P. 1



# OAR Box 

# 1796 Prepped byKeeiaRichards



### Document

Number: 

# 37 ) IV-H-6 3 Docket Number: 

# A-90-3 7

Printed 10/31/20084:20:37

PM Sheet 37 of 107I16:2 2FA X91 9 54 1 550 9 1B213:4 5 313-484012 2 NG'->-22-?00 203 : d O OP GII GEPA EC P 

### P. 2 2103 0 PAG E 03/1 3 P.Wl^l b

To Fax* : From FA XTRANSMISSIO N OFFIC E O P INFORMATTO N AN D (-IESULATORYAFFAIR S

OFFIC E O FMANAGEMEN TAN D BUD-SET NATURA L BESOUBCES . £NERS > AN D AGRICULTUR E BRANC H

72 5 17t h Street . NW . Roo m 1020 2 Washington . foC 2050 3 Office : 202-395-3084/FaJt : 202-395-728 5

) Ar tFraas ) Ric h Therou x ) Ji m Lait y ) Amand a Le e Am yFarrel l ) Bryo n Alle n ) Morgt e Malanosk i ) Davi d Rostke r ) Rut h Solomo n ) Edman d To y v . J " Date : Page s 

# hi

# Qvt

7 

# )

. . includin g fhi » i:ov« rshee t 

# £

3

DOCKE T

Comments - . 

# Pirvp An~\t-yf^^^L. A ( 

# * - 

# A**

r*xsHseTKio »P. 3 P.02/1 6 , NOU^W-200 2 03=4 6

Internal , and Deliberativ e Draft

- D o no t quote , cite , copy , o r distribute . ^y^Y^^-tf :^ Novembe r 19 , 200 2 • . \J .outcome , b

yrequiring th e reviewing authorit yt o e.oasidisrevaluate-TgfiegBSr you r -PA L cemLiuufets t o LH= I -roQDbnabX

y ^tepiefa'tiiiLdLive-e ^ baselin e actua l emission s a t the time o f PA L permi t renewal . Althoug hwe believ e tha t a periodi c revie wo f th e leve l o f th e PA

L mayb e necessary , an d tha t thi s mayresul t i na n adjustmen t i n you r PA L t o a leve l tha t i s representativ e o f you r baselin e actua l emissions , we do no t believ e tha t we shoul d mandat e a

n adjustmen t t o the PA L base d on onl yon e prescribe d methodology . Suc hanapproac hcoul d lead t o inappropriat e results , a s discusse d below . Instead , w e believ e tha t ou r concern s can b e appropriatel yaddresse d b y providin g the State s the authorit yt o adjus t th e PA L base d on wha t i s representativ e o f you r baselin e actua l emissions . W e believ e tha t some discretio ni n determining wha t i s representativ e o f actua l emission s i s appropriate ^ based r i n part- r on ou r experienc e wit hthe pilo t project s previousl y mentioned . I n on e instance , a participan t voluntaril y agree d t o reduc e it s actua l emission s b y5 4 percen t i n exchang e fo r obtaining a source—-wid e emission s cap . Afte r agreein g to'thi s emission s reduction , the participan t furthe r reduce d emission s b yincreasing captur e efficienc y an d incorporating pollutio n preventio nstrategie s int o it s 20 5-e±- i

NOU-li-200 2 0 3 = 4 6 P.03/1 6

Internal , ari

d Deliberativ e Draft

- D o no t quote , cite , copy , o r distribute .

Novembe r 19 , 200 2 relevan t terminologyfo r calculating a post modificatio n (changerpre-chang e emission s increas e fo r mos t application s i s no w^baselin e actua l emissions ^ rathe r tha n factua l emissions. ^ Yo u mayus e an yconsecutiv e 24-mont hperio d i n th e pas t 1 0 year s t o determin e your baselin e actua l emissions . Second , we ar e supplementing th e existing "actual-t o •potentia l ^actual.-to-poten t ia l applicabilit ytes t wit ha n "actua l -to projecte d •actual"actual-to-pro i iected

actua. 1 applicabilit ytes t fo r determining i f a non-routin e physica l o r operationa l chang e a t a n existing emission s uni t wil l resul t i n an emission s increase . Notwithstandin g th e ne wtest , yo u wil l stil l hav e th e abilit yt o conduc t an• "aotual'-tu potentia l "actua l -to-poten t ial , typ e tes t withi n th e ne w"actual-to-oronacte d aetual^actual-to-DroJected

actua l applicabilit ytest . I n thi s case , yo u wil l no t b e i / • 1 subjec t t o certai n recordkeeping requirement s tha t -woulo O If/r/c,*, 

# tfo**s pcfXofcfrgrw-is

e appT^ T *r V^Atvd Fo r EUSGUs , w e ar e makin g severa l change s t o th e existin g procedure s an d ar e codifying ou r curren t polic yfo r U"^ X calculatin g th e baselin e actua l emissions . Tha t is , th e baselin e actua l emission s fo r EUSGU s i s th e averag e rate , i n tona pe r yeartpv , a t whic htha t th e uni t actuall yemitte d th e pollutan t during a 2-yea r (consecutive 24-month ) perio d 2 0 

# JNOU-22-200 2 03:4 6 

# 1 P. 5 P.04/1 6 

# l^)^s^'>^ ^ • Interna l and Deliberativ e Draft

- D o no t quote , cite , copy , o r distribute . Novembe r 19 , 200 2 Today' s actio n amend s th e existing NS Rregulation s t o provid e yo u wit ha common^applicabilit ytes t fo r al l existin g emission s unit s -th e "actua l t o prujected

aotual"actual-to-projected-actua l applicabilit ytest . Thi s tes t ha s change d i n som e way s from

bot hthe 199 6 NPR Man d th e 199 8 NOA . A s describe d i ngreate r detai l i nsection s II. C and II. D below , the keyfeature s o f the methodologyar e asfollows : I f yo u ar e a n existing emission s uni t (othe r thanan EUSGU) , yo u wil l determin e th e pre-chang e (baseline ) actua l emission s b ycalculating a

n averag e annua l emission s rate , i n tonspe r yeartpy , using an y consecutiv e 24-months2 4 month s during the 10-yea r perio d immediatel ypreceding the change . Thi s rat e mus t b e adjuste d downwar d t o reflec t an ylegall y enforceabl e emissio nlimitation s impose d afte r th e selecte d baselin e period. ' W e ar e codifying th e "2-yeava •irr-5"2-in-5-years " presumptio n fo r calculating th e baselin e actua l emission s fo r EUSGUs . I f yo u ar e a

n existing emission s uni t (including EUSGUs) , yo u wil l estimat e post-chang e emission s (projecte d actua l emissions) , i n tuns - par—yeartpy , t o 4 8NOU-22-200 2 03=4 7 P.05/1 6

Internal , and Deliberativ e Draft

- D o no t quote , cite , copy , o r distribute . WlW 6 ? ^yfe^rack) o r repor t you r post-chang e emissions . t lfP s< ^ ^ A s discusse d earlier , th e cu-gjferr t regulation s provide ^ tha t whe n you r emission s unit , othe r thana nelectri c uti-lit ysLfcra mgenerating unit—f-EUSGU^ , "ha s no t begun norma l operations, " actua l emission s equa l th e PT E o f th e unit . Ther e hayv e bee n considerabl e issue s raise d wit hthi s approach . Fo r example , using potential—b o emitPT E a s a measur e o f post-chang e emission s automaticall yattribute s al l possibl e emission s increase s t o th e change . Ther e ar e manycases , however , wher e thi s simpl yi s no t true . Moreover , whe n th e actual-to-potentia l tes t i s applied ^ i t i s automaticall yassume d tha t the emission s uni t ha s no t begun norma l operation s afte r the chang e period . I n man y suc hcases , however , the change d uni t a s a practica l matte r wil l functio n essentiall ya s i t di d befor e th e change . W e are , therefore , allowing al l existing emission s unit s t o us e an actual-to-projected-actual

- emiAsionsar>plicab.ilit ytest . Accordingly ^ w e ar e eliminating th e term "begunnorma l operations " fromth e determinatio no f whethe r a chang e result s i n a significan t emission s increase. 1 1

r / W e d o mak e us e o f the ter m"resume s regula r operations " (a s oppose d t o "norma l operations" ) i n th e fina l rule

- B ^ bu t tha t termha s a verydifferen t meanin g an d w e ar e using i t fo r a n entirel ydifferen t purpose . Specifically , w e ar e 5 1P. 7

NDU-22-200 2 03=4 ? P.06/1 6

Interna l an dDeliberativ e Draft - D o no t quote , cite , copy , o r distribute . Novembe r 19 , 200 2 th e selecte d 24-mont hbaselin e perio d an d i s not . relate d t o th e change . Accordingly , yo u wil l calculat e th e unit's

projecte d actua l emission s a s the produc t of : (1 ) th e hourl y emission s rate , whic hi s base d onthe emission s unit' s operationa l capabilitie s following the change(s) , taking int o accoun t legall yenforceabl e restriction s tha t coul d affec t th e hourl yemission s rat e following th e change(s) ; an d (2 ) th e projecte d leve l o f utilization , whic hi s base d on bot hth e emission s unit' s historica l annua l utilizatio n rat e an d availabl e informatio nregarding the emission s unit' s likel ypost-chang e capacit yutilization . I n calculatin g th e projecte d actua l emissions , yo u shoul d conside r bot hthe expecte d an d th e highes t projection s o f th e busines s activit ytha t you expec t coul d b e achieve d an d tha t ar e consisten t wit hinformatio nyou r compan ypublishe s fo r business-relate d purpose s sucha s a stockholde r prospectus , o r application s fo r busines s l c .oans. ] n Whe n determining ^ projecte d actua l emission s befor e bequHTTn a

construction ^ vo u mus t proie^fe-'-FTT e highes t ^annua. ] at e tha t th e emissi^ftg^unit s (includin g EUSGUs ) tha t ar e e n >

d wij., 1 achiev e onc e thevresume /lorma l ; e ra t io n 7^ ) Fromthe initia l calculation , yo u maythe nmak e th e appropriat e adjustmen t t o subtrac t ou t an yportio n o f 6 4NOU-22-200 2 03:4 7 P. 8 P.07/1 6

Interna l an

d Deliberativ

e Draft

- Do no t quote , cite , copy , or distribute . Novembe r 19 , 200 2 •unit-by-uni t basis , th e —monitorin g mus t b e sufficien t t o provid e dat a tha t demonstrat e tha t emission s do.no t excee d th e applicabl e limi t fo r a particula r unit . Unde r th e tiaditionalthi s approach , i f a n emission s uni t ha s t o mee t a n NSP S VOC

limi t o f 9 ppm , the

—monitorin g nee d onl y demonstrat e tha t VOC emission s ar e n o highe r tha n 9 pp mbu t not nmeasur e VOC^emission s a t an yprecis e leve l belo w9 pp m (fo r example , 7 ppm , 8 ppm) . I n contrast , unde r a VO C emission s actua l PAL , th e VO C emission s fro m

eac hemission s uni t mus t b e quantifie d (i n tpy ) , generall yeac hmont ha s th e sumo f th e previou s 1 2 month s o f VO C emissions . thus , i t become s necessar yt o requir e monitorin g tha t quantifie s th e emission s fro meac h emission s uni t t o ensur e tha t th e annua l limi t i s enforceabl e a s a practica l matter . A s a result , th e monitorin g requirement s fo r emission s unlet s unde r a PA L ma y b e mor e stringen t tha n fo r thos e emission s unit s no t unde r a PAL . • I n man yinstances , you r emission s unit s ma yhav e monitorin g suitabl e fo r determinin g complianc e wit ha unit ^ specifi c emissio n limitatio n o n a periodi c basi.s , i n accordanc e wit htitl e V requirements , bu t ev&n tha t monitorin g frequenc yo f dat a collectio n ma yno t b e appropriat e fo r rrtt-gM&Jru u mai,d's~luii.3

- e^raret

if-icat. i nn . -£G>J : a 12

- 15 2NOU-22-200 2 03=4 8 P. 9 P.08/1 6

Interna l and Deliberativ e Draft

- D o no t quote , cite , copy , o r distribute . Novembe r 19 , 200 2 •monitorin

g system s accuratel ydetermin e emission s from each uni t subjec t t o a PAL . Yo u wil l nee d t o collec t suc hdat a fromal l unit s subjec t t o th e PAL , including thos e tha t ar e unregulate d a t th e presen t time . I f yo u d o no t hav e curren t emission s data ^ or^i f you r emission s unit' s operatio n an d equipmen t hav e change d sinc e collectio n o f tha t data , yo u wil l nee d t o obtai n current , accurat e data , typicall yb y conductin g performanc e test s o r othe r direc t measurement s before.submissio n o f you r complet e permi t applicatio n t o obtai n a PAL . I n addition,•yo u wil l nee d t o re-validat e th e dat a an d an ycorrelatio n t o demonstrat e tha t you r monitorin g system s continu e t o accuratel ydetermin e emission s fromeac huni t subjec t t o a PAL . Thi s re-validatio nmus t occu r a t leas t onc e everyfivej i year s fo r the lif e o f th e PAL . Dat a mus t b e re-validate d througha performanc e evaluatio ntes t o r othe r scientificall yvali d mean s tha t i s approve d byth e reviewin g authority . Yo u mus t conduc t al l testing i naccordanc e wit htes t < . ^method s appropriat e t o you r emission s uni t an d applicabl e rp "~^requirement ^ Fo r example , among th e tes t method s fo r ^•<-jmeasurin g organi c emission s ar e Method s 18 , 25 , 25A , an d 25B , whic hcan b e foun d i n4 0 CFRpar t 60 , appendi xA . 15 4 ^

_P.1 0

NOU-22-200 2 03=4 8 P.09/1 6

Interna l an d Deliberativ e Draft

- D o no t quote , cite , copy , o r distribute . Novembe r 19 , 200 2 •solvent wit h25 . percen t VOC s (as demonstrate d using Metho d 311) . Yo u woul d b e require d t o repor t an d includ e 2 ton s o f VO C emission s (sinc e 8 * 0.2 5 '- 2 ) fo r tha t mont ht o compar e wit hth e PAL , eve n thoughsome o f the VOC s ma yno t ultimatel yb e emitted . (For example , the ycoul d b e retaine d i n you r emission s unit' s produc t o r i na proces s waste. ) ACEMS , couple d wit ha CERM S a s wel l a s anADH S (collectivel yknow

na s a CEMS) , mayb e use d t o measur e an d verif yth e PA

L pollutan t concentration , volumetri c ga s flow (i f applicable) , an d PA L pollutan t mas s emission s discharge d t o th e atmospher e fro meachemission s uni t emitting th e PA L pollutant . I f a-vou r sourc e utilizes

- a CEM S approach , tir e auumeyo u mus t ensur e tha t th e CEM S meet s th e applicabl e Performanc e Specification s i n4 0 CFRpar t 60, appendi xB . Th e CEM S mus t b e capabl e o f dat a sampling a t leas t onc e every1 5 minutes . I naddition , the ^ouiL.ey_g u mus t b e abl e t o conver t th e dat a obtaine d fro mthe CEM S system

t o a mas s emission s rate . I J a significan t ^^emissd . o n s um t wishes / t o use/cEMS r i •allir>sta i lIation , car t i f ica t ion , afl d testing/mus t b e ^conducted^withi n 6 month. ^ o f t the PA L permi t issua/ce . Thes e type s o f monitoring system s ar e appropriat e fo r emission s source s subject

- t o respectiv e sulfu r dicxideSO-. , nitroge n oyiidesNO,. , carbo n monoxide , particulat e matte r 

# I i^ciw^V 0

# fP.1 1 NQU-22-200 2 03=4 8 P.10/1 6

Internal , an d Deliberativ e Draft r D o no t quote , cite , copy > o r distribute . Novembe r .19 , 200 2 operationa l time s whe n a n emission s correlatio ni s no t available . I f ^significan t emission s uni t wishes ' t o us e paramete r m^itopanq, , perjcormanc ytesting Reede d tc yprovid e £h e corpelatig/ T between/th e monitore d paramete r an/ j th e emiss/on s mys t b e con/ucte d withi n 6 mont/h s o f th 4 PA

L permi t issuance . u

i nN

II Alternatively / the reviewing authorit ymaydecid e tha t operatio n o f th e emission s uni t during period s wher e ther e i s n o emission s correlatio ni s a violatio no f th e PAL . The PAL permi t .mus t includ e enforceabl e requirement s i f eithe r o f thes e alternative s t o th e require d correlatio n fo r •Pgaramete r Mgjonitorin g ar e used . Emissio n factor s mayb e used fo r demonstratin g complianc e wit hPALs , s o long a s the factor s ar e adjuste d fo r th e degre e o f uncertaint yo r limitation s i nth e factors ' development . I n ascertaining whethe r anemissio n facto r i s appropriate , yo u an d your reviewing authorit yshoul d conside r th e contributio n o f emission s fromth e emission s uni t i n relatio n t o th e PAL , the siz e o f th e emission s unit , an d th e margi n o f complianc e o f th e emission s unit . I n addition , i f th e emissio nfacto r approac hi s taken , the emission s uni t shal l operat e withi n th e designate d rang e o f us e fo r th e emissio n factor . 16 1NOU-22-200 2 03=4 9 _EJ2 _ P.11/1 6

Interna l and Deliberativ e Draft

- D o no t quota , cite , copy, o r distribute .

. Novembe r 19 , 200 2 •hig hloa d condition s a s demonstrate d throughmultipl e performanc e tests ) fo r eac hemission s unit . Yo u must , however , us e on e o f the accepte d monitorin g approaches , includin g alternativ e monitorin g approve d b yth e reviewin g authority , fo r thes e period s o r calculat e th e emission s durin g thes e period s b yassuming the highes t pate n ti-al—to bjjfiitPT K withou t considering enforceabl e emissio n limitation s o r operationa l restrictions . I n addition , th e rul e permit s the reviewing authorit y t o us e th e reasonabl yestimate d highes t potentia l emission s withou t considering—enforceabl e emissio nlimitation s fo r period s whe n you r emission s uni t operate s outsid e it s paramete r range(s ) establishe d i n th e performanc e test —/ unles s anothe r metho d i s speeifre d in—the

- permit , an d includ e thos e emission s i nthe 12-mont hrolling tota l during those

- pa-riaii s i n orde r t o demonstrat e complianc e wit hth e PAL . Alternatively , th e reviewing authorit ymaydecid e tha t operatio n outsid e th e range(s ) establishe d i n th e performanc e tes t i s considere d a violatio n o f th e PAL . Th e reviewin g authorit ymus t decid e howt o handl e emission s whe n th e uni t i s operating outsid e th e range s establishe d i n th e performanc e test s prio r t o the issuanc e o f th e PA L permi t and mus t includ e appropriat e enforceabl e condition s i nthe 16 6- NOU-22-200 2 03=4 9 P.1 3 P.12/1 6

Interna l and Deliberativ e Draft

- D o no t quote , cite , copy , o r distribute . Novembe r 19 , 200 2 and inten t underlying NSR . W e believ e th e PA L regulation s constitut e a reasonabl e interpretatio no f th e Act' s definitio n o f "modification " an d ar e permissibl e unde r curren t law . Th e definitio n o f "modification " se t fort hi nsectio n 111(a)(4 ) o f th e Ac t i s fundamenta l t o determinin g majo r NS R applicability . Pursuan t t o the Act , th e termmodificatio n mean s "an

yphysica l chang e i n o r chang e i n th e metho d o f operatio n o f a stationarysourc e whic hincrease s th e amoun t o f an yai r pollutan t emitte d b ysuchsourc e o r whic hresults , i n th e emissio n o f an yai r pollutan t no t previousl y emitted. " Th e statute , however , doe s no t prescrib e the methodologyfo r establishing a stationarysource' s emission s baselin e fromwhic hemission s increase s ar e measured . Whe n a statut e i s silen t o r ambiguou s wit hrespec t t o specifi c issues , th e relevan t inquiryi s whethe r th e agency' s interpretatio n o f th e statutoryprovision s i s permissible . Chevron , USAU.S.A.,, , Inc . v . NRDC , Inc. . 46 7 U.S . '837 , 86 5 (1984 ) . Accordingly , EPAi s . exercising it s discretion/"^emperer J wit hi^s~~-e^p^riencejL£ o develop reasonabl e alternative s t o determin e NS Rapplicabilit ytha t ar e consisten t .wit hthe statutoryprovision s an d Congressiona l inten t underlyin g th e 17 6 • ^. . NOU-22-200 2 03=4 9 P.1 4 P.13/1 6

Interna l an d Deliberativ e Draft

- D o no t quote , cite , copy , o r distribute . Novembe r 19 , 20Q 2 •unit s tha t hav e • installe d goo d emission s controls , man y commenter s indicat e tha t i t woul d b e inappropriat e fo r EPA t o "confiscate " suc hemission s reductions . Suc hanapproac h woul d encourag e source s t o pollut e t o maintai n a highe r baselin e emissions , an d woul d penaliz e thos e source s wh o woul d voluntaril yreduc e emissions . At leas t on e commente r maintain s tha t bot hyo u an d the environmen t shoul d benefi t fromthes e reductions , an d thus , yo u shoul d b e allowe d t o retai n a portio n o f you r voluntaryemission s reductions . W e agre e wit hsom

e commenter s tha t mandatin g an adjustmen t a t renewal , base d solel yoncurren t operation s an d emission s levels , woul d discourag e th e voluntary emission s reduction s th e PAL i s specificall ydesigne d t o encourage.—Today,—w e air e finalizing our propo&a l t o retai n a 2 0 pe r cen t operating cushio n whe n renewing the PAL . Thi s provision s wil l b e .supplemente d asdiscusse d furthe r 'below . W e agre e wit hcommenter s tha t bot hyo u an d the environmen t shoul d benefi t fromyour commitmen t t o compl ywit ha PAL . Shoul d yo u engag e i nvoluntaryemission s reductions , w e believ e yo u shoul d b e abl e t o retai n far^&r^zTon o f thes e -emission s -reductiong-aTTti-lth e accompanying flexibilit ytha t encourage d yo u t o mak e thes e reductions . A t th e time o f renewal , i t mayb e verydifficul t fo r a reviewing authorit y 19 9P.14/1 6

NOO-22-200 203=5 0

Interna lan dDeliberativ eDraft - Dono tquote , cite , copy , o rdistribute . Novembe r19 , 200 2 units , th e resulting emission s leve l wil l excee d your • curren t PA

L whe n combine d wit hthe emission s frombot hyour smal l emission s unit s an d you r newemission s unit' s allowabl e emissions . 12 . Wha t complianc e monitoring , reporting , recordkeeping , and testin g (MRRT ) t requirement s ar e necessaryt o ensur e the enforceabilit yo f PAL s a s a practica l matter ? Th e MRR T requirement s fo r PAL s ar e addresse d below . Numerou s commenters , generall yStat e agencies-and environmenta l groups , stat e tha t adequat e monitoring , reporting , an

d recordkeeping requirement s woul d b e necessary t o ensur e tha t the PA L limit s wer e federall yenforceable . Some commenter s hol d tha t th e monitoring , recordkeeping , an d reportin g provision s woul d b e to o burdensome an d restrictive . Some believ e tha t PAL s woul d no t b e viabl e becaus e o f thes e requirements . \ Severa l commenter s request(Jytha~w e clarif yth e monitorin g tha t i s necessaryt o showcomplianc e wit ha PAL , especiall yi n relatio n t o th e CA Man d titl e V

programs . Several

- commenter s prefe r tha t the monitorin g requirement s b e flexibl e an

d simple . Thes e commenter s urg e u s no t t o us e CAM , requir e CEMS , o r establis hstringen t protocols . Afe w commenter s prefe r tha t we no t defin e wha t woul d b e federall y 21 3P.15/1 6

NDU-22-200 2 03=5 0

Internal , an

dDeliberativ e Draft

- D o no t quote , cite , copy , o r distribute. .

Novembe r 1.9 , 200 2 ."substantiall ya s effective " a s BAC T i f i t achieve s a n emissio n limitatio n tha t i s equa l t o o r bette r than—th e averag e of . th e emission-limitation s achieve d b ya 1-1—th

e source s fo r whic ha DAC T o r LAE Rdeterminatio n-has bee n mad e withi n th e preceding 0 year s an d entered , int o th e RDLC,—arr d fo r which-i t is—technicall yfeasibl e t u appl yth e DAC T o r LAE n contro l technolog yt o th e emissions—unit . I na nonattainmen t area , you r emission s uni t w¥f.l achiev e a leve l o f contro l tha t i s "substantiall ya s effective " a s LAER,[tf ^ i t achieve s an emissio nlimitatio ntha t i s at_—Le-a-&t-"a s s-txXn^errt—a-s-^rry^-Qfte ^ pcr f orm4xig^-s-ifflila r sourtJeSNEo r whic ha LAEB-.-d^t-e-r^JLax^-efT'lTa s bee nmade~~~wtrt'hi

n th v e~-^£^gedJjQjg--4-^ea^r§^_ J The reviewing authorit ywil l mak e a decisio n o n whethe r a particula r ai r pollutio ncontro l technology(whichinclude s pollutio n preventio no r wor k practices ) i s "substantiall ya s effective " a s the BACT/LAE R technologyfo r a specifi c sourc e o n a case-by-cas e basis . WK^JS i w e ar e no t promulgating specifi c requirement s o r performanc e criteri a fo r satisfying the "substantiall ya s effective " test , w e believ e reviewing authoritie s ar e i n th e bes t positio n t o determin e whethe r i nfac t a particula r ai r pollutio n contro l technolog y(whichinclude s pollutio n preventio n o r wor k practices ) i s "substantiall ya s 23 2P.1 7

,NOU-22-200 2 03=5 0 P.16/1 6

Interna l and Deliberativ e Draft

- D o no t quote , cite , copy , o r distribute . Novembe r 19., . 200 2 .operations . Unexpectedly , th e participan t als o suffere da n unusua l economi c downtur ntha t cause da decreas e i n th e rat e Ln g decreas e i n actua l V ( AJA° ^ productio nan d a correspondi i y i ('pTtiissinns

. A tthf ttim e o frsns i /*L, }' emissions . A t th e tim e o f renewa l o f th e source-^wid e /« v( V V emission s cap , th e participant' s actua l emission s wer e 1 0 V T PC , ( iA(vpercen t o f it s actua l emission s befor e committin g t o th e

^ /\2 / emission s cap . Th e participan t chos e no t t o rene wit s \ \ emission s caps , becaus e renewa l require da nautomati c

^ ^ adjustmen t t o it s curren t actua l emission s level . Clearly , \ C J5. \ unde r a PA L provides , an d discourage s yo u fro mundertakin g \ voluntar yreductions . Accordingly , altj^ug htoday' s fina l ..N ^ ^ysuc ha resul t contravene s th e mutua l benefit s operatin g

* ' rule s requir e th e reviewin g authorit yto . consider^^tfovmwATii ,

^d-jUTTLmuii L u l thu « PAL*wne nyou-ir curren t baselin e actua l emission s plu s th e significan t leve l ar e les s tha n8 0 percen t o f you r PA L level , 44—arirSc^provide s th e reviewin g authorit yth e abilit yt o rejec t such 1 a n outcom e whe ni t leads—t o a n "inappropriat e result—suc has—th e on e tha t occurred—rn—th e ••example—abovediscretio n.t o conside r a ~-^g^" i ffit* t -frf--Partorg- i ne.34iab.l.i.6h.j.-ru3-"-t?fa e appropriat e level, . W e ar e als o providin g you r reviewin g authorit y discretio nt o tak e int o accoun t measure s necessar yt o preven t a violatio no f a NAAQ S o r PS D increment , an d t o

TOTR L P.1 6