45CSR14

PERMITS FOR CONSTRUCTION AND MAJOR MODIFICATION OF MAJOR

STATIONARY SOURCES OF AIR POLLUTION FOR THE PREVENTION OF

SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION

RESPONSE TO COMMENTS

On June 10, 2011, the Division of Air Quality (DAQ) commenced a thirty day public

comment period and subsequently held a public hearing on July 11, 2011 to accept oral comments

on proposed revisions to legislative rules 45CSR14. Written comments were also accepted through

6:00 PM on Monday, July 11, 2011.

Two people provided substantive verbal comment at the public hearing concerning proposed

rule 45CSR14. One commenter submitted written comments on proposed rule 45CSR14. DAQ

addresses these comments below.

I. COMMENTER: Sierra Club

COMMENT A. The commenter states, “45-CSR-14. PSD Construction Permits. The terms"

2.9 "Baseline Area" and 2.42 "Baseline Date" do not appear to have any application outside of the

Plantwide Applicability Limitations (PALS)? I don't seem to see them used anywhere else. How

many facilities in West Virginia currently have PALs in their permits? How would this apply to

something like the TransGas Coal-to-Liquids plant in Mingo County? We believe that it would make

a lot more sense to get rid of these PALs. Applying pollution emission limits at each emission point

would make it much simpler to monitor these emissions and identify the best control technologies.

We recommend that this rule be revised to strike all reference to PALs.”

RESPONSE A. A PAL is an approach that provides owners or operators of major stationary

sources, with the abilityto manage facility-wide emissions without triggeringmajor NSR. The added

flexibility of a PAL allows industry to respond rapidly to market changes consistent with the goals

of the NSR program. EPA requires that states adopt the PAL provisions of the final counterpart

federal PSD/NSR Rule, Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Nonattainment New

Source Review (NSR) [67 FR 80189]. That is the primary reason we are incorporating the PAL

provisions into 45CSR14. But the agency is also convinced that PALs benefit the public and the

environment. DAQ can only establish a PAL by using a public process that affords citizens the

opportunity to comment upon the proposed PAL. This process is designed to assure local

communities that air emissions from major stationary sources will not exceed the facility-wide cap

set forth in the permit unless the sources first meet the major NSR requirements. 

A PAL provides a more complete perspective to the public because in setting a PAL, DAQ accounts

for all current processes and all emissions units together and reflectsthe long-term maximum amount

of emissions it would allow from the source. Moreover, to comply with a PAL the source must meet

1
monitoring requirements prescribed in the rules that ensure that both DAQ and the public have

sufficient information from which to determine plant wide compliance. Additionally, the PAL

regulations promote voluntary improvements in pollution controls by creating an incentive for

sources to control existing and new emissions units to maintain a maximum amount of operational

flexibility under the PAL. Most importantly, for pollutants subject to a PAL, the rule prohibits serial,

small, unrelated emissions increases, which otherwise could have occurred under previous

regulations.

The terms “baseline area” and “major and minor source baseline date” do not apply solely to a

plantwide applicability limitation under 45CSR14, but are inherent components of West Virginia’s

PSD program. DAQ notes that no permits issued under 45CSR14 contain a PAL. A PAL would not

apply to the TransGas Coal-to-Liquids plant, as the facility is not a major source. DAQ takes careful

steps to ensure that 45CSR14 comports to current federal counterpart language and guidance, so that

the rule remains as stringent as the federal counterpart. DAQ notes that Plant-wide Applicability

Limit provisions are consistent with current federal counterpart language, and therefore should not

be deleted.

II. COMMENTER: Jim Kotcon

COMMENT A. The commenterstates, “Specifically what's being done to 45CSR14, there are

a number of minor changes to many terms. In particularly there is (sic) definitions for content such

as the baseline area and the baseline dates. It does not appear that either of those terms have any

application to construction permits, except for the concept of the Platt Line applicability, Platt Line

Applicability Limitation, it's referred to as the PAL. The PAL concept is something that we have

been opposed to for quite sometime. It is our recommendation that in this rule, we simply eliminate

that concept all together.”

RESPONSE A. DAQ refers the commenter to Response IA.

III. COMMENTER: Mary Ann Maul

COMMENT A. The commenter states, “I'm an attorney here in Charleston, West Virginia.

I have represented Bill Hughes in a Air Quality current appeal 10-03, for the Air Quality Board,

which has been heard, but we have not received a written decision on as of yet. In this case the main

issue was whether two proposed permits for natural gas compressor stations would be considered

together, which is also called aggregated or aggregation.”

RESPONSE A. DAQ notes that scope the comment is an Air Quality Board matter, and not

one relevant to the proposed revisions to 45CSR14. DAQ also notes that sources subject to the

Appeal 10-03 would not be subject to 45CSR14 for ozone, even if aggregated. Marshall County is

currently designated attainment for the 1997 ozone standards, and there have been no subsequent

designations to date.

2