P. 1


# OAR Box 1790 Prepped byKeeia Richards



### Document

Number: 

# 238 ) ll-F-2 8 Docket Number: 

# A-90-3 7

Printed 10/31/2008 12:43:17

PM Sheet 238 of 250P. 2

• fM r



## •»i-rs^ g 

## IT - F- ss - . Integrate d Implementation Group (MD-12) Infonnatio nTransfe ran d .Progra mIntegratio

nDiv . Offic eof AirQualit

yPlannin gan d Standard

s U . S . Environmenta

l Protectio

nAgenc y Researc h TrianglePark

, N C 2771 1 FA X Number : (919)541-550 9

KOMPANY/OFF1C E

_______ _ 

# 7r

che H-t-hu.. £74 £>QC_ [PHON ENUMBE

R |FA XNUMBE

R 

### 2.C& &JT17C FROM : NAJkfl* ^ 

### '&t\ *

• ^S " (^risy~<~~f> U IPHON ENUMBE

R 

### 919-541 - D^l

I 

# 1 COMMENTS :



### . /TCU) LO G< 

### nA^&*&ut <%•£

_u)e ar-C

c<~5, 

## Jorl&JP Lycftzk. Wt 

# i w _?^__u ^ ^-t- ^ 

# * A

- g ^ 

## vers7ev^s_jW " Aja-^e - ii^t ^ 

# •q^ elA^JyerlruemJ

UP4Z> ~K<?- UTAida*"*^5kc-^^>x
. /^< ? Set*se/J tjf/f £e 7?rd

«£ 33U^p4 ]

## HNumbe rof Page s (includin gcoversheet) :

INAM E 

### I f youdid no

treceiveall thepages , pleasecontac tth efollowingperson :

p-HON B NUMBE

R 

### 919-541 -COMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TNS R RULE S (continued ) Propose d Rul e A. The

"Clean Unit" Exclusion

* Revised

package

presents

no substantive

changes

in the actual test: some editing Asimplifie d applicabilit ytes t fo rchange s t o existin g unit s tha t alread yhav e state-of the-ar t controls
. Change s whic h d o no tincreas e th e unit' s hourl ypotentia l emission s woul d no t b e considere d a physica l o roperationa l chang e an d woul d no t trigge rmajo rNS R Wha t i s a "clea n unit" ? a n emission s uni t tha t ha s a federall y enforceabl e emissio n limi t comparabl e t o th e emissio n limi t tha t woul d resul t fro m a curren t revie wunde rth e BACT/LAE R requirement s Curren t Rul e Th e existin g NS R progra m doe s no tinclud e th e "Clea n Unit " exclusion
.

Augus t 7 , 199 5 Outlin e base d o n Jun e 29 , 199 5 packag eCOMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TNS R RULE S (continued ) thre e limit s woul d qualify : o BAC To rLAE R limit s se t withi n th e las t 1 0 year s o limit s se t bya Stat e technolog y mino rne wsourc e revie wprogram determine d b yEP At o b e equivalen t t o th e federa l BACT/LAE R program s

* o Revised

package

allows States to qualify a technology

on acaseby-case basis, to

be comparable to BACT/LAER

limits. The

11/94 package was more prescriptive.

' Augus t 7 , 199 5 Outlin e base d o n Jun e 29 , 199 5 packag eCOMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TNS R RULE S (continued ) B. The

"Clean Facility"

Exclusion
* Subsumes

the non-emitting

unit exclusion

of the 11/94 package Allow s State s t o exclud e fro m majo rNS R propose d change s t o a n existin g majo rstationarysourc e tha t ha s installe d BAC To rLAE R an d ha s undergon e a n ai rqualit yimpac t analysi s withi n th e las t1 0 year s C. Netting

Baseline Amor e flexibl e an d lenien t metho d fo r computin g "nettin g baseline " emissions
. Base d o n source' s highes t leve l o f utilizatio n an d no t necessaril yhighes t emissio n rate
. Base d o n th e source' s averag e rat e a t whic h th e uni t actuall yemitte d th e pollutant
. Thi s reflect s actua l operatin g hours , productio n rates , an d type s o fmaterial s processed , stored , o rcombuste d durin g th e prescribe d tim e period
.

Augus t 7 , 199 5 Outlin e base d o n Jun e 29 , 1995 packag eCOMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TNS R RULE S (continued ) Utilizatio n leve l (capacit yfactor ) i s th e highes t consecutiv e 12-mont h perio d i n th e 1 0 year s precedin g th e propose d change
. I n nonattainmen t area s an d ozon e transpor t regions , th e baselin e canno t begi n prio rt o Novembe r11 , 1990
.

Sourc e mus t us e th e curren t allowabl e emissio n rat e (e.g. , Ibs./MMbtu ) takin g int o consideratio n Federa l o rStat e emission s restriction s (RACT , NESHAP , MACT , BACT , LAER , NSPS , etc. ) impose d ove r th e 1 0 yea rperiod
. "Nettin g baseline " i s th e curren tallowabl e emissio n rat e multiplie d b yth e utilizatio n level
. "Actua l emissions " a s o fa particula rdat e equa l th e averag e rat e a twhic h th e uni t actuall yemitte d th e pollutan tdurin g a 2-yearperio d whic h precede s th e particula rdat e an d whic h i s representativ e o fnorma l sourc e operation
. Th e Administrato rma yallo wth e us e o fa differen ttim e perio d upo n determinatio n tha t i s i t mor e representativ e o fnorma l sourc e operation
. Fo ra n electri cutilit ysteam generatin g unit , actua l emission s ar e th e representativ e actua l annua l emission s o fth e uni t fo ran y2-yea rperio d ou t o fth e precedin g 5 years . Th e Administrato rma ypresum e tha t source-specifi c allowabl e emission s fo rth e uni t ar e equivalen t t o th e actua l emission s o fth e unit
. Allowabl e emission s accoun t fo rapplicabl e Federal standards , SI P emission s limitations , o rfederall yenforceabl e permi t conditions
. "Nettin g baseline " i s th e actua l rat e o femission s fro m th e uni t average d ove ra 2-yea rperiod
.

' Augus t 7 , 199 5 Outlin e base d o n Jun e 29 , 199 5 packag eCOMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TNS R RULE S (continued ) 

### D. Pollution

Control Projects Proposin g genera l exclusio n fro m majo r NSR : Add-o n control s Fue l switche s t o cleane rfuel s Pollutio n preventio n project s

* •Revised

package

proposes

essentially to broaden

the WEPCO

exclusion

to all source categories. It

creates a presumption

that add-on-type

and simple fuel switching

pep projects

are environmentally

beneficial. Although proposal

calls for comment

on deleting the WEPCO

exclusion

in the face of adopting

the broader

general

exclusion, the actual provisions

of the WEPCO PCP exclusion

are retained

in and by the proposed

revisions. Ther e ar e currentl yn o exclusion s fo radd-o n control s o rfue l switches
. Pollutio n contro l project s (no t includin g pollutio n preventio n projects ) a t electri cutilitie s ar e exempt
. Ther e ar e currentl y exemption s fo rtemporaryclea n coa l technolog y demonstratio n project s an d fo rpermanen tclea n coa l technolog ydemonstratio n project s tha t d o no t increas e th e potentia l t o emit
.

Augus t 7 , 199 5 Outlin e base d o n Jun e 29 , 199 5 packag eCOMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TNS R RULE S (continued ) Includes all exclusions

under WEPCO Includes temporary

and permanent projects of all types at State's discretion Allows emissions

determination

of increases

based on comparison

of "representative

actual annual emissions"

before and after the project applies generally. Implementatio n safeguards : Environmentall ybeneficia l tes t fo r pollutio n preventio n project s Permittin g authorit ygive n th e responsibilit yfo rdecisio n o n th e Caus e o rcontribut e test/ai rqualit y impac t assessmen t Thes e safeguard s ar e applie d t o th e electri cutility exclusions , bu td o no tinclud e consideratio n o f AQRV s i n Clas s I areas .

' Augus t 7 , 199 5 Outlin e base d o n Jun e 29 , 199 5 packag eCOMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TNS R RULE S (continued ) E. Plantwide

Applicability

Limits (PALs) Proposin g regulation s t o allo wan d facilitat e •Curren trule s mak e n o provision s fo rPALs. State s issuanc e o fvoluntarysource specifi cPALS
. Apermittin g authorit yma ychoos e t o adop t a n area-wid e PA Lapproac h APA Lpermi t allow s th e sourc e t o mak e an ychang e provide d i t doe s no t violat e it s plantwid e emission s limi t F. Actual-to-Future-Actual Methodology Th e WEPC O rul e i s explicitl ylimite d t o utilitie s an d promulgate d a n actual-to-future-actua l methodolog y fo ral l change s a t a utility , excep t fo rne wunits
. I n th e fina l rule , EP Aindicate d i twoul d conside r adoptin g thi s methodolog yfo ral l sourc e categorie s i n a subsequen trulemaking
. EP Asolicit s commen t o n thre e alternative s fo rth e futur e actua l methodology : leavin g th e scop e th e same ; applicabl e onl yt o utilit yunit s extendin g th e methodolog yt o al l sourc e categorie s eliminatin g th e methodolog y

Augus t 7 , 199 5 Outlin e base d o n Jun e 29 , 1995 packag eCOMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TNS R RULE S (continued ) G . Proposal

of CMAExhibit

B
* Revised

package

unchanged EP Aagree d t o propos e an d tak e fina l actio n o n a methodolog yfo rdeterminin g whethe ra sourc e ha s undertake n a modificatio n base d o n th e source' s potentia l emission s Unde rthi s methodology , source s may calculat e emission s increase s o rdecrease s base d o n eithe rth e existin g actua l emission s o ro n potentia l emissions , measure d i n term s o fhourl yemission s Source s coul d us e thi s potential-to potentia l tes t fo rbot h NS R applicabilit yan d fo rcalculatin g offsets , nettin g credits , an d othe remissio n reductio n credits
. Aseriou s drawbac k

o fthi s approac h i s tha t i t woul d allo wunchecke d consumptio n of incremen t b yold , grandfathere d t o th e exclusio n o fnew , mor e efficien tan d les s pollutin g sources . Th e curren t basi s fo rne t emission s increas e i s actua l emissions
.

Augus t 7 , 199 5 Outlin e base d o n Jun e 29 , 199 5 packag e 8COMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TNS R RULE S (continued ) IV . Bes t Availabl e Contro l Technolog y(BACT ) A. EPAis

proposing

to codify core criteria for BACT determinations: Al l o fth e availabl e contro l system s fo rth e •Curren t rule s d o no tspecif ythes e criteria , bu t source , includin g th e mos t stringent , mus t curren t polic ycall s fo rthei ruse . b e considere d i n th e determinatio n Th e selectio n o fa particula rcontro l syste m •Curren t rule s d o no tspecif ythes e criteria , bu t a s BAC Tmus t b e justifie d i n term s o fth e curren tpolic ycall s fo rthei ruse . statutorycriteri a an d supporte d b yth e record , an d mus t explai n th e basi s fo rth e rejectio n o fth e othe rmor e stringen t contro l candidat e syste m B. Codifying

the Existing

"Top-Down"

BACT Determination

Policy in Federal NSR Regulations EP Arequest s publi ccomment s o n alternativ e method s fo rdeterminin g BACT
. Th e propose d Federa l regulation s woul d serv e a templat e fo rStat e an d loca l agenc yrules
. Announce s Case-Stud yReport tha t wil l provid e additiona l guidanc e o n determinan t factors
. C. Improve

Content

and Management

of RACT/ BACT/LAER

Clearinghouse
* EPAwill

propose

in a separate

-

Curren trule s d o no t requir e submitta l t o th e RBLC
. rulemaking

mandatory

submittal

of BACT determinations

to the RBLC bv the permitting

authority

within 60 days of permit issuance.

•Augus t 7 , 199 5 Outlin e base d o n Jun e 29 , 199 5 packag e * *COMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TNS R RULE S (continued ) Mos t o fth e improvement s t o th e RBL C requir e allocatio n o fadditiona l resources . D. Streamlining

BACT/LAER

Determinations BACT/LAE R determination s nee d onl y conside rtechnologie s "demonstrate d i n practice. "

"Demonstrate d i n practice " includes : al l technologie s require d an d reporte d throug h existin g regulatoryprogram s an d thos e that , whil e no tidentifie d i n th e regulatoryarena , mee tspecifi c criteri a fo rdeterminin g thei ravailabilit y an d appropriatenes s fo rconsideratio n i n a BACT/LAE R analysi s Curren t rule s d o no tmak e detaile d requirement s wit h regar d t o a cutof fdate
. Curren tEP Apolicy call s fo rconsideratio n o favailabl e contro l technologie s fo rBACT , includin g emergin g technologies , unti l th e tim e tha t a fina l NS R permi t i s issued
.

Augus t 7 , 199 5 Outlin e base d o n Jun e 29 , 199 5 packag e 1 0COMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TNS R RULE S (continued )
an ytechnolog ytha t ha s bee n (1 ) installe d an d operatin g continuall y fo ra t leas t 6 month s o n a n emission s uni t whic h ha s bee n operatin g a t leas t a t 5 0 percen t o fnameplat e capacity ; an d (2 ) whos e performanc e ha s bee n verifie d wit h a performanc e tes t o r performanc e dat a whil e operatin g eithe ra t a loa d tha t coincide s wit h th e operatio n o fth e emission s unit s serve d b yth e contro l devic e a t thei r potentia l t o emit , o ra t 9 0 percen t of th e contro l technology' s desig n specifications
. Proposa l authorize s th e permittin g authorit y•Cu t offi n curren tpolicyi s whe n fina l permi ti s t o cu t offconsideratio n o fadditiona l contro l issued
. technologie s identifie d afte rth e permi t applicatio n ha s bee n determine d complet e unles s a commente rmeet s minimu m documentatio n criteria
.

Augus t 7 , 199 5 Outlin e base d o n Jun e 29 , 199 5 packag e * * 1 1COMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TNS R RULE S (continued ) Minimu m documentatio n criteri a Nam e an d locatio n o fth e sourc e utilizin g th e technolog y Manufacture ran d typ e o fcontro l devic e Dat e technolog ywa s installe d an d operationa l Performanc e requirement s Resultin g tes t o rperformanc e dat a Complete

Application

Criteria New name for Source Information EPAis proposing

minimum

criteria upon which the permitting

authority should base its completeness determination: Thorough

BACT or LAER analysis additional

impact analyses Class I area analyses PALapplicability undemonstrated

technology

waiver provisions FLM review and coordination registration

on applicable

bulletin board statewide

compliance

for nonattainment Curren t rule s requir e tha t source s submi tal l informatio n necessaryt o perfor m an yanalysi s o r mak e require d determinations , includin g a descriptio n o fth e source , a schedul e fo r constructio n o rmodification , informatio n necessary t o determin e BACT , meteorologica l an d topographica l data , an d ai rqualit yan d growt h impacts
.

' Augus t 7 , 199 5 Outlin e base d o n Jun e 29 , 199 5 packag e 1 2COMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TNS R RULE S (continued )

Proposing

reforms

to the existing

Innovative Control Technology

(ICT) waiver Ne wnam e - - "Undemonstrate d Technolog y o rApplication " (UT/A ) waive r Ne wdefinitio n - - "an ysystem , process , material , o rtreatmen t technolog ytha t show s substantia l likelihoo d t o operat e effectivel yan d t o achiev e either : (a ) greate rcontinuou s reduction s o fai r pollutan t emission s tha n an ydemonstrate d system , o r(b ) comparabl e emissio n reduction s a t lowe rcost , lowe renerg y input , wit h lesse rnon-ai renvironmenta l impacts , o rwit h othe radvantage s tha t ar e define d an d mutuall yagree d o n a case specifi cbasi s t o justif yth e us e o fUT/ A provisions. " Expandin g applicabilit yo fUT/ Awaive rt o nonattainmen t areas . UT/ Awaive rmus t contai n a referenc e emissio n contro l performanc e objectiv e o f th e UT/ Aan d th e otherwis e applicabl e BAC To rLAE R standard
. Referre d t o a s innovativ e contro l technolog y(ICT ) a t 51.166(s ) Curren t definition--"an ysyste m o fai rpollutio n contro l tha t ha s no tbee n adequatel ydemonstrate d i n practice , bu t woul d hav e a substantia l likelihoo d o fachievin g greate rcontinuou s emission s reductio n tha n an ycontro l syste m i n curren tpractic e o ro f achievin g a t leas tcomparabl e reduction s a t lowe r cos t i n term s o fenergy , economics , o rnon-ai r qualit yenvironmenta l impacts. "

IC Twaiver s ar e limite d t o PS D areas .

' Augus t 7 , 199 5 Outlin e base d o n Jun e 29 , 199 5 packag e 1 3COMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TNS R RULE S (continued ) Permittin g authorit yi s require d t o includ e i n • th e UT/ Apermi t bot h "marginal " an d "gross " failur e emissio n limits
. Contingenc ymeasure s mus t b e identifie d fo rfailur e modes
. "Gross " failur e emissio n limi t i s a n enforceabl e emissio n limi t Provide s permittin g authorit yth e flexibilit y t o eithe rpermi t th e UT/ Aa t it s "marginal " failur e emissio n leve l o rrequir e th e sourc e t o instal l technolog ycapabl e o fachievin g th e appropriat e referenc e emissio n limit
. EP Arequest s commen t o n possibl e method s fo rcreatin g incentives
. A n UT/ Atha t "grossly " fails i s require d t o eithe rreplac e o rretrofit , o n a n expeditiou s schedule , suc h tha t th e sourc e achieve s th e applicabl e BAC To rLAE R standar d withi n 1 8 months
. Duratio n o fUT/

Awaive r 2 year s fro m dat e o fstart-u p or ; 5 year s fro m dat e o fpermi t issuance
. IC Tmus t achiev e a leve l o fcontinuou s emissio n reductio n equivalen t t o BACT
. Ther e i s n o distinctio n betwee n margina l an d gros s failure
.

N o margina l failur e provisions
.

I fth e IC Tfail s t o mee tth e require d leve l o f emissio n reduction , th e sourc e ha s u p t o 3 year s t o mee tth e requirement
.
Duratio n o fIC Twaive r

- 4 year s fro m dat e o fstartup ; o r

- 7 year s fro m dat e o fpermi tissuanc e

Augus t 7 , 199 5 Outlin e base d o n Jun e 29 , 1995 packag e 

### 1 4COMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TNS R RULE S (continued ) Consisten t wit h th e CAA , establishe s a limi t o n th e issuanc e o fUT/ Awaiver s t o tha t necessaryt o demonstrat e th e performanc e o fa technolog yo rapplication
. G . Pollution

Prevention

(PP) Reaffirm s existin g Agenc ypolicyo n •N o specifi cmentio n o fpollutio n prevention , pollutio n preventio n (Ma y28 , 199 2 memo ) whic h provide s guidanc e o n incorporatin g pollutio n preventio n int o th e Agency' s ongoin g programs . Revised package

retains position

that existing regulations

and the PCP exclusion

provide

satisfactory consideration

of PP initiatives

Augus t 7 , 199 5 Outlin e base d o n Jun e 29 , 199 5 packag e * * 

### 1 5COMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TNS R RULE S (continued ) Clas s I Area s Se e attachment for details of revised OMB Package

• Proposin g severa l revision s t o improv e coordinatio n amon g th e FLMs , permittin g authorities , an d permi t applicants
. A. Defining

Air Quality Related

Values and Determining

Adverse

Impacts EP Ai s proposin g genera l definition s fo r "ai rqualit yrelate d value " an d "advers e impac t o n ai rqualit yrelate d values. " EP Ai s affirmin g tha t FLM s mus t hav e sufficien t latitud e t o addres s impact s o n a n area-by-are a an d o n a permit-by-permi t basis
. EP Ai s encouragin g FLM s t o identif y AQRV s o n a regiona l o rnationa l basi s wher e appropriate , an d t o establis h genera l procedure s fo ridentifyin g AQRVs
. EP Ai s proposin g t o authoriz e FLM s t o fil e a notic e whe n i t i s believe d tha ta propose d sourc e mayhav e a h advers e impac t o n a Clas s I area . Thes e term s ar e no t define d i n curren t rules
.
N o specifi cmentio n o fFL M wit h regar d t o monitorin g requirement s o rimpact analyses
.

51.166(p)(2 ) simpl ystate s tha tFLM s hav e affirmativ e responsibilit yt o protec t thei rAQRVs
. FLM s ma ypresen t a demonstratio n tha t emission s woul d adversel yaffectAQRVs
.

' Augus t 7 , 199 5 Outlin e base d o n Jun e 29 , 199 5 packag e 1 6COMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TNS R RULE S (continued ) EP Ai s proposin g tha t th e FL M b e require d t o provid e pertinen tinformatio n o n AQRV s an d method s t o analyz e potentia l impacts , wher e available , t o PS D permi tapplicant s upo n request
. EP Ai s creatin g a n electroni cdatabas e fo r th e compilatio n o favailabl e Clas s I information
. B. Proposing

Pre-Application

Coordination

with FLMs through

Early Notification

and Involvement Permittin g authorit yrequire d t o notifyth e FL M withi n 3 0 day s o fbein g informe d tha t a propose d sourc e intend s t o locat e withi n 10 0 k m o fa Federa l Clas s I area . Propos e requirin g permittin g authoritie s t o provid e a n opportunit yfo rFLM s t o participat e i n an ypre-applicatio n meeting s wit h prospectiv e PS D applicant s plannin g t o locat e withi n 10 0 k m o fa Federal Clas s I area . Th e FL M wil l receiv e summarynotificatio n o fsource s beyon d 10 0 km
. FLM s ar e no trequire d t o provid e suc h information
.

Notificatio n o fFLM s i s no trequired
.

Permittin g authoritie s ar e no trequire d t o includ e FLMs , althoug h FLM s hav e th e responsibilit yt o protec t AQRV s i n Clas s I areas . FL M revie woccur s afte rth e permittin g authorit ymake s it s preliminary determination
. Notificatio n o fFLM s i s no t required
.

Augus t 7 , 199 5 Outlin e base d o n Jun e 29 , 1995 packag e 

### 1 7COMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TNS R RULE S (continued ) Propose Improving

Coordination

During Permit Application

Review Requir e th e permittin g authorit yt o notif y FLM s whe n a permi t applicatio n i s receive d fro m eac h sourc e proposin g t o locat e withi n 10 0 k m o fa Federa l Clas s I area . Proposin g t o establis h publicl yaccessibl e electroni cdatabas e fo rPS D permit s t o facilitat e FL M revie wo fsource s beyon d 10 0 k m Requir e a summar yo feac h PS D permi t applicatio n b e entere d int o thi s database
. FL M wil l hav e a t leas t 7 day s fro m th e dat e o fregistratio n o n th e databas e t o reques t th e entir e permi t applicatio n FL M wil l hav e a t leas t 3 0 day s fro m receip t o fpermi t applicatio n fo rrevie wprio rt o issuanc e o fa completenes s determinatio n b yth e permittin g authorit y

•Th e permittin g authorit ymus t consul t wit h th e FL M an d tr yt o resolv e an y informatio n deficiencie s prio rt o issuin g a completenes s determination
. Notificatio n o fFLM s i s no t required
.

Th e onl ymentio n o fFL M revie wi s afte rth e permittin g authority' s preliminar ydetermination
.
Permittin g authorit yi s no t require d t o consul t wit h FLM
.

Augus t 7 , 199 5 Outlin e base d o n Jun e 29 , 1995 packag e 1 8COMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TNS R RULE S (continued ) Proposing

that permitting

authorities coordinate

with FLMs in the preliminary determination

regarding

the PSD permit.

•Th e FL M o rdesignate d representativ e o r adjoinin g Stat e mus t fil e a notic e allegin g advers e impac t (i n th e cas e a source' s applicatio n indicate s n o significan t impac t o n increment ) i n orde rt o obligat e sourc e t o conductin g furthe rincremen t o rAQR V analysis
.
•EP Ai s proposin g t o provid e fo r consideratio n o fth e FLM s advers e impac t determinatio n fo ran yAQRVs , no t limite d onl yt o visibility
.
•EP Ai s proposin g tha t th e FL M b e allowe d 6 0 day s t o mak e th e advers e impac t demonstration , an d tha t th e permittin g authorit yus e a 60-da yperio d t o conside r th e FLM s demonstratio n prio rt o makin g th e preliminar ydetermination
. Onl yrequir e consideratio n o fvisibilit yimpacts
.

FL M i s give n 3 0 days
.

' Augus t 7 , 199

5 Outlin e base d o n Jun e 29 , 199 5 packag e 

### 1 9COMPARISO N O F TH E NE WSOURC E REVIE W(NSR ) REFOR M RULEMAKIN G PACKAG E AN D CURREN TNS R RULE S (continued )

E. •EP Ai s proposin g t o establis h

consideration s fo ra permittin g authority' s rejectio n o fa n FLM' s advers e impac t demonstration
. Scientific/Technica l basi s Importanc e o fth e AQR Van d natur e o fth e advers e impac t Mitigatio n

•EP Ai s proposin g a genera l consultatio n provisio n betwee n th e permittin g authorit yan d th e FL M whe n a disagreemen t arises
.
•EP Ai s proposin g t o requir e tha t th e permittin g authorit yinclud e a summar yi f issue s raise d b yth e FL M fo rth e publi c recor d Proposing

to allow a source to provide emission

offsets, a

reduction

in emissions

or some combination

of both to mitigate

its adverse impacts

on a Class I area in order to obtain a PSD permit. Post-construction

ambient

monitoring

may be required in Class I areas to determine

the effect of emissions

on AQRVs. N o criteri a fo rrejectio n o fFL M analysi s ar e specified
.

N o consultatio n i s required
.

N o summar yo fFL M issue s i s require d

Mitigatio n i s no t specificall yaddressed
.

Post-constructio n monitorin g i s require d fo rai r qualit yimpact s a t th e discretio n o fth e permittin g agency .

: Augus t 7 , 199

5 Outlin e base d o n Jun e 29 , 199 5 packag e 2 0P.2 3



## Change s to Contro l Technolog y Section s A/ 0 8/8/9 5 1 . Remove d th e technica l guidanc e discussio n fo r LAE R fro mth e preambl e an d eliminate d th e procedura l languag e fro mth e regulations . W e retaine d a placeholde r fo r certai n LAE R regulation s tha t ar e planne d fo r proposa l i n th e Par t C & D rulemaking . 2 . Modifie d th e Definitio n o f "Demonstrate d i n Practice " t o includ e al l criteri a tha t make s a technolog ya mandator ycandidat e fo r BAC T o r LAER , eithe r require d i n a regulatio n o r majo r sourc e permi t o r successfull yinstalled , operate d an d documented . 3 . Inserte d additiona l technica l suppor t fo r criteri a fo r th e successfull yinstalled , operate d an d documente d tes t i n th e definitio n o f "Demonstrate d i n Practice. " 4 . Inserte d tha t Stat e regulation s ma yspecif yBAC T methodolog yothe r tha n Top-down , bu t i t mus t satisf y propose d cor e criteria , whic hare : Univers e o f technologie s t o b e considere d mus t includ e th e bes t tha t hav e bee n demonstrate d i n practice . Rejectio n o f Technologie s mor e stringen t tha n th e alternativ e selecte d mus t b e supporte d b ystatutor y factor s an d mus t b e documente d fo r th e publi c record . 5 . Clarifie d i n Preambl e th e subtl e differenc e betwee n cut-of f dat e fo r introductio n o f ne wtechnolog yan d dat e b ywhic hsomethin g shoul d hav e bee n demonstrate d i n practic e fo r mandator yconsideratio n b yapplican t 6 . Clarifie d requirement s fo r Completenes s i n Reg s an d Preambl e discussio n 7 . Incorporate d specifi c publi c informatio n requirement s fo r cor e criteri a regulation s i n reg s an d preambl eP.2 4



### 8 . Provid e i n th e Federa l regulation s a n absolut e cut
of f dat e a t clos e o f th e publi c commen t perio d afte r whic happlicant s bea r n o burde n t o conside r ne wand emergin g BACT/LAE R tha t i s identifie d afte r tha t date . Thi s modifie s curren t polic yse t i n severa l memo s tha t BACT/LAE R ca n b e establishe d up-t o permi t issuance . State s wil l b e lef t t o establis ha fina l cut-of f