P. 1


# OAR Box 1802 Prepped by Charmelle Mathews



### Document

Number: 

# 55 ) IV-E-5 0 Docket Number: 

# A-90-3 7

Printed 11/4/200811:57:59 AM

Sheet 55 of 117P. 2

TESTIMON

Y O F JOH N SEIT Z OFFICE DIRECTO R OFFICE OF AIRQUALIT Y PLANNING AN

D STANDARD S OFFICE O

F AIRAN

D RADIATION BEFOR E TH E SUBCOMMITTE

E O N CLEA N AIR, WETLANDS , PRIVATE PRpPERT¥p*N D NUCLEARSAFET

Y OFTH E COMMITTE

E O N ENVIRONMENT AN

D PUBLI C W

O UNITE D STATES SENATE Februar y 28,200 0 Goo d afternoo n Mr
. Chairma n an d Member s ofth e Subcommittee
. Than k yo u fo rth e opportunit

yt o tal k wit h yo u abou t th e Ne

w Source Review progra m unde rth e Clea n Ai r Act
. Th e Ne

w Sourc e Review (o r"NSR" ) progra m wa s enacte d b yCongres s i n 1977
. It' s goa l i s t o minimiz e ai rpollutio n fro m larg e ne w an d modifie d stationar ysources . Recen t figure s sugges t tha t ove rth e lif e of th e program , NS R has prevente d mor e tha n a hundre d millio n ton s o f ai rpollution
. Whe n companie s upgrad e facilities , eithe rb y buildin g a ne

w plan t o rmakin g majo rmodification s t o a n existin g plant , the yare require d t o instal l th e bes t availabl e pollutio n contro l equipment
. I n area s wit h unhealth y air , NS R assure s tha t thes e source s d o not imped e progres s toward cleane rair
. I n areas wit h clea n air , especiall ypristin e area s like nationa l parks , th e progra m assure s tha t emission s fro m ne

w an d modifie d source s d o not significantl ydegrad e ai rquality
. Th e progra m als o assure s citizen s tha t an ylarg e new o rmodifie d industria l sourc e i n thei rneighborhood s wil l b e as clea n a s practical
. Upgradin g pollutio n control s an d th e industria l infrastructure simultaneousl ymake s economi c an d environmenta l sense . I n general , i t i s mor e cost-effectiv e fo rsource s t o instal l pollutio n contro l equipmen t suc h as scrubbers , electrostati c precipitators , o r selectiv e catalyti c converters at th e sam e tim e tha t the ymak e majo rcapita l improvements
. Becaus e th e NS R progra m relie s o n thi s principle , i t minimize s emission s fro m ne

w source s whil e maximizin g opportunitie s fo radditiona l industria l an d economi c growth
. It' s a simpl e concep t tha t has bee n workin g i n th e NS R progra m fo r almost a quarter-century , protectin g ou rnation' s ai rresources , an d makin g u p a critica l componen t of ou rtota l ai rqualityprogram . Backgroun d Th e NS R provision s of th e Clea n Ai rAc t combin e ai rqualityplanning , ai rpollutio n technolog yrequirements , an d stakeholde rparticipation
. NS R i s a preconstructio n permittin g program . I f ne w constructio n o rmakin g a majo rmodificatio n wil l increas e emission s b

ya n amoun t larg e enoug h t o trigge rNS R requirements , the n th e sourc e mus t obtai n a permi t before i t ca n begi n construction
. State s are ke ypartner s i n th e program . Unde rth e Act , state s have th e primar yresponsibilit

yfo rissuin g permits , an d the yca n customiz e thei rNS R program s withi n th e limit s of EP A regulations
. EPA' s rol e 

## IP. 3

i s t o approv e stat e programs , t o review , commen t on , an d tak e an yothe rnecessar y action s o n draft permits , an d t o assure consistenc ywit h EPA' s rules , th e state' s implementatio n plan , an d th e Clea n Ai rAct
. (EPA als o issue s permit s wher e ther e i s n o approve d NS R program , suc h as o n som e Triba l lands)
. Citizen s als o playa rol e i n th e permittin g decision , an d mus t b e afforde d a n opportunityt o commen t o n eac h constructio n permi t before i t i s issued
. Th e NS R permi t progra m fo rmajo rsource s ha s tw o differen t component s - on e fo r area s where th e ai ri s dirtyo runhealthy , an d th e othe rfo rarea s wher e th e ai ri s cleaner
. Unde rth e Clea n Ai rAct , geographi c area s (e.g. , countie s o rmetropolita n statistica l areas ) are designate d a s "attainment " o r"nonattainment " wit h th e health-base d Nationa l Ambien t Ai rQualit yStandard s (NAAQS ) - th e ai rquality standard s whic h ar e se t t o protec t huma n health
. Permit s fo rsource s locate d i n attainmen t (o runclassifiable ) area s are calle d Preventio n o f Significan t Deterioratio n (PSD ) permit s an d thos e fo rsource s locate d i n nonattainmen t area s are calle d nonattainmen t NS R permits
. A majo rdifferenc e i n th e tw o program s i s tha t th e contro l technolog yrequiremen t i s mor e stringen t i n nonattainmen t area s an d i s calle d th e Lowest Achievabl e Emissio n Rate (LAER)
. O n th e othe rhand , i n attainmen t areas , a sourc e must appl yBest Availabl e Contro l Technolog y(BACT) an d th e statut e allows consideratio n o f cos t i n weighin g BACT options
. Also , i n keepin g wit h th e goa l o f progres s toward attainin g th e nationa l ai rquality standards , source s i n nonattainmen t area s must always provid e o rpurchas e "offsets " - decrease s i n emission s whic h compensat e fo rth e increase s fro m th e ne w sourc e o r modification
. I n attainmen t areas , PS D source s typicall yd o no t nee d t o obtai n offsets
. However , PS D doe s require a n ai rqualitymodelin g analysi s ofth e impac t ofth e constructio n project , an d i f th e analysi s find s tha t th e projec t contribute s t o ambien t ai r pollutio n tha t exceed s allowabl e levels , thi s impac t must b e mitigated
. Sometime s thes e mitigatio n measure s ca n includ e offset s i n PS D areas . I n additio n t o ensurin g complianc e wit h th e NAAQS , state s trac k an d contro l emission s o f ai rpollutio n by calculatin g th e maximu m increas e i n concentratio n allowe d t o occu rabov e a n establishe d backgroun d leve l - tha t chang e i n concentratio n i s know n a s a PS D increment
. Anothe rkeyrequiremen t i s th e provisio n i n th e PS D progra m t o protec t pristin e area s like nationa l parks o rwildernes s area s (referre d t o a s Clas s I areas)
. I f a sourc e construct s o rmodifie s i n a waythat coul d affec t a Clas s I area , th e la

w afford s a federa l lan d manage r(fo rexample , a Nationa l Par k Servic e superintendent ) a n opportunityt o review th e permi t an d th e ai rqualityanalysi s t o assure tha t relevan t factor s associate d wit h th e protectio n o f nationa l park s an d wildernes s area s are take n int o consideration , and , i f necessary , tha t harmfu l effect s are mitigated
.



# 0.P. 4

(Th e Clea n Ai rAct als o require s state s t o regulat e constructio n fo rsmalle rchanges , an d a t source s tha t are not bi g enoug h t o b e classifie d as "major. " Thi s progra m i s know n a s mino rNSR
. However , mino rNS R i s no t par t of th e NS R Refor m rul e an d i s no t th e focu s o f today' s remarks ) Curren t Statu s o

f th e NS R Progra m Le t m e giv e yo u a fe w statistic s abou t th e NS R progra m t o pu t thing s i n perspective
. Preliminar yestimate s base d o n ou rmost recen t dat a indicat e that approximatel y25 0 facilitie s appl yfo ra PS D o rnonattainmen t NS R permi t annually
. That' s ou t ofth e approximatel y20,00 0 source s tha t woul d b e classifie d as "major " unde rth e Act , an d th e fa rlarge rnumbe rof additiona l stationar ysource s of ai rpollutio n i n th e Unite d State s tha t are not larg e enoug h t o b e calle d major
. Th e nonattainmen t NS R an d PS D program s ar

e designe d t o focu s o n change s t o facilitie s that have a majo rimpac t o n ai r quality
. An d th e NS R progra m i s resultin g i n cleane rair
. Recen t dat a show that , eac h year , NS R permit s at PS D source s have prevente d abou t hal f a millio n ton s pe ryea rof ne w emission s compare d t o what woul d b e emitte d i f there were n o federa l o rstat e permitting
. Clearly , i n th e absenc e of NSR , American s woul d b e breathin g les s health y air
. Eve n i n area s wit h clea n air , ther e woul d likel yhave bee n significan t decline s i n ai r qualityi n som e places , a s wel l a s harmfu l impact s i n nationa l parks
. A s thes e reduction s have bee n occurring , th e Unite d State s i s i n th e mids t o f a record-breakin g economi c expansion
. Thus , th e progra m i s accomplishin g it s intende d purpose . I n additio n t o th e emission s reductions , th e NS R progra m ha s sparke d improvement s an d innovation s i n pollutio n contro l technology
. Wheneve rdeman d fo rgoo d contro l technolog yexists , vendors compet e t o suppl ybette rcontro l technolog yat lowe rcost . Thi s competitio n reduce s th e cos t of control s as th e contro l technolog yimproves
. Thi s technology-forcin g aspec t ofth e progra m i s a n importan t reaso n wh yi t has bee n s o successfu l i n allowin g fo rcontinue d economi c growt h whil e ensurin g environmenta l protection
. I t als o ensure s tha t th e U.S
. wil l remai n a leadin g exporte rof pollutio n contro l technology
. NS R Refor m Despit e th e successe s ofth e NS R program , som e o f thos e wit h a stake i n th e progra m

- EPA , regulate d industry , stat e an d loca l governments , environmenta l groups , federa l lan d managers , an d others - have engage d i n a long-runnin g dialogu e abou t ho w t o mak e th e progra m wor k

mor e efficientl yan d effectively
. Th e issue s raise d fal l int o fiv e genera l categories
. First , som e argu e that th e proces s fo rdeterminin g exactl ywhethe r a permi t i s necessar

yfo rchange s the yare makin g t o existin g source s coul d b e easier
. Second , despit e th e statutor yrequiremen t tha t PS D permit s b e issue d withi n 1 2 month s of a complet e permi t application , som e believe tha t th e proces s fo robtainin g a permi t ca n take to o long , delayin g construction
. Third , som e ar e concerne d tha t th e decision s mad e i n th e NS R process , suc h a s th e selectio n o f a contro l technology , have bee n arbitrary , makin g i t difficul t t o pla n ahead
. Fourth , stakeholders suc h as citizen s an d federa l lan d manager

s wan t t o b e mor

e involve d i n th e decision-makin g process . I n addition , som e believ e tha t th e progra m need s t o cove rmor e source s an d i s no tP. 5

sufficientl yrigorous , whil e other s fee l tha t th e existin g progra m i s alread yto o rigorou s an d to o broa d i n scope . Fo rth e pas t severa l years , th e EP A ha s bee n undertakin g a thoroug h multi-stakeholde r proces s t o understan d an d addres s th e concern s associate d wit h NS R i n a n effor t t o mak e th e progra m wor k

better
. Th e NS R progra m protect s th e publi c fro m ai rpollutio n fro m larg e source s - fro m ever ytyp e o f industry
. EP

A ha s bee n diligen t abou t bein g inclusiv e an d comprehensiv e i n ou ranalysi s of industr yconcerns . Sinc e 1992 , w e have hel d hundred s of hour

s of meeting s activel yseekin g comment s an d recommendation s fro m variou s stakeholders
. We forme d th e NS R Refor m Subcommitte e o f th e Clea n Ai r Act Advisor

yCommittee , a grou p of expert s fro m industry , environmenta l groups , an d stat e an d loca l governmen t brough t togethe rfo rth e purpos e of makin g recommendation s o n improvin g NSR
. W e listene d t o analysi s an d debat e fro m a wid e varietyo f ofte n conflictin g point s o f view
. W e issue d a propose d rul e i n 1996 , too k writte n comments , an d hel d a publi c hearing
. Sinc e then , w e continu e t o mee t wit h stakeholders , and , as recentl yas thi s month , have ha d multipl e meeting s wit h outsid e group s representin g industry
. Ou rfundamenta l principl e durin g thi s refor m effor t has bee n t o promot e more certainty an d flexibilityi n th e permittin g proces s whil e maintainin g at leas t th e sam e leve l o f environmenta l protectio n as th e curren t program . A fe w example s of th e approache s w e have propose d include : (1 ) promotio n o f flexibl e plantwid e cap s tha t woul d enabl e source s t o mak

e change s a

t thei rplant s withou t triggerin g NS R applicabilitys o lon g a s th e overal l ca p i s not exceeded ; (2 ) a mor e clearl ydefine d an d faste rproces s fo r makin g contro l technolog ydecisions ; (3 ) deregulatio n o f sourc e modification s tha t have alread yrecentl yinstalle d goo d controls ; (4 ) increase d incentive s fo rne w o rmodifie d source s t o incorporat e pollutio n preventio n o rinnovativ e contro l technology ; an d (5 ) opportunitie s fo rmor

e meaningfu l participatio n i n th e permittin g proces s fo rth e publi c an d federa l lan d manager s throug h increase d availabilityof informatio n an d earlie r involvement
. We are als o considerin g othe rways t o bette rachiev e th e sam e goal s a s th e curren t program . Fo rexample , w e recentl yhel d a meetin g of NS R stakeholders t o obtai n view s o n th e concep t o f a sector-base d approac h t o NS R at utilities
. Thi s approac h woul d tailo rNS R regulation s specificall yt o th e utilitysecto ri n a n effor t t o addres s issue s uniqu e t o utilities , whil e stil l providin g th e overal l environmenta l protectio n o f th e NS R program . A s noted , w e continu e t o discus s severa l issue s wit h stakeholders , an d have not reache d fina l decision s o n th e Refor m package
. However , w e hop e t o complet e a n NS R Refor m rulemakin g late rthi s year . Mr
. Chairman , thi s conclude s myprepare d statement . I appreciat e th e opportunityt o b e here today
. I woul d b e happyt o answe ran yquestion s tha t yo u ma yhave
. 

# V