Cindy To eheying@deq.state.ut.us, DMCNEILL@deq.state.ut.us. 

Rosenberg/P2/RB/USEPNU breiss@deq.state.ut.us 

S ee Larry Svoboda, komp.mark@epa.gov, Kerri Fiedler, Kevin 

02/19/2002 05: 15 PM Golden, Jonah Staller, Douglas 

Latimer/P2/R8/USEPNUS@EPA, williams.megan@epa.gov 

bee 

Subject EPA Comments on 2/6/02 Utah County draft plan 

Here are our most recent comments on the plan. These comments are not complete because they don't 

incl.ude comments'yet from enforcement, permitting, legal, or more detailed eMS and emission inventory 

comments. We've discussed most of these comments over the last few weeks with your staff. I'm also 

including the commitment language as it was when we originally sent it this summer. We will follow this 

up with an official letter from Larry for these comments tomorrow. 

-Cindy 

UTCntyPlanCmnts.EPA.2.19.02.\\ commitments2.wpl 

Cindy Rosenberg 

Particulate Matter Program Manager 

US EPA Region 8 - Air & Radiation Program 

999 18th St. Suite 300 

Denver, CO 80202-2466 

(303) 312-6436 

rosenberg.cindy@epa.gov 
Draft Language for Utah PM 10 Maintenance Plan - 7/17/01 

Prepared by EPA Region VIII for Discussion With Utah DEQ 

A.	 Commitments for Future Maintenance Plans 

Within one year of the effective date of EPA's approval of this maintenance plan, Utah 

commits to do the following: 

1.	 Submit to EPA a revision to this maintenance plan that uses dispersion modeling (using 

the UAM Aero model) to demonstrate maintenance of the PM10 NAAQS in Utah County 

through 2015. Such dispersion modeling shall project emissions for the sources named in 

the following list at levels consistent with emissions limitations in the SIP or with the 

source's maximum potential to emit (PTE): 

a.	 [source name] 

b.	 [source name] 

c.	 [source name] 

d.	 etc. 

Unless a source has emissions limitations with a 24-hour or shorter averaging time, 

projections for the source for modeling maintenance of the 24-hour PM 10 NAAQS shall 

be based on the source's maximum PTE on a 24-hour basis. 

2.	 Submit to EPA a maintenance plan for Salt Lake County that: 

a.	 Uses dispersion modeling (using the UAM Aero model) to demonstrate 

maintenance of the PM10 NAAQS in Salt Lake County for at least a 12-year 

period. Such dispersion modeling shall project emissions for the sources named 

in the following list at levels consistent with emissions limitations in the SIP or 

with the source's maximum potential to emit (PTE): 

1.	 [source name] 

11. [source name]
 

lll. [source name]
 

iv.	 etc. 

Unless a source has emissions limitations with a 24-hour or shorter averaging 

time, projections for the source formodeling maintenance of the 24-hour PM1 0 

NAAQS shall be based on the source's maximum PTE on a 24-hour basis; 

b.	 Establishes emissions limitations and compliance detennining methods for 

refinery nares; 

c.	 Eliminates any exemptions from emissions limitations during SRU maintenance 

or "turnaround" periods. 
3.	 Address issues raised by EPA regarding Utah's NSR program by letter dated May 10, 

2001, through modifications to Utah's NSR regulations, and submit such modifications to 

EPA for approval into the SIP. 

4.	 Revise Utah's emissions banking rule (R307-403-7, UACR, ofthe current codification of 

the Utah regulations, R307-1-3.3.6, UACR, of the EPA approved SIP) to either delete it 

from the Utah regulations or modify it to meet current Federal requirements for banking 

and trading programs, and submit such revision to EPA for approval into the SIP. 

5.	 Revise Utah's breakdown rule (R307-l-4.7 of the EPA approved SIP; ? ofthe current 

Utah codification) to make the rule consistent with EPA's September 20, 1999 policy 

entitled "State Implementation Plans: Policy Regarding Excess Emissions During 

Malfunctions, Startup, and Shutdown." Specifically, Utah will promulgate a replacement 

rule consistent with such policy that establishes an affirmative defense to penalties for 

malfunctions. 

6.	 Revise the Utah SIP to remove director's discretion provisions (provisions that appear to 

reserve to the State the authority to unilaterally modify, or make compliance 

determinations under, the federally approved SIP) and variance provisions. 

B.	 NSR Applicability and NSR Offsets 

With the adoption of this maintenance plan, the following provisions shall apply 

Statewide, notwithstanding provisions ofUACR that might be interpreted to the contrary. These 

provisions of the maintenance plan shall be deemed to modify and supersede any conflicting 

regulatory provision in UACR: 

1.	 Determinations of applicability of the major nonattainment NSR requirements under 

R307-403, UACR (R307-l-3.3 of the SIP-approved codification), shall be based solely 

on whether a source or modification proposing to locate in a nonattainment area is a 

major source or major modification for the nonattainment pollutant (rather than on 

whether any new major source or major modification will cause or contribute to a 

violation ofthe NAAQS as of the projected startup date of the new source). 

2.	 In determining the applicability of offset requirements (under R307-403-5, UACR (R307­

l-3.3.3.B of the SIP-approved codification» or ofNSR requirements in general (under 

R307-403, UACR (R307-1-3.3 of the SIP-approved codification», no interpollutant 

trading within a source shall be permitted (i.e., no interpollutant trading to net out of 

review will be allowed). 

3.	 Interpollutant trading shall not be permitted as a means to meet the requirements ofR307­

403-5, UACR (R307-l-3.3.3.B of the SIP-approved codification), for emissions offsets, 

with the exception that a new or modified source of a PMlO precursor (NOx or S02) may 

obtain its emission offsets from reductions in primary PMlO•. Modeling will be required, 

to the extent discussed in 40 CFR part 51, appendix S, to ensure that offsets provide for a 
net air quality benefit in the area. 

4.	 All offsets obtained (including offsets from banked emissions) to comply with R307-403­

5 and 6, UACR (R307-1-3.3.3.B and C of the SIP-approved codification), shall ensure 

that the total tOJll1age ofthe emissions increase is offset by an equal or greater tonnage of 

reductions in actual emissions. The reductions in actual emissions shall be Federally 

enforceable (i.e., contained in an approval order issued under R307-401, UACR (R307-1­

3 of the SIP-approved codification), or a SIP revision approved by EPA) before the new 

or modified source's approval order is issued, be in effect (i. e., have actually occurred) by 

the time the new source or modification commences operation, and be surplus (i. e., not 

otherwise required under the Act or the Utah Air Conservation Rules or State 

Implementation Plan). All offsets shall be fully documented and described in both the 

donee and donor administrative orders. 

C.	 Language to Address Director's Discretion and Emissions Banking and Trading in the 

Interim SIP 

Notwithstanding any other provision in the Utah SIP, no change to emission limits or 

other requirements contained in this maintenance plan, or contained in regulations, permits, or 

other documents that this maintenance plan identifies as part of the ongoing plan for 

maintenance, shall be effective to change such federally enforceable emission limits or 

requirements without a SIP revision approved by EPA. 

[[Need to determine an approach for Salt Lake County in the absence of an interim plan.]]