P. 1 

# OAR Box 1781 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 120 ) IV-C-34 Docket Number: 

# A-90-3 7

Printed 10/29/200810:46:23 AM Sheet 120of 142P. 2

JA! ' 200 '

Honorabl e Ted Stricklan d U.S . Hous e o f

Representative s Washington , D C 20515-350 6 Dea r Congressma

n Strickland : Thi s i s i n respons e to you

r lette r o f Septembe r 28,199 9 to Presiden

t Clinton . I appreciat e th e input fro myou an d you r colleague s regardin g th e Environmenta l Protectio n Agency' s (EPA's ) activitie s t o refor mth e air pollutio n progra

mknow n a s new sourc e revie w (NSR) . You

r letter describe d you

r concern s abou

t di e NS Rprogra

msuch a s it s possibl e economi c impact s o n communit y redevelopmen

t project s (e.g. , brownfield s redevelopment ) an d EPA' s plan s fo

r bringin g t o conclusio n di e effor t unde r wa y to improv e th e NS Rprogram . A majo r par t o f thi s effor t i s th e publi c stakeholde

r proces s fo

r explorin g whic h project s or facilitie s ar e subject t o ne w sourc e review . I wan t t o assur e you tha t th e issue s yo u rais e are bein g considere d full

y a s w e mov e forwar

d to asuccessfu

l conclusio n o f

tiiis project . I

n fact , a s a result of your letter an d othe r letter s an drequests , w e extende dth e stakeholde r proces s b y severa

l month s int o Januar

y 2000 . You r letter expresse d concer

n ove r th e complexit

y o f th e NS Rprogra

man dth e difficultie s tha

t facilitie s ma

y face in complying wit

h thes e rules . It

i s importan

t to remembe

r tha t th e progra

mha s been ver

y successfu

l ove r th e pas t 2 0 years , reducin g or

preventin g hundred s o f

thousand s o f

ton s o f pollutio n frombein g emitte dinto th e air eac h year . Th e mos t cost-effectiv e time to put

o n pollutio n contro l equipmen t i s whe n constructio n project s ar

e planne d an

d initiated , a s oppose d t

o retrofittin g later . However , despit e th e successe s o f

th e NS R program , w e believ e it

ca n b e streamlinedan

dstrengthened . On

e o f ou r guidin g principle s in reforming th e NS Rprogra

mi s to retai n th e environmenta l protectio n afforde

db y thes e regulation s whil e givin g industr y mor e flexibility andclarifyin g andstreamlinin g th e permittin g process . Th e EPA' s efforts t o refor

mth e NS Rregulation s were initiate di n 199 2 whe n w e hel d tw o initia l publi c workshop s i n respons e to concem s about th e complexit

y o f di e program . I

n 1993 , w e formed a

n NS RRefor

mSubcommittee o f

tii e Clea n Air Ac t Advisor y Committe e —a nationa l advisor y pane l o f expert s in th e fiel

do f air pollutio n —to allo w th e stakeholde r discussion s t o mov e towar

d consensus . The rol e o f

thi s subcommitte e o f

expert s fromindustry , States , an d environmenta

l group s wa s specificall

y to develo p option s fo

r revisin g th e NS R program . Eigh

t publi c meeting s of

th e NS RRefor

mSubcommitte e wer

e convenedbetween 199 2 and 1994 . Durin g thi s period , EP A sough t publi c commen

t o n di e packag e o n severa

l occasions , includin g apreliminar y draf t i n th e summe

r o f 1994 .P. 3

Numerou s meeting s wit

h separat e industr y group s followedbetween th e fal l o f 199 4 and EPA' s propose d revision s t o di e NS Rrul e ma t w e issue di n di e summe

r o f 1996 . Th e EP

A als o provide d fo

r apubli c hearin g and a6-mont h publi c commen

t perio don th e refor

mproposal . Afte r tha t time , w e conducte d furthe

r discussion s unde

r di e auspice s o f

th e Titl e V , Toxics , and NS RSubcommitte e o f

di e Clea n Air Act Advisor y Committee . In July 1998 , EP A publishe d a notic e o f availabilit y i n th e Federa

l Register , allowin g additiona l publi c commen

t o n tw o ke y issue s addresse d b y th e NS Rrefor mrulemaking . Thi s notic e als o triggere danother roun do f meeting s requeste d b y variou s stakeholde r group s ove

r severa l months . I n late 1998 , a s aresul t

o f meetin g wit

h industr y representatives , EP

A offeredonc e again to explor e ne w way s o f

reforming th e NS Rrules . Again , th e goa l wa s to provid e mor

e flexibility fo r industry , streamlin e th e permittin g proces s where possible , but preserv e th e environmenta l protectio n calle d fo

r b y th e Clea

n Air Act . Industr

y group s expresse dinteres t i n such a n effort . Accordingly , EP

A convene d alarg e stakeholde r meetin g o n Februar

y 2-3,1999 , andha s hel d multipl e round s o f

follow-o n meeting s sinc e tha t time . W e hav e scheduledadditiona l meeting s wit h stakeholder s in Januar

y 2000 . In summary , EP

A ha s bee n workin g extensivel y wit h industr y an dother outsid e stakeholder s t o addres s man y o f th e concem s voice db y industr y fo r th e pas t 7 years . W

e hav e met repeatedl y wit

h intereste d partie s concerne dwit h reforming NSR . Th e meeting s and dialogu e hav e been constructive ; however , consensu s o n asimpl e tes t fo r determinin g whether and/or whe n NS Rrule s apply to new constructio n project s or majo r change s to existin g unit s i s elusive , even among industr y groups . Afte r year s o f talkin g an d littl e action , I believ e tha t w e hav e reachedth e point

o f diminishin g return s fo

r publi c discussion . T o dela y promulgatio n furthe

r only serve s t o perpetuat e any existin g problem s without movin g u s towar

daworkabl e solution . I believ e tha t i t i s in th e bes t

interest s o f

affecte d source s andth e publi c to implemen t th e bes t o f thos e idea s alread y full y examined , discussed , an

darticulated . Usin g th e input w e hav e received , w e believ e w e ca

n promulgat

e a n NS Rrefor

mpackag e tha

t provide s areasonabl e resolutio n o f th e centra l issue s b y sprin g o f

2000 . We nee dt o begi n workin g o n tha t regulator y package . I n addition , w e are als o investigatin g alternativ e approaches , i.e. , allowin g NS Rt o b e me t acros s a n entire industr

y sector , rather

tha n plant-by-plant . Thi s wil l b e aseparat e effor t tha t wil l requir e furthe r discussio n wit

h stakeholders , bu t

ma y yiel dimportan

t dividend s i f

th e lega l and polic y issue s ca

n b e resolved . We hav e hear

d concem s abou

t th e possibl e effects of

permittin g programs , such a s th e NS Rprogra

mo n redevelopment , includin g brownfield s areas . A s aresult o f thes e concerns , w e hav e bee n workin g wit

h th e citie s o f

Chicago , Dallas , an

dBaltimor e in apilo t progra mt o tr y t o better understan d wha

t th e difficultie s ar

e an dt o identif

y step s tha

t migh t b e take n t o mak

e i t easier fo r redevelopment

t o occu r i n thes e areas . 

# 2_1 7 !

I appreciat e thi s opportumt

y to b e o f servic e an dtrus t tha t thi s informatio n wil l b e helpfu l to you . SuK-erely ,



# Origina l Signe d B y *r t n , Brenne r frerciasep e Assistan t Administrator OAQPS/ITPro/nG:DCrumpler:pfinch:RTP(MD-12):919-541-5281:l/3/0 0 Contro l numbe

r AL-990267 7 Due : 12/30/9 9 Reviewed/concurre d b y Jo n Devine , OGC Identica l letter s sen

t to : RonKlin k Jame s Barci a Rick Bouche r Bud Crame

r Bar t Gordon Jerr y Costell o Solomo n P . Orti z Marti n Fros t John Sprat t Virgi l Goode , Jr . Davi d Phelp s Chri s Joh n Benni e Thompso n Sanfor d Bishop , Jr . Ke n Luca s Mario n Berr

y Mik e Doyl e Allen Boy d Ji mTurne r Jame s E . Clybur

n Ma x Sandlin Fran k Mascar ai Pau l E . Kanjorsk

i Gen e Gree n 

# 3P. 5 TE D STRICKLAN D 6T H DISTRICT , OHI O 

# Congres s o ttt e Unite * State s %)ou$t o f ftepretfentattoe* flfchington, B C 20515-350 6 Septembe r 28 , 199 9 Th e Honorabl e Willia

mJefferso n Clinton */in/ i A zioa . D 

## . , . M04448 * Presiden t Unite d State s of

Americ a Th e Whit e Hous e Washington , D C 2050 0 Dea r Mr . President : W e ar e writing t o urg e you t o ensur e tha t th e Environmenta

l Protectio n Agenc

y (EPA ) continue s th e dialogu e it

ha s begun wit

h stakeholder s o n it s propose dNe w Sourc e Revie w (NSR) rule unde r th e Clea n Ai r Act . Th e NS Rregulation s ar e complicatedan

dan y revision s requir

e a n ope n revie w of stakeholde

r proposals . W

e ar e concernedabou

t th e economi c impact

of th e NS R progra mo n communit

y developmen

t project s includin

g brownfield s redevelopment . NS Rca n b e abottleneck

t o man y positiv e communit

y programs . W

e believe tha

t a n extensio n o f

th e ongoing dialogue'woul d provid

e a n opportunit

y fo r th e EP A t o guarante e meaningfu

l improvement s t o th e NS Rprogram . A s yo u know , th e NS Ri s aClea

n Ai r Ac t permitting revie

w proces s tha

t i s require d befor e certain project s o r

facilit y modification s ca

n b e undertaken . I

n 1991 , EPA announced tha t i t woul d "simplif y an d reform " th e 198 0 NS Rregulations . A s o f today , however , ther

e ar e ove r seve n volume s of

interpretiv e guidanc e fromth e agenc y an dno relief fromth e confusion . Operator s an

d regulator s i

n ou r district s ar

e mystifie db y th e comple

x rule s an dthey ar e understandabl

y alarme d b y EPA' s recen

t clai mtha t ninet y percen t o f th e countr

y i s i n violatio n o f th e NS Rrules . NS Ra t alarg e plan

t ca n take fourtee

n month s o r

longer , an ddetermining whethe

r NS Ri s eve n "applicable " t o aprojec t

depend s on twent

y year s of EP A interpretatio n o f

complicatedNS R rules . For example , accordin g t o interpretation s containedi n arecen t EP A Federa

l Registe r notice , facilit

y modification s t o increas e reliabilit y migh t trigge r NS Reve n thoug h th e modification s would result

i n n o increas e i

n emissions . I t

wouldb e unfortunat

e i f th e revision s unde r consideratio n b

y th e Agenc

y wouldonl

y ad dt o th e confusio

n an doverall complexit

y o f th e program . I n Februar y o f thi s year , EPA convene

dindustry , environmenta

l leader s an

dstat e regulator s an

d requeste d tha

t they develo

p propose dalternativ e approache s t o improve th e NS R program . I

n June , stat

e regulator s askedEP

A t o continu e discussion s concernin g thes e ne w proposal s befor

e finalizing th e NS Rrule . W e understandtha

t EP A i s no w considering finalization of th e rule , bu

t have bee n tol d tha t th e Agenc y plan s t o hol

donl y asingle roundof

meeting s wit

h majo r stakeholder s befor

e makin g adecision whethe

r t o finalize th e proposal . 

# 4 - PRINTE D O N RECYCLE D PAPE RP. 6

W e ar e concerned tha

t one mor e roun do f stakeholde

r discussion s wil

l b e insufficien

t t o full y revie w th e alternativ e approache s t o NS Rrefor man dt o determine whethe

r a n equitable proposa l ca n b e crafted . W

e believe tha

t th e recen t efforts b y th e stakeholder s t o forg e consensu s o n NS Rrefor

moffe r th e bes t hop e fo r aworkable solution . We respectfull y reques t you r hel p t o ensur e tha t th e EP A doe s no t

rush to finalize th e NS Rpropose drule . Instead , w e hop e tha t th e agenc y wil l pursu e it s dialogu e wit

h stakeholder s t o create a

n efficien t NS Rrul e tha

t avoid s unnecessar y pitfalls . Sincerely , 

# J&JrfZ<J4Jh*d'



# TW^f i

/



# JDP. 7



# h^ihiL

V>P. 8

Signatorie s t o Septembe

r 28,199 9 NS Rlette r

t o th e Presiden

t 1 . Ted Strickland 2 . RonKlin k 3 . Jame s Barci a 4 . Ric k Bouche r 5 . Bud Crame

r 6 . Bar t Gordo n 7 . Jerr y Costell o 8 . Solomon P . Orti z 9 . Marti n Fros t 10 . Joh n Sprat t 11 . Virgil Goode , Jr . 12 . Davi d Phelp s 13 . Chri s John 14 . Benni e Thompson 15 . Sanfor d Bishop , Jr . 16 . Ken Luca s 17 . Mario n Berr

y 18 . Mik e Doyl e 19 . Alle n Boy d 20 . Ji mTurne r 21 . Jame s E . Clybu

m 22 . Ma x Sandli n 23 . Fran k Mascara 24 . Paul E . Kanjdrsk

i 25 . Gen e Green



# 7P. 9 " * T wy -*w? 

### TH E WHIT E HOUS E OFFIC E

REFERRA L

TO : ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENC Y ACTIO N REQUESTED : APPROPRIAT E ACTIO N Decembe r15,199 9

DESCRIPTIO N O F INCOMING : ID : 40444 8 MEDIA : LETTER , DATE D SE P 28,199 9 TO : PRESIDEN T CLINTO N FROM : TH E HONORABL E TE D STRICKLAN D

U.S . HOUS E O F REPRESENTATIVE S WASHINGTON , D C 2051 5 SUBJECT : EXPRESSE S CONCER N REGARDIN G TH E ECONOMI C IMPAC T O F TH E NE W SOURC E

- REVIE W PROGRA M ORI COMMUNItT Y DEVELOPMEN T PROJECTS INCLUDIN G BROWNFIEL D REDEVELOPMEN T

PROMPT ACTIO N I S ESSENTIA L - I F REQUIRE D ACTIO N HA S NO T BEE N TAKE N WITHI N 9 WORKIN G DAY S O F RECEIPT , PLEAS E TELEPHON E TH E UNDERSIGNE D A T 456-2590 . RETUR N CORRESPONDENCE , WORKSHEE T AN D COP Y O F RESPONS E (O R DRAFT) TO : RECORD S MANAGEMENT , ROO M 72 , TH E WHIT E HOUSE , 2050 0 OFFIC E O F RECORD S MANAGEMEN T - TH E WHIT E HOUS EP.1 0 TH E WHIT E HOUS E CORRESPONDENC E TRACKIN G WORKSHEE T ID # PAG E 40444 8

1 DAT E RECEIVED : NAM E O F CORRESPONDENT : TH E HONORABL E TE D STRICKLAN D SUBJECT : EXPRESSE S CONCER N REGARDIN G TH E ECONOMI C IMPAC T O F TH E NE W SOURC E REVIE W PROGRA M O N COMMUNIT Y DEVELOPMEN T PROJECT S INCLUDIN G BROWNFIEL D REDEVELOPMEN T ROUT E TO : OFFICE/AGENCY (STAF F NAME ) LEGISLATIV E AFFAIR S LARR Y STEI N ACTIO N COMMENTS ^ENVIRONMENTA L t/ PROTECTIO N AGENC Y ACTIO N COMMENT

S * ACTIO N COMMENTS : ACTIO N COMMENTS : ACTIO N ACTIO N DAT E COD E YY/MM/D D OR G 1999/12/0 7

RA A 1999/12/1 5

/ J / / TYP E

RES P DISPOSITIO N

C D C

•

. COMPLETE D

YY/MM/D D 1999/12/0 7

/ / / /

COMMENTS ADDITIONA L CORRESPONDENTS : 2 4 REPOR T CODES : MEDIA : LETTE R USE R CODES : INDIVIDUA L CODES :

DISPOSITIO N CODES : A-ANSWERE D B - NON-SEPOREFERRA L C-COMPLETE D S-SUSPENDE D OUTGOIN G CORRESPONDENCE : TYP E RES P = INmAL S O F SIGNE R CODE= A COMPLETE D = DAT E O F OUTGOIN G ACTIO N CODES : A - APPROPRIAT E ACTIO N C - COMMENT/RECOMMENDETIO N D - DRAF T RESPONS E F-FURNIS H FAC T SHEE T I - INF O COPY/N O AC T NECCESSAR Y R - DIREC T REPL Y W / COP Y S - FO R SIGNATUR E REFE R QUESTION S AN D ROUTIN G UPDATE S T O RECORD S MANAGEMEN T (ROO M 72 , OEOB ) EXT-6259 0 KEE P THI S WORKSHEE T ATTACHE D T O TH E ORIGINA L INCOMIN G LETTE R A T AL L TIME S AN D SEN D COMPLETE D RECOR D T O RECORD S MANAGEMENT . 

# 1P.1 1 -jfr-yy ,. .„y. y .. . . ..

TH E WHIT E HOUS E WA S HI N GT O N Decembe r 7 , 199 9

MEMORANDU

M FO R DIANE E . THOMPSO N ENVIRONMENTA

L PROTECTIO

N AGENC Y FROM : CHARLE S M . BRAI N

LEGISLATIV

E AFFAIR S SUBJECT : PRESIDENTIA L CORRESPONDENC E Enclose d pleas e find a cop yo f a lette r tha t wa s sen t t o th e Presiden t fromRep . Te d Stricklan d (D-OH ) an

d twenty-fou r othe r Member s o f Congress . I d o no t believ e thi s lette r require s a Presidentia l respons e a t thi s time . Pleas e revie w th e attache d lette r an d respond directl yt o th e Member(s ) o f Congress . Pleas e forwar d a cop yo f th e respons e t o th e Offic e o f Record s Management , Roo m7 2 Ol d Executiv e Offic e Building . Thank yo u ver ymuc h fo r you r assistanc e i n thi s matter . I f yo u hav e an yquestions , pleas e fee l fre e t o cal l Courtne yCrouch , Offic e o f Legislativ e Affairs , a t 456-7500 .

Enclosur e



# D