Environmental 

Protection Agency 

40 CFR Part 52 . 

State lrnplementation mans; General 

Preamb:e for the Implementation of Tie 

1 of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 

1990; Supplemental; Proposed Rule 
18070 ~sderal Register / Vol. 57, No. 82 / Tuesday. April 28. 1992 / Proposed Rules 

ENVIRONMENTAL PFiOTECTiON ~\'O=average vehicle occupancy "Procedures for the Reparation 

AGENCY BACCl-best available control measures Emissions Inventories lor Carbon 

~~CT=best available control technology and Recurson of Ozone. Volume 

40 CFR Part 52 CAA = Clean Air Act ISQ/C41-016. US En\ironmental 

M=Clean Air Act Amendments Agency. Omce of Air Quality Plr 

lFRL-4127-1 I CARB=California Air Resources Board Standards. Research Triangie Parjk. ?iC klay CMS=continuous emissicn monitoring . 

State Implenentat!on Plans; General system 'Procedures for the Repa:atior. of 

preamble for the lmple~tatl~n of CO'carbOn Emissions Inventories for Carbon klonoxi& 

Title I of the Clean Air Act CPM-condensible particulate matter and Precursors of Orone. Volume U: Emissios 

CfC=control technique guideline Amendments of 1990; Supplemental DOI=Depar?menl of the Intefior Inventory Requirements for Photochemical , Air Quality SimulaUon Models.- f3A-1~1c 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection DOT=Depclrtment of Transportation 91-014. U.S. Envinnniental Protection 

Agency (EPA). ' . . EICMA=Empirical Kinetic hfodeling . Agency. Office of Alr Quality Plaruliq and 

ACTION: General Preamble for future Approach Standards. Research Triangle Park. NC %fay ERC=emission reduction credits 1m. proposed rulemakings: Appendices- ~~~=emp~oyer k~fUp0flalion coordinator . -mission inventov RquiremeHI.:s lor 

SUMHARY: f he EPA published a General m'Emission Trading Slatemen' Ozone State hnplementalion Plans.' EPAFIP= Federal lmplemen~ation %an Preamb!e for t!e Impleaentation of title nlv~p=~,,d~~,,l hfotor vekicie Control ISO/~-Q~-OI~ U.S. Environmental Protection 

I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of program . Agency. Office of Air Quality Planning ad 

1990 on April 16.1992 (57 FR 13.198)- This m=Feder~l Register Standards. Research Triangle Park. SC. 

document describes EPA's preliminary GVWR =Gross Vehicle Weight Rating March 1991. 

"Emission Inventory Requirements for views on how EPA should interpret HC= hydrocarbons Carbon Monoxide State 1nplemez:ation various provisions of title I of:the Clean llhl=inspection and maintenance Plans." EP.4-1501t9141. US. 

Air Act Amendments of 1990. primarily IPP=invento~ preparation plan Environmental Protection Agency. Office of 

those concerning SlaleklPkfhenlation Air Quality Planning and Standards. 

plan [SIP] revisions required for Research Triangle Park. NC hiarch 1991. 

nanattainment areas. It senves as 

MSA/C~isA=metm~olitan statistical anal Air Poilutant In,.entory Sfanagement consolidated metmpolitan rtalbtiul area System (SASfs] ,O and advance notice of how EPA generally sMQS=mtiona! ambient air 

intends. in subsequent rulemakings. to standards Manual." US. Environmental R~ection 

take action on SIP submissions. NAS= National Academy of Sciences Agency. Office of Air Quality Plariing and 

The appendices to the General NG=Nitrogen dioxide Standards. Research Triangle Park Korth 

Carolina. Sia~h 1991. flpwaa4e, Reamble were inadvertently omitted. NO1'ni'mgen 

NSPS=new 'Example Emission Inventory <I source performance standard The appendices contain important Documentation for Post-387 Oroce ~ta, j! 

support ~ateria!~ tht are referenced ~~~~~~~r~$~$~~~~eif Implementation Plans (SIP$).' D.A-ISO/L 

throughout the General Preamble. PSI)= prevention of significant deterioration ma- U.S. hvironmental Protection Agency. 

Therefore. this notice. containing the psi = pounds per square inch Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. 

aforementioned appendices. serves as a RAG\l=rcasonably available control Research Triang!c Park SC Oc:ober 1969. 

supplemefit to the General Preamble and measures - "Procedures for Estimating and Appiying 

should be considered as such. RACT=reasonably available control Rule Effectiveness in Post-1987 Base Year 

FOR FURTHER INFORMAnON CONTACT: technology Emission Inventories for Ozone aad Carbon 

Mr. Brock Nicholson. Chief. Policy ~~~=rcasonable'further progress hfonoxidr Slate Implementation Plans." U.S. 

RTA=rural transport area Environmental Protection Agenc. Office of Development Section. OzoneICO RVP=Reid vapor pressure Air Quality Planning and Standads. 

Programs Branch at (919) SCAQSID =South Coast Air Qcality Research Triangle Park. SC. june 1989. 

5317. for issues related to ozone or Xlanagcment District Quality Assurance/Inve~ta~ Revirw carbon monoxide: Mr. Eric Ginsburg at SO,=sulfur dioxide Guidance 

(919) 541-0877, SuIfur Dioxide/ SIP=State implementation pian 

Particulate Matter P;og:ams Branch TCM= transportation ccntrol nieasures "Quality Review Guide!ir,es for Past-196: 

(hD15]. for issues related to sulfur TS~=~~~~I pariicula..e S:ate Implementation Plan [SIP] azse Yea: 

dioxide. particula:e matter. or lead; bfr.. VOC=volatile o~anic com~ols:d Emission Inventories [Draft)." C.S. 

VhlT=vehicle miles trave!cd Environmental Protection Agenc::. Office 3: 

Gary McCutchen at (913) 541-5592. Air Quality Planning and Star.dard2. 

Permits Programs Srazch (MD-15). for Appendix B-Bibliography and Ci:ed Research Tridnale Park. NC. Fcbriap IW. 

issues related to new source review. References [Final version to be comp!eted in AU~USI 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. To obtain copies of Or\QPS documents. 1wl.l 

Research Triangle Park. North Caro!ina contact the EPA Libraq. (919) W1-&314: "Guidance for the Preparation oi Quality 

27711: b(s. Paula Van Lare at (2021 2% (FTS) 629-5514. For OhIS publice:ions. please Assurance Plans for QlCO SIP Enission 

3450 for issues related to mobile contact Mark Wolcott. (313) mag: ()-Ts) In\'entories." EPA-150/4-e803. U.S. 

sources. 401 M Street. SM'. Washington. 3744"9. Environmental Protec!ion Agency. OfEce of 

DC 204N. SIP Inventory GuidancelRequirenents Air Quality Planning and Standads. Research Triangle Park. NC. Ilrce-.ber 1%. 

ADDRESSES: The appendices are also in "Roccdures for Preparing Ezissions 

Air Docket A-91-35. at 401 Sf Stree:. Projections." EPA-43;+914~. U.S. General Invenioq Guidance 

SW. Washington. DC. Environmental Protection Aaency. Office of "Procedures for Emissior. lnven!o~ 

Air Quality Pl~nning and S:nnc!ards. Preparation." U.S. Environmental 

Dated: April 21.1992. Research Tritlngle Park KC. july 1991. Agency; Office of Air Quality Pljnn 

Michael Sbapim. . "Procedures for Emission 1nven:ory Standards. Research Triangle Pa&. s 

Acting Assis:onl,4cn,cis"o:or forAiiond Preparation. Volumc 1V: hlobile Sources." a. "Volume 1: Emission lnvento? 

Rodi~ tion. EPA4501441-026d. U.S. Environnental Fundamentals." EPA450/+814'5a. 

Protection Agency. Office of Mobile Sources. September 1981. 

Appendix AIIOSS~ ' Ann Arbor. MI. July 1m. (also listed below b. "Volume 11: Point Sourtes." D.\450:;- 

ACT= alternative control technique under General Invent09 Guidance). 81426b. September 1981. 
-. ' 

Federal Register 1 Vol. 57, No. 82 1 Tuesday. April 28. 1992 1 Proposed Rules 18071 

Yotume Ilk Area Gums." EPA~&/& "Letter from William Reilly to h1emor;lndum from joaeph Tilrvart aid 

8:4zSC Sqhnber RepresentaSre fohn Din& In Response lo Robert Bauman concerning modeling 

Sowc~~.~ ~~3501 queslbna and GAO m" April 10. I&. gvidelina aC&uing PSl-10. dated july 3s. 

Citations md ~uida& for Lead 1990. 

bf-(ion ocl A~~~~~ Memorandum from William Laxton 

sepkder 3881. Director. TtcCica1 Suppoef Division to P-"hpth Lud .kn~km=tption *=IU Regimal fir ~~~.l~i~~ ~i~~~ -he and 

Emhsionfadon/Modek - . . . -p&onaI ~omputer Venion of Lbe - . 

US' RotectiOn Agency. -n Diode Design Value Calculatks." . ResearchTriaogle . . Park. NC July 1983. 

Saier Development of an . . . 18. . Biogenic E~~OIU 1n-t~ Sp~tem ypC- . . sw for tub- h!emonndum From Craig J. bhrr.'-hterid 

. -. . . BUS) With Um'i &id&- EPA-IU)/m- . 4501s~ April ZOra . . . . . Policy on Stack Heighl Regulatory Actions." 

017. US Envtoamtnhl Rotdon Agtncy.' .. w&e Serie* Supknluy . April 22 1988. . 

;'. Offie of Ak Qwlity Planning ad Shndardr ' Cuidh fk Lmplcmentation Piam- Memotaodurn from Gcmld A Emison . Rmuch Trkde Park. NC Jdy 1991. . EPA-4SO/2=8-03R Awt 1978. - . Director. O.4QPS. to Reg!onaI Air Division 

7 - WICT*~ Chi& &MOBILE( ('Slobik Sou= . Dimtom Transmittal of Reissued OAQPS ( hi- M&dLw EpEP\-AA-- hiodw Caw ' :. . =S hiicy.' hfdrch a. 1988. . . 01. US &~vj-&nt.l Proteclion Agency. . "UA! ~pplications'~uidance." hfay 1991. Memomedum from John Seitr Director. I - Oflice of Mobile -AM Arbor. MI. "User's Guide for the Urban Airshed Stationary Source Compliance Division to 1 Febp,wy.l989. (Revised version of MO- Mod& VoL 4." EPA-W-. 1% Regional Air Division Directom. 

and cbcumenbkicm to be completed in July 1990. ' 

.' . . . . 

.. . "lmplementalion of Rule Effectiveness 

lsSq ..... . .-:.. '. - -Guidance on Air Quality Models Studies." Mad 31.1988. 

Surfae knpoundment hfodeling Syrtem. . [R+*ifed)-- mA-45012-18027~ july 1986. Memorandun from Craig Potter. Thomas ! Ynherim Rocedu+es for Air Adam. and Francis Biake to Regional ?.ir lShlS1 Vcnion+o EPA-OSOi Models: -9a. US Environmental Protection Division Directors. "Review of State 5. 

. Ofti of Air Quality Planning and hp'err.e*ation- 450/4-85-006. July ImphCntation Ram and Revisions for 

Standards. hsswch Triangle Park. KC 1985. EnforCeability and tcgal Sufficiency." 

September 199Q . . New source Review Guidance - Septetnbu 2f 198;. \ ackpmd Document lo; S~ace . 

' 

"Naw Sour&Review Prevention'of hlemomndum horn Gerald Emison 

! Impoundment Weling Systtm (SMSI ' Significant &kri-tion and ~~~~tai~~~t ' Director;OAQPS. to David Kec. I)irrctor. Air . . Versioau). EPA4X)/4404I9b." US. , . Area Guidance Notebook" January 1988. hianagement Division. Region V. "Need for a 

( Envir-aid Protection Agency. W~ce of '&a% WAEop Manual for NeiSource Short-Term BACf Alalycis for the Promd 

i Air Quality Pbdng and Standards. Review [SSR) Prograa" December 1990. Willias k Zimmer Power Plant." Pr'ouz-ber 

Rtseenh Triangk Park NC September 1990. MisceUams &idance 24.1986. 

i . -AIRS Facility Subsystem Source Memorandum from Richard Rhoadr 

Classifition Codes (SCC1) and Emission "Criteria for Assess* the Role of Director CPDD. to Divisicn Directom. Regions 

Lirting for Criteria US. Transport of ~ne/P~cu~son in Ozone I-X. "Growth Restrictions in Secondary 

"irccmen* Rotution 'geocy' Offie Nonattalnment Areas.- US. Enviro~~en:ai K~QS ~onnttainment A~~~~- october 3. Rotedon Agency. Research Triangle Pa& 19a. Planning and Standards. NC EPA-450/4-91-015). 

Park NC Se~embei 1989. . ..~~f~~~~~~, cuidance for Stage II 

hle~oiandum fiom R. Strelow to RYs 

*Conpihtla of Air Pollutart Enission vekicle ~~f~~li~~ control kograms.- Region I-X. 'Guidance for Ddennining 

Facion. volume^ I end II and its December 1991. Acceptability of SIP Regulations in Pior.- 

supplements. FourthEdition." .AP42. US. 'Getting Started on T1t1e 1." U.S. Attainment Areas." Eecember 9.1978 

En$~onmental R?tcction &mq. Office of EnvimrATenlal protection A~~~~~, OAQPS. Fderal Register Citations 

.%r Quality firming and Standards. Research Triangle Park. NC. AprJ 19. 4 m 3372. A?~I 4. lm. . ~esearch ~riartgle Park Pic Sptember 1985. "Issues Relating to VCC Regulations. 44 FR ,3375. April 4.193. 

Citations and Guidance for SIP Corrections Cutpoinls. Deficiencies. and Deviations.:' 4-1 FR 5373; Spteaber 17.1979. 

Clarification lo Appendix D of NovenSer 24. 44 rn 53769. Se3tenber i7.IT9. 'cuidanr' Domen' for Coaection " Pan 1987 FR [Blue Book revised jacuar, 11.1000). 4 FR ~~~~~~b~~ 1- 1979. D SlPs for Nonattainnect Asas." EP.I 

OCce 6.S. Eii~~ffin;r.e;ltal koteclion Agency. Office 45 rn 526x. ,qCgcs;;. of Air Quality Planning ar.d Standards. of ~i~ ~~~li~~ planning and Star.dards. Reseanh Triangle Pak NC. Januap 27.1984. AQ~. M~~ 25. 1988 

46 FR 718L Januar; 3.1981. 

46 FR XE. 1anca.-j Z i981. 

Ci!ations snd Guidance for PSI-10 "b:tm~ls: Can Coaters. 45R [Decercber 51 rn 4jalr ~~~~~b~~ 4. 

'Assessnent cf the Controllabiiity of 8.19@). + T~alers." EPA-I~/=e 51 FR 4331:. D~~~I.~~ 4.1~3~ 

Condendib Paiticulate Ma(ter." J3'.4m/f3- !D~~~c~~~idanc13tage II vapo; 51 FR 438:- Decer~ber 4.1986. 

90-75. October 1990. . 52 FR 29283. Au~ust 7.1937. .Recovery System for Control of Veticie 52 FR 4SON. Novenbe: 14.1987. ''P;oceducs fw LtimaYng Probability of RefceYw Eoissior~ at Gasoline Dis~eying Fionattainnent of a Phf-10 N-UQS Using F~~~~~~~~.. Volme November 345m Sq:ember :gm. 

Total wended Particulate of PSI-10 Data.- 5J FR 612 January 9.1969. 

EP.4450ikS&Ol7. December 1966. Biemoranda 55 rnmX973. Iuly 30.1W. 

'pxf-:~ SP Development Guide!ine.". June ' hfernorandm from 'William Laxtoa 55 FR 41% Octaber 12 1990. 

1S63. Direc!or. Tecknical Support Division. lo 55 FX X:i. October 1: 1~. 

'Conlrol of Open Fugitive Dust Sources." Regonal Air Division Directors. "Guidance 53 FR 4m. Oeober 31.1950 

~?~+~/~~September 1988. for Determining Sigcificanl Stationary 56 FR j4SO. Febmary 11.1991. 

"Guidance Document for Residential Wood. Sources of Carbon Monoxide. hiay 13.1991. 56 FR 1llCl. March 15. i991. 

Combustion Enission Control Measures.- Xlemorandum from 1ck.n Seih. O.AQPS to 56 FR lm4. April 12. iw. 

PA--lj0/2-89-015. September 1989. - Air Dir-ision Director. Regions I-X 'Sew 56 FR ZXCZS. %fay 2:. 199. ' 

'Prescribed Fire Smoke Management SO.J~X Review lYsR) Rogram Transi!ional 58 FR tZ7. Jcce 13.1991. 

Guide." - No. 1279. Febmary 1985. Cuidocce." htarch 11.1991. . 56 FR'ZGO. ]une 14. ;991. 

"Prescibed Fue Plan Guide.' NFES KO. Menorandurn from John Calcagni and 58 FR 31151. Ju!~ 9.19l. 

a 1933. August 1986, , - .- , : William bxtof~. ?r.t&m'Guidance on - 56 FR 31154. ju:j 19.1391. 

Emission limits and StackTest.!4ethods for 56 FR 3763. August 8.1991. ita:ioka?d Chidan& for .SG 1r.clusia in PM-10 SF'S.:' December 24,1943. 56 FR 43593. September 3. i991. 

'St3 Guideline.' EPA-QSO/-A~- hlemmndam froin Robert Bauma;l and 56 FX 5453. October ZL 1S91. 

. 'SC& G6dehe:Appendices." EPA~w/z- Rich Biondi to,.\ir B~nq Chiefs. '%.a SF 56 FR 566%. November 6. IW. 

89-019. October 19m. . . 

. . Deficiemy Ch~Mist~.Novernber~8,1990. 56 FR 58656. h'overnber 21. I=. . 
Federal Register '/ V 

Code of Federal Regulations Citations . 

40 CFR saa 

10 CFR 5(19 Appendix H. 

40CFRso.9.. 

40 CFR CFRrt 51. 

io CFR Part 51 ~~~tddix h.I 

40 CFR Part 51 Appendix S. 

10 CFR 51.106(0]. ' ' 

40 CFR 51110(~](1). . . 

40 CFR 51117. 

40 CFR 51.16!i. . . 40 CFR 51.la . - 40 CFR 51%0 (Subpart R). 

40CFRPart52 

40cFRsz1a -. . 

10cFRSza: ' ' , - ... 

. : 

40CFR522.1.- . . ' 

40 CFR Part 55. 

40 CFR Part 58. . . 

40 CFR Parl60. 

40 CFR Part 60 Subpart Da. 

40CFR Parl 81. . . 

Appellate Court Citatiocs 

Alabcmo Power C4mpany v. Cost!e. 638 ' 

F3d 323.38061.404-05 (D.C Cir. 19806 - 

NRDC v. T,4omas. 08 F2d 1Z4. (DL Cir. 

1988). Ccrt denied. 109 S.Ct 2-19 (1988). 

Delaney v. &PA. 898 Fld 087.136 Cong. . Rec Sl697l (October 27.1990). 

Hause of Representatives Reports . ' 

H.R. Rep. No. 4W,l&t Congress. 2nd 

Session. pt 1 at 204. 239.24% 257,258267. 

268, and 381. 

Appendix ~l-Aivai!able Fugitive Dust 

Control Sleasures 

Wekgmund 

The available control measuros listed 

below apply to all fugitive dust sources 

except those to which only available control 

technology is app!icable (i.e, process fugitive 

dust associated with siationaij sources). 

Fugi:ire dust is particulate matter suspended 

in the sir either by rnccl;~nical disturbance of 

the surface rmterial or by wind action 

blowing across the sur5ce. hlechanical 

dis!urSance includes resuspension of 

particles Iron vehicles traveling over road:vays, parking lots. and other opcn zreas. Wind action includes c'ust blown off 

i2adequa:ely stabilked opeil areas. The 

quantity of fugitive dust e~issicos is 

dependec! upon severrl faciors such as the 

size of the scarce. emission rate. and control 

efiicicncy. The Environmental Protection 

Ageocqy's (EP.41 policy is to reduce fugitive 

aus! emissions. wi!h an emphasis on preventing, ratter than mitigating. them. For 

exarn~ie. past ef!ods to control emissions 

from paved roads Eave usual!y relied on stxet cleaning to reduce silt loading-The . new approach would put a higher priority on measures to prevent silt from gelling on the 

road s=face. Mitigztive rneaagres shoo!d be 

reserved for those areas/situations where 

pzeventi~n is cot feasible. Tecfinical guidance on fugiti..,e dus: control neasurcs is fomd In 

Conlml of Open Fugitive Dusl Sources [EPA450/3-8~8 September. 19E8). 

List of A ~~iloble Control ,%Jeas3res 

1. Pave. vegetate. or chenica!ly stabilize access points where unpaved trqlfic surfzces 

adjoin paved roads. 

'01. 57. No. 82 / Tuesday, April 28. 1992'/ Proposed Rules 

t Requi~ dust control plans for (September 1989). Guidance Docuzcnt for construction or land dea~g projects. Residential Wood Combustion Emissicn 

3. Require haul tmdu to be covered. Confml.~suns Nothing in this docunent 

4. Provide for traffic rerouting or npid prevents a State implementation plan (SIP) in 

dean up of temporary (and not readi!y a moderate WIO nonottalnmmt area from 

~revmbble) 80- of dust on ~avd roads coaltining control measures mom stringent (water emrion nmoR rnudldirt canyotit than RACM. areas. material spik skid control sand]. 

Delineate who is tespoprible for deanup. of A~dfable Conbfdf.fmsufes 

5. Require paving. chemically ctabilii. or t kbblirh ur tpidt curt.ilment 

otherwire rtabilig permanent unpaved pm &dudln~ A milmat plaa a haul roads. and paw or staging areas a1 eommrmication r-tegy b implunent he . cornmem'al. municipal, or induftrial facilities. ' plan: a 8weua~e phn(cg, 4u[inaield 

6. Develop traffic dudionlam for . . swey. opacify Mggu): and edolsement ' 

unpaved roads. UK of speed bumps. low pmvkiom i,,cluw procedurr* peoaMer. speed limits. etc. b enmuage use of other and acmpuonr). A volunt.ry -m will (paved] roads. be deemed masonable if the ama. .. - 

7. Limit use of recreational vehicles on ' 

demonstrates atiainment open land [e-g, confine opeatioru to specific 2 a public i~orma~on pmgram areas. require use permits. outright ban]. to infonn and educate dtizeru about stove 8. Require imprbved material specification proper uld fdr and reduc:ion of usage of skid control mainteDancr geneal health risb of wood sand or salt [eg.. require use of coarse. nonfriable material during snow and ice smoke, new technology s toves. and . 

- _ - - -. alternatives to wood heatinn. season]. 3 Encouage improved pe>ormance of 9. Require curbing and pave or slzbilize woodburning devices (chemically or with vegetation) shoulders of 

paved mads. -Establishing a pmpm to identify. through 

10. Pare or chemically stabilize uzpaved 

roads. 

11. Pave. vegetate. or chemically stabilize 

unpaved parking areas. 

12 Establish dust control measure^ for . 

material storage piles. 

13. Provide for storm water hicage to 

prevent water erosion onto paved rcads. 

14. Require vegetation. chemical 

stabilization. or other abatement of wind 

ero.'ible soi!. including lands subjected to 

water mining, abandoned farms. ani 

abandoned construction sites. 

IS. Rely upon the soil conservakn 

requi:ements (e.g.. conservation pla-s. 

c~nservation reserve) of the Food Secxity 

Act to reduce emissions from agricultural 

operations. 

Appendix (2-Available Raidendal Wood 

Conbus:ion Control Measures 

Wood smoke from residential wood stoves 

and fireplaces is a sis~ificant sea= of P.M10 pollution in some areas in t$e wes:zm United States that do not attain the psI-10 

ambie~t air quality standards. For example. 

in sone mountain communities. a:nospheilc 

in\-ersions can trap wood snoke ?~r'.iculates 

inTva!leps and cause Phf-10 concensaLions to 

reach levels weU in excess of t;i~ s:andards. 

The U.S. WA's new source perfoimance 

standard (53 FR 5360. February 26.1988) is a longterm strategy designed to iiriprove-the 

pericrmance of wood buminn -~ devices 

nationwide. The EPA b&cves that this 

rtandard alone. though. may not result in 

.attainxent of he PM-10 air quality standards 

in areas affected by wood smoke. Addiconal 

a~ailable cont-ol measures are listed below. 

They are intended to (11 reduce eraissions 

fro& current stoves Gough izspections. 

education. and shifting to cleaner stoves or fuel: (2) curtail the use of wood stoves or fireplaces during advene meteorological 

conditions; and (31 limit future growth in 

emissioni. Additional guidance on these measures is contained in EPA450/3-8MS 

opadty observation. defidencies in stove 

operation and maintenan- (Under such a .prvgram advice and assistance should be 

provided to the identified households to 

help reduce visible emissions from lheir 

devices.) 

-Providing voluntary dryneu ceiication 

programs for dealen andlor ma&. free or inexpensive wood moisture checks 

available to burnen. . 

-Evaluating and encouraging. as - appropriata. the accelerated changeover 

existing devic~ to new source performance standard or other dean 

bf 

baing new or existing technol- stoves 

[e.g, hybrid designs. pellet stoves] by such 

approaches as subsidized stove purchases 

tax cedits. or other incentives. 

4. Provide inducements that wouid le~d :o 

redactions in the stove and fireplace 

population (or use] by: 

-Slowirig the growth of woodburning 

devices in new housing units by texts. 

installation permit fees. or other 

disincentives. 

-Encouraging a reduction in ke ~ur.5e; ol 

woodburning devices [i-e.. remcecg or 

disabling the devices) through tax cxdi!3 

or other incentives. 

-Discouraging the resale of used s:a.res 

through taxes. fees. or o&er disincentkes. 

-Discouraging the availability oi free (cr 

very inexpensive) firewood by incroasicg 

cutting fees or limiting the ccttiq season. 

Appendix C3-hsuibed Burning Control 

Measures 

Packgmund 

Prescribed burning. inclouding silvicultural 

and agricultural burning. is a contributor to 

PM-10 nonattainment in some regions. L.1 

many cases, well-established moice 

management approaches are not beicg 

followed. resulring in avoidable air quali 

problem. The EPA has been working clo~!~ 

with the National Wildfii Coordinating 

Group [NWCG) to develop appropriate 
I 

I - ~edetal Register / .Yola. 57. No. 82 / .Tuesday,. April 28. 1992 ./ Proposed ~ules -. . . 18093 

I . . . . 

guld?ne. objective is to establirh smoke ' Bum PIanning. Authoriurtion. ond . .. . . rules and &latidn;.should bdekcted in 

rnrnagement (SM) p-ms In these areas . . Administmtion ; : . -' . . . . such a manner that aU prbvisioru of he SM 

ich constitute kasonably available control n, smoke aanagenie;ltb-m should ' p~ are enforceable by the State Lhrough 

earun? [RAcM]2.bd Hue papulauon . provide i p-a (eg: k!ephone UU-~) for i18 Slate implementaha plan CcnmUy. - ' 

. cxpoa~to smoke from pre?aibed bdng.' requesk emluting mlu"b memonndum?.of undentanding ?h?uld . . ';

whlle auuring thi! &- aanasment and granting approval for bums. ~ppmval of , utilized to dedy spcdfy wofing ' . . goah in met . . - .. . . a bum. rhould be lpd on an evaletion of . nlafiodrhlpi among agcncier. . . -.. . . . . States 'hould a& ed~~io~ from the ahhds upadty/upability to disprme . &&& CC-PACT for 

prescribed bm In 8 maper bl balances . e-om on a11pyab.Ie bum dayj ithat the . Sta- -. .. . . . . . . .. , .. -. . aahd .Magiicultq& and 0th . .... . . -cumulative emiuiona from aU bum and. ,.. . . ..., L7 . .. :. . .... .... .. . burning objectivei with .Irg@ty p?b hnd - other.1orrnis @ the ilrrhed will nbt uuse or .. ; i3ackg~~d~,.;'~,:~: :.- - . . ;- ,-: . . .. ,,: ; . . .-. . . . objcaiwa by utUidGa.r&oke m-sement .iontribute to V~O~L~ON of thip~-10 . . . -.kr for ae ,&,,d,ti;rie in . : 

- 

it pmpa'ar dejamed Ip the vm -2 . ..:- :*.: .NMQS The approval to, bu+?p a bum'&F .aing the clyan,* M (~~~1 swIuuy ... 

:r Prescribed Fire Smoke,Mamgement Guide .- -: ibould bepqultably divided among aU '.:.: ,.l.<;:,r iehuj4 that re.nable available :. .. Q. - (NFES ~~.'~m.Febiri.~ 19851 and the . :,- ::.. categorip of b-em r6quG~'appro~~ to ... .*logy IRAcr) be applld t6 exirHw +. 

- .. Rtr* Fm Pi;n wide (NFES Na 1939. burn wblle accommodating the "inantiv-a' ..:- ,Mtionay noMttainment amas ln ' 

. - Auguet 1986). publ!caUo~.of the .hi= ., . : .:. rpedfied ekwhek In this policy. ; : '. ..: .. :;- i -. . .. ... ..- , .... . ... ... . . :- -. ln(b)(3) of A,.~ *, in - [Idaho] Iitemgincy Fe-enter. :-. . . ' .' . : 

.-. -. 

-. ~be'i* .of i SM programrbould reflect r . &quiremen& QuolIifico'tions for :L . BUmei -.:. -.:. .L :. ' 19n. Congmr specified that nonattainment ' 

* 

-. ,- ;. , , . . \ -. . . , ... - area plam were to"require. *. .. ' 

the spekific &ndiUoy and requirements of a .- . ...-. . 'reatonable further progress ' .' ~.lncluding 

- -local ar6a.Zxirtlng prom may be : ..-. - Voluntary hining L?imoke management: rrduction la emisslam from . adqiuate h.eiiij asen and in other carer .: techniques ?hould be'?n?onably ivaihble In the area as may obtllined . . - may prollder bails for developing a refined .. for blimen:The prqsram should include . ' . hug,, the adoptloh at a of . p-m Snibke enagement should - .: . .-- ... incentives for burnem who'complete ihe available control l&nology.- 

encowage th(.~perativeefforta of lqL . voluntaQ'.hi+ng k-8.. priority for apprnval . ~h~ RACT was wuld in . . Stat& FederaL.and priva!e !and managers. : 1. t0.b- ._ on . 'burn . _ ..... . . . . . . . . for areas that were designated nonattaiment ' &pbasil +Id b. on andydbg bum;. . public ~d~&tj~~ ond~vamness . . . . for total suspended particulate m<er. Now, . . under an'ertablirhed planning procar. ' a F~~ tbe purpo;( of w1o SIP develop me^^ Information p&mi on the natuk of aid In =!jon l*(cl(ll Of the clean AirAd, as ' 

the term pn-w burning induden ill open reason; for smoke management should be amended by the aean Air Act iimendment6 

. periodically presentid to the public (e-g- . '. of 1990 (Nonattaieent Plan hvisions-In burdng of kgetauvt inalter. This indudes . , 

both pla~~ignilion~~~d pred~ Mtunl . , public service . ;. announ~lts. ". . . : : -, . .,.. nkyspapcr , J . . : . : ... :hemb nonattainment Con~u area again plans wquires *vide that for "* ' ' ' . . fire.'Nolhlng in dSM program corutituting . . . . . . .? ; .. . such ductlons in emissions from existing RACM 18 intended to 1.duence vegetation . . . SurveiIIance and Enforcement . sounes in the (nonattainment) area as may or fie suppression practices so The SM program rhould rely .dn routine ' 

. be obtained through the adoption. at a . 

the potential PM-10 monitoring. and/or modeling . . 'minimum of masonably available control 

that natural resO'!rces Or public .. =lety . supplemented by periodic visual assessments technology.'Thus. RACT is now required for 

of the effectivencss of the dispersion . Phi-10 nonattainment area SIPS. : ' 

The it is a evaluation,program. The existing Phi-10 - The EPA recommends that the RACT for a SN program apply in lhose moderate PM-10 monitoring network should be evaluated for particular source continues to be determined nonattainment arear where it has been . its ability to provide information on the on a case-bycase basis considering the I . Or effectiveness of the SM program as applied to technological and economic feasibility of other analysis. that prescribed burning can or buming in and near the. reducing emissioris from that source (through does contribute violations of !he P"-10 - nonattainmenl area. The network sh&ld be process change3 or add-on control 

i national ambient air quality standards modified as appropriate. The prognm should technology). The following technological and 

(NAAQS).The SM program should apply also provide a process for documenting and economic parameters should be considered in 

lo areas Ihe area if following up on public complaints and should deternining RACT for a particular souxe. 

it is shown that prescribed burning outside of pro~,je for and levy fines against bunerr 

the nonattainment area can or does who violate any of its mandatory Technologiccl Feasibility 

contribute to NAAQS violations. The requirements. The technological feasibility of applying an prescribed burning control mcasures emission reduction method to a particular . reasonably may be limited only to the Emission Inc.en!ories ond Emission E[forfs source should consider L+~ sourceqs process season(s) when high ambient P.U-10 . * Slates should develop and main:ain an and operating procedures. raw mate ria!^. - concentrations occur. if il can be shown'thal emission inventory for prescribed burning physical plant layout. and any other 

the annual PM-10 NAAQS is not violated. and all burns should be categorized as to environmental impacts such as water 

See H.R. Rep. No. 490. lOlsl Cong- 2d Sess. their purpose. Documentation of the size. pollution. waste disposal. and energy 

288-269 (1990). date. purpose. and emission reduction requirements. The process. operating 

Source categories (e.g.. burning of measures used should be subinitted following procedures. and raw materials used by a 

.. . fencelines. ditch banks. small brush piles. each large bum. Emission reduction souice can affect the feasibility of - 

rmaU pmcn'bed natural burns. garden plots) techniques (e.g, mass Ignition. rapid iop-up] implementing process changes that reduce 

may not be reasonably controlled where their should be encouraged and incentives (e.g, emissions and the releaion of add-on ! impact is de minimis based on consideration p.ority for approval to bum on -burn dayss.) emission control equipment. The operation of 

of their collective influence on PM-10 should be offered for demonstrated emission and longevity of control equipment can be 

emissions. their duration reason. and reduction efforts. including the use of . significantly influenced by the raw materials 

proximity to potentially affected populations. ' alternatives to burning. provided that such . used and the process to which it is applied. 

An SM program should consist of at least incentives can be utilized without The feasibility of modifying processes or the following componenls: compromising resource management applying control equipment is also influenced 

I objectives. by the physical layout of the particular plant. Dispenion Evwluolion . . The space available in which to implement 

As a minimum. the program should use Sfole Ovenighl . . such changes may limit the choices and hill 

ational Weather Service forecasts or other The relatknship of the Slate air pollution . . also affect the costs of control. . meteorological analyses to determine when . agency with other State agencies to which . Reducing air emissions may not justify 

meteorological conditions are favorable or - management of the SM program may have . adversely affecting other resources by 

unfavorable for dispersion and hqsport of been delegated will need to be determined on . increasing pollution of bodies bf water. I/ . m... burn days. no b days). . a stat&~-stale basis. Nevertheless. State creating additional solid waste disposal 
1m71 Fedztal Register / VoL 57, No. 82 / Tuesday. April 28. 1992 / Proposed Rules . 

pmblems or creating excessive enen3Y dele-ed by evidence Lhat other wurces in E?A expects that numemus issues -adzq 

demr.ds. (.+ otherwise available PSf-20 a s~~category have in f~c! applied t.5e L5e 1390 henhen& will arise. mr 

control technology may not be :earonable ii contml technology 13 quuticn memorandum sets forlh the Agmcj's Fosi 

l~e other envimnc.end LmpacU cannot The capital costs. muslued ~OS~S. and on moat important of these tranfihn 

reasonably be miligsted.) For adJnic ccst effectiveness of an emission reduction . bun bolving lbe NSZ p-m 

purposes. a State say consider a Phi-10 tec!!ology Add be considered in This guidance document doa not 

mnml meas- technolcgically infeasible If. determining Its economic feasibility. n.e rupcnde exis* Stok mgulatioar or 

cotridering the availabi:ity [and tort) of OAOFS Control Cost Manual. Fourth EdiYor, approved sate implementation play. mitigative adverse impacts of that control on EPA--I50/3-W4Mt. 1anuar)r 1990. describer J+,,~~~~, wne carer 1: alh qn sratts 

other pollution media. L5e control would no4 ~4- for determining the= cork The lo implemcnl rheb NSR progr;rmr mPzrCT ~n Le slate's reasoned judgmenl provide a above should be determined lo: all mMirlenl ,,$* won, of ;Oso get environmental benefit. In many Wtances. tee??nolqiaUy feasible eaiuion reduction, appliable hdiakly Sowever. P%IO control technologies have option& and with the requiremenu that t?uu dimb hwn energy mdda md bdva effectr state^ may give substantial weigh to cast -, fmm lbese.pmvidma Nmette!ns. 

on her mda. but rc& clfecla and rha as! effectiveness in eva\ua~ng Ihe economic policks out fn chlr mw;am-- , of their nitigauon am alsa knowa and have feasibility or an emissfon rdudion 

bee3 borne by owners of exlrting mum in technology. The cost effectivecess of a memorandum are intended roielyas guidazce 

numerow ares. Such welkstablished technology is its annualized cost (Slyear) and do Wment linal A8mc~ 

adverse efiectr lbeir costs arc nomal divided by the arnout of PM-lo emission They an judfdal !or 

and zrsunrd to be reawnable ar.d shoc!d reduclion [i.e, tons/year) which fields a cost "y are nOtLntmded.r.cr 

nol in zorl cases. justify xmnuse of the P.% Per amount of emission reduction (~JtonJ. upo"- lo matezY 

10 con~ol techao[ogy.ne costs of p~venting Cost effectiveness provides a value for eae! e*orceable by party in litigadon l*iL! 

adverse water. solid wasle and energy emission reduction opnon that is comparabl& Ihe Unit& Slates.Th EPA ofids may 

impacts G.ll a!= influence the economic with other options and other facilities. decide memorandrun :o fo!low orto thead guidena variance pm%ic?d with in :he :!is

feasibility of~5e p.~o contm] tdno1ogy. If a company contends that it camo! 

Xternaiive a?proa&es to rcduciag he technology that a~pwn 10be R4CT fa: guidance. Lased on an analysis 3f specific 

emissions ofparticulate matter fnduding psf- that sowe Or group of 10~~1. the claim c-mstanaThe Agency nay ch~zce 

10 are dims6ed in ~~(rol Techniques for should be supported with such idoncation as &is guidane at any time without ~usic 

Psrticulete Emisrions from Stationary the impact on: notice. 

Souaxe+-Volume 1 (EPA+S0/341-C05a] and 1. Fxed acd variable pdiclion costs IS/ The Rqiil OEccs should sad this 

Volume ii (EiJA-1~0/3-B1-005b). September unit). guidance document to their Stata. Ques!icns 

fie design operation and maic~emnce 2. Product sapply and demand elasticity. ' Stata and appllcanb c0n-d~ 

of general particulate matter control systems 3. Product prices [cost absorption vs. cost ' 'pedfic issues should& directed 

such as mechanical collecton. eleurostatic pass-through). to the appropriate EPA Regional OEa. If . 

pr-tipitatorr. fabric filters. and wet scr~bbers 4. Expected costs incurred by competitors. YOU haye any ge-1 quationa please 

are discaued In Volume I. The collection 5. Company profi!~. and contact Mr. Michael Sewell of the Sew 

eficieccy of each sys:em is discussed as a 6. employ men^ Sou- Review Section at FIS 8-S o 

f.~nction of particle size. Information is ale0 ua company wctends that available (9%) , .. 541-0813. 

presented repding enem and control technology is not affoeable and .4:tachment 

environmental considerations and proccdum wocld lead to dosing Lhe facli~j. the costs 01 Addressees fsr esiina:ing costs of ~aiticulatc nailer closcre should be considered. Cosure ma:, 

c~ntrol equipment. The exissicn iac~i costs for demolition docation. Direc:or. Ai:. Rsticides. and Toxic; 

character.stics and antro! tcchaolcpies sevcranu: pay. etc. hfanageaent Division. Reaio;~ L :V. azd 

a;piicabla to specific so'yte mtegorias are Appendix D 

v1 

disc~ssed in Volume IL Sexzdary Direc:or. Air and Waste hfanqenent 

envimnmental in:pacts are also discussed. United Slates Eiivironmer.!si Rotection Division. Region I1 

Additional solrrces of inZorrnatien cn Agency. Office of Air Queiiiy ?!acnicg and Direor. Air ?.fanagenen( Divisiaz zeg;..-.rc 

con!ml tei!!noloaj are backgmund Stsndard3. Research Triangz Pa&. Sorth 111 and IX 

jzformalion docurncnts fcr new socrcc. Crrcilina 27711. Dli~c:~:. ?.ir azd Rzdiation Di\:sic.-, 3~3,: 

pe:iom.ance st=ndards and Identific3lior,. >[arch 11.1ggl. V 

Assessrr.cc1. acd Control oi Fugitive .~!encrcr;dcm Oirectcr. Air and T=xic~ Civisicn. Xqic-5 

Fanicu1a:a hissions. Er"AW/W(i.c"?2, V11. VI!I. and X 

A~;:Is! IS^. Subiec~: Ne:u Source Review [I;SP,: Eogra~ I,:, 

In sixc icsi3nces. c;n!rcl technologics Transitional Guida;~ce. 1. Gltigni more zo8.m cr nicre adve:~ced than tksse F:cm: Ichn S. Seitz. Direc:cr. Cike of Air R. Canp3e:l described in the 2ocuments reiercnced may Qca!ity Planning and S:ancards IM& iV. L3x:c.l 

e:tist. 12 wch wses. t!e S:aie's LAG . 101. E. !i!iis 

azalysis for 3 saurce sboald rcnei2er .~cch Tn: Addiessees. 1. Rzszic 

a-;ai!able tec1:~clogy. The Ciean Air Act Amesb~ests ci 1% L '~Vega~n [199(! Aaeildments) make noxeroas cfiacgcs E;.cnon~:'c Fi-csib;lif.v LVei;o,d to ~!e NSR requirements oi the prevention of xSR Coztac:s Ecccomic Seasibi!ily ncsiden the cest of sisniRcant deleriora~icn (ED) zod 

reducing caissiohs and he differerce in nonattainment area prog:ans. i5e iW Cornctions to Ofiginal Docunez;: TWO 

ccs:s bctween Be particular source and other Amrndaents wale new and expanded errors in thc docxnent as issued cr: >fa=? ;I. 

similar sosaes that have imp!eaented ona attainment areas. extend ED covemae 10 1991 have been corrected in this m;y. C;1 

erzissicn reduction. discussed above. i3A current Class I area boundaries. and mandate FzS? 2 0.l ~!e lasf !ine. "CFC lf2- i~ char.;r?a 

~~sunes that i: is reasonable for similsr a FSD exeription for cer!ain haza;joul air 10 c=rrecdy recd "CFC llJ". On FZ~ s iz 

szcrces to ha: similar casts of emissicn pc1:utanls. Tie Environment Protection i:em 4. [he cite "Section 1;2(b)" is char;'& :o 

reduc:lons. Econcniic feasi5i:i:y rests very Agency (EPA) intends to 7ropose by c;nc:ly read "Section 173(b)". 

1i::le on t!!e abi:i:y ofa ~jrti~;113r ~0urc-e !O Septembe: of this year a rqclatory package Sew Source Revier, (NCRJ Trar.sitional 

"afford" to reduce ernissior,~ to the level of that will implement these and other changes G~iJar.~~ 

sirniiar scurces. Less e!ficient sources wauld 10 the NSR provisions. Final adcption of 

be rew3,ded by having to bear lcwcr these revised mgulations is projected fcr Toxi- ond P.'alionol Emissions SXJ.:~~., 

gi.;en high consideration. Ralber. economic Passage of the 1990 Amendments and 

ezirsion costs if aflordability were Augusl199)92 Ln the interim period betweon Eaz='d~~s.4ir po//ulan~s (hrESH42Sj isces 

I. Seclion 112 Hazardous Air Pnllvter.!~ ere 

feasibility for FACT purposes is largclj. adoption of ~!e Agency's final reylatio~:~. SO Lor.gm Co~sidered Regdaletl hl!c~aa:s 
enacment of the 1990 A;r.er.dments 

IXovember 15.1W1. For Federal PSD cemit 

Federal Register / V 

Under Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(ED). but NESHAPS Still Apply. 

Under the i~n Amendments to the Clean 

Air Ad [Act) and regulations issued 

thereunder. the requirements of the Act 

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

'modifications. f.e, thore excedirig certain 

annual tonnage thmholds (see '10 CFR 

Sm(b)[t)[i) and (b)(2)(i)). Typically. new sources and modificatiom become subject to 

PSO because they exceed the spedfied ' 

tonnage threshold for a criteria pollutant. i.e, 

a pollutant for which a national ambient air 

quality rtandard [NAAQS) has been 

established under section 109 of the Act 

Once a new sow or modification is subject 

to PSD. the PSD requirements appfy to every 

pollutant subject to.regulation under the Act 

that is emitted in 'significant" quantities (or. 

in the case of a major modificatiom for which 

there is a significant net emissions increase) 

(see 40 CFR sm(b)(n) and (i)(2)). Under he 

197i Amendments. best available control 

technology (BACT) and other PSD 

requirements apply not only to emissions of 

uiteria pollutants but also to emissions of 

pollutanb regulated under other provjsions of 

the AcL such as section 111 or 112 This 

regulatory structure was altered by the 1990 

Amendments. 

Title 111 of the 19W Amendments added a 

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

Eazardous air pollutants listed in section . 

112(b)(l) of the nvised Act (as well as any 

pollutants that may be added to the list) from 

the PSD (and other] requirements of Part C. 

Thus. becauee they an on the initial Title 111 

hazardous air pollutants list. the following 

pollutants. which had been regulated under 

PSD because they were covered by the 

section 112 NESHAFS or section 111 new source performance standards (NSPS) 

program. are now exempt from Federal PSD 

applicability: 

Arsenic 

Asbestos 

Benzene (lncludirig benzene from gasolice] 

Beryllium 

Hydrogen sulfide (H:S) 

Mercury 

Radionuclides [includica radon ~nd 

pc!oniun) 

Vinyl chloride 

The Title I11 exerr.p:ion applies tc final 

Faderel ED pem.it (i.e.. those issued in liaa! 

form and !o: which admi2is::ative appeals. if 

as?. ccder 40 CFR 124.19 have been 

exkaus:d) issued oc oi a2er :he date of 

applica:ior~ now under review by eithhr an EPA Regicnal Office or a delegated State. 

PSD ~e-nit requirements do not app!y to the 

pollutants ~xempted by Tit!e 111. For Federal 

ED permits containing PSD requirements for 

the pollrtants exempted by Title I11 issued on or after November 15.19. the perinittee 

nay request a revision (e.8.. removal of a BACT limit for benzene) to their PSD perrnit 

to reflect the Title LII exemption from Federal 

.ED applicability. 

Note that pursuant to sec!ion 116 azd the 

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

amended Act. States with an approved PSD 

program may conlrnue to regulate the Titlc I11 

hazardous air pollutants now eiempted from 

'01. 57, No. 82 / Tuesday. April 28. 1992 / Proposed Rules 18075 

Federal PSD by section 11qb)[6) if the State When evaluating control technolog!es and 

PSD regulations provide an independent their associated emissions limits. c~mbustion 

basis to do so. There State rules would practices. and related pennit terms and 

remain in effect unless a State revised them conditions in a BACT proposal the applicant lo provide-rimilar exemptions. Addilionally. must wnsider &e en~ironmentol impacts of 

the Title UI pollutants continue lo be subject all pollutants not regulated by ED. Once a 

to any other applicable State and Federal project fs subjed to BAm due to the 

rules: the exdusion only br Part C rules. emission of nonexempted pollutants. the 

Fi~lly. section 112(q) retains existing BACT analysis should therefore consider all 

NESHAPS regulations by s~dbkg that any pollutants. induding Title UI hazardous air atandad under section 112 in +?fiect prior to . pollutantr subject to ED. in 

the date of enactment of the 1990 determining which control slratcgy is best. Amendments shall remain in force and effect 

after ruc! date unIeu modified as provided PSD Clos~ I Boundaty Issues 

in the amended section. Therefore. the 1. PSD ~pplicability Coreragc"Chir.ges as requirements of '10 CFR 61.05 to 61DB. . Class I Area Boundaries Change Lqduding prewnstruction ~ermitting 

requiremenu, for new and modified sources , *tions 162(a) and 1Wa) of be anended 

subject to existing NESHAPS are Act specify that the of areas ' 

still applicable. designated as Class 1 must now con!o:m to 

In summary..the pollutants cumntly all boundary changes at suc! parks and 

regulated under the as ofb~ad 1991 that wilderness areas made si~ce August 7.19;; 

are still subject to Federal ED review and and any changes that may occur in the future. 

permitting requiremenb are: The EPA does not believe that Congzess 

Carbon monoxide intended to create the turmoil which would 

Nitrogen oxides occur if this redesignation required the 

Sulfur dioxide modification of permits issued between 

Particulate matter and PH-lo August 7.1927 and November IS. 1990. or the 

Orone (volatile organic compocnds) resubmission and reevaluation of complete 

Lead (elemental) enn nit applications submitted prior to 

Fluorides e~ctinent of the 1M Amendments. Thus. for 

Sulfuric acid mist this reason application; considered compleie 

Total reduced sulfur compounds [including prior to November lS.1990 &~uld be 

Has) processed as submitted without reaard to the 

CFCs 11.12 113.114.115 new Class I area bouzdaries. Exceptions to 

klalons lime 1301.2402 this general policy are in the area or 

Slunicipal waste combus:or [\{WC] acid increment consumplion and air qua!iiy 

gases. LIWC metals and BIWC or,anics re!ated values [inc!udicg risibi1i:y). as 

2 Hazardous Air Pol1u:ants that are discussed below. 

Regulated as One Compcnent of a hlorc For an applicant who submit:ed a compie:e 

Geceral Pollutant Under Other bvisions of PSD application prior to Noember ?5.1W. il 

the Clean Air Act are Still Regulated. all other PSD requirezenb are met. a pe.mi: 

Any hazardous air pollu!ants listed in ma:; be issued based on the Class i azalysi; 

section 11?(b)(1) which are rega1r:ed as as submitted in the applica:ion uclrss thc 

of a more genenl pollurant listed reviewing authority En&. on a czse-bv-case 

under section 108 of the are subiect basis. that aaditicnal andlysis is reeded lrcn 

to PSD as part of the more genemi pol!utant. the applicant lo addyss sus?ec!ed a68'ersc 

despite L+e exemption in Tille I!1. For i..r,pac:s or incezezt conscnpticn jxob1err.s 

volatile wrr.fou,rfs [-Joc-~) lee to the expanded boux!a;ies cf ~3e Claas 

(a tern which includes benzene. *:inyl I areas. Xnj' existing increxenl vio!a:ions in 

chloride. methanol. toluene. me!k:;l e:hr.l the new bouadaries or Class I areas =us: be 

);?tDnc. azd thousands of con?ounds) remedied t!iou?h a Si? revision pzrzaanl :O 

a;e stil! regulated as VOC's (bvt nst as 40 CFR 51.1E6(a)[3]. 

indiridCel pcllutants such as berZeze. The FS3 a~plications no! coniide:rd 

uder the,PSD regulatiocs beca~ze these cornp:ete bzfare Soce-ber 15. :SO 7;s: 

pcfiutants are ozone preccrsors. fict because tocsl6er the insact of boB esisticj soc;rces 

tkey are air toxics. Also. pa..ticuia:es ax! tke cerv or mccified sccrce 0: :.'.? C12ss i 

(i~cludin~ lead compounds 2nd asjcslos) are areas as de:ined bg !he 1990 A~c.-.Lrr;entz. 

stil: redulated as partic~lat~~ (bc:h?&I-10 Thus. he complete application ncs: ccnsider 

acd par:iculate matter) ur..der tie SD the inpacts on the en:ire Class 1 ares base5 

rcgulatic?~. Lead compounds are exempt upon the boundaries in existence of tke date 

from Federal PSD by Title 111. but :he of submiital oi a conplete appiica :lor: . as 

ele;nental lead portion or lead cnpounds (as before. if a Class I bcundarj changes before 

tested for in 40 CFR part 60. appecdix -4. the permit is issued. the reviewing acthori:~ 

Method 121 is still considered a c:i!eria may find. on a case-by-case basis. :hat 

~ollutant subject to the lead r\'.l\QS and still additional ana!ysis is needed iron tha 

regulated under PSD. a2plicant to address suspected 2dverse 

3. Toxic Effect of Unreg~lat~d Pcllutanls impacts or increment consurzptioc ~roblexs 

S:ill Considered in BACT Analysis. due to expacded Class I Area bouzdaiies. 

Based on the remand decision on June 3. ,VSR Nocollc;,,menl 1986 by the EPA Administrator in :\.or:h 

County Resoone Recovery A~~~~,~~(PSD 1. h?iR Cons'hction Permi: ~equirerr.enls iz 

Appeal NO. 85-2). the impact on enissions or h'onaflainmenl Areas 

other psllulanls. including unreg~!~t~d In many States. the existing approved Part 

pollutants. must be taken into account in D permit program.by its terms covers all 

de!e.mining BACT for a regulate6 pollutant. dcsignated conattainment areas in 15: Slslc. 
18076 Federal Register / Vol. 57.- No. 82 -/ Tuesday. April 28, lS92 I Proposed .Rules .- ... . . 

. . . . 

so a Part D permit program will automatically Tide 1 provisions- In addition. EP.4 nonattainment The EPA published a list of 

apply to le new and u;anded . ' encourages any State having adequate . - Lhue FM-10 areas in a Federal Regist& 

nonattainment areas which a= established auhority for mrly implementaticn of the NSR notie (see 55 FR 45799. October n. 1 

wader provisions of Tide I of the I990 . C- to do 80 at roan as pmible. aha 52 FR t9383. August 7.1483). The 

Amendment.. Thus, until new Nkc are .- 

' lf Staiu fail to mbmit lo EPA the new NSR pb& to publi& a notice h.h F&l 

adopted for these new ar expanded pamil pmeam mln for nonattainrnent areas ~cgist- usling these prrar as ~onatlainm~nc 

nomttainment areas, States .hould appl~ the - by the deadlints in the avded Act EPA in fie -fut- but they ahdy 

mquirernents of thSr existing appmvd Part . intends to Impose n0nattaia.t coruided nonathinmurt areas or of . ' 

D pmit program. However. in o,ther Stat-; . areas l Federal implementation plan (FLP), . '~~~~~

1990. . .. . .. . -. 

D my b~? limited 10 rp#ifid -bodying SU~ ~ulremmb. CU-~Y. ' . Si&rly. the l990 ~rneddmen~ orpand by areas and doer not apply to new or expanded - EPA intends to pmpose revised %R . . . opention of low iomc CO and mooc . .. areas. In these cases. State must Implemmt . rcylalions at 10 (TR part 52 that would . nonnttahcnt arras ~d~~

. . 

a transitional permitting pmpm.unUl their implcmcnt lhe new nlle I NSR nquimnenb . hnges didnot became aw 

uistiq Part D program are revised to meet '. under-a FLP in a State if that State'? revised . but *u on ~~b~ & Lhe requirements of tbc 1990 Amcndmen(r :. .. . NSR rulea to Implement Title I are not . tpedfip arerr followr :,i::2di. . .. end otpanded to aver alldonatti,@nent . . : submitted in approvable fonn to EPA and -. . 

areas in he ~tote;'~thensise,'both the goals .made effective widin the Strte by the '. -: Section lWd)(4)(A)(iv) of Lhe'Gended 

of part Dand hngms*. intent t! eating ". . dadha established by the 1990 .;. : . ': ' . ... '. Ad providu tbaf exqtion 

new or expanded-nonattainmcnt areas will .'. . Amendmenk - -. - " - . . . ' . - .-' ' '. - '. exphbed below ozone and CO -- 

be frurtratec -< - . . .. . .. .. The area designation In &led on the date '. ' ~~~~ta~s~te

' 

Th! EPA fegulatbns already provide for - of penkit issuance by the =viewing agency.- metropalitan tta C1.tical areas WA) and 

Lhese new or exponded designated . . ': - . determines which regulations mn C or Part : .ed-lidated mebopolibn statistical areas 

nonattainment areas becaure the Emission . . D) apply to'hatbermi~ In other words. he . - [CMSA) which are classifid ai~ous. 

Offset Interpretations Ruling (10 CFR part 51. , PSD permit regulations apply to pcllutants for - severe. or 'exlrrme for ozone'or as serictcs 

appendix S] gov- permits to,w.stmct %. whic! the area is designated as attainment or for are autormticalb-w to . 

between he date of designation end the date unclasslfiable. and lhe MR nonattahrnent indude lhe entire XSA or ChtS.4 This 

an Part D plan it made applicable pernit regulations apply to pollutant^ for . ; . expansion became effective by-tiar: of 

to the new nonettalnment ;U, CFR . which the area is designated nonattain-t - law 45 days afker eriactmqt,dctt the 

5=4(k)). Until a State's mw Part b plan is . ' [see 40 CFR 51f68(i) (3) and (5); and 10 (3~ : covernor submitted a hotia this 

approved by EPA. if a Slate wishes lo issue a Sm(i) [3) and (51). Under hew mlations, a . deadline of the state's fntent to Keir a 

pedi for a major stationtry source or major PSD pemit for a pollutent wriot be iszd . ..modification of the expaZded balmb~cs 

modification in a new or a;ral?ded . .: h an area L!at is designated nona%inment - ' pmuant to the proce8k ~l-forth in 

designated nonattainment area. thc State . : . for $at wllutant For the situation where,a . . sectioiik07(d)[4)[~~v). So i[a Sbte did ~t 

should comply with lc requirernecta of .' . rource receives a PSD or other permit prior to - .provide this notice.+e nonattaicment 

appendix S Among other things eppendix S ' the date the area is designated as boundaxin of all ierio& swcs and 

requires a major sourer seeking to locate in a nonattainment. lhe permit remainsin effect exbeme ckone.nonattainment arras 

nonattainm~nt area to (I) meet the lowest ' as long as the so- commencer .- State and d ierioiis CO are'as h !be 

achievable emission rate for such source. (2) constr~ciion within :a months aiter the date .. expanded to indude the entVke LEA c 

proi+de offsets from existing sources in the of nonatbinment designation of the area. CMSA on December 30.1990. lf a Stat 

arcs; and (3) show that the oketa will . ' does not discontinue construction for more provide timely notice. le Administrator , 

,- provide a positive net air quality benefit (see than 18 munlh* and ccmple~es umtruction has uplo 14 montbr from ebctnmt.to 

40 CFR part 51. appendix S. section NA). within a reasonable time [see 40 CFR 52-24 (g) resolve lhe Slate's challenge. Until EPA 

. fie EPA believes that in order to cany out and [k)]- Although the PSD regidations promulgates a resolution of the Slate's 

the intent of appcndix S. oEfsets should be provide for exteruion of these deadliqes. no challenge. the old boundaries rekain in 

required for souries in all categories a?d in extension would be appropriate where the . cffect. 

all should be cs!culated on a tons ares has been dmignated as nonattaisle~t ~~~~~t for these two caM where ;.,ew or per year beyis (see 40 CFIZ part 51. appendix following pem-it issuance. Acc=rdingl if any expanded baundaries have been c-ea!ed 

S. section 1V.C). . of these construction provisiom arr no! met. oparJtion of law. nonattainment ara Of ccune, neither appenda S nor the the PSD Permit or ober permjt ma no; be changm will not be conridered ei?ectir.e 

exizting NSR rules incorporate the P;SR ' extended. and the row subid :o the the &anger are pmmulgated by EP* 

changes mandated by Titie I d the 1990 nonattainmmt provisions] mest cb:ain 3 to most new areas or expansions cf 

P.mccdments such a lower source . corattainment pem't prior to ccinmzcing .pre,.ious~y-~~signated nonattainmr.t area applicability thresholds. ir.creased emissions [or continuing) construction. this wi!l occur 240 days after enacmen (5i.e 

oliset ratios. new defitior~ ofmajor The 1990 Amendments c~ate =me sew sec!ion lC7(d](.(;(A] (i] and [ii)) Newly- , s:a:ionary source. and (for ozone and expanded nona!tainmei..t areas by created ozone and CO ncaatlaker.~ areis 

noasttainment a~as) requirements for . cperation of law. Other nonat!ainment area will be parl of a deaiFJIed 

nilwen oxides (NOx) contnl and NOx . , chogges are expected is the Sta:es and E9.4 nonattainment area for pwses a: i-d emissions offsets. Howeve:. the 1993 complete the designation process prescribed time of promulgation Amendmects require Sta:er, to subnit to EPA in mended section 107(d). Becam of theee 

new NSR permit program rules for ozone provisicns. the dates areas switc! from 2. SOtus of Corsb~ction Bans 

nonattaiment areas by NcvernberlS. 1992: . attzinment to nonattrtlnment for NSR Pcnoant to section 110(n][7]. an enisticg 

for a:-10 nonatkinmen! areas by June 30. p'uposes vary by pollutan~ However. except cons'mction ban that was imposed Cue LL:? 

1992: and for most carbon monoxide [CO] for the ~-.wJ i~~ta.nces where the hendments absence of approved Part D NSa rdes 

nonattainment areas no later than 3 yean create Changes by operation of law. the new remains in eFect until a revised b:s S3 i: 

from the date of the nonattainment designations and expanded b~ndaries will approve.d Existing constr~ction hrs 

designation. The E?A interprets L!is 2s an not be e5ective for NSR p?lrposm until EPA - imposed due !o disapproval ~fp.~~? SU:-- 

expression of congressionel intent not to promulgates the changes. The promulgations dioxide NAAQS attainment plans also 

'mandate that States adhere to the more' wi!l be arnounccd in the Federal R+!er. remain in effect A Federal Reer notice 

stringent Title 1 NSR requiremeats in Corigress created new Pbt-10 will be published soon axnouncir.g ~\e s:a:us 

nor.a!tainrnent areas during the time provided nonattainme.71 areas through designations of conshction bans in general and a1 

for Stale implementation plan (SIP) that brame effective upon enactment of the lifting specific bans where 

developrnen~ Thus. for NSR permitting 1990 Amendments on Nouemk IS. 1990 (see Should a construction ban 

until the States. as requid by the Act. adopt vioiatioxu of the Phi-10 NAAQS had 

purposes in nonattainment areas. the new secuon 107(d)(4IIBl). Specifically. Congress - area designated as nonattainmen~ ad ~?e 

KSR requirements in Title 1 are not in effect designated Group I areas and areas where area racks an appmved Part D Ns rule. &e 

State should meet the requirements of-^ 

NSR pzrmit program rules 20 implement the occurred prior to january 1.1989 as . part 51. appendix S. in issuing pemita to 
Federal Register / Val. 57, No. 82 / Tuesday. April 28, 1992 / Proposed Rules . 18077 

najor new sources or major modifications 

prior to the adoption ~f SSR rules meeting 

the requirements of the 1990 Amendments. 

3. Federal Implementation Plans Remain in 

mect 

The NSR penmtting prcgmm in an existing 

FIP remains in effect until a SIP is approved or a revised FIP Ir adopted. 

4. Use of ~eviousl;-~~pia~ed Growth 

Al!owanqs Is Pmhibited 

Section 1?3(bj 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 permi9 issued on or after 

November 1% 1990..~ren'ously-approved 

growth allowances cannot be used in these 

areas. Construction pemits cannot be issued 

in SIP-call areas under existing EPAappmved Psrt D programs to the extent that 

such permits rely on previously-approved 

growth allowances. Case-byxase emission 

offsets must be obtained for any such 

permits, and other existing Part D 

requirements must be met. 

5. Exirting NSR Permitting Rules Contjnue TO 

Apply In the Northeast Ozone Transport 

Region (NOTR) 

Tne 199a Amendments establish a single ozone transport region compiised of the 

States of Connecticut. Delaware. Maine. 

Maryland Massachusetts. New Hampshire. 

XeSu jersey. New Yo*. Pennsylvania. Rhode 

Islacd Vermont. and the OlSA that includes 

the District of Columbia and part of the State 

of Viqinia. For this transport reaion. 

including all attainment areas within its 

boundaries. new eection 1M(b](2] specifies 

doc.~ment." One type of "CTG document" is a 

CTG: a CTC is a technical document that sets 

fort! a presumptive level of RACT contmls 

for a source category. The Act provides that 

EPA must issue e!even CfC's by November 

15,1993. In addition the Act specifically 

requires the Agency to prepare CTC's for 

aerospace coatings and ship building and 

repair within the same tinefame. \ This document is not a technical CTC. but 

ather a second type of CK; document* , document that lists the eleven CK;'s EPA 

anticipates publ!shing in accordance with 

section 183(a) and establishes time tables for 

submittal of RACf rules for sources that are not ultimately coveml by a CTG issued by 

h'ovember 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 RACf rule submittal requirement 

for sources that EP.4 expects to be covered 

by a postsnactment CTC. 

IT. List of Eleven CTT;'s 

The EPA plans to issue the following CTC's 

in accordance with section 183[a]. . I. Synthetic oganic chemical 

manufacturing industry (SOC\II) distillation: 

2 SOCMI reactors 

3. Wood furniture: 

4. Plastic parts coating (business machines]: 

5. Plastic parts coating (other;: 

6. Offset lithography: 

7. Industrial wastewater: 

8. Autobody refinishing: 

9. SOChfI batch processing: 

10. Volatile oganic liquid storage tar-!s: 

and 

11. Clean up soivents. 

those foi which neither a pre-iinact-nent CTG 

nor a postsnactment CTC doclslr.et.t tad 

been issued 

The EPA's obligation to issue the elevea 

CfC's does not ripen until h'ove=3er 15. 

1993. and EPA does not antidpate issuing all - 

of these CfCs before November IS. 1992 

Thmfore. to the extent EPA doer cot isrce a CTG document before November IS. 1992 

States would be required to submit nonCTG 

RACT rules Tor scums that could in the 

future be covered by a CfC. In addition at 

the time the CK; docu~.ent was issued, the 

State could then be required lo submit a new 

rule. consistent with the CK; d-ent. 

thereby duplicating its eadier 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 CTC document to retain 

the sharp distinction between the L! 

different groups in rubparappb (A). (B]. . 

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

eleven CTG's listed in %ion !I will cover a 

particular major source. the State 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 15.19&? R+CT . submittal. 

IV. Time Table 

The EPA is establishing the follou-ing 

general tine table for States to submit R+CT 

rules for sources thet it identifies in a 

November 15.1992 submittal as being a 

source covered by a post-enactment CTG 

document. 

[II on h'ovenber 15.1992 the State must 

that any stationery source that emits or has 

the potential to emit at least 50 tons per year 

oi VOCs shall be considered a major 

stationary source and subject to the 

requirements which wou!d be applicable to 

major stationarj sources if the area were classifled as a m~derate ozone rionat!ainment area Por XSi( purposes. the 

requirenents.of section iM(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 impiercecting those 

reqcirements]. A State in the NOT3 has until 

Ncvenber 15.1997 to subriit to EPA the new oi revised Pu'Sii rules addressing the new reqcirements. 

Appecdix E 

I. I:~!.~duc:ion 

The EPA is issuing this CTG document 

under section 18qb) of the Clean Air Act. as emended Under section 182(b). Sta!es must 

develop RACT mlea for sources "covered by - a CiG document issued by the Administrator 

between November 15. IS90 and the date of 

atiaiment!" The State must submi: these 

RXCT rules "within the period set forth by 

tke Administrator in iss~inn the relevant CTG 

Ur.de: section 18?(b](?). Stales cust adopt 

RICT rdes for three general giocps of 

sources: (A) Those cover4 by a pcstenact!r.er.t CiC document: (b] those covered 

by a pre-enactrxent CTG: (c] "all othe: major 

3tatiocary source3 of VCC's." Sec:ion 

1S?[b)(2) also establishes the tiniq for State 

submittzi zed source Implerr.er.:arion of 

RIG rdes for these three grocps. For 

sources covered by a post-enac:r?.ent CTG 

dccunen:. the State must rabcit KICT rules 

within L!e per;od establitihed is the relevant 

CTG docucent For the other two aroups. the 

Ac: provides specific dates for s?tornittal. 

h'ovecber :5. IS92 and implece:tation. no 

la!er <>an Msy 31.1W5. 

Alone. subparagraphs (A]. (2) ecd (C) seem to se! forth 5irw distinct groups cfsources. 

However. he submittal dates under the 

second ~o~ion of the provision patentially 

could blur the line between these three 

groups if =A does not issce before 

November 15.1991 a CTG docueent 

cove5r4 all sources for which it plans to 

issue a CTG under section 183(a). At that 

tiae. S:ates would need to subrcit RICT 

rules for all other ma]or stationav sourcessubmit a list of major stationary soxces that 

it anticipates will be rubject to oze of the 

CTG's listed in Section 11. whi& ETA plans to 

issue by h'oveaber 15.1993. 

(2) For those major sources on tke list 

submitted by ~!e.State in the 1992 s:'cmii!al 

that are cot covered by a CTG that F.4 has 

issued by November 15. 1993. the S;a:e must 

submit a MCT ru!e by November 1:. 193.1 

that requires impiementation of R3.C by 

hlay 15.1995. 

(3) For sourcea covered by a CTG issued 

under section 183(a] and [or which Ce State 

has not by the date oi euch issuanc?. 

adopted an apprcvabie RACT ru!e. *e State 

must submit a RACT rule in accomazce wit5 

the tiae schedule set forth in tie relevant 

CT G. 

(4) For sources subject to a RAG mle that 

the State adopted and EPA approved under 

section 182(b](2] prior to EPA's issuance of en epplicable CTG. EPA will work wit!! i-.e 

State to deternine whether the existkg rule 

should be revised owe a CTG has been 

issued that would apply to that source. 

IFR Doc 92-9266 Filed 4-27-92: 8:45 ezj 

BllUMC CODE CSS&Y;U