P. 1



# OAR Box 

# 1790 Prepped by Keeia Richards



## Document

Number: 

# 217 ) ll-F- 6

Docket Number: 

# A-90-3 7

Printed 10/31/2008 12:43:16

PM Sheet 217 of 250P. 2

10'31'I U 17:u 7 - »a"» u

. - -u s lo- u "a.-o v> h .-V J .*.!-* > .lu.'LLt-rrD t|»» l U O J 

# United State s Departmen

to f th e Interior

I N REPL Y Btrtf i TO, NATIOKAI . PAR KSERVTCF

, P.O . Bo x 3712 7 Washington , DC . 2001 3 712 7 

# A-90-3 7 

# /ofei/qif

OAT E 

# :__^/l I

HUflBE R O F PA6E S T O FOLLOW!
. 

# J l

TO : §Z /

/(«JtKM(*iH f 

### v;YsL*. fectfo* Till 7j*Jofl 

# Mt/J;L

_____ _ *"?< •


### FROM : ^gy , SUBJECT : 

# x-* £ 

# ^ /



# I f

• - ^ fast/I,^J£e.te. r>u^ ? 

# . 77,</jk.sl REMARK S

I F YO U HAV E AN Y PROBLEM S WIT H THI S FA X O R TROUBL E RECEIVIN G AFA X PLEAS E CAL L (202 ) 208-4911
.



# |jjULS,i*. t l l AX : 7

C a * ' i » »...'

- fc-

. 

# !:,••: : -J J

: r. 7 1 O-^.'Haj S |P. 3

NATIONA L PAR KSERVIC E AN

D DOS . FIS H AM

D WILDLIF E SERVICE PRIORITIE S FO RNEt f SOURC E REVLK

V PACKAG E — 10/28/9 4 .ftBQOESTE

D REFINEMENT S AN

D OTHE RINFORMATIO

N

- - OUTSETS*- 5 '-SP

A wil l lou

k Int o addin

g regulator

y language simila r to choc proposed b

y NP S .an d USFU S o

n10/2 1 (an

d l npreviou s communications ) int o Ch e NS R packag e tha t wil l go c o OMB .

— APPLICANTS ' IMPAC T ANALYSES : Civo nFL M an d permittin

g authority

resourc e (staf f an

d money ) constraints , th e Draf t 199 0 Ne

w Sourc e Revie

w Workshop Manua l languag e o

np . £12 . researc

han d monitorin

g supportin

g existin

g advers e impac t condition* : a t Clas s I areas , th e FLMs ' lega l mandates , an d othe r policy/lega l consideration.*-. , i t i e essentia l chat th e r.«gulation

e mak e clea r tha t th e PS D permi t applican t perform s AQRV c impact s analysi s for Clas s I area , l n consultation wit hth e affecte

d M M an d permittin

g authorities . Followin g i a som

e suggo*ced compromis e language t o reliev

e concern s cha

e th o FLMs "dra

w a line " A

C wha t analysi s i s needed : Propose d revisio

nt u (n)(4) : The plan shal l provid e tha t th e applicatio

nfor an

y ne w o r modified majo r stationar

y sourc e shal l include , wher e necessary , sufficien t informatio

n for th

e jSfecte d Federa l Lan d Manage r an

d permittin

g Authorit y

t p -4eterming , i naccordanc e withcn e requirement s Unde r paragraphs^(p ) o f thi s section , whothe r emission s fro m th e proposed Sourc e nr modificatio nwoul d hav

e i n advers e impac t o nan y af r quality relate d value s (includirif t visibility ) o f a Clas s I atea . (TTtreri s informatio

n shal l include , bu t no t b e limite

d to , mod*lin

g analyse s at.ggesca

d b y EPA' s Modelin

g Guidelines , includin g lon g 1rang e transpor t modelin g analyse s for propose d source s locate

d mor a [tha n "5 0 k m fro m a Clas s I area .

— FI XCONSULTATIO

N FO & CHANCE S EXCLUDED FRO M PSD/NSR : NF S an

d USFU S appreciat e EPA' s agreemen t tha t FLMs be consulte d vir. hb

y permittin

g authoritie s to determine impacc s C o AQRVs whena courc e request s that a nactivity , sucha s a pollutio

npreventio

n activity , be exclude d fro m TSD/NSR . Fo r FAT. « an d othe r applicability

evaluations , whichhav e th e effec t o f removin g certai nactivitie s fro m PSD/NS Rreview , NP S an d USFU S woul d accept EPA' s desir e no t to requir e FL M consultation , s o lon g a s th

e loo k bac k perio

d io reduce

d fro m th e currentl y proposed 1 0 year s to a recurrin g fiv e yea r period , whichcoul d coincide wit h Titl e V permi t renewals . See th e attachment showin g example s wher e a loo k bac k o f 1 0 year s woul d preven t th e besc , mos t innovativ e contro l technologie s fro m bein g employed .

— TRAC KINCREMENT : NF S an d USFU S understan

d that th

e Existin

g Source s Workgrou

p Repor t i s aurrencl y bein g finalize

d to inolud

e th e consensu s reached b y th e grou p las t Jul y

t o enforc e an

d strengthe

nrequirement s c

o trac k increment . Onc e tha t repor t i s submitted C O £FA , NP S an

d USFU S reques t Cha

C EP A reconside r it s curren t position an

d inolud

e provision s i nth e NS Rpackag

e c o strengthen incremen t trackin g requirement.*: . NP S an d USFU S wil l b

e prepare

d c o discus s specifi c languag e a c EPA' s convenience .

— SI P REVISION S FO

R "GENERIC " ADVERS E IMPAC T DETERMINATION : NF S an d U S FWS aske

d tha t EP A eonsido r includin

g suc hrequirement s (a

s describe

d in10/1 4 paper ) i n th e NS R package . NP S an d USFU S reques t further discussio nwit hEPA .P£-

I n our Septembe r 1 , 199-4 , comment s regardin g th e Jul y 11 , 19*34 . draf t revision s to th

e Ne w Sourc e Revie

w Refor m package , w

e indicate

d thac a five yea r look bac k period , rather tha nth e propose

d tnr, yea r period , i c mor e appropriaia-ifor-tha * "Clea nUni t Exemption. " l u ou r recent conferenc e call , you requested tha t W e provid

e ey-niple

s t o demonstrat e ho v contro l determination s coul d chang e substantiall y

over a te

nyea r peHi-ad . W

e hav e reviewed Ch

e EPAO s Rankin

g Report s an

d recent an

d historica l BAC T •determination

s i n th

e RACT/BACT/LAE

RClearinghous e fo r natura l ga s fire d turbine s an

d for ooa l fire

d boilers . Ou

r revie w Indicate s that , for nature ! ga s fired turbines . BAC T ha s progresse d fro m th e Ne w Sourc e Performanc e Standard requiremen t (a s hig ha s 13 0 ppm ) t

o current leve l A

o f 4 pp

m (SCR ) or l i to 4 2 pp

m (dr y low-NO , technology) . Thi s represent s a substantia l improvemen t i n availabl e contro l technology , an d demonstrate s how , when implemented properly , RACT review s ca nb e technolog

y forcing . W

e ar e concerned that , i f aninappropriat e number o f exemption s arc allowed , thi s developmen t o f now , improve

d technolog

y wil l b

e greatly

delayed . Data fo

r coa l fired boiler s Indicat e tha t NO , level s hav e decrease

d ove r th e pas t te

nyear s fro

m

. 6 or . 7 lb/MMBT

Uto current level s o f .1 7 lb/MMBTU . S0_level s have decreased fro m approximatel y

1. 2 lbs/MMBT

U(som e highe r an

d Som e lover ) t

ncurren t level s o f ..12 o r .1 3 lh/MMBTU . Not e tha t eve n over th

e pas t fiv

e years , bot h N0 Xan d 30 2 level s hav

e beenapproximatel y halved . Th

e Clearinghous e dat a clearl y •demonstrate tha t contro l technolog y ca n improv

e significantl y

ove r a ten , an d even a fiv

e yea r period . W

e therefore reques t ch e EP A reconside r th

e CleanUni t Exemptio n proposal . Th

e loo k bac k perio

d shoul d b e fiv

e year s at most , or ideally , th e examptio

n shoul d only

apply c o unit s whic har e usin g cechnolo-jy

whichrepresent s current BACT/LAE Rlevels .