P.1 

OAR Box 1790 

Prepped by Keeia Richards 

Document Number: 

234) ll-F-24 

Docket Number: 

A-90-37 

Printed 10/31/200812:43:17 PM Sheet 234 of 250 
S&NT 6Y:ASST. SECRETARY FWP : 3-21-95 : 1:02PM : INTERIOR DEPARTMENT^ 

United States Department ofthe Interior 

OFFICE OF TI IF. SL ORE' I'ARY 

Washington, H.C 20'.>4f) 

TRANSMISSION NOTICE 

This message ia electronically transmitted un a Xerox, 703 

Facsimile machine. 

P.2 

919 541 5509:* 1/ 5 

A-90-37 

Transmission Number: 

Verification Number: 

To: 

202/208-4684 

202/208-6655 5 A 

Agency Phone Nuiuber 

Frnm: A/S Staff Memberlrs: (U.otLy fttf 

7Yt)<Hu,J 

Department of the Interior 

Assistant Secretary Cor Fisfi 

and Wildlife and Tarke 

1849 "C" Street N. W. 

MS-MIB-II56 

Wasnlnqtun, D.C. 20240 

Number of Pages to follow: 

Date: _ 

Time: 
SENT BY-ASST. SECRETARY FWP : 3-21-95 : 1:02PM : INTERIOR DEP4RTMENTJi3_ 

NSR PaoKage — Proposed DOI, Nr8/U8PW8 inserts and Deletions to 

11/ie/M OM B version 

[NOTE: An * denotes items that may need to be raised at 

919 541 5509:* 2/ 5 

Regulation 

[NOTE: Corresponding changes to Part 52 should als o be ikde.] 

*rart(5l) P. 8, Definitions: Jjc-sfaieJ ya^ui*-xt-ti ou*-/_»-Ui^ 

Add to-_nd of entry "(40) Air Quality Related Value": *Tvwinding 

rtionr i ilnnr •minri itnl ritii MM j i i in i mjjjniTr a " Inseifp "Class 

II, " top of page 9 after "class I." 

)MB mtq] 

Ai Quality 

rjilete "a 

/alue" at 

»r-aa-, -or^ 

*Part 51, p. 9, Definitions: 

Delete the "an" in entry "(41) Adverse Impact on an 

Related Value" and add an "(s)'\ after "Value.", 

specific" <md substitute "one or more", add an "s" to ' 

end of present text and add: "irr-a•-f FederalT" Cluao- ~i 

impair...tJia_.StXUC,T.Urg-<tilC'!' f wr t i oninr^Ql an .ggge^ygtoro^ 

fart 51 [and add to Tart 52], wherevpr adverse impact, nl: 

of an adveree impact, or monitoring impacts with regard t< 

at issue, consultation with the affected FLM shall bP r s quired."// / 

[or "implied" if "required" is too strnngj __ — f- • -JJ 

jOTEjyTT^norigreeinent nn this or similar, centralized lod 

consultation requirement, then refer to mark-up for 

places in regulation where consultation is desirable. Li 

defining ['affected FLM,__ evpn it means a cuLuff in km, 1 

cutoff re^cnntormity regs. 

Throughout 

tigation 

AQRVs TJ. 

ition for 

ilndividual 

a .'& avoid 

cc 100 km 

Part 51, p. 11, Definitions: 

On (47)(ii) add "or nitrogen oxides" after "volatil 

comEOynds." 

_5OTEX) Dill T. previously agreed to tnis change, but : 

discussed with RTP. J 

I

organic 

wac not 

Pdit 51, p. 13, "(iii)" re BACT 

Change "may" to "shall." 

P. 1.1, delete sectiun " (iv)" in entirety or change "iateH" in line 

3 to "eauli 

NOTETYB^ 1 1 T ^ ) thniight these changes were reasonable, fi|jt we dirt 

not drs with RTP. Point io, EPA should not 

eval./discussion of BACT before close of public comment 

•Part 51, p. lo, "(o)": 

Uelete (o)(3) and revioc (o) (l) of currp.nt reg. as follows: 

"The owner or operator shali provide an analysis of the impairment 

of visibility, soils, and vegetation by the proposed sit >., as well 

as an'analysis of AQRVe (as defined in (4U) above), w ich would 

occur ae a result of the source or modification ani general 

commercial, residential, industrial, and other growth associated 

with Lhe source or modification. Concerning any . npacts on 

vegetation not associated with an AQRV, as defined in (40) , the 

owner or operator need nul. provide an analysis of veg«t.a\Lon having 

no significant ecological value." 

6tyf.«fr k GD)C* 0 0-9 ^ M 

A-IT-^T 5 x 

V7c - T T 

M 

1 

cut off ? 

period. 
StMT BY:ASST. SECRETARY r*Wr* : 3-21-95 : 1:03PM : INTERIOR DEPARTMENTP.4 

,ffc 

{$* 

0 

[Note: This proposed rewrite tries to draw a distinctioi 

AQRVs on fed. landc and other resources, to help address 

concern ahout "nor. making applicants do something nev 

determ. of "no sign. eco. value" would be made by 

authority and i3 irrelevant to Class I and IT areas.] 

pi 1 

~~\ jPart bl, p. 17,: (2) Federal Land Manger Responsibility 

(B), and (C) under that, and revise 

919 541 5509:S 3/ 

Delete (ii) and (A) 

follows: 

"The federal Land Manager, through the permitting authoftty, EPA 

Bulletin Board, or directly, shall make availablp. to the a:?licant, 

whose emissions may affect a federal Class I area any 

information concerning AQRVs of that Class I area.1 

G "X ^Part 51, p. 18 and p. 1 <., ' demonstration of adverse iiuact and 

denial, and p. 

These sections 

21-22 (q) public participation: 

need to be rewritten to clarify EPA' s i Mtent 

uate 

between 

EPA'S 

The 

emitting 

(iii) as 

relevant 

and 

provide a consistent, realistic framework to make and ev the 

FLM's adverse impact determination. The first heading tyhould be 

public participation, and describe 

requirements for notifying the public as to state's preliminary 

determination summary. Thai nutification should rela> any FLM 

concerns presented to date, including any FLM prelim adverse 

impact determination, and make FT.M comments available. Once the 

FT.M has all the info. nee. to bate adverse impact determir ;ition on, 

which way not occur until after ctate prepares its preliminary 

determination summary, then if FT.M is inclined to ma) e such a 

dptermination, the FLM and permitting authority should consult on 

the determination, relevant analyses, and mitigation stratnglns. 

Any writings between FLM and state permitting authority on this 

consultation and resolution (i.e., state has burder to put 

rejection of FLM's determin.' in a rationale written form) fphould go 

in the public docket. 

Preamble 

*P. 314, Insert 

determination": 

first full para., after "adyer 

The NSR Class I Area Coordination Subgroup came up with the 

following criteria to be considered by the permitting a»:hority: 

jj**0 Scientific basis of the FLM'c adverse impact determ lation; 

5t(FbJ Existing status of pofpnf.ially affected class I areas!land their 

XTftvs; 

y^c) Presence of mitigating factors, such as offsets; 

jd^ Permit conditions, such as pre- and post-co fetiuction 

litoring, with contingent corrective action plan; 

\ (e) Informal mediation efforts during considp.ratioN ot the 

' application; 

(f) Participation by the FLM during completeness review 

/ ^ 4g4--PuT5lrrc--smppw «*"**-

r^i T 

impact 
SENT BY:ASST. SECRETARY FWP : 3-21-95 : 1:03PM : INTERIOR DEPARTMENTP.5 

(h) alternativ e siting . 

[NOTE! ® ® and(_)f roro the list above ar e probably most 

s e t out for FT.M's benefit.] 

919 541 5509:2 4/ 5 

JlyJlSj) Insert B, afte r (2) , deletin g RYi stin g tex t and stlDStitute 

lol louring: . . . „ 

1

 txlsting Adverse Impacts Previously Documented for the Class I Arpa 

Where the FLM has previously publicly documented or :ertified , 

existing adverse impact conditions at a Class I area, or ditermined ( • y> 

that one or more particular proposed sources would COBS . : Ltutefan j ,,--T 

adverse impact, t-^an AQKV at a particular Class I ai >a, that £l-yZ' 

information should be afforded 3_ubstant_ial weight by the pirmitting $••<' 

authority. The legislative history of th« CAA instructs t^ "err on 

the side of protecting tne air-quality related values f 

generations." S. Rep. No. 9*3-127, 95th Cong., let Sess. 3 

imp. to 

J —..mm— ~ V ...- . _ . m.-rmr . . . — ~ T — T m. . , T — T . . W W • •- ^ * , — — * • WW»» . 

The permitting authority should consider that instruction 

of existing conditions at a particular class I aiea. 

P. 329, See JD's Significant Impact Inset 

/-- kc 

* p. ru:*?, insert D new section, before 

Clearinghouse": 

Generic Approaches to Address Any AQRV Issue 

Ir 

The NSR Subcommittee, Existing Sources subgroup discus ;s< I 

options for addressing specific AQRV degradation in Cl 

The group camp, to consensus on the need to enforce exis 

requiring SIP revisions in cases where PSD increment ej 

have been documented. In particular, the group discuss 

to enforce existing requirements for permitting auth 

track increment consumption cumulatively for all sources, 

for EPA guidance on methodology for tracking emissions cuiu 

and periodically assp.ssing increment consumption was r 

EPA Will endeavor to piovide such guidance. 

.as ; 

*P. 336, insert C, after "52.2i(o)(3)," delete rest of ara. 

substitute: 

In recognizing that Federal Class I and ii areas have AQfWs, which 

are mandated under various statutes for preservation unimpaired 

(e.g., Organic Act, Wilderness Act), EPA is proposing to c 

last sentence in (o)(l) ot both current regulations 

clarifications should help ensure that permit applicants 

all potential impacts to Class I and (fl area AQRVs^ ^ -y. 

f

: future 

(1977). 

in light 

,'n 

»**• 

and 

jiete the 

These 

consider 

r-^ W -<Ln~> /-=r i'i— «•>•' 

ormation C/^nJZ 

several 

I areas. 

Lng rules 

reedances 

the need 

ities to 

The need 

latlvely 

cognized. 

r< 

The Existing Sources Subgroup also discussed suppleiuentin: 

regulations by adding a trigger for 3IP revisions, or eve 

of regional implementation plans, to address existi 

impact conditions for AQRVs at Class I areas within a 

state or region. Although FLMs and environments 

representatives pointed out the merits of such an a 

ameliorating the "existing sources problem" for AQRVs, nt 

of the full group could be readied on this option. 

l-A" h' 

I*-

, < * 

t'S 

existing 

adoption 

adverse 

rticular 

1 group 

ifbroach in 

consensus 
P.6 

SE1^I,BV.:ASST. _SECRETARY_FWP : 3-21-95 : 1:04PM : INTERIOR DEPARTMENTV ^ A I jk*,4»- 7'1'f H in C(^«,(. 

SH <mi f ica-r . Impact Inaprr 

IJT 4-

November T6, 1994, draft; Insert following paragraph at 

page 329. 

919 541 5509:a 5/ 5 

Although the FLMs (NPS/FWS) agree that the use 

significance levels wich respect to Class I incrftmer 

may be appropriate in certain circumstances, 

believe that thcoc levels ahould be propel 

conservative and consistent with the methodolc 

originally used to esr.ahlish the NAAQS significai 

levels ($&£. proposed sections 51.166(b) (23) (iv) 

52.21(h)(23J (iv)). Therefore, the MPS and FWS 

developet^alteniatt^ve, significance levela by taking 1 

ratio of tn"_~TS£AQS 'significance level to the NAAQS 

multiplying that number by the respective Class 

increment. 

Revise lasr paragraph on page 331 aa follows: 

The EPA requests public comment on 4*# fffi!£ propound 

Class I increment significance levels, in particular, 

che EPA requests comment on \Wtta, the lovc-li 

which arci four percent of the applicable Class 

increment level t&M 

end of 

<if 

:B 

ttj^y 

y 

:e 

did 

I14 re 

te 

4nd 

I 

NOTK- I suggest EPA also add a column to 

•51 .166(b) (23>(v) and 52.21(b)(23) (v)) that includes 

significance levels for comparison, or else put both 

numbers in che preamble. NPS/FWS numbers are as followi 

ihe 

Pollutant 

Snlfur Dioxide (SO,) 

Particulate Matter 

(PM10) 

Nitrogen Dioxide 

(N02) 

Averaging 

Time 

Annual 

24-hour 

3-hour 

Annual 

24-hour 

Annual 

NPS/FWS 

Proposed 

Levels 

0.03 

0.07 

0.48 

0.08 

0.27 

0.03 

ilectious 

ecs of