p. 1



# OAR Box 1778 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 268 ) IV-C-14 Docket Number: 

# A-90-0 6

Printed 10/28/2008 9:51:04

AM Sheet 268 of 276TEL : 202-252-045 1 Ja n27,9 2 3:5 2 No.00 8 P.0 2 1 

### .HQ*nPQP S A 

### -qO- ^ (JAS?

PS



### ^ 9 

### S* UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENC Y WASHINGTON , D.C . 20460 **t m& & DE C I 3 jqa j

OFFIC E O F AI R AN D RADIATIO N FROM : Willia

mG . Rosenbefg^^i^W^--^— ' Assistan t Administrato r ^&~-* fo r Ai r an

d Radiatio n " TO : Linda Stunt z

DeputyUnde r Secretary Policy , Planning , an d Analysi s U.S . Departmen t o f Energ y Yo u hav e aske d fo r a n outlin e o f wha t majo r change s EP Ai s making i n th e WEPC O regulatorypackage . A s yo u know , EP Ai s currentl yi n th e proces s o f evaluating th e comment s receive d during the publi c commen t period . Ou r preliminaryreviewo f th e comment s receive d s o fa r ha s identifie d some specifi c issue s 1 woul d lik e t o bring t o you r attention . Ther e ma yals o b e additiona l issue s tha t ar e identifie d during th e commen t perio d tha t wil l b e reflecte d i n ou r draf t fina l rule , bu t I hav e endeavore d t o mentio n al l o f th e significan t issue s w e hav e identifie d t o date . Pending a complet e revie wo f al l comment s received , EP A expect s t o mak e veryfe wchange s t o th e propose d rul e an d intend s t o propos e a fina l rul e whic hi s consisten t wit hth e Administration' s WEPC O policy . O f course , th e publi c commen t perio d ha s no t close d an d EP Acanno t mak e an

yfir mdecision s on th e exac t term s o f th e fina l rul e unti l al l comment s hav e bee n receive d an d reviewed . Perhap s the mos t controversia l aspec t o f th e propose d rul e i s EPA' s proposa l t o adop t a presumptio n tha t bes t availabl e contro l technolog

y(BACT ) fo r emission s o f NOxfro mexisting coal-fire d electri c utilit ystea mgenerating unit s woul d b e the technolog y require d unde r sectio n 40 7 o f th e Clean Ai r Act . Significan t negativ e commen t o n thi s issu e wa s receive d claiming tha t suc ha presumptio n i s illega l an d conflict s wit hth e statutor yrequiremen t tha t BAC T b e a case-by-cas e decision . Consequently , EPAi s considering deleting the presumptio n i n th e fina l rul e Ther e ar e tw o othe r aspect s o f th e rulemaking that , base d o n EPA' s initia l revie wo f comments , wil l requir e additiona l clarification . I n general , th e change s wil l b e consisten t wit hth e testimon

yo f EP Aan d DO E a t the Jul y2 2 hearing . Specifically , EP A i s considering clarifying th e degre e t o whic ha utilit ymus tP. 3



### - l 

### -,.-r

### ~> TEL : 9OM-252-045 1

documen t th e basi s fo r it s exclusio n o f deman d - growt hfromit s projectio n o f increase d capacit yutilization . I n addition , th e fina l rui e ma ydiscus s mechanism s necessar yt o ensur e th e accurac y an d enforceabilit yo f th e factor s relie d o n i n makin g applicabilit y determinations . W e remai n committe d t o sendin g th e draf t fina l rul e t o OM B by Januar y17 . I hop e tha t th e abov e informatio n help s yo u i n preparin g fo r tha t upcomin g revie wprocess . Pleas e giv e m e a cal l i f w e ca n b e o f furthe r assistance .