P.1 

OAR Box 1790 

Prepped by Keeia Richards 

Document Number: 

236) ll-F-26 

Docket Number: 

A-90-37 

Printed 10/31/200812:43:17 PM Sheet 236 of 250 
0-1/06/95 16:17 ®20 2 208 1620 

04/06/95 14:51 ©3U3 MBS 2822 

WASP NR/AQ NPS 

WASO DENVFR 

P.2 

ITPID-IIG/OPC "2)001/001 

- AOD D.C. 121001/004 

"75, /Ho/fy//*^ 

A-90-37 

DT- F- 5u 

£ . /tV ^ 0 ^ >o«c ftu on. -fa &A. f /O/V -

/ / / *ri CM 

OPTIONAL conn <ia (?-nm 

FAX TRANSMITTAL i ot pjses • 

OonuAoonici y / 

^Z^JS^L£ _ 

ftsrr i^a _ t/2&\r 

4/6/9$ 

U-4.7U0-aSS-3T-l.-4. EM 0 

5000 101 GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 
P.3 

04/06/95 16:17 

04/00/83 14:51 

®20 2 208 1620 

©30 3 969 2822 

WASO NR/AQ NPS -»-»-» ITPID-IIG/OPG 

WASO DENVER •»-•- AQD D. C 

0002/00 1 

81002/004 

X.artlV. t.*m 

J ,J -. t&^'AJi** 'f A- V " , 'mr- ITiX 1 SC^/troiH^T , f j . ^g- . ^ 

consider duch input and decide whether the regulations fZtf r&K 

^^txiZk'ulu- v 0 

WCWiQWW-V. should specifically address these pact, 

Zn addition to tha proppsed ehange te the timing of the 

PLK's submittal, the EPA ie proponing to,ee»t*nifl Uir fuiuiT spe~or -

the deaonotretien under eection 92.21(p)(3) 

lUtLjt-s ^.gyaraijn »r H m adiMmto iapacts ,Zr. / for any AQRV ^ that aay have 

been identified by th* FUf. whan the Federal PSD 

regulations vere originally promulgated, visibility vee the 

only specified AQRV; however, the FLM's have since 

identified various air quality related values for vhich an 

enalysis and a deaanstration ef minm 11 iapaet must be V v V 

completed. pxi>t<L O^lpr^ric!^ 

a. Air gualitjnmodel modele* . ^'V 

The FLMs and PSD applicants often must use models which 

ere not specified ln the EPA's "Guideline on Air Quality 

Models" in order ^"estimate ambient pollutant 

concentrations in class I.areas, Per example, tbe EPA's 

SAOC/fZr-. //** *'*• or*. s*4i*~er AA 

modeling guidance does not c^tfa^qnafcejiaBvea model to 

f 

estiaate ambient concentrations resulting from the longrange transport of pollutants. Xn addition, it is sometisos 

neoeesary te convert aabient concentrations to values that 

reflect effects on specific AQRV's. Questions have arisen 

sbout vhether special modeling analyses performed to asaese 

the impacts on Class I areas (PSD inerepente and AQRV's) 

PRELZKXKAP.Y ffAM WOUXVO DBAVT FOP OPPIC8 OP KAMA0EMBN9 AVD 

SUD91T BCYXlY • fiOEB "MOT RZWtEHEMT OFFICIAL BPA POLICY 

«*• vovembey it, l»»4 — [fileaaae PRSMC x.xxej •** 
P.4 

04/06/95 16:17 ©202 208 1620 WASO NR/AQ NPS -»-»- ITPID-IIG/OPG 121003/004 

04/00/95 14:52 ©303 909 2822 WASO DENVER --- AQD D.C @]003/004 

W*»'» J it'l l M«« « «WO ««CV l>A«W 4-tarHat t<f« OW*.-.- . M>AII > n„ , ^,»*v..J« 

I 

, ^ 

313 

If a proposed souree doee not eauee or contribute to an 

inoreaent violation in a Federal class Z area, 

section 115(d)(2)(c)(ii) of the Aet provides that the FLM 

meyjieyertheiesB demonstrate to the satisfaction of -the— 

y( j**' -£Sfca*e~W-iat the emissions froa the proposed source will have 

an adverse iapaet en the AQRV's of a Federal class I area 

and the permit shall not be issued. Recent permit 

controversies have underscored the need for national 

guidanee addressing the Other's role in aseeeeing a FLM'G

 r 

adverse ixnpaot determination in these circumstances. 

The ,EPA policy currently provides that, in light of the 

FLM'5 expertise, tfte permitting authority must give 

i aa Jul ialiT*i"uui >a i Jet u t ion to a FLM's adverse impact 

determination. However, the final decision rests vith the 

permitting authority and it may reject the FLM's assertion 

ae long as i t has a rational basis ror doing so. fififi so FR 

28544, 28549 (July 12, 198S); see a^eo Old Dowinioq Ele-cjrle* 

Cooperative. PSD Appeal No. 91-39 at 8 and n. 9 (Jan. 29, 

1992) . 

In Hadson Power 14—Buena vista. PSD Appeal Nos. 92-3, 

>», 92-4 k 92-S (Oct. 5. 1992), tha SPA'S Environmental Appeals 

~\Vnj Beard held that Virginia erred in summarily rejecting the 

-h-B-y finding of the •£>«*<*- for the Shenandoah National Park and 

. James Riv«r Fece Wilderness chat the proposed facilit y vould 

PRELIMINARY STAFF WORKING DRAFT FOR OFFXOI OP KlVaGEXEliT AND 

8D0689 R-BVXSV * 00B6 NOT R8PRIB8VX OFFICIAL EPA POLICY 

• ** November is, 1994 — [filename VR1A1C 1.114] **• 
0 1/06/95 16:18 ©20 2 203 1620 

04/06/93 14:32 ©30 3 969 2622 

P.5 

WASO NR/AQ NPS 

WASO DENVER 

4-4 ITPID-IIG/OPG 

-»••-• AQD P C 

@00 1/004 

1004/004 

^"1 

311 

Administrator aust be obtained, and their use must be 

subject to notiee and opportunity for public comment. 

Tho current language aaJcee no distinction betveen 

models used for Class II area analyses and class I analyses, 

and the EPA does net believe there is any reason to conclude 

that such a distinction should be made. Thus, vhile no 

regulatory changes are being proposed, the EPA wishes to 

emphasize its position that any modeling carried out under 

the PSO program te ee 

based en $£*?'EPA-appTt&W~src 

lent pollutant concentrations 

/nScjm/t^r'jT^t'r-vct-.tt.iz 

(subjec 

notiee and opportunity for public comaen vft^flS^* 

guideline aodel is usedX.j^rt is sometimes necessary for 

modeled ambient pollutant concentrations to bo eonverted to 

. .other forms in order te compare them directly to specific 

*—"^ AQRV's. For example, models exist for predicting changes in 

alkalinity (water chemistry) resulting from air quality 

changes caused by emissions increases, other models also 

exist, vhieh are in various stages of development. The SPA 

does not believe that such models are automatically covered 

by the existing PSD regulations, in addition, the EPA does 

not believe that such models should be treated in exactly 

the same manner ae medals which are used for PSO purposes to 

•predict ambient pollutant concentrations. The special 

models that nay need to be used for AQRV analyses should, 

M1LIWNARY 8TAFF WORKING DRAFT FOR OFFICE OF JttMAGEJlBHT ANT> 

l ROME? RBVXEB • D088 NOT R8FRBSOT OFFICIAL IFA FOLICT 

• •• November is, i§»4 •- [filename PRRAX :.U(] ***