yt o accommodat e non-VO C HA P controls . 

### OuAdL .@t~ s-t. 

# LfX

X>

:TO ® 

# xx2*%

S 6 C = S TS6/^0/T T