P.1 

OAR Box 1802 

Prepped by Charmelle Mathews 

Document Number: 

8) IV-E-03 

Docket Number: 

A-90-37 

Printed 11/4/2008 11:57:59 AM Sheet 8 of 117 
P.2 

/?- 90-3 7 

515- E-3 

Docket Submittal: NSRJRefonn 

Subject: Meeting to Discuss Attachment 1 (prepared by Texas Natural Resource 

Conservation Commission) Relative to the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency's New Source Review Reform Package of July 23, 1996 

Date: September 18, 1996 

Time: 9:00 to 11:30 Eastern Standard Time 

Attendees: 'u J^« •••" / 

David Solomon, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality 

Planning and Standards 

Mike Sewell, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality 

Planning and Standards 

Dale Beebe-Farrow, Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission 

Steve Hagle, Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission 

Victoria Hsu, Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission 

Stanley Spruiell, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region VI 

Mary Stanton, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region VI 

7 

Larry Feldcamp, BakeF'& Botts 

J.L. Woolbert, Eastman Chemical Company 

Joe Downing, Texas Instruments 

Darcy Wilson, Eastern Research Group 
P.3 

New Source Reform 

Agenda 

10:00 to 12:00 and 1:00 to 2:00 Sept. 4, 1996 

EPA Region 6 

Participants: TNRCC: Victoria Hsu, Dale Beebe-Farrow 

EPA Region 6: Jole Luehrs, Stanley Spruiell, Mary Stanton 

New Source Reform Program Discussion, Clarification and Comparisons 

Clean Units/Facilities and SB 1126 

Disparity in allowables and actuals 

Hourly vs. annual PTE 

No check on actual increases (SIP strategy) 

NSPS capital cost test for reconstruction 

Clean facilites allow replacement in kind 

Emission trades not allowed with clean facilites 

Case by Case determination requires public notice, good for 5yrs 

Pollution Control Projects and Standard Permits 

• 5 yr monitoring requirement 

• Need Pollution Prevention definition of Environmentally Beneficial Test 

PALs and Flexible Permits 

Can flexible permit cap be used to establish a plantwide applicability limit? 

New sources and amendments vs. NSR applicability 

Partial or plantwide cap 

When a modification is triggered, is NSR applied to just that project? 

Public Notice 

NNSR EPA and NNSR Texas 

Netting for Small Major Sources (retroactive reviews or netting for all projects) 

Netting for Large Major Sources (tagged window, 5tpy de minimis) 

Internal Offsets 

Netting baseline change to highest 12 month utilization in last 10 yrs 

Netting within the project 

Will collateral increases be included as project increases? 

Upcoming Activities: 

• EPA headquarters (Sept 16-18) Hearing, Subcommittee meeting, TX issues meeting 

• Agency comments due to EPA (Oct. 21, 1996) 
Issue 

Qualification 

Case by case 

Modification 

trigger 

Compliance 

Demonstration 

New sources 

Reconstruction 

Emission trades 

Program review 

Clean Unit/Facility vs. 

Clean Unit/Facility 

PSD/NA rvw. last 10 yrs or 

approved state technology rvw. or 

Case by case 

PN reqd. Limit 5yr viability 

If no hourly change, no mod. 

Monitor 6 mo. before, after 

Clean facility allows replacement in 

NSPS test for capital cost 

No emission trades 

Use Title V to qualify 

kind 

Sbll26 

SB 1126 

lOyrold permit 

lOyrBACT 

Case by case 

No PN requires pn:approval 

Hourly, annual check 

None required 

No new sources 

Rely on federal 

Trades allowed 

Use NSR 
Issue 

Environmentally Beneficial 

Test 

NAAQS/Increment Review 

Toxicological Evaluation 

Demonstrations of Compliance 

Post-control increases 

Pollution Prevention/Control vs. 

Pollution Control/P2 

• P2 - not well-defined 

• PC - Listed 

7 

None 

• soft landing provision 

• 5years monitoring 

no production increase for 

5 years 

Standard Permits 

Standard permits 

Case-by-case 

7 

7 

none 

evaluated w/ subsequent authorization 
Issue 

Establish cap 

Public notice 

Renewal/revision 

Incentive 

New sources 

Multiple source 

Enforcement 

Modification 

triggered 

PALs vs. Flexible Permits 

PAL 

Actual: highest utilization in 10 yrs + 

insignificant amount 

Any 

/ 

Title V 

No controls required 

allowed under actual cap 

Area-wide PAL 

10 yr old records ~ \ 

L 9C^cV»'ca\V^- W^<ACJLO\_&>) 

increase above cap. Not specified if 

only applicable to project 

Flexible Permit 

Allowable assuming entire source has BACT applied + <9% 

case-by-case 

NSR 

Pay for controls with rewards of flexibility 

not allowed 

one per account number 

Extensive compliance demonstration required and recordkeeping 

• preauthorized under original review 

• no new sources/modifications 

• stay below significance or trigger NSR 
Comparison of EPA's NSR Reform Netting Proposal and TNRCC Nonattainment Methods 

Item 

Baseline emissions 

period 

Baseline emissions 

period alternative 

Baseline emissions 

calculation 

Netting trigger level 

other than ozone 

Netting trigger level 

ozone i.e VOC and 

NOX in 

serious/severe NA 

areas 

EPA Proposed Rule 

Highest 12 month utilization during 10 yrs 

prior lo change 

No alternative allowed 

Utilization level x Current allowable 

emission rate factor (incl all emission limits 

eg BACT, MACT, NSPS, RACT etc.) 

Project increase must be > or = sig. level 

Project net increase > 0 triggers netting. 

Defined as creditable increases and 

decreases at the source from time of project 

application to SOO 

TNRCC Current Practice 

2 yr period prior to change using ave. actual 

Administrator discretion for a more 

representative time frame 

2 yr or representative period noted above 

based on actual emissions at the time 

Same as EPA 

For VOC look at increase:; only > 5tpy 

Project decreases are not included 

5 tpy trigger also in effect in Moderate NA 

counties 

For NOx 40 tpy netting trggcr in effect 

under the temporary NO. exemption 

Comments 

May want to 

consider assessing 

the change for 

increases by 

potential to potential 

and decreases actual 

to poten.ial actual 

Tagged window for 

the >250tpy PTE 

will account for all 

trivial increases, 

once netting is 

triggered. 

Moving windows 

may need to review 

increases at some 

specific interval or 

require netting with 

each increase. 
Item 

NOX as an ozone 

precursor 

Co ntemporaneous 

period for netting 

Net Change 

equation 

Collateral increases 

EPA Proposed Rule 

NOX regulated as an ozone precursor 

5 yrs prior to Start of Operation (SOO) 

including calendar year when SOO occurs 

EPA requests comments on : 

Actual to future Actual 

Actual to Allowable 

Potential to Potential (CMA) 

Include in netting, apply offsets but no 

LAER 

TNRCC Current Practice 

182(f) exemption is permanent in El Paso 

and DFW and expires Dec 31, 1997 in HG 

and BPA assuming EPA grants extension 

For 1) Pb, CO, PM10; 2) VOC site <250 tpy 

PTE 3) VOC site > 250 tpy PTE if Start of 

construction (SOC) before 11/15/97: period 

is 5 yrs prior to SOC and thru SOO 

For VOC site > 250 tpy PTE, if SOC after 

11/15/97 period from 11/15/92 thru SOO 

For 1) NOX site >250 tpy PTE 2) NOX site 

with <250 tpy PTE if SOC before 11/15/97 

period is 11/15/92 thru SOO 

For NOX site <250tpy PTE if SCC after 

11/15/97: period is 5 yrs prior to SCC thru 

SOO 

Actual to allowable 

same 

Comments 

May want to 

consider alternatives 

and change SIP 

demonstration 

May cause 

confusion under 

exclusions