1

Technical Support Document 

EPA-R06-OAR-2012-0022 

Revisions to the Louisiana Prevention of Significant Deterioration Program for the 

Regulation and Permitting of Greenhouse Gases 

Submitted December 21, 2011 

Received January 5, 2012 

April 20, 2016 

No material in this submittal package was designated as Confidential Business Information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Adina Wiley United States Environmental Protection Agency Region 6, Air Permits Section 

(6PD-R), 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, (214) 665-2115. 
2

Contents 

I. Executive Summary............................................................................................................................... 3

II. Background of State Submittal ............................................................................................................. 3

III. Technical Review of State Submittal................................................................................................. 4

A. Part 51, Appendix V Evaluation of the December 21, 2011 SIP Submittal ....................................... 5

B. Current Federal Requirements for PSD Permitting of GHG Emissions........................................... 10

C. Evaluation of the December 21, 2011 SIP Submittal ...................................................................... 12

1. EPA’s Analysis of Louisiana’s Automatic Rescission Provisions.................................................. 12

2. EPA’s Analysis of Louisiana’s Revisions to the PSD Program...................................................... 14

IV. Conclusion.......................................................................................................................................19

 
3

I. Executive Summary

This Technical Support Document (TSD) reviews one proposed revision to the Louisiana State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) concerning the regulation and permitting of greenhouse gas (GHG) 

emissions in the Louisiana Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program under the 

Louisiana Administrative Code (LAC) at LAC 33:III.509, and a related revision to the general 

requirements of the Louisiana SIP under LAC 33:III.501(C)(14). This review will determine if 

the revisions to the Louisiana PSD program submitted on December 21, 2011, are consistent 

with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and EPA’s regulations, policy and guidance 

for major source permitting of GHG emissions. 

II. Background of State Submittal

Under the CAA, GHGs became subject to the PSD program in 2011 when EPA first regulated 

this pollutant under the CAA. See 75 FR 17004, April 2, 2010. To phase in these requirements 

for sources not previously required to obtain PSD permits, on June 3, 2010, the EPA 

promulgated a final rule entitled “Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V 

Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule” (referred to as the Tailoring Rule). See 75 FR 31514. 

After the GHG Tailoring Rule, the LDEQ adopted revisions to the LAC on April 20, 2011, to 

address the PSD permitting requirements for sources with GHG emissions. These revisions to the 

LA PSD program were submitted to the EPA on December 21, 2011, by Ms. Peggy Hatch, 

Secretary of the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality. Specifically, the LDEQ 

submitted new definitions for “carbon dioxide equivalent emissions”, “greenhouse gases 

(GHGs)” and revisions to the existing definitions of “major stationary source” and “significant” 

at LAC 33:III.509(B). The submittal also included revisions to the general permitting program 

requirements at LAC 33:III.501(C)(14) to limit the regulation of GHGs under Louisiana’s SIP to 

match any future changes in federal law or decisions by the Supreme Court or U.S. Court of 

Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. 

The December 21, 2011 submittal also included revisions to the Louisiana title V program at 

LAC 33:III.502 which will be addressed by the EPA in a separate action at a later date. 

Note that the LDEQ submitted a clarification letter on February 3, 2012, that specified the 

revisions to LAC 33:III.509 were submitted as revisions to the Louisiana PSD program and the 

revisions to LAC 33:III.502 were submitted as revisions to the Louisiana title V program. 
4

III. Technical Review of State Submittal

The December 21, 2011 SIP submittal revising the Louisiana PSD program is evaluated for 

compliance with the relevant requirements of the Act and Title 40 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (40 CFR) part 51 – Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of 

Implementation Plans. These requirements include, but are not limited to the following: 

1. §110(a)(2)(C) of the Act which provides:

(C) include a program to provide for the regulation of the modification and construction 

of any stationary source within the areas covered by the plan as necessary to assure that 

national ambient air quality standards are achieved, including a permit program as 

required in parts C and D;

2. §110(l) of the Act which provides:

(l) Plan Revisions. – Each revision to an implementation plan submitted by a State under 

this chapter shall be adopted by such State after reasonable notice and public hearing. 

The Administrator shall not approve a revision of a plan if the revision would interfere 

with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress 

(as defined in section 171), or any other applicable requirement of the chapter.

3. 40 CFR 51.160 – Legally enforceable procedures. The regulatory text of 40 CFR 51.160 

is available on line at Electronic Code of Federal Regulations: 

http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/textidx?c=ecfr&sid=07e214c52bbfc82a2781e3e14c7616ca&rgn=div8&view=text&node=4

0:2.0.1.1.2.6.8.1&idno=40

4. 40 CFR 51.161 – Public availability of information. The regulatory text of 40 CFR 

51.161 is available on line at Electronic Code of Federal Regulations: 

http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/textidx?c=ecfr&sid=07e214c52bbfc82a2781e3e14c7616ca&rgn=div8&view=text&node=4

0:2.0.1.1.2.6.8.2&idno=40

6. 40 CFR 51.166 – Prevention of significant deterioration of air quality. The regulatory text 

of 40 CFR 51.166 is available on line at Electronic Code of Federal Regulations: 

http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/textidx?c=ecfr&sid=0dbbe52d31085f8454d6cbf1412e1557&rgn=div8&view=text&node=4

0:2.0.1.1.2.6.8.7&idno=40.

Other applicable requirements of the Act, 40 CFR part 51, and applicable policy and guidance 

will be identified in the evaluation where appropriate. 

Specifically, the December 21, 2011, submittal is first reviewed for completeness as a SIP 

submittal under Part 51, Appendix V. This will be followed by a detailed analysis of the 

submitted revised rules to determine consistency with EPA regulations, guidance and whether 

the submitted provisions interfere with any applicable CAA provisions. This analysis produces a 

written evaluation used to make a determination of whether or not the December 21, 2011 GHG 

PSD SIP revision is in agreement with the CAA, other EPA policies and guidance. 
5

A. Part 51, Appendix V Evaluation of the December 21, 2011 SIP Submittal 

The criteria for completeness determination are found in Appendix V to Part 51 - Criteria for 

determining the completeness of plan submissions and are outlined below: 

1.0 Purpose: This appendix V sets forth the minimum criteria for determining whether a 

State implementation plan submitted for consideration by EPA is an official submission 

for purposes of review under § 51.103. 

1.1 The EPA shall return to the submitting official any plan or revision thereof which fails to 

meet the criteria set forth in this appendix V, and request corrective action, identifying 

the component(s) absent or insufficient to perform a review of the submitted plan. 

1.2 The EPA shall inform the submitting official whether or not a plan submission meets the 

requirements of this appendix V within 60 days of EPA's receipt of the submittal, but no 

later than 6 months after the date which the State was required to submit the plan or 

revision. If a completeness determination is not made by 6 months from receipt of a 

submittal, the submittal shall be deemed complete by operation of law on the date 6 

months from receipt. A determination of completeness under this paragraph means that 

the submission is an official submission for purposes of §51.103. 

The attached checklist outlines the basic criteria included under 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3 of Appendix V. 

SIP Completeness Checklist for the December 21, 2011 SIP Submittal 

Administrative Materials (2.1) 

1. The package is sent with a formal submittal letter from the Governor or his or her 

designee requesting EPA's approval of the revision. 

The SIP revision was submitted by a letter from Ms. Peggy Hatch, Secretary of the 

LDEQ, dated December 21, 2011. The SIP submittal was received by EPA Region 6 Air 

Permitting Section on January 5, 2012. 
6

2. Evidence is included that the State has adopted the revision in the State code or body of 

regulations, or that the State has issued the permit, order, consent agreement (hereafter 

document) in final form. This evidence would include the date of adoption or final 

issuance and the effective date of revision, if different from adoption/issuance date. 

The revisions to the Louisiana Major PSD program were adopted by the Louisiana 

Department of Environmental Quality on April 20, 2011. 

3. Evidence is included that the State has necessary legal authority under State law to adopt 

and implement the revision, e.g., a citation of the appropriate State authority. 

The authority to adopt and implement the revisions is the Louisiana Environmental 

Quality Act, R.S. 30:2001 et seq., and in accordance with the provisions of the 

Administrative Procedures Act, R.S. 49:950 et seq. 

4. A copy is included of the actual regulation or document submitted for approval and 

incorporation by reference into the SIP including an indication of the changes made to the 

existing approved plan where applicable. The submittal shall be a copy of the official 

State regulation document signed, stamped, and dated by the appropriate State official 

indicating that it is fully enforceable by the State. The effective date of the regulation 

document shall, whenever possible, be indicated in the document itself. 

 

The December 21, 2011, submittal included a copy of the official State regulation 

document published in the Louisiana Register. 

5. Evidence is included that the State followed all the procedural requirements of its laws 

and/or its constitution in the conducting and completing the adoption/issuance of the 

plan. 

The SIP submittal package included a certification demonstrating the SIP submittal was 

developed pursuant to 40 CFR 51.104. 

6. Evidence is included that public notice was given of the proposed changes consistent 

with the procedures approved by EPA, including the date of publication of such notice, 

(e.g., notarized or certified copies of any public notices published in newspapers). (The 

notice should be at least 30 days prior to the public hearing(s). 

Notices of public hearing and comment period for rule revision AQ314ft were published 

in the: 

 Louisiana Register on October 20, 2010. 
7

7. A certification is included indicating that public hearing(s) was/were held in accordance 

with the information provided in the public notice(s) and the State's laws and 

constitution, if applicable. 

The public hearing for AQ314ft was held on November 24, 2010. The transcript of the 

hearing was included in the December 21, 2011 submittal package. 

8. A compilation of public comments and the State's response is included. 

The SIP submittal package did include a compilation of comments and the State’s 

response to comments. LDEQ received comment letters from the EPA Region 6, 

Louisiana Chemical Association, Louisiana Mid-Continent Oil and Gas Association and 

Sierra Club. The December 21, 2011 submittal included the comment letters and the 

response to comments summary. 

Technical Support (2.2) 

The State should include the following technical information in its SIP revision request package. 

1. Identification of all regulated pollutants affected by the revision is included. 

The December 21, 2011, submittal revises the Louisiana PSD program to regulate and 

permit emissions of GHGs in the LA PSD program in all attainment areas statewide. 

2. Identification of the locations of affected sources including the EPA 

attainment/nonattainment designation of the locations and the status of the attainment 

plan for the affected area(s) is included. 

The December 21, 2011 revisions to the LA PSD program apply statewide in attainment 

areas. 

3. Quantification of the changes in SIP allowable emissions from the affected sources is 

included. (Examples include estimates of changes in current actual emissions from 

affected sources and/or, where appropriate, quantification of changes in actual emissions 

from affected sources through calculations of the differences between certain baseline 

levels and allowable emissions anticipated if the revisions were approved.) 

Quantification of “SIP allowable emissions” is not required for the December 21, 2011, 

revisions to the Louisiana PSD permit program. A determination of “allowable 

emissions” consistent with the PSD permitting requirements will be addressed on a 

permit-by-permit basis. 

4. Demonstration is included that the NAAQS/PSD increments/RFP demonstration and 

visibility as applicable would be protected if the revision were approved and 

implemented. 
8

The December 21, 2011, revision to the Louisiana PSD permit program was adopted and 

submitted consistent with the federal PSD requirements. Adoption of these revised rules 

will protect the NAAQS/PSD increments/RFP demonstration and visibility. 

5. FOR REDESIGNATIONS: 

 a. Is there a fully approved maintenance plan for the primary ambient air quality 

standards for at least 10 years as required by §175A of the Clean Air Act? 

 Not applicable. 

 b. Are contingency measures included? 

 Not applicable. 

6. Modeling information, if applicable, is required to support the proposed revision. 

Modeling information is not necessary to support the analysis and review of the 

December 21, 2011, submitted regulatory provisions. Modeling will be provided on a 

permit-by-permit basis in accordance with the Louisiana PSD SIP regulations. 

7. Evidence is included where necessary, that emission limitations are based on continuous 

emission reduction technology (e.g., add-on controls, industrial/process equipment 

designs, reformulated materials, etc.). 

Evidence that emission limitations are based on continuous emission reduction 

technology is not necessary to support the analysis and review of the December 21, 2011, 

submitted regulatory provisions. Emission limitations will be established on a permit-bypermit basis in accordance with the PSD SIP regulations. 

8. Evidence is included indicating that a SIP revision contains emission limitations, work 

practice standards, and recordkeeping/reporting requirements to ensure stated emission 

levels. 

The December 21, 2011, SIP submittal does not establish emission limitations, work 

practice standards, and recordkeeping/reporting requirements. They will be established 

on a permit-by-permit basis according to the applicable Louisiana PSD SIP 

requirements. 

9. Compliance/enforcement strategies including how compliance will be determined in 

practice (including at what frequency). 

The December 21, 2011, SIP submittal does not establish compliance/enforcement 

strategies. Each PSD SIP permit will separately address compliance/enforcement. 
9

10. As appropriate, special economic and technological justifications are included per 

applicable EPA policies or an explanation why such justifications are not necessary 

should be included. For example, requests for alternative RACT may require such 

justification. 

 These justifications are not necessary for December 21, 2011, SIP revision. 

The December 21, 2011 SIP submittal satisfies the completeness criteria established in 40 

CFR part 51, Appendix V. 
10

B. Current Federal Requirements for PSD Permitting of GHG Emissions 

Under the Clean Air Act, greenhouse gases became subject to the PSD program in 2011 when 

EPA first regulated this pollutant under the Clean Air Act. See 75 FR 17004, April 2, 2010. On 

June 3, 2010, the EPA published a final rule, known as the Tailoring Rule, which phased in 

permitting requirements for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from stationary sources under the 

CAA PSD and title V permitting programs (75 FR 31514). Under its interpretation of the CAA at 

the time, the EPA believed the Tailoring Rule was necessary to avoid a sudden and 

unmanageable increase in the number of sources that would be required to obtain PSD and title 

V permits under the CAA because the sources emitted or had the potential to emit GHGs above 

the applicable major source and major modification thresholds. 

In Step 1 of the Tailoring Rule, which began on January 2, 2011, the EPA limited application of 

PSD and title V requirements to sources only if they were subject to PSD or title V ‘‘anyway’’ 

due to their emissions of pollutants other than GHGs. These sources are referred to as ‘‘anyway 

sources.’’ In Step 2 of the Tailoring Rule, which began on July 1, 2011, the EPA applied the 

PSD and title V permitting requirements under the CAA to sources that were classified as major, 

and, thus, required to obtain a permit, based solely on their GHG emissions or potential to emit 

GHGs, and to modifications of otherwise major sources that required a PSD permit because they 

increased only GHG emissions above the level in the EPA regulations. We generally describe the 

sources covered by PSD during Step 2 of the Tailoring Rule as “Step 2 sources.” 

On June 23, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision in Utility Air Regulatory Group 

(UARG) v. EPA, 134 S. Ct. 2427, addressing the application of stationary source permitting 

requirements to GHGs. The U.S. Supreme Court held that the EPA may not treat GHGs as an air 

pollutant for the specific purpose of determining whether a source is a major source (or a 

modification thereof) and thus required to obtain a PSD or title V permit. The Court also said 

that the EPA could continue to require that PSD permits, otherwise required based on emissions 

of pollutants other than GHGs, contain limitations on GHG emissions based on the application of 

Best Available Control Technology (BACT). With respect to PSD, the ruling effectively upheld 

PSD permitting requirements for GHG emissions under Step 1 of the Tailoring Rule for 

‘‘anyway sources,’’ and invalidated PSD permitting requirements for Step 2 sources. Because 

the Supreme Court decision affirmed in part and reversed in part an earlier decision of the D.C. 

Circuit in Coalition for Responsible Regulation v. EPA, 684 F.3d 102 (D.C. Cir. 2012), on April 

10, 2015, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (the D.C. Circuit) issued 

an Amended Judgment (Nos. 09–1322, 10–073, 10–1092 and 10–1167), which reflects the 

UARG v. EPA Supreme Court decision. The D.C. Circuit simultaneously issued its mandate, 

which means that the Coalition Amended Judgment became final and effective upon issuance. In 

the Coalition Amended Judgment, the D.C. Circuit ordered that the EPA regulations under 

review (including 40 CFR 51.166(b)(48)(v) and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(49)(v)) be vacated “to the 

extent they require a stationary source to obtain a PSD permit if greenhouse gases are the only 

pollutant (i) that the source emits or has the potential to emit above the applicable major source 

thresholds, or (ii) for which there is a significant emissions increase from a modification.” 

In response to the Coalition Amended Judgment, the EPA promulgated a good cause final rule 

on August 19, 2015, removing the PSD permitting provisions for Step 2, non-anyway sources 
11

from the federal regulations at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(48)(v) and 52.21(b)(49)(v). See 80 FR 50199. 

The EPA no longer has the authority to conduct PSD permitting for Step 2, non-anyway sources, 

nor can we approve provisions submitted by a State for inclusion in their SIP providing this 

authority. We anticipate taking future federal rulemakings to address the remainder of the UARG

and Coalition judgments. 

However, the EPA has an obligation under section 110 of the CAA to act upon a submitted 

revision to a state’s SIP within 18 months of receipt. As the December 21, 2011, submitted 

revisions have not been withdrawn, the EPA has an obligation to act on the provisions.
12

C. Evaluation of the December 21, 2011 SIP Submittal 

The LDEQ has the authority under the state’s SIP-approved PSD program to regulate GHG 

emissions. The Louisiana PSD program regulations define a “regulated NSR pollutant” at LAC 

33:III.509(B), in part, as any pollutant that is subject to any standard promulgated under Section 

111 of the Clean Air Act or any pollutant that otherwise is subject to regulation under the Clean 

Air Act. The applicability of the Louisiana PSD program at LAC 33:III.509(A) and (J) then 

applies the requirements of PSD permitting (Best Available Control Technology, etc) to new 

major stationary sources and major modifications. 

On October 20, 2010, the LDEQ initiated rulemaking to adopt provisions in the Louisiana PSD 

program that would provide the LDEQ the express authority to regulate GHGs under the 

Louisiana PSD program at the thresholds specified in EPA’s Tailoring Rule. After soliciting 

public comment, the LDEQ adopted the revisions in LAC 33:III.501 and 509 on April 20, 2011. 

These revisions were submitted to EPA as revisions to the Louisiana SIP on December 21, 2011. 

We note that EPA Region 6 submitted comments on the proposed rulemaking; our comments 

were addressed in the final revisions submitted on December 21, 2011. 

The intent of these provisions was and continues to be the regulation and permitting of GHGs 

through the Louisiana PSD program consistent with all federal PSD requirements. The following 

presents the revisions made to the Louisiana Code and EPA’s analysis of those revisions. 

 

1. EPA’s Analysis of Louisiana’s Automatic Rescission Provisions 

Table 1: Revisions to LAC 33:III.501 – Scope and Applicability EPA’s Analysis 

New Requirement at LAC 33:III.501(C)(14) 

Adopted by LDEQ on April 20, 2011; Submitted on December 21, 2011 

14. If there is a change in federal law or the United States Court of 

Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit or the United State 

Supreme Court issues an order which limits or renders ineffective 

the regulation of greenhouse gases from stationary sources under 

Part C of Title I (Prevention of Significant Deterioration of Air 

Quality) or Title V (Permits) of the Clean Air Act, the regulation of 

greenhouse gases under the corresponding programs in this Chapter 

shall be limited or rendered ineffective to the same extent. 

This provision is approvable. Please 

see the discussion later in this TSD 

addressing approvability of the 

rescission clause. 

Louisiana’s December 21, 2011 SIP submission submittal adds automatic rescission provisions 

to the State’s PSD regulations at LAC 33:III.501(C)(14). The automatic rescission provisions 

provide that in the event that there is a change in federal law, or the D.C. Circuit or the U.S. 

Supreme Court issues an order which limits or renders ineffective the regulation of GHGs under 

title I of the CAA, then the corresponding provisions of the Louisiana PSD program shall be 

limited or rendered ineffective to the same extent. 

In assessing the approvability of automatic rescission provisions, the EPA considers two key 

factors: (1) whether the public will be given reasonable notice of any change to the SIP that 

occurs as a result of the automatic rescission provisions, and (2) whether any future change to the 

SIP that occurs as a result of the automatic rescission provisions would be consistent with the 
13

EPA’s interpretation of the effect of the triggering action on federal GHG permitting 

requirements. See, e.g., 79 FR 8130 (February 11, 2014) and 77 FR 12484 (March 1, 2012). 

These criteria are derived from the SIP revision procedures set forth in the CAA and federal 

regulations. 

Regarding public notice, CAA section 110(l) provides that any revision to a SIP submitted by a 

State to EPA for approval “shall be adopted by such State after reasonable notice and public 

hearing.” In accordance with CAA section 110(l), LDEQ followed applicable notice-andcomment procedures prior to adopting the automatic rescission provisions. Thus, the public is on 

notice that the automatic rescission provisions in the Louisiana PSD program will enable the 

Louisiana PSD program and the Louisiana SIP to update automatically to reflect any order by a 

federal court or any change in federal law that limits or renders ineffective the regulation of 

GHGs under the CAA’s PSD permitting program. Additionally, the EPA interprets this provision 

to require the LDEQ to provide notice to the general public and regulated community of the 

changes to the Louisiana PSD program in the event that the automatic rescission provision is 

triggered. 

The EPA’s consideration of whether any SIP change resulting from Louisiana’s automatic 

rescission provisions would be consistent with the EPA’s interpretation of the effect of the 

triggering action on federal GHG permitting requirements is based on 40 CFR 51.105, which 

states that “[r]evisions of a plan, or any portion thereof, will not be considered part of an 

applicable plan until such revisions have been approved by the Administrator in accordance with 

this part.” To be consistent with 40 CFR 51.105, any automatic SIP change resulting from a 

court order or federal law change must be consistent with the EPA’s interpretation of the effect 

of such order or federal law change on GHG permitting requirements. We interpret this provision 

to mean that Louisiana will wait for and follow the EPA’s interpretation as to the impact of any 

federal law change or the D.C. Circuit or the U.S. Supreme Court issues an order before 

Louisiana’s SIP would be changed. In the event of a court decision or federal law change that 

triggers (or likely triggers) application of Louisiana’s automatic rescission provisions, the EPA 

intends to promptly describe the impact of the court decision or federal law change on the 

enforceability of its GHG permitting regulation. 

For the reasons stated above, the EPA should propose approval of the Louisiana automatic 

rescission provisions. Further, it is recommended that we invite comment, particularly from the 

State, regarding our interpretations of the automatic rescission provisions. 
14

2. EPA’s Analysis of Louisiana’s Revisions to the PSD Program 

Table 2: Revisions to LAC 33:III.509(B) - Definitions EPA’s Analysis *** New Definition at LAC 33:III.509(B) Adopted by LDEQ on April 20, 2011; Submitted on December 21, 2011 CO2 Equivalent Emissions (CO2e) – the emitted amount of greenhouse gases (GHGs) computed by multiplying the mass amount of emissions for each of the six greenhouse gases in the pollutant GHGs by the gas’s associated global warming potential published in Table A-1 to Subpart A of 40 CFR, Part 98 – Global Warming Potentials, and summing the resultant value for each. 

Approvable. This new parathe requirements at 40 CFR 

*** New Definition at LAC 33:III.509(B) Adopted by LDEQ on April 20, 2011; Submitted on December 21, 2011 Greenhouse Gases (GHGs) – an air pollutant defined as the aggregate group of six greenhouse gases: carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, methane, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride. 

Approvable. This new parathe requirements at 40 CFR 

*** SIP-approved Major Stationary Source – 

(a) Any of the stationary 

sources of air pollutants listed in Table A of this definition that emits, or hast the potential to emit, 100 tons per year or more of any pollutant subject to regulation under this Section 

(b) For stationary source 

categories other than those listed in Table A of this definition, any stationary source that emits, or has the potential to emit, 250 tons per year or more of any air pollutant subject to regulation under this Section; 

(c) any physical change that 

would occur at a source 

Revisions adopted on December 20, 2005 

(a) Any of the stationary 

sources of air pollutants listed in Table A of this definition that emits, or hast the potential to emit, 100 tons per year or more of any pollutant subject to regulation under this Section 

(b) For stationary source 

categories other than those listed in Table A of this definition, any stationary source that emits, or has the potential to emit, 250 tons per year or more of any air pollutant subject to regulation under this Section; 

(c) any physical change that 

would occur at a source 

Revisions adopted on April 20, 2011; Submitted on December 21, 2011 Major Stationary Source – 

(a) Any of the stationary 

sources of air pollutants listed in Table A of this definition that emits, or hast the potential to emit, 100 tons per year or more of any pollutant (except for GHGs) 

subject to regulation under this Section 

(b) For stationary source 

categories other than those listed in Table A of this definition, any stationary source that emits, or has the potential to emit, 250 tons per year or more of any air pollutant (except 

The revision to the definitiosource” adopted on Decembparagraph (e) addressing fuapprovable. This new paragthe federal requirements at 51.166(b)(1)(iii). In our pri2015, we did not specificallparagraph submitted on Depart of our analysis or propcorrecting that omission herThe revisions adopted on Asubmitted December 20, 20“major stationary source” paddressing the regulation anare approvable. Consistent decision, these revisions medefined as a major stationarlevel of greenhouse gas emNote that the addition of padefinition of “major stationspecifically for the impleme
15

Table 2: Revisions to LAC 33:III.509(B) - Definitions EPA’s Analysis 

not otherwise qualifying as a major stationary source under Subparagraphs a and b of this definition if the change would constitute a major source by itself; 

(d) a major source that is 

major for volatile organic compounds or nitrogen oxides shall be considered major for ozone; TABLE A unchanged 

not otherwise qualifying as a major stationary source under Subparagraphs a and b of this definition if the change would constitute a major source by itself; 

(d) a major source that is 

major for volatile organic compounds or nitrogen oxides shall be considered major for ozone; 

(e) Fugitive emissions of a 

stationary source shall not be included in determining for any of the purposes of this Section whether it is a major stationary source, unless the source is listed in Table A of this definition or, as of August 7, 1980, is being regulated under Section 111 or 112 of the Clean Air Act. 

TABLE A unchanged 

for GHGs) subject to 

regulation under this Section; 

(c) As of July 1, 2011, any 

stationary source listed in Table A of this definition which emits, or has the potential to emit, 100 tpy or more of GHGs on a mass basis (i.e., no global warming potentials applied) and 100,000 tons per year or more of CO2e; or a stationary source not listed in Table A that emits, or has the potential to emit, 250 tpy or more of GHGs on a mass basis and 100,000 tons per year or more of CO2e or; 

(d) any physical change that 

would occur at a source not otherwise qualifying as a major stationary source under Subparagraphs a and b of this definition if the change would constitute a major source by itself; 

(e) a major source that is 

major for volatile organic compounds or nitrogen oxides shall be considered major for ozone; 

(f) Fugitive emissions of a 

stationary source shall 

requirements. Therefore the this provision. Neither the Lthe authority to regulate or GHGs for sources that are nPSD. Because the LDEQ prsubmitted these rules to propermitting, the EPA must dthese rules for Step 2 permi
16

Table 2: Revisions to LAC 33:III.509(B) - Definitions EPA’s Analysis 

not be included in determining for any of the purposes of this Section whether it is a major stationary source, unless the source is listed in Table A of this definition or, as of August 7, 1980, is being regulated under Section 111 or 112 of the Clean Air Act. 

TABLE A unchanged 

*** Current SIP; Revisions adopted on April 20, 2011; Submitted on December 21, 2011 

Significant – 

 a. In reference to a net emissions increase or the potential of a source to emit any of the following pollutants, a rate of emissions that would equal or exceed any of the following rates: 

Pollutant Emission Rate 

Carbon monoxide 100 tons per year (tpy) Nitrogen oxides 40 tpy Sulfur dioxide 40 tpy Particulate matter 25 tpy of particulate emissions 

15 tpy of PM10 emissions 10 tpy of direct PM2.5 emissions; 40 tpy of sulfur dioxide 

emissions; 40 tpy of nitrogen oxide emissions1 

Ozone 40 tpy of volatile organic compounds or nitrogen oxides Lead 0.6 tpy Fluorides 3 tpy Sulfuric acid mist 7 tpy Hydrogen sulfide (H2S) 10 tpy Total reduced sulfur (including H2S) 

10 tpy 

Reduced sulfur compounds (including H2S) 

10 tpy 

Municipal waste combustor organics2

0.0000035 tpy 

Note that the definition of “the current SIP is the reviseby EPA on November 5, 20

The revisions adopted on Asubmitted December 20, 20“significant” addressing the permitting of GHGs are appwith new LAC 33:III.501(CLAC 33:III.509.J requires “stationary source shall applregulated NSR pollutant thapotential to emit in significamajor modification shall apregulated NSR pollutant for significant net emissions in

(emphasis added). The effeto the definition of “signific33:III.509(B) is to limit the to new sources and major mhave the potential to emit 7year of GHGs on a CO2e bon a mass basis. Although t
17

Table 2: Revisions to LAC 33:III.509(B) - Definitions EPA’s Analysis 

Municipal waste combustor metals3

15 tpy 

Municipal waste combustor acid gases4

40 tpy 

Municipal solid waste landfills emissions5

50 tpy 

GHGs and GHGs as CO2e 0 tpy and 75,000 tpy, respectively6

1Nitrogen oxides are presumed to be precursors to PM2.5 in all attainment and unclassifiable areas 

unless the administrative authority demonstrates to the administrator’s satisfaction or EPA demonstrates that emissions of nitrogen oxides from sources in a specific area are not a significant contributor to that area’s ambient PM2.5 concentrations. 2Measured as total tetra- through octa-chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and dibenzofurans 

3Measured as particulate matter. 4Measured as sulfur dioxide and hydrogen chloride 5Measured as nonmethane organic compounds 6 Both of the following conditions must be met: (1) the net emissions increase of GHGs calculated as the sum of the six GHGs on a mass basis (i,e., no global warming potentials applied) equals or exceeds 0 tpy; and (2) the net emissions increase of GHGs calculated as the sum of the six GHGs on a CO2e basis (i.e., global warming potentials applied) equals or exceeds 75,000 tpv C02e. 

(b) in reference to a net emissions increase or the potential of a source to emit a regulated NSR 

pollutant that Subparagraph a of this definition does not list, any emissions rate; 

(c) notwithstanding Subparagraph a of this definition, any emissions rate or any net emissions 

increase associated with a major stationary source or major modification that would construct within 10 kilometers of a Class I area and have an impact on such area equal to or greater than 1 mg/m3 (24-hour average); 

(d) Notwithstanding Subparagraph a of this definition, between January 2, 2011 and June 30, 2011, 

the pollutant GHGs is “subject to regulation” only if the stationary source is: 

(i). A new major stationary source for a regulated NSR pollutant that is not GHGs and also 

will emit or have the potential to emit GHGs in a significant amount; or 

(ii). An existing major stationary source for a regulated NSR pollutant that is not GHGs and 

also will have a significant net emissions increase of both GHGs and another regulated NSR pollutant. 

submission is structured diffederal rules, the primary prthe same: the PSD BACT rapply to GHG emissions frounless the source emits GH75,000 tons per year threshLDEQ has not revised its dmodification,” which uses tGiven the addition of GHG“significant,” it initially appdefinition of “major modifiJune 30, 2011 to a modificaGHGs by a significant amoparagraph (d) of LDEQ’s dserves to prohibit this result June 30, 2011, consistent wTailoring Rule. However, tlimitation in LDEQ’s rule f30, 2011. The absence of sconsistent with Step 2 of thnot now consistent the Suprsection 51.166 of EPA’s regremoval of certain vacated given the Supreme Court de33:III.501(C)(14) now funcof LDEQ’s definition of “mThe EPA interprets LAC 33application of Louisiana’s Pto only apply to “anyway” mmodifications that are projeincrease of at least one reguthan GHGs by significant aAs such, the specific revisioprogram to provide for Step approvable. Neither the LDauthority to regulate or perm
18

Table 2: Revisions to LAC 33:III.509(B) - Definitions EPA’s Analysis 

for Step 2 sources. Because and submitted these rules to permitting, the EPA must athese rules for Step 2 permi
19

IV. Conclusion 

The technical analysis provided in the preceding sections has compared the applicable sections 

of the CAA and 40 CFR Part 51 to the December 21, 2011, proposed revision to the Louisiana 

SIP for PSD regulation and permitting of GHGs. The revisions to the Louisiana PSD program 

are approvable as providing the state the authority to regulate and permit step 1, anyway sources, 

of GHGs consistent with federal law and regulations. Specifically, the EPA should propose 

approval of the following: 

 New provisions at LAC 33:III.501(C)(14) adopted on April 20, 2011 and submitted 

December 20, 2011; 

 New definitions of “carbon dioxide equivalent” and “greenhouse gases” at LAC 

33:III.509(B) adopted on April 20, 2011 and submitted December 20, 2011; and 

 Revisions to the definitions of “major stationary source” and “significant” as adopted on 

April 20, 2011 and submitted December 20, 2011. 

Note that the EPA has also reviewed, evaluated, and recommends proposal of a new provision in 

“major stationary source” at LAC 33:III.509(B) that was initially adopted and submitted as 

subparagraph (e) on December 20, 2005, but was moved to subparagraph (f) in the December 20, 

2011 submittal. 

The EPA’s proposed action on the December 21, 2011 submittal revising the PSD program for 

the permitting of GHGs should be a proposed partial approval and partial disapproval. As 

presented above, our partial approval would be to address the revisions to the SIP that provide 

the LDEQ the authority to regulate and permit emissions of GHGs from step 1 anyway sources 

as consistent with federal law and regulations. We are partially disapproving the submittal as it 

relates to the ability of the state to regulate and permit Step 2, non-anyway sources – specifically 

the definition of “major stationary source” paragraph (c) and the definition of “significant” as it 

pertains to Step 2 permitting. Because the recent UARG and Coalition judgments determined that 

EPA had no authority to require PSD permits for GHG emissions from step 2 sources, there is no 

further action needed from the state to address step 2 sources. 

We anticipate future rulemakings by the EPA to address the remainder of the UARG and 

Coalition judgments, which may require further revisions to the Louisiana PSD program. 

However, the EPA sees no compelling reason not to address at this time the December 21, 2011 

submitted revisions, as limited by the UARG and Coalition judgments.