P. 1 

# OAR Box 1781 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 76 ) IV-A-9 Docket Number: 

# A-90-3 7

Printed 10/29/200810:46:21 AM Sheet 76 of 142Comment : P,2_ 

## fl-SO- 3 7 IV-fr ^ ^O V 2 2 200 2 EP AA! ^ DOCKE T j Som e commenter s argue dthat EP A mus t

prepar e a n analysiFof"th e environmenta l impact s o f

th e rul e befor e issuin g i t

i n fina l form . Response : A s w e hav e previousl y noted , acommon-sens e analysi s o f th e effec t o f thes e rule s show s the y wil l no t

resul t i n a n increas e i n emissions . Nevertheless , EP A conducte da n analysi s o f

th e anticipate denvironmenta l impact s fromth e final rule , "Supplementa l Analysi s o f th e Environmenta l Impac t

o f th e 200 2 Fina l NS RImprovemen t Rule " (DATE) . Althoug hth e analysi s was no t

use di n formulatin g our

rule , it provide s further

support for EPA' s vie w that

th e rul e wil l b e environmentall y beneficial . Thi s analysi s i s availabl e i n th e docket . Overall , th e analysi s show s that th e fina l rul e wil l resul t

i n emission s reduction s compare dt o th e curren t

NS Rrules . Becaus e th e NS RImprovemen t rul e doe s no t

significantl y alte r th e rule s for

coal fire dpowe r

plants , an ddoe s no t

affect th e NS Rprovision s for

ne w source s an dne w units , it s overal l impac t i s relativel y small . Th e reduction s wil l primaril y reduc e level s o f criteri apollutant s like ozone . Thes e reduction s wil l resul t i n healthan dwelfare benefit s suc h a s lowe r incidence s o f

prematur e mortality , asthma , an dothe r respiratory disease s an ddamage . Smalle r reduction s i n hazardou s ai r pollutants , ozon e depletin g substances , an dothe r pollutant s wil l als o occur . Specifically , for

eac ho f th e rule' s fiv e provisions , th e analysi s conclude s th e following :

- Plantwid e Applicability Limit s (PALs ) wil l resul t i n ten s o f

thousand s o f

ton s pe r yea r o f Volatil e Organi c Compound s (VOC ) reduction s fromjus t thre e industria l categorie s wher e PAL s are likel y t o b e use dheavily . Overal l reduction s wil l b e greate r becaus e i t

i s likel y that

PAL s wil l b e adopte dfor mor e sourc e categorie s an dpollutant s than thos e analyzed .

—Th e Clean Uni t

Tes t wil l b e environmentall y neutra l for mos t sources , bu t

som e source s wil l contro l earlie r o r mor e extensivel y than unde r curren t rules , an danet benefi t wil l result . Th e amoun t

o f thi s benefi t

i s uncertai n nationally , bu t wil l likel y resul t

i n importan t

reduction s i n individua l cases , suc ha s th e estimate d 9,30 0 to n pe r

yea r VO C reductio n see n i n on e example .

—Th e Pollutio n Contro l Projec t Exclusio n wil l leadt o asmal l increas e i n th e numbe r o f environmentall y beneficial project s becaus e i t remove s NS Rbarrier s t o suc hprojects . Th e amoun t o f thi s benefi t

i s uncertai n nationally , bu t wil l likel y b e relativel y small .

- Th e chang e i n actual emission s baselin e wil l no t hav e asignifican t

environmenta l impact . A smal l numbe r

o f existin g emission s unit s may ge t highe r baseline sP. 3

unde r th e fina l rul e an dpotentiall y avoi dNSR , bu t othe r unit s may ge t

lowe r baseline s du e t o th e requiremen t t o adjus t th e baselin e downwar dt o accoun t for an y ne w emission s limit s a t that unit . New sources , ne w units , electri c utilities , an dman y modifie dsource s wil l b e completel y unaffecte db y th e baselin e change , s o it s impac t

i s small .

- Th e chang e t o a

n actual-to-projected-actua l tes t wil l hav e ane t

environmenta l benefit , bu t

arelativel y smal l one . Th e benefi t stem s fromtw o things : (1 ) remova l o f

th e NS Rprogram' s curren t incentiv e t o kee p actual emission s hig h before makin g achange , an d(2 ) remova l o f NSR' s barrier s t o project s that wil l actuall y reduc e emissions . Th e amoun t o f thi s benefi t

nationall y i s uncertain . New sources , ne w units , electri c utilities , an dmodification s that actuall y resul t

in increase demission s wil l b e completel y unaffecte db y thi s change , s o it s impac t i s small . Unde r

th e curren t

rule , virtuall y al l othe r

source s tak e permi t

limit s t o avoi dNSR . Th e analysi s conclude s that th e benefit s fromthi s aspec t o f th e progra mare likewis e unaffecte dbecaus e suc hsource s mus t stil l assur e that

actual emission s d o no t

significantl y increase . Becaus e four

o f th e fiv e provision s resul t i n environmenta l benefits , an dth e othe r provisio n ha s n o significan t

effect , th e analysi s conclude s that th e overal l effec t

o f th e rul e wil l b e ane t environmenta l benefit .