State
Implementation
Plans;
General
Preamble
for
the
Implementation
of
Title
I
of
the
Clean
Air
Act
Amendments
of
1990;
Supplemental
Federal
Register,
Volume:
57
,
Issue:
82
,
Page:
18070
(
57
FR
18070)
,
Tuesday,
April
28,
1992
Agency:
Environmental
Protection
Agency­­(
EPA);
Office
of
Air
and
Radiation­­(
OAR)
Document
Type:
Proposed
Rules
Code
of
Federal
Regulations
(
CFR):
40
CFR
Part
52
Numbers:
FRL­
4127­
1
Contact
Information:
Brock
Nicholson,
919­
541­
5517,;
Eric
Ginsburg,
919­
541­
0877,;
Gary
McCutchen,
919­
541­
5592;
or;
Paula
Van
Lare,
202­
260­
3450
Action:
General
Preamble
for
future
proposed
rulemakings;
Appendices
Internal
Data:
(
FR
Doc.
92­
9866
Filed
4­
27­
92;
8:
45
am)
SUMMARY:
The
EPA
published
a
General
Preamble
for
the
Implementation
of
title
I
of
the
Clean
Air
Act
Amendments
of
1990
on
April
16,
1992
(
57
FR
13498).
This
document
describes
EPA's
preliminary
views
on
how
EPA
should
interpret
various
provisions
of
title
I
of
the
Clean
Air
Act
Amendments
of
1990,
primarily
those
concerning
State
implementation
plan
(
SIP)
revisions
required
for
nonattainment
areas.
It
serves
as
advance
notice
of
how
EPA
generally
intends,
in
subsequent
rulemakings,
to
take
action
on
SIP
submissions.
The
appendices
to
the
General
Preamble
were
inadvertentl
omitted.
The
appendices
contain
important
support
materials
that
ar
referenced
throughout
the
General
Preamble.
Therefore,
this
notice
containing
the
aforementioned
appendices,
serves
as
a
supplement
to
th
General
Preamble
and
should
be
considered
as
such.

­­­­­­­­­­

ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
40
CFR
Part
52
(
FRL­
4127­
1)

State
Implementation
Plans;
General
Preamble
for
the
Implementation
of
Title
I
of
the
Clean
Air
Act
Amendments
of
1990;
Supplemental
AGENCY:
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA).

ACTION:
General
Preamble
for
future
proposed
rulemakings;
Appendices.
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

SUMMARY:
The
EPA
published
a
General
Preamble
for
the
Implementation
of
title
I
of
the
Clean
Air
Act
Amendments
of
1990
on
April
16,
1992
(
57
FR
13498).
This
document
describes
EPA's
preliminary
views
on
how
EPA
should
interpret
various
provisions
of
title
I
of
the
Clean
Air
Act
Amendments
of
1990,
primarily
those
concerning
State
implementation
plan
(
SIP)
revisions
required
for
nonattainment
areas.
It
serves
as
advance
notice
of
how
EPA
generally
intends,
in
subsequent
rulemakings,
to
take
action
on
SIP
submissions.

The
appendices
to
the
General
Preamble
were
inadvertently
omitted.
The
appendices
contain
important
support
materials
that
are
referenced
throughout
the
General
Preamble.
Therefore,
this
notice,
containing
the
aforementioned
appendices,
serves
as
a
supplement
to
the
General
Preamble
and
should
be
considered
as
such.

FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT:
Mr.
Brock
Nicholson,
Chief,
Policy
Development
Section,
Ozone/
CO
Programs
Branch
(
MD­
15)
at
(
919)
541­
5517,
for
issues
related
to
ozone
or
carbon
monoxide;
Mr.
Eric
Ginsburg
at
(
919)
541­
0877,
Sulfur
Dioxide/
Particulate
Matter
Programs
Branch
(
MD­
15),
for
issues
related
to
sulfur
dioxide,
particulate
matter,
or
lead;
Mr.
Gary
McCutchen
at
(
919)
541­
5592,
Permits
Programs
Branch
(
MD­
15),
for
issues
related
to
new
source
review,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Research
Triangle
Park,
North
Carolina
27711;
Ms.
Paula
Van
Lare
at
(
202)
260­
3450
for
issues
related
to
mobile
sources,
401
M
Street,
SW,
Washington,
DC
20460.

ADDRESSES:
The
appendices
are
also
in
Air
Docket
A­
91­
35,
at
401
M
Street,
SW,
Washington,
DC.

Dated:
April
21,
1992.

Appendix
A­­
Glossary
ACT=
alternative
control
technique
AVO=
average
vehicle
occupancy
BACM=
best
available
control
measures
BACT=
best
available
control
technology
CAA=
Clean
Air
Act
CAAA=
Clean
Air
Act
Amendments
CARB=
California
Air
Resources
Board
CEMS=
continuous
emission
monitoring
system
CO=
carbon
monoxide
CPM=
condensible
particulate
matter
CTG=
control
technique
guideline
DOI=
Department
of
the
Interior
DOT=
Department
of
Transportation
EKMA=
Empirical
Kinetic
Modeling
Approach
ERC=
emission
reduction
credits
ETC=
employer
transportation
coordinator
ETPS=
Emission
Trading
Policy
Statement
FIP=
Federal
Implementation
Plan
FMVCP=
Federal
Motor
Vehicle
Control
Program
FR=
Federal
Register
GVWR=
Gross
Vehicle
Weight
Rating
HC=
hydrocarbons
I/
M=
inspection
and
maintenance
IPP=
inventory
preparation
plan
LAER=
lowest
achievable
emission
rate
MMS=
Minerals
Management
Service
MSA/
CMSA=
metropolitan
statistical
area/
consolidated
metropolitan
statistical
area
NAAQS=
national
ambient
air
quality
standards
NAS=
National
Academy
of
Sciences
NO2=
Nitrogen
dioxide
NOx=
nitrogen
oxides
NSPS=
new
source
performance
standard
NSR=
New
Source
Review
OCS=
outer
continental
shelf
PSD=
prevention
of
significant
deterioration
psi=
pounds
per
square
inch
RACM=
reasonably
available
control
measures
RACT=
reasonably
available
control
technology
RFP=
reasonable
further
progress
RTA=
rural
transport
area
RVP=
Reid
vapor
pressure
SCAQMD=
South
Coast
Air
Quality
Management
District
SO2=
sulfur
dioxide
SIP=
State
implementation
plan
TCM=
transportation
control
measures
TSP=
total
suspended
particulate
(
matter)
VOC=
volatile
organic
compound
VMT=
vehicle
miles
traveled
Appendix
B­­
Bibliography
and
Cited
References
To
obtain
copies
of
OAQPS
documents,
contact
the
EPA
Library,
(
919)
541­
5514;
(
FTS)
629­
5514.
For
OMS
publications,
please
contact
Mark
Wolcott,
(
313)
668­
4219;
(
FTS)
374­
8219.

SIP
Inventory
Guidance/
Requirements
"
Procedures
for
Preparing
Emissions
Projections,"
EPA­
450/
4­
91­
019,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Office
of
Air
Quality
Planning
and
Standards,
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC,
July
1991.

"
Procedures
for
Emission
Inventory
Preparation,
Volume
IV:
Mobile
Sources,"
EPA­
450/
4­
81­
026d,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Office
of
Mobile
Sources,
Ann
Arbor,
MI,
July
1991.
(
also
listed
below
under
General
Inventory
Guidance).

"
Procedures
for
the
Preparation
of
Emissions
Inventories
for
Carbon
Monoxide
and
Precursors
of
Ozone,
Volume
I",
EPA­
450/
4­
91­
016,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Office
of
Air
Quality
Planning
and
Standards,
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC,
May
1991.

"
Procedures
for
the
Preparation
of
Emissions
Inventories
for
Carbon
Monoxide
and
Precursors
of
Ozone,
Volume
II:
Emission
Inventory
Requirements
for
Photochemical
Air
Quality
Simulation
Models,"
EPA­
450/
4­
91­
014,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Office
of
Air
Quality
Planning
and
Standards,
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC,
May
1991.

"
Emission
Inventory
Requirements
for
Ozone
State
Implementation
Plans,"
EPA­
450/
4­
91­
010,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Office
of
Air
Quality
Planning
and
Standards,
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC,
March
1991.

"
Emission
Inventory
Requirements
for
Carbon
Monoxide
State
Implementation
Plans,"
EPA­
450/
4­
91­
011,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Office
of
Air
Quality
Planning
and
Standards,
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC,
March
1991.

"
SIP
Air
Pollutant
Inventory
Management
System
(
SAMS)
Version
4.0
and
SAMS
User's
Manual,"
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Office
of
Air
Quality
Planning
and
Standards,
Research
Triangle
Park,
North
Carolina,
March
1991.

"
Example
Emission
Inventory
Documentation
for
Post­
1987
Ozone
State
Implementation
Plans
(
SIPs),"
EPA­
450/
4­
89­
018,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Office
of
Air
Quality
Planning
and
Standards,
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC,
October
1989.
"
Procedures
for
Estimating
and
Applying
Rule
Effectiveness
in
Post­
1987
Base
Year
Emission
Inventories
for
Ozone
and
Carbon
Monoxide
State
Implementation
Plans,"
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Office
of
Air
Quality
Planning
and
Standards,
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC,
June
1989.

Quality
Assurance/
Inventory
Review
Guidance
"
Quality
Review
Guidelines
for
Post­
1987
State
Implementation
Plan
(
SIP)
Base
Year
Emission
Inventories
(
Draft),"
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Office
of
Air
Quality
Planning
and
Standards,
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC,
February
1990.
(
Final
version
to
be
completed
in
August
1991.)
"
Guidance
for
the
Preparation
of
Quality
Assurance
Plans
for
O3/
CO
SIP
Emission
Inventories,"
EPA­
450/
4­
88­
023,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Office
of
Air
Quality
Planning
and
Standards,
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC,
December
1988.

General
Inventory
Guidance
"
Procedures
for
Emission
Inventory
Preparation,"
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Office
of
Air
Quality
Planning
and
Standards,
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC:
a.
"
Volume
I:
Emission
Inventory
Fundamentals,"
EPA­
450/
4­
81­
026a,
September
1981.

b.
"
Volume
II:
Point
Sources,"
EPA­
450/
4­
81­
026b,
September
1981.

c.
"
Volume
III:
Area
Sources,"
EPA­
450/
4­
81­
026c,
September
1981.

d.
"
Volume
IV:
Mobile
Sources,"
EPA­
450/
4­
81­
026d
(
Revised),
July
1981.

e.
"
Volume
V:
Bibliography,"
EPA­
450/
4­
81­
026e,
September
1981.

Emission
Factors/
Models
"
Personal
Computer
Version
of
the
Biogenic
Emissions
Inventory
System
(
PC­
BEIS)
With
User's
Guide,"
EPA­
450/
4­
91­
017,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Office
of
Air
Quality
Planning
and
Standards,
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC,
July
1991.

"
User's
Guide
to
MOBILE4
(
Mobile
Source
Emission
Factor
Model),"
EPA­
AA­
TEB­
89­
01,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Office
of
Mobile
Sources,
Ann
Arbor,
MI,
February
1989.
(
Revised
version
of
MOBILE4
and
documentation
to
be
completed
in
July
1991.)
"
Surface
Impoundment
Modeling
System
(
SIMS)
Version
2.0
User's
Manual,"
EPA­
450/
4­
90­
019a,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Office
of
Air
Quality
Planning
and
Standards,
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC,
September
1990.

"
Background
Document
for
Surface
Impoundment
Modeling
System
(
SIMS)
Version
2.0,
EPA­
450/
4­
90­
019b,"
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Office
of
Air
Quality
Planning
and
Standards,
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC,
September
1990.

"
AIRS
Facility
Subsystem
Source
Classification
Codes
(
SCCs)
and
Emission
Factor
Listing
for
Criteria
Pollutants,"
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Office
of
Air
Quality
Planning
and
Standards,
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC,
September
1989.

"
Compilation
of
Air
Pollutant
Emission
Factors,
Volumes
I
and
II
and
its
supplements,
Fourth
Edition,"
AP­
42,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Office
of
Air
Quality
Planning
and
Standards,
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC,
September
1985.

Citations
and
Guidance
for
SIP
Corrections
"
Guidance
Document
for
Correction
of
Part
D
SIP's
for
Nonattainment
Areas,"
EPA,
Office
of
Air
Quality
Planning
and
Standards,
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC,
January
27,
1984.

Citations
and
Guidance
for
PM­
10
"
Assessment
of
the
Controllability
of
Condensible
Particulate
Matter,"
EPA­
600/
8­
90­
75,
October
1990.

"
Procedures
for
Estimating
Probability
of
Nonattainment
of
a
PM­
10
NAAQS
Using
Total
Suspended
Particulate
of
PM­
10
Data,"
EPA­
450/
4­
86­
017,
December
1986.

"
PM­
10
SIP
Development
Guideline,"
June
1987.

"
Control
of
Open
Fugitive
Dust
Sources,"
EPA­
450/
3­
88­
008,
September
1988.

"
Guidance
Document
for
Residential
Wood
Combustion
Emission
Control
Measures,"
EPA­
450/
2­
89­
015,
September
1989.

"
Prescribed
Fire
Smoke
Management
Guide,"
NFES
No.
1279,
February
1985.

"
Prescribed
Fire
Plan
Guide,"
NFES
No.
1939,
August
1986.
Citations
and
Guidance
for
SO2
"
SO2
Guideline,"
EPA­
450/
2­
89­
019.

"
SO2
Guideline
Appendices,"
EPA­
450/
2­
89­
019.
October
1989.

"
Letter
from
William
Reilly
to
Representative
John
Dingell,
In
Response
to
questions
and
GAO
report."
April
10,
1991.

Citations
and
Guidance
for
Lead
"
Updated
information
on
Approval
and
Promulgation
of
Lead
Implementation
Plans,"
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC,
July
1983.

"
Guideline
Series,
Development
of
an
Example
Control
Strategy
for
Lead,"
EPA­
450/
2­
79­
002,
April
1979.

"
Guideline
Series,
Supplementary
Guideline
for
Lead
Implementation
Plans,"
EPA­
450/
2­
78­
038,
August
1978.

Modeling
Guidance
"
UAM
Applications
Guidance,"
May
1991.

"
User's
Guide
for
the
Urban
Airshed
Model,
Vol.
4,"
EPA­
450/
4­
90­
007D,
June
1990.

"
Guidance
on
Air
Quality
Models
(
Revised)."
EPA­
450/
2­
78­
027R.
July
1986.

"
Interim
Procedures
for
Evaluating
Air
Quality
Models:
Experience
with
Implementation."
EPA
450/
4­
85­
006.
July
1985.

New
Source
Review
Guidance
"
New
Source
Review
Prevention
of
Significant
Deterioration
and
Nonattainment
Area
Guidance
Notebook,"
January
1988.

"
Draft
Workshop
Manual
for
New
Source
Review
(
NSR)
Programs,"
December
1990.

Miscellaneous
Guidance
"
Criteria
for
Assessing
the
Role
of
Transport
of
Ozone/
Precursors
in
Ozone
Nonattainment
Areas."
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC,
EPA­
450/
4­
91­
015).

"
Enforcement
Guidance
for
Stage
II
Vehicle
Refueling
Control
Programs,"
December
1991.

"
Getting
Started
on
Title
I,"
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
OAQPS.
Research
Triangle
Park,
NC.,
April
1991.

"
Issues
Relating
to
VOC
Regulations,
Cutpoints,
Deficiencies,
and
Deviations,"
Clarification
to
Appendix
D
of
November
24,
1987
FR
(
Blue
Book,
revised
January
11,
1990),
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Office
of
Air
Quality
Planning
and
Standards,
AQMD,
May
25,
1988.

"
Protocols:
Can
Coaters,
45FR
(
December
8,
1988)
+
Topcoaters,"
EPA­
450/
3­
88­
018
(
December
1988).

"
Technical
Guidance­­
Stage
II
Vapor
Recovery
System
for
Control
of
Vehicle
Refueling
Emissions
at
Gasoline
Dispensing
Facilities,"
Volume
1,
November
1991.

Memoranda
Memorandum
from
William
Laxton,
Director,
Technical
Support
Division,
to
Regional
Air
Division
Directors,
"
Guidance
for
Determining
Significant
Stationary
Sources
of
Carbon
Monoxide,"
May
13,
1991.

Memorandum
from
John
Seitz,
OAQPS
to
Air
Division
Director,
Regions
I­
X,
"
New
Source
Review
(
NSR)
Program
Transitional
Guidance,"
March
11,
1991.

Memorandum
from
John
Calcagni
and
William
Laxton,
"
Interim
Guidance
on
Emission
Limits
and
Stack
Test
Methods
for
Inclusion
in
PM­
10
SIP's,"
December
24,
1990.

Memorandum
from
Robert
Bauman
and
Rich
Biondi
to
Air
Branch
Chiefs,
"
SO2
SIP
Deficiency
Checklist,"
November
28,
1990.

Memorandum
from
Joseph
Tikvart
and
Robert
Bauman
concerning
modeling
guidelines
addressing
PM­
10,
dated
July
15,
1990.

Memorandum
from
William
Laxton,
Director,
Technical
Support
Division,
to
Regional
Air
Division
Directors,
"
Ozone
and
Carbon
Dioxide
Design
Value
Calculations,"
June
18,
1990.

Memorandum
from
Craig
J.
Potter,
"
Interim
Policy
on
Stack
Height
Regulatory
Actions,"
April
22,
1988.

Memorandum
from
Gerald
A.
Emison,
Director,
OAQPS,
to
Regional
Air
Division
Directors,
"
Transmittal
of
Reissued
OAQPS
CEMS
Policy,"
March
31,
1988.

Memorandum
from
John
Seitz,
Director,
Stationary
Source
Compliance
Division,
to
Regional
Air
Division
Directors,
"
Implementation
of
Rule
Effectiveness
Studies,"
March
31,
1988.

Memorandum
from
Craig
Potter,
Thomas
Adams,
and
Francis
Blake
to
Regional
Air
Division
Directors,
"
Review
of
State
Implementation
Plans
and
Revisions
for
Enforceability
and
Legal
Sufficiency,"
September
23,
1987.

Memorandum
from
Gerald
Emison,
Director,
OAQPS,
to
David
Kee,
Director,
Air
Management
Division,
Region
V,
"
Need
for
a
Short­
Term
BACT
Analysis
for
the
Proposed
William
A.
Zimmer
Power
Plant,"
November
24,
1986.

Memorandum
from
Richard
Rhoads,
Director
CPDD,
to
Division
Directors,
Regions
I­
X,
"
Growth
Restrictions
in
Secondary
NAAQS
Nonattainment
Areas,"
October
28,
1980.

Memorandum
from
R.
Strelow
to
RA's
Region
I­
X,
"
Guidance
for
Determining
Acceptability
of
SIP
Regulations
in
Non­
Attainment
Areas,"
December
9,
1976.

Federal
Register
Citations
44
FR
20372,
April
4,
1979.

44
FR
20375,
April
4,
1979.

44
FR
53762,
September
17,
1979.

44
FR
53769,
September
17,
1979.

44
FR
53791,
September
17,
1979.

45
FR
52676,
August
7,
1980.

46
FR
7182,
January
21,
1981.

46
FR
7187,
January
22,
1981.

51
FR
43812,
December
4,
1986.
51
FR
43814,
December
4,
1986.

51
FR
43832,
December
4,
1986.

52
FR
29383,
August
7,
1987.

52
FR
45044,
November
24,
1987.

53
FR
34500,
September
7,
1988.

54
FR
612,
January
9,
1989.

55
FR
30973,
July
30,
1990.

55
FR
41546,
October
12,
1990.

55
FR
41547,
October
12,
1990.

55
FR
45799,
October
31,
1990.

56
FR
5460,
February
11,
1991.

56
FR
11101,
March
15,
1991.

56
FR
16274,
April
12,
1991.

56
FR
23826,
May
24,
1991.

56
FR
27257,
June
13,
1991.

56
FR
27603,
June
14,
1991.

56
FR
31151,
July
9,
1991.

56
FR
31154,
July
19,
1991.

56
FR
37654,
August
8,
1991.

56
FR
43593,
September
3,
1991.

56
FR
54554,
October
22,
1991.

56
FR
56694,
November
6,
1991.

56
FR
58656,
November
21,
1991.
Code
of
Federal
Regulations
Citations
40
CFR
50.8.

40
CFR
50.9
Appendix
H.

40
CFR
50.9.

40
CFR
Part
51.

40
CFR
Part
51
Appendix
M.

40
CFR
Part
51
Appendix
S.

40
CFR
51.100(
o).

40
CFR
51.110(
c)(
1).

40
CFR
51.117.

40
CFR
51.165.

40
CFR
51.166.

40
CFR
51.340
(
Subpart
R).

40
CFR
Part
52.

40
CFR
52.10.

40
CFR
52.21.

40
CFR
52.24.

40
CFR
Part
55.

40
CFR
Part
58.

40
CFR
Part
60.

40
CFR
Part
60
Subpart
Da.

40
CFR
Part
81.
Appellate
Court
Citations
Alabama
Power
Company
v.
Costle,
636
F.
2d
323,
360­
61,
404­
05
(
D.
C.
Cir.
1980).

NRDC
v.
Thomas,
838
F.
2d
1224,
(
D.
C.
Cir.
1988),
Cert.
denied,
109
S.
Ct.
219
(
1988).

Delaney
v.
EPA,
898
F.
2d
687,
136
Cong.
Rec.
S16971
(
October
27,
1990).

House
of
Representatives
Reports
H.
R.
Rep.
No.
490,
101st
Congress,
2nd
Session,
pt.
1
at
204,
239,
242,
257,
258,
267,
268,
and
381.

Appendix
C1­­
Available
Fugitive
Dust
Control
Measures
Background
The
available
control
measures
listed
below
apply
to
all
fugitive
dust
sources
except
those
to
which
only
available
control
technology
is
applicable
(
i.
e.,
process
fugitive
dust
associated
with
stationary
sources).
Fugitive
dust
is
particulate
matter
suspended
in
the
air
either
by
mechanical
disturbance
of
the
surface
material
or
by
wind
action
blowing
across
the
surface.
Mechanical
disturbance
includes
resuspension
of
particles
from
vehicles
traveling
over
roadways,
parking
lots,
and
other
open
areas.
Wind
action
includes
dust
blown
off
inadequately
stabilized
open
areas.
The
quantity
of
fugitive
dust
emissions
is
dependent
upon
several
factors
such
as
the
size
of
the
source,
emission
rate,
and
control
efficiency.
The
Environmental
Protection
Agency's
(
EPA)
policy
is
to
reduce
fugitive
dust
emissions,
with
an
emphasis
on
preventing,
rather
than
mitigating,
them.
For
example,
past
efforts
to
control
emissions
from
paved
roads
have
usually
relied
on
street
cleaning
to
reduce
silt
loading.
The
new
approach
would
put
a
higher
priority
on
measures
to
prevent
silt
from
getting
on
the
road
surface.
Mitigative
measures
should
be
reserved
for
those
areas/
situations
where
prevention
is
not
feasible.
Technical
guidance
on
fugitive
dust
control
measures
is
found
in
Control
of
Open
Fugitive
Dust
Sources
(
EPA­
450/
3­
88­
008
September,
1988).

List
of
Available
Control
Measures
1.
Pave,
vegetate,
or
chemically
stabilize
access
points
where
unpaved
traffic
surfaces
adjoin
paved
roads.
2.
Require
dust
control
plans
for
construction
or
land
clearing
projects.

3.
Require
haul
trucks
to
be
covered.

4.
Provide
for
traffic
rerouting
or
rapid
clean
up
of
temporary
(
and
not
readily
preventable)
sources
of
dust
on
paved
roads
(
water
erosion
runoff,
mud/
dirt
carryout
areas,
material
spills,
skid
control
sand).
Delineate
who
is
responsible
for
cleanup.

5.
Require
paving,
chemically
stabilizing,
or
otherwise
stabilizing
permanent
unpaved
haul
roads,
and
parking
or
staging
areas
at
commercial,
municipal,
or
industrial
facilities.

6.
Develop
traffic
reduction
plans
for
unpaved
roads.
Use
of
speed
bumps,
low
speed
limits,
etc.,
to
encourage
use
of
other
(
paved)
roads.

7.
Limit
use
of
recreational
vehicles
on
open
land
(
e.
g.,
confine
operations
to
specific
areas,
require
use
permits,
outright
ban).

8.
Require
improved
material
specification
for
and
reduction
of
usage
of
skid
control
sand
or
salt
(
e.
g.,
require
use
of
coarse,
nonfriable
material
during
snow
and
ice
season).

9.
Require
curbing
and
pave
or
stabilize
(
chemically
or
with
vegetation)
shoulders
of
paved
roads.

10.
Pave
or
chemically
stabilize
unpaved
roads.

11.
Pave,
vegetate,
or
chemically
stabilize
unpaved
parking
areas.

12.
Establish
dust
control
measures
for
material
storage
piles.

13.
Provide
for
storm
water
drainage
to
prevent
water
erosion
onto
paved
roads.

14.
Require
vegetation,
chemical
stabilization,
or
other
abatement
of
wind
erodible
soil,
including
lands
subjected
to
water
mining,
abandoned
farms,
and
abandoned
construction
sites.

15.
Rely
upon
the
soil
conservation
requirements
(
e.
g.,
conservation
plans,
conservation
reserve)
of
the
Food
Security
Act
to
reduce
emissions
from
agricultural
operations.

Appendix
C2­­
Available
Residential
Wood
Combustion
Control
Measures
Background
Wood
smoke
from
residential
wood
stoves
and
fireplaces
is
a
significant
source
of
PM­
10
pollution
in
some
areas
in
the
western
United
States
that
do
not
attain
the
PM­
10
ambient
air
quality
standards.
For
example,
in
some
mountain
communities,
atmospheric
inversions
can
trap
wood
smoke
particulates
in
valleys
and
cause
PM­
10
concentrations
to
reach
levels
well
in
excess
of
the
standards.

The
U.
S.
EPA's
new
source
performance
standard
(
53
FR
5860,
February
26,
1988)
is
a
long­
term
strategy
designed
to
improve
the
performance
of
wood
burning
devices
nationwide.
The
EPA
believes
that
this
standard
alone,
though,
may
not
result
in
attainment
of
the
PM­
10
air
quality
standards
in
areas
affected
by
wood
smoke.
Additional
available
control
measures
are
listed
below.
They
are
intended
to
(
1)
reduce
emissions
from
current
stoves
through
inspections,
education,
and
shifting
to
cleaner
stoves
or
fuel;
(
2)
curtail
the
use
of
wood
stoves
or
fireplaces
during
adverse
meteorological
conditions;
and
(
3)
limit
future
growth
in
emissions.
Additional
guidance
on
these
measures
is
contained
in
EPA­
450/
2­
89­
015
(
September
1989),
Guidance
Document
for
Residential
Wood
Combustion
Emission
Control
Measures.
Nothing
in
this
document
prevents
a
State
implementation
plan
(
SIP)
in
a
moderate
PM­
10
nonattainment
area
from
containing
control
measures
more
stringent
than
RACM.

List
of
Available
Control
Measures
1.
Establish
an
episode
curtailment
program,
including:
A
curtailment
plan;
a
communication
strategy
to
implement
the
plan;
a
surveillance
plan
(
e.
g.,
"
windshield"
survey,
opacity
trigger);
and
enforcement
provisions
including
procedures,
penalties,
and
exemptions).
A
voluntary
program
will
be
deemed
reasonable
if
the
area
demonstrates
attainment.

2.
Establish
a
public
information
program
to
inform
and
educate
citizens
about
stove
sizing,
installation,
proper
operation
and
maintenance,
general
health
risks
of
wood
smoke,
new
technology
stoves,
and
alternatives
to
wood
heating.

3.
Encourage
improved
performance
of
woodburning
devices
by:

­­
Establishing
a
program
to
identify,
through
opacity
observation,
deficiencies
in
stove
operation
and
maintenance.
(
Under
such
a
program,
advice
and
assistance
should
be
provided
to
the
identified
households
to
help
reduce
visible
emissions
from
their
devices.)
­­
Providing
voluntary
dryness
certification
programs
for
dealers
and/
or
making
free
or
inexpensive
wood
moisture
checks
available
to
burners.

­­
Evaluating
and
encouraging,
as
appropriate,
the
accelerated
changeover
of
existing
devices
to
new
source
performance
standard
or
other
clean
burning
new
or
existing
technology
stoves
(
e.
g.,
hybrid
designs,
pellet
stoves)
by
such
approaches
as
subsidized
stove
purchases
tax
credits,
or
other
incentives.

4.
Provide
inducements
that
would
lead
to
reductions
in
the
stove
and
fireplace
population
(
or
use)
by:

­­
Slowing
the
growth
of
woodburning
devices
in
new
housing
units
by
taxes,
installation
permit
fees,
or
other
disincentives.

­­
Encouraging
a
reduction
in
the
number
of
woodburning
devices
(
i.
e.,
removing
or
disabling
the
devices)
through
tax
credits
or
other
incentives.

­­
Discouraging
the
resale
of
used
stoves
through
taxes,
fees,
or
other
disincentives.

­­
Discouraging
the
availability
of
free
(
or
very
inexpensive)
firewood
by
increasing
cutting
fees
or
limiting
the
cutting
season.

Appendix
C3­­
Prescribed
Burning
Control
Measures
Background
Prescribed
burning,
including
silvicultural
and
agricultural
burning,
is
a
contributor
to
PM­
10
nonattainment
in
some
regions.
In
many
cases,
well­
established
smoke
management
approaches
are
not
being
followed,
resulting
in
avoidable
air
quality
problems.
The
EPA
has
been
working
closely
with
the
National
Wildfire
Coordinating
Group
(
NWCG)
to
develop
appropriate
guidance.
The
objective
is
to
establish
smoke
management
(
SM)
programs
in
these
areas
which
constitute
reasonably
available
control
measures
(
RACM),
and
reduce
population
exposure
to
smoke
from
prescribed
burning,
while
assuring
that
resource
management
goals
are
met.

States
should
address
emissions
from
prescribed
burning
in
a
manner
that
balances
natural
resource,
agricultural,
and
other
burning
objectives
with
air
quality
goals
and
objectives,
by
utilizing
a
smoke
management
program
as
described
in
the
NWCG's
Prescribed
Fire
Smoke
Management
Guide
(
NFES
No.
1279,
February
1985)
and
the
Prescribed
Fire
Plan
Guide
(
NFES
No.
1939,
August
1986),
publications
of
the
Boise
(
Idaho)
Interagency
Fire
Center.

The
scope
of
a
SM
program
should
reflect
the
specific
conditions
and
requirements
of
a
local
area.
Existing
programs
may
be
adequate
in
many
cases
and
in
other
cases
may
provide
a
basis
for
developing
a
refined
program.
Smoke
management
should
encourage
the
cooperative
efforts
of
local,
State,
Federal,
and
private
land
managers.
Emphasis
should
be
on
conducting
burns
under
an
established
planning
process.

For
the
purpose
of
PM­
10
SIP
development,
the
term
prescribed
burning
includes
all
open
burning
of
vegetative
matter.
This
includes
both
planned
ignition
and
prescribed
natural
fire.
Nothing
in
a
SM
program
constituting
RACM
is
intended
to
influence
vegetation
management
or
fire
suppression
practices
so
as
to
increase
the
potential
for
wildfire
to
the
point
that
natural
resources
or
public
safety
are
compromised.

The
EPA
believes
it
is
reasonable
that
a
SM
program
apply
in
those
moderate
PM­
10
nonattainment
areas
where
it
has
been
shown,
through
monitoring,
modeling,
or
other
analysis,
that
prescribed
burning
can
or
does
contribute
to
violations
of
the
PM­
10
national
ambient
air
quality
standards
(
NAAQS).
The
SM
program
should
also
apply
to
areas
outside
of
the
nonattainment
area
if
it
is
shown
that
prescribed
burning
outside
of
the
nonattainment
area
can
or
does
contribute
to
NAAQS
violations.
The
prescribed
burning
control
measures
reasonably
may
be
limited
only
to
the
season(
s)
when
high
ambient
PM­
10
concentrations
occur,
if
it
can
be
shown
that
the
annual
PM­
10
NAAQS
is
not
violated.
See
H.
R.
Rep.
No.
490,
101st
Cong.,
2d
Sess.
268­
269
(
1990).

Source
categories
(
e.
g.,
burning
of
fencelines,
ditch
banks,
small
brush
piles,
small
prescribed
natural
burns,
garden
plots)
may
not
be
reasonably
controlled
where
their
impact
is
de
minimis
based
on
consideration
of
their
collective
influence
on
PM­
10
emissions,
their
duration,
season,
and
proximity
to
potentially
affected
populations.

An
SM
program
should
consist
of
at
least
the
following
components:

Smoke
Dispersion
Evaluation
As
a
minimum,
the
program
should
use
National
Weather
Service
forecasts
or
other
meteorological
analyses
to
determine
when
meteorological
conditions
are
favorable
or
unfavorable
for
dispersion
and
transport
of
smoke
(
i.
e.,
"
burn
days,"
"
no
burn
days").

Burn
Planning,
Authorization,
and
Administration
The
smoke
management
program
should
provide
a
process
(
e.
g.,
telephone
call­
in)
for
receiving
burn
requests,
evaluating
requests
and
granting
approval
for
burns.
Approval
of
a
burn
should
be
based
on
an
evaluation
of
the
airshed's
capacity/
capability
to
disperse
emissions
on
allowable
burn
days
so
that
the
cumulative
emissions
from
all
burns
and
other
sources
in
the
airshed
will
not
cause
or
contribute
to
violations
of
the
PM­
10
NAAQS.
The
approval
to
burn
on
a
burn
day
should
be
equitably
divided
among
all
categories
of
burners
requesting
approval
to
burn
while
accommodating
the
"
incentives"
specified
elsewhere
in
this
policy.

Requirements
for
Ensuring
Burner
Qualifications
Voluntary
training
in
smoke
management
techniques
should
be
reasonably
available
for
all
burners.
The
program
should
include
incentives
for
burners
who
complete
the
voluntary
training
(
e.
g.,
priority
for
approval
to
burn
on
"
burn
days").

Public
Education
and
Awareness
Information
programs
on
the
nature
of
and
reasons
for
smoke
management
should
be
periodically
presented
to
the
public
(
e.
g.,
public
service
announcements,
newspaper
articles).

Surveillance
and
Enforcement
The
SM
program
should
rely
on
routine
PM­
10
monitoring,
and/
or
modeling
supplemented
by
periodic
visual
assessments
of
the
effectiveness
of
the
dispersion
evaluation
program.
The
existing
PM­
10
monitoring
network
should
be
evaluated
for
its
ability
to
provide
information
on
the
effectiveness
of
the
SM
program
as
applied
to
burning
conducted
in
and
near
the
nonattainment
area.
The
network
should
be
modified
as
appropriate.
The
program
should
also
provide
a
process
for
documenting
and
following
up
on
public
complaints
and
should
provide
for
and
levy
fines
against
burners
who
violate
any
of
its
mandatory
requirements.

Emission
Inventories
and
Emission
Efforts
States
should
develop
and
maintain
an
emission
inventory
for
prescribed
burning
and
all
burns
should
be
categorized
as
to
their
purpose.
Documentation
of
the
size,
date,
purpose,
and
emission
reduction
measures
used
should
be
submitted
following
each
large
burn.
Emission
reduction
techniques
(
e.
g.,
mass
ignition,
rapid
mop­
up)
should
be
encouraged
and
incentives
(
e.
g.,
priority
for
approval
to
burn
on
"
burn
days")
should
be
offered
for
demonstrated
emission
reduction
efforts,
including
the
use
of
alternatives
to
burning,
provided
that
such
incentives
can
be
utilized
without
compromising
resource
management
objectives.
State
Oversight
The
relationship
of
the
State
air
pollution
agency
with
other
State
agencies
to
which
management
of
the
SM
program
may
have
been
delegated
will
need
to
be
determined
on
a
State­
by­
State
basis.
Nevertheless,
State
rules
and
regulations
should
be
enacted
in
such
a
manner
that
all
provisions
of
the
SM
program
are
enforceable
by
the
State
through
its
State
implementation
plan.
Generally,
memorandums
of
understanding
should
be
utilized
to
clearly
specify
working
relationships
among
agencies.

Appendix
C4­­
RACT
Determinations
for
Stationary
Sources
Background
Congress
has
for
the
second
time
in
amending
the
Clean
Air
Act
(
Act)
specifically
required
that
reasonable
available
control
technology
(
RACT)
be
applied
to
existing
stationary
sources
in
nonattainment
areas.
In
section
172(
b)(
3)
of
the
Act,
as
amended
in
1977,
Congress
specified
that
nonattainment
area
plans
were
to
"
require,
*
*
*,
reasonable
further
progress
*
*
*
including
such
reduction
in
emissions
from
existing
sources
in
the
area
as
may
be
obtained
through
the
adoption,
at
a
minimum,
of
reasonably
available
control
technology."
Thus,
RACT
was
required
in
SIP's
developed
for
areas
that
were
designated
nonattainment
for
total
suspended
particulate
matter.
Now,
in
section
172(
c)(
1)
of
the
Clean
Air
Act,
as
amended
by
the
Clean
Air
Act
Amendments
of
1990
(
Nonattainment
Plan
Provisions­­
In
General),
Congress
again
requires
that
nonattainment
area
plans
provide
for
"*
*
*
such
reductions
in
emissions
from
existing
sources
in
the
(
nonattainment)
area
as
may
be
obtained
through
the
adoption,
at
a
minimum,
of
reasonably
available
control
technology."
Thus,
RACT
is
now
required
for
PM­
10
nonattainment
area
SIP's.

The
EPA
recommends
that
the
RACT
for
a
particular
source
continues
to
be
determined
on
a
case­
by­
case
basis
considering
the
technological
and
economic
feasibility
of
reducing
emissions
from
that
source
(
through
process
changes
or
add­
on
control
technology).
The
following
technological
and
economic
parameters
should
be
considered
in
determining
RACT
for
a
particular
source.

Technological
Feasibility
The
technological
feasibility
of
applying
an
emission
reduction
method
to
a
particular
source
should
consider
the
source's
process
and
operating
procedures,
raw
materials,
physical
plant
layout,
and
any
other
environmental
impacts
such
as
water
pollution,
waste
disposal,
and
energy
requirements.
The
process,
operating
procedures,
and
raw
materials
used
by
a
source
can
affect
the
feasibility
of
implementing
process
changes
that
reduce
emissions
and
the
selection
of
add­
on
emission
control
equipment.
The
operation
of
and
longevity
of
control
equipment
can
be
significantly
influenced
by
the
raw
materials
used
and
the
process
to
which
it
is
applied.
The
feasibility
of
modifying
processes
or
applying
control
equipment
is
also
influenced
by
the
physical
layout
of
the
particular
plant.
The
space
available
in
which
to
implement
such
changes
may
limit
the
choices
and
will
also
affect
the
costs
of
control.

Reducing
air
emissions
may
not
justify
adversely
affecting
other
resources
by
increasing
pollution
of
bodies
of
water,
creating
additional
solid
waste
disposal
problems
or
creating
excessive
energy
demands.
(
An
otherwise
available
PM­
10
control
technology
may
not
be
reasonable
if
these
other
environmental
impacts
cannot
reasonably
be
mitigated.)
For
analytic
purposes,
a
State
may
consider
a
PM­
10
control
measure
technologically
infeasible
if,
considering
the
availability
(
and
cost)
of
mitigative
adverse
impacts
of
that
control
on
other
pollution
media,
the
control
would
not,
in
the
State's
reasoned
judgment,
provide
a
net
environmental
benefit.
In
many
instances,
however,
PM­
10
control
technologies
have
known
energy
penalties
and
adverse
effects
on
other
media,
but
such
effects
and
the
cost
of
their
mitigation
are
also
known
and
have
been
borne
by
owners
of
existing
sources
in
numerous
cases.
Such
well­
established
adverse
effects
and
their
costs
are
normal
and
assumed
to
be
reasonable
and
should
not,
in
most
cases,
justify
nonuse
of
the
PM­
10
control
technology.
The
costs
of
preventing
adverse
water,
solid
waste
and
energy
impacts
will
also
influence
the
economic
feasibility
of
the
PM­
10
control
technology.

Alternative
approaches
to
reducing
emissions
of
particulate
matter
including
PM­
10
are
discussed
in
Control
Techniques
for
Particulate
Emissions
from
Stationary
Sources­­
Volume
I
(
EPA­
450/
3­
81­
005a)
and
Volume
II
(
EPA­
450/
3­
81­
005b),
September
1982.
The
design,
operation
and
maintenance
of
general
particulate
matter
control
systems
such
as
mechanical
collectors,
electrostatic
precipitators,
fabric
filters,
and
wet
scrubbers
are
discussed
in
Volume
I.
The
collection
efficiency
of
each
system
is
discussed
as
a
function
of
particle
size.
Information
is
also
presented
regarding
energy
and
environmental
considerations
and
procedures
for
estimating
costs
of
particulate
matter
control
equipment.
The
emission
characteristics
and
control
technologies
applicable
to
specific
source
categories
are
discussed
in
Volume
II.
Secondary
environmental
impacts
are
also
discussed.

Additional
sources
of
information
on
control
technology
are
background
information
documents
for
new
source
performance
standards
and
Identification,
Assessment,
and
Control
of
Fugitive
Particulate
Emissions,
EPA­
600/
8­
86­
023,
August
1986.

In
some
instances,
control
technologies
more
modern
or
more
advanced
than
those
described
in
the
documents
referenced
may
exist.
In
such
cases,
the
State's
RACT
analysis
for
a
source
should
consider
such
available
technology.

Economic
Feasibility
Economic
feasibility
considers
the
cost
of
reducing
emissions
and
the
difference
in
costs
between
the
particular
source
and
other
similar
sources
that
have
implemented
emission
reduction.
As
discussed
above,
EPA
presumes
that
it
is
reasonable
for
similar
sources
to
bear
similar
costs
of
emission
reductions.
Economic
feasibility
rests
very
little
on
the
ability
of
a
particular
source
to
"
afford"
to
reduce
emissions
to
the
level
of
similar
sources.
Less
efficient
sources
would
be
rewarded
by
having
to
bear
lower
emission
reduction
costs
if
affordability
were
given
high
consideration.
Rather,
economic
feasibility
for
RACT
purposes
is
largely
determined
by
evidence
that
other
sources
in
a
source
category
have
in
fact
applied
the
control
technology
in
question.

The
capital
costs,
annualized
costs,
and
cost
effectiveness
of
an
emission
reduction
technology
should
be
considered
in
determining
its
economic
feasibility.
The
OAOPS
Control
Cost
Manual,
Fourth
Edition,
EPA­
450/
3­
90­
006,
January
1990,
describes
procedures
for
determining
these
costs.
The
above
costs
should
be
determined
for
all
technologically
feasible
emission
reduction
options.

States
may
give
substantial
weight
to
cost
effectiveness
in
evaluating
the
economic
feasibility
of
an
emission
reduction
technology.
The
cost
effectiveness
of
a
technology
is
its
annualized
cost
($/
year)
divided
by
the
amount
of
PM­
10
emission
reduction
(
i.
e.,
tons/
year)
which
yields
a
cost
per
amount
of
emission
reduction
($/
ton).
Cost
effectiveness
provides
a
value
for
each
emission
reduction
option
that
is
comparable
with
other
options
and
other
facilities.

If
a
company
contends
that
it
cannot
afford
the
technology
that
appears
to
be
RACT
for
that
source
or
group
of
sources,
the
claim
should
be
supported
with
such
information
as
the
impact
on:

1.
Fixed
and
variable
production
costs
($/
unit),
2.
Product
supply
and
demand
elasticity,
3.
Product
prices
(
cost
absorption
vs.
cost
pass­
through),
4.
Expected
costs
incurred
by
competitors,
5.
Company
profits,
and
6.
Employment.

If
a
company
contends
that
available
control
technology
is
not
affordable
and
would
lead
to
closing
the
facility,
the
costs
of
closure
should
be
considered.
Closure
may
incur
costs
for
demolition,
relocation,
severance
pay,
etc.

Appendix
D
United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Office
of
Air
Quality
Planning
and
Standards,
Research
Triangle
Park,
North
Carolina
27711.

March
11,
1991.

Memorandum
Subject:
New
Source
Review
(
NSR)
Program
Transitional
Guidance.
From:
John
S.
Seitz,
Director,
Office
of
Air
Quality
Planning
and
Standards
(
MD­
10).
To:
Addressees.

The
Clean
Air
Act
Amendments
of
1990
(
1990
Amendments)
make
numerous
changes
to
the
NSR
requirements
of
the
prevention
of
significant
deterioration
(
PSD)
and
nonattainment
area
programs.
The
1990
Amendments
create
new
and
expanded
nonattainment
areas,
extend
PSD
coverage
to
current
Class
I
area
boundaries,
and
mandate
a
PSD
exemption
for
certain
hazardous
air
pollutants.
The
Environment
Protection
Agency
(
EPA)
intends
to
propose
by
September
of
this
year
a
regulatory
package
that
will
implement
these
and
other
changes
to
the
NSR
provisions.
Final
adoption
of
these
revised
regulations
is
projected
for
August
1992.
In
the
interim
period
between
passage
of
the
1990
Amendments
and
adoption
of
the
Agency's
final
regulations,
EPA
expects
that
numerous
issues
regarding
the
1990
Amendments
will
arise.
This
memorandum
sets
forth
the
Agency's
position
on
the
most
important
of
these
transitional
issues
involving
the
NSR
program.

This
guidance
document
does
not
supersede
existing
State
regulations
or
approved
State
implementation
plans.
However,
in
some
cases,
it
calls
upon
States
to
implement
their
NSR
programs
in
a
manner
consistent
with
provisions
of
the
1990
Amendments
that
are
applicable
immediately
and
with
the
requirements
that
flow
directly
from
these
provisions.
Nonetheless,
the
policies
set
out
in
this
transition
memorandum
are
intended
solely
as
guidance
and
do
not
represent
final
Agency
action.
They
are
not
ripe
for
judicial
review
for
this
reason.
Moreover,
they
are
not
intended,
nor
can
they
be
relied
upon,
to
create
any
rights
enforceable
by
any
party
in
litigation
with
the
United
States.
The
EPA
officials
may
decide
to
follow
the
guidance
provided
in
this
memorandum,
or
to
act
at
variance
with
the
guidance,
based
on
an
analysis
of
specific
circumstances.
The
Agency
also
may
change
this
guidance
at
any
time
without
public
notice.

The
Regional
Offices
should
send
this
guidance
document
to
their
States.
Questions
from
States
and
applicants
concerning
specific
issues
and
cases
should
be
directed
to
the
appropriate
EPA
Regional
Office.
If
you
have
any
general
questions,
please
contact
Mr.
Michael
Sewell
of
the
New
Source
Review
Section
at
FTS
629­
0873
or
(
919)
541­
0873.

Attachment
Addressees
Director,
Air,
Pesticides,
and
Toxics
Management
Division,
Regions
I,
IV,
and
VI
Director,
Air
and
Waste
Management
Division,
Region
II
Director,
Air
Management
Division,
Regions
III
and
IX
Director,
Air
and
Radiation
Division,
Region
V
Director,
Air
and
Toxics
Division,
Regions
VII,
VIII,
and
X
cc:
J.
Calcagni
R.
Campbell
W.
Laxton
E.
Lillis
J.
Rasnic
L.
Wegman
J.
Weigold
NSR
Contacts
Corrections
to
Original
Document:
Two
errors
in
the
document
as
issued
on
March
11,
1991
have
been
corrected
in
this
copy.
On
page
2
on
the
last
line,
"
CFC
112"
is
changed
to
correctly
read
"
CFC
113".
On
page
8
in
item
4,
the
cite
"
Section
172(
b)"
is
changed
to
correctly
read
"
Section
173(
b)".

New
Source
Review
(
NSR)
Transitional
Guidance
Toxics
and
National
Emissions
Standards
for
Hazardous
Air
Pollutants
(
NESHAPS)
Issues
1.
Section
112
Hazardous
Air
Pollutants
are
No
Longer
Considered
Regulated
Pollutants
Under
Prevention
of
Significant
Deterioration
(
PSD),
but
NESHAPS
Still
Apply.

Under
the
1977
Amendments
to
the
Clean
Air
Act
(
Act)
and
regulations
issued
thereunder,
the
PSD
requirements
of
the
Act
apply
to
all
"
major"
new
sources
and
"
major"
modifications,
i.
e.,
those
exceeding
certain
annual
tonnage
thresholds
(
see
40
CFR
52.21(
b)(
1)(
i)
and
(
b)(
2)(
i)).
Typically,
new
sources
and
modifications
become
subject
to
PSD
because
they
exceed
the
specified
tonnage
threshold
for
a
criteria
pollutant,
i.
e.,
a
pollutant
for
which
a
national
ambient
air
quality
standard
(
NAAQS)
has
been
established
under
section
109
of
the
Act.
Once
a
new
source
or
modification
is
subject
to
PSD,
the
PSD
requirements
apply
to
every
pollutant
subject
to
regulation
under
the
Act
that
is
emitted
in
"
significant"
quantities
(
or,
in
the
case
of
a
major
modification,
for
which
there
is
a
significant
net
emissions
increase)
(
see
40
CFR
52.21(
b)(
23)
and
(
i)(
2)).
Under
the
1977
Amendments,
best
available
control
technology
(
BACT)
and
other
PSD
requirements
apply
not
only
to
emissions
of
criteria
pollutants
but
also
to
emissions
of
pollutants
regulated
under
other
provisions
of
the
Act,
such
as
section
111
or
112.
This
regulatory
structure
was
altered
by
the
1990
Amendments.

Title
III
of
the
1990
Amendments
added
a
new
section
112(
b)(
6)
that
excludes
the
hazardous
air
pollutants
listed
in
section
112(
b)(
1)
of
the
revised
Act
(
as
well
as
any
pollutants
that
may
be
added
to
the
list)
from
the
PSD
(
and
other)
requirements
of
Part
C.
Thus,
because
they
are
on
the
initial
Title
III
hazardous
air
pollutants
list,
the
following
pollutants,
which
had
been
regulated
under
PSD
because
they
were
covered
by
the
section
112
NESHAPS
or
section
111
new
source
performance
standards
(
NSPS)
program,
are
now
exempt
from
Federal
PSD
applicability:

**
Arsenic
**
Asbestos
**
Benzene
(
including
benzene
from
gasoline)
**
Beryllium
**
Hydrogen
sulfide
(
H2S)
**
Mercury
**
Radionuclides
(
including
radon
and
polonium)
**
Vinyl
chloride
The
Title
III
exemption
applies
to
final
Federal
PSD
permits
(
i.
e.,
those
issued
in
final
form
and
for
which
administrative
appeals,
if
any,
under
40
CFR
124.19
have
been
exhausted)
issued
on
or
after
the
date
of
enactment
of
the
1990
Amendments
(
November
15,
1990).
For
Federal
PSD
permit
applications
now
under
review
by
either
an
EPA
Regional
Office
or
a
delegated
State,
PSD
permit
requirements
do
not
apply
to
the
pollutants
exempted
by
Title
III.
For
Federal
PSD
permits
containing
PSD
requirements
for
the
pollutants
exempted
by
Title
III
issued
on
or
after
November
15,
1990,
the
permittee
may
request
a
revision
(
e.
g.,
removal
of
a
BACT
limit
for
benzene)
to
their
PSD
permit
to
reflect
the
Title
III
exemption
from
Federal
PSD
applicability.

Note
that
pursuant
to
section
116
and
the
preservation
clause
in
section
112(
d)(
7)
of
the
amended
Act,
States
with
an
approved
PSD
program
may
continue
to
regulate
the
Title
III
hazardous
air
pollutants
now
exempted
from
Federal
PSD
by
section
112(
b)(
6)
if
the
State
PSD
regulations
provide
an
independent
basis
to
do
so.
These
State
rules
would
remain
in
effect
unless
a
State
revised
them
to
provide
similar
exemptions.
Additionally,
the
Title
III
pollutants
continue
to
be
subject
to
any
other
applicable
State
and
Federal
rules;
the
exclusion
is
only
for
Part
C
rules.

Finally,
section
112(
q)
retains
existing
NESHAPS
regulations
by
specifying
that
any
standard
under
section
112
in
effect
prior
to
the
date
of
enactment
of
the
1990
Amendments
shall
remain
in
force
and
effect
after
such
date
unless
modified
as
provided
in
the
amended
section.
Therefore,
the
requirements
of
40
CFR
61.05
to
61.08,
including
preconstruction
permitting
requirements,
for
new
and
modified
sources
subject
to
existing
NESHAPS
regulations
are
still
applicable.

In
summary,
the
pollutants
currently
regulated
under
the
Act
as
of
March
1991
that
are
still
subject
to
Federal
PSD
review
and
permitting
requirements
are:

**
Carbon
monoxide
**
Nitrogen
oxides
**
Sulfur
dioxide
**
Particulate
matter
and
PH­
10
**
Ozone
(
volatile
organic
compounds)
**
Lead
(
elemental)
**
Fluorides
**
Sulfuric
acid
mist
**
Total
reduced
sulfur
compounds
(
including
H2S)
**
CFC's
11,
12,
113,
114,
115
**
Halons
1211,
1301,
2402
**
Municipal
waste
combustor
(
MWC)
acid
gases,
MWC
metals
and
MWC
organics
2.
Hazardous
Air
Pollutants
that
are
Regulated
as
One
Component
of
a
More
General
Pollutant
Under
Other
Provisions
of
the
Clean
Air
Act
are
Still
Regulated.

Any
hazardous
air
pollutants
listed
in
section
112(
b)(
1)
which
are
regulated
as
constituents
of
a
more
general
pollutant
listed
under
section
108
of
the
Act
are
still
subject
to
PSD
as
part
of
the
more
general
pollutant,
despite
the
exemption
in
Title
III.
For
example,
volatile
organic
compounds
(
VOC's)
(
a
term
which
includes
benzene,
vinyl
chloride,
methanol,
toluene,
methyl
ethyl
ketone,
and
thousands
of
other
compounds)
are
still
regulated
as
VOC's
(
but
not
as
individual
pollutants
such
as
benzene,
etc.)
under
the
PSD
regulations
because
these
pollutants
are
ozone
precursors,
not
because
they
are
air
toxics.
Also,
particulates
(
including
lead
compounds
and
asbestos)
are
still
regulated
as
particulates
(
both
PM­
10
and
particulate
matter)
under
the
PSD
regulations.
Lead
compounds
are
exempt
from
Federal
PSD
by
Title
III,
but
the
elemental
lead
portion
of
lead
compounds
(
as
tested
for
in
40
CFR
part
60,
appendix
A,
Method
12)
is
still
considered
a
criteria
pollutant
subject
to
the
lead
NAAQS
and
still
regulated
under
PSD.

3.
Toxic
Effect
of
Unregulated
Pollutants
Still
Considered
in
BACT
Analysis.

Based
on
the
remand
decision
on
June
3,
1986
by
the
EPA
Administrator
in
North
County
Resource
Recovery
Associates
(
PSD
Appeal
No.
85­
2),
the
impact
on
emissions
of
other
pollutants,
including
unregulated
pollutants,
must
be
taken
into
account
in
determining
BACT
for
a
regulated
pollutant.
When
evaluating
control
technologies
and
their
associated
emissions
limits,
combustion
practices,
and
related
permit
terms
and
conditions
in
a
BACT
proposal,
the
applicant
must
consider
the
environmental
impacts
of
all
pollutants
not
regulated
by
PSD.
Once
a
project
is
subject
to
BACT
due
to
the
emission
of
nonexempted
pollutants,
the
BACT
analysis
should
therefore
consider
all
pollutants,
including
Title
III
hazardous
air
pollutants
previously
subject
to
PSD,
in
determining
which
control
strategy
is
best.

PSD
Class
I
Boundary
Issues
1.
PSD
Applicability
Coverage
Changes
as
Class
I
Area
Boundaries
Change
Sections
162(
a)
and
164(
a)
of
the
amended
Act
specify
that
the
boundaries
of
areas
designated
as
Class
I
must
now
conform
to
all
boundary
changes
at
such
parks
and
wilderness
areas
made
since
August
7,
1977
and
any
changes
that
may
occur
in
the
future.
The
EPA
does
not
believe
that
Congress
intended
to
create
the
turmoil
which
would
occur
if
this
redesignation
required
the
modification
of
permits
issued
between
August
7,
1977
and
November
15,
1990,
or
the
resubmission
and
reevaluation
of
complete
permit
applications
submitted
prior
to
enactment
of
the
1990
Amendments.
Thus,
for
this
reason,
applications
considered
complete
prior
to
November
15,
1990
should
be
processed
as
submitted
without
regard
to
the
new
Class
I
area
boundaries.
Exceptions
to
this
general
policy
are
in
the
area
of
increment
consumption
and
air
quality
related
values
(
including
visibility),
as
discussed
below.

For
an
applicant
who
submitted
a
complete
PSD
application
prior
to
November
15,
1990,
if
all
other
PSD
requirements
are
met,
a
permit
may
be
issued
based
on
the
Class
I
analysis
as
submitted
in
the
application,
unless
the
reviewing
authority
finds,
on
a
case­
by­
case
basis,
that
additional
analysis
is
needed
from
the
applicant
to
address
suspected
adverse
impacts
or
increment
consumption
problems
due
to
the
expanded
boundaries
of
the
Class
I
areas.
Any
existing
increment
violations
in
the
new
boundaries
of
Class
I
areas
must
be
remedied
through
a
SIP
revision
pursuant
to
40
CFR
51.166(
a)(
3).
The
PSD
applications
not
considered
complete
before
November
15,
1990
must
consider
the
impact
of
both
existing
sources
and
the
new
or
modified
source
on
the
Class
I
areas
as
defined
by
the
1990
Amendments.
Thus,
the
complete
application
must
consider
the
impacts
on
the
entire
Class
I
area
based
upon
the
boundaries
in
existence
of
the
date
of
submittal
of
a
complete
application;
as
before,
if
a
Class
I
boundary
changes
before
the
permit
is
issued,
the
reviewing
authority
may
find,
on
a
case­
by­
case
basis,
that
additional
analysis
is
needed
from
the
applicant
to
address
suspected
adverse
impacts
or
increment
consumption
problems
due
to
expanded
Class
I
Area
boundaries.
NSR
Nonattainment
Issues
1.
NSR
Construction
Permit
Requirements
in
Nonattainment
Areas
In
many
States,
the
existing
approved
Part
D
permit
program
by
its
terms
covers
all
designated
nonattainment
areas
in
the
State,
so
a
Part
D
permit
program
will
automatically
apply
to
the
new
and
expanded
nonattainment
areas
which
are
established
under
provisions
of
Title
I
of
the
1990
Amendments.
Thus,
until
new
rules
are
adopted
for
these
new
or
expanded
nonattainment
areas,
States
should
apply
the
requirements
of
their
existing
approved
Part
D
permit
program.
However,
in
other
States,
a
Part
D
program
may
be
limited
to
specified
areas
and
does
not
apply
to
new
or
expanded
areas.
In
these
cases,
States
must
implement
a
transitional
permitting
program
until
their
existing
Part
D
programs
are
revised
to
meet
the
requirements
of
the
1990
Amendments
and
expanded
to
cover
all
nonattainment
areas
in
the
State.
Otherwise,
both
the
goals
of
part
D
and
Congress'
intent
in
creating
new
or
expanded
nonattainment
areas
will
be
frustrated.

The
EPA
regulations
already
provide
for
these
new
or
expanded
designated
nonattainment
areas
because
the
Emission
Offset
Interpretations
Ruling
(
40
CFR
part
51,
appendix
S)
governs
permits
to
construct
between
the
date
of
designation
and
the
date
an
approved
Part
D
plan
is
made
applicable
to
the
new
nonattainment
area
(
see
40
CFR
52.24(
k)).
Until
a
State's
new
Part
D
plan
is
approved
by
EPA,
if
a
State
wishes
to
issue
a
permit
for
a
major
stationary
source
or
major
modification
in
a
new
or
expanded
designated
nonattainment
area,
the
State
should
comply
with
the
requirements
of
appendix
S.
Among
other
things,
appendix
S
requires
a
major
source
seeking
to
locate
in
a
nonattainment
area
to
(
1)
meet
the
lowest
achievable
emission
rate
for
such
source,
(
2)
provide
offsets
from
existing
sources
in
the
area,
and
(
3)
show
that
the
offsets
will
provide
a
positive
net
air
quality
benefit
(
see
40
CFR
part
51,
appendix
S,
section
IV.
A).
The
EPA
believes
that
in
order
to
carry
out
the
intent
of
appendix
S,
offsets
should
be
required
for
sources
in
all
categories
and
in
all
instances
should
be
calculated
on
a
tons
per
year
basis
(
see
40
CFR
part
51,
appendix
S,
section
IV.
C).

Of
course,
neither
appendix
S
nor
the
existing
NSR
rules
incorporate
the
NSR
changes
mandated
by
Title
I
of
the
1990
Amendments
such
as
lower
source
applicability
thresholds,
increased
emissions
offset
ratios,
new
definitions
of
major
stationary
source,
and
(
for
ozone
nonattainment
areas)
requirements
for
nitrogen
oxides
(
NOx)
control
and
NOx
emissions
offsets.
However,
the
1990
Amendments
require
States
to
submit
to
EPA
new
NSR
permit
program
rules
for
ozone
nonattainment
areas
by
November
15,
1992;
for
PM­
10
nonattainment
areas
by
June
30,
1992;
and
for
most
carbon
monoxide
(
CO)
nonattainment
areas
no
later
than
3
years
from
the
date
of
the
nonattainment
designation.
The
EPA
interprets
this
as
an
expression
of
congressional
intent
not
to
mandate
that
States
adhere
to
the
more
stringent
Title
I
NSR
requirements
in
nonattainment
areas
during
the
time
provided
for
State
implementation
plan
(
SIP)
development.
Thus,
for
NSR
permitting
purposes
in
nonattainment
areas,
the
new
NSR
requirements
in
Title
I
are
not
in
effect
until
the
States,
as
required
by
the
Act,
adopt
NSR
permit
program
rules
to
implement
the
Title
I
provisions.
In
addition,
EPA
encourages
any
State
having
adequate
authority
for
early
implementation
of
the
NSR
changes
to
do
so
as
soon
as
possible.

If
States
fail
to
submit
to
EPA
the
new
NSR
permit
program
rules
for
nonattainment
areas
by
the
deadlines
in
the
amended
Act,
EPA
intends
to
impose
in
these
nonattainment
areas
a
Federal
implementation
plan
(
FIP)
embodying
such
requirements.
Currently,
EPA
intends
to
propose
revised
NSR
regulations
at
40
CFR
part
52
that
would
implement
the
new
Title
I
NSR
requirements
under
a
FIP
in
a
State
if
that
State's
revised
NSR
rules
to
implement
Title
I
are
not
submitted
in
approvable
form
to
EPA
and
made
effective
within
the
State
by
the
deadlines
established
by
the
1990
Amendments.

The
area
designation
in
effect
on
the
date
of
permit
issuance
by
the
reviewing
agency
determines
which
regulations
(
Part
C
or
Part
D)
apply
to
that
permit.
In
other
words,
the
PSD
permit
regulations
apply
to
pollutants
for
which
the
area
is
designated
as
attainment
or
unclassifiable,
and
the
NSR
nonattainment
permit
regulations
apply
to
pollutants
for
which
the
area
is
designated
nonattainment
(
see
40
CFR
51.166(
i)
(
3)
and
(
5);
and
40
CFR
52.21(
i)
(
3)
and
(
5)).
Under
these
regulations,
a
PSD
permit
for
a
pollutant
cannot
be
issued
in
an
area
that
is
designated
nonattainment
for
that
pollutant.
For
the
situation
where
a
source
receives
a
PSD
or
other
permit
prior
to
the
date
the
area
is
designated
as
nonattainment,
the
permit
remains
in
effect
as
long
as
the
source
commences
construction
within
18
months
after
the
date
of
nonattainment
designation
of
the
area,
does
not
discontinue
construction
for
more
than
18
months,
and
completes
construction
within
a
reasonable
time
(
see
40
CFR
52.24
(
g)
and
(
k)).
Although
the
PSD
regulations
provide
for
extension
of
these
deadlines,
no
extension
would
be
appropriate
where
the
area
has
been
designated
as
nonattainment
following
permit
issuance.
Accordingly,
if
any
of
these
construction
provisions
are
not
met,
the
PSD
permit
or
other
permit
will
not
be
extended,
and
the
source
(
if
subject
to
the
nonattainment
provisions)
must
obtain
a
nonattainment
permit
prior
to
commencing
(
or
continuing)
construction.

The
1990
Amendments
create
some
new
and
expanded
nonattainment
areas
by
operation
of
law.
Other
nonattainment
area
changes
are
expected
as
the
States
and
EPA
complete
the
designation
process
prescribed
in
amended
section
107(
d).
Because
of
these
provisions,
the
dates
areas
switch
from
attainment
to
nonattainment
for
NSR
purposes
vary
by
pollutant.
However,
except
for
the
two
instances
where
the
Amendments
create
changes
by
operation
of
law,
the
new
designations
and
expanded
boundaries
will
not
be
effective
for
NSR
purposes
until
EPA
promulgates
the
changes.
The
promulgations
will
be
announced
in
the
Federal
Register.

Congress
created
new
PM­
10
nonattainment
areas
through
designations
that
became
effective
upon
enactment
of
the
1990
Amendments
on
November
15,
1990
(
see
section
107(
d)(
4)(
B)).
Specifically,
Congress
designated
Group
I
areas
and
areas
where
violations
of
the
PM­
10
NAAQS
had
occurred
prior
to
January
1,
1989
as
nonattainment.
The
EPA
published
a
list
of
these
PM­
10
areas
in
a
Federal
Register
notice
(
see
55
FR
45799,
October
31,
1990;
see
also
52
FR
29383,
August
7,
1987).
The
EPA
plans
to
publish
a
notice
in
the
Federal
Register
listing
these
areas
as
nonattainment
in
the
near
future,
but
they
are
already
considered
nonattainment
areas
as
of
November
15,
1990.

Similarly,
the
1990
Amendments
expand
by
operation
of
law
some
CO
and
ozone
nonattainment
areas.
However,
these
changes
did
not
become
effective
with
passage
but
rather
on
December
30,
1990.
The
specifics
are
as
follows:

Section
107(
d)(
4)(
A)(
iv)
of
the
amended
Act
provides
that,
with
the
exception
explained
below
ozone
and
CO
nonattainment
areas
located
within
metropolitan
statistical
areas
(
MSA)
and
consolidated
metropolitan
statistical
areas
(
CMSA)
which
are
classified
as
serious,
severe,
or
extreme
for
ozone
or
as
serious
for
CO
are
automatically
expanded
to
include
the
entire
MSA
or
CMSA.
This
expansion
became
effective
by
operation
of
law
45
days
after
enactment
unless
the
Governor
submitted
a
notice
by
this
deadline
of
the
State's
intent
to
seek
a
modification
of
the
expanded
boundaries
pursuant
to
the
procedures
set
forth
in
section
107(
d)(
4)(
A)(
v).
So
if
a
State
did
not
provide
this
notice,
the
nonattainment
boundaries
of
all
serious,
severe,
and
extreme
ozone
nonattainment
areas
in
the
State
and
all
serious
CO
areas
in
the
State
expanded
to
include
the
entire
MSA
or
CMSA
on
December
30,
1990.
If
a
State
did
provide
timely
notice,
the
Administrator
has
up
to
14
months
from
enactment
to
resolve
the
State's
challenge.
Until
EPA
promulgates
a
resolution
of
the
State's
challenge,
the
old
boundaries
remain
in
effect.

Except
for
these
two
cases
where
new
or
expanded
boundaries
have
been
created
by
operation
of
law,
nonattainment
area
changes
will
not
be
considered
effective
until
the
changes
are
promulgated
by
the
EPA.
As
to
most
new
areas
or
expansions
of
previously­
designated
nonattainment
areas,
this
will
occur
240
days
after
enactment
(
see
section
107(
d)(
4)(
A)
(
i)
and
(
ii)).
Newly­
created
ozone
and
CO
nonattainment
areas
will
be
considered
part
of
a
designated
nonattainment
area
for
NSR
purposes
at
the
time
of
promulgation.

2.
Status
of
Construction
Bans
Pursuant
to
section
110(
n)(
3),
an
existing
construction
ban
that
was
imposed
due
to
the
absence
of
approved
Part
D
NSR
rules
remains
in
effect
until
a
revised
NSR
SIP
is
approved.
Existing
construction
bans
imposed
due
to
disapproval
of
primary
sulfur
dioxide
NAAQS
attainment
plans
also
remain
in
effect.
A
Federal
Register
notice
will
be
published
soon
announcing
the
status
of
construction
bans
in
general
and
also
lifting
specific
bans
where
appropriate.
Should
a
construction
ban
be
lifted
in
any
area
designated
as
nonattainment,
and
the
area
lacks
an
approved
Part
D
NSR
rule,
the
State
should
meet
the
requirements
of
40
CFR
part
51,
appendix
S,
in
issuing
permits
to
major
new
sources
or
major
modifications
prior
to
the
adoption
of
NSR
rules
meeting
the
requirements
of
the
1990
Amendments.

3.
Federal
Implementation
Plans
Remain
in
Effect
The
NSR
permitting
program
in
an
existing
FIP
remains
in
effect
until
a
SIP
is
approved
or
a
revised
FIP
is
adopted.

4.
Use
of
Previously­
Approved
Growth
Allowances
Is
Prohibited
Section
173(
b)
invalidates
growth
allowances
in
existing
SIP's
in
areas
that
received
a
SIP
call
prior
to
enactment
of
the
1990
Amendments,
or
that
receive
one
thereafter.
For
NSR
permits
issued
on
or
after
November
15,
1990,
previously­
approved
growth
allowances
cannot
be
used
in
these
areas.
Construction
permits
cannot
be
issued
in
SIP­
call
areas
under
existing
EPA­
approved
Part
D
programs
to
the
extent
that
such
permits
rely
on
previously­
approved
growth
allowances.
Case­
by­
case
emission
offsets
must
be
obtained
for
any
such
permits,
and
other
existing
Part
D
requirements
must
be
met.

5.
Existing
NSR
Permitting
Rules
Continue
To
Apply
in
the
Northeast
Ozone
Transport
Region
(
NOTR)

The
1990
Amendments
establish
a
single
ozone
transport
region
comprised
of
the
States
of
Connecticut,
Delaware,
Maine,
Maryland,
Massachusetts,
New
Hampshire,
New
Jersey,
New
York,
Pennsylvania,
Rhode
Island,
Vermont,
and
the
CMSA
that
includes
the
District
of
Columbia
and
part
of
the
State
of
Virginia.
For
this
transport
region,
including
all
attainment
areas
within
its
boundaries,
new
section
184(
b)(
2)
specifies
that
any
stationary
source
that
emits
or
has
the
potential
to
emit
at
least
50
tons
per
year
of
VOC's
shall
be
considered
a
major
stationary
source
and
subject
to
the
requirements
which
would
be
applicable
to
major
stationary
sources
if
the
area
were
classified
as
a
moderate
ozone
nonattainment
area.
For
NSR
purposes,
the
requirements
of
section
184(
b)(
2)
are
not
in
effect
in
a
State
until
the
State
submits
a
new
or
revised
SIP
that
includes
the
requirements
(
or
EPA
imposes
a
FIP
implementing
those
requirements).
A
State
in
the
NOTR
has
until
November
15,
1992
to
submit
to
EPA
the
new
or
revised
NSR
rules
addressing
the
new
requirements.

Appendix
E
I.
Introduction
The
EPA
is
issuing
this
CTG
document
under
section
182(
b)
of
the
Clean
Air
Act,
as
amended.
Under
section
182(
b),
States
must
develop
RACT
rules
for
sources
"
covered
by
a
CTG
document
issued
by
the
Administrator
between
November
15,
1990
and
the
date
of
attainment."
The
State
must
submit
these
RACT
rules
"
within
the
period
set
forth
by
the
Administrator
in
issuing
the
relevant
CTG
document."
One
type
of
"
CTG
document"
is
a
CTG;
a
CTG
is
a
technical
document
that
sets
forth
a
presumptive
level
of
RACT
controls
for
a
source
category.
The
Act
provides
that
EPA
must
issue
eleven
CTG's
by
November
15,
1993.
In
addition,
the
Act
specifically
requires
the
Agency
to
prepare
CTG's
for
aerospace
coatings
and
ship
building
and
repair
within
the
same
timeframe.

This
document
is
not
a
technical
CTG,
but
rather
a
second
type
of
CTG
document­­
a
document
that
lists
the
eleven
CTG's
EPA
anticipates
publishing
in
accordance
with
section
183(
a)
and
establishes
time
tables
for
submittal
of
RACT
rules
for
sources
that
are
not
ultimately
covered
by
a
CTG
issued
by
November
15,
1993.
The
EPA
believes
that
it
is
necessary
to
issue
this
document
at
this
time
so
that
States
will
be
able
to
determine
which
sources
and
source
categories
fit
within
the
RACT
rule
submittal
requirement
for
sources
that
EPA
expects
to
be
covered
by
a
post­
enactment
CTG.

II.
List
of
Eleven
CTG's
The
EPA
plans
to
issue
the
following
CTG's
in
accordance
with
section
183(
a).

1.
Synthetic
organic
chemical
manufacturing
industry
(
SOCMI)
distillation;
2.
SOCMI
reactors;
3.
Wood
furniture;
4.
Plastic
parts
coating
(
business
machines);
5.
Plastic
parts
coating
(
other);
6.
Offset
lithography;
7.
Industrial
wastewater;
8.
Autobody
refinishing;
9.
SOCMI
batch
processing;
10.
Volatile
organic
liquid
storage
tanks;
and
11.
Clean
up
solvents.
III.
Authority
Under
section
182(
b)(
2),
States
must
adopt
RACT
rules
for
three
general
groups
of
sources:
(
A)
Those
covered
by
a
post­
enactment
CTG
document;
(
b)
those
covered
by
a
pre­
enactment
CTG;
(
c)
"
all
other
major
stationary
sources
of
VOC's."
Section
182(
b)(
2)
also
establishes
the
timing
for
State
submittal
and
source
implementation
of
RACT
rules
for
these
three
groups.
For
sources
covered
by
a
post­
enactment
CTG
document,
the
State
must
submit
RACT
rules
within
the
period
established
in
the
relevant
CTG
document.
For
the
other
two
groups,
the
Act
provides
specific
dates
for
submittal,
November
15,
1992,
and
implementation,
no
later
than
May
31,
1995.

Alone,
subparagraphs
(
A),
(
B)
and
(
C)
seem
to
set
forth
three
distinct
groups
of
sources.
However,
the
submittal
dates
under
the
second
portion
of
the
provision
potentially
could
blur
the
line
between
these
three
groups
if
EPA
does
not
issue
before
November
15,
1992,
a
CTG
document
covering
all
sources
for
which
it
plans
to
issue
a
CTG
under
section
183(
a).
At
that
time,
States
would
need
to
submit
RACT
rules
for
all
other
major
stationary
sources­­
those
for
which
neither
a
pre­
enactment
CTG
nor
a
post­
enactment
CTG
document
had
been
issued.

The
EPA's
obligation
to
issue
the
eleven
CTG's
does
not
ripen
until
November
15,
1993,
and
EPA
does
not
anticipate
issuing
all
of
these
CTG's
before
November
15,
1992.
Therefore,
to
the
extent
EPA
does
not
issue
a
CTG
document
before
November
15,
1992,
States
would
be
required
to
submit
non­
CTG
RACT
rules
for
sources
that
could
in
the
future
be
covered
by
a
CTG.
In
addition,
at
the
time
the
CTG
document
was
issued,
the
State
could
then
be
required
to
submit
a
new
rule,
consistent
with
the
CTG
document,
thereby
duplicating
its
earlier
effort.

In
order
to
relieve
the
States
from
being
required
to
duplicate
rules
and
to
relieve
sources
from
potentially
being
subject
to
two
different
requirements
within
a
short
period,
EPA
is
issuing
this
CTG
document
to
retain
the
sharp
distinction
between
the
three
different
groups
in
subparagraphs
(
A),
(
B),
and
(
C).
If
a
State
believes
that
one
of
the
eleven
CTG's
listed
in
Section
II
will
cover
a
particular
major
source,
the
State
should
follow
the
timing
provisions
of
Section
IV,
below
for
submittal
of
a
rule
applicable
to
that
source.
The
State
should
identify
those
sources
in
its
November
15,
1992
RACT
submittal.

IV.
Time
Table
The
EPA
is
establishing
the
following
general
time
table
for
States
to
submit
RACT
rules
for
sources
that
it
identifies
in
a
November
15,
1992
submittal
as
being
a
source
covered
by
a
post­
enactment
CTG
document.
(
1)
on
November
15,
1992,
the
State
must
submit
a
list
of
major
stationary
sources
that
it
anticipates
will
be
subject
to
one
of
the
CTG's
listed
in
Section
II,
which
EPA
plans
to
issue
by
November
15,
1993.

(
2)
For
those
major
sources
on
the
list
submitted
by
the
State
in
the
1992
submittal
that
are
not
covered
by
a
CTG
that
EPA
has
issued
by
November
15,
1993,
the
State
must
submit
a
RACT
rule
by
November
15,
1994
that
requires
implementation
of
RACT
by
May
15,
1995.

(
3)
For
sources
covered
by
a
CTG
issued
under
section
183(
a)
and
for
which
the
State
has
not,
by
the
date
of
such
issuance,
adopted
an
approvable
RACT
rule,
the
State
must
submit
a
RACT
rule
in
accordance
with
the
time
schedule
set
forth
in
the
relevant
CTG.

(
4)
For
sources
subject
to
a
RACT
rule
that
the
State
adopted
and
EPA
approved
under
section
182(
b)(
2)
prior
to
EPA's
issuance
of
an
applicable
CTG,
EPA
will
work
with
the
State
to
determine
whether
the
existing
rule
should
be
revised
once
a
CTG
has
been
issued
that
would
apply
to
that
source.

(
FR
Doc.
92­
9866
Filed
4­
27­
92;
8:
45
am)

BILLING
CODE
6560­
50­
M
Legal
Publications:
Pub.
Law
95­
95
SEC.
129
­­
Clean
Air
Act
Amendments
of
1977
Pub.
Law
90­
148
SEC.
2
­­
Air
Quality
Act
of
1967;
National
Emissions
Standards
Act
(
Act
of
11/
21/
67)
Pub.
Law
84­
159
SEC.
172
111
112
116
184
182
183
­­
Air
Pollution
Control
Act
(
Act
of
7/
14/
55)
Pub.
Law
101­
549
SEC.
305
103
­­
Clean
Air
Act,
Amendments
(
11/
15/
90)
Pub.
Law
91­
604
SEC.
4
­­
Noise
Pollution
and
Abatement
Act
of
1970;
Clean
Air
Act
Amendments
of
1970
Federal
Register

format
only
2004
Dialog,
a
Thomson
business.
All
rights
reserved.
Dialog
«
File
Number
180
Accession
Number
2251559
