P.1 

OAR Box 1790 

Prepped by Keeia Richards 

Document Number: 

232) ll-F-22 

Docket Number: 

A-90-37 

Printed 10/31/2008 12:43:17 PM Sheet 232 of 250 
P.2 

SENT BY:ASST. SECKETAKT HUr* :.3-20-95 :11:22AM : INItKIOR UtPAKIMtNH 919 541 5503:8 1/ 4 

United States Department of ihe Interior 

OI-TIC1-: OF Tl lii SF.CRtTAKV 

Wellington, n.c. aomn 

TRANSMISSION NOTTCP 

Thic 

JSlSlTJl*ln: 1*

Ctru,,1C

«

l l y

 W-"*"- ' ~ . X.rox, J 

Transmission Number: 

Verification Number: 

202/203-4604 

202/208-6655 

To: Name: (M/^f €iU^/^F 

Agency Phnne Number: 

irom: A/S Staff Member: f-AOuLH fy-^S % 

A-90-37 

P33 

Department of the InLeriorl 

Assistant Secretary for Fitti 

ana Wildlife and Parks 

1849 "c» Gtreet N. w. 

MS-MTB-3156 

Washington, u.C. 20240 

Number of Pages to follow; 

Date: 

Time: 

\2. <A r. 

EFz\£ziJZJ.t2Jl 

>n 

'J 
P.3 

SENT BY:ASST. SECRETARY FWP : 3-20-95 :11:22AM : INTERIOR DEPARTMENT- 919 341 5509:* 2/ 4 

NSR Package — proposed DOI, NPS/USFWS inserts and Deletions to 

11/16/94 OMB Version 

(NOTE: An * denotes items that may need to be raised -\\ OMb mtgj 

Regulation 

[NOTE: corresponding changes to part 52 should also bej made.] 

*Part 51, P. 8, Definitions: 

Add to end of enlry "(40) Air Quality Related Value": "IJincluding 

thoee values associated with ecosystem impacts." Insert "Class 

TT," top of page 9 after "Class I." 

*rart 51, p. 0, Definitions: 

Delete the "an" in entry "(41) Adverse Impact on an A|i 

Related value" and add an "(s)'\ after "Value." 

specific" and substitute "one or more", add an "s" to 

pnd of present text and add: "in a [Federal) Class 

impair the structure and functioning of an ecosystem. 

Tart 51 [and add to Part 52], wherever adverse impact, 

of sn adverse impact, or monitoring impacts with regard 

at issue, consultation witn the affected KL M shall be 

(or "implied" if "required" is too strong] 

NOTE: If no agreement on this or similar, centralized 

consultation requirement, then reter to mark-up for 

places in regulation where consultation is desirable, 

defining "affected FLM," even it means a cutoff in km, ] 

cutorf re conformity regs. 

Part 51, p. 11, Definitions: 

un (47)(ii) add "or nitrogen oxides" after "voiati 

compounds." 

[NOTE: Bill T. previously agreed to this change, but 

discussed witn KTP.J 

Part 51, p. 13, "(iii)" re BACT: 

Change "may" to "shaI I." 

P.13, del-Le section "(iv)" in entirety or change "lateltf" in line 

3 to "earlier." 

NOTE: Rill T. thought these changes were reasonable, but we did 

not discuss with RTP. Point is, EPA should not cut ott 

eval./discussion of DACT before close of public comment period. 

*Part 51, p. 15, "(o)": 

Delete (o)(3) and revise (o)(1) of current reg. as fol 

"The owner or operator shall provide an analysis of the 

of visibility, soils, and vegetation by the proposed si 

as an analysis of AQRVs (as defined in (40) above) , w 

or.r.rr as a result of the source or modification 

commercial, residential, industrial, and other growth 

with the source or modification. Concerning any 

vegetation not associated with an AQRV, as defined in 

owner or operator need not provide an analysis ot vegetat 

no significant ecological value." 

In 

it is 

an i 

r Quality 

)elete "a 

value" aL 

area, or 

'hrougnout 

[litigation 

AQRVc ie 

Required." 

location for 

ndividual 

iji I's avoid 

.kc 100 km 

organic 

t was not 

impairment 

as wei I. 

ich would 

general 

associated 

npacts on 

(40), the 

on having 
P.4 

SENT BY:ASST. SECRETARY FW : 3-20-95 :11:23AM : INTERIOR DEPARTMENT- 919 541 5509:* 3/ 4 

i on between 

SR EPA's 

The 

Jermitting 

•ft 

ns w 

[Note: This proposed rewrite tries to draw a distincti 

AQRVc on .fed. lands and other resources, to help add 

concern about "not making applicants do somethiny 

determ. of "no sign. eco. value" would be made by 

authority and is irrelevant tu Class I and li areas.] 

*Parl 51, p. 17, U) federal Land Manger—Responsibility: 

Delete (ii) and (A), (B), and (C) under that, and revis= (iii) as 

follows: 

"The Federal Land Manager, through the permitting auth:rity, EPA 

Bulletin Board, or directly, shall make available to the. applicant, 

whose emissions may affeot a Federal Class I area an1' relevant 

information concerning AQRVs of that class I area." 

•Part 51, p. 18 and p. 19, demonstration of adverse .npact and 

denial, and p. 21-22 (q) public participation: 

These sections need Lo be rewritten to clarify EPA's . ntent and 

provide a consistent, realistic framework Lo make and evaluate the 

FLM'S adverse impact determination. The first heading phould be 

public participation, and describe permitting authority 

requirements for notifying the public as Lu state's preliminary 

determination summary. That notification should relaK any FLM 

concerns presented Lo date, including any FLM prelin 

impact determination, and make FLM comments available. 

FLM has all the info. nee. to base adverse impact dctermi 

adverse 

Once the 

Hation on, 

which may not occur until after state prepares its prsliminary 

determination nummary, then if FLM . is inclined to ma<e such a 

determination, the FLM and permitting authority should insult o/i 

the determination, relevant analyses, and mitigation s :rategiee 

Any writings between FLM and state permitting authorit;' on this 

consultation and resolution (i.e., otate has burde• to put 

rejection of FLM's determin. in a rationale written form) |ehould go 

in the public docket. 

Preamble 

*P. 114, Insert 

determination": 

A, firet full para., after "adverse impact 

The NSR Class I Area Coordination Subgroup came up witn the 

following criteria to be considered by the permitting authority, 

(a) Scientific basis uf Lhe FLM'S adverse impact dfttermi fiation; 

(h) Existing status of potentially affected Class I areas 

AQRVs;-

(c) Presence of mitigatiny factors, such as offsets; 

(d) Permit conditions, cuch as pre- and posL-corJ! 

monitoring, with contingent corrective action plan; 

(c) Informal mediation efforts during consideration! 

application; 

(f) Participation hy the FLM during completeness review; 

(g) Public support/opposition to the permit; and 

ind their 

utructlon 

of the 
P.5 

SENT BY:ASST. SECRETARY FWP : 3-20-95 :11:24AM : INTERIOR DEPARTMENT- 919 541 5509:* 4/ 4 

(h) alternative siting. 

(NOTE: b- d, and e from the li3t above are probably moflt imp. to 

set out for FLM's benefit.] 

*P. 315, Insert B, after (2), deleting existing text and yubstitur.e 

followinq: 

Existing Adverse Impacts Previously Documented for the class I Area 

Where the FLM has previously publicly documented or certified 

exieting adverse impact conditions at a Class T area, or ietermincd 

that one or more particular proposed sources would constitute an 

adverse impact to an AQRV at a particular Class I *:ea, that 

information should be affurded substantial weight by the sarmitting 

authority. The legislative history of the CAA instructs to "err on 

the side of protecting the air-quality related values ; sr future 

generations." S. Rep. No. 9f5-i2*>, yi)th Cong. , 1st Sess. 56 (1977) 

The permitting authority 3hould consider that instructior, in light 

of existing conditions at a particular Class I area. 

P. 329, See JB'e Significant Impact Inset 

*r. 33C, Insert C, after "5<>.ZI (o) P ) ," delete rest of tora. and 

substitute: 

In recognizing that Federal class I and II areas have AQU/s, which 

are mandated under various statutes for preservation v limpaired 

(e.g.. Organic Act, Wilderness Act), EPA is proposing to <l«l«te the 

last sentence ,in (o)(1) of both current regulations. These 

clarifications shuuld help ensure that permit applicants consider 

all potential impacts to Class I and II area AL>KVS. 

*P. 343, Insert D. new section, before "7 

Clearinghouse": 

Generic Approaches to Address Any AQRV Issue 

lr ormation 

The NSR Subcommittee, Existinq Sources Subgroup discuss*<l several 

options for addressing specific AQRV degradation in Clasji I areas;. 

The group came to consensus on the need to enforce exist,ng xules 

requiring CIP revisions in cases where PSD increment exceedances 

have been documented. In particular, the group discussec the need 

Lu enforce existing requirements for permitting authoTitles to 

track increment consumption cumulatively for all sources. The need 

for EPA guidance on methodology for tracking emissions cum latively 

and periodically assessing increment consumption was reiounized. 

ErA will endeavor tu provide such guidance. 

The Existing Sources Subgroup also diccusced supplementim 

regulations by adding a trigger for STP revisions, or ever 

of regional implementation plans, tu address existinc 

impact conditions For AQRVs at class I areas within a p 

state or region. Although FLMs and environmenttl group 

representativec pointed out the merits of such an aprt -oach in 

ameliorating the "existing sources problem" for AQRVs, no qonsensus 

of the full group could be reached on this option. 

existing 

adoption 

adverse 

rticular