P. 1 

# OAR Box 1802 Prepped by Charmelle Mathews



### Document

Number: 

# 7 ) IV-E-0 2 Docket Number: 

# A-90-3 7

Printed 11/4/2008 11:57:59 AM

Sheet 7 of 117P. 2 

# ft —<?0-3 7 TO : Docke t # A-90-3 7 ("NS R Reform" ) Th e purpos e o f thi s not e i s t o documen t a presentatio n o n .Jun e 6 , 199 6 entitle d "EP AOvervie wo f th e Ne wSourc e Revie w Refor mRulemaking " b yrepresentative s of,th e EP AOffic e o f Genera l Counse l (OGC ) organize d b yth e Environment , Energyand ; Natura l Resource s Sectio n o f th e Distric t o f Columbi a Bar . Th e purpos e o f th e presentatio n wa s t o provid e informatio n abou t th e recentl ysigne d Ne wSourc e Revie wReform proposa l t o intereste d member s o f the,D:C . Bar . Topic s include d applicability , BACT , and clas s I proposals . Th e presentatio n too k plac e a t th e offide s o f th e D.C . Bar . Coordinator : Kare n Malkin . Presenters : Vicki e Patto n an d Mar k Kataoka , EP AOGC . Alis t o f registrant s i s attached . Als o attache d ar e "EP AOvervie wo f th e Ne wSourc e Revie w Refor mRulemaking " an d "Compariso n o f th e Ne wSourc e Revie w(NSR ) Refor mRulemakin g Packag e an d Curren t NS R Rules, " whic h wer e distribute d t o attendees .

0\ 

### 1 EP AAI R DOCKE RP. 3 

## :-^m

•- 

# EP

A OVERVIE

W O F TH

E NEW SOURCE REVIE

W REFOR

M RULEMAKIN

G 

# Ti SEP I I 199

6 *~~m> f 

### EFAAi R DQCKE ~ 

# Jun e 6 , 199 6 07-00-4 8
Sponsored by : The Environment, Energ

y an d Natura l Resources Sectio n The Districto f

ColumbiaBa

rCOMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TNS R RULE S I . Backgroun d • Goa l of NS R Refor m i s t o reduc e cost s an d regulator yburden s withou t sacrificin g environmenta l benefit s embodie d i n th e presen t approach . • NS R Refor m Subcommitte e forme d i n Jul y199 3 unde rth e auspice s o f th e Clea n Ai rAc t Advisor yCommittee . • Subcommittee' s purpos e i s t o provid e independen t advic e an d counse l t o EP Ao n polic yan d technica l issue s associate d wit h reformin g th e NS R rules . • Propose d change s would :

- reduc e th e numbe ran d type s o f activitie s subjec t t o NS R

- provid e State s greate rflexibilit yt o implemen t th e NS R progra m

- revam p permittin g o f source s nea rClas s I area s

- promot e innovativ e technologie s an d pollutio n preventio n

- streamlin e th e NS R permittin g proces s

" Apri l 9,1996 ; Propose d NS R Refor m Rule sCOMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TNS R RULE S (continued ) Propose d Rul e A. The "Clean Unit" Exclusion
• Asimplifie d applicabilit ytes t fo rchange s t o existin g unit s tha t alread yhav e state-of-the-ar t controls . • Change s whic h d o no t increase , th e unit' s hourl y potentia l emission s woul d no t b e considere d a physica l o roperationa l chang e ari d woul d no t trigge rmajo rNS R
• Wha t i s a "clea n unit" ? a n emission s uni t tha t ha s a federall y enforceabl e emissio n limi t comparabl e t o th e emissio n limi t tha t woul d resul t fro m a curren t revie wunde rth e BACT/LAE R requirement s Curren t Rul e th e existin g NS R progra m doe s no t includ e "Clea n Unit " exclusion . th e

Apri l 9,1996 ; Propose d NS R Refor m Rule s

bi

### COMPARISO N O F TH E NEWSOURC E REVIE W (NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TRULE S (CONTINUED ) Propose d Rul e Curren t Rul e thre e limit s woul d qualify : o BAC To rLAE R limit s se t withi n th e las t 1 0 year s o limit s se t b ya Stat e technolog ymino r ne wsourc e revie wprogra m determine d b yEP At o b e equivalen t t o th e federa l BACT/LAE R program s fl. The "Clean Facility"

Exclusion Allow s State s t o exclud e fro m majo rNS R propose d change s t o a n existin g majo rstationar ysourc e tha t ha s installe d BAC To rLAE R an d ha s undergon e a n ai rqualit y impac t analysi s withi n th e las t 1 0 years Th e existin g NS R progra m doe s no t includ e th e "Clea n Facility " exclusion . C. Netting

Baseline • Amor e flexibl e an d lenien t metho d fo r computin g "nettin g baseline " emissions .

" Apri l 9,1996 ; Propose d NS R Refor m Rule s
T J

### COMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W (NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TRULE S (CONTINUED ) Propose d Rul e Curren t Rul e

• Base d o n source' s highes t leve l o f utilizatio n an d no t necessaril yhighes t emissio n rate . Utilizatio n leve l (capacityfactor ) i s th e highes t consecutiv e 12-mont h perio d i n th e 1 0 years precedin g th e propose d change . I n nonattainmen t area s an d ozon e transpor t regions , th e baselin e canno t begi n prio rt o Novembe r11,1990 .
Sourc e must us e th e curren t allowabl e emissio n • rat e (e.g. , Ibs./MMbtu ) takin g int o consideratio n Federa l o rStat e emission s restriction s (RACT , NESHAP , MACT , BACT , LAER , NSPS , etc. ) impose d ove rth e 1 0 yea rperiod . "Nettin g baseline " i s th e curren t allowabl e • emissio n rat e multiplie d b yth e utilizatio n level . Base d o n th e source' s averag e rat e a t whic h th e uni t actuall yemitte d th e pollutant . Thi s reflect s actua l operatin g hours , productio n rates , an d type s of material s processed , stored , o rcombuste d durin g th e prescribe d tim e period . "Actua l emissions " as o f a particula rdat e equa l th e averag e rat e a

t whic h th e uni t actuall yemitte d th e pollutan t durin g a 2-yea rperio d whic h precede s th e particula rdat e an d whic h i s representativ e o f norma l sourc e operation . Th e Administrato rma yallo wth e us e of a differen t tim e perio d upo n determinatio n tha t i s i t mor e representativ e o f norma l sourc e operation . Fo ra n electri cutilit ystea m generatin g unit , actua l emission s ar e th e representativ e actua l annua l emission s o

f th e uni t fo ran y2-yea rperio d ou t o f th e precedin g 5 years . Th e Administrato rma

ypresum e tha t source-specifi c allowabl e emission s fo rth e uni t ar e equivalen t t o th e actua l emission s of th e unit . Allowabl e emission s accoun t fo rapplicabl e Federa l standards , SI P emission s limitations , o rfederall yenforceabl e permi t conditions . "Nettin g baseline " i s th e actua l rat e o f emission s fro m th e uni t average d ove ra 2-yea rperiod . Apri l 9,1996 ; Propose d NS R Refor m Rule sCOMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TRULE S (CONTINUED ) Propose d Rul e Curren t Rul e 

## D. Pollution

Control Projects • Proposin g genera l exclusio n fro m majo rNSR : Add-o n control s

- - Fue l switche s t o cleane rfuel s

Pollutio n preventio n project s Ther e ar e currentl yn o exclusion s fo radd-o n control s o rfue J switches . Pollutio n contro l project s (no t includin g pollutio n preventio n projects ) a t electri c utilitie s ar e exempt . Ther e ar e currentl yexemption s fo rtemporar yclea n coa l technolog ydemonstratio n project s an d fo rpermanen t clea n coa l technolog y demonstratio n project s tha t d o no t increas e th e potentia l t o emit .

• Implementatio n safeguards : Environmentall ybeneficia l tes t fo rpollutio n preventio n project s Permittin g authorit ygive n th e responsibilit y fo rdecisio n o n th e Caus e o rcontribut e test/ai rqualit yimpac t assessmen t Thes e safeguard s ar e applie d t o th e electri cutilit y exclusions , bu t d o no t includ e consideratio n o f AQRV s i n Clas s I areas .
E. Plantwide

Applicability

Limits (PALs) • Proposin g regulation s t o allo wan d facilitat e State s issuanc e o

f voluntar ysource-specifi c PALS . Curren t rule s mak e n o provision s fo rPALs .

** Apri l 9,1996 ; Proposed NS R Refor m Rules "

T3 0 0

### COMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W (NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TRULE S (CONTINUED ) Propose d Rul e Curren t Rul e

• Apermittin g authorit yma ychoos e t o adop t a n area-wid e PA L approac h • APA L permi t allow s th e sourc e t o mak e an y chang e provide d i t doe s not violat e it s plantwid e emission s limi t

Apri l 9,1996 ; Propose d NS R Refor m Rule s **

T 3 C O

### COMPARISON O F TH E NE W

SOURC E REVIE

W (NSR ) REFOR

M RULEMAKIN

GPACKAG E AND CURREN T RULE S (CONTINUED ) Propose d Rul e Curren t Rul e F. Actual-to-Future-Actual Methodology • Th e WEPC O rul e i s explicitl ylimite d t o utilitie s an d promulgate d a n actual-to-future-actua l methodolog yfo ral l change s a t a utility , excep t fo rne wunits . I n th e fina l rule , EP Aindicate d i t woul d conside radoptin g thi s methodolog yfo ral l sourc e categorie s i n a subsequen t rulemaking . • EP Asolicit s commen t o n thre e alternative s fo rth e futur e actua l methodology : leavin g th e scop e th e same ; applicabl e onl yt o utilit yunit s extendin g th e methodolog yt o al l sourc e categorie s eliminatin g th e methodolog y G. Proposal

of CMA Exhibit

B • EP Aagree d t o propos e an d tak e fina l actio n o n a methodolog yfo rdeterminin g whethe ra sourc e ha s undertake n a modificatio n base d o n th e source' s potentia l emission s • Unde rthi s methodology , source s ma ycalculat e emission s increase s o rdecrease s base d o n eithe rth e existin g actua l emission s o ro n potentia l emissions , measure d i n term s o f hourl y emission s Th e curren t basi s fo rne t emission s increas e i s actua l emissions .

Apri l 9,1996 ; Propose d NS R Refor m Rules "

T J o

### COMPARISO N O F TH E NE W SOURC E REVIE W (NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TRULE S (CONTINUED ) ' Propose d Rul e Curren t Rul e

• Source s coul d us e thi s potential-to-potentia l tes t fo rbot h NS R applicabilit yan d fo rcalculatin g offsets , nettin g credits , an d othe remissio n reductio n credits . • Aseriou s drawbac k

o f thi s approac h i s that i t woul d allo wunchecke d consumptio n o f incremen t byold , grandfathere d source s t o th e exclusio n o

f new , more efficien t an d les s pollutin g sources . IV . Bes t Availabl e Contro l Technolog y(BACT ) A. EPAis

proposina

to codifv core criteria for BACT determinations: • Al l of th e availabl e contro l system s fo rth e • Curren t rule s d o not specifythes e criteria , bu t curren t source , includin g th e mos t stringent , mus t b e policycall s fo rthei ruse . considere d i n th e determinatio n • Th e selectio n of a particula rcontro l syste m a s • Curren t rule s d o no t specifythes e criteria , bu t curren t BAC Tmust b e justifie d i n term s o f th e statutor ypolicycall s fo rthei ruse . criteri a an d supporte d b yth e record , an d mus t explai n th e basi s fo rth e rejectio n o f th e othe r mor e stringen t contro l candidat e syste m

* * Apri l 9,1996 ; Propose d NS R Refor m Rule s " 7 ^ . • 9, . •

### COMPARISO N O F TH E NE W

SOURC E REVIE

W (NSR ) REFOR

M RULEMAKIN

GPACKAG E AN D CURRENT RULE S (CONTINUED ) Propose d Rul e Curren t Rul e Codifying

the Existing

"Top-Down"

BACT Determination

Policy in Federal NSR Regulations • EP Arequest s publi ccomment s o n alternativ e method s fo rdeterminin g BACT . • Th e propose d Federa l regulation s woul d serv e a templat e fo rStat e an d loca l agenc yrules . Impro ve Content

and Management

ofRA CV BACT/LAER

Clearinghouse • EP Ai s proposin g mandator ysubmitta l o f BAC T determination s t o th e RBL C b yth e permittin g authorit ywithi n 6 0 day s o f permi t issuance . Curren t rule s d o no t requir e submitta l t o th e RBLC .

Apri l 9,1996 ; Propose

d NS R Refor m Rules 8 T J

### COMPARISO N O F TH E NE W SOURC E REVIE W (NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TRULE S (CONTINUED ) Propose d Rul e Curren t Rul e

• Man yof th e improvement s t o th e RBL C recommende d b yth e CAAA C hav e bee n made ; others wil l occu ra s resource s becom e availabl e D. Streamlining

BACT/LAER

Determinations • BACT/LAE R determination s nee d onl yconside r technologie s "demonstrate d i n practice. " Curren t rule s d o not make detaile d requirement s wit h regar d t o a cutof f date . Curren t EPApolic ycall s fo r consideratio n of availabl e contro l technologie s fo r BACT , includin g emergin g technologies , unti l th e tim e tha t a fina l NS R permi t i s issued . • "Demonstrate d i n practice " includes : al l technologie s require d an d reporte d throug h existin g regulator yprogram s an d thos e that , whil e no t identifie d i n th e regulatoryarena , mee t specifi ccriteri a fo r determinin g thei ravailabilit yan d appropriatenes s fo rconsideratio n i n a BACT/LAE R analysi s

Apri l 9,1996 ; Proposed NS R Refor m Rule sCOMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TRULE S (CONTINUED ) Propose d Rul e Curren t Rul e an ytechnolog ytha t ha s bee n (1 ) installe d an d operatin g continuall yfo ra t leas t 6 month s o n a n emission s uni t whic h ha s bee n operatin g a t leas t a t 5 0 percen t o f nameplat e capacity ; an d (2 ) whos e performanc e ha s bee n verifie d wit h a performanc e tes t o rperformanc e dat a whil e operatin g a t 9 0 percen t o f th e desig n specifications . Proposa l authorize s th e permittin g authorit yt o cu t off consideratio n o f additiona l contro l technologie s identifie d afte rth e permi t applicatio n ha s bee n determine d complet e unles s a commente rmeet s minimu m documentatio n criteria . Cu t of f i n curren t polic yi s whe n fina l permi t i s issued .

' Apri l 9,1996 ; Propose d NS R Refor m Rule s 

### 1 0

### COMPARISO N O F TH E NE W

SOURC E REVIE

W (NSR ) REFOR

M RULEMAKIN

GPACKAG E AN D CURREN T RULE S (CONTINUED ) Propose d Rul e Curren t Rul e

• Minimu m documentatio n criteri a Nam e an d locatio n o f th e sourc e utilizin g th e technolog y Manufacture ran d typ e of contro l devic e Dat e technolog ywa s installe d an d operationa l Performanc e requirement s Resultin g tes t o rperformanc e dat a E. Complete

Application

Criteria New name for Source Information • EP Ai s proposin g minimu m criteri a upo n whic h th e permittin g authorityshoul d bas e it s completenes s determination : Thoroug h BAC To rLAE R analysi s additiona l impact analyse s Clas s I are a analyse s PA L applicabilit y undemonstrate d technolog ywaive r provision s FL M revie wan d coordinatio n registratio n o n applicabl e bulleti n boar d statewid e complianc e fo rnonattainmen t Documentatio n of offset s Curren t rule s requir e tha t source s submi t al l informatio n necessar

yt o perfor m an yanalysi s o r mak e require d determinations , includin g a descriptio n of th e source , a schedul e fo rconstructio n o r modification , informatio n necessar yt o determin e BACT , meteorologica l an d topographica l data , an d ai rqualit yan d growt h impacts .

Apri l 9,1996 ; Proposed NSR Refor m Rule s 

### 1 1 T JCOMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TRULE S (CONTINUED ) Propose d Rul e Curren t Rul e Proposing

reforms

to the existing Innovative Control Technology

(ICT) waiver • Ne wnam e - - "Undemonstrate d Technolog yo r Application " (UT/A ) waive r • Ne wdefinitio n —"an ysystem , process , material , o rtreatmen t technolog ytha t show s substantia l likelihoo d t o operat e effectivel yan d t o achiev e either : (a ) greate rcontinuou s reduction s o f ai r pollutan t emission s tha n an ydemonstrate d system , o r(b ) comparabl e emissio n reduction s at lowe rcost , lowe renerg yinput , wit h lesse r non-ai renvironmenta l impacts , o rwit h othe r advantage s tha t ar e define d an d mutuall y agree d o n a case-specifi cbasi s t o justif yth e us e of UT/Aprovisions. " • Expandin g applicabilit yo f UT/ Awaive rt o nonattainmen t areas . • UT/ Awaive rmus t contai n a referenc e emissio n contro l performanc e objectiv e o f th e UT/Aan d th e otherwis e applicabl e BAC To rLAE R standard . Referre d t o a s innovativ e contro l technolog y(ICT ) a t 51.166(s ) Curren t definition—"an ysyste m o f ai rpollutio n contro l tha t ha s no t bee n adequatel ydemonstrate d i n practice , bu t woul d hav e a substantia l likelihoo d o f achievin g greate rcontinuou s emission s reductio n tha n an ycontro l syste m i n curren t practic e o ro f achievin g a t leas t comparabl e reduction s a t lowe r cos t i n term s o f energy , economics , o rnon-ai rqualit y environmenta l impacts. " IC Twaiver s ar e limite d t o PS D areas .

Apri l 9,1996 ; Proposed NS R Refor m Rule s 1 2 T JCOMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TRULE S (CONTINUED ) Propose d Rul e

• Permittin g authorit yi s require d t o includ e i n th e UT/Apermi t bot h "marginal " ari d "gross " failur e emissio n limits . Contingenc ymeasure s mus t b e identifie d fo rfailur e modes . "Gross " failur e emissio n limi t i s a n enforceabl e emissio n limi t • Provide s permittin g authorit yth e flexibilit yt o eithe rpermi t th e UT/

Aa t it s "margina rfailur e emissio n leve l o rrequir e th e sourc e t o instal l technolog ycapabl e of achievin g th e appropriat e referenc e emissio n limit . • EP Arequest s commen t o n possibl e method s fo r creatin g incentives . • A n UT/ Atha t "grossly " fail s i s require d t o eithe r replac e o rretrofit , o n a n expeditiou s schedule , suc h tha t th e sourc e achieve s th e applicabl e BAC To rLAE R standar d withi n 1 8 months . • Duratio n o f UT/

Awaive r 2 year s fro m dat e o f start-u p or ;

- 5 year s fro m dat e o f permi t issuance .

• * Apri l 9,1996 ; Proposed NSR Reform Rule s ** •

•

• •
•

1 3 Curren t Rul e IC Tmus t achiev e a leve l o f continuou s emissio n reductio n equivalen t t o BACT . Ther e i s n o distinctio n betwee n margina l an d gros s failure .
N o margina l failur e provisions .

I f th e IC Tfail s t o mee t th e require d leve l o f emissio n reduction , th e sourc e ha s u p t o 3 year s t o mee t th e requirement . Duratio n o f IC Twaive r

- 4 year s fro m dat e of star t up ; o r

- 7 year s fro m dat e o f permi t issuanc e

• \ ^

### COMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W (NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TRULE S (CONTINUED ) Propose d Rul e Curren t Rul e

• Consisten t wit h th e CAA , establishe s a limi t o n th e issuanc e of UT/

Awaiver s t o tha t necessar y t o demonstrat e th e performanc e of a technolog y o rapplication . GA Pollution

Prevention

(PP) • Reaffirm s existin g Agencypolicyo n pollutio n preventio n (Ma

y28 , 199 2 memo ) whic h provide s guidanc e o n incorporatin g pollutio n preventio n int o th e Agency' s ongoin g programs . • Revise d packag e retain s positio n tha t existin g regulation s an d th e PC P exclusio n provid e satisfactor

yconsideratio n of P P initiative s N o specifi cmentio n of pollutio n prevention .

" Apri l 9,1996 ; Proposed NS R Refor m Rule s 

### 1 4 =COMPARISO N O F TH E NE W SOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TRULE S (CONTINUED ) Propose d Rul e Curren t Rul e Clas s I Area s A . Pre-Applicatio n Coordinatio n wit h FLM s • Permittin g authorit yrequire d t o notif yth e FL M withi n 3 0 day s o f bein g informe d tha t a propose d sourc e intend s t o locat e withi n 10 0 k m o f a Federa l Clas s I area . • Requir e permittin g authoritie s t o provid e a n opportunit yfo rFLM s t o participat e i n an ypre applicatio n meeting s wit h prospectiv e PS D applicant s plannin g t o locat e withi n 10 0 k m o f a Federa l Clas s I area . • FL M mus t provid e pertinen t informatio n o n AQRV s an d method s t o analyz e potentia l impacts , wher e available , t o PS D permi t applicant s upo n request . • EP Ai s creatin g a n electroni cdatabas e fo rth e compilatio n o f availabl e Clas s I information . Sam e notificatio n o f FLM s i s currentl yrequire d unde r th e Federa l PS D rules ; n o requiremen t exist s unde r par t 5 1 PS D rules. . N o opportunit yt o participat e i s explicitl yprovide d i n curren t PS D rules . FLM s ar e no t require d t o provid e suc h information . N o forma l databas e currentl yexists .

••Apri l 9,1996 ; Proposed NS R Refor m Rules 1 5
T J C O

### COMPARISO N O F TH E NE W

SOURC E REVIE

W (NSR ) REFORM

RULEMAKIN

GPACKAG E AN D CURREN T RULE S (CONTINUED ) Propose d Rul e Curren t Rul e B . Completenes s Revie w
• Permittin g authorit ymus t sen d permi t applicatio n t o FL M fo reac h sourc e locate d withi n 100 k m o f Federa l Clas s I area . • FL M ma yrevie wsummar yinformatio n i n EP Adatabas e for . eac h propose d sourc e beyon d 100 k m fro m a Federa l Clas s I area . EP Amus t Provid e writte n notic e o f an ypermi t applicatio n fo ra source.whic h "ma yaffect " a Clas s I area . Suc h notic e mus t b e give n withi n 3 0 day s o f receip t an d a t leas t 6 0 day s befor e publi chearin g N o comparabl e requiremen t currentl yexists .

- Summar yo f eac h PS D permi t applicatio n mus t b e entere d int o th e database .

- FL M ha s 7 day s fro m dat e o f registratio n i n th e databas e t o reques t permi t application . • FL M mus t fil e a Notic e allegin g potentia l advers e impact . Thi s Notic e trigger s requiremen t fo ra Clas s I analysi s (PS D increment s + AQRVs) . N o requiremen t currentl yexist s fo rFL M t o fil e a Notic e allegin g potentia l advers e impacts . [Although

Notice is prescribed

the Act.]

" Apri l 9,1996 ; Proposed NS R Refor m Rule s 1 6 T J h oCOMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TRULE S (CONTINUED ) Propose d Rul e Curren t Rul e FL M ha s a t leas t 3 0 day s fro m receip t o f permi t applicatio n fo rrevie wprio rt o issuanc e o f a completenes s determinatio n b yth e permittin g authority .

• Th e permittin g authorit ymus t consul t wit h th e FL M an d tryt o resolv e an ypotentia l inlormatio n deficiencie s prio r t o issuin g a completenes s determination . PS D rule s provid e n o FL M involvemen t i n completenes s determination . Unde rFedera l PS D rules , FL M ha s 3 0 day s fro m receip t o f applicatio n l o provid e EP Awit h a n analysi s o f advers e impac t o n visibility . N o comparabl e consultatio n requiremen t currentl y exists . Permi t Evaluation : Advers e Impac t Analysi s Proposa l clarifie s tha t require d Clas s I analysi s involve s an yAQRV s identifie d b yth e FL M fo rwhic h th e Notic e ha s bee n filed . PS D rule s contai n genera l provisio n fo rFL M t o demonstrat e tha t sourc e emission s wil l hav e a n advers e impac t o n AQRVs . Federa l PS D rule s hav e specifi cprocedure s fo rsubmittin g a demonstratio n concernin g visibility .

Apri l 9,1996 ; Proposed NS R Reform Rules 1 7
T J h oCOMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TRULE S (CONTINUED ) Propose d Rul e Curren t Rul e

• EP Ai s proposin g genera l definition s fo r"ai r qualit y relate d value " an d "advers e impac t o n ai r qualit y relate d values. "

- EP Ai s affirmin g tha t FLM s mus t hav e sufficien t latitud e t o addres s impact s o n a n area-by-are a an d o n a permit-by-permi t basis .

- EP Ai s encouragin g FLM s t o identif yAQRV s o n a regiona l o rnationa l basi s wher e appropriate , an d t o establis h genera l procedure s lo ridentifyin g AQRVs . • FL M ha s a t leas t 6 0 day s fro m dat e completenes s determinatio n i s mad e t o mak e th e advers e impac t demonstration . Permittin g authorit ycanno t issu e a preliminar ydeterminatio n unti l FL M ha s bee n give n thi s opportunit yt o submi t a demonstration . Curren t PS D rule s d o no t contai n comparabl e definitions . Federa l PS D rule s contai n a definitio n o f "advers e impac t o n visibility. "

FL M ha s 3 0 day s fro m receip t o f applicatio n t o submi t visibility analysis

unde rFedera l PS D rules ; n o tim e fram e i s provide d unde reithe rse t of rule s fo r analysi s o f AQRV s i n general . Par t 5 1 PS D rule s provid e tha t FL M shoul d provid e demonstratio n after th e permittin g authority' s preliminar ydetermination .
• Proposin g significanc e level s fo rClas s I increment s tha t woul d b e use d t o determin e whethe ra propose d sourc e contribute s t o a Clas s I incremen t violation . N o Clas s I significanc e level s currentl yexist . Existin g significanc e level s appl yonl yt o NAAQ S an d Clas s I I increments .

" Apri l 9,1996 ; Propose d NS R Refor m Rule s " 1 8COMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TRULE S (CONTINUED ) Propose d Rul e Curren t Rul e

• Permittin g authorit ymus t consul t wit h th e FL M regardin g permittin g authority' s ow n evaluatio n o f th e FLM' s advers e impac t demonstratio n • Propose d sourc e ma yobtai n emissio n offsets , a reductio n i n emission s o rsom e combinatio n o f bot h t o

. mitigat e it s advers e impact s o n a Clas s I are a i n orde rt o obtai n a PS D permit . N o comparabl e requirement s exis t fo rconsultatio n wit h th e FL M regardin g advers e impac t demonstrations . N o specifi cprovision s fo rmitigatio n o f advers e impact s currentl yexists . D . Preliminar y Determination : Publi c Revie w • Permittin g authorit ymus t b e satisfie d tha t th e FLM' s demonstratio n show s tha t a n advers e impac t o n AQRV s wil l occur . Thi s requiremen t i s consisten t wit h curren t PS D rules .

- I f permittin g authorit yagree s wit h th e demonstration , mus t propos e tha t permi t b e denied .

- I f permittin g authorit yi s no t satisfie d tha t a n advers e impac t wil l occur , ma ypropos e t o issu e th e permit .

" Apri l 9,1996 ; Proposed NS R Refor m Rule s " 1 9

r oCOMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TRULE S (CONTINUED ) Propose d Rul e Curren t Rul e Permittin g authorit ymus t provide , i n th e publi crecord , a n explanatio n o f th e reason s fo rproposin g t o rejec t th e FLM' s demonstratio n o f advers e impact . Rejectio n mus t focu s o n th e predicte d impacts , th e underlyin g assumption s concemin g advers e impacts , an d wh yth e source' s impact s ar e no t considere d adverse . Federa l PS D rule s contai n a provisio n requirin g EP A t o provid e it s reason s fo rrejectin g a n advers e impac t findin g o n visibilit yi n th e notic e o f publi chearing . Part 5 1 PS D rule s d o no t contai n an ycomparabl e provisions . E . Fina l Permi t Permittin g authorit ymus t addres s an ycomment s receive d fro m th e FL M concernin g th e permittin g authority' s preliminar ydetermination N o comparabl e requiremen t currentl yexists . VI . Allowabl e Activitie s Prio r t o Permi t Issuanc e • EP Ai s takin g commen t o n th e type s o f activitie s tha t migh t b e allowe d t o a facilit yundergoin g modificatio n bu t prio rt o receip t o f th e constructio n permi t Existin g Reg s d o no t allo wfo ran yconstructio n activitie s prio rt o permi t issue s

Apri l 9,1996 ; Proposed NS R Refor m Rule s " ••Eiatt a Apri l 18 . I996 4 * 2 0

### COMPARISO N O F TH E NE W

SOURC E REVIE

W (NSR ) REFOR

M RULEMAKIN

GPACKAG E AND CURREN T RULE S (CONTINUED ) Propose d Rul e Curren t Rul e VII . Judicia l Standin g • State s woul d b e require d t o provid e applicant s an d publi c wit h opportunityfo rStat e judicia l revie wo f majo rNS R permi t action s unde rapprove d NS R SIP s VIII . Easin g Restriction s o n Creditin g Shutdow n Emission s a s NS R Offset s I n Nonattainmen t Area s Needin g Attainmen t Demonstration s Currentl yavailabl e unde rFedera l PS D programs , an d considere d a s a genera l requiremen t fo rSIP s unde rsevera l section s o f th e Act .

• Alternativ e # 1 - I n ozon e nonattainmen t area s emission s fro m sourc e shutdown s o rcurtailment s tha t occu rafte r Novembe r15 , 199 0 are creditabl e a s NS R offset s s o lon g a s th e State' s pla n fo rattainmen t i s curren t wit h th e milestone s an d th e attainmen t dat e ha s no t bee n missed . • Alternativ e #2 - I n al l nonattainmen t area s emission s reduction s fro m sourc e shutdown s o rcurtailment s ar e creditabl e a

s NS R offset s s o lon g a s th e reduction s occu r afte rth e bas e yea ro

f Ih e emission s inventor yan d th e emission s ar e properl yinclude d i n th e inventory . I n nonattainmen t area s lackin g EP Aapprove d attainmen t demonstrations , emission s fro m sourc e shutdowns/curtailment s ar e no t generall yeligibl e as NS R offset s unles s th e reductio n occur s afte rth e ne wpropose d sourc e o rmodificatio n ha s file d a permi t application .

Apri l 9,1996 ; Propose d NS R Refor m Rule s 

### 2 1

### COMPARISO N O F TH E NE W

SOURC E REVIE

W (NSR ) REFORM

RULEMAKIN

GPACKAG E AND CURRENT RULE S (CONTINUED ) Propose d Rul e Curren t Rul e 

### IX . PROVISION S IMPLEMENTIN G TH E 199 0 CLEA N AI R AC TAMENDMENT S A . Majo r Sourc e Threshold s fo r Nonattainmen t NS R Applicabilit y • Fo rozon e nonattainmen t area s th e majo rsourc e threshol d i s 10 0 tp yfo rmargina l an d moderat e areas , 5 0 tp yfo rseriou s areas , 2 5 tp yfo rsever e areas , an d 1 0 tp y fo rextrem e areas . • Fo rPM-1 0 nonattainmen t area s th e majo rsourc e threshol d i s 10 0 tp ylo rmoderat e area s an d 7 0 tp yfo r seriou s areas . • Fo rC O nonattainmen t area s th e majo rsourc e threshol d i s 10 0 tpy , excep t fo rseriou s area s wit h significan t stationar ysourc e contributio n th e majo rsourc e threshol d i s 50 . Th e majo rsourc e threshol d fo ral l nonattainmen t area s i s 100 tpy .

" Apri l 9,1986 ; Propose d NS R Refor m Rule s * * 2 2 T J h o 0 )COMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TRULE S (CONTINUED ) Propose d Rul e Curren t Rul e B . Emission s Offse t Ratio s Fo rozon e nonattainmen t area s th e emission s offse t

. ratio s ar e 1. 1 t o 1 fo rmargina l areas , 1,1 5 t o 1 fo r margina l areas , 1. 2 t o 1 fo rseriou s areas , 1. 3 t o 1 fo r sever e areas , an d 1. 5 t o 1 fo rextrem e areas . Th e existin g emission s offse t rati o i s greate rtha n 1: 1 fo ral l pollutants . Precursor s T o Nonattainmen t Pollutant s
• Proposa l clarifie s tha t NO xi s presume d a precurso rt o ozon e an d tha t Nox , Sox , an d VO C ar e PM-1 0 precursor s a s determine d b yth e Administrato rfo reac h nonattainmen t area . Th e curren t rule s onl yconside rvolatil e organi c compound s a s ozon e precursor s an d d o no t addres s PM-1 0 precursor s D . Specia l Modificatio n Provision s fo r Seriou s an d Sever e Ozon e Nonattainmen t Area s • Significanc e threshol d fo rmodification s i s greate rtha n 2 5 tp yfo r VO C an d NO x Significanc e threshol d i s 4 0 tp yfo rVOC . NO xi s no t regulate d a s a n ozon e precursor . I f propose d modificatio n increas e emission s the n nettin g provision s apply . Modificatio n include s al l propose d increase s an d decreases . Propose d modificatio n b yitsel f mus t b e 4 0 tp yo r greate rt o trigge rnetting . Emission s decrease s ar e no t considered .
" Apri l 9,1996 ; Propose d NS R Refor m Rule s " 2 3COMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TRULE S (CONTINUED ) Propose d Rul e Curren t Rul e

• Nettin g include s propose d modificatio n an d al l creditabl e increase s an d decrease s ove r5 yea rcontemporaneou s period . • I f ne t increas e i s >2 5 tp ythe n majo rNS R applie s a s follows : Fo rexistin g sourc e emittin g les s tha n 10 0 tp y nonattainmen t NS R applie s bu t BAC Tapplie s instea d of LAER . Nonattainmen t NS R doe s no t appl yt o an y o ral l unit s tha t obtai n interna l offset s a t 1. 3 t o 1 . Sam e basi cnettin g metho d generall yapplie s I f ne t increas e i s 4 0 tp yo rgreater , the n .nonattainmen t NS R applies . Othe rtha n norma l nettin g ther e i s n o specia l consideratio n fo rinterna l offsets . fo rexistin g sourc e 100 tp yo rgreater , nonattainmen t NS R applie s bu t LAE R doe s no t appl yt o an yo ral l unit s tha t obtai n interna l offset s a t 1. 3 t o 1 . Providin g interna l offset s a t 1. 3 t o 1 satisfie s th e genera l offse t requirement .

" Apri l 9,1996 ; Propose d NS R Refor m Rule s " 2 4
r o o oCOMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TRULE S (CONTINUED ) Propose d Rul e Curren t Rul e E . Ozon e Depletin g Substance s Regulate d unde r Titl e V I o

f Clea n Ai r Ac t • Th e preventio n o f significan t deterioratio n (PSD ) permi t • progra m applie s t o majo rmodification s o f ozon e depletin g substance s (ODS) . Fo rpurpose s o f determinin g i f a modificatio n i s subjec t t o PS D th e EP Ai s proposin g a significan t threshol d leve l o f 10 0 tp yfo rthes e ODS . An yincreas e i n OD S resultin g fro m a modificatio n a t a majo rsourc e i s considered-significan t fo rPS D applicabilit ypurposes .

• Switche s fro m t o lowe rozon e depletin g substance s ar e generall yconsidere d a s pollutio n contro l project s tha t ar e exemp t fro m majo rNS R permittin g F . Hazardou s Ai r Pollutant s (HAPs ) liste d i n Titl e II I ar e no t Subjec t t o PS D • HAP s liste d unde rTitl e II I o f th e amende d Clea n Ai rAc t tha t wer e regulate d unde rPS D ar e n o longe rregulate d unde rPSD . HAP s ma ystil l b e regulate d unde rPS D a s constituent s o f mor e genera l pollutant s suc h a s volatil e organi ccompound s o rparticulat e matter . Curren t PS D rule s d o no t explicitl yexemp t suc h change s fro m PSD . HAP s tha t ar e regulate d unde rth e Clea n Ai rAc t ar e als o regulate d unde rPS D

" Apri l 9,1996 ; Propose d NS R Refor m Rule s 2 5i~ 3 6 13=4 3 D C BA R SECTIONS OFC . DISTRIC T O F COLUMBI A EUEN T REGISTRAN T NAM E 

### BA R 

# R v' l \_ 

# . 

# 11 ! 111 1 f SE P I I 199 6 EPAAI R DOCKE T 

# I i 1 

# . 1 REGI S NUMBE R 070043 APSP/NS R Pro9ram/07.00.48A/Ju.n e 6 , 199 6 Bel-de n Ro yS 12437 7 Bradle y Claasse n Clearwate r Eisenber g Eriedlan d Heiderschei t Kara s Kataok a Kelle y Kosovic h Lewi s Loud a Malki n Moskouit s Muelle r Novell o Qppenheime r Patric k Patto n Reits e Rot h Seit z Sha u Eri n B 

### An n .Scot t 12438 2 12438 3 12434 9 Henr yC . . 124.14 4 Davi d Y Joh n U i 12440 3 12438 1 Jennife r L 12414 1 Mar k M 12415 1 Rosemari e A12437 5 Jud yH Stephe n Bal e A Kare n A Richar d Rober t Davi d P Pete r r Sose r ! J Vicki e Arnol d Thoma s 12438 4

H 12440 2

12440 4 12438 5 S 12437 8 J 12414 6

12414 7 12437 6 12414 8 L 12415 0 ' , U 124405 ; D 124142 ; J Barto n . 12414 5 Har o 

### I d M 12438 0 P.2/ 3 ' - ^

ALPHABETI C R

i MEMBE R NUMBE R 43384 0 42696 1 42707 4 41265 9 40174 1 41455 6 41869 3 44258 5 43419 3 42733 3 33407 8 23463 3 44877 0 41913 1 42456 7 42871 0 43018 4 43891 5 38481 9 42335 6 10895 1 42889 9 41529 8 38853 5 REGI S

CLAS S 

### A A A A 

### A A 

### A A A A A A A A . 

### A A . 

### A A A

- P R 

### A A A AP.3 1

JU L26.'9 6 13:4 3 D

C BA RSECTION

S OFC . DISTRIC T O

F COLUMBI

A BA R EUEN T 

### REGISTRANT NAME Solomo n Davi d H Thorsso n Kat h Tierne yCat h Z 2 7 Record s 3 C 2 7 Record s ] H n B e n G * REGI S

NUMBE R 12414 9 12437 9 12414 3 P . 3/ 3 JS_\

• ALPHABETI C R I MEMBE R NUMBE R 35887 9 43460 9 44020 7 REGI S

CLAS S 

### A A Ai\v* 

# Ne

w Sourc e Review (NSR ) Refor m EPA' s Apri l 3,199 6 Proposa l



## Histor y of Refor m Proces s i 199 2 thre e stakeholde rworkshop s > Jul y 1993 NSRRefor

m Subcommitte e -Industr y

- State an

d Loca l Environmenta

l Agencie s

- Environmenta

l Group s

- Othe rFedera

l agencies

- EP A H Q & Regiona

l Offices

- Fiv e publicmeeting Staf f draf tmad e public7/94 i « . c o
L U C O 

# te^Ei Purpos e o f Refor m i Respond t

o concern s fro

m industr y an d regulators.. . - Progra m complexit

y -Uncertaint y

- Needles s projec tdelay s

- Inflexibilit

y

- Excessive costs Maintain the curren tlevel o f environmenta

l protection



## Key Reform s NSRapplicabilit

y Control Technology Determinations Innovative technology and applications Clas s I are

apermittin g Prio rShutdown Credits c 6 tf a G U

Pao e 1- 4

# !'V . Applicabilit y

• Clea n uni ttest

- NSPS typ e tes t

- Hourly maximum emissions • Clean facilit

y tes t v NSRpermitte d withi n 1 0 years

- An y change consistentwit

h permi t • Actua l emission s (baseline)

- Highes t1 i n 1 0 years fo roperation

- Curren temission s factor

s 

## Applicability (continued ) i Pollutio n contro

l projec texclusio n

—Covers _"» • Add-on control s • Switc h t o cleane rfuels » Pollution prevention (P2 ) projects

—Safeguards

- Ai rqualit

y standards , PS D increment s and Clas s I area

s protecte d • P 2 mus tb e environmentally beneficia l


## Applicabilit y (continued ) • Plantwid e applicabilit

y limit s (PAL)

- Emissions allocatio n (cap ) • Actual s fo rPS D • Actuals/offsetamoun

tfornonattainment areas

- Sourc e ca

n make an

y change i f

emission s stay unde rca p • • Certaint y • Maximize s flexibility • - Reduced administrative burde n 

## Applicability (continued ) • Actual-to-future-actua

l tes t

—Applie s t

o modifications • New unit

s stil l us e potential emissions

—Source project

s pos tmodificatio n emission s

—Currently limited t

o utilitie s -Jul y 199

2 WEPC O rul e

—Would appl

y t o all sourc e type s

—Deman

d growt h exclusio n i s a

n issu e
Pag e 5- 8!%V_ 

## Applicability (continued )

CMAExbibitB -198 0 Settlementagreement

- Potentia l t o potentia l tes t • Applicabilit

y • Nettin g •Offsets , 

### - Agenc y concerns • Environmenta

l ris k • Lega l issues



## Undemonstrate d Technologyo r Applicatio n UT/

A Waive r • Replaces currentInnovative Contro l Technolog

y waive r • Propose extenndin g t

o nonattainmen

tareas > Include s pollution preventio n project s • Failur e modes included i n permit

- "Gross " failure required to compl y wit h BAC T o rLAER

- "Marginal " failure i s acceptabl e

% ~ ^Page9-1 2 

## Bes tAvailabl e Contro l Technolog y (BACT ) • Two core criteri afo rSIPapproved state s

- All availabl e control s mus tb e considered , includin g th e mos tstringent

- BAC T selectio n mus tb e justified in terms of statutory criteri aand supporte d b y th e record • "Top-down " fo rfederal progra m • Improvement

s t o RACIYBACT/LAE

R Clearinghous e • Demonstrated i n practic e • Cut-of f foremergin g technologies IX ) ( 9 t n u o J> 3 O I ( D \ O T ) t n



## Clas s I Are aProtectio n • Improved coordinatio n among FLM, permittin g agency an d applicant • Defining "AirQuality Related Values " • Proposing significanc e level s fo rClass I incrementanalysi s • Proposing offset

s a s mitigatio n measur

e • Stat e makes ultimate permi tdecision

L OP 

# 1 • •-#.- "



## Coordination wit

h Federal Land Manage r(FLM ) • Pre-application procedure s » Permitapplication revie w

- Notification whe

n applicatio n is received

- Completeness review coordinatio n

- FL M notic e o f potential advers e impac

t • Preliminar

y determination phas e '

- FL M 60 da y review

- Documen

to f rejectio n of

advers e impact

- Consultation on issues

- Summarize issues fo rrecor d



## OtherRulemaking Action s • 199 0 Clea n Ai rAc tAmendment

s

—Ne wnonattainmen

tmajo rsource threshold s

—Ne w offse tratios

—Precursor

s t o nonattainmentpollutants .. —Specia l provisions formodifications in seriou s an d severe nonattainmentareas 1 

### —Delisting of

Titl e HI hazardous ai rpollutants

. ''•'• • • - •::' • • • • ' "' . ' '

- - • - - • 

## Othe rProgram Reform s • Requesting comment

s o n preconstructio n monitoring • Proposin g easin g restriction s on us e of prio r shutdowns -Requestin g commento n two options • 10 0 TP Y significance level fo rozone depleting substances
. • NationalSecurityEmergenc y • Confidentia

l Militar y Informatio n •

i i !

i i i i ( <

• - N

. • • ~

• •