P.1 

OAR Box 1781 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

133) IV-C-47 

Docket Number: 

A-90-37 

Printed 10/29/2008 10:46:24 AM Sheet 133 of 142 
;il ./uj. r m xo.ti rAA 202 564 1554 

/"•*S 

** UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY '" 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 

©oo: 

JAN I 9 2001 

OFFICE OF 

AIR AND RADIATION 

MEMORANDUM 

SUBJECT: Status of the New Source Review Improvement Rulemaking 

TO: ... 

FROM: 

New Source Review Stakeholders 

>ert Perciasepe / l J j ' g/\A/*-&*^/^ 

istant Administrate^/ I 

Robert 

Assistant 

Over the last two years we have all worked hard to develop improvements to the New 

Source Review (NSR) program. As I have discussed with you, I believe it is essential that this 

program have greater incentives for companies to employ the most effective emission reduction 

techniques voluntarily and give greater flexibility when companies take these voluntary actions. 

I am writing to share with you where we are on the NSR Improvement effort as I leave this 

office. 

We have come a long way together in developing the conceptual framework for how EPA 

can improve the NSR program by providing greater certainty and flexibility for industry without 

sacrificing the level of environmental benefit provided by the current program or meaningful 

public participation. Due to the array of policy and legal issues that arose on the vast number of 

areas we attempted to tackle in one very large rulemaking, we were not able to complete the 

regulatory packages in this Administration. The concepts that we developed make both 

economic and environmental sense because in return for environmental performance, industry 

will receive greater flexibility and more certainty for business investment decisions. The 

concepts would not undercut the basic goals of the NSR program. 

The concepts that we developed and which I support are listed below. I believe many of 

these cot Id be taken as final actions because of the hard work we have done together. 

• Voluntary Alternative NSR Program for the Electric Power Generating Industry- This 

voluntary program would allow owners of power plants to commit to specific, verifiable 

ej tiissions reductions across all their electric generating units over a defined period of 

tune and in most instances would avoid the need to get an NSR permit when making 

changes at their facilities. 

Internet Address (URL) • http.7Avww.epa.gov 

Recycled/Recyclable • Printed with Vegetable Oi) Basad Inks on Recycled Paper (Minimum 30% Postcon3umer) 
Plantwide Applicability Limits fPALsV- Source owners would be able to make changes 

io their facilities without obtaining a major NSR permit, provided their emissions do not 

exceed the plantwide cap. Also, facility owners that use PALs must commit to install 

l>est controls over time to gain this flexibility and certainty. PALs would be especially 

attractive to those industries (e.g., pharmaceuticals and electronics) who need to make 

changes quickly to respond to market demands in order to stay competitive in a global 

marketplace. 

Clarifications of Roles. Responsibilities and Time Frames for Class I Area Reviews-

'*he process for review of permit applications by Federal Land Managers (FLMs) would 

be clarified to delineate the roles of the source owner, the permitting authority and the 

1LM, in conducting permit reviews for sources potentially affecting air quality near 

.rational wilderness areas and parks (Federal Class I areas). These changes would reduce 

<:elays and disputes associated with permitting applications for sources near Federal Class 

I areas because they would provide a time frame for the FLM to identify any concerns and 

analyses needed for the permit applications. Also, it would clarify that the FLM does not 

have the authority to veto permits, and ensure that the FLM obtains the necessary 

information to conduct their permit reviews in a timely manner. 

Clean Unit Exemption- This exemption would provide an incentive for source owners to 

install the best emission controls on new or modified emission units and provide 

flexibility and certainty so that most future changes at such units would not trigger NSR. 

An owner of an emissions unit that meets certain minimum criteria to be considered 

"clean" could make most changes to these units without triggering NSR for a specified 

period of time, such as ten years. 

Innovative Control Technology Waiver- This waiver would provide more flexibility for 

owners of sources who risk trying innovative technologies that have not yet been proven 

effective. Should the innovative technologies not perform up to expectations, we would 

provide the owners with time either to correct the deficiencies or alternatively apply a 

more standard control technology. 

Pollution Control Project Exclusion- This would codify our existing policy diat owners 

of facilities making changes to their plants that primarily reduce one or more targeted air 

pollutants (but which collaterally increase other pollutants) are excluded from NSR 

piovided certain conditions are met. We would provide a list of environmentally 

beneficial technologies that, absent other information that would indicate that the projects 

w juld not be environmentally beneficial, would be presumptively eligible for the 

e> elusion. 

Control Technology Review Requirements- Because disputes arise over what control 

technologies are considered available, the permit review process can become lengthy. To 

iniprove the process for obtaining a permit, we would (1) add a definition of 
19/01 FFI 15:22 FAX 202 564 1554 

P.4 

©DO-

'S 

'demonstrated in pxactice,"(2) provide a "cut off' date for consideration of additional 

ijontrol technologies, (3) add provisions that specify when applications are deemed 

"complete," and (4) require that control technology determinations be entered into a 

clearinghouse before permits can become effective. 

Nearly all parties in our discussions identified the need to have all of the data on the latest 

control technology determinations made by permitting authorities in the EPA clearinghouse. 

Improving the availability of this information to everyone will greatly assist the permitting 

process. To this end, I have committed significant resources to gather all of the existing data,, 

input it nto the database, and redesign the system to make it easier for all parties to put in new. 

data to keep it up-to-date. 

.. .One of the lessons that we have learned through our ongoing efforts is that it would be 

difficult, if not impossible, to improve NSR in one large rulemaking. Instead, I believe it is best 

to make incremental changes that will provide flexibility and certainty without sacrificing the 

benefits of the current program. I hope the new Administration will consider finalizing the 

concepts described above that provide flexibility and certainty without compromising 

environ) nental protection to make near term progress. I realize there are other issues, such as 

applicability for the base program, that also need resolution. For these remaining issues, 

continued discussions in the context of the overall program are needed. 

I appreciate and thank you for the time, effort and input that you have provided over the 

past years, and I believe that both industry and the environment will benefit from the approaches 

described above. •