# + 2

(,1 1/,1(

Citation: 57 Fed. Reg. 18070 1992

Content downloaded/printed from HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org) Thu Apr 19 10:48:39 2012

-- Your use of this HeinOnline PDF indicates your acceptance of HeinOnline's Terms and Conditions of the license agreement available at http://heinonline.org/HOL/License

-- The search text of this PDF is generated from uncorrected OCR text.

### Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 82 / Tuesday, April 28, 1992 / Proposed Rules

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52 [FRL-4127-1]

State Implementation Plans; General Preamble forthe Implementation of Title I ofthe Clean AirAct Amendments of 1990; Supplemental

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: General Preamble for future proposed rulemakings; Appendices.

SUMMARY: 'T'heEPA published a General Preamble for the Implementation of title I ofthe Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 on April 16, 1992 (57 FR 13498). This document describes EPA's preliminary views on how EPA should interpret various provisions oftitle I ofthe Clean Air Act Amendments of1990, primarily those concerning State implementation plan (SIP)revisions required for nonattainment areas. It serves as advance notice ofhow EPA generally intends, in subsequent rulemakings, to take action on SIP submissions.

The appendices to the General Preamble were inadvertently omitted. The appendices contain important support materials that are referenced throughout the General Preamble. Therefore, thisnotice, containing the aforementioned appendices, serves as a supplement to the General Preamble and should be considered as such. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Brock Nicholson, Chief, Policy Development Section, Ozone/CO Programs Branch (MD-15) at (919) 541- 5517, forissues related to ozone or carbon monoxide; Mr. Eric Ginsburg at (919) 541-0877, SulfurDioxide/ Particulate Matter Programs Branch (MD-15), for issues related to sulfur dioxide, particulate matter, or lead; Mr. Gary McCutchen at (919)541-5592, Permits Programs Branch (MD-15), for issues related to new source review, U.S.Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; Ms. Paula Van Lare at (202) 260- 3450 forissues related to mobile

sources. 401 M Street. SW. Washington. 

### DC 20460. ADORESSES: The appendices are also in Air Docket A-91-35. at 401 M Street, SW, Washington. DC.

Dated: April21. 1992. Michael Shapiro, ActingAssistantAamnistrator for Airand Radiation. Appendix A-Glossary ACT=alternative control technique AVO= average vehicle occupancy BACM=best available control measures BACT= best available control technology CAA= Clean Air Act CAAA-Clean AirAct Amendments CARB -California Air Resources Board CEMS=-continuous emission monitoring

system CO--carbon monoxide CPM=condensible particulate matter CTG=control technique guideline DOl=Department of the Interior DOT= Department ofTransportation EKMA=Empirical Kinetic Modeling

Approach ERC= emission reduction credits ETC employer transportation coordinator ETPS=Emission Trading Policy Statement FtP-Federal Implementation Plan FMVCP:-Federal Motor Vehicle Control

Program FR

- Federal Register GVWR=Gross Vehicle Weight Rating I-IC= hydrocarbons l/M=inspection and maintenance IPP=inventory preparation plan LAER- lowest achievable emission rate MMS=Minerals Management Service MSA/CMSA- metropolitan statistical area/

consolidated metropolitan statistical area NAAQS=national ambient air quality

standards NAS=National Academy ofSciences NO =Nitrogen dioxide NO,=nitrogen oxides NSPS~new source performance standard NSR=New Source Review OCS=outer continental shelf PSD prevention ofsignificant deterioration psi= pounds per square inch RACM = reasonably available control

measures RACT reasonably available control

technology RFP= reasonable further progress RTA= rural transport area RVP=Reid vapor pressure SCAQMD=South Coast AirQuality

Management District SO =sulfur dioxide SIP=State implementation plan TCM =transportation control measures TSP= total suspended particulate (matter) VOC=volatile organic compound VMT=vehicle miles traveled Appendix B-Bibliography and Cited References

To obtain copies ofOAQPS documents.
contact the EPA Library. (910) 541-5514: (FTS)629-5514. For OMS publications, please
contact Mark Wolcott. (313) 668-4219: (FTS) 374-8219.
SIP Inventory Guidance/Requirements

"Procedures for Preparing Emissions Projections," EPA-450/4-91-019. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park. NC, July 1991.

"Procedures for Emission Inventory Preparation. Volume IV: Mobile Sources." EPA-450/4-81-026d, U.S.Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Mobile Sources, Ann Arbor. MI, July 1991. (also listed below under General Inventory Guidance). "Procedures for the Preparation of Emissions Inventories for Carbon Monoxide and Precursors ofOzone, Volume I",EPA450/4-91-016, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards. Research Triangle Park. NC.May 1991.

"Procedures for the Preparation of Emissions Inventories for Carbon Monoxide and Precursors ofOtone. Volume I1: Emission Inventory Requirements for Photochemical Air Quality Simulation Models." EPA-450/4- 91-014, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office ofAirQuality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC, May 1991.

"Emission Inventory Requirements for Ozone State Implementation Plans," EPA450/4-91-010, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC, March 1991.

"Emission Inventory Requirements for Carbon Monoxide State Implementation Plans." EPA-450/4-91-011. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park. NC, March 1991.

"SIPAir Pollutant Inventory Management System (SAMS) Version 4.0 and SAMS User's Manual." U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park. North Carolina, March 1991.

"Example Emission Inventory Documentation for Post-1987 Ozone State Implementation Plans (SIPs)." EPA-450/4-89-- 018. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards. Research Triangle Park. NC. October 1989.

"Procedures for Estimating andApplying Rule Effectiveness inPost-1987 Base Year Emission Inventories for Ozone and Carbon Monoxide State Implementation Plans," U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Office of AirQuality Planning and Standards. Research Triangle Park. NC, June 1989. Quality Assurance/Inventory Review Guidance

"Quality Review Guidelines for Post-1987 State Implementation Plan (SIP)Base Year Emission Inventories (Draft)." U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park. NC, February 1990. (Final version to be completed in August 

### 1991.)

"Guidance for the Preparation ofQuality Assurance Plans for 03/CO SIP Emission Inventories." EPA-450/4-88-023, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. Research Triangle Park. NC. December 1988.
General Inventory Guidance

"Procedures for Emission Inventory Preparation," U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park. NC:

a. "Volume I: Emission Inventory Fundamentals," EPA-450/4-81-026a. September 1981.

b. "Volume 11:Point Sources," EPA-450/4- 81-026b, September 1981. 

### 18070

HeinOnline -- 57 Fed. Reg. 18070 1992

### Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 82 / Tuesday, April 28, 1992 / Proposed Rules

c. "Volume II:Area Sources," EPA-450/4- 81-02 c.September 1961.

d. "Volume IV: Mobile Sources." EPA-450/ 4-81-026d (Revised). July 1981.

e. "Volume V: Bibliography." EPA-450/4- 81-026e. September 1981.
Emission Factors/Models

"Personal Computer Version of the Biogenic Emissions Inventory System (PCBEIS) With User's Guide." EPA-450/4-91- 017, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, OfficeofAir Quality Planning and Standards. ResearchTriangle Park. NC. July 1991.

"User's Guide to MOBILE4 (Mobile Source Emission Factor Model)." EPA-AA-TEB-89- 01. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Mobile Sources. Ann Arbor. MI. February 1989. (Revisedversion of MOBILE4 and documentation to be completed in July 

### 1991.)

"Surface Impoundment Modeling System (SIMS) Version 2.0 User's Manual," EPA-4501 4-90-019a. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards. Research Triangle Park, NC. September 1990.

"Background Document for Surface Impoundment Modeling System (SIMS) Version2.0. EPA-450/4-90-019b," U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Air QualityPlanning and Standards, ResearchTriangle Park. NC, September 1990.

"AIRS Facility Subsystem Source Classification Codes (SCCs) and Emission Factor Listing for Criteria Pollutants." U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. September 1989.

"Compilation ofAir Pollutant Emission Factors. Volumes Iand 11 and its supplements. Fourth Edition." AP-42, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, 

### ResearchTriangle Park. NC, September 1985. Citations and GuidanceforSIP Corrections

"Guidance Document for Correction of Part DSIP's for Nonattainment Areas," EPA. OfficeofAir Quality Planning and Standards. ResearchTriangle Park, NC, January 27. 1984.
Citations and Guidance for PM-10

"Assessment ofthe Controllability of Condensible Particulate Matter," EPA--60/8- 90-75, October 1990.

"Procedures for Estimating Probabilityof Nonattainment ofa PM-10 NAAQS Using Total Suspended Particulate of PM-10 Data." EPA-450/4-80-017, December 1986.

"PM-10 SIP Development Guideline." June 1987.

"Control ofOpen Fugitive Dust Sources." EPA-450/3-88-008 September 1988.

"Guidance Document for Residential Wood Combustion Emission Control Measures," EPA-450/2-489-015. September 1989.

"Prescribed Fire Smoke Management Guide." NFES No.1279, February 1985.

"Prescribed Fire Plan Guide." NFES No. 1939.August 1966.
Citations and Guidance for SO2

"SO Guideline." EPA-450/12-89-019. "SO, Guideline Appendices." EPA-450/2- 89-019.October 1909. "Letter from William Reilly to 

### Representative John Dingell, In Response to questions and GAO report." April 10. 1091. Citations and Guidance for Lead

"Updated information on Approval and Promulgation of Lead Implementation Plans." U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Research Triangle Park. NC, July1983.

"Guideline Series. Development ofan Example Control Strategy for Lead." EPA450/Z-79-WoZ. April1979.

"Guideline Series. Supplementary Guideline for Lead Implementation Plans." EPA-450/2-78-038, August 1978. Modeling Guidance

"UAM Applications Guidance." May 1991. "User's Guide for the Urban Airshed Model, Vol. 4." EPA-450/4-9-007D. June 1990.



### "Guidance on Air QualityModels (Revised)." EPA--450/2-78-027R. July 1986.

"Interim Procedures for Evaluating Air Quality Models: Experience with Implementation." EPA 450/4-85-006.July 1985. 

### NewSource Review Guidance

"New Source Review Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Nonattainment Area Guidance Notebook," January 1988.

"Draft Workshop Manual for New Source Review (NSR) Programs." December 1990. Miscellaneous Guidance

"Criteria for Assessingthe Roleof Transportof Ozone/Precursors in Ozone Nonattainment Areas." U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Research Triangle Park. NC. EPA-450/4-91-015).

"Enforcement Guidance for Stage II Vehicle Refueling Control Programs," December 1991.

"Getting Started on Title I."U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, OAQPS. Research Triangle Park, NC.. April 1991.

"Issues Relating toVOC Regulations. Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations." Clarification to Appendix DofNovember 24. 1987 FR (Blue Book, revised January 11, 1990). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Office ofAir Quality Planningand Standards. AQMD,May 25. 1988.

"Protocols: CanCoaters. 45FR (December 8.1988) + Topcoaters." EPA-450/3-88-018 (December 1988).

"Technical Guidance-Stage 11 Vapor .Recovery System forControl ofVehicle RefuelingEmissions at Gasoline Dispensing Facilities." Volume 1.November 1991. Memoranda

Memorandum from William Laxton, Director.TechnicalSupport Division.to Regional Air Division Directors, "Guidance for Determining Significant Stationary Sources of Carbon Monoxide." May 13. 1991.

Memorandum from John Seitz, OAQPS to Air Division Director, Regions I-X, "New Source Review (NSR) Program Transitional Guidance," March 11. 1991.

Memorandum from John Calcagni and William Laxton,"Interim Guidance on Emission Limits and StackTest Methods for Inclusion in PM-10 SIP's." December 24, 1990.

Memorandum from Robert Bauman and Rich Biondi to Air Branch Chiefs, "SO0SIP Deficiency Checklist." November 28. 1990. 

### Memorandum from Joseph Tikvart and Robert Bauman concerning modeling guidelines addressingPM-10, datedJuly 15. 1990.

Memorandum from William Laxton, Director.Technical Support Division,to Regional Air DivisionDirectors, "Ozone and Carbon Dioxide Design Value Calculations." June 18, 1990. IMemorandum from Craig 1.Potter. "Interim Policyon Stack Height Regulatory Actions." April 22. 1988.

Memorandum from Gerald A. Emison. Director, OAQPS. to Regional Air Division Directors, "Transmittal of Reissued OAQPS CEMS Policy," March 31. 1988.

Memorandum from John Seitz, Director. Stationary Source Compliance Division. to Regional Air Division Directors, "Implementation ofRule Effectiveness Studies." March 31,1988.

Memorandum from Craig Potter.Thomas Adams. and Francis Blake to Regional Air Division Directors, "Review ofState Implementation Plansand Revisions for Enforceability and Legal Sufficiency," September 23. 1987.



### Memorandum from Gerald Emison, Director. OAQPS,to David Kee, Director,Air Management Division, Region V."Need for a Short-Term BACT Analysis for the Proposed William A.Zimmer Power Plant." November 24,1988.

Memorandum from Richard Rhoads. DirectorCPDD. to Division Directors. Regions I-X. "Growth Restrictions in Secondary NAAQS Nonattainment Areas," October 28, 1980.

Memorandum from R.Strelow to RA's Region i-X. "Guidance for Determining AcceptabilityofSIP Regulations in NonAttainment Areas." December 9, 1976. Federal Register Citations
44 FR 20372. April 4,1979. 44 FR 20375, April 4, 1979. 44 FR 53702, September 17. 1979. 44 FR 53709, September 17. 1979. 44 FR 53791. September 17, 1979. 45 FR 

### 52676.August 7, 1980. 

### 46 FR 7182. January 21,1981. 46 FR 7187.January 22, 1981. 51 FR 43812, December 4.1986. 51 FR43814, December 4, 1986. 51 FR 43832, December 4. 1986. 

### 52FR 29383, August 7, 1987. 52 FR 45044, November 24,1987. 53FR 34500, September 7, 1988. 54 FR612, January 9, 1989. 55 FR30973, July 30,1990. 55 FR41546, October 12,1990. 55 FR41547. October 12. 1990. 55 FR45799, October 31.1990 56 FR 5480.February 11. 1991. 56 FR 11101, March 15,1991. 56 FR 16274,April 12. 1991. 56 FR 23826, May 24,1991. 56 FR 27257.June 13. 1991. 56 FR 27003,June 14,1991. 56 FR 31151.July 9.1991. 56 FR 31154,July 19,1991. 56 FR 37654,August 8,1991. 56 FR 43593,September 3, 1991. 56 FR 54554.October 22. 1991. 56 FR 56894, November 6 1991. 56 FR 59656, November 21, 1991 

### 18071

HeinOnline -- 57 Fed. Reg. 18071 1992

### Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 82 / Tuesday, April 28, 1992 / Proposed Rules

Code ofFederal Regulations Citations
40 CFR 50.8. 40 CFR 50.9 Appendix H. 40 CFR 50.9. 40 CFR Part 51. 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix M 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix S. 40 CFR 51.100(o). 40 CFR 51.110(c)(1). 40 CFR 51.117. 40 CFR 51.165. 40 CFR 51.166. 40 CFR 51.340 (Subpart R). 40 CFR Part 52. 40 CFR 52.10. 40 CFR 52.21. 40 CFR 52.24. 40 CFR Part 55. 40 CFR Part 58. 40 CFR Part 60. 40 CFR Part 60 Subpart Da. 40 CFR Part 81. Appellate Court Citations

AlabamaPuwerCompany v. Castle,636 F.2d 323, 360-61, 404-05 (D.C. Cir. 1980).

NRDCv. Thomas, 838F.2d 1224, (D.C. Cir. 1988), Cert. denied, 109 S.Ct. 219 (1988).

Delanoyv. EPA, 898 F.2d 687, 136 Cong. Rec. S16971 (October 27, 1990).

House ofRepresentatives Reports

H.R. Rep. No. 490, 101st Congress, 2nd Session. pt. 1at 204, 239, 242. 257,258, 267. 268, and 381.
Appendix Cl-Available Fugitive Dust Control Measures
Background

The available control measures listed below apply to all fugitive dust sources except those to which only available control technology is applicable (i.e., process fugitive dust associated with stationary sources). Fugitive dust is particulate matter suspended in the air either by mechanical disturbance of the surface material orby wind action blowing across the surface. Mechanical disturbance includes resuspension of particles from vehicles traveling over roadways, parking lots, and other open areas. Wind action includes dust blown off inadequately stabilized open areas. The quantity of fugitive dust emissions is dependent upon several factors such as the size ofthe source, emission rate, and control efficiency. The Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) policy is to reduce fugitive dust emissions, with an emphasis on preventing, ratherthan mitigating, them. For example, past efforts to control emissions from paved roads have usually relied on street cleaning to reduce silt loading. The

new approach would put a higherpriority on

measures to prevent silt from getting on the road surface. Mitigative measures should be reserved for those areas/situations where prevention is not feasible. Technical guidance

on fugitive dust control measures is found in ControlofOpenFugitiveDust Sources (EPA450/3-88-008 September, 1988).

Listof Available ControlMeasures
1.Pave, vegetate, or chemically stabilize

access points where unpaved traffic surfaces adjoinpaved roads. 2. Require dust control plans for construction or land clearing projects.

3.Require haul trucks to be covered. 4. Provide for traffic rerouting or rapid clean up oftemporary (and not readily preventable) sources ofdust on paved roads (water erosion runoff,mud/dirt carryout
areas, material spills, skid control sand). Delineate who is responsible for cleanup.

5. Require paving, chemically stabilizing, or otherwise stabilizing permanent unpaved haul roads, and parking or staging areas at commercial, municipal, or industrial facilities.

6. Develop traffic reduction plans for unpaved roads. Useof speed bumps,low speed limits, etc., to encourage use of other (paved) roads.

7. Limit use ofrecreational vehicles on open land (e.g., confine operations to specific
areas, require use permits, outright ban).

8. Require improved material specification for andreduction ofusage ofskid control sand orsalt (e.g., require use ofcoarse, nonfriable material during snow andice season).

9. Require curbing and pave or stabilize (chemically orwith vegetation) shoulders of paved roads.

10. Pave orchemically stabilize unpaved roads.

11. Pave, vegetate, orchemically stabilize unpaved parking areas.

12. Establish dust control measures for material storage piles.

13. Provide for storm water drainage to prevent water erosion onto paved roads.

14. Require vegetation, chemical stabilization, or otherabatement of wind erodible soil, including lands subjected to water mining, abandoned farms, and abandoned construction sites.

15. Rely upon the soil conservation requirements (e.g., conservation plans, conservation reserve) ofthe Food Security Act toreduce emissions from agricultural operations. Appendix C2-Available Residential Wood Combustion Control Measures Background

Wood smoke from residential wood stoves and fireplaces is a significant source ofPM10 pollution in some areas in the western United States that do not attain the PM-1O ambient air quality standards. For example, in some mountain communities, atmospheric inversions can trap wood smoke particulates in valleys and cause PM-10 concentrations to reach levelswell in excess ofthe standards.

The U.S. EPA'snew source performance standard (53 FR 5860, February 26, 1988) is a longterm strategy designed to improve the performance ofwood burning devices nationwide. The EPAbelieves that this standard alone, though, may not result in attainment of the PM-10 air quality standards in areas affected by wood smoke. Additional available control measures are listed below. They are intended to (1) reduce emissions from current stoves through inspections, education, and shifting to cleaner stoves or fuel; (2) curtail the use ofwood stoves or fireplaces during adverse meteorological conditions; and (3) limit future growth in emissions. Additional guidance on these

measures is contained in EPA-450/2-89-015 (September 1989), GuidanceDocument for ResidentialWood CombustionEmission ControlMeasures.Nothing in this document prevents a State implementation plan (SIP) in

a moderate PM-10 nonattainment area from containing control measures more stringent than RACM.

Listof Available Control Measures
1.Establish an episode curtailment
program, including: A curtailment plan; a communication strategy to implement the plan; a surveillance plan (e.g., "windshield"
survey, opacity trigger); and enforcement provisions including procedures, penalties, and exemptions). A voluntary program will be deemed reasonable ifthe area demonstrates attainment.

2. Establish a public information program to inform and educate citizens about stove sizing, installation, proper operation and maintenance, general health risks ofwood smoke, new technology stoves, and alternatives to wood heating.

3. Encourage improved performance of woodburning devices by: -Establishing a program to identify, through

opacity observation, deficiencies in stove operation and maintenance. (Under such a program, advice and assistance should be provided to the identified households to help reduce visible emissions from their devices.) -Providing voluntary dryness certification

programs for dealers and/or making free or inexpensive wood moisture checks available to burners. -Evaluating and encouraging, as

appropriate, the accelerated changeover of existing devices to new source performance standard or other clean burning new or existing technology stoves (e.g., hybrid designs, pellet stoves) by such approaches as subsidized stove purchases
tax credits, or other incentives.
4. Provide inducements that would lead to reductions in the stove andfireplace population (oruse) by: -Slowing the growth of woodburning

devices in new housing units by taxes, installation permit fees, orother disincentives. -Encouraging a reduction in the number of

woodburning devices (i.e., removing or disabling the devices) through tax credits

or otherincentives. -Discouraging the resale ofused stoves

through taxes, fees, or other disincentives. -Discouraging the availability offree (or

very inexpensive) firewood by increasing cutting fees or limiting the cutting season. Appendix C3-Prescribed Burning Control

Measures
Background

Prescribed burning, including silvicultural and agricultural burning, is a contributor to PM-10 nonattainment in some regions. In many cases, well-established smoke management approaches are not being followed, resulting in avoidable air quality problems. The EPA has been working closely with the National Wildfire Coordinating Group (NWCG) todevelop appropriate 

### 18072

HeinOnline -- 57 Fed. Reg. 18072 1992

## Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 82 / Tuesday, April 28, 1992 / Proposed Rules

guidance.The objective is to establish smoke management (SM) programs in these areas which constitute reasonably availablecontrol

measures (RACM), and reduce population exposure to smoke from prescribed burning, while assuringthat resource management goals are met.

States should address emissions from prescribed burning in amanner that balances natural resource, agricultural, and other burning objectiveswith airquality goals and objectives, by utilizing asmoke management program as described in the NWCG's Prescribed Fire Smoke Management Guide (NFES No. 1279, February 1985) and the Prescribed Fire PlanGuide (NFES No. 1939, August 1986), publications of the Boise (Idaho) Interagency Fire Center.

The scope ofaSM program should reflect the specificconditions and requirements ofa local area. Existing programs may be adequate in manycases and in other cases may provide abasis for developingarefined program. Smoke management should encourage the cooperative efforts of local, State, Federal. and private land managers. Emphasis should beon conducting burns under an established planning process.

For the purpose ofPM-10 SIPdevelopment, the term prescribed burning includes all open burningof vegetative matter.This includes both planned ignition and prescribed natural fire. Nothing in aSM program constituting RACM is intended to influence vegetation management or fire suppression practices so as to increase the potential for wildfire to the point that natural resources or publicsafety
are compromised.

The EPA believesit isreasonablethat a SM program apply in those moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas where it hasbeen shown, through monitoring,modeling, or other analysis,that prescribed burning canor does contribute toviolations of !he PM-10 national ambient airquality standards (NAAQS).The SM program should also apply to areas outside ofthe nonattainment area if it is shown that prescribed burningoutside of the nonattainment area can or does contribute to NAAQSviolations.The prescribed burning control measures reasonably may be limited only to the season(s) when high ambient PM-10 concentrations occur, ifit can be shown that the annual PM-10 NAAQS is not violated. See H.R. Rep. No.490, 101st Cong., 2d Sess. 268-269 (1990).

Sourcecategories (e.g.. burning of fencelines,ditch banks, small brush piles, small prescribed natural burns,garden plots) may not be reasonably controlledwhere their impact is de minimis based on consideration of theircollective influenceon PM-10 emissions, theirduration, season, and proximity to potentially affected populations.

An SM program should consist of at least the followingcomponents:
Smoke DispersionEvaluation

As aminimum, the program should use National Weather Service forecastsorother meteorological analyses to determine when meteorological conditionsare favorable or unfavorable fordispersion and transport of smoke (i.e., "burn days," "no burn days"). Burn Planning,Authorization, and Administration

The smoke management program should provide aprocess (e.g., telephone call-in for receiving burn requests, evaluating requests andgranting approval for burns. Approval of

aburnshould be based onan evaluation of the airshed's capacity/capabilityto disperse emissionson allowable burn days sothat the cumulative emissions from all burns and other sources in the airshedwill notcause or contribute to violationsof the PM-10 NAAQS.The approval to burnon aburn day should be equitably divided among all categories ofburners requesting approval to burn while accommodating the "incentives" specified elsewhere in this policy. Requirements forEnsuring Burner Qualifications

Voluntary training insmoke management techniquesshould be reasonably available forall burners.The program should include incentivesfor burners whocomplete the voluntary training (e.g., priority for approval to burn on "burn days").
PublicEducation andA wareness

Information programs on the nature ofand
reasons forsmoke management should be periodicallypresented to the public (e.g., publicservice announcements, newspaper articles).
Surveillance andEnforcement

The SM program should rely on routine PM-10monitoring, and/or modeling supplemented by periodic visual assessments ofthe effectiveness ofthe dispersion evaluation program. The existing PM-10 monitoring network should beevaluated for its abilityto provide information on the effectiveness ofthe SM program as applied to burning conducted in and near the nonattainment area.The network should be modified as appropriate. The program should also provide aprocess for documenting and following up on public complaints andshould provide for and levyfines against burners who violate anyofits mandatory requirements.
Emission InventoriesandEmission Efforts

States should developand maintain an emission inventory for prescribed burning and all burns should becategorized asto theirpurpose. Documentation of the size, date. purpose, and emission reduction
measures usedshould be submitted following each large burn. Emission reduction techniques (e.g., mass ignition, rapid mop-up) should beencouraged and incentives (e.g., priority for approval to burn on "burn days") should be offered for demonstrated emission reduction efforts, including the use of alternatives to burning, provided that such incentives can be utilizedwithout compromising resource management objectives.

State Oversight

The relationshipof the State air pollution agency with otherState agencies to which management of the SM program may have been delegated will need to bedetermined on
aState-by-State basis. Nevertheless, State rules and regulations should be enacted in such amanner that all provisions ofthe SM program are enforceable by the State through its State implementation plan. Generally, memorandums ofunderstanding should be utilized to clearlyspecify working relationships amongagencies. Appendix C4-RACT Determinations for Stationary Sources Background

Congress has for the second time in amending the Clean AirAct (Act) specifically required that reasonable available control technology (RACT) be applied to existing stationary sources in nonattainment areas. In section 172(b)(3) ofthe Act,as amended in 1977, Congressspecified that nonattainment

area plans were to "require, * ** reasonablefurther progress * * *including such reduction inemissions from existing

sources in the area as may be obtained through the adoption,at aminimum, of reasonably available control technology." Thus, RACT was required in SIP's developed forareas that were designated nonattainment for total suspended particulate matter. Now, insection 172(c)(1) ofthe CleanAir Act, as amended by the Clean Air Act Amendments of1990 (Nonattainment Plan Provisions-in General), Congressagain requires thatnonattainment area plans provide for" such reductions in emissions from existing
sources in the (nonattainment) area as may beobtained through the adoption, at a minimum, ofreasonably available control technology." Thus, RACT is now required for PM-10nonattainment area SIP's.

The EPA recommends that the RACT fora particular sourcecontinues to bedetermined
on acase-by-case basis considering the technological and economic feasibility of reducingemissions from that source (through process changes oradd-on control technology).The following technological and economic parameters should be considered in determining RACT for aparticular source. TechnologicalFeasibility

The technological feasibility ofapplying an emission reductionmethod to aparticular
source shouldconsider the source's process and operatingprocedures, raw materials, physical plant layout, and anyother environmental impacts suchas water pollution,waste disposal, and energy requirements, The process, operating procedures, and raw materials used by a source can affect the feasibility of implementing process changes that reduce emissions and the selection ofadd-on emission control equipment. Theoperation of and longevity ofcontrol equipment can be significantly influenced by the raw materials usedand the process to which it isapplied. The feasibilityofmodifying processes or applyingcontrol equipment is alsoinfluenced by the physical layout of the particular plant. The space available in which to implement such changes may limit the choices andwill alsoaffect the costs of control.

Reducing air emissions may not justify adversely affecting otherresources by increasing pollution ofbodies ofwater. creatingadditional solid waste disposal 

## 18073

HeinOnline -- 57 Fed. Reg. 18073 1992

### Federal Register 

## / Vol. 57, No. 82 / Tuesday, April 28, 1992 / Proposed Rules

problems or creating excessive energy demands. (Anotherwise available PM-10 control technology may not bereasonable if these other environmental impacts cannot reasonably be mitigated.) For analytic purposes, a Statemay consider a PM-10 control measure technologically infeasible if, considering the availability (andcost) of mitigative adverse impacts ofthat control on other pollution media, the control would not, in the State's reasoned judgment, provide a net environmental benefit. In many instances, however, PM-10 control technologies have known energy penalties and adverse effects

on other media, butsuch effects andthe cost oftheir mitigation are alsoknown andhave beenborne' by owners ofexisting sources in

numerous cases. Such well-established adverse effects and theircosts arenormal and assumed tobe reasonable and should not. in most cases,justify nonuse ofthe PM10 control technology. The costs ofpreventing adverse water, solid waste andenergy impacts will also influence the economic feasibility ofthe PM-l0 control technology.

Alternative approaches to reducing emissions ofparticulate matter includingPM10 are discussed in Control Techniques for Particulate Emissions from Stationary Sources-Volume I(EPA-450/3-81-O5a) and Volume II(EPA-.450/3.-1-005b), September 1982.The design, operation and maintenance ofgeneral particulate matter control systems such as mechanical collectors, electrostatic precipitators, fabric filters, and wet scrubbers

are discussed in Volume 1.The collection efficiency ofeach system is discussed as a function of particle size. Information is also presented regarding energy and environmental considerations and procedures forestimating costs ofparticulate matter control equipment. The emission characteristics and control technologies applicable to specific source categories are discussed in Volume I1. Secondary environmental impacts are also discussed.

Additional sources ofinformation on control technology are background information documents for new source performance standards and Identification, Assessment, and Control ofFugitive Particulate Emissions, EPA-600/8-8g-023, August 1986.

In some instances, control technologies

more modern or more advanced than those described in the documents referenced may exist. In such cases, the State's RACT analysis for a source should consider such available technology.
Economic Feasibility

Economic feasibility considers the cost of reducing emissions and the difference in costsbetween the particular source andother similar sources that have implemented emission reduction.As discussed above,EPA presumes that it is reasonable for similar

sources tobear similarcosts ofemission reductions. Economic feasibility rests very little on the ability ofa particular source to "afford" to reduce emissions to the level of similar sources. Less efficient sources would be rewarded by having tobear lower emission reduction costs ifaffordability were given high consideration.Rather, ecoromic feasibility forRACT purposes Islargely determined by evidence that othersources in

a source category have in fact applied the control technology in question.

The capital costs, annualized costs, and costeffectiveness ofan emission reduction technology shouldbe considered in determiningits economic feasibility. The OAOPS Control Cost Manual, Fourth Edition, EPA-450/3-90-406, January 1990, describes procedures for determining these costs.The above costs should bedetermined for all technologically feasible emission reduction options.

States may give substantial weight to cost effectiveness in evaluating the economic feasibilityof an emissionreduction technology. The cost effectiveness ofa technology is its annualized cost (S/year) divided by the amount ofPM-10 emission reduction (i.e., tons/year)which yields a cost peramount ofemission reduction (S/ton). Cost effectiveness provides a value foreach emission reduction option that is comparable with otheroptions and otherfacilities.

Ifa company contends that it cannot afford the technology that appears to be RACTfor that source or group ofsources, the claim shouldbe supported with such information as the impact on: 1.Fixed and variable production costs ($/

unit). 2.Product supply anddemand elasticity, 3.Product prices (cost absorption vs. cost

pass-through), 4.Expected costs Incurred by competitors, 5.Company profits, and 6.Employment.

Ifa company contends that available control technology is not affordable and would lead to closing the facility, the costs of closure should be considered. Closure may incur costs for demolition, relocation.

severance pay,etc. Appendix D United States Environmental Protection

Agency. Office ofAirQuality Planning and Standards. Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711. March 11, 1991.
Memorandum Subject: New Source Review (NSR) Program Transitional Guidance. From: John S. Seitz, Director, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards (MD10). To: Addressees.

The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (1990Amendments) make numerous changes to the NSR requirements ofthe prevention of significant deterioration [PSD) and nonattainment area programs. The 1990 Amendments create new andexpanded nonattainment areas,extend PSD coverage to current Class Iarea boundaries, and mandate

aPSD exemption forcertain hazardous air pollutants.The Environment Protection Agency (EPA) intends to propose by September ofthis year a regulatory package that will implement theseand other changes to the NSR provisions. Final adoption of these revised regulations isprojected for August 1992. In the interim period between passage ofthe 1990Amendments and adoption ofthe Agency's final regulations. EPA expects that numerous issues regarding the 1990 Amendments will arise.This memorandum sets forth the Agency's position

on the most important ofthese transitional issues involving the NSR program.

Thisguidance document does not supersede existing State regulations or approved State implementation plans. However, in some cases, it calls upon States
to implement their NSR programs in a manner consistent with provisions ofthe 1990 Amendments that are applicable immediately and with the requirements that flow directly from these provisions. Nonetheless, the policies set out in this transition memorandum are Intended solely as guidance and do not represent final Agency action. They are not ripe forjudicial review for this

reason. Moreover, they are not intended, nor

can they be relied upon, to create any rights enforceable by any party in litigation with the United States. The EPA officials may decide to follow the guidance provided in this memorandum, or to act at variance with the guidance, based on an analysis ofspecific circumstances. The Agency also may change this guidance at any time without public notice.

The Regional Offices should send this guidance document to their States. Questions from States and applicants concerning specific issues and cases should be directed
to the appropriate EPA Regional Office. If
you have any general questions, please
contact Mr.Michael Sewell of the New Source Review Section at FTS 629-0873 or (919) 541-0873.
Attachment

Addressees Director, Air, Pesticides, and Toxics

Management Division, Regions I, IV, and VI Director. Air and Waste Management

Division. Region I1 Director, Air Management Division. Regions

IIl and IX Director, Air and Radiation Division, Region

V Director, Air and Toxics Division. Regions

VII, VIII. and X

cc:J.Calcagni

R. Campbell W. Laxton E. Lillis 

### J.Rasnic L.Wegman
J.

Weigold NSR Contacts
Corrections to Original Document: Two

errors in the document as issued on March 11, 1991 have been corrected in this copy. On
page 2 on the last line, "CFC 112" is changed
to correctly read "CFC113". On page 8 in item 4, the cite "Section 172(b)" is changed to correctly read "Section 173(b)".
New Source Review (NSR) Transitional Guidance

Toxicsand NotionalEmissions Standards for llazardous AirPollutants(NESHAPS) Issues
1. Section 112 Hazardous AirPollutants are No Longer Considered Regu!ated Pollutants 

### 18074

HeinOnline -- 57 Fed. Reg. 18074 1992

## Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 82 / Tuesday, April 28, 1992 / Proposed Rules

Under Prevention ofSignificant Deterioration (PSD}. but NESHAPS till Apply.

Under the 1977 Amendments to the Clean AirAct (Act) and regulations issued thereunder, the PSD requirements of the Act applyto all "major" new sources and "major" modifications, i.e., those exceeding certain annual tonnagethresholds (see40 CFR 52.21(b)(1)(i) and (b)(2)(i)). Typically,new sourcesand modifications become subject to PSD because theyexceed the specified tonnage threshold for acriteria pollutant, i.e.,
apollutant forwhich anationalambient air quality standard (NAAQS)has been established under section 109 ofthe Act. Once anew source ormodification is subject to PSD, the PSD requirements apply to every pollutant subject to regulation under the Act that is emitted in "significant" quantities (or, in the case ofamajor modification,for which there is asignificant net emissions increase) (see40 CFR 52.21(b)(23) and (i)(2)). Under the 1977 Amendments, best availablecontrol technology (BACT) andother PSD requirements apply notonly to emissions of criteria pollutants but also to emissions of pollutants regulated underother provisions of the Act, such as section 111 or 112. This 

### regulatory structure was altered by the 1990 Amendments.

Title l1 ofthe 1990Amendments added a new section 112(b)(6) that excludes the hazardous air pollutants listed in section 112(b)(1) ofthe revised Act (as well as any pollutants that may be added to the list) from the PSD (and other) requirements of Part C. Thus, because they areon the initial Title Ill hazardous airpollutants list,the following pollutants,which had been regulated under PSD because theywere covered by the section 112 NESHAPS or section 111 new source performance standards (NSPS) program, are now exempt from Federal PSD applicability: " Arsenic " Asbestos " Benzene (including benzene from gasoline) " Beryllium " Hydrogensulfide (H 2 

### S) " Mercury " Radionuclides (includingradon and

polonium) " Vinyl chloride

The TitleIll exemption applies to final Federal PSD permits (i.e., those issued in final form and forwhich administrative appeals, if any, under40 CFR 124.19 have been 

### exhausted) issued on or after the date of enactment ofthe 1990Amendments (November 15. 1990). For Federal PSD permit applications now under review by either an EPA Regional Officeoradelegated State, PSD permit requirements do not apply to the pollutants exempted byTitle Ill.For Federal PSD permits containing PSD requirements for the pollutants exempted by Title Ill issued on
or after November 15, 1990, the permittee 

### may request arevision (e.g., removal ofa BACT limit for benzene) to their PSD permit to reflect the Title Illexemption from Federal PSD applicability.

Note that pursuant to section 116 and the preservation clause in section 112(d)(7) ofthe amended Act, Stateswith an approved PSD program may continue toregulate theTitle Ill hazardous air pollutants now exempted from Federal PSD by section 112(b)(6) ifthe State PSD regulations provide an independent basisto do so.TheseState ruleswould remain in effect unless aState revised them to provide similar exemptions.Additionally, the Title Illpollutants continue to be subject to anyother applicable State and Federal rules: theexclusion isonly for PartCrules.

Finally. section112(q) retainsexisting NESHAPS regulations by specifying that any standard under section112 in effect prior to the date ofenactment ofthe 1990 Amendments shall remain in force and effect after suchdate unless modified as provided in the amended section.Therefore, the requirements of40 CFR 61.05 to61.08, including preconstruction permitting requirements, for new and modified sources subject to existing NESHAPS regulationsare still applicable.

Insummary, thepollutants currently regulated under the Actas of March 1991 that
are stillsubject to Federal PSD review and permitting requirements are: " Carbon monoxide " Nitrogen oxides "Sulfur dioxide " Particulate matterand PH-10 " Ozone (volatile organic compounds) " Lead (elemental) " Fluorides " Sulfuricacid mist "Total reduced sulfurcompounds (including

H2S}

" CFC's 11, 2,113, 114, 115 " Halons 1211. 1301. 2402 

### * Municipalwaste combustor (MWC) acid

gases, MWC metals and MWC organics 2.Hazardous Air Pollutantsthat are Regulated asOne Component ofaMore General Pollutant Under Other Provisions of the Clean AirAct are Still Regulated.

Any hazardous air pollutants listed in section 112(b)(1) which are regulated as constituents ofamore general pollutant listed under section 108 ofthe Act are stillsubject to PSD as part ofthe more general pollutant, despitethe exemption inTitle II.For example, volatile organic compounds (VOC's) (aterm which includes benzene, vinyl chloride, methanol, toluene, methyl ethyl ketone, and thousandsofother compounds)
are still regulated as VOC's (but notas individual pollutants suchas benzene.etc.) underthe PSD regulations because these pollutantsare ozone precursors, not because theyare airtoxics.Also, particulates (including lead compounds and asbestos) are stillregulated as particulates (both PM-10 and particulate matter) under the PSD regulations.Lead compounds are exempt from Federal PSD by Title Ill,but the elemental lead portion oflead compounds (as tested for in 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, Method 12) is still considered acriteria pollutantsubject to the lead NAAQS and still regulated under PSD.

3.Toxic Effect of Unregulated Pollutants StillConsidered in BACT Analysis.

Based on the remand decision on June 3. 1986 by the EPA Administrator in North CountyResourceRecoveryAssociates(PSD Appeal No.85-2). the impact on emissions of otherpollutants, including unregulated pollutants, must be taken into account in determining BACT foraregulated pollutant. When evaluating control technologies and theirassociated emissions limits, combustion practices,and related permit terms and conditions in aBACT proposal,the applicant must consider tke environmental impacts of all pollutants not regulated by PSD. Oncea project issubject to BACT dueto the emissionof nonexempted pollutants, the BACT analysis should therefore consider all pollutants, including Title Ill hazardous air pollutants previouslysubject to PSD, in determining which control strategy is best.

PSD ClassIBoundary Issues
1.PSD Applicability Coverage Changes as Class IArea Boundaries Change

Sections 162(a) and 104(a) ofthe amended Act specify that the boundaries ofareas designated as Class I must nowconform to all boundary changes at such parks and wilderness areas made sinceAugust 7,1977 andany changes that may occur in the future. The EPA does not believe that Congress intended to create the turmoil which would
occur ifthis redesignation required the modification ofpermits issued between August 7,1977 and November 15,1990, or the resubmission and reevaluation ofcomplete permit applications submitted priorto enactment of the 1990 Amendments. Thus, for this reason, applications considered complete priorto November 15, 1990 should be processed as submitted without regard to the
new Class Iarea boundaries.Exceptions to this general policy are in the areaof increment consumption andair quality related values (includingvisibility),as discussed below.

For an applicantwho submitted acomplete PSD application prior to November 15, 1990,if all other PSD requirements are met, apermit may beissued based on the Class I analysis
as submitted in the application,unless the reviewing authorityfinds, on acase-by-case basis,that additional analysis isneeded from the applicant to address suspected adverse impacts or increment consumption problems due to the expanded boundaries ofthe Class I areas. Any existing increment violationsin the new boundaries ofClass I areas must be remedied through aSIP revisionpursuant to 40 CFR51.166(a)(3).

The PSD applicationsnot considered complete before November 15, 1990 must 

### consider the impact ofboth existing sources and the new or modified sourceon the Class I
areas as defined by the 1990Amendments. Thus, the complete application must consider the impacts on the entire Class I area based upon the boundaries in existence of the date ofsubmittal ofacomplete application: as before, ifaClass I boundary changes before the permit is issued, the reviewing authority may find,on acase-by-case basis,that additional analysis is needed from the applicant to address suspected adverse impacts or increment consumption problems due to expanded Class IArea boundaries.

NSR NonattoinmentIssues 1.NSR Construction Permit Requirements in NonattainmentAreas

In many States, the existingapproved Part Dpermit program by its terms covers all designated nonattainment areas in the State, 

## 18075

HeinOnline -- 57 Fed. Reg. 18075 1992

### Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 82 

## / Tuesday, April 28, 1992 / Proposed Rules

so a Part D1 permit program will automatically apply to the new and expanded nonattainment areas which are established under provisions ofTitle Iofthe 1990 Amendments. Thus, until new rules are adopted for these new or expanded nonattainment areas, States should apply the requiremeats oftheir existing approved Part D per-nit program. However, in other States,

a Part D piogram may be limited tospecified

areas and does not apply to new or expanded

ureas. In these cases, States must implement

a transitional permitting program uniil their existing Part D programs are revised to meet the ruquirlrments ofthe 1990 Amendments and expanded to cover all nonattainment
artas in th, State. Otherwise, both the goa!s ofpart D a-0 Congress' intent in creating n," or e' iknded nonattainment areas will be frustrated.

The EPA regulations alreidy provide for these new or expanded designated nonattainn-ent areas because the Emission Offset Interpretations Ruling (40 CFRpart 51, appendix S) governs permits to constgr-ct between the date of designation and the date

an approved Fart D plan is made applicable
to the new nonattainment area (see 40 CFR 52.24(k)). Until a State's new Part D plan is appro% e.1 by EPA,ifa State wishes to issue a permit fora mijor stationary source ormajor modifir;ation in Lnew orexpanded designated nonattvinment area, the State should comply with the requirements of appendix S. Among other things, appendix S requires a major source seeking to locate in a nonattainment area to (1) meet the lowest achiCvable emission rate for such snurce, 

### (2) protide oflsets from existing sources in the
area, vrid J3) show that the offsets will provide a positive nr-t air quality benefit (see 40 CFR part 51, appendix S. section IVAJ. The EPA believes that in order to carry out the intent of appendix S. offsets should be required for sources in all categories and in all instances should be calculated on a tons per yearbasis (see 40 CFRpart 51, appendix S. section IV.CJ.

Ofcourse, neith-2r appendix S nor the existing NSR rules incorporate the NSR chanAcs mandated by Title Iof the 1990 Amendments such as lower source applicability thresholds, increased emissions offset ratios, new definitions ofmajor stationary source, and (forozone nonattainment areas) requirements for nitrogen oxides (NOx) control and NOx emissions offsets. However. the 1990 Amendments require States to submit to EPA

new NSR permit program rules for ozone nonattainment areas by November 15. 1992; for PM-10 nonattainment areas by June 30, 1992;and for most carbon monoxide (CO) nonattainment areas no later than 3years from the date ofthe nonattainment designation. The EPA interprets this us an expression ofcongressional intent not to mandate that States adhere to the more stringent Title INSR requirements in nonattainment areas during the time provided for State implementation plan (SIP) development. Thus. for NSR permitting
purposes in nonattainment areas, the new NSR requirements in Title Iare not in effect until the States, as required by the Act, adopt NSR permit program rules to implement the Title I provisions. In addition, EPA
encourages any State having adequate authority for early implementation ofthe NSR changes to do so as soon as possible.

IfStates fail tosubmit to EPA the new NSR permit program rules for nonattainment areas by the deadlines in the amended Act, EPA intends toimpose in these nonattainment

areas a Federal implementation plan (FIP) embodying such requirements. Curre.ntly, EPA intends to propose revised NSR reguldtions at40 CFR part 52 that would implement the new Title INSR requirements under a FIP in a State ifthat State's revised NSR rules to implement Title I are not submitted in approvable form to EPA and made effective within the State by the deadlines established by the mit0 Amendments.

The area designation in eltect on the date ofpermitissuanceby the reviewing agency determines which regulations (Part Cor Part D) apply to that permit. In othe r words, the PSD permit regulations apply topollutants for which the area is designated as attainment or Lnclassifiatae, and the NSR nunattainment permit regulations apply to pollutants for which the area is designated nonattainment (see 40 CFR51.166(i) (3) and (5); and 40 CFR 52.21(i) (3) and (5)]. Under theseregulations, a PSD permit for i pollutant cannot be issued in an area that is designated nonattpinment for that pollutant. For the situation where a

source receives a PSD or other permit prior to the date the area is designated as nonattainment, the permit remains in effect

as long as the source commences construction within 18 months after the date of nonattainment designation ofthe area, does not discontinue construction for more than 18 months, and completes construction within a reasonable time (see40 CFR 52.24 (g) and (k)). Although the PSD regulations provide for extension ofthese deadlines, no extension would be appropriate where the

area has been designated as nonattainment following permit issuance. Accordingly, ifany of these construction provisions are not met, the PSD permit or otherpermit will not be extended, and the source (if subject to the nonattainment provisions) must obtain a nonattainment permit prior to commencing (or continuing) construction.

The 1990 Amendments create some new and expanded nonattainment areas by operation oflaw. Other nonattainment area changes are expected as the States and EPA complete the designation process prescribed inamended section 107(d). Because of these provisions, the dates areas switch from attainment to nunattainment for NSR purposes vary by pollutant. However, except for the two instances where the Amendments
create changes by operation of law, the new designations and expanded boundaries will
notbe effective for NSR purposes until EPA promulgates the changes.The promulgations will be announced in the Federal Register.

Congress created new PM-10 nonattainment areas through designations that br.,ame effective upon enactment ofthe 1990Amendments on November 15, 1990 (see section 107(d)(4)(B)). Specifically, Congress designated Group Iareas and areas where violations of the PM-10NAAQS had occurred prior toJanuary1, 1989 as nonattainment. The EPA published a listof these PM-10areas in a Federal Register notice (see 55 FR 45799, October 31, 1990, see also52 FR 29383, August 7, 1987). The EPA plans to publish a notice in the Federal Register listing these areas as nonattainment in the near future, but they are already considered nonattainment areas as of November 15, 1990.

Similarly, the 1990 Amendments expand by operation oflaw some CO and ozone nonattainment areas. However, these changes didnot become effective with
passage but rather on December 30. 1990. The specifics are as follows:
Section 107(d)(4)(A)(iv) ofthe amended Act provides that, with the exception explained below ozone and CO nonattainment areas located within metropolitan statistical areas (MSA) and consolidated metropolitan statistical areas (CMSA) which are classified as serious,
severe, or extreme for ozone or as serious for CO are automatically expanded to include the entire MSA or CMSA.This expansion became effective by operation of law45 dayq after enactment unless the Covernor submitted a notice by this deadline of the State's intent to seek a modification ofthe expanded boundaries pursuant to the procedures set forth in section 107(d)(4(A)(v). So ifa State did not provide this notice, the nonattainnient boundaries of all serious, severe, and
extreme ozone nonattainment areas in the State and all serious CO areas in the State expanded to include the entire MSA or CMSA on December 30, 1990. If a State did provide timely notice, the Administrator has up to 14 months from enactment to resolve the State's challenge. Until EPA promulgates a resolution ofthe State's challenge, the old boundaries remain in effect. Except for thcse two cases where new or expanded boundaries have been created by operation oflaw, nonattainment area changes will not beconsidered effective until the changes are promulgated by theEPA. As
to most new areas orexpansions of previously-designated nonattainment aieas, this will occur 240 days after enactment (see section 107(d)(4)(A) (i)and (ii)). Newlycreated ozone and CO nonattainment areas will be considered part ofa designated nonattainment area for NSR purposes at the time ofpromulgation.

2. Status ofConstruction Bans

Pursuant to section 110(n)(3). an existing construction ban that was imposed due to the absence ofapproved Part D NSR rules remains in effect until a revised NSR SIPis approved. Existing construction bans imposed due to disapproval of primary sulfur dioxide NAAQS attainment plans also remain in effect. A Federal Register notice will be published soon announcing the status ofconstruction bans in general and also lifting specific bans where appropriate. Should a construction ban be lifted in any
area designated as nonattainment, and the

area lacks an approved Part D NSR rule, the State should meet the requirements of40 CFR part 51, appendix S, in issuing permits to v w A f I 

### 18076

HeinOnline -- 57 Fed. Reg. 18076 1992

### Federal Register 

## / Vol. 57, No. 82 / Tuesday, April 28, 1992 / Proposed Rules

major new sources ormajor modifications prior to the adoption ofNSR rules meeting the requirements ofthe 1990 Amendments.

3. Federal Implementation Plans Remain in Effect

The NSR permitting program in an existing FIP remains ineffect until a SIP is approved

or a revised FIP is adopted.

4. Use ofPreviously-Approved Growth Allowances Is Prohibited

Section 173(b) invalidates growth allowances in existing SIP's in areas that received a SIP call prior to enactment of the 1990 Amendments, orthat receive one thereafter. For NSR permits issued on or after November 15, 1990, previously-approved growth allowances cannot beused in these

areas. Construction permits cannot be issued in SIP-call areas under existing EPAapproved Part D programs to the extent that such permits rely on previously-approved growth allowances. Case-by-case emission offsets must beobtained for any such permits, and other existing Part D requirements must be met.

5. Existing NSR Permitting Rules Continue To Apply in the Northeast Ozone Transport Region (NOTR)

The 1990 Amendments establish a single

ozone transport region comprised ofthe States ofConnecticut, Delaware. Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire. New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island.Vermont, and the CMSA that includes the District ofColumbia and part of the State ofVirginia. For this transport region, including all attainment areas within its boundaries, new section 184(b)(2) specifies that any stationary source that emits orhas the potential to emit at least 50 tons per year of VOC'sshall be considered a major stationary source and subject to the requirements which would be applicable to major stationary sources ifthe area were classified as a moderate ozone nonattainment area.For NSR purposes, the requirements ofsection 184(b)(2) are not in effect in a State until the State submits a new

or revised SIPthat includes the requirements (or EPAimposes a FIP implementing those requirements). A State in the NOTR has until November 15. 199Z to submit to EPA the new

or revised NSR rules addressing the new requirements. Appendix E

I. Introduction

The EPA is issuing this CTG document under section 182(b) ofthe Clean Air Act, as amended. Under section 182(b), States must develop RACT rules for sources "covered by

a CTG document issued by the Administrator between November 15, 1990 and the date of attainment." The State must submit these RACT rules "within the period set forth by the Administrator in issuing the relevant CTG document." One type of "CTG document" is a CTG: a CTG is a technical document that sets forth a presumptive level ofRACT controls for a source category. The Act provides that EPA must issue eleven CTG's by November 15. 1993. In addition, the Act specifically requires the Agency to prepare CTG's for
aerospace coatings and ship building and repair within the same timeframe.

This document is not a technical CTG, but rather a second type ofCTG document-a document that lists the eleven CTG's EPA anticipates publishing in accordance with section 183(a) and establishes time tables for submittal ofRACT rules for sources that are not ultimately covered by a CTG issued by November 15, 1993. The EPA believes that it is necessary to issue this document at this time so that States will be able to determine which sources and source categories fit within the RACT rule submittal requirement for sources that EPA expects to be covered by a post-enactment CTG.

11.Listof Eleven CTG's The EPA plans to issue the following CTG's in accordance with section 183(a).

1. Synthetic organic chemical manufacturing industry (SOCMI) distillation:

2. SOCMI reactors; 3. Wood furniture; 4. Plastic parts coating (business machines): 5. Plastic parts coating (other):
6.

Offset lithography; 7. Industrial wastewater, 8. Autobody refinishing: 9. SOCMI batch processing; 10. Volatile organic liquid storage tanks: and

11. Clean up solvents.

II1.Authority

Under section 1(12(b)(2), States must adopt RACT rules for three general groups of

sources: (A) Those covered by apostenactment CTG document; (b) those covered by a pre-enactment CTG: (c) "all other major stationary sources ofVOC's." Section 182(b)(2) also establishes the timing for State submittal and source implementation of RACT rules for these three groups. For

sources covered by a post-enactment CTG document, the State must submit RACT rules within the period established in the relevant CTG document. Forthe other two groups, the Act provides specific dates for submittal. November 15. 1992, and implementation, no laterthan May 31. 1995.

Alone. subparagraphs (A), (B) and (C) seem to set forth three distinct groups ofsources, However, the submittal dates under the second portion of the provision potentially could blur the line between these three groups ifEPA does not issue before November 15, 1992. a CTG document covering all sources for which it plans to issue a CTG under section 183(a). At that time, States would need to submit RACT rules for all other major stationary sourcesthose for which neither a pre-enactment CTG

nor a post-enactment CTG document had been issued.

The EPA's obligation to issue the eleven CTG's does not ripen until November 15, 1993, and EPA does not anticipate issuing all ofthese CTG's before November 15. 1992. Therefore, to theextent EPA does notissue a CTG document before November 15, 1992, States would be required to submit non-CTG RACT rules for sources that could In the future be covered by a CTG. In.addition, at the time the CTG document was issued, the State could then be required to submit a new rule, consistent with the CTG document, thereby duplicating its earlier effort.

In order to relieve the States from being required to duplicate rules and to relieve

sources from potentially being subject to two different requirements within a short period, EPA is issuing this CTG document to retain the sharp distinctionbetween the three different groups in subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C). Ifa State believes that one ofthe eleven CTG'slisted in Section 11 will cover a particular major source, the State should follow the timing provisions ofSection IV. below for submittal ofa rule applicable to that source. The State should identify those

sources in itsNovember 15, 1992 RACT submittal.

IV. Time Table

The EPA is establishing the following general time table for States to submit RACT rules for sources that itidentifies in a November 15, 1992 submittal as being a

source covered by a post-enactment CTG document.

(1)on November 15. 1992. the State must submit a list ofmajor stationary sources that it anticipates will be subject to one ofthe CTG's listed inSection I1 which EPA plans to issue by November 15, 1993.

(2) For those major sources on the list submitted by the State in the 1992 submittal that are not covered by a CTG that EPAhas issued by November 15. 1993. the State must submit a RACT rule by November 15, 1994 that requires implementation ofRACT by May 15, 1995.

(3) For sources covered by a CTG issued under section 183(a) and for which theState has not,by the date of such issuance, adopted an approvable RACT rule. the State
must submit a RACT rule in accordance with the time schedule set forth in the relevant CTG.

(4) For sources subject to a RACT rule that the State adopted and EPA approved under section 182(b)(2) prior to EPA's issuance of an applicable CTG, EPA will work with the State to determine whether the existing rule should be revised once a CTG has been issued that would apply to that source.
[FR Doc.92-9866 Filed 4-27-92; 8:45 am]

BILUING CODE GseO-SO-A • I I I 

### 18077

HeinOnline -- 57 Fed. Reg. 18077 1992