+(,121/,1(

Citation: 57 Fed. Reg. 18070 1992 

Content downloaded/printed from 

HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org)

Thu Feb 5 18:58:09 2015

-- Your use of this HeinOnline PDF indicates your acceptance

 of HeinOnline's Terms and Conditions of the license

 agreement available at http://heinonline.org/HOL/License

-- The search text of this PDF is generated from 

 uncorrected OCR text.
Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 82 / Tuesday, April 28, 1992 / Proposed Rules

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[FRL-4127-1]

State Implementation Plans; General

Preamble for the Implementation of

Title I of the Clean Air Act

Amendments of 1990; Supplemental

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: General Preamble for future

proposed rulemakings; Appendices.

SUMMARY: 'T'he EPA published a General

Preamble for the Implementation of title

I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of

1990 on April 16, 1992 (57 FR 13498). This

document describes EPA's preliminary

views on how EPA should interpret

various provisions of title I of the Clean

Air Act Amendments of 1990, primarily

those concerning State implementation

plan (SIP) revisions required for

nonattainment areas. It serves as

advance notice of how EPA generally

intends, in subsequent rulemakings, to

take action on SIP submissions.

The appendices to the General

Preamble were inadvertently omitted.

The appendices contain important

support materials that are referenced

throughout the General Preamble.

Therefore, this notice, containing the

aforementioned appendices, serves as a

supplement to the General Preamble and

should be considered as such.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. Brock Nicholson, Chief, Policy

Development Section, Ozone/CO

Programs Branch (MD-15) at (919) 541-

5517, for issues related to ozone or

carbon monoxide; Mr. Eric Ginsburg at

(919) 541-0877, Sulfur Dioxide/

Particulate Matter Programs Branch

(MD-15), for issues related to sulfur

dioxide, particulate matter, or lead; Mr.

Gary McCutchen at (919) 541-5592,

Permits Programs Branch (MD-15), for

issues related to new source review,

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina

27711; Ms. Paula Van Lare at (202) 260-

3450 for issues related to mobile

sources. 401 M Street. SW. Washington.

DC 20460.

ADORESSES: The appendices are also in

Air Docket A-91-35. at 401 M Street,

SW, Washington. DC.

Dated: April 21. 1992.

Michael Shapiro,

Acting Assistant Aamnistrator for Air and

Radiation.

Appendix A-Glossary

ACT=alternative control technique

AVO= average vehicle occupancy

BACM=best available control measures

BACT= best available control technology

CAA= Clean Air Act

CAAA-Clean Air Act Amendments

CARB -California Air Resources Board

CEMS=-continuous emission monitoring

system

CO--carbon monoxide

CPM=condensible particulate matter

CTG=control technique guideline

DOl=Department of the Interior

DOT= Department of Transportation

EKMA=Empirical Kinetic Modeling

Approach

ERC= emission reduction credits

ETC employer transportation coordinator

ETPS=Emission Trading Policy Statement

FtP-Federal Implementation Plan

FMVCP:-Federal Motor Vehicle Control

Program

FR - Federal Register

GVWR=Gross Vehicle Weight Rating

I-IC= hydrocarbons

l/M=inspection and maintenance

IPP=inventory preparation plan

LAER- lowest achievable emission rate

MMS=Minerals Management Service

MSA/CMSA- metropolitan statistical area/

consolidated metropolitan statistical area

NAAQS=national ambient air quality

standards

NAS=National Academy of Sciences

NO = Nitrogen dioxide

NO,= nitrogen oxides

NSPS~new source performance standard

NSR=New Source Review

OCS=outer continental shelf

PSD prevention of significant deterioration

psi= pounds per square inch

RACM = reasonably available control

measures

RACT reasonably available control

technology

RFP= reasonable further progress

RTA= rural transport area

RVP= Reid vapor pressure

SCAQMD=South Coast Air Quality

Management District

SO =sulfur dioxide

SIP=State implementation plan

TCM =transportation control measures

TSP= total suspended particulate (matter)

VOC=volatile organic compound

VMT=vehicle miles traveled

Appendix B-Bibliography and Cited

References

To obtain copies of OAQPS documents.

contact the EPA Library. (910) 541-5514:

(FTS) 629-5514. For OMS publications, please

contact Mark Wolcott. (313) 668-4219: (FTS)

374-8219.

SIP Inventory Guidance/Requirements

"Procedures for Preparing Emissions

Projections," EPA-450/4-91-019. U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency. Office of

Air Quality Planning and Standards,

Research Triangle Park. NC, July 1991.

"Procedures for Emission Inventory

Preparation. Volume IV: Mobile Sources."

EPA-450/4-81-026d, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Office of Mobile Sources,

Ann Arbor. MI, July 1991. (also listed below

under General Inventory Guidance).

"Procedures for the Preparation of

Emissions Inventories for Carbon Monoxide

and Precursors of Ozone, Volume I", EPA450/4-91-016, U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and

Standards. Research Triangle Park. NC. May

1991.

"Procedures for the Preparation of

Emissions Inventories for Carbon Monoxide

and Precursors of Otone. Volume I1: Emission

Inventory Requirements for Photochemical

Air Quality Simulation Models." EPA-450/4-

91-014, U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and

Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC, May

1991.

"Emission Inventory Requirements for

Ozone State Implementation Plans," EPA450/4-91-010, U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and

Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC,

March 1991.

"Emission Inventory Requirements for

Carbon Monoxide State Implementation

Plans." EPA-450/4-91-011. U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency. Office of

Air Quality Planning and Standards,

Research Triangle Park. NC, March 1991.

"SIP Air Pollutant Inventory Management

System (SAMS) Version 4.0 and SAMS User's

Manual." U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency. Office of Air Quality Planning and

Standards, Research Triangle Park. North

Carolina, March 1991.

"Example Emission Inventory

Documentation for Post-1987 Ozone State

Implementation Plans (SIPs)." EPA-450/4-89--

018. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.

Research Triangle Park. NC. October 1989.

"Procedures for Estimating and Applying

Rule Effectiveness in Post-1987 Base Year

Emission Inventories for Ozone and Carbon

Monoxide State Implementation Plans," U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency. Office of

Air Quality Planning and Standards.

Research Triangle Park. NC, June 1989.

Quality Assurance/Inventory Review

Guidance

"Quality Review Guidelines for Post-1987

State Implementation Plan (SIP) Base Year

Emission Inventories (Draft)." U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency. Office of

Air Quality Planning and Standards,

Research Triangle Park. NC, February 1990.

(Final version to be completed in August

1991.)

"Guidance for the Preparation of Quality

Assurance Plans for 03 /CO SIP Emission

Inventories." EPA-450/4-88-023, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency. Office of

Air Quality Planning and Standards.

Research Triangle Park. NC. December 1988.

General Inventory Guidance

"Procedures for Emission Inventory

Preparation," U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and

Standards, Research Triangle Park. NC:

a. "Volume I: Emission Inventory

Fundamentals," EPA-450/4-81-026a.

September 1981.

b. "Volume 11: Point Sources," EPA-450/4-

81-026b, September 1981.

18070
Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 82 / Tuesday, April 28, 1992 / Proposed Rules

c. "Volume II: Area Sources," EPA-450/4-

81-02 c. September 1961.

d. "Volume IV: Mobile Sources." EPA-450/

4-81-026d (Revised). July 1981.

e. "Volume V: Bibliography." EPA-450/4-

81-026e. September 1981.

Emission Factors/Models

"Personal Computer Version of the

Biogenic Emissions Inventory System (PCBEIS) With User's Guide." EPA-450/4-91-

017, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.

Research Triangle Park. NC. July 1991.

"User's Guide to MOBILE4 (Mobile Source

Emission Factor Model)." EPA-AA-TEB-89-

01. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Office of Mobile Sources. Ann Arbor. MI.

February 1989. (Revised version of MOBILE4

and documentation to be completed in July

1991.)

"Surface Impoundment Modeling System

(SIMS) Version 2.0 User's Manual," EPA-4501

4-90-019a. U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and

Standards. Research Triangle Park, NC.

September 1990.

"Background Document for Surface

Impoundment Modeling System (SIMS)

Version 2.0. EPA-450/4-90-019b," U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency. Office of

Air Quality Planning and Standards,

Research Triangle Park. NC, September 1990.

"AIRS Facility Subsystem Source

Classification Codes (SCCs) and Emission

Factor Listing for Criteria Pollutants." U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency. Office of

Air Quality Planning and Standards,

Research Triangle Park, NC. September 1989.

"Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission

Factors. Volumes I and 11 and its

supplements. Fourth Edition." AP-42, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, Office of

Air Quality Planning and Standards,

Research Triangle Park. NC, September 1985.

Citations and Guidance for SIP Corrections

"Guidance Document for Correction of Part

D SIP's for Nonattainment Areas," EPA.

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.

Research Triangle Park, NC, January 27. 1984.

Citations and Guidance for PM-10

"Assessment of the Controllability of

Condensible Particulate Matter," EPA--60/8-

90-75, October 1990.

"Procedures for Estimating Probability of

Nonattainment of a PM-10 NAAQS Using

Total Suspended Particulate of PM-10 Data."

EPA-450/4-80-017, December 1986.

"PM-10 SIP Development Guideline." June

1987.

"Control of Open Fugitive Dust Sources."

EPA-450/3-88-008 September 1988.

"Guidance Document for Residential Wood

Combustion Emission Control Measures,"

EPA-450/2-489-015. September 1989.

"Prescribed Fire Smoke Management

Guide." NFES No. 1279, February 1985.

"Prescribed Fire Plan Guide." NFES No.

1939. August 1966.

Citations and Guidance for SO 2

"SO Guideline." EPA-450/12-89-019.

"SO, Guideline Appendices." EPA-450/2-

89-019. October 1909.

"Letter from William Reilly to

Representative John Dingell, In Response to

questions and GAO report." April 10. 1091.

Citations and Guidance for Lead

"Updated information on Approval and

Promulgation of Lead Implementation Plans."

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Research Triangle Park. NC, July 1983.

"Guideline Series. Development of an

Example Control Strategy for Lead." EPA450/Z-79-WoZ. April 1979.

"Guideline Series. Supplementary

Guideline for Lead Implementation Plans."

EPA-450/2-78-038, August 1978.

Modeling Guidance

"UAM Applications Guidance." May 1991.

"User's Guide for the Urban Airshed

Model, Vol. 4." EPA-450/4-9-007D. June

1990.

"Guidance on Air Quality Models

(Revised)." EPA--450/2-78-027R. July 1986.

"Interim Procedures for Evaluating Air

Quality Models: Experience with

Implementation." EPA 450/4-85-006. July

1985.

New Source Review Guidance

"New Source Review Prevention of

Significant Deterioration and Nonattainment

Area Guidance Notebook," January 1988.

"Draft Workshop Manual for New Source

Review (NSR) Programs." December 1990.

Miscellaneous Guidance

"Criteria for Assessing the Role of

Transport of Ozone/Precursors in Ozone

Nonattainment Areas." U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency. Research Triangle Park.

NC. EPA-450/4-91-015).

"Enforcement Guidance for Stage II

Vehicle Refueling Control Programs,"

December 1991.

"Getting Started on Title I." U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, OAQPS.

Research Triangle Park, NC.. April 1991.

"Issues Relating to VOC Regulations.

Cutpoints, Deficiencies, and Deviations."

Clarification to Appendix D of November 24.

1987 FR (Blue Book, revised January 11, 1990).

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Office

of Air Quality Planning and Standards.

AQMD, May 25. 1988.

"Protocols: Can Coaters. 45FR (December

8. 1988) + Topcoaters." EPA-450/3-88-018

(December 1988). "Technical Guidance-Stage 11 Vapor

.Recovery System for Control of Vehicle

Refueling Emissions at Gasoline Dispensing

Facilities." Volume 1. November 1991.

Memoranda

Memorandum from William Laxton,

Director. Technical Support Division. to

Regional Air Division Directors, "Guidance

for Determining Significant Stationary Sources of Carbon Monoxide." May 13. 1991.

Memorandum from John Seitz, OAQPS to

Air Division Director, Regions I-X, "New

Source Review (NSR) Program Transitional

Guidance," March 11. 1991.

Memorandum from John Calcagni and

William Laxton, "Interim Guidance on

Emission Limits and Stack Test Methods for

Inclusion in PM-10 SIP's." December 24, 1990.

Memorandum from Robert Bauman and

Rich Biondi to Air Branch Chiefs, "SO0 SIP

Deficiency Checklist." November 28. 1990.

Memorandum from Joseph Tikvart and

Robert Bauman concerning modeling

guidelines addressing PM-10, dated July 15.

1990.

Memorandum from William Laxton,

Director. Technical Support Division, to

Regional Air Division Directors, "Ozone and

Carbon Dioxide Design Value Calculations."

June 18, 1990. I Memorandum from Craig 1. Potter. "Interim

Policy on Stack Height Regulatory Actions."

April 22. 1988.

Memorandum from Gerald A. Emison.

Director, OAQPS. to Regional Air Division

Directors, "Transmittal of Reissued OAQPS

CEMS Policy," March 31. 1988.

Memorandum from John Seitz, Director.

Stationary Source Compliance Division. to

Regional Air Division Directors,

"Implementation of Rule Effectiveness

Studies." March 31, 1988.

Memorandum from Craig Potter. Thomas

Adams. and Francis Blake to Regional Air

Division Directors, "Review of State

Implementation Plans and Revisions for

Enforceability and Legal Sufficiency,"

September 23. 1987.

Memorandum from Gerald Emison,

Director. OAQPS, to David Kee, Director, Air

Management Division, Region V. "Need for a

Short-Term BACT Analysis for the Proposed

William A. Zimmer Power Plant." November

24, 1988.

Memorandum from Richard Rhoads.

Director CPDD. to Division Directors. Regions

I-X. "Growth Restrictions in Secondary

NAAQS Nonattainment Areas," October 28,

1980.

Memorandum from R. Strelow to RA's

Region i-X. "Guidance for Determining

Acceptability of SIP Regulations in NonAttainment Areas." December 9, 1976.

Federal Register Citations

44 FR 20372. April 4,1979.

44 FR 20375, April 4, 1979.

44 FR 53702, September 17. 1979.

44 FR 53709, September 17. 1979.

44 FR 53791. September 17, 1979.

45 FR 52676. August 7, 1980.

46 FR 7182. January 21, 1981.

46 FR 7187. January 22, 1981.

51 FR 43812, December 4. 1986.

51 FR 43814, December 4, 1986.

51 FR 43832, December 4. 1986.

52 FR 29383, August 7, 1987.

52 FR 45044, November 24, 1987.

53 FR 34500, September 7, 1988.

54 FR 612, January 9, 1989.

55 FR 30973, July 30, 1990.

55 FR 41546, October 12, 1990.

55 FR 41547. October 12. 1990.

55 FR 45799, October 31. 1990

56 FR 5480. February 11. 1991.

56 FR 11101, March 15, 1991.

56 FR 16274, April 12. 1991.

56 FR 23826, May 24, 1991.

56 FR 27257. June 13. 1991.

56 FR 27003, June 14, 1991.

56 FR 31151. July 9. 1991.

56 FR 31154, July 19, 1991.

56 FR 37654, August 8, 1991.

56 FR 43593, September 3, 1991.

56 FR 54554. October 22. 1991.

56 FR 56894, November 6 1991.

56 FR 59656, November 21, 1991

18071
Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 82 / Tuesday, April 28, 1992 / Proposed Rules

Code of Federal Regulations Citations

40 CFR 50.8.

40 CFR 50.9 Appendix H.

40 CFR 50.9.

40 CFR Part 51.

40 CFR Part 51 Appendix M

40 CFR Part 51 Appendix S.

40 CFR 51.100(o).

40 CFR 51.110(c)(1).

40 CFR 51.117.

40 CFR 51.165.

40 CFR 51.166.

40 CFR 51.340 (Subpart R).

40 CFR Part 52.

40 CFR 52.10.

40 CFR 52.21.

40 CFR 52.24.

40 CFR Part 55.

40 CFR Part 58.

40 CFR Part 60.

40 CFR Part 60 Subpart Da.

40 CFR Part 81.

Appellate Court Citations

Alabama Puwer Company v. Castle, 636

F.2d 323, 360-61, 404-05 (D.C. Cir. 1980).

NRDC v. Thomas, 838 F.2d 1224, (D.C. Cir.

1988), Cert. denied, 109 S.Ct. 219 (1988).

Delanoy v. EPA, 898 F.2d 687, 136 Cong.

Rec. S16971 (October 27, 1990).

House of Representatives Reports

H.R. Rep. No. 490, 101st Congress, 2nd

Session. pt. 1 at 204, 239, 242. 257, 258, 267.

268, and 381.

Appendix Cl-Available Fugitive Dust

Control Measures

Background

The available control measures listed

below apply to all fugitive dust sources

except those to which only available control

technology is applicable (i.e., process fugitive

dust associated with stationary sources).

Fugitive dust is particulate matter suspended

in the air either by mechanical disturbance of

the surface material or by wind action

blowing across the surface. Mechanical

disturbance includes resuspension of

particles from vehicles traveling over

roadways, parking lots, and other open areas.

Wind action includes dust blown off

inadequately stabilized open areas. The

quantity of fugitive dust emissions is

dependent upon several factors such as the

size of the source, emission rate, and control

efficiency. The Environmental Protection

Agency's (EPA) policy is to reduce fugitive

dust emissions, with an emphasis on

preventing, rather than mitigating, them. For

example, past efforts to control emissions

from paved roads have usually relied on

street cleaning to reduce silt loading. The

new approach would put a higher priority on

measures to prevent silt from getting on the

road surface. Mitigative measures should be

reserved for those areas/situations where

prevention is not feasible. Technical guidance

on fugitive dust control measures is found in

Control of Open Fugitive Dust Sources (EPA450/3-88-008 September, 1988).

List of Available Control Measures

1. Pave, vegetate, or chemically stabilize

access points where unpaved traffic surfaces

adjoin paved roads.

2. Require dust control plans for

construction or land clearing projects.

3. Require haul trucks to be covered.

4. Provide for traffic rerouting or rapid

clean up of temporary (and not readily

preventable) sources of dust on paved roads

(water erosion runoff, mud/dirt carryout

areas, material spills, skid control sand).

Delineate who is responsible for cleanup.

5. Require paving, chemically stabilizing, or

otherwise stabilizing permanent unpaved

haul roads, and parking or staging areas at

commercial, municipal, or industrial facilities.

6. Develop traffic reduction plans for

unpaved roads. Use of speed bumps, low

speed limits, etc., to encourage use of other

(paved) roads.

7. Limit use of recreational vehicles on

open land (e.g., confine operations to specific

areas, require use permits, outright ban).

8. Require improved material specification

for and reduction of usage of skid control

sand or salt (e.g., require use of coarse,

nonfriable material during snow and ice

season).

9. Require curbing and pave or stabilize

(chemically or with vegetation) shoulders of

paved roads.

10. Pave or chemically stabilize unpaved

roads.

11. Pave, vegetate, or chemically stabilize

unpaved parking areas.

12. Establish dust control measures for

material storage piles.

13. Provide for storm water drainage to

prevent water erosion onto paved roads.

14. Require vegetation, chemical

stabilization, or other abatement of wind

erodible soil, including lands subjected to

water mining, abandoned farms, and

abandoned construction sites.

15. Rely upon the soil conservation

requirements (e.g., conservation plans,

conservation reserve) of the Food Security

Act to reduce emissions from agricultural

operations.

Appendix C2-Available Residential Wood

Combustion Control Measures

Background

Wood smoke from residential wood stoves

and fireplaces is a significant source of PM10 pollution in some areas in the western

United States that do not attain the PM-1O

ambient air quality standards. For example,

in some mountain communities, atmospheric

inversions can trap wood smoke particulates

in valleys and cause PM-10 concentrations to

reach levels well in excess of the standards.

The U.S. EPA's new source performance

standard (53 FR 5860, February 26, 1988) is a

longterm strategy designed to improve the

performance of wood burning devices

nationwide. The EPA believes that this

standard alone, though, may not result in

attainment of the PM-10 air quality standards

in areas affected by wood smoke. Additional

available control measures are listed below.

They are intended to (1) reduce emissions

from current stoves through inspections,

education, and shifting to cleaner stoves or

fuel; (2) curtail the use of wood stoves or

fireplaces during adverse meteorological

conditions; and (3) limit future growth in

emissions. Additional guidance on these

measures is contained in EPA-450/2-89-015

(September 1989), Guidance Document for

Residential Wood Combustion Emission

Control Measures. Nothing in this document

prevents a State implementation plan (SIP) in

a moderate PM-10 nonattainment area from

containing control measures more stringent

than RACM.

List of Available Control Measures

1. Establish an episode curtailment

program, including: A curtailment plan; a

communication strategy to implement the

plan; a surveillance plan (e.g., "windshield"

survey, opacity trigger); and enforcement

provisions including procedures, penalties,

and exemptions). A voluntary program will

be deemed reasonable if the area

demonstrates attainment.

2. Establish a public information program

to inform and educate citizens about stove

sizing, installation, proper operation and

maintenance, general health risks of wood

smoke, new technology stoves, and

alternatives to wood heating.

3. Encourage improved performance of

woodburning devices by:

-Establishing a program to identify, through

opacity observation, deficiencies in stove

operation and maintenance. (Under such a

program, advice and assistance should be

provided to the identified households to

help reduce visible emissions from their

devices.)

-Providing voluntary dryness certification

programs for dealers and/or making free or

inexpensive wood moisture checks

available to burners.

-Evaluating and encouraging, as

appropriate, the accelerated changeover of

existing devices to new source

performance standard or other clean

burning new or existing technology stoves

(e.g., hybrid designs, pellet stoves) by such

approaches as subsidized stove purchases

tax credits, or other incentives.

4. Provide inducements that would lead to

reductions in the stove and fireplace

population (or use) by:

-Slowing the growth of woodburning

devices in new housing units by taxes,

installation permit fees, or other

disincentives.

-Encouraging a reduction in the number of

woodburning devices (i.e., removing or

disabling the devices) through tax credits

or other incentives.

-Discouraging the resale of used stoves

through taxes, fees, or other disincentives.

-Discouraging the availability of free (or

very inexpensive) firewood by increasing

cutting fees or limiting the cutting season.

Appendix C3-Prescribed Burning Control

Measures

Background

Prescribed burning, including silvicultural

and agricultural burning, is a contributor to

PM-10 nonattainment in some regions. In

many cases, well-established smoke

management approaches are not being

followed, resulting in avoidable air quality

problems. The EPA has been working closely

with the National Wildfire Coordinating

Group (NWCG) to develop appropriate

18072
Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 82 / Tuesday, April 28, 1992 / Proposed Rules

guidance. The objective is to establish smoke

management (SM) programs in these areas

which constitute reasonably available control

measures (RACM), and reduce population

exposure to smoke from prescribed burning,

while assuring that resource management

goals are met.

States should address emissions from

prescribed burning in a manner that balances

natural resource, agricultural, and other

burning objectives with air quality goals and

objectives, by utilizing a smoke management

program as described in the NWCG's

Prescribed Fire Smoke Management Guide

(NFES No. 1279, February 1985) and the

Prescribed Fire Plan Guide (NFES No. 1939,

August 1986), publications of the Boise

(Idaho) Interagency Fire Center.

The scope of a SM program should reflect

the specific conditions and requirements of a

local area. Existing programs may be

adequate in many cases and in other cases

may provide a basis for developing a refined

program. Smoke management should

encourage the cooperative efforts of local,

State, Federal. and private land managers.

Emphasis should be on conducting burns

under an established planning process.

For the purpose of PM-10 SIP development,

the term prescribed burning includes all open

burning of vegetative matter. This includes

both planned ignition and prescribed natural

fire. Nothing in a SM program constituting

RACM is intended to influence vegetation

management or fire suppression practices so

as to increase the potential for wildfire to the

point that natural resources or public safety

are compromised.

The EPA believes it is reasonable that a

SM program apply in those moderate PM-10

nonattainment areas where it has been

shown, through monitoring, modeling, or

other analysis, that prescribed burning can or

does contribute to violations of !he PM-10

national ambient air quality standards

(NAAQS). The SM program should also apply

to areas outside of the nonattainment area if

it is shown that prescribed burning outside of

the nonattainment area can or does

contribute to NAAQS violations. The

prescribed burning control measures

reasonably may be limited only to the

season(s) when high ambient PM-10

concentrations occur, if it can be shown that

the annual PM-10 NAAQS is not violated.

See H.R. Rep. No. 490, 101st Cong., 2d Sess.

268-269 (1990).

Source categories (e.g.. burning of

fencelines, ditch banks, small brush piles,

small prescribed natural burns, garden plots)

may not be reasonably controlled where their

impact is de minimis based on consideration

of their collective influence on PM-10

emissions, their duration, season, and

proximity to potentially affected populations.

An SM program should consist of at least

the following components:

Smoke Dispersion Evaluation

As a minimum, the program should use

National Weather Service forecasts or other

meteorological analyses to determine when

meteorological conditions are favorable or

unfavorable for dispersion and transport of

smoke (i.e., "burn days," "no burn days").

Burn Planning, Authorization, and

Administration

The smoke management program should

provide a process (e.g., telephone call-in for

receiving burn requests, evaluating requests

and granting approval for burns. Approval of

a burn should be based onan evaluation of

the airshed's capacity/capability to disperse

emissions on allowable burn days so that the

cumulative emissions from all burns and

other sources in the airshed will not cause or

contribute to violations of the PM-10

NAAQS. The approval to burn on a burn day

should be equitably divided among all

categories of burners requesting approval to

burn while accommodating the "incentives"

specified elsewhere in this policy.

Requirements for Ensuring Burner

Qualifications

Voluntary training in smoke management

techniques should be reasonably available

for all burners. The program should include

incentives for burners who complete the

voluntary training (e.g., priority for approval

to burn on "burn days").

Public Education and A wareness

Information programs on the nature of and

reasons for smoke management should be

periodically presented to the public (e.g.,

public service announcements, newspaper

articles).

Surveillance and Enforcement

The SM program should rely on routine

PM-10 monitoring, and/or modeling

supplemented by periodic visual assessments

of the effectiveness of the dispersion

evaluation program. The existing PM-10

monitoring network should be evaluated for

its ability to provide information on the

effectiveness of the SM program as applied to

burning conducted in and near the

nonattainment area. The network should be

modified as appropriate. The program should

also provide a process for documenting and

following up on public complaints and should

provide for and levy fines against burners

who violate any of its mandatory

requirements.

Emission Inventories and Emission Efforts

States should develop and maintain an

emission inventory for prescribed burning

and all burns should be categorized as to

their purpose. Documentation of the size,

date. purpose, and emission reduction

measures used should be submitted following

each large burn. Emission reduction

techniques (e.g., mass ignition, rapid mop-up)

should be encouraged and incentives (e.g.,

priority for approval to burn on "burn days")

should be offered for demonstrated emission

reduction efforts, including the use of

alternatives to burning, provided that such

incentives can be utilized without

compromising resource management

objectives.

State Oversight

The relationship of the State air pollution

agency with other State agencies to which

management of the SM program may have

been delegated will need to be determined on

a State-by-State basis. Nevertheless, State

rules and regulations should be enacted in

such a manner that all provisions of the SM

program are enforceable by the State through

its State implementation plan. Generally,

memorandums of understanding should be

utilized to clearly specify working

relationships among agencies.

Appendix C4-RACT Determinations for

Stationary Sources

Background

Congress has for the second time in

amending the Clean Air Act (Act) specifically

required that reasonable available control

technology (RACT) be applied to existing

stationary sources in nonattainment areas. In

section 172(b)(3) of the Act, as amended in

1977, Congress specified that nonattainment

area plans were to "require, * * * reasonable further progress * * * including

such reduction in emissions from existing

sources in the area as may be obtained

through the adoption, at a minimum, of

reasonably available control technology."

Thus, RACT was required in SIP's developed

for areas that were designated nonattainment

for total suspended particulate matter. Now,

in section 172(c)(1) of the Clean Air Act, as

amended by the Clean Air Act Amendments

of 1990 (Nonattainment Plan Provisions-in

General), Congress again requires thatnonattainment area plans provide for"

such reductions in emissions from existing

sources in the (nonattainment) area as may

be obtained through the adoption, at a

minimum, of reasonably available control

technology." Thus, RACT is now required for

PM-10 nonattainment area SIP's.

The EPA recommends that the RACT for a

particular source continues to be determined

on a case-by-case basis considering the

technological and economic feasibility of

reducing emissions from that source (through

process changes or add-on control

technology). The following technological and

economic parameters should be considered in

determining RACT for a particular source.

Technological Feasibility

The technological feasibility of applying an

emission reduction method to a particular

source should consider the source's process

and operating procedures, raw materials,

physical plant layout, and any other

environmental impacts such as water

pollution, waste disposal, and energy

requirements, The process, operating

procedures, and raw materials used by a

source can affect the feasibility of

implementing process changes that reduce

emissions and the selection of add-on

emission control equipment. The operation of

and longevity of control equipment can be

significantly influenced by the raw materials

used and the process to which it is applied.

The feasibility of modifying processes or

applying control equipment is also influenced

by the physical layout of the particular plant.

The space available in which to implement

such changes may limit the choices and will

also affect the costs of control.

Reducing air emissions may not justify

adversely affecting other resources by

increasing pollution of bodies of water.

creating additional solid waste disposal

18073
Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 82 / Tuesday, April 28, 1992 / Proposed Rules

problems or creating excessive energy

demands. (An otherwise available PM-10

control technology may not be reasonable if

these other environmental impacts cannot

reasonably be mitigated.) For analytic

purposes, a State may consider a PM-10

control measure technologically infeasible if,

considering the availability (and cost) of

mitigative adverse impacts of that control on other pollution media, the control would not,

in the State's reasoned judgment, provide a net environmental benefit. In many instances,

however, PM-10 control technologies have

known energy penalties and adverse effects on other media, but such effects and the cost

of their mitigation are also known and have

been borne' by owners of existing sources in numerous cases. Such well-established

adverse effects and their costs are normal

and assumed to be reasonable and should

not. in most cases, justify nonuse of the PM10 control technology. The costs of preventing

adverse water, solid waste and energy

impacts will also influence the economic

feasibility of the PM-l0 control technology.

Alternative approaches to reducing

emissions of particulate matter including PM10 are discussed in Control Techniques for

Particulate Emissions from Stationary

Sources-Volume I (EPA-450/3-81-O5a) and

Volume II (EPA-.450/3.-1-005b), September

1982. The design, operation and maintenance

of general particulate matter control systems

such as mechanical collectors, electrostatic

precipitators, fabric filters, and wet scrubbers

are discussed in Volume 1. The collection

efficiency of each system is discussed as a function of particle size. Information is also

presented regarding energy and

environmental considerations and procedures

for estimating costs of particulate matter

control equipment. The emission

characteristics and control technologies

applicable to specific source categories are discussed in Volume I1. Secondary environmental impacts are also discussed.

Additional sources of information on control technology are background

information documents for new source performance standards and Identification,

Assessment, and Control of Fugitive

Particulate Emissions, EPA-600/8-8g-023,

August 1986.

In some instances, control technologies more modern or more advanced than those

described in the documents referenced may

exist. In such cases, the State's RACT

analysis for a source should consider such

available technology.

Economic Feasibility

Economic feasibility considers the cost of

reducing emissions and the difference in

costs between the particular source and other

similar sources that have implemented

emission reduction. As discussed above, EPA

presumes that it is reasonable for similar sources to bear similar costs of emission

reductions. Economic feasibility rests very

little on the ability of a particular source to "afford" to reduce emissions to the level of

similar sources. Less efficient sources would

be rewarded by having to bear lower

emission reduction costs if affordability were given high consideration. Rather, ecoromic

feasibility for RACT purposes Is largely

determined by evidence that other sources in a source category have in fact applied the

control technology in question.

The capital costs, annualized costs, and

cost effectiveness of an emission reduction

technology should be considered in

determining its economic feasibility. The

OAOPS Control Cost Manual, Fourth Edition,

EPA-450/3-90-406, January 1990, describes

procedures for determining these costs. The

above costs should be determined for all

technologically feasible emission reduction

options.

States may give substantial weight to cost

effectiveness in evaluating the economic

feasibility of an emission reduction

technology. The cost effectiveness of a technology is its annualized cost (S/year)

divided by the amount of PM-10 emission

reduction (i.e., tons/year) which yields a cost

per amount of emission reduction (S/ton).

Cost effectiveness provides a value for each

emission reduction option that is comparable

with other options and other facilities.

If a company contends that it cannot afford

the technology that appears to be RACT for

that source or group of sources, the claim

should be supported with such information as the impact on:

1. Fixed and variable production costs ($/

unit).

2. Product supply and demand elasticity,

3. Product prices (cost absorption vs. cost

pass-through),

4. Expected costs Incurred by competitors,

5. Company profits, and

6. Employment.

If a company contends that available

control technology is not affordable and

would lead to closing the facility, the costs of

closure should be considered. Closure may

incur costs for demolition, relocation. severance pay, etc.

Appendix D

United States Environmental Protection

Agency. Office of Air Quality Planning and

Standards. Research Triangle Park, North

Carolina 27711.

March 11, 1991.

Memorandum

Subject: New Source Review (NSR) Program

Transitional Guidance.

From: John S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air

Quality Planning and Standards (MD10).

To: Addressees.

The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990

(1990 Amendments) make numerous changes

to the NSR requirements of the prevention of

significant deterioration [PSD) and

nonattainment area programs. The 1990

Amendments create new and expanded

nonattainment areas, extend PSD coverage to

current Class I area boundaries, and mandate a PSD exemption for certain hazardous air

pollutants. The Environment Protection

Agency (EPA) intends to propose by

September of this year a regulatory package

that will implement these and other changes

to the NSR provisions. Final adoption of

these revised regulations is projected for

August 1992. In the interim period between

passage of the 1990 Amendments and

adoption of the Agency's final regulations.

EPA expects that numerous issues regarding

the 1990 Amendments will arise. This

memorandum sets forth the Agency's position

on the most important of these transitional

issues involving the NSR program.

This guidance document does not

supersede existing State regulations or

approved State implementation plans.

However, in some cases, it calls upon States

to implement their NSR programs in a manner

consistent with provisions of the 1990

Amendments that are applicable immediately

and with the requirements that flow directly

from these provisions. Nonetheless, the

policies set out in this transition

memorandum are Intended solely as guidance

and do not represent final Agency action.

They are not ripe for judicial review for this

reason. Moreover, they are not intended, nor

can they be relied upon, to create any rights

enforceable by any party in litigation with

the United States. The EPA officials may

decide to follow the guidance provided in this

memorandum, or to act at variance with the

guidance, based on an analysis of specific

circumstances. The Agency also may change

this guidance at any time without public

notice.

The Regional Offices should send this

guidance document to their States. Questions

from States and applicants concerning

specific issues and cases should be directed

to the appropriate EPA Regional Office. If

you have any general questions, please

contact Mr. Michael Sewell of the New

Source Review Section at FTS 629-0873 or

(919) 541-0873.

Attachment

Addressees

Director, Air, Pesticides, and Toxics

Management Division, Regions I, IV, and

VI

Director. Air and Waste Management

Division. Region I1

Director, Air Management Division. Regions

IIl and IX

Director, Air and Radiation Division, Region

V

Director, Air and Toxics Division. Regions

VII, VIII. and X

cc:

J. Calcagni

R. Campbell

W. Laxton

E. Lillis

J. Rasnic

L. Wegman

J. Weigold

NSR Contacts

Corrections to Original Document: Two

errors in the document as issued on March 11,

1991 have been corrected in this copy. On

page 2 on the last line, "CFC 112" is changed

to correctly read "CFC 113". On page 8 in

item 4, the cite "Section 172(b)" is changed to

correctly read "Section 173(b)".

New Source Review (NSR) Transitional

Guidance

Toxics and Notional Emissions Standards for

llazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPS) Issues

1. Section 112 Hazardous Air Pollutants are

No Longer Considered Regu!ated Pollutants

18074
Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 82 / Tuesday, April 28, 1992 / Proposed Rules

Under Prevention of Significant Deterioration

(PSD}. but NESHAPS till Apply.

Under the 1977 Amendments to the Clean

Air Act (Act) and regulations issued

thereunder, the PSD requirements of the Act

apply to all "major" new sources and "major" modifications, i.e., those exceeding certain

annual tonnage thresholds (see 40 CFR

52.21(b)(1)(i) and (b)(2)(i)). Typically, new

sources and modifications become subject to

PSD because they exceed the specified

tonnage threshold for a criteria pollutant, i.e.,

a pollutant for which a national ambient air

quality standard (NAAQS) has been

established under section 109 of the Act.

Once a new source or modification is subject

to PSD, the PSD requirements apply to every

pollutant subject to regulation under the Act

that is emitted in "significant" quantities (or,

in the case of a major modification, for which

there is a significant net emissions increase)

(see 40 CFR 52.21(b)(23) and (i)(2)). Under the

1977 Amendments, best available control

technology (BACT) and other PSD

requirements apply not only to emissions of

criteria pollutants but also to emissions of

pollutants regulated under other provisions of

the Act, such as section 111 or 112. This

regulatory structure was altered by the 1990

Amendments.

Title l1 of the 1990 Amendments added a

new section 112(b)(6) that excludes the

hazardous air pollutants listed in section

112(b)(1) of the revised Act (as well as any pollutants that may be added to the list) from

the PSD (and other) requirements of Part C.

Thus, because they are on the initial Title Ill

hazardous air pollutants list, the following

pollutants, which had been regulated under

PSD because they were covered by the

section 112 NESHAPS or section 111 new

source performance standards (NSPS)

program, are now exempt from Federal PSD

applicability:

" Arsenic

" Asbestos

" Benzene (including benzene from gasoline)

" Beryllium

" Hydrogen sulfide (H2S)

" Mercury

" Radionuclides (including radon and

polonium)

" Vinyl chloride

The Title Ill exemption applies to final

Federal PSD permits (i.e., those issued in final

form and for which administrative appeals, if

any, under 40 CFR 124.19 have been

exhausted) issued on or after the date of

enactment of the 1990 Amendments

(November 15. 1990). For Federal PSD permit applications now under review by either an

EPA Regional Office or a delegated State,

PSD permit requirements do not apply to the

pollutants exempted by Title Ill. For Federal

PSD permits containing PSD requirements for

the pollutants exempted by Title Ill issued on or after November 15, 1990, the permittee

may request a revision (e.g., removal of a

BACT limit for benzene) to their PSD permit

to reflect the Title Ill exemption from Federal

PSD applicability.

Note that pursuant to section 116 and the

preservation clause in section 112(d)(7) of the

amended Act, States with an approved PSD

program may continue to regulate the Title Ill

hazardous air pollutants now exempted from

Federal PSD by section 112(b)(6) if the State

PSD regulations provide an independent

basis to do so. These State rules would

remain in effect unless a State revised them

to provide similar exemptions. Additionally,

the Title Ill pollutants continue to be subject

to any other applicable State and Federal

rules: the exclusion is only for Part C rules.

Finally. section 112(q) retains existing

NESHAPS regulations by specifying that any

standard under section 112 in effect prior to

the date of enactment of the 1990

Amendments shall remain in force and effect

after such date unless modified as provided

in the amended section. Therefore, the

requirements of 40 CFR 61.05 to 61.08,

including preconstruction permitting

requirements, for new and modified sources

subject to existing NESHAPS regulations are

still applicable.

In summary, the pollutants currently

regulated under the Act as of March 1991 that

are still subject to Federal PSD review and

permitting requirements are:

" Carbon monoxide

" Nitrogen oxides

" Sulfur dioxide

" Particulate matter and PH-10

" Ozone (volatile organic compounds)

" Lead (elemental)

" Fluorides

" Sulfuric acid mist

" Total reduced sulfur compounds (including

H2S}

" CFC's 11, 2,113, 114, 115

" Halons 1211. 1301. 2402

* Municipal waste combustor (MWC) acid

gases, MWC metals and MWC organics

2. Hazardous Air Pollutants that are

Regulated as One Component of a More

General Pollutant Under Other Provisions of

the Clean Air Act are Still Regulated.

Any hazardous air pollutants listed in

section 112(b)(1) which are regulated as

constituents of a more general pollutant listed

under section 108 of the Act are still subject

to PSD as part of the more general pollutant,

despite the exemption in Title II. For

example, volatile organic compounds (VOC's)

(a term which includes benzene, vinyl

chloride, methanol, toluene, methyl ethyl

ketone, and thousands of other compounds)

are still regulated as VOC's (but not as

individual pollutants such as benzene. etc.)

under the PSD regulations because these

pollutants are ozone precursors, not because

they are air toxics. Also, particulates (including lead compounds and asbestos) are

still regulated as particulates (both PM-10

and particulate matter) under the PSD

regulations. Lead compounds are exempt from Federal PSD by Title Ill, but the

elemental lead portion of lead compounds (as

tested for in 40 CFR part 60, appendix A,

Method 12) is still considered a criteria

pollutant subject to the lead NAAQS and still

regulated under PSD.

3. Toxic Effect of Unregulated Pollutants

Still Considered in BACT Analysis. Based on the remand decision on June 3.

1986 by the EPA Administrator in North

County Resource Recovery Associates (PSD

Appeal No. 85-2). the impact on emissions of

other pollutants, including unregulated

pollutants, must be taken into account in

determining BACT for a regulated pollutant.

When evaluating control technologies and

their associated emissions limits, combustion

practices, and related permit terms and

conditions in a BACT proposal, the applicant

must consider tke environmental impacts of

all pollutants not regulated by PSD. Once a

project is subject to BACT due to the

emission of nonexempted pollutants, the

BACT analysis should therefore consider all

pollutants, including Title Ill hazardous air

pollutants previously subject to PSD, in

determining which control strategy is best.

PSD Class I Boundary Issues

1. PSD Applicability Coverage Changes as

Class I Area Boundaries Change

Sections 162(a) and 104(a) of the amended

Act specify that the boundaries of areas

designated as Class I must now conform to

all boundary changes at such parks and

wilderness areas made since August 7, 1977

and any changes that may occur in the future.

The EPA does not believe that Congress

intended to create the turmoil which would

occur if this redesignation required the

modification of permits issued between

August 7, 1977 and November 15, 1990, or the

resubmission and reevaluation of complete

permit applications submitted prior to

enactment of the 1990 Amendments. Thus, for

this reason, applications considered complete

prior to November 15, 1990 should be

processed as submitted without regard to the

new Class I area boundaries. Exceptions to

this general policy are in the area of

increment consumption and air quality

related values (including visibility), as

discussed below.

For an applicant who submitted a complete

PSD application prior to November 15, 1990, if

all other PSD requirements are met, a permit

may be issued based on the Class I analysis

as submitted in the application, unless the

reviewing authority finds, on a case-by-case

basis, that additional analysis is needed from

the applicant to address suspected adverse

impacts or increment consumption problems

due to the expanded boundaries of the Class

I areas. Any existing increment violations in

the new boundaries of Class I areas must be

remedied through a SIP revision pursuant to

40 CFR 51.166(a)(3).

The PSD applications not considered

complete before November 15, 1990 must

consider the impact of both existing sources

and the new or modified source on the Class I

areas as defined by the 1990 Amendments.

Thus, the complete application must consider

the impacts on the entire Class I area based

upon the boundaries in existence of the date

of submittal of a complete application: as

before, if a Class I boundary changes before

the permit is issued, the reviewing authority

may find, on a case-by-case basis, that

additional analysis is needed from the

applicant to address suspected adverse

impacts or increment consumption problems

due to expanded Class I Area boundaries.

NSR Nonattoinment Issues

1. NSR Construction Permit Requirements in

Nonattainment Areas

In many States, the existing approved Part

D permit program by its terms covers all

designated nonattainment areas in the State,

18075
Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 82 / Tuesday, April 28, 1992 / Proposed Rules

so a Part D1 permit program will automatically

apply to the new and expanded

nonattainment areas which are established

under provisions of Title I of the 1990

Amendments. Thus, until new rules are

adopted for these new or expanded

nonattainment areas, States should apply the

requiremeats of their existing approved Part

D per-nit program. However, in other States,

a Part D piogram may be limited to specified

areas and does not apply to new or expanded

ureas. In these cases, States must implement

a transitional permitting program uniil their

existing Part D programs are revised to meet

the ruquirlrments of the 1990 Amendments

and expanded to cover all nonattainment

artas in th, State. Otherwise, both the goa!s

of part D a-0 Congress' intent in creating

n," or e' iknded nonattainment areas will

be frustrated.

The EPA regulations alreidy provide for

these new or expanded designated

nonattainn-ent areas because the Emission

Offset Interpretations Ruling (40 CFR part 51,

appendix S) governs permits to constgr-ct

between the date of designation and the date

an approved Fart D plan is made applicable

to the new nonattainment area (see 40 CFR

52.24(k)). Until a State's new Part D plan is

appro% e.1 by EPA, if a State wishes to issue a

permit fora mijor stationary source or major

modifir;ation in L new or expanded

designated nonattvinment area, the State

should comply with the requirements of

appendix S. Among other things, appendix S

requires a major source seeking to locate in a

nonattainment area to (1) meet the lowest

achiCvable emission rate for such snurce, (2)

protide oflsets from existing sources in the

area, vrid J3) show that the offsets will

provide a positive nr-t air quality benefit (see

40 CFR part 51, appendix S. section IVAJ.

The EPA believes that in order to carry out

the intent of appendix S. offsets should be

required for sources in all categories and in

all instances should be calculated on a tons

per year basis (see 40 CFR part 51, appendix

S. section IV.CJ.

Of course, neith-2r appendix S nor the

existing NSR rules incorporate the NSR

chanAcs mandated by Title I of the 1990

Amendments such as lower source

applicability thresholds, increased emissions

offset ratios, new definitions of major

stationary source, and (for ozone

nonattainment areas) requirements for

nitrogen oxides (NOx) control and NOx

emissions offsets. However. the 1990

Amendments require States to submit to EPA

new NSR permit program rules for ozone

nonattainment areas by November 15. 1992;

for PM-10 nonattainment areas by June 30,

1992; and for most carbon monoxide (CO)

nonattainment areas no later than 3 years

from the date of the nonattainment

designation. The EPA interprets this us an

expression of congressional intent not to

mandate that States adhere to the more

stringent Title I NSR requirements in

nonattainment areas during the time provided

for State implementation plan (SIP)

development. Thus. for NSR permitting

purposes in nonattainment areas, the new

NSR requirements in Title I are not in effect

until the States, as required by the Act, adopt

NSR permit program rules to implement the

Title I provisions. In addition, EPA

encourages any State having adequate

authority for early implementation of the NSR

changes to do so as soon as possible.

If States fail to submit to EPA the new NSR

permit program rules for nonattainment areas

by the deadlines in the amended Act, EPA

intends to impose in these nonattainment

areas a Federal implementation plan (FIP)

embodying such requirements. Curre.ntly,

EPA intends to propose revised NSR

reguldtions at 40 CFR part 52 that would

implement the new Title I NSR requirements

under a FIP in a State if that State's revised

NSR rules to implement Title I are not

submitted in approvable form to EPA and

made effective within the State by the

deadlines established by the mit0

Amendments.

The area designation in eltect on the date

of permit issuance by the reviewing agency

determines which regulations (Part C or Part

D) apply to that permit. In othe r words, the

PSD permit regulations apply to pollutants for

which the area is designated as attainment or

Lnclassifiatae, and the NSR nunattainment

permit regulations apply to pollutants for

which the area is designated nonattainment

(see 40 CFR 51.166(i) (3) and (5); and 40 CFR

52.21(i) (3) and (5)]. Under these regulations, a

PSD permit for i pollutant cannot be issued

in an area that is designated nonattpinment

for that pollutant. For the situation where a

source receives a PSD or other permit prior to

the date the area is designated as

nonattainment, the permit remains in effect

as long as the source commences

construction within 18 months after the date

of nonattainment designation of the area,

does not discontinue construction for more

than 18 months, and completes construction

within a reasonable time (see 40 CFR 52.24 (g)

and (k)). Although the PSD regulations

provide for extension of these deadlines, no

extension would be appropriate where the

area has been designated as nonattainment

following permit issuance. Accordingly, if any

of these construction provisions are not met,

the PSD permit or other permit will not be

extended, and the source (if subject to the

nonattainment provisions) must obtain a

nonattainment permit prior to commencing

(or continuing) construction.

The 1990 Amendments create some new

and expanded nonattainment areas by

operation of law. Other nonattainment area

changes are expected as the States and EPA

complete the designation process prescribed

in amended section 107(d). Because of these

provisions, the dates areas switch from

attainment to nunattainment for NSR

purposes vary by pollutant. However, except

for the two instances where the Amendments

create changes by operation of law, the new

designations and expanded boundaries will

not be effective for NSR purposes until EPA

promulgates the changes. The promulgations

will be announced in the Federal Register.

Congress created new PM-10

nonattainment areas through designations

that br.,ame effective upon enactment of the

1990 Amendments on November 15, 1990 (see

section 107(d)(4)(B)). Specifically, Congress

designated Group I areas and areas where

violations of the PM-10 NAAQS had

occurred prior to January 1, 1989 as

nonattainment. The EPA published a list of

these PM-10 areas in a Federal Register

notice (see 55 FR 45799, October 31, 1990, see

also 52 FR 29383, August 7, 1987). The EPA

plans to publish a notice in the Federal

Register listing these areas as nonattainment

in the near future, but they are already

considered nonattainment areas as of

November 15, 1990.

Similarly, the 1990 Amendments expand by

operation of law some CO and ozone

nonattainment areas. However, these

changes did not become effective with

passage but rather on December 30. 1990. The

specifics are as follows:

Section 107(d)(4)(A)(iv) of the amended

Act provides that, with the exception

explained below ozone and CO

nonattainment areas located within

metropolitan statistical areas (MSA) and

consolidated metropolitan statistical areas

(CMSA) which are classified as serious,

severe, or extreme for ozone or as serious

for CO are automatically expanded to

include the entire MSA or CMSA. This

expansion became effective by operation of

law 45 dayq after enactment unless the

Covernor submitted a notice by this

deadline of the State's intent to seek a

modification of the expanded boundaries

pursuant to the procedures set forth in

section 107(d)(4(A)(v). So if a State did not

provide this notice, the nonattainnient

boundaries of all serious, severe, and

extreme ozone nonattainment areas in the

State and all serious CO areas in the State

expanded to include the entire MSA or

CMSA on December 30, 1990. If a State did

provide timely notice, the Administrator

has up to 14 months from enactment to

resolve the State's challenge. Until EPA

promulgates a resolution of the State's

challenge, the old boundaries remain in

effect.

Except for thcse two cases where new or

expanded boundaries have been created by

operation of law, nonattainment area

changes will not be considered effective until

the changes are promulgated by the EPA. As

to most new areas or expansions of

previously-designated nonattainment aieas,

this will occur 240 days after enactment (see

section 107(d)(4)(A) (i) and (ii)). Newlycreated ozone and CO nonattainment areas

will be considered part of a designated

nonattainment area for NSR purposes at the

time of promulgation.

2. Status of Construction Bans

Pursuant to section 110(n)(3). an existing

construction ban that was imposed due to the

absence of approved Part D NSR rules

remains in effect until a revised NSR SIP is

approved. Existing construction bans

imposed due to disapproval of primary sulfur

dioxide NAAQS attainment plans also

remain in effect. A Federal Register notice

will be published soon announcing the status

of construction bans in general and also

lifting specific bans where appropriate.

Should a construction ban be lifted in any

area designated as nonattainment, and the

area lacks an approved Part D NSR rule, the

State should meet the requirements of 40 CFR

part 51, appendix S, in issuing permits to

v w A f I

18076
Federal Register / Vol. 57, No. 82 / Tuesday, April 28, 1992 / Proposed Rules

major new sources or major modifications

prior to the adoption of NSR rules meeting

the requirements of the 1990 Amendments.

3. Federal Implementation Plans Remain in

Effect

The NSR permitting program in an existing

FIP remains in effect until a SIP is approved

or a revised FIP is adopted.

4. Use of Previously-Approved Growth

Allowances Is Prohibited

Section 173(b) invalidates growth

allowances in existing SIP's in areas that

received a SIP call prior to enactment of the

1990 Amendments, or that receive one

thereafter. For NSR permits issued on or after

November 15, 1990, previously-approved

growth allowances cannot be used in these

areas. Construction permits cannot be issued

in SIP-call areas under existing EPAapproved Part D programs to the extent that

such permits rely on previously-approved

growth allowances. Case-by-case emission

offsets must be obtained for any such

permits, and other existing Part D

requirements must be met.

5. Existing NSR Permitting Rules Continue To

Apply in the Northeast Ozone Transport

Region (NOTR)

The 1990 Amendments establish a single

ozone transport region comprised of the

States of Connecticut, Delaware. Maine,

Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire.

New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode

Island. Vermont, and the CMSA that includes

the District of Columbia and part of the State

of Virginia. For this transport region,

including all attainment areas within its

boundaries, new section 184(b)(2) specifies

that any stationary source that emits or has

the potential to emit at least 50 tons per year

of VOC's shall be considered a major

stationary source and subject to the

requirements which would be applicable to

major stationary sources if the area were

classified as a moderate ozone

nonattainment area. For NSR purposes, the

requirements of section 184(b)(2) are not in

effect in a State until the State submits a new

or revised SIP that includes the requirements

(or EPA imposes a FIP implementing those

requirements). A State in the NOTR has until

November 15. 199Z to submit to EPA the new

or revised NSR rules addressing the new

requirements.

Appendix E

I. Introduction

The EPA is issuing this CTG document

under section 182(b) of the Clean Air Act, as

amended. Under section 182(b), States must

develop RACT rules for sources "covered by

a CTG document issued by the Administrator

between November 15, 1990 and the date of

attainment." The State must submit these

RACT rules "within the period set forth by

the Administrator in issuing the relevant CTG

document." One type of "CTG document" is a

CTG: a CTG is a technical document that sets

forth a presumptive level of RACT controls

for a source category. The Act provides that

EPA must issue eleven CTG's by November

15. 1993. In addition, the Act specifically

requires the Agency to prepare CTG's for

aerospace coatings and ship building and

repair within the same timeframe.

This document is not a technical CTG, but

rather a second type of CTG document-a

document that lists the eleven CTG's EPA

anticipates publishing in accordance with

section 183(a) and establishes time tables for

submittal of RACT rules for sources that are not ultimately covered by a CTG issued by

November 15, 1993. The EPA believes that it

is necessary to issue this document at this

time so that States will be able to determine

which sources and source categories fit

within the RACT rule submittal requirement

for sources that EPA expects to be covered

by a post-enactment CTG.

11. List of Eleven CTG's

The EPA plans to issue the following CTG's

in accordance with section 183(a).

1. Synthetic organic chemical

manufacturing industry (SOCMI) distillation:

2. SOCMI reactors;

3. Wood furniture;

4. Plastic parts coating (business machines):

5. Plastic parts coating (other):

6. Offset lithography;

7. Industrial wastewater,

8. Autobody refinishing:

9. SOCMI batch processing;

10. Volatile organic liquid storage tanks:

and

11. Clean up solvents.

II1. Authority

Under section 1(12(b)(2), States must adopt

RACT rules for three general groups of

sources: (A) Those covered by a postenactment CTG document; (b) those covered

by a pre-enactment CTG: (c) "all other major

stationary sources of VOC's." Section

182(b)(2) also establishes the timing for State

submittal and source implementation of

RACT rules for these three groups. For

sources covered by a post-enactment CTG

document, the State must submit RACT rules

within the period established in the relevant

CTG document. For the other two groups, the

Act provides specific dates for submittal.

November 15. 1992, and implementation, no

later than May 31. 1995.

Alone. subparagraphs (A), (B) and (C) seem

to set forth three distinct groups of sources,

However, the submittal dates under the

second portion of the provision potentially

could blur the line between these three

groups if EPA does not issue before

November 15, 1992. a CTG document

covering all sources for which it plans to

issue a CTG under section 183(a). At that

time, States would need to submit RACT

rules for all other major stationary sourcesthose for which neither a pre-enactment CTG

nor a post-enactment CTG document had

been issued.

The EPA's obligation to issue the eleven

CTG's does not ripen until November 15,

1993, and EPA does not anticipate issuing all

of these CTG's before November 15. 1992.

Therefore, to the extent EPA does not issue a

CTG document before November 15, 1992,

States would be required to submit non-CTG

RACT rules for sources that could In the

future be covered by a CTG. In.addition, at

the time the CTG document was issued, the

State could then be required to submit a new

rule, consistent with the CTG document,

thereby duplicating its earlier effort.

In order to relieve the States from being

required to duplicate rules and to relieve

sources from potentially being subject to two

different requirements within a short period,

EPA is issuing this CTG document to retain

the sharp distinction between the three

different groups in subparagraphs (A), (B),

and (C). If a State believes that one of the

eleven CTG's listed in Section 11 will cover a

particular major source, the State should

follow the timing provisions of Section IV.

below for submittal of a rule applicable to

that source. The State should identify those

sources in its November 15, 1992 RACT

submittal.

IV. Time Table

The EPA is establishing the following

general time table for States to submit RACT

rules for sources that it identifies in a

November 15, 1992 submittal as being a

source covered by a post-enactment CTG

document.

(1) on November 15. 1992. the State must

submit a list of major stationary sources that

it anticipates will be subject to one of the

CTG's listed in Section I1 which EPA plans to

issue by November 15, 1993.

(2) For those major sources on the list

submitted by the State in the 1992 submittal

that are not covered by a CTG that EPA has

issued by November 15. 1993. the State must

submit a RACT rule by November 15, 1994

that requires implementation of RACT by

May 15, 1995.

(3) For sources covered by a CTG issued

under section 183(a) and for which the State

has not, by the date of such issuance,

adopted an approvable RACT rule. the State

must submit a RACT rule in accordance with

the time schedule set forth in the relevant

CTG.

(4) For sources subject to a RACT rule that

the State adopted and EPA approved under

section 182(b)(2) prior to EPA's issuance of an

applicable CTG, EPA will work with the

State to determine whether the existing rule

should be revised once a CTG has been

issued that would apply to that source.

[FR Doc. 92-9866 Filed 4-27-92; 8:45 am]

BILUING CODE GseO-SO-A

• I I I

18077