p. 1



# OAR Box 1793 Prepped by Keeia Richards



### Document

Number: 

# 5 ) ll-F-4 7 Docket Number: 

# A-90-3 7

Printed 11/3/2008 11:31:54

AM Sheet 5of 45

# Woul d yo u kindl y 

# se etha t thi s get s t o th eright person ? ' ys-F-ij P. 2 

### H-10- 3 7 

### JT-f-U *



## orrzc s o r XANACEKEN T AN D BUDGE T 

## orrzc z o r XKTORXATIO N

AN D REGULATOR YAFFAIR S

OATE t 0 

### , ,
_SENDE R 

# : Afr £<***

TO » AGENCY I IRON * . 

## ^Utevuol s Crun.plx-r '

RECIPIENT' S PA

XNO. I fo »< 0 5*/ / ~SS0 9 RECIPIEN

T TELEPHON

E MO. I TOTA L NUXBE RO P PAGE S INCLUDIN

GCOVE RSBEET l CONMENT S l

, _ _

MOTE : I P YO

UD O HO T RECEIV

E AL L A S POSSIBLE . VERIFICATIO

N NO . I 202-395-734 0 OZR A PA XNO. f 202-395-721 5 IKE PAGES , YXJEASE CALL A S SOO NP. 3



## CJgfl*L, U/uI r

FyrL A



### UUx/ihe/ i tW^Ut^L&jT"LTftuJr < **y\'*^ U 

### * U 

### fr

, J... . ^"„-»... • .i L .4-"' . ...i f .JL A 'L . ~ (PZ rl^tWx^W.4L.-p/3 . S-bzig . Ol/xr?/!? ? t

kfaulJa.L^T' 

## -f aEPA /]q|vi ^ W

J. Q1/Xr7/5f rLS . ^i , 

## (j^^-c^Qj^Ql g pp , 31 3 

## 3 S j9? ^

QM»LM^LT S 

### Cihifci.f. 1 [hH)t CQ'^I afa^ UK^U-il*. ?>QrtAi

, Pfd/f^Ja y 

## G^. ? 

## Vi*
. t

n"U w y^ f <HA,T ) 

## ft^ M 

## tiidc * B AC T d.
k iJh&rAiu^i^ "iLls . .AiQ ^ ggvl L Z^^t k {. CJ^Atnl^
V W . fJr^AjuiL^k. f^ i <p> . ^ \ J

### forg^a'np U f I S I "5 / * I II

_ I- f

II 

## /Ujwg, l fen^av^^.a^k

ove-tL
. MAIIK

F& 

## F.Pf t yxrg^.-f ^ ^La ^ i/ftvA A 'VAI^ . 

### ( ^ uWf r CJ**JLAA& 

### -\L^ rdx ^ fjvtogUfl.bU , , 3) UAg. \ ^ ^ Sa-fcu&cuc* * S^-D«..If tS-ackw i (^.33 )



## -? C^XA3.€^g^ & WXgflAAa . .P. 4



## y) Tlr Is* ^'1 1 VU)

fAta*, 4 o Y*JLIJXJJLA. 

# dlu a •ACT/L^E g ^ ^^pyirg V

-a^nQAbiJc^t

n <?OAUSA 

## T^ACT/lAF ? <4>frfoi* n

£ ) CLUXJ ^ 4 Q 

### koTtbVn 6 ^ (p . ?(r ? |'f?* V /? , 

## )W^cl p

• - , I —P. 5

OC T0 2 '9 5 03:26P M ITPID-IIG/OP- J P.5/-1 2

. . . < a . • l l • I nothe r worda , wha t oxitari a diatinguia ha uni t eligibl e fo r thl a axciuaio c fro

m on e whic hi a sot ? Criteri a whic hallow a ' " broad , rang e o f unit e t o qualif y eoui diargal y

transfor

m th e exiatirv g applicabilit y

ayata m int o on e bau daoial y o a aaaaaein g a wfit'. a potentia l amiasiona . vit htha posaibilit y e f a dramati c increaa a i a a unit' a actua l amiaalon e -withou t undergoin g vaft .

. • * . • ' • i

• . Th a EPA' a propoaea . t o requir e dmisaiea a unit s t o hav a a ' •federall y

enforceabl e emlaalon e limit " tha t "i » aowtpagabi e t o J * the , em i aaio nlimi t tha t . . .woul dresul t frem,>-current-rovieifl' y unde r th e BAn - oj

r LABA regulrejanta . whieheva r i a applicabl e t o th e prapoaa dchange . te*m. a-a.. . propose daeetion e S**9 * Il.lfiS(e ) (i ) (v ) io (W (ii) , 3l.l« 6 Co) . (21 (111 ) (L ) (2 ) and 52.21(b ) (2) . (Ill ) iii) (2). ) Th aIP A enviaion atha tthre e fcypeaO f llralt awoul

d qualif y (1 ) SAW

, o rLAS E liwit aae twithi n th e lae t 1 0 yaara, ; (2>*litdq^Vet A b y aata^ aV ig ^A^.p > *fsft/a wBgaaral

n da tar m « , (2telitd.ge7aet.b y aa>^ | v^Wf* ^ »TMM f I m BPft . t n ivalent\t o th afedera l BACT ' o rLAE R
notic e an

d 

# _fi 'ifr program*/

, and , omimiaS'ftoun d o

n aoaaa«by,-caae. baei e - - afta r ' " > rpubli ccomment

' » » t o b e Cayaivalent

) tof* 8 * +Ui. ' OfcctTc-4-M

- 

### U « & *» ^ # 

### "^*

r 

### "*'** * ^ *-*""f

W l a . • feita wit hBACT . o r LAS * Limit . "* ; * **& T "•tf*" S "M**'"* * On e etartin g poin t fo r determining wbethe r a .uni t ia , well - . controlle di a th e lava l o f control . require dt O eatlef y PAC T (i n attainment/enelaaalCla dareaa ) o r LAE R(I nnonattainmen t araaa) . ro t uni t a whic hhav a recentl y undergon e thea e reviews , re PBiLXKlVMi y

flTAf f N0JUC2N9 DRAF T FO B OFFIC E O P XAKA98X2O T ALU ?

. Hionai T MVXS W

* pos e NO T AEPMSBN T orrscxA bS» A POLIC Y- #• • Jul y 15 , 1M B -- - [fil e nema i Naate.rC.a9 ] •* • 

## f/iy

### : PJ
_ 

### OC T 0 2 '95 03-26P

M ITPID-IIG/OP

G P.6/1 2

-' ' ' -.'.. . 

### wit hFedera l MAC T o r XAC T limi t a , th e SP A i s no t incline dt o d o •

• , .'••• • • ' • a * •••." ' 

### a o aoroa e th e board . Rather , the-EP A beiieve a tha t MAC T p r RAC T llmlt a ahoul db e foun dt o qualif y fo r th e clea nUni t exclusio n Uaing'th e edao-byces a optio ndescribe di nsection-2X.C.)* c below . .'.'•*•' " b . stat e Technolog y

Programa Equivalen t t o BAC T o r LAER , Ther e ar e man y

emisalon s unit s a t etationar y eource a tha t wer e permitte dacoordln g t o a state* s mino r NfiR,permitting ' program , whil e thee a uni t a are . not^at r oiled ' pmauan L • L Ua SA W o r LAE Rlimit , the y

etil l ma y

.nave l etate-of-the-'art' i

lain . • L Ua SAffK a contxtole . J

/ Fo r instance , severa l jurisdiction * hav e contro l technolog y review s a e par t o f State , loea l e r triba l mino r NS Rprogra m whie h require s ne w

or-modifyin g aeurea a t o mee t amission s leval e '\ Caqujva l eafc \ t o majo r sourc e contro l techhology requirements . 11AC T o r LABR) . Pp r thl a reaaon- , th e SP A l e proposin g tha t permittin g

1 ' ' f * ' * * • > i • 

### -authorities , may'submi t mine r NS Reontro l technolog y requirements ; fo r certificatio nb y

th e EP A tha t th e mino r NBA ' program require o ' . . eontro l technolog y

tha t woul dsatisfy,th a requirement a fo r th e

. clea nuni t axolueioh . Sift proposed'section s 51.16*(a ) (1 ) (v ) ( O(U ) ( X 

### ) il) , Bl.lfi S (b ) (2 ) (iii ) (L ) (A ) (ii ) ai d• ^ S3.21(b ) (3 ) (iii ) (L ) (A ) (ii ) • Onp a determine db y EP A t o be . ~~ Yr*^\*£

, , , • • • , - _ * *- " 

### • equivalent. " el l unit e subjec t t o emieeion s limitatio nestablishe d uader.th e jurisdiction' a mine r NB Rprogram woul db e eligibl e fo r th e dee s Uni t exeluaio nfo r th a fire t 1 0 year e followin g &


### PMLIMIllAR YITAF F WOAKXX ODRAF T FO ROF F IC I O F MAHABSK2N T AMD 1UDGS T Ain/ID

W * SOIf l NO T ASPA1B8N T OFFICIA L aF A POLIC Y' •• • Jul y 5 , 100 1 — - [fil e name i Master*.2* ) *• *P. 7

OCT 0 2 '9 S 03:2BP

nITPID-IIG/OP

G P.7/1 2



# V " • 3 S ....-- . issuenc e o f th e permit , the ' EP A als o solicit s commen t o a whethe r a shorte r period

, euc ha s 5 years , woul db e mor e appropriate ,

* ' a a ' ' 'Th e BP A als o solicit s commen t o nth e appropriate ' standard s fo r IfP A t e Ufa'i ndetermining , whethe r a permittin g authorit y a mino r V W

program

contro l technology

requirement ! ar e comparabl e t o th e BAC T an dIAE A requirement! . TJh

e BP A snvlsion a tba t a a a'"""") . minimu m a "pre*certifled" ' mino r NB A program compl y wit h* DCF R

, 5i..iao-ua . 1 e . Qualificatio no f Unit s o na Case-by-Cas a fi&ai'a

' . I nman y

case s a nemission s uni t not-subjec t t o major . Np * i e eonetruetad.o r retrofitte dwit ha eontro l technology o r etratag y i • • • equivalen t t o th e bee t Ooatrol a applie di npractice . Thi e ma y occu r whe na aourc e minimise s emiaaion e i norde r t o »nat « a uni t

i • i .out o f majo r NB A

o r applies,controls . t o compl y vit hothe r provision s 'o

f th a Act. ' Fo r this.reason , the BPA 1 a prepoae d regulation s woul dallow a aburo e havin g a limi t o ne namlaal < uni t determine dt o b e ( / eyilvalentJ | t o BAC T o r LABkAfcc.qualit y lor ? c»* s Meti 

### er* - +»A, bc**£N a th e •'clea

nunit * exclusio no na ceee-by-eae e baaie*/fOno e a permittin g authorit y

maka a this.determinatio nthroug ha proces s involvin g notic e an dopportunit y fo r public s comment , the.uni t woul db e eligibl e fo r tn e clea n'uni t exclusio nfo r the\nex t fiv e yaaxa * . A a wit hth e othe r type s o f propose dclea nuni t •exclusions , 1P A

reques t a , publi c comment a o ntla e prepoae d exclusio neligibilit y period , flaft prepoae daactien a • ^XaJL-k.v t PaiLXXXNAR

V STAF F WOKKX1 W

PAAP T FO * OFFlC S O F KaKAQHMM T AND

_OFFICIA

L 8F A POL. " — Masters.2t ] •• • 1PDOT T UVZX W

« SO^ B KO T AltABSBO T OFFICIA L 8F A POLIC Y 

### •***,July.3, * IM S •* • (fil e hama i 

# i?s.OC

T 0 2 '33 B3-27P

nITPID-IIG/OP

G •P.9/1 2 P. 8

1 « 91.165(a ) (1 ) tv ) (C ) (ia ) (x ) 11) . Sl.UCCb ) (* > (ill ) (L ) (5 ) (iii ) and ' S3.2Kb ) (2 ) (iii ) (L)(l ) OU) . . . X ^ H • '

» ^ •soUcf'T

s frai*w«a»tSS # K Th e BP^propoeei j aeverai*%lT»«na t iv a baea a upo nwhie ha permittin g euthorit y coul dtak e t o .mak

e th e determinetio ntha t a uni t ha e an-equivalen t BAC T o r LAB A emieeiona'limltetiBn . Th e firs t woul db e baae do na naverag e o f BAC T o r LAS * fo r equivalen t o r simila r aouvoe e ove r a recen t perio de f tim e (e.g. * mOe t repen t thre e years) , Th e Secon dwoul db e bare de nth e unit' s control , leve l bein g withi nsoma percentag e (e.g. , fiv e or , te n peroent V

o f th e moa t recant , o r averag e o f th e moa t recent * ,1AI o r LAE Rlevel s .fo

r equivalen t o r simila r sources. . Th e SP A 'solicit s commen t o nthes e approache s aa do nth e genera l issue s eoneernln g whethe r an dho w .SP A aheul dimpos e a.epeoifi e .'• ; * •

methodolog y

fo r determinin g tha t a specifi c emieeion a limit , la . "comparable " .t

o th e QugrgtjBAC T o r LAB * limit x^ '^ate-f c ft>ierf \ Pe r el l o f th e 4b«s"s - teate . th e BP A realitee ' that - ther e ar e man y aouro e and * emlsaio nuni t categoris e fo r whie hBAC T .o r LAS * ' .determination a d o net.exist , le t alon e recen t determinations . For , thes e sources , th e SP A propose s tha t thei r leve l o f contto l b a gauge dageine t tb e contro l leve l aaaoeiate dwit hBAC T o r LAB * fo r omissio nunit e vit hsimilar - amissio nstream eharactariaalde . Tha t i s i i f thafamlasion e uni t wer e t o underg o a BACT . -or . IAE A . A • ' . • • .t revie w toda y o r recently , whe, t technologie s woul db e evaluate d .an dwhat,ar e the^currentjBAC T o r LAE Rlevel s associate dwith . I*1XL2¥IWAJI

¥ STAF F WORXIM

O DRAFT FO

R0FFZ0 1 O

P ' avpoi T Mvjr w

• sol dNO T RBFBSSEH T OFFICIA L NP A FOLIC * « • • Jul y S i 1SS B • - • [fil e asma i Kaacarfi.BS ] ***. ' «



# °s{^'OC

T 0 2 '9 5 03.29Pr i ITPID-IIG/OP

G P.12/1 2 3
.



# 1

Si t requirements , Includin g aa y federall y

enforceabl e limit e o n emieeion a o r operation s an dmine r NB Rrequiremen t et' .

* . • a I • - ' 

### Finally , th e .determinatio n tha tauni ci s "clean * o r."well -

• * ' •••'" . . • • . - • controlled • .unde r today' s proposa l i a independen t fro m th e ease bycaa e determinatio no f .RAC T o r LAB * fo r Bourse s subjec t t o : najb s Nf* . whil e contro l technology ' whic hquai l fle a a unlt.a a ' Jf%t &t,tar*ri*+**''<-*M V «»na\4er>iM|tta u*i* < •.clean " ma y

b e comparabl e t o BAC T e r LAIR , i t i e ne t necessaril y > . •fpr*V*f e u*.r t mx OL >vauAwg^ f • » . • 4Jr«*^iT*"^ e B equa l to'BAC T o r LA*R . aa dIn-n o wa y establishe s a preeunptlv e BAC T o r .LAB* . Further , a five o xta nyea r praeumptie ntha t a ' uni t i s •clean hdoe a no t i nany wa y "freeee * BAC T 6 r LAB * determination s i npermittin g aetiona . Th e Ac t require s that'BAC T

• I' I * an dLAB * b e curren t caaa-hy-cae e determination s fo r souree a au bj se t t o majo r NB A an dth a clea nuni t ij«ier^\*^oC

T 

# t r canno t overrid e thi s
4. . Deacriptip no f tha Clea nFacilit y Proposal . • Simila r t o th e clea nuni t exclusion / BP A l a pcepoain g a n exoluaio nfo r change s a t clea nfacilitiaa . Thi s •clean 1 facility" . ' . exclusio nwil l allow

state s t e exclud e from majo r M Rprepoaed, ' & \*+.

, chenge a t o a noieletln g majo r atatienary . aeure e tha t ha s installe dtf*Vjtpi majo r BAC T o r LAB Ran dha s undergon e a nai r qualit y impac t l' l analyai a a a appropriat e t a th e area - designation / o r whic h* . * * • y V ctherwia e qualif y

a a a "clea nfacility ^ fie* prapoae dsection s ^^H'?** ^ Si.lisU . U ) if) ( O (u*» " Bl.l««(b ) (2 ) (iii ) <H ) an d•...•* • \&*\. iS.ailb ) (a ) (iii ) tM) . unde r thi s exclusion , souree a ca nmak e anyif>."jj L
a 1 v. i FBBz.XNxamR'

rBTAF F wonxur o BXAF T FO ROFFICI Io rMaxxasKBM T AN B V ^lutf* * .

» ' BPDOJB T RBVXB H• DOB S MO T RBPRaSBNX ; OFFICIAL SP A »OLIC V 0>\,/* ^ I 

### •* * J^l y B , iss 5 .- - [fil e name i Heaters.a* J «• • ^



# rfps.P.1 0 

# Woul dyou kindl y 

# se e tha t thi s get s to th e right person ? S+ P-V5"



## orrxc xo r MANAGEMEN T AN D BODGE T 

## orrzc z o r XNPORMATZO N

AN D XECUZATOR YATTAIN S

DATE * Ull 

### , . , „ ^

, «^K3ER : ,/ l T T *<&&&
TO » AGENCY ) FROM : . 

# *?$?.

RECIPIENT' S PA

X NO. f 

## ftiQs^/-gsro9 JgCZFZEN T TELEPHON E NO. f TOTA L NUXBE RO P PAGE * XNCXX7DZN GCOVE * SBEET l COMMENT S t

. _ _

NOTE : X P YOUD O NO T RECEIVE AL L A S POSSIBLE . VERIFICATION

NO. I 202-3*5-734 0 OZK A PA XNO. i 202-395-721 5 TH E PAGES , YLEAS E CAL L A S SOO NP.1 1



### Ctg&*i , li/ul r

FyfLu i VtTYl . 

### U lUp.4<gf.4

< IiA*. * 7
0^nKA{\AA n \\\. ^ o( f l ff ? 

# f f
.dl&fc/ l l<UM^ W-iW- f

<f t Sfajg
. Q1/»7/ S n LKOfr, ^ L , : T M S
. /f !
. 0 /

i 

## nkg.^Ctt.Oial

s pp . ^Ij^^ J

.£L) Ctte
. QlU^a
. nXA/AAAAhiM <iJ\n*L±<**l

YTIA O
. l^ k

iVUtd T QM
. Lu^[ ^ CfjdCuA Ic^k f £r..iij
. k c uvtul/
. ^-* ^ ip^/^/J g (Prd.«fr.<la& C

lA^ T^-yj^j^XjLa^^^L k LfOf l 

## ~tke , Afl* > ,IH
. v u gf)< j G^vdrtol s



## z

- ^ l Ia( t" I1 ' ' f ^VCUJQ U U^ r(UJU r/Twtcflxo-bU>

. 

### j ) U/U
. W V -fr/

ms^eur ^ ft^ -tVl s S^£h^ v (^-^V **£**.'{h^Vi IXUI T

## £&L

< ^ Q,,^ ^ fl>^^ ^tlogA/CX ^ -bUalite *P.1 2



# *** K^ a n^cxtoitt

U 

# fo n . .SMT/ 1 ftEg. «ttUo



# Sf^t ^

•^> . 

# i s^Z k Cs«.<p.-w) ? . •<p < 

## *A*
. "V

o botibv ? fry p i 3(r ? !*(*«>& , a . - ! • 

### S&. m-*ct f /%, . AX ',\J&IA

-^4 -P.1 3

OC T 0 2 '9 5 03-26PI 1 ITPID-HG/OF- S P.5/1 2

• a• ' " »

I nothe r words, ' wha t criteri a distinguis ha uni t eligibl e fo r thi s exclusio nfro m on e whic hi s not ? Criteri a whie hallo w a "

... . H ' •/.,•• . broad. 1 rang e e f unit s t o <r-ialtfi y coul dlargel y

transfor m

th e * * ». existin g applicabilit y ayste m Int o on e base dsolel y o nassessing . a ujjiat' s potentia l eaissions . vit hth e possibilit y e f a draimati e increaa a i na unit' a actua l am i a alon e withou t undergoin g NBi* .

. Th e SPA' S proposes , t o requir e Omission s unit s t o hav e a ' • H
' '•.-'• ' -»;i p< • - •federally'enforceabl e emission s limi t "tha t "i e oeriparabi a t o •Ji*ry"• 

# " ' * * • ^Jf c the.-em i aaio n.limi t tha t . . .woul dresul t fro m ' a -current ' revieW^.O r *<v> i unde r th e BAC T o r LAB A requirements , whichever^ i s applicabl e t o \\JAiyl ' th e propose dchange , (flee , e.g.. . propose dsection s Pf*3 * Sl.ics(a ) (l ) (v ) (C)(1A ) (ii),,3l.lfi6(b).(a 1 (lllML).(A ) an d $a;il(b ) (2H111 ) (ii ) (2). ) Th e BP A envi«ion e tha t thre e typiae O f limit s voul dquellf y •Cof.-tk* . eerV . fc*W

»**• * 1 0 yeara / (2)Alim i 1 

## . - A A — •Am^m^nj^A h y

Bt & «•••* • > « (equivalent ^ t o th e federa l BAC T o r .LAE R programs* , and , (3)*limitifftoundo na caaa^by.-caae . baai e «• - afte r notic e an dbopartunit y fp r publi c comment ' r* t o b e lify . (1 1 BACT . o r LAS B limit s se t withi n.th e lae t * *JT »«^i*."4UBee

t lt^V*»'bs+P**U*»k+r*»* mib^aet^b y aatatjo^t^'^r ' »^g y pypfp* * .

ivalenS ) toj^-* ' aat^r . ot * IAJ RlitfottC^ . , % ; (A A J # ^Lertdiae . V>«-^we* l e * +Ui ; petcbc<4«. r Ujtit e wit h BACT

. o rLAB

A Limit s wi»-f

c<*£4>* ' K\ri»v-

» rttb^Atcocf

e On e etartfn g poin tfo rdeterminin g whethe ra.uni tis . well oontrolla d i e th e leve l o f eontrol . require d to " se ti s f y BAC T (i n attainment/anelaaalfis d areas ) o rLAB A (I n nonattainmen tareae) .

'
. ' '
. * ' a'
. 70 * unit s whic h hav e recentl y undergon e thes e reviews , re - PRBLaDCZKML

Y STAP PWOABXN

WSBAP T JO B 0FFIC B O PXAHA9BMBN

T AJ P • • BOT01T RSVXfl

W • > con e ura

rASPASSSN T orrjcuu . S» A POLIC Y - '•• * Jul y S , 199B -- - [fil e neae i NeStsrC2.i l •• * 

## 5"// y~~— —P.1 4 OC T B 2 '9 5 03.26P M ITPID-IIG/OP G P.6/1 2

• a . • , • • a


### , . wit hfedera l MAC T 

### o r IAC T limits , the BP A i s no t incline dt o d o •

* •* . * * • - > . . • ' " 

### a o aoree e th e board . Rather, ' th e EPA believe s that - MAC T .o r BAC T . limit s shoul db e foundt o qualif y fo r th e clea nUni t exclusio n using'th e edee-by-eas e optio ndescribe di nsection-IX.C.l. c

• • ** ,•••• . •
. below . • *• • '""'. -

- • • . . < i 

### b . Stat e Technology

Program a Equivalen t t o BAC T o r LAE A

' , '

. '

• • ' • •'•'' . 

### Ther e ar e many

emiaaion s unit s a t stationary source s tha t .wer e permitte daccordin g t o a state' s mino r N8 R.permitting ' program , whil e thes e unit e are . not^coatrolled ' imrauaut.L Oa BACfes . . <T •'* eAuiwaUH. V 7 ^ V o r LAE Rlimit , the y

stil l ma y

heve\atate-of * the-ar t controls . J/ Pe r instance , severa l jurisdiction s have contro l technolog y review s a s par t o f State , loca l e r triba l mino r NBA program whic h require s ne w

or-modifyin g source s t o meet.amissions-level s " V s 

### equ ; 

### ivftlent\t o majo r aourc e eontro l technology requirements . t l AC T o r LABA) . Fp r thi s reason , the BP A i e proposin g tha t .permitting

' ..'.'•' ' ' • ' 

### -authorities.may

submi t mine r NS Reontro l technology requirement s fo r Certificatio nb

y th s SP A tha t th s mino r Man ' program require s ' ' . oontro l teohnolegy

tha t woul dsatisfy.th e requirement s fo r th e

. clea nuni t exclusion . S M propess dsection s 51,168(a ) (1 ) (v ) ( O (U ) ( X 

### ) ( D, ".51.16 6 (b ) (2 ) (iii ) ( D(A ) <ii ) ah d. Sa.ailb ) (2 ) (iii)(L ) (AMii ) . Ono e determine db y BPA t o be .

. 4 , • ' ' **m < 

### • e-quiyalsnt ; al l -units eubjec t t e emieeien s limitatio nestablishe d unde r .th e jurisdiction' s mino r NBR'progra m woul db e eligibl e fo r th e Cleat ; Uni t axcluaio nfo r th e firs t i o year s followin g PRSLIMXHARYSTAF F WORKXK O DRAF T FOROF?IC I O F KASAOMN T AMD 1OTOR T RRV3X

W * DOE S HO T KXFR188K T OFFSCZAZ i SF A POLIC Y ' •• • Jul y

5 , las t —

- [fil e name i MesterC.as ] *• *

• -iP.1 5

OC T 0 2 '9 3 03s26P M ITPID-IIG/OP G P.7/1 2

• 3 S ....-- . iaauanc e o f th e permit . The ' BP A ala o solicit * commen t o nwhethe r a shorte r period , suc ha s 5 years , woul db e mor e appropriate. .
' Th e BP A

also solicit s commen t O nth e appropriate ' standard s ..fo r RP A t o use'i ndetermining , whethe r a permittin g authority' s * mino r srfl

Rprogram

control , teohnolegy-requiremen t a ar e comparabl e t o th e BAC T an dLAB A requirements. . Th e BP A envisions - tha t a e a'~~ \ minimum a "prei-certifi*d" ' mino r NB A program

compl y wit ht o CFR '

."' o . Qualificatio no f unit e o na Ca'as-By-Cas a Ba'ei' e

. t nman y

case s a nemiaaion s uni t not-subjec t t o majo r NB A i a conetrueted . o r retrofitte dwit ha centro l technolog y o r strateg y
• equivalen t t o th e bee t Control s applie di npractice . Thi s ma y

- occu r wha na aourc e minimise s emission s i norde r t o "net " a uni t .out o f majo r NB Ro r applie s controls , t o compl y wit hothe r provision s 'o

f th e Aat. ' Fo r this , reason , the BPA 1 a propose d regulatien e woul dallow a aburp e havin g a limi t o na n.omissl f 

# V

uni tdetermine d t o be/equivalent)t cBAC T o r : o qualit y fo r VVKt



# * -*»W £ th e "clea n unit 1 * exclusio n o n asass-by-oas e basi s j/fOno e a• AY * i permittin g authorit y maka a this.determinatio nthroug ha procee a involvin g notic e en dopportunit y fe r publi c comment , .ihe.uni t

• a ' ' ' I '

- woul db e eligibl e fo r th a clea n'unit exclusio nfo r theVnex t fiv e
• yaaxa > A s wit hth e ethe r type s o f propose dclea nuni t •exclusions , BP A

requests , puftll c comment a o ntn e prepoae d.

, ' exelueio neligibilit y period , je * propose deaction e • i££*Xt*ttPBILXXZMAR YSTAF F WORXIS O DRAF T P0 A OFFlC RO F KRMAOJBMBN T AM D . • .OTBQS V

ASVZX W « DOR S MO T RBFRRSBK T OFFICIAL SP * POLIC Y • *+ + july.S,-14J S •- - (fil e name i Master*.as ] •• • 

# iK .OC T 0 2 '3 5 &3i27Pf

1 ITPID-IIG/OP G P.1 6

• • . • •P.9/1 2

3 «

•i . 31.16 5 (a ) (l ) tv ) (fi ) (ifl ) ( U ) (i > S1.U 6 (b ) (i > (ill ) (L ) &) ' (iii ) and ' 82.21(b ) (2 ) (iii ) (L ) (A ) IU1 ) . Th e RP^propbees^jneverey ^ permittin g euthorit y coul d tak e t o .mak e th e datormi.netio n cha ta iativ e baea s upo n whie h a

* • 

### uni t ha s a n• equivalen t BAC T o r LAS R

### emissions'limitation . Th e •firs t woul db e basa dot f a naverag e o f BAC T o r LAB A fo r aqulvalen t o r simila r aouree a eve r a recan t perio do f tim e (e.g. , mOa t repen t thre e years) , Th e 'secon dwoul db e base de nth e unit'. s

, control , lava l bein g withi nsom e percentag e (e.g. , fiv e or , te n
• 'percent ) o f th e mos t recent , o r averag e o f th e moa t recent , ^^V ^ o r LAB A level s .to

r equivalen t o r simila r soureea. . Th e SP A IAJ^'II^IM - 

### ' 'solicit a commen t o nthes e approache s aa de nth e genera l ieeuee . ^AK* ' Mf_o * concernin g whethe r an dho w .SP A shoul dimpos e a.speoifi o .'• ; UxuJ^ i methodolog y

fo r determinin g tha t a specifi c amission s limit , is , , Cr. '' - . ' I V " a


### ' "comparable " -t

o th e (Curren t JBAC T o r LAB A limit ^ f

k

### ' L durnJt

tti'xt >* '-. Pe r al l o f th e ahov-a - teats , th e BP A realiaes ' that - ther e e.ra . \ man y aouro a and * emlsaio nuni t categorie s fo r whie hBAC T .o r LAS k .determination s d o net.exist , le t alon e recen t determinations .

• ' " • 

### Pe r thes e source» , th a SP A propose s tha t thei r leve l e f contto l b e gauge dageine t th e contro l leve l aeeociate dwit hBAC T o r LAI R fe r am i a sio nunit e wit hsimilar-emissio nstream chara c terieaiCe . ~£*r-cic»A»« - Tha t i s i i f th e Remission s uni t wer e t o underg o a BACT . -or . IAE A

A • ' ' revie w toda y o r recently , wha t technologie s woul db e evaluate d .an dwha t ar e the^urranc j BAC T o r LAE Rlevel a associate dwith ; PJOLXiailAR

y STAF F WORXXW

O DRAF T FO

R6FFXCRO F MA«A0)BSR11T ; AN D ' aVDOS T RXVXS W

• BOB S MO T RRPRBSEW T OFFICIA

L BV A POLICV «• • Jul y

S , 19S B •- • till s aama i Kaacerfi.RS ] ••*. • *



# i^P.1 7 OC T 0 2 '9 5 03-23P n ITPID-IIG/OP G P.12/1 2

' *

» • .% a • • .,-..•' . . . • ... . SI P requijramflnte , includin g an y federally

enforceabl e limit e o n emission s o r eperetlon a an dmino r NS Rrequiremen

t e ; • '

i ' - • * • • Finally , th

e .'determinatio

ntha t a uni t i a "claaa " or ."well - •'controlled

* .unde r today' e proposa l i'e independen t fro m th e ease -
' byoae e determinatio no f .BAC

T o r LAE

Rfo r aource

a subjec t t o ma } o r HSR . whil e contro l t^hnelcgy * whichaua l i f le a a unit'a e • •".clean " .ma y be comparabl e t o BAC T or lAXA , i t i e ne t necessaril y * s equa l to 1 BAC T o r LAER . an din-n o wa y establishe s a preaunptiv a • -fsr-t*<*n\ s •*-.'t j ••«^Z^ , 4> y P « e r cAjk***' * BAC T or,LABA . Further , a fiv e o r te nyea r praeumptie

ntha t a ' uni t i e "cleen * doea no t inan v wa y "fracee * BAC T Or LAB A determination s i npermittin g aetiona . Th

e Ac t require s that * BAC T end-LAS Rbe ourrent eaae-'by-eaa e determinations for source s au bj sot t o majo r NB

A An dth a clea nuni t Wsaveanno- t overrid e thi a •dtWt-MiHecH' t 4. . beecriptip

no f th a Clea nFacilit

y Proposal. ' Simlla ' t o th

e clea nuni t exclusion / BP A i e proposing , a

n * • ' * 

### exclusio n fo rohanges a tclea n facilitias . Thi s "clean ' facility" . ' . 'exclusio n wil l allo wState s t o exclud e fro m .majo rM Rpropoee-d. ' ffi^*^

. change s t o e n existin g najo ratatienary , aource tha tha s installe d jp*Vrfi najo g BAC

T o rLAE Ran d has undergon

e a aai rqualit y impacty\ • analyai aa aappropriate t ath e ere adesignation / o rwhich •

. • y Y. otharvia' aqualif

y .as a"clea n facility'., " AA A propose d section s *\^*\i Bi.iiiU ) U ) (y ) ( O (ii 1 

### ) . 8i.i«6(b ) (2) (iii ) m) an d -...•» • \&£\* SS.ailb ) (2)(Iii ) IM). underthi aexclusion , source s ee n mak e anyv U Jjt

, nBLaczmn rSTAFF HOARM O DSAF T FO R

### ome n orHMtAOBCBM

T AN D 

### W M V^ *

- ' ' BUDORT ABVXSM

• DOB S MOT RlPMaB W OFFICIA

L B A FOLIC * ^\,/^



### - •* * Jv-l y B , IBS S 

### «- • [fil e aafte i Kaaterl.aa ] ** • ,gf* k 

# 4

'W