+ 2 (,1 1/,1(

Citation: 57 Fed. Reg. 18070 1992 

Content downloaded/printed from 

HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org)

Thu Oct 13 12:19:59 2011

-- 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 I Vol. 57, No. 82 I Tuesday, April 28, 1992 I Proposed Rules 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[FRL-4127-1] 

State Implementation Plans; General 

Preamble for the Implementation of 

Title I of the Clean Air Act 

Amendments of 1990; Supplemental 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: General Preamble for future 

proposed rulemakings; Appendices. 

SUMMARY: The EPA published a General 

Preamble for the Implementation of title 

I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 

1990 on April16, 1992 (57 FR 13498). This 

document describes EPA's preliminary 

views on how EPA should interpret 

various provisions of title I of the Clean 

Air Act Amendments of 1990, primarily 

those concerning State implementation 

plan (SIP) revisions required for 

nonattainment areas. It serves as 

advance notice of how 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, this notice, 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, for issues related to ozone or 

carbon monoxide; Mr. Eric Ginsburg at 

(919) 541-0877, Sulfur Dioxide/ 

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 for issues related to mobile 

sources, 401 M Street, SW. Washington, 

DC 20460. 

ADDRESSES: The appendices are also in 

Air Docket A-91-35, at 401 M Street, 

SW, Washington. DC. 

Dated: April21. 1992. 

Michael Shapiro, 

Acting Assistant Aam.nistrator for Air and 

Radiation. 

Appendix A-Glossary 

ACf=alternative control technique 

AVO= average vehicle occupancy 

BACM =best available control measures 

BACT"-- best available control technology 

CAA=Ciean Air Act 

CAAA,=Ciean Air Act AmendmPnts 

CARB=California Air Resources Board 

CEMS=·conlinuous emission monitoring 

system 

CO,-carbon monoxide 

CPM=condensible particulate matter 

CTG=control technique guideline 

DOI=Department of the Interior 

DOT= DepartmPnt of Transportation 

EKMA=Empiricul Kinetic Modeling 

Approach 

ERC=emission rt~duction credits 

ETC=employer transportation coordinator 

ETPS=Emission Trading Policy Statf'ment 

FIP= Federallmplemenlation Plan 

FMVCP= Federal Motor Vehicle Control 

Program 

FR =Federal Register 

GVWR=Gross Vehicle Weight Rating 

HC=hydrocarbons 

1/M=inspection and maintenance 

IPP= inventory preparation plan 

LAER=Iowest achievable emission rate 

MMS=Minerals Management Service 

MSA/CMSA= metropolitan statistical area/ 

consolidated metropolitan statistical area 

NAAQS=nationul ambient air quality 

standards 

NAS=National Academy of Sciences 

NOJ=Nitrogen dioxide 

NO,~ nitrogen oxides 

NSPS=new source performance standard 

NSR=New Source Review 

OCS=outer continental shelf 

PSD-=prevention of significant 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 Air Quality 

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 8-Bibliography and Cited 

References 

To obtain copies of Oi\QPS documents. 

contact the EPA Library. (919) 541-5514; 

(1-!S) 629-5514. For OMS publications. please 

contact Mark Woh;ott. (313) 668-4219; WI'S) 

374-8219. 

SIP Inventory Guidance/Requirements 

"Procedures for Preparing Emissions 

Projections," EPi\-450/4-91-{119. 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-{)26d. U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency. Office of Mobile Sources. 

Ann Arbor. Ml, July 1991. (also listed below 

under General Inventory Guidance). 

"Procedures for the PrPparation of 

Emissions Inventorie& for Carbon Monoxide 

and Precursors of Ozone. Volume 1". EPA450/4-91-Q16. U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency. Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards. Research Triangle Park. NC. May 

1991. 

"Procedures for the Preparation of 

Emissions Inventories for Carbon Monoxide 

and Precursors of O.wne. Volume II: Emission 

Inventory Requirements for Photochemical 

Air Quality Simulation Models." EPA-450/4-

91-014. U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency. Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards. Research Triangle Park. NC. ll.lay 

1991. 

"Emission Inventory Requirements for 

Ozone State Implementation Plans," EPA450/4-91-Q10. U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency. Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards. Research Triangle Park. NC. 

March 1991. 

"Emission Inventory Requirements for 

Carbon Monoxide State Implementation 

Plans." EPA-450/4-91-{111. U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency. Office of 

Air Quality Planning and Standards. 

Research Triangle Park. NC. March 1991. 

"SIP Air Pollutant Inventory Management 

System (Si\MS) Version 4.0 and SAMS User's 

Manual." U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency. Office of Air Qualit}· 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 of Air Quality Planning and Standards. 

Research Triangle Park. NC. October 1989. 

"Procedures for Estimating and Applying 

Rule Effectiveness in Post-1987 Base Year 

Emission Inventories for Ozone and Carbon 

Monoxide State Implementation Plans," U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Office of 

Air Quality 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 of Quality 

Assurance Plans for 0./CO SIP Emission 

Inventories," EPA-450/4-81Hl23. U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency. Office of 

Air Quality Planning and Standards. 

Research Triangle Park. NC. December 19A8. 

General Inventory Guidance 

"Procedures for Emission Inventory 

Preparation." U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency. Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards. Research Triangle Park. NC: 

a. "Volume 1: Emission Inventory 

Fundamentals."' EPA-450/4-81-{)26a. 

September 1981. 

b. "Volume II: Point Sources.~ EPA-450/4-

81-{)26b. September 1981. 
c. "Volume III: Area Sources," EPA-450/4-

81~26c. September 1981. 

d. "Volume IV: Mobile Sources." EPA-450/ 

H1~2&d (Revised). July 1981. 

e. "Volume V: Bibliography," EPA-450/4-

61~26e. September 1981. 

Emission Factors/Models 

"Personal Computer Version of the 

Biogenic Emissions Inventory System {PCBEIS) With Ueer't Guide." EPA-450/4-91-

017, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. 

Research Triangle Park. NC. July 1991. 

"User's Guide lo MOBILE4 (Mobile Source 

Emission Factor Model)." EPA-AA-TEB-{19-

01. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 

Office of Mobile Sources, Ann Arbor. MI. 

February 1969. {Revised version of MOBILFA 

and documentation to be completed in July 

1991.) 

"Surface Impoundment Modeling System 

(SIMS) Version 2.0 User's Manual." EPA-450{ 

4-90-Q19a, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards. Research Triangle Park. NC. 

September 1990. 

"Background Document for Surface 

Impoundment Modeling System (SIMS) 

Version 2.0. EPA-450/4-90-<l19b," U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency. Office of 

Air Quality Planning and Standards. 

Research Triangle Park. NC. September 1990. 

"AIRS Facility Subsystem Source 

Classification Codes (SCCs) and Emission 

Factor Liating for Criteria Pollutants." U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Office of 

Air Quality Planning and Standards, 

Research Triangle Park. NC. September 1989. 

"Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission 

Factors. Volumes.I and II and its 

supplementa, Fourth Edition," AP-42, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency. Office of 

Air Q~~«lity Planning and Standards, 

Research Triangle Park, NC, September 1965. 

Citations and Guidance for SJP Corrections 

"Guidance Document for Correction of Part 

D SIP's for Nonattainment Areas," EPA. 

OFfice of Air Quality Planning and Standards. 

Research Triangle Park, NC. January 27. 1984. 

Citations and Guidance for PM-10 

"Assessment of the Controllability of 

Condensible Particulate Matter," EPA--«JJ/6-

90-75, October 1900. 

"Procedurea for Estimating Probability of 

Nonattainment of a PM-10 NAAQS Using 

Total Suspended Particulate of PM-10 Data.'' 

EPA-450/4-M-Ci7, December 1986. 

"PM-10 SIP Development Guideline," June 

1987. 

"Control of Open Fugitive Dust Sources." 

EPA-450/3-$-008. September 1968. 

"Guidance Document for Residential Wood 

Combustion Emission Control Measures," 

EPA-450/2~15, September 1969. 

''Prescribed Fire Smoke Management 

Guide." NFES No. 1279. February 1985. 

"Prescribed Fire Plan Guide," NFES No. 

1939. August 1966. 

Citations and G11idance for so. 

"SOz Guideline," EPA-450/2-as-019. 

•·so, Guideline Appendices." EPA-450/2-

89-019. October 1989. 

"Letter from William Reilly to 

Representative John Dingell, In Response to 

questions and GAO report." April10. 11!91. 

Citations and Guidance for Lead 

"Updated information on Approval and 

Promulgation of Lead Implementation Plans," 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 

Research Triancle Park. NC, July 1983. 

"Guideline Series. Development of an 

Example Control Strategy for Lead." EPA450/l-79-00Z.. April1979. 

"Guideline Series. Supplementary 

Guideline for Lead Implementation Plans." 

EPA-450/2-76-038, August 1978. 

Modeling Guidance 

"UAM Applications Guidance." May 1991. 

"User's Guide for the Urban Airshed 

Model. Vol. 4," EPA-450/4-90-007D. June 

1990. 

"Guidance on Air Quality Models 

(Revised)." EPA-450/2-78-{)27R. July 1966. 

"Interim Procedures for Evaluating Air 

Quality Models: Experience with 

Implementation." EPA 450/4-81Hl06. July 

1985. 

New Source 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 Assessing the Role of 

Transport of Ozone/Precursors in Ozone 

Nonattainment Areas." U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park. 

NC, EPA-450/4-91-{115). 

"Enforcement Guidance for Stage II 

Vehicle Refueling Control Programs," 

December 1991. 

"Getting Started on Title 1." U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, OAQPS. 

Research Triangle Park, NC .. April1991. 

"Issues Relating to VOC Regulations. 

Cutpoints. Deficiencies. and Deviations," 

Clarification to Appendix D of Novelllber 24. 

1987 FR {Blue Book. revised January 11. 19110). 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Office 

of Air Quality Planning and Standards, 

AQMD, May 25,11188. 

"Protocols: Can Coaters. 45FR (December 

8. 1988) + Topcoaters," EPA-450/3-81Hl18 

· {December 1988). 

"Technical Guidance-Stage II Vapor 

.Recovery System for Control of Vehicle 

RefueUng Emissions at Gasoline Dispensing 

Facilities," Volume 1, November 1991. 

Memoranda 

Memorandum from William Laxton, 

Director. Technical Support 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 fro!" John Calcagni and 

William Laxton. "Interim Guidance on 

Emission Limits and Stack Test Methods for 

Inclusion in PM-10 SIP's," December 24. 1990. 

Memorandum from Robert Bauman and 

Rich Biondi to Air Branch Chiefs, "S~ SIP 

Deficiency Checklist.'' November 211. 1990. 

Memorandum from Joaepb Tikvarl and 

Robert Bauman concerning modeling 

guidelines addressing PM-10, dated July 15. 

1990. 

Memorandum from William Laxton, 

Director. Technical Support Division, to 

Regional Air Division Directors. "Ozone and 

Carbon Dioxide Design Value Calculations." 

June 18, 1990. 

· Memorandum from Craig J. Potter. "Interim 

Policy on Stack Height Regulatory Actions." 

April 22. 1968. 

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 of Rule Effectiveness 

Studies." March 31, 1968. 

Memorandum from Craig Potter, Thomas 

Adams. and Francis Blake to Regional Air 

Division Directors, "Review of Stale 

Implementation Plans and Revisions for 

Enforceability and Legal Sufficiency." 

September 23, 1967. 

Memorandum from Gerald Emison, 

Director. OAQPS, to David Kee, Director. Air 

Management Divi&ion, Region V, "Need (or a 

Short-Term BACT Analysis for the Proposed 

William A. Zimmer Power Plant," November 

24.1988. 

Memorandum from Richard Rhoads. 

Director CPDD, 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 

Acceptability of SIP Regulations in NonAttainment Areas," December 9, 1976. 

Federal Register Citations 

44 FR 20312. April4, 1979. 

44 FR 20375, April 4, 1979. 

44 FR 53762, September 17. 1979. 

44 FR 53709, September 17, 1979. 

44 FR 53791. September 17, 1979. 

45 FR 52676. August 1, 1980. 

46 FR 7182, January 21. 1961. 

46 FR 1187, January 22, 1961. 

51 FR 43812, December 4. 1986. 

51 FR 43814. December 4. 1988. 

51 FR 43632. December 4. 1986. 

52 FR 29363, August 7, 1987. 

52 FR 45044, November 24, 1987. 

53 FR 34500, September 7, 1988. 

54 FR 812. January 9, 1989. 

55 FR 30973, July 30, 1990. 

55 FR 41546, October 12. 1990. 

55 FR 41547, October 12. 1990. 

55 FR 45799, October 31, 1990 

56 FR 5460, February 11, 1991. 

56 FR 11101, March 15, 1991. 

56 FR 16274, April12. 1991. 

56 FR 23826, May 24, 1991. 

56 FR 27257, June 13. 1991. 

56 FR 27803, June 14, 1991. 

56 FR 31151. July 9, 1991. 

56 FR 31154, July 19, 1991. 

58 FR 37654, August 8. 1991. 

56 FR 43593, September 3. 1991. 

56 FR 54554, October 22. 1991. 

56 FR 56694, November 6, 1991. 

56 FR 58656, November 21, 1991 
Code of Federal Regulations Citations 

40 CFR 50.8. 

40 CFR 50.9 Apprndix H. 

40 CFR 50.9. 

40 CFR Purt 51. 

40 CFR Purl 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 

Alaban111 Pu1ver Company v. Cost/e. 636 

F.2d 32:1, 3fi0·61, 404-05 (D.C. Cir. 1980). 

NRDC v. Thomas, 838 F.Zd 1224, (D.C. Cir. 

1988), Cert. denied, 109 S.Ct. 219 (1988). 

DelanP.y v. EPA, 898 F.Zd 687, 136 Cong. 

Rec. S16971 [October 27, 1990). 

House of Representatives Reports 

H.R. Rep. No. 490, 101st Congress, 2nd 

Session. pt. 1 at 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 associuted with stationary sources). 

Fugitive duN I is particulate matter suspended 

in the air either by mechanical disturbance of 

the surface material or by 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 of the source, emission rate, and control 

efficiency. The Environmental Protection 

Agency's (EPA) policy is to reduce fugitive 

dust emissions. with an emphasis on 

preventing. rather than mitigating. them. For 

example, past efforts to control emissions 

from paved roads have usually relied on 

street cleaning to reduce silt loading. The 

new approat:h would put a higher priority 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 

Control of Open Fugitive Dust Sources (EPA450/3-88-008 September. 1988). 

List of A vailab/e Control Measures 

1. Pave. vegetate, or chemically stabilize 

access points where unpaved traffic surfaces 

adjoin paved roads. 

2. Require dust control plans for 

construction or land clearing projects. 

3. Require huul trucks to be covered. 

4. Provide for traffic rerouting or rapid 

clean up of temporary (and not readily 

preventable) sources of dust 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. Use of speed bumps, low 

speed limits, etc., to encourage use of other 

(paved) roads. 

7. Limit use of recreational vehicles on 

open land (e.g., confine operations to specific 

areas, require use permits, outright ban). 

8. Require improved material specification 

for and reduction of usage of skid control 

sand or salt (e.g., require use of coarse, 

nonfriable mat~riul during Rnow nnd ice 

season). 

9. Require curbing and pave or stabilize 

(<:hemically or with vegetation) shoulders of 

paved roads. 

10. Pave or chemically stubilize unpaved 

roads. 

11. Pave, vegdute, or chemically stabilize 

unpaved parking areas. 

12. Establish dust control measures for 

material storage piles. 

13. Provide for sto1m water drainage to 

prevent water erosion onto paved roads. 

14. Require vegetation, chemical 

stabilization, or other abatement of wind 

erodible soil, induding lands subjected to 

water mining, abandoned farms, and 

abandoned construction sites. 

15. Rely upon the soil conservation 

requirements (e.g., conservation plans, 

conservation reserve) of the Food Security 

Act to reduce cmiRsions from agricultural 

opera lions. 

Appendix C2-Available Residential Wood 

Combustion Control Measures 

Background 

Wood smoke from residential wood stoves 

and fireplaces Is a significant source of PM10 pollution in some areas in the westem 

United States that do not attain the PM-10 

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 levels well in excess of the standards. 

The U.S. EPA's new source performance 

standard (53 FR 5860, February 26, 1988) is a 

long4erm strategy designed to improve the 

performance of wood burning devices 

nationwide. The EPA believes 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 of wood 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), Guidance Document for 

Residential Wood Combustion Emission 

Control Measures. Nothing in this document 

prevents a State implementation plan (SIP) in 

a moderate PM-10 nonattainment area from 

containing control measures more stringent 

thanRACM. 

List of 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 if the 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 of wood 

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 and fireplace 

population (or use) by: 

-Slowing the growth of woodburning 

devices in new housing units by taxes, 

installation permit fees, or other 

disincentives. 

-Encouraging a reduction in the number of 

woodburning devices (i.e., removing or 

disabling the devices) through tax credits 

or other incentives. 

-Discouraging the resale of used stoves 

through taxes, fees, or other disincentives. 

-Discouraging the availability of free (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) to develop appropriate 
g, y, p, p

guidance. The objective is to establish smoke 

management (SM) programs in these areas 

which constitute reasonably available control 

measures (RACM). and reduce population 

exposure to smoke from prescribed burning, 

while assuring that resource management 

goals are met. 

States should address emissions from 

prescribed burning in a manner that balances 

natural resource, agricultural. and other 

burning objectives with air quality goals and 

objectives, by utilizing a smoke management 

program as described in the NWCG's 

Prescribed Fire Smoke Management Guide 

(NFES No. 1279, February 1965) and the 

Prescribed Fire Plan Guide (NFES No. 1939, 

August 1986), publications of the Boise 

(Idaho) Interagency Fire Center. 

The scope of a SM program should reflect 

the specific conditions and requirements of a 

local area. Existing programs may be 

adequate in many cases and in other cases 

may provide a basis for developing a refined 

program. Smoke management should 

encourage the cooperative efforts of local. 

State, Federal. and private land managers. 

Emphasis should be on conducting burns 

under an established planning process. 

For the purpose of PM-10 SIP development, 

the term prescribed burning includes all open 

burning of vegetative matter. This includes 

both planned ignition and prescribed natural 

fire. Nothing in a SM 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 public safety 

are compromised. 

The EPA believes it is reasonable that a 

SM program apply in those moderate PM-10 

nonattainment areas where it has been 

shown, through monitoring. modeling, or 

other analysis, that prescribed burning can or 

does contribute to violations of !he PM-10 

national ambient air quality standards 

(NAAQS). The SM program should also apply 

to areas outside of the nonattainment area if 

it is shown that prescribed burning outside of 

the nonattainment area can or does 

contribute to NAAQS violations. The 

prescribed burning control measures 

reasonably may be limited only to the 

season(s) when high ambient PM-10 

concentrations occur. if it 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). 

Source categories (e.g .. burning of 

fencelines. ditch banks, small brush piles, 

small prescribed natural burns. garden plots) 

may not be reasonably controlled where their 

impact is de minimis based on consideration 

of their collective influence on PM-10 

emissions. their duration, season, and 

proximity to potentially affected populations. 

An SM program should consist of at least 

the following components: 

Smoke Dispersion Evaluation 

As a minimum. the program should usc 

National Weather Service forecasts or other 

meteorological analyses to determine when 

meteorological conditions are favorable or 

unfavorable for dispersion and transport of 

smoke (i.e., "burn days," "no burn days"). 

Burn Planning, Authorization, and 

Administration 

The smoke management program should 

provide a process (e.g., telephone call-in) for 

receiving burn requests, evaluating requests 

and granting approval for burns. Approval of 

a bum should be based on an evaluation of 

the alrshcd's capacity/capability to disperse 

emissions on allowable bum days so that the 

cumulative emissions from all burns and 

other sources in the airshed will not cause or 

contribute to violations of the PM-10 

NAAQS. The approval to burn on a burn day 

should be equitably divided among all 

categories of burners requesting approval to 

burn while accommodating the "incentives" 

specified elsewhere in this policy. 

Requirements for Ensuring Burner 

Qualifications 

Voluntary training in smoke management 

techniques should be reasonably available 

for all burners. The program should include 

incentives for burners who complete the 

voluntary training (e.g .. priority for approval 

to burn on "burn days"). 

Public Education and Awareness 

Information programs on the nature of and 

reasons for smoke management should be 

periodically presented to the public (e.g .. 

public service announcements, newspaper 

articles). 

Surveillance and Enforcement 

The SM program should rely on routine 

PM-10 monitoring. and/or modeling 

supplemented by periodic visual assessments 

of the effectiveness of the dispersion 

evaluation program. The existing PM-10 

monitoring network should be evaluated for 

its ability to provide information on the 

effectiveness of the 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 a process for documenting and 

following up on public complaints and should 

provide for and levy fines against burners 

who violate any of its mandatory 

requirements. 

Emission Inventories and Emission Efforts 

States should develop and maintain an 

emission inventory for prescribed burning 

and all burns should be categorized as to 

their purpose. Documentation of the size. 

date. purpose, and emission reduction 

measures used should be submitted following 

each large bum. Emission reduction 

techniques (e.g., mass ignition. rapid mop-up) 

should be encouraged 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 utilized without 

compromising resource management 

objectives. 

State Oversight 

The relationship of the State air pollution 

agency with other State agencies to which 

management of tbe SM program may have 

been delegated will need to be determined on 

a State-by-State basis. Nevertheless, State 

rules and regulations should be enacted in 

such a manner that all provisions of the SM 

program are enforceable by the State through 

its State implementation plan. Generally, 

memorandums of understanding should be 

utilized to clearly specify working 

relationships among agencies. 

Appendix C4-RACT Delenninatlons for 

Stationary Sources 

Bar;kground 

Congress has for the second lime in 

amending the Clean Air Act (Act) specifically 

required that reasonable available control 

technology (RACT) be applied to existing 

stationary sources In nonaltainment areas. In 

section 172(b)(3) of the Act, as amended in 

1977, Congress specified that nonattainment 

area plans were to "require, * * *, 

reasonable further progress * * * including 

such reduction In emissions from existing 

sources in the area as may be obtained 

through the adoption, at a minimum, of 

reasonably available control technology." 

Thus, RACT was required in SIP's developed 

for areas that were designated nonattoinmcnt 

for total suspended particulate matter. Now, 

in section 172(c)(l) of the Clean Air Act, as 

amended by the Clean Air Act Amendments 

of 1990 (Nonattainment Plan Provisions-In 

General), Congress again requires that· 

nonattainment area plans provide for "• • • 

such reductions In emissions from existing 

sources in the (nonattainment) area as may 

be obtained through the adoption, at a 

minimum, of reasonably available control 

technology." Thus. RACT is now required for 

PM-10 nonattainment area SIP's. 

The EPA recommends that the RACT for a 

particular source continues to be determined 

on a case-by-case basis considering the 

technological and economic feasibility of 

reducing emissions from that source (through 

process changes or add-on control 

technology). The following technological and 

economic parameters should be considered in 

determining RACT for a particular source. 

Technological Feasibility 

The technological feasibility of applying an 

emission reduction method to a particular 

source should consider the source's process 

and operating procedures. raw materials, 

physical plant layout, and any other 

environmental impacts such as 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 of add-on 

emission control equipment. The operation of 

and longevity of control equipment can be 

significantly influenced by the raw materials 

used and the process to which it is applied. 

The feasibility of modifying processes or 

applying control equipment is also influenced 

by the physical layout of the particular plant. 

The space available in which to implement 

such changes may limit the choices and will 

also affect the costs of control. 

Reducing air emissions may not justify 

adversely affecting other resources by 

increasing pollution of bodies of water, 

creating additional solid waste disposal 
problems or creating excessive energy 

demands. (An otherwise available PM-10 

control technology may not be reasonable if 

these other environmental impacts cannot 

reasonably be mitigated.) For analytic 

purposes. 1t State may consider a PM-10 

control measure technologically Infeasible If, 

considering the availability (and cost) of 

mitigative adverse Impacts of that control on 

other pollution media, the control would not, 

in the State'~ reasoned judgment, provide a 

net environmental benefit. In many instances, 

however. PM-10 control technologies have 

known energy penalties and adverse effecta 

on other media, but such effects and the r.oat 

of their mitigation are also known and have 

been borm? by owners of existing sources In 

numerous c:ases. Such well-established 

adverse effects and their costs are normal 

and assumed to be reasonable and should 

not. in most cases, justify nonuse of the PM10 control technology. The costs of prcvenlinR 

adverse water, solid waste and energy 

Impacts will also influence the economic 

fea'!ibility of the PM-10 control technology. 

Alternative approaches to reducing 

emissions of particulate matter Including PM10 are discussed in Control Techniques for 

Particulate Emissions from Stationary 

Sources-Volume I (EPA-450/3-81-00Sa) and 

Volume II (EPA-450/3-81-005b), September 

1982. The design, operation and maintenance 

of general particulate matter control systems 

such as met:hanical collectors, electrostatic 

precipitators, fabric filters, and wet scrubbers 

are discussed in Volume I. The collection 

efficiency of each system is discussed as a 

function of particle size. Information is also 

presented regarding energy and 

environmental considerations and procedures 

for estimating costs of particulate matter 

control equipment. The emission 

characteristics and control technologies 

applicable to specific source categories are 

discussed in Volume II. Secondary 

environmental impacts are also discuRsed. 

Additionnl sources of Information on 

control technology are background 

information documents for new source 

performance standards and Identification, 

Assessment, and Control of Fugitive 

Particulate Emissions, EPA~/8-8~23, 

August 1986. 

In some instances, control technologies 

more modern or more advanced than those 

described in the documents referenced may 

exist. In s01:h cases, the State's RACT 

analysis for a source should consider such 

available technology. 

Economic Feasibility 

EconomiL feasibility considers the cost of 

reducing emissions and the difference in 

costs between the particular source and other 

similar sources that have implemented 

emission reduction. As discussed above, EPA 

presumes that it is reasonable for similar 

sources to bear similar costs of emission 

reductions. Economic feasibility rests very 

little on the ability of a particular source to 

"afford" to reduce emissions to the level of 

similar sources. Less efficient sources would 

be rewarded by having to bear lower 

emission reduction costs if affordabilily were 

given high coJnsideration. Rather, economic 

feasibility for RACT purposes is largely 

determined by evidence that other sources in 

a source category have In fact applied the 

control technology in question. 

The capital costs, annualized costs, and 

cost effectiveness of an emission reduction 

technology should be considered in 

determining its economic feasibility. The 

OAOPS Control Cost Manual, Fourth Edition, 

EPA-450/3-90-006. January 1990, describes 

procedures for determining these costs. The 

above costs should be determined for all 

technologically feasible emission reduction 

options. 

States may give substantial weight to cost 

effectiveness in evaluating the economic 

feasibility of an emission reduction 

technology. The cost effectiveness of a 

technology is its annualized cost ($/year) 

divided by the amount of PM-10 emission 

reduction (i.e., tons/year) which yields a cost 

per amount of emission reduction ($/ton). 

Cost effectiveness provides a value for each 

emission reduction option that is comparable 

with other options and other facilities. 

If a company contends that it cannot afford 

the technology thnt appears to be RACT for 

that source or group of sources, the claim 

should be supported with such information as 

the impact on: 

1. Fixed and variable production costs ($/ 

unit), 

2. Product supply and demand elasticity, 

3. Product prices (cost absorption vs. cost 

pass-through), 

4. Expected costs Incurred by competitors, 

5. Company profits, and 

6. Employment. 

If a 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, eft:. 

Appendix D 

United States Environmental Protection 

Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards. Reseurch Triangle Park, North 

Carolina 27711. 

March 11, 1991. 

Memorandum 

Subject: New Source Review (NSR) Program 

Transitional Guidance. 

From: John S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air 

Quality Planning and Standards (MD--

10). 

To: Addressees. 

The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 

(1990 Amendments) make numerous changes 

to the NSR requirements of the prevention of 

significant deterioration (PSD) and 

nonattainment area programs. The 1990 

Amendments create new and expanded 

nonattainment areas, extend PSD coverage to 

current Class I area boundaries, and mandate 

a PSD exemption for certain hazart!ous air 

pollutants. The Environment Protection 

Agency (EPA) intends to propose by 

September of thi~ year a regulatory pnckage 

that will implement these and other changes 

to the NSR provisions. Final adoption of 

these revised regulntions is projected for 

August 1992. In the interim period between 

passage of the 1990 Amendments and 

adoption of the Agency's final regulations, 

EPA expects thai numerous issues regarding 

the 1990 Amendments will arise. This 

memorandum sets forth the Agency's positil)n 

on the most important of these transitional 

issues involving the NSR program. 

This guidance document does not 

supersede existing State regulations or 

approved State implementation plans. 

However, in some cases, it calls upon State~ 

to implement their NSR programs in a manner 

consistent with provisions of the 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 guidanc:P 

and do not represent final Agency action. 

They are not ripe for judicial 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 of specific 

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 62!Hl873 or 

(919} 541~73. 

Attachment 

Addressees 

Director, Air, Pesticides, and Toxics 

Management Division, Regions I, IV, and 

VI 

Director. Air and Waste Management 

Division, Region II 

Director, Air Management Division, Regions 

III 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 "CFC 113". 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 

Taxies and Notional Emissions Standards for 

I lazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPS) Issues 

1. Section 112 Hazardous Air Pollutants are 

No Longer Considered Regu!atecl Pollutants 
g, y, p, p

18075 

Under Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD). but NESHAPS ~till Apply. 

Under the 1977 Amendments to the Clean 

Air Act (Act) and regulations issued 

thereunder. the PSD requirements of the Act 

apply to all "major" new sources and "major" 

modifications. i.e., those exceeding certain 

annual tonnage thresholds (see 40 CFR 

52.21(b)(1)(i) and (b)(2)(i)). Typically, new 

sources and modifications become subject to 

PSD because they exceed the specified 

tonnage threshold for a criteria pollutant, i.e., 

a pollutant for which a national ambient air 

quality standard (NAAQS) has been 

established under section 109 of the Act. 

Once a new source or modification 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 of a major modification. for which 

there is a significant net emissions increase) 

(see 40 CFR 52.21(b)(23) and (i)(2)). Under the 

1977 Amendments. best available control 

technology (BACT) and other PSD 

requirements apply not only to emissions of 

criteria pollutants but also to emissions of 

pollutants regulated under other provisions of 

the Act, such as section 111 or 112. This 

regulatory structure was altered by the 1990 

Amendments. 

Title 111 of the 1990 Amendments added a 

new section 112(b)(6) that excludes the 

hazardous air pollutants listed in section 

112(b)(l) of the 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 are on the initial Title III 

hazardous air pollutants list. the following 

pollutants, which had been regulated under 

PSD because they were 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 

• Hydrogen sulfide (H2Sl 

• Mercury 

• Radionuclides (including radon and 

polonium) 

• Vinyl chloride 

The Title Ill exemption applies to final 

Federal PSD permits (i.e .. those issued in final 

form and for which administrative appeals, if 

any, under 40 CFR 124.19 have been 

exhausted) issued on or after the date of 

enactment of the 1990 Amendments 

(November 15, 1990). For Federal PSD permit 

applications now under review by either an 

EPA Regional Office or a delegated State, 

PSD permit requirements do not apply to the 

pollutants exempted by Title III. For Federal 

PSD permits containing PSD requirements for 

the pollutants exempted by Title III issued on 

or after November 15, 1990, the permittee 

may request a revision (e.g., removal of a 

BACT limit for benzene) to their PSD permit 

to reflect the Title Ill exemption from Federal 

PSD applicability. 

Note that pursuant to section 116 and the 

preservation clause in section 112(d)(7) of the 

amended Act. States with an approved PSD 

program may contmue to regulate the Title III 

hazardous air pollutants now exempted from 

Federal PSD by section 112(b)(6) if the State 

PSD regulations provide an independent 

basis to do so. These State rules would 

remain in effect unless a State revised them 

to provide similar exemptions. Additionally. 

the Title Ill pollutants continue to be subject 

to any other applicable Stale and Federal 

rules: the exclusion is only for Part C rules. 

Finally. section 112(q) retains existing 

NESHAPS regulations by specifying that any 

standard under section 112 in effect prior to 

the date of enactment of the 1990 

Amendments shall remain in force and effect 

after such date unless modified as provided 

in the amended section. Therefore, the 

requirements of 40 CFR 61.05 to 61.08. 

including preconslruction permitting 

requirements. for new and modified sources 

subject to existing NESHAPS regulations are still applicable. , 

In summary. the pollutants currently 

regulated under the Act as of March 1991 that 

are still subject to Federal PSD review and 

permitting requirements are: 

• Carbon monoxide 

• Nitrogen oxides 

• Sulfur dioxide 

• Particulate matter and PH-10 

• Ozone (volatile organic compounds) 

• Lead (elemental) 

• Fluorides 

• Sulfuric acid mist 

• Total reduced sulfur compounds (including 

1-I,S) 

• CFC's 11. 12, 113. 114.115 

• Halons 1211. 1301. 2402 

• Municipal waste combustor (MWC) acid 

gases, MWC metals and MWC organics 

2. Hazardous Air Pollutants that are 

Regulated as One Component of a More 

General Pollutant Under Other Provisions of 

the Clean Air Act are Still Regulated. 

Any hazardous air pollutants listed in 

section 112(b)(1) which are regulated as 

constituents of a more general pollutant listed 

under section 106 of the Act are still subject 

to PSD as part of the more general pollutant, 

despite the exemption in Title Ill. For 

example. volatile organic compounds (VOC's) 

(a term which includes benzene. vinyl 

chloride, methanol, toluene. methyl ethyl 

ketone, and thousands of other compounds) 

are still regulated as VOC's (but not as 

individual pollutants such as benzene. etc.) 

under the PSD regulations because these 

pollutants are ozone precursors. not because 

they are air toxics. Also, particulates 

(including lead compounds and asbestos) are 

still regulated as particulates (both PM-10 

and particulate matter) under the PSD 

regulations. Lead compounds are exempt 

from Federal PSD by Title III. but the 

elemental lead portion of lead compounds (as 

tested for in 40 CFR part 60. appendix A, 

Method 12) is still considered a criteria 

pollutant subject to the lead NAAQS and still 

regulated under PSD. 

3. Toxic Effect of Unregulated Pollutants 

Still Considered in BACT Analysis. 

Based on the remand decision on June 3. 

1986 by the EPA Administrator in North 

County Resource Recovery Associates (PSD 

Appeal No. 85-2). the impact on emissions of 

other pollutants. including unregulated 

pollutants. must be taken into account in 

determining BACT for a regulated pollutant. 

When evaluating control technologies and 

their associated emissions limits, combustion 

practices, and related permit terms and 

conditions in a BACT proposal. the applicant 

must consider tke environmental impacts of 

all pollutants not regulated by PSD. Once a 

project is subject to BACT due to the 

emission of nonexempted pollutants, the 

BACT analysis should therefore consider all 

pollutants. including Title III hazardous air 

pollutants previously subject to PSD. in 

determining which control strategy is best. 

PSD Class I Boundary Issues 

1. PSD Applicability Coverage Changes as 

Class I Area Boundaries Change 

Sections 162(a) and 164(a) of the amended 

Act specify that the boundaries of areas 

designated as Class 1 must now conform to 

all boundary changes at such parks and 

wilderness areas made since August 7. 1977 

and any changes that may occur in the future

The EPA does not believe that Congress 

intended to create the turmoil which would 

occur if this redesignation required the 

modification of permits issued between 

August 7, 1977 and November 15, 1990. or the 

resubmission and reevaluation of complete 

permit applications submitted prior to 

enactment of the 1990 Amendments. Thus, fo

this reason, applications considered complet

prior to November 15, 1990 should be 

processed as submitted without regard to the 

new Class 1 area boundaries. Exceptions to 

this general policy are in the area of 

increment consumption and air quality 

related values (including visibility). as 

discussed below. 

For an applicant who submitted a complet

PSD application prior to November 15, 1990. 

all other PSD requirements are met, a permit 

may be issued based on the Class 1 analysis 

as submitted in the application, unless the 

reviewing authority finds. on a case-by-case 

basis. that additional analysis is needed from 

the applicant to address suspected adverse 

impacts or increment consumption problems 

due to the expanded boundaries of the Class 

I areas. Any existing increment violations in 

the new boundaries of Class I areas must be 

remedied through a SIP revision pursuant to 

40 CFR 51.166(a)(3). 

The PSD applications not considered 

complete before November 15, 1990 must 

consider the impact of both existing sources 

and the new or modified source on the Class 

areas as defined by the 1990 Amendments. 

Thus. the complete application must conside

the impacts on the entire Class I area based 

upon the boundaries in existence of the date 

of submittal of a complete application: as 

before, if a Class I boundary changes before 

the permit is issued, the reviewing authority 

may find. on a case-by-case basis, that 

additional analysis is needed from the 

applicant to address suspected adverse 

impacts or increment consumption problems 

due to expanded Class I Area boundaries. 

NSR Nonattainmentlssues 

1. NSR Construction Permit Requirements in 

Nonattainment Areas 

In many States, the existing approved Part 

D permit program .by its terms covers all 

designated nonattainment areas in the State
sua Part lJ permit program will automatically 

apply to the new and expanded 

nonattainment areas which are established 

under provisions of Title I of the 1990 

Amendments. Thus, until new rules are 

adopted for these new or expanded 

nonattainment areas, States should apply the 

requirPme.tls of their existing approl'ed Part 

D per·nit progrum. However, in othl'r Stales, 

a Par! D program may be limited to specified 

areas and does not apply to new or expanded 

HreiJS. In the~;e caHes, StateR must imp:ement 

a tranqitionHI permitting program unlil their 

existing Pt~rl D programs are revised to meet 

the requirromPntR of the 1990 Amendments 

und expanded to cover all nonattainment 

arPus in th,• State. Otherwise. both thP gon!s 

of pHrt U aT~ Congress' intent in creilfing 

nrow ur e.-. phndcd nonattainment arPas will 

be frustmind. 

The EPA regulations alre.Jdy providP for 

the~e new or expanded designated 

nonattainn•ent arras because the Emission 

Offset Interpretations Ruling [40 CFR part 51!, 

appe:1dix S) ROVerns permitH to construct 

between the date of designution and the dt~le 

1m approVI'd Pa!"! D plan Is maue applicable 

to the new nonattainment area (sPe 40 CFR 

52.24(1.)). Until a State's new Part D pian is 

B!ifll"O\eri hy EPA, if a St<tiP wishes to lssue H 

permit for .t mnjor statiom;ry source or major· 

modifir:atiun in~; new or expanded 

designated nnnattr.inmentarea, the StHifJ 

should comJ.IlY with the requirements of 

appendix S. Among other things, appendix S 

rr•quires a maj•Jr source seddng to locate In a 

nonattainrne:-tt area to (1) meet the lowest 

HchiE:vable emission rate for sud: S'"lurce, [2) 

pro\ irle off sets from existing sources in the 

area, t:'ld (3) shov.; that the offsets will 

provirleo p.lsith·e n10t air quality benefli (see 

40 CFR purl fil. appendix S, section IV.A}. 

. The EPA believes that in order to carry out 

the intent "f appeudix S, offsets should be 

required for sources in all categories and in 

all instdnct!N should be calculated on a tons 

per year basis [see 40 CFR part 51, appendix 

S. section IV.(.I. 

Of COUf~P.. m>ith~r appendix S nor thP 

f'Xistin!! 1\lS.R rules incorpofllte the NSR 

chankPS mundated by Title I of the 1990 

Amendment& such as lower source 

applicability thresholds, increased emi&sions 

offset ratio~. n<Jw definitions of major 

st11tionary source, and (for ozone 

nonattainment areas) requirements fur 

nitrogen oxides (NOx] control and NO;.; 

emissions offsets. However. the 1990 

Amendments require Sta~es to submit to EPA 

new NSR permit program rules for ozcne 

non:tttainment 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 3 years 

from the date of the nonattainment 

designation. The EPA interprets this I!~ an 

expression of congressional intent not to 

mandate that States adhere to the more 

stringent Title I NSR requirements in 

nonattainmenl 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 I are 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 Stale having adequate 

authority for early implementation of the NSR 

changes to do so us soon as possible. 

If States filii to submit to EPA the new NSR 

permit program rules for nonattainment areas 

by the dP.adlines in the amended Act, EPA 

Intends to impose in these nonattainment 

areas a Federal implementation plan (FIP) 

embodying such requirem1mts. Currently, 

EPA intends to propose revis!'d NSR 

regulations ul 40 CFR part 52 that would 

implement the new Title I NSR requirements 

under a FIP In a State if that Stc~te'a revised 

NSR rules to Implement Title I ar" not 

submitted in approvublt~ form tn EPA and 

rn:1d1~ effective within the State hy thP 

deadlines established by th" 1~10 

Amendments. 

Th" urea designation in elletl un the d:j!l' 

of permit issuance by the rnviewing agency 

determines which regulations (Part C or Part 

D) apply to that permit. In oth1 r words, the 

PSD permit regolations apply to pollutants for 

which the area Is uesignated us attainment or 

t.nclussifial:la. unJ lhe NSR nun;>ttainment 

permit regnlations apply to pollu:ants for 

which the are!! is designated nonatthinment 

(see 40 CFR 51.166[i) (3) anu (5); and 40 CFR 

52.21(i) (3)anu (5)}. Under theHe regulations, a 

PSD permit for a pollutant c;annot be issued 

in an area that is designated nonallr.inment 

for that pollutant. For the situation where a 

source wceives a PSD o; other permit prior to 

the date the area is designated as 

nonattC>inment, thP. permit remains in efftc! 

as long as the source commenr.es 

wnstruction within 18 month!! after the date 

of nonaaainment designation of tht' area, 

dues not rlis1;ontinue construction for more 

than 18 months, and completes CIJnStl1Jction 

within a reasonable time (sP.e 40 CPR 52.24 [g) 

and (k)). Although the PSD regulations 

provide for extension of these deadlines, no 

extension would be appropJiale where the 

area has been designated as nonattainment 

following permit issuance. Accordingly, if any 

of these construction provisions ure not met, 

the PSD permit or other permit will not be 

extended, and the source (if subject to the 

nonattainment provisions) must obtain a 

nonattalnment permit prior to commencing 

(or continuing) construction. 

The 1990 Amendments create some new 

and expanded nonattainment areas by 

operation of law. Other nonallalnmt:nt area 

changes are expected as thP Sidles and EPA 

complete the designation process prescribed 

in amended section 107(d). Ber;ause of these 

provisions, the dates areas switch from 

attainment to nunattainmenl for NSR 

purpo~es 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 

not be 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 of the 

1990 Amendments on November 15, 1990 (see 

section 107(d)(4)(B)). Specifically. Congress 

designated Group I areas and areas where 

violations of the PM-10 NAAQS had 

occurred prior to January 1, 1989 us 

nonattainment. The EPA published a list of 

these PM-10 areas in a Federal Register 

notice (see 55 FR 45799, October 31, 1990; SllP 

also 52 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 nonattainmentareas as of 

November 15, 1990. 

Similal'ly, the 1990 Amendments expand by 

operation of law some CO and ozone 

nonattainment areas. However, these 

changes did not become effective with 

passage but rather on December 30, 1990. The 

specifics nre as follows: 

Section 107(d)(4}(A)(iv) of the ornendt>d 

Act provides that, with the exception 

explained below ozone and CO 

nonat!ainment 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 

IRw 45 d11y~ after enactment unlesf, the 

Governor suhmilled a notice by this 

deadline of the State's intent to seek a 

modification of the expanded bound<tries 

purHuant to the procedures set forth in 

section 107(d)(4}(A}(v). So if a State did nut 

provide this notice, the nonattainment 

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, 1990.1f a State did 

provide ti;;r.ely notice, the Administrator 

hat< up to 14 months from enactment to 

resolve the State's challenge. Until EPA 

promulgates a resolution of the State's 

challenge, the old boundaries rem11ln in 

effect. 

Except for th~.:se two cases where new ur 

expanded boundaries have been created by 

op!lration of luw, nonatlainment area 

changes will not be considered effective until 

the changes arll promulgated by the EPA. As 

to most new areas or expansions of 

previou&ly-designated nonattainment ateas, 

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 of a designated 

nonattainment area for NSR purposes at thP 

time of promulgation. 

2. Status of Construction Bans 

Pursuant to section 110(n)(3], an existing 

construction ban that was imposed due to the 

absence of approved Part D NSR rules 

remains in effect until a revised NSR SIP is 

approved. Existing construction bans 

imposed due to disapproval of primary sulfur 

dioxide NAAQS allainment plans also 

remain in effect. A Federal Register notice 

will be puhlished soon announcing the statu'! 

of construction bans in general and also 

lifting specific bans where appropriate. 

Should a construction ban be lifted In any 

area designated as nonallainment, and the 

area locks an approved Part D NSR rule, the 

State should meet the requirements of 40 CFR 

part 51, appendix S, in issuing permits to 
g, y, p, 99p

18077 

major new sources or major modifications 

prior to the adoption of NSR rules meeting 

the requirements of the 1990 Amendments. 

3. Federal Implementation Plans Remain in 

Effect 

The NSR permitting program in an existing 

FIP remains in effect until a SIP is approved 

or a revised FIP is adopted. 

4. Use of Previously-Apprvved 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, or that receive one 

thereafter. For NSR permits issued on or after 

November 15, 1990. previously-approved 

growth allowances cannot be used 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 be obtained 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 of the 

States of Connecticut. Delaware. Maine, 

Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire. 

New Jersey. New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode 

Island. Vermont, and the CMSA that includes 

the District of Columbia and part of the State 

of Virginia. For this transport region, 

including all attainment areas within its 

boundaries, new section 184(b)(2) specifies 

that any stationary source that emits or has 

the potential to emit at least 50 Ions per year 

of VOC's shall be considered a major 

stationary source and subject to the 

requirements which would be applicable to 

major stationary sources if the area were 

classified as a moderate ozone 

nonattainmenl area. For NSR purposes, the 

requirements of section 184(b)(2} are not in 

effect in a State until the State submits a new 

or revised SIP that includes the requirements 

(or EPA imposes a FIP implementing those 

requirements). A Stale 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) of the 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 Slate must submit these 

RACT rules wwithin 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 of RACT 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 of CTG document-a 

document that lists the eleven CTG's EPA 

anticipates publishing in accordance with 

section 183(a) and establishes lime tables for 

submittal of RACT 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. 

II. List of 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 coaling (business machines): 

5. Plastic parts coaling (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. 

!II. Authority 

Under section 182(b}(2), States must adopt 

RACT rules for three general groups of 

sources: (A) Those covered by a postenactment CTG document; (b) those covered 

by a pre-enactment CTG; (c) "all other major 

stationary sources of VOC's.'' Section 

182(b)(2) also establishes the timing for Stale 

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. For the other two groups. the 

Act provides specific dates for submittal. 

November 15, 1992. and implementation. no 

later than May 31, 1995. 

Alone. subparagraphs (A). (B) and (C) seem 

to set forth three distinct groups of sources. 

However. the submittal dates under the 

second portion of the provision potentially 

could blur the line between these three 

groups if EPA 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 

of these CTG's before November 15. 1992. 

Therefore, to the extent EPA does not issue 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 lo 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 distinction between the three 

different groups in subparagraphs (A). (B), 

and (C). If a State believes that one of the 

eleven CTG's listed in Section II will cover a 

particular major source. the Stale should 

follow the timing provisions of Section IV, 

below for submittal of a rule applicable to 

that source. The State should Identify those 

sources in its November 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 it identifies 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 of major stationary sources that 

it anticipates will be subject to one of the 

CTG's listed in Section II. which EPA plans to 

issue by November 15, 1993. 

(2) For those major sources on the list 

submitted by the Stale in the 1992 submittal 

that are not covered by a CTG that EPA has 

issued by November 15, 1993. the State must 

submit a RACT rule by November 15, 1994 

that requires implementation of RACT by 

May 15, 1995. 

(3) For sources covered by a CTG issued 

under section 183(a) and for which the Stale 

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 thai would apply to thai source. 

(FR Doc. 92-9866 Filed 4-27-92; 8:45am) 

BILUNG CODE 6560-~