ATTACHMENT 5

Ventura County Air Pollution Control District 

FINAL STAFF REPORT – April 27, 2011 

NEW RULE 26.13 – NEW SOURCE REVIEW - 

PREVENTION OF SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) is a 

federal pre-construction permitting program for 

facilities located in areas that either comply with

federal ambient air quality standards for particular 

pollutants (classified as attainment) or are unclassifiable for any criteria air pollutant. PSD applies to new 

major stationary sources and existing major stationary sources where a significant modification will 

occur. The counterpart of PSD in federal permitting 

is the Federal New Source Review Program for major 

sources of pollutants that are not in attainment of 

federal ambient air quality standards. 

In Ventura County, the PSD permitting program is 

currently administered by the Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) Region IX. At this time, 

no facility in the county requires a PSD permit. 

The recent addition of greenhouse gases (GHG) to 

the list of regulated pollutants makes these pollutants 

subject to federal permitting. As a result, EPA 

Region IX could have a significant increase in PSD 

permit applications throughout the state. EPA staff 

would be overwhelmed with these new permit 

applications and processing time could be significantly longer. Consequently, EPA is encouraging 

local air districts to take responsibility for processing 

any PSD permit applications within their jurisdiction. 

This requires each district to adopt a PSD permitting 

rule that mirrors federal requirements. The rule must 

be approved for incorporation into the State Implementation Plan (SIP) by both the California Air 

Resources Board (ARB) and EPA. 

The most straightforward way for an air district to

take PSD responsibility is to adopt a rule that 

incorporates the federal requirements by reference. 

The California Air Pollution Control Offices 

Association (CAPCOA) has developed a model rule 

for just this purpose. The rule was developed 

cooperatively by EPA staff, ARB staff, and the 

CAPCOA Engineering Managers Committee. 

District staff is proposing a PSD rule based on the

CAPCOA model rule. Certain changes have been 

made to accommodate specific situations in Ventura 

County. In addition, existing PSD Rule 26.10, which 

requires a source operator to obtain a PSD permit 

from EPA, will be repealed. 

PROPOSED RULE

Proposed new Rule 26.13 is based on a CAPCOA 

model PSD rule developed by EPA staff, ARB staff, 

and the CAPCOA Engineering Managers Committee. 

The features of the rule are discussed below. 

A. Purpose 

This section of the rule is relatively self-explanatory, 

establishing the context of the rule with respect to 

new source review. Ventura County has not attained

the federal NAAQS for ozone; it's status is 

"attainment" for all other pollutants. A list of 

applicable attainment pollutants appears in Table 1. 

The prevention of significant deterioration 

(PSD) program is a construction permitting 

program for new major facilities and major 

modifications to existing major facilities that 

emit either criteria or greenhouse gas 

pollutants located in areas classified for an 

air pollutant as either attainment or 

unclassifiable. Rules 10 through 32 contain 

application requirements and processing 

requirements for permit actions. The intent 

of this Rule is to incorporate by reference 

federal PSD rule requirements into these 

Rules and Regulations. 

B. Applicability 

Section B specifies that Rule 26.13 shall apply to 

sources subject to federal regulation 40 CFR Part 

52.21. 
FINAL STAFF REPORT – Rule 26.13 – Prevention Of Significant Deterioration Page 2 

April 27, 2011 

 Table 1 

 Significant Pollutants for Major Modifications in § 52.21 (b)(23) 

 Pollutant Emissions Rate

 Carbon monoxide................................................... 100 tons per year (tpy) 

 Nitrogen oxides...................................................... 40 tpy 

 Sulfur dioxide......................................................... 40 tpy 

 Particulate matter: .................................................. 25 tpy of particulate matter emissions 

 15 tpy of PM10 emissions 

 Ozone ..................................................................... 40 tpy of volatile organic compounds* 

 Lead ....................................................................... 0.6 tpy 

 Asbestos ................................................................. 0.007 tpy 

 Beryllium ............................................................... 0.0004 tpy 

 Mercury.................................................................. 0.1 tpy 

 Vinyl chloride ........................................................ 1 tpy 

 Fluorides ................................................................ 3 tpy 

 Sulfuric acid mist ................................................... 7 tpy 

 Hydrogen sulfide (H2S) ......................................... 10 tpy 

 Total reduced sulfur (including H2S)..................... 10 tpy 

 Reduced sulfur compounds (including H2S): ........ 10 tpy 

 Greenhouse Gases.................................................. 75,000 tpy 

 Municipal Waste processing .................................. Specific limits 

 * - Ozone is non-attainment in Ventura County

The provisions of this rule shall apply to any 

source and the owner or operator of any 

source subject to any requirement under 40 

Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR) Part 

52.21 as incorporated into this rule. 

C. Incorporation by Reference 

Section C incorporates by reference federal regulation 40 CFR Part 52.21. In Subsections 1, 2 and 3 

(not shown), exclusions and amendments to the 

federal regulations are specified. These changes are 

detailed in Appendix A and Appendix B. 

Except as provided below, the provisions of 

40 CFR Part 52.21, in effect August 2, 2010, 

are incorporated herein by reference and 

made part of these Rules and Regulations. 

D. Requirements 

This section specifies that a facility owner or operator 

must obtain a PSD permits prior to construction for

applicable projects. The District shall issue the 

permit and the applicant shall pay the fees specified 

in Rule 42. 

1. An owner or operator must obtain a 

prevention of significant deterioration 

(PSD) permit pursuant to this Rule 

before beginning actual construction of 

a new major stationary source, a major 

modification, or a Plantwide Applicability Limit (PAL) major modification, 

as defined in 40 CFR 52.21(b). 

2. Not withstanding the provisions of any 

other Rule or Regulation, the Air 

Pollution Control Officer shall require 

compliance with this rule prior to 

issuing a federal Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration permit as 

required by Clean Air Act (CAA) 

Section 165. 

3. The applicant shall pay the applicable 

fees specified in Rule 42. 

E. Public Participation 

Section E specifies that the public notice requirements in Rule 26.7, New Source Review – Notification, shall apply. Rule 26.7 requires a published 

notice in both a newspaper of general circulation and 

the District newsletter for a period of 30 days prior to 

a final decision. ARB and EPA are also notified. 

1. Prior to issuing a federal PSD permit 

pursuant to this rule, the Air Pollution 

Control Officer shall comply with the 

public notice requirements of Rule 26.7, 

New Source Review - Notification. 
FINAL STAFF REPORT – Rule 26.13 – Prevention Of Significant Deterioration Page 3 

April 27, 2011 

DISCUSSION

The federal PSD program appears in 40 Code of 

Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 52.21. The discussion below explains many of the features of the 

program as it applies to Ventura County. 

Who is Subject to PSD Permitting? 

A pre-construction PSD permit is required for any 

new major source or significant modification of an 

existing major source for any the pollutants in Table 

1 except pollutants for which an area has been 

classified non-attainment. Currently, Ventura County 

is a federal non-attainment area for ozone. The 

remaining pollutants in Table 1 are applicable attainment pollutants. The mass emission rates listed in

Table 1 apply to modifications of a existing source. 

In general, a new major source is a facility with mass 

emissions of 250 tons or more per year of an applicable pollutant, except for GHGs, for which there is an 

additional threshold of 100,000 tons per year of 

carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e). CO2e is calculated 

by multiplying the mass emission rate of a greenhouse gas by its global warming potential (GWP). 

GWP values for manygreenhouse gases appear in 

Appendix C. 

Note also that there are 28 types of industries where a 

new major source is defined as 100 tons per year or

more of an applicable pollutant (Appendix D), with 

the same additional GHG threshold. No such source 

type is likely to be constructed in Ventura County.

With the recent addition of GHG as a regulated 

pollutant, it is possible for an existing source to

become a PSD source. However, based on past 

permitting experience, no new or existing PSD 

sources are expected in Ventura County. 

What are the Primary Requirements 

to Obtain a PSD Permit? 

PSD permit applicants must meet five requirements 

to obtain a PSD permit, as listed below; 

• Apply BACT during all phases of operation 

• Conduct an air quality impact analysis 

• Perform an increment consumption analysis 

• Analyze impacts to soils, vegetation and 

visibility 

• Not adversely impact any Class I area1

The air quality impact analysis should show that the 

increase in emissions will neither cause or contribute 

to an exceedence of a National Ambient Air Quality 

Standard (NAAQS) 

BACT is required on each emissions unit that emits 

an applicable air pollutant in excess of the significance threshold for that pollutant. Because GHGs are 

newly regulated, BACT has not been thoroughly 

developed. As an example, a PSD source of GHGs 

could be a fossil-fuel fired boiler with a capacity of 

over 200 million Btu/hr operating full time. In this 

case, BACT would likely be a fuel efficiency requirement; if fuel use is reduced, carbon dioxide emissions 

are reduced. 

The air quality impact analysis compares the background concentration of a pollutant plus the potential 

to emit of the new or modified emissions units to the 

NAAQS on an hour by hour basis over the course of 

a year. Background concentrations are determined 

from either a public monitoring site nearby (with 

three to five years of ambient data) or one year of

site-specific hourly monitoring. Both pollutant 

concentration and weather data is collected. If there 

are other facilities with issued Authorities to 

Construct that have not begun operation at the time of 

the site monitoring, the potential to emit of these

other facilities must be added to the background 

concentration. If the air quality impact analysis 

shows an exceedence of the NAAQS, additional 

emission controls or operational limitations must be 

imposed on the new or modified units. If an NAAQS 

exceedence remains possible, post-project air quality 

monitoring may be imposed on the applicant. In 

addition, the project must not impact a Class I area 

(such as the Los Padres National Forest in northern

Ventura County). 

In addition to exceeding the NAAQS, federal regulations limit the increase in ambient air concentration 

of a pollutant from a single source. This is called the 

ambient air increment. Increments differ by pollutant 

and are measured in micrograms per cubic meter (see

Appendix E). Because neither a NAAQS nor an 

ambient air increment have been established for 

GHGs, an air quality impact analysis is not required. 

What are the Benefits of District 

PSD Permitting? 

The primary benefit for sources requiring a PSD 

permit at the District level is a shorter permit 

processing time. Currently, obtaining a PSD permit 

from EPA can take several years. With a District 

PSD designation, permit processing will occur much 
FINAL STAFF REPORT – Rule 26.13 – Prevention Of Significant Deterioration Page 4 

April 27, 2011 

more quickly. EPA PSD permit processing involves 

both the federal Fish and Wildlife Service and the 

National Marine Fisheries Service (regarding the 

Endangered Species Act (ESA)) because an EPA 

PSD permit issuance is considered a federal action. 

Local districts are not required to consult federal

agencies, although compliance with applicable ESA 

is still required. ESA and other impacts are 

considered in the California Environmental Quality 

Act (CEQA) process. Note, however, that the PSD 

permit process is both complicated and labor-intensive and will take much more time to complete 

compared to the typical APCD permit process. 

Appeals for PSD permits issued by EPA are heard by 

the federal Environmental Appeals Board (EAB) in 

Washington, DC. Appeals of a District-issued PSD 

permit issued are heard by the District Hearing 

Board. Appeals handled locally will be quicker and

have more scheduling flexibility. 

Financial Impact 

The adoption of Rule 26.13 will have a financial 

impact on businesses that require a PSD permit 

because they will be required to pay the District for 

the additional permit processing required to obtain

the permit. Currently, EPA charges no fee for 

processing PSD permit applications. 

The District proposes to charge for PSD permit 

processing as specified in Rule 42. Because of the

modeling required, actual labor hours required to 

process a PSD permit could be significantly more 

than those required for a Title V permit. Also, costs 

could vary considerably depending on the level of 

participation by both the public and EPA. The 

current hourly service rate for an Air Quality 

Engineer is $119.00 per hour. Staff estimates that, 

depending on its complexity, the cost of a PSD 

permit could range from $15,000 to $100,000. 

Implementation of State Senate Bill 288 

SB 288 restricts changes that California air pollution 

control districts may make to their existing New 

Source Review (NSR) and PSD rules. SB 288 also 

requires ARB to formally approve any NSR and PSD 

rule changes made by local districts. If a district 

makes any NSR or PSD rule changes that ARB finds, 

after a public hearing, are less stringent than those 

that existed on December 30, 2002, SB 288 directs 

ARB to promptly adopt the rules necessary to restore 

equivalent NSR and PSD obligations.2

New Rule 26.13 is being proposed in part to 

accommodate the federal Greenhouse Gas Tailoring 

Rule. With regard to SB 288, ARB states: 

Based on the text and timing of SB 288, as well 

as other policy considerations discussed in the 

enclosed guidance document, ARB staff 

concludes that SB 288 is not applicable to those 

changes to district rules required to be 

implemented by the districts as a result of the 

Tailoring Rule. Therefore, SB 288 should not 

act as a barrier to the efforts underway to 

expeditiously develop rules for implementing 

the GHG Tailoring Rule.1

Because Rule 26.13 is a new rule that implements 

federal PSD requirements, the rule will be no less 

stringent than existing Rule 26.10. Rule 26.10 states 

that an applicant subject to PSD must obtain a PSD 

permit from EPA. 

EMISSION REDUCTION / COST EFFECTIVENESS

Health & Safety Code § 40703 states that the District 

must consider, and make public, "the cost-effectiveness of a control measure." The proposed rule is not 

included in any control measure, so a costeffectiveness calculation is not necessary. 

Nevertheless, although the proposed rule is administrative in nature, a significant increase in permit 

processing costs will occur for sources requiring a

PSD permit. Also, the District will experience an 

increase in costs to implement the PSD program; 

some of these costs may not be directly offset by the 

permit processing fee. Although emissions may be 

reduced as a result of PSD requirements, it is not 

possible to calculate the quantity of these emissions 

until an application is received. Therefore, the costeffectiveness of the proposal cannot be calculated.

Because this rule action is not a measure to implement Best Available Retrofit Control Technology, an

incremental cost-effectiveness analysis under Health 

& Safety Code Section 40920.6 is not required. 
FINAL STAFF REPORT – Rule 26.13 – Prevention Of Significant Deterioration Page 5 

April 27, 2011 

SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACT

Health & Safety Code § 40728.5 requires the Air 

Pollution Control Board consider the socioeconomic 

impact of any new rule or amendment to an existing 

rule if air quality or emission limits are significantly 

effected. The proposed rule is administrative in 

nature and does not include emission limits. 

However, emissions may be reduced as a result of 

PSD requirements. It is not possible to calculate the 

quantity of these emissions until individual projects 

are evaluated. However, the rule may affect air 

quality in Ventura County, so the requirements of the 

section must be evaluated. 

The Board must evaluate the following socioeconomic information on new Rule 26.13: 

(1) The type of industries or business, including 

small business, affected by the rule or 

regulation.

 Rule 26.13 will impact businesses that construct 

a new major source or a make a significant 

modification to an existing major source of an 

attainment pollutant. It is not possible to determine the quantity or nature of these emissions 

until the individual projects are evaluated. 

There are currently no PSD permit holders in 

Ventura County and few, if any, are expected. 

The rule will have no impact on small business. 

(2) The impact of the rule or regulation on 

employment and the economy of the region 

affected by the adoption of the rule or 

regulation. 

 The adoption of Rule 26.13 is expected to have 

no impact on employment in and the economy 

of Ventura County. A new major source or a 

significant modification to an existing major 

source of an attainment pollutant will require a 

PSD permit regardless of the identity of the 

issuing agency. There are currently no PSD 

permit holders in Ventura County and few, if 

any, are expected. 

(3) The range of probable costs, including costs to

industry or business, including small business, 

of the rule or regulation. 

 The District proposes to charge for PSD permit 

processing as specified in Rule 42. Because of 

the modeling required, actual labor hours 

required to process a PSD permit could be 

significantly more than those required for a 

Title V permit. Also, costs could vary 

considerably depending on the level of participation by both the public and EPA. The current 

hourly service rate for an Air Quality Engineer 

is $119.00 per hour. Staff estimates that, 

depending on the complexity, the cost of a PSD 

permit could be from $15,000 to $100,000. 

(4) The availability and cost-effectiveness of 

alternatives to the rule or regulation being 

proposed or amended. 

 The PSD program is implemented pursuant to 

federal law. A new major source or a significant modification to an existing major source 

of an attainment pollutant will require a PSD 

permit regardless of the identity of the issuing 

agency. No alternatives to the rule exist. 

(5) The emission reduction potential of the rule or

regulation. 

 While emissions may be reduced as a result of 

PSD requirements, it is not possible to calculate 

the quantity of these emissions until a project is 

evaluated. Therefore, the emission reduction 

potential of the proposal cannot be calculated. 

(6) The necessity of adopting, amending, or 

repealing the rule or regulation in order to 

attain state and federal ambient air standards 

pursuant to Chapter 10 (commencing with 

Section 40910). 

 Although it is possible that NOx and VOC 

emissions will be reduced as a result of this rule,

no new PSD sources are expected in Ventura 

County. However, any reductions that do occur 

will assist in the District's progress towards 

attainment and maintenance of the federal and 

California ambient air quality ozone standards. 

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF METHODS OF COMPLIANCE / CEQA

Methods of Compliance 

California Public Resources Code § 21159 requires 

the District to perform an environmental analysis of 

the reasonably foreseeable methods of compliance if

the proposed rule requires "the installation of 

pollution control equipment, or [specifies] a 

performance standard or treatment requirement..." 
FINAL STAFF REPORT – Rule 26.13 – Prevention Of Significant Deterioration Page 6 

April 27, 2011 

The proposed rule is administrative in nature but may 

involve a requirement to install air pollution control 

equipment. It is not possible to determine the nature 

of the control equipment until the project is 

evaluated. Therefore, an analysis is not possible.

CEQA Requirements 

Staff concludes that the adoption of proposed Rule 

26.13 is within the scope of the categorical 

exemptions from the CEQA under CEQA guideline 

Sections 15308, Protection of Environment, and that

no exception to these categorical exemptions apply.

ANALYSIS OF EXISTING FEDERAL AND DISTRICT REGULATIONS

California Health & Safety Code § 40727.2(a) 

requires districts to provide a written analysis of

existing regulations prior to adopting, amending or

repealing a regulation. Section 40727.2(a) states:

 In complying with Section 40727, the district 

shall prepare a written analysis as required by 

this section. In the analysis, the district shall 

identify all existing federal air pollution control

requirements, including, but not limited to, 

emission control standards constituting best 

available control technology for new or 

modified equipment, that apply to the same 

equipment or source type as the rule or 

regulation proposed for adoption or 

modification by the district. The analysis shall 

also identify any of that district's existing or 

proposed rules and regulations that apply to the 

same equipment or source type, and all air 

pollution control requirements and guidelines 

that apply to the same equipment or source type 

and of which the district has been informed 

pursuant to subdivision (b). 

The proposed rule includes no emission control 

standards; therefore, the requirements of Health & 

Safety Code § 40727.2(a) are satisfied pursuant to 

Health & Safety Code § 40727.2(g). Nevertheless, 

the PSD program requires the implementation of 

BACT. It is not possible to determine the nature of 

the BACT requirement until a project is evaluated. 

Note also that the PSD program is implemented 

pursuant to federal law. A new major source or a 

significant modification to an existing major source 

of an attainment pollutant will require a PSD permit 

regardless of the identity of the issuing agency. 

Existing District Rule 26.10, New Source Review - 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration , is proposed 

for repeal. 

PUBLIC MEETINGS AND COMMENTS

Public Workshop 

Staff conducted a public workshop on new Rule 

26.13 on February 24, 2011. There were no 

attendees. 

Advisory Committee 

The Advisory Committee met on April 26, 2011, to 

consider recommending adoption of new Rule 26.13 

and repeal of Rule 26.10. There was no public comment. The committee recommended unanimously 

approval of proposed rule action.

REFERENCES

1. Laura Yannayon, EPA Region 9 Permit Office, 

CAPCOA Permit Staff Training, Prevention of 

Significant Determination (PSD) Permitting, 

October 18, 2010 

2. Robert D. Fletcher, California Air Resources 

Board, To All California Air Pollution Control 

Officers/Executive Officers, December 22, 2010 

Acknowledgment

Placer County APCD, Proposed New Rule 518, 

Prevention Of Significant Deterioration Staff Report, 

October 21, 2010 
FINAL STAFF REPORT – Rule 26.13 – Prevention Of Significant Deterioration Page 7 

April 27, 2011 

Appendix A 

Rule 26.13 Subsection C.1, Exemptions 

Subject Summary 

The following subsections of 40 CFR Part 52.21 are excluded: 

(a)(1) Plan Disapproval (EPA function only) 

(b)(55) Definition of "process unit," in general 

(b)(56) Definition of "Functionally equivalent component" 

(b)(57) Definition of "Fixed capital cost" 

(b)(58) Definition of "Total capital investment" 

 (ERP definitions struck down by DC Circuit Court but not yet removed from the CFR) 

(f) [Reserved] 

(g) Redesignation (EPA function only) 

(i) (Exemptions) 

(i)(1)((i) Construction or modification commenced before August 7, 1977. 

(i)(1)((ii) The source or modification was subject to 40 CFR 52.21 as in effect before March 1, 1978. 

(i)(1)((iii) The source or modification was not subject to 40 CFR 52.21 as in effect before March 1, 1978. 

(i)(1)((iv) The source or modification was not subject to 40 CFR 52.21 as in effect before March 1, 1978. 

(i)(1)((v) The source or modification was not subject to 40 CFR 52.21 as in effect on June 19, 1978. 

(i)(1)((ix) The source or modification was not subject to §52.21, with respect to particulate matter, as in 

effect before July 31, 1987. 

(i)(1)((x) The source or modification was subject to 40 CFR 52.21, with respect to particulate matter, as in 

effect before July 31, 1987. 

(i)(6) Best Available Control Technology as in effect on June 19, 1978. 

(i)(7) Air quality monitoring as in effect on June 19, 1978. 

(i)(8) Air quality monitoring of PM10 on or before June 1, 1988 and no later than December 1, 1988. 

(p)(6-8) Class 1 variances by the Governor 

(q) Public Participation (EPA only) 

(s) Environmental Impact Statements (NEPA) 

(t) Disputed Permits or Redesignations – resolutions 

(u) Delegation of Authority (EPA function only) 

(v) Innovative Control Technology – Approval procedure 

(w) Permit Rescission (EPA function only) 

(x) [Reserved] 

(y) [Reserved] 

(z) [Reserved] 

(cc) "Routine maintenance, repair and replacement" definition, capital cost threshold for equipment 

replacement, and basic design parameters. The replacement activity shall not cause the process unit to 

exceed any emission limitation. 

 (ERP provisions struck down by DC Circuit Court.) 
FINAL STAFF REPORT – Rule 26.13 – Prevention Of Significant Deterioration Page 8 

April 27, 2011 

Appendix B 

Rule 26.13, Subsection C.2 and C.3 

Revisions From Federal Code 

(Changes noted in Strikeout/Underline format) 

Subsection C.2

The following definitions found in 40 CFR Part 52.21(b) are revised as follows: 

a. In the definition of “potential to emit” contained in 40 CFR Part 52.21(b)(4), the phrase “is federally 

enforceable” shall read “is federally enforceable or enforceable as a practical matter.” 

(4) Potential to emit means the maximum capacity of a stationary source to emit a pollutant under its 

physical and operational design. Any physical or operational limitation on the capacity of the source to emit 

a pollutant, including air pollution control equipment and restrictions on hours of operation or on the type 

or amount of material combusted, stored, or processed, shall be treated as part of its design if the limitation 

or the effect it would have on emissions is federally enforceable or enforceable as a practical matter. 

Secondary emissions do not count in determining the potential to emit of a stationary source. 

b. In the definition of “allowable emissions” contained in 40 CFR Part 52.21(b)(16): 

1) The phrase “unless the source is subject to federally enforceable limits which restrict the operating 

rate, or hours of operation, or both” shall read, “unless the source is subject to enforceable limits 

which restrict the operating rate, or hours of operation, or both.” 

2) Paragraph (iii) shall read as follows: “The emissions rate specified as an enforceable permit 

condition, including those with a future compliance date.” 

(16) Allowable emissions means the emissions rate of a stationary source calculated using the maximum 

rated capacity of the source (unless the source is subject to federally enforceable limits which restrict the 

operating rate, or hours of operation, or both) and the most stringent of the following: 

(i) The applicable standards as set forth in 40 CFR parts 60 and 61; 

(ii) The applicable State Implementation Plan emissions limitation, including those with a future 

compliance date; or 

(iii) The emissions rate specified as a federally an enforceable permit condition, including those with a 

future compliance date. 

Subsection C.3

The following terms found in 40 CFR Part 52.21(b) are revised as follows: 

a. The term “administrator” means: 

1) “federal administrator” in 40 C.F.R. 52.21(b)(17), (b)(37)(i), (b)(43), (b)(48)(ii)(c), (b)(50)(i),

(b)(51), (l)(2) and (p)(2); or 

2) “Air Pollution Control Officer” as defined in Rule 2. 

b. The phrase “paragraph (q) of this section” in 40 CFR 52.21(p)(1) shall read as follows: the public notice 

and comment provisions of Rule 26.7, New Source Review - Notification. 

 (p) Sources impacting Federal Class I areas-additional requirements - 

(1) Notice to Federal land managers. The Administrator shall provide written notice of any permit 

application for a proposed major stationary source or major modification, the emissions from which may
FINAL STAFF REPORT – Rule 26.13 – Prevention Of Significant Deterioration Page 9 

April 27, 2011 

affect a Class I area, to the Federal land manager and the Federal official charged with direct responsibility 

for management of any lands within any such area. Such notification shall include a copy of all 

information relevant to the permit application and shall be given within 30 days of receipt and at least 60 

days prior to any public hearing on the application for a permit to construct. Such notification shall include 

an analysis of the proposed source's anticipated impacts on visibility in the Federal Class I area. The 

Administrator shall also provide the Federal land manager and such Federal officials with a copy of the 

preliminary determination required under paragraph (q) of this section the public notice and comment 

provisions of Rule 26.7, New Source Review - Notification, and shall make available to them any materials 

used in making that determination, promptly after the Administrator makes such determination. Finally, 

the Administrator shall also notify all affected Federal land managers within 30 days of receipt of any 

advance notification of any such permit application. 

(q) Public participation. The Administrator shall follow the applicable procedures of 40 CFR part 124 in 

processing applications under this section. The Administrator shall follow the procedures at 40 CFR 

52.21(r) as in effect on June 19, 1979, to the extent that the procedures of 40 CFR part 124 do not apply. 
FINAL STAFF REPORT – Rule 26.13 – Prevention Of Significant Deterioration Page 10 

April 27, 2011 

Appendix C 

Global Warming Potentials for Certain Greenhouse Gases 

Global warming potentials (GWPs) are used to compare the abilities of different greenhouse 

gases to trap heat in the atmosphere. GWPs are based on the radiative efficiency (heat-absorbing 

ability) of each gas relative to that of carbon dioxide (CO2), as well as the decay rate of each gas 

(the amount removed from the atmosphere over a given number of years) relative to that of CO2. 

The GWP provides a construct for converting emissions of various gases into a common 

measure, which allows climate analysts to aggregate the radiative impacts of various greenhouse 

gases into a uniform measure denominated in carbon or carbon dioxide equivalents. 

Comparison of 100-Year GWP Estimates from the IPCC's Second 

(1996) and Third (2001) Assessment Reports 

Gas 1996 IPCC 

GWPa 

2001 IPCC 

GWPb 

 Carbon Dioxide 1 1 

 Methane 21 23 

 Nitrous Oxide 310 296 

 HFC-23 11,700 12,000 

 HFC-125 2,800 3,400 

 HFC-134a 1,300 1,300 

 HFC-143a 3,800 4,300 

 HFC-152a 140 120 

 HFC-227ea 2,900 3,500 

 HFC-236fa 6,300 9,400 

 Perfluoromethane (CF4) 6,500 5,700 

 Perfluoroethane (C2F6) 9,200 11,900 

 Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) 23,900 22,200 

This page last updated August 12, 2002 

IPCC Global Warming Potential page 

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/gwp.html 
FINAL STAFF REPORT – Rule 26.13 – Prevention Of Significant Deterioration Page 11 

April 27, 2011 

Appendix D 

Definition of Major Stationary Source 

40 CFR 52.21 (b)(1)(a)

(i) Major stationary source means: 

( a ) Any of the following stationary sources of air pollutants which emits 

or has the potential to emit 100 tons per year or more of any regulated NSR pollutant:* 

1. Fossil Fuel-Fired Steam Electric Plants of more than 250 million British thermal units per 

hour heat input 

2. Coal Cleaning Plants (with thermal dryers) 

3. Kraft Pulp Mills 

4. Portland Cement Plants 

5. Primary Zinc Smelters 

6. Iron And Steel Mill Plants 

7. Primary Aluminum Ore Reduction Plants (with thermal dryers) 

8. Primary Copper Smelters 

9. Municipal Incinerators capable of charging more than 250 tons of refuse per day 

10. Hydrofluoric Acid Plants 

11. Sulfuric Acid Plants 

12. Nitric Acid Plants 

13. Petroleum Refineries 

14. Lime Plants 

15. Phosphate Rock Processing Plants 

16. Coke Oven Batteries 

17. Sulfur Recovery Plants 

18. Carbon Black Plants (Furnace Process) 

19. Primary Lead Smelters 

20. Fuel Conversion Plants 

21. Sintering Plants 

22. Secondary Metal Production Plants 

23. Chemical Process Plants (which does not include ethanol production facilities that 

produce ethanol by natural fermentation included in NAICS codes 325193 or 312140) 

24. Fossil-Fuel Boilers (or combinations thereof) totaling more than 250 million British 

thermal units per hour heat input 

25. Petroleum Storage And Transfer Units with a total storage capacity exceeding 300,000 

barrels 

26. Taconite Ore Processing Plants 

27. Glass Fiber Processing Plants 

28. Charcoal Production Plants 

* except greenhouse gases, for which the threshold is 100,000 tons per year. 
FINAL STAFF REPORT – Rule 26.13 – Prevention Of Significant Deterioration Page 12 

April 27, 2011 

Appendix E 

Ambient Air Increments 

In areas designated as Class I, II or III, increases in pollutant concentration over the baseline 

concentration shall be limited to the following: 

Pollutant Maximum allowable increase(mg/m3) 

Class I (Parks and Wilderness)

Particulate matter:

PM-10, annual arithmetic mean 4

PM-10, 24-hr maximum 8

Sulfur dioxide:

Annual arithmetic mean 2

24-hr maximum 5

3-hr maximum 25

Nitrogen dioxide:

Annual arithmetic mean 2.5

Class II (Default Classification)

Particulate matter:

PM-10, annual arithmetic mean 17

PM-10, 24-hr maximum 30

Sulfur dioxide:

Annual arithmetic mean 20

24-hr maximum 91

3-hr maximum 512

Nitrogen dioxide:

Annual arithmetic mean 25

Class III (None designated)