Utah Commitment List Action Items - Revised 12-23-04 

Issue What Who When Comments AgreelDisagree 

1. Director's Discretion - Send Ft. Hall 

FIP references 

- Send 4 states 

implementing 40 

CFR 70.6a 

- Send CO emails 

- Resend list with 

Director's 

discretion ref. 

- Detailed list 

with Director's 

discretion 

- Jonah Staller 

- Cheryl 

Heying 

- Jonah Staller 

- Jonah Staller· 

- Jonah 

Staller/Libby 

Faulk 

10/23/03 

10/23/03 

10/23/03 

10/28103 

BegilU1ing of 

January 

Update as of1­

23-04 ­ EPA is 

still working to 

identify all DD. 

During the 11-25-03 

call, Utah stated that 

they would like to use 

40 CFR 70.6 and 

White Paper No.2. 

Next steps ­ UDAQ 

would need to start 

drafting SIP 

language to remove 

the DD provisions 

from the SIP. 

Agree - UDAQ can 

use 40 CFR 70.6 and 

White Paper No.2 to 

develop SIP 

language that allows 

equivalent or more 

stringent SIP 

changes through the 

Title V permitting 

process. 

Disagree Existing 

director's discretion 

provisions must be 

removed from the 

SIP. 

2. Variance Procedures - Work with AG 

to develop state 

rule only 

- Rick Sprott will 

work with Utah 

AG's office. Rick 

thinks the State 

could remove the 

vanance 

provisions from 

the federally 

- Rick Sprott 

Update as of 

11-25-03 ­

UDAQ needs 

to go back to 

the AGs office 

and see about 

keeping this as 

a State only 

rule. 

11-25-03 - UDAQ does not 

feel that the variance 

provisions have 

compromised the SIP. 

- UDAQ mentioned 

that some of their 

other environmental 

programs allow 

variances, such as 

RCRA. 

- EPA questions the 

utility of further 

Previously AgreedVariances need to be 

removed from the 

SIP, and the SIP 

revision to remove 

the variance 

provisions would 

need to go through 

the Board and be 

submitted by the 

Governor. If Utah 

retams variance 

1
 
approved SIP, but discussions regarding I provisions in State 

retain them in this issue. EPA and law, UDAQ needs to 

State law only. ' UDAQ have had keep in mind that 

-UDAQ Before next many prevIOus EPA has to consider 

- UDAQ plans to conf. call in discussions on this implementation of 

have an internal January. Issue. the SIP. If variances 

discussion - EPA asked UDAQ are being used, then 

regarding this As of1-23-04 ­ what objection it has it may raise 

issue and will EPA has not to removing the questions about the 

report back to heardfrom . . . vanance prOVISIons implementation of 

Dick Long UDAQ from the federally the SIP. 

whether UDAQ regarding this enforceable SIP and Disagree as of 

wants further issue. retaining them as 11/25/03 Call ­

discussions state-only provisions. UDAQ now does not 

involving feel that it is 

UDAQ's necessary to remove 

attorneys and the language. 

EPA's attorney. UDAQ believes 

Utah's new variance 

rule (not in the SIP) 

provides appropriate 

protection by stating 

that "Variance from 

these regulations 

may be granted by 

the Committee... 

unless prohibited by 

the CAA". EPA 

feels that this 

language will not 

protect the integrity 

2
 
of the SIP. We may 

have differing 

interpretations about 

what is prohibited by 

the CAA and EPA 

doesn't want 

enforceability of the 

SIP to be subject to 

this kind of 

uncertainty. 

3. UAM Modeling - State working on 

Final Modeling 

- UDAQ will 

respond back to 

EPA regarding 

our comments on 

theDRAFI 

modeling protocol 

and IPP. Ifin 

UDAQ's 

comments they 

express concern 

regarding our 

comments, EPA 

and UDAQ then 

need to schedule a 

meeting within the 

following week to 

- State 

developing 

EPA will 

reVIew 

- UDAQ Staff Letter will not be 

sent out before 

Christmas. 

Update as of1­

23-04-EPA 

received a call 

on 11-18-03 

from UDAQ 

staffregarding 

our comments 

on the DRAFT 

modeling 

protocol and 

IPP. 

- UDAQ Modelers 

informed EPA in a 

call on October 7, 

2003 that UDAQ had 

figured out a way to 

address our concerns 

regarding using the 

1996 episode by 

looking 

comprehensively at 

the NA area 

emissions. EPA 

informed the UDAQ 

Modelers during this 

same call that EPA 

will need to see the 

draft TSD before we 

can decide whether 

the State would still 

need to consider the 

1996 episode or not. 

Agree - During our 

conference call with 

UDAQ and Dianne 

Nielson (dated 10­

16-03) EPA and 

UDAQ agreed that if 

there's concern with 

Utah not using the 

1996 episode after 

EPA reviews the 

draft ISO, the EPA 

and UDAQ agree to 

have a meeting, as 

opposed to sending 

comments, to openly 

discuss the issues 

and how EPA came 

to the conclusion that 

the 1996 episode 

should be included in 

the modeling. '--------­

3
 
discuss the 

concerns. 

- UDAQ will 

provide EPA with 

a submittal date 

for the TSD once 

EPA and UDAQ 

have completed 

discussions on the 

DRAFT modeling 

protocol and IPP. 

- UDAQ Staff 

Update as of1­

23-04-EPA 

has flot been 

provided a date. 

Disagree - Whether 

or not the 1996 

episode should be 

included in the 

model. EPA will 

wait to look at the 

draft TSD when it's 

submitted. 

4. Stationary Source 

Modeling 

- State to include 

in demonstration 

- State 

developing 

EPA will 

reView 

Agree - Thresholds 

and the use of 

allowables as an 

enforceable part of 

the SIP. 

S.a. Enforceable Emission 

Limits 

- State to include 

in demonstration 

- State 

developing 

EPA will 

reVieW 

Agree - Emission 

limits for sources in 

the SIP, including 

enforceable 24-hour 

emission limits. 

S.b. Refinery SRU and 

Flaring 

- Back Burner 

- EPA plans to 

discuss this issue 

within the Region 

and report back to 

UDAQ. 

- EPA Mgmt. 

and Staff 

11-25-03 

No action came 

from the 11-25­

03 call. 

- UDAQ does not 

feel that there is a 

specific basis for 

requiring limits or 

regulations on flaring. 

- UDAQ expressed 

concern regarding 

technology for 

monitoring flaring. 

Disagree - need for 

emission limits for 

flares. 

Disagree - UDAQ is 

concerned about 

setting precedent for 

monitoring flaring. 

EPA does not feel 

that UDAQ would be 

4
 
, - EPA has already setting a precedent 

disapproved a since there's already I 

Montana SIP because been monitoring for 

it didn't include flaring approved in 

limits on flares and it the Bay area. 

would be inconsistent Disagree - UDAQ 

if we didn't require feels that the MT 

Utah to include limits situation is different 

on flares. than Utah's and since 

- UDAQ is focusing Utah is monitoring 

on limits as well as attainment there's no 

monitoring. clear purpose as to 

- UDAQ feels that why they should look 

the consent decrees at flares. EPA feels 

that are in place will that UDAQ needs to 

be impacted if the account for all 

sources should have sources of emissions, 

to address flares. including flares. -c:. 

As of11-25-03 ­ - TheUtah~ identifies flar t EPA and UDAQ are 

the flares are still in disagreement 

excluded frc the ~this issue. 

emissions limits. /\ 

6. Emission Inventory - State to include - EPA is /// in demonstration currently ~/

reviewing a 

DRAFTTSD , rec'd on 

January 12, I 2004. 

5
 
7. NSRlBanking/Trading - Look at May 

10lh letter again to 

-EPNUDAQ 11/25/03 - EPA stated that 

typically states switch 

Disagree - UDAQ 

feels these issues 

determine what over to a PSD would be moot 

issues remain if program when the should Utah 

state goes PSD area becomes an implement a PSD 

- Establish Focus -EPNUDAQ - After EPA's attainment area. program. EPA does 

Group to discuss research not feel that all the 

- EPA will -EPA - Completed- issues would be 

research whether Regional EPA provided resolved by going to 

these issues would Counsel this info. in an a PSD program but 

be resolved should email to UDAQ will look into it and 

Utah go to a PSD on 12-15-03 get back with 

program. - See above UDAQ. 

- EPA will check - EPA comment 

to see what policy 

or guidance refers 

to switching from 

a nonattainment 

NSR to aPSD 

program. - Update: EPA 

- EPA will meet -EPNUDAQ met internally 1-23-04 -EPA has 

internally the Dec. 16. EPA not heard backfrom 

week ofDec. 8 emailed UDAQ UDAQ regarding 

and then we'll to schedule a establishing a call. 

tentatively meet meetingfor Dec. 

with UDAQ the 23 or the week 

week of Dec. 15 ofJan. 5. 

to discuss. 

-_._­

6
 
8. Unavoidable - Update progress - Cheryl 111/25/03 - UDAQ 

Breakdown on Excess Heying, Fred stakeholders have 

Emission rule Nelson I expressed concern 

development about the fact that the 

policy is not rule and 

- UDAQ will - UDAQ Staff 1-23-04 -UDAQ questions what the 

provide comments is still workillg authority is in going 

back to EPA on Oil a response to beyond federal rule. 

EPA's comments EPA. 

on UDAQ's rule 

language. 

- UDAQ will -UDAQ Update: Per a 

work with their 12-16-03 email 

AG's office, their from Cheryl 

stakeholders and Heying, UDAQ 

EPA to navigate is planning on 

the issues. starting 

discussions with 

the Stakeholders 

alld UDAQ is 

researching this 

issue as to what 

has beell 

discussed at 

other Regions 

and are 

following what 

Texas recently 

adopted. 

7)
 
- UDAQis 

meeting with the 

AGs ofe. Oil Dec. 

3 and will report 

back to EPA. 

-UDAQ 1-23-04 - EPA 

has not heard 

from UDAQ I 

I 

I 

9. Inclusion of Annual 

Growth Rates 

- EPA will 

provide case law 

on this subject. 

- State to include 

in demonstration 

-EPA 

- State 

developing 

EPA will 

Completed 

Agree - annual 

growth rates will be 

included. 

reVIew 

10. Wood Burning Credits - State to include 

in demonstration 

- State 

developing 

EPA will 

Agree - UDAQ will 

provide a technical 

demonstration to 

II. Back Half Emissions - Review language 

in 1991 SIP 

revIew 

- EPAIUDAQ Completed - UDAQ expressed 

concern that there is 

justify the credit. 

Disagree - UDAQ 

feels that no other 

- EPA will check 

to see if Denver 

measured for 

- EPA Completed 

no way to 

characterize backhalf 

by size. 

- EPA feels that until 

state within Region 8 

has been required to 

measure backhalf. 

EPA feels that the 

Backhalf. 

- EPA needs to - EPA Dick offered 

UDAQ inventories 

backhalf, we can't 

determine the level of 

measuring of 

backhalf is not a one 

size fits all 

discuss this issue 

within the Region 

and report back to 

UDAQ. 

UDAQthe 

options of not 

including 

backhalf in the 

significance ofthese 

emISSIOns. 

- UDAQ agreed to 

measure backhalf for 

requirement 

maintenance inventory purposes in 

8
 
plan but that 

UDAQwould 

need to begin 

measunng 

backhalf in the 

the 1991 SIP as well 

as in the Utah County 

SIP revision that was 

recently approved by 

EPA. 

future. 

i 

- UDAQ has had 

some internal 

discussion 

regarding Dick's 

offer about not 

-UDAQ - UDAQ would 

get back with us 

after they have 

more internal 

discussions. 

i 

, including backhalf 

in the 

maintenance plan 

but beginning to 

measure backhalf 

1-23-04 Update: 

EPA has not 

heard back 

from UDAQ 

in the future. 

UDAQ would like 

more time to 

discuss this issue 

internally. 

12. General Language 

Cleanup 

- State to include 

in final plan 

- State 

developing 

EPA will 

reVIeW 

3

1


L 

Diesel lIM - Develop 

language 

justifying 2% 

- State mobile 

source section, 

EPA will review 

11/25/03 Agree- UDAQ 

will provide a 

technical 

demonstration to 

9
 
- UDAQ mobile - UPDA TE: EPA justify the credit. 

source folks will will review and 

be getting to this provide 

SOOIl. UPDA TE: commellts. 

UDAQ submitted 

to EPA 01112-16­

03. 

14. Emission Budgets for PM and 

NOx 

- State to include 

in demonstration 

- State to include 

separate budgets 

for PM to and NOx 

in the Salt Lake 

County SIP. 

- State developing 

EPA will review 

Agree Separate 

budgets are 

needed for PMIO 

and NOx. 

15. IJM Program Changes - State to include 

in demonstration 

- State developing 

EPA will review 

Agree- UDAQ 

and EPA are in 

agreement that 

the switch to 

biennial testing 

will be modeled 

and that changed 

requirements will 

be submitted as a 

SIP revision. 

16. Magna dust I Set up a new call 

I d" to ISCUSS 

Bev or Deb As schedules 

allow 

As of1-23-04 

UDAQhas not 

contacted EPA 

on tltis issue. 

10