Insert
on
p.
38
We
believe
a
similar
bright­
line
rule
that
would
obviate
much
of
the
case­
by­
case
review
under
our
multi­
factor
test
for
appropriate
categories
of
equipment
replacements
would
be
extremely
useful
in
addressing
many
of
the
problems
that
we
have
identified
with
the
operation
of
the
NSR
program.
Such
a
rule
would
be
particularly
useful
in
reducing
the
delay
and
uncertainty,
and
consequent
postponed
or
foregone
equipment
replacements,
that
our
multi­
factor
case­
by­
case
review
induces.

For
example,
our
RIA
indicates
that
it
takes
a
year,
on
average,

for
the
petroleum
refinery
sector
to
obtain
a
determination
whether
a
proposed
replacement
is
routine.
Moreover,
our
rulemaking
record
shows
that
application
of
the
multi­
factor
test
can
lead
to
substantial
uncertainty
about
whether
RMRR
projects
can
be
implemented.
The
delay,
uncertainty,
and
other
costs
of
the
old
case­
by­
case
approach
creates
perverse
disincentives
to
refrain
from
equipment
replacements
and
instead
repair
existing
equipment
or
find
some
other
solution.

This
is
the
kind
of
classic
problem
that
induces
agencies
to
fashion
bright­
line
tests
to
provide
greater
regulatory
certainty
and
efficiency.
Moreover,
because
the
kind
of
disincentives
that
give
rise
to
this
concern
operate
largely
by
economic
means,

prompting
sources
to
take
one
course
of
action
(
cut
back
on
productive
equipment
replacement)
rather
than
another
(
replace
the
equipment
and
incur
the
costs
of
delay,
as
well
as
potentially
the
costs
of
installing
state­
of­
the­
art
controls),

we
think
our
cost­
based
threshold
is
a
reasonable
basis
on
which
to
create
such
a
bright­
line
rule.

As
to
where
to
set
the
threshold:
In
the
proposal,
...
