Barry R. Wallerstein, D.Env. In the new source permitting process, little consideration of cost is given in making LAER determinations according to U.S. EPA policy. Although the burden of a stringent control technology may not be extraordinary for a major source emitting 100 tons per year of a pollutant in other parts of the country, for smaller sources within the AQMD the implication of expensive control technology may be economic infeasibility. After considerable discussion with various U.S. EPA offices, it became clear that U.S. EPA is unwilling to consider cost in determining if a LAER technology is feasible for any size source. U.S. EPA has expressed concern regarding the consideration of any relocated source as modification to an existing source, even under limited circumstances as proposed.
Many sources relocate only due to economic hardships such as a loss of lease or natural disaster.
Having to move and install current LAER can create a serious financial penalty on a source that is not creating any new emissions. The AQMD is required to impose a strict federal program consisting of federal LAER and emission offsets on all new and modified sources which increase emissions. Relocated sources are considered brand new sources pursuant to federal LAER policy. The design of federal NSR program was intended for larger sources, and LAER and offsets can be quite restrictive and expensive for smaller sources. ERCs have been issued for emissions reductions of compounds such as perchloroethylene that were previously, but are not now, considered VOCs.