p. 1



# OAR Box 1793 Prepped byKeeia Richards



### Document

Number: 

# 8 ) ll-F-5 0 Docket Number: 

# A-90-3 7

Printed 11/3/2008 11:31:54

AM Sheet 8 of45P. 2 

# Woul dyou kindl y 

# se etha t thi sgetsto th eright person ? •rtr-j s

I' • I . f" , Vo w ' l



### OPFZC E O F XANAGEXENT AK DWDGE T OFFIC E O F XHFOWCATZO N AK DREGULATORYAFFAIR S



### BATE : -J®'- SEHDER : 

# CffW

#k- z



# - T OI 

# /PetitJis AZUMPLBLAGENCY * FROH : RBCZPZENT' S PA XHC l _ % 

### RECZPZEN T TEXXPHOH E HO. I " TOTA LKDKBE RO P PAGE JZHCLDDZN 6 COVE RSHEE T t li s COMCENTS f

- 

# &/

fL/iIS&eV'

HOTE : I F YO UO OHO T R5CEIV E AL L TH E PAGES , "PLEAS E CAL LA S SOO N A S POSSIBLE . vERZFICATZO N

RO. I 302-395-734 0 OZRAFAXHO. S J&«*3?>726 3P. 3



# ^ s .0 , 1 M

. ' • an d a e define d "b

ya Stat e o r India n Governin g Bod yfo r nonfedera l . 

### > 0 J S land s withi n thei r respective * jurisdictions . Th e propose d (^definitio n attempt s t o includ e th e fundamenta l purpose s fo r whic h V ^ .suchland s hav e bee n establishe d an d preserved . Th e propose d

^ vdefinitio n als o recognize s tha t th e FLM s hav e th e responsibilit y £ t o identif yAQRV s fo r Federa l Clas s I areas . Th e propose d 

### 5 definitio ni e als o intende d to'clarif yth e EPA' s positio ntha t V^ S .State s an

d India n Governing Bodie s mayidentif yAQRV s in . area s k . -whic hthe yelec t t o hav e redesignate d a e Clas s I areas.* 5 3 Se e propose d .section 51* . 166(b ) (40 ) and sectio n 52.2Kb ) (41 ) . ' Th e EPA.i s proposin g t o defin e "advers e impact s o n ai r qualit yrelate d values " a s a deleteriou s effec t resulting @. n -JLyrhole or ' i n par u fromth e emission s o f a propose d sourc e o r modification , tha t interfere s wit hth e management , protection , preservation , o r enjoymen t o f the AQRV s ofj a Federa l Clas s I area . Se e propose d sectio n 51.166(b)(41 ) an d sectio n " 7 52.2 1 (b ) .(42 ) . Unde r th e par t 5 2 PS D regulations , th e propose d definitio n woul d b e i n additio n t o the . existing definitio n o f !'advers e impac t o n visibility " [section-52.21(b ) (29) ] whic hi s derive d from.th e EPA' s visibilit yregulation s adopte d pursuan t t o

5 3 Sectio n 164(e ) o f the . Act - provide s fo r EPAprotectio n o f AQRV s whe n th e EP Ais

- requeste d t o resolv e a disput e betwee n a State.and Trib e abou t th e redesignatio n of'a n are a o r a propose d PS D permit.,Th e reade r i e als o referre d t o the discussio n i n sectio n IV.C. 5 o f thi s preamble , wher e EPAclarifie s it s positio n concernin g th e authorit yo f State s an d Indian tribe s t o establis h AQRVs . PRELIMINARY STAF F WORKINGDRAF T FO R OFFIC E O F MANAGEMENT AN D BUDGE T REVIE W* DOE S NO T REPRESEN T OFFICIAL EPAPOLIC Y ** * Jul y,5 , 199 5 -- - [fil e name : Master6.29 ] ** *P. 4

16 5 th e Act' s visibilit yprotectio n program . Se e existing 4 0 CF R 51.301(a) . Th e propose d definitio n recognize s tha t th e term "advers e impac t o n ai r qualit yrelate d values " ha s specia l meanin g under , th e Ac t tha t i s properl ylimite d t o Federa l clas s I areas . Se e sectio n 165(d ) o f th e Act . A s describe d "previously , 1 permit s mus t b e denie d t o source s whos e emission s would.hav e an . advers e impac t AQRV s i n a Federa l Clas s I area , eve n thoughn o violatio n o f a .Clas s I incremen t woul d resul t fro mthos e emissions . b . .Rol e o f the FLMi n Defining Specifi c AQRVs . I n general , th e EPAexplicitl yrecognize s tha t .FLMs- hav e • specia l expertis e and knowledg e abou t th e Federa l Class . I-areas ; whic hthe ymanage . .I n addition , the EPAagree s wit hth e CAAAC' s recommendatio n tha t th e FLM s shoul d b e expressl yrecognize d a s havin g th e primar yresponsibilit yfo r th e identificatio n o f specifi c AQRVs .

. Th e EPAbelieve s tha t i t i s appropriat e no t t o propos e regulation s tha t woul d dictate•how j th e FLM s identif yAQRV s (an d associate d critica l pollutan t loadings ) o r demonstrat e a n advers e impac t o n AQRVs . Thes e responsibilitie s ar e closel ytie d t o th e C rol e o f th e FLMmandate d b yth e Act , an

d ar e als o integra l t o th e managemen t of , thos e AQRV s unde r th e mandate s o f th e Federa l Land s statute s .a

s wel l (e.g. , Wildernes s Act , 1 6 U.S.C . sec . 113 1 e t Beg. , and . 191 6 Nationa l Park Servic e Organi c Act , 1 6 U.S.C . sec . PRELIMINARY STAF F WORKINGDRAF T FO R OFFIC E O F MANAGEMENT AN D BUDGE T REVIE W* DOE S NO T REPRESEN T OFFICIAL EPA . POLIC Y

. ** * Jul y5 , 199 5 [fil e name : Master6.29 ] ** * 

# 1P. 5

166 . 1 ej : seq. ) Furthermore , becaus e o f th e wid e variet yo f Federa l Clas s I areas * and AQRVs , sensitivitie s o f critica l receptors , an d th e unavailabilit yo f dat a i n man ycases , the EP Abelieve s tha t th e FLMs.mus t hav e sufficien t latitud e t o addres s thes e issue s o n an . area-by-area , a s yel l a s a permi t -b ypermit . . basi s -a- s th e nee d arises . , A t th e same-time , th e EPAencourage s FLM s t o identif y AQRV s o ha regiona l o r nationa l basi s wher e appropriate , and t o . _, : i establis hgenera l procedure s fo r identifying AQRVs. . wr '" " 'jjyr*' c . Rol e o f th e FLMi n Triggering a Clas s I Are a Analysis . , I t i s generall yagree d tha t no t al l source s applyin g for.PS D permit s shoul d hav e tp provid e informatio n concerning potential

Clas s I are a impacts . Variou s factor s concerning a particula r source , includin g th e typ e and, , amoun t o f it s emissions, , distanc e t o th e Clas s I area , significan t terrain

- features , an d surroundin g meteorologica l condition s playkeyrole s i n determinin g whethe r an ysourc e wil l have th e potentia l t o harma Clas s I area . Th e Ac t link s th e nee d fo r Clas s I impac t informatio n wit hth e filing o f a notic e tha t emission s from a . propose d majo r emitting facilit ymayaffec t a particula r Clas s I area . Th e proposa l i s consisten t wit hsectio n 165(d)(2)(C)(i ) o f the ' Ac t whic hrequire s tha t onc e a notic e i s file d th e applican t mus t demonstrat e tha t it s propose d emission s wil l no t caus e o r contribut e t o a violatio n o f th e Clas s I increments ; Se e propose d sectio n .51.16 6 (pM2 ) (i ) an d sectio n 5 2 .2 1 (p ) (2 ) (i ) . .

. PRELIMINARY STAF F WORKINGDRAF T FO R OFFIC E O F MANAGEMENT AND BUDGE T REVIE W* DOE S NO T REPRESENT OFFICIAL EPAPOLIC Y ** * Jul y5 , 199 5 -- - [fil e name s Masters.29 ] ** *P. 6

Inser t - Preambl e p . 166 , lin e 8 : ...general * procedure s fo r identifying AQRVs . NP S ha s assure d EPA that , wit hrespec t t o visibilit yan d othe r AQRVs , fo r specifi c Clas s I areas , th e NP S i s working wit hai r pollutio n effect s scientist s t o develo p list s o f sensitiv e resource s and sensitivit ythresholds . EP Abelieve s tha t suc hdocumentatio n o f AQRV s fo r specifi c Clas s I area s shoul d b e mad e availabl e t o th e public , t o th e maximu mexten t possible , t o infor mpotentia l ne w source s o f th e critica l value s fo r a n area . EPAha s adde d a s a par t o f th e propose d change s Sectio n 51.161(p)(2 ) requirin g th e FL Mt o provid e suc hinformatio n t o th e owner s o r operator s o f a majo r sourc e o r modification .P. 7

16 3 Th e Ac t ahd th e existing PS D regulation s ar e silen t in. , explainin g wha t a n AQR V (other , than visibility ) is, , wha t procedure s shoul d b e followe d fo r definin g an . AQRV , and wha t criteri a shoul d b e use d fo r setting critica l pollutan t loading s fo r determinin g whethe r an advers e impac t o n AQRV s woul d occur . '•'"* ' Th e EPA.i s proposin g t o add genera l definition s fp r th e term s "ai r qualit yrelate d value " an d "advers e impac t o n ai r qualit y relate d values. " In-addition , the . EPAi s clarifyin g its . positio n .concerning th e rol e o f th e FLMi n defining specifi c AQRVs. . a . '.Definitions . Th e EPAi s proposin g t o ad d definition s o f "ai r qualit y relate d value " an

d "advers e impac t on ai r qualit yrelate d values"

- t o bot hset s o f PS D regulations . A s noted , th e Ac t i s silen t i n definin g AQRVs . othe r tha n visibility . However , th e legislativ e historyprovide s th e following : [T ] h e 'ter

m • xai r qualit yrelated-value s ' o f Federa l land s . designate d a s clas s I include s the fundamenta l purpose s fo r whic h suc hlands , have , bee n establishe d an d preserve d byth e Congres s and th e responsibl e Federa l agency . Fo r example , unde r th e 191- 6 Organi c Ac t t o establis hth e Nationa l Par k Service.(1 6 U.S.C . § 1) , th e purpos e o f suc hnationa l par k land s 'i s t o conserv e th e sceneryand th e natura l and histori c object s an d th e wildlif e therei n and t o provid e fo r the enjoymen t o f th e same i n suc h manner , and byeuc hmean s a s wil l leave them unimpaire d fo r th e enjoymen t o f futur e generations. 1 S . Rep.'No . 127 , 95t hCong. , 1s t SesS . 3 6 (1977) . vIj u Th e EP' Apropose s t o defin e "ai r qualit yrelate d value"

- .as.- a *\^f\ e scenic , cultural , physical , biological, , ecological,'o r recreationa l resource, , a s define d by.th e FLMfo r Federa l land s PRELIMINARY STAF F WORKINGDRAF T 'FO R OFFIC E O F MANAGEMENT AN D BUDGE T REVIE W* DOE S NO T REPRESENT OFFICIAL EP APOLIC Y ** * Jul y

5 , 199 5 -- - [fil e name : Master6.29 ] ** * 

# «£ >P. 8

• # . .16 8 informatio n pertainin g t o impact s o n suc hthing s a s soils , vegetatio n and visibilit ywil l hel p th e FLM.conside r a n adverse . ' \ ^7 impac t o n AQRV s wil l occu r an d t o mak e a demonstratio n o f suc h advers e impac t t o th e permitting authority , wher e appropriatei" : Whil e th e Ac t i s silen t concerning the timing for"~filin g thi s notice , th e EP Abelieve s tha t i t i s necessaryan d reasonabl e t o requir e th e FLMo r othe r name d official s t o fil e th e notic e befor e th e permittin g authorit yissue s it s completenes s determinatio n o n th e permi t application . On e reaso n fo r thi s i s tha t th e filin g o f th e notic e -establishes , certai n informationa l requirement s whic hserv e as , a -measure o f the application's , completeness . Moreover , i t i s generall yimportan t tha t th e notic e b e file d earl yi n th e permit , proces s s o tha t th e applican t ca n provid e th e appropriat e Clas s I analyse s i n a.timel ymanne r s o a s no t t o delayth e revie wand . issuanc e o f th e permit . I n some cases , particularl ywher e a sourc e proposes , t p locat e withi n 10 0 kilometers ' fro ma Federa l Clas s I area , th e applican t ma ychoos e t o coordinat e wit hth e FL Mprio r t o th e submitta l o f its . applicatio n i n .order t o b e abl e t o lear n o f an y FLM' s concern s an

d submi t the Clas s I analyse s along wit hth e Othe r required.informatio n i n it s initia l permit

- application . Otherwise , th e FLMwoul d generall ybe expecte d t o fil e th e notic e allegin g potentia l affect s o n th e Federa l Clas s I area , wher e appropriate , during th e 3 0-da yperio d fo r revie wo f th e PRELIMINARY STAF F WORKINGDRAF T FOR OFFIC E O F MANAGEMENT AN D BUDGE T REVIEW * DOE S NO T REPRESEN T OFFICIAL EP APOLIC Y .'*** • Jul y5 , 199 5 -- - [file , name : Master6.29 ] ** *P. 9

16 9 applicatio n for " completeness,'a s provide d unde r today' s proposa l .an d describe d i n sectio n IV.C. 2 o f thi s preamble . I n th e absence , o f - a notic e bein g file d concerning-potentia l Clas s I impacts , the . applican t wil l b e require d t o demonstrat e tha t emission s fromth e propose d sourc e d o not , cause' , o r contribut e t o a violati"b n o f th e Clas s I I increment s o r NAAQ S anywhere . Today' s proposa l t o requir e the notic e to.b e file d prio r t o / th e permittin g authority' s issuanc e o f it s completenes s determinatio n i s no t intende d -t o preclud e the FLMfro mraisin g concern s abou t potentia l affect s a t a late r time during th e .permi t review , althoughth e EPAcertainl yanticipate s tha t thi s wil l no t nee d t o occu r frequently . Th e FL Mmayfil e a notice'a t a late r time if , fo r some reason , i t wa s no t file d prio r t o th e permittin g authority' s completenes s determination ; however , i n filin g late r th e FLMmus t assume a greate r burde n fo r ^^p____^^^^^ MHHV

_ l ^^MP«M_«P^-V«Ma^MW«^_* M M #_^_ ^ demonstratin g a n advers e impact , o n AQRVs . Tha t is , th e FL Mwil l

' • ' * " « • • ' . " ' TM - the n hav e t o wor k wit hth e applican t an d the permittin g authorit y

^m ^»—^___i_____«-"»»-P*I»^ >H MM«Ni-*'-- I

I -> I

I ^M« vw , **—^^~mmmm^m+^^*^^—mw^**^^*^^^^^^m "'^^^^^^ t o obtai n th e necessaryinformatio n i" f it , i s not - alread yi n th e application . Alsp , i n th e absenc e o f a demcnstratio n tha t th e propose d sourc e wil l caus e o r contribut e t o a violatio n o f a Clas s I increment , th e FLMmus t demonstrat e tp th e satisfactio n o f the ' permittin g authorit yan advers e impac t o n AQRVs . Th e EP Arequest s comment s o n thi s aspec t o f th e proposa l i n ligh t o f th e specifi c implication s associate d wit hth e failure/t o PRELIMINARY STAF F WORKINGDRAF T FO R OFFIC E O F MANAGEMENT AN D BUDGE T REVIE W* DOE S NO T REPRESEN T OFFICIAL EPAPOLIC Y •• , ** * Jul y5 , 199 5 [fil e name : Master6.29 ] ** *P.1 0

1 7 1 •• ' specifi c pollutan t emissions , 'it s relativ e locatio n t o th e Clas s I area , and th e known ai r qualit yrelate d value s i n th e affecte d Federa l Clas s I are a to. - suppor t th e allegatio n o f a potential

advers e impac t o n AQRVs . Th e notic e i s intende d for' . administrativ e purpose s an d shoul d no t b e use d fo r any* " prejudgmen t o n th e par t o f th e permitting authorit y'a s t o whethe r anyadvers e impact , o n AQRV s wil l actually.'occur , o r whethe r a Clas s I are a analysi s shoul d b e completed . ""^•__l_____i_____________a>-'-^^^^^^H_l^•_^H HBH ^^^ aMM J aHBHa riiv____i^i^i« ^ «

— ^______****** An importan t relate d issu e concerns.th e responsibilit yfo r ^~* \ carryin g ou t an

yadditiona l technica l analyse s whic hmayb e necessar yfo r th e FLMt o demonstrat e tha t a source' s emission s wil l hav e a n advers e impac t o n AQRVs . Th e EPAgenerall yexpects ' th e analyse s performe d b ythe applican t unde r th e propose d provision s t o enabl e a FLMt o asses s the impact's-o n AQRVs . I n some cages , however , additiona l informatio n maybe . necessar yt o mak e a thoroug hAQR V assessmen t an

d ther e i s a questio n a s t o wh o should , bea r th e responsibilit yfo r suc hinformation . The _ generally"limite d resource s availabl e t o FLM s maymak e i t very 'difficul t fo r themt o independentl ycomplet e al l th e additiona l analyse s whic hma ybe . needed . Applicant s fo r PS D permit s ar e • typicall yrequire d t o provid e informatio n an d analyse s necessary fo r the ' permittin g authorit yt o mak e a variet yof.ambien t ai r qualit ydecisions . Yet , applicant s shoul d no t necessaril yb e expecte d t o conduc t an unlimite d numbe r o f studie s a t the ' reques t PRELIMINARY STAF F WORKINGDRAF T FO R OFFIC E O F MANAGEMENT AND BUDGE T REVIE W* DOE S NO T REPRESEN T OFFICIAL EPAPOLIC Y ** * Jul y5 , 199 5 [fil e name : Masters.29 ] ** * r \$* J 

# 7P.1 1 • ^ r *'^>}^-5ry.^ ^

, 17' 6 • • authorit yfrom " a prospectiv e applican t involving a sourc e tha t woul d construc t withi n 10 0 kilometer s o f a Federa l Clas s I area . A s proposed , th e affecte d FLMmus t be notifie d withi n 3 0 day s o f th e permitting'authority' s receip t o f an ysuc hadvanc e notificatio n o f a PS D permi t application . Se e proposed ; sectio n 51.166 . (p ) (3 ) (i ) ari d sectio n 52.2 1 (.p ) (3 ) (i ) . .

' Th e EP Arecognize s tha t the ' typ e o f earl ynotificatio n tha t a prospectiv e applican t mayprovid e t o th e permitting authority . wil l varyfromone . situatio n t o the next . Thus , the typ e o f notificatio n provide d byth e permitting authorit yt o th e FLM shoul d b e commensurat e wit hth e typ e of.informatio n whic hi s . received . Fo r example , a brief , lette r o r phon e cal l from th e permittin g authorit yt o the"FLM'maybe appropriat e whe n the . information , abou t th e potentia l projec t i s onl yveryprelimi n Additionally , consisten t .wit hCAAAC . recommendations , th' e EP A i s proposin g t o requir e tha t the permitting authorit yprovid e th e FLM'wit hreasonabl e notic e of , and/aft ) opportunit yt o participat e

'pre-applic.atib

n meeting s schedule d wit hprospectiv e PS D applicant s that , woul d locat e .within 10 0 kilometer s o f a Federa l Clas s I . area . Se e propose d sectio n 51.166(p)(3)(ii ) and sectio n 52.2 1 (p ) (3 ) (ii ) . . I f give n such , an earl yopportunity- , th e FLMma y find i t appropriat e t o infor mthe potentia l applican t o f an y concern s abou t Clas s I impact s a s wel l a s an yintentio n t o fil e a notic e allegin g potentia l Clas s I impacts . 

# <? 

# l 

# ^l

PRELIMINARY STAF F WORKINGDRAF T FO R OFFIC E O F MANAGEMENT AN D BUDGE T REVIE W* DOE S NO T REPRESEN T OFFICIAL EPAPOLIC Y ** * Jul y5 , 199 5 [fil e name : Masters.29 ] . ** *P.1 2

' . .' ' 19 1 / ' ' FL Mmus t demonstrat e t o th e satisfactio n o f th e permittin g authorit ythat'an.advers e impact : o n AQRV s wil l occur . Th e permitting^authority's ' concurrenc e wit hsuch*demonstratio n mean s tha t th e permittin g authorit ymus t propos e t o denyth e PS D permit . Se e existin g section s 51.166(p ) (3 ) an d 52.21(p ) (4 ) . '.'Se e also . propose d sections . 51.16 6 (p ) (.6) (ii ) an d 52.21(p ) (6)..(ii ) . ] - •' . . Th e FLM s hav e exper t knowledg e abou t th e land s the ymanag e i t , .. . . ' and ar e expressl yentruste d byth e Ac t wit ha n affirmativ e responsibility , t o protec t th e AQRV s o f Federa l Clas s I areas . Accordingly , th e EP Abelieve s i t i s appropriat e fo r th e 

### v-fcco-W^e, . permittin g authorit yt o 9MttadaJae_ea(B-B*-^(* wthe FLM' s scientifi c an d technica l expertis e i n iAe-->swn.

- evaluatio n a f nl * ri nrmn n r . 1 * irat e ie a • Nevertheless , th e permitting authorit yi s plainl y give n authority.t o determin e whethe r t o accep t or.rejec t th e FLM' s demonstration , and i t mayrejec t the

- demonstratio n a s lon g a s i t ha s a rationa l basis ^ fo r doin g «o. 5 8 Recent , permit " controversie s have underscored^th e need , fo r •nationa l guidanc e addressing th e permitting*authority' s rol e i n evaluatin g th e FLM' s demonstratio n o f a n advers e impac t o n AQRV s an d th e rational e .fo r any . decisio n t o disagre e .wit hth e FLM' s findings , . , For . example , i n a PS D permi t appea l proceeding , th e

5 M' Se e 5 0 FR 28544 , 2854 9 (July12 , 1985) ; se e als o Ol d Dominio n Electri c Cooperative . PS D Appea l No..91-3 9 a t 8 and n . 9 (Jan . 29 , 1992 ) . PRELIMINARY STAF F WORKINGDRAF T FOR OFFIC E O F MANAGEMENT AND BUDGE T REVIE W* ' DOE S NO T REPRESENT OFFICIAL EPAPOLIC Y ** * Jul y.5 , 199 5 [fil e name : Master6.29 ] ** * . 'P.1 3

.19 3 - ' . rejectin g th e FLM' s demonstratio n o f adverse , impact . Se e propose d section s 51.166(p)(6)(iii ) and 51.166(q)(4)(ii ) and (iii ) and sectio n 52.21(p ) (6 ) (iii) . A s proposed , thi s writte n evaluatio n mus t addres s th e followin g factors : \ " —. i . Scientific/Technica l Basis . . ^ Th e permittin g authorit yshoul d ^ippxed^m^mmam^my^mmth e FLM' s scientifi c and technica l expertise ^ • Th e TjerTr/tti'h<_ n g^^0&1&*JA& 1%_

e authorit ymus t conside r al l relevan t dat a an d analyse s submitte d byth e FL Man

d offe r a reasone d explanatio n fo r it s disagreemen t j &irftf<n£f t wit hth e technica l dat a ari d analyses . Se e propose d section'51.16 6 (p)'(6 ) (iii ) (A ) and 52.2 1 (p ) (6 ) (iii ) (A ) . ii . Descriptio n o f th e AQRV s an d a n Advers e Impact . Th e permittin g authorit ymus t addres s th e FLM' s statements - | . describin g th e ai r qualit yrelate d valu e an d th e advers e impac t I / , g n /L pftr *' bein g demonstrated, , th e method s an d procedure s b

ywhic hth e FLM ha s identified , th e AQRVs , an d explai n an

yconclusion s i t reache s tha t ar e inconsisten t wit hthose , recommende d b yth e FLM . See , propose d sectio n 51.16 6 (p ) (6 ) (iii ) (B ) an d 52.2 1 (p ) (6)'(iii ) (B ) . .iii . Mitiaativ e Measures . Th e permittin g authorit yshoul d describ e an yeffort s tha t hav e 'bee

n undertake n t o mitigat e the potentia l impact s o f a propose d sourc e o n th e Federa l Clas s I are a o f concern' , includin g anyestimate d emission s reductions , and.th e effec t o f suc h PRELIMINARY STAF F WORKINGDRAF T FOR OFFIC E O F MANAGEMENT AND BUDGE T REVIE W* DOE S NO T REPRESENT OFFICIAL EPAPOLIC Y .** * Jul y5 , 199 5 -- - [fil e name : Master6.29 ] ** *