### Re: EPA-HQ-2010-0107 Lisa Sutton to: Tangela Niemann 09/02/2010 10:40 AM Cc: Raj Rao, Jan Cortelyou-Lee

Hi, Tangela:
I'll try to provide a short explanation of this "SIP Fix" rulemaking--the two proposals published today.
The first of the two notices, the "SIP Call," proposes a finding of substantial inadequacy, identifying states that appear to have a SIP inadequacy with regard to greenhouse gases. In the same notice, EPA proposes a SIP call for the identified states. States for which we finalize the SIP call (projected for December 2010) will be formally requested to revise their SIPs to correct the GHG problem, and the state will be given a SIP submittal deadline by which to do so. In the SIP call process (pursuant to CAA 110)(k)), EPA is asking the state to revise its PSD program to correct the GHG problem, then go through the process for EPA's approval of the revision into the state's SIP.
During a period of time until the SIP revision process is complete, I understand, neither the state nor EPA would have authority to issue PSD permits for GHG emissions--obviously a serious concern for facilities needing PSD permits during that period of time. Thus, the other notice published today, the "FIP," proposes that EPA would impose a federal PSD program--specifically for states that are unable to submit revisions to their PSD regulations by the date of the SIP call's SIP submittal deadline. An important point here is that EPA can't "FIP" a state until we have gone through the step (pursuant to CAA 110(c)) of making a finding that the state failed to make a required submission by its SIP submittal deadline.
So it's the legal process that so closely links these two proposals: EPA can't even impose a FIP in a state until we've first gone through with a SIP call. Of course, it is not EPA's desire to take on PSD permitting responsibility for GHGs; this SIP Fix rulemaking is offering a backstop to cover PSD permitting for GHG sources only while there is a SIP inadequacy.
I'll add a clarification, since it's a question that comes up a lot: This SIP Fix rulemaking does not address states whose programs cover GHG among their regulated NSR pollutants, even if those states are unable to apply the higher GHG emission thresholds for PSD that are in our recently finalized Tailoring Rule. Those states do have GHG permitting authority (although not at the preferred higher emission thresholds), so there's no SIP Fix finding of substantial inadequacy to be made for those states. Although the inability of a state to apply the Tailoring Rule thresholds is a problem, it is not addressed by this SIP Fix rulemaking.

--Lisa S.

*************************************************** Lisa Sutton U.S. Environmental Protection Agency OAQPS/AQPD/NSRG (C504-03) Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 Phone (919) 541-3450 Fax (919) 541-5509

***************************************************

"Tangela Niemann" 09/02/2010 08:38:42 AM Hi Lisa,

From: "Tangela Niemann" <TNiemann@tceq.state.tx.us> To: Lisa Sutton/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA Date: 09/02/2010 08:38 AM Subject: Re: EPA-HQ-2010-0107

### Hi Lisa,
Just wanted to get some clarification on the following Notices that were published in today's Federal Register. Unsure what the difference between the two since both has been assigned the same Docket No. Please advise. Thanks so much.

A ction To Ensure Authority To Issue Permits Under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration P rogram to Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions: F inding of Substantial Inadequacy and SIP Call; Comments due October 4
, 2010 and

A ction To Ensure Authority To Issue Permits Under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration P rogram to Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions: F ederal Implementation Plan; Comments due October 4
, 2010



# Tangela Niemann

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
Intergovernmental Relations, MC-119 Ofc 512.239.3786 Fax 512.239.3335 tniemann @ tceq

. state

. tx

. us 

# 3 Please consider whether it is necessary to print this e-mail