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

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.

Action To Ensure Authority To Issue Permits Under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

Program to Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Finding of Substantial Inadequacy and SIP 

Call; Comments due October 4, 2010

and

Action To Ensure Authority To Issue Permits Under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

Program to Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Federal 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