### Montana Department of 

# ENvIRONMENTAL UALITY BrianSchwcitUT.Governo
P.o. Bo:-,: 201190 I Hdenll. MT 59620·0901 June 19, 2006 (406) 444-2544 •**www.deq.mt.~o**

Laurel Dygowski U.S. EPA Region VIII Air Programs Branch 999 18th Street, Suite 300 Denver, CO 80202-2466
Dear Laurel Dygowski: Overthe pastdecade, Montana's airquality program experienced unprecedented growth in federal regulatory requirementswhile EPA's stagnant financial support has constrained the state's abilityto address airquality issues in athorough and timely manner. Bythemselves, existing federal statutory requirements are formidable and require all available staffresources. The anticipated effects ofadditional proposed federal rules, when finalized, 

### will draw us closerto a disastrous tipping point. For example, since 2002, EPA has required Montanato develop and implement regulations addressing New Source Review (NSR) reform, consolidated emissions reporting, mercury emissions, regional haze, and Maximum Available Control Technology (MACT) standards, to name afew.
In response to these challenging regulatory requirements, Montana proposed many workable solutions to effectively regulate and trackemission sources in ways that maximize scarce state resources while protecting the health of Montanans. These include redefining PSD baseline areas, allowing oil and gas permit registration, and providing for a "de minimis" permitting process. EPA has not supported our effortsto 

### streamline ourworkload in ways that do not sacrifice protection.
As a direct resultofthe regulatorydemands imposed on states bythe federal government overthe past decade, the Department is forced to evaluate declining resources and prioritize programs accordingiy. While I do not enjoy reiinquishing any activities ofthe air program, I am forced to take action to protect Montana's core program elements. Thus, it is with great reluctance that I withdraw Montana's effortsto revise the state's visibility control plan thatwould incorporate provisions ofthe Regional Haze Rule, including the development and implementation ofthe BestAvailable Retrofit Technology (BART) rule. To that end, I have re-assigned staffpreviously committed to protecting visibility impairment in national parks and wilderness areas and assigned them to support regulatory programs aimed directly at protecting public health.Laurel Dygowski June 19, 2006 Page 2 of2

In response to this regrettable situation, EPAwill make a finding of State Implementation Plan inadequacy and be forced to promulgate additional federal rules to address the requirements ofthe Regional Haze Rule, including BART. EPAwill be the lead agency in negotiating BARTwith eligible sources and forfulfilling additional plan requirements. Montana is discontinuing the monthly stakeholder meetings and involvementwith the regional planning organization. Your participation on the stakeholders work group was certainly appreciated. Iwill continue to reassess this position in relation to current and future federal regulatory requirements, program funding assistance, and available Department resources. Ifyou should have any questions on this matter, please contact Robert Habeckat (406) 444-7305.
Sincerely,

Richard H. Opper 

### Director